Combining Model Predictive Control with a Reduced Genetic Algorithm for Real-Time Flood Control

Vermuyten, Evert; Meert, Pieter; Wolfs, Vincent; Willems, Patrick

doi:10.1061/(asce)wr.1943-5452.0000859

Cited by 30 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It, therefore, limits the applicability of the coupled model for studies that demand long‐term simulations or multiple runs. There is thus a need for a conceptual river model that provides similar accuracy as a fully hydrodynamic one but with shorter computational times (Meert et al ., 2016, ; Vermuyten et al ., ). Incorporating such river model would allow to broaden the range of applications of the coupled model.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

On the importance of river hydrodynamics in simulating groundwater levels and baseflows

Quan

Meert

Huysmans

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research to date affirmed the key role of stream-aquifer interactions in integrated water resources management. The importance of river hydrodynamics on the spatial and temporal behaviour of groundwater was, however, not yet fully investigated. In contrast to the common approach where topography-based estimates of riverbed elevation may lead to inappropriate discretization and constant river stages, this study couples a fully hydrodynamic and one-dimensional river model to a twodimensional catchment hydrological model. The surface and subsurface runoff, groundwater, and river components are integrated into a single modelling framework.The coupled model was applied to a medium sized catchment in Belgium with three model setups, in which the level of detail of representation of river hydrodynamics varies. Further model iterations were carried out for the most exhaustive setup to assess the importance of the bi-directional interactions between model components.Results show that higher details of river hydrodynamics help to improve the simulation of time-averaged groundwater levels. However, the impacts were not that clear for the time-varying groundwater levels. Moreover, visual and statistical model performance evaluation indicates a strong enhancement of the coupled models compared to the output from the hydrological model with respect to river discharge observations at catchment outlet and at internal stations. It also reveals the impact of river hydrodynamics on groundwater discharges when the most detailed setting delivered the highest performance among the three coupled models. K E Y W O R D Sgroundwater discharge, groundwater model, integrated modelling, river hydrodynamics

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

On the importance of river hydrodynamics in simulating groundwater levels and baseflows

Quan

Meert

Huysmans

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Major upscaling of flood‐attenuation features (brown area in Figure ) has a considerable cost‐effective impact. Unmitigated FEV parts can be covered by other mitigation measures: by building higher flood‐defence walls than currently in place or further increasing the reservoir volumes via dynamic control (Breckpot, ; Breckpot et al, ; Vermuyten et al, ). However, optimisation of the draw‐down of reservoirs would involve cost functions with the opposite demands of drinkwater maximisation, volume minimisation, dam safety, and controlled water release with minimal flood, erosion, and environmental damage.…”

Section: Main Results: Flood‐mitigation Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating (nature‐based) flood‐mitigation schemes using flood‐excess volume

Bokhove

Kelmanson

Kent

et al. 2019

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As interest mounts in nature-based solutions (NBS) for flood mitigation as complementary options to civil-engineering measures, possible flood-protection strategies have become more diverse and hence complicated to assess. We offer a straightforward and educational protocol targeted for effectiveness analysis and decision making involving stakeholder participation. It is based on the concept of flood-excess volume (FEV), the volume exceeding a threshold and generating flood damage, and explores what fraction of FEV is reduced, and at what cost, by particular flood-mitigation measures. Quantification and interpretation of cost scenarios are facilitated using a graphical display that is easy to understand and encapsulates concepts of flood magnitude, FEV and protection-measures efficacy. It is exemplified for two recent extreme-flood events on the River Calder in Mytholmroyd (Yorkshire, United Kingdom) and the River Brague in Biot (Alpes-Maritimes, France). Each case has different flood-mitigation measures such as natural water-retention measures, tree planting, river-bed widening, or use of reservoirs and floods walls. Our straightforward protocol enables fast, quantifiable and easy-to-understand exploration of protection strategies using multiple measures, and in doing so highlights the issue of NBS scalability.

show abstract

“…Both static and dynamic draw-down of reservoirs requires more investigation on how to optimize the conflicting demands on drink-water capacity, flood buffering and mitigation, reservoir safety, scour and ecological impact due to relative rapid draw-downs needed prior to probabilistic forecasts of extreme rainfall. Modern optimization strategies for river-flood mitigation such as in Breckpot (2013), Breckpot et al (2013) and Vermuyten et al (2018) can form a starting point for such investigations.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This requires further detailed modelling and pilot studies, cf. Breckpot (2013) and Vermuyten et al (2018).…”

Section: Flood Storage In Reservoirsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On using flood-excess volume to assess natural flood management, exemplified for extreme 2007 and 2015 floods in Yorkshire

Bokhove¹,

Kelmanson²,

Kent³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper offers a protocol for conducting a quantified assessment of the relative merits of both existing and proposed methods of Natural Flood Management (NFM). Assessment is based on the rarely used concept of flood-excess volume (FEV), which approximately quantifies the volume of water one wishes to eliminate via flood-mitigation schemes, and is exemplified using publicly available river-gauge data for recent well-known extreme-flood events in Yorkshire, UK. The following question motivates the study: what fraction of the FEV is reduced, and at what cost, by a particular (suite of) flood-mitigation measure(s)? The approach presented admits juxtaposed cost assessments, of disparate and popular NFM measures, that are neither available nor considered in existing flood-mitigation policy. With promulgation of a societally useful protocol in mind, quantification and interpretation of alternative cost scenarios are facilitated using the authors' novel visualisation of flood-alleviation basins as partially filled, realistically constructible, two-metre-deep square lakes of side-length approximately one-to-two kilometres. In the first case study, a hypothetical flood-alleviation scheme for the River Calder at Mytholmroyd, comprising flow-attenuation features, tree planting and peat restoration, and reservoir storage, is critically assessed alongside reasonable cost estimates. The clear quantification and visual representation of the analysis indicate that the fractions of FEV reduced by the NFM measures, while not insignificant, are dwarfed by the careful draw-down of reservoirs. The second case study, of the River Don at Sheffield, extends the analysis via a range of scenarios that attempt to sample realistic seasonal rainfall distributions across a catchment, and in doing so elucidates both the potential and uncertainty of numerous mitigation schemes under different conditions. We corroborate the growing consensus that, while NFM measures can reduce low-level flooding locally, the spatial scale at which they are effective is limited and may not upscale to the catchment level. Our FEV analysis and protocol thus not only offers a concise quantification of the effectiveness of disparate and in-tandem flood mitigation measures but also further highlights the issue of NFM scalability.

show abstract

Combining Model Predictive Control with a Reduced Genetic Algorithm for Real-Time Flood Control

Cited by 30 publications

References 33 publications

On the importance of river hydrodynamics in simulating groundwater levels and baseflows

On the importance of river hydrodynamics in simulating groundwater levels and baseflows

Communicating (nature‐based) flood‐mitigation schemes using flood‐excess volume

On using flood-excess volume to assess natural flood management, exemplified for extreme 2007 and 2015 floods in Yorkshire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About