Janice Green, Cathy Beesley, Cynthia The, Catherine Jolly
Design rainfall estimates are essential inputs to the design of infrastructure such as gutters, roofs, culverts, stormwater drains, flood mitigation levees and retarding basins. They are also integral to large dam spillway adequacy assessments undertaken to determine the flood magnitude that existing dams can safely withstand.
The previous design rainfall estimates for probabilities from the 1 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) to the 100 year ARI were derived by the Bureau of Meteorology (the Bureau) in the early 1980s using a database comprising primarily of Bureau raingauges and techniques for statistical data analysis that were considered appropriate at the time. More recently, estimates of rare design rainfall estimates for probabilities from 100 year ARI to 2000 year ARI have been derived for each state, with the exception of the Northern Territory, using the CRC-FORGE method.
As part of the revision of the 1987 edition of Australian Rainfall and Runoff: A Guide to Flood Estimation being undertaken by Engineers Australia, the Bureau conducted a five year project to revise the design rainfall estimates for probabilities from 1 year ARI to 100 year ARI. The new design rainfall estimates are based on a greatly expanded database which incorporates data collected by organisations across Australia. These data have been analysed using contemporary statistical methods that are appropriate for Australian rainfall data. These new Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IFD) design rainfalls were released in July 2013.
Over the next 18 months, the Bureau will be deriving design rainfall estimates for probabilities more frequent than 1 year ARI and revising the existing estimates of the CRC-FORGE rare design rainfalls. The estimates for more frequent design rainfalls will replace the current ad hoc estimates that have been derived by organisations in the absence of other estimates. The revised rare design rainfall estimates will replace the current estimates that were derived on a state by state basis and which, for most states, are now in need of revision as a result of the release of the new IFDs.
— OR —
Francisco Lopez and Michael McKay
At 36 m high and completed in 1902, Barossa Dam is one of the first true concrete arch dams in the world. During the 1954 Darlington Earthquake the dam sustained some damage, in the form of several vertical cracks on both dam’s abutments. In 2013, GHD conducted a nonlinear time-history seismic assessment of Barossa Dam. The analyses, carried out using finite element techniques, included ground motion loading corresponding to Maximum Design Earthquakes (MDEs) with 1 in 10,000 Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP).
This paper will explain the purpose of the study, the material investigation phase, the methodology, model results, the anticipated seismic behaviour of the dam wall, as well as the predicted level of damage under the MDEs. The paper examines the dam construction practices of the beginning of the 20th century, and how such practices affected the material properties and the structural performance of Barossa Dam.
This paper outlines lessons learned from 8 years of regular operations and testing of 111 gates at 22 sites. It points out that the implementation challenges involved are not only technological in nature, but also encompass human factor and organizational issues. This is perhaps understandable since the initiative is part of the cultural shift to sustain gate reliability long-term.
An increase in gate testing frequency has led to the identification of more performance anomalies, ranging from deficiencies to operational failures. This finding may not be unique to a single dam owner. It leads to the following question to the general dam owner community: Are we testing our gates enough?
Marius Jonker and Dr Radin Espandar
This paper provides a summary of the current state of practice for arch dam design criteria that have been adopted by some international dam organizations, and where relevant, compares that with the criteria provided in the updated ANCOLD Guidelines on Design Criteria for Concrete Gravity Dams, with the view to provide a basis for consistent and unified design criteria for arch dams in Australia.
The paper draws on the authors’ experience with arch dams, including recent experience with a number of arch dam safety reviews in Australia, their past experience with arch dams over 200 m height, as well as their involvement with the development of the mentioned updated ANCOLD Guidelines.
Since the last arch dam was constructed in Australia, a number of international publications have been released on arch dam design practices, providing general information and guidance for the design of new dams and evaluation of the safety and structural integrity of existing arch dams. This paper compares these publications and proposes criteria that are aligned with the ANCOLD gravity dam guidelines.
Two techniques were used to calculate seismic hazard at a number of locations in southeast Australia. To simplify matters only Peak Ground Accelerations were compared.
The first technique used a seismological model of areal source zones that was based on the recorded seismicity as well as geological and tectonic inputs. Each zone was assigned a rate of earthquake activity that had been calculated from the recorded seismicity and a magnitude completeness function. Known geological faults that are also part of the model had to be excluded to allow a direct comparison with the second technique. A standard probabilistic seismic hazard analysis then gave PGA values versus return periods. This is the approach that has been used for the current Australian earthquake loading code (AS1170.4).
The second technique used a simple historical approach whereby recorded earthquakes were combined with an attenuation function to directly give the estimated return periods. This approach takes no account of tectonics, geological terranes or faulting – it simply uses the known, recorded earthquake catalogue. This is the technique used in the original Australian earthquake loading code (AS 2121).
The same ground motion attenuation function was used in both techniques but for a direct comparison the aleatory variability was set to zero in the probabilistic case because the historical approach did not include this effect.
In the historical approach the variability in completeness of the recorded catalogue was not considered. It was simply assumed that all earthquakes producing accelerations greater than a given value would be recorded over the last 100 years.
The comparisons were made for minimum considered magnitudes of 4 and 5.
There was general agreement between the two approaches especially at shorter return periods (lower PGA amplitudes). At longer return periods (higher PGA amplitudes) where there were higher uncertainties, the results at some sites diverged.
This simple comparison of two approaches to the same problem of estimating earthquake hazard is shown to be of value in ensuring that the AUS5 model used by SRC is producing results that are consistent with the historically recorded data.
Paul Southcott, Tony Harman
This paper addresses structural behaviour of the Rowallan spillway walls and the learning that can be derived from this in the design of critical retaining walls in dams and how this can be applied both to remedial works and new work. The authors propose design criteria suitable for retaining walls in high hazard dams.