All Issue

2025 Vol.35, Issue 1 Preview Page

Research Article

Optimizing Outflow Simulations Using the SWAT Model in a Small Watershed with Scarce Discharge Observations: A Methodological Approach
Sadiqi Sayed Shah Jan1
,
Teak-So Hong2
,
Eun-Mi Hong3
,
Gyoo-Bum Kim4*
1Researcher, Department of Disaster and Safety Engineering, Daejeon University
2Master Degree Student, Department of Disaster and Safety Engineering, Daejeon University
3Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Kangwon National University
4Professor, Department of Disaster and Safety Engineering, Daejeon University
*Corresponding Author
31 March 2025. pp. 63-80
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Understanding how water moves through a landscape is essential for managing water resources, especially in small areas where direct measurements are scarce. In this study, we used the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model to estimate how much water flows out of a watershed using limited data. Our analysis included information on land use, soil type, and weather patterns from 2021 to 2024, helping us account for changes in rainfall, including extreme weather events. Over these four years, the area received an average of 1,481 mm of rainfall per year, with 397 mm running off the surface. The total amount of water flowing out, including underground water movement, was estimated at 711 mm per year, which made up about 48% of the total rainfall. To improve accuracy, we adjusted CN2, SOL_K, and ALPHA_BF key model settings related to how water moves through the soil and how streams are fed by underground sources. The model showed that underground water movement varied throughout the year, with the lowest values in April (9 mm) and the highest in August (39 mm), reflecting wetter conditions. Water lost through plant use and evaporation also changed with the seasons, reaching its peak in July (115 mm) and dropping to its lowest levels in winter (17 mm in January and December). When we compared the model’s predictions with actual data, the results showed a strong match. The model slightly underestimated water flow in October 2024, but overall, it provided reliable estimates. Despite the limited data, our findings show that this approach is useful for understanding water flow in small watersheds and can support better planning for water use and flood prevention.

Keywords
hydrological modeling
SWAT
surface runoff
SWAT-CUP
sensitivity analysis
water budget
References
1

Abbaspour, K.C., Rouholahnejad, E., Srinivasan, R., Yang, H., Kløve, B., 2015, A continental-scale hydrology and water quality model for Europe: Calibration and uncertainty of a high-resolution large-scale SWAT model, Journal of Hydrology, 524, 733-752.

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.027
2

Abbaspour, K.C., Yang, J., Maximov, I., Siber, R., Bogner, K., Mieleitner, J., Srinivasan, R., 2007, Modelling hydrology and water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using SWAT, Journal of Hydrology, 333(2-4), 413-430.

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.09.014
3

Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998, Crop evapotranspiration: Guidelines for computing crop water requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, FAO, Rome, 300(9), D05109.

4

Arnold, J.G., Allen, P.M., Volk, M., Williams, J.R., Bosch, D.D., 2010, Assessment of different representations of spatial variability on SWAT model performance, Transactions of the ASABE, 53(5), 1433-1443.

10.13031/2013.34913
5

Arnold, J.G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R.S., Williams, J.R., 1998, Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment Part I: Model development, Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 34(1), 73-89.

10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x
6

Burger, J., 2019, A framework for increasing sustainability and reducing risk to ecological resources through integration of remediation planning and implementation, Environmental Research, 172, 586-595.

10.1016/j.envres.2019.02.03630875512
7

Costa, D., Zhang, H., Levison, J., 2021, Impacts of climate change on groundwater in the Great Lakes Basin: A review, Journal of Great Lakes Research, 47(6), 1613-1625.

10.1016/j.jglr.2021.10.011
8

De Vries, J.J., Simmers, I., 2002, Groundwater recharge: An overview of processes and challenges, Hydrogeology Journal, 10, 5-17.

10.1007/s10040-001-0171-7
9

Eamus, D., Zolfaghar, S., Villalobos-Vega, R., Cleverly, J., Huete, A., 2015, Groundwater-dependent ecosystems: Recent insights from satellite and field-based studies, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 19(10), 4229-4256.

10.5194/hess-19-4229-2015
10

Garg, V., Nikam, B.R., Thakur, P.K., Aggarwal, S.P., 2013, Assessment of the effect of slope on runoff potential of a watershed using NRCS-CN method, International Journal of Hydrology Science and Technology, 3(2), 141-159.

10.1504/IJHST.2013.057626
11

Gassman, P.W., Reyes, M.R., Green, C.H., Arnold, J.G., 2007, The soil and water assessment tool: Historical development, applications, and future research directions, Transactions of the ASABE, 50(4), 1211-1250.

10.13031/2013.23637
12

Guinn Garrett, C., Vulava, V.M., Callahan, T.J., Jones, M.L., 2012, Groundwater-surface water interactions in a lowland watershed: Source contribution to stream flow, Hydrological Processes, 26(21), 3195-3206.

10.1002/hyp.8257
13

Hong, S.Y., Zhang, Y.S., Kim, Y.H., Jung, K.H., Lee, Y.J., Choe, E., Jung, K.Y., 2008, Development of soil information system and its application in Korea, National Academy of Agricultural Science, 1-17.

14

Kim, D.W., Chung, E.G., Kim, K., Kim, Y., 2022, Impact of riverbed topography on hydrology in small watersheds using Soil and Water Assessment Tool, Environmental Modelling & Software, 152, 105383.

10.1016/j.envsoft.2022.105383
15

Lee, J., Jung, C., Kim, S., Kim, S., 2019, Assessment of climate change impact on future groundwater-level behavior using SWAT groundwater-consumption function in Geum River Basin of South Korea, Water, 11(5), 949.

10.3390/w11050949
16

Lee, S., Kim, D., McCarty, G.W., Anderson, M., Gao, F., Lei, F., Sun, L., 2024, Spatial calibration and uncertainty reduction of the SWAT model using multiple remotely sensed data, Heliyon, 10(10), e30923.

10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e3092338778950PMC11108841
17

Lewis, E., Birkinshaw, S., Kilsby, C., Fowler, H.J., 2018, Development of a system for automated setup of a physically-based, spatially-distributed hydrological model for catchments in Great Britain, Environmental Modelling & Software, 108, 102-110.

10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.07.006
18

McMillan, H., Krueger, T., Freer, J., 2012, Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: Rainfall, river discharge and water quality, Hydrological Processes, 26(26), 4078-4111.

10.1002/hyp.9384
19

McMillan, J.M., Birkmann, S., Tangwanichagapong, S., Jamshed, A., 2022, Spatial planning and systems thinking tools for climate risk reduction: A case study of the Andaman Coast, Thailand, Sustainability, 14(13), 8022.

10.3390/su14138022
20

Moon, H.T., Yoon, S.K., Kim, J.S., Moon, Y.I., 2024, Assessing future urban flood hazard: A comprehensive approach to estimating the implications of future rainfall scenarios, Journal of Flood Risk Management, 17(3), e13000.

10.1111/jfr3.13000
21

Moriasi, D.N., Arnold, J.G., Van Liew, M.W., Bingner, R.L., Harmel, R.D., Veith, T.L., 2007, Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations, Transactions of the ASABE, 50(3), 885-900.

10.13031/2013.23153
22

Moriasi, D.N., Rossi, C.G., Arnold, J.G., Tomer, M.D., 2012, Evaluating hydrology of the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) with new tile drain equations, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 67(6), 513-524.

10.2489/jswc.67.6.513
23

Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Williams, J.R., 2005, Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Theoretical documentation version 2005, Retrieved from https://swat.tamu.edu/media/1292/SWAT2005theory.pdf.

24

Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Williams, J.R., 2011, Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Theoretical documentation version 2009, Texas Water Resources Institute, 647p.

25

Paradi, J.C., Yang, Z., Zhu, H., 2011, Assessing bank and bank branch performance: Modeling considerations and approaches, In: Cooper, W., Seiford, L., Zhu, J. (Eds.), Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis, Springer, 315-361.

10.1007/978-1-4419-6151-8_13
26

Sadiqi, S.S.J., Nam, W.H., Lim, K.J., Hong, E., 2024, Investigating nonpoint source and pollutant reduction effects under future climate scenarios: A SWAT-based study in a highland agricultural watershed in Korea, Water, 16(1), 179.

10.3390/w16010179
27

Tan, M.L., Gassman, P.W., Yang, X., Haywood, J., 2020, A review of SWAT applications, performance and future needs for simulation of hydro-climatic extremes, Advances in Water Resources, 143, 103662.

10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103662
28

Thiessen, A.H., 1911, District No. 10, Great Basin, Monthly Weather Review, 39(8), 1248-1248.

10.1175/1520-0493(1911)39<1248a:DNGB>2.0.CO;2
29

Van Liew, M.W., Veith, T.L., Bosch, D.D., Arnold, J.G., 2007, Suitability of SWAT for the conservation effects assessment project: Comparison on USDA Agricultural Research Service watersheds, Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 12(2), 173-189.

10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2007)12:2(173)
30

Wellen, C., Kamran-Disfani, A.R., Arhonditsis, G.B., 2015, Evaluation of the current state of distributed watershed nutrient water quality modeling, Environmental Science & Technology, 49(6), 3278-3290.

10.1021/es504955725691078
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Society of Engineering Geology
  • Publisher(Ko) :대한지질공학회
  • Journal Title :The Journal of Engineering Geology
  • Journal Title(Ko) :지질공학
  • Volume : 35
  • No :1
  • Pages :63-80
  • Received Date : 2024-12-15
  • Revised Date : 2025-02-20
  • Accepted Date : 2025-03-19
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.9720/kseg.2025.1.063
Journal Informaiton The Journal of Engineering Geology The Journal of Engineering Geology
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close