《Table 6 The values of performance criteria for Nash and GIUH-Nash models rainfall-runoff events》

《Table 6 The values of performance criteria for Nash and GIUH-Nash models rainfall-runoff events》   提示：宽带有限、当前游客访问压缩模式
本系列图表出处文件名：随高清版一同展现
《Using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for finding the best rainfall-runoff model in mountainous watersheds(Case study: the Navrood watershed in Iran)》


  1. 获取 高清版本忘记账户？点击这里登录
  1. 下载图表忘记账户？点击这里登录
Notes:PEV means Percentage Error in Volume；PEP means Percentage Error in Peak；PETP means Percentage Error in Time to Peak；RMSE means Root Mean Square Error；ENS means Nash–Sutcliffe model efficiency coefficient；GIUH means Geomorphologic Instantaneous Unit

Inputs of the GIUH model include the stream length ratio（RL），the length （km），the peak velocity V（m/s），the watershed area （km2）and the rate of rainfall excess，ir（mm/hr）.These inputs are shown in Table 1.

图表编号XD0056561500    严禁用于非法目的
绘制时间2019.03.01
作者Arash ADIB、Morteza LOTFIRAD、Ali HAGHIGHI
绘制单位Civil Engineering Department,Engineering Faculty,Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz、Civil Engineering Department,Engineering Faculty,Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz、Civil Engineering Department,Engineering Faculty,Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz
更多格式高清、无水印（增值服务）

相关图表

  1. 《Table 8 The values of performance criteria for Clark and GcIUH-Clark models for different rainfall-runoff events》2019.03.01
  2. 《Table 7 The calibrated values of parameters of Clark and GcIUH-Clark models for different rainfall-runoff events》2019.03.01
  3. 《Table 4 The values of performance criteria for GIUH and GcIUH models different rainfall-runoff events》2019.03.01
  4. 《Table 5 The calibrated values of parameters of Nash and GIUH-Nash models for rainfall-runoff events》2019.03.01
  5. 《Table 9 The performance of parent material value extraction for the descriptive text of soil profiles with the condition》2019.02.20
  6. 《Table 8 The performance of parent material value extraction for the descriptive text of soil types with the conditional》2019.02.20
  7. 《Table 11 The performance of landform value extraction for the descriptive text of soil profiles with the conditional ran》2019.02.20
  8. 《Table 10 The performance of landform value extraction for the descriptive text of soil types with the conditional random》2019.02.20
  9. 《Table 6 The performance of parent material value extraction using the conditional random fields based method (%) 1)》2019.02.20
  10. 《Table 1 Reference values for the relative nitrogen and oxygen isotope ratios of the nitrate reference materials》2019.01.03
  11. 《Table 2.Diagnostic performance of UT and TSGF for the AL》2019.02.20
  12. 《Table 1 Optimized Values ofχ*andη*for each atom type with including the effect of the local chemical environments in fra》2019.01.15
  13. 《Table 2.comparison of the cost and product values for two processes[57].》2019.01.01
  14. 《Table 2 Differences of the mean and maximum values for combinations of starting indices at stations in northern China》2018.04.01
  15. 《Table 4 Differences of the mean and maximum values for combinations of length indices at stations in northern China》2018.04.01
  16. 《Table 3 Differences of the mean and maximum values for combinations of ending indices at stations in northern China》2018.04.01
  17. 《Table 1 Experimental value for K (φ) of the specimens annealed at 673 K and their ratio to the value of Al-0.33vol%Pb co》2018.07.01
  18. 《Table 3 Maximum values of the reduced physical quantities for Fig.6.》2018.10.01
  19. 《Table 4.The Q-value and direction of ears for main texture components》2018.06.01
  20. 《Table 1–Coded and actual values of variables in central-composite design for the preparation of Lop formulations.》2018.05.01

随机翻阅

《表2 网络舆情总分高低分组独立样本t检验》 《表6 拼多多、京东、唯品会净资产收益率对比》 《表3 2019年米林县中小学生营养情况（n,%)》 《表2 医院药房风险工作任务表》 《表1 两种方案所受环境力对比》 《表3 全球主要股指期权到期日与最后交易日》 《表3 第三次测试结果：一种避雷器相对阻性电流在线检测方法》 《表9 全球固定收益债券跟踪评级累积违约概率 (1981～2015年)》 《表2 两篇重复选文课后练习比对》 《表3 两组患者治疗效果比较[n (%) ]》