Earthquakes are a well-known threat to the safety of dams. While this threat is subdued for Australian Dams, the potential for earthquake induced failure of a dam requires risk minimisation in the downstream community through monitoring and emergency response procedures. This paper details WaterNSW’s approach to their development of a Seismic Monitoring Strategy which was to align the business and ensure an appropriate post-seismic response.
The strategy also identifies that a proactive approach to seismic instrumentation can be taken to reduce business risk by aiding decision making should a dam be in a damaged post-seismic state.
The interim outcome of implementing the Seismic Monitoring Strategy resulted in a fast emergency
response time and less overreaction/distraction of dam safety resources in insignificant seismic events. There is opportunity for other Australian dam owners to implement similar systems to = WaterNSW and achieve similar results.
Now showing 1-12 of 58 2982:
Junction and Clover Dams are central spillway slab-and-buttress dams located in Victoria. Previous safety reviews and assessments of the dams concluded that neither dam met modern dam design standards and remedial works were recommended, including infilling the slab-and-buttress dams with mass concrete to sustain seismic loadings. These conclusions were based largely on the assessed seismic hazard at the site, the results of response spectrum analyses and observed conditions of the dams including alkali-aggregate reaction of the concrete. AECOM used current seismic hazard assessment techniques, conducted concrete investigations and testing, assessed long term surveillance monitoring results and used modern finite element techniques to demonstrate that no upgrade works were required at either dam resulting in a significant saving for AGL.
On February 7, 2017, the gated service spillway (also known as the Flood
Control Outlet or FCO Spillway) at Oroville Dam was being used to release water
to control the Lake Oroville level according to the prescribed operations plan.
During this operation, the service spillway’s concrete chute slab failed, resulting
in the loss of spillway chute slab sections and deep erosion of underlying
foundation materials. Subsequently, as the damaged service spillway was
operated in an attempt to manage multiple risks, the project’s free overflow
emergency spillway was overtopped for the first time since the project was
completed in 1968. Significant erosion and headcutting occurred downstream of
the emergency spillway’s crest structure, leading authorities to evacuate about
188,000 people from downstream communities.
The revised magnitudes of the Geoscience Australia’s NSHA18 earthquake catalogue approximately halve the rate of occurrence of earthquakes of a given Mw magnitude in Australia. This yields probabilistic ground motion levels that are significantly lower than the present design levels at dam sites in Australia that are not near faults, and is expected to result in a general reduction in ground motion levels at dams not near faults estimated for all Risk Assessments, and for Deterministic Assessments for all consequence levels except Extreme Consequence. For the latter, the ANCOLD (2018) guidelines will tend to increase existing SEE ground motion estimates for both of the methods used to estimate the safety evaluation earthquake (SEE). By requiring the use of the Deterministic SEE if it is larger than the probabilistic SEE, and by requiring use of the 85th fractile of the Probabilistic SEE if it is larger than the Deterministic SEE, the ANCOLD (2018) guidelines for Deterministic Assessments are much more conservative than the ICOLD and NZSOLD guidelines for Extreme Consequence dams, especially at those located near faults.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Risk Management Center (RMC) developed the Reservoir Frequency Analysis software (RMC-RFA) to facilitate, enhance, and expedite flood hazard assessments within the USACE Dam Safety Program. RMC-RFA is a stochastic flood modeling software that employs advanced statistical and computing techniques, allowing a user to perform a screening-level stage-frequency analysis on a desktop PC with runtimes on the order of seconds to a few minutes. RMC-RFA utilizes an inflow volume-based stochastic simulation framework that treats the seasonal occurrence of the flood event, the antecedent reservoir stage, inflow volume, and the inflow flood hydrograph shape as uncertain variables rather than fixed values. In order to construct uncertainty bounds for reservoir stage-frequency estimates, RMC-RFA employs a two looped, nested Monte Carlo methodology. The natural variability of the reservoir stage is simulated in the inner loop defined as a realization, which comprises many thousands of events, while the knowledge uncertainty in the inflow volume-frequency distribution is simulated in the outer loop, which comprises many realizations.
Stage-frequency curves derived with RMC-RFA are compared to those derived with more complex, precipitation-based simulation frameworks, such as the Monte Carlo Reservoir Analysis Model (MCRAM), the Stochastic Event Flood Model (SEFM), and the Watershed Analysis Tool (HEC-WAT). The inflow volume-based framework employed by RMC-RFA produces stage-frequency curves that strongly agree with the more complex, precipitation-based methods. Furthermore, the results from the alternative methods fall within the RMC-RFA uncertainty bounds, demonstrating its robustness. In this sense, the RMC-RFA simulation framework lends itself to a value of information approach to risk management, where knowledge uncertainty can be efficiently quantified at a screening-level assessment, and then the value of performing more complex and sophisticated studies to reduce uncertainty can be considered.
New technology and outputs from flood forecasting systems can raise issues for dam safety managers in how they use uncertain information to make critical dam safety decisions. In particular, making operational decisions around pre-releases based on forecast inflow presents challenges. In this case dam safety risk needs to be weighed up with other risks such as increasing downstream flooding, or being able to supply water into the future. The process of developing a flood forecasting system should be a close collaboration between the developers and the users. This ensures that outputs provide meaningful information that can be used to support operational decision-making in a flood or emergency response situation.