Embankment Dam Failure Analysis (FEMA 541) - Association of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Acknowledgements The project proposal and scope of work were developed and submitted by Dr. Greg Hanson and Darrel Temple of the ARS as a joint effort with Bill Irwin of the NRCS. The steering committee which helped organize the Workshop on Issues, Resolutions, and Research Needs Related to Embankment Dam Failure Analysis included the following members: Dr. Greg Hanson, USDA-ARS Bill Irwin, USDA-NRCS Darrel Temple, USDA-ARS Wayne Graham, USBR Charles Pearre, USACE Ed Fiegle, GA Dept. of Natural Resources Terry Hampton, Gannett Fleming Brandee Hancock, and Ruth Treat of the ARS-PSWCRL served as the administrative staff in organizing the meeting, corresponding with participants, and making local arrangements. Kevin Cook and Brandee Hancock assisted in organizing the proceedings. Nate Snorteland of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation served as the facilitator and therefore led all group discussions. Nate Snorteland contributed heavily to the “Dam Failure Analysis and Research Development Topics,” section of the proceedings. PROJECT SPONSOR Federal Emergency Management Agency National Dam Safety Program Research Subcommittee, David Achterberg, (USBR), Chair 500 C Street SW Washington, DC 20047 PROJECT COORDINATOR USDA-ARS-PSWCRL 1301 N. Western Stillwater, OK 74075
Page 1: PROCEEDINGS FEMA WORKSHOP, JUNE 26-
Page 7: 1 OVERVIEW ________________________
Page 10 and 11: The first half of the third day was
Page 12 and 13: 1.2 Present Practice for Predicting
Page 14 and 15: are used for conducting dam failure
Page 16 and 17: 3.4.4 Dam Break Routing - Michael G
Page 18 and 19: TOPIC NUMBER 5 RESEARCH / DEVELOPME
Page 20 and 21: TOPIC NUMBER RESEARCH / DEVELOPMENT
Page 26 and 27: 6. Make available hands-on end-user
Page 31: APPENDICES
Page 34 and 35: WEDNESDAY, June 27 Morning Current
Page 37 and 38: Dam Volume Economic Dam Date and Ti
Page 39 and 40: Dam name: South Fork (Johnstown) Lo
Page 41 and 42: Dam name: Austin Dam Location: On F
Page 43 and 44: Dam name: Castlewood Dam Location:
Page 45 and 46: Dam name: Buffalo Creek Coal Waste
Page 47 and 48: Dam name: Teton Dam Location: near
Page 49 and 50: Dam name: Lawn Lake Dam Location: I
Page 51: B-2
Page 54 and 55:
If we can’t predict dam failures,
Page 56 and 57:
Risk Management Tools • Facility
Page 58 and 59:
Challenges • Focus research needs
Page 61 and 62:
2/6/02 'DP 6DIHW\ 'HFLVLRQV &XUUHQW
Page 63 and 64:
2/6/02 'HVLJQ (YHQWV )ORRG ✦ 3UH
Page 65 and 66:
2/6/02 :K\ 1RW &KDQJH IURP 0&(" ✦
Page 67 and 68:
2/6/02 5LVN $QDO\VLV IRU 'DP 6DIHW\
Page 69 and 70:
2/6/02 5LVN $QDO\VLV 5 ' )RFXV ✦
Page 71 and 72:
2/6/02 5LVN $QDO\VLV 5 ' )RFXV ✦
Page 73:
B-4
Page 76 and 77:
The breach development time does no
Page 78 and 79:
considered “small” reservoirs a
Page 80 and 81:
• The testing made use of the sam
Page 82 and 83:
Equation PEAK FLOW EQUATIONS (conti
Page 84 and 85:
The potential for failure and the d
Page 86 and 87:
each widths. This is not surprising
Page 88 and 89:
the method overpredicted the peak o
Page 90 and 91:
Froehlich, David C., 1995b, “Emba
Page 93 and 94:
SOME EXISTING CAPABILITIES AND FUTU
Page 95 and 96:
Table 1. History of Dam-Breach Mode
Page 97 and 98:
the following: h b =h d- (h d - h b
Page 99 and 100:
critical parameters for the sedimen
Page 101 and 102:
each erosion model was not subject
Page 103 and 104:
upstream face slope 1:17, downstrea
Page 105 and 106:
5.1 Flood Routing with Saint-Venant
Page 107 and 108:
forecast location and, if a flood d
Page 109 and 110:
about 5 percent for DAMBRK and 12 p
Page 111 and 112:
6. References: Bechteler,W. and Bro
Page 113:
Singh,V.P.,Scarlatos,P.D.,Collins,J
Page 117 and 118:
Issues, Resolutions, and Research N
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 1. Map of the Kyrönjoki Riv
Page 121 and 122:
The first step of the research incl
Page 123 and 124:
The concept of probabilistic risk a
Page 125 and 126:
4.3 Determination of the Breach Hyd
Page 127 and 128:
A constant roughness coefficient (M
Page 129 and 130:
RUN 6 Conditions of RUN 4 modified
Page 131 and 132:
uildings with 0-2 floors. As a whol
Page 133 and 134:
6. CONLUSIONS In the RESCDAM projec
Page 135:
B-7
Page 138 and 139:
HAZARD POTENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 140 and 141:
HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL • Loss of O
Page 142 and 143:
INCREMENTAL HAZARD ASSESSMENT • D
Page 144 and 145:
LIFE LOSS CONSIDERATIONS • Design
Page 146 and 147:
Upstream Damage Potential • It is
Page 148 and 149:
ECONOMIC LOSSES • Direct Physical
Page 150 and 151:
RISK BASED ASSESSMENT • The purpo
Page 152 and 153:
GUIDELINE PROCESS • Final Draft t
Page 155 and 156:
Embankment Dam Failure Analysis Sta
Page 157 and 158:
Maryland also recommends that the e
Page 159 and 160:
On August 27, 1971, the West Branch
Page 161:
• Forensic Team. The Research Sub
Page 165 and 166:
Issues, Resolutions, and Research N
Page 167 and 168:
Pritchard's Lake Dam Morgan County
Page 169 and 170:
Table 2 - Breach Parameters Definit
Page 171 and 172:
6. Reinventory of Dams Timeframe:
Page 173:
B-10
Page 176 and 177:
MODELING EXPERIENCE DAM SAFETY HYDR
Page 178 and 179:
Basis of Uncertainty Close counts i
Page 180 and 181:
Get out of the box. To think outsid
Page 183 and 184:
A Simple Procedure for Estimating L
Page 185 and 186:
Step 5: Determine When Dam Failure
Page 187 and 188:
Step 6: Select Appropriate Fatality
Page 189 and 190:
warnings, confirmed by visual image
Page 191:
Step 7: Evaluate Uncertainty Variou
Page 195 and 196:
Workshop on Issues, Resolutions, an
Page 197 and 198:
Figure 2 - Comparison of Predicted
Page 199 and 200:
Figure 5 - Ascalmore #11 - looking
Page 201:
B-13
Page 204 and 205:
Important Areas to Consider in the
Page 206 and 207:
•4
Page 208 and 209:
•6
Page 210 and 211:
•8
Page 212 and 213:
•10
Page 214 and 215:
Pertinent Data • Licensed: 1923
Page 216 and 217:
Canal Embankment - before failure 2
Page 218 and 219:
Graph 2/12/02 FERC-CRO June 2001 11
Page 220 and 221:
Downstream Side at Secondary Breach
Page 222 and 223:
Upstream side 7/22/96 2/12/02 FERC-
Page 224 and 225:
Erosion at House 7/22/96 2/12/02 FE
Page 226 and 227:
Headgate Structure 9/30/96 2/12/02
Page 228 and 229:
Investigation and Evaluation • Pr
Page 230 and 231:
Exhibit 2/12/02 FERC-CRO June 2001
Page 232 and 233:
September 30, 1997 Inspection • T
Page 234 and 235:
Canal Embankment 9/30/97 2/12/02 FE
Page 237:
B-14
Page 240 and 241:
BC Dam Regulations and Guidelines L
Page 242 and 243:
• hydraulic model inundation poly
Page 245 and 246:
Analyzing Flooding Caused by Embank
Page 247 and 248:
In most inflow design flood studies
Page 249:
peak breach outflow were + 10 perce
Page 261:
B-17
Page 264 and 265:
Hydraulic Design of Stepped Spillwa
Page 266 and 267:
Stepped Spillway Tests • Horizont
Page 268 and 269:
Observations, cont’d h = 1.0 ft N
Page 270 and 271:
Hydraulic Design Procedure • Assu
Page 273 and 274:
Purpose • To evaluate the perform
Page 275 and 276:
Placement Un-Vegetated 13
Page 277 and 278:
Block Overtopping Tests Flume Setup
Page 279 and 280:
Threshold Levels Force Balance Flow
Page 281 and 282:
Design Criteria for Rounded Rock Ri
Page 283 and 284:
Testing Matrix Cumulative Database
Page 287:
B-18
Page 290 and 291:
INTRODUCTION The drought of the 193
Page 292 and 293:
Figure 1. Potential allowable emban
Page 294 and 295:
the action that occurs during these
Page 296 and 297:
REFERENCES European Commission (199
Page 299 and 300:
HEC Models for Dam Break Flood Rout
Page 301 and 302:
Some HEC History • 80’s - Simpl
Page 303 and 304:
Steps to Develop RAS Data • Start
Page 305 and 306:
Profile Plot XYZ Perspective Plot
Page 307 and 308:
Results of HEC-RAS computations can
Page 309 and 310:
New Geometric Features for HEC-RAS
Page 311 and 312:
Cross Section Properties Plot Cross
Page 313 and 314:
Boundary and Initial Conditions •
Page 315 and 316:
Post-processing Results • Used to
Page 317 and 318:
Animation of Profile Plot Hydrologi
Page 319 and 320:
Gate Operation Computed Hydrographs
Page 321 and 322:
Future Work (cont.) • Dam & Levee
Page 323:
B-20
Page 326 and 327:
MORRIS 2 CADAM - AN INTRODUCTION Th
Page 328 and 329:
MORRIS 4 which models performed bes
Page 330 and 331:
MORRIS 6 simulating partial or tota
Page 332 and 333:
MORRIS 8 Use of 1D or 2D Models It
Page 334 and 335:
MORRIS 10 Fig. 6 Typical scatter of
Page 336 and 337:
MORRIS 12 Piping Vs Overtopping 450
Page 338 and 339:
MORRIS 14 effective contingency pla
Page 340 and 341:
MORRIS 16 IMPACT: BENEFITS OF THE R
Page 342 and 343:
MORRIS 18 • Model development and
Page 344 and 345:
MORRIS 20 uncertainty associated wi
Page 347:
B-21
Page 350 and 351:
1. Contingency planning for abnorma
Page 352 and 353:
3.1 Shear strengths and permeabilit
Page 354 and 355:
Initial tests will cover homogeneou
Page 356 and 357:
The following data will be recorded
Page 358 and 359:
Longitudinal section Cross section
Page 361 and 362:
C PARTICIPANTS ____________________
Page 363 and 364:
Ellen Faulkner Mead & Hunt, Inc. 45
Page 365 and 366:
Matt Lindon Dam Safety State Divisi
Page 367:
Darrel Temple USDA-ARS 1301 N. West
show all

Embankment Dam Failure Analysis (FEMA 541) - Association of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?