Choosing an arbitrary calibration period for hydrologic models: How much does it influence water balance simulations?,Hydrological Processes

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › Hydrol. Process. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

Choosing an arbitrary calibration period for hydrologic models: How much does it influence water balance simulations?
Hydrological Processes ( IF 2.8 ) Pub Date : 2021-01-13 , DOI: 10.1002/hyp.14045
Daniel T. Myers ₁ , Darren L. Ficklin ₁ , Scott M. Robeson ₁ , Ram P. Neupane ₂ , Alejandra Botero‐Acosta ₃ , Pedro M. Avellaneda ₁

Affiliation

The selection of calibration and validation time periods in hydrologic modelling is often done arbitrarily. Nonstationarity can lead to an optimal parameter set for one period which may not accurately simulate another. However, there is still much to be learned about the responses of hydrologic models to nonstationary conditions. We investigated how the selection of calibration and validation periods can influence water balance simulations. We calibrated Soil and Water Assessment Tool hydrologic models with observed streamflow for three United States watersheds (St. Joseph River of Indiana/Michigan, Escambia River of Florida/Alabama, and Cottonwood Creek of California), using time period splits for calibration/validation. We found that the choice of calibration period (with different patterns of observed streamflow, precipitation, and air temperature) influenced the parameter sets, leading to dissimilar simulations of water balance components. In the Cottonwood Creek watershed, simulations of 50‐year mean January streamflow varied by 32%, because of lower winter precipitation and air temperature in earlier calibration periods on calibrated parameters, which impaired the ability for models calibrated to earlier periods to simulate later periods. Peaks of actual evapotranspiration for this watershed also shifted from April to May due to different parameter values depending on the calibration period's winter air temperatures. In the St. Joseph and Escambia River watersheds, adjustments of the runoff curve number parameter could vary by 10.7% and 20.8%, respectively, while 50‐year mean monthly surface runoff simulations could vary by 23%–37% and 169%–209%, depending on the observed streamflow and precipitation of the chosen calibration period. It is imperative that calibration and validation time periods are chosen selectively instead of arbitrarily, for instance using change point detection methods, and that the calibration periods are appropriate for the goals of the study, considering possible broad effects of nonstationary time series on water balance simulations. It is also crucial that the hydrologic modelling community improves existing calibration and validation practices to better include nonstationary processes.

中文翻译：

为水文模型选择任意的校准周期：它对水平衡模拟有多大影响？

水文建模中校准和验证时间段的选择通常是任意进行的。非平稳性可能导致一个周期的最佳参数设置，而这可能无法准确地模拟另一个周期。但是，关于水文模型对非平稳条件的响应仍有很多要学习的知识。我们研究了选择校准和验证期如何影响水平衡模拟。我们使用观察到的流域校准/验证，使用观察到的三个美国流域（印第安纳州/密歇根州的圣约瑟夫河，佛罗里达州/阿拉巴马州的埃斯坎比亚河和加利福尼亚州的卡顿伍德克里克）校准了水土评估工具的水文模型。我们发现，校准周期的选择（具有不同的观测流量，降水，和空气温度）影响了参数集，导致水平衡要素的模拟不同。在卡顿伍德克里克流域，对50年平均一月流量的模拟变化了32％，这是因为在较早的校准期间对校准参数的冬季降水和气温较低，这削弱了对较早校准的模型进行后期模拟的能力。该流域的实际蒸散量峰值也因4月至5月的变化而变化，这是由于标定期的冬季气温不同而导致的参数值不同。在圣约瑟夫河和埃斯坎比亚河流域，径流曲线数参数的调整可能分别变化10.7％和20.8％，而50年平均每月地面径流模拟可能变化23％–37％和169％–209 ％，取决于观察到的流量和所选校准周期的降水量。当务之急是有选择地而不是任意选择校准和验证时间段，例如使用变化点检测方法，并且考虑到非平稳时间序列对水平衡模拟可能产生的广泛影响，校准时间段应适合研究目标。水文建模界还必须改善现有的校准和验证方法，以更好地包括非平稳过程，这一点也至关重要。考虑到非平稳时间序列对水平衡模拟可能产生的广泛影响，因此校准周期适合本研究的目标。水文建模界还必须改善现有的校准和验证方法，以更好地包括非平稳过程，这一点也至关重要。考虑到非平稳时间序列对水平衡模拟可能产生的广泛影响，因此校准周期适合本研究的目标。水文建模界还必须改善现有的校准和验证方法，以更好地包括非平稳过程，这一点也至关重要。

更新日期：2021-02-19

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

阅读更多本刊最新论文本刊介绍/投稿指南11