Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment

In this study, two hydrodynamic models, TELEMAC-2D and HEC-RAS 2D, were compared for their Rain-on-Grid (RoG) technique with a particular focus on runoff generation processes in a small and steep catchment. Curve number (CN) method was applied in both the models to simulate two single storm events u...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Godara, Nitesh, Bruland, Oddbjørn, Alfredsen, Knut Tore
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume
creator Godara, Nitesh
Bruland, Oddbjørn
Alfredsen, Knut Tore
description In this study, two hydrodynamic models, TELEMAC-2D and HEC-RAS 2D, were compared for their Rain-on-Grid (RoG) technique with a particular focus on runoff generation processes in a small and steep catchment. Curve number (CN) method was applied in both the models to simulate two single storm events up to 20 h of duration, whereas the Green-Ampt Redistribution (GAR) method was additionally applied in HEC-RAS 2D for a multi-peak flood event with sustained flow between the peaks. CN and GAR methods were compared for this flood event, and a sensitivity analysis of the GAR parameters was also done. Moreover, the two models were compared for their calibration process, computational time, mesh size and shape, and model availability, in general, as well as the results including inundated areas, water depth, and velocity. The results indicate that both the models are capable of reproducing short duration single storm floods. NSE and R2 for both models ranged from 0.70 to 0.90 and from 0.93 to 0.95. However, the models struggled to reproduce the long- duration multi-peak flood event. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results are not very sensitive to the two GAR parameters which are responsible to influence the flow of the second peak in the flood event. Neither the CN nor the GAR infiltration method successfully replicated such events because the hydraulic models permanently lose infiltrated water from the domain. The returned sub-surface flow significantly contributes to river flow during these flood events; however, none of the model incorporates a return flow algorithm.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>cristin_3HK</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_cristin_nora_11250_3129392</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>11250_3129392</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-cristin_nora_11250_31293923</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjjEOwjAMALswIOAP5gGVaCuGzhWIB7BXVuIQS41dEleov6cDD2C5W264fZUHTTNmLiqgAeyjEFef1a-CiR0k9TQVCJrBInGGjCy1Sv3K7MHIReH3QmAKhdMyoRGECUvcqOoLsEAxohkcmouJxI7VLuBU6PTzoTrfb8_hUbttw1hG0Yxj07TXy9g1bd_1bfdP8wULBUPz</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment</title><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><creator>Godara, Nitesh ; Bruland, Oddbjørn ; Alfredsen, Knut Tore</creator><creatorcontrib>Godara, Nitesh ; Bruland, Oddbjørn ; Alfredsen, Knut Tore</creatorcontrib><description>In this study, two hydrodynamic models, TELEMAC-2D and HEC-RAS 2D, were compared for their Rain-on-Grid (RoG) technique with a particular focus on runoff generation processes in a small and steep catchment. Curve number (CN) method was applied in both the models to simulate two single storm events up to 20 h of duration, whereas the Green-Ampt Redistribution (GAR) method was additionally applied in HEC-RAS 2D for a multi-peak flood event with sustained flow between the peaks. CN and GAR methods were compared for this flood event, and a sensitivity analysis of the GAR parameters was also done. Moreover, the two models were compared for their calibration process, computational time, mesh size and shape, and model availability, in general, as well as the results including inundated areas, water depth, and velocity. The results indicate that both the models are capable of reproducing short duration single storm floods. NSE and R2 for both models ranged from 0.70 to 0.90 and from 0.93 to 0.95. However, the models struggled to reproduce the long- duration multi-peak flood event. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results are not very sensitive to the two GAR parameters which are responsible to influence the flow of the second peak in the flood event. Neither the CN nor the GAR infiltration method successfully replicated such events because the hydraulic models permanently lose infiltrated water from the domain. The returned sub-surface flow significantly contributes to river flow during these flood events; however, none of the model incorporates a return flow algorithm.</description><language>eng</language><publisher>Frontiers Media</publisher><creationdate>2024</creationdate><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,777,882,26548</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/3129392$$EView_record_in_NORA$$FView_record_in_$$GNORA$$Hfree_for_read</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Godara, Nitesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruland, Oddbjørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alfredsen, Knut Tore</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment</title><description>In this study, two hydrodynamic models, TELEMAC-2D and HEC-RAS 2D, were compared for their Rain-on-Grid (RoG) technique with a particular focus on runoff generation processes in a small and steep catchment. Curve number (CN) method was applied in both the models to simulate two single storm events up to 20 h of duration, whereas the Green-Ampt Redistribution (GAR) method was additionally applied in HEC-RAS 2D for a multi-peak flood event with sustained flow between the peaks. CN and GAR methods were compared for this flood event, and a sensitivity analysis of the GAR parameters was also done. Moreover, the two models were compared for their calibration process, computational time, mesh size and shape, and model availability, in general, as well as the results including inundated areas, water depth, and velocity. The results indicate that both the models are capable of reproducing short duration single storm floods. NSE and R2 for both models ranged from 0.70 to 0.90 and from 0.93 to 0.95. However, the models struggled to reproduce the long- duration multi-peak flood event. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results are not very sensitive to the two GAR parameters which are responsible to influence the flow of the second peak in the flood event. Neither the CN nor the GAR infiltration method successfully replicated such events because the hydraulic models permanently lose infiltrated water from the domain. The returned sub-surface flow significantly contributes to river flow during these flood events; however, none of the model incorporates a return flow algorithm.</description><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjjEOwjAMALswIOAP5gGVaCuGzhWIB7BXVuIQS41dEleov6cDD2C5W264fZUHTTNmLiqgAeyjEFef1a-CiR0k9TQVCJrBInGGjCy1Sv3K7MHIReH3QmAKhdMyoRGECUvcqOoLsEAxohkcmouJxI7VLuBU6PTzoTrfb8_hUbttw1hG0Yxj07TXy9g1bd_1bfdP8wULBUPz</recordid><startdate>2024</startdate><enddate>2024</enddate><creator>Godara, Nitesh</creator><creator>Bruland, Oddbjørn</creator><creator>Alfredsen, Knut Tore</creator><general>Frontiers Media</general><scope>3HK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2024</creationdate><title>Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment</title><author>Godara, Nitesh ; Bruland, Oddbjørn ; Alfredsen, Knut Tore</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-cristin_nora_11250_31293923</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Godara, Nitesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruland, Oddbjørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alfredsen, Knut Tore</creatorcontrib><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Godara, Nitesh</au><au>Bruland, Oddbjørn</au><au>Alfredsen, Knut Tore</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment</atitle><date>2024</date><risdate>2024</risdate><abstract>In this study, two hydrodynamic models, TELEMAC-2D and HEC-RAS 2D, were compared for their Rain-on-Grid (RoG) technique with a particular focus on runoff generation processes in a small and steep catchment. Curve number (CN) method was applied in both the models to simulate two single storm events up to 20 h of duration, whereas the Green-Ampt Redistribution (GAR) method was additionally applied in HEC-RAS 2D for a multi-peak flood event with sustained flow between the peaks. CN and GAR methods were compared for this flood event, and a sensitivity analysis of the GAR parameters was also done. Moreover, the two models were compared for their calibration process, computational time, mesh size and shape, and model availability, in general, as well as the results including inundated areas, water depth, and velocity. The results indicate that both the models are capable of reproducing short duration single storm floods. NSE and R2 for both models ranged from 0.70 to 0.90 and from 0.93 to 0.95. However, the models struggled to reproduce the long- duration multi-peak flood event. The sensitivity analysis showed that the results are not very sensitive to the two GAR parameters which are responsible to influence the flow of the second peak in the flood event. Neither the CN nor the GAR infiltration method successfully replicated such events because the hydraulic models permanently lose infiltrated water from the domain. The returned sub-surface flow significantly contributes to river flow during these flood events; however, none of the model incorporates a return flow algorithm.</abstract><pub>Frontiers Media</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier
ispartof
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_cristin_nora_11250_3129392
source NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives
title Comparison of two hydrodynamic models for their rain-on-grid technique to simulate flash floods in steep catchment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T16%3A45%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-cristin_3HK&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20two%20hydrodynamic%20models%20for%20their%20rain-on-grid%20technique%20to%20simulate%20flash%20floods%20in%20steep%20catchment&rft.au=Godara,%20Nitesh&rft.date=2024&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Ccristin_3HK%3E11250_3129392%3C/cristin_3HK%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true