Search

Different approaches used in hydrological modelling are compared in terms of the way each one takes the rainfall data into account. We examine the errors associated with accounting for rainfall variability, whether in hydrological modelling (distributed vs lumped models) or in computing catchment rainfall, as well as the impact of each approach on the representativeness of the parameters it uses. The database consists of 1859 rainfall events, distributed on 500 basins, located in the southeast of France with areas ranging from 6.2 to 2851 km2. The study uses as reference the hydrographs computed by a distributed hydrological model from radar rainfall. This allows us to compare and to test the effects of various simplifications to the process when taking rainfall information (complete rain field vs sampled rainfall) and rainfall-runoff modelling (lumped vs distributed) into account. The results appear to show that, in general, the sampling effect can lead to errors in discharge at the outlet that are as great as, or even greater than, those one would get with a fully lumped approach. We found that small catchments are more sensitive to the uncertainties in catchment rainfall input generated by sampling rainfall data as seen through a raingauge network. Conversely, the larger catchments are more sensitive to uncertainties generated when the spatial variability of rainfall events is not taken into account. These uncertainties can be compensated for relatively easily by recalibrating the parameters of the hydrological model, although such recalibrations cause the parameter in question to completely lose physical meaning. Citation Arnaud, P., Lavabre, J., Fouchier, C., Diss, S. & Javelle, P. (2011) Sensitivity of hydrological models to uncertainty of rainfall input. Hydrol. Sci. J. 56(3), 397-410. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]