메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학위논문
저자정보

김영규 (충남대학교, 忠南大學校 大學院)

지도교수
정관수
발행연도
2017
저작권
충남대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.

이용수4

표지
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (4)

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Unlike small-scale hydraulic structures, large-scale hydraulic structures such as dam have been designed based on extreme floods. PMF(Probable Maximum Flood) is mostly applied for the designs of large-scale hydraulic structures and it estimated by computing the runoff hydrograph where PMP(Probable Maximum Precipitation) is inserted as design rainfall input parameter. PMF determines the design flood discharge of large-scale hydraulic structures and the estimated PMF greatly depends on PMP. Therefore, in order to estimate the PMF with high accuracy, it is very important to improve the accuracy of PMP.
The existing PMP is estimated by transferring the heavy rainfall from
all watersheds of korea to the design watershed. Thus, there may be concerns of overestimation because it does not properly reflect the characteristics of the design watershed. Therefore, in this study, PMP was analyzed by selecting only rainfall events occurred in the design watershed. In order to accurately analyze the characteristics of the design watershed, the Average Point-tracking method which can reflect spatio-temporal characteristics of the rainfall was utilized and multiply with the moisture maximizing rate for estimation of PMP.
Therefore, this study proposed a new PMP estimation methodology based on watershed with the procedures as above mentioned. After that, the CSEM model was used to estimate the PMF based on the estimated PMP. In the end, the PMF and the sediment-runoff yield for Yongdam-dam basin were estimated.

The summary of process and result is as following.

1. The existing PMP estimtation method and the PMP estimation method proposed in this study were presented and the differences between these two methods were evaluated. In order to compare the estimation method proposed in this study, the design watershed was selected as the Yongdam-dam watershed. From 2002 to 2014, a total of 18 heavy rainfall events exceeding the standards of heavy rain warning and heavy rain advisory were selected.

2. The DADs analyzed in all events were multiplied by the moisture maximizing rate, and PMP was estimated by listing the maximum values for each area and duration. As a result, the 24-hour PMP of the YD1 basin was estimated to be 366 mm, the 24-hour PMP of the YD2 basin was 359 mm, the 24-hour PMP of the YD3 basin was 401 mm and the 24-hour PMP of the YD4 basin was 398 mm.

3. The CSEM model was used to simulate the rainfall-runoff and sediment-runoff behavior of the estimated PMP in the Yongdam-dam basin. A total of nine parameters were selected to determine the surface runoff and sediment runoff and they were calibrated using SCE-UA method. The simulation results indicated that the PMF corresponding to the estimated PMP was 7,799 m3/s and the sediment yield was estimated as 696 mg/l.

4. Comparing with the PMF estimated by the lumped model, the PMF estimated using distributed model was 1,333 m3/s higher than PMF using the lumped model. After that, the PMF estimated in this study compared with the existing PMF and the 200-year frequency design flood discharge. Consequently, the existing PMF was 1.38 times higher as compared with the PMF estimated using watershed-based PMP. It is due to different deriving procedures used in storm area based approach and watershed based approach for estimating PMP. After reviewing the results, The PMF estimated in this study is considered to be out of the risk of underestimation because it was estimated to be 1.75 times higher than the 200-year frequency design flood discharge.

PMP and PMF according to the existing guidelines may be reasonable in areas with high flooding probability and frequent meteorological changes, but there is a possibility of overestimation in areas where flood risk is relatively lower, and abnormal climate changes is relatively rare. Therefore, application of the method proposed in this thesis along with the existing method for respective flood risk of a watershed could reduce the possibility of PMF overestimation. However, it is necessary to evaluate the applicability of the proposed methodology in several watersheds other than Yongdam-dam basin and carry out a comparative study using rainfall data observed using radar.

목차

목 차
List of Tables ⅴ
List of Figures ⅵ
제 1 장 서 론 1
1.1 연구 배경 1
1.2 연구 목적 2
1.3 연구 동향 3
1.3.1 국외 연구 동향 3
1.3.2 국내 연구 동향 5
1.4 연구 내용 및 범위 6
제 2 장 유역기반의 PMP 산정 10
2.1 기존의 PMP 산정절차 11
2.1.1 강우자료 구축 11
2.1.2 등우선도 작성 11
2.1.3 DAD 분석 11
2.1.4 수분최대화비 13
2.1.5 호우전이비 14
2.1.6 PMP 산정 16
2.2 시·공간적 특성을 고려한 유역기반의 PMP 산정 방법 제시 17
2.2.1 강우의 공간분포화 18
2.2.2 격자 기반의 DAD 분석 19
2.2.3 Point-tracking 22
2.2.4 Average Point-tracking(APT) 25
2.2.5 호우최대화비 27
2.3 본 연구에서 제시한 DAD 분석방법 검토 27
제 3 장 Catchment-scale Soil Erosion Model(CSEM)을 이용한 PMF 산정 29
3.1 강우-유출 모형 30
3.1.1 Digital Elevation Models (DEM)를 이용한 유역 모델링 30
3.1.2 강우-유출 알고리즘 32
3.1.3 수위-유량 관계 33
3.2 유사-유출 모형 35
3.3 매개변수 보정 40
3.3.1 Shuffled Complex Evolution-University of Arizona(SCE-UA)법을 이용한 매개변수 최적화 42
3.3.2 매개변수 최적화를 위한 목적함수 선정 44
제 4 장 용담댐 유역의 PMP 산정 45
4.1 대상유역 선정 45
4.2 대상호우 선정 47
4.3 소유역 분할 48
4.4 PMP 산정 50
4.4.1 강우의 공간분포화 50
4.4.2 호우의 최대화 53
4.4.3 용담댐 유역의 PMP-DAD 산정 54
4.4.4 임계지속시간 57
4.4.5 용담댐 유역 PMP의 시간분포 58
4.4.6 유역기반의 PMP 검토 62
제 5 장 용담댐 유역의 PMF 산정 64
5.1 지형자료 분석 64
5.2 토지피복도 구축 65
5.3 매개변수의 선정 67
5.4 강우-유출 모형 검증 68
5.5 강우-유사-유출 모형 검증 72
5.6 PMP에 따른 PMF 및 유역 유사량 산정 78
5.7 용담댐 유역의 PMF 산정결과 비교 83
5.7.1 집중형 모형과 분포형 모형에 따른 PMF 산정결과 비교 83
5.7.2 기존 PMF와의 비교결과 검토 84
제 6 장 결론 86
참고문헌 88
ABSTRACT 97
APPENDIX 101

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0