Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 291, Issue 3-4, 2004, Pages 232-253

  Brath, Armando ^a   Montanari, Alberto ^a   Toth, Elena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Automatic calibration; Data availability; Distributed hydrological models; Flood hydrograph; Rainfall spatial variability

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODAL ANALYSIS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; RAIN; RAIN GAGES; RUNOFF;

HYDROLOGISTS; PARAMETERIZATION;

HYDROLOGY;

CALIBRATION; HYDROGRAPH; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; MODEL VALIDATION; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING;

EID: 1942502700     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.12.044     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Arnaud P., Bouvier C., Cisneros L., Dominguez R. Influence of rainfall spatial variability on flood prediction. J. Hydrol. 260:2002;216-230
2. Band L.E. Topographic partition of watersheds with digital elevation models. Water Resour. Res. 22:1986;15-24
3. Beck M.B., Jakeman A.J., McAleer M.J. Construction and evaluation of models of environmental systems. Kakeman A.J., Beck M.B., McAleer M.J. Modelling Change in Environmental Systems. 1993;3-35 Wiley, New York
4. Beldring S. Multi-criteria validation of a precipitation-runoff model. J. Hydrol. 257:2002;189-211
5. Beven K.J. Changing ideas in hydrology: The case of physically-based models. J. Hydrol. 105:1989;157-172
6. Beven K.J. Rainfall-Runoff modeling. 2000;Wiley, London
7. Beven K.J. Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated hydrologic response modeling system. Hydrol. Process. 16:2002;189-206
8. Beven K., Binley A. The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrolol. Process. 6:1992;279-298
9. Booji M.J. Modelling the effects of spatial and temporal resolution of rainfall and basin model on extreme river discharge. Hydrol. Sci. J. 47:(2):2002;307-320
10. Brath A., Montanari A. Effects of the spatial variability of soil infiltration capacity in distributed rainfall runoff modeling. Hydrol. Process. 14:(5):2000;2779-2794
11. Brath A., Montanari A., Moretti G. Analisi degli effetti sul regime di frequenza delle piene delle variazioni recenti di uso del suolo. Analysis of the effects of land-use changes on flood frequency regime Maione U., Brath A., Mignosa P. La progettazione della difesa idraulica. Analysis of the effects of land-use changes on flood frequency regime:2001;53-92 Editoriale Bios, Cosenza (Italy). In Italian
12. Brath, A., Montanari. A., Toth, E., 2001. Comparing the calibration requirements and the simulation performances of lumped and distributed hydrological models: an Italian case study. Eos. Trans. AGU, 82, Spring Meet. Suppl., Abstract H31D-04.
13. Chaubey I., Haan C.T., Grunwald S., Salisbury J.M. Uncertainty in the models parameters due to spatial variability of rainfall. J. Hydrol. 220:1999;46-61
14. Cunge J.A. On the subject of a flood propagation computation method (Muskingum Method). J. Hydraulic Res. 7:1969;205-230
15. Doorembos J., Pruitt W.O., Aboukhaled A., Damagnez J., Dastane N.G., Van der Berg C., Rijtema P.E., Ashford O.M., Frere M. Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements. FAO Irrig. Drainage Pap., Rome, Italy. 1984
16. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V.K. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resour. Res. 28:(4):1992;1015-1031
17. Duan Q., Gupta V.K., Sorooshian S. A shuffled complex evolution approach for effective and efficient optimization. J. Optimization Theory Appl. 76:(3):1993;501-521
18. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V.K. Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J. Hydrol. 158:1994;265-284
19. Faures J., Goodrich D.C., Woolhiser D.A., Sorooshian S. Impact of small-scale spatial rainfall variability on runoff modeling. J. Hydrol. 173:1995;309-326
20. Gan T.Y., Dlamini E.M., Biftu G.F. Effects of model complexity and structure, data quality, and objective functions on hydrologic modeling. J. Hydrol. 192:1997;81-103
21. Grayson R.B., Moore I.D., McMahon T.A. Physically based hydrologic modeling. 1. A terrain-based model for investigative purposes. Water Resour. Res. 28:(10):1992;2639-2658
22. Gupta V.K., Sorooshian S. The automatic calibration of conceptual catchment models using derivative-based optimization algorithms. Water Resour. Res. 21:(4):1985;473-486
23. Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S., Yapo P.O. Toward improvged calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour. Res. 34:(4):1998;751-763
24. Krajewski W., Lakshmi V., Georgagkakos K.P., Jain S.C. A Monte Carlo study of rainfall sampling effect on a distributed catchment model. Water Resour. Res. 27:(1):1991;119-128
25. Kuczera G., parent E. Monte Carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchmnet models: the Metropolis algorithm. J. Hydrol. 211:1998;69-85
26. Lopes V.L. On the effect of uncertainty in spatial distribution of rainfall on catchment modelling. Catena. 28:1996;107-119
27. Michaud J.D., Sorooshian S. Effect of rainfall-sampling errors on simulations of desert flash floods. Water Resour. Res. 30:(10):1994;2765-2775
28. Montgomery D.L., Foufoula-Georgiou E. Channel network source representation using digital elevation models. Water Resour. Res. 29:1993;3925-3934
29. Nelder J.A., Mead R. A simplex method for function minimization. Comput. J. 7:1965;308-313
30. Obled C., Wendling J., Beven K. The sensitivity of hydrological models to spatial rainfall patterns: an evaluation using observed data. J. Hydrol. 159:1994;305-333
31. Orlandini S., Perotti A., Sfondrini G., Bianchi A. On the storm flow response of upland Alpine catchments. Hydrol. Process. 13:1999;549-562
32. Rosenbrock H.H. An automatic method of finding the greatest or least value of a function. Comput. J. 3:1960;175-184
33. Senarath S.U.S., Ogden F.L., Downer C.W. On the calibration and verification of two-dimensional, distributed, hortonian, continuous watershed models. Water Resour. Res. 36:(6):2000;1495-1510
34. Shah S.M.S., O'Connell P.E., Hosking J.R.M. Modelling the effects of spatial variability in rainfall on catchment response2. Experiments with distributed and lumped models. J. Hydrol. 175:1996;89-111
35. Soil Conservation Service, 1972. National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology. US Dept. of Agriculture. Washington D.C.
36. Sun H., Cornish P.S., Daniell T.M. Spatial variability in hydrologic modeling using rainfall-runoff model and digital elevation model. J. Hydrologic Engng. 7:(6):2002;404-412
37. Tarboton D.G. A new method for the determination of flow directions and contributing areas in grid digital elevation models. Water Resour. Res. 33:1997;309-319
38. Troutman B.M. Runoff prediction errors and bias in parameter estimation induced by spatial variability of precipitation. Water Resour. Res. 19:(3):1983;791-810
39. Wilson C.B., Valdes J.B., Rodriguez-Iturbe I. On the influence of the spatial distribution of rainfall on storm runoff. Water Resour. Res. 15:(2):1979;321-328
40. Yapo P.O., Gupta V.J., Sorooshian S. Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: sensitivity to calibration data. J. Hydrol. 181:1996;23-48