Probability assessment of the Kyiv reservoir overflow
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32347/2411-4049.2021.4.73-99Keywords:
annual exeedance probability, failure and fault tree method, floods, forecasting, fuzzy modelling, hydrological safety, Kyiv reservoir overflowAbstract
Reservoirs are an integral part of the world’s hydraulic infrastructure and form the basis of modern water management in most countries including Ukraine. However, reservoirs are also sources of an essential danger to the environment, infrastructure, and population. The potential danger and risks to the population living near reservoirs especially downstream may be no less than to people living near nuclear facilities or chemical plants, with which experts and the public usually associate problems of technogenic safety. Moreover, statistics show that about a third of all accidents on dams and levees occurred due to overflow of reservoirs when upstream water levels exceeded allowable values.
There are 1103 reservoirs in Ukraine with a total water volume of about 55,500 million m3. The Kyiv reservoir is the third one by volume and water surface area in the country. In addition, the reservoir is created by one of the longest dams in the world; the total dam length of the reservoir reaches 70 km.
Admittedly, the overflow of a reservoir can be caused by an extreme flood with inflow parameters exceeding the capacity of hydraulic structures. The challenge is that the capacity of water passage structures may be insufficient both due to the inaccuracy of the hydrological forecast and because of faults, poor functioning, or failures of the hydraulic structures during a design flood. In particular, long-term forecasts of floodwater discharges maxima of the inflow into the Kyiv reservoir based on using various probability distribution functions show the essential divergence of the obtained results. As well, as practice shows, the unavailability of some water passage tracts of the reservoir can reach several months in a year. Sometimes repair works were performed even during floods.
The aim of the study consisted of probabilistic forecasting the emergency situation on the Kyiv reservoir as a result of its uncontrolled overflow through the possible inaccuracy of the hydrological forecast concerning an actual water inflow into the reservoir and due to failures of water passage hydraulic structures during floods. To achieve the study aim the following tasks were solved: (1) there was proposed a method of hydrological forecasting, which allows taking into account results of long-term forecasts of floodwater discharges maxima based on using various probability distribution functions and fuzzy modelling; (2) there was performed hydrological forecasting of floodwater discharges maxima of the Dnieper affecting the condition of the Kyiv reservoir based on the actual data collected the Vyshgorod water level gauge; (3) there was assessed the probability of the Kyiv reservoir overflow taking into account the occurrence possibility of a shortage of the capacity of water passage structures with using the failure and fault tree method. Totally, six incompatible hypothetical emergency situations at the Kyiv reservoir were considered. The calculations showed the total probability of the Kyiv reservoir overflow equal to 3.84*10–4 (year–1), which is acceptable to guarantee the hydrological safety of infrastructure and the population.
References
Valuing Water. The United Nations World Water Development Report 2021. UNESCO. Paris, France. Available from https://www.unwater.org/publications/un-world-water-development-report-2021/.
Tadda, M.A., Ahsan, A., Imteaz, M., Shitu, A., Danhassan, U.A., and Muhammad, A.I. (2020). Operation and Maintenance of Hydraulic Structures. Hydraulic Structures – Theory and Applications. IntechOpen; DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.91949. Available from https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/72208.
Muller, M., Biswas, A., Martin-Hurtado, R. and Tortajada, C. (2015). Built infrastructure is essential. Science, Vol. 349, No. 6248, 585–586; DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.1126/science.aac7606.
Ukraine. Water resources. FAO of the UN. Available from http://www.fao.org/NR/water/aquastat/countries_regions/Profile_segments/UKR-WR_eng.stm.
Khilchevskyi, V., Grebin, V., Zabokrytska, M., Zhovnir, V., Bolbot, H. & Plichko, L. (2020). Hydrographic characteristic of ponds distribution in Ukraine – Basin and regional features. Journal of Water and Land Development. No. 46 (VII–IX), 140–145; DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.24425/jwld.2020.134206.
World Commission on Dams. (2000). Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-Making. An Overview. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, UK, 40 p. Available from https://www.rivernet.org/general/wcd/wcd_overview_english.pdf.
Saxena, K.R., and Sharma, V.M. (2005). Dams: Incidents and Accidents. A.A. BALKEMA PUBLISHERS. Leiden. London. New York. Philadelphia. Singapore, 228 p.
Costa, J.E. (1985). Floods from Dam Failures. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-560, Denver, Colorado, 54 p.
Fread, D.L. (1996). Dam-Breach Floods. In: Singh, V.P. (eds). Hydrology of Disasters. Water Science and Technology Library, Vol. 24. Springer, Dordrecht; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8680-1_5.
Pierce, M.W., Thornton, C.I., and Abt, S.R. (2010). Predicting Peak Outflow from Breached Embankment Dams. J. Hydrology Eng, 15, 338–349.
Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2011). Forecasting accidents on dams in the tasks of assessment and ensuring their reliability and safety. Hydropower of Ukraine, № 3–4, 52-60. (in Ukrainian).
Dams Sector. Estimating Loss of Life for Dam Failure Scenarios. (2011). Homeland Security, 94 p. Available from https://damsafety.org/sites/default/files/files/DamsSectorConsequenceEstimation_LossOfLife.pdf.
Bellendir, E.N., Stefanyshyn, D.V., Filippova, E.A. (2012). Failure risk assessment and its role in safety management at the design. Proc. International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD), 24th Congress, Q. 93, R.5, Kyoto: Japan, 68–84.
Aureli, F., Maranzoni, A., Petaccia, G. (2021). Review of Historical Dam-Break Events and Laboratory Tests on Real Topography for the Validation of Numerical Models. Water, 13, 1968; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/w13141968.
Veksler, A.B., Ivashintsov, D.A., and Stefanishin, D.V. (2002). Reliability, social and environmental safety of hydraulic structures: risk assessment and decision making. St. Petersburg: VNIIG B.E. Vedeneeva, 591 p. (in Russian).
Lessons from historical dam incidents. Project: SC080046/R1. Environment Agency, Horizon House, Bristol, 160 p. Available from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603369e7e90e07660cc43890/_Lessons_from_Historical_Dam_Incidents_Technical_Report.pdf.
Stefanishin D.V. (2008). Breakdown forecast of the designing and constructing dams using the statistical analysis results of the previous breakdowns. Izvestiya B.E. Vedeneev VNIIG, V. 251, 3–9. (in Russian).
Toledo, M.Á., Morán, R., and Oñate, E. (Eds.).(2015). Dam Protections against Overtopping and Accidental Leakage (1st ed.). CRC Press, London, 328 p.; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b18292.
Zhang, L.M., Xu, Y. and Jia, J.S. (2009). Analysis of earth dam failures: A database approach. Georisk: Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards, 3:3, 184–189; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17499510902831759.
Ukrhydroenergo. Kyiv HPP. Available from https://uhe.gov.ua/filiyi/filiya_kaskad_kyyivskykh_hes_i_haes/kyyivska_hes (in Ukrainian).
River basin management plan for the Upper Dnieper pilot basin of Ukraine. (2015). Draft. Contract No. 2011/279-666. Prepared by UNENGO “MAMA-86”. Kyiv, 115 p. Available from http://blacksea-riverbasins.net/sites/default/files/RBMP_Upper%20Dnieper_UA_EN_final_1.pdf.
Shevchuk, S.A., Vishnevsky, V.I., Shevchenko, I.A., and Kozytsky, O.M. (2019). Research of water objects of Ukraine using the data of remote sensing of the Earth. Land reclamation and water management, No 2, 146–156; DOI: https://doi.org/rn.3rn73/mivg201902-198. (in Ukrainian).
Obodovskiy, O.G., Mechkin, K.R. (2018). The Dnieper Cascade as part of International Waterway E40. Geog. and tourism, Vol. 6, No. 1, 69–75; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1314030.
Zheleznyak, M., Blaylock, G., Gontier, G., and Konoplev, A. (1995). Modeling of radionuclide transfer in rivers and reservoirs: validation study whithin the IAEACEC VAMP Programme. International Symposium on Environmental Impact of Radioactive Releases, IAEA, Vol. 8, Vienna, 330–331.
Kivva, S., Zheleznyak, M., Bezhenar, R., Pylypenko, O., Sorokin, M., and al. (2021). Modeling of major environmental risks for the Kyiv city, Ukraine from the Dnieper river waters – inundation of coastal areas and contamination by the radionuclides deposited in bottom sediments after the Chornobyl accident, EGU General Assembly 2021, online, 19–30 Apr., EGU21-13038, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-13038, 2021.
Jacyk, A.V., Yakovlev, Ye.O., Osadchuk, V.O. (2002). On the question of the descent of the Kyiv reservoir. Kyiv, Oriiany, 52 p. (in Ukrainian).
Wieland, M., Mueller, R. (2009). Dam safety, emergency actions plans and water alarm systems. International Water Power & Dam Construction. January, 34–38.
Rogers, J.D. (2002). Dams and disasters: a brief overview of dam building triumphs and tragedies in California’s past. Berkeley, University of California, 158 p. Available from https://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/dams_of_ca/Dams-of-California-Presentation-2012.pdf.
Serra-Llobet, A., Tàbara, J.D., and Sauri, D. (2013). The Tous dam disaster of 1982 and the origins of integrated flood risk management in Spain. Nat Hazards 65, 1981–1998; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0458-0.
Taum Sauk Pumped Storage Project (No. P-2277). (2006). Dam Breach Incident. Incident Description. FERC Staff Report. Available from http://www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/safety/projects/taum-sauk/staff-rpt.asp.
Stefanishin, D.V., Romanchuk, E.G. (2011). Probabilistic modeling of hypothetical scenarios of two atypical accidents at hydropower facilities in case of automation failures. Prevention of accidents of buildings and structures. Available from https://pamag.ru/src/vmgs-heo/vmgs-heo.pdf. (in Russian).
Potashnik, S.I. (1986). Cascade of Sredne Dnieper HPPs: Development and Operation Experience. Moscow, Energoatomizdat, 144 p. (in Russian).
Independent forensic team report Oroville dam spillway incident. (2018), 584 p. Available from https://damsafety.org/sites/default/files/files/Independent%20Forensic%20Team%20Report%20Final%2001-05-18.pdf.
Koskinas, A., Tegos, A., Tsira, P., Dimitriadis, P., Iliopoulou, T., Papanicolaou, P., Koutsoyiannis, D., and Williamson, T. (2019). Insights into the Oroville Dam 2017 Spillway Incident. Geosciences, 9, 37; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010037.
Salmon, G.M., and Hartford, D.N.D. (1995). Risk analysis for dam safety. Part I, II. Int. Water Power and Dam Construction. March, 42–47.
Lagerholm, S. (1996). Safety and reliability of spillway gates. Repair and upgrading of dams Symposium, Stockholm, 362–373.
Johansen, P.M., Vick, S.G., and Rikartsen, C. (1997). Risk analyses of three Norwegian rockfill dams. Hydropower’97, Balkema Rotterdam, 431–442.
Lecornu, J. (1998). Dam Safety: from the Engineer’s Duty to Risk Management. The International Journal on Hydropower & Dams, Vol. 5, 43–56.
Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2008). Assessment of accident risks to support safety of the Boureya dam. Proc. of Int. Scientific School “Modelling and Analysis of Safety and Risk in Complex Systems”, Saint-Petersburg, 377–382.
Romanchuk, K.G., and Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2015). Probabilistic predicting of the emergencies on waterworks due to failures of spillway capacity of weirs. Environmental safety and natural resources, № 4 (20), 70–79. (in Ukrainian).
Stefanyshyn, D., Benatov, D. Application of a logical-probabilistic method of failure and fault trees for predicting emergency situations at pressure hydraulic facilities (The case of Kakhovka hydroelectric complex). (2020). Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4/2 (106), 55–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2020.208467.
Blöschl, G., Bierkens, M.F.P., Chambel, A., Cudennec, Ch., Destouni, G., Fiori, A., Kirchner, J.W., McDonnell, J. J., Savenije, H. H.G., Sivapalan, M., Stumpp, Ch., Toth, E., Volpi, E., and al. (2019) Twenty-three unsolved problems in hydrology (UPH) – a community perspective. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 64:10, 1141-1158; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2019.1620507.
Tarasova, L., Merzl, R., Kiss, A., Basso, S., Blöschl, G., Merz, B., Alberto Viglione, A., Plötner, S., and al. (2019). Causative classification of river flood events. WIREs Water published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 23 p; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1353.
Chow, Y.T., Maidment, D.R., and Mays, L.W. (1988). Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 294 p.
Handbook of Engineering Hydrology. Fundamentals and Applications. (2014). Edited by Saeid Eslamian. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, 624 p.
Flood flow frequency. (1982). Guidelines for determining. Bull. #17B of the Hydrology Subcommitee. U.S. Department of the Interior, Reston, Virginia, 194 p.
Extreme Hydrological Events: New Concepts for Security (NATO Science Series: IV: Earth and Environmental Sciences). (2007). Paperback: Editors: O. F. Vasiliev, P. H. A. J. M. van Gelder, E. J. Plate, M. V. Bolgov. Springer; 1 edition, 480 p. Available from https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-5741-0.
Koutsoyiannis, D. (2008). Probability and statistics for geophysical processes. National Tech. University of Athens. Available from https://www.itia.ntua.gr/en/docinfo/1322/.
Apel, H., Merz, B., and Thieken, A.H. (2008). Quantification of uncertainties in flood risk assessments. International Journal of River Basin Management, 6, 2, 149–162.
Review of Applied European Flood Frequency Analysis Methods. (2012). Editors: Castellarin, A., Kohnová, S., Gaál, L., Fleig, A., Salinas, J.L., Toumazis, A., and al. Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, 130 p. Available from https://www.academia.edu/2172432/Review_of_applied-statistical_methods_for_flood-frequency_analysis_in_Europe.
Madsen, H., Lawrence, D., Lang, M., Martinkova, M., and Kjeldsen, T.R. (2012). A Review of Applied Methods in Europe for Flood Frequency Analysis in a Changing Environment. [Research Report] irstea, 189 p. Available from https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02597863/document.
Hrachowitz, M., and P. Clark, M. (2017). HESS Opinions: The complementary merits of competing modelling philosophies in hydrology. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3953–3973; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3953-2017
Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2018). On the use of the type I Gumbel distribution to assess risks given floods. Mathematical modeling in economy, №1, 74–83.
Korbutiak, V., Stefanyshyn, D., Lahodniuk, O., and Lahodniuk, A. (2020). The combined approach to solving issues of the flood hazard assessment using water gauge records and spatial data. Acta Sci. Pol. Architectura 19 (1), 111–118; DOI: https://doi.org/10.22630/ASPA.2020.19.1.12.
DBN B.2.4-3: 2010. (2010). Hydrotechnical, energy and reclamation systems and structures, underground mining. Substantive provisions, Kyiv, 37 p. (in Ukrainian).
Andres, M. (2000). Design flood definition and reservoir characteristics. Seasonal flood storage influence. The use of risk analysis to support dam safety decisions and management. Trans. of the 20-th Int. Congress on Large Dams, Vol. 1, Q. 76, R.26, Beijing-China, 387–403.
Loukola, E., and Maijala, T. (1998). New dam safety guidelines in Finland. In L. Berga (ed.), Dam Safety; Proc. Intern. Symp., Barcelona, 17-19 June, Rotterdam, Balkema.
Small dams. Guidelines for design, construction and monitoring. (2002). Coordination by G. Degoutte. French Committee on Large Dams, 179 p. Available from https://www.barrages-cfbr.eu/IMG/pdf/pb2002-en.pdf.
Ren, M., He, X., Kan, G., Wang, F., Zhang, H., Li, H., Cao, D., Wang, H., Sun, D., Jiang, X., Wang, G., and Zhang, Z. (2017). A Comparison of Flood Control Standards for Reservoir Engineering for Different Countries. Water, 9, 152; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/w9030152.
Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2008). Application of risk analysis to support safety of dams and flooded territories against floods. Proc. of Int. Scientific School “Modelling and Analysis of Safety and Risk in Complex Systems”. June 24–28, Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 371–376.
Dnipro waterway Ukraine. (2016). Engineering evaluation report. Final, 175 p. Available from https://mtu.gov.ua/files/USACEreport.pdf.
Stefanyshyn, D.V., and Shtilman, V.B. (2012). Towards assessing the probability of water overflow across the dam crest. Magazine of Civil Engineering, № 9, 70–78; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5862/MCE.35.9. (in Russian).
Stefanyshyna-Gavryliuk, Yu.D., and Stefanyshyn, D.V. (2013). The use of fuzzy measure to overcome the uncertainty of long-term predictions based on extrapolations. System Research and Information Technologies, № 4, 99–110; Available at https://ela.kpi.ua/handle/123456789/7021. (in Ukrainian).
Zimmermann, H.-J. (2001). Fuzzy set Theory and its applications. Springer, 4-th edition, 544 p.
Nash, J.E., and Sutcliffe, J.V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10 (3), 282–290.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Dmytro V. Stefanyshyn
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The journal «Environmental safety and natural resources» works under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
The licensing policy is compatible with the overwhelming majority of open access and archiving policies.
