water

Article
Physical Model-Based Investigation of Reservoir
Sedimentation Processes
Cheng-Chia Huang 1 , Jihn-Sung Lai 2 , Fong-Zuo Lee 2 and Yih-Chi Tan 1, *
1 Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei City 106, Taiwan;
chengchiahuang@gmail.com
2 Hydrotech Research Institute, National Taiwan University, Taipei City 106, Taiwan;
jslai525@ntu.edu.tw (J.-S.L.); windleft@gmail.com (F.-Z.L.)
* Correspondence: yctan95@126.com




Received: 2 February 2018; Accepted: 20 March 2018; Published: 22 March 2018


Abstract: Sedimentation is a serious problem in the operations of reservoirs. In Taiwan, the situation
became worse after the Chi-Chi Earthquake recorded on 21 September 1999. The sediment trap
efficiency in several regional reservoirs has been sharply increased, adversely affecting the operations
on water supplies. According to the field record, the average annual sediment deposition observed in
several regional reservoirs in Taiwan has been increased. For instance, the typhoon event recorded
in 2008 at the Wushe Reservoir, Taiwan, produced a 3 m sediment deposit upstream of the dam.
The remaining storage capacity in the Wushe Reservoir was reduced to 35.9% or a volume of
53.79 million m3 for flood water detention in 2010. It is urgent that research should be conducted to
understand the sediment movement in the Wushe Reservoir. In this study, a scale physical model was
built to reproduce the flood flow through the reservoir, investigate the long-term depositional pattern,
and evaluate sediment trap efficiency. This allows us to estimate the residual life of the reservoir by
proposing a modification of Brune’s method. It can be presented to predict the lifespan of Taiwan
reservoirs due to higher applicability in both the physical model and the observed data.

Keywords: sedimentation; reservoir; physical model; sediment trap efficiency

1. Introduction
Issues of water resources have been determined as a priority in recent years. Water scarcity is an
urgent threat globally. Water scarcity could be solved with the improvement of reservoir operations.
Reservoirs are often equipped with multiple functions, including water supply, irrigation, flood control,
power generation, recreation, and navigation. Among all of these, water supply is a most important
operation and highly depends on the reservoir storage capacity. According to the statistics, the capacity
of large reservoirs in the world had decreased 5% from 1901 to 2010 [1]. As the world’s population
increases, reservoir sedimentation will pose more challenges in the utilization of water resources. In an
effort to reduce reservoir sedimentation and the impacts of sediment deficit downstream from dams,
various measures have been applied for sediment reduction such as the turbidity current venting
technique implemented in Lake Mead, USA [2–4], Guanting Reservoir, China [5,6], or the sediment
bypass tunnel built at the Asahi Reservoir, Japan [7]. Recently, the reservoir sedimentation problem
is receiving increasing attention worldwide; for example, Taiwan also has serious sedimentation
problems in its reservoirs. Yu [8] indicated that the storage capacity of Taiwan reservoirs has declined to
1.9 billion m3 in 2016, and the lost storage is 0.9 billion m3 , which accounts for 34% of the original design.
Thus, the operation of water supply has significantly deviated from the original design. To better
understand the problem, the sediment yield from the watershed was adopted for investigation [9].
Also, a sediment release strategy has been applied in a Taiwan reservoir [10]. Even though studies on

Water 2018, 10, 352; doi:10.3390/w10040352 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2018, 10, 352 2 of 13

reservoir sedimentation have sufficed, the issue of long-term reservoir deposition is rarely discussed.
If the sediment transportation can be analysed through studying a reservoir, we can better predict the
sediment movement during typhoon periods.
In order to investigate the sediment transportation from short-term to long-term deposition in
the reservoir, several researchers have proposed different methods. Below, we briefly review relevant
studies, including empirical relations, numerical simulations, and physical models. Finally, we propose
an improved relationship between capacity inflow ratio (storage capacity/annual inflow) and trap
efficiency based on previous empirical research [11].
The empirical formula was an early method employed, and the details can be found in the
Reservoir Sedimentation handbook [11]. For the long-term reservoir depositional pattern reaching an
equilibrium state, the ultimate capacity (remaining storage capacity) of a reservoir can be predicted by
parameters including the reservoir water level, cross section, and equilibrium slope. The area-increment
method [11] was suitable for reservoirs that had a small meandering in the flow pattern with varied
cross sections. It was derived to use the actual flow area at each cross section. However, these methods
focus on the ultimate capacity and are unable to calculate the transportation process and reservoir
depositional pattern over years. In addition, analyzing the variation of trap efficiency is another
approach to understand reservoir storage capacity. Brune [12] and Siyam [13] specifically investigated
the relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and sediment trap efficiency. Although these methods
cannot describe the sediment flow pattern, they can obtain the amount of sediment deposition by a
regression curve.
Numerical models were expected to be viable options to estimate the sediment movement pattern
in reservoirs. Therefore, various computer models were adopted. The United States Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) has developed the 1D model, HEC-6, to predict the sediment deposition in a
reservoir. Although the simulated erosion pattern was shown to be reasonable with measured data,
it barely simulates the meandering patterns through a fluvial reservoir [14]. Nils [15] developed a
2D numerical model to simulate the flushing phenomenon from reservoirs. However, the secondary
currents were hard to calculate. The simulated erosion pattern showed the reasonable with measured
data. However, 2D models can fairly predict the lateral but hardly predict vertical particle movements
in a reservoir due to the fact that the fall velocity term is ignored. In the last decade, 3D models have
been adopted to solve sedimentation-related problems. Gessler et al. [16] developed a 3D model to
investigate the bed erosion phenomena, further verifying the accessibility of 3D models. Although the
3D numerical model can describe the flow field more specifically and practically, it requires significant
computing resources and data mining.
Due to the limitations in numerical models, physical models can better estimate the reservoir
sedimentation. Furthermore, to predict the elevation variation along a reservoir, Lai and Capart [17]
reported on different laboratory experiments constructed to reproduce reservoir delta movements.
Their research figured out the variation of reservoir delta movement. Lai and Chang [18] built a
physical model of the Ta-Pu Reservoir in Taiwan using a 1:100 length scale equivalent model to explore
the variation of the overall storage capacity. In addition, the timing of empty flushing operation
and sediment release efficiency can be used as the reference for reservoir operation. Another 1:50
equivalent model of the Sun Moon Lake Reservoir operated sediment flushing during typhoon periods
to lead the reservoir sediment to return downstream. Different boundary conditions were used for
verification, and the sedimentation problem can be effectively alleviated [19]. Wu [20] investigated the
deposition of the Shimen Reservoir using a scale model. The variation of bed elevation and release
efficiency of the sluice outlets were observed specifically. The findings brought more information on
the sedimentation of Shimen Reservoir. The scale model was also adopted in the experiment of the
Agongdian Reservoir [21] to investigate flushing efficiency during typhoon events. The horizontal and
the vertical ratios of the model were 1:60, and 1:15, respectively. Insights from this study provided
suggestions for future operations. Furthermore, the study demonstrated the effectiveness of the
distorted scale model. Huang et al. [22] also used a distorted physical model to investigate the
Water 2018, 10, 352 3 of 13

long-term evolution of deposition due to reservoir sedimentation. The above studies show that physical
models can effectively evaluate the effect of short-term deposition in reservoirs. Next, the long-term
sedimentation problem will be further discussed in this study.
Above all, the empirical formula can estimate the ultimate capacity or trap efficiency of the
reservoir. However, different reservoirs have various characteristics, so the input parameters need
to be calibrated.
Water 2018,Besides,
10, x FOR PEERalthough
REVIEW the numerical models could calculate the sediment 3 of 13transport
mechanism, limitations were noticed. Reservoir sedimentation is a 3D physical phenomenon. Lateral
studies show that physical models can effectively evaluate the effect of short-term deposition in
and verticalreservoirs.
transport mechanisms are ignored in 1D models; the vertical transport mechanism is
Next, the long-term sedimentation problem will be further discussed in this study.
ignored in 2D models. Moreover,
Above all, the empirical theformula
sediment grain size
can estimate the in front capacity
ultimate of the Wushe Dam is less
or trap efficiency of thethan # 200,
and the sediment
reservoir.isHowever,
classified as thereservoirs
different clay orhavesilt property. The kinematic
various characteristics, behavior
so the input of non-Newtonian
parameters need to
be calibrated.
fluid is influenced by the Besides, although the
concentration ofnumerical
sediment. models could3D
Existing calculate the sediment
numerical modelstransport
have difficulty
mechanism, limitations were noticed. Reservoir sedimentation is a 3D physical phenomenon. Lateral
in computational efficiency to simulate such phenomena, especially for
and vertical transport mechanisms are ignored in 1D models; the vertical transport mechanism is
long-term sedimentation
processes. ignored
In order in 2D models. Moreover, the sediment grain size in front of the Wushe Dam is less to
to select an applicable approach, a physical model is adopted thaninvestigate
#
the short-term reservoir
200, and bed evolution
the sediment is classifiedand long-term
as the clay or siltstorage
property.process. First of
The kinematic all, field
behavior data will be
of non-
collected toNewtonian
verify the fluid is influenced
physical model.by the concentration
Second, of sediment.
a repeated Existing 3Disnumerical
experiment conducted models
to have
estimate the
difficulty in computational efficiency to simulate such phenomena, especially for long-term
long-term reservoir deposition. Finally, the research proposes the relationship between the reservoir
sedimentation processes. In order to select an applicable approach, a physical model is adopted to
storage capacity andthe
investigate theshort-term
proportion of sediment
reservoir release
bed evolution efficiency.
and long-term Thisprocess.
storage study is expected
First to attest to
of all, field
the applicability of be
data will Brune’s
collected[12] and Siyam’s
to verify the physical[13] method.
model. Second, Furthermore, the results
a repeated experiment from the
is conducted to physical
estimate the long-term reservoir deposition. Finally, the research proposes
model of the Wushe Reservoir in central Taiwan and the field data obtained from the Shimen Reservoir the relationship between
the reservoir storage capacity and the proportion of sediment release efficiency. This study is
in the northexpected
of Taiwan and the Tzengwen Reservoir in the south of Taiwan are shown in Table 1 and
to attest to the applicability of Brune’s [12] and Siyam’s [13] method. Furthermore, the
selected forresults
comparison. Next,model
from the physical the results showReservoir
of the Wushe that sedimentation
in central Taiwaninandthese reservoirs,
the field data obtainedwhich rank
among the five
from largest
the Shimen in Reservoir
Taiwan, in canthereasonably
north of Taiwanbe and
approximated
the Tzengwen by Brune’s
Reservoir method
in the south of[12].
Taiwan Finally, the
are shown intrap
distinctive sediment Tablecharacteristics
1 and selected forin comparison. Next, the results
Taiwan reservoirs show
can be that sedimentation
presented in these
by the modification of
reservoirs, which rank among the five largest in Taiwan, can reasonably be approximated by Brune’s
Brune’s [12]method
in the [12].
research.
Finally, the distinctive sediment trap characteristics in Taiwan reservoirs can be
presented by the modification of Brune’s [12] in the research.
Table 1. Characteristics of three main reservoirs in Taiwan.
Table 1. Characteristics of three main reservoirs in Taiwan.
Original Capacity,
Original Capacity, Completion
Current Capacity Deposition Rate
Reservoir
Reservoir 6 3 Current(10 6 m3 ) (106 m3)
Capacity Deposition Location
Completion
Year (10Year
6 m3) (10 m ) (%) Rate (%) Location

Wushe
Wushe 148.60 (ranking
148.60 (ranking thethe 5th),
5th), 1957
1957 53.79
53.79 (2010)
(2010) 63.4
63.4
Shimen
Shimen 309.12 (ranking
309.12 (ranking the 3rd),
the 1964
3rd), 1964 208.26 (2015)
208.26 (2015) 32.6
32.6
Shimen

Wushe

Tzengwen 748.40 (ranking the 1st), 1973 468.01 (2015) 37.4

Tzengwen

Taiwan
Tzengwen 748.40 (ranking the 1st), 1973 468.01 (2015) 37.4

2. Methodology
2. Methodology
2.1. Description of Research Site
2.1. Description of Research Site
Reservoir sedimentation has recently gained much attention all over the world. However, the
issue of reservoir sedimentation
Reservoir sedimentation caused
has recently by natural
gained much disasters is highlighted
attention all over in Taiwan.
the world. Among all the the issue
However,
reservoirs in Taiwan, the Wushe Reservoir, observed to have very serious deposition problems, was
of reservoir sedimentation caused by natural disasters is highlighted in Taiwan. Among all the
selected to be our research site. The Wushe Reservoir is located in the Wushe Mountains, upstream
reservoirs in Taiwan,
of the Chouishui theRiver,
Wushe
whereReservoir, observed
the first storage to water
of reservoir haveoccurred
very serious deposition
in April 1957. The Wushe problems,
was selectedReservoir
to be our is aresearch site. The
curved concrete Wushe
gravity dam Reservoir
type with a is located
height inmthe
of 114 andWushe Mountains,
a total capacity of 150upstream
million m
of the Chouishui 3. After five decades of operation, only 53.79 million m3 currently remain [23]. Propagation
River, where the first storage of reservoir water occurred in April 1957. The Wushe
of sediment deposits filling more than half of the Wushe Reservoir can be clearly seen in Figure 1.
Reservoir is a curved concrete gravity dam type with a height of 114 m and a total capacity of
150 million m3 . After five decades of operation, only 53.79 million m3 currently remain [23]. Propagation
of sediment deposits filling more than half of the Wushe Reservoir can be clearly seen in Figure 1.
Water 2018, 10, 352 4 of 13
Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Relative
Relative position
position of
of Wushe
Wushe Reservoir.
Reservoir.

The sedimentation problems in Taiwan are primarily due to extraordinary earthquake disasters
The sedimentation problems in Taiwan are primarily due to extraordinary earthquake
[24] and some of the most extreme precipitation events in the world [25]. Among them, the 1999 Chi-
disasters [24] and some of the most extreme precipitation events in the world [25]. Among them,
Chi Earthquake has been ranked the worst damage disaster in the last two decades, especially in
the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake has been ranked the worst damage disaster in the last two decades,
Central Taiwan [26]. Therefore, the serious sedimentation problems in Taiwan reservoirs can be
especially in Central Taiwan [26]. Therefore, the serious sedimentation problems in Taiwan reservoirs
attributed to two factors. First, before the reservoir was constructed, the upstream sediment from the
can be attributed to two factors. First, before the reservoir was constructed, the upstream sediment
watershed could be transported to the downstream river with heavy floods. However, upon the
from the watershed could be transported to the downstream river with heavy floods. However,
completion of the reservoir construction, the inflow sediment could be trapped by the dam. Second,
upon the completion of the reservoir construction, the inflow sediment could be trapped by the
the original design of the Wushe Reservoir had two major outlet works: a spillway (999 m a.s.l.
dam. Second, the original design of the Wushe Reservoir had two major outlet works: a spillway
(meters above sea level)) and a tunnel spillway (983 m a.s.l.). However, it does not have any bottom
(999 m a.s.l. (meters above sea level)) and a tunnel spillway (983 m a.s.l.). However, it does not
outlet to release sediment during flood events. Hence, the sedimentation worsened after several years
have any bottom outlet to release sediment during flood events. Hence, the sedimentation worsened
of operation. Furthermore, the sedimentation became more threatening after the 1999 Chi-Chi
after several years of operation. Furthermore, the sedimentation became more threatening after the
Earthquake. The sedimentation yield per year in reservoirs has increased, adversely affecting the
1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake. The sedimentation yield per year in reservoirs has increased, adversely
functions of water supplies. Due to an excessive number of landslides and debris flows caused by the
affecting the functions of water supplies. Due to an excessive number of landslides and debris flows
earthquake, extreme hydrological events brought greater amounts of sediment into the reservoir.
caused by the earthquake, extreme hydrological events brought greater amounts of sediment into the
According to field-measured data, the average annual sedimentation rate had increased from 1.78
reservoir. 3According to field-measured data, the average annual sedimentation rate had increased from
million m (1959–2010) to 4.25 million m3 (1999–2010). Based on field measurement in December 2010,
1.78 million m3 (1959–2010) to 4.25 million m3 (1999–2010). Based on field measurement in December
the deposition elevation had reached 969.7 m on the upstream side of the dam. The remaining
2010, the deposition elevation had reached 969.7 m on the upstream side of the dam. The remaining
capacity of the reservoir accounts for 35.9% of the original design. As a consequence, the lifespan of
capacity of the reservoir accounts for 35.9% of the original design. As a consequence, the lifespan of
Wushe Reservoir is worthy of investigation.
Wushe Reservoir is worthy of investigation.
In order to investigate the long-term depositional pattern and the storage capacity variation of
In order to investigate the long-term depositional pattern and the storage capacity variation of
Wushe Reservoir, a scale physical model was adopted to simulate possible events. The proportions of the
Wushe Reservoir, a scale physical model was adopted to simulate possible events. The proportions of
reservoir length, width, and maximum water depth were evaluated. The length and the width of Wushe
the reservoir length, width, and maximum water depth were evaluated. The length and the width
Reservoir are about 4750 and 600 m, respectively; however, the maximum water depth is only 35.3 m
of Wushe Reservoir are about 4750 and 600 m, respectively; however, the maximum water depth is
(normal water level = 1005 m a.s.l.). Consequently, a huge disparity exists between the proportions of the
only 35.3 m (normal water level = 1005 m a.s.l.). Consequently, a huge disparity exists between the
length and width of the reservoir, and the maximized water depth. In addition, if a scale model were to
proportions of the length and width of the reservoir, and the maximized water depth. In addition, if a
be adopted, the flow pattern of this scale model might not reflect the real field due to a shallow water
scale model were to be adopted, the flow pattern of this scale model might not reflect the real field
level. Therefore, a distorted physical model was considered. To validate the effectiveness of this distorted
due to a shallow water level. Therefore, a distorted physical model was considered. To validate the
model, the design of a physical model was based on the Buckingham π theorem. Next, the distorted
effectiveness of this distorted model, the design of a physical model was based on the Buckingham
physical model should be compared with the field-measured data to prove that deposition of this
π theorem. Next, the distorted physical model should be compared with the field-measured data
distorted model would reflect that of the reservoir after typhoon events. After the verification of the
to prove that deposition of this distorted model would reflect that of the reservoir after typhoon
distorted model, the long-term pattern of the Wushe Reservoir was investigated.
events. After the verification of the distorted model, the long-term pattern of the Wushe Reservoir
was investigated.
2.2. Scale and Similarity of Physical Model
In the Buckingham π theorem, hydrodynamic similarity and sediments similarity should satisfy
the similarity theory. The Froude number should be matched with the similarity method between the
prototype and this model. Froude number dynamic similarity and sediment fall velocity are
Water 2018, 10, 352 5 of 13

2.2. Scale and Similarity of Physical Model

In the Buckingham π theorem, hydrodynamic similarity and sediments similarity should satisfy
the similarity theory. The Froude number should be matched with the similarity method between the
prototype and this model. Froude number dynamic similarity and sediment fall velocity are important
factosr. Therefore, the horizontal and the vertical scale should be confirmed, and then the sediment
flow pattern can be described well.
A simplified sediment transport equation was applied to define model-prototype similarity.
The equation can be written as

∂s ∂ ∂ ∂
= (us) + (vs) + (ws) (1)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z

where u, v, w are velocity of x, y, z direction; s is sediment concentration. In addition, u and v are

horizontal terms, which could be combined, and present to U.
∂ ∂
According to Buckingham π theorem, ∂x (Us) = ∂z (ws). Moreover, the prototype and this model
must have the same shape, and the scale ratio could be derived as follows:

λU λ s λw λs
= (2)
λL λh

where λU is the horizontal velocity scale; λw is the vertical scale. In this case, λ L is the horizontal scale,
λh is the vertical scale, and λs is a concentration scale. (2) can be rewritten as (3)

λU λw
= (3)
λL λh

Furthermore, according to Froude number law of similarity, √λU = 1. g is the acceleration of

λ g λh
gravity and λ g = 1. (4) can be derived as follows:

λU = λ1/2
h (4)

(3) and (4) can be combined as (5)

λh = (λ L λw )2/3 (5)

The purpose of this research is reservoir deposition type. The prototype and this model must have
the same vertical velocity (λw = 1). Therefore, this study can use field sediment to do the experiment.
Due to model site constraints, this physical model sets λ L = 1000. Hence, (5) can be used to obtain the
vertical depth ratio as (6)
λz = λh = 100 (6)

The time scale λt = λL

λU , and λU = λ1/2
h , which can be derived as (7)
λL
λt = = 100 (7)
λ1/2
h

The inflow discharge can be written as follows:

λ Q = λ L λ h λU (8)

(4) is substituted into (8), and available as follows:

λQ = λ L λ3/2
h = 1000000 (9)

In summary, the scale ratio of the prototype and the model are shown in Table 2.
Water 2018, 10, 352 6 of 13

Table 2. Scale ratio of the prototype and the model.

Term Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Time (s) Velocity (m/s) Discharge (m3 /s)
Scale λL λL λh λ L λh −1/2 λh 1/2 λ L λh 3/2
Proportion 1000 1000 100 100 10 1,000,000
Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13

Table
2.3. Initial and Boundary Condition 2. Scale
of the ratio of Model
Physical the prototype and the model.

Term Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Time (s) Velocity (m/s) Discharge (m3/s)
The initial and boundary
Scale λL conditions
λL for theλ h physicalλ L λ h model
−1 2 need
λ h 1 2 to be confirmed λ L λh 3 2 as a prerequisite.
The following are
Proportion described1000 separately:
1000 the inflow
100 boundary
100 condition,
10 the initial
1,000,000 bed morphology,
the sediment particle distribution, and the outflow operation strategy.
First,2.3.
theInitial and Boundary Condition of the Physical Model
upstream boundary conditions of inflow water and sediment discharges should be
The initial
determined. The current research and boundary conditions
includes two forevents:
the physical model need
a replication of to be confirmed
historic typhoon as events
a and
prerequisite. The following are described separately: the inflow boundary condition, the initial bed
a pattern prediction of long-term reservoir deposition. In order to validate the effectiveness of this
morphology, the sediment particle distribution, and the outflow operation strategy.
model, the selection
First, theprinciple
upstream was that the
boundary field measured
conditions of inflow water dataandshould
sediment be able to reflect
discharges should thebeseverity of
depositiondetermined.
in the particular
The current year. Theincludes
research typhoon two events
events: ain the yearof 2008
replication historic were used
typhoon as the
events andverification
a
pattern prediction
case. According of long-term reservoir
to the field-measured data, thedeposition. In order
deposition of to
thevalidate
Wushe theReservoir
effectiveness of this 3 million
reached
model, the selection principle was that the field measured data should be able to reflect the severity
m3 after Typhoon Sinlaku in 2008. However, besides Typhoon Sinlaku, the other two events—Typhoon
of deposition in the particular year. The typhoon events in the year 2008 were used as the verification
Fongwongcase. andAccording
TyphoontoJungmi—occurred
the field-measured data, inthe
thedeposition
same year, which
of the Wushecaused thereached
Reservoir reservoir bed elevation
3 million
to increasem3from
after 965
Typhoonto 968 m. The
Sinlaku huge
in 2008. amountbesides
However, of deposition
Typhoon Sinlaku,duringthe these
othertyphoon
two events— events led to
Typhoon Fongwong and Typhoon Jungmi—occurred in the same year,
a certain level of difficulty in the physical model estimation. If the physical model can be proved which caused the reservoir
bed elevation to increase from 965 to 968 m. The huge amount of deposition during these typhoon
effective, it can be further applied to future sedimentation prediction.
events led to a certain level of difficulty in the physical model estimation. If the physical model can
The inflow
be provedboundary conditions
effective, it can of theto second
be further applied event is prediction.
future sedimentation shown in Figure 2. With careful
considerationThe of inflow sediment
inflow boundary affecting
conditions of the
the long-term
second eventdeposition
is shown in case, Figurethe total careful
2. With sediment yield
amount ofconsideration
4.25 millionofminflow 3 wassediment
used. The affecting
peakthe long-term
flow discharge deposition case, the
of design total sediment
hydrograph yield m3 /s [23].
is 1523
amount of 4.25 million m3 was used. The peak flow discharge of design hydrograph is 1523 m3/s [23].
In the physical model, the design hydrographs of inflow water and sediment were imposed with an
In the physical model, the design hydrographs of inflow water and sediment were imposed with an
unsteady flow state.
unsteady flowThe boundary
state. The boundary conditions
conditionsof of different
different events events
are are
listedlisted in 3.Table 3.
in Table

FigureFigure 2. Inflow
2. Inflow boundary conditions
boundary conditions of of
thethe
long-term case. case.
long-term
Table 3. Boundary conditions of different events.
Table 3. Boundary conditions of different events.
Item Event Duration (h) Peak Discharge (m /s) Sediment Yield (m3) Flow Condition
3

Fongwong 92 513 690,160 Unsteady

Item 1 EventSinlaku Duration (h)
160 Peak Discharge
1493 (m3 /s) Sediment 3 Flow Condition
4,101,562Yield (m ) Unsteady
Jangmi
Fongwong 92 152 612
513 1,739,730
690,160 Unsteady
Unsteady
1 2 Long-term case 92 1523 4250,000 Unsteady
Sinlaku 160 1493 4,101,562 Unsteady
Jangmi 152 612 1,739,730 Unsteady
2 Long-term case 92 1523 4250,000 Unsteady
Water 2018, 10, 352 7 of 13

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13

In order
Water 2018, to
10, xinvestigate the long-term depositional pattern of the Wushe Reservoir, a mobile-bed
FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 13
In order to investigate the long-term depositional pattern of the Wushe Reservoir, a mobile-bed
physical model was adopted. After the verification case of 2008 was completed, the pattern prediction
physical model
In order towas adopted.the
investigate After the verification case pattern
long-term of 2008 was completed, the pattern prediction
of long-term reservoir deposition based ondepositional
the bed elevation of of the
2010Wushe Reservoir,
was applied. The a mobile-bed
bed elevation
of long-term reservoir deposition based on the bed elevation of 2010 was applied. The bed elevation
physical model was adopted. After the verification case of 2008 was completed, the pattern prediction
and physical model of the Wushe Reservoir are shown
and physical model of the Wushe Reservoir are shown in Figure 3.in Figure 3.
of long-term reservoir deposition based on the bed elevation of 2010 was applied. The bed elevation
and physical model of the Wushe Reservoir are shown in Figure 3.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure (a)(a)
3. 3.
Figure BedBedelevation
elevation of
of the Wushe
WusheReservoir;
Reservoir;(b)(b) physical
physical model.
model.
Figure 3. (a) Bed elevation of the Wushe Reservoir; (b) physical model.
In the mobile-bed experiment, the sediment particle size should be carefully considered.
In the mobile-bed experiment, the sediment particle size should be carefully considered. Samples
Samples weremobile-bed
In the collected after the flood season
experiment, during October
the sediment particle 2010
size and January
should 2011. Figure
be carefully 4 shows
considered.
werethe
collected after
grainwere
size the flood season
distributions during October 2010 and January 2011. Figure 4 location
shows theare grain
Samples collected aftermeasured within
the flood season 1m-deep
during bed
October surface forJanuary
2010 and each sampling
2011. Figure 4 shows
size distributions
indicated
the grain in measured
thedistributions
size within
Wushe Reservoir. 1m-deep
The Dwithin
measured bed
50 is aboutsurface for
0.015 bed
1m-deep each sampling location are indicated
mm.surface for each sampling location are in
the Wushe Reservoir.
indicated The D
in the Wushe 50 is about
Reservoir. The0.015
D50 ismm.
about 0.015 mm.

Figure 4. Grain size distribution from samples collected in the lower Wushe Reservoir.
Figure 4. Grain size distribution from samples collected in the lower Wushe Reservoir.
Figure 4.
Reservoir Grain size
operation wasdistribution from samples
the other important factorcollected in the the
that affected lower Wushe Reservoir.
depositional pattern of the
reservoir. The
Reservoir operation strategy and water level of this model need to be determined.
was the other important factor that affected the depositional pattern First,
of the
the
spillway
Reservoir and
reservoir. The the tunnel
operation
operation spillway
was were
the other
strategy two major
important
and water outflow
level offactor boundaries.
that affected
this model The model spillway
thedetermined.
need to be depositional was
pattern
First, the of
prioritized
spillway and
the reservoir. to release
The the floodspillway
tunnel
operation until thewere
strategy inflow
andtwo discharge
major
water level reached
outflow 850 m3/s. Since
boundaries.
of this model Thethe
need maximum
model
to be spillwaydesign
determined. was First,
outflow discharge
prioritized of the
to release spillway
flood wasinflow
until the 850 mdischarge
3/s, when the inflow discharge
reached 850 m3/s. Sinceamount was greater
the maximum than
design
the spillway and the tunnel spillway were two major outflow boundaries. The model spillway was
outflow discharge of the spillway was 850 m3/s, when the inflow discharge
prioritized to release flood until the inflow discharge reached 850 m3 /s. amount was greater than
Since the maximum design
3
outflow discharge of the spillway was 850 m /s, when the inflow discharge amount was greater
Water 2018, 10, 352 8 of 13

than Water
850 m 3 /s, the tunnel spillway, of which maximum discharge was 1200 m3 /s, was operated to
2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 13
release the flood. Next, the tunnel spillway was closed when the discharge became less than 850 m3 /s.
850 m3/s, the
The spillway wastunnel
thenspillway,
closed untilof which
the maximum
end of the discharge was 1200
flood event. m3/s,the
After wasoperation
operated to release was
strategy
the flood. Next, the tunnel spillway was closed when the discharge became less than 850 m3/s. The
confirmed, the water level of this model was considered to match the field record. The water level
spillway was then closed until the end of the flood event. After the operation strategy was confirmed,
measured at the Wushe Dam was between 1002 and 1004 m. Therefore, the designed water level was
the water level of this model was considered to match the field record. The water level measured at
set atthe
1003 m in Dam
Wushe this experiment.
was between At theand
1002 end of the
1004 experiment,
m. Therefore, thethe water water
designed level was
levelreduced to1003
was set at 980 m to
simulate the field scenario at a low water level.
m in this experiment. At the end of the experiment, the water level was reduced to 980 m to simulate
The same
the field procedure
scenario at a lowwas repeated
water level. until the reservoir was filled up with sediment. That is,
the sedimentThe release efficiency
same procedure wasreached
repeated100%
until(trap efficiencywas
the reservoir = 0%).
filledSampling locationsThat
up with sediment. wereis,chosen
the to
sediment
calculate release efficiency
the sediment releasereached 100%
efficiency. The(trap efficiency
locations = 0%). Sampling
included one inflowlocations were chosen
boundary, to
the reservoir
calculate the sediment release efficiency. The locations included one inflow boundary,
entrance and two outflow boundaries, the spillway, and the tunnel spillway. Therefore, the cumulative the reservoir
entrance
sediment and two
release outflowofboundaries,
efficiency the spillway,
the experiment and the tunnel
was obtained. The spillway.
equationTherefore, the cumulative
can be written as (10)
sediment release efficiency of the experiment was obtained. The equation can be written as (10)
∑ Outflow Sediment
Sediment Release Efficiency(%) = 1 − Trap Efficiency=Outflow Sediment (10)
Sediment Release Efficiency ( % ) =1 − Trap Efficiency= ∑ Inflow Sediment (10)
 Inflow Sediment
3. Physical Model Results
In the first place,
3. Physical Modelthe physical model should be verified with the field measured data. The repeated
Results
experiment were conducted since the verification was proved applicable. In the following description,
In the first place, the physical model should be verified with the field measured data. The
the comparison of similarity in the depositional pattern between the physical model and field data and
repeated experiment were conducted since the verification was proved applicable. In the following
the variation of sediment
description, release
the comparison efficiencyinare
of similarity thediscussed.
depositional pattern between the physical model and
The
field data and the variation of sediment releasedata
experiment results and the measured of longitudinal
efficiency bed elevation along the thalweg
are discussed.
are compared in Figure results
The experiment 5. Theandlongitudinal
the measured bed elevations
data in November
of longitudinal 2007along
bed elevation and theMarch 2009 are
thalweg
demonstrated
are comparedwithinthe solid5.line
Figure Theand the dashed
longitudinal bedline, respectively.
elevations Also, the
in November dashed
2007 line can
and March 2009beare
seen as
demonstrated
the base with the solid
and was compared withlinethe
and the dashed
result obtainedline,from
respectively. Also, the
the physical dashed
model line can
(dotted be seen
line). It can be
as thethat
observed basethe
and was compared
inflow sedimentwith led the
the result obtained
reservoir deltafrom the physical
to move forward model
after(dotted line). Itevents
the typhoon can of
be observed that the inflow sediment led the reservoir delta to move forward after the
2008. In this case, much sediment flowed into the reservoir and caused serious deposition. The physical typhoon events
of 2008. In this case, much sediment flowed into the reservoir and caused serious deposition. The
model reflects this movement pattern. First, the physical and the measured delta front had a similar
physical model reflects this movement pattern. First, the physical and the measured delta front had
movement trend. Next, the elevation of deposition was approximately matched by 968.2 m in the
a similar movement trend. Next, the elevation of deposition was approximately matched by 968.2 m
physical model andmodel
in the physical 968.6and
m in them
968.6 measured data. data.
in the measured

1020
Original Nov-07 Physical Mar-09
1010
1005 (Normal Water Level)
1000
990
Bed Elevation (m)

980
970
960
950
940
930
920
910
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Distance (m)

Figure 5. Longitudinal bed elevation of the physical model and field-measured data.
Figure 5. Longitudinal bed elevation of the physical model and field-measured data.

In the above study, the depositional pattern of typhoon events was verified by using the same
In thesize
grain above study, the
distribution depositional
in the field. Model pattern of typhoon
results closely matchedevents was verified
the patterns by using
of deposition the same
measured
graininsize
thedistribution in the
field. Therefore, field.theModel
using same results
sedimentsclosely
as a matched
prototypethe patterns
in the of deposition
specified scale modelmeasured
can
properly simulate the sedimentation pattern in the Wushe Reservoir. That is, the
in the field. Therefore, using the same sediments as a prototype in the specified scale model cansedimentation
properly simulate the sedimentation pattern in the Wushe Reservoir. That is, the sedimentation pattern
Water 2018, 10, 352 9 of 13

of the physical model was consistent with that of the measured data, leading to the possibility of
predicting the long-term deposition of the Wushe Reservoir.
The verification case has proved the reliability of the physical model. Hence, the long-term
depositionalWaterpattern
2018, 10, x FOR
canPEER
be REVIEW
discussed. In order to analyze the propagation pattern of9the of 13delta front,

we measured theofreservoir
pattern the physical bed topography
model was consistentafter every
with that ofthree consecutive
the measured experiments
data, leading (i.e., three events
to the possibility
in three consecutive
of predicting years in the deposition
the long-term field). The experiments
of the were conducted repeatedly until the physical
Wushe Reservoir.
model was filled The upverification case has proved
with sediment the reliability
to understand of the physical
its lifespan in themodel.
future Hence,
(2013thetolong-term
2037).
depositional pattern can be discussed. In order to analyze the propagation pattern of the delta front,
The depositional patterns of the delta from 2013 to 2037 are shown in Figure 6a–h. The black
we measured the reservoir bed topography after every three consecutive experiments (i.e., three
dotted line represents
events the delta front,
in three consecutive years inwith the sub-aerial
the field). The experiments portion of the delta
were conducted to the until
repeatedly top ofthethe dotted
line. In thephysical model was filled up with sediment to understand its lifespan in the future (2013 to 2037). Movement
year 2013 (Figure 6a), the delta front is about 3000 m away from the dam.
of the delta frontThe depositional
from 2013patternsto 2019ofistheshown
delta from 2013 to 2037
in Figure 6b,c.areTheshown
deltain Figure 6a–h. The750
front moves black
m, which is
dotted line represents the delta front, with the sub-aerial portion of the delta to the top of the dotted
about 2250 m upstream from the dam. During this period, the slope of the delta front extending to the
line. In the year 2013 (Figure 6a), the delta front is about 3000 m away from the dam. Movement of
dam frontthe (the transition
delta front fromzone 2013 toof2019
blue and green)
is shown shows
in Figure a steep
6b,c. The trend.
delta front movesIn 750
2022m,and
which2025 (Figure 6d,e),
is about
the delta has
2250been moved
m upstream fromtothe
a distance
dam. During of this
1800 and the
period, 1700 m of
slope from the front
the delta dam.extending
Moreover,to thethe
dam delta of the
right bankfront (the transition
moved zone of blue
faster. Figure 6f–hand green) that
shows showsina 2028,
steep trend.
2031,Inand2022 2034,
and 2025 (Figure
the delta6d,e),
fronttheshifts from
the left to delta has been moved to a distance of 1800 and 1700 m from the dam. Moreover, the delta of the right
the right-hand side due to the operation of the spillway tunnel (the height of the spillway
bank moved faster. Figure 6f–h shows that in 2028, 2031, and 2034, the delta front shifts from the left
tunnel is lower
to the right-hand side the
than that of due spillway).
to the operation Thus, wespillway
of the predict that(the
tunnel theheight
Wushe Reservoir
of the will fill up with
spillway tunnel
sediment is within
lower than that of the spillway). Thus, we predict that the Wushe Reservoir will fill up with extent is
three years in 2037. The delta moves to the dam site, and the water storage
only about 250 mwithin
sediment three years
left before the in 2037. As
dam. The adelta moves to the dam
consequence, the site, and
delta the water
front storagewith
migrates extentaissignificant
only about 250 m left before the dam. As a consequence, the delta front migrates with a significant
speed to almost fill up the reservoir within 24 years.
speed to almost fill up the reservoir within 24 years.

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)

Unit: m

Figure 6. Deposition delta movement patterns from 2013 to 2034. (a) 2013; (b) 2016; (c) 2019; (d) 2022;
Figure 6. Deposition delta movement patterns from 2013 to 2034. (a) 2013; (b) 2016; (c) 2019; (d) 2022;
(e) 2025; (f) 2028; (g) 2031; (h) 2034.
(e) 2025; (f) 2028; (g) 2031; (h) 2034.
The release efficiency is a method to judge the remaining lifespan of the Wushe Reservoir. In
order to monitor the sediment release efficiency of different years, we collected released water
The release efficiency is a method to judge the remaining lifespan of the Wushe Reservoir. In order
samples from the spillway and the spillway tunnel and then calculated the sediment concentration
to monitorofthe sediment
water samples to release
estimateefficiency of different
the cumulative years, volume
release sediment we collected released
of different outlets.water samples from
The variation of sediment release efficiency from 2013 to 2037
the spillway and the spillway tunnel and then calculated the sediment concentration is shown in Figureof7. water
The samples
cumulative release efficiency of each experiment increased with the time series. The rate of increase
to estimate the cumulative release sediment volume of different outlets.
gradually diminished over each experiment, especially after peak discharge (33rd minute). Overall,
The the
variation of sediment release efficiency from 2013 to 2037 is shown in Figure 7.
cumulative release efficiency increased significantly over the first 25 min of each experiment. This
The cumulative release
phenomenon efficiency
showed of reservoir
that the each experiment
would not increased with
flush sediment the time
before series.toThe
its transport therate
damof increase
graduallyfront. Also, the over
diminished cumulative release efficiency
each experiment, increased after
especially at a much
peakslower degree(33rd
discharge after minute).
the first Overall,
experiment was conducted for 41 min. In this case, the cumulative sediment efficiency increased due
the cumulative release efficiency increased significantly over the first 25 min of each experiment.
to the fact that the delta gradually moved to the dam front. Otherwise, the slope of the cumulative
This phenomenon showed that the reservoir would not flush sediment before its transport to the
dam front. Also, the cumulative release efficiency increased at a much slower degree after the first
experiment was conducted for 41 min. In this case, the cumulative sediment efficiency increased due
to the fact that the delta gradually moved to the dam front. Otherwise, the slope of the cumulative
sediment efficiency also increased year by year. This phenomenon showed that the inflow sediment
Water 2018, 10, 352 10 of 13
Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13

had insufficient
sediment
Water xspace
efficiency
2018, 10, to
FOR PEERalsodeposit.
increasedInyear
REVIEW other words,
by year. Thisthe reservoirshowed
phenomenon trap ability isinflow
that the reduced due
sediment
10 to the
of 13
had insufficient
declining space tocaused
storage capacity deposit.byInsediment
other words, the reservoir trap
accumulation. ability
Finally, is reduced
when due toefficiency
the release the
reachesdeclining
sediment
100% in storage
efficiency capacity
2037, the also caused
increased
reservoir by sediment
year
storage bycapacityaccumulation.
year. This phenomenon
will Finally,
no longer when
showed
change. thethe
that release
inflowefficiency
sediment
reaches
had 100%
insufficient in 2037,
space the
to reservoir
deposit. storage
In other capacity
words, will
the no longer
reservoir change.
Based on the results, the active storage, the ultimate capacity, and sediment release to
trap ability is reduced due the
efficiency
Basedstorage
declining on the capacity
results, the activebystorage,
caused sedimentthe accumulation.
ultimate capacity, and sediment
Finally, when the release
releaseefficiency
efficiency
can be determined after experimental tests. The relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and the trap
can be determined
reaches 100% in 2037, after
theexperimental tests. capacity
reservoir storage The relationship of the capacity
will no longer change. inflow ratio and the trap
efficiency will also
efficiency be developed
will also be developed bybyscale
scalemodel
modeltests of the
tests of theWushe
WusheReservoir.
Reservoir.
Based on the results, the active storage, the ultimate capacity, and sediment release efficiency
can be determined after experimental tests. The relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and the trap
100
efficiency will also be developed
2013by scale model tests of the Wushe Reservoir.
90
2016
(%)

80
100
2019
2013
Release Efficiency

70
90
2022
2016
60
(%)

80
2025
2019
Efficiency

50
70
2028
2022
40
60
2031
2025
Sediment

30
50
Sediment Release

2034
20 2028
40 2037
10 2031
30
0 2034
20
0 2037 10 20 30 40 50 60
10 Time (min)

0
Figure 7. Sediment release
0 efficiency
10 from202013 to 30
2037 as computed
40 from measurements
50 60 in the
Figure 7. Sediment release efficiency from 2013Time
to 2037
(min)
as computed from measurements in the
physical model.
physical model.
Figure 7. Sediment release efficiency from 2013 to 2037 as computed from measurements in the
4. Discussion
physical model.
4. DiscussionFirst, the ultimate depositional pattern and reservoir capacity will be discussed. Next, the annual
sediment
4. Discussion
First, release efficiency
the ultimate depositional and remaining
pattern and storage are presented
reservoir capacityinwill relation to the trapNext,
be discussed. efficiency.
the annual
Finally, most important is the comparison of Brune’s [12] and Siyam’s [13] method and the physical
sediment First,
release efficiency and remaining storage are presented in relation
the ultimate depositional pattern and reservoir capacity will be discussed. Next, the annual to the trap efficiency.
model result.
Finally, most important
sediment release is the comparison
efficiency and remaining of storage
Brune’sare [12] and Siyam’s [13] method andefficiency.
the physical
Figure 8 shows the ultimate depositional pattern ofpresented
the WusheinReservoir.
relation to
In the
the trap
year 2037, the
modelFinally,
result. most important is the comparison of Brune’s [12] and Siyam’s [13] method
bed elevation reaches close to 999 m, which equals that of the threshold of the spillway. Although and the physical
model
outlet result.
Figure 8works
shows canthe
be ultimate
operated,depositional
the development pattern of the Wushe
of deposition of the Reservoir.
Wushe Reservoir In thehas
year 2037, the
reached a bed
elevation Figure
reaches
balance. 8 shows
close
In other the
to 999
words, ultimate
them, depositional
whichofequals
amount pattern of
that of the
inflow sediment the Wushe
threshold
will Reservoir.
equal thatof of the In the
spillway.
the outflow year 2037,
Although
sediment, the
and outlet
worksbedcanelevation
the flow pattern
be operated,reaches
willtheclose
be to 999
similar m, which
to the
development shallow equals
water that
of deposition of of
flow. the
When
the threshold
Wushe of the
the capacity
Reservoir spillway.
reduces year Although
has reachedby year,
a balance.
outlet works storage
can be operated, thedecrease
development ofmillion
deposition of the Wushewith Reservoir has reached
thewords,
In other ultimate the amountcapacity will
of inflow sedimentto 3.96
will equalmthat3. Compared
of the outflow the sediment,
original design,
andthethea flow
balance. In other words, the amount of inflow sediment will equal that of the outflow sediment, and
patternremaining storage to
will be similar is only 2.66% and
the shallow will be
water located
flow. Whenjustthe
above the tunnel
capacity spillway.
reduces year by year, the ultimate
the flow pattern will be similar to the shallow 3water flow. When the capacity reduces year by year,
storage capacity will decrease to 3.96 million m . Compared with the original design, the remaining
the ultimate storage capacity will decrease to 3.96 million m3. Compared with the original design, the
storage is only 2.66%
remaining storageand will2.66%
is only be located
and willjust
be above
locatedthejusttunnel
above the spillway.
tunnel spillway.

Figure 8. Ultimate depositional pattern of the Wushe Reservoir.

Figure 9 shows the remaining storage of the Wushe Reservoir. The x-axis represents the time in
years. The y-axis on Figure
the left8.represents the sediment
Ultimate depositional release
pattern of theefficiency, and the y-axis on the right
Wushe Reservoir.
Figure 8.
represents the remaining Ultimate
storage. Thisdepositional pattern the
research compares of the Wushe Reservoir.
relationship between release efficiency
and Figure
remaining storage
9 shows theand finds that
remaining the critical
storage of the point
Wushe is Reservoir.
the year 2025.TheIn the Wushe
x-axis Reservoir,
represents the timethein
high sedimentation
Figure
years. 9 shows
The onrate
y-axis the period
remaining
the willstorage
be from
left represents 2010
theof to Wushe
the
sediment2024. TheReservoir.
release efficiency increases
efficiency,The from
andx-axis
the 26.5%
ontothe
represents
y-axis 48.4%
the time
right
represents
in years. the remaining
The y-axis storage.
on the left This research
represents compares
the sediment the relationship
release efficiency,between
and therelease
y-axisefficiency
on the right
represents the remaining storage. This research compares the relationship between Reservoir,
and remaining storage and finds that the critical point is the year 2025. In the Wushe the
release efficiency
high sedimentation rate period will be from 2010 to 2024. The efficiency increases from 26.5% to
and remaining storage and finds that the critical point is the year 2025. In the Wushe Reservoir, the high48.4%
sedimentation rate period will be from 2010 to 2024. The efficiency increases from 26.5% to 48.4% to
Water 2018, 10, 352 11 of 13

Water 2018, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 13

have the increment of 21.9%. The annual amount of deposition reaches 2.68 million m3 . By contrast,
to have
the time seriesthefrom
increment
2025 of to21.9%. The annual
2037 can be calledamount of deposition
the high sediment reaches 2.68period.
release million m 3. By contrast,
During this period,
the time series from 2025 to 2037 can be called the high sediment release period. During this period,
the release efficiency
Water 2018, 10, x FOR will increase significantly from 51.9% to 100.0%. In addition, the demarcation
PEER REVIEW 11 of 13
the release efficiency will increase significantly from 51.9% to 100.0%. In addition, the demarcation
point can be determined at year 2025, and the disparity rate between the release efficiency of 2010 to
point
to havecan
thebeincrement
determined at yearThe
of 21.9%. 2025, and the
annual disparity
amount rate between
of deposition the 2.68
reaches release efficiency
million m3. Byofcontrast,
2010 to
2024 and
2024 that
andof 2025
that to 2037
offrom
2025 is nearly
to 2037 2.2 times.
is nearly Further, the
the investigation ofofthe
thetrap
trap characteristics in
the time series 2025 to 2037 can be2.2 times.
called Further,
the investigation
high sediment release period. Duringcharacteristics
this period,
Taiwaninreservoirs is presented
Taiwan reservoirs below.
is presented below.
the release efficiency will increase significantly from 51.9% to 100.0%. In addition, the demarcation
point can be determined at year 2025, and the disparity rate between the release efficiency of 2010 to
100 6000
2024 and that of 2025 to 2037 is nearly 2.2 times.
Sediment Further, the investigation of the trap characteristics
Release Efficiency
in Taiwan reservoirs is presented below. 5000 Remaining Storage
(%)Efficiency (%)

(104 m3)
80
100 6000
4000
Sediment Release Efficiency

(104 mStorage
48.4
Remaining Storage 5000
60 3000
Release

(2024)

3)
80
Efficiency

Remaining
4000
2000
Sediment

Remaining Storage
40 26.5 48.4
60 3000
Sediment Release

(2011) (2024) 1000

2000
20 0
40 2010 26.5 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
(2011) Time (year)
(Year) 1000

Figure 9. Annual20sediment release efficiency and remaining storage of the

0 Wushe Reservoir.
Figure 9. Annual sediment
2010 release
2015 efficiency
2020 and remaining
2025 2030 storage
2035 of the Wushe Reservoir.
2040
Time (year)
(Year)
Reduced deposition after 2025 appears to be due to increased water velocities and
Reduced deposition
transformation from after
3D to 2025
2D appears
flow withinto be
the due to increased
diminishing
Figure 9. Annual sediment release efficiency and remaining
open
storagewater
of thevelocities
water portion ofand
the transformation
Wushe Reservoir.
reservoir.
from 3DSediment
to 2D isflowmorewithin
efficiently
thetransported
diminishing through
openthe waterreservoir due to
portion of both of these factors.
the reservoir. Sediment is more
efficiently Next,
Reducedto extend
transported the applicability
deposition
through after of this
2025
the reservoir study,
appears
due totothe
both Shimen
be due
of Reservoir
to factors.
these and the
increased Tzengwen
water Reservoir
velocities and
have also been adopted
transformation from 3D for
to comparison.
2D flow Thethe
within relationship
diminishing of the
open capacity
water inflow
portion ratio
of andreservoir.
the the trap
Next, to extend the applicability of this study, the Shimen Reservoir and the Tzengwen Reservoir
efficiency
Sediment is is shown in Figure transported
more efficiently 10. The results show the
through thatreservoir
Siyam’s [13] does notof match
thesethe trap efficiency
have also beenfrom
obtained
adopted for comparison.
the physical model and
The relationship ofduethetocapacity
both factors.
inflow ratio and the trap
Next, to extend the applicability of the
thisobserved
study, thedata, thusReservoir
Shimen being less andapplicable here. However,
the Tzengwen Reservoir
efficiency
the is shown in Figure 10. The results show that Siyam’s [13] does not match the trap efficiency
havethree
also reservoirs
been adopted present
for an approximate
comparison. Thesimilarity
relationship withofBrune’s [12], while
the capacity inflowthe capacity
ratio and the inflow
trap
obtained
ratiofrom
was the physical
between 0.12 model
and 0.5. and
The the
last observed
and most data,
important thus being
result was less
that
efficiency is shown in Figure 10. The results show that Siyam’s [13] does not match the trap efficiency applicable
the Shimen here. However,
Reservoir
the three reservoirs
represented
obtained from present
thethe
same anmodel
trapping
physical approximate
characteristics similarity
and the observedas thosedata,with
of the Brune’s
thus Wushe
being less [12],
Reservoir,while
applicable thethe
while
here. capacity
capacityinflow
However,
inflow
ratio was
the three ratio
between was smaller
0.12 and
reservoirs present than 0.12.
0.5.anThe The findings
last and similarity
approximate prove
most important that this
with Brune’s study
result validates
was
[12], thatthe
while Brune’s
thecapacity
Shimen[12] and
Reservoir
inflow
further
ratio was
represented discovers
thebetween the sediment
0.12 and 0.5.
same trapping trap characteristics
The last and most
characteristics of the Wushe
important
as those Reservoir
of theresultWushe and the
was Reservoir, Shimen
that the Shimen whileReservoir.
Reservoir
the capacity
When the trap
represented efficiency
the same of the Wushe
trapping Reservoirasreaches
characteristics those 48.1%,
of the the modification
Wushe Reservoir, iswhile
proposedthe starting
capacity
inflow ratio was smaller than 0.12. The findings prove that this study validates Brune’s [12] and further
with
inflow the demarcation point in 0.12.
2025.TheIt can be more appropriately applied to the Brune’s
other reservoirs,
discovers theratio was smaller
sediment than
trap characteristics findings prove
of the Wushe that this study
Reservoir andvalidates
the Shimen [12] andWhen
Reservoir.
especially for the range of capacity inflow ratio between 0.01 and 0.1.
further discovers the sediment trap characteristics of the Wushe Reservoir and the Shimen Reservoir.
the trap efficiency of the Wushe Reservoir reaches 48.1%, the modification is proposed starting with
When the trap efficiency of the Wushe Reservoir reaches 48.1%, the modification is proposed starting
the demarcation 100
point in 2025. It can be more appropriately applied to the other reservoirs, especially
with the demarcation point inWushe_experiment
2025. It can be more appropriately applied to the other reservoirs,
90 Shimen_observed
for theespecially
range offor
capacity inflow ratio
the range of capacity between
inflow ratio
Tzengwen_observed
0.01 and 0.1.
between 0.01 and 0.1.
80
Brune (1953)
70
100 Siyam (2005)
(%) trapped (%)

Wushe_experiment
(UpdatedofBrune
Modification
對數 BruneMethod)
60
90 Shimen_observed
Tzengwen_observed
50
80
Brune (1953)
40
70 Siyam (2005)
Sediment

(UpdatedofBrune
Modification
對數 BruneMethod)
30
60
Sediment trapped

20
50
10
40
0
30
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
20 Capacity inflow ratio (Capacity/Annual inflow)
10
0 Relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and the trap efficiency.
Figure 10.
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Capacity inflow ratio (Capacity/Annual inflow)

Figure 10. Relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and the trap efficiency.
Figure 10. Relationship of the capacity inflow ratio and the trap efficiency.
Water 2018, 10, 352 12 of 13

5. Conclusions
Reservoir sedimentation has been a highly discussed issue globally. To investigate the movement
pattern of reservoir sediment, we developed a physical model to investigate the sedimentation pattern
and implications for sediment trapping and release for the Wushe Reservoir. Typhoon events of a
single year were applied to verify the short-term depositional pattern. Furthermore, the recurring
hydrological events were used to predict longer-term, future sedimentation and trapping efficiency.
Additionally, the sediment release efficiency was measured to investigate the relationship of the
release efficiency and the reservoir storage capacity. A research study of high credibility (Brune [12]
and Siyam [13]) was selected to validate the effectiveness of the current research. These results are
concluded below.
The movement of the reservoir delta and the elevation of deposition were used to verify the
physical model in the specified scale. Model results closely matched the patterns of deposition
measured in the field. Hence, the model can properly simulate the sedimentation pattern in the
Wushe Reservoir, leading to the possibility of predicting its long-term depositional processes.
The reservoir delta moved toward the dam site every year. In other words, the reservoir capacity
reduced as a result. In the model simulations, by year 2037, the sedimentation reached the threshold
of the spillway of the dam. At this time, the model predicts that the difference between the bed
elevation and crest of the dam (1005 m) would be only 6 m. With such little storage capacity and
increased water velocities, in this condition, the sediment trapping efficiency is negligible, and nearly
all sediment entering the reservoir is transported downstream. In conclusion, the flow pattern of the
Wushe Reservoir will be transformed into a shallow water flow.
The cumulative sediment release efficiency increases gradually and slowly within the first 14 years
but significantly in the 15th year. Therefore, the demarcation point of the sediment release efficiency is
in 2025. As a result, the sediment release efficiency will increase nearly 2.2 times by comparing the two
time periods before and after that demarcation point.
Based on the physical model tests, we modified the conventional regression line of Brune for use
when the trapping efficiency falls within the range 48.1% to 0%. The modification of Brune’s method is
also found to be feasible for the range of capacity inflow ratio between 0.01 and 0.1, which should be
more suitable for estimating the long-term storage capacity of the Wushe Reservoir. This approach also
allows us to predict changes in trapping efficiency in other reservoirs throughout Taiwan. The Shimen
Reservoir and the Tzengwen Reservoir, the important reservoirs in the north and south of Taiwan,
show good agreement with predictions using this formula. In other words, this method can be used to
predict their reservoir sedimentation processes, followed by an investigation into the release strategy
to approach the goal of sustainable reservoir development.

Acknowledgments: The facilities of physical model experiments for this study were provided by Hydrotech
Research Institute, National Taiwan University. This research was partially funded by the Taiwan Power Company
and Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST 106-2917-1-002-013, MOST 105-2221-E-002-063-MY3). The authors
gratefully acknowledge the support.
Author Contributions: Cheng-Chia Huang was responsible for performing the physical model, analyzing the
data, and writing the article. Jihn-Sung Lai was responsible for inspecting correctness of the methodology.
Fong-Zuo Lee was responsible for checking the results of the experiment and analyses. Yih-Chi Tan was responsible
for proofreading the whole article.
Conflicts of Interest: There is no conflict of interest.

References
1. Wisser, D.; Frolking, S.; Hagen, S.; Bierkens, F.P.M. Beyond peak reservoir storage? A global estimate of
declining water storage capacity in large reservoirs. Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49, 5732–5739. [CrossRef]
2. Smith, W.O.; Vetter, C.P.; Cummings, G.B. Comprehensive Survey of Sedimentation in Lake Mead, 1948–1949;
United States Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1960.
3. Ren, Z.; Ning, Q. Lecture Notes of the Training Course on Reservoir Sedimentation; IRTCES: Beijing, China, 1985.
Water 2018, 10, 352 13 of 13

4. Schmidt, J.C.; Wilcock, P.R. Metrics for assessing the downstream effects of dams. Water Resour. Res. 2008, 44.
[CrossRef]
5. Batuca, D.G.; Jordaan, J.M. Silting and Desilting of Reservoirs; A.A. Balkema: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2000.
6. Kondolf, G.M.; Rubin, Z.K.; Minear, J.T. Dams on the Mekong: Cumulative sediment starvation. Water Resour. Res.
2014, 50, 5158–5169. [CrossRef]
7. Sumi, T.; Okano, M.; Takata, Y. Reservoir sedimentation management with bypass tunnel in Japan. In Proceedings
of the Ninth International Symposium on River Sedimentation, Yichang, China, 18–21 October 2004.
8. Yu, G.-H. The essentiality of water resource development in Taiwan. J. Taiwan Water Conserv. 2016, 64, 1–8.
9. Chen, C.-N.; Tsai, C.-H.; Tsai, C.-T. Simulation of sediment yield from watershed by physiographic soil
erosion-deposition model. J. Hydrol. 2006, 327, 293–303. [CrossRef]
10. Chen, C.-N.; Tsai, C.-H. Estimating sediment flushing efficiency of a shaft spillway pipe and bed evolution
in a reservoir. Water 2017, 9, 924. [CrossRef]
11. Morris, G.L.; Fan, J. Reservoir Sedimentation Handbook: Design and Management of Dams, Reservoirs,
and Watersheds for Sustainable Use; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2010.
12. Brune, G.M. Trap efficiency of reservoirs. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 1953, 34, 407–418. [CrossRef]
13. Siyam, A.M. Assessment of the current state of the Nile Basin reservoir sedimentation problems. In Nail
Basin Capacity Building Network (NBCBN); River Morphology Research Cluster: Khartoum, Sudan, 2005.
14. US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center. Scour and deposition in rivers and reservoirs.
In Scour and Deposition in Rivers and Reservoirs, User’s Manual; US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic
Engineering Center: Davis, CA, USA, 1993.
15. Nils, R.B.O. Two-dimensional numerical modelling of flushing processes in water reservoirs. J. Hydraul. Res.
1999, 37, 3–16.
16. Gessler, D.; Hall, B.; Spasojevic, M.; Holly, F.; Pourtaheri, H.; Raphelt, N. Application of 3D mobile bed,
hydrodynamic model. J. Hydraul. Eng. 1999, 125, 737–749. [CrossRef]
17. Lai, S.Y.-J.; Capart, H. Reservoir infill by hyperpycnal deltas over bedrock. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2009, 36.
[CrossRef]
18. Lai, J.-S.; Chang, F.-J. Physical modeling of hydraulic desiltation in Tapu Reservoir. Int. J. Sediment Res. 2001,
16, 363–379.
19. Sinotech Engineering Consultants. Applicability Research of Numerical and Physical Model-Based Sedimentation
Improvement in Sun-Moon Lake; Taiwan Power Company: Taipei, Taiwan, 2013.
20. Wu, C.-H. A Study on Flood-Induced Sediment Transport and Its Sluicing Methods in a Reservoir. Ph.D.
Thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City, Taiwan, 2015.
21. Water Resources Planning Institute. Hydraulic Model Studies on the Functions and Operations of Silting Prevention
in A-Kung-Tien Reservoir; Water Resources Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs: Taichung, Taiwan, 2003.
22. Huang, C.-C.; Lee, F.-Z.; Khadeeda, S.H.; Liao, Y.-J.; Lai, J.-S.; Tsung, S.-C.; Tan, Y.-C. Long-term evolution of
sedimentation in a reservoir. J. Taiwan Water Conserv. 2015, 63, 24–32.
23. Sinotech Engineering Consultants. Applicability Research of Sedimentation Improvement of Wushe Reservoir;
Taiwan Power Company: Taipei, Taiwan, 2010.
24. Shyu, J.B.H.; Chuang, Y.-R.; Chen, Y.-L.; Lee, Y.-R.; Cheng, C.-T. A new on-land seismogenic structure
source database from the Taiwan Earthquake Model (TEM) project for seismic hazard analysis of Taiwan.
Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci. 2016, 27, 311–323. [CrossRef]
25. Water Resources Agency. Analysis of Storm Rainfall and Flood Discharge of Typhoon Morakot; Terrestrial, Ministry
of Economic Affairs: Taichung, Taiwan, 2009.
26. Yanties, B.J.; Tucker, G.E.; Hsu, H.-L.; Chen, C.-C.; Chen, Y.-G.; Mueller, K.J. The influence of sediment
cover variability on long-term river incision rates: An example from the Peikang River, central Taiwan.
J. Geophys. Res. 2011, 116. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).