Estimating Flash Flood Discharge in a Catchment Area with the Use of Hydraulic Model and Terrestrial Laser Scanner

  • D. D. AlexakisEmail author
  • D. G. Hadjimitsis
  • A. Agapiou
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Atmospheric Sciences book series (SPRINGERATMO)


A flood can be determined as a mass of water that produces runoff on land that is not normally covered by water. This paper aims to define the potential utility of terrestrial laser scanning data and hydraulics for improving flood risk assessment models in Yialias catchment area in Cyprus. Recently, terrestrial scanners have been used to capture 3D point cloud data of high accuracy for inundation models. Thus, different methods are used to process the scanning data in order to extract hydraulically relevant information. For this reason a variety of Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of different spatial resolution was derived. The combined use of a two dimensional (2D) numerical hydraulic model and a terrestrial laser scanner can give the opportunity of estimation of peak discharge of a recent flash flood. Hence, the approach used in this study demonstrated the potential of hydraulics and laser scanner for flood risk assessment in catchments with infrastructure and vulnerable goods.


Point Cloud Digital Elevation Model Flash Flood Terrestrial Laser Scanner Flood Risk Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The project is funded by the Cyprus Research Promotion Foundation in the frameworks of the “SATFLOOD” project. In addition the authors would like to acknowledge the Cyprus University of Technology/Department of Civil Engineering and Geomatics (Remote Sensing Laboratory) for supporting this study.


  1. Cavalli M, Tarolli P, Marchi L, Fontana GD (2008) The effectiveness of airborne LiDAR data in the recognition of channel-bed morphology. Catena 73:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dawson RJ, Hall JW, Sayers PB, Bates PD, Rosu C (2005) Sampling-based flood risk analysis for fluvial dike systems. Stoch Environ Res Risk A 19(6):388–402. doi: 10.1007/s00477-005-0010-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gaume E, Bain V, Bernardara P, Newinger O, Barbuc M, Bateman A, Blaskovicova L, Bloschl G, Borga M, Dumitrescu A, Daliakopoulos I, Garcia J, Irimescu A, Kohnova S, Koutroulis A, Marchi L, Matreata S, Medina V, Preciso E, Sempere-Torres D, Stancalie G, Szolgay J, Tsanis I, Velasco D, Viglione A (2009) A compilation of data on European flash floods. J Hydrol 367(1–2):70–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.12.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hall JW, Sayers PB, Dawson RJ (2005) National-scale assessment of current and future flood risk in England and Wales. Nat Hazards 36(1–2):147–164. doi: 10.1007/s11069-004-4546-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Knebla MR, Yanga ZL, Hutchisonb K, Maidment DC (2005) Regional scale flood modeling using NEXRAD rainfall, GIS, and HEC-HMS/RAS: a case study for the San Antonio river basin summer 2002 storm event. J Environ Manage 75:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lane SN, Chandler JH, Richards KS (1998) Landform monitoring, modelling and analysis: landform in geomorphological research. In: Lane SN, Richards KS, Chandler JH (eds) Landform monitoring, modelling and analysis. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  7. Mandlburger G, Hauer C, Hofle B, Habersack H, Pfeifer N (2009) Optimization of LiDAR derived terrain models for river flow modelling. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:1453–1466. doi: 10.5194/hess-13-1453-2009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Michaelides S, Tymvios F, Michaelidou T (2009) Spatial and temporal characteristics of the annual rainfall frequency distribution in Cyprus. Atmos Res 94:606–615Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. D. Alexakis
    • 1
    Email author
  • D. G. Hadjimitsis
    • 1
  • A. Agapiou
    • 1
  1. 1.Cyprus University of TechnologyLimassolCyprus

Personalised recommendations