Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluating precipitation datasets for large-scale distributed hydrological modelling
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering.
2019 (English)In: Journal of Hydrology, ISSN 0022-1694, E-ISSN 1879-2707, Vol. 578Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We are experiencing a proliferation of satellite derived precipitation datasets. Advantages and limitations of their promising application in hydrological modelling application have been broadly investigated. However, most studies have analysed only the performance of one or few datasets, were limited to selected small-scale case studies or used lumped models when investigating large-scale basins.

In this study, we compared the performance of 18 different precipitation datasets when used as main forcing in a grid-based distributed hydrological model to assess streamflow in medium to large-scale river basins. These datasets are classified as Uncorrected Satellites (Class 1), Corrected Satellites (Class 2) and Reanalysis – Gauges based datasets (Class 3). To provide a broad-based analysis, 8 large-scale river basins (Amazon, Brahmaputra, Congo, Danube, Godavari, Mississippi, Rhine and Volga) having different sizes, hydrometeorological characteristics, and human influence were selected. The distributed hydrological model was recalibrated for each precipitation dataset individually.

We found that there is not a unique best performing precipitation dataset for all basins and that results are very sensitive to the basin characteristics. However, a few datasets persistently outperform the others: SM2RAIN-ASCAT for Class 1, CHIRPS V2.0, MSWEP V2.1, and CMORPH-CRTV1.0 for Class 2, GPCC and WFEDEI GPCC for Class 3. Surprisingly, precipitation datasets showing the highest model accuracy at basin outlets do not show the same high performance in internal locations, supporting the use of distributed modelling approach rather than lumped.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. Vol. 578
National Category
Oceanography, Hydrology and Water Resources
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-256544DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124076Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85071308400OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-256544DiVA, id: diva2:1346454
Note

QC 20190829

Available from: 2019-08-28 Created: 2019-08-28 Last updated: 2019-10-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Brandimarte, Luigia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Brandimarte, Luigia
By organisation
Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering
In the same journal
Journal of Hydrology
Oceanography, Hydrology and Water Resources

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 10 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf