Potential Improvement of the Parameter Identifiability in Ungauged Catchments

The objective of this study was to reduce the parameter uncertainty which has an effect on the identification of the relationship between the catchment characteristics and the catchment response dynamics in ungauged catchments. Model deficiencies influencing on the identification of the regional relationships were identified through analysing the non-stationarity nature under different climate conditions. An advanced calibration approach was proposed to improve the identification of the regional relationships, according to the deficiencies on model structure suitability for the different flow regime. This study demonstrated the refined calibration strategy can improve the identification of the relationships between the catchment characteristics and the calibrated model parameters for the dry period. In the assessment of model structure suitability to represent the non-stationary catchment response characteristics, there was a flow-dependent bias in the runoff simulations. In particular, over-prediction of the streamflow was dominant for the dry period. The poor model performance during the dry period was associated with the largely different impulse response estimates for the entire period and the dry period. Based on assessment of model deficiencies, the rainfall–runoff models were separately calibrated to different parts of the flow regime, and the calibrated models for the separated time series were used to establish the regional models of relevant parts of the flow regime (i.e. wet and dry periods). The effectiveness of the parameter values for the refined approach in regionalisation was evaluated through investigating the accuracy of predictions of the regional models. The regional models from the refined calibration approach clearly enhanced the hydrological behaviour for the dry period by improving the identification of the relationships between the catchment attributes and the catchment response dynamics representing the time constants in fitting recession parts of hydrograph (i.e. improving the parameter identifiability representing the different behaviour of the catchment) in regionalisation.

[1]  Barry Croke,et al.  A technique for deriving an average event unit hydrograph from streamflow—only data for ephemeral quick-flow-dominant catchments , 2006 .

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

[3]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Predicting daily flows in ungauged catchments: model regionalization from catchment descriptors at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, North Carolina , 2003 .

[4]  Jan Seibert,et al.  Regionalisation of parameters for a conceptual rainfall-runoff model , 1999 .

[5]  Martijn J. Booij,et al.  Catchment Variability and Parameter Estimation in Multi-Objective Regionalisation of a Rainfall–Runoff Model , 2010 .

[6]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  MODELLING LAND-COVER-INDUCED VARIATIONS IN HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE: PICANINNY CREEK, VICTORIA , 1996 .

[7]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  An assessment of modelling capacity to identify the impacts of climate variability on catchment hydrology , 2011, Math. Comput. Simul..

[8]  Günter Blöschl,et al.  Regionalisation of catchment model parameters , 2004 .

[9]  B. Croke.  Representing uncertainty in objective functions: extension to include the influence of serial correlation , 2008 .

[10]  Thorsten Wagener,et al.  Parameter estimation and regionalization for continuous rainfall-runoff models including uncertainty , 2006 .

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

[12]  R. Vogel,et al.  Regional calibration of a watershed model , 2000 .

[13]  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 .

[14]  Günter Blöschl,et al.  Regional calibration of catchment models: Potential for ungauged catchments , 2007 .

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

[16]  S. Lee,et al.  Assessment of the adequacy of the regional relationships between catchment attributes and catchment response dynamics, calibrated by a multi‐objective approach , 2014 .

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

[18]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Performance of conceptual rainfall‐runoff models in low‐yielding ephemeral catchments , 1997 .

[19]  D. Legates,et al.  Evaluating the use of “goodness‐of‐fit” Measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation , 1999 .

[20]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  Predicting the daily streamflow of ungauged catchments in S.E. Australia by regionalising the parameters of a lumped conceptual rainfall-runoff model , 1999 .

[21]  Keith Beven,et al.  Equifinality, data assimilation, and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology , 2001 .

[22]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Rainfall-runoff modelling in gauged and ungauged catchments , 2004 .

[23]  Franciscus Maria Kleissen.  Uncertainty and identifiability in conceptual models of surface water acidification , 1991 .

[24]  Anthony J. Jakeman,et al.  An open software environment for hydrological model assessment and development , 2011, Environ. Model. Softw..