Assessing impact of flood on river dynamics and susceptible regions: geomorphometric analysis
MetadataShow full item record
Sharma, C. S.; Mishra, Atmaram; Panda, S. N. 2014. Assessing impact of flood on river dynamics and susceptible regions: geomorphometric analysis. Water Resources Management, 28(9):2615-2638. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0630-2
Permanent link to cite or share this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/58380
Natural climatic hazards like flood, an important hydro-geomorphic process of earth’s surface, have different regional and local impacts with significant socio-economic consequences. Similar was the case in Gujarat State, India during last week of June 2005. This study is about assessing the impact of Gujarat flood on river dynamics. It deals with extraction of water bodies information using radiance image and standard water indices i.e., Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) and Modified Normalized Difference Water Index (MNDWI) for pre- and post-flooding periods. Geomorphometric analysis along with drainage network extraction was done using two different Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) i.e., Advanced Space borne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) and Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM) and compared. Finally, depressions mapping and comparative analysis of magnitude and directional change of drainage networks was carried out. Results confirmed better accuracy of MNDWI in separating water bodies. The water bodies area increased by 10.4 % in post-flood monsoon compared to pre-flood monsoon and by 3.8 % in post-flood dry season compared to pre-flood dry season. Geomorphometric analysis indicated that ASTER DEM gave more values of maximum slope, average slope, and standard deviation as compared to SRTM. Aspects distribution algorithm did not work well in low relief regions. The drainage network generated using SRTMDEM was more accurate. The depressions identified were more susceptible to flood events. Change analysis of drainage network (deviating 100–300 m) indicated that 5.22 % points deviated between October, 2004 and 2005 and 3.18 % between February, 2005 and 2006.