Appraising the effect of choosing hydrological model parameters on the inter-annual and intra-annual distribution of simulated runoff

doi:10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2019.211

Abstract

Abstract:

In the assessment of the impact of climate change on the hydrology and water resources by using hydrological models, it is generally assumed that the parameters of hydrological models are stationary through the historical and future periods without distinguishing the differences of the parameters of hydrological models under the influence of environmental changes. To solve this problem, Set Pair Analysis (SPA) method was used to partition wet, medium and dry years based on annual total precipitation and annual average runoff. The parameters of SWAT distributed hydrological model for different years of recurrence interval were calibrated by to explore the influence of parameters instationarity on the intra-annual and inter-annual distribution patterns of runoff. The results showed that when the times series were respectively classified into wet, medium and dry years by annual total precipitation and annual average runoff, 70% of the 50 years were of the same type (wet or dry). If only the data of an individual certain type (wet, medium and dry) are selected for calibration, the simulation accuracy will be lower than that of the overall consideration of wet, medium and dry years, mainly due to the simulated runoff is overestimated. When the same hydrological data and model parameters under different environmental conditions are used to derive the runoff process, from the perspective of inter-annual variation, the parameters of a specific type (wet, medium and dry) are used to generally generate the wetter results, which increases the proportion of wet years and decreases the proportion of dry years. While from the perspective of intra-annual variation, influenced by the parameters of different types, the concentration of runoff decreases which means the distribution tends to be more uniform, and the runoff concentration period is delayed. The results can provide reference for improving the reliability of hydrological simulation under changing environment in the future and are of great significance for the adaptive management of water resources under changing environment.

Key words: Hydrological model parameters, Set Pair Analysis (SPA), Instationary, Runoff concentration degree, Runoff concentration period

Jing-Wen ZHANG,Jia-Li GUO,Jing-Bin WANG,Li-Li XIA,Qing-Hua YUE,Zhang-Jun LIU. Appraising the effect of choosing hydrological model parameters on the inter-annual and intra-annual distribution of simulated runoff[J]. Climate Change Research, 2020, 16(3): 325-335.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig. 1 Map of Ganjiang River basin

Fig. 2 Comparison of classification results based on precipitation and runoff during 1961-2010

Fig. 3 Monthly results for calibration and validation periods

Table 1 The ranking of sensitive parameters for SWAT model under different dry and wet years

Table 2 Performance under the wet and dry years based on precipitation and runoff

Table 3 Performance of observed and simulated runoff under different wet-dry conditions

Fig. 4 Wet and dry years of simulated runoff under different hydrological model parameters

Fig. 5 Runoff response characteristic under different wet-dry conditions based on precipitation (a) and runoff (b) classification

Fig. 6 Runoff concentration degree under different wet-dry conditions

Fig. 7 Runoff concentration period under different wet-dry conditions

References

[1]	朱仟. 气候变化下降水输入和水文模型参数对水文模拟的影响[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2017.
[1]	Zhu Q. Effects of precipitation products and parameters in hydrological model on hydrological simulation under climate change[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2017 ( in Chinese)
[2]	Milly P C D, Betancourt J, Falkenmark M, et al. Stationarity is dead: whither water management?[J]. Science, 2008,319(5863):573-574
[3]	Cliquet A. International and European law on protected areas and climate change: need for adaptation or implementation?[J]. Environmental Management, 2014,54(4):720-731
[4]	武震, 张世强, 张小文. 流域水文模型参数识别的现代优化方法研究进展[J]. 冰川冻土, 2008,30(1):64-71.
[4]	Wu Z, Zhang S Q, Zhang X W. Modern optimization method of parameter identify in hydrological models research and application[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2008,30(1):64-71 (in Chinese)
[5]	Beven K. Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological modelling[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 1993,16(1):41-51
[6]	Coron L, Andréassian V, Perrin C, et al. Crash testing hydrological models in contrasted climate conditions: an experiment on 216 Australian catchments[J]. Water Resources Research, 2012,48(5):213-223
[7]	Luo J, Wang E, Shen S, et al. Effects of conditional parameterization on performance of rainfall-runoff model regarding hydrologic non-stationarity[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2012,26(26):3953-3961
[8]	Zhu Q, Zhang X J, Ma C, et al. Investigating the uncertainty and transferability of parameters in SWAT model under climate change[J]. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 2016,61(5):914-930
[9]	Oni S, Futter M, Ledesma J, et al. Using dry and wet year hydroclimatic extremes to guide future hydrologic projections[J]. Hydrology & Earth System Sciences, 2016,20(7):2811-2825
[10]	Bastola S, Murphy C, Sweeney J. The role of hydrological modelling uncertainties in climate change impact assessments of Irish River catchments[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 2011,34(5):562-576
[11]	江西省. 江西河湖大典[M]. 武汉: 长江出版社, 2010.
[11]	Jiangxi Province. Encyclopedia of rivers and lakes in jiangxi [M]. Wuhan: Changjiang Press, 2010 ( in Chinese)
[12]	Arnold J, Allen P. Estimating hydrologic budgets for three Illinois watersheds[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 1996,176(1):57-77
[13]	Ficklin D L, Luo Y, Luedeling E, et al. Climate change sensitivity assessment of a highly agricultural watershed using SWAT[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2009,374(1-2):16-29
[14]	Bajracharya A R, Bajracharya S R, Shrestha A B, et al. Climate change impact assessment on the hydrological regime of the Kaligandaki basin, Nepal[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018,625:837-848
[15]	Githui F, Gitau W, Mutua F, et al. Climate change impact on SWAT simulated streamflow in western Kenya[J]. International Journal of Climatology, 2009,29(12):1823-1834
[16]	张永勇, 张士锋, 翟晓燕, 等. 气候变化下石羊河流域径流模拟与影响量化[J]. 资源科学, 2013 ( 3):143-151.
[16]	Zhang Y Y, Zhang S F, Zhai X Y, et al. Runoff simulation on the impact of climate change in the Shiyang River basin[J]. Resources Science, 2013 ( 3):143-151 (in Chinese)
[17]	Abbaspour K C, Vejdani M, Haghighat S. SWAT-CUP calibration and uncertainty programs for SWAT[J]. Modsim International Congress on Modelling & Simulation Land Water & Environmental Management Integrated Systems for Sustainability, 2007,364(3):1603-1609
[18]	Yang J, Reichert P, Abbaspour K C, et al. Comparing uncertainty analysis techniques for a SWAT application to the Chaohe basin in China[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2008,358(1):1-23
[19]	Abbaspour K C, Genuchten M T V, Schuli R, et al. A sequential uncertainty domain inverse procedure for estimating subsurface flow and transport parameters[J]. Water Resources Research, 1997,33(8):1879-1892
[20]	刘贤赵, 李嘉竹, 宿庆, 等. 基于集中度与集中期的径流年内分配研究[J]. 地理科学, 2007,27(6):791-795.
[20]	Liu X Z, Li J Z, Su Q, et al. Interannual runoff distribution based on degree and time of concentration for rivers[J]. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2007,27(6):791-795 (in Chinese)
[21]	Menabde M, Sivapalan M. Linking space-time variability of river runoff and rainfall fields: a dynamic approach[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 2001,24(9):1001-1014
[22]	张静文, 郭家力, 章梦杰, 等. 基于径流丰枯分类的月水量平衡模型参数响应研究[J]. 水利水电技术, 2019,50(1):81-89.
[22]	Zhang J W, Guo J L, Zhang M J, et al. Responses of monthly water balance model parameter based on discharge classification[J]. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 2019,50(1):81-89 (in Chinese)
[23]	张德伟, 崔永生. 在计算机上应用泰森多边形法计算流域平均面雨量[J]. 水文, 1991 ( 1):52-53.
[23]	Zhang D W, Cui Y S. The application of Tyson polygon method to the calculation of average area precipitation[J]. Journal of China Hydrology, 1991 ( 1):52-53 (in Chinese)
[24]	Moriasi D N, Zeckoski R W, Arnold J G, et al. Hydrologic and water quality models: key calibration and validation topics[J]. Transactions of the Asabe, 2015,58(6):1609-1618
[25]	高鑫. SWAT模型径流过程参数时空差异研究[D]. 福州: 福建师范大学, 2018.
[25]	Gao X. Spatial-temporal differences of hydrologic parameters in SWAT model[D]. Fuzhou: Fujian Normal University, 2018 ( in Chinese)
[26]	李胜坤. 基于SWAT模型的潮河流域径流模拟[D]. 武汉:华中师范大学, 2015.
[26]	Li S K. Research of runoff simulation in Chaohe basin using SWAT model[D]. Wuhan: Central China Normal University, 2015 ( in Chinese)
[27]	芮孝芳. 水文学前沿科学问题之我见[J]. 水利水电科技进展, 2015,35(5):95-102.
[27]	Rui X F. Discussion of some frontier problems in hydrology[J]. Advances in Science and Technology of Water Resources, 2015,35(5):95-102 (in Chinese)
[28]	Troch P, Carrillo G, Sivapalan M, et al. Climate-vegetation-soil interactions and long-term hydrologic partitioning: signatures of catchment co-evolution[J]. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2012,10(3):2927-2954
[29]	梁忠民, 胡义明, 王军. 非一致性水文频率分析的研究进展[J]. 水科学进展, 2011,22(6):864-871.
[29]	Liang Z M, Hu Y M, Wang J. Advances in hydrological frequency analysis of non-stationary time series[J]. Advances in Water Science, 2011,22(6):864-871 (in Chinese)
[30]	涂新军, 陈晓宏, 张强, 等. 东江径流年内分配特征及影响因素贡献分解[J]. 水科学进展, 2012,23(4):493-501.
[30]	Tu X J, Chen X H, Zhang Q, et al. Streamflow annual distribution and its influencing factors in Dongjiang River, South China[J]. Advances in Water Science, 2012,23(4):493-501 (in Chinese)
[31]	秦鹏程, 刘敏, 杜良敏, 等. 气候变化对长江上游径流影响预估[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2019,15(4):405-415.
[31]	Qin P C, Liu M, Du L M, et al. Climate change impacts on runoff in the upper Yangtze River basin[J]. Climate Change Research, 2019,15(4):405-415 (in Chinese)
[32]	Li L, Hao Z C, Wang J H, et al. Impact of future climate change on runoff in the head region of the Yellow River[J]. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 2008,13(5):347-354