Development of probabilistic inundation mapping for dam failure induced floods

  • Christina W. TsaiEmail author
  • Jing-Jie Yeh
  • Chi-Hao Huang
Original Paper


A primary function of flood inundation mapping is to forecast flood hazards and assess potential losses. However, uncertainties limit the reliability of inundation hazard assessments. Major sources of uncertainty should be taken into consideration by an optimal flood management strategy. This study focuses on the 20 km reach downstream of the Shihmen Reservoir in Taiwan. In the modified dam failure model proposed in this study, the surface area of the water in the reservoir and water elevation are allowed to vary with the volume of the reservoir. A dam failure induced flood herein provides the upstream boundary conditions of flood routing. The two major sources of uncertainty that are considered in the hydraulic model and the flood inundation mapping herein are uncertainties in the dam break model and uncertainty of the roughness coefficient. The perturbance moments method is applied to a dam break model and the hydrosystem model to develop probabilistic flood inundation mapping. Uncertain variables such as roughness coefficient, breach width and reservoir surface area can be considered in these models and the variability of outputs can be quantified. The probabilistic flood inundation mapping for dam break induced floods can be developed with consideration of the variability of output using a hydraulic model. Two different probabilistic flood inundation mappings are discussed and compared. Probabilistic flood inundation mappings are hoped to provide improved insights in support of the evaluation of concerning reservoir flooded areas.


Uncertainty analysis Perturbance moments method Probabilistic inundation mapping Dam break Point estimate method Flood routing 



This research is supported by Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) under Grant Contract Number 104-2628-E-002-011-MY3. The authors also appreciate Mr. David D. Kao at National Taiwan University for his kind assistance with the preparation of the revised manuscript, and Mr. Shih-Hsun Huang, and Mr. You-Ren Hsiao at National Taiwan University for their assistance with figures and tables. The data used are listed in the references and tables.


  1. Baldassarre GD (2012) Floods in a changing climate: inundation modelling. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldassarre GD, Montanari A (2009) Uncertainty in river discharge observations: a quantitative analysis. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:913–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Capart H (2013) Analytical solutions for gradual dam breaching and downstream river flooding. Water Resour Res 49:1968–1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Domeneghetti A, Castellarin A, Brath A (2012) Assessing rating-curve uncertainty and its effects on hydraulic model calibration. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 16:1191–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Domeneghetti A, Vorogushyn S, Castellarin A, Merz B, Brath A (2013) Probabilistic flood hazard mapping: effects of uncertain boundary conditions. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:3127–3140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foster M, Fell R, Spannagle M (2000) The statistics of embankment dam failures and accidents. Can Geotech J 37:1000–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Franceschini S, Marani M, Tsai C, Zambon F (2012a) A perturbance moment point estimate method for uncertainty analysis of the hydrologic response. Adv Water Resour 40:46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franceschini S, Tsai C, Marani M (2012b) Point estimate methods based on taylor series expansion: the perturbance moments method—a more coherent derivation of the second order statistical moment. Appl Math Model 36:5445–5454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fread DL (1988) DAMBRK (a dam-break flood forecasting model). National Weather Service, NOAAGoogle Scholar
  10. Froehlich DC (2008) Embankment dam breach parameters and their uncertainties. J Hydraul Eng 134:1708–1721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Henderson V (1966) The nature of nursing: a definition and its implications for practice, research and education. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Hong HP (1998) An efficient point estimate method for probabilistic analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 59:261–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krause P, Boyle DP, Bäse F (2005) Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment. Adv Geosci 5(2005):89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li KS (1992) Point-estimate method for calculating statistical moments. J Eng Mech 118:1506–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lin N, Shullman E (2017) Dealing with hurricane surge flooding in a changing environment: part I. Risk assessment considering storm climatology change, sea level rise, and coastal development. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 31:2379–2400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Macchione F (2008) Model for predicting floods due to earthen dam breaching. I: formulation and evaluation. J Hydraul Eng 134(2008):1688–1696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mazzoleni M et al (2014) Innovative probabilistic methodology for evaluating the reliability of discrete levee reaches owing to piping. J Hydrol Eng 20:04014067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Papaioannou G, Vasiliades L, Loukas A, Aronica GT (2017) Probabilistic flood inundation mapping at ungauged streams due to roughness coefficient uncertainty in hydraulic modelling. Adv Geosci 44:23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Parhi PK, Sankhua RN, Roy GP (2012) Calibration of channel roughness for Mahanadi River, (India) using HEC-RAS model. J Water Resour Prot 4:847–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rosenblueth E (1975) Point estimates for probability moments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 72:3812–3814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sarhadi A, Soltani S, Modarres R (2012) Probabilistic flood inundation mapping of ungauged rivers: linking GIS techniques and frequency analysis. J Hydrol 458–459:68–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Singh VP, Scarlatos PD (1988) Analysis of gradual earth-dam failure. J Hydraul Eng 114:21–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Timbadiya PV, Patel PL, Porey PD (2011) Calibration of HEC-RAS model on prediction of flood for lower Tapi River, India. J Water Resour Prot 3:805–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tsai CW, Franceschini S (2005) Evaluation of probabilistic point estimate methods in uncertainty analysis for environmental engineering applications. J Environ Eng 131:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tsai CW, Li M (2014) Uncertainty analysis and risk assessment of DO concentrations in the Buffalo River using the perturbance moments method. J Hydrol Eng 19:04014032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tsakiris G, Spiliotis M (2013) Dam-breach hydrograph modelling: an innovative semi-analytical approach. Water Resour Manag 27:1751–1762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vaz de Melo Mendes B, Pericchi L (2009) Assessing conditional extremal risk of flooding in Puerto Rico. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 2009(23):399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Venkatesh M, Francisco O, Mazdak A, Scott E (2008) Uncertainty in flood inundation mapping: current issues and future directions. J Hydrol Eng 13:608–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wahl TL (1998) Prediction of embankment dam breach parameters: a literature review and needs assessment. Water Resources Rsearch Laboratory, DSO-98-004Google Scholar
  30. Wahl TL (2004) Uncertainty of predictions of embankment dam breach parameters. J Hydraul Eng 130:389–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wu W (2013) Simplified physically based model of earthen embankment breaching. J Hydraul Eng 139:837–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wu S-J, Lien H-C, Chang C-H (2010) Modeling risk analysis for forecasting peak discharge during flooding prevention and warning operation. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 2010(24):1175–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xu Y, Zhang LM (2009) Breaching parameters for earth and rockfill dams. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135:1957–1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Taiwan UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations