FORECASTING OPERATIONALHYDROWGICAL INTERCOMPARISON

(1)

WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION

Operational Hydrology Report No.7

INTERCOMPARISON OF CONCEPTUAL MODELS USED IN OPERATIONAL HYDROWGICAL FORECASTING

Reprinted in 1986

I

WMO - No. 429

¹

Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization - Geneva - Switzerland 1975

(2)

NOTE

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

(3)

CONTENTS

Foreword .

Summary (English, French, Russian, Spanish) ..

Chapter I - The aim and implementation of the project .

Page

v

VII

Chapter 2 - Generalized description of models submitted for intercomparison .

Chapter 3 - Data sets and their limitations

Chapter4 - Intercomparison test results . . . . 1.1

I.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

2.1 '2.2

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Introduction .

Project background .

Aim of the project .

Limitations of the project .

Implementation plan of the project ., .

Classification of models tested in the project Asummarydescription of submitted models

Summary descriptions of the project data sets

Transfer of data sets and intercomparison test results . , . ^{J •} ^{• • • • •} Standard data sets tested on participating models . Identification of problems encountered in the project data sets .

Retention of standard data sets by WMO .

Data requirements of various models

Problems associated with data acquisition, transmission and processing for forecasting

purposes in general .. .." .

Limitations of basic input data , , .

Verification criteria .. ..

Use of mean daily discharge .

Graphical verification curves .. . . . _ ..

Tables of numerical verification coefficients Limitations of application of the tested models Problems encountered in the project ..

2 2 3 5 5 5 7 7 8 10 11 11 12 12 13.

14 14 15 16 16 17 20

(4)

Chapter 5 - Conclusions and recommend-ations . ..

IV

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . .

Recom-mendations on verification criteria . . . . General conclusions and recommendations Specific conclusions

Recommendations for future activities

Page

22 22 22 22 24 25 References

Annexes

27

Questionnaire on operational conceptual models for use in short-term hydrological forecasting. 29 II

III IV

v

VI VII VIII IX X

XI XII XIII

Tabular summary of the tested models . A summary description of the tested models ..

Atabular summary of seven hydrological models which were submitted butnottested in the

project , . . . .

A summary description of seven hydrological models which were submitted but not testedin

the p.roject . .. _ . . . .. . .

A tabular summary of five hydraulic models which were submitted but not testedinthe

project . . . .

Questionnaire onavailabilityofdatasets . . . . .

Summary description of standard data sets - general" basin description and map availability Summary description of standard data sets - rainfaH and streamflow data . Summary description of standard data sets - snow, evaporation and other meteorological

data. . . .. . .

Summary description of the Kostroma river data set CU.S.S.R.) . Graphical verification curves

Tables of numerical verification coefficients ..

37 38 61 62 70 71 77 78 79 80 82 153

(5)

FOREWORD

National services responsible for hydrological forecasting, unless they develop suitable models themselves, face the difficulty of ascertaining the relative ad'vantages and disadvantages of the many conceptual models proposed for operational use. Development of models is taking place in several countries, but to date only large services with suffi- cient logistic support in manpower and computer facilities have been in a position to apply them operationally.

In view of this and in order to provide information and guidance on the use of models in various hydrological forecasting situations, the third session of the WMO Commission for Hydrology (CHy) recommended, and the WMO Executive Committee subsequently approved, the launching of an international project on the intercomparison of conceptual models used in operational hydrological forecasting. This project was initiated in 1968 and completed in 1974 bythe WMO Secretariat in co-operation with national institutions involved in hydrological forecasting or in other hydrological activities. The present publication contains the final report on the project.

The successful implementation of this project was made possible by the close co-operation and effective contri- bution of national services and other institutions and individual experts who participated in it. The scientists who participated in the three informal study group meetings (Washington - July 1969, Paris - December 1969 and Tokyo- August 1970) helped in the formulation of the plan of action of the project. The experts who took part in the Meeting -of Experts (Geneva - October 1972) proposed guidelines for the actual intercomparison and verification of the test

results. The participants in the technical conference (Geneva, July 1974) evaluated and compared the perfonnance of the tested models and made conclusions and recommendations on their use in various forecasting situations. The project could not possibly have been successfully implemented without the effective participation of the national institutions and services which had developed models and provided the data sets. The testing of the models and provision of the data sets for the project were in fact carried out at no cost to WMO.

Particular reference must be made to the Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology of the Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, Switzerland, for arranging for the preparation and transmittal of the project standard data sets to the model owners in computer format and for perfonning the computations for the numerical and graphical verification criteria used in evaluating the project intercomparison test results.

It is a great pleasure for me to express the thanks of WMO to all the participants in the project and to the Swiss authorities mentioned above as well as to the other scientists and experts who have contributed to the successful implementation of this project.

~.

-

D. A. Davies Secretary-General

(6)

(7)

SUMMARY

This is the final report on the WMO project on the intercomparison of conceptual models used in operational hydrological forecasting, initiated by WMO in 1968 and completed in 1974. The aim of the. project was:

(aj To proceed with an evaluation and intercomparison of operational conceptual hydrological models which use electronic computers to provide short-tenn forecasts of streamflow;

(b) To provide information and guidance on the use of such models in various forecasting situations, with regard to specific conditions and accuracy requirements.

Itshould be emphasized that the intention of the project was not to detenuine which model fits best in all circumstances.

The project involved the testing of ten operational conceptual hydrological models submittedby seven coun- tfies on six standard river catchment data sets from climatologically and geographically varied conditions in six countries. Each data set consisted of two distinct periods: a calibration period (six years) and a verification period (two years) which immediately followed after. For each data set, the model owners were supplied with the necessary concur- - rent observed input data (precipitation, evaporation and other meteorological data) and observed output data (stream-

flow) for the six-year calibration period and only observed input data for the two-year verification period. The observed output data for the two-year verification period were retained by the WMO Secretariat.

For each data set the model owners used the concurrent observed input and output data for the six-year calibration period to calibrate and develop the parameters of their models and employed the additional two years of observed input data in the verification period to produce a simulated discharge (computed output). The simulated discharges producedbythe tested models for both the calibration and verification periods in each data set were then centrally evaluated and compared by WMO using several graphical and numerical verification criteria agreed upon by all modellers. On the basis of this evaluation and intercomparison, several conclusions and recommendations were made concerning the performance and use of the models in various forecasting situations.

The implementation plan of the project was divided into preliminary, intercomparison and reporting phases.

The plan of action of the project was formulated, during the preliminary phase, on the basis of three informal study group meetings which were held in Washington D.C., Paris and Tokyo. The detailed description and plans of the project were given in a WMO report entitledIntercomparison of conceptual models for purposes of hydrological fore- casting - background report and plan of implementationwhich was circulated, together with aQuestionnaireallopera-

tional conceptual models for use in short-tenn hydrological forecasting,to all WMO Member countries concerned in 1971. In reply to this questionnaire 23 models were submitted by nine Member countries.

The intercomparison phase started with a Meeting of Experts (Geneva, October 197'2) which proposed that nineteen of the submitted models be included in the intercomparison. For various reasons, only ten models were actually tested in the project. The ten models as well as the catchments for the six standard data sets are listed in Table1.

The graphical and numerical verification criteria used in the evaluation of the simulated discharges produced by the tested models are given in Table II.

(8)

VIII SUMMARY

During the reporting phase, a technical conference, attendedbyrepresentatives of agencies participating in the project and also several invited experts, was organized by WMO in Geneva in July 1974. This conference considered the results of the project and prepared conclusions and recommendations for national authorities and all interested special- ists in need of guidance on this subject.

Chapter 1 of this publication outlines the aim and implementation of the project. A generalized description of models submitted for .intercornparison in the project is given in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 reviews the standard data sets used in the project and their limitations as well as the data requirements of various models. The graphical and numerical verification results of the simulations produced by the tested models are presented in Chapter 4, together with a evaluation of the limits of application of the models and evaluation of river basins on which the models were tested. Chapter 5 includes the conclusions and recommendations of the conference with respect to verification criteria and the use of different models in various forecasting situations for specific types of basins and conditions.

(9)

TABLE I

Standard data sets tested on participating models

Standard river catchment data sets tested in the project

Model name Bird Blkin Wollombi Kizu Sanaga NamMune

(and abbreviation) Name and address of model developer Creek River Brook River River River

U.S.A. U.S.S.R. Australia Japan. Cameroun Thailand

2344 13100 1580 1445 131500 104000

km' km' km' km' km' km'

Bureau

or

Meteorology Model Bureau of Meteorology, P.O. Box 1289 K, 0 0 0 0

(CBM) Melbourne, Vic. 3001, Australia

Girard I Model ORSTOM, 19,rueEugene Carriere, ⁰ ⁰

75018 Paris, France

Serial Storage Type Model (Tank I) National Research Centre for Disaster ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰

Prevention, 1 Ginza Higasi 6,

Chuo~ku,Tokyo, Japan

Serial Storage Type Model (Tank II) Ditto

•

⁰

The Flood Forecasting Model Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology ⁰ ⁰ (IMH2-SSVP) $05.Bucure~ti-Ploie~ti97,

Bucarest, Romania

Streamflow Synthesis and Reservoir Corps of Engineers, Portland, ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰

•

Regulation Model (SSARR) Oregon, U.S.A.

National Weather Service Hydrologic National Weather Service, Silver Spring, ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰

Model (NWSH) Maryland, U.S.A.

Sacramento River Porecast Center National Weather Service River Forecast ⁰

•

⁰

•

Hydrologic Model (SRI'CH) Center, Sacramento, California U.S.A.

Rainfall Runoff Model of the Hydrometeorological Centre of the U.S.S.R., ⁰ ⁰

•

J-lydrometcorological Centre of Bolshevistskaya 13, the U.S.S.R. (HMC) Moscow 123 376, U.S.S.R.

Constrained Linear System ModeJ Hydraulic Institute of Pavia University 0 ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ 0

(CLS) and IBM Pisa Scientific Centre, Italy

Notes: 0

=-

Test results received in the WMO Secretariat after the conference (1974), that is after the modellers had had the opportunity to acquaint themselves with the dat.a on the output during the two-year verification period of the data sets. These two test results will hereafter be referred to as "delayed test results".

The KO$troma river data set (U .S.S.R.) was tested on the Snowmelt-runoff Model of the Hydrometeorological Centre of the U.S.S.R.

en

e

;;:;;:

~

><

(10)

TABLE II ><

The graphical and numerical verification criteria used in the-project

GraphiCal critetirJ Numerical c'riteria Flow variables for which numerical

criteria were indicated

3. Ratio of absolute error to the mean given by 1;lYe -"Yo I

5. Phasing coefficient (PH) for the monthly peak flows given bythe number of times that the simulated peak is shiftedin time from the corresponding observed peal< by at least dneday

~ "

_~

~

4. Mean daily discharge fodow flow days defined as those days during Which the flow is above zero and is below the flow not exceeded during a period of130 days during the verification period. For the Wollombi Brook data set, this variable was defined as the flow below the mean for the wh?le verification period.

3. Monthly volumes of flows expressed in centimetres of depth over the catIunent area

2. Maximum daily discharge(rn³ s-I ) for each month in which the flow equals or exceeds the mean flow for the whole period of calibration and verification 1. Mean daily discharge (in m:! s~l)

LYo,e n

A= nJio R=

y=

4. Arithmetic mean given'by D=

JIO

2. Ratio of relative error to the mean given by 1;

lV

e - Yo)

nyc

1. Coefficient of variation of residual of errors given by:

[ 1;(ye : Yo)' ]

'I,

2. Double mass plots of simulated versus obsetved monthly discharge volumes 3. Flow duration curves of simulated and

observed daily discharges

4, Scatter diagrams of simulated versus observed monthly maximum dail!;

discharges (peak flows)

1. Linear scaleplots of simulated and observed hydrographs

6. Coefficient ofpersi:i:tence(PE)given by

f sf

L=..l-

V Inthe above equations:

Yo= abserved discharge Yc

=

computed discharge

n =total number of observations

_ Lyo

Yo;:;:: ^{- - i l -}

k

=

numberofpositive and negative rlins

"

V = 1; (yo - Ye)' forthenitems l= 1

B

=

the individualareas ofeach segment

(11)

RESUME

Cette publication contient Ie rapport final sur Ie projet de l'OMM relatif

a

1a comparaison des modeles theoriques utilises pourla prevision hydro1ogique operationnelle, entrepris par l'Organisation en1968 et acheve en 1974. Ce projet avait pour but:

aj de proceder

a

une evaluation et

a

une comparaison des modeles hydrologiques theoriques utilises en exploi·

tation, qui font appel a des ordinateurs electroniques, en vue d'etablir des previsions du debit a courte

echeance;

b) de [aumir des renseignements et des directives sur I'utilisation de ces modeles dans les diverses situations au 1'0n est appele

a

etablir une prevision, du point de vue des conditions particulieres de travail et de la precision requise.

n

faudrait sQuligner qu'il ne s'agissait pas de determiner quel modele convient Ie mieux en toutes circonstances.

Leprojet comportait la mise

a

l'essai de dix modeles hydrologiques theoriques operationnels presentes par sept pays, qui ont ete utilises avec six jeux de donnees standard relatifs

a

des bassins fluviaux representant une diversite de conditions climatologiques et geographiques dans six pays differents, Chaque jeu de donnees partait sur deux periodes distinctes, une periode d'etalonnage (six ans), qui etait suivie immediatement d'une periode de verification (deux ans).

Pour chaque jeu de donnees,ila ete fourni aux detenteurs des modeles les donnees d'observation connexes necessaires comme donnees d'entree (precipitations, evaporation et autres donnees meteorologiques) et comme donnees de sortie (debit) pOUf la periode d'etalonnage de six ans, mais seulement les donnees d'observation servant de donnees d'entree pour la periode de verification de deux ans, Les donnees de sortie correspondant

a

cette demiere periode ont ete COll-

servees par Ie Secretariat de l'OMM.

Dans chaque cas, les detenteurs des modeles ont utilise les donnees d'entree et de sortie connexes relatives

a

la periode d'etalonnage de six ans pour ajuster leurs rnodeles et ont employe les donneesd'entn~ecorrespondant aux deux annees suppIementaires de la periode de verification pour obtenir des valeurs simulees du debit (donnees de sortie cal- cuMes). Les debits simules obtenus

a

l'aide des modeles mis

a

l'essai aussi bien pour la periode d'etalonnage que pourla periode de verification correspondant

a

chaque jeu de donnees ant ete ensuite evalues dans un centre et compares par l'OMM

a

I'aide de plusieurs criteres de verification graphiques et numeriques acceptes partous ceux qui avaient elabore des modeles. En se fondantSUIcette evaluation et sur cette comparaison, on a forrnule plusieurs conclusions et recommandations au sujet des resultats obtenus avec les modeles et de l'utilisation de ceux-ci dans les diverses situations

ou

l'on est appele:ietablir des previsions.

L'execution du projet comportait trois phases: la phase preliminaire, la phase des comparaisons et la phase de synthese.

Le plan d'action a ete elabore durant la phase preliminaire, auCOUTSde trois reunions officieuses d'un groupe de travail, quisesont tenues

a

Washington, D, C., Paris et Tokyo. La description d6taillee et les plans du projet ont fait I'objet d'un rapport de l'OMM intituIeIntercompan·son of conceptual models for purposes of hydrological forecasting - Background report and plan a/implementation,qui a

Me

distribue en 1971, accompagne d'un questionnaire sur les modeles theoriques utilises en exploitation pour la prevision hydrologique

a

courte echeance,

a

taus les pays Membres de l'OMM interesses, En reponse au questionnaire, neuf pays Membres ont presente 23 modeles.

(12)

XII ^RESUME

Laphase des comparaisons a commence par une reunion d'experts (Geneve, octobre 1972) qui a propose que 19 des modeles presentes soient soumis

a

comparaison. Pour dive-rses raisons, dix modeles seulement fment effectivement mis

a

l'essai dans Ie cadre du projet. Ces dix modeIes, ainsi que les bassins correspondant aux six jeux de donnees standard, sont indiques dans Ie tableau1.

Les edteres de verification graphiques etTIumeriques utilises pourevaluerles debits simules obtenus

a

^{l'aide des}

modEdes mis

a

l'essai figment dans Ie tableau II.

Au cours de la phase de synthese, l'OMM a organise 11 Geneve, en juillet 1974, une conference technique

a

laquelle assistaient les representants des organismes participant au projet ainsi que p1usieurs experts invitCs. Cette conference a examine 1es resu1tats du projet et a prepare des conclusions et des recommandations

a

l'intention des autorites nationa1es et de taus 1es specialistes interesses qui souhaitent recevoir des directives en 1a matiere.

Lechapitre premier de cette publication exposelesobjectifs et les activites de mise en oeuvre du projet. Le chapitre 2 contient une description genera1e des modeles soumisi comparaison.Lechapitre 3 passe en revue lesjeux de donnees standard utilises dans Ie cadre du projet et leurs limites, ainsi que les besoins en donnees de divers mode-Ies. Les resultats de la verification graphique et numerique des simulations produites par 1es modeles mis

a

l'essai sont presentes dans Ie chapitre 4, accompagnes d'une evaluation des limites d'application des mode-1es et de l'appreciation des bassins fluviaux choisis pour mettre

a

l'essai lesdits rnocteles.Lechapitre 5 contient les conclusions et les recommandations for- mutees par 1a conference au sujet des criteres de verification et de l'utilisation des differents mode-Ies dans les diverses situations

au

1'on est appete

a

etablir des previsions, pour certains types de bassins et dans des conditions particulie-res de travail.

(13)

Nom et super/icie de chaque bassin don! les donnees normalisees ont servi pour ['essai desmodeles

Nom du modele Nom et adresse du service Bird Elkin. Wollombi Kiw, Sanaga, NamMlme,

Creek, V.R.S.S. Brook, ^Japan Cameroun Thai"lande

(etabrelJlation) ayan! mis au point iemodele Hiats-Unis Austrolie

d'Amerique

2344 13100 1580 1445 131500 104000

km² km² km² km! km' km²

Modch:: du Bureau de meteorologie Bureau of Meteorology, P,O. Box 1289 K, 0 0 0 0

(CBM) Melbourne, Vic. 3001, Australie

Modele Girard I ORSTOM, 19,rueEugemc-carriere, ⁰ ⁰

75018 Paris, France

Modele typed'emmagasinement National Research Centre for Dis<lster ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰

serie (Reservoir

n

Prevention, 1 Gin:za Higasi 6, Chuo-ku, TokYO, Japon

Modele type d'emmagasincment Dito 0 0

scrie (Reservoir II)

ModClc deprevisiondes erues Institutdemeteorologie et d'hydrologie, 0 0

(IMH2-SSVP) ~os. Bucure~ti-Ploie~ti97, Bucarest, Roumanie

Modele de synthese de I'ccoulement Corps of Engineers, Portland, Oregon, ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰

•

⁰

et de regulation des reservoirs Etats-Unis d'Amerique (SSARR)

Modele hydrologique du Service National Weather Service, Silvcr Spring, 0 0 0 0

meteorologique national (NWSH) Maryland, Etats-Unis d'Arrierique

Modele hydrologique du Centre de Nat.ional Weather Service River Forecast ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ prcvision 'hydro!ogique de Centre, Sacramento, Californie,

Sacramento (SRFClI) Etats-Unis d' Amerique

MoMle'de l'ecouIement du nux Centre hydrometeorologique de I'V.R.S.S., ⁰ ⁰ ⁰ precipit<ltions, du Centre Boishevistskaya13, Moscou 123376,

hydrometeorologiquede U.R.S.S.

I'U.R.S.S. (rlMC)

Modele de systeme Iincaire bride Institut hydraulique de !'Universite de Pavie 0 0 0 0 0 0

(CLSl et Centre scientifiqueIBMde Pise, halk Notes:0

TABLEAU I

Jeux de donnees normalisees utilises pour I'essai des modeles presentes

Les resultats deCGSessais ant etc re9U5auSecretariat del'OMM apres Ia cloture de la conference (1974), c'est-a-dire apres que, les responsables du modele curent eu In fllculte de se familiariser avec les donnees de sortie dcs jeux de donnees relatifs aIa periode de verification de deux ans. En consequence, ees d.::ux resultats d'essai seront, par In suite, consideres comme des "resultats d'essais apres coup".

Le jeu de donnees relatif aubassin de la Kostroma (U .R.5.S.) a

etc

utilise avec Ie modele de I'ecoulementdu

a

la fonte des neiges, du Centre hydrometeorologique de l'U.R.S.S.

'"

~tn' C

s:

tn'

" ^c

(14)

TABLEAU II

·Criteresgraphiquesetnumeriqlllesde verification utiHses d:j.ns Ie cadre du projet

~

Criteresgraphiques Criteres numeriques Variables de l'ecoulement pour lesquelles des

.criteres numeriques ont

ere

^indiques

nyc

?'OJ'

i:1 a::

OJ' 3. Volumes mensuels des ecoulementsexp.ri~

mes en centimetres d'epaisseur de Ia lame d'eau correspondante sur l'aire du bassin

4. Debit moyen quotidien pour lesjours de faible ecoulement, eeux-ei etant definis comme Ies jours au cours d'esquels l'ecou- Iement est superieuritzero, mais inferieur

a

Ia valeur de l'ecoulement qui n'a pas ete depassee durantunepe-riode de 130jours,aucours de Ia periode de verification. Pour Ie jeu de donnees concer- nant Ie Wollombi Brook, cette variablea etc derinic comme I'ecoulement inferieur

a

Ia moyenne correspondant

a

la totalite de Ia periode de verification

2. Debit maximal quotidien (en rna S-I) pour chaque mois au cours duqueIl'ecoulement a etc egalausuperieur al'ecoulement moyen durantIa totalite de Ia periode d'etalonnage et de verification

1. Debit moyen quotidien (en rna S-I)

t Bl

L::..L-

V nyo,

L:yo,C'

D=

n

I:(yc -Yo) R=

2. Rapport de l'erreur relative

a

Ia rnoyenne,donnepar l'expression:

5. Coefficient de dephasage(PH)pour les debits mensuels de pointe; c'est1e nombre de fois au 1e debit de pointesimuU;

s'est trouve decale d'au mains un jour par rapportaudebit de pointe observe correspondant

6. Coefficient de persistance(PE), donne par l'expression:

3. Rapport de l'erreur absolue

a

la moyenne, donne par I'expression: 'LlYe - Yo

I

A=

4. Moyenne arithmetique donuee par l'expression:

1. Coefficient de variat.ion du residu deserreuIS,donne par l'expression: [ ~(yc _yo)2]'I,

y= n

2. Pointage des courbes de double masse des debits mensuelssimulesetobserves 3. Courbe de durce del'ecQulementpour les

debitsquotidienssirnuleset observes 4. Diagrammes de dispersion pour les debits

quotidiens maximaux mensuels simuhh et observes (debits de pointe)

1. Pointage, selon une echelle lineaire, des hydrogrammessirnulesetobserves

Dans les equations ci-dessus:

Yo =debitobserve yc

=

debit calcule

n

=

nombxe total d'observations _ _ :Lyo

Yo - -11-

k

=

nombre de passages positifs et negatifs

11

V ;:;: L (yo - Yc)2 pour lesnrubriques i= 1

B =aires de chaque segment

(15)

PE31Oil'IE

HH'iK8 C.rreAyeTOROHlIaT,8JIbHblti OTl.J:8T 0 rrp08RTe

BMO

no BsaUMocpaBH8HHID ROHu;enTyaJIbHbIX MOp;eJI8H, rrp:VUvI8Hfl8MbIX rrpH orrepaTHBHQild rHAPOJIOrIP-:IeCROM rrporH08MpOBaHHH , ROTOP},I}I 6bIJ1 HaqaT

BMO B1968r. IiBaBepIIIeH B1974 r. L(eJIb rrpoeRTa :

a) llPO.n;OJliRHTb OIJ;8HRY 1'1BsaHMocpaBH8HH8 orrepaTHBHhIX KOHI.J;eIITyaJIbHbIX rup.pOJIOrHQeCKHX MOA8JIefI , HCIIOJIbSYIOll.J;rrx 8JI8RTPOHHbI8 KOl\UlbIOTepbI A.ITfl COCTaBJI8HllR KpaT!\Ocpo'(IHbIX rrporHo8oB peQHOrO CTOKa ;

b) IIpeAcTaBHTb VI:HIflOpMaU;liIo H H8JlOmHTb pyROBOP;R.IIJ;H8 rrpHHIJ;HIIlJno llCIIOJLb30BaHHIO IIOA06HbIX Mo,n;eJIeti: B paSJUIl{H.bIX rrporHOCTH'll8CKHX Cl'ITyaU;HRx C YQ8TOM crreU;HfIHiqecKHx yCJIOBHH VI:Tpe6oBaHl'J;II TOQHOCTH.

CJI8AyeT IIOp;qepRHyTh, l£TO I.(8JIbIO rrp08KTa He HBJIflJIOCb orrpe;o;eJI8HH8 l'tIOp;eJIH, Ma:KCMMaJlbHO rrpHI'o,n;HOfi B JII06IUX 06CTOHTeJIbCTBax.

B

xo;o;e rrpoeKTa 6IUJIE rrpOBe,n;eH:hI H.crrIJTaHHH p;eCHTH orrepaTHBHhlX KOHIJ;errTyaJIbHbIX I'M,n;pO- JIOI'HQeCKHX Mo,n;eJI8H) rrpe.n;CTaBd"I8HHbIX C8MbIa CTpauaMH no lli8CTM IWMIIJI8KTaM .n;aHHbIX no

CTaH,n;apTHbIM peQHbIM Bo,n;oc6opar-.I pa3I-IQo6pa3HbIX RJIHl'I-IaTOJIOrKQ8CRHX 11 I'eorparpMQeCKMX yCJIOBHH lII8CTH CTpaH. Ram,n;IJH R.OMIIJIeRT BKJIIOqaJI ,n;aHHbIe gByX OTP;8JIbHbIX rrepHop;OB : rr8pno.n.a RaJIH6pOBaHIIH (meCTI. JIOT) , II Henocp8p;CTB8HHO ·CJI8.n.YlOru;er03a HRM n8pMo.n.a npOB8pRH ("ABa ro.n.a). ,I(JIH RamAoI'o ROMIIJI8RTa p;aUHbIX 06JIap;aT8JIHi\[ MOp;eJIH 6bIJIliI IIpeAOCTaBJIeHbI H806xoJJ,IiIMbI8 BXO.n;Hbl8 .n;aHHbI8 napaJIJI8JIbHbIX Ha6JIIO;O;8H11H (oca,qRU, HcrrapeHHe 11 ApyrMe M8TeOpOJIOI'MQ8CRM8 .u:aHI-rr,Ie), a TaRlRe Bhlxop;HbIe p;aHHbIe Ha6JIIO.u:eHHH (peQHOH CTOK) P;JIH IIIeCTHJIeTHerO rr8pMo,n;a RaJIu6pOBaHMH) a AJIR ,n;ByxI'OAMtIHOrO rrepHo,n;a IIpOB8pKM - TOJIbKO BXO)l;HIJ8 p;aHHble Ha6JIlOJJ;eHH:M:. BbIXOJJ,HbIe ,n;aHHbI8 Ha6JIIO,n;8HHH B Te1I8HMe AByxr0.llWIHOrO rr8pMop;a rrpOBepRH XpaUMJUICb B CeHpeTapHaTe BMO.

)J;JIH"RamAOI'o IWMIIJIeRTa p;aHHI:.IX o6J"Ia,n;aTe~TJHi\w,n;eJIH llCIIOJIbSOBaJIll BXO]J;HbI.e H BbIXOAHble p;aHHble rrapaJIJIeJIbHhlX Ha6JIIO,JJ;8H:HH sa llIeCTHJIeTHHfr rrepHOA KaJIu6pOBaHHH, QTo6bI BbIB8pHTb :H BbIB8CTH rrapaMeTpbI CBOHX 1\Wp;8JIetrI a TaRlli8 rrpHMeHHJIH ,JJ;JUI IIOJIY1I8HllH HMliTHpOBaHHoro pacxop;a (KOMIIbIOTepHbIe BbIXO,D;Hb18 )J;aHHbIC) BXOgHbIe .u:aUHbI8 Ha6JIIO.o;8HUR p;OrrOJIHHTeJIbHbIX ,n;BYX JIeT B T81IeHue rrepHo,n;a rrpoBepKIL BaT8r-I

BMO

rrpOB8JIa B U;8HTpaSIUSOBaHHOM rropH;D;Ke , C MCnOJlb30BaHH8i\I pRp;a rpaWHlIeCKHX H qMCJIeHHbIX KpHTepHeB rrpoBepKH₁ cor,;racoBauHhIe co BC8MH aBTopaMH Mo.n;8netI , OIJ;8HKY H: cpaBHeHHe IIMI-ITHpOBaHHbIX pacxop;oBI rro;ryqeHHbIX IIpH HCllbITaHMH i\IOAeJI8tI B l}epnO,lJ;bI RaJUI6pOBaHHH H rrpOBep:KH B KaiRp;OM KOl\-Hr.rr8RTe p;aHHblX. Ha OCHOB8 sTofr 0U;8HRH H BsaUMocpaBHeHHH 6bI,;r c.n;8JIaH PH)]; BbIBOP;0B II peBOM8HgaIJ;Hlr B O'l'HOIlIeHHH rroBep;eHHH H HCrrOJIb30BaHHH Mo,n;8J1eit B paa,;u-rqHbIX IIporHocT1PmcRHx cUTyaU;Hf!x.

IlJIaH BbIIIOJIHeRUH rrpoeKTa BKJIIOqa~'IB ce6H npe;O;BapHT8.JIbHYlO crasy1 !paay BsaIHwcpaBH8H:HH I-Iepaay OTQeTHOCTI-I.

(16)

XVI PE3IOME

B XQ!l,8 rrpegBapuT8abHofr cfJa3bI Ii-iTaH P;81ICTBHll ITO rrp08RTY 6bIJI c(ImpMy.:ulponaH Ha OCHOBe TpeX

I\CoqmIJ,JWc'IhlIbIX eone~alnlrI HCC-JlegOBaTe~1LGIWfIrpyrUIbI, HOTOPbI8 6bI,rrw: npOB8,D;8HbI B BanuwrTon8

(Onpyr !{O.:IyMOUH), n flapr·miC I1 B TOKHO. IIO.n;POOHbIC OIIHcaIUIH 11 nJIaHhI rrp08nTa :H3JIOjn:eUbl B A0I-W8;::t;e Bl\IO, n:.l<1l'.:laUJI8Hl-lO:'Il {{ BS8Ui\WCpaBII8Ium l\OH11cIITya.ilbHbIX Mop;eJIefl B IJ,8JUIX rHApo- :rDnIQCCHOrO nponWaUpOBaI-IMfI - OCHOBHbI8 p;am-IbIC H ILilaH BUIIO"IH8HII.H)}1 KOTOPbUf 6uJI

paCilpOeTpalJ(~IIcpeA.H neex 3anHTepeCOBaHHb1X CTpan - LJ';WHOBBMOB1971r. HapRAY C«BorrpocHuKOM

nO HCIIO.:lhUOBalIIIIU onepUTHBHbIX I-WnU;eIITyaJIbHLIX l\IO;:J;8.neit B n:paTIWCpo-qHO.M rup;pOJIOrl-PI8CKOM lIpOrf-IOa8 ». B OTB8T na aTOT BonpocHHK 9 cTpaH- LL1CHOB npep;CTamI~TIn23 MOp;eJUL

(1)a8a B3<lILHOCpaBl-f8HHH Ha1.Ja.naCb C C-OBew;aHnn 3KcrrepToB (mCnCEa , OHTfl6pb 1972

r.L

^ua^.KOTOpOM

ObtnO rrpCJI,.:IOH\l'IIO .HcrrO~tb80BaTLrrpn BSaHi\!OCpUBlIeHUH p;eBflTI-Iagu;aTb U3 npe.n;CT3BJIeHHhIX M:0)J,8JICfJ:.

no pU8.T1'P-IHbL"I rrp:wIlIHfu\l rrpmnH'IeCKH 6U;"lO UClIbl'l'anO TO~~IbKOp;eCHTb i\Wp;CJ"l81I. 8TH ^p;eCHTb MO}J.8JI8H , a TaEI-:I,C BO,lWc60PbI , flOC:IYfFHBUHIC I1CT01-£HHRaMH W8C'l'lI cTauAap'l'HbIX lWl\UIJICHTOB p;aHHbIX ,

nep8"lUICJIeHhI B Ta6Jl1U,e 1.

rpaq)n1.Jec.KUC HqHC~lelIHblC RjH1TepUH npOBep.fUI , HCrrOJlb3yeMHc rrpH ou;eHK8UMMTnpOBaHHhlX paCXOi'J,OB, nOJlyqeHHblX rrpn HCIlbITaIIHH i'vIOp;e~'18jtlnpHBogHTCH B'I'u6JIHu;e II.

BXO;J,Q<pash1 OTQeTHOeTH B i:H'8H8B8 B HlD,Tl81974r. HMOopraHH30BaJIaTeXH}PIeCKYIO IWHtPepeHH,lfiOl B pal>O'l'cHOTOpOii: yqUCTBOBa.:IH rrpcJJ;cTuBHTC,;Ul ar8HTCTBI rrpHHHMaIOlI.l,HX yqac.nI8B rrpoeRT8 , a TaIURe IIeKoTophI8 upHr;raweHHble 3KCrrepTbI. 8Ta IWH!f>epeH1.lll.f{ pacclIWTpeci"la pe3YJlbTU'fbI rrpo8RTa H

IfOHrOTOBn,'1a BbIBO,JJ;bl H penOM8H,l:(aIVIH g,HH KOMn8T8HTHI1TX Ha.u;IlOUUJIbHbIX opraH.HsaU;I-rn , a TRIUK8 Bcex 3am:l'l'8peCOBaHHblx crrCI"\1IajIHC'rOB₁ Hylli,IJ,aIOUJ;I-IXCH B PYEOBoj:(cTBe no 9TOwry Borrpocy,

B r~'laBe 1HaCTO.HIIJ,eit rry6JiH.KaIJ;MM H8JIOil:il"'HbI u;eJIb M BbIrrOJ"lH8HUe rrpoeRTa. 06ooru.eHHoe OIUlcaHH8

MO,IJ,eJIefrj rrpeACTaB~'leHlIbIX AJIH B3a:HMocpaBlII:IIHH B xop;.e rrpo8RTa_l ARno B rJIaBe 2. B rJIaB8 3

pacCwlaTplIBUIOTCH cTaHgapTHbIe TWMI1JICETbI gaHHblx₁ ncrronb30BRHIlbI8 B rrpo8RT8_l fiX U8)J,OCTUTRH , a TaHllie Tpe6oBaHI1.H pa3,;npulhlx i\'10A8J"l8:i1: H lJ;aHHbII\'1. fpaqrH1.JeCRHe H -qUCJIeHHble peayJIbTaTliI rrpoHepluI MO;:J.8JUlpOBmnrtt, rro"'y-qeHHble rrpH HCIlHTaHHH MOp;8JTerr₁ rrpegcTaBJl8HbI B rJIaBe 4 ^HapHAY

C ou;em·wlr rrpe,n.CJ£hlibIX B03MOlliHOCT8it rrpHlI'IeH8HlUI .iHo,JJ;eJIeit 11 o.u;mrKOl1: peQHbIX 6accellHoB_l r.n;e rrpoBogHauCh HcrrbITaHHH ivIOp;eJIc:tL B rJlaBC 5 cOAepnwTcFl BbIBOghI H pe.KOMeHJ\alI;:HI-1 KOHepepeHI.J;HM B OTHoweHHlI EpJITep:W:8n rrpoBepluI 11 HCIIOJIh30BaIniH pa3JIH1.JHbIX MO,!l.eJIe.ti: B pa3HOo6pa3IIblX rrporHOCTW:I8CRHX CkITyau,lulx ,lJ;JUI OC06bIX THIIOE 6accefrHoB 11 YCJIoBlir~L

(17)

Ta6JIMqa I

CTll.U;Il;l1P'rIILIC I£OMn.'ICRTLI ~ll.JllibIX, HCDLITRUIILIC BDpln~eliHeMLlxMO;Il;CJUIX

CmanfJapmHble X:OMn,aex:ml.ol fJamtbtX no pe1t1-iL(,M eofJoc6opa-M, UCnl.olmaH1U..tefJnpoemne

Ha3rWitUe .MOi)MU Bupo

Burow-/, BMM.M.6u

J(uq_y CaHaea HaM MY1-£

(u. co,,'paUf.eHue) lIaaeaHue u a8pec coafJame.n,.'t .M.ooe.au rpuroeIIlA eeep Aecmpa.n,u.n^Bpyn fInOItWl R'a.Mepyll Tau.aaHfJ

2344 13100 1580 1445 131 500 104 000

1i:.M2 X:.M 2

K...' ^h'.M

2 _II:Jrt2 11:..11,2

MeTeOpOJIOrJ1lICCHOe GIOpO Bureau of Meteorology, P.O. Box 1289K,

• •

•

MOI(OJlb (CBM) Melbourne, Vic. 3001, Australia

MO;n;eJIh ]H:lIp:~p;r~ I ORSTOM, 19, rue Eugene Carriere,

•

75018 Paris, France

MOACJ1h '1'1111<1 nocnCiwnaTCJlL- National Research Centre for Disaster

•

• • ^• ^•

1101'0 UaH011J1eIll1fl (TANH I) Prevention,l Ginza Higasi 6, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

MOiJ,(Wb 'l'Hna nOCJIC;n;OBa'l'eJH~' To me caMoe

• ^•

lIoro liaHomlCllllH (TANH Il)

MO;r\C,:lb IlpOrllD:-mpOlJ:JJ111H Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology

• •

nn,rJO;LJ.JiOJ3 ([MI-J2-~~VP) Sos. Bucuresti-Ploiesti 97, Bucarest, Romania

MOnCJIb CllHTC3a pet.llIoro CTona Corps of Engineers, Portland,

•

• • • •

11 pCl'y:l'H1ponuIIHR Oregon, U.S.A.

nOiiClxpamUIUU(a (SSARR)

I'Il,iJ,po:lloruclecHan MO~WJIb National Weather Service, Silver Spring,

• • • •

naIlllOlIaJlbllOij c.rzyrH6hT nOI'O.r\J)I Maryland, U _S.A.

(N\\"SHI

rU;,WOJ10rHQCCHan MO}:(8JIh National Weather Service River Forecast

• • • •

J~ell1'po.peLJl1LIX nporH03011 Centre, Sacramento, California, U.S.A.

11 Cal(paM8HTO (SHFCH)

MO)l,em, CTOHa OCD..r\HOB 1'l-IIJ:pOMeTCOpOJIOnl'JeCl-un1 IIeHTp CCCP,

• ^• ^•

f'llll:P 0;,\1'e'1'eop OJI 0I'lI'-I eCI" 01'0 EOJlhWelH1CTCI-Wfl 13,

),CUTP"

cecp

^(rMl.\1 ^Moclma, ^{123 376,}

ccep

MOp,8Jlbmmei-hroH ClICTeMLI Hydraulic Institute of Pavia University 0

• • • •

⁰

C orp::tllH"leIIHRMII (CLS) and IBM Pisa Scientific Centre, Italy

'"

is i':

'"

llpUMe'-taHu.rt : 0= PesYJIbTD.TbI J1CnbITaI·mtl: TIOJJyqeHbI u CeHpeTapMa're BMO IIOCJ1e HoucjJepe:HIJ;:J1H (19n

r.L

a I1MeUHO, I10eJIe 'roro, I\al~ cos;n:aTeJ1U Mo):\eJIeJii: MMeJIH B08MOrlUIOCTb 03HaHOMMThCR C BbIXO,DJlbIMM ;n:aHI:IbIMM no npeMR ;D;uyxroJJ;I1QHOrO nepJ1O;D;a nponepKliI HOMTIJIeHTOB ):\aJUIl..IX. STn pesYJIbTaTbI UCTIbITaHldt .n:aJIee 5Y)];YT nasbIBaTbcfI, IW.H (1 nOCJIeAYIOII\He peSYJIbTaTbI lfCnbITaI-udi )}.

HO~mJ1e"T ;~aHHI:JX no pCRe H'ocTpoMa (CCCP) 6hIJI I1Cn:bITaH Ha MO,l:\eml CTOHa raJIl>IX no;n: rHAPOMeTeOp0J10rI1QeCHoro IIeHTpa CCCP.

~

(18)

'['aOJ[l\l\<1 11

rpn'~WICCl~ne ~I 'i!IC,llClIilhiCl~[lll'l'nIHUilIpOUCpltn.,nCIlO.Tll.aouaUHMC 1lllJlOCWI'C

/'parPWleC/f,u.e npumepuu ([UCJtCHHLle h'Pu.mepuu

Ilcpe"lWltll-a"f/. (IeA,U'IIIIIa. pac:I:o()a.(loi)",.

/)jUo I->omopMi. 1)&1.17, IJlJpeu'e.w/l.

'lllf'J!.('III/,l,'!i. NpUmCp!J,ti.

'"

..,

~

HJ,PIHC,TlneTCH no (!IOPMYJlO Y

=

"

OJro

~

OJ S. E1H8MCCffllllhltl oCh,eM C1'OI\(l,

llhlpa;IWlljl['II~1n C8.IITI1MeTpaX I'JIy6l1Hhi n putinJle 1l0JiOCOOpU

11. CPU),\llHO omeJ'llemrhll1 pacxo!, nOl(bl n.nn

/>'lHllll~1:lJlbIlOI'O C'fOI,a, onpen.8n8111lhllt no 'l'eM D,!1HM, 11 TO'IOIlHC H01'OphlX C'1'OH Ohm lIi>lUle Ilynn, HI) Ill-li-J\U C1'QIHI, IlU.lll1l'lHlla IW'roporo He npeflhllllfl.,TI3 IH1Jm'Il1lly, lla6J'l10J~alllll'ylocn11 TQ^cltH\110

l:W l~llot1 IH~pHo)1.a rlflOneplH1. JLml

l\OMTl.UCll'l'U /(11111]1>1;':' DOJI.HOMOH GP,VI'l

~l'1'a nepOMClllI<ll1 1lt:.JJH\IHlla fll>l.l'l1l onpe)l.(~.J18Ha IWl\ l1e,lH1'11111aCTOlm IIV!,lW

CpOl\llei1. aD. neCl> neJlllon npOllepml.

2. J'vla1\(',l1M<l,lIl..>llh\n t~llCnllol1 pacxoi~ BO,'ihI (Il M~/cel,) J~.nn Han,~~oro M0('.fll(:l, 1\

']'P'IPIIIW IWTOpOI'O C1'OII: pum:ll IUll'l lIr)()IIJ,ll11~W'l' CpeJl,IlHtl eTOl, :l<\ lweI>

ltePl10i~ l·ta.nt10ponamIH Il np01WpHi'!

1. CpeJl,lIl1HJlIll~l1llOl,l pacxo,n 1l0j'V,1

(II ~la/c('H)

R=

D=

A=

(JlOpMyJIo:t'l :

5. H03(1){IH11.~nell'r (Va:IHpouall.lul (H(I)) J,l;.11fr MCCflYllhlX lH1HOJ.:)h!X IH1CXO).l;On BOnl,! ; I1MIfTl'\pOnallHbrti mm c~UlHracTcnno BpcMeHH 0'1' COOTllQ'l'C'l'Jl.Y101qero llUUJIlOp;eHIlOco nHW..l no HpaHllDf1 Mope H;), OHMH )'tell!>

G. l{o:'HI)(Inll(~feliT coxpaHeHl1H Ilh\pmHae'l'CH {IlopMy,nott : k

L 81

L=-L-

V nyo

II:. Cpe).l;IlHRapl-!l!lMCTH'1ccI,an lleJll-1.l1111lil Bhlpamae'rcl1

LYo,e n

L(Ye-Yo) nyo

3. OTHOIlJ(~IH1e aGcomo1'lloi\ nlllHfllHI I,cpeJ~lIeii

LIYc-Yol

Yo

2. (h'110111l:!lHIG (lTIIOCl1'J'eJlbllof·i olill'lflJ\l-1 !( C[)())~I10i1.

1, Ho::>r!HjmqIICIITH:IMOllellJ.lli pa:JlIOCTH Ollt~lGnr,

[ L (ye ,;- Yo)'

r'

II:. ,IJ,11arpaMMbl paCC8F1I1I1R I1MHT11pOBal-rHOrO OTHOCUTeJIhHO

lIa6mOp;elJHOrOM,l!WHMaJIblJOrO aa MecR~AlIeEnoI'O pucxoAaBO)l,bT

3, H:pUBhTe npo).l;OJIiHJilTeJIhllOCTI1 CTOHa UMJI(TJI(pOnam'lOro H lHl,Gmo.n;eHlloro AHeRHOI'O pacxo{.(a^BOALl

2. )~IlOt1Hb!e rpa<}JI1I\H MaCChI

HMHTHl1OuallllOro pacxoJV..l nOAhl Il:al, (llYHHI~HH UUOJIlO,U,ellHOI'O MeCl1'lllOI'O of'i'£.,eMU paCxoA8.nO~'hT

1. JIHuefiuhlf) l'paqH11'il1 lIJMHTHP0B<\llllhlX H no.uJIlolWllHl,TXI'11~~porpi\(l)ofl

.Vo

By!,a:HUlIlbIX BhlllIe ypanHCHl1.fIX : Yo = uaomOAeHHhTti paCXOl~ DO.n;bl Yc = pacc'mTaUUhll1. pacxoABOAh!

/1 = o6~eeHOJIl1^CleCTlJO IWO,llIOI-WlIVlM

= ^-/1-LYo

k = HOJU1'ieC'rBO nOJIOIHI1TenbHbIX MOTprtI~a1'eJ1hHhIX

CJIY'laeB n

V

=

2-: (yo - Yc)2 AJIfI nCJIy'luen

i~1

B = HB~~I1BHAyaJ1bH.blti patlonHilffiAorocerMeUT<'l

(19)

RESUMEN

Lapresente publicacion constituye el informe final del prayecto que la OMM ha realizado sabre comparacion de modelos conceptuales utilizados en las prediceiones de hidralogia operativ", iniciado en 1968 y que termino en 1974.

Los objetivos del prayecto eran los siguientes :

a) llevar a cabo una evaluaci6n y comparacion de los modelos conceptuales de hidrologia operativa que se utilizan en las computadoras electr6nicas para elaborar predicciones a corto plazD del caudal de las corrientes;

b) facilitar informaciony directrices sabre la utilizaci6n de clichos modelos en distintas situaciones de prediccion, teniendo presente las condiciones espedficas de cada caso y las exigencias de precision.

Se debe poner de manifiesto que en este proyecto nunca se irat6 de determinar emil es el modelo que mejor se ajusta a tadas las circunstancias.

Se verificaron 10 modelos hidro16gicos conceptuales operativQs presentados por siete paisesy referentes a las series de datos correspondientes a seis cuencas fluviales tipo sometidas a las distintas condiciones climatol6gicas y geognificas de seis paises diferentes. Cada serie de datos comprendia dos periodos distintos: un periodo de calibraci6n (seis anos) seguido inmediatamente de un periodo de verificacion (dos anos). Can respecto a cada serie de datos, se facilitaron a los propietarios de los modelos los correspondientes datos entrantes de observaci6n (precipitaci6n, evapora- ciony otros datos meteoro16gicos) as! como los datos resultantes observados (caudal) correspondientes al period a de calibracion de seis afiosy solo los datos entrantes observados correspondientes a los dos ailos del periodo de verificacion. Los datos resultan-tesobservados correspondientes a1 periodo de verificaci6n de dos afios fueran conservados en la Secretaria de la OMM.

Can respecto a cada serie de datos los propietarios de los modelos utilizaron los correspandientes datos meteo- rologicos observados, tanto de entrada como de salida en el madelo, correspondientesalperiodo de calibraci6n de seis anos con objeto de verificar y deterrninar los parametros de sus modelos y ademas utilizaron el periodo de dos ailos de datos de entrada observados correspondientes al periodo de verificaci6n, can abjeto de abtener un caudal simulado (datos resultantes calculados). Los caudales simuladas producidos par los modelos verificados y correspondientes a los periodos de calibraci6nyverificacion, dentm de cada serle de datos, fueron ulteriormente evaluados de manera centra- lizada y comparados par la OMM utilizando diversos criterios gnificosynUlnericos de verificaci6n aceptadospOItodos los autores de los model os. Fundandose en esta evaluaci6ny comparaci6n, se fonnularon varias conclusiones y recomendaciones con respecto al funcionamiento y aplicacion de los modelos a diferentes situaciones de predicci6n.

El plan de ejecucion del proyecto fue dividido en tres etapas: fase preIiminar, fase de comparaci6nyfase de informacion.

El plan de operaciones del proyecto fue fonnulado durante la fase preliminar, fundandose en tres reuniones ofieiosas del Grupo de estudio celebradas en Washington D.C., Parisy Tokio. En 1971 la OMM distribuyo a todos los paises Miembros interesados la descripci6ny plan detallado del proyecto en un informe titulado "Comparacion de modelos conceptuales para fines de predicci6n hidrol6gica - Informe general y plan de ejecuci6n". Junto con dicho infonne la OMM distribuyo tambien un "cuestionario sabre los modelos canceptuales operativQs utilizados en la prediccion hidrologica a corto plazo" al que respondieron nueve paises Miembros can la descripci6n de 23 modelos.

(20)

xx

RESUMEN

Larase de comparadon caroenz6 con una reunion de expertos celebrada en Ginebra en el mes de octubre de 1972, en la que se propuso que se inc1uyesen en la comparaci6n 19 de los modelos presentados. Por distinto'S motivos s610 se verificaron realmente en el proyecto 10 modelos. Diehos modelos asi como las cuencas correspondientes a las sels series de datos tipo figuran en la Tabla1.

LaTabla II contiene los criterios gnificos y numericos de verificaci6n utilizados en la evaluacion de los caudales simulados producidos par los modelos verificados.

Durante la fase deinfomlacion,IaOMM organiz6 en Ginebra en el mes de julio de 1974 una ConferenciaTecnica a la que asistieron representantes de los organismos participantes en el proyecto, asi como varias expertos invitados.

Dicha Conferencia estudi6 los resultados del proyectoy redact6 conc1usiones y recomendaciones destinadas a las autoridades nacionalesy a todos los especialistas interesados que necesitaban instrucciones en esta materia.

En el Capitulo 1 de la presente publicaci6n se describen los objetivosyla realizacion del proyecto. El Capitulo 2 contiene una descripcion general de los modelos presentados para fines de comparaci6nyen el Capitulo 3 se estudian las series de datos tipo utiIizados en el proyectoyse explican sus limitaciones aSI como las caracteristicas que los datos han de tener para los distintes modelos. El Capitulo 4 contiene los resultados de las verificaciones graficasynumericas de las simulaciones producidas par los modelos verificados, aSI como una evaluaci6n de los limites de aplicaci6n de los modelosy un estudio de las cuencas fluviales en las que los modelos fueron verificlldos. En el Capitulo 5 se describen las conc1usionesyrecomendaciones delaConferencia can respecto a los criterios de verificaci6nyala aplicaci6n de los distintos modelos en diferentes situaciones de predicci6n, en detenninados tipos de cuencasy en varias condiciones.

(21)

TABLA I

Conjuntos de datos normalizadoS verificados en los modelo's conceptuales comparados

Conjuntos de datos de cuencas fluviales tlpo, verificados en los modelos del proyecto

Nombre del modelo Nombreysefios de fa instituci6n Bird Rio Wal/ombi Rio Rio Rio

(yabreviatura) o centro queelaboroel modelo conceptual Creek Blkin Brook Kizu Sanaga NamMune

USA URSS Australia Japan Camerun Tailandia

2344 13.100 1.580 1.445 131.500 104.000

km' km' km' km' km² km'

Modelo de la Oficina de Bureau of Meteorology, P.O. Box 1289 K,

• • • •

Meteorologia (CBM) Melbourne, Vic. 3001, Australia

Modelo Girard I ORSTOM, 19 rue Eugene-earriere

• •

75018, Paris, Francia

Modelo tipo de almacenamiento National Research Centre for Disaster

• • • • • •

en serie (DepositoI) Prevention, 1 Ginza Higasi 6, Chuo-ku, Tokio,Japon

Modelo tipo de almacenamiento Ditto

• •

en serie (DepositoII)

Modelo de prediccion de crecidas Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology

• •

(IMH2-SSVP) 50S.Bucurestj~Ploiesti97 Bucarest, Rumania

Modelo de sintesis del caudal y de Corps of Engineers, Portland Oregon,

• • • ^• • •

regulaci6n de depositos (SSARR) U.S.A.

Modelo hidrologico del Servicio National Weather Service, Silver Spring,

• • • •

Meteorologico Mundial (NWSH) Maryland, U.S.A.

Modelo hidrologico del Centro de National Weather Service River Forecast

• • • •

prediccion fluvial de Sacramento Center, Sacramento, California, U.S.A.

(SRFCH)

Modelo del Centro Hydrometeorological Centre of the U.S.S.R.,

• • •

Hidrometeorologico de escorrentia Boishevistskaya 13, Moscu. 123376, de la precipitacion de la URSS (HMC) _U.R.S.S.

Modelo del sistema lineal forzado Hydraulic Institute of Pavia University and ⁰

• • • •

⁰

eCLS) IBM Pisa Scientific Centre, Italia

Notas: 0 = Resultados de 1a verificDcion recibidos en Ia Secretaria de la OMM despues de la Conferencia (1974), es dedI, despues que los especiaJistas en elaboracion de modelos tuvleran la posibilidad de familiarizarse con los resultados de la comprobacion de los conjuntos de datos durante el periodo de verificacion de dos ail os. En adelante, so aludini a estos resultados con la denominacion de "resultados diferides de las verificacienes".

EI conjunto de datos del rio Kostroma (URSS) fue veriflcado mediante el modele "Snowmelt·Runoff" (nievederretida~escorrentia)del Centro Hidrometeorologico de 1a URSS.

'" _'"

'" _~

'"

Z

><

d

(22)

---,- - - - - - - - -^----,

TABLA II

C:dte:~io:sgnificos y l1umericos de verificacion utilizados durante la realizacion del proyecto

~

Criterio$ gr4ficos Criteriosn~mericos Varia!Jles del flujo para las que se

j71'oroll criteria!;numericos

A=

'"

i

en

4. Caudal diario medio correspondiente a los diasd~escaso fJujo, definidos como aquellos diasdurante los cuales el flujo es superior a cero, perc inferioral f1ujo corrcspon- dienteaun periodo de 130 dias del periodo de verificacion, Parae1conjunto de datos del WaUombi arook, esta variable 11a sido defin~dacomo e1 flujo inferior al yalor medio resulta.nte de la totalidad del p~ri04Q q.~verifjcaeion.

3. Volumenesmensual~sde los flujos expresados enc~ntimetrQsde profundidad en 1azona dehlcuenca.

L Caudal diario rnedio (enm:J PPfsegl,lodo).

2. Caudaldi~rionUlxjmo (en m; por segundo) de oaqa uno qe los meses en que el nujo es igualo superior al flujo medio deIn totaliclad, del pedodo de calibraciony verificacion.

k

Bl

L L=--l-

V

~Yo,c D= 11

Yo

nyo

Lv'c

-Yo)

~IYc-Yol

y=

R=

6. EI coeficiente de persistencia (PE) viene daqo par:

5. El coeficiente de fase(PH)para el caud<l) de pico,e~que reslllta del numero de veces que e1ptCQsimulado esta defasado, en el tiempo y con respecto al pico observado, en un dill por10 men-ps,

4, La media aritmetica viene dada por:

llJ}o

3. Lar~1~ci6nentre el error absolutoyel valor medio viene dada por:

2. La relacion entre e1 error reactivoy el valor medio viene dada por:

1. ElGoefiotente de variacion de errores resid1.jales viene dado por:

[

~(yc,~YO)2t

3. Curvas de duracion del fiujopelos ca,udales diarios simulados y observados.

4. Diagramasdeva,lores desperdigfl,dos simulados, comparados con los valores q.ilUioS (,ie losca~dalesmaximas mensuales observados (caudal pe pico).

2. 'Diagr8cm!lpeva,lor~sacumula,pos, comparados can losvolum~nesde los caudales mensuall?;s observadQs.

1. Piaggunalin~~1 d~los valPfes Q,<} Ips hic;irogr!3-fo~,simulados y observad,os.

En las anteriores ecuaciones:

Yo

=

^caudalob.~ervadc

Yc

=

cal\dal calculado

n = numero total de observaciones Y- - ~YQ

Q - n

k =nttmero pe zonas positivas y negativas

n

V =

2:

(VO - Yc)2 paranvalores i=1

B =cad;l. una de las zonas de ca,da periodQ (0 segmento).