JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Improvement of condition assessment criteria and embankment transformation of agricultural reservoirs after raising embankments
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Improvement of condition assessment criteria and embankment transformation of agricultural reservoirs after raising embankments
Lee, Dal-Won; Lee, Young-Hak;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Recently, as fluctuations in annual precipitations continue to grow, the frequency of floods and droughts is rapidly increasing. Especially, since many reservoirs are reported as having less capacity and aging faster than large dams, the damages due to floods and droughts are estimated to become more severe. With this background for the present study, field investigation of reservoirs in Chungnam, Chungbuk, and Chonbuk regions was carried out for disaster prevention and the safety management of agricultural reservoirs. Furthermore, embankment transformations were compared and analyzed after the raising of embankments. Based on design methods for remodeling agricultural reservoirs and the results of embankment raising and the problems which occurred on crest, supplementation to the upstream and downstream slopes, control sector, and spillway should be implemented in the existing reservoir. In regard to this, the condition assessment score of compound member of reservoirs was performed, the Chungnam region score was in the 3.11-4.73 range. In addition, reservoirs in Chungbuk scored in the 4.00-4.49 range, and reservoirs in Chonbuk scored in the 3.90-4.60 range. Applying current precision safety inspection practices to small reservoirs requires economic expenses and time, for which assessment items are too varied and complex. Therefore, subdivided condition assessment items and criteria should be improved and streamlined by deleting, reducing, combining, and selecting only the riskiest factors. In the future, reservoirs should be periodically monitored and systemically managed and rational plans for maintenance and repairs should be used as reinforcement methods.
 Keywords
agricultural reservoirs;condition assessment criteria;embankment transformation;raising embankment;safety inspection;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
ANCOLD. 2003. Australian national committee on large dams. Guidelines on risk assessment. http://www.ancold.org.au/publications.asp

2.
Antunes DO, Carmo JS. 2013. Guidelines and tools to properly design and manage reservoir-dam systems. pp. 81-119. Nova science publishers. Inc.

3.
Bowles DS. 2001. Evaluation and use of risk estimates in dam safety decision making. Proceedings of the united engineering foundation conference on risk-based decision-making in water resources IX. American Society of Civil Engineers.

4.
Cleary PW, Prakash M, Mead S, Lemiale V, Robinson GK, Ye F, Ouyang S, Tang X. 2015. A scenario-based risk framework for determining consequences of different failure modes of earth dams. Nat Hazards 75:1489-1530. crossref(new window)

5.
Costa LM, Alonso EE. 2009. Predicting the behavior of an earth and rockfill dam under construction. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvirnmental Engineering 135:851-862. crossref(new window)

6.
Donnelly CR, Stephen CD, Jamieson K, Perkins S, Hinchberger S. 2015. A description of their application of a new quantitative dam safety risk assessment tool for risk-informed decision making. Conference Hydrovision.

7.
Fell R, Wan CF, Cyganiewicz J, Foster M. 2003. Time for development of internal erosion and piping in embankment dams. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironment Engineering ASCE 129:307-314. crossref(new window)

8.
FERC. 2012. Federal guidelines for dam safety risk management. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

9.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2004. Federal guidelines for dam safety; hazard potential classification system for dams. National dam safety program.

10.
Foster M, Fell R, Spannagle M. 2000. The statistics of embankment dam failure and accidents. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 37:1000-1024. crossref(new window)

11.
ICOLD. 2005. Risk Assessment in Dam Safety Management: A reconnaissance of benefits. Methods and current applications. International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD) Bulletin 130.

12.
Kim MH, Lee DW. 2009. Safety evaluation of reservoir embankment by instrument system. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 51:33-43. [in Korean]

13.
Kim YI, Yeon KS, Kim KS, Jeong JW, Kim YS. 2011. An experimental study of reservoir failure phenomena according to transitional zone: spillway scour during overflow. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 53:27-33. [in Korean]

14.
Korea Rural Community Corporation (KRC). 2011. The project of raising embankment of agricultural reservoir. http://www.ekr.or.kr. [in Korean]

15.
Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers (KSAE). 2013. Rural resources, Magazine of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 55:5-50. [in Korean]

16.
Kumar C, Sreeja P. 2012. Evaluation of selected equations for predicting scour at downstream of ski-jump spillway using laboratory and field data. Engineering Geology 129:98-103.

17.
Lee DW, Lee YH. 2012. Behavior of pore water pressure of agricultural reservoir according to raising embankment. Journal of Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 54:11-17. [in Korean]

18.
Lee DW, Noh JJ. 2014. Behavior of failure agricultural reservoirs embankment reinforced by geotextile under overtopping condition. Journal of Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 56:59-64. [in Korean]

19.
Lee JK. 2014. Development of integrity evaluation model for small reservoirs and dams using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Ph.D. Incheon National University. [in Korean]

20.
Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTM). 2011. The 4 major rivers restoration. http://4rivers.go.kr. [in Korean]

21.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA), Korea Rural Community Corporation (KRC). 2013. Statistical yearbook of land and water development for agriculture. [in Korean]

22.
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA). 1982. 2002. Agricultural infrastructure fill dam design standards. [in Korean]

23.
Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTM), Korea Rural Community Corporation (KRC). 2011. Guidelines for reservoirs precision safety inspections. [in Korean]

24.
Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MLTM), 2011. Guidelines for dam design. [in Korean]

25.
Munger DF, Bowles DS, Boyer DD, Davis DW, Margo DA, Moser DA, Regan PJ, Snorteland N. 2009. Interim tolerable risk guidelines for US Army Corps of engineers dams. 32nd United States Society on Dams Annual Conference 20-24

26.
Noh JJ, Lee DW. 2014. Behavior of failure for embankment and spillway transitional zone of agriculture reservoirs due to overtopping. Journal of Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers 56:71-79. [in Korean] crossref(new window)

27.
Passey M, Bennett T, Zielinski A, Donnelly CR. 2014. Dam safety management plans: a conceptual framework for risk-informed decision making in Ontario. Canadian Dam Association Annual Conference.

28.
Salazar FR, Moran MA, Toledo E Onate. 2015. Data-based models for prediction of dam behaviour: a review and some methodological considerations. Springer.

29.
Sun Y, Chang H, Miao Z. Zhong D. 2012. Solution method of overtopping risk model for earth dams. Safety Science 50:1906-1911. crossref(new window)

30.
USACE. 2011. Safety of dams-policy and procedures. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. ER 1110-2-1156.

31.
USBR. 1997. Guidelines for achieving public protection in dam safety decision making. Dam Safety Office. US Bureau of Reclamation.

32.
USBR. 2011. Interim dam safety public protection guidelines-a risk framework to support dam safety decision making. US Bureau of Reclamation.

33.
USBR. 2012. Best practices in dam and levee safety risk analysis-a joint publication. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Reclamation. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

34.
Zhou X, Zhou J, Du X, Li S. 2015. Study on dam risk classification in China. Water Science and Technology. Water Supply 15:483-489. crossref(new window)