Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Manuscript Draft
Manuscript Number:
Title: The advantage of sensitivity analysis for global parameters applying to spatially distributed flood
forecasting model
Article Type: Full Length Article
Keywords: Sensitivity analysis; Global parameter; Flood forecasting; WetSpa extension model
Corresponding Author: Mrs. Chi Thi Phuong Pham, M.D.
Corresponding Author's Institution: Geosphere Research Institute
First Author: Chi Thi Phuong Pham, M.D.
Order of Authors: Chi Thi Phuong Pham, M.D.; Chiaki T Oguchi, Dr.
Abstract: Flood prediction models combined with simulation and GIS such as WetSpa series are useful
and have been improved for some decades. However, to predict flooding phenomenon in time is a
challenge for scientists because of necessity of tremendous parameters involving not only hydrological
parameters but also soil physical properties as well as land use conditions In order to evaluate the
importance of parameters for input to simulation model, this study focus on creating new combined
simulating model for flood discharge by the WetSpa extension model by using the global technique
Morris's sensitivity analysis. Hydrological parameters were collected from An Chi station, which
locates in the upstream part of the Ve river basin, the largest rainy region of Quang Ngai province in
the central of Vietnam. The application for flood forecasting purpose of the model shows good, by
evaluating using Nash-Sutcliffe criteria of 0.76. However, the logarithmic version of Nash-Sutcliffe
efficiency for low flow is 0.78 and the adapted version of Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency for high flow
evaluation is 0.74 showed the poor ability of reproducing the time evolution of flows due to the semiopen basin characteristics.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Nguyen T.G. and Ms. Nguyen T.T. for academic advice and other
support. We also want to say thank to The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and
Technology, Japan for the fund for this research.
PhD student, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-okubo,
Sakura-ku, Saitama 338-0825, Japan
Associate Professor, Geosphere Research Institute, Saitama University, 255 Shimo-okubo, Sakuraku, Saitama 338-0825, Japan
3
4
ABSTRACT
Flood prediction models combined with simulation and GIS such as WetSpa series are
useful and have been improved for some decades. However, to predict flooding phenomenon in
time is a challenge for scientists because of necessity of tremendous parameters involving not
only hydrological parameters but also soil physical properties as well as land use conditions In
order to evaluate the importance of parameters for input to simulation model, this study focus
10
on creating new combined simulating model for flood discharge by the WetSpa extension model
11
by using the global technique Morriss sensitivity analysis. Hydrological parameters were
12
collected from An Chi station, which locates in the upstream part of the Ve river basin, the
13
largest rainy region of Quang Ngai province in the central of Vietnam. The application for flood
14
forecasting purpose of the model shows good, by evaluating using Nash-Sutcliffe criteria of
15
0.76. However, the logarithmic version of Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency for low flow is 0.78 and the
16
adapted version of Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency for high flow evaluation is 0.74 showed the poor
17
ability of reproducing the time evolution of flows due to the semi-open basin characteristics.
18
Keywords: Sensitivity analysis; Global parameter; Flood forecasting; WetSpa extension model
19
1. Introduction
20
Flood prediction using simulation of discharge is important to reduce the unpleasant effects
21
of this hazard causing on the nature and human livings. Usually this progress of simulation
22
meets difficulties due to the limitation of data as well as the available technology. For some
23
decades, people tend to use the Geographical Information Systems (GIS) hydrological models to
24
imitate flood hydrographs due to their easy-to-use characteristics. However, to predict flooding
25
phenomenon in time is a challenge for scientists because many input parameters are necessary
26
for each model. The value of parameters must be estimated from the topography of the basin,
27
physical properties of soil type, aquifer zones or land use conditions and so on. These factors
28
cannot be measured easily, especially for large areas. For this reason, optimization using a
29
certain initial values, after that, adjusted parameters are useful for higher efficiency of models.
30
This optimization steps take time, so that sensitivity analyze is necessary to find the important
31
32
understood the sense of each parameter used in the models, which are the most important ones
33
for preliminary calibration of models. It can assess the effects of inputs on outputs of the model
34
35
number of adjusted inputs leads to better estimation of their values and to shorten the operating
36
time for modeling. From that, better predicting water discharge and managing watershed can
37
38
There have been done the sensitivity analysis for the WetSpa (Water and Energy Transfer
39
between Soil, Plants and Atmosphere) extension model. Liu and De Smedt [1] described the
40
order of parameter priority and gave relative sensitivity of the variables. The authors not only
41
suggested the order in which parameters are typically adjusted, but also showed the aspect of the
42
output is primarily affected. Bahremand and De Smedt [2] used a model-independent nonlinear
43
parameter optimization for a local analysis. The noticeable recommendation for further studies
44
is using a global sensitivity analysis instead of the local parameter estimation (PEST) method.
45
Because the PEST design uses only local information that might not represent the entire
46
47
The aim of this research is using the Morris [3] method for global sensitivity analysis of
48
parameters in the WetSpa Extension model, and then, applying the results in simulating flood
49
50
2. Study area
51
The Ve river basin is located in Quang Ngai Province in the central region of Vietnam. The
52
basin has a catchment area of 1300 km2 at outlet and the total length of main stream from
53
upstream to the coast is 91 km [4]. The river flows in a generally north-east direction towards
54
the coast. The upper reaches of the catchment is steep mountainous region with the highest point
55
having an elevation of over 1100 m. The floodplains near the coast are flat and the mouth of the
56
river joins the mouth of the Tra Khuc River through a coastal water course and a network of
57
minor channels. The inundated areas of the Ve basin join the floodplain of the Tra Khuc basin in
58
the north and also extend along the coast towards the south. These flow patterns in the
59
floodplain are complex with a network of channels and branches in the downstream. The
60
National Highway and Railway Line both cross the river in the lower section at approximately
61
62
An Chi station, which is one of the main stations in the province is located where the
63
irrigation channel crosses the river in a siphon. The gauge is also located at a point immediately
64
upstream of where there is an extensive area of floodplain inundation, while the flow is
65
relatively constricted at the station. In major floods with significant downstream inundation,
66
there is a backwater effect from the downstream floodplain. Within this research, the basin of
67
the upstream area of An Chi station was taken into account. This surface area of the basin is 757
68
km2. The terrain of steep slope in a small area makes flood process complicated. Furthermore,
69
the location of the catchment corresponds to heavy rainfall area in the region, so that flash flood
70
often occurs, causing serious damages to the human community. The problems need to be
71
solved here is to raise the degree of accuracy in flow forecasting and to extent the foresee time
72
of predicting water level in order to prevent and reduce damages caused by flood.
73
74
There have been a large number of flood forecasting models used in Vietnam. Among of
75
those, several classical models should be mentioned as for not only the purpose of research as
76
well as the practical forecasting; e.g., the HEC model system of United States Army Corps of
77
Engineers or MIKE of Denmark Hydraulic Institute, and BASIN model of United States
78
Environmental Protection Agency. Recently, the new model WetSpa Extension has been tested
79
in the karstic Suoi Muoi region for modeling flood processes by Liu et al [5]. This model is
80
suitable for flood prediction and also able to simulate the spatial variation of other hydrological
81
characteristics such as ground water and water level at each time step. The same model has been
82
used for flood simulating of Ca river basin in Vietnam [6]. For further applying, it should be
83
continued the research on the applicable of this model for more case study in order to access the
84
85
The WetSpa extension model [1] was an extension of the original WetSpa by Wang and
86
Batelaan [7]. Another extension WetSpass also has been developed by Batelaan and De Smedt
87
[8] for regional groundwater flow systems while the extension WetSpa was proposed for flood
88
prediction as well as water balance simulation. This model is a kind of GIS-based models and
89
suitable on catchment scale. It accounts for spatially distributed hydrological and geophysical
90
characteristics of a catchment with simulating runoff and other hydrological data at certain
91
points in the river networks and their distribution in grid cell scale. Further, the model can
92
provide easy-operating interface, which is suitable for studying the impact of input change on
93
94
4. Sensitivity analysis
95
There are different methods for sensitivity analysis applying to refine the parameter
96
97
(GLUE) to assess the uncertainty value of the land using distribution in the interaction 1D and
98
2D hydrodynamic models in Meuse river basin in the Netherlands. Bahremand and De Smedt
99
[1] validated and performed sensitivity analysis for some global parameters using a
100
model-independent Parameter Estimator (PEST) with WetSpa model for the Torysa basin which
101
has a surface area of 1297 km2 in Slovakia. Fedak [10] has studied the influence of grid cell size
102
in the two models of HEC-1 and TopModel for the Back Creek watershed in America. There are
103
some other researches were reported (e.g. Iman and Helton [11], Campolongo and Saltelli [12],
104
105
Selecting the sensitivity analysis methods is usually based on the complexity of the model
106
and analyze target. Morgan and Henrion [14] gave four selection criteria as follows: 1)
107
uncertainty in the model form, 2) the essence of that model, 3) analyzing requirements, and 4)
108
the base conditions. Based on these criteria, a new method developed by Morris was used in this
109
research. This design of Morris has been used widely and proved to be an effective global
110
sensitivity analysis tool in previous studies (e.g. Morris [3], Saltelli et al [15], Nguyen and De
111
Kok [13]).
112
The original purpose of Morris method is to improve the economy of a sensitivity analysis
113
basing on the construction of an input factor value j by k matrix with rows that represent runs
114
and columns stands for parameters. The progress would be repeated many times, it takes only
115
one parameter in each run, and then the number of steps is the linear function of the number of
116
parameters. During the simulation, the corresponding experiment provides k elementary effects
117
from (k+1) running steps. The economy of a design will be defined to be the number of
118
elementary effects divided by the number of experimental runs. Therefor this method has an
119
economy of k/(k+1). The main advantage of this design is low computing cost.
120
121
To define the elementary effect dj which is the change in output caused by the change in
input factor, first we suppose that the output function is as below:
122
y = f(x1,x2,...,xk)
123
124
(1)
dj
(2)
125
Where, j indicates the jth input. For more explanation, readers are recommended to reference
126
127
The sensitivity analysis to find out the most influential inputs can be done by calculating
128
the standard deviation and mean of the elementary effect value series. The high mean value
129
shows the important global impact when large standard deviation corresponds to the interaction
130
131
132
There are many parameters included in the WetSpa extension model; however, this study
133
put only seven parameters into sensitivity analysis applied for the Ve catchment. The brief
134
description about these seven parameters will be given as below. These global parameters have
135
physical interpretations that are important in controlling runoff production and hydrographs at
136
the basin outlet. Nevertheless, it is difficult to assign them properly over a grid scale. Therefore,
137
it is preferable to calibrate these parameters against observed runoff data in addition to the
138
adjustment of the spatial distributed model parameters. The initial values were determined based
139
upon known values in previous simulation studies of Bissen Catchment in Luxembourg (Liu
140
and De Smedt [9]). Then the calibration progress was done by the trial simulation. The outputs
141
from the model were compared with observed stream flows, and evaluated by assessment
142
criteria to achieve fit of runoff volumes, peak discharge, delay time and fit of hydrograph shape
143
as well as to refine hydrograph fit. Based upon those comparisons and evaluations, parameter
144
145
146
147
green crop and with adequate water status in the soil profile. It reflects the energy available for
148
evaporation and the ability of the lower atmosphere to transport evaporated moisture away from
149
150
there is sufficient water. Potential evapotranspiration is usually measured indirectly, from other
151
climatic factors, although it depends on local factors such as existence of free water, soil or
152
vegetation types and elevation. For applying this global parameter to WetSpa extension, the
153
parameter value is necessary to be estimated from data from several meteorological station
154
distributed in the target catchment. To account for variation of the values, a correction factor is
155
156
157
In case of lacking of the evapotranspiration data, the correction factor for potential
158
159
precipitation (%):
160
xinput x K r
(3)
161
Where, xinput is the input precipitation, x is the measured precipitation, Kr is the evaporation
162
163
164
Interflow or subsurface runoff is an essential runoff component for the humid temperate
165
region especially for the sloping areas with dense vegetation. It is assumed to occur when soil
166
moisture exceeds the field capacity and there is sufficient hydraulic gradient to move the water.
167
Even though a uniform soil matrix is considered in the model, but in fact, the porosity and
168
permeability of soil tend to decrease with depth due to overlying soils and the translocation of
169
material in percolating water to lateral subsurface flow. Quick movement of soil water to a
170
stream through root canals, animal tunnels, or pipes produced by subsurface erosion may also
171
become a critical component of peak flow. Taking these effects into account, Ki which is
172
generally greater than 1, should be calibrated by comparing the recession part of computed
173
174
175
The groundwater recession coefficient (Kg) reflects the storage characteristics of the
176
sub-watershed and, therefore, is the same for all hydrographs at a given location. It will remain
177
constant if storage and discharge volumes are divided by area and expressed as depth in mm.
178
This is under the condition that groundwater flow for each sub-catchment has the same
179
recession constant, and total groundwater at the outlet of the river is only a time-shifted
180
181
182
(4)
183
where QGs is the average groundwater flow at the sub-catchment outlet (m3/s), SGs (mm) is the
184
groundwater storage of the sub-catchment at time t, the exponent m is set to 1 for linear
185
reservoir, and to 2 for non-linear reservoir, Kg is a groundwater recession coefficient taking the
186
sub-catchment area into account, has a dimension of (m2/s) for linear reservoir and (m-1s-1) for
187
non-linear reservoir, which is dependent upon area, shape, pore volume and transmissivity of
188
the sub-catchment.
189
In real river basins, base flow recession coefficient for each sub-catchment may not be the
190
same, and may have a considerable deviation from the theoretical constant. For model
191
192
basin outlet.
193
194
K g ,s K g
Ss
Ws
S
(5)
195
Where Kg,s and Kg (m2/s) are groundwater recession coefficient of the sub-catchment and the
196
entire basin, Ss and S are average slope of the sub-catchment and the entire basin, and Ws is the
197
areal weight of the sub-catchment. Calibration of this parameter is necessary by comparing the
198
199
200
Soil moisture content is a key element in the model controlling the hydrological processes
201
of surface runoff production, evapotranspiration, percolation and interflow. Proper initial soil
202
moisture (Kss) condition may provide a much more realistic starting point for predictions.
203
However, for a long-term flow simulation in a watershed, the initial soil moisture condition is
204
less important, as it affects the hydrological processes only in the initial part of the simulation.
205
An assumption of uniform initial moisture distribution can be made in this case with modelling
206
purpose of flood prediction under present condition. A ratio against field capacity is then
207
defined in the input parameter file for setting up the initial soil moisture conditions. This value
208
can be adjusted during calibration by analysis of water balance output and comparison between
209
210
211
Groundwater balance is maintained on sub-catchment scale and for the active groundwater
212
storage, which is that part of storage in perched or shallow aquifers that contribute to the surface
213
stream flow. Water percolating from the root zone storage may flow to active groundwater
214
storage or may be lost by deep percolation. Active groundwater eventually reappears as base
215
flow, but deep percolation is considered lost from the simulated system. A value of initial
216
groundwater storage (G0) in depth (mm) is set up in the input parameter file for all
217
sub-catchment. This value can be adjusted during calibration by comparing the computed and
218
219
5.6. Surface runoff exponent for a near zero rainfall intensity (Krun)
220
Rainfall intensity has a big influence in controlling the proportion of surface runoff and
221
infiltration. For a near zero rainfall intensity, this surface runoff exponent (Krun) is assumed to
222
be a variable starting from a higher value, and changing linearly up to 1 along with the rainfall
223
intensity, when the predetermined maximum rainfall intensity is reached. If an exponent value 1
224
is given, the actual runoff coefficient is then a linear function of the relative soil moisture
225
content, and the effect of rainfall intensity on the runoff coefficient is not taken into account.
226
227
This rainfall intensity (Pmax) corresponds to a threshold rainfall intensity in unit of mm/h of
228
the model simulation at the surface runoff exponent of 1. The actual runoff coefficient becomes
229
a linear function of the relative soil moisture content. A constant value is assumed in the current
230
model for simplification. This parameter is in fact spatially distributed, depending upon the cell
231
characteristics, such as soil type, land use, and slope, etc. Calibration of this parameter can be
232
performed by comparison of the observed and computed surface runoff volume and the peak
233
234
6. Sensitivity of parameters
235
Initial calibration was performed to find variation limits of the parameters by using the two
236
methods of Random sampling and Latin hypercube sampling by Doldersum [16]. From these
237
calibration processes, minimum and maximum values are obtained (Table 1).
238
The sensitivity analysis was done by Morris [3] method for the two output factors peak
239
discharge and the total discharge volume of flow data series at An Chi station. The below results
240
were achieved based on the data collected in the two storms of November and December 1999.
241
Figure 2 presents the sensitivity of the model parameters regarding to the highest point of
242
each flood showing by arrow in Fig. 1. Parameters Kg and Krun have high standard deviation,
243
indicating strong interaction with other parameters. Kr, Ki and Pmax have relatively large
244
standard deviations that demonstrate the ability to interact with each other and with other
245
parameters. Kr, Ki and Kg have high mean values, which represents the influence on peak flow
246
values. Pmax have relatively large mean value, corresponding to significant influence to the
247
output. The two factors Kss and G0 are not sensitive to the peak discharge of stream flow.
248
The results of sensitivity analysis for the total value showed clearly that parameters Kg have
249
a very high standard deviation, indicating a strong interaction with other parameters. Parameter
250
Kr, Ki and Krun have relatively large standard deviations demonstrate their interaction ability.
251
Parameter Kr, Ki and Kg have a high average value shows the influence on flooding volume. The
252
253
From the above results, apparently that the groundwater recession coefficient Kg is the most
254
sensitive one for both the flood peak and the total volume of flooding water amount. Beside of
255
that is the interaction with other parameters in the model. This is the most important factor
256
257
258
259
The standard deviation of Krun which represents the surface runoff exponent for a near zero
rainfall intensity is also rather high, reflecting the ability to interact with other parameters.
The evaporation recession coefficient Kr and the interflow coefficient K3 has strongly
260
261
7. Flood forecasting
262
263
Spatial data for the WetSpa extension includes three base digital maps: digital elevation
264
map (DEM), soil type map and land use map. In addition, to compare and calculate basin
265
characteristics, the river networks as well as the hydrological station network maps are also
266
267
Precipitation data at 4 stations An Chi, Son Giang, Gia Vuc and Ba To were used to
268
calculate the stream flow in the basin. Among of those, Ba To and An Chi stations are located
269
inside the basin while the two other gauges are outside. The hourly rainfall data calculated from
270
the 6h-data measured in these 4 stations were used to draw the Thiessen polygons and
271
interpolate data over the entire basin. For the demand of continuous input data for running the
272
model, the interpolating method was also used for some missing data during the executed time.
273
The discharge data of seven years from 1999 to 2005 was used for model calibration. The
274
observed data for each six hours during flood season from September to December was
275
276
277
Flow data series at An Chi station was used to compare to output results from WetSpa
model. The data was collected in the two storms of October and November 2008.
278
279
The suggested progress for calibration of twelve global parameters in the WetSpa extension
280
model is basing on the evaluation results and the visual comparison between observed and
281
calculated hydrographs, readjusting global parameters in the input file, then running the model
282
with a semi-distributed approach. These steps would be repeated until a good match is reached
283
284
Taking advantage of results from the sensitivity analysis for the flood forecasting, in order
285
to shorten the calibrating time, the authors focus on the values of four parameters Kg, Krun, Kr,
286
287
Automatic operation of the model was carried out based on the modified source code of the
288
original model. Then instead of calculating the output volume for each certain set of parameters
289
one-by-one, the model can execute with all the set in one-time operation. The concerning output
290
was runoff data at downstream An Chi station corresponding to each set of parameters.
291
In this study, one hundred values randomly chosen from the variation range in Table 1 for
292
each factor were executed. Therefore, in total there were four hundred parameter sets
293
corresponding to four hundred running steps. This progress saved nearly a half of consuming
294
295
296
The discharge graph simulated from the model performs the good agreement with the
297
measured data. The model bias is 0.045 for the simulation period. Model determination
298
coefficient is 0.86 and the flow efficiency coefficient is 0.76. Adapted version of Nash-Sutcliffe
299
efficiency for high flow and low flow evaluations are 0.74 and 0.78, respectively. These poor
300
performances may due to the semi-open basin condition. Under normal weather conditions it is
301
a closed basin, but in extreme circumstances water can flow in and out through the boundary.
302
These evaluations show the ability of producing a good flow hydrographs for the study area of
303
304
8. Conclusions
305
This study focus on combining flood discharge prediction by the WetSpa extension model
306
and sensitivity analysis by the global technique Morriss [3]. When using WetSpa extension for
307
flood forecasting, it is need to focus on adjusting values of four global parameters: the
308
groundwater recession coefficient, the surface runoff when the rainfall intensity is very small,
309
the evaporation recession coefficient, and the scaling factor for interflow computation.
310
Basing on the model evaluations, the model is available to application for flood prediction
311
in Ve catchment. The achieved Nash efficiency for reproducing the river discharges of 76%
312
shows good agreement with observed hydrographs. However, to apply in flood forecasting, it is
313
314
References
315
[1].
Liu Y.B., De Smedt F., 2004. Documentation and User Manual WetSpa Extension; A GIS
316
based Hydrologic Model for Flood Prediction and Watershed Management, Vrije
317
318
[2].
319
320
321
322
Bahremand A., De Smedt F., 2008. Distributed Hydrological Modeling and Sensitvity
Morris D.M., 1991. Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments,
Technometrics, 33, 161-174.
[4].
Nguyen T.S, 2008. Simulating the rainfall-runoff process for rational water resources and
323
land use in some upstream watersheds in central region of Vietnam. PhD thesis, Hanoi
324
325
[5].
Liu Y.B, Batelaan O., Huong N.T., Tam, V.T., De Smedt F., 2004. Flood prediction in the
326
Karstic
327
328
Hanoi, Vietnam.
329
[6].
330
331
Suoi
Muoi
catchment,
Vietnam,
Proceedings
of
the
International
Nguyen T.T, 2008. Using the WetSpa extension model for flood simulating of Ca river
basin. Bachelor thesis, Hanoi University of Science, Vietnam.
[7].
Wang, Z.M., Batelaan, O. and De Smedt, F., 1996. A distributed model for water and
332
energy transfer between soil, plants and atmosphere (WetSpa), Physics and Chemistry of
333
334
[8].
Batelaan, O., De Smedt, F., 2001. WetSpass: a flexible, GIS based, distributed recharge
335
methodology for regional groundwater modelling, In: Gehrels, H., Peters, N.E., Hoehn,
336
E., Karsten, J., Leibundgut, C., Griffioen, J., Webb, B. & Zaadnoordijk, W.J. (eds),
337
338
339
340
341
[9].
Werner M.G.F., Hunter N.M, Bates P.D., 2005. Identifiability of distributed floodplain
roughness values in flood extent estimation, Journal of Hydrology, 314, 139157.
[10]. Fedak R., 1999. Effect of Spatial Scale on Hydrologic Modeling in a Headwater
Catchment, Master thesis, State University, The United States of America.
342
343
[11]. Iman R.L., Helton J.C., 1988. An investigation of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
techniques for computer models, Risk Analysis, 8, 71-90.
344
[12]. Campolongo F., Saltelli A., 1997. Sensitivity analysis of an environmental model: an
345
application of different analysis methods, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 57,
346
49-69.
347
[13]. Nguyen, T.G., De Kok J., 2006. Systematic testing of an integrated systems model for
348
349
350
[14]. Morgan, M.G., Henrion, M., 1990. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in
351
Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge University Press, The United States of
352
America.
353
354
355
356
[15]. Saltelli, A., Chan, K., Scott, E., 2000. Sensitivity Analysis, Chichester: John Wiley and
Sons Ltd.
[16]. Doldersum T, 2009. Global sensitivity analysis of the WetSpa model, Bachelor thesis,
Twente University, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Figure1
Peak discharge
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Figure2
s
600
Kg
Krun
500
400
300
Ki
200
Kr
Pmax
100
Kss
G0
0
-400
-200
m
200
400
600
800
Figure3
s
70
Kg
60
50
40
30
Krun
20
Ki
10
Kss
Pmax
G0
0
-20
-10
Kr
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Figure4
Discharge (m3/s)
1600
1400
1200
Qsimulated
1000
Qobserved
800
600
400
200
0
Table1
Kr
0.9
1.1
Ki
2
11
Kg
0.002
0.06
Kss
0
1.5
G0
0
50
Krun
0
10
Pmax
0
500
Table2
Kr
Ki
Kg
Kss
G0
Krun
Pmax
Value
1.1
5.0
0.04
0.0
16.67
3.33
333.33