In this study, an integrated flood hazard modeling and mapping framework has been developed and implemented at ungauged urban, suburban and rural streams/catchments. The main goal is to highlight the possible disastrous effect of fluvial floods on human health, economic activities, cultural heritage, and the environment for three typical design return periods (T = 50, 100, 1000 years), according to the European Union Flood Directive 2007/60/EC and the respective Greek legislation. The single event-based deterministic approach is adopted, based on three modeling components: (i) a synthetic storm generator/estimator; (ii) a hydrological simulation model; and (iii) a hydraulic simulation model. The major assumption of the framework is that the flood hazard is connected to the determination of the input rainfall return period. Finally, the outcome of the framework is the flood hazard maps (for T = 50, 100, 1000 years) corresponding to the “average” hydrological scenario as well as two “extreme” scenarios, which allow providing lower and upper uncertainty bounds of the estimated flood quantities for each return period of interest. The proposed framework is described in the next paragraphs.
2.1. Synthetic Design Storm Estimator
A key assumption of the event-based approach is that the flood risk is determined in terms of return period, T, of the design rainfall (hyetograph). The latter represents the temporal evolution of a hypothetical storm event of a certain duration D and time resolution Δt, which corresponds to the given return period. In this study, we have investigated a number of rainfall scenarios, setting D = 24 h (which is about five times larger than the time of concentration of the basin) and Δt = 15 min. Moreover, following the semi-distributed approach, we assigned spatially-varying rainfall inputs across sub-basins, thus accounting for the heterogeneity of the storm regime over the study basin, which is due to climatic reasons as well as relief and orography effects.
The computational procedure for extracting design hyetographs across sub-basins comprised three steps: (a) estimation of partial rainfall depths for all temporal scales and return periods of interest, on the basis of spatially-averaged Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) curves relationships; (b) derivation of a synthetic hyetograph, by placing the partial depths at specific time intervals across the given duration (i.e., 24 h); and (c) application of an empirical reduction formula, to transform point to areal estimations.
The IDF relationships could be described by the following equation, proposed by [
7]:
where,
i is the average rainfall intensity over a certain time scale (also referred to as duration)
d, and a given return period
T, as the ratio of a probability function,
a(
T), to a function of time scale,
b(
d). The nominator
a(
T) of Equation (1) is the mathematical expression of a Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distribution for rainfall intensity over some threshold at any time scale. The parameters of Equation (1),
η and
θ were estimated from observed data and the shape parameter
κ is initially obtained by fitting the GEV model to the maximum 24 h data and estimating its parameters by the
L-moments method. For given parameters
κ,
η and
θ, the
L-moments method is employed to estimate the scale and location parameters,
λ′ and
ψ′, at each station. In order to extract the confidence intervals of rainfall estimations, a generalized Monte Carlo framework was applied, because there are no analytical formulas for the GEV distribution as made for most of distributions [
8].
2.2. Hydrological Modeling
For each return period of interest (T = 50, 100, 1000 years), three scenarios (herein referred to as low, average and high) have been formulated, in order to account for joint rainfall and hydrological uncertainties. Specifically, the design rainfall estimation provided by the IDF relationship is assumed to correspond to the average scenario (or median 50%), while its 80% confidence limits, which are measures of rainfall uncertainty, correspond to the two extreme scenarios (e.g., low-20% and high-80%). The design hyetorgraphs have been produced by IDF curves using the Alternating Block Method (ABM) for return periods of T = 50 and 100 years, and the method of Worst Case Design Storm (WCDS) for the return period of T = 1000 years.
The hydrological uncertainty has been expressed in terms of three typical antecedent soil moisture conditions: Dry, moderate, and wet. The well-known SCS-CN approach developed by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) [
3] has been used for the estimation of excess rainfall. Three antecedent soil moisture conditions have been employed in each case, the dry (or low) represented by CNI, the moderate (or average) represented by CNII, and the wet (or high) represented by CNIII.
The transformation of the excess rainfall over the basin to flood hydrograph at the outlet junction is made by using the dimensionless curvilinear unit hydrograph approach of SCS of the HEC-HMS modeling system. The widely-used empirical Giandotti formula is used for the estimation of basin time of concentration,
tc, given by:
where
tc is the time of concentration (h), A is the basin area (km
2),
L is the length of the longest runoff distance across the basin (km), and Δ
z is the difference between the mean elevation of the basin and the outlet elevation (m). Its predictive capacity was by far superior with respect to other widely-used empirical formulas of the literature [
9]. To account for the dependence of the response time of the basin against runoff, the following semi-empirical formula, which arises from the kinematic wave theory, is used. This is based on the consideration that
tc is inversely proportional to the design rainfall, i.e.,:
where
i(5) is the design rainfall intensity for return period
Τ = 5 years, for which the time of concentration is estimated by the Giandotti formula, and
i(
Τ) is the intensity of any higher return period,
T.
2.3. Hydraulic-Hydrodynamic Modeling
The two-dimensional (2D) HEC-RAS model is used for hydraulic/hydrodynamic flow simulation and flood routing within streams/rivers and lakes. The model has been developed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC) of United States Army Corps of Engineers [
10] and has been applied in many studies for flood inundation modeling (e.g., [
5,
11]). Furthermore, a benchmark analysis based on the two dimensional modeling capabilities, conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, proved that HEC-RAS performed extremely well compared to the leading 2D models [
12].
The HEC-RAS 5.0.3 computational engine is based on the full 2D Saint-Venant equations or the 2D diffusive wave equations [
10]. Shallow water equations are simplifications of the Navier-Stokes equations. The Diffusive Wave Approximation of the Shallow Water (DSW) equations can be derived through the combination of mass conservation and the two-dimensional form of the Diffusion Wave Approximation. The HEC-RAS 2D solver is using the sub-grid bathymetry approach [
10].
One of the basic factors of input data uncertainty in flood inundation modeling and mapping, especially when 2D hydraulic hydrodynamic models are used, is the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) accuracy. The DEM estimation process involves several errors, especially in complex river and riverine areas, due to the topographical technique used. In this study, the DEM resolution used is 5m and has been provided by National Cadastre and Mapping Agency S.A. (NCMA). The raw data consist of the Digital Surface Model that includes canopy, manmade structures and other surface obstacles. First, the different DSMs derived from the 1:5000 aerial photos have been merged to a continue DSM. Then, the entire DSM has been processed to fill/sink the erroneous areas. Finally, the DSM has been re-corrected using typical elevation downgrading methods in order to create the DEM.
An important input data uncertainty factor in flood inundation modeling is the roughness coefficient and the parameterization process that follows. A typical approach for large scale applications that uses two-dimensional hydraulic models is the estimation of the roughness coefficient using CORINE land cover data and standard roughness coefficient tables (e.g., [
13]). This approach has been used in this study. Moreover, based on the EU Flood Directive guides, the “upper” and “lower” boundaries of Manning’s roughness coefficient were estimated, as −50% and +50% of the average Manning’s roughness coefficient values, respectively. Furthermore, all hydraulic structures of the study area were detected using aerial photographs, a GIS database of the technical works, field observations, and information collected by several authorities. Then, based on hydraulic structures geometry data, the entire DEM has been modified in order to include the flood protection works and the geometry of all hydraulic structures.
Finally, flood inundation modeling and mapping at urban and suburban areas remains a big challenge due to the complexity of the entire system. One of the most important factors in flood inundation modeling in built-up areas is the representation of buildings within the 2D hydraulic-hydrodynamic model. In this study, the local increase of building block representation method with parallel adjustment of roughness coefficient is used for significant urban areas such as large cities, whereas the approach of building representation with the local rise of roughness coefficient value is applied for small settlements and villages.
Following the above methodology, three (3) hydrologic/hydraulic scenarios have been formulated and simulated for the reach of every basin/sub-basin, stream/river and lake in every return period, considering uncertainty. The first, low, scenario represents the dry antecedent soil moisture conditions (CNI); the design synthetic storm is estimated for the 20% confidence level of IDF curves using the ABM for the storm time distribution; and low Manning’s roughness coefficient (e.g., nlow = naverage – 0.5 × naverage). Accordingly, the average scenario represents average antecedent soil moisture conditions (CNII), the design storm is estimated by the median IDF curves (50%) using the ABM for the storm time distribution, and the estimated Manning’s roughness coefficient (naverage). The high scenario represents high antecedent soil moisture conditions (CNIII). The design storm is estimated for the 80% confidence level of IDF curves (80%) using the WCDS for the storm time distribution and high Manning’s roughness coefficient (e.g., nhigh = naverage + 0.5 × naverage). In total, nine scenarios were simulated for the three return periods (e.g., T = 50, 100, 1000 years).