Journal of Korea Water Resources Association (한국수자원학회논문집)

Korea Water Resources Association (한국수자원학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the flow estimation methods through GIUH rainfall-runoff model for flood warning system on Banseong stream

반성천 홍수경보 시스템을 위한 GIUH기반 한계홍수량 산정기법 비교연구

  • Seong, Kiyoung (Department of Civil Engineering, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Ahn, Yujin (Department of Civil Engineering, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Lee, Taesam (Department of Civil Engineering, Gyeongsang National University)
  • 성기영 (경상국립대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 안유진 (경상국립대학교 토목공학과) ;
  • 이태삼 (경상국립대학교 토목공학과)
  • Received : 2021.03.09
  • Accepted : 2021.03.19
  • Published : 2021.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In the past few years, various damages have occurred in the vicinity of rivers due to flooding. In order to alleviate such flood damage, structural and non-structural measures are being established, and one of the important non-structural measures is to establish a flood warning system. In general, in order to establish a flood warning system, the water level of the flood alarm reference point is set, the critical flow corresponding thereto is calculated, and the warning precipitation amount corresponding to the critical flow is calculated through the Geomorphological Instantaneous Unit Hydrograph (GIUH) rainfall-runoff model. In particular, when calculating the critical flow, various studies have calculated the critical flow through the Manning formula. To compare the adequacy of this, in this study, the critical flow was calculated through the HEC-RAS model and compared with the value obtained from Manning's equation. As a result of the comparison, it was confirmed that the critical flow calculated by the Manning equation adopted excessive alarm precipitation values and lead a very high flow compared to the existing design precipitation. In contrast, the critical flow of HEC-RAS presented an appropriate alarm precipitation value and was found to be appropriate to the annual average alarm standard. From the results of this study, it seems more appropriate to calculate the critical flow through HEC-RAS, rather than through the existing Manning equation, in a situation where various river projects have been conducted resulting that most of the rivers have been surveyed.

지난 수년간 하천 인근에서 홍수로 인하여 다양한 피해가 발생하고 있다. 이러한 홍수피해를 경감하기 위해 구조적 비구조적 대책들을 세워 홍수 경감에 노력하고 있으며, 중요한 비구조적 대책 중의 하나가 홍수경보시스템을 구축하는 것이다. 일반적으로 홍수경보시스템을 구축하기 위해서는 홍수경보 기준지점의 수위를 먼저 설정하고 이에 대응하는 한계유량을 산출한다. 그리고, 강우-유출모형(특히, GIUH)을 통하여 한계유량에 대응하는 경보강수량을 산정하는 방식을 택하고 있다. 특히 한계유량을 산출하는 경우, 다양한 연구에서 하천측량이 이루어지지 않은 점 때문에 Manning 공식을 변수로 사용하여 한계유량을 산출하여왔다. 이에 대한 적정성을 비교하기 위해 본 연구에서는 HEC-RAS 모형을 통하여 한계유량을 계산하였고 Manning 공식에서 나온 값과 비교하였다. 비교결과, 한계유량 산정공식(Manning 공식을 변수로 사용)에서 산출된 한계유량은 과다한 경보 강수량값을 채택하고 기존 설계강수량에 비해서도 매우 큰 값이 계산됨을 확인할 수 있었다. 이에 비해 HEC-RAS의 한계유량값은 적정한 경보강수량 값을 제시하였고 연평균 알람 기준에도 적정함을 알 수 있었다. 본 연구 결과를 통해, 현재 다양한 하천사업이 이루어져 대부분의 하천의 측량이 이루어진 상황에서 기존의 Manning식에 의한 한계유량 산출보다는 강우-유출모형(GIUH)으로부터 산정된 유량 자료를 입력조건으로 하여 HEC-RAS를 통한 한계유량 및 경계 수위를 산정 해야 하는 것이 보다 적정해 보인다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 진주시 및 2021년도 정부(교육과학기술부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 중견연구사업 지원을 받아 수행되었고(2018R1A2B6001799), 이에 감사드립니다.

References

  1. Ahn, S.J., Kim, J.G., Park, J.H., and Lee, H.Z. (2005). "Analysis of Flood Runoff using GIUH Model." Conference of Korea Water Resources Association 2005, KWRA, pp. 705-709.
  2. Bamufleh, S., Al-Wagdany, A., Elfeki, A., and Chaabani, A. (2020). "Developing a geomorphological instantaneous unit hydrograph (GIUH) using equivalent Horton-Strahler ratios for flash flood predictions in arid regions." Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 1697-1723. doi: 10.1080/19475705.2020.1811404
  3. Chonnam National University (CNU) (2004). Gok-seong gun rainfall warning criteria alarming facilities, pp. 69-70.
  4. GyeongNam (2016). River fundamental plan for banseong stream. MOLIT.
  5. Kim, K.-W., Roh, J.-H., Jeon, Y.-W., and Yoo, C. (2003). "Analysis of rainfall effect on the GIUH characteristic velocity." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 533-545.
  6. Kim, Y., Tak, W., and Jun, K. (2018). "Automated rainfall warning system standards setting using GIS." Journal of Korea Society Hazard Mitigation, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 179-184. doi: 10.9798/KOSHAM.2018.18.1.179
  7. Mohammadi, F., Fakheri Fard, A., and Ghorbani, M.A. (2019). "Application of cross-wavelet-linear programming-Kalman filter and GIUH methods in rainfall-runoff modeling." Environmental Earth Sciences, Vol. 78, No. 5. doi: 10.1007/s12665-019-8133-3
  8. National Disaster Management Research Institute (NDMRI) (2016). Preliminary research on flash flood alert system advancement. Ulsan, pp. 146-149.
  9. Oh, M.-J., Yang, I.-T., and Park, B.-S. (2006). "An analysis for goodness of fit on trigger runoff of flssh flood and topographic parameters using GIS." Journal of Korean Society for Geospatial Information Science, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 87-95.
  10. Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., and Valdes, J.B. (1979). "The geomorphologic structure of hydrologic response." Water Resources Research, Vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 1409-1420. doi: 10.1029/WR015i006p01409
  11. Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., Gonzalez-Sanabria, M., and Bras, R.L. (1982). "A geomorphoclimatic theory of the instantaneous unit hydrograph." Water Resources Research, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 877-886. doi: 10.1029/WR018i004p00877
  12. Sahoo, R., and Jain, V. (2018). "Sensitivity of drainage morphometry based hydrological response (GIUH) of a river basin to the spatial resolution of DEM data." Computers and Geosciences, Vol. 111, pp. 78-86. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2017.10.001
  13. Strahler, A.N. (1952). "Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography." Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, Vol. 63, No. 11, pp. 1117-1142. doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1952)63[1117:HAAOET]2.0.CO;2
  14. Valdes, J.B., Fiallo, Y., and Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. (1979). "A rainfall-runoff analysis of the geomorphologic IUH." Water Resources Research, Vo. 15, No. 6, pp. 1421-1434. doi: 10.1029/WR015i006p01421