FLOODsite is co-funded by the European Community
Sixth Framework Programme for European Research and Technological Development (2002-2006) FLOODsite is an Integrated Project in the Global Change and Eco-systems Sub-Priority
Start date March 2004, duration 5 Years Document Dissemination Level
PU Public
PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services)
CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO
Web-based knowledge transfer
SPECIFICATION OF THE E-FLOOD PLATFORM
Report Number
T30-06-09
Revision Number 2_0_P01
Integrated Flood Risk Analysis
and Management Methodologies
Date
December 2006
Deliverable Number: D30.1 Due date for deliverable: March 2006 Actual submission date: December 2006
D
OCUMENTI
NFORMATIONTitle Web-based knowledge transfer (Specification of the E-Flood
Platform)
Lead Author Helen Udale-Clarke
Contributors Dimitri Solomatine
Distribution Project Team and Affiliates
Document Reference M30.1
D
OCUMENTH
ISTORYDate Revision Prepared by Organisation Approved by Notes
19/09/06 1_0_P01 HUC HRW Incomplete version containing initial review of tools and modelling methodologies
21/12/06 2_0_P01 HUC HRW Complete version including amendments to the review of tools based on meeting held on 12/12/06 between Task 30 and Theme 3
A
CKNOWLEDGEMENTThe work described in this publication was supported by the European Community’s Sixth Framework Programme through the grant to the budget of the Integrated Project FLOODsite, Contract GOCE-CT-2004-505420.
D
ISCLAIMERS
UMMARYThe overall objective of Task 30 is to support the communication of the findings of the whole FLOODsite project and to promote uptake of the FLOODsite framework and methodologies by the three main target groups: public, professional and educational.
The specific objective of Task 30 is to enhance uptake through the adoption of a Web-enabled knowledge based, modelling and dissemination platform, which is referred to as E-Flood.
The purpose of this report is to fulfil the obligations of Milestone 30.1, as defined in the Description of Work. This is to review the FLOODsite related software and modelling methodologies and to provide a specification for E-Flood platform.
There will be three components to the E-Flood platform:
The Knowledge Map will provide access to descriptors of people, organisations, projects, training courses and documents related to FLOODsite;
The Modelling Facility will provide web access to the tools and modelling systems with suitable web-enabling interfaces developed in Themes 1 to 3 and demonstrated/tested in Theme 4;
The Knowledge Transfer and Learning Facility will provide structured web access to the web-based training activities (E-Learning) for the FLOODmasters and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) components of Task 31 (Face-to-face Knowledge Transfer). It will also serve as an interface to the Modelling Facility when the latter is to be used in education, thus making the “learning shell” around it.
Further details regarding all three components can be found in the detailed specification in this report. It should be noted that all three components will form integral parts of the overall FLOODsite website. The E-Flood platform will not be seen by users as a separate entity from the main website. However, it is a separate entity with respect to who will be undertaking the development within the FLOODsite project, i.e. E-Flood will be developed by Task 30, whilst the FLOODsite website is the responsibility of Task 32. Close liaison will be required between both tasks.
C
ONTENTS Document Information ii Document History ii Acknowledgement ii Disclaimer ii Summary iii Contents v 1. Background... 1 1.1 Objectives of Task 30 ... 11.2 Objectives of this report... 1
2. Review of tools and modelling methodologies... 2
2.1 Objective of this review ... 2
2.2 How the review was undertaken ... 2
2.3 Summary of results from the review... 2
2.4 Details obtained from each task ... 5
2.4.1 Task 1 ... 5 2.4.2 Task 2 ... 5 2.4.3 Task 3 ... 5 2.4.4 Task 4 ... 5 2.4.5 Task 5 ... 5 2.4.6 Task 6 ... 5 2.4.7 Task 7 ... 5 2.4.8 Task 8 ... 5 2.4.9 Task 9 ... 6 2.4.10 Task 10 ... 6 2.4.11 Task 11 ... 6 2.4.12 Task 12 ... 6 2.4.13 Task 13 ... 7 2.4.14 Task 14 ... 7 2.4.15 Task 15 ... 7 2.4.16 Task 16 ... 7 2.4.17 Task 17 ... 7 2.4.18 Task 18 ... 7 2.4.19 Task 19 ... 8 2.4.20 Task 20 ... 8
2.5 Recommended contributions to the Modelling Facility... 9
2.5.1 Summary of contributions from Themes 1 to 3... 9
2.5.2 Prioritisation of contributions... 9
2.5.3 Use of pilots... 10
3. Detailed specification ... 11
3.1 Guiding principles of communication and dissemination... 11
3.2 Knowledge Map... 11
3.3 Modelling Facility... 13
Tables
Table 2.1 Contacts for each task 3
Table 2.2 Summary of potential contributions to Task 30 4
Table 2.3 Completion dates for contributions 9
Figures
Figure 1 Example “People Card” from the PoWER Knowledge Map 12
Figure 2 Example Graphical Search from the PoWER Knowledge Map 13
1. Background
1.1 Objectives of Task 30
The overall objective of Task 30 is to support the communication of the findings of the whole FLOODsite project and to promote uptake of the FLOODsite framework and methodologies by the three main target groups: public, professional and educational.
The specific objective of Task 30 is to enhance uptake through the adoption of a web-enabled knowledge based, modelling and dissemination platform, which is referred to as E-Flood.
There will be three components to the E-Flood platform:
The Knowledge Map will provide access to descriptors of people, organisations, projects, training courses and documents related to FLOODsite;
The Modelling Facility will provide web access to the tools and modelling systems with suitable web-enabling interfaces developed in Themes 1 to 3 and demonstrated/tested in Theme 4;
The Knowledge Transfer and Learning Facility will provide structured web access to the web-based training activities (E-Learning) for the FLOODmasters and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) components of Task 31 (Face-to-face Knowledge Transfer). It will also serve as an interface to the Modelling Facility when the latter is to be used in education, thus making the “learning shell” around it.
Further details regarding all three components can be found in the detailed specification in Section 3 of this report.
It should be noted that all three components will form integral parts of the overall FLOODsite website. The E-Flood platform will not be seen by users as a separate entity from the main website. However, it is a separate entity with respect to who will be undertaking the development within the FLOODsite project, i.e. E-Flood will be developed by Task 30, whilst the FLOODsite website is the responsibility of Task 32. Close liaison will be required between both tasks.
1.2 Objectives of this report
The purpose of this report is to fulfil the obligations of Milestone 30.1, as defined in the Description of Work. This is to review the FLOODsite related software and modelling methodologies and to provide a specification for E-Flood platform.
2. Review of tools and modelling methodologies
2.1 Objective of this review
A preliminary review has been undertaken of tools and modelling methodologies being developed as part of FLOODsite that might be suitable for inclusion in the Modelling Facility for the E-Flood platform.
The objective in principle of the Modelling Facility is to provide as many appropriate tools/models as possible interactively through the web. This might include (but not be limited to) decision-making tools, animations of model results, demonstrations of models, pseudo-modelling (i.e. providing a limited range of scenarios that can be rerun or results accessed by the web-user to see the impact of different decisions, etc.).
2.2 How the review was undertaken
Task members for Tasks 1 to 20 (Themes 1 to 3) were contacted by email and requested to provide brief details of outputs being produced by their task that might be appropriate for this type of web-based knowledge transfer. Contacts are listed in Table 2.1.
It should be noted that in most cases the Task Leader was contacted. In some instances HR Wallingford staff members were contacted instead. The reason for this was only to gain a response as quickly as possible. For a few tasks emails were sent to additional Task Members who were thought more likely to respond than the Task Leader.
Before the Modelling Facility can be developed, Task Leaders need to be contacted and agreement reached regarding contributions from each task.
2.3 Summary of results from the review
The feedback received indicates that there is a wide range of potential outputs that could be made available. These are summarised in Table 2.2 and further details can be found in Section 2.4. This list should be considered as recommendations only. Further discussions with each Task Leader should be undertaken and agreement reached regarding contributions.
The review highlighted that there was little awareness of Task 30 by other tasks. Links to Task 30 are not identified in DOWs or RIPs, even where the link has been explicitly identified in the DOW for Task 30, namely tasks in Theme 3. Obviously, this review has gone some way towards rectifying this. Actions to be undertaken by Task 30 prior to and during the next FLOODsite workshop in February 2007 in Dresden should increase awareness further.
Table 2.1 Contacts for each task
Task Description Enquiry made to Response received from
Theme 1 Advancing scientific knowledge … Sub-theme 1.1 Hazard (Risk Sources)
T 1 Identification of flash flood hazards Dr Sandrine Anquentin (INPG)
Dr Sandrine Anquentin (INPG)
T 2 Estimation of extremes Peter Hawkes (HRW) Peter Hawkes (HRW) & Prof. Agustin Sanchez-Arcilla (UPC)
T 3 Contribution to European Flood Hazard Atlas
Prof. Agustin Sanchez-Arcilla (UPC) & Dr José A. Jiménez (UPC)
Dr José A. Jiménez (UPC)
Sub-theme 1.2 Hazard (Risk Pathways)
T 4 Understanding and predicting failure modes Mark Morris (HRW) Mark Morris (HRW) T 5 Predicting morphological changes in rivers,
estuaries and coasts
Roger Bettess (HRW) Valerie Bain (HRW) T 6 Modelling breach initiation and growth Mark Morris (HRW) Mark Morris (HRW) T 7 Reliability analysis of flood defence
structures and systems
Ben Gouldby (HRW) & Dr Ir Pieter van Gelder (TUD)
Dr Ir Pieter van Gelder (TUD)
T 8 Flood inundation modelling / methodologies Dr Nathalie Asselman (WL Delft)
Dr Nathalie Asselman (WL Delft)
Sub-theme 1.3 Vulnerability (Receptors, consequences) T 9 Guidelines for socio-economic flood damage
evaluation
Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) T 10 Socio-economic evaluation and modelling
methodologies
Prof Edmund Penning-Rowsell (MU/FHRC)
Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) T 11 Risk perception, community behaviour and
social resilience
Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) Theme 2 Innovative mitigation …
Sub-theme 2.1 Pre-flood measures
T 12 Identification and ex-post evaluation of existing flood mitigation and defence measures
Jochen Schanze (IOER) & Alfred Olfert (IOER)
Alfred Olfert (IOER)
T 13 Investigation of integrated strategies considering planning and communicative instruments
Jochen Schanze (IOER) & Gérard Hutter (IOER)
Gérard Hutter (IOER)
T 14 Design and Ex-ante evaluation of innovative strategies for flood risk management
Caroline McGahey (HRW)
Caroline McGahey (HRW)
Sub-theme 2.2 Flood event measures
T 15 Radar and satellite observation of storm rainfall for flash flood forecasting in small to medium basins
Dr Guy Delrieu (INPG) & Dr Jean-Dominique Creutin (INPG)
Dr Guy Delrieu (INPG)
T 16 Real time guidance for flashflood risk management
Prof Marco Borga (UniPad)
Prof Marco Borga (UniPad)
T 17 Emergency flood management – evacuation planning
Darren Lumbroso (HRW)
Darren Lumbroso (HRW)
Theme 3 Framework for Integration
T 18 Framework for long-term Planning Caroline McGahey (HRW)
Caroline McGahey (HRW)
T 19 Framework for flood event management planning
Darren Lumbroso (HRW)
Darren Lumbroso (HRW)
T 20 Development of framework for the influence and impact of uncertainty
Table 2.2 Summary of potential contributions to Task 30
Task Description Originally expected Current suggestions
Theme 1 Advancing scientific knowledge … Sub-theme 1.1 Hazard (Risk Sources)
T 1 Identification of flash flood hazards None Powerpoint presentation summarising main results
T 2 Estimation of extremes None Methods and/or data sets
T 3 Contribution to European Flood Hazard Atlas
None Guidelines and examples
of flood hazard mapping techniques
Sub-theme 1.2 Hazard (Risk Pathways)
T 4 Understanding and predicting failure modes None See Task 6 T 5 Predicting morphological changes in rivers,
estuaries and coasts
None Process diagrams and
flow charts T 6 Modelling breach initiation and growth Possible use of the
modelling results
Examples of breach models and animations of breach models T 7 Reliability analysis of flood defence
structures and systems
None Demonstration outputs
T 8 Flood inundation modelling / methodologies None AVI-films of inundation simulations for a number of pilot sites
Sub-theme 1.3 Vulnerability (Receptors, consequences) T 9 Guidelines for socio-economic flood damage
evaluation
None Figures, diagrams or
posters T 10 Socio-economic evaluation and modelling
methodologies
None Several models for
demonstration T 11 Risk perception, community behaviour and
social resilience
None Figures, diagrams or
posters Theme 2 Innovative mitigation …
Sub-theme 2.1 Pre-flood measures
T 12 Identification and ex-post evaluation of existing flood mitigation and defence measures
None Web-based tool for
information gathering of possible measures and instruments; interactive tool for cases of implemented measures and instruments; web-based tool for the selection of evaluation criteria.
T 13 Investigation of integrated strategies considering planning and communicative instruments
None None
T 14 Design and Ex-ante evaluation of innovative strategies for flood risk management
None None
Sub-theme 2.2 Flood event measures
Theme 3 Framework for Integration
T 18 Framework for long-term planning Long-term planning DSS
prototype software T 19 Framework for flood event management
planning
Evacuation and rescue DSS prototype software T 20 Development of framework for the influence
and impact of uncertainty
Prototype software - decision-support and modelling tools and scenarios
Uncertainty model (prototype software for tracing uncertainty through flood models)
2.4 Details obtained from each task 2.4.1 Task 1
The Task 1 deliverable is only a report. However, it has been suggested that it might be possible to produce a powerpoint presentation that will summarise the main results, which could be included on the website. Dr Sandrine Anquentin (INPG) will ask the Task 1 partners whether they would be willing to produce this.
2.4.2 Task 2
Task 2 has made some developments to two methods of joint probability analysis and carried out and written up analysis of a number of data sets. Peter Hawkes (HRW) has suggested that none of this is really suitable for casual use, for example, by people not familiar with the methods and potential pitfalls, but the methods and/or data sets could probably be made available in a way where no harm can come from misuse. However, the Task Leader, Prof. Sanchez-Arcilla (UPC) advocates the approach that third parties (i.e. those outside of the FLOODsite project) should have to contact directly the originator of the required data set.
2.4.3 Task 3
Part of Task 3 is to review flood hazard mapping techniques. This will result in guidelines with examples, for coastal areas. This may produce something suitable for inclusion on E-Flood.
2.4.4 Task 4 See Task 6 2.4.5 Task 5
Task 5 will be developing an approach for taking morphology into account when assessing flood risk. Depending on what is successfully developed, the task might be able to contribute some process diagrams and flow charts to guide someone through the steps in assessing morphological interaction with flood risk.
2.4.6 Task 6
Task 6 will be able to provide examples of breach models and provide animations of breach models showing the growth of a breach and flood hydrographs.
2.4.7 Task 7
Task 7 will be able to provide some demonstration outputs from the reliability analysis of flood defence structures and systems.
any problems for at least the Scheldt pilot site. Dr Nathalie Asselman (WL Delft) will contact the other partners of Task 8 to ask their opinion.
2.4.9 Task 9
The potential to publish results interactively through the web is rather small for Task 9, which has developed a guideline for flood damage evaluation. However, potentially the crucial task results from the report could be presented in the forms of figures, diagrams or posters.
Sub-theme 1.3 (Tasks 9, 10 and 11) are having a meeting at the end of September in Italy where this issue will be raised and the results of the discussion will be reported back by Dr Frank Messner (UFZ). 2.4.10 Task 10
Task 10 will develop several models (impact of polluted flood water on biodiversity, damage reducing effects of flood warning, loss-of-life model and MCA approach to evaluate flood risk) and all of these have the potential to be demonstrated over the web. However, this needs discussion with all of the project partners and will be raised by Dr Frank Messner (UFZ) at the next Sub-theme 1.3 meeting at the end of September.
Tasks 9 to 11 are all developing basic methodological approaches that are planned to be applied in the pilot sites (theme 4). At the very least, some scenario runs for the different approaches of Task 10 will be produced on one or more of the pilot sites. Dr Frank Messner should be able to provide more details after the next Sub-theme 1.3 meeting at the end of September.
2.4.11 Task 11
The potential to publish results interactively through the web is rather small for Task 11, which will produce a report on flood risk perception. However, potentially the crucial task results from the report could be presented in the forms of figures, diagrams or posters.
Sub-theme 1.3 (Tasks 9, 10 and 11) are having a meeting at the end of September in Italy where this issue will be raised and the results of the discussion will be reported back by Dr Frank Messner (UFZ). 2.4.12 Task 12
Task 12 is producing a number of web-based tools. These are:
1. The web-based tool for information gathering as specified in the original DOW (i.e. an information tool of possible measures and instruments, classified according to different homologous classification systems) is under preparation. There was an early version delivered by a Task partner, but unfortunately this could not be used for web-application. Since then, the data bank has been redone and a functioning web-tool is now in the process of being constructed. This should be available (draft status presumably) by the end of October 2006. 2. An interactive tool for cases of implemented measures and instruments. This tool should offer
methodology for ex-post evaluation of measures and instruments this selection tool makes the criteria system a bit more practicable.
Once each of these has been approved by the Task partners, it should be possible to include them in E-Flood.
2.4.13 Task 13
Task 13 will not be producing anything appropriate. 2.4.14 Task 14
Task 14 will not be producing anything appropriate. 2.4.15 Task 15
The radar and satellite SAS libraries have been operational since month 24 and the evaluation phase, which will end at month 48 is about to begin. This evaluation will impact on the algorithms contained in the library and the intention is to deliver the final version of the library at month 48 together with the final report. Once this has been achieved, the final version of the SAS library can be disseminated to the end-users via Task 30.
2.4.16 Task 16
The principal output of Task 16 could be included in Task 30 by developing a means of demonstrating the model. The Flash Flood Guidance concept will be integrated in a system for flood forecasting. Therefore, further thought would need to go into understanding what would be needed to produce a model demonstration for this output.
2.4.17 Task 17
Task 17 will be testing a number of existing evacuation models developed for flood management in at least two pilot sites (The Thames gateway being one). This should hopefully produce some animations of possible evacuation scenarios that may be of interest for inclusion on E-Flood.
2.4.18 Task 18
Task 18 will be developing prototype software for application within a Decision Support System (DSS) Framework for long-term planning.
DSSs will be enacted on 3 pilots; certain components of the DSS methodology will be selected, coded and implemented for the sites:
For the Thames pilot (Task 24), HRW will create a basic software interface (most likely in GIS) that calls on existing calculation modules (largely using the TE2100/Task 24 models).
For the Scheldt Pilot (Task 25), Delft will select and enact certain calculation modules. Because their calculation approach will be different from the Thames pilot, their basic software interface will look different and will call upon different modules.
For the Mulde, part of the Elbe Catchment (Task 21), IOER will also be doing some basic DSS modelling.
It was agreed at the Theme 3 review meeting on 12 December 2006, that the Task Leader for Task 18 would provide further information regarding the technical detail of outputs suitable for E-Flood and review issues of confidentiality and sensitivities with respect to release of data/results to be used in any demonstrations (i.e. the pilot studies). The deadline for this is 22 December 2006.
2.4.19 Task 19
Task 19 will be developing prototype software for application within a “risk management” DSS. The DSS will be based on evacuation and rescue; it will not include flood warning or operational measures. This software will be made available for E-Flood.
It was agreed at the Theme 3 review meeting on 12 December 2006, that the Task Leader for Task 19 would provide further information regarding the technical detail of outputs to E-Flood and review issues of confidentiality and sensitivities with respect to release of data/results to be used in any demonstrations (i.e. the pilot studies). The deadline for this is 22 December 2006.
It should be noted that Tasks 18 and 19 are “conceptually linked”, but the outputs are entirely independent. Therefore, the outputs will be delivered separately to Task 30.
2.4.20 Task 20
Task 20 will be producing an “uncertainty model”, prototype software for tracing uncertainty through flood models. This will be made available for E-Flood.
The software will be developed to “research standard”; it is not anticipated that the model will be at a stage where it can be picked up and used by someone without considerable support from the developers. It is likely to be of more interest to people who might be able to contribute to development than those who would wish to use it.
Making the software available for download will be done as part of the process of releasing it as open source. The developers will attempt to provide compiled versions, which can be run reasonably easily, as well as source code, but these will not be particularly stable or ‘featureful’. At the present time it is hard to confirm the level of functionality that will be available. Development is proceeding in the context of example computations, which means the functionality being developed is precisely that which is needed to complete those examples. A general user is quite likely to want to do something which hasn't been implemented.
It was agreed at the Theme 3 review meeting on 12 December 2006, that the Task Leader for Task 20 would provide further information regarding the technical detail of outputs to Task 30 and review issues of confidentiality and sensitivities with respect to release of data/results to be used in any examples. The deadline for this is 22 December 2006.
2.5 Recommended contributions to the Modelling Facility 2.5.1 Summary of contributions from Themes 1 to 3
The main potential contributions are in the form of the following:
a) Prototype software within the Decision Support Systems being developed in Tasks 18, 19 and 20 b) Direct links to web-based tools being developed by Tasks 12 and 15
c) Model demonstrations and/or animations from Tasks 6, 7, 8, 16 and 17
Suggestions from other Tasks (in Themes 1 to 3), such as presentations, posters, etc., may be best provided/disseminated via other parts of the FLOODsite knowledge transfer programme, through the website.
Table 2.3 Completion dates for contributions
Task Description Completion Date (1)
6 Examples of breach models and animations of breach models showing the growth of a breach and flood hydrographs
February 2007 (2) 7 Demonstration outputs of reliability analysis of flood defence
structures and systems
February 2008 (2) 8 AVI-films of flood inundation simulations for a number of pilot sites September 2007 (2) 12 Web-based tool for information gathering of possible measures and
instruments
October 2006 (3) 12 Interactive tool for cases of implemented measures and instruments May 2007 (3) 12 Web-based tool for the selection of evaluation criteria Available (3)
15 Radar and satellite SAS libraries March 2008 (4)
16 Model demonstration of flash flood forecasting March 2007
17 Animations of possible evacuation scenarios using existing evacuation models
September 2007
18 Long-term planning DSS prototype software February 2008
19 Evacuation and rescue DSS prototype software October 2007 #
20 Uncertainty model (prototype software for tracing uncertainty through flood models)
February 2008 (1)
Taken from the latest RIP unless stated otherwise. Therefore, does not necessarily represent latest anticipated delivery dates based on current progress.
(2)
Tasks 6, 7 and 8 are linked. Therefore, allow for a potential delay in delivery of final outputs until completion of the latest running task.
(3)
See section 2.4.12.
(4)
See section 2.4.15. #
Completion date taken from minutes of Theme 3 review meeting on 12 December 2006
2.5.2 Prioritisation of contributions
If it proves necessary to limit the number of contributions to the Modelling Facility, these should be prioritised based on the following considerations (provided in likely order of importance):
1. How closely does the inclusion of a particular task output meet with the original project brief? 2. Are there any issues of confidentiality or copyright that would prevent dissemination?
3. What is the extent of the risk of outputs being misinterpreted or misused? 4. How soon would the outputs be available for Task 30?
7. How easily could the outputs be accessed by the intended audience (including issues such as readability on screen, software requirements for viewing animations, download times for large files, how to search and navigate within the site as a whole, but also with respect to each output, etc.)?
8. How much additional work would be required by the delivering Task versus Task 30 in order to develop the web-based version of the output?
9. Would the output be particularly innovative in comparison with what is already available via the internet?
10. How easily could the outputs be tailored to different target audiences? 11. Do the outputs relate to other outputs to be included on E-Flood? 12. How quickly would the outputs become out-of-date or obsolete?
13. How easily could outputs be updated/maintained (including who would do this, how and would it need financing)?
On this basis,
Items listed as (a) above should be included because this is a requirement from the original brief (Theme 3 is particularly critical for the successful delivery of Task 30);
Items listed as (b) above should be included on the basis that these will require little additional effort on the part of Task 30 to be included;
Items listed as (c) should be prioritised based on the list above and be included depending on available time and budget.
2.5.3 Use of pilots
It should be noted that the models and prototype software are being developed by Themes 1 to 3. However, application of these is likely to be best demonstrated using the outputs from the pilots in Theme 4. This is discussed in more detail in Section 3.3.
Some of the case studies are much further along than the earlier Themes and will be better placed to provide early demonstrations of items for the Modelling Facility. Early indications are that the hydrological modelling in the pilot of the flash flood basins (Task 23) could be used as a demonstration and discussion platform with other tasks.
Depending on the pilot site, there are going to be sensitivity/confidentiality issues regarding the use of modelling results or allowing the public to generate “extreme scenarios” that may cause scaremongering (particularly the Thames and Scheldt). However, it is thought that enough sites should be free from such problems to enable use. German Bite and Ebro are probably fairly free from such problems. At least some of the Elba should be useable, as it is already being used as part of the Dresden course.
3. Detailed specification
3.1 Guiding principles of communication and dissemination
In all regards, the final delivery of E-Flood should fulfil the guiding principles of communication and dissemination for the FLOODsite project. These being:
1. Keep it simple – We will keep our outputs as simple as possible to maximise readability and understanding for the audience.
2. Audience centred – We will design our activities and outputs for the intended audience. 3. Fulfil contract requirements – We will ensure our activities and outputs will deliver our
contractual requirements.
4. Co-ordinated – We will coordinate our activities and outputs in a suite of communication and dissemination actions defined by the FLOODsite project.
5. Timely – We will communicate our results as early as possible, in accordance with our communication and dissemination plan, but without jeopardising the successful completion of other parts of the project.
6. Control of quality and content – We will review all outputs as appropriate for quality and content.
7. Disclaimer – All project outputs will include an appropriate disclaimer of liability.
8. Version control – All documents will include a unique reference number and version number. 9. Acknowledgement – All outputs will include appropriate acknowledgements of the project
funder, authors (with name and organisation) and contributors.
10. No plagiarism – We will seek permission to use, with acknowledgement, all material originating from others, whether or not they are participating in the project.
3.2 Knowledge Map
The purpose of the Knowledge Map is to allow efficient and effective knowledge networking and knowledge disclosure by making knowledge items (both internal and external) accessible, searchable, and transferable.
The Knowledge Map will provide access to descriptors of people, organisations, projects, training courses and documents related to FLOODsite via a relational data model.
The Knowledge Map will be similar to the PoWER Knowledge Map already developed by IHE. This can be found at www.webserver3.ihe.nl and an example card used in the Knowledge Map is shown in Figure 1.
Ownership/Intellectual Property issues between IHE and their consultants regarding the data model must be resolved prior to development.
The structure and objectives of the Knowledge Map must be agreed with Theme 5 prior to development. The following should be considered as a minimum set of requirements.
Document Management System. The issue of updating the Knowledge Map and the existing FLOODsite databases needs resolving in close liaison with Task 32 and the FLOODsite web developers. If at all possible, the need for users to update more than one database should be avoided. The FLOODsite web developers will provide details of the structure and data held by the site, so that Task 30 can review possible approaches for uploading data.
The Knowledge Map must be clearly identifiable as part of the FLOODsite website, using the FLOODsite logo, common design/templates (where practicable) and simple links. This will require close liaison with Task 32.
The Knowledge Map should be designed with the end users in mind. These will include the project team, professionals within the flood risk management field and educational users.
Development of the Graphical Search, as shown in Figure 2 should be considered. Some form of visualisation of the data map is likely to prove popular with users.
Figure 2 Example Graphical Search from the PoWER Knowledge Map
3.3 Modelling Facility
The Modelling Facility will provide web access to the tools and modelling systems with suitable web-enabling interfaces developed in Themes 1 to 3 and demonstrated/tested in Theme 4.
The provision of “web-enabling interfaces” as referred to in the DOW is a grey area; it is unclear whether this should be developed by each task or by Task 30. No one specifically has an item within their task to develop such interfaces. A compromise will have to be reached on a task by task basis during discussions between Task 30 and Task Leaders.
Reference should be made to section 2.5 of this specification for a recommended list of contributions to the Modelling Facility.
The modelling capabilities within the web-enabling interfaces should not be designed to allow new applications of the models. The purpose is to show examples, the process and the technology. The models should not allow full access to parameters, but the models should be run on the web.
Real cases should come from the pilots. All four types of site (flash flood, river, estuary and coast) should be represented. Ideally, multiple examples of each type should be provided.
As part of the review and selection of pilots, it will also be necessary to identify which flood risk concepts/elements are being covered in each example, e.g. sources-pathways-receptors-consequence (S-P-R-C) concepts, breaching, inundation, evacuation, uncertainty, etc. If it is possible to have a very broad range of sites, then it might prove best to keep each case as simple as possible. If, however, there can only be a very limited number of sites, then each case will potentially need to be more complicated, covering more than one concept.
At the present time it is unclear whether any of the pilot studies cover all S-P-R-C aspects of flood risk. However, the flash-flood basins (Task 23) are the most likely.
In addition to this, a range of different “timescales” of flood risk management should also be provided, e.g. long-term planning, emergency planning, real-time event planning, pre-event management planning.
Some means of visualising the distribution of flood risk concepts and timescales between the examples/pilot studies being used would probably prove very useful for end users and possibly for the development of the website. Structuring the Modelling Facility around the Risk Management Model (as shown in Figure 3) should be considered as one possibility.
The interface, functionality and structure of the Modelling Facility should be developed with all three of the main end user groups in mind, these being, the general public, professionals within the flood risk management field and educational users. It is likely that a tiered structure will be the most suitable, with more advanced users being able to access greater functionality.
In all regards, the Modelling Facility must mesh seamlessly with the rest of the FLOODsite website, using a common design/templates and simple links. This will require close liaison with Task 32.
Society (Context)
Flood Risk Management
Formulation / implementation of strategies Actor n Actor 1 Risk analysis Risk reduction Risk assessment
3.4 Knowledge Transfer and Learning Facility
The Knowledge Transfer and Learning Facility (KTLF) will provide structured web access to the web-based training activities (E-Learning) for the FLOODmasters and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) components of Task 31 (Face-to-face Knowledge Transfer).
The KTLF will serve as an interface to the Modelling Facility when the latter is to be used in education, thus making the “learning shell” around it.
The KTLF should be orientated towards various users including those in developing countries.
A 2-layered structure will be required, in order to provide a clear distinction between the training material developed through FLOODsite and additional material developed using other financial sources by the participating educational institutions (i.e. material that is owned by the educational institutions, not FLOODsite). Clarification regarding FLOODsite ownership of training material must be sought from the Project Co-ordinator.
The top layer should be available to the public free of charge, located on the main FLOODsite website (or at least appear to be hosted by FLOODsite) and be clearly marked as FLOODsite material in all cases.
The second layer would contain additional material for courses (or provide suitable links to courses) that are available for a fee through the relevant educational institutions.
It is not the responsibility of Task 30 to define the educational material. Again, the responsibilities of Tasks 30 and 31 are a grey area and some flexibility/negotiation will be required between Tasks to clarify issues of perception, design and content of material.
The KTLF should also link with the text-based knowledge transfer deliverables being produced by Task 29 (Summary Brochure and Best Practice Guide) and Theme 4 (“book” of the pilots). Clarification regarding how these links will be best structured must be sought from Task 32, which is currently developing the overall structure of the public access area of the FLOODsite website.
In all regards, the KTLF must mesh seamlessly with the rest of the FLOODsite website, using a common design/templates and simple links. This will require close liaison with Task 32.
