基于多模型适用的大通河流域洪水临界雨量阈值研究与比较分析

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2021.09.005

湖北农业科学 ›› 2021, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (9): 26-31.doi: 10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2021.09.005

基于多模型适用的大通河流域洪水临界雨量阈值研究与比较分析

刘义花¹, 李红梅¹, 李林², 汪青春¹, 许显花³

1.青海省气候中心,西宁 810001;
2.青海省人工影响天气办公室,西宁 810001;
3.黄南州气象局,青海黄南 811300

收稿日期:2020-07-09 发布日期:2021-05-14
作者简介:刘义花（1979-）,女,青海平安人,副研级高级工程师,硕士,主要从事气象灾害风险评估与区划,（电话）13897213187（电子信箱）yihualiu12@126.com。
基金资助:
青海省科技厅项目（2019-ZJ-603）

Comparative analysis of three models to the study on risk precipitation threshold value in Datong river basin

LIU Yi-hua¹, LI Hong-mei¹, LI Lin², WANG Qing-chun¹, XU Xian-hua³

1. Qinghai Climate Center,Xining 810001,China;
2. Qinghai Weather Modification Office,Xining 810001,China;
3. Huangnan Meteorological Bureau,Huangnan 811300,Qinghai,China

Received:2020-07-09 Published:2021-05-14

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 基于大通河流域地理信息资料、气象资料、水文资料,采用SWAT模型、HBV水文模型、统计模型对大通河流域进行临界雨量适用研究。结果表明,大通河流域中雨以上量级降水主要出现在5—9月,2007—2011年中雨以上量级降水累计次数为41次,频次和强度增加明显。通过大通河流域3种模型适用的结果以及实际洪水发生的检验情况来看,SWAT水文模型在大通河流域适用效果最好,率定期模型效率系数为0.87,相关系数为0.94,验证期模型效率系数为0.62,相关系数为0.83,模拟流量和观测流量的拟合率满足模型检验的标准;HBV模型率定期确定性系数为0.84,NSE为0.61,验证期确定性系数为0.81,NSE为0.51,率定后HBV水文模型在大通河流域具有较强的适用性,但与SWAT模型拟合结果相比,HBV水文模型模拟流量和实际流量拟合率较低。在流域内如果有较长时段的水文资料,采用水文模型确定临界雨量较为科学,而统计模型基于降水量与水位差的回归关系,没有考虑从降雨形成地表径流的过程,确定的阈值偏大。

关键词: 中小河流域, 水文模型, 临界雨量, 大通河流域

Abstract: Based on data from GIS information, meteorological stations and hydrological stations, the applicability study of risk precipitation in Datong river basin was carried out using SWAT model, HBV model and statistical model. The results indicated that, the middle rain and above the middle rain in Datong river mainly appeared from May to September, the cumulative number of times was 41 from 2007 to 2011, and the trend of frequency and intensity showed an obvious increasing. Through the results of the application of three models in Datong river basin and the test of the actual flood,the SWAT model was the best method to modify the runoff in the Datong river basin, with efficiency coefficient of 0.87 and R² of 0.94 during the validation period, and with efficiency coefficient of 0.62 and R² of 0.83 during the calibration period, and simulating runoff and observed runoff reached the testing standard; The coefficients of determination and NSE were 0.84 and 0.61 during the validation period with HBV model , but they were 0.81 and 0.51 during the calibration period, there was no good fitting rate using HBV model compared with SWAT model. If there is a long period of hydrological data in the basin, it is more scientific to use hydrological model to determine the critical rainfall. However, the statistical model, based on the regression relationship between precipitation and water level difference, does not consider the process of surface runoff formed from rainfall, so the threshold value determined is too large.

Key words: small and medium-sized river, hydrological model, risk precipitation, Datong river basin

中图分类号:

P338⁺.3

刘义花, 李红梅, 李林, 汪青春, 许显花. 基于多模型适用的大通河流域洪水临界雨量阈值研究与比较分析[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2021, 60(9): 26-31.

LIU Yi-hua, LI Hong-mei, LI Lin, WANG Qing-chun, XU Xian-hua. Comparative analysis of three models to the study on risk precipitation threshold value in Datong river basin[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2021, 60(9): 26-31.

参考文献

[1] 李昌志,郭良.山洪临界雨量述评[J].中国防汛抗旱理论研讨,2013,23(6):23-28.
[2] Japan national institute for land and infrastructure management. Operating methods of critical rainfall for warning and evacuation from sediment-related disasters[R]. 2001.
[3] 张世才,储建华,张同泽,等,祁连山区山洪灾害临界雨量计算分析和风险区划[J],水土保持学报,2007,21(5): 196-200.
[4] 祁元,刘勇,杨振华,等.基于GIS兰州滑波与泥石流灾害危险性分析[J].冰川冻土,2012,34(1): 96-104.
[5] 王志,赵琳娜,张国平,等.汶川地震灾区堰塞湖流域面雨量计算方法研究[J].气象,2010,36(6):7-12.
[6] 李武阶,王继竹,郭英莲,等.金沙江中下游流域面雨量特征分析[J].长江流域资源与环境,2014,23(6):846-853.
[7] 江锦红,邵利萍.基于降雨观测资料的山洪预警标准[J]. 水利学报,2010, 41(4):458-463.
[8] 陈文辉. 山洪灾害防治非工程措施中预警指标的确定——以甘肃省陇南市宕昌县为例[J]. 广东水利水电,2011(3):65-67.
[9] 魏丹,刘智勇,李小冰. SWAT模型及SUFI算法在秃尾河上游流域径流模拟中的应用[J].干旱地区农业研究,2012,30(6):200-206.
[10] 张小咏,李佳,杨艳昭,等.基于SWAT模型的长江源区径流摸拟[J]. 西北林学院学报,2012,27(5):38-44.
[11] 李谦,张静,宫辉力.基于SUFI-2算法和SWAT模型的妫水河流域水文模拟及参数不确定性分析[J].水文,2015,35(3):38-44.
[12] 贾建伟,王栋, 沈杰, 等, 基于HBV模型的高寒区径流模拟研究[J].人民长江,2018, 49(22): 83-87.
[13] 张调风,赵全宁,时兴合,等, HBV模型在隆务河流域洪水致灾临界面雨量研究中的应用[J].中国农业大学学报,2017, 22(3): 69-75.
[14] 刘鸣彦,孙凤华,侯依玲,等. 基于HBV 模型的太子河流域径流变化情景预估[J]. 地球科学进展, 2019,34(6):650-659.
[15] 刘义花,鲁延荣,周强,等.HBV水文模型在玉树巴塘河流域洪水临界雨量阈值研究中的应用[J]. 水土保持研究,2015,22(4):224-228.
[16] 卢燕宇,田红. 基于HBV模型的淮河流域洪水致灾临界雨量研究[J].气象,2015,41(6):755-760.
[17] 宋楠,马振峰,范广洲,等.基于分布式水文模型的嘉陵江流域暴雨洪涝致灾风险阈值研究[J].西南大学学报,2018,40(2):186-192.
[18] 文明章,李昕,游立军.山洪灾害风险雨量评估方法研究[J].气象,2013, 39(10):1325-1330.
[19] 刘义花,鲁延荣,周强,等. 基于GIS栅格数据的青海省羊脂沟洪水动态模拟[J].中国农业大学学报,2015,20(3):169-174.
[20] 刘睿翀,霍艾迪,CHEN X H,等. 基于SUFI-2算法的SWAT模型在陕西黑河流域径流模拟中的应用[J].干旱地区农业研究,2014,32(5):213-222.

基于多模型适用的大通河流域洪水临界雨量阈值研究与比较分析

Comparative analysis of three models to the study on risk precipitation threshold value in Datong river basin

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价