Journal cover Journal topic
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 4.256 IF 4.256
  • IF 5-year value: 4.819 IF 5-year
  • CiteScore value: 4.10 CiteScore
  • SNIP value: 1.412 SNIP 1.412
  • SJR value: 2.023 SJR 2.023
  • IPP value: 3.97 IPP 3.97
  • h5-index value: 58 h5-index 58
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 99 Scimago H
    index 99
Discussion papers
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Research article 16 Apr 2019

Research article | 16 Apr 2019

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).

Uncertainty analysis of floodplain friction in hydrodynamic models

Guilherme Dalledonne, Rebekka Kopmann, and Thomas Brudy-Zippelius Guilherme Dalledonne et al.
  • Department of Hydraulic Engineering in Inland Areas, Federal Waterways Engineering and Research Institute, BAW, Karlsruhe, Germany

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.

Guilherme Dalledonne et al.
Interactive discussion
Status: open (until 11 Jun 2019)
Status: open (until 11 Jun 2019)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Guilherme Dalledonne et al.
Guilherme Dalledonne et al.
Total article views: 272 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
210 59 3 272 1 4
  • HTML: 210
  • PDF: 59
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 272
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 4
Views and downloads (calculated since 16 Apr 2019)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 16 Apr 2019)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 127 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 121 with geography defined and 6 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
No saved metrics found.
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 22 May 2019
Publications Copernicus
Short summary
This study presents how the concept of uncertainty analysis can be applied to river engineering problems and how important it is to understand the limitations of numerical models from a probabilistic point of view. We investigated floodplain friction formulations from the point of view of uncertainty analysis in order to include those limitations in the final results. This kind of analysis is planned to be integrated in future projects and also extended to morphodynamic studies.
This study presents how the concept of uncertainty analysis can be applied to river engineering...