Formulation of a hybrid calibration approach for a physically based distributed model with NEXRAD data input

This paper describes the background, formulation and results of an hourly input–output calibration approach proposed for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) watershed model, presented for 24 representative storm events occurring during the period between 1994 and 2000 in the Blue River watershed (1233 km2 located in Oklahoma). This effort is the first follow up to the participation in the National Weather Service-Distributed Modeling Intercomparison Project (DMIP), an opportunity to apply, for the first time within the SWAT modeling framework, routines for hourly stream flow prediction based on gridded precipitation (NEXRAD) data input. Previous SWAT model simulations, uncalibrated and with moderate manual calibration (only the water balance over the calibration period), were provided for the entire set of watersheds and associated outlets for the comparison designed in the DMIP project. The extended goal of this follow up was to verify the model efficiency in simulating hourly hydrographs calibrating each storm event using the formulated approach. This included a combination of a manual and an automatic calibration approach (Shuffled Complex Evolution Method) and the use of input parameter values allowed to vary only within their physical extent. While the model provided reasonable water budget results with minimal calibration, event simulations with the revised calibration were significantly improved. The combination of NEXRAD precipitation data input, the soil water balance and runoff equations, along with the calibration strategy described in the paper, appear to adequately describe the storm events. The presented application and the formulated calibration method are initial steps toward the improvement of the simulation on an hourly basis of the SWAT model loading variables associated with the storm flow, such as sediment and pollutants, and the success of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) projects.

[1]  Q. Duan,et al.  A global optimization strategy for efficient and effective calibration of hydrologic models. , 1991 .

[2]  Curtis L. Larson,et al.  Modeling infiltration during a steady rain , 1973 .

[3]  J. Arnold,et al.  SWAT2000: current capabilities and research opportunities in applied watershed modelling , 2005 .

[4]  J. A. Cunge,et al.  On The Subject Of A Flood Propagation Computation Method (Musklngum Method) , 1969 .

[5]  Mark A. Nearing,et al.  Curve numbers and Green-Ampt effective hydraulic conductivities. , 1996 .

[6]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Calibration of rainfall‐runoff models: Application of global optimization to the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model , 1993 .

[7]  W. Green,et al.  Studies on Soil Phyics. , 1911, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[8]  John R. Williams,et al.  LARGE AREA HYDROLOGIC MODELING AND ASSESSMENT PART I: MODEL DEVELOPMENT 1 , 1998 .

[9]  Raghavan Srinivasan,et al.  A GIS‐Coupled Hydrological Model System for the Watershed Assessment of Agricultural Nonpoint and Point Sources of Pollution , 2004, Trans. GIS.

[10]  D. Maidment,et al.  Coordinate Transformations for Using NEXRAD Data in GIS-Based Hydrologic Modeling , 1999 .

[11]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods , 2000 .

[12]  D. Seo,et al.  Overall distributed model intercomparison project results , 2004 .

[13]  Raghavan Srinivasan,et al.  CONTINENTAL SCALE SIMULATION OF THE HYDROLOGIC BALANCE 1 , 1999 .

[14]  George Kuczera,et al.  Probabilistic optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models: A comparison of the shuffled complex evolution and simulated annealing algorithms , 1999 .

[15]  G. Kuczera.  Improved parameter inference in catchment models: 2. Combining different kinds of hydrologic data and testing their compatibility , 1983 .

[16]  J. Nash,et al.  River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles☆ , 1970 .

[17]  Limin Yang,et al.  COMPLETION OF THE 1990S NATIONAL LAND COVER DATA SET FOR THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES FROM LANDSAT THEMATIC MAPPER DATA AND ANCILLARY DATA SOURCES , 2001 .

[18]  Peter M. Allen,et al.  Automated Base Flow Separation and Recession Analysis Techniques , 1995 .

[19]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall‐runoff models , 1992 .

[20]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  Stochastic parameter estimation procedures for hydrologie rainfall‐runoff models: Correlated and heteroscedastic error cases , 1980 .

[21]  Gilbert T. Bernhardt,et al.  A comprehensive surface-groundwater flow model , 1993 .

[22]  Herman Bouwer,et al.  Rapid field measurement of air entry value and hydraulic conductivity of soil as significant parameters in flow system analysis , 1966 .

[23]  Göran Lindström,et al.  A Simple Automatic Calibration Routine for the HBV Model , 1997 .

[24]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Multiple and noncommensurable measures of information , 1998 .

[25]  David R. Maidment,et al.  Handbook of Hydrology , 1993 .

[26]  Jeffrey G. Arnold,et al.  COMPARISON OF GREEN-AMPT AND CURVE NUMBER METHODS ON GOODWIN CREEK WATERSHED USING SWAT , 1999 .

[27]  Dong-Jun Seo,et al.  The WSR-88D rainfall algorithm , 1998 .

[28]  Dong-Jun Seo,et al.  The distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP): Motivation and experiment design , 2004 .

[29]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Multi-objective global optimization for hydrologic models , 1998 .

[30]  Henrik Madsen,et al.  Comparison of different automated strategies for calibration of rainfall-runoff models , 2002 .