The effect of coupling hydrologic and hydrodynamic models on probable maximum flood estimation

Deterministic rainfall-runoff modelling usually assumes stationary hydrological system, as model parameters are calibrated with and therefore dependant on observed data. However, runoff processes are probably not stationary in the case of a probable maximum flood (PMF) where discharge greatly exceeds observed flood peaks. Developing hydrodynamic models and using them to build coupled hydrologic-hydrodynamic models can potentially improve the plausibility of PMF estimations. This study aims to assess the potential benefits and constraints of coupled modelling compared to standard deterministic hydrologic modelling when it comes to PMF estimation. The two modelling approaches are applied using a set of 100 spatio-temporal probable maximum precipitation (PMP) distribution scenarios. The resulting hydrographs, the resulting peak discharges as well as the reliability and the plausibility of the estimates are evaluated. The discussion of the results shows that coupling hydrologic and hydrodynamic models substantially improves the physical plausibility of PMF modelling, although both modelling approaches lead to PMF estimations for the catchment outlet that fall within a similar range. Using a coupled model is particularly suggested in cases where considerable flood-prone areas are situated within a catchment.

[1]  Ignacio Escuder-Bueno,et al.  Assessing the impact of uncertainty on flood risk estimates with reliability analysis using 1-D and 2-D hydraulic models , 2012 .

[2]  Guido Felder,et al.  An approach for the determination of precipitation input for worst-case flood modelling , 2016 .

[3]  David J. Dahlstrom.  Calibration and Uncertainty Analysis for Complex Environmental Models , 2015 .

[4]  Bruno Merz,et al.  Influence of dike breaches on flood frequency estimation , 2009, Comput. Geosci..

[5]  Francesco Serinaldi,et al.  Synthetic Design Hydrographs Based on Distribution Functions with Finite Support , 2011 .

[6]  Massimiliano Zappa,et al.  Does model performance improve with complexity? : A case study with three hydrological models , 2015 .

[7]  P. Bates,et al.  Large-scale coupled hydrologic and hydraulic modelling of the Ob river in Siberia , 2009 .

[8]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  How extreme is extreme? An assessment of daily rainfall distribution tails , 2012 .

[9]  Robert Leconte,et al.  Estimation of the summer‐fall PMP and PMF of a northern watershed under a changed climate , 2013 .

[10]  N. Katopodes,et al.  Coupled modeling of hydrologic and hydrodynamic processes including overland and channel flow , 2012 .

[11]  C. Chatterjee,et al.  Comparison of hydrodynamic models of different complexities to model floods with emergency storage areas , 2008 .

[12]  Günter Blöschl,et al.  Runoff models and flood frequency statistics for design flood estimation in Austria – Do they tell a consistent story? , 2012 .

[13]  A. Brath,et al.  Analysis of the effects of levee heightening on flood propagation: example of the River Po, Italy , 2009 .

[14]  K. Beven,et al.  Uncertainty in the calibration of effective roughness parameters in HEC-RAS using inundation and downstream level observations , 2005 .

[15]  C. Perrin,et al.  Towards robust methods to couple lumped rainfall–runoff models and hydraulic models: A sensitivity analysis on the Illinois River , 2012 .

[16]  Giuliano Di Baldassarre,et al.  Uncertainty in design flood profiles derived by hydraulic modelling , 2012 .

[17]  Raveendra Kumar Rai,et al.  Evaluation of the Adequacy of Statistical Distribution Functions for Deriving Unit Hydrograph , 2009 .

[18]  David Salze,et al.  A coupling of hydrologic and hydraulic models appropriate for the fast floods of the Gardon River basin (France) , 2014 .

[19]  P. Diplas,et al.  Hydraulic Modeling of Extreme Hydrologic Events: Case Study in Southern Virginia , 2014 .

[20]  D. Viviroli,et al.  Continuous simulation for flood estimation in ungauged mesoscale catchments of Switzerland - Part II: Parameter regionalisation and flood estimation results , 2009 .

[21]  M. Zappa,et al.  Continuous simulation for flood estimation in ungauged mesoscale catchments of Switzerland - Part I: Modelling framework and calibration results , 2009 .

[22]  Jin Teng,et al.  Storage-based approaches to build floodplain inundation modelling capability in river system models for water resources planning and accounting , 2013 .

[23]  Rolf Weingartner,et al.  An introduction to the hydrological modelling system PREVAH and its pre- and post-processing-tools , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[24]  Nicholas Pinter,et al.  The use of retro- and scenario-modeling to assess effects of 100+ years river of engineering and land-cover change on Middle and Lower Mississippi River flood stages , 2009 .

[25]  Rolf Weingartner,et al.  Retrospective analysis of a nonforecasted rain-on-snow flood in the Alps – a matter of model limitations or unpredictable nature? , 2013 .

[26]  Günter Blöschl,et al.  Step changes in the flood frequency curve: Process controls , 2012 .

[27]  D. Solomatine,et al.  Testing different cross-section spacing in 1D hydraulic modelling: a case study on Johor River, Malaysia , 2015 .

[28]  H. Buiteveld,et al.  Impact of river training and retention measures on flood peaks along the Rhine , 2002 .

[29]  Markus Disse,et al.  The effectiveness of polder systems on peak discharge capping of floods along the middle reaches of the Elbe River in Germany , 2007 .

[30]  P. Troch,et al.  Modelling river-floodplain interaction during flood propagation , 2010 .

[31]  Alfonso Mejia,et al.  Evaluating the effects of parameterized cross section shapes and simplified routing with a coupled distributed hydrologic and hydraulic model , 2011 .

[32]  Bellie Sivakumar,et al.  Nonlinear dynamics and chaos in hydrologic systems: latest developments and a look forward , 2009 .

[33]  B. Boudevillain,et al.  Distributed hydrologic and hydraulic modelling with radar rainfall input: Reconstruction of the 8–9 September 2002 catastrophic flood event in the Gard region, France , 2009 .

[34]  Saralees Nadarajah,et al.  Probability models for unit hydrograph derivation , 2007 .

[35]  J. Salas,et al.  Uncertainty of the PMP and PMF , 2018, Handbook of Engineering Hydrology (Three-Volume Set).

[36]  Bruno Merz,et al.  A new methodology for flood hazard assessment considering dike breaches , 2010 .

[37]  Extreme flood estimations on a small alpine catchment in Switzerland, the case study of Limmerboden , 2015 .

[38]  V. Merwade,et al.  Effect of topographic data, geometric configuration and modeling approach on flood inundation mapping , 2009 .

[39]  Crash tests for forward-looking flood control in the city of Zürich (Switzerland) , 2015 .

[40]  Keith Beven,et al.  Influence of uncertain boundary conditions and model structure on flood inundation predictions. , 2006 .

[41]  P. Bates,et al.  Optimal Cross-Sectional Spacing in Preissmann Scheme 1D Hydrodynamic Models , 2009 .

[42]  M. Demissie,et al.  Coupling of hydrologic and hydraulic models for the Illinois River Basin , 2007 .

[43]  George H. Taylor,et al.  Uncertainty analysis for Probable Maximum Precipitation estimates , 2015 .

[44]  V. Singh,et al.  The HBV model. , 1995 .

[45]  Bruno Merz,et al.  Analysis of a detention basin impact on dike failure probabilities and flood risk for a channel-dike-floodplain system along the river Elbe, Germany , 2012 .