SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Utökad sökning

WFRF:(Westerberg C)
 

Sökning: WFRF:(Westerberg C) > (2015-2019) > A comparison of met...

A comparison of methods for streamflow uncertainty estimation.

Westerberg, Ida (författare)
IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet
Kiang, J. (författare)
Gazoorian, C. (författare)
visa fler...
McMillan, H. (författare)
Coxon, G. (författare)
Le Cos, J. (författare)
Belleville, A. (författare)
Sevrez, D. (författare)
Sikorska, A.E. (författare)
Petersen-Överleir, A. (författare)
Reitan, T. (författare)
Freer, J. (författare)
Renard, B. (författare)
Mansanarez, Valentin (författare)
Stockholms universitet,Institutionen för naturgeografi,Hydrology-Hydraulics, IRSTEA, France
Mason, R. (författare)
visa färre...
 (creator_code:org_t)
2018
2018
Engelska.
Ingår i: Water resources research. - 0043-1397 .- 1944-7973. ; :54, s. 7149–7176-
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
Abstract Ämnesord
Stäng  
  • Streamflow time series are commonly derived from stage‐discharge rating curves, but the uncertainty of the rating curve and resulting streamflow series are poorly understood. While different methods to quantify uncertainty in the stage‐discharge relationship exist, there is limited understanding of how uncertainty estimates differ between methods due to different assumptions and methodological choices. We compared uncertainty estimates and stage‐discharge rating curves from seven methods at three river locations of varying hydraulic complexity. Comparison of the estimated uncertainties revealed a wide range of estimates, particularly for high and low flows. At the simplest site on the Isère River (France), full width 95% uncertainties for the different methods ranged from 3 to 17% for median flows. In contrast, uncertainties were much higher and ranged from 41 to 200% for high flows in an extrapolated section of the rating curve at the Mahurangi River (New Zealand) and 28 to 101% for low flows at the Taf River (United Kingdom), where the hydraulic control is unstable at low flows. Differences between methods result from differences in the sources of uncertainty considered, differences in the handling of the time‐varying nature of rating curves, differences in the extent of hydraulic knowledge assumed, and differences in assumptions when extrapolating rating curves above or below the observed gaugings. Ultimately, the selection of an uncertainty method requires a match between user requirements and the assumptions made by the uncertainty method. Given the significant differences in uncertainty estimates between methods, we suggest that a clear statement of uncertainty assumptions be presented alongside streamflow uncertainty estimates.

Ämnesord

NATURVETENSKAP  -- Geovetenskap och miljövetenskap (hsv//swe)
NATURAL SCIENCES  -- Earth and Related Environmental Sciences (hsv//eng)
NATURVETENSKAP  -- Biologi (hsv//swe)
NATURAL SCIENCES  -- Biological Sciences (hsv//eng)

Nyckelord

uncertainty
hydrometry
stream gauge
rating curve, , uncertainty
hydrometry
stream gauge
rating curve

Publikations- och innehållstyp

ref (ämneskategori)
art (ämneskategori)

Hitta via bibliotek

Till lärosätets databas

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy