DOCSLIB.ORG

State Standard for Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State Standard for Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES FLOOD MITIGATION SECTION State Standard For Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines Under the authority outlined in ARS 48-3605(A) the Director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources establishes the following standard for Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines in Arizona. State Standard for Hydrologic Modeling, or “guidelines for the experienced modeler”, has been developed to address hydrologic conditions for a variety of statewide watersheds. Included are problems and situations identified by the State Standard Work Group (SSWG) and floodplain managers. The intended audience is statewide; engineers, professionals and Floodplain Administrators. The following topics are included: • Hydrologic Model comparison and recommendation • Guidelines and parameters • Model application for specific situations, and associated hydrologic parameters • Precipitation values (NOAA 14) • Storm duration • Unique conditions, such as wildfire burn, overgrazing, logging, drought, rapid snowmelt, urbanization. The State Standard includes examples addressing the above key issues. This requirement is effective August, 2007. Copies of this State Standard and the State Standard Technical Supplement can be obtained by contacting the Department’s Water Engineering Section at (602) 771-8652. SS10-07 1 August 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................5 1.1 Purpose and Background .......................................................................5 1.2 General ...................................................................................................5 1.3 Overview of Standard.............................................................................6 2.0 Hydrologic Models............................................................................................7 2.1 General ...................................................................................................7 2.2 Model Selection......................................................................................7 2.2.1 Model Evaluation Criteria ............................................................7 Parameters..................................................................................7 2.2.2 Evaluated Models........................................................................8 2.2.3 Recommendation ......................................................................11 3.0 Modeling Process and Procedure.................................................................12 3.1 General ................................................................................................12 3.2 Project Description and Initialization .....................................................12 3.3 Precipitation Data..................................................................................13 3.3.1 General .....................................................................................13 3.3.2 Depth-Duration-Frequency Statistics........................................13 3.3.3 Depth-Area Reduction...............................................................14 3.3.4 Rainfall Distribution ...................................................................18 3.3.5 Procedures................................................................................18 3.4 Subbasin Data......................................................................................21 3.4.1 Prepare Watershed Map ...........................................................21 3.4.2 Rainfall Losses..........................................................................21 3.4.2.1 Evaporation and Interception......................................22 3.4.2.2 Depression Storage....................................................23 3.4.2.3 Infiltration During Initial Abstraction ............................24 3.4.2.4 Method for Rainfall Losses .........................................24 3.4.2.5 Impervious Area.........................................................28 3.4.2.6 General Considerations for Rainfall Losses ...............29 3.4.2.7 Procedures for Rainfall Losses...................................34 3.4.2.8 Applications and Limitations for Rainfall Losses ........35 3.4.3 Unit Hydrographs ......................................................................36 3.4.3.1 General.......................................................................36 3.4.3.2 Method for Unit Hydrographs .....................................36 3.4.3.3 Unit Hydrograph Duration...........................................39 3.4.3.4 Unit Hydrograph Procedure........................................42 3.4.3.5 Application and Limitations for Unit Hydrographs.......43 3.5 Channel Routing...................................................................................44 3.5.1 General .....................................................................................44 3.5.2 Methods for Channel Routing....................................................44 Modified Puls.............................................................................44 Kinematic Wave ........................................................................44 SS10-07 2 August 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued 3.5.3 General Considerations.............................................................45 Routing......................................................................................45 Kinematic Wave ........................................................................46 3.5.4 Procedures for Channel Routing...............................................47 3.5.5 Applications and Limitations for Channel Routing.....................48 3.6 Storage Routing....................................................................................49 3.7 Hydrograph Combinations....................................................................49 3.8 Diversions .............................................................................................50 4.0 Unique Watershed Conditions ......................................................................52 4.1 Transmission Losses............................................................................52 4.1.1 General .....................................................................................52 4.1.2 Procedure..................................................................................52 4.2 Wildfire Burn .........................................................................................54 4.2.1 Rainfall Losses..........................................................................56 4.3 Grazing .................................................................................................60 4.4 Logging .................................................................................................60 4.5 Drought .................................................................................................61 4.6 Rapid Snowmelt....................................................................................61 4.6.1 Background ...............................................................................61 4.6.2 Methodologies...........................................................................62 4.6.3 Guidelines .................................................................................63 Snowmelt-Runoff.......................................................................64 Snowmelt Coefficient.................................................................64 Base Temperature.....................................................................64 Air Temperature ........................................................................64 Snow Water Equivalent.............................................................65 Snowmelt Losses ......................................................................66 Rainfall-Runoff ..........................................................................66 4.6.4 Procedures................................................................................67 4.6.5 Applications and Limitations......................................................67 4.7 Urbanization..........................................................................................68 5.0 References ......................................................................................................69 SS10-07 3 August 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued List of Figures Figure 3.1 Depth-Area Relation Zones.......................................................15 Figure 3.2 Depth-Area Reduction Relation for Western Arizona................16 Figure 3.3 Depth-Area Reduction Relation for Eastern Arizona.................17 Figure 3.4 NOAA Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Data Server Input ......19 Figure 3.5 NOAA Atlas 14 Precipitation Frequency Data Server Output ...20 Figure 3.6 Rainfall Loss Process................................................................22 Figure 3.7 Composite Values of PSIF and DTHETA as a Function of XKSAT............................................................26 Figure 3.8 Effect of Vegetation Cover on Hydraulic Conductivity...............27 Figure 3.9 Status of Soil Surveys – Publication..........................................31 Figure 3.10 Status of Soil Survey – Digitizing ..............................................33 Figure 3.11 Synthetic Time-Area Relation....................................................41 Figure 3.12 Example Input Files...................................................................51
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Infiltration from the Pedon to Global Grid Scales: an Overview and Outlook for Land Surface Modeling
    Published June 24, 2019 Reviews and Analyses Core Ideas Infiltration from the Pedon to Global • Land surface models (LSMs) show Grid Scales: An Overview and Outlook a large variety in describing and upscaling infiltration. for Land Surface Modeling • Soil structural effects on infiltration in LSMs are mostly neglected. Harry Vereecken, Lutz Weihermüller, Shmuel Assouline, • New soil databases may help to Jirka Šimůnek, Anne Verhoef, Michael Herbst, Nicole Archer, parameterize infiltration processes Binayak Mohanty, Carsten Montzka, Jan Vanderborght, in LSMs. Gianpaolo Balsamo, Michel Bechtold, Aaron Boone, Sarah Chadburn, Matthias Cuntz, Bertrand Decharme, Received 22 Oct. 2018. Agnès Ducharne, Michael Ek, Sebastien Garrigues, Accepted 16 Feb. 2019. Klaus Goergen, Joachim Ingwersen, Stefan Kollet, David M. Lawrence, Qian Li, Dani Or, Sean Swenson, Citation: Vereecken, H., L. Weihermüller, S. Philipp de Vrese, Robert Walko, Yihua Wu, Assouline, J. Šimůnek, A. Verhoef, M. Herbst, N. Archer, B. Mohanty, C. Montzka, J. Vander- and Yongkang Xue borght, G. Balsamo, M. Bechtold, A. Boone, S. Chadburn, M. Cuntz, B. Decharme, A. Infiltration in soils is a key process that partitions precipitation at the land sur- Ducharne, M. Ek, S. Garrigues, K. Goergen, J. face into surface runoff and water that enters the soil profile. We reviewed the Ingwersen, S. Kollet, D.M. Lawrence, Q. Li, D. basic principles of water infiltration in soils and we analyzed approaches com- Or, S. Swenson, P. de Vrese, R. Walko, Y. Wu, and Y. Xue. 2019. Infiltration from the pedon monly used in land surface models (LSMs) to quantify infiltration as well as its to global grid scales: An overview and out- numerical implementation and sensitivity to model parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • DOGAMI GMS-5, Geology of the Powers Quadrangle, Oregon
    o thickness of about 1,500 feet. The southern outcrop terminates against the Sixes River fault, indicat­ Intermediate intrusive rocks, mainly diorite and quartz diorite, intrude the Gal ice Formation ing that the last movement involved down-faulting along the north side. south of the Sixes River fault. One stock, covering nearly 2 square miles, is bisected by Benson Creek, Megafossils are present in some of the bedded basal sandstone. Forominifera examined by W. W. and numerous small dikes are present nearby. One of the largest dikes extends from Rusty Creek eastward Rau (Baldwin, 1965) collected a short distance west of the mouth of Big Creek along the Sixes River were through the Middle Fork of the Sixes River into Salman Mountain. These intrusive racks are described by assigned a middle Eocene age . A middle Eocene microfauna in beds of similar age near Powers was ex­ Lund and Baldwin ( 1969) and are correlated with the Pearse Peak diorite of Koch ( 1966). The Pearse amined by Thoms (Born, 1963), and another outcrop along Fourmile Creek to the north contained a mid­ Peak body, which intrudes the Ga lice Formation along Elk River to the south, is described by Koch (1966, GEOLOGICAL MAP SERIES dle Eocene molluscan fauna (Allen and Baldwin, 1944). Phillips (1968) also collected o middle Eocene p. 51-52) . fauna in middle Umpqua strata along Fourmile Creek, o short distance north of the mapped area. Lode gold deposits reported by Brooks and Ramp ( 1968) in the South Fork of the Sixes drainage and on Rusty Butte are apparently associated with the dioritic intrusive bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Restoration, a Natural Channel Design
    Stream Restoration Prep8AICI by the North Carolina Stream Restonltlon Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant INC STATE UNIVERSITY I North Carolina State University and North Carolina A&T State University commit themselves to positive action to secure equal opportunity regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability. In addition, the two Universities welcome all persons without regard to sexual orientation. Contents Introduction to Fluvial Processes 1 Stream Assessment and Survey Procedures 2 Rosgen Stream-Classification Systems/ Channel Assessment and Validation Procedures 3 Bankfull Verification and Gage Station Analyses 4 Priority Options for Restoring Incised Streams 5 Reference Reach Survey 6 Design Procedures 7 Structures 8 Vegetation Stabilization and Riparian-Buffer Re-establishment 9 Erosion and Sediment-Control Plan 10 Flood Studies 11 Restoration Evaluation and Monitoring 12 References and Resources 13 Appendices Preface Streams and rivers serve many purposes, including water supply, The authors would like to thank the following people for reviewing wildlife habitat, energy generation, transportation and recreation. the document: A stream is a dynamic, complex system that includes not only Micky Clemmons the active channel but also the floodplain and the vegetation Rockie English, Ph.D. along its edges. A natural stream system remains stable while Chris Estes transporting a wide range of flows and sediment produced in its Angela Jessup, P.E. watershed, maintaining a state of "dynamic equilibrium." When Joseph Mickey changes to the channel, floodplain, vegetation, flow or sediment David Penrose supply significantly affect this equilibrium, the stream may Todd St. John become unstable and start adjusting toward a new equilibrium state.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a Site Characteristics for Selected USGS Gage Stations In
    APPENDIX A Site Characteristics for Selected USGS Gage Stations in the Allegheny Plateau and Valley and Ridge Physiographic Provinces This Appendix provides summaries of field data collected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) at fourteen U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gage station monitored stream sites in the Allegheny Plateau and Valley and Ridge hydro-physiographic region of Maryland. For each site, information and survey data is summarized on four pages. The first page for each site contains general information on the drainage basin, gage station, and the study reach. The Maryland State Highway Administration provided land use/land cover information using the software program GIS Hydro (Ragan 1991) and 1994 Landsat and Spot coverage information. The land use/land cover information may be incomplete for drainage basins that extend beyond the state of Maryland boundaries, this is noted in the General Study Reach Description for the pertinent sites. Stream order and magnitude are based on Strahler (1964) and Shreve (1967), respectively. The reported discharge recurrence intervals are from the log-Pearson type III flood frequency distribution for the annual maximum series calculated by USGS according to the Bulletin 17B procedures. The second page provides information on the study reach including cross-section plots and particle size distributions in the riffle and reach. The third page presents photographic views of the surveyed cross-section in the study reach and the fourth page provides a scale plan form diagram of the study reach mapped using a total station survey instrument and generated with the graphic and survey reduction software Terra Model.
    [Show full text]
  • Fast Hydraulic Erosion Simulation and Visualization on GPU
    Fast Hydraulic Erosion Simulation and Visualization on GPU Xing Mei Philippe Decaudin Bao-Gang Hu CASIA-LIAMA/NLPR, Beijing, China INRIA-Evasion, Grenoble, France CASIA-LIAMA/NLPR, Beijing, China xmei@(NOSPAM)nlpr.ia.ac.cn & CASIA-LIAMA, Beijing, China hubg@(NOSPAM)nlpr.ia.ac.cn philippe.decaudin@(NOSPAM)imag.fr Figure 1. Illustration of our erosion simulation on a ”PG”-shaped mountain. (a) The initial terrain. (b) Terrain is being eroded by rainfall. The dissolved soil (denoted by green color) is transported by the water flow (blue). (c) The eroded terrain and the deposited sediment (red) after the rainfall and during the evaporation. Abstract 1. Introduction Natural mountains and valleys are gradually eroded by Natural terrains exhibit a lot of complex shapes such rainfall and river flows. Physically-based modeling of this as valleys, ridges, sand ripples and crests. These geomor- complex phenomenon is a major concern in producing re- phological structures are mostly determined by the erosion alistic synthesized terrains. However, despite some recent phenomenon: soil is dissolved and transported by the wa- improvements, existing algorithms are still computationally ter flow, sand is carried away by the wind, and stones are expensive, leading to a time-consuming process fairly im- decomposed into small blocks by the temperature. Erosion practical for terrain designers and 3D artists. simulation has always been an important research topic in landscape design [5, 8], since it greatly enhances the realism In this paper, we present a new method to model the hy- of the synthesized terrains. draulic erosion phenomenon which runs at interactive rates We focus on hydraulic erosion, which is the predominant on today’s computers.
    [Show full text]
  • Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville Newfoundland
    Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville Newfoundland Submitted by: James H. McCarthy AMEC Earth & Environmental Limited 95 Bonaventure Ave. St. John’s, NL A1C 5R6 Submitted to: Mr. Kirk Peddle SGE-Acres 45 Marine Drive Clarenville, NL A0E 1J0 January 8, 2003 TF05205 Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville, NF, TF05205 January 8, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 WETTED PERIMETER METHOD ................................................................................... 1 2.0 STUDY TEAM ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 CRITICAL AREAS (TRANSECTS).................................................................................. 3 3.2 SURVEY DATA................................................................................................................ 4 4.0 RESULTS............................................................................................................................. 6 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Survey data from each transect Page i Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal
    [Show full text]
  • Rainfall-Runoff Relationship (Contd.) Rainfall-Runoff
    Module 3 Lecture 2: Watershed and rainfall-runoff relationship (contd.) Rainfall-Runoff How does runoff occur? When rainfall exceeds the infiltration rate at the surface, excess water begins to accumulate as surface storage in small depressions. As depression storage begins to fill, overland flow or sheet flow may begin to occur and this flow is called as “Surface runoff” Runoff mainly depends on: Amount of rainfall, soil type, evaporation capacity and land use Amount of rainfall: The runoff is in direct proportion with the rainfall. i.e. as the rainfall increases, the chance of increase in runoff will also increases Module 3 Rainfall-Runoff Contd…. Soil type: Infiltration rate depends mainly on the soil type. If the soil is having more void space (porosity), than the infiltration rate will be more causing less surface runoff (eg. Laterite soil) Evaporation capacity: If the evaporation capacity is more, surface runoff will be reduced Components of Runoff Overland Flow or Surface Runoff: The water that travels over the ground surface to a channel. The amount of surface runoff flow may be small since it may only occur over a permeable soil surface when the rainfall rate exceeds the local infiltration capacity. Module 3 Rainfall-Runoff Contd…. Interflow or Subsurface Storm Flow: The precipitation that infiltrates the soil surface and move laterally through the upper soil layers until it enters a stream channel. Groundwater Flow or Base Flow: The portion of precipitation that percolates downward until it reaches the water table. This water accretion may eventually discharge into the streams if the water table intersects the stream channels of the basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Drainage Basins As Fundamental Units for Mine Closure Planning: Aurora and Pastor I Quarries
    Natural Drainage Basins as Fundamental Units for Mine Closure Planning: Aurora and Pastor I Quarries Cristina Martín-Moreno1, María Tejedor1, José Martín1, José Nicolau2, Ernest Bladé3, Sara Nyssen1, Miguel Lalaguna2, Alejandro de Lis1, Ivón Cermeño-Martín1 and José Gómez4 1. Faculty of Geological Sciences, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain 2. Polytechnic School, Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain 3. Institut FLUMEN, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain 4. Fábrica de Alcanar, Cemex España ABSTRACT The vast majority of the Earth’s ice-free land surface has been shaped by fluvial and related slope geomorphic processes. Drainage basins are consequently the most common land surface organization units. Mining operations disrupt this efficient surface structure. Therefore, mine restoration lacking stable drainage basins and networks, “blended into and complementing the drainage pattern of the surrounding terrain” (in the sense of SMCRA 1977), will be always limited. The pre-mine drainage characteristics cannot be replicated, because mining creates irreversible changes in earth physical properties and volumes. However, functional drainage basins and networks, adapted to the new earth material properties, can and should be restored. Dominant current mine restoration practice, typically, either lacks a drainage network or has a deficient, non-natural, drainage design. Extensive literature provides evidence that this is a common reason for mined land reclamation failure. These conventional drainage engineered solutions are not reliable in the long term without guaranteed constant maintenance. Additionally, conventional landform design has low ecological and visual integration with the adjoining landscapes, and is becoming rejected by public and regulators, worldwide. For these reasons, fluvial geomorphic restoration, with a drainage basin approach, is receiving enormous attention.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 an Interdisciplinary and Hierarchical Approach to the Study and Management of River Ecosystems M
    18 An Interdisciplinary and Hierarchical Approach to the Study and Management of River Ecosystems M. C. THOMS INTRODUCTION Rivers are complex ecosystems (Thoms & Sheldon, 2000a) influenced by prior states, multi-causal effects, and the states and dynamics of external systems (Walters & Korman, 1999). Rivers comprise at least three interacting subsystems (geomorphological, hydro- logical and ecological), whose structure and function have traditionally been studied by separate disciplines, each with their own paradigms and perspectives. With increasing pressures on the environment, there is a strong trend to manage rivers as ecosystems, and this requires a holistic, interdisciplinary approach. Many disciplines are often brought together to solve environmental problems in river systems, including hydrology, geomor- phology and ecology. Integration of different disciplines is fraught with challenges that can potentially reduce the effectiveness of interdisciplinary approaches to environmental problems. Pickett et al. (1994) identified three issues regarding interdisciplinary research: – gaps in understanding appear at the interface between disciplines; – disciplines focus on specific scales or levels or organization; and, – as sub-disciplines become rich in detail they develop their own view points, assumptions, definitions, lexicons and methods. Dominant paradigms of individual disciplines impede their integration and the development of a unified understanding of river ecosystems. Successful inter- disciplinary science and problem solving requires the joining of two or more areas of understanding into a single conceptual-empirical structure (Pickett et al., 1994). Frameworks are useful tools for achieving this. Established in areas of engineering, conceptual frameworks help define the bounds for the selection and solution of problems; indicate the role of empirical assumptions; carry the structural assumptions; show how facts, hypotheses, models and expectations are linked; and, indicate the scope to which a generalization or model applies (Pickett et al., 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • Hydraulic Erosion of Soil and Terrain Atira Odhner, Joseph Fleming 2009 Abstract
    Hydraulic Erosion of Soil and Terrain Atira Odhner, Joseph Fleming 2009 Abstract We have developed an algorithm for hard and soft water-based terrain erosion. Additionally, we have added a rain generation into the simulator. The algorithm is based upon fluid simulation, but is simplified, while still preserving the fluid motion effects. Introduction Our goal is to design an algorithm that generates water-eroded terrain quickly for the purposes of artistic productions, rather than scientific study. We wish to simulate the effects of rivers and streams, taking into account erosion, transportation, and sedimentation. Other algorithms take into account full fluid simulation, but we wished to obtain similar results by using a less-costly yet water- based erosion algorithm. Previous Work There are many examples of previous work on the subject of erosion, as it is important for both the graphics community and the environmental conservation community. We have chosen a few that are both relevant to the our algorithm, and demonstrate natural and atmospheric effects related to our algorithm. Since there are so many similar works (often repeating themselves), these studies are introduced by relevance, rather than by year. In 2005, Beneš and Arriaga [1] proposed a method for generating table mountains. Table mountains are desert geological structures that are very narrow, yet water-based erosion; plateaus with almost vertical cliff walls. These mountains form through mostly thermal erosion rather than by; rock that is exposed deteriorates. For this reason, table mountains are found in desert environments. The algorithm in this paper is not water-based, but it relates to the erosion of river banks.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracking Rainfall Impulses Through Progressively Larger Drainage Basins in Steep Forested Terrain
    Tracking rainfall impulses through progressively larger drainage basins in steep forested terrain ROBERT R. ZIEMER & RAYMOND M. RICE USDA Forest Service,Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Arcata, California 95521, USA ABSTRACT The precision of timing devices in modern electronic data loggers makes it possible to study the routing of water through small drainage basins having rapid responses to hydrologic impulses. Storm hyetographs were measured using digital. tipping bucket raingauges and their routing was observed at headwater piezometers located mid-slope, above a swale, and near the swale. Downslope, flow was recorded from naturally occurring soil pipes draining the 0.8-ha swale, Progressing downstream from the swale, streamflow was measured at stations gauging nested basins of 16, 156, 217, and 383 ha. Peak lag time significantly (p = 0.035) increased downstream. Peak unitareadischarge decreased downstream, but the relationship was not statistically significant (p = 0.456). The processes involved in the delivery of rainfall from hillsides, to swales, and through progessively larger stream channels in steep forested watersheds are not fully understood. Most hydrologic concepts concerning the routing of flood hydrographs have developed from observations on large rivers. It is usually assumed that downstream hydrographs are lagged in time and flattened to produce later peaks and smaller unit area peak discharges (Chow, 1964). There are few reports of hydrograph routing in small, steep upland watersheds. Researchers working in steep forested watersheds generally agree that classic Hortonian overland flow (Horton, 1933) rarely occurs because the infiltration rate of forest soils usually exceeds precipitation rates. Despite several studies conducted in the past 20 years,the pathways of muting rainfall into and through hillslope soils in forested basins remain poorly understood.
    [Show full text]
  • A Method of Watershed Delineation for Flat Terrain Using Sentinel-2A Imagery and DEM: a Case Study of the Taihu Basin
    International Journal of Geo-Information Article A Method of Watershed Delineation for Flat Terrain Using Sentinel-2A Imagery and DEM: A Case Study of the Taihu Basin Leilei Li 1,2,*, Jintao Yang 2,3 and Jin Wu 2,3 1 State Key Laboratory of Desert and Oasis Ecology, Xinjiang Institute of Ecology and Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Urumqi 830011, China 2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100039, China; [email protected] (J.Y.); [email protected] (J.W.) 3 State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environment Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Beijing 100101, China * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-18911719037 Received: 4 September 2019; Accepted: 24 November 2019; Published: 26 November 2019 Abstract: Accurate watershed delineation is a precondition for runoff and water quality simulation. Traditional digital elevation model (DEM) may not generate realistic drainage networks due to large depressions and subtle elevation differences in local-scale plains. In this study, we propose a new method for solving the problem of watershed delineation, using the Taihu Basin as a case study. Rivers, lakes, and reservoirs were obtained from Sentinel-2A images with the Canny algorithm on Google Earth Engine (GEE), rather than from DEM, to compose the drainage network. Catchments were delineated by modifying the flow direction of rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and overland flow, instead of using DEM values. A watershed was divided into the following three types: Lake, reservoir, and overland catchment. A total of 2291 river segments, seven lakes, eight reservoirs, and 2306 subwatersheds were retained in this study.
    [Show full text]