مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Verion

Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

873
Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

0
Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

1

Information Journal Paper

Title

COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF DYNAMIC WAVE AND GEN EXPRESSION PROGRAMMING METHODS TO RIVER FLOOD ROUTING

Pages

  592-602

Abstract

 Gen Expression Programming is the newest method of evolutionary algorithm methods that because of the sufficient accuracy, has more application. GEP using the information in the data and without any assumption on the structure of the relationship between independent and dependent variables identifies an appropriate relationship and predicts the output hydrograph. DYNAMIC WAVE method is one of the complicate methods in FLOOD ROUTING and because of the need to hydraulic and cross section data routing by this method is costly and time-consuming. In this study a computer model has been developed in which partial differential equations of unsteady none uniform flow, are solved by staggered method. This model can consider infiltration into river bed. Statistical indicator such as Coefficient of Correlation(R), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Square Relative Error (MSRE) and Relative Error (RE) are used to comparison two methods. The results of routing of 6 events between 1384 and 1388 indicate that performance of GEP model to predict the volume of output hydrograph is better than DYNAMIC WAVE model. While, the ability of DYNAMIC WAVE model to predict hydrograph peak flow and time of peak discharge is more reasonable than GEP model. Hydrograph peak flow discharge is calculated by DYNAMIC WAVE model with 7.25% mean error and GEP model predict it with 17% error. Also mean error for prediction of time of peak discharge is 1.45% and 2.25% by mentioned models respectively.

Cites

References

Cite

APA: Copy

GHOBADIAN, R., GHORBANI, M.A., & KHALAJ, M.. (2013). COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF DYNAMIC WAVE AND GEN EXPRESSION PROGRAMMING METHODS TO RIVER FLOOD ROUTING. JOURNAL OF WATER AND SOIL (AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY), 27(3), 592-602. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/141325/en

Vancouver: Copy

GHOBADIAN R., GHORBANI M.A., KHALAJ M.. COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF DYNAMIC WAVE AND GEN EXPRESSION PROGRAMMING METHODS TO RIVER FLOOD ROUTING. JOURNAL OF WATER AND SOIL (AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY)[Internet]. 2013;27(3):592-602. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/141325/en

IEEE: Copy

R. GHOBADIAN, M.A. GHORBANI, and M. KHALAJ, “COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF DYNAMIC WAVE AND GEN EXPRESSION PROGRAMMING METHODS TO RIVER FLOOD ROUTING,” JOURNAL OF WATER AND SOIL (AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY), vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 592–602, 2013, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/141325/en

Related Journal Papers

Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.
  • Related Plans

  • No record.
  • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top