Usoi Dam Wave Overtopping and Flood Routing in the 

Bartang and Panj Rivers, Tajikistan 

Prepared in cooperation with the 

U.S. Agency for International Development, 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4004 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 
Cover photograph: 

The Usoi dam was created in the winter of 1911 after an earthquake caused a rock slide that completely 

blocked the valley of the Bartang River in the Pamir Mountains of southeastern Tajikistan. At present the dam 

impounds 17 million cubic meters of water in Lake Sarez. A major flood emanating from Lake Sarez could be 

devastating to millions of people downstream, not only in Tajikistan but also in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and 

Turkmenistan. (Photograph courtesy of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Johnson Space 

Center, Image Science and Analysis Laboratory.) 
Usoi Dam Wave Overtopping and Flood Routing in the 

Bartang and Panj Rivers, Tajikistan

By John Risley, Joseph Walder, and Roger Denlinger 

Prepared in cooperation with the 

U.S. Agency for International Development, 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4004 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 
U.S. Department of the Interior

Dirk A. Kempthorne, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 

For product and ordering information: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, 

 its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

Suggested citation: Risley, John, Walder, Joseph , and Denlinger, Roger, 2006, Usoi Dam Wave Overtopping and Flood Routing in the 

Bartang and Panj Rivers, Tajikistan, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4004, 28 p.

Use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not 

imply endorsement by the U.S. Government 

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 

ii 
Contents 

Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope.............................................................................................................................................3

Description of the Study Area...........................................................................................................................4

Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................................................................5

Probable Flood Hydrograph Determination .......................................................................................................5

Landslide-Generated Floods .............................................................................................................................6

Wave Generation.............................................................................................................................................6

Wave Runup .....................................................................................................................................................6

Overtopping ......................................................................................................................................................6

Dam Breach Flood...............................................................................................................................................9

Flood Routing ...........................................................................................................................................................9

Model Selection ..................................................................................................................................................9

Model Description.............................................................................................................................................10

Channel Configuration......................................................................................................................................10

Roughness Coefficients ...................................................................................................................................11

Simulations.........................................................................................................................................................12

Overtopping Floods .......................................................................................................................................12

Dam-Breach Flood ........................................................................................................................................17

Limitations ..............................................................................................................................................................20

Summary and Conclusions..................................................................................................................................21

References Cited...................................................................................................................................................22

Appendix A: Alternative Investigation...............................................................................................................24

Appendix B: Method of Estimating the Starting Hydrograph for the Overtopping Flood Scenarios.....24

Wave generation and propagation................................................................................................................25

Wave runup........................................................................................................................................................27

Overtopping........................................................................................................................................................27

Appendix C: Method of Estimating the Starting Hydrograph for the Dam-Breach Flood Scenario.......29

iii 
Figures 

 1. Study area reach.............................................................................................................................2 

 2. Lake Sarez and the Usoi Dam .......................................................................................................3 

 3. Bartang-Panj River reach longitudinal bed-channel profile ..........................................................5 

 4. Hydrographs showing change in discharge with time for overtopping and dam-breach floods ...8 

 5. Relationship between water depth and cross-sectional area........................................................11 

 6. Flow depth profiles of the 87 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood at 5-hour 

intervals .......................................................................................................................................13 

 7. Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 87 million cubic meter volume 

overtopping flood ........................................................................................................................15 

 8. Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 22 million cubic meter volume 

overtopping flood ........................................................................................................................15 

 9. Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 2 million cubic meter volume 

overtopping flood ........................................................................................................................16 

 10. Wetting front arrival times of the three overtopping floods ........................................................17 

 11. Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the dam-breach flood ...............................19 

 12. Wetting front arrival time of the dam-breach flood.....................................................................19 

Tables 

 1. Summary of overtopping flood characteristics............................................................................... 7 

 2. Summary of dam-breach flood characteristics ............................................................................... 9 

 3. Input water prism dimensions used for the overtopping flood simulations.................................. 12 

iv 
Conversion Factors 

Multiply By To obtain 

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch

meter 3.281 foot 

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile 

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile 

cubic meter (m3

) 1.308 cubic yard (yd3) 

cubic meter per second(m3

/s) 35.31 cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) is calculated as follows:

°F = (1.8°C+32)

In this report vertical coordinates are referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929)—a 

geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada. 

v 
This page is intentionally blank.

vi 
Usoi Dam Wave Overtopping and Flood Routing in the 

Bartang and Panj Rivers, Tajikistan

By John Risley, Joseph Walder, and Roger Denlinger 

Abstract 

The Usoi dam was created in the winter of 1911 after an enormous seismogenic rock slide 

completely blocked the valley of the Bartang River in the Pamir Mountains of southeastern Tajikistan. 

At present the dam impounds 17 million cubic meters of water in Lake Sarez. 

Flood volume and discharge estimates were made for several landslide generated floods that 

could overtop the dam. For landslide volumes of 200, 500, and 1,000 million cubic meters, estimated 

overtopping flood volumes were 2, 22, and 87 million cubic meters of water, respectively. Estimated 

peak discharge at the dam for these three flood scenarios were 57,000, 490, 000, and 1,580,000 cubic 

meters per second, based on triangular hydrographs of 70-, 90-, and 110-second durations, 

respectively. 

Flood-routing simulations were made for the three landslide-induced overtopping floods over a 

530-kilometer reach of the Bartang and Panj Rivers below the Usoi dam. A one-dimensional flow 

model using a Riemann numerical solution technique was selected for the study. A constant 50-meter 

wide rectangular channel, which represented the mean channel width, was used for the entire reach. A 

roughness coefficient of 0.038, appropriate for steep mountainous streams, also was used for the entire 

reach. 

For the 87 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood scenario, the peak flows were 

approximately 1,100, 800, and 550 cubic meters per second at locations 50, 100, and 150 kilometers 

downstream of the dam, respectively. 

The model was also used to simulate the less likely scenario of an instantaneous dam breach 

and draining of the total volume of the lake. Simulated peak flows were approximately 64,000, 52,000, 

40,000, and 20,000 cubic meters per second at locations 50, 100, 150, and 530 kilometers downstream 

of the Usoi dam. 

Introduction 

In the winter of 1911 an enormous seismogenic rock slide completely blocked the valley of the 

Bartang River in the Pamir Mountains of southeastern Tajikistan (fig. 1) (Alford and Schuster, 2000). 

The Usoi landslide dam, named after a village that was buried by the slide, is the highest dam—natural 

or man made—in the world. Following emplacement of the Usoi landslide dam, which has a thickness 

of 500 to 700 m, a lake (Lake Sarez) began to form behind the dam. For the first few years after 

1 
impoundment, water level rose at a rate of approximately 75 meters per year. Today Lake Sarez is 

more than 60 kilometers long, has a maximum depth in excess of 500 meters, and contains an 

estimated 17 cubic kilometers of water. The lake-surface elevation is higher than 3,000 meters above 

sea level. Surrounding mountains peaks reach elevations higher than 6,000 meters. The current 

freeboard (distance between the lake surface and the lowest point on the dam crest) is approximately 

50 meters. Lake level is currently rising at an average of 0.2 meters per year, and approximately 50 to 

60 cubic meters per second of water leak through the dam. 

Many landslide dams have failed, producing catastrophic floods (Costa and Schuster, 1991), so, 

unsurprisingly, the potential for catastrophic drainage of Lake Sarez has been a concern for many 

decades. Since the political disintegration of the Soviet Union, Western scientists and disastermanagement experts have become involved in evaluating hazards associated with Lake Sarez. 

Depending on the magnitude of the event, a flood emanating from Lake Sarez could be devastating to 

people downstream, not only in Tajikistan but also in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. To 

mitigate potential disaster, Tajik officials and Western disaster-management experts want to develop 

an early warning system for the Bartang and Panj River Valley region and improve the infrastructure 

required for better disaster preparedness. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is assisting in the 

development of the early warning system. 

2 
Results from previous geotechnical studies (Hanisch and Soder, 2000; Stucky Consulting 

Engineers, 2001) indicate that the Usoi dam itself is unlikely to fail owing to either seismic shaking or 

ground-water seepage forces. The likeliest scenario for a flood involves landslide-generated water 

waves overtopping the dam. A rock mass on the right-bank slope of the lake, approximately 3 

kilometers from the dam, is known to be creeping slowly and is one obvious potential source of a 

wave-generating landslide (fig. 2; Alford and Schuster, 2000). As we will show below, the volume of 

water in an overtopping flood wave would depend on landslide characteristics (including volume), 

geometry of the dam, freeboard, and the proximity of the landslide to the dam. Waves overtopping the 

dam would generate floods downstream and, if sufficiently erosive, might breach the dam, resulting in 

a secondary flood involving a substantial portion or all of the water impounded. 

Purpose and Scope 

We used physically based models to estimate the flood hydrograph at the dam for a range of 

overtopping flood events as well as for catastrophic dam failure. These results were upstream boundary 

input for flood-routing simulations between the Usoi dam and the town of Moskovskiy (approximately 

530 kilometers downstream) to determine peak flow depths and flood-wave travel times. The floodrouting simulations were made using a one-dimensional computational model developed by Denlinger 

and Iverson (2001), which uses a Riemann technique (Toro, 1997). Results of this study will assist in 

the development of an early warning system, which is one component of overall USGS activities 

related to hazards at Lake Sarez. Other USGS activities include providing computer hardware, 

software, and training in the Geographic Information System (GIS) applications to Tajik officials and 

disaster-management specialists. 

Investigations related to the work reported here have been carried out by Alford (2000) and 

Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001). Alford (2000) assumed certain flood volumes and applied the 

U.S. National Weather Service FLDWAV hydraulic model (formerly known as DAMBRK) to route 

the hypothetical floods a distance of 184 kilometers (km) downstream. Stucky Consulting Engineers 

(2001) applied methods different from ours to estimate the probable volume of water that would 

3 
overtop the Usoi dam owing to landslides into Lake Sarez. They concluded that landslide-generated 

overtopping floods would be considerably more modest than the scenarios that we suggest. A 

comparison of the differing overtopping flood magnitudes is presented in Appendix A. 

Description of the Study Area 

The geology of the Pamir Mountains in the vicinity of Lake Sarez is described briefly by Fan 

and Wallace (1994). Geotechnical assessments (Hanisch and Soder, 2000) have identified at least one 

potentially unstable rock mass along the lake shore, but broader-scale geotechnical assessments have 

not been done. 

For flood-routing purposes, we considered the reach extending approximately 530 kilometers 

along the Bartang and Panj Rivers from Lake Sarez to Moskovskiy (fig. 1). The Panj River in this 

reach forms the international border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan. This region of Tajikistan is 

extremely mountainous and arid. Mean annual precipitation at the Lake Sarez hydrometeorological 

station (elevation 3,290 meters) is 108 millimeters, and mean annual ambient air temperature at the 

station is 1 degree Celsius (Watanabe, 2000). The lake elevation is approximately 3,265 meters above 

mean sea level, while the elevation of the river at Moskovskiy is 582 meters above mean sea level. 

Overall, the study reach has an mean channel gradient of 0.47 percent. The upper section of the study 

reach (Bartang River) is from the Usoi dam to the Panj River confluence. This section is approximately 

150 kilometers in length and has a mean channel gradient of 0.74 percent. Geomorphic features along 

the Bartang River include glacial moraines, river terraces, alluvial fans/cones, flood plains, talus 

slopes, and steep bedrock valley margins. The lower section of the study reach (Panj River) is 

approximately 380 kilometers in length and has a mean gradient of 0.37 percent. A longitudinal bedchannel profile of the entire study reach, based on data from a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the 

study area that was created in an earlier phase of the study, is shown in figure 3. 

4 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Elevation, in meters above mean sea level

Confluence with the Panj River

Bartang River

Panj River

Figure 3.--Bartang-Panj River reach longitudinal bed-channel profile.

[Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Digital Elevation Model developed for the study.]

The economy of the study area is predominately agrarian. The main crops are potatoes and 

cereals. Owing to the rugged terrain, many farms and dwellings lie on the only arable land available: 

alluvial fans and terraces close to the river. An estimated 35,000 or more inhabitants of the Bartang 

and Panj River valleys could be affected by even a moderate flood outburst (Ives and Pulatova, 2000). 

Acknowledgments 

The authors thank Janice Fulford of the USGS Hydrologic Instrumentation Facility for her 

assistance in this project. 

Probable Flood Hydrograph Determination 

The likely sources of floods emanating from Lake Sarez include overtopping waves generated 

by landslides into the lake or a less likely total dam breach. We evaluate plausible scenarios for each of 

these mechanisms. The resulting hypothetical floods at the dam are then taken as starting conditions 

for downstream flood-routing describe in a subsequent section. 

5 
Landslide-Generated Floods 

 To address the possibility of landslide-generated waves overtopping the dam, we used results 

of Walder and others (in press) to relate landslide characteristics to wave amplitude, along with 

Synolakis’ (1987) method for computing wave runup and Müller’s (1995) results relating overtopping 

flood volume to runup and freeboard. The following is a summary of the method, which requires us to 

evaluate three phenomena: wave generation, wave runup, and wave overtopping. A more detailed 

presentation of the method, including pertinent mathematics, is presented in Appendix B. 

Wave Generation 

The experimentally based scaling results of Walder and others (in press) form a starting point 

for predicting the “near-field” wave amplitude associated with a particular size landslide. (“Near field” 

refers to the region just beyond the “splash zone” of complicated fluid/solid interaction, but before 

propagation effects become dominant.) Wave amplitudes predicted by this method strictly apply to 

only two-dimensional (flume-like, using the x and z dimensions) geometry. The situation at Lake Sarez 

obviously differs from a flume, as the likely landslide sources are along the banks. This fact has two 

consequences: First, the impulse wave set up by a landslide would spread laterally during the time of 

landslide motion. Second, the near-field wave mound will then “split” and propagate both towards the 

Usoi dam and towards the opposite end of the lake. We deal with the second of these factors simply by 

doubling the landslide volume associated with a given wave height via a flume analysis. To deal with 

lateral wave spreading during submerged landslide motion, it was assumed that the near-field wave 

source evolves into more or less a circular mound and conserves the total wave volume, as described in 

the TOPICS software package (Watts, 2001). For purposes of characterizing the wave source, we 

assume that water depth in the wave generation region is about 350 m. 

Wave Runup 

We assume as a reasonable approximation that Synolakis’ (1987, 1991) results for runup of 

solitary waves are applicable to the impulse waves of interest here. Solitary waves constitute a special 

class of impulsively generated waves (e.g., Dean and Dalrymple, 1991), and while the impulse waves 

studied experimentally by Walder and others (in press) and previous investigators were not strictly 

solitary waves, we are unlikely to be making a great error by applying Synolakis’ results. Runup is 

defined as the highest point (relative to the ambient water surface) that would be reached by a wave as 

it runs into an indefinitely long sloping plane. If runup R exceeds freeboard f, the elevation difference 

between ambient water level and the dam crest, then water must spill over the dam crest. The upvalley 

face of the Usoi dam obviously is not planar, but for purposes of applying Synolakis’ results, we 

assume a uniform embankment slope of 23 degrees, a value estimated by inspection of a topographic 

map of the dam. 

Overtopping 

The results of Müller (1995) may be used to estimate the overtopping flood characteristics. 

Müller did flume experiments with solitary waves generated by a falling mass and dams with diverse 

embankment slopes and crest widths. He found that the last two factors had relatively little effect on 

overtopping flood volume, which depended primarily on freeboard, runup, and wave height. Because 

wave height depends on landslide volume and runup height depends upon wave height, one can derive 

6 
an expression relating overtopping flood volume to landslide volume and freeboard. Müller’s results 

were also applied to estimate the duration of overtopping. Details are presented in Appendix B. 

The Usoi landslide dam is of course not a simple embankment, and the freeboard varies from 

point to point. To apply Müller’s results, we estimated an “average” freeboard as follows: For any 

specified runup height, the wave would overtop the dam crest between, say, s1 and s2, where s is a 

coordinate measured along the mean strike of the dam crest. The average freeboard faverage was then 

defined simply as the mean value of f in the interval between s1 and s2. The total overtopping flood 

volume was then computed as the overtop flood volume per unit width for freeboard faverage times 

the width of the dam crest actually overtopped. 

The tabulated peak discharge is estimated by assuming a simple triangular hydrograph with 

identical rising and falling limbs. Table 1 and ure 4 show the characteristics of three overtopping flood 

hydrographs resulting from volumes of 200, 500, and 1,000 million cubic meters of landslide debris 

falling into the lake. The volume of water that overtops the dam is only about 0.5 percent of the total 

lake volume for the largest landslide considered. 

Table 1: Summary of overtopping flood characteristic 

Landslide volume, in 

million cubic meters 

Overtopping flood 

volume, in million cubic 

meters 

Overtopping flood 

duration, in seconds 

Peak discharge at dam, 

in cubic meters per 

second 

200 2 70 57,000 

500 22 90 490,000 

1000 87 110 1,580,000 

7 
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

TIME, IN SECONDS

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

DISCHARGE, IN THOUSAND CUBIC METERS PER SECOND

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

TIME, IN HOURS

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

DISCHARGE, IN THOUSAND CUBIC METERS PER SECOND

87 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood

22 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood

2 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood

(100 meters per hour erosion rate)

17 cubic kilometer volume dam-breach flood

17 cubic kilometer volume dam-breach flood

(10 meters per hour erosion rate)

Figure 4.--Hydrographs showing change in discharge with time for overtopping and dam-breach floods.

8 
Dam Breach Flood 

The possibility of catastrophic dam breaching and drainage of the entire lake is unlikely 

(Hanisch and Soder, 2000; Stucky Consulting Engineers, 2001), but because the resulting flood would 

be much larger than one resulting from a wave overtopping the dam, a hypothetical breach flood bears 

investigation. Geotechnical studies suggest that the Usoi dam is unlikely to fail owing to either seismic 

shaking or ground-water seepage forces (Hanisch and Soder, 2000; Stucky Consulting Engineers, 

2001). However, sufficiently large landslide-generated water waves would overtop the dam and 

perhaps erode the blockage enough to initiate a breach. This type of breach has been documented to 

have occurred in Italy (Costa, 1991), Canada (Clague and Evans, 1994), and Oregon, United States 

(O’Connor and others, 2001). Plausible bounds on the starting hydrograph for a breach flood may be 

readily derived from Walder and O’Connor (1997), who showed that peak flow may be related to total 

lake volume, a characteristic lake depth, and an average erosion rate of the breach. In table 2 below 

and in figure 4, the lower bound on peak discharge corresponds to an assumed breach erosion rate of 

10 meters per hour (m/h), while the upper bound corresponds to as assumed breach erosion rate of 100 

m/h. Walder and O’Connor (1997) found from their literature review that estimated erosion rates for 

actual dam failures nearly all fell within this range. More details on this method are presented in 

Appendix C. 

Table 2: Summary of dam-breach flood characteristics 

Erosion rate, in meters 

per hour 

Peak discharge at dam, in 

million cubic meters per 

second 

Time to peak flow, in 

hours 

Time to empty lake, in 

hours 

10 0.26 11.7 36.3 

100 2.3 2.5 4.1 

Flood Routing 

The flood-routing component of the study included selecting a flood-routing model and 

defining proper channel hydraulic characteristics, and performing simulations for the possible flood 

hydrographs at the dam. 

Model Selection 

Four separate one-dimensional dynamic hydraulic models were evaluated for suitability in 

simulating the overtopping flood scenarios listed in table 1. These models included U.S. National 

Weather Service FLDWAV (formerly known as DamBreak) (Fread and Lewis, 1998), USGS-FourPt 

(DeLong and others, 1997), USGS-DAFLOW (Jobson, 1989), and a USGS one-dimensional flow 

model developed by Denlinger and Iverson (2001). Each of these models were tested using the worstcase overtopping flood scenario, in which a massive landslide (1 cubic kilometer in volume) generates 

a 110-second triangular flood hydrograph with a peak discharge of 1,580,000 cubic meters per second 

(a total volume of 87 million cubic meters of water) at the upstream boundary. A hypothetical model 

configuration having a length of 530 kilometers, constant width, and 0.47 percent gradient was used in 

each test. Of the models tested, only the model developed by Denlinger and Iverson (2001) succeeded 

9 
in fully simulating the downstream propagation of the flood wave from start to finish. The other 

models could not process flow input data from the 110-second triangular hydrograph, and subsequently 

terminated their simulations after only a few time steps. Accordingly, the model developed by 

Denlinger and Iverson (2001), which will be referred to as the “Denlinger model” in this report, was 

used for flood-routing simulations in the study. 

Model Description 

The Denlinger model numerically solves the one-dimensional shallow-water equations (or St. 

Venant equations) as described in Vreugdenhil (1994). The equations were solved using an 

approximate weighted average flux Riemann solver (Toro, 1997) with a fractional step correction for 

the source term created by bottom topography and for the influence of bed friction. Bed friction was 

parameterized by a Manning roughness coefficient (described in a following section). The initial 

conditions are a rectangular prism of water at rest upstream of a dry channel. Once the water is 

released, it rapidly forms an approximate triangular wave, and the user selects the length, width, and 

height of the prism to produce a wave with the specified total volume of discharge at the dam. The 

flow is then routed downstream along the channel thalweg. The time step length is based on the 

Courant number and can vary during a simulation. (The Courant number is the cell size divided by the 

sum of the fluid speed and the gravity wave speed.) Time steps typically range from 0.01 to 20 seconds 

in length. 

Channel Configuration 

Cross sections were delineated from a 17-meter-cell sized DEM of the study area and equally 

spaced every 0.5 kilometers along the channel thalweg. The DEM encompassed the entire 530 

kilometer study reach with 10-kilometer buffer width. The DEM was created by scanning and 

vectorizing 1:50,000 scale Soviet General Staff topographic maps with 20-meter contour intervals. To 

assist and automate the cross section delineation, a GIS Arc Macro Language (AML) program was 

developed. A total of 1,060 cross sections was calculated and incorporated into the channel 

configuration input file. The cross sections were normal to the channel thalweg. For each cross section, 

50 horizontal width distances from bank to bank (one for each meter in elevation above the lowest 

channel bed elevation) were computed by the AML. 

Preliminary simulations using the one-dimensional Denlinger model were made using the 1,060 

channel cross sections described above. Because width changes from cross section to cross section in 

the Bartang and Panj Rivers are highly variable and abrupt, a one-dimensional flow model can 

overestimate the velocity and amplitude of the flow front (Frazao and Zech, 2002). The Riemann 

weighted average flux solution technique used in the Denlinger model was not formulated to 

incorporate large changes in cross section. 

Using a two-dimensional model with the same level of cross sectional detail could have 

resolved these issues and provided a better estimate of delays. However, the setup costs and time 

necessary to use a two-dimensional model were outside the original scope of the study. Using the onedimensional model for the study required averaging the channel width over the length of the reach. For 

the final simulations, the 1,060 cross sections were assumed to be rectangular with a 50-meter constant 

width. A 50-meter width is representative of the bottom widths of the 1,060 cross sections, which 

range from 5 to 1,012 meters. The mean and median of the bottom widths are 79 and 56 meters, 

respectively. Figure 5 shows the relationship between water depth versus both natural and constant 

width cross sectional areas. The natural cross sections were from 11 locations spaced every 50 

10 
kilometers between 25 and 525 kilometers downstream of Usoi dam, respectively. The straight line in 

the figure represents the 50-meter constant width cross section. Using a 50-meter constant width cross 

section to represent the study reach is a simplification of real-world conditions. However, almost all of 

the natural cross section lines are above the constant 50-meter cross section line. The additional error 

introduced using a 50-meter constant width cross section would be error on the conservative side (or 

the side of caution). 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Cross-sectional area, in square meters

Natural cross section at 25 km

Natural cross section at 75 km

Natural cross section at 125 km

Natural cross section at 175 km

Natural cross section at 225 km

Natural cross section at 275 km

Natural cross section at 325 km

Natural cross section at 375 km

Natural cross section at 425 km

Natural cross section at 475 km

Natural cross section 525 km

50-meter constant cross section

Figure 5.--Relationship between water depth and cross-sectional area.

[km, kilometers downstream of Usoi dam.]

Although the natural cross-section widths were not used in the simulations, actual thalweg 

elevations were included in the configuration for every 0.5 kilometer point along the reach. The 

numerous gradient variations within the 530 kilometer reach had a significant effect on the height and 

velocity of the flood wave. 

Roughness Coefficients 

The only available guide to determining roughness values were digital photographs of 30 

reaches, located throughout the study area, taken by representatives of the FOCUS Humanitarian 

Assistance organization. Various stream slopes within the reach were approximated using the DEM. 

On the basis of the mean slope for the entire reach (approximately 0.47 percent) and the photos, a 

coefficient of 0.038 seemed appropriate on the basis of comparison with Barnes (1967). Therefore, a 

11 
constant roughness coefficient of 0.038 was used for all 1,060 cross sections throughout the model 

configuration. 

Simulations 

Separate flood-routing simulations were made for three overtopping flood scenarios. In 

addition to the overtopping floods, we simulated the worst-case scenario of a total dam breach. 

Overtopping Floods 

The Denlinger model simulates an upstream boundary flow input as an instantaneous collapse 

of water, which would be analogous to removing a giant sluice gate. Because of the way the model 

operates, the overtopping flood hydrographs (fig. 4) could not be used as a time-varying upstream 

boundary flow input. However, the hydrograph durations ranged from only 70 to 110 seconds, which 

could be considered near instantaneous conditions in any case. The calculated overtopping flood 

volumes were used to define the dimensions of the water prisms released at the dam. Height, length, 

and width dimensions used for each overtopping flood simulation are shown in table 3. 

Table 3: Input water prism dimensions used for the overtopping flood simulations 

Model specified 

height, in meters 

Model specified 

length, in meters 

Assumed width, in 

meters 

Overtopping flood 

volume, in million 

cubic meters 

310 129 50 2 

730 600 50 22 

5,000 350 50 87 

The actual height and length dimensions used for the water prism were not critical so long as 

they and the assumed width (50 meters) corresponded with a specified overtopping flood volume used 

in the simulation. Using different combinations of height and length to define a flood volume only had 

the effect of altering the simulated flow depth profile for about 10-20 kilometers below the dam. As the 

simulated flood wave moves further downstream, the flow depth profiles are identical for any given 

combination of height and length of the water prism. 

Although the length of the model time steps are variable (typically from 0.01 to 20 seconds) 

and determined by the numerical solution, output files from the Denlinger model are written at 

constant time increments (such as 7.5, 15, 30, or 60 minutes) which are preset by the user. Each output 

file is a “snapshot” of simulated velocity and flow depth at each half-kilometer spaced cross section for 

the entire 530 kilometer reach. Figure 6 shows 5-hour interval flow depth profiles for the worst case 

overtopping flood scenario (which has a total volume of 87,000,000 cubic meters of water) based on a 

constant 50-meter channel width. The simulated peak flow depths were approximately 8, 7, and 6.5 

meters above the channel bed at locations 50, 100, and 150 kilometers downstream of the dam, 

respectively. The leading edge of the flood profile remains abrupt and nearly vertical as it moves down 

the reach. The combination of a near flat reach (140 to 175 kilometers downstream of the dam) and a 

very steep reach (175 to 195 kilometers downstream of the dam) (shown in fig. 3) had a significant 

12 
effect on the flow depth profiles because some of them have double peaks. Overall flow depth is also 

sharply decreased for locations downstream of 195 kilometers downstream of the dam compared to the 

reach between the dam and 140 kilometers downstream of the dam. 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

t=5

t=10

t=15

t=20

t=25

t=30

t=35 t=40 t=45

t=50 t=55

t=60

t=65

t=70 t=75

Figure 6.--Flow depth profiles of the 87 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood at 5-hour intervals.

[Notation "t=5-75" corresponds to the number of hours after the start of the flood event for each profile.]

The simulated flow depths, based on a constant 50-meter channel width, provide a coarse 

approximation of potential flood levels. However, for hazard mitigation it is necessary to estimate 

more accurate flood levels at selected locations of interest along the river. Using the constant 50-meter 

channel width, simulated velocity, and simulated depth, simulated flow at each cross section can be 

computed. The peak flow for a given location can then be used in step-backwater analysis or as input 

to a 2-dimensional model to determine local peak flood elevations. 

Step-backwater analysis would be used for locations having subcritical flow conditions, which 

could be expected to occur upstream of channel constrictions or “choke” points in the study reach. 

(Many of the villages seem to be located in the flatter, wider subcritical flow reaches upstream of 

channel constrictions rather than along the narrower steep canyon-like reaches.) Because cross sections 

located every half-kilometer have already been created for this project, they could be used in stepbackwater analyses. As an example, if the wide, flat reach located 140 to 175 kilometers downstream 

of the dam were used in a step-backwater analysis, the starting downstream cross section would be just 

upstream of the steep and narrow reach (175 to 195 kilometers downstream of the dam). The flood 

elevation computation would start at the downstream cross section and then work upstream one cross 

13 
section at a time. Simulated peak flow from the Denlinger model at the downstream cross section 

would be the flow input. For convenience, the one-dimensional HEC-RAS model is commonly used in 

many step-backwater analyses (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1998). However, step-backwater 

analysis could not be used in steep gradient reaches where supercritical flow conditions are likely to 

occur. 

A more accurate method of determining local peak flood elevations than step-backwater 

analysis would be to use a two-dimensional model (horizontal X and Y dimensions). A twodimensional model could also simulate the effect of sharp channel bends on flood elevations and 

supercritical flow conditions. The Tidal, Residual, Intertidal Mudflat (TRIM) model has a twodimensional version that has been used in various flood applications around the world (Casulli, 1990; 

Cheng and others, 1993). Setting up the model configuration necessary to use TRIM for a reach of 

interest could be done using the 17-meter DEM created in the study. Simulated peak flow from the 

Denlinger model would be the upstream boundary input to a TRIM simulation. 

Simulation results from the Denlinger model for all three overtopping flood scenarios are 

shown in figures 7 through 9. In these figures, the peak flow was determined by extracting the 

maximum simulated flow that occurred at each cross section along the study reach. These figures also 

show the corresponding depth and velocity that occurred at the time of peak flow. As expected, the 87 

million and the 2 million cubic meter volume overtopping floods produced the highest and the lowest 

peak flows, peak depths, and peak velocities of three scenarios, respectively. For the 87 million cubic 

meter overtopping flood, peak flows were approximately 1,100, 800, and 550 cubic meters per second 

at locations 50, 100, and 150 kilometers downstream of the dam, respectively. Peak velocities for all 

three overtopping floods generally ranged from 1 to 3 meters per second for most of the study reach. 

Velocity decreased in low channel gradient reaches such as the confluence of the Bartang and Panj 

Rivers (between approximately 140 and 175 kilometers downstream of the dam). However, velocity 

increases in the reach from 175 to 195 downstream of the dam because the channel gradient (over 1 

percent) is steeper than the average for the entire study reach (0.47 percent). 

14 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

2500

5000

7500

10000

12500

15000 Flow, in cubic meters per second

Peak flow

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

Depth

Velocity

Velocity, in meters per second

Figure 7.--Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 87 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood.

[Based on actual channel slope and hypothetical 50-meter channel width.]

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Flow, in cubic meters per second

Peak flow

0

2.5

5

7.5

10

12.5

15

17.5

20

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

Depth

Velocity

Velocity, in meters per second

Figure 8.--Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 22 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood.

[Based on actual channel slope and hypothetical 50-meter channel width.]

15 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Flow, in cubic meters per second

Peak flow

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Depth

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

Velocity

Velocity, in meters per second

Figure 9.--Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the 2 million cubic meter volume overtopping flood.

[Based on actual channel slope and hypothetical 50-meter channel width.]

The appearance of small oscillations in the lines on the left side in figures 7 through 9 is the 

result of the aliasing effect of the model output. The model output was provided as “snapshots” (shown 

in fig. 6) every 7.5 minutes. Peak flow for each cross section was extracted from an overlay of all the 

snapshots. Because of the speed of the flood wave, a 7.5-minute increment of output was not able to 

always capture the peak flow that the model really simulated at some locations. True peak flow would 

appear on figures as a smoother line connecting the peaks of the oscillations. Peak flow, depth, and 

velocity between the dam and 10 kilometers downstream of the dam are not shown in figures 7 through 

9 because the extreme velocity of the flood wave in this reach created extreme oscillations in the 

model output. The nearest village, Barchidev, is 16 kilometers downstream of the dam. 

In addition to knowing an approximate location and extent of the flood elevation, hazard 

mitigation planners need to know the approximate arrival time of the flood wave at points along the 

reach. Figure 10 shows the wetting front arrival times for the three overtopping floods. The wetting 

front arrival times for the 2, 22, and 87 million cubic meter volume overtopping floods at the lower end 

of the reach are approximately 135 (5.6 days), 95 (4 days), and 77 (3.2 days) hours, respectively. 

16 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

Time, in hours

2 million cubic meter flood

22 million cubic meter flood

87 million cubic meter flood

Figure 10.--Wetting front arrival times of the three overtopping floods.

Dam-Breach Flood 

Although complete and rapid breaching of the dam is unlikely according to the geotechnical 

analyses of Hanisch and Soder (2000) and Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001), the resulting flood 

would be the worst-case scenario. The geotechnical studies by Hanisch and Soder (2000) and Stucky 

Consulting Engineers (2001) suggest that the Usoi dam is unlikely to fail owing to either seismic 

shaking or ground-water seepage forces. However, an overtopping flood wave of sufficient size could 

erode the blockage enough to initiate a breach. As described earlier, for breach erosion rates ranging 

between 10 and 100 meter per hour, the entire lake would empty in 4.1 to 36.3 hours, resulting in a 

peak discharge between 0.26 and 2.3 million cubic meters per second. However, because input 

hydrographs can not be specified for the Denlinger model, it was not possible to specifically evaluate 

these two end-member dam-breach hydrographs. The U.S. National Weather Service FLDWAV model 

may be capable of simulating the two dam-breach hydrographs; although we did not attempt to do this 

due to time and budget limitations. 

For this study, we used the Denlinger model to simulate the flood wave that would result from 

an instantaneous breaching of Usoi Dam and complete draining of Lake Sarez. This is not as 

physically plausible as the previously described dam-breach scenarios, but it does provide information 

on the maximum possible hazard. Because the total volume of the dam breach flood (17 cubic 

kilometers) is many times greater than the volumes of the overtopping floods, it was necessary to 

17 
assume a much larger water prism for the upper boundary in the simulation. For the height of the prism 

(at the upstream boundary) we used 500 meters because that is the approximate height of Usoi dam. 

Length of the prism was specified at 34,000 meters. However, instead of using a constant 50-meter 

width rectangular channel as we used in the overtopping flood simulations, it was necessary to assume 

a wider constant (1,000-meter) width rectangular channel. To use a 50-meter-wide rectangular channel 

would have required using an unrealistic prism length dimension (680,000 meters). Also, it would have 

been unrealistic to assume that the width of a flood from an instantaneous dam breach would not be 

wider than 50 meters. Because of the length of the prism (34,000 meters), the reach from 0 to 34 

kilometers downstream of the dam could not be simulated. The upper boundary started at 34 

kilometers downstream of the dam. 

Results from the dam-breach flood scenario simulation are shown in figure 11. Simulated peak 

flows were approximately 64,000, 52,000, 40,000, and 20,000 cubic meters per second at locations 50, 

100, 150, and 530 kilometers downstream of the Usoi dam. Figure 11 also shows the corresponding 

depth and velocity for the dam-breach flood scenario. The wetting front arrival time at the lower end of 

the study reach was approximately 56 hours (2.3 days) (fig. 12), which is sooner than the wetting front 

arrival times of the overtopping floods.

18 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

Flow, in cubic meters per second

Peak flow

0

5

10

15

20

25

Depth above the channel bed, in meters

Depth

Velocity

Velocity, in meters per second

Figure 11.--Peak flow and corresponding depth and velocity for the dam-breach flood.

[Based on actual channel slope and hypothetical 1000-meter channel width.]

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550

Distance from Usoi Dam, in kilometers

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

Time, in hours

Figure 12.--Wetting front arrival time of the dam-breach flood.

19 
As expected, the magnitude of the peak flow from the dam-breach flow is significantly greater 

than the peak flow from the largest overtopping flood (87 million cubic meters) scenario. The peak 

flow information shown in figure 11 can be used in conjunction with step-backwater analysis or twodimensional modeling (both described earlier) to determine local peak flood elevations for a location 

of interest. Because the results shown in figure 11 were simulated using a constant 1,000-meter wide 

channel, which is wider than the average bottom width for the actual study reach channel, it can be 

assumed that these peak flows would be higher than the peak flows from a simulation based on the 

actual channel bends and contractions in the study reach. However, estimated peak flood elevations 

based on higher peak flows would be error on the side of caution. 

Limitations 

Owing to the many approximations involved in developing the starting hydrographs, due 

caution should be used in interpreting results of the flood-routing simulation. For the overtopping flood 

scenario, we have described the wave-generation process by a method consistent with scale-model 

experiments, but we have made no attempt to calculate the evolution of the wave geometry as it 

propagated toward the dam; doing so would require detailed lake bathymetric data, which was 

unavailable. 

Similarly, we have relied upon actual scale-model experiments and, to some extent, theory in 

calculating wave runup on the dam and the volume of water that would overtop and enter the channel 

downstream. Such scale-model experiments do not incorporate all the complex topography in real 

landslide dams. For the dam breaching scenario, we assumed total drainage of the lake. Although this 

commonly occurs when earthen dams fail, many natural dams only breach partially, therefore releasing 

only a portion of the impounded volume. Additionally, landslide dams are commonly broader than 

other earthen dams, such as constructed or moraine dams, and erosion rates applicable for breaching of 

landslide dams may be lower than the rates used in arriving at the hydrograph characteristics in table 2 

(Walder and O’Connor, 1997). 

Assuming that an exact input flood hydrograph could be predicted, there are still other 

limitations with the simulations. Although 0.5-kilometer-spaced cross sections were calculated and 

used in preliminary simulations, they were not be used in the final simulations because of numerical 

difficulties in propagating the flood wave downstream. It was necessary to assume constant 50-meter 

rectangular cross sections for the entire reach in the overtopping flood simulations; however, actual 

elevation detail was included in the simulations. 

The model used in this study was one-dimensional. The 530 kilometer Bartang and Panj River 

study reach contains numerous bends. The possible effects of sharp bends cannot be accounted for in a 

one-dimensional model. In a sharp bend, the centrifugal forces in a high velocity flow will cause the 

depth to be higher on the outside than on the inside of the turn. A two-dimensional flood-routing model 

would be more accurate in simulating the maximum flood levels. 

The flood-routing simulations also assumed a constant roughness coefficient for the entire 

length of the study reach. A value of 0.038 was used because it is representative of mountainous 

streams similar to the Bartang and Panj Rivers. However, the flood-routing simulations might have 

been more accurate if separate roughness coefficients were used for different sections of the study 

reach. To properly estimate roughness coefficients, the Manning’s equation can be used if discharge 

time series data are available at two or more locations. 

20 
The simulations were based on clear water conditions and did not simulate changes to the 

channel geometry that could occur due to scour and deposition. Outburst floods from the Usoi dam 

would undoubtedly entrain and deposit material along the flood route, which would probably increase 

the flow volume. 

Summary and Conclusions 

In the winter of 1911 a massive rock slide in the Pamir Mountains of southeastern Tajikistan 

completely blocked the valley of the Bartang River and formed the world’s highest natural or manmade dam, which today impounds approximately 17 cubic kilometers of water in Lake Sarez. 

Previous geotechnical studies suggest that the Usoi dam itself is unlikely to fail owing to either 

seismic shaking or ground-water seepage forces. Therefore, the likeliest scenario for a flood would be 

from landslides entering the lake that produce waves capable of overtopping the dam and entering the 

channel downstream. A rock mass on the right-bank slope of the lake, approximately 3 kilometers 

from the dam, is known to be a potential source of a wave-generating landslide. 

A set of hypothetical flood hydrographs were developed based on a plausible range of volumes 

of landslide material that could fall into the lake. For landslide volumes of 200, 500, and 1,000 million 

cubic meters, estimated overtopping flood volumes were 2, 22, and 87 million cubic meters, 

respectively. Estimated peak discharge for these three flood scenarios were 57,000, 490, 000, and 

1,580,000 cubic meters per second based on triangular hydrographs of 70, 90, and 110 second 

durations, respectively. 

Flood-routing simulations were made for the three landslide-induced overtopping floods and a 

worst-case scenario of the entire dam breaching for the 530 kilometer reach of the Bartang and Panj 

Rivers below the Usoi dam. The flood routing was performed with a one-dimensional flow model 

using a Riemann numerical solution technique. The channel hydraulic characteristics included a 

roughness coefficient of 0.038 (appropriate for steep mountainous streams) and actual elevations for 

every 0.5 kilometer point along the reach. Cross sections were assumed as rectangular in shape with a 

constant 50-meter width. 

For the maximum overtopping flood scenario, having a volume of 87 million cubic meters, the 

estimated peak flows were approximately 1,100, 800, and 550 cubic meters per second at locations 50, 

100, and 150 kilometers downstream of the dam, respectively. Such a flood would cause elevated flow 

stages throughout the entire 530-kilometer study reach. As expected, the simulated peak flows for the 

two other overtopping flood scenarios were lower than the maximum overtopping flood scenario. To 

accurately determine local peak flood elevations for a location of interest, simulated peak flows from 

this study can be used boundary input data to a step-backwater analysis or as input to a 2-dimensional 

model. 

Though less probable than an overtopping flood, the worst-case flood scenario would be a 

complete dam breach and draining of the lake (17 cubic kilometers). The resulting flood, which would 

have a volume many times greater than the overtopping flood volumes, would have greater discharges 

and velocities, and would persist for a longer duration. Simulated peak flows were approximately 

64,000, 52,000, 40,000, and 20,000 cubic meters per second at locations 50, 100, 150, and 530 

kilometers downstream of the Usoi dam, respectively. 

21 
References Cited 

Alford D., 2000, Flood Scenarios, in Alford, D. and Schuster, R., eds., 2000, Usoi Landslide Dam and 

Lake Sarez—An Assessment of Hazard and Risk in the Pamir Mountains, Tajikistan: Geneva, 

Switzerland, United Nations, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) Prevention Series 

No. 1 (ISBN 92-1-132022-4), Chapter 6, p. 59-62. 

Alford D. and Schuster, R., 2000, Introduction and summary, in Alford, D. and Schuster, R., eds., 

2000, Usoi Landslide Dam and Lake Sarez—An Assessment of Hazard and Risk in the Pamir 

Mountains, Tajikistan: Geneva, Switzerland, United Nations, International Strategy for Disaster 

Reduction (ISDR) Prevention Series No. 1 (ISBN 92-1-132022-4), Chapter 1, p. 1-18. 

Barnes, H.H., 1967, Roughness characteristics of natural channels: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 1849, 213 p.

Casulli, V., 1990, Semi-implicit finite-difference methods for the two-dimensional shallow water 

equations: Journal of Computer Physics, v. 86, p. 56-74.

Cheng, R. T., Casulli, V., and Gartner, J.W., 1993, Tidal, residual, intertidal mudflat (TRIM) model 

and its applications to San Francisco Bay, California: Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science, v. 36, p. 

235-280.

Clague, J.J., and Evans, S.G, 1994, Formation and failure of natural dams in the Canadian Cordillera: 

Geological Survey of Canada, Bulletin 464, 35 p.

Costa, J.E., 1991, Nature, mechanics, and mitigation of the Val Pola Landslide, Valtellina, Italy, 1987-

1988: Z. Geomorph. N.F., Marz 1991, p. 15-38.

Costa, J.E., and Schuster, R.L., 1991, Documented historical landslide dams from around the world: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 91-239, 486 p.

Dean and Dalrymple, 1991, Water wave mechanics for engineers and scientists: Singapore, World 

Scientific, 353 p.

DeLong, L.L., Thompson, D.B. and Lee, J.K., 1997, The computer program FourPt (Version 95.01)—

A model for simulating one- dimensional, unsteady, open-channel flow: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4016, 69 p. 

Denlinger, R., and Iverson, R., 2001, Flow of variably fluidized granular masses across threedimensional terrain 2. Numerical predictions and experimental tests: Water Resources Research, v. 

106, no. B1, p. 553-566.

Fan, G., Ni, J. F., and Wallace, T. C., 1994, Active tectonics of the Pamirs and Karakoram: Journal of 

Geophysical Research, Solid Earth, v. 99, no. Be, p. 7131-7160.

Frazao, S. S., and Zech, Y., 2002, Dam break in channels with a 90 degree bend, Journal of Hydraulic 

Engineering, v. 128, issue 11, p. 956-968.

Fread, D.L. and Lewis, J.M., 1998, NWS FLDWAV MODEL: National Weather Service, 

[http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hl/rvmech/documentation/fldwav_doc.pdf, accessed May 21, 2001.]

Hanisch, J. and Soder, C., 2000, Geotechnical assessment of the Usoi landslide dam and right bank of 

the Lake Sarez, in Alford, D. and Schuster, R., eds., 2000, Usoi Landslide Dam and Lake Sarez—An 

Assessment of Hazard and Risk in the Pamir Mountains, Tajikistan: Geneva, Switzerland, United 

22 
Nations, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) Prevention Series No. 1, (ISBN 92-1-

132022-4), Chapter 3, p. 23-42. 

Huber, A., 1980, Schwallen in Seen als Folge von Felssturzen: Zurich, VAW-ETH, Mitt. Nr. 47.

Ives, J. and Pulatova, G., 2000, Human Geography/Demography in Alford, D. and Schuster, R., eds., 

2000, Usoi Landslide Dam and Lake Sarez—An Assessment of Hazard and Risk in the Pamir 

Mountains, Tajikistan: Geneva, Switzerland, United Nations, International Strategy for Disaster 

Reduction (ISDR) Prevention Series No. 1, (ISBN 92-1-132022-4), Chapter 9, p. 83-86. 

Jobson, H.E., 1989, Users manual for an open-channel streamflow model based on the diffusion 

analogy: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4133, 73 p.

Muller, D.R., 1995, Auflaufen and Uberschwappen von Impulswellen an Talsperren: Zurich, VAWETH, Mitt. Nr. 137.

O’Connor, J.E., Hardison, J.H., and Costa, J.E., 2001, Debris flows from failures of neoglacial-age 

moraine dams in the three sisters and Mount Jefferson Wilderness areas, Oregon: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 1606, 93 p.

Stucky Consulting Engineers, 2001, Lake Sarez Risk Mitigation Project—Design Report (ID67610), 

A—Monitoring and early warning systems and C—Studies on long-term solutions: Renens, 

Switzerland, PD/cb/4448/4006a, [variously paginated].

Synolakis, C.E., 1987, The runup of solitary waves: Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 185, p. 523-545.

Synolakis, C.E., 1991, Tsunami runup on steep slopes—How good linear theory really is: Natural 

Hazards, vol. 4, p. 221-234.

Toro, E.F., 1997, Riemann solvers and numerical methods for fluid dynamics: Springer-Verlag 

Publishers, 592 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1998, HEC-RAS river analysis system, version 2.2: Hydraulic 

Reference Manual CPD-69, [variously paginated].

Vreugdenhil, C.B., 1994, Numerical methods for shallow water flow: Klumer Academic Publishers, 

261 p.

Walder, J.S., Sorenson, O.E., and Watts, P., in press, Water waves generated by subaerial mass flows, 

Journal of Geophysical Research.

Walder, J.S., and O’Connor, J.E., 1997, Methods for predicting peak discharge of floods caused by 

failure of natural and constructed eathen dams: Water Resources Research., v. 33, p. 2337-2348.

Watts, P., 2001, Tsunami Open and Progressive Initial Conditions System (TOPICS), program, 

freeware available through Applied Fluids Engineering, Inc., Private Mail Box #237, 5710 E. 7th 

Street, Long Beach, California, 90803, http://www.appliedfluids.com/

Watanabe, T., 2000, Environmental impact assessment—Geomorphology of the Bartang and Kudara 

valleys in Alford, D. and Schuster, R., eds., 2000, Usoi Landslide Dam and Lake Sarez—An 

Assessment of Hazard and Risk in the Pamir Mountains, Tajikistan: Geneva, Switzerland, United 

Nations, International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) Prevention Series No. 1, (ISBN 92-1-

132022-4), Chapter 5, p. 53-58. 

23 
Appendix A: Alternative Investigation 

An alternative method of estimating landslide induced overtopping flood is presented in Stucky 

Consulting Engineers (2001). Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001) concluded that an overtopping flood 

was unlikely to occur for landslides with a volume less than 500 million cubic meters. The authors 

evaluated two scenarios of overtopping floods that could be caused by potential landslides having 100 

and 500 million cubic meters of material. The calculated overtopping flood volumes were 9,000 and 

1,567,000 cubic meters for landslides that are 100 and 500 million cubic meters in size, respectively. 

For the 9,000 cubic meter flood, its volume would be completely absorbed by the blocks of material on 

the dam crest before the flood reached the downstream face of the dam. For the 1,567,000 cubic meter 

flood, more than 50 percent of its volume would be absorbed by two depressions on the dam crest, 

which would have created small lakes on the southern side of the crest. 

For the two scenarios of 200 and 500 million cubic meters of landslide material, the calculated 

volume of overtopping floods in our study was 2,000,000 and 22,000,000 cubic meters, respectively. It 

is possible and likely that some of the overtopping flood volume could be absorbed by the two dam 

crest depressions. Not having access to detailed topographic data on Usoi Dam, we did not assume or 

estimate flood volume losses to the dam crest depression in our simulations. 

The main reason our study and the study by Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001) had differing 

overtopping flood volumes was due to very different estimates of the flood wave amplitude that would 

occur in the vicinity of the landslide. Our study estimated wave amplitude heights that were typically 

twice as high as comparable wave heights estimated by Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001). Both 

studies used different methods of calculating wave amplitude. The approach in our study used 

empirically derived equations based on laboratory data. Wave amplitude was defined as a function of 

landslide volume (V), water depth of the lake (h), lake width (W), and duration of landslide motion (to) 

(Appendix B). 

Stucky Consulting Engineers (2001) assumed that the ratio of landslide and wave energies 

could be constant for different events. Using observed data from historic events that took place at 

Flores Island, Indonesia, and Morrow Point Dam, Colorado, they assumed that the ratio landslide and 

wave energies could then be applied to Lake Sarez. However, wave energy was computed using a 

sinusoidal wave equation that did not use lake depth as an input. Water depths where the historic 

landslide events took place were shallower than the Lake Sarez site (300 meters). 

Appendix B: Method of Estimating the Starting Hydrograph for the 

Overtopping Flood Scenarios

We use a three-step procedure to estimate the starting hydrograph, that is, the hydrograph at the 

Usoi dam. This procedure entails distinguishing three phenomena: wave generation, wave runup 

against an adverse slope, and wave overtopping. Wave generation is assessed using the experimentally 

based scaling results of Walder and others (in press) to predict the “near-field” wave amplitude 

associated with a particular size landslide. Wave amplitudes predicted by this method strictly apply 

only to a two-dimensional (flume-like, using x and z dimensions) geometry, so an approximate 

correction for geometrical spreading must be applied. For this purpose, we apply the method described 

in the TOPICS software package (Watts, 2001). Wave runup on the Usoi dam is then estimated using 

Synolakis’ (1987) theoretical results for runup of solitary waves. This theory has been shown to 

describe experimental data reasonably well (Synolakis, 1991). Although the landslide-generated 

24 
impulse waves are probably not strictly solitary waves, the leading wave will probably have a shape 

similar to that of a solitary wave, so applying Synolakis’ results should be reasonably accurate. Finally, 

wave overtopping is assessed using Müller’s (1995) scaling results based on laboratory tests. These 

three steps are described in further detail below.

Wave generation and propagation 

We assume that waves are generated by a landslide from one of the banks, and that waves 

propagate towards both the Usoi dam and the upvalley end of the lake. Walder and others (in press) 

have shown that a coherent wave first exists in the “near field,” which is the region just beyond the 

“splash zone” of complicated fluid/solid interaction, but before propagation effects—dispersion, 

bathymetric refraction, and wave-front spreading—come into play. Although the near-field region is 

spatially limited, it turns out that for many impulse waves in lakes, much of the domain of interest lies 

within the near field. Moreover, the near-field impulse wave has well-defined characteristics and can 

serve as a proxy “source” for computational wave-propagation purposes. Thus as long as one is willing 

to forego details of the conditions within the splash zone proper—and that is appropriate for the 

present application—then the wave-propagation part of the impulse-wave problem can be carried out 

independently of the complicated exercise of computing splash-zone dynamics. 

We begin by summarizing results for wave generation in constant-depth, flume-like channels. 

The near-field wave has some local amplitude , where x is distance in the direction of landslide 

motion. Walder and others (in press) have shown that experimental data for maximum wave height 

 in the near field are well described by 

(1)

where h is water depth. Vw* is a dimensionless measure of wavemaker volume per unit lake width: 

Vw*= V/Wh2

(2)

where V is wavemaker volume and W is landslide width. The term “wavemaker” is commonly used in 

the coastal-engineering literature (e.g., Dean and Dalrymple,1991) and we adopt it here. The 

dimensionless duration of landslide motion, ts

*

, is defined by 

(3)

where ts is duration of landslide motion and g is acceleration of gravity. Equation (1), which applies up 

to the stability limit , appears to be generally valid for diverse types of laboratory 

wavemakers, including solid blocks and dry granular avalanches, and we shall assume that it applies to 

rock avalanches in nature. 

The near-field wave is commonly a broad hump with “wavelength” –really a measure of the hump’s 

width–given empirically by 

(4)

25 
when the wave shape is fit to a function sech2

(x/ ). 

Equations (1) to (4) strictly apply to constant-depth, flume-like (that is, two-dimensional, 

constant-depth) channels. For prognostic purposes such as the present one, Vw*can be calculated once 

one specifies V, W and h. Geotechnical considerations can be used to posit plausible values of V and 

W; h should be interpreted as the depth at which the landslide stops. Estimating ts or ts*

requires some 

additional considerations. Walder and others (in press) found in their block-landslide experiments that 

(5)

where L was the length of the block landslide. For actual landslides, L is of course not known in 

advance, but we can make plausible estimates by assuming that a landslide of total volume V will 

spread out with a characteristic lateral extent L and thickness , where <<1. We then find 

 and thus 

(6)

so that 

(7)

In what follows we will use Equation (7) with the value = 0.1, corresponding to a rather 

blunt landslide. Smaller values of may be more reasonable in many situations, so we are probably 

underestimating ts* and and overestimating wave amplitude. Note, however, that ts*

 ~ , so a 

tenfold change in epsilon changes ts* by a factor of only about 1.5. 

Equations (1) to (7) would suffice for a natural geometry akin to a flume–that is, a long, narrow 

water body with the landslide source at one end. The situation at Lake Sarez differs from a flume in an 

obvious way: the likely landslide sources are along the banks. In the lake, the landslide creates a nearfield lateral wave mound (or “hump”) of water that spreads both upvalley and downvalley. Therefore, 

to determine the appropriate wave height, it was necessary to double the volume of material that fell 

into the lake and use the wave height, calculated from the flume analyses, that was associated with that 

volume. To deal with lateral wave spreading, we assumed that the near-field wave source evolved into 

more or less circular mound. For an assumed wave shape with r being radial 

distance from the peak, volume conservation requires that 

(8)

and using Equations (4) and (7), 

(9)

26 
The amplitude of the leading wave will decrease with distance from the generation zone owing 

to dispersion and other effects. The near-field amplitude described above should be reasonably 

accurate out to a distance of about from the generation zone (cf. Watts, 2000), where is 

the “width” of the waveform. At greater distances, wavefront spreading reduces wave amplitude 

noticeably (Huber, 1980). for plausible ranges of V and and h = 350 m, a typical 

lake depth in the region of interest. With the likeliest landslide source being about 3 to 4 km from the 

dam, the wave amplitude estimated by the method probably modestly overestimates wave amplitude at 

the dam. A more detailed calculation would involve solving the nonlinear partial differential equations 

for wave propagation, with detailed bathymetry being one of the inputs required for the calculation. 

Wave runup 

We will assume as a reasonable approximation that Synolakis’ (1987, 1991) results for runup 

of solitary waves are applicable to the impulse waves of interest here. Synolakis predicted on 

theoretical grounds—and laboratory data show this result to be reasonably accurate—that the runup 

height R of a solitary wave on a embankment with slope angle is given by 

(10)

R here should be interpreted as the runup that would occur on a sloping plane of indefinite extent. 

Equation (10) seems to be reasonably accurate for R/h up to approximately unity. In any actual case of 

interest, if R exceeds f, the freeboard (or elevation difference between the embankment crest and 

undisturbed water level), the wave will overtop the embankment. 

For the Usoi dam, we adopt the value as an approximate value to characterize the 

lakeward-facing slope. Combining Equations (9) and (10) then gives 

(11)

We emphasize that this equation is valid only for R/h < circa 1; in the present case, this means 

the limit of validity in terms of landslide volume is . 

Overtopping 

We apply the results of Müller (1995) to get at the overtopping characteristics. Müller did 

flume experiments with solitary waves generated by a falling mass and dam experiments with diverse 

embankment slopes and crest widths. He found little dependence of overtopping volume on 

embankment slope and crest width. The overtopping volume Vf per unit embankment width was given 

by 

(12)

where f is the freeboard, R is (as before) wave runup, and V0 is a reference value, namely, the 

overtopping volume per unit width for f = 0, no freeboard. Equation (12) is obviously not meaningful 

if f`=h, meaning there is no water impounded behind the dam. V0 is given by 

27 
(13)

where co is an O(1) empirical “weir” coefficient, is the duration of overtopping, and VE is another 

empirical coefficient of O(1). In dimensionless form this may be written as 

(14)

The coefficient VE is given empirically by 

(15)

where H is the peak-to-trough wave amplitude, not generally the same as , although for the solitary 

waves of interest here, the difference is small: , and thus 

(16) 

In addition, overtopping duration at zero freeboard is related to wave period T by the empirical relation 

1 2 4 9 1 2

0

g g 4 T

h h

τ ⎛ ⎞ ⎡ ⎤ ⎛ ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ = ⎢ ⎥ ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎢⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎥⎦

(17)

The wave period T is related to the “width” of the waveform by 

(18)

where , . The denominator is the wave celerity, which would be simply for 

small-amplitude “long” waves, but has a more complicated functional dependence for finite-amplitude 

waves. Combining Equations (14) through (18) with Equation (7) and the definition (Walder and 

others, in press) , we find after some algebra: 

(19) 

The numerical coefficient in Equation (19) reflects the choice co = 0.43, corresponding to the 

case of a fairly broad-crested dam (cf. Müller, 1995). Finally, then, combining Equations (9), (12), and 

(19), we find the overtopping volume per unit width as a function of landslide volume V, water depth 

h, and freeboard f: 

(20)

Note that there is a minimum landslide volume Vmin for any overtopping at all: 

28 
(21)

For the Usoi dam, supposing that and m are representative values, and recalling 

that the “effective” landslide volume needs to be doubled to account for wave propagation both upvalley and down-valley, we find no overtopping at all unless Vmin > circa 66 x 106

 m3. 

The duration of overtopping at zero freeboard may be written, after some algebra, as 

(22)

Müller (1995) provides no data bearing on how the duration of overtopping is reduced for nonzero freeboard. Equation (21) will obviously overestimate the duration of overtopping at nonzero 

freeboard, but this is of negligible importance for flood-inundation calculations except very near the 

dam. Moreover, in the context of the other approximations involved in our approach, there seems to be 

no point in trying to “refine” Equation (22). 

Appendix C: Method of Estimating the Starting Hydrograph for the DamBreach Flood Scenario 

Walder and O’Connor (1997) presented a simple, physically based model of floods due to 

earthen-dam failures (both natural and constructed) and showed that model predictions of peak 

discharge were in reasonably good agreement with data, without resorting to any fitting coefficients. 

They showed that both peak discharge Qp and the time to peak, tp, depend primarily on lake volume V, 

the drop in water level d, and k, the mean rate of breach downcutting. Qp and tp take different 

asymptotic forms depending upon whether the dimensionless quantity (where g is 

acceleration due to gravity) is large or small compared to unity. In the case of Lake Sarez, using V = 

17 x 109 m3, d = 350 m, g = 9.8 m/s2, and k in the range 10 to 100 m/h–corresponding to most actual 

dam failures–we find , to 0.19. We then apply the appropriate relationships from Walder 

and O’Connor for the case : 

(23)

(24)

Numerical values given in the main text are derived from this relation. 

29