My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1400000062 Droz Creek Inundation Report
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
1400000062 Droz Creek Inundation Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/5/2014 3:04:57 PM
Creation date
2/5/2014 12:02:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
14000000062
Contractor Name
Droz Creek Dam
Contract Type
Grant
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Droz Creek Reservoir Breach Inundation Report | Breach Modeling 2 <br /> <br />BREACH MODELING <br />The first task of this analysis was to develop a flood hydrograph resulting from a “sunny-day” <br />breach of the dam assuming the reservoir was at normal capacity prior to the breach. As such, no <br />inflow into Droz Creek Dam at the time of the breach was assumed. <br /> <br />According to guidance published under the CDWR’s Guidelines for Hazard Classification (CDWR, Nov <br />2010), the Droz Creek Dam is considered a small dam. Pursuant to the CDWR’s Guidelines for Dam <br />Breach Analysis (CDWR, Feb 2010), for Small Dams with a medium storage intensity, the dam <br />breach parameters should be based on either the empirical breach relationships developed by <br />David C. Froehlich (Froehlich, 1987) or the MacDonald & Langridge Monopolis with Washington <br />State failure time (MLM). Because a sunny day breach was modeled, an overtopping breach is not <br />considered likely, so only the piping failure mode was considered. <br /> <br />The Froehlich and MLM breach calculations require certain parameters of the dam be specified. <br />These parameters, and the values selected for this analysis, are as follows: <br /> <br />Parameter Value Source <br />Maximum Water Depth (Hw) 30.5 ft Dam height per spillway (8623.9’) and outlet (8593.4’) elevations <br />Reservoir Volume (Vw) 155.3 ac-ft Storage at spillway height (8623.9) per stage-storage table <br />Reservoir Surface Area (As) 13.3 ac Maximum surface area per Stage/Storage curve <br />Height of Breach (Hb) 34.6 ft Dam Crest (8628) and outlet (8593.4’) <br />Crest Width of Dam (C) 15 ft From as-constructed drawings <br />Slope of Upstream Dam Face (Zu) 3 From as-constructed drawings <br />Slope of Downstream Dam Face (Zd) 2.5 From as-constructed drawings <br /> <br />The resulting breach parameters for the empirical relationships can be found in Appendix A. The <br />predicted peak breach discharge based on the Froelich Method is 14,533 cfs. The MLM Method <br />resulted in a predicted peak breach discharge of 6,912 cfs. <br /> <br />The breach hydrograph was developed by performing a dam breach analysis using HEC-HMS v3.5. <br />The calculated Froelich breach parameters were utilized for the dam breach model as they were the <br />most conservative. The analysis simulated the reservoir as a storage area with a defined stage- <br />storage relationship provided by the as-constructed drawings, included in Appendix B. The peak <br />breach discharge predicted by the HEC-HMS model was approximately 7,266 cfs. Because there are <br />four smaller dams downstream of the Droz Creek Dam, the outflow from the Droz Creek Dam <br />breach was routed through each, and overtopping failure was assumed for these four ponds in a <br />cascading model. The final peak outflow from the system is calculated as 7,252 cfs. The modeled <br />peak discharge is lower than anticipated by the Froehlich methodology, which is considered more <br />conservative. The dam breach discharge hydrograph can be found in Appendix C.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.