Comparison of Method of Residuals and Cluster Analysis for Flood Regionalization
Publication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 115, Issue 6
Abstract
The method of residuals was recently used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to delineate seven flood regions for the state of Kentucky. An alternative approach is to use cluster analysis in conjunction with important statistical properties of the maximum annual flood‐peak series. Applying the FASTCLUS clustering procedure of the Statistical Analysis System, five cluster regions are identified using a similar data base as the USGS study. Flood regions delineated under these two methods of flood regionalization are then compared by examining trends in important hydrological characteristics within each of the regions, and through a discriminant analysis based upon watershed physical attributes. Results show that, although cluster regions are in no way similar to those defined by the method of residuals nor coincident with geographical boundaries, they are more distinguishable and better discriminated in terms of the hydrological characteristics controlling flood response than the USGS regions. Furthermore, standard errors associated with the regression equations relating the log‐Pearson, Type‐III 50‐year flood estimate to watershed physical attributes are comparable under the two methods of regionalization.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Choquette, A. F. (1988). “Regionalization of peak discharges for streams in Kentucky.” Water Resources Investigations Report 87‐4209, U.S. Geological Survey, Louisville District, Louisville, Ky.
2.
Darymple, T. (1960). “Flood frequency analysis.” Manual of hydrology, Part 3, U.S. Geological Survey Water‐Supply Paper 1543‐A, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
3.
“Guidelines for determining flood flow frequency.” (1982). Bulletin 17‐B, U.S. Department of the Interior, Hydrology Subcommittee, Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va.
4.
Houghton, J. C. (1977). “Robust estimation of the frequency of extreme events in a flood frequency context,” dissertation presented to Harvard University, at Cambridge, Mass., in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
5.
Milligan, G. W., and Cooper, M. C. (1983). “An examination of procedures for determining the number of clusters in a data set.” College of Administrative Science Working Paper Series 83‐51, Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio.
6.
Mosley, M. P. (1981). “Delimitation of New Zealand hydrological regions.” J. Hydrol., 49, 173–192.
7.
Riggs, H. C. (1973). “Regional Analysis of Streamflow Characteristics.” Techniques of water resources investigations, book 4, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., 15.
8.
“Statistical analysis system.” (1985). SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Ed. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, N.C., 956.
9.
Thomas, D. M., and Benson, M. A. (1970). “Generalization of streamflow characteristics from drainage‐basin characteristics.” U.S. Geological Survey Water‐Supply Paper 1975, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
10.
Wiltshire, S. E. (1986). “Regional flood frequency analysis II: multivariate classification of drainage basins in Britain.” Hydrol. Sci. J., 31(3), 335–346.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 ASCE.
History
Published online: Nov 1, 1989
Published in print: Nov 1989
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.