Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.15681/KSWE.2011.27.1.8

SWAT Direct Runoff and Baseflow Evaluation using Web-based Flow Clustering EI Estimation System  

Jang, Won Seok (Department of Regional Infrastructures Engineering, Kangwon National University)
Moon, Jong Pil (National Academy of Agricultural Science, Rural Development Administration)
Kim, Nam Won (Korea Institute of Construction Technology)
Yoo, Dong Sun (Department of Regional Infrastructures Engineering, Kangwon National University)
Kum, Dong Hyuk (Department of Regional Infrastructures Engineering, Kangwon National University)
Kim, Ik Jae (Korea Environment Institute)
Mun, Yuri (Korea Environment Institute)
Lim, Kyoung Jae (Department of Regional Infrastructures Engineering, Kangwon National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society on Water Environment / v.27, no.1, 2011 , pp. 61-72 More about this Journal
Abstract
In order to assess hydrologic and nonpoint source pollutant behaviors in a watershed with Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model, the accuracy evaluation of SWAT model should be conducted prior to the application of it to a watershed. When calibrating and validating hydrological components of SWAT model, the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (EI) has been widely used. However, the EI value has been known as it is affected sensitively by big numbers among the range of numbers. In this study, a Web-based flow clustering EI estimation system using K-means clustering algorithm was developed and used for SWAT hydrology evaluation. Even though the EI of total streamflow was high, the EI values of hydrologic components (i.e., direct runoff and baseflow) were not high. Also when the EI values of flow group I and II (i.e., low and high value group) clustered from direct runoff and baseflow were computed, respectively, the EI values of them were much lower with negative EI values for some flow group comparison. The SWAT auto-calibration tool estimated values also showed negative EI values for most flow group I and II of direct runoff and baseflow although EI value of total streamflow was high. The result obtained in this study indicates that the SWAT hydrology component should be calibrated until all four positive EI values for each flow group of direct runoff and baseflow are obtained for better accuracy both in direct runoff and baseflow.
Keywords
K-means clustering EI estimation system; Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient; Soil and Water Assessment Tool; SWAT auto-calibration tool; Web-based flow clustering EI estimation system;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., and Williams, J. R. (1998). Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment: part I: model development. Journal of American Water Resources Association, 34(1), pp. 73-89.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Bicknell, B. R., Imhoff, J. C., Donigian, A. S., and Johanson, R. C. (1997). Hydrological Simulation Program-FOTRAN (HSPF). User's Manual for release 11(EPA-600/R-97/080), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA.
3 Cao, F., Liang, J., and Jiang, G. (2009). An initialization method for the Web-based K-means algorithm using neighborhood model. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 58, pp. 474-483.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Cho, J., Park, S., and Lm, S. (2008). Evaluation of Agricultural Nonpoint Source (AGNPS) model for small watersheds in Korea applying irregular cell delineation. Agricultural Water Management, 95(4), pp. 400-408.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Chow, V. T., Maidment, D. R., and Mays, L. W. (1988). Applied Hydrology, McGraw-Hill, New York.
6 Cryer, S. A. and Havens, P. L. (1999). Regional sensitivity analysis using a fractional factorial method for the USDA model GLEAMS. Environmental Modeling and Software, 14(6), pp. 613-624.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Green, C. H. and Van Griensven, A. (2008). Autocalibration in hydrologic modeling: Using SWAT 2005 in small-scale watersheds. Environmental Modelling & Software, 23, pp. 422-434.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Gupta, H. V., Sorooshian, S., and Yapo, P. O. (1999). Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: comparison with multilevel except calibration. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 4(2), pp. 135-143.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Kim, J., Park, Y., Yoo, D., Kim, N., Engel, B. A., Kim, S., Kim, K., and Lim, K. J. (2009). Development of a SWAT patch for better estimation of sediment yield in steep sloping watersheds. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 45(4), pp. 963-972.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Lim, K. J., Engel, B. A., Tang, Z., Choi, J., Kim, K., Muthukrishnan, S., and Tripathy, D. (2005). Automated Web GIS-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool, WHAT. Journal of the American Water Recourse Association, 41(6), pp. 1407-1416.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Lloyd, S. P. (1957). Least square quantization in PCM. Bell Telephone Laboratories Paper. Published in journal much later: S. P. Lloyd (1982). Least squares quantization in PCM. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 28(2). pp. 129-137.   DOI
12 MacQueen, J. B. (1967). Some Methods for classification and Analysis of Multivariate Observations. Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, University of California Press, 1, pp. 281-297.
13 Qi, C. and Grunwald, S. (2005). GIS-Based hydrologic modeling in the Sandusky watershed using swat. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 48(1), pp. 169-180.   DOI
14 McCuen, R. H., Knight, Z., and Cutter, A. G. (2006). Evaluation of the Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency Index, Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 11(6), p. 597.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part 1: A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10(3), pp. 282-290.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., Srinivasan, R., and Williams, J. R. (2005). Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) Users Manual. BRC(02-06), Blackland Research Center, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Temple, Texas.
17 Rossman, L. A. (2009). Storm Water Management Model User's Manual Version 5.0. EPA/600/R-05/040, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.
18 Steinhaus, H. (1956). Sur la division des corps matériels en parties, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci., 1, pp. 801-804.
19 Van Grienven, A., Francos, A., and Bauwens, W. (2002). Sensitivity analysis and auto-calibration of an integral dynamic model for river water quality. Water Science and Technology, 45(9), pp. 325-332.
20 Van Griensven, A., Meixner, T., Grunwald, S., Bishop, T., Di luzio, M., and Srinivasan, R. (2006). A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. Journal Hydrology, 324, pp. 10-23.   DOI
21 Walling, D. E., He, Q., and Whelan, P. A. (2003). Using 137Cs Measurements to validate the application of the AGNPS and ANSWERS erosion and sediment yield modles in two small Devon Catchments. Soil and Tillage Research, 69(1-2), pp. 27-43.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Zhou, H., and Liu, Y. (2008). Accurate integration of multiview range image using k-means clustering. The Journal of the Pattern Recognition Society, 41(1), pp. 152-175.   DOI   ScienceOn