A process-based, distributed hydrologic model based on a large-scale method for surface-subsurface coupling

Advances in Water Resources

Volumn 33, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1524-1541

  Shen, Chaopeng ^a   Phanikumar, Mantha S ^a  

^a Michigan State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Catchment hydrology; Distributed hydrological model; Mechanistic models; Multiscale models; Process based models; Runoff generation

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENT HYDROLOGY; DISTRIBUTED HYDROLOGICAL MODEL; MECHANISTIC MODELS; MULTISCALE MODELS; PROCESS-BASED MODELS; RUNOFF GENERATION;

CLIMATE MODELS; GROUNDWATER; GROUNDWATER FLOW; LANDFORMS; RUNOFF; THREE DIMENSIONAL; WATER RESOURCES; WATERSHEDS;

CATCHMENTS;

CALIBRATION; CATCHMENT; COUPLING; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; HYDROLOGICAL RESPONSE; NUMERICAL MODEL; PREDICTION; RUNOFF; STREAMFLOW; WATERSHED;

EID: 78649632956     PISSN: 03091708     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.09.002     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Beven K. Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated hydrologic response modelling system. Hydrol Process 2002, 16(2):189-206,.
2. U.S.EPA. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Ground Water Rule; Proposed Rules. 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142. 2000. p. 30194-274.
3. Thupaki P., Phanikumar M.S., Beletsky D., Schwab D.J., Nevers M.B., Whitman R.L. Budget analysis of Escherichia coli at a Southern Lake Michigan Beach. Environ Sci Technol 2010, 44(3):1010-1016. 10.1021/es902232a.
4. Grant S.B., Kim J.H., Jones B.H., Jenkins S.A., Wasyl J., Cudaback C. Surf zone entrainment, along-shore transport, and human health implications of pollution from tidal outlets. J Geophys Res-Oceans 2005, 110(C10):C10025. 10.1029/2004jc002401.
5. Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR. Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2005. Temple, Texas: US Department of Agriculture - Agricultural Research Service; 2005.
6. Liang X., Xie Z.H. A new surface runoff parameterization with subgrid-scale soil heterogeneity for land surface models. Adv Water Resour 2001, 24(9-10):1173-1193.
7. Chen F., Dudhia J. Coupling an advanced land surface-hydrology model with the Penn State-NCAR MM5 modeling system. Part I: Model implementation and sensitivity. Mon Weather Rev 2001, 129(4):569-585.
8. Miguez-Macho G., Fan Y., Weaver C.P., Walko R., Robock A. Incorporating water table dynamics in climate modeling: 2. Formulation, validation, and soil moisture simulation. J Geophys Res-Atmos 2007, 112(D13):D13108. 10.1029/2006jd008112.
9. Jiang X.Y., Niu G.Y., Yang Z.L. Impacts of vegetation and groundwater dynamics on warm season precipitation over the Central United States. J Geophys Res-Atmos 2009, 114:D06109. 10.1029/2008jd010756.
10. Maxwell R.M., Miller N.L. Development of a coupled land surface and groundwater model. J Hydrometeorol 2005, 6(3):233-247.
11. Gulden L.E., Rosero E., Yang Z.L., Rodell M., Jackson C.S., Niu G.Y., et al. Improving land-surface model hydrology: is an explicit aquifer model better than a deeper soil profile?. Geophys Res Lett 2007, 34(9):L09402. 10.1029/2007gl029804.
12. Maxwell R.M., Kollet S.J. Interdependence of groundwater dynamics and land-energy feedbacks under climate change. Nature Geosci 2008, 1(10):665-669. 10.1038/Ngeo315.
13. Entekhabi D., Rodriguez-Iturbe I., Castelli F. Mutual interaction of soil moisture state and atmospheric processes. J Hydrol 1996, 184(1-2):3-17.
14. Anyah R.O., Weaver C.P., Miguez-Macho G., Fan Y., Robock A. Incorporating water table dynamics in climate modeling: 3. Simulated groundwater influence on coupled land-atmosphere variability. J Geophys Res-Atmos 2008, 113(D7):D07103. 10.1029/2007jd009087.
15. Richards L.A. Capillary conduction of liquids in porous mediums. Physics 1931, 1:318-333.
16. Downer C.W., Ogden F.L., Martin W.D., Harmon R.S. Theory, development, and applicability of the surface water hydrologic model CASC2D. Hydrol Process 2002, 16(2):255-275.
17. VanderKwaak J.E., Loague K. Hydrologic-response simulations for the R-5 catchment with a comprehensive physics-based model. Water Resour Res 2001, 37(4):999-1013.
18. Goderniaux P., Brouyere S., Fowler H.J., Blenkinsop S., Therrien R., Orban P., et al. Large scale surface-subsurface hydrological model to assess climate change impacts on groundwater reserves. J Hydrol 2009, 373(1-2):122-138. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.017.
19. Camporese M., Paniconi C., Putti M., Orlandini S. Surface-subsurface flow modeling with path-based runoff routing, boundary condition-based coupling, and assimilation of multisource observation data. Water Resour Res 2010, 46:W02512. 10.1029/2008wr007536.
20. Kollet S.J., Maxwell R.M. Integrated surface-groundwater flow modeling: a free-surface overland flow boundary condition in a parallel groundwater flow model. Adv Water Resour 2006, 29(7):945-958. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2005.08.006.
21. Maxwell R.M., Kollet S.J. Quantifying the effects of three-dimensional subsurface heterogeneity on Hortonian runoff processes using a coupled numerical, stochastic approach. Adv Water Resour 2008, 31(5):807-817. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2008.01.020.
22. Yeh G.T., Huang G.B., Cheng H.P., Zhang F., Lin H.C., Edris E., et al. A first-principle, physics-based watershed model: WASH123D. Watershed models 2006, 211-244. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla. V.P. Singh, D.K. Frevert (Eds.).
23. Simunek J, Van Genuchten MT, Sejna M. The HYDRUS software package for simulating two- and three-dimensional movement of water, heat, and multiple solutes in variably-saturated media, version 1.0, technical manual, PC Progress. Prague, Czech Republic, 2006.
24. Panday S., Huyakorn P.S. A fully coupled physically-based spatially-distributed model for evaluating surface/subsurface flow. Adv Water Resour 2004, 27(4):361-382.
25. Downer C.W., Ogden F.L. Appropriate vertical discretization of Richards' equation for two-dimensional watershed-scale modelling. Hydrol Process 2004, 18(1):1-22.
26. Weill S., Mouche E., Patin J. A generalized Richards equation for surface/subsurface flow modelling. J Hydrol 2009, 366(1-4):9-20. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.12.007.
27. Downer C.W., Ogden F.L. GSSHA: model to simulate diverse stream flow producing processes. J Hydrol Eng 2004, 9(3):161-174.
28. McMichael C.E., Hope A.S., Loaiciga H.A. Distributed hydrological modelling in California semi-arid shrublands: MIKE SHE model calibration and uncertainty estimation. J Hydrol 2006, 317(3-4):307-324. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.05.023.
29. Thompson J.R., Sorenson H.R., Gavin H., Refsgaard A. Application of the coupled MIKE SHE/MIKE 11 modelling system to a lowland wet grassland in southeast England. J Hydrol 2004, 293(1-4):151-179. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.01.017.
30. Vazquez R.F., Feyen L., Feyen J., Refsgaard J.C. Effect of grid size on effective parameters and model performance of the MIKE-SHE code. Hydrol Process 2002, 16(2):355-372.
31. Jia Y.W., Ni G.H., Kawahara Y., Suetsugi T. Development of WEP model and its application to an urban watershed. Hydrol Process 2001, 15(11):2175-2194.
32. Breuer L., Eckhardt K., Frede H.G. Plant parameter values for models in temperate climates. Ecol Model 2003, 169(2-3):237-293. 10.1016/S0304-3800(03)00274-6.
33. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M. Crop evaporation. Guidelines for computing crop water requirement-FAO Irrigation and Drainage paper 56. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; 1998.
34. Noilhan J., Planton S. A simple parameterization of land surface processes for meteorological models. Mon Weather Rev 1989, 117(3):536-549.
35. Lai C.T., Katul G. The dynamic role of root-water uptake in coupling potential to actual transpiration. Adv Water Resour 2000, 23(4):427-439.
36. Braud I., Varado N., Olioso A. Comparison of root water uptake modules using either the surface energy balance or potential transpiration. J Hydrol 2005, 301(1-4):267-286.
37. Dingman S.L. Physical hydrology 2002, Prentice Hall.
38. Singh V.P. Kinematic wave modeling in water resources: surface water hydrology 1996, Wiley-Interscience.
39. Gottardi G., Venutelli M. An accurate time integration method for simplified overland flow models. Adv Water Resour 2008, 31(1):173-180. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.08.004.
40. Casulli V. Semi-implicit finite-difference methods for the 2-dimensional shallow-water equations. J Comput Phys 1990, 86(1):56-74.
41. van Dam J.C., Feddes R.A. Numerical simulation of infiltration, evaporation and shallow groundwater levels with the Richards equation. J Hydrol 2000, 233(1-4):72-85.
42. Celia M.A., Bouloutas E.T., Zarba R.L. A general mass-conservative numerical-solution for the unsaturated flow equation. Water Resour Res 1990, 26(7):1483-1496.
43. van Genuchten M.T. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Amer J 1980, 44(5):892-898.
44. Press W.H., Flannery B.P., Teukolsky S.A., Vetterling W.T. Numerical recipes in FORTRAN 77: the art of scientific computing 1997, Cambridge University Press.
45. Jia Y.W. Modeling infiltration into a multi-layered soil during an unsteady rain. J Hydrosci Hydraulic Eng, JSCE (Japan) 1998, 16(2).
46. Neuman S.P. Wetting front pressure head in infiltration-model of Green and Ampt. Water Resour Res 1976, 12(3):564-566.
47. Luce C.H., Tarboton D.G. The application of depletion curves for parameterization of subgrid variability of snow. Hydrol Process 2004, 18(8):1409-1422.
48. Luce C.H., Tarboton D.G., Cooley R.R. The influence of the spatial distribution of snow on basin-averaged snowmelt. Hydrol Process 1998, 12(10-11):1671-1683.
49. Luce C.H., Tarboton D.G., Cooley K.R. Sub-grid parameterization of snow distribution for an energy and mass balance snow cover model. Hydrol Process 1999, 13(12-13):1921-1933.
50. Twarakavi N.K.C., Simunek J., Seo S. Evaluating interactions between groundwater and vadose zone using the HYDRUS-based flow package for MODFLOW. Vadose Zone J 2008, 7(2):757-768.
51. Stoppelenburg FJ, Kavar K, Pastoors MJH, Tiktak A. Modeling the interactions between saturated and unsaturated groundwater. Off-line coupling of LGM and SWAP, RIVM Rep. 500026001/2005. RIVM. Bilthoven, The Netherlands; 2005.
52. van Dam J.C., Groenendijk P., Hendriks R.F.A., Kroes J.G. Advances of modeling water flow in variably saturated soils with SWAP. Vadose Zone J 2008, 7(2):640-653.
53. Gunduz O., Aral M.M. River networks and groundwater flow: a simultaneous solution of a coupled system. J Hydrol 2005, 301(1-4):216-234.
54. Freeze R.A., Harlan R.L. Blueprint for a physically-based, digitally-simulated hydrologic response model. J Hydrol 1969, 9:237-258.
55. Vauclin M., Khanji D., Vachaud G. Experimental and numerical study of a transient, 2-dimensional unsaturated-saturated water table recharge problem. Water Resour Res 1979, 15(5):1089-1101.
56. Shen C. A process-based distributed hydrologic model and its application to a Michigan watershed. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing; 2009.
57. DiGiammarco P., Todini E., Lamberti P. A conservative finite elements approach to overland flow: the control volume finite element formulation. J Hydrol 1996, 175(1-4):267-291.
58. Haverkamp R., Vauclin M., Touma J., Wierenga P.J., Vachaud G. Comparison of numerical-simulation models for one-dimensional infiltration. Soil Sci Soc Amer J 1977, 41(2):285-294.
59. Lehmann F., Ackerer P.H. Comparison of iterative methods for improved solutions of the fluid flow equation in partially saturated porous media. Transp Porous Media 1998, 31(3):275-292.
60. Freeze A.R., Cherry J.A. Groundwater 1979, Prentice Hall.
61. Dogan A., Motz L.H. Saturated-unsaturated 3D groundwater model. II: verification and application. J Hydrol Eng 2005, 10(6):505-515. 10.1061/(Asce)1084-0699(2005)10:6(505).
62. Clement T.P., Wise W.R., Molz F.J. A physically-based, 2-dimensional, finite-difference algorithm for modeling variably saturated flow. J Hydrol 1994, 161(1-4):71-90,.
63. Sulis M., Meyerhoff S.B., Paniconi C., Maxwell R.M., Putti M., Kollet S.J. A comparison of two physics-based numerical models for simulating surface water-groundwater interactions. Adv Water Resour 2010, 33(4):456-467. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.01.010.
64. NCDC. National Climatic Data Center. Available at ; 2010 [accessed 10.08.2010]. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/climatedata.html#daily.
65. MAWN. Michigan Automated Weather Network, East Lansing, Michigan, 48823. Available at ; 2010 [accessed 10.08.2010]. http://www.agweather.geo.msu.edu/mawn/.
66. MDNR. 2001 IFMAP/GAP Lower Peninsula Land Cover. Available at ; 2010 [accessed 28.11.2009]. http://www.mcgi.state.mi.us/mgdl/?rel=thextaction=thmnamecid=5cat=Land+Cover+2001.
67. Bjerklie D.M. Estimating the bankfull velocity and discharge for rivers using remotely sensed river morphology information. J Hydrol 2007, 341(3-4):144-155. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.04.011.
68. GWIM. State of Michigan Public Act 148 Groundwater Inventory and Mapping Project (GWIM). Technical Report. 2006.
69. Simard A. Predicting groundwater flow and transport using Michigan's statewide wellogic database. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing; 2007.
70. Li S.G., Liu Q., Afshari S. An object-oriented hierarchical patch dynamics paradigm (HPDP) for modeling complex groundwater systems across multiple-scales. Environ Model Software 2006, 21(5):744-749. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2005.11.001.
71. Price K., Storn R., Lampinen J. Differential evolution: a practical approach to global optimization 2005, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.