4.5 Article

Modelling-based methodological approach to assess the effect of urbanization on hydrology and runoff water quality: a case of study for tropical and dry regions

期刊

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 87, 期 3, 页码 783-797

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2023.010

关键词

environmental modelling; runoff quality; runoff quantity; urban drainage modelling; urban hydrology; urbanization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a modelling-based methodology using EPA SWMM to evaluate the effect of urbanization on watershed hydrology in Spain and Colombia. Results show that urbanization significantly increases variables such as runoff volume, peak flow, and pollutant loads. The effect of urbanization differs between the two regions, with Colombian cities having higher values and Spanish cities showing more variability. The analysis also allowed clustering of cities within each country based on their modeled hydrological behavior, and the curve fitting procedure showed high performance rates for all variables studied.
It is necessary to have unified tools and methodologies for the correct understanding and quantification of urbanization effects on watershed hydrology. This study presents a modelling-based methodology developed on EPA SWMM to evaluate the effect of urbanization in conceptual watersheds using meteorological data from cities in Spain and Colombia. Results show that the effect of urbanization is significant in variables such as runoff volume, peak flow and pollutant loads, increasing these indicators in all cases. Furthermore, this effect has different dynamics for the regions evaluated. Overall, Colombian cities presented higher runoff volumes, peak flows and pollutant loads, while Spanish cities presented higher variability in these variables due to urbanization. The analysis allowed to cluster the cities within each country, using as criteria the modelled hydrological behaviour. A curve fitting procedure presented high performance rates for all the variables studied.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据