Assessment of lumped hydrological balance models in peninsular Spain

Abstract

Abstract. The assessment of inflows in a water resources system is essential for the appropriate analysis of its management.These inflows can be obtained from hydrological balance models. In this paper, we intend to perform a comparative study of six lumped hydrological balance models in several basins with different climatic conditions within Spain. Lumped models enable the estimation of catchment resources without using spatially distributed information that would not be available in 10 many cases. We have selected basins where long time series of climatic and hydrological data are available (more than 30 years) to calibrate parsimonious models, taking into account the stochastic behaviour of the natural streamflow and the climatic variables. The study period comprises 34 years . The explored models are Témez, ABCD, GR2M, the Australian water balance model (AWBM), GUO-5 parameters (Guo-5p) and Thornthwaite-Mather. Six statistical indices are applied to compare the results of the models: Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency coefficient (NSE), root-mean-square deviation (RMSE), 15Pearson's correlation coefficient (R), percent bias (PBIAS), RMSE-observations standard deviation ratio (RSR) and the relative error between observed and simulated runoff volumes (REV). The results show that although lumped models can be employed in humid and sub-humid regions, the more humid the catchments are, the better the results obtained. Témez models provide the worst results in dry sub-humid and semi-arid regions. Guo-5p estimates runoff volumes with errors below 10% despite the unsatisfactory results provided according to the Bressiani classification. The Bressiani classification takes into 20 account different comparison criteria to help in the decision-making process when selecting a model. Nevertheless, the assessment of the margin of error in total runoff volume using REV is also a key index. The usefulness of Pearson's correlation when selecting a model is quite low but can be helpful in the analysis of models' weaknesses.

A Comparison of SWAT and ANN Models for Daily Runoff Simulation in Different Climatic Zones of Peninsular Spain

“…After analysing these results, it was concluded that both SWAT and ANN were suitable. The more arid the catchment, the lower the performances obtained in the hydrological models, which is similar to the experience reported by Pérez-Sánchez et al, (2017) [61].…”

“…Therefore, scenario 1 was the selected architecture for LRB. However, the performance levels of ANN models for HSRB were lower in general because modelling the hydrological response of arid and semi-arid regions, where evapotranspiration rates are high and precipitation is irregular and/or limited, is especially complex [61]. The selected model for HSRB was scenario 3 where NSE and RMSE were better than those obtained in other proposed scenarios.…”

Using Multiple Monthly Water Balance Models to Evaluate Gridded Precipitation Products over Peninsular Spain

“…When comparing total volumes observed and modelled (Table 6) with REV, previous findings were confirmed. GR2M appeared to be the best model for all the watersheds [24], and, although AEMET_G did not give the lowest percentage in all cases, the difference was never over 5% compared with the rest of the datasets. TRMM and MSWEP results for GR2M were below 15% in all watersheds, except in GAR, where CFSR volume error was −1.59%, 20% lower than the others.…”

“…It also includes some of the driest areas in the southeast, with a marked summer drought, and the rainiest areas in Europe in the northeast [24]. Four basins distributed over Peninsular Spain were used as study areas.…”

“…The water balance in these models is represented by different storages, the moisture content of which varies depending on physical or empirical relationships [40]. More information about these MWBMs can be found in [24]. A brief description of the models is given below:…”