Flood Analysis Using Hydrological Modeling. Case Study – The Flood In The Upper Catchment Of River Geru, Galaţi County, Romania

Balan, Isabela; Crenganis, Loredana; Pricop, Claudiu

doi:10.1515/pesd-2015-0030

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such differences can have a major impact on future runoff predictions which is the reason why it is prudent to not only rely on one method or even model. Balan et al, (2016) observed that the application of the SCS Generalised method yielded a hydrograph with four peaks, with a 26.5-hour difference in peak flow occurrence. The first peak was underestimated compared to the maximum recorded discharge, while the second one, which was the highest peak flow, overpredicted the measured value by 1.67%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The losses to infiltration, surface storage and evaporation are expressed as proportional losses (the rational method), as fixed initial and constant losses, by the curve number (CN) method or by the SCS (Soil Conservation Service) Generalized one (DHI, 2017a). Balan et al, (2016) conducted a runoff simulation study in the upper catchment of river Geru, using the Mike 11 modelling system with NAM and UHM modules, based on the rainfall event recorded on 11-13 September 2013. The four methods available in the UHM module were applied successively and the results were finally compared with those of the NAM module.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparative Assessment of Different Loss Methods Available in Mike Hydro River-Uhm

Strapazan

Haidu

Irimuș

2021

Carpath. J. Earth Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrologic modelling studies usually involve data series with a large temporal scale, especially in Romania, focusing on a long-term impact analysis. Nevertheless, event-based runoff models are essential tools for short-term purposes such as flash flood forecasting. Suitable methods or models must be considered in order to ensure the validity of such research based on parameter calibration to a particular area. Therefore, a comparative analysis of methods must be conducted first, in order to determine the optimal ones that can be used for future data prediction. The aim of the present study is to apply and validate the MIKE HYDRO River modeling system - the UHM module, through a comparative analysis of the SCS, Generalized SCS and Proportional Loss methods available, to a small-sized mountainous watershed, where no research has been conducted in this field. To this end, three spring rainfall events were chosen, but with different antecedent moisture conditions, in order to examine how well the chosen methods can reproduce the available observations in such circumstances. The SCS method yielded the highest quality performance, but the Proportional Loss method has also proven effective under these conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Assessment of Different Loss Methods Available in Mike Hydro River-Uhm

Strapazan

Haidu

Irimuș

2021

Carpath. J. Earth Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Assessment in Narayani River Basin, Nepal

Pangeni,

Bhurtyal,

Pokhrel

et al. 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Techno

447

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floods, earthquakes, forest fires, landslides, and other natural hazard are common in Nepal. Among them, the flood is one of the natural disasters and that occurred in the Narayani River basin. The Narayani River Basin's exposures and vulnerabilities are at danger from a flood catastrophe of this kind, hence this studies attempts to reduce and control the risk of flooding in order to better manage disasters. The factors of flood hazard, flood exposures, and flood vulnerability are investigated as part of the ward-level flood risk assessment, which aims to prevent and manage the flood disaster. The hydraulic model (HEC-RAS) for the 2018 flood event was used in this study to create the GIS- based modeling of the flood inundation maps. Additionally, it calculated the various return periods for floods in the river basin—5, 10, 25, 50, 75, and 100 years. Furthermore, the flood extent was confirmed using the flood map produced by the Google Earth Engine (GEE) using remotely sensed techniques. For Hydraulic modelling, ALOS/PALSAR Digital Elevation Model (12.5m.) spatial resolution was used. In addition, RAS-MAPPER generated the geometric data for the hydraulic modeling, which was then transferred into HEC-RAS. This data included the cross-section, flow route, streamline, and bank lines. On both sides of the river, the necessary Manning value "n" values were computed for every cross-section. The steady-flow models of the anticipated flood hydrographs were created using the hydraulic model. Google Earth Engine (GEE) flood maps generated from Sentinel-1C radar satellite data were used to validate the results for the 2018 flood events. When comparing the simulated result's flood inundation area with the remote sensing data's flood area, the overlap area for the 2018 flood event is 65%. Additionally, the flood area is verified. In addition, the hydraulic model generated flow conditions for 5, 10, 25, 50, 75, and 100 year return periods. The river basin's surface water level and flood extent are both progressively rising. In order to effectively manage and prepare for potential flood hazards in the study area, an analysis of the flood risk assessment was conducted by taking into consideration three primary factors: the flood hazard map, flood exposure, and flood vulnerability. The layers of the population, crops, schools, hospitals, and road network were all exposed to flooding, and the factors that determined flood vulnerabilities were literacy, urban area, and agecomposition (less than 14 and more than 65). The higher flood risk area was found in Ward number 1, 3, 4,16,18,26 of Bharatpur metropolitan, Gaindakot municipality ward number 1 and 12, 15 of Madhyabindu Municipality.

show abstract

Flood Analysis Using Hydrological Modeling. Case Study – The Flood In The Upper Catchment Of River Geru, Galaţi County, Romania

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

A Comparative Assessment of Different Loss Methods Available in Mike Hydro River-Uhm

A Comparative Assessment of Different Loss Methods Available in Mike Hydro River-Uhm

Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Assessment in Narayani River Basin, Nepal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About