Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages

Flooding is amongst the most common natural disasters on the world. 1D modelling tools for hydraulic design make simplifying assumptions that may result in overly cautious, insufficient, or incorrect findings and conclusions. In the other hand, tools for 2D hydraulic modelling are widely accessible...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pricynthia Biusti
Format: Academic Exercise
Language:English
English
Published: 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/1/24%20PAGES.pdf
https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/2/FULLTEXT.pdf
https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.ums.eprints.35186
record_format eprints
spelling my.ums.eprints.351862023-03-09T07:04:51Z https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/ Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages Pricynthia Biusti TC401-506 River, lake, and water-supply engineering (General) Flooding is amongst the most common natural disasters on the world. 1D modelling tools for hydraulic design make simplifying assumptions that may result in overly cautious, insufficient, or incorrect findings and conclusions. In the other hand, tools for 2D hydraulic modelling are widely accessible and continue to develop as technology develops. The Joint Defra (Department for Environmental, Food, and Rural Affairs) Environment Agency of the United Kingdom (UK) created a series of benchmark tests for 2D modelling as a result. The dataset for the test has been used in this project to compare the performances of HEC-RAS and RiverFlow2D. Total of three tests conducted in this project using HEC-RAS while the result for RiverFlow2D is obtained from previous researchers. Diffusion Wave Equation (DWE) and Shallow Water Equation (SWE) have been used in HEC-RAS to run the test. Based on the three tests, both software showed well performances in running the test include when using complicated terrain profile as the Data Elevation Model (DEM). However, when comparing the result obtained from both software, RiverFlow2D performed well than HEC-RAS. The succession of HEC-RAS and RiverFlow2D to run the test showed that both software can do the prediction and simulation of flooding. 2022 Academic Exercise NonPeerReviewed text en https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/1/24%20PAGES.pdf text en https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/2/FULLTEXT.pdf Pricynthia Biusti (2022) Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages. Universiti Malaysia Sabah. (Unpublished)
institution Universiti Malaysia Sabah
building UMS Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaysia Sabah
content_source UMS Institutional Repository
url_provider http://eprints.ums.edu.my/
language English
English
topic TC401-506 River, lake, and water-supply engineering (General)
spellingShingle TC401-506 River, lake, and water-supply engineering (General)
Pricynthia Biusti
Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
description Flooding is amongst the most common natural disasters on the world. 1D modelling tools for hydraulic design make simplifying assumptions that may result in overly cautious, insufficient, or incorrect findings and conclusions. In the other hand, tools for 2D hydraulic modelling are widely accessible and continue to develop as technology develops. The Joint Defra (Department for Environmental, Food, and Rural Affairs) Environment Agency of the United Kingdom (UK) created a series of benchmark tests for 2D modelling as a result. The dataset for the test has been used in this project to compare the performances of HEC-RAS and RiverFlow2D. Total of three tests conducted in this project using HEC-RAS while the result for RiverFlow2D is obtained from previous researchers. Diffusion Wave Equation (DWE) and Shallow Water Equation (SWE) have been used in HEC-RAS to run the test. Based on the three tests, both software showed well performances in running the test include when using complicated terrain profile as the Data Elevation Model (DEM). However, when comparing the result obtained from both software, RiverFlow2D performed well than HEC-RAS. The succession of HEC-RAS and RiverFlow2D to run the test showed that both software can do the prediction and simulation of flooding.
format Academic Exercise
author Pricynthia Biusti
author_facet Pricynthia Biusti
author_sort Pricynthia Biusti
title Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
title_short Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
title_full Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
title_fullStr Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
title_sort comparative study between two industry-standard flood modelling software packages
publishDate 2022
url https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/1/24%20PAGES.pdf
https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/2/FULLTEXT.pdf
https://eprints.ums.edu.my/id/eprint/35186/
_version_ 1760231394727952384
score 13.160551