Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of simplified physically based dam breach models

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ASCE/EWRI Task Committee on Dam/Levee Breach (2011) Earthen embankment breaching. J Hydraul Eng 137(12):1549–1564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briaud JL, Ting FCK, Chen HC, Cao Y, Han SW, Kwak KW (2001) Erosion function apparatus for scour rate prediction. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127(2):105–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broich K (1998) Mathematical modelling of dam-break erosion caused by overtopping. In: Morris M (ed) CADAM—concerted action on dambreak modelling: 2nd project workshop, Universitat der Bunderswehr, Munich

  • Costa JE (1985) Floods from dam failures. Open-File Rep. No. 85-560, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver

  • Cristofano EA (1965) Method of computing erosion rate of failure of earth dams. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Eliso C (2007) Breaching of sea dikes initiated by wave overtopping: A tiered and modular modeling approach. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Braunschweig, Germany and University of Florence, Italy

  • Faeh R (2007) Numerical modeling of breach erosion of river embankments. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 133(9):1000–1009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fread DL (1984) DAMBREAK: the NWS dam break flood forecasting model. National Weather Service (NWS) Rep. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Silver Spring

    Google Scholar 

  • Fread DL (1988) BREACH: an erosion model for earthen dam failure (model description and user manual). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service, Silver Spring

    Google Scholar 

  • Froehlich DC (1995a) Peak outflow from breached embankment dam. J Water Resour Plan Manage Div 121(1):90–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Froehlich DC (1995b). Embankment dam breach parameters revisited. In: Proceedings of 1995 ASCE conference on water resources engineering, New York, pp 887–891

  • Gallegos HA, Schubert JE, Sanders BF (2009) Two-dimensional, high-resolution modeling of urban dam-break flooding: a case study of Baldwin Hills, California. Adv Water Resour 32(8):1323–1335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee DM (2008) Comparison of dam breach parameter estimators. Hydrology Engineering Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Davis

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson GJ, Cook KR (2004) Determination of material rate parameters for headcut migration of compacted earthen materials. In: Proceedings of Dam Safety 2004 (CD-ROM), Association of State Dam Safety Officials (ASDSO), Phoenix, pp 128–138

  • Hanson GJ, Simon A (2001) Erodibility of cohesive streambeds in the loess area of the Midewestern USA. Hydrol Process 15(1):23–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson GJ, Cook KR, Hunt SL (2005) Physical modeling of overtopping erosion and breach formation of cohesive embankments. Trans ASAE 48(5):1783–1794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson GJ, Tejral RD, Hunt SL, Temple DM (2010). Internal erosion and impact of erosion resistance. In: Proceedings of 30th U.S. Society on Dams annual meeting and conference (CD-ROM), USSD, Sacramento, pp 773–784

  • Hanson GJ, Temple DM, Hunt SL, Tejral RD (2011) Development and characterization of soil material parameters for embankment breach. Appl Eng Agric 27(4):587–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris GW, Wagner DA (1967) Outflow from breached earth dams. B.Sc. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City

  • Hassan M, Morris MW (2008) IMPACT project field tests data analysis. FloodSite Rep. T04-08-04, FLOODsite, European Community

  • Justin JD (1932) Earth dam projects. Wiley, New York, p 345

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraus NC, Hayashi K (2005) Numerical morphologic model of barrier island breaching. In: Proceedings of 29th coastal engineering conference, World Scientific Press, National Civil Engineering Laboratory, Lisbon, pp 2120–2132

  • MacDonald TC, Langridge-Monopolis J (1984) Breaching characteristics of dam failures. J Hydraul Eng 110(5):567–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsooli R, Wu W (2014) Numerical investigation of wave attenuation by vegetation using a 3D RANS model. Adv Water Resour 74(24):245–257. doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2014.09.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed AAA, Samuels PG, Morris MW, Ghataora GS (2002) Improving the accuracy of prediction of breach formation through embankment dams and flood embankments. In: Proceedings of international conference on fluvial hydraulics (river flow 2002), Louvain-la-Neuve

  • Morris MW (2011) Breaching of earth embankments and dams. Ph.D. Thesis, the Open University, England

  • Morris MW, Hassan M, Vaskinn KA (2005) Breach formation technical report (WP2). In: IMPACT Project Reports, European Commission, FP5 Research Programme. www.impact-project.net

  • Morris MW, Kortenhaus A, Visser PJ, Hassan MAAM (2009a) Breaching processes: a state of the art review. FLOODsite Rep. T06-06-03, FLOODsite Consortium. www.floodsite.net

  • Morris MW, Kortenhaus A, Visser PJ (2009b) Modelling breach initiation and growth. FLOODsite Report T06-08-02, FLOODsite. www.floodsite.net

  • Pierce MW, Thornton CI, Abt SR (2010) Predicting peak outflow from breached embankment dams. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 15(5):338–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh VP (1996) Dam breach modeling technology. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Singh VP, Scarlatos CA (1985) Breach erosion of earthfill dams and flood routing: BEED model. Research Report, Research Triangle Park, N.C.: Battelle, Army Research Office

  • Singh KP, Snorrason A (1984) Sensitivity of outflow peaks and flood stages to the selection of dam breach parameters and simulation models. J Hydrol 68:295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart GM (1984) Sediment transport formula for steep channels. J Hydraul Eng 110(3):267–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temple DM (1992) Estimating flood damage to vegetated deep soil spillways. Appl Eng Agric 8(2):237–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temple DM, Hanson GJ (1994) Headcut development in vegetated earth spillways. Appl Eng Agric 10(5):677–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temple DM, Hanson GJ, Neilsen ML, Cook KR (2005) Simplified breach analysis model for homogeneous embankment: part I, background and model components. In: Proceedings of 25th annual USSD conference, U.S. Society on Dams, Denver

  • Temple DM, Hanson GJ, Neilsen ML (2006) WINDAM-Analysis of overtopped earth embankment dams. In: Proceedings ASABE annual international meeting, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph

  • Toro EF (2001) Shock-capturing methods for free-surface shallow flows. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1982) Guidelines for defining inundated areas downstream from Bureau of Reclamation dams. Reclamation Planning Instruction No. 82-11, vol 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver

  • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1988) Downstream hazard classification guidelines. ACER Tech. Memorandum No. 11, vol 57. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA–NRCS) (1997) Chapter 51: earth spillway erosion model. Part 628 Dams, National engineering handbook. NRCS, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser PJ (1998) Breach growth in sand-dikes. Communication on hydraulic and geotechnical engineering, TU Delft, Report No. 98-1

  • Von Thun JL, Gillette DR (1990) Guidance on breach parameters. Internal memorandum. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  • Wahl TL (1998) Prediction of embankment dam breach parameters: a literature review and needs assessment. Dam Safety Rep. No. DSO-98-004, U.S. Department of the interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver

  • Wahl TL (2004) Uncertainty of embankment dam breach parameters. J Hydraul Eng 130(5):389–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walder JS, O’Connor JE (1997) Methods for predicting peak discharge of floods caused by failure of natural and constructed earth dams. Water Resour Res 33(10):2337–2348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wan CF, Fell R (2004) Investigation of rate of erosion of soils in embankment dams. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130(4):373–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang P, Kahawita R, Mokhtari A, Phat TM, Quach TT (2006) Modeling breach formation in embankments due to overtopping. In: ICOLD conference, Barcelona

  • Wu W (2007) Computational river dynamics. Taylor and Francis, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W (2013) Simplified physically based model of earthen embankment breaching. J Hydraul Eng 139(8):837–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Wang SSY, Jia Y (2000) Nonuniform sediment transport in alluvial rivers. J Hydraul Res 38(6):427–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Marsooli R, He Z (2012) A depth-averaged two-dimensional model of unsteady flow and sediment transport due to noncohesive embankment break/breaching. J Hydraul Eng ASCE 138(6):503–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Y, Zhang LM (2009) Breaching parameters for earth and rock-fill dams. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(12):1957–1969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang RJ (1961) River dynamics. Industry Press, Beijing (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang JY, Li Y, Xuan GX, Wang XG, Li J (2009) Overtopping breaching of cohesive homogeneous earth dam with different cohesive strength. Sci China E Technol Sci 52(10):3024–3029

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author acknowledges the support from the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51379129, 51109141, 51539006).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Key Laboratory of Failure Mechanism and Safety Control Techniques of Earth-rock Dam of the Ministry of Water Resources, Nanjing, China

    Qiming Zhong

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY, USA

    Weiming Wu & Meng Wang

  3. Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Key Laboratory of Failure Mechanism and Safety Control Techniques of Earth-rock Dam of the Ministry of Water Resources, Nanjing, China

    Shengshui Chen

Authors
  1. Qiming Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Weiming Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shengshui Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Meng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiming Zhong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhong, Q., Wu, W., Chen, S. et al. Comparison of simplified physically based dam breach models. Nat Hazards 84, 1385–1418 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2492-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2492-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation