考虑梯级坝级联溃决的生命损失评估与预警决策

doi:10.3799/dqkx.2025.160

考虑梯级坝级联溃决的生命损失评估与预警决策

doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2025.160

彭铭^1,2,
季思同^1,2,
孙蕊^1,2, ,,
朱艳³,
杨鸽⁴,
曹子君⁵,
白泽文^1,2

1. 同济大学土木防灾减灾全国重点实验室, 上海, 200092;
2. 同济大学土木工程学院地下建筑与工程系, 上海, 200092;
3. 中船第九设计研究院工程有限公司, 上海, 200063;
4. 中国电建集团华东勘测设计研究院有限公司, 杭州, 311122;
5. 西南交通大学智慧城市与交通学院, 成都, 611756

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金-联合基金重点项目(U23A2044)

国家自然科学基金-青年基金(42207238,42407242)

广西重点研发计划项目(桂科AB25069121)

详细信息

作者简介:
彭铭(1981—)，男，教授，主要从事地质灾害、溃坝机理、风险评估与决策研究。E-mail:pengming@tongji.edu.cn,ORCID:0000-0001-9134-4391

通讯作者:
孙蕊(1993—)，女，博士后，主要从事加筋土边坡动力响应及可靠度分析、地质灾害研究。E-mail:sr-tjut@tongji.edu.cn

中图分类号: P694
计量
- 文章访问数: 16
- HTML全文浏览量: 0
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2025-06-28
- 网络出版日期: 2025-09-08

Assessment of Life Loss and Early Warning Strategies under Cascading Failures of Cascade Dams

Ming Peng^1,2,
Sitong Ji^1,2,
Rui Sun^{1,2
, ,},
Yan Zhu³,
Ge Yang⁴,
Zijun Cao⁵,
Zewen Bai^1,2

1. State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China;
2. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China;
3. China Shipbuilding NDRI Engineering Co., Ltd, Shanghai 200063, China;
4. Power China Huadong Engineering Corporation Limited, Hangzhou 311122, China;
5. Southwest Jiaotong University, Smart City and Transportation College, Chengdu 611756, China

摘要

摘要: 梯级坝级联溃决引发的洪水放大效应显著提升下游生命风险，亟需系统化的风险评估与预警决策方法。本文构建了融合“洪水演进模拟-生命损失评估-预警决策”的分析框架。基于不同类型坝体的溃口参数与地形数据，采用二维水动力模型模拟级联溃决过程，引入HURAM模型量化不同风险区域生命损失率，并构建预警疏散时间与总疏散损失的响应关系，确定“最优”预警决策。以清江流域为例，模拟假设发生千年一遇洪水并诱发三座梯级坝级联溃决场景。结果表明，该方法框架能系统性评估级联溃决的生命损失风险与制定合理的预警决策，级联溃决显著放大洪峰流量，隔河岩（8.29%），高坝洲（47.05%），同时受上游坝体结构与“U”型河谷地形影响，坝前水位提升而溃决洪水流量削弱；级联溃决二维模型较一维模型更精细刻画风险区，生命损失风险提高约5.3%；在高坝洲溃坝前3.4小时启动预警，可使疏散总损失降至最低（约8.70亿元）。级联溃决放大效应受地形与坝体结构共同调控，生命损失率受水深等致灾因子的非线性影响显著增强，相应成果为梯级坝级联溃决灾害的风险评估与应急管理提供了可行路径与理论支撑。
- 梯级坝 /
- 级联溃决 /
- 生命损失评估 /
- 预警决策 /
- 洪水放大效应
Abstract: Cascading failures of cascade dams significantly amplify downstream life risk due to the flood magnification effect, highlighting the urgent need for a systematic framework for risk assessment and early warning decision-making. This study proposes an integrated analytical framework that couples flood evolution simulation, life loss estimation, and early warning optimization. A two-dimensional hydrodynamic model is employed to simulate cascading dam-break scenarios based on breach parameters of different dam types and high-resolution terrain data. The HURAM model is used to quantify life loss rates across varying risk zones. Furthermore, a response relationship between early warning lead time and total evacuation loss is established to identify the optimal warning strategy. Using the Qingjiang River Basin as a case study, a hypothetical scenario involving three sequential dam failures triggered by a 1-in-1000-year flood is simulated. The results demonstrate that the proposed framework enables comprehensive life loss risk assessment and informed early warning decisions under cascading failure conditions. Compared to single dam failure, cascading breaches increase peak flood discharges by 8.29% at Geheyan and 47.05% at Gaobazhou. However, due to the influence of upstream dam structures and U-shaped valley topography, local flood attenuation occurs despite upstream water level rise. The two-dimensional model captures terrain and velocity distribution more accurately, resulting in an approximately 5.3% increase in estimated life loss risk relative to the one-dimensional model. To minimize evacuation loss, the optimal early warning time is determined as 3.4 hours before Gaobazhou dam failure, reducing total economic loss to approximately 870 million CNY. The results highlight that the flood amplification effect is constrained by both terrain and dam structure, while life loss is highly sensitive to non-linear interactions with hazard parameters such as water depth. This study provides a practical approach and theoretical foundation for cascading dam failure risk management.
- Cascade dams /
- Cascading failure /
- Life loss assessment /
- Early warning decision-making /
- Flood magnification effect

HTML全文

参考文献(36)

[1]	Zhou,Y.,Guo,S.,Chang,F.J.,et al.,2018.Methodology that Improves Water Utilization and Hydropower Generation without Increasing Flood Risk in Mega Cascade Reservoirs.Energy,143:785-796. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.035
[2]	Mehta,A.M.,Weeks,C.S.,Tyquin,E.,2020.Towards Preparedness for Dam Failure: An Evidence Base for Risk Communication for Downstream Communities.International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction,50: 101820. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101820
[3]	Wang,T.,Li,Z.,Ge,W.,et al.,2022.Calculation of Dam Risk Probability of Cascade Reservoirs Considering Risk Transmission and Superposition.Journal of Hydrology, 609: 127768. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.127768
[4]	Wang,T.,Li,Z.,Ge,W.,et al,.2023.Risk Consequence Assessment of Dam Breach in Cascade Reservoirs Considering Risk Transmission and Superposition.Energy,265:126315. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.126315
[5]	Niu,Z.,Xu,W.,Li,N.,et al.,2012.Experimental Investigation of the Failure of Cascade Landslide Dams.Journal of Hydrodynamics,24(3):430-441. doi: 10.1016/S1001-6058(11)60264-3
[6]	Chen,H.Y.,Xu,W.L.,Deng,J,et al.,2014.Experimental Investigation of Pressure Load Exerted on A Downstream Dam by Dam-Break Flow.Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,140(2):199-207. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000743
[7]	Takayama,S.,Fujimoto,M.,Satofuka,Y.,2021.Amplification of Flood Discharge Caused by the Cascading Failure of Landslide Dams.International Journal of Sediment Research,36(3):430-438. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsrc.2020.10.007
[8]	Wu,W.,2016.Introduction to DLBreach-A Simplified Physically-based Dam/Levee Breach Model.Clarkson University, NY.
[9]	Dai,S.,He,Y.,Yang,J.,et al.,2020.Numerical Study of Cascading Dam-break Characteristics Using SWEs and RANS.Water Supply,20(1):348-360. doi: 10.2166/ws.2019.168
[10]	Santa Rita,L.C.S.,Oliveira,A.N.,Almeida,A.Q.,et al.,2023.Dam Safety in Sergipe: Jacarecica I and Jacarecica II hypothetical Cascade Dam-break Simulation.RBRH,28:e32. doi: 10.1590/2318-0331.282320230041
[11]	Ge,W.,Wang,X.,Li,Z.,et al,.2021.Interval Analysis of the Loss of Life Caused by Dam Failure.Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management,147(1):04020098. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001311
[12]	Jonkman,S.,Penning-Rowsell,E.,2008.Human Instability in Flood Flows.JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association,44(5):1208-18. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2008.00217.x
[13]	Peng,M.,Zhang,L.M.,2012a.Analysis of Human Risks Due to Dam-break Floods-part 1: A New Model Based on Bayesian Networks.Natural Hazards,64(1):903-33. doi: 10.1007/s11069-012-0275-5
[14]	Brazdova,M.,Riha,J.,2014.A Simple Model for the Estimation of the Number of Fatalities Due to Floods in Central Europe.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,14(7),1663-1676. doi: 10.5194/nhess-14-1663-2014
[15]	Zhu,Y.,Peng,M.,Zhang,P.,et al.,2021.Warning Decision-making for Landslide Dam Breaching Flood Using Influence Diagrams.Frontiers in Earth Science,9:679862. doi: 10.3389/feart.2021.679862
[16]	Xu,Y.,Zhang,L.M.,2009.Breaching Parameters for Earth and Rockfill Dams.Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,135(12):1957-1970. doi: 10.1007/s10346-011-0271-y
[17]	Syafri,R.R.,Hadi,M.P.,Suprayogi,S.,2020.Hydrodynamic Modelling of Juwana River Flooding Using HEC-RAS 2D.Conference Series:Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing,412(1):012028.
[18]	21-01816-0
[19]	23. doi: 10.1007/s11069-012-0336-9
[20]	Peng,M.,Zhang,L.,2013.Dynamic Decision Making for Dam-break Emergency Management-Part 1: Theoretical Framework.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,13(2):425-37. doi: 10.5194/nhess-13-425-2013
[21]	Peng,M.,Zhang,L.,2013.Dynamic Decision Making for Dam-break Emergency Management-Part 2: Application to Tangjiashan Landslide Dam Failure.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,13(2):439-54. doi: 10.5194/nhess-13-439-2013
[22]	周洪福,聂德新,王春山,2015.水电工程坝基玄武岩体波速与变形模量关系.地球科学(中国地质大学学报),40(11):1904-1912.
[23]	刘家宏,周晋军,王浩,2023.梯级水电枢纽群巨灾风险分析与防控研究综述.水利学报,54(1):34-44.
[24]	于子波,向衍,孟颖,等,2021.梯级水库连溃风险分析及洪水演进模拟.人民珠江,42(8):11-16.
[25]	崔鹏,王姣,王昊,等,2022.如何科学防控与预警巨灾风险?.地球科学,47(10):3897-3899.
[26]	王建中,孙万光,李晓军,等,2025.梯级水库心墙坝连溃过程数值模拟.中国农村水利水电,(04): 7-13.
[27]	杨泽文,吴兵兵,刘维明,等,2025.高能溃决洪水侵蚀机理与地貌效应研究进展.地球科学,50(02): 718-736.
[28]	许唯临,2013.梯级库群的连锁溃决.中国水利水电出版社,01.
[29]	周兴波,陈祖煜,黄跃飞,等,2015.特高坝及梯级水库群设计安全标准研究Ⅲ: 梯级土石坝连溃风险分析.水利学报,46(07):765-772.
[30]	郭新蕾,周兴波,夏庆福,等,2017.梯级水库群控制梯级极端工况泄洪安全分析.水利学报,48(10):1157-1166.
[31]	王霞,郑雄伟,陈志刚,2009.某梯级水库溃坝应急分析.水利规划与设计,(01):52-53+70.
[32]	马黎,田耘,陈灵淳,等,2024.梯级水库群溃坝洪水风险分析-以澜沧江上游为例.河南科学,42(02):157-164.
[33]	孟颖,唐玲玲,2022.考虑致灾后果的溃坝洪水风险评估与等级划分.长江科学院院报,39(10):61-65+96.
[34]	胡良明,张志飞,李仟,等,2018.梯级水库土石坝连溃模拟及风险分析.水力发电学报,37(07):65-73.
[35]	杨彦龙,沈海尧,黄维,2022.混凝土坝破坏模式及溃口几何参数探讨.大坝与安全,(03):1-9.
[36]	李雷,王仁钟,盛金保,等,2006.大坝风险评价与风险管理.中国水利水电出版社,192.

施引文献

资源附件(0)

访问统计

点击查看大图

计量

文章访问数: 16
HTML全文浏览量: 0
PDF下载量: 0
被引次数: 0

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

留言板

考虑梯级坝级联溃决的生命损失评估与预警决策

doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2025.160

作者简介:
彭铭(1981—)，男，教授，主要从事地质灾害、溃坝机理、风险评估与决策研究。E-mail:pengming@tongji.edu.cn,ORCID:0000-0001-9134-4391

通讯作者:
孙蕊(1993—)，女，博士后，主要从事加筋土边坡动力响应及可靠度分析、地质灾害研究。E-mail:sr-tjut@tongji.edu.cn

计量

Assessment of Life Loss and Early Warning Strategies under Cascading Failures of Cascade Dams

计量

目录

留言板

考虑梯级坝级联溃决的生命损失评估与预警决策

doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2025.160

作者简介: 彭铭(1981—)，男，教授，主要从事地质灾害、溃坝机理、风险评估与决策研究。E-mail:pengming@tongji.edu.cn,ORCID:0000-0001-9134-4391

通讯作者: 孙蕊(1993—)，女，博士后，主要从事加筋土边坡动力响应及可靠度分析、地质灾害研究。E-mail:sr-tjut@tongji.edu.cn

计量

出版历程

Assessment of Life Loss and Early Warning Strategies under Cascading Failures of Cascade Dams

计量

出版历程

目录

作者简介:
彭铭(1981—)，男，教授，主要从事地质灾害、溃坝机理、风险评估与决策研究。E-mail:pengming@tongji.edu.cn,ORCID:0000-0001-9134-4391

通讯作者:
孙蕊(1993—)，女，博士后，主要从事加筋土边坡动力响应及可靠度分析、地质灾害研究。E-mail:sr-tjut@tongji.edu.cn