长江科学院院报

长江科学院院报 >

2026 , Vol. 43 >Issue 5: 111 - 117

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11988/ckyyb.20250225

水灾害

丹江口水库突发超标准泄洪及淹没风险研究

  • 李晨 , 1 ,
  • 孙远莹 1 ,
  • 魏为 1 ,
  • 黄卫 2
展开
  • 1 长江水利委员会 河湖保护与建设运行安全中心, 武汉 430010
  • 2 长江科学院 水力学研究所, 武汉 430010

李 晨(1992-),男,甘肃平凉人,工程师,硕士,主要从事水利工程建设与运行管理工作。E-mail:

Copy editor: 王慰

收稿日期: 2025-03-17

  修回日期: 2025-07-19

  网络出版日期: 2025-09-19

收起

Sudden Over-standard Flood Discharge and Inundation Risks of Danjiangkou Reservoir

  • LI Chen , 1 ,
  • SUN Yuan-ying 1 ,
  • WEI Wei 1 ,
  • HUANG Wei 2
Expand
  • 1 River and Lake Protection and Construction Operation Safety Center, Changjiang Water Resources Commission, Wuhan 430010, China
  • 2 Hydraulics Department, Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute, Wuhan 430010, China

Received date: 2025-03-17

  Revised date: 2025-07-19

  Online published: 2025-09-19

Fold

摘要

为适应现代化水库运行管理矩阵建设需求,进一步提升丹江口水库洪水预报预警能力,推动洪水预演可视化、预案精准化,基于MIKE和GIS软件,模拟了7种情景丹江口水库超标准泄洪时下游洪水演进情况,分析了不同情景下游区域洪水的到达时间及洪峰出现时间,对比了洪峰水位、洪峰水量与典型断面设计水位、最大允许流量的关系,研究了不同情景下游区域淹没范围和淹没深度。结果显示:工程调蓄作用下,襄阳及其上游的洪水均在2~10 h内到达,宜城至沙洋段洪水在10~24 h内到达,仙桃地区洪水约在2 d后出现,各典型断面洪峰出现时间均超过68 h;混凝土坝溃坝工况下,近坝山区的洪水漫延规律与调蓄情景相似,平原地区的洪水演进速度整体上比工程调控情景慢3 h以上;突发超标准来水土坝溃坝工况,钟祥以上区域的洪水和洪峰分别在12 h和18 h内到达,钟祥以下区域的洪水和洪峰则分别在13 h和31 h后到达;丹江至宜城河段有较多漫堤险情。校核洪水、设计洪水、混凝土坝死水位溃坝和混凝土坝加高部分溃坝工况下,坝址至襄阳樊城大部分区域淹没深度为16~20 m,天门下游淹没深度<3 m;特大洪水土石全溃工况,坝址至襄阳樊城区淹没深度约为35 m,丹江口河段淹没深度>50 m;沙洋县洪水倒灌致潜江市>70%区域被淹,整体淹没深度≤2 m。研究成果为丹江口水库大坝安全管理应急预编制,洪水预演可视化和现代化水库运行管理矩阵建设提供了有力支撑。

关键词： 丹江口大坝; 突发洪水事件; 溃坝; 洪水演进

本文引用格式

李晨 , 孙远莹 , 魏为 , 黄卫 . 丹江口水库突发超标准泄洪及淹没风险研究[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2026 , 43(5) : 111 -117 . DOI: 10.11988/ckyyb.20250225

Abstract

[Objective] To meet the demands of constructing a modern reservoir operation and management matrix and to further enhance the flood forecasting and early warning capabilities of the Danjiangkou Reservoir, this study simulates the over-standard flood discharge scenario of the Danjiangkou Reservoir, and analyzes the evolution and inundated conditions of the downstream flood, aiming to improve the accuracy of the flood forecasting visualization and emergency planning. In doing so, the study seeks to provide stronger support for ensuring the safety of the Danjiangkou Reservoir Project and the security of water supply. [Methods] Based on the principles of the continuity equation and the momentum equation, the MIKE series model software was used to establish a two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the downstream river channel and floodplain. Fully considering the impact of flood evolution on key cities downstream, a computational grid was constructed based on DEM and measured terrain to simulate the flood evolution of the downstream areas during over-standard discharge from the Danjiangkou Reservoir under seven scenarios. The arrival time of flood and peak flood in downstream areas under different scenarios was analyzed. The relationships between peak flood water level, peak flood discharge, design water level, and maximum allowable flow at typical cross-sections were compared. Based on GIS software, the inundation range and inundation depth in the downstream areas under different scenarios were analyzed. [Results] Under the regulation and storage effect of the project, the flood reached Xiangyang and its upstream areas within 2 to 10 hours, the Yicheng-Shayang cross-section within 10 to 24 hours, and the Xiantao area approximately two days later. The arrival time of the flood peak at each typical cross-section exceeded 68 hours. Under the condition of concrete dam failure, the flood spread pattern in the mountainous areas near the dam was similar to that under the regulation and storage scenario, while the flood evolution speed in the plain areas was generally more than 3 hours slower than that under the engineering regulation and control scenario. In the case of sudden over-standard water inflow and earth dam failure, the flood and flood peak in the areas upstream of Zhongxiang arrived within 12 and 18 hours, respectively, while in the areas downstream of Zhongxiang, they arrived after 13 and 31 hours, respectively. There were high risks of embankment overflow in the section from Danjiang to Yicheng. Under the conditions of verification flood, design flood, dead water level failure of the concrete dam, and failure of the elevated part of the concrete dam, the inundation depth of most areas from the dam site to Fancheng, Xiangyang was 16-20 meters, while that downstream of Tianmen was less than 3 meters. In the case of a severe flood in which all soil and rocks collapsed, the inundation depth from the dam site to Fancheng, Xiangyang was approximately 35 meters, while that of the Danjiangkou section exceeded 50 meters. The flood in Shayang County caused the inundation of over 70% of the area in Qianjiang City, with the overall inundation depth below 2 meters. [Conclusion] Based on the above results, this study provides strong support for the emergency preparedness for the safety management of the Danjiangkou Reservoir Dam, the development of a visualized flood rehearsal, and the construction of a modern reservoir operation management matrix.

Key words： Danjiangkou Reservoir; sudden flood events; dam failure; flood evolution

0 引言

大坝漫顶溃决概率极小,但造成的危害极大,该问题也一直是我国水库大坝安全管理的重要关注点[1-2]。丹江口水库左右岸为土石坝、河床中部为混凝土重力坝,结构复杂,其安全管理问题长期以来备受关注。2008年,李昌志等[3-4]对丹江口水库溃坝洪水进行了模拟,综合考虑了一二期工程汛期特大洪水土坝全溃和二期工程条件下混凝土坝局部溃决情景,为当时丹江口水库防洪调度及安全管理提供了良好支撑。近些年,溃坝洪水分析技术越发成熟,计算方法愈发多样、溃口形式拟定愈加真实、入流边界优化愈加合理[5-9],HEC-HMS、MIKE FLOOD、暴雨洪水管理模型(Storm Water Management Model,SWMM)、InfoWorks ICM、FloodArea等洪水分析软件的广泛应用,使得洪水模拟结果更加准确[10-14];部分水库利用地理信息系统(Geographic Information System,GIS)、建筑信息模型(Building Information Modeling,BIM)结合遥感影像将模拟结果进行可视化展示[15-16],为流域防洪和工程调度提供了有力支持。
随着丹江口水库二期加高工程的完工和南水北调中线工程调水量的增加,丹江口水库工情、水情和流域下垫面要素发生了较大变化,且随着丹江口水库下游经济社会迅速发展,社会各界对丹江口水库安全管理问题的关注更加紧密;同时伴随着近些年数字孪生[17-21]、现代化运行管理矩阵建设要求[22-26]的提出,丹江口水库洪水推演过程、下游洪水演进及淹没损失可视化需求逐步提高,必须结合最新地形地貌、工情水情予以重新分析,同步修编水库大坝安全管理应急预案[23-24]。
因此,本文针对丹江口水库超标准泄洪情景进行了模拟,分析了下游洪水演进及淹没情况,以期为保障丹江口水库工程安全、供水安全提供更有力的支撑。

1 研究区域概况

丹江口水库位于湖北省丹江口市境内(见图1),是汉江控制性大型骨干工程和南水北调中线工程的水源地,具有防洪、发电、引水、灌溉、航运等综合效益。水库控制流域面积9.52万km2,多年平均天然入库径流量387.8亿m3,扣除上游耗损及蒸发后,实际多年平均入库径流量约为312.2亿m3。大坝由左右岸土石坝与河道重力坝组成,坝顶高程176.60 m,坝长3 442.00 m,正常蓄水位170.00 m、设计洪水位172.20 m、校核洪水位174.35 m、总库容319.50亿m3。设计洪水标准1 000 a一遇,校核洪水标准10 000 a一遇并加大20%,防洪调度执行预报预泄、补偿调节、分级控泄的原则,与上游石泉、安康等8座和下游王甫洲、崔家营等6座大型水利枢纽工程联合调度,为汉江中下游地区社会经济发展提供了坚实保障。
图1 研究区域地理位置及地形地貌概况

注:图中B1—B16红色文字为蓄滞洪区编号。

Fig.1 Location and topography of study area

2 研究方法及模型构建

2.1 计算原理及模型构建

以连续方程与动量方程[11,14]为基本方程,采用Mike系列模型软件构建下游河道及洪泛区二维水动力学模型,并使用丹江口水库坝址1983年典型洪水率定模型其他参数;考虑丹江口超标准泄洪及溃坝洪水量级,计算时忽略下垫面糙率对洪水演进的影响;大坝溃口及流量的选择采用有关技术规范推荐方法[27-28]。计算网格采用数字高程模型(Digital Elevation Model,DEM)构建,河道及河堤两侧采用实测地形加密;计算范围充分考虑洪水演进对下游重点城市的影响,纳入十堰、襄阳、荆门、天门、潜江、仙桃、武汉等9市28个县区;洪水分析设置丹江口(黄家港水文站)、老河口(王甫洲)、谷城、襄阳(襄阳水文站)、宜城、钟祥(皇庄)、沙洋(沙洋水文站)、仙桃(仙桃水文站)为典型断面。计算区域网格划分见图2。
图2 模拟区域网格剖分及加密情况

Fig.2 Simulation of regional mesh division and refinement

2.2 计算工况及情景设置

考虑当前筑坝技术水平和其他重要工程的研究成果,按照“最不利、最可能”原则设置模拟情景。将汛期平均流量2 000 m3/s条件下恒定流计算结果作为突发洪水事件的初始计算条件[3-4]。上游边界条件考虑正常运用和汛期运用工况超标准泄洪与溃坝洪水坝址处流量过程。计算范围选取长江武汉部分河段,上游边界条件给定多年平均汛期洪水流量41 100 m3/s,下边界为天兴洲上游,给定水位流量关系。情景设置详见表1。
表1 丹江口水库突发洪水计算情景设置

Table 1 Scenario settings for sudden flood calculation of Danjiangkou Reservoir

情景编号 情景描述
情景1 校核洪水过程经过水库调蓄后下泄
情景2 设计洪水过程经过水库调蓄后下泄
情景3 在战争等非常时期,坝前水位已降低到水库死水位(145 m),此时库容85亿m3,由于外部因素的作用,混凝土坝泄流坝段(长408 m)发生外力破坏,形成溃坝,溃口底高程为113 m,即泄洪深孔底高程
情景4 地震或恐怖袭击等外力作用下,混凝土大坝加高部分瞬间全部溃决,溃口宽度1 141 m,水库正常运用水位170.0 m,库容由272.05亿m3(水位170 m)降至196.46亿m3(水位162 m)
情景5 水库遭遇特大洪水漫坝(水位176.6 m),土坝发生渐进溃决,溃口底部高程105 m,平均宽度1 365 m,1 h溃完
情景6 水库遭遇特大洪水漫坝(水位176.6 m),土坝发生渐进溃决,溃口底部高程105 m,平均宽度1 365 m,2 h溃完
情景7 水库遭遇特大洪水漫坝(水位176.6 m),土坝发生渐进溃决,溃口底部高程105 m,平均宽度1 365 m,4 h溃完

3 洪水演进及淹没情况分析

3.1 洪水演进过程分析

从表2来看,工程调蓄作用下,各典型断面洪峰到达时间有所延迟,但洪水漫延速度仍然较快。情景1和情景2,丹江口市洪水在2~3 min到达,老河口和谷城区域洪水3 h内到达,襄阳至钟祥洪水8~16 h陆续到达,沙洋洪水13~16 h到达,仙桃洪水45~90 h后到达;典型断面洪峰出现时间在68 h以上,洪峰流量在丹江口至钟祥段达到30 000~40 000 m3/s量级、沙洋段达到10 000~13 000 m3/s量级、仙桃段达到1 000~2 000 m3/s量级;丹江口断面存在洪水越堤风险。
表2 不同情景各典型断面下泄洪水情况统计

Table 2 Statistics of flood discharge at typical cross-sections under different scenarios

洪水特征值 模拟情景
分类		 主要典型断面
丹江口 老河口 谷城 襄阳 宜城 钟祥 沙洋 仙桃
洪水到达
时间/h		 情景1 0.03(2 min) 2 3 9 10 13 17 45
情景2 0.05(3 min) 2 3 8 12 16 22 90
情景3 0.016(1 min) 2 4 7 8 18 23 100
情景4 0.03(2 min) 2 4 7 9 13 30 48
情景5 0.016(1 min) 0.75(45 min) 1.56 6 7 18 29 54
情景6 0.016(1 min) 1.01 2 5 6 15 17 42
情景7 0.016(1 min) 1.5 2.7 8 12 13 22 54
洪峰出现
时间/h		 情景1 68 70 71 104 113 168 197 240
情景2 85 86 89 118 126 179 232 240
情景3 0.18(11 min) 6 9 20 24 40 54 141
情景4 0.2(12 min) 7 12 23 36 39 106 178
情景5 0.016(1 min) 3 7 14 15 31 50 134
情景6 0.016(1 min) 4 9 17 18 47 49 59
情景7 0.016(1 min) 5 9 16 17 48 52 59
峰值水位/m 设计水位 96.45 88.9~91.5 84.5~86.4 69.92 58.4~64.4 59.19 44.5 36.2
情景1 101.6 85.21 81.43 67.91 63.53 49.51 44.09 25.9
情景2 98.83 84.37 79.74 66.4 62.63 48.68 43.81 25.97
情景3 112.1 89.49 85.55 68.18 63.21 48.51 43.64 26.2
情景4 106.59 86.83 82.98 67.16 62.85 51.05 43.69 30.77
情景5 141.41 104.3 100.49 80.94 71 52.18 44.47 29.93
情景6 141.55 104.23 100.77 81.31 71.21 52.35 44.47 30.08
情景7 141.61 104.53 100.97 81.47 71.3 52.47 44.48 30.12
峰值流量/
(m3·s-1)		 河道最大
允许泄量		 20 000~
22 000		 20 000~
22 000		 20 000~
22 000		 27 000~
28 300		 27 000~
28 300		 27 000~
30 000		 18 400~
19 400		 11 000~
15 000
情景1 43 288 42 913 41 902 39 558 39 128 25 943 13 335 1 086
情景2 29 990 29 523 29 037 28 160 25 713 18 716 10 682 1 786
情景3 123 089 105 777 93 834 39 677 30 961 17 885 9 447 1 151
情景4 76 238 64 139 61 062 31 145 27 846 17 044 9 835 2 673
情景5 899 876 635 621 526 139 267 978 265 889 256 383 25 809 2 838
情景6 889 219 664 088 538 979 403 791 348 375 168 347 26 587 2 894
情景7 859 311 643 234 543 810 409 933 354 156 174 793 23 917 2 960
情景3和情景4因提前采取了降低水位等预防措施,下泄洪水总量和坝址处洪水势能得到了有效控制,丹江口至襄阳断面洪水到达时间基本与情景1和情景2相近,钟祥、沙洋、仙桃洪水分别13~18、23~30、48~100 h到达。2种情景下,丹江口至谷城断面洪峰流量达到60 000~100 000 m3/s量级,襄阳至宜城断面达到30 000 m3/s量级,钟祥和沙洋断面达到10 000 m3/s量级,仙桃断面流量基本平稳,洪水基本在河道内演进,洪峰流量1 100~2 700 m3/s量级。2种情景洪峰出现时间较情景1和情景2提前了4 d左右,丹江口断面均存在洪水越堤风险;情景3下老河口、谷城断面也存在洪水越堤风险。
情景5—情景7,丹江口至宜城断面洪水到达时间均早于情景1—情景4,钟祥至沙洋断面洪水到达时间与情景1—情景4相近,仙桃断面基本在42~54 h到达。丹江口、老河口、谷城断面洪峰流量分别达到850 000 ~890 000、630 000~660 000、520 000~540 000m3/s 量级;情景5下,襄阳至沙洋断面峰值流量均达到26 000 m3/s量级;情景6和情景7,襄阳至钟祥断面峰值流量分别达到400 000、350 000、170 000 m3/s量级,沙洋和仙桃分别达到25 000、2 800 m3/s量级。3种情景下,钟祥及以上断面,洪峰到达时间与情景3和情景4相近;沙洋及以下断面较情景3和情景4提前。3种情景下,丹江口至宜城段存在洪水漫堤风险。
结合图3可知,上述7个情景,钟祥及以下断面的洪峰流量在地形影响下坦化明显,洪水演进速度总体上呈延缓趋势,但因坝址处初始阈值的影响,不同工况洪水动能和势能的差异导致各断面洪水到达时间和洪峰流量的差异。对比表2数据,情景1—情景4各断面峰值水位、峰值流量规律与洪水到达时间、洪峰出现时间规律表现一致;情景5—情景7峰值流量明显高于情景1至情景4近20倍,各断面洪峰出现时间明显提前,但钟祥以下断面的峰值水位与情景1—情景4相近。
图3 不同情景下各典型断面洪水演进情况

Fig.3 Flood evolution at typical cross-sections under different scenarios

究其原因,可能与部分情景下丹江口、老河口、谷城、襄阳、宜城等断面的洪水漫堤导致河道内洪水动能和势能有所削减有关,这与李昌志等[3]的研究结果相似。

3.2 下游淹没情况

淹没范围受地形影响,整体呈现上游淹没范围小、淹没深度大,下游淹没范围大、淹没深度小的特征(图4)。情景1—情景4,丹江口大坝至襄阳大部分区域淹没,淹没深度16~20 m;襄阳至钟祥两岸淹没范围进一步增加,进而影响京山、天门,淹没深度<3 m。沙洋境内水流倒灌东荆河,洪水越堤进入平原,导致潜江、沙市部分区域淹没。洪水在天门境内坦化,河道内洪水不再越堤漫溢。情景5—情景7,丹江口大坝至襄阳市樊城区淹没水深较大,大部分区域淹没深度在35 m左右,丹江口河段淹没深度>50 m;襄阳至钟祥两岸淹没范围进一步增加,钟祥、京山、沙洋部分沿江区域遭受淹没;钟祥境内洪水越堤淹没京山市南部区域,进而导致天门、汉川、应城、云梦、孝南等区域被淹,武汉东西湖区、蔡甸区、汉南区均发生大面积淹没,淹没深度<2 m。
图4 不同情景下最大淹没水深分布情况

Fig.4 Distribution of maximum inundation depth under different scenarios

4 结论

(1)钟祥上游山区洪水均漫延较快,下游平原洪水漫延有所延缓。工程调蓄有效推迟洪峰出现时间,但洪水漫延速度仍较快,沙洋以上区域洪水均在24 h内到达。混凝土坝局部溃坝情景(情况3—情况4),钟祥以上区域洪水规律与调蓄情景(情况1—情况2)相近,平原地区洪水演进整体缓于工程调控情景3 h以上。土石坝全溃工况(情况5—情况7),洪水及洪峰出现时间均较快,钟祥以上区域洪水和洪峰分别在12 h和18 h以内达到,钟祥以下区域洪水和洪峰分别在13 h和31 h后到达;丹江至宜城河段出现较多漫堤现象。
(2)淹没范围受地形影响,整体上呈现出上游淹没范围小、淹没深度大,下游淹没范围大、淹没深度小的特征。其中在情景1—情景4,丹江口大坝至襄阳市樊城区大部分区域淹没深度在16~20 m,天门下游区域淹没深度<3 m。情景5—情景7,丹江口大坝至襄阳市樊城区淹没深度在35 m左右,丹江口河段淹没深度>50 m;沙洋县境内,水流倒灌支流导致上游潜江市有>70%区域淹没、沙市北部区域遭受洪水淹没,整体淹没深度<2 m。
(3)因丹江口水库洪水体量过大, 本文模拟未考虑溃口演变、 上下游联防联调、 下游蓄滞洪区分洪蓄洪滞洪和区间洪水叠加效应, 模拟溃口洪水下泄流速、 流量、 动能偏大, 导致洪峰流量、 峰值水位高于实际情况, 洪水演进时间快于实际情况, 下游淹没区域大于实际情况。 因此, 在后续优化模拟时, 需继续深化溃口演变、 联防联调和应急抢险等作用对下游洪水演进以及淹没范围的影响, 以期为保障丹江口水库及下游区域防洪安全提供了更可靠支撑。

参考文献

原文顺序 | 文献年度倒序 | 文中引用次数倒序
[1]
张建云, 盛金保, 金君良, 等. 全国水库大坝应急管理存在问题和对策建议[J]. 中国应急管理科学, 2022(9):23-30.

(Zhang Jian-yun, Sheng Jin-bao, Jin Jun-liang, et al. The Problems and Countermeasures of Reservoir-dam Emergency Management in China[J]. Journal of China Emergency Management Science, 2022(9):23-30. (in Chinese))

[2]
盛金保, 李宏恩, 盛韬桢. 我国水库溃坝及其生命损失统计分析[J]. 水利水运工程学报, 2023(1): 1-15.

(Sheng Jin-bao, Li Hong-en, Sheng Tao-zhen. Statistical Analysis of Dam Failure and Its Loss of Life in China[J]. Hydro-Science and Engineering, 2023(1): 1-15. (in Chinese))

[3]
李昌志, 黄金池, 何晓燕, 等. 丹江口水库溃坝洪水分析[J]. 长沙理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2008, 5(3): 1-7.

(Li Chang-zhi, Huang Jin-chi, He Xiao-yan, et al. Flood Caused by Dam Failure of the Danjiangkou Reservoir[J]. Journal of Changsha University of Science and Technology (Natural Science), 2008, 5(3): 1-7. (in Chinese))

[4]
李昌志, 黄金池, 何晓燕, 等. 丹江口水库洪水风险图编制[J]. 中国防汛抗旱, 2008, 18(4): 63-66.

(Li Chang-zhi, Huang Jin-chi, He Xiao-yan, et al. Compilation of Flood Risk Map of Danjiangkou Reservoir[J]. China Flood and Drought Management, 2008, 18(4): 63-66. (in Chinese))

[5]
务境飞. 尾矿堆积坝溃口演变规律及溃坝模拟[D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2019.

(Wu Jing-fei. Evolution Law of Tailings Accumulation Dam and Simulation of Dam Break[D]. Nanchang: Nanchang University, 2019. (in Chinese))

[6]
张卓, 张新华. 紫坪铺水库溃坝洪水风险分析[J]. 科学技术创新, 2025(5): 183-187.

(Zhang Zhuo, Zhang Xin-hua. Risk Analysis of Zipingpu Reservoir Dam Break Floods[J]. Scientific and Technological InnovationInformation, 2025(5): 183-187. (in Chinese))

[7]
杨蒙, 钟启明, 林忠, 等. 沥青混凝土心墙坝漫顶溃坝试验与溃坝过程数值模拟[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2024, 46(7): 1534-1540.

(Yang Meng, Zhong Qi-ming, Lin Zhong, et al. Model Tests and Numerical Simulation of Overtopping-induced Breach Process of Asphalt Concrete Core Dams[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2024, 46(7): 1534-1540. (in Chinese))

[8]
李同春, 贾玉彤, 李宏恩, 等. 基于改进SPH模型的溃坝洪水演进模拟方法[J]. 水科学进展, 2023, 34(5):744-752.

(Li Tong-chun, Jia Yu-tong, Li Hong-en, et al. Simulation Method of Dam Break Flood Propagation Based on Improved SPH Model[J]. Advances in Water Science, 2023, 34(5): 744-752. (in Chinese))

[9]
Samma H, Khosrojerdi A, Rostam-Abadi M, et al. Numerical Simulation of Scour and Flow Field over Movable Bed Induced by a Submerged Wall Jet[J]. Journal of Hydroinformatics, 2020, 22(2): 385-401.

DOI

[10]
刘梦凡. 二维非黏性土石坝溃决改进模型的开发与验证[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2022.

(Liu Meng-fan. Development and Validation of Improved 2D Non-cohesive Embankment Breach Model[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University, 2022. (in Chinese))

[11]
邵广哲, 李云瑶, 宋利祥, 等. 基于一维、二维耦合水动力模型的水库溃坝洪水演进分析[J]. 大坝与安全, 2024(6): 61-67.

(Shao Guang-zhe, Li Yun-yao, Song Li-xiang, et al. Analysis of Dam-break Flood Propagation Based on 1D and 2D Coupled Hydraulic Model[J]. Dam & Safety, 2024(6): 61-67. (in Chinese))

[12]
李红艳, 郝景开, 刘大为, 等. 基于元启发式算法优化的洪水风险评价模型[J/OL]. 水资源保护, 2024: 1-17. (2024-07-10). https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=SZYB2024070300E&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ.

(Li Hong-yan, Hao Jing-kai, Liu Da-wei, et al. Flood Risk Assessment Model Based on Meta-heuristic Algorithm Optimization[J/OL]. Water Resources Protection, 2024: 1-17. (2024-07-10). https://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=SZYB2024070300E&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ. (in Chinese))

[13]
石振明, 周明俊, 彭铭, 等. 崩滑型堰塞坝漫顶溃决机制及溃坝洪水研究进展[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2021, 40(11): 2173-2188.

(Shi Zhen-ming, Zhou Ming-jun, Peng Ming, et al. Research Progress on Overtopping Failure Mechanisms and Breaching Flood of Landslide Dams Caused by Landslides and Avalanches[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2021, 40(11): 2173-2188. (in Chinese))

[14]
闫琪琪. 溃坝洪水的数值模型研究与应用[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2020.

(Yan Qi-qi. Research and Application of Numerical Model of Dam-break Flood[D]. Dalian: Dalian University of Technology, 2020. (in Chinese))

[15]
来亦姝, 张社荣, 王超, 等. 洪水演进融合三维动态可视化关键技术与应用[J]. 天津大学学报(自然科学与工程技术版), 2024, 57(12): 1232-1244.

(Lai Yi-shu, Zhang She-rong, Wang Chao, et al. Key Technologies and Application of Three-dimensional Dynamic Visualization of Flood Evolution[J]. Journal of Tianjin University, 2024, 57(12): 1232-1244. (in Chinese))

[16]
苏强. 水利工程BIM+GIS协同管理平台研发与应用[J]. 人民黄河, 2024, 46(11): 133-136, 148.

(Su Qiang. Research and Application of BIM+GIS Collaborative Management Platform for Hydraulic Engineering Works[J]. Yellow River, 2024, 46(11): 133-136, 148. (in Chinese))

[17]
冶运涛, 梁犁丽, 曹引, 等. 流域洪水演进实时高效可视化仿真方法[J]. 应用基础与工程科学学报, 2020, 28(2): 271-286.

(Ye Yun-tao, Liang Li-li, Cao Yin, et al. A Real-time and Efficient Method of Visual Simulation of Flood Routing in River Basin[J]. Journal of Basic Science and Engineering, 2020, 28(2): 271-286. (in Chinese))

[18]
冶运涛, 蒋云钟, 梁犁丽, 等. 数字孪生流域: 未来流域治理管理的新基建新范式[J]. 水科学进展, 2022, 33(5): 683-704.

(Ye Yun-tao, Jiang Yun-zhong, Liang Li-li, et al. Digital Twin Watershed: New Infrastructure and New Paradigm of Future Watershed Governance and Management[J]. Advances in Water Science, 2022, 33(5): 683-704. (in Chinese))

[19]
黄艳, 喻杉, 罗斌, 等. 面向流域水工程防灾联合智能调度的数字孪生长江探索[J]. 水利学报, 2022, 53(3): 253-269.

(Huang Yan, Yu Shan, Luo Bin, et al. Development of the Digital Twin Changjiang River with the Pilot System of Joint and Intelligent Regulation of Water Projects for Flood Management[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2022, 53(3): 253-269. (in Chinese))

[20]
谢明霞. 数字孪生水利内涵及应用场景研究[J]. 人民长江, 2024, 55(2): 245-251, 264.

(Xie Ming-xia. Connotation and Application Scenarios of Digital Twin Water Conservancy[J]. Yangtze River, 2024, 55(2): 245-251, 264. (in Chinese))

[21]
马强, 李郑淼, 董芳睿, 等. 流域数字孪生防洪模型的构建:以子牙河“23·7”大洪水复盘为例[J]. 水利学报, 2025, 56(1):73-84.

(Ma Qiang, Li Zheng-miao, Dong Fang-rui, et al. Flood Modeling Developed for Digital Twin Watershed: a Case Study of “23·7” Great Flood Assessment in Ziya River Basin[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2025, 56(1): 73-84. (in Chinese))

[22]
张文洁. 夯实水利工程安全管理基础提升现代化运行管理水平[J]. 中国水利, 2023(24): 15-16.

(Zhang Wen-jie. Consolidate the Foundation of Safety Management of Water Conservancy Projects and Improve the Level of Modern Operation Management[J]. China Water Resources, 2023(24): 15-16. (in Chinese))

[23]
刘六宴. 构建现代化水库运行管理矩阵与发展水利新质生产力[J]. 中国水利, 2024(9): 5-8.

(Liu Liu-yan. Accelerating the Development of Modern Reservoir Operation and Management Matrix to Foster New Quality Productive Forces of Water Conservancy[J]. China Water Resources, 2024(9): 5-8. (in Chinese))

[24]
赵永涛, 党永超. 大型水库大坝安全管理应急预案编制实践和探讨[J]. 人民黄河, 2024, 46(增刊1): 121-122, 124.

(Zhao Yong-tao, Dang Yong-chao. Practice and Discussion on the Compilation of Emergency Plan for Dam Safety Management of Large Reservoirs[J]. Yellow River, 2024, 46(Supp. 1): 121-122, 124. (in Chinese))

[25]
方卫华, 袁威, 杨浩东. 现代化水库运行管理矩阵体系分析与构建关键问题研究[J]. 中国水利, 2024(4):53-60.

(Fang Wei-hua, Yuan Wei, Yang Hao-dong. Studies on Key Issues Related to Construction of a Modern Reservoir Operation and Management Matrix System[J]. China Water Resources, 2024(4): 53-60. (in Chinese))

[26]
付建军. 丹江口水库现代化运行管理矩阵构建实践[J]. 中国水利, 2024(20): 25-33, 44.

(Fu Jian-jun. Construction of a Modernized Operation and Management Matrix for the Danjiangkou Reservoir[J]. China Water Resources, 2024(20): 25-33, 44. (in Chinese))

[27]
SL/T164—2019,溃坝洪水模拟技术规程[S]. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 2019.

(SL/T164-2019,Technical Codefor Simulation of Dam Break Flow[S]. Beijing: China Water Resources and Hydropower Press, 2019. (in Chinese))

[28]
姚志坚, 彭瑜. 溃坝洪水数值模拟及其应用[M]. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 2013.

(Yao Zhi-jian, Peng Yu. Numerical Simulation of Dam-break Flood and Its Application[M]. Beijing: China Water & Power Press, 2013. (in Chinese))

Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

*严禁使用本系统存储、处理、传输涉密信息*
版权所有 © 《长江科学院院报》编辑部
技术支持：北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司