2021
DOI: 10.1111/wej.12695
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A combined catchment‐reservoir water quality model to guide catchment management for reservoir water quality control

Abstract: In this study, the Hydrological Simulation Programme‐FORTRAN (HSPF) and the Water Quality Analysis Simulation Programme (WASP), were adopted as a combined tool. The long Feitsui impounding reservoir located in Taiwan was used as a case study. The combined model helped illustrate the total phosphorus (TP) mass balance. Approximately 51.4% of the TP flowed out from the reservoir, while 16.2% of the TP remained in the waterbody and 32.2% of the TP was deposited. The reservoir was divided into five sections along … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The advantage of these methods is that their parameters are easy to tune and express, and they have a very clear physical meaning; also, the prediction model is robust and adaptable. Commonly used mechanism models generally include the MIKE model, CE-QUAL-W2 model, EFDC model, and WASP model [7][8][9][10]. However, due to the complex internal mechanism of some water bodies, it is difficult and time-consuming to directly describe the evolution process of water quality with mathematical expressions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The advantage of these methods is that their parameters are easy to tune and express, and they have a very clear physical meaning; also, the prediction model is robust and adaptable. Commonly used mechanism models generally include the MIKE model, CE-QUAL-W2 model, EFDC model, and WASP model [7][8][9][10]. However, due to the complex internal mechanism of some water bodies, it is difficult and time-consuming to directly describe the evolution process of water quality with mathematical expressions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of the existing water quality modeling or time-series predicting methods are based on the mechanism or the LSTM model [7][8][9][10]26]. This paper not only avoids the complexity of constructing a mechanistic model but also extracts data features to reduce the dependence on data quality, which proposes an improved deep belief network (DBN) and LSTM fusion method to construct a water quality prediction model based on a data-driven approach, and constructs a DBN with Gaussian Restricted Boltzmann Machines (GRBMs) stacking to improve the algorithm, noted as GDBN, which solves the problem of data loss in the feature extraction of the classical DBN neuron binary problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Namely, mechanical models typically have a large number of parameters, and if these parameters are not well-tuned or there are large errors, the simulation effect of the models could be significantly affected. Commonly used mechanism models generally include the MIKE model, CE-QUAL-W2 model, EFDC model, and WASP model [7][8][9][10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are different methods and approaches to couple these two models. Various commonly used coupling models have been reported, i.e., the coupling of HEC and water quality analysis simulation program (WASP), hydrological simulation program-Fortran (HSPF) and SWAT, HSPF and WASP, SWAT and CE-QUAL-W2, , and SWAT and EFDC. , Despite the aforementioned reports, these coupling models were not summarized and compared in detail, specifically their simulation mechanisms and application fields.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%