Methodology for Estimating Streamflow by Water Balance and Rating Curve Methods Based on Logistic Regression

被引:1
|
作者
Generoso, Tarcila Neves [1 ]
da Silva, Demetrius David [1 ]
Amorim, Ricardo Santos Silva [1 ]
Rodrigues, Lineu Neiva [1 ,2 ]
dos Santos, Erli Pinto [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Vicosa, Dept Agr Engn, Univ Campus,Peter Henry Rolfs Ave, BR-36570900 Vicosa, MG, Brazil
[2] Brazilian Agr Res Corp EMPRAPA Cerrados, DF 020 Km18, Planaltina, Brazil
关键词
Extrapolation; Modeling; Outflow; Streamflow gauge station; Water balance method;
D O I
10.1007/s11269-022-03259-1
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Both water balance (WB) and rating curve (RC) are methods for estimating streamflow. The first is mostly used to estimate reservoir outflows, while the second is usually adopted in hydrometeorological network streamflow gauges. While WB uses hourly collected data, the RC estimates streamflow using current water level and extrapolation techniques. The objective of this study was to analyze variations in the reservoir's hourly outflow at Queimado Hydroelectric Power Plant (HPP Queimado) and to propose a method to evaluate whether the estimate of the daily outflows, obtained by the WB method, is similar to the flow values obtained at a conventional station. The logistic regression (LR) model was used because it is a method that adopts binary, categorically dependent variables to identify the event of interest. The results showed that the values of streamflow, obtained from an average of two daily readings, were a good representation of the flows in the region. The LR was able to identify atypical data, especially in the rainy season. This means that data consistency analysis can be faster and safer, when adequately employed and considering the proposed conditions, contributing to both management policies and the management of water resources.
引用
收藏
页码:4389 / 4402
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Methodology for Estimating Streamflow by Water Balance and Rating Curve Methods Based on Logistic Regression
    Tarcila Neves Generoso
    Demetrius David da Silva
    Ricardo Santos Silva Amorim
    Lineu Neiva Rodrigues
    Erli Pinto dos Santos
    Water Resources Management, 2022, 36 : 4389 - 4402
  • [2] Estimating streamflow by an innovative rating curve model based on hydraulic parameters
    Vatanchi, Sajjad M.
    Maghrebi, Mahmoud F.
    ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, 2024, 83 (09)
  • [3] Rating curve based assessment of seasonal variability of sulfate in streamflow
    Wickramaarachchi, Thushara Navodani
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, 2018, 190 (08)
  • [4] Rating curve based assessment of seasonal variability of sulfate in streamflow
    Thushara Navodani Wickramaarachchi
    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2018, 190
  • [5] A COMPARISON OF 3 METHODS OF ESTIMATING THE LOGISTIC-REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS
    HOSMER, TA
    HOSMER, DW
    FISHER, L
    COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 1983, 12 (05) : 577 - 593
  • [6] Personal Credit Rating System Based on the Logistic Regression Method
    Yan, Mingjia
    2019 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT AND MODEL ENGINEERING (ICEMME 2019), 2019, : 156 - 163
  • [7] Bayesian Regression and Neuro-Fuzzy Methods Reliability Assessment for Estimating Streamflow
    Hamaamin, Yaseen A.
    Nejadhashemi, Amir Pouyan
    Zhang, Zhen
    Giri, Subhasis
    Woznicki, Sean A.
    WATER, 2016, 8 (07)
  • [8] Improving rating curve accuracy by incorporating water balance closure at river bifurcations
    Gensen, M. R. A.
    Warmink, J. J.
    Berends, K. D.
    Huthoff, F.
    Hulscher, S. J. M. H.
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2022, 610
  • [9] Efficient methods for estimating constrained parameters with applications to regularized (lasso) logistic regression
    Tian, Guo-Liang
    Tang, Man-Lai
    Fang, Hong-Bin
    Tan, Ming
    COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS & DATA ANALYSIS, 2008, 52 (07) : 3528 - 3542
  • [10] Automated methods for estimating baseflow and ground water recharge from streamflow records
    Arnold, JG
    Allen, PM
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, 1999, 35 (02): : 411 - 424