Flood Plain Mapping Index / Risk Management

454
9
07-28-2021 01:41 PM
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

I got the following variables - Sanitary manhole , Minor Catchment Ara , Major culvert, Storm water management pond , Storm conduit , Storm culvert and storm structure.  

Locations of poles. 

I am trying to  identify the equipment  (POLES) that is most at risk.

0 Kudos
9 Replies
DanPatterson
MVP Esteemed Contributor

It can't be determined from just a list of assets.  Risk would have to assessed with respect to their location within flood prone areas.  Do you have that information? What is the form of your data? (raster? vector?)


... sort of retired...
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

I have vector data . I have elevation for the sanitary manhole. Not for any other variables. 

0 Kudos
DanPatterson
MVP Esteemed Contributor

If you are lacking flood plain data or any data to identify risk areas, it would be impossible to locate assets that that are at risk.


... sort of retired...
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

@DanPatterson @ThomasHamill So I was able to find the water dataset. 

CanJM_0-1628097068191.pngCanJM_1-1628097111839.png

Using the water dataset . I am trying to determine which assets I would need to replace. 

0 Kudos
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

With the flood plain data I would calculate the elevation ? This would help me understand the assets at risk. 

0 Kudos
ThomasHamill
New Contributor III

@CanJM,  are you working in the United States?  If you are, I'd recommend the FEMA NFHL, USFWS NWI, and the USGS NHD (or any combinations of the three) for measuring likelihood of failure for your assets based on spatial coincidence or proximity.  Two or more of these base datasets could be synthesized together using a simple multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) exercise, i.e., if an asset is within 5m or less of all three (flood zone, wetlands, and hydrography) at once then it is ranked with a risk value of 3, if an asset is within 5m of two layers then it is coded with a risk value of 2 and so on... the higher the risk value, the greater the likelihood of failure and incentive to monitor, replace, relocate, etc.

Kindest Regards,

t
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

Hi Thomas, Thank you for the response. However, I am not in States but in Canada. You mentioned assigning the risk value. That's what I want to do but I am not sure how to do it. I did get the flood plain dataset. 


Please let me know how I can go about it. 

0 Kudos
ThomasHamill
New Contributor III

@CanJM, I recommend the following for a simple approach:

1) add a new field (integer or short field type) to Poles--in fact, add one for every variable/factor you want to populate upon Poles.  You could name them something like "RiskScore_FromManhole," "RiskScore_FromPond," etc.
2) Run a select by location  to find the subset of Poles that either intersects or is within a distance (that you find reasonable/meaningful) of each of your factor layers.  Add a value of 1 in the Pole field for the respective risk scores--any Pole that doesn't touch a factor (or its distance buffer) should be given a value of 0 for that "RiskScore_FactorLayer" field.
3) After you've populated each factor-based risk score field in the Poles attribute table, add a new field called something like "RiskScore_Total" and set that equal to the sum of each of the individual factor risk scores.  The higher the value, the more at risk (in theory) the pole is based on the combination of the factors/variables it intersects or is near.

Kindest Regards,

t
CanJM
by
New Contributor II

@ThomasHamill  Hello, I have tried the method. I added risk from Storm Culvert field to poles.  When I clicked apply it highlighted every pole. Nothing else happened. I followed it. When I tried  different selecting feature such as manhole. It selected all poles. That's all it did. Please help me. Thank YOu 

CanJM_0-1628028950588.png

0 Kudos