Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data
Ten conceptually different models in predicting discharge from the artificial Chicken Creek catchment in North-East Germany were used for this study. Soil texture and topography data were given to the modellers, but discharge data was withheld. We compare the predictions with the measurements from t...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2009-11-01
|
| Series: | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| Online Access: | http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/13/2069/2009/hess-13-2069-2009.pdf |
| _version_ | 1831615335174766592 |
|---|---|
| author | H. Flühler G. Blöschl S. Stoll C. Stamm P. Kraft H. Hölzel D. Gustafsson J.-F. Exbrayat G.B. Chirico W. Buytaert H. Bormann T. Blume H. M. Holländer |
| author_facet | H. Flühler G. Blöschl S. Stoll C. Stamm P. Kraft H. Hölzel D. Gustafsson J.-F. Exbrayat G.B. Chirico W. Buytaert H. Bormann T. Blume H. M. Holländer |
| author_sort | H. Flühler |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Ten conceptually different models in predicting discharge from the artificial Chicken Creek catchment in North-East Germany were used for this study. Soil texture and topography data were given to the modellers, but discharge data was withheld. We compare the predictions with the measurements from the 6 ha catchment and discuss the conceptualization and parameterization of the models. The predictions vary in a wide range, e.g. with the predicted actual evapotranspiration ranging from 88 to 579 mm/y and the discharge from 19 to 346 mm/y. The predicted components of the hydrological cycle deviated systematically from the observations, which were not known to the modellers. Discharge was mainly predicted as subsurface discharge with little direct runoff. In reality, surface runoff was a major flow component despite the fairly coarse soil texture. The actual evapotranspiration (AET) and the ratio between actual and potential ET was systematically overestimated by nine of the ten models. None of the model simulations came even close to the observed water balance for the entire 3-year study period. The comparison indicates that the personal judgement of the modellers was a major source of the differences between the model results. The most important parameters to be presumed were the soil parameters and the initial soil-water content while plant parameterization had, in this particular case of sparse vegetation, only a minor influence on the results. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-18T19:46:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-24edac389305419ea623a86fde9d3558 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1027-5606 1607-7938 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-18T19:46:06Z |
| publishDate | 2009-11-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-24edac389305419ea623a86fde9d35582022-12-21T20:55:18ZengCopernicus PublicationsHydrology and Earth System Sciences1027-56061607-79382009-11-01131120692094Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse dataH. FlühlerG. BlöschlS. StollC. StammP. KraftH. HölzelD. GustafssonJ.-F. ExbrayatG.B. ChiricoW. BuytaertH. BormannT. BlumeH. M. HolländerTen conceptually different models in predicting discharge from the artificial Chicken Creek catchment in North-East Germany were used for this study. Soil texture and topography data were given to the modellers, but discharge data was withheld. We compare the predictions with the measurements from the 6 ha catchment and discuss the conceptualization and parameterization of the models. The predictions vary in a wide range, e.g. with the predicted actual evapotranspiration ranging from 88 to 579 mm/y and the discharge from 19 to 346 mm/y. The predicted components of the hydrological cycle deviated systematically from the observations, which were not known to the modellers. Discharge was mainly predicted as subsurface discharge with little direct runoff. In reality, surface runoff was a major flow component despite the fairly coarse soil texture. The actual evapotranspiration (AET) and the ratio between actual and potential ET was systematically overestimated by nine of the ten models. None of the model simulations came even close to the observed water balance for the entire 3-year study period. The comparison indicates that the personal judgement of the modellers was a major source of the differences between the model results. The most important parameters to be presumed were the soil parameters and the initial soil-water content while plant parameterization had, in this particular case of sparse vegetation, only a minor influence on the results.http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/13/2069/2009/hess-13-2069-2009.pdf |
| spellingShingle | H. Flühler G. Blöschl S. Stoll C. Stamm P. Kraft H. Hölzel D. Gustafsson J.-F. Exbrayat G.B. Chirico W. Buytaert H. Bormann T. Blume H. M. Holländer Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
| title | Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data |
| title_full | Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data |
| title_fullStr | Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data |
| title_short | Comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment (Chicken Creek) using sparse data |
| title_sort | comparative predictions of discharge from an artificial catchment chicken creek using sparse data |
| url | http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/13/2069/2009/hess-13-2069-2009.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT hfluhler comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT gbloschl comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT sstoll comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT cstamm comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT pkraft comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT hholzel comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT dgustafsson comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT jfexbrayat comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT gbchirico comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT wbuytaert comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT hbormann comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT tblume comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata AT hmhollander comparativepredictionsofdischargefromanartificialcatchmentchickencreekusingsparsedata |