Abstract
The derived distribution approach for predicting flood frequency distributions provides a potentially attractive way to analyze flood hazards in ungaged watersheds. This paper examines the performance of two typical derived distribution techniques (Hebson and Wood, 1982; Diaz‐Granados et al., 1984). Flood frequency distributions obtained with each technique are compared to sample distributions estimated from measured discharge records. The comparison is based on over 40 years of discharge data from each of three different watersheds. Input parameters required by the derived distribution methods are estimated from limited data sets to simulate conditions encountered in watersheds where rainfall and discharge records are available for only a few years. Both of the derived flood frequency methods performed poorly in every watershed when compared to sample distributions. The results of the comparison suggest that fundamental improvements are needed before the derived distribution approach can be applied with any confidence.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
