Dealing With Time Bomb: A Careful Analysis of The Quake Lake

Control Group 4104

COMAP Mathematical Contest in Modeling January 27, 2013

Abstract The crisis in the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake is holding the hearts of all Chinese people as a shocking news, which leaves more secondary disasters than what people concern. The quake lake, a new denotation of the barrier lake or the landslide dam, is an example among the most serious ones. In this paper, our study focus on: 1) How a quake lake is form and how it fails. We analyze the process and estimate the lasing time before a lake fails; also, we form a structural model of the lakes dam, and then we conduct a numerical simulation based on mathematical derivation to calculate the dams outow each timestep during failing. 2) Ranking the failing risk and the ood scale. To describe the characteristics of the quake lake, we develop a set of parameters to grade the risk and scale. We resort to AHP in deciding the weight of each factor and the result shows Tangjiashan and Shibangou are the most dangerous, which is in accordance with the reality. 3) The overall risk and ood scale of a river with quake lakes. We develop a probability-based algorithm to deal with the bead-like distribution of quake lakes along a river, meanwhile considering two patterns (series and branch). We test our model with the representative Tongkou River by dividing the river into three parts. The result reveals seriousness: failure of Tangjiashan, located at the highest upstream, will cause a chain reaction of other lakes; once Tangjiashan fails, more than 100 villages may be drown and ruined. At the end of this paper, we summarize our key ndings and give a recommendation for the Rescue Headquarters.

Team number 4104

Page 1 of 28

Contents
1 Introduction 2 Breaking Down the Problem 3 Assumptions 4 Notations 5 Model One: Formation and Failure 5.1 5.2 Blocking and Storing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seemingly Safe: The Critical Stable Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.3 Judgment of Risk in Failing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lasting Time Before Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 6 6 6 7 13 13 17 19 19 19 19 20 21 22 24 25 25 27

How It Fails : The Process of Erosion and Outow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 5.3.2 Structural Model of the Dam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dam Erosion and Outow Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6 Model Two: Failing Risk and Flood Scale 6.1 6.2 Evaluate the Failing Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluate the Flood Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 Model Three: Overall Inuence by Chain Reaction 7.1 Overall Failing Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.1.3 7.1.4 7.1.5 7.2 Bead-Like Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pattern I: Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pattern II: Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Probability-Based Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Testing of the model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Overall Flood Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

8 Recommendation 9 Conclusions Appendices

Team number 4104

Page 2 of 28

1 Introduction
The violent earthquake struck Sichuan Province in China on May 12th, 2008, causing catastrophic damage to the local people. This event, occurred in Wenchuan County, measured 7.9 to 8.0 on the Richter Scale and was along with serious secondary disasters, typically as the landslide and debris ow. Massive landslides blocked the river and thus create the quake lake, which is also known as the landslide dam, debris dam or barrier lake [1], as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Quake Lake in Beichuan County

Such big pool would induce troubles. The 33 quake lakes created during the Wenchuan Earthquake, mostly on streams as the Minjiang, Tuojiang, Fujiang and Jialing River, were greatly concerned in both rescue and the post-disaster reconstruction. With the increasing upper stream inow (and even worse, along with a heavy rain) raised water levels, the barrier dams were easily to fail, resulting in terrible oods. Since the varying condition and inuence from both inner and outer factors, it is quite a tough work to analyze the regularity of these mountain disasters. To make scientic judgments under emergencies is important for leaders and engineers in dealing with the quake lakes, which can be best achieved by mathematical modeling. What should be done rst is trying to work out the mechanism of how the lake is formed and how it fails. Now we are faced with the following: 1. Analyze the formation and failure of quake lakes, including its stability requirements. 2. Rank the failing risk of the endangered lakes into four grades, and rank the ood scale (resulting from the failure of dams) into four grades. 3. Assess the overall risk (in failure of lakes) and the overall ood scale of each main stream, in consideration of the possible chain reaction among quake lakes in one stream.

Team number 4104

Page 3 of 28

2 Breaking Down the Problem

1. We rst analyze the formation and failure process, including several phases of formation, the structure of the dam and the numerical simulation of erosion and outow. This model will make it clear about some key characteristics of a single quake lake. 2. To develop a set of parameters as media in evaluating the risk and ood scale. 3. To gure out two major distribution (series and branch), and then analyze the overall inuence of quake lakes along a river.

3 Assumptions
1. In discussing the process of failure, we only consider the overtopping function, which means the dam is eroded gradually or step-by-step. We do not discuss a sudden failure. 2. In Model Three, we assume the velocity of the water ow is constant (it would not slow down when turning around). 3. We assume the thickness of the dam is equal, and its top surface parallels the water surface. 4. Structure of the dam (the stones and sands) is uniform.

4 Notations
Vdam Alake Hm Vmax V0 V t Wup Wdown Hm volume of a dam area of the quake lake height of the dam maximum water capacity initial volume of water water inow each day days since its formation upper length of the max-eroded area lower length of the max-eroded area height of the dam Wi hi hi vi Qi hmax r Vstorage Vm IR the eroded length change in height height of water when t=i velocity of outow (or ood) when t = i the outow per second when t = i maximum of hi its steady value natural growth rate of the water level the water storage of a quake lake the maximal water storage among all lakes the Index of Risk

5 Model One: Formation and Failure

According the development cycle of a quake lake, it experiences three phases: blocking and storing, critical stability and then, the failure. The rst two process are relatively simple for estimation while the last one require structural analysis of the barrier dam.

Team number 4104

Page 4 of 28

5.1 Blocking and Storing

The rst step in formation is the blocking. The original rivers has been owing in peace. Suddenly, as soon as the earthquake and landslide, hill stones and debris begin sliding down to the river, then soon block it. See in Figure 2.

(a) the original river

(b) stones and debris slide down

Figure 2: Blocking

And then, with the upper stream inow and the accumulation of rainfall, the river store water in this section. As it keeps on storing for a period, the quake lake is formed. See in Figure 3.

(a) storing water

(b) the lake is formed

Figure 3: Storing

5.2 Seemingly Safe: The Critical Stable Phases

After the formation, the quake lake may seem to become silent. However, rather than being seemingly safe, the lake is actually endangered, which we call the Critical Stable Phases. 5.2.1 Judgment of Risk in Failing According to the study on 73 failed natural dams by J. E. Costa and R. L. Schuster in 1988, 27 percent of them failed one day after formation, 41 percent within a week, 85 percent within one year and so on [2], which implies that most natural dams are going to fail eventually. To gure out the case

Team number 4104

Page 5 of 28

in quake lakes (or landslide dams), Ermini and Casagli, two Italian specialists, analyzed the data of 84 quake lakes and their barrier dams, then dened an index DBI in judging the stability of the landslide dams [3]: Hm DBI = lg Alake V
dam

where, Vdam : the volume of a dam (m3 ) Alake : the area of the quake lake (m2 ) Hm : the height of the dam (m)

The stability criterion of the dam of a quake lake was given by Ermini and Casagli as below:

Table 1: Stability criterion based on DBI

Condition DBI < 2.75 2.75 < DBI < 3.08 DBI > 3.08

Judgment Stable Unstable Unstable

Now we use the data of Tangjiashan quake lake on the Tongkou River to test the criterion above: For Tangjiashan quake lake,

Vdam = 2.037 107 m3 , Alake = 3550km2 = 3.55 109 m2 , Hm = 82.8m.

so, 109 82.8 DBI = lg 3.55 = 4.1593. 2.037107 Since 4.1593 > 3.08, it is safe to say that Tangjiashan quake lake had risk in failing. In fact, Tangjiashan quake lake was the most endangered among the 33 lakes [4], which accorded with our calculation above.

Team number 4104

Page 6 of 28

5.2.2 Lasting Time Before Failure As we discussed above, a quake lake keeps storing water and nally fails. In order to predict when a quake lake fails, now we hope to calculate the lasting time from its formation to failure, in other words, to estimate the lasting time of the Critical Stable Phases. For a certain quake lake, we have: Vmax (m3 ) : maximum of its water capacity V0 (m3 ) : initial volume of water V (m3 ) : water inow each day t(days) : lasting days since its formation when V0 + V t > Vmax , which means the quake lake is already full through storing of water, we assume it is to fail. In other words, the failure happens when: V0 t > Vmax . V Now we start to calculate the possible failure time of Tangjiashan quake lake. We suppose the storing began on 12th, May (when the massive quake occurred). The data we use come from the appendix and ref. [5].

V0 = 8 107 m3 (the volume of water on 12th, May), V = 6 106 m3 , Vmax = 2.2 108 m3 ,
V0 2.2108 8107 t > Vmax = 23(days). V 6106 Thus, the lake may fail on 4th, June, 2008. According to the analysis by experts on 5th, June, the probability of failure was 93%, which is very close to our estimation [6]. Fortunately, the Rescue Headquarters started to release ood at 7:00 a.m. on 7th, June, and it nished at 17:00 p.m. on 10th, June without casualty.

5.3 How It Fails : The Process of Erosion and Outow

5.3.1 Structural Model of the Dam In an effort to analyze the process of failure, we simplify the quake lake and its dam into a structural model. Figure 4 is an illustration from different angles.

Team number 4104

Page 7 of 28

(a) sapce view

(b) side view

Figure 4: Structural Model of the lakes dam

In the model above, we assume the shape of river is a trapezoid (from cutaway view), which is close to its actual form. Another work is to determine the eroded shape. During the process of failure, the water (on the right side in Figure 4. b) would gradually erode the dam on the left and nally destroy most of it. There are 3 common types of eroded shape: square, triangle and trapezoid.

(a) square (b) triangle (c) trapezoid

Figure 5: Three eroded shapes

To simplify the problem, we choose (c) trapezoid, a general one, as the eroded shape in the later study. 5.3.2 Dam Erosion and Outow Simulation After forming the structural model, now we want to start the failure process: the process of dam Erosion along with outow water. To calculate the outow, we use a time-discrete simulation based on physical laws. As the preparation, a detailed cutaway view of the dam is shown in Figure 6:

Team number 4104

Page 8 of 28

Figure 6: Cutaway view of the dam

In actual cases, the dam of a quake lake would not be totally eroded, so we dene the Max-Eroded Area (the dotted trapezoid area in Figure 6), namely the maximum of eroded area when the failure ends. For simplicity, we let the slope angle to be a constant, so with a certain pair of and we can determine the structure of the dam. Other parameters in Figure 6 are explained below: Wup : upper length of the max-eroded area, Wdown : lower length of the max-eroded area; Hm : height of the dam, Hb : stable height; and Wi : the eroded length (when t = i)

(a) half-eroded

(b) completely eroded

Figure 7: Process of dam erosion

Figure 7 shows a process of dam erosion, which can be considered as a step-by-step process. For one step as Figure 7 (a), we have: hi (m) : change in height from t = i 1 to t = i ; hi (m) : height of water when t = i (current position); vi (m/s) : velocity of outow (or ood) when t = i ;

Team number 4104

Page 9 of 28

Qi (m3 /s) : the outow per second when t = i ;

Since the inow from upstream and the rainfall, a quake lake has a continuous increase of water inow, which we dene as Q0 (m3 /s) . Now we conduct the computation of three key parameter: Wi , vi and Qi : (where g is the gravity acceleration and g = 9.8m/s2 )

1. Wi
The eroded length Wi can be a function of hi

W = f1 (h) ,
suppose the Wup and Wdown are xed (to a certain dam), so we have: Wup Wdown Wi Wdown 2 tan = H 2 = h , m Hb i Hb

Wi =

(Wup Wdown ) (hi Hb ) + Wdown Hm Hb

(5.1)

2. vi
In the same way, our goal is to nd the function between vi and hi :

v = f2 (h) ,
When t = i, the coming outow would fall by hi and release some potential energy. According to the law of conservation of energy, we have:
1 mv 2 2

0 = mg hi

where m is the mass of outow water, so:

vi =

2 g hi

(5.2)

Team number 4104

Page 10 of 28

3. Qi
For t = i, the outow is:

Qi = Wi hi vi ,
by substituting Wi and vi into the formula above, we get the full formula by Qsum =

Qi :

] Wup Wdown (hi1 hi Hb ) + Wdown hi 2g hi Qi = Hm Hb [

(5.3)

So far, we have worked out the outow of each timestep. In order to calculate the outow process, we design a time-discrete simulation using MATLAB. The algorithm are shown below:

Figure 8: The algorithm for outow calculation

Now we will test our model with the data of Tangjiashan quake lake.

Team number 4104

Page 11 of 28

A. An idealized condition: hi is a constant

When hi is a constant, it means that hi decreases at a constant rate, or in other words, the dam is being eroded uniformly. We set hi = 4m in the simulation and the result is as follow in Figure 9 :

Figure 9: An idealized condition

From the result we can see that Qi changes linearly, which also ts formula eq.(5.3). About 1.7 hours after erosion begins, the outow will reach a balance at 1.1 104 m3 /s.

B. An alternative case: hi is a variable

However, actually erosion does not happen in a constant speed. To better achieve the actual situation, we want to nd out how hi is changing. According to Wang Li and Gao Yixins numerical simulation of Tangjiashan quake lake, the change of water level in front of the dam is a gradual process, which can be divided into 3 phases [7]:

Figure 10: Change of water level in front of the dam

Team number 4104

Page 12 of 28

From Figure 10 we nd that: At the beginning of outow (erosion), the water level is constant. This is because the gradual start of erosion; Then from time 0.5 to 1.5 it declines as a convex curve; At the third phase (t > 1.5), it declines linearly. Since the curve of water level presents such a tendency, so we have a wild hypothesis that hi , the rst-order difference of the water level, would resemble Logistic growth function. Thus we construct the following model:

hi =
where

( hmax ) hmax 1 eri 1+ h

0

hmax : maximum of hi (its steady value) r : natural growth rate of the water level We plot hi and the water level below (hmax = 4m and r = 0.7 ) :

Figure 11: Logistic-curve of changing hi

and the change of water level

We can see (in Figure 11) the water level decreases by three phases, which is very close to that of Figure 10, the result of Wang Li and Gao Yixins study. Now we use this hi in our simulation and get the result of outow:

Team number 4104

Page 13 of 28

Figure 12: Case with changing hi

From the curve above, it is obvious that the outow: rst grows rapidly, then reaches its peak, and nally declines to a certain value. The result presents a closer approach to the actual situation, which conrms our hypothesis.

6 Model Two: Failing Risk and Flood Scale

6.1 Evaluate the Failing Risk
In order to evaluate the risk of a certain quake lake, we want to set a number of parameters and join them together to make a judgment. After referring to documents and carefully analyzing the lakes dam, we develop ve most signicant parameters as shown below: 1. Dam Structure index (DS ) The structure of a lakes dam depends on the composition of it. There are four major types of composition and they stands for different strength of the dam.
Table 2: Composition and Dam structure index

Composition type mostly heavy stones majorly stones & some sands stones and sands equally majorly sands & some stones

Strength level very strong strong so so weak

Dam structure index (DS ) 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Team number 4104

Page 14 of 28

The more stones a dam contains the stronger it is. We dene in Table 2 that very strong means

DS = 0.4 and weak means DS = 1.0, or in other words, larger DS means more dangerous.
2. Water Storage (W S ) Typically, for an endangered dam, if water in the lake accumulates, it may increase the risk due to the greater pressure. Thus, we dene Water Storage (W S ) as a factor : the larger WS is, the higher the risk is. The maximum possible value of this factor is 1 (after normalization).

W S = storage Vm
where

Vstorage is the water storage of a quake lake; Vm is the maximal water storage among all lakes.
3. Width-length Ratio (W LR ) In consideration of shape, another key factor of structure, now we dene Wid-length Ratio (W LR), which describes the proportional relationship between the width of and length of the quake lake. Lwidth W LR = L Similarly, we normalize all W LRs in our calculation later. 4. Height of Dam (HD) For a certain quake lake, it is also important to consider the height of its dam (HD), since the higher the dam is, the greater water pressure is put on it.

length

Figure 13: Higher dam means greater pressure

The denition of this parameter is as follow (likewise, we normalize it):

dam HD = H Hm

where

Hdam is the height of a dam; Hm is the maximal height among all dams.

Team number 4104

Page 15 of 28

5. Backwater Extension (BE ) The inow of water does not always go through the river and supply the storage of the quake lake. In fact, some of it turns around after crashing on the big dam, which is call backwater. Naturally, it seems like the pressure on the dam will reduce as a result of backwater. However, contrary to our common sense, the backwater in deed will exacerbates the erosion by brushing the bottom more violently.

Figure 14: The effect of backwater

As is shown in Figure 14, the extension of backwater Lback is positive correlated to vwater , the velocity of water inow. Longer Lback is, more rapid the inow should be, and thus leads to a bigger threat. We dene Backwater Extension (BE ), the normalized Lback , as an indicator of the failing risk.

BE = L Lback backmax
So far, we have developed the ve parameters, which should be put together to describe the failing risk, for which we dene the Index of Risk (IR ):

IR =

i=1 Pi

wi

where Pi is the ith parameter: P1 = DS, P2 = W S, P3 = W L, P4 = HD, and P5 = BE . In order to decide the respective weight wi scientically, we call for Analytical Hierarchy Process. AHP First we should build a 7 7 reciprocal matrix by pair comparison: The number of each cell is based on Sattys law and is explained below: Then we solve the comparative matrix in Table 3 using MATLAB program, and the result is below:

DS w1
0.3059

WS w2
0.0422

W LR w3
0.0635

HD w4
0.4777

BE w5
0.1107

Team number 4104

Page 16 of 28

Table 3: Reciprocal matrix

DS
Dam Structure index Water Storage Width-length Ratio Height of Dam Backwater Extension

WS 7 1 2 8 3

W LR 6
1 2

HD
1 2 1 8 1 7

BE 3
1 3

1
1 7 1 6

1 7 2

2 5 1

2
1 3

1
1 5

Table 4: Explanation of the comparative value

Intensity of Value Interpretation

1 3 5 7 9 2, 4, 6, 8 Reciprocals

Interpretation
Requirement i and j are of equal value Requirement i is slightly stronger than j Requirement i is stronger than j Requirement i is much stronger than j Requirement i is absolutely stronger than j Intermediate scales between two adjacent judgments The reciprocal value between each other

To test the consistency of AHP, we conduct the following calculation:

max = 5.0070
5 CI = max 51 = 0.01925 0.01925 CR = CI RI = 1.12 = 0.0137 < 0.1 Thus, the above AHP method show an acceptable consistency and the weights we get are reasonable. So we have:

IR =

i=1

Pi wi

= 0.3059DS + 0.0422W S + 0.0635W LR + 0.4777HD + 0.1107BE

The four ranks of IR are given according to the following criterion:

Ranks
Extremely dangerous Very dangerous Dangerous Moderate

Range of IR
> 0.8 0.45 ~ 0.8 0.25 ~ 0.45 < 0.25

Team number 4104

Page 17 of 28

Table 5: Ranks of Failing Risk of 12 major quake lakes

Rank of Failing Risk Extremely dangerous Very dangerous Dangerous Moderate Quake lake 1 2, 3, 13 4, 6, 15, 16, 25 7, 8, 14 * The numbers above stands for: 1, Tangjiashan; 2, Shibangou; 3, Xiaojiaqiao; 4, Weishuizhen; 6, Kuzhuba; 7, Xinjiecun; 8, Baiguocun; 13, Nanba; 14, Heidongya; 15, Xiaogangjian(upstream); 16, Xiaogangjian(downstream); 25, Hongshihe. We choose 12 major quake lakes to calculate their Index of Risk, and the ranks are as follow: From the result above we can conclude that the Tangjiashan quake lake is the most risky time bomb with the rank Extremely dangerous, and most of the others remain a dangerous condition. We compare our result with the study of Cui Peng, a researcher of CAS, and nd a coherence (only with slightly difference in lake 7, 16) [8].

6.2 Evaluate the Flood Scale

Similarly, we want to develop three parameters to describe the scale of the ood. 1. Location Index (LI ) The location of surroundings is the primary consideration of ood. We dene Location Index (LI ) to evaluate it, which consists of two parts:

i) Distance to Beichuan County (normalized)

max D Dnormalized = DD max

D is the distance from Beichuan County to a certain quake lake, and Dmax is the maximum of D
among all quake lakes discussed.

ii) Relative Location toward Beichuan County (RL)

We set RL according to the following 3 cases: located to the West, East or South of Beichuan County RL = 0 Northeast or Northwest RL = 0 located at the upstream of the county RL = 0 So, we join the two parts together as:

LI = Dnormalized RL .

Team number 4104

Page 18 of 28

2. Total Quantity of Outow (Qsum ) The scale of ood is essentially related with the total quantity of outow from a certain quake lake. Here we use Qi , the result of Model One, to calculate the total outow by integration. We replace the integration with summation in this time-discrete case:

Qsum =

i Qi

Qi is the outow per unit time, and i is each unit time. Also, we will normalize Qsum in the later calculation.
3. External Factor (EF ) In the duration of ood, some external factors, such as rainfall and aftershocks, may increase its scale and make the condition worse. Since the uncertainty of these external events, we set a random number in [0, 1] to describe them:

EF [0, 1] ,
and EF is a random number. The next work is to determine the three weights of the parameters above. For the rst two (LI and Qsum ), we resort to AHP and get a weight vector

[ 2 ]T w = 1 3, 3 ,
For the third factor EF , we assume its weight to be 0.2. This is because the majority inuence is from the internal, namely the rst two factors. So we have the nal weight vector of the three:

[1 ]T 2 w all = 3 0.8, 3 0.8, 0.2

Similarly we calculate the IR and this time the criterion of ood scale is as follow:

Flood Scale
Extremely huge Huge Big Moderate

Range of IR
> 0.6 0.4 ~ 0.6 0.2 ~ 0.4 < 0.2

This time we choose 10 quake lakes to test our model. We calculate IR of them and draw the following conclusion: Combine the Failing Risk (in Table 5)with the Flood Scale (in Table 6), we easily see that: 1. Quake lake 1 (Tangjiashan) has both Extremely Failing Risk and Flood Scale; 2. Quake lake 2 (Shibangou) is both Very dangerous and Huge; 3. The most safe one is Quake lake 8 (Baiguocun).

Team number 4104

Page 19 of 28

Table 6: Flood Scale of 10 major quake lakes

Flood Scale Quake lake

Extremely huge 1, 25

Huge 2, 6, 7, 14, 15

Big 3, 16

Moderate 8

7 Model Three: Overall Inuence by Chain Reaction

In the last section, we want to build a model in analyzing the overall inuence on a certain river, along which are several quake lakes. Like the analysis of a single lake in chapter 6, we evaluate the overall inuence by two parts: overall failing risk and overall ood scale. Considering a series of quake lakes, the cumulative effect is vital, which seems like a chain reaction among them. Our algorithm is based on probability formula. Now we begin to discuss such cases.

7.1 Overall Failing Risk

7.1.1 Bead-Like Distribution Rather than staying single, the quake lakes along the river are linked together and have impact on each other. Since the river ow system is connected, there is denitely a cumulative effect on the latter lake by the former one(s). After carefully analyzing and comparison, we nd that the lakes presents a bead-like distribution and it has two major patterns: series and branch.

(a) series

(b) branch

Figure 15: The bead-like distribution

In the graph, node A, B, C and D stand for four quake lakes, and the lines among them equal to the river. With such distribution structure we are capable of describing the characteristics, and thus evaluate the inuence. 7.1.2 Pattern I: Series As for the series case in Figure 15.(a), we suppose A locates at the highest of upstream. Here we use the Index of Risk (discussed and solved in Model Two) to be the failing probability of the quake lake. So the probability of A would not change because there is no any lake at higher than it. We mainly consider how A inuences B and how B inuences C :

Team number 4104

Page 20 of 28

Suppose A is failed and namely P(A) = 1, the inuence on B should be its large inow water, denoted as VIN . So now the water in quake lake B is its origin storage added by VIN . As a result, when this sum of water is larger than Vmax , the maximum of capacity, the quake lake will fail.

if VIN + Vorigin > Vmax B fails, and P (B |A) = 1; else B does not fail, P (B |A) < 1. so, we have the conditional probability P (B |A), the failing probability of B when A is already failed:

P (B |A) =
According to the law of total probability, we have:

) P (A) P (B ) = P (B |A) P (A) + P (B |A

) is where P (A) is the failing probability of A, while P (A) is its opposite (not failing). Since P (B |A the independent failing probability (without A), we substitute it with IR ; for P (B |A), given the range above we can calculate it easily (we will discuss it later). In the same way, we can evaluate Bs inuence on C. 7.1.3 Pattern II: Branch The difference between pattern series and branch is: B meets with a branch and its outow will go into both C and D. It means that the outow of B equals to inow of C added inow of D:

VOU T = VIN 1 + VIN 2 ,

The proportion of VIN 1 and VIN 2 is decided by the cross area of the riverbed: VIN 1 VIN 2

SC SD

where VOU T is the outow of B; VIN 1 , VIN 2 is the inow of C and D respectively. SC , SD : the cross area of the riverbed (branch C and D respectively)

Team number 4104

Page 21 of 28

Figure 16: The algorithm in calculating the failing probability of each lake (N lakes along a river)

7.1.4 The Probability-Based Algorithm So far, we have analyzed the two typical pattern, series and VIN 1 and VIN 2 branch. Given a river containing N quake lakes, we can develop the following algorithm (see in Figure 16)to calculate the failing probability of each lake.

i: number of the ith quake lake, i = 1, 2, ..., N P (i): failing probability of the ith quake lake P (i|i 1): failing probability of the ith quake lake, when the (i 1)th lake is failed VOU T (i): total outow of the ith lake VIN (i): total inow of the ith lake Now we discuss the calculation of VIN and P (i|i 1).

Team number 4104

Page 22 of 28

1. VIN
From [9]y we nd the formula to calculate QL , the amount of ow where is L meters away from quake lake A:

QL (t) =
where

Vmax Vmax L Q(t) + v k

Vmax : the maximum of water capacity of the lake Q(t) : the water ow at quake lake A v : the average speed of ood, usually 4m/s in mountain area k : an empirical coefcient, the value is 1.3 in mountain area
Then integrate t on QL (t) to get VIN :

VIN = 2. P (i|i 1)

QL (t)dt=

Vmax Vmax L Q(t) + v k

dt .

(The computational process is somehow lengthy so we only focus on the main points.) The calculation of P (i|i 1) is based on the result of AHP method in chapter 6.1. Besides the ve parameters (DS, W S, W LR, HD and BE ), we introduce a new factor: Force Index (F IN ). To use AHP again, we get the 6 weights and thus, the formula below:

P (i|i 1) = 0.1993DS +0.3149W S +0.0295W LR +0.0593HD +0.0711BE +0.3259F IN

. 7.1.5 Testing of the model To test our model, we choose Tongkou River, which is the most representative, as the example. We will study the 8 quake lakes along the river.
Note:Conclusion: i) The data of Zhicheng quake lake cannot be found so we do not consider it; ii) In the given material, the location of Sunjiayuanzi quake lake is inaccurate. Actually, it should be 19.2 km North-east to the county.

We divide the Tongkou River into three parts for convenient analysis: the upstream (I), the midstream (II) and the downstream (III): After carefully analysis of the location of the 8 quake lakes and the surrounding counties, we discuss three typical cases in (I), (II) and (III) respectively:

Team number 4104

Page 23 of 28

Figure 17: Tongkou River (divided into 3 parts)

1. Inuence on (I), (II) and (III) when Tangjiashan (I) fails In the following three tables, P1 is the failing probability of the single quake lake; while P2 takes other lakes into consideration (considers the chain reaction).
Table 7: Change in failing probability when Tangjiashan fails

Quake lake Kuzhuba Xinjiecun Baiguoshu Yanyangtan Guanzipu Sunjiayuanzi Tangjiawan

P1 0.33084 0.24621 0.17979 0.28680 0.32370 0.32260 0.2908

P2 0.89996 0.89996 0.89996 0.89996 0.89996 0.89996 0.89996

Relative growth 172.02% 265.53% 400.56% 213.77% 178.02% 178.97% 209.48%

Conclusion: When Tangjiashan quake lake fails, all of the rest seven quake lakes change greatly in

their failing probability: they all become much more dangerous! 2. Inuence on (II) and (III) when Baiguocun (II) fails
Table 8: Change in failing probability when Baiguoshu fails

Quake lake Yanyangtan Guanzipu Sunjiayuanzi Tangjiawan

P1 0.2868 0.3237 0.3226 0.2908

P2 0.3869 0.5492 0.9477 0.6265

Relative growth 34.9% 69.66% 193.58% 115.44%

Conclusion: When Baiguocun quake lake fails, only Sunjiayuanzi and Tangjiawan are inuence greately.

Team number 4104

Page 24 of 28

3. Inuence on (III) when Sunjiayuanzi (III) fails

Table 9: Change in failing probability when Sunjiayuanzi fails

Quake lake Tangjiawan

P1 0.2893

P2 0.3111

Relative growth 6.98%

Conclusion: If Sunjiayuanzi fails, the lake Tangjiawan on the downstream would hardly be inu-

enced.

7.2 Overall Flood Scale

As to the inuence of ood, we maily take the number of villages drown into consideration. From the former discussion we know that:

QL (t) =
thus,

Vmax Vmax L Q(t) + v k

QLmax =

Vmax Vmax L Qmax + v k

According to document [9], the Flood Control Standard is dened as: A village is drown: Not drown:

QLmax 6600m3 /s QLmax < 6600m3 /s

For the three cases we list in chapter 7.1.5 (failures of Tangjiashan, Baiguocun and Sunjiayuanzi), we calculate QLmax respectively to nd out the drown villages. We conclude the result in Table 10 as below:
Table 10: Villages being drown under three different failures

Situation
(1) Tangjiashan fails (2) Baiguocun fails (3) Sunjiayuanzi fails

Villages being drown

Dashui, Beichuan, Longwei, Maoba, Baiguo, Shipozi, Haiguang, Zhixin, Dengjiadu, Yanyangcun (and >100 small villages) Baiguo, Tangjiawan, Hongyan Tangjiawan, Hongyan, Zhangjiawan

Conclusion: It would be a terrible disaster if Tangjiashan quake lake fails it would cause the most

villages to be drown, along with uncountable loss of lives and property. Meanwhile, the potential damage of Baiguocun and Sunjiayuanzi quake lakes will also call for attention.

Team number 4104

Page 25 of 28

8 Recommendation
According to the study in this paper, we summarize our key ndings for the Rescue Headquarters: 1. Once Tangjiashan quake lake fails, the quake lakes on its downstream will all fail (since Tangjiashans huge volume of water). Thus, the emergency is to deal with Tangjiashan by ood discharging as well as transferring all the people nearby. 2. In our second model we nd that Tangjiashan and Shibangou are the most dangerous. They must be tackled immediately. 3. Some relatively stable quake lakes (such as Baiguocun) could be the secondary consideration. 4. In the ood discharge, it is important to consider the distribution of other lakes and not to bring the ood into another quake lake (otherwise, it may lead to unimaginable disasters).

Figure 18: Reconstruction project in Tangjiashan

9 Conclusions
In this paper we analyze and study the formation and failure process of quake lakes, making judgments and conclusions based on mathematical derivation and facts. Though we have achieved most of our goals, the unpredictable situation in the disaster area would always have more factor than we can handle within three days. Nevertheless, with carefully study we do have some constructive ideas, and we hope these can be useful materials for latter research.

Team number 4104

Page 26 of 28

References
[1] Wikipedia, Landslide dam, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landslide_dam [2] John E. Costa, Robert L. Schuster, The formation and failure of natural dams, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 100, 1054-68 [3] Ermini, Casagli, Prediction of the behaveiour of landslide dams using a geomorphological dimensionless index, Earth Surf. Process, Landforms 28, 31-47 [4] Sina News, http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2008-05-22/031615590872.shtml [5] Baidupedia, http://baike.baidu.com/view/1608238.htm [6] Sina News, http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2008-06-05/040413972381s.shtml [7] Wang Li, Gao Yixin, Cheng Peipei and Wei Yongsheng, The Theoretical Model and Numerical Simulation For the Flood Discharging of Tangjiashan Barrier Lake, Mathematics In Practice And Theory, 39-16 (August 2009). [8] Cui Peng, Han Yongshun, Chen Xiaoqing, Distribution and Risk Analysis of Dammed Lakes Reduced by Wenchuan Earthquake, Journal Of Sichuan University, 41-3 (May 2009) [9] Kuang Shangfu, Wang Xiaogang, Huang Jinchi, Wei Yingqi, Risk analysis and impact assessment of dam-break in barrier lake, China Water Resources, 2008.16

Team number 4104

Page 27 of 28

Appendices
(MATLAB Scripts) 1. outow calculation when delta_h is a constant
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

delta_h = 4; Hm = 83; Hb = 0.2 * Hm; K = 1.5; Wdown = 300; Q0 = 600; g = 9.8; v = (2*g*delta_h) ^ 0.5; Q = []; h = Hm; while (h > Hb)
% delta_h = 0.96 * delta_h ;

h v w Q

= = = =

h - delta_h; (2*g*delta_h)^0.5; (K-1)*Wdown*(h-Hb)/(Hm-Hb)+Wdown; [Q;w*delta_h*v+Q0];

end t = 1:size(Q,1); figure(3); plot(0.1*t, Q);

2. when delta_h ts the Logistic growth curve

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Hm = 83; Hb = 0.2*Hm; K = 1.5; Wdown = 300; Q0 = 70; g = 9.8; Q = []; H = []; h = Hm; count = 0; while (h > Hb) xm = 3.9; x0 = 0.2; r=0.7; delta_h=xm/(1+(xm/x0-1)*exp(-1*r*count)); h=h-delta_h; H=[H;h]; v=(2*g*delta_h)^0.5;

Team number 4104

Page 28 of 28

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

w=(K-1)*Wdown*(h-Hb)/(Hm-Hb)+Wdown; Q=[Q;w*delta_h*v+Q0]; count=count+1; end t=1:size(Q,1); plot(0.1*t,Q,*); figure(2) t=1:(size(Q,1)+2); H=[H;H(end);H(end)]; plot(0.1*t,H,rp) axis([0 2.5 0 90])

3. the Logistic growth curve

1 2 3 4 5 6

t = 0:30; xm = 3.9; x0 = 0.2; r = 0.7; x = xm./(1+(xm./x0-1)*exp(-1.*r.*t)); plot(0.1*t, x)