Efficacy of Nakagami-m distribution function for deriving unit hydrograph

Water Resources Management

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 563-575

  Rai, R K ^a   Sarkar, S ^b   Upadhyay, Alka ^a   Singh, V P ^c  

^a DHI (Water Environment and Health)   (India)

^b INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROORKEE   (India)

^c Texas A and M University   (United States)

Author keywords

Gamma; Nakagami m; Probability distribution function; Statistical distribution; Unit hydrograph; Unit hydrograph identification; Watershed

Indexed keywords

HYDROGRAPHS; LOG-NORMAL; MEAN ABSOLUTE PERCENTAGE ERROR; NAKAGAMI-M; NAKAGAMI-M DISTRIBUTION; ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERRORS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL MEASURES; UNIT HYDROGRAPH; VISUAL COMPARISON; WEIBULL;

DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS; LANDFORMS; WATERSHEDS;

PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION;

HYDROGRAPH; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION; RUNOFF; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; WATERSHED; WEIBULL THEORY;

EID: 77349127569     PISSN: 09204741     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11269-009-9459-5     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bhunya PK, Mishra SK, Berndtsson R (2003) Simplified two-parameter gamma distribution for derivation of synthetic unit hydrograph. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 8(4): 226-230.
2. Bhunya PK, Mishra SK, Ojha CSP, Berndtsson R (2004) Parameter estimation of beta distribution for unit hydrograph derivation. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 9(4): 325-332.
3. Charash U (1979) Reception through Nakagami Eading multipath channels with random delays. IEEE Trans Commun Com-27(4): 657-670.
4. Chow VT, Maidment DR, Mays LW (1988) Applied hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York.
5. Croley TE (1980) Gamma synthetic hydrographs. J Hydrol 47: 41-52.
6. Dooge JC (1959) A general theory of the unit hydrograph. J Geophys Res 64(2): 241-256.
7. Dooge JC (1973) Linear theory of hydrologic systems. Technical Bulletin No. 1468, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC.
8. Gaur ML, Mathur BS (2003) Modeling event-based temporal variability of flow resistance coefficient. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 8(5): 266-277.
9. Gray DM (1961) Synthetic hydrographs for small drainage areas. J Hydraul Div ASCE 87(4): 33-54.
10. Haktanir T, Sezen N (1990) Suitability of two-parameter gamma and three-parameter beta distribution as synthetic hydrographs in Anatolia. Hydrol Sci J 35(2): 167-184.
11. Nadarajah S (2007) Probability models for unit hydrograph derivation. J Hydrol 344: 185-189.
12. Nakagami M (1960) The m-distribution, a general formula of intensity of rapid fading. In: Hoffman WG (ed) Statistical methods in radio wave propagation: proceedings of a symposium held at the University of California. Permagon Press, pp 3-36.
13. Nash JE, Sutcliff JV (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part-3 a discussion of the principle. J Hydrol 10: 282-290.
14. Rai RK, Jain MK, Mishra SK, Ojha CSP, Singh VP (2007) Another look at Z-transform technique foe deriving unit impulse response function. Water Resour Manag 21: 1829-1848.
15. Rai RK, Sarkar S, Gundekar HG (2008) Adequacy of two-parameter beta distribution for deriving the unit hydrograph. Hydrol Res 39(3): 201-208.
16. Rai RK, Sarkar S, Singh VP (2009) Evaluation of the adequacy of statistical distribution functions for deriving unit hydrograph. Water Resour Manag 23: 899-929.
17. Sherman LK (1932) Stream flow from rainfall by the unit-graph method. Eng News-Rec 108: 501-505.
18. Singh SK (2000) Transmuting synthetic unit hydrographs into gamma distribution. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 5(4): 380-385.
19. Singh VP (1988) Hydrologic systems, vol 1. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
20. Yue S, Taha BMJ, Bobee B, Legendre P, Bruneau P (2002) Approach for describing statistical properties of flood hydrograph. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 7(2): 147-153.