ASDSO Dam Safety Toolbox

Post-Analysis Communication Best Practices

From ASDSO Dam Safety Toolbox
Jump to: navigation, search

Purpose

This page presents a framework for an engineer/modeler to effectively communicate the results of hydrologic, hydraulic, seepage, and stability models to both a dam owner and regulatory agency. While computer models can be useful tools in evaluating the performance of dams and appurtenant structures, watersheds, and a dam’s downstream consequences, there are a variety of approaches and methodologies for conducting and documenting these modeling efforts; therefore, it is important to owners, consultants, and regulators that clear communication is integrated in the process. The purpose of this page is to guide communication of the approach and results of a modeling effort. Such post-modeling communication may include a report submittal, a metadata document, digital file delivery, or a meeting with the regulator and owner.

The following sections outline best practices for post-analysis model communication and digital file delivery.

Reporting Guidance

Reports that present the results of a modeling effort, the following should be included:

  • A description of the project features and operations, with special attention to those that are important to the development of the model such as key elevations, construction methodology, materials, reservoir operations, historical incidents, floods, and/or seismic events, etc.
  • A definition of the model’s purpose and objective. E.g., was the model prepared for the purposes of designing a new dam, modifying an existing structure, informing a risk analysis, or evaluating the existing conditions of a project?
  • A summary of the assumptions and methods used to complete the modeling effort. Key assumptions may include software selection, methodology, boundary conditions, and model scenarios. Examples of key assumptions and important considerations for specific model types including seepage analysis, slope stability analysis, hydrologic analysis, hydraulic analysis, and consequence estimation are included in the pre-communication fact sheet attachments. Even if a model work plan was not prepared or submitted, these items should be discussed in the final report. State the software selection and describe the limitations of the program as they apply to this project.
  • A summary of the data and references to the sources used as the basis of the analysis. Note the guidance documents (e.g., State published guidance, USBR Design Standards, FERC Engineering Guidelines for Evaluation of Hydropower Projects, USACE Engineering Manuals, etc.)
  • Results of sensitivity analyses, model validation and/or calibration, if completed and/or justification for why these runs were not performed.
  • A summary of the analysis scenarios modeled. E.g., Flood Frequency/Reservoir Level, Seismic, Static, Transient, Sunny-day, etc.
  • A clear presentation of the model input parameters and the basis for their selection. Note the sources of information. If a parametric sensitivity analysis was completed, describe the findings.
  • Describe the uncertainties or limitations of the model (e.g., hydrologic model only valid for storms up to the 1% annual exceedance probability [AEP] event).
  • A clear presentation of the model results and findings consistent with the analysis scenarios described and focused on addressing the purpose or goal of the modeling project and a comparison to the performance criteria.
  • If necessary, recommended additional work to resolve data gaps or complete more advanced modeling not included in the scope of work.

Model File Preparation Checklist

Below are suggested best practices for preparing digital model files to be delivered to the owner and/or regulator. It should be noted that some modeling projects have some degree of confidentiality. The confidential nature of a project should be considered before sending files to third parties. If required by the owner or consultant, a digital file release form may need to be signed by the pertinent parties before digital files are transferred.

File Naming Conventions:
□ Use a consistent, clear naming structure (e.g. [ProjectName]_[ModelType]_[ModelVersion]_[Date]).
□ Avoid special characters and spaces — stick to underscores and/or CamelCase.
□ If applicable, consider including the work "CONFIDENTIAL" in the directory name.
File Organization:
□ Structure files logically (e.g., folders for inputs, outputs, scripts, and reports).
□ Compress large files or datasets into archives for easier transfer.
□ Consider including the model software version in the name of the model's parent directory.
□ Add a README file summarizing the purpose of the files and their organization.
□ Define in plain terms each model scenario and what file names they relate to.
□ If not denoted elsewhere, include the software version in the README file.
Data Preparation:
□ Ensure all input data are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with documented data in other deliverables.
□ Confirm geometry transformations were performed appropriately and provide the coordinate system used, if applicable.
□ Only provide model scenarios used to calibrate or compute final results, as documented in other model deliverables (e.g., design drawings, reports, memorandums, etc.).
□ If a description input is available within the modeling software, include a current description of the model, its purpose, limitations, etc.
□ Perform quality checks on the model results before sending them to the owner and/or regulator.
Regulatory Compliance:
□ Review guidelines from the governing authority to ensure models and data meet their specifications.
□ Include required forms, metadata (see links below), or supplementary information.
Backups and Redundancy:
□ Create backups of the modeling files and store them securely.
□ Share files via a reliable platform with proper permissions (e.g., SharePoint, cloud storage).

Optional Metadata Templates

In addition to thorough reporting as described above, regulators, owners, and modelers may require or electively use the attached metadata template for seepage analysis, slope stability analysis, hydrologic analysis, and hydraulic analysis. The purpose of the metadata templates are to provide a tool for recording basic elements associated with modeling that may not otherwise be included in the reporting. Metadata may be included in the report as an Appendix and/or kept in the project file with the models for future reference.

Application-Specific Metadata Templates

Slope Stability Model Communication Template

Seepage Model Communication Template

Hydrologic Model Communication Template

Hydraulic Model Communication Template


Development of this page was sponsored by the Montana Department of Natural Resources & Conservation with funding from the FEMA Assistance to States Grant Program.



Revision ID: 8234
Revision Date: 03/26/2025

Retrieved from "https://damtoolbox.org/index.php?title=Post-Analysis_Communication_Best_Practices&oldid=8234"