Performance of UAV Image for Flood Mapping with 2 Dimensional Model in Kaliputih River, Panti District

Abstract

In January 2006, the flash flood in Panti Sub-district was a national disaster, causing damage to building infrastructure and fatalities. From this incident, it is necessary to have flood mitigation by providing a map of the distribution of flood inundation using a 2D hydraulic model to provide information regarding the extent of flood inundation in the study area. Due to the limited DEM data for 2D modeling, it is necessary to use UAV images to provide a DSM with good and higher resolution. This study aims to assess the performance of 2D flood modeling results using HEC-RAS equipped with RAS Mapper through UAV processing as input. There are 21 GCP in the study area as an increase in accuracy, the RMSE value in the horizontal direction is 0.3853m, and the vertical direction is 0.1836m. From the CE90 accuracy test results for a horizontal accuracy of 0.58m and LE90 for a vertical accuracy of 0.30m, it can be concluded that the map accuracy test meets the 1:2500 scale. Terrain maps are input to HEC-RAS; selected meshes are 5x5m and 2x2m. The modeling results can show the inundation depth in each GCP from the min-max depth. The model calibration shows an RMSE value of 0.183, while the flood depth validation shows an RMSE value of 0.13. In other words, modeling can represent the distribution of flood inundation in the study area and provide benefits for the community to be more alert in the event of a flood in the coming year.
 Keywords : UAV; GCP; DSM; HEC-RA; Flood mapping
 
 Copyright (c) 2022 Geosfera Indonesia and Department of Geography Education, University of Jember
 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share A like 4.0 International License

Effectiveness of UAV‐based DTM and satellite‐based DEMs for local‐level flood modeling in Jamuna floodplain

“…Some research has been conducted to assess the performance of different satellite‐based DEMs in landslide susceptibility, river morphology and watershed analysis, where different DEMs are shown to produce different results (Arash & Yasi, 2022; Chanu & Bakimchandra, 2022; Karabulut & Özdemir, 2019; Pryde et al, 2007; Rabby et al, 2020; Saleem et al, 2019). Also, studies are available on the use of UAV‐based DTM in flood modeling in Indonesia (Derka et al, 2022), South Korea (Lee et al, 2022), China (Li et al, 2021), Italy (Annis et al, 2020), Philippines (Gagula et al, 2023), Ghana (Trepekli et al, 2022), Colombia (Escobar Villanueva et al, 2019), Turkey (Yalcin, 2020), and Poland (Karamuz et al, 2020). However, comparative studies on effectiveness of satellite‐based DEMs and UAV‐based DTM in local‐level flood modeling are scarce (Adesina et al, 2022).…”