A comparison between the conventional approach to the hydrologic balance and L'vovich's catchment wetting approach, referred herein as the cybernetic approach, reveals fundamental conceptual differences. The conventional approach is seen to be mostly suited to event hydrology, particularly for applications of flood hydrology and related urban hydrology. On the other hand, the cybernetic approach is suited to yield hydrology, i.e., for determinations of the availability of water resources on an annual basis.
Why is the cybernetic balance better suited for yield hydrology than the conventional approach?
A comparison between the conventional approach to the hydrologic balance and L'vovich's catchment wetting approach, referred herein as the cybernetic approach, reveals fundamental conceptual differences. The conventional approach is seen to be mostly suited to event hydrology, particularly for applications of flood hydrology and related urban hydrology. On the other hand, the cybernetic approach is suited to yield hydrology, i.e., for determinations of the availability of water resources on an annual basis.
0 Comments