Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 7, 2016
3rd European Conference on Flood Risk Management (FLOODrisk 2016)
Article Number 19002
Number of page(s) 7
Section Evacuation and emergency management planning
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160719002
Published online 20 October 2016
  1. Bieberstein, A., et al. (2007). River dikes - actual developments for improvement in flood safety. Bautechnik, 84(12), pp. 829–837. [CrossRef]
  2. Lind, N., Pandey, M. & Nathwani, J. (2009). Assessing and affording the control of flood risk. Structural Safety, 31(2), pp. 143–147. [CrossRef]
  3. European Parliament and Council (2007). Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risks. Official Journal of the European Union, L288, pp. 27–34.
  4. Bouwer, L.M., et al. (2009). Inundation scenarios for flood damage evaluation in polder areas. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 9(6), pp. 1995–2007. [CrossRef]
  5. Vorogushyn, S., et al. (2010). A new methodology for flood hazard assessment considering dike breaches. Water Resources Research, 46(8), pp. 17. [CrossRef]
  6. CIRIA(2013). The International Levee Handbook. CIRIA, London, pp. 1332.
  7. Vorogushyn, S. (2008). Analysis of flood hazard under consideration of dike breaches. Dissertation, University of Potsdam, pp. 165.
  8. Cannata, M. & Marzocchi, R. (2012). Twodimensional dam break flooding simulation: a GIS-embedded approach. Natural Hazards, 61(3), pp. 1143–1159. [CrossRef]
  9. Jonkman, S.N., Kok, M. & Vrijling, J.K. (2008). Flood Risk Assessment in the Netherlands: A Case Study for Dike Ring South Holland. Risk Analysis, 28(5), pp. 1357–1374. [CrossRef]
  10. Lin, B., Wicks, J. & Falconer, R.A. (2006). Integrating 1D and 2D hydrodynamic models for flood simulation. Water Management, 159(1), pp. 19–25.
  11. Homagk, P. & Ludwig, K. (2009). Operational forecast of flooding as a consequence of rhine dykebreaks in Baden-Württemberg. WasserWirtschaft, 99(1/2), pp. 12–16.
  12. geomer GmbH & RZB GbR(2015). FloodArea and FloodAreaHPC: ArcGIS extension for calculating flooded areas. geomer GmbH, Heidelberg, pp. 67.
  13. Anders, K., Assmann, A. & Fritsch, K. (2014). Operationelle Überflutungssimulation für Deichbrüche. AGIT - Journal für Angewandte Geoinformatik, 1, pp. 228–233.
  14. Uniwasser GmbH, geomer GmbH & Magdeburg-Stendal, H. (2015). Abschlussbericht: Erarbeitung einer Methodik zur zeitnahen Abschätzung von Überflutungssituationen infolge von Deichbrüchen unter Berücksichtigung der Erfahrungen im Juni-Hochwasser 2013 an der Elbe. Landesbetrieb für Hochwasserschutz und Wasserwirtschaft Sachsen-Anhalt, unpublished, p. 110.
  15. Jüpner, R., Brauneck, J. & Pohl, R. (2015). Einsatz von Drohnen im Hochwasserfall – Erfahrungen und Ideen. Wasser Wirtschaft, 9, pp. 49–54.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.