• Beven, K., 1993: Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological modeling. Adv. Water Resour., 16, 4151, https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1708(93)90028-E.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brunner, G. W., 2010: HEC-RAS River analysis system: Hydraulic reference manual, version 4.1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tech. Rep. CPD-69, 417 pp.

  • Carpenter, T. M., and K. P. Georgakakos, 2004: Impacts of parametric and radar rainfall uncertainty on the ensemble streamflow simulations of a distributed hydrologic model. J. Hydrol., 298, 202221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.03.036.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Castronova, A. M., and Coauthors, 2019 : Improving access to continental-scale hydrology models for research and education—A subsetting adventure. 2019 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, Amer. Geophys. Union, Abstract H43I-2146, https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm19/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/619688.

  • Clark, M. P., and Coauthors, 2021: The abuse of popular performance metrics in hydrologic modeling. Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR029001, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR029001.

  • Cohen, S., S. Praskievicz, and D. R. Maidment, 2018: Featured collection introduction: National Water Model. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 54, 767769, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12664.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Congressional Research Service, 2019: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) streamgaging network: Overview and issues for Congress. CRS Rep. R45695, 31 pp., https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45695.

  • Cosgrove, B., and Coauthors, 2015 : Hydrologic modeling at the National Water Center: Operational implementation of the WRF-hydro model to support National Weather Service hydrology. 2015 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, Amer. Geophys. Union, Abstract H53A-1649, https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm15/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/66151.

  • Cosgrove, B., and Coauthors, 2016 : An overview of the National Weather Service National Water Model. 2016 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, Amer. Geophys. Union, Abstract H42B-05, https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm16/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/181304.

  • Downer, C. W., F. L. Ogden, W. D. Martin, and R. S. Harmon, 2002: Theory, development, and applicability of the surface water hydrologic model CASC2D. Hydrol. Processes, 16, 255275, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.338.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gochis, D., and Coauthors, 2018 : The NCAR WRF-Hydro modeling system technical description (version 5.0). NCAR Tech. Note, 107 pp., https://ral.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/public/WRF-HydroV5TechnicalDescription.pdf.

  • Gupta, H. V., H. Kling, K. K. Yilmaz, and G. F. Martinez, 2009: Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling. J. Hydrol., 377, 8091, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Iowa Silver Jackets Program, 2016 : Iowa Bridge Sensor Demonstration Project Phase I and Phase II Executive Summary Report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tech. Rep., 11 pp., https://www.mvr.usace.army.mil/Portals/48/docs/FRM/Iowa%20Bridge%20Sensor%20Demonstration%20Project%20Executive%20Summary.pdf?ver=2017-05-05-125939-557.

  • Koren, V., M. Smith, and Z. Cui, 2014: Physically-based modifications to the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting model. Part A: Modeling the effects of frozen ground on the runoff generation process. J. Hydrol., 519, 34753491, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.03.004.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krajewski, W. F., and Coauthors, 2017: Real-time flood forecasting and information system for the State of Iowa. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 98, 539554, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00243.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kruger, A., W. F. Krajewski, J. J. Niemeier, D. L. Ceynar, and R. Goska, 2016: Bridge mounted river stage sensors (BMRSS). IEEE Access, 4, 89488966, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2631172.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lamontagne, J. R., C. A. Barber, and R. M. Vogel, 2020: Improved estimators of model performance efficiency for skewed hydrologic data. Water Resour. Res., 56, e2020WR027101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027101.

  • Maidment, D. R., 2016: Conceptual framework for the National Flood Interoperability Experiment. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 53, 245257, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12474.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McKay, L., T. Bondelid, T. Dewald, J. Johnston, R. Moore, and A. Rea, 2012: NHDPlus Version 2: User guide. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 181 pp., ftp://ftp.horizon-systems.com/NHDplus/NHDPlusV21/Documentation/NHDPlusV2_User_Guide.pdf.

  • Nash, J. E., and J. V. Sutcliffe, 1970: River flow forecasting through conceptual models Part I—A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol., 10, 282290, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Niu, G.-Y., and Coauthors, 2011: The community Noah land surface model with multi-parameterization options (Noah‐MP): 1. Model description and evaluation with local‐scale measurements. J. Geophys. Res., 116, D12109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015139.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quintero, F., W. F. Krajewski, B.-C. Seo, and R. Mantilla, 2020: Improvement and evaluation of the Iowa flood center hillslope link model (HLM) by calibration-free approach. J. Hydrol., 584, 124686, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124686.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quintero, F., and Coauthors, 2021: Development of synthetic rating curves: Case study in Iowa. J. Hydrol. Eng., 26, 05020046, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002022.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rojas, M., F. Quintero, and W. F. Krajewski, 2020: Performance of the national water model in Iowa using independent observations. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 56, 568585, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12820.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Romanowicz, R. J., P. C. Young, and K. J. Beven, 2006: Data assimilation and adaptive forecasting of water levels in the river Severn catchment, United Kingdom. Water Resour. Res., 42, W06407, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004373.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Seo, B.-C., B. Dolan, W. F. Krajewski, S. Rutledge, and W. Petersen, 2015: Comparison of single and dual polarization based rainfall estimates using NEXRAD data for the NASA Iowa flood studies project. J. Hydrometeor., 16, 16581675, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-14-0169.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Seo, B.-C., W. F. Krajewski, and F. Quintero, 2021a: Multi-scale hydrologic evaluation of the national water model streamflow data assimilation. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc., 57, 875884, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12955.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Seo, B.-C., W. F. Krajewski, F. Quintero, S. Buan, and B. Connelly, 2021b: Assessment of streamflow predictions generated using multi-model and multi-precipitation product forcing. J. Hydrometeor., 22, 22752290, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-20-0310.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sorooshian, S., Q. Duan, and V. K. Gupta, 1993: Calibration of rainfall- runoff models: Application of global optimization to the Sacramento soil moisture accounting model. Water Resour. Res., 29, 11851194, https://doi.org/10.1029/92WR02617.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Souverijns, N., A. Gossart, S. Lhermitte, I. V. Gorodetskaya, S. Kneifel, M. Maahn, F. L. Bliven, and N. P. M. van Lipzig, 2017: Estimating radar reflectivity—Snowfall rate relationships and their uncertainties over Antarctica by combining disdrometer and radar observations. Atmos. Res., 196, 211223, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2017.06.001.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tang, X., D. W. Knight, and P. G. Samuels, 1999: Variable parameter Muskingum–Cunge method for flood routing in a compound channel. J. Hydraul. Res., 37, 591614, https://doi.org/10.1080/00221689909498519.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Uccellini, L. W., and J. E. Ten Hoeve, 2019: Evolving the National Weather Service to build a weather-ready nation: Connecting observations, forecasts, and warnings to decision-makers through impact-based decision support services. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 100, 19231942, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-18-0159.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wigmosta, M. S., and D. P. Lettenmaier, 1999: A comparison of simplified methods for routing topographically driven subsurface flow. Water Resour. Res., 35, 255264, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998WR900017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wigmosta, M. S., L. W. Vail, and D. P. Lettenmaier, 1994: A distributed hydrology‐vegetation model for complex terrain. Water Resour. Res., 30, 16651679, https://doi.org/10.1029/94WR00436.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Xia, Y., and Coauthors, 2012: Continental-scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for the North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS-2): 1. Intercomparison and application of model products. J. Geophys. Res., 117, D03109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016048.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yang, Z.-L., and Coauthors, 2011: The community Noah land surface model with multi-parameterization options (Noah‐MP): 2. Evaluation over global river basins. J. Geophys. Res., 116, D12110, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015140.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhang, J., and Coauthors, 2016: Multi-Radar Multi-Sensor (MRMS) quantitative precipitation estimation: Initial operating capabilities. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 97, 621638, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-14-00174.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhang, J. L., Y. P. Li, G. H. Huang, C. X. Wang, and G. H. Cheng, 2016: Evaluation of uncertainties in input data and parameters of a hydrological model using a Bayesian framework: A case study of a snowmelt–precipitation-driven watershed. J. Hydrometeor., 17, 23332350, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0236.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ziliani, M. G., R. Ghostine, B. Ait-El-Fquih, M. F. McCabe, and I. Hoteit, 2019: Enhanced flood forecasting through ensemble data assimilation and joint state-parameter estimation. J. Hydrol., 577, 123924, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.123924.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 420 420 23
Full Text Views 102 102 4
PDF Downloads 87 87 4

Expanding and Enhancing Streamflow Prediction Capability of the National Water Model Using Real-Time Low-Cost Stage Measurements

Bong-Chul SeoaIowa Flood Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
bIIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Search for other papers by Bong-Chul Seo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3092-0241
,
Marcela RojasaIowa Flood Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
bIIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Search for other papers by Marcela Rojas in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Felipe QuinteroaIowa Flood Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
bIIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Search for other papers by Felipe Quintero in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Witold F. KrajewskiaIowa Flood Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
bIIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Search for other papers by Witold F. Krajewski in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Dong Ha KimcNOAA/National Water Center, Tuscaloosa, Alabama

Search for other papers by Dong Ha Kim in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

This study demonstrates an approach to expand and improve the current prediction capability of the National Water Model (NWM). The primary objective is to examine the potential benefit of real-time local stage measurements in streamflow prediction, particularly for local communities that do not benefit from the improved streamflow forecasts due to the current data assimilation (DA) scheme. The proposed approach incorporates real-time local stage measurements into the NWM streamflow DA procedure by using synthetic rating curves (SRC) developed based on an established open-channel flow model. For streamflow DA and its evaluation, we used 6-yr (2016–21) data collected from 140 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stations, where quality-assured rating curves are consistently maintained (verification stations), and 310 stage-only stations operated by the Iowa Flood Center and the USGS in Iowa. The evaluation result from NWM’s current DA configuration based on the USGS verification stations indicated that DA improves streamflow prediction skills significantly downstream from the station locations. This improvement tends to increase as the drainage scale becomes larger. The result from the new DA configuration including all stage-only sensors showed an expanded domain of improved predictions, compared to those from the open-loop simulation. This reveals that the real-time low-cost stage sensors are beneficial for streamflow prediction, particularly at small basins, while their utility appears to be limited at large drainage areas because of the inherent limitations of lidar-based channel geometry used for the SRC development. The framework presented in this study can be readily applied to include numerous stage-only stream gauges nationwide in the NWM modeling and forecasting procedures.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Bong-Chul Seo, bongchul-seo@uiowa.edu

Abstract

This study demonstrates an approach to expand and improve the current prediction capability of the National Water Model (NWM). The primary objective is to examine the potential benefit of real-time local stage measurements in streamflow prediction, particularly for local communities that do not benefit from the improved streamflow forecasts due to the current data assimilation (DA) scheme. The proposed approach incorporates real-time local stage measurements into the NWM streamflow DA procedure by using synthetic rating curves (SRC) developed based on an established open-channel flow model. For streamflow DA and its evaluation, we used 6-yr (2016–21) data collected from 140 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stations, where quality-assured rating curves are consistently maintained (verification stations), and 310 stage-only stations operated by the Iowa Flood Center and the USGS in Iowa. The evaluation result from NWM’s current DA configuration based on the USGS verification stations indicated that DA improves streamflow prediction skills significantly downstream from the station locations. This improvement tends to increase as the drainage scale becomes larger. The result from the new DA configuration including all stage-only sensors showed an expanded domain of improved predictions, compared to those from the open-loop simulation. This reveals that the real-time low-cost stage sensors are beneficial for streamflow prediction, particularly at small basins, while their utility appears to be limited at large drainage areas because of the inherent limitations of lidar-based channel geometry used for the SRC development. The framework presented in this study can be readily applied to include numerous stage-only stream gauges nationwide in the NWM modeling and forecasting procedures.

© 2022 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Bong-Chul Seo, bongchul-seo@uiowa.edu
Save