1Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Salvatore Manfreda
Dipartimento di Ingegneria e Fisica dell’Ambiente,Università degli Studi della Basilicata
Detection of Flood Prone Areas using Digital Elevation Models
Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, 6-10 June 2010
2Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Flooding21%
3Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Firenze, November 1966
4Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Flood and Landslides occurences in Italy - AVI project
(probability of a flood anda land slide over 50 years)
(http://sici.irpi.cnr.it/ ) (e.g., Reichenbach et al., 1998; Guzzetti et al., 2002)
5Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
MotivationThere are essentially two scientific questions posed here:i) Are there geomorphological signatures useful for the delineation of flood prone areas? ii) Is possible to define a simplified approach for the delineation of flood prone areas?iii) What is the optimal scale to describe such characteristics?
6Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Digital Elevation ModelsThe increasing availability of digital terrain models has given a
strong impulse to the development of so called distributed and DEM-based models.
Digital terrain model obtained through interferometric data gathered by the space shuttle campaign by NASA with a cell-size of 90m. (CGIAR-CSI: http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org/)
ASTER GDEM 30m available from June 2009 (http://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/gdem.asp )
7Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Description of the study area and morphological characteristics of the basin
A)flood inundation exposure map of the Arno river basin where different codes correspond to different flood exposure levels (1=P1; 2=P2; 3=P3; 4=P4; 5=stagnant water, and 6=water bodies);B)Digital Elevation Model (DEM);C)log(ad) where ad is drained area per unit contour length;D)Surface local slope;E)Surface curvature;F)TOPMODEL Topographic index proposed by Kirkby (1975).
(A) (B)
(C) (D)
(E) (F)
8Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
The Geomorphological Characteristics of the Areas Exposed and Non-Exposed to Flood InundationThe conditioned probability distributions of the different geomorphological measurements at the 4 exposure levels (P1, P2, P3, P4) show very similar shapes and are very different from the one conditioned on P0 (areas non exposed to flood inundation).
9Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
The Topographic Index
Stream line
Contour line
The concept of contributing area per unit contour length
The topographic index wasintroduced in the TOPMODEL withthe aim to mimic soil moisturepatterns based on:• local slope• basin area•Topographic convergence
)tan(/ln a
(Beven and Kirkby, 1979)D�Algorithm
10Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Relationships among topographic index and flood prone areas Po River and Arno River
Probability distribution of theTopographic index conditional on theflood exposure
Po River
Arno RiverFlood Exposure
Topographic index
Topographic index
11Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Arno River basin
Slope
Flow Accumulation MFD
Resize of DTM:20m – 40m60m – 80m
100m – 120m140m – 160m180m – 260m360m – 720m
Risk map PAICell size 20 m
Tan βATIm
ndln
12Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Error functions
, from PAI areas Flooding
ITwith IT areas FloodingER msm 1001
The objective was to define a thresholdvalue which minimizes both errors in thedelineation of the flood inundation areas.Underestimation
.1002from PAI areas Flooding Non
IT ITareas with Flooding Non ER msm
Overestimation
(n=0,2; ITms=3.9)
The error ER1 defines the percentage of error in relation to the correct identification of flooding areas while ER2 represents the error due to the overestimation of the method. It should be remarked that a reduction in the value ITms generally produces an overestimation of the flood inundation area and an increasing reduction in ER1.
13Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Testing the New Approach on the Arno River
A) the areas exposed to flood inundation;B) the map of areas with topographic index superior to the threshold value of 8.40;C) error distribution given by the difference between the map A and B;D) map of areas with modified topographic index superior to the threshold value of 3.90;E) error distribution given by the difference between the map A and D.
(Manfreda et al., 2008)
14Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Arno River sub-catchments
11 10
2 3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
Sub -catchments
15Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Results 1/2
16Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Results 2/2
17Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
18Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
DEM Resolution affects morphological indexes
(Wood, 1996)
19Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Scale Dependence of theModified Topographic Index
The spatial distribution of the topographicindex is inevitably linked to the cell-size ofthe adopted DEM (Zhang and Montgomery,1994). This dependence is investigatedcomparing the errors ER1 and ER2 obtainedusing the topographic index by Kirkby andits modified version (ITm) computed fromDEMs with different cell-size.The scale dependence analyses were carriedstarting from a digital elevation model withcell-size of 20m. From this model, DEMswith different resolution were obtainedthrough aggregations of the first andintermediate hydrological elaborations forthe construction of the topographic indexand modified topographic index
20Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Scale Dependence and Associated Errors
21Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Patameter n vs spatial scale
n
22Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Patameter t vs n
23Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
VALIDATION
24Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
CONCLUSIONSThe methodology proposed for the delineation of areas exposed to
flooding offers an estimation of the flooded areas with a very low underestimation and a more relevant overestimation. This may be due to terrain characteristics and to protective measures which cover conspicuous portions of the territory otherwise subject to flooding.
The geomorphological method described here is a valid preliminary tool in contexts where there is a lack of data for detailed hydrologic and hydraulic simulations.
The methodology may benefit from the use of a higher resolution DEM.The errors associated with different scales are deeply influenced by the
grid cell resolution and tend to decrease when using a more detailed description of the topography.
The threshold values of ITms were found to vary with the reference scale.
25Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,6-10 June 2010
Thanks for your attention…
Publication related to this research lineManfreda, S., M. Di Leo, A. Sole, Detection of Flood Prone Areas using Digital
Elevation Models Journal of Hydrological Engineeering, Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 10, September/October 2011, pp. 781-790 (10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000367), 2011.
Fiorentino, M., S. Manfreda, V. Iacobellis, Peak Runoff Contributing Area as Hydrological Signature of the Probability Distribution of Floods, Advances in Water Resources, 30(10), 2123-2144, 2007.
Manfreda, S., A. Sole, e M. Fiorentino, Valutazione del pericolo di allagamentosul territorio nazionale mediante un approccio di tipo geomorfologico, L'Acqua, n. 4, 43-54, 2007 (In Italian).
Manfreda, S., A. Sole, M. Fiorentino, Can the basin morphology alone provide an insight on floodplain delineation?, on Flood Recovery Innovation and Response, WITpress, 47-56, 2008.
Top Related