logging in or signing up Klotz at TFMA Fall 2008 gusgraham Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT lite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 50 Category: Education License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: November 13, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas : Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas November 5, 2008 Introductions : Introductions Fergus Graham, PE Storm Water Division, Klotz Associates, Inc., Houston, TX Background Originally from Glasgow, Scotland 10 years of experience in Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Post Graduate Degree in Information Technology Passionate about the application of GIS and technology in engineering Glossary of Terms : Glossary of Terms Amur I am Amurny I am not Burn Stream Dreich Misty Weather Haud yer weesht Be quiet! Thon That One Youse Y’all Project Description : Project Description Client City of Houston Project Name Phase I Design Services for: Shepherd Westmoreland Glen Oak Purpose Identify Problems & Develop Design Alternatives Estimate Costs & Recommend Preferred Alternative Prepare Preliminary Engineering Report Project Location : Project Location Design Goals : Design Goals Design Criteria City of Houston Design Manual (Chapter 9) City of Houston Technical Paper 100 City of Houston Technical Paper 101 Basic Design Steps Analyze Existing System for 2 Year event Define Existing Problems Design Proposed System for 2 Year Event Analyze Proposed System for 100 Year Event Design Overland Flow Control for 100 Year Event Locating Problem Areas : Locating Problem Areas Flood Complaint Data Source: 311 Call Centre Data: Flood Complaint Location Flooding Type: Street Flooding Passable Impassable House Flooding No. of Instances Complaint Map : Complaint Map Basic Complaint Density Map : Basic Complaint Density Map Weighting/Scoring Complaints : Weighting/Scoring Complaints Simple Additive Score All Points Score 1 for being a complaint +1 if includes Street Flooding +1 if impassable +1 if includes House Flooding Weighted Score All Points Score 1 x w1 for being a complaint +1 x w2 if includes Street Flooding +1 x w3 if includes impassable +1 x w4 if includes House Flooding w1 + w2 + w3 + w4 = 1 Weighted Complaint Density Map : Weighted Complaint Density Map Basic Complaint Density Map : Basic Complaint Density Map Weighted Complaint Density Map : Weighted Complaint Density Map Overland Flow Analysis : Overland Flow Analysis City of Houston Methodology 4 Methods: Method 1 – Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis Method 2 – Conduit & Overland Flow Analysis Method 3 – Conduit & Overland Flow with Storage Method 4 – Dynamic Flow Routing Analysis Method 1 : Method 1 Proposed Design Analyzed at the 100-Year Event HGL must be below Maximum Ponding Elevation MPE is the elevation of natural ground at the road ROW Also need to consider maximum allowable street ponding: 6” at high points 18” at low points 100-Year HGL negates overland storage. Results in over-sized conduits. Method 2 : Method 2 Method 3 : Method 3 Method 4 : Method 4 Time consuming dynamic model 1D model not always adequate for overland flow Assumes that overland flow travels in the same general direction as sub-surface flow GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefits often difficult to assess Huge advantage in selecting a solution GIS allows us to: Visually identify and quantify benefits of various proposed solutions Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis 2-yr Return Period Losses: Existing Condition = $458,157 Proposed Condition = $169,005 These losses can be accumulated over the lifetime of the proposed system and compared to other proposed conditions. Perhaps not an absolute benefit….but certainly relative Thanks for your attention!Questions? : Thanks for your attention!Questions? You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.
Klotz at TFMA Fall 2008 gusgraham Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT lite Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 50 Category: Education License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: November 13, 2008 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas : Using GIS to Evaluate Benefits of Flood Reduction in Sewered Areas November 5, 2008 Introductions : Introductions Fergus Graham, PE Storm Water Division, Klotz Associates, Inc., Houston, TX Background Originally from Glasgow, Scotland 10 years of experience in Water, Wastewater & Stormwater Post Graduate Degree in Information Technology Passionate about the application of GIS and technology in engineering Glossary of Terms : Glossary of Terms Amur I am Amurny I am not Burn Stream Dreich Misty Weather Haud yer weesht Be quiet! Thon That One Youse Y’all Project Description : Project Description Client City of Houston Project Name Phase I Design Services for: Shepherd Westmoreland Glen Oak Purpose Identify Problems & Develop Design Alternatives Estimate Costs & Recommend Preferred Alternative Prepare Preliminary Engineering Report Project Location : Project Location Design Goals : Design Goals Design Criteria City of Houston Design Manual (Chapter 9) City of Houston Technical Paper 100 City of Houston Technical Paper 101 Basic Design Steps Analyze Existing System for 2 Year event Define Existing Problems Design Proposed System for 2 Year Event Analyze Proposed System for 100 Year Event Design Overland Flow Control for 100 Year Event Locating Problem Areas : Locating Problem Areas Flood Complaint Data Source: 311 Call Centre Data: Flood Complaint Location Flooding Type: Street Flooding Passable Impassable House Flooding No. of Instances Complaint Map : Complaint Map Basic Complaint Density Map : Basic Complaint Density Map Weighting/Scoring Complaints : Weighting/Scoring Complaints Simple Additive Score All Points Score 1 for being a complaint +1 if includes Street Flooding +1 if impassable +1 if includes House Flooding Weighted Score All Points Score 1 x w1 for being a complaint +1 x w2 if includes Street Flooding +1 x w3 if includes impassable +1 x w4 if includes House Flooding w1 + w2 + w3 + w4 = 1 Weighted Complaint Density Map : Weighted Complaint Density Map Basic Complaint Density Map : Basic Complaint Density Map Weighted Complaint Density Map : Weighted Complaint Density Map Overland Flow Analysis : Overland Flow Analysis City of Houston Methodology 4 Methods: Method 1 – Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis Method 2 – Conduit & Overland Flow Analysis Method 3 – Conduit & Overland Flow with Storage Method 4 – Dynamic Flow Routing Analysis Method 1 : Method 1 Proposed Design Analyzed at the 100-Year Event HGL must be below Maximum Ponding Elevation MPE is the elevation of natural ground at the road ROW Also need to consider maximum allowable street ponding: 6” at high points 18” at low points 100-Year HGL negates overland storage. Results in over-sized conduits. Method 2 : Method 2 Method 3 : Method 3 Method 4 : Method 4 Time consuming dynamic model 1D model not always adequate for overland flow Assumes that overland flow travels in the same general direction as sub-surface flow GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis GIS Overland Flow Analysis : GIS Overland Flow Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefits often difficult to assess Huge advantage in selecting a solution GIS allows us to: Visually identify and quantify benefits of various proposed solutions Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis Benefit Analysis : Benefit Analysis 2-yr Return Period Losses: Existing Condition = $458,157 Proposed Condition = $169,005 These losses can be accumulated over the lifetime of the proposed system and compared to other proposed conditions. Perhaps not an absolute benefit….but certainly relative Thanks for your attention!Questions? : Thanks for your attention!Questions?