IAHR, founded in 1935, is a worldwide independent member-based organisation of engineers and water specialists working in fields related to the hydro-environmental sciences and their practical application. Activities range from river and maritime hydraulics to water resources development and eco-hydraulics, through to ice engineering, hydroinformatics, and hydraulic machinery.
Log On
About IAHRDirectoryCommitteesMy IAHRNews & JournalseLibraryeShopEventsJoin IAHRWorld CongressDonate
spacer.gif
spacer.gif eLibrary
spacer.gif eLibrary
You are here : eLibrary : IAHR World Congress Proceedings : 36th Congress - The Hague (2015) ALL CONTENT : Water resources and hydroinformatics : Influence of the representation of the groundwater component in hydrological catchment models on eva...
Influence of the representation of the groundwater component in hydrological catchment models on evapotranspiration (et) estimation
Author : AKLILU DINKNEH (1), OLKEBA TOLESSA LATA(2) ,CHRISTIAN ANIBAS(1), MARIJKE HUYSMANS (1) & ANN VAN GRIENSVEN (1)
ET is an important component of the hydrological cycle and it completes the energy balance of the cycle in the vegetationsoil
and atmosphere interface. ET is a combination of evaporation from land surface, open water, soil zone and
transpiration from vegetation. The proportion of the ET flux in the water balance varies and it could be as high as 90% in
some river basins. The representation of the ground water component in hydrological models influences the water
distribution in the basin, affecting the runoff and evapotranspiration components. In this study we investigate how the
representation of groundwater in the hydrological model influences the ET component by comparing different model
structures. We made the comparison for monthly ET estimations at pixel and at a catchment scale. Monthly average ET
from SWAT, Water and Energy Transfer between Soil, Plants and Atmosphere (WetSpass), Precipitation and runoff
simulation model (PRMS) and MODIS were compared. The ET results from the different models were validated using
values derived from MODIS16. The monthly average ET from these models is different, moreover as expected the
spatial variation is better represented in semi distributed models. ET estimation of the SWAT model is the lowest
compared to estimation from the other models. When we look at the ground water contribution for ET the variation of the
result from the models is more significant, time series plot of monthly average ground water ET contribution results from
SWAT and PRMS have different shape. Result from WetSpass models, in which spatial variation of ground water
depth is represented, show very sensitive ET to groundwater level representation.
File Size : 401,612 bytes
File Type : Adobe Acrobat Document
Chapter : IAHR World Congress Proceedings
Category : 36th Congress - The Hague (2015) ALL CONTENT
Article : Water resources and hydroinformatics
Date Published : 19/08/2015
Download Now