Identifying runoff processes on the plot and catchment scale

Abstract. Rainfall-runoff models that adequately represent the real hydrological processes and that do not have to be calibrated, are needed in hydrology. Such a model would require information about the runoff processes occurring in a catchment and their spatial distribution. Therefore, the aim of this article is (1) to develop a methodology that allows the delineation of dominant runoff processes (DRP) in the field and with a GIS, and (2) to illustrate how such a map can be used in rainfall-runoff modelling. Soil properties were assessed of 44 soil profiles in two Swiss catchments. On some profiles, sprinkling experiments were performed and soil-water levels measured. With these data, the dominant runoff processes (DRP) were determined using the Scherrer and Naef (2003) process decision scheme. At the same time, a simplified method was developed to make it possible to determine the DRP only on the basis of maps of the soil, topography and geology. In 67% of the soil profiles, the two methods indicated the same processes; in 24% with minor deviations. By transforming the simplified method into a set of rules that could be introduced into a GIS, the distributions of the different DRPs in two catchments could be delineated automatically so that maps of the dominant runoff processes could be produced. These maps agreed well with manually derived maps and field observations. Flood-runoff volumes could be quite accurately predicted on the basis of the rainfall measured and information on the water retention capacity contained in the DRP map. This illustrates the potential of the DRP maps for defining the infiltration parameters used in rainfall-runoff models.

[1]  Shoji Noguchi,et al.  Stormflow generation in steep forested headwaters: a linked hydrogeomorphic paradigm , 2000 .

[2]  P. Schmocker-Fackel.  A method to delineate runoff processes in a catchment and its implications for runoff simulations , 2004 .

[3]  Felix Naef,et al.  A decision scheme to indicate dominant hydrological flow processes on temperate grassland , 2003 .

[4]  R. Schwarzenbach,et al.  Simultaneous assessment of sources, processes, and factors influencing herbicide losses to surface waters in a small agricultural catchment. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[5]  Felix Naef,et al.  Simulating surface and subsurface initiation of macropore flow , 2003 .

[6]  A. Lilly,et al.  Investigating the relationship between a soils classification and the spatial parameters of a conceptual catchment-scale hydrological model , 2001 .

[7]  Andrew W. Western,et al.  Terrain and the distribution of soil moisture , 2001 .

[8]  James M. Buttle,et al.  Coupled vertical and lateral preferential flow on a forested slope , 2002 .

[9]  B. Ambroise,et al.  Variable ‘active’ versus ‘contributing’ areas or periods: a necessary distinction , 2004 .

[10]  G. W. Titmarsh,et al.  CALIBRATION PROCEDURES FOR RATIONAL AND USSCS DESIGN FLOOD METHODS , 1996 .

[11]  Keith Beven,et al.  Dalton Medal Lecture: How far can we go in distributed hydrological modelling? , 2001 .

[12]  Doerthe Tetzlaff,et al.  Scaling up and out in runoff process understanding: insights from nested experimental catchment studies , 2006 .

[13]  Thomas A. McMahon,et al.  Physically based hydrologic modeling: 2. Is the concept realistic? , 1992 .

[14]  P. Shand,et al.  Evidence for deep sub-surface flow routing in forested upland Wales: implications for contaminant transport and stream flow generation , 2004 .

[15]  Malcolm G. Anderson,et al.  Process studies in hillslope hydrology. , 1993 .

[16]  F. Naef,et al.  Can we model the rainfall-runoff process today? , 1981 .

[17]  Johan Bouma,et al.  Advances in Hydropedology , 2005 .

[18]  J. McDonnell,et al.  112 Subsurface Stormflow , 2006 .

[19]  S. Uhlenbrook,et al.  Hydrological process representation at the meso-scale: the potential of a distributed, conceptual catchment model , 2004 .

[20]  Keith Beven,et al.  Distributed Hydrological Modelling , 1998 .

[21]  M. Mosley,et al.  Hydrological behaviour of pastoral hill country modified by extensive landsliding, northern Hawke's Bay, New Zealand , 1998 .

[22]  S. Zimmermann,et al.  Runoff generation regionalization: analysis and a possible approach to a solution , 1999 .

[23]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Where does water go when it rains? Moving beyond the variable source area concept of rainfall‐runoff response , 2003 .

[24]  Doerthe Tetzlaff,et al.  Runoff processes, stream water residence times and controlling landscape characteristics in a mesoscale catchment: An initial evaluation , 2006 .

[25]  R. Sidle,et al.  Field observations and process understanding in hydrology: essential components in scaling , 2006 .

[26]  P. E. O'connell,et al.  IAHS Decade on Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB), 2003–2012: Shaping an exciting future for the hydrological sciences , 2003 .

[27]  J. M. Hollis,et al.  Hydrology of soil types: a hydrologically-based classification of the soils of United Kingdom. , 1995 .

[28]  I. Cordery,et al.  Formation of runoff at the hillslope scale during intense precipitation , 2006 .

[29]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Role of discrete landscape units in controlling catchment dissolved organic carbon dynamics , 2003 .

[30]  G. Blöschl.  Rainfall‐Runoff Modeling of Ungauged Catchments , 2006 .