The Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) is designed to simulate the hydrologic cycle. This broad simulation capability requires many different components: shortwave and longwave radiation, precipitation, potential evapotranspiration, snowmelt, infiltration, surface runoff, baseflow, and channel routing. Water control structures such as reservoirs and diversions also contain a number of simulation components for spillways, pumps, and culverts, to name a few. These simulation components require an extensive array of time-series data, paired data, and gridded data. The interaction of these various data and simulation components leads to a software package that is very complex.

Hydrologic engineers in Corps of Engineers' offices nationwide support planning, design, operation, permitting, and regulating activities by providing information about current and potential future runoff from watersheds, with and without water control structures. HEC-HMS can support these activities by simulating the behavior of watersheds, and computing estimates of runoff volumes, of peak flow rates, and of timing of flows. It is critical that these estimates be precise and accurate if they are to be useful. By precise we mean that every time the software computes a simulation, it must obtain the exact same numerical results for the same input data. By accurate we mean that the equations that are the foundation of each of the simulation components are solved correctly.

Code validation can be described as the process of determining that a complex software program such as HEC-HMS produces precise and accurate results. Code validation should not be confused with other types of testing. For example, model validation is the process of determining if a proposed model (often a mathematical model) accurately represents a physical process and provides predictive capability. In another example, verification is the process of determining if a set of model parameters estimated during calibration performs well under different but similar conditions. Code validation instead focuses on the very specific question of whether the software accurately solves the equations used to model or represent the physical process. Software should not be used for any of the tasks undertaken by a hydrologic engineer unless it first can demonstrate code validation of all its internal components.

The models and equations incorporated in HEC-HMS have been validated by the research community. The equations in each of the simulation components included in the program have been sourced from published hydrology textbooks and from papers published in peer-reviewed journals. The code validation process described here is designed to determine if the published models and equations have been incorporated correctly in the HEC-HMS software. However, code validation does not mean that a particular model can be applied in any and every watershed. A variety of simulation components are included in HEC-HMS because not every model is applicable in every watershed. The HEC-HMS user is responsible for selecting simulation components in the software appropriate to the study watershed, and configuring them to appropriately represent the hydrological processes in the watershed. A calibration and verification process should be developed by the hydrologic engineer to determine if appropriate choices have been made in how the software is applied.

The Test Suite

The team responsible for the development of HEC-HMS has created an extensive set of code validation tests. The tests are designed to determine if input data including time-series, paired data, and gridded data are processed correctly. This includes tests of unit system conversion and interpolation. The code validation tests also determine if the simulation results are accurate. The accuracy of the results is determined by one of two methods. In some cases it is possible, given the input data and parameters, to calculate the correct result by hand. In these cases the equations are simple enough that hand calculations with the aid of a calculator can determine that the results computed by HEC-HMS are correct. Other cases require independent software such as Parametric Technology Corporation's Mathcad® or Microsoft Excel®. This second approach is required when the equations used in a simulation component are differential equations, or some other type of complex equation. Mathcad and Excel are developed independently by teams of industry specialists. The results from these independent software tools can be used to confirm that HEC-HMS is calculating accurate results.

The code validation test suite created for HEC-HMS includes numerous projects. Each of these projects focuses on a separate simulation component, as shown in Table 1. Each of these projects contains several to many simulations. Each simulation tests one component of the software in isolation from all other components. These tests have been carefully developed and have a known, accurate solution. The test suite also includes numerous projects from actual watershed applications, as shown in Table 2. These projects were selected because they are complex and require the interaction of many of the different simulation components included in HEC-HMS. These complex projects do not have rigorously developed accurate solutions. They are still useful because they can be used to detect any changes in simulated values that may arise from incremental changes in the software. A change in the software that causes a computed result to change can be detected with these projects. If such a change occurs, then the source of the change must be found, investigated, and resolved.

The projects used in the code validation test suite compute thousands of time-series and paired data records. Each value of the time-series or paired data record is compared and a test is deemed to have failed if even a single value is outside the allowable range. As a general rule, tests use an allowable error range of 0.02% of the correct value. This means that HEC-HMS is deemed to have failed a validation test if it makes an error greater than 0.02% of the correct value. The development team reviews the results from the entire test suite before certifying a new software version for general release. The validation suite is used to find errors so they can be repaired.

A new software version is not released for general use until it can successfully pass all of the code validation tests in the suite. We make the test suite available through the HEC website ( so that users may, if desired, review the data sets included in the suite, and optionally compute them and compare the results to the benchmark values. The projects do not need to be evaluated after downloading the software to know that the software is working correctly. The software is fully tested before it is released for use and therefore will pass all of the tests successfully after it is installed. The digital certificate included in the installation package guarantees that the software has not changed since it was certified as passing all validation tests. Any change that might occur in the software between the time it leaves HEC and the time it is actually installed could cause errors during validation. Because a digital certificate is included in the installation package, the user would be alerted to any such changes during the installation process. Nevertheless, users have the option of independently confirming the results already achieved by HEC staff preparing the software for release.

The following sections serve as documentation of the procedures used by HEC staff during testing. All of these steps are followed by HEC staff during the testing required before a new version of HEC-HMS is released for use. A user could follow these same steps if they wished to independently validate the software.

Table 1.Listing of the projects for testing each of the HEC-HMS simulation components in isolation from other components.


Simulation Component


Sources, junctions, and sinks




Lag reach routing


Kinematic wave reach routing


Modified Puls reach routing


Muskingum reach routing


Muskingum-Cunge reach routing


Muskingum-Cunge reach routing


Reservoir routing and structures


Reservoir specified release routing


Reservoir culvert outlets


Subbasin loss rate


Subbasin transform


Subbasin baseflow


Straddle stagger reach routing


Specified hyetograph precipitation


Inverse distance precipitation


Gage weights precipitation


SCS storm precipitation


Standard project storm precipitation


Frequency storm


Gridded precipitation


Most of the potential evapotranspiration methods


Temperature index snowmelt


Subbasin canopy and surface


Source, junction, diversion, sink sediment


Optimization trial simulation component


Depth-area analysis simulation component


Forecasting alternative simulation component


Subbasin surface erosion


Reach sediment transport


Reservoir sediment settling


Uncertainty analysis simulation component


Shortwave radiation


Longwave radiation

Table 2. Listing of the projects from watershed applications with HEC-HMS for testing complex interactions of simulation components.


Primary Testing Focus


Kinematic wave overland and channel flow


Gridded snowmelt and time interpolation

Bald Eagle Creek

Continuous simulation with deficit constant

Bald Eagle Creek 4.3

HMR52 precipitation

Bald Eagle Dam Break

Dam failure and flood wave routing

Ball Mtn

HMR52 probable maximum precipitation

Culvert 111P

Pond with culvert outlet

DAA Maricopa TestMaricopa County Depth-Area Analysis
Debris BasinDebris yield methods,

Forecasting Init

Automatic initialization for forecasting

Gridded Green AmptGridded Green Ampt loss


Green Ampt loss, Modified Puls routing

KerrDam PMF

HMR52 probable maximum precipitation

Lag and K

Lag and K reach routing


Reservoir spillway gates

Maricopa UH

Features specific to Maricopa County USA

Mill Creek Event

Gridded deficit constant loss rate


Soil moisture accounting, save states


Forecasting and blending

NAB West Branch SusquehannaForecasting, automatic baseflow initialization, and automatic reservoir initialization

Normal Depth

Normal depth reach routing

Penman Monteith

Penman Monteith potential evapotranspiration

Pistol Creek

Gridded deficit constant

Redwood Creek2D Diffusion Wave transform


Gridded precipitation, monthly ET, ModClark

RTI BenchmarkRadiation-derived Temperature Index snowmelt method
SPK TruckeeForecasting with snowmelt, observed SWE time series, and cumulative flow


Canopy, surface, soil moisture accounting

Unit Hydrograph Shift

Unit hydrograph with smoothing

Variable Clark UH

Variable Tc and R parameters

Wet MeltVariable wet melt rate

White River

HMR52 precipitation

Project Data

The code validation test suite includes numerous projects for individual components plus additional projects for testing complex interactions. All of the files in each project directory are set with "read-only" file permission. The permission must be changed to "read-write" file permission before the files can be used with HEC-HMS. Additionally, the project DSS file in each project does not contain any simulation results. If the user plans to compute the simulation runs included in these projects, a backup copy of these projects should be kept. Each time the benchmark validation tests will be computed, a fresh copy of the backup projects should be used. Any changes to the data in the validation projects will cause the tests to fail.

Established Accurate Results

Hand calculations and independent software have been used to establish known accurate results for each code validation test. These known results are stored in a DSS file. There is a separate DSS file for each of the corresponding projects used in validation testing. The simulation results in each DSS file have been checked very carefully. Some of the methods used to check the results include HEC-RAS for culvert calculations, Mathcad®, Excel®, and hand calculations by calculator. These files should never be modified.

Automated Comparison

It would be very onerous to compare all of the time-series and paired data records manually. The development team has created a small utility program to automate this task. The utility program reads the time-series and paired data of computed results from the project DSS file. It also reads the records from the known result. The utility program then compares value by value the two records. If two values do not agree within the error range, the error is recorded in a log file. A successful passage of the test is recorded in the log file if all values match within the necessary error range. The log file is the only place to determine the success or failure of each test.

The configuration information for the comparison utility is stored in text files that have "in" as a prefix. These files contain the configuration data necessary for the automated comparison of the simulated results with the established standard results. These files are designed to be used by the "Compare" utility. The utility reads the configuration file and according to the instructions, compares simulated results against the established standard results. A CMD script file is provided for each validation project. The script file can be executed by double-clicking on it in Windows Explorer. The script file will cause the Compare program to start, read a configuration file, and then perform certain comparisons. The results of the comparisons will be written to an output report file.

Application Steps

The following steps should be used to execute the validation tests:
1) Place a fresh copy of the benchmark projects in the directories and make sure the file permission is set to "read-write."
2) Start HEC-HMS and open the first project.
3) Compute all of the simulation runs in the project.
4) Open each of the additional projects and also compute all of the simulation runs.
5) Close HEC-HMS.
6) Using Windows Explorer, double-click on each of the CMD script files except for the one called "compare.cmd".
7) Open each of the output report files and examine the results.