Water Resources Management

, Volume 29, Issue 12, pp 4241–4267 | Cite as

Reverse Flood Routing in Natural Channels using Genetic Algorithm

Article

Abstract

Establishing a clear overview of data discharge availability for water balance modelling in basins is a priority in Europe, and in the particular in the framework of the system of Economic and Environmental Accounts for Water (SEEAW) developed by the EU Directorate-General for the Environment. However, accurate discharge estimation at a river site depends on rating curve reliability usually defined by recording the water level at a gauged section and carrying out streamflow measurements. Local stage monitoring is fairly straightforward and relatively inexpensive compared to the cost to carry out flow velocity measurements which are, in addition, hindered by high flow. Moreover, hydraulic models may not be ideally suitable to serve the purpose of rating curve extension or its development at a river site upstream/downstream where the discharge is known due to their prohibitive requirement of channel cross-section details and roughness information at closer intervals. Likewise, rainfall-runoff transformation might be applied but its accuracy is tightly linked to detailed information in terms of geomorphological characteristics of intermediate basins as well as rainfall pattern data. On this basis, a procedure for reverse flood routing in natural channels is here proposed for three different configurations of hydrometric monitoring of a river reach where lateral flow is significant and no rainfall data are available for the intermediate basin. The first considers only the downstream channel end as a gauged site where discharge and stages are recorded. The second configuration assumes the downstream end as a gauged site but only in terms of stage. The third configuration envisages both channel ends equipped to recording stages. The channel geometry is known only at channel ends. The developed model has basically four components: (1) the inflow hydrograph is expressed by a Pearson Type-III distribution, involving parameters of peak discharge, time to peak, and a shape factor; (2) the basic continuity equation for flow routing written in the characteristic form is employed; (3) the lateral flow is related to stages at channel ends. (4) the relation between local stage and remote discharge as found by Moramarco et al. (2005b) is exploited. The parameters, coefficients and exponents of the model are obtained, for each configuration, using the genetic algorithm method. Three equipped river branches along the Tiber River in central Italy are used to validate the procedure. Analyses are carried out for three significant flood events occurred along the river and where the lateral flow was significant. Results show the good performance of the procedure for all three monitoring configurations. Specifically, the discharge hydrographs assessed at channel ends are found satisfactory both in terms of shape with a Nash-Sutcliffe ranging overall in the interval (0.755–0.972) and in the reproduction of rating curves at channel ends. Finally, by a synthetic test the performance of the developed procedure is compared to that of the hydraulic model coupled with a hydrologic model. Two river reaches are considered, the first along the Tiber River and the second one located in the Rio Grande basin which is a tributary of the Tiber River. Detailed channel geometry data are available for both the river sections. Results showed the effectiveness of the reverse flood routing to reproducing fairly well the hydrographs simulated by the hydraulic model in the three monitoring investigated configurations.

Keywords

Reverse routing Flood wave Peak rate Time to peak Simulation Hydrograph generation Hydraulic modelling River reach Genetic algorithm 

References

  1. Artichowicz W, Szymkiewicz R (2009) “Inverse integration of open channel flow equation”. International Symposium on Water Management and Hydraulic Engineering, Ohrid, MacedoniaGoogle Scholar
  2. Aytek A, Kisi O (2008) A genetic programming approach to suspended sediment modelling”. J Hydrol 351(3–4):288–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbetta S, Franchini M, Melone F, Moramarco T (2012) Enhancement and comprehensive evaluation of the Rating Curve Model for different river sites”. J Hydrol 464–465:376–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brocca L, Melone F, Moramarco T (2011) Distributed rainfall-runoff modelling for flood frequency estimation and flood forecasting”. Hydrol Process 25(18):2801–2813. doi:10.1002/hyp.8042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruen M, Dooge JCI (2007) Harmonic analysis of the stability of reverse routing in channels”. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 11(1):559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng CT, Ou CP, Chau KW (2002) Combining a fuzzy optimal model with a genetic algorithm to solve multiobjective rainfall-runoff model calibration”. J Hydrol 268(1–4):72–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng CT, Wu XY, Chau KW (2005) Multiple criteria rainfall-runoff model calibration using a parallel genetic algorithm in a cluster of computer”. Hydrol Sci J 50(6):1069–1088Google Scholar
  8. Cheng CT, Zhao MY, Chau KW, Wu XY (2006) Using genetic algorithm and TOPSIS for Xinanjiang model calibration with a single procedure. J Hydrol 316(1–4):129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Oria M, Tanda MG (2012) Reverse flow routing in open channels: A Bayesian geostatistical approach”. J Hydrol 460–461:130–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Danish Hydraulic Institute (DHI) (2003) “User’s manual and technical references for MIKE 11” (version 2003). Hørsholm, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  11. Das A (2009) Reverse stream flow routing by using Muskingum models”. Sadhana 34(3):483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dooge JCI, Bruen M (2005) Problems in reverse routing”. Acta Geol Pol 53(4):357–371Google Scholar
  13. Eli RN, Wiggert JM, Contractor DN (1974) Reverse flow routing by the implicit method”. Water Resour Res 10(3):597–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldberg DE (1989) Genetic algorithms for search, optimization, and machine learning”. Addison-Wesley, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldberg DE (1999) Genetic Algorithms”. Addison-Wesley, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Guan J, Aral MM (2005) Remediation System Design with Multiple Uncertain Parameters using Fuzzy Sets and Genetic Algorithm”. J Hydrol Eng 10(5):386–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hejazi MI, Cai XM, Borah DK (2008) Calibrating a watershed simulation model involving human interference: an application of multi-objective genetic algorithms”. J Hydroinf 10(1):97–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jain A, Bhattacharjya RK, Sanaga S (2004) Optimal design of composite channels using genetic algorithm”. J Irrig Drain Eng 130(4):286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liong SY, Chan WT, ShreeRam J (1995) Peak flow forecasting with genetic algorithm and SWMM”. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 121(8):613–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Moramarco T, Saltalippi C, Singh VP (2004) Estimation of mean velocity in natural channels based on Chiu’s velocity distribution equation”. J Hydrol Eng 9(1):42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moramarco T, Melone F, Singh VP (2005a) Assessment of flooding in urbanized ungauged basins: a case study in the Upper Tiber area, Italy”. Hydrol Process 19(10):1909–1924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moramarco T, Barbetta S, Melone F, Singh VP (2005b) Relating local stage and remote discharge with significant lateral inflow”. J Hydrol Eng 10(1):58–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Moramarco T, Pandolfo C, Singh VP (2008) Accuracy of kinematic wave approximation for flood routing. II. Unsteady analysis”. J Hydrol Eng 13(11):1089–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Palisade Corporation (2013) “Evolver, the genetic algorithm solver for Microsoft Excel 2012”. Newfield, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Perumal M, Moramarco T, Sahoo B, Barbetta S (2007) “A methodology for discharge estimation and rating curve development at ungauged river sites”. Water Resour Res, 43, W02412, doi:10.1029/2005WR004609, 2007, pp. 22Google Scholar
  26. Perumal M, Moramarco T, Sahoo B, Barbetta S (2010) “On the practical applicability of the VPMS routing method for rating curve development at ungauged river sites”. Water Resour Res, 46, W03522, doi:10.1029/2009WR008103, 2010, pp. 9Google Scholar
  27. Sahoo B (2013) Field application of the multilinear Muskingum discharge routing method”. Water Resour Manag 27(2013):1193–1205. doi:10.1007/s11269-012-0228-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sahoo B, Perumal M, Moramarco T, Barbetta S (2014) Rating Curve Development at Ungauged River Sites using Variable Parameter Muskingum Discharge Routing Method”. Water Resour Manag 28(2014):3783–3800. doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0709-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sen Z, Oztopal A (2001) Genetic algorithms for the classification and prediction of precipitation occurrence”. Hydrol Sci J 46(2):255–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Singh RM, Datta B (2006) Identification of Groundwater Pollution Sources Using GA-based Linked Simulation Optimization Model”. J Hydrol Eng 11(2):101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Szymkiewicz R (1996) Numerical stability of implicit four-point scheme applied to inverse linear flow routing”. J Hydrol 176:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Taji K, Miyake T, Tamura H (1999) “On error back propagation algorithm using absolute error function”. Int Conf Syst Man Cybern IEEE SMC '99Confer Proc 5:401–406Google Scholar
  33. Tayfur G (2009) GA-optimized method predicts dispersion coefficient in natural channels”. Hydrol Res 40(1):65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tayfur G (2012) Soft Computing in Water Resources Engineering”. WIT Press, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  35. Tayfur G, Moramarco T (2008) “Predicting hourly-based flow discharge hydrographs from level data using genetic algorithms”. J Hydrol 352(1–2):77–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tayfur G, Singh VP (2011) Predicting Mean and Bankfull Discharge from Channel Cross-Sectional Area by Expert and Regression Methods”. Water Resour Manag 25(5):1253–1267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tayfur G, Moramarco T, Singh VP (2007) Predicting and forecasting flow discharge at sites receiving significant lateral inflow”. Hydrol Process 21:1848–1859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tayfur G, Barbetta S, Moramarco T (2009) Genetic Algorithm-Based Discharge Estimation at Sites Receiving Lateral Inflows”. J Hydrol Eng 14(5):463–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu CL, Chau KW (2006) A flood forecasting neural network model with genetic algorithm”. Int J Environ Pollut 28(3–4):261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Fellow, National Research CouncilResearch Institute for Geo-Hydrological ProtectionPerugiaItaly
  2. 2.Department. Civil EngineeringIzmir Institute of TechnologyUrla IzmirTurkey
  3. 3.Researcher, National Research CouncilResearch Institute for Geo-Hydrological ProtectionPerugiaItaly

Personalised recommendations