precipitation forecasts and their uncertainty as input into hydrological models
Clicks: 75
ID: 241400
2005
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
22.2
/100
75 views
11 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #284 of 303 articles by views in materials research bulletin
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 303 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Torrential streams and fast runoff are characteristic of most Slovenian rivers and extensive damage is caused almost every year by rainstorms affecting different regions of Slovenia. Rainfall-runoff models which are tools for runoff calculation can be used for flood forecasting. In Slovenia, the lag time between rainfall and runoff is only a few hours and on-line data are used only for now-casting. Predicted precipitation is necessary in flood forecasting some days ahead. The ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts) model gives general forecasts several days ahead while more detailed precipitation data with the ALADIN/SI model are available for two days ahead. Combining the weather forecasts with the information on catchment conditions and a hydrological forecasting model can give advance warning of potential flooding notwithstanding a certain degree of uncertainty in using precipitation forecasts based on meteorological models. Analysis of the sensitivity of the hydrological model to the rainfall error has shown that the deviation in runoff is much larger than the rainfall deviation. Therefore, verification of predicted precipitation for large precipitation events was performed with the ECMWF model. Measured precipitation data were interpolated on a regular grid and compared with the results from the ECMWF model. The deviation in predicted precipitation from interpolated measurements is shown with the model bias resulting from the inability of the model to predict the precipitation correctly and a bias for horizontal resolution of the model and natural variability of precipitation.
| Reference Key |
kobold2005hydrologyprecipitation
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;M. Kobold;M. Kobold;K. Sušelj |
| Journal | materials research bulletin |
| Year | 2005 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.