Advertisement

Sub-catchments flow losses computation using Muskingum–Cunge routing method and HEC-HMS GIS based techniques, case study of Wadi Al-Lith, Saudi Arabia

  • Khalil Ur Rahman
  • Khaled S. Balkhair
  • Mansour Almazroui
  • Amjad Masood
Original Article

Abstract

Due to permanent dry conditions in arid land basins, channels experience a great quantity of water loss during the runoff process. The objective of this study is to quantify and delineate the spatial variability of channel losses over the contributing area of the upstream side of Wadi Al-Lith, in the western region of Saudi Arabia, by using Muskingum–Cunge flow routing method. HEC-HMS model was used here to simulate rainfall-runoff relationship, to route flood hydrograph, and to determine losses in the channel network of the basin. The required geomorphological parameters such as channel’s geometry, roughness coefficient, and slopes obtained from GIS and field measurements. The model was calibrated and validated on real rainfall-runoff events and the optimized parameters were generalized. Results showed that both calibrated and validated hydrographs are in good agreement with observed hydrographs. Channel constituted the highest losses from the total rainfall and that these losses increased as the basin area increased and the slope decreased. The maximum percentage loss was 47.3% and the minimum percentage loss was 2.1%. Although these losses are from surface water, at the same time these losses are considered as gains to the subsurface storage. Therefore, such losses and gains should be considered in the water resources planning and management formulation.

Keywords

Flow losses Muskingum–Cunge Wadi Al-Lith HEC-HMS Arid lands 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This project was funded by the National Plan for Science, Technology and Innovation (MAARIFAH)—King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology - the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia—award number (11-WAT1999-03). The authors also, acknowledge with thanks Science and Technology Unit, King Abdulaziz University for technical support.

References

  1. Abida H, Ellouze M, Mahjoub MR (2005) Flood routing of regulated flows in Medjerda River. Tunis J Hydroinformatics 7:209–216Google Scholar
  2. Al-Ahmadi FS (2005) Rainfall-runoff modeling in arid regions using geographic information systems and remote sensing: case study; western region of Saudi Arabia. King Abdulaziz University, JeddahGoogle Scholar
  3. Choudhury P, Shrivastava RK, Narulkar SM (2002) Flood routing in river networks using equivalent Muskingum inflow. J Hydrol Eng 7:413–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cunge JA (1969) On the subject of a flood propagation computation method (Musklngum method). J Hydraul Res 7:205–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dastorani MT, Khodaparast R, Talebi A, Vafakhah M, Dashti J (2011) Determination of the ability of HEC-HMS Model components in rainfall-run-off simulation research. J Environ Sci 5:790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Delphi M, Shooshtari MM, Zadeh HH (2010) Application of Diffusion Wave Method for Flood Routing in Karun River. Int J Environ Sci Dev 1:432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fenton JD (2010) Accuracy of Muskingum-Cunge flood routing. Technical report, Alternative Hydraulics, Institute of Hydraulic and Water Resources Engineering. http://johndfenton.com/Papers/03-Accuracy-of-Muskingum-Cunge-flood-routing.pdf
  8. Fread D (1983) A unified coefficient routing model. In: Paper present at seminar, Department of Civil Engineering, Pa. State University, University ParkGoogle Scholar
  9. Haktanir T, Ozmen H (1997) Comparison of hydraulic and hydrologic routing on three long reservoirs. J Hydraul Eng 123:153–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hughes DA (2008) Modelling semi-arid and arid hydrology and water resources: the southern Africa experience. In: Wheater H, Sorooshian S, Sharma KD (eds) Hydrological modelling in arid and semi-arid areas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 29–40Google Scholar
  11. Ivkovic KM (2009) A top–down approach to characterise aquifer–river interaction processes. J Hydrol 365:145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kafle T, Hazarika M, Karki S, Shrestha R, Sharma S, Samarakoon L (2007) Basin scale rainfall-runoff modelling for flood forecasts. In: Proceedings of the 5th Annual Mekong Flood Forum, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, pp 17–18Google Scholar
  13. Lange J (2005) Dynamics of transmission losses in a large arid stream channel. J Hydrol 306:112–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lawyer (1964) Flood routing. In: US Army Corps of Engineers (ed) Handbook of applied hydrology, Sect. 25-II river division. US Army Corps of Engineers, Ohio, pp 35–58Google Scholar
  15. McCarthy GT (1939) The unit hydrograph and flood routing. US Corps Engrs Office, Providence, RI, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Merkel WH (2002) Muskingum-Cunge flood routing procedure in NRCS hydrologic models. In: Second Fed. Interag. Hydrol. Model. Conf., Las Vegas, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  17. Merz R, Blöschl G (2009) A regional analysis of event runoff coefficients with respect to climate and catchment characteristics in Austria. Water Resour Res 45:W01405. doi: 10.1029/2008WR007163
  18. Micheal A, Ojha T (2006) Principles of agricultural engineering. Jain BrosGoogle Scholar
  19. NERC (1975) Flood-routing studies. Report No V–III. Natural Environment Research Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Radmanesh F, Hemat JP, Behnia A, Khond A, Mohamad BA (2006) Calibration and assessment of HEC-HMS model in Roodzard watershed. In: 17 th international conference of river engineering, university of Shahid Chamran, AhvaGoogle Scholar
  21. Renard K, Nichols M, Woolhiser D, Osborn H (2008) A brief background on the US Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed. Water Resour Res 44Google Scholar
  22. Shaw EM (1994) Hydrologyin practice. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Sophocleous M (2002) Interactions between groundwater and surface water: the state of the science. Hydrogeol J 10:52–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tewolde MH, Smithers J (2006) Flood routing in ungauged catchments using Muskingum methods. Water SA 32:379–388Google Scholar
  25. Wheater HS (2008) Modelling hydrological processes in arid and semi-arid areas: an introduction. In: Wheater H, Sorooshian S, Sharma KD (eds) Hydrological modelling in arid and semi-arid areas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–20Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Khalil Ur Rahman
    • 1
  • Khaled S. Balkhair
    • 1
  • Mansour Almazroui
    • 2
  • Amjad Masood
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Hydrology and Water Resources ManagementKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Center of Excellence for Climate Change Research/Department of MeteorologyKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations