Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the impact of lower resolutions of digital elevation model on rainfall-runoff modeling for ungauged catchments

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph (GIUH) usually uses geomorphologic parameters of catchment estimated from digital elevation model (DEM) for rainfall-runoff modeling of ungauged watersheds with limited data. Higher resolutions (e.g., 5 or 10 m) of DEM play an important role in the accuracy of rainfall-runoff models; however, such resolutions are expansive to obtain and require much greater efforts and time for preparation of inputs. In this research, a modeling framework is developed to evaluate the impact of lower resolutions (i.e., 30 and 90 m) of DEM on the accuracy of Clark GIUH model. Observed rainfall-runoff data of a 202-km2 catchment in a semiarid region was used to develop direct runoff hydrographs for nine rainfall events. Geographical information system was used to process both the DEMs. Model accuracy and errors were estimated by comparing the model results with the observed data. The study found (i) high model efficiencies greater than 90% for both the resolutions, and (ii) that the efficiency of Clark GIUH model does not significantly increase by enhancing the resolution of the DEM from 90 to 30 m. Thus, it is feasible to use lower resolutions (i.e., 90 m) of DEM in the estimation of peak runoff in ungauged catchments with relatively less efforts. Through sensitivity analysis (Monte Carlo simulations), the kinematic wave parameter and stream length ratio are found to be the most significant parameters in velocity and peak flow estimations, respectively; thus, they need to be carefully estimated for calculation of direct runoff in ungauged watersheds using Clark GIUH model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altaf, F., Meraj, G., & Romshoo, S. (2013). Morphometric analysis to infer hydrological behaviour of Lidder watershed, Western Himalaya, India. Geography Journal, 1–14. doi:10.1155/2013/178021.

  • Bhimjiani, H. M. (2015). A survey paper on prediction of runoff for ungauged catchment. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 2(4), 881–883.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buakhao, W., & Kangrang, A. (2016). DEM resolution impact on the estimation of the physical characteristics of watersheds by using SWAT. Advances in Civil Engineering, 8180158, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. O. (1945). Storage and the unit hydrograph. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Transactions, 10, 1419–1446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, T., Diekkrüger, B., & Bogena, H. R. (2016). Using high-resolution data to test parameter sensitivity of the distributed hydrological model HydroGeoSphere. Water, 8(5), 202:1–20221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devi, G. K., Ganasri, B. P., & Dwarakish, G. S. (2015). A review on hydrological models, international conference on water resources, coastal and ocean engineering (ICWRCOE 2015). Aquatic Procedia, 4(2015), 1001–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, B., & Earls, J. (2009). Resample or not?! Effects of resolution of DEMs in watershed modeling. Hydrological Processes, 23, 1714–1724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghaffari, G. (2011). The impact of DEM resolution on runoff and sediment modelling results. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5(8), 691–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghumman, A. R., Ahmad, M. M., Hashmi, H. N., & Kamal, M. A. (2012). Development of geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph for a large watershed. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184, 3153–3163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghumman, A. R., Kheder, K., Hashmi, H. N., & Ahmad, M. M. (2014). Comparison of Clark and geographical instantaneous unit hydrograph models for arid and semi arid regions. International Journal of Water Resources and Arid Environments, 3(1), 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haider, H., Sadiq, R., & Tesfamariam, S. (2016). Intra-utility performance management model (In-UPM) for the sustainability of small to medium sized water utilities: conceptualization to development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133(1), 777–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasan, E., Khan, S. I., & Hong, Y. (2015). Investigation of potential sea level rise impact on the Nile Delta, Egypt using digital elevation models. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(2015), 649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, R. E. (1945). Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitayive morphology. Bull., Geological Soc. of Am., 56, 275–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini, S., Mahjouri, N., & Riahi, S. (2016). Development of a direct geomorphologic IUH model for daily runoff estimation in ungauged watersheds. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 05016008. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001333.

  • Jena, P., Panigrahi, B., & Chatterjee, C. (2016). Assessment of Cartosat-1 DEM for modeling floods in data scarce regions. Water Resources Management, 1293–1309. doi:10.1007/s11269-016-1226-9.

  • Jing, L., & Wong, D. W. S. (2010). Effects of DEM sources on hydrologic applications. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34, 251–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kar, K., Yang, S., & Lee, J. (2015). Assessing unit hydrograph parameters and peak runoff responses from storm rainfall events: a case study in Hancheon Basin of Jeju Island. Journal of Environmental Science International, 437–447. doi:10.5322/JESI.2015.24.4.437.

  • Kumar, A. (2015). Geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph based hydrologic response models for ungauged hilly watersheds in India. Water Resources Management, 863–883. doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0848-z.

  • Lampe, J., Platten, J.. (2015), Triangular distributions and correlations—the simple math behind triangular distributions and correlations in Monte Carlo simulations. Cited on 24th Dec 2016 <http://www.iceaaonline.com/ready/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/RI08-Presentation-Lampe-Triangular-Distributions.pdf>

  • Lin, S., Jing, C., & Chaplot, V. (2010). Effect of DEM resolution on SWAT outputs of runoff, sediment and nutrients. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 7(4), 4411–4435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linsley, R. K., Kohler, M. A., & Paulhus, J. L. H. (1982). Hydrology for engineers (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Marconi, M., Gatto, B., Magni, M., & Marincioni, F. (2016). A rapid method for flood susceptibility mapping in two districts of Phatthalung Province (Thailand): present and projected conditions for 2050. Natural Hazards, 81(1), 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mirza, M., Dawod, G., & Al-Ghamdi, K. (2011). Accuracy and relevance of digital elevation models for geomatics applications—a case study of Makkah municipality. Saudi Arabia, International Journal Of Geomatics And Geosciences, 1, 803–812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mondal, S., Jana, S., Majumder, M., & Roy, D. (2012). A comparative study for prediction of direct runoff for a river basin using geomorphological approach and artificial neural networks. Applied Water Science, 2(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutreja, K. M. (1986), Hydrologic synthesis and simulation, Applied Hydrology, 613–668

  • Nash, J. E., & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models, part-I: a discussion of principles. Journal for Hydrology, 10(3), 282–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponce, V. M. (1980). Linear reservoirs and numerical diffusion. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, 106(5), 691–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponce, V. M. (1989). Engineering hydrology: principles and practices. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pumo, D., Viola, F., & Noto, L. V. (2016). Generation of natural runoff monthly series at ungauged sites using a regional regressive model. Water, 8(202), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., & Valdes, J. B. (1979). The geomorphologic structure of hydrologic response. Wat. Resour. Res., 15(6), 1409–1420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., Gonzalez-Sanabria, M., & Bras, R. L. (1982). A geomorphoclimatic theory of instantaneous unit hydrograph. Water Resources Research, 18, 877–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadeghi, S., Mostafazadeh, R., & Sadoddin, A. (2015). Changeability of simulated hydrograph from a steep watershed resulted from applying Clark’s IUH and different time–area histograms. Environmental Earth Sciences, 74(4), 3629–3643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, K., & Sarkar, S. (2013). Development of GIUH for the catchment contributing to Loktak Lake, North East India. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 41(2), 447–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, M. L., Ficklin, D. L., Dixon, B., Ibrahim, A. L., Yusop, Z., & Chaplot, V. (2015). Impacts of DEM resolution, source, and resampling technique on SWAT-simulated streamflow. Applied Geography, 63, 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WRI. (2016), World’s 36 most water-stressed countries, World Resources Institute (WRI), 2015 Annual Report, < http://www.wri.org/blog/2013/12/world%E2%80%99s-36-most-water-stressed-countries> cited on May 2016

  • Zafer, A. (2015). Geographic instantaneous unit hydrograph models for direct runoff from arid area of Pakistan, MSc thesis. Taxila: University of Engineering and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The co-operation from the Meteorological Department Lahore and Rawalpindi Pakistan is acknowledged. The moral support from the University of Engineering and Technology Taxila, Pakistan, and Faculty of Engineering, Qassim University, is also commendable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Qassim University, Buraydah, 52571, Saudi Arabia

    Abul Razzaq Ghumman, Ibrahim Saleh Al-Salamah, Saleem Saleh AlSaleem & Husnain Haider

  2. On leave from University of Engineering and Technology Taxila, Taxila, Pakistan

    Abul Razzaq Ghumman

Authors
  1. Abul Razzaq Ghumman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibrahim Saleh Al-Salamah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saleem Saleh AlSaleem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Husnain Haider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abul Razzaq Ghumman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghumman, A.R., Al-Salamah, I.S., AlSaleem, S.S. et al. Evaluating the impact of lower resolutions of digital elevation model on rainfall-runoff modeling for ungauged catchments. Environ Monit Assess 189, 54 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-5766-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-5766-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation