Evacuations under way near Kherson after destruction of dam prompts flooding
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
“That latter point means that, like all concrete structures, concrete dams will crack. These cracks will be tend to be vertical, since the concrete is free to grow and shrink in the vertical dimension, while the canyon it spans is of a fixed dimension. While an arch dam will have the pressure of the water pushing these vertical cracks closed, a gravity dam has no forces acting along its axis--well, except for the temperature changes. The easiest way to deal with this is to provide a known place for the concrete to crack. Therefore, the dam is divided into monoliths, where each monolith is a separately-placed block of concrete that is more or less structurally independent of the monoliths next to it. The dividing lines between monoliths are contraction joints, and will open and close with temperature changes, sometimes quite dramatically. This is the same reason sidewalks are cut into squares and concrete highways have the joints that go "ba-dump" as you drive over them--the concrete will crack, so provide a way to make it crack in a controlled, pretty manner.
[...]
This will hold true for all of the concrete, but once you get to the foundation, it gets a bit tricker. The soil is not a relatively well-controlled material like the concrete. It's typically full of joints and is permeable. At the base of the dam, it's typical to assume that the full pressure of the forebay is acting at the heel and the pressure of the tailwater is acting at the toe. The total force acting upwards is typically pretty large, which is a problem: this pressure will reduce the forces acting on the foundation, and therefore the force squeezing any joints in the rock. If you remember from high school physics, it's typically assumed that frictional forces are proportional to the force squeezing two surfaces together. Therefore, this uplift pressure can reduce these forces enough that a wedge of foundation rock will slide with the dam in a foundation failure. This is the typical cause of failure in a large gravity dam.
I've shown with a dashed line what that uplift pressure would look like under the monolith, if we let it reach its natural state. However, we have some tricks that we can use to dramatically reduce this uplift pressure. I've drawn a grout curtain and foundation drains extending from the bottom of the dam. The grout curtain is a "wall" of portland cement grout, formed by drilling through the bottom of the dam from the drainage gallery and injecting the grout under pressure. It's typically much deeper than I've shown here, as I ran out of room on the paper. This curtain will increase the path length for flow lines, which will primarily serve to reduce the volume of water flowing under the dam. ”
-- “Effort Post: Concrete Gravity Dam” https://www.datasecretslox.com/index.php/topic,215.msg3582.h...
(see also parts II and III at https://www.datasecretslox.com/index.php/topic,1012.msg19813... and https://www.datasecretslox.com/index.php/topic,1359.msg31228...)
But if you wanted to go and do demo on each monolith, that's...a very elaborate operation. Not impossible for a military to conduct, but it's hard for me to believe that it would have escaped notice until now. I'd expect to have seen a bunch of video of Russian soldiers spending weeks putting demo on each monolith, including having drilling rigs out there. People tend to have an overly-optimistic view of how easy it is to do a surreptitious controlled demolition, and it's harder when dealing with a structure that mainly functions by just being so damn heavy that water can't push it downstream--you need to either remove mass or disrupt the structure of the dam long enough for the reservoir to push it out of the way, which either means really big bombs that are probably easily visible, or super-elaborate placement of a bunch of small ones, which is also easily visible.”
1: https://nitter.hu/Gerashchenko_en/status/1666061532080361472... 2: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live-blog/khakovka-dam-li...
But that said I read this is a major problem for the Crimean peninsula so its arguable this one hurts everyone, and whichever side did it, has to incur some blowback costs. It is possible in the horrible metrics of modern warfare the impact to a successful defence of Crimea and troop movements is worse for Russia than the unimaginable pain of life without power, dislocation and living the swamp for Ukranians citizenry.
I am very glad I am not a military planner. I wouldn't want the stress of doing this kind of calculus.
The major problem was the Ukraine cutting all the water supply to Crimea in 2014 [0] and electricity in 2015. [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Crimean_Canal#2014%E2%80...
Adjust how? After the start of the war Russia reenabled the flow of water to Crimea as soon as it could.
"I believe the act was perpetrated by the Russians either cynically to demoralise deelectrify and dehouse"
Firstly, what is the point of that from the military perspective? And according to Putin, the regions where the fighting is going, 'voted' to join Russia and antagonizing population even further serves no end.
Secondly, attributing such meaningless callousness to Russians is either russophobia or the result of thoughtless consumption of Western propaganda.
Thirdly, what adjective would you use to the Ukrainians shelling of small Russian cities and villages near boarder?
Russian history has more to add to this conversation regarding the “population” and taking in of their considerations when Russia’s elite made and make decisions. The population itself historically seems to have accepted this state of affairs.
(It is not “Russophobia” to remind of Russian military’s history when discussing Russian military tactics.)
"to remind of Russian military’s history"
Actually, you haven't reminded of anything specific.
Only because they were routed (and the whole front in that region collapsed, basically) so quickly that they didn't have time to roll out the usual scorched-earth tactic that is their calling card.
Blowing up that dam sure helped them get caught up towards that end, though.
Not that quickly. [0]
"the usual scorched-earth tactic that is their calling card"
That's russophobic fiction.
"Blowing up that dam sure helped them get caught up towards that end"
Here is a Washington Post article [0] about Ukrainians attacking the dam with American missile to test if they can blow it up:
"Kovalchuk considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages.
The test was a success, Kovalchuk said, but the step remained a last resort. He held off."
There were many more attacks on that dam by the Ukraine [1] but I won't bother to try to find non-Russian sources, the WP article is enough.
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/29/ukraine-offe...
[1] https://pikabu.ru/story/skolko_raz_vsu_obstrelivali_kakhovsk...
It's reality, I know that Russia and its supporters need their safe space from reality but unfortunately reality says they blew up the dam.
Theres multiple videos of Russians admitting to blowing up the dam, and theres also evidence they blew up another dam.
Committing war crimes with impunity to stop the enemies advance has been a Russian tactic for a long tine.
>> https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/16660615320803614...
>> "We mined everything on Kakhovka HPP. So, they'll f*king blow it up and will wash away Ukrainian Armed Forces on the other side" - a Russian says. The video was published on 10 December, 2022.
>> https://twitter.com/den_kazansky/status/1666003021925347328
>> Russian soldier Yegor Guzenko, who is fighting in the Kherson region, admitted that Russia blew up the dam in Nova Kakhovka to stop Ukrainian army He also said that the Russian army should also blow up other dams on the Dnieper
> "Kovalchuk considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages.
> There were many more attacks on that dam by the Ukraine [1] but I won't bother to try to find non-Russian sources, the WP article is enough.
This is a typical Russian tactic of misinformation, Russia has themselves aid they hit the dam and has Russian propagandists where on TV saying they will blow up Kyiv dam if they want to.
Ah, I see where this exchange is going.
He held off
While the Russians didn't. That's the key distinction between the two sides.
All six reactors were shut down last year [1]. Cooling is still needed due to the residual heat produced by natural decay of the fuel even when the reactors are not running.
At the currently reported rate of 5 cm / hour, the water level in the reservoir will have sunk below 12.7 m by Friday morning (local time). It will then no longer be possible to pump water from the reservoir to the reactors. There are alternative sources, however [2]:
There are a number of alternative sources of water.
A main one is the large cooling pond next to the site that by design is kept above the height of the reservoir. As the reactors have been shut down for many months it is estimated that this pond will be sufficient to provide water for cooling for some months. The Agency will confirm this very shortly.
[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/11/last-reactor-at-ukr...
[2] https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/iaea-director-...