Abstract
The effective and efficient optimization of Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) parameters is critical to improving the accuracy of the urban rainfall-runoff simulation. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the applicability of the dynamic system response curve (DSRC) method in optimizing SWMM model parameters, which is newly proposed to solve the nonlinear problems encountered by current widely used optimization methods. A synthetic case, free of data and model errors, was used to examine the applicability of the DSRC with single-objective or multi-objective functions in finding the optimum parameter values known by assumption. A real watershed case was selected for the optimization of SWMM parameters by use of DSRC with the most suitable objective function, which was determined by a synthetic case. In addition, the advantages of the DSRC in SWMM parameter optimization over the Particle Swarm Optimization(PSO) and Multiple Objective Particle Swarm Optimization(MOPSO) algorithms were analyzed in terms of NSE, \({RE}_{v}\), \({RE}_{p}\), and \({EP}_{t}\). The results revealed that the DSRC with multi-objective function could find the global optima of all SWMM model parameters in the synthetic case, but it could only attain part of them with a single-objective function. In the real watershed case, the DSRCS-optimized SWMM performed better than MOPSO-optimized one with an increase of average \(\mathrm{NSE}\) by 5.8% and a reduction of average \(\left|{RE}_{v}\right|\), \(\left|{RE}_{p}\right|\) and \(\left|{EP}_{t}\right|\) by -53.7%, -67.9%, and -34.6% respectively during the study period. The outputs of this paper could provide a promising approach for the optimization of SWMM parameters and the improvement of urban flooding simulation accuracy, and a scientific support for urban flood risk control and mitigation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
All of the data, models, and code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Bao W, Zhang X, Zhao L (2013) Parameter estimation method based on parameter function surface. Sci China Technol Sci 56:1485–1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-013-5224-3
Bao W, Zhao L (2014) Application of linearized calibration method for vertically mixed runoff model parameters. J Hydrol Eng 19:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000984
Behrouz MS, Zhu Z, Matott LS, Rabideau AJ (2020) A new tool for automatic calibration of the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). J Hydrol 581:124436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124436
Casallas-Ojeda M, Soto-Paz J, Alfonso-Morales W et al (2021) Optimization of operational parameters during anaerobic co-digestion of food and garden waste. Environ Process 8:769–791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-021-00506-2
Coello CAC, Lechuga MS (2002) MOPSO: a proposal for multiple objective particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC’02 (Cat. No.02TH8600). IEEE 1051–1056. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2002.1004388
Hashemi M, Mahjouri N (2022) Global sensitivity analysis-based design of low impact development practices for urban runoff management under uncertainty. Water Resour Manag 36:2953–2972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03140-1
Jeon J-H, Park C-G, Engel B (2014) Comparison of performance between genetic algorithm and SCE-UA for calibration of SCS-CN surface runoff simulation. Water 6:3433–3456. https://doi.org/10.3390/w6113433
Jiang Y, Liu C, Huang C, Wu X (2010) Improved particle swarm algorithm for hydrological parameter optimization. Appl Math Comput 217:3207–3215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2010.08.053
Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of ICNN’95 - International Conference on Neural Networks. IEEE, Purdue Sch Engn Technol Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA PU - IEEE PI - New York PA - 345 E 47TH ST, New York, NY 10017 USA, pp. 1942–1948. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNN.1995.488968
Li Q, Zhou Z, Dong J, Wang Y, Yu M, Chen Q, Du Y, He P (2022) Comparison of runoff control performance by five permeable pavement systems in Zhenjiang, Yangtze River Delta of China. J Hydrol Eng 27. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002202
Liu YR, Li YP, Sun J (2020) A two-stage fuzzy-stochastic factorial analysis method for characterizing effects of uncertainties in hydrological modelling. Hydrol Sci J 65:2057–2071. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1790566
Macro K, Matott LS, Rabideau A, Ghodsi SH, Zhu Z (2019) OSTRICH-SWMM: A new multi-objective optimization tool for green infrastructure planning with SWMM. Environ Model Softw 113:42–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.12.004
Molina-Navarro E, Andersen HE, Nielsen A, Thodsen H, Trolle D (2017) The impact of the objective function in multi-site and multi-variable calibration of the SWAT model. Environ Model Softw 93:255–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.03.018
Muleta MK (2012) Model Performance Sensitivity to Objective Function during Automated Calibrations. J Hydrol Eng 17:756–767. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000497
Qu S, Yang Q, Zheng H, Shi P, Shang Y, Xu Y, Song L, Hao Q (2023) Application of system differential response parameter calibration method in SWAT model. Water Resour Protect 39:118–124. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/32.1356.TV.20220307.1348.002.html (in Chinese). Accessed Mar 2023
Rossman LA (2015) Storm Water Management Model User’s Manual Version 5.1. United States Environment Protection Agency 353
Si W, Bao W, Qu S, Zhou M, Shi P, Yang X (2017) Modelling the effect of land use change on hydrological model parameters via linearized calibration method in the upstream of Huaihe River Basin, China. Water SA 43:275. https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v43i2.11
Sun Y, Bao W, Jiang P, Wang X, He C, Zhang Q, Wang J (2018) Development of dynamic system response curve method for estimating initial conditions of conceptual hydrological models. J Hydroinformatics 20:1387–1400. https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2018.022
Wu Z, Ma B, Wang H et al (2021) Identification of sensitive parameters of urban flood model based on artificial neural network. Water Resour Manag 35:2115–2128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-02825-3
Xue F, Tian J, Wang W, Zhang Y, Ali G (2020) Parameter calibration of SWMM model based on optimization algorithm. Comput Mater Contin 65:2189–2199. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmc.2020.06513
Zhang W, Li T (2015) The influence of objective function and acceptability threshold on uncertainty assessment of an urban drainage hydraulic model with generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation methodology. Water Resour Manag 29:2059–2072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-0928-8
Zhou Z, Li Q, He P et al (2023) Impacts of rainstorm characteristics on flood inundation mitigation performance of LID measures throughout an urban catchment. J Hydrol 624:129841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129841
Acknowledgements
Financial support is gratefully acknowledged from the National Natural Science Foundation Commission of China under Grant numbers 51879069.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Du, Y., Li, Q., He, P. et al. Simultaneous Optimization of SWMM Parameters by the Dynamic System Response Curve with Multi-Objective Function. Water Resour Manage 37, 5061–5079 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-023-03595-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-023-03595-w