소유역 별 기저유출 감수상수를 적용한 유량 및 기저유출 모의
Baseflow and Streamflow Simulation Applying Baseflow Recession Constants in Individual Sub-watersheds
2
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
This study attempted to improve the accuracy of streamflow and baseflow prediction of Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) by applying baselfow recession constants for each sub-watershed. This study set two different scenarios (S1 and S2) to evaluate the impact of application of baseflow recession constants for each sub-watershed on streamflow prediction. In S1, Only the baseflow recession constant obtained from the streamflow station located in the final outlet of study area was applied for whole sub-watersheds. In S2, baseflow recession constants obtained from six different streamflow stations were applied for each sub-watershed. Then, baseflow was separated form the measured streamflow data and the predicted streamflow of S1 and S2 using Web-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool (WHAT). The results showed Nash-Sutcliff efficiency (NSE) and R2 of S2 were a little higher than these of S1 in both streamflow and baseflow prediction results. However, it is important that S2 reflected physical meaning of baseflow recess. Also, recession part of hydrograph in S2 was calibrated better than that of S1 compared to the measured hydrograph.
Abstract
This study attempted to improve the accuracy of streamflow and baseflow prediction of Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) by applying baselfow recession constants for each sub-watershed. This study set two different scenarios (S1 and S2) to evaluate the impact of application of baseflow recession constants for each sub-watershed on streamflow prediction. In S1, Only the baseflow recession constant obtained from the streamflow station located in the final outlet of study area was applied for whole sub-watersheds. In S2, baseflow recession constants obtained from six different streamflow stations were applied for each sub-watershed. Then, baseflow was separated form the measured streamflow data and the predicted streamflow of S1 and S2 using Web-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool (WHAT). The results showed Nash-Sutcliff efficiency (NSE) and R2 of S2 were a little higher than these of S1 in both streamflow and baseflow prediction results. However, it is important that S2 reflected physical meaning of baseflow recess. Also, recession part of hydrograph in S2 was calibrated better than that of S1 compared to the measured hydrograph.
참고문헌 (18)
- Ahiablame, L.M., "Effectiveness of low impact development practices in two urbanized watersheds:Retrofitting with rain barrel", cistern and porous pavement, 2013, pp.119(15), 151~161
- Arnold, J.G., "Regional estimation of base flow and groundwater recharge in the Upper Mississippi river basin", Journal of Hydrology, 227(1), pp.21~40 (2000)
- Boskidis, I., "Hydrologic and water quality modeling of lower nestos river basin", Water Resource Management, 26, pp.3023~3051 (2012)
- Cho, S. H., "Computation of baseflow contribution to streamflow using environmental tracers in three small catchments Yuseong, Daejeon", PhD, pp.2006
- 홍지영, "한강수계의 하천에 대한 직접유출과 기저유출의 기여도 정량화", 한국수자원학회 논문집, 48(4), pp.309~319 (2015), 한국수자원학회
- 한정호, "낙동강 수계에서의 하천유량 변동성과 기저유출 기여도의 관계 분석", 한국농공학회논문집, 58(1), pp.27~38 (2016), 한국농공학회
- 한정호, "유역단위 유출 모형 별 기저유출 분석 기법 검토", 한국농공학회논문집, 58(4), pp.75~83 (2016), 한국농공학회
- Kang, D. S., "Study on the change of river discharge and baseflow considering urbanization and climate change", MS, pp.2011
- Lee, G., "Development of webbased RECESS model for estimating baseflow using SWAT", Sustainability, 6(4), pp.2357~2378 (2011)
- 이승찬, "다양한 기저유출 분리 방법을 이용한 4대강 수계의 시간대별 (연･계절･월) 기저유출 기여도 분석", 한국농공학회논문집, 59(2), pp.1~11 (2017), 한국농공학회
- Liddle, R. G., "Recharge and discharge calculations to characterize the groundwater hydrologic balance", Proceedings America Society of Mining and Reclamation, pp.41~53 (1998)
- Luo, Y., "Baseflow simulation using SWAT model in an inland river basin in Tianshan Mountains, Northwest China", Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16(4), pp.1259~1267 (2012)
- Nash, J.E., "River flow forecasting through conceptual models. part I-A discussion of principles", Journal of Hydrology, 10(3), pp.282~290 (1970)
- Soil and water assessment tool. user’s manual, version 2009, "Neitsch, S.", Texas Water Resources Institute, ~ (2009)
- Parajuli, P.B., "Comparison of AnnAGNPS and SWAT model simulation results in USDA‐CEAP agricultural watersheds in south-central Kansas", Hydrological Processes, 23(5), pp.748~763 (2009)
- Santhi, C., "Validation of the SWAT model on a large river basin with point and nonpoint sources", Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37, pp.1169~1188 (2001)
- 이재응, "Fuzzy 회귀분석기법을 이용한 평창강 유역의 설계홍수량 산정", 한국수자원학회 논문집, 45(10), pp.1023~1034 (2012), 한국수자원학회
- Zhang, X., "Simultaneous calibration of surface flow and baseflow simulations: a revisit of the SWAT model calibration framework", Hydrological Processes, 25(14), pp.2313~2320 (2011)