COMRISK Workshop Norden 12./13. May 2004 Failure probability of the Ribe sea defence Andreas Kortenhaus Leichtweiß-Institut for Hydraulics (LWI) Dept.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ENV-2E1Y: Fluvial Geomorphology:
Advertisements

Robert W. Bobel, P.E. Park Engineer Cuyahoga Valley National Park
BUILDING STRONG ® Do not include this Slide. This template is a guide for preparing power points presentations. The information requested is important.
Flood security strategies An assessment of the strategies of compartmentalization and flood shelters Lansink J., A.Y. Hoekstra, M.W.J. van Reedt Dortland,
May 2002 LTV & VNK Managing the Safety of Flood Defences in the Netherlands Fola Ogunyoye Presented on Friday 17th May 2002 at the IMPACT Project Workshop,
Stability and Failure Mechanisms of Dams A dam safety research project Kjetil Arne Vaskinn.
Funding Project Management Coordination Structural Approaches – Dikes, Reservoirs and Dams IMPROVEMENT OF THE GENERAL RESISTANCE OF DIKES AGAINST EROSION.
A COMPARISON OF HOMOGENEOUS AND MULTI-LAYERED BERM BREAKWATERS WITH RESPECT TO OVERTOPPING AND STABILITY Lykke Andersen, Skals & Burcharth ICCE2008, Hamburg,
Analysis of dike breach sensitivity using a conceptual method followed by a comprehensive statistical approach to end up with failure probabilities 4 th.
Workshop of the ISSMGE TC 32, September 2010, Budapest Dikes failures and limit states of the HYD in EC 7 Ivan Vaníček Czech.
Platzhalter für Bild, Bild auf Titelfolie hinter das Logo einsetzen Leichtweiß-Institute for Hydraulic Engineering and Water Resources Department of Hydromechanics.
Kystdirektoratet Gr Nr.1 Risk Assessment for the Wadden Sea Pilot study Ribe Dike Progress report of sub-project SP7 Workshop May 2004,
PHYSICAL MODELING OF BREACH FORMATION Large scale field tests Kjetil Arne Vaskinn, Sweco Gröner Norway.
OCEN 201 Introduction to Ocean & Coastal Engineering Coastal Processes & Structures Jun Zhang
Detention / Infiltration Structure. Figure 21–1 Point Discharge and Downstream Stability Analysis Procedure.
By Andrew Burke, James Ferguson and Chris Silins.
Risk Management and Dam Safety. Reclamation Played a Pivotal Role in Developing Major River Basins in the Western United States.
Coastal Erosion – Holderness Coast
Workshop September 2004 Sandilands, United Kingdom COMRISK Subproject 8 “Risk Assessment Lincolnshire, Pilot Studies” (SP8)
May 6-8, PROBABILISTIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF DUNE EROSION CALCULATIONS 4 th International Symposium on Flood Defence, Toronto, Canada Kees den.
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING FOR COASTAL HAZARDS JUNE 30, 2006 BY ENGINEERING SECTION COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT UNIT COASTAL ENGINEERING FOR NATURAL HAZARDS.
PSAEA – CNRA Conference on OEF (Köln, 29-31/05/2006) The relationship between risk analysis and event analysis – PSA based Event Analysis P. De Gelder.
Coastal Impacts: Beaches, Sand Spits, and Bluffs Amber Moore University of Washington School of Marine Affairs 12 February 2009 Amber Moore University.
Quantitative Methods for Flood Risk Management P.H.A.J.M. van Gelder $ $ Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Delft University of Technology THE.
Workshop on Risk Assessment for Seepage and Piping in Dams and Foundations Virginia Tech / U.S. Army Corps of Engineers March 21-22, 2000 Thomas F. Wolff,
Concrete (Gravity) Dam Engineering
Toronto, May 6-8, 2008Flood Defence1 Risk assessment in trans-boundary cooperation between the Netherlands and Germany Jan Stijnen.
Data-assimilation in flood forecasting for the river Rhine between Andernach and Düsseldorf COR-JAN VERMEULEN.
EPSRC Grant: EP/FP202511/1 From offshore wave to coastal erosion and overtopping Nicolas Chini 1, Lucy Bricheno 2, Chris Wilson 2,
Risk based design of flood defence systems: A preliminary analysis for the New Orleans Metropolitan Area S.N. Jonkman M. Kok M. Van Ledden J.K. Vrijling.
1 Futureproof design of flood defences A wide approach… ISFD 2008 – Toronto W.L.A. ter Horst – INFRAM / Delft University of Technology Dr. P. Bernardini.
Your logo کاربرد ژئوگرید در افزایش پایداری موج شکنها
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Greater New Orleans Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System Armoring Brief Team New Orleans U.S.
1 Flood Hazard Analysis Session 1 Dr. Heiko Apel Risk Analysis Flood Hazard Assessment.
BUILDING STRONG ® Do not include this Slide. This template is a guide for preparing power points presentations. The information requested is important.
FLANDERS HYDRAULICS RESEARCH FLEMISH ADMINISTRATION - DEPARTEMENT OF MOBILITY AND PUBLIC WORKS Sea level rise and its danger for the Belgian coast ir.
Coastal Resilience. 2 Contents  Traditional approach  Current trends:  Coastal Resilience  Soft measures  Example projects  Dune creation  ‘Sandengine’
Department of Civil Engineering,
9. Seepage (Das, chapter 8) Sections: All except 8.2, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 8.9.
Photo Credit:Con Desplanque, Dr. Danika van Proosdij Dept. of Geography MCCAP workshop Feb 2013.
Formulation of a New Breach Model for Embankments IMPACT Project Workshop, Wallingford 2002 Breach Formation Theme.
Scenarios 1.Tidal influence 2.Extreme storm surge (wave overtopping, max. limit 200 l/s/m, period 2 h) Outlook calibration and validation of 3D model transfer.
Quantitative Risk Analysis – Fallacy of the Single Number World Tunnel Congress 2015 Dubrovnik Dubrovnik, Philip Sander Alfred.
National-scale quantified analysis of future flood risk in the UK Paul Sayers Head of Floods and Water Management HR Wallingford, UK Jim Hall Professor.
How can coasts be protected from the effects of natural resources?
Determination of initial conditions for dam erosion due to overtopping and possible integration into a probabilistic design concept Dr.-Ing. K. Broich.
This house sits on the top of a hill that is covered with loose soil and rocks. The new owners of this house have some concerns about their property. What.
COMRISK Sub-Project 8 Lincshore: Risk Management Options Pete Floyd, Risk & Policy Analysts Ltd., working with Halcrow and the Environment Agency.
BUILDING STRONG ®  Wave modeling for design of MRL-HSDRRS  MRL-HSDRRS design / overtopping calcs  Map of deficient areas  Overtopping along MRL-HSDRRS.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Name of Levee Segment Presenter Name Presenter Title Duty Location Date of Presentation.
IMPACT 4 November 20044th IMPACT Workshop - Zaragoza1 Investigation of extreme flood Processes and uncertainty Model uncertainty How uncertain are your.
International Levee Handbook Overview of the handbook Chapter 3 Functions, Forms and Failure of Levees.
VIEWING SURVEY DATA IN CONTEXT: CRITICAL, MAINTENANCE AND DESIGN TRIGGER LEVELS Jonathan Clarke Canterbury City Council.
International Levee Handbook Overview of the handbook Chapter 10 Construction.
International Levee Handbook Overview of the handbook Chapter 6 – Emergency Management and Operations.
International Levee Handbook Overview of the handbook Chapter 8 Physical processes and tools for levee assessment and design.
Simulation of the Filling of a Polder after a Dike Breach on the North Sea Golder Associates GmbH, Hamburg Office Hydrological Discussion Flintbek, May.
Field characterization of problematic earthfills, by DMT. A case history Nuno Cruz - MOTA-ENGIL; Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal Isabel Caspurro - Estradas.
OVERVIEW OF CLARA MODEL IMPROVEMENT TESTING Kenneth Kuhn – RAND Corporation Jordan Fischbach – RAND Corporation David Johnson – Purdue University.
General Road Construction Information
Norman W. Garrick Design of Grass Swales.
Effects of Waves: Beach Erosion
Presented by Engr. Motaher Hossain
RISK ANALYSIS AND REMEDIAL WORKS AT KAAIMANS PASS
Agriculture University in Kraków Department of Water Engineering
Study Evaluation of Random Set Method on Results from Reliability analysis of Finite Element in Deep Excavation Article Code: 443 Presenter Mehdi Poormousavian.
EAG346-Sem II 2014/2015 Lesson 2.
Date of download: 12/18/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Kick-off Conference “Risk Management for
Responses Drivers Residential properties Damage to buildings
Presentation transcript:

COMRISK Workshop Norden 12./13. May 2004 Failure probability of the Ribe sea defence Andreas Kortenhaus Leichtweiß-Institut for Hydraulics (LWI) Dept. Hydromechanics and Coastal Engineering Beethovenstr. 51a Braunschweig

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Contents Introduction Location of Ribe sea defence Input parameter Deterministic calculations Uncertainties Probabilistic calculations Overall failure probability Summary / concluding remarks

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions On the richness of English language Question: how is the German word “schräg”, Dutch: “”, Danish “” translated into English  leaning (in terms of the tower of Pisa or the church in Norden)  oblique (in plan view for wave attack)  diagonal  sloping (in terms of slopes of a structure)  inclining (in terms of walls)  tilted (in terms of very large angles)  at an angle (in terms you do not know exactly)

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Definition of risk Flooding risk R f c = ( P f ) S ·E(D) Expected damage and consequences of flooding E(D) Failure probability P f

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Location of project area

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Map of Ribe area and sea defences Mandø Ribe Ribe-Å Southern wing dike Northern wing dike Sluice Ribe-Å Outlet V. Vedsted Outlet Konge-Å Outlet Darum Potential flooding area Main dike line Ribe Contiguous dike line N Ebb way Contiguous dike line

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Standard dike profile 0,00 m DVR90 h k = 6,88m h t = 2,38m B k = 2,50m d DWL = + 5,22 m Sandcore 1:3 1:10 d fr Clay layer 1:100 dbdb ParameterValue Slope of foreland (length 100m)1:100 Height of dikefoot h t 2,38 m Height of crown h K 6,88 m Width of crown B K 2,50 m Seaward slope 1:n1:10 Shoreward slope 1:m1:3 Thickness clay layer outer slope d fr 1,0 m Thickness clay layer inner slope d b 0,5 m

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Ribe sluice Outer floodgates 0 mDVR90 DWL = 5,22 m Outer flood gates (closed) -3,60 m Sole paving 5,78 m 5,88 m Chamber walls Inner floodgates

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Outlet Konge-Å 0 m DVR90 -2,00 m 5,22m DWL 6,88 m Floodgate Sandcore Grass layer Clay layer Storm gate Stone mattress Berm 1:3 1:2 4,23 m 2,50 m 1:7 Filter gravel Drainage Pavement Sole (concrete)

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Location of profiles analysed Wave rider Fanø Fanø Mandø Ribe N Sluice Ribe-Å Profile 270 Profile 1 Profile 250 Profile 290 Outlet Konge–Å Outlet Darum Outlet V. Vedstedt Sluices / outlets Dike profiles Wind measurements Water level measurements

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile 3156 Ribe N 3156

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile 6644 Ribe N 6644

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile 8422 Ribe N 8422

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile 9400 Ribe N 9400

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile Ribe N 10403

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Adaption of profile data to model – profile Ribe N 14499

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Typical input parameter for two sections 0,00 m DVR90 h k = 6,73m h t = 1,92m B k = 2,80m d Clay:  K,  Kr DWL = + 5,22 m H s, T p, θ Sand:  S,  Sr,  s 1:3,1 1:20 1:11 d fr km 8422 H s =1,47md fr =1,0mc u =15,0 [KN/m 2 ] T p =6,01s  K =17,0 KN/m 3 d G =0,05[m] θ =20°  Kr =20,0 KN/m 3  S =19,0 [KN/m 3 ] t s =6,5hc s =35,0 KN/m 2  Sr =22,0 [KN/m 3 ] d=3,3mc ss =10,0 KN/m 2  s =40,0[°] 0,00 m DVR90 h k = 7,08m h t = 2,66m B k = 2,00m d Clay:  K,  Kr 1:12 1:10 DWL = + 5,22 m H s, T p, θ Sand:  S,  Sr,  s 1:2,6 d fr km 6644 H s =1,51md fr =1,0mc u =15,0 [KN/m 2 ] T p =4,89s  K =17,0 KN/m 3 d G =0,05[m] θ =20°  Kr =20,0 KN/m 3  S =19,0 [KN/m 3 ] t s =6,5hc s =35,0 KN/m 2  Sr =22,0 [KN/m 3 ] d=2,65mc ss =10,0 KN/m 2  s =40,0[°]

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Failure modes for dike profiles Core Clay Layer Global failure modes: Overflow Overtopping Dike breach Dike slid Failure modes shoreward slope: Velocity overflow Velocity overtopping Gras erosion Clay erosion Infiltration Kappensturz Phreatic line Clay uplift Clay slid Bishop shoreward slope Sand erosion Failure modes seaward slope: Revetment stability Impact Revetment uplift Velocity wave run-up Gras erosion Clay erosion Phreatic line Cliff erosion Bishop shoreward slope Internal failure modes: Piping Matrix erosion

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Failure modes Ribe sluice Global failure modes: Overtopping Overflow Hydraulic uplift

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Results of deterministic calculations

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Results of sensitivity analysis

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Uncertainty analysis of water level

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Correlation of water level and wave heights

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Uncertainties of input parameter

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Fault tree calculations

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Probabilistic results (overview)

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Probabilistic results of scenario approach (sect )

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Probabilistic results (sensitivity analysis)

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Definition of sections of Ribe sea defence

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Overall failure probability for Ribe sea defence all sectionsall (modified)only dikes P f,max 6, , , sectionRibe sluice Dkm P f,Ribe 9, , ,

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions study of input parameters  good representation of dike cross sections  soil parameters taken from measurements if possible deterministic calculations of all cross sections and sluices  overtopping failure at sluice for design conditions  grass erosion failure for all sea dikes uncertainty analysis of input parameters  detailed study of water level  correlation of water levels and wave heights probabilistic calculations of all cross sections and sluices  reduction of scenario tree to most important elements  overall failure probability for dikes in the range of P f =  failure probability for sluice in the range of P f = Overall failure probability of sea defence  sluice and outlets to be considered correctly  overall probability governed by dike failure probability

LWI Introduction Location Input param. Det. calc. Uncertainties Prob. calc. Conclusions Thank you very much for your attention Andreas Kortenhaus Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau Technische Universität Braunschweig Tel.: 0531 / LWI