Workshop 8

Uncertainty Analysis
Disclaimer: The United States Army Corps of Engineers has granted access to the information in this
model for instructional purposes only. Do not copy, forward, or release the information
without United States Army Corps of Engineers approval.

Uncertainty analyses can be used to explore output sensitivity to variation in model parameters. HMS
contains several methods for varying a model’s parameters based on random sampling, and in this
workshop you will explore the most common of these methods.

Name some situations (project types, phases of model development, and so on) when exploring model
parameter sensitivity might be useful to a modeler:

You will evaluate the sensitivity of part of the Latah Creek watershed’s outflows to variation in runoff
parameters. This watershed has significant runoff contribution caused by snowmelt, but it is uncertain
whether the rate of melt and the intensity of rainfall makes the surface runoff processes (i.e. infiltration
and transform) more sensitive, or the interflow/baseflow processes are dominant.

Spend approximately 20 minutes per uncertainty analysis to accomplish all tasks in this workshop
within the time allotted.

1
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits
1. First, set up an uncertainty analysis for surface parameters for the 2017 event using the Latah
Creek basin model and the DerivedGauges2017 meteorological model. This is done by opening
the Uncertainty Analysis Manager located under the Compute tab. Choose output to be
Outflow at the Tekoa junction (using the right-click menu) so you only need to add parameters
for the LatahCr_S30 sub-basin by right clicking the analysis and selecting the Results option.
This is seen in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Output Selection

2. Set the time window for water year 2017.

3. Choose 50 Total Samples (in the interest of time, this should take about 5 minutes – if you have
time when you’re done with the workshop, consider running more.)
4. Take the provided value for Seed Value.
5. The Uncertainty Analysis setup should appear similar to Figure 2.

Figure 2: Uncertainty Analysis Setup

2
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits
 6. Next, add a sensitivity parameter using Simple Distribution sampling for the Constant Loss
Rate first using the right-click menu.
7. Choose either the Uniform distribution or Triangular distribution unless you are comfortable
with some of the more complex distributions1.

Figure 3: Parameter Setup

8. To create parameters for the Uniform or Triangular distributions, look at the loss rates in the
basin model and draw on your own experience to decide what you think a reasonable range to
explore might be. Use the upper and lower end of your range to populate a
minimum/maximum/upper/lower parameter (use the same values for min/lower and max/upper –
these distributions already have built-in bounds) and if you chose the Triangular distribution,
decide on a “most likely” value as well for the mode.
9. Add parameters for the LatahCr_S30 Clark Unit Hydrograph Time of Concentration,
Storage Coefficient, and Deficit and Constant Max Deficit. Make sure your parameter ranges
won’t cause errors, such as a Max Deficit value less than the Initial Deficit already in the basin
model.
10. Run your uncertainty analysis for the surface parameters.
11. After completing the run (50 iterations should take about 5 minutes or less) open the “w8.xlsx”
spreadsheet and start with the “Max Outflow – Surf” worksheet.
12. Open the results in HEC-HMS, and paste in the max outflow results in column C.
13. Add in the parameter values in columns D through G. The plots on the right side will update.
14. Repeat this procedure on the “Volume – Surf” worksheet with the outflow volume results. The
parameter values will automatically update but you will need to paste in the volumes.

1
The easiest to parameterize of the complex distributions are the Exponential or the Normal distribution. Using the
minimum and maximum controls will be important for those distributions to keep samples within a valid range (e.g.
not negative.)
3
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits
Which surface parameter do you think was most sensitive for peak discharge, and for the volume of
discharge? Are these simulations conclusive?

How does your choice of the settings for the uncertainty distribution for a parameter affect the range of
outputs?

Based on your results, do you think 50 simulations is enough to evaluate the range of parameter
combinations? Why or why not?

15. Now, create a new uncertainty simulation for the baseflow parameters using the same settings
(meteorological model, basin model, uncertainty analysis).
16. Add parameters for GW1 Coefficient, GW2 Coefficient, GW1 Steps and GW2 Steps based on
the current basin model parameters as well as your judgment.
17. Record the results in the “Max Outflow – BF” and “Volume – BF” worksheets2.

Which baseflow parameter do you think was most sensitive for peak discharge, and for the volume of
discharge?

2
Although the uncertainty analysis samples decimal values for GW steps, the parameters can only take on integer
values in the model. HMS stores these parameter values as decimals, but when reading them only keeps the integer
part of the value.
4
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits
Between surface flow and interflow/baseflow, which do you think has more influence on the runoff
process in this sub-basin?

18. Go back to your results for the two analyses. Look at the outflow hydrograph for Tekoa for each
of the analysis. Does this confirm your conclusion about which process has more influence?

A feature new to HEC-HMS is the ability to perform uncertainty analyses of many Temperature Index
Snowmelt process parameters. It turns out that while the hydrologic process uncertainty is substantial for
Latah Creek, the snow model might be just as important. Nearby SNOTEL sites which are higher in
elevation (e.g. Moscow Mountain, Sherwin) accumulate 5 – 20 inches of peak SWE in a normal year.
Tekoa is down in the valley but plenty of the Latah Creek watershed has enough elevation to create
orographic uplift and enhance precipitation in the watershed, where otherwise it is very dry.

19. Create a third uncertainty analysis for the LatahCr_S30 sub-basin using the same settings as
before, except add the Temperature Index – Base Temperature, PX Temperature, and Wet
Melt Rate parameters for the uncertainty analysis. These three parameters control quite a bit of
the snow calibration for a typical watershed.
20. Choose reasonable ranges for each of these three parameters and use the distribution of your
choice to express the parameter uncertainty.
21. Draw 50 samples and record your results in the “Max Outflow – Snow” and “Volume – Snow”
worksheets.

5
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits
Compared to the runoff parameters, how much control do these snowmelt parameters have?

When performing a sensitivity analysis in this way, how is interaction or dependency between the
parameters handled? What is a tool in HMS that can help you analyze that dependency?

Based on the sensitivity analyses above, if you were tasked with calibrating this watershed model, which
parameters would you concentrate on the most?

Additional Task: If you have more time, consider running an uncertainty analysis with a combination of
parameters that you think is the most sensitive and see how much control you have over the resulting
hydrograph for a reasonable range for each parameter. In DSS you can overlay the observed data with the
hydrograph and confidence limits (in the project’s data folder there is a DSS file called “Tekoa.dss”
which has the observed data).

6
W – Uncertainty Analysis/Karlovits