1 / 48

The MIKE SHE Model -Theory and Applications in Southern Forests

2. Why modeling?. Data synthesis tools (gap filling)Predictions (too expensive for measurement)Test hypotheses (answer what-if questions) Learning tools (integrated thinking). 3. Features of MIKE SHE. Integrated watershed

lucie
Download Presentation

The MIKE SHE Model -Theory and Applications in Southern Forests

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. 1 The MIKE SHE Model -Theory and Applications in Southern Forests Ge Sun, Jianbiao Lu, Zhaohua Dai and other collaborators Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service Ge_Sun@ncsu.edu

    2. 2 Why modeling? Data synthesis tools (gap filling) Predictions (too expensive for measurement) Test hypotheses (answer what-if questions) Learning tools (integrated thinking)

    3. 3 Features of MIKE SHE Integrated watershed–scale hydrologic model Distributed, physically based, model for solving groundwater-surface water interactions User-friendly interface integrated with GIS Commercialized - (learning curve and bugs?)

    4. 4 What is MIKE SHE? Originally developed by Systeme Hydrologique Europeen (SHE). First generation of distributed feature since 1980s (Abbot et al., 1986; Reefsgaard and Storm, 1995). Commercialized by DHI, Inc in Denmark. In the US, it has been used by South Florida. It has been applied to hilly watersheds in Europe and Korea (Sangjun et al. 2004) No forest/ecological applications in the US yet California (Tague et al., 2004; Compared to RHESSys). Water quality modeling (Styszen and Storm (1993) and Birkinshaw and Ewen (2000).

    5. 5 What is MIKE SHE?

    6. 6

    7. 7

    8. 8 Surface flow and Channel Flow Routing 2-D Diffusive Wave Equation solved by implicit finite difference method 1-D Saint Venant equation for river flow and water level Surface water and aquifer exchange (Coupling MIKE SHE and MIKE 11)

    9. 9 Evapotranspiration(ET) Kristensen and Jensen ET Method Reference ET based on FAO Penman-Monteith model or other PET method AET=Canopy Interception+Soil E + Plan T Interception=f(LAI) Soil E=f(LAI,PET, Soil Moisture) Plan T= f(LAI, Root Depth, Soil Moisture)

    10. 10 Unsaturated Water Movement (3 options) 1-D Richard’s Equation Require soil moisture release data Gravity flow (Vertical unit gradient) Require soil moisture release data Simple two-layer water balance Does not require soil moisture release data Require field capacity, porosity, wilting points

    11. 11 Saturated Water Movement 3-D groundwater flow solved by Finite Difference Method (MODFLOW) Geological layering Hydraulic conductivity, Specific yield (storage coefficients)

    12. 12 Input Data DEM 10-30 m resolution Climate data (hourly rainfall, temperature, solar radiation, RH, wind speed – for PET calculations). Soil data (spatial distribution, soil depth, type - ?(h), K(h). Land use/Vegetation (spatial distribution, LAI, rooting depth) Stream network and the cross-section profile. Geologic information – underneath aquifers (conductivity, storage coefficient).

    13. 13 Model Outputs Total flow (m3/s) at the watershed outlet or point of interest Spatial distribution of groundwater table Spatial distribution of soil moisture content at different layers Spatial distribution of ET Other detailed water fluxes (seepage from unsaturated zone to the saturated zone; groundwater flow direction)

    14. 14

    15. 15

    16. 16

    17. 17

    18. 18

    19. 19

    20. 20

    21. 21

    22. 22

    23. 23

    24. 24

    25. 25

    26. 26

    27. 27 Model Testing 1. Model Calibration (streamflow) January – December, 2003 2. Model Validation (streamflow) January – December, 2004, 2005

    28. 28 Model Setup (Topography)

    29. 29 Model Setup

    30. 30 Model Setup

    31. 31 Model Setup

    32. 32 Model Setup (Leaf Area Index LAI for Deciduous Forests)

    33. 33 Model Setup (Potential ET based on Penman Monteith method)

    34. 34 Model Calibration (2003)

    35. 35 Model Validation (2004, 2005)

    36. 36 Model Validation (2004, 2005)

    37. 37

    38. 38

    39. 39

    40. 40

    41. 41 Model Calibration (1988-1989)

    42. 42 Model Validation (1985-1990)

    43. 43

    44. 44

    45. 45

    46. 46

    47. 47

    48. 48

    49. 49

More Related