water

Article
Overtopping Failure of a Reinforced Tailings Dam:
Laboratory Investigation and Forecasting Model of
Dam Failure
Xiaofei Jing 1 , Yulong Chen 2, *, David J. Williams 3 , Marcelo L. Serna 3 and Hengwei Zheng 4
1 School of Safety Engineering, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, Chongqing 401331, China;
xfjing@cqust.edu.cn
2 Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
3 School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia;
d.williams@uq.edu.au (D.J.W.); m.llanoserna@uq.edu.au (M.L.S.)
4 School of Mathematics and Physics, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, Chongqing 401331,
China; 2013015@cqust.edu.cn
* Correspondence: chen_yl@tsinghua.edu.cn




Received: 29 December 2018; Accepted: 8 February 2019; Published: 12 February 2019


Abstract: Overtopping failure of reinforced tailings dam may cause significant damage to the environment
and even loss of life. In order to investigate the feature of overtopping of the reinforced tailings dam,
which has rarely appeared in the literature, the displacement, the phreatic level and the internal stress
of dam during overtopping were measured by a series of physical model tests. This study conclusively
showed that, as the number of reinforcement layers increased, the anti-erosion capacity of tailings
dam was notably improved. It could be supported by the change of the dimension of dam breach,
the reduction of stress loss rate, and the rise of phreatic level from the tests. Based on the erosion principle,
a mathematical model was proposed to predict the width of the tailings dam breach, considering
the number of reinforcement layers. This research provided a framework for the exploration of the
overtopping erosion of reinforced tailings dam, and all presented expressions could be applied to predict
the development of breach during overtopping.

Keywords: tailings dam; overtopping test; reinforcement; dam breach; erosion evolves

1. Introduction
Tailings, which are generally stored in a slurry form and then pumped into a sedimentation pond,
are waste products of the ore-dressing process [1]. Currently, tighter legislation and regulations on
tailings disposal are forcing mine operators to play a more prominent role in controlling the disposal
of vast quantities of highly visible wastes [2]. Over the last few decades, there were several failures
of tailings impoundments due to various reasons, including liquefaction of the retained tailings,
overtopping erosion of the dam, or an excessive water seepage that would produce breach [3–7].
However, flood overtopping was recognized as the major cause of tailings dam failure [8].
Overtopping had been of particular interest in the last few decades due to the protection from
potential environmental damages and the loss of property [9–13]. However, actual measurements of
overtopping erosion is a costly and time-consuming process that is usually limited to small experimental
tests [14–18]. The main influence of overtopping on dam is the erosion by water, so the characteristic
of soil erosion is very important to study and many people focused on the soil erosion in recent years.
A great many of the theories and methods of erosion have been studied and lots of achievements and
experience were obtained in many fields. In the coast erosion, Mulder et al. [19], Van Rijn et al. [20]
and Giardino et al. [21] studied the characteristics of coastal erosion and proposed some effective

Water 2019, 11, 315; doi:10.3390/w11020315 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2019, 11, 315 2 of 16

methods to control it. In the research on erosion of earth dams, the characteristics of dam erosion
by water was researched by Carlsten et al. [22], Ran et al. [23] and Wu et al. [24]. Callaghan et al. [25],
Serpa et al. [26] and Stefanidis et al. [27] studied the effect of climate change on soil erosion in
a mountainous Mediterranean catchment to assess soil erosion changes. Simonneaux et al. [28] and
Teng et al. [29] also studied the climate change effects on soil erosion in a semi-arid mountainous
watershed and the assessment of soil erosion by water on the Tibetan Plateau based on the Revised
Universal Soil Equation (RUSLE) and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) climate
models, respectively. Meanwhile, Wang et al. [30] studied the response of the meltwater erosion to
runoff energy consumption on loessal slopes, and Sujatha et al. [31] used the RUSLE to predict the
erosion risk of a small mountainous watershed in Kodaikanal, South India. Deng et al. [32] presented
a coupled model for simulating bed deformation and bank erosion that focuses on the erosion of the bank
with a composite structure in the Lower Jingjiang Reach. Choi et al. [33] proposed a combined erosion
framework; the framework adopts a dam-breach erosion model that can capture the progressive nature
of fluvial erosion by considering the particle size distribution of the soil being eroded. The findings from
the field investigation were then used to back-analyze fluvial erosion along the riverbank.
All the aforementioned research presented a great many theories and methods of erosion that can
provide a good reference for the study of overtopping failure of the tailings dam. In terms of overtopping
failure research of the tailings dam, to analyze the tailings dam failure evolution pattern, Zhang et al. [34]
studied a tailings dam overtopping evolution model based on a physical model experiment method
according to the model similarity theory and dam breach erosion model. Sun et al. [8] found out that
the displacement of dam was dependent on the degree of dam saturation during overtopping erosion.
Sliding displacement was increased as the saturation line rose. Liu et al. [35] proposed a physical-based
model to analyze the flood process, integrating the theory of non-equilibrium sediment transposition and
a conceptual model of the process of lateral erosion. However, the above research results made a great
contribution to study tailings dam overtopping evolution, but the dam was built without reinforcement.
The geosynthetics have been applied extensively for strengthening and/or increasing the height of
tailings dam built from low-shear strength fine-grain tailings for decades [36–38]. Yin et al. [39] studied
the characteristics of interaction between geosynthetics (geobelt and geo-grid) and fine copper ore
tailings through laboratory pull-out tests, and the results revealed that the interaction was influenced
by tailings particle size, density, moisture content, and vertical load. James et al. [40] found out
that reinforcement could improve the seismic stability of tailings impoundments, which could also
help dissipate porewater pressures after shaking. Liu et al. [41] focused the variation in properties
of composite materials after immersion to evaluate the shear behaviors of polymer–sand composite
material after immersion with direct shear tests. The shear behaviors were improved with an increment
in the curing time, polymer content and sand dry density while there is a decrease in the shear behaviors
with increasing immersion time. Consoli et al. [42] studied the mechanical properties of gold tailings
with the insertion of fibers. The research advanced in understanding the parameters that control
durability and strength of fiber-reinforced compacted gold tailings.
Although overtopping and reinforcement of tailings dam have been studied separately over the past
few years, rather less attention had been paid to the effect of reinforcement on the overtopping process.
Since geosynthetics have been extensively used in tailings dam projects, the feature of overtopping
erosion considering the influence of reinforcement, which has rarely appeared in the literature, is worth
investigating. It will help to provide theoretical framework for the protection of dam failure.
This study aimed to analyze the feature of overtopping erosion of the tailings dam in terms of the
number of reinforcement layers. It is achieved by the use a self-designed Tailings Dam Overtopping
Failure Model Test System, which consisted of a glass flume, an observation system for phreatic line,
and a rainfall system. In addition, a mathematical model for overtopping failure prediction considering
the reinforcement layers was proposed based on the river dynamics theory and the erosion principle.
This model could be used for predicting the width of breach caused by erosion and the discharge of water
through the breach. It will provide data for the risk assessment of reinforced tailings dam overtopping.
 Water 2019, 11, 315 3 of 16

2. Experimental

2.1. Experimental Facilities

Water 2019, 11, 315 3 of 16
The experimental facilities consist of a glass flume, an observation system for phreatic line,
and artificial rainfall simulator (Figure 1). Experiment tracer points and equipment layout are shown
the reinforcement layers was proposed based on the river dynamics theory and the erosion principle.
in Figure 2.
This model could be used for predicting the width of breach caused by erosion and the discharge of
The glass flume had an internal dimension of 200 cm (length) by 60 cm (width) by 50 cm (height).
water through the breach. It will provide data for the risk assessment of reinforced tailings dam
The inner wall of flume was lubricated by the Vaseline in order to reduce the friction. The process of
overtopping.
flooding and the change of the breach could be monitored using a high resolution camera (Camera
model: Sony/HDR-CX680 (SONY, Beijing, China), Camera resolution: 1920×1080/50p). There were
2. Experimental
three U-type tubes that were evenly spaced at 30 cm monitoring the phreatic line (JR-01, JR-02, JR-03),
2.1. with a diameter
Experimental of 20 mm and height of 50 cm (Figure 2). Each U-type tube was divided into two
Facilities
segments: the one in the dam was made of perforated Polyvinyl Chlorid (PVC) and the other that was
The experimental
outside the dam was facilities
made ofconsist of a glass
transparent flume,
acrylic. an observation
Geo-grid was used system for phreatic
as the reinforcing line, andof
materials
artificial rainfall simulator (Figure 1). Experiment tracer points
the model test [43], and the basic properties were shown in Table 1. and equipment layout are shown in
Figure 2.

Figure 1. Tailings dam overtopping failure model test system.

Figure 1. Tailings dam overtopping failure model test system.
 Water2019,
Water 11,315
2019,11, 315 44 ofof1616

Figure 2.
Figure Monitoring distribution
2. Monitoring distribution of
of tailings
tailings dam
dam failure
failure experiment.
experiment. (a)
(a) Side
Side view;
view; (b)
(b) Top
Top view.
view.

The glass flume had an internalTable dimension

1. Basic of 200 cmof(length)
property geo-grid.by 60 cm (width) by 50 cm (height).
The inner wall of flume was lubricated by the Vaseline in order to reduce the friction. The process of
flooding Type
and the changeGrid of
Size
the(mm)
breach could Tensile
be Strength
monitored ·m−1 ) a high resolution camera (Camera
(kNusing
Elongation at Break (%)
model: Sony/HDR-CX680
Vertical (SONY,
HorizontalBeijing, China), Camera
Longitudinal resolution: 1920×1080/50p). There were
Transverse
three U-type
JT1101tubes that
25 were evenly25 spaced at 30 6.5 cm monitoring 6.5 the phreatic line12.7
(JR-01, JR-02, JR-03),
with a diameter of 20 mm and height of 50 cm (Figure 2). Each U-type tube was divided into two
segments: the one in the dam was made of perforated Polyvinyl Chlorid (PVC) and the other that was
In order to measure the deformation of the dam, tracer points were located at the crest, the slope
outside the dam was made of transparent acrylic. Geo-grid was used as the reinforcing materials of the
and the toe of the model tailings dam (Figure 2). Two soil pressure sensors (BX-202, BX-203, Dandong
model test [43], and the basic properties were shown in Table 1.
Electronic Instrument Factory, Dandong, China) were installed in the middle of the dam slope at a depth
of 20 cm to measure the stress of the tailings
Table in property
1. Basic the dam,ofand two other soil pressure sensors (BX-201,
geo-grid.
BX-204) were installed 20 cm horizontally away from BX-202 and BX-203. BX-201 and BX-203 were
horizontallyGrid
placed Type whileSize (mm)
BX-202 Tensile
and BX-204 wereStrength (kN·m−1)in order to measure the vertical and
placed vertically, Elongation at Break (%)
Vertical
horizontal stresses, Horizontal
respectively Longitudinal
(Figure 2). Transverse
The soil pressure sensor had a dimension of Φ12 × 4.2 mm,
and theJT1101
measuring 25range is from 250 to 50 kPa. The6.5 model of dynamic
6.5 strain tester is 12.7
TST3828EW (Jiangsu
Test Electronic Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Jingjiang, China), the maximum sampling frequency
In order to measure the deformation of the dam, tracer points were located at the crest, the slope
is 1 kHz, and the A/D (Analog to Digital) conversion resolution of dynamic strain tester is 24 bits.
and the toe of the model tailings dam (Figure 2). Two soil pressure sensors (BX-202, BX-203, Dandong
All of these equipment were calibrated before their placement in the tailings dam. The model dam was
Electronic Instrument Factory, Dandong, China) were installed in the middle of the dam slope at a
a 1.4 m × 0.6 m × 0.4 m upstream dam with an upstream slope ratio of 1:6 and a downstream slope
depth of 20 cm to measure the stress of the tailings in the dam, and two other soil pressure sensors
ratio of 1:2.
(BX-201, BX-204) were installed 20 cm horizontally away from BX-202 and BX-203. BX-201 and BX-203
A series of dam overtopping tests were carried out with different reinforcement layers
were placed horizontally while BX-202 and BX-204 were placed vertically, in order to measure the
(reinforcement layers number N = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4; see Figure 3).
vertical and horizontal stresses, respectively (Figure 2). The soil pressure sensor had a dimension of
Φ12×4.2 mm, and the measuring range is from 0 to 50 kPa. The model of dynamic strain tester is
TST3828EW (Jiangsu Test Electronic Equipment Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Jingjiang, China), the
maximum sampling frequency is 1 kHz, and the A/D (Analog to Digital) conversion resolution of
dynamic strain tester is 24 bits. All of these equipment were calibrated before their placement in the
tailings dam. The model dam was a 1.4 m × 0.6 m × 0.4 m upstream dam with an upstream slope ratio
of 1:6 and a downstream slope ratio of 1:2.
A series of dam overtopping tests were carried out with different reinforcement layers
(reinforcement layers number N = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4; see Figure 3).
 Water 2019, 11, 315 5 of 16
Water 2019, 11, 315 5 of 16

(a) N = 0 (b) N = 1
1: 6 1: 2 1: 6 1: 2

40 cm
40 cm

Water 2019, 11, 315 Tailings dam Tailings 5 of 16

20 cm
dam

(a) N = 0 (b) N = 1
1: 6 (c) N = 2 1: (d) N = 3
1: 6 1: 2
1: 2 1: 66 1: 2
1: 2

cm
cm

4040cm
10 cm
4040cm

13 cm
Tailings dam Tailings
Tailings Tailings 1020cmcm
13 cm dam
dam dam 10 cm

(c) N = 2 (d) N = 3
1: 6 1: 2 (e) N = 4 1: 6 1: 2
1: 6 1: 2

40 cm
10 cm
cm

813
cmcm
4040cm

Tailings 8 cm Tailings 10 cm
Tailings 13
8 cmcm
dam dam 10 cm
dam 8 cm

Figure 3.
Figure The schematic diagram of geo-grid laying. (a) N
3. The N == 1;
N = 0; (b) N 1; (c) N ==2;
(c) N 2;(d) N==3;3;(e)
(d) N (e)NN==4.4.
(e) N = 4
1: 6 1: 2
2.2. Experimental Materials
8 cmand and Procedures
2.2. Experimental Materials Procedures
40 cm

8 cm
Tailings
The copper tailings8utilized
cm in the all tests were extracted from a tailings disposal site located in
The copper damtailings utilized in the all tests were extracted from a tailings disposal site located in
8 cm classified
Yunnan Province, China, being as medium sand approximately (code for design of tailings
Yunnan Province, China, being classified as medium sand approximately (code for design of tailings
facilities. The particle mass percent with grain size greater than 0.25 mm is more than 50%; the tailings
facilities. The3.particle
Figure mass percent
The schematic diagramwith grain size
of geo-grid greater
laying. (a) N =than
0; (b)0.25
N = mm
1; (c)is
N more
= 2; (d)than 50%;
N = 3; (e) Nthe
= 4.tailings
are classified as medium sand.) The copper tailings particle size distribution was shown in Figure 4,
are classified as medium sand.) The copper tailings particle size distribution was shown in Figure 4,
and the characterization
2.2. test Procedures
by Standard for soil test method and results were presented in Table 2.
and Experimental Materialstest
the characterization andby Standard for soil test method and results were presented in Table 2.
According to the similarity theory, the tailings dam model should be built first, and all the sensors
andThe coppershould
geo-grid tailings
be utilized
installedin the all tests
completely. werethrough
Then, extractedthe from a tailings
rainfall system to disposal site located
pump water into thein
Yunnan Province, 100
flood control areaChina, being
until the beachclassified as medium
length reached 10 cmsand approximately
(as well as local beach(code for 40
length design of rainfall
m , the tailings
facilities. The particle mass percent with grain size greater than 0.25 mm is more
intensity was 80 mm/day, which was as well as the local of Yunnan Province, China. While the water than 50%; the tailings
are
hadclassified as the
saturated medium
beach80sand.)
and theThedam,copper tailings
the current particlelevel
phreatic sizewas
distribution
measuredwas untilshown in Figure
the phreatic level4,
and the characterization test by Standard for soil test method and results were presented
was stabilized. Finally, it rained again until the tailings dam model flood overtopping failure happened. in Table 2.
Percent Finer (%) Percent Finer (%)

60
100
40
80
20
60
0
400.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle Size (mm)
20
Figure 4. Grain size distribution curve of the copper tailings sample.

0
Table 2. Properties of the copper tailings sample.
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Index Particle Size (mm) Values
Specific gravity 2.10
Figure 4. Grain size distribution curve of the copper tailings sample.
Moisture
Figure 4. Grain size content
distribution (%)
curve 12.5 sample.
of the copper tailings
Porosity 0.024
Table 2. Properties
Modulus of the copper
of compression tailings sample.
(MPa) 17.6
Coefficient of compressibility
Index (MPa −1) 0.058
Values
Permeability coefficient
Specific gravity(×10−6 m·s−1) 5.86
2.10
Moisture content (%) 12.5
Porosity 0.024
Modulus of compression (MPa) 17.6
−1
 Water 2019, 11, 315 6 of 16

Water 2019, 11, 315 Table 2. Properties of the copper tailings sample. 6 of 16

Index Values
Cohesion (kPa)
Specific gravity 7.52
2.10
Internal friction
Moisture angle
content (%)(Φ/°) 31.2
12.5
Porosity 0.024
According to the similarity Modulus
theory, the tailings dam
of compression model should17.6
(MPa) be built first, and all the sensors
−1 )
and geo-grid should be installed completely.
Coefficient Then, through
of compressibility (MPathe rainfall system to pump water into the
0.058
Permeability coefficient ( × 10 −6 m · s−1 ) 5.86
flood control area until the beach length reached 10 cm (as well as local beach length 40 m , the rainfall
Cohesion (kPa) 7.52
intensity was 80 mm/day, which was as well as the local◦of Yunnan Province, China. While the water
Internal friction angle (Φ/ ) 31.2
had saturated the beach and the dam, the current phreatic level was measured until the phreatic level
was stabilized. Finally, it rained again until the tailings dam model flood overtopping failure
The dam displacements, internal stress of the dam, phreatic level and erosion of the dam were
happened.
recorded
The damby the sensors introduced
displacements, internalabove.
stress of the dam, phreatic level and erosion of the dam were
recorded by the sensors introduced above.dam construction were listed as below:
All the detail procedures of tailings

1. All thetailings
The detail procedures of tailings
with 10% water contentdamwereconstruction were listed
prepared according as below:
to the test requirements (as shown
1. in tailings
The Figure 5a).
with 10% water content were prepared according to the test requirements (as shown
2. inLayer
Figurecompaction
5a). method for construction tailings dam, each layer was 8 cm, the compactness of
2. eachcompaction
Layer layer is 85%method
(as shownfor in Figure 5b). tailings dam, each layer was 8 cm, the compactness of
construction
3. each
Laylayer
down is the
85%reinforcement
(as shown in andFigure 5b). (as shown in Figure 5c).
sensors
3.4. Lay
Thedown the reinforcement
displacement monitoringand sensors
mark were(as shown
placed onin Figure
the 5c).
side of the dam every 10 cm according to
4. The
thedisplacement monitoring
drawn grid lines (as shownmark were placed
in Figure 5d). on the side of the dam every 10 cm according to
5. the drawn
Install thegrid lines and
camera, (as shown in Figure
calibrate 5d).
these equipment after their placement in the tailings dam.
5. Install the camera, and calibrate these equipment after their placement in the tailings dam.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure
Figure5. Theprocedures
5. The procedures of tailings
of tailings dam construction.
dam construction. (a) sample;
(a) Tailings Tailings(b)sample; (b) construction;
tailings dam tailings dam
construction; (c) tailings dam construction; (d) displacement
(c) tailings dam construction; (d) displacement monitor. monitor.

3.3.Results
Resultsand
andDiscussion
Discussion

3.1.Reinforcement
3.1. ReinforcementDensity
DensityononDam
DamDisplacement
Displacement

ToToanalyze
analyzethe
thedisplacement
displacement ofof the
the tailings
tailings dam
dam during
during overtopping,
overtopping, thethe displacement
displacement of the
of the key
key tracer points W1, W8, W10 were recorded throughout the test. For
tracer points W1, W8, W10 were recorded throughout the test. For the number of different the number of different
reinforcementlayers
reinforcement layers(N(N==0,0,1,1,2,2,3,
3, 4),
4), the
the final
final vertical
vertical and
and horizontal
horizontal displacement
displacementwere
wereplotted
plottedinin
Figure6.6.
Figure
Water 2019, 11, 315 7 of 16
Water 2019, 11, 315 7 of 16

2.1 -2.6
(a)

Horizontal displacement (cm)

Vertical displacement (cm)

2.0
-2.8

1.9
-3.0
1.8

-3.2
1.7 W1-Horizontal
W1-Vertical
1.6 -3.4
0 1 2 3 4
Reinforcement layers
-1.6
Horizontal displacement (cm)

3.2 (b)

Vertical displacement (cm)

-1.7

3.0 -1.8

-1.9
2.8
-2.0
2.6
W8-Horizontal -2.1
W8-Vertical
2.4 -2.2
0 1 2 3 4
Reinforcement layers
2.6 -1.6
(c)
Horizontal displacement (cm)

Vertical displacement (cm)

2.4
-2.0
2.2

2.0 -2.4

1.8
W10-Horizontal -2.8
1.6 W10-Vertical

1.4 -3.2
0 1 2 3 4
Reinforcement layers
Figure
Figure 6. The
Thefinal
finalvertical
vertical
andand horizontal
horizontal displacement
displacement of points
of tracer tracerduring
pointsovertopping
during overtopping
for differentfor
different reinforcement
reinforcement layers. (a) layers. (a) Displacement
Displacement of point W1; of
(b)point W1; (b)ofDisplacement
Displacement of point W8;of(c)
point W8; (c) Displacement
Displacement
point W10. of point W10.

3.2. It
Reinforcement
was shown Layers
that, asand
theFlooding
numberTime on the Phreaticlayers
of reinforcement Level increased, the final displacement of W1,
W8, and W10
As the reduced
rainfall significantly.
continued, Theofmain
the height reason was
the phreatic level that
in thereinforcement layers
observation tubes could
was combine
recorded at
tailings
a time interval of 4 min. In order to analyze the influence of reinforcement layers on the height of theof
together and enhance the strength of tailings dam. With the increase of the number
reinforcement
phreatic level in(geo-grid) layers, tubes,
the observation the distance
the databetween
of JR-01,geo-grid
JR-02 and layers
JR-03decreased and the
were collected. Theinteraction
phreatic
between
level monitor tube JR-02 was located near the crest of the dam, which was the most representative toof
two adjacent layers increased considerably, which effectively restrained the deformation
tailings dam.
reflect the tailings dam phreatic level changes during overtopping.
The change of phreatic level from JR-02 was shown in Figure 7. The phreatic level rose as rainfall
3.2. Reinforcement
continued, Layers
but the andrise
rate of Flooding Time ondown
was slowing the Phreatic
with theLevel
increased number of reinforcement layers.
 As the rainfall continued, the height of the phreatic level in the observation tubes was recorded at
a time interval of 4 min. In order to analyze the influence of reinforcement layers on the height of the
phreatic level in the observation tubes, the data of JR-01, JR-02 and JR-03 were collected. The phreatic
level monitor tube JR-02 was located near the crest of the dam, which was the most representative to
reflect the 11,
Water 2019, tailings
315 dam phreatic level changes during overtopping. 8 of 16
The change of phreatic level from JR-02 was shown in Figure 7. The phreatic level rose as rainfall
continued, but the rate of rise was slowing down with the increased number of reinforcement layers.
Comparingtotothe
Comparing thedam
dam without
without reinforcement,
reinforcement, the
the peak
peak of
of the
the phreatic
phreatic level
level of
ofthe
thedam
damwith
withfour
four
reinforcement layers delayed about 36 min. The main reason was that the fine tailings’
reinforcement layers delayed about 36 min. The main reason was that the fine tailings’ particles particles
attachedtotothe
attached thegeotextile
geotextileand
andformed
formedaawater
waterimpermeable
impermeablelayer
layerininthe
thedam,
dam,which
whichimpeded
impededthetherise
riseof
of phreatic
phreatic level.level.

50
Reach the peak level Overtopping happened
86 min 122 min 139 min
40 Test
Phreatic level (cm)

finished
150 min
30

N=0
20 N=0
N=1
N =1
NN=2
=2

10 NN=3
=3
NN=4
=4

0
60 80 100 120 140 160
Time (min)
7. Phreatic level of JR-02
Figure 7.
Figure JR-02 during
during test.
test.

Tailingsdam
Tailings damovertopping
overtoppingoccurred
occurredatat139
139min,
min,and
andthe
thephreatic
phreaticlevel
leveldeclined
declinedininthe
thefollowing
following11
11 min until the water flowed out completely. Figure 8 displayed the final phreatic
min until the water flowed out completely. Figure 8 displayed the final phreatic level of tailings level of tailings
dam
damdifferent
with with different reinforcement
reinforcement layers layers when overtopping
when overtopping was ended.
was ended. It indicated
It indicated that thethat
finalthe final
phreatic
phreatic
level waslevel was as
higher higher
the as the number
number of reinforcement
of reinforcement layer
layer increased.The
increased. Themain
main reason was wasthatthat
deformation during overtopping would
deformation during overtopping would reduce reduce the height of tailings dam while the reinforcement
of tailings dam while the reinforcement
layers effectively
layers effectively restrained
restrainedthe
thedeformation.
deformation. Hence, the more
Hence, the reinforcements
the more there were,
the reinforcements therethe higher
were, the
Water 2019, 11, 315 9 of 16
the dam was, which resulted in the ascent of the final phreatic level.
higher the dam was, which resulted in the ascent of the final phreatic level.

25
JR-01
JR-02
Phreatic level (cm)

20 JR-03

15

10

5
0 1 2 3 4 5
Reinforcement layers
Figure 8. Final phreatic level at the end of time.

3.3. Stress Change during Overtopping

The internal stress of dam during overtopping was obtained by the sensors throughout the tests.
When the phreatic level reached the peak, the internal stress of dam was measured as peak stress (SP).
When the test finished, the internal stress of dam was measured as final stress (SF), and the loss rate of
stress (SL) was calculated by Equation (1):
SL  ( SF  SP ) / SP  100% . (1)
 Ph
5
0 1 2 3 4 5
Water 2019, 11, 315 Reinforcement layers 9 of 16

Figure 8. Final phreatic level at the end of time.

3.3. Stress Change during Overtopping
3.3. Stress Change during Overtopping
The internal stress of dam during overtopping was obtained by the sensors throughout the tests.
When Thetheinternal
phreaticstress
levelof dam during
reached overtopping
the peak, was
the internal obtained
stress of dambywas
themeasured
sensors throughout the(SP).
as peak stress tests.
When
When the test finished, the internal stress of dam was measured as final stress (SF), and the loss rate(SP).
the phreatic level reached the peak, the internal stress of dam was measured as peak stress of
When
stress the
(SL)test
wasfinished, theby
calculated internal stress
Equation (1):of dam was measured as final stress (SF), and the loss rate of
stress (SL) was calculated by Equation (1):
SL = (SF − SP)/SP × 100%. (1)
SL  ( SF  SP ) / SP  100% . (1)
As shown
As shown ininFigure
Figure9, 9,
with the the
with increase of theofreinforcement
increase layers, the
the reinforcement SL ofthe
layers, tailings dam
SL of gradually
tailings dam
decreased.decreased.
gradually From the reading
From ofthesensor BX-201,
reading the SP and
of sensor SF (Figure
BX-201, the SP 9a)and
without
SF reinforcement were
(Figure 9a) without
0.73 kPa cm and
reinforcement 0.230.73
were kPa,kPa
andcm SL was
the and 0.2368.9%; andSPthe
kPa, the andSLSFwas
with68.9%;
four reinforcement
the SP and SF layers were
with four
0.73 kPa cm and 0.57 kPa, and the SL was only 21.3%. Meanwhile, the data from sensor BX-202
reinforcement layers were 0.73 kPa cm and 0.57 kPa, and the SL was only 21.3%. Meanwhile, the data suggested
from the SP BX-202
that sensor and SF suggested
(Figure 9b) without
that the SPreinforcement
and SF (Figurewere 0.43 kPareinforcement
9b) without cm and 0.11 kPa, wereand kPaSL
0.43the cm
was 72.1%; the SP and SF with four reinforcement layers were 0.44 kPa cm and 0.37 kPa
and 0.11 kPa, and the SL was 72.1%; the SP and SF with four reinforcement layers were 0.44 kPa cm and the SL was
and
onlykPa
0.37 16.8%.
and the SL was only 16.8%.

1.0 0.80
0.73 0.74 0.74 0.73
0.8
0.58 0.57
0.6 0.43 0.53

0.4
Stress (kPa)

0.23
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
-0.2
22.6% 21.3%
-0.4 33.7%
-0.6 42.1%

-0.8 68.9% Reinforcement layers （N）

(N)
Peak stress （SP）
(SP)
Water 2019, 11, 315
(a) Final stress （SF）
(SF) 10 of 16
Loss rates of stress（SL）
(SL)
0.6
0.43 0.43 0.45 0.43 0.44
0.37
0.4 0.22 0.27 0.33

0.2 0.11
Stress (kPa)

0.0
0 1 2 3 4
-0.2
16.8%
19.7%
-0.4
38.7%
-0.6 46.5%

-0.8 Reinforcement layers（N）

(N)
72.1%
(b) Peak stress （SP）
(SP)
Final stress （SF）
(SF)
Loss rates of stress （SL）
(SL)
The characteristics
Figure9.9. The
Figure characteristics of
of dam
dam internal
internal stress,
stress, (a)
(a) stress
stress of
ofsensor
sensorBX-201;
BX-201;(b)
(b)stress
stressofofsensor
sensor
SL 
BX-202, SL
BX-202, SF −SP
=((SF SP))//SP × 100%.
SP  100% .

In view of the mechanics analysis, the flood overtopping carried away a large number of tailings
sands during the overtopping process, which led to a significant reduction in the internal stress.
However, the erosion of adjacent tailings was impeded by reinforcement layers to a certain degree. As
the number of the reinforcement layers increased, the erosion of tailings was gradually reduced.
 Loss rates of stress （SL）
(SL)

Figure 9. The characteristics of dam internal stress, (a) stress of sensor BX-201; (b) stress of sensor
BX-202, SL  ( SF  SP) / SP  100% .
Water 2019, 11, 315 10 of 16
In view of the mechanics analysis, the flood overtopping carried away a large number of tailings
sands during the overtopping process, which led to a significant reduction in the internal stress.
In view
However, the of the mechanics
erosion analysis,
of adjacent tailingsthe flood
was overtopping
impeded carried away
by reinforcement a large
layers to anumber
certain of tailings
degree. As
the number of the reinforcement layers increased, the erosion of tailings was gradually reduced.stress.
sands during the overtopping process, which led to a significant reduction in the internal
However, the erosion of adjacent tailings was impeded by reinforcement layers to a certain degree.
As Analysis
3.4. the number of the reinforcement
on Evolution layersFailure
of the Overtopping increased, the erosion of tailings was gradually reduced.
Process

3.4. The failure

Analysis process ofof
on Evolution the the tailings Failure
Overtopping dam Process
varies significantly with different numbers of
reinforcement layers, which directly affected the shape of the breach and the discharge of tailings. The
The failure
final breach shapeprocess of thedam
of tailings tailings dam varies
for different significantlylayers
reinforcement with different
was shownnumbers of reinforcement
in Figure 10.
layers, which directly affected the shape of the breach and the discharge of tailings. The final breach
shape of tailings dam for different reinforcement layers was shown in Figure 10.

Reinforcement
Water 2019, 11, 315 (b) N = 0 (c) N = 1 11 of 16
(a) Before test

Reinforcement
Reinforcement

Reinforcement

(d) N = 2 (e) N = 3 (f) N = 4

Figure
Figure10.
10.The
Thebreach
breachshape forfor
shape different reinforcement
different layers.
reinforcement (a) Before
layers. test; test;
(a) Before (b) N(b)
= 0;N(c)
=N 0; =(c)1;N
(d)=N
1;=
2;(d)
(e)N
N== 2;
3; (e)
(f) N = 4.
3; (f) N = 4.

AsAsshown
shownininFigure
Figure10,10,itit was
was found
found that
that more reinforcement layers layers will
will lead
leadtotoaarelatively
relativelyless
less
damagetotothe
damage thetailings
tailingsdamdam during
during overtopping.
overtopping. For For the unreinforced tailings
tailings dam
dam (N(N== 0),
0),aalarge
large
amountofoftailings
amount tailingsononthe
thetop
topwere
were washed
washed away, forming
forming aa deep
deep breach.
breach.This
Thiserosion
erosionprocess
processwould
would
causethe
cause theshore
shoreofofthe
thebreach
breach to to become
become instable,
instable, which could result in in collapse
collapse ofofboth
bothsides
sidesofofthethe
breach.Since
breach. Sincethethedebris
debris ofof the
the dam
dam accumulated
accumulated at at
thethe
toetoe and
and blocked
blocked thethe erosion,
erosion, thethe bottom
bottom of of
the
dam was not
the dam wasgreatly affected.
not greatly The breach
affected. was was
The breach eventually shaped
eventually as an
shaped ashourglass
an hourglass(see(see
Figure 10b).
Figure For
10b).
the
Forcase withwith
the case fourfour
layers of reinforcement
layers of reinforcement (N (N
= 4), both
= 4), both sides
sidesofofthe
thedam
dam breach
breach did not not show
showan an
obvious
obvioustrench
trenchcollapse.
collapse.TheThemain
mainreason
reason was
was that
that reinforcement had aa locking
locking effect
effectononthe
thetailings
tailings
particle,
particle,sosothe
theerosion
erosionofofadjacent
adjacent tailings
tailingswas
wasimpeded
impeded bybyreinforcement.
reinforcement. TheThelarge-scale
large-scalecollapse
collapsedid
not occur at the main body of the dam, finally showing a clear ladder-shaped slope, as shown in Figure
10f.
Figure 11 shows that plots of width and depth of the breach versus time for different
reinforcement layers. It was found that the maximum width and depth of the breach for the
unreinforced tailings dam was about 43 cm and 22 cm, respectively. At the end of the overtopping test,
the maximum width and depth had decreased to 8 cm and 14 cm for two layers of reinforcement, and 7
 amount of tailings on the top were washed away, forming a deep breach. This erosion process would
cause the shore of the breach to become instable, which could result in collapse of both sides of the
breach. Since the debris of the dam accumulated at the toe and blocked the erosion, the bottom of the
dam was not greatly affected. The breach was eventually shaped as an hourglass (see Figure 10b). For
the case with four layers of reinforcement (N = 4), both sides of the dam breach did not show an
Water 2019, 11, 315 11 of 16
obvious trench collapse. The main reason was that reinforcement had a locking effect on the tailings
particle, so the erosion of adjacent tailings was impeded by reinforcement. The large-scale collapse did
didoccur
not not occur
at theatmain
the main
body body
of theof the dam,
dam, finallyfinally
showingshowing
a cleara ladder-shaped
clear ladder-shaped
slope,slope, as shown
as shown in Figurein
Figure 10f.
10f.
Figure 11 shows
Figure showsthat plots
that of width
plots and depth
of width and ofdepth
the breach versus
of the time for
breach different
versus timereinforcement
for different
layers. It was found
reinforcement layers. that the maximum
It was found that width
the and depth of
maximum the breach
width for theof
and depth unreinforced
the breachtailings
for the
dam was about 43 cm and 22 cm, respectively. At the end of the overtopping test,
unreinforced tailings dam was about 43 cm and 22 cm, respectively. At the end of the overtopping the maximum width
test,
and
the depth had
maximum decreased
width to 8 cm
and depth hadand 14 cm for
decreased to two
8 cmlayers
and 14ofcm reinforcement,
for two layersand 7 cm and 18 cmand
of reinforcement, for 7
four
cm and layers
18 cmoffor
reinforcement.
four layers ofInreinforcement.
addition, it was In noticed
addition,that, when
it was the reinforcement
noticed that, when the was more than
reinforcement
twomore
was layers, the two
than further improvement
layers, the furtherwas not significant.
improvement wasThis
notresult showedThis
significant. thatresult
the optimum
showednumber
that the
optimum
was two number
layers ofwas two layers of reinforcement.
reinforcement.

50
N=0
N =0
N=1
N =1 (a)
The breach width (cm)

40 N=2
N =2
N=3
N =3
N=4
N =4
30

20

10

0
Water 2019, 11, 315 0 100 200 300 400 12 of 16

Time (s)
25
N=0
N =0
N=1
N =1
(b)
The breach depth (cm)

20 N=2
N =2
N=3
N =3
N=4
N =4
15

10

0
0 100 200 300 400
Time (s)
Figure 11.11.
Figure The width/depth
The changes
width/depth graph
changes of breach,
graph (a)(a)
of breach, breach width;
breach (b)(b)
width; breach depth.
breach depth.

4. Prediction
4. Prediction Model
Model of Overtopping
of Overtopping Failure
Failure
A prediction
A prediction model
model waswas established
established to to quantify
quantify thethe processofofthe
process theerosion
erosionofofthe
thebreach
breachandand
validated with the experimental data obtained. Based on the results of the tailings dam overtopping
validated with the experimental data obtained. Based on the results of the tailings dam overtopping tests,
thethe
tests, changing
changingprocess of the
process of breach widthwidth
the breach on theon
topthe
of top
the tailings dam should
of the tailings damsatisfy
shouldthe following
satisfy the
Equation [44]:
following Equation [44]:
Ct ν2 − νk2
C v ρsvk2 νk ∆t,
∆b =2 (2)
b  t t， (2)
s vk
where ρs was the density of the tailings (kg/m3), Ct was the erosion coefficient of tailings (kg/m3), b
was the increment of breach width in t (m), v was the velocity of water in breach (m/s), and vk was the
velocity of impact resistance (m/s), which was related to the properties of the dam material.
The hydraulic characteristics of overtopping flow were similar to the flow of broad crested weir
[44]. The flow discharge could be obtained by Equation (3):
Water 2019, 11, 315 12 of 16

where ρs was the density of the tailings (kg/m3 ), Ct was the erosion coefficient of tailings (kg/m3 ),
∆b was the increment of breach width in ∆t(m), v was the velocity of water in breach (m/s), and νk
was the velocity of impact resistance (m/s), which was related to the properties of the dam material.
The hydraulic characteristics of overtopping flow were similar to the flow of broad crested
weir [44]. The flow discharge could be obtained by Equation (3):

Qout = k sm (c1 bh1.5 2.5

0 + c2 mh0 ). (3)

Among them, c1 = 1.7, c2 = −1.3 [45], the slope parameter was m = 0.36 according to the test model,
ksm was the coefficient of submergence, ksm = 0.95, b was the breach width (m), h0 was the breach depth
(m), and in this paper, h0 = z.
The relationship about time, breach depth and the number of reinforcement layers (N) was shown
in Table 3, which could be calculated by the following Equation (4), the coefficients were obtained
by best-fitting using Matrix Laboratory (Matlab, The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA) based on the
test results:
z = 5.287 + 0.102t − 2.983N − 0.009tN − 0.0001t2 + 0.395N 2 . (4)

Table 3. Relationship about breach depth, reinforcement layers (N) and time.

Index Values
Time (s) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 280 300 320
N=0 0 10 10 12 12.5 14 16 18 20 20 22 22 22 22 22 22
N=1 0 6 8 11 11 13 13 15 15 17 17 20 20 20 20 20
Breach
N=2 0 4 6 7.2 8 8 8 8 10 12 14 14 14 14 14 14
Depth (cm)
N=3 0 3 3 3 4 4 6 7 8 8 9 10 10 10 10 10
N=4 0 2 2 2 4 4 5 7 7 8 8 10 10 10 10 10

Ct was the erosion coefficient of reinforced tailings dam. From the test results, it was found that
the Ct was changing with the number of reinforcement layers. The relationship between Ct and the
number of reinforcement layers (N) was shown in Table 4, which could be represented by Equation (5):

3 −1
Ct = f ( N ) = Ct0 × ( N + 9) , (5)
2
where the N was the number of reinforcement layers, and Ct0 was the erosion coefficient of tailings
dam without reinforcement.

Table 4. Relationship between Ct and reinforcement.

Reinforcement Layers (N) 0 1 2 3 4

Ct (×10−4 kg/cm3 ) 38.62 13.51 9.92 6.10 5.59

Substituting Equation (5) into Equation (2), an equation of the width of the breach after introducing
reinforcement layers number (N) can be obtained:

Ct0 ν2 − νk2
∆b = × ∆t. (6)
ρs ( 32 N + 9) νk

According to the initial conditions above, the width of the dam breach with four reinforcement
layers could be predicted by Equation (6), showing a high goodness of fit. The calculated breach width
values were compared to the measured ones, as shown in Figure 12.
 Reinforcement Layers (N) 0 1 2 3 4
Ct (×10−4 kg/cm3) 38.62 13.51 9.92 6.10 5.59

According to the initial conditions above, the width of the dam breach with four reinforcement
layers could be predicted by Equation (6), showing a high goodness of fit. The calculated breach13
Water 2019, 11, 315
width
of 16
values were compared to the measured ones, as shown in Figure 12.

8
Measured value
Calculated value

The breach width (cm)

6

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time (s)

Figure
Figure12.
12.Comparison
Comparisonofofthe
thecalculated
calculatedand
andmeasured
measuredbreach
breachwidth
widthfor
forfour
fourreinforcement
reinforcementlayers.
layers.

Substituting
Substituting Equation
Equation (4)(4) into
into Equation
Equation (3),(3),
thethe flow
flow through
through the the breach
breach of reinforcement
of reinforcement damdamwas
was calculated
calculated by Equation
by Equation (3), asin
(3), as shown shown
Figurein13.
Figure
It was13. It was
found thatfound that the reinforcement
the reinforcement could
could effectively
Water 2019, 11, 315 14 of 16
effectively
reduce reduce the
the discharge discharge
of the of the overtopping.
overtopping.

10
Flow through breach (×103cm3/s)

N=0
N =0

8 N=2
N =2
N=4
N =4

0 50 100 150 200 250

Time (s)
Figure 13. Calculated
Calculated of flow through breach with different reinforcement
reinforcement layers.
layers.

5.5.Conclusions
Conclusions
Overtoppingwas
Overtopping wasrecognized
recognized as
as the
the major
major cause
cause of
of tailings
tailings dam
damfailure.
failure.In
Inorder
ordertotoinvestigate
investigatethe
the
feature of overtopping of the reinforced tailings dam, a series of physical model tests were carried
feature of overtopping of the reinforced tailings dam, a series of physical model tests were carried out. out.
Thefindings
The findingsof
ofthis
this research
research provided
provided insights
insights for
for the
the overtopping
overtopping erosion
erosionofofthe
thetailings
tailingsdam
damwith
with
different numbers of reinforcement. All presented expressions were applicable to the prediction of of
different numbers of reinforcement. All presented expressions were applicable to the prediction the
the development
development of breach
of breach in terms
in terms of of time.
time. Fromthe
From thestudy
studydeveloped
developed in
in this
this paper,
paper,thethefollowing
following
conclusionscould
conclusions couldbebedrawn:
drawn:

1.1. The
Thereinforcement
reinforcementlayers
layerssignificantly
significantly affected
affected the
the phreatic
phreatic level.
level. As
As the
thenumber
numberofofreinforcement
reinforcement
layers increased, the rate of the rise of the phreatic
layers increased, the rate of the rise of the phreatic level was slowing
slowing down, but the finalphreatic
down, but the final phreatic
level became higher.
level became higher.
2.2. The
Thenumber
numberofofreinforcement
reinforcementlayers
layers had
had anan impact
impact on the final
final shape
shape of
of dam
dambreach
breachafter
after
overtopping erosion. The final breach was
overtopping erosion. The final breach was shaped shaped as a ladder with four reinforcement layers and
with four reinforcement layers and
ananhourglass
hourglasswithout
withoutreinforcement.
reinforcement.
3. The reinforcement layers could improve the anti-erosion capability of tailings dam. With the
increase of reinforcement layers, the size of breach and the loss rate of stress were reduced
significantly.
4. Based on the erosion principle, a mathematical model including the number of reinforcement
layers was proposed to predict the width and flow of the tailings dam breach.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.J.; Methodology, X.J.; Validation, Y.C.; Supervision, D.J.W. and
Water 2019, 11, 315 14 of 16

3. The reinforcement layers could improve the anti-erosion capability of tailings dam. With
the increase of reinforcement layers, the size of breach and the loss rate of stress were
reduced significantly.
4. Based on the erosion principle, a mathematical model including the number of reinforcement
layers was proposed to predict the width and flow of the tailings dam breach.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.J.; Methodology, X.J.; Validation, Y.C.; Supervision, D.J.W. and
M.L.S.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, X.J. and Y.C.; Writing—Review and Editing, X.J., Y.C. and H.Z.
Funding: The research reported in this paper has been funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (No. 51404049), the Natural Science Foundation project of Chongqing Science and Technology Commission
(No. cstc2016jcyjA0319, No. cstc2018jcyjAX0231, No. cstc2015jcyjA50010), the China Scholarship Council
(No. 201608505157), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2017M620048, No. 2018T110103), and grant
chongqing-0004-2017AQ, Chongqing-0009-2018AQ.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments that improved
the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ozcan, N.; Ulusay, R.; Isik, N. A study on geotechnical characterization and stability of downstream slope of
a tailings dam to improve its storage capacity (Turkey). Environ. Earth Sci. 2013, 69, 1871–1890. [CrossRef]
2. Reid, C.; Becaert, V.; Aubertin, M.; Rosenbaum, R.; Deschenes, L. Life cycle assessment of mine tailings
management in Canada. J. Clean Prod. 2009, 17, 471–479. [CrossRef]
3. Harder, L.F.; Stewart, J.P. Failure of Tapo Canyon tailings dam. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 1996, 10, 109–114.
[CrossRef]
4. McDermott, R.K.; Sibley, J.M. The Aznalcollar tailings dam accident a case study. Miner. Res. Eng. 2000, 9,
101–118. [CrossRef]
5. Blight, G.E. Destructive mudflows as a consequence of tailings dyke failures. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Geotech.
Eng. 1997, 125, 9–18. [CrossRef]
6. Fourie, A.; Blight, G.E.; Papageorgiou, G. Static liquefaction as a possible explanation for the Merriespruit
tailings dam failure. Can. Geotech. J. 2001, 38, 707–719. [CrossRef]
7. Villavicencio, G.; Espinace, R.; Palma, J. Failures of sand tailings dams in a highly seismic country.
Can. Geotech. J. 2014, 51, 449–464. [CrossRef]
8. Sun, E.J.; Zhang, X.K.; Li, Z.X.; Wang, Y.H. Tailings dam flood overtopping failure evolution pattern.
Procedia Eng. 2012, 28, 356–362. [CrossRef]
9. Hahn, W.; Hanson, G.J.; Cook, K.R. Breach morphology observations of embankment overtopping tests.
Water Res. 2000, 1–10. [CrossRef]
10. Coleman, S.E.; Andrews, D.P.; Webby, M.G. Overtopping breaching of noncohesive homogeneous
embankments. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2002, 128, 829–838. [CrossRef]
11. Hanson, G.J.; Cook, K.R.; Hunt, S.L. Physical modeling of overtopping erosion and breach formation of
cohesive embankments. Trans. ASAE 2005, 48, 1783–1794. [CrossRef]
12. Tørum, A.; Kuhnen, F.; Menze, A. On berm breakwaters. Stability, scour, overtopping. Coast. Eng. 2003, 49,
209–238. [CrossRef]
13. Hanson, G.J.; Cook, K.R.; Hahn, W.; Britton, S.L. Observed erosion processes during embankment
overtopping tests. In Proceedings of the ASAE Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 July 2003;
pp. 11–17. [CrossRef]
14. Yang, Y.; Cao, S.Y.; Yang, K.J.; Li, W.P. Experimental study of breach process of landslide dams by overtopping
and its initiation mechanisms. J. Hydrodyn. 2015, 27, 872–883. [CrossRef]
15. Yuan, S.U.; Tang, H.W.; Li, L.; Pan, Y.; Amini, F. Combined wave and surge overtopping erosion failure
model of HPTRM levees: Accounting for grass-mat strength. Ocean Eng. 2015, 109, 256–269. [CrossRef]
16. Mohamed, M.M.A.; El-Ghorab, E.A.S. Investigating scale effects on breach evolution of overtopped sand
embankments. Water Sci. 2016, 30, 84–95. [CrossRef]
Water 2019, 11, 315 15 of 16

17. Mohamed, M.M.A. Overtopping breach peak outflow approximation of embankment dam by using Monte
Carlo method. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Water Resource Engineering and Water Resources
Planning and Management, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 30 July–2 August 2000. [CrossRef]
18. He, Z.G.; Hu, P.; Zhao, L.; Wu, G.F.; Pähtz, T. Modeling of Breaching Due to Overtopping Flow and Waves
Based on Coupled Flow and Sediment Transport. Water 2015, 7, 4283–4304. [CrossRef]
19. Mulder, J.P.M.; Hommes, S.; Horstman, E.M. Implementation of coastal erosion management in the
Netherlands. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2011, 54, 888–897. [CrossRef]
20. Van Rijn, L.C. Coastal erosion and control. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2011, 54, 867–887. [CrossRef]
21. Alessio, G.; Eleni, D.; Stuart, P.; Giorgio, S.; Kees, D.H. A Regional Application of Bayesian Modeling for
Coastal Erosion and Sand Nourishment Management. Water 2019, 11, 61. [CrossRef]
22. Carlsten, S.; Johansson, S.; Wörman, A. Radar techniques for indicating internal erosion in embankment
dams. J. Appl. Geophys. 1995, 33, 143–156. [CrossRef]
23. Ran, Q.H.; Wang, F.; Li, P.; Ye, S.; Tang, H.L.; Gao, J.H. Effect of rainfall moving direction on surface flow and
soil erosion processes on slopes with sealing. J. Hydrol. 2018, 567, 478–488. [CrossRef]
24. Wu, Y.Y.; Ouyang, W.; Hao, Z.C.; Lin, C.Y.; Liu, H.B.; Wang, Y.D. Assessment of soil erosion characteristics in
response to temperature and precipitation in a freeze-thaw watershed. Geoderma 2018, 328, 56–65. [CrossRef]
25. Callaghan, D.P.; Nielsen, P.; Short, A.; Ranasinghe, R. Statistical simulation of wave climate and extreme
beach erosion. Coast. Eng. 2008, 55, 375–390. [CrossRef]
26. Serpa, D.; Nunes, J.P.; Santos, J.; Sampaio, E.; Jacinto, R.; Veiga, S.; Lima, J.C.; Moreira, M.; Corte-Real, J.;
Keizer, J.J.; et al. Impacts of climate and land use changes on the hydrological and erosion processes of two
contrasting Mediterranean catchments. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 538, 64–77. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Stefanidis, S.; Stathis, D. Effect of Climate Change on Soil Erosion in a Mountainous Mediterranean
Catchment (Central Pindus, Greece). Water 2018, 10, 1469. [CrossRef]
28. Simonneaux, V.; Cheggour, A.; Deschamps, C.; Mouillot, F.; Cerdan, O.; Le Bissonnais, Y. Land use and
climate change effects on soil erosion in a semi-arid mountainous watershed (High Atlas, Morocco).
J. Arid Environ. 2015, 122, 64–75. [CrossRef]
29. Teng, H.; Liang, Z.; Chen, S.; Liu, Y.; Rossel, R.A.V.; Chappell, A.; Yu, W.; Shi, Z. Current and future
assessments of soil erosion by water on the Tibetan Plateau based on RUSLE and CMIP5 climate models.
Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 635, 673–686. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, T.; Li, P.; Hou, J.M.; Li, Z.B.; Ren, Z.P.; Cheng, S.D.; Xu, G.C.; Su, Y.Y.; Wang, F.C. Response of the
Meltwater Erosion to Runoff Energy Consumption on Loessal Slopes. Water 2018, 10, 1522. [CrossRef]
31. Sujatha, E.R.; Sridhar, V. Spatial Prediction of Erosion Risk of a Small Mountainous Watershed Using RUSLE:
A Case-Study of the Palar Sub-Watershed in Kodaikanal, South India. Water 2018, 10, 1608. [CrossRef]
32. Deng, S.S.; Xia, J.Q.; Zhou, M.R.; Lin, F.F. Coupled modeling of bed deformation and bank erosion in the
Jingjiang Reach of the middle Yangtze River. J. Hydrol. 2019, 568, 221–233. [CrossRef]
33. Choi, C.E.; Cui, Y.F.; Kelvin, Y.K.A.; Liu, H.M.; Wang, J.; Liu, D.Z.; Wang, H. Case Study: Effects of
a Partial-Debris Dam on Riverbank Erosion in the Parlung Tsangpo River, China. Water 2018, 10, 250.
[CrossRef]
34. Zhang, X.K.; Sun, E.J.; Li, Z.X. Experimental Study on Evolution Law of Tailings Dam Flood Overtopping.
China Saf. Sci. J. 2011, 21, 118–124. [CrossRef]
35. Liu, L.; Zhang, H.W.; Zhong, D.Y.; Miao, R.Z. Research on tailings dam break due to overtopping.
J. Hydraul. Eng. 2014, 45, 675–681. [CrossRef]
36. Festugato, L.; Consoli, N.C.; Fourie, A. Cyclic shear behaviour of fibre-reinforced mine tailings. Geosynth. Int.
2015, 22, 196–206. [CrossRef]
37. Li, L.; Mitchell, R. Effects of reinforcing elements on the behavior of weakly cemented sands. Can. Geotech. J.
1988, 25, 389–395. [CrossRef]
38. Wei, Z.A.; Yin, G.Z.; Li, G.Z.; Wang, J.G.; Wan, L.; Shen, L.Y. Reinforced terraced fields method for fine
tailings disposal. Miner. Eng. 2009, 22, 1053–1059. [CrossRef]
39. Yin, G.; Wei, Z.; Wang, J.G.; Wan, L.; Shen, L. Interaction characteristics of geosynthetics with fine tailings in
pullout test. Geosynth. Int. 2008, 15, 428–436. [CrossRef]
40. James, M.; Aubertin, M. The use of waste rock inclusions to improve the seismic stability of tailings
impoundments. In Proceedings of the GeoCongress 2012: State of the Art and Practice in Geotechnical
Engineering, Oakland, CA, USA, 25–29 March 2012; pp. 4166–4175. [CrossRef]
Water 2019, 11, 315 16 of 16

41. Liu, J.; Bai, Y.X.; Li, D.; Wang, Q.Y.; Qian, W.; Wang, Y.; Debi Prasanna, K.; Wei, J.H. An Experimental
Study on the Shear Behaviors of Polymer-Sand Composite Materials after Immersion. Polymers 2018, 10, 924.
[CrossRef]
42. Consoli, N.C.; Nierwinski, H.P.; da Silva, A.P.; Sosnoski, J. Durability and strength of fiber-reinforced
compacted gold tailings-cement blends. Geotext. Geomembr. 2017, 45, 98–102. [CrossRef]
43. Zhu, X.; Huang, X.M. Laboratory simulating test and field settlement observation of reinforced embankment.
Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 2002, 24, 386–388. [CrossRef]
44. Zhang, H.W.; Zhang, J.H.; Bu, H.L. Discuss the probability formula of bed load transport. South-to-North
Water Transf. Water Sci. 2011, 9, 140–145. [CrossRef]
45. Singh, V.P. Dam Breach Modeling Technology; Kluwer Academic Publisher: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1996;
Volume 17, pp. 181–200.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).