Articles | Volume 26, issue 16
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4407-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4407-2022
Research article
 | 
29 Aug 2022
Research article |  | 29 Aug 2022

Large-sample assessment of varying spatial resolution on the streamflow estimates of the wflow_sbm hydrological model

Jerom P. M. Aerts, Rolf W. Hut, Nick C. van de Giesen, Niels Drost, Willem J. van Verseveld, Albrecht H. Weerts, and Pieter Hazenberg

Related authors

Relevance of feedbacks between water availability and crop systems using a coupled hydrology – crop growth model
Sneha Chevuru, Rens L. P. H. van Beek, Michelle T. H. van Vliet, Jerom P. M. Aerts, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-465,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-465, 2024
Short summary
On the importance of observation uncertainty when evaluating and comparing models: a hydrological example
Jerom P.M. Aerts, Jannis M. Hoch, Gemma Coxon, Nick C. van de Giesen, and Rolf W. Hut
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1156,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1156, 2023
Short summary
Coupling a global glacier model to a global hydrological model prevents underestimation of glacier runoff
Pau Wiersma, Jerom Aerts, Harry Zekollari, Markus Hrachowitz, Niels Drost, Matthias Huss, Edwin H. Sutanudjaja, and Rolf Hut
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5971–5986, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5971-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5971-2022, 2022
Short summary
The eWaterCycle platform for open and FAIR hydrological collaboration
Rolf Hut, Niels Drost, Nick van de Giesen, Ben van Werkhoven, Banafsheh Abdollahi, Jerom Aerts, Thomas Albers, Fakhereh Alidoost, Bouwe Andela, Jaro Camphuijsen, Yifat Dzigan, Ronald van Haren, Eric Hutton, Peter Kalverla, Maarten van Meersbergen, Gijs van den Oord, Inti Pelupessy, Stef Smeets, Stefan Verhoeven, Martine de Vos, and Berend Weel
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 5371–5390, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5371-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-5371-2022, 2022
Short summary
Comparison of estimates of global flood models for flood hazard and exposed gross domestic product: a China case study
Jerom P. M. Aerts, Steffi Uhlemann-Elmer, Dirk Eilander, and Philip J. Ward
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3245–3260, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3245-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3245-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Impacts of spatiotemporal resolutions of precipitation on flood event simulation based on multimodel structures – a case study over the Xiang River basin in China
Qian Zhu, Xiaodong Qin, Dongyang Zhou, Tiantian Yang, and Xinyi Song
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1665–1686, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024, 2024
Short summary
A network approach for multiscale catchment classification using traits
Fabio Ciulla and Charuleka Varadharajan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1617–1651, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-model approach in a variable spatial framework for streamflow simulation
Cyril Thébault, Charles Perrin, Vazken Andréassian, Guillaume Thirel, Sébastien Legrand, and Olivier Delaigue
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1539–1566, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024, 2024
Short summary
Advancing understanding of lake–watershed hydrology: a fully coupled numerical model illustrated by Qinghai Lake
Lele Shu, Xiaodong Li, Yan Chang, Xianhong Meng, Hao Chen, Yuan Qi, Hongwei Wang, Zhaoguo Li, and Shihua Lyu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1477–1491, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1477-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1477-2024, 2024
Short summary
Technical note: Testing the connection between hillslope-scale runoff fluctuations and streamflow hydrographs at the outlet of large river basins
Ricardo Mantilla, Morgan Fonley, and Nicolás Velásquez
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1373–1382, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1373-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1373-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.: The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5293–5313, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017, 2017. a
Aerts, J. P. M.: eWaterCycle_example_notebooks (Version 1), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5724512, 2021a. a
Aerts, J. P. M.: Wflow SBM streamflow estimates for CAMELS data set (Version 1), Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5724576, 2021b. a
Beck, H. E., Wood, E. F., Pan, M., Fisher, C. K., Miralles, D. G., van Dijk, A. I. J. M., McVicar, T. R., and Adler, R. F.: MSWEP V2 Global 3-Hourly 0.1 Precipitation: Methodology and Quantitative Assessment, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 473–500, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0138.1, 2019. a
Bell, V. A., Kay, A. L., Jones, R. G., and Moore, R. J.: Development of a high resolution grid-based river flow model for use with regional climate model output, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 532–549, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-532-2007, 2007. a
Download
Short summary
In recent years gridded hydrological modelling moved into the realm of hyper-resolution modelling (<10 km). In this study, we investigate the effect of varying grid-cell sizes for the wflow_sbm hydrological model. We used a large sample of basins from the CAMELS data set to test the effect that varying grid-cell sizes has on the simulation of streamflow at the basin outlet. Results show that there is no single best grid-cell size for modelling streamflow throughout the domain.