Paper detail

Simulating the 1976 Teton Dam Failure using Geoclaw and HEC-RAS and comparing with Historical Observations

Dam failures occur worldwide, often from factors including aging structures, extreme hydrologic loading, and design oversights related to the changing climate. Understanding and mitigating risk to downstream inhabited areas require developing and improving low-cost high-fidelity tools, such as numerical models, which allow emergency managers to predict the consequences of dam failures better. Two-dimensional (2D) depth-averaged hydraulic models can provide valuable insights into the importance of breach parameters or downstream flow characteristics, but historical studies considering historic failures using real topographies are less common in literature. This study compares Geoclaw, a 2D hydraulic model with adaptive mesh refinement capabilities, to an industry-standard software HEC-RAS (Hydrologic Engineering Center - River Analysis System) using the 1976 Teton Dam failure as a case study. The suitability of Geoclaw for dam failure modeling is determined based on its capability to resolve inundation extent and flood wave arrival times. This study performs sensitivity analyses of the HEC-RAS model to compare an instantaneous dam breach assumption with a time-dependent breach formation for quantifying the model uncertainty. We find the 2D Geoclaw dam-break model results compare reasonably with historical gauge and field observational data and HEC-RAS results. The model demonstrates stability and relatively low computational costs. Our findings highlight opportunities for future work, with the Geoclaw software performance supporting continued studies to evaluate performance. Outcomes of this study will assist dam owners, floodplain managers, and emergency managers by providing an additional tool for estimating the impacts of dam failures to protect lives and infrastructure downstream.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.