Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling

For detailed hydrodynamic modelling of vegetated floodplains, the ability to quantify vegetation is advantageous as vegetation significantly influences the flow mechanism. Although it is widely known that roughness changes with depths, many two-dimensional (2D) models assign constant or generic roug...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohd Zahidi, Izni, Yusuf, Badronnisa, Cope, Mike, Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed, Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis 2018
Online Access:http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/1/Effects%20of%20depth-varying%20vegetation%20roughness%20in%20two-dimensional%20hydrodynamic%20modelling.pdf
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15715124.2017.1394313
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.upm.eprints.72485
record_format eprints
spelling my.upm.eprints.724852020-06-18T14:07:07Z http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/ Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling Mohd Zahidi, Izni Yusuf, Badronnisa Cope, Mike Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi For detailed hydrodynamic modelling of vegetated floodplains, the ability to quantify vegetation is advantageous as vegetation significantly influences the flow mechanism. Although it is widely known that roughness changes with depths, many two-dimensional (2D) models assign constant or generic roughness and the values are typically adjusted for calibration. This practice is likely to lead to the misinterpretation of the flow mechanism. This paper assesses the effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in 2D hydrodynamic modelling based on vegetation density derived from a remotely sensed regression analysis. The simulated flood extents, depths and velocities of a historical flood event were compared between the constant and depth-varying vegetation roughness coefficients and verified against historical data and literature. A minimum value of 0.03 was found for vegetation with the lowest density of 0.01 m−1 at 0.2 m depth and a maximum value of 0.20 for vegetation with the highest density of 0.20 m−1 at 2 m flow depth, resulting in the maximum differences in flood depths and velocities of 0.40 m and 0.25 m/s, respectively. This study presented a bridge between the theoretical and practical applications which can potentially be used for evaluating vegetation restoration and removal. Taylor & Francis 2018 Article PeerReviewed text en http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/1/Effects%20of%20depth-varying%20vegetation%20roughness%20in%20two-dimensional%20hydrodynamic%20modelling.pdf Mohd Zahidi, Izni and Yusuf, Badronnisa and Cope, Mike and Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed and Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi (2018) Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling. International Journal of River Basin Management, 16 (4). 413 - 426. ISSN 1571-5124; ESSN: 1814-2060 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15715124.2017.1394313 10.1080/15715124.2017.1394313
institution Universiti Putra Malaysia
building UPM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Putra Malaysia
content_source UPM Institutional Repository
url_provider http://psasir.upm.edu.my/
language English
description For detailed hydrodynamic modelling of vegetated floodplains, the ability to quantify vegetation is advantageous as vegetation significantly influences the flow mechanism. Although it is widely known that roughness changes with depths, many two-dimensional (2D) models assign constant or generic roughness and the values are typically adjusted for calibration. This practice is likely to lead to the misinterpretation of the flow mechanism. This paper assesses the effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in 2D hydrodynamic modelling based on vegetation density derived from a remotely sensed regression analysis. The simulated flood extents, depths and velocities of a historical flood event were compared between the constant and depth-varying vegetation roughness coefficients and verified against historical data and literature. A minimum value of 0.03 was found for vegetation with the lowest density of 0.01 m−1 at 0.2 m depth and a maximum value of 0.20 for vegetation with the highest density of 0.20 m−1 at 2 m flow depth, resulting in the maximum differences in flood depths and velocities of 0.40 m and 0.25 m/s, respectively. This study presented a bridge between the theoretical and practical applications which can potentially be used for evaluating vegetation restoration and removal.
format Article
author Mohd Zahidi, Izni
Yusuf, Badronnisa
Cope, Mike
Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed
Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi
spellingShingle Mohd Zahidi, Izni
Yusuf, Badronnisa
Cope, Mike
Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed
Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi
Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
author_facet Mohd Zahidi, Izni
Yusuf, Badronnisa
Cope, Mike
Mohammed Ali, Thamer Ahmed
Mohd Shafri, Elmi Zulhaidi
author_sort Mohd Zahidi, Izni
title Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
title_short Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
title_full Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
title_fullStr Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
title_full_unstemmed Effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
title_sort effects of depth-varying vegetation roughness in two-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling
publisher Taylor & Francis
publishDate 2018
url http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/1/Effects%20of%20depth-varying%20vegetation%20roughness%20in%20two-dimensional%20hydrodynamic%20modelling.pdf
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/72485/
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15715124.2017.1394313
_version_ 1671341091626942464
score 13.18916