Exploration of warm-up period in conceptual hydrological modelling

Abstract One of the important issues in hydrological modelling is to specify the initial conditions of the catchment since it has a major impact on the response of the model. Although this issue should be a high priority among modelers, it has remained unaddressed by the community. The typical suggested warm-up period for the hydrological models has ranged from one to several years, which may lead to an underuse of data. The model warm-up is an adjustment process for the model to reach an ‘optimal’ state, where internal stores (e.g., soil moisture) move from the estimated initial condition to an ‘optimal’ state. This study explores the warm-up period of two conceptual hydrological models, HYMOD and IHACRES, in a southwestern England catchment. A series of hydrologic simulations were performed for different initial soil moisture conditions and different rainfall amounts to evaluate the sensitivity of the warm-up period. Evaluation of the results indicates that both initial wetness and rainfall amount affect the time required for model warm up, although it depends on the structure of the hydrological model. Approximately one and a half months are required for the model to warm up in HYMOD for our study catchment and climatic conditions. In addition, it requires less time to warm up under wetter initial conditions (i.e., saturated initial conditions). On the other hand, approximately six months is required for warm-up in IHACRES, and the wet or dry initial conditions have little effect on the warm-up period. Instead, the initial values that are close to the optimal value result in less warm-up time. These findings have implications for hydrologic model development, specifically in determining soil moisture initial conditions and warm-up periods to make full use of the available data, which is very important for catchments with short hydrological records.

[1]  Vazken Andréassian,et al.  How crucial is it to account for the antecedent moisture conditions in flood forecasting? Comparison of event-based and continuous approaches on 178 catchments , 2009 .

[2]  T. Gan,et al.  Automatic Calibration of Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Models: Optimization Algorithms, Catchment Conditions, and Model Structure , 1996 .

[3]  Zong-Liang Yang,et al.  Preliminary study of spin‐up processes in land surface models with the first stage data of Project for Intercomparison of Land Surface Parameterization Schemes Phase 1(a) , 1995 .

[4]  Thomas J. Jackson,et al.  Runoff simulation sensitivity to remotely sensed initial soil water content , 1994 .

[5]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  A framework for development and application of hydrological models , 2001, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences.

[6]  Neil McIntyre,et al.  Towards reduced uncertainty in conceptual rainfall‐runoff modelling: dynamic identifiability analysis , 2003 .

[7]  Kue Bum Kim,et al.  Hydrological modelling under climate change considering nonstationarity and seasonal effects , 2016 .

[8]  J. D. Tarpley,et al.  Land surface model spin‐up behavior in the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS) , 2003 .

[9]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Methods for the analysis of trends in streamflow response due to changes in catchment condition , 2001 .

[10]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Diagnostic evaluation of conceptual rainfall–runoff models using temporal clustering , 2010 .

[11]  Marco Borga,et al.  Influence of rainfall spatial resolution on flash flood modelling , 2009 .

[12]  M. Martínez-Mena,et al.  The role of antecedent soil water content in the runoff response of semiarid catchments: a simulation approach , 2003 .

[13]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling , 2009 .

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

[15]  R. Moore The probability-distributed principle and runoff production at point and basin scales , 1985 .

[16]  A. Jakeman,et al.  How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall‐runoff model? , 1993 .

[17]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  An assessment of the dynamic response characteristics of streamflow in the Balquhidder catchments , 1993 .

[18]  Hatim O. Sharif,et al.  On the calibration and verification of two‐dimensional, distributed, Hortonian, continuous watershed models , 2000 .

[19]  D. Boyle Multicriteria Calibration of Hydrologic Models , 2013 .

[20]  W. J. Shuttleworth,et al.  Toward a South America Land Data Assimilation System: Aspects of land surface model spin‐up using the Simplified Simple Biosphere , 2006 .

[21]  H. S. Kim,et al.  Assessment of a seasonal calibration technique using multiple objectives in rainfall–runoff analysis , 2014 .

[22]  I. G. Littlewood Improved unit hydrograph characterisation of the daily flow regime (including low flows) for the River Teifi, Wales: towards better rainfall-streamflow models for regionalisation , 2002 .

[23]  Reed M. Maxwell,et al.  Spin‐up behavior and effects of initial conditions for an integrated hydrologic model , 2015 .

[24]  Andrea Rinaldo,et al.  On the impact of rainfall patterns on the hydrologic response , 2008 .

[25]  Fei Chen,et al.  Using the GEWEX/ISLSCP Forcing Data to Simulate Global Soil Moisture Fields and Hydrological Cycle f , 1999 .

[26]  Dara Entekhabi,et al.  Extending the Predictability of Hydrometeorological Flood Events Using Radar Rainfall Nowcasting , 2006 .

[27]  Thibault Mathevet,et al.  Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Hess Opinions " Crash Tests for a Standardized Evaluation of Hydrological Models " , 2022 .

[28]  A heterogeneous land surface model initialization study , 2010 .

[29]  Henrik Madsen,et al.  Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives. , 2000 .

[30]  Aaron A. Berg,et al.  Evaluation of 10 Methods for Initializing a Land Surface Model , 2005 .

[31]  L. Gottschalk,et al.  Validation of a distributed hydrological model against spatial observations , 1999 .

[32]  Paul D. Bates,et al.  The effect of model configuration on modelled hillslope -riparian interactions , 2003 .

[33]  M. Vanclooster,et al.  Effect of high-resolution spatial soil moisture variability on simulated runoff response using a distributed hydrologic model , 2011 .

[34]  Emmanouil N. Anagnostou,et al.  Sensitivity of a mountain basin flash flood to initial wetness condition and rainfall variability , 2011 .

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

[36]  V. Bell,et al.  The sensitivity of catchment runoff models to rainfall data at different spatial scales , 2000 .

[37]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  A Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters , 2002 .

[38]  Kue Bum Kim,et al.  Exploration of sub-annual calibration schemes of hydrological models , 2017 .

[39]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Parameter Estimation, Model Identification, and Model Validation: Conceptual-Type Models , 1991 .

[40]  M. Mccabe,et al.  Assessing the impact of model spin‐up on surface water‐groundwater interactions using an integrated hydrologic model , 2012 .

[41]  Mark A. Nearing,et al.  Effects of antecedent soil moisture on runoff modeling in small semiarid watersheds of southeastern Arizona , 2011 .

[42]  H. Wheater,et al.  The significance of spatial rainfall representation for flood runoff estimation : A numerical evaluation based on the Lee catchment, UK , 2006 .