论文部分内容阅读
人们在进行洪水频率计算时,人为地割裂了洪水过程。一般地,都是以每年的最大洪峰流量对应的洪水作为该年的洪水过程,因此会出现洪水过程遗漏现象。洪水频率结果为防洪工程的建立提供依据,而洪水场次的界定是洪水频率计算的基础。文中研究采用两种方式界定洪水场次,利用Gumbel-Logistic模型分别计算界定的洪水场次的频率结果,并与传统方式下获取的洪水场次的频率结果进行比较。结果表明:3种情形下的洪水频率结果存在较大的差异。其中,以P-III型分布得出6年重现期的洪峰流量为洪水场次选取的门限值获得的洪水场次,即利用本研究中的界定方式二,得到的最大洪峰流量对应的频率值偏低,依此设计防洪工程,相比采用另外两种洪水场次选取方式进行防洪工程的设计偏于安全。
When people calculated the flood frequency, the flood process was artificially separated. Generally, floods corresponding to the maximum peak flow rate each year are used as the flood process of the year, so the omission of the flood process may occur. The result of flood frequency provides basis for the establishment of flood control project, and the definition of flood stage is the basis of flood frequency calculation. In this paper, two methods are used to define the flood frequency, and the Gumbel-Logistic model is used to calculate the frequency results of the defined flood events respectively. The results are compared with the frequency results obtained in the traditional method. The results show that there is a big difference between the flood frequency results under the three conditions. Among them, the flood peak times obtained from the P-III type distribution for the 6-year recurrence peak is the threshold value selected for the flood stage, that is, the frequency value corresponding to the maximum peak flow obtained by using the definition method 2 in this study Low, flood control project is designed accordingly, compared with the other two kinds of flood scene selection of flood control project design is safe.