Peyman Andaroodi, Barton Maher
Seqwater is a statutory authority of the Government of Queensland that provides bulk water storage, transport and treatment, water grid management and planning, catchment management and flood mitigation services to the South East Queensland region of Australia. Seqwater also provides irrigation services to about 1,200 rural customers in the region that are not connected to the grid and provides recreation facilities. Seqwater owns and operates 26 referable dams regulated under Queensland dam safety legislation.
Leslie Harrison Dam is an Extreme Hazard category dam located in the Redland Bay area of Brisbane.A significant portion of Population at Risk is located within a short distance downstream of the dam, reducing the available warning time in the event of a dam safety issue and impacting on the estimated loss of life used to assess risk. Following the Portfolio Risk Assessment undertaken by Seqwater in 2013, a series of detailed investigations were undertaken to confirm the assessed risk and the scope and urgency of the upgrade works.
Before a final decision on the scope and timing of the dam upgrade is made, Seqwater has completed a detailed review of the downstream consequences. This review was intended to update the Population at Risk(PAR) and Potential Loss of Life(PLL) estimates using the latest estimation methods for a range of scenarios. Three life loss estimation methods were used including empirical and dynamic simulation models and the results were compared.
This paper discusses the updated consequences assessment and the impact on the assessed risks, for Leslie Harrison Dam for both the current dam and the proposed upgrade scenarios using the revised Potential Loss of Life estimates.
Lisa J Neumann, Rod Westmore
In Australia construction of a new dam on a greenfield site is relatively uncommon and construction of a new dam on a brownfield site is even more unusual.This paper presents an innovative design solution to address the challenges associated with such a project.Ridge Park Dam is a new flood retarding dam located in a suburban recreation park, less than 10km south east of Adelaide, South Australia.The dam was constructed in 2014/15 and was designed to limit the peak flows in the creek downstream of the park under the 1 in 100 ARI event and to impound water as a component of the infrastructure required for the Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) scheme located in Ridge Park.The expectations of both the client and community and the technical issues encountered in the early stages of the project resulted in some unique design criteria. At the outset the client and community expectation was that the dam would improve the overall amenity of the park without impacting the existing vegetation or functionality of the park, including public access and safety.Identifying a dam type to suit the client and community expectations and address the technical issues was not straightforward.Typical dams types such as embankment dams, mass concrete gravity or concrete buttress structures, were found to be not suitable.A less typical, innovative solution was sought.The outcome was to construct a dam comprising a concrete core wall supported by rock filled gabion baskets.
Eric Lesleighter, Peyman Andaroodi, Colleen Stratford
In January 2011 major flooding was experienced across a large part of Southern Queensland. The flood discharges through the Wivenhoe Dam spillway caused extensive erosion of the rock in the plunge pool. While not an issue in relation to the spillway structure’s security, the rock erosion experience was dramatic for a number of reasons. The paper presents details of the extent of erosion under head conditions that can be classed as moderate only when compared with many taller dams. The discharges over several days resulted in a pile of huge rock blocks downstream of the plunge pool.
The paper describes the plunge pool design dimensions, the geology, the hydrology of the releases, the hydraulics of the plunge pool, the surveys of the pool and rock mound, and moves on to discuss the mechanism of the fracturing and transport of the rock. Similar relevant experiences will be cross referenced, especially from details of recent experiences at the Kariba Dam and the study of remedies in the context of the dam’s actual safety.
From an actual major experience of erosion, and the sheer volume of rock that was lifted up and out of the plunge pool, the occurrence stands as a timely demonstration of what can happen in similar spillway situations, and suggests the type of awareness that spillway design needs to accommodate for energy dissipation facilities in unlined spillways plunge pool.
Keywords: Spillways, plunge pools, rock erosion, scour, plunging jets, pressure transients.
Chriselyn Kavanagh, Simon Lang, Andrew Northfield, Peter Hill
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have recently releasedHEC-LifeSim1.0, a dynamic simulation model for estimating life loss from severe flooding (Fields, 2016). In contrast to the empirical models that are often used to estimate life loss from dam failure, HEC-LifeSim explicitly models the warning and mobilisation of the population at risk, and predicts the spatial distribution of fatalities across the structures and transport networks expected to be inundated. This capability provides additional insights to dam owners that can be used to better understand and reduce the life safety risks posed by large dams. In this paper, we demonstrate the use of HEC-LifeSim to model the potential loss of life from failure of five large Australian dams. Particular attention is paid to how the predicted life loss varies with warning time, in a manner that depends on human response and the transport network’s capacity for mass evacuations, and the modelled severity of flooding. We also examine how the HEC-LifeSim estimates of life loss compare with those from the empirical Reclamation Consequence Estimating Methodology (RCEM).
Mark Pearse, Peter Hill
Risk assessments for large dams and the design of upgrades are often dependent on estimates of peak inflows and outflows well beyond those observed in the historic record. The flood frequencies are therefore simulated using rainfall-runoff models and design rainfalls. The recent update of Australian Rainfall and Runoff (ARR) has revised the design rainfalls used to model floods that are of interest to dam owners. This will change the best estimate of flood frequencies for some dams. However, for most dams the impact of revised design rainfalls on flood frequencies is small compared to other factors that can change (independent of dam upgrades). These include model re-calibrations to larger floods, changes to operating procedures that affect the drawdown distribution and improvements in how the joint probabilities of flood causing factors are simulated. In this paper, we look at how the design flood frequencies for some of Australia’s large dams have changed, the reasons for this and then identify five key questions for dam owners to ask to aid assessment of whether the hydrology for a dam should be reviewed