Comparison of Lumped and Distributed Hydrologic Models for the Runoff Simulation
of a Large Watershed in Alabama and Mississippi
Jairo N. Diaz-Ramirez Billy E. Johnson
William H. McAnallyJames L. Martin
Northern Gulf Institute ConferenceMobile, AL
May 19, 2010
Outline
• The BASINS/HSPF Model• The WMS/GSSHA Model• Goal• Study Area• Model Setup• Model Evaluation• Model Results• Conclusions• Products• Ongoing Work • Acknowledgments
The BASINS/HSPF Model
BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating point & Non-point Sources), FR 1996
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/basins/
Data (Weather, water quality)
Tools (GIS, Met Generation)
Models (HSPF, SWMM, AQUATOX, WASP)
HSPF (Hydrological Simulation Program – FORTRAN)
Supported by EPA Modular program with capacity of simulation
hydrologic cycle, erosion, sediment transport, nutrients, pesticides, and in-stream water quality
Used successfully since 80’s in USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and Africa.
The WMS/GSSHA Model
GSSHA (Gridded Surface Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis), 2002
The Watershed Modeling System, first released 1994
Brigham Young University, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, and Aquaveo LLC. http://xmswiki.com/wiki/WMS:WMS
http://gsshawiki.com/gssha/Main_Page
Tools (GIS, watershed delineation)
Models (HECs, TR-20, TR-55, HSPF, SWMM, GSSHA, CEQUAL-W2)
Supported by USACE/ERDC It is a physics-based, distributed, hydrologic,
sediment and constituent fate and transport model Hydrology Features: 2D overland flow, 1D
streamflow, 1D infiltration, and 2D groundwater
HSPF and GSSHA
Characteristic HSPF GSSHAArea Representation Sub-watersheds Squared gridsRelesed 1980 2002Supported USEPA/AQUATERRA USACE/ERDCPre/Post Processor BASINS/GenScn WMSScale Small/Large Watershed Plot/Field/Small WatershedSimulation Period Continuous Event/ContinuousSimulation Time Step Hourly <1 minuteInfiltration Power function Green&Ampt, RichardsOverland Flow Chezy-Manning 2D Diffusive Wave
Stream Channel Routing storage-based or nonlinear reservoir methods and user
defined area-volume-flow table1D Diffusive Wave
Baseflow Basin reservoir 2D Darcy's Law
Goal
• The main goal of this research was to apply and test the application of two hydrologic models (HSPF and GSSHA) to predict overlandflow in the Luxapallila Creek watershed (1,858 km2 rural watershed), located in Alabama and Mississippi.
Study Area
Area: 1,851 km2
Pervious area: 99%
Forest area: 72%
Agricultural area: 20%
Wetlands: 6%
Model Setup
Channel cross-section data
Model Setup
Channel cross-section dataTopography: 30 mt resolution NED
Model Setup
Channel cross-section dataTopography: 30 mt resolution NED
100x100 m = 185,816 cells
50 sub-watersheds
Model Setup
Channel cross-section dataTopography: 30 mt resolution NED
100x100 m = 185,816 cells
50 sub-watersheds
Climate and Flow Stations
Model Setup
Channel cross-section dataTopography: 30 mt resolution NED
100x100 m = 185,816 cells
50 sub-watersheds
Climate and Flow Stations
Mainly sandy loam soils with hydrologic soil group B
Model Setup
Channel cross-section dataTopography: 30 mt resolution NED
100x100 m = 185,816 cells
50 sub-watersheds
Climate and Flow Stations
Mainly sandy loam soils with hydrologic soil group B
(1980 GIRAS dataset)
Storm Event Calibration Period (02443500)
Verification Period (02443000)
1 1/12-1/17 1/12-1/172 2/21-2/26 2/21-2/243 2/28-3/4 2/28-3/34 3/5/-3/9 3/5-3/8
Storm events evaluated in 1989
Model Evaluation
Model Evaluation02443500 USGS Station Data
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1/1/1989 1/21/1989 2/10/1989 3/2/1989 3/22/1989Time (days)
Flow
(cm
s)
Runoff and Baseflow Separation
• Web-based hydrograph separation system (WHAT)
02443500 USGS Station
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1/1/1989 1/15/1989 1/29/1989 2/12/1989 2/26/1989 3/12/1989 3/26/1989
Time (days)
Flow
(cm
s)
Streamflow
Direct Runoff
Base Flow
Model Results: CalibrationHSPF Parameter
(unit)Definition Forest Agricultural Barren Wetlands
Urban orbuilt-up land
(pervious)
LZSN (mm) Lower zone nominal soil moisture storage 228.6 228.6 228.6 228.6 228.6
INFILT (mm h-1) Index to infiltration capacity 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3
KVARY (1/mm) Variable groundwater recession 45.7 45.7 45.7 45.7 45.7
AGWRC (1/day) Base groundwater recession 0.996 0.99 0.97 0.996 0.97
DEEPFR Fraction of groundwater inflow to deep recharge 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
BASETP Fraction of remaining evapotranspiration from baseflow 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
AGWETPFraction of remaining
evapotranspiration from active groundwater
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0
CEPSC (mm) Interception storage capacity 5.1 4.6 0.0 3.8 1.3
UZSN (mm) Upper zone nominal soil moisture storage 24.4 18.8 18.8 24.4 18.8
NSUR Manning's for overland flow 0.4 0.2 0.25 0.4 0.15
INTFW Interflow inflow parameter 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
IRC (1/day) Interflow recession parameter 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
LZETP Lower zone evapotranspiration parameter 0.7 0.6 0.1 0.8 0.3
GSSHA Parameter
Definition (unit) Soil Forest Agricultural Barren WetlandsUrban or
built-up land(pervious)
K hydraulic conductivity (cm/hr) 0.14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Ψ Suction head (cm) 11.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/Aθs Porosity (cm) 0.38 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/Anm Surface Roughness 0.31 0.35 0.15 0.40 0.045
Model Results: Calibration
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1/1/1989 1/16/1989 1/31/1989 2/15/1989 3/2/1989 3/17/1989
Dire
ct R
unof
f (cm
s)
Time (days)
Observed
HSPF
GSSHA
Model Results: Calibration
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1/1/1989 1/16/1989 1/31/1989 2/15/1989 3/2/1989 3/17/1989
Dire
ct R
unof
f (cm
s)
Time (days)
Observed
HSPF
GSSHA
Model Results: Calibration
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1/1/1989 1/16/1989 1/31/1989 2/15/1989 3/2/1989 3/17/1989
Dire
ct R
unof
f (cm
s)
Time (days)
Observed
HSPF
GSSHA
HSPF Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 46.6 53.9 85.5 -12 -4.5 26.1 19.5 -13 23.4 60.0 45.0 -14 -31.8 16.2 30.9 -1
GSSHA Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 32.2 27.0 96.3 02 -31.8 -41.8 28.0 -13 -28.0 5.9 80.7 -14 35.0 40.8 14.6 0
Model Results: Calibration
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1/1/1989 1/16/1989 1/31/1989 2/15/1989 3/2/1989 3/17/1989
Dire
ct R
unof
f (cm
s)
Time (days)
Observed
HSPF
GSSHA
HSPF Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 46.6 53.9 85.5 -12 -4.5 26.1 19.5 -13 23.4 60.0 45.0 -14 -31.8 16.2 30.9 -1
GSSHA Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 32.2 27.0 96.3 02 -31.8 -41.8 28.0 -13 -28.0 5.9 80.7 -14 35.0 40.8 14.6 0
(1980 GIRAS dataset)
Model Results: Verification
Model Results: Verification
Model Results: Verification
Model Results: Verification
HSPF Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 48.7 57.9 42.1 02 59.5 81.6 18.8 03 53.5 83.1 34.4 04 40.8 73.8 15.2 0
GSSHA Event
Peak error (%)
Volume error (%)
Runoff RMSE (cms)
Peak time error (days)
1 18.5 14.8 40.3 02 44.8 37.8 21.3 03 11.9 28.9 31.4 04 76.0 83.2 23.1 0
Conclusions
EPA HSPF is a comprehensive water quantity/quality watershed model. Hydrology is simulated using a physically based water budget scheme with empirical equations among the different components (interception, infiltration, evapotranspiration, surface runoff, etc).
USACE GSSHA is a physics-based multidimensional watershed model. While runoff excess calculations in the HSPF model use the soil
infiltration rate, the GSSHA model applies the soil hydraulic conductivity, along with a number of other soil parameters to compute a more physically based infiltration rate.
GSSHA, like HSPF, also under simulated runoff during most of the evaluated storm events.
This study found that the GSSHA model had a better performance than HSPF runoff results when calibrated parameters were evaluated in a sub-watershed outlet.
GSSHA was more computationally intensive and less efficient than HSPF: numerical solution-based scheme vs analytical solution 185,816 cells vs. 50 sub-watersheds 20 hours vs. 5 seconds (Dual Core AMD Opteron(m) 3 GB of RAM)
• Goal: Improve watershed-wide decision support for resource management agencies
Products (02/2007-01/2010)Watershed Modeling Improvements to Enhance Coastal Ecosystems
• Goal: Improve watershed-wide decision support for resource management agencies
Mobile River watershed
Products (02/2007-01/2010)Watershed Modeling Improvements to Enhance Coastal Ecosystems
• Goal: Improve watershed-wide decision support for resource management agencies
3-D Models
HPC
GIS
Radar
Mobile River watershed
Improved models
Use the state-of-the-art technology related to watershed simulation
Products (02/2007-01/2010)Watershed Modeling Improvements to Enhance Coastal Ecosystems
• Goal: Improve watershed-wide decision support for resource management agencies
3-D Models
HPC
GIS
Radar
Habitat
Mobile River watershed
Improved models
Use the state-of-the-art technology related to watershed simulation
Habitat response evaluation
System-wide perspective
Products (02/2007-01/2010)Watershed Modeling Improvements to Enhance Coastal Ecosystems
Products (02/2007-01/2010)
Supported Personnel• MSU Faculty: (8)
– Biology: Gary Ervin, Christopher Brooks– Civil Eng: Jairo Diaz, William McAnally, James Martin– GRI: Vladimir Alarcon– Landscape Architecture: Wayne Wilkerson– Forestry: Mary L. Tagert
• MSU Research Associates: (4)– Civil Eng: Sandra Ortega– GRI: Rita Jackson, Luis Wasson, and John Cartwright
• MSU Post-Doc: (1)– Civil Eng. Jairo Diaz
• MSU Students: (11)– John Ramirez (PhD, Civil Eng)– Jeremy Sharp, Jared McKee, and Richard McComas (MS, Civil Eng)– Carlos Ortiz (MBA) – Matthew Roberts (PhD, Biology)– Lee Turnage (MS, Biology)– David Holly, Robert Sawyer, Nathan Sonderman, Tanaya Johnson (BS, Biology)
• Student Awards: (3)– John Ramirez, PhD, Civil Eng: 2010 Environmental and Water Resources Engineering National Student Technical Paper Contest.
1st Place.– John Ramirez, PhD, Civil Eng: 2009 Northern Gulf Institute Annual Conference. Student Paper Contest. 2nd Place.– Jared McKee, MS, Civil Eng: 2008 Mississippi Water Resources Conference Best Student Paper Award.
• USACE Engineer Research and Development Center : (2)– Billy E. Johnson– Mike Follum
Products (02/2007-01/2010)
Collaborators(s)/Partners
PUBLICATIONS: Peer-Reviewed Journals (6)• Wilkerson G.W., W.H. McAnally, J.L. Martin, J.A. Ballweber, K. Collins Peavy, J. Diaz-Ramirez, and A. Moore. Latis: A Spatial Decision
Support System to Assess Low Impact Site Development Strategies. Submitted to Advances in Civil Engineering, Hindawi Publishing Corporation. [In Press]
• Ortega-Achury, S. L., J. J., Ramírez-Avila, W. H. McAnally, and J. L. Martin. 2010. Using turbidity and total suspended solids to determine suspended sediment concentration in the Town Creek Watershed. Paper to be submitted to the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering.
• Diaz-Ramirez, J.N., W.H. McAnally, and J.L. Martin. Sensitivity of Simulating Hydrologic Processes to Gauge and Radar Rainfall Data in Subtropical Coastal Catchments. Submitted to Journal of Hydrology [In review since January, 2010]
• Diaz-Ramirez, J.N., B.E. Johnson, W.H. McAnally, and J.L. Martin. Comparative Assessment of Multidimensional and Lumped Hydrologic Models: A Case Study in Alabama and Mississippi, USA. Submitted to Journal of Hydroinformatics [In review since January, 2010]
• Diaz-Ramirez, J.N., B.E. Johnson, W.H. McAnally, J.L. Martin, V.J. Alarcon, and J.J. Ramirez-Avila. Global Parameter Sensitivity and Uncertainty of the USEPA HSPF Model: A Hydrology Model Evaluation in Alabama and Mississippi. Submitted to Environmental Modelling & Software [In review since March, 2009]
• Diaz-Ramirez, J.N., V. Alarcon, Z. Duan, M.L. Tagert, W. H. McAnally, J. L. Martin, and C.G. O’Hara. 2008. Impacts of Land Use Characterization in Modeling Hydrology and Sediments for the Luxapallila Creek Watershed, Alabama/Mississippi. Transactions of the ASABE 51(1): 139-151.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile DistrictBegun March 2007Provide in-kind support Nature: sharing of data and models, interlocking tasks
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer R&D CenterBegun June 2007Part reimbursed support, part in-kind support (signed agreements)Nature: Shared models, training on Corps’ models
U. S. Department of Agriculture, National Sediment LabBegun Dec 2007Planned reimbursable and in-kind support (signed agreement)Nature: Shared models, data, training on models and field operations
Products (02/2007-01/2010)
PUBLICATIONS: Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceedings (7)
PUBLICATIONS: Conference Proceedings (6)
PUBLICATIONS: Reports (12)
PUBLICATIONS: Thesis and Dissertations (2)
PRESENTATIONS: Conferences/Meetings (28)
http://physics.unipune.ernet.in/~cmg/img/publication.jpg
Ongoing Work
Acknowledgments
http://www.northerngulfinstitute.org/mobile/about.html