Evaluating the impact of model complexity on flood wave propagation and inundation extent with a hydrologic-hydrodynamic model coupling framework

Jannis M. Hoch, Dirk Eilander, Hiroaki Ikeuchi, Fedor Baart, Hessel C. Winsemius

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Fluvial flood events are a major threat to people and infrastructure. Typically, flood hazard is driven by hydrologic or river routing and floodplain flow processes. Since they are often simulated by different models, coupling these models may be a viable way to increase the integration of different physical drivers of simulated inundation estimates. To facilitate coupling different models and integrating across flood hazard processes, we here present GLOFRIM 2.0, a globally applicable framework for integrated hydrologic-hydrodynamic modelling. We then tested the hypothesis that smart model coupling can advance inundation modelling in the Amazon and Ganges basins. By means of GLOFRIM, we coupled the global hydrologic model PCR-GLOBWB with the hydrodynamic models CaMa-Flood and LISFLOOD-FP. Results show that replacing the kinematic wave approximation of the hydrologic model with the local inertia equation of CaMa-Flood greatly enhances accuracy of peak discharge simulations as expressed by an increase in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) from 0.48 to 0.71. Flood maps obtained with LISFLOOD-FP improved representation of observed flood extent (critical success index C = 0:46), compared to downscaled products of PCR-GLOBWB and CaMa-Flood (C = 0:30 and C = 0:25, respectively). Results confirm that model coupling can indeed be a viable way forward towards more integrated flood simulations. However, results also suggest that the accuracy of coupled models still largely depends on the model forcing. Hence, further efforts must be undertaken to improve the magnitude and timing of simulated runoff. In addition, flood risk is, particularly in delta areas, driven by coastal processes. A more holistic representation of flood processes in delta areas, for example by incorporating a tide and surge model, must therefore be a next development step of GLOFRIM, making even more physically robust estimates possible for adequate flood risk management practices.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1723-1735
Number of pages13
JournalNatural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
Volume19
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Aug 2019

Fingerprint

flood wave
wave propagation
hydrodynamics
hazard
peak discharge
routing
inertia
modeling
simulation
floodplain
management practice
tide
kinematics

Cite this

@article{284fb2a102894715a65645751bc2e2df,
title = "Evaluating the impact of model complexity on flood wave propagation and inundation extent with a hydrologic-hydrodynamic model coupling framework",
abstract = "Fluvial flood events are a major threat to people and infrastructure. Typically, flood hazard is driven by hydrologic or river routing and floodplain flow processes. Since they are often simulated by different models, coupling these models may be a viable way to increase the integration of different physical drivers of simulated inundation estimates. To facilitate coupling different models and integrating across flood hazard processes, we here present GLOFRIM 2.0, a globally applicable framework for integrated hydrologic-hydrodynamic modelling. We then tested the hypothesis that smart model coupling can advance inundation modelling in the Amazon and Ganges basins. By means of GLOFRIM, we coupled the global hydrologic model PCR-GLOBWB with the hydrodynamic models CaMa-Flood and LISFLOOD-FP. Results show that replacing the kinematic wave approximation of the hydrologic model with the local inertia equation of CaMa-Flood greatly enhances accuracy of peak discharge simulations as expressed by an increase in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) from 0.48 to 0.71. Flood maps obtained with LISFLOOD-FP improved representation of observed flood extent (critical success index C = 0:46), compared to downscaled products of PCR-GLOBWB and CaMa-Flood (C = 0:30 and C = 0:25, respectively). Results confirm that model coupling can indeed be a viable way forward towards more integrated flood simulations. However, results also suggest that the accuracy of coupled models still largely depends on the model forcing. Hence, further efforts must be undertaken to improve the magnitude and timing of simulated runoff. In addition, flood risk is, particularly in delta areas, driven by coastal processes. A more holistic representation of flood processes in delta areas, for example by incorporating a tide and surge model, must therefore be a next development step of GLOFRIM, making even more physically robust estimates possible for adequate flood risk management practices.",
author = "Hoch, {Jannis M.} and Dirk Eilander and Hiroaki Ikeuchi and Fedor Baart and Winsemius, {Hessel C.}",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "12",
doi = "10.5194/nhess-19-1723-2019",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "1723--1735",
journal = "Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences",
issn = "1561-8633",
publisher = "European Geosciences Union",
number = "8",

}

Evaluating the impact of model complexity on flood wave propagation and inundation extent with a hydrologic-hydrodynamic model coupling framework. / Hoch, Jannis M.; Eilander, Dirk; Ikeuchi, Hiroaki; Baart, Fedor; Winsemius, Hessel C.

In: Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, Vol. 19, No. 8, 12.08.2019, p. 1723-1735.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating the impact of model complexity on flood wave propagation and inundation extent with a hydrologic-hydrodynamic model coupling framework

AU - Hoch, Jannis M.

AU - Eilander, Dirk

AU - Ikeuchi, Hiroaki

AU - Baart, Fedor

AU - Winsemius, Hessel C.

PY - 2019/8/12

Y1 - 2019/8/12

N2 - Fluvial flood events are a major threat to people and infrastructure. Typically, flood hazard is driven by hydrologic or river routing and floodplain flow processes. Since they are often simulated by different models, coupling these models may be a viable way to increase the integration of different physical drivers of simulated inundation estimates. To facilitate coupling different models and integrating across flood hazard processes, we here present GLOFRIM 2.0, a globally applicable framework for integrated hydrologic-hydrodynamic modelling. We then tested the hypothesis that smart model coupling can advance inundation modelling in the Amazon and Ganges basins. By means of GLOFRIM, we coupled the global hydrologic model PCR-GLOBWB with the hydrodynamic models CaMa-Flood and LISFLOOD-FP. Results show that replacing the kinematic wave approximation of the hydrologic model with the local inertia equation of CaMa-Flood greatly enhances accuracy of peak discharge simulations as expressed by an increase in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) from 0.48 to 0.71. Flood maps obtained with LISFLOOD-FP improved representation of observed flood extent (critical success index C = 0:46), compared to downscaled products of PCR-GLOBWB and CaMa-Flood (C = 0:30 and C = 0:25, respectively). Results confirm that model coupling can indeed be a viable way forward towards more integrated flood simulations. However, results also suggest that the accuracy of coupled models still largely depends on the model forcing. Hence, further efforts must be undertaken to improve the magnitude and timing of simulated runoff. In addition, flood risk is, particularly in delta areas, driven by coastal processes. A more holistic representation of flood processes in delta areas, for example by incorporating a tide and surge model, must therefore be a next development step of GLOFRIM, making even more physically robust estimates possible for adequate flood risk management practices.

AB - Fluvial flood events are a major threat to people and infrastructure. Typically, flood hazard is driven by hydrologic or river routing and floodplain flow processes. Since they are often simulated by different models, coupling these models may be a viable way to increase the integration of different physical drivers of simulated inundation estimates. To facilitate coupling different models and integrating across flood hazard processes, we here present GLOFRIM 2.0, a globally applicable framework for integrated hydrologic-hydrodynamic modelling. We then tested the hypothesis that smart model coupling can advance inundation modelling in the Amazon and Ganges basins. By means of GLOFRIM, we coupled the global hydrologic model PCR-GLOBWB with the hydrodynamic models CaMa-Flood and LISFLOOD-FP. Results show that replacing the kinematic wave approximation of the hydrologic model with the local inertia equation of CaMa-Flood greatly enhances accuracy of peak discharge simulations as expressed by an increase in the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) from 0.48 to 0.71. Flood maps obtained with LISFLOOD-FP improved representation of observed flood extent (critical success index C = 0:46), compared to downscaled products of PCR-GLOBWB and CaMa-Flood (C = 0:30 and C = 0:25, respectively). Results confirm that model coupling can indeed be a viable way forward towards more integrated flood simulations. However, results also suggest that the accuracy of coupled models still largely depends on the model forcing. Hence, further efforts must be undertaken to improve the magnitude and timing of simulated runoff. In addition, flood risk is, particularly in delta areas, driven by coastal processes. A more holistic representation of flood processes in delta areas, for example by incorporating a tide and surge model, must therefore be a next development step of GLOFRIM, making even more physically robust estimates possible for adequate flood risk management practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070649828&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070649828&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5194/nhess-19-1723-2019

DO - 10.5194/nhess-19-1723-2019

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 1723

EP - 1735

JO - Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences

JF - Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences

SN - 1561-8633

IS - 8

ER -