Integrating River Bed Dynamics to Flood Risk Assessment

Neuhold, Clemens; Stanzel, Philipp; Nachtnebel, Hans Peter

doi:10.5772/20307

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results presented in the articles mentioned in the Introduction (Lane et al, 2007; Neuhold et al, 2009, 2011; Nones, 2019; Pender et al, 2016;Radice et al, 2013; Radice et al, 2016) indicate the role of morphodynamic changes in the assessment of flood hazard. The obtained changes in the bed invert vary from several dozens of centimetres (Lane et al, 2007; Neuhold et al, 2009, 2011; Nones, 2019; Pender et al, 2016) to a few meters (Radice et al, 2013; Radice et al, 2016). The changes in inundation areas range from over a dozen (Lane et al, 2007) to even 25% (Neuhold et al, 2009, 2011).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The obtained changes in the bed invert vary from several dozens of centimetres (Lane et al, 2007; Neuhold et al, 2009, 2011; Nones, 2019; Pender et al, 2016) to a few meters (Radice et al, 2013; Radice et al, 2016). The changes in inundation areas range from over a dozen (Lane et al, 2007) to even 25% (Neuhold et al, 2009, 2011).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the majority of cases, the slow long-term changes in the channel capacity are invisible and ignored. The interesting alternative of single event simulations is the method presented by Neuhold et al (2009Neuhold et al ( , 2011. However, the stochastic algorithm they presented is still a method for single event analysis, but including uncertainty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These are single event computations based on simple deterministic modelling (Lane, Reid, Tayefi, Yu, & Hardy, 2008; Lane, Tayefi, Reid, Yu, & Hardy, 2007; Nones, 2019; Radice et al, 2013; Radice, Longoni, Papini, Brambilla, & Ivanov, 2016). Interesting stochastic extension of this concept has been presented by Neuhold, Stanzel, and Nachtnebel (2009, 2011), who applied a combination of rainfall‐runoff modelling with the river morphodynamic model GSTAR‐1D (Greimann & Huang, 2018). To the best of the author's knowledge, the only known example of long‐term analyses focused on morphological changes' impact on flood hazard has been presented by Pender et al (2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Development of methodology for assessment of long‐term morphodynamic impact on flood hazard

Dysarz

2020

J Flood Risk Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A methodology for quantification of the impact of sediment transport on flood hazard is proposed. The applied algorithm consists of several Python scripts for automation of sediment routing, hydrodynamic simulations, and geoprocessing of results. Flood hazard maps are uniquely linked with particular simulations of morphological changes in a river. Finally, the maps are stochastically processed. The proposed procedure was applied for a selected reach of the Warta river, located in Poland. Simulations were run for 6-and 12-year flow series composed randomly on the basis of historical data. The 30 flow series for each period and four functions describing the transport of sediment were treated as uncertain variables. It was assumed that the features characterising the mean sample may properly represent the sediment content in the river reach studied. The final results are presented as maps showing the probabilities of inundation. The comparison of results with literature data confirmed the significance of the impact related to sediment transport processes on the quantification of flood hazard uncertainty. The main advantages of the presented algorithm are effective management of simulations and processing of results obtained in 240 runs of the sediment routing model. K E Y W O R D S flood hazard assessment, flood mapping, modelling of sediment transport, python scripting 1 | INTRODUCTION The interactions between sediment transport and flood hazard seem to be obvious (e.g., Sear, Newson, & Brookes, 1995), yet these two processes are rarely linked together in a long-term perspective. An exception is an article by Pender, Patidar, Pender, and Haynes (2016), which also indicates the complexity of the mentioned problem. However, modern modelling tools, GIS processing systems, as well as programming languages, provide a sufficient framework for such analyses today.

show abstract