Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2018-65
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2018-65
19 Feb 2018
 | 19 Feb 2018
Status: this preprint has been withdrawn by the authors.

On the effectiveness of recession analysis methods for capturing the characteristic storage-discharge relation: An intercomparison study

Xing Chen, Mukesh Kumar, Stefano Basso, and Marco Marani

Abstract. Storage-discharge (S-Q) relations are widely used to derive watershed properties and predict streamflow responses. These relations are often obtained using different recession analysis methods, which vary in recession period identification criteria and Q vs. −dQ/dt fitting scheme. Although previous studies have indicated that different recession analysis methods can result in significantly different S-Q relations, several challenges remain regarding the evaluation of relative effectiveness of these methods in obtaining the characteristic S-Q relation. Here we demonstrated these challenges and presented a new control setup based experimental approach to compare four recession analysis methods. Results indicated that irregular binning and event-based methods show superior performance at obtaining the characteristic S-Q relation and reconstructing streamflow, while lower envelope method performs the worst. Notably, accuracy of the methods is influenced by the extent of scatter in the ln(−dQ/dt) vs. ln(Q) plot. In addition, the derived S-Q relation was very sensitive to the criteria used for identifying recession periods. These results raise a warning sign against indiscriminate application of recession analysis methods and derived S-Q relations for watershed characterizations or hydrologic simulations. Thorough evaluation of representativeness of the derived S-Q relation should be performed before it is used for hydrologic analysis.

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Xing Chen, Mukesh Kumar, Stefano Basso, and Marco Marani

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Xing Chen, Mukesh Kumar, Stefano Basso, and Marco Marani
Xing Chen, Mukesh Kumar, Stefano Basso, and Marco Marani

Viewed

Total article views: 2,261 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
1,787 424 50 2,261 153 67 64
  • HTML: 1,787
  • PDF: 424
  • XML: 50
  • Total: 2,261
  • Supplement: 153
  • BibTeX: 67
  • EndNote: 64
Views and downloads (calculated since 19 Feb 2018)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 19 Feb 2018)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,941 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,890 with geography defined and 51 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 26 Apr 2024
Download

This preprint has been withdrawn.