 |
| Titel |
Multi-site calibration, validation, and sensitivity analysis of the MIKE SHE Model for a large watershed in northern China |
| VerfasserIn |
S. Wang, Z. Zhang, G. Sun, P. Strauss, J. Guo, Y. Tang, A. Yao |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1027-5606
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Hydrology and Earth System Sciences ; 16, no. 12 ; Nr. 16, no. 12 (2012-12-06), S.4621-4632 |
| Datensatznummer |
250013608
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/hess-16-4621-2012.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Model calibration is essential for hydrologic modeling of large watersheds in
a heterogeneous mountain environment. Little guidance is available for model
calibration protocols for distributed models that aim at capturing the
spatial variability of hydrologic processes. This study used the
physically-based distributed hydrologic model, MIKE SHE, to contrast a lumped
calibration protocol that used streamflow measured at one single watershed
outlet to a multi-site calibration method which employed streamflow
measurements at three stations within the large Chaohe River basin
in northern China. Simulation results showed that the single-site calibrated
model was able to sufficiently simulate the hydrographs for two of the three
stations (Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of 0.65–0.75, and correlation
coefficient 0.81–0.87 during the testing period), but the model performed
poorly for the third station (Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient only 0.44).
Sensitivity analysis suggested that streamflow of upstream area of the
watershed was dominated by slow groundwater, whilst streamflow of middle- and
down- stream areas by relatively quick interflow. Therefore, a multi-site
calibration protocol was deemed necessary. Due to the potential errors and
uncertainties with respect to the representation of spatial variability,
performance measures from the multi-site calibration protocol slightly
decreased for two of the three stations, whereas it was improved greatly for
the third station. We concluded that multi-site calibration protocol reached
a compromise in term of model performance for the three stations, reasonably
representing the hydrographs of all three stations with Nash-Sutcliffe
coefficient ranging from 0.59–072. The multi-site calibration protocol
applied in the analysis generally has advantages to the single site
calibration protocol. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|