IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v84y2016i2d10.1007_s11069-016-2492-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of simplified physically based dam breach models

Author

Listed:
  • Qiming Zhong

    (Key Laboratory of Failure Mechanism and Safety Control Techniques of Earth-rock Dam of the Ministry of Water Resources)

  • Weiming Wu

    (Clarkson University)

  • Shengshui Chen

    (Key Laboratory of Failure Mechanism and Safety Control Techniques of Earth-rock Dam of the Ministry of Water Resources)

  • Meng Wang

    (Clarkson University)

Abstract

Three simplified physically based earthen embankment breach models, NWS BREACH (Revision 1), HR BREACH (Version 4.1) and DLBreach, are used to calculate the breaching of twelve dams, and the results are compared against the measured data and the predictions by three parametric breach models. It is found that NWS BREACH may have large errors for cohesive embankments, since it uses a noncohesive sediment transport model and does not consider headcut erosion as a typical mode of cohesive dam breach. HR BREACH considers headcut and surface erosion modes and adopts various surface erosion equations for noncohesive and cohesive soils. DLBreach adopts a nonequilibrium total-load sediment transport model and headcut erosion model for noncohesive and cohesive embankment breaching, respectively. All the three physically based models can handle overtopping failure of homogeneous and composite dams, as well as piping failure. HR BREACH and DLBreach consider both one- and two-sided widening, whereas only DLBreach allows subbase erosion. The comparison shows that DLBreach has best overall performance. Sensitivity studies show that sensitivity of these three models to soil erodibility is case dependent, but overall, DLBreach and HR BREACH are more sensitive than NWS BREACH. In addition, it is demonstrated that an adequate physically based breach model can perform better and provide more detailed results than a parametric model.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiming Zhong & Weiming Wu & Shengshui Chen & Meng Wang, 2016. "Comparison of simplified physically based dam breach models," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(2), pages 1385-1418, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:84:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-016-2492-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-016-2492-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-016-2492-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11069-016-2492-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:84:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s11069-016-2492-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.