# Dynamic Control of Water Level in Flood Limited Reservoir Based on Intelligent Calculation

Authors: Jianbo Pan; Yan Xie; Meng Liu; Zhuo Gao; Zhenzan Gao; Bowen Xue
Journal: Mathematical Problems in Engineering
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Determining the flood-limited water level is the focus of the contradiction between flood control and profit-making. The dynamic control of the flood-limited water level of the reservoir is an effective way to ensure flood control safety and realize flood resource utilization. Based on the analysis of the availability of forecast information, this paper conducts a study on the dynamic control of the flood-limited water level in Panjiakou Reservoir. The dynamic control area of Panjiakou Reservoir is determined by the “predischarge capacity constraint method.” On the premise of satisfying the flood control safety of the reservoir, the “prestorage and predischarge method” is adopted according to the real-time forecast information, the water conditions, work conditions, disaster conditions, etc. to develop a dynamic control plan for the flood-limited water level in the main flood season of the reservoir. Finally, based on the improved first-order second moment method (AFOSM), the dispatch risk model of the dynamic control of the flood-limited water level of the reservoir is constructed, and the risk analysis of the flood forecasting system is carried out. The results show that (1) the flood forecast accuracy of Panjiakou Reservoir conforms to the standard of the B-level forecasting scheme, and the results can be applied under the condition of considering the forecast error; (2) it is suggested that the maximum water level of the Panjiakou Reservoir in the main flood season is dynamically controlled to be 218 m. In the case of water supply guarantee rateP=75%, compared with the current situation of the flood-limited water level of 216 m, the water supply is increased by 40 million m3, and the flow of electricity is increased by 30 million. The flood control risk rate under the rain leakage error is lower than 0.1, which is the minimum risk level, which is acceptable. However, when the net rain leakage error is greater than 25 mm, there may be insufficient leakage or excessive leakage, which will cause inconvenience to downstream flood control.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

With the rapid development of the national economy, the demand for water resources continues to increase, and the contradiction between supply and demand of water resources has become increasingly prominent. Reservoir flood control limit water level is a key indicator for coordinating flood control safety and benefit. How to scientifically set the reservoir flood control limit water level is a major issue related to ensuring flood control safety and improving water resource utilization efficiency [1]. Since the end of the 1950s, many large-scale reservoirs with good regulation capacity in China have gradually changed from “setting a single-value flood limit water level in the whole flood season” in order to avoid the unfavorable situation that they dare not store during the flood season and have no water to store after the flood season. They set multivalue flood limit water levels for “flood season stages,” divide the flood season into two to three stages according to the requirements of the specification, calculate the flood limit water level of the reservoir in stages, and even refine it into a daily flood limit water level control value; that is, the flood limit water level will follow the time variation, which is described by a continuous curve [2]. Although the flood limit water level of the reservoir is adjusted according to the sequence change, the implementation of dynamic control value conforms to the statistical law of flood change, and it is possible to increase the utilization of water resources, but the flood season is based on historical hydrometeorological data, which is only a statistical law. Without considering real-time hydrometeorological information, it not only is difficult to seize the opportunity of water storage, but also increases the risk of flood control [3]. The practical experience of reservoir flood control scheduling has proved the use of the reservoir flood limit water level and scheduling rules determined by the original project design to guide the reservoir flood control scheduling. Although the flood control safety is guaranteed, it is not conducive to the full use of water resources, and the rational use of water resources. On the basis of mastering the flood law and real-time meteorological and hydrological forecast information, and according to the current water conditions and working conditions, implementing dynamic control of the flood-limited water level in the reservoir is an effective method to properly handle the conflict between flood control safety and water resource efficiency.In the early 1950s, a number of reservoirs were built in China one after another, and the initial theoretical system of flood control and dispatch was established with reference to the relevant experience and theories of the former Soviet Union. Due to the limitations of forecasting technology at that time and the small capacity of reservoir flood samples, the research on flood-limited water level control by stages was difficult. The basic conditions are lacking, and the designed fixed flood limit water level is adopted throughout the flood season. In the 1960s, with the accumulation of flood data and the emergence of staged flood characteristics, the development of the national economy increased the demand for water resources and began to study the method of staged control of the flood-limited water level. The key to controlling the flood-limited water level by stages is the reasonable staging of the flood season. Before the 1980s, the flood season staging was basically based on the mathematical statistics method of hydrological elements. After the 1980s, the flood season staging was analyzed from the perspective of meteorological causes [4], and then the fuzzy theory was introduced into the flood season staging [5], the period of instalment is gradually shortened [6], and the concept and calculation method of the change curve of the flood-limited water level are proposed accordingly. After entering the 1990s, with the development of hydrometeorological science and computer science, and the improvement of forecast technology and precision, favorable conditions have been provided for the research on flood control forecast and dispatch. Based on this, literatures [7–11] studied the forecasting and dispatching method of the total flood forecast information and gradually implemented it in some reservoirs in the north. In the literature, the theory of flood control forecast and dispatch is systematically introduced, and the definition and attributes of dynamic control of flood limit water level are proposed for the first time. A special study on the dynamic control method of the flood-limited water level of the reservoir is established by the Office of the National Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters, and the theory and method of dynamic control of the flood-limited water level have been gradually improved [12–17].Based on the above method for determining the dynamic control area of the limited water level during the flood season, the water level in the real-time dispatching stage of the reservoir has a reference value, but there is the design flood process on which the control threshold value is based, as well as the result of probability statistics, and the real-time water, rain. Therefore, it is necessary to study the dynamic control method of the real-time flood limit water level during the flood season. Based on the feasibility analysis of the dynamic control of the limited water level during the flood season and the analysis of the availability of forecast information, this paper uses the “predischarge capacity constraint method” to determine the dynamic control area of the Panjiakou Reservoir. Faced with information on water conditions, work conditions, and disaster conditions at all times, the “prestorage and predischarge method” is used to formulate a dynamic control plan for the flood-limited water level in the main flood season and further build a dispatch risk model for the dynamic control of the flood-limited water level in the reservoir.


## 2. Methods and Materials

### 2.1. Availability Analysis of Rainfall and Flood Forecast Information

The upstream confluence time of Panjiakou Reservoir is short, and the effective flood forecast period is also short. Therefore, in the dynamic control process of Panjiakou Reservoir’s flood limit water level, short-term rainfall forecast information within 24 hours is selected to analyze the real-time water conditions faced by the reservoir dam site. There are different meteorological stations in the Panjiakou Reservoir area. Through the comparative analysis of 15 large regional rainfall processes from 2001 to 2004, it is found that the precipitation in the central Chengde urban area is closest to the average value of the whole area, so this paper chooses the representative station of Panjiakou Reservoir, Chengde Meteorological Station to conduct rainfall forecast analysis. The calculation formulas of the accuracy rate, empty alarm rate, and missed alarm rate required in the forecast accuracy analysis are as follows:Accuracy rate:(1)η=nm×100%.Missed alarm rate:(2)β=μm×100%.Empty alarm rate:(3)k=1−η+β×100%.In the above formula,m is the number of times the forecast is issued; n is the number of times the actual value falls within the forecast grade area; μ is the number of missed reports (the actual rainfall is greater than the upper limit of its grade domain) in the forecast release; η is the forecast accuracy; β is False alarm rate; k is the empty alarm rate.According to the above formula, the calculation accuracy of rainfall forecast for each magnitude is shown in Table1.Table 1
River basin rainfall forecast accuracy.
Forecast magnitudeStatistics projectNumber of forecasts issuedThe actual frequency and frequency of rainfall of various magnitudesMissed alarm rate (%)Accuracy rate (%)Empty alarm rate (%)<0.10.1∼1010∼2525∼5050∼100>100No rainFrequency (time)904836644000688360Frequency (%)92.57.10.40.00.00.07.592.50.0Light rainFrequency (time)3811921562490033156192Frequency (%)50.441.96.32.40.00.08.740.950.4Light to moderate rainFrequency (time)53728135005417Frequency (%)13.252.824.59.50.00.09.577.313.2Moderate rainFrequency (time)2927145106149Frequency (%)6.924.148.317.23.40.020.648.331.0Moderate to heavy rainFrequency (time)1000100001Frequency (%)0.00.0100.00.00.00.00.00.0100.0Heavy rainFrequency (time)0000000000Frequency (%)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Heavy rain to rain stormFrequency (time)7011410052Frequency (%)0.014.314.357.114.30.00.071.428.6It can be seen from the above table that (1) when the meteorological station issued no rain forecast, the missed report rate was 7.5%. After the missed report, the probability of rain is light rain is 7.1%, the probability of moderate rain is 0.4%, and there is no heavy rain. (2) When the meteorological station issued a light rain forecast, the missed report rate was 8.7%. After the missed report, the probability of the rainfall is moderate rain is 6.3%, the probability of heavy rain is 2.4%, and there is no heavy rain or heavy rain. (3) When the Meteorological Observatory issued a moderate rain forecast, the missed report rate was 20.6%. After the missed report, the probability of rain being heavy rain is 17.2%, the probability of heavy rain is 3.4%, and there is no heavy rain. (4) When the Meteorological Observatory issued a forecast of heavy rain and above, its air-report rate was 28.6%. After the air-report occurs, the probability of rain as light rain and moderate rain is both 14.3%.Therefore, the following conclusions can be drawn for the short-term rainfall forecast information: (1) the 24-hour rain-free forecast accuracy rate of Chengde Meteorological Observatory is 92.5%, and the missed report rate is 7.5%. The results can be used. Although the probability of light rain and moderate rain after missing reports is low, and heavy rains do not occur, at the same time, it should be considered that the rainfall that occurs withP=0.1% is 18 mm, and the rainfall that occurs with P=1% is 5.5 mm after missing reports. (2) The 24-hour rain forecast sample size is small, and the accuracy rate is low, and the risk needs to be considered when using its forecast results. (3) In this paper, the effective forecast period of rainfall forecast between Sandaohezi Station, Hanjiaying Station, and Panjiakou Reservoir dam site is taken as 12 h.


### 2.2. Analysis of Flood Forecast Information

Four sets of flood forecasting schemes have been established for Panjiakou Reservoir. The first set is a forecast scheme for the second water source model of the Xin’an River considering artificial experience factors. This scheme refers to the contents of some forecast schemes during the construction period; the second set is related to rainfall-runoff experienced model. These two programs have been evaluated by experts as Class B programs. The third set is prepared by the China Academy of Water Resources and Hydropower Science (hereinafter referred to as the plan of the Academy of Water Resources), and the fourth set is prepared by Hohai University. Compared with the previous two sets, these two sets of schemes have a longer effective forecast period and a high degree of automation, so the third and fourth sets of flood forecasting schemes are mainly used at present. The allowable error of the scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences and the scheme of Hohai University adopts the same standard to evaluate the accuracy. The allowable error of the flood peak forecast is 20% of the measured flood peak flow, the allowable error of the time period flood forecast is 20% of the measured flood volume, and the allowable error of the peak current time forecast is allowed. The error takes two calculation periods as long as 6 hours. Figure1 shows a representative flood process line.Figure 1
Representative flood process line.


#### 2.2.1. Scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences

The plan of the Academy of Water Sciences uses 16 flood data from 1969 to 1995 for accuracy assessment, as shown in Table2.Table 2
Forecast precision of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902724−0.6−1−1.0−6.0−1021969081608109011082.0−13.03.0−5.0319690819171560216035−2166.0−4.041973081208127313244.004.0118.0519730820201900230922−412158.06197707292023741090−542−48−42−417197708022013551246−8.0−3−11−16−2081978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.0919780727052680305414−1−9.0−13−171019780807202420317131−2121.0−8.01119780825202310300930−322128.012198308040817401440−1709.028−2713199407112394158596−91−6.00.0−5.0141994081123197521529−813110.015199507282338204358141158.04.0161995080120245028791800−2.0−5.0Pass rate (%)70888888It can be seen from the above table that, in the comparison of the selected 16 flood forecasts and the measured floods, the qualified rate of flood peak is 70%, the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 88%, and the peak occurrence time error is mostly 1∼2 times, that is, 3 to 6 hours.


#### 2.2.2. Hohai University Program

This scheme adopts the same flood process as that of the Water Research Institute, that is, 15 flood forecasting processes from 1969 to 1995 to evaluate the accuracy. The results are shown in Table3.Table 3
Forecast precision of HHU.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902510−13.105.8−2.3−1.921969081608109011818.3−9−24.4−1.6−14.43196908191715601250−19.9312.38.62.3419730812081273167131.3−10−39.5−69.3−76.0519730820201900275745.12−18.6−17.7−15.56197707292023741200−49.5−533.737.034.27197708022013551159−14.5−019.317.016.981978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.09197807270526802322−13.4016.36.8−1.410197808072024202405−0.6013.015.812.81119780825202310332844.15−26.8−8.5−19.91219830804081740329189.11−76.8−96.1−97.513199407112394157824−16.9013.017.913.61419940811231975275639.59−32.5−2.1−14.3151995072823382040816.8−1−24.7−3.9−4.71619950801202450275812.616.310.88.5Pass rate (%)60608080According to the analysis of the above table, among the 16 floods tested, the qualified rate of flood peak is 60%, and the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 60%, 80%, and 80%, respectively. The peak occurrence time error was mostly 1∼2 periods, that is, 3 to 6 hours.The program of Hohai University is put into use late and has not yet been tested by large floods. The program of the Academy of Water Sciences was put into trial operation in 1997 and was tested by the floods in 1997/1998. The flood peak, flood volume, and actual measurement process were forecasted. Judging from the forecast, the qualification rate of the flood peak, 3 d flood volume, and peak occurrence time of the plan of the Academy of Water Sciences is 100%, as shown in Table4.Table 4
Forecast precision evaluation of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)3 d flood volume/100 million m3RealForecastError (%)RealForecastError (%)198070224602070−15.9−23.343.22−3.6298070621201920−9.402.292.321.33980714889101013.6−11.601.58−1.349807251420167017.602.202.241.8As a result, the following conclusions can be drawn on the availability of flood forecast information: (1) the scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences and the scheme of Hohai University are both Grade B schemes after expert verification. According to the “Hydrological Information Forecasting Specification,” both can be used for formal forecast, but the impact of forecast errors needs to be considered when applying its results; (2) considering the time required for information transmission, decision-making, gate operation, etc., the effective forecast period of flood forecasting is 6 hours; (3) with the accumulation of flood data, the operation forecast accuracy of the plans of the Academy of Water Sciences and the Hohai University plan needs to be further tested and improved, and the flood forecast plan of the reservoir also needs to be further revised and improved.


### 2.3. Determination of the Dynamic Control Area of the Reservoir during the Main Flood Season

Combined with the original and improved design of Panjiakou Reservoir and years of operation (Figure2), the maximum inflow is 3.7 billion m³, and the flood limit water level in the main flood season is 216 m. Therefore, the flood limit water level of 216 m is adopted as the lower limit of the dynamic control range of Panjiakou Reservoir, that is, the initial value of flood control calculation. When there is no rain forecast, within the effective forecast period, the reservoir will have a large discharge capacity, and the flood limit water level will be raised as much as possible, and a certain margin will be reserved to ensure that the water level will be lowered to the next level before the flood rises. When heavy rainfall is forecasted or has already started, the flood-limited water level can be lowered according to the remaining water volume during the water withdrawal process during the effective forecast period, leaving a certain margin. The water margin will raise the reservoir water level to the original design flood limit water level, also known as the predraining and recharging method. The time period before the onset of precipitation and flooding is selected as 12 hours. According to the flood forecast of different frequencies, we consider the most unfavorable combination of forecast errors, magnify each frequency flood by 20%, consider the rainfall and flood forecast period, and calculate the flood entering the reservoir 6 hours in advance. The limits are shown in Table 5.Figure 2
Change of inflow water of Panjiakou Reservoir.Table 5
The floating value of flood water level at different frequencies.
Flood frequency (year)The amount of water that can be released during the forecast period (m3)Corresponding storage capacity (100 million m3)Floating water level (m)Typical year9578177117.988217.64041009576147617.988217.640010009566100017.987217.638350009558918917.986217.6371100009556100017.986217.6366P.M.P9546100017.985217.6349According to the calculation results in the above table, the floating water levels are taken as 217 m and 218 m, respectively, and the calculation results of flood control for each frequency of floods are shown in Table 6.It can be seen from the calculation results in Table6 that when the starting water levels of the main flood season are 217 m and 218 m, the highest water levels during the flood regulation process are 220.58 m and 220.64 m, which are both lower than the normal storage level of 222 m. The maximum discharge flow is 18111.39 m3/s and 18298.5 m3/s, both lower than the downstream flood control standard of 28000 m3/s.Table 6
Flood adjustment calculation results.
Design flood frequency (years)ProjectWater level217 m218 mTypical yearNormal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)217218Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)18800Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)930011600100Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)220.58220.64Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)22800Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)18111.3918298.51000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)224.71225Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)40400Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)31347.7531463.775000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)227.49227.52Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)54500Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)41862.8541966.2810000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)225.84225.89Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)59200Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)35597.9735745.20P.M.PNormal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)225.75225.83Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)63000Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)35245.8235561.51Therefore, the upper limit of the dynamic control domain in the main flood season determined by the predischarge capacity constraint method is 218 m, and the dynamic control domain of the limited water level in the main flood season can be controlled at 216 m∼218 m.


## 2.1. Availability Analysis of Rainfall and Flood Forecast Information

The upstream confluence time of Panjiakou Reservoir is short, and the effective flood forecast period is also short. Therefore, in the dynamic control process of Panjiakou Reservoir’s flood limit water level, short-term rainfall forecast information within 24 hours is selected to analyze the real-time water conditions faced by the reservoir dam site. There are different meteorological stations in the Panjiakou Reservoir area. Through the comparative analysis of 15 large regional rainfall processes from 2001 to 2004, it is found that the precipitation in the central Chengde urban area is closest to the average value of the whole area, so this paper chooses the representative station of Panjiakou Reservoir, Chengde Meteorological Station to conduct rainfall forecast analysis. The calculation formulas of the accuracy rate, empty alarm rate, and missed alarm rate required in the forecast accuracy analysis are as follows:Accuracy rate:(1)η=nm×100%.Missed alarm rate:(2)β=μm×100%.Empty alarm rate:(3)k=1−η+β×100%.In the above formula,m is the number of times the forecast is issued; n is the number of times the actual value falls within the forecast grade area; μ is the number of missed reports (the actual rainfall is greater than the upper limit of its grade domain) in the forecast release; η is the forecast accuracy; β is False alarm rate; k is the empty alarm rate.According to the above formula, the calculation accuracy of rainfall forecast for each magnitude is shown in Table1.Table 1
River basin rainfall forecast accuracy.
Forecast magnitudeStatistics projectNumber of forecasts issuedThe actual frequency and frequency of rainfall of various magnitudesMissed alarm rate (%)Accuracy rate (%)Empty alarm rate (%)<0.10.1∼1010∼2525∼5050∼100>100No rainFrequency (time)904836644000688360Frequency (%)92.57.10.40.00.00.07.592.50.0Light rainFrequency (time)3811921562490033156192Frequency (%)50.441.96.32.40.00.08.740.950.4Light to moderate rainFrequency (time)53728135005417Frequency (%)13.252.824.59.50.00.09.577.313.2Moderate rainFrequency (time)2927145106149Frequency (%)6.924.148.317.23.40.020.648.331.0Moderate to heavy rainFrequency (time)1000100001Frequency (%)0.00.0100.00.00.00.00.00.0100.0Heavy rainFrequency (time)0000000000Frequency (%)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Heavy rain to rain stormFrequency (time)7011410052Frequency (%)0.014.314.357.114.30.00.071.428.6It can be seen from the above table that (1) when the meteorological station issued no rain forecast, the missed report rate was 7.5%. After the missed report, the probability of rain is light rain is 7.1%, the probability of moderate rain is 0.4%, and there is no heavy rain. (2) When the meteorological station issued a light rain forecast, the missed report rate was 8.7%. After the missed report, the probability of the rainfall is moderate rain is 6.3%, the probability of heavy rain is 2.4%, and there is no heavy rain or heavy rain. (3) When the Meteorological Observatory issued a moderate rain forecast, the missed report rate was 20.6%. After the missed report, the probability of rain being heavy rain is 17.2%, the probability of heavy rain is 3.4%, and there is no heavy rain. (4) When the Meteorological Observatory issued a forecast of heavy rain and above, its air-report rate was 28.6%. After the air-report occurs, the probability of rain as light rain and moderate rain is both 14.3%.Therefore, the following conclusions can be drawn for the short-term rainfall forecast information: (1) the 24-hour rain-free forecast accuracy rate of Chengde Meteorological Observatory is 92.5%, and the missed report rate is 7.5%. The results can be used. Although the probability of light rain and moderate rain after missing reports is low, and heavy rains do not occur, at the same time, it should be considered that the rainfall that occurs withP=0.1% is 18 mm, and the rainfall that occurs with P=1% is 5.5 mm after missing reports. (2) The 24-hour rain forecast sample size is small, and the accuracy rate is low, and the risk needs to be considered when using its forecast results. (3) In this paper, the effective forecast period of rainfall forecast between Sandaohezi Station, Hanjiaying Station, and Panjiakou Reservoir dam site is taken as 12 h.


## 2.2. Analysis of Flood Forecast Information

Four sets of flood forecasting schemes have been established for Panjiakou Reservoir. The first set is a forecast scheme for the second water source model of the Xin’an River considering artificial experience factors. This scheme refers to the contents of some forecast schemes during the construction period; the second set is related to rainfall-runoff experienced model. These two programs have been evaluated by experts as Class B programs. The third set is prepared by the China Academy of Water Resources and Hydropower Science (hereinafter referred to as the plan of the Academy of Water Resources), and the fourth set is prepared by Hohai University. Compared with the previous two sets, these two sets of schemes have a longer effective forecast period and a high degree of automation, so the third and fourth sets of flood forecasting schemes are mainly used at present. The allowable error of the scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences and the scheme of Hohai University adopts the same standard to evaluate the accuracy. The allowable error of the flood peak forecast is 20% of the measured flood peak flow, the allowable error of the time period flood forecast is 20% of the measured flood volume, and the allowable error of the peak current time forecast is allowed. The error takes two calculation periods as long as 6 hours. Figure1 shows a representative flood process line.Figure 1
Representative flood process line.


### 2.2.1. Scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences

The plan of the Academy of Water Sciences uses 16 flood data from 1969 to 1995 for accuracy assessment, as shown in Table2.Table 2
Forecast precision of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902724−0.6−1−1.0−6.0−1021969081608109011082.0−13.03.0−5.0319690819171560216035−2166.0−4.041973081208127313244.004.0118.0519730820201900230922−412158.06197707292023741090−542−48−42−417197708022013551246−8.0−3−11−16−2081978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.0919780727052680305414−1−9.0−13−171019780807202420317131−2121.0−8.01119780825202310300930−322128.012198308040817401440−1709.028−2713199407112394158596−91−6.00.0−5.0141994081123197521529−813110.015199507282338204358141158.04.0161995080120245028791800−2.0−5.0Pass rate (%)70888888It can be seen from the above table that, in the comparison of the selected 16 flood forecasts and the measured floods, the qualified rate of flood peak is 70%, the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 88%, and the peak occurrence time error is mostly 1∼2 times, that is, 3 to 6 hours.


### 2.2.2. Hohai University Program

This scheme adopts the same flood process as that of the Water Research Institute, that is, 15 flood forecasting processes from 1969 to 1995 to evaluate the accuracy. The results are shown in Table3.Table 3
Forecast precision of HHU.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902510−13.105.8−2.3−1.921969081608109011818.3−9−24.4−1.6−14.43196908191715601250−19.9312.38.62.3419730812081273167131.3−10−39.5−69.3−76.0519730820201900275745.12−18.6−17.7−15.56197707292023741200−49.5−533.737.034.27197708022013551159−14.5−019.317.016.981978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.09197807270526802322−13.4016.36.8−1.410197808072024202405−0.6013.015.812.81119780825202310332844.15−26.8−8.5−19.91219830804081740329189.11−76.8−96.1−97.513199407112394157824−16.9013.017.913.61419940811231975275639.59−32.5−2.1−14.3151995072823382040816.8−1−24.7−3.9−4.71619950801202450275812.616.310.88.5Pass rate (%)60608080According to the analysis of the above table, among the 16 floods tested, the qualified rate of flood peak is 60%, and the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 60%, 80%, and 80%, respectively. The peak occurrence time error was mostly 1∼2 periods, that is, 3 to 6 hours.The program of Hohai University is put into use late and has not yet been tested by large floods. The program of the Academy of Water Sciences was put into trial operation in 1997 and was tested by the floods in 1997/1998. The flood peak, flood volume, and actual measurement process were forecasted. Judging from the forecast, the qualification rate of the flood peak, 3 d flood volume, and peak occurrence time of the plan of the Academy of Water Sciences is 100%, as shown in Table4.Table 4
Forecast precision evaluation of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)3 d flood volume/100 million m3RealForecastError (%)RealForecastError (%)198070224602070−15.9−23.343.22−3.6298070621201920−9.402.292.321.33980714889101013.6−11.601.58−1.349807251420167017.602.202.241.8As a result, the following conclusions can be drawn on the availability of flood forecast information: (1) the scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences and the scheme of Hohai University are both Grade B schemes after expert verification. According to the “Hydrological Information Forecasting Specification,” both can be used for formal forecast, but the impact of forecast errors needs to be considered when applying its results; (2) considering the time required for information transmission, decision-making, gate operation, etc., the effective forecast period of flood forecasting is 6 hours; (3) with the accumulation of flood data, the operation forecast accuracy of the plans of the Academy of Water Sciences and the Hohai University plan needs to be further tested and improved, and the flood forecast plan of the reservoir also needs to be further revised and improved.


## 2.2.1. Scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences

The plan of the Academy of Water Sciences uses 16 flood data from 1969 to 1995 for accuracy assessment, as shown in Table2.Table 2
Forecast precision of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902724−0.6−1−1.0−6.0−1021969081608109011082.0−13.03.0−5.0319690819171560216035−2166.0−4.041973081208127313244.004.0118.0519730820201900230922−412158.06197707292023741090−542−48−42−417197708022013551246−8.0−3−11−16−2081978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.0919780727052680305414−1−9.0−13−171019780807202420317131−2121.0−8.01119780825202310300930−322128.012198308040817401440−1709.028−2713199407112394158596−91−6.00.0−5.0141994081123197521529−813110.015199507282338204358141158.04.0161995080120245028791800−2.0−5.0Pass rate (%)70888888It can be seen from the above table that, in the comparison of the selected 16 flood forecasts and the measured floods, the qualified rate of flood peak is 70%, the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 88%, and the peak occurrence time error is mostly 1∼2 times, that is, 3 to 6 hours.


## 2.2.2. Hohai University Program

This scheme adopts the same flood process as that of the Water Research Institute, that is, 15 flood forecasting processes from 1969 to 1995 to evaluate the accuracy. The results are shown in Table3.Table 3
Forecast precision of HHU.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)Magnanimity error (%)RealForecastError (%)1 d magnanimity3 d magnanimity5 d magnanimity1196908102028902510−13.105.8−2.3−1.921969081608109011818.3−9−24.4−1.6−14.43196908191715601250−19.9312.38.62.3419730812081273167131.3−10−39.5−69.3−76.0519730820201900275745.12−18.6−17.7−15.56197707292023741200−49.5−533.737.034.27197708022013551159−14.5−019.317.016.981978072605151515671.01−1.5−3.04.09197807270526802322−13.4016.36.8−1.410197808072024202405−0.6013.015.812.81119780825202310332844.15−26.8−8.5−19.91219830804081740329189.11−76.8−96.1−97.513199407112394157824−16.9013.017.913.61419940811231975275639.59−32.5−2.1−14.3151995072823382040816.8−1−24.7−3.9−4.71619950801202450275812.616.310.88.5Pass rate (%)60608080According to the analysis of the above table, among the 16 floods tested, the qualified rate of flood peak is 60%, and the qualified rate of flood volume of 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d is 60%, 80%, and 80%, respectively. The peak occurrence time error was mostly 1∼2 periods, that is, 3 to 6 hours.The program of Hohai University is put into use late and has not yet been tested by large floods. The program of the Academy of Water Sciences was put into trial operation in 1997 and was tested by the floods in 1997/1998. The flood peak, flood volume, and actual measurement process were forecasted. Judging from the forecast, the qualification rate of the flood peak, 3 d flood volume, and peak occurrence time of the plan of the Academy of Water Sciences is 100%, as shown in Table4.Table 4
Forecast precision evaluation of the IWHR.
No.Flood numberPeak flow (m3/s)Peak time error (length of time period)3 d flood volume/100 million m3RealForecastError (%)RealForecastError (%)198070224602070−15.9−23.343.22−3.6298070621201920−9.402.292.321.33980714889101013.6−11.601.58−1.349807251420167017.602.202.241.8As a result, the following conclusions can be drawn on the availability of flood forecast information: (1) the scheme of the Academy of Water Sciences and the scheme of Hohai University are both Grade B schemes after expert verification. According to the “Hydrological Information Forecasting Specification,” both can be used for formal forecast, but the impact of forecast errors needs to be considered when applying its results; (2) considering the time required for information transmission, decision-making, gate operation, etc., the effective forecast period of flood forecasting is 6 hours; (3) with the accumulation of flood data, the operation forecast accuracy of the plans of the Academy of Water Sciences and the Hohai University plan needs to be further tested and improved, and the flood forecast plan of the reservoir also needs to be further revised and improved.


## 2.3. Determination of the Dynamic Control Area of the Reservoir during the Main Flood Season

Combined with the original and improved design of Panjiakou Reservoir and years of operation (Figure2), the maximum inflow is 3.7 billion m³, and the flood limit water level in the main flood season is 216 m. Therefore, the flood limit water level of 216 m is adopted as the lower limit of the dynamic control range of Panjiakou Reservoir, that is, the initial value of flood control calculation. When there is no rain forecast, within the effective forecast period, the reservoir will have a large discharge capacity, and the flood limit water level will be raised as much as possible, and a certain margin will be reserved to ensure that the water level will be lowered to the next level before the flood rises. When heavy rainfall is forecasted or has already started, the flood-limited water level can be lowered according to the remaining water volume during the water withdrawal process during the effective forecast period, leaving a certain margin. The water margin will raise the reservoir water level to the original design flood limit water level, also known as the predraining and recharging method. The time period before the onset of precipitation and flooding is selected as 12 hours. According to the flood forecast of different frequencies, we consider the most unfavorable combination of forecast errors, magnify each frequency flood by 20%, consider the rainfall and flood forecast period, and calculate the flood entering the reservoir 6 hours in advance. The limits are shown in Table 5.Figure 2
Change of inflow water of Panjiakou Reservoir.Table 5
The floating value of flood water level at different frequencies.
Flood frequency (year)The amount of water that can be released during the forecast period (m3)Corresponding storage capacity (100 million m3)Floating water level (m)Typical year9578177117.988217.64041009576147617.988217.640010009566100017.987217.638350009558918917.986217.6371100009556100017.986217.6366P.M.P9546100017.985217.6349According to the calculation results in the above table, the floating water levels are taken as 217 m and 218 m, respectively, and the calculation results of flood control for each frequency of floods are shown in Table 6.It can be seen from the calculation results in Table6 that when the starting water levels of the main flood season are 217 m and 218 m, the highest water levels during the flood regulation process are 220.58 m and 220.64 m, which are both lower than the normal storage level of 222 m. The maximum discharge flow is 18111.39 m3/s and 18298.5 m3/s, both lower than the downstream flood control standard of 28000 m3/s.Table 6
Flood adjustment calculation results.
Design flood frequency (years)ProjectWater level217 m218 mTypical yearNormal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)217218Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)18800Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)930011600100Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)220.58220.64Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)22800Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)18111.3918298.51000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)224.71225Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)40400Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)31347.7531463.775000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)227.49227.52Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)54500Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)41862.8541966.2810000Normal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)225.84225.89Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)59200Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)35597.9735745.20P.M.PNormal water level (m)222Maximum water level (m)225.75225.83Maximum inbound flow (m3/s)63000Maximum discharge flow (m3/s)35245.8235561.51Therefore, the upper limit of the dynamic control domain in the main flood season determined by the predischarge capacity constraint method is 218 m, and the dynamic control domain of the limited water level in the main flood season can be controlled at 216 m∼218 m.


## 3. Results and Analysis

Based on the dynamic control domain of flood limit water level in main flood season, the dynamic control scheme of flood limit water level in main flood season of reservoir is selected in this chapter, the operation risk model of dynamic control of flood limit water level of reservoir is constructed, and the risk analysis and benefit analysis of real-time operation under dynamic control scheme of flood limit water level are carried out.


### 3.1. Dynamic Control Scheme and Model in Main Flood Season

The real-time prestorage and predischarge method of dynamic control of flood-limited water level is based on the premise of ensuring that the reservoir itself and the original flood control design indicators for upstream and downstream remain unchanged and are carried out within the designed dynamic control range of limited water level during the flood season. When receiving 24 h heavy rain or more rainfall forecast information at any time, it is required that the current control value of the flood-limited water level can be reduced to the lower limit of the dynamic control domain of the flood-limited water level within the effective forecast period. This process is called forecasting leaking process.(4)ΔZ1≤fqout−Qin×t1;qout≤qan;Zt1=Z0+ΔZ1≤ZLmax,whereZt1: facing the time t0, the flood limit water level that will rise after the period t1ΔZ1: after the period of time t1, the above floating value Z0t1: the forecast period of rainfall forecast and flood forecast minus the effective forecast period of information transmission, decision-making and gate operation timeQin: the average inflow during the period t1qout: the average discharge capacity or discharge volume during the period t1qan: the overflow capacity of the embankment at the protection pointZLmax: the allowable upper limit of the dynamic control limit of the flood limit water levelf∗: relationship between storage capacity and water levelThe reservoir flood forecasting and dispatching method increases the risk source of the runoff forecasting error compared with the conventional reservoir dispatching method. From the perspective of practicality and simplified calculation, based on the original design to check the standard flood and the corresponding maximum water level, the frequency of the regulated flood is used to replace the frequency of the reservoir water level exceeding the corresponding maximum water level of flood regulation, and the frequency that can resist the flood is used to characterize the risk of the flood control forecast and dispatch method.In this paper, the focus of the reservoir real-time flood control forecast and dispatch risk analysis is for the major floods in the main flood season, the major floods near the check flood standard are mainly considered, the check flood level is used as the control index, and real-time forecast and dispatch risk model of main flood season is shown as formula (5). The risk model refers to the probability that, in the process of real-time flood control forecasting and dispatching, when the reservoir encounters a flood WPk of a certain design frequency Pk that can still be resisted, the maximum water level of the flood regulation Zm is exactly equal to the maximum allowable water storage level ZA approved by the planning, expressed by the following formula:(5)PZZL=PWkRRm0+RC,Zmc≤PZL0,Zm0Zl≤ZL≤Zn.In the above formula,Zl—the lowest ebb and flow water level of the reservoir before the flood; Zn—the normal high water level of the planning and design; ZL0Zm0—the original design flood limit water level and the check flood level.


### 3.2. Risk Analysis of Real-Time Forecasting and Dispatching of Reservoir

The dynamic control range of the limited water level during the main flood season of Panjiakou Reservoir is 216 m–218 m. The range is evenly divided, and the selected starting water levels are 216 m, 216.5 m, 217 m, 217.5 m, and 218 m, respectively. Assuming that the net rain forecast error (average value of the basin) isδ mm, since the net rain depth is numerically equal to the runoff depth, the change value of the total inflow caused by the flood forecast error is(6)ΔQtotal=δ×S.In the formula,S is the watershed area controlled by Panjiakou Reservoir, 33700 km2.Combine the above risk model, and the risk ratios of different flood forecast errors and combinations of different starting water levels can be obtained. The calculation results are shown in Table7. According to the traditional classification standard and the level of acceptable risk rate, it is considered that when the risk rate F is less than 0.1, it is considered as “low risk”; when F is between 0.1 and 0.2, it is considered as “low risk”; when F is between 0.2 and 0.5, it is considered as “high risk”; when F is greater than 0.5, it is considered as “high risk.” It can be seen from the table that when the initial adjustment water level is less than 217.5 m, F is only at the level of “low risk” even if the forecast error is 30 mm, while when the initial adjustment water level is 218 m, F becomes the level of “high risk” when the forecast error reaches 30 mm. This indicates that, with the increase of the initial adjustment water level and the forecast error, the risk level is gradually increasing.Table 7
Flood control risk rate/%.
Forecast error (mm)Water level (m)216216.5217217.521850.0230.0400.0620.0640.071100.0280.0450.0700.0730.078150.0340.0580.0740.0780.084200.0450.0610.0790.0810.086250.0510.0660.0850.0880.094300.0570.0690.0920.0960.102


### 3.3. Benefit Analysis of Real-Time Dynamic Control in the Main Flood Season of Reservoir

In the main flood season, the dynamic operation of the reservoir with the limited water level during the flood season between 216 and 218 m can increase the benefit of the reservoir, such as water supply and power generation. The power generation benefit of Panjiakou Power Station is difficult to be calculated accurately, because not only its conventional units can generate electricity with natural water flow, but also when the outflow flow is large during the flood season, its pumped storage units can also use abandoned water to generate electricity. Therefore, this paper mainly considers the influence of the dynamic control of the limited water level in the main flood season on the water supply efficiency of the reservoir in the calculation of the benefit of the Panjiakou Reservoir and only calculates the annual average water flow and electricity index of the reservoir for the power generation benefit. The operating water level calculated by Xingli Adjustment for each month is as follows: the highest operating water level from July 1st to August 15th is 218 m, the highest operating water level from August 16th to August 31st is 222 m, and the highest control water level in other months maintains the status quo design. The water level remains unchanged, and the maximum control water level has gradually decreased since April and should be lowered below the flood limit water level before the end of June to welcome the flood. The minimum control water level in each month is the same as the original design.The designed runoff series is based on 32 years of data from 1953 to 1984, and the average design runoff for many years is 2.144 billion m3. Taking 2000 as the design level year, the natural runoff after deducting the design water consumption in the upstream area is the designed inflow runoff of the Panjiakou Reservoir. The process of downstream water usage, the proportion of water distribution, and the actual annual water diversion from Tianjin and Hebei Province are quite random, and it is difficult to calculate the water demand law. This paper adopts the 1 billion m3 water diversion process line in Tianjin city and the 950 million m3 water diversion process line in Tangshan area provided in the design stage. The water diversion hydrographs of the two regions are formulated based on the changes in the abundance and dryness of the Qiao, Qiuzhuang, and Douhe reservoirs, respectively, and the diversion hydrographs for different typical years are proposed according to the local water sources in the respective regions. The results are shown in Table 8.Table 8
Water use process table in Tianjin and Tangshan area Unit: 100 million m3.
MonthsLow waterFlat waterHigh waterTianjinTangshanTianjinTangshanTianjinTangshan70.710.790.160.690.650.69800.7000.2000.2091.000.3600.3600.36100.590.281.600.281.600.28111.500.281.500.281.150.28121.500.201.600.200.960.20100.1600.1600.16200.1600.1600.1631.600.561.600.561.600.5641.301.161.501.361.501.3651.002.541.602.741.602.7460.802.310.442.510.942.51Total10.009.5010.009.5010.009.50In the case of water supply guarantee rateP: 75%, if the annual water supply of Panjiakou Reservoir is less than 1.95 billion m3, the water supply to the above two areas will be reduced proportionally. Table 9 shows the distribution ratio of water diversion between the two regions.Table 9
Water allocation ratio of Luanhe-Tianjin Water Diversion Project (108 m3).
Water supply guarantee rate (%)Water distribution ratio (%)TianjinHebeiTotal7551.348.7100The calculation results of runoff regulation are shown in Table10.Table 10
Runoff adjustment calculation results.
ProjectFlood limit water level (m)216216∼218DifferenceAnnual water supply whenP=75% (100 million m3)16.116.50.4Annual average water flow (100 millionkW⋅h)3.523.550.03Years of abandoned water (years)17170Years of storage during the flood season (years)17170It can be seen from the calculation results that when the flood limit water level in the main flood season is controlled dynamically between 216 and 218 m, the reservoir can increase the water supply by 40 million m3 and the water flow and electricity by 30 million when the water supply guarantee rate is P=75%.


## 3.1. Dynamic Control Scheme and Model in Main Flood Season

The real-time prestorage and predischarge method of dynamic control of flood-limited water level is based on the premise of ensuring that the reservoir itself and the original flood control design indicators for upstream and downstream remain unchanged and are carried out within the designed dynamic control range of limited water level during the flood season. When receiving 24 h heavy rain or more rainfall forecast information at any time, it is required that the current control value of the flood-limited water level can be reduced to the lower limit of the dynamic control domain of the flood-limited water level within the effective forecast period. This process is called forecasting leaking process.(4)ΔZ1≤fqout−Qin×t1;qout≤qan;Zt1=Z0+ΔZ1≤ZLmax,whereZt1: facing the time t0, the flood limit water level that will rise after the period t1ΔZ1: after the period of time t1, the above floating value Z0t1: the forecast period of rainfall forecast and flood forecast minus the effective forecast period of information transmission, decision-making and gate operation timeQin: the average inflow during the period t1qout: the average discharge capacity or discharge volume during the period t1qan: the overflow capacity of the embankment at the protection pointZLmax: the allowable upper limit of the dynamic control limit of the flood limit water levelf∗: relationship between storage capacity and water levelThe reservoir flood forecasting and dispatching method increases the risk source of the runoff forecasting error compared with the conventional reservoir dispatching method. From the perspective of practicality and simplified calculation, based on the original design to check the standard flood and the corresponding maximum water level, the frequency of the regulated flood is used to replace the frequency of the reservoir water level exceeding the corresponding maximum water level of flood regulation, and the frequency that can resist the flood is used to characterize the risk of the flood control forecast and dispatch method.In this paper, the focus of the reservoir real-time flood control forecast and dispatch risk analysis is for the major floods in the main flood season, the major floods near the check flood standard are mainly considered, the check flood level is used as the control index, and real-time forecast and dispatch risk model of main flood season is shown as formula (5). The risk model refers to the probability that, in the process of real-time flood control forecasting and dispatching, when the reservoir encounters a flood WPk of a certain design frequency Pk that can still be resisted, the maximum water level of the flood regulation Zm is exactly equal to the maximum allowable water storage level ZA approved by the planning, expressed by the following formula:(5)PZZL=PWkRRm0+RC,Zmc≤PZL0,Zm0Zl≤ZL≤Zn.In the above formula,Zl—the lowest ebb and flow water level of the reservoir before the flood; Zn—the normal high water level of the planning and design; ZL0Zm0—the original design flood limit water level and the check flood level.


## 3.2. Risk Analysis of Real-Time Forecasting and Dispatching of Reservoir

The dynamic control range of the limited water level during the main flood season of Panjiakou Reservoir is 216 m–218 m. The range is evenly divided, and the selected starting water levels are 216 m, 216.5 m, 217 m, 217.5 m, and 218 m, respectively. Assuming that the net rain forecast error (average value of the basin) isδ mm, since the net rain depth is numerically equal to the runoff depth, the change value of the total inflow caused by the flood forecast error is(6)ΔQtotal=δ×S.In the formula,S is the watershed area controlled by Panjiakou Reservoir, 33700 km2.Combine the above risk model, and the risk ratios of different flood forecast errors and combinations of different starting water levels can be obtained. The calculation results are shown in Table7. According to the traditional classification standard and the level of acceptable risk rate, it is considered that when the risk rate F is less than 0.1, it is considered as “low risk”; when F is between 0.1 and 0.2, it is considered as “low risk”; when F is between 0.2 and 0.5, it is considered as “high risk”; when F is greater than 0.5, it is considered as “high risk.” It can be seen from the table that when the initial adjustment water level is less than 217.5 m, F is only at the level of “low risk” even if the forecast error is 30 mm, while when the initial adjustment water level is 218 m, F becomes the level of “high risk” when the forecast error reaches 30 mm. This indicates that, with the increase of the initial adjustment water level and the forecast error, the risk level is gradually increasing.Table 7
Flood control risk rate/%.
Forecast error (mm)Water level (m)216216.5217217.521850.0230.0400.0620.0640.071100.0280.0450.0700.0730.078150.0340.0580.0740.0780.084200.0450.0610.0790.0810.086250.0510.0660.0850.0880.094300.0570.0690.0920.0960.102


## 3.3. Benefit Analysis of Real-Time Dynamic Control in the Main Flood Season of Reservoir

In the main flood season, the dynamic operation of the reservoir with the limited water level during the flood season between 216 and 218 m can increase the benefit of the reservoir, such as water supply and power generation. The power generation benefit of Panjiakou Power Station is difficult to be calculated accurately, because not only its conventional units can generate electricity with natural water flow, but also when the outflow flow is large during the flood season, its pumped storage units can also use abandoned water to generate electricity. Therefore, this paper mainly considers the influence of the dynamic control of the limited water level in the main flood season on the water supply efficiency of the reservoir in the calculation of the benefit of the Panjiakou Reservoir and only calculates the annual average water flow and electricity index of the reservoir for the power generation benefit. The operating water level calculated by Xingli Adjustment for each month is as follows: the highest operating water level from July 1st to August 15th is 218 m, the highest operating water level from August 16th to August 31st is 222 m, and the highest control water level in other months maintains the status quo design. The water level remains unchanged, and the maximum control water level has gradually decreased since April and should be lowered below the flood limit water level before the end of June to welcome the flood. The minimum control water level in each month is the same as the original design.The designed runoff series is based on 32 years of data from 1953 to 1984, and the average design runoff for many years is 2.144 billion m3. Taking 2000 as the design level year, the natural runoff after deducting the design water consumption in the upstream area is the designed inflow runoff of the Panjiakou Reservoir. The process of downstream water usage, the proportion of water distribution, and the actual annual water diversion from Tianjin and Hebei Province are quite random, and it is difficult to calculate the water demand law. This paper adopts the 1 billion m3 water diversion process line in Tianjin city and the 950 million m3 water diversion process line in Tangshan area provided in the design stage. The water diversion hydrographs of the two regions are formulated based on the changes in the abundance and dryness of the Qiao, Qiuzhuang, and Douhe reservoirs, respectively, and the diversion hydrographs for different typical years are proposed according to the local water sources in the respective regions. The results are shown in Table 8.Table 8
Water use process table in Tianjin and Tangshan area Unit: 100 million m3.
MonthsLow waterFlat waterHigh waterTianjinTangshanTianjinTangshanTianjinTangshan70.710.790.160.690.650.69800.7000.2000.2091.000.3600.3600.36100.590.281.600.281.600.28111.500.281.500.281.150.28121.500.201.600.200.960.20100.1600.1600.16200.1600.1600.1631.600.561.600.561.600.5641.301.161.501.361.501.3651.002.541.602.741.602.7460.802.310.442.510.942.51Total10.009.5010.009.5010.009.50In the case of water supply guarantee rateP: 75%, if the annual water supply of Panjiakou Reservoir is less than 1.95 billion m3, the water supply to the above two areas will be reduced proportionally. Table 9 shows the distribution ratio of water diversion between the two regions.Table 9
Water allocation ratio of Luanhe-Tianjin Water Diversion Project (108 m3).
Water supply guarantee rate (%)Water distribution ratio (%)TianjinHebeiTotal7551.348.7100The calculation results of runoff regulation are shown in Table10.Table 10
Runoff adjustment calculation results.
ProjectFlood limit water level (m)216216∼218DifferenceAnnual water supply whenP=75% (100 million m3)16.116.50.4Annual average water flow (100 millionkW⋅h)3.523.550.03Years of abandoned water (years)17170Years of storage during the flood season (years)17170It can be seen from the calculation results that when the flood limit water level in the main flood season is controlled dynamically between 216 and 218 m, the reservoir can increase the water supply by 40 million m3 and the water flow and electricity by 30 million when the water supply guarantee rate is P=75%.


## 4. Conclusion

Taking Panjiakou Reservoir as an example, based on the analysis of the availability of reservoir forecast information, this paper conducts a research on the real-time dynamic control of the flood-limited water level in the reservoir during the flood season. The “predischarge capacity constraint method” is used to calculate the dynamic control area of the flood-limited water level of the Panjiakou Reservoir. The main conclusions are as follows:(1)
The flood forecasting accuracy of Panjiakou Reservoir meets the standard of the Grade B forecasting scheme, and the application of the results can be carried out under the condition of considering the forecasting error;(2)
It is suggested that the maximum water level of the Panjiakou Reservoir in the main flood season is 218 m for dynamic control of the limited water level during the flood season. Under the condition of the water supply guarantee rate ofP=75%, the water supply of this scheme will increase by 0.4 million m3 compared with the current situation of the flood-limited water level of 216 m, and the water flow and electricity will increase by 30 million;(3)
The flood control risk rate of the Panjiakou Reservoir 218 m flood-limited water level dispatching scheme determined in this paper is lower than 0.1 under the error of 0∼25 mm net rain miss reporting, which is the minimum risk level. However, when the net rain misreporting error is greater than 25 mm, there may be underleakage or overleakage problems, causing unnecessary risks to downstream flood control.



---

*Source: 3683122-2022-04-07.xml*