1 / 14

Hungarian Part of Raba Model development

Dr. Michal Veverka. Hungarian Part of Raba Model development. RAAB(A)…. Flood Forecasting model. FFS Development of Hungarian Part. Setup of Hydraulical Part of Model. Setup of important valey obstruction. Setup of river net - basic branches. Setup of floodplain chanels.

jean
Download Presentation

Hungarian Part of Raba Model development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dr. Michal Veverka Hungarian Part of Raba Model development

  2. RAAB(A)…. Flood Forecasting model Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  3. FFS Development of Hungarian Part Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  4. Setup of Hydraulical Part of Model • Setup of important valey obstruction • Setup of river net - basic branches • Setup of floodplain chanels • Setup of cross profiles • Final setup in network editor view. • Setup of links Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  5. Calibration example Ragyogohit Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  6. Calibration – Hydrologicall Model • Setup of roughness based on field inspection CORINE Landuse Methodology Meteo data (rainfall and evap, teper,) Hydro data Q Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  7. RR1 RR4 RR10 RR7 Hydrological Model RR2 RR5 RR11 RR8 • The qualityof calibration is depend on quality of input data. • Daily precipitation can’t catch the short events so some of the peaks are missing in results of calibration RR3 RR6 RR12 RR9 • The optimal is to have 3-4 station for catchment in case we don’t have them is preferable to calibrate bigger parts of catchments together • Calibration of very small catchment is not suitable for future system running as well Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  8. Merging of Forecasting Models AT -HU Border – geograficall probles Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  9. Austrian cross profile B - Real distance between profiles Hungarian cross profile Merging of Forecasting Models AT -HU Elevation problems A A – Real elevation difference B – Real distance between profiles C – The difference between Hu and Au reference level C Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  10. Elevation problems – TR – BG experience Conclusion: The calculated difference between Baltic leveling system (Bulgaria) and Leveling system in Turkey is 0,526 m in the border area. This difference may be valid for the area around Edirne. Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  11. Model Merging • Relativelly short project period • Data distribution and data collection • Producing DEM for flood plains Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  12. Dewelopment of Web Pages Thresholds systems in AU Threshold system in CZ Forecasting profiles Language versions connected to methodology of thresholds Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  13. Thresholds Hungaria Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

  14. Training • HD model building • Branches NWK editor • Cross profiles editor • Data management • Floodplains • Objects – structures • NAM model • 2D modeling • Next Training • NAM modeling • Flood Forecasting System • 2D modeling • Data flow management Güssing am 31.5./1.6.2011

More Related