Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Addition of overland runoff and flow routing methods to SWMM—model application to Hyderabad, India

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

Abstract

Hydrological models apply different methods to estimate runoff and route flows. Suitability of these methods is not unique, but varies with catchment conditions. This study aims to find the suitable overland runoff and flow routing methods for a catchment in Hyderabad, India, using customised Storm Water Management Model (SWMM-C). Currently, SWMM adapts only non-linear reservoir (NLR) method to estimate overland runoff. Linear reservoir (LR) and kinematic wave overland flow (KWO) have been incorporated as additional overland runoff methods. For flow routing, SWMM currently has kinematic wave (KW) and dynamic wave (DW) methods. Muskingum, Muskingum Cunge (MC) and lag methods have been included as additional methods in this customised version. SWMM-C was calibrated with four event rainfalls and tested with six event rainfalls using all possible combinations of overland runoff and flow routing methods. Efficiency of SWMM-C in simulating runoff was evaluated using performance indices. Results showed that for low magnitude event rainfalls, NLR, LR and KWO simulated runoff with a maximum deviation of 50%, 60% and 40% from observed runoff, respectively. In high magnitude event rainfalls, NLR, LR and KWO simulated runoff with maximum deviations of 20%, 40% and 20%, respectively, from the observed runoff. It was inferred from model outputs that NLR method could simulate runoff reasonably well for rainfalls that have duration greater than the time of concentration of catchment. LR method could simulate peak runoff better. KWO method was found to be suitable for chosen catchment for all rainfall durations. Flow routing methods KW, DW and MC are found to have minor influences on the runoff.

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

  • Alley, W.M., & Smith, P.E. (1982). Distributed routing rainfall-runoff model; version II. US Geological survey, 82–344.

  • Arnold, J. (1994). SWAT-soil and water assessment tool. Temple: Agricultural Research Service, Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baek, S. S., Ligaray, M., Pyo, J., Park, J. P., Kang, J. H., Pachepsky, Y., Chun, J. A., & Cho, K. H. (2020). A novel water quality module of the SWMM model for assessing Low Impact development (LID) in urban watersheds. Journal of Hydrology, 586, 124886.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barco, J., Wong, K. M., & Stenstrom, M. K. (2008). Automatic calibration of the US EPA SWMM model for a large urban catchment. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 134, 466–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barfield, B. J., Hayes, J., Stevens, E., Harp, S., & Fogle, A. (2006). SEDIMOT III model. In Book: Watershed models, pp. 381-398.

  • Basu, M. (2011). Economic environmental dispatch using multi-objective differential evolution. Applied Soft Computing, 11, 2845–2853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, D., Huggins, L., & Monke, A. (1980). ANSWERS: a model for watershed planning. Transactions of the ASAE, 23, 938–0944.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bicknell, B. R., Imhoff, J. C., Kittle Jr., J. L., Jobes, T. H., Donigian Jr., A. S., & Johanson, R. (2001). Hydrological simulation program-Fortran: HSPF version 12 user’s manual AQUA TERRA Consultants. California: Mountain View.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkel, C., Broder, T., & Biester, H. (2017). Nonlinear and threshold-dominated runoff generation controls DOC export in a small peat catchment. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, 122(3), 498–513.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Borah, D. K. (2011). Hydrologic procedures of storm event watershed models: a comprehensive review and comparison. Hydrological Processes, 25, 3472–3489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, G., Sitzenfrei, R., Kleidorfer, M., & Rauch, W. (2014). Parallel flow routing in SWMM 5. Environmental Modelling & Software, 53, 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cao, X., Wen, Z., Xu, J., De Clercq, D., Wang, Y., & Tao, Y. (2020). Many-objective optimization of technology implementation in the industrial symbiosis system based on a modified NSGA-III. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 118810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, L. H., & Wong, T. S. (2010). Improving event-based rainfall–runoff modeling using a combined artificial neural network–kinematic wave approach. Journal of Hydrology, 390(1), 92–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristina, C. M., & Sansalone, J. J. (2003). Kinematic wave model of urban pavement rainfall-runoff subject to traffic loadings. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 129(7), 629–636.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deb, K., & Jain, H. (2014). An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting approach, part I: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Evolutionary Computation, 18, 577–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dechmi, F., Burguete, J., & Skhiri, A. (2012). SWAT application in intensive irrigation systems: model modification, calibration and validation. Journal of Hydrology, 470, 227–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooge, J. (1973). Linear theory of hydrologic systems. Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, USA, 1468.

  • Downer, C. W., & Ogden, F. L. (2006). Gridded Surface Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis (GSSHA) User’s Manual, Version 1.43 for Watershed Modeling System 6.1. Vicksburg: System Wide Water Resources Program, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory.

  • Feldman, A. D. (2000). Hydrologic modeling system HEC-HMS: Technical reference manual. St, Davis: US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center

  • Feng, Y., Burian, S., & Pomeroy, C. (2016). Potential of green infrastructure to restore predevelopment water budget of a semi-arid urban catchment. Journal of Hydrology, 542, 744–755.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gassman, P. W., Reyes, M. R., Green, C. H., & Arnold, J. G. (2007). The soil and water assessment tool: historical development, applications, and future research directions. Transactions of the ASABE, 50, 1211–1250.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • GHMC (2007) General information on drains of Hyderabad. Unpublished report

  • Gong, Y., Li, X., Zhai, D., Yin, D., Song, R., Li, J., Fang, X., & Yuan, D. (2018). Influence of rainfall, model parameters and routing methods on stormwater modelling. Water Resources Management, 32(2), 735–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • Google Earth v 6 (2016) Hyderabad, Telangana, India, 17.45 lat, 78.44 long at eye alt 35.16 miles. (Accessed on May 2016).

  • Hossain, S., Hewa, G. A., & Wella-Hewage, S. (2019). A Comparison of continuous and event-based rainfall–runoff (RR) modelling using EPA-SWMM. Water, 11(3), 611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyun, K. H., & Lee, J. M. (2010). Impacts on water-cycle by land use change and effects of infiltration trenches in Asan New town. Journal of Korean Society of Water and Wastewater, 24, 691–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal, R., Thomas, T., Galkate, R., Ghosh, N., Lohani, A., & Kumar, R. (2014). Development of geomorphology based regional Nash model for data scares central India region. Water Resources Management, 28(2), 351–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, J., Kannan, N., Arnold, J., Glick, R., Gosselink, L., & Srinivasan, R. (2010). Development and integration of sub-hourly rainfall–runoff modeling capability within a watershed model. Water Resources Management, 24, 4505–4527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, J., Zhu, A. X., Qin, C. Z., & Liu, J. (2019). A knowledge-based method for the automatic determination of hydrological model structures. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 21(6), 1163–1178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannessen, B. G., Hamouz, V., Gragne, A. S., & Muthanna, T. M. (2019). The transferability of SWMM model parameters between green roofs with similar build-up. Journal of Hydrology, 569, 816–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R., & Smakhtin, V. (2014). Hydrological modeling of large river basins: how much is enough? Water Resources Management, 28(10), 2695–2730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffeldt, A., Wetterhall, F., Pappenberger, F., Salamon, P., & Thielen, J. (2016). Technical review of large-scale hydrological models for implementation in operational flood forecasting schemes on continental level. Environmental Modelling & Software, 75, 68–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, A. (2015). Geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph based hydrologic response models for ungauged hilly watersheds in India. Water Resources Management, 29(3), 863–883.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, H., An, H., & Muhamad, H. (2018). Flood routing for selected gauged basins in Malaysia. International Robotics and Automation Journal, 4(6), 446–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavesley, G., Stannard, L., & Singh, V. (1995). The precipitation-runoff modeling system-PRMS. Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, 83, 281–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. T., & Huang, P. C. (2012). Evaluating the adequateness of kinematic-wave routing for flood forecasting in midstream channel reaches of Taiwan. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 14, 1075–1088.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, T., Van Rompaey, A., Steegen, A., Fohrer, N., Frede, H. G., & Govers, G. (2005). Considering spatial distribution and deposition of sediment in lumped and semi-distributed models. Hydrological Processes, 19, 785–794.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lighthill, M. J., & Whitham, G. B. (1955). On kinematic waves II. A theory of traffic flow on long crowded roads. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series, A Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 229, 317–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, G., Pers, C., Rosberg, J., Strömqvist, J., & Arheimer, B. (2010). Development and testing of the HYPE (Hydrological Predictions for the Environment) water quality model for different spatial scales. Hydrology Research, 41, 295–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Wang, W., Hu, Y., & Cui, W. (2016). Improving the distributed hydrological model performance in upper Huai River basin: using streamflow observations to update the basin states via the ensemble Kalman filter. Advances in Meteorology, 4921616, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, S., Willis, I., Arnold, N., & Ahlstrom, A. (2008). Subglacial meltwater drainage at Paakitsoq, west Greenland: insights from a distributed, physically based numerical model. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts.

  • Luan, B., Yin, R., Xu, P., Wang, X., Yang, X., Zhang, L., & Tang, X. (2019). Evaluating green stormwater infrastructure strategies efficiencies in a rapidly urbanizing catchment using SWMM-based TOPSIS. Journal of Cleaner Production, 223, 680–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macro, K., Matott, L. S., Rabideau, A., Ghodsi, S. H., & Zhu, Z. (2019). OSTRICH-SWMM: A new multi-objective optimization tool for green infrastructure planning with SWMM. Environmental Modelling & Software, 113, 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Solano, F. J., Iglesias-Rey, P. L., Saldarriaga, J. G., & Vallejo, D. (2016). Creation of an SWMM toolkit for its application in urban drainage networks optimization. Water, 8(6), 259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mateo-Lázaro, J., Castillo-Mateo, J., Sánchez-Navarro, J. Á., Fuertes-Rodríguez, V., García-Gil, A., & Edo-Romero, V. (2018). New analysis method for continuous base-flow and availability of water resources based on parallel linear reservoir models. Water, 10(4), 465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merz, R., & Tarasova, L. B. S. (2019). Towards regional consistent parameters of distributed hydrological models. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 21, 1–1.1.

  • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (2020) Available stormwater models and selecting a model,https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Available_stormwater_models_and_selecting_a_model. (Accessed on May 1, 2020)

  • Nguyen, V. T., & Dietrich, J. (2018). Modification of the SWAT model to simulate regional groundwater flow using a multicell aquifer. Hydrological Processes, 32(7), 939–995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehoff, D., Fritsch, U., & Bronstert, A. (2002). Land-use impacts on storm-runoff generation: scenarios of land-use change and simulation of hydrological response in a meso-scale catchment in SW-Germany. Journal of Hydrology, 267, 80–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nourani, V., Fard, A. F., Niazi, F., Gupta, H. V., Goodrich, D. C., & Kamran, K. V. (2015). Implication of remotely sensed data to incorporate land cover effect into a linear reservoir-based rainfall–runoff model. Journal of Hydrology, 529, 94–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pang, J. (2014). Proposed Addition to SWMM5 Capability to model long term continuous rainfall dependent infiltration. Journal of Water Management Modeling. https://doi.org/10.14796/JWMM.C369.

  • Perumal, M. (2019). A critical introspection into the kinematic wave theory. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 21, 1–1.1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponce, V. M. (1991). Kinematic wave controversy. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 117, 511–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, P. J. (2006). Physical analog of the linear reservoir. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 11(2), 184–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reggiani, P., Todini, E., & Meißner, D. (2014). Analytical solution of a kinematic wave approximation for channel routing. Hydrology Research, 45(1), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossman, L. A. (2010). Storm water management model user's manual, version 5.0. USA: National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharffenberg, W. A., & Fleming, M. J. (2006). Hydrologic modeling system HEC-HMS: User's manual. US Army Corps of Engineers. USA: Hydrologic Engineering Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibert, J., Vis, M. J., Lewis, E., & Meerveld, H. (2018). Upper and lower benchmarks in hydrological modelling. Hydrological processes, 32(8), 1120–1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, X., Hong, Y., Zhang, K., & Hao, Z. (2017). Refining a distributed linear reservoir routing method to improve performance of the CREST model. Journal of hydrologic engineering, 22(3), 04016061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V. P. (2018). Hydrologic modeling: progress and future directions. Geoscience letters, 5, 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swathi, V. (2020). Analsing the linkages between urban floods, climate change and land use. PhD Thesis, BITS Pilani Hyderabad campus.

  • Swathi, V., Raju, K. S., Varma, R. R. M., & Veena, S. S. (2019). Automatic calibration of SWMM using NSGA-III and the effects of delineation scale on an urban catchment. Journal of hydroinformatics, 21(5), 781–797.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tegegne, G., Park, D. K., & Kim, Y.-O. (2017). Comparison of hydrological models for the assessment of water resources in a data-scarce region, the Upper Blue Nile River Basin. Journal of hydrology: Regional studies, 14, 49–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiernan, E. D. (2018). Developing SWMMCALPY: an automated, genetic approach to calibrating the storm water management model. PhD Thesis, The University of Texas, Austin.

  • Van Griensven, A., & Bauwens, W. (2003). Multiobjective auto calibration for semidistributed water quality models. Water Resources Research, 39, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vemula, S., Raju, K. S., Veena, S. S., & Kumar, A. S. (2019). Urban floods in Hyderabad, India, under present and future rainfall scenarios: a case study. Natural hazards, 95, 637–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolhiser, D. A. (1996). Search for physically based runoff model-A hydrologic El Dorado? Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 122, 122–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, Y., & Melching, C. S. (2005). Comparison of kinematic-wave and nonlinear reservoir routing of urban watershed runoff. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 10, 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen, B., Chow, V. (1983). Local design storms: Vol III H 38 FHWA-RD-82 65.

  • Young, R.A. (1987). AGNPS, Agricultural Non-Point-Source Pollution Model: a watershed analysis tool. Conservation research report, USA.

  • Zaghloul, N. A. (1983). Sensitivity analysis of the SWMM runoff-transport parameters and the effects of catchment discretisation. Advances in Water Resources, 6, 214–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, K., Chui, T. F. M., & Yang, Y. (2018). Simulating the hydrological performance of low impact development in shallow groundwater via a modified SWMM. Journal of Hydrology, 566, 313–331.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thank the officials of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) for providing storm water network data, brainstorming discussions, valuable suggestions and facilitating field surveys. Special acknowledgments to Mr. D. Ravinder, Superintending Engineer, GHMC; Ms. P. Sumasri, Deputy Executive Engineer, GHMC for providing data and facilitating valuable thought-provoking discussions. We thank Department of Civil Engineering, NIT Warangal for providing rainfall data. We extend our thanks to Hussain Sagar Lake Division (HSLD) for providing inflow data. We thank the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) for making Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) an open source software. Authors also thank Google Earth for its open source images. First author thank Santosh Penubothula, IBM research, Bangalore for sparing time and extending his help in coding aspect.

Funding

This work is supported by Information Technology Research Academy (ITRA), Government of India under ITRA-water grant ITRA/15(68)/water/IUFM/01.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani-Hyderabad Campus, Hyderabad, 500078, India

    V. Swathi, K. Srinivasa Raju & Murari R. R. Varma

Authors
  1. V. Swathi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Srinivasa Raju
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Murari R. R. Varma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Swathi.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Swathi, V., Raju, K.S. & Varma, M.R.R. Addition of overland runoff and flow routing methods to SWMM—model application to Hyderabad, India. Environ Monit Assess 192, 643 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08490-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08490-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation