Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Flood mapping using LIDAR DEM. Limitations of the 1-D modeling highlighted by the 2-D approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, the use of 2-D fully dynamic models represents the most reliable approach for flood inundation and flood hazard studies, especially in complex applications. However, 1-D modeling is still a widely used approach due to the reduced computational time and cost. The introduction of LIDAR technique has stimulated a more detailed topographic description of river reaches. As a result, this huge amount of topographic data can lead to significant improvements in the 1-D computations. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to realize how the improvements in the topographic description can reduce the difference between 1-D and 2-D models, highlighting at the same time the critical aspects and the limitations of 1-D approach in the hydraulic simulation as well as in the spatial representation of the results. The analysis presented in the paper refers to two actual case studies for which terrestrial and airborne LIDAR DEMs were collected on purpose. The results of those applications show that the use of 1-D models requires a greater hydraulic skilfulness than the use of 2-D model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alho P, Aaltonen J (2008) Comparing a 1D hydraulic model with a 2D hydraulic model for the simulation of extreme glacial outburst floods. Hydrol Proces 22:1537–1547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson BG, Rutherfurd ID, Western AW (2006) An analysis of the influence of riparian vegetation on the propagation of flood waves. Environ Modell Softw 21:1290–1296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arcement GJ Jr, Schneider VR (1989) Guide for selecting Manning’s roughness coefficients for natural channels and flood plains. US geological survey water-supply paper, Vol 2339

  • Ballestreros JA, Bodoque JM, Díez-Herrero A, Sanchez-Silva M, Stoffel M (2011) Calibration of floodplain roughness and estimation of flood discharge based on tree—ring evidence and hydraulic modeling. J Hydrol 403:103–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bladé E, Gómez-Valentín M, Dolz J (1994) Quasi two dimensional modelling of flood routing in rivers and flood plains by means of storage cells. In: Molinaro P, Natale L (eds) Modelling of flood propagation over initially dry areas, proceedings of the specialty conference co sponsored by ASCE CNR/GNDCI-ENEL SPA. ASCE, NewYork, pp 156–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Bladé E, Gómez-Valentín M, Dolz J, Aragón-Hernández JL, Corestein G, Sánchez-Juny M (2012) Integration of 1D and 2D finite volume schemes for computations of water flow in natural channels. Adv Water Resour 42:17–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohorquez P, Darby SE (2008) The use of one- and two-dimensional hydraulic modelling to reconstruct a glacial outburst floods in a steep Alpine valley. J Hydrol 361:240–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao Z, Meng J, Pender G, Wallis S (2006) Flow resistance and momentum flux in compound open channel. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 132:1272–1282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carling P, Villanueva I, Herget J, Wright N, Borodavko P, Morvan H (2010) Unsteady 1D and 2D hydraulic models with ice dam break for quaternary megaflood, Altai mountains, southern Siberia. Global Planet Change 70:24–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellarin A, Di Baldassarre G, Bates PD, Brath A (2009) Optimal cross sectional spacing in Preissmann scheme 1D hydrodynamic models. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 135:96–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellarin A, Domeneghetti A, Brath A (2011) Identifying robust large scale flood risk mitigation strategies: a quasi 2D hydraulic model as a tool for the Po River. Phys Chem Earth 36:299–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro MJ, Ortega S, De la Asuncion M, Mantas JM, Gallardo JM (2011) GPU computing for shallow water flow simulation based on finite volume schemes. CR Mec 339:165–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caviedes-Voullième D, García-Navarro P, Murillo J (2012) Influence of mesh structure on 2D full shallow water equations and SCS curve number simulation of rainfall/runoff events. J Hydrol 448–449:38–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee C, Forster S, Bronstert A (2008) Comparison of hydrodynamic models of different complexities to model floods with emergency storage areas. Hydrol Process 22:4695–4709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow VT (1959) Open channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook A, Merwade V (2009) Effect of topographic data, geometric configuration and modelling approach on flood inundation mapping. J Hydrol 377:131–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costabile P, Macchione F (2012) Analysis of one-dimensional modeling for flood routing in compound channels. Water Resour Manag 26:1065–1087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costabile P, Macchione F (2015) Enhancing river model set-up for 2-D dynamic flood modelling. Environ Modell Software (Accepted for publication)

  • Costabile P, Costanzo C, Macchione F (2012) Comparative analysis of overland flow models using finite volume schemes. J Hydroinf 14:122–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costabile P, Costanzo C, Macchione F (2013a) A storm event watershed model for surface runoff based on 2D fully dynamic wave equations. Hydrol Process 27:554–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costabile P, Macchione F, Natale L, Petaccia G (2013a) Representing skewed bridge crossing on 1-D and 2-D flood propagation models: Compared analysis in practical studies. In: Proceedings Int. Conf. on fluvial hydraulics river flow 2014, Lausanne, 733–741

  • Costabile P, Macchione F, Natale L, Petaccia G (2013b) Study of backwater effects induced by bridge piers using 1D and 2D unsteady flow models for flood hazard assessment. Accepted for publication in CMES, Computer Modelling in Engineering and Science

  • Costanzo C, Macchione F (2006) Two-dimensional numerical simulation of flood propagation in presence of buildings. In Leal J, Cardoso A(eds) Proceedings Int. Conf. on fluvial hydraulics river flow 2006, Lisboa, Portugal, 6–8 September, vol. 1, Taylor & Francis/Balkema Group: London; 291–301

  • Cunge JA, Holly FM, Vervey A (1980) Practical aspects of computational river hydraulics. Pitman Publ. Inc, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Baldassarre G, Castellarin A, Montanari A, Brath A (2009) Probability weighted hazard maps for comparing different flood risk management strategies: a case study. Nat Hazards 50:479–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Baldassarre G, Schumann G, Bates PD, Freer JE, Beven KJ (2010) Flood-plain mapping: a critical discussion of deterministic and probabilistic approaches. Hydrol Sci J 55:364–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dottori F, Di Baldassarre G, Todini E (2013) Detailed data is welcome, but with a pinch of salt: accuracy, precision, and uncertainty in flood inundation modeling. Water Resour Res 49:6079–6085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Kadi Abderrezzak K, Paquier A, Mignot E (2009) Modelling flash flood propagation in urban areas using a two-dimensional numerical model. Nat Hazards 50:433–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst J, Dewals BJ, Detrembleur S, Archambeau P, Erpicum S, Pirotton M (2010) Micro-scale flood risk analysis based on detailed 2D hydraulic modeling and high resolution geographic data. Nat Hazards 55:181–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escuder-Bueno I, Castillo-Rodriguez JT, Zechner S, Jöbstl C, Perales-Momparler S, Petaccia G (2012) A quantitative flood risk analysis methodology for urban areas with integration of social research data. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12(9):2843–2863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forzieri G, Degetto M, Righetti M, Castelli F, Preti F (2011) Satellite multispectral data for improved floodplain roughness modelling. J Hydrol 407:41–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez M, Macchione F, Russo B (2011) Methodologies to study the surface hydraulic behaviour of urban catchments during storm events. Water Sci Technol 63:2666–2673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmiö T (2002) Unsteady flow model of compound channel with vegetated floodplains. J Hydrol 269:89–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmiö T (2005) Unsteady 1D flow model of a river with partially vegetated floodplains- application to the Rhine river. Environ Modell Softw 20:361–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horritt MS, Bates PD (2002) Evaluation of 1D and 2D numerical models for predicting river flood inundation. J Hydrol 268:87–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huthoff F, Roos PC, Augustijn DCM, Hulscher S (2008) Interacting divided channel method for compound channel flow. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 134:1158–1165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiry SN, Sen D, Bates PD (2010) Coupled 1D- quasi 2D flood inundation model with unstructured grids. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 136:493–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb R, Crossley A, Waller S (2009) A fast two-dimensional flood inundation model. P I Civil Eng Wat M 162:363–370. doi:10.1680/wama.2009.162.6.363

    Google Scholar 

  • Latorre B, Burguete J, Murillo J, Brufau P, García-Navarro P, Petaccia G, Calvo B, Savi F (2010) Flood wave simulation with 1D-2D coupled models. In: Proceedings of the 10th international on computing and control for the water industry, CCWI 2009: 735–739

  • Liu W-C, Wu C-Y (2011) Flash flood routing modeling for levee-breaks and overbank flows due to typhoon events in a complicated river system. Nat Hazards 58:1057–1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macchione F, Morelli MA (2003) Practical aspects in comparing shock-capturing schemes for dam-break problems. J Hydraul Eng- ASCE 129:187–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macchione F, Rino A (2008) Model for predicting floods due to earthen dam breaching. II: comparison with other methods and predictive use. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 134:697–1707

  • Macchione F, Viggiani G (2004) Simple modelling of dam failure in a natural river. P I Civil Eng Wat M 157:53–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahmood K, Yevjevich V (1975) Unsteady flow in open channels. Water Resources Publication, Fort Collins CO

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandlburger G, Hauer C, Höfle B, Habersack H, Pfeifer N (2009) Optimisation of LiDAR derived terrain models for river flow modelling. Hydrol Earth Syst Sc 13:1453–1466. doi:10.5194/hess-13-1453-2009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mignot E, Paquier A, Haider S (2006) Modeling floods in a dense urban area using 2D shallow water equations. J Hydrol 327:186–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morales-Hernández M, Petaccia G, Brufau P, García-Navarro P (2013) Conservative 1D-2D coupled numerical applied to urban flooding: the Tiber river (Rome). Submitted to Applied mathematical Modelling

  • Morvan H, Knight D, Wright N, Tang X, Crossley A (2008) The concept of roughness in fluvial hydraulics and its formulation in 1D, 2D and 3D simulation models. J Hydraul Res 46:191–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natale L, Savi F (2007) Monte Carlo analysis of probability of inundation of Rome. Environ Model Softw 22(10):1409–1416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal JC, Fewtrell TJ, Bates PD, Wright NG (2010) A comparison of three parallelisation methods for 2D flood inundation models. Environ Modell Softw 25:394–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neal J, Villanueva I, Wright N, Willis T, Fewtrell T, Bates P (2012) How much physical complexity is needed to model flood inundation? Hydrol Process 26:2264–2282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petaccia G, Natale E (2013) ORSADEM: a one dimension shallow water code for flood inundation modeling. J Irrig Drain ASCE 62:29–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petaccia G, Savi F (2002) Numerical modelling of shock waves: simulation of a large number of laboratory experiments. In: Proceedings of the international conference in fluvial hydraulics, river flow 2002 Vol 1: 449–458

  • Petaccia G, Soares-Frazão S, Savi F, Natale L, Zech Y (2010) Simplified versus detailed two-dimensional approaches to transient flow modeling in urban areas. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 136(4):262–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petaccia G, Natale L, Savi F, Velickovic M, Zech Y, Soares-Frazão S (2013) Flood wave propagation in steep mountain rivers. J Hydroinf 15:120–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pramanik N, Panda RK, Sen D (2010) One dimensional hydrodynamic modeling of river flow using DEM extracted river cross sections. W Resour Manag 24:835–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proust S, Bousmar D, Riviere N, Paquier Y (2009) Nonuniform flow in compound channel: a 1-D method for assessing water level and discharge distribution. Water Resour Res 45:W12411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roe PL (1981) Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes. J Comput Phys 43:357–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders BF, Schubert JE, Detwiler RL (2010) ParBreZo: a parallel, unstructured grid, Godunov-type, shallow water code for high resolution flood inundation modeling at the regional scale. Adv Water Resour 33:1456–1467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert JE, Sanders BF (2012) Building treatments for urban flood inundation models and implications for predictive skill and modeling efficiency. Adv Water Resour 41:49–64. doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.02.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shatnawu FM, Goodall JL (2010) Comparison of flood top width predictions using surveyed and lidar derived channel geometries. J Hydrol Eng 15:97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straatsma MW, Baptist XX (2008) Floodplain roughness parameterization using airborne laser scanning and spectral remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 112:1062–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tayefi V, Lane SN, Hardy RJ, Yu D (2007) A comparison of one- and two-dimensional approaches to modelling flood inundation over complex upland floodplains. Hydrol Proces 21:3190–3202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toro EF (2001) Shock-capturing methods for free surface shallow flows. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • USBR (1988) Downstream hazard classification guidelines. ACER technical memorandum No. 11, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado

  • Villanueva I, Wright NG (2006) Linking Riemann and storage cell models for flood prediction. P I Civil Eng Wat M 159:27–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner MGF, Lambert MF (2007) Comparison of modeling approaches used in practical flood extent modelling. J Hydraul Res 45:202–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner MGF, Hunter MN, Bates PD (2005) Identifiability of distributed floodplain roughness values in flood extent estimation. J Hydrol 314:139–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright NG, Villanueva I, Bates PD, Mason DC, Wilson MD, Pender G, Neelz S (2008) Case study of the use of remotely sensed data for modeling flood inundation on the river Severn, UK. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 134:533–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamazaki D, Baugh CA, Bates PD, Kanae S, Alsdorf DE, Oki T (2012) Adjustment of spaceborne DEM for use in floodplain hydrodynamic modeling. J Hydrol 436–437:81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin J, Yu D, Yin Z, Wang J, Xu S (2013) Multiple scenario analyses of Huangpu River flooding using a 1D/2D coupled flood inundation model. Nat Hazards 66:577–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu D, Lane SN (2006) Urban fluvial flood modelling using a two-dimensional diffusion-wave treatment, part 2: development of a sub-grid-scale treatment. Hydrol Proces 20:1567–1583

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank the three anonymous Reviewers and the Associate Editor for their constructive comments that greatly contributed to improve the paper. This work was supported in part by the European Union and the Region of Calabria in the funding project POR Calabria 2000–2006 Asse 1, Misura 1.4, Azione 1.4.c, “Studio e sperimentazione di metodologie e tecniche per la mitigazione del rischio idrogeologico” Lotto 8 “Metodologie di individuazione delle aree soggette a rischio idraulico di esondazione.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio di Modellistica Numerica per la Protezione Idraulica del Territorio (LAMPIT), Department of Environmental and Chemical Engineering, University of Calabria, Via P. Bucci, Cubo 42/B, 87036, Rende, Italy

    Pierfranco Costabile & Francesco Macchione

  2. DICAR, Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Pavia, Via Ferrata 3, 27100, Pavia, Italy

    Luigi Natale & Gabriella Petaccia

Authors
  1. Pierfranco Costabile
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesco Macchione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luigi Natale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gabriella Petaccia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pierfranco Costabile.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costabile, P., Macchione, F., Natale, L. et al. Flood mapping using LIDAR DEM. Limitations of the 1-D modeling highlighted by the 2-D approach. Nat Hazards 77, 181–204 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1606-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1606-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation