Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Swakoppoort Dam 15-04-26 01
Swakoppoort Dam 15-04-26 01
Swakoppoort Dam 15-04-26 01
0.5% 2 500
0.2% 4 150
Inflow (m3/s)
Water level
1000 1 131
100 1 126
10 1 121
1 1 116
0.1 1 111
78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Time
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF SWAKOPPOORT DAM
Recurrence interval in 2 5 10 20 50 100 1000 10000
10000
LN
LP3
GEV
GEVpwm
Proposed
1000
Annual peak flow (m3/s)
100
10
1
0.998 0.995 0.99 0.98 0.95 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.001 0.0001
Probability of exceedance
This study
Flood peaks (m3/s)
Probability of Greenbaum et al
exceedance (%) Statistical (2014)* TR 137 Recommended
Recommended 1 472
Design Flood
SEF 4 602
Flood hydrographs
• 1984/85, 1987/88 and 2005/06
• SUH
– 1 tc = 26 hours
– tc = 9 hours
1.0
1985
0.9 1988
2006
0.7
0.6
Flow (m3/s)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0 12 24 36 48 60 72
Time (hours)
Spillway capacity
• Uncontrolled ogee spillway
• Hydraulic model study
• Maximum capacity of spillway system
= 4 250 m3/s
• Cannot accommodate unrouted SEF
• Can accommodate routed SEF:
– 0.16 m freebord 26 hour
– 1.58 m freeboard 9 hour
Outlet works
• Outlet works capacity = 9.5 m3/s at
FSL 93.4 days from FSL to lowest
draw down level sufficient under
normal operating circumstances
• Capacity is, however, not sufficient to
lower the water level down during an
impending failure.
Dam wall
• Trial load analysis
• 7 scenarios
• Relies on pressure relief of
foundation
• Stresses acceptable
• Calcite stains corresponds with trial
load results
Inspection
1.E+08
Risk of financial losses (R/annum)
1.E+07
1.E+06
1.E+05
1.E+04
1.E+03
Operation:
3. The Operation and Maintenance Manual should be updated as
a matter of urgency;
4. A proper Emergency Preparedness Plan should be compiled;
5. The Operation and Maintenance Manual should be revised on
an annual basis;
6. Once compiled the Emergency Preparedness Plan should be
update (especially the telephone numbers) and tested on an
annual basis;
7. The updated Operation and Maintenance Manual and
Emergency Preparedness Plan should effectively implemented
by training the operators of the dam in the proper operation
and maintenance of all the components;
8. The dam’s blocks should be numbered on the downstream face
for monitoring purposes. The numbering should be of
sufficient size to enable identification from either flank;
9. The drainage holes should be clearly numbered and this should
be recorded on a drawing for future reference;
Recommendations
Monitoring & inspection:
10. NamWater should start detail water level monitoring as soon
as possible in addition to the DWA monitoring to provide
appropriate redundancy;
11. A system of three monthly routine visual inspections be
implemented;
12. Logbooks (for civil as well as mechanical/electrical
components) should be compiled by an appropriate person to
record the observation made during routine inspections;
13. Movement of the vertical construction joints should be
monitored at least on a monthly basis by the installation of 3D
crack gauges on the non-overspill crest (both left and right
flanks) as well as at the downstream toe;
14. The displacement of the dam should be monitored on a six
monthly basis by a geodetic survey to monitor the possible
alkali aggregate swelling action at the dam. The survey should
be conducted to correspond with the turning points in the
displacements (January/February and July/August);
15. Formal monitoring of the calcite stains and cracks should done
on an annual basis (a detail crack map as well as detail enough
photos of the whole of the downstream face) as part of the
routine inspection program;
16. The depths of the drainage holes at the toe of downstream
face should be measured and recorded after each cleaning;
Recommendations
Betterment:
Other:
19. The statistically determined flood peaks determined from
the analysis of the observed flood peaks should be used as
the representative flood peaks for Swakoppoort Dam;
20. That the synthetic flow record methodology previous used
for Swakoppoort Dam not be used at Swakoppoort Dam or
any other dam in Namibia;
21. That the K-value for the determination of the RMF be
changed form 4.6 down to 4.0;
22. A flood peak of 4 602 m3/s with an annual probability of
exceedance of 0.001% (10-5) be used as Safety Evaluation
Flood (SEF) instead of using any relationship with the RMF
peak (typically RMF+Δ);
Thank you
Louis Hattingh
halh@icon.co.za