EGU26-10315, updated on 14 Mar 2026
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu26-10315
EGU General Assembly 2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
PICO | Wednesday, 06 May, 08:40–08:42 (CEST)
 
PICO spot 2
Leveraging opportunistic rainfall sensors to improve hydrological flood modelling in a peri-urban catchment
Andrijana Todorović1, Nebuloni Roberto2,3, De Michele Carlo4, Cazzaniga Greta5, Deidda Cristina6, Kovačević Ranka7, and Ceppi Alessandro4
Andrijana Todorović et al.
  • 1University of Belgrade, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, Serbia (atodorovic@grf.bg.ac.rs)
  • 2Politecnico di Milano, Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering (DEIB), Milan, Italy
  • 3National Research Council, Institute of Electronics, Computer and Telecommunication Engineering (CNR-IEIIT), Milan, Italy
  • 4Politecnico di Milano, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (DICA), Milan, Italy
  • 5Laboratory for Climate and Environmental Sciences (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement – LSCE/IPSL), Gif sur Yvette Cedex, France
  • 6Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Water and Climate, Brussels, Belgium
  • 7University of Belgrade, Faculty of Forestry, Belgrade, Serbia

Accurate flood simulations necessitate rainfall inputs with fine spatiotemporal resolution, especially if semi- or fully-distributed hydrological models are used. Rainfall data are commonly obtained from rain gauges and/or weather radars, each with their associated uncertainties and challenges, especially with capturing heavy, localised events, and with high implementation- and maintenance costs [1]. This further translates into high costs of hydrological modelling of flood events [2].

An interesting alternative to rain gauges and radars are the rainfall data gathered from opportunistic sensors, such as Commercial Microwave Links (CMLs). CML data come at no infrastructure cost as they are generated by the network management system of mobile networks to monitor link performance. Furthermore, CMLs cover a large part of the world. Their strong potential to providing near-surface, fine-resolution rainfall fields has been demonstrated in many studies [3]. However, their usage for hydrological modelling has been little investigated so far. CML data have been mostly used for fully-distributed models in small catchments with an area of few square kilometres [1], with isolated examples of application in large catchments and/or with semi-distributed models [1],[4].

In this study, we analyse the impact of various modelling decisions about application of CML rainfall data on simulated flood hydrographs. Specifically, selection of (i) the approach to pre-processing CML signals to obtain hyetographs [3], (ii) CML data usage as a standalone input or in a combination with conventional datasets, and (iii) the way to calculate sub-catchment-averaged rainfall, are analysed. Different rainfall inputs are created accordingly, and used to force a semi-distributed model of the pre-alpine, peri-urban Lambro catchment in northern Italy notorious for intensive, tightly-localised events that trigger floods [4]. The simulated hydrographs of twelve flood events are compared to the observed ones in terms of the Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient, relative errors in peak magnitudes and runoff volumes, and timing of peak occurrence. Based on our analyses, specific recommendations are provided, with the ultimate goal to promote a wider application of CML data for hydrological modelling.

 

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the “OpenSense” COST Action (CA20136) for supporting their collaboration through the STSM program.

References

[1]           J. Olsson et al., ‘How close are opportunistic rainfall observations to providing societal benefit?’, Journal of Hydrometeorology, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.1175/JHM-D-25-0043.1.

[2]           J. Seibert, F. M. Clerc‐Schwarzenbach, and H. J. (Ilja) Van Meerveld, ‘Getting your money’s worth: Testing the value of data for hydrological model calibration’, Hydrological Processes, vol. 38, no. 2, p. e15094, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1002/hyp.15094.

[3]           S. C. Doshi, C. De Michele, G. Cazzaniga, and R. Nebuloni, ‘A Framework for Minimizing the Impact of Wet Antenna Attenuation on Rainfall Estimates Provided by Commercial Microwave Links’, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Observations Remote Sensing, vol. 19, pp. 421–437, 2026, doi: 10.1109/JSTARS.2025.3632933.

[4]           G. Cazzaniga, C. De Michele, M. D’Amico, C. Deidda, A. Ghezzi, and R. Nebuloni, ‘Hydrological response of a peri-urban catchment exploiting conventional and unconventional rainfall observations: the case study of Lambro Catchment’, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 2093–2111, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.5194/hess-26-2093-2022.

How to cite: Todorović, A., Roberto, N., Carlo, D. M., Greta, C., Cristina, D., Ranka, K., and Alessandro, C.: Leveraging opportunistic rainfall sensors to improve hydrological flood modelling in a peri-urban catchment, EGU General Assembly 2026, Vienna, Austria, 3–8 May 2026, EGU26-10315, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu26-10315, 2026.