Forum Replies Created

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Modelling a glacial lake outburst flood #12971
    Sauhardra Joshi
    Participant

    Return-Path:
    Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43])
    by sloti21d1t10 (Cyrus 3.3.0-570-gba0a262-fm-20201106.001-gba0a2623) with LMTPA;
    Sat, 07 Nov 2020 22:01:34 -0500
    X-Cyrus-Session-Id: sloti21d1t10-1604804494-3841407-2-5367290184640761099
    X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 3.0
    X-Spam-known-sender: no
    X-Spam-sender-reputation: 500 (none)
    X-Spam-score: 0.1
    X-Spam-hits: FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001, HTML_MESSAGE 0.001, ME_SENDERREP_NEUTRAL 0.001,
    RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 -0.001,
    SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001, SPF_PASS -0.001, URI_HEX 0.1, LANGUAGES en,
    BAYES_USED none, SA_VERSION 3.4.2
    X-Spam-source: IP=’209.85.218.44′, Host=’mail-ej1-f44.google.com’, Country=’US’,
    FromHeader=’com’, MailFrom=’com’
    X-Spam-charsets: plain=’UTF-8′, html=’UTF-8′
    X-Resolved-to: [email protected]
    X-Delivered-to: [email protected]
    X-Mail-from: [email protected]
    Received: from mx5 ([10.202.2.204])
    by compute3.internal (LMTPProxy); Sat, 07 Nov 2020 22:01:45 -0500
    Received: from mx5.messagingengine.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by mailmx.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 830E43C00C5
    for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 22:01:45 -0500 (EST)
    Received: from mx5.messagingengine.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
    by mx5.messagingengine.com (Authentication Milter) with ESMTP
    id B887A01081F;
    Sat, 7 Nov 2020 22:01:45 -0500
    ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; d=messagingengine.com; s=fm1; t=
    1604804505; b=H5Xczzd5JjXoms2JJ23j/MS7JVqM1HcAfoP8f3n/MKjl8ZGA3b
    bndExfwUK7bbfwmzRsyLKOyjE3aUdtWpYZVT3OmSz+kk3O+yRWVx2nThRz6maySQ
    IC8IPt2vCqyQ7XTHlYx6oTqzYb8TA2lZ35Vg1PM9qQJL5zZlhxqc5XSODiLBVTh8
    +sEUvAF/VAa9muNcFZXUtv+EOTKaflBtIKQaplK4gk7+ZmkI9IIyIYvSgc7P0coe
    5SO219LJspl96CD2UkJ22OeIpFzeWTp3+Pz63oDfSVH/vmPtGteV5VVlCrN2Li/6
    PqsgAgMCxNTGxyQOfPl3dMOigbNEeschrP7Q==
    ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
    messagingengine.com; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from
    :date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; s=fm1; t=1604804505;
    bh=EF0eJ9kSzPhFQAtUafYisE0fHFivB26mB2ABJty5fes=; b=HLPC/u+NzY0b
    WiL+vjVzoTlVM4W512i/AM/7sGEjAOk65Tj9W2GQ1ixx4R+d+F5JU84e6NI9npQF
    AIFIG99pMUlERoc8xqLNHk/LWXNLI2XkfOcFQTMiwr8c+g40pCH4dUv8+x4bgt7u
    b6hOvRc42WIn+th0kbuUlDgq3VqvWMEjCrp2yZ9yG+0B56NG2Sqi8WbSHXDgS9SZ
    9SLCaXFZuT6y/S3ViBu/Ti+hkfluxjqCzRXcy71IoMP1btpVl/SEJPSwhlyM1euE
    Ih5PmagXZcWlgWzLS2Gt+6PkZy7S0627E9SqimYPDUaFt+1I3emNaM/oD3vcnhpe
    4qky5YqZHA==
    ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx5.messagingengine.com; arc=none (no signatures found);
    bimi=skipped (DMARC Policy is not at enforcement);
    dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=gmail.com
    [email protected] header.b=NOFT3kIh header.a=rsa-sha256
    header.s=20161025 x-bits=2048;
    dmarc=pass policy.published-domain-policy=none
    policy.published-subdomain-policy=quarantine
    policy.applied-disposition=none policy.evaluated-disposition=none
    (p=none,sp=quarantine,d=none,d.eval=none) policy.policy-from=p
    header.from=gmail.com;
    iprev=pass smtp.remote-ip=209.85.218.44 (mail-ej1-f44.google.com);
    spf=pass [email protected]
    smtp.helo=mail-ej1-f44.google.com;
    x-aligned-from=pass (Address match);
    x-google-dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key) header.d=1e100.net
    [email protected] header.b=MR/3dKwC;
    x-ptr=pass smtp.helo=mail-ej1-f44.google.com
    policy.ptr=mail-ej1-f44.google.com;
    x-return-mx=pass header.domain=gmail.com policy.is_org=yes
    (MX Records found: alt3.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt4.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com);
    x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=gmail.com policy.is_org=yes
    (MX Records found: alt3.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt4.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com);
    x-tls=pass smtp.version=TLSv1.2 smtp.cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256
    smtp.bits=128/128;
    x-vs=clean score=0 state=0
    Authentication-Results: mx5.messagingengine.com;
    arc=none (no signatures found);
    bimi=skipped (DMARC Policy is not at enforcement);
    dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key sha256) header.d=gmail.com
    [email protected] header.b=NOFT3kIh header.a=rsa-sha256
    header.s=20161025 x-bits=2048;
    dmarc=pass policy.published-domain-policy=none
    policy.published-subdomain-policy=quarantine
    policy.applied-disposition=none policy.evaluated-disposition=none
    (p=none,sp=quarantine,d=none,d.eval=none) policy.policy-from=p
    header.from=gmail.com;
    iprev=pass smtp.remote-ip=209.85.218.44 (mail-ej1-f44.google.com);
    spf=pass [email protected]
    smtp.helo=mail-ej1-f44.google.com;
    x-aligned-from=pass (Address match);
    x-google-dkim=pass (2048-bit rsa key) header.d=1e100.net
    [email protected] header.b=MR/3dKwC;
    x-ptr=pass smtp.helo=mail-ej1-f44.google.com
    policy.ptr=mail-ej1-f44.google.com;
    x-return-mx=pass header.domain=gmail.com policy.is_org=yes
    (MX Records found: alt3.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt4.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com);
    x-return-mx=pass smtp.domain=gmail.com policy.is_org=yes
    (MX Records found: alt3.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt2.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt1.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com,alt4.gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com);
    x-tls=pass smtp.version=TLSv1.2 smtp.cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256
    smtp.bits=128/128;
    x-vs=clean score=0 state=0
    X-ME-VSSU: VW5zdWI9aHR0cDovL2hlYy1yYXMtaGVscC4xMDkxMTEyLm41Lm5hYmJsZS5jb20vdGVtcG
    xhdGUvTmFtbFNlcnZsZXQuanRwP21hY3JvPXVuc3Vic2NyaWJlX2J5X2NvZGUmbm9kZT05
    MzMwJmNvZGU9YzNOaGRXaGhjbVJBWjIxaGFXd3VZMjl0ZkRrek16QjhMVFF4TWpVd09UTX
    dNQT09
    X-ME-VSCause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudduvddgheduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
    fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu
    rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeggfhgjhf
    ffkffuvfgtsegrtderredttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefurghuhhgrrhguucflohhshhhiuceo
    shhsrghuhhgrrhgusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefgjefhtd
    ffleelvdefudehtdekffdvudduffevgefhhfejvdehgfekjeelvdekvdenucffohhmrghi
    nhepnhgrsggslhgvrdgtohhmnecukfhppedvtdelrdekhedrvddukedrgeegnecuvehluh
    hsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehinhgvthepvddtledrkeehrddvudekrdeg
    gedphhgvlhhopehmrghilhdqvghjuddqfheggedrghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpdhmrghilh
    hfrhhomhepoehsshgruhhhrghrugesghhmrghilhdrtghomheq
    X-ME-VSScore: 0
    X-ME-VSCategory: clean
    Received-SPF: pass
    (gmail.com … _spf.google.com: Sender is authorized to use ‘[email protected]’ in ‘mfrom’ identity (mechanism ‘include:_netblocks.google.com’ matched))
    receiver=mx5.messagingengine.com;
    identity=mailfrom;
    envelope-from=”[email protected]”;
    helo=mail-ej1-f44.google.com;
    client-ip=209.85.218.44
    Received: from mail-ej1-f44.google.com (mail-ej1-f44.google.com [209.85.218.44])
    (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
    (No client certificate requested)
    by mx5.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS
    for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2020 22:01:45 -0500 (EST)
    Received: by mail-ej1-f44.google.com with SMTP id k3so7384679ejj.10
    for ; Sat, 07 Nov 2020 19:01:45 -0800 (PST)
    DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
    d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
    h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
    bh=EF0eJ9kSzPhFQAtUafYisE0fHFivB26mB2ABJty5fes=;
    b=NOFT3kIhYEV+04DeHtPeSTNtjyyL7RaU0qrEhkAyR6vqoHU6OIlFwnetFAm8Z6glfQ
    cdvryMzgTEkx7r4/bvdV0ged4hSviIwj1tmMXbEBpqr6Oo+/AK73ezh7MlKXVn4WsrOL
    WWmePXukA0qBYb29gxRMR0CXvxZxUon9nUT2XkrFib2EAXcEeDn2HQ5kp3BkZQOhcURa
    E0KMGJmgILX56DZG8J3GrxAdEYsRV8MOr+fMI8VG7tfMWzRQi9in6u2jHa4lQhc1r56t
    ejQGWIe0wYMuleRZG5KYyazTccMrL06t5bg2AbTUaHfr/qcc6GhX3b2hBZs0qA4zKcQJ
    IeEw==
    X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
    d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
    h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
    :message-id:subject:to;
    bh=EF0eJ9kSzPhFQAtUafYisE0fHFivB26mB2ABJty5fes=;
    b=MR/3dKwCyCuu9Eu1ngCTa5JQ+cssjmnKhlq6V6HfbHuRo1j4OMl3ZYaHwZqDhSTqhM
    VNyF5/BoJmmtTdV+J+/AcdyIZbXDteBmBEUUKoqjuHborJpl8U5C1rMRC0tnV2FJQEwl
    MHlHNo8JHvr9aK/mqN871SQi8EWjea2yNqm1KnPGeiI9tEtOOV5Gb1yGOq5jArFmVHFj
    1oOxISrKTIkkAB3NILpWo0nJtjdRxFRbfLhjS/qXUy3p6wqKTn47KNPbyYA5c0EIeSrF
    gk91j4MkWyC7dwoPH6sq62TiQTHfZYsydvHCwlMCwfrUSeJ0WqjRPLg0P8Y0KFVDpQk6
    p+Gw==
    X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bWiuE9vQng0vQhFWO7ax4ink5FQhrUSwKnSyzZawgL3BZOnK2
    i9YZM8xcZmo7dgiN5DsEahXQI5zSFhvtm84S/JHxHQnfgOU=
    X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyJJUop4nMkYXKrIRfBqtusF2RR4r5m8eQoVrPv+SxxuTV13wi2YXePGiBXJKUa+VhPh1cwe4mfEq1qlVFF7jU=
    X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:50f:: with SMTP id j15mr8732457eja.198.1604804503099;
    Sat, 07 Nov 2020 19:01:43 -0800 (PST)
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
    <[email protected]>
    In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
    From: Sauhard Joshi
    Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 08:46:06 +0545
    Message-ID:
    Subject: Re: Modelling a glacial lake outburst flood
    To: “emilyrose [via HEC-RAS Help]”
    Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=”000000000000575c6c05b38faa01″

    –000000000000575c6c05b38faa01
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”UTF-8″
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    hello,
    actually I am doing thesis on GLOF as well. Is there anyway I could connect
    with you? From what i read in your mail, I think you have a good
    understanding of the hydrology of Glacier and having difficulty in
    Hydraulic modeling. I have few queries about your inflow hydrograph . I
    assume the lake to be reservoir of certain constant volume without inflow
    and let it over top over the moraine dam. After reading your mail I think
    your idea for inflow hydrograph seems more valid. Is you empirical formula
    for discharge at outlet of the dam? or upstream of the lake?
    Furthermore, if you need any information regarding my work, I will be happy
    to share. Thank you.

    On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 10:42 PM emilyrose [via HEC-RAS Help] < [email protected]> wrote:

    > Thank you so much for your reply!
    >
    > My thesis is assessing the hazard of a potential glacial lake outburst
    > flood, so the rest of my thesis has assessed how the hazard has changed
    > over the past decade, i.e. glacier area change, lake area and volume chan=
    ge
    > etc., I have also assessed how the vulnerability of the downstream
    > community has changed in terms of population and infrastructure at risk. =
    So
    > the final step would be to tie this together which an estimation of how f=
    ar
    > an outburst of that size may travel etc.
    >
    > You are completely right, it is a lot to learn and I have very little
    > knowledge on river hydraulics and flood modelling unfortunately, and
    > neither does my supervisor but it is something I am being advised to do
    > nonetheless – so I have been trying my best to teach myself the basics to
    > complete this but it is rather complex to me.
    >
    > Most research within the field does use a dam-breach model, however, thes=
    e
    > are more complicated and as the aim of my project is not to assess how th=
    e
    > dam would breach I was hoping to do something as simple as possible. In
    > terms of terrain, I have a modern DEM which I have produced a DTM in TIN
    > format from (not sure if this is right), but using HEC-RAS I created a
    > terrain from this which seemed correct.
    >
    > I have currently been doing a 2D unsteady flow simulation, using a flow
    > hydrograph for the upstream, and normal depth for downstream. As a
    > moraine-dammed lake it is assumed that flood discharge would increase
    > linearly to a peak and decrease linearly to 0 m3/s over a time span equal
    > to that of the rising limb – so the hydrograph is assumed to be triangula=
    r
    > in shape as has been applied to other GLOF studies. The peak discharge wa=
    s
    > calculated using Qmax=3D 0.72V^0.53, a relationship developed for
    > moraine-dammed lakes.
    >
    > I managed to get this simulation up and running but even giving the
    > hydrograph a duration of 8 hours the result in RAS-mapper is showing the
    > flood to travel only ~30km downstream, when I want it to reach ~90km
    > downstream to a large town. I am certain it would reach this far as there
    > has been a flood from a nearby lake which reached the town that was a
    > fraction of the size of the lake that I am modelling. I have no idea how
    > to resolve this at all, I may have carried out the whole simulation out
    > wrong but I am unsure how to make the flood continue further.
    >
    > I hope this makes some sense! Thank you for your time.
    >
    > ——————————
    > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
    > below:
    >
    > http://hec-ras-help.1091112.n5.nabble.com/Modelling-a-glacial-lake-outbur=
    st-flood-tp9330p9336.html
    > To unsubscribe from Modelling a glacial lake outburst flood, click here
    > <http://hec-ras-help.1091112.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=
    =3Dunsubscribe_by_code&node=3D9330&code=3Dc3NhdWhhcmRAZ21haWwuY29tfDkzMzB8L=
    TQxMjUwOTMwMA=3D=3D>
    > .
    > NAML
    > <http://hec-ras-help.1091112.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=
    =3Dmacro_viewer&id=3Dinstant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=3Dnabble.naml.=
    namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.v=
    iew.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=3Dnotify_subscribers%21nabble%3A=
    email.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble=
    %3Aemail.naml>
    >

    –000000000000575c6c05b38faa01
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=”UTF-8″
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    hello,

    actually I am doing thesis on GLOF as well. Is =
    there anyway I could connect with you? From what i read in your mail, I thi=
    nk you have a good understanding of the hydrology=C2=A0of Glacier and havin=
    g difficulty in Hydraulic modeling. I have few queries about your inflow hy=
    drograph . I assume the lake to be reservoir of certain constant volume wit=
    hout inflow and let it over top over the moraine dam. After reading your ma=
    il I think your idea for inflow hydrograph seems more valid. Is you empiric=
    al formula for discharge at outlet of the dam? or upstream of the lake?

    Furthermore, if you need any information regarding my work, I will b=
    e happy to share. Thank you.=C2=A0=C2=A0

    On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 10:42 =
    PM emilyrose [via HEC-RAS Help] <[email protected]> wrote:

    <= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">

    Thank you so much for your reply!=20

    My thesis is assessing the hazard of a potential glacial lake outbu=
    rst flood, so the rest of my thesis has assessed how the hazard has changed=
    over the past decade, i.e. glacier area change, lake area and volume chang=
    e etc., I have also assessed how the vulnerability of the downstream commun=
    ity has changed in terms of population and infrastructure at risk. So the f=
    inal step would be to tie this together which an estimation of how far an o=
    utburst of that size may travel etc.=20

    You are completely right, it is a lot to learn and I have very litt=
    le knowledge on river hydraulics and flood modelling unfortunately, and nei=
    ther does my supervisor but it is something I am being advised to do noneth=
    eless – so I have been trying my best to teach myself the basics to complet=
    e this but it is rather complex to me.=20

    Most research within the field does use a dam-breach model, however=
    , these are more complicated and as the aim of my project is not to assess =
    how the dam would breach I was hoping to do something as simple as possible=
    . In terms of terrain, I have a modern DEM which I have produced a DTM in T=
    IN format from (not sure if this is right), but using HEC-RAS I created a t=
    errain from this which seemed correct.=20

    I have currently been doing a 2D unsteady flow simulation, using a =
    flow hydrograph for the upstream, and normal depth for downstream. As a mor=
    aine-dammed lake it is assumed that flood discharge would increase linearly=
    to a peak and decrease linearly to 0 m3/s over a time span equal to that o=
    f the rising limb – so the hydrograph is assumed to be triangular in shape =
    as has been applied to other GLOF studies. The peak discharge was calculate=
    d using Qmax=3D 0.72V^0.53, a relationship developed for moraine-dammed lak=
    es.=20

    I managed to get this simulation up and running but even giving the=
    hydrograph a duration of 8 hours the result in RAS-mapper is showing the f=
    lood to travel only ~30km downstream, when I want it to reach ~90km downstr=
    eam to a large town. I am certain it would reach this far as there has been=
    a flood from a nearby lake which reached the town that was a fraction of t=
    he size of the lake that I am modelling.=C2=A0 I have no idea how to resolv=
    e this at all, I may have carried out the whole simulation out wrong but I =
    am unsure how to make the flood continue further. =C2=A0

    I hope this makes some sense! Thank you for your time.=20

    =09
    =09
    =09


    If you reply to this email, your message =
    will be added to the discussion below:

    http://hec-ras-help=
    .1091112.n5.nabble.com/Modelling-a-glacial-lake-outburst-flood-tp9330p9336.=
    html


    =09
    To unsubscribe from Modelling a glacial lake outburst flood, click here.
    NAML

    –000000000000575c6c05b38faa01–

    in reply to: steady flow analysis #13620
    Sauhardra Joshi
    Participant

    This is the screenshot of the code.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)