Browse > Article

Effects of DEM Resolution on Hydrological Simulation in, BASINS-BSPF Modeling  

Jeon, Ji-Hong (Graduate Program, Department of Rural Engineering, Konkuk University)
Ham, Jong-Hwa (Graduate Program, Department of Rural Engineering, Konkuk University)
Chun G. Yoon (Department of Rural Engineering, Konkuk University)
Kim, Seong-Joon (Department of Rural Engineering, Konkuk University)
Publication Information
Magazine of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers / v.44, no.7, 2002 , pp. 25-35 More about this Journal
Abstract
In this study, the effect of DEM (Digital Elevation Model) resolution (15m, 30m, 50m, 70m, 100m, 200m, 300m) on the hydrological simulation was examined using the BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating point and Nonpoint Source) for the Heukcheon watershed (303.3 ㎢) data from 1998 to 1999. Generally, as the cell size of DEM increased, topographical changes were observed as the original range of elevation decreased. The processing time of watershed delineation and river network needed more time and effort on smaller cell size of DEM. The larger DEM demonstrated had some errors in the junction of river network which might affect on the simulation of water quantity and quality. The area weighted average watershed slope became milder but the length weighted average channel slope became steeper as the DEM size increased. DEM resolution affected substantially on the topographical parameter but less on the hydrological simulation. Considering processing time and accuracy on hydrological simulation, DEM grid size of 100m is recommended for this range of watershed size.
Keywords
DEM; Resolution; BASINS; HSPF; Hydrological simulation; GIS;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Kim, S. J. 1998. Grid-Based KineMatic Wave STOrm Runoff Model (KIMSTORM) (1) Theory and Model-. Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 31(3): 303-308
2 Lopes, V. L. 1995. CHDM-Catchment hydrology distributed model. In Water Management Planning for the 21st Century, Proceedings of a symposium. American Society of Civil Engineers, San Antonio, Texas. 144-154
3 Ogden, F.L., and Saghafian, B. 1995. Hydrologic modeling within GRASS-r.hydro.CASC2D. In Water Resources Engineering, Proceedings of the First International Conference, American Society of Civil Engineers, San Antonio, Texas. 892-896
4 Tarboton, D. G., Bras, R. L. and Rodriguez-Iturbe I. 1991. On the extraction of channel networks from digital elevation data. Hydrological Processes, Vol.5: 81-100
5 Walker J. P. and Willgoose, G. R 1999. On the effect of digital elevation model accuracy on hydrology and geomorphology. Water Resources Research, Vol. 35: 2259-2268
6 Water Reources Management System. 2002. wamis.kowaco.or.kr
7 Yang, D., Herath, S. and Musiake, K. 2000 Comparison of different distributed hydrological models for characterization of catchment spatial variability. Hydrological Processes, Vol. 14: 403-416
8 Beven, K. J., Wood, E. F., and Sivapalan, M. 1988. On hydrological heterogeneity-Catchment morphology and catchment response. Journal of Hydrology Vol. 100: 353-357   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Lahlou, M., Shoemaker, L., Choudhury, S., Elmer, R, Hu, A., Manguerra, H., Parker, A. 1998. Better Assessment Science Integrating Point and Nonpoint source; User's manual. EPA- 823-B-98-006, EPA, Washington, DC
10 Korea Meteorological Administration. 2002. www.kma.go.kr
11 Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V. 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models 1. A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 10: 282-290
12 Burt, T. P., Butcher, D. P. 1985. Topographic controls of soil moisture distribution. Journal of Soil Science Vol. 36: 469-486   DOI
13 Zhang W. and Montgomery D. 1994. Digital elevation model grid size, landscape representation, and hydrologic simulation. Water Resources Research, Vol. 30: 1019-1028
14 Shoemaker, L., Lahlou M., Bryer D., Kumar D., and Kratt K. 1997. Compendium of Tools for Watershed Assessment and TMDL Development. EPA841-B-97-006, EPA, Washington, DC.7-35
15 Palacios-Velez O., Cuevas-Renaud, B. 1986. Automated river-course, ridge and basin delineation from digital elevation data. Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 86: 299-314
16 Beasley, D.B. 1986. Distributed parameter hydrologic and water quality modeling. In Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution: Model Selection and Application. ed. A. Giorgini and F. Zingales. 345-362
17 Wolock, D. M., Hornberger, G. M., Beven, K. J. and Campbell, W. G. 1989. The relationship of catchment topography and soil hydraulic characteristics to lake alkalinity in the northeastern United States. Water Resource Research, Vol. 25: 829-837
18 Yang, D., Herath, S. and Musiake, K. 2001. Spatial resolution sensitivity of catchment geomorphologic properties and the effect on hydrological simulation. Hydrological Processes, Vol. 15: 2085-2099
19 Servet, E. and Dezetter, A. 1991. Selection of calibration objective functions in the context of rainfall-runoff modeling in a Sudanese savannah area. Hydrology Science Journal, Vol. 36: 307-330
20 Young, R.A., C. A. Onstad, D.D. Bosch, and W.P. Anderson. 1989. AGNPS: A nonpointsource pollution model for evaluating agriculture watersheds. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 44:168-173
21 Wolock, D. M. and Price, C. V. 1994. Effects of digital elevationmodel map scale and data resolution on a topography-based watershed model. Water Resources Research, Vol. 30: 3041-3052
22 Kim, S. J., Steenhuis,T. S. 2001. GRISTORM: Grid-Based Variable Source Area Storm Runoff Model. Transaction of the ASAE, Vol. 44(4): 863-875