Baerbel Koppe, Birgitt Brinkmann


Permanent flood protection systems like dykes and protection walls offer a high level of protection against flooding and need only little maintenance during flood events. Therefore, most high-risk areas are protected by permanent constructions. Problems arise in densely populated areas where no space for dykes is available and less space consuming flood protection walls would cut off traffic lines and obstruct view axes. In these cases, mobile flood protection measures may be a solution to fit both requirements: protection in case of flooding and open access to the floodplain over the remaining time. Furthermore, mobile protective systems can be used as emergency tool against flooding in unprotected low-lying areas and for heightening of permanent flood protection structures in extreme events.
Planning criteria of mobile flood protection like types of application, early warning and deployment time, required personnel, structural failure mechanisms, financial aspects, and essential information politics are discussed in this paper. As the available constructions differ in material, construction, permanent facilities, available protection height, and safety level, a systematization of mobile flood protection systems as well as opportunities and drawbacks of the described constructions are given.


flood protection; flood defense; flood management; early warning time; mobile systems; emergency systems

Full Text:



AquaFence, 2010: Information on the Website: http://www.aquafence.com. Status August 2010.

BfG, 2009: "Genauigkeit der Wasserstandsvorhersagen". Information on the Website of the Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde (BfG): http://www.bafg.de/M2/DE/01__Referat__M2/04__Vorhersagen/Genauigkeit/genauigkeit__node.html (website accessed September 2010).

Blake, E.S., E.N. Rappaport; C.W. Landsea, and NHC Miami. 2007: The deadliest, costliest, and most intense United States tropical cyclones from 1851 to 2006 (and other frequently requested hurricane facts). NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS TPC-5. National Weather Service, National Hurricane Center, Miami, Florida.

BWK, 2005: "Mobile Hochwasserschutzsysteme - Grundlagen für Planung und Einsatz". Merkblatt 6, Bund der Ingenieure für Wasserwirtschaft, Abfallwirtschaft und Kulturbau (BWK) e.V., Sindelfingen.

FEMA, 2010: The 100 Most Expensive Natural Disasters of the 20TH Century. Information at the Website: http://www.disastercenter.com/disaster/TOP100C.html, Federal Emergency Management Agency, June 2010.

Koppe, B., 2002: "Hochwasserschutzmanagement an der deutschen Ostseekueste" (Flood management at the German Baltic Sea coast - dissertation). Rostocker Berichte aus dem Fachbereich Bauingenieurwesen, Issue 8 University Rostock, 2002.

KWS, 2010: Information on the Website www.kws-stag.ch (website accessed September 2010)

Plate, E.; Merz, B. (ed). 2001. Naturkatastrophen - Ursachen, Auswirkungen und Vorsorge (Natural hazards - causes, consequences and precautions). Schweizerbart'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.

Rapidam, 2010: Information on the website: http://www.floodguards.com/rapidam/case_studies.html(website accessed September 2010).

Rekers, 2010: Information on the website http://www.rekers-beton.de/winkelstuetzwaende.php. Status: (website accessed September 2010).

THW, 2001: Handbuch Hochwasserschutz und Deichverteidigung. Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk, Bonn.

THW, 2010: Deichverteidigung und Hochwasserschutz. Deutsches Technisches Hilfswerk. www.deichverteidigung.de (website accessed September 2010).

VKF / BWG, 2004a: "Entscheidungshilfe Mobiler Hochwasserschutz". Vereinigung kantonaler Feuerversicherungen, Bern; Bundesamt für Wasser und Geologie, Biel.

VKF / BWG, 2004b: "Mobile Flood Protection, Leaflet". Vereinigung kantonaler Feuerversicherungen, Bern; Bundesamt für Wasser und Geologie, Biel.

Wirtz, A. 2010: The year in figures. In: Topics Geo – Natural catastrophes 2009, Analyses, assessments, positions. Munich Re, p. 34.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.9753/icce.v32.management.24