在水文建模中,河流走向的重要性有多大?

IF 5.7 1区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Nicolás Cortés-Salazar, Nicolás Vásquez, Naoki Mizukami, Pablo A. Mendoza, Ximena Vargas
{"title":"在水文建模中,河流走向的重要性有多大?","authors":"Nicolás Cortés-Salazar, Nicolás Vásquez, Naoki Mizukami, Pablo A. Mendoza, Ximena Vargas","doi":"10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Spatially distributed hydrology and land surface models are typically applied in combination with river routing schemes that convert instantaneous runoff into streamflow. Nevertheless, the development of such schemes has been somehow disconnected from hydrologic model calibration research, although both seek to achieve more realistic streamflow simulations. In this paper, we seek to bridge this gap to understand the extent to which the configuration of routing schemes affects hydrologic model parameter searches in water resources applications. To this end, we configure the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) model coupled with the mizuRoute routing model in the Cautín River basin (2770 km2), Chile. We use the Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) method to generate 3500 different model parameters sets, for which basin-averaged runoff estimates are obtained directly (no routing or instantaneous runoff case) and are subsequently compared against outputs from four routing schemes (unit hydrograph, Lagrangian kinematic wave, Muskingum–Cunge, and diffusive wave) applied with five different routing time steps (1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 h). The results show that incorporating routing schemes may alter streamflow simulations at sub-daily, daily, and even monthly timescales. The maximum Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) obtained for daily streamflow increases from 0.64 (instantaneous runoff) to 0.81 (for the best routing scheme), and such improvements do not depend on the routing time step. Moreover, the optimal parameter sets may differ depending on the routing scheme configuration, affecting the baseflow contribution to total runoff. Including routing models decreases streamflow values in flood frequency curves and may alter the probabilistic distribution of the medium- and low-flow segments of the flow duration curve considerably (compared to the case without routing). More generally, the results presented here highlight the potential impacts of river routing implementations on water resources applications that involve hydrologic models and, in particular, parameter calibration.","PeriodicalId":13143,"journal":{"name":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To what extent does river routing matter in hydrological modeling?\",\"authors\":\"Nicolás Cortés-Salazar, Nicolás Vásquez, Naoki Mizukami, Pablo A. Mendoza, Ximena Vargas\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. Spatially distributed hydrology and land surface models are typically applied in combination with river routing schemes that convert instantaneous runoff into streamflow. Nevertheless, the development of such schemes has been somehow disconnected from hydrologic model calibration research, although both seek to achieve more realistic streamflow simulations. In this paper, we seek to bridge this gap to understand the extent to which the configuration of routing schemes affects hydrologic model parameter searches in water resources applications. To this end, we configure the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) model coupled with the mizuRoute routing model in the Cautín River basin (2770 km2), Chile. We use the Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) method to generate 3500 different model parameters sets, for which basin-averaged runoff estimates are obtained directly (no routing or instantaneous runoff case) and are subsequently compared against outputs from four routing schemes (unit hydrograph, Lagrangian kinematic wave, Muskingum–Cunge, and diffusive wave) applied with five different routing time steps (1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 h). The results show that incorporating routing schemes may alter streamflow simulations at sub-daily, daily, and even monthly timescales. The maximum Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) obtained for daily streamflow increases from 0.64 (instantaneous runoff) to 0.81 (for the best routing scheme), and such improvements do not depend on the routing time step. Moreover, the optimal parameter sets may differ depending on the routing scheme configuration, affecting the baseflow contribution to total runoff. Including routing models decreases streamflow values in flood frequency curves and may alter the probabilistic distribution of the medium- and low-flow segments of the flow duration curve considerably (compared to the case without routing). More generally, the results presented here highlight the potential impacts of river routing implementations on water resources applications that involve hydrologic models and, in particular, parameter calibration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要空间分布的水文和地表模型通常与将瞬时径流转化为径流的河流路线方案相结合。然而,这些方案的发展在某种程度上与水文模型校准研究脱节,尽管两者都寻求实现更现实的水流模拟。在本文中,我们试图弥合这一差距,以了解路由方案的配置在多大程度上影响水资源应用中的水文模型参数搜索。为此,我们在智利Cautín河流域(2770平方公里)配置了可变入渗能力(VIC)模型和mizuRoute路由模型。我们使用拉丁超立方采样(LHS)方法生成3500个不同的模型参数集,直接获得流域平均径流估计(没有路由或瞬时径流情况),随后与四种路由方案(单位线、拉格朗日运动波、Muskingum-Cunge和扩散波)的输出进行比较,采用五种不同的路由时间步长(1,2,3,4,结果表明,在亚日、日甚至月尺度上,引入路由方案会改变径流模拟。最大克林-古普塔效率(KGE)从0.64(瞬时径流)增加到0.81(最佳路由方案),这种改善不依赖于路由时间步长。此外,最优参数集可能因路由方案配置而异,从而影响基流对总径流的贡献。纳入路径模型降低了洪水频率曲线中的流量值,并可能显著改变流时曲线中低流量段的概率分布(与不纳入路径模型的情况相比)。更一般地说,这里提出的结果强调了河流路线实施对涉及水文模型,特别是参数校准的水资源应用的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
To what extent does river routing matter in hydrological modeling?
Abstract. Spatially distributed hydrology and land surface models are typically applied in combination with river routing schemes that convert instantaneous runoff into streamflow. Nevertheless, the development of such schemes has been somehow disconnected from hydrologic model calibration research, although both seek to achieve more realistic streamflow simulations. In this paper, we seek to bridge this gap to understand the extent to which the configuration of routing schemes affects hydrologic model parameter searches in water resources applications. To this end, we configure the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) model coupled with the mizuRoute routing model in the Cautín River basin (2770 km2), Chile. We use the Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) method to generate 3500 different model parameters sets, for which basin-averaged runoff estimates are obtained directly (no routing or instantaneous runoff case) and are subsequently compared against outputs from four routing schemes (unit hydrograph, Lagrangian kinematic wave, Muskingum–Cunge, and diffusive wave) applied with five different routing time steps (1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 h). The results show that incorporating routing schemes may alter streamflow simulations at sub-daily, daily, and even monthly timescales. The maximum Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) obtained for daily streamflow increases from 0.64 (instantaneous runoff) to 0.81 (for the best routing scheme), and such improvements do not depend on the routing time step. Moreover, the optimal parameter sets may differ depending on the routing scheme configuration, affecting the baseflow contribution to total runoff. Including routing models decreases streamflow values in flood frequency curves and may alter the probabilistic distribution of the medium- and low-flow segments of the flow duration curve considerably (compared to the case without routing). More generally, the results presented here highlight the potential impacts of river routing implementations on water resources applications that involve hydrologic models and, in particular, parameter calibration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
7.90%
发文量
273
审稿时长
15 months
期刊介绍: Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS) is a not-for-profit international two-stage open-access journal for the publication of original research in hydrology. HESS encourages and supports fundamental and applied research that advances the understanding of hydrological systems, their role in providing water for ecosystems and society, and the role of the water cycle in the functioning of the Earth system. A multi-disciplinary approach is encouraged that broadens the hydrological perspective and the advancement of hydrological science through integration with other cognate sciences and cross-fertilization across disciplinary boundaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信