ANNEXURE-A

June 2012

REVIEW REPORT ON SEDIMENT FLUSHING THROUGH KAROT RESERVOIR

142-D Model Town, Lahore

ASSOCIATED TECHNOLOGIES (PVT) LTD
Tel: +92-42-35847194-7 www.atlpvt.com Fax: +92-42-35857637

Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd

Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 4 2. SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY..................................................................................... 4 3. MODELING SEDIMENT DELTA PROFILE FOR KAROT RESERVOIR USING HEC-RAS.................. 7 3.1 GENERAL ............................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7 3.3.8 3.3.9 3.3.10 Cross Section Locations ............................................................................................ 8 Boundary conditions................................................................................................. 9 Flow series .............................................................................................................. 10 Temperature ........................................................................................................... 10 Modeling delta profile of Karot reservoir using HEC-RAS:...................................... 11 Project area ............................................................................................................ 11 Scenario for delta modeling ................................................................................... 11 Input data for The HEC-RAS model......................................................................... 12 River system schematic .......................................................................................... 12 Geometric Data ...................................................................................................... 12 Cross Sections ......................................................................................................... 13 Dam Data ................................................................................................................ 13 Quasi-Unsteady Flow .............................................................................................. 14 Sediment Data ........................................................................................................ 15 Delta modeling: ....................................................................................................... 17

4. WORLDWIDE EXPERIENCE OF SEDIMENT FLUSHING ............................................................. 19 5. MODELING SEDIMENT FLUSHING THROUGH KAROT RESERVOIR USING HEC-RAS ............... 22 6. STRATEGIES FOR FLUSHING SEDIMENTS THROUGH THE RESERVOIR .................................... 24 6.1 Flushing Strategies...................................................................................................... 25 Page | 1

Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd

Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir

7. FLUSHING INDICATORS FOR THE KAROT RESERVOIR ............................................................. 26 8. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................ 29 9. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 29

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Schematic diagram showing the cross section locations used for the delta modeling ................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Flow Hydrographs at Karot dam site used as upstream boundary condition………..7 Figure 3: Bed material gradation curve for the Karot reservoir ............................................... 8 Figure 4: Suspended Sediment rating curve for Karot dam site .............................................. 9 Figure 5: Typical result of the HEC-RAS model for water surface profile before delta modeling ................................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 6: Results of Sensitivity Analysis of HEC-RAS Model to various Sediment Transport Functions ................................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 7: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to one year sediment deposition………………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 Figure 8: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to 12 years sediment deposition ............................................................................................................... 13 Figure 9: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to 16 years sediment deposition………………………………………………………………………………………………………….14 Figure 10: Country wise reservoir storage loss in percentages............................................ 155 Figure 11: Worldwide number of flushed reservoirs of various countries .......................... 166 Figure 12: Bed profile of Karot Reservoir before flushing based on 1 year Sediment deposition ............................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 13: Longitudinal profile of Karot reservoir after flushing the 1 year deposited sediments ............................................................................................................................... 18 Page | 2

... 19 Figure 15: Surface area of Karot Reservoir as a function of Elevation .......................Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir Figure 14: Average daily flows and average flushing discharge ........... 1989) ................26 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 : Twenty nine cross sections used for the delta modeling……………………………………...............5 Table 2: Computations for flushing indicators of Karot Reservoir……………………………………28 Page | 3 .............. 21 Figure 17: Reservoir emptying time and re-filling time.......................... 25 Figure 21: Cross section immediately u/s of the dam for simplified reservoir geometry….................. 24 Figure 20: Flushing durations required to flush one year deposited Sediments ............................ 20 Figure 16: Rating curve for discharges through flushing sluices .......................................................... 22 Figure 18: Mean Velocities at various sections of the Karot Reservoir………………………..................…….....23 Figure 19: Critical velocities for various sediment sizes (Yang........

Live storage of reservoir then would be 149.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 1. Feasibility study also addresses the degradation study on downstream of the dam.490 AF). due to which dead storage of the reservoir comes 10. Surface area of the proposed reservoir at Normal Operating Level would be Page | 4 . computations for the bed load.760 AF) at Normal Operating Level (NOL) of 461 m. modeling of sediment delta in the reservoir for one year. when to flush the reservoir. worldwide experience of sediment flushing. 2. total sediment inflow to the reservoir. Hence a need was felt to study the sediment flushing operation in detail to investigate the flushing scenario fully. As per feasibility report. and finally flushing indicators for the reservoir were determined to explain the feasibility of the flushing for the Karot reservoir. i.INTRODUCTION The Power and Energy Studies carried out by the Consultants and incorporated in Feasibility Study Report (FSR) for the reservoir of Karot Hydropower Project. how much should be the flushing duration. suggests that a flushing period of 10 days per year will be taken to clear and drain out the accumulated sediments downstream through the bottom sluices provided for in the dam. 12 years and 16 years of sediment depositions using HEC-RAS Model (U. what should be the suitable flushing discharge and what strategies are needed to enhance the life of the reservoir. The crest level of the dam is proposed as 466 m. each with sill level at 410 m. It also includes computation of suspended sediment inflow to the reservoir from the nearby sediment gauging stations. The power tunnel’s crown and invert levels are proposed at 440 m and 430 m.S. 2001). density of deposited sediments with time.8 MCM (121. The longitudinal sediment delta profile was modeled considering one year of deposited sediments in the reservoir using SHARC Model (Wallingford. Army Corps of Engineers. respectively. SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY Feasibility Report for the Sedimentation study of the Karot Reservoir (SMEC. Present study addresses the Sediment flushing operation of the Karot Reservoir in detail including summary of the sedimentation study at feasibility stage. 2005). Total height of the dam would be 76 m with a free board of 5 m. 2009) describes the sediment characteristics of the watershed of the proposed dam site and reservoir of Karot Hydropower Project on River Jhelum. during the review of FSR it was discovered that no in-depth analysis regarding sediment flushing was performed by the Consultants to support the said flushing period. interpretation of the model results. efficiency of the proposed reservoir in trapping sediments and life of reservoir without any flushing option. It covers description of previous sedimentation studies for the dam site. modeling sediment flushing operation to de-silt the sediment deposits accumulated in one year. However. The river bed level at dam site is 390 m. sediment yield of the watershed and sediment transport pattern of the river at the dam site. There are four proposed low level outlets of 12 by 18 m cross-section. strategies for flushing sediments through the Karot reservoir.2 MCM (8272 AF) which cannot be sluiced through the dam by any means. how much amount of water will be utilized in each flushing.e. the total reservoir capacity of the Karot reservoir would be 160 MCM (129.

e. Results of sediment study reveal that average specific suspended sediment yield at Karot dam site is about 1176 tons/km2/year. Average slope of the reservoir is 0.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 River Station 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2. to estimate the suspended sediment yield and total sediment inflow to the reservoir. No.5 2 1 0 1000 1000 0 Distance to d/s (m) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 Remarks Reservoir Area do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do Karot dam site D/S of dam side do do For the sedimentation study of the reservoir at feasibility stage. Azad Pattan and Karot. data of thirteen sediment gauging stations were collected and used.41 km2 (1337 acres) and length of the reservoir would be about 26 km.0026. Table 2 : Twenty nine cross sections used for the delta modeling Sr. calculations are mainly based on two sediment gauging stations. i. average suspended sediment load entering into the reservoir Page | 5 . However.

75 MCM (23376 AF). average bed load entering into the reservoir is about 4.54 MCM (12635 AF).07 MCM (26882 AF). The recommended density of deposited sediments is 1106 kg/m3 (69 Pcf). Mean annual trapped sediment load in the reservoir is 15. On average basis. Figure 1: Schematic diagram showing the cross section locations used for the delta modeling Trap efficiency of reservoir computed on the basis of Churchill curve is 40 % for the first year and finally reduces to 18%. The expected degradation on downstream of the dam is 9 m based on the occurrence of rocks. The pivot point of delta deposits will reach at a distance of 16 km from the dam face as a result of one year deposition. Flushing discharge required to carry out flushing of the reservoir would be equal to greater than 1600 m3/s. however a sediment particle of 0. whereas flushing duration required would be around one to two weeks depending on the flow available for the purpose. the annual sediment load entering into the power tunnels would be 1. Sands will start entering into the power tunnel when flow through the reservoir exceeds 6800 m3/s.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir is about 28. The life of the un-sluiced Karot reservoir is about 08 years.1 mm diameter is expected to enter into the power tunnel when flow exceeds 17500 m3/s.22 Mm3. Page | 6 . The recommended trap efficiency for any year is 47 % based on total sands and coarser material. average annual total sediment inflow to the reservoir is about 33.31 MCM (3495 AF).

Present study models the sediment delta and flushing operation. whereas. Page | 7 .1 GENERAL Delta profile modelling and flushing modelling are carried out by using HEC-RAS 4. Delta modelling is carried out using hourly time step for the 16 years of sediment deposition with average flow and sediment discharge conditions. 3. suitable flushing durations are predicted for various flushing discharges to de-silt the one year deposited sediments. the life of the reservoir can be further extended by the dredging the sediment deposits closer to the dam outlets. To carry out efficient flushing.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir The life of the reservoir can be enhanced to about 48 years with appropriate flushing operations at the rate of one per year in the month of May or June. Figure 2: Flow Hydrographs at Karot dam site used as upstream boundary condition It is noted that Feasibility Study does not contain modeling of sediment flushing operation of the reservoir either using SHARC or HEC-RAS Models. This study describes the application of HEC-RAS model for the prediction of delta profile and sediment flushing scenario for the Karot reservoir. the sediment delta in the reservoir should be monitored every year before flushing. MODELING SEDIMENT DELTA PROFILE FOR KAROT RESERVOIR USING HEC-RAS 3.1 model in addition to SHARC model to become more confident about results in the absence of calibration and validation of data. operator must be fully vigilant on the coming forecasted flows which may offer suitable flushing opportunity. Moreover. After 48 years.

which is a division of the Institute for Water Resources (IWR).01 0.001 0. multi-user network environment.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir The reservoir / river in this study was modelled as the compound channel with 27 cross-sections. Brunner.2. 2005).5. designed for interactive use in a multi-tasking. Army Corps of Engineers. leader of the HEC-RAS development team. In general. data storage and management capabilities.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION The HEC-RAS 4. graphics and reporting facilities. The inline structure for the dam is taken in between sections 3 and 2 and named as station 2. the equilibrium load was assigned as upstream boundary condition for the reservoir area. Four cross sections in the vicinity of the hydraulic structure are required for a complete model. HEC-RAS is designed to perform one-dimensional sediment transport calculation for a full network of natural and constructed channels. For Delta profile modeling.S. 3. 100 90 80 70 % finer 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.S. The quasi unsteady equation is used for 16 years inflow data in the reservoir area. The system is comprised of a graphical user interface (GUI). there should Page | 8 . HEC-RAS is an integrated system of software.1 dia (mm) 1 10 100 Figure 3: Bed material gradation curve for the Karot reservoir 3. The software was designed by Mr. U. The following is description of the major capabilities of HEC-RAS (U.1 Cross Section Locations The inline weir and gated spillway routines in HEC-RAS require the same cross sections as the bridge and culvert routines. two upstream and two downstream.1 software was developed at the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC). Gary W.. separate hydraulic analysis and sediment transport analysis components.

One at the upstream end of the structure (representing the headwater location).2.000 10. 3. Optional internal boundaries include Lateral Flow Series and Uniform Lateral Flow Series.2.000. such that the user entered downstream boundary condition does not affect the hydraulics of flow through the structure.000 y = 0. One at the downstream end of the structure (representing the tail water location). The quasiunsteady approach approximates a flow hydrograph by a series of steady flow profiles associated with corresponding flow durations.000 Sediment disc (tons/day) 100. culvert. One cross section located far enough upstream at the point in which the flow begins to contract.0187x 2.000 1.1456 R2 = 0. etc). weir. One cross section sufficiently downstream such that the flow is fully expanded.000 Water discharge (cumecs) 10. so it is necessary to provide different input along with boundary condition.000 1. 10.709 Figure 4: Suspended Sediment rating curve for Karot dam site 3.000. Each downstream boundary (the downstream most cross section Page | 9 . Each upstream boundary (the most upstream cross section of an open ended upstream reach) must have a Flow Series boundary condition specified.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir always be additional cross sections downstream from any structure (bridge.2 Quasi – unsteady flow simulation Current sediment capabilities in HEC-RAS are based on quasi-unsteady hydraulics.000 100 10 1 10 100 1. These four cross sections include.3 Boundary conditions Several different boundary conditions are available in HEC-RAS. Because this type of analysis requires different information than steady or unsteady flow.

3. each specified flow must also be accompanied by a time duration (over which the flow is constant). Due to the non-linear nature of alluvial sediment movement.2. each steady flow profile must have a flow duration. an irregular time step is desirable. particularly fall velocity. incipient motion and sediment transport are sensitive to water temperature. The duration is then broken up into a series of computational increments over which the sediment routing occurs. These events are usually of relatively short duration and are characterized by rapidly changing flow.4 Flow series Since Quasi-unsteady flow can have irregular (varying) time steps.5 Temperature Because several aspects of sediment transport mechanics.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir of an open ended downstream reach) can be either: Stage Time Series. Page | 10 . Additionally. hence. Because of this non-linearity. HEC-RAS requires temperature information. Low flows. or Normal Depth. are often approximated with large time steps. Figure 5: Typical result of the HEC-RAS model for water surface profile before delta modeling 3. Flow Duration: To approximate a flow hydrograph as a series of steady flows. peak flow events. transport is usually concentrated during large. Only one temperature per time step can be specified for the entire model. a computational time step must be entered for each record. corresponding to small or moderate transport (or bed change). Rating Curve.2.

Kotli (Azad Kashmir) Road nearly 68 km from Rawalpindi.3. sediment calculations are carried out on hourly basis. whereas. it was assumed that the reservoir is full at NOL of 461 m and the average monthly flow data is used to simulate the delta profile due to deposition of sediments in the reservoir area.1 has been used to model the longitudinal delta profile in the reservoir from stating to ending simulation time. there was a stream flow gauging station having wire weight gauge slightly on the upstream of the new bridge. the gauging station was closed by the end of 1979.3.2 Scenario for delta modeling For the present study. At the dam site. Karot dam site is located on River Jhelum at latitude of 33° 36' and longitude of 73° 37'. The results of the modelled delta can be easily seen for all time steps through animation option of the software. 3.3 Modeling delta profile of Karot reservoir using HEC-RAS: HEC-RAS 4. The monthly average flows and monthly average sediment flows were given as the input to the reservoir.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 3. Annual Sediment Deposition (MCM) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Functions Empirical Acres & white England & Hansen Yang Laursen Figure 6: Results of Sensitivity Analysis of HEC-RAS Model to various Sediment Transport Functions Tofaletees Wilcock Meyer Peter & Muller Page | 11 .1 Project area The project area lies along the river Jhelum on Rawalpindi . 3.

4 River system schematic The schematic defined in the HEC-RAS show the simplified plan view and locations of the cross section data from upstream to downstream of the dam site. whereas three cross sections were taken on downstream side of the dam. Figure 7: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to one year sediment deposition 3. reach lengths.3.5 Geometric Data The basic geometric data consist of establishing the connectivity of the river system (River system schematic). Quasi-unsteady flow data.3 Input data for The HEC-RAS model The data needed to perform various computations with HEC-RAS are divided into the following categories: Geometric data. number 2.e. 3.5. i.3. In river system schematic. Twenty nine cross sections were incorporated in the model and inline structure was also created in the geometric data in between section numbers 3 and 2. The dam site is situated at section number 2.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 3. Sediment data. and stream junction information. Page | 12 . river Jhelum was drawn in geometric data editor option of HEC-RAS. 1 and 0. In the geometric data editor the name for river reach was specified.3. The setting up of the model was carried out by considering 26 km river length with 27 cross-sections as shown in Figure 1. respectively. Bed gradation curve and inline structure data. cross section data. A brief description of these data formats and requirements in accordance with this study is given in the subsequent sections.

Figure 8: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to 12 years sediment deposition 3. Karot dam was simulated as an inline structure.3. The cross sectional data of river Jhelum was entered in HEC-RAS by the cross sectional data editor. left over bank and right over bank and Manning’s roughness coefficient (both vertical and horizontal variation of n. Pairs of station and elevation. The detailed information about the locations of cross sections is given in Table 1. The data entered into the cross section data editor comprises of River station information.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 3. The data entered into the In Line Structure data editor comprises of • • • • River station information Weir embankment data Weir crest shape Information about crest level Page | 13 . Cross sections from both the ends of inline structure (dam structure) upstream and downstream were plotted. Demarcation of main channel bank station.3.6 Cross Sections Boundary geometry for the analysis of flow in river was specified in terms of ground surface profiles (cross sections) and the measured distance between these (reach lengths at each crosssection).values were considered).. the distance up to next downstream cross section.7 Dam Data The data regarding dam was entered in the geometric data editor’s sub-option inline structure data.) for main channel.e. Downstream reach lengths (i.

a) Upstream boundary condition b) Downstream boundary condition a) Upstream Boundary Condition Monthly inflow hydrograph for 16 years was assigned as the upstream boundary condition. The upstream boundary condition flow hydrograph is shown in Figure 2. Page | 14 .3. The flow hydrograph was generated using the Karot and Azad Pattan gauging stations data using 37 years data record (1970-2006).8 Quasi-Unsteady Flow The flow data which was synthesized from the previous historical data was entered in the Quasiunsteady flow data editor which comprised of two boundary conditions.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir Figure 9: Modeled Longitudinal Sediment Delta Profile for Karot Reservoir due to 16 years sediment deposition 3. 1979-2006 at Azad Pattan which was transformed at Karot using a proposed multiplication factor.

Page | 15 UK . This function gives relatively suitable results closer as computed by the SHARC Model and also determined by empirical approach.4 0 China Turkey S Africa SE Asia India Japan USA Reigon Figure 10: Country wise reservoir storage loss in percentages b) Downstream Boundary Condition Normal depth was prescribed as downstream boundary condition with friction slope equal to the average river bed slope in the reservoir area at the downstream end (S = 0.2 2.6 1.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 3.8 Storage Loss (%) 2.8 0. Boundary Condition a) Initial Conditions and Transport Parameters: The initial condition and transport parameters specified for HEC-RAS for Karot reservoir are as following at each cross section.2 0.0026). For the present study. England-Hansen transport function was selected on the basis of sensitivity analysis of transport functions to model the delta of Karot reservoir. • • Initial Conditions and Transport Parameters. the sediment data was entered to develop a delta profile of sediment transport. Transport Function: A sediment transport function can be selected from the drop down box near the top of the form.4 2 1. The sediment data was entered in sediment data editor which comprised of following conditions. 3.3. i.9 Sediment Data Once the geometric data are entered.

Bed Gradation curve used for modeling the delta profile is shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 shows the Page | 16 Venez Iran . The control volume starts midway from the next cross section upstream and ends midway to the next cross section downstream. v.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir ii. 27 24 No. The maximum erodible depth used for model is 10 m. Sorting Method The sorting method to compute active layer thickness and vertical bed layer tracking assumption. iv. The Exner 5 method is currently used. Then the bed gradations curve can be associated with the appropriate range of cross sections using pick and drag functionalities. It was also selected after carrying out the sensitivity analysis of various fall velocity formulae available in the software. which was generated for the dam site using sediment discharge data of Karot reservoir area. a sediment control volume is associated with each cross section. Fall Velocity Approach Several methods are available for computing fall velocity. of flushed Reservoirs 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0 China Switzerland New Zeland Puer Rico USSR Guatemala Cost Rica Pakistan India USA Austria Algeria Tunisia Taiwan Sudan Japan Countries Figure 11: Worldwide number of flushed reservoirs of various countries iii. Maximum Depth In the HEC-RAS sediment framework. But Report 12 (Default method in HEC6) was used for delta modeling of the Karot reservoir.004 to 32 mm. It is a three layer active bed model that includes the capability of forming a coarse surface layer that will limit erosion of deeper material thereby simulating bed armoring. Bed Gradation HEC-RAS first requires the creation of bed material gradation curve. The sediment sizes in the bed material of the dam site ranges in between 0.

The maximum depth that is distance below the original invert of the channel was assigned as 10 m for all the cross sections and same bed gradation curve generated for Karot was used for the model.3. The typical result of HEC-RAS for the water surface profile before delta profile modeling is shown in Figure 5. Figure 12: Bed profile of Karot Reservoir before flushing based on 1 year Sediment deposition Figure 6 shows the results of the sensitivity analysis for the various sediment transport functions. Results show that Englund-Hansen equation computes the sediment deposition value and pattern very similar to SHARC Model results and as well result of the Empirical Approach which is the basic one.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir mean gradation curve for the suspended sediments at the Karot and Azad Pattan stream gauging stations of the river Jhelum. b) Sediment Boundary Conditions The equilibrium load is used as sediment boundary condition for delta modeling.10 Delta modeling: The Karot reservoir area was modeled for 16 years using monthly flow and sediment data. Page | 17 . 3.

it would become difficult to flush sediments in a shorter period which can be sacrificed for the flushing process. Page | 18 . The total sediment deposited in 16 years in the reservoir was estimated as 76. Figure 9 shows aggradation in the reservoir area and degradation on the downstream of the dam after 16 years of fluvial processes. Figure 8 shows aggradations in the reservoir area and degradation on downstream of the dam site after 12 years. The result shows that the he pivot point of the delta approaches at 8 km from the dam face whereas level of pivot point reaches at 446.63 MCM.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir Figure 13: Longitudinal profile of Karot reservoir after flushing the 1 year deposited sediments Figure 7 shows the aggradations on the upstream side of the dam and degradation on the downstream of the dam after one year flow and sediment transport processes. The total sediment deposited in the reservoir was estimated as 15. The pivot point of the delta approaches at 16 km from the dam face whereas level of pivot point reaches at 451.7 m.9 km from the dam face. The maximum degradation appears at just downstream from the dam site with a degradation depth of about 4. The pivot point of the delta will reach as close as about 7.1 m.8 m.7 MCM. The maximum degradation appears at just downstream from the dam site with a degradation depth of about 4 m.5 MCM. show that flushing of the sediment becomes essential at the end of each year to flush the deposited sediments accumulated in one year. The overall sediment deposition patterns in the reservoir for several years up to 16 years. After a long deposition period. The total sediment deposited in the reservoir was estimated as 66.

.0 percent (Liu.22. The maximum number of reservoirs are in North America. The number of storage reservoirs with storage volumes (in Bcm) in other regions are as: South Asia 4131(1039).1 to 2. India 0. with the storage volume of 148 Bcm.3%. whereas the minimum storage loss is in U..e. i. Middle East 895(224). and Japan 0.A. with average annual world storage loss of about 1. South America 1498(1039). As a result of reservoir sedimentation rate. China 1851(649)..464 Bcm (ICOLD 1998. i. about 300 to 400 new dams need to be constructed annually just to maintain current total storage. and South East Asia 277(117).3 percent. whereas the minimum numbers of reservoirs are in Central Asia. 4.e..1%. 7.15. Africa 967(575).e.34.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 2000 1800 1600 1400 flow (m 3/s) 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 0 60 120 180 time (days) 240 300 360 hydrograph flushing discharge Figure 14: Average daily flows and average flushing discharge Moreover. World annual reservoir storage loss due to sedimentation varies from 0. 2002). Pacific Rim 2278(277). White 2000). The storage loss in other regions is: Turkey 1. North Africa 289(188). WORLDWIDE EXPERIENCE OF SEDIMENT FLUSHING Globally there are about 25. i.46. 0. This is highly objectionable as far as the safety of the hydraulic machines is concerned. This Storage loss is mainly due to different vegetation cover.K. As shown in Figure 10 the maximum storage loss is in China.30.e. with the storage volume of about 1... 2. 0. South Europe 3220(938).205.5. topographic and geological conditions of the watershed areas (Liu.845 Bcm. U. North Europe 2277(938).S.500 storage reservoirs with the total storage volume of about 6. South East Asia 0. the high pivot point location of the delta deposits after 16 years would be such that it will cause entry of heavy sediment load with bigger sediment diameters into the power tunnel in case of high flows. 44. i. South Africa 0. Page | 19 . 2002).

used independently or in combination (Palmieri A. (2005)) Several methods by which the life enhancement of storage Reservoir can be made are: Watershed Management.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 20 18 16 Surface area (Mm 2) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 350 y = 5E-34x 12. flushing of sediments from Reservoir.777 R2 = 0.2003).R. sediment routing/sluicing. dredging (conventional dredging. hydrosuction and dry excavation). Page | 20 .. sediment bypassing and Density current venting.9762 375 400 425 450 475 Elevation (m) 500 525 550 Figure 15: Surface area of Karot Reservoir as a function of Elevation The 20th Century was concerned with the development of reservoir storage. The goal will be to convert today’s inventory of non-sustainable reservoirs into sustainable assets for future generations (White W. more emphasis will be required in the 21st century on the conservation of storage. Sediment management will become crucial.

000 12. However constraints may limit either the allowable drawdown or the invert elevation of flushing outlet.000 0 410 415 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 455 460 465 Out flow Inflow Reservoir Level (m) Figure 16: Rating curve for discharges through flushing sluices Flushing sediments through a Reservoir has been practiced successfully and found to be inexpensive in many cases. the great amount of water consumed in the flushing operation might affect it (Fi-John Chang.000 8.000 2. these impacts are less severe as compared to absence of flushing at all. The Reservoir is refilled during the latter part of flood season Chaudhry. Low level outlets for flushing operation are provided close to the original riverbed level and sufficient hydraulic capacity to achieve full drawdown White (2000). Flushing is most effective in preserving Reservoir storage when outlets are placed near the original streambed level and Reservoir is completely emptied.000 4.000 Discharge (cumecs) 14. however.000 18. M. partial drawdown flushing. Every Reservoir of the world cannot be flushed successfully due to the number of parameters affecting it like flatter bed slope. complete drawdown flushing. resulting in the creation of river-like flow conditions in the Reservoir. Flushing with partial drawdown may be used to clear more live storage space and locate the sediments in a more favorable position for future complete drawdown flushing Morris and Fan (1997).000 6. However. wider section. higher height of the dam and availability of water for flushing.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 20.A (2007). In complete drawdown flushing the Reservoir is emptied before the flood season. Two approaches to flushing exist. passing early season floods through the impoundment without significant detention. Flushing also causes sediments to be released from the Reservoir at a much higher concentration than occurs in the natural fluvial system which may create unacceptable environmental impacts downstream. 2003). Some irrigation Reservoirs in China are emptied for flushing during the first part of the flood season.000 16.000 10. Page | 21 . requiring the flushing be undertaken with only partial drawdown.

To investigate the flushing performance of the reservoir. Gebidem-Switzerland. It was assumed that the flushing becomes essential after one year sediment deposition in the Page | 22 . Mangahao-Newzealand. Puerto Rico 2. flushing scenario is modeled using HECRAS 4. Heisonglin. the same 27 basic locations of cross sections were used as the geometric data. Hengshan-China. Palagnedra-switzerland. Japan 1 New Zealand 1 Pakistan 1. except that these were modified as obtained after one year delta modeling. and Cachi of Costa Rica (White. KHASHM EL GIBRASudan.1 Model. 2000). Tunisia 1. Guatemala 1 Iran. The number of flushed reservoirs in different countries are as: Switzerland 5. Costa Rica 1. Shuicaozi. Jensanpei-Taiwan. MODELING SEDIMENT FLUSHING THROUGH KAROT RESERVOIR USING HEC-RAS As the reservoir is small and the sediment deposition rate is high. Former USSR 4. As shown in Figure 11. the project can only be considered feasible with successful flushing of the deposited sediments. Venezuela 1. USA 3. Naodehai. The study reveals that there are about 50 reservoirs which are flushed. the maximum numbers of reservoirs are flushed in China which are 21. Austria 1. Taiwan 1. India 3. For modeling. Warsak-Pakistan. while the unsuccessfully flushed reservoirs are: Chinese reservoirs. out of which flushing data is available for about 22 reservoirs. Gmund-Austria. Nanqin. ouchi-Kurgan and ZemoAfchar of former USSR. Worldwide flushing has been successfully implemented at Baira-India. Gaunting. Ichari-India. Sudan 1. Guernsey-USA. sufid-Rud-Iran. Santo-Domingo-Venezuela Reservoirs.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 30 Emptying and Refilling time (hrs) 25 20 15 10 5 0 410 Emptying time Refilling time 415 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 455 460 465 Reservoir Level (m) Figure 17: Reservoir emptying time and re-filling time Flushing is not a new technique and has been experienced for the last 6 decades and probably attempted for thousands of the reservoirs of the world. Algeria 1. 5. sanmenxia.

similarly a quasi unsteady file was prepared.000 6. The normal depth was given by assigning a value of friction slope as 0. Flushing durations required to flush the deposited sediments in one year were determined.5 200 0. Figure 13 shows the reservoir bed profile after flushing the deposited sediments in the reservoir which were accumulated in one year.000 10.5 1800 1600 Mean Velocity. sediment rating curve derived for the dam site based on long past data record was used.000 8. Due to flushing operation. Froude Num 1400 2.000 22.000 12.000 20. For initial condition.0 0 Froude Num Flow (cumecs) 1200 800 600 400 0 2. sand and gravel was assigned on the basis of the bed material gradation characteristics and amount of the bed load transport rate. 1600.0 2. As boundary condition. slight aggradations have been obtained on the upstream of the dam site.000 Flow 1000 . fraction of the clay.0026.000 Distance from dam face (m) Figure 18: Mean Velocities at various sections of the Karot Reservoir For flushing modeling. For the sediment boundary condition. 1200. The temperature of the water was assigned for each day as it affects the sediment transport processes. Moreover. 3.5 1. daily flows of 800. 2000 and 2400 m3/s were tried as the constant flushing discharges for the entire flushing duration of 120 days.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir reservoir. It is due to the fact that the Page | 23 24. silt.000 18. The flushing duration required to flush the deposited sediments was 20 days for a flushing discharge of 1600 m3/s.0 Velocity (m/s) 1. The longitudinal profile of the delta which was used as input for the flushing scenario is shown in Figure 12.000 4.000 16.000 14. Sediment transport function used for the analysis was the same England-Hansen. sorting method used was of Exener 5 and fall velocity method of Report 12 was used for the estimation of fall velocities. bed material gradation curve at the dam site was used.0 0.

However. and hence relatively silt free water has caused scouring on down stream side. Page | 24 . A mean daily flow hydrograph for the Karot dam site is plotted in Figure 14 along with the flushing discharge of 1600 m3/s constant line.001 0. there is an increase in the degradation of bed profile on the downstream of the dam site. It is due to the fact that the height of the dam up to the sill level of flushing sluices acted as a barrier in the transport of bed load and much of the suspended load. However. STRATEGIES RESERVOIR FOR FLUSHING SEDIMENTS THROUGH THE Literature on flushing the reservoirs reveals that the flows required for flushing should be of the order of double of mean annual flow.0 1.5 1. hence a recommended flushing discharge would be about 1632 or 1600 m3/s.5 Critical Velocity (m/s) 2.01 0.1 1 10 100 Average Sediment dia (mm) Figure 19: Critical velocities for various sediment sizes (Yang.5 0.0 2. This Figure show that the suitable flushing time would be somewhere in May or June. As the mean annual flow is 816 m3/s. for every year it depends on the availability of the flows closer to 1600 m3/s.0 0. aggradations will start and at a later stage an equilibrium condition will be maintained by the river. 3. when the flows are highest. Then instead of degradation on downstream side of the dam. This scouring on the downstream of the dam site will automatically check once the bed level on the upstream of the dam site will raise up to the flushing sluices sill level. 1989) 6.0 0.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir sill level of the flushing sluices is sufficiently higher than the bed level and hence it has to be filled with sediments.

The velocity of flows during flushing varies from 0. certain days are required for continuous flushing at riverine flow conditions. after flushing operation.0 20.0 14.1 Flushing Strategies To carryout flushing of the sediments through the reservoir. This Figure shows that even a 50 mm diameter sediment particle can be flushed with 1600 cumecs discharge value.0 8. the flushing sluices will be opened and a riverine flow will be obtained.0 10. Page | 25 . it should be re-filled back. flushing the reservoir and refilling the reservoir must be estimated. Corresponding to any discharge value what will be the depth of flows. it should be emptied somewhere at the end of April on the basis of average flows.0 12. Froude number and mean velocities. about the critical velocities required to move various particle sizes.0 2. The same Figure illustrates the time required to refill the reservoir with a standard flow of 1600 m3/s.0 6. Rating curve for total outflows from the dam is shown in Figure 16. can be obtained from the output of the HEC-RAS model in tabular form.0 4.0 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 3 Flushing Duration (days) 2000 2200 2400 Flushing discharge (m /s) Figure 20: Flushing durations required to flush one year deposited Sediments To achieve draw-downs. time required to empty the reservoir at various levels have been computed and shown in Figure 17.0 16. As it is necessary to empty the reservoir before flushing. After emptying. Figure 19 depicts the findings of Yang et al.0 18.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 6. Practically it would depend on the actual temporal distribution of the flows. To do so graphical relationship between surface area of the reservoir and elevation was established and is shown in Figure 15.0 22. For discharge of 1600 cumecs. the velocity of flows at various sections are given in Figure 18. time for emptying the reservoir. The time required to empty fully the reservoir is 11 hours with the provided facility of under sluices.5 to 2. To study this whole process. 24.6 m/s.0 0.

But the main indicators that are to be Page | 26 .SBR >1.7. At low flushing discharge (800 m3/s). This much duration of flushing is expected for average flow and sediment years. 7. The model was run for various discharges and flushing durations were determined. for which flushing durations required would be 20 to 17 days. Draw Down Ratio (DDR). Long Term Capacity Ratio (LTCR). It is learnt from the Figure that suitable flushing discharges for the Karot reservoir are 1600 to 2000 m3/s. For the successful flushing the limits of these indicators are: . Total time required for the flushing process would be time for emptying the reservoir (11 hours). Flushing was modelled for range of flushing discharges from 800 to 2400 m3/s.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir The one year delta deposit was given as input to the flushing model HEC-RAS. LTCR approaching to unity. Sediment Balance Ratio during full draw down ( SBR d ). FWR > 1 and TWR = 1-2 (Atkinson. Flushing Width Ratio (FWR) and Top Width Ratio (TWR). the flushing duration required would be 22 days. These are plotted and shown in Figure 20. DDR = 0. SBR d >1. In total 20 days would be required for complete flushing operation of the reservoir. time for flushing (18 days) and time for refilling the reservoir (30 hours). 1996). FLUSHING INDICATORS FOR THE KAROT RESERVOIR The various indicators for successful flushing of sediments from Reservoir are Sediments Balance Ratio (SBR). Scoured channel cross section Reservoir cross section Figure 21: Cross section immediately u/s of the dam for simplified reservoir geometry The above calculations show that around 18 days flushing is required to desilt the about 90% of the annual trapped sediment load in the Karot reservoir.

are the SBR and LTCR. SBR = Mf M dep (1) Where M f is sediments mass flushed annually and M dep is the sediments mass deposited annually. 2009).5 El max − El f L Q f S 1.. Wres = Wbot + 2SS res (El f − El min ) (2) (3) (4) Wf = 12. 1996). The detailed discussion about two parameters is given below: Sediment Balance Ratio (SBR) is defined as the ratio between sediments mass flushed annually and sediments mass deposited annually. LTCR = Af Ar (8) Wtf = W + 2 SS S (El max − El f ) (9) (10) Wt = Wbot + SS res (El max − El min ) Page | 27 .8 Q f S= 0.6 QS = ψ (5) M f = 86400 T f QS M dep = M in TE 100 (6) (7) LTCR is defined as the ratio between sustainable capacity to the original capacity of the reservoir.6 1. whereas sustainable capacity is the total volume of the reservoir which can be maintained due to the flushing of the reservoir (Atkinson.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir fulfilled to assess the successful flushing of the reservoir.2 W 0. Successfully flushed Reservoirs fulfill the above two indicators whereas unsuccessfully flushed reservoirs do not fulfill the LTCR criteria at all (Habib et al.

SSres is the Page | 28 . hf is a height defined in Figure 21 (m).No 1 2 3 4 5 Value 35. Elf is the water surface elevation at the dam during flushing (m).73 1.69 1.7 >1 1 to 2 Af = Wtf + W 2 (El max − El min ) (11) hm = Wres − W 2(SS S − SS res ) (12) hl = El max − El f − hm h f = El max − El f (13) (14) Where Af is the cross sectional area of valley scoured out by flushing (m2).840 36. Elmin is the minimum river bed elevation immediately upstream from the dam (m). Mf is the mass of sediments flushed annually from the reservoir (Tons).000 461 390 412 90 1. S is the longitudinal slope during flushing. Ar is the cross sectional area of reservoir in reach immediately upstream from dam (m2).0062 47 1600 20 Units MCM m m m m m MCM Tonnes % cumecs days S.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir Table 2: Computations for flushing indicators of Karot Reservoir S. Qf is the discharge passing through reservoir during flushing (m3/s).000 300 3 0.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Input data for flushing Analysis Parameter Symbol Original Storage Capacity Co Reservoir Length L Elevation of top water level at dam Elmax River Bed Level at dam site Elmin Water surface elevation at dam during flushing Elf Representative bottom width Wbot Representative Side Slope SSres Representative Side Slope for Sediment SSs Mean Annual Water Inflow Vin Mean Annual Sediment Inflow Min Tsinghua University Factor for Sediment Type Ψ Sediment Load factor (if different China) Capacity inflow ratio Co/Vin Trap Efficiency TE Flushing Discharge Qf Flushing Duration Tf Output Flushing Parameters Parameter Symbol Sediment Balance Ratio SBR Long Term Capacity Ratio LTCR Drawdown Ratio DDR Flushing Width Ratio FWR Top Width Ratio TWR Value 160 26.42 0.81 0.5 25. Mdep is the mass of sediments which deposits annually in the reservoir (Tons). L is the reservoir length (m).00 Criteria >1 1 > 0. Qs is the sediment load during flushing (Tons/s). Elmax is the elevation of top water level (m). hl is a height defined in Figure 21 (m).070. Min is the mean annual sediments inflow (Tons).5 1.

whereas. The computed value of Sediment Balance Ratio (SBR) is over satisfied. The values of 05 flushing indicators have been computed for the Karot reservoir and are reported in Table 2. Appropriate flushing discharge determined for the Karot reservoir flushing is 1600 m3/s and the appropriate month to flush the reservoir should be either in May or June. total flushing duration required to flush the deposited sediments of one year including the emptying and refilling time would be around 20 days.7 MCM. Results of the HEC-RAS Model for longitudinal sediment delta profile of the Karot reservoir reveal that in one year deposited sediments would be 15. whereas. TE is the trapping efficiency of reservoir (%). CONCLUSIONS Feasibility report does not contain any study relating to sediment flushing modeling through the reservoir using either SHARC or HEC-RAS Model. The input data required for these calculations are also given in the same Table. Page | 29 . The output values show that Karot reservoir fulfills all the criteria except for Long Term Storage Capacity (LTCR). Tf is the duration of flushing (days). 9. The parameters are computed for a flushing discharge of 1600 cumecs with a flushing duration of 20 days. W bot is the bottom width for the reservoir (m). hence flushing efficiency of the reservoir to flush the sediments wouldn’t be 100 %. pivot point would be expected to reach at 8 and 7. It would be around 80 to 90%. W res is the reservoir width in the reach upstream from the dam at flushing water surface elevation (m).5 MCM and the pivot point will reach at 8 km from the dam face. hence a longer duration of the flushing is expected. whereas Flushing Width Ratio (FWR) and Top Width Ratio (TWR) are also fully satisfying.9 km. 8. As the Karot reservoir does not satisfy the LTCR criteria fully. W f is the width of flow at the bed of the flushing channel (m).63 and 76. respectively.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir representative side slope for the reservoir. RECOMMENDATIONS Flushing discharge of 1600 m3/s with a total flushing duration of 20 days is recommended in the month of either May or June to flush the deposited sediments of one year in the Karot reservoir.7. sediment deposited would be 66. W is the width of flow for flushing conditions (m). SSs is side slope for the deposits exposed by flushing. After 12 and 16 years. its value is 0. The mentioned one to two weeks flushing duration was just based on the experience of the Consultant’s expert. hence the flushing efficiency of the reservoir wouldn’t be 100%. 0. The value of Drawdown Ratio (DDR) is very close to the criteria i.e. ψ is the multiplier in the Tsinghua University method for sediment load prediction during flushing. W tf is the top width of the scoured valley at the top water level (m). Numerical values obtained for 05 flushing indicators for the Karot reservoir are well satisfied except for LTCR.81 except 1.

5th int. Approaches to enhance the life of reservoirs. 2006 Fi-John Chang. "Optimization of operation rule curves and flushing schedule in a reservoir"..S. Lahore.2005 Page | 30 . and Akhtar. Liu B-Y. “Investigation and evaluation of the pressure flushing through storage reservoir”.L. Report OD137. SHARC-Procedure for the Selection and Outline Design of Sediment Control Structures. Davis CA 95616.” Advances in Hydro-Sciences and engineering. (2009). Jihn-Sung Lai. FR/R0012. Fathi-Moghadam M... Reservoir Conservation: Volume 1 The RESCON Approach. Poland. (2009). 2003 Habib-ur-Rehman. “Reservoir sedimentation management in Asia. 2009. March 2001. CD ROM.M. . New York. . “Feasibility of flushing sediment from reservoir”.Ghomeyshi. and Habib-ur-Rehman.Technical Manual. ICOLD World Register of Large Dams. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank. 609 second street. pp. 1 No. Reservoir Sedimentation Handbook: Design and Management of Dams. N.C.R “A review of Current Knowledge World Water Storage in Man. Conf. and Expo of Water Technologies. Assessment of sediment flushing efficiency of Reservoirs.A. xxiv+805 pp.1623-1640. Annandale G. .. Washington D.. (2001). McGraw Hill.. White W. Wallingford. Fan J.2003 SMEC.. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences Vol.. 40. Volume 17 Issue 8. Ashida K. Dinar. Li-shan Kao. Feasibility Study Report. 1998 Liu J. M. Lahore Pakistan. MAES & EGC. A. A.. 40 pp. Marlow.. Conf. Pakistan Journal of Science. Chaudhry. HR Wallingford. pp. Emamgholizadeh S. River Analysis System) Manual. 2002. pp. Liston Road.. The Listons. Volume 4. x+21 pp. Australia.3-13.. 61(3): 181-187. (2007). April 2005. 1996.Associated Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Sediment Flushing Through Karot Reservoir 10. Bina M. Foundation for Water Research Allen House. REFERENCES Atkinson E..7-16. Hydrological Processes. pp. Volume 2 RESCON Model and User Manual. Army Corps of Engineers. Sedimentation Report. Snowy Mountain Engineering Corporation Ltd. Int. Shah F.. April. W.Made Reservoirs”. U. M. Reservoirs and watershed for sustainable use. Karot Hydropower Project. Warsaw. Chaudhry. 1997 Palmieri A. on Hydro-science and Engineering. (1997).. (2005). Wallingford HR. 4. HEC-RAS (Hydrologic Engineering Center. Morris G. January 9-10.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful