1 / 12

Towards an Hydrological Qualification of the Simulated Rainfall in Mountainous Areas

Towards an Hydrological Qualification of the Simulated Rainfall in Mountainous Areas. Eddy Yates, Sandrine Anquetin, Jean-Dominique Creutin Laboratoire d’étude des Transferts en Hydrologie et Environnement, Grenoble, France. Introduction Method Results Conclusions. 300 mm 9 h.

chenoa
Download Presentation

Towards an Hydrological Qualification of the Simulated Rainfall in Mountainous Areas

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Towards an Hydrological Qualification of the Simulated Rainfall in Mountainous Areas Eddy Yates, Sandrine Anquetin, Jean-Dominique Creutin Laboratoire d’étude des Transferts en Hydrologie et Environnement, Grenoble, France

  2. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions 300 mm 9 h Q~ 100 Q mean • Storms • 300-400 mm in 6-12 h. over some 100s km2 • Watersheds • 100 to 1000 km2 • specific outflows of up to 5 m3s-1km-2 Hilly region between the Mediterranean sea and the Massif Central. Rainy autumns. HYDRAM Water depth seen by the Nîmes radar (Météo-France) October 6, 2001 Vidourle, October 6 – 7, 2001 Cévennes-Vivarais : a region prone to flash floods • Objective : forecast of these flash floods. • We focus here on the precipitation forecast.

  3. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions Precipitation forecast model We use Meso-NH (Météo-France, CNRS) : • ameso-scalenon-hydrostatic model • a nested configuration. The finest grid has a2.5 kmresolution which allows anexplicit resolution of the convection

  4. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions Reference observed rain fields • We use kriging : • an exact interpolator • it takes into account the statistical structure of the rain-gauge data • it gives an estimation of the reliability of the interpolation (estimation variance) Simulation and observation are observed for 1h and 11h cumulated rainfall.

  5. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions 1995 2001 Observations Simulation Quite a good localisation Not enough precipitation simulated (maximum cumulated rainfall of 100 mm vs. 170 mm) 1995 : Gardon d’Anduze Observations 2001 : Vidourle Simulation Bad localisation Not enough precipitation simulated (maximum cumulated rainfall of 160 mm vs. 260 mm) Cases studied Two simulations with very different qualities. The point is : • “how much better” is the better simulation ? • is it betterfor hydrological purposestoo ?

  6. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions Method

  7. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions R²(area) R²(area) Method Observation Forecast

  8. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions Method estimation error limit point to point correlation limit

  9. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions 1995 11 h cumulated rainfall 1995 1 h cumulated rainfall 1995 2001 Lower short-range accuracy for short time accumulation Evolution of the correlation with the area

  10. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions 2001 1995 Limits of the method

  11. IntroductionMethod Results Conclusions Conclusions, perspectives • The method can discriminate good forecasts from very bad forecasts • We need other cases to test the method • The method must be tested with distributed data too (radars) • Next step : use of TOPODYN (LTHE), a hydrologic model from the TOPMODEL family. It considers several scales of the watersheds.

  12. Thank you

More Related