INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROORKEE

Hydrological and Hydrodynamic Modelling

for Flood Damage Mitigation in
Budhabalang River Basin, Odisha

Under The Guidance of :-

Dr. S.K.MISHRA, Prof. & Head
Presented by :-
Dept of WRDM & RANJIT KUMAR PANI
Dr. R.D.SINGH, Enroll. No.- 17548027
Visiting Prof. & Former Director, NIH MTech - 2nd Year
OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

• Application of an Event Based Hydrological Rainfall–Runoff

Simulation Model using HEC-HMS for the Budhabalang river
basin and validate at Govindpur outlet.

• Assessment of Design Floods with Different Return Periods at

Govindpur gauging site using Flood Frequency Analysis.

• Real Time Flood Forecasting at Govindpur site.

• Computation of water surface profile in the downstream to

Govindpur site using Unsteady Flow Analysis in HEC-RAS
Platform.

• Development of Flood Inundation Map in the flood plain area for

100-year return period using the output of HEC-RAS.

2
RESEARCH GAP / RATIONALE

• Event based rainfall-runoff modelling for the estimation of

design floods for Budhabalang basin up to Govindpur Site,
Odisha has not been attempted so far.
• HEC-HMS together with HEC-RAS has not been applied
for flood management in Budhabalang Basin.
• Real-time flood forecasting has not been carried out using
the event based rainfall-runoff models for Budhabalang
river at Govindpur Gauging site.
• Flood plain mapping has not been carried out for different
return periods in the downstream of Govindpur gauging
site of Budhabalang river.

3
FLOW DIAGRAM FOR HEC-HMS PROCESS -
DIGITAL TERRAIN PRE-
BASE FLOW
ELEVATION PROCESSING
MODEL (DEM) IN ArcGIS
HEC-GeoHMS INITIAL LOSS
OBSERVED
HOURLY RAIN BASIN
FALL DATA PARAMETERS
HEC -
COMPUTED HMS ROUTING
HOURLY
FLOW DATA TRANSFORMATION

SIMULATED DISCHARGE
AND FLOW HYDROGRAPH

OBSERVED COMPARISON WITH No

DATA OBSERVED VALUES
Yes
CALIBRATION PARAMETERS

MODEL VALIDATION

ACCEPTANCE AND RESULT, TAKEN AS INPUT Cntd.

FOR HYDRODYNAMIC MODELLING
4
FLOW DIAGRAM FOR HEC-RAS PROCESS

START A NEW
HEC-RAS MODELLING
PROJECT

RIVER SCHEMATIC PLAN BY DEM DOWNLOADED AND

RAS MAPPER PROCESSED IN ARC-GIS

RIVER CHARACTERISTICS,
ENTERING
CROSS SECTION & MANNING’S
GEOMETRIC DATA
OBSERVED FLOW ‘n’ VALUE
DATA AS
UP-STREAM UNSTEADY FLOW SIMULATION
BOUNDARY
CONDITION WATER SURFACE PROFILE & FLOW AT
DOWNSTREAM

OBSERVED WATER LEVEL AT NO

COMPARISION
DOWNSTREAM SECTION
YES
CALIBRATION AND FLOOD INUNDATION MAPPING
VALIDATION FOR Oct-2013 (A) FLOOD

SIMULATED FLOW DATA

WATER SURFCE PROFILE & SATELLITE IMAGE OF Oct-
WITH 100 YEAR RETURN
FLOOD INUNDATION MAPPING 2013 (A) FLOOD MAP
PERIOD

FOR STRUCTURAL & NON-STRUCTURAL

PROTECTION MEASURES

5
 Works Completed and progress of work
Event based Rainfall-runoff Modelling
Acquisition of Spatial, Meteorological and
Hydrological data
Spatial data processing:- Basin map &
drainage network, DEM model, Thiessen
Polygon map computation, LULC and soil
Mapping, Isochronal map and time-area
relationship graph
Temporal data processing:- Identification of
major floods, Rainfall data processing, Stream
flow data processing
Sensitivity analysis, Calibration and
validation of Clark, Snyder & SCS transform
models of HEC-HMS and selection of best
transform model.
Design flood Assessment
Estimation of design rainfall hyetographs for
100-year return period and computation of
100-year flood using Clark Model
Computation of 100-year flood using flood
frequency analysis of annual peak flood series
Real time flood forecasting
Real time flood forecast and forecasting
of water levels in real time
Comparison of observed and
forecasted flood hydrograph
Hydraulic modelling
Geometric Data preparation by
RAS-Mapper
Unsteady flow analysis and calibration
using hourly stage and discharge data
Development of Inundation Map
Generation of flood inundation map for
an observed flood event
Generation of flood inundation map for
100-years return period flood
Writing of Dissertation Report
6
Obtained /Expected Results
Rainfall-runoff Model
Generation
Calibrated results of five events based on
Clark, SCS and Snyder’s transformation and
validating the representative parameters with
two events.
Compared the results of three transformation
models. Clark’s model is found to be most
suitable (Tc = 29 hours, R = 47 hours)
Assessment of Design Flood
100-years flood based on rainfall frequency
analysis with single and double bell storm
patterns obtained as 4236.18 and 4194.93 cumec.
Flood based on frequency analysis of annual
flood peaks came to 3522.41 cumec
Real time Flood
Forecasting
Flood Forecasting based on four hours rainfall
block periods for event Oct-2013(A) obtained
and it closely matches with observed flood
hydrograph
Hydrodynamic
model Generation
Manning’s n values calibrated as 0.028
for main channel and 0.036 for banks
for the hydraulic model of the river.
Development of Flood Inundation Map
Inundation map with simulated flood
hydrograph for event Oct-2013 (A) obtained.
Closely matches with the inundation map
created by Disaster Management Support
Service available on BHUVAN web site.
7
Remaining Work

To be
To be
Sl No Remaining Work Status submitted to
completed
supervisor

Flood inundation map

10th April
1 generation for flood with Under progress 15th April 2019
2019
100-years return period

Writing of Dissertation 20th April

2 Under Progress 25th April 2019
Report 2019

8
THANK YOU

9
Sensitivity Analysis of UH Models

Sensitivity Analysis of Clark UH Model

Variation of Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency
coefficient (NSE) with variation of parameters
like Storage coefficient, R and Time of
concentration, Tc

VARIATION OF NS EFFICIENCY WITH

LAG TIME FOR SCS UH
0.9
Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Sensitivity Analysis of 0.2
0.1
SCS UH Model 0
Variation of NSE with 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Time Lag, Tlag Lag Time in Minutes

10
Results obtained

COMPARISION OF TRANSFORM MODELS IN OCT-2013(A)

4500

Observed discharge
4000
Discharge in cumec

3500 Clark (NSE 0.937)

3000
SCS (NSE 0.536)
2500

Snyder (NSE 0.938)

2000

1500

1000

500

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

Time in hours

Comparison of observed and simulated flood hydrographs of three models for event
Oct-2013(A)
11
Results obtained

Forecasted Flood Hydrograph for event Oct-2013 (A)

4,000

4 Hour 8 Hour
3,500

12 Hour 16 Hour
3,000
Discharge in cumec

2,500
20 Hour 24 Hour

2,000 28 Hour 33 Hours

1,500

1,000

500

-
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
Time in hours

Comparison of observed and simulated flood hydrographs of three models

for event Oct-2013(A)
12
Results obtained

100-years
Approach of 100-years
Types of maximum
flood Flood Peak Remarks
storm water level
Estimation (cumec)
(m)

Single Bell 4236.18 10.40

Deterministic
approach
Double Bell 4194.93 10.36

Probabilistic
3522.41 9.59
approach

Comparison of 100-years flood peaks with two approaches

13
Results obtained

Calibrated stage and flow hydrograph for flood event Oct-2013(A)

14
Results obtained

Simulated area of inundation for flood event Oct-2013(A) at 06:00 on 14th Oct.

15
Results obtained

Actual area of inundation for flood event Oct-2013(A) at 06:00 on 14th Oct. as per
Disaster Management Support Service available on Bhuvan web site.
16