Talk:Taum Sauk Dam Failure

I'm for merging this page into the main article, but might wait a little while – it's convenient to collect information here that can then be thoughtfully merged there in a coherent manner.

Also, I'm not entirely comfortable with the term "dam" for the upper reservoir. A dam is an obstruction that holds back flowing water, IMHO. The transitive verm "dam" means to obstruct and/or impound a flow. The upper reservoir is much more like a very large above-ground swimming pool. The structure has been described as a very large berm. I think it more accurate just to say that the reservoir was breached or failed and that there is a large gap in the berm that forms the reservoir. &mdash; Kbh3rdtalk 18:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Engineering forensics reports
There is a long, detailed forensics report on the failuer by an engineering firm availble on Ameren's site, and a report by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. These need to be digested and their findings incorporated here. I don't have time at the present. --Kbh3rd talk 15:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Merging
I'd agree with it eventually being merged, but the link is fine for the time being.

I'm a Reservoir Engineer for a UK water company that have similar structures. Technically its termed a fully bunded pumped storage reservoir. Regards, Oismiffy 14:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Let's merge these articles now that 1 year has passed since the incident. Kbh3rd has correctly raised concerns about calling the failed structure around the fully bounded pumped storage reservoir a 'dam'. How about 'berm' or 'impoundment'? Bigturtle 23:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)