Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 127–140 | Cite as

Assessment of water balance for a forest dominated coastal river basin in India using a semi distributed hydrological model

  • Sridhara Setti
  • Maheswaran Rathinasamy
  • S. Chandramouli
Original Article


Nagavali River plays a major role in supporting agriculture and water supply demands in parts of the Kalahandi, Rayagada and Koraput districts of Odisha and Vizianagaram and Srikakulam districts of Andhra Pradesh. With the increase in demand for water and stress from the climate change, there is a need to understand the water balance of the river basin and suggest suitable measures to improve water resources development and water harvesting. In this study, a semi-distributed model, soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) is used to study the spatio-temporal water balance for the entire basin. The model was calibrated and validated at monthly scale using the observed river discharge at Srikakulam over a period of 15 years from 1985 to 2000. Calibration and Validation results for stream flow are satisfactory on a monthly scale. The seasonal water budget analysis reveals that 70% of the annual rainfall and 74% of the annual runoff occur during the monsoon season. The sensitivity analysis showed that the lateral flow travel time, average slope steepness, curve number, available water capacity of the soil basin are the most sensitive parameters. Further the spatial analysis of the water balance components show that there is considerable difference in the precipitation and streamflow within the basin ranging from 914 to 1319 and 82 to 246 mm respectively. The results from the study provide valuable information for the proposed interlinking projects in the future.


SWAT model Water balance Nagavali river basin region (NRB) 



The financial assistance provided by Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India under the schemes of Inspire Faculty Award and the Early Career Research Award held by Dr.Maheswaran is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. Abbaspour KC, Yang J, Maximov I, Siber R, Bogner K, Mieleitner J, Zobrist J, Srinivasan R (2007) Modelling hydrology and water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using SWAT. J Hydrol 333:413–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arabi M, Frankenberger JR, Engel BA, Arnold JG (2008) Representation of agricultural conservation practices with SWAT. J Hydrol Process 22:3042–3055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold JG, Allen PM, Bernhardt G (1993) A comprehensive surface-groundwater flow model. J Hydrol 142(1–4):47–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development. J AWRA 34:1Google Scholar
  5. Batelis S-C, Nalbantis I (2014) Potential effects of forest fires on streamflow in the Enipeas river basin, Thessaly, Greece. J Environ Process 1:73–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Central Water Commission, Annual Report (2006–2007), Govt. of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Chien H, Yeh PJF, Knouft JH (2013) Modeling the potential impacts of climate change on streamflow in agricultural watersheds of the Midwestern United States. J Hydrol 491:73–88, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.03.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eckhardt K, Arnold J (2001) Automatic calibration of a distributed catchment model. J Hydrol 251:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garg KK, Wani SP, Barron J, Karlberg L, Rockstrom J (2012) Up-scaling potential impacts on water flows from agricultural water interventions: opportunities and trade-offs in the Osman Sagar catchment, Musi sub-basin, India. J Hydrol Process 27:3905–3921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gassman P, Reyes M, Green C, Arnold J (2007) The soil and water assessment tool: historical development, applications, and future research directions invited review series transactions. J ASABE 50:1211–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gosain A, Rao S, Srinivasan R, Reddy NG (2005) Return-flow assessment for irrigation command in the Palleru River basin using SWAT model. J Hydrol Process 19:673–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta HV, Sorooshian S, Yapo PO (1999) Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: Comparison with multilevel expert calibration. J Hydrol Eng 4:135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hamed KH, Rao AR (1998) A modified Mann-Kendall trend test for autocorrelated data. J Hydrol 204(1–4):182–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Himanshu SK, Pandey A, Shrestha P (2017) Application of SWAT in an Indian river basin for modeling runoff, sediment and water balance. J Environ Earth Sci 76:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holvoet K, Van Griensven A, Gevaert V, Seuntjens P, Vanrolleghem PA (2008) Modifications to the SWAT code for modelling direct pesticide losses. J Environ Model Softw 23:72–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jang SS, Ahn SR, Kim SJ (2016) Evaluation of executable best management practices in Haean highland agricultural catchment of South Korea using SWAT. J Agric Water Manag 180:224–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khare D, Patra D, Mondal A, Kundu S (2015) Impact of landuse/land cover change on run-off in a catchment of Narmada river in India. Appl Geomatics 7:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim J, Choi J, Choi C, Park S (2012) Impacts of changes in climate and land use/land cover under IPCC RCP scenarios on streamflow in the Hoeya River Basin, Korea. J Sci Total Environ 452:181–195Google Scholar
  19. Kumar S, Mishra A, Raghuwanshi NS (2014) Identification of critical erosion watersheds for control management in data scarce condition using the SWAT model. J Hydrol Eng 20:C4014008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Laflen J, Elliot W, Simanton J, Holzhey C, Kohl K (1991a) WEPP: Soil erodibility experiments for rangeland and cropland soils. J Soil Water Conserv 46:39–44Google Scholar
  21. Laflen JM, Lane LJ, Foster GR (1991b) WEPP: A new generation of erosion prediction technology. J Soil Water Conserv 46:34–38Google Scholar
  22. Legates DR, McCabe J (1999) Evaluating the use of goodness-of-fit measures in hydrologic and hydro climatic model validation. J Water Resour Res 35:233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lenhart T, Eckhardt K, Fohrer N, Frede HG (2002) Comparison of two different approaches of sensitivity analysis. J Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 27:645–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li D, Christakos G, Ding X, Wu J (2017) Adequacy of TRMM satellite rainfall data in driving the SWAT modelling of Tiaoxi catchment (Taihu lake basin, China). J Hydrol 0022–1694Google Scholar
  25. Mani A, Mooley DA (1983) Wind energy data for India. Allied, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  26. Monteith JL (1965) Evaporation and the environment. In: 19th Symposia of the society for experimental biology: the state and movement of water in living organisms. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 205–234Google Scholar
  27. Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2006) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. J Trans Asabe 50:885–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Murty P, Pandey A, Suryavanshi S (2013) Application of semi—distributed hydrological model for basin level water balance of the Ken basin of Central India. Hydrol Process 28:4119–4129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Narasimhan B, Srinivasan R, Bednarz ST, Ernst MR, Allen PM (2010) A comprehensive modeling approach for reservoir water quality assessment and management due to point and nonpoint source pollution. J ASABE 535:1605–1617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Narsimlu B, Gosain AK, Chahar BR (2013) Assessment of future climate change impacts on water resources of upper sind river basin, India using SWAT model. J Water Resourc Manag 27:3647–3662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I- A discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10:282–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR, King KW (2002) Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation. Ver. 2000. USDA‐ARS Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory and Texas A&M University, Blackland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TexasGoogle Scholar
  33. Park J (2011) Assessment of future climate change impacts on water quantity and quality for a mountainous dam watershed using SWAT. J T Asabe 54:1725–1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Qi J, Li S, Li Q, Xing Z, Bourque CP-A, Meng F-R (2016) Assessing an enhanced version of SWAT on water quantity and quality simulation in regions with seasonal snow cover. J Water Resourc Manag 30:5021–5037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rahman MM, Lin Z, Jia X, Steele DD, DeSutter TM (2012) Impact of subsurface drainage on streamflows in the Red River of the North basin. J Hydrol 511:474–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Reshmidevi T, Kumar DN, Mehrotra R, Sharma A (2014) Estimation of the climate change impact on a catchment water balance using an ensemble of GCMs. J Hydrol 1694(17):30093–30096Google Scholar
  37. Roth V, Nigussie TK, Lemann T (2016) Model parameter transfer for streamflow and sediment loss prediction with SWAT in a tropical watershed. J Environ Earth Sci 75:1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Santhi C, Arnold JG, Williams JR, Dugas WA, Srinivasan R, Hauck LM (2001) Validation of the swat model on a large rwer basin with point and nonpoint sources. J AWRA 37:1169–1188Google Scholar
  39. Schilling KE, Manoj KJ, Zhang YK, Gassman PW, Wolter CF (2008) Impact of land use and land cover change on the water balance of a large agricultural watershed: historical effects and future directions. J Water Resour Res 44:W00A09Google Scholar
  40. Setti S, Maheswaran, Chandramouli Ch (2017) Hydrological modelling of Nagavalli River Basin. In: Proceeding of international conference on emerging trends in water resources and environmental engineering, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  41. Shrestha RR, Dibike YB, Prowse TD (2012) Modelling of climate-induced hydrologic changes in the Lake Winnipeg watershed. J Great Lakes Res 38:83–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shrestha S, Shrestha M, Shrestha PK (2017) Evaluation of the SWAT model performance for simulating river discharge in the Himalayan and tropical basins of Asia. J Hydrol Res 2017:189. Google Scholar
  43. Srinivasan R, Arnold JG (1994) Integration of a basin-scale water quality model with GIS. J AWRA 30:453–462Google Scholar
  44. Srinivasan R, Ramanarayanan TS, Arnold JG, Bednarz ST (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part II: model application. J AWRA 34:91–101Google Scholar
  45. Suryavanshi S, Pandey A, Chaube UC (2016) Hydrological simulation of the Betwa River basin (India) using the SWAT model. J Hydrol Sci 62:960–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tarboton DG (2005) Terrain analysis using digital elevation models (TauDEM). Utah State University, LoganGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Griensven A, Meixner T, Grunwald S, Bishop T, Diluzio M, Srinivasan R (2006) A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. J Hydrol 324:10–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Liew MW, Veith TL, Bosch DD, Arnold JG (2007) Suitability of SWAT for the conservation effects assessment project: comparison on USDA agricultural research service watersheds. J Hydrol Eng 12(2):173–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. White KL, Chaubey I (2005) Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model. J AWRA 41(5):1077–1089Google Scholar
  50. Willmott CJ (1981) On the validation of models. J Phys Geogr 2:184–194Google Scholar
  51. Woznicki SA, Nejadhashemi AP, Abouali M, Herman MR, Esfahanian E, Hamaamin YA, Zhang Z (2012) Ecohydrological modeling for large-scale environmental impact assessment. J Sci Total Environ 543:274–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wua Y, Chen J (2014) Estimating irrigation water demand using an improved method and optimizing reservoir operation for water supply and hydropower generation: a case study of the Xinfengjiang reservoir in southern China. Agric Water Manag. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringMVGR College of EngineeringVizianagaramIndia

Personalised recommendations