Development of a Hybrid Watershed Model STREAM: Test Application of the Model

복합형 유역모델 STREAM의 개발(II): 모델의 시험 적용

Cho, Hong-Lae;Jeong, Euisang;Koo, Bhon Kyoung

  • Received : 2015.05.17
  • Accepted : 2015.09.01
  • Published : 2015.09.30


In this study, some of the model verification results of STREAM (Spatio-Temporal River-basin Ecohydrology Analysis Model), a newly-developed hybrid watershed model, are presented for the runoff processes of nonpoint source pollution. For verification study of STREAM, the model was applied to a test watershed and a sensitivity analysis was also carried out for selected parameters. STREAM was applied to the Mankyung River Watershed to review the applicability of the model in the course of model calibration and validation against the stream flow discharge, suspended sediment discharge and some water quality items (TOC, TN, TP) measured at the watershed outlet. The model setup, simulation and data I/O modules worked as designed and both of the calibration and validation results showed good agreement between the simulated and the measured data sets: NSE over 0.7 and $R^2$ greater than 0.8. The simulation results also include the spatial distribution of runoff processes and watershed mass balance at the watershed scale. Additionally, the irrigation process of the model was examined in detail at reservoirs and paddy fields.


Calibration;Hybrid watershed model;Nonpoint source pollution;Sensitivity analysis;Validation;Verification


  1. Anderton, S., Latron, J., and Gallart, F. (2002). Sensitivity Analysis and Multi-Response, Multi-Criteria Evaluation of a Physically Based Distributed Model, Hydrological Processes, 16(2), pp. 333-353.
  2. Bicknell, B. R., Imhoff, J. C., Kittle, J. L., Jr., Jobes, T. H., and Donigian, A. S. Jr. (2005). HSPF Version 12.2 User's Manual, National Exposure Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Athens, Georgia, USA.
  3. Cho, J. and Mostaghimi, S. (2009). Dynamic Agricultural Nonpoint Source Assessment Tool (DANSAT): Model Application, Biosystems Engineering, 102(4), pp. 500-515.
  4. Everaert, W. (1991). Empirical Relations for the Sediment Transport Capacity of Interrill Flow, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 16(6), pp. 513-532.
  5. Jeolabuk-do Agricultural Research & Extension Services. (2015). Jeolabuk-do Agricultural Research & Extension Services, (accessed Mar. 2015).
  6. Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J, V. (1970). River Flow Forecasting Through Conceptual Models. Part I: a Discussion of Principles, Journal of Hydrology, 10 pp. 282-290.
  7. Neitsch S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., and Williams, J. R. (2009). Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), Theoretical Documentation Version 2009, Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory - Agricultural Research Service, Blackland Research Center, Temple, Texas, USA.
  8. Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., and Veith, T. L. (2007). Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations, Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 50(3), pp. 885-900.
  9. Ramanarayanan, T. S., Williams, J. R., Dugas, W. A., Hauck, L., M., and McFarland, A. M. S. (1997). Using APEX to Identify Alternative Practices for Animal Waste Management, American Society of Agricultural Engineers International Meeting, 97-2209, pp. 1-7.
  10. Refsgaard, J. C. and Knudsen, J. (1996). Operational Validation and Intercomparison of Different Types of Hydrological Models. Water Resources Research, 32(7), pp. 2189-2202.
  11. Rossman, L. A. (2005). Storm Water Management Model User's Manual, Version 5.0, USA Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
  12. Van Rijn, L. C. (1984). Sediment Transport, Part II: Suspended Load Transport. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 110(11), 1613-1641.