2006
DOI: 10.5194/hessd-3-3211-2006
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Uncertainty analysis of hydrological ensemble forecasts in a distributed model utilising short-range rainfall prediction

Abstract: Advances in mesoscale numerical weather pred-ication make it possible to provide rainfall forecasts along with many other data fields at increasingly higher spatial resolutions. It is currently possible to incorporate high-resolution NWPs directly into flood forecasting systems in order to obtain an extended lead time. It is recognised, however , that direct application of rainfall outputs from the NWP model can contribute considerable uncertainty to the final river flow forecasts as the uncertainties inherent… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The quantitative precipitation forecasts were reported as unreliable and the forecast discharge was negatively biased in both time and magnitude. Cluckie et al (2006) employed a distributed rainfall-runoff model (GBDM) (500 m grid resolution) driven by the ECMWF EPS which was first resolved to a 2 km grid resolution using a dynamical downscaling technique, then spatially corrected and finally temporally adjusted. The study ascertained the potential values of using EPS in flood forecasting.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quantitative precipitation forecasts were reported as unreliable and the forecast discharge was negatively biased in both time and magnitude. Cluckie et al (2006) employed a distributed rainfall-runoff model (GBDM) (500 m grid resolution) driven by the ECMWF EPS which was first resolved to a 2 km grid resolution using a dynamical downscaling technique, then spatially corrected and finally temporally adjusted. The study ascertained the potential values of using EPS in flood forecasting.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, a number of the uncertainty factors in the precipitation forecasting, which contribute to the uncertainty of the river flow forecast, should be taken in account, such as the uncertainty in the numerical weather prediction model (Cluckie et al 2006). Furthermore, the proposed risk model could be used to analyze accuracy and reliability of the predicted water level by integrating the relationship between the water stage and discharge, named the rating curve, so that the associated uncertainty could be taken into account, such as the uncertainty in the regarding parameters between the discharge and the water stage.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, during a typhoon event, the weather forecast center provides precipitation forecast information using the real-time quantitative precipitation forecasting (QPF) (Collier and Kzyzysztofowicz 2000). Nevertheless, the forecasted precipitation is affected by the various uncertainties in observation and the meteorological model (Grecu and Krajewski 2000), thereby propagating the uncertainty within flood forecasting (Cluckie et al 2006;Gabellani et al 2007). Therefore, this study develops a risk analysis model primarily to explore the effect of the uncertainties in rainfall information and the parameters of the rainfall-runoff model on the estimation of the peak discharge as well as to quantify the risk of underestimating the predicted peak discharge for the rainfall predictions given.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The information upstream can include the observations of river water levels and/or rainfall measurements. In the situation where meteorological ensemble forecasts are available, they can be used to further extend the forecast lead times (Cluckie et al, 2006), as in the approach presented by Krzysztofowicz (1999Krzysztofowicz ( , 2002 and Pappenberger et al (2005), but such information was not necessary for the lead times required in the present study.…”
Section: The Lancaster Real-time Flood Forecasting Systemmentioning
confidence: 94%