Hydrologic and Water Resource Modeling and Simulation - Science topic

Pourya Alipour Atmianlu

I wish best luck to your research and please try the following template that i uploaded. I added some helpful comments too.

In my opinion, Normalizing each component will solve problem!

Hi Md. Tareq Aziz I would recommend the Kirpich formula, which relates length and slope, in addition to the De Rowe formula, which relates the length of the stream section to the difference in heights between one section and another.

Regards,

There is version of the curve number application in Excel called "Wildcat 5" for use on a PC. I have attached the manual for Wildcat 5 where the authors discuss how to incorporate reservoirs into the curve number technology. Wildcat 5 isa 2014 Excel application, and I am not sure if it still works. You can download it from this site: https://www.fs.usda.gov/biology/nsaec/products-tools.html

Hope this helps.

Given the density of water, 1000 kg/m^3, the evapotranspiration (ETA) in the units of kg/m2/sec with 3 hours intervals, can be expressed in mm/month as

ETA [mm/month] = ETA [kg/m2/sec] x 10800 [sec/3hr] x 8 [3hr/day] * 30 [days]

You can access GIS layers for all 15 agro-climatic zones of India from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) website. The GIS layers can be found in the Resources section of the ICAR website.

Dear Mostafa

water hammer or mass oscillation depends on the rate of flow variation , if it is slow then mass oscillation

if the filling rate in the discharge tunnel is low < 70 % then you can consider the weir as boundary condition otherwise you have to consider both ascending and descending tunnels in simulation as two phase transient may occur in the second stretch

any commercial software can fill the needs , AFT , Hytran , Hammer , or Wanda

good luck

The standard ET measurement method is the so called FAO 56-PM method. But different studies indicated the preference of other empirical methods according to the specific climatic conditions they studied, For example, based on the study of Gao et al. (2017) the Priestley-Taylor performed better in Dry climate, Hargreaves performed better in semi dry climate and Makkink methods performed best in humid climates. So it depends. It is also important to note that now a days ET could be predicted easily by machine learning algorithms.

F. Gao, G. Feng, Y. Ouyang, H. Wang, D. Fisher, A. Adeli, J. Jenkins Evaluation of reference evapotranspiration methods in arid, semiarid, and humid regions

JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 53 (2017), pp. 791-808,

Adil Sbai, thanks for responding. I am still not sure about recharge values as an output from the porous media - for that there is the Drainage package. I can only assume that In recharge is the flux of water fed into the model as recharge at each stress period, and the Out recharge is the flux of water that has been rejected as recharge at the same time point. Does it make any sense?

I have used statistics as analysis of variance to compare data and come up with relationship if it exists. But usually at the beginning, I graphically plot each data set on a time scale. Hand plotting was quite consuming, but computers and software make this easy. For exceptionally long records, I might even use a plotter to plot long periods of record, or break it up into meaningful time segments. By looking at this data visually, one can see any noticable time lags, intensity of response, compare groundwater hydrograph and recession curve responses. Sometimes the spatial response of Two separated sites will depend on the direction and speed of the storm, and this may be helpful when trying to recover data. Weather agencies may save the Doppler storm tracks. The more one knows about the individual station responses, their trends or correlation, the storm specifics (direction, speed, spatial extent, etc.), the more reliable the recovery of data can be. The visualization of time series data plot of two locations of interest in comparing, and with storm Doppler data, can be very helpful beyond just model or statistical recovery.

Dear Harsh Upadhyay,

Interesting question. In addition to the very useful comments and replies from colleagues, I would like to add some observations and comments. The calibration and validation strategy depends on different factors, such as the purpose of the modelling and possible final application, the availability of data and the hydroclimatological conditions in the studied catchment(s).

The modelling purpose can be very general (e.g. simulation of hydrological regime and behaviour of a catchment), specific (e.g. low flows) or supporting water systems and infrastructure design (extreme, non-observed conditions) and future impacts (e.g. due to climate change). Calibration and validation strategies for general purposes can be more straightforward by using the split-sample test and dividing the time series in two parts, indeed generally somewhat more data for calibration (e.g. 2/3) than for validation. Specific purposes and support for design and impact assessment require more tailor-made approaches showing the robustness of the model. For instance, for flood design purposes one would like to show that the calibrated model can also be used for more extreme conditions than the calibration conditions. Hence, one might select the calibration and validation periods in such a way that the validation period includes more extreme events than the calibration period. In this and similar cases a so-called differential split-sample test is therefore more appropriate. Similar reasoning applies for climate change impacts studies, where you might want to show that your model can also be used for changed climatic conditions. This can be (partly) achieved by selecting a validation period with (hydro)climatological conditions more similar to the expected changed climatic conditions than the calibration period.

Data avaliability obviously determines what is possible in the calibration and validation. When for instance streamflow data are not sufficiently available, you might look for alternative data regarding other output variables such as actual evaporation (e.g. based on satellite information) or state variables (e.g. soil moisture, snow and groundwater). Different calibration strategies for multiple variables (and objectives) are available in the literature, see for instance .

Recommended splits for calibration and validation periods (e.g. 50-50 or 70-30) will also depend on the hydroclimatological conditions in the study catchment (e.g. the occurrence of dry and wet periods) and the hydrological model used. The systematic study mentioned by Mehmet Cüneyd Demirel provides a nice example of the detemination of the optimal data length, but results obviously depend on the hydroclimatological conditions, the catchment characteristics and the model used.

Good luck,

Martijn

Harsch, you need to give some more detail about your model setup in order for anybody to be able to say anything about what may be the cause of this.

Thank you everyone for replying. I had an inkling that the equation referred to the Manning's equation. That is why the thesis author using a K value of 5 by jyst looking at the channel bed surface made no sense to me. To be honest, tgat thesis smells fishy to me now.

Define a reservoir, then put a pump on that and play with the rule base of the pump such that it always pumps unless (some condition you like)

You can use the outlet observations for calibrating the basin parameters as well as MC parameters which depend mostly on your river cross-sections. So only outlet discharge observations is enough for modeling. You have also chance to see the modeled inflows of the channels in hms and you can compare inflow and outflow hydrographs.

Dear Qussay

you must tick flow direction in display option to view flow streams

Best Regards

abas

IntErO model for calculation of soil erosion intensity and runoff

Dear colleague/s,

(to Ibrahim, but open to some other interested colleagues)

I am kindly inviting you to have a look at the application of my IntErO model for the calculation of soil erosion intensity and runoff (link):

IntErO model

www.geasci.org/IntErO.

- Free download of the software;

- Simple installation;

- Examples of applications available on the same web page (but also on RG and on www.geasci.org/Publications);

- I, as an author, am available to demonstrate how it is working.

Finally, in case you decide to compare the results received with using the IntErO with some other model/s and or measurements, I will try to arrange to finance the publication of the paper having in a team of authors two of us from my team,

Sincerely,

Velibor Spalevic

Mob/Viber/WhatsApp: +38267201222

E-mail: velibor.spalevic@gmail.com

That is a good question.

Due to different factors

Alicia Chong So sorry friends, I just read your question now. I suppose that you've already known the answer. However, I write here to help the other persons who have the same question.

You can use the access function of Microsoft to open/edit/save a .dbf file.

I think mike she will be best suited for integrated hydro metrological and water quality modelling purpose

Hello, is there anyone to help me to do groundwater pumping and monitoring wells data analysis using this software? I may pay you little ....Ahsan

This problem occured when you make an error while you fill the Weather generator in SWAT2012.mb data base.

Re-check it your PCPstata, and dewpoint input data.

Interesante pregunta, sería muy bueno poder acceder a sitios o software q aportaran esta información

Follow

Dear Jobin Thomas

We also faced a similar problem in the Jhelum basin. In larger basins, you are very much right that natural drainage is not always available for stream burning. Further in our case, the pseudo drainage occurred in flat surfaces and over the lakes. For lakes, we had the lake polygon layer to burn. I think increasing the threshold is one of the viable options that does reduce such spurious drainage lines.

The solution lies in between the opinions provided by W. J. van Verseveld Richard Gloaguen Neelakantan Sajikumar

Thank you all for this wonderful knowledgeable discussion.

Regards

Gowhar Meraj

A couple of my earliest Researchgate entries and citations may be informative, even though different conditions. Many water quality parameters have influence from flow rate (discharge), and in part often due to rainfall dilution effect, runoff and movement of sediment and other non-point pollutants and nutrients during storms. You may find a hysteresis effect with markedly higher values during rising limb of hydrograph, and lower rates as hydrograph recedes. Geology and groundwater and its chemistry influences contribute to varying degrees as some streams loose water to groundwater, while others gain water inputs from groundwater for substantial periods of time. There are many books and papers on the subject, as well as professional or informational courses. It is not unusual to find these trends. Stream temperature in many locations increases in the summer growing season as more solar radiation, higher temperatures with lower streamflow often combine to elevate temperatures. Streams heavily augmented by groundwater or springflow as well as dense forest cover have substantially less effect than conditions without these benefits. In one of my studies, mountain streams without dense forest cover actually had lower winter temperatures, so forested stream buffers may have a moderating effect on temperature extremes in both summer and winter. It is highly useful to have recording water levels to estimate flow rates with time. A relative moderate expense tool for this is transducer (vented or barometric adjusted unvented). Streams with excessive sediment may contribute to transducer fouling, but properly installed, they can collect high quality data for weeks or months without service. The USGS collects flow data every 15 minutes, and appropriate for your study area. For small catchments, more frequent readings may be needed. A variety of tools or techniques are available to collect samples during storms or more routinely, if ample research funding exists.

hello dear

please check the below links

how to solve the SWAT_CUP error dispalyed in figure below.

with regards

look for NASA aqua and terra

in which environment

Manning's n or roughness coefficient is actually a measure of energy or head loss along a channel reach. The roughness of the channel, bank and floodplain is a major determinant of Manning's n. However, all mechanisms that contribute to energy loss should be considered in selecting its proper value. For example, flow velocity and associated turbulence are important (e.g., if velocity is near zero, the Manning's n will be zero even when the river has high roughness). Similarly flow depth is important. So is the season (e.g., more vegetation and thus higher roughness in summer).

I think engineers should think of Manning's n as more related to energy loss under specific flow conditions than to only roughness.

It depends on how you want to represent the urban. The urbca2 are the default values but if you have your own values you can change them in "SWAT2012" though the name might vary with the version. Usually default value is okay.

Hi, you are talking of hydrodynamic mathematical 2D model. For calibration and / or verification studies, you would require a few prototype hydraulic observations, like velocities with direction, depths of flow, water levels at different locations. Corresponding discharges are of critical importance. If gauge discharge curves are available within the reach reproduced in the model, then it is of immense value.

You will require discharge hydrograph for control of discharge at the upstream end and a gauge discharge at the downstream end of the model for water level control.

As you are at the "Verification stage", it is assumed that these are already available and used for the studies.

Initially, you are required to run the model with the specified discharge values at the upstream end and water level control curve at the downstream end.

The first stage is to reproduce the average water surface slopes for the different discharge stages. For calibration of the same, the Mannings' value on n needs to be corrected / adjusted.

After getting satisfactory results, for the specific discharges (Depending up on the available prototype data) you may have to look at the flow conditions (Velocities with direction, depth of flow, etc) for the specific discharges.

Most of these verification studies are problem-dependent. Each and every parameter observed at the site may or may not be correctly reproduced all the time. A description of the modeller is many times required.

You can use Cropwhat . you can download from FAo.

Dear Bro. Indranil Mondal

You can

Please find the attched manual file, it will help you:

all the best

Once you have calibrated and validated the hydrological model against the streamflow values at the basin outlet, you can get the baseflow parameters as the actual ones. Another way is to apply the methods of baseflow separation

we usually use regression techniques (mostly linear) by utilizing data from the nearby or at least closest stations in columns. Moreover, for temperature data, we sometimes create random points to extract from remote sensing imagery and create a column to include the regression process. Although each process comprises uncertainty itself, we think they still represent the required climate data in case of data scarcity.

Dear Lawrence,

Since you are new to hydrogeology I would suggest you start with Applied Groundwater Modelling by Andreson and Woessner and Groundwater Modeling - An introduction to groundwater flow and solute transport modelling by Rausch. Also Fundamentals of groundwater modelling by Huasam Baalousha. The latter two are available on Research Gate, but the applied Groundwater Modelling good is not only a good read but a good reference.

The first question of groundwater modelling is do you need a model? Several basic calculations and analytical solutions can be better than using a groundwater model. There are good flow charts to follow in regards to the modelling process.

As you start to read you will start to realise that although modelling is data intensive, models if conceptualised correctly can be very useful even with limited data. Some of the parameters can be estimated via a literature review if not available and can be refined during the calibration process.

As Ajoy Saha said at the very least some basic geological information is a must that is followed by hydrological data and hydrogeological data (T, k, water levels etc.).

My final comment will be to kindly remember that the software is a programme that can be used once you understand how to work the programme. However successful groundwater modelling or any other modelling is dependent on you understanding the limitations of your data and the limitations of the final product.

Best Wishes,

Raoul

According our results for the Czech Republic conditions the relationship is not statistically significant. This should be always verified for local conditions. Strong statistical significance exhibits for example longitude for the Czech Republic conditions.

Best Regards.

Jiri

Thank you for sharing your latest related research, I will read it carefully!@Yijian Zeng

You must go through my article: " A Review of RUSLE Model".

Dear Mourad,

I do not think that this material exists in one of the research laboratories in Algeria. Maybe you have to look at the meteorological office. It may be equipped with such a device.

Regards

Coefficient of Determination and Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency are based on least squares so give greater weight to the peaks. A high CoD can indicate the peaks fit well but not the recessions. You can get a better idea of the fit of the recessions by taking logs. There are other measures you can use if you trawl through the literature however I used a combination of NSE and logNSE to indicate the fit of my models when working on my PhD. However what value to pick is a very good question - the answer to that is dependent on so many factors and is often a case of as good as you can get given the uncertainties involved. Good luck. It is probably good practice to determine your limits of acceptability before you start to model then throw out any models that don't comply - again trawl the literature particularly the work of Keith Beven.

@Rmm Pradeep

I am working as a consultant for WRD, Assam. The department receives the model outcomes (prepared by NESAC) during flood time and takes action based on it. The department was a part of the decision makers during formulation of the model and one of the end users too.

Use Microsoft Excel, which has a wide range of functiona

It would be a good idea to compare the interpretations based on different seasons of the year. Winter would give you an idea of where areas with limited snow cover occur, and so the ground is likely to be very cold. Areas with large amounts of snow would be possible areas of discontinuous permafrost or where if might be absent. In summer, the topography would give you a good idea of where palsas/lithalsas might be present and the vegetation tell you where peat plateaus may occur. Look up the appearance of these on aerial photography. Do not forget to carry out a thorough literature search and incorporate the results of prior field studies by others to guide your interpretations. Otherwise you my end up clashing with the results of good field and laboratory studies. Check with the appropriate Territorial government bodies who carry out these studies as well as the GSC. Also check your interpretations against the available climate data, especially mean annual freezing and thawing indices based on seasons.

Stuart.

I think SUSTAIN Was developed by a private company on behalf of the US EPA and you might be able to get specific information about modifications from them.

The SUSTAIN manual refers to the company as follows:

Tetra Tech, Inc.

10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340

Fairfax, VA 22030

And the authors on the manual included:

Leslie Shoemaker, Ph.D.

John Riverson Jr.

Khalid Alvi

Jenny X. Zhen, Ph.D., P.E.

Sabu Paul, Ph.D., P.E.

Teresa Rafi

If you can find a contact for any of these folk on researchgate, Linkedin, or elsewhere, you may get a response? I was able to talk to some people at Tetra Tech back in 2013 or so about using SUSTAIN so they may still be open to discuss how easy it might be to port the model to ArcMap 10, and/or modify functions?

Thanks Dr. Darren, Dr. Hening and Dr. Guilermo, for suggestions on ADCP, it will be helpful in selection of Appropriate ADCP. Shared ADCP Report is of immense help.

Regards

Rajat

Have a look this group discussion

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/swat-cup/dce44cc4-4800-4618-b5fb-47c5a68be7ae%40googlegroups.com.

From the previous answers, a lot has been said regarding the potentials usefulness of dams, which is really good. I would like to adress in this answer, for the sake of discussion, some key points regarding why dams can be problematic to us.

It appears that during the past decades, wild river streams (ones that run free from headwaters to confluence) have nearly been wiped and then replaced by river dams. Fact is, dams disrupt natural systems and subsequently thwart the work of rivers. They block fish runs, seasonal flood patterns, affecting redistribution of nutrients (like marine nitrogen delivered by salmon to feed the inlands).

Dams encourage unsustainable growth, displace people, often indigenous people

Very often, dams are built through grants of institutions and rarely benefit the local people. Most of the generated hydropower (if any) is delivered to big cities, not the rural villages displaced by the dams.

Even from a design perspective, it appears dams are made to fail. A huge reservoir surfaces mean terrible annual evaporation losses. Silting is unavoidable. Even the largest reservoirs silt up. When they collapse, it is nightmarish.

Some researchers point out dams are not the solution to our energy crisis. Solar and wind can provide far more reliable, long-term energy than hydropower with far fewer environmental costs.

SCS CN Curve number method give you better result but it has some restriction it is applicable for small catchment and ungauged watershed.

@Vasker Sharma, you can use the autocorrelation fuction syntax in R,that is acf (), assuming you have a monthly data series of a data frame called Rubi, to check for auto correlation at lag=1 in the January series of Rubi in R you type as follows;

acf (Rubi$January,lag.max=1)$acf pressing your enter key will display the autocorrelation plot at lag=1,you will clearly see the limit line marked in blue,if your output crosses the limit line in either the positive or negative side of the divide then you can say that the January series of the data frame called Rubi is statistically significant at lag=1.Modified Mann-Kendall (MMK) is then recommended,in such case i will recommend the Bias Corrected Pre-whitening (BCPW).

Best of luck

see my profile to get the publication related to the calibration.

Hi Praveen,

You might have a look at the correlations between the scour depth data and the parameters. If there is a high correlation between the scour depth and a particular parameter in the data, you would expect that this high correlation is also present in a (good) model and hence the model output (scour depth) is sensitive to variations in this parameter.

Good luck,

Martijn

Well,

C_t = C₀e^-kt, Where

C₀ is the concentration at t = 0, that is, at the upstream boundary of the river section of interest.

C_t is the concentration after travel downstream for time t.

x distance downstream

v stream velocity , the time of travel (Residence time, when inlet=outlet) is t = x/v.

The coefficient k indicates how rapidly the pollutant disappears from the water; high k means faster disappearance. k has units of 1/time (time-1).

Regards

I am not totally familiar with HEC-HMS. I believe that it runs by reaches, with a stage, storage, outflow for each reach, is that correct? If so, then you need to make each reservoir along the river to to have its own stage storage outflow information. This is challenging modeling, so it will take some time to fully describe each of the reservoirs.

If you are modeling the upland runoff to HEC-HMS using the Curve Number methodology, there is a way in the method to account for the effect of reservoir storage in the sub basins. Let me know if you need some suggestions on how to do that.

Even if you ultimately want to be able to differentiate the contributions from the multiple sources of sediments without taking into account the characteristics of the watershed, a modeling approach, like the one proposed by Timothy O Randhir, could help you initially to derive a (graphical) model of your own, calibrate it, and validate it. It could be something like this:

Obviously there is difference between R and DEM (physical model).

Actually, to built unit hydrograph need automatic water level recorded, if you have only 4 discharges for one time, you have to built rainfall prediction plan in that time to make discharge estimation in that time

Protecting water as a vulnerable resource - water saving awareness- responding to climate change impact on water – increasing water use efficiency – using the right price for water services.

APHRO_MA_025deg_V1101.1951 is this a netcdf file ? it does not open by any standard netcdf reader

Hi Naveed,

Assuming you have temperature and precipitation data, you could setup and calibrate a rainfall runoff model to predict missing flows. If instrumental data are not available, most places in the world have gridded meteorlogical data which often works better for runoff simulation than direct measurements from a met. station. You could make the met data as simple or as complex as you like, we've had surprisingly good results for most of the Indian subcontinent using a single precipitation and temperature time series to model river flows. There are a range of straight forward and easy to use rainfall runoff models. My group has had success with Jan Seibert's HBV-Light model and my PERSiST model.

Sincerely,

Martyn

Yes, as answered. However, during active growing season, some of the diurnal changes in small streams noticed may be due to transpiration demand by forest. I have used an Insitu sonde that was unvented, and they sold a barometer that could be installed nearby, and with it software that corrected the stream stage readings. The same would be true of well levels when using pressure transducers, adjustment for barometric pressure is needed.

One thing you can do... If you save the native text documents while creating your model. then all the files will be saved in text document. then you can easily run modflow exe file with name in c++

IN GMS there are tutorials which you can download from their official website. from there you can get a complete data set for simulation of saltwater intrusion.

Considering that the area shows no difference with the porosity & permeability of the soil and also of the sub-surface material, the infiltration rate will be the same whether the source of water is rainfall or river water.

Of course, other than the permeability, amount of water recharging groundwater through rainfall depends on the intensity & duration of rainfall; soil moisture; vegetation; slope; etc.

Hi Marcos,

First of all thanks for your detailed comment.

I have contacted with the developers of CRHM and they have provided me required information which was very helpful for me to select the most appropriate model for my research scope. As long as concern about my research work, i will mainly focus on the runoff generations under changing climate from the permafrost zones due to dynamics of the Active Layer Thickness (ALT). The CRHM is better to use in the cold environments have mainly covered with snow and CRHM is applicable to the tundra or other like this environments found in Arctic, Canada and Alaska's regions.

WaSiM model simulate the dynamics of the active layer thickness more better as compared to CRHM and also gave three dimentional variations in the soil temperatures.

Therefore after review some articles and some other literature, I finally selected WaSiM. I can use CRHM if I found that I have enough time to simulate using it as well. By comparing both the model's results, I will conclude the application efficiency as well as I will be able to write some good articles.

Thanks a lot for you precios time and detailed comment.

Regards

Naveed.

Sharing link:

Regards!

Sharing link:

Regards!

Dear Saima,

See the steps and sample formats in the attachments.

Do you want to prepare observation series of data in to SWAT-CUP format?

I have attached the SWAT-CUP SUFI-2 formulation. For the rest of the calibration uncertainty analysis techniques, you may refer the following paper. As you may choose any of the available SWAT-CUP packages (DOI:10.3390/w9100782).

Regards,

Gebiaw