Optimal selection of numerical models for flood embankment pore pressure and temperature data

Abstract

The aim of the ISMOP project is to study processes in earthen flood embankments: water filtration, pore pressure changes, and temperature changes due to varying water levels in the riverbed. Developing a system for continuous monitoring of flood embankment stability is the main goal of this project. A full-size earthen flood embankment with built-in sensors was built in Czernichow and used to conduct experiments involving the simulation of different flood waves, with parameters mostly measured at time intervals of 15 minutes. Numerical modelling—in addition to providing information about phenomena occurring in the embankment due to external factors and changes in water level—could be used to assess the state of the embankment. Modelling was performed using Itasca Flac 2D 7.0 with an assumed grid cell size of 10x10 cm. The water level in the embankment simulated the water flow in the Wisła River and the temperature of the air and water. Data about the state of the flood embankment was exported every hour.Using numerical models and real experiment data, a model-driven module was used to perform comparisons. Analyses of each half-section of the flood embankment were carried out separately using similarity measures and an aggregate window.For the tests, the North-West (NW) half cross-section of the embankment was chosen, which contains pore pressure and temperature sensors UT6 to UT10. The water level in the embankment was raised to a height of 3m; the best numerical model was considered the one that best matched the actual data recorded by the sensors during the experiment. The experiment period was from 9pm on 29/08/2016 to 9am on 03/09/2016.Seventeen numerical models of the water level rising to 2, 3, and 4 meters were compared against real experimental data from the NW half cross-section. The first step was to verify the similarity between the incoming data from the sensors. If the correlation value exceeded 0.8, the data from the sensors was averaged. The experimental data was then compared against the numerical models using least absolute deviations L1-Norm. The L1-Norm varied from 26 to 32, depending on window length and the numerical model used.