A comparison of simplified methods for routing topographically driven subsurface flow

A comparison of simplified methods for routing topographically driven subsurface flow The relative performance of an explicit grid cell by grid cell approach and a statistical‐dynamical method widely used in Topmodel for modeling topographically driven subsurface flow was evaluated using a series of numerical experiments. Both approaches were compared with analytical solutions to the kinematic wave equation for flow down an inclined plane of constant slope. The hillslope discharge and water table profiles simulated by the explicit method were in good agreement with the analytical solution in all test cases. The statistical‐dynamical method converged to the correct steady state solution but failed to reproduce accurately transient conditions. The two algorithms were also compared using topography and observed hourly precipitation for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Mahantango, Pennsylvania, research catchment. The percent root‐mean‐ square‐difference in hourly discharge between the two methods for a 1 year simulation ranged from 20% to several hundred percent. The agreement in discharge between the two methods was best for deep soils, high surface conductivity, and large values of the power law exponent describing the decay in vertical hydraulic conductivity with depth. “Calibration” of the statistical‐dynamical model to discharge simulated by the explicit method was most effective for soils with low power law exponents. However, even in the calibrated cases, there were large discrepancies between local water table depths simulated by the two models. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Water Resources Research Wiley

A comparison of simplified methods for routing topographically driven subsurface flow

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/a-comparison-of-simplified-methods-for-routing-topographically-driven-MbXQ0hvjSe
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the American Geophysical Union.
ISSN
0043-1397
eISSN
1944-7973
D.O.I.
10.1029/1998WR900017
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The relative performance of an explicit grid cell by grid cell approach and a statistical‐dynamical method widely used in Topmodel for modeling topographically driven subsurface flow was evaluated using a series of numerical experiments. Both approaches were compared with analytical solutions to the kinematic wave equation for flow down an inclined plane of constant slope. The hillslope discharge and water table profiles simulated by the explicit method were in good agreement with the analytical solution in all test cases. The statistical‐dynamical method converged to the correct steady state solution but failed to reproduce accurately transient conditions. The two algorithms were also compared using topography and observed hourly precipitation for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Mahantango, Pennsylvania, research catchment. The percent root‐mean‐ square‐difference in hourly discharge between the two methods for a 1 year simulation ranged from 20% to several hundred percent. The agreement in discharge between the two methods was best for deep soils, high surface conductivity, and large values of the power law exponent describing the decay in vertical hydraulic conductivity with depth. “Calibration” of the statistical‐dynamical model to discharge simulated by the explicit method was most effective for soils with low power law exponents. However, even in the calibrated cases, there were large discrepancies between local water table depths simulated by the two models.

Journal

Water Resources ResearchWiley

Published: Jan 1, 1999

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off