Error in the baseflow and local recharge map

I have run the seasonal water yield model using the default parameters and my soil group is mostly C and little of D group for curve number calculation. But the thing is the output for the baseflow and local recharge is like the highest value is coming in the built-up area which is somewhat looks wrong cause recharge should in my opinion must happen in natural area because infiltration should occur here. And I am not able to find the error in this. Could you help me with this problem.
Input of the SWY
I have attached my file containing the output.

Hi @Supriya12 -

I’ve just requested access to the model inputs and outputs and will check them out.

~ Stacie

Thank you so much. Hope to hear from you. And I have given the access also.

Hi @Supriya12 -

Looking at the inputs, the one thing I see is that Kc is set to 0 for Built Up areas. Local recharge and Baseflow are strongly influenced by AET, which is calculated using Kc. Setting Kc to 0 will give low (or 0 values) for AET, which contributes to a high level of recharge and baseflow (since what doesn’t evapotranspire can become recharge or baseflow). You can look at the intermediate_outputs/aet.tif layer, and compare with the L and B rasters to see if this is what’s happening.

~ Stacie

1 Like

Yes Thank you for the reply. I did run again by changing the Kc value for built-up area from 0 to 50% of forest. Like I didnt kept the Kc value for built-up area 0. But still the Recharge and baseflow is coming higher in this region as compared to the forest. What other reason could it be? I thought it might be because of the DEM. but I am not pretty sure.

I always recommend looking carefully at your different input layers and tables, and compare them with the model equations and methods given in the User Guide, to see how the inputs correspond with the output patterns.

The DEM is used to determine how water flows downslope from pixel to pixel, and where streams are located. This is unlikely to contribute much to a difference that appears very strongly related to land cover type. If it’s strongly driven by land cover type, then look at the land cover parameters to explain the result.

For other layers, if the soil layer is the same over most of the study area, then it’s not really contributing to the difference. The precipitation and/or ET0 layers might be, but they are not included in the input folder you provided. And again, if the pattern is strongly related to land cover type, then that’s probably the best place to focus.

~ Stacie

1 Like

Okay I will look more carefully in the land cover part then. Thank you. Will put here if there is any update.

Hi @Supriya12 !

Did you find a solution for your problem? I’m having the same issue with my L and B maps, they also show higher values on urban area than forest, which does not look correct to me.

Thank you!!

Thank you for reaching out. I didnt find the correct solution but after analysis I found that in my region the heavy rainfall was observed in the area where there is mainly rainfall. And the dem in the built up area was somewhat lower. So I concluded like this in my Thesis defense as of now. But I also need to study more on this. Or maybe there is some issue in the model itself.

Hi @rodrigofrederico,

Would you be able to share your inputs to SWY for us to take a look at?



Hi @dcdenu4!

Sure, i’m sharing my inputs with you on this link:

I really appreciate your attention! I’m using SWY model in my research and the results seem a little confusing to me, especially baseflow map.

If there is anything missing, please contact me.


Hi @dcdenu4, I hope this message finds you well!
Were you able to identify what’s going on in my inputs that can explain higher B values on pasture and urban areas than forest areas?