Natural Hazards

, Volume 87, Issue 3, pp 1313–1331 | Cite as

Comparison of the performance of power law and probability distributions in the frequency analysis of flood in Dez Basin, Iran

  • Farshad Ahmadi
  • Feridon Radmaneh
  • Gholam Ali Parham
  • Rasoul Mirabbasi
Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 156 Downloads

Abstract

Determination of the return period of design flood depends on the nature of the project and the consequences of the flood and is based on economic criteria, human casualties, and hydrological factors. Underestimation of flood might result in casualties and economic damages, while the overestimation leads to capital waste. Therefore, in this research, the flood frequency analysis of Dez Basin, Iran was conducted within the period of 1956–2012 using power law approach together with ordinary distributions, including normal, log normal, Pearson type III, exponential, gamma, generalized extreme value, Nakagami, Rayleigh, logistic, generalized logistic, generalized Pareto, and Weibull distributions. The power law comes from the fractal nature of earth science phenomena such as precipitation and runoff. Accordingly, in this research the partial duration flood series of five hydrometric stations in Dez Basin were extracted using power law with the intervals of 7, 14, 30, and 60 days and then compared with the annual maxima. The results indicated that the annual maxima were not suitable for frequency analysis of the flood in Dez Basin, and the 30-day partial duration series obtained from the power law has a better correspondence with the flow and properties of the Dez Basin. The independence and stationarity of the 30-day partial duration series were examined by Wald–Wolfowitz test, confirming the independence of the considered series. Next, the power distribution and the typical statistical distributions were fitted onto the data of the flood in Dez Basin, with the performance of each distribution being investigated using normalized root-mean-square error and Nash–Sutcliffe criteria. The results revealed that in the SDZ and TPB stations, power distribution had a better performance than other considered distributions. Moreover, in the SDS, TPS, and TZ stations the power distribution stood in the second rank in terms of the best distribution. As the performance of power distribution in the estimation of the flood in Dez Basin has been very satisfactory and calculation of its parameters and its application is easier than ordinary probability distributions, thus it can be suggested as the superior distribution for flood frequency analysis in Dez Basin.

Keywords

Flood Partial series Frequency analysis Probability distribution Power law 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abdi A, Hassanzadeh Y, Talatahari S, Fakheri-Fard A, Mirabbasi R (2016) Parameter estimation of copula functions using an optimization-based method. Theor Appl Climatol. doi: 10.1007/s00704-016-1757-2 Google Scholar
  2. Adamowski K (2000) Regional analysis of annual maximum and partial duration flood data by nonparametric and L-moment methods. J Hydrol 229(3):219–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aki K (1981) A probabilistic synthesis of precursory phenomena. Earthq Predict 1(1):566–574Google Scholar
  4. Benson MA (1968) Uniform flood-frequency estimating methods for federal agencies. Water Resour Res 4(5):891–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowers MC, Tung WW, Gao JB (2012) On the distributions of seasonal river flows: lognormal or power law? Water Resour Res 48(1):9685–9698Google Scholar
  6. Cunderlik JM, Burn DH (2003) Non-stationary pooled flood frequency analysis. J Hydrol 276(1):210–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gianvittorio JP, Rahmat-Samii Y, Romeu J (2001) Fractal FSS: various self-similar geometries used for dual-band and dual-polarized FSS. Antenna Propaga Soc 3:8–13Google Scholar
  8. Guzzetti F, Malamud BD, Turcotte DL, Reichenbach P (2002) Power-law correlations of landslide areas in central Italy. Earth Planet Sci Lett 195(1):169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hamed K, Rao AR (1999) Flood frequency analysis. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  10. Harte D (2001) Multifractals. Chapman and Hall, London. ISBN 978-1-58488-154-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hosking JRM (1986) The theory of probability weighted moments. IBM Research Division. TJ Watson Research Center, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Hosking JRM (1990) L-moments: analysis and estimation of distributions using linear combinations of order statistics. J R Stat Soc 52(1):105–124Google Scholar
  13. Hosking JRM, Wallis JR (1993) Some statistics useful in regional frequency analysis. Water Resour Res 36(1):953–963Google Scholar
  14. Jingyi Z, Hall MJ (2004) Regional flood frequency analysis for the Gan-Ming River Basin in China. J Hydrol 296(1):98–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kidson R, Richards KS, Carling PA, Cello G, Malamud BD (2006) Power-law extreme flood frequency. Geol Soc 261(1):141–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kumar R, Chatterjee C (2005) Regional flood frequency analysis using L-Moments for North Brahmaputra region of India. J Hydrolo Eng 10(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumar R, Goel NK, Chatterjee C, Nayak PC (2015) Regional flood frequency analysis using soft computing techniques. Water Resour Manag 29(6):1965–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Labat D, Mangin A, Ababou R (2002) Rainfall-runoff relations for karstic springs: multifractal analysis. J Hydrol 256(3):176–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Malamud BD, Turcotte DL (2006) The applicability of power-law frequency statistics to floods. J Hydrol 322(1):160–180Google Scholar
  20. Malamud BD, Millington JD, Perry GLW (2005) Characterizing wildfire regimes in the USA. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102(1):4694–4699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mandelbrot BB (1983) The fractal geometry of nature, vol 173. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. May R, Zainol Z, Shukor MFB (2015) Flood frequency analysis due to climate change condition at the Upper Klang River basin. In: International symposium on flood research and management. Springer, Singapore, pp. 271–281Google Scholar
  23. Ngongondo C, Li L, Gong L, Xu CY, Alemaw BF (2013) Flood frequency under changing climate in the upper Kafue River basin, southern Africa: a large scale hydrological model application. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27(8):1883–1898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pandey G, Lovejoy S, Schertzer D (1998) Multifractal analysis of daily river flows including extremes for basins of five to two million square kilometers, one day to 75 years. J Hydrol 208(1):62–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pearson CP (1995) Regional frequency analysis of low flow in New Zealand Rivers. J Hydrol 30(2):53–64Google Scholar
  26. Schertzer D, Lovejoy S (1987) Physical modeling and analysis of rain and clouds by anisotropic scaling multiplicative processes. J Geophys Res 92(1):9693–9714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tessier Y, Lovejoy S, Hubert P, Schertzer D, Pecknold S (1996) Multifractal analysis and modeling of rainfall and river flows and scaling, casual transfer function. J Geogr Res 101(1):26427–26440Google Scholar
  28. Turcotte DL, Greene L (1993) A scale-invariant approach to flood-frequency analysis. Stoch Hydrol Hydraul 7(1):33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. White CJ (2007) The use of joint probability analysis to predict flood frequency in Estuaries and Tidal Rivers. University of Southampton, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  30. Xu Y, Huang G, Fan Y (2015) Multivariate flood risk analysis for Wei River. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi: 10.1007/s00477-015-1196-0 Google Scholar
  31. Yang T, Xu CY, Shao QX, Chen X (2010) Regional flood frequency and spatial patterns analysis in the Pearl River Delta region using L-moments approach. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 24(2):165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang Q, Chen YD, Chen X, Li J (2011) Copula-based analysis of hydrological extremes and implications of hydrological behaviors in the Pearl River basin, China. J Hydrol Eng 16(7):598–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farshad Ahmadi
    • 1
  • Feridon Radmaneh
    • 1
  • Gholam Ali Parham
    • 2
  • Rasoul Mirabbasi
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Water Sciences EngineeringShahid Chamran UniversityAhwazIran
  2. 2.Department of Statistics, Faculty of Mathematical Sciences and ComputerShahid Chamran UniversityAhvazIran
  3. 3.Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of AgricultureShahrekord UniversityShahrekordIran

Personalised recommendations