scholarly journals Considering rating curve uncertainty in water level predictions

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 4415-4427 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. E. Sikorska ◽  
A. Scheidegger ◽  
K. Banasik ◽  
J. Rieckermann
Keyword(s):  
Water Level ◽  
Bayesian Framework ◽  
Water Levels ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Calibration Data ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Rating Curve ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model

Abstract. Streamflow cannot be measured directly and is typically derived with a rating curve model. Unfortunately, this causes uncertainties in the streamflow data and also influences the calibration of rainfall-runoff models if they are conditioned on such data. However, it is currently unknown to what extent these uncertainties propagate to rainfall-runoff predictions. This study therefore presents a quantitative approach to rigorously consider the impact of the rating curve on the prediction uncertainty of water levels. The uncertainty analysis is performed within a formal Bayesian framework and the contributions of rating curve versus rainfall-runoff model parameters to the total predictive uncertainty are addressed. A major benefit of the approach is its independence from the applied rainfall-runoff model and rating curve. In addition, it only requires already existing hydrometric data. The approach was successfully demonstrated on a small catchment in Poland, where a dedicated monitoring campaign was performed in 2011. The results of our case study indicate that the uncertainty in calibration data derived by the rating curve method may be of the same relevance as rainfall-runoff model parameters themselves. A conceptual limitation of the approach presented is that it is limited to water level predictions. Nevertheless, regarding flood level predictions, the Bayesian framework seems very promising because it (i) enables the modeler to incorporate informal knowledge from easily accessible information and (ii) better assesses the individual error contributions. Especially the latter is important to improve the predictive capability of hydrological models.

scholarly journals Considering rating curve uncertainty in water level predictions

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 2955-2986 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. E. Sikorska ◽  
A. Scheidegger ◽  
K. Banasik ◽  
J. Rieckermann
Keyword(s):  
Water Level ◽  
Bayesian Framework ◽  
Water Levels ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Calibration Data ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Rating Curve ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model

Abstract. Streamflow cannot be measured directly and is typically derived with a rating curve model. Unfortunately, this causes uncertainties in the streamflow data and also influences the calibration of rainfall-runoff models if they are conditioned on such data. However, it is currently unknown to what extent these uncertainties propagate to rainfall-runoff predictions. This study therefore presents a quantitative approach to rigorously consider the impact of the rating curve on the prediction uncertainty of water levels. The uncertainty analysis is performed within a formal Bayesian framework and the contributions of rating curve versus rainfall-runoff model parameters to the total predictive uncertainty are addressed. A major benefit of the approach is its independence from the applied rainfall-runoff model and rating curve. In addition, it only requires already existing hydrometric data. The approach was successfully tested on a small urbanized basin in Poland, where a dedicated monitoring campaign was performed in 2011. The results of our case study indicate that the uncertainty in calibration data derived by the rating curve method may be of the same relevance as rainfall-runoff model parameters themselves. A conceptual limitation of the approach presented is that it is limited to water level predictions. Nevertheless, regarding flood level predictions, the Bayesian framework seems very promising because it (i) enables the modeler to incorporate informal knowledge from easily accessible information and (ii) better assesses the individual error contributions. Especially the latter is important to improve the predictive capability of hydrological models.

scholarly journals Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of GIS based continuous hydrological modelling

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry R. Manson
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Curve Number ◽  
Monte Carlo Analysis ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Lumped Model ◽  
Daily Average ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model

The impact of uncertainty in spatial and a-spatial lumped model parameters for a continuous rainfall-runoff model is evaluated with respect to model prediction. The model uses a modified SCS-Curve Number approach that is loosely coupled with a geographic information system (GIS). The rainfall-runoff model uses daily average inputs and is calibrated using a daily average streamflow record for the study site. A Monte Carlo analysis is used to identify total model uncertainty while sensitivity analysis is applied using both a one-at-a-time (OAT) approach as well as through application of the extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Technique (FAST). Conclusions suggest that the model is highly followed by model inputs and finally the Curve Number. While the model does not indicate a high degree of sensitivity to the Curve Number at present conditions, uncertainties in Curve Number estimation can potentially be the cause of high predictive errors when future development scenarios are evaluated.

scholarly journals Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of GIS based continuous hydrological modelling

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry R. Manson
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Curve Number ◽  
Monte Carlo Analysis ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Lumped Model ◽  
Daily Average ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model

The impact of uncertainty in spatial and a-spatial lumped model parameters for a continuous rainfall-runoff model is evaluated with respect to model prediction. The model uses a modified SCS-Curve Number approach that is loosely coupled with a geographic information system (GIS). The rainfall-runoff model uses daily average inputs and is calibrated using a daily average streamflow record for the study site. A Monte Carlo analysis is used to identify total model uncertainty while sensitivity analysis is applied using both a one-at-a-time (OAT) approach as well as through application of the extended Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Technique (FAST). Conclusions suggest that the model is highly followed by model inputs and finally the Curve Number. While the model does not indicate a high degree of sensitivity to the Curve Number at present conditions, uncertainties in Curve Number estimation can potentially be the cause of high predictive errors when future development scenarios are evaluated.

Parameterization of the rainfall-runoff model in changing climate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milica Aleksić ◽  
Patrik Sleziak ◽  
Kamila Hlavčová
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Model ◽  
Climate Scenario ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model

AbstractA conceptual rainfall-runoff model was used for estimating the impact of climate change on the runoff regime in the Myjava River basin. Changes in climatic characteristics for future decades were expressed by a regional climate model using the A1B emission scenario. The model was calibrated for 1981–1990, 1991–2000, 2001–2010, 2011–2019. The best set of model parameters selected from the recent calibration period was used to simulate runoff for three periods, which should reflect the level of future climate change. The results show that the runoff should increase in the winter months (December and January) and decrease in the summer months (June to August). An evaluation of the long-term mean monthly runoff for the future climate scenario indicates that the highest runoff will occur in March.

scholarly journals Importance of the informative content in the study area when regionalising rainfall-runoff model parameters: the role of nested catchments and gauging station density

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 5149-5171
Author(s):  
Mattia Neri ◽  
Juraj Parajka ◽  
Elena Toth
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
The Status ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
Informative Content ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Runoff Model ◽  
Station Density

Abstract. The setup of a rainfall-runoff model in a river section where no streamflow measurements are available for its calibration is one of the key research activities for the Prediction in Ungauged Basins (PUB): in order to do so it is possible to estimate the model parameters based on the hydrometric information available in the region. The informative content of the dataset (i.e. which and how many gauged river stations are available) plays an essential role in the assessment of the best regionalisation method. This study analyses how the performances of regionalisation approaches are influenced by the “information richness” of the available regional dataset, i.e. the availability of potential donors, and in particular by the gauging density and by the presence of nested donor catchments, which are expected to be hydrologically very similar to the target section. The research is carried out over a densely gauged dataset covering the Austrian country, applying two rainfall-runoff models and different regionalisation approaches. The regionalisation techniques are first implemented using all the gauged basins in the dataset as potential donors and then re-applied, decreasing the informative content of the dataset. The effect of excluding nested basins and the status of “nestedness” is identified based on the position of the closing section along the river or the percentage of shared drainage area. Moreover, the impact of reducing station density on regionalisation performance is analysed. The results show that the predictive accuracy of parameter regionalisation techniques strongly depends on the informative content of the dataset of available donor catchments. The “output-averaging” approaches, which exploit the information of more than one donor basin and preserve the correlation structure of the parameter, seem to be preferable for regionalisation purposes in both data-poor and data-rich regions. Moreover, with the use of an optimised set of catchment descriptors as a similarity measure, rather than the simple geographical distance, results are more robust to the deterioration of the informative content of the set of donors.

scholarly journals Regionalizing rainfall–runoff model parameters to predict the daily streamflow of ungauged catchments in the dry tropics

2009 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 433-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Post
Keyword(s):  
Input Data ◽  
Water Yield ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Wet Season ◽  
Daily Streamflow ◽  
Total Length ◽  
Dry Tropics ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
Runoff Model

A methodology has been derived which allows an estimate to be made of the daily streamflow at any point within the Burdekin catchment in the dry tropics of Australia. The input data requirements are daily rainfall (to drive the rainfall–runoff model) and mean average wet season rainfall, total length of streams, percent cropping and percent forest in the catchment (to regionalize the parameters of the rainfall–runoff model). The method is based on the use of a simple, lumped parameter rainfall–runoff model, IHACRES (Identification of unit Hydrographs And Component flows from Rainfall, Evaporation and Streamflow data). Of the five parameters in the model, three have been set to constants to reflect regional conditions while the other two have been related to physio-climatic attributes of the catchment under consideration. The parameter defining total catchment water yield (c) has been estimated based on the mean average wet season rainfall, while the streamflow recession time constant (τ) has been estimated based on the total length of streams, percent cropping and percent forest in the catchment. These relationships have been shown to be applicable over a range of scales from 68–130,146 km2. However, three separate relationships were required to define c in the three major physiographic regions of the Burdekin: the upper Burdekin, Bowen and Suttor/lower Burdekin. The invariance of the relationships with scale indicates that the dominant processes may be similar across a range of scales. The fact that different relationships were required for each of the three major regions indicates the geographic limitations of this regionalization approach. For most of the 24 gauged catchments within the Burdekin the regionalized rainfall–runoff models were nearly as good as or better than the rainfall–runoff models calibrated to the observed streamflow. In addition, models often performed better over the simulation period than the calibration period. This indicates that future improvements in regionalization should focus on improving the quality of input data and rainfall–runoff model conceptualization rather than on the regionalization procedure per se.

Analysis of parameter uncertainty of a flow and quality stormwater model

2009 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 717-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. B. S. Dotto ◽  
A. Deletic ◽  
T. D. Fletcher
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Bayesian Methods ◽  
Flow Model ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Sources Of Uncertainty ◽  
Music Model ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
Water Quality Models ◽  
Runoff Model

Uncertainty is intrinsic to all monitoring programs and all models. It cannot realistically be eliminated, but it is necessary to understand the sources of uncertainty, and their consequences on models and decisions. The aim of this paper is to evaluate uncertainty in a flow and water quality stormwater model, due to the model parameters and the availability of data for calibration and validation of the flow model. The MUSIC model, widely used in Australian stormwater practice, has been investigated. Frequentist and Bayesian methods were used for calibration and sensitivity analysis, respectively. It was found that out of 13 calibration parameters of the rainfall/runoff model, only two matter (the model results were not sensitive to the other 11). This suggests that the model can be simplified without losing its accuracy. The evaluation of the water quality models proved to be much more difficult. For the specific catchment and model tested, we argue that for rainfall/runoff, 6 months of data for calibration and 6 months of data for validation are required to produce reliable predictions. Further work is needed to make similar recommendations for modelling water quality.

Effect of rainfall data errors on the optimized values of model parameters

Soil Research ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 15
Author(s):  
WC Boughton ◽  
FT Sefe
Keyword(s):  
Storage Capacity ◽  
Rainfall Data ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Similar Magnitude ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Data Errors ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
Induced Changes ◽  
Runoff Model

The rainfall input to a rainfall-runoff model was arbitrarily increased and decreased in order to determine the magnitude of corresponding changes in optimized values of the model parameters. The optimized capacities of moisture stores representing surface storage capacity of a catchment changed by average amounts of +24% and -20% as rainfall input was changed by +10% and -10%, respectively. Values of other parameters showed changes of similar magnitude, but there was no uniformity in the magnitude of induced changes from catchment to catchment. The results cast doubt on the validity of relating optimized values of model parameters to physical characteristics of catchments.

scholarly journals Calibration of hydrological model parameters for ungauged catchments

2007 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 703-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Bárdossy
Keyword(s):  
Hydrological Model ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Model Parameters ◽  
Hydrological Models ◽  
Rainfall Runoff ◽  
Ungauged Catchments ◽  
Rainfall Runoff Model ◽  
Climate Statistics ◽  
Runoff Model ◽  
German Part

Abstract. The parameters of hydrological models for catchments with few or no discharge records can be estimated using regional information. One can assume that catchments with similar characteristics show a similar hydrological behaviour and thus can be modeled using similar model parameters. Therefore a regionalisation of the hydrological model parameters on the basis of catchment characteristics is plausible. However, due to the non-uniqueness of the rainfall-runoff model parameters (equifinality), a workflow of regional parameter estimation by model calibration and a subsequent fit of a regional function is not appropriate. In this paper a different approach for the transfer of entire parameter sets from one catchment to another is discussed. Parameter sets are considered as tranferable if the corresponding model performance (defined as the Nash-Sutclife efficiency) on the donor catchment is good and the regional statistics: means and variances of annual discharges estimated from catchment properties and annual climate statistics for the recipient catchment are well reproduced by the model. The methodology is applied to a set of 16 catchments in the German part of the Rhine catchments. Results show that the parameters transfered according to the above criteria perform well on the target catchments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document