Shared Cost Action Projects in Area 3.3 (CEO) of the Specific Programme for Climate and Environment

HydAlp
Hydrology of Alpine and High Latitude Basins

Project Reference: ENV4-CT96-03634

Internal report RPR1
3-Monthly Progress Report 1: May 1997

Authors: Helmut Rott, Shaun Quegan, Michael Baumgartner
Date: 30 May 1997
Institute: Institute fuer Meteorologie und Geophysik der Universitaet Innsbruck

This document was produced under the terms and conditions of Contract ENV4-CT96-03634 for the European Union, DG XXII.

Distribution list

Hard copies to:

Electronic form available:

internally by all project members through CEO ftp server:
directory: HYDALP/private/common/3-monthReps/RPR1
Files: RPR1.doc, Figures: BASAT.doc, BASCH.doc, BASSW.doc

Amendment record

Table of Contents

1. Summary of technical activities and management issues during month 1 to 3 *

1.1 Project status *

1.2 Problems and risks *

1.3 Quality control *

2. WP100: Project Management *

2.1 WP 110: Technical Co-ordination *

2.1.1 WP 111: Definition of report formats and standards *

2.1.2 WP 112: Definition of software standards *

2.2 WP 120: Management and Administration *

2.2.1 WP 121: Scientific and technical management *

2.2.2 WP 122: Milestones, meetings, risk analysis *

2.3 WP 130: Communication and Interaction with End Customers *

2.3.1 WP 131: Organisation of customer community and meetings *

2.3.2 WP 132: Dissemination of framework standards for customer requirements *

3. WP200: Assessment of customer needs and data base compilation *

3.1.1 WP 201: WP supervision and quality control *

3.2 WP 210: Specification of customer needs *

3.2.1 WP211: Assessment of customer needs *

3.2.2 WP212: Customer Workshop *

3.2.3 WP213: Requirements for Hydropower Management *

3.2.4 WP214: Interim Report 1 on Customer Requirements *

3.3 WP 220: Hydrological and meteorological data base compilation *

3.3.1 WP221: Status of BASAT *

3.3.2 WP222: Status of BASCH *

3.3.3 WP223: Status of BASSW *

3.3.4 WP224: Status of BASUK *

3.3.5 WP225: Data access module and file transfer *

3.4 WP230: Remote sensing data base *

3.4.1 WP231: Search and acquisition of NOAA data *

3.4.2 WP232: Definition data requirements / acquisition requests *

3.4.3 WP233: Remote sensing data search *

3.5 WP240: Field experiments *

3.5.1 WP241: Preparation and conductance of Field Work - BASAT *

3.5.2 WP242: Preparation and conductance of Field Work - BASUK *

3.5.3 WP243 and WP244 *

4. WP 300: Remote sensing methods and analysis *

4.1.1 WP 301: WP supervision and quality control *

4.2 WP 310: Extraction of Basin Characteristics *

4.2.1 WP 311: Review of methods and improvements *

4.3 WP 320: Remote Sensing Methods for High Resolution Sensors *

4.3.1 WP 321: Improvement of methods for SAR & HROI *

4.3.2 WP 322: Methods for geocoding and information extraction *

4.4 WP 330: Remote Sensing Methods for Medium Resolution Sensors *

4.4.1 WP 331: Review and improvement of methods for MROI *

4.5 Summary of progress on active WP 300 tasks *

5. WP400: Hydrological Modelling *

6. HydAlp Basins *

• Summary of technical activities and management issues during month 1 to 3

• Project status

During the first three project months various organisational questions had to be solved, including the assignment of task and WP responsibilities, definition of procedures for quality assessment, and the definition of report formats and standards. Certain management issues have been already addressed in the Kick-Off Meeting and 1st Technical Meeting, and are documented in the minutes of these meetings. The dissemination of framework standards for customer requirements (WP132) has been completed as a draft version. Further major activities included the data base selection and compilation (WP220 to WP240), and the interaction with customers (WP130 and WP210). Potential customers have been contacted, and the preparation of the Workshop of the Scottish Customer Focus Group is proceeding. The test basins in Austria, Scotland, Sweden, and Switzerland have been selected, and the compilation of the data base for these basins has been initiated. Preliminary field activities started in the Austrian basin in order to document the special snow cover situation of this spring.

Activities on review and improvement of remote sensing methods for hydrological application are in the first stage, including the review of methods for the extraction of basin characteristics (WP310), and the review of remote sensing methods for high resolution and medium resolution sensors (WP320 and WP330). Additional activities, scheduled for the three first project months were related to WP410 (intercomparisons of the SRM and HBV models) as part of WP400 (hydrological modelling). The progress report on WP400 has not yet been received, but will be submitted within the next days. As a basis for the hydrological modelling tasks software and documentation for SRM have been made available to the project partners at the project start, and were sent out for HBV in mid-May.

According to the monthly management reports and the technical information received by the project co-ordinator, most of the activities are proceeding without technical problems and are in time, but certain tasks are delayed due to organisational or technical problems. These issues are addressed in section 1.2.

1.2 Problems and risks

Various problems and risks, both on the technical and management side, have been identified. These were concluded from management reports and communications on technical issues. Though none of these problems represents at present a major risk for the conductance of the project, major negative impacts, jeopardising the full success of the project, have to be expected if the issues addressed below cannot be solved in the near future.

The main problems and risks result from shortcomings of the following activities:

  Co-ordination of work between the different institutes.

It is very important that the scientific work is co-ordinated in an early stage. At present major parts of the work are carried out in isolation at the various institutions. This may lead to duplication of work, incompatibility of results, and waste of resources, in particular of manpower. It is too late to find out that the work has gone in the wrong direction at the time when the deliverables are due. It is strongly recommended to exchange information, draft documents and preliminary reports well in advance of the date when the task or WP results have to be delivered. In addition to the use of telecommunication (including the exchange of draft documents), it is strongly recommended to foster the exchange of scientists between the partners’ institutes. Travel funds for this purpose have been requested and obtained by each partner.

  Guidance and control of work by WP managers and WP co-ordinators.

According to the organisational structure of HYDALP, which was set up in the project proposal and approved at the Kick-Off Meeting, the work of the individual tasks (at level WPXXX) should be co-ordinated and supervised by WP managers (level WPXX0) and WP co-ordinators (level WPX00). From one of the contributions to the 1st Progress Report the project co-ordinator had to conclude that the information had passed through all stages (Task manager -  WP manager -  WP co-ordinator) without quality control. (Activities had been performed within the task which were out of scope with the project plan).

It should not be necessary to mention that the task of WP managers and WP co-ordinators is not just to collect and pass on information, but to guide and co-ordinate the various tasks. If this is not the case the selected organisational structure is useless.

  Responsibilities for tasks and work packages.

According to the management structure, individual scientists are responsible for managing tasks and WPs. The project scientists who signed the contract with EU are responsible to select these persons and to inform the WP co-ordinators and the project co-ordinator on the responsibilities. If responsibilities are changing (even in case of temporary replacement) the WP co-ordinators and the project co-ordinator have to be informed in advance. In some cases confusion resulted from the fact that task reports were received from persons not known as task managers to the project management.

  Time schedule for reporting and deliverables.

At the Kick-Off Meeting it was agreed that the dates for reporting and for submitting of deliverables are firm final deadlines. The reason to be firm on this issue is the complexity of the project and the interdependence of individual tasks, as well as the experience of the first three months with significant efforts wasted for chasing monthly management reports.

It helps to keep the deadline by planning to submit the document in advance. In particular, early submission will be necessary during the upcoming holidays (anticipating that the dates of leave are known in advance). For the monthly management reports this should not cause any problems.

For the technical deliverables (reports) it may happen that part of the task cannot be fulfilled in time due to unexpected problems. Also in this case the deliverable has to be submitted at the given date, stating clearly which parts are missing and the anticipated date for the delivery of these parts. As mentioned above, due to the interdependence of tasks, an incomplete report at the specified date may help other tasks to proceed in time, whereas complete failure to keep the schedule very likely results in unacceptable long term delay of the overall project.

In view of the need for quality control (addressed in section 1.3) the due date for submitting of draft technical deliverables (reports) for project internal review is the 15th of the project month. The month for each deliverable is specified in the Technical Annexe of the contract. In order to enable the project scientists to adapt to this time schedule a transition phase is envisaged until project month 5. Also the contributions to the 3-Monthly Progress Report have to be submitted to the project co-ordinator on the 15th of month 3, 6, 9, ... .

As a last remark on the issues mentioned above, the project co-ordinator wants to stress that the majority of the project scientists is well aware of the need for certain management regulations and clearly proceeds along the agreed lines. However, in some cases the experience in participating in a complex international project seems to be missing, which was the reason for the explanations.

1.3 Quality control

Quality control was addressed as an important issue in the HYDALP proposal, and was actually recognised as one of the strengths during the review process. In order to guarantee reliable assessment of quality throughout the project, a few simple guidelines have been set up.

In an E-mail to the responsible project scientists on 15 May the project co-ordinator proposed guidelines for quality assessment and asked for comments. Only positive comments were received, though not all of the project partners responded. The rules are:

· Each deliverable has to be approved by
The WP manager (level WPXX0)
The WP co-ordinator (level WPX00)
The project co-ordinator.

· In order to avoid major delay the three reviews should be carried out in parallel within 10 days of delivery of the draft. The review is delivered by E-mail directly to the author of the deliverable with copy to the other two reviewers. The review process is co-ordinated by the WP co-ordinator.

· If one of the reviewers is not available during the period scheduled for review, another scientist may be proposed as reviewer in advance. The replacement has to be approved by the project co-ordinator (and WP co-ordinator, if applicable).

· A list of presence/absence is being maintained containing the periods of absence for project scientists (task managers, WP managers, WP co-ordinators) for three months in advance. Leaves of more than 4 days should be included. This is important for review activities and related communication, as well as for project activities in general.

2. WP100: Project Management

Objective: Project management at scientific, technical, and administrative level; organising the customer community and maintaining the interaction with the customers throughout the project.

Responsible: H. Rott, IMGI

Key issues of scientific and technical management are addressed above.

2.1 WP 110: Technical Co-ordination

Responsible: R. Caves, SCEOS

Objectives: To define a common format for the reports, as well as quality standards and formats for graphic work (WP 111); to define standards for the software which will be developed within the project; to define data formats and/or protocols for exchange of data files between project partners (WP 112).

Tasks within WP 110

WP 111 Definition of report formats and standards SCEOS Caves

WP 112 Definition of software standards IMGI Glendinning

2.1.1 WP 111: Definition of report formats and standards

Responsible: R. Caves, SCEOS, month 1-3

A first version of report formats was received by the project co-ordinator on 15 May 1997. Several minor changes were proposed. The final version was received by the project co-ordinator on 29 May 1997. Graphics quality and standards are still under discussion.

2.1.2 WP 112: Definition of software standards

Responsible: G.Glendinning, IMGI, month 1-6

A first version of the software standards has been put together for discussion, with contributions from DIBAG and UBE. This will be distributed for comment by June 10th. Possible problem areas include visualisation package and exact program documentation for reading by an automatic information extraction program.

2.2 WP 120: Management and Administration

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI

Objectives: Planning and supervision of the project activities in general, administration of the project finances, monitoring of project progress, analysis of potential problems and risks, quality control of deliverables (by the project coordinator, in parallel to the WP co-ordinator and WP manager), planning and organisation of meetings.

Tasks within WP 120

WP 121 Scientific and technical management IMGI Nagler

WP 122 Milestones, meetings, risk analysis IMGI Rott

2.2.1 WP 121: Scientific and technical management

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI, month 1-30

Issues and concerns related to this WP are addressed in the introductory part to this document by the project co-ordinator (under „Problems-Risks-Responsibilities" and „Quality Control").

At the Second Users Seminar of the Space Applications Institute (SAI) of JRC, held in Baveno near Ispra on 21-22 May 1997, an invited paper was presented by H. Rott on the project HYDALP with the title „ Remote Sensing Applications for Alpine Hydrology: a CEO Initiative". A summary paper was written for the seminar proceedings.

HYDALP has been selected for this seminar as „the representative CEO project", though the project is still in a very early stage. The project co-ordinator hopes that the project outcome will not be too far from the expectations of the CEO officials.

Status of the Action Items from the Kick-Off Meeting:

Status of the Action Items from the 1st Technical Meeting:

Deliverables received:Draft Report RI 132 „The Framework Standards for Customer Requirements" on 15 May 1997.Draft Report RI 111 ,,Definition of report formats and standards", May 1997

2.2.2 WP 122: Milestones, meetings, risk analysis

Responsible: H. Rott, IMGI, month 1-30

The Kick-Off Meeting and 1st Technical Meeting were held on 3 and 4 March in Innsbruck. The minutes of the meetings were compiled and distributed. Risk analysis see section 1.2 of this document.

2.3 WP 130: Communication and Interaction with End Customers

Responsible: G. Wright, MLURI

Objectives: To organise the customers (including project partners and new customers) for the purpose of obtaining specifications of their requirements for hydrological modelling and forecasting, for the assessment of project activities throughout the project, and for assessment of project results.

Tasks within WP 130

WP 131 Organisation of customer community and meetings MLURI Gauld

WP 132 Dissemination of framework standards for customer MLURI Wright
requirements

2.3.1 WP 131: Organisation of customer community and meetings

Responsible: Gauld, MLURI, month 1-30

Potential customers were contacted, several individual meetings were held with Scottish Customers. Candidates for the Scottish Customer Focus Group (SCFG) were identified.

Some 8-10 customers are now signed up for the SCFG and a further 2-4 are expected. The main theme of the work now lies in co-ordinating individual exploratory meetings with the customers identified and assisting with compilation of their responses, so that a series of useful questions can be produced to open the full meeting of the SCFG.

2.3.2 WP 132: Dissemination of framework standards for customer requirements

Responsible: G. Wright, MLURI, month 1-3

The Draft Report RI132 „The Framework Standards for Customer Requirements" was received by the project co-ordinator on 15 May 1997. The review with proposal for minor modifications was sent from IMGI to MLURI on 24 May 1997. As the Report RI132 will be put on the ftp site and sent out within the next days, there is no need to include detailed information in this progress report.

3. WP200: Assessment of customer needs and data base compilation

Objective: Definition of customer needs, preparation (including acquisition) of hydrological, meteorological and remote sensing data, data base compilation, design of an access module

Responsible: Michael Baumgartner / Hannes Kleindienst, UBE

3.1.1 WP 201: WP supervision and quality control

Responsible: H. Kleindienst, UBE, months 1-24

There have been only a few problems, some of which are already solved:

· Due to temporary shortage of manpower WP 213 (VERB) is delayed. According to recent communication with O. Pirker, the manager of WP 213, this problem will be solved within project month 5.

· The four test basins have finally been selected. Due to problems with the quality of runoff measurements in the previously proposed Swedish basin (Litnok), another basin was finally selected.

· Some minor problems regarding responsibilities seem to be solved. They occurred due to uncertainties at the beginning of the project.

It seems, that over all, the work packages WP 220 to WP 240 are within the scheduled time table.

3.2 WP 210: Specification of customer needs

Responsible: G. Wright, MLURI

The needs for improvements in hydrological modelling and forecasting will be specified in close interaction with customers such as hydropower agencies, hydrological services and environmental agencies.

Tasks within WP 210

WP 211 Assessment of customer needs MLURI Gauld

WP 212 Customer - workshop MLURI Gauld

WP 213 Requirements for hydropower management VERB Pirker

WP 214 Interim report 1 on customer requirements MLURI Wright

For the Customer Focus Group, potential "customers" must have or be prepared to show, an active interest in using the main products set out in the HYDALP Project itself. The Scottish Customer Focus Group is formed for the sole purpose of involving "customers" in the specification of their requirements for a hydrological application's run-off model for monitoring and forecasting in alpine and high latitude basins. Primary inputs to this model will be remotely sensed earth observation data and conventional climatic and river basin characteristic information.

3.2.1 WP211: Assessment of customer needs

Responsible: Gauld, MLURI, months 3-7

This part of the HYDALP Project started in month 3 and is therefore at an early stage. It is closely linked to the outcome of WP 130. A number of the Scottish Customer Focus Group participants identified in WP 130 have been contacted and interactive discussions with these individual "customers" is now taking place. The initial input from SEPA (Scottish Environmental Protection Agency), whose primary aim is the monitoring of all water resources and the Scottish Hydro-Electric Company, who are actively involved in the use of snow area assessment methods using remote sensing, has been very positive, but it is still too early to drawn conclusions for the project.

3.2.2 WP212: Customer Workshop

Responsible: Gauld, MLURI, months 3-6

This part of the HYDALP Project started in month 3 following guidance supplied by WP 130. Because of the special nature of this Customer Focus Group (related to specific snow-melt and runoff models) and it's requirements (the potential development of a remote sensing input to the models), it was necessary to have a very tightly defined "specialist" or expert Customer Focus Group, certainly at the initial stages, if not for the duration of the project.

Following the initial results from WP 130, it would seem that the SCFG proposed for the HYDALP Project, could be better described as an "Expert" or "Scientific" Customer Focus Group. In the HYDALP Project, the "product" is a Snow-Melt/Run-Off Model and the potential users or "customers" are all experts (industrial, environmental or cultural) or scientists. This format is a significant deviation from the accepted Focus Group format which is used extensively in marketing. Special Expert Groups exist in the research community, but usually contain no "customers" as such. Therefore the SCFG is a hybrid interactive discussion group and as such should also be regarded as a development product.

The required outcomes of the HYDALP Project itself, as well as the scientific and expert constraints on the establishment of the Focus Group (for example selection of target audience) are quite precise. Because of these, particular care is being taken to put together a group who will have a real potential to eventually use the product and will not simply have an interest in what is going on within the "product" community or area (the Spey River Basin - BASUK, in the case of this Scottish study).

The Spey Basin, has long been an area with a high conservation profile. As a result, over the last 10 to 15 years, many conferences or seminars have been organised concerned with conservation issues associated with the river basin. By searching the proceedings of these meetings in the early stages of this WP, it has been possible to identify organisations who repeatedly send participants to these meetings. It was then possible to establish in which areas of resource management these participants were interested and thus whether they were potential users of snowmelt or hydrological models for the Spey Basin. At this early stage, the following have been identified and are fully committed as participants of the Scottish Customer Focus Group (SCFG);

Confirmed Participants:

Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) (water resources policy and legislation); Scottish Hydro Electric (power generation); Macaulay Research Consultancy Services (MRCS); Scottish National Heritage (SNH) (conservation policy and UK or European legislation); Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) (conservation policy and UK or European legislation).

Potential Participants:

United Distillers (quality water abstraction); Northern Water Services (potable water abstraction); Spey Valley Fisheries (game management); Scottish Landowners Federation (farm and estate representation); British Aluminium (industrial abstraction and power generation); General Accident Insurance (flood Warning); Forestry Commission (afforestation development).

Each of these potential participants are now being contacted and will receive information concerning the project, it's methods and objectives as well as the models to be used and the possible outputs which might be of benefit to the customers. They will be interviewed and selected for full participation in the SCFG in due course.

3.2.3 WP213: Requirements for Hydropower Management

· Responsible: O. Pirker, VERB, months 1-4

This part of the Work Package should have been running since month 1 of the project. Due to temporary shortage of manpower the work is delayed. According to recent communication with O. Pirker this problem will be solved in project month 5.

3.2.4 WP214: Interim Report 1 on Customer Requirements

Responsible: G. Wright, MLURI, months 7-9

This part of Work Package 210 does not need to be actioned yet.

3.3 WP 220: Hydrological and meteorological data base compilation

Responsible: H. Kleindienst, UBE

The Work package 220 deals with the data base compilation for the four test basins. The former aim, to compile all data (of all basins) into one data base is no longer needed. Instead, data transfer formats have to be defined to enable links between the project partner.

Sketch maps of the BASAT, BASCH, and BASSW are included in the 3 last pages of the report. For BASUK no acceptable map was received in spite of several inquiries (only parts of the figure were included in the transmitted files).

Tasks within WP 220

WP 221 Hydromet data base for BASAT IMGI Glendinning

WP 222 Hydromet data base for BASCH UBE Kleindienst

WP 223 Hydromet data base for BASSW SMHI Johansson

WP 224 Hydromet data base for BASUK MLURI Morgan-Davies

WP 225 Access module design UBE Kleindienst

3.3.1 WP221: Status of BASAT

Responsible: G. Glendinning, IMGI, months 2-7

The basin choice for BASAT was made after careful consideration of the possibilities in the light of the requirements of HYDALP. The areal extent, land cover types, availability and quality of the hydromet data were all considered. The presence of a good DEM and a time series of remote sensing imagery is also of importance.

The chosen basin was that of Tuxbach, in the Zillertaler Alpen, draining to Mayrhofen. This basin is composed of a main basin, Tuxbach, of limited glacial extent, and three feeder basins in the Tux-Überleitung:

· großer Kunerbach

· kleiner Kunerbach

· Schwarzbach.

These smaller basins are more heavily glaciated. A table of the basin’s areal extent and cover types is given below.

Basin characteristics of BASAT

The meteorological data is available from four stations in the surrounding area:

· Mayrhofen (643 m)

· Stillup (1138 m)

· Schlegeis (1800 m)

· Plattkopf (2260 m)

The measured data is in the form of air temperature at 07:00, 14:00 and 19:00, Daily maximum and minimum temperatures, precipitation and some snowdepth measurements.

Hydrological Information

¼ hourly values are measured at the bottom of the 3 basins (gr. + kl. Kunerbach, and Schwarzbach) but are of dubious accuracy. It was recommended that only the daily values be used for these measurements. Daily values are measured for Tuxbach for 1995, with method available, and there are good ¼ hourly measurements at Pegel Wasserfall (ca. 10-20% accuracy) and Pegel Persal (ca 5% accuracy). These poles are situated towards the top and bottom of the basin.

Subterranean flow for the largest of the flows in the kl. Kunerbach may lead to problems for the routing of water, though this plays a subordinate roll in the daily values of the Tuxbach-Überleitung.

Measurements are also available at the sediment settlement area (Tuxbachseite) for short periods, but with gaps in the data. All measurements have historical records pre-1971.

Other data

The DEM available is of 25m spatial resolution linking the Zillertal with parts of Südtirol, and available satellite data over the area dates from 1992.

Conclusion

It is due to the good measurements, DEM and meteorological data, as well as a fair glacial contribution, that we are utilising this basin. Another advantage is that the glacial part of the basin (Tux-Überleitung) can be treated separately because the runoff is collected and measured at three gauges just below the glaciers. This part is lead over to the reservoir Schlegeis. The basin below (116 km2) is undisturbed, which was also one of the reasons for the selection. The runoff in most other basins in the region is affected by hydropower generation. In a later stage of the project an additional basin in the same region (probably Zemmbach) will be used for model assessment.

3.3.2 WP222: Status of BASCH

Responsible: H. Kleindienst, UBE, months 2-7

The Rhine-Felsberg area has been selected as Swiss test basin. The basin is part of the central Alps, the basin outlet is located close to Chur (CH). With a total area of 3249km² only 3% of the basin is covered by glaciers. The elevation ranges from 571 to 3614 m a.s.l. with 85% of the area above 1400 m.

There are five main rivers to be named in that area: Vorderrhein, Hinterrhein, Landwasser, Albula and Julia. Again, each of them is divided into a number of tributary rivers and creeks, building a complex river channel network due to the topographic conditions.

The basin can be divided into three regions with respectively similar climate: The western part shows a mean annual precipitation of about 1200 to 1400 mm, whereas the eastern region receives less then 1000 mm per year. The southern part of the basin is influenced by continental climate with topographically induced convective showers (to some extent showing high rainfall intensities).

The annual hydrograph of the Rhine-Felsberg catchment is dominated by snowmelt, lasting from March until August. The months April to September cover 88% of the annual discharge. It is important to consider the artificial influence on runoff due to the management of the hydropower stations. It can lead to a deviation of the actual outflow to values between 50% and 200% of the natural discharge.

There are seven meteorological stations which can be used to derive mean temperature and precipitation values. They are listed in the table below.

Meteorological stations for BASCH

There is yet no complete list of the time period of available data. The stations are maintained by the Swiss Meteorological Service (SMA), a real time receipt of the data seems to be possible, but has still to be discussed with the SMA. The SMA also provides weather forecasts

3.3.3 WP223: Status of BASSW

Responsible: B. Johansson, SMHI, months 2-7

Due to problems concerning runoff data quality for the originally proposed test basin, the choice of the Swedish catchment had to be reconsidered. Now the Tjaktjajaure catchment has been selected as Swedish test basin (BASSW).

To derive meteorological data for the basin, the stations listed belowError! Reference source not found. will be used. Long-term monthly mean values of potential evapotranspiration have been computed for the station Kvikkjokk (16798).

Unfortunately none of the stations lies within the catchment. The data is available at SHMI and can be easily converted into the file formats required by the hydrological models. Some of the meteorological stations are synoptic, the data is received on a real time basis. It is also possible to get the runoff data in real time. This enables the simulation of real time runoff forecasts.

Meteorological stations for BASSW

Runoff stations for BASSW

3.3.4 WP224: Status of BASUK

Responsible: J. Morgan-Davies, MLURI, months 2-7Already available data (historical data):The data listed below is available to the project (within MLURI). It is digitally compiled in an ORACLE data base:

· Average monthly/annual rainfall for Scotland (1941-70)

· Average annual accumulated temperatures ( C) for 200 stations at 100m intervals above sea level

· Average annual wind speeds (m/s)

Further on the MLURI Climate Change Data Directory is available. It contains both point and surface data information including (possibly) interpolated Evapotranspiration figures (must be researched further before final decision reached).

The meteorological Office ‘Morecs Data’ (1961-80) available through MLURI provides the following data:

· rainfall

· vapour pressure

· temperature

· potential and actual Evapotranspiration

· runoff

· soil moisture deficit

· field capacity

The data is available as:

· weekly averages and totals

· monthly averages and totals

· yearly totals

Data expected to become available (additions from Key „customers") (current data)

It is envisaged that both SEPA, Scottish Hydro Electric and perhaps HW University can provide:

· monthly/annual rainfall and temperature data

· wind speed

· river and runoff flow data.

· daily temperature and precipitation from selected stations in the Spey catchment

Note: Quantity, quality and format of the data will be dependant on the ‘Customers’ concerned.

3.3.5 WP225: Data access module and file transfer

Responsible: H. Kleindienst, UBE, months 2-7

Because every partner will use its own database, a general access module is not really required. However it may show some advantages, to have a common program for data handling. Figure 3.1 shows the structure of a data management module. It would be able to handle data up- and download as well as conversion of data into the required file formats.

To exchange hydrological and meteorological data, a file transfer format has to be defined. The transfer file should consist of two parts, the file header containing a description of the data and the data itself.

The data description should include all information listed below:

· Name and institute of file creator

· date and time of file creation

· comment concerning data rights and restricted use of the data

· list of data with short comments to each data type

· Number of data lines (to control completeness)

· Characters used for date and time separation and data separation

The data itself should be organised in lines with one line for every time step. The first column contains the date and time of data recording, additional columns consist of the data separated by the character defined in the file header. Missing data values have to be marked as ‘-9999’.

The detailed format of the transfer file has to be discussed with Mr. Riegler from DIBAG. That will be done in until end of month 3 (May 1997).

Data requirements

The hydrological models HBV and SRM require several data to simulate the snowmelt runoff. The following table shows the necessary data:

Data requirements for the hydrological models SRM and HBV

The list is based on the latest available model versions. It is possible that additional data is required for the HBV model due to model improvements, which are part of the project (WP 440).

3.4 WP230: Remote sensing data base

Responsible: G. Glendinning, IMGI

Work Package 230, Remote Sensing Data Base, comprises the project requirements for selecting and ordering remote sensing data in HYDALP. For this process, the details of basin locations, data already available and further requirements are needed.

A WWW format listing for each of the databases will be formulated, with links to images and coverage maps included. This should enable an quick, comprehensive and easy to use interface for the user.

Tasks within WP 230

WP 231 Search and acquisition of NOAA data UBE Ottersberg

WP 232 Definition data requirements / acquisition requests IMGI Nagler

WP 233 Remote sensing data search SCEOS Turpin/Nagler

3.4.1 WP231: Search and acquisition of NOAA data

Responsible: R. Ottersberg, UBE, months 1-24

With the receiving station for NOAA at UBE, the satellite images are continually recorded. On average 80% to 90% of the data can be received and stored without errors. During the next months, there may occur additional data losses due to an upgrade of the controlling system (Hard- and Software). This should be finished until autumn 1997.

Since 1989 the NOAA imagery is available covering the whole of Europe. The scenes should include the Swedish test basin, however, the extent of the recorded images to the north is depending on the equator crossing of the satellite. Besides, a short view of the Quick look archive showed predominant cloudy conditions above Sweden. Back to 1984 the imagery coverage is limited to middle Europe.

A complete list of the recorded images is available at:
http://www.giub.unibe.ch/remsen/service/

3.4.2 WP232: Definition data requirements / acquisition requests

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI, months 1-4

An overview of sensors which may be useful within the HydAlp Project are summarised in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2. Due to their coarse resolution satellite based passive microwave systems are not useful within the project and are not taken into account. A detailed description of selected sensors and platforms including information about channels, viewing geometry, and orbit information is in preparation. If available information about local data distributors and WWW-addresses of Quicklook archives are added.

Table 3.1

Visible (VIS: 0.35 - 75 mm), Near Infrared (NIR: 0.75 -1.3 mm), Short Wave Infrared
(SWIR: 1.3 - 3 mm), and Thermal Infrared (TIR: 1.3 - 3 mm) sensor systems

Table 3.1 Continue

Table 3.2
Active Microwave Systems

References: CEOS, Co-ordination for the next decade, CEOS Yearbook, 133 p. 1995
Kramer H.J., Observation of the Earth and its Environment - Survey of Missions and Sensors, Springer, 960 p. 1996

3.4.3 WP233: Remote sensing data search

Responsible: O. Turpin, SCEOS / Nagler, IMGI , months 1-4

Archives already exist for BASAT and BASCH. Search for supplementary data (sensor) is going on.

Work done to date

· Identified categories of data which serve purpose

Landsat: TM and MSS
SPOT: Pan and XS
RESURS-01: MSU-SK
ERS: SAR and ATSR
JERS: SAR and VNIR
Radarsat: SAR
NOAA AVHRR

· Identified spatial and temporal bounds

Work completed:

· Sent above data searches to National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC).

· Downloaded DESCW software from ESA and run searches for ERS, JERS and Landsat for both basins.

· Searched EiNet (Eurimage) for RESURS-01 images.

Work to be done:

· Check results generated by NRSC using DESCW software and Internet RS data search tools.

· Identify scenes that seem to serve purpose (i.e. minimal cloud cover, minimal layover etc.).

· Identify probability of obtaining cloud free scenes for optical sensors based on archived acquisitions.

3.5 WP240: Field experiments

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI

For intercomparisons of remote sensing techniques and for the assessment of the accuracy and of the applicability of the data analysis methods, comparative field experiments will be carried out in the Austrian and Scottish test basins.

Tasks within WP 240

WP 241 Preparation and conductance of Field Work IMGI Nagler

WP 242 Preparation and conductance of Field Work MLURI Bell

WP 243 Field work SCEOS Turpin

WP 244 Field work UBE Kleindienst

3.5.1 WP241: Preparation and conductance of Field Work - BASAT

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI, 1-4, 14-16

After the choice of the basin BASAT, an exploratory field campaign was carried out in the region of Tuxerbach / Zillertal with the purpose of selection of appropriate sites for measuring snow water equivalence and for photographic documentation of the melting pattern of the annual snow coverage. In comparison with the previous year, more snow was accumulated during the winter 1996/97.

The different ablation pattern observed at southern and northern slopes was documented photographically. The southern oriented slopes of the basin were mainly snow free at lower elevations; at about 2000 m altitude patches of snow were found, the snow coverage increased at higher altitudes. At northern slopes the snow coverage was in general much higher. For daily monitoring of the snow extent permanently installed video cameras are quite useful. For the basin Tuxerbach a video camera at the „Gefrorene Wand" is available, but it covers only parts of the glaciated areas of the Tuxer Ferner. The option of setting up an additional video cameras in the basin Tuxerbach will be investigated.

Snow parameters (like snow depth, snow density, snow stratigraphy) were measured in a snow pit at 2170 m close to the gauges of the Tuxbach-Überleitung. On 16 May 1997 the snow depth was about 1.30 m and the total snow pack was wet. Further places selected for snow measurements are near the Hobalm, the Grieralm and/or Höllenstein Hütte. At these areas only patches of snow were found on 16 May 1997.

3.5.2 WP242: Preparation and conductance of Field Work - BASUK

Responsible: Bell, MLURI, months 1-3,13-15

The principal objective of WP 242 (MLURI), is to collect field data for verification of products derived from satellite data, enabling an inter-comparison of methods of remote sensing data analysis between the project partners. A secondary support objective is to assist in the supply of additional useful hydro-meteorological variables.

WP 242 fieldwork is carried out in BASUK (the Spey Basin). In the first year (project months 1-3), fieldwork is primarily concerned with obtaining clearance/access to "field areas" and the collection of "Ground Reference" information for the verification of land cover classifications required for the hydrological models. In project months 1-3, the selection of sites and testing of instrumentation for the collection of soil moisture information in the land area surrounding the Insh Marshes will also be undertaken. The latter dataset will be compared to real time SAR data (to be processed by SCEOS) in the second year of the project.

Work completed by end of month 3 of HYDALP Project:

Some 17 Estate/Farm or organisational owners have been identified and contacted by telephone and "field" visits. Of these two are responsible for much of the "high" ground associated with the BASUK test area, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and Rothiemurchus Estate. A third key area is owned and by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the Loch Insh Marshes. With the aid of these owners and government records, the ownership boundaries have been mapped (1:25,000 scale) and non-dynamic, primary/secondary land cover information has also been transferred to maps, 1:25,000 scale. These will be used in the second year field programme and also to assist in the more detailed basin analysis under WP310 and WP340. During the survey of ownership fieldwork, it was also possible (in association with other research projects in the Cairngorm area) to obtain some oblique photography of the BASUK test basin.

From the ownership and preliminary land cover maps, a selection of potential soil moisture analysis sites, are being made (will be complete by the end of project month 3) which will be used in the second year of the project. A Theta Probe for measuring soil water, has been chosen to provide suitable soil moisture measurements. These probes are highly portable and can be used at any angle to the soil surface being measured. The probe can be buried in the soil or used to provide a rapid large area set of surface measurements. The Theta Probe measures volumetric soil moisture content to within 2% (when calibrated to site) and can be used on any unknown area to provide soil moisture readings to within 5%. A range of calibration curves are available to fit most soils which are capable of reducing this error back to 2%. (See also http://www.mluri.sari.ac.uk/~jdm.html.)

Although not required by WP242 and MLURI, contact with WP132 (MLURI Scottish Customer Focus Group) has enabled early access to other hydro-meteorological records (in particular from the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency - SEPA), which can be used in the HYDALP Project. It is expected that other data sources within the SCFG will be used in the future for hydro-meteorological data as well as snow quantity and quality information.

3.5.3 WP243 and WP244

Responsible: Turpin: SCEOS and Kleindienst: UBE, respectively. Months 3, 14, 15

Because the main field campaign has been shifted to spring 1998, only little work has been performed for the Tasks 243 and 244. Any fieldwork that SCEOS is responsible for will be undertaken next year, when it is clear, what measurements need to be taken. At UBE, some spots of the Swiss basin were selected, which could be visited during an excursion with the project partner.

4. WP 300: Remote sensing methods and analysis

Responsible: Shaun Quegan, SCEOS

This work package has the following objectives:

· To review available methods for remote sensing data analysis, to identify needs for improvements regarding the application in hydrological models, and to implement the methodological improvements.

· To extract hydrological relevant information from the remote sensing data to be used as input for hydrological modelling and forecasting.

Optical sensors are to be used for mapping areal extent of snow cover, surface albedo, and land surface types, while SAR is to be used for mapping the extent of melting snow cover. Possibilities for estimating evapotranspiration will also be investigated. The work is broken down into four sub-work packages:

WP 310 Extraction of Basin Characteristics. SCEOS Caves

WP 320 Remote Sensing Methods for High Resolution Sensors. IMGI Nagler

WP 330 Remote Sensing Methods for Medium Resolution Sensors. UBE Baumgartner

WP 340 Earth Observation Data Analysis. SCEOS Caves

The work carried out to date on each of these areas is summarised below. Work on WP 340 does not start until month twelve.

4.1.1 WP 301: WP supervision and quality control

Responsible: R. Caves, SCEOS, months 1-24

WP supervision and quality control involves ensuring that the objectives of all tasks are met and that deliverables are all on time, and resolving any problems that arise. While monthly reports have stated that all tasks are on time and that no problems have arisen, in reality more co-ordination and communication between individual tasks and work packages is need if the project is going to keep to schedule.

An internal report is deliverable in month twenty four.

4.2 WP 310: Extraction of Basin Characteristics

Responsible: D. Miller, MLURI

Tasks within WP 310

WP 311 Review of methods and improvements MLURI Miller

WP 312 Data analysis for basin BASAT, IMGI Start in M4

WP 313 Data analysis for basin BASCH UBE Start in M4

WP 314 Data analysis for basin BASUK SCEOS Start in M4

WP 315 Data analysis for basin BASSW SCEOS Start in M4

The objective of this work package is to extract the physiographic characteristics of each test basin. This data will be compiled into a GIS for integration with other datasets (hydrological, climatological, EO, and ground based) in hydrological modelling. The minimum characteristics that are required are those that will provide the models with their key inputs, such as altitudinal bands and selected land cover classes. These data will be gathered for entire basins and in greater detail for selected sub-basins to allow for a more comprehensive demonstration of the potential of the models.

Work to date has involved a review of methods and improvements for extracting basin characteristics (WP 311) - more details of which are given below. Work on data extraction and analysis for the four test basins will begin from month four (WP 312-315). This will involve a search for existing information on land use/cover and hydrographic features. This information will be complemented and updated using optical and SAR data. After geocoding, including terrain correction, digital classification techniques based on multi-channel data will be applied to obtain digital maps of the main surface classes.

The data on basin characteristics will be described in a formal manner, to obtain a common minimal level of meta-data across each dataset, and to aid comparisons between datasets for each model in each basin. This approach to formalising the descriptions of data is consistent with the current discussion document "Towards a European Policy Framework for Geographic Information," from the European Umbrella Organisation for Geographical Information and DGXIII (November 1996), which includes progress towards a European meta-data standard and the stimulation of meta-data services. The meta-data descriptions will be entered, maintained and consulted over the World Wide Web and will form part of the HydAlp demonstration site.

4.2.1 WP 311: Review of methods and improvements

Responsible: David Miller, MLURI, months 1-8

The review of the methods for extracting basin characteristics has involved both a literature review and an example search for relevant data in the BASUK test site. A range of issues are being considered including:

· Data formats: raster or vector, scale, and resolution.

· Available data sources.

· Data quality: information content, timeliness, consistency and validity.

· Manual versus automatic techniques for catchment delimitation.

· The provision of the data to users in general and the models in particular.

· Should site and project specific data be used or only data that is likely to be available for an operational system in any given country.

The data sources which are currently being considered include: elevation models, land cover, soils and surface hydrology. Several basin characteristics are directly obtainable from the source data. However, there are issues over data quality and consistency between basins and even within basins, that need to be discussed.

The definition and description of the basin boundaries is an example of one input which may be obtained in different ways and at different scales, and hence, may potentially produce significant differences in output. Additional characteristics (such as relative exposure) which may be employed within the model testing in each basin, are derived from source data and require more complex spatial analysis, with some contribution from meteorological sources.

Currently, a document is being prepared for circulation to each partner on the issues concerning the basin characteristics to be assessed, the data available, and the methods being proposed.

A report and example dataset are deliverable in month eight for distribution to the project consortium and customers.

4.3 WP 320: Remote Sensing Methods for High Resolution Sensors

Responsible: Thomas Nagler, IMGI

The objective of this WP is to assess the available methods for the extraction of information from high resolution optical and radar imaging sensors for mapping extent and properties of the snow pack and for estimation of evapotranspiration, to identify deficiencies, and to implement modifications regarding the use in hydrological models. The work is broken down into two tasks.

Tasks within WP 320

WP321 Improvement of methods for SAR & HROI IMGI Nagler

WP322 Methods for geocoding and information extraction SCEOS Caves

4.3.1 WP 321: Improvement of methods for SAR & HROI

Responsible: T. Nagler, IMGI, months 2-12

As a first step in this work the available procedures for mapping surface classes using SAR and optical data are tested. These investigations are based on ERS images and Landsat TM images acquired over the Austrian basin Tuxerbach/Zillertal during 1993 to 1996; available data sets from other parts of the Austrian Alps will also be used for the methodological research. A DEM of this region is available (25 m pixel spacing, Gauss-Kruger projection, central meridian 10 20'E, Bessel Ellipsoid, Austrian local datum); if necessary the DEM will be improved by adding mountain ridges.

The geocoding procedure for optical images (Landsat TM) uses the DEM, orbit/imaging parameters and ground control points and is part of the EASI/PACE software (CDLANDC, SMODEL, SORTHO). For geocoding of SAR images two software packages are available at IMGI, the SAR geocoding tools of EASI/PACE (SARSIM1, SARGEO) and the RSG (Remote Sensing Graz) software package. The requirements for hydrological applications are:

· Geocoding of ratio images;

· Good matching of ascending and descending images.

Both packages have been tested. A major problem with RSG is finding accurate ground control points (1 pixel accuracy) for orbit correction (no artificial targets are available). Hence, the EASI/PACE software based on SAR image simulation is primarily used.

The calculation of the surface albedo from Landsat TM images utilises a radiative transfer model. Initial tests show that the main problem occurs in shadow zones, where the calculated albedo is in general too high. The classification of various surface classes (used as hydrological response units) follows a procedure developed at IMGI, which is based on the planetary and surface albedo. Forest cannot be discriminated from low alpine vegetation based on the albedo at one date; a multitemporal approach will be used. As first step classification of snow - rock - vegetation (grass and forest) has been conducted.

Mapping wet snow using SAR data is based on a procedure developed at IMGI. At the moment this procedure is tested using ERS images acquired on 21 April 1996 (5 March 1993 as reference image). For geocoding the SARSIM/SARGEO package was applied. Manual correction of the Layover/Shadow Masks for ascending and descending images, is currently in progress.

Further work to be carried out in collaboration with SCEOS includes:

· Development of software for semi-automatic matching of repeat pass SAR images (with sub-pixel accuracy).

· Further testing of various speckle filters and segmentation methods (annealing).

· Development of an integrated system for generation of snow maps from SAR images including the geocoding module (from WP 322).

An internal report is deliverable in month twelve.

4.3.2 WP 322: Methods for geocoding and information extraction

Responsible: R. Caves, SCEOS, months 2-10

The OEEPE report on geocoding ERS-1 SAR data [1] has been studied to gain an overview of the current state of the art. The report compares a number of SAR geocoding facilities and concludes that the most effective methods are those based on the rigorous approach of solving for the range and Doppler equations, e.g. that used by the D-PAF, but then goes on to say that methods derived from photogrammetric bundle adjustments can produce equal results when they include specific provisions for the use of SAR data. The different methods are described in more detail in [2].

Contact has been made with the UK National Remote Sensing Centre regarding use of their TSAR geocoding facility, which adopts the rigorous approach. Andy Sowter of NRSC offered to process one image for HydAlp for free as a demonstration of TSAR capabilities. This trial would be used to compare in-house methods with state-of-the-art, and as a cost-benefit analysis for an eventual operational system. Costs for further processing have yet to be agreed. This would be dependent on the number of images to be processed. The full commercial cost for TSAR processing of a single ERS scene is around 1000 UKL. TSAR includes radiometric terrain correction, i.e. radiometric calibration using the incidence calculated from the DEM.

As at IMGI, existing geocoding facilities at SCEOS are based on the EASI/PACE image processing software. The (photogrammetric) routines SMODEL and SORTHO have been used for geocoding both optical and SAR data. For the SAR data this approach was found to give better results than using the TSAR system - difficulties were encountered in accurately identifying ground control points for use with TSAR. The EASI/PACE routines do not include radiometric terrain correction, but the corrections can easily be derived from the incidence angles maps generated by the standard software (as done at IMGI). An attempt has also been made to use the EASI/PACE geocoding routines to register SAR images from ascending and descending orbits. This has previously been conducted successfully at IMGI but not at SCEOS.

The choice of which geocoding facility to use will depend on a number of issues including:

· Number of images to be processed.

· The cost of processing.

· Time available.

· Availability and quality of satellite orbit information.

· DEM resolution, projection and height datum.

· Availability of ground control points.

· Existing facilities.

All partners involved in analysing EO data in WP 310 and WP 340 have been asked to supply input regarding the above issues (IMGI, UBE, MLURI and SCEOS). More specific collaboration is planned with IMGI to learn from their existing expertise in geocoding and terrain effects.

It would be useful to identify a target accuracy for geocoding in the project. An internal report is deliverable in month ten.

[1] I Dowman, The OEEPE GEOSAR test of geocoding ERS-1 SAR data, European Organisation for Experimental Photogrammetric Research, March 1996.

[2] G Schreier, SAR geocoding: data and systems, Wichmann, 1993.

Remark by the project co-ordinator:

Close co-ordination with IMGI is strongly recommended.

4.4 WP 330: Remote Sensing Methods for Medium Resolution Sensors

Responsible: M. Baumgartner, UBE, months 2-12

This WP will review, improve and document, semi-automatic and automatic procedures for estimating albedo, and generating snow cover maps from NOAA AVHRR data; this study will include geocoding issues. The output will be in a format suitable for integrating into hydrological models within a GIS.

At a later stage this work package will also look at estimating evapotranspiration and hence the water balance.

Tasks within WP 330

WP 331 Review & improvement of methods for MROI UBE Baumgartner

WP 332 Water balance and evatranspiration MLURI Start in M8

WP 333 Documentation of methods UBE Start in M9

4.4.1 WP 331: Review and improvement of methods for MROI

Responsible: Michael Baumgartner, UBE, months 2-10

A review of the most commonly used methods for medium resolution sensors, especially NOAA-AVHRR data, has been carried out. The methods can be summarised as:

· Pre-processing: radiometric, geometric and atmospheric correction and geocoding of raw data (for snow cover mapping atmospheric corrections are usually neglected).

· Processing: user-dependent classification by supervised learning techniques (e.g. minimum distance, Mahalanobis distance, maximum likelihood classifiers).

· Post-processing: masking, filtering, raster-to-vector conversion, transfer to GIS or snowmelt runoff model.

For operational use of remote sensing in snowmelt runoff modelling, the geocoding and classification procedures must be adapted. This field will be studied in the forthcoming months.

An internal report is deliverable in month ten.

4.5 Summary of progress on active WP 300 tasks

· WP 301 - To date all tasks are on time and no major problems have arisen.

· WP 311 - A document is being prepared for circulation to each partner on the issues concerning the basin characteristics to be assessed, the data available, and the methods being proposed.

· WP 321 - Tests are being conducted of existing procedures for using SAR and optical data for classifying surface classes, mapping dry and wet snow extent, and calculating surface albedo. Some overlap with the geocoding work of WP 322 has arisen, e.g. matching SAR images on ascending and descending orbits.

· WP 322 - Existing geocoding facilities of HydAlp partners are being evaluated. At both IMGI and SCEOS geocoding is based on EASI/PACE routines. Alternatives have also been evaluated, e.g. the NRSC TSAR facility from whom a limited free trial is on offer. Responses from partners regarding a final choice of geocoding procedures are being compiled.

· WP 331 - A review of the methods for snow cover mapping using NOAA-AVHRR data is ongoing.

5. WP400: Hydrological Modelling

Objective: To review the conceptual and physical basis of each model, the parameterisation of processes, and the way the models use or could use remotely sensed information. To point out strength and weakness of the models and to make recommendations for the model modifications. To modify existing models for input from remote sensing data and for synergistic use of remote sensing and conventional data. To calibrate the runoff models.

Responsible: R. Ferguson, SCEOS

WP410 Intercomparisons SRM/HBV Model SCEOS Turpin

WP420 Def. Calibration of Runoff Model Par. for Basins IMGI Glendinning

WP430 Data Fusion: Remote sensing and in situ data SCEOS Clark

WP440 Hydrological Model Verification SMHI Johannson

Only WP410 started within the first three months of the project (month 1-9).

The 3-monthly report on WP400 is at present with SMHI and UBE for comments, and will follow, late. The delay is due to organisational problems and/or temporary manpower shortage.

6. HydAlp Basins

The HydAlp basins are laid out in the same directory as this file, under the names

· BASAT.DOC

· BASCH.DOC

· BASSW.DOC

The file transfer for BASUK from SCEOS to IMGI was unsuccessful, in spite of several attempts

A copy of the format file, hydalp.dot is also included. The Figures are included on the last 3 pages of the hardcopy of the report.