Calibration of river hydraulic model combined with GIS analysis using ground-based observation data

Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology

Volumn 3, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 456-463

  Reza Ghanbarpour, M ^a   Salimi, Shokoufeh ^b   Saravi, Mohsen Mohseni ^c   Zarei, Mehdi ^b  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE   (United States)

^b University of Mazandaran Faculty of Natural Resources   (Iran)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN   (Iran)

Author keywords

Calibration; Floodplain mapping; GIS; HEC RAS; Manning coefficient

Indexed keywords

FLASH FLOOD; FLOOD EVENT; FLOOD PLAINS; FLOOD WATERS; FLOODED AREAS; FLOODPLAIN INUNDATION; FLOODPLAIN MAPPING; GIS ANALYSIS; GROUND BASED MEASUREMENT; GROUND TRUTH; GROUND-BASED OBSERVATIONS; HEC-RAS; HEC-RAS MODEL; MANNING COEFFICIENT; MANNING ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT; MANNING'S ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT; MODEL PERFORMANCE; OPTIMAL VALUES; RETURN PERIODS; RIVER BASINS; RIVER HYDRAULICS;

BANKS (BODIES OF WATER); CALIBRATION; HYDRAULIC MODELS; HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES;

RIVERS;

EID: 79960065100     PISSN: 20407459     EISSN: 20407467     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Aronicaa, G., B. Hankinband and K. Beven, 1998. Uncertainty and equifinality in calibrating distributed roughness coefficients in a Xood propagation model with limited data. Adv. Water Resour., 22(4): 349-365.
2. Beven, K.J., 2002. Towards a coherent philosophy for modelling theenvironment. P. Roy. Soc. Lond. A Mat., 458(2026): 2465-2484.
3. Correia, F.N., M.D.G. Saraiva, F.U.D. Silva and I. Ramos, 1999. Floodplain management in urban developing areas. Part II. GIS-based flood analysis and urban growth modeling. J. Water Resour. Manage., 13: 23-37.
4. Di Baldassarre, G., G. Schumann and P.D. Bates, 2009. A technique for the calibration of hydraulic models using uncertain satellite observations of flood extent. J. Hydrol., 367: 276-282.
5. Ghanbarpour, M.R., 2007. Evaluation of flood mitigation alternatives using hydrological modelling. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage., 11(4): 113-117.
6. Ghanbarpour, M.R., M. MohseniSaravi, Sh. Salimi, S.T. Hajiseyedjavadi and M. Zareii, 2010. Innovative method for flood insurance assessment using hydraulics simulation and contingent valuation. Technical Report: Iran National Science Foundation, pp: 125 (in Persian).
7. Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), 2009. HECGeoRAS, GIS tools for support of HEC-RAS. User's Manual (version: 4.2), U.S. Army Corps of Engineering, Davis, CA, September.
8. Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), 2010. HEC-RAS river analysis system. Hydraulic Reference Manual (version: 4.1), U.S. Army Corps of Engineering, Davis, CA, January, pp: 262.
9. Hicks, D.M. and P.D. Mason, 1991. Roughness Characteristics of New Zealand Rivers. New Zealand National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, N.Z. (also published by Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, CO, 1998).
10. Horritt, M.S. and P.D. Bates, 2002. Evaluation of 1-D and 2-Dmodels for predicting river flood inundation. J. Hydrol., 268(1-4): 87-99.
11. Horritt, M.S., 2006. A methodology for the validation of uncertain flood inundation models. J. Hydrol., 326: 153-165.
12. Kidson, R.L., K.S. Richards and P.A. Carling, 2006. Hydraulic model calibration for extreme floods in bedrock-confined channels: Case study from northern Thailand. Hydrol. Process., 20(2): 329-344.
13. Noman, N.S., E.J. Nelson, A.K. Zundel, 2003. Improved process for floodplain delineation from digital terrain models. J. Water Resour., 129: 427-436.
14. Pappenberger, F., K. Beven, M. Horritt and S. Blazkova, 2005. Uncertainty in the calibration of effective roughness parameters in HEC-RAS using inundation and downstream level observations. J. Hydrol., 302(1-4): 46-69.
15. Salimi, Sh., M.R. Ghanbarpour, K. Solaimani and M.Z. Ahmadi, 2008, Floodplain Mapping Using Hydraulic Simulation Model in GIS. J. Appl. Sci., 8(4): 660-665.
16. Werner, M.G.F., 2001. Impact of grid size in GIS based flood extent mapping using a 1D flow model. J. Phys. Chem. Earth, Part B: Hydrol. Oc. Atm., 26: 517-522.