1 / 25

The SWAT Model Mauro Di Luzio , TAES-BREC Blackland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX

The SWAT Model Mauro Di Luzio , TAES-BREC Blackland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX Jeff Arnold , USDA-ARS Grassland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX Jerry Whittaker , USDA-ARS National Forage Seed Production Research Center, Corvallis, OR

boyce
Download Presentation

The SWAT Model Mauro Di Luzio , TAES-BREC Blackland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The SWAT Model Mauro Di Luzio, TAES-BREC Blackland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX Jeff Arnold, USDA-ARS Grassland Research and Extension Center, Temple, TX Jerry Whittaker, USDA-ARS National Forage Seed Production Research Center, Corvallis, OR Rem Confesor, Oregon State University National Forage Seed Production Research Center, Corvallis, OR The Distributed Model Intercomparison Project (DMIP-2) Workshop Hydrology Laboratory National Weather Service September 10-12, 2007 Silver Spring, MD ARS

  2. Soil and Water Assessment Tool Arnold et al. (1998) SWAT is a product of over 30 years of USDA model development History Time Line CREAMS USLE (CLEAN WATER ACT) EPIC SWRRB SWAT 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s GLEAMS WEPP ANN AGNPS AGNPS

  3.  Partnership – Texas A&M, ARS, EPA, NRCS Developing models, GIS, databases, applications  Worldwide User Community  Widely used for water quality

  4. TMDL Applications  Bosque River – Dairy Waste, Agriculture Range, Treatment Plants Wisconsin – Nitrogen and Phosphorus Texas – Atrazine Missouri – Atrazine • Oklahoma – Nutrients • Nehalem River – OR • Cannonsville Reservoir – NY • ………….

  5. Conservation Effects Assessment Project C.E.A.P.—the acronym

  6. CEAP National SWAT River Basin Model River Routing and Non-Cultivated Lands

  7. Channel routing: Muskingum routing method.

  8. Di Luzio et al., 2004

  9. Used Data • DEM 1 arc-second (30 m) USGS NED • LandUse/Land Cover NLCD 1992 (National Land Cover Dataset) (30 m)21 classes • Soil Map STATSGO (State Soil Geographic) 1:250,000-scale • Hydrography NHD (National Hydrography Dataset) • Precipitation NEXRAD DMIP2(Hourly Time Step) • Temperature NCDC Cooperative Network (daily)

  10. Illinois River (129, 78) Elk River (119) Baron Fork (41) Blue River (55)

  11. DMIP1 The Blue River near Blue, Oklahoma (1,233 Square Km)

  12. DMIP1 Automatic Calibration • Single objective measure: sum of square of the residuals (SSQ). • Optimization algorithm: Shuffled Complex Evolution Method (SCE) • (Duan, 1991; Sorooshian et al., 1993).

  13. DMIP1 Event 2, November 12–27, 1994 Event 6, September 17 – 24, 1995 Event 9, November 6–21, 1996 Event 7, September 26–October 11, 1996

  14. Optimization of Multiple Objectives * * * * Objective 1 * * * * * Objective 2

  15. NFSPRC Beowulf Cluster • 24 Pentium 4 processors (2.4 GHz) 1 GB of RAM,– 12 with hyperthreading technology • 24 port, 1 gigabit/second ethernet switch • Integrated INTEL 10/100/1000 Mbps network interface card • 24 ports - KVM switches • Linux, Fedora Core2, kernel version 2.6.5smp

  16. Number of calibration parameters • Tahlequa 9,228 • 40 variables, 129 sub-basins, 419 HRU • Blue 4,198 • Baron 3,422 • Elk 7,946 • Illinois 4,893

  17. Thanks! Questions?

More Related