Assessment criteria for simple conceptual daily rainfall-runoff models

Hydrological Sciences Journal

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 237-261

  Houghton carr, H A ^a  

^a CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRAINAGE; FUNCTIONS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RAIN; RUNOFF;

HYDROGRAPHS; OBJECTIVE FUNCTIONS;

HYDROLOGY;

BASIN; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0032826146     PISSN: 02626667     EISSN: 21503435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02626669909492220     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bonvoisin, N. J., and Boorman, D. B., 1992a. MIMIC Users Manual. Wallingford, UK:Institute of Hydrology.
2. Bonvoisin, N. J., and Boorman, D. B., 1992b. Daily Rainfall-Runoff Modelling as an Aid to the Transfer of Hydrological Parameters. Report to MAFF Wallingford, UK:Institute of Hydrology.
3. Chiew, F. H. S., Stewardson, M. J., and McMahon, T. A., 1993. Comparison of six rainfall-runoff modelling approaches. J. Hydrol., 147:1–36.
4. Dawdy, D. R., and O'Donnell, T., 1965. Mathematical models of catchment behaviour. Proc. J. Hydraul. Div. ASCE, HY4:91–123. paper 4410
5. Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., and Gupta, V., 1992. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Wat. Resour. Res., 28 (4):1015–1031.
6. Franchini, M., and Pacciani, M., 1991. Comparative analysis of several conceptual rainfall-runoff models. J. Hydrol., 122:161–219.
7. Franchini, M., Galeati, G., and Berra, S., 1998. Global optimization techniques for the calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol. Sci. J., 43 (3):443–458.
8. Gan, T. Y., and Biftu, G. F., 1996. Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models:optimization algorithms, catchment conditions, and model structures. Wat. Resour. Res., 32 (12):3513–3524.
9. Gan, T. Y., and Burges, S. J., 1990a. An assessment of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model's ability to represent the dynamics of small hypothetical catchments:1. Models, model properties and experimental design. Wat. Resour. Res., 26 (7):1595–1604.
10. Gan, T. Y., and Burges, S. J., 1990b. An assessment of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model's ability to represent the dynamics of small hypothetical catchments:2. Hydrologic responses for normal and extreme rainfall. Wat. Resour. Res., 26 (7):1605–1619.
11. Gustard, A., Bullock, A., and Dixon, J. M., 1992. “ Low flow estimation in the United Kingdom. ”. In Report no. 108, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
12. Harding, R. J., and Moore, R. J., 1992. “ PACK:a pragmatic snowmelt model for real-time use. ”. In Report to MAFF, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
13. Houghton-Carr, H. A., and Arnell, N. W., 1994. “ Comparison of simple conceptual daily rainfall-runoff models. ”. In Report to MAFF, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
14. Institute of Hydrology. 1993. Hydrological Data UK:Hydrometric Register and Statistics 1986–90. Wallingford, UK:Institute of Hydrology/British Geological Survey.
15. Johnston, P. R., and Pilgrim, D. H., 1973. “ Optimising the parameters of a rainfall-runoff model. ”. In Instn Civil. Engrs Hydrology Papers 173–180. Australia.:Sydney.
16. Jones, S. B., 1983. “ The estimation of catchment average point rainfall profiles. ”. In Report no. 79, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.
17. Klemeš, V., 1986. Operational testing of hydrological simulation models. Hydrol. Sci. J., 31 (1):13–24.
18. Lichty, R. W., Dawdy, D. R., and Bergman, J. M., 1968. “ Rainfall-runoff model for small basin hydrograph simulation. ”. In The Use of Analogue and Digital Computers in Hydrology (Proc. Tucson Symp.), IAHS/UNESCO, IAHS Publ. no 81 Vol. 2, 356–367.
19. Met. Office. 1946. Snow Survey of Great Britain. Bracknell.:Meteorological Office. /1947 onwards)
20. Moore, R. J., 1985. The probability-distributed principle and runoff production at point and basin scales. Hydrol. Sci. J., 30 (2):263–297.
21. Nash, J. E., and Sutcliffe, J. V., 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models:1. a discussion of principles. J. Hydrol., 10:282–290.
22. Pickup, G., 1977a. Testing the efficiencies of algorithms and strategies for automatic calibration of rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol. Sci. Bull., 22:257–274.
23. Pickup, G., 1977b. Potential and limitations of rainfall-runoff models for prediction on ungauged catchments:a case study from the Papua New Guinea Highlands. J. Hydrol. (NZ), 16 (1):87–102.
24. Rosenbrock, H. H., 1960. An automatic method of finding the greatest or least value of a function. Computer J., 3 175–184
25. Thompson, N., Barrie, I. A., and Ayles, M., 1981. “ The Meteorological Office Rainfall and Evaporation Calculation System (MORECS). ”. In Hydrol. Memorandum 45, Met. Office., Bracknell, UK.
26. Wilmott, C. J., Rowe, C. M., and Mintz, Y., 1985. Climatology of the terrestrial seasonal water balance. J. Clim., 5:589–606.
27. WMO (World Meteorological Organization). 1986. “ Intercomparison of models of snowmelt runoff. ”. In WMO Operational Hydrology Report no. 23, WMO Report no. 646. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
28. Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S., 1996. Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models:sensitivity to calibration data. J. Hydrol., 181:23–48.