English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Rainfall intensity–frequency–duration (IFD) relationships are commonlyrequired for the design and planning of water supply and management systemsaround the world. Currently, IFD information is based on the "stationaryclimate assumption"  that weather at any point in time will vary randomlyand that the underlying climate statistics (including both averages andextremes) will remain constant irrespective of the period of record.However, the validity of this assumption has been questioned over the last15 years, particularly in Australia, following an improved understanding ofthe significant impact of climate variability and change occurring oninterannual to multidecadal timescales. This paper provides evidence ofregime shifts in annual maximum rainfall time series (between 1913–2010) using 96 daily rainfallstations and 66 sub-daily rainfall stations across Australia. Furthermore, theeffect of these regime shifts on the resulting IFD estimates are exploredfor three long-term (1913–2010) sub-daily rainfall records (Brisbane, Sydney, andMelbourne) utilizing insights into multidecadal climate variability. It isdemonstrated that IFD relationships may under- or over-estimate the designrainfall depending on the length and time period spanned by the rainfalldata used to develop the IFD information. It is recommended that regimeshifts in annual maximum rainfall be explicitly considered and appropriatelytreated in the ongoing revisions of the Engineers Australia  guide toestimating and utilizing IFD information, <i>Australian Rainfall and Runoff (ARR)</i>,and that clear guidance needs to be provided on how to deal with the issueof regime shifts in extreme events (irrespective of whether this is due tonatural or anthropogenic climate change). The findings of our study alsohave important implications for other regions of the world that exhibitconsiderable hydroclimatic variability and where IFD information is based onrelatively short data sets

Regime shifts in annual maximum rainfall across Australia – implications for intensity–frequency–duration (IFD) relationships