Embankment Dams Overtopping Breach: A Numerical Investigation of Hydraulic Results

Mahdi EbrahimiMirali MohammadiSayed Mohammad Hadi Meshkati & Farhad Imanshoar


The overtopping breach is the most probable reason of embankment dam failures. Hence, the investigation of the mentioned phenomenon is one of the vital hydraulic issues. This research paper tries to utilize three numerical models, i.e., BREACH, HEC-RAS, and FLOW-3D for modeling the hydraulic outcomes of overtopping breach phenomenon. Furthermore, the outputs have been compared with experimental model results given by authors. The BREACH model presents a desired prediction for the peak flow. The HEC-RAS model has a more realistic performance in terms of the peak flow prediction, its occurrence time (5-s difference with observed status), and maximum flow depth. The variations diagram in the reservoir water level during the breach process has a descending trend. Whereas it initially ascended; and then, it experienced a descending trend in the observed status. The FLOW-3D model computes the flow depth, flow velocity, and Froude number due to the physical model breach. Moreover, it revealed a peak flow damping equals to 5% and 5-s difference in the peak flow occurrence time at 4-m distance from the physical model downstream. In addition, the current research work demonstrates the mentioned numerical models and provides a possible comprehensive perspective for a dam breach scope. They also help to achieve the various hydraulic parameters computations. Besides, they may calculate unmeasured parameters using the experimental data.

월류 현상은 제방 댐 실패의 가장 유력한 원인입니다. 따라서 언급된 현상에 대한 조사는 중요한 수리학적 문제 중 하나입니다.

본 연구 논문에서는 월류 침해 현상의 수리적 결과를 모델링하기 위해 BREACH, HEC-RAS 및 FLOW-3D의 세 가지 수치 모델을 활용하려고 합니다. 또한 출력은 저자가 제공한 실험 모델 결과와 비교되었습니다. BREACH 모델은 최대 유량에 대해 원하는 예측을 제시합니다.

HEC-RAS 모델은 최고유량 예측, 발생시간(관찰상태와 5초 차이), 최대유량수심 측면에서 보다 현실적인 성능을 가지고 있습니다. 위반 과정 중 저수지 수위의 변동 다이어그램은 감소하는 추세를 보입니다. 처음에는 상승했지만 그런 다음 관찰된 상태가 감소하는 추세를 경험했습니다.

FLOW-3D 모델은 물리적 모델 위반으로 인한 흐름 깊이, 흐름 속도 및 Froude 수를 계산합니다. 또한, 실제 모델 하류로부터 4m 거리에서 최대유량 발생시간이 5%, 5초 차이에 해당하는 최대유량 감쇠를 나타냈습니다.

또한, 현재 연구 작업은 언급된 수치 모델을 보여주고 댐 침해 범위에 대한 가능한 포괄적인 관점을 제공합니다. 또한 다양한 유압 매개변수 계산을 수행하는 데 도움이 됩니다. 게다가 실험 데이터를 사용하여 측정되지 않은 매개변수를 계산할 수도 있습니다.



  • https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-024-01387-9


  • Association of state dam safety officials (2023) Kentucky, USA. Available from https://damsafety.org
  • ASTM D1557 (2007) Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. West Conshohocken, PA, USA
  • ASTM D422–63 (2002) Standard test method for particle size analysis of soils
  • Azimi H, Shabanlou S (2016) Comparison of subcritical and supercritical flow patterns within triangular channels along the side weir. Int J Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 17(7–8):361–368Article MathSciNet Google Scholar 
  • Azimi H, Shabanlou S (2018) Numerical study of bed slope change effect of circular channel with side weir in supercritical flow conditions. Appl Water Sci 8(6):166Article ADS Google Scholar 
  • Azimi H, Shabanlou S, Kardar S (2017) Characteristics of hydraulic jump in U-shaped channels. Arab J Sci Eng 42:3751–3760Article Google Scholar 
  • Brunner GW (2016) HEC-RAS Reference Manual, version 5.0. Hydrologic Engineering Center, Institute for Water Resources, US Army Corps of Engineers, Davis, California
  • Brunner GW (2016) HEC-RAS users Manual, version 5.0. Hydrologic Engineering Center, Institute for Water Resources, US Army Corps of Engineers, Davis, California
  • Chanson H, Wang H (2013) Unsteady discharge calibration of a large V-notch weir. Flow Meas Instrum 29:19–24Article Google Scholar 
  • Committee on Dam Safety (2019) ICOLD incident database bulletin 99 update: statistical analysis of dam failures, technical report, international commission on large dams. Available from: https://www.icoldchile.cl/boletines/188.pdf
  • Engomoen B, Witter DT, Knight K, Luebke TA (2014) Design Standards No 13: Embankment Dams. United States Bureau of Reclamation
  • Flow Science Corporation (2017) Flow-3D v11.0 User Manual. Available from: http://flow3d.com
  • Froehlich DC (2016) Predicting peak discharge from gradually breached embankment dam. J Hydrol Eng 21(11):04016041Article Google Scholar 
  • Hakimzadeh H, Nourani V, Amini AB (2014) Genetic programming simulation of dam breach hydrograph and peak outflow discharge. J Hydrol Eng 19:757–768Article Google Scholar 
  • Hooshyaripor F, Tahershamsi A, Golian S (2014) Application of copula method and neural networks for predicting peak outflow from breached embankments. J Hydro-Environ Res 8(3):292–303Article Google Scholar 
  • Irmakunal CI (2019) Two-dimensional dam break analyses of Berdan dam. MSC thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey
  • kumar Gupta A, Narang I, Goyal P, (2020) Dam break analysis of JAWAI dam PALI, Rajasthan using HEC-RAS. IOSR J Mech Civ Eng 17(2):43–52Google Scholar 
  • Mo C, Cen W, Le X, Ban H, Ruan Y, Lai S, Shen Y (2023) Simulation of dam-break flood and risk assessment: a case study of Chengbi river dam in Baise, China. J Hydroinformatics 25(4):1276–1294Article Google Scholar 
  • Morris M, Kortenhaus A, Visser P (2009) Modelling breach initiation and growth. FLOODsite report: T06–08–02, FLOODsite Consortium, Wallingford, UK
  • Novak P, Moffat AIB, Nalluri C, Narayanan RAIB (2017) Hydraulic structures. CRC PressGoogle Scholar 
  • Pierce MW, Thornton CI, Abt SR (2010) Predicting peak outflow from breached embankment dams. J Hydrol Eng 15(5):338–349Article Google Scholar 
  • Saberi O (2016) Embankment dam failure outflow hydrograph development. PhD thesis, Graz University of Technology, Austria
  • Sylvestre J, Sylvestre P (2018) User’s guide for BRCH GUI. 2018. Available from: http://rivermechanics.net
  • USACE) 2004) General design and construction considerations for Earth and rockfill dams, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington DC, USA
  • USBR (1987) Design of small dams, Bureau of Reclamation, Water Resources Technical Publication
  • Versteeg HK, Malalasekera W (2007) An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson education
  • Wang Z, Bowles DS (2006) Three-dimensional non-cohesive earthen dam breach model. Part 1: theory and methodology. Adv Water Resour 29(10):1528–1545Article ADS Google Scholar 
  • Webby MG (1996) Discussion of peak outflow from breached embankment dam by David C. Froehlich. J Water Resour Plan Manag 122(4):316–317
  • Wu W, Marsooli R, He Z (2012) Depth-averaged two-dimensional model of unsteady flow and sediment transport due to noncohesive embankment break/breaching. J Hydraul Eng 138(6):503–516Article Google Scholar 
  • Xu Y, Zhang LM (2009) Breaching parameters for earth and rockfill dams. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(12):1957–1970Article Google Scholar