Validation of the open-source hydrodynamic model SFINCS on historical river floods at the global scale

Sadana, T., Aerts, J.C.J.H., Eilander, D., Merz, B., de Moel, H., Busker, T., Bril, V.C., & de Bruijn, J. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3961-6382 (2026). Validation of the open-source hydrodynamic model SFINCS on historical river floods at the global scale. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 30 (17) 5491-5519. 10.5194/hess-30-5491-2026.

Preview

Text hess-30-5491-2026.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (5MB) | Preview

Abstract

We evaluate the performance of the Super-Fast INundation of CoastS (SFINCS) hydrodynamic model for simulating riverine floods, combined with a fully automated open-source data preprocessing pipeline. To do this, we assessed the simulated extent of 499 historic flood events against the satellite derived flood extents using the Critical Success Index (CSI) as a performance metric. We utilised simulated discharges from the Global Flood Awareness System (GloFAS) hydrological model and found that SFINCS performance improved with upstream basin size, with a global mean CSI of 0.42 for basins with large upstream area (>1000 km2) and a CSI of 0.29 for basins with small upstream area (<50 km2). Our results illustrate the importance of accurate discharge data input to flood hazard simulations. When the (globally simulated) GloFAS data is replaced with observed discharge data for ten events in the US, the CSI improved from 0.39 to 0.67. These results suggest that global hydrological model performance limits the accuracy of the flood hazard simulations. Our findings also showed a significant improvement in the CSI (from 0.37 to 0.57) when changing to a higher-resolution elevation input by contrasting a ∼1 m digital elevation model (DEM; 3DEP) with our default ∼30 m global DEM (FABDEM) in six US events. Sensitivity analysis of bathymetric calculations revealed a systematic underestimation of the default 2-year return period estimated by GloFAS discharge, likely driven by underrepresentation of annual block maxima, which resulted in underestimated channel dimensions. All of these factors resulted in a loss of detail, which impacted model performance, especially in smaller headwater rivers. We recommend to improve the estimation of bathymetry, for instance by employing the “gradually varying solver” method or using data from the SWOT mission. Furthermore, incorporating additional validation data which ideally includes flood depth measurements can largely enhance our understanding of the model performance.

Actions (login required)

View Item