Flood issues have always been major disaster in many countries especially the tropical regions where extreme precipitations occurred during the monsoon seasons. Hence, well-established hydrological modelling framework is required to estimate the peak discharge in the river network as part of flood mitigation measures. Unfortunately, in poorly gauged river basin, observations data required for performing hydrological modelling such as landuse changes, climatology data, hydrological data, and soil information are often insufficient and difficult to obtained. The objectives of this study are to utilize readily accessible remote sensing data to generate the topography, land use characteristics, and climate data, and to establish the hydrological model framework for determining the peak streamflow discharge in poorly gauged basin. For this study, hydrological modelling was performed using ArcSWAT, an integrated extension in ArcGIS. Two types of data are used for the simulation, remote sensing climate data (RSCD) and observe climate data (OCD). There were 20 subbasins delineated for Kuantan River Basin with a total number of 87 Hydrological Response Unit (HRU) defined through ArcGIS. The periods used for calibration and validation of the hydrological model selected were from January 2010 to December 2011 and January 2017 to December 2018 based on the availability of the climate data to run the simulation. Both data will be the compared using observed streamflow data (OSD) at Station Bukit Kenau. Overall result obtained from the simulation, the observed climate data give better prediction than remote sensing climate data by comparing the performance rating using Ration of Standard deviation to RSME (RSR) and Percentage bias (PBIAS).

1.
S. K.
Roy
and
S. C.
Sarker
, “
Integration of Remote Sensing Data and GIS Tools for Accurate Mapping of Flooded Area of Kurigram, Bangladesh
”,
Journal of Geographic Information System
,
8
, pp.
184
192
, (
2016
)
2.
L.
Singh
and
S.
Saravanan
, “
Simulation of monthly streamflow using the SWAT model of the Ib River watershed, India
”,
HydroResearch
,
3
, pp.
95
105
, (
2020
)
3.
J.
Qi
,
X.
Zhang
,
Q.
Yang
,
R.
Srinivasan
,
J. G.
Arnold
,
J.
Li
,
S. T.
Waldholf
and
J.
Cole
, “
Swat ungauged: Water quality modeling in the Upper Mississippi River Basin
”,
Journal of Hydrology
,
584
, pp.
124601
, (
2020
)
4.
I.
Ridwansyah
,
M.
Yulianti
and
H.
Wibowo
, “
Soil Water Analysis Tools (SWAT) hydrology modelling as a basis for spatial planning: A case study in Cimandiri watershed, West Java Province
”,
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
,
380
(
1
), pp.
012017
, (
2019
)
5.
A.
Malagó
,
F.
Bouraoui
,
O.
Vigiak
,
B.
Grizzetti
and
M.
Pastori
, “
Modelling water and nutrient fluxes in the Danube River basin with Swat
”,
Science of The Total Environment
,
603-604
, pp.
196
218
, (
2017
)
6.
T.
Kondo
,
N.
Sakai
,
T
,
Yazawa
and
Y.
Shimizu
, “
Verifying the applicability of Swat to simulate fecal contamination for watershed management of Selangor River, Malaysia
”,
Science of The Total Environment
,
774
, pp.
145075
, (
2021
)
7.
Y.
Wang
,
R.
Jiang
,
J.
Xie
,
Y.
Zhao
,
D.
Yan
and
S.
Yang
, “
Soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) model: A systemic review
”,
Journal of Coastal Research
,
93
), pp.
22
, (
2019
)
8.
N.
Wang
,
W.
Liu
,
F.
Sun
,
Z.
Yao
,
H.
Wang
and
W.
Liu
, “
Evaluating satellite-based and reanalysis precipitation datasets with gauge-observed data and hydrological modeling in the Xihe River Basin, China
”,
Atmospheric Research
,
234
, (
2020
).
9.
N. S.
Romali
,
Z.
Yusop
,
N. I. H. M.
Zaki
,
M. S. A. K.
Sulaiman
,
N. A. A. A.
Ghani
and
S.
Sulaiman
, “
Flood damage function model for residential area in Kuantan: A preliminary study
”,
International Journal of Integrated Engineering
,
11
(
2
), pp
203
213
, (
2019
)
10.
R.
Elfithri
,
S.
Halimshah
,
M. P.
Abdullah
,
M.
Mokhtar
,
M. E.
Toriman
,
A. F.
Embi
,
M.
Abdullah
,
L. Yook
Heng
,
K. N. Ahmad
Maulud
,
S.
Salleh
,
M.
Maizan
and
N. M.
Ramzan
, “
Pahang Flood Disaster : The Potential Flood Drivers
”,
Malaysian Journal of Geosciences
,
1
(
1
), pp.
34
37
, (
2017
)
11.
M. L.
Tan
,
P. W.
Gassman
,
J.
Liang
and
J. M.
Haywood
, “
A review of alternative climate products for Swat Modelling: Sources, assessment and Future Directions
”,
Science of The Total Environment
,
795
, pp.
148915
, (
2021
)
12.
F.
Olivera
,
M.
Valenzuela
,
R.
Srinivasan
,
J.
Choi
,
H.
Cho
,
S.
Koka
and
A.
Agrawal
, “
ArcGIS-SWAT: A geodata model and GIS interface for SWAT
”,
Journal of the American Water Resources Association
,
42
(
2
), pp.
295
309
, (
2006
)
13.
S. M.
Zaidi
,
A.
Akbari
,
A. Abu
Samah
,
S. K.
Ngien
,
J. I. A.
Gisen
, “
Landsat-5 Time Series Analysis for Land Use/Land Cover Change Detection Using NDVI and Semi-Supervised Classification Techniques
”,
Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
,
26
(
6
), pp.
2833
2840
, (
2017
)
14.
K.
Kumarasamy
and
P.
Belmont
, “
Calibration parameter selection and watershed hydrology model evaluation in time and frequency domains
”,
Water (Switzerland)
,
10
(
6
), (
2018
)
15.
sD.
Sao
,
T.
Kato
,
L. H.
Tu
,
P.
Thouk
,
A.
Fitriyah
and
C.
Oeurng
, “
Evaluation of different objective functions used in the sufi-2 calibration process of swat-cup on water balance analysis: A case study of the pursat river basin, Cambodia
”,
Water (Switzerland)
,
12
(
10
), pp.
1
22
, (
2020
)
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.