Spatial and temporal variability in the R-5 infiltration data set: Deja vu and rainfall-runoff simulations

Water Resources Research

Volumn 33, Issue 12, 1997, Pages 2883-2895

  Loague, Keith ^a   Kyriakidis, Phaedon C ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFILTRATION; MODELING; RAINFALL; RUNOFF;

INFILTRATION DATA; RAINFALL/RUNOFF MODEL;

CATCHMENTS; RAIN; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION;

GEOSTATISTICAL METHOD; HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE; QUASI-PHYSICALLY-BASED RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELS; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; RAINFALL-RUNOFF SIMULATIONS; SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIABILITY; STATISTICAL CRITERION; TEMPORAL VARIABILITY;

RUNOFF;

EID: 0030687976     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/97WR01093     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Beven, K., Changing ideas in hydrology - the case of physically based models, J. Hydrol., 105, 157-172, 1989.
2. Deutsch, C., and A. Journel, GSLIB: Geostatistical Software Library and User's Guide, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1992.
3. Dunne, T., Relation of field studies and modeling in the prediction of storm runoff, J. Hydrol., 65, 25-48, 1983.
4. Engman, E. T., A partial area model for simulating surface runoff from small watersheds, Ph.D., Penn. State Univ., University Park, 1974.
5. Goovaerts, P., and A. Journel, Integrating soil map information in modeling the spatial variation of continuous soil properties, Soil Sci., 46, 397-414, 1995.
6. James, B. R., and S. M. Gorelick, When enough is enough: The worth of monitoring data in aquifer remediation design, Water Resour. Res., 30, 3499-3513, 1994.
7. Journel, A., New distance measures: The route toward truly non-Gaussian geostatistics, Math. Geol., 20, 459-475, 1988.
8. Journel, A., Fundamentals of Geostatistics in Five Lessons, vol. 8, Short Course in Geology, AGU, Washington, D. C., 1989.
9. Journel, A., The abuse of principles in model building and the quest for objectivity, in Proceedings of the 5th International Geostatistics Congress, edited by E. Baafi, Kluwer Acad., Norwell, Mass., in press, 1997.
10. Konikow, L. F., and J. D. Bredehoeft, Ground-water models cannot be validated, Adv. Water Resour., 15, 75-83, 1992.
11. Lide, D. R. (Ed.), Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 74th ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 1993.
12. Loague, K., Comments on "Changing ideas in hydrology - The case of physically based models," by K. Beven, J. Hydrol., 120, 405-407, 1990a.
13. Loague, K., R-5 revisited, 2, Reevaluation of a quasi-physically based rainfall-runoff model with supplemental information, Water Resour. Res., 26, 973-987, 1990b.
14. Loague, K., Space-time tradeoffs across the hydrologic data sets of competing rainfall-runoff models: A preliminary Analysis, Water Resour. Bull., 27, 781-789, 1991.
15. Loague, K., Comment on "Terrain-based catchment partitioning and runoff prediction using vector based elevation data," by I. D. Moore and R. B. Grayson, Water Resour. Res., 28, 1741-1744, 1992a.
16. Loague, K., Using soil texture to estimate saturated hydraulic conductivity and the impact on rainfall-runoff simulations, Water Resour. Bull., 28, 687-693, 1992b.
17. Loague, K., Soil-water content at R-5, 1, Spatial and temporal variability, J. Hydrol., 139, 233-261, 1992c.
18. Loague, K., Soil-water content at R-5, 2, Impact of antecedent conditions on rainfall-runoff simulations, J. Hydrol., 139, 253-261, 1992d.
19. Loague, K., Impact of overland flow plane characterization on event simulations with a quasi-physically based model, Water Resour. Res., 28, 2541-2545, 1992e.
20. Loague, K., Discussion of "Searching for physically based runoff model - A hydrologic El Dorado?" by David A. Woolhiser, J. Hydraul. Eng., in press, 1997.
21. Loague, K. M., and R. A. Freeze, A comparison of rainfall-runoff modeling techniques on small upland catchments, Water Resour. Res., 21, 229-248, 1985.
22. Loague, K., and G. A. Gander, R-5 revisited, 1, Spatial variability of infiltration on a small rangeland catchment, Water Resour. Res., 26, 957-971, 1990.
23. Loague, K., and R. E. Green, Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models, Overview and application, J. Contam. Hydrol., 7, 51-73, 1991.
24. Loague, K., D. Lloyd, T. W. Giambelluca, A. Nguyen, and B. Sakata, Land misuse and hydrologic response: Kaho'olawe, Hawaii, Pac. Sci., 50, 1-35, 1996.
25. Moore, I. D., and R. B. Grayson, Terrain-based catchment partitioning and runoff prediction using vector elevation data, Water Resour. Res., 27, 1177-1191, 1991.
26. Oreskes, N., K. Shrader-Frechette, and K. Belitz, Verification, validation and confirmation of numerical models in the earth sciences, Science, 263, 641-646, 1994.
27. Sharma, M. L., G. A. Gander, and C. G. Hunt, Spatial variability of infiltration in a watershed, J. Hydrol., 45, 101-122, 1980.
28. Woolhiser, D. A., Search for physically based runoff model - A hydrologic El Dorado?, J. Hydraul. Eng., 122, 122-129, 1996.
29. World Meteorological Organization, Inter-comparison of conceptual models used in hydrologic forecasting, Oper. Hydrol. Rep. 7, 172 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 1975.