Flood Modeling in a Composite System Consisting of River Channels, Flood Storage Areas, Floodplain Areas, Polder Areas, and Flood-Control-Protected Areas
, Guoqiang Dong 2, Xiaofeng Chen 2, Hongwei Ruan 2, Qibing Zhang 2, Lei Wang 2 and Minjie Wang 2
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAccording to the attached file, this manuscript was significantly revised either at the prior submission stage or during the pre-peer review stage.
The analysis was carried out utilizing the well-known MIKE FLOOD simulation package.
I would suggest that the authors significantly expand the conclusion section and discuss the limitations and prospects of the recommended flood estimation methodology, including the possibility of expanding it to other rivers in China or different countries.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFlood Modeling in a Composite System Consisting of River Channels, Flood Storage Areas, Floodplains, Polder areas and Flood Control Protected Areas
1) What are the key components of the composite flood management system described in the study?
2) Explain how do land use changes or infrastructure developments affect flood risk within this system?
3) Are there any limitations or uncertainties in the modeling approach or data used in the study?
4) Justify main challenges associated with modeling flood events in such a composite system?
5) Finally, what recommendations does the study offer for improving flood management practices in similar composite systems
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageOk
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an interesting and informative paper on integrated flood modelling of the system for a river basin and something I have been writing about and promoting extensively. This is a nice example and case study of what I have been promoting and for this reason I would like to see this paper published.
My suggested amendments to improve the paper are as follows:
(i) The version of the paper I have been sent includes large chunks of editing and it is difficult to read. However, even when I have read it - with some difficulty - the English is still far from clear. The paper needs to be edited by a fluent English speaker.
(ii) In the abstract you mention that the model is a dam break model. However, there are many forms of dam break models and in the main body of the paper you should say how the model is set up to simulate dam breaches. For example, is it a TVD algorithm (or whatever).
(iii) On page 2, line 86 you mention flood inundation modelling. Much work has been done in this field by my own team and you might wish to include the following paper, which was published in this journal: Kvocka, D., Ahmadian, R., Falconer, R.A. 2017. Flood inundation modelling of flash floods in steep river basins and catchments. Water, 9(9), 705, 1-16. 10.3390/w9090705
(iv) On page 2, lines 93-100 you make reference to past papers on integrated 1D-2D flood inundation modelling. Again you might wish to consider adding the following reference which involved comparing many similar linked models for river basin modelling: Ahmadian, R., Falconer, R.A., Wicks, J. 2018. Benchmarking of flood inundation extent using various dynamically linked 1D-2D approaches. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 11(S1), S314-S328. 10.1111/jfr3.12208
(iv) Page 8 lines 259-262, here you mention that the 1-D/2-D linked models transferred information from one model to the other. Most 1-D/2-D models are not dynamically linked, which is a serious short-coming. In a later section you mention that the models are linked dynamically. Could you therefore explain briefly how this is accomplished. In my experience this is important.
(v) Page 8 lines 261-264, here you mention the use of a 0-D model. However, these models assume a horizontal surface slope and for a large basin this can lead to significant errors. You should make this point here.
(vi) Page 12 etc. you mention the 2-D model frequently and you give details about the boundary conditions and Manning's n, but you give no details of the minimum and average grid sizes and simulation times. This is important information that you should include in such a paper. Many journals would ask for evidence of grid independency, but I am not asking for that.
(vii) Page 13, lines 406-408. You mention the 1-D grid resolution here and it is difficult to work out how fine this is relative to the length of the basin. Can you add the number of sections down the main river reach?
(viii) Page 14, line 460, you mention the precipitation condition in 1954, but this is now 70 years ago and climate change is affecting precipitation across most parts of the world. Can you provide a little more evidence to advise on why you have gone back so far?
(ix) Page 18, Section 3.1.1, Was any sensitivity testing undertaken? If not then perhaps you could indicate why not. I think this would answer an obvious question.
(x) Page 19, Table 5, Why is the Manning number so much higher on land? The shallower depth would increase the impact of friction and it seems to me there is no good reason for increasing the frictional roughness on land. Please try and explain why you have done this.
(xi) Page 22, Figure 6, the discharges in figures b oscillate quite significantly. Can you explain why this occurs succinctly beneath the figure?
(cii) Page 27, Conclusion, the conclusion are far too short and more needs to be written here about the novelty of the work and the key findings. I would expect the conclusions to be at least 1/2 a page - if not longer.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The paper has been difficult to read as the track changes have not been removed. However, despite the difficulties in reading and reviewing the version sent to me the English still needs to be edited by a fluent English speaker. There are many places where the English is still not right.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAfter revision, the paper can be accepted for publication
Author Response
Thanks for comments
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAfter analyzing the material: Flood modeling in a composite system consisting of river channels, flood storage areas, floodplain areas, and flood control protected areas, id: water-2830015, I consider that the manuscript in its current form cannot be published in Water.
Among the most important observations regarding the presentation, methodology, etc., I mention the following:
1) The bibliographical part is too short. It does not provide enough background.
2) All presented topological schemes require clarification. A unitary notation is not maintained in accordance with those mentioned in the text of the manuscript.
3) Hydraulic modeling does not have a proper calibration, especially in terms of roughness coefficients.
4) Modeling inputs are not presented: maximum flows, hydrographs, etc.
5) The presentation of modeling results must be greatly improved: the addition of specific details for these analyses.
6) Discussions and conclusions are treated briefly.
In general, the analysis is complex, and all the stages presented (relatively correct for such analyses) are treated too superficially. Both the description of the methods and the research design must be explained and presented in more detail.
If the authors bring significant improvements to the manuscript, I will be happy to review it again.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsFlood modeling in a composite system consisting of river channels：
This study established a coupled 1D-2D hydrodynamic model to simulate the flood inundation in the composite system of the Linhuaigang Flood Control Project (LFCP) consisting of river channels, flood storage areas, floodplain areas, and flood control protected area in downstream of the Huaihe River. In spite of the complex system, the simulated flood stage by the coupled model (MIKE FLOOD) matched the measured peak water levels quite well, thus providing a relatively reliable scenario simulation for extreme flood events. This is very important not only for flood forecasting and flood diversion operations but also for flood risk management in flood-prone areas and elsewhere. The manuscript needs further improvements and a spelling check.
Other comments:
1) Abstract and other places: ponder area->polder areas;
2) L22: …was simulated with a 2D hydrodynamic model;
3) L24, …peak water stage does not (didn’t) exceed 0.2 m in 2003 and 2007;
4) Figure 1, add Lat/lon labels on the frame, in the legend: ponder->polder
5) There are too many acronyms for the hydrological stations, flood storage areas etc. in the MS, which makes it difficult to read. I suggest authors use full spelling for those acronyms.
6) Tables 4-6, add more information for the table captions and make the table stand alone for readers.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe manuscript needs further improvements and a spelling check.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
The paper „Flood modeling in a composite system consisting of river channels, flood storage areas, floodplain areas, and flood control protected areas” could be interesting for many scientists who are working with flood risk assessment problems.
The biggest advantage of the work done is the creation of a methodology with the composite model system for solving the flood control problem. A detailed example of the application of the methodology relates to Linhuaigang Flood Control Project, situated in the Huaihe River. The application part of the model could provide a better understanding of the hydrological aspects of the modeled river. Also, the authors could provide brief recommendations (summaries) on the advantages of applying the developed model system to other river basins in different countries.
In my opinion, this article should be published after major corrections according to my remarks (below). There are some remarks for improvements of the paper quality:
1. “2. Materials and Methods”. More information is necessary in Figure 1 (River catchment location information in China map). Also, Figure 1 is not cited in the text.
2. Lines 132-133: “The flooding in the system was simulated from July-1 to Aug-15, and the duration was 46 days”. Why this period was selected for modeling?
3. Lines 138-139: “The hydrodynamic models for flood inundation calculation are divided into 1D, 2D, and 3D methods”. The following paragraph describes only the 0D, 1D, and 2D models. So, the authors did not use 3D models in their study.
4. Formulas (1) and (2). If authors use formulas from literature sources, they should cite the reference.
5. Data section is needed in the Methodology section. In this section all necessary hydrological data used in the modeling process could be described: data for model calibration (what hydrological stations and used periods), from what data is calculated 100-year – 1000-year return period floods, etc.
6. Figure 4. The legend of the x-axis is necessary in this figure.
7. At the beginning of the section “3.2 Riverine flood in the design flood event” some hydrological information related to the description of the design flood event would be useful. In Table 4 the peak water stages are presented for all scenarios (S1 – S5). Therefore, there is no text description in section 3.2 related to S3 – S5 (the entire section is dedicated only to the analysis of S1 and S2).
8. The pros and cons of the used model system could be very interesting and important part of the authors research. The methodology developed by the authors is of more interest to foreign scientists than specific floodplains under different scenarios in the Huaihe River. Therefore, some methodological advice for other researchers would be useful at the end of the paper.
