Effect of three pillars on hydrological model calibration: data length, spin-up period and spatial model resolution

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ömer Ekmekcioğlu ◽  
Mehmet Cüneyd Demirel ◽  
Martijn J. Booij
10.29007/5hv1 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuanzhe Li ◽  
Jia Liu ◽  
Fuliang Yu ◽  
Jiyang Tian ◽  
Yang Wang ◽  
...  

This paper evaluates the effects of calibration data series length on the performance of a hydrological model in data-limited catchments where data are non-continuous and fragmental. Non-continuous calibration periods were used for more independent streamflow data for SIMHYD model calibration. Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency and percentage water balance error were used as performance measures. The particle swarm optimization method was used to calibrate the rainfall-runoff models. Different lengths of data series ranging from one year to ten years were used to study the impact of calibration data series length. Fifty-five relatively unimpaired catchments located all over Australia with daily precipitation, potential evapotranspiration, and streamflow data were tested to obtain more general conclusions. The results show that longer calibration data series do not necessarily result in better model performance. Our results may have useful and interesting implications for the efficiency of using limited observation data for hydrological model calibration in different climates.


Author(s):  
Ida K. Westerberg ◽  
Anna E. Sikorska-Senoner ◽  
Daniel Viviroli ◽  
Marc Vis ◽  
Jan Seibert

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Hrachowitz ◽  
Petra Hulsman ◽  
Hubert Savenije

<p>Hydrological models are often calibrated with respect to flow observations at the basin outlet. As a result, flow predictions may seem reliable but this is not necessarily the case for the spatiotemporal variability of system-internal processes, especially in large river basins. Satellite observations contain valuable information not only for poorly gauged basins with limited ground observations and spatiotemporal model calibration, but also for stepwise model development. This study explored the value of satellite observations to improve our understanding of hydrological processes through stepwise model structure adaption and to calibrate models both temporally and spatially. More specifically, satellite-based evaporation and total water storage anomaly observations were used to diagnose model deficiencies and to subsequently improve the hydrological model structure and the selection of feasible parameter sets. A distributed, process based hydrological model was developed for the Luangwa river basin in Zambia and calibrated with respect to discharge as benchmark. This model was modified stepwise by testing five alternative hypotheses related to the process of upwelling groundwater in wetlands, which was assumed to be negligible in the benchmark model, and the spatial discretization of the groundwater reservoir. Each model hypothesis was calibrated with respect to 1) discharge and 2) multiple variables simultaneously including discharge and the spatiotemporal variability in the evaporation and total water storage anomalies. The benchmark model calibrated with respect to discharge reproduced this variable well, as also the basin-averaged evaporation and total water storage anomalies. However, the evaporation in wetland dominated areas and the spatial variability in the evaporation and total water storage anomalies were poorly modelled. The model improved the most when introducing upwelling groundwater flow from a distributed groundwater reservoir and calibrating it with respect to multiple variables simultaneously. This study showed satellite-based evaporation and total water storage anomaly observations provide valuable information for improved understanding of hydrological processes through stepwise model development and spatiotemporal model calibration.</p>


2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 3301-3317 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Honti ◽  
A. Scheidegger ◽  
C. Stamm

Abstract. Climate change impact assessments have become more and more popular in hydrology since the middle 1980s with a recent boost after the publication of the IPCC AR4 report. From hundreds of impact studies a quasi-standard methodology has emerged, to a large extent shaped by the growing public demand for predicting how water resources management or flood protection should change in the coming decades. The "standard" workflow relies on a model cascade from global circulation model (GCM) predictions for selected IPCC scenarios to future catchment hydrology. Uncertainty is present at each level and propagates through the model cascade. There is an emerging consensus between many studies on the relative importance of the different uncertainty sources. The prevailing perception is that GCM uncertainty dominates hydrological impact studies. Our hypothesis was that the relative importance of climatic and hydrologic uncertainty is (among other factors) heavily influenced by the uncertainty assessment method. To test this we carried out a climate change impact assessment and estimated the relative importance of the uncertainty sources. The study was performed on two small catchments in the Swiss Plateau with a lumped conceptual rainfall runoff model. In the climatic part we applied the standard ensemble approach to quantify uncertainty but in hydrology we used formal Bayesian uncertainty assessment with two different likelihood functions. One was a time series error model that was able to deal with the complicated statistical properties of hydrological model residuals. The second was an approximate likelihood function for the flow quantiles. The results showed that the expected climatic impact on flow quantiles was small compared to prediction uncertainty. The choice of uncertainty assessment method actually determined what sources of uncertainty could be identified at all. This demonstrated that one could arrive at rather different conclusions about the causes behind predictive uncertainty for the same hydrological model and calibration data when considering different objective functions for calibration.


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 4593-4604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongqiang Zhang ◽  
David Post

Abstract. Gap-filling streamflow data is a critical step for most hydrological studies, such as streamflow trend, flood, and drought analysis and hydrological response variable estimates and predictions. However, there is a lack of quantitative evaluation of the gap-filled data accuracy in most hydrological studies. Here we show that when the missing data rate is less than 10 %, the gap-filled streamflow data obtained using calibrated hydrological models perform almost the same as the benchmark data (less than 1 % missing) when estimating annual trends for 217 unregulated catchments widely spread across Australia. Furthermore, the relative streamflow trend bias caused by the gap filling is not very large in very dry catchments where the hydrological model calibration is normally poor. Our results clearly demonstrate that the gap filling using hydrological modelling has little impact on the estimation of annual streamflow and its trends.


2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 353-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Haberlandt ◽  
I. Radtke

Abstract. Derived flood frequency analysis allows the estimation of design floods with hydrological modeling for poorly observed basins considering change and taking into account flood protection measures. There are several possible choices regarding precipitation input, discharge output and consequently the calibration of the model. The objective of this study is to compare different calibration strategies for a hydrological model considering various types of rainfall input and runoff output data sets and to propose the most suitable approach. Event based and continuous, observed hourly rainfall data as well as disaggregated daily rainfall and stochastically generated hourly rainfall data are used as input for the model. As output, short hourly and longer daily continuous flow time series as well as probability distributions of annual maximum peak flow series are employed. The performance of the strategies is evaluated using the obtained different model parameter sets for continuous simulation of discharge in an independent validation period and by comparing the model derived flood frequency distributions with the observed one. The investigations are carried out for three mesoscale catchments in northern Germany with the hydrological model HEC-HMS (Hydrologic Engineering Center's Hydrologic Modeling System). The results show that (I) the same type of precipitation input data should be used for calibration and application of the hydrological model, (II) a model calibrated using a small sample of extreme values works quite well for the simulation of continuous time series with moderate length but not vice versa, and (III) the best performance with small uncertainty is obtained when stochastic precipitation data and the observed probability distribution of peak flows are used for model calibration. This outcome suggests to calibrate a hydrological model directly on probability distributions of observed peak flows using stochastic rainfall as input if its purpose is the application for derived flood frequency analysis.


2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 5044-5073 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Minville ◽  
Dominique Cartier ◽  
Catherine Guay ◽  
Louis-Alexandre Leclaire ◽  
Charles Audet ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document