Abstract. This study proposes a framework to estimate the uncertainty of hydrodynamic models on floodplains. The traditional floodplain resistance formula of Pasche (1984) (based on Lindner, 1982) used for river… Click to show full abstract
Abstract. This study proposes a framework to estimate the uncertainty of hydrodynamic models on floodplains. The traditional floodplain resistance formula of Pasche (1984) (based on Lindner, 1982) used for river modelling as well as the approaches of Baptist et al. (2007), Järvelä (2004), and Battiato and Rubol (2014) have been considered for carrying out an uncertainty analysis (UA). The analysis was performed by means of three different methods: traditional Monte Carlo (MC), First-Order Second-Moment (FOSM) and Metamodelling. Using a two-dimensional hydrodynamic model, a 10 km reach of the River Rhine was simulated. The model was calibrated with water level measurements under steady flow conditions and then the analysis was carried out based on flow velocity results. The compared floodplain friction formulae produced qualitatively similar results, in which uncertainties in flow velocity were most significant on the floodplains. Among the tested resistance formulae the approach from Järvelä presented on average the smallest prediction intervals i.e. the most accurate results. It is important to keep in mind that UA results are not only dependent on the defined input parameters deviations, but also on the number of parameters considered in the analysis. In that sense, the approach from Battiato and Rubol is still attractive for it reduces the current analysis to a single parameter, the canopy permeability. The three UA methods compared gave similar results, which means that FOSM is the less expensive one. Nevertheless it should be used with caution as it is a first-order method (linear approximation). In studies involving dominant non-linear processes, one is advised to carry out further comparisons.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.