引用本文: | 孟春芳,宋孝玉,田珂宁,等.卫河水系新乡段环境流量最小值研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2022,41(7):86-95. |
| MENG Chunfang,SONG Xiaoyu,TIAN Kening,et al.卫河水系新乡段环境流量最小值研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2022,41(7):86-95. |
|
摘要: |
【目的】研究卫河水系新乡段环境流量最小值,促进河流生态系统的规划与保护研究。【方法】将环境流量最小值分为生态需水量、水质自净需水量和输沙需水量3部分。首先采用Tennant法计算生态需水量,采用一维水质模型计算水质自净需水量,根据汛期输送单位泥沙所需水量来计算输沙需水量。其中,计算生态需水量时,Tennant法基于径流突变前的自然水流(1963—1982)。计算水质自净需水量时,鉴于河流的水污染特征存在明显的空间差异,提出通过聚类分析和判别分析识别导致水污染空间变化的显著水质指标。为验证环境流量推荐值的合理性,采用变动范围法(RVA)计算独立的环境流量值与环境流量推荐值进行比较。最后,将环境流量的推荐值与自然水流(1963—1982)的多年平均流量进行比较从而分析环境流量的盈缺状况,并以月为单位评估了环境流量保证率。【结果】干流自上而下7个水文站的生态需水量存在较大差异。在污水达标排放情景下,修武站和合河卫站的水质自净需水量分别为0.74 m3/s和5.98 m3/s。各站输沙需水量大致在8月达到最高值,沿程输沙需水量存在较大差异。环境流量的盈缺分析表明,7个水文站中合河卫站、汲县站、刘庄站出现明显缺水。环境流量保证率表现为:7个水文站汛期的保证率均明显低于非汛期。淇门站的保证率最高,合河卫站的保证率最低。【结论】卫河水系新乡段7个水文站环境流量的推荐值为:修武站的环境流量范围是0.74~7.28 m3/s,合河卫站的环境流量为5.98 m3/s,汲县站环境流量范围为0.85~18.51 m3/s,淇门站为1.55~65.73 m3/s,合河共站为0.47~34.61 m3/s,黄土岗站为0.53~36.63 m3/s,刘庄站为0.17~61.54 m3/s。 |
关键词: 环境流量;卫河;新乡;Tennant法;一维水质模型 |
DOI:10.13522/j.cnki.ggps.2022115 |
分类号: |
基金项目: |
|
Minimum Water Flow for Environmental Requirements in Xinxiang Section of the Wei River |
MENG Chunfang, SONG Xiaoyu, TIAN Kening, LIU Xueyong,
GUO Shuxian, WANG Yu, YE Bingxiao
|
1. State Key Laboratory of Eco-Hydraulics in Northwest Arid Region, Xi’an University of Technology,
Xi’an 710048, China; 2. Xinxiang Hydrology and Water Resources Survey Bureau, Xinxiang 453000, China;
3. Henan Vocational College of Water Conservancy and Environment, Zhengzhou 450008, China
|
Abstract: |
【Objective】Surface water in rivers has multiple functions serving direct sectors. The objective of this paper is to analyze the minimum water flow (e-flow) in Xinxiang Section of the Wei River (XSWR) for environmental service. 【Method】We considered three demands: ecological demand for water, demand for water self-purification, and demand for sediment transport. Ecological water demand was calculated using the Tennant method based on the water flow data measured from 1963 to 1982; self-purification demand was simulated using the one-dimensional water quality model; the demand for sediment transport was calculated as the amount of water required to transport unit sediment in flooding season. Spatiotemporal change in water quality due to pollution was calculated using cluster analysis (CA) and discriminant analysis (DA). The e-flow calculated using the range of variability approach (RVA) was compared with the recommended e-flows, as well as the average annual flow measured from 1963 to 1982. 【Result】Ecological water demand varied greatly between the seven hydrometric stations along the river. Under standard sewage discharge, the demand for water self-purification in Xiuwu and Hehewei station was 0.74 m3/s and 5.98 m3/s, respectively. The demand for sediment transport at all stations peaked in August, though it varied significantly between the seven hydrometric stations. Surplus-deficit analysis showed the e-flow in Hehewei, Jixian, and Liuzhuang station was markedly short of water. The guarantee rates of 7 hydrometric stations were as follows: Guarantee rates in flooding season were lower than in non-flooding season; Qimen station had the highest guarantee rate and Hehewei station had the least. 【Conclusion】The e-flow was 5.98 m3/s for Hehewei station, 0.74 to 7.28 m3/s for Xiuwu station, 0.85 to 18.51 m3/s for Jixian station, 1.55 to 65.73 m3/s for Qimen station, 0.47 to 34.61 m3/s for Hehegong station, 0.53 to 36.63 m3/s for Huangtugang station, and 0.17 to 61.54 m3/s for Liuzhuang station. |
Key words: environmental flow; Wei River; Xinxiang; Tennant method; one-dimensional water quality model |