Comparison of radar and gauge precipitation data in watershed models across varying spatial and temporal scales. Issue 9 (18th June 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Price, Katie; Purucker, S. Thomas; Kraemer, Stephen R.; Babendreier, Justin E.; Knightes, Chris D.
• Is Part Of: Hydrological processes. Volume 28:Issue 9(2014:Mar.)
• Page Start: 3505
• Page End: 3520
• Publication Date: 2013-06-18
• Subjects: Hydrology -- Periodicals; Hydrology -- Research -- Periodicals; Hydrologic models -- Periodicals; Hydrological forecasting -- Periodicals; 631.432
• DOI: 10.1002/hyp.9890
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0885-6087

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Precipitation is a key control on watershed hydrologic modelling output, with errors in rainfall propagating through subsequent stages of water quantity and quality analysis. Most watershed models incorporate precipitation data from rain gauges; higher‐resolution data sources are available, but they are associated with greater computational requirements and expertise. Here, we investigate whether the Multisensor Precipitation Estimator (MPE or Stage IV Next‐Generation Radar) data improve the accuracy of streamflow simulations using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), compared with rain gauge data. Simulated flows from 2002 to 2010 at five timesteps were compared with observed flows for four nested subwatersheds of the Neuse River basin in North Carolina (21‐, 203‐, 2979‐, and 10 100‐km<sup>2</sup> watershed area), using a multi‐objective function, informal likelihood‐weighted calibration approach. Across watersheds and timesteps, total gauge precipitation was greater than radar precipitation, but radar data showed a conditional bias of higher rainfall estimates during large events (>25–50 mm/day). Model parameterization differed between calibrations with the two datasets, despite the fact that all watershed characteristics were the same across simulation scenarios. This underscores the importance of linking calibration parameters to realistic processes. SWAT simulations with both datasets underestimated median and low flows, whereas radar‐based simulations were more accurate than gauge‐based simulations for high flows. At coarser timesteps, differences were less pronounced. Our results suggest that modelling efforts in watersheds with poor rain gauge coverage can be improved with MPE radar data, especially at short timesteps. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.</p> </abstract>