12.07.2015 Views

Quels apports hydrologiques pour les modèles hydrauliques? Vers ...

Quels apports hydrologiques pour les modèles hydrauliques? Vers ...

Quels apports hydrologiques pour les modèles hydrauliques? Vers ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

X - 30LERAT ET AL.: VALUE OF UPSTREAM FLOW MEASUREMENTStel-00392240, version 1 - 5 Jun 2009Table 1.CharacteristicCharacteristics of the 192 catchment datasetPercentile Median Mean Percentile25 th 75 thDistance between stations along the riverDistance UP - TOTAL (km) 18 34 52 71Catchment areaUP (km 2 ) 78 170 258 334TOTAL (km 2 ) 534 1160 1771 2288Ratio S UP /S T OT AL (%) 7 17 22 33Annual discharge (mm)Station UP 300 395 480 530Station TOTAL 310 385 425 490Annual precipitation (mm)Catchment UP 860 940 1000 1080Catchment TOTAL 860 930 970 1040Annual PE (mm)Catchment UP 620 650 650 680Catchment TOTAL 630 660 660 690Table 2.The three semidistributed models tested. θ, θ ′ and θ ′′ are parameter sets for therainfall-runoff model. ρ and ρ ′ are parameter sets for the routing model.Model Parameters Parameters Inputson the UP on the INTsub-catch. interm. areaBenchmark θ θ P UP , P INTρUP-Meas - θ ′ P UP , P INTρ ′UP-Sim θ ′′ θ ′ P UP , P INTρ ′D R A F T July 24, 2008, 3:43pm D R A F T

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!