Search

Your search keyword '"peak river discharge"' showing total 7 results
Start Over Descriptor "peak river discharge"
7 results on '"peak river discharge"'

1. The critical role of the routing scheme in simulating peak river discharge in global hydrological models

Author

Fang Zhao, Ted I E Veldkamp, Katja Frieler, Jacob Schewe, Sebastian Ostberg, Sven Willner, Bernhard Schauberger, Simon N Gosling, Hannes Müller Schmied, Felix T Portmann, Guoyong Leng, Maoyi Huang, Xingcai Liu, Qiuhong Tang, Naota Hanasaki, Hester Biemans, Dieter Gerten, Yusuke Satoh, Yadu Pokhrel, Tobias Stacke, Philippe Ciais, Jinfeng Chang, Agnes Ducharne, Matthieu Guimberteau, Yoshihide Wada, Hyungjun Kim, and Dai Yamazaki

Subjects
ISIMIP, global hydrological models, peak river discharge, river routing, flood, daily runoff, Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering, TD1-1066, Environmental sciences, GE1-350, Science, Physics, QC1-999
Abstract

Global hydrological models (GHMs) have been applied to assess global flood hazards, but their capacity to capture the timing and amplitude of peak river discharge—which is crucial in flood simulations—has traditionally not been the focus of examination. Here we evaluate to what degree the choice of river routing scheme affects simulations of peak discharge and may help to provide better agreement with observations. To this end we use runoff and discharge simulations of nine GHMs forced by observational climate data (1971–2010) within the ISIMIP2a project. The runoff simulations were used as input for the global river routing model CaMa-Flood. The simulated daily discharge was compared to the discharge generated by each GHM using its native river routing scheme. For each GHM both versions of simulated discharge were compared to monthly and daily discharge observations from 1701 GRDC stations as a benchmark. CaMa-Flood routing shows a general reduction of peak river discharge and a delay of about two to three weeks in its occurrence, likely induced by the buffering capacity of floodplain reservoirs. For a majority of river basins, discharge produced by CaMa-Flood resulted in a better agreement with observations. In particular, maximum daily discharge was adjusted, with a multi-model averaged reduction in bias over about 2/3 of the analysed basin area. The increase in agreement was obtained in both managed and near-natural basins. Overall, this study demonstrates the importance of routing scheme choice in peak discharge simulation, where CaMa-Flood routing accounts for floodplain storage and backwater effects that are not represented in most GHMs. Our study provides important hints that an explicit parameterisation of these processes may be essential in future impact studies.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. The Response of Turbidity Maximum to Peak River Discharge in a Macrotidal Estuary

Author

Xianwen Bao, Yuhan Yan, Wang Nan, and Dehai Song

Subjects
lcsh:Hydraulic engineering, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, turbidity maximum, Geography, Planning and Development, Stratification (water), Aquatic Science, 010502 geochemistry & geophysics, 01 natural sciences, Biochemistry, estuary, lcsh:Water supply for domestic and industrial purposes, stratification, lcsh:TC1-978, medicine, spring-neap modulation, FVCOM, Turbidity, peak river discharge, recovery time, Seabed, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, Water Science and Technology, Hydrology, geography, lcsh:TD201-500, geography.geographical_feature_category, Discharge, Sediment, Estuary, Environmental science, Flushing, medicine.symptom, Sediment transport
Abstract

The Ou River, a medium-sized river in the southeastern China, is examined to study the estuarine turbidity maximum (ETM) response to rapidly varied river discharge, i.e., peak river discharge (PRD). This study analyzes the difference in ETM and sediment transport mechanisms between low-discharge and PRD during neap and spring tides by using the Finite-Volume Community Ocean Model. The three-dimensional model is validated by in-situ measurements from 23 April to 22 May 2007. In the Ou River Estuary (ORE), ETM is generally induced by the convergence between river runoff and density-driven flow. The position of ETM for neap and spring tides is similar, but the suspended sediment concentration during spring tide is stronger than that during neap tide. The sediment source of ETM is mainly derived from the resuspension of the seabed. PRD, compared with low-discharge, can dilute the ETM, but cause more sediment to be resuspended from the seabed. The ETM is more seaward during PRD. After PRD, the larger the peak discharge, the longer the recovery time will be. Moreover, the river sediment supply helps shorten ETM recovery time. Mechanisms for this ETM during a PRD can contribute to studies of morphological evolution and pollutant flushing.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. The Response of Lateral Flow to Peak River Discharge in a Macrotidal Estuary

Author

Yang Ding, Yuhan Yan, Dehai Song, and Xianwen Bao

Subjects
Buoyancy, lcsh:Hydraulic engineering, 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences, Geography, Planning and Development, Stratification (water), Aquatic Science, engineering.material, 01 natural sciences, Biochemistry, momentum balance, lcsh:Water supply for domestic and industrial purposes, lcsh:TC1-978, FVCOM, peak river discharge, recovery time, Pressure gradient, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences, Water Science and Technology, Hydrology, geography, lcsh:TD201-500, small-/medium-sized river estuary, geography.geographical_feature_category, 010505 oceanography, Discharge, Advection, Estuary, Salinity, Flow velocity, lateral flow, engineering, Environmental science
Abstract

The Ou River, a medium-sized river in southeastern China, is selected to study the lateral flow response to rapidly varied river discharge, i.e., peak river discharge (PRD). A three-dimensional model based on the Finite-Volume Community Ocean Model is validated by in situ measurements from 15 June to 16 July 2005. PRD, which considers the extra buoyancy and longitudinal momentum in a short time, rebuilds the stratification and lateral flow. PRD, compared with low-discharge, generally makes stratification stronger and lateral flow weaker. PRD mainly rebuilds lateral flow by changing lateral advection, lateral Coriolis, and lateral-barotropic pressure gradient terms. After PRD, the salinity recovery time is longer than that of the flow because the impact on buoyancy lasts longer than that on longitudinal flow. Longitudinal flow is mostly affected by the momentum transferred during PRD, therefore, the recovery time is close to the flooding duration. However, the lateral flow is affected by the buoyancy, and its recovery time is generally longer than the flooding duration. The lateral flow recovery time depends on transect width, flow velocity and the variation caused by PRD. PRD occurs widely in global small-/medium-sized river estuaries, and the result of this work can be extended to other estuaries.

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. The critical role of the routing scheme in simulating peak river discharge in global hydrological models

Author

Zhao, Fang, Veldkamp, Ted, Frieler, Katja, Schewe, Jacob, Ostberg, Sebastian, Willner, Sven, Schauberger, Bernhard, Gosling, Simon, Schmied, Hannes Müller, Portmann, Felix, Leng, Guoyong, Huang, Maoyi, Liu, Xingcai, Tang, Qiuhong, Hanasaki, Naota, Biemans, Hester, Gerten, Dieter, Satoh, Yusuke, Pokhrel, Yadu, Stacke, Tobias, Ciais, Philippe, Chang, Jinfeng, Guimberteau, Matthieu, Ducharne, Agnès, Wada, Yoshihide, Kim, Hyungjun, Yamazaki, Dai, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK), National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Water and Food Group, Wageningen University and Research [Wageningen] (WUR), Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering [Ann Arbor] (CEE), University of Michigan [Ann Arbor], University of Michigan System-University of Michigan System, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), ICOS-ATC (ICOS-ATC), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Laboratoire d'Océanographie et du Climat : Expérimentations et Approches Numériques (LOCEAN), Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (MNHN)-Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Institut Pierre-Simon-Laplace (IPSL (FR_636)), École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS-PSL), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-École polytechnique (X)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS-PSL), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-École polytechnique (X)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Milieux Environnementaux, Transferts et Interactions dans les hydrosystèmes et les Sols (METIS), Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC)-École Pratique des Hautes Études (EPHE), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis [Laxenburg] (IIASA), Institute of Industrial Science (IIS), The University of Tokyo (UTokyo), Water and Climate Risk, Wageningen University and Research Center (WUR), Université Paris-Saclay-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC)-Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (MNHN), École pratique des hautes études (EPHE)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), The University of Tokyo, Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Pierre et Marie Curie - Paris 6 (UPMC)-Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (MNHN)-Institut Pierre-Simon-Laplace (IPSL (FR_636)), École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS Paris), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 (UPD7)-École polytechnique (X)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS Paris), École pratique des hautes études (EPHE), and Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)

Subjects
GRDC, Water and Food, ISIMIP, global hydrological models, river routing, Water en Voedsel, daily runoff, flood, Climate Resilience, Klimaatbestendigheid, peak river discharge, [SDU.STU.HY]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Earth Sciences/Hydrology, SDG 6 - Clean Water and Sanitation, ComputingMilieux_MISCELLANEOUS
Abstract

Global hydrological models (GHMs) have been applied to assess global flood hazards, but their capacity to capture the timing and amplitude of peak river discharge—which is crucial in flood simulations—has traditionally not been the focus of examination. Here we evaluate to what degree the choice of river routing scheme affects simulations of peak discharge and may help to provide better agreement with observations. To this end we use runoff and discharge simulations of nine GHMs forced by observational climate data (1971–2010) within the ISIMIP2a project.The runoff simulations were used as input for the global river routing model CaMa-Flood. The simulated daily discharge was compared to the discharge generated by each GHM using its native river routing scheme. For each GHM both versions of simulated discharge were compared to monthly and daily discharge observations from 1701 GRDC stations as a benchmark. CaMa-Flood routing shows a general reduction of peak river discharge and a delay of about two to three weeks in its occurrence, likely induced by the buffering capacity of floodplain reservoirs. For a majority of river basins, discharge produced by CaMa-Flood resulted in a better agreement with observations. In particular, maximum daily discharge was adjusted, with a multi-model averaged reduction in bias over about 2/3 of the analysed basin area. The increase in agreement was obtained in both managed and near-natural basins. Overall, this study demonstrates the importance of routing scheme choice in peak discharge simulation, where CaMa-Flood routing accounts for floodplain storage and backwater effects that are not represented in most GHMs. Our study provides important hints that an explicit parameterisation of these processes may be essential in future impact studies.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. The Response of Turbidity Maximum to Peak River Discharge in a Macrotidal Estuary.

Author

Yan, Yuhan, Song, Dehai, Bao, Xianwen, and Wang, Nan

Subjects
TURBIDITY, ESTUARIES, RIVER sediments, SUSPENDED sediments, RIVERS
Abstract

The Ou River, a medium-sized river in the southeastern China, is examined to study the estuarine turbidity maximum (ETM) response to rapidly varied river discharge, i.e., peak river discharge (PRD). This study analyzes the difference in ETM and sediment transport mechanisms between low-discharge and PRD during neap and spring tides by using the Finite-Volume Community Ocean Model. The three-dimensional model is validated by in-situ measurements from 23 April to 22 May 2007. In the Ou River Estuary (ORE), ETM is generally induced by the convergence between river runoff and density-driven flow. The position of ETM for neap and spring tides is similar, but the suspended sediment concentration during spring tide is stronger than that during neap tide. The sediment source of ETM is mainly derived from the resuspension of the seabed. PRD, compared with low-discharge, can dilute the ETM, but cause more sediment to be resuspended from the seabed. The ETM is more seaward during PRD. After PRD, the larger the peak discharge, the longer the recovery time will be. Moreover, the river sediment supply helps shorten ETM recovery time. Mechanisms for this ETM during a PRD can contribute to studies of morphological evolution and pollutant flushing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. The Response of Lateral Flow to Peak River Discharge in a Macrotidal Estuary.

Author

Yan, Yuhan, Song, Dehai, Bao, Xianwen, and Ding, Yang

Subjects
STREAMFLOW, MOMENTUM transfer, FLOW velocity, ESTUARIES, BUOYANCY, THREE-dimensional modeling, LATERAL loads
Abstract

The Ou River, a medium-sized river in southeastern China, is selected to study the lateral flow response to rapidly varied river discharge, i.e., peak river discharge (PRD). A three-dimensional model based on the Finite-Volume Community Ocean Model is validated by in situ measurements from 15 June to 16 July 2005. PRD, which considers the extra buoyancy and longitudinal momentum in a short time, rebuilds the stratification and lateral flow. PRD, compared with low-discharge, generally makes stratification stronger and lateral flow weaker. PRD mainly rebuilds lateral flow by changing lateral advection, lateral Coriolis, and lateral-barotropic pressure gradient terms. After PRD, the salinity recovery time is longer than that of the flow because the impact on buoyancy lasts longer than that on longitudinal flow. Longitudinal flow is mostly affected by the momentum transferred during PRD; therefore, the recovery time is close to the flooding duration. However, the lateral flow is affected by the buoyancy, and its recovery time is generally longer than the flooding duration. The lateral flow recovery time depends on transect width, flow velocity and the variation caused by PRD. PRD occurs widely in global small-/medium-sized river estuaries, and the result of this work can be extended to other estuaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

7. The critical role of the routing scheme in simulating peak river discharge in global hydrological models

Author

Zhao, Fang, Veldkamp, Ted I.E., Frieler, Katja, Schewe, Jacob, Ostberg, Sebastian, Willner, Sven, Schauberger, Bernhard, Gosling, Simon N., Schmied, Hannes Müller, Portmann, Felix T., Leng, Guoyong, Huang, Maoyi, Liu, Xingcai, Tang, Qiuhong, Hanasaki, Naota, Biemans, Hester, Gerten, Dieter, Satoh, Yusuke, Pokhrel, Yadu, Stacke, Tobias, Ciais, Philippe, Chang, Jinfeng, Ducharne, Agnes, Guimberteau, Matthieu, Wada, Yoshihide, Kim, Hyungjun, Yamazaki, Dai, Zhao, Fang, Veldkamp, Ted I.E., Frieler, Katja, Schewe, Jacob, Ostberg, Sebastian, Willner, Sven, Schauberger, Bernhard, Gosling, Simon N., Schmied, Hannes Müller, Portmann, Felix T., Leng, Guoyong, Huang, Maoyi, Liu, Xingcai, Tang, Qiuhong, Hanasaki, Naota, Biemans, Hester, Gerten, Dieter, Satoh, Yusuke, Pokhrel, Yadu, Stacke, Tobias, Ciais, Philippe, Chang, Jinfeng, Ducharne, Agnes, Guimberteau, Matthieu, Wada, Yoshihide, Kim, Hyungjun, and Yamazaki, Dai

Abstract

Global hydrological models (GHMs) have been applied to assess global flood hazards, but their capacity to capture the timing and amplitude of peak river discharge—which is crucial in flood simulations—has traditionally not been the focus of examination. Here we evaluate to what degree the choice of river routing scheme affects simulations of peak discharge and may help to provide better agreement with observations. To this end we use runoff and discharge simulations of nine GHMs forced by observational climate data (1971–2010) within the ISIMIP2a project. The runoff simulations were used as input for the global river routing model CaMa-Flood. The simulated daily discharge was compared to the discharge generated by each GHM using its native river routing scheme. For each GHM both versions of simulated discharge were compared to monthly and daily discharge observations from 1701 GRDC stations as a benchmark. CaMa-Flood routing shows a general reduction of peak river discharge and a delay of about two to three weeks in its occurrence, likely induced by the buffering capacity of floodplain reservoirs. For a majority of river basins, discharge produced by CaMa-Flood resulted in a better agreement with observations. In particular, maximum daily discharge was adjusted, with a multi-model averaged reduction in bias over about 2/3 of the analysed basin area. The increase in agreement was obtained in both managed and near-natural basins. Overall, this study demonstrates the importance of routing scheme choice in peak discharge simulation, where CaMa-Flood routing accounts for floodplain storage and backwater effects that are not represented in most GHMs. Our study provides important hints that an explicit parameterisation of these processes may be essential in future impact studies.

Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results