Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 19 September 2012
Received in revised form
7 March 2013
Accepted 10 March 2013
Available online 6 April 2013
Hydrologic simulation employing computer models has advanced rapidly and computerized models
have become essential tools for understanding human inuences on river ows and designing ecologically sustainable water management approaches. The HEC-HMS is a reliable model developed by the US
Army Corps of Engineers that could be used for many hydrological simulations. This model is not calibrated and validated for Sri Lankan watersheds and need reliable data inputs to check the suitability of
the model for the study location and purpose. Therefore, this study employed three different approaches
to calibrate and validate the HEC-HMS 3.4 model to Attanagalu Oya (River) catchment and generate long
term ow data for the Oya and the tributaries.
Twenty year daily rainfall data from ve rain gauging stations scattered within the Attanagalu Oya
catchment and monthly evaporation data for the same years for the agro meteorological station
Henarathgoda together with daily ow data at Dunamale from 2005 to 2010 were used in the study. GIS
layers that were needed as input data for the ow simulation were prepared using Arc GIS 9.2 and used
in the HEC-HMS 3.4 calibration of the Dunamale sub catchment using daily ow data from 2005 to 2007.
The model was calibrated adjusting three different methods. The model parameters were changed and
the model calibration was performed separately for the three selected methods, the Soil Conservation
Service Curve Number loss method, the decit constant loss method (the Snyder unit hydrograph
method and the Clark unit hydrograph method) in order to determine the most suitable simulation
method to the study catchment. The calibrated model was validated with a new set of rainfall and ow
data (2008e2010). The ows simulated from each methods were tested statistically employing the coefcient of performance, the relative error and the residual method. The Snyder unit hydrograph method
simulates ows more reliably than the Clark unit hydrograph method. As the loss method, the SCS Curve
Number method does not perform well.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
HEC-HMS
Calibration
Validation
SCS Curve Number
Snyder unit hydrograph
Clark unit hydrograph
1. Introduction
1.1. Hydrological simulation modeling
There is a need for supporting environmental planning choices
with simulation and prediction models, due to the development of
regulatory and planning tools, such as the river basin master plan,
which involve a direct link between the description of physical
phenomena (such as oods) and the attribution of land planning
constraints. The need of such a modeling system is stimulated, and
sometimes even enforced, by the many activities required by river
basin planning and management, ranging from timely ood alert to
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 94 777412089, 94 11 2903402; fax: 94 11
2914479.
E-mail address: mnajim@kln.ac.lk (M.M.M. Najim).
1364-8152/$ e see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.03.006
156
2. Methodology
2.1. Study area
between 7
6.600 e7
7.880
WCN
Pi n
i 1 CNi $Ai
Pi n
i 1 Ai
(1)
where, WCN is weighted curve number, Ai is area for ith landuse type and CNi is
curve number for ith landuse type. Curve numbers were taken from standard curve
157
Fig. 1. The drainage network, four sub-catchments and the location of the ow gauging station in the study catchment.
number tables (Schwab et al., 2005). Calculated weighted curve number was used in
the calibration of the model and was changed consecutively. The model simulation
was performed for each curve number separately in order to nd the most suitable
curve number for the study area.
The area of the sub-basin which is impervious (%) needs to be specied as a
portion of total area. No loss calculations are carried out on the impervious areas
where all the precipitation on such portions become excess precipitation and subjected to direct runoff.
2.5.2. Decit constant loss method
The decit constant loss method uses a single soil layer to account for continuous changes in the moisture content. It should be used in combination with a
meteorological model that computes evapotranspiration. The potential evapotranspiration computed by the meteorological model is used to dry out the soil layer
between precipitation events.
2.5.2.1. Transform method. While a sub-basin element conceptually represents
inltration, surface runoff and subsurface processes interact together with the actual
surface runoff. The calculation of the surface runoff is performed by a transform
method contained within the sub-basin. A total of seven different transform
methods are provided by the model. The decit constant loss method was performed in two different transform methods, namely the Clark unit hydrograph and
the Snyder unit hydrograph.
2.5.2.2. Clark unit hydrograph. The Clark unit hydrograph is a synthetic unit
hydrograph method. That is, the user is not required to develop a unit hydrograph
through the analysis of the past observations. Instead a time versus area curve built
into the program is used to develop the translation hydrograph resulting from a
burst of precipitation. The resulting translation hydrograph is routed through a
linear reservoir to account for the storage attenuation across the sub-basin.
2.5.2.3. Snyder unit hydrograph. The Snyder unit hydrograph is also a synthetic unit
hydrograph method. It was originally developed to compute the peak ow as a unit
of precipitation. Additionally, empirical methods have been developed for estimating the time base of the hydrograph and the width at 50% of the peak ow. The
implementation used in the program utilizes a unit hydrograph generated with the
Clark methodology so that the empirical Snyder relationships are maintained.
The unit hydrograph technique is used in the runoff component of a rain event
to transform rainfall excess to out ow and it represents direct runoff at the outlet of
a basin resulting from one unit of precipitation excess over the basin. The excess
occurs at constant intensity over a specied duration. The decit constant loss
method is designed as a simple, one-layer model for continuous soil moisture
simulation. The soil is assumed to have a xed water holding capacity, xed inltration rate and the full potential amount is removed from the soil without accounting for reductions due to increasing tension at low water contents. Simplifying
assumptions are made regarding soil dynamics so that inltration only occurs when
the soil is saturated. Water is removed from the soil to simulate evapotranspiration.
158
N
X
Si Oi 2
(2)
i1
CPA 0 P
N
i1
CPA
2
Oi Oavg
(3)
Simulated Observed
100
Observed
(4)
The percentage RE is negative for under prediction and positive for over prediction. Following the simulation process of three different methods, simulated
ows were statistically analyzed by using the CP method. Generated CP values were
graphically compared to nd the coefcient of performance values that approaches
virtually zero. In addition the validated model was evaluated by residual method
(Bennett et al., 2013; Pauly, 1980). Bennett et al. (2013) stated that the most prevalent methods for model evaluation are residual methods, which calculate the difference between observed and modeled data points. The residual plot is a simple
graphical method to analyze model residuals. Of the many possible numerical calculations on model residuals, by far the most common are bias and Mean Square
Error. Bias is simply the mean of the residuals, indicating whether the model tends
to under- or over-estimate the measured data, with an ideal value zero.
The calibrated model was used in the validation process with a new set of
rainfall data for the next three years (2008e2010). The parameters that were found
from the calibration and the validation processes were used in the model simulation
for the whole catchment. The calibrated and the validated model was applied to the
four sub catchments for daily rainfall values of fty years. Daily ows were generated in cumecs (m3 s1).
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Mean
Mean CPA0
CN 71
CN 65
CN 60
CN 55
CN 50
CN 45
CN 40
CN 20
35.6
20.9
1167.8
847.4
232.6
627.0
138.4
257.7
335.8
21.5
68.2
7.6
313.4
16.2
12.8
996.6
798.0
223.9
613.5
136.4
254.9
332.8
21.4
68.1
7.6
290.2
9.5
7.8
848.3
747.0
214.4
598.2
134.0
251.7
329.3
21.2
67.8
7.6
269.7
7.4
4.2
699.5
686.5
202.7
578.3
130.8
247.4
324.5
21.0
67.5
7.5
248.1
7.1
2.0
554.3
616.4
188.2
552.9
126.6
241.6
318.0
20.7
67.1
7.5
225.2
7.1
0.9
416.9
536.8
170.8
520.6
121.1
233.8
309.3
20.3
66.5
7.5
201.0
7.1
0.6
292.0
448.6
150.1
479.9
113.9
223.4
297.4
19.7
65.6
7.4
175.5
7.1
0.5
11.4
75.4
39.3
202.5
56.9
132.5
187.1
13.8
54.5
6.4
165.6
Fig. 2. Percentage reduction in the parameters and the corresponding CPA0 for (b) the
Snyder unit hydrograph method and the Clark unit hydrograph method and (a) the
curve number method for the upper Attanagalu Oya catchment.
used. Normally the CN for different landuse patterns are taken from
standard CN tables (Sonbol et al., 2005), which occasionally may not
provide accurate results due to the range of climatic conditions.
Atkinson (2001) stressed the need to use accurate predictions of the
CN in order to predict runoff from watersheds.
The standard SCS method used to nd the average CN for the
basins failed to estimate excess rainfalls correctly. This resulted in
unacceptably large deviations of predicted peak discharges from
the observed ones. It is concluded that the use of standard SCS
tables of runoff CN in tropical climate may lead to large errors in
runoff estimates. Prior to the application of the standard SCS
method, suitability of this method should be veried or altogether
replaced by a method deriving CN values from local rainfall runoff
data (Muzik, 1993). Knebl et al. (2005) stated that decreasing the CN
increased the amount of recharge into the watershed system in San
Antonio river basin in the United States and therefore reduced
overestimation of runoff in the model.
Table 2
Mean values of the observed ows, the simulated ows, employing the Snyder unit
hydrograph method, the CPA0 values and the relative errors of validation results for
the next three years (2008e2010).
Month
Simulated ows
(m3 s1)
Observed ows
(m3 s1)
CPA0
Relative
error (%)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Mean
2.06
0.87
3.71
6.97
14.34
10.13
6.66
2.17
5.08
15.88
16.25
9.92
1.59
0.85
3.97
7.41
11.09
9.29
6.27
1.91
4.82
12.94
11.78
9.19
1.14
0.48
0.68
0.71
0.94
1.33
0.67
0.94
0.66
0.98
2.33
0.94
0.98
0.30
0.02
0.07
0.06
0.29
0.09
0.06
0.14
0.05
0.23
0.38
0.08
0.12
159
160
161
4. Conclusion
The HEC-HMS 3.4 computer model can be reliably used to
simulate Attanagalu Oya ows with calibration and validation. As
the transformation method in the model, the Snyder unit hydrograph method simulates ows more reliably in the study catchment than the Clark unit hydrograph method. As the loss method,
the SCS CN method does not perform well but the decit and
constant method is a good option. Therefore, the Snyder unit
hydrograph method could be recommended as the best transformation method for the Attanagalu Oya basin with the decit and
constant method as the loss method. As there are plenty of ungauged rivers located in the wet zone in Sri Lanka, this approach
can reliably be applied in order to simulate river ows in the
country and also same approach of calibration and validation can
be applied in other parts of the tropics.
Acknowledgments
Our heartfelt thanks go to Director General, Department of
Meteorology and Director General, Department of Irrigation for
providing meteorological data and ow data, respectively. We are
also thankful to the General Manager, Water Supply and Drainage
Board, Ratmalana, for providing the past and future water extraction data of the Attanagalu Oya basin.
References
Atkinson, E.L., 2001. Natural Resources Conservation Service Curve Number Analysis
for Texas. Unpublished thesis in Civil Engineering. Graduate Faculty of Texas
Tech University, USA.
Babel, M.S., Najim, M.M.M., Loof, R., 2004. Assessment of agricultural nonpoint
source model for a watershed in tropical environment. Journal of Environment
Engineering 130 (9), 1032e1041.
Bajwa, H.S., Tim, U.S., 2002. Toward immersive virtual environments for GIS-based
oodplain modeling and visualization. In: Proceedings of 22nd ESRI User
Conference, San Diego, TX, USA.
Banitt, A.M.M., 2010. Simulating a century of hydrographs e Mark Twain reservoir.
In: 2nd Joint Federal Interagency Conference, Las Vegas, USA, June 2010.
Bates, P.D., De Roo, A.P.J., 2000. A simple raster-based model for ood inundation
simulation. Journal of Hydrology 236 (1e2), 54e77.
Bennett, N.D., Croke, B.F.W., Guariso, G., Guillaume, J.H.A., Hamilton, S.H.,
Jakeman, A.J., Marsili-Libelli, S., Newham, L.T.H., Norton, J.P., Perrin, C.,
Pierce, S.A., Robson, B., Seppelt, R., Voinov, A.A., Fathi, B.D., Andreassian, V.,
2013. Characterising performance of environmental models. Environmental
Modelling & Software 40, 1e20.
Castronova, M.A., Goodall, J.L., 2013. Simulating watersheds using loosely integrated
model components: evaluation of computational scaling using open MI. Environmental Modelling & Software 39, 304e313.
Cunderlik, J.M., Simonovic, S.P., 2005. Hydrological extremes in a southwestern
Ontario river basin under future climate conditions. Hydrological Sciences 50
(4), 631e654.
162
Cunderlik, J.M., Simonovic, S.P., 2010. Hydrologic models for inverse climate change
impact modeling. In: 18th Canadian Hydro-technical Conference, Manitoba,
August 2007.
Descheemaeker, K., Poesen, J., Borselli, L., Nyssen, J., Raes, D., Haile, M., Muys, B.,
Deckers, J., 2008. Runoff curve numbers for steep hillslopes with natural
vegetation in semi-arid tropical highlands, northern Ethiopia. Hydrological
Processes 22 (20), 4097e4105.
Duan, Z., 2011. Optimum simulation of ood ow rate: comparing combinations of
precipitation loss and rainfall excess-runoff transform models. Bechtel Technology Journal, 1e10.
Fang, X., Cleveland, T., Garcia, C.A., Thompson, D., Malla, R., 2005. Literature Review
on Timing Parameters for Hydrographs. Department of Civil Engineering, Lamar
University, Beaumont, Texas, p. 77.
Feldman, A.D., 2000. Hydrologic Modeling System HEC-HMS, Technical Reference
Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, HEC,
Davis, CA, USA.
Fleming, M., Scharffenberg, W., 2012. Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS):
New Features for Urban Hydrology. Hydraulic Engineer, USACE Hydrologic
Engineering Center, Davis, CA.
Gichamo, T.Z., Popescu, I., Jonoski, A., Solomatine, D., 2012. River cross-section
extraction from the ASTER global DEM for ood modeling. Environmental
Modelling & Software 31, 37e46.
Hawkins, R.H., 1984. A comparison of predicted and observed runoff curve umbers.
In: Proceeding of Water Today and Tomorrow, Flagstaff Arizona. American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 702e709.
Heshmatpoor, A., 2009. Identication runoff source area in tropical watershed. In:
Proceedings of Postgraduate Qolloquium Semester. Department of Environmental Engineering, University Putra Malaysia, Malaysia, pp. 30e39.
Hunukumbura, P.B., Weerakoon, S.B., Herath, S., 2008. Runoff modeling in the upper
Kotmale Basin. In: Hennayake, N., Rekha, N., Nawfhal, M., Alagan, R., Daskon, C.
(Eds.), Traversing No Mans Land, Interdisciplinary Essays in Honor of Professor
Madduma Bandara. University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, pp. 169e184.
James, L.D., Burgess, S.J.,1982. Selections, calibration and testing of hydrologic models.
In: Haan, C.T., Brakensiek, D.L. (Eds.), Hydrologic Modelling of Small Watersheds.
American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Michigan, pp. 437e472.
Kalita, D.N., August 2008. A study of basin response using HEC-HMS and subzone
reports of CWC. In: Proceedings of the 13th National Symposium on Hydrology.
National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, New Delhi.
Kalyanapu, A.J., Shankar, S., Pardyjak, E.R., Judi, D.R., Burian, S.J., 2011. Assessment of
GPU computational enhancement to a 2D ood model. Environmental Modelling & Software 26, 1009e1016.
Knebl, M.R., Yanga, Z.L., Hutchisonb, K., Maidment, D.R., 2005. Regional scale ood
modeling using NEXRAD rainfall, GIS, and HEC-HMS/RAS: a case study for the
San Antonio River Basin Summer 2002 storm event. Journal of Environmental
Management 75, 325e336.
Kovar, P., 1990. Hydrology of mountainous areas. In: Proceedings of the Strbsk
Pleso Workshop, Czechoslovakia, pp. 391e401.
Muthukrishnan, S., Harbor, J., Lim, K.J., Bernard, A.E., 2006. Calibration of a simple
rainfall-runoff model for long-term hydrological impact evaluation. Urban and
Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) Journal 18 (2), 35e42.
Muzik, I., 1993. Applicability of the modied SCS runoff prediction method to small
catchments in Thailand. In: Proceedings of the Yokohama Symposium. Hydrology of Warm Humid Regions, Japan, pp. 195e201.
Najim, M.M.M., Babel, M.S., Loof, R., 2006. AGNPS model assessment for a mixed
forested watershed in Thailand. Science Asia 32, 53e61.
Pauly, D., 1980. On the interrelationship between natural mortality, growth parameters, and mean environmental temperature in 175 sh stocks. Journal of
International Exploration 39 (2), 175e192.
Perrone, J., Madramootoo, C.A., 1997. Use of AGNPS for watershed modelling in
Quebec. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers (ASAE)
40 (5), 1349e1354.
Qi, H., Altinakar, M.S., 2011. A GIS-based decision support system for integrated
ood management under uncertainty with two dimensional numerical simulations. Environmental Modelling & Software 26, 817e821.
Razi, M.A.M., Arifn, J., Tahir, T., Arish, A.M., 2010. Flood estimation studies using
hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS) for Johor River, Malaysia. Journal of
Applied Sciences 10, 930e939.
Schoener, G., 2010. Comparison of AHYMO and HEC-HMS for Runoff Modeling in
New Mexico Urban Watersheds. Unpublished Project Report for the Degree of
Master of Water Resources Hydro-science. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Schwab, G.O., Fangmeier, D.D., Elliot, W.J., Frevert, K.R., 2005. Soil and Water Conservation Engineering, fourth ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 508.
Senay, G.B., Verdin, J.P., 2004. Developing maps for water-harvest potential in Africa.
American Society of Agricultural Engineers 20 (6), 789e799.
Sonbol, M.A., Mtalo, F., El-bihery, M., Abdel-motteleb, M., 2005. Watershed Modelling
of Wadi Sudr and Wadi Al-Arbain in Sinai, Egypt. Natural Sciences Hydrology
Programme. UNESCO Cairo Ofce, Egypt.
Straub, T.D., Melching, C.S., Kocher, K.E., 2000. Equations for estimating Clark unithydrograph parameters for small rural watersheds in Illinois. In: Water-resources Investigations Report 00-4184. Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Ofce of Water Resources U.S. Geological Survey, Urbana, Illinois,
pp. 4e6.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2008. Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) Applications Guide: Version 3.1.0. Institute for Water Resources, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA.
Wijesekara, R.S., Kudahetty, C., 2010. Preliminary groundwater assessment and
water quality study in the shallow aquifer system in the Attanagalu Oya Basin.
In: Evans, A., Jinapala, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of National Conference on Water,
Food Security and Climate Change in Sri Lanka. Water Quality, Environment and
Climate Change, vol. 2. BMICH, Colombo, Sri Lanka, pp. 77e87.
Yilma, H., Moges, S.A., 2007. Application of semi-distributed conceptual hydrological model for ow forecasting on upland catchments of Blue Nile River Basin, a
case study of Gilgel Abbay catchment. Catchment and Lake Research, 200.