80
M. F. Chow
Table 5.1
Performances of IFAS for flood simulation at different catchment characteristics
No
Catchment
Area (km 2
)
Rainfall type
Calibration (%)
Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency
Reference
Peak flow
Volume
Calibration
Validation
1
Kelantan
11,099
Ground
26
–
Hafiz et al. (2014)
Ground
0.8
Chow et al. (2019)
2
Dungun
1858
Ground
1.68
0.72
Hafiz et al. (2013)
Satellite GSMAP 41.96%
3
Cagayan
27,280
Ground
< 10%
Miyamoto et al.
(2014)
4
Upper-Middle
Indus
467,136
Ground
−85.8–44.9%
−62.7–27.3%
Aziz and Tanaka
(2011)
Satellite GSMAP 53.2–82.7%
−69.5–71.7%
Satellite GSMaP
(corrected)
−21.7–48.1%
−156.5–48.8%
Satellite 3B42RT
−48.1–12.1%
−155.5–20.2%
5
Upper Indus
133,300
Ground
0.61
0.67
Sugiura et al. (2014a,
b)
6
Kabul
92,605
Satellite GSMaP
(original)
87%
−69.5%
Aziz (2014)
Satellite GSMaP
(corrected)
−6.8%
−156.5%
7
Bengawan Solo
16,100
Ground
0.955
1.106
Astuti (2014)
8
Thai Binh River,
Thailand
17,580
Ground
Fukami and Herath
(2009)
(continued)
M. F. Chow
Table 5.1
Performances of IFAS for flood simulation at different catchment characteristics
No
Catchment
Area (km 2
)
Rainfall type
Calibration (%)
Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency
Reference
Peak flow
Volume
Calibration
Validation
1
Kelantan
11,099
Ground
26
–
Hafiz et al. (2014)
Ground
0.8
Chow et al. (2019)
2
Dungun
1858
Ground
1.68
0.72
Hafiz et al. (2013)
Satellite GSMAP 41.96%
3
Cagayan
27,280
Ground
< 10%
Miyamoto et al.
(2014)
4
Upper-Middle
Indus
467,136
Ground
−85.8–44.9%
−62.7–27.3%
Aziz and Tanaka
(2011)
Satellite GSMAP 53.2–82.7%
−69.5–71.7%
Satellite GSMaP
(corrected)
−21.7–48.1%
−156.5–48.8%
Satellite 3B42RT
−48.1–12.1%
−155.5–20.2%
5
Upper Indus
133,300
Ground
0.61
0.67
Sugiura et al. (2014a,
b)
6
Kabul
92,605
Satellite GSMaP
(original)
87%
−69.5%
Aziz (2014)
Satellite GSMaP
(corrected)
−6.8%
−156.5%
7
Bengawan Solo
16,100
Ground
0.955
1.106
Astuti (2014)
8
Thai Binh River,
Thailand
17,580
Ground
Fukami and Herath
(2009)
(continued)