請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/50304
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 陳發林 | |
dc.contributor.author | Bo-Wei Wang | en |
dc.contributor.author | 王柏崴 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T12:35:41Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2026-07-30 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2016-08-24 | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2016-07-30 | |
dc.identifier.citation | [1] 臺北翡翠水庫管理局。2015。翡翠水庫下遊河道變遷與防洪能力檢討。
[2] 魏莨伊。2016年2月24日。淤沙量歷年最高 大台北水源直潭壩蓄水力砍半。聯合報。 [3] 經濟部水利署第十河川局。2010。新店溪中上游段治理規劃報告(2/3)。 [4] 經濟部水利署第十河川局。2015。「新店溪中上游廣興地區河段河川治理方案」研商會議會議記錄。經濟部水利署第十河川局舉辦。 [5] Chisholm, I. 1999. Dam removal success stories: restoring rivers through selective removal of dams that don’t make sense. American Rivers, Friends of the Earth, Trout Unlimited Report, Washington, D.C. [6] Dadswell, M. J. 1996. The removal of Edwards Dam, Kennebec River, Maine: Its effects on the restoration of anadromous fishes. Draft environmental impact statement, Kennebec River, Maine, Appendices 1–3, 92 pp. [7] Bednarek, A.T. 2001. Undamming rivers: A review of the ecological impacts of dam removal. Environmental Management. 27(6): 803–814. [8] Kondolf, G. M. 1997. Hungry water: Effects of dams and gravel mining on river channels. Environmental Management. 21(4): 533-551. [9] Flessa, K. W., Dettman, D. L., Schöne, B. R., Goodwin, D. H., Rodriguez, C. A., and Noggle, S. K. 2001. Since the dams: Historical ecology of the Colorado Delta. Poster presented at United States –Mexico Colorado River Delta Symposium, International Boundary and Water Commission. [10] Born, S.M., K.D. Genskow, T.L. Filbert, N. Hernandez-Mora, M.L. Keefer, and K.A. White. 1998. Socioeconomic and institutional dimensions of dam removals: the Wisconsin experience. Environmental Management 22(3):359-370. [11] O’Connor, J. E. , Duda, J. J., and Grant, G. E. 2015. 1000 dams down and counting. Science. 348(6234): 496–497. [12] Shuman, J. R. 1995. Environmental Considerations for Assessing Dam Removal Alternatives for River Restoration. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management.11: 249-261. [13] Doyle, M. W., E. H. Stanley and J. M. Harbor. 2002. Geomorphic analogies for assessing probable channel response to dam removal. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 38(6): 1567-1579. [14] Pizzuto, J. 2002. Effects of dam removal on river form and process. BioScience. 52: 683-692. [15] Evans,J.E. 2007. 'Sediment Impacts of the 1994 Failure of IVEX Dam (Chagrin River, NE Ohio): A Test of Channel Evolution Models.'Journal of Great Lakes Research, 33(sp2), 90-102. [16] 王筱雯、郭偉丞、張家豪。2013。七家灣溪拆壩後之河道演變模式。中華水土保持學報44(4):271-281。 [17] Doyle, M.W., Stanley, E.H., Harbor, J.M. .2003. Channel adjustments following two dam removals in Wisconsin. Water Resources Research. 39: 1011. [18] Harris, N., Evans, J.E. .2014. Channel evolution of sandy reservoir sediments following low-head dam removal, Ottawa River, Northwestern Ohio, U.S.A. Open Journal of Modern Hydrology. 04: 44–56 [19] Pearson, A.J., Snyder, N.P., Collins, M. 2011. Rates and processes of channel response to dam removal with a sand-filled impoundment. Water Resource Research. 47(8). [20] Wilcox, A.C., O'Connor, J.E., Major, J.J. 2014. Rapid reservoir erosion, hyperconcentrated flow, and downstream deposition triggered by breaching of 38-m-tall Condit Dam, White Salmon River, Washington. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 119: 1376-1394. [21] Major, J. J., O'Connor, J. E., Pedolak, C. J., Spicer, K. R., Wallick, J. R., Bragg, H. M., Pittman, S., Wilcok, P. R., Rhode, A., and Grant, G. E. 2010. Evolving Fluvial Response of the Sandy River, Oregon, Following Removal of Marmot Dam. 2nd Joint Federal Interagency Conference. Las Vegas. [22] Kibler, K. M., Tullos, D. D., and Kondolf, G. M. 2011. Evolving expectations of dam removal outcomes: Downstream geomorphic effects following removal of a small, gravel-filled dam. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc., 47: 408–423. [23] Stewart, G. 2005. Patterns and Processes of Sediment Transport Following Sediment-Filled Dam Removal in Gravel Bed Rivers. Ph.D. Dissertation, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. [24] Burroughs, B.A., Hayes, D.B., Klomp, K.D., Hansen, J.F.,and Mistak, J. 2009. Effects of Stronach Dam removal on fluvial geomorphology in the Pine River, Michigan, United States. Geomorphology, 110: 96–107. [25] Riggsbee, J.A., Julian, J.P., Doyle, M.W., Wetzel, R.G.2007. Suspended sediment, dissolved organic carbon, and dissolved nitrogen export during the dam removal process. Water Resource Research. 43(9): 1-16. [26] Draut, A.E., Ritchie, A.C. 2013. Sedimentology of new fluvial deposits on the Elwha River, Washington, USA, formed during large-scale dam removal. River Res. Appl. 31: 42-61 [27] Gottgens, J. F., Arceo, A. I., and Crail, T. D. 2009. Impact of the Removal of the Secor Road Dam on the Fish Community Structure and Composition in the Ottawa River, Ohio. Final Report- Project 06(h) EPA 10. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Columbus, Ohio. [28] Orr, C.H., Kroiss, S.J., Rogers, K.L., Stanley, E.H. 2008. Downstream benthic responses to small dam removal in a coldwater stream. River Res. Appl. 24: 804–822. [29] Doyle M.W., Stanley, E.H., Orr C.H., Selle, A.R., Sethi, S.A., and Harbor, J.M. 2005.Stream ecosystem response to small dam removal: lessons from the Heartland.Geomorphology. 71: 227–244. [30] 白音包力皋、許鳳冉、陳興茹、陳文學。2012。小浪底水庫排沙對下游魚類的影響研究。水利學報43(10):1146-1153。 [31] Sethi, S. A., Selle, A. R., Doyle, M. W., Stanley, E. H., and Kitchel, H. E. 2004. Response of unionid mussels to dam removal in Koshkonong Creek, Wisconsin (USA). Hydrobiologia. 525:157–165. [32] Cooper, J. E. 2011. Unionid mussel mortality from habitat from habitat loss in the salmon river. Advances in Environmental Research. 14: 351-364. [33] Heise, R. J., Cope, W. C., Kwak, T. J., and Eads, C. B. 2013. Short-term effects of small dam removal on a freshwater mussel assemblage. Walkerana. 6: 41–52. [34] Sawaske, S.R., Freyberg, D.L. 2012. A comparison of past small dam removals in highly sediment-impacted systems in the US. Geomorphology. 151: 50–58. [35] Cantelli, A., Paola, C., and Parker, G. 2004. Experiments on upstream-migrating erosional narrowing and widening of an incisional channel caused by dam removal, Water Resour. Res. 40: 1-12 [36] Grant, G.E., Lewis, S.L. 2015. The remains of the dam: what have we learned from 15 years of US dam removals? Engineering Geology for Society and Territory. 3: 31–35 [37] 經濟部水利署北區水資源局。2015。蓄水設施簡介。 網址: http://www.wranb.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=1203&ctNode=323&mp=5。 [38] 經濟部水利屬第十河川局。2014。新店溪中上游段堰壩操作機制對於洪水位影響分析研究(1/2)。 [39] Moges, E. M. 2010. Evaluation of Sediment Transport Equations and Parameter Sensitivity Analysis Using the SRH-2D Model. MS Thesis in Universitat Stuttgart. [40] 經濟部水利署。2016。新店溪上游流域保育治理及區域穩定供水綱要計畫。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/50304 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 台灣地區地勢變化劇烈加上豐枯季節明顯,為了蓄水之故,新店溪上共建了五座水壩,但水壩的存在阻斷水流自然流動迫使泥砂淤積於水庫中,上游底床受淤以及壩體回水作用導致河岸兩處居民在洪水時期容易受淹水影響。
翡翠水庫為因應民國101年蘇拉颱風而採取放流操作,造成下游河段直潭壩至粗坑壩之間的屈尺及廣興地區發生嚴重洪災,許多廣興地區居民對於直潭壩在颱洪時期的操作存有疑慮,懷疑是因直潭壩開啟閘門時間過慢或者閘門並無全開起,才導致廣興地區嚴重淹水,又在築高堤會破壞當地自然景觀的考量之下,建議直接廢除直潭壩,期許能解決颱洪時期的淹水問題,因此本研究主旨在藉由模擬探討廢除直潭壩後的水砂分布行為,並以模擬結果作為參考,討論拆壩後是否能解決廣興及屈尺地區的淹水問題,或是否能夠有效提升兩地區的洪水保護標準。 本研究主要分為兩部分:第一部分為參考國內外相關的拆壩文獻,了解拆壩後實際河川的水砂分布現象;第二部分則為運用數值模擬軟體分別進行定床模擬及動床模擬,模擬範圍在粗坑壩至思源橋之間,藉由兩模擬結果比較屈尺及廣興地區在拆壩前後的水位差異。 在各重現期下定量流模擬60小時的結果顯示2年及5年重現期下,廣興及屈尺地區的水位僅能降低數十公分,在10年以上重現期水位降低幅度始大於1公尺,但仍無法解決兩地區的淹水問題,而在以5年重現期下定量流模擬300小時的結果中,上游底床受更顯著的沖刷狀況下,廣興地區的淹水問題能完全被改善,屈尺地區的淹水深度亦大幅下降2公尺,最後在民國104年蘇迪勒颱風之歷線作為模擬的邊界條件下則發現,歷經單場蘇迪勒規模的颱風後,兩地區的水位高程沒有降低,而歷經六場的結果與以5年重現期定量流模擬60小時的結果相似。 由模擬結果知曉,拆壩後廣興及屈尺地區的底床在短期內並不會受到顯著改變,必須在不斷歷經大規模的颱洪事件之後,主深槽底床才能明顯受沖刷進而改善此二地區的洪災問題,而定量流與變量流在上游河段的沖淤位置一致,僅量級的不同,因此可以確定拆壩後的泥砂分布位置,以利政府單位疏浚。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | In Taiwan, due to the special terrain with high gradient slope and large flow velocity, 5 dams were built on Xindian River for water conservation. However, the existence of dams would cause sediment accumulation in the reservoir. Sediment deposition occurs the area of cross-section of river channel in upstream decreases, which leads to the residents beside the river banks would be easily impacted by the flood.
In response to the Saola Typhoon in 2012, Jade Reservoir took releasing operation, which caused the Guangsing and Quchi area between Zhitan and Tskeng Dam were seriously impacted by flood disaster. Many residents in Guangsing area doubted that the gates of Zhitan dam had not be operated correctly during this typhoon event, so they proposed to remove the Zhitan Dam to resolve the flooding issues. Therefore, the main purpose of this research is to discuss the sediment distribution after removing the Zhitan Dam by using numerical simulation. This research was conducted in two phases. The first phase was referring to scientific and technical literatures relevant to dam removal. The second phase was using numerical simulation software SRH-2D to simulate fixed-bed and mobile-bed conditions. The range of numerical simulation was between Tsukeng Dam and Si-Yuan Bridge. In the conclusion, 60 hours simulation under 2 and 5-year return period with steady inflow cases show that the water elevation in Guangsing and Quchi area could only descend tens of centimeter, but the descent value would be higher than 1 meter under the steady inflow case of 10-year return period. However, the flooding issues still exist in those two areas. The result indicated that the flooding issue in Guangsing area could be completely improved and the water elevation in Quchi area would be lowers for two meters under 300 hours of 5-year return period steady flow simulation. Finally, we used Soudelor Typhoon inflow hydrograph as boundary condition to simulate the situation under unsteady inflow. We found that the water elevation of those two areas did not change after experience single Soudelor Typhoon, and after 7 soudelor Typhoon, the result was similar to 60 hours simulation under 5-year return period steady inflow case. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T12:35:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-R03543031-1.pdf: 3944168 bytes, checksum: 1b8f8b89ee22984719e640ec4e46a87a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 致謝 i
摘要 ii Abstract iii 目錄 v 圖目錄 vii 表目錄 ix 第一章 緒論 1 1.1 研究背景 1 1.2 研究動機 3 1.3 研究方法 4 第二章 拆壩文獻回顧 6 2.1 拆壩歷史及動機 6 2.2 拆壩後上游河道變化 7 2.3 不同拆壩方法下的河道變化 10 2.3.1一次性拆壩法下之河道變化 10 2.3.2階段性拆壩法下之河道變化 15 2.4 不同拆壩方法下的生態變化 16 2.4.1一次性拆壩法下之生態變化 16 2.4.2階段性拆壩法下之生態變化 18 2.5 兩種拆壩方法比較 19 2.6 小結 24 第三章 資料蒐集分析與軟體介紹 25 3.1 資料蒐集分析 25 3.1.1直潭壩資料 25 3.1.2河道底床高程資料 25 3.1.3河道大斷面資料 25 3.1.3河床質粒徑分布及曼寧係數 26 3.1.4各重現期下之入流及出口水位 27 3.1.5蘇迪勒颱風入流及出口水位歷線 28 3.2 軟體介紹 29 3.2.1 SMS模擬軟體 29 3.2.2 SRH-2D模擬軟體 29 第四章 模擬結果 31 4.1 底床內插計算結果 32 4.2 各重現期下定床模擬結果 35 4.2.1各重現期下定床模擬直潭壩上游結果 39 4.2.2各重現期下定床模擬直潭壩下游結果 42 4.3 各重現期下動床模擬60小時後之結果 43 4.3.1各重現期下動床模擬60小時直潭壩上游結果 52 4.3.2各重現期下動床模擬60小時直潭壩下游結果 57 4.4 五年重現期下動床模擬300小時結果 58 4.5 蘇迪勒颱風流況下之動床模擬結果 60 第五章 結論 68 5.1 結論 68 5.2 未來展望 69 參考文獻 71 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 動床模擬廢除直潭壩以改善屈尺及廣興地區淹水問題之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Morphodynamics Simulation on Zhitan Dam Removal to Improve Flooding Issue in Quchi and Guangsing Area | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 104-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 李鴻源,賴進松,譚義績 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 廣興,屈尺,拆壩,直潭壩,動床模擬, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Zhitan Dam,dam removal,Guangsing,Quchi,mobile-bed simulation, | en |
dc.relation.page | 74 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201601678 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2016-08-01 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 工學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 應用力學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 應用力學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-105-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.85 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。