Flood inundation modelling: A review of methods, recent advances and uncertainty analysis

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 90, Issue , 2017, Pages 201-216

  Teng, J ^a,b   Jakeman, A J ^b   Vaze, J ^a   Croke, B F W ^b   Dutta, D ^a   Kim, S ^a  

^a CSIRO   (Australia)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

1D, 2D, 3D hydrodynamic model; Environmental flows; Flooding; High resolution; Large floodplains; Natural hazards; Remote sensing

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; FLOOD CONTROL; FLOODS; HYDRODYNAMICS; INSURANCE; OIL WELL FLOODING; REMOTE SENSING; WATER RESOURCES;

ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW; FLOOD-PLAINS; HIGH RESOLUTION; HYDRODYNAMIC MODEL; NATURAL HAZARD;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

FLOODING; FLOODPLAIN; HYDRODYNAMICS; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; LITERATURE REVIEW; NATURAL HAZARD; ONE-DIMENSIONAL MODELING; REMOTE SENSING; SPECTRAL RESOLUTION; THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELING; TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELING; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER FLOW;

EID: 85012134757     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.01.006     Document Type: Review

References (112)

1. Abbott, M.B., Bathurst, J.C., Cunge, J.A., O'Connell, P.E., Rasmussen, J., An introduction to the European Hydrological System – système Hydrologique Européen, ‘‘SHE’’, 1: history and Philosophy of a physically-based distributed modelling system. J. Hydrol. 87 (1986), 45–59.
2. Abily, M., Bertrand, N., Delestre, O., Gourbesville, P., Duluc, C.-M., Spatial Global Sensitivity Analysis of High Resolution classified topographic data use in 2D urban flood modelling. Environ. Model. Softw. 77 (2016), 183–195.
3. Alcrudo, F., A State of the Art Review on Mathematical Modelling of Flood Propagation, IMPACT Project. 2004, 22 http://www.impact-project.net/cd/papers/print/008_pr_02-05-16_IMPACT_Alcrudo.pdf.
4. Apel, H., Aronica, G.T., Kreibich, H., Thieken, A.H., Flood risk analyses—how detailed do we need to be?. Nat. Hazards 49:1 (2009), 79–98.
5. Apel, H., Thieken, A., Merz, B., Blöschl, G., A probabilistic modelling system for assessing flood risks. Nat. Hazards 38:1–2 (2006), 79–100.
6. Arduino, G., Reggiani, P., Todini, E., Recent advances in flood forecasting and flood risk assessment. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 9:4 (2005), 280–284.
7. Aronica, G., Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE. Hydrol. Process. 16:10 (2002), 2001–2016.
8. Asher, M.J., Croke, B.F.W., Jakeman, A.J., Peeters, L.J.M., A review of surrogate models and their application to groundwater modelling. Water Resour. Res. 51:8 (2015), 5957–5973.
9. Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Aronica, G., Beven, K., Bayesian updating of flood inundation likelihoods conditioned on flood extent data. Hydrol. Process. 18:17 (2004), 3347–3370.
10. Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Smith, C.N., Mason, D., Integrating remote sensing observations of flood hydrology and hydraulic modelling. Hydrol. Process. 11:14 (1997), 1777–1795.
11. Beven, K., Changing ideas in hydrology - the case of physically-based models. J. Hydrol. 105:1–2 (1989), 157–172.
12. Beven, K., Distributed Models and Uncertainty in Flood Risk Management. 2010, Flood Risk Science and Management, 289–312.
13. Beven, K., Binley, A., The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Process. 6:3 (1992), 279–298.
14. Beven, K., Lamb, R., Leedal, D., Hunter, N., Communicating uncertainty in flood inundation mapping: a case study. Int. J. River Basin Manag. 13:3 (2015), 285–295.
15. Bhuiyan, M., Dutta, D., Analysis of flood vulnerability and assessment of the impacts in coastal zones of Bangladesh due to potential sea-level rise. Nat. Hazards 61:2 (2012), 729–743.
16. Blazkova, S., Beven, K., Uncertainty in flood estimation. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 5:4 (2009), 325–332.
17. Brackbill, J.U., Ruppel, H.M., FLIP: a method for adaptively zoned, particle-in-cell calculations of fluid flows in two dimensions. J. Comput. Phys. 65:2 (1986), 314–343.
18. Bridson, R., Fluid Simulation for Computer Graphics. 2008, A K Peters/CRC Press.
19. Brunner, G.W., HEC-RES River Analysis System - User's Manual Version 5.0. US Army Corps of Engineers. 2016, Institute for Water Resources, Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), 962.
20. Caleffi, V., Valiani, A., Zanni, A., Finite volume method for simulating extreme flood events in natural channels. J. Hydraul. Res. 41:2 (2003), 167–177.
21. Casulli, V., Stelling, G.S., Numerical simulation of 3D quasi-hydrostatic, free-surface flows. J. Hydraul. Eng. 124:7 (1998), 678–686.
22. Cleary, P.W., Prakash, M., Discrete-element modelling and smoothed particle hydrodynamics: potential in the environmental sciences. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 362:1822 (2004), 2003–2030.
23. DHI, MIKE 11-A Modelling System for Rivers and Channels - User Guide. 2003, DHI, 430.
24. DHI, MIKE 21-2D Modelling of Coast and Sea. 2012, DHI Water & Environment Pty Ltd.
25. Doherty, J., Christensen, S., Use of paired simple and complex models to reduce predictive bias and quantify uncertainty. Water Resour. Res., 47(12), 2011, W12534.
26. Dottori, F., Di Baldassarre, G., Todini, E., Detailed data is welcome, but with a pinch of salt: accuracy, precision, and uncertainty in flood inundation modeling. Water Resour. Res. 49:9 (2013), 6079–6085.
27. Dottori, F., Todini, E., Developments of a flood inundation model based on the cellular automata approach: testing different methods to improve model performance. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. Parts A/B/C 36:7–8 (2011), 266–280.
28. Dutta, D., Herath, S., Musiake, K., An application of a flood risk analysis system for impact analysis of a flood control plan in a river basin. Hydrol. Process. 20:6 (2006), 1365–1384.
29. Dutta, D., Teng, J., Vaze, J., Lerat, J., Hughes, J., Marvanek, S., Storage-based approaches to build floodplain inundation modelling capability in river system models for water resources planning and accounting. J. Hydrol. 504:0 (2013), 12–28.
30. Freer, J., Beven, K.J., Neal, J., Schumann, G., Hall, J., Bates, P., Flood Risk and Uncertainty. 2011, Risk and Uncertainty Assessment for Natural Hazards, Cambridge, UK, 190–233.
31. Gallegos, H.A., Schubert, J.E., Sanders, B.F., Two-dimensional, high-resolution modeling of urban dam-break flooding: a case study of Baldwin Hills, California. Adv. Water Resour. 32:8 (2009), 1323–1335.
32. Gao, B.C., NDWI - a normalized difference water index for remote sensing of vegetation liquid water from space. Remote Sens. Environ. 58:3 (1996), 257–266.
33. Gingold, R.A., Monaghan, J.J., Smoothed particle hydrodynamics - theory and application to non-spherical stars. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 181:2 (1977), 375–389.
34. Guidolin, M., Chen, A.S., Ghimire, B., Keedwell, E.C., Djordjević, S., Savić, D.A., A weighted cellular automata 2D inundation model for rapid flood analysis. Environ. Model. Softw. 84 (2016), 378–394.
35. Hall, J.W., Manning, L.J., Hankin, R.K.S., Bayesian calibration of a flood inundation model using spatial data. Water Resour. Res., 47(5), 2011, W05529.
36. Hall, J.W., Tarantola, S., Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Distributed sensitivity analysis of flood inundation model calibration. J. Hydraul. Eng. 131:2 (2005), 117–126.
37. Harlow, F.H., The Particle-in-cell Method for Numerical Solution of Problems in Fluid Dynamics. 1962 United States report LA-DC-5288, 39, http://www.osti.gov/scitech/servlets/purl/4769185.
38. Harlow, F.H., Welch, J.E., Numerical calculation of time-dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface. Phys. Fluids, 8(12), 1965, 2182.
39. Harten, A., Lax, P.D., Vanleer, B., On upstream differencing and Godunov-type schemes for hyperbolic conservation-laws. Siam Rev. 25:1 (1983), 35–61.
40. Hunter, N.M., Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Wilson, M.D., Simple spatially-distributed models for predicting flood inundation: a review. Geomorphology 90:3–4 (2007), 208–225.
41. Jakeman, A.J., Barreteau, O., Hunt, R.J., Rinaudo, J.-D., Ross, A., IntegratedGroundwater Management; Concepts, Approaches and Challenges. 2016, Springer 762 pp.
42. Jakeman, A.J., Jakeman, J.D., An Overview of Methods to Identify and Manage Uncertainty for Modelling Problems in the Water-agriculture-environment Sector. Forum “Math for Industry” 2016, pp.24–30. MI lecture Note volume 70, 2016, Kyushu University, Institute Mathematics for Industry ISSN 2188–1200 http://www.imi.kyushu-u.ac.jp/.
43. Jakeman, A.J., Letcher, R.A., Norton, J.P., Ten iterative steps in development and evaluation of environmental models. Environ. Model. Softw. 21:5 (2006), 602–614.
44. Karim, F., Dutta, D., Marvanek, S., Petheram, C., Ticehurst, C., Lerata, J., Kim, S., Yang, A., Assessing the impacts of climate change and dams on floodplain inundation and wetland connectivity in the wet-dry tropics of northern Australia. J. Hydrol. 522 (2015), 80–94.
45. Keating, E.H., Doherty, J., Vrugt, J.A., Kang, Q., Optimization and uncertainty assessment of strongly nonlinear groundwater models with high parameter dimensionality. Water Resour. Res., 46(10), 2010, W10517.
46. Laloy, E., Rogiers, B., Vrugt, J.A., Mallants, D., Jacques, D., Efficient posterior exploration of a high-dimensional groundwater model from two-stage Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation and polynomial chaos expansion. Water Resour. Res. 49:5 (2013), 2664–2682.
47. Le Cozannet, G., Rohmer, J., Cazenave, A., Idier, D., van de Wal, R., de Winter, R., Pedreros, R., Balouin, Y., Vinchon, C., Oliveros, C., Evaluating uncertainties of future marine flooding occurrence as sea-level rises. Environ. Model. Softw. 73 (2015), 44–56.
48. L'homme, J., Sayers, P., Gouldby, B., Samuels, P., Wills, M., Mulet-Marti, J., Recent development and application of a rapid flood spreading method. Samuels, P., Huntington, S., Allsop, W., Harrop, J., (eds.) Flood Risk Management: Research and Practice, 2008, Taylor & Francis Group, London, UK.
49. Liang, D., Falconer, R.A., Lin, B., Comparison between TVD-MacCormack and ADI-type solvers of the shallow water equations. Adv. Water Resour. 29:12 (2006), 1833–1845.
50. Liu, Q., Qin, Y., Zhang, Y., Li, Z.W., A coupled 1D-2D hydrodynamic model for flood simulation in flood detention basin. Nat. Hazards 75:2 (2015), 1303–1325.
51. Losasso, F., Talton, J., Kwatra, N., Fedkiw, R., Two-way coupled SPH and particle level set fluid simulation. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 14:4 (2008), 797–804.
52. Lucy, L.B., Numerical Approach to testing of fission hypothesis. Astron. J. 82:12 (1977), 1013–1024.
53. Mara, T.A., Tarantola, S., Annoni, P., Non-parametric methods for global sensitivity analysis of model output with dependent inputs. Environ. Model. Softw. 72 (2015), 173–183.
54. Marriott, S., Textural analysis and modeling of a flood deposit - river Severn. UK. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 17:7 (1992), 687–697.
55. Martinis, S., Twele, A., Voigt, S., Towards operational near real-time flood detection using a split-based automatic thresholding procedure on high resolution TerraSAR-X data. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 9:2 (2009), 303–314.
56. Matgen, P., Hostache, R., Schumann, G., Pfister, L., Hoffmann, L., Savenije, H.H.G., Towards an automated SAR-based flood monitoring system: lessons learned from two case studies. Phys. Chem. Earth 36:7–8 (2011), 241–252.
57. Medeiros, S.C., Hagen, S.C., Review of wetting and drying algorithms for numerical tidal flow models. Int. J. Numer. methods fluids 71:4 (2013), 473–487.
58. Merz, B., Kreibich, H., Schwarze, R., Thieken, A., Review article 'Assessment of economic flood damage'. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 10:8 (2010), 1697–1724.
59. Merz, B., Thieken, A.H., Separating natural and epistemic uncertainty in flood frequency analysis. J. Hydrol. 309:1–4 (2005), 114–132.
60. Monaghan, J.J., Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 30 (1992), 543–574.
61. Monaghan, J.J., Simulating free surface flows with SPH. J. Comput. Phys. 110:2 (1994), 399–406.
62. Moulinec, C., Denis, C., Pham, C.T., Rouge, D., Hervouet, J.M., TELEMAC: an efficient hydrodynamics suite for massively parallel architectures. Comput. Fluids 51:1 (2011), 30–34.
63. Mure-Ravaud, M., Binet, G., Bracq, M., Perarnaud, J.-J., Fradin, A., Litrico, X., A web based tool for operational real-time flood forecasting using data assimilation to update hydraulic states. Environ. Model. Softw. 84 (2016), 35–49.
64. Neal, J., Keef, C., Bates, P., Beven, K., Leedal, D., Probabilistic flood risk mapping including spatial dependence. Hydrol. Process. 27:9 (2013), 1349–1363.
65. Neal, J., Schumann, G., Bates, P., A subgrid channel model for simulating river hydraulics and floodplain inundation over large and data sparse areas. Water Resour. Res., 48, 2012.
66. Néelz, S., Pender, G., Desktop Review of 2D Hydraulic Modelling Packages. 2009, DEFRA/Environment Agency, UK http://evidence.environment-agency.gov.uk/FCERM/Libraries/FCERM_Project_Documents/SC080035_Desktop_review_of_2D_hydraulic_packages_Phase_1_Report.sflb.ashx.
67. Néelz, S., Pender, G., Benchmarking of 2D Dyfraulic Modelling Packages. 2010, DEFRA/Environment Agency, UK https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/290884/scho0510bsno-e-e.pdf.
68. Néelz, S., Pender, G., Benchmarking the Latest Generation of 2D Hydraulic Modelling Packages. 2013, DEFRA/Environment Agency, UK http://evidence.environment-agency.gov.uk/FCERM/Libraries/FCERM_Project_Documents/SC120002_Benchmarking_2D_hydraulic_models_Report.sflb.ashx.
69. Nobre, A.D., Cuartas, L.A., Hodnett, M., Renno, C.D., Rodrigues, G., Silveira, A., Waterloo, M., Saleska, S., Height above the Nearest Drainage - a hydrologically relevant new terrain model. J. Hydrol. 404:1–2 (2011), 13–29.
70. Norton, J., An introduction to sensitivity assessment of simulation models. Environ. Model. Softw. 69 (2015), 166–174.
71. O'Connor, J.E., Costa, J.E., The World's Largest Floods, Past and Present—Their Causes and Magnitudes: U.S. Geological Survey Circular, vol. 1254, 2004, 13.
72. O'Hagan, A., Kingman, J.F.C., Curve fitting and optimal design for prediction. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Methodol. 40:1 (1978), 1–42.
73. Pappenberger, F., Beven, K., Horritt, M., Blazkova, S., Uncertainty in the calibration of effective roughness parameters in HEC-RAS using inundation and downstream level observations. J. Hydrol. 302:1–4 (2005), 46–69.
74. Pappenberger, F., Beven, K.J., Ratto, M., Matgen, P., Multi-method global sensitivity analysis of flood inundation models. Adv. Water Resour. 31:1 (2008), 1–14.
75. Pender, G., Briefing: introducing the flood risk management research consortium. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Water Manag. 159:1 (2006), 3–8.
76. Pizzuto, J.E., Sediment diffusion during overbank flows. Sedimentology 34:2 (1987), 301–317.
77. Prakash, M., Rothauge, K., Cleary, P.W., Modelling the impact of dam failure scenarios on flood inundation using SPH. Appl. Math. Model. 38:23 (2014), 5515–5534.
78. Pulvirenti, L., Chini, M., Pierdicca, N., Guerriero, L., Ferrazzoli, P., Flood monitoring using multi-temporal COSMO-SkyMed data: image segmentation and signature interpretation. Remote Sens. Environ. 115:4 (2011), 990–1002.
79. Refsgaard, J.C., van der Sluijs, J.P., Højberg, A.L., Vanrolleghem, P.A., Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process – a framework and guidance. Environ. Model. Softw. 22:11 (2007), 1543–1556.
80. Roberts, S., Nielsen, O., Gray, D., Sexton, J., Davies, G., ANUGA User Manual. 2015, Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) and the Australian National University, 127.
81. Roe, P.L., Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference-schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 43:2 (1981), 357–372.
82. Romanowicz, R., Beven, K., Estimation of flood inundation probabilities as conditioned on event inundation maps. Water Resour. Res. 39:3 (2003), SWC41–SWC412.
83. Romanowicz, R.J., Beven, K.J., Young, P.C., Uncertainty Propagation in a Sequential Model for Flood Forecasting. 303 ed, 2006, IAHS-AISH publication, 177–184.
84. Saltelli, A., Chan, K., Scott, E.M., Sensitivity Analysis. 2000, John Wiley & Sons, LTD., 494pp.
85. Sanyal, J., Lu, X.X., Application of remote sensing in flood management with special reference to monsoon Asia: a review. Nat. Hazards 33:2 (2004), 283–301.
86. Sarrazin, F., Pianosi, F., Wagener, T., Global sensitivity analysis of environmental models: convergence and validation. Environ. Model. Softw. 79 (2016), 135–152.
87. Savage, J.T.S., Bates, P., Freer, J., Neal, J., Aronica, G., When does spatial resolution become spurious in probabilistic flood inundation predictions?. Hydrol. Process. 30:13 (2016), 2014–2032.
88. Schumann, G., Bates, P.D., Horritt, M.S., Matgen, P., Pappenberger, F., Progress in integration of remote sensing–derived flood extent and stage data and hydraulic models. Rev. Geophys., 47(4), 2009, RG4001.
89. Shin, M.-J., Guillaume, J.H.A., Croke, B.F.W., Jakeman, A.J., Addressing ten questions about conceptual rainfall–runoff models with global sensitivity analyses in R. J. Hydrol. 503 (2013), 135–152.
90. Sleigh, P.A., Gaskell, P.H., Berzins, M., Wright, N.G., An unstructured finite-volume algorithm for predicting flow in rivers and estuaries. Comput. Fluids 27:4 (1998), 479–508.
91. Smith, L.C., Satellite remote sensing of river inundation area, stage, and discharge: a review. Hydrol. Process. 11:10 (1997), 1427–1439.
92. Stam, J., Stable Fluids, Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. 1999, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 121–128.
93. Stephens, E., Bates, P., Assessing the reliability of probabilistic flood inundation model predictions. Hydrol. Process. 29:19 (2015), 4264–4283.
94. Stephens, E.M., Bates, P.D., Freer, J.E., Mason, D.C., The impact of uncertainty in satellite data on the assessment of flood inundation models. J. Hydrol. 414–415 (2012), 162–173.
95. Sudret, B., Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 93:7 (2008), 964–979.
96. Sulsky, D., Chen, Z., Schreyer, H.L., A particle method for history-dependent materials. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 118:1 (1994), 179–196.
97. Teng, J., Vaze, J., Dutta, D., Marvanek, S., Rapid inundation modelling in large floodplains using LiDAR DEM. Water Resour. Manag. 29:8 (2015), 2619–2636.
98. Ticehurst, C., Dutta, D., Karim, F., Petheram, C., Guerschman, J., Flood mapping at a daily scale using MODIS imagery in large floodplains and reduction of uncertainty with the aid of hydrodynamic modelling. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 78 (2015), 803–820.
99. Ticehurst, C., Guerschman, J.P., Chen, Y., The strengths and limitations in using the daily MODIS open water likelihood algorithm for identifying flood events. Remote Sens. 6:12 (2014), 11791–11809.
100. Toro, E.F., Garcia-Navarro, P., Godunov-type methods for free-surface shallow flows: a review. J. Hydraul. Res. 45:6 (2007), 736–751.
101. Tsubaki, R., Kawahara, Y., The uncertainty of local flow parameters during inundation flow over complex topographies with elevation errors. J. Hydrol. 486 (2013), 71–87.
102. Vacondio, R., Rogers, B., Stansby, P., Mignosa, P., SPH modeling of shallow flow with open boundaries for practical flood simulation. J. Hydraul. Eng. 138:6 (2011), 530–541.
103. Van Der Sluijs, J.P., Craye, M., Funtowicz, S., Kloprogge, P., Ravetz, J., Risbey, J., Combining quantitative and qualitative measures of uncertainty in model-based environmental assessment: the NUSAP system. Risk Anal. 25:2 (2005), 481–492.
104. Vaze, J., Teng, J., Chiew, F.H.S., Assessment of GCM simulations of annual and seasonal rainfall and daily rainfall distribution across south-east Australia. Hydrol. Process 25:9 (2011), 1486–1497.
105. Vaze, J., Viney, N., Stenson, M., Renzullo, L., Van Dijk, A., Dutta, D., Crosbie, R., Lerat, J., Penton, D., Vleeshouwer, J., Peeters, L., Teng, J., Kim, S., Hughes, J., Dawes, W., Zhang, Y., Leighton, B., Perraud, J.-M., Joehnk, K., Yang, A., Wang, B., Frost, A., Elmahdi, A., Smith, A., Daamen, C., The Australian Water Resource Assessment System (AWRA) Proceedings of the 20th International Congress on Modelling and Simulation (MODSIM2013), 2013, Adelaide, Australia.
106. Wang, S., Baig, M.H.A., Zhang, L., Jiang, H., Ji, Y., Zhao, H., Tian, J., A simple enhanced water index (EWI) for percent surface water estimation using landsat data. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 8:1 (2015), 90–97.
107. Werner, M., Blazkova, S., Petr, J., Spatially distributed observations in constraining inundation modelling uncertainties. Hydrol. Process. 19:16 (2005), 3081–3096.
108. Woodhead, S., Asselman, N., Zech, Y., Soares-Frazão, S., Bates, P., Kortenhaus, A., Evaluation of Inundation Models. FLOODsite report T08-07-01, 2007, 28 http://www.floodsite.net/html/partner_area/project_docs/t08_07_01_inundation_model_evaluation_m8_1_v1_7_p15.pdf.
109. Xu, H., Modification of normalised difference water index (NDWI) to enhance open water features in remotely sensed imagery. Int. J. Remote Sens. 27:14 (2006), 3025–3033.
110. Yamazaki, D., de Almeida, G.A.M., Bates, P.D., Improving computational efficiency in global river models by implementing the local inertial flow equation and a vector-based river network map. Water Resour. Res. 49:11 (2013), 7221–7235.
111. Yamazaki, D., Kanae, S., Kim, H., Oki, T., A physically based description of floodplain inundation dynamics in a global river routing model. Water Resour. Res., 47, 2011.
112. Ye, J., McCorquodale, J.A., Simulation of curved open channel flows by 3D hydrodynamic model. J. Hydraul. Eng. 124:7 (1998), 687–698.