brief description about GIS application on conceptual modeling

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

brief description about GIS application on conceptual modeling

© All Rights Reserved

- null
- IV Barchschsyll6
- Soft Systems Methodology
- Resume
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence...
- Analysis_of_land-use_change_in_a_sector.pdf
- DB-Design-3
- Rajao11 GIS in the Amazon PhD Final Small
- Web GIS as support for sustainable development local economy in the fields of agro-industry and fine chemicals
- NatGeogStds_Review2
- WaterSolution Brochure 2014Update LTR Screen En
- Modelling Constructed Wetlands Scopes and Aims a Comparative REVIEW 2015
- simondowling resume 2019
- Reliance Scada His Integration
- 00b4951a318e2dcf65000000.pdf
- Object Modeling Techniques
- Project Planning and Lifecycle(1)
- Gis Analysis and Modelling
- NA2-module.pdf
- Timeline for Student Projects

You are on page 1of 17

www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

rainfall±runoff modeling

A.H. Schumann a,*, R. Funke b, G.A. Schultz a

a

Institute of Hydrology, Water Resources Management and Environmental Techniques, Ruhr University Bochum, 44780 Bochum, Germany

b

Kisters AG, Charlottenburger Allee 5, 52068 Aachen, Germany

Received 18 June 1999; revised 30 May 2000; accepted 25 August 2000

Abstract

Geographic information systems (GIS) offer many new opportunities for hydrological modeling. They can be used to form

spatially distributed models of watershed. However, some problems of this approach, e.g. the parameterization of physically

based models, are not resolved yet. Conceptual models of the meso-scale still have a great practical importance. In this paper

one approach is presented: how statistical descriptions of distributed catchment characteristics could be used to consider spatial

heterogeneity within conceptual models. Three semi-distributed modules are presented. The three components are combined to

a hydrological model including feedback components between surface ¯ow and in®ltration and between subsurface return ¯ow

and surface ¯ow in saturated areas. The model was set up to use spatially distributed information about catchment character-

istics for the estimation of its parameters. By a direct estimation of some model parameters from a GIS-based analysis of the

catchment characteristics, the number of calibration parameters can be reduced. In the second part it is shown how the

application of this model to different catchments within a region can bene®t from boundary conditions for optimization,

which are derived from a GIS considering the differences of catchment characteristics. q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All

rights reserved.

Keywords: Hydrological modeling; Conceptual parameters; Geographic information system; Optimization; Regionalization

basin with the widely used SCS model (Pilgrim and

The large amount of spatially detailed information Cordery, 1992) from its land use data and digitized

derived from remote sensing, ground surveys (e.g. digi- soil maps.

tal maps, digital terrain models) or interpolation of point ² Estimation of lumped catchment characteristics

measurements and handled within a geographic infor- with a GIS considering spatial heterogeneity of a

mation system (GIS), offers new opportunities for catchment for parameterization of a lumped model.

hydrologic modeling. Some options are: Some examples for this approach will be discussed

later.

² The use of a GIS to improve the estimation of para- ² The use of a distributed catchment characteristic as

meters in existing conceptual models, e.g. determin- a covariant mean to distribute a lumped state vari-

able. An example is the use of the topographic

* Corresponding author. Fax: 149-234-32-14153.

index in the well-known TOP-model as a charac-

E-mail address: andreas.schumann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de teristic of the spatial variability of the soil water

(A.H. Schumann). content (Beven et al., 1984).

0022-1694/00/$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PII: S 0022-169 4(00)00312-7

46 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

² Subdivision of the catchment into so-called ªhydro- mined by calibration, the parameters lose their precise

logic response unitsº (HRUs), which are similar physical signi®cance and may be of a magnitude quite

with regard to selected characteristics and which different from measured values. Owing to this fact,

are modeled separately, as in e.g. the precipita- distributed hydrologic models are not truly physically

tion±runoff modeling system (PRMS) of Leavesley based but rather a special category of conceptual

et al. (1983). models (Beven, 1989).

² Subdivision of the catchment into equally spaced Considering these issues about physically based

square grid elements and representation of the models and parameter values in distributed models,

hydrologic processes in these units by a parameter the question arises as to how GIS could be used as a

set in which the physical characteristics of the units new base of conceptual hydrologic modeling. One

are considered. An example is the SHE model option is mentioned above: we can use the GIS to

(Abbott et al., 1986). improve the estimation of parameters in existing

conceptual models. This is a very limited use of the

The last two options mentioned lead to distributed available information and the power of the GIS. There

hydrological models, in which the spatial heterogene- is no reason to limit ourselves to model parameteriza-

ity of catchment characteristics is usually represented tions that were developed decades ago in an era with-

by small area elements which are considered as homo- out the information and computing facilities available

genous. Subdividing a catchment into spatial units is today.

also useful with regard to the areal distribution of However, other options to develop or improve

meteorological inputs. Under the assumption of homo- conceptual models also exist. The main problem

geneity of the area elements micro-scale-based consists in the consideration of the spatial variability

process models can be used. However, the physical of physical characteristics which are relevant for the

characteristics within each grid cell may be still non-linear behavior of a catchment. Examples of use

heterogeneous. By reducing the size of the grid of spatial heterogeneity in lumped model parameters

cells, this heterogeneity would be reduced, but the or catchment characteristics from literature are the

disadvantages of a very detailed resolution consist Xinanjiang model, in which an uneven distribution

not only in an increase of computational requirements of tension water capacity in a catchment is approxi-

but also in a very complex model structure owing to mated with a non-linear function (Zhao, 1992) or the

the need to describe more interactions among the concept of the geomorphological instantaneous unit

resulting small spatial units. Physically based models hydrograph in connection with a parameterization

of micro- (or point-) scale processes were developed which is based on a lumped representation of the

for well-de®ned physical conditions. In distributed river network with path probabilities and path lengths

modeling of the meso-scale they are used for spatial (Snell and Sivapalan, 1994). Unfortunately, a GIS-

units of some 100 m 2. As a result, the applicability of based consideration of heterogeneity within concep-

these models at the meso-scale is limited by unre- tual models also does not eliminate the general

solved problems of their parameterization (Grayson problems to estimate the values of conceptual model

et al., 1993). The required model parameters (e.g. parameters.

soil characteristics) cannot be measured for catch- Here an event-based rainfall±runoff model will be

ments in the order of hundreds of km 2 or larger, presented in which the heterogeneity of certain catch-

they must be derived using transfer functions and ment characteristics is considered by lumped model

other assumptions from known catchment characteris- parameters, which describes averaged catchment

tics, e.g. from soil texture classes. ªRepresentativeº or characteristics as well as their heterogeneity. The

ªeffectiveº values of parameters are commonly used parameters can be derived directly from a GIS-analy-

to bridge the gap between a micro-scale model and its sis. This model consists of three components. For each

use at the meso-scale. Unfortunately, the transfer func- of these components a spatial differentiation with

tions depend not only on the used model type but also regard to one physical characteristic which is seen

on the heterogeneity of the catchment and on the as most relevant for a speci®c hydrological process

spatial scale used. Since they usually have to be deter- is combined with a lumped description of the

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 47

Precipitation

generation

Unit: soil texture

Catchment Characteristics: soil parameters soil storage capacity

Description: effective parameters distribution function

State Variables: saturated and non-saturated areas, soil water

content, surface water storage

Results: surface runoff, interflow, percolation

Unit: soil vegetation

combination

Catchment Characteristics: slope surface roughness transmissivity

Description: distributed eff. Parameter saturated,

per unit non-saturated

State Variables: velocity of lateral flows,

drainage areas per time step

Results: lateral fluxes of water

certain soil vegetation comb. to another or runs into the river

network

which drains into a certain pathway of the river network

Unit: River network,

resolved into pathways

Catchment Characteristics: dispersion advection length inflow

Description: effective effective value per distributed

parameter parameter pathway per pathway

State Variables: inflow per pathway in each time step

Fig. 1. Coupling three process models (runoff generation, runoff formation and concentration) to form the rainfall±runoff model.

heterogeneity of other characteristics which are also 2. Model structure and GIS-based model

important for this process. The model is based on a components

GIS with data in a high spatial resolution

(50 m £ 50 m) in which the following catchment char- 2.1. General structure

acteristics are stored: soil type, land cover, slope,

elevation and drainage network estimated from the The model structure is based on the classical

digital elevation model. The main advantage of this approach of three different hydrological processes:

approach consists in the reduction of the number of runoff generation (vertical hillslope processes), runoff

conceptual parameters. formation on hillslopes (lateral hillslope processes)

48 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

and runoff concentration within the river network. The is done according to the partial areas of the soil texture

three model components are: unit which is covered by a speci®c type of vegetation.

The lateral ¯uxes of water between the resulting soil±

² a component describing the in®ltration and runoff vegetation combinations which reach the river

generation process in the upper soil layer applying network are again summarized according to the speci-

distribution functions of soil storage capacity ®c pathways of the drainage system which drains

derived from an overlay of soil and land cover them. In what follows the three modules are described

maps; in detail.

² a component for lateral ¯ow on hillslopes under

consideration of the interactions of different soil± 2.2. Runoff generation and the soil storage

vegetation combinations; distribution

² a component for the runoff concentration process

within the river network applying a parameteriza- For the runoff generation the soil parameters, which

tion of the geomorphological unit hydrograph, determine the in®ltration process, are seen as most

proposed by Snell and Sivapalan (1994). relevant physical characteristics. A physically based

in®ltration model (e.g. the used Green±Ampt model)

The subdivision into these components is process needs physical soil characteristics such as hydraulic

related. For their combination the following problem conductivity, porosity, ®eld capacity, and wetting

exists: in order to consider the spatial heterogeneity front suction. With respect to soil texture classes

for each component the catchment is subdivided into these parameters can be assumed (Rawls et al.,

speci®c spatial units which are chosen with regard to 1983). As unit of the distributed in®ltration model

the most relevant physical characteristics of the speci- the soil texture class can be used. Another very impor-

®c hydrological process. The heterogeneity of other tant characteristic of the soil which in¯uences the

characteristics of relevance for the speci®c process runoff generation is the soil storage capacity. In

model is described in two different ways, i.e. by distri- many models and also in the model discussed here

bution functions or by averaged (representative) para- the out¯ow from the soil storage is related to the

meter values. As the subdivision into spatial units relative storage content. Unfortunately, the depth of

differs between the different process models the ¯uxes the upper soil zone within a catchment is mostly

of water from each spatial unit must be summarized at unknown. If we keep up the classical de®nition of

the interface between the different modules and soil horizons we can estimate the depth of upper

distributed again among the spatial units of the next (rooted) soil in relation to the type of vegetation.

model component. The general structure of the result- Our hypothesis is that the storage capacity of upper,

ing model is shown in Fig. 1. The three tables within non-saturated soil can be expressed by the product of

this ®gure represent the units of the three process effective soil porosity above ®eld capacity and root

components. In the following sections the three depth. We assume a jump in the vertical soil perme-

model components and their interactions and feed- ability at the bottom of the root zone. First, our catch-

back are explained with respect to their structure ment is subdivided into units of different soil textures.

and their parameterization. After that, each of these units is overlaid by different

The ®rst module is based on a subdivision of the types of vegetation classi®ed according to rooting

catchment into spatial units which are de®ned by the depth. The heterogeneity of the storage capacity of

soil texture. The heterogeneity of the soil storage the upper soil, derived from an overlay of the soil

capacity which is caused (by de®nition) by the map with types of vegetation can be considered by a

depth of the root zone is considered in the form of a distribution function SB(a) (Schumann, 1993). SB(a)

distribution function. The second module describes expresses the storage capacity of the upper soil layer

the lateral ¯ow of water at hillslopes. To consider which is not exceeded for the relative partition a of the

different characteristics of roughness the ¯ow compo- total area of the soil texture. Such linear or non-linear

nents of each soil texture unit are distributed among distribution functions are widely used in conceptual

the vegetation types which cover it. This distribution hydrological models (Franchini and Pacciani, 1991;

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 49

INF(t)

SB(a)

SBMax

RO(t) SBact(t)

INF(t) ∆t

SBact(t-∆t)

SBMin

RH(t)

as(t)

a=0 a=1,0

PER(t)

Fig. 2. Bucket model for the upper soil layer with three-parametric distribution function SB(a) of soil storage capacity.

Wood et al., 1991). They are used to describe the percolation PER, which are the out¯ows from the soil

degree of saturation of the upper soil during a rainfall storage:

event by the saturated part of the area.

We use this distribution function of the soil storage Zt

SBact
t SBact
t 2 Dt 1
INF
t 2 RH
t

capacity in the following three-parametric non-linear t 2 Dt

form (Funke, 1999)

2 PER
t dt: (2)

1=B

SB
a SBMax 2
SBMax 2 SBMin £
1 2 a
1

From the distribution function of the soil storage

The three parameters are the maximum storage capa- capacity SB(a) and the actual soil water level SBact

city SBMax the minimum capacity SBMin and the shape the saturated proportion of the area at simulation

parameter B describing the non-linear shape of the time t is de®ned for each soil texture by the following

distribution between minimum and maximum of condition:

each spatial unit. In this form it is possible to consider

minimum and maximum storage capacity. This is SBact
t $ SB
a:
3

much closer to nature than the assumption of a mini-

mum storage capacity of zero (SBMin 0) used by The saturated part of the catchment as
t at time t

Franchini and Pacciani (1991) or Wood et al. resulting from the actual storage content SBact(t) is:

(1991). The proportion of the catchment with an

equal or smaller soil storage capacity than SB is a. as
t 0 for SBact
t # SBMin

B

The application of this function in a typical bucket SBMax 2 SBact
t

as
t 1 2 for SBMin , SBact
t , SBMax

assumption of a conceptual model, is shown in Fig. 2. SBMax 2 SBMin

The temporally variable soil water level SBact as
t 1 for SBact
t SBMax

within the bucket model of every unit can be calcu-
4

lated for every time t at the end of a simulation inter-

val with a duration of Dt from the in®ltration rate INF, The maximal amount of water, which can be stored in

computed by application of the Green and Ampt in®l- the upper soil WMax results from the integration of the

tration model minus the subsurface ¯ow RH and the distribution function SB SB(a) between a 0 and

50 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

0.4 0.4

loam

capacityt [m]

capacityt [m]

0.3 0.3

SBmin = 0.04 m

storage

storage

SBmax = 0.25 m

0.2 loamy sand 0.2 B = 1.53

SBmin = 0.04 m

0.1 SBmax = 0.37 m 0.1

B = 0.44

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

rel. area [-] rel. area [-]

0.4 0.4

silty clay loam clay

capacityt [m]

capacityt [m]

storage

0.3 0.3

storage

0.2 B = 1.63 0.2 B = 1.49

0.1 0.1

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

rel. area [-] rel. area [-]

Fig. 3. Storage capacity distribution of the upper soil layer in the Alsdorf catchment (264 km 2) with ®tted distribution functions SB(a) for four

different soil texture classes.

Z1 Z1 ¯ow RH in the time step t of the duration Dt we use the

WMax SB a da SBMax 2 SBMax 2 SBMin following non-linear equation:

0 0

Wact t CHEX

SBMax 2 BSBMin RH t CH 7

£ 1 2 a1=B da (5) WMax

11B

It has two conceptual parameters, one exponent

The actual water content of the soil storage results CHEX and one factor CH. The factor CH describes

from a summation of the soil storage capacity of the the possible maximum subsurface ¯ow rate for the

saturated areas (area as t and the actual soil water saturated soil in the spatial unit of simulation, the

content of the unsaturated areas: exponent CHEX the non-linear relationship between

Zas Z1 runoff formation and actual soil water content.

Wact t SB a da 1 SBact t da For the computation of the amount of percolated

0 as

water PER, a similar approach is used:

SBMax 2 SBMin

SBMax as 2 1 2 1 Wact t CBEX

1 1 1=B PER CVSAT 8

WMax

2 as t11 1=B 1 SBact t 1 2 as t 6

In this equation two further conceptual parameters are

The relative water content of the soil storage (the used, the maximum percolation rate CVSAT of the

actual water content Wact t in relation to maximal saturated soil and the exponent CBEX.

soil storage content WMax) at time t (end of a simula- As shown above, the distribution function of the

tion time interval) is used to compute the actual rates soil storage capacity is a very important characteristic

of percolation and subsurface ¯ow. These rates are of the model. By our hypothesis (the soil storage

assumed to be constant during the duration Dt of the capacity is the product of root depth and effective

simulation time interval from t 2 Dt to t. soil porosity) this distribution can be estimated

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 51

directly for each soil texture class from a GIS-analysis vegetation typeº of the hillslope model, the physical

by an overlay of the soil texture map and land cover, characteristics, soil and vegetation are homogeneous

obtained e.g. from remote sensing data by satellites. but slope, a very relevant characteristic for lateral

From these data one can construct a discrete function ¯ows, is still heterogeneous. As the slope varies

SB SB(a), which can be approximated by analytical strongly within a small scale, a grid-based process

functions to be used in the hydrological model as description was chosen. Each grid square with a

described above. Fig. 3 shows, as an example, the chosen width of 50 m is characterized by its slope,

empirical distributions and the ®tted functions for ¯ow direction, vegetation and soil type.

the four different soil texture classes in a catchment Under the assumption that we can use an approach

together with the relevant model parameters SBMin, that is similar to Manning's formula (the ¯ow velocity

SBMax and B. The shapes of the ®tted functions vary depends on the slope and on the depth of water at the

according to the land cover within the different soil soil surface in a non-linear way) to estimate the velo-

texture classes. The values of SBMin and SBMax city of surface ¯ow, we obtain:

decrease with decreasing effective porosity from coar- p

ser soils like loamy sand to ®ner soils like clay. The v
t kr H
t2=3 I
9

shape parameter B is related to the distribution of where kr is the roughness (which depends on land

different land covers and corresponding root depth. cover), I the slope, H
t the depth of water at the

With increasing forest areas with deep roots, the soil surface and t the simulation time, and the Darcy

shape of the function is convex and B smaller than equation for subsurface ¯ow:

1. For increasing areas with shallow roots the shape is

v
t ks I
10

concave and the value of B greater than 1. The value

of parameter B is estimated by a GIS-based analysis where ks is the hydraulic conductivity, I the slope and t

for each soil texture directly. The exponents in Eqs. the simulation time.

(7) and (8) are conceptual parameters which have to In the upper soil layer the water content varies over

calibrated. Although their application within the time and we normally have unsaturated conditions in

model to express non-linearities are similar, these most parts of the soil storage. According to these

parameters are not related. conditions, we have to simulate the subsurface ¯ow

with an unsaturated hydraulic conductivity which

2.3. Lateral hillslope processes varies spatially, in time and also with water content

of the soil. An effective parameter, which describes

For the runoff formation on hillslopes the type of this behavior is the subsurface ¯ow rate RH(t) of the

vegetation and the soil type seem to be of much rele- non-linear soil storage. So, we made the assumption

vance. The vegetation determines the roughness of the that the Darcy equation can be rewritten as a linear

land surface as well as the depth of the soil storage. If velocity equation with effective parameters as

we further consider the in¯uence of soil texture on

v
t RH
tI
11

subsurface ¯ow the resulting soil±vegetation combi-

nations are seen as most suitable units to describe tnjAs the slope is a temporal constant parameter it

lateral hillslope processes. These units can be related becomes possible to describe its impact on lateral

to the soil texture classes which were used previously surface ¯ow and on subsurface ¯ow by representative

for runoff generation modeling. The surface runoff ¯ow times, which can be computed for each soil±

and subsurface ¯ow from the different texture classes, vegetation combination under consideration of their

calculated in the runoff generation model, are distrib- speci®c surface roughness kr and effective dynamic

uted for the lateral hillslope processes among the hydraulic conductivity RH(t). In relation to the

different vegetation types that belong to each speci®c width Dx of the grid cells and the ¯ow direction w

soil texture class. For this distribution the percentages in the grid cell, the representative ¯ow time tr can be

of the different vegetation types that cover every soil estimated in which the surface runoff or the subsur-

texture class are used. face ¯ow with a depth of one unit passes a grid cell.

Within the next, more detailed spatial units, ªsoil± For the surface runoff we can use the following

52 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

1.0

a(Tr)

Σa (T )

i r

Tr Tr

Fig. 4. Example of a histogram of relative travel times for draining of a water droplet from a soil±vegetation combination; left hand side,

representative drainage times versus histogram of relative areas; right hand side, cumulative distribution function.

slope frequency classes (see Fig. 4 for an example):

Dx

tr p if utan wu , 1 12

kr I cos w

² under the assumption of a speci®c roughness kr for

each vegetation type we receive a histogram of

Dx

tr p if utan wu $ 1: 13 travel times for the surface runoff;

kr I sin w ² if we use the well-known Darcy equation with an

For the subsurface ¯ow: assumption of an effective hydraulic conductivity

ks RH t we obtain a histogram for the travel

Dx times for subsurface ¯ow.

tr if utan wu , 1 14

I cos w

With this approach, it becomes possible to estimate

Dx the drained part of a soil±vegetation combination for

tr if utan wu $ 1: 15

I sin w a given simulation interval and to calculate the water

The heterogeneity of the slope can be considered depth on the land surface RO t £ Dt and of the

by a histogram of slope classes for each soil± subsurface ¯ow RH t £ Dt for each time step with-

vegetation combination. With respect to its ¯ow out recalculation of all ¯ow paths directly from the

direction a representative time can be estimated distribution function of thePrepresentative travel time

in which the surface runoff with a depth of one Tr versus the relative area a:

unit passes a grid cell with a certain slope. The For an actual calculated surface runoff with the

total time after which a water droplet leaves a height RO t £ Dt; the real travel time T has to be

certain soil±vegetation combination depends on smaller than the simulation time step Dt, if the water

its ¯ow path. If we add up representative times should leave the soil±vegetation combination to

in which water passes the different grid cells in its another one or ¯ows into a river. To work with

pathway we get the total representative time span Manning's equation with the height h in m and typical

Tr, which is needed for water with the height of roughness parameters kr in m 1/3/s, we have to correct

one unit to ¯ow from one point within a soil± for this equation the surface runoff rate to m/h by a

vegetation combination to the border line with factor 0.001

any other soil±vegetation combination. Also,

these time spans have a distribution that can be Tr Tr

T 2=3

# Dt 16

described empirically by a histogram of represen- H 0:001RO tDt2=3

tative travel times for each soil±vegetation com-

bination. Solving this equation in terms of the representa-

As a result, two histograms of representative travel tive travel times we get the maximum representa-

times can be estimated for every soil±vegetation tive travel time for an actual surface runoff to

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 53

1.0 adrained(t) Tr

T # Dt 18

RH tDt

as the maximum representative travel

Σa(Tr)

The subsurface draining part of the soil±vegetation

combination aH;drained t can be estimated from the

Tr,max (t) T* i distribution function of the representative subsurface

¯ow times.

Fig. 5. Utilization of the distribution function of drainage time for a

In the last step of these computations, the partitions

soil±vegetation combination to estimate the draining partition.

of the ¯ows between soil±vegetation combinations

are calculated. The effective surface and subsurface

leave the soil±vegetation combination: ¯ow components draining a speci®c combination are

By utilization of the distribution function of the soil± RHdrained
t RH
taH;drained
t
21

vegetation combination, we can estimate the partition

aO;drained
t of the soil±vegetation combination which The remaining parts of runoff are

drains on the surface to other combinations (Fig. 5). ROrem
t RO
t
1 2 aO;drained
t
22

For an actual calculated subsurface ¯ow the maxi-

mum representative travel time is calculated in the RHrem
t RH
t
1 2 aH;drained
t
23

total

j=1 2 3 River outflow

Out- 1 - 0 2 8 10

flow

from 2 1 - 1 7 9

i 3 3 3 - 8 14

Sum

inflow 4 3 3 23 33

2. Estimation of Transition Frequencies

soil-vegetation- combination 1

soil-vegetation- combination 2

soil-vegetation- combination 3

river

flow direction κ Relative Outflow Frequencies from

combinations i to j

1. Grid-based Estimation of:

-flow direction j=1 2 3 River Tota l

-slope i

-borders between different

Out- 1 - 0 0.20 0.80 1.00

combinations

flow

from 2 0.11 - 0.11 0.78 1.00

i 3 0.21 0.21 - 0.57 1.00

54 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

In the next time interval the remaining surface runoff transition frequency from i to j, Ai the area of soil±

will be added to the precipitation and the remaining vegetation combination i, Aj the area of soil±vegeta-

subsurface runoff will be added to the actual soil water tion combination j, and n the number of water draining

level. combinations.

The draining parts of the runoff ¯ow into other The runoff reaching the river network is calculated

soil±vegetation combinations. In order to describe by

these interactions between different soil±vegetation

X

n

combinations, we count the number of grid elements ROinflow;River
t ROdrained;i ki;River Ai
27

for each soil±vegetation combination i, which drain i1

into another soil±vegetation combination j by a GIS-

based analysis (i.e. we count grid cells of type i, which X

n

have a common border with every other combination j RHinflow;River
t RHdrained;i ki;River Ai
28

i1

in the ¯ow direction). The ¯ow direction of each grid

cell within a raster-based GIS can be estimated from a In the next simulation step t 1 Dt, the in¯ow at the

digital elevation model. We obtain a matrix of transi- soil surface into a soil±vegetation combination

tion numbers with n runoff-producing soil±vegetation ROinflow
t can be in®ltrated together with new preci-

combinations in its columns and
n 1 1 runoff- pitation P
t 1 Dt and the remaining surface runoff of

receiving elements (all other soil±vegetation combi- the same soil±vegetation combination ROrem
t: The

nations plus the river network) in its rows. The potential in®ltration rate for the runoff generation

elements Kij of this matrix are the number of grid model, which operates with the soil types as spatial

cells which drain directly from combination i into units of simulations is estimated as areal weighted

combination j. The relative transition frequencies mean of all potential in®ltration rates of the different

can be estimated as the quotient of transition numbers soil±vegetation combinations inside that soil type.

divided by the total number of drainage elements of a Also, the actual soil water level of the non-linear

certain soil±vegetation combination bucket has to be corrected for the next simulation step

Ki;j by lateral subsurface in¯ow from neighboring combi-

ki;j X

n :
24 nations, the remaining subsurface runoff and the new

Ki;j in®ltration. If this correction is higher than the free

j1 partition of the storage bucket of the soil type, the part

of the subsurface ¯ow that has not been stored returns

The methodology for estimating these frequencies is to the soil surface (the so-called return ¯ow). This

shown in Fig. 6. return ¯ow will be routed together with new surface

Using the drained ¯ows and the transition frequen- runoff and can in®ltrate together with the precipitation

cies kij , the in¯ow rates into other soil±vegetation of the next time step if the soil is not further saturated

combinations j can be estimated as or if it ¯ows to an area with unsaturated soil.

X

n

Ai With the coupled models for runoff generation and

ROinflow;j
t ROdrained;i kij
25 the lateral ¯ows on and in hillslopes to rivers, the

i1

Aj

interesting parts of the water ¯uxes for a rainfall±

runoff model are described. The percolation from

X

n

Ai the upper soil layer into deep soil is considered as a

RHinflow;j
t RHdrained;i kij
26

i1

Aj loss since our model estimates only direct ¯ow

components. The base ¯ow in the river is not consid-

where ROinflow;j
t is the lateral in¯ow rate of surface ered here.

runoff into combination j, ROdrained;i
t the drained

surface runoff from soil±vegetation combination i, 2.4. GIS-based estimation of a two-dimensional

RHinflow;j
t the lateral in¯ow rate of subsurface runoff system function for channel ¯ow

into combination j, RHdrained;i
t the drained subsur-

face runoff from soil±vegetation combination i, kij the The linear advection±dispersion equation is an

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 55

often-used model for single-channel ¯ow: pathway g to the outlet can be computed using:

2Q 2Q 22 Q Av VY 21

2t 2x 2x Atotal iv ij

32

where c is the advective velocity, D the dispersion

coef®cient, Q the discharge, t the time, and x the where A v is the area which drains directly into a

distance along the longitudinal axis of the water- stream with the initial order v of this pathway, pij

course. the probability that a stream of order i runs into a

It can be shown that the solution of this differential stream of order j (where i and j are elements of path-

equation gives a two-dimensional response function way g ), Atotal the area of the catchment, and V the

on a Dirac impulse: order of the stream at the outlet.

The average length of the streams of an order v can

!

x x 2 ct2 be computed from the total lengths of the pathways of

h x; t p exp 2 30 the same order:

2t pDt 4Dt

1X n

n i1 v;i

considered as a second dimension of the impulse

response function (besides time), the out¯ow from The typical length of a pathway g is estimated by

the system can be derived from the following double summation

integral:

X

V

ZLmax Zt Lg Lv
34

v1;v[g

Q
t qz
x; th
x; t 2 t dt dx
31

0 0

The runoff from the soil±vegetation combinations is

With this two-dimensional model, the in¯ow qz into distributed (time variant) among the pathways that are

the river network resulting from surface and subsur- different in their distance to the outlet Lg : The impulse

face hillslope runoff can be distributed along the river response function of the river network can be

channel network. This in¯ow distribution is time described by:

variant. Following a suggestion from Snell and Siva- !

1 X
Lg 2 ct2

palan (1994) the river network was resolved into f
t p pg Lg exp 2
35

2t pDt g 4Dt

different pathways as spatial units of the runoff

concentration model. Each of these pathways is repre- A time variant description of the spatial runoff distri-

sented by its drainage area and its length. The runoff bution can be obtained if the probability of a pathway

from a certain soil±vegetation combination g (the relation between the drainage area of this path-

ROinflow;River
t 1 RHinflow;River
t; which reaches way ag and the total drainage area Atotal) is weighted

the river network, is distributed among the different with the relation between the actual runoff Rg
t of the

pathways taking into consideration their speci®c drai- area ag and the mean runoff height Rtotal
t of the total

nage area characteristics. The pathways are generated catchment Rtotal
t :

with the aid of the Strahler ordering scheme (Strahler,

1957). All ¯ow paths are divided into a limited ag Rg
t

pg
36

number of ways describing the transition of water Atotal Rtotal
t

between the initial order v into which a droplet is

injected and higher-ordered streams, until the outlet

with order V is reached. Each of these pathways 3. GIS-based parameterization strategy of the

drains a certain portion of the total catchment. The model

probability of a droplet of runoff produced at any

point within the catchment ¯owing via a certain The main advantage of the three model components

56 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

first catchment

Start values transfer functions

Physical or

numerical Boundary conditions

boundary Calibration from formerly handled

conditions catchments

Comparison/Analysis

Sensitivity and regression analysis Parameters from

formerly handled

catchments

Contradictions Dependencies No

to parameters of between Contradictions

other catchments parameters

Transfer

New New calibration

All catchments functions between

boundary under consideration

parameterized? catchment

conditions of the dependencies

no yes characteristics

and model

Next catchment parameters

Decision

End of parameterization

presented above, which were combined into a rain- calibrate different catchments of a region in a consis-

fall±runoff model, consists in the options to estimate tent way. The single steps of the procedure are numer-

at least some model parameters directly from a GIS. ical optimization, comparison and analyses of the

However, there is also another option to use a GIS in results from different catchments and a decision

conceptual modeling, which has not been mentioned about the change of parameter values in concert

yet. The information provided by the GIS about catch- with the relevant catchment characteristics (Fig. 7).

ment characteristics can be used also for optimization In the ®rst step, all conceptual model parameters

of model parameters, e.g. to de®ne boundary condi- are simultaneously optimized by a global optimiza-

tions. With a GIS-based parameterization of the tion strategy until a best ®t parameter set was identi-

model components also, the internal heterogeneity ®ed for every catchment. If we assume that our model

of catchment characteristics can be considered. The parameters have a physical explanation they are

remaining conceptual model parameters cannot be related to speci®c catchment characteristics, but

estimated directly from GIS-analysis and still have mostly in a relationship that is not known quantita-

to be quanti®ed by calibration. If several gauged tively. This relationship is hidden by the random char-

catchments within a region are available, we can esti- acter of the results of the numerical optimization. We

mate regional valid relationships between catchment can use, e.g. regression analysis to identify these rela-

characteristics and conceptual model parameters. tionships between optimized conceptual model para-

Therefore, an iterative procedure was developed to meters and the most relevant catchment

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 57

7,0

CBEX vs. 7,0

CBEX vs. ψ 7,0

CBEX vs. ψ

CBEX

CBEX

CBEX

5,5 5,5 5,5

13,0 23,0 33,0 13,0 23,0 33,0 13,0 23,0 33,0

ψ ψ ψ

Fig. 8. Relationship between the conceptual parameter CBEX and wetting front suction c : left, after numerical optimization of CBEX and

CVSAT without consideration of the dependency between the two parameters; center, after replacement of parameter CVSAT by the hydraulic

conductivity of saturated soil (distributed for every soil texture in the catchment) and a second optimization of CBEX; right, after a third

optimization of CBEX with changed boundary conditions for outliers.

characteristics for a speci®c process. Also, sensitivity istics also for ungauged catchments of the same

analyses are used to identify the impact of the differ- region. Finally, the problem of unknown concep-

ent parameters on simulation results in the different tual parameters is solved by empirically estimated

catchments or to identify interdependencies between regional relationships between catchment charac-

different conceptual model parameters. At the end of teristics and model parameters. A restriction of

the ®rst parameterization, a decision has to be made this approach consists in its limited transferability

about the parameter consistency under consideration of catchments which are different from the used

of interdependencies and outliers. sample.

Then, in the second parameterization step, the

model parameters are optimized again but with utili-

zation of the new knowledge about interdependencies 4. A case study in the Pruem river basin/Germany

and boundary conditions. Particularly for catchments

with outlying parameters in the regression curves, In order to demonstrate the ability and the different

these parameters were optimized again with new steps of model parameterization with the aid of GIS-

boundary conditions. These new boundary conditions based catchment information, the rainfall±runoff

are de®ned taking into consideration the expected model described above was applied to seven gauged

relationship between model parameters and catch- catchments (areas between 18 and 576 km 2) within

ment characteristics, which was identi®ed for every the river basin of the Pruem river (840 km 2), a tribu-

optimized parameter by the regression analysis tary of the Mosel river in the western part of Germany.

between optimized parameters and catchment charac- Most of the model parameters were estimated by GIS-

teristics before. The relationship between catchment based analysis from the catchment characteristics. Six

characteristics and model parameters ®ts now in a conceptual model parameters out of 16 for each catch-

better way into a new repression curve than in the ment could not be estimated directly and had to be

®rst step. calibrated.

This procedure of parameter optimization and Altogether 56 ¯ood events were used for calibration

regression adjustment can be repeated until signi®cant and validation. Model calibration and validation were

and stable transfer functions between catchment char- done by split sampling of these historical events. The

acteristics and model parameters are received. The antecedent soil moisture was optimized as a state vari-

estimated regression functions then have the meaning able. The objective function used for minimizing the

of a regional transfer function, which can be used to overall simulation error F 2 of the m calibration storms

estimate model parameters from catchment character- in a single catchment is the ªmean square simulation

58 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

ªmean wetting front suction c º).

100 X

m

This fact is caused mainly by internal dependencies

F2 1 2 EFFj 2 37

m j1 between the two model parameters CH and CHEX of

the non-linear subsurface ¯ow computation formula

based on the simulation ef®ciency criterion EFF (Eq. (7)) and between the model parameters CVSAT

(Beven et al., 1984) for every storm j (optimum for and CBEX of the corresponding percolation function

EFF 1.0). The ef®ciency criterion is calculated from (8). These interrelationships between the parameters

the ordinates Qmeas;i and Qsim;i of the measured and can be described by sensitivity analyses. As an exam-

simulated direct runoff hydrographs and the mean ple, Fig. 9 shows a small ridge, where for each value

measured direct runoff QÅ meas of every storm: of parameter CVSAT, an exponent CBEX exists with

X

n X

n an optimal ef®ciency value. With the assumption that

Q meas 2 Qmeas;i 2 2 Qmeas;i 2 Qsim;i 2 the percolation depends mainly on the hydraulic

EFFj i1 i1

: conductivity of the saturated soil, we can replace the

X

n

conceptual parameter CVSAT with the ªphysicalº

Q meas 2 Qmeas;i 2

i1

parameter hydraulic conductivity ks

38 CVSAT k s 39

At the beginning of the GIS-supported parameter esti- The values of the hydraulic conductivity are estimated

mation the best ®t parameter values for all catchments from the GIS (from the digital soil map) for each soil

were estimated by a global gradient algorithm without texture in the catchment. As a result of this reparame-

taking catchment characteristics into consideration. terization it becomes possible to replace the concep-

By comparison of these ®tted parameter values, no tual parameter values of CVSAT for each soil texture.

correlation to any catchment characteristic could be We can now estimate the optimal values of a uniform

found (e.g. Fig. 8, left hand side for the model exponent CBEX for the whole catchment in Eq. (8),

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 59

Table 1

Results of an application of the developed model on some catchments in Germany, all mean errors were calculated with the calibration and

validation sets of ¯ood events

area (km 2) of ¯ood error of peak ¯ow of runoff volume

events (mean in %) (mean in %)

Sinspelt Enz 101 9 13.5 8.2

Echterhausen Pruem 323 11 10.3 7.4

Pruemzurlay Pruem 574 9 7.2 8.1

Giesdorf Nims 17 5 10.0 7.7

Seffern Nims 136 5 6.4 6.1

Alsdorf Nims 264 9 9.1 6.1

which belongs to these distributed values of CVSAT Then the exponent CHEX, which is used for the

(Fig. 8 center). Obviously, after this optimization, the computation of the subsurface ¯ow can also be related

parameter values CBEX show a relationship to the to the wetting front suction c .

wetting front suction c , which was estimated as a As result of this parameterization of Eqs. (7) and

weighted average of the different soil types within (8), the conceptual model re¯ects soil physics more

each catchment. In a third optimization with changed closely and the set of conceptual model parameters is

boundary conditions for these catchments, which are reduced from six to four parameters. The parameters

outliers of the regression between the conceptual CHEX and CBEX correlate physically correctly and

model parameter CBEX and the catchment character- strongly with the parameter ªwetting front suction c º

istic c , the residuals of the regional regression were (Rawls et al., 1983) of the Green and Ampt in®ltration

reduced (Fig. 8 right hand side). model. This relation can be described by a regression.

In Eq. (7), the parameter CH can be interpreted as Now the general relationship ªwith increasing wetting

the lateral transmissivity of the upper soil, which we front suction c the values of CHEX and CBEX

de®ne as the product of the hydraulic conductivity of increaseº is de®ned quantitatively by transfer func-

saturated soil ks and the actual water level within the tions in a regional speci®c way. With these two trans-

soil storage SBact(t). Now CH can be distributed to fer functions the parameter set could be reduced from

the soil units in the same way as CVSAT before. fourteen different values of the two parameters CHEX

Table 2

Utilization of GIS-procedures for model parameterizations

soil storage capacity classi®cation

Estimation of drainage area±time Digital elevation model; digital soil Estimation of grid-based values of slope and ¯ow

functions on and in the hill slopes map land cover classi®cation direction; overlaying of soil and vegetation classes

Estimation of transition frequencies for Digital elevation model; digital soil Identi®cation of transitions between different soil±

water ¯uxes from one soil±vegetation map land cover classi®cation vegetation combinations

combination to another

Estimation of the distribution of Digital elevation model Computation of the river network; stream ordering;

drainage areas on different ¯ow paths in estimation of ¯ow lengths along different pathways;

the rivers estimation of the drainage areas of initial-order streams of

the different pathways

60 A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61

and CBEX in seven catchments to four parameters of Some ideas about new GIS-based model compo-

the regressions, which are valid for all catchments nents and their possibilities and limitations to consider

within this region. Using this form of parameteriza- spatial heterogeneity of catchment characteristics

tion, only two conceptual parameters remain for each within the meso-scale were presented in the paper.

catchment (the parameters c and D in Eq. (29) of the A problem of semi-distributed conceptual models

runoff concentration model for the river network). In consists in the different spatial units which result

Table 1, the satisfactory results of the model applica- from the need to differentiate between vertical and

tion after a regional estimation of the conceptual para- lateral processes (soil bucket, hillslope, river

meters CVSAT, CH, CBEX, CHEX from catchment network). Here an aggregation and distribution of

characteristics are presented. By a lack of precipita- water ¯uxes from or into different units became neces-

tion data, it was not possible to test the model sary. Some tools for consideration of spatial hetero-

approach which was presented here also for continu- geneity of relevant physical characteristics within

ous simulations. these units were presented.

A GIS offers new ways to handle and use informa-

tion about catchment characteristics with a high

5. Summary and conclusions spatial resolution. These opportunities demand new

approaches in modeling. Some ideas regarding how

In this paper two different applications of GIS- conceptual models can bene®t from the new possibi-

based information were presented. In the ®rst applica- lities were presented here.

tion, a GIS was used to derive lumped catchment

characteristics, which describe the spatial heterogene-

ity within a catchment. These characteristics, which Acknowledgements

are listed in Table 2, can be used directly in model

components which were developed with the aim to The authors express their gratitude to the German

make good and effective use of the distributed infor- Research Foundation for ®nancial support.

mation base. The second application of the GIS is

dedicated to the regional model parameter estimation

taking catchment characteristics into consideration. References

Here the model parameters for different catchments

in a region should be calibrated in accordance to their Abbott, M.B., Bathurst, J.C., Cunge, J.A., O'Connel, P.E., Rasmus-

sen, J., 1986. An introduction to the European Hydrological

physical explanation and related characteristics. To System Ð Systeme Hydrologique ªSHEº. Journal of Hydrol-

reach this target a hydrological model was needed, ogy 87, 45±59.

in which all model parameters have a physical expla- Beven, K., 1989. Changing ideas in hydrology Ð the case of physi-

nation and which can deal with the hydrological cally-based models. Journal of Hydrology 105, 157±172.

heterogeneity of a catchment. Such a rainfall±runoff Beven, K.J., Kirkby, M.J., Scho®eld, N., Togg, A.F., 1984. Testing

a physically-based ¯ood forecasting model (TOPMODEL) for

model was developed, for which it was possible to three U.K. catchments. Journal of Hydrology 69, 119±143.

estimate the majority of model parameters from Franchini, M., Pacciani, M., 1991. Comparative analysis of several

GIS-based catchment characteristics and to regiona- conceptual rainfall±runoff models. Journal of Hydrology 122,

lize the remaining conceptual parameters in accor- 161±219.

dance to the catchment characteristics in the region Funke, R., 1999. Parameterization and regionalization of a runoff

generation model for heterogeneous catchments. Physics and

by an iterative procedure of numerical parameter opti- Chemistry of the Earth, Part B: Hydrology, Oceans and Atmo-

mization taking their physical meaning into consid- sphere 24 (1±2), 49±54.

eration. As a result we obtain not only a model which Grayson, R.B., BloÈschl, G., Barling, R.D., Moore, I.D., 1993.

is calibrated for different catchments within a region, Process, scale and constraints to hydrological modelling in

but also transfer functions between catchment char- GIS. In: HydroGIS'93: Application of Geographic Information

Systems in Hydrology and Water Resources (Proceedings of the

acteristics and model parameters which can be used Vienna Conference), IAHS Publication No. 211, pp. 83±92.

for a model parameterization of ungauged catchments Leavesley, G.H., Lichty, R.W., Troutman, B.M., Saindon, L.G.,

within the same region. 1983. Precipitation±runoff modeling system Ð user's manual.

A.H. Schumann et al. / Journal of Hydrology 240 (2000) 45±61 61

US Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report natural catchments and the geomorphological unit hydrograph.

83-4238. Water Resources Research 30, 2311±2323.

Pilgrim, D.H., Cordery, I., 1992. Flood runoff. In: Maidment, D.R. Strahler, A.N., 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomor-

(Ed.). Handbook of Hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. phology, EOS Transactions, AGU 38, pp. 913±920.

9.21±9.26 (chap. 9). Wood, E.F., Lettenmaier, D.P., Wallis, J.R., 1991. Comparison of

Rawls, W.J., Brakensiek, L., Miller, N., 1983. Green±Ampt in®l- an Alternative Land Surface Parameterization with the GDFL

tration parameters from soil data. Journal of Hydraulic Engi- High Resolution Climate Model. Proceedings of the Vienna

neering 109 (1), 62±70. Symposium, IAHS Publication No. 204. IAHS Press, Walling-

Schumann, A.H., 1993. Development of conceptual semi-distribu- ford.

ted hydrological models and estimation of their parameters with Zhao, R.-J., 1992. The Xinanjiang model applied in China. Journal

the aid of GIS. Hydrological Sciences Journal 38, 519±528. of Hydrology 135, 371±381.

Snell, J.D., Sivapalan, M., 1994. On geomorphological dispersion in

- nullUploaded byM-NCPPC
- IV Barchschsyll6Uploaded byRakesh
- Soft Systems MethodologyUploaded byRouella May Altar
- ResumeUploaded byS
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence...Uploaded bynikhil gupta
- Analysis_of_land-use_change_in_a_sector.pdfUploaded byVasilică-Dănuţ Horodnic
- DB-Design-3Uploaded byapi-3853133
- Rajao11 GIS in the Amazon PhD Final SmallUploaded byRaoni Guerra
- Web GIS as support for sustainable development local economy in the fields of agro-industry and fine chemicalsUploaded byGIEOLab - Geographic Information , E-participation & Open gov
- NatGeogStds_Review2Uploaded bysgrrsc
- WaterSolution Brochure 2014Update LTR Screen EnUploaded byMathiTwadC
- Modelling Constructed Wetlands Scopes and Aims a Comparative REVIEW 2015Uploaded byLeonardo Marcelino
- simondowling resume 2019Uploaded byapi-286493827
- Reliance Scada His IntegrationUploaded bysahilcc
- 00b4951a318e2dcf65000000.pdfUploaded byJuanCarlosEstrada
- Object Modeling TechniquesUploaded bySuresh Kumar Mukhiya
- Project Planning and Lifecycle(1)Uploaded byNahidul Islam
- Gis Analysis and ModellingUploaded byAndreas Tarigan
- NA2-module.pdfUploaded byodcardozo
- Timeline for Student ProjectsUploaded byJuanPalacios
- Analysis of Design Processes by Function, Behavior and StructureUploaded byMohamed Elfawal
- Introduction to GISUploaded byfcaceresjerez
- Assignment 1 & 2Uploaded byashima
- Integration of 3S With Mobile CommunicationUploaded byVijay Kanth
- CV GuidelinesUploaded byPirzada Najmul Hussain Qureshi
- IT Project Manager or GIS Project Manager or GIS Consultant or LUploaded byapi-78184848
- Research PaperUploaded byMuhammad Idrees
- l4 assign4 swilliamsUploaded byapi-276783092
- Report.docxUploaded byumer
- 297Uploaded byHemant Dewangan

- Notice: Pollution control; consent judgments: Westwood Chemical Corp.Uploaded byJustia.com
- FINAL Salient Tech Features_DGP_ 2x20 MW.pdfUploaded bykalaiselvan0707
- Jar Test LabsheetUploaded byOmar Yusuf Mohamad Shafiee
- Horton Calculations CH5Uploaded bydstar13
- Soiltac Product Information PacketUploaded bySidney Serafim
- Donk in Turbo CompressorsUploaded byLeon Sanchez
- Sea Level Rise and Its Potential Effects on Washington, DCUploaded byJ Otavio Thompson
- CDP Problem Solving Matrix WorkshopUploaded byAmbosLinderoAllanChristopher
- 901Uploaded bygangaraju
- 18014_CHE110 Practice MCQ Problems With AnswerUploaded byravi chandra
- Hotel_guidelines From 19-01-2018Uploaded byEclat
- OGP 373-18-1 Guidelines for Offshore Drilling SurveysUploaded byJose Quintero
- Intro_pptUploaded byPradeep Rathore
- Some Basic Concept of ChemistryUploaded byHarshit Dixit
- Crosslinking of Starch 2Uploaded bypanakos
- Diffusion Plant Phy Lab ReportUploaded byBenjune Roselada
- BROAD X Absorption Chiller Model Selection Design ManualUploaded bypseudosil
- oct3_11.pdfUploaded byaditya6996
- tuticorinUploaded bySachin Sithik
- 106808 REVISED 05a FSM Diagnostics Urban Case Study BalikpapanUploaded byNatasya Abigail
- RJS Grand Cru International WinemakingUploaded bylemnepefoc
- Pulp_and_paper_industry.pptUploaded byRishabh Gulalkari
- Seasons of IndiaUploaded byNareshchn
- Cooling Tower Performance Assessment.pdfUploaded byHamid Ariz
- Tanker ShipsUploaded bySonny Sonjaya
- Cum Sa Construiesti Un IazUploaded byrecutu
- Lampiran EdgeUploaded byLourensia Brigita
- 10.1021@cr0200116Uploaded byChidambaram Ramaswamy
- Warangal (Rice) Mill OwnersUploaded byVarun Marar
- Checkerboard Dwarf CichlidUploaded byBarron Fields