On the importance of analyzing flood defense failures

Flood defense failures are rare events but when they do occur lead to significant amounts of damage. The defenses are usually designed for rather low-frequency hydraulic loading and as such typically at least high enough to prevent overflow. When they fail, flood defenses like levees built with modern design codes usually either fail due to wave overtopping or geotechnical failure mechanisms such as instability or internal erosion. Subsequently geotechnical failures could trigger an overflow leading for the breach to grow in size Not only the conditions relevant for these failure mechanisms are highly uncertain, also the model uncertainty in geomechanical, internal erosion models, or breach models are high compared to other structural models. Hence, there is a need for better validation and calibration of models or, in other words, better insight in model uncertainty. As scale effects typically play an important role and full-scale testing is challenging and costly, historic flood defense failures can be used to provide insights into the real failure processes and conditions. The recently initiated SAFElevee project at Delft University of Technology aims to exploit this source of information by performing back analysis of levee failures at different level of detail. Besides detailed process based analyses, the project aims to investigate spatial and temporal patterns in deformation as a function of the hydrodynamic loading using satellite radar interferometry (i.e. PS-InSAR) in order to examine its relation with levee failure mechanisms. The project aims to combine probabilistic approaches with the mechanics of the various relevant failure mechanisms to reduce model uncertainty and propose improvements to assessment and design models. This paper describes the approach of the study to levee breach analysis and the use of satellites for breach initiation analysis, both adopted within the SAFElevee project.

[1]  P. Peeters,et al.  Comparing overflow and wave-overtopping induced breach initiation mechanisms in an embankment breach experiment , 2016 .

[2]  Aleksey Sidorchuk,et al.  Stochastic Modelling of Soil Erosion and Deposition , 2002 .

[3]  Jonathan D. Bray,et al.  New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. III: The 17th Street Drainage Canal , 2008 .

[4]  E. Whitehead A guide to the use of grass in hydraulic engineering practice , 1976 .

[5]  R. Hanssen Radar Interferometry: Data Interpretation and Error Analysis , 2001 .

[6]  I. Nezu T. Okamoto Simultaneous measurements of velocity and plant motion in open-channel flows with flexible vegetations , 2010 .

[7]  N. Pollen Temporal and spatial variability in root reinforcement of streambanks: Accounting for soil shear strength and moisture , 2007 .

[8]  Steven A. Hughes,et al.  Adaptation of the Levee Erosional Equivalence Method for the Hurricane Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRRS) , 2011 .

[9]  M. Morris,et al.  Breaching of earth embankments and dams , 2011 .

[10]  Paul J. Visser,et al.  Breach growth in sand-dikes , 1998 .

[11]  Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts,et al.  Uncertainty in flood risk assessments: What are its major sources and implications? , 2012 .

[12]  R. Bagnold An approach to the sediment transport problem from general physics , 1966 .

[13]  J. Vrijling,et al.  Methods for the estimation of loss of life due to floods: a literature review and a proposal for a new method , 2008 .

[14]  M. Morris,et al.  Modelling breach initiation and growth , 2009 .

[15]  Gianfranco Fornaro,et al.  A new algorithm for surface deformation monitoring based on small baseline differential SAR interferograms , 2002, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[16]  H. de Moel Uncertainty in flood risk , 2012 .

[17]  J. K. Vrijling,et al.  Chapter 10 Soil headcut erosion: process and mathematical modeling , 2008 .

[18]  L. A. Richards Capillary conduction of liquids through porous mediums , 1931 .

[19]  Mohamed Hassan,et al.  Improving the accuracy of breach modelling: why are we not progressing faster? , 2008 .

[20]  R. Hanssen,et al.  Monitoring water defense structures using radar interferometry , 2008, 2008 IEEE Radar Conference.

[21]  Adam Bezuijen,et al.  INFLUENCE OF SEEPAGE ON STABILITY OF SANDY SLOPE , 1992 .

[22]  Fabio Rocca,et al.  Permanent scatterers in SAR interferometry , 1999, Remote Sensing.

[23]  Jonathan D. Bray,et al.  New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. II: The Central Region and the Lower Ninth Ward , 2008 .

[24]  F. V. Leijen,et al.  Persistent Scatterer Interferometry based on geodetic estimation theory , 2014 .

[25]  T. Schweckendiek,et al.  Updating piping reliability with field performance observations , 2014 .

[26]  R. E. Wahl,et al.  Overview of New Orleans Levee Failures: Lessons Learned and Their Impact on National Levee Design and Assessment , 2008 .

[27]  Andrew Hooper,et al.  A multi‐temporal InSAR method incorporating both persistent scatterer and small baseline approaches , 2008 .

[28]  C. van Rhee,et al.  Sediment Entrainment at High Flow Velocity , 2010 .

[29]  Fuk K. Li,et al.  Synthetic aperture radar interferometry , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[30]  Li Min Zhang,et al.  Dike Failure Mechanisms and Breaching Parameters , 2015 .

[31]  David C. Froehlich,et al.  Embankment Dam Breach Parameters and Their Uncertainties , 2008 .

[32]  F. Rocca,et al.  Space geodesy: Subsidence and flooding in New Orleans , 2006, Nature.

[33]  Robert G. Dean,et al.  Erosional Equivalences of Levees: Steady and Intermittent Wave Overtopping , 2010 .