A Qualitative Approach to Understanding the Role of DEM Error and Climate Change Impact on Long-Term Floodplain Inundation Mapping
- 1 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- 2 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- 3 Department of Civil Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engineering & Technology, Rajshahi, Bangladesh
Abstract
Watershed management throughout the world has undergone revolutionary changes due to topographic data and the impact of climate change. Research in floodplain inundation mapping reflects these changes. As part of the current research, two aspects are examined: the impact of climate change and the influence of Digital Elevation Model (DEM) error on the Nith River floodplain inundation mapping. The study uses terrain data generated from SWOOP elevation points as well as climate change emissions scenarios regionally assessed by CRCM and MNR (SRES A2 and SR B1). Using Log Pearson Type III, a widely used frequency analysis, floods with a 100-year return period for different climate scenarios and historical storm events were calculated, and a steady-state 1D hydrodynamic HEC-RAS model was applied to simulate extreme event floods. The impacts of DEM errors and climate change on flood simulations were quantified by analyzing the results of the model. A sensitivity analysis of the hydraulic models was performed considering surface roughness and boundary conditions as potential uncertainties. As a result of the impact of climate change, the model indicated a significant increase in flood risk. It is not evident that DEM errors affect model performance, but they should be minimized to produce accurate flood maps. The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that surface roughness influences flood simulations. Geo-processing procedures, HEC-RAS and GeoRAS in ArcGIS, have been used to extract the 100-year flood inundation maps for the current and future conditions and compare them with those for the existing conditions. The 19.8% increase in inundation corresponds specifically to the SRES A2 scenario, representing a high-emission future. The SR B1 scenario (low-emission) was analyzed for comparison, but did not produce the maximum inundation values.
- IPCC (2012) Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 582 p.
- Ackerman, C. (2009) HEC-GeoRAS-GIS Tools for Support of HEC-RAS Using ArcGIS, User’s Manual. US Army Corps of Engineers-Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC), 4.2 (September).
- Veijalainen, N., Lotsari, E., Alho, P., Vehviläinen, B. and Käyhkö, J. (2010) National Scale Assessment of Climate Change Impacts on Flooding in Finland. Journal of Hydrology , 391, 333-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.07.035
- Saksena, S. and Merwade, V. (2015) Incorporating the Effect of DEM Resolution and Accuracy for Improved Flood Inundation Mapping. Journal of Hydrology , 530, 180-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.069
- Jung, Y. and Merwade, V. (2012) Uncertainty Quantification in Flood Inundation Mapping Using Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimate and Sensitivity Analysis. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering , 17, 507-520. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)he.1943-5584.0000476
- Demir, V. and Kisi, O. (2016) Flood Hazard Mapping by Using Geographic Information System and Hydraulic Model: Mert River, Samsun, Turkey. Advances in Meteorology , 2016, Article ID: 4891015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4891015
- Griffis, V.W. and Stedinger, J.R. (2007) Log-Pearson Type 3 Distribution and Its Application in Flood Frequency Analysis. I: Distribution Characteristics. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering , 12, 482-491. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2007)12:5(482)
- Pappenberger, F., Beven, K., Horritt, M. and Blazkova, S. (2005) Uncertainty in the Calibration of Effective Roughness Parameters in HEC-RAS Using Inundation and Downstream Level Observations. Journal of Hydrology , 302, 46-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.06.036