首页> 外文期刊>Transactions of the ASABE >HYDROLOGIC SIMULATION ON AGRICULTURAL WATERSHEDS: CHOOSING BETWEEN TWO MODELS
【24h】

HYDROLOGIC SIMULATION ON AGRICULTURAL WATERSHEDS: CHOOSING BETWEEN TWO MODELS

机译:农业流域水文模拟:两种模型的选择

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Strengths and limitations of hydrologic simulation models are used as criteria for selecting a particular model for a given water resources application. The performance of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and the Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF) continuous simulation models was compared on eight nested agricultural watersheds within the Little Washita River Experimental Watershed (LWREW) and two agricultural watersheds adjacent to the LWREW within the Washita River Basin in southwestern Oklahoma. Two subwatersheds within the LWREW were first used to calibrate parameters in both models for a “wetter than average” period of record. Both models were then applied to six other subwatersheds within the LWREW and the two adjacent watersheds, under varying climatic conditions. Three quantitative and two qualitative evaluation criteria were used to assess streamflow simulated by SWAT and HSPF: computation of (1) deviation of streamflow volume, (2) coefficient of efficiency, and (3) prediction efficiency and visual inspection of (4) hydrographs and (5) flow duration curves. A comparison of model performance showed that while HSPF performed better on the watersheds used for calibration, SWAT gave better results on the validation watersheds. On one of the validation subwatersheds adjacent to the LWREW, values of deviation of streamflow volume were -38.7%, -13.3%, and -1.3% for SWAT and -64.3%, -81.1%, and -8.2% for HSPF under “much dryer than average,” “dryer than average,” and “near average” climatic conditions, respectively. Differences in model performance were mainly attributed to the runoff production mechanism in the two models. Results of this study showed that SWAT exhibited an element of robustness in that it gave more consistent results than HSPF in estimating streamflow for agricultural watersheds under various climatic conditions. SWAT may therefore be better suited for investigating the long-term impacts of climate variability on surface-water resources
机译:水文模拟模型的优势和局限性被用作为给定的水资源应用选择特定模型的标准。在Little Washita河实验流域(LWREW)内的八个嵌套农业流域和与LWREW相邻的两个农业流域上,比较了土壤和水评估工具(SWAT)和水文模拟程序Fortran(HSPF)连续模拟模型的性能在俄克拉何马州西南部的Washita河流域内。 LWREW中的两个子流域首先用于校准两个模型中的参数,以实现“优于平均水平”的记录。然后将这两个模型分别应用于LWREW内的其他六个子流域和两个相邻的流域,且气候条件不同。使用三个定量和两个定性评估标准来评估SWAT和HSPF模拟的流量:计算(1)流量偏差,(2)效率系数,(3)预测效率和目视检查(4)水文图和(5)持续时间曲线。模型性能的比较表明,虽然HSPF在用于校准的分水岭上表现更好,但SWAT在验证分水岭上却提供了更好的结果。在“大水量”条件下,在与LWREW相邻的一个验证子集水区中,SWAT的水流量偏差值为-38.7%,-13.3%和-1.3%,HSPF的水流量偏差值为-64.3%,-81.1%和-8.2%。比平均干燥度,“比平均干燥度”和“接近平均”的气候条件。模型性能的差异主要归因于两个模型的径流产生机理。这项研究的结果表明,在估算各种气候条件下农业流域的水流量时,SWAT比HSPF表现出更强的鲁棒性。因此,特警队可能更适合调查气候多变性对地表水资源的长期影响

著录项

  • 来源
    《Transactions of the ASABE》 |2003年第6期|p.1539-1551|共13页
  • 作者单位

    Michael W. Van Liew, ASAE Member Engineer, Research Hydrologist, USDA-ARS Grazinglands Research Lab, El Reno, Oklahoma;

    Jeff G. Arnold, Research Hydraulic Engineer, USDA-ARS Grassland Soil and Water Research Lab, Temple, Texas;

    and Jurgen D. Garbrecht, Research Hydraulic Engineer, USDA-ARS Grazinglands Research Lab, El Reno, Oklahoma. Corresponding author: Michael W. Van Liew, USDA-ARS Grazinglands Research Lab, 7207 W. Cheyenne Street, El Reno, OK 73036;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Calibration/validation; Climate variability; Modeling; HSPF; Hydrology; Simulation; Streamflow; SWAT; Watershed;

    机译:校准/验证;气候多变性;造型;HSPF;水文学;模拟;水流;扑打;分水岭;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号