1、 ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 122Sediment Dynamics upon Dam RemovalPrepared bythe Task Committee on Sediment Dynamics Post-Dam Removal ofthe Environmental and Water Resources Institute ofthe American Society of Civil EngineersEdited byAthanasios (Thanos) N. Papanicolaou, Ph.D
2、.Brian D. Barkdoll, Ph.D., P.E.Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataSediment dynamics upon dam removal / prepared by the Task Committee on Sediment Dynamics Post-Dam Removal of the Environmental and Water Resources Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers; edited by Athanasi
3、os (Thanos) N. Papanicolaou and Brian D. Barkdoll.p. cm. (ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice; no. 122)Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978-0-7844-1136-0 (alk. paper)1. Sediment transport. 2. Dam retirementEnvironmental aspects. I. Papanicolaou, Athanasios. II. Barkdol
4、l, Brian D. III. Environmental and Water Resources Institute (U.S.). Task Committee on Sediment Dynamics Post-Dam Removal.TC175.2.S346 2011627.122dc222011000280Published by American Society of Civil Engineers1801 Alexander Bell DriveReston, Virginia 20191www.pubs.asce.orgAny statements expressed in
5、these materials are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of ASCE, which takes no responsibility for any statement made herein. No reference made in this publication to any specifi c method, product, process, or service constitutes or implies an endorsement, reco
6、mmendation, or warranty thereof by ASCE. The materials are for general information only and do not represent a standard of ASCE, nor are they intended as a reference in purchase specifi cations, contracts, regulations, statutes, or any other legal document.ASCE makes no representation or warranty of
7、 any kind, whether express or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or utility of any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this publication, and assumes no liability therefor. This information should not be used without fi rst securing competent advice with
8、 respect to its suitability for any general or specifi c application. Anyone utilizing this information assumes all liability arising from such use, including but not limited to infringement of any patent or patents.ASCE and American Society of Civil EngineersRegistered in U.S. Patent and Trademark
9、Offi ce.Photocopies and permissions. Permission to photocopy or reproduce material from ASCE publications can be obtained by sending an e-mail to permissionsasce.org or by locating a title in ASCEs online database (http:/cedb.asce.org) and using the “Permission to Reuse” link. Bulk reprints. Informa
10、tion regarding reprints of 100 or more copies is available at http:/www.asce.org/reprints.Cover photo courtesy of the U.S. Dept. of Defense, Integration and Application Network Image Library, http:/ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary.Copyright 2011 by the American Society of Civil Engineers.All Rights Reserv
11、ed.ISBN 978-0-7844-1136-0Manufactured in the United States of America.18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 1 2 3 4 5MANUALS AND REPORTS ON ENGINEERING PRACTICE(As developed by the ASCE Technical Procedures Committee, July 1930, and revised March 1935, February 1962, and April 1982)A manual or report in this seri
12、es consists of an orderly presentation of facts on a particular subject, supplemented by an analysis of limitations and applications of these facts. It contains information useful to the average engineer in his or her everyday work, rather than fi ndings that may be useful only occasionally or rarel
13、y. It is not in any sense a “stan-dard,” however; nor is it so elementary or so conclusive as to provide a “rule of thumb” for nonengineers.Furthermore, material in this series, in distinction from a paper (which expresses only one persons observations or opinions), is the work of a committee or gro
14、up selected to assemble and express information on a specifi c topic. As often as practicable, the committee is under the direction of one or more of the Technical Divisions and Councils, and the product evolved has been subjected to review by the Executive Committee of the Division or Council. As a
15、 step in the process of this review, proposed manuscripts are often brought before the members of the Technical Divisions and Councils for comment, which may serve as the basis for improvement. When published, each work shows the names of the com-mittees by which it was compiled and indicates clearl
16、y the several pro-cesses through which it has passed in review, in order that its merit may be defi nitely understood.In February 1962 (and revised in April 1982) the Board of Direction voted to establish a series entitled “Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice,” to include the Manuals publish
17、ed and authorized to date, future Manuals of Professional Practice, and Reports on Engineering Practice. All such Manual or Report material of the Society would have been ref-ereed in a manner approved by the Board Committee on Publications and would be bound, with applicable discussion, in books si
18、milar to past Manuals. Numbering would be consecutive and would be a continuation of present Manual numbers. In some cases of reports of joint committees, bypassing of Journal publications may be authorized.MANUALS AND REPORTS ON ENGINEERING PRACTICE CURRENTLY AVAILABLENo. Title28 Hydrology Handbook
19、, Second Edition40 Ground Water Management45 Consulting Engineering: A Guide for the Engagement of Engineering Services49 Urban Planning Guide50 Planning and Design Guidelines for Small Craft Harbors54 Sedimentation Engineering57 Management, Operation and Maintenance of Irrigation and Drainage Syste
20、ms60 Gravity Sanitary Sewer Design and Construction, Second Edition62 Existing Sewer Evaluation and Rehabilitation66 Structural Plastics Selection Manual67 Wind Tunnel Studies of Buildings and Structures71 Agricultural Salinity Assessment and Management73 Quality in the Constructed Project: A Guide
21、for Owners, Designers, and Constructors74 Guidelines for Electrical Transmission Line Structural Loading, Third Edition77 Design and Construction of Urban Stormwater Management Systems80 Ship Channel Design81 Guidelines for Cloud Seeding to Augment Precipitation82 Odor Control in Wastewater Treatmen
22、t Plants84 Mechanical Connections in Wood Structures85 Quality of Ground Water91 Design of Guyed Electrical Transmission Structures92 Manhole Inspection and Rehabilitation, Second Edition93 Crane Safety on Construction Sites94 Inland Navigation: Locks, Dams, and Channels95 Urban Subsurface DrainageN
23、o. Title97 Hydraulic Modeling: Concepts and Practice98 Conveyance of Residuals from Water and Wastewater Treatment100 Groundwater Contamination by Organic Pollutants: Analysis and Remediation101 Underwater Investigations103 Guide to Hiring and Retaining Great Civil Engineers104 Recommended Practice
24、for Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Products for Overhead Utility Line Structures105 Animal Waste Containment in Lagoons106 Horizontal Auger Boring Projects107 Ship Channel Design and Operation108 Pipeline Design for Installation by Horizontal Directional Drilling109 Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Opera
25、tion in Wastewater Treatment Plants110 Sedimentation Engineering: Processes, Measurements, Modeling, and Practice111 Reliability-Based Design of Utility Pole Structures112 Pipe Bursting Projects113 Substation Structure Design Guide114 Performance-Based Design of Structural Steel for Fire Conditions1
26、15 Pipe Ramming Projects116 Navigation Engineering Practice and Ethical Standards117 Inspecting Pipeline Installation118 Belowground Pipeline Networks for Utility Cables119 Buried Flexible Steel Pipe: Design and Structural Analysis120 Trenchless Renewal of Culverts and Storm Sewers121 Safe Operation
27、 and Maintenance of Dry Dock Facilities122 Sediment Dynamics upon Dam RemovalCONTRIBUTORSNicholas Allmendinger, Otak, Chapter 6Brian D. Barkdoll, Michigan Technological University, Chapter 1Jennifer A. Bountry, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Chapter 10Chris Bromley, University of Nottingham, Chapters 2
28、 and 7Alessandro Cantelli, University of MinnesotaTwin Cities, Chapter 2Fang Cheng, Ohio State University, Chapter 8Martin W. Doyle, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapter 3Jennifer Egan, Duffi eld Associates, Chapter 6Mohamed Elhakeem, University of Iowa, Chapter 1Daniel Gillenwater,
29、Ohio State University, Chapter 8Timothy C. Granata, Ohio State University, Chapter 8Gordon Grant, U.S. Forest Service, Chapter 7Blair Greimann, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Chapters 1 and 9Cassie C. Klumpp, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Chapters 1 and 4James G. MacBroom, Milone (2) dams that are greate
30、r than 7.5 m (25 ft) in height with a storage volume greater than 18,500 m3(15 acre-ft); and (3) dams of any size that can “pose signifi cant threat to human lives or property.” There are roughly 2 million dams estimated by the National Research Council (NRC 1992) that are not listed in the NID.Dams
31、 were once considered long-term, permanent landscape struc-tures (or, interchangeably, infrastructure) that provide for water supply, irrigation, fl ood control, hydropower generation, pollution control, navi-gation, or recreation (ASDSO 2005). Dams were once seen as sources of clean energy that did
32、 not require the burning of coal and, therefore, negated “raping” of the land through strip mining and the production of acid rain. In addition, dams helped make possible the migration of new settlers in the western part of the United States. In North America, 3,123 dams were completed in 1960, the
33、greatest number of dams completed in one year (WWF 2009) and more than 200 major dams were completed each year between 1962 and 1968 (Beaumont 1978).However, dams have also changed the ecology of thousands of rivers, disrupted native populations of fi sh and wildlife, and adversely affected 2 SEDIME
34、NT DYNAMICS UPON DAM REMOVALmany local economies and communities (Babbitt 2002). Trade-offs between the dams benefi ts and detrimental impacts have led to a reconsideration of the value of many dams in the nation. According to Hart et al. (2002), in the United States dam removal is “no longer consid
35、ered a fringe radical approach for river restoration,” especially when the operational costs and environmental impacts outweigh the benefi ts, or when the dam no longer serves any useful purpose. Over the past two decades there has been a clear shift toward the removal (or breaching) of structurally
36、 outdated, ecologically damaging dams from river systems (ASCE 1997). Such removals include not only small, obsolete dams (Fig. 1-1A), but also midsize and large dams such as Embrey Dam (Fig. 1-1B), which has caused great ecological damage to the Rappahannock River in Virginia (American Rivers 2002)
37、.This struggle to balance the perceived needs of humans and those of wildlife and ecology have come to a head. The number of dams being built is declining (Fig. 1-2) (partly due to awareness of environmental effects and partly due to the lack of new appropriate dam sites), while the concurrent numbe
38、r of dams being removed is increasing exponentially. On average, ten dams were removed per year between 1940 and 1970, whereas the average number of dams removed per year in the 1980s and 1990s was 90 and 180, respectively (AR/FE/TU 1999). The number of dam removals, however, is still small compared
39、 to the number of dams built. If these trends continue, the number of dams removed each year will surpass the number of dams being built.ABFigure 1-1. Dam removal. (A) Smelt Hill Dam removal in 2002, Presumpscot River, Maine (photo courtesy of Friends of the Presumpscot River); (B) Embrey Dam remova
40、l in 2006, the Rappahannock River, Virginia (photo courtesy of the U.S. Dept. of Defense, Integration and Application Network, Image Library, http:/ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary).SEDIMENT DYNAMICS POST-DAM REMOVAL 31.2 THE FUTURE OF DAM REMOVALImproved understanding and appreciation for the many societ
41、al values of healthy rivers and fi sheries has increased the interest in dam removal as a means of river restoration (Aspen Institute 2002). Multiple factors motivate dam removal, including economic and social effects (AR/FE/TU 1999), but the primary reason for dam removal is to remediate the disrup
42、tion of ecosystems and restore the functionality of rivers (Bednarek 2001). However, dam removal can have as signifi cant effects on ecosys-tems at both reach and watershed scales as does dam construction. Also, this river restoration approach adds new challenges for watershed and riverine managemen
43、t to fi nd nonstructural alternatives for water storage, fl ood mitigation, irrigation, and power generation. Although removal of small dams can be inexpensive and the assessment of the rivers response Figure 1-2. Dams removed in the United States. Source: AR/FE/TU (1999); Doyle et al. (2000); USACE
44、 (2009).4 SEDIMENT DYNAMICS UPON DAM REMOVALto restoration can be relatively straightforward, decisions about removal of large dams are complexdue in no small part to the substantial time and costs associated with removing a large dam, and to great scientifi c uncertainty (or lack of site-specifi c
45、knowledge) about the potential envi-ronmental impacts of the removal option (Wik 1995). Also, in most cases, many of these dams still serve their original, or perhaps somewhat modi-fi ed, purposes.To determine the most appropriate future for a dam, the positive and negative impacts resulting from it
46、s removalfrom both short- and long-term perspectivesmust be evaluated based on scientifi cally valid crite-ria. It is diffi cult to predict the many changes (biological, chemical, physical, spatial, and temporal) in post-dam-removal conditions, and this has implications for decisions about removal a
47、ppropriateness and methodology (Babbitt 2002). More data on river responses to dam removal are required, including changes in hydrologic conditions due to the drastic shift in subsurface/surface fl ow stage caused by the reservoir removal; sediment releases and transport rates of mixed fi ne and coa
48、rse material upstream and downstream of the removed dam; degradation rates of reach habitat conditions for fi sh and other organisms through the altered reach of the river; and water quality trends during and after the removal.More importantly, a scientifi c framework is needed for examining how riv
49、ers potentially respond to dam removal and altered watershed charac-teristics. This scientifi c basis, when established, can help in dam removal/retention decision making and can direct the local community to optimal use of funding (Heinz Center 2002). A fi rst step toward the development of a science-based framework is the collection and documentation of studies and fi ndings related to the impacts of dam removal, which is the goal of this manual.An example of the development of such a framewor
