1 Participants
2 Agenda
3 Flip Charts Notes
4 Consolidated Dam Safety Research Needs List
5 Report
6 Current Dam Related Research
7 Press Release
8 Follow Up Tasks
9 Contact
1 Participants
Federal, State
Baals, John
BOR
Becker, Brian
BOR
Nuss, Larry
BOR
Guttierez, David
California Dept. of Water
Schultz, Mark
California Dept. of Water
Allerton, Bill
FERC
Brand, Bruce
FERC
Hall, Robert
USACE
Private Sector
Charlwood, Robin
Consultant
Ehasz, Joseph
Washington Group
France, John
URS
Ghanaat, Yusof
Quest Structures
Johnson, Daniel
GEI; USSD
Vazinkhoo, Saman
BC Hydro
Nguyen, Phuong
Hydro Quebec
Tarbox, Glenn
MWH
Tjoumas, Gus
CEATI
Vazinkhoo, Saman
BC Hydro
Yen, John
Southern California Edison
Academia
Bowles, David
Utah State University
Duron, Zeyad
Harvey-Mudd
Ko, Hon-Yim
University of Colorado
Leger, Pierre
Polytechnic of Montreal
Saouma, Victor
University of Colorado
Suarez, Luis
Univ. of Puerto-Rico
2 Agenda
Thursday Sept. 27:
Session I: Introduction
8:30-8:35 Welcoming remarks, Prof. Sture, Vice Chancellor for Research
8:35-8:40 Welcoming remarks, Saouma
8:40-8:50 Overview, Nuss
8:50-9:00 Opening remarks, Charlwood
Session II Presentations on policy, practice and current projects
Moderator: Charlwood, Recorder: Nuss
9:00-9:10 Bureau of Reclamation, Nuss
9:10-9:20 US Army Corps of Engineers Hall (Audio-Conference)
9:20-9:30 National Dam Safety Program France, Becker
9:30-9:40 Interagency Committee on Dam Safety, Allerton, Becker
9:40-9:50 CEATI Tjoumas
9:50-10:00 Association of State Dam Safety Officials France
10:00-10:20 Break
10:20-10:30 United States Society on Dams Johnson, Ehasz, Bowles
10:30-10:40 California Department of Water Resources Guttierez, Schultz
10:40-10:50 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Brand, Allerton
10:50-11:00 Canadian perspective Phuong, Vazinkhoo, Zielinski
11:00-11:10 University Perspective Duron, Ko, Leger, Suarez, Saouma
11:10-11:20 Utility Companies perspective Yen
11:20-11:30 Consultants perspective Ehasz, France, Tarbox
Ghanaat
11 :30-12 :00 Discussions I
12:00-1:00 Lunch (on premises)
1:00-2:00 Discussion II
Session III Reports on Activities
Moderator: Duron
2:00-2:20 Seismic Working Group Charlwood
2:20:2:40 USSD/ICOLD (Aging) Charlwood
2:40-3:00 FEMA (Seismology, Embankments) Hall (Audio-Conference)
3:00-3:20 NEES Saouma
Session IV Research Identification
3:00-4:00 Summary of key research needs (Charlwood, Tjoumas)
4:00-4:30 Summary of current research funding (Saouma, Duron)
4:30-5:15 Tour of laboratory facilities, centrifuge, NEES laboratories.
Informal No-Host Reception/Dinner
Friday Sept. 28
Session V Research Support
Moderator: Guttierez
8:15-8:45 Sites and Facilities to perform research (Universities, others)
8::45-9:00 Peer Review of Research (USSD, others)
9:00-9:30 Discussion
9:30-10:00 Break
Session VI Strategic Planning
Moderators; Charlwood and Saouma
10:00-10:30 Strategic Development
10:30-11:00 Action Items
11:00-12:00 Drafting of the “Boulder Declaration on Dam Safety”
12:00 Adjourn
1 Flip Charts Notes
Pictures of notes recorded by Robin Charlwood on the board can be found here.
2 Consolidated Dam Safety Research Needs List
The following list (compiled by Bruce Brand on the basis of collected information) represents an attempt to consolidate several previous lists generated by dam engineering organizations. Larry Nuss of the Bureau of Reclamation compiled input from the Bureau of Reclamation, (BREC) the Corps of Engineers (CoE), and the United States Society of Dams (USSD). The list that Nuss complied was actually 3 lists, representing the research needs submitted by the above noted agencies, without coordination amongst themselves. Because of this, there is some redundancy in the Nuss list that this list attempts to consolidate.
In addition the work of Nuss and his committee of reviewers, lists of research needs put forth by the Interagency Committee of Dams (ICODs), the National Dam Safety Review Board (NDSRB), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) are also included.
The research needs in these lists are listed numerically. In the case of the NUSS list and the NDSRB list, the topics are listed in descending order of importance. The prioritization of theses lists was done by the generators of the lists, not by the compiler. In the case of ICODs and FERC, no attempt was made to establish a prioritization because FERC and ICODS did not assign priorities.
When a item identified by one of these agencies coincides with an item in the another list, this is pointed out by the appearance of the item number in the respective agencies’ column on the right side of the spreadsheet. In addition, when there is redundancy between two or three agencies, this is pointed out in a similar manor.
For example “Validate soil constitutive models” was identified in the Nuss list, and was also appeared as item 3 in the ICODs list and item 6 in the FERC list. There has been numerous priority lists in the past. Larry has summarized them in this, and Bruce will consolidate and finalize it.
NDSRB
ICODS
FERC
NUSS
List from National Dam Safety Review Board
1
Develop a marketing plan and outreach strategy to promote the significance of EAP’s .
1
2
Guidance on the design and construction of overtopping protection of earth embankments
2
3
3
Documentation of the hydraulic design criteria for embankment stepped spillways
3
4
Development of the historical, regional databases of storms and floods
4
27
27
5
Guidelines for the evaluation of the hydrologic safety of dams
5
6
Development of regional hydrology parameters
6
7
Improved technology transfer of GIS, NEXRAD, and meteorological data
7
7
8
Guidance on methodologies to address snowmelt contributions to the inflow design flood
8
9
9
Guidelines for state utilization of standard and consistent approaches to inundation mapping
9
10
Additional research on breach parameters, the results of breaches, and inundation mapping
10
11
Guidelines on acceptable/tolerable risk criteria need development
11
12
Guidance on performing failure mode identification, including a list of failure modes for outlets works
12
13
Extension of frequency curves to rare Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP)
13
1
14
Evaluation of the earthquake effects on small earth and concrete dams
14
15
Practice manual on the use of chemicals and bio-barriers in dam applications
15
16
Research on use of soil bacteria for stabilizing liquefiable soil in earthquake-prone locations
16
17
Inspection procedures to identify potential seismic deficiencies at small earth and concrete dams
17
ICODS List
1
Frequency Of Extreme Hydrologic Events For Dams
13
1
2
Consistent Assessment Of Earthquake Ground Motions At Dams
2
3
Consistent Assessment Of Liquefaction Resistance And Deformation Analysis Of Embankment Dams
3
6
4,8
4
Piping And Internal Erosion In Dams
4
4
5
Consistent Assessment Of Static And Dynamic Structural Stability Of Concrete Dams
5
6
Addressing Hydrologic Adequacy Of Dams On The Same Watershed
6
7
Determination Of The Probable Maximum Precip. In Assessing The Hydrologic Adequacy Of Dams
7
7
8
Rainfall-Runoff Modeling In Assessing The Hydrologic Adequacy Of Dams
8
9
Snowmelt Calculations In Assessing The Hydrologic Adequacy Of Dams
8
9
FERC List Presented at the September 2007 Workshop in Boulder CO
1
Research on debris plugging of spillways during extreme flood events
1
2
Gather gate reliability data as a function of maintenance and testing
2
3
Errodibility of earth embankments as a function of Overtopping depth, Soil type, & Vegetation cover
2
3
4
Develop methods for predicting / monitoring piping. (Flow Tomography?)
4
4
5
Develop failure modes for concrete dams
5
11
6
Develop a soil liquefaction numerical model with realistically obtainable parameters
3
6
4,8
Composite List Compiled by Larry Nuss (Bureau of Reclamation)
1
Compare theoretical analyses of different types to observed case histories
1
2
Determine failure modes of concrete dams through physical model testing
5
2
3
Determine the level of damping in concrete dams
3
4
Validate soil constitutive models
3
6
4
5
Develop methods to predict and mitigate transverse cracking in embankments
5
6
Expand and update program of strong motion instrumented dams
6
7
Determine hydrodynamic loads on spillway gates
7
8
Develop better estimates of liquefaction potential in problematic soils
3
6
8
9
Determine reliability of insitu soil test methods (SPT, Becker, Cone, Shear-wave)
9
10
Application of seismic motions through embankments
10
11
Determine seismic response of multiple arch dams
5
11
12
Determine methods for coupled dam/foundation block stability analysis
12
13
Investigate cracking of embankment dams
13
14
Determine vulnerability of levees
14
15
Earthquake monitoring in the eastern US
15
16
Develop constitutive models for concrete
16
17
Effects of spatially varying ground motions
17
18
Validate analyses by analyses of laboratory tests
18
19
Improve field sampling techniques
19
20
Develop means to predict duration & intensity for liquefaction/deformation analyses
20
21
Guidance on risk methodology
21
22
Develop simplified embankment analysis procedures for low seismic areas
22
23
Determine the effect of fault movement under dams
23
24
Perform and present more detailed reviews of dam performance -lessons learned
24
25
Guidance for probabilistic analysis of ground motions
25
26
Determine how uplift changes during earthquake
26
27
Study internal erosion potential for clay soils
4
4
27
28
Develop guidance for selection of ground motions for representative parts of the US
28
29
Determine innovative rehabilitation schemes for deficient spillways
29
30
Determine strength of shear keys
30
31
Determine stability of small concrete dams on soil foundations
31
32
Develop updated design and analysis criteria for concrete dams
32
33
Assessing the consequences of embankment deformations
33
34
Develop better near field ground motions
34
35
Develop consistent set of guidelines for state and federal regulatory agencies
35
36
Develop observational numerical approach to embankment design
36
37
Study embankment overtopping
37
38
Develop 3 dim. Slope stability analysis tools for embankment dams
38
39
Upgrade attenuation relationships for site conditions and directivity
39
40
Develop guidance on selection of subduction zone time histories
40
41
Develop method to determine factor of safety for underdrains in embankments
41
42
Develop roller compacted construction techniques for arch dams
42
43
Determine dynamic soil pressures on spillway crest structures
43
44
Develop coupled thermal/structural analysis method for predicting cracking in RCC
44
45
Develop procedure for defining background earthquakes in deterministic analyses
45
46
Study progressive deformation of dam foundation
46
47
Determine influence of low velocity structures adjacent to normal and thrust faults
47
48
Determine embankment seismic deformation using strain
48
49
Determine procedures for measurement of reservoir bottom absorption
49
50
Study time for an embankment dam to achieve steady state flow
50
51
Develop simplified analysis method for seismic analysis of arch dams
51
3 Report
Preliminary report for the Thursday meeting was assembled by Prof. Suarez.
4 Current Dam Related Research
e-Mail sent by David Guttierez:
Attached is a document I couldn’t find on the website. This is the 1999 document which led to the in depth research needs for each of the dam safety research subjects. As you can see, they went through the entire dam safety issues and outlined them in terms of priority. Next, an in-depth needs assessment was completed for many of the issues which can be downloaded from the sites below (Research Reports Completed thus far: Seepage through Embankment Dams (FEMA 535), Dam Spillways (FEMA 536), Spillway Gates (FEMA 537), Hydrologic Issues for Dams (FEMA 538), Impacts of Plants & Animals on Earthen Dams (FEMA 540), Embankment Dam Failure Analysis (FEMA 541), Risk Assessment for Dams, Outlet Works, The Costs of Rehabilitating the Nation’s Dams). There is one completed for earthquake dam issues, but I don’t see it in either website. I was part of that FEMA committee several years ago with professors and other specialist around the country. I will find out what is the hang-up with releasing this document, since it will fit our needs perfectly. Also attached for your reference is the Dam Safety Research strategic plan which explains the vision they had.
Here are some websites that have the information you can download the actual documents:
ASDSO link showing the FEMA research needs completed for each subject area: http://www.damsafety.org/resources/?p=913e28b0-4f4e-425f-a36d-b8518b3e3f12
FEMA link with some of the same information and more: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/damfailure/publications.shtm
National Dam Safety Review Board Research goals/objectives: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/damfailure/research.shtm
Hope this helps.
David
5 Press Release
Following the workshop, a consensual press release was prepared and issued on January 9, 2008.
Contact: Victor Saouma, (303) 492-1622
Dan Johnson, (303) 440-5234
Carol Rowe, (303) 492-7426
Jan. 9, 2008
DAM EXPERTS ISSUE CALL TO
STRENGTHEN RESEARCH ON SAFETY
AND REHABILITATION OF U.S. DAMS
In the aftermath of America’s poor infrastructure report card on dams, as well as the levee failures in New Orleans and the August bridge collapse in Minnesota, a group of dam experts is calling for more research funding to develop better investigative and inspection techniques to identify unsafe dams.
The experts want to see more economical and effective rehabilitation of the nation’s most deficient dams for the protection of the public and other infrastructure.
The group of 25 engineers has wide representation from government, the private sector and higher education, and most are members of the United States Society on Dams, or USSD, and the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, or ASDSO. They endorsed the need to fund basic research to support national dam safety initiatives for the protection of life and property at a University of Colorado at Boulder workshop last fall.
“Given the limited resources available to address maintenance of our aging infrastructure, we must develop a rational plan for rehabilitation based on thorough scientific research,” said workshop co-organizer Victor Saouma, a professor of civil engineering who directs the George E. Brown Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation site at CU-Boulder. “Millions of dollars in rehabilitation and many lives can potentially be saved by properly studying and rehabilitating dams that are unsafe due to aging or at risk of failure from earthquakes or flooding.”
The American Society of Civil Engineers’ 2005 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure gave dams in the United States a grade of D, as compared to a grade of C given to the nation’s bridges. Technological advances through research are required for the development of investigative tools and new analytical methodologies to identify and correct deficient dams in the interest of public safety, according to the experts.
Of the 78,000 dams in the United States, 10,000 have a high-hazard potential, meaning that their failure could result in loss of life or severe property damage, according to the Dam Safety and Security Act of 2003. Many of the dams at risk are located along active fault lines in California.
Additionally, the ASDSO has estimated it would cost more than $10 billion to upgrade the condition of all critical nonfederal dams — dams that pose a direct risk to human life should they fail.
Robin Charlwood, chairman of the Concrete Dams Committee of the International Commission on Large Dams and a USSD board member, stressed that investing in research now will save both time and money in addressing long-term needs. “There is a need to have more research and development to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the investment we must make in maintaining the availability and safety of our dams,” Charlwood said.
Dan Johnson, vice president of the USSD and a senior water resources engineer with GEI Consultants in Boulder, said the lack of research funding to study dam safety has led to a decrease in U.S. competitiveness.
“The federal government should allocate more resources in an area where U.S.
technology was once a world leader. We are now at risk of falling behind countries such as France, Spain and Brazil in dam technology. Other fast-developing countries such as China and Iran have made great progress in the last decade. They are becoming leaders themselves and are starting to compete in the world technology markets,” Johnson said.
As part of its declaration, the Boulder workshop identified earthquakes, aging infrastructure and floods as the primary risks for dam failure and therefore the major research priorities. CU-Boulder will work with other universities to develop a research plan to be conducted in coordination with the USSD and other industry organizations, which will advise the academic community on its research direction and disseminate the research for cost-effective implementation of dam infrastructure upgrades.
David Gutierrez, chief of the Division of Safety of Dams, California Department of Water Resources, expressed continued concern with the complex behavior of dams during earthquakes and the limited research being conducted compared with the nation’s investment in these dams and the cost of rehabilitating them.
For more information go to http://www.dam-research.org.
– 30 -
6 Follow Up Tasks
1. Priority List Bruce
2. Research List David G., Mark
a. Structures Victor
b. Risk David B.
c. Geotech DSOD
d. Hydraulics & Hydrology FERC
3. Write report: Luis and Larry
4. Set up Web Page: Victor
5. Contact consultants Glenn
6. First draft of “Boulder Statement” Victor
7. “Endorsement”
a. from USSD Dan
b. ASDSO Dave
c. NDSRB John
8. Follow up with CEATI Gus, Tai
7 Contact
A “secretariat” is in place to follow up: Bruce Brand, Robin Charlwood, Pierre Leger, Victor Saouma
For corrections, additions, suggestions, please contact Prof. Victor Saouma, saouma@colorado.edu (303)492-1622
Recent Comments