Comparative Analysis of Xinjiang Mountain Flooding Simulation and Threshold based on Different Data

Liancheng ZHANG;Xingjie YU;Weiling SHAO;Jingli ZHANG;Xingyi TONG;Yuanpeng LI

PDF(4382 KB)
Plateau Meteorology
Plateau Meteorology ›› 2020, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1) : 80-89. DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-0534.2019.00008

Comparative Analysis of Xinjiang Mountain Flooding Simulation and Threshold based on Different Data

Author information +
History +

Abstract

In this paper, the flooding events in boerbosong basin is studied using observed flood depth data, digital elevation map （DEM） data, land use type data, hourly precipitation data, quantitative precipitation estimation(QPE) data, et al.FloodArea model was utilized to simulate the flood process of the study area on 25 August 2013, 28 June 2015 and 17 June 2016.The spatial and temporal distribution characteristics are analyzed based on the precision test of the measured data.Then the relationship between surface rainfall and submerged depth was established, and the critical rainfall corresponding to the four flood levels in the study area was determined.It is also found that the submerged depth is increasing, which can be divided into three stages: accumulation period, stable growth period and fluctuation uplift period.Through precision verification, the flooded depth derived by FloodArea model is higher than observation, while QPE and R-QPE (revised quantitative precipitation estimates data）data are lower than that observed.The above three data simulation results absolute error of the investigation points（borborzon and Tal village） is 0.46 m, 0.78 m, 0.35 m and 1.35 m, 1.44 m and 0.65 m respectively.R-QPE data can simulate the flood depth with the best accuracy and can reflect the flood situation of the basin.Through correlation analysis, the correlation between the surface rainfall of the cumulative aging for 7 h and the simulated flood depth is the best, with the correlation coefficient reaching 0.989.On this basis, the relationship between surface rainfall and submerged depth is established.The relationship between surface rainfall and flood depth was obtained according to mountain flood disaster grade, the cumulative aging of 7 h surface rainfall at the early-warning point can obtain the threshold values of four levels of critical rainfall causing disasters: level 4 is 6.25 mm, level 3 is 23.61 mm, level 2 is 49.64 mm and level 1 is 75.67 mm respectively.

Key words

QPE data / FloodArea model / flood simulation / critical rainfall th

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations
Liancheng ZHANG , Xingjie YU , Weiling SHAO , Jingli ZHANG , Xingyi TONG , Yuanpeng LI. Comparative Analysis of Xinjiang Mountain Flooding Simulation and Threshold based on Different Data. Plateau Meteorology. 2020, 39(1): 80-89 https://doi.org/10.7522/j.issn.1000-0534.2019.00008

References

[1]Dugwon S, Lakjamkar T, Mejia J, al et, 2013.Evaluation of operational national weather service gridded flash flood fuidance over the Arkansas Red River basin[J].Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 15(1): 1-12.
[2]Norbbiato D, Borga M, Dinale R, 2009.Flash flood warning in ungauged basins by use of the flash flood guidance and model-based runoff threshold[J].Meteorological Applications, 16（1）: 65-75.
[3]Tang C, Zhu J, 2006.Use of GIS technology for torrent risk zo-nation in the upstream red river basin, China[J].Geographical Sciences, 16(4): 1-8.
[4]曾勇, 杨莲梅, 2018.新疆西部一次极端暴雨事件的成因分析[J].高原气象, 37(5): 1220-1232.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-0534. 2018.00014．
[5]程卫帅, 2013.山洪灾害临界雨量研究综述[J].水科学进展, 24（6）: 901-908.
[6]崔晓临, 程贇, 张露, 等, 2018.基于 DEM 修正的 MODIS 地表温度产品空间插值[J].地球信息科学学报, 20(12): 1768-1776.
[7]葛小平, 许有鹏, 张琪, 等, 2002.GIS支持下的洪水淹没范围模拟[J].水科学进展, 13(14): 456-460.
[8]李俊, 支树林, 郭艳, 等, 2012.SWAN 系统雷达定量降水估测产品在江西的应用[J].气象与减灾研究, 35(2): 61-66.
[9]李兰, 周月华, 叶丽梅, 等, 2013.基于淹没模型的流域暴雨洪涝风险区划方法[J].气象, 39（1）: 112-117.
[10]刘鸣彦, 王颖, 郑石, 等, 2015.清原地区 “0816” 洪水灾害临界雨量分析[J].气象, 31(5): 25-30.
[11]刘维成, 王勇, 周晓军, 2014.SWAN 系统 QPE 产品的误差统计及订正方法研究[J].干旱气象, 32(6): 1025-1030.
[12]刘志雨, 杨大文, 胡健伟, 2010.基于动态临界雨量的中小河流山洪预警方法及其应用[J].北京师范大学学报: 自然科学版, 46(3): 317-318.
[13]吕晓娜, 牛淑贞, 袁春风, 等, 2013.SWAN中定量降水估测和预报产品的检验与误差分析[J].暴雨灾害, 32（2）: 142-150.
[14]曲晓波, 张涛, 刘鑫华, 等, 2010.舟曲“8．8”特大山洪坭石流灾害气象成因分析[J].气象, 36(10): 102-105.
[15]苏军锋, 张锋, 魏邦宪, 等, 2012.SWAN在陇南短历时强降水监测预警预报中的应用[J].干旱气象, 30(2): 287-292.
[16]孙桂华, 王善旭, 王金銮, 等, 1992.洪水风险分析制图使用指南[M].北京: 水力电力出版社, 54-82.
[17]王春光, 刘军省, 殷显阳, 等, 2018.基于 IDW 的铜陵地区土壤重金属空间分析及污染评价[J].安全与环境学报, 18（5）: 1989-1996.
[18]谢五三, 田红, 卢燕宇, 2015.基于FloodArea模型的大通河流域暴雨洪涝灾害风险评估[J].暴雨灾害, 34(4): 384-387.
[19]姚俊强, 杨青, 毛炜峄, 等, 2018.基于HYSPLIT4的一次新疆天山夏季特大暴雨水汽路径分析[J].高原气象, 37(1): 68-77．DOI: 10.7522 /j.issn.1000-0534.2017.00031．
[20]叶金印, 李致家, 常露, 2014.基于动态临界雨量的山洪预瞀方法研究与应用[J].气象, 40（1）: 101-107.
[21]叶勇, 王振宇, 范波序, 2008.浙江省小流域山洪灾害临界雨确定方法分析[J].水文, 28（1）: 56-58.
[22]张洪江, 北原曜, 解明曙, 1994.晋西几种不同土地利用状况下糙率系数的研究[J].北京林业大学学报, 16(4): 86-92.
[23]张俊兰, 彭军, 2017.北疆春季降水相态转换判识和成因分析[J].高原气象, 36(4): 939-949.DOI: 10.7522 /j.issn.1000-0534. 2016.00094．
[24]张磊, 王文, 文明章, 等, 2015.基于“FloodArea”模型的山洪灾害精细化预警方法研究[J].复旦学报: 自然科学版, 54 (3): 282-287.
[25]张连成, 江远安, 刘精, 等, 2018.基于FloodArea模型的新疆山洪淹没模拟及致灾临界雨量阈值的研究——以皮里青河流域为例[J].干旱区地理, 41（1）: 48-55.
[26]张明达, 李蒙, 戴丛蕊, 等, 2016.基于Flood Area模型的云南山洪淹没模拟研究[J].灾害学, 31(1): 78-82.
[27]赵琳娜, 包红军, 田付友, 等, 2012.水文气象研究进展[J].气象, 38(2): 147-154．
[28]郑璟, 谭畅, 李春梅, 2015.基于洪水淹没模型的山洪致灾临界雨量确定方法研究[C].中国科学技术协会学会学术部、 吉林省人民政府.湖泊湿地与绿色发展——第五届中国湖泊论坛论文集.中国科学技术协会学会学术部、 吉林省人民政府: 中国科学技术协会学会学术部, 106-110.
[29]朱玉果, 杜灵通, 谢应忠, 等, 2018.不同气象插值方法精度评估及对草地NPP估算的影响[J].水土保持研究, 25（6）: 160-167.
[30]庄晓翠, 赵江伟, 李健丽, 等, 2018.新疆阿勒泰地区短时强降水流型及环境参数特征[J].高原气象, 37(3): 675-685.DOI: 10. 7522/j.issn.1000-0534.2017.00061．
PDF(4382 KB)

903

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail
Sections
Recommended

The system is designed and developed by Beijing magtec Technology Development Co., Ltd. with technical support: support@magtech.com.cn

/

〈 〉