4.5 Article

Simulation of dam-break flood and risk assessment: a case study of Chengbi River Dam in Baise, China

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROINFORMATICS
Volume 25, Issue 4, Pages 1276-1294

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/hydro.2023.193

Keywords

Chengbi River Dam; dam-break flood; flood hazard; HEC-RAS 2D; risk assessment; vulnerability

Ask authors/readers for more resources

When a reservoir is damaged, it brings destruction to people's lives and the regional economy. Flood simulation and risk assessment are effective ways to mitigate flood risk. This study introduces a new quantitative method for flood risk assessment, and proposes three schemes for flood simulation.
When a reservoir is damaged, it will bring destruction to people's lives and the regional economy. Flood simulation and risk assessment are two effective ways to mitigate flood risk. Flood risk is assessed by using flood hazard and vulnerability indices. However, one of the key concerns is how to quantify hazards and vulnerabilities more rationally. To this end, this study introduces a new quantitative method for flood risk assessment. Three schemes - full dam breach (S1), 1/2 dam breach (S2), and 1/3 dam breach (S3) - were proposed for flood simulation. HEC-RAS 2D was used to simulate the evolution process of dam-break floods. This study used a new quantification approach to calculate flood risk based on simulation results. The results show the following: (1) The inundation process is similar under the three schemes, but the degree differs. The greater the degree of dam break, the greater the inundation depth, maximum flow velocity, and inundation duration. (2) High-risk areas decrease with decreased dam break degree. Under the three schemes, the flood risk areas of Longjing Street account for 65.37, 71.41, and 66.22% of the total risk areas, respectively, which are the areas most affected by dam-break floods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available