Journals / ARI The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University / 2003 / Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 2

Pre-event failure analyses of Kestel dam for disaster management

Pages
58–64
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The EAP's are outlined in detail in the present study.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study [1] was undertaken for the State Hydraulics Works of Turkey (DSİ) within the framework of the program (TUR/94/006) for the Improvement of the Disaster Management of Turkey, executed by the General Directorate of Disaster Works under the Ministry of Constructions and Settlement.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For the worst scenario case the final breach width was taken as 190 m (about 3 times the dam height) and the failure time was assumed to be 30 minutes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The EAP's are outlined in detail in the present study.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The present study [1] was undertaken for the State Hydraulics Works of Turkey (DSİ) within the framework of the program (TUR/94/006) for the Improvement of the Disaster Management of Turkey, executed by the General Directorate of Disaster Works under the Ministry of Constructions and Settlement. In this study, numerical failure simulations of Kestel dam were performed under different scenarios. Kestel dam is located on the Kestel creek near the Bergama County within the province of İzmir in the western part of Turkey. This location was selected as the pilot region by DSI for the present study, which may be used later as a basis within more comprehensive disaster management programs at a larger scale. The required data for the study were provided by DSI. Next, the numerical failure simulations were carried out under different scenarios. The numerical model employed in the present study was the one developed by Pread, D.L. at the National Weather Service, the U.S.A. and it is called the NWS DAMBREAK Model. In the simulations, it was assumed that a breaching started within the dam body soon after the maximum possible flood hydrograph entered the dam reservoir and caused the water to spill over the dam crest due to the insufficient capacity of the spillway. Other assumptions were made as to the formation characteristics of the breaching of the dam, such as the breaching shape, final breach width and breach formation time. For the worst scenario case the final breach width was taken as 190 m (about 3 times the dam height) and the failure time was assumed to be 30 minutes. The peak flood discharges, peak flood elevations and flood arrival times at preselected six cross-sections downstream of the dam were determined. The flood discharge hydrographs indicated that the regions affected adversely were those closest to the dam site. At the end, it was recommended that DSI establish a new department, namely, Department of Dam Safety at its headquarters in Ankara supported by auxiliary units to be set up in the regional directorates of the DSİ. The engineers working for this department should prepare emergency action plans (EAP) for a potential dam-break disaster in coordination with the local public authorities. The EAP's are outlined in detail in the present study.

🔖

Cite This Article

BOZKUŞ, Z. (2022). Pre-event failure analyses of Kestel dam for disaster management. ARI The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University, Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 2, 58–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/448184

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. METU/DMC, Z. Bozkuş, (Middle East Technical University, Disaster Management Implementation and Research Center, Ankara, Report No: 98-02 (1998)
  2. This inventory inludes dams either with a height greater than 7.62 m, or with a reservoir capacity greater than 61 700 m3 [3] USACE, I-V, National Program of Inspection of Dams (Dept. of the Army, Office of Chief of Engineers (Washington, D.C, 1975)
  3. DSİ (Devlet Su İşleri Ajandası 2001)
  4. Z. Bozkuş, DSİ 40. Kuruluş Yılı Su ve Toprak Kaynaklarının Geliştirilmesi Konferansı Bildirileri, 2, Ankara (1994)
  5. C. Sezer, DSİ Teknik Bülteni, 77 (1992)
  6. DİE (İzmir, 2111 1997)
  7. D.L. Fread, The NWS Dambreak Model, Theoretical Background/User Documentation, Hydrologic Research Laboratory, Office of Hydrology, National Weather Service (NWS), Silver Spring, Maryland, June 1988 (Revision 4, 1991)
  8. L.T. Wahl, 27th IAHR Congress, San Francisco, California August 10-15 (1997)
  9. C.A. Brown and J.G. Wayne, Water Resources Bulletin, 24 (1998)
  10. A.W. Petrascheck and P. A. Sydler, International Water Power and Dam Construction, 36, 29 (1984)
  11. FEMA, Emergency Action Planning Guidelines for Dam Owners (Washington, D.C, 1996)
  12. USBR, Emergency Planning and Exercise Guidelines (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1995).