水库调节地区东江流域非一致性水文极值演变特征、成因及影响

doi:10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2013.07.851

地理科学 ›› 2013, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (7): 851-858.doi: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2013.07.851

水库调节地区东江流域非一致性水文极值演变特征、成因及影响

叶长青^1,²(), 陈晓宏^1,²(), 张家鸣^1,², 张丽娟^1,², 孔兰³

1.中山大学水资源与环境研究中心, 广东广州 510275
2.华南地区水循环与水安全广东省普通高校重点实验室, 广东广州 510275
3.中水珠江规划勘测设计有限公司, 广东广州 510610

收稿日期:2012-08-22 修回日期:2013-01-04 出版日期:2013-07-20 发布日期:2013-07-20
作者简介:
作者简介：叶长青（1982-）,男,海南屯昌人,博士研究生,主要从事水文水资源方面研究。E-mail:yechangqing2001@hotmail.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金重大国际合作和重点项目（51210013,50839005）、水利部公益性行业科研专项经费项目专题（200901043-3）、广东省科技厅项目(2010B050300010)、广东省水利科技创新项目（2009-39）、中山大学重大项目培育和新兴交叉学科项目（10lgzd11）、国家重点基础研究发展计划（973）项目(2010CB428405)、广东省自然科学基金（S2011040005992）、国家自然科学基金（51209095）、国家自然科学基金项目（41001019）资助

Changing Properties, Causes and Impacts of Non-stationary Extreme Stream Flow Under the Changing Environment of Hydraulic Engineering Regulated Basin in Dongjiang River, China

Chang-qing YE^1,²(), Xiao-hong CHEN²(), Jia-ming ZHANG^1,², Li-juan ZHANG^1,², Lan KONG³

1.Department of Water Resources and Environment, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou,Guangdong 510275, China
2.Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Water Security in Southern China of Guangdong High Education Institute, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou,Guangdong 510275, China
3.China Water Resources Pearl River Planning Surveying ＆ Designing Co．Ltd,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510610,China

Received:2012-08-22 Revised:2013-01-04 Online:2013-07-20 Published:2013-07-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

选用8种概率分布函数,以极大似然法估计函数参数,采用AIC、BIC和AICc模型选择准则选出最优分布函数,系统分析变化环境下东江龙川和河源2站的极值流量特征,并对年最大流量变化规律及其影响做有益探讨。结果表明：降雨和水库蓄水工程是年最大流量显著下降的主要原因。龙川和河源站年最大流量LN2混尾分布拟合最好,变化环境后洪水频率最优分布线型基本保持一致,但流量变小造成分布参数改变已导致分布线型高水尾部特性变缓,相应设计流量偏小。用水文情势发生变化前估计的洪水重现期不能很好描述变化后洪水频率特征。

关键词: 频率分析, 概率分布函数, 极值流量, 非一致性, 东江流域

Abstract:

No "stationarity" existed any longer in the environmental background for the formation of runoff series. Designed by the existing engineering hydrologic analysis method will face the risk of distortion in design frequency caused by the ever-changing environment. We analyzed the statistical properties of hydrologic extreme flow for hydrologic station of Longchuan and Heyuan in Dongjiang river using 8 probability distribution functions. Estimate of parameters was performed using the maximum likelihood technique. Goodness of fit was done based on AIC, BIC and AICc for the optimal linear frequency distribution before and after environment change. And the rules and effects of variability for hydrologic extreme flow was discussed. The research results indicate that the non-stationary annual maximum daily flow series of stations in Dongjiang Basin show a descend trend that caused by rainfall and construction of water conservancy projects. Mixed tail distribution (LN2) at Longchuan and Heyuan stations were found to be the best fitting model. The optimal linear frequency distribution maintain consistency before and after environment change, but the impacts on fitting curve of flood series showed an overall performance as upper tail from "steep" to "gentle". The Changing properties and impacts of parameters to distribution are analyzed by the 30-year moving average method. Flood frequency analyses for Dongjiang river show that the maximum flow with a 0.01-annual probability (corresponding to 100-year flood peak under stationary conditions) over the 56-year record has ranged from a maximum discharge of 9 189 m³/s to a minimum of 2 305 m³/s at longchuan station; and has ranged from a maximum discharge of 11 125 m³/s to a minimum of 4 072 m³/s at Heyuan station. If the non-stationarity of series is not considered, the traditional method is still used for calculation. At the Longchuan and Heyuan Stations, the design flood magnitude will be overestimated. Compared with non-stationary flood series characteristics, the flood magnitude is smaller and the frequency is lower for the stationary "real" flood series characteristics caused by hydraulic engineering regulation and rainfall. After changes in the hydrological regime, the flood return period estimated before the change is often unable to well describe the flood frequency characteristics after environmental changes.

Key words: Frequency analysis, probability distribution functions, stream flow extremes, non-stationarity, Dongjiang river

中图分类号:

P333

叶长青, 陈晓宏, 张家鸣, 张丽娟, 孔兰. 水库调节地区东江流域非一致性水文极值演变特征、成因及影响[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(7): 851-858.

Chang-qing YE, Xiao-hong CHEN, Jia-ming ZHANG, Li-juan ZHANG, Lan KONG. Changing Properties, Causes and Impacts of Non-stationary Extreme Stream Flow Under the Changing Environment of Hydraulic Engineering Regulated Basin in Dongjiang River, China[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2013, 33(7): 851-858.

图/表 13

表1

表2

表3

水文频率分析的分布概率密度函数"

分布线型	概率密度函数	参数	特征
PT3	$f (x) = β α Γ (α) (x - a 0) α - 1 exp [- β (x - a 0)]$	尺度: $β$ ;位置: $a 0$ ;形状: $α$	薄尾
GLO	$f (x) = 1 α exp [- 1 - k) y] [1 + exp (- y)] 2$ 当 k≠0, y= k^-¹ln{1-k $($ x-ξ $)$ /α}; 当 k=0, y= $($ x-ξ $)$ /α.	尺度: $α$ ;位置: ξ;形状: k	厚尾
GEV	$f (x) = 1 α 1 - k (x - ξ) α (1 / k) - 1 exp - 1 - k (x - ξ) α 1 k$	尺度: $α$ ;位置: ξ;形状:k	混尾
Weibull	$f (x) = k α (x - ξ α) α - 1 exp - (x - ξ α) k$	尺度: $α$ ;位置: ξ;形状: k	薄尾
Gumbel	$f (x) = 1 α exp - x - ξ α - exp - x - ξ α$	尺度: $α$ ;位置: ξ	混尾
LN3	$f (x) = 1 x - ξ σ 2 π exp - [ln x - ξ - μ] 2 2 σ 2$	尺度: $σ$ ;位置: ξ;形状: $μ$	混尾

表3

表4

洪水频率分析最优线型选择准则"

准则	公式	描述	特性
AIC	$A AIC = - 2 ln L (D θ ?) + 2 m$	$L (D θ ?)$ 是对数似然函数, $θ ?$ 为分布D的参数集,m为参数个数,n为样本大小	基于最大熵原理,可检验出不同模型间差异显著性。但AIC值受样本容量的影响较大^[19]
BIC	$B BIC = - 2 ln L (D θ ?) + ln (n) m$		基于Bayesian理论,对增加的模型参数和小样本序列加上更大的惩罚^[19]
AICc	$A AI C c = - 2 ln L (D θ ?) + 2 m (n n - m - 1)$ ^[19]		对参数个数的惩罚要比AIC严厉,当样本容量相对模型参数的个数较小时较适用（n/p<40）^[20]

表4

图1

表5

表6

图2

图3

图4

表7

图5

图6

参考文献 21

[1]	李景宜. 黄河小北干流洪水倒灌渭河风险评估及其影响[J].地理科学,2011,31(8):947-951.
[2]	张强,孙鹏, 陈喜等.1956~2000年中国地表水资源状况:变化特征、成因及影响[J].地理科学,2011,31(12):1430-1436.
[3]	周玉良,袁潇晨,金菊良,等.基于Copula的区域水文干旱频率分析[J].地理科学,2011,31(11):1383-1388.
[4]	Milly P C D,Wetherald P T.Increasing risk of great floods in a changing climate[J].Nature,2002,415(6871):514-517.
[5]	梁忠民,胡义明,王军.非一致性水文频率分析的研究进展[J].水科学进展,2011,22(6):864-871.
[6]	Strupczewski W G,Singh V P,Feluch W.Non-stationary approach to at-site flood frequency modeling I. Maxi mum likelihood estimation[J].Journal of Hydrology,2001,248(1-4):123-142.
[7]	Cunderlik J M,Burn D H.Non-stationary pooled flood frequency analysis[J].Journal of Hydrology,2003,276(1-4):210-223.
[8]	Waylen P,Woo M K.Prediction of annual floods generated by mixed processes[J].Water Resources Research,1982,18(4):1283-1286.
[9]	Singh V P,Wang S X,Zhang L.Frequency analysis of nonidentically distributed hydrologic flood data[J].Journal of Hydrology,2005,307(1-4):175-195.
[10]	Khaliq M N,Ouarda T B M J,Ondo J C,et al. Frequency analysis of a sequence of dependent and/or non-stationary hydro-meteorological observations:A review[J].Journal of Hydrology,2006,329(3-4):534-552.
[11]	Zhang Q,Xu C Y,Yu Z,et al.Multifractal analysis of streamflow records of the East River basin(Pearl River),China[J].Physica A,2009,388(6):927-934.
[12]	王兆礼. 气候与土地利用变化的流域水文系统响应——以东江流域为例[D].广州:中山大学博士论文,2007.
[13]	孙桂丽,陈亚宁,李卫红.新疆极端水文事件年际变化及对气候变化的响应[J].地理科学, 2011, 31(11):1389-1395.
[14]	Dahman E R,Hall M J.Screening of hydrological data[M].Netherlands:International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement (ILRI),1990:49,58.
[15]	郭生练. 设计洪水研究进展与评价[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2005.
[16]	S El Adlouni,B Bobe´e,T B M J Ouarda. On the tails of extreme event distributions in hydrology[J].Journal of Hydrology,2008,355(1-4):16-33.
[17]	Huang W R,Xu S D,Nnaj S.Evaluation of GEV model for frequency analysis of annual maximum water levels in the coast of United States[J].Ocean Engineering,2008,35(11-12):1132-1147.
[18]	Laio F,Di Baldassarre G,Montanari A.Model selection techniques for the frequency analysis of hydrological extremes[J].Water Resources Research,2009,45W07416.doi.10.1029/2007/WR006666.
[19]	Haddad K,Rahman A.Selection of the best fit flood frequency distribution and parameter estimation procedure:A case study for Tasmania in Australia[J].Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess,2011,25(3):415-428.
[20]	Calenda G,Mancini C P,Volpi E.Selection of the probabilistic model of extreme floods: the case of the River Tiber in Rome[J].Journal of Hydrology,2009,371(1-4):1-11.
[21]	詹道江,叶守泽.工程水文学[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,1999.

水文站	位置		流域面积(km²)	序列长度
龙川	115°15´E	24°07´N	7 699	1954-1-1~2009-12-31
河源	114°42´E	23°44´N	15 750	1954-1-1~2009-12-31

水库	河流	库容 (10⁸m³)	建库年代	影响站点
枫树坝	东江干流	19.4	1970~1974	龙川,河源
新丰江	新丰江	139.0	1958~1962	河源

水文站	拟合检验	PT3	GLO	GEV	Weibull	GUM	LN3	LN2	LP3
龙川 (1954~2009年)	AIC	922.91	921.16	931.93	923.68	929.84	921.38	919.78	925.66
	BIC	928.99	927.24	938.01	929.75	933.90	927.45	923.84	931.73
	AICc	923.37	921.62	932.39	924.14	930.07	921.84	920.01	926.12
龙川 (1975~2009年)	AIC	557.39	548.83	548.91	549.21	548.18	548.85	546.87	548.85
	BIC	562.06	553.49	553.57	553.87	551.29	553.52	549.98	553.52
	AICc	558.17	549.60	549.68	549.98	548.55	549.62	547.24	549.62
河源 (1951~2010年)	AIC	1046.99	1038.33	1040.67	1036.11	1038.64	1037.52	1035.63	1037.33
	BIC	1053.28	1044.62	1046.95	1042.40	1042.83	1043.81	1039.82	1043.61
	AICc	1047.42	1038.76	1041.09	1036.54	1038.85	1037.95	1035.84	1037.76
河源 (1964~2010年)	AIC	803.21	791.43	792.32	794.23	792.72	792.80	790.85	792.85
	BIC	808.76	796.98	797.87	799.78	796.42	798.35	794.55	798.40
	AICc	803.77	791.98	792.88	794.79	792.99	793.35	791.13	793.41

水文站	序列长度（年代）	最优分布	参数
水文站	序列长度（年代）	最优分布	尺度	形状	位置
龙川	1954~2009	LN2	7.184	0.653	/
龙川	1975~2009	LN2	6.956	0.538	/
河源	1951~2010	LN2	7.684	0.603	/
河源	1964~2010	LN2	7.563	0.543	/

水文站	线型	序列长度（年）	T=5	T=10	T=20	T=50	T=100	T=200
龙川	LN2	1954~2009	2284.43	3099.44	3997.56	5038.82	6020.42	7085.47
龙川	LN2	1975~2009	1650.35	2091.31	2543.02	3169.11	3669.98	4197.46
河源	LN2	1951~2010	3609.37	4705.90	5858.50	7496.70	8836.09	10270.60
河源	LN2	1964~2010	3040.74	3860.60	4701.90	5869.97	6805.78	7792.42

水库调节地区东江流域非一致性水文极值演变特征、成因及影响

Changing Properties, Causes and Impacts of Non-stationary Extreme Stream Flow Under the Changing Environment of Hydraulic Engineering Regulated Basin in Dongjiang River, China

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 21

相关文章 6

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	顾西辉, 张强, 孔冬冬, 刘剑宇, 范科科. 中国年和季节极端降水时空特征及极值分布函数上尾部性质[J]. 地理科学, 2017, 37(6): 929-937.
[2]	罗贤, 何大明, 季漩, 陆颖, 李运刚. 近50年怒江流域中上游枯季径流变化及其对气候变化的响应[J]. 地理科学, 2016, 36(1): 107-113.
[3]	刘洁, 陈晓宏, 许振成, 虢清伟, 肖志峰, 王兆礼, 吴根义. 降雨变化对东江流域径流的影响模拟分析[J]. 地理科学, 2015, 35(4): 483-490.
[4]	何艳虎, 陈晓宏, 林凯荣, 吴孝情. 东江流域近50年旱涝时空演变特征[J]. 地理科学, 2014, 34(11): 1391-1398.
[5]	张强, 孙鹏, 白云岗, 张江辉. 塔河流域枯水流量概率特征及成因与影响研究[J]. 地理科学, 2013, 33(4): 465-472.
[6]	周玉良, 袁潇晨, 金菊良, 郦建强, 宋松柏. 基于Copula的区域水文干旱频率分析[J]. 地理科学, 2011, 31(11): 1383-1388.