Comparative Study of Flood and Long-term Mean Monthly Flow Estimation Approaches: Case Studies of Six Basins in Nepal

Buddha Subedi, Prem Chandra Jha, Namita Gautam, Bikalpa Lamichhane, Gudiya Jaiswal
{"title":"Comparative Study of Flood and Long-term Mean Monthly Flow Estimation Approaches: Case Studies of Six Basins in Nepal","authors":"Buddha Subedi, Prem Chandra Jha, Namita Gautam, Bikalpa Lamichhane, Gudiya Jaiswal","doi":"10.3126/tgb.v9i1.55425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \nMost of Nepal's river basins have poor hydro- meteorological databases, with several river basins being ungauged. Thus, hydrological parameters need to be estimated using different types of computation methods. The primary goal of this study is to identify the most accurate method for calculating peak flood and long-term mean monthly flow among the most commonly used methods in Nepal. We compared the peak flood calculated using various flood computation formulas, such as Hydest, Modified Hydest, MHSP (Medium Hydropower Study Project) 1997, Modified Dickens, PCJ (Prem Chandra Jha) 1996, Rational, and Specific Discharge, to the flood calculated using gauged discharge data frequency analysis. We find that it is wise to use the Modified Hydest method in the khokana basin for all Return Periods (RPs) and in the Belkot basin (for RP ≤ 100 years), the Specific Discharge method in the Jamu basin, the MHSP 1997 method in the Belkot basin (for RP ≤ 100 years) and the Bagasoti Gaun basin (for RP ≤ 20 years). The PCJ 1996 method having the lowest cumulative value of Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) for the six studied catchments is suitable for Rabhuwa Bazar (for RP > 50 years) and Bagasoti Gaun (for RP >20 years). Similarly, the Modified Dickens method is suitable in the Bagasoti Gaun basin for RP ≤ 50 years. This paper also shows the performance of the Hydest and MHSP 1997 mean flow estimation methods and suggests different coefficients or constants to be used with the MHSP 1997, Modified MIP (Medium Irrigation Project), and Hydest methods to obtain more reliable long-term mean monthly flows. Overall, our study will help the designer choose a reliable method for design flow estimation. This study also shows that the flow obtained from even the most suitable methods needs to be adjusted. As a result, intensive research is required to adjust previous methods and develop the new one. \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":268155,"journal":{"name":"The Geographic Base","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Geographic Base","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/tgb.v9i1.55425","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most of Nepal's river basins have poor hydro- meteorological databases, with several river basins being ungauged. Thus, hydrological parameters need to be estimated using different types of computation methods. The primary goal of this study is to identify the most accurate method for calculating peak flood and long-term mean monthly flow among the most commonly used methods in Nepal. We compared the peak flood calculated using various flood computation formulas, such as Hydest, Modified Hydest, MHSP (Medium Hydropower Study Project) 1997, Modified Dickens, PCJ (Prem Chandra Jha) 1996, Rational, and Specific Discharge, to the flood calculated using gauged discharge data frequency analysis. We find that it is wise to use the Modified Hydest method in the khokana basin for all Return Periods (RPs) and in the Belkot basin (for RP ≤ 100 years), the Specific Discharge method in the Jamu basin, the MHSP 1997 method in the Belkot basin (for RP ≤ 100 years) and the Bagasoti Gaun basin (for RP ≤ 20 years). The PCJ 1996 method having the lowest cumulative value of Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) for the six studied catchments is suitable for Rabhuwa Bazar (for RP > 50 years) and Bagasoti Gaun (for RP >20 years). Similarly, the Modified Dickens method is suitable in the Bagasoti Gaun basin for RP ≤ 50 years. This paper also shows the performance of the Hydest and MHSP 1997 mean flow estimation methods and suggests different coefficients or constants to be used with the MHSP 1997, Modified MIP (Medium Irrigation Project), and Hydest methods to obtain more reliable long-term mean monthly flows. Overall, our study will help the designer choose a reliable method for design flow estimation. This study also shows that the flow obtained from even the most suitable methods needs to be adjusted. As a result, intensive research is required to adjust previous methods and develop the new one.
洪水与长期月平均流量估算方法的比较研究——以尼泊尔六个流域为例
尼泊尔大多数河流流域的水文气象数据库都很差,有几个河流流域没有被测量。因此,需要使用不同类型的计算方法来估算水文参数。本研究的主要目标是在尼泊尔最常用的方法中确定最准确的计算洪峰和长期平均月流量的方法。我们比较了使用各种洪水计算公式(如Hydest、Modified Hydest、MHSP (Medium Hydropower Study Project) 1997、Modified Dickens、PCJ (Prem Chandra Jha) 1996、Rational和Specific Discharge)计算的洪峰洪水与使用计量流量数据频率分析计算的洪水。在khokana盆地、Belkot盆地(RP≤100年)、Jamu盆地、Belkot盆地(RP≤100年)和Bagasoti gan盆地(RP≤20年)分别采用修正Hydest法和MHSP 1997法。pcj1996方法对6个流域的累积均方根误差(RMSE)值最低,适用于Rabhuwa Bazar流域(RP > 50年)和Bagasoti Gaun流域(RP >20年)。同样,改进的Dickens方法适用于RP≤50年的Bagasoti Gaun盆地。本文还展示了Hydest和MHSP 1997平均流量估算方法的性能,并建议在MHSP 1997、改良MIP (Medium Irrigation Project)和Hydest方法中使用不同的系数或常数,以获得更可靠的长期平均月流量。总的来说,我们的研究将有助于设计师选择一个可靠的方法来估计设计流程。这项研究还表明,即使是最合适的方法所获得的流量也需要调整。因此,需要进行深入的研究,调整现有的方法,开发新的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信