Abstract
The hydrological properties of a river basin are extremely affected by the construction of a dam. The discharges and sediment flow distribution, in a modified river basin will not be the same as to a natural catchment. Hydrological models contextually focus on a natural river basin without any modification. Unfortunately, most of the river basins have been under such modification, which is not favorable for a model simulation at a normal condition. This research was done at the Awash River Basin, already modified because of dam construction. A systematic approach was applied to handle the modification in the basin, through an application of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and Hydrologic Engineering center’s River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) consecutively. SWAT model was implemented to simulate the upstream part of the basin. At the downstream parts of the basin, a simulation process was difficult on a SWAT model, due to the modified hydrologic parameters. Hence, the HEC-RAS model was applied because of its applicability under such circumstances. The model outputs indicate that the SWAT model can simulate the upstream part of the basin, in a good performance range that can be used for practical implementation. The downstream i.e., the modified catchment was simulated relatively better in the HEC-RAS model with good accuracy. Also, this research pointed out that a combined hydrologic and hydraulic model system development can be the best solution for modified catchments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
All the data sources were acknowledged and cited in the manuscript.
References
Abbaspour, K.C. (2015). SWAT-CUP: SWAT calibration and uncertainty programs user manual. Eawag; Swiss Federal institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland
Abbaspour KC, Yang J, Maximov I, Siber R, Bogner K, Mieleitner J, Srinivasan R (2007) Modelling hydrology and water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using SWAT. J Hydrol, 333 (2–4), 413–430
Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Srinivasan R, Williams JR, Haney EB, Neitsch SL (2011) Soil and Water Assessment Tool input/output file documentation: Version 2009. Texas Water Resourc Inst Tech Rep, 365
Balascio CC, Palmeri DJ, Gao H (1998) Use of a genetic algorithm and multi-objective programming for calibration of a hydrologic model. Trans ASAE 41(3):615
Bedient PB, Huber WC (2002) Hydrology and floodplain analysis, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall Publishing Co., p 763
Brunner GW (2016) HEC-RAS river analysis system 2D modeling user’s manual. US Army Corps Eng—Hydrol Eng Center, 1–171
Cameron, T. & Ackerman, P. E., (2012). Tools for Support of HEC-RAS Using ArcGIS User’s; Manual; Report No. CPD-83. US Army Corps of Engineers
Cao W, Bowden WB, Davie T, Fenemor A (2006) Multi-variable and multi-site calibration and validation of SWAT in a large mountainous catchment with high spatial variability. Hydrol Process 20(5):1057–1073
Duan QY, Gupta H, Sorooshian S, Rousseau AN, Turcotte R (2003) Calibration of watershed models. Water science and application 6. American Geophysical Union, p 345
Fenicia F, Savenije HHG, Matgen P, Pfister L (2007) A comparison of alternative multiobjective calibration strategies for hydrological modeling. Water Resour Res 43(3)
Grayson RB, Moore ID, McMahon TA (1992) Physically-based hydrologic modeling II: is the concept realistic? Water Resour Res 28(10):2659–2666
Gupta HV, Sorooshian S, Yapo PO (1999) Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: comparison with multilevel expert calibration. J Hydrol Eng 4(2):135–143
Gurtz J, Baltensweiler A, Lang H (1999) Spatially distributed hydrotope-based modelling of evapotranspiration and runoff in mountainous basins. Hydrol Process 13(17):2751–2768
Keshta N, Elshorbagy A, Carey S (2009) A generic system dynamics model for simulating and evaluating the hydrological performance of reconstructed watersheds. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13(6):865–881
Kirchner JW (2006) Getting the right answers for the right reasons: linking measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of hydrology. Water Resour Res 42(3)
Klemes V (1986) Operational testing of hydrological simulation models. Hydrol Sci J 31(1):13–24
Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50(3):885–900
Musy A, Higy C (2011) Hydrology: a science of nature. CRC Press, 386 pp
Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models’ part I - a discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10(3):282–290
Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry, JR, Williams JR (2011) Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2009. Texas Water Resourc Inst
Peel MC, Blöschl G (2011) Hydrological modelling in a changing world. Prog Phys Geogr 35(2):249–261
Phillips JV, Tadayon S (2006) Selection of Manning's roughness coefficient for natural and constructed vegetated and non-vegetated channels, and vegetation maintenance plan guidelines for vegetated channels in Central Arizona. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey
Schaefli B, Hingray B, Niggli M, Musy A (2005) A conceptual glacio-hydrological model for high mountainous catchments. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 9(1–2):95–109
Thirel G, Andréassian V, Perrin C, Audouy J-N, Berthet L, Edwards P, Folton N, Furusho C, Kuentz A, Lerat J, Lindström G, Martin E, Mathevet T, Merz R, Parajka J, Ruelland D, Vaze J (2015) Hydrology under change: an evaluation protocol to investigate how hydrological models deal with changing catchments. Hydrol Sci J 60(7–8):1184–1199
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (1990). Hydraulics design of spillways. Engineering manual EM 1110–2-1603, Washington, DC
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (2001). The Columbia River system inside story. Tech. Rep.,80 pp. [Available online at https://www.bpa.gov/power/pg/columbia_river_inside_story.pdf.]
Vieux BE (2001) Distributed hydrologic modeling using GIS, Water science technology series, 38. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, p 293
Acknowledgments
The data for this research was collected from a Metrological Agency and the Ministry of Water Resources, Energy, and Irrigation of Ethiopia. You deserve heartfelt sympathy for the provision and support during research work.
Funding
No direct funding was available, but the data sources were acknowledged for their contribution to the research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
I have done all the work alone.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Responsibilities
The manuscript complies with all the ethical requirements, the paper was not summited to any journal at a time. All the sources and contributors were acknowledged properly.
Consent to Participate
I am very much to participate in the task for the journal including reviewing similar works.
Consent to Publish
I have fully agreed to publish the manuscript “The influence of a dam construction on the catchment hydrologic behavior and its effects on a discharge forecast in hydrological models” after peer review on the journal of water resources management.
Conflict of Interest
In this research paper, there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bulti, A.T. The Influence of Dam Construction on the Catchment Hydrologic Behavior and its Effects on a Discharge Forecast in Hydrological Models. Water Resour Manage 35, 2023–2037 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-02829-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-02829-z