<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">HESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Hydrology and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">HESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1607-7938</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/hess-22-331-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Scale effect challenges in urban hydrology highlighted with a distributed hydrological model</article-title><alt-title>Scale effect challenges in urban hydrology</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Scale effect challenges in urban hydrology}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{A.~Ichiba et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Ichiba</surname><given-names>Abdellah</given-names></name>
          <email>abdellah.ichiba@enpc.fr</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Gires</surname><given-names>Auguste</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4121-9928</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Tchiguirinskaia</surname><given-names>Ioulia</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Schertzer</surname><given-names>Daniel</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4930-5115</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Bompard</surname><given-names>Philippe</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Ten Veldhuis</surname><given-names>Marie-Claire</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9572-2193</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>HMCO, Ecole des Ponts ParisTech, Université Paris-Est, 6–8 Av Blaise Pascal Cité Descartes,
<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Marne-la-Vallée, 77455 Cx2, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Conseil Départemental du Val-de-Marne, Direction des Services de l'Environnement et  <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> de
l'Assainissement (DSEA), Bonneuil-sur-Marne, 94381, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Department of Water Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft
University of <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Technology, P.O. Box 5048, 2600 GA Delft, the Netherlands</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Abdellah Ichiba (abdellah.ichiba@enpc.fr)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>15</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>331</fpage><lpage>350</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>15</day><month>May</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>22</day><month>May</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>15</day><month>October</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day><month>October</month><year>2017</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2018 Abdellah Ichiba et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2018</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018.html">This article is available from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e145">Hydrological models are extensively
used in urban water management, development and evaluation of future
scenarios and research activities. There is a growing interest in the
development of fully distributed and grid-based models. However, some complex
questions related to scale effects are not yet fully understood and still
remain open issues in urban hydrology. In this paper we propose a two-step
investigation framework to illustrate the extent of scale effects in urban
hydrology. First, fractal tools are used to highlight the scale dependence
observed within distributed data input into urban hydrological models. Then
an intensive multi-scale modelling work is carried out to understand scale
effects on hydrological model performance. Investigations are conducted
using a fully distributed and physically based model, Multi-Hydro, developed
at Ecole des Ponts ParisTech. The model is implemented at 17 spatial
resolutions ranging from 100  to 5 m. Results clearly exhibit scale effect
challenges in urban hydrology modelling. The applicability of fractal
concepts highlights the scale dependence observed within distributed data.
Patterns of geophysical data change when the size of the observation pixel
changes. The multi-scale modelling investigation confirms scale effects on
hydrological model performance. Results are analysed over three ranges of
scales identified in the fractal analysis and confirmed through modelling.
This work also discusses some remaining issues in urban hydrology modelling
related to the availability of high-quality data at high resolutions, and
model numerical instabilities as well as the computation time requirements.
The main findings of this paper enable a replacement of traditional methods of
“model calibration” by innovative methods of “model resolution
alteration” based on the spatial data variability and scaling of flows in
urban hydrology.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e157">Urban environments are very complex systems due to their intrinsic extreme
variability over a wide range of spatio-temporal scales, and the interaction
between human activities and natural processes. A notable illustration is the
ongoing urbanization process that changes land cover and strongly influences
the hydrological behaviour of urban catchments. Urban hydrological models
were developed over the years and used to simulate the portion of the water
cycle in urban environments (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx37 bib1.bibx43 bib1.bibx39 bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx2 bib1.bibx5 bib1.bibx40 bib1.bibx1" id="altparen.1"/>). They can be
classified according to either the nature of the employed algorithms (empirical, conceptual or physically based; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx39" id="altparen.2"/>), or
their spatial resolution and how they represent the complexity of urban
hydrology<?pagebreak page332?> processes (lumped, semi-distributed and fully-distributed models).</p>
      <p id="d1e166">Lumped (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="altparen.3"/>) and semi-distributed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx21" id="altparen.4"/>)
models are conceptual ones and rely on a simplified representation of urban
catchment's heterogeneity. Indeed the whole catchment is considered as a
single unit with homogeneous features for the lumped ones, while a catchment
is divided into a limited number of homogeneous sub-catchments for the
semi-distributed models. These two approaches were widely developed and used
for modelling applications because they require limited amount of data for
their implementation, and exhibit fast computation time. They often rely on a
calibration step that '“forces” the model to represent the observed data.
However, these models give output information at the sub-catchment scale,
which is too coarse for meeting urban water managers' requirements in their
need to understand some very local flooding problems or to evaluate
management strategies at very small scales. Hence, the need has arisen to change the
spatial resolution of hydrological models, and several works
in the literature have investigated this approach for
semi-distributed models (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx42" id="altparen.5"/>). It
appears that the aggregation and disaggregation of sub-catchments changes the
model output, which reflects a “scale effect issue”, and that the complex
calibration step must be performed again to obtain performance similar to
the previous configuration.</p>
      <p id="d1e178">The influence of catchment scale on hydrological response is more pronounced
for fully distributed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.6"/>) and gridded-based models,
because of their modelling approach that usually consists in representing the
high heterogeneity of urban catchment in a gridded format. The choice of an
appropriate spatial resolution is always critical and the obtained model
performance strongly depends on the chosen implementation scale
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.7"/>). The appropriate spatial resolution is obviously
linked to the quality and resolution of data available as well as the
modelling goal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="altparen.8"/>). A more accurate representation of
the land cover heterogeneity is obtained using a high-resolution grid (small
pixel size). However, given current computational capabilities and data
availability, high-resolution modelling is feasible only for small areas.
Therefore, it is important for modellers to understand the effects of spatial
resolution in urban hydrological simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e190">Scale effects and scaling in
urban hydrology have been investigated by researchers – for example
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx34 bib1.bibx42 bib1.bibx6 bib1.bibx50 bib1.bibx54" id="text.9"/>. This topic was also reviewed by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1" id="text.10"/>. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="text.11"/> discussed temporal and
spatial scaling issues in the context of urban storm water modelling.
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="text.12"/> proposed a spatial discretization methodology applied
for distributed hydrological models to get an efficient representation of
land cover heterogeneity. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="text.13"/> investigated the effects of
spatial resolution on predictions of peak flow and total outflow volume in an
urban catchment. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx54" id="text.14"/> analysed the Digital Elevation Model
(DEM) grid size and land cover representation. They found that the effect of
grid size on the model performance is not linear; a 10 m grid size provides a
substantial improvement over 30 and 90 m data, whereas 2 or 4 m data
provide only marginal additional improvement. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx50" id="text.15"/>
investigated the effects of scale in urban hydrology by trying to identify a
threshold scale called “Representative Elementary Area (REA)”. The REA is
strongly influenced by the topography.</p>
      <p id="d1e216">Fractal tools will be used in this work to characterize scale effects in
environmental data. They are widely used in several science domains including
geology, medicine, meteorology and finance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx30 bib1.bibx49 bib1.bibx16 bib1.bibx31 bib1.bibx46 bib1.bibx53 bib1.bibx45" id="altparen.16"/>). In hydrology, the fractal dimension concept has been used
in many studies in the past for various purposes, ranging from catchment
geometrical characterization to flow analysis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx51 bib1.bibx44 bib1.bibx8 bib1.bibx52 bib1.bibx38 bib1.bibx23 bib1.bibx12 bib1.bibx35" id="altparen.17"/>), but has seldom been used  in urban
hydrology (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="altparen.18"/>).</p>
      <p id="d1e228">This work was motivated by the fact that on the one hand the inputs of the
hydrological models exhibit scale-invariant features while on the other hand
distributed models are implemented at a single resolution. Hence the question
we seek to investigate in this paper is “at which resolution should we
implement the model?” – bearing in mind practical constraints such as missing
data at high resolution or longer computation time. The main goal of the
paper is to investigate the existence and try to identify the appropriate
resolution (or a range of resolution) for a Multi-Hydro model (Sect. 3)
implementation over a peri-urban area close to Paris (Sect. 4). We first use fractal tools to analyse the features of the model's inputs and
then we perform multi-scale modelling work. Methodology is
presented in Sect. 4 and results are discussed in Sect. 5.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Multi-Hydro model</title>
      <p id="d1e239">Multi-Hydro (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29 bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx4" id="altparen.19"/>) is a fully
distributed and physically based model developed at Ecole des Ponts ParisTech
which has been used by several authors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20 bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx48 bib1.bibx13" id="altparen.20"/>). It is an interacting
core between four open source software packages, each of them representing a
portion of the water cycle in urban environments. Multi-Hydro involves a
modelling approach that consists in rasterizing the urban domain at a
specific spatial resolution chosen by the user. A unique land use class for
which hydrological<?pagebreak page333?> and physical properties are specified is then assigned to
each pixel.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e252">The Multi-Hydro model is an interacting core between four modules, each
of them representing a portion of the water cycle in urban environments.
© <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="paren.21"/>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e264">The modelling approach involved in Multi-Hydro model relies on solving
physical equations that describe the catchment behaviour. Seven processes are
generally simulated; (1) precipitation, (2) interception and
storage, (3) infiltration, (4) overland flow, (5) sewer
flow, (6) infiltration into the subsurface zone and (7) sewer overflow.</p>
      <p id="d1e268">The four modules that make up the core of Multi-Hydro are presented in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>:
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e275">The surface component (MHSC) is based on the existing TREX model (Two-dimensional Runoff,
Erosion, and Export model) developed by Colorado State University and used in Multi-Hydro only
for rainfall–runoff modelling (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx47" id="altparen.22"/>). The surface module computes interception,
storage and infiltration occurring at each pixel according to the properties of its land cover class.
The overland flow can occur after exceeding the depression storage threshold, and it is governed by
equations ensuring the conservation of mass (continuity) and momentum. This flow depends on the surface
properties as well as the elevation, and is computed using the diffusive wave approximation of
Saint-Venant equations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7 bib1.bibx47" id="altparen.23"/>).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e285">The rainfall module was developed at Ecole des Ponts ParisTech. It is used to manage different
types of rainfall data (rain gauges, radar data,…) and to process them in the correct input
format needed for the Multi-Hydro model. The module also performs some data analysis and can be used
for radar data downscaling. The downscaling and data analysis carried out relies on the multifractal
framework (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26 bib1.bibx41" id="altparen.24"/>) and has been used in an urban context by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11" id="text.25"/>.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e295">The Drainage module (MHDC) is based on the 1-D SWMM (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx22" id="altparen.26"/>) model
(Storm Water Management Model) developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency. It is
widely used for urban drainage and modelling purposes. The flow in the sewer network is given
by a numerical solution of Saint-Venant equations. This module requires a detailed description
of the sewer network (nodes, pipes characteristics, gullies, outlet…).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e302">The infiltration module relies on the VS2DT model developed by the US Geological
Survey. It is used to simulate the infiltration into the unsaturated subsurface zone
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18 bib1.bibx25" id="altparen.27"/>). This module uses the infiltration depth calculated
by the surface module as input, and simulates a 2D infiltration (vertical and 1-D horizontal)
into the subsurface. This module was not used here because the analysis of the subsurface
infiltration was not one of the objectives of this work.</p></list-item></list></p>
      <p id="d1e308">The four modules are connected via the Multi-Hydro core, which groups
together a set of codes allowing interaction, retro-action (feedback) and
data exchange between these modules. In this case study, these interactions
are performed after each time loop of 5 min. More precisely, the surface
module outputs are used as inputs for the soil and the drainage modules, and
in the same way the sewer overflow is taken into account in the overland
depth for the next step. Multi-Hydro produces a large set of outputs that
describe the catchment response. For example, overland water depth maps are
available at each time step as well as overland discharge flow maps and
velocity profiles at any point of the catchment. Saturation profile of the
subsurface zone and sewer flows are also computed. The model also provides a
detailed volume balance at each time step.</p>
      <p id="d1e311">Multi-Hydro is highly demanding on data quality and resolution. Distributed
data (usually available in GIS format) describing the topography and land use
over the catchment must be collected at a high resolution. Precise
information about all the components of the sewer network are also necessary
for the drainage module. Such information is usually available for urban
areas and can be obtained from the local authority in charge of the water
management. Details about all pipes (geometry, length, diameter as well as
inlet and outlet nodes) should be carefully validated, as well as all the
system nodes (coordinates and elevation). The subsurface structure should be
described as well if there is a need to simulate the infiltration through the
unsaturated zone. The rasterization of the urban domain is the first step of
Multi-Hydro implementation. During this process a unique class of land use is
attributed to each individual pixel. This attribution can be done following
at least two methodologies, illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>. The first one
is based on a priority order defined by the user to attribute land use class.
The second method is based on a majority rule, which means that each pixel
will be affected by the majority class of land observed within it, with an
exception of the gully class which remains a priority regardless of the
method applied, to ensure the connection between the surface and the drainage
system.</p>
      <p id="d1e316">The possibility to implement other rules was investigated in the framework of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.28"/>, but the model formulation allows only one land use
class (characterized by a few parameters such as the conductivity) per pixel.
This means that implementing other approaches (such as a fractional approach)
would require to a great increase in the number of classes as well as the
development of a multifractal spatial characterization of key parameters such as
conductivity. Those are possible motivating future investigation paths but
they are outside the scope of the current study. Hence it was chosen to limit
the study to two rules for affecting pixels' class, while keeping the number
of classes reasonable.</p>
      <p id="d1e322">The two rules considered here were tested and compared by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="text.29"/>. The main findings are reported in Sect. 5 (see
Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>) and indicate that considering the
majority rule methodology leads to a better representation of<?pagebreak page334?> the catchment
heterogeneity. Consequently, the majority rule was used here during the
rasterization step to attribute a unique land cover class to each pixel.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e335">Two attribution methodologies are implemented in Multi-Hydro and
can be used during the rasterization phase. The first one is based on a priority
order defined by the user to attribute land use class, whereas the second methodology
is based on a majority rule. In both methodologies, the gully class has priority,
to ensure the connection between the surface and the drainage modules.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e344">Multi-Hydro has already been implemented in several locations for different
purposes: in the cities of Villecresnes (France) and Manchester (UK) for
flood mitigation by using barriers and retention basins
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="altparen.30"/>), in Sucy (France) for retention basin
management (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.31"/>), in Sevran (France) to study the impact of
small-scale rainfall variability in urban areas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx13" id="altparen.32"/>), and
in Villepinte and Champs-sur-Marne (France) for  quantifying the impact of
large-scale implementation of blue and green infrastructures on storm water
management (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx48" id="altparen.33"/>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Case study and data sets</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Sucy-en-Brie catchment</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e376">Location of the Sucy-en-Brie case study in Val-de-Marne
County, southeast of Paris.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e385">The case study presented in this paper is a 2.45 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> urban catchment
located southeast of Paris, in Val-de-Marne County, which is part of
the Île-de-France region (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>). The city is connected to
Paris via a train at the Sucy-Bonneuil station (30 min travel time to the
centre of Paris). Known historically as an agriculture area, the city is now
highly urbanized with an imperviousness coefficient around 35 %. The city
is bounded at the north by the Marne river (one of the two main rivers in the
Paris region). The area has suffered in the past from several flooding events
as a consequence of (1) the very steep slope (34 m km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) that
increases water speed and causes overflows in the
downstream portion of the storm water network and (2) the increase of impervious
areas combined with a soil structure that limits infiltration to the subsurface.
The drainage system in this area is a separated one (i.e. there are separate
networks for waste water and storm water). The storm water system is routed
to the Marne River.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Distributed data</title>
      <p id="d1e419">Spatially distributed data are used in this study to set up the Multi-Hydro model.
The data were made available by various public institutions in the framework of
research collaborations with Ecole des Ponts ParisTech.
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e424">Topography: the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the catchment was obtained from the
IGN (French National Institute of Forest and Geographic Information). The spatial resolution
of the data is 25 m with a 1 m resolution in height, which is far from meeting the needs
of the studies carried out in this work. Linear interpolation was implemented to
obtain data at a better resolution (between 5  and 10 m).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e428">Land cover: Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/> shows distributed data (available in GIS format)
describing the land cover. The data were obtained from the DSEA 94 of
Val-de-Marne County (Direction des Services de l'Environnement et de
l'Assainissement). Its quality is high, with a precision of up to 50 cm, but we
had to deal with one land use class named ”Other” in the original data.
This class corresponds to unknown information and introduces missing data. A
comparison with satellite images was done and the majority of missing data
was filled with urban grass.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e434">Sucy-en-Brie subsurface structure: the subsurface structure was elaborated
using data obtained from the BRGM database (Office of Geological and Mining Research)
from  soil investigations  done before construction works and archived
in the BRGM database. The data indicate that a layer of clay mixed in some places
with sand dominates the majority of the catchment subsurface.<?pagebreak page335?> Downstream, near the
river, there is a layer of sandy soil which is much more permeable. Physical parameters
characterizing soil, which are needed for modelling, were obtained from the literature
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="altparen.34"/>) and no measurements were done to verify or to estimate these parameters.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e441">Sucy-en-Brie storm runoff system: the sewer system in this
catchment (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>) is a separate one. The storm water system is
routed downstream to the Marne river. The DSEA 94 of Val-de-Marne County is
the service in charge of the control and the management of the whole system.
Data describing the sewer system in this area are very detailed, consisting
of 2030 nodes and 1015 elements of pipes representing a total length of 25
 km. The average slope is around 0.052 m m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></list-item></list></p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e460">The land cover data available for Sucy-en-Brie catchment
and used to implement the Multi-Hydro model.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e471">The storm water system of Sucy-en-Brie catchment which
is used to implement the Multi-Hydro model.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page336?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Rainfall and flow measurements data</title>
      <p id="d1e488">Rainfall data are provided by the General Council of Val-de-Marne County. The
data  come from a 0.2 mm resolution tipping bucket rain gauge located at
the centre of the catchment. The data were processed and validated by the DSEA
94 and provided with a 5 min resolution. Eight rainfall events
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>) that occurred between 2010 and 2014 were selected. Their
main characteristics are summarized in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>. The
corresponding flow measurement data were available, also at 5 min
resolution – coming from a flow sensor located at the outlet of the
catchment. The choice was made in this work to use uniform rainfall
information in order to focus on the sensitivity of the Multi-Hydro model to
land use variability and to avoid the effect of rainfall spatial variability.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e498">Main characteristics of the eight rainfall events selected to perform
the scale dependence investigations. Imax is the maximum rainfall intensity
recorded in mm h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over 5 min.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Event</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Date</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Time start–end</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Imax (mm h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Total depth (mm)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12/06/2010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22:00–07:00 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">19.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">16</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12/07/2010</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">06:00–14:00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">14.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16/07/2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19:00–05:00 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">38.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5/08/2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">07:00–19:00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">21/05/2012</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11:00–04:00 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">43.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">19.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8/07/2012</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">01:00–09:00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">11.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8/10/2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">06:00–15:00</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">33.2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">12/12/2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18:00–18:00 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">38.6</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e740">Rainfall data and the corresponding flow measurement available for
the eight rainfall events selected to perform the multi-scale modelling
investigation.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Part 1: analysis of the scaling of urban catchment</title>
      <p id="d1e765">The first step of this work is to investigate and identify the scale
dependence observed within the distributed GIS information (presented in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3.SS2"/>) used as input for hydrological models. The analysis
relies on the fractal dimension concept.</p>
      <p id="d1e770">Fractal geometry was formally introduced by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="text.35"/> and is
used to describe geometrical sets that exhibit a great level of complexity,
i.e. they are too irregular to be easily described with the help of basic
Euclidean concepts but they can be described with the help of simple and
iterative processes. Fractal sets exhibit scale invariance, which means that
similar structure will be observed at any scale. The concept of fractal
dimension is used to characterize them. The fractal dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
is the exponent of the power-law relation between the resolution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which is defined as the ratio between the outer scale <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the
observation scale <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and the number of
non-overlapping pixels <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> needed to cover the set (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) at a
given resolution:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M17" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          Hence <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the asymptotic slope of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vs. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
in a log-log plot. It has a limit behaviour, meaning that mathematically the
fractal dimension is defined as follows:

                <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M21" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munder><mml:mo movablelimits="false">lim⁡</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>→</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munder><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ln</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ln</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e974">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> shows an example of how fractal analysis is practically
implemented in urban hydrology to analyse a portion of the sewer system.
Several pixel sizes are used to cover the sewer network starting from 2 m
pixels and multiplying their size by 2 at each step. The number of pixels
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> needed at a given resolution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to cover the storm water
system is<?pagebreak page337?> computed and plotted in a log-log plot as a function of the
resolution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (blue points).  Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> shows
the linear behaviour retrieved over two separate ranges of scales. This means
that the concept of fractal dimension can be used to characterize the sewer
network, but two regimes must be taken into account. In this work, the
structure of the urban storm water system and the distribution of impervious
land use will be analysed using fractal tools.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1009">Example of fractal analysis of a portion of the sewer network
(256 m size). <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is plotted as function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in a
log-log plot. <bold>(b)</bold> A scaling behaviour is retrieved over two separate ranges
of scales with a break around 32 m.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Part 2: scale effects on fully distributed models outputs</title>
      <p id="d1e1050">To address the effects of spatial resolution on Multi-Hydro performance, the
model was implemented at 17 spatial scales ranging from 100 to 5 m and
intensive modelling work was carried out. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/> shows how the
chosen grid size influences the way that land cover heterogeneity is represented
in the model. These scale effects will be analysed with respect to real flow
measurements from various points of view according to the performance
indicators chosen:</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1057">Scale effect observed on the catchment land cover. The grid size
strongly affects the way land cover heterogeneity is represented in the
model.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1066"><list list-type="bullet">
            <list-item>

      <?pagebreak page340?><p id="d1e1071"><italic>Correlation coefficient r:</italic> The correlation
coefficient <italic>r</italic> (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>) measures the strength
and the direction of the linear relationship between the modelled
flow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the observed one <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. It is computed as follows:

                      <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M29" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Cor</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cov</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cov</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> refers to the covariance
of the variables <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are their respective standard
deviations.</p>

      <p id="d1e1240">The <italic>r</italic> value ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1. A positive value of <italic>r</italic> indicates
that the two time series describe the same dynamic (they increase and decrease
at the same moment). Generally, a correlation greater than 0.8 is described as
strong, whereas a correlation smaller than 0.5 is described as weak.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>

      <p id="d1e1266"><italic>Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency NSE:</italic> The NSE
coefficient (Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) is the most commonly used
indicator to quantify performance of urban hydrological models.  NSE
measures how well the model outputs reproduce the observation outputs in
comparison with a model that only uses the mean of the observed data.
The  NSE coefficient is computed as follows:

                      <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M37" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NSE</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are respectively the observed and
modelled flow at time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the mean of observed
flow and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the length of the time series.</p>

      <p id="d1e1418">NSE ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1. A value of 1 indicates a
perfect model, while a value of zero indicates performance no better
than simply using the mean. A negative value corresponds to performance
worse than using just the mean.
The pros and cons of the  NSE coefficient have been discussed
in the literature, and many attempts have been made to
improve it (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx17" id="altparen.36"/>).</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>

      <p id="d1e1444"><italic>The coefficient of regression</italic> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>: The   <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E5"/>) is computed as follows:

                      <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M47" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cov</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">var</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                where cov<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the covariance between
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and var<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
variance of the observed flow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <p id="d1e1582">The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is used here to distinguish spatial scales for which the model
overestimates and those for which the model underestimates the observed flow.
The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values range between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">∞</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and a value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
indicates an ideal match between the observed and simulated flows. If <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
then the model is underestimating the observed flow, otherwise it is overestimating the observed flow.</p>
            </list-item>
            <list-item>

      <p id="d1e1647"><italic>Peak flow relative error</italic>  <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>: A special focus is
given
to peak flows. The relative error observed at the peak flow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E6"/>) is used to address effects of scale changes on
the modelled peak flow. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is estimated as follows:

                      <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M62" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

                where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mod</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">max</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> refer respectively to the maximum modelled
flow and the maximum observed one.</p>
            </list-item>
          </list>In total, 136 simulations (17 spatial resolutions, 8 rainfall
events) were run and results were analysed with the help of these statistics.
The analysis will help to identify spatial resolutions for which the model
exhibits good performance with respect to available flow measurements.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Results and discussions</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>Fractal analysis of distributed data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>5.1.1</label><title>Fractal dimension of urban sewer network</title>
      <p id="d1e1780">Two areas have been selected to perform the fractal analysis for the storm
water system. The purpose of this selection is to minimize the effect of no
data pixels by considering two well-covered square areas whose size is a
power of 2. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/> shows the 2 m pixel size original data
available and the two selected zones. The small and great area are
respectively of size 512 m (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">512</mml:mn><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) and 1024 m
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e1822">The original 2 m pixel size data used to perform the fractal
analysis of the storm water sewer system and impervious areas; two well-covered areas were selected.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f09.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1831">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F10"/> displays results obtained when plotting in a log-log
plot the number of pixels <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> needed at a given resolution
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to cover the storm runoff system as a function of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Results show a clear agreement to the relation defined in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E1"/>)
over two distinct ranges of scales separated by a break at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>≈</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 64 m.
For small scales (2–64 m), the fractal dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is almost
equal to 1, simply reflecting the linear behaviour of the sewer pipes
structure observed across this range scales. For large scales <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 64 m the fractal dimensions <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> found of 1.82 and 1.88 are
close to the dimension of the embedding space of 2. This means that over this
range of scales, the structure of the pluvial networks fills most of the
space. These results confirm similar conclusions of a multi-catchment work
performed in the framework of the RainGain project about fractal analysis of
environmental data of 10 pilot sites located in Europe
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="altparen.37"/>). The break at 64 m is related, according to this
study, to the typical distance between two roads in urban areas.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e1909">Fractal analysis of the sewer system structure. Two ranges of scale
are identified in both areas; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is equal to 1 at small scales
(2–64 m) and 1.8 for large scales <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 64 m.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f10.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>5.1.2</label><title>Fractal dimension of impervious data</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e1949">Fractal analysis of the impervious data. One unique scaling
regime is identified across the whole range of available scales
(2–1024 m); <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is greater than 1.8 for both areas.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f11.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e1969">For impervious data (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>), two 1024 m size square areas were
selected to perform the fractal analysis. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F11"/> shows the
obtained results. Both areas exhibit a clear and unique scaling regime across
the whole range of available scales (2–1024 m). This shows the high scale
dependence of<?pagebreak page341?> urban catchment patterns and demonstrate how important it is to
well represent urban catchment heterogeneity when using gridded models. This
scale dependence has significant consequences on a hydrological model
performance, as we will show. The fractal dimension <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> computed is
1.82 for Area 1 and 1.85 for Area 2, which is similar to the values retrieved
for the large scales of  sewer systems  found in other European cities
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="altparen.38"/>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>5.1.3</label><title>Effect on the urban catchment behaviour</title>
      <?pagebreak page342?><p id="d1e1998">Previous results show that the urban catchment configuration considered in
grid-based models highly depends on the scale at which the model is
implemented. In fact, spatial patterns observed in the land cover strongly
evolve with the observation scale. Figures <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>
display, for the two land cover pixel attribution methodologies, the
distribution of the four main land cover classes (forest, road, grass and
house) considered in the Multi-Hydro model, as well as the imperviousness
coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> – defined as the ratio between impervious surface
(gully, roads, houses) and the total surface – as a function of the model
spatial scale. The imperviousness coefficient is actually not a parameter of
the modelling formulation. It is simply a quantity used to gain some insight
into the inputs of the model and how its overall features change with
resolution. It refers here to the areas directly participating in the rapid
runoff. Results with priority rule are in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/> and those
obtained with the majority rule in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2020">Both figures demonstrate that the scale dependence highlighted here is mainly
due to the rasterization methodology performed in the Multi-Hydro model during
the implementation phase, which assigns a unique land cover to each pixel. At
very small scales both methodologies will basically lead to the same
catchment representation, whereas results obtained at intermediate scales are
different. To illustrate these differences, let us consider the case of
pixels of size 100 m. In an urban environment it is very likely that such a
pixel will intersect a road. Then, with the priority rule, since “road”
pixels have a high level of priority, this will make the portion of pixels
affected by road land cover class greater. This portion decreases as the
pixel size decreases. On the other hand, with the majority rule
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>), the portion of road pixels is smaller because the roads
will usually not occupy the greater portion of such pixel.</p>
      <p id="d1e2025">The variation of the imperviousness coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (red line)
provides an insight into the model behaviour across scales. It is
continuously decreasing in the first configuration (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>),
whereas in the second (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/>), the behaviour is different. The
high values of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> coefficient at large scales are due to
the fact that  most of the priority land cover classes (gully, road and houses)
are  impermeable.</p>
      <p id="d1e2054">When applying the priority rule (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>), the imperviousness
coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is still very high even at high resolution (5 m
pixels), meaning that the user must perform hydrological simulations at much
finer resolutions, which is challenging in urban hydrology modelling
considering the quality of available GIS data, as well as computation time.
On the other hand, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F13"/> shows that the majority rule
methodology is more suitable to take into account urban catchment
heterogeneity at coarser resolutions. The land cover distribution is more
coherent than with the previous methodology. In this case, three ranges of
scales can be identified: (i) large scales (100–30 m) at which the
imperviousness coefficient decreases significantly from 55 % observed at
100  m to its minimum value of 27 % at 30 m – this is due to a great
redistribution of land cover classes; (ii) medium scales (30–10 m), at
which the imperviousness coefficient increases from 27 to 37 % estimated
at 10 m; (iii) small scales (10–5 m), at which we observe what can be
considered as the final configuration of the catchment, i.e. the most
accurate, and closer to the reality on the ground. Across small scales the
imperviousness coefficient remains stable around 38 %, which  suggests
that the model response will be stable  across this range of scales.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e2075">Scale dependence observed in the overall distribution of land cover
classes and the imperviousness coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with priority
rule as explained in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>. The priority order was set  as
follows: gully, road, forest, house, grass.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f12.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e2099">Scale dependence observed in the overall distribution of land cover
classes and the imperviousness coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with majority
rule as explained in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/></p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f13.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Scale effects on Multi-Hydro model outputs</title>
      <p id="d1e2129">For each of the eight selected rainfall events, 17 simulations were carried out
and the corresponding simulated flow time series were retrieved at the outlet
pipe, where effects are typically smoothed compared to more upstream pipes.</p>
      <p id="d1e2132">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/> represents all simulated flows <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> obtained
with the Multi-Hydro model at the 17 spatial scales involved. These results show
the high sensitivity of the outputs to the spatial scale of the model.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e2150">Multi-scale modelling outputs compared with observed flow, showing the high sensitivity of Multi-Hydro response to the spatial resolution
of the model.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f14.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>5.2.1</label><title>Hydrodynamic evaluation</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e2169">Results of model hydrodynamic evaluation; the correlation
coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> was retrieved for each modelling output with respect to real
measurements.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=327.206693pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f15.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e2185">The hydrodynamic evaluation aims to quantify the ability of the model to
reproduce the flow dynamic observed in the measurements. It is based here on
the estimation of the correlation coefficient <italic>r</italic> between modelled and
observed data. The box plots are obtained from the computation of eight samples
corresponding to the eight rainfall events. All the results obtained are plotted
and no information was removed. The boxes corresponding to the 20 and
80 % quantiles were added only for indicative purpose. From
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F15"/>, one can notice the high capacity of the Multi-Hydro model to
reproduce the observed flow dynamic at any spatial scale. In fact,
<italic>r</italic> values range between 0.85 and 0.98, with an average between 0.94
and 0.98, indicating high correlation between modelled and observed data. This
trend was also noticed from visual inspection of modelling outputs and
observed data (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F14"/>). This demonstrates the ability of this
physically based model to reproduce correctly the observed flow dynamic, and
also the rather good quality of the rainfall data, bearing in mind that the
spatial variability is not taken into account. It also indicates that the
physical parameters characterizing the behaviour of each land cover class,
which were selected from their somewhat representative range and used for the
implementation of the model, yield acceptable results whatever the chosen
implementation scale. This suggests an alternative approach to the classical model
calibration. Indeed, instead of tuning the parameters to force the model to
reproduce the simulated flow, one can simply change the implementation scale
to one enabling a proper representation of the catchment's land cover
variability. As an illustration, the overestimation of the volume visible
with coarse pixels is in fact mainly due to an overestimation of impervious
areas<?pagebreak page344?> observed with such pixel size. The next section will provide hints on how
to select the appropriate modelling scale.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>5.2.2</label><title>Performance evaluation</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e2208">Performance indicators NSE, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> estimated from
Multi-Hydro modelling output obtained at the 17 spatial scales with respect
to observed data.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/331/2018/hess-22-331-2018-f16.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e2234">The multi-scale performance evaluation of Multi-Hydro model output is
performed using the three statistical indicators presented in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4.SS2"/>: NSE, the coefficient of
regression <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and the relative error at the peak flow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Obtained results are summarized in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/>.  Note the
high scale dependence of the obtained model performance, which was not the
case for the dynamic evaluation. In fact, all indicators reveal a similar
trend of higher performance at small scales and lower performance at large
scales. Model performance is indeed improved as the model resolution
increases. From these results, the three ranges of scale previously
identified with the help of the fractal analysis (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F12"/>) are
also found in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/>. Consequently, performance evaluation will
be analysed at these three ranges of scale. Basic statistics (minimum,
maximum and mean) of performance indicators Correlation, NSE,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> calculated for the three ranges of scales
(100–40 m), (30–15 m) and (10–5 m) are displayed in
Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e2285">Min/max/mean of performance indicators (Correlation, NSE,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) calculated at three ranges of scale: (100–40 m),
(30–15 m) and (10–5 m).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.86}[.86]?><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range of scales</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col5" align="center">Performance indicators (min/max/mean) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Correlation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NSE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(100–40 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.83/0.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13.92/0.92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.62/4.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.36/3.69</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">/0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">/<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">/1.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">/1.09</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(30–15 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.81/0.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.63/0.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.54/1.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.31/0.51</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">/0.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">/0.79</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">/0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">/0.17</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">(10–5 m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.82/0.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.44/0.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.59/1.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.39/0.61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">/0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">/0.72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">/1.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">/0.19</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2504"><list list-type="bullet">
              <list-item>

      <p id="d1e2509">At large scales (100–40 m): the imperviousness coefficient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
of the catchment is very high, ranging from 45 % at 100 m to 30 % at 40 m. The
modelled flow obtained at this range of scales exhibits similar dynamic as observed
flow; however, performance indicators are bad. NSE values range from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>13.92
observed at 100 m scale to 0.92 observed at 40 m scale. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicator suggests
that the model is highly overestimating observed flow, with values ranging from 4.07
observed at<?pagebreak page345?> 100 m scale to a minimum value of 0.62 noticed at 40 m, and an average
around 2. This follows a trend similar to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">imp</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In terms of the peak flow analysis,
the relative error indicator (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) shows clear overestimation of the peak flow
at this range of scales, up to 369 %.</p>

      <p id="d1e2558">All statistic indicators suggest very weak performance of the model at large
scales (100–40 m). In fact, the catchment behaviour at this range of scales is
consistent with the high imperviousness coefficient observed, which means that
infiltration is limited and water is in the majority of cases rapidly routed to the sewer system.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>

      <p id="d1e2564">At medium scales (30–15 m): the model shows its best performance.
NSE values range from 0.63 to 0.91, with an average around 0.79. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
indicator takes values between 0.54 and 1.25, and its mean is around 0.89, suggesting
a good fit between modelled and observed data. The relative error indicator
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.31 to 0.51 with a mean value around 0.17, meaning
that the model still overestimates the peak flow by 17 % on average.</p>
              </list-item>
              <list-item>

      <p id="d1e2594">At small scales (10–5 m): at this range of scales, the model  performance
remains high but potential trends with regards to scale are unclear. In fact, Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>
indicates that NSE values range between 0.44 and 0.91 with
a mean value around 0.72, demonstrating good performance of the Multi-Hydro model. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
indicator takes values between 0.59 and 1.6, with a mean around 1.06. The relative error
indicator (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) ranges from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.39 to 0.61, with a mean value around 0.19. Slight
fluctuations of the model performance are observed at this range of scales; the trend
observed in statistics as a function of pixel size for large and medium scales (the improvement
of all statistics as the pixel size decreases) is no longer valid at small scales,
where fluctuations of statistics are noticed (they increase at 10  and 9 m before
decreasing at 7 m). These fluctuations highlight some specific issues at this range
of scales, which influence the model performance. This
point will be discussed further in the next section.</p>
              </list-item>
            </list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2.SSS3">
  <label>5.2.3</label><title>Specific modelling issues at small scales</title>
      <p id="d1e2633">It is also important to discuss in this paper the performance of the model in
a more global framework, especially by taking into consideration some serious
problems that one may face when performing high-resolution modelling. In
fact, as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F16"/>, the model performance indeed
increases with  decreasing spatial scale of the model. This is due to a
better representation of the catchment complexity, notably its scaling
behaviour and the small-scale heterogeneity. However, three ranges of scales were
clearly identified from previous results. At large scales (100–40 m), the
model shows a fast computation time (up to only few minutes on a standard
laptop) but lower performance (the model reproduces the same flow dynamic,
but the volume is overestimated by up to 234 %). At medium scales
(30–15 m), the model exhibits high performance (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T2"/>)
and fast computation time. At small scales (10–5 m) the urban catchment
configuration remains unchanged (the imperviousness coefficient remains
around 37 %, compared to the medium scale); however, model performance at
this range of scales is unclear and some fluctuations are noticed. Such
fluctuations are in fact related to some non-trivial problems that only take
place at small scales and should be considered when implementing urban storm
models:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2642">Quality of distributed data: urban hydrological models in  general and fully distributed
ones in particular are highly demanding with respect to the  distributed data needed for their
implementation. A detailed description of the land cover is essential as well as distributed
topography data. Such data are usually available and can be provided by specialized services.
However,  quality is a big issue, especially when used to perform high-resolution modelling.
Two main issues are highlighted here:
<list list-type="bullet"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2647">The spatial resolution of the topography data: the topography is the main driving force for
surface water movements and the accuracy of these data has a lot of influence on grid-based
models outputs. In our case, the topography data were available at 25 m resolution and interpolation
was performed to obtain distributed data at small scales. However, the quality of obtained data
below the 25 pixel grid is not fully reliable. The problem is even more striking for small scales
down to 2 m (not included in this work, but details can be found in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.39"/>),
where the movements of water in the surface are very limited because the elevation gradient
becomes very low.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2654">Land cover description: the land cover is also of extreme importance in urban hydrology and
specifically for fully distributed models. In fact, physical properties defined for each pixel
depend exclusively on its land cover. Such data are usually available especially after huge
improvements noticed in the availability of satellite images and new technologies used in
this field. However, one commonly faced issue  is the proportion of unknown
data,<?pagebreak page347?> indicating unidentified land cover. This is not related to the data resolution, but
depends on the processing procedure of satellite and areal images obtained. In the case of
Sucy-en-Brie catchment, land cover data were available at very good resolution (25 cm), but
the proportion of unidentified data was about 20 % and was filled in most cases by grass.
At large scales, the problem associated with “no data” pixels has limited
influence, because
large pixels usually include a large portion of well-identified land cover classes, like roads
and houses. But at small scales, the catchment behaviour will be affected by the land cover
attributed to these “no data” pixels, and the model response will not be the same if the
unidentified areas are filled by grass or by impervious soil.</p></list-item></list></p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2658">Numerical instabilities: fluctuation of the model performance noticed at small scales
can also be the consequence of numerical instabilities. In fact, the numerical scheme used in the
Multi-Hydro model for the surface modelling calculations is sensitive to small-scale variation, which
affects  the model response. Further works should be conducted to better quantify these instabilities.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2662">Computation time: it is important in urban hydrology to consider the computation time
needed for a model to simulate a given rainfall period. It is in fact one of the first criteria
considered by urban water managers for the choice of urban storm models. Fast computation time
is even crucial in the case of models used in real-time management processes. For fully distributed
models, the computation time depends on two factors; the size of the catchment and the resolution of the model.
For the case of Sucy-en-Brie catchment, the Multi-Hydro model shows fast computation time at large
scales up to 10 m (a few minutes on a standard laptop), and huge computation time is needed at
very small scales (5–2 m) (several hours). This is due to the numerical scheme, the modelling
approach and the great number and size of the model outputs saved for research needs. Improvements
should be implemented in the model structure in order to enhance the model performance from this
point of view.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2666">Mismatch between rainfall input resolution and model resolution: in this study, uniform
rainfall input (rain gauge data) was applied to the catchment in all model simulations. Numerous
authors have shown that model performance is strongly dependent on rainfall input resolution
(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx32 bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.40"/>). Nevertheless,
the  aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity of model performance to model resolution
independently of rainfall resolution; therefore uniform rainfall was purposely input  to the
model. Future studies will look into the combined effects of rainfall and model resolution, based on the
high-resolution rainfall data increasingly available.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2673">Interactions between spatial and temporal resolution: In this study, a constant
time resolution of 5 min was used for rainfall input, flow data and model simulations. Previous
studies have shown that a dependence exists between spatial and temporal resolution of rainfall inputs
and model simulation results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx36 bib1.bibx32 bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx20" id="altparen.41"/>). Both rainfall phenomena and hydrological processes exhibit scale dependence,
both with respect to their spatial and temporal resolution. Previous studies have suggested that a
fixed relationship could exist between spatial and temporal resolution and
that the spatial resolution of rainfall input and model simulation cannot be
changed independently of the temporal resolution. Future studies are planned
to  investigate this relationship and the implications it has for
hydrological model simulations.</p></list-item></list></p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>6</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2689">This work was motivated by the fact that on the one hand the inputs of the
hydrological models exhibit scale-invariant features while on the other hand
distributed models are implemented at a single resolution. Hence the question
we tried to investigate in this paper is “at which resolution should we
implement the model?” – bearing in mind practical constraints such as missing
data at high resolution or longer computation time. The main goal of the
paper is to investigate the existence and try to identify the appropriate
resolution (or a range of resolutions) for Multi-Hydro implementation.</p>
      <p id="d1e2692">In the first part of the paper, fractal tools were used to characterize the scale
dependence observed within distributed data (available in commonly used GIS
formats) used to configure urban storm models. Both the structure of the
sewer network and the distribution of impervious areas were analysed. Then
multi-scale modelling investigations were carried out using the fully
distributed model to analyse the effect of this scale dependence on the model
performance.</p>
      <p id="d1e2695">The model was implemented at 17 spatial resolutions ranging from 100 to 5 m.
The case study area is a 2.45 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> urban catchment located southeast of Paris, in Val-de-Marne County.</p>
      <p id="d1e2707">Results coming from this work confirm the scale dependence of the obtained
model outputs. In fact,  model performance indeed increases with
decreasing spatial scales. This is due to a better
representation of the catchment small-scale heterogeneity and scaling
behaviour, notably for the impervious areas which are immediately active
during a rainfall event. At large scales (100–40 m), the model shows a<?pagebreak page348?> fast
computation time (only a few minutes) and also reproduces well the overall
flow dynamic, but the flow volumes remain largely overestimated. At small
scales (10–5 m) the urban catchment configuration, including the overall
imperviousness, becomes scale independent, without any further improvement,
and one can notice a possible decline of the model performance. The small
fluctuations of the model performance at this range of scales are in fact
related to specific issues taking place at high resolution: mainly data
problems, such as GIS data quality and missing information, as well as model
numerical instabilities, without ignoring the computation time constraints
essential for urban hydrology applications.</p>
      <p id="d1e2711">Over the remaining medium range of scales (30–15 m) for our case study, the
model exhibits high performance and fast computation time since the increase
in data resolution creates sufficient spatial variability among the
grid-based parameters of the model. Such variability becomes somewhat
representative (i.e. up to the selected precision) for the geophysical
variability of the studied urban catchment.</p>
      <p id="d1e2714">Due to a tremendous increase in number of data pixels for grid-based models,
one easily understands the difficulty of applying the classical methods for
model parameter calibration. Analysis performed here demonstrates that
forcing the model to give a better performance by changing its parameters is
simply not reasonable for grid-based models because of their strong scale
dependence. In turn, such scaling dependence induces an alternative to the
classical model calibration. As we have demonstrated here, a better consideration
of such scale dependence makes it possible to define an optimum range of scales – over
which the model performs much better with respect to the measurements. This
can be seen as a proposed alternative to the classical parameter calibration
of grid-based models.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e2721">GIS data as well as all rainfall and flow measurements were
made available by the CG94 as part of a collaboration agreement that prevents
the publication of these data. The Multi-Hydro model is available upon
request from the HMCo Lab (<uri>http://hmco.enpc.fr</uri>).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e2730">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e2736">The authors acknowledge both the European project INTERREG RainGain
(<uri>http://www.raingain.eu</uri>) and the ANRT association
(<uri>http://www.anrt.asso.fr</uri>) for their financial support of this work. The
first author thanks the DSEA94 (Direction des Services de
l'Environnement et de l'Assainissement) for providing data sets used in this
work. A partial financial support of the Chair “Hydrology for resilient
cities” endowed by Veolia is gratefully acknowledged.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by: Nadia Ursino<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: Jamal
Alikhani and one anonymous referee</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Bl{\"{o}}schl and Sivapalan(1995)}}?><label>Blöschl and Sivapalan(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Blöschl, G. and Sivapalan, M.: Scale issues in hydrological modelling:
A review, Hydrol. Process., 9, 251–290, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Daniel et al.(2011)Daniel, Camp, LeBoeuf, Penrod, Dobbins, and
Abkowitz</label><mixed-citation>
Daniel, E. B., Camp, J. V., LeBoeuf, E. J., Penrod, J. R., Dobbins, J. P.,
and
Abkowitz, M. D.: Watershed modeling and its applications: A state-of-the-art
review, Open Hydrology Journal, 5, 26–50, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Dehotin and Braud(2008)</label><mixed-citation>Dehotin, J. and Braud, I.: Which spatial discretization for distributed
hydrological models? Proposition of a methodology and illustration for medium
to large-scale catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 769–796,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-769-2008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-12-769-2008</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>El Tabach et al.(2009)El Tabach, Tchiguirinskaia, and Mahmood, O And
Schertzer,</label><mixed-citation>
El Tabach, E., Tchiguirinskaia, I., and Mahmood, O., and Schertzer:
Multi-Hydro: a spatially distributed numerical model to assess and manage
runoff processes in peri- urban watersheds, in: Proceedings Final conference of the COST Action C22 Urban
Flood Management, Paris, France, 26 November 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Elliott and Trowsdale(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Elliott, A. H. and Trowsdale, S. A.: A review of models for low impact urban
stormwater drainage, Environ. Modell. Softw., 22, 394–405, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Elliott et al.(2009)Elliott, Trowsdale, and Wadhwa</label><mixed-citation>
Elliott, A. H., Trowsdale, S. A., and Wadhwa, S.: Effect of Aggregation of
On-Site Storm-Water Control Devices in an Urban Catchment Model, J.
Hydrol. Eng., 14, 975–983, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>England et al.(2007)England, Velleux, and Julien</label><mixed-citation>
England, Jr., J. F., Velleux, M. L., and Julien, P. Y.: Two-dimensional
simulations of extreme floods on a large watershed, J. Hydrol., 347,
229–241, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Frankhauser(1998)</label><mixed-citation>
Frankhauser, P.: The Fractal Approach. A New Tool for the Spatial Analysis of
Urban Agglomerations, Population: An English Selection, 10, 205–240, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>Ghosh and Hellweger(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Ghosh, I. and Hellweger, F. L.: Effects of Spatial Resolution in Urban
Hydrologic Simulations, J. Hydrol. Eng., 17, 129–137, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Giangola-Murzyn(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Giangola-Murzyn, A.: Modélisation et paramétrisation hydrologique de
la
ville, résilience aux inondations, PhD thesis, Université
Paris-Est, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Gires et al.(2012)Gires, Onof, Maksimovic, Schertzer,
Tchiguirinskaia, and Simoes</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Onof, C., Maksimovic, C., Schertzer, D., Tchiguirinskaia, I., and
Simoes, N.: Quantifying the impact of small scale unmeasured rainfall
variability on urban runoff through multifractal downscaling: A case study,
J. Hydrol., 442–443, 117–128, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Gires et al.(2013)Gires, Tchiguirinskaia, Schertzer, and
Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer, D., and Lovejoy, S.: Multifractal
analysis of a semi-distributed urban hydrological model, Urban Water J., 10,
195–208, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Gires et al.(2014)Gires, Giangola-Murzyn, Abbes, Tchiguirinskaia,
Schertzer, and Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Giangola-Murzyn, A., Abbes, J.-B., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer,
D., and Lovejoy, S.: Impacts of small scale rainfall variability in urban
areas: a case study with 1D and 1D/2D hydrological models in a
multifractal framework, Urban Water J., 12, 607–617, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Gires et al.(2015)Gires, Giangola-Murzyn, Abbes, Tchiguirinskaia,
Schertzer, and Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Giangola-Murzyn, A., Abbes, J.-B., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer,
D., and Lovejoy, S.: Impacts of small scale rainfall variability in urban
areas: a case study with 1D and 1D/2D hydrological models in a
multifractal framework, Urban Water J., 12, 607–617, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Gires et al.(2017)Gires, Tchiguirinskaia, Schertzer, Ochoa-Rodriguez,
Willems, Ichiba, Wang, Pina, Van Assel, Bruni, Murla Tuyls, and ten
Veldhuis</label><mixed-citation>Gires, A., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer, D., Ochoa-Rodriguez, S., Willems,
P., Ichiba, A., Wang, L.-P., Pina, R., Van Assel, J., Bruni, G., Murla Tuyls,
D., and ten Veldhuis, M.-C.: Fractal<?pagebreak page349?> analysis of urban catchments and their
representation in semi-distributed models: imperviousness and sewer system,
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2361–2375,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2361-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-21-2361-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Goldberger and West(1987)</label><mixed-citation>
Goldberger, A. L. and West, B. J.: Fractals in physiology and medicine, Yale
J.
Biol. Med., 60, 421–435, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Gupta et al.(2009)Gupta, Kling, Yilmaz, and Martinez</label><mixed-citation>
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition of
the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for
improving hydrological modelling, J. Hydrol., 377, 80–91, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Healy(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Healy, R. W.: Simulation of solute transport in variably saturated porous
media
with supplemental information on modifications to the US Geological
Survey's computer program VS2D, Department of the Interior, US Geological
Survey, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Hromadka(1987)</label><mixed-citation>Hromadka II, T. V.: The state-of-the-art in hydrologic models, Environ. Softw., 2, 29–36,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-9838(87)90026-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0266-9838(87)90026-8</ext-link>, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Ichiba(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Ichiba, A.: X-band radar data and predictive management in urban hydrology,
Ph.D. thesis, Universite Paris-Est, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Insa-Valor(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Insa-Valor, S.: Canoe: logiciel d'hydrologie urbaine, conception et
evaluation
de reseaux d'assainissement, simulation des pluies, des ecoulements et de la
qualite des eaux, Manuel de l'utilisateur, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>James et al.(2010)James, Rossman, and James</label><mixed-citation>
James, W., Rossman, L. A., and James, W. R. C.: User's guide to SWMM
5:[based
on original USEPA SWMM documentation], 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Jiang et al.(2012)Jiang, Shiguo, and Desheng</label><mixed-citation>
Jiang, S., Shiguo, J., and Desheng, L.: Box-Counting Dimension of Fractal
Urban Form, International Journal of Artificial Life Research, 3, 41–63,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Kleidorfer et al.(2009)Kleidorfer, Deletic, Fletcher, and
Rauch</label><mixed-citation>Kleidorfer, M., Deletic, A., Fletcher, T. D., and Rauch, W.: Impact of input
data uncertainties on urban stormwater model parameters, Water Sci. Technol., 60, 1545–1554, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.493" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2166/wst.2009.493</ext-link>,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Lappala et al.(1987)Lappala, Healy, Weeks, and
Others</label><mixed-citation>
Lappala, E. G., Healy, R. W., and Weeks, E. P.: Documentation of computer
program VS2D to solve the equations of fluid flow in variably saturated
porous media, Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Lovejoy and Schertzer(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Lovejoy, S. and Schertzer, D.: Multifractals, universality classes and
satellite and radar measurements of cloud and rain fields, J. Geophys. Res.,
95, 2021–2034, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Mandelbrot(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Mandelbrot, B. B.: The fractal geometry of nature, vol. 173, Macmillan, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Mesev et al.(1995)Mesev, Longley, Batty, and Xie</label><mixed-citation>
Mesev, T. V., Longley, P. A., Batty, M., and Xie, Y.: Morphology from
Imagery:
Detecting and Measuring the Density of Urban Land Use, Environ. Plann. A, 27, 759–780, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Multi-Hydro(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Multi-Hydro: Official number: IDDN.FR.001.340017.000.S.C.2015. <?xmltex \hack{\\}?>0000.31235,
Agence de Protection des Programmes (French Agency for software protection),
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>Niu et al.(2016)Niu, Wang, and Lu</label><mixed-citation>
Niu, H., Wang, J., and Lu, Y.: Fluctuation behaviors of financial return
volatility duration, Physica A,
448, 30–40, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Nonnenmacher et al.(2013)Nonnenmacher, Losa, and
Weibel</label><mixed-citation>
Nonnenmacher, T. F., Losa, G. A., and Weibel, E. R.: Fractals in Biology and
Medicine, Birkhäuser,  Basel, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><?xmltex \def\ref@label{{Ochoa-Rodriguez et~al.(2015)Ochoa-Rodriguez, Wang, Gires, Pina,
Reinoso-Rondinel, Bruni, Ichiba, Gaitan, Cristiano, van Assel, Kroll,
Murl\`{a}-Tuyls, Tisserand, Schertzer, Tchiguirinskaia, Onof, Willems, and
ten Veldhuis}}?><label>Ochoa-Rodriguez et al.(2015)Ochoa-Rodriguez, Wang, Gires, Pina,
Reinoso-Rondinel, Bruni, Ichiba, Gaitan, Cristiano, van Assel, Kroll,
Murlà-Tuyls, Tisserand, Schertzer, Tchiguirinskaia, Onof, Willems, and
ten Veldhuis</label><mixed-citation>Ochoa-Rodriguez, S., Wang, L.-P., Gires, A., Pina, R. D., Reinoso-Rondinel,
R.,
Bruni, G., Ichiba, A., Gaitan, S., Cristiano, E., van Assel, J., Kroll, S.,
Murlà-Tuyls, D., Tisserand, B., Schertzer, D., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Onof,
C., Willems, P., and ten Veldhuis, M.-C.: Impact of spatial and temporal
resolution of rainfall inputs on urban hydrodynamic modelling outputs: A
multi-catchment investigation, J. Hydrol.,   531,  389–407, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/." ext-link-type="DOI">.</ext-link>10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.05.035, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Ostrowski(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Ostrowski, M. W.: Modeling urban hydrological processes and management
scenarios at different temporal and spatial scales, Best Modeling Practices
for Urban Water Systems, Monograph, 10, 27–40, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx34"><label>Park et al.(2008)Park, Lee, Park, and Ha</label><mixed-citation>
Park, S. Y., Lee, K. W., Park, I. H., and Ha, S. R.: Effect of the
aggregation
level of surface runoff fields and sewer network for a SWMM simulation,
Desalination, 226, 328–337, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx35"><label>Radziejewski and Kundzewicz(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Radziejewski, M. and Kundzewicz, Z. W.: Fractal analysis of flow of the river
Warta, J. Hydrol., 200, 280–294, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx36"><label>Rafieeinasab et al.(2015)Rafieeinasab, Norouzi, Kim, Habibi, Nazari,
Seo, Lee, Cosgrove, and Cui</label><mixed-citation>Rafieeinasab, A., Norouzi, A., Kim, S., Habibi, H., Nazari, B., Seo, D.-J.,
Lee, H., Cosgrove, B., and Cui, Z.: Toward high-resolution flash flood
prediction in large urban areas –  Analysis of sensitivity to spatiotemporal
resolution of rainfall input and hydrologic modeling, Journal of Hydrology,
531, Part 2, 370–388, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.045" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.045</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx37"><label>Refsgaard and Knudsen(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Refsgaard, J. C. and Knudsen, J.: Operational Validation and Intercomparison
of
Different Types of Hydrological Models, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2189–2202,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx38"><label>Sagar(2004)</label><mixed-citation>Sagar, B. S. D.: Fractal dimension of non-network space of a catchment basin,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31,   L12502, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL019749" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004GL019749</ext-link>,  2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx39"><label>Salvadore et al.(2015)Salvadore, Bronders, and
Batelaan</label><mixed-citation>
Salvadore, E., Bronders, J., and Batelaan, O.: Hydrological modelling of
urbanized catchments: A review and future directions,  Part
1, J. Hydrol., 529, 62–81, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx40"><label>Sarma et al.(1973)Sarma, Delleur, and Rao</label><mixed-citation>
Sarma, P. B. S., Delleur, J. W., and Rao, A. R.: Comparison of
rainfall-runoff
models for urban areas, J. Hydrol., 18, 329–347, 1973.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx41"><label>Schertzer and Lovejoy(1987)</label><mixed-citation>
Schertzer, D. and Lovejoy, S.: Physical modeling and analysis of rain and
clouds by anisotropic scaling multiplicative processes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 92, 9693–9714, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx42"><label>Stephenson(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Stephenson, D.: Selection of Stormwater Model Parameters, J. Environ. Eng.,
115, 210–220, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx43"><label>Tech University of Darmstadt and
Ostrowski(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Tech University of Darmstadt and Ostrowski, M.: Modeling Urban Hydrological
Processes and Management Scenarios at Different Temporal and Spatial Scales,
JWMM, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx44"><label>Thibault and Crews(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Thibault, S. and Crews, J.: The morphology and growth of urban technical
networks: a fractal approach, flux, 19, 17–30, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx45"><label>Turcotte(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Turcotte, D. L.: Fractals in Geology and Geophysics, in: Fractals in
Geophysics, edited by: Scholz, C. H. and Mandelbrot, B. B., Pure and Applied
Geophysics, Birkhäuser, Basel, 171–176, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx46"><label>Turcotte and Huang(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Turcotte, D. L. and Huang, J.: Fractal Distributions in Geology, Scale
Invariance, and Deterministic Chaos, in: Fractals in the Earth Sciences,
edited by: Barton, C. C. and La Pointe, P. R.,   1–40, Springer US, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx47"><label>Velleux et al.(2008)Velleux, England, and Julien</label><mixed-citation>
Velleux, M. L., England, Jr., J. F., and Julien, P. Y.: TREX: spatially
distributed model to assess watershed contaminant transport and fate, Sci.
Total Environ., 404, 113–128, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx48"><label>Versini et al.(2016)Versini, Gires, Tchinguirinskaia, and
Schertzer</label><mixed-citation>
Versini, P.-A., Gires, A., Tchinguirinskaia, I., and Schertzer, D.: Toward an
operational tool to simulate green roof hydrological impact at the basin
scale: a new version of the distributed rainfall–runoff model Multi-Hydro,
Water Sci. Technol., 74, 1845–1854, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx49"><label>West(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
West, B. J.: Fractal Physiology and Chaos in Medicine, World Scientific,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx50"><label>Wood et al.(1988)Wood, Sivapalan, Beven, and Band</label><mixed-citation>
Wood, E. F., Sivapalan, M., Beven, K., and Band, L.: Effects of spatial
variability and scale with implications to hydrologic modeling, J. Hydrol.,
102, 29–47, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page350?><ref id="bib1.bibx51"><label>Wu et al.(2013)Wu, Sun, Shi, Chen, and Fu</label><mixed-citation>Wu, H., Sun, Y., Shi, W., Chen, X., and Fu, D.: Examining the
Satellite-Detected Urban Land Use Spatial Patterns Using Multidimensional
Fractal Dimension Indices, Remote Sens., 5, 5152–5172, 2013.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx52"><label>Wu and He(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, J. and He, C.: Experimental and modeling investigation of sewage solids
sedimentation based on particle size distribution and fractal dimension, Int.
J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 7, 37–46, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx53"><label>Yanshi and Kaixuan(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Yanshi, X. and Kaixuan, T.: Fractal research on fracture structures and
application in geology, Geology-Geochemistry,  30,  71–77, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx54"><label>Zhang and Montgomery(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, W. and Montgomery, D. R.: Digital elevation model grid size, landscape
representation, and hydrologic simulations, Water Resour. Res., 30,
1019–1028, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Scale effect challenges in urban hydrology highlighted with a distributed hydrological model</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Hydrological models are extensively
used in urban water management, development and evaluation of future
scenarios and research activities. There is a growing interest in the
development of fully distributed and grid-based models. However, some complex
questions related to scale effects are not yet fully understood and still
remain open issues in urban hydrology. In this paper we propose a two-step
investigation framework to illustrate the extent of scale effects in urban
hydrology. First, fractal tools are used to highlight the scale dependence
observed within distributed data input into urban hydrological models. Then
an intensive multi-scale modelling work is carried out to understand scale
effects on hydrological model performance. Investigations are conducted
using a fully distributed and physically based model, Multi-Hydro, developed
at Ecole des Ponts ParisTech. The model is implemented at 17 spatial
resolutions ranging from 100  to 5&thinsp;m. Results clearly exhibit scale effect
challenges in urban hydrology modelling. The applicability of fractal
concepts highlights the scale dependence observed within distributed data.
Patterns of geophysical data change when the size of the observation pixel
changes. The multi-scale modelling investigation confirms scale effects on
hydrological model performance. Results are analysed over three ranges of
scales identified in the fractal analysis and confirmed through modelling.
This work also discusses some remaining issues in urban hydrology modelling
related to the availability of high-quality data at high resolutions, and
model numerical instabilities as well as the computation time requirements.
The main findings of this paper enable a replacement of traditional methods of
<q>model calibration</q> by innovative methods of <q>model resolution
alteration</q> based on the spatial data variability and scaling of flows in
urban hydrology.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Blöschl and Sivapalan(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Blöschl, G. and Sivapalan, M.: Scale issues in hydrological modelling:
A review, Hydrol. Process., 9, 251–290, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Daniel et al.(2011)Daniel, Camp, LeBoeuf, Penrod, Dobbins, and
Abkowitz</label><mixed-citation>
Daniel, E. B., Camp, J. V., LeBoeuf, E. J., Penrod, J. R., Dobbins, J. P.,
and
Abkowitz, M. D.: Watershed modeling and its applications: A state-of-the-art
review, Open Hydrology Journal, 5, 26–50, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Dehotin and Braud(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Dehotin, J. and Braud, I.: Which spatial discretization for distributed
hydrological models? Proposition of a methodology and illustration for medium
to large-scale catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 769–796,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-769-2008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-769-2008</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>El Tabach et al.(2009)El Tabach, Tchiguirinskaia, and Mahmood, O And
Schertzer,</label><mixed-citation>
El Tabach, E., Tchiguirinskaia, I., and Mahmood, O., and Schertzer:
Multi-Hydro: a spatially distributed numerical model to assess and manage
runoff processes in peri- urban watersheds, in: Proceedings Final conference of the COST Action C22 Urban
Flood Management, Paris, France, 26 November 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Elliott and Trowsdale(2007)</label><mixed-citation>
Elliott, A. H. and Trowsdale, S. A.: A review of models for low impact urban
stormwater drainage, Environ. Modell. Softw., 22, 394–405, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Elliott et al.(2009)Elliott, Trowsdale, and Wadhwa</label><mixed-citation>
Elliott, A. H., Trowsdale, S. A., and Wadhwa, S.: Effect of Aggregation of
On-Site Storm-Water Control Devices in an Urban Catchment Model, J.
Hydrol. Eng., 14, 975–983, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>England et al.(2007)England, Velleux, and Julien</label><mixed-citation>
England, Jr., J. F., Velleux, M. L., and Julien, P. Y.: Two-dimensional
simulations of extreme floods on a large watershed, J. Hydrol., 347,
229–241, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Frankhauser(1998)</label><mixed-citation>
Frankhauser, P.: The Fractal Approach. A New Tool for the Spatial Analysis of
Urban Agglomerations, Population: An English Selection, 10, 205–240, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>Ghosh and Hellweger(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Ghosh, I. and Hellweger, F. L.: Effects of Spatial Resolution in Urban
Hydrologic Simulations, J. Hydrol. Eng., 17, 129–137, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Giangola-Murzyn(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Giangola-Murzyn, A.: Modélisation et paramétrisation hydrologique de
la
ville, résilience aux inondations, PhD thesis, Université
Paris-Est, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Gires et al.(2012)Gires, Onof, Maksimovic, Schertzer,
Tchiguirinskaia, and Simoes</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Onof, C., Maksimovic, C., Schertzer, D., Tchiguirinskaia, I., and
Simoes, N.: Quantifying the impact of small scale unmeasured rainfall
variability on urban runoff through multifractal downscaling: A case study,
J. Hydrol., 442–443, 117–128, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Gires et al.(2013)Gires, Tchiguirinskaia, Schertzer, and
Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer, D., and Lovejoy, S.: Multifractal
analysis of a semi-distributed urban hydrological model, Urban Water J., 10,
195–208, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Gires et al.(2014)Gires, Giangola-Murzyn, Abbes, Tchiguirinskaia,
Schertzer, and Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Giangola-Murzyn, A., Abbes, J.-B., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer,
D., and Lovejoy, S.: Impacts of small scale rainfall variability in urban
areas: a case study with 1D and 1D/2D hydrological models in a
multifractal framework, Urban Water J., 12, 607–617, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Gires et al.(2015)Gires, Giangola-Murzyn, Abbes, Tchiguirinskaia,
Schertzer, and Lovejoy</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Giangola-Murzyn, A., Abbes, J.-B., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer,
D., and Lovejoy, S.: Impacts of small scale rainfall variability in urban
areas: a case study with 1D and 1D/2D hydrological models in a
multifractal framework, Urban Water J., 12, 607–617, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Gires et al.(2017)Gires, Tchiguirinskaia, Schertzer, Ochoa-Rodriguez,
Willems, Ichiba, Wang, Pina, Van Assel, Bruni, Murla Tuyls, and ten
Veldhuis</label><mixed-citation>
Gires, A., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Schertzer, D., Ochoa-Rodriguez, S., Willems,
P., Ichiba, A., Wang, L.-P., Pina, R., Van Assel, J., Bruni, G., Murla Tuyls,
D., and ten Veldhuis, M.-C.: Fractal analysis of urban catchments and their
representation in semi-distributed models: imperviousness and sewer system,
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2361–2375,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2361-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2361-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Goldberger and West(1987)</label><mixed-citation>
Goldberger, A. L. and West, B. J.: Fractals in physiology and medicine, Yale
J.
Biol. Med., 60, 421–435, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Gupta et al.(2009)Gupta, Kling, Yilmaz, and Martinez</label><mixed-citation>
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition of
the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for
improving hydrological modelling, J. Hydrol., 377, 80–91, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Healy(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Healy, R. W.: Simulation of solute transport in variably saturated porous
media
with supplemental information on modifications to the US Geological
Survey's computer program VS2D, Department of the Interior, US Geological
Survey, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Hromadka(1987)</label><mixed-citation>
Hromadka II, T. V.: The state-of-the-art in hydrologic models, Environ. Softw., 2, 29–36,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-9838(87)90026-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-9838(87)90026-8</a>, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Ichiba(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Ichiba, A.: X-band radar data and predictive management in urban hydrology,
Ph.D. thesis, Universite Paris-Est, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Insa-Valor(1999)</label><mixed-citation>
Insa-Valor, S.: Canoe: logiciel d'hydrologie urbaine, conception et
evaluation
de reseaux d'assainissement, simulation des pluies, des ecoulements et de la
qualite des eaux, Manuel de l'utilisateur, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>James et al.(2010)James, Rossman, and James</label><mixed-citation>
James, W., Rossman, L. A., and James, W. R. C.: User's guide to SWMM
5:[based
on original USEPA SWMM documentation], 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Jiang et al.(2012)Jiang, Shiguo, and Desheng</label><mixed-citation>
Jiang, S., Shiguo, J., and Desheng, L.: Box-Counting Dimension of Fractal
Urban Form, International Journal of Artificial Life Research, 3, 41–63,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Kleidorfer et al.(2009)Kleidorfer, Deletic, Fletcher, and
Rauch</label><mixed-citation>
Kleidorfer, M., Deletic, A., Fletcher, T. D., and Rauch, W.: Impact of input
data uncertainties on urban stormwater model parameters, Water Sci. Technol., 60, 1545–1554, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.493" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.493</a>,
2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Lappala et al.(1987)Lappala, Healy, Weeks, and
Others</label><mixed-citation>
Lappala, E. G., Healy, R. W., and Weeks, E. P.: Documentation of computer
program VS2D to solve the equations of fluid flow in variably saturated
porous media, Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Lovejoy and Schertzer(1990)</label><mixed-citation>
Lovejoy, S. and Schertzer, D.: Multifractals, universality classes and
satellite and radar measurements of cloud and rain fields, J. Geophys. Res.,
95, 2021–2034, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Mandelbrot(1983)</label><mixed-citation>
Mandelbrot, B. B.: The fractal geometry of nature, vol. 173, Macmillan, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Mesev et al.(1995)Mesev, Longley, Batty, and Xie</label><mixed-citation>
Mesev, T. V., Longley, P. A., Batty, M., and Xie, Y.: Morphology from
Imagery:
Detecting and Measuring the Density of Urban Land Use, Environ. Plann. A, 27, 759–780, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Multi-Hydro(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Multi-Hydro: Official number: IDDN.FR.001.340017.000.S.C.2015. <br/>0000.31235,
Agence de Protection des Programmes (French Agency for software protection),
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>Niu et al.(2016)Niu, Wang, and Lu</label><mixed-citation>
Niu, H., Wang, J., and Lu, Y.: Fluctuation behaviors of financial return
volatility duration, Physica A,
448, 30–40, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Nonnenmacher et al.(2013)Nonnenmacher, Losa, and
Weibel</label><mixed-citation>
Nonnenmacher, T. F., Losa, G. A., and Weibel, E. R.: Fractals in Biology and
Medicine, Birkhäuser,  Basel, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Ochoa-Rodriguez et al.(2015)Ochoa-Rodriguez, Wang, Gires, Pina,
Reinoso-Rondinel, Bruni, Ichiba, Gaitan, Cristiano, van Assel, Kroll,
Murlà-Tuyls, Tisserand, Schertzer, Tchiguirinskaia, Onof, Willems, and
ten Veldhuis</label><mixed-citation>
Ochoa-Rodriguez, S., Wang, L.-P., Gires, A., Pina, R. D., Reinoso-Rondinel,
R.,
Bruni, G., Ichiba, A., Gaitan, S., Cristiano, E., van Assel, J., Kroll, S.,
Murlà-Tuyls, D., Tisserand, B., Schertzer, D., Tchiguirinskaia, I., Onof,
C., Willems, P., and ten Veldhuis, M.-C.: Impact of spatial and temporal
resolution of rainfall inputs on urban hydrodynamic modelling outputs: A
multi-catchment investigation, J. Hydrol.,   531,  389–407, <a href="https://doi.org/." target="_blank">https://doi.org/.</a>10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.05.035, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Ostrowski(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Ostrowski, M. W.: Modeling urban hydrological processes and management
scenarios at different temporal and spatial scales, Best Modeling Practices
for Urban Water Systems, Monograph, 10, 27–40, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>Park et al.(2008)Park, Lee, Park, and Ha</label><mixed-citation>
Park, S. Y., Lee, K. W., Park, I. H., and Ha, S. R.: Effect of the
aggregation
level of surface runoff fields and sewer network for a SWMM simulation,
Desalination, 226, 328–337, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>Radziejewski and Kundzewicz(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Radziejewski, M. and Kundzewicz, Z. W.: Fractal analysis of flow of the river
Warta, J. Hydrol., 200, 280–294, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>Rafieeinasab et al.(2015)Rafieeinasab, Norouzi, Kim, Habibi, Nazari,
Seo, Lee, Cosgrove, and Cui</label><mixed-citation>
Rafieeinasab, A., Norouzi, A., Kim, S., Habibi, H., Nazari, B., Seo, D.-J.,
Lee, H., Cosgrove, B., and Cui, Z.: Toward high-resolution flash flood
prediction in large urban areas –  Analysis of sensitivity to spatiotemporal
resolution of rainfall input and hydrologic modeling, Journal of Hydrology,
531, Part 2, 370–388, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.045" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.045</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>Refsgaard and Knudsen(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Refsgaard, J. C. and Knudsen, J.: Operational Validation and Intercomparison
of
Different Types of Hydrological Models, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2189–2202,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>Sagar(2004)</label><mixed-citation>
Sagar, B. S. D.: Fractal dimension of non-network space of a catchment basin,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 31,   L12502, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL019749" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL019749</a>,  2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>Salvadore et al.(2015)Salvadore, Bronders, and
Batelaan</label><mixed-citation>
Salvadore, E., Bronders, J., and Batelaan, O.: Hydrological modelling of
urbanized catchments: A review and future directions,  Part
1, J. Hydrol., 529, 62–81, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>Sarma et al.(1973)Sarma, Delleur, and Rao</label><mixed-citation>
Sarma, P. B. S., Delleur, J. W., and Rao, A. R.: Comparison of
rainfall-runoff
models for urban areas, J. Hydrol., 18, 329–347, 1973.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>Schertzer and Lovejoy(1987)</label><mixed-citation>
Schertzer, D. and Lovejoy, S.: Physical modeling and analysis of rain and
clouds by anisotropic scaling multiplicative processes, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 92, 9693–9714, 1987.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>Stephenson(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Stephenson, D.: Selection of Stormwater Model Parameters, J. Environ. Eng.,
115, 210–220, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>Tech University of Darmstadt and
Ostrowski(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Tech University of Darmstadt and Ostrowski, M.: Modeling Urban Hydrological
Processes and Management Scenarios at Different Temporal and Spatial Scales,
JWMM, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>Thibault and Crews(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Thibault, S. and Crews, J.: The morphology and growth of urban technical
networks: a fractal approach, flux, 19, 17–30, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>Turcotte(1989)</label><mixed-citation>
Turcotte, D. L.: Fractals in Geology and Geophysics, in: Fractals in
Geophysics, edited by: Scholz, C. H. and Mandelbrot, B. B., Pure and Applied
Geophysics, Birkhäuser, Basel, 171–176, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>Turcotte and Huang(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Turcotte, D. L. and Huang, J.: Fractal Distributions in Geology, Scale
Invariance, and Deterministic Chaos, in: Fractals in the Earth Sciences,
edited by: Barton, C. C. and La Pointe, P. R.,   1–40, Springer US, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>Velleux et al.(2008)Velleux, England, and Julien</label><mixed-citation>
Velleux, M. L., England, Jr., J. F., and Julien, P. Y.: TREX: spatially
distributed model to assess watershed contaminant transport and fate, Sci.
Total Environ., 404, 113–128, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>Versini et al.(2016)Versini, Gires, Tchinguirinskaia, and
Schertzer</label><mixed-citation>
Versini, P.-A., Gires, A., Tchinguirinskaia, I., and Schertzer, D.: Toward an
operational tool to simulate green roof hydrological impact at the basin
scale: a new version of the distributed rainfall–runoff model Multi-Hydro,
Water Sci. Technol., 74, 1845–1854, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>West(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
West, B. J.: Fractal Physiology and Chaos in Medicine, World Scientific,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>Wood et al.(1988)Wood, Sivapalan, Beven, and Band</label><mixed-citation>
Wood, E. F., Sivapalan, M., Beven, K., and Band, L.: Effects of spatial
variability and scale with implications to hydrologic modeling, J. Hydrol.,
102, 29–47, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>Wu et al.(2013)Wu, Sun, Shi, Chen, and Fu</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, H., Sun, Y., Shi, W., Chen, X., and Fu, D.: Examining the
Satellite-Detected Urban Land Use Spatial Patterns Using Multidimensional
Fractal Dimension Indices, Remote Sens., 5, 5152–5172, 2013.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>Wu and He(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, J. and He, C.: Experimental and modeling investigation of sewage solids
sedimentation based on particle size distribution and fractal dimension, Int.
J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 7, 37–46, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>Yanshi and Kaixuan(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Yanshi, X. and Kaixuan, T.: Fractal research on fracture structures and
application in geology, Geology-Geochemistry,  30,  71–77, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>Zhang and Montgomery(1994)</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, W. and Montgomery, D. R.: Digital elevation model grid size, landscape
representation, and hydrologic simulations, Water Resour. Res., 30,
1019–1028, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
