Skip to Main Content

Twenty-seven historical floods from 2005 to 2010 are employed to verify the performance of the proposed algorithm. As the algorithm has little influence on the peak time, here we list only the results of peak discharge and total runoff volume for comparison. Table 5 presents the simulated results of peak discharge and total runoff volume based on Pa calculated by the Xinanjiang DM and modified by GA, and the observed results of peak discharge and total runoff volume for all floods. Table 6 shows the statistical results of the DM and GA.

Table 5

Comparisons of peak discharge and total runoff volume based on Pa from DM and GA

 Peak dischargeTotal runoff volume
  DMGA DMGA
FloodsObserved (m³ s−1)Simulated (m³ s−1)Error (%)Simulated (m³ s−1)Error (%)Observed (108 m³)Simulated (108 m³)Error (%)Simulated (108Error (%)
20050213 2,089.9 1,961.2 −6.16 2,156.9 3.21 3.38 3.63 7.21 3.44 1.70 
20050619 3,956.9 4,852.5 22.63 4,243.7 7.25 7.75 8.89 14.71 7.74 0.13 
20060608 3,353.0 4,256.0 26.93 3,353.2 0.01 5.66 6.69 18.20 5.90 4.24 
20060613 2,257.6 2,264.5 0.31 2,251.6 0.27 3.77 4.33 14.85 4.35 15.38 
20060804 2,499.7 2,184.6 −12.61 2,361.8 5.52 4.32 4.11 4.86 4.39 1.62 
20070429 1,947.7 1,261.8.3 35.22 1,903.2 −2.28 3.11 2.09 32.72 2.99 −4.00 
20070603 3,398.4 3,126.9 −7.99 3,221.5 5.21 4.20 4.12 1.90 4.22 0.48 
20070607 7,326.6 9,111.6 24.36 7,419.8 1.27 8.86 11.16 25.92 9.35 5.56 
20070613 3,398.4 4,367.0 28.50 3,388.5 −2.9 5.02 6.26 24.72 5.31 5.88 
20080509 1,511.2 1,424.0 −5.77 1,446.7 4.27 2.19 2.08 5.02 2.12 3.20 
20080613 7,642.2 10,053.7 31.56 7,663.0 2.72 14.58 16.39 12.45 13.12 10.02 
20090424 875.3 864.3 −1.26 868.1 0.82 0.90 0.88 2.78 0.89 1.77 
20090519 3,138.0 2,928.6 −6.67 2,874.1 8.41 4.64 4.12 11.16 4.28 7.89 
20090602 896.5 793.7 −11.47 890.0 0.73 1.32 1.27 −3.30 1.37 3.79 
20090611 1,569.9 1,880.2 19.77 1,666.4 6.15 1.97 2.77 40.33 2.26 14.72 
20090728 1,399.7 1,679.8 20.01 1,413.2 0.96 1.72 2.33 35.46 1.59 −7.56 
20100416 3,139.1 3,300.9 5.15 3,192.2 1.69 6.78 6.86 1.18 6.58 2.95 
20100421 3,454.2 3,507.4 1.54 3,233.6 6.39 4.60 5.43 18.04 5.12 11.30 
20100426 1,351.4 1,444.1 6.86 1,269.1 6.09 1.14 1.38 21.05 1.26 10.53 
20100513 2,706.5 3,339.9 23.40 2,758.4 1.92 3.96 4.22 6.57 3.47 12.37 
20100519 1,602.9 1,552.5 −3.14 1,602.9 0.00 1.56 1.53 1.92 1.58 1.28 
20100522 2,691.4 2,366.6 −12.07 2,795.4 3.86 2.66 2.30 13.53 2.66 0.00 
20100531 3,270.0 4,693.6 43.54 3,109.2 4.92 5.79 6.65 14.85 5.10 11.92 
20100609 1,036.8 1,307.6 26.12 1,038.0 0.12 1.30 1.48 13.85 1.26 3.08 
20100613 3,270.1 3,778.6 15.55 2,919.4 −10.72 4.92 5.54 12.60 4.61 6.30 
20100617 2,683.1 3,209.5 19.62 2,680.2 −0.11 3.51 4.12 17.38 3.65 3.99 
20100621 5,829.2 7,014.6 20.34 6,015.1 3.19 7.70 8.73 13.38 7.79 1.18 
 Peak dischargeTotal runoff volume
  DMGA DMGA
FloodsObserved (m³ s−1)Simulated (m³ s−1)Error (%)Simulated (m³ s−1)Error (%)Observed (108 m³)Simulated (108 m³)Error (%)Simulated (108Error (%)
20050213 2,089.9 1,961.2 −6.16 2,156.9 3.21 3.38 3.63 7.21 3.44 1.70 
20050619 3,956.9 4,852.5 22.63 4,243.7 7.25 7.75 8.89 14.71 7.74 0.13 
20060608 3,353.0 4,256.0 26.93 3,353.2 0.01 5.66 6.69 18.20 5.90 4.24 
20060613 2,257.6 2,264.5 0.31 2,251.6 0.27 3.77 4.33 14.85 4.35 15.38 
20060804 2,499.7 2,184.6 −12.61 2,361.8 5.52 4.32 4.11 4.86 4.39 1.62 
20070429 1,947.7 1,261.8.3 35.22 1,903.2 −2.28 3.11 2.09 32.72 2.99 −4.00 
20070603 3,398.4 3,126.9 −7.99 3,221.5 5.21 4.20 4.12 1.90 4.22 0.48 
20070607 7,326.6 9,111.6 24.36 7,419.8 1.27 8.86 11.16 25.92 9.35 5.56 
20070613 3,398.4 4,367.0 28.50 3,388.5 −2.9 5.02 6.26 24.72 5.31 5.88 
20080509 1,511.2 1,424.0 −5.77 1,446.7 4.27 2.19 2.08 5.02 2.12 3.20 
20080613 7,642.2 10,053.7 31.56 7,663.0 2.72 14.58 16.39 12.45 13.12 10.02 
20090424 875.3 864.3 −1.26 868.1 0.82 0.90 0.88 2.78 0.89 1.77 
20090519 3,138.0 2,928.6 −6.67 2,874.1 8.41 4.64 4.12 11.16 4.28 7.89 
20090602 896.5 793.7 −11.47 890.0 0.73 1.32 1.27 −3.30 1.37 3.79 
20090611 1,569.9 1,880.2 19.77 1,666.4 6.15 1.97 2.77 40.33 2.26 14.72 
20090728 1,399.7 1,679.8 20.01 1,413.2 0.96 1.72 2.33 35.46 1.59 −7.56 
20100416 3,139.1 3,300.9 5.15 3,192.2 1.69 6.78 6.86 1.18 6.58 2.95 
20100421 3,454.2 3,507.4 1.54 3,233.6 6.39 4.60 5.43 18.04 5.12 11.30 
20100426 1,351.4 1,444.1 6.86 1,269.1 6.09 1.14 1.38 21.05 1.26 10.53 
20100513 2,706.5 3,339.9 23.40 2,758.4 1.92 3.96 4.22 6.57 3.47 12.37 
20100519 1,602.9 1,552.5 −3.14 1,602.9 0.00 1.56 1.53 1.92 1.58 1.28 
20100522 2,691.4 2,366.6 −12.07 2,795.4 3.86 2.66 2.30 13.53 2.66 0.00 
20100531 3,270.0 4,693.6 43.54 3,109.2 4.92 5.79 6.65 14.85 5.10 11.92 
20100609 1,036.8 1,307.6 26.12 1,038.0 0.12 1.30 1.48 13.85 1.26 3.08 
20100613 3,270.1 3,778.6 15.55 2,919.4 −10.72 4.92 5.54 12.60 4.61 6.30 
20100617 2,683.1 3,209.5 19.62 2,680.2 −0.11 3.51 4.12 17.38 3.65 3.99 
20100621 5,829.2 7,014.6 20.34 6,015.1 3.19 7.70 8.73 13.38 7.79 1.18 
Table 6

Statistical result comparison of DM and GA

MethodQualificatory peak dischargeQualificatory total runoff volume
NumberRatio (%)NumberRatio (%)
DM 16 69.57 21 91.30 
GA 27 100 27 100 
MethodQualificatory peak dischargeQualificatory total runoff volume
NumberRatio (%)NumberRatio (%)
DM 16 69.57 21 91.30 
GA 27 100 27 100 

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal