Simulation of water quality in a flood detention area using models of different spatial discretization

Detention areas provide a means to lower peak discharges in rivers by temporarily storing excess water. In the case of extreme flood events, the storage effect reduces the risk of dike failures or extensive inundations for downstream reaches and near the site of abstraction. Due to the large amount of organic matter contained in the river water and the inundation of terrestrial vegetation in the detention area, a deterioration of water quality may occur. In particular, decay processes can cause a severe depletion of dissolved oxygen (DO) in the temporary water body. In this paper, we studied the potential of a water quality model to simulate the DO dynamics in a large but shallow detention area to be built at the Elbe River (Germany). Our focus was on examining the impact of spatial discretization on the model’s performance and usability. Therefore, we used a zero-dimensional (0D) and a two-dimensional (2D) modeling approach in parallel. The two approaches solely differ in their spatial discretization, while conversion processes, parameters, and boundary conditions were kept identical. The dynamics of DO simulated by the two models are similar in the initial flooding period but diverge when the system starts to drain. The deviation can be attributed to the different spatial discretization of the two models, leading to different estimates of flow velocities and water depths. Only the 2D model can account for the impact of spatial variability on the evolution of state variables. However, its application requires high efforts for pre- and post-processing and significantly longer computation times. The 2D model is, therefore, not suitable for investigating various flood scenarios or for analyzing the impact of parameter uncertainty. For practical applications, we recommend to firstly set up a fast-running model of reduced spatial discretization, e.g. a 0D model. Using this tool, the reliability of the simulation results should be checked by analyzing the parameter uncertainty of the water quality model. A particular focus may be on those parameters that are spatially variable and, therefore, believed to be better represented in a 2D approach. The benefit from the application of the more costly 2D model should be assessed, based on the analyses carried out with the 0D model. A 2D model appears to be preferable only if the simulated detention area has a complex topography, flow velocities are highly variable in space, and the parameters of the water quality model are well known.