Developing Guidelines for Two-Dimensional Model Review and Acceptance

Authors

• Horacio Toniolo
• Joel Homan

Files

Description

Two independent modelers ran two hydraulic models, SRH-2D and HEC-RAS 2D. The models were applied to the Lakina River (MP 44 McCarthy Road) and to Quartz Creek (MP 0.7 Quartz Creek Road), which approximately represent straight and bend flow conditions, respectively. We compared the results, including water depth, depth averaged velocity, and bed shear stress, from the two models for both modelers. We found that the extent and density of survey data were insufficient for Quartz Creek. Neither model was calibrated due to the lack of basic field data (i.e., discharge, water surface elevation, and sediment characteristics). Consequently, we were unable to draw any conclusion about the accuracy of the models. Concerning the time step and the equations used (simplified or full) to solve the momentum equation in the HEC-RAS 2D model, we found that the minimum time step allowed by the model must be used if the diffusion wave equation is used in the simulations. A greater time step can be used if the full momentum equation is used in the simulations. We developed a set of guidelines for reviewing model results, and developed and provided a two-day training workshop on the two models for ADOT&PF hydraulic engineers.

Publication Date

1-31-2018

Keywords

modeling, 2D hydraulic modeling, model review guidelines

Recommended Citation

Toniolo, Horacio and Homan, Joel, "Developing Guidelines for Two-Dimensional Model Review and Acceptance" (2018). CESTiCC Project Reports. 23.
https://scholarworks.alaska.edu/uaf_cesticc_project_reports/23

Handle

http://hdl.handle.net/11122/9597