Abstract
This paper compares the results obtained from three hydrologic techniques namely Clark, Nash and Geographical Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph. Underpinning of these models and calibration of parameters for these models was a demanding assignment which was performed by downhill simplex optimization method. A semi-arid region of Pakistan was selected for testing the models. Computer coding was prepared for all the models. SPOT maps of the study area were collected from NESPAK (National Engineering Services of Pakistan). The rainfall runoff data was taken from Punjab Irrigation and Power Department. The maps were digitized using ERDAS and Arc GIS to determine the geographic parameters of the watershed. Field surveys and measurements were used to estimate the discharge data. The shape of direct runoff hydrograph, peak flows and time to peak flow obtained from the three models were compared. The model efficiency was determined by a statistical parameter coefficient of determination. It was found that the Clark model simulated superior results in comparison with Nash and Geographical Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahmad, M.M., Ghumman, A.R., Ahmad, S., and Hashmi, H.N., Estimation of a unique pair of Nash model parameters: an optimization approach, J. Water Resour. Manag., 2010, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 2971–2989.
Ahmad, M.M., Ghumman, A.R., and Ahmad, S., Estimation of Clark’s instantaneous unit hydrograph parameters and development of direct surface runoff hydrograph, J. Water Resour. Manag., 2009, vol. 23, pp. 2417–2435.
Ahmed, F., A hydrologic model of kemptville basin-calibration and extended validation, Water. Resour. Manag., 2012, vol. 26, pp. 2583–2604.
Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R., and Mays, L.W., Applied Hydrology, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Company, 1988.
Clark, C.O., Storage and the unit hydrograph, Trans. ASCE, 1945, vol. 110, pp. 1419–1446.
Dobrovolski, S.G., Year to year and many year runoff variations in world rivers, Water Resour., 2012, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 693–708.
Dzhamalov, R.G., Krichevets, G.N., and Safronova, T.I., Current changes in water resources in Lena river basin, Water Resour., 2012, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 147–160.
Ghumman, A.R., Ahmad, M.M., Hashmi, H.N., and Kamal, M.A., Regionalization of hydrologic parameters of Nash model, Water Resour., 2011, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 735–744.
Ghumman, A.R., Ahmad, M.M., Hashmi, H.N., and Kamal, M.A., Development of geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph for a large watershed, Environ. Monit. Assess., 2012, vol. 184,is. 5, pp. 3153–3163.
Gupta, V.K., Wymire, E.D., et al., A representation of an instantaneous unit hydrograph from geomorphology, Water Resour. Res., 1980, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 855–862.
Horton, R., Erosional development of streams and their drainage basin: hydro-physical approach to quantitative morphology, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 1945, vol. 56, pp. 275–370.
Johnston, R. and Kummu M., Water resources models in the Mekong Basin: a review, Water Resour. Manag., 2012, vol. 26, pp. 429–455.
Kirpitch, Z.P., Time of concentration of small agricultural catchments, Civil Eng., 1940, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 362–365.
Kumar, R., Chatterjee, C., Singh, R.D., et al., GIUH based Clark and Nash models for runoff estimation for an ungauged basin and their uncertainty analysis, Int. J. River Basin Manag., 2004, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 281–290.
Linsley, R.K., Kohler, M.A., and Paulhus, J.L.H., Hydrology for Engineers, 3rd ed., N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1982.
Mikhailova, M.V., Mikhailov, V.N., and Morozov, V.N., Extreme hydrological events in the Danube river basin over the last decades, Water Resour, 2012, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 161–179.
Nash, J.E., The form of instantaneous unit hydrograph, Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol., 1958, pp. 546–557.
Nguyen, H.Q., Maathuis, B.H.P., and Rientjes, T.H.M., Catchment storm runoff modelling using the geomorphologic instantaneous unit hydrograph, Geocarto Int., 2009, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 357–375.
Ponce, V.M., Engineering Hydrology: Principles and Practice, N.Y.: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. and Valdes, J., The geomorphological structure of hydrologic response, Water Resour. Resour., 1979, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1409–1420.
Rosso, R., Nash model relation to Horton order ratios, Water Res. Resour., 1984, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 914–920.
Sarangi, A., Madramootoo, C.A., Enright P., and Prasher, S.O., Evaluation of three unit hydrograph models to predict the surface runoff from a Canadian watershed, Water Resour. Manag., 2007, vol. 21, pp. 1127–1143.
Serrano, S.E., Hydrology for Engineers, Geologists, and Environmental Professionals, Kentucky, USA: Hydro Sciences Incorporation, 1997.
Singh, V.P., Hydrologic Systems: Rainfall-Runoff Modeling, vol. 1. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1988.
Troitskaya, Yu.I., Rybushkina, G.V., Soustova, I.A., et al., Satellite altimetry of inland water bodies, Water Resour., 2012, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 184–199.
Yasinskii, S.V. and Kashutina E.A., Effect of regional climate variations and economic activity on changes in the hydrological regime of watersheds and small-river runoff, Water Resour., 2012, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 272–293.
Zelazinski, J., Application of the geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph theory to development of forecasting models in Poland. Hydrol. Sci., Journal des Sciences Hydrogiques, 1986, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 263–270.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The article is published in the original.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ghumman, A.R., Khan, Q.U., Hashmi, H.N. et al. Comparison of Clark, Nash Geographical Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph models for semi arid regions. Water Resour 41, 364–371 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807814040071
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807814040071