With population growth, industrialization, and urbanization within the watershed, the hydrologic response changed dramatically, resulting in increases in peak flow with lesser time to peak and total runoff with shortened time of concentration. Infiltration is directly affected by initial soil moistu...
With population growth, industrialization, and urbanization within the watershed, the hydrologic response changed dramatically, resulting in increases in peak flow with lesser time to peak and total runoff with shortened time of concentration. Infiltration is directly affected by initial soil moisture condition, which is a key element to determine runoff. Influence of the initial soil moisture condition on hydrograph analysis should be evaluated to assess land use change impacts on runoff and non-point source pollution characteristics. The Long-Term Hydrologic Impact Assessment (L-THIA) model has been widely used for the estimation of the direct runoff worldwide. The L-THIA model was applied to the Little Eagle Creek (LEC) watershed and Its estimated direct runoff values were compared with the BFLOW filtered direct runoff values by other researchers. The $R^2$ value Was 0.68 and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value was 0.64. Also, the L-THIA estimates were compared with those separated using optimized $BFI_{max}$ value for the Eckhardt filter. The $R^2$ value and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value were 0.66 and 0.63, respectively. Although these higher statistics could indicate that the L-THIA model is good in estimating the direct runoff reasonably well, the Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) was not adjusted in that study, which might be responsible for mismatches in peak flow between the L-THIA estimated and the measured peak values. In this study, the L-THIA model was run with AMC adjustment for direct runoff estimation. The $R^2$ value was 0.80 and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value was 0.78 for the comparison of L-THIA simulated direct runoff with the filtered direct runoff. However there was 42.44% differences in the L-THIA estimated direct runoff and filtered direct runoff. This can be explained in that about 80% of the simulation period is classified as 'AMC I' condition, which caused lower CN values and lower direct runoff estimation. Thus, the coefficients of the equation to adjust CN II to CN I and CN III depending on AMC condition were modified to minimize adjustments impacts on runoff estimation. The $R^2$ and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient values increase, 0.80 and 0.80 respectively. The difference in the estimated and filtered direct runoff decreased from 42.44% to 7.99%. The results obtained in this study indicate the AMC needs to be considered for accurate direct runoff estimation using the L-THIA model. Also, more researches are needed for realistic adjustment of the AMC in the L-THIA model.
With population growth, industrialization, and urbanization within the watershed, the hydrologic response changed dramatically, resulting in increases in peak flow with lesser time to peak and total runoff with shortened time of concentration. Infiltration is directly affected by initial soil moisture condition, which is a key element to determine runoff. Influence of the initial soil moisture condition on hydrograph analysis should be evaluated to assess land use change impacts on runoff and non-point source pollution characteristics. The Long-Term Hydrologic Impact Assessment (L-THIA) model has been widely used for the estimation of the direct runoff worldwide. The L-THIA model was applied to the Little Eagle Creek (LEC) watershed and Its estimated direct runoff values were compared with the BFLOW filtered direct runoff values by other researchers. The $R^2$ value Was 0.68 and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value was 0.64. Also, the L-THIA estimates were compared with those separated using optimized $BFI_{max}$ value for the Eckhardt filter. The $R^2$ value and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value were 0.66 and 0.63, respectively. Although these higher statistics could indicate that the L-THIA model is good in estimating the direct runoff reasonably well, the Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) was not adjusted in that study, which might be responsible for mismatches in peak flow between the L-THIA estimated and the measured peak values. In this study, the L-THIA model was run with AMC adjustment for direct runoff estimation. The $R^2$ value was 0.80 and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient value was 0.78 for the comparison of L-THIA simulated direct runoff with the filtered direct runoff. However there was 42.44% differences in the L-THIA estimated direct runoff and filtered direct runoff. This can be explained in that about 80% of the simulation period is classified as 'AMC I' condition, which caused lower CN values and lower direct runoff estimation. Thus, the coefficients of the equation to adjust CN II to CN I and CN III depending on AMC condition were modified to minimize adjustments impacts on runoff estimation. The $R^2$ and the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient values increase, 0.80 and 0.80 respectively. The difference in the estimated and filtered direct runoff decreased from 42.44% to 7.99%. The results obtained in this study indicate the AMC needs to be considered for accurate direct runoff estimation using the L-THIA model. Also, more researches are needed for realistic adjustment of the AMC in the L-THIA model.
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.