DESIGN OF APPROPRIATE HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES FOR

SUSTAINABLE FLOOD CONTROL IN KADUNA STATE

Faith Paul and Engr. O.J. Oyebode

Civil Engineering Department, Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria

ABSTRACT

Many cities developed independently along a number of river valleys throughout the world because
rivers supplied a continuous if not always dependable flow of water. In Kaduna state, different areas
are prone to floods and landslides and this is due to various aspects such as topography, land use and
others. The aim of this study is to build suitable hydraulic systems for long-term flood control in the
River Kaduna catchment area. In achieving this aim for the project several criterias were observed;
the utmost discharge that current hydraulic systems can accommodate within the study area, review
the present hydraulic structure of the study area and designing a control structure (culvert) for a
protracted time control within the study area. The results of research show that floods in Kaduna
Metropolis occur mostly at the event of rainfall intensity, especially at the height of time of year
September. Factors apart from rainfall that have been identified to have influence flooding within the
study area are: Lack of and poor drainage networks, dumping of wastes/refuse in drainage and water
channels, topographic characteristics, overflowing of river banks, low infiltration due to high water
level and degree of built or up areas resulting in increased runoffs.

KEYWORDS

Flooding, Open Channel, Culverts, River, Kaduna,

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Many cities developed independently along a
number of river valleys throughout the world
because rivers supplied a continuous if not
always dependable flow of water for domestic,
agricultural, industrial, and navigational
purposes among others. Some of these cities
include; Kaduna, the capital of Kaduna State,
Nigeria along the River Kaduna, Cairo, along
the Nile River, New York, along the Hudson
River.
On several occasions these rivers overflow their
banks and flood the adjoining properties on their
floodplains. River Kaduna in 2003; Elbe River
in 2003, 2005 and 2007, River Sokoto in 2006,
River Ogun in 2007, etc. Consequently,
flooding, an associated natural hazard with
floodplain developments is a major problem
these cities had to contend with and develop

1
policy, legislative and technical measures to
control (Proverbs and Lamond, 2017).
In Nigeria, the flooding of urban settlements has
become an annual occurrence. This usually
becomes obvious at the peak of the raining
season. the resultant damage caused by the
flooding calls for a more pragmatic approach to
flood management and control.
In Kaduna state, different areas are prone to
floods and landslides and this is due to various
aspects such as topography, land use and others.
The effect of flooding has grown from
significant to life-threatening proportions,
resulting in the loss of lives and property. While
accurate data on the damages suffered by city
dwellers and flood victims are not available, it is
clear from the available records that people have
suffered irreparable harm as a result of what has
become a perennial natural disaster in our cities.
Apart from bridges and houses that have been
collapsed and flooded, market places and
farmlands have also been submerged for weeks
and sometimes washed away. As a result,
flooding in Kaduna must be assessed.
The aim of this study is to build suitable
hydraulic systems for long-term flood control in
the River Kaduna catchment area. The scope of
the study is limited to the design of appropriate
hydraulic structures for sustainable flood control
in the River Kaduna Catchment. The design of
those hydraulic structures has been limited to
the River Kaduna drainage channel. This
research almost all sectors of the economy,
government departments and the society at
large, such as; the research work provides
information on the flood vulnerability of
infrastructures in the study area, the work
provides satellite derived data of the study area
for further studies and research, the research
work increases and add to the knowledge of the
study area
1.1 AREA OF STUDY
River Kaduna can be found upstream of
the Shiroro Reservoir. Geographically, River
Kaduna is located between latitudes 9°52ʹ38ʺN
and 10°39ʹ07ʺN and between longitudes
6°52ʹ33ʺE and 8°28ʹ50ʺE. Rainfall in the study
area is governed by the annual passage of the
Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), the
meeting point of a dry northeastern low-pressure
air mass and a moist southwestern high-pressure
air mass (Butu et al., 2020). The northeastern
movement of the ITCZ and the rain-bearing
winds that accompany the movement marks the
onset of the rainy season, while the
southwestward movement and the
accompanying harmattan winds marks the
beginning of the dry season.
2
 Figure 1.1: Map Of Kaduna Illustrating The Major River Flows

Source: (CIV246; 2009)

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW result of heavy downpour which destroyed

2.1 Flooding in Kaduna properties and rendered many homeless.

Table 2.1 shows the summary of how

According to George and Abdulkadir
flooding has affected the respondents in the
(2019), floods are the most devastating natural
study area. From Table 2.1, 64.79% of the
disasters in the world, claiming more lives and
respondents have their houses flooded, 41.32%
causing damage to more properties than any
prevented from moving out, 25.51% houses
other natural phenomena. In Kaduna metropolis,
collapsed, 25% suffer health problems and
flood affects and displaces more people than any
22.44% have their sources of water, especially
other disaster. It also causes more damage to
hand dug wells, polluted. Aside from personal
properties and at least 20% of the population is
affects, all of the respondents mentioned that
at risk from one form of flooding or the other
flooding has harmed public infrastructure, such
(Adelekan and Asiyanbi, 2016). , Ibrahim
as roads being flooded, electric and telephone
and Abdullahi (2016) reported that over 500
lines being cut, markets, schools, and churches
houses in Kaduna Metropolis were flooded as

3
being inundated, and drainage systems being
clogged with rubbish.

Table 2.1: Continuous Occupation Floodable areas of Kaduna metropolis

Effect Respondents (n=196) Respondents (%)

House flooded with water 127 64.29

House collapse due to flooding 50 25.51

Prevented people from moving 81 41.32

out

Source of water polluted 44 22.44

Heath problems arises due to 49 25

flooding

Source: (CIV246; 2009)

Figure 2.1: Chart showing flooded houses

Source: Researchers Computation, 2015

2.2 Major Causes of Flooding in Kaduna Metropolis

Long hours of rainfall, type of land use channels, absence of and inefficient drainage
pattern, dumping of garbage into water networks, terrain, nature of urban land surface

4
and building kinds, and stream
characteristics are all key causes of flooding in
Nigerian cities. Table 2.2 gives a brief summary
of the causes of flooding in kaduna metropolis.
From Table 2.2, 64.79% strongly agree and
22.44% agree that heavy torrential rainfall is
one of the causes of flooding in the study area.
Most tropical flood events, which are partly or
basin entirely climatological in nature, are thought to
be primarily caused by rainfall intensity,
duration, and amount (Johnson et al., 2016).
Other factors only aided the incidence of
flooding in urban areas of Nigeria. This has
been confirmed by several studies (Ibrahim and
Abdullahi, 2016).

Table 2.2: Major causes of flooding in Kaduna Metropolis

Major cause Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly agree

of flooding agree
Heavy rainfall 127(64.79%) 44(22.44%) 19(9.69%) 6(3.06%) 0(0%)
Overflowing of 105(53.57%) 60(30.61%) 6(3.06%) 22(11.22%) 3(1.58%)
river Kaduna
bank
Topography 114(58.16%) 61(31.12%) 0% 10(5.10%) 11(5.61%)
Infiltration 84(42.85%) 73(37.24%) 12(6.12%) 11(5.61%) 16(8.16%)
Lack of 160(81.63%) 31(15.82%) 0% 3(1.53%) 1(0.51%)
drainage
network
Poor drainage 147(75%) 39(19.90%) 0% 4(2.04%) 6(3.06%)
network
Building on 96(48.90%) 52(26.53) 2(1.02%) 22(11.22%) 24(12.24%)
water channel
Dumping of 122(62.24) 34(17.34%) 2(1.02%) 10(5.10%) 28(14.28%)
waste on
channels
Climate change 27(13.77%) 73(37.24%) 1(0.51%) 34(17.34%) 61(31.12%)

Source: (Fieldwork, 2015)

2.3 Effects of Floods telephone lines have been lost for many days,
while many land areas were inundated,
Studies have reported that communications and
industrial plants and commercial establishment
traffics were interrupted, electricity and
were paralyzed during floods in Nigeria. This

5
revelation suggests that if all data of flood 2.4 Flood Control
disasters in Nigeria were to be available,
humans would not be able to conceive the Flood control refers to all
devastating effects of flooding that occurs in this methods used to reduce or prevent the
Nigeria (Wahab and Falola, 2018). detrimental effects of flood waters.
Some of the common techniques used
The consequences of flooding was considered to
for flood control are installation of
be of two major types;
rocks, rock rip-raps, sandbags,
i) Primary consequences: These include physical maintaining normal slopes with
damages to many types of structures, including vegetation or application of soil cements
bridges, cars, buildings, sewerage systems, on steeper slopes and construction or
roadways and canals in many parts of the expansion of drainage channels
country. (Zainudini and Sardarzaei, 2020).

ii) Secondary consequences: These include The objectives of flood control include:
contamination water supplies (water pollution).
i. Reduce (Avoid, if possible) the potential
Clean drinking water therefore becomes scarce
losses from hazards.
with consequent unhygienic conditions and
Spread of water-borne diseases. The effects of ii. Assure prompt and appropriate assistance
flooding from the sources outlined above are felt to victims when necessary
by various 'receptors'. These include, people,
iii. Achieve rapid and durable recovery.
buildings, infrastructure, agriculture, open
recreational space and the entire natural world. 2.4.1 Flood Control Structures and

In extreme cases flooding may cause a loss of Techniques

lives.
Flood control structures are
The devastating effect of floods was not limited
designed to protect coastal and river-
to houses and people. Many farmlands both
bank areas, including urban and
arable and agroforestry were swept away when
agricultural communities, homes, and
schools were submerged, this therefore results to
other economically valuable areas, and
sudden food shortage resulting from loss of
the people located within them. These
entire harvest, spoiling of grains when
structures are used to divert flow of
submerged in water along as well as loss of
water, by re-directing rivers, slowing
animal fodder (Wamugi, 2016).
natural changes in embankments and
coastlines, or preventing inundation of
vulnerable coastlines or floodplains.
Dams, dikes, spurs, levees, and seawalls

6
 often act as the first line of defense Q= Quantity of flow in cubic meters per second
against overflowing rivers, floods, (m3s-1) or (m3/s).
storm surges, and—in the longer term—
V = Mean velocity, in meters per second
rising seas. (Jeong, 2019).

3.0 METHODOLOGY n = Manning coefficient of roughness

3.1 Channel Discharge Capacity

S = Channel slope, in meters per meter
The hydraulic capacity of a
drainage channel is dependent on the R = Hydraulic Radius, in meters

size, shape, slope and roughness of the

R = A/WP
channel section. For a given channel,
the hydraulic capacity becomes greater A = Cross sectional flow area, in square meters
as the grade or depth of flow increases.
WP = Wetted perimeter, in meters
The channel capacity decreases as the
channel surface becomes rougher. A Commonly accepted values for Manning's
rough channel can sometimes be an roughness coefficient, n, based on materials and
advantage on steep slopes where it is workmanship required in the Standard
desirable to keep flow velocities from Specifications (Hashim, 2018).
becoming excessively high (Ferguson
3.3 Culverts
et al., 2017)
The function of the Culvert is to convey or
3.2 Manning’s Equation transport storm runoff (or other discharge) from
one side of the roadway to the other - either
Robert Manning (1816-1897)
culvert or bridge.
was an Irish accountant who spent more
time studying engineering than
accounting. In 1890 he developed the
Manning formula which is still in
common use today.

The formula takes two basic forms as follows:

In metric units.

R2 S1
V =I × × (2.1)
31 2
R2 S1
Q= A × V =n × A × × (2.2)
3 2

Where ;

7
 Figure 3.1: Culvert Under A Roadway

Source: (paccpolicy.org)

3.3.1 Design of a Rectangular Culverts D= Height (inside) (m)

B= Width (Inside) (m)

Rectangular culverts are
culverts which have the rectangular H1= Upstream energy Level, relative to the
shape. The rectangular culverts design invert level (m).
formula is described below.

Figure 3.2: Culvert's elements

√
H1 2 2
For 0 < ≤ 1.2 Q= C B B H 1 g H 1
D 3 3

(2.3) (2.4)

8
Where: watershed as a function of the drainage area,
runoff coefficient, and mean rainfall intensity
CB=1.0 for rounded inlets (r > 0.1B)
for duration equal to the time of concentration.

CB =0.9 for square inlets

The rational formula is:

H1 CIA
For > 1.2 Q=
D Z

(2.5) (2.7)

Q=C h BD √ 2 g( H 1 −C h D) Where:

Q = maximum rate of runoff (m3/sec.)

(2.6)

C = runoff coefficient
Where:

I = average rainfall intensity (mm/hr.)

Ch=0.8 for rounded inlets

A = drainage area (in ha)

Ch=0.6 for square inlets (Wood, 2007)

3.4 Estimation of the runoff discharge Z = conversion factor, 1 for English and 360 for
metric.
The rational method is appropriate for
4.0 Results and Discussion
estimating peak discharges for small drainage
4.1 Estimation of peak runoff discharge
areas of up to about 200 acres (80 hectares) with
no significant flood storage. The method The rainfall intensity has got to be

provides the designer with a peak discharge calculated by using the common rainfall

value. intensity method. The rainfall records of 1980 -

1990, 1991 - 2001 and 2002 - 2012 have the
3.4.1 Estimation by using the Rational
typical rainfall of 111.5 mm.
Method

The rational method estimates the peak

rate of runoff at a specific location in a

Table 4.3: Increment/reduction pattern of annual rainfall

Period Ri Rm Ri-Rm %change

9
 1980-1990 112 111.5 0.5 0.45%

1991-2001 111 111.5 -0.5 -0.45%

2002-2012 112 111.5 0.5 0.45%

Source: Journal of Scientific Research and Reports

The typical rainfall (Ri) of the year (2002 -2 012) increased to 112 mm showing a
(1980 – 1990) increased to 112 mm showing a positive change with percentage rainfall
positive change with percentage rainfall difference of 0.45%.
difference of 0.45%. This pattern changed from However, in this research work the
1991-2001 by showing a negative rainfall and predicted discharge was obtained from
therefore the average rainfall (Ri) reduced to (Abayomi et al., 2015) as described in the
111mm with a percentage rainfall difference of -
table below:
0.45%. the common rainfall (Ri) of the year

Table 4.2 : Statistic of Discharge Data

Month Mean Runs test

January 244.32 0.11

February 248.46 0.21

March 251.74 0.01

April 227.52 0.217

May 211.33 0.75

June 238.73 0.03

July 340.00 0.22

August 357.64 0.11

September 349.88 0.05

October 348.30 0.07

November 279.01 0.28

December 247.68 0.80

Source: Journal of Scientific Research and Reports

The table above shows the mean average it is noted that August has the highest discahrge
discharge determined using the rational method,

10
of 357.64m3/s and the month of January has the
least discharge of244.32m3/s.

4.2 The Discharge Capacity of the Existing

Hydraulic Structure
The existing hydraulic structures in
the Kaduna drainage channel which have
been considered in this research are the
main open channel and one culverts located:
the first is under the bridge on the road
which connect the Kaduna south to the
Kaduna north area.

4.3 Existing Channel Discharge Capacity

B=8.5m

H=3.35m
a= 2.4m

b=6.7m

Plate 4.1 : Cross Section of an Open Channel

The determination of the discharge capacity of 3.35 2

The area = ( 8.5+6.7 ) × =25.46 m (4.1)
an open channel using the mining equation has 2
taken into consideration of the calculation of the
The injected parameter ¿ ( 2 ×2.4 )+ 6.7=11.5 m
following parameters:
(4.2)

11
 A 25.46
The hydraulic radius R= = =2.21 m
P 11.5
(4.3)

A R2 /3 S 1/ 2
Estimated discharge Q= AV = (4.4)
n

The main channel slope S = 0.032 (4.5)

The Manning's coefficient n = 0.03 because the

channel is constructed in stone masonry.

12
 1
Hydraulic Discharge Capacity ¿ ×(25.46)× ¿ (4.6)
0.03

The hydraulic discharge capacity of the existing Hydraulic Discharge Capacity

channel at its time of construction was 258.25 1
¿ ×(23.18)× ¿ (4.11)
3 0.03
m /s

The hydraulic discharge capacity of the existing

For open channel, it was assumed that the
open channel during heavy rain with high
channel is exposed to various use liken solid
waste dumped, sedimentation of considerable sedimentation is 220.65 m3 /s .

quantities of stones and soil particles from the

channel surrounding areas especially during 4.4 Design of the New Channel
heavy rain and this contribute to the reduction of
the channel discharge capacity because it From the table 3.2, the maximum predicted
reduces the channel height. Thus, it was discharge was 357.64 m3 /s
assumed the height of the channel was reduced n=1.5
by 0.30.
Chezy constant c = 65

Therefore, the calculation of the discharge Q = 357.64m3/s

capacity of the open channel has to be taken into
y
consideration, the current situation where the Hydraulic radius R= (4.12)
2
channel height becomes 3.05m.
Q 357.64 2
Area of flow, A= = =15.43 m
Area after sedimentation V 23.18
(4.13)
3.08
A=( 8.5+6.7 ) × =23.18 m2 (4.7)
2 Wetted parameter p = b+ 2 y √ n2 +1 (4.14)

P= (2 ×2.4 ) +6.7=11.5 m (4.8) A 15.43 y

R= = =
P b+ 2 y √ n +1 2
2

23.18 (4.15)
R= =2.01 m (4.9)
11.5
y
i.e. R=
The discharge capacity of the channel has been 2
again calculated by using the formula (Liu et
al.);
46.36= y ¿] = y(b+3.6) (4.16)
1 2 /3 1 /2
46.36=by+3.6 y 2 (4.17)
Q= A × V = × A × R × S (4.10)
n
A= (b + ny) y (4.18)

13
S= (b+1.5y) y (4.19) The channel is assumed to be exposed to

2
different use like solid waste, sedimentation,
by=1.543 − 1.5 y (4.20)
dumps of considerable quantities this contribute
Substitute (4.20) into (4.17) we have; to the reduction of channel discharge capacity

2 2 2
because it reduces the height of channel, thus it
46.36=15.43 −1.5 y +3.6 y =15.43+2.1 y
was assumed that the height of channel was
(4.21)
reduced by 0.30m

y= ( 15.43
2.1 )
1
1 /2
=2.712m (4.22)
i.e. Q= AV =
AR
2 /3

n
S
1/ 2

Substituting the value of (y = 2.712m) in (4.31)

equation (4.17) we get
h=3 −0.3=2.7 m, B =13.4m, b = 7.33m
46.36=b × 2.712+ 3.6× ¿ (4.23)
2.7 2
The area = ( 13.4+7.33 ) × =27.98m
46.36 ¿ 2.712 b+26,478 (4.24) 2
(4.32)
46.36 −26.478
Bottom width,b= =7.33m
2.712 The wetted parameter
(4.25) ¿ ( 2 ×2.4 )+7.33=12.13 m (4.33)

Top width,V =C √ RS (4.26)

A 27.98
The hydraulic radius R= = =2.31 m

√ √
P 12.13
y 2.712
23.18= S=0.60=65 × S=75.69 √ S
2 2 (4.34)
(4.27)
A R2 /3 S 1/ 2
Estimated discharge Q= AV =
S=¿ (4.28) n
(4.35)
B = b + 2ny (4.29)

B=7.33+2+1.5 × 2.712=13.39 m (4.30) The main channel slope S = 0.032 (4.36)

1
Q¿ ×(27.98)× ¿ (4.37)
0.03

The hydraulic discharge capacity of 4.5 Existing Culvert Discharge Capacity

channel after it was reduced by 0.30 due to the The discharge capacity of this
exposure to different use like solid waste, culvert has been calculated by also taking
sedimentation, dumps of considerable quantities into consideration, its shape, its
3
291.54 m /s . H1
parameters and the relation .
D

14
 Plate 4.2 : Cross Section of Culvert
Dimensions:
B=7.2m, D=3.2 m , H 1=4 m
H1 4
= =1.25 m > 1.2
D 3.2
(4.38)
Q=C h BD √ 2 g ( H 1 − Ch D ) (4.39)
Q=0.6 ×7.2× 3.2 √ 2 ×9.81 × ( 4 −0.6 × 3.2 )=88.13 m3 /s .
The on field situation: The so called on
field situation is the observed situation
during the amount of high sedimentation
like for the open channel. This has been
observed during the research period.
During this period, the peak of the culvert
opening was reduced of 30cm 0r 0.30m
Where:
With: Ch=0.6 for square inlets
g = 9.81 m/s 2
Where: D= The inside Height (in m)
B= The inside width (in m)
H1= The upstream energy Level, relative
to the invert level (m).
(4.40)
in average. The calculation of the
discharge Capacity of the culvert has
taken into consideration this situation
which is followed by the change of the
culvert vertical parameters then, the
reduction of its discharge capacity.
15
Q=0.6 ×7.2× 3.2 √2 ×9.81 × ( 3.7 − 0.6 ×3.2 )=81.69 m /s
3
(4.41)

4.6 Design of the new culvert H1 4

= =1.25 m
In the design of the new culvert, the vertical D 3.2
parameters of the existing culvert have been
maintained and the design has focused on the (4.42)

widening by increasing the culverts opening. H1

Since >1.25 m then the following equation
For the design of this culvert, the existing D
vertical parameters H1and D have been taken is used

into consideration and then the horizontal

C h BD √2 g ( H 1 −C h D )
parameter which is the width B has been
calculated and the design focused on the useful
(4.43)
height.
C h=0.6
Dimension: D = 3.2m, and H1= 4m.
2
g=9.81 m/ s

357.64=0.6 × B ×3.2 √ 2× 9.81× ( 4 − 0.6 ×1.92 ×3.2 )=12.26 B (4.44)

357.64 29.17
B= =29.17 m (4.45) b= =12.15 openings ≅ 13 opennings
12.26 2.4

Thus, the design of this culvert has been

taken into consideration the widening of the
existing culvert. The widening had taken
reference on the existing opening which have
2.4m width Hence, for opening of 2.4 width:
b = 13 openings.
In conclusion, the culvert under the bridge has
to be with 13 openings with the inside width (D
= 3.2) and the upstream energy level relative to
the inlet level (H1= 4m) for each.

Plate 4.3 : Designed culverts under the bridge on the Kaduna river,

16
5.0 CONCLUSION
The River Kaduna is a tributary river of River
Niger that flows for 550km through Nigeria.
Daily rainfall data from January 2002 to June
2015 have been collected from Journal of
Scientific Research and Reports.
The peak runoff discharge was determined by
using the extreme value theorem has fallen on
August, 2015 to be 357.64m3 /s . The hydraulic
discharge capacity of the existing open channel
was 258.25m3 /s , where the channel had a
section of top width(B) = 8.5m, bottom width(b)
= 6.7m, and height(H) = 3.35m which would be
less when the hydraulic discharge capacity rises
3
to 357.64 m /s in August from Table 3.2,
therefore a new new open channel was designed
with dimension of top width(B) = 13.39m,
bottom width(b) = 7.33m and height(H) = 3m .
The existing culverts which have a dimension of
B(width of culvert) = 7.2m, D(height of culvert)
= 3.2m, width of culvert = 2.4m and H1(height
of culvert to top slab) = 4.2m which was
estimated to carry 88.13 m 3 /s of hydraulic
discharge but with the flooding of the study area
the dimension of the culvert had to be increased
to B(length of culvert) = 29.17m, D(height of
culvert) = 3.2m, width of culvert = 2.4m and
H1(height of culvert to top slab) = 4m .
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
For a sustainable flood control solution, new
hydraulic structures have been proposed because
the existing structures are unable of carrying the
nowadays and the predicted discharge. When
these proposed hydraulic structures will be
constructed, it will be a long term sustainable
flood control solution for the River Kaduna
Catchment Area. Suggested recommendations
that will contribute to the flood control in
Kaduna include;
i. Routine maintenance should be carried out
to determine the condition of the hydraulic
structures.
ii. Larger main drainage channels should be
constructed to transport large volume of
water.
iii. Regular cleaning of the hydraulic structures
should be carried out to remove all form of
silt and solid waste that would hinder the
transportation of water to a safe location.
iv. Regulating bodies should be set up to
control the release of potential solid waste
into the environment by residents of the
state.
v. Evaluation and modification of current
drainage network of the state.
REFERENCES
Adelekan, I. O. And Asiyanbi, A. P. 2016.
Flood Risk Perception In Flood-
Affected Communities In Lagos,
Nigeria. Natural Hazards, 80, 445-469.
Butu, A. W., Emeribe, C. N., Columbus, D.,
Leke, M. S. J. And Ananya, B. J. 2020.
Effect Of Urbanization On Channel
Platforms Of River Kaduna From 1962-
2017, Kaduna State, Nigeria.
Ferguson, R., Sharma, B., Hardy, R., Hodge, R.
And Warburton, J. 2017. Flow
17
 Resistance And Hydraulic Geometry In Smallholder Farmers In Kilifi, Embu
Contrasting Reaches Of a Bedrock And Budalangi. Pwani Unversity.
Channel. Water Resources Research, Zainudini, M. A. And Sardarzaei, A. 2020. The
53, 2278-2293. Study Of Hydrological Model In
George, U. And Abdulkadir, A. 2019. An Implementing Flood Management In
Investigation Of 2017 Flooding Event Sistan And Balochestan Province
In Nasarawa Hayi In Niger State, (Catchment Area: Dashtyari And
Nigeria. Gasrgand) Iran. Journal Of Emerging
Hashim, N. A. E. K. 2018. Evaluation Of The Trends In Engineering And Applied
Impact Rains And Floods On Drainage Sciences, 11, 169-175.
System Of Asphalt Pavement Of Roads
Case Study Of Upper Atbara And Setit
Dam Complex Project. Sudan
University Of Science And Technology.
Ibrahim, A. H. And Abdullahi, S. Z. 2016.
Flood Menace In Kaduna Metropolis:
Impacts, Remedial And Management
Strategies. Science World Journal, 11,
16-22.
Johnson, F., White, C. J., Van Dijk, A.,
Ekstrom, M., Evans, J. P., Jakob, D.,
Kiem, A. S., Leonard, M., Rouillard, A.
And Westra, S. 2016. Natural Hazards
In Australia: Floods. Climatic Change,
139, 21-35.
Proverbs, D. And Lamond, J. 2017. Flood
Resilient Construction And Adaptation
Of Buildings. Oxford Research
Encyclopedia Of Natural Hazard
Science.
Wahab, B. And Falola, O. 2018. Vulnerable
Households And Communities’
Responses To Flood Disasters In The
Ibadan Metropolis, Nigeria. Ibadan
Journal Of Sociology, 7, 46-75.
Wamugi, S. M. A. 2016. Effects Of Climate
Change And Adaptation Strategies Of

18