Monitoring the deformation and strain analysis on the Ataturk Dam, Turkey

Abstract

Every man-made structure creates certain risks -dams are no exception. Most failures in man-made structures that have occurred could have been avoided if the structures' behaviour had been inspected, monitored, and analyzed continuously, and if proper corrective measures had been taken in a timely fashion. The DSI (The General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works), which is the institution responsible for dam safety, has long used surveying methods to measure the displacements of geodetic points as a part of dam monitoring policy. In this study, we focus on the dam's mechanical behaviour throughout a time period of more than 10 years. These study results have been derived from a separate, ongoing project that has monitored deformation on the Ataturk Dam and is now determining the water level of the reservoir. The project results show that although the dam body has become more stable and the water load behind the dam has increased, the rate of displacement of the dam has declined significantly. From these results, it can be seen that the reservoir water level can be increased evenly over time and that 542 m is the maximum water level of the dam's reservoir.

Risking to underestimate the integrity risk

“…These findings show that one indeed runs a serious risk of underestimating the actual integrity risk (or overestimating the confidence level) when using the unconditional distributions instead of the conditional ones. We hereby note that our findings, although demonstrated by means of an application of the DIA procedure, are equally valid for any other method of fault detection and exclusion, and, therefore, hold true for a wide variety of different applications, such as geodetic quality control (Kösters and van der Marel 1990;Amiri Simkooei 2001;Perfetti 2006), navigational integrity (Teunissen 1990b;Gillissen and Elema 1996;Yang et al 2014), structural health integrity (Verhoef and de Heus 1995;Yavaşoğlu et al 2017;Durdag et al 2018), and integrity monitoring of GNSS (Jonkman and de Jong 2000;Kuusniemi et al 2004;Hewitson and Wang 2006). Finally, a summary with conclusions are presented.…”

Geodetic monitoring of earth-filled flood embankment subjected to variable loads

“…Kalkan (2014) indicates that the di erences in displacement values determined by these techniques are not greater than 10 mm, while the required measurement accuracy for horizontal displacement of rockll dams is 20-30 mm. A similar analysis was performed by Yavaşoğlu et al (2018), giving detailed results for 30 points, for which the di erence between classic and GNSS results equals ca. 8 mm (mean absolute error) for a period of 6 years.…”

Determination of the Stability of High-Steep Slopes by Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Real-Time Monitoring in Long Wall Mining

“…Small crustal deformation caused by slow slip events in southwest Japan was detected using GNSS and tremor data [28]. GNSS also is applied in frost heave deformation [29,30], volcanic deformation [31,32], mining subsidence [33], bridge deformation [34,35], and dam deformation [36,37], and so on. The advantages of GNSS monitoring are (a) allow sampling at any time interval, (b) remote and severe weather data collection can be achieved, (c) avoid human errors caused by manual readings and records, (d) 24 h a day for continuous monitoring.…”