Advertisement

Journal of Geographical Sciences

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 1039–1060 | Cite as

A review of underlying surface parameterization methods in hydrologic models

  • Lingling Zhao
  • Changming LiuEmail author
  • Leszek Sobkowiak
  • Xiaoxiao Wu
  • Jiafu Liu
Article
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

Numerous topography, land-cover, land-use, and soil-type parameterization methods are required to simulate the hydrologic cycle. In this paper, using the principles of hydrologic cycle simulation, 20 methods commonly applied to runoff-yield simulation are analyzed. Additionally, parameterization methods used in 17 runoff-yield simulation methods and 15 confluence methods are discussed, including the degree of parameterization. Next, the parameterization methods are classified into four categories: not clearly expressed; calibrated; deterministic; and physical—conceptual. Furthermore, we clarify responses and contributions of different parameterization methods to hydrologic cycle simulation results. Finally, major weaknesses of simplified descriptions of complex rational and physical mechanisms in the parameterization methods of the underlying surfaces in hydrologic models are outlined, and two directions of future development are estimated, looking toward simple practicality and complex mechanization.

Keywords

hydrologic cycle simulation watershed topography land use and cover watershed characteristics parameterization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbott M B, Bathhurst J C, Cunge J A et al., 1986a. An introduction to the European Hydrologic System-Systeme Hydrologique European, SHE: 1. History and philosophy of a physically based distributed modeling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87(1): 45–59.Google Scholar
  2. Abbott M B, Bathhurst J C, Cunge J A et al., 1986b. An introduction to the European Hydrologic System-Systeme Hydrologique European, SHE: 2. Structure of a physically-based distributed modeling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87(1): 61–77.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold J G, Williams J R, Srinivasan R et al., 1998. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment (Part 1): Model development. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 34(1): 73–89.Google Scholar
  4. Bajracharya K, Barry D A, 1997. Accuracy criteria for linearised diffusion wave flood routing. Journal of Hydrology, 195(1): 200–217.Google Scholar
  5. Bao W, 2006. Hydrologic Forecasting. Beijing: China Water & Power Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  6. Bao W, Zhang J, 2008. Hydrologic Forecasting. Beijing: China Water & Power Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  7. Beven K J, Kirkby M J, Schofield N et al., 1984. Testing a physically based flood-forecasting model (Topmodel) for three UK catchments. Journal of Hydrology, 69(1): 119–143.Google Scholar
  8. Beven K, Lamb R, Quinn P et al., 1995. Topmodel. In: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology. Colorado: Water Resources Publications, 627–668.Google Scholar
  9. Cunge J A, 1969. On the subject of a flood propagation computation method (Muskingum Method). Journal of Hydraulic Research, 7(2): 205–230.Google Scholar
  10. Entekhabi D, Asrar G R, Betts A K et al., 1999. An agenda for land surface hydrology research and a call for the second international hydrologic decade. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 80(10): 2043–2058.Google Scholar
  11. Feldman A D, 1981. HEC models for water resources system simulation: Theory and experience. Advance in Hydroscience, 12: 297–423.Google Scholar
  12. Govindaraju R S, Kavvas M L, Jones S E, 1990. Approximate analytical solutions for overland flows. Water Resources Research, 26(12): 2903–2912.Google Scholar
  13. Green W H, Ampt G A, 1911. Studies on soil physics (Part 1): The flow of air and water through soils. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 4: 1–24.Google Scholar
  14. Gupta V K, Waymire E, Wang C T, 1980. A representation of an instantaneous unit hydrograph from geomorphology. Water Resources Research, 16(5): 855–862.Google Scholar
  15. Horton R E, 1935. Surface runoff phenomena. Horton Hydrology Laboratory.Google Scholar
  16. Horton R E, 1940. An approach towards a physical interpretation of infiltration-capacity. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 5: 399–417.Google Scholar
  17. Huber W C, Heaney J P et al., 2008. Storm Water Management Model User’s Manual (Version 5.0). US: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
  18. Jia Y, Ni G, Kawahara Y et al., 2001. Development of WEP model and its application to an urban watershed. Hydrologic Process, 15(11): 2175–2194.Google Scholar
  19. Jia Y, Wang H, Zhou Z et al., 2006. Development of the WEP-L distributed hydrologic model and dynamic assessment of water resources in the Yellow River Basin. Journal of Hydrology, 331(3): 606–629.Google Scholar
  20. Kuk-Hyun A, Venkatesh M, 2014. Quantifying the relative impact of climate and human activities on stream flow. Journal of Hydrology, 515: 257–266.Google Scholar
  21. Lei X, Jiang Y, Wang H et al., 2010a. Distributed hydrologic model Easy DHM II: Application. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 41(8): 893–899. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  22. Lei X, Liao W, Jiang Y et al., 2010b. Distributed hydrologic model Easy DHM I: Theory. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 41(7): 786–794. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  23. Li J, Liu C, Wang Z et al., 2015. Two universal runoff yield models: SCS vs. LCM. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 25(3): 311–318.Google Scholar
  24. Li Li, 2007. Study on flood routing of distributed hydrologic models [D]. Nanjing: Hohai University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  25. Liang X, Lettenmaier D P, Wood E F, 1994. A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models. Journal of Geophysical Research, 99(D7): 14415–14428.Google Scholar
  26. Liang X, Wood E F, Lettenmaier D P, 1996. Surface soil moisture parameterization of the VIC-2L model: Evaluation and modification. Global and Planetary Change, 13(1): 195–206.Google Scholar
  27. Liang W, Bai D, Wang F et al., 2015. Quantifying the impacts of climate change and ecological restoration on stream flow changes based on a Budyko hydrological model in China’s Loess Plateau. Water Resources Research, 51(8): 6500–6519.Google Scholar
  28. Linsley R K, Kohler M A, Paulhus J L et al., 1975. Hydrology for Engineers. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  29. Liu C, Zheng H, Wang Z, 2006. Distribution Regional Hydrologic Cycle Simulation. Zhengzhou: Yellow River Conservancy Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  30. Liu C, Wang Z, Zheng H et al., 2008. Development and application of HIMS system and its custom model. Science in China Press E: Technology Science, 38(3): 350–360. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  31. Liu C, Wang Z, Yang S et al., 2014. Hydro-informatic modeling system: Aiming at water cycle in land surface material and energy exchange processes. Acta Geographica Sinica, 69(5): 579–587. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  32. Liu J, Qiang Z, Xi C et al., 2016. Quantitative evaluations of human- and climate-induced impacts on hydrological processes of China. Acta Geographica Sinica, 71(11): 1875–1885. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  33. Liu Z, Todini E, 2002. Towards a comprehensive physically-based rainfall-runoff model. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 6(5): 859–881.Google Scholar
  34. Lu G, He H, 2006. View of global hydrologic cycle. Advances in Water Science, 17(3): 419–424. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  35. Lu G, Wu Z, He H, 2010. Hydrologic Cycle and Quantity Forecast. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  36. McCarthy G T, 1938. The unit hydrograph and flood routing. Conference of the North Atlantic Division of US Corps of Engineers.Google Scholar
  37. Mishra S K, Singh V P, 2003. Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) Methodology. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Mo X, Liu S, 2004. Simulating the water balance of the Wuding River Basin in the Loess Plateau with a distribution eco-hydrologic model. Acta Geographica Sinica, 59(3): 341–348. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  39. Nash J E, 1957. The form of the instantaneous unit hydrograph. Hydrologic Science B, 45(3): 114–121.Google Scholar
  40. Nash J E, 1960. A unit hydrograph study with particular reference to British catchments. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers B, 17(3): 249–282.Google Scholar
  41. Neitsch S L, Arnold J G, Kiniry J R et al., 2011. Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation (Version 2009). Texas Water Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  42. Orlandini S, Perroti A, Sfondrini G et al., 1999. On the storm flow response of upland Alpine catchments. Hydrologic Processes, 13: 549–562.Google Scholar
  43. Philip J R, 1954. An infiltration equation with physical significance. Soil Science, 77(2): 153–157.Google Scholar
  44. Richards L A, 1931. Capillary conduction of liquids through porous mediums. Journal of Applied Physics, 1(5): 318–333.Google Scholar
  45. Rodriguez-Iturbe I, Valdes J B, 1979. The geomorphologic structure of hydrologic response. Water Resources Research, 15(6): 1409–1420.Google Scholar
  46. Rui X, 1997. Some problems in research of watershed hydrology model. Advances in Water Science, 8(1): 94–98. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  47. Rui X, 2004. Principles of Hydrology. Beijing: China Water Power Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  48. Singh V P, 1988. Hydrologic Systems: Rainfall-Runoff Modeling. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  49. Singh V P, 1994. Accuracy of kinematic wave and diffusion wave approximations for space-independent flows. Hydrologic Processes, 18(1): 45–62.Google Scholar
  50. Singh V P, 1995. Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology. Colorado: Water Resources Publications.Google Scholar
  51. Smith R E, Parlange J Y, 1978. A parameter-efficient hydrologic infiltration model. Water Resources Research, 14(3): 533–538.Google Scholar
  52. Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 1993. National Engineering Hand-book. Section 4: Hydrology. USDA, Springfield, VA.Google Scholar
  53. Skaggs R W, Khaleel R, 1982. Infiltration. In: Haan C T et al. (eds). Hydrologic Modeling of Small Watersheds. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI, 121–166.Google Scholar
  54. Tang Q, Huang Z, Liu X et al., 2015. Impacts of human water use on the large-scale terrestrial water cycle. Advances in Earth Science, 30(10): 1091–1099. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  55. Ullah W, Dickinson W T, 1979a. Quantitative description of depression storage using a digital surface model: I. Determination of depression storage. Journal of Hydrology, 42(1/2): 63–75.Google Scholar
  56. Ullah W, Dickinson W T, 1979b. Quantitative description of depression storage using a digital surface model: II. Characteristics of surface depressions. Journal of Hydrology, 42(1/2): 77–90.Google Scholar
  57. USACE, 2000. HEC-HMS Hydrologic Modeling System Technical Reference Manual. Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA.Google Scholar
  58. USACE, 2001. HEC-HMS Hydrologic Modeling System User’s Manual. Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA.Google Scholar
  59. Wang G, 2005. Theory and method of distributed time-variant gain model [D]. Beijing: IGSNRR. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  60. Wood E F, Sivapalan M, Beven K, 1988. Effects of spatial variability and scale with implications to hydrologic modeling. Journal of Hydrology, 102(1): 29–47.Google Scholar
  61. Xia J, 2002a. A system approach to real time hydrologic forecasts in watersheds. Water International, 27(1): 87–97.Google Scholar
  62. Xia J, 2002b. Theory and Method of Nonlinear Hydrologic System. Wuhan: Wuhan University Academic Library. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  63. Xia J, Duan Q, Luo Y et al., 2017. Climate change and water resources: Case study of Eastern Monsoon Region of China. Advances in Climate Change Research, 8: 63–67Google Scholar
  64. Xia J, Wang G, Tan G et al., 2005a. Development of distributed time-variant gain model for nonlinear hydrologic systems. Science in China: Series D, 48(6): 713–723.Google Scholar
  65. Xia J, Wang G, Ye A et al., 2005b. A distributed monthly water balance model for analyzing impacts of land cover change on flow regimes. Pedosphere, 15(6): 761–767.Google Scholar
  66. Xu Z, 2009. Hydrologic Model. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  67. Yuan F, Xie Z, Liu Q et al., 2004. An application of the VIC-3L land surface model and remote sensing data in simulating stream flow for the Hanjiang River basin. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 30(5): 680–690.Google Scholar
  68. Zhan D, Ye S, 2000. Engineering Hydrology. Beijing: China Water & Power Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  69. Zhang Q, Liu J, Singh V P et al., 2016. Evaluation of impacts of climate change and human activities on stream flow in the Poyang Lake basin, China. Hydrological Processes, 30(14): 2562–2576.Google Scholar
  70. Zhang S, Cordery L, Sharma A, 2002. Application of an improved linear storage routing model for the estimation of large floods. Journal of Hydrology, 258(1): 58–68.Google Scholar
  71. Zhang W, Guo S, 2007. The Theory and Method of Rainfall-Runoff. Wuhan: Hubei Science and Technology Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  72. Zhao L, Xia J, Xu C et al., 2013. Evapotranspiration estimation methods in hydrological models. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 23(2): 359–369.Google Scholar
  73. Zhao R, 1984. Regional Hydrologic Simulation: Xin’anjiang Model and Shanbei Model. Beijing: China Water & Power Press. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  74. Zhao R, Zhuang Y, 1963. Regional pattern of rainfall-runoff relationship. Journal of East China Technical University of Water Resources Engineering, (Suppl.2): 53–68. (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press Springer-Verlag 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lingling Zhao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Changming Liu
    • 2
    Email author
  • Leszek Sobkowiak
    • 3
  • Xiaoxiao Wu
    • 4
  • Jiafu Liu
    • 5
  1. 1.Guangzhou Institute of GeographyGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources ResearchCASBeijingChina
  3. 3.Institute of Physical Geography and Environmental PlanningAdam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznańPoland
  4. 4.Department of Earth and EnvironmentAnhui University of Science & TechnologyHuainan, AnhuiChina
  5. 5.Maoming Branch Hydrological Bureau of Guangdong ProvinceMaoming, GuangdongChina

Personalised recommendations