Image velocimetry has proven to be a promising technique for monitoring river flows using remotely operated platforms such as Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). However, the application of various image velocimetry algorithms has not been extensively assessed. Therefore, a sensitivity analysis has been conducted on five different image velocimetry algorithms including Large Scale Particle Image Velocimetry (LSPIV), Large-Scale Particle Tracking Velocimetry (LSPTV), Kanade–Lucas Tomasi Image Velocimetry (KLT-IV or KLT), Optical Tracking Velocimetry (OTV) and Surface Structure Image Velocimetry (SSIV), during low river flow conditions (average surface velocities of 0.12–0.14 m s − 1 , Q60) on the River Kolubara, Central Serbia. A DJI Phantom 4 Pro UAS was used to collect two 30-second videos of the surface flow. Artificial seeding material was distributed homogeneously across the rivers surface, to enhance the conditions for image velocimetry techniques. The sensitivity analysis was performed on comparable parameters between the different algorithms, including the particle identification area parameters (such as Interrogation Area (LSPIV, LSPTV and SSIV), Block Size (KLT-IV) and Trajectory Length (OTV)) and the feature extraction rate. Results highlighted that KLT and SSIV were sensitive to changing the feature extraction rate; however, changing the particle identification area did not affect the surface velocity results significantly. OTV and LSPTV, on the other hand, highlighted that changing the particle identification area presented higher variability in the results, while changing the feature extraction rate did not affect the surface velocity outputs. LSPIV proved to be sensitive to changing both the feature extraction rate and the particle identification area. This analysis has led to the conclusions that for surface velocities of approximately 0.12 m s − 1 image velocimetry techniques can provide results comparable to traditional techniques such as ADCPs. However, LSPIV, LSPTV and OTV require additional effort for calibration and selecting the appropriate parameters when compared to KLT-IV and SSIV. Despite the varying levels of sensitivity of each algorithm to changing parameters, all configuration image velocimetry algorithms provided results that were within 0.05 m s − 1 of the ADCP measurements, on average.

The paper attempts to explain sources of surplus storm water runoff in urban areas, particularly in relation with functioning of inlets. Inlet capacity (quantity of captured water) and inlet efficiency (portion of the approaching flow rate) have been defined and their relationship with relevant parameters (approaching flow, longitudinal and lateral street slopes) was established through laboratory measurements. Effects of clogging of inlets on inlet capacity were also investigated in laboratory conditions. As a consequence of decreased inlet efficiency, there is a portion of approaching flow that is not captured by the inlet (pass-over flow). If the pass-over flow is considered along a street having numerous inlets, it is easy to estimate the quantity of flow that would accumulate on the pavement. Inlet inefficiency can be significant when overestimation of inlet capacity results in increased distance between consecutive inlets, and when clogging of grates or inadequate placing of inlets causes significant decrease in inlet capacity.

Hydro-meteorological risks are a growing issue for societies, economies and environments around the world. An effective, sustainable response to such risks and their future uncertainty requires a paradigm shift in our research and practical efforts. In this respect, Nature-Based Solutions (NBSs) offer the potential to achieve a more effective and flexible response to hydro-meteorological risks while also enhancing human well-being and biodiversity. The present paper describes a new methodology that incorporates stakeholders’ preferences into a multi-criteria analysis framework, as part of a tool for selecting risk mitigation measures. The methodology has been applied to Tamnava river basin in Serbia and Nangang river basin in Taiwan within the EC-funded RECONECT project. The results highlight the importance of involving stakeholders in the early stages of projects in order to achieve successful implementation of NBSs. The methodology can assist decision-makers in formulating desirable benefits and co-benefits and can enable a systematic and transparent NBSs planning process.

Abstract:Water resource has become a guarantee for sustainable development on both local and global scales. Exploiting water resources involves development of hydrological models for water management planning. In this paper we present a new stochastic model for generation of mean annul flows. The model is based on historical characteristics of time series of annual flows and consists of the trend component, long-term periodic component and stochastic component. The rest of specified components are model errors which are represented as a random time series. The random time series is generated by the single bootstrap model (SBM). Stochastic ensemble of error terms at the single hydrological station is formed using the SBM method. The ultimate stochastic model gives solutions of annual flows and presents a useful tool for integrated river basin planning and water management studies. The model is applied for ten large European rivers with long observed period. Validation of model results suggests that the stochastic flows simulated by the model can be used for hydrological simulations in river basins.

No abstract

No abstract

<p>Image velocimetry (IV) is a remote technique which calculates surface flow velocities of rivers (or fluids) via a range of cross-correlation and tracking algorithms. IV can be implemented via a range of camera sensors which can be mounted on tri-pods, or Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). IV has proven a powerful technique for monitoring river flows during flood conditions, whereby traditional in-situ techniques would be unsafe to deploy. However, little research has focussed upon the application of such techniques during low flow conditions. The applicability of IV to low flow studies could aid data collection at a higher spatial and temporal resolution than is currently available. Many IV techniques are under-development, that utilise different cross-correlation and tracking algorithms, including, Large Scale Particle Image Velocimetry (LSPIV), Large Scale Particle Tracking Velocimetry (LSPTV), Optical Tracking Velocimetry (OTV), Kanade Lucas Tomasi Image Velocimetry (KLT-IV) and Surface Structure Image Velocimetry (SSIV). Nevertheless, the true applications and limitations of such algorithms have yet to be extensively tested. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a sensitivity analysis on the commonly relatable parameters between the different algorithms, including the particle identification area parameters (such as Interrogation Area (LSPIV, LSPTV and SSIV), Block Size (KLT-IV) and Trajectory Length (OTV)) and the feature extraction rate (or sub sampled frame rate).</p><p>Fieldwork was carried out on Kolubara River near the city of Obrenovac in Central Serbia. Cross-sectional surface width was relatively constant, varying between 23.30 and 23.45m. During the experiment, low flow conditions were present with a discharge of approx. 3.4m<sup>3 </sup>s<sup>-1</sup> (estimated using a Sontek M9 ADCP), and depths of up to 1.9m. A DJI Phantom 4 Pro UAS was used to collect video data of the surface flow. Artificial seeding material (wood-mulch) was distributed homogenously across the rivers’ surface, in order to improve the conditions for IV techniques during slow flows. Two 30-second videos were utilised for surface velocity analysis.</p><p>This study highlighted that KLT, SSIV, OTV and LSPIV are the least sensitive algorithms to changing parameters when no pre- or post-processing of results are conducted. On the other hand, LSPTV must undergo post-processing procedures in order to avoid spurious results and only then, results may be reliable. Furthermore, KLT and SSIV highlighted a slight sensitivity to changing the feature extraction rate, however changing the particle identification area did not affect significantly the outputted surface velocity results. OTV and LSPTV, on the other hand, highlighted that changing the particle identification area provided a higher variability in the results, whilst changing the feature extraction rate did not affect the surface velocity outputs. LSPIV proved to be sensitive to changing both the feature extraction rate and the particle identification area.</p><p>This analysis has led to the conclusions that during the conditions of sampling with surface velocities of approximately 0.12ms<sup>-1</sup>, and homogeneous seeding on the rivers surface, IV techniques can provide results comparable to traditional techniques such as ADCPs during low flow conditions. All IV algorithms provided results that were, on average, within 0.05ms<sup>-1</sup> of the ADCP measurements.</p><p> </p>

No abstract