Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
}
Computation of Expected Annual Damage
1. Construct basic relationships for without-plan situation
Flow exceedance distribution
Stage-discharge curve
Stage-damage curve
Damage exceedance distribution
2. Compute the area beneath the damage-exceedance distribution
(expected annual flood damage) for each location and sum to obtain the
total expected annual flood damage
3. Repeat step (1) for each alternative flood plain management plan under
investigation
4. Repeat step (2)
5. Subtract results of step (4) (with plan) for each plan from without-plan
results. The differences will be expected annual flood damage reduction
for each plan
Expected Annual Flood Damage
Calculating Expected Annual Flood Damage
] [FD E
Flow exceedance distribution
Stage-discharge curve Stage-damage curve
Damage exceedance distribution
Benefits of E[FD] Reduction
Expected Annual Flood Damage reduction
Difference between E[FD] with and without protection
Calculating Expected Flood Damage Reduction Benefits
Floodplain Protected by a Levee
Probability of overtopping or geo-
structural failure
Need stage-discharge relationships in
the channel and on the floodplain
Flood stage in the floodplain
protected by a levee is a function
of
Flow in the stream or river channel,
Crosssectional area of the channel
between the levees on either side,
Channel slope and roughness,
Levee height.
If floodwaters enter the
floodplain
Water level in the floodplain depends
on the topological characteristics of
the floodplain
Levees
Probability of levee failure
function of
Levee height
Distribution of flows
Probability of geostructural
failure
Probability of levee failure
15% = probable non-failure
point, PNP
85% = probable failure point,
PFP
Stage
Probability of failure if water
surface reaches stage shown
0.0
0.15
0.85
1.0
Probable failure point (PFP)
Probable non-failure
point (PNP)
Levee
Stage
Damage
Without
Project
With
Project
Example
Urban basin.
Floods have caused significant
damage
Flow is measured at a USGS
gauge nearby
communities in the basin have
been flooded periodically
Increased development in the
upper portion of the basin
promises to worsen the flood
problem, as urbanization
increases the volume and peak
discharge
Inundated 130 businesses and
732 residences, second-story
flooding, eight lives lost.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 200 400 600
D
a
m
a
g
e
(
$
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
1
9
7
8
)
Discharge (m3/sec)
Example
Flood problem analyzed to identify opportunities for damage reduction
Set of damage reduction alternatives formulated
Evaluate each alternative in terms of economic performance
Display the results so that alternatives can be compared
Identify and recommend a superior plan from amongst the alternatives
The standard for damage-reduction benefit computation is the without-
project condition. Expected annual damage should be computed
For the computation, discharge-frequency, stage-discharge, and stage-
damage relationships were developed following standard procedures
Discharge - Probability Function
The existing, without-project discharge-frequency relationship
was developed from the sample of historical annual maximum
discharge observed at the USGS gauge
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
D
i
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
m
3
/
s
)
Exceedence Probability
Exceedence
Probability
Discharge
(m3/s)
0.002 899
0.005 676
0.01 539
0.02 423
0.05 299
0.1 223
0.2 158
0.5 87
0.8 51
0.9 39
0.95 32
0.99 22.9
Stage - Discharge Function
0.0
200.0
400.0
600.0
800.0
1000.0
1200.0
1400.0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
D
i
s
c
h
a
r
g
e
(
m
3
/
s
)
Stage (m)
The present, without project stage-damage relationship at the
USGS gauge index point was developed from water-surface
profiles computed with a computer program
Discharge-Stage
Stage (m)
Discharge
(m3/s)
1.97 84.4
2.39 100.4
3.39 168.2
4.07 228.4
4.58 277.5
5.50 383.7
6.70 538.5
7.13 605.8
7.47 651.5
7.75 721.7
8.10 838.2
8.79 1030.8
8.99 1159.1
9.57 1297.1
Stage - Damage Function
0.0
1000.0
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
D
a
m
a
g
e
(
$
1
,
0
0
0
)
Stage (m)
Developed with the following procedure:
Categorize structures in the basin
Define an average-case stage-damage relationships for categories
Add emergency costs
Stage-Damage
Stage (m)
Damage
($1,000)
3.35 0.0
4.27 25.7
4.57 88.6
5.18 339.3
5.49 525.1
6.10 1100.0
6.71 2150.6
8.23 5132.8
8.53 5654.2
9.14 6416.5
9.45 6592.2
Flood Damage Exceedance Frequency
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
D
a
m
a
g
e
(
$
1
0
0
0
)
Exceedence Frequency
Exceedence
Probability
Damage
($1,000)
0.002 5286
0.005 3830
0.01 2133
0.02 817
0.05 168
0.1 18.2
0.2 0
EAD Integration Procedure
Area between
each pair of
points is found
by Integration.
Damage ($)
Exceedance Probability
Area added as
last step in
integration
Area under
curve is
expected
annual damage
Last
exceedance
frequency
First
exceedance
value should be
at zero damage
Expected Annual Flood Damage
Trapezoid Rule:
E(D) = p
0
D
0
+ p
j
p
j1
( )
D
j
+ D
j1
( )
2
j=1
n
Integrating
Exceedence
Probability
Discharge
(m3/s) Stage (m)
Damage
($1,000)
Probability
Increment
Mean
Damage
for
increment
Weighted
Damage
0.002 5286 10,572
0.002 898.8 8.32 5286
0.003 4557.9 13,673.8
0.005 676.1 7.57 3830
0.005 2981.7 14,908.5
0.01 538.5 6.70 2133
0.01 1475.4 14,753.5
0.02 423.0 5.80 817
0.03 492.5 14,773.5
0.05 298.8 4.76 168
0.05 92.9 4,645.0
0.1 222.5 4.00 18.2
0.10 9.1 910.0
0.2 158.4 3.24 0
EAD 74,236
Uncertainty
In flood damage-reduction planning, uncertainties include
Future hydrologic events: streamflow and rainfall
choice of distribution and values of parameters
Simplified models of complex hydraulic phenomena
geometric data, misalignment of structure, material variability, and slope
and roughness factors
Relationship between depth and inundation damage
structure values and locations, how the public will respond to a flood
Structural and geotechnical performance when subjected to floods
Introducing Uncertainty
Assign probability density
functions to evaluation functions
At any location an orthogonal
slice would yield the PDF of
uncertainty
EAD and benefits determined in
the same way as before,
however, a Monte Carlo
sampling is used to sample from
the functions to produce
independent probability
damage functions that are
integrated to compute EAD
Monte Carlo sampling is
repeated (replicates) until stable
expected values are computed.
Darryl W. Davis, Risk Analysis in Flood Damage Reduction Studies The
Corps Experience, World Water Congress 2003 118, 306 (2003)