Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

TOUS CASE STUDY. MODELLER OVERVIEW REVIEW. COMPARATION AND ANALYSIS OF MODELLING RESULTS 4th IMPACT WORKSHOP 3-5 NOVEMBER 2004.

Published byFrank McLaughlin Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "TOUS CASE STUDY. MODELLER OVERVIEW REVIEW. COMPARATION AND ANALYSIS OF MODELLING RESULTS 4th IMPACT WORKSHOP 3-5 NOVEMBER 2004."— Presentation transcript:

1 TOUS CASE STUDY. MODELLER OVERVIEW REVIEW. COMPARATION AND ANALYSIS OF MODELLING RESULTS 4th IMPACT WORKSHOP 3-5 NOVEMBER 2004

2 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. GENERAL VIEW. REMAINS OF THE TOUS DAM THE CITY OF SUMACÁRCEL

3 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. AVAILABLE DATA. - UPSTREAM BOUNDARY CONDITION → TOUS DAM OUTFLOW HYDROGRAPH - DOMWSTREAM BOUNDARY CONDITION → NOT FIXED - FRICTION PARAMETERS ● VALLEY FRICTION → MANNING 0.025 – 0.045 ● CULTIVATED ZONES FRICTION → MANNING 0.05 – 0.1 - BATHYMETRY 1982 / BATHYMETRY 1998 - CITY OF SUMACÁRCEL ● LOCATION OF THE BUILDINGS ● HEIGHT OF THE BUILDINGS - MAXIMUM WATER LEVELS AT SOME LOCATIONS (CITY AREA) SUMACÁRCEL CULTIVATED ZONES DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BATHYMETRIES SOIL EROSION URBAN AREA

4 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. FLOOD PROPAGATION GAUGE AND SECTION LOCATIONS.

5 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. URBAN FLOODING GAUGE LOCATIONS.

6 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. SIMULATIONS. SIMULATION NUMBER OF CELLSCITY MODEL CEMAGREF COURSE MESH2611VERTICAL WALLS CEMAGREF FINE MESH~ 11000VERTICAL WALLS UCL R-760911VERTICAL WALLS UDZ-1~ 20000VERTICAL WALLS SIMULATION NUMBER OF CELLSCITY MODEL CEMAGREF COURSE MESH2611VERTICAL WALLS CEMAGREF FINE MESH~ 11000VERTICAL WALLS UCL R-560911VERTICAL WALLS UDZ-1~ 20000VERTICAL WALLS UDZ-2~ 40000BOTTOM ELEVATION 1982 BATHYMETRY 1998 BATHYMETRY REQUESTED RESULTS: - WATER DEPTH HISTORY AT GAUGE LOCATIONS - DISCHARGE HYDROGRAPH THROUGH SECTIONS - WATER DEPTH ENVELOPE OF 0.5 m AND 2 m

7 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. CEMAGREF´S MODELLING. COARSE MESHFINE MESH

8 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. UCL´S MODELLING. REFINED MESH AROUND THE BUILDINGS

9 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. UDZ-1´S MODELLING. GENERAL VIEW OF THE MESH SIMPLIFIED CITY MODEL VIEW

10 THE TOUS CASE STUDY. UDZ-2´S MODELLING. GENERAL MESH VIEW CITY MODEL VIEW

11 - LOWER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - SLOWER CITY EMPTYING THAN EXPERIMENTAL - DIFFERENCES IN THE WAVE FRONT ARRIVAL URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 1. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE RIVER BED WAVE ARRIVAL VIEW ~ 5000 s ≈ ~ 1h 15m

12 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 2. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE OLD CINEMA - GOOD MAXIMUM RESULTS FOR BOTH BATHYMETRIES - DIFFERENCE IN THE WAVE SHAPE BETWEEN BATHYMETRIES - DIFFICULTIES DUE TO GAUGE 2 LOCATION

13 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 3. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE CHURCH STREET - MISTAKE IN THE GAUGE 3 LOCATION - UDZ-1 RESULTS WITH THE RIGHT LOCATION

14 - DIFFERENCE IN THE WAVE FRONT ARRIVAL TIME AND SHAPE BETWEEN BATHYMETRIES AND MODELLERS - UDZ-1 HIGHER LEVEL DUE TO AN UNKNOWN SET UP ERROR. URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 4. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE CONDES DE ORGAZ STREET

15 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 5. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY JÚCAR STREET - ~ 1m HIGHER WATER LEVELS - GAUGE 5 FOR 1998 BATHYMETRY LOCATED JUST OUT OF THE CITY MODEL FOR UDZ-1

16 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 6. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE PROYECTO C STREET - ~ 1m HIGHER WATER LEVELS - SAME PROBLEM AS IN GAUGE 4 FOR UDZ-1 RESULTS - POTENCIAL RISK 2m WATER DEPTH AT SAME TIME

17 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 7. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE OLD CITY HALL - ~ 1m HIGHER WATER LEVELS FOR 1982 BATHYMETRY - WAVE ARRIVAL MORE ACCURATE IN 1998 BATHYMETRY - LOWER EMPTYING RATES THAN EXPERIMENTAL WAVE ARRIVAL VIEW ~ 5000 s ≈ ~ 1h 15m

18 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 8. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE CLOCK´S SITE - ~ 1-2m HIGHER WATER LEVELS - LOWER FILLING UP RATES THAN EXPERIMENTAL WAVE ARRIVAL VIEW LOWER FILLING UP RATES

19 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 9. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE ERA SQUARE - ~ 1m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - GOOD RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

20 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 10. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE JÚCAR STREET - ~ 2m DIFFERENCE WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY BETWEEN MODELLERS - ~ 1m DIFFERENCE WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY BETWEEN MODELLERS

21 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 11. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE STAIRS STREET - ~ 2m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - ~ 1.5m DIFFERENCE WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY BETWEEN MODELLERS

22 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 12. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE CONDES DE ORGAZ STREET - SAME AND GOOD RESULTS FOR BOTH BATHYMETRIES

23 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 13. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE VALENCIA STREET - ~ 3m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - GOOD RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY - UDZ-2 LOWER WATER LEVELS DUE TO CITY MODEL

24 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 14. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE PINTOR SOROLLA STREET - LOWER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

25 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 15. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE VALENCIA STREET - ~ 2m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH BOTH BATHYMETRIES

26 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 16. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE PINTOR SOROLLA STREET - ~ 1.5m LOWER RESULTS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - GOOD RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

27 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 17. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY PALLECER STREET - ~ 2m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - GOOD RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

28 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 18. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE SEVERO OCHOA STREET - GOOD RESULTS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - ~ 1.5m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

29 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 19. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY VIRGEN STREET - SAME AND GOOD RESULTS WITH BOTH BATHYMETRIES FOR UCL AND UDZ-1

30 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 20. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE VIRGEN STREET - LOWER WATER LEVELS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - BETTER RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

31 URBAN FLOODING RESULTS. GAUGE 21. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE WEST AVENUE - GOOD RESULTS WITH BOTH BATHYMETRIES

32 GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE 1 KM DOWNSTREAM TOUS DAM VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT A. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY - SUBSTANCIAL DIFFERENCES IN WATER LEVELS BETWEEN MODELLERS - LOWER RESULTS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY - DIFFERENCE IN THE WAVE FRONT ARRIVAL WAVE ARRIVAL VIEW ~ 3000 s ≈ ~ 50 m

33 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. SECTION 1. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE 1 KM DOWNSTREAM TOUS DAM - SAME WATER FLOW RATE FOR BOTH BATHYMETRIES THROUGH SECTION 1 DESPITE THE DIFFERENCE IN WATER LEVEL - SAME PEAK AS IN THE OUTFLOW TOUS DAM HYDROGRAPH

34 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT B. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE AZUD - ~ 3m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

35 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. SECTION 2. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE AZUD - SAME WATER FLOW RATE FOR BOTH BATHYMETRIES THROUGH SECTION 2 DESPITE THE DIFFERENCE IN WATER LEVEL - SAME PEAK AS IN THE OUTFLOW TOUS DAM HYDROGRAPH

36 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT C. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE 3 KM DOWNSTREAM TOUS DAM - SAME SHAPE OF THE WAVE FOR ALL THE MODELLERS WITH 1982 BATHYMETRY - HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

37 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. SECTION 3. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE 3 KM DOWNSTREAM TOUS DAM - SAME WATER FLOW RATE FOR BOTH BATHYMETRIES THROUGH SECTION 3 DESPITE THE DIFFERENCE IN WATER LEVEL - SAME PEAK AS IN THE OUTFLOW TOUS DAM HYDROGRAPH

38 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT D. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE BEFORE HILL UPSTREAM SUMACÁRCEL - ~ 2m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY

39 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT E. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE RIVER BANK OPPOSITE SUMACÁRCEL - ~ 4m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY - SUBSTANCIAL DIFFERENCES IN THE WAVE FRONT ARRIVAL WAVE ARRIVAL VIEW ~ 5000 s ≈ ~ 1 h 15 m

40 VALLEY FLOODING RESULTS. POINT F. 1998 BATHYMETRY1982 BATHYMETRY GAUGE LOCATION PICTURE DOWNSTREAM SUMACÁRCEL - ~ 3m HIGHER WATER LEVELS WITH 1998 BATHYMETRY - SUBSTANCIAL DIFFERENCES IN THE WAVE FRONT ARRIVAL - DOWNSTREAM BOUNDARY CONDITION EFFECTS

41 TOUS CASE STUDY. CONCLUSIONS. - COMPROMISE SOLUTION BETWEEN CELL SIZE AND TOPOGRAPHY CHARACTERISTICS - WATER LEVELS ADJUSTED TO THE TOUS OUTFLOW HIDROGRAPH OVER THE VALLEY - THE MOST “ECONOMICAL” CITY MODEL: VERTICAL WALLS ● MESHING DIFFICULTIES ● LONG DURATION OF SIMULATIONS - PROBLEMS WITH THE SELECTION OF DOWNSTREAM BOUNDARY CONDITION - MODELS SEEM TO REPRODUCE URBAN FLOODING SLOWER THAN IT WAS (FILLING UP AND CITY EMPTYING). - UNCERTAINTY IN THE RESULTS UP TO 5m IN THE VALLEY AND AROUND 2m IN THE URBAN AREA BETWEEN BATHYMETRIES AND MODELLERS

Download ppt "TOUS CASE STUDY. MODELLER OVERVIEW REVIEW. COMPARATION AND ANALYSIS OF MODELLING RESULTS 4th IMPACT WORKSHOP 3-5 NOVEMBER 2004."

Similar presentations

To Next Slide Unit 1 Chapter 1 Lesson 2 Rivers Change the Land 20 Questions!

To Next Slide Unit 1 Chapter 1 Lesson 2 Rivers Change the Land 20 Questions!
THE MODEL CITY BENCHMARK (TOCE) 3RD IMPACT Workshop November 5-8, 2003 Université Catholique de Louvain Lovain-la-Neuve, Belgium.

THE MODEL CITY BENCHMARK (TOCE) 3RD IMPACT Workshop November 5-8, 2003 Université Catholique de Louvain Lovain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Wallingford - May 2002 Flood propagation - UCL experiments 1 Flood propagation Dam-break flow experiments in idealised representation of complex topography.

Wallingford - May 2002 Flood propagation - UCL experiments 1 Flood propagation Dam-break flow experiments in idealised representation of complex topography.
IMPACT PROJECT Flood Propagation Progress Review 2 nd Impact Workshop Mo i Rana, Norway September 12-13, 2002 Francisco Alcrudo University of Zaragoza.

IMPACT PROJECT Flood Propagation Progress Review 2 nd Impact Workshop Mo i Rana, Norway September 12-13, 2002 Francisco Alcrudo University of Zaragoza.
3 rd IMPACT WORKSHOP Brembo-Adda test case Fabrizio Savi, University of Rome “La Sapienza”

3 rd IMPACT WORKSHOP Brembo-Adda test case Fabrizio Savi, University of Rome “La Sapienza”
WinTR-20 Course February 20151 Muskingum-Cunge Flood Routing Procedure in NRCS Hydrologic Models Prepared by William Merkel USDA-NRCS National Water Quality.

WinTR-20 Course February Muskingum-Cunge Flood Routing Procedure in NRCS Hydrologic Models Prepared by William Merkel USDA-NRCS National Water Quality.
GCSE Geography Enquiry

GCSE Geography Enquiry
URBAN FLOOD MODELING Concepts & Models. 2 Different Approaches For Modeling an Urban Flood Hydrological Approach Objective is to generate a storm hydrograph.

URBAN FLOOD MODELING Concepts & Models. 2 Different Approaches For Modeling an Urban Flood Hydrological Approach Objective is to generate a storm hydrograph.
River Studies. Outline of Events During your river field work you will be visiting two different sites in the lower course of the river. At each site.

River Studies. Outline of Events During your river field work you will be visiting two different sites in the lower course of the river. At each site.
Runoff Processes Reading: Applied Hydrology Sections 5.6 to 5.8 and Chapter 6 for Tuesday of next week.

Runoff Processes Reading: Applied Hydrology Sections 5.6 to 5.8 and Chapter 6 for Tuesday of next week.
4 th International Symposium on Flood Defence, 6 th – 8 th May 2008, Toronto, Canada Efficiency of distributed flood mitigation measures at watershed scale.

4 th International Symposium on Flood Defence, 6 th – 8 th May 2008, Toronto, Canada Efficiency of distributed flood mitigation measures at watershed scale.
Key factors determining the extent of tsunami inundation – Investigations using ANUGA Biljana Lukovic and William Power GNS Science, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.

Key factors determining the extent of tsunami inundation – Investigations using ANUGA Biljana Lukovic and William Power GNS Science, Lower Hutt, New Zealand.
By the end of the lesson I should know:

By the end of the lesson I should know:
Sediment Movement after Dam Removal

Sediment Movement after Dam Removal
URBAN FLOOD MODELING Simulation of flood in a dense urban area using 2D Shallow water equations.

URBAN FLOOD MODELING Simulation of flood in a dense urban area using 2D Shallow water equations.
Background: In the mid 18 th century a dam was built at 0668249E 4923484N for the E.N. Colton shingle and saw mills along the Mill Brook in the town of.

Background: In the mid 18 th century a dam was built at E N for the E.N. Colton shingle and saw mills along the Mill Brook in the town of.
Paul Bates SWOT and hydrodynamic modelling. 2 Flooding as a global problem According to UNESCO in 2004 floods caused ….. –~7k deaths –affected ~116M people.

Paul Bates SWOT and hydrodynamic modelling. 2 Flooding as a global problem According to UNESCO in 2004 floods caused ….. –~7k deaths –affected ~116M people.
1 River Processes and Morphology A Case Study of the Souteyran valley.

1 River Processes and Morphology A Case Study of the Souteyran valley.
WP3 : Flood Propagation Computation On The ‘Isolated Building Test Case’ And The ‘Model City Flooding Experiment ’ B. Noël, Soares S., Y. Zech Université.

WP3 : Flood Propagation Computation On The ‘Isolated Building Test Case’ And The ‘Model City Flooding Experiment ’ B. Noël, Soares S., Y. Zech Université.
2003 Overview of IST Group Results on the Sediment Benchmark 3 rd IMPACT Workshop Louvain-la-Neuve University of Beira Interior João Leal (UBI) Rui Ferreira.

2003 Overview of IST Group Results on the Sediment Benchmark 3 rd IMPACT Workshop Louvain-la-Neuve University of Beira Interior João Leal (UBI) Rui Ferreira.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google