hydrology

Article
Rainfall-Runoff Modeling Using the HEC-HMS Model for the
Al-Adhaim River Catchment, Northern Iraq
Ahmed Naseh Ahmed Hamdan 1 , Suhad Almuktar 2,3 and Miklas Scholz 3,4,5, *

1 Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, The University of Basra, Al Basra 61004, Iraq;
[email protected]
2 Department of Architectural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, The University of Basra,
Al Basra 61004, Iraq; [email protected] or [email protected]
3 Division of Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Lund University, P.O. Box 118,
221 00 Lund, Sweden
4 Department of Civil Engineering Science, School of Civil Engineering and the Built Environment, University
of Johannesburg, Kingsway Campus, P.O. Box 524, Aukland Park, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa
5 Department of Town Planning, Engineering Networks and Systems, South Ural State University (National
Research University), 76, Lenin Prospekt, 454080 Chelyabinsk, Russia
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +46-(0)-462228920

Abstract: It has become necessary to estimate the quantities of runoff by knowing the amount
of rainfall to calculate the required quantities of water storage in reservoirs and to determine the
likelihood of flooding. The present study deals with the development of a hydrological model
named Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC-HMS), which uses Digital Elevation Models (DEM).
This hydrological model was used by means of the Geospatial Hydrologic Modeling Extension



(HEC-GeoHMS) and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to identify the discharge of the Al-

 Adhaim River catchment and embankment dam in Iraq by simulated rainfall-runoff processes. The
Citation: Hamdan, A.N.A.; meteorological models were developed within the HEC-HMS from the recorded daily rainfall data
Almuktar, S.; Scholz, M. for the hydrological years 2015 to 2018. The control specifications were defined for the specified
Rainfall-Runoff Modeling Using the period and one day time step. The Soil Conservation Service-Curve number (SCS-CN), SCS Unit
HEC-HMS Model for the Al-Adhaim Hydrograph and Muskingum methods were used for loss, transformation and routing calculations,
River Catchment, Northern Iraq.
respectively. The model was simulated for two years for calibration and one year for verification of
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58. https://doi.
the daily rainfall values. The results showed that both observed and simulated hydrographs were
org/10.3390/hydrology8020058
highly correlated. The model’s performance was evaluated by using a coefficient of determination of
90% for calibration and verification. The dam’s discharge for the considered period was successfully
Academic Editor: Andrea Petroselli
simulated but slightly overestimated. The results indicated that the model is suitable for hydrological
Received: 26 February 2021 simulations in the Al-Adhaim river catchment.
Accepted: 24 March 2021
Published: 26 March 2021 Keywords: hydrologic model; remote sensing; HEC-HMS; Al-Adhaim River; rainfall/runoff

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral

with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil- 1. Introduction
iations. Surface water from the Tigris, Euphrates and Shatt Al-Arab rivers is the main water
resource in Iraq. The water flow of these rivers varied from year to year depending on the
incoming water flows coming from outside of Iraq and the annual rainfall intensity during
the studied period [1].
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. The main factors affecting water shortage challenges in Iraq are the dams located
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. outside of Iraq, in the Tigris and the Euphrates Rivers and their tributaries, climate change,
This article is an open access article and the mismanagement of Iraq’s water resources [2]. It has been reported that the growing
distributed under the terms and water consumption in Turkey and Syria could lead to the complete drying-up of the Tigris
conditions of the Creative Commons and Euphrates rivers by the year 2040 [1].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// The rivers of Iraq are also affected by the annual and seasonal precipitations. A year
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
with heavy precipitations may lead to major floods and disasters, while a year with low
4.0/).

Hydrology 2021, 8, 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology8020058 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/hydrology

Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 2 of 17

precipitation amounts can lead to droughts damaging soil and endangering crops [3]. Ex-
cessive precipitations may also lead to runoffs, which occur when water that is discharged
exceeds river, lake or artificial reservoir capacity. Often rainfall-runoff models are used
for modeling or predicting possible floods as well as rivers and lakes’ water levels during
different boundary conditions [4].
Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC-HMS) is a hydrologic modeling software devel-
oped by the US Army Corps of Engineers of the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC),
which contains an integrated tool for modeling hydrologic processes of dendritic water-
shed systems. This model consists of several components for processing rainfall loss,
direct runoffs and routing. The HEC-HMS model has been widely used, for example, in
many hydrological studies because of its simplicity and capability to be used in common
methods [5].
The Geospatial Hydrologic Modeling Extension (HEC-GeoHMS) is a public-domain
software package for use with Geographical Information Systems (GIS), GeoHMS ArcView
and Spatial Analysis to develop several hydrological modeling inputs. After analyzing
the information of the Digital Elevation Model (DEM), HEC-GeoHMS transforms the
drainage paths and watershed boundaries into a hydrologic data structure that represents
the watershed response to rainfall [6]. An important feature of the HEC-GeoHMS model is
the assignment of the curve numbers (CN), which are related to the land use/land cover
and soil type of the Al-Adhaim catchment.
Several researchers have used the HEC-HMS hydrological model to represent flow
by simulated rainfall-runoff processes. In this regard, a study conducted by Oleyiblo
et al. [7] on the Misai and Wan’an catchments in China used the HEC-HMS model for flood
forecasting. The results were calibrated and verified using historical observed precipita-
tion data, which showed satisfactory results. Saeedrashed et al. [8] used computational
hydrological and hydraulic modeling systems designed by using the interface method,
which links GIS with the modeling systems (HEC-HMS and HEC-RAS). They conducted
a floodplain analysis of the Greater Zab River. Their model calibration and verification
processes showed satisfactory results. Martin et al. [9] used HEC-GeoHMS in the Arc-Map
environment to predict floods by hydraulic modeling. They obtained flood hazard maps
by exporting the HEC-RAS model output results to Arc- Map, where they were processed
to identify the flood-expanded areas. The results from the flood hazard maps showed that
the areas more prone to floods were located in the river middle reach.
HEC-HMS has also been used by Tassew et al. [10] to conduct a rainfall-runoff simu-
lation of the Lake Tana Basin of the Gilgel Abay catchment in the upper Blue Nile basin
in Ethiopia by using six extreme daily time-series events. The Nash Sutcliffe Efficiency
(NSE) accounts for the comparison between the simulated and observed hydrographs.
The coefficient of determination R2 was 0.93 indicating that the model was appropriate
for hydrological simulations. HEC-HMS and GIS were successfully used to simulate the
rainfall-runoff process in the Karun river basin in Iran [11], as well as the inflow designed
floods and dam breach hydraulic analyses of four reservoirs in the Black Hills, South
Dakota [6]. Other examples include the modeling of the watershed in Ahvaz, Iran [12,13],
the simulation of the runoff process for the adjoining areas of the Lagos Island and Eti-Osa
Local Government Areas and the assessment of the influence of different levels of water-
shed spatial discretization on the HEC-HMS model’s performance for the Uberaba River
Basin region [14].
Generally, it is important to mention that in Iraq, and especially in the area under
assessment, very few studies have used such a modeling approach. Large input data have
been prepared for the model, including maps of DEM, land use/land cover, soil type and
curve number, in addition to the rainfall data and observed discharge values. Furthermore,
the Al-Adhaim catchment characteristics have been created and prepared using HEC-Geo
HMS, which were subsequently exported to HEC-HMS. This study will provide good
support for other researchers to continue with such studies for adjacent catchments as well
as other catchments, providing water resources management control in Iraq.
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 3 of 17

The main objective of this study is to develop the HEC-HMS hydrological model using
remotely sensed data such as DEM. The hydrological model was used in combination with
HEC-GeoHMS and GIS to identify the flow by simulating the rainfall-runoff processes for
the Al-Adhaim catchment. Model input parameters were calculated for the HEC-HMS
model. The rapid increase of water demand in Iraq, as well as the predicted water storage
problems due to various factors (mainly climate change), can be assessed by hydrological
modeling, which can help decision-makers to take preemptive actions such as storing
water in the dams, depending on rainfall-runoff predictions. Furthermore, the calibrated
parameters of this model can be used for future hydrological studies in this and adjacent
catchments.

2. Methodology
The Al Adhaim hydrologic model was created by means of HEC-GeoHMS and par-
ticularly by using DEM of the studied areas, obtained from the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) website. HEC-GeoHMS creates an HMS input file, such as the catchment of
the area under study, a stream network, sub-basin boundaries, and different hydrological
parameters in an Arc map environment via a series of steps. An HEC-HMS model for
the Al-Adhaim catchment was developed, and simulations were run with daily rainfall
recorded data.

2.1. Description of Study Area

The studied area (Al-Adhaim catchment) is located in the northeast of Iraq and
comprises a dam with a reservoir downstream of the river (Figure 1). There is also a
discharge gauge downstream of the dam. The Al-Adhaim river is the main source of
freshwater for the Kirkuk Province. The length of the river is close to 330 km. The river
joins the Tigris River at about 15 km to the south of the Balad district. The river drains
an area of 13,000 km2 and then runs almost dry from June to October. Floods take place
from November to May each year, as they are mainly fed by rainfall. The total summation
of the rainfall for the Al-Adhaim catchment for the recent years equals to 489, 915, 415
and 623 mm for the hydrological years 2014 to 2018 in that order. Note that it was not
raining during the months of June, July, August and September [15], while the temperature
ranged from 2 ◦ C to 48 ◦ C. Al-Adhaim can be classified as an arid catchment with 71%
Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 ofof18
its surface being covered by forests and 29% by agricultural lands [2].

Figure1.1.Layout
Figure LayoutofofAl-Adhaim
Al-AdhaimDam
Dam(Arc-GIS
(Arc-GISby
byauthors).
authors).

The Al-Adhaim dam is a 3.8 km long and 150 m high earth-filled embankment dam.
Its width is about 10 m at its highest point. It was built in 1999, and consists of a spillway
intake, a bottom outlet gate shaft, and a power intake (Figure 1). Its storage capacity, live
storage and spillway discharge are about 1.5 × 109 m3, 1 × 109 m3 and 1150 m3, respectively.
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 4 of 17

Al-Adhaim dam is located downstream of the river, within the administrative bor-
ders of the Diyala Province (34◦ 320 N and 44◦ 300 E, about 135 km northeast of the capital
Baghdad, 65 km southeast of Kirkuk Province, and 70 km upstream from Al-Adhaim’s con-
fluence with the Tigris River). The main purposes of this dam are flood control, irrigation
and obtaining hydropower energy (Figure 1).
The Al-Adhaim dam is a 3.8 km long and 150 m high earth-filled embankment dam.
Its width is about 10 m at its highest point. It was built in 1999, and consists of a spillway
intake, a bottom outlet gate shaft, and a power intake (Figure 1). Its storage capacity,
live storage and spillway discharge are about 1.5 × 109 m3 , 1 × 109 m3 and 1150 m3 ,
respectively. The crest of the dam, which is 15 m long, follows an ogee spillway shape
profile according to the United States Bureau of Reclamation standard. It has an elevation
of 131.54 m and is designed to pass a probable maximum flood discharge of 1150 m3 /s [15].
The bottom outlet gate shaft is used for water release for irrigation purposes. The
structure consists of an intake structure, which was used for releasing water through a
closed conduit, which gradually transitions from a squared to a circular section. The
intake is divided into two openings with the transition from a square section of 6 × 6 m2
to a 6 m diameter circular one, which starts the circular tunnel section. The gate shaft
accommodates two gates: the upstream one (the guard gate) and the downstream one (the
regulating gate).
The power intake was used for releasing water for irrigation and power generation
purposes. This outlet includes a 50-m high reinforced concrete shaft at the beginning of
the tunnel, which includes two emergency gates. The inlet is a 6.5 × 16 m2 streamlined
rectangular opening with a shape gradually changing from a 4.5 × 4.5 m2 square section to
4.5 m diameter circular section.
The reservoir’s water surface area is 270 km2 at an elevation of 143 m, which is
the maximum water elevation, and 122 km2 at an elevation of 130 m. The reservoir
volume is 3750 million cubic meters (MCM). The highest operating elevation is 135 m,
corresponding to an area of 170 km2 and a volume of 2150 MCM (Table 1), and the lowest
operating elevation is 118 m, corresponding to 52 km2 and a capacity of 450 MCM. The
water elevation and corresponding area and volume of the reservoir at the beginning of
the hydrological year are shown in Table 2 [15,16]. The gates’ opening coefficients were
used for calibration, because the discharge gate was downstream of the dam. The initial
elevation of the water in the reservoir at the beginning of the hydrological year was also
provided by the Central Statistical Organization of Iraq [17].

Table 1. Water elevation and corresponding area and volume of the reservoir [15,16].

Elevation 1 (m) Area (km2 ) Volume (MCM 2 )

100 3 70
115 41 310
118 52 450
120 60 520
125 85 980
130 122 1400
135 170 2150
140 233 3130
143 270 3750
1 Elevation: meters above sea level; 2 MCM: million cubic meters.
 130 122 1400
135 170 2150
140 233 3130
143 270 3750
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 5 of 17
1 Elevation: meters above sea level; 2 MCM: million cubic meters.

Table 2. Elevations and the corresponding water volumes at the start of the hydrological year [17].
Table 2. Elevations and the corresponding water volumes at1 the start of the hydrological year [17].2
Date Elevation (m) Capacity (BCM )
1/10/2015
Date Elevation 1120.71
(m) 0.60
Capacity (BCM 2)

1/10/2016
1/10/2015 120.71
115.22 0.60
0.31
1/10/2017
1/10/2016 115.22113.94 0.31 0.27
1/10/2018
1/10/2017 113.94117.20 0.27 0.42
1 Elevation:1/10/2018 117.20
meters above sea level; 2 BCM: Billion Cubic Meters. 0.42
1 2
Elevation: meters above sea level; BCM: Billion Cubic Meters.
2.2. Daily Rainfall Data
2.2. Daily Rainfall Data
The rainfall season begins in October and ends in April for the majority of the Iraqi
The rainfall
territory. seasonrainfall
The average beginsincreases
in October andsouthwest
from ends in April for the majority
to northeast of the Iraqi
due to topographical
territory. Therecorded
effects. The average rainfall increases
daily rainfall from
data southwest
were to northeast
downloaded from the due to topographical
Power Data Access
effects.
ViewerThe recorded
website. daily
Figure rainfallthe
2 shows data were downloaded
maximum from for
rainfall amount the the
PowerlastData Access
ten years for
Viewer website. Figure 2 shows the maximum rainfall amount for the last
the studied area that occurred exactly on 17 November 2015, which approached 39 mm ten years for the
studied
[18]. area that occurred exactly on 17 November 2015, which approached 39 mm [18].

Figure2.2.Distribution
Figure Distributionof
ofthe
themaximum
maximumrainfall
rainfallin
inthe
thestudy
studyarea,
area,which
whichoccurred
occurred on
on 17
17 November
November
2015 (Power Data Access Viewer website; https://power.larc.nasa.gov/data-access-viewer, (ac-
2015 (Power Data Access Viewer website; https://power.larc.nasa.gov/data-access-viewer, (accessed
cessed on 26 March 2021)).
on 26 March 2021)).

2.3. HEC-GeoHMS
HEC-GeoHMS is working under the GIS environment, which is a geospatial hydrol-
ogy tool allowing users to determine sub-basin streams as an input for the HEC-HMS
hydrological model [17]. In this study, Arc Map 10.5 and HEC-GeoHMS were used.

2.4. HEC-HMS Project Set-Up

The HEC-HMS software was applied to convert the rainfall data into direct flow taking
into account the topography and the surface characteristics of the modelled location (e.g.,
length of the reach). The software also considers routing, loss, and flow transformation in
the runoff computation. The data were checked, and the HEC-HMS model was developed,
with the creation of several HEC-HMS parameters and the basin and meteorological
model files.

Model Input Parameters

The parameters required for running the HEC-HMS model are listed in Table 3.
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 6 of 17

Table 3. The hydrological model named Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC-HMS) catchment
model parameters for Al-Adhaim.

No. Model Method Parameters Required (Unit)

Initial abstraction (mm),
1 Loss Rate Parameter SCS Curve Number Curve Number and
Impervious area (%)
2 Runoff Transform SCS Unit Hydrograph Lag time (min)
Travel time (K) and
3 Routing Method Constants Muskingum
dimensionless weight (X)

3. Results and Discussion

The temporal variation of the flow at the outlet of the catchment has been assessed by
considering the model’s response for three years of separate precipitation. The basin was
divided into nine sub-basins based on the river network. Runoff from the sub-basins was
estimated by using the SCS-CN, SCS Unit Hydrograph and Muskingum methods for loss,
transformation, and routing calculations, respectively. Some hydrological parameters were
obtained by the calibration process that performed by comparing the simulated flow with
the observed flow data measured by using a discharge gauge, which is located near to the
outlet of the catchment.

3.1. Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

The DEM is an essential input to define the topography of the catchment on the basis
Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW
of semi-DEM 7 of 18
shown in Figure 3. Data were downloaded from the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) website [19] and modified for the study area using Arc-map by the authors.

Figure
Figure3.3.Digital
Digitalelevation
elevation model
model for
for Al-Adhaim (downloadedfrom
Al-Adhaim (downloaded fromUnited
UnitedStates
StatesGeological
GeologicalSurvey
Sur-
vey (USGS) [19] and modified by the authors).
(USGS) [19] and modified by the authors).

3.2.HEC-GeoHMS
3.2. HEC-GeoHMSDevelopment
Development
Terrain pre-processing
Terrain pre-processing andand model
model development
development usingusing HEC-GeoHMS
HEC-GeoHMS is is shown
shown in in
Figure 4. In terrain pre-processing, the DEM sinks were filled, flow direction
Figure 4. In terrain pre-processing, the DEM sinks were filled, flow direction and flow and flow
accumulation were
accumulation were estimated,
estimated, and
and catchments
catchments were
were separated.
separated. The
Thecatchment
catchment boundaries
boundaries
were drawn and stored as different shapefiles. Then, a suitable outlet point
were drawn and stored as different shapefiles. Then, a suitable outlet point was selectedwas selected
at the
the outlet
outlet point
point located
located at ◦ 0
at 44°17′33.937″
44 17 33.937” EE and ◦ 0
and 34°0′14.846″
34 0 14.846”N. N.After
Afterthose
those basins
basins were
were
at
merged,the
merged, the longest
longest flow
flow path
path and
and basin
basin centroid
centroid were
were determined.
determined. After
After processing,
processing, the
the
developed model became ready to export to HEC-HMS software. Extra
developed model became ready to export to HEC-HMS software. Extra processing was processing was
with HEC-GeoHMS and includes the estimation of hydrologic parameters, such as the
curve numbers.

3.2.1. Soil Map and Land Use/Cover Shape Files

Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 7 of 17

Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW

with HEC-GeoHMS and includes the estimation of hydrologic parameters, such8 as
of 18
the
curve numbers.

Figure 4. Pre-processing and model development: (a) raw digital elevation model; (b) fill sinks;
Figure 4. Pre-processing and model development: (a) raw digital elevation model; (b) fill sinks; (c)
(c) low directions;
low directions; (d) catchment
(d) catchment polygon;
polygon; (e) raster;
(e) basin basin raster;
(f) flow(f) flow accumulation;
accumulation; (g) generated
(g) generated pro-
project; (h) basin merge; (i) longest flow path; (j) Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC-HMS)
ject; (h) basin merge; (i) longest flow path; (j) Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC-HMS) legend; legend;
(k) HEC-HMS schematic; and (l) basin
(k) HEC-HMS schematic; and (l) basin centroid.centroid.

3.2.1. Soil Map and Land Use/Cover Shape Files

Procedures to get the land use/cover for the Al-Adhaim catchment include down-
loading Procedures
of theto get the soil
raster types
file offorthe
the Al-Adhaim
global soilcatchment
type include
from downloading
the websiteof
the raster file of the global soil type from the
http://due.esrin.esa.int/page_globcover.php, website on
(accessed http://www.fao.org/soils-portal/
26 March 2021). Data were then
data-hub/soil-maps-and-databases/harmonized-world-soil-database-v12/en/,
exported to Arc map to clip the study area from the global map of soil types and(accessed convert
on 26 March 2021). Data were then exported to Arc map to clip the study
it from the raster file to the shape file. A symbology has been performed afterwards. Fi- area from the
global map of soil types and convert it from the raster file to the shape file.
nally, a shape file has been created by converting the raster to polygons to get a file thatA symbology
hasbe
can been performed
merged afterwards.
with the soil type Finally, the created
file to calculate the shape
curve file has been
number. Themerged
land usewith the
in the
land use/land cover type file to calculate the curve number.
Al-Adhaim catchment is either Ever Green Forest, Dwarf Scrup or Open Sea (Figure 6).
The soil upper layer in most of the areas of the Al-Adhaim catchment is considered as
homogeneous, except in the middle region of the country, which is covered by mounds.
The soil consists of mosaic clay or loam within a surface layer consisting mainly of silt, clay
and silt loam. The sub-surface layer is mainly made of clay loam or clay (Figure 5). Land
use (or land cover) is used as an input for a catchment model as it can affect surface erosion
and water runoff [20].
 Hydrology2021,
Hydrology 2021,8,8,58x FOR PEER REVIEW 98 of
of 17
18

Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 18

Figure5.5.Soil
Figure Soilmap
mapof
ofthe
theAl-Adhaim
Al-Adhaimcatchment
catchment(adapted
(adaptedand
andmodified
modifiedby
bythe
theauthors).
authors).

Procedures to get the land use/cover for the Al-Adhaim catchment include down-
loading of the raster file of the global soil type from the website http://due.esrin.esa.int/
page_globcover.php, (accessed on 26 March 2021). Data were then exported to Arc map to
clip the study area from the global map of soil types and convert it from the raster file to
the shape file. A symbology has been performed afterwards. Finally, a shape file has been
created by converting the raster to polygons to get a file that can be merged with the soil
type file to calculate the curve number. The land use in the Al-Adhaim catchment is either
Figure
Ever 5. SoilForest,
Green map ofDwarf
the Al-Adhaim
Scrup orcatchment
Open Sea(adapted
(Figure and
6). modified by the authors).

Figure 6. Land use classification of the Al-Adhaim catchment (adapted and modified by the au-
thors).

3.2.2. Curve Number

Soil map and land use datasets were used to generate the Curve Number (CN) grid
file, which is required to build the HEC-HMS model. CN values were used to determine
the stream/sub-basin characteristics and to estimate the hydrological parameters used in
the model [10]; Figure 7. CN values range from 30 corresponding to permeable soils with
Figure 6. Land use classification of the Al-Adhaim catchment (adapted and modified by the authors).
high infiltration
Figure 6. Land userates to approximately
classification 100 corresponding
of the Al-Adhaim to water
catchment (adapted andbodies.
modified by the au-
thors).Curve Number
3.2.2.
Soil map and land use datasets were used to generate the Curve Number (CN) grid
3.2.2. Curve Number
file, which is required to build the HEC-HMS model. CN values were used to determine
Soil map and land
the stream/sub-basin use datasets and
characteristics weretoused to generate
estimate the Curveparameters
the hydrological Number (CN)usedgrid
in
file,model
the which[10];
is required
Figure 7.toCN
build the HEC-HMS
values range frommodel. CN values to
30 corresponding were used to soils
permeable determine
with
the stream/sub-basin
high characteristics
infiltration rates to approximately and tocorresponding
100 estimate the hydrological parameters used in
to water bodies.
the model [10]; Figure 7. CN values range from 30 corresponding to permeable soils with
high infiltration rates to approximately 100 corresponding to water bodies.
Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 9 of 17

Figure 7. Curve Number calculations for the Al-Adhaim catchment (adapted and modified by
Figure 7. Curve Number calculations for the Al-Adhaim catchment (adapted and modified by
authors).
authors).
3.3. Parameters Estimation
3.3. Parameters
3.3.1. EstimationConservation Service Curve Number
Loss Model—Soil
3.3.1. The
Lossloss
Model—Soil
models inConservation
HEC-HMS wereService Curve Number
calculated by subtracting the volume of water
that The
was loss models in
intercepted, HEC-HMS
infiltrated, were calculated
stored, evaporatedbyorsubtracting
transpired the volume
to the of water
rainfall water
volume
that [10]. We used
was intercepted, the Soilstored,
infiltrated, Conservation
evaporatedService Curve Number
or transpired loss (SCS
to the rainfall watercurve
vol-
number)
ume [10]. method
We usedtothecalculate the direct runoff
Soil Conservation from
Service a design
Curve Numberrainfall.
loss (SCS curve number)
method Fortothe loss model,
calculate the SCS-CN
the direct runoff has
fromtwo parameters:
a design the curve number (CN) and the
rainfall.
initial
For abstraction (Ia). The
the loss model, thedefault
SCS-CN initial abstraction
has two ratio the
parameters: wascurve
equalnumber
to 0.2 but thenand
(CN) varied
the
after the
initial model calibration.
abstraction The CN
(Ia). The default is aabstraction
initial function ofratio
landwasuse equal
and soil type
to 0.2 butestimated
then varied by
using the HEC-GeoHMS toolkit of Arc Map 10.5. The percentage of imperviousness
after the model calibration. The CN is a function of land use and soil type estimated by for
each sub-basin
using was assumed
the HEC-GeoHMS to beof0%
toolkit (the
Arc Mapentire
10.5.catchment was assumed
The percentage to be completely
of imperviousness for
pervious). The CN values for each sub-basin were calculated by using
each sub-basin was assumed to be 0% (the entire catchment was assumed to be completely formula (1) [21,22].
pervious). The CN values for each sub-basin were calculated by using formula (1) [21,22].
∑ A CNi
CN = ∑ i (1)
CN = ∑ Ai (1)
∑

where Aii is
where is the
the area (km22))of
area (km ofthe
thesub-basin
sub-basinandand CN
CNiiisisthe
thecorresponding
corresponding curve
curve number.
number. IaIa
(mm) is
(mm) is obtained
obtained by by multiplying
multiplying the the loss
loss coefficient
coefficient byby the
the potential
potential abstraction
abstractionSS(mm).
(mm).
The potential
The potential abstraction
abstraction is is aa function
function of
of CN
CN and
and calculated
calculated by by using
using the
the formula
formula (2)
(2) [22].
[22].

S=25, 400 − 254 (2)

S= − 254 (2)
CN

3.3.2. Transform
3.3.2. Transform Model—Soil
Model—Soil Conservation
Conservation Service Unit Hydrograph Method
The transform
The transform prediction
prediction models
models inin HEC-HMS
HEC-HMS simulate
simulate the
the process
process of excess
excess rainfall
rainfall
direct runoff in the
direct the catchment
catchmentandandtransform
transformthetherainfall
rainfallexcess
excessininpoint
pointrunoff
runoff[10]. During
[10]. Dur-
the the
ing analysis of the
analysis study
of the data,
study the the
data, SCSSCS
Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph model
modelwaswas
used to transform
used the
to transform
excess rainfall into runoff.
the excess rainfall into runoff.
The basin
The basin lag
lag time
time parameter
parameter values
values have
have been
been calculated
calculated during
during data
data processing
processing byby
means of the HEC GeoHMS application and stored in the attributes’ table
means of the HEC GeoHMS application and stored in the attributes’ table of the sub-basinof the sub-basin
data layer.
data layer. Basin
Basin lag
lag times
times were
were initially
initially calculated
calculated inin hours
hours for
for the
the sub-basins
sub-basins by by using
using
Equation (3)
Equation (3) and
and were
were then
then converted
converted toto minutes
minutes when
when used
used with
with HEC-HMS.
HEC-HMS.
. .
(S + 1)0.7 L. 0.8
Lag= (3)
Lag = ∗ (3)
1900 ∗ Y0.5
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 10 of 17

where S = maximum retention (mm) as defined by Equation (2), lag = basin lag time (hour),
L= hydraulic length of the catchment (longest flow path) (feet) and Y = basin slope (%).
Table 4 shows the Loss and Transform Model parameter value estimations.

Table 4. The estimation of Loss and Transform Model parameter values.

Basin Area Basin Slope Curve Number Potential Basin Lag

Sub-Basin Ia (mm)
(km2 ) (%) (CN) Abstraction (mm) (Hours)
W880 193.5333 37.00 87 1.49 7.59 5.3959
W890 708.2559 29.87 80 2.50 12.70 6.1618
W710 1635.3000 14.20 78 2.82 14.33 9.0085
W860 8.15850 35.00 95 0.53 2.67 5.4074
W620 2490.1000 18.24 75 3.33 16.93 8.0493
W980 81.4450 47.00 100 0.00 0.00 4.5998
W1000 24.7302 49.00 100 0.00 0.00 4.50491
W700 4485.1000 21.04 79 2.66 13.50 7.37090
W850 2718.1000 38.06 70 4.29 21.77 5.70099

3.3.3. Routing—Muskingum Method

As the flood runoff moves through the channel reach, it weakens because of the
channel storage effects. The routing model available in the HEC-HMS software for this
scenario was the Muskingum method [23].
The Muskingum method is a common lumped flow routing technique. In this model,
a calibration for two parameters, X and K, was required. X is a dimensionless weight, which
is a constant coefficient that varies between 0 and 0.5, where X is a factor representing the
relative influence of flow on storage levels. It can be assumed that the value equals 0.1 as
an initial value of the calibration parameters, which was corrected during the calibration
process. K is the parameter having a unit of time and value ranging from 1 to 5 h. It is
related to the delay between discharge peaks [24]. K is estimated using Equation (4).

L
K= (4)
Vw

where Vw is the flood wave velocity, which can be taken as 1.5 times the average velocity,
and L is the reach length. The average velocity was obtained from the stream gauging
sites. The value of K was used also in the calibration process within short limits based on
Equation (4) until the simulated hydrographs approached the observed ones.
The rainfall runoff processes of the dendritic catchment systems were simulated by
using the hydrological modeling system of the HEC-HMS software. After considering the
pre-processing in the HEC-GeoHMS, the model was imported to the HEC-HMS software
as a basin file. Figure 8 shows the basin model file. HEC-HMS input data are important to
run the rainfall-runoff modeling.
The calculated parameters, such as loss parameters (curve number, initial abstrac-
tion and percentage of imperviousness), transform parameters (lag time) and routing
parameters (k and x), were added to the sub-basins and the reaches either manually or
automatically from the GIS attribute tables. The precipitation, temperature, evaporation
and discharge gauge data were added as time series using the time series data manager,
while the elevation-area table was added as paired data.
Three files were created for rainfall data input in the meteorological folder, correspond-
ing to the hydrological year intervals 2015–2016, 2016–2017 and 2017–2018. For the control
run, daily rainfall was started on 1 October at 00:00 and ended on 30 September at 00:00.
The selected time interval for the hydrograph was of one day for the three corresponding
hydrological years.
ology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 11 of 17

Figure 8. Hydrologic modeling system of the Al-Adhaim catchment by HEC-HMS.

Figure 8. Hydrologic modeling system of the Al-Adhaim catchment by H
3.4. Model Calibration
The model is calibrated by using the daily rainfall data from the hydrological year
3.4. Model Calibration
intervals 2016–2017 and 2015–2016. Manual calibration was applied to estimate the values
of the different parameters. The optimal values of the Muskingum Model parameters (K,
The model is calibrated by using the daily rainfall data from
X) were obtained by comparing the observed and simulated flows, while the parameters of
intervals
the Loss Model 2016–2017 and Model
and the Transform 2015–2016. Manual
were calculated calibration
as explained was
in Sections 3.3.1applie
and 3.3.2. The dam data and the data needed for running the HEC-HMS models such as
of the different parameters. The optimal values of the Muskingum
the spillway level, the gates opening area and the center elevation were obtained from the
X) were
Central obtained
Statistical by comparing
Organization of Iraq [17]. the observed and simulated flow
of
3.5.the LossofModel
Comparison andandthe
the Simulated Transform
Observed Hydrograph Model were
and Validation calculated as ex
of Model
andThe 3.3.2. Theand
simulated dam datahydrographs
observed and thefor data neededperiod
the calibration for intervals
running the HE
2015–
2016 and 2016–2017 are shown in Figure 9a,b and Figure 10a,b for both the simulated and
the spillway
observed level,
hydrographs the gates
exhibiting nearly opening area
similar trends and the
and shapes. center
However, the elevation
peak
Central
discharge ofStatistical
the simulatedOrganization of Iraq
hydrographs is greater [17].
than the observed ones. The results
of the model in this study showed an acceptable fit between the simulated values and
observations. The trend and shape of the hydrograph seems compatible. The R2 values for
3.5. Comparison
the calibration periods of the Simulated
2015–2016 and
and 2016–2017 Observed
were 0.90 for the Hydrograph
outlet section. and Valida
The simulated and observed hydrographs for the calibration
2016 and 2016–2017 are shown in Figures 9a,b and 10a,b for both
served hydrographs exhibiting nearly similar trends and shapes.
charge of the simulated hydrographs is greater than the observed
model in this study showed an acceptable fit between the simula
tions. The trend and shape of the hydrograph seems compatible
ogy 2021, 8,Hydrology 8, 58
2021,REVIEW
x FOR PEER 13 of 18 12 of 17
Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 18

Figure 9.and
Figure 9. Observed Observed and simulated
simulated discharge discharge
values forvalues for outlet
the dam the dam(a)outlet (a) calibration
calibration of 2015–2016;
of 2015–2016; (b) calibration of
(b) calibration Figure
of 9. Observed
2016–2017; and (c) and simulated
validation of discharge values for the dam outlet (a) calibration of 2015–2016;
2017–2018.
2016–2017; and (c) validation(b)
of calibration
2017–2018. of 2016–2017; and (c) validation of 2017–2018.

Figure 10. Regression scatter plot for the (a) calibration period for the dam outlet for the years 2015–2016; (b) calibration
Figure
Figure
period for the dam 10.for
10.
outlet Regression
Regression scatter
the yearsscatter plotfor
plot
2016–2017; forthe
and the (a)
(c)(a) calibration
calibration
validation period
period
period forthe
forfor
the thedam
dam dam outlet
outlet
outlet forthe
for for
the theyears
years
years 2015–2016;(b)
2015–2016;
2017–2018. (b)calibration
calibration
periodfor
period forthe
thedam
damoutlet
outletfor
forthe
theyears
years2016–2017;
2016–2017;andand(c)
(c)validation
validationperiod
periodfor
forthe
thedamdamoutlet
outletfor
forthe
theyears
years2017–2018.
2017–2018.
The model was run for one year of daily rainfall data for validation purposes. The
The model
Thebymodel was run
runforforone
oneyear of daily
dailyrainfall data for validation purposes. The
runoff was simulated using was
the hydrological year
year ofinterval rainfall
2017–2018 datain for
the validation
validation purposes. The
runoff was simulated by using the hydrological year interval 2017–2018 ininthe validation
model. The model calibration parameters were applied to the validation model. The sim- the validation
runoff was simulated by using the hydrological year interval 2017–2018
model.
model. The model
The modelcalibration
calibrationparameters
parameterswere wereapplied
applied to to
thethe validation
validation model.
model. The The
sim-
ulated and observed hydrograph and regression scatter plot for the outlet section for the
simulated
ulated and and observed
observed hydrograph
hydrograph and and regression
regression scatter
scatter plot plot
for for
the the outlet
outlet section
section for for
the
validation period of the years 2017 and 2018 is presented in Figures 9c and 10c. As ob-
the validation
validationplots, period
period of the years 2017 and 2018 is presented in Figures 9c and 10c. As
served in the calibration theofobserved
the yearsand 2017 and 2018hydrographs
simulated is presentedare in almost
Figuresiden-
9c and 10c. As ob-
observed
served in in
thethe calibration
calibration plots,
plots, the the observed
observed and and simulated
simulated hydrographs
hydrographs are almost
are almost iden-
tical except for the peak discharge, which is higher for the simulated graph. The R for the 2
2 for
identical
tical except
except for for the
the peakpeak discharge,
discharge, which
which is is higher
higher forfor
thethe simulated
simulated graph.
graph. TheThe
R 2R
for the
validation period of 2017–2018 is 0.906 for the outlet section.
the validation
validation period
period of 2017–2018
of 2017–2018 is 0.906
is 0.906 forfor
thethe outlet
outlet section.
section.
 Hydrology 2021, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 18
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 13 of 17

A similar result for 2R2 of 0.9 was obtained by Oleyiblo et al. [7] on Misai and Wan’an
A similarinresult
catchments Chinafor R ofHEC-HMS.
using 0.9 was obtained
Tassewby et Oleyiblo et aal.comparison
al. [10] did [7] on Misaiofand
the Wan’an
observed
catchments in China using HEC-HMS. Tassew et al. [10] did a comparison
and simulated hydrographs and the performance of the model was as follows: NSE of the observed
= 0.884
and
andsimulated
the R hydrographs
2 = 0.925. It and
follows thethe
that performance
model is of the model
suitable for was as follows:
hydrological NSE = 0.884
simulations in the
and the R2 = 0.925. It follows that the model is suitable for hydrological simulations in
Gilgel Abay Catchment. Barbosa [14] used seven different methods to investigate the per-
the Gilgel Abay Catchment. Barbosa [14] used seven different methods to investigate the
formance of the HEC-HMS model: MAE, RMSE, RSR, NSE, PBIAS, R2, and KGE. The re-
performance of the HEC-HMS model: MAE, RMSE, RSR, NSE, PBIAS, R2, and KGE. The
searcher concluded that the HEC-HMS model represents the hydrological processes of the
researcher concluded that the HEC-HMS model represents the hydrological processes
basin under investigation efficiently. The results suggest that the subdivision of a catch-
of the basin under investigation efficiently. The results suggest that the subdivision of
ment does not result in the improvement of the HEC-HMS model’s performance without
a catchment does not result in the improvement of the HEC-HMS model’s performance 2
significant differences in physiographic characteristics; for example, the values of R
without significant differences in physiographic characteristics; for example, the values of
ranged between 0.72 for two sub-basins to 0.73 for 32 sub-basins. From the above, it can
2
R ranged between 0.72 for two sub-basins to 0.73 for 32 sub-basins. From the above, it can
be concluded that the model performs considerable well, and the simulation can be judged
be concluded that the model performs considerable well, and the simulation can be judged
to be satisfactory.
to be satisfactory.
During modeling using HEC-HMS, it was noticed that the main parameters which
During modeling using HEC-HMS, it was noticed that the main parameters which
affectrunoff
affect runoffquantities
quantitieswere
werethe
thecurve
curvenumber
numberandandthen
theninitial
initialabstraction.
abstraction.However,
However,lag lag
time and percentage of impervious area were less affected by the
time and percentage of impervious area were less affected by the runoff results. runoff results.

3.6.Reservoir
3.6. ReservoirModelling
Modelling
Accordingtotothe
According the Department
Department of of Environment
EnvironmentStatistics
Statistics[17],
[17],the observed
the observed annual
annualvol-
umes discharged from the dam concerning its outlet were 1.15, 0.81
volumes discharged from the dam concerning its outlet were 1.15, 0.81 and 0.81 billion and 0.81 billion cubic
meters
cubic (BCM),
meters whilewhile
(BCM), the simulated volumes
the simulated volumeswere were
1.22, 0.93
1.22,and
0.930.909 BCM BCM
and 0.909 for thefor
hydro-
the
logical yearyear
hydrological intervals 2015–2016,
intervals 2016–2017
2015–2016, 2016–2017andand
2017–2018, respectively
2017–2018, respectively(Figure 11a).
(Figure Ad-
11a).
ditionally, the
Additionally, thesimulated
simulatedvalues
values for
for the average annual
annualdischarge
dischargeflow flowwere
were51.6,
51.6,29.9
29.9and
and
29.3mm
29.3 3 /s,
3/s, while the
while the observed values [17] for the outlet outlet were
were 36.42,
36.42, 25.83
25.83and
and25.58
25.58m 3 /s
m3/s for
thethehydrological
for hydrologicalyear yearintervals
intervals 2015–2016,
2015–2016, 2016–2017 and and 2017–2018,
2017–2018,respectively,
respectively,asas
shownininFigure
shown Figure11b.
11b.The
Thefigures
figuresindicate
indicatea aslightly
slightlyoverestimated
overestimated discharge
discharge flow.
flow.

Figure Observed
11.11.
Figure Observed and simulated
and hydrographs
simulated hydrographscorresponding
correspondingtoto(a)(a)
the annual
the water
annual volume
water discharged;
volume and
discharged; (b)(b)
and the
the
annual discharge
annual flow.
discharge flow.

Table
Table5 5shows
showsthetheresults
resultsofof
the
thesimulation
simulationrunrunfor the
for dam
the dam storage
storagearea.
area.The
Theresults
results
indicate
indicate that the storage and the pool elevation at the beginning of the hydrologicalyears
that the storage and the pool elevation at the beginning of the hydrological years
were compatible with Table 2 for all years assessed in this study. The results
were compatible with Table 2 for all years assessed in this study. The results showed thatshowed that
the
theyears
years2015–2016
2015–2016can canbebeconsidered
considered as as wet
wet ones, with peak
ones, with peak storage
storageofof0.86
0.86BCM
BCMandandan
anelevation
elevationofof124.6
124.6m.m.However,
However, for for this
this period
period the storage capacity was just underthe
the storage capacity was just under the
maximum limits, accounting for approximately 1.5 BCM at the elevation of 131.54 m, which
maximum limits, accounting for approximately 1.5 BCM at the elevation of 131.54 m,
is when the spillway comes into operation.
which is when the spillway comes into operation.
Hydrology 2021, 8,
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58
x FOR PEER REVIEW 1514of
of 18
17

Table 5. Results of a simulation run for the dam storage area.

Storage (BCM)/Elevation
Storage (BCM)/ElevationPeak Inflow
Peak Inflow Peak Discharge InflowInflow
Volume Vol- PeakStorage
Peak Storage
Year
Year (m) at the Start
(m) of the
at the Hy-
Start of the Peak Discharge (m3/s)/Date
(m3 /s)/Date
(m3/s)/Date (m3 /s)/Date ume (BCM) (BCM)/Elevation
(BCM) (BCM)/Elevation(m)
(m)
Hydrological
drological Year Year
742.4/ 742.4/ 133.3/
133.3/
2015–2016
2015–2016 0.60/120.71
0.60/120.71 1.3201.320 0.860/124.6
0.860/124.6
12 April
12 2016
April 2016 1616April
April2016
2016
396.9/ 396.9/ 142.1/
142.1/
2016–2017
2016–2017 0.31/115.20
0.31/115.20 0.8950.895 0.438/118.4
0.438/118.4
24 March
24 March 2017 2017 2626March
March2017
2017
2017–2018 0.27/113.94 625.1/ 625.1/ 142.4/
142.4/ 0.9530.953 0.438/118.4
2017–2018 0.27/113.94 18 February 2018 26 0.438/118.4
18 February 2018 26 February2018
February 2018
BCM,
BCM,billion cubicmeters.
billion cubic meters.

Figure 12a–c
Figures 12a–cshow
showthethe Al-Adhaim
Al-Adhaim reservoir
reservoir simulations for the
simulations for the year
year intervals
intervals 2015–
2015–
2016, 2016–2017
2016, 2016–2017 and
and 2017–2018.
2017–2018. These
These figures
figures show
show that
that during
during the
the summer
summer season
season when
when
there was
there was almost
almostno norain,
rain,nonoflow
flowoccurred,
occurred,and thethe
and pool elevation
pool approached
elevation approachedits minimum.
its mini-
mum. This is due to the fact that the main water source for the Al-Adhaim riverrainfall.
This is due to the fact that the main water source for the Al-Adhaim river is In
is rainfall.
contrast, during the period of precipitation, the storage capacity increased,
In contrast, during the period of precipitation, the storage capacity increased, reaching reaching peak
inflow
peak values
inflow of 742.4,
values 396.9396.9
of 742.4, and 625.1 m3 /smcorresponding
and 625.1 3/s corresponding to maximum
to maximum rainfall values
rainfall val-
of 39.91, 29.14 and 33.41 mm for the year intervals 2015–2016, 2016–2017
ues of 39.91, 29.14 and 33.41 mm for the year intervals 2015–2016, 2016–2017 and 2017– and 2017–2018,
respectively.
2018, respectively.
The model
The model used
used inin our
our research
research isis useful
useful inin predicting
predicting runoff
runoff volumes
volumes andand flooding
flooding
in the area of interest. Figure 12 shows that the peaks of the estimated discharges
in the area of interest. Figure 12 shows that the peaks of the estimated discharges for the for
the hydrological years from 2015 to 2018 occurred between March and May, which is
hydrological years from 2015 to 2018 occurred between March and May, which is consid-
considered to be the time in which severe flooding takes place in the area. Moreover, it can
ered to be the time in which severe flooding takes place in the area. Moreover, it can be
be noted that during the March to May period, runoff depth and volume increased, and
noted that during the March to May period, runoff depth and volume increased, and
therefore, special attention should be dedicated to dam outlet management during this
therefore, special attention should be dedicated to dam outlet management during this
period in the coming years.
period in the coming years.

Figure 12. Cont.

Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 15 of 17

Figure 12. The simulation run for the Al-Adhaim reservoir concerning the intervals (a) 2015–2016; (b) 2016–2017; and (c)
2017–2018.

4. Conclusions and Recommendations

The HEC-HMS hydrologic model was used in combination with the HEC-GeoHMS
and GIS to identify flow by simulated rainfall-runoff processes. The outlet flow discharge
of the Al Adhaim Dam has been simulated and compared with the flow obtained from
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 16 of 17

the discharge gauge located downstream of the dam by calibration of the parameters for
two hydrological years and verification for one hydrological year. The results show a good
agreement between observed and simulated flows, and R2 was 0.9 for both calibration and
verification. The correlation between simulation and observation was good, but the total
volume of discharge storage for these years was slightly overestimated. The conclusions
from the analysis are listed below:
1. The HEC-HMS model can be used to obtain satisfactory simulated hydrological
models and is a valuable tool for the management of dam storage by forecasting
rainfall amounts.
2. The simulation results of runoff discharge peaks are slightly different compared with
the observed data.
3. In the summer season with almost no precipitation, there was no flow and the pool
elevation approached minimum limits. On the contrary, during the period of precipi-
tation, the storage capacity approached the peak inflow of 742.4 m3 /s for the years
2015–2016, which corresponds to maximum daily rainfall of 39.91 mm.
4. The area of interest does not have an available discharge station other than the one
located near the outlet. Discharge stations could provide real observed discharge
data that can be used to validate the modeling results. Therefore, the provision of an
upstream discharge station is vital.
5. The development of serious water policy and planning strategies in accordance with
the results obtained from this study could reduce the probability of floods and may
help in the management and control of the dam outlet.
6. During modeling using HEC-HMS, it was noticed that the main parameters which
affect runoff quantities were the curve number and then initial abstraction.
7. HEC-HMS model results were good for flood forecasting concerning the Al-Adhaim
catchment. Data can be exported to simulate a 2-dimensional flood inundation map
using a hydraulic model such as HEC-RAS. They can also be used for forecasting the
rainfall using a suitable program to predict flooding for long-time periods.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.N.A.H., S.A., and M.S.; methodology, S.A.; software,
A.N.A.H.; validation, S.A., A.N.A.H. and M.S.; formal analysis, A.N.A.H.; investigation, S.A.; re-
sources, A.N.A.H.; data curation, S.A. and A.N.A.H.; writing—original draft preparation, A.N.A.H.;
writing—review and editing, S.A. and M.S.; visualization, S.A., A.N.A.H. and M.S. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Al-Ansari, N. Management of water resources in Iraq: Perspectives and prognoses. Engineering 2013, 5, 667–684. [CrossRef]
2. Abbas, N.; Wasimia, S.A.; Al-Ansari, N. Assessment of climate change impacts on water resources of Al-Adhaim, Iraq using
SWAT model. Engineering 2016, 8, 716–732. [CrossRef]
3. Rahi, K.A.; Al-Madhhachi, A.-S.T.; Al-Hussaini, S.N. Assessment of Surface Water Resources of Eastern Iraq. Hydrology 2019, 6,
57. [CrossRef]
4. Jia, Y.; Zhao, H.; Niu, C.; Jiang, Y.; Gan, H.; Xing, Z.; Zhao, X.; Zhao, Z. A WebGIS-based system for rainfall-runoff prediction and
real-time water resources assessment for Beijing. Comput. Geosci. 2009, 35, 1517–1528. [CrossRef]
5. Halwatura, D.; Najim, M. Application of the HEC-HMS model for runoff simulation in a tropical catchment. Environ. Modell.
Softw. 2013, 46, 155–162. [CrossRef]
6. Hoogestraat, G.K. Flood hydrology and Dam-Breach Hydraulic Analyses of Four Reservoirs in the Black Hills, South Dakota; U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5011; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 2011; p. 37.
Hydrology 2021, 8, 58 17 of 17

7. Oleyiblo, J.O.; Li, Z.-j. Application of HEC-HMS for flood forecasting in Misai and Wan’an catchments in China. Water Sci. Eng.
2010, 3, 14–22.
8. Saeedrashed, Y.S. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modelling of the Greater Zab River-Basin for an Effective Management of Water
Resources in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq Using DEM and Raster Images. In Environmental Remote Sensing and GIS in Iraq;
Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 415–446.
9. Martin, O.; Rugumayo, A.; Ovcharovichova, J. Application of HEC HMS/RAS and GIS tools in flood modeling: A case study for
river Sironko–Uganda. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2012, 1, 19–31.
10. Tassew, B.G.; Belete, M.A.; Miegel, K. Application of HEC-HMS model for flow simulation in the Lake Tana basin: The case of
Gilgel Abay catchment, upper Blue Nile basin, Ethiopia. Hydrology 2019, 6, 21. [CrossRef]
11. Tahmasbinejad, H.; Feyzolahpour, M.; Mumipour, M.; Zakerhoseini, F. Rainfall-runoff Simulation and Modeling of Karon River
Using HEC-RAS and HEC-HMS Models, Izeh District, Iran. J. Appl. Sci. 2012, 12, 1900–1908. [CrossRef]
12. Radmanesh, F.; Hemat, J.P.; Behnia, A.; Khond, A.; Mohamad, B.A. Calibration and assessment of HEC-HMS model in Roodzard
watershed. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of River Engineering, University of Shahid Chamran, Ahva, Iran,
26–28 February 2020.
13. Olayinka, D.; Irivbogbe, H. Estimation of Hydrological Outputs using HEC-HMS and GIS. N. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 1,
390–402. [CrossRef]
14. Barbosa, J.; Fernandes, A.; Lima, A. The influence of spatial discretization on HEC-HMS modelling: A case study. Int. J. Hydrol.
2019, 3, 442–449.
15. Salman, A.H.; Habib, Z.H.; Rahman, A.A. Environmental impacts of water dams in Iraq. J. Geog. Univ. Kufa 2014, 20, 329–364.
16. Jasim, S.M. The natural constituents of the Great Dam Lake and its impact on developing tourism demand. J. Admin. Econ. 2008,
71, 207–231.
17. The Central Statistical Organization of Iraq/Environment Statistics/Bagdad. Available online: http://cosit.gov.iq/en/ (accessed
on 5 August 2020).
18. UN-ESCWA. Inventory of shared water resources in Western Asia. In United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western
Asia; Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources: Beirut, Lebanon, 2013.
19. USGS. Available online: https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov (accessed on 5 August 2020).
20. Mhaina, A.S. Modeling suspended sediment load using SWAT model in data scarce area-Iraq (Al-Adhaim Watershed as a Case
Study). Master’s Thesis, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq, 2017.
21. FAO. State of Food and Agriculture 2012: Investing in Agriculture for a Better Future; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2012.
22. Manoj, N.; Kurian, C.; Sudheer, K. Development of a flood forecasting model using HEC-HMS. In Proceedings of the National
Conference on Water Resources & Flood Management, National Conference on Water Resources & Flood Management with
special reference to Flood Modelling, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology, Surat, India, 14–15 October 2016;
pp. 14–15.
23. McCarthy, G.T. The unit hydrograph and flood routing. In Proceedings of the Conference of North Atlantic Division, US Army
Corps of Engineers, New London, CT, USA, 1 January 1939; pp. 608–609.
24. Din, S.U.; Khan, N.M.; Israr, M.; Nabi, H.; Khan, M. Runoff modelling using HEC HMS for rural watershed. Development 2019, 6.
[CrossRef]