ANFAS 3rd Plenary Meeting

II-SAS15-16 February 2001

Thursday 15th

Approval of the agenda

The agenda was briefly presented and accepted by the participants.

1. Discussion of the upcoming PMC meeting

Change of the Anfas scientific Co-ordinator

Olivier Monga informed the participants that he was moving from INRIA to IRD (former ORSTOM) and therefore can not continue being the scientific coordinator of ANFAS. He will continue, however, to be involved in the ANFAS project as the link between the European teams and the Chinese one. It was decided that Poulicos Prastacos from now on, will act as the scientific manager of the project.

Recent discussions with EU co-ordinator

The meeting, requested by the consortium, was held in Brussels on the first of February. Participants were
Georgia Eftimiopoulo for the EC side, Le Dantec, Havas (MATRA), and Prastacos for the ANFAS ones.
It mainly focused on the three following topics:
Change of scientific coordinator
Project is in danger
Next review might be the last one

The more important comments from EU were that there is no clear  message  from ANFAS, there is not coherence between the 3 sites, an excessive emphasis is placed in modeling although this is an informatics project, the system is not generic enough etc. The Project officer strongly suggested to modify the working program and felt that the evaluation could be done in Sophia Antipolis.

First review of document related to work carried out and existing state of the art of the project
P Prastacos briefly described the documents sent by O Monga one month ago and asked the partners to comment them before the end of the meeting.
Advancement state of ANFAS project, 22-01-01

Advancement State of the development issues addressed by the ANFAS partners
ANFAS priorities before the review (mid march or early April)

Project Management Committee - PMC

B Le Dantec discussed about the scheduled PMC meeting to be held in Paris on February 22. The main issues to be discussed will be :
Results of the Bratislava meeting
State of the art per work package
Management issues
Involvement of the Chinese partners
Preparation of the next review.

2. System architecture review

Apologies have been received from P Houdry who could not attend the meeting. The topic was introduced by P Prastacos who reminded the consortium that the architecture is a very important issue in ANFAS. A discussion on the System Requirement and on the System Design documents took place.

Description of the System architecture proposed by Matra
F Giraud was asked to present the system design. He pointed out that the main question is to know what the ANFAS system should be offering to the end user besides the standard simulation.

He reviewed the 2 European pilot sites and emphasized the point that it is very difficult for the staff of these agencies toexpresswhat they technically want.

He pointed out that a company in France (Strategis) has developed a post-processor to hydraulic models, namely OPTHYCA,which permit the visualisation of the results of the hydraulic models in a GIS system. This post-processor is used to present the hydraulic results of the Hydra model of the plan Loire Grandeur Nature.
The company Strategis has also developed an integrated software called ALPHEE since mid-90 for a private company in France, which includes : the hydraulic model Hydra, a post-processor for the visualisation of the results, and a module to estimate some impact assessments (price of property damages,). The software offers also facilities to modify interactively some features of the geometry of the model itself (suchs as dikes features) allowing the end-users to run new simulations. The software relies on existing data base (like road network data base, giving the possibility of diversions in case of flooded roads,). This software was developed by Strategis as a Decision Support System for the managers of the great reservoir dams on the Seine river.

It was pointed out that the impact assessment might affect the overall functionality of the system. Since the issue of impact assessment has not been fully addressed to this point it was agreed that BRGM, FORTH and CCLRC should prepare a generic list of impacts in case of floods.This list should be exhaustive and the various partners should choose some of these impacts to be used on their pilot sites.P. Prastacos pointed out that impact estimation is affected by data (coverages) availability, many impacts can be easily estimated through standard GIS functionality and that pilot sites should try to create some of the necessary coverages even if these are not highly accurate in order to demonstrate the capability of the system to address these issues.
ActionF Giraud: Find more information on the OPTHYCA and ALPHEE systems

Report to Matra and come back to the consortium with a solution

Deadline: End of February

ActionBRGM, CCLRC, FORTH: Prepare a generic list of flood impacts
Deadline: End week 1 March

Two presentations by P Houdry sent by e-mail were discussed. The presentations are available on the ANFAS web. Some of the key points of the presentations were the need to define the list of impacts since they may affect system functionality, to clarify how the 2D models will affect the proposed system design, the need to define piorities etc.

Description of the Chinese system
V Prinet then explained that the Chinese partners are planning to develop their own system

Their system may have similar architecture with the system proposed by ANFAS, but the overall architecture of the System has still to be studied and is not fully defined yet. However, it is possible that all GIS data are kept on the Web and Web technologyis used for displaying the results of the models. It is has not been decided yet, the level of integration that their system will have. She pointed out that they have studied the documents on system architecture prepared by Matra and would be very interested in having a cooperation. However, cooperation has not started yet.IRSA will be the Chinese partner responsible for system integration for the Chinese pilot site. In discussions after the ending of the meeting between V Prinet, S Dang and P Prastacos the issue of the system architecture of the Chinese system was further discussed.
ActionV Prinet: Provide more details on the Chinese system
Deadline: End of February

At the end of the discussion on the system, if was requested that all partners send their comments to P Houdry on deliverables 5 before the end of February.P. Houdry will assemble these in order to have the deliverable to be send to the Commission before March 15th
ActionAll partners: Send their comments on Deliverable 5.1 to P Houdry
Deadline: End of February

Action P. Houdry: Prepare final version of Deliverables 5

Deadline: March 15

Discussion on ArcView 3.1 vs. 8.1

P Prastacos explained that there should be no difference for the system functionalityto use the new version of ArcView.The system, however, will be developed with the current version of ArcView since the new version is not available yet.

Demonstration for the next review
It was felt that it in the next Review meeting the consortium should present a demo. The demo will be a stand alone system using CARIMA and the Loire data. The specification of the details of the demo functionality was postponed for the second meeting day.

3. WPs review 

Review of rewritten WPs


S Maybank said that the contract to get the LIDAR data for the Vah river has been signed. All data should be available end of May.
Regarding the Loire data, 3 CDs containing the data were received at Reading. One copy should be sent to FORTH.
ActionS Maybank: Send the Loire data to FORTH
Deadline: 24 February

Having bought the necessary data for these two pilot sites, some resources are still available, about 20 000 euro. A discussion started to decide whether or not to use these funds to acquire more data. Possible data could be:
High resolution DTM issued from photogrammetry for the Loire. Since WP3 will conduct 2D modelling on the Loire pilot site, it is felt usefull to have accurate DTM on the Loire site. This will allow to test and validate the full methodology of the ANFAS Suytsem from automatic basins extraction to 1D-basin and 2D modelling, at least on one of the 3 pilot sites,
1D model + basin for the Vah,
Image satellite on real flood. Possible but this requires two images, one with flood, one without flood.
ActionAll partners are requested to send to S Maybank any suggestions
for using the remaining part of the budget for data purchase
Deadline: As soon as possible

During the discussion, and as the WP2 and BRGM have to extract basins from the received data, for both European sites, it was felt necessary to give a more accurate definition of the "basin" needed by the CARIMA software. To do so, interaction between the WP2 leader, BRGM and the hydrologist working at INRIA should take place as soon as possible. The objective is to define common criteria (geometry, elevation, slopes, hydraulic connexions,) in order to try to automatically extract flood basins from the data issued of the imagery, and to discuss the attempt limits of this automatic method.
ActionS Maybank: Organise the interaction with the Hydrologist
Deadline: End of February

Situation of the 2D and 3D Processing in China. V Prinet reported that this has started at IOA. They are presently working on 2D registration and 3D modeling..

FX Le Dimet reported that in the ANFAS system 3 models will be used: CARIMA (1D), FESWMS (2D), LMCFLOOD (2D).For each one of these data assimilation will be applied. The updated version of the WP3, currently under preparation, will be more focused on data assimilation.

Input parameters, boundary or initial conditions, all the information provided by the other WP must be compatible with the model. P. Prastacos, S. Maybank pointed out that there is a need for describing the inputs to the models less "mathematical" so that the tasks of preparing the input data from the GIS and computer vision can proceed faster.

Currently, the input file of CARIMA for the Loire pilot site has been prepared and efforts are underway to perform data assimilation. The adjoint model which has to be prepared should be available in the summer. P. Prastacos asked whether the system development and the development of the scripts for the transparent "connection" of the GIS and the models can start now or has to wait when data assimilation will be completed. C Mazuric replied that the system design can be initiated now. In the final version of the system the user will have the option to use the existing version of CARIMA (andSMS) or the one developed through data assimilation.The input files for the original model and the one from data assimilation are similar.
ActionFX Le Dimet: Provide the new version of the WP3
Deadline: 24 February

The discussion then started on the possibility for the other partners, namely S Maybank and P Prastacos, to have access to the CARIMA software in order to start some experimentation. This may be useful when preparing the input files for the model. C. Mazauric pointed out that the input file to CARIMA is about 3000 lines and even if partners have access to the model it would not be easy for them to understand what went wrong on test runs. P. Prastacos agreed but he stressed the need for MATRA to have access to the model so that they can develop and test the various systems.FX Le Dimet reported that a meeting has been organised in Grenoble on March 6 to discuss this issue with representatives of Sogreah.
ActionFX Le Dimet: To report to the consortium the issue of the discussion with Sogreah
Deadline: 8 March

FESWMS (SMS): Last version of the source code is now available. The development of the adjoint code to be used for data assimilation will commence in the next few weeks.

See also discussion on revised WPs that occurred on the second day of the meeting at the end of these minutes

4. State of the art, data, numerical models, end user requirements in the three pilot sites

Operation Vah river (See the slides on the Anfas site)
Two sets of (43 and 100) cross profiles (measurements done in 1982)
Vector 1:50 000
Raster 1:10 000
Landsat images 1999
Lidar available end of May.

Overall it appears that all data from the Vah pilot site (with the exception of DTM) are currently available and have been also provided to WP1.

Model to be used
To use CARIMA it isneeded to determined the basin on the Vah river. Reading University, BRGM, INRIA and VRA must discuss right after the delivery of the DTM.
ActionS Maybank: interact with BRGM, INRIA and VRA to determine the Basin for the Vah river
Deadline: As soon as possible after the delivery of the Lidar data

It was also decided to work in close co-operation with the BRGM that will have to use the same tool for the Loire river. In the case of the Loire river, having two DTMs, low resolution (issued of the ERS imagery) and high resolution (photogrametry) would give the opportunity to compare the flood basins defined through automatic procedures

SMS will be also used in the Vah pilot site. It can be used only after the DTM data become available.
Then, Feswmswith the data assimilation will be provided by INRIA as soon as it is ready.

Impact assessment.
It was felt necessary to include the duration of the flood in the list of parameters which have a strong impact on the costs of the flood. The discussion also went on the Socio economic evaluation of a flood: The idea here is to provide a cost for each categories of sectors (agricultural, habitation, industry) and also to includea specific category that MUSN'T be flooded at all. P Petrovich proposed 6 categories as a starting point starting from 0 (no costs) and ended to flooded area that must not be flooded under any circumstance (military areas).P. Petrovich and his colleagues will prepare the necessary GIS layers for impact assessment in the Vah river.

For the "dike breaking option " the decision should be taken on the same basis in the 3 pilot sites. F. Giraud asks the Slovak and Chinese partners to complete the table entitled "data_synthetis" mailed few days ahead the meeting . This has to be done by mid-march and may be used for the review at Sophia.

Operation Loire river
(see the slides)
Val d'Ouzouer
24 basins are already defined.
A fuse dike and a watergate exist.

Risk assessment
Different tables were shown by F Giraud. Elevation / costs for city, down town area.

F Giraud emphasised on the fact that it is difficult to find were a dike accidentally could break. He proposed to include in the Anfas system, a database/model which takes as inputs some geometric characteristics of the dike and can pinpoint the point of a dike where breaks could occur. This possibility was not rejected but the way to integrated it in the global Anfas scheme should be more developed.

Model to be used
CARIMA alreadyruns on the Loire data. The data assimilation will be integrated into CARIMA by INRIA byAugust.

For SMS, there are no data yet. BRGM is waiting for topography, physical and hydraulic data. BRGM has no experience with 2D model.The question came about the usefulness to use or not a 2D model in the Loire river. For the data assimilation since historical data on past floods are not available, the results obtained from HYDRA, the model used at Plan Loire, will be used as the historical data set
Finally, it was approved that a 2D model will be used on the Loire river, requiring a high resolution DTM. This 2D model will be built by IMAG (Grenoble, France).

Operation JingJiang (See slides)
C. Dang presented the data situation for the Chinese pilot site. Many coverages have been already digitised and a web site has been created with these data (using IRSA's Geobeans software). DTM data will be purchased at a cost of 250,000 RMB from a government department.
Suggestion: Can we get the URL for the Chine web bas demonstration ?

Model to be used
1D simulation will be realised in the main river course.
2D simulation will be implementedin the JingJiang retention area which is a very flat area.

The constraints to chose the model are slightly different from the two European pilot operations: Sedimentation transport and bed moving have to be integrated since these are major issues in the Yangtzee river.

1D model : A fusion of existing models will be used : CARICHA and SUSBED. SUSBED has been developed entirely in China Caricha is a derived model from CARIMA. The advantage is that CARICHA is dealing with sedimentation process and the bed moving.
2D Model: ". CSMS is the Chinese version of the SMS. SMS will not be used because again, sedimentation and bed moving are not taking into account. CSMS will be used in combinaison with LMCFLD, which has been developed in France atImag.
These two models already exist.Fusion of 1D and 2D models will be developed

It has to be stressed that using an hydraulic model which would no have been initially set up within the Anfas system(such as CARIMA or SMS) will notallow the user to modify interactively the geometry of the model. To do so, this might require more development work from WP5.

For the development of the rainfall model data assimilation techniques will be used. M Bei presented rainfall forecast resultson the 1998 rainfall.

The output of the simulation is really important as the flood has a huge impact on the population that has to move when the authorities decide to flood the reserved area.Among other, the following results may be obtained: Water level in Yangtze, effect on gate opening on the Yangtze level, total volume of water to be stored in the retention area, speed of the water propagation.

Friday 16th

5.Chinese collaboration

Before going though the other points of the agenda, several points regarding the Chinese Collaboration were raised. It was reminded that cooperation is well under way as FX Le Dimet is already working with Chineseresearchers on modelling and S. Maybank has numerous exchanges with the Chinese team.V. Prinet made it clear that she could provide the different models available in China if asked by the European Partners.Also it was agreed that the Chinese data will be also sent to FORTH with the exception of the DTM which because of licensing agreements can not be used outside of China.

In order toreinforce the European/Chinese cooperation, a technical workshop was proposed to be organised. The topic of this workshop is to be defined but it is likely to deal with Decision Support and should present a demonstration of the ANFAS system at the end. The date and the Topic have still to be defined.

It was also proposed to organise a visit of the Jing Xiang Reach in May. This will have to be confirmed according to the number of participants (4 to 5 actually).

The idea of having the next plenary meeting organised in China was rejected as this will be too costly.

ActionVPrinet : Send e-mail precising date and topic of workshop

Deadline:first week of March

6.Detailed planning for demonstration during the review

P Prastacos pointed out that there is not any reason to have a large ANFAS delegation during the next review. The only participants will be WP leaders and if the need arises other persons to be designated later on.

It was agreed that efforts should be made to present a simulation/demonstration of the ANFAS system during the review. This demonstration could involve both the Loire and the Vah river, depending on the achievements for each site.

The demonstration will include:
- Display in ArcView ofthe data from Vah river,Loire and JingJiang
- Execution of the CARIMA model with data from Loire.
- Display of the results of CARIMA in ArcView
- Possibility of estimating some impacts from the GIS for the Loire site
The level of integration between data and models will be determined later on. It was felt, however, that there might not be enough time to perform a tight integration

For Loire river since eventually there will be two DTMs, (different resolution: ERS imagery, low resolution, and photogrammetry, high resolution) the demo will be based on the low resolution DTM which will be available at that time.In order for FORTH to organize the data under ArcView there is an immediate need to send all data from Loire and JingJang to FORTH as soon as possible.
ActionBRGM, IRSA, UREADS: Send all data to FORTH as soon as possible
Deadline: March 1

P. Prastacos will discuss with P Houdry how MATRA could contribute to the demo. P Houdry had suggested that a "light" version of the distributed system could be developed for the demo (?)

P. Prastacos in collaboration with other partners will prepare the scenario for the review.
ActionP Prastacos: Prepare scenario for review
Deadline: March 15

7.Presentation of the HPCN work done at II-SAS

L Hluchy and his colleagues presented their work on parallelizing a component ofthe SMS model on a computer. Partners were impressed and it was decided that a presentation on the HPCN aspect will also be made in the Review. Of course this will be a presentation and not a demo since a computer cluster will not be available at ERCIM.Prof Hluchy proposed to the Chinese partners to collaborate on the HPCN work od II-SAS.
ActionL Hluchy: Detailed plan for HPCN presentation at the review
Deadline: March 10

8. Rewritten WPs(issue also discussed on the first day of the meeting)

The workplan with the changes for the various WPs should be sent to the Commission as soon as possible.

WP3FX Le Dimet will have the new WP by February 24th. It should include detailed tasks.
WP4It was suggested by BRGM (C Oliveiros ?) that some minor changes are also needed in WP4 since in the ANFAS system we will not estimate runoffs etc. as written in the original WP. Also a task could be added for reviewing the various DSS systems currently available to assess their functionality.It was agreed that probably there is not a need to identify it as a separate task but such a review should occur asap. CRLRCC, BRGM and FORTH will be involved.
WP5It was suggested by P Prastacos that some changes might also be needed in WP5 since the WP ispresently very general. P Houdry will look on that and suggest changes ifneeded.
ActionFX Le Dimet: Prepare new WP for WP3
Deadline: February 24

ActionBRGM: Suggest changes in WP4
Deadline: March 1

ActionMATRA: Suggest changes in WP5

Deadline: March 1

ActionBRGM, CRLCC, FORTH: Review of DSS systems for floods
Deadline: March 10


Several deliverables were due to the Commission at To + 12, that is on December 31. Because of the upcoming review it is important that these deliverables are thorough and delivered to the Commission before March 20 so that reviewers have enough time to read them.

Del NDeliverable nameAction DeadlineResponsible

D5.1System Design Documents (SDD)Read and comment9.03All
System REQUIREMENT document Read and comment9.03All
D3.1aData needs and sources Send a first version 9.03II-SAS
D3.2b Numerical Model descriptionSend a first version1.03INRIA
D4.1aEnd Users requirementsSend an improved version20.03BRGM
D8.2Dissemination and use PlanSend Contribution to ERCIM28.02ALL

10.Final review of the documents for the PMC

A review of the documents was initiated but it was soon agreed through a rapid round table that the PMC was no longer needed as most issues had been discussed during those 2 days. A vote was taken to validate P Prastacos' position as the new Scientific co-ordinator of the project.

There was a brief discussion of the documents describing the state of advancement of the project and intended for the PMC. These are no longer required since the PMC has been cancelled, and there is an action onPoulicos Prastacos to produce a new statement of priorities (see below).

Review of the priorities of the project

It was agreed that the priorities listed in the document should be altered based on the discussions that took place in the meeting.Issues related to impact assessment, rapid development of a prototype,DSS system review, system development priorities etc. should be the immediate priorities.Tasks related to impact assessment and DSS review have been alreadyassigned. P. Prastacos will prepare a new brief document summarizing these.
ActionP Prastacos: Prepare a new priorities document
Deadline: February 24

Note from P. Prastacos: The deadline for the document will be extended for one week so that it incorporates the discussions with MATRA that will occur next week.

S.J. Maybank, F Giraud, N. Courtois and C. Oliveros had a meeting at lunch time to share the work coherentlyamong themselves and suggest changes in the workplan of WP2.It was agreed that:

1. Matra is no longer in WP2. The months allocated to WP2 will be reallocated by MS&I elsewhere in the project.
2. The words `hydrological modelling' in the first paragraph should be replaced by `hydraulic 1D-basin and 2-D basin models'. All other occurrences of `hydrological' to be replaced by `hydraulic'.
3. Information about the main water courses and the flood plain for thethree sites (Vah, Loire, JingJiang) will be extracted from the available imagery. In the case of the Vah only this available imagery includes Lidar. The aim for all three sites is to obtain the site specificinformation needed by the 1D and 2D hydraulic models.
4. Computer vision based methods will contribute to the range of methods used to determine land use and measure the roughness parameters, and develop in collaboration with BRGM and WP3 methods to automatically extract the features of the basins within the flood plain as needed by the hydraulic models.
5. Work on "reconnaissance de form" should be performed by WP2 in order to better implement the impact assessment module. In particular: recognition of the different type of building, hoising, firmsThis is seen also as a way to demonstrate the capacity of innovation within the project.
ActionR Ronchaud: Incorporate these changes in the revised WP2
Deadline: February 24

11.Other issues

Cost statement

Some partners have not sent to ERCIM their cost statements, namely INRIA and university of Reading. They should send them by February 24.

ActionINRIA, U Reading: Send Cost statement

Deadline: February 24

Status report 4

ActionINRIA: Send input for Status Report4
Deadline: February 24

Distribution ofVah river data

P Petrovich distributed to WP1, WP2 and BRGM (C Oliveiros) one copy of the orthophotomaps of the Slovak pilot site, in scale1:10 000. The data can be used only within the ANFAS consortium.

Expression of interest for collaboration from a Romanian institute

P Petrovic passed to ERCIM (R Ronchaud) a copy of a mail froma Romanian institute interestedin participating in the project.
ActionR Ronchaud: Reply to Romanian Institute
Deadline: February 24

Review of Actions spreadsheet

The Actions document was reviewed and will be updated

Cancellation of PMC meeting

Confirmation of the cancellation of the PMC meeting will be given on Monday after MATRA that has requested it agrees.

End of Meeting

Anfas3rd plenary meeting - 15-16/02/011

Document converted from ms word 8 by MSWordView(mswordview 0.5.14)
MSWordView written by Caolan McNamara