Design‐Basis Flood for Rehabilitation of Existing Dams
Publication: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume 118, Issue 2
Abstract
Rehabilitation of existing dams in a cost‐effective manner with due regard to hydrologic safety requires a rational method to determine the design‐basis flood (DBF). Four methods are presented to determine the DBF based on economic considerations alone. These include the expected damage, indemnification cost with and without price escalation, and modified expected damage approaches. The expected damage approach is presented to provide a basis for comparison with other approaches. One of the indemnification‐cost approaches includes no price escalation and the other provides for escalation of dollar‐denominated damages attributable to dam failure that is likely to occur in the future. The modified expected damage approach considers probabilities of flood damages during the life of the rehabilitated dam, rather than the absolute probabilities. In most cases, however, consideration of nondollar‐denominated consequences of rehabilitation are equally or more important. An approach based on a combination of the delphi and fuzzy‐set methods is presented to evaluate rehabilitation alternatives with different DBFs and select the most cost‐effective and acceptable DBF, based on both economic and nondollar‐denominated factors.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Brown, B. S., Cochran, S. W., and Dalkey, N. C. (1969). The delphi method‐II. Structure and experiments. The Rand Corp., Santa Monica, Calif.
2.
Cecilio, C. (1985). “Practice of risk analysis in the private sector.” Risk‐based decision making in water resources, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 299–303.
3.
Dalkey, N. C. (1969). The delphi method: An experimental study of group opinion. The Rand Corp., Santa Monica, Calif.
4.
Dalkey, N. C., Brown, B., and Cochran, S. W. (1970). The delphi method IV, effect of percentile feedback and feed‐in of relevant facts. The Rand Corp., Santa Monica, Calif.
5.
Estimating probabilities of extreme floods, methods, and recommended research. (1988). National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
6.
Evaluation procedures for hydrologic safety of dams. ASCE, New York, N.Y.
7.
Fontaine, T. A., and Potter, K. W. (1989). Estimating probabilities of extreme rainfalls. J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 115(11), 1562–1575.
8.
Haimes, Y. Y., and Stakhiv, E. Z. (1985). “Risk‐based decision making in water resources.” Proc. Engrg. Foundation Conf, ASCE, New York, N.Y.
9.
Helmar, O. (1966). Social technology. Basic Books, New York, N.Y.
10.
Moglen, G. E., and R. H., McCuen, (1990r). “Economic framework for flood and sediment control with detention basins.” Water Resour. Bull., 26(1), 145–156.
11.
Prakash, A. (1979). Discussion of “Risk of catastrophic failure of major dams.” J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 105(6), 761–763.
12.
Prakash, A. (1985). “Impacts of risk‐based analysis on current design practices.” Risk‐based decision making in water resources, ASCE, New York, N. Y., 194–202.
13.
Prakash, A. (1989). “Probabilities of hydrologic extremes and risk analysis.” Proc. Nat. Conf. on Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 607–612.
14.
Prakash, A. (1990). “Estimation of expected damages, indemnification costs, and joint probabilities of dam failures.” Proc. of Int. Symp., ASCE, New York, N.Y. 177–181.
15.
Prakash, A., and Sherlock, P. (1991). “Evaluation of rehabilitation alternatives for small hydropower plants.” Waterpower 91, ASCE, New York, N.Y.
16.
Recommended guidelines for safety inspection of dams. (1976). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Washington, D.C.
17.
“Reevaluating spillway adequacy of existing dams.” (1973). J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 99(2), 337–372.
18.
Rose, D. (1978). “Risk of catastrophic failure of major dams.” J. Hydr. Div., ASCE, 104(9), 1349–1351.
19.
Safety of dams—flood and earthquake criteria. (1985). National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
20.
Singg, R. N., and Webb, E. R. (1979). “Use of delphi methodology to assess goals and social impacts of a watershed project.” Water Resour. Bull., 15(1), 136–143.
21.
Toy, D., and Lawrence, D. R. (1990). “Risk analysis as a tool to determine spillway design capacities.” Proc. Int. Symp., ASCE, New York, N.Y., 171–176.
22.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1979, “Feasibility Studies for Small Scale Hydropower Additions.” (1979). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DOE/RA‐0048, The Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, Calif.
23.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), 1989, Policy and procedures for dam safety decision making. (1989). U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo.
24.
Yevjevich, V. (1972). Probability and statistics on hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, Colo.
25.
Zadeh, L. A. (1973). “Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes.” IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 3(1), 28–44.
26.
Zadeh, L. A., Fu, K. S., Tanaka, K., and Shimura, M., eds. (1975). Fuzzy sets and their applications to cognitive and decision processes. Academic Press Inc., New York, N.Y., 227–256.
27.
Znotinas, N. M., and Hipel, K. W. (1979). “Comparison of alternative engineering designs.” Water Resour. Bull., 15(1), 44–59.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume 118 • Issue 2 • February 1992
Pages: 291 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 ASCE.
History
Published online: Feb 1, 1992
Published in print: Feb 1992
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.