Volume 6, Issue 1 (2018)
ECOPERSIA 2018, 6(1): 11-20 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Dahmardeh Ghaleno M. Runoff Simulation using WetSpa Distributed Hydrological Model in Ziarat Watershed of Golestan Province, Iran. ECOPERSIA 2018; 6 (1) :11-20
URL: http://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-13237-en.html
URL: http://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-13237-en.html
Department of Range and Watershed Management, Faculty of Water and Soil, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran , mr.dahmardeh@uoz.ac.ir
Abstract: (8261 Views)
Aims: Modeling precipitation-runoff processes and forecasting river flow are an essential step in floods management and controlling, designing water structures in watersheds and droughts management.
Materials & Methods: In the present research, WetSpa distributed hydrological model was applied to simulate river flow in Ziarat watershed of Golestan Province. This basin has an area of 95 km2 and it has an average height of 1760 m above sea level. As a distributed, continuous, and physical model, WetSpa is characterized with daily or hourly time series which accounts for processes of precipitation, runoff, and evapotranspiration contexts. The model parameters include distributive and global parameters. To run model, daily data on flow, precipitation, temperature, and evaporation for years 2008–2016 were considered for calibration and validation.
Findings: The results of simulation showed a relatively good compatibility between calculated and measured hydrograph at the basin outlet. According to Nash-Sutcliffe model for calibration periodic model, efficiency coefficient estimated daily hydrographs and maximum flow rate by 57.32% and 84.11% accuracy, respectively. However, given Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient which was equaled to −385.39 and −209.06 for low and high flow, respectively, validation results are not acceptable which it can be attributed to water withdrawal and diversion dam for water harvesting before gauging stations in outle.
Conclusion: Given the calibration results, WetSpa model has great efficiency under high flow circumstances compared to low flow mainly due to model weakness in low flow estimation but as a whole model simulated total flow with acceptable accuracy.
Materials & Methods: In the present research, WetSpa distributed hydrological model was applied to simulate river flow in Ziarat watershed of Golestan Province. This basin has an area of 95 km2 and it has an average height of 1760 m above sea level. As a distributed, continuous, and physical model, WetSpa is characterized with daily or hourly time series which accounts for processes of precipitation, runoff, and evapotranspiration contexts. The model parameters include distributive and global parameters. To run model, daily data on flow, precipitation, temperature, and evaporation for years 2008–2016 were considered for calibration and validation.
Findings: The results of simulation showed a relatively good compatibility between calculated and measured hydrograph at the basin outlet. According to Nash-Sutcliffe model for calibration periodic model, efficiency coefficient estimated daily hydrographs and maximum flow rate by 57.32% and 84.11% accuracy, respectively. However, given Nash–Sutcliffe coefficient which was equaled to −385.39 and −209.06 for low and high flow, respectively, validation results are not acceptable which it can be attributed to water withdrawal and diversion dam for water harvesting before gauging stations in outle.
Conclusion: Given the calibration results, WetSpa model has great efficiency under high flow circumstances compared to low flow mainly due to model weakness in low flow estimation but as a whole model simulated total flow with acceptable accuracy.
Article Type: مقاله Ø§Ø³ØªØ®Ø±Ø§Ø Ø´Ø¯Ù‡ از پایان نامه |
Subject:
Aquatic Ecology
Received: 2014/08/4 | Accepted: 2017/11/2 | Published: 2018/03/30
Received: 2014/08/4 | Accepted: 2017/11/2 | Published: 2018/03/30
References
1. Vansteenkiste T, Tavakoli, M, Ntegeka V, Willems P, et al. Climate change impact on river flows and catchment hydrology: a comparison of two spatially distributed models. Hydrol Process. 2013;27(25):3649-62. [Link] [DOI:10.1002/hyp.9480]
2. Liu YB, De Smedt F. Flood modeling for complex terrain using GIS and remote sensed information. Water Resour Manag. 2005;19(5):605-24. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11269-005-6808-x]
3. Dahmardeh Ghaleno MR, Sadoddin A, Sheikh V, Sabouhi Sabouni M. Optimal utilization of the chahnimeh water reservoirs in Sistan region of Iran using goal programming method. ECOPERSIA. 2017;5(1):1641-54. [Link] [DOI:10.18869/modares.ecopersia.5.1.1641]
4. Akbari M, Ranaee E, Mirzakhan H, Dargahi A, Jargeh M. Simulation of snowmelt runoff using SRM model and comparison with neural networks ANN and ANFIS (case study: Kardeh dam basin). J Water Soil. 2016;30(6):1794-807. [Persian]. [Link]
5. Wang ZM, Batelaan O, De Smedt F. A distributed model for water and energy transfer between soil, plants and atmosphere (WetSpa). Phys Chem Earth. 1996;21(3):189-93. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0079-1946(97)85583-8]
6. De Smedt F, Yongbo L, Gebremeskel S. Hydrological modeling on a catchment scale using GIS and remote sensed land use information. Risk Anal II. 2000;45:295-304. [Link]
7. Liu YB, Gebremeskel S, De Smedt F, Hoffmann L, Pfister L. A diffusive transport approach for flow routing in GIS-based flood modeling. J Hydrol. 2003;283(1-4):91-106. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00242-7]
8. Safari A, De Smedt F, Moreda F. WetSpa model application in the distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP2). J Hydrol. 2012;418-419:78-89. [Link]
9. Bahremand A, De Smedt F. Predictive analysis and simulation uncertainty of a distributed hydrological model. Water Resour Manag. 2010;24(12):2869-80. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11269-010-9584-1]
10. Porretta-Brandyk L, Chormanski J, Ignar S, Okruszko T, Brandyk A, Szymczak T, et al. Evaluation and verification of the WetSpa model based on selected rural catchments in Poland. J Water Land Dev. 2010;14:115-33. [Link] [DOI:10.2478/v10025-011-0010-8]
11. Rwetabula J, De Smedt F, Rebhun M. Prediction of runoff and discharge in the Simiyu river (tributary of Lake Victoria, Tanzania) using the WetSpa model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discussions. 2007;4(2):881-908. [Link] [DOI:10.5194/hessd-4-881-2007]
12. Golestan Regional Water Authority. A report of water resources status in Golestan Province. Publisher location unknomn: Publisher unknown;2015. [Persian] [Link]
13. Liu YB. Wetspa extension a gis-based hydrologic model for flood prediction and watershed management documentation and user manual. Kabir A, Bahremand A, Mehazin M, translators. Mashhad: Arastoo; 2015. [Persian] [Link]
14. Bahremand A, Corluy J, Liu Y, De Smedt F, Poórová J, Velcická L. Stream flow simulation by WetSpa model in Hornad river basin, Slovakia. In: Alphen JV, Beek EV, Taal M, editors. Floods, from defence to management. London: Taylor & Francis Group; 2006. [Link]
15. Rwetabula J, De Smedt F, Rebhun M. Prediction of runoff and discharge in the Simiyu river (tributary of Lake Victoria, Tanzania) using the WetSpa model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discussions. 2007;4(2):881-908. [Link] [DOI:10.5194/hessd-4-881-2007]
16. Liu YB, Batelaan O, De Smedt F, Poórová J, Velcická L. Automated calibration applied to a GIS-based flood simulation model using PEST. In: Alphen JV, Beek EV, Taal M, editors. Floods, from defence to management. London: Taylor & Francis Group; 2005. [Link]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |