Runoff generation and its representation in land surface models - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Runoff generation and its representation in land surface models PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 212cff-NjdhY



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Runoff generation and its representation in land surface models

Description:

... Processes via two 25 m2 weighing lysimeters (shown here) and additional ... of canopy effects on snow accumulation and melt to the weighing lysimeter data. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:122
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 89
Provided by: SurfaceWat
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Runoff generation and its representation in land surface models


1
Runoff generation and its representation in land
surface models
  • Dennis P. Lettenmaier
  • Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
  • University of Washington
  • for presentation at
  • GSSP Seminar Series
  • NASA/GSFC
  • June 14, 2002

2
OUTLINE OF THIS TALK
  • 1. Runoff generation processes
  • 2. Spatially distributed modeling
  • 3. Macroscale modeling
  • a) Strategy
  • b) Testing and evaluation
  • c) Implementation
  • Example 1 Puget Sound flood forecast system
  • Example 2 Seasonal ensemble forecasting
  • Example 3 Climate change assessment

3
1. Runoff generation processes
4
 
Darcys Equation (fundamental equation of motion
in subsurface, applies to both saturated and
unsaturated zones)  where  q flow per
unit cross-sectional area (units L/T)  K
hydraulic conductivity (L/T)    Definitions  
? volume of water/total volume ? porosity
(volume of voids/total volume ? suction head
(height to which moisture is drawn above free
surface
5
let
diffusivity
From continuity
Combining,
(Richards equation)
6
Complications in the application of Richards
Equation
  • Applies at point scale, well behaved porous
    medium
  • K is highly nonlinear spatially varying function
    of suction head, moisture
  • K varies over orders of magnitude due to
    variations in soil properties at meter scales
    (much less than typical scale of application)
  • Direct estimation of K difficult even at small
    scale (and scale complications in interpretation
    of measurements)
  • Methods of estimating K from e.g. mapable soil
    properties are highly approximate, and subject to
    scale complications

7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
Runoff generation mechanisms
  • 1) Infiltration excess precipitation rate
    exceeds local (vertical) hydraulic conductivity
    -- typically occurs over low permeability
    surfaces, e.g., arid areas with soil crusting,
    frozen soils
  • 2) Saturation excess fast runoff response
    over saturated areas, which are dynamic during
    storms and seasonally (defined by interception of
    the water table with the surface)

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Infiltration excess flow (source Dunne and
Leopold)
13
Runoff generation mechanisms on a hillslope
(source Dunne and Leopold)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
Saturated area (source Dunne and Leopold)
17
(No Transcript)
18
Seasonal contraction of saturated area at
Sleepers River, VT following snowmelt (source
Dunne and Leopold)
19
Expansion of saturated area during a storm
(source Dunne and Leopold)
20
Seasonal contraction of pre-storm saturated
areas, Sleepers River VT (source Dunne and
Leopold)
21
2. Spatially distributed modeling
Distributed Hydrology Soil Vegetation Model
(DHSVM)
22
Explicit Representation of Downslope Moisture
Redistribution
Lumped Conceptual (Processes parameterized)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
DHSVM Snow Accumulation and Melt Model
26
Distributed vs Spatially Lumped Hyrologic Models
Lumped Conceptual
Fully Distributed Physically-based
Suitable for flood forecasting and a wide range
of water resource related issues
Suitable for flood forecasting
27
Macroscale modeling a strategy
28
Traditional bottom up hydrologic modeling
approach (subbasin by subbasin)
29
Macroscale modeling approach (top down)
1 Northwest 5 Rio Grande 10 Upper Mississippi 2
California 6 Missouri 11 Lower Mississippi 3
Great Basin 7 Arkansas-Red 12 Ohio 4 Colorado 8
Gulf 13 East Coast 9 Great Lakes
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
3. Macroscale hydrologic models, b Testing
and evaluation
33
Investigation of forest canopy effects on snow
accumulation and melt
Measurement of Canopy Processes via two 25 m2
weighing lysimeters (shown here) and additional
lysimeters in an adjacent clear-cut.
Direct measurement of snow interception
34
Calibration of an energy balance model of canopy
effects on snow accumulation and melt to the
weighing lysimeter data. (Model was tested
against two additional years of data)
35
Summer 1994 - Mean Diurnal Cycle
Point Evaluation of a Surface Hydrology Model for
BOREAS
SSA Mature Black Spruce
SSA Mature Jack Pine
NSA Mature Black Spruce
Flux (W/m2)
Local time (hours)
36
Range in Snow Cover Extent
Observed and Simulated
37
(No Transcript)
38
Mean Normalized Observed and Simulated Soil
Moisture
Central Eurasia, 1980-1985
39
Cold Season Parameterization -- Frozen Soils
Key Observed Simulated 5-100 cm layer 0-5
cm layer
40
3. Macroscale hydrologic models, c
Implementation
41
Shasta Reservoir inflows
42
(No Transcript)
43
5. Example 1 Puget Sound flood forecasting
44
  • Terrain - 150 m. aggregated from 10 m.
    resolution DEM
  • Land Cover - 19 classes aggregated from over 200
    GAP classes
  • Soils - 3 layers aggregated from 13 layers (31
    different classes) variable soil depth from 1-3
    meters
  • Stream Network - based on 0.25 km2 source area

Data Requirements for applying DHSVM.
45
Calibration-Validation with all available
meteorological observations (50 sites)
Validation 1991-1996
  • Calibration (Snohomish River)
  • From 1987-1991
  • (USGS gauges at
  • Gold Bar and Carnation only )

46
DHSVM Calibration (Snoqualmie at Carnation)
Flood of record
  • Principal calibration locations were the
    Skykomish at Gold Bar and the Snoqualmie at
    Carnation

47
  • Calibration to two USGS sites
  • Split sample validation at over 60 sites
  • Parameters transfer extremely well to other
    watersheds without recalibration

48
2000/2001 Real-time Streamflow Forecast
System 26 basins 48,896 km2 2,173,155
pixels _at_ 150 m resolution
http//hydromet.atmos.washington.edu
49
The average relative absolute error in peak
runoff forecast for six events during water year
1999 (Westrick et al 2002).
Obs-based MM5 MM5 no bias RFC
Sauk Skykomish N.F. Snoq M.F. Snoq Snoq
Cedar
50
5. Example 2 Seasonal ensemble streamflow
forecasting
51
General Approach
  • climate model forecast
  • meteorological outputs
  • 1.9 degree resolution (T62)
  • monthly total P, avg T
  • Use 3 step approach 1) statistical bias
    correction
  • 2) downscaling
  • 3) hydrologic simulation

? hydrologic (VIC) model inputs
  • streamflow, soil moisture,
  • snowpack,
  • runoff
  • 1/8-1/4 degree resolution
  • daily P, Tmin, Tmax

52
Models Global Spectral Model (GSM) ensemble
forecasts from NCEP/EMC
  • forecast ensembles available near beginning of
    each month, extend 6 months beginning in
    following month
  • each month
  • 210 ensemble members define GSM climatology for
    monthly Ptot Tavg
  • 20 ensemble members define GSM forecast

53
One Way Coupling of GSM and VIC models
a) bias correction climate model
climatology ? observed climatology b) spatial
interpolation GSM (1.8-1.9 deg.) ? VIC (1/8
deg) c) temporal disaggregation (via resampling
of observed patterns) monthly ? daily
54
GSM Regional Bias a spatial example
Bias is removed at the monthly GSM-scale from the
meteorological forecasts (so 3rd column 1st
column)
55
Downscaling Test
  • Start with GSM-scale monthly observed met data
    for 21 years
  • Downscale into a daily VIC-scale timeseries
  • Force hydrology model to produce streamflow
  • Is observed streamflow reproduced?

56
GSM forecast and climatology ensembles
(21 sets)
10 member climatology ensembles
from 1979 SSTs
from 1980 SSTs
from 1981 SSTs
from 1999 SSTs
20 member forecast ensemble
from current SSTs
57
Simulations
58
CRBInitial Conditionslate-May SWE water
balance
59
CRBInitial Conditions(percentile)
60
CRB May forecast
forecast
observed
forecast medians
61
CRB May forecast
hindcast observed
forecast
forecast medians
62
CRB May forecast
forecast
hindcast observed
forecast medians
63
CRB May forecastbasin avg. soil moisture
64
CRB May Forecast Streamflow
65
CRB sequential streamflow forecasts
climatologies
forecasts
hindcast
ensemble medians
66
CRBMay Forecastcumulative flow averages
forecast medians
67
6. Example 3 Climate change assessment
68
Accelerated Climate Prediction Initiative (ACPI)
NCAR/DOE Parallel Climate Model (PCM) grid over
western U.S.
69
Regional Climate Model (RCM) grid and hydrologic
model domains
70
Climate Change Scenarios
PCM Simulations
Historical B06.22 (greenhouse CO2aerosols
forcing) 1870-2000 Climate Control
B06.45 (CO2aerosols at 1995 levels) 1995-2048
Climate Change B06.44 (BAU6, future
scenario forcing) 1995-2099 Climate Change
B06.46 (BAU6, future scenario forcing)
1995-2099 Climate Change B06.47 (BAU6,
future scenario forcing) 1995-2099
PNNL Regional Climate Model (RCM) Simulations
Climate Control B06.45 derived-subset
1995-2015 Climate Change B06.44
derived-subset 2040-2060
71
ACPI PCM-climate change scenarios, historic
simulation v air temperature observations
72
ACPI PCM-climate change scenarios, historic
simulation v precipitation observations
73
Bias Correction and Downscaling Approach
  • climate model scenario
  • meteorological outputs

? hydrologic model inputs
  • snowpack
  • runoff
  • streamflow
  • 2.8 (T42)/0.5 degree resolution
  • monthly total P, avg. T
  • 1/8-1/4 degree resolution
  • daily P, Tmin, Tmax

74
Bias Correction
Note future scenario temperature trend (relative
to control run) removed before, and replaced
after, bias-correction step.
75
Downscaling
76
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Columbia River
Basin (Basin Averages)
77
RCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Columbia
River Basin (Basin Averages)
PCM BAU B06.44
RCM BAU B06.44
control (2000-2048)
historical (1950-99)
78
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios California
(Basin Average)
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
79
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Colorado (B
asin Average)
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
80
PCM Business-as-Usual Scenarios Snowpack
Changes Columbia River Basin April 1 SWE
81
PCM Business-as-Usual Scenarios Snowpack
Changes California April 1 SWE
82
PCM Business-As-Usual Mean Monthly Hydrographs
Columbia River Basin _at_ The Dalles, OR
1 month 12
1 month 12
83
PCM Business-As-Usual Mean Monthly Hydrographs
Shasta Reservoir Inflows
84
CRB Operation Alternative 1 (early refill)
85
CRB Operation Alternative 2 (reduce flood storage
by 20)
86
(No Transcript)
87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
About PowerShow.com