Evaluation and Comparison of the Artificial Neural Network and the HEC-HMS Models in the Simulation of the Rainfall-Runoff process and the development of Hydrograph in the Kasilian representative Basin

Subject Areas : Subjects

Farshid Safsheken ¹ (دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد داریون، باشگاه پژوهشگران جوان و نخبگان، داریون، ایران.)
Nader Pirmoradian ² (استادیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه گیلان، رشت)
Reza Afshin Sharifan ³ (گروه سازه های آبی، واحد شیراز،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی،شیراز، ایران)

Received: 2015-04-28 Accepted : 2018-02-24 Published : 2018-02-20

Keywords: Rainfall-Runoff hydrograph, Artificial Neural Network, HEC-HMS model,

Abstract :

The Rainfall-runoff process is a non-linear and a very complicated phenomenon. As collection of the reliable data is difficult, time consuming and expensive, hydrologists resort to the simulation of such events using the so-called black box models such as the artificial neural network (ANN). However, as such models have been developed and evaluated and different geographical settings, their comparison is essential if one desires to apply them to a certain watershed. To this end, the ANN (version 9-10-7) and the HEC-HMS models were evaluated and copmarid in generating hydroghraph for the kasilian basin, to improve the models stability and training, the rainfall data were divided into four groups according to the Huff distribution of rainfall pattern. Furthermore, different combinations of transfer functions were used in the hidden and output layers. The ANN model was derived using the Qnet2000 software. The HEC-HMS model was also used to compare it with the ANN.
the absolute relative error of Q_P, T_P, T_b, W₇₅, W₅₀, T₅₀ and T₇₅ parameters simulated using the ANN were 0.02-51.97, 0.55-41.23, 0.26-54.07, 0.23-202.62, 0.52-69.88, 2.21-82.07 and 2.42-55.76, respectively. Meanwhile these confines were 0.58-756.53, 0-250, 0-141.18, 2.84-575, 0.93-167.86, 3.33-350 and 2-266.67 using the HEC-HMS model. Regarding the relative error of the outcomes of each event, it can be concluded that the neural network in the most cases has been simulated all the parameters and the overall shape of the hydrograph with little error compared to the HEC-HMS model. Ofcourse the HEC-HMS model was rarely more accurately than the ANN in the some cases, for example, to simulate the peak, the base time and overall shape of hydrograph.

References:

1)       جهانگیر، ع.، رائینی، م.، احمدی، م. ض. و اکبرپور، ا. 1384. شبیه­سازی فرایند بارش- رواناب با استفاده از شبکه­ی عصبی مصنوعی در حوضه کارده. مجموعه مقالات پنجمین کنفرانس هیدرولیک ایران. دانشکده مهندسی دانشگاه شهید با هنر کرمان.

2)       گزارش های آماری حوضه آبخیز معرف کسیلیان از سال آبی 61-1360 الی 78- 1377. مرکز تحقیقات منابع آب ایران(تماب).

3)       منهاج م. ب. 1386. مبانی شبکه های عصبی. جلد اول(هوش محاسباتی)، مرکز نشر دانشگاه صنعتی امیر کبیر. 715ص.

4)        Antar, M.A., Elassiouti, I., and Allam, M.N. 2006. Rainfall-runoff modelling using artificial neural networks technique: a Blue Nile catchment case study. Hydrol. Process. 20: 1201-1216.

5)        Aytek, A., and Alp, M. 2008. An Application of artificial intelligence for rainfall–runoff modeling. J. Earth Syst, Sci. 117: 145–155.

6)        Department of Civil Engineering National Institute of Technology, Rourkela.p:40.

7)        Firat, M., and Gungor, M. 2007. River flow estimation using feed forward and radial basis neural networks approaches. International Congress on River Basin Management. 599-611.

8)        Harun, S., Ahmat, N.I., and Kassim, A.H.M. 2002. Artificial neural network model for rainfall-runoff relationship. Journal Technology. 37(B) Dis: 1-12.

9)        Huff, F.A. 1967. Time distribution of rainfall in heavy storms. Water Resources Research. 3(4): 1007-1101.

10)    Jain, A.K., Mao, J., and Mohiuddin, k. m. 1996. Artificial neural networks: a tutorial. Computer, IEEE P. 31-44.

11)    Jy, W.M., Han, j., Annambhotla, S. and Bryant, S. 2005. Artificial neural networks for forecasting watershed runoff and stream flows. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. ASCE. 10(3): 216-223.

12)    Kim, M.S., Shim, S.B., and Yeon, G.B. 2000. The rainfall –runoff models for real time flood forecasting in Geum river watershed.

13)    Kumar, P., and Singh, A. 2010. Rainfall- runoff modeling of River Kosi using SCS-CN method and ANN. a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of bachelor of technology

14)    Lorria, M., and Sechi, G.M. 1995. Neural networks for modeling rainfall runoff transformations. Water Resource Management. 9: 299-313.

15)    Pan, T.Y., and Wang, R.Y. 2005. Using recurrent neural networks to reconstruct rainfall-runoff processes. Hydrological Process. 19(18): 3603-3619.

16)    Shoo, G.B., and Ray, C. 2006. Flow forecasting for a Hawaii steram using rating curves and neural networks. Journal of Hydrology. 317: 63-80.

17)    Simonovic, S.P., and Ahmad, S. 2005. An artificial neural network model for generating hydrograph from hydro-meteorological parameters. Journal of Hydrology. 315: 236-251.

18)    Singh, V.P., and Woolhiser, D.A. 2002. Mathematical modelling of watershed hydrology. Journal of Hydrology. 7(4): 270-292.

19)    Sohail, A., Watanabe, K., and Takeuchi, S. 2008. Runoff analysis for a small watershed of Tono area Japan by back propagation artificial neural network with seasonal data.Water Resour Management. 22(1): 1-22.

20)    Tayfur, G., and Moramarco, T. 2007. Forecasting flood hydrographs at Tiber River Basin in Italy by Artificial Neural Network. International Congress on River Basin Management, Antalya, Turkey, H: 485-497.

21)    Tokar, A.S. and Markus, M. 2000. Precipitation-Runoff Modelling Using Artificia L Neural Networks and Conceptual Models. Journal of Hydrology Engineering. 2: 156-161.

22)    Tokar, A.S., and Johnson, P.A. 1999. Rainfall-runoff modelling using artificial neural networks. Journal of Hydrology Engineering, 3: 232-239.