Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Post-fire runoff simulation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

PFHydro: A New Watershed-Scale Model for Post-Fire Runoff Simulation

Runoff increases after wildfires that burn vegetation and create a condition of soil-water repellence (SWR). A new post-fire watershed hydrological model, PFHydro, was created to explicitly simulate vegetation interception and SWR effects for four burn severity categories: high, medium, low severity and unburned. The model was applied to simulate post-fire runoff from the Upper Cache Creek Watershed in California, USA. Nash–Sutcliffe modeling efficiency (NSE) was used to assess model performance. The NSE was 0.80 and 0.88 for pre-fire water years (WY) 2000 and 2015, respectively. NSE was 0.88 and 0.93 for WYs 2016 (first year post-fire) and 2017 respectively. The simulated percentage of surface runoff in total runoff of WY 2016 was about six times that of pre-fire WY 2000 and three times that of WY 2015. The modeling results suggest that SWR is an important factor for post-fire runoff generation. In conclusion, the model was successful at simulating SWR behavior.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluating post-fire watershed response to varying burn severity and precipitation regimes using fully-distributed and integrated hydrologic models

Wildfires can cause significant changes in vegetation and soil, which may lead to increased surface runoff and soil erosion, thereby affecting water cycling within ecosystems. This study uses the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), an integrated and fully distributed hydrologic model at the watershed scale, to examine post-fire hydrologic responses in selected watersheds with varying burn severities in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. The model integrates surface overland flow, subsurface flow, and canopy biophysical processes. We have developed a new fire module in ATS to account for changes in soil hydraulic properties caused by fire in the topsoil layer. Modeling results indicate that, in the year following a high-severity burn, watershed-averaged evapotranspiration decreases by 25%. Additionally, post-fire peak flows increase by 18-29% in watersheds burned with medium to high severity due to changes in soil properties. Conversely, a low-severity burn results in less than a 1% increase in post-fire peak flow. Furthermore, a high-severity fire causes a 38% reduction in the infiltration rate within the affected watershed during the first post-fire wet season. Hypothetical numerical experiments with varying precipitation regimes after a high-severity fire show that post-fire peak flows can increase by 1-29% due to fire-induced changes in soil hydraulic properties. This study highlights the importance of using fully distributed hydrologic models to quantify disturbance-feedback loops, which are essential for understanding the complexities brought about by spatial heterogeneity in post-fire landscapes.

ATS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data and scripts associated with “When do Riverine Systems 'Feel the Burn'? Simulating How Burn Extent and Severity Modulate Hydrologic Controls on Biogeochemical Export” (v2)

This data package is associated with the publication “When do Riverine Systems 'Feel the Burn'? Simulating How Burn Extent and Severity Modulate Hydrologic Controls on Biogeochemical Export” published in Water Resources Research (Wampler et al. 2025; preprint: https://doi.org/10.22541/essoar.174438106.63564767/v1). This study used the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), a processed based model to explore the impacts of area burned and burn severity on streamflow, nitrate, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in two test basins: a semi-arid, mixed land use basin and a humid, primarily forested basin. We developed 1800 wildfire scenarios that we ran in each basin: 20 different burn extents (5 to 100% by 5%), 3 different burn severities (low, moderate, and high), and 30 different post-fire precipitation scenarios. We also ran an additional 30 scenarios associated with no wildfire for the 30 post-fire precipitation scenarios. For each scenario we were interested in the change in runoff ratio (streamflow) and average concentration and annual loads (nitrate and DOC) across the wildfire scenarios. This data package contains the data and scripts required to build SWAT models for the two test basins, create and run the wildfire scenarios, and generate the data summaries and figures used in the associated manuscript. This data package was originally published in March 2025. It was updated in January 2026 (v2; new and modified files) to include the final files after the manuscript went through reviews. See the change history section below for more details. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data and scripts associated with the manuscript evaluating the hydrologic responses of the Pacific Northwest watersheds to wildfires (v2)

This data package is associated with the publication “Evaluating Post-fire Watershed Response to Varying Burn Severity and Precipitation Regimes Using Fully-distributed and Integrated Hydrologic Models” submitted to Journal of Hydrology (Li et al. 2025). In this study, we employed the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), an integrated watershed model that couples surface flow, subsurface flow, and canopy biophysical processes, to investigate post-fire hydrologic responses in a few selected watersheds with varying burn severity.The data package contains the required input data (meteorological forcing, Leaf Area Index, wildfire burn severities, etc.) to run the model, configuration files, the Jupyter notebooks in Python to pre-process and post-process data, the figures in the manuscript, and the modeling output files. The variables include watershed-averaged evapotranspiration, watershed-averaged surface/subsurface/canopy water content, and river discharge at watershed outlet.The data package contains a file-level metadata that lists and describes all the files contained in the data package (ATS_flmd.csv), a data dictionary file that defines columns headers across all csv files contained in the data package (ATS_dd.csv), a data package level readme file (the current file), and four zipped folders.The ‘data’ folder provides data needed to run the model in .h5, .i2s, .xyz, .shp, and .exo formats. The sub-folders are for each data types. The ‘model’ folder provides input files (.xml format) and essential model outputs. Each sub-folder provides the files from each simulated watershed. The ‘notebooks’ folder provides the Jupyter notebooks (.ipynb format) for pre- and post- processing model files, and for producing the figures in the manuscript. The ‘figures’ folder provides the figures associated with manuscript in .pdf and .png formats.The ‘model’ folder and the ‘data’ folder have been split into 5GB-large pieces using the Linux command ‘split -b 5120m model.zip model.zip.’ and ‘split -b 5120m data.zip data.zip.’, respectively. They can be merged back using the Linux command ‘cat model.zip.* > model.zip’ and ‘cat data.zip.* > data.zip’, respectively.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗