SWAT模型参数校准方法对比研究  

A Comparative Study of the SWAT Model Parameter Calibration Methods

作　　者：樊琨[1] 马孝义[1] 李忠娟[1] 冯珍珍[1] 钟新铭 

机构地区：[1]西北农林科技大学,陕西杨凌712100

出　　处：《中国农村水利水电》2015年第4期77-81,共5页China Rural Water and Hydropower

基　　金：国家科技支撑计划(2012BAD08B01);"十二五""863"计划课题(2011AA100509)

摘　　要：以SWAT2005与SWAT2012建立的三水河流域水文模型为研究对象,分别采用手动校准和SWAT-CUP自动校准两类参数校准方案,对模型的参数进行调整。阐述了两类校准方案的原理、优势与劣势,总结了手动校准时遇到的一些问题及解决方法,两种校准方案均采用决定系数R2与纳什效率系数ENS为校准指标,手动校准后R2与ENS在校准期分别为0.73与0.71,在验证期分别为0.76与0.72,自动校准后R2与ENS在校准期分别达到了0.85与0.84,在验证期分别为0.85与0.79。对比结果表明手动校准耗时较长,研究人员需要一定的校准经验;SWAT-CUP自动校准效率高,结果较好,但结果的稳定性不如手动校准,会出现误差,SWAT模型校准仍需要人工进行干预调整,不可完全依赖自动校准。Sanshui River hydrological models established by SWAT2005 and SWAT2012 as the research object are applied to manual‐ly calibration and SWAT-CUP automatic calibration to adjust the parameters of the model .The principle of the two calibration meth‐ods ,strengths and weaknesses are described .Some of the questions about the manual calibration and the solutions are summarized . Two calibration methods are used in the determination coefficient R2 and Nash efficiency coefficient ENS as the target function .R2 and ENS after manual calibration are 0 .73 and 0 .71 in the calibration period ,the validation period are 0 .76 and 0 .72 ,after automat‐ic calibration ,R2 and ENS in calibration period reached 0 .85 and 0 .84 ,and in the validation period were 0 .85 and 0 .79 .The results show that manual calibration takes longer and researchers need some calibration experience ;SWAT-CUP automatic calibration is more efficient and has better results ,but its stability is poor ,there may be errors ,SWAT model calibration still requires manual in‐tervention to adjust ,cannot fully rely on automatic calibration .

关 键 词：SWAT模型 SWAT-CUP 参数校准 地理信息系统 

分 类 号：P334.92[天文地球—水文科学]