Hydrology and Earth System Sciences www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net 1027-5606 1607-7938 12 1 2008 10.5194/hess-12-77-2008 http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/12/77/2008/ http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/12/77/2008/hess-12-77-2008.html http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/12/77/2008/hess-12-77-2008.pdf 77 89 2008-01-25 Influence of rainfall observation network on model calibration and application A. Bárdossy T. Das tadas@ucsd.edu Institute of Hydraulic Engineering, Universitaet Stuttgart, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany now at: Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego The objective in this study is to investigate the influence of the spatial resolution of the rainfall input on the model calibration and application. The analysis is carried out by varying the distribution of the raingauge network. A meso-scale catchment located in southwest Germany has been selected for this study. First, the semi-distributed HBV model is calibrated with the precipitation interpolated from the available observed rainfall of the different raingauge networks. An automatic calibration method based on the combinatorial optimization algorithm simulated annealing is applied. The performance of the hydrological model is analyzed as a function of the raingauge density. Secondly, the calibrated model is validated using interpolated precipitation from the same raingauge density used for the calibration as well as interpolated precipitation based on networks of reduced and increased raingauge density. Lastly, the effect of missing rainfall data is investigated by using a multiple linear regression approach for filling in the missing measurements. The model, calibrated with the complete set of observed data, is then run in the validation period using the above described precipitation field. The simulated hydrographs obtained in the above described three sets of experiments are analyzed through the comparisons of the computed Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient and several goodness-of-fit indexes. The results show that the model using different raingauge networks might need re-calibration of the model parameters, specifically model calibrated on relatively sparse precipitation information might perform well on dense precipitation information while model calibrated on dense precipitation information fails on sparse precipitation information. Also, the model calibrated with the complete set of observed precipitation and run with incomplete observed data associated with the data estimated using multiple linear regressions, at the locations treated as missing measurements, performs well. Aarts, E. and Korst, J.: Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines A Stochastic Approach to Combinatorial Optimization and Neural Computing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester, 1989. Ahmed, S. and de Marsily, G.: Comparison of geostatistical methods for estimating transmissivity using data on transmissivity and specific capacity, Water Resour. Res., 23(9), 1717–1737, 1987. Anctil, F., Lauzon, N., Andreassian, V., Oudin, L., and Perrin, C.: Improvement of rainfall-runoff forecasts through mean areal rainfall optimization, J. Hydrol., 328, 717–725, 2006. Bárdossy, A. and Plate, E.: Space-Time Model for Daily Rainfall using Atmospheric Circulation Patterns, Water Resour. Res., 28(5), 1247–1259, 1992. Bergström, S. and Forsman, A.: Development of a conceptual deterministic rainfall-runoff model, Nordic Hydrol., 4, 174–170, 1973. Beven, K. J.: Rainfall-Runoff Modelling: The Primer, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 2001. Booij, M. J.: Modelling the effects of spatial and temporal resolution of rainfall and basin model on extreme river discharge, Hydrol. Sci. J., 47(2), 307–320, 2002. Bormann, H.: Impact of spatial data resolution on simulated catchment water balances and model performance of the multi-scale TOPLATS model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 165–179, 2006. Brath, A., Montanari, A., and Toth, E.: Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model, J. Hydrol., 291, 232–253, 2004. Chaplot, V., Saleh, A., and Jaynes, D. B.: Effect of the accuracy of spatial rainfall information on the modeling of water, sediment, and NO₃-N loads at the watershed level, J. Hydrol., 312, 223–234, 2005. Chaubey, I., Hann, C. T., Grunwald, S., and Salisbury, J. M.: Uncertainty in the models parameters due to spatial variability of rainfall, J. Hydrol., 220, 46–61, 1999. Dong, X., Dohmen-Janssen, C. M., and Booij, M. J.: Appropriate Spatial Sampling of Rainfall for Flow Simulation, Hydrol. Sci. J., 50(2), 279–297, 2005. Duncan, M. R., Austin, B., Fabry, F., and Austin, G. L.: The effect of gauge sampling density on the accuracy of streamflow prediction for rural catchments, J. Hydrol., 142, 445–476, 1993. Hargreaves, G. H. and Samani Z. A.: Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature, Appl. Engr. Agric., 1, 96–99, 1985. Hundecha, Y. and Bárdossy, A.: Modeling of the effect of land use changes on the runoff generation of a river basin through parameter regionalization of a watershed model, J. Hydrol., 292, 281–295, 2004. Kitanidis, P. K.: Introduction to Geostatistics: Applications in Hydrogeology, Cambridge University Press, 249 pp., 1997. Krajewski, W. F., Lakshimi, V., Georgakakos, K. P., and Jain, S. C.: A monte carlo study of rainfall sampling effect on a distributed catchment model, Water Resour. Res., 27(1), 119–128, 1991. Krajewski, W. F., Ciach, G. J., and Habib, E.: An analysis of small-scale rainfall variability in different climatic regimes, Hydrol. Sci. J., 48, 151-162, 2003. Lindström, G., Johansson, B., Persson, M., Gardelin, M., and Bergström, S.: Development and test of the distributed HBV-96 hydrological model, J. Hydrol., 201, 272–288, 1997. Michaud, J. D. and Sorooshian, S.: Effect of rainfall-sampling errors on simulations of desert flash floods, Water Resour. Res., 30(10), 2765–2776, 1994. Montgomery, D. C. and Peck, E. A.: Introduction to linear regression analysis, John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA, 1982. Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.: River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part I. A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282-290, 1970. Oudin, L., Perrin, C., Mathevet, T., Andreassian, V., and Michel, C.: Impact of biased and randomly corrupted inputs on the efficiency and the parameters of watershed models, J. Hydrol., 320, 62–83, 2006. Peters-Lidard, C. D. and Wood, E. F.: Estimating storm areal average rainfall intensity in field experiments, Water Resour. Res., 30(7), 2119–2132, 1994. Samaniego, L.: Hydrological consequences of landuse/land cover and climatic changes in mesoscale catchments, Doctoral Thesis, University of Stuttgart, Germany, 2003. Seed, A. W. and Austin, G. L.: Sampling Errors for Raingage Derived Mean Areal Daily and Monthly Rainfall, J. Hydrol., 118, 163–173, 1990. Singh, V.: Effect of Spatial and Temporal Variability in Rainfall and Watershed Characteristics on Stream flow Hydrograph, Hydrol. Processes, 11, 1649–1669, 1997. St-Hilarie, A., Ouarda, T. B. M. J., Lachance, M., Bobée, B., Gaudet, J., and Gibnac, C.: Assessment of the impact of meteorological network density on the estimation of basin precipitation and runoff: a case study, Hydrol. Processes, 17(18), 3561–3580, 2003. Sun, H., Cornish, P. S., and Daniell, T. M.: Spatial Variability in Hydrologic Modeling using Rainfall-Runoff Model and Digital Elevation Model, J. Hydrol. Eng., 7(6), 404–412, 2002. Syed, K. H., Goodrich, D. C., Myers, D. E., and Sorooshian, S.: Spatial characteristics of thunderstorm rainfall fields and their relation to runoff, J. Hydrol., 271, 1–21, 2003. Wilson, C. B., Valdes, J. B., and Rodriguez-Iturbe, I.: On the influence of the spatial distribution of rainfall on storm runoff, Water Resour. Res., 15(2), 321–328, 1979. Zehe, E., Becker, R., Bárdossy, A., and Plate, E.: Uncertainty of simulated catchment sale runoff response in the presence of threshold processes: role of initial soil moisture and precipitation, J. Hydrol., 315(1–4), 183–202, 2005.