Advertisement

Runoff Simulation Using SWAT Model in the Middle Reaches of the Dagu River Basin

  • Fu-hui Du
  • Li Tao
  • Xin-mei Chen
  • Huai-xian Yao
Conference paper
Part of the Environmental Earth Sciences book series (EESCI)

Abstract

This article uses Dagu River basin that is located in Qingdao of Shandong Province as the research object, and sets up the hydrological model using SWAT hydrological model and the software of ARCGIS 9.3 which was combined with the basin DEM figure, soil, land use, the observed meteorological data and runoff data. It then established a simulation for regional hydrology on the basis of the runoff data in 1986–2000 and adjusts sensitive parameters by SWAT CUP-2012. The results showed that the determination coefficient (R2) was higher than 0.8 and Nash efficiency coefficient (NS) was higher than 0.7. Therefore, the simulation results can meet the requirements. In addition, it sets up five different land use scenarios and 25 kinds of assumptions of the weather situations to analyze the surface runoff variation of Dagu River basin with two different scenarios, and then sums up the impact of surface runoff influenced by land use change and climate change in Dagu River. The simulation results have an important reference value and practical significance for the sustainable development of this basin in the future and a reasonable allocation of water resources.

Keywords

Runoff simulation SWAT model Land use change Dagu River basin 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was financially supported by Key research and development project of Hebei Province (16263604D).

References

  1. 1.
    Freeze, R.A., Harlan, R.L.: Blueprint for a physically-based-digitally simulated hydrological response model. J. Hydrol. 9, 237–258 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hewlett, J., Troendle, C.: Non-point and diffused water sources: a variable source area problem. In: Watershed Management Proceeding Symposium of American Society of Civil Engineers. New York held in Logan, Utah (1975)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beven, K.J., Kirkby, M.J.: A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrol. Bull. 24, 43–69 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abbott, M.B., Bathurst, J.C., Cunge, J.A., et al.: An introduction to the European hydrological system-system hydrologique European. “SHE”, l: history and philosophy hydrology of a physically-based distributed modeling system. J. Hydrol. 87(1–2), 45–59 (1986)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abbort, M.B., Bathurst, J.C., Cunge, J.A., et al.: An introduction to the European hydrological system-system hydrologique European. “SHE”, 2: structure of a physically based distributed modeling system. J. Hydrol. 87(1–2), 61–77 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bathurst, J.C., Wiek, J.M., O’Connell, P.E.: The SHE/SHESED basin scale water flow and sediment transport modeling system. Colorado water flow Water Resources (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., et al.: Soil and water assessment tool’s theoretical documentation, version 2000. TWRI Report TR-191, Texas Water Resources Institute, College Station, Texas (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Srinivasan, R.: Integration of a basin-scale water quality model with GIS. Water Resour. Bull. 30(3), 453–462 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arnold, J.G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R.S.: Large-area hydrologic modeling and assessment-Part 1: model development. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 34(1), 73–89 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arnold, J.G., Allen, P.M.: Automated methods for estimating base flow and groundwater recharge from stream flow. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 35(2), 411–424 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rosenthal, W.D., Hoffman, D.W.: Hydrologic modeling/GIS as an aid in locating monitoring sites. Trans. ASAE 42(6), 1591–1598 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harmel, R.D., Richardson, C.W., King, K.W: Hydrologic response of a small watershed model to generated precipitation. Trans. ASAE 43(6), 1483–1488 [28] (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chanasyk, D.S., Map Fumo, E., Wilhns, W.: Quantification and simulation of surface runoff from fescue grassland watersheds. Agric. Water Manag. 59(2), 137–153 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bingner, R.L.: Runoff simulated from Goodwin Creek watershed using SWAT. Trans. ASAE 39(1), 85–90 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Andrea, W., Fohrer, N., Moler, D.: Long-term land use change in a mesoscale watershed due to socio-economic factors-effects on and landscape structures functions. Ecol. Model. 140(1–2), 125–140 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kannan, N., White, S.M., Worrall, F.: Sensitivity analysis and identification of the best evapotranspiration and runoff options for hydrological modeling in SWAT2000. J. Hydrol. (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pandey, V.K., Panda, S.N., Sudhakar, S.: Modelling of an agricultural watershed using remote sensing and a geographic information system. Biosyst. Eng. 90(3), 331–347 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eckhardt, K., Haverkamp, S., Fohrer, N., Frede, H.G.: SWAT-G a version of SWAT99.2 modified for application to low mountain range catchments. Phys. Chem. Earth 27(9/10), 641–644 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fontaine, T.A., Cruickshank, T.S., Arnold, J.G., et al.: Development of a snowfall–snowmelt routine for mountainous terrain for the soil water assessment tool (SWAT). J. Hydrol. 262, 209–223 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fu-hui Du
    • 1
  • Li Tao
    • 1
  • Xin-mei Chen
    • 2
  • Huai-xian Yao
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Hydraulics and Electric PowerHebei University of EngineeringHandanChina
  2. 2.Water Resources Bureau of Handan, HebeiHandanChina
  3. 3.Water Resources Bureau of GuantaoGuantaoChina

Personalised recommendations