DAM BREACH ANALYSIS AND PARAMETER SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ALONG A RIVER REACH USING HECRAS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2022.04.0043Keywords:
2D-HEC-RAS modelling, Dam Breach, Inundation Mapping, Local Sensitivity Analysis, Global Sensitivity Analysis, Monte CarloAbstract
A dam break is a low-probability, high risk catastrophe event that is extremely destructive and has a substantial negative socio-economic impact on downstream and nearby areas. Simulating dam breach and analyzing flood propagation downstream from those events is vital for identifying and minimizing the risks associated downstream of dam location. This study is intended to anlayse the effect of overtopping failure of dam for two scenario (a) base-case scenario (scenario with average value of dam breach parameters from their range) and (b) worst case scenario (the breach with largest geometry, shortest formation time and highest peak outflow magnitude). Further, a hydrodyanmic modelling is perfomed to investigate the sensitivity analysis (local and global) of five dam breach parameters (dam breach elevation, dam breach width, breach formation time, weir coefficient, trigger failure elevation) on breach outflow in a proposed hydropower project located in Nepal. Aeronautical Reconnaissance Coverage Geographic Information System (ArcGIS), Hydraulic Engineering Center River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) and OriginPro 2022b are utilized to analyse the effect of dam breach and parameter sensitivity.
Generation of outflow hydrograph shows that worst case scenario has devasting effect downstream with innudation of 1047 of househols and 50.83 kilometers of roads. The breach velocty was recorded as 15.16 m/s and 20.85 m/s for base and worst case respectively. The minimum depth and maximum depth of flooding downstream from dam location was found to be 24.51 m and 73.6 m for base case and 47.43 m and 106.75 m for worst case. Due to backwater effect at Bheri river, peak flow at 14 km downstream from dam reduces significantly to 124852.57 m3/s and 244204.41 m3/s for base and worst case respectively. From local sensitivty analysis it has been found that, dam breach elevation is more sensitive and triggering failure elevation is less sensitive for peak outflow hydrograph. Whereas, dam breach width seems more sensitive and TFE seems least sensitive for peak outflow using Monte Carlo Simulation for gloal sensitivity.
Downloads
References
T. A. Atallah, “MASTER OF SCIENCE N HYDROSYSTEM ENGINEERING A REVIEW ON DAMS AND BREACH PARAMETERS ESTIMATION,” 2002.
D. A. H. A. NajmObaidSalim Alghazali, “Mathematical Model of Rcc Dam Break Bastora Rcc Dam As a Case Study,” Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1–14, 2013.
D. Mirauda, R. Albano, A. Sole, J. A.- Water, and undefined 2020, “Smoothed particle hydrodynamics modeling with advanced boundary conditions for two-dimensional dam-break floods,” mdpi.com, Accessed: Aug. 31, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/692902.
W. Li, Z. Li, W. Ge, S. W.- Water, and undefined 2019, “Risk evaluation model of life loss caused by dam-break flood and its application,” mdpi.com, 2019, doi: 10.3390/w11071359.
W. Ge et al., “A method for fast evaluation of potential consequences of dam breach,” mdpi.com, Accessed: Aug. 31, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/560530.
S. Dhiman and K. C. Patra, “Evaluation of Empirical Equations for Dam Breach Parameters,” E-proceedings 37th IAHR World Congr., no. 1, 2017.
L. Zhang, M. Peng, D. Chang, and Y. Xu, “Dam Failure Mechanisms and Risk Assessment,” Dam Fail. Mech. Risk Assess., pp. 1–476, Jan. 2015, doi: 10.1002/9781118558522.
“User´s Manual HEC-RAS 6.0,” Hydrologic Engineering Center. 2021.
M. Bernard-Garcia and T.-F. Mahdi, “A Worldwide Historical Dam Failure’s Database,” Jul. 2020, doi: 10.5683/SP2/E7Z09B.
V. Bellos, V. K. Tsakiris, G. Kopsiaftis, and G. Tsakiris, “Propagating dam breach parametric uncertainty in a river reach using the HEC-RAS software,” Hydrology, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1–14, 2020, doi: 10.3390/hydrology7040072.
G. Tsakiris and M. Spiliotis, “Dam- Breach Hydrograph Modelling: An Innovative Semi- Analytical Approach,” Water Resour. Manag. 2012 276, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1751–1762, May 2012, doi: 10.1007/S11269-012-0046-9.
FERC, “Dam Breach Analysis,” 2014.
J.-T. Kuo, B.-C. Yen, Y.-C. Hsu, and H.-F. Lin, “Risk Analysis for Dam Overtopping—Feitsui Reservoir as a Case Study,” J. Hydraul. Eng., vol. 133, no. 8, pp. 955–963, Aug. 2007, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2007)133:8(955).
L. P. Gyawali, D.R. and Devkota, “Dam Break Analysis USING HEC-RAS: A CASE STUDY of Proposed Koshi High Dam,” 2015.
M. S. Khattak, F. Anwar, T. U. Saeed, M. Sharif, K. Sheraz, and A. Ahmed, “Floodplain Mapping Using HEC-RAS and ArcGIS: A Case Study of Kabul River,” Arab. J. Sci. Eng., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1375–1390, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s13369-015-1915-3.
M. Heydari, A. Shahiri Parsa, M. S. Sadeghian, and M. Moharrampour, “Flood Zoning Simulation by HEC-RAS Model (Case Study: Johor River-Kota Tinggi Region),” J. River Eng., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 6, 2013, [Online]. Available: http://www.scijour.com/page/download-e-AfqLK9Ipw.artdl.
S. E. Yochum, L. A. Goertz, and P. H. Jones, “Case Study of the Big Bay Dam Failure: Accuracy and Comparison of Breach Predictions,” J. Hydraul. Eng., vol. 134, no. 9, pp. 1285–1293, 2008, doi: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9429(2008)134:9(1285).
F. E. Hicks and T. Peacock, “Suitability of HEC-RAS for Flood Forecasting,” Can. Water Resour. J., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 159–174, 2005, doi: 10.4296/cwrj3002159.
B. Balaji and S. Kumar, “Dam break analysis of kalyani dam using HEC-RAS,” Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 372–380, 2018.
Colorado dam safety branch 2010, “Guidelines for Dam Breach Analysis,” 2010. Accessed: Aug. 23, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=colorado+dam+safety+branch+2010&btnG=.
A. Saltelli, “Sensitivity analysis: Could better methods be used?,” J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., vol. 104, no. D3, pp. 3789–3793, Feb. 1999, doi: 10.1029/1998JD100042.
C. Pichery, “Sensitivity Analysis,” Encycl. Toxicol. Third Ed., pp. 236–237, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-386454-3.00431-0.
X. Zhou and H. Lin, “Local Sensitivity Analysis,” Encycl. GIS, pp. 616–616, 2008, doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-35973-1_703.
N. B. Lucie Pheulpin, Vito Bacchi, “Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for hydraulic models with dependent inputs | Enhanced Reader,” uropean Geosciences Union General Assembly, EGU, 2019. .
M. Ratto, S. Tarantola, and A. Saltelli, “Sensitivity analysis in model calibration: GSA-GLUE approach,” Comput. Phys. Commun., vol. 136, no. 3, pp. 212–224, May 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0010-4655(01)00159-X.
Nalgad, “Updated Feasibility Study Report,” 2018.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Stavební obzor - Civil Engineering Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
Accepted 2022-11-27
Published 2022-12-31
