Advertisement

HEC-RAS One-Dimensional Hydrodynamic Modelling for Recent Major Flood Events in Pahang River

  • Muhammad Kashfy ZainalfikryEmail author
  • Aminuddin Ab Ghani
  • Nor Azazi Zakaria
  • Ngai Weng Chan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 53)

Abstract

The occurrence of severe floods in recent years globally as well as in many parts of Malaysia is an indication of both climate change and human interference in land use change. This requires for an integrated flood risk management approach and a shift from conventional structural flood mitigation. Flood modelling is an important part of flood risk management. In this study, development of one dimensional (1D) hydrodynamic model for Pahang River was performed in HEC-RAS 5.0 using combinations of surveyed data with spatial-extracted cross sections and recorded stream flow. The study area had been hit by several extreme floods that caused substantial property damages and loss of lives. This study focusses on the recent 2007 and 2014 flood events. Analyses of water levels, stream discharges and river cross sections were carried out based on the data gathered. A set of flood levels were obtained as the outputs of the hydraulic model and the accuracy of the simulated flood levels were validated. It was found that the model predicts a good output agreement with \(R^{2}\) = 0.96 and \(R^{2}\) = 0.82 for the 2007 and 2014 flood events respectively.

Keywords

Flood modelling HEC-RAS 5.0 1D hydrodynamic model Pahang river 

References

  1. 1.
    Ab. Ghani A, Chang CK, Leow CS, Zakaria NA (2012) Sungai Pahang digital flood mapping: 2007 flood. Int J River Basin Manag 10(2):139–148Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ab. Ghani A, Chang CK, Siang LC, Zakaria NA, Hassan ZA (2011) Digital flood mapping: case study of 2007 Sungai Pahang flood. Final report, USM Research University GrantGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ab. Ghani A, Zakaria NA, Chang CK, Ariffin J, Abu Hasan Z, Abdul Ghaffar AB (2007) Revised equations for manning’s coefficient for sand-bed rivers. Int J River Basin Manag 5(4):329–346Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahmad B, Hassan ZA (2011) Flood map of Tupai River using combined 1D and 2D modelling. In: 3rd international conference on managing rivers in the 21st century: sustainable solutions for global crisis of flooding, pollution and water scarcity, Penang, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akasah ZA, Doraisamy SV (2015) 2014 Malaysia flood: impacts and factors contributing towards the restoration of damages. J Sci Res Dev 2(14):53–59Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Azad WH, Brown E, Osman S, Asan G, Osman AQ, Samsudin RK, Boelee L, Ahmad F (2017) Flood forecasting and warning for Muar River: non-structural measures for flood mitigation. In: 37th IAHR world congress, 2017 Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brunner GW (2016) HEC-RAS: river analysis system user’s manual version 5.0. http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-ras/downloads.aspx
  8. 8.
    Chan NW (1995) A contextual analysis of flood hazard management in Peninsular Malaysia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Middlesex University, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chan NW (2012) Impacts of disasters and disasters risk management in Malaysia: the case of floods. ERIA research project report 2011–8, JakartaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chan NW, Roy R, Lai CH, Tan ML (2018) Social capital as a vital resource in flood disaster recovery in Malaysia. Int J Water Resour Dev 35(4):619–637.  https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2018.1467312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan NW, Tan ML, Ab Ghani A, Zakaria NA (2019) Sustainable urban drainage as a viable measure of coping with heat and floods due to climate change. In: 9th international conference on future environment and energy, Osaka, JapanCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang CK (2018) Simulation of flood inundation map associated with sediment transport for Sungai Pahang. Ph.D. thesis, Universiti Sains MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chow VT (1959) Open channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book. Co, Inc., New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID) Malaysia (2003) Guidelines and procedure for the assessment of flood damage in MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID) Malaysia (2012) Updating of condition of flooding and flood damage assessment in MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horritt M, Bates P (2002) Evaluation of 1D and 2D numerical models for predicting river flood inundation. J Hydrol 268(1–4):87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hussein RAA (2010) Flood hazard and risk assessment through incorporating GIS with hydrodynamic modelling: case study of Muda River. Ph.D. thesis, Universiti Sains MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jafri AM, Hashim Z, Kavvas ML, Chen ZQ, Ohara N (2013) Development of atmospheric based flood forecasting and warning system for selected river basins in MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Julien PY, Ab. Ghani A, Zakaria NA, Abdullah R, Chang CK (2010) Case study: flood mitigation of the Muda River, Malaysia. J Hydraul Eng 136(4):251–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kubal C, Haase D, Meyer V, Scheuer S (2009) Integrated urban flood risk assessment—adapting a multicriteria approach to a city. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9(6):1881–1895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leow CS, Abdullah R, Zakaria NA, Ab. Ghani A, Chang CK (2008) Modelling urban river catchment: a case study in Malaysia. Proc Inst Civ Eng Water Manag 162(1):25–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maruti SF, Amerudin S, Kadir WHW, Rahman MZA, Yusof ZM, Ariffin A, Huey TT (2016) Hydrodynamic modelling of a proposed Lebir and Galas Dam for flood hazard analysis. Malays J Civ Eng 28(3):223–239Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ogura J, Berlinger J (2018) Japan floods: death toll rises to 200 as UN offers assistance. In: CNN (ed) CNNGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Patel SB, Mehta DJ, Yadav SM (2018) One dimensional hydrodynamic flood modeling for Ambica River, South Gujarat. J Emerg Technol Innov Res 5(4):595–601Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pramanik N, Panda RK, Sen D (2010) One dimensional hydrodynamic modeling of river flow using DEM extracted river cross-sections. J Water Resour Manag 24(5):835–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shah SMH, Mustaffa Z, Yusof KW (2017) Disasters worldwide and floods in the Malaysian Region: a brief review. Indian J Sci Technol 10(2)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Timbadiya PV, Patel PL, Porey PD (2014) One-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling of flooding and stage hydrographs in the lower Tapi River in India. Curr Sci 106(5):708–716Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vozinaki A-EK, Morianou GG, Alexakis DD, Tsanis IK (2016) Comparing 1D and combined 1D/2D hydraulic simulations using high resolution topographic data a case study of the Koiliaris basin. Greece Hydrol Sci J 62(4):642–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zakaria NA, Ab. Ghani A, Abdullah R, Sidek LM, Ainan A (2003) Bio-ecological drainage system (BIOECODS) for water quantity and quality control. Int J River Basin Manag 1(3):237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zellou B, Rahali H (2016) Assessment of reduced-complexity landscape evolution model suitability to adequately simulate flood events in complex flow conditions. Nat Hazards 86(1):1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Kashfy Zainalfikry
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aminuddin Ab Ghani
    • 1
  • Nor Azazi Zakaria
    • 1
  • Ngai Weng Chan
    • 2
  1. 1.River Engineering and Urban Drainage Research Centre (REDAC), Universiti Sains MalaysiaPenangMalaysia
  2. 2.Geography Section, School of HumanitiesUniversiti Sains MalaysiaPenangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations