HR: 0800h
AN: H51H-0863    [Abstracts]
TI: Comparison of Flow Distribution Algorithms for Estimating Spatio-temporal Soil Water Content With an Eco-hydrological Model
AU: Kim, E
EM: drummer76@empal.com
AF: Department of Environmental Planning, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Office # 215, Graduate School of Environmental Studies(82 dong), Seoul National University, SAN 56-1,SILLIM-DONG, GWANAK-GU, Seoul, 151-742, Korea, Republic of
AU: * Park, J
EM: ecohani@gmail.com
AF: Department of Environmental Planning, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Office # 215, Graduate School of Environmental Studies(82 dong), Seoul National University, SAN 56-1,SILLIM-DONG, GWANAK-GU, Seoul, 151-742, Korea, Republic of
AU: Lee, D
EM: leedw@snu.ac.kr
AF: Department of Environmental Planning, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University, Office # 215, Graduate School of Environmental Studies(82 dong), Seoul National University, SAN 56-1,SILLIM-DONG, GWANAK-GU, Seoul, 151-742, Korea, Republic of
AU: Kim, S
EM: kimsangh@pusan.ac.kr
AF: Department of Environmental Engineering, Pusan National University, Pusan National University, GEUMJEONG-GU, Pusan, 609-735, Korea, Republic of
AU: Kim, J
EM: joon-kim@yonsei.ac.kr
AF: Department of Atmospheric Science, Yonsei University, Yonsei University. 134 SINCHON-DONG, SEODAEMUN-GU, Seoul, 120-749, Korea, Republic of
AB: In an eco-hydrological model, RHESSys, soil water content (SWC) estimations are variable with flow distribution algorithms, by which some of model input data are calculated. The aim of this study was to compare three flow algorithms to calculate wetness index and flow table. Single Flow Direction (SFD), two types of Multi Flow Direction (MFD), and Demon algorithms were modified to produce wetness index of semi-distribution hydrological model and flow table of distribution hydrological model. The resultants were used to estimate SWC's, which were compared with observed values. Our results showed that effects of topography was better reflected and maps of soil water distribution were more natural in MFD and Demon algorithms than in SFD. Volumetric SWC of SFD was on average 0.30 v/v, and that of MFD 0.27 v/v, indicating that output of total water amount were also variable with flow distribution algorithms. We found that spatial distribution as well as total amount of SWC was different depending on flow distribution algorithms. Average RMSE's of SWC estimated with the modified SFD, MDF, and Demon algorithms were 0.13 (0.11~0.15), 0.11 (0.09~0.14), and 0.12 (0.09~0.15), respectively. Among the flow distribution algorithms, MFD was the most reliable.
DE: 1813 Eco-hydrology
DE: 1846 Model calibration (3333)
DE: 1866 Soil moisture
SC: Hydrology [H]
MN: 2007 Fall Meeting