Remotely sensed hydrologic variables, in conjunction with streamflow data, have been increasingly used to conduct multivariable calibration of hydrologic model parameters. Here, we calibrated the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model using different combinations of streamflow and remotely sensed hydrologic variables, including Atmosphere–Land Exchange Inverse (ALEXI) Evapotranspiration (ET), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) ET, and Soil MERGE (SMERGE) soil moisture. The results show that adding remotely sensed ET and soil moisture to the traditionally used streamflow for model calibration can impact the number and values of parameters sensitive to hydrologic modeling, but it does not necessarily improve the model performance. However, using remotely sensed ET or soil moisture data alone led to deterioration in model performance as compared with using streamflow only. In addition, we observed large discrepancies between ALEXI or MODIS ET data and the choice between these two datasets for model calibration can have significant implications for the performance of the SWAT model. The use of different combinations of streamflow, ET, and soil moisture data also resulted in noticeable differences in simulated hydrologic processes, such as runoff, percolation, and groundwater discharge. Finally, we compared the performance of SWAT and the SWAT-Carbon (SWAT-C) model under different multivariate calibration setups, and these two models exhibited pronounced differences in their performance in the validation period. Based on these results, we recommend (1) the assessment of various remotely sensed data (when multiple options available) for model calibration before choosing them for complementing the traditionally used streamflow data and (2) that different model structures be considered in the model calibration process to support robust hydrologic modeling.
more »
« less
Investigating model performance and parameter sensitivity for runoff simulation across multiple events for a large green roof
Green roofs are a form of green infrastructure aimed at retaining or slowing the movement of precipitation as stormwater runoff to sewer systems. To determine total runoff versus retention from green roofs, researchers and practitioners alike employ hydrologic models that are calibrated to one or more observed events. However, questions still remain regarding how event size may impact parameter sensitivity, how best to constrain initial soil moisture (ISM), and whether limited observations (i.e., a single event) can be used within a calibration‐validation framework. We explored these questions by applying the storm water management model to simulate a large green roof located in Syracuse, NY. We found that model performance was very high (e.g., Nash Sutcliffe efficiency index > 0.8 and Kling‐Gupta efficiency index > 0.8) for many events. We initially compared model performance across two parameterizations of ISM. For some events, we found similar performance when ISM was varied versus set to zero; for others, varying ISM yielded higher performance as well as greater water balance closure. Within a calibration‐validation framework, we found that calibrating to larger events tended to produce moderate to high performance for other non‐calibration events. However, very small storms were notoriously difficult to simulate, regardless of calibration event size, as these events are likely fully retained on the roof. Using regional sensitivity analysis, we confirmed that only a subset of model parameters was sensitive across 16 events. Interestingly, many parameters were sensitive regardless of event size, though some parameters were more sensitive when simulating smaller events. This emphasizes that storm size likely influences parameter sensitivity. Overall, we show that while calibrating to a single event can achieve high performance, exploring simulations across multiple events can yield important insight regarding the hydrologic performance of green roofs that can be used to guide the gathering of in situ properties and observations for refining model frameworks.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10367126
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Hydrological Processes
- Volume:
- 35
- Issue:
- 10
- ISSN:
- 0885-6087
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract The global increase of urban impervious land cover poses a significant threat to the integrity of river ecosystems. Hence, it is critical to assess the efficiency of green roofs (GR) to mitigate the negative impacts of urbanization on river ecosystems, such as thermal surges and pollutants. In this study, we evaluated the ecohydrological behaviour of two fully established GR under differing management regimes at the Chicago Botanical Gardens from July to September 2019. The drainage outflow from a non‐vegetated roof, a managed GR (perennial native and non‐native plants) and an unmanaged GR (perennial natural prairie vegetation) were monitored, and thermal dynamics, dissolved organic matter (DOM) composition and nitrate concentration assessed. The managed GR runoff had a lower DOC concentration and less humic‐like DOM signal (SUVA254) compared to the unmanaged GR. In contrast, lower concentrations of nitrate and more recalcitrant DOM (less protein‐like compounds relative to humic‐like compounds) were associated with the unmanaged GR. The unmanaged GR also displayed a greater capacity to reduce thermal surges associated with storm events. Our study provides new information on the implications of GR management for water quality with particular relevance to the urban stream syndrome. Further, the impacts of GR management on the mitigation of thermal surges and DOM composition can help to improve future GR design, as these ecohydrological responses have been largely overlooked to date. Our findings can support future urban planning, particularly for scenarios where green infrastructures are used to mitigate the impacts of climate change on urban river ecosystems.
-
Thenkabail, Prasad S. (Ed.)more » « less
Physically based hydrologic models require significant effort and extensive information for development, calibration, and validation. The study explored the use of the random forest regression (RFR), a supervised machine learning (ML) model, as an alternative to the physically based Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) for predicting streamflow in the Rio Grande Headwaters near Del Norte, a snowmelt-dominated mountainous watershed of the Upper Rio Grande Basin. Remotely sensed data were used for the random forest machine learning analysis (RFML) and RStudio for data processing and synthesizing. The RFML model outperformed the SWAT model in accuracy and demonstrated its capability in predicting streamflow in this region. We implemented a customized approach to the RFR model to assess the model’s performance for three training periods, across 1991–2010, 1996–2010, and 2001–2010; the results indicated that the model’s accuracy improved with longer training periods, implying that the model trained on a more extended period is better able to capture the parameters’ variability and reproduce streamflow data more accurately. The variable importance (i.e., IncNodePurity) measure of the RFML model revealed that the snow depth and the minimum temperature were consistently the top two predictors across all training periods. The paper also evaluated how well the SWAT model performs in reproducing streamflow data of the watershed with a conventional approach. The SWAT model needed more time and data to set up and calibrate, delivering acceptable performance in annual mean streamflow simulation, with satisfactory index of agreement (d), coefficient of determination (R2), and percent bias (PBIAS) values, but monthly simulation warrants further exploration and model adjustments. The study recommends exploring snowmelt runoff hydrologic processes, dust-driven sublimation effects, and more detailed topographic input parameters to update the SWAT snowmelt routine for better monthly flow estimation. The results provide a critical analysis for enhancing streamflow prediction, which is valuable for further research and water resource management, including snowmelt-driven semi-arid regions.
-
null (Ed.)Flooding during extreme weather events damages critical infrastructure, property, and threatens lives. Hurricane María devastated Puerto Rico (PR) on 20 September 2017. Sixty-four deaths were directly attributable to the flooding. This paper describes the development of a hydrologic model using the Gridded Surface Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis (GSSHA), capable of simulating flood depth and extent for the Añasco coastal flood plain in Western PR. The purpose of the study was to develop a numerical model to simulate flooding from extreme weather events and to evaluate the impacts on critical infrastructure and communities; Hurricane María is used as a case study. GSSHA was calibrated for Irma, a Category 3 hurricane, which struck the northeastern corner of the island on 7 September 2017, two weeks before Hurricane María. The upper Añasco watershed was calibrated using United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream discharge data. The model was validated using a storm of similar magnitude on 11–13 December 2007. Owing to the damage sustained by PR’s WSR-88D weather radar during Hurricane María, rainfall was estimated in this study using the Weather Research Forecast (WRF) model. Flooding in the coastal floodplain during Hurricane María was simulated using three methods: (1) Use of observed discharge hydrograph from the upper watershed as an inflow boundary condition for the coastal floodplain area, along with the WRF rainfall in the coastal flood plain; (2) Use of WRF rainfall to simulate runoff in the upper watershed and coastal flood plain; and (3) Similar to approach (2), except the use of bias-corrected WRF rainfall. Flooding results were compared with forty-two values of flood depth obtained during face-to-face interviews with residents of the affected communities. Impacts on critical infrastructure (water, electric, and public schools) were evaluated, assuming any structure exposed to 20 cm or more of flooding would sustain damage. Calibration equations were also used to improve flood depth estimates. Our model included the influence of storm surge, which we found to have a minimal effect on flood depths within the study area. Water infrastructure was more severely impacted by flooding than electrical infrastructure. From these findings, we conclude that the model developed in this study can be used with sufficient accuracy to identify infrastructure affected by future flooding events.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract The selection of calibration and validation time periods in hydrologic modelling is often done arbitrarily. Nonstationarity can lead to an optimal parameter set for one period which may not accurately simulate another. However, there is still much to be learned about the responses of hydrologic models to nonstationary conditions. We investigated how the selection of calibration and validation periods can influence water balance simulations. We calibrated Soil and Water Assessment Tool hydrologic models with observed streamflow for three United States watersheds (St. Joseph River of Indiana/Michigan, Escambia River of Florida/Alabama, and Cottonwood Creek of California), using time period splits for calibration/validation. We found that the choice of calibration period (with different patterns of observed streamflow, precipitation, and air temperature) influenced the parameter sets, leading to dissimilar simulations of water balance components. In the Cottonwood Creek watershed, simulations of 50‐year mean January streamflow varied by 32%, because of lower winter precipitation and air temperature in earlier calibration periods on calibrated parameters, which impaired the ability for models calibrated to earlier periods to simulate later periods. Peaks of actual evapotranspiration for this watershed also shifted from April to May due to different parameter values depending on the calibration period's winter air temperatures. In the St. Joseph and Escambia River watersheds, adjustments of the runoff curve number parameter could vary by 10.7% and 20.8%, respectively, while 50‐year mean monthly surface runoff simulations could vary by 23%–37% and 169%–209%, depending on the observed streamflow and precipitation of the chosen calibration period. It is imperative that calibration and validation time periods are chosen selectively instead of arbitrarily, for instance using change point detection methods, and that the calibration periods are appropriate for the goals of the study, considering possible broad effects of nonstationary time series on water balance simulations. It is also crucial that the hydrologic modelling community improves existing calibration and validation practices to better include nonstationary processes.
