Scenario-Based Analysis of Reverse Flow and Hydraulic Backwater Effects on Dam Failures

Öz

In dam failure applications, the dam break mechanism and the outflow hydrograph are among the most uncertain factors. Therefore, 2D hydraulic modeling and analyzing dam failure scenarios, aiming to reduce uncertainties related to different failure mechanisms by creating 11 distinct scenarios, are carried out. During the modeling process, the interactions between the dam structure and the downstream flow area were evaluated through two-dimensional analyses, incorporating various failure types such as "overtopping" and "piping." According to the analysis results, peak flow rates varied between 6,510.06 m³/s and 33,004.04 m³/s depending on the scenario, while the time to reach peak flow ranged from 18 to 91 minutes. It aims to provide a negative backpressure of the hydraulic behavior of dam failures, contributing to risk management and emergency planning while offering critical insights to enhance safety factors in dam design.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dam Failure Modeling
• Hydraulic Analysis of Dam Breach
• Risk Assessment

Scenario-Based Analysis of Reverse Flow and Hydraulic Backwater Effects on Dam Failures

Öz

In dam failure applications, the dam break mechanism and the outflow hydrograph are among the most uncertain factors. Therefore, 2D hydraulic modeling and analysis of dam failure scenarios are carried out, aiming to reduce uncertainties related to different failure mechanisms by creating 11 distinct scenarios. During the modeling process, the interactions between the dam structure and the downstream flow area were evaluated through two-dimensional analyses, incorporating various failure types such as "overtopping" and "piping." According to the analysis results, peak flow rates varied between 6,510.06 m³/s and 33,004.04 m³/s depending on the scenario, while the time to reach peak flow ranged from 18 to 91 minutes. It aims to provide a negative backpressure of the hydraulic behavior of dam failures, contributing to risk management and emergency planning while offering critical insights to enhance safety factors in dam design.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Baraj Hasar Modellemesi
• Baraj Deliğinin Hidrolik Analizi
• Risk Değerlendirmesi

Kaynakça

1. [1] Abay, O., Baykan, N., (2015). Reasons for dam failures throughout history. Proceedings of the 4th Water Structures Symposium, 19–21 November, Ankara, pp. 157–166.
2. [2] Altinakar, M.S., Riffai, M.A., Bergman, N., Bradford, S.F., (2011). Earthen embankment breaching. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 137(12), 1549–1564.
3. [3] Arcement, G.J., Schneider, V.R., (1989). Manning’s roughness coefficients for natural channels and floodplains. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper, 2339.
4. [4] Aris, R., (1990). Vectors, Tensors, and the Basic Equations of Fluid Mechanics. Dover Publications, ISBN: 0486661105, 320 p.
5. [5] Aydemir, A., Güven, A., (2017). Comparison of discharge estimation methods used in dam break models. HU Journal of Engineering, 1, 22–29.
6. [6] Azeez, O., Elfeki, A., Kamis, A.S., Chaabani, A., (2020). Dam break analysis and flood disaster simulation in arid urban environment: the Um Al‑Khair Dam case study, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Natural Hazards, 100, 995–1011.
7. [7] Basco, D.R., (1989). Limitations of de Saint Venant equations in dam break analysis. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 115(7), 950–965.
8. [8] Bayazıt, M., Önöz, B., (2008). Flood and Drought Hydrology. Nobel Academic Publishing, 1st Edition, ISBN: 6053951421, 259 p. [In Turkish]

9. [9] Bosa, S., Petti, M., (2013). A numerical model of the wave that overtopped the Vajont Dam in 1963. Water Resources Management, 27, 1763–1779.
10. [10] Bozkuş, Z., Bağ, Z., (2011). Virtual failure analysis of Çınarcık Dam. IMO Technical Journal, 364, 5675–5688. [In Turkish]
11. [11] Bozkuş, Z., (2004). Dam break analysis for disaster management. IMO Technical Journal, 224, 3335–3350. [In Turkish]
12. [12] Broich, K., (1998). Mathematical modelling of dam-break erosion caused by overtopping. Concerted Action on Dam Break Modelling, 2nd Project Workshop, Munich, Germany.
13. [13] Brown, R.J., Rogers, D.C., (1981). BRDAM Users’ Manual. Water and Power Resources Service, Denver, 67 p.
14. [14] Cao, Z., Yue, Z., Pender, G., (2011a). Landslide dam failure and flood hydraulics. Part I: Experimental investigation. Natural Hazards, 59(2), 1003–1019.
15. [15] Cao, Z., Yue, Z., Pender, G., (2011b). Landslide dam failure and flood hydraulics. Part II: Coupled mathematical modelling. Natural Hazards, 59(2), 1019–1045.
16. [16] Cao, J.G., Feal, O.G., Nóvoa, D.F., Gesteira, M.G., (2020). Iber+: A new code to analyze dam-break floods. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Natural Hazards, 23–26 June, Pico Island.
17. [17] NFB Engineering (2014). Flood Analysis of Atasu Dam-Break, Technical Report, Ankara, Türkiye, 544 s.
18. [18] MacDonald, T.C., Langridge-Monopolis, J., (1984). Breaching characteristics of dam failures. ASCE Journal Hydraulic Engineering, 110(5), 567-586.
19. [19] Froehlich, D. C., (1995), Peak outflow from breached embankment dam. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 121(1), 90-97.
20. [20] Singh, K.P. Snorrason, A., (1984) Sensitivity of outflow peaks and flood stages to the selection of dam breach parameters and simulation models. Journal of Hydrology. 68, 295-310.
21. [21] Froehlich, D.C., (2008). Embankment Dam Breach Parameters and Their Uncertainties. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. 134(12), 1708-1721.
22. [22] Von Thun, J.L., Gillette, D. R., (1990). Guidance on Breach Parameters, Internal Memorandum. Unpublished Internal Document.
23. [23] Qiu, W., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Wen, L., Wang, T., Wang, J., & Sun, X. (2024). Numerical investigation on the evolution process of cascade dam-break flood in the downstream earth-rock dam reservoir area based on coupled CFD-DEM. Journal of Hydrology, 635, 131162.
24. [24] Pianforini, M., Dazzi, S., Pilzer, A., & Vacondio, R. (2024). Real-time flood maps forecasting for dam-break scenarios with a transformer-based deep learning model. Journal of Hydrology, 635, 131169.
25. [25] Ma, B., Zhou, J., & Zhang, C. (2024). Risk Prediction Model for Tailings Ponds Based on EEMD-DA-LSTM Model. Applied Sciences, 14(19), 9141.
26. [26] Deng, Y., Zhang, D., Cao, Z., & Liu, Y. (2024). Spatio-temporal water height prediction for dam break flows using deep learning. Ocean Engineering, 302, 117567.
27. [27] Al-Ghosoun, A., Gumus, V., Seaid, M., & Simsek, O. (2025). Predicting morphodynamics in dam-break flows using combined machine learning and numerical modelling. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment, 11(1), 74.
28. [28] Gouli, M. R., Hu, K., Khadka, N., Liu, S., Yifan, S., Adhikari, M., & Talchabhadel, R. (2025). Quantitative assessment of the GLOF risk along China-Nepal transboundary basins by integrating remote sensing, machine learning, and hydrodynamic model. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 105231.
29. [29] Xu, Y., & Zhang, L. M. (2009). Breaching parameters for earth and rockfill dams. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 135(12), 1957-1970.