近年來，由於生態意識的抬頭以及環境永續經營的重視，台灣現有防砂壩存廢與否的問題逐漸受到重視。現有的防砂壩多數壩體已淤滿，且對周遭環境存在許多潛在的影響，在工程、經濟、生態、社會等多方面因素的考量下，壩體移除為一個可行的辦法。
本研究以台中縣和平鄉七家灣溪一號壩壩體為研究對象，針對壩體移除的方式、時機以及壩體移除後泥砂對下游河道可能造成之影響，蒐集歷年來的水文資料及現地實測資料，經過模型相似理論依比例縮尺後建置物理水工模型，以不同洪水重現期距、移除缺口位置、寬度及深度等控制變因的組合進行實驗，提供縱剖面變化、單位沖淤量變化、泥沙出流量等資料進行比較分析。
在壩體移除的瞬間，溯源侵蝕是一個很重要的指標性現象，而本研究從物理水工模型試驗中取得壩體移除後的斷面變化資料與一維擴散方程式所推導出的解析解中，發現在一次性移除的壩體改善條件下，實驗中跌落點的移動方式與解析解模擬結果並不相同，最後一個時間點的河床高程變化也僅靠近壩體的斷面較一致，探究其誤差原因與方程式的假設與限制有關。而在大部分的實驗組數中，結果顯示因壩下游斷面束縮，大部分壩後庫區所攔蓄的泥砂會在下游堆積，河道會以最短的時間達到平衡，而不致影響更下游的斷面。

In recent years, ecological awareness highlights importance of check dam while most of the existing check dams in Taiwan have been filled up and aging with potential risk and negative impacts on the surrounding environment. Among the different strategies, the dam removal is one option.
The study focused on Chijiawan No. 1 Check Dam in Taichung County. Based on the field and hydrological data collection, the physical model was scaled from prototype. Different scenarios of different flood return periods, removal positions and widths were evaluated. Longitudinal profile changes, eroded and deposited sediment amount, and transported sediment were analyzed and compared.
As head-cutting erosion is a very important indicator to understand the channel evolution, this study compared the longitudinal file changes after dam removal between experimental results and the analytical solution which were derived from one-dimensional diffusion equation. The study found the experimental knickpoint movement was different from that of the analytical solution. The bed elevation of the final time step was similar only near the dam site, which might be attributed to the assumptions and limitations of the one-dimensional diffusion equation. Most of the experimental cases showed most of the earlier impounded sediment accumulate in the downstream reach quickly and took short time to reach equilibrium.

1. Burroughs, B. A., Hayes, D. B., Klomp, K. D., Hansen, J. F., Mistak, J., 2009. Effects of Stronach Dam removal on fluvial geomorphology in the Pine River, Michigan, United States, Geomorphology.110, pp.96–107.
2. Brush, L. M., and Wolman M.G., 1960. Knickpoint behavior in noncohesive material: a laboratory study. Geological Society of America Bulletin. 71, pp.59-74
3. Cantelli, A., Paola C., Parker G., 2004. Experiments on upstream-migrating erosional narrowing and widening of an incisional channel caused by dam removal. Water Resource Research, Vol. 40, W03304.
4. Chang, H., 2008. Case Study of Fluvial Modeling of River Responses to Dam Removal, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, pp.295-302.
5. Cui, Y., Cluer, B., 2008. Dam Removal Express Assessment Models (DREAM-1 and -2): Applications and Examinations, Proceedings of the World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, Honolulu, Hawaii.
6. Cui, Y., 2008. Simulating Sediment Transport in a Flume with Forced Pool-Riffle Morphology: Examinations of Two One-Dimensional Numerical Models, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, pp.892-904.
7. Doyle, M. W., Stanley E. H., and Harbor, J. M., 2002. Channel adjustments following two dam removals in Wisconsin. Water Resource Research, 39(1), pp.1011–1029.
8. Doyle, M.W. and Harbor, J.M., 2003. Modeling the effect of form and profile adjustments on channel equilibrium timescales. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, In Press.
9. Evans, J. E., Huxley, J. M., and Vincent, R. K., 2007. Upstream Channel Changes Following Dam Construction and Removal Using a GIS/Remote Sensing Approach. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43(3), pp.683-697.
10. Gessler, J., 1965. The Beginning of Bed load Movement of Mixtures investigated as Natural Armoring in Channels, The Laboratory of Hydraulic Research and Soil Mechanics, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich, Switzerland (transl. W. Mkeck Laboratory of Hydraulics and Water Resources, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif.). Technical Rep. No. 69.
11. Holland, W. N., and Pickup, G., 1976. Flume study of knickpoint development in stratified sediment, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 87, p76– 82.
12. Pizzuto, J., 2002. Effects of Dam Removal on River Form and Process. BioScience, 52(8), pp.683-691.
13. Poesen, J., Nachtergaele, J., Verstraetenand G., Valentin, C., 2002. Gully erosion and environmental change: importance and research needs. Catena,50 (2003),pp.91– 133.
14. Poff, N. L., and Hart, D. D., 2002. How Dams Vary and Why It Matters for the Emerging Science of Dam Removal. BioScience, 52(8), pp.659-668.
15. Roberts, S. J., Gottgens, J. F., Spongberg, A. L., Evans, J. E., and Levine, N. S., 2007. Assessing Potential Removal of Low-Head Dams in Urban Settings: An Example from the Ottawa River, NW Ohio. Environment Management, 39, pp.113-124.
16. Schumm, S. A., Watson, C., and Harvey, M., 1984. Incised channels: Morphology, Dynamics, and Control. Water Resources Publications, Littelton, CO.
17. Stein, O.R., and Julian, P.Y., 1993. Criterion delineating the mode of headcut migration, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE, 119(1), pp37-40.
18. Stillwater Sciences, 2000. Technical Report: Numerical Modeling of Sediment Transport in the Sandy River, OR Following Removal of Marmot Dam. Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Berkeley, California for Portland General Electric, Portland, Oregon. March 2000.
19. Soil Science Society of America, 2001. Glossary of Soil Science Terms. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, http://www.soils.org/sssagloss/.
20. Stewart, G. et al., 2005. Potential Geomorphic and Ecological Impactsof Marmot Dam Removal, Sandy River, OR: Final Report(1st ed.), Oregon. Portland General Electric.
21. Wildman, L. A.S., MacBroom, J. G., 2005. The evolution of gravel bed channels after dam removal: Case study of the Anaconda and Union City Dam removals, Geomorphology. 71, pp.245–262.
22. Wikimedia commons, 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_function
23. Wang, H. W., Kondolf, G. M., and Desiree, T., 2010. Modeling Sediment Dynamics of Dam Removal: What Can We Learn From the Failure of Barlin Dam, Taiwan. Water Resources Research (manuscript).
24. 水文水資源資料管理供應系統http://gweb.wra.gov.tw/wrweb/
25. 毛壽彭，1987，水工模型試驗，中國土木水利工程學會。
26. 王瀅婷，2010，巴陵壩潰壩後對上游河床變遷影響之研究，國立臺灣大學工學院土木工程學系碩士論文。
27. 王筱雯，2010，七家灣溪一號壩壩體及棲地改善工程-泥砂衝擊物理模型及數值分析，雪霸國家公園管理處。
28. 李培芬，2002，七家灣溪集水區之遙測監測，雪霸國家公園管理處。
29. 林永發、于淑芬，2002，高山溪防砂壩改善後環境監測及武陵地區水質調查，內政部營建署雪霸國家公園管理處自行研究報告。
30. 林幸助、李慧琳、官文惠、邵廣昭、郭美華、曾晴賢、葉昭憲，2009，98年度武陵地區長期生態研究，雪霸國家公園管理處。
31. 施上粟、王筱雯、胡通哲，2009，橫向水工結構物移除、改善與河川復育效益評估(2/3)，經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所。
32. 施上粟、王筱雯、胡通哲，2010，橫向水工結構物移除、改善與河川復育效益評估(3/3)，經濟部水利署水利規劃試驗所。
33. 黃世村，1992，河川中梯狀床形之運移特性研究，國立台灣大學工學院土木工程研究所碩士論文。
34. 曾晴賢，2005，武陵地區長期生態監測暨生態模式建立櫻花鉤吻鮭族群監測與動態分析，雪霸國家公園管理處。
35. 葉昭憲、段錦浩、連惠邦，1998，七家灣溪河床棲地改善之試驗研究(一)，雪霸國家公園管理處。
36. 葉昭憲、段錦浩、連惠邦，1999，七家灣溪河床棲地改善之試驗研究(二)，雪霸國家公園管理處。
37. 葉昭憲、段錦浩、連惠邦，2000，七家灣溪河床棲地改善之試驗研究(三)，雪霸國家公園管理處。
38. 葉昭憲、段錦浩、連惠邦，2001，七家灣溪河床棲地改善之試驗研究(四)，雪霸國家公園管理處。
39. 葉昭憲、段錦浩、連惠邦，2002，七家灣溪河床棲地改善之試驗研究(五)，雪霸國家公園管理處。
40. 葉昭憲，2002，高山溪拆壩後環境監測及武陵地區水質調查，雪霸國家公園管理處。
41. 葉昭憲，2002，高山溪河道變化及物理棲地調查研究，雪霸國家公園管理處。
42. 葉昭憲，2005，武陵地區長期生態監測暨生態模式建立-環境改變對河道地形及物理棲地變化趨勢之影響，雪霸國家公園管理處。
43. 葉昭憲，2007，七家灣溪壩體改善研究評估，雪霸國家公園管理處。
44. 葉昭憲，2008，七家灣溪一號壩壩體改善之試驗研究，雪霸國家公園管理處。
45. 郭城孟，2005，七家灣溪潛在植被之研究，雪霸國家公園管理處。
46. 郭權億，2010，輸砂模式應用於陡坡溪流河床變遷之適用性研究-以高山溪為例，國立成功大學工學院水利及海洋工程研究所碩士論文。
47. 蔡長泰，2009，河道水力學。
48. 錢寧、張仁、周志德，1989，河床演變學。
49. 錢寧、萬兆惠，1991，泥砂運動力學。