Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783

Research Article

Hydrological Modelling of Banjar River Watershed using HEC-HMS

Aniket Rajput*, Umakant Rawat, Ankit Yadav, PS Pawar and Devendra Vasht
Department of Soil and Water Engineering, College of Agricultural Engineering, JNKVV, Jabalpur-482004

Abstract
In this study, Hydrologic Engineering Centre’s Hydrologic Modeling The results suggest that HEC-HMS can be
System (HEC-HMS) is employed to simulate rainfall runoff process utilized for the hydrological modelling of
in Banjar river watershed situated in between Mandla and Balaghat the basin that will be helpful for various
district of Madhya Pradesh, India. The CartoDEM is used as input soil and water conservative practices.
elevation to generate the sub-watersheds and river characteristics. The
rainfall – runoff process is represented by the Soil Conservation Keywords: HEC-HMS, Hydrologic
Service Curve Number (SCS-CN) method. The performance of the modeling, Rainfall-Runoff simulation,
model is assessed using performance evaluation indicators such as Banjar Basin, SCS-CN
Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), Percentage Error in Peak and
Coefficient of Determination (R2). During calibration the values of *Correspondence
NSE, PEP and R2 obtained are 0.792, 4.96% and 0.849, and 0.751, Author: Aniket Rajput
10.51% and 0.809 for validation period, respectively. Email: aniketdocument04@gmail.com

Introduction
Soil and water are the two most important natural resources which are essential for agricultural production. The
production of crops is affected by the appropriate use and management of these resources [1]. Due to rapid increase in
urbanization, industrial growth, deforestation, climate change, the availability of water resources for the production of
agricultural crops and their needs has become very limited [2, 3]. To solve the problem of water scarcity attention is
needed on proper utilization and management of water resources [4]. Lack of land use planning and management
practices has adversely affected the surface runoff generation and production of agriculture. In developmental action
plans, accurate measurement and quantification of the river or channel flow generated by the respective basins is
important for soil and water infrastructure design [5].
The understanding of hydrological phenomena such as variations in runoff with changes in climatic, geographic
or physical factors are needed for the design of soil and water conservation structures [6]. It is desirable to estimate
the stream flows with respect of time of occurrence and magnitude for while designing and planning soil and water
conservation structures. The use of hydrological modelling becomes apparent for an ungagged and/or data scares
regions [7].
There are several hydrological models available such as Soil and Water Assessment Tool, Hydrologiska Byrans
Vattenavdelning model, Variable Infiltration Capacity model, etc. [8]. However, Hydrologic Engineering Centre’s
Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) is found to be easy to use and can be used in data scares region [9, 10]. A
number of studies were carried out by researchers using HEC-HMS model that prove its ability to simulate and
predict streamflow from the basin. For example, a study conducted by [11] used HEC-HMS model to simulate rainfall
runoff process in Abnama watershed in south of Iran and found that after calibration of lag time parameter, the model
can be used to perform hydrologic simulation. [12] Perform hydrological modelling using HEC-HMS for flood
forecasting in two subbasins with different slope and land use, in Iran. [13] used HEC-HMS and IHACRES model in
an arid basin of Jordan for simulation of a single stream flow to develop framework for rainfall runoff application.
The HEC-HMS model outperformed the IHACRES model. There are several studies that use the HEC-HMS for
hydrological modelling and found to be performing well [14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19].
In this study we attempt to simulate the rainfall-runoff process using HEC-HMS hydrological model in Banjar
river watershed where various watershed development and management activities are being proposed. The study will
be useful to provide information to the decision makers for sustainable planning and management policies related to
soil and water conservation measures and infrastructure development projects.

Study Area
The present study is being carried out in the Banjar river watershed. The Banjar River originate in Mandla district,
Madhya Pradesh, India. Most of the watershed lies in Balaghat district with some part under the Mandla district of

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 81
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
Madhya Pradesh. Banjar River is one of the main tributary of the Narmada River. Geographically the watershed is
located in between 22005’N to 23029’N latitudes and between 80022’E to 81000’E longitudes. It covers a total
geographical area of around 2461 sq. km, with an elevation range of 384 to 848 m above mean sea level. The average
slope of the study area is relatively flat. The normal annual rainfall of the watershed is 1400 mm. The soils of the
watershed are clayey and loamy. The location of the study area is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Location Map of Study Area

Data Availability
The following data is collected from various sources for the hydrological modelling of the watershed.

Terrain Data

Digital Elevation Model (DEM) is a digital representation of a topography surface. The CartoDEM of the study area
is obtained from Indian Geo-Platform Bhuvan (https://bhuvan.nrsc.gov.in/bhuvan_links.php). Four tiles were
downloaded and then mosaic together. The data was obtained in Tagged Image file (.tif) format with a spatial
resolution of 30 m.

Rainfall Data

The daily rainfall data is obtained from India Meteorological Department (IMD) website ( http://imdpune.gov.in/
Clim_Pred_LRF_New/Grided_Data_Download.html). The spatial resolution of data was 0.250x0.250. The
rainfall data is extracted for the study are that covered six grid points.

Discharge Data

Daily discharge data of stream gauging station at outlet Bamhani banjar of the watershed is collected from central
water commission (CWC).

Soil Data

The soil map was constructed in GIS environment in form of vector layer using sheet no. 5 of the soil map generated

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 82
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
by National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning (NBSSLUP) at a scale 1:500000. Soil map is further
classified into A, B, C and D hydrologic soil groups (HSGs) as per infiltration rate based on [20]. Soil group with
HSG of B and D are available that have the properties of low infiltration rate and more runoff. The soil map of the
study area is shown in Figure 2. In most part of the study area, surface soil is loamy and the subsurface soil is sandy
clay loam except in alluvial deposits that have relatively heavy texture of clay.

Land Use/Land Cover (LULC)

Landsat 8 satellite image with a spatial resolution of 30 m is used to make LULC map. The imagery was classified
using unsupervised classification. The validation is performed using high resolution imagery from Google Earth. The
LULC map of the study area is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 2 Soil Map of Study Area

Figure 3 LULC Map of Study Area

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 83
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
Model Description

HEC-HMS is a physics based, semi-distributed hydrological model that simulates the hydrological processes of
watershed systems in a wide range of geographic areas such as large river basins and small urban or natural
watersheds. HEC-HMS is developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC).
The software used for the present study is HEC-HMS (v4.6.1) and was downloaded from the USACE website
(https://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-hms/downloads.aspx). The Geospatial Hydrologic Modeling
Extension (HEC-GeoHMS) is an extension and integrating tool between HEC-HMS and GIS. HEC-GeoHMS uses
ArcGIS and the Spatial Analyst extension tool to process geospatial data and develop hydrologic modeling inputs for
HEC-HMS model.

Methodology
The overall methodology is represented in the Figure 4. The CartoDEM is processed using HEC-GeoHMS to
generate sub-watersheds and channel characteristics. The curve number is generated using based on the LULC and
the HSG provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service [20]. The curve number grid is shown in Figure 5.
The loss method used is Soil Conservation Service Curve Number (SCS-CN), the transform method is Soil
Conservation Service Unit Hydrograph, and channel routing method is Muskingum-Cunge.

Figure 4 Flow Chart of Methodology

The HEC-HMS model includes four basic components, i.e., the basin models, meteorological models, control
simulations and input data. The basin model stores the physical datasets describing the catchment properties and the
meteorological model includes precipitation, evapotranspiration, and snowmelt data. The time span of a simulation is
controlled by control specifications including a starting date and time, ending date and time, and computation time
step. Input data stores boundary and parameter conditions for basin and meteorological models.

Loss Method

The SCS-CN method accounts for most of the runoff-producing watershed characteristics, such as soil type, land use,
hydrologic soil group, and antecedent moisture condition [13, 19 and 21].
The formula for calculating loss through the SCS-CN method is

(1)

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 84
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
Where Q is the runoff value (mm), P is the precipitation (mm), Ia is the initial abstraction (mm), S is the potential
maximum retention.

Figure 5 Curve number map

The potential maximum retention (S) is a measurement of the capacity of a catchment to abstract and retain storm
precipitation. There will be no precipitation excess until the accumulated rainfall exceeds the initial abstraction. As
shown in equation (2)

Ia = 0.2S (2)

Therefore, the cumulative excess at time t is given as

(3)

Soil retention is calculated using CN values with the formula as

(4)

CN = SCS curve number for the watershed.

In this study the values of CN can be obtained for different land uses, treatment, and hydrologic conditions from
the standard table are found in the Technical Release Number 55 (TR-55) [20]. The CN values vary from 100 to 55.
The value of 100 is assumed for water bodies and 55 for permeable soils of moderate infiltration rates.

Model Calibration and Validation

Model calibration is a systematic process and is performed to obtain the best fit between model calculations and
observed data by adjusting or changing the selected parameters in the model [22]. These calibration parameters were
estimated using a trial and error method in the HEC-HMS model until an appropriate match was obtained between
observed and simulated daily flow data at the gauging station. The next step after the model setup and calibration is
the validation of the model. The process of comparing the model to the real system is validation. Validation is
achieved without any additional adjustment to the model parameters by running the model using data covering an
alternative period. In this study only one extreme event September 2005 and was selected for model calibration and
other extreme event August 2014 were used for validation.

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 85
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
Model performance evaluations

The HEC-HMS model performance evaluation involved assessing the goodness of fit between the observed and
simulated stream flow using through visual examination of the simulated and observed hydrograph, and through
statistical indicators such as Nash and Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), Coefficient of determination (R 2), Percent error
peak flow (PEPF) and Root mean square error (RMSE). The values of NSE, R 2, and PEPF were calculated using the
following equations

1. The percentage Error in Peak Flow (PEPF).

Where are the observed and simulated flows, respectively.

2. The Coefficient of correlation (R2).

R2 is indicates how the simulated data correlates to the observed values of data. The range of R 2 is extends from 0
(Unacceptable) to 1(best)

3. Nash-Sutcliffe efficiencies (NSE) [23].

Nash-Sutcliffe efficiencies can range from -∞ to 1.

Where: = observed discharge, = simulated discharge, = mean of observed discharge, = mean of
simulated discharge.
To interpret the results, general performance ratings shown in Table 1 were used as a guide [24, 25, 26 and 27]

Table 1 Performance indicator for various evaluation criteria

Performance Rating PEPF (%) R2 NSE
Very good <15 0.75 to 1 0.75 to 1
Good 15 to 30 0.65 to 0.75 0.65 to 0.75
Satisfactory 30 to 40 0.50 to 0.65 0.50 to 0.65
Unsatisfactory >40 <0.50 <0.50

Results and Discussion

The HEC-HMS rainfall-runoff model for the Banjar river watershed is shown in Figure 6. The Banjar river watershed
is divided into 57 sub-watersheds.

Calibration and Validation

The model is calibrated in order to determine the best fit between the model and observation. HEC-HMS has a trail
optimization function that can be used to match the simulated flow with observed flow. The HEC-HMS model is
calibrated and validated using two different events of 2005 (September) and 2014 (August) in the Banjar river
watershed respectively, as shown in Figure 7-8.
From the results of the calibration run on event dated 15th September 2005, the computed peak discharge was
1528.1 m3/s lower than the observed peak discharge of 1455.9 m3/s, with an acceptable percent error of peak flow
4.96 %. In terms of model efficiency, the NSE was 0.792, which means there was an acceptable agreement produced
by the rainfall-runoff model.

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 86
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783

Figure 6 Basin Model Map of Study Area

Figure 7 (a) Observed and Simulated discharge for the calibration period

Figure 7 (b) Scatter plots of observed discharge versus simulated discharge for the calibration period

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 87
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783

Figure 8 (a) Observed and Simulated discharge for the validation period

Figure 8 (b) Scatter plots of observed discharge versus simulated discharge for the validation period.

Table 2 shows the percent error peak (PEPF), the coefficient of determination (R2), and the Nash-Sutcliffe
efficiency (NSE) for calibration events. It indicates a close relationship between the observed and simulated flow and
the model performance is very good. Once the calibration was completed, then the calibrated final parameters were
taken as input in the selected other events of August 2014 for the model validation.
The validated results of 2014 events are as shown in Figure 8. The coefficient of determination (R 2), the percent error
peak flow (PEPF), and Nash Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) values are obtained as 0.809, 10.51% and 0.751 respectively
for 2014 event. This is resulted closely and good correlation between the observed and simulated flow.

Table 2 Model performance statistics during calibration and validation period

Period Objective function
PEPF (%) NSE R2
Calibration 4.96 0.792 0.849
Validation 10.51 0.751 0.809

Conclusion
In the present study, hydrological modelling of Banjar river watershed is carried out using HEC-HMS. The SCS-CN
is used to represent loss method, the transform method is Soil Conservation Service Unit Hydrograph, and
Muskingum-Cunge as channel routing method. The model is evaluated using Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency, coefficient of
determination and percentage error in peak flow. Daily timescale calibration and validation results over the study area
show good performance with NSE, R2 and PEPF (%) 0.792, 0.849 and 4.96% respectively for calibration and 0.751,

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 88
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
0.809 and 10.51% respectively for validation. The developed hydrologic model is found to be a good fit for the basin.
The calibrated model is very much useful for better planning and management practices of water resources in the
study area or for the basin having similar characteristics. In future, the simulation can be done for other rainfall
events.

Acknowledgment
The authors are thankful to National Agriculture Higher Education Project (NAHEP), Centre for Advanced
Agricultural Science and Technology on “Skill development to use spatial data for natural resources management in
agriculture”, Department of Soil and Water Engineering, College of Agricultural Engineering, JNKVV, Jabalpur for
providing financial and other support.

References
[1] J. Lampurlanés, D. Plaza-Bonilla, J. Álvaro-Fuentes, C. Cantero-Martínez et al. Long-term analysis of soil
water conservation and crop yield under different tillage systems in Mediterranean rainfed conditions. Field
Crops Research 2016; 189:59-67
[2] D. Shi, W. Wang, G. Jiang, X. Peng, Y. Yu, Li Y, W. Ding et al. Effects of disturbed landforms on the soil
water retention function during urbanization process in the Three Gorges Reservoir Region, China. Catena
2016; 144:84-93.
[3] R. Lal, J. A. Delgado, P. M. Groffman, N. Millar, C. Dell, A. Rotz et al. Management to mitigate and adapt to
climate change. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 2011; 66(4):276-285.
[4] H. Xiubin, L. Zhanbin, H. Mingde, T. Keli, Z. Fengli et al. Down-scale analysis for water scarcity in response
to soil–water conservation on Loess Plateau of China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 2003;
94(3):355-361
[5] W. P. David. Soil and water conservation planning: policy issues and recommendations (No. JPD 1988 Vol.
XV No. 1-c). Philippine Institute for Development Studies, 1988.
[6] J. C. Refsgaard and M. B. Abbott. The role of distributed hydrological modelling in water resources
management in Distributed hydrological modelling. Springer, Dordrecht 1990; 1-16.
[7] I. P. Sentís. Hydrological approach to soil and water conservation. 2001.
[8] G. K. Devia, B. P. Ganasri, G. S. Dwarakish. A review on hydrological models. Aquatic Procedia 2015;
4:1001-1007
[9] D. Halwatura, M. M. M. Najim. Application of the HEC-HMS model for runoff simulation in a tropical
catchment. Environmental Modelling & Software 2013; 46: 155–162.
[10] X. Chu and A. Steinman. Event and continuous hydrologic modeling with HEC-HMS. Journal of Irrigation and
Drainage Engineering 2009; 135(1):119–124.
[11] A. Majidi, and K. Shahedi. Simulation of rainfall-runoff process using Green-Ampt method and HEC-HMS
model (Case study: Abnama Watershed, Iran) International Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 2012; 1(1):5-9.
[12] A. Asadi and F. Boostani. Application of HEC-HMS for flood forecasting in Kabkian basin and Delibajak
subbasin in Iran. Journal of Engineering 2013; 3(9):10-16.
[13] E. Abushandi and B. Merkel. Modelling Rainfall Runoff Relations Using HEC-HMS and IHACRES for a
Single Rain Event in an Arid Region of Jordan. Water Resources Management, 2013; 27(7):2391–2409.
[14] K. Darji, V. Khokhani, D. I. Prakash, K. Mehmood, B. T. Pham, M. E. Final et al. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling
Using HEC-HMS Model: An Application of Regression Analysis. Journal of Emerging Technologies and
Innovative Research 2019; 6(5).
[15] M. R. Knebl, Z. L. Yang, K. Hutchison, D. R. Maidment. Regional scale flood modeling using NEXRAD
rainfall, GIS, and HEC-HMS/RAS: a case study for the San Antonio River basin summer 2002 storm event.
Journal of Environmental Management 2005; 75(4):325–336.
[16] P. Gao, G. J. Carbone, Lu J. Flood simulation in South Carolina watersheds using different precipitation inputs.
Advance Meteorol 2018; 1–10.
[17] S. Natarajan and N. Radhakrishnan. Simulation of extreme event-based rainfall–runoff process of an urban

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 89
Chemical Science Review and Letters ISSN 2278-6783
catchment area using HEC-HMS. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment 2019; 5(4):1867–1881.
[18] S. P. Mandal, A. Chakrabarty. Flash flood risk assessment for upper Teesta river basin: Using the hydrological
modeling system (HEC-HMS) software. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment 2016; 2(2): 59.
[19] W. Yuan, M. Liu and F. Wan. Calculation of Critical Rainfall for Small-Watershed Flash Floods Based on the
HEC-HMS Hydrological Model. Water Resources Management 2019; 33(7):2555–2575.
[20] USDA Urban hydrology for small watersheds, technical release 55. United states Department of Agriculture.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. Conservation Engineering Division, Washington, D.C. 1986.
[21] S. K. Mishra and V. P. Singh. Long-term hydrological simulation based on the soil conservation service curve
number. Hydrol Processes 2004; 18:1291–1313.
[22] A. Belayneh, G. Sintayehu, K. Gedam and T. Muluken. Evaluation of satellite precipitation products using
HEC-HMS model. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment 2020; 6(4):2015-2032.
[23] J. E. Nash and J. V. Sutcliffe. River flow forecasting through conceptual models Part 1-A discussion of
principals. J. Hydrology 1970; 10:282-290.
[24] C. Santhi, J. Arnold, J. Williams, J. Dugas, and Srinivasan. Validation of the SWAT model. J Am Water
Resource Association 2001; 37(5):1169–1188.
[25] D. N. Moriasi, J. G. Arnold, M. W. VanLiew, R. L. Bingner, R. D. Harmel, T. L. Veith et al. Model evaluation
guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the American
Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) 2007; 50: 885−900.
[26] S. L. Gebre. Application of the HEC-HMS Model for Runoff Simulation of Upper Blue Nile River Basin.
Journal of Waste Water Treatment & Analysis, 2015: 06(02).
[27] W. Ouédraogo, J. Raude and J. Gathenya. Continuous Modeling of the Mkurumudzi River Catchment in Kenya
Using the HEC-HMS Conceptual Model: Calibration, Validation, Model Performance Evaluation and
Sensitivity Analysis. Hydrology 2018; 5(3):44.

© 2021, by the Authors. The articles published from this journal are distributed Publication History
to the public under “Creative Commons Attribution License” (http://creative Received 04.01.2021
commons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). Therefore, upon proper citation of the original Revised 04.02.2021
work, all the articles can be used without any restriction or can be distributed in Accepted 15.02.2021
any medium in any form. For more information please visit www.chesci.com. Online 30.03.2021

DOI:10.37273/chesci.CS205201275 Chem Sci Rev Lett 2021, 10 (37), 81-90 Article cs205201275 90