Difference between revisions of "Calibration/Validation in Mohid Land"
From MohidWiki
Davidbrito (talk | contribs) (→Before you start) |
Davidbrito (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
==Resume== | ==Resume== | ||
| Line 24: | Line 23: | ||
==Step 1 - Validate your rain== | ==Step 1 - Validate your rain== | ||
| − | ==Step 2 - Validate evapotranspiration or river flow in long term simulation | + | ==Step 2 - Validate evapotranspiration or river flow in long term simulation== |
==Step 3 - Validate floods (surface water)== | ==Step 3 - Validate floods (surface water)== | ||
| − | ==Step 4 - Validate baseflow | + | ==Step 4 - Validate baseflow== |
Revision as of 15:01, 27 August 2012
Contents
Resume
Before you start
Model lack of accurancy usually is simpton of three things:
- or model does not describe fully the system physics/relations
- or model data provided (initial or boundary) is not good enough to describe its state or variability (spatially or temporally)
- or both,
If we agree that Mohid Land model has the main physical processes that describe watershed hydrodynamics than one should have in mind that model results accurancy will suffer from the given data difference to reality. And those data consist of:
- Digital Terrain model that will affect land and river slopes, drainage direction and accumulation, etc
- Land Use map that affects vegetation growing, runoff resistance to flow, impermeabilization etc
- Soil Map and van Genuchten parameters that affect porous media flow, infiltration, etc
- Rain data that is the main driver of the water cycle and can have high spatial and temporal variation and usually prone to errors (collection errors, publication errors, data manipulation errors) that may impact severely the results.
