S69 - Quantifying The Key Factors That Create Roadway Flooding - LTC2013

QUANTIFYING THE KEY FACTORS THAT CREATE ROAD FLOODING
Joshua D. Kent Center for GeoInformatics Louisiana State University 2013 LA Transportation Conference February 20, 2013
Photo provided by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission
Road Flooding
2/20/2013
2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA
Road Flooding
Flooding Represents A Serious Operational Hazard for Evacuation Routes Located Across Southern Louisiana
2/20/2013 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA 3
Road Flooding
2011 DOTD and LTRC Announced a Special Topics Research Grant:
Quantify the Key Factors that Create Road Flooding

Tropical Storm Lee

September 3, 2011 @ 1:00am Landfall in Vermilion Parish 60mph winds 18 casualties $1.6 billion in damage
2/20/2013
Tropical Storm Lee - 2011 - Photo by Tim Osborne (NOAA)
Louisiana Highway LA-1 South of Golden Meadow Towards Leeville
2/20/2013
Emergency Evacuation Routes Across Coastal Louisiana are Vulnerable to Inundation
LA 56
2/20/2013
South of Chauvin, Louisiana Terrebonne Parish 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA 7
Photo provided by Terrebonne Levee & Conservation District
Road Flood Hazards

Louisiana Roads and Highways are at Risk of Inundation from a Variety of Weather and Environmental Conditions:

Tropical Storm Lee over Louisiana (NOAA, 2011)
Lunar Tide Cycles Northerly Winds Storm Surge Sea Level Rise Subsidence
2/20/2013
PROJECT GOALS:
Collected and synthesize data that can quantify flood risk. Operationalize actionable data to facilitate informed decision making. Assess flood risk to vehicles by type.
2/20/2013
2005 Todd Bigelow 9
Project Objectives & Methodology

Quantify Flood Hazard
Define Flood Hazard Characteristics. Collect, Process, and Synthesize Data. Compute Flood Depths over Roads.
Develop a Decision Support Tool that will Operationalize the Factors that Contribute to Road Flooding:
Synthesized flood risk. Develop a Meaningful User Interface.
Research and Assess the Flood Risk by Vehicle Type and Flood Conditions:
At what Flood Depth is Road Travel Hazardous? Assess Risk to Different Vehicle Types.
2/20/2013
10
Steps to Quantify Flooding

Define Road Flooding and Develop Formula
Data Requirements Collect and Process the Data
2010 National Geographic
2/20/2013
11
Quantify Road Flooding

Road = Inundation tides + waves + surge + other
Elevation
A road will flood when its elevation is exceeded by the sum of:
Tidal Effects Wave heights Storm Surge Heights Other factors:
wind direction, wind speed, local barriers, topography, and bathymetry.
Data Requirements
Model the Inundation from Hurricane Induced Storm Surge Over the Surfaces of 86 Unique LDOTD Routes Located Across the 5 Management Districts in South Louisiana.
Current & Authoritative Data Selected routes due to historic vulnerability to flooding. Inundation derived from the maximum surge heights (ft.) estimated using the SLOSH surge models. Identify the nearest tidal or water gauge to the vulnerable routes.
Data Sources
Road Elevations: Derived from the LDOTD Pavement
Management System (PMS) database.
SLOSH: Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes

models published by the National Weather Service (NWS).
Tide Gauges: Real-Time Stream and Tide Gauge

Readings published online by NOAA, USGS, and other Agencies. Tide also included with surge models.
Wave Action: Limited integrated within SLOSH

models. Requires complex modeling of topography, bathymetry, and meteorological factors.
SLOSH Models
Forecast model of Storm Induced Surge Over Land:

Developed by the National Weather Service (NWS) Consists of an ensemble of deterministic, numerical models based on meteorological variables.
SLOSH: Deterministic, Numerical Models Founded on Meteorological Variables:

Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale (e.g., Category 1-5) Tide Stage (e.g., low vs. high tide) Storm Direction & Speed (e.g., North-west at 10mph) Organized by Basins (e.g., New Orleans, Vermilion Bay, Sabine Lake, etc.)
2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA 16
2/20/2013
2/20/2013
17
Ensemble Surge Models

Three basic types of Surge models published by the NWS:
P-Surge
Probabilistic Storm Surge
Response
Landfall < 48hrs
MEWO
Maximum Envelope Of Water
Readiness
Landfall 48hrs
MOM
Maximum Of MEOWs
Planning Mitigation
Landfall > 120hrs
18
2/20/2013
Tide Gauge Data: NOAA & USGS
2/20/2013
19
2/20/2013
20
2/20/2013
21
Wave Models
Wave models are produced for large geographic areas, which make data synthesis too problematic for the defined objectives.
Cat 1 @ 15mph (Hi Tide)

INUNDATION
Road Elevations
.0
.5
.0 -3 6
0.
-1
-1
<
0.
1.
Tide & Water Gauges (2012)

Agency
! ( " )
NOAA USGS
The Pavement Management System (PMS) Maintains a Road Database:

Location Elevation Type LRS/Control Sec. District Etc.
2/20/2013
1.
3.
<
Implementing a Decision Support Tool

Synthesize Road Elevations with SLOSH Surge Models and Tide Gauge Locations. Display as a Map in a GIS Relative to a Hurricane Scenarios:
Represent data by LDOTD district. Illustrate flood depths in feet above the road surface. Organize by hurricane category, path, speed, and tide-range
Tool Organization & Functionality

The Operational Requirements for this Instrument were Designed & Implemented According to:
map organization user interface & functionality
2/20/2013
25
Tool Development
Coordinated Development with the Project Review Committee:
Mr. Jonathan Brazzell, NWS Mr. Rhett Desselle, LDOTD Mr. Chris Fillastre, LDOTD Mr. Kurt Johnson, LDOTD Mr. Vincent Latino, LDOTD Mr. Lyle LeBlanc, LDOTD Dr. James E. Mitchel, LDOTD
2/20/2013
Customized Identify Tool
Intuitive Map Tools
Organized Table of Contents:

Actionable Data Layers:
Surge Vulnerable Road Features Real-time Gauge Data Major Highways LDOTD Districts Parishes
Basemap Layers:
Simplified Map Interface
2/20/2013
27
Map Bookmarks
Tide Gauge Links
2/20/2013
28
Deliverables
Project Delivered as a Proof of Concept for a Operational Tool Capable of Providing Effective Decision Support for Flood Hazards on Vulnerable, State-Maintained Routes.
Tool Implementation & Utilization

Five ArcGIS Desktop map documents were delivered for LDOTD districts: 02, 03, 07, 61, and 62 Inundation was computed for designated evacuation routes in each district.
Inundated road segments (i.e., point features) were symbolized to depict the maximum (worse-case) flooding (ft.) for a given hurricane scenario.
Name, description, and Web link to nearest realtime water and tide gauge facilities were added to each road point feature.
The Decision Support Tool
a brief demonstration
2/20/2013
31
TOOL DEMONSTRATION:
Vulnerable District 02 Roads: Category 2 Hurricane Northerly Track 15mph Forward Speed Average Tidal Conditions Results: Inundation along select routs symbolized according to degree of flood depth above the road surface.
2/20/2013
32
Cat 1 @ 15mph (Hi Tide)

INUNDATION
.0
.5
.0 -3 6
0.
-1
-1
<
0.
1.
Tide & Water Gauges (2012)

Agency
! ( " )
NOAA USGS
2/20/2013
1.
3.
<
33
2/20/2013
34
2/20/2013
35
2/20/2013
36
2/20/2013
37
The Decision Support Tool
end of demonstration.
2/20/2013
38
Defining Vehicle Flood Risk

Define Vehicle Categories Determine Flood Risk Parameters Assess Flood Risk Present Results
2006 (cc) ifish.net
2/20/2013
39
Flood Risk by Vehicle Type

At what flood depth is road travel hazardous?
Mini Passenger Vehicle
Weight: 1,750 lbs. | Clearance: 5.5"
400 350
Water Depth
6" 7" 8" 9" 10" 8" Threshold Ff = 342.5 lbs. 9" Threshold Ff = 199.5 lbs. 10" Threshold Ff = 56.5 lbs.
Lateral Force (lbs)
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2 1.4 mph 4 2.7mph 6 4.1mph 8 5.5mph 10 6.8mph
Water Velocity (feet per second)
2/20/2013
40
Turn Around - Dont Drown
2/20/2013
41
Computing Flood Risk to Vehicles

Develop a simplistic approach for
computing vehicle risk follows a three-stage

conditional function in which the buoyancy,
lateral forces, and friction forces are

combined.
Computing Flood Risk to Vehicles

1) The net weight of a vehicle is reduced by the weight displaced by the rising water (i.e., buoyancy). 2) Lateral Forces of moving water against the vehicle (i.e., water pressure) are computed. 3) Friction Force is determined when the combined lateral forces of water pressure and buoyancy move the vehicle.
Width: 6 feet Length: 18 feet Ground Clearance: 18 inches Weight: 5,040 lbs.
1-foot of water displaced by this vehicle weighs: (6ft x 18ft x 1ft x 62.4 lbs./ft3) = 6,739 lbs.
6,739 lbs. > 5,040 lbs.

Computing Vehicle Buoyancy

Archimedes Principle: The buoyant force on an object is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by that object. WB = Wv (Av Zw w )
WB = Buoyant Weight of Immersed Vehicle Wv = Vehicle Weight Av = Vehicle Area Zw = Net Depth of Flood Waters (flood height ground clearance) w = Water Density per Volume (~62.4 lbs./foot3)
Computing Lateral Force of Water

Compute the force of the moving water against the vehicle, the weight of the vehicle, and the drag forces of the vehicle within the water Fw = (Az Pdw)
Fw = Blas Pascals Second Law: the Force of Water Az = Submerged Surface Area of the Vehicle Pdw= Dynamic Hydrostatic Pressure of Water
Computing Lateral Force of Water

Compute the force of the moving water Pdw = k Vw2 against the vehicle, the weight of the densityof value of water on a k = constant vehicle, and the drag forces the vehicle square object: ~1.4 lbs./ft (AASHTO) within the waterV = velocity of the water
3 w
Fw = (Az Pdw)
Fw = Blas Pascals Second Law: the Force of Water Az = Submerged Surface Area of the Vehicle Pdw= Dynamic Hydrostatic Pressure of Water
Computing Friction Force

Critical force applied to a vehicle sufficient to overcome its static inertia is dependent on both the friction forces keeping the vehicle still and the lateral forces of the water incident to the vehicles surface area. Ff = Cf WB
Ff = Friction Force of a Vehicle Cf = Coefficient of Friction for a Wet Surface (~0.4) WB = Apparent Weight of Immersed Vehicle
Assessing Vehicle Risk

Lateral Force of Water (Fw ) Friction Force (Ff )
Risk assessed for a static vehicle in moving flood waters can be assessed by combining each of the previous equations.
2/20/2013 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA
2007 Associated Press
49
Example: Vehicle Risk Assessment

A vehicle is stalled in flood waters moving at 6 feet per second:
4,050 lbs. Lateral Force: 411.4 lbs.
Friction force: 295.8 lbs.
Width: 6.5 ft. Length: 14 ft. Clearance: 10.5 in. Weight: 4,050 lbs. Flood Depth: 17.5 in. Submerged Depth: 0.583 ft. Water Velocity: 6 ft. sec.-1
3,310.5 lbs.
17.5
Net Weight: 4,050 l = 739.5 lbs. Friction Force: 0.4 x 739.5 lbs. = 295.8 lbs. 2/20/2013 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA Risk: 295.8 lbs. < 411.4 lbs.
10.5
50
Compute Risk by Vehicle Type

Actionable Data for Realistic Search & Rescue Strategies
When is a flooded road impassable? What are the rescue hazards? Search & Rescue Vehicle Fording Options
Civilian Vehicle Specifications

CLASS BODY MEAN CURB WEIGHT (lbs.) 1,750 2,250 2,750 3,250 MEAN LENGTH (feet) 12.50 13.00 14.75 15.75 MEAN WIDTH (feet) MEAN GROUND CLEARANCE (inches) 5.50 6.00 6.75 7.00
MINI (PC/Mi) SUBCOMPACT (PC/L)
5.50 5.50 5.75 6.00
PASSENGER
COMPACT (PC/C)
MIDSIZE (PC/Me) FULL-SIZE (PC/H)

MINIVAN
3,750
2,250 2,750 3,250 5,250 3,750
16.00
15.00 16.50 15.75 17.25 15.50
6.25
6.50 6.50 6.25 6.50 6.25
7.50
7.00 10.00 11.00 15.50 11.75
MULTI-PURPOSE VEHICLE (MPV) SPORT UTILITY VEHICLE PICKUP/TRUCK

2/20/2013
FULL MID-SIZED FULL MID-SIZED
2013 LA Transportation Baton Rouge, LA FULL-SIZE 5,250 Conference |17.25
6.50
15.50 52
Military Vehicle Specifications

CLASS BODY AVG. CURB WEIGHT (lbs.) 5,500 AVG. LENGTH (feet) 15.00 AVG. WIDTH (feet) 7.10 AVG. GROUND CLEARANCE (inches) 16.00
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) humvee 2 Ton Cargo deuce and a-half
M-998
M-1114/6
7,800
15.00
7.10
16.00
M-35/G-742
18,000
23.00
8.00
20.00 (30 w/fording kit)
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV)
M-1078-81 LMTV (2.5 ton)
17,000
21.00
8.00
22.00
M-1083-84 FMTV (5-ton)

2/20/2013
20,000
23.00
8.00
22.00
53
Flood Risk to Civilian Vehicles

The stability threshold is represented as a dashed line, which illustrates the point at which the friction force, Ff, is overwhelmed by the lateral forces, Fw, exerted by moving flood waters.
Lateral Force (lbs)
Mini Passenger Vehicle

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2
1.4 mph
Water Depth
6" 7" 8"
9"
10" 8" Threshold Ff = 342.5 lbs. 9" Threshold Ff = 199.5 lbs. 10" Threshold Ff = 56.5 lbs.
Estimates based on idealized assumptions of an 9 deep flood flowing at 13 against ftsec-1 debris-free water over smooth surfaces and evenly submerged vehicle. 10 deep flood flowing at 9.7 ftsec-1
A Compact Passenger Car is at Risk when:
4
2.7mph
6
4.1mph
8
5.5mph
10
6.8mph
11 deep flood flowing at 6.9 ftsec-1 Subcompact Passenger Vehicle

Weight: 2,250 lbs. | Clearance: 6"
600 500 Lateral Force (lbs) 400 300 200 100
Compact Passenger Vehicle

Weight: 2,750 lbs | Clearance: 6.75"
800 700 Lateral Force (lbs) 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 5
3.4 mph
10" 11" 9" Threshold Ff = 703.1 lbs. 11" Threshold Ff = 526.7 lbs. 10" Threshold Ff = 350.3 lbs.
Water Depth
6.5" 7.5" 8.5" 9.5"
Water Depth
7"
8" 9"
10.5"
8.5" Threshold Ff = 528.2 lbs. 9.5" Threshold Ff = 379.5 lbs. 10.5" Threshold Ff = 230.8 lbs. 3.4 mph
0
5
4.7mph
6.1mph
7.5mph
11
8.9mph
13
7
4.7mph
9
6.1mph
11
7.5mph
13
8.9mph
Water Velocity (feet per second) 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, Water Velocity (feet per second) 2/20/2013 LA
54
Midsized Passenger Vehicle

Weight: 3,250 lbs | Clearance: 7"
1,000 900 800 Lateral Force (lbs)
Full-Sized Passenger Vehicle

1,200 1,000 Lateral Force (lbs) 800 600 400
Water Depth
8" 9" 10" 11" 12" 11" Threshold Ff = 708.4 lbs. 12" Threshold Ff = 511.3 lbs. 10" Threshold Ff = 314.1 lbs.
Water Depth
8.5" 9.5" 10.5"
700
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
3.4 mph
11.5"
9.5" Theshold Ff = 1,084 lbs. 10.5" Theshold Ff = 876 lbs. 11.5" Threshold Ff = 668 lbs.
200
0 5
3.4 mph
10
6.8mph
15
10.23mph
20
13.6mph
4.7mph
6.1mph
7.5mph
11
8.9mph
13
Minivan Multi-Purpose Vehicle

600 500 Lateral Force (lbs) 400 300 200 100
Minivan Multi-Purpose Vehicle

600 500 Lateral Force (lbs) 400 300
11"
Water Depth
10.5" 11.5"
Water Depth
8" 9" 10"
12.5"
13.5" 14.5" 12.5" Threshold Ff = 655.8 lbs. 13.5" Threshold Ff = 453.0 lbs. 14.5" Threshold Ff = 250.2 lbs.
200 100
9" Threshold Ff = 494.4 lbs. 10" Threshold Ff = 291.6 lbs.
0
2
1.4 mph
6
4.1mph
10
6.8mph
14
9.5mph
0
3
2.1 mph
8
5.5mph
13
8.9mph
11" Threshold Ff = 88.8 lbs.
2/20/2013Water Velocity (feet per second)2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA Water Velocity (feet per second)
55
Midsized Sport Utility Vehicle

Weight: 3,250 lbs | Clearance: 11"
1,200 1,000 Lateral Force (lbs) 800 600 400
Full-Sized Sport Utility Vehicle

1,800 1,600 1,400 Lateral Force (lbs) 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 5
3.4 mph 20" 18" Threshold Ff = 1,516.9 lbs. 19" Threshold Ff = 1,283.7 lbs. 17" 18" 19"
Water Depth
11.5" 12.5" 13.5" 14.5" 15.5" 13.5" Theshold Ff = 804.4 lbs.
Water Depth
16"
200
0
3.4 mph
14.5" Threshold Ff = 606.1 lbs.
6.8mph
10
10.23mph
15
13.6mph
20
15.5" Threshold Ff = 407.9 lbs.
10
6.8mph
15
10.23mph
20
13.6mph
20" Threshold Ff = 1,050.5 lbs.
Midsized Pickup
1,400 1,200 Lateral Force (lbs) 1,000 800 600 400
Full-Sized Pickup
1,800 1,600 1,400 Lateral Force (lbs) 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 5
3.4 mph
Water Depth
12" 13" 14" 15" 16" 14" Threshold Ff = 1,046.6 lbs. 15" Threshold Ff = 845.1 lbs. 16" Threshold Ff = 643.6 lbs.
Water Depth
16" 17" 18" 19" 20" 18" Threshold Ff = 1,516.9 lbs. 19" Threshold Ff = 1,283.7 lbs. 20" Threshold Ff = 1,050.5 lbs.
200
0 5
3.4 mph
10
6.8mph
15
10.23mph
20
13.6mph
10
6.8mph
15
10.23mph
20
13.6mph
2/20/2013 Water Velocity (feet per second) 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA Water Velocity (feet per second)
56
Flood Risk to Military Vehicles

Lateral Force (lbs)
2 Ton (M35/G742) Military Vehicle

7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0
Water Depth
21.5'' 22.5'' 23.5'' 24.5'' 25.5''
Ff = 5,095.1lbs.
The stability threshold is represented as a dashed line, which illustrates the point at which the friction force, Ff, and the vehicles buoyant weight, Wb, is overwhelmed by the forces exerted by the moving flood waters. Military Vehicles chosen represent those accessible to and used by the Louisiana National Guard. Estimates based on idealized assumptions of an debris-free water over evenly submerged vehicles.
20.5" Threshold 19.5" Threshold 18.5" Threshold

Ff = 5,860.5 lbs.
Ff = 5,477.8 lbs.
8.1 mph
12
11.6 mph
17
15.0 mph
22
18.4 mph
27
2/20/2013
57
HMMWV (M998) Military Vehicle

2,500
Water Depth
16.5''
2,000
Lateral Force (lbs) 1,500 1,000 500 0
5.5 mph
17.5''
18.5'' 19.5'' 20.5'' 20.5" Threshold Ff = 1,203.2 lbs. 19.5" Threshold Ff = 1,424.7lbs. 18.5" Threshold Ff = 1,646.2 lbs.
11
9.5 mph
14
17
13.6mph
20
HMMWV (M1114/6) Military Vehicle

3,500 3,000 Lateral Force (lbs) 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0
6.8 mph
Water Depth
16.5'' 17.5'' 18.5'' 19.5'' 20.5'' 20.5" Threshold Ff = 2,123.2lbs. 19.5" Threshold Ff = 2,344.7lbs. 18.5" Threshold Ff = 2,676.9 lbs.
10
13
10.9 mph
16
19
15mph
22
25
19.1mph
28
2/20/2013
Water 2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA Velocity (feet per second)
58
LMTV (2 Ton) Military Vehicle

7,000 6,000 Lateral Force (lbs) 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0
10.2 mph
Water Depth
22.5'' 23.5'' 24.5'' 25.5''
Ff = 5,577lbs.
20.5" Threshold 19.5" Threshold 18.5" Threshold

Ff = 6,275.8 lbs.
Ff = 5,926.4 lbs.
15
17.1 mph
25
23.9 mph
35
30.7 mph
45
FMTV (5 Ton) Military Vehicle

10,000 9,000 8,000 Lateral Force (lbs) 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 15 25 35 45
Water Depth
22.5'' 23.5'' 24.5'' 25.5''
Ff = 6,660.5lbs.
20.5" Threshold 19.5" Threshold
Ff = 7,043.2 lbs.
18.5" Threshold
Ff = 7,425.9 lbs.
2/20/2013
10.2 mph
17.1 mph
23.9 mph
30.7 mph
59
Results
Summary of Passenger Vehicle Flood Risk
CLASS
BODY MEAN CURB WEIGHT (lbs.) MEAN LENGTH (feet) MEAN WIDTH (feet) MEAN GROUND CLEARANCE (inches) WATER DEPTH NEEDED FOR NEUTRAL BUOYANCY (inches) VELOCITY OF WATER NEEDED TO DESTABALIZE VEHICLE (ft./sec.)
PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER PASSENGER MPV MPV SUV SUV PICKUP PICKUP
2/20/2013
MINI SUBCOMP ACT COMPACT MIDSIZED
1,750 2,250 2,750 3,250 3,750 2250 2,750 3,250 5,250 3,750 5,250
12.5 13 14.75 15.75 16 15 16.5 15.25 17.25 15.5 17.25
5.5 5.5 5.75 6 6.25 6.5 6.5 6.25 6.5 6.25 6.5
5.5 6 6.75 7 7.5 7 10 11 15.5 11.75 15.5
10.40 12.05 12.99 13.61 14.71 11.44 14.93 17.56 24.50 19.19 24.50
15.66 15.66 16.01 16.35 16.69 17.02 17.02 16.69 17.02 16.69 17.02 60
PASSENGER FULL-SIZED
MINI-VAN FULL-SIZED MIDSIZED FULL-SIZED MIDSIZED FULL-SIZED
Results
Summary of Military Vehicle Flood Risk
MEAN GROUND CLEARANCE (inches) WATER DEPTH NEEDED FOR NEUTRAL BUOYANCY (INCHES) 25.93 30.08 38.81 VELOCITY OF WATER NEEDED TO DESTABALIZE VEHICLE (FT/SEC) 17.79 17.79 18.88 MEAN WEIGHT (lbs.) MEAN LENGTH (feet) MEAN WIDTH (feet)
CLASS
BODY
M-998
5,500 7,800 18,000
15 15 23
7.1 7.1 8
16 16 20
HMMWV
M-1114/6
2.5 Ton
M-35/G-742
FMTV
M-1078-81 LMTV
M-1083-84 FMTV
17,000
20,000
21
23
8
8
22
22
41.46
42.90
18.88
18.88
2/20/2013
61
Conclusions
Quantified the Flood Hazards
Defined Flood Hazard Characteristics Collected Authoritative Data & Models Computed Flood Risk over Roads
Developed a Proof of Concept Decision Support Tool that Presents Worst-Case Flooding over Evacuation Routes.
Synthesized Flood Risk via District Map Developed a Functional User Interface Provided Recommendations for Future Developments
Researched Flood Risk by Vehicle Type:

Defined Vehicle Types Assessed Buoyancy, Lateral Forces of Water, and Friction Forces Determined Risk for Civilian and Military Vehicle Types Provided Recommendations for Evacuation Strategies
2/20/2013
Discussion
Numerous Caveats when Estimating Inundation over a Vulnerable Routes were Computed by Subtracting the Road Elevations from Modeled Surge.
Road Elevations Worse-Case Scenario Surge Estimates Vehicle Flood Risk
2/20/2013
Data Uncertainty & Limitations

SLOSH Model Accuracy:
20% accurate when forecast simulations matched actual storm
conditions.
Caution when interpreting of the estimates as anything beyond

guidance for potential flood intensity.
SLOSH Surge Uncertainty:

Grid cells are often too large. Estimates are effectively skewed relative to outlier elevations. Limitations of the hydrological data that mask the occurrence of actual shallow flooding events. Topographic issues are directly related to the spatial resolution of the SLOSH basin. Does not parameterize the specific values for tide, wave, or rainfall.
SLOSH Cell Sizes Can Be Too Large
Varying Grid Cell Size
2/20/2013
65
Uses the Mean Water Height and Elevation for Each Cell
2/20/2013
66
Resolution of the Barriers and Features
Average Elevation Mask Shallow Flooding
Topographic Barriers Topographic and Impedances are Barriers and the models weakest Impedances link.
2/20/2013
67
Summary of SLOSH Accuracy
Accuracy within 20% of Peak Storm Surge
Accounts for Astronomical Tides

Does not include rainfall, river flow, or wind-driven waves
2/20/2013
68
Summary of SLOSH Accuracy

Intense storms cause higher surges. The highest surges usually occur to the right of the storm track. Fast moving storms = high surges along open coast. Slow moving storms = greater flooding inside bays and estuaries. Large storms impact more coastline. Direction impacts flood extent Shallow shorelines = greater surge Steep shorelines = lesser surge
Decision Support Tool Recommendations

Decision Support Tool Demonstrated to the Project Review Committee in May, 2012
Effectiveness as an operational instrument questionable. Need to be implemented as Web-based tool. Simplify the User Interface (UI). Questions about Data accuracy and age of non real-time data. Incorporate more Real-Time data Districts to begin collecting data for flood events.
Vehicle Risk Recommendations

Vehicle Flood Risk Presented to the Project Review Committee in May, 2012
Need for a consistent vehicle classification scheme. Resolve differences between curb weight and gross vehicle weight. Need to revise estimates for computing Hydrostatic Pressure applied to submerged vehicle dependent on vehicle design (e.g., ground clearance and aerodynamics). Differentiation of debris vs. clear water and flow. Address PSA challenges and risks when driving through any flooded road, regardless of water depth!
Thank You
Questions?
Joshua D. Kent, Ph.D. Center for GeoInformatics Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 www.c4g.lsu.edu

S69 - Quantifying The Key Factors That Create Roadway Flooding - LTC2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S69 - Quantifying The Key Factors That Create Roadway Flooding - LTC2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

QUANTIFYING THE KEY FACTORS THAT CREATE ROAD FLOODING

Photo provided by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Photo provided by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission

Photo provided by the Greater Lafourche Port Commission

2011 DOTD and LTRC Announced a Special Topics Research Grant:

Quantify the Key Factors that Create Road Flooding

Tropical Storm Lee

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tropical Storm Lee - 2011 - Photo by Tim Osborne (NOAA)

Louisiana Highway LA-1 South of Golden Meadow Towards Leeville

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Emergency Evacuation Routes Across Coastal Louisiana are Vulnerable to Inundation

Road Flood Hazards

2005 Todd Bigelow 9

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Project Objectives & Methodology

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Steps to Quantify Flooding

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Quantify Road Flooding

SLOSH: Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricanes

Tide Gauges: Real-Time Stream and Tide Gauge

Wave Action: Limited integrated within SLOSH

Forecast model of Storm Induced Surge Over Land:

SLOSH: Deterministic, Numerical Models Founded on Meteorological Variables:

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Ensemble Surge Models

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tide Gauge Data: NOAA & USGS

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tide Gauge Data: NOAA & USGS

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tide Gauge Data: NOAA & USGS

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Cat 1 @ 15mph (Hi Tide)

Tide & Water Gauges (2012)

The Pavement Management System (PMS) Maintains a Road Database:

Implementing a Decision Support Tool

Tool Organization & Functionality

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Customized Identify Tool

Intuitive Map Tools

Organized Table of Contents:

Simplified Map Interface

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tide Gauge Links

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Tool Implementation & Utilization

The Decision Support Tool

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Cat 1 @ 15mph (Hi Tide)

Tide & Water Gauges (2012)

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

The Decision Support Tool

2013 LA Transportation Conference | Baton Rouge, LA

Defining Vehicle Flood Risk

2006 (cc) ifish.net