Skip to Main Content

After applying the derived UHs to hydrograph prediction, visual comparison of the observed and predicted hydrographs of GCC and Nash method (Figure 5) suggested that the GCC method generally provided better predictions than the Nash method with respect to the magnitude of the peak, and the timing of the rise, peak and recession. This was supported by the goodness-of-fit statistics (Table 4). In the calibration period, the average values of ENS, EWB, and PDE of the three watersheds were 87.90%, 1.01 and 8.71%, respectively, for the GCC method and 82.49%, 0.99 and 12.58%, respectively, for the Nash method. The best values of ENS, EWB, and PDE were 95.30%, 1.00 and 1.99%, respectively, for the GCC method and 92.39%, 1.00 and 0.58%, respectively, for the Nash method. The worst values of ENS, EWB, PDE were 70.10%, 1.06 and 18.12%, respectively, for the GCC method and 68.00%, 0.95 and 27.09%, respectively, for the Nash method. Similar results were obtained in the verification period.

Table 4

Goodness of fit statistics between predicted and observed DRHs in three study areas for GCC and Nash hydrograph

GCC hydrograph
Nash hydrograph
CatchmentStorm IDENS (%)EWBPDE (%)ENS (%)EWBPDE (%)
Dagutai 95.30 1.00 1.99 92.39 1.00 –9.21 
86.28 1.04 5.75 85.20 1.03 0.58 
89.41 1.00 11.90 86.20 1.00 15.66 
91.80 1.00 18.12 89.90 1.00 23.43 
90.79 1.00 0.97 84.67 0.99 6.75 
86.87 0.95 9.61 68.35 0.93 4.88 
Bailianhe 91.66 1.02 8.34 83.14 0.96 27.09 
84.19 0.99 8.00 80.68 0.97 7.60 
70.10 1.00 3.17 68.00 0.96 5.39 
10 87.12 0.99 7.99 79.90 1.00 14.17 
11 95.59 1.00 2.29 73.04 0.99 10.46 
12 84.55 0.99 10.36 75.32 0.97 18.99 
13 87.47 1.03 30.46 68.65 0.93 44.08 
Kaifengyu 14 90.30 1.06 12.55 74.27 0.95 9.19 
15 92.36 1.00 13.95 90.51 1.00 6.31 
16 86.58 1.01 3.02 78.60 1.00 20.39 
17 88.00 1.01 3.07 82.95 1.01 13.03 
18 90.25 1.00 11.67 89.00 0.98 18.87 
GCC hydrograph
Nash hydrograph
CatchmentStorm IDENS (%)EWBPDE (%)ENS (%)EWBPDE (%)
Dagutai 95.30 1.00 1.99 92.39 1.00 –9.21 
86.28 1.04 5.75 85.20 1.03 0.58 
89.41 1.00 11.90 86.20 1.00 15.66 
91.80 1.00 18.12 89.90 1.00 23.43 
90.79 1.00 0.97 84.67 0.99 6.75 
86.87 0.95 9.61 68.35 0.93 4.88 
Bailianhe 91.66 1.02 8.34 83.14 0.96 27.09 
84.19 0.99 8.00 80.68 0.97 7.60 
70.10 1.00 3.17 68.00 0.96 5.39 
10 87.12 0.99 7.99 79.90 1.00 14.17 
11 95.59 1.00 2.29 73.04 0.99 10.46 
12 84.55 0.99 10.36 75.32 0.97 18.99 
13 87.47 1.03 30.46 68.65 0.93 44.08 
Kaifengyu 14 90.30 1.06 12.55 74.27 0.95 9.19 
15 92.36 1.00 13.95 90.51 1.00 6.31 
16 86.58 1.01 3.02 78.60 1.00 20.39 
17 88.00 1.01 3.07 82.95 1.01 13.03 
18 90.25 1.00 11.67 89.00 0.98 18.87 

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal