Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Find the attachment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is written rather correctly but the main objection is the lack of scientific approach. This theme may be interesting for readers so I will suggest the acception of the paper due to its well organized presentation connected to the local flood problem in West African country. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have developed model 2d for urban inundation simulation due to extreme tropical rainfall in Ouagadougou city. The results have shown the capability of the numerical tool developed to simulate flow depths in natural watercourses. The sensitivity of the model to rainfall intensity and soil roughness coefficient was highlighted through flood spatial extent and water depth at the outlet of the watershed.

General Comments

Authors should show what is new in the approach used and that the study has no local dimension. Why was this research object chosen and is it transposable to other areas?

Introduction
I miss reference to research in other parts of the world. After all, the problem of floods is not only in Africa. So it may be worth showing that this is a global problem, not a local one. There is a lot of literature on this subject. In addition, I suggest referring to the IPCC report on climate change projections.
I also suggest to increase the literature review is a bit too small in relation to the amount of research carried out worldwide in this field.

Material and methods
It would be useful to describe why such a research area was chosen and should be referred to other similar areas.
The description of the area lacks a description of the hydrographic network, physico-geographical indicators and precipitation and hydrological characteristics.
It would be better to describe how the real evapotranspiration was adopted in the model and whether the adoption of roughness from the literature is accurate enough.

In discussion lacks reference to other works carry out on modeling urban floods.

Dear Authors please find my others comments in the attached file

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors

Thank you for considering my comments.

Best regards

Reviewer