Spatial resolution sensitivity of catchment geomorphologic properties and the effect on hydrological simulation

The geomorphologic area function and width function that characterize the forms of hillslope and river networks are two key parameters employed in the GBHM (geomorphology-based hydrological model) for representing the hydrological processes together with other spatial information. One fundamental issue on the use of the geomorphologic properties is the spatial resolution sensitivity in both the threshold area for river network generation and digital elevation model (DEM) resolution. The threshold area is the minimum drainage area required to initiate the river; the DEM resolution depends on the available elevation data. In the present study, multifractal analysis was used to investigate the sensitivity of width functions extracted by different threshold areas and the sensitivity of area functions extracted from various resolutions of DEMs. Fifteen Japanese catchments were selected for the sensitivity analysis based on 250 m mesh DEM data. It was found that the river networks generated with larger threshold areas tend to lose the detailed scaling information. When the DEM mesh size increases, the river networks extracted with the same threshold area become sparser and the topography tends to be flat and scaling structures of the area functions become simpler. The runoff generations of the GBHM were influenced by the DEM resolution. The effect of the DEM resolution on the hydrological response is related to the temporal resolution with more influence on the hourly response compared with the daily response. From the relation between the scaling structure expressed by the multifractal spectrum and the hydrological response of a catchment, it was found that the detailed scaling information had more effect on the hydrological response of higher temporal resolution. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Katumi Musiake,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A GEOMORPHOLOGY-BASED HYDROLOGICAL MODEL FOR LARGE CATCHMENTS , 1998 .

[2]  Garry R. Willgoose,et al.  On the effect of digital elevation model accuracy on hydrology and geomorphology , 1999 .

[3]  Arnon Karnieli,et al.  Application of Fractal Techniques to the Comparative Evaluation of Two Methods of Extracting Channel Networks from Digital Elevation Models , 1996 .

[4]  R. Jensen,et al.  Direct determination of the f(α) singularity spectrum , 1989 .

[5]  A. N. Strahler Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. , 1952 .

[6]  Keith Beven,et al.  Changing ideas in hydrology — The case of physically-based models , 1989 .

[7]  I. Moore,et al.  A contour‐based topographic model for hydrological and ecological applications , 1988, Earth surface processes and landforms.

[8]  Oscar J. Mesa,et al.  On the Relative Role of Hillslope and Network Geometry in Hydrologic Response , 1986 .

[9]  E. Foufoula‐Georgiou,et al.  Channel network source representation using digital elevation models , 1993 .

[10]  A. Rinaldo,et al.  Geomorphological width functions and the random cascade , 1994 .

[11]  R. Rosso,et al.  On the fractal dimension of stream networks , 1989 .

[12]  I. Rodríguez‐Iturbe,et al.  Self-organized fractal river networks. , 1993, Physical review letters.

[13]  D. Wolock,et al.  Effects of digital elevation model map scale and data resolution on a topography‐based watershed model , 1994 .

[14]  Dawen Yang,et al.  Description of catchment hydrological response using the catchment area function , 1999 .

[15]  Ben Chie Yen,et al.  Unit Hydrograph Derivation for Ungauged Watersheds by Stream-Order Laws , 1997 .

[16]  Dawen Yang,et al.  Comparison of different distributed hydrological models for characterization of catchment spatial variability , 2000 .

[17]  Dawen Yang,et al.  Analysis of Geomorphologic Properties Extracted from DEMs for Hydrologic Modeling , 1997 .

[18]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Digital elevation model grid size, landscape representation, and hydrologic simulations , 1994 .

[19]  O. Palacios-Velez,et al.  Automated river-course, ridge and basin delineation from digital elevation data , 1986 .

[20]  Praveen Kumar,et al.  On the use of digital elevation model data for Hortonian and fractal analyses of channel networks , 1993 .

[21]  D. Montgomery,et al.  Analysis of Erosion Thresholds, Channel Networks, and Landscape Morphology Using a Digital Terrain Model , 1993, The Journal of Geology.

[22]  David G. Tarboton,et al.  On the extraction of channel networks from digital elevation data , 1991 .

[23]  M. Sivapalan,et al.  On the relative roles of hillslope processes, channel routing, and network geomorphology in the hydrologic response of natural catchments , 1995 .

[24]  John F. O'Callaghan,et al.  The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data , 1984, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[25]  Bras,et al.  Multifractal analysis: Pitfalls of standard procedures and alternatives. , 1995, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[26]  Vladimir Nikora,et al.  River network fractal geometry and its computer simulation , 1993 .

[27]  I. Moore,et al.  Digital terrain modelling: A review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications , 1991 .

[28]  Maritan,et al.  Scaling laws for river networks. , 1996, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.