Assessing the Effects of Flood Resilient Technologies

Transcription

1 S. Golz 1, R. Schinke 1, T. Naumann 1, S. Garvin 2, I. White 3 Assessing the Effects of Flood Resilient Technologies International Conference on Flood Resilience 5-7 September 2013, Exeter (GBR) 1 Leibniz-Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, Dresden (GER) 2 Building Research Establishment, Glasgow (GBR) 3 University of Waikato, Hamilton (NZL)

2 2 13 Background Aerial photo of the flooded city Meißen / Saxony Picture: MSC/Thomas Kramer, 6 June 2013 Floated floor construction due to flooding Picture : Golz/Nikolowski, 12 June 2013 Flood damage repair Picture: Golz/Nikolowski, 12 June 2013 Phenomenon Increasing impacts of floods on buildings in urban areas due to (i) the intensification of extreme weather events, (ii) unplanned or uncontrolled settlements, and (iii) the rising vulnerability of assets Objective To mitigate flood impacts and to better cope with flooding the improvement of buildings flood resilience is becoming an important strategy in flood risk management Issue Lacking knowledge about the assessment of the effects of flood resilient technologies

3 3 13 EU-FP7 Research Project SMARTeST Smart Resilience Technology, Systems and Tools Overall Aim Improving the Road to Market of (innovative) flood resilient technologies (FRe T) Key criterion for the implementation of FRe T is having sufficient evidence about their effects concerning flood risk reduction Systematic tests of FRe T by experimental studies Understanding of Flood Resilience Flood resilience of buildings can be defined as their ability to recover easily and quickly from damaging effects (in this context flood resilience is inversely related to flood vulnerability) The enhancement of flood resilience properties is generally aiming at (i) minimising flood damage, (ii) decreasing direct flood repair costs, and (iii) allowing fast reoccupation

4 4 13 Flood Resilient Technologies (1) Categorisation What are Flood Resilient Technologies (FRe T)? Basically, flood resilient technologies (FRe T) are specified as any methods, products or materials that improve the resilience properties of the built environment (Lawson 2011). Categories of FRe T flood protection to specific locations up to a certain threshold, e.g. mobile flood barrier systems flood protection to roads, railways etc. using surfacing materials, membranes, automatic barriers etc. temporary watertight closure of façade openings such as doors, windows or ventilation elements address either resilient building components or resilient engineering solutions Perimeter Technologies Infrastructure Technologies Building Aperture Technologies Building Technologies URBAN SCALE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING SCALE

5 5 13 Flood Resilient Technologies (2) Individual building scale FRe T on individual building scale FRe T implementation on an individual building scale has direct impacts on physical flood vulnerability Building Aperture Technologies Building Technologies temporary watertight closure of façade openings such as doors, windows or ventilation elements Resilient Building Components Resilient Engineering Solutions materials for the temporary or permanent sealing of the building envelope, anti-corrosive products that prevent triggering destructive processes or smart domestic flood warning systems that operate automatically flood barriers advice on how to design new or how to modify existing building assemblies, e.g. external wall or floor constructions, in order to enhance cleanability, to promote fast drying and to minimise the extent of necessary repair works in case of flood water is entering the building

6 Visualisation: R. Schinke Flood Resilient Technologies (3) Impacts on Flood Vulnerability Dry proofing strategy Building aperture technologies Resilient building components Flood vulnerability analyses considering FRe T implementation Derivation of adapted depthdamage functions Wet proofing strategy Resilient engineering solutions selected FRe T to follow the DRY proofing strategy temporary flood guards (boards) for doors selected FRe T to follow the WET proofing strategy modified ground floor construction using e.g. foam glass and mastic asphalt screed air-brick covers modified external wall: construction using e.g. polyurethane cavity wall insulation valves for backflow prevention

7 7 13 HOWAD-Prevent Flood Damage Simulation Model / Methodology

8 8 13 Case study Heywood / Greater Manchester (UK) Coupled modelling / SMARTeST Toolkit Modelling the effects of selected FRe T regarding vulnerability mitigation considering different flood scenarios and various levels of FRe T implementation Site survey Data collection Modelling flood water level Multi-Hydro Modelling flood damage HOWAD-Prevent (± FRe T) BRE, UNIMAN, IOER 2010 ENPC 2012 IOER 2012

9 9 13 Case study Heywood / Greater Manchester (UK) Results (1) LTH-SE 3 - about 1890 LTH-SE 5 - about 1960 SDH 5 - about 1964 SDH 6 - about 1980 DH 8 - about 2000

10 10 13 Case study Heywood / Greater Manchester (UK) Results (2) Water level above g.f. Potential flood damage reduction FRe T WP FRe T DP - 10 cm 20 % 95 % + 10 cm 25 % 90 % + 30 cm 30 % 81 % + 50 cm 32 % 70 % cm 35 % 0 % Exemplary depth-damage functions (DDF) for the building type LTH-SE 5 indicating its flood vulnerability (the reference value is the water depth above ground floor) Black function: original state considering no FRe T implementation Red function: dry proofed state considering building aperture technologies and resilient building components Green function: wet proofed state considering flood resilient engineering solutions

11 11 13 Case study Heywood / Greater Manchester (UK) Results (3) Flood damage to buildings in monetary terms for a heavy rain event of 58 mm / 2 hours reference scenario without FRe T implementation four scenarios considering different FRe T implementation levels

12 12 13 Conclusions and Outlook Proposed methodology has been initially tested in three case study areas in Heywood (UK), Valencia (ESP) and Dresden (GER) proved potential to assess the effects of FRe T within flood damage calculations Further work will be done to consider also the expenditures (costs) of FRe T in monetary terms in order to calculate the efficiency of their implementation Efficiency = Effects / Costs Detailed information about the reliability of various FRe T resulting from laboratory testing or numerical modelling will be gathered in order to link the parameters reliability and efficiency to obtain an indication of their performance Performance = Reliability * Efficiency Performance indicator will serve as profound basis for the selection of most appropriate FRe T alternatives Methodology of flood damage assessment will be improved to capture prospective FRe T performance

13 Thank you for your attention. Further Information