1D, 2D Integrated Flood Risk Mapping (Incheon-gyo Catchment) 2007. 8. 24 Team RED Seongjoon BYEON Myeongsoo HAM Michele ROMANO K. Shobha YADAV Masahiko.

1D, 2D Integrated Flood Risk Mapping (Incheon-gyo Catchment)

2007. 8. 24Team RED

Seongjoon BYEON Myeongsoo HAMMichele ROMANO K. Shobha YADAV

Masahiko TERAZONOADVISER : Gyewoon CHOI

HYDROASIA TEAM-RED

Michele, Joon, Shobha, Ham, Masahiko

Face-to-Face Week

•The first face-to-face meeting of the participants started on 20th August-2007

•Our team had preliminary presentation for the work progress on 20 August

•Started to work on our further plan for this week and comments from preliminary presentation

Making good experiences!!!!

CONTENTS

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

RAINFALL ANALYSIS

URBAN DRAINAGE & MIKEFLOOD MODEL SETUP USING DIFFERENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT

ANALYZING RESULTS

RISK ANALYSIS

CONCLUSION

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

Main purpose

– Runoff analysis based on rainfall data and DEM

– Simulation of Incheon Gyo watershed for the flood Aug 1997

– Investigating the way to apply runoff coefficient

– Comparison with results simulated with different parameters and model

– Mapping Flood Risk 1D-2D

– Comparison with Real Flood

– Risk analysis

FLOW CHART OF OVERALL FRAMEWORK

MIKE FLOOD

Set up

Coupling

Preprocessing for MOUSE

Run Model

Check the result and evaluation

Set up

Validation

MIKE21 Model

MOUSE Model

Set up

ValidationPreparation

GIS

Rainfall Analysis

Evaluation of the Flood risk

INCHEON INTENSITY FORMULA VS GUMBELL

)]([

)(uh

eehP

nath

Gumbell Formula

Monomial Precipitation Formula

Incheon University Intensity Formula

GUMBELL

)]([

)(uh

eehP

1

5772.0

u

rThP

11)(

uhP

h

)(

1lnln

1

tntath

tnamh

logloglogloglog

logloglog

11

2logloglog11

loglogloglog11loglog

10

ttt

ththth

a

2)log(loglog11

loglogloglog11

ttt

ththn

year 10min 20min 30min 40min 50min 1hr 2hr 3hr 6hr 12hr 24hr1961 20.4 39.6 46.6 50.9 51.6 53.4 79.3 93.8 122.1 143.4 153.31962 14 23.3 34.9 39.8 42.3 44.7 52.8 55.5 62.1 70.5 901963 18.4 29 36.5 42.5 51.8 56.5 80.8 99.4 108 144.1 152.71964 14 23.8 30.2 31.2 31.8 37.5 51 60.6 82.4 86.8 89.6

2003 17 28 37.5 41.5 51.5 59.5 76 91 102.5 168.5 1932004 9.5 13.5 19 23 28 32 52.5 63 69 79.5 95

Maximum of observed raifall data based upon the duration (1961~2004)

nath

Intensity

COMPARISON INTENSITY

3 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

2 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

20

40

60

80

100

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

5 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

10 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

20 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

020

4060

80100

120140

160

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

30 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

2040

6080

100

120140

160

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

50 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

2040

60

80

100120

140

160

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itati

on

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

70 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

0

2040

60

80

100120

140

160

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

COMPARISON INTENSITY

80 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

020406080

100120140160180

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

100 years - Intensity [mm/hour]

020406080

100120140160180

0.166 0.333 0.500 0.666 0.833 1.000 2.000 3.000 6.000 12.000 24.000

Duration [hours]

Pre

cip

itat

ion

[m

m]

Gumbell Incheon University formula

COMPARISON INTENSITY

1D FLOOD MAP

INTRODUCTION-MIKE FLOOD

Rainfall Runoff

Surface Runoff Overflo

w

Figure 1 Application of Standard Links

Re-inflow after floodFlow-capacity excess

Sewage/Rainfall water

Sewage/Rainfall water

INTRODUCTION-MIKE FLOOD

Catchment boundary

Gajwa-WWTP

Cityhall

Ganseok st.Juan st.

Incheon gyo

Pump Station

Flooded area

REPORTED FLOODING AREAS

Real Event 2D- 100% Runoff - Time step 1 Real Event 2D- 75.8% Runoff - Time step 1

(Tr=20 years-Duration=50min) 100% Runoff Time step 1Real Event 1D - Runoff=f(manhole area) Time step 1

RESULTS OF MIKE FLOOD(1)

Real Event 2D - 100% Runoff - Time step 2 Real Event 2D - 75.8% Runoff - Time step 2

(Tr=20 years-Duration=50min) 100% Runoff Time step 2Real Event - 1D Runoff=f(manhole area) Time step 2

RESULTS OF MIKE FLOOD(2)

RISK ANALYSIS

)( iii LpLR

)( iiTOT LpLR

Risk=(Probability of an accident)*(Losses per accident)

Probability of an accident

Factors Considered

Losses per accident

Factors Considered

A1) Slope B1) Building

A2) Impervious areas B2) Density of Population

A3) Land use B3) Population Increase Forecast

A4) Velocity of the flow in the

Flooded Area

SLOPE MAP

IMPERVIOUS AREAS MAP & LAND USE TABLE

Location Residence Market Industrial Green Total

Incheon gyo CoveredOpenchannel

Left 743.3 145.9 226.3 77.1 1,183.6

Right 364.8 47.8 353.3 231.3 997.2

Seoknam Canal 204.4 38.4 357.9 310.2 910.9

Total 1303.5 232.1 937.5 618.6 3,091.7

VELOCITY MAP

BUILDING MAP

POPULATION INCREASE 2016

1

1

0

It

P

Pr

IItrPP )1(2016 Formula interesse composto

Population Increase

020000400006000080000

100000120000140000160000

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

p200

7

p200

8

p200

9

p201

0

p201

1

p201

2

p201

3

p201

4

p201

5

p201

6

Year

Inh

abita

nts

Jung-gu

Dong-gu

Nam-gu

Namdong-gu

Seo-gu

Bupyeong-gu

Where

DENSITY OF POPULATION MAP

Zone Population 2006 Population 2016 중구 - J ung- gu 15910.768 15517.58597 동구 - Dong- gu 33835.93476 24987.77516 남구 - Nam- gu 74118.23852 72100.65662 남동구 - Namdong- gu 4984.641035 5087.590032 서구 - Seo- gu 17926.67214 22102.96073 부평구 - Bupyeong- gu 129742.9176 146479.1425

DECISION MAKING

Zone Population 2006 Population 2016 중구 - J ung- gu 15910.768 15517.58597 동구 - Dong- gu 33835.93476 24987.77516 남구 - Nam- gu 74118.23852 72100.65662 남동구 - Namdong- gu 4984.641035 5087.590032 서구 - Seo- gu 17926.67214 22102.96073 부평구 - Bupyeong- gu 129742.9176 146479.1425

BUILDING MAP

CONCLUSIONS

Experience in Incheon was …an experience:)

The advantage mapping with 2D surface runoff modeling could be found as following with nicely matching of the reported area

– The terrain characteristic can be considered

– The lag due to the puddle, discontinuity can be considered

– The magnification of result can be prevented with distribution of flooded water to another manhole

A simple Risk analysis can be arranged

Lets take pride in being

TEAM RED !!!