SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi / 2021 / Sayı: 28

Review and Comparison of Flood Modeling Methods

Taşkın Modelleme Yöntemlerinin Gözden Geçirilmesi ve Karşılaştırılması

Vahdettin DEMİR
Neslihan BEDEN
Aslı ÜLKE KESKİN
Pages
1013–1021
Publication Date
2021-11-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the aim of modeling and modeling, the data and analysis methods will be needed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the latest technology experimental, hydrodynamic and simple conceptual models used to analyze floods, one of the greatest disasters globally, are compared.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the latest developments in flood modeling are emphasized and the advantages and disadvantages of the existing models are presented.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the aim of modeling and modeling, the data and analysis methods will be needed.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Taşkınlar · Doğal afetler · Hidrodinamik modelleme

Abstract

In this study, the latest technology experimental, hydrodynamic and simple conceptual models used to analyze floods, one of the greatest disasters globally, are compared. In this study, the latest developments in flood modeling are emphasized and the advantages and disadvantages of the existing models are presented. Various approaches and ways of analyzing the uncertainties about modeling are discussed. The aim of the study is to give the latest information on the subject to the scientists, emergency response organizations, insurance companies and other decision makers working on water resource management for the studies on this subject and to guide the selection of the most appropriate method or model for solving practical problems related to floods. it is to. According to the aim of modeling and modeling, the data and analysis methods will be needed.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, global anlamda en büyük felaketlerden biri olan taşkınların analiz edilmesinde kullanılan son teknoloji deneysel, hidrodinamik ve basit kavramsal modeller karşılaştırılmaktadır. Çalışmada taşkın modellemesinde yaşanan en son gelişmeler vurgulanarak, mevcut modellerin avantajları ve dezavantajları ortaya konulmaktadır. Modelleme konusundaki belirsizliklerin analiz edilmesinde kullanılabilecek çeşitli yaklaşımlar ve ele alınış biçimleri irdelenmiştir. Çalışmanın amacı, bu konu üzerine yapılacak çalışmalar için su kaynaklarının yönetimi üzerine çalışan bilim insanlarına, acil durum müdahale kuruluşlarına, sigorta şirketlerine ve diğer karar vericilere konu ile ilgili en son bilgileri vermek ve taşkınlarla ilgili pratik sorunların çözümü için en uygun yöntemin ya da modelin seçilmesinde rehberlik etmektir. Çalışma ile modelleme amacına ve modelleme sonucunda elde edilmek istenen spesifik çıktılara göre, ihtiyaç duyulacak veriler ve analiz yöntemleri anlatılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, V., BEDEN, N., KESKİN, A. Ü. (2021). Review and Comparison of Flood Modeling Methods. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, Sayı: 28, 1013–1021. https://ajindex.com/articles/471588

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Abbott, M. B., Bathurst, J. C., Cunge, J. A., O’Connell, P. E., & Rasmussen, J. (1986). An introduction to the European Hydrological System — Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, “SHE”, 2: Structure of a physically-based, distributed modelling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87(1–2), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(86)90115-0
  2. Alcrudo, F. (2004). A State of the Art Review on Mathematical Modelling of Flood Propagation, IMPACT Project. Apel, H., Thieken, A. H., Merz, B., & Blöschl, G. (2006). A probabilistic modelling system for assessing flood risks. Natural Hazards, 38(1–2), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-005-8603-7
  3. Arduino, G., Reggiani, P., & Todini, E. (2005). Recent advances in flood forecasting and flood risk assessment. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 9(4), 280–284. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-9-280-2005
  4. Baker, W. H., Addams, H. L., & Davis, B. (2005). Critical Factors for Enhancing Municipal Public Hearings. Public Administration Review, 65(4), 490–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00474.x
  5. Bates, P., & De Roo, A. P. (2000). A simple raster-based model for flood inundation simulation. Journal of Hydrology, 236(1–2), 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00278-X
  6. Bates, P. D., Horritt, M. S., Smith, C. N., & Mason, D. (1997). Integrating remote sensing observations of flood hydrology and hydraulic modelling. Hydrological Processes, 11(14), 1777–1795. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(199711)11:14 3.0.CO;2-E Beden, N. (2019). Cevizdere havzasının sayısal modelleme sistemlerine dayalı taşkın analizi ve taşkın zararlarının değerlendirilmesi. O.M.Ü. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Beven, K. (1989). Changing ideas in hydrology — The case of physically-based models. Journal of Hydrology, 105(1–2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(89)90101-7
  7. Bhuiyan, M. J. A. N., & Dutta, D. (2012). Analysis of flood vulnerability and assessment of the impacts in coastal zones of Bangladesh due to potential sea-level rise. Natural Hazards, 61(2), 729–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-0059-3
  8. Brunner, G. W. (2016). HEC-RAS River Analysis System, 2D Modeling User’s Manual Version 5.0, (CPD-68A), 1–171. Retrieved from www.hec.usace.army.mil Casulli, V., & Stelling, G. S. (1998). Numerical Simulation of 3D Quasi-Hydrostatic, Free-Surface Flows. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 124(7), 678–686. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1998)124:7(678)
  9. Cesur, D. (2007). GIS as an information technology framework for water modeling.