You are on page 1of 92

!"#$%"&'('$)&*+"#,-'$)&*(&#*./"-0*1(%*1"2$3&*$&*'/"*.

$4(4(5$*+$6"7*
Bachelor Thesis!
Gerben Jan Vos
!"##$"%$#&'
!"##$"($!%'
08
)*++'
P a d j a d j a r a n U n i v e r s i t y
U n i v e r s i t y o f T w e n t e
Bachelor Thesis
23 January 2012

Institutions
University of Twente
Faculty of Engineering Technology
Civil Engineering
Enschede
The Netherlands

Padjadjaran University
Faculty of Agricultural Industries Technology
Institute of Ecology
Bandung
Indonesia

Supervisors
Dr. Ir. H. Wagiono
Faculty of Agricultural Industries Technology
Institute of Ecology
Padjadjaran University

Dr. K.M. Wijnberg
Faculty of Engineering Technology
Department of Water Engineering & Management
Civil Engineering
University of Twente

Author
Gerben Jan Vos
g.j.vos@student.utwente.nl
University of Twente
Faculty of Engineering Technology
Bachelor Civil Engineering
i
Foreword
This is the Bachelor Thesis of Gerben Jan Vos within the educational institutions of
Padjadjaran University in Bandung, Indonesia, and University of Twente in Enschede, The
Netherlands. The period for this project is ten weeks and the residence was in Jatinangor,
Sumedang, Indonesia, where the second location of the Padjadjaran University is situated.
The reason for this report is a problem of erosion and sedimentation in and near to
the Cilalawi River in West Java, Indonesia, which is resulting in water storage reduction of
the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur downstream. This report treats the progress in achieving the
goal including the complete check dam design to counter sediment transport problem.
I owe the completion of this report to several persons and companies. First of all, I
would like to thank Dr. H. Wagiono of the Padjadjaran University and Dr. K.M. Wijnberg of
the University of Twente for guiding me as supervisors through the project. In special, a word
of thanks to Ir. K.T. Veenvliet of the University of Twente. He provided guidance in the design
phase and in finishing the report. Secondly, I thank my father, Ir. M.J. Vos, for giving me
supporting expertise and encouragement. Thirdly, Laura Septy Ferlany and Fattah Tamtanus
were important companions in the bureaucratic data collection. They were my counterpart
students who helped me inside and outside the project during the total period. Furthermore,
several people in the community of the faculty of Agricultural Industries Technology were
crucially helpful. Dr. M. Muheamin as president welcomed me to his faculty and made my
stay comfortable, while Ir. MT. T. Pujianto as vice-president completed a variety of formal
letters to obtain data from participating companies and was also responsible for the
successful stay. The last person of the faculty I am grateful for, for guiding me in AutoCAD, is
Ir. M. Saukat. Finally, I want to thank all the data providing companies, especially the Water
Research Center in Bandung, and the person who checked the language, spelling and
grammar of the complete report, Drs. A.E. Reinders of the The Hague University.
ii
Abstract
An overdose of sediment from the Cilalawi River is going into the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur.
This is resulting in the problem of reservoir capacity reduction. With water still coming from
different rivers, the future will be inundation. In this matter the recommendation for this
problem is check dam(s) and changing land use, stated by the local government, Perum
Jasa Terta II (PJT II). These solutions can both reduce sediment transport in the river by
respectively decreasing flow velocities and reduction in erodibility.
The Cilalawi River and reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur are located in the province of
Purwakarta, West Java, Indonesia. Cultivation, forest and buildings surround this river.
Residents in this area are using the river for waste disposal, private fishing, washing and
recreation, while chemicals and excreta heavily pollute it. What is more, the PJT II manages
the policy for rivers in West Java region. On the contrary, there is currently no policy
concerning the Cilalawi River, although, recommendation has been written for the described
problem.
Therefore, the goal is to use the design of a functional check dam to estimate the
impact of the civil structure on erosion and sedimentation in the watershed. Land use
changing is no option, because of the large surface area to treat, the additional high
expenses and the essential sawah existence with high erodibility.
The research questions to the theme and to achieve the goal are:

1. Which characteristics of the Cilalawi River and watershed are responsible for the
sedimentation and erosion?

2. What would be the design of the functional check dam for the Cilalawi River?
a) What are the requirements for the new check dam?
b) What will be the time horizon of the check dam till its expiration?
c) What does the designed check dam look like in the phase of preliminary design?

The check dam in this project is an object, which will catch moving sediment in the upstream
to hold it in the original catchment area. For the model of the dam the characteristics of land
use, river conditions, climate and preconditions have been taken into account. Prior to the
check dam design data collection was needed to derive, for example, discharges, elevations
and precipitation.
Study of the check dam resulted in a definition of the structure, stated as:

'A check dam is a civil structure that is built in an active channel, perpendicular to both river banks, to
achieve erosion reduction in the river and catch sediment upstream by decreasing flow velocities.'

After the study area description the requirements are collected followed by potential locations
and dam alternatives. Environmental requirements demand a dam in a straight upstream
section with the narrowest profile. Moreover, the design prevents inundation upstream and
erosion in the downstream, meanwhile the performance requirements of the check dam
claim: 25 year peak discharge, ability to treat a watershed of 72 km
2
or smaller, the longest
lifetime, maximum height, conduction on spillway, constructed against damaging obstacles
and a forced hydraulic jump. The last requirements are technical and physical, which ask for:
downstream dam slope of 20-30%, upstream dam slope of 45% or more, dam positioned
perpendicular to the flow direction and river banks, and minimum maintenance required.
Chosen is for an impervious concrete check dam at the location of Babakansari East.
The location is chosen from four vantages in the upstream with mainly the environmental
requirements, while the concrete check dam is selected by the performance requirements.
Beside the impervious dams are the temporary and regular dams, which are both limited by
iii
lifetime. The regular dams also need more maintenance and are less firm as impervious
check dams. Within the impervious dams the concrete dam is the only without height limit;
the used dam in this project.
The created sub-watershed is besides the sediment transport model, modeled on
land use soil to get insight into the erodibility process. The land uses with the average rainfall
in the Rational Formula are providing 300 thousand m
3
/year of sediment going into the river.
Consequently, the sediment of the river can be divided into three types: bed load, suspended
load and wash load. The sediment transport is modeled by the formulas of Meyer-Peter &
Mller (bed load) and Engelund & Hansen (bed load and suspended load) with the result of
respectively 74.2 thousand m
3
/year and 88.9 thousand m
3
/year. The high uncertainty in the
used parameters and outcomes are causing difficulty in the conclusion that there are high
amounts of wash load. Compared with the amount of sediment by the Rational Formula, it
can be stated that almost 100% of the soil is coming from land use.
According to the PJT II, there is capacity reduction in the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur of
274 million m
3
in 10 years. This amount results eventually in 13.6 million m
3
/year of sediment
transport from the treated Cilalawi River watershed. This amount is compared with a
reservoir called Sermo in East Java, Indonesia. The difference in sediment settlement of the
Cilalawi River in the reservoir is assumed to be a factor 10 less, resulting in 1.36 million
m
3
/year. Consequently, the calculated sediment transport of 88.9 thousand m
3
/year could
become closer to reality with this fact and all the parameter uncertainties.
The check dam design is the next phase, knowing the river profile and the sediment
transport. The height of the dam is determined by the height of the river profile and maximum
discharge of 77.7 m
3
/s. As a consequence, the dam will be 2.1 m high and has a sediment
storage capacity of 3000 m
3
. The average discharge of 5.54 m
3
/s shows 12 days of
expiration time and less than 1 with all the uncertainty. This leads to the advice of multiple
check dams or dredging for a deeper channel. Multiple check dams will each treat a smaller
catchment and will have larger expiration time. Research in this option is required starting in
the upper reaches. in addition, dredging is expensive and the impact is smaller as result of a
limited water depth. In case of subsequent check dams the expiration time is required to be
the same for every check dam and long enough so dredging can be planned. Overall, after
the dividing of the complete area and the treated surface area sections, the several river
properties and sediment transport need to be analyzed over again to achieve a coherent
design.
The check dam design in this report has the height of 2.1 m with a semicircular
spillway containing a radius of 1.79 m. The round cross-section of layout is for reason that
the stream needs to be guided into the downstream to prevent unwanted forces. Between the
semicircle spillway and the concrete plate the dam has two small dam slopes. Furthermore,
the two wings parallel to the stream are designed with 0.30 m thickness directed towards the
bottom of the dam and they have a maximum height of 5.15 m. The sidewalls, attached to
the wings, are as giant pillars at the boundaries of the spillway narrowing the influx of the
stream. They have the same thickness as the spillway. The lowest level of the check dam is
the apron in case of a soil underground. The apron length for the hydraulic jump and
incoming turbulent stream is 7 m. The thickness of this plate is also 0.30 m against damaging
stones and trees in the stream. The end wall of 0.5 m height is a small dam with the same
dam slopes as the actual check dam, forcing a hydraulic jump. After the end wall the
concrete plate of the apron continues with 5 m. The collapse bed of large diameter stones
continues after the concrete plate until the other side of a bridge in the downstream. This is
preventing erosion, which can cause the bridge falling apart.
List of Contents

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 2
3 Problem Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................................................................. 4
3.2 Problem Definition .......................................................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................................... 5
3.4 Goal Definition ................................................................................................................................................ 5
3.5 Check Dam Definition ..................................................................................................................................... 6
4 Study Area Description ................................................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................................... 7
4.2 River Use ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 Policy .............................................................................................................................................................. 8
4.4 Site Investigation ............................................................................................................................................ 8
4.5 River Course ................................................................................................................................................ 10
4.6 Elevation ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
4.7 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
4.8 Waduk Jatiluhur ............................................................................................................................................ 11
5 Requirements ................................................................................................................................................ 12
6 Location .......................................................................................................................................................... 14
7 Sediment ........................................................................................................................................................ 16
7.1 Classification ................................................................................................................................................ 16
7.2 Rational Formula .......................................................................................................................................... 17
8 River Model .................................................................................................................................................... 18
8.1 River Profile .................................................................................................................................................. 18
8.2 Sediment Transport ...................................................................................................................................... 18
9 Check Dam Design ........................................................................................................................................ 20
9.1 Check Dam Alternatives ............................................................................................................................... 20
9.2 Model ........................................................................................................................................................... 21
9.3 Dimensions .................................................................................................................................................. 23
9.4 Underseepage and Outflanking ................................................................................................................... 25
9.5 Stability ......................................................................................................................................................... 25
10 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................... 26
10.1 Parameter Uncertainty ............................................................................................................................... 26
10.2 Sedimentation Inconsistency ..................................................................................................................... 26
10.3 Design Discharge ...................................................................................................................................... 27
10.4 Verification ................................................................................................................................................. 27
11 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 28
12 References .................................................................................................................................................. 30
13 Appendices .................................................................................................................................................. 32
Appendix A Flow Chart ........................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix B List of Data .......................................................................................................................................... 33
Appendix C Interview PJT II Purwakarta ................................................................................................................ 34
Appendix D Catchment Area of Cilalawi River ........................................................................................................ 35
Appendix E Elevation Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River ................................................................................ 37
Appendix F Land Use Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River ................................................................................ 40
Appendix G Requirement Validation ....................................................................................................................... 42
Appendix H Location Check Dam ........................................................................................................................... 43
Appendix I Soil Classification .................................................................................................................................. 45
Appendix J Captured Catchment Area ................................................................................................................... 48
Appendix K Precipitation Cisomang ....................................................................................................................... 50
Appendix L Land Runoff Formula ........................................................................................................................... 60
Appendix M Parameter List .................................................................................................................................... 61
Appendix N River Profile ......................................................................................................................................... 62
Appendix O Flow Velocity ....................................................................................................................................... 64
Appendix P Discharges .......................................................................................................................................... 66
Appendix Q Flow Type ........................................................................................................................................... 76
Appendix R Sediment Motion ................................................................................................................................. 78
Appendix S Expiration Time .................................................................................................................................... 80
Appendix T Apron Length ....................................................................................................................................... 81
Appendix U Grain Size Velocities ........................................................................................................................... 83
Appendix V Stability ................................................................................................................................................ 84
Appendix W Technical Drawings ............................................................................................................................ 85



1
1 Introduction
This report is about a project in River Engineering concerning the Cilalawi River in West Java,
Indonesia. The environment of the river is using and affecting the water. So, nature (sawah,
vegetables, fruit, shrubs and forest) feeds itself with water and releases sediment going into
the stream. The residents in the same area provide pollution and are using the river for
fishery. Meanwhile, the river is influenced by slopes differences and meandering along the
complete course. For this river, the government, Perum Jasa Tirta II (PJT II), rules policy and
provides essential information.
The problem is an overdose of sediment going into the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur,
which causes reduction in water storage capacity of 274 million m
3
in 10 years, stated by
research in watermanagement by PJT II. Recommendation of the government is to decrease
deposition of sediment in the reservoir by generating (a) check dam(s). Changes in land use
to control erodibility, as solution, is almost impossible with the residents and is expensive.
Therefore, the solution is to be found in a functional check dam design.
The objective of this project is to get insight in the design of a functional check dam
as solution for the sediment transport problem. The designed check dam catches the
sediment in the upstream resulting in reduction of sediment for downstream. The design will
be made using knowledge about sediment transport, river conditions, requirements and
check dam alternatives resulting in a functional dam in preliminary drafts. The preliminary
report [Vos, 2011] was the preparation for this project.
There are research questions to be answered for achieving the objective. The first
question is about the processes in and around the river that leads to the decision of
designing a check dam. This will be answered in the early project stages. The second
question that is divided into three sub-questions gives globally the outcome of the project and
the process of the functional check dam design in the Cilalawi River.

1. Which characteristics of the Cilalawi River and watershed are responsible for the
sedimentation and erosion?

It is due to site investigation and knowledge gathered from various studies, that the
morphology conditions in the river can be approached. There is knowledge about land use,
elevation, discharges and precipitation. Furthermore, surveys in analyzing the river and the
modeling of the sediment transport provide answers to this question.

2. What would be the design of the functional check dam for the Cilalawi River?
a) What are the requirements for the check dam?
b) What will be the time horizon of the check dam till its expiration?
c) What does the designed check dam look like in the phase of preliminary design?

The requirements for the check dam come from literature and experts. The designed
dimensions, the sediment transport model, the found data on erosion and sediment rates can
lead to estimations about the expiration time. Lastly, the check dam will be visualized in
preliminary design.
The report is composed of a problem and a location analysis till the complete
substantiated civil structure. In Chapter 2 the method and the way of tackling the problem is
considered. After the methodology, the definition of the problem is given in Chapter 3.
Chapter 4 is dedicated to the analysis of the river and its location followed by the
requirements mentioned in Chapter 5. The exact location is given in Chapter 6, which is
followed by Chapter 7 about river sediment. In Chapter 8 and 9 the model of the river and the
complete design of the check dam is developed. Chapter 10 treats the discussion part and
this report will end with the concluding Chapter 11.



2
2 Methodology
The visualization of the approach of the project is given in Appendix A. The basis is the
preliminary report, which contains the global planning and background information of this
project. The general approach is: Preliminary report (I), Problem analysis & definition (II),
Project description (III), Location Determination (IV), River Modeling (V) and Check Dam (VI).

Goal Description
The problem of an overdose of sediment going into the reservoir must be interrupted by a
check dam design. The study makes clear what the impact is of a check dam and what the
sequential proceedings are to treat the sediment transport.

Preliminary Phases
Prior to the data collection and mathematical model is the preliminary report, the problem
analysis & definition and the project description.
The preliminary report consists of the literature study and the global plan. Literature is
coming from the library of the University of Twente and books of the study Civil Engineering
in the mentioned university and the Delft University of Technology. The library contains the
search engine Scopus for the archive and database. Search terms in different combinations
are mainly: check dam, sedimentation, erosion, analysis, tropical, rivers, West Java,
Indonesia, Asia. The obtained knowledge was used to generate the global work plan, which
is parallel to this report, and to provide background information on the subject. For example,
there is spoken about the climate in Indonesia, the function of a check dam and the
morphology.
Communication with the supervisor and the government leaded to the problem
definition stated by the regional government. Coupled to this definition is the formulated
objective.
When the problem was known the location was analyzed by visit and data from
different companies. The study area is a description of the river and his environment by
mentioning the location, the function, the policy, the course and the reservoir. Furthermore, it
contains the analysis on the elevation and the land uses obtained by Water Research Center
in Bandung, West Java, Indonesia.

Data Collection
In the preparation of the data collection there is generated: one data list (Appendix B) for all
participant organizations and an interview (Appendix C) for PJT II. The several information
providers will be mentioned. The organizations, which were supporting the data collection,
are in sequence of visit:

1. Pusat Penelitian Sumber Daya Alam - Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat
(PPSDAL - LPPM)
Library of Padjadjaran University Institute of Ecology
2. Center of Information Scientific Resources and Library (CISRAL)
Library of Padjadjaran University Diparti Ukur
3. Pusat Penelitian Air (PUSAIR)
Water Research Center (Bandung)
4. Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai (BBWS)
Central River Region
5. Dinas Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Air (PSDA)
Water Resource Management and Maintenance
6. Perum Jasa Tirta II Purwakarta (PJT II Purwakarta)
Water Management Region Puwakarta



3
The two libraries of the Padjadjaran University in Bandung supported the catchment area
data and map. Consequently, Water Research Center (Bandung) showed modeled
weirs/check dams in the hydraulic laboratory. They were able to provide a land use map, a
elevation map, discharges for 10 years collected by PJT II with a checkpoint and precipitation
data of the Cisomang River. The Cisomang River is the closest river, adjacent above the
upper reaches of the Cilalawi River. BBWS also gave discharges, but the most important was
the reference to the PSDA. The PSDA have the same discharge data with maxima and
minima. The last organization is the government department PJT II, which provided the
problem description and the confirmation of the goal for this report. This is summarized in the
table 1.

Data Year(s) Organization Purpose
Problem 2009 PJT II Purwakarta Problem Definition
Catchment Area Map 1978 and 2011 PPSDAL - LPPM
and PUSAIR
Study Area
Land Use Map 2011 PUSAIR Study Area
Rational Formula
Precipitation 2001-2009 PJT II Purwakarta Rational Formula
Elevation Map 2011 PUSAIR Study Area
Sediment Transport
Discharges 2000-2009 (excl.
2003 and 2004)
BBWS and PSDA Sediment Transport
Check Dam Design
Table 1 External Data Collection

Survey
During the data collection it became clear that not all the data were known. Hence, survey
was performed to obtain the missing river profile, essential flow velocities and soil properties.
Before the modeling the check dam location has been determined by the
requirements and the observation of the complete river. An unusable river profile
downstream was given by the PSDA. Owing to this, the river profile is measured at the
location of the check dam in order to obtain the schematic profile for the sediment transport
formulas.
During the same survey the current meter measured flow velocities, because only
discharges were given and assumptions had to be made about the Chzy coefficient.
The soil sample was the last part for the sediment movement model. Residents filled
a bottle with sediment 500 m downstream of the check dam location. The sediment would
show the transported soil through the measured river profile. That sample was analyzed by
soil classification.

Modeling
First of all, the rational formula for land surface runoff is used with the precipitation data and
land use map. Secondly, the model of the sediment transport consists of; current conditions
of the flow, estimation of plausible sediment movement, Chzy coefficient calculations and
the use of Meyer-Peter & Mller, and Engelund & Hansen with elevation map and discharges.
This complete model is based on experimental formulas, which is resulting in uncertainty in
the results.
The model is followed by the determination of the check dam dimensions (dam slopes,
spillway, apron, sidewalls and wings). This is possible by knowing the maximum discharge
and water level. The final step is the expiration time in consideration of the thrust curve.
Additional, seepage under and around the dam, the stability of the dam due to water
pressures, and the shear forces have been taken in consideration.



4
3 Problem Analysis
This section is reserved for the extension of the problem description and goal mentioned in
the introduction. Watershed characteristics will support and clarify the problem. After the
problem definition the goal and check dam definition will be given in order to get a clear view
of the purpose. The problem will be made concrete and handled after this section by
research on the location, the river conditions and the dam solution.
3.1 Watershed Characteristics
Combinations of land uses, slopes, erodibility and the influences of the river will give view on
the causes of the problem. More about this subjects can be found in Chapters 4 and 6.
The land uses, sawah, gardens, vegetables and fruit belong to land type cultivation.
Simultaneously, the buildings with their margins belong to the barren and the shrubs to the
forest type of land. According to Singh and Khera [2008], the erodibility of the cultivation and
barren has the highest responsible for less retaining of land. Forest has the lowest erosion
rate and furthermore, there is no grassland in the treated catchment area (table 2).

Land Type Land Uses Percentage (%) Erosion Ratio
Barren Buildings & Houses 15 0.97
Cultivated Sawah, Gardens, Vegetables & Fruit 70 0.84
Grassland - - 0.74
Forest Shrubs & Forest 15 0.63
Table 2 Land Type and Erodibility combined with Land Use and Percentage by Singh and Khera [2008]

The map with explanation table of 1978 in Appendix D shows that there are steeper slopes in
the north and the south areas of the catchment area. Steeper slopes result in higher runoffs.
These runoffs erode the soil especially from cultivated or barren grounds.
The north and south areas are mainly occupied by sawah. This is the main cause for
the fact of already present sediment in the upstream of the main river. So, the steeper slopes
with the higher erosion rate on the sawah land result in large amounts of sediment in the river.
The gradients in Appendix E will be assumed as representative for the river slopes.
Due to high flow velocities in the upper reaches, sediment and suspended clay is inevitably
going downstream. This means that large amounts of sediment are coming from the upper
reaches. So, it can be said that most of the sediment will come from the upper reaches.
3.2 Problem Definition
The problem of the Cilalawi River is not in sedimentation in the river with the sequence
inundation as mentioned in the preliminary report. There seems to be enough space in the
river for all kind of discharges. However, sedimentation is a problem for downstream, the
reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur. PJT II [2009] quoted:

"The water main entrance (Citarum) of the Waduk Cirata reservoir contains a relatively small
sediment concentration, while water enters from watershed Cilalawi River and Cisomang
River carry relatively high concentrations of sediment." (PJT II, 2009: 16)

The outflow of the Citarum in the Waduk Cirata reservoir, before heading to Waduk Jatiluhur
(Ir.H.Djuanda), causes less sediment transport, unlike the Cilalawi River. This is due to the
intervention of the Waduk Cirata. The river is, in this respect, continuous down to the outflow.




5
"The estuary in alignment with the Cilalawi River outlet shows that the surface of the
reservoir base deposition is 10-15 meters in 2009 compared with the results of
implementation in 2000." (PJT II, 2009: 17)

"The sedimentation concentration in watershed Cilalawi River is more significant compared
with Cisomang River (and outlet reservoirs Cirata). The basic contour map of 2009 around
the location of the outlet water reservoir dam and the estuary of the Cisomang River shows
basic deposition 5 meters of the reservoir surface compared with the results of the
implementation of the underwater contour map in 2000." (PJT II, 2009: 19)

The bed of the reservoir base rose between 10 and 15 meters in 10 years within 15.5 km
2
of
bed surface, while the Cisomang River provides 5 meters of deposition in the same period
and surface.

"The Waduk Jatiluhur current storage capacity is 2173.13 million m
3
with the details of an
effective storage of 2120.34 million m
3
and dead storage of 52.79 million m
3
. There has been
a reduction in storage capacity of 274 million m
3
in the period of nearly 10 years. Reservoir
capacity at this time is 73% of capacity design." (PJT II, 2009: 20)

Cilalawi River and Cisomang River are both responsible for the reduction in the storage
capacity. The difference is that the Cilalawi River provides approximately 70% with 12.5
meters rising and the Cisomang River 30% with 5 meters measured rising of the bed surface.
The rivers are responsible for the numbers in table 3.

River Bed Rising (m) Percentage (%) Quantity (m
3
/10 years)
Cisomang 5 30% 82,000,000
Cilalawi 12.5 70% 192,000,000
Table 3 Sediment Quantities of Cisomang and Cilalawi River

Therefore, the problem is defined as an overdose of sediment of the Cilalawi River
transported into the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur, assumed to be 192 million m
3
/10 years,
resulting in reduction of the water storage capacity, which will ultimately result in inundation.
3.3 Recommendation
For the solution of the problem, PJT II [2009] also quoted:

"It is necessary to do land management and conservation in the catchment area in
watershed Cilalawi and Cisomang to reduce the rate of sedimentation." (PJT II, 2009: 19)

According to the PJT II land management is focusing on changing land use by retaining the
sediment and conservation in the catchment area must be provided by building a check dam
to catch the sediment in the river, which taken by the water flow, stated by Mr. A. Mardiyono
head of PJT II.
3.4 Goal Definition
It is of great importance that the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur retains enough capacity to store
the water quantities of Cilalawi and Citarum. The goal of this project is to get insight in
countering the sedimentation in the Waduk Jatiluhur by designing a check dam in the
Cilalawi River.
The check dam will catch transported sediment in the upstream. The result is that soil
is kept in the original catchment area. The characteristics of land use, river conditions,



6
climate and requirements are taken into account for the model of the sediment and the check
dam.
The final result will be a technical design of the check dam in the preliminary drafts
with time horizon of expiration as a functional design. To obtain this result there are two
research question generated.

1. Which characteristics of the Cilalawi River and watershed are responsible for the
sedimentation and erosion?

2. What would be the design of the functional check dam for the Cilalawi River?
a) What are the requirements for the new check dam?
b) What will be the time horizon of the check dam till its expiration?
c) What does the designed check dam look like in the phase of preliminary design?

Firstly, the area need to be investigated and the size of the sedimentation problem. This data
and information will be used to match the check dam solution. Secondly and lastly, the
design of the dam will give clarity in the functionality of the civil structure meeting the
requirements.
3.5 Check Dam Definition
Check dams belong to the category of
dams with the function of catching
sediment. The civil structure is the same
as the weir, only this last one needs to
increase water level for the intake of
irrigation water (pers. comm. Dr. Slemat,
head of the Water Research Center in
Bandung). The dams reduce the effective
slope of the channel. Decreasing the
velocity of flowing water allows sediment to
settle with simultaneous reduction of
erosion (figure 1). Check dams can be
permanent or temporary barriers
constructed from a variety of materials, for
example: rocks, logs and concrete
[California Stormwater BMP Handbook,
2003]. The definition will be:

'A check dam is a civil structure that is built in an active channel, perpendicular to both river banks, to
achieve erosion reduction in the river and catch sediment upstream by decreasing flow velocities.'

Figure 1 Construction of Check Dam by Dindigul
District



7
4 Study Area Description
In the previous section the region is not thoroughly discussed. This section speaks about the
characteristics of the Cilalawi River as noted in the research question 1. It also provides data
for the sediment transport, which makes estimations possible of check dam performance
possible. First of all, the study area, the river use and the policy are treated. Secondly, the
observations made during the site investigation will be considered. Thirdly, addressed are
the river course and the characteristics in land use and elevation. Finally, the report will
describe the Waduk Jatiluhur as end station of the Cilalawi River.
4.1 Study Area
The river section that is treated is
located between Palinggihan and
Cibinong (figure 2). Two small
horizontal lines in black and red give
the borders of the main river. The flow
direction of river is from south towards
north in the province of Purwakarta.
The Waduk Jatiluhur is the outlet of
the river. Water of the rivers Cilalawi
River and the Citarum supply this
reservoir.
Northeast of the village Plered
2 the main Cilalawi River begins after
the confluence of two smaller rivers
with large sub-watersheds. Further
downstream are two main roads (solid
line) and one railway (dash) crossing
the river.
The main river has the
distance, as the crow flies, of 6 km
with a total length of 9.5 km. The
catchment area is calculated at 72.06
km
2

(see Appendices E and F); these
appendices contain the watershed
with elevation and land use. At the end
of this section the whole elevation and
land use analysis is done. This is part
of the properties of the watershed.
The rainfall pattern in this
watershed can be divided into two
periods: 3 months of drought and the
same period for heavy rainfall.
Between these periods there is the
transitional period. As a matter of fact,
the dry season is from December till
March and the wet season is from
June till September. With an annual precipitation between 2500 and the 3000 mm, the
location belongs to the wet climate.
[Aqil et al., 2006: 370]
Figure 2 Cilalawi River Map



8
4.2 River Use
Only residents are directly using the river. Industries are using the river indirectly by having
pump systems in the Waduk Jatiluhur. Commercial fishery, navigation, recreation purposes
for visitors/foreigners are not possible owing to the hygiene. The river is too narrow and
shallow for navigation and has too high flow velocities. Also at the mouth of the river in the
reservoir no fishery will be found, what would be normal in case of clean water.
Residents are using the river for waste disposal, private fishing (for the fish species
Lele and Nila), washing and recreation. Besides, raw materials for the construction of roads
are taken from the riverbed. The residents! excreta and waste disposal leave heavy
chemicals and cause illnesses in the water. Drinking water supply from the river is not an
option.
On the riverside there are still many sawah to be found, because of the high activity
agriculture in whole Indonesia. The sawah on the lowest level are mainly using water from
the river. The higher levels are supplemented by water out of rainfall.
4.3 Policy
Persusahaan Umum (PERUM) Jasa Tirta II (PJT II) is one of the State-owned Enterprises,
which has permission by the government to maintain all the river aspects including
infrastructure of Water Resources and water quality for 74 rivers in West Java. [Indonesia
Infrastructure Initiative, 2010] The major concern of the PJT II is the Citarum, which is
crossing almost whole West Java. No waterpolicy exists for the Cilalawi River, because it is a
small river compared to the Citarum (pers. comm. Mr. A. Mardiyono, head of PJT II). There is
no current policy, but there are plans for in the future mentioned in the second chapter.
4.4 Site Investigation
The first visit of the river with a view to the location
analysis contained a total of three points to observe the
situation. The purpose of this visit was to be able to
describe the circumstances. The locations were:

1. Bridge at Anjun North
2. Left of Palinggihan
3. Cilalawi River mouth

It became clear by having interviews with residents what
the conditions of the river are. Yellow/brown water (figure
3) already indicated large amounts of sediment coming
from the upper reaches of the river. The cause of the
problem (sediment transport) is visualized in figure 2
along the river as a red line. At the end of the river in the
Waduk Jatiluhur the problem (deposition) has been
reflected in the red-hatched area. The second chapter is
dedicated to identifying the problem.
In figure 4 the inflow of the Cilalawi River is
shown at the level of Cibinong. At this section the river is
a channel in the sandy-clay land.
In figure 5 a small part of Jatiluhur is shown,
which is directly adjacent to the river mouth. Even the fishing boats of the reservoir do not
come in this area, because of the small water depth.
Figure 3 Cilalawi River with (Railway)
Bridge at Anjun North



9


Figure 4 Inflow of Cilalawi River in Waduk Jatiluhur (Panorama)


Figure 5 Cilalawi River Deposition in Waduk Jatiluhur (Panorama)

The river contains no civil structures and the water carrying capacity of the river is sufficient,
because there was not any inundation during maximum discharge in 2001, according to the
PJT II discharge data.
A closer look near the river in the field and from the map shows a few characteristics.
The river is narrowing and broadening over the total river course. The river width varies
between 5 m and 16 m.
Due to changing river widths and sediment banks there are deep and shallow parts in
the river, approximately 0.5 until 1.5 m in the transition months of June and May. A few
sandbanks with heavy rocks are splitting the river into two branches. In short, there is no
recent problem within peak flow flood waves for flooding of cultivated land.
The soil properties of the riverbed differ from upstream to downstream. In the
upstream there is small grain while in the downstream grain diameter increases to gravel and
rocks. The clay substances suspended in the stream find their origin above the main Cilalawi
River. Close to the reservoir there are large rocks, which can be obstacles in the stream.
In the river is no vegetation due to the heavy pollution, which captures the sunlight.
From the upstream to downstream there are a lot of sawah irrigated with the river water. The
most cultivation is located only upstream. Downstream of the river the surface area in use is
by irrigation reducing towards the reservoir.
There are no thresholds in this river. Only the heavy rock area in the downstream
seems to have great elevation changes. There are no natural barriers or waterfalls. The main
subsoil of the bed of the river area does consist of rock, sand and clay. As mentioned earlier
the heavy rocks are deposited in the downstream and along the river in banks. This material
needs high flow forces to transport them, concluding that their origin is the main river course.



10
Furthermore, Appendix F shows volcanic geomorphology along the complete river. Volcanic
deposits are always containing large rocks.
4.5 River Course
The Cilalawi River course exhibits familiar patterns of the idealized river [Ribberink, 2007]. It
can be divided into three global sections:
1. Upper reaches (mountain area and origin of the river)
2. Middle reaches (between origin and river mouth)
3. Lower reaches (inflow of river in sea or reservoir and end of the river)
These reaches characterize, in ideal conditions, high flow velocities in the upper reaches,
lower flow velocities in the middle reaches and transition in the lower reaches. The main river
possesses the middle and lower reaches.
The river mainly shows meandering and braiding in lesser extent along the whole
main river. Moreover, there are sandbars and channels in the middle reaches, and in the
lower reaches a small delta is formed where the river enters the reservoir. This delta is the
last stage where the flow velocities will be not significant and the sedimentation base is
formed.
More about the different branches of the main river can be found in two appendices B
and C, which are mentioned in the next paragraphs.
4.6 Elevation
The elevation fluctuates from the origin of
the smaller river in the upper reaches to the
end (figure 6). In Appendix E the elevation
map is divided into four sections, which
includes one section outside the area of
investigation, the upper reaches.
The upper reaches have the highest
elevation and differences in elevation. This
is a logical result of the hills in these
sections. After the average gradient in the
upper reaches come the flatter reaches in
respectively the middle reaches, the
downstream, and the upstream
.
The
downstream slopes decrease to almost zero
in gradient where the river approaches the
reservoir (table 4). The elevation map in the
appendix shows high elevation differences
before the delta, while in the upstream the
gradient is the smallest. Consequently, the
meandering length is the factor causing
reduction in slopes.
River Section Gradient (%)
Upper Reaches 1.2
Upstream !"#
Middle Reaches $"%
Downstream &"$
Table 4 River Section with Slope
Figure 6 Cilalawi River Catchment Area



11
4.7 Land Use
There seems to be inhomogeneous distribution of land use in the catchment area (table 5).
With a close look there are the differences of surface area of each land use for each section.
In Appendix F the land use in the catchment area is analyzed. These numbers are used in
the runoff on land in Chapter 7.
Indonesia is characterized by a high population and cultivation rate With small houses,
the population is no dominant factor in the land use distribution. Apart from this, at the
borders of many cultivation area, shrubs and forest are situated. The large amount of sawah,
vegetable and fruit land have, for technical reasons, more shrubs. The reason is that the
shrubs are making the land slopes stable. To be more precise, the vegetation supplies
retaining borders around all the cultivation land use during high rainfall periods with heavy
runoffs.

Land Use Percentage (%)
Sawah 35
Vegetables and fruit 20
Buildings & Houses 15
Gardens 15
Shrubs 10
Forest 5
Table 5 Land Use and Percentages of Catchment Area by Water Research Center (Bandung, Indonesia)
4.8 Waduk Jatiluhur
The reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur, approximately
80 km
2
[Tim Pemeruman Waduk Ir. H.
Djuanda, 2009], is the third reservoir in the
Citarum watershed. The reservoir separates
the downstream (figure 7) by dam
construction from Citarum upstream, Cilalawi
River and other smaller rivers.
Reservoir Waduk Cirata and reservoir
Waduk Saguling are in the upstream of the
Waduk Jatiluhur. After the three reservoirs
the Citarum will end in the Java Sea. The
three breaks in the Citarum causes the river
to have less sediment load and pollution
between the reservoirs.
Residents use the reservoir for
commercial and non-commercial fishery. They have houses and nets in the middle of the
reservoir. The middle of the reservoir is the safest place. When the dam opens its gates
there will be heavy suction forces.

A global representation of the area is given with important knowledge about the river course,
the elevation differences and the land uses. This data will be used to calculate the amount of
sediment movement and to investigate the check dam location.

Figure 7 Waduk Jatiluhur Dam and Citarum



12
5 Requirements
In the previous sections the problem and the study area are set out. In this, the problem
analysis makes clear that the solution is found in a check dam instead of land type changes.
This section contains the requirements for the design process of the dam for research
question 2a.

There are requirements for weirs or check dams to meet. For instance, it possesses the
expectations of the head of the assignment and the wishes of the users. The next
requirements (table 6) were obtained from Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the
Asian and Pacific Region [1995] and by consulting the supervisor and principal of this project,
Dr. Wagiono.
Because of the incompleteness of this list of requirements there is space for advice
about: dam type, river profile, dam material, dam performance, dredging, underground,
sediment and the expenses. The dam performance will consist of capacity, expiration time,
stability, seepage, outflanking and rising by water pressure. While the requirements are
compared with the choices, also the other specifications are mentioned to underpin the
selection.
Appendix G shows in which section the requirements are used. What is more, the
table tells also where requirements are not yet validated, but assumed to be without
constraints.



13

Code Type Requisite Source Status
EM1 Environmental Upstream location to keep the
sediment high in the catchment area
and minimize the sub-watershed
Literature Negotiable
EM2 Idem Narrowest sections of river for the
cheapest dam
Literature Negotiable
EM3 Idem Not located in bend to prevent
spinning out and inundation
Literature Mandatory
EM4 Idem No inundation upstream for houses &
building and cultivation
Interview Mandatory
EM5 Idem No erosion downstream around the
dam in turbulent zone
Interview Mandatory
PM1 Performance Permanent dam based on 25 year
peak discharge
Literature Mandatory
PM2 Idem Able to treat watershed of 72 km
2
or
smaller
Literature Mandatory
PM3 Idem Longest lifetime for a cheaper dam
and regarding US1
Interview Negotiable
PM4 Idem Maximum height for largest
sedimentation capacity
Interview Negotiable
PM5 Idem Conduction of flow on spillway to
prevent unwanted forces on the dam
Literature Mandatory
PM6 Idem Construction dimensioned against
damaging obstacles
Literature Mandatory
PM7 Idem Hydraulic jump forced in front of dam Literature Negotiable
PM8 Idem Safe construction with regard to
stability
Literature Mandatory
TC1 Technical Downstream dam slope is between
20% and 30%
Literature Negotiable
TC2 Idem Upstream dam slope 45% or larger Literature Negotiable
PS1 Physical Perpendicular to the flow direction and
the river banks
Literature Mandatory
US1 User Minimum maintenance required in
order to obtain a cheaper dam
Interview Mandatory
Table 6 Requirements




14
6 Location
The requirements are essential to make the decision about the location of the check dam.
With the exact location, data and information can be collected about the sediment and the
river. The consideration of four vantages is treated in this section.

The location of the check dam will be in the upstream of the main Cilalawi River to maintain
sediment high in the catchment area. The slope in this area is approximately 0.4% (section
4.6). During the second visit there was site seeing at four points to see the complete river
(figure 8) to determine the most obvious section for the exact location.



Figure 8 Cilalawi Upstream Side Investigation Points




15
These four vantages were:

A. Anjun North
B. Anjun Northeast
C. Babakansari East
D. Babakansari Southeast

Point A and point B have almost the same flow
velocities, because width and profile seem
similar. The river has the largest width in this
section. In addition, at Anjun North a smaller
river is inflowing. The section with the highest
flow velocities and incised channel is point C.
The river is the narrowest at this location and is
surrounded by forest with in lesser amount
sawah and gardens. The last point, D, is
Babakansari Southeast. The river here is
fluctuating in width with one large sand bank in
the middle of the river. This location upstream
gives high flow velocities with sufficient width
and height in river profile to counter large
discharges.
With the requirements from the previous
chapter section C Babakansari East is chosen.
Firstly, the location is in the upstream, which
means that sediment is kept as much as
possible in the origin (requirement EM1). Secondly, this is the narrowest part of the river in
the upstream section (requirement EM2). Thirdly, the indicated river section is practically
straight and shows no bend (requirement EM3). Fourthly, large surface area of forest near
the riverside surrounds this area (requirement EM 4). This should mean safety in
circumstances with abnormal high discharges and inundation. This will be validated within
the check dam design. Furthermore, due to the small river profile at that location the flow
velocity is high and contains consequently high sediment transport. The check dam can
reduce the flow velocities, especially with the reservoir behind, with the result that sediment
movement is reduced.
A third visit to the river was of important to determine to exact location of the check
dam (figure 9). The support for this location is given in Appendix H. The check dam is placed
30 with respect to the north arrow with the coordinates S 0637'29.8", E 10724'25.6". This
is in order to meet the perpendicular requirement (requirement PS1). It is located 70 m
upstream of the bridge in front of the narrowest river profile. The sand bank surface will
become a reservoir. In this scenario, sand can be deposited in the created reservoir instead
of in the smallest profile. This location has as stakeholder the residents, who are using the
river for sediment supply. With the chosen location residents are still be able to use the river
to exploit sand and rock for road construction.

Sediment is collected and analyzed in the next section due to the known location. The above
stated location analysis started the design phase, which is more developed in the coming
sections about the river model and check dam design.

Figure 9 Check Dam Location by Google Earth
[2011]



16
7 Sediment
This section treats the soil in and around the river. One sand sample of the riverbed has
been classified by particle analysis in the laboratory. This sample and its characteristics are
useful to the river sediment transport modeling. The material on the bed of the Cilalawi River
is mainly coming from hill slopes with different forms of land use. Hence, the rational runoff
formula is used for a catchment area up to 10 km
2
surface area [Booij, 2007]. The
information mentioned in this section is still part of research question 1, comprehensive the
characteristics.
7.1 Classification
The sieve and particle analysis by diameter size and passing is made with one soil sample of
the riverbed gathered at location Anjun Northeast (figure 8). The equipment and total
procedure of the analysis is mentioned in Appendix I. The U.S. Standard Sieve Series are
used in this test. The soil density results are shown in the table 7. The porosity is calculated
at 0.46.

!"#$#%&'&$! ()'&$#'*$&!+#,*&! -&.'!+#,*&! /0)'! 1&.2$)3')40!
3
5
! '&!!!' $()*' +,-.
*
' /01'2034516'
3
6
! $7(!' $7$$' +,-.
*
' 89:+'2034516'
3
.
! &%7!' &)(;' +,-.
*
' <=0>5?5>'2034516'
Table 7 Wet, Bulk and Specific Density

The outcome is also the sieve curve in figure 10. Measuring all the used sieves in weight,
converted to percentages, generates this curve. The cumulative percentages will draw the
graph. The graph shows that 10% of the mixer finer (d
10
) is 0.19 mm, 50% finer (D
50
) is 0.53
mm and 90% (D
90
) finer is 4 mm.


Figure 10 Sieve Curve of Cilalawi Sand Sample with d
10
, d
50
and d
90



17
7.2 Rational Formula
Large amounts of sand in the river are due
to the different land uses with cultivation
as dominator (sections 3.1 and 4.7). The
quantity can be calculated by the rational
formula of runoff [Schwab et al, 1983].
The formula makes use of rainfall data
and, for the sub-watershed behind the
check dam, a surface area of 51 km
2
(figure 11). This surface area is 71% of
the total catchment area (Appendix J).
Assuming uniform properties concerning
terrain (geology and topography) this
means that approximately 71% of the 192
million m
3
of sediment in 10 years, which
is the number 136 million, comes from this
region. This is similar with 13.6 million
m
3
/year of sediment. The assumption is
that the amount of rainfall in the Cisomang
River catchment area is similar to the
watershed. Therefore, rainfall data of the
Cisomang River is used.
The rational formula calculates 300 thousand m
3
/year of sediment runoff on land in
Appendix L. This number is approximately 2.1% of the 13.6 million m
3
/year of the river
sediment. This conclusion is not conform the hypothesis that majority of sediment
transported are from land. For this reason, these numbers and the sediment transport
quantities will be discussed in Chapter 10.

The calculated numbers of land use runoff can be compared with the results of the sediment
transport to get insight in the error of the modeled numbers with regards to the magnitude of
the different values. The river model consisting the sediment transport is the following phase.

Figure 11 Cilalawi Sub-watershed by Check Dam



18
8 River Model
The amount of sediment moving is the combination of flow velocity and sediment
concentration. Consequently, the river has transport of sediment by channel stream erosion.
Water will take material by flowing over stream banks or erode by scouring the bed during
(high) runoffs. Scour is heavy along the riverside, which is dependent on vegetation, flow
velocity, direction of flow, depth, width and soil type. This moving sediment will be disposed
at another location, which causes sandbanks and meandering, for instance.
The model used in this section is made by literature of Nortier & De Koning [1996]. An
overview of the used parameters without subscripts is found in Appendix M. Input value for
the sediment transport model is generated with the subsequent location description and
investigation. In particular, an average discharge of 5.54 m
3
/s is used to approach sediment
movement in 10 years. In contrast, to determine the check dam dimensions the maximum
discharge of 77.7 m
3
/s is used.
This section contains the phase for the modeling of the river and sediment movement
to complete research question 1.
8.1 River Profile
The third survey had as its main purpose the determination of the river profile (Appendix N)
to obtain a schematic profile for the use of the flow type and sediment transport modeling.
For the sediment transport model the average width is estimated, because the used formulas
are dominated by width and not by height. Therefore, an estimate width of 10 m is
appropriate for making assumptions about the sediment movement.
8.2 Sediment Transport
The flow and velocities during the survey in June for the wet river profile are shown in
Appendix O to estimate the average flow velocity, which was 0.55 m/s. In the same
calculations of the present flow the Reynolds number of 352000 (> 800) indicate a turbulent
flow. Owing to this, the flow is not in layers, which disturbs the bed with sediment.
The sediment that is taken in the flow can be divided into wash load, suspended load,
and bed load [Bendegom, 1971]. Firstly, wash load is the smallest grain size, which is during
the transport sans contact with the riverbed. Secondly, load that is suspended by a little
movement of the water will be in this condition for considerable time in hours to days. This
kind of load has the characteristic of bouncing with heights of more than 50 cm. One sample
of suspended load in water of the river took days to deposit in a 600 ml bottle, which was an
almost invisible layer of approximately 0.1 mm on the bottom. At last, bed load contains the
heaviest particles. This load will move by large flow velocities and shear forces between the
flow and the streambed. Suspended load and bed load (> 0.5 mm) can be caught in the
check dam for 100%, because these grain sizes are staying close to the bed. Bed load is
skipping 0 to 10 cm above the riverbed. In addition, this transport symptom is affected by
flow velocity, turbulence, size distribution, diameter, cohesiveness, specific gravity, channel
roughness and obstructions to flow [Schwab et al, 1983].

Flow Properties
To make the comparison with the total amount of sediment of 13.6 million m
3
/year (section
7.2), the average discharge of 5.54 m
3
/s is considered (Appendix P). As a matter of fact, the
real average discharge for the treated watershed is smaller, because the checkpoint for the
used discharge is more than 1 km downstream of the check dam location, which means a
larger catchment area. The difference is assumed to be insignificant.
The river in Appendix Q indicates being closely to the transition phase of sub- and
supercritical flow, because the equilibrium depth (0.31 m) is almost equal to the critical depth



19
(0.32 m). The smaller value means supercritical flow. This means also that upstream of the
narrow profile, the river is wider and with lower flow velocities. In short, the river is upstream
subcritical, which promotes a thrust curve.
To achieve the water depth results, data from survey from the wet river profile is
taken into account to make the first estimation of the Chzy coefficient, after which the
average discharge is used for an iterative process. The coefficient of 52 is used for the bed
movement in two sediment transport formulas.

Bed Movement
Appendix R calculates the sediment motion from the treated watershed into the reservoir
Waduk Jatiluhur by Meyer-Peter & Mller (bed load) and Engelund & Hansen (bed load and
suspended load), respectively 74.2 thousand m
3
/year and 88.9 thousand m
3
/year by an
average discharge of 5.54 m
3
/s.
In addition, the uncertainty of 50% in the formula of Meyer-Peter & Mller with the
scarce provided data, the low quantity of measurements, the diversity of the river conditions
and the fluctuations of the discharges can lead to higher uncertainty. The inconsistency in
transport formulas and results is discussed in Chapter 10.
What is more, the sediment coming from runoff on land in the watershed of 300
thousand m
3
/year is high. A conclusion from the comparison is that the rational formula is not
used correctly. The value also contains uncertainty, because the formula is designed for a 10
km
2
watershed and not 72 km
2
.

The numbers calculated are essential for the design of the check dam and its properties. For
instance, the expiration time of the dam can be determined with the total amount of sediment
moving. This is one of the most important facets in this project, which lead to conclusions
about the impact and functionality of a check dam.



20
9 Check Dam Design
This section treats the check dam model, forms and dimensions. The expiration time for the
dam is the time until the area upstream of check dam is fully filled with sediment. Using the
amounts of sediment moving towards the dam from the previous section make assumptions
possible about the expiration to respond to research question 2b. The visualizing by
dimensions with forms in a technical drawing is to meet research question 2c.
9.1 Check Dam Alternatives
There are more than 14 types of check dams, which can be divided into 3 categories. The
first type of dam is the temporary dams for temporal use to establish vegetation around the
channel/gully. This solution is inexpensive, can be built rapidly and inexpensive. The second
kind of dams is the regular pervious dams. These are dams for the longer term with a
maximum life of 6 years and a maximum height of 1.5 meters. The third and last kind of dam
is the impervious dam. The different types of check dams are [Food and Fertilizer
Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific Region, 1995]:

Temporary dams
Timber dam: brush dam, plank or log dam and
wood crib dam (figure 12)
Wire mesh dam
Sandbag dam
Riprap dam

Regular dams (pervious dam)
Dry masonry dam (figure 13)
Gabion dam: wire sausage and wire box
Fence dam: single and double
Fire dam
Concrete slab dam (figure 14)
Concrete crib dam

Impervious dams
Mortar rubble masonry dam with concrete core
(max. 2 m)
Mortar masonry dam with rock core (max. 2 m)
Concrete dam
Brick dam (max. 2 m)

The temporary dams are only suitable for catchment
areas smaller than 10 acres (= 0.04 km
2
) [California
Stormwater BMP Handbook, 2003]. These dams are
not appropriate owing to 72 km
2
of surface area for
the concerning watershed (requirement PM2 in
Chapter 5).
The regular dams are having limitations in
lifetime. Hence, the impervious check dams are used
in this project, because it knows lesser constraints in
this matter (requirement PM4). Furthermore, the impervious dams have the highest safety
and the need of low maintenance (requirement US1). Within the impervious dams, the
Figure 12 Plank Dam 3D
Figure 13 Masonry Dam 3D
Figure 14 Concrete Slab Dam 3D



21
concrete alternative guarantees no height limitations (requirement PM3) and is firmest
construction (PM8). The design process will continue with the concrete check dam.
9.2 Model
The purpose of the check dam is to catch 100% of bed load and suspended load, which is
88.9 thousand m
3
/year. The result of a dam in an active channel and sediment movement is
given in figure 15. In the upstream the sediment transport is towards the dam. There is the
gathering of the soil. After the low flow velocities upstream there will be supercritical flow on
the spillway, causing turbulent and erodibility downstream.



Figure 15 Dam Impact

The maximum discharge (Q
max
) of 77.7 m
3
/s is found on 19 February 2002 (Appendix P).
This is the normative discharge for the design of the check dam. The dam will be designed
with the maximum width of 15 m for the reason of guidance in the narrow profile downstream,
'so that the spilt water is kept from
damaging the banks' [Food and Fertilizer
Technology Center for the Asian and
Pacific Region, 1995]. In reality the river is
staying around half the maximum 22 m
width in the middle of the profile (figure
34). For example, see figure 16.
Furthermore, in figure 17 the
situation of heights is shown. The height
of the dam depends on the maximum
water depth until inundation (h
tot
), the
height of caught sand (h
s
), free water
depth behind the dam (h
f
), the water depth
on the spillway (a) and the height between
water surface and top of the river bank
(h
t
). The check dam height (h
cd
) is the sum
of free water depth plus the sand layer
height.





The depth of the spillway water can be calculated knowing the critical flow at that point (h
c
).
The critical flow velocity and the discharge formula are used to complete the calculation.
Assuming that the equilibrium depth of the subcritical flow (h) is the same as the
specific energy (H
e
) due to the low flow velocities in front of the dam. The kinetic energy is
therefore insignificant compared to the water depth.
h
tot
= h
s
+h
f
+a +h
t
h
cd
= h
s
+h
f
Figure 16 Inspiration Check Dam Plipiran, Bruno,
Indonesia, with Narrow Spillway by Panoramio.com



22

v = g! h
c
with h
c
=
2
3
H
e
=
2
3
h
Q= Av =
2
3
hb
2
3
hg
"77.7 =
2
3
h!15
2
3
h! 9.81
" h = 2.10 m


The height of the check dam is equal to the depth of overflow during the designed peak flow
(requirement PM1). The distance between the maximum water level and the top is given in
the next calculation. The maximum water depth until inundation (h
tot
) of 5.15 m is presented
in Appendix N.

h = a = h
cd
= 2.10 m
h
tot
= (h
s
+h
f
) +a +h
t
= h
cd
+a +h
t
= 5.15 m
!h
t
= h
tot
"(a +h
t
) = 5.15"(2.10 +2.10) = 0.95 m


Figure 17 Dam Aspect Heights

The sedimentation depth behind the dam will be 1.5 m. For this reason, there is (2.1 - 1.5 =)
0.6 m left of free water, which is of importance for the bed load, saltation and suspended load.
The height of the free water in this case is larger than the jumping height of the suspended
equal to or larger than 50 cm.
Knowing the thrust curve of the check dam (figure 18), the maximum amount of soil
can be determined and the moment of dredging.


Figure 18 Dam Thrust Curve

The curve is approached by the formula mentioned below [Nortier & de Koning, 1996]. The
outcome is shown in table 8. The d
l
is the rising of the water depth in distance to the
disturbance (m), d
0
is the thrust at the location of the disturbance (m), i is the bed gradient, l
is the distance until the disturbance (m) and h
e
is the equilibrium depth (m) (Appendix R).



23


h
cd
= 2.1 m
h
c
= 0.32 m
d
0
= h
cd
!h
c
= 2.1!0.32 =1.78 m
e = 2.72
i = 0.004





160 m of the disturbance is the normal flow of the water.
The assumption is that the sedimentation will start here into
a triangle, because the sediment is inclined to settle
horizontally (figure 17).
The expiration time of the check dam is given in
Appendix S. The sedimentation layer with the maximum
height of 1.5 m and 0.4% in bed slope can contain 3000 m
2

of soil (V
ch
)
.
The expiration time is determined by 88.9 thousand
m
3
/year of sediment (Q
b
) coming from the upstream
Cilalawi River.

t
exp
=
V
ch
Q
b
100%
!
days
year
=
3000
88.9!10
3
! 365 " 12 days

With all the uncertainty in the parameters and the river modeling the expiration time could be
less than a day. In conclusion, daily dredging is required, when the discussed facts are taken
into account. This dredging can be arranged with the residents, who already use this river for
the sand and stone supply.

In contrast, the advice will be multiple check dams in this watershed starting in the upper
reaches, and/or dredging behind the dam in order to deepen the channel. In the first option
dams treat a smaller catchment and have expiration times larger than a few days. In that
case, research is required starting in the upper reaches. The second option of dredging is
expensive and the impact is smaller than the first, because the activity is limited in water
depth.
For multiple check dams mapping of the
entire watershed and dividing it into sections is
required. The expiration time need to be the same for
every check dam and long enough so dredging can
be planned in a timeline with sufficient clearance.
Hence, after the dividing of the complete area the
treated surface area sections, the river properties and
sediment transport need to be analyzed to achieve a
coherent design.
9.3 Dimensions
Dams consist of several parts with different
characteristics and dimensions. The parts spoken of
d
l
= d
0
! e
"3!i!l
h
e
Distance (m) Depth (m)
0 1.78
10 1.22
20 0.84
30 0.58
40 0.40
50 0.27
60 0.19
70 0.13
80 0.09
90 0.06
100 0.04
110 0.03
120 0.02
130 0.01
140 0.01
150 0.01
160 0.00
Table 8 Thrust Curve Results
Figure 19 Check Dam Parts by Food and
Fertilizer Technology Center for the
Asian and Pacific Region [1995]



24
in this section are: dam (1), spillway (2), sidewalls (3), apron / stilling basin (4), wings (5) and
end wall/sill (6) (figure 19) [Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific
Region, 1995].
The first dimension is already determined in the previous section, which is the 2.10 m
check dam height due to the maximum discharge (requirement PM1). This height is without
inundation in the upstream (requirement EM4)

Dam (1)
Dams have also two surfaces slopes including downstream and upstream. The downstream
surface has a 30% slope (requirement TC1). The steep dam slope is in order to prevent
damage from stones and trees in during high discharges. The less steeper slope of 30% is to
reduce the gravitation forces on the object by shear forces on the dam side, which will again
prevent damaging the apron by smaller impact of the object.
The upstream side slope of the check dam should be larger than 45% (requirement
TC2). By making the slope larger, sediment will have the opportunity to take the ramp easier
during high flow velocities in the overflow. For this check dam is the minimal downstream
slope of 45% is used.

Spillway (2)
The spillway will be the Creager design, rounded spillway (figure 20). The hydrostatical
pressure and the centrifugal powers are working together in the rounding. When the radius of
the rounded spillway is too small, water will leave the dam causing suction forces
(requirement PM5). To prevent this kind of situation, the radius (r) should be approximately
70 to 100% of the equilibrium depth above
dam (2.1 m) [Nortier & de Koning, 1996].
The dam will be larger and more
expensive when 100% of the height is
used. 70% would not be appropriate when
there is an higher discharge than 77.7
m
3
/s. Consequently, 85% will be used,
which is the same as 1.79 m.

Sidewalls (3)
The rocks that impact the apron can also come into contact with the sidewalls and wings
(requirement PM6). As a consequence, the sidewalls have a thickness of 0.30 m as the
apron and will have the diameter of the spillway, which is 3.58 m. Furthermore, the sidewalls
will have the maximum river profile height of 5.15 m.

Apron (4)
An apron is used downstream for protecting the foundation from water erosion. The
thickness of the construction depends on the dam height (table 9) and whether the water
contains (floating) damaging objects and heavy gravel.

Dam Height (m) Material Apron Thickness (m)
< 2 Concrete 0.20
2-3 Concrete 0.20-0.30
3-5 Concrete 0.30-0.50
Table 9 Apron Thicknesses by Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific Region
[1995]

The thickness of the apron will be 0.30 m, because the river can contain large rocks.
Figure 20 Creager Spillway



25
The length and presence of the apron depends on the highest water level differences
between the downstream and upstream, and the maximum discharge. The calculation is to
be found in Appendix T. For this reason the stilling basin has a minimum of 7 m in length
following a barrier of 0.5 m. This half a meter wall will assure any hydraulic jump against the
dam (requirement PM7). A flat concrete slab of 5 m will be after the basin with 0.30 m
thickness. Lastly, one collapse bed is built of 10 m in length, constructed from heavy rocks.
The concrete slap and the collapse bed are both to ensure no erosion downstream
(requirement EM4).

Wings (5)
The wings will have the same thickness of 0.30 m as the stilling basin for damaging of
obstacles taken by the flow. What is more, the wings will be 5.15 m high in the connection
point with the sidewalls and decrease to 2.5 m at the end of the stilling basin. This is because
the maximum discharge involves water depth downstream of 1.74 m. The wings prevent
erosion in the unsteady flow downstream close to the dam (requirement EM5).

End Wall (6)
This end wall length is between the 0.2 and the 0.6 m [Food and Fertilizer Technology Center
for the Asian and Pacific Region, 1995]. The maximum of 0.6 m will generate the maximum
counteraction against flowing water under the construction.
9.4 Underseepage and Outflanking
Underseepage of the check dam needs to be minimized by the length of the dam including
the apron. Consequently, the law of Darcy is applied in Appendix U. The minimum length of
the dam is in the calculations 0.79 m. So, the already determined apron of 7 m solves this
problem (requirement PM8).
Outflanking is not taken into account for the reason that the banks of the river consist
of rocks. The wings of the check dam can be constructed straightly to wall of rock and
installed by civil anchors in. These assumptions are made by site-investigation. The real
structure of the soil should be investigated by geotechnical research.
9.5 Stability
The dam needs to sustain the horizontal en vertical water pressure to prevent unwanted
movement. The weight of the dam, the shear forces under it and the hydrostatic pressure will
determine collapsing. In Appendix V it is proved that the check dam is stable. The rising is no
risk as result of observed rocky environment. Thus, water cannot move to and built pressure
under the structure (requirement PM8).

The technical drawings and preliminary drawings of this check dam are shown in Appendix
W.



26
10 Discussion
This discussion section starts with the results of the river and sediment transport modeling.
There is large uncertainty in these numbers due to assumptions, rules of thumb and
diversity/fluctuations in the real situation. What is more, is the design discharge used for the
dimensions of the check dam and the verification table for the requirements.
10.1 Parameter Uncertainty
The average discharge is the right number for yearly discharge and knowledge about water
quantities, but for the sediment transport is it useless. In the formula of Meyer-Peter & Mller
(MPM) and Engelund & Hansen (EH) different power are used for the flow velocity,
respectively v
3
and v
5
(figure 21).

MPM:


EH:

The discharge (Q) is closely related to the flow
velocity (v). The power is causing a different
relation with the runoff (Q
sed
and s
bs
) in
comparison with the average taken discharge,
which is referring to a linear relation.
Hence, when flow velocities reduce,
sediment transport will rapidly decrease.
Importantly, this will extend the expiration time.
Yet, increasing velocity leads to larger amounts of sediment transported entering the check
dam. For instance, long periods of flow velocities below 5.54 m
3
/s (average flow velocity
2000-2009) will extent the expiration with possible days. Therefore, with a higher discharge
the dam will be filled in a few hours, according to the modeled sediment transport, but still the
expiration time will be days due to the previous period of low discharge. In case of
continuously high discharge the check dam will be sediment overcrowded each day,
eventually causing total sediment moving downstream.
In other words, 5.54 m
3
/s is a value, which is not including the powers of the formulas
and the different discharges, which are occurring over time (tables 37 to 45). Moreover,
because sediment movement begins with the flow velocity of 0.014 m/s (Appendix U) it can
be confirmed that the normative discharge must higher than the average.
10.2 Sedimentation Inconsistency
It is said that the Cilalawi River (average discharge 5.54 m
3
/s) with 72 km
2
catchment area
supplies 192 million m
3
sedimentation in 10 years to reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur. For the sub-
watershed treated by the check dam this amount is approximately 136 million m
3
in 10 years
(13.6 million m
3
/year).
A comparison is made with the Serayu Mrica reservoir in Central Java, Indonesia.
Due to investigation in 2005-2006 it is noted that the reservoir suffers high sedimentation and
Q
b
=16b!
v
C
k
"
#
$
%
&
'
2
(0.08d
50
"
#
$
$
%
&
'
'
3
2
Q
bs
= 0.03!
g
C
2
"
#
$
%
&
'
3
2
!
v
5
g
2
! d
50
"
#
$
$
%
&
'
'
! b
Figure 21 Meyer-Peter & Mller and Engelund
& Hansen



27
storage decreasing just like reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur. The Serayu River (average
discharge 57.16 m
3
/s) [Hidayat Pawitan, A. W. Jayawardena "K. Takeuchi & Soontak Lee,
2000] section flowing into the reservoir includes a catchment area of 1022 km
2
[Soewarno &
Petrus Syariman, 2008: 17]. This area is generating 2.2 to 7.0 million m
3
/year of
sedimentation.
The number 13.6 million m
3
/years of the Cilalawi River is not in the same order of
magnitude as the large transportation 7.0 million m
3
/years of the Serayu River, when the
average discharges and catchment area sizes are taken into account. These numbers
contain an observed inconsistency of the factor 10 or more, resulting in at least 1.36 million
m
3
/years of the Cilalawi River.
10.3 Design Discharge
The maximum discharge for the design of the check dam is 77.7 m
3
/s. This number is
derived from the available tables of discharge in 9 years given in Appendix P. In other
discharge data of the PSDA the maximum (calculated) discharges are mentioned as 278.44
m
3
/s on 25 October 2001. Data of the same organization on this subject mentions 33.5 m
3
/s.
Besides, the number of 278.44 m
3
/s is too large for the Cilalawi River. The reliable 77.7 m
3
/s
is used.
10.4 Verification
In Chapter 5 and Appendic G the 17 requirements are summed and referenced. All the
requirements are validated throughout the report. This section speaks about the verification
and if the system meets the expectations. In table 10 all the requirements are mentioned in a
short confirmation.

Requirement Code Confirmation
EM1 The dam location is in the upstream of the river in the East of
Babakansari.
EM2 The dam is in front of the narrowest section of the river.
EM3 The dam is practical not in a river bend.
EM4 The dam is designed with no inundation upstream.
EM5 The dam is designed with no erosion in the downstream by wings
and apron.
PM1 The dam is designed on 25 year peak discharge.
PM2 The dam is design for a watershed 72 km
2
of smaller.
PM3 The dam is designed including the longest lifetime.
PM4 The dam has the maximum height with due consideration of
maximum sedimentation and upstream inundation.
PM5 The dam has a Creager spillway against tensile.
PM6 The dam parts thicknesses are dimensioned on possible damaging
obstacles.
PM7 The dams has a smaller dam creating an apron, which is forcing
the hydraulic jump.
PM8 The dam is made of concrete ensuring safety and stability.
TC1 The dam slope of the downstream is 30%.
TC2 The dam slope of the downstream is 45%.
PS1 The dam is built perpendicular to the flow direction and river banks.
US1 The dam of concrete requires minimum maintenance.
Table 10 Requisite Verification



28
11 Conclusion
The Cilalawi River provides an overdose of sediment going into the reservoir Waduk Jatiluhur.
According to the PJT II Purwakarta it is 274 million m
3
sediment in 10 years. This is causing
water storage reduction. Check dams can limit the sedimentation process, which is one of
the recommendations. In the first phase of the project research questions are generated. An
elaboration of each question will be given in this chapter.

1. Which characteristics of the Cilalawi River and watershed are responsible for the
sedimentation and erosion?

Chapters 3, 4, 7 and 8 provide answers to this question. There are different land uses with a
dominant sawah involved in the watershed of the active river. This land use is erodibility
sensitive and is the main producer of sediment in the runoff by rainfall.
There are large elevation differences in the upper reaches, decreasing till the river
reaches the reservoir. This means high flow velocities, erosion and sediment transport in the
upstream. Moreover, the river from the upper reaches is already filled with suspended and
wash load.
The land use in this region is providing 300 thousand m
3
/year and the river has a
sediment transport of 88.9 thousand m
3
/year as shown by Engelund & Hansen. The region
treated must generate 13.6 million m
3
/year, according to PJT II Purwakarta, but as result of a
discussion the value is assumed to be 1.36 million m
3
/year. There is a high uncertainy in the
values of the transport model, because of the inaccuracy in the parameters.
2. What would be the design of the functional check dam for the Cilalawi River?
Chapter 5, 6 and 9 give the answers to the sub-questions.
a) What are the requirements for the new check dam?
17 requirements for the location and check dam design are collected. First of all,
environmental requirements minister to locate the dam in a practical straight upstream
section with the narrowest profile. The design prevents inundation upstream and erosion in
the downstream. Secondly, for the performance of the check dam is required: 25 year peak
discharge, ability to treat a watershed of 72 km
2
or smaller, the longest lifetime, maximum
height, conduction on spillway, constructed against damaging obstacles and a forced
hydraulic jump. Lastly, the technical and the physical requirements ask for a(n): downstream
dam slope of 20-30%, upstream dam slope of 45% or more, dam positioned perpendicular to
the flow direction and river banks, and minimum maintenance required.
b) What does the designed check dam look like in the phase of preliminary design?
The figure of the check dam as preliminary is shown in Appendix W. The above-mentioned
requirements are verified to conclude that the dam meets the expectations. The designed
check dam contains six parts: dam, spillway, sidewalls, apron, wings and end wall. The dam
is 2.1 m high with a semicircle spillway ('Creager spillway') containing a radius of 1.79 m. The
dam slopes under the spillway are designed by rules of thumb. The two sidewalls in an angle
towards the bottom of the dam apron are designed with 0.3 m thickness and 5.15 m height
decreasing to the downstream. The apron for the hydraulic jump is 7 m between the actual
dam and the end wall of 0.5 m. This little dam with the same dam slopes as the spillway is
forcing a hydraulic jump. The last parts are the wings, of 5.15 m in height, standing as large
pillars next to the spillway. They are 3.58 m in width, the same as the spillway diameter. The
dam is mainly concrete, except the sidewalls and the wings. These contain environmental
rocks combined with concrete.



29
c) What will be the time horizon of the check dam till its expiration?
The time of expiration is 1 until 12 days, concerning an average discharge or less in rainy
season. The overall conclusion is, that a functional check dam is designed. Nevertheless, the
expiration time is extremely short due too the small volume of 3000 m
3
of the check dam.
The advice is to design and built more check dams in sequence to establish smaller sub-
watersheds, before the building of the dam designed in this report, because deepening the
channel is an expensive activity with lesser impact. Importantly, the expiration time of
subsequential check dams needs to be the same for every dam and long enough for timeline
planned dredging. Hence, after the dividing of the complete area, the several river properties
and sediment transport need to be analyzed to achieve a coherent design of each new check
dam.




30
12 References
Articles

Aqil, M. Kita, I. Yano, A. & Nishiyama S. (2006) A Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy System for the
Prediction of River Stage Dynamics, JARQ, Vol.40, No.4, p.369-378.

Fakultas Teknologi Industri Pertanian, Universitas Padjadjaran (2009) Stochastic Model for
Simulation of Landuse Changing to Erosion Relation on Cikapundung Gandok Catchment
Area, Jurnal Teknotan, Vol.2, No.2, p.84-87.

Singh, M.J. & Khera, K.L. (2008) Soil Erodibility Indices Under Different Land Uses in Lower
Shiwaliks, Tropical Ecology, Vol.49, No.2, p.113-119.

Soewarno & Petrus Syariman (2008) Sedimentation Control: Part II. Intensive Measures The
Inside of Mrica Reservoir, Central Java, Journal of Applied Sciences in Environmental
Sanitation, Vol.3, No.1, p.17-24.

Books

Bendegom, L. van (1971) Algemene Waterbouwkunde, Delft (Netherlands): Technische
Hogeschool Delft, 159p.

Bezuyen, K.G. Stive, M.J.F. Vaes, G.J.C., Vrijling, J.K. & Zitman, T.J. (2007) Inleiding
Waterbouwkunde, Delft (Netherlands): Technische Universiteit Delft. 319p.

Bischoff van Heemskerk, W.C. (1964) Vloeistofmechanica. Delft (Netherlands): Technische
Hogeschool Delft, 70p.

Booij, M.J. (2009) Inleiding Waterbeheer. Enschede (Netherlands): University of Twente,
138p.

Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for the Asian and Pacific Region (1995) Soil
Conservation Handbook. Taipei (Taiwan, China): Food and Fertilizer Technology Center for
the Asian and Pacific Region, 451p.

Nortier, I.W. Koning, P. de (1996) Toegepaste Vloeistofmechanica. Groningen/Houten
(Netherlands): Wolters-Noordhoff, 489p.

President of the Republic of Indonesia (2010) Indonesian Government Regulation - Number
7. The Chief of Berau of Industrial and Economy, Jakarta (Indonesia): President of the
Republic of Indonesia, 33p.

Ribberink, J.S. (2007) Shallow - Water Flows. Enschede (Netherlands): University of Twente,
121p.

Ribberink, J.S. (2007) Transport Processes and Morphology. Enschede (Netherlands):
University of Twente, 93p.

Schwab, G.O. et al. (1983) Soil and Water Conservation Engineering. New York (United
States of America): Wiley, 525p.




31
Setiawan, S. (2010) Kajian Sedimentasi Waduk Berdasarkan Kondisi Tataguna Lahan Studi
Kasus Waduk Sermo Kabupaten Kulon Progo Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta.
Yogyakarta (Indonesia): Universitas Gadjah Mada, 57p.

Soemarwoto, O. Boerboom, J.H.A. (1978) Project Tropical Ecology - Vegetation and erosion
in Jatiluhur Region. Bandung: Padjadjaran University & Agricultural University
Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative (2010) Jatiluhur - Jakarta Pipeline And Water Treatment
Plant Pre-feasibility Study, Jakarta (Indonesia): GHD, 23p.

Tim Pemeruman Waduk Ir.H.Djuanda (2009) Laporan Pekerjaan - Pemeruman / Bathymetri -
Waduk Ir.H.Djuanda - PJT II Puwakarta (Indonesia): Perusahaan Umum Jasa Tirta II, 21p.

Vlotman, W.F. (1989) Discharge Measurement Structures. Wageningen (Netherlands): ILRI,
27p.

Vos, G.J. (2011) Erosion and Sedimentation Control by Check Dam in the Cilalawi River -
Preliminary Report - Bachelor Thesis. Enschede (Netherlands): University of Twente, 24p.

Websites

California Stormwater BMP Handbook (2003) Check Dams SE-4. Retrieved, April 11, 2011
from
http://www.cabmphandbooks.com

Hidayat Pawitan, A. W. Jayawardena "K. Takeuchi & Soontak Lee (2000) Kali Serayu.
Retrieved, June 15, 2011 from
http://flood.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/ihp_rsc/riverCatalogue/Vol_03/03_Indonesia-8.pdf

Khan, H.J. & Shinwari M.Q. (2010) Sieve Analysis and Particle Analysis of Size & Passing.
Retrieved, May 29, 2011 from
http://www.aboutcivil.com/Sieve-analysis-and-soil-classification.html

Piranha Pumps & Dredges (2011) Piranha - Gasoline Engine Dredge Model PS135E.
Retrieved, June 19, 2011 from
http://www.piranhapumps.com/PS135E_1.html




32
13 Appendices
Appendix A Flow Chart
The flow chart (figure 22) represents the steps undertaken in the project. The basis was the
preliminary report, which was constructed by consultation between supervisor/expert, the
assignment of the Padjadjaran University and a literature study at the University of Twente.
The main route is preliminary report, project description, problem analysis, exact
location, river modeling and check dam design. The short description of these phases is
given in the boxes with an angle in the sidelines. This plan results in the thesis. There are a
few parallel activities to support the main activities. For instance, literatures study, river site
investigation and survey.


Figure 22 Flow Chart of the Project in River Engineering




33
Appendix B List of Data
river course
river slopes or elevation map
length of slopes
map of catchment area
land use
hydrographics
discharges
water levels
precipitation
river profile
heights
widths
bed form(s)
alluvial roughness
vegetation parameters
sediment data
composition (for example, American Geographical Union)
density
shape factor of sediments



34
Appendix C Interview PJT II Purwakarta
1. List of Data.
The list of data is shown to derive all the data/properties on the river.
2. Literature of Cilalawi River.
This is to find all the data about the river in written sources.
3. What is the current policy for the Cilalawi?
The function of the Cilalawi and its regulation is the purpose here.
4. What is the current policy for the Waduk Jatiluhur?
In this question the focus is on the function and regulation of the Waduk Jatiluhur.
5. What are the futures plans for the reservoir and the river?
For example, having the goal of reduction of toxins, sediment reduction, accessible
for boats, possibility of fishing.
6. What are they used for?
The question is there to discover who is using these waters and with what purpose.
7. Impact of river on reservoir?
This is asked to reveal what the result is of the Cilalawi flow into the reservoir.
8. Water level changes in the reservoir due to the Cilalawi River?
This is to see the impact of the Cilalawi on capacity of the reservoir.
9. Problems in and around the river and reservoir.
This treats problems like inundation in both waters, water quality issues, etc.
10. Previous check dams in the reservoir.
For the design of the check dam the requirements and location of an expired check
dam can support the design process.



35
Appendix D Catchment Area of Cilalawi River

Figure 23 Sub-watershed and Land Use of Cilalawi River by Padjadjaran University (Bandung, Indonesia)
and Agricultural University (Wageningen, The Netherlands) [1978]




36
Explanation sections Cilalawi catchment area in figure 23 are given in table 11. The
geomorphology in staight contact with the river is bolded.

No. Geomorphology Soil Land Use Slope
(%)
1 Moderately dissected hills of
Miocene deposits
Complex
latosol/regosol
Dryland agriculture 8-25
2 idem idem Mixed Gardens 8-15
3 Moderately dissected hills
of intrusive origin
idem idem 15-40
4 idem idem Intermittent cultivation 15-25
5 Complex of intrusive necks idem idem > 40
6 idem idem Mixed gardens/sawah 25-40
7 idem idem idem 8-15
8 idem idem Intermittent cultivation > 40
9 Isolated intrusive necks idem Shrubs/intermittent
cultivation
> 25
10 Footslope of volcanic tuff Grey
hydromorphic
Sawah 8-12
11 Slightly/moderately dissected
volcanic deposits
Regosol idem 0-2
12 idem Grey
hydromorphic
idem idem
13 Slightly/moderately dissected
volcanic deposits
Red Latosol Mixed gardens/sawah idem
14 idem idem Dryland cultivation 2-8
15 idem idem Mixed gardens/sawah idem
16 idem idem Sawah & village 0-2
17 Slightly dissected volcanic
deposits
Complex
latosol/grey
hydromorphic
Sawah idem
18 Undissected alluvial deposits Grey
hydromorphic/
low humic gley
Sawah & brick
factories
idem
19 Ancient volcanic foot slope Red Latosol Mixed gardens 8-25
20 idem idem Rubber 15-25
21 idem idem Shrub & forest 15-25
22 idem idem Dryland cultivation 15-40
23 Valley with moderately
dissected Miocene deposits
Complex
regosol/Iatosol
Sawah 15-25
24 Strongly dissection Complex
litosol/regosol
Dryland cultivation 25-40
Table 11 Land Uses Cilalawi Watershed [1978]



37
Appendix E Elevation Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River
In this section will speak of the relief and height differences in the Cilalawi River. The
elevation map is to be representative for the river slopes (see figure 24). In this map there
are contour lines given with heights in meters. Two following lines differ 12.5m from each
other. The sections are zoomed-in in the figures 25, 26, 27 and 28.
The river can be divided into 4 sections. The first section is above the Cilalawi before
the two smaller rivers combine, the upper reaches. The next three sections are the upstream,
middle reaches and downstream. This subdivision is based on the schematic contour map.
The point of division is the contour line crossing the river.
To determine the slope of the river elevations, lengths and one curvimeter are
required. The curvimeter units are not used. The outcome is used as comparison to achieve
factors. The factor for every river section converts the differences between the distances as
the crow flies (black line) in the meandering length (blue line). The straight length with the
factor gives the real length in meters (see table 12). The accuracy is with 10 meters.

Section of
Cilalawi!
7&#,!,&08'9!
.'$#)89'!
:%;!
<*$=)%&'&$!
>'$#)89'!:?;!
<*$=)%&'&$!
7)=&$!:?;!
@#2'4$!! 7&#,!
(&08'9!
:%;!
A94,&!
0*%6&$!
:%;!
Upper Reaches! 7&!!' &#"7' *!"7' $"&#7' %#)#' %#;!'
! *(!!' $("7' &7"7' $"*$' 7$!$' 7$!!'
! #%&7' &;")' *#"!' $"$;7' 7#;$' 7#;!'
Upstream! &&7!' &$"!' **"!' $"7)' *7*7' *7#!'
Middle
Reaches!
$(!!' &*"!' *)"!' $"%$' *!7(' *!%!'
Downstream! &$!!' &#"$' &)"$' $"$&7' &*%!' &*%!'
Table 12 Straight Lengths to Real Lengths

The upper reaches contain a diversity of small rivers. To make assumptions about the
gradient in that sections 3 river branches are used adjacent to the upstream of the main river.
The gradient is the elevation difference divided by the real length of the river section (table
13).

Section of Cilalawi Elevations (m) Elevation
Difference (m)
Real
Length (m)
Gradient (%)
Upper Reaches 212.5 - 262.5 50 %#;!' !";'
212.5 - 262.5 50 7$!!' $"!'
212.5 - 312.5 100 7#;!' $";'
Upstream 200 - 212.5 12.5 *7#! !"#'
Middle Reaches 150 - 200 50 *!%!' $"%'
Downstream 100 - 150 50 &*%!' &"$'
Table 13 Gradients in the River Sections

It is evident that the highest gradients occur in the upper reaches. After this river section
follow respectively the middle reaches, the downstream and the upstream. The average of
the gradient of the three upper reaches gradients is 1.2%.

38

Figure 24 Elevation Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River by Water Research Center (Bandung)
39


Figure 25 Downstream Figure 27 Upstream
Figure 26 Middle Reaches
Figure 28 Upper Reaches
Appendix F Land Use Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River
This section treats the different land uses in the Cilalawi catchment area. The land uses
given in Bahasa Indonesia in the figure 29 are translated in table 14.

Bahasa Indonesia English
Air Tawar Freshwater
Belukar/Semak Shrubs
Gedung Buildings
Hutan Forest
Kebun Gardens
Pemukiman Houses
Rumput Grass
Sawah Irigasi Sawah Irrigation by River
Sawah Tadak Hujan Sawah Irrigation by Rainfall
Tanah Berbatu Stones and Rocks
Tanah Ladang/Tegalan Vegetables and Fruits Fields
Table 14 Translation Land Use Bahasa Indonesia to English
The complete upper reaches are taken into account in this analysis. This part consists of
mainly sawah and buildings. Vegetables and fruits, shrubs and gardens are predominant in
the watershed. In the upstream sawah, buildings, vegetables & fruits, shrubs, gardens areas
are proportionally distributed. Besides, forest represents a small part at the borders of the
catchment area. The buildings disappear further on in the middle reaches. In the downstream
vegetables & fruits and sawah dominate. Buildings and shrubs use a small part of the area.
The vegetables and the rice fields are fed by the nutritious sludge in the river.
In table 15 there are the four sections of catchment area, described with their land
types. It can be said that irrigation by the residents and their houses contribute to filling
almost the total area of the Cilalawi catchment area.

Sections of Cilalawi Land Uses
Upper Reaches 15% Buildings & Houses
Idem 10% Gardens
Idem 10% Vegetables & Fruits
Upstream 65% Sawah
Idem 10% Vegetables & Fruits
Idem 10% Shrubs
Idem 10% Buildings & Houses
Idem 5% Gardens
Middle Reaches 35% Sawah
Idem 25% Shrubs
Idem 20% Vegetables & Fruits
Idem 10% Gardens
Idem 10% Forest
Downstream 30% Sawah
Idem 30% Gardens
Idem 35% Vegetables and fruits
Idem 5% Buildings & Houses
Table 15 Cilalawi Sections with Land Use
41

Figure 29 Land Use Map Catchment Area of Cilalawi River by Water Research Center (Bandung)
Appendix G Requirement Validation
Validation is required to design a consistent object, which meets the requisite. The appendix
shows in which section the requirement is used (x). It becomes obvious that not in every
section validation is needed. The four subjects location, sediment, river model and check
dam in table 16 are parallel to Chapter 6, 7, 8 and 9.

Code Description Location
Analysis
Sediment River
Model
Check Dam
Design
EM1 Located upstream
x
EM2 Narrowst section
x
EM3 Not located in bend
x
EM4 No inundation upstream
- x
EM5 No erosion downstream
- x
PM1 Designed on 25 years discharge
x
PM2 Treat watershed 72 km
2
or
smaller
x
PM3 Longest lifetime
x
PM4 Maximum height and capacity
x
PM5 Conduction flow on spillway
x
PM6 Firm construction against
damaging
x
PM7 Forced hydraulic jump
x
PM8 Safe construction
x
TC1 Downstream dam slope 20-30%
x
TC2 Upstream dam slope >45%
x
PS1 Perpendicular to flow and banks
x
US1 Minimum maintenance
x
Table 16 Requirements Section Validation

The demands E5 and E6 are in early phase assumed to be no constraint (-) when it is used
within the check dam design. Therefore, in the check dam design this will be checked.



43
Appendix H Location Check Dam
The location in figure 30 refers to the point in the narrowest section of the river. The higher
flow velocities with morphological changes result in a grounded river profile. Reduction in the
higher flow velocities in the upstream in this section support lesser sediment transport and
possible erosion of the rocky underground.
There is a bridge, which is an advantage for the building of the dam and the removal
of sediment, although, as a consequence of the bridge the check dam cannot be built
downstream, because the bridge is designed on discharges and water level of the river. A
check dam will modify these numbers. Besides, inundation due to these numbers will make
the bridge inaccessible.
The large sand layer upstream will become a small reservoir, which stimulates more
deposition. The current situation is that the sand layer deformed in a small bend with on the
left side the sand. This plateau and bend will become without flooding risk a small reservoir
for deposition of sediment and will be no constrain in the design.

The GPS equipment (eTrex Vista HCx) provided the exact coordinates of the location of the
check dam. The coordinates are:

S 0637'29.8"
E 10724'25.6"

The check dam makes an angle with respect to the north arrow of approximately 30, which
is perpendicular to the flow direction and the river banks. Furthermore, the point is 70m
upstream of the bridge.
One constraint in the river can be the residents who are using the section for the
exploitation of sand and stones for road construction. Permitting them to remove the
sediment of the expired check dam, when the water depth of the artificial reservoir allows this,
can solve that problem.


Figure 30 Check Dam Location and Coordinate by Google Earth [2011]
Appendix I Soil Classification
This section is about the sand sample, which is
classified by the particle analysis in the sieve test.
The complete analysis from the wet sand sample to
the sieve results is mentioned.

The requirements for this test are:

Sand sample
Oven (blower)
Measure glass
Mechanical sieve shaker (figure 31)
Scale

The order of analyzing is first the characteristics of
the wet soil. Measuring the volume and weight in the
measure glass provides in the wet density (table 17).
This is using the general formula with ! for density
(kg/m
3
), V for volume (m
3
) and m for mass (kg).



The same procedure needs to be applied for the bulk density (the dry soil sample) after
drying the sand in the oven blower.

!"#$% &'()*+%,(+*%
-."//%01)2%
&'()*+%34%
-."//%01)2%
&'()*+%34%
!"#$%01)2%
53.67'%07
8
2% 9'#/(+:%01);7
8
2%
,'+% 1.293 0.210 1.083 3.3*10
-4
1973
$<:% 1.083 0.234 0.831 3.3*10
-4
1311
Table 17 Wet and Dry Density

The next table provides the results of the test with the values of the literature wrote by
Ribberink [2007]. The bulk density is the soil with pores. The porosity factor, which is
between the 0.3 and 0.4, needs to be taken into account to get the specific density (table 18).
This can be calculated by:



The formula contains the "
p
the share of pores in the soil, the v
w
for the volume of water in
the saturated soil (m
3
) and the total volume of the sample (m
3
). The total volume of the sand
is 550 ml. The amount of the water weight (m
w
) and the density of water (p
w
= 1000 kg/m
3
)
leads to an estimate of the volume of the water (v
w
).

v
w
=
m
w
!
w
=
1.085!0.831
1000
= 2.54"10
!4
m
3

! =
V
m
!
p
=
v
w
v
tot
Figure 31 Mechanical Sieve Shaker



46

When the formula for the granules in the soil is completed, the outcome of epsilon is 0.46.

!
p
=
v
w
v
tot
=
2.54!10
"4
5.5!10
"4
= 0.46

This number is used with the bulk density to determine the specific density. To conclude, the
porosity parameter is 46% of the bulk soil.
The specific density is calculated by:

p
s
=
p
b
1!!
p
=
1511
1!0.46
= 2798 kg/m
3


%% 9'/=<(>+(3#% ?(+'<"+6<'%5".6'% @'/+%5".6'% A#(+%
>
,
% weL denslLy 2000 1973 kg/m
3

>
B
% bulk denslLy 1390 1311 kg/m
3

>
/
% speclflc denslLy 2630 2798 kg/m
3

Table 18 Wet, Bulk and Specific Density

The next step is to sieve the dry soil in the mechanical sieve shaker. First, the several sieves
need to be measured in weight (g) [Khan, H.J. & Shinwari M.Q., 2010]. The soil sample will
be put in the top sieve with the largest diameter. The smaller parts of the soil will fall through
large diameter sieve nets by shaking the soil sample in the sieve tower. When the diameter
of the grain is larger than the sieve, the sand will stay in that tray. The result is given in the
table 19.

C3D% !('E'%/(F'%
0772%
&'()*+%!('E'%0)2% &'()*+%!('E'%
,(+*%!"#$%0)2%
!"#$%0)2% G'<='#+")'%
G"//(#)%0H2%
I% > 4.76 293.34 331.77 36.43 6.4
JK% 0.84 314.27 390.14 219.44 24.9
8K% 0.39 293.98 423.24 129.26 14.7
IK% 0.421 309.98 403.87 93.89 10.7
LK% 0.23 296 303.17 209.17 23.7
MK% 0.177 299.34 409.98 110.44 12.3
NKK% 0.13 291.84 304.41 12.37 1.4
NJK% 0.123 292.23 296.79 4.34 0.3
B'$% < 0.123 167.23 212.73 43.3 3.2
+3+".% %% %% %% MMNDJI% NKKDK%
Table 19 Sieve Quantities Soil Sample of Cilalawi River

The number of the sieve is related to the U.S. Sieve Standard to obtain diameter to the sieve,
the sieve size. The last column gives the percentage of the total soil sample in the
concerning sieve. The weight of the total soil divided by the sand of one sieve gives the
percentage. When these percentages are summed from the bed and represented
cumulatively, the sieve curve can be achieved (figure 32) It is the plotting of the linear
percentages against the log scale of the grain size.



47

Figure 32 Sieve Curve Soil Sample of Cilalawi River%



48
Appendix J Captured Catchment Area
This appendix and figure 33 provide data of the division of the catchment area by the check
dam.

Figure 33 Captured Catchment Area by Check Dam

The total catchment area of the Cilalawi River is 72,06 km
2
(A), while the total number of
squares is 221 (n
tot
) to make assumptions about the sub-watershed created by the check
dam. 7 squares (n
c
) at level check dam divided into downstream and upstream section.



49
58 squares at the downstream (n
d
) check dam generates the sub watershed of:



149 squares at the upstream (n
u
) check dam generates the sub watershed of:


A
d
=
n
d
+ n
c
2
( )
n
tot
!
"
#
$
%
&' A =
58+ 7 2
( )
221
!
"
#
$
%
&' 72.06 = 21.2 km
2
(29%)
A
d
=
n
u
+ n
c
2
( )
n
tot
!
"
#
$
%
&' A =
156 + 7 2
( )
221
!
"
#
$
%
&' 72.06 = 50.9 km
2
(71%)



50
Appendix K Precipitation Cisomang
This appendix provides precipitation data of the Cisomang, which will be used for the rational
method in the Cilalawi River watershed. The translation for the precipitation over the years is
given in table 20.

Bahasa Indonesia English
Tahun Data Year of Data
Tanggal Date
Bulan Months
Tahunan Annual
Hujan Maksimum Maximum Rain
Jml Curah Hujan Rainfall Amount
Jml. Hari Hujan Quantity Rainy Daily
Rata-rata Average
Hujan (1-15) Rain (1-15)
Jml. Data Kosong Quantity Data Empty
Hujan (16-31) Rain (16-31)
Jml. Data Kosong Quantity Data Empty
Table 20 Translation Precipitation Bahasa Indonesia to English

Average precipitation is calculated in table 21 for 9 years. The tables 22 to 30 were used to
determine the total average.

Year Days Total Precipitation (mm/year) Average Precipitation (mm/h)
2001 365
2444
0.28
2002 364 2873 0.33
2003 365 2201 0.25
2004 366 2311 0.26
2005 365 2877 0.33
2006 365 2877 0.33
2007 365 2535 0.29
2008 366 2546 0.29
2009 365 2565 0.29
Average JOMN KDJP
Table 21 Average Precipitation Data of Cisomang Watershed


TAHUN DATA 2001
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 0 13,2 2,3 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 22,6 0 0 0 0 46,2 12,2 0
3 0 0 0 6,2 20,1 0 0 0 82,6 15,6 3 0
4 0 0 0 26 2 0 0 22 74,2 35,6 10,1 16,6
5 0 0 0 53,4 10,5 0 0 24,4 6,7 0 8,1 0
6 0 0 0 4 47,4 0 0 0 7 0 33,3 0
7 0 20,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,9 15 60,1 0
8 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,4 0 0
9 0 22 0 7 0 0 0 0 12,9 8,4 4,3 0
10 0 0 20,4 7,1 0 0 0 59 0 0 43,2 0
11 0 6 5 5,7 0 0 7 0 0 0 13,7 0
12 0 0 25,5 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
13 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 15,7 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 19,2 0
15 0 6,2 0 22,2 0 0 0 0 0 14 94 0
16 0 18 33,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,7 18,4 0
17 0 2,4 60 8 0 0 0 0 0 30 86,8 0
18 0 4 17,6 7 0 0 3,2 0 0 0 17,1 0
19 0 0 12 0 0 0 25,6 0 24,6 15,6 12 40,5
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,4 2,8
21 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 19 53
22 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,7 15,2 0
23 0 0 0 0 16,3 0 0 0 0 21,3 2,6 0
24 0 16 24,4 0 8,2 0 0 0 12,4 82,6 7,6 0
25 0 0 5,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,7 59 0
26 0 14,3 0 13 0 0 31,2 0 0 7,7 1,1 20
27 0 0 38,2 0 0 0 31,6 0 21,4 8,6 0 16
28 0 18,2 8,2 6,9 0 0 0 0 0 10 11,6 0
29 0 19,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,7 26,1 17
30 0 0 0 0 0 3,4 0 0 0 0 0
31 0 0 3,5 0 0 1,6 17,3

Hujan Maksimum 0 22 60 55 47 0 32 59 83 83 94 53 94
Jml Curah Hujan 0 142 310 224 131 0 142 105 267 357 582 183 2444
Jml. Hari Hujan 0 11 15 14 8 0 9 3 10 19 24 8 121
Rata-rata 0 5 10 7 4 0 5 4 9 12 19 6
Hujan (1-15) 0 69 80 189 103 0 17 105 208 140 301 17
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 0 73 230 35 28 0 125 0 58 217 281 167
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 22 Precipitation 2001



52

TAHUN DATA 2002
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 0 49 33,5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 34,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 12,3
5 0 0 24,5 0 0 2,5 0 0 0 0 34,7 0
6 0 14 16 0 35,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,7
7 4,4 3,5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,3 0 0
8 4,4 0 0 37 26,3 0 0 8,9 0 0 13 87,6
9 49,4 33,4 14,4 4,2 46,8 0 20 0 0 0 0 14,3
10 21,5 6,8 0 4,8 4,6 0 0 0 0 0 3,4 1,7
11 39,4 9 14,6 4,8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,4 8,3
12 11 0 1,3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
13 13,4 57,3 18,4 16,4 0 32,4 0 0 0 0 10 27,3
14 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,3 6,5
15 1,6 27 0 3,1 55,6 0 60 0 0 0 2,3 46,7
16 0 0 30 35 2,1 24,7 0 0 0 0 0 36,7
17 0 0 17,8 1,8 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,7
18 26,6 0 0 2,8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 75,6 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0
20 11 1,8 2 5,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 50,0 0
21 6,5 48,8 21 33,1 0 0 0 38 0 0 41 0
22 22 0 0 4,2 0 22,7 0 0 0 0 13,3 48,9
23 53,8 1,7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,0 7,9
24 5,2 0 46,7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,3 20
25 17,8 5,6 15,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7,3
26 0 0 8,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63,0 11,3
27 19,4 0 6,5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,9 1,3
28 9 22,6 53 0 0 0 0 0 28 21 81,7 24,2
29 34,8 2,3 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,3 0,0 0
30 84,4 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 38,4 10 0 0 0 0 1,1

Hujan Maksimum 84,4 57,3 53 67,0 55,6 32,4 60 38 28 21 81,7 87,6 87,6
Jml Curah Hujan 584,0 233,5 402,9 284,1 222,8 102,3 80 46,9 28 38,5 403,4 446,8 2873,2
Jml. Hari Hujan 22 13 19 16 7 5 2 2 1 4 16 20 127
Rata-rata 18,8 8,3 13 9,5 7,2 3,4 2,7 1,6 0,9 1,3 13,4 14,4
Hujan (1-15) 179,5 153,0 138,2 127,8 168,7 54,9 80 8,9 0 4,3 94,6 241,4
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 404,5 80,5 264,7 156,3 54,1 47,4 0 38 28 34,2 308,8 205,4
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 23 Precipitation 2002



53

TAHUN DATA 2003
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 23 0 4,3 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 23
2 0,0 24 46 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 21
3 2 2 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
4 2 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 41 67,0
5 0 22 0,0 14 0 0,0 0 0 0 11 3,3 0
6 0 0 16 0 2,0 7 0 0 9 15 6 24,0
7 0,0 0,0 11 0 3 0 0 0 0 25,1 0 23
8 0,0 35 6 0 25,3 0 0 0,0 0 10 0 48,6
9 38,2 0,0 7,1 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0,0
10 9,2 0,0 4 52,2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
11 0,0 7 0,0 6,2 0 0 0 0 0 23 0,0 48,9
12 0 9 1,5 1 0 0 0 0 0 79 0 51
13 0,0 0,0 0,0 3,3 33 0,0 0 0 0 3 0 15,5
14 0 0 12 28 39 0 0 0 21 0 0,0 3,2
15 37,3 57 0 0,0 62,7 0 0 0 30 0 27,1 0,0
16 0 14 0 0 3,7 0,0 0 0 59 4 5 2,0
17 0 15 4,6 0,0 0 0 0 2 40 23 0 7,7
18 0,0 17 2 2,7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0,0 0 3 4 0 4 0 0 78 0 9 2
20 0 0,0 0 0,0 4 0 0 0 3 0 4,6 0
21 0,0 0,0 0 9,0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 8
22 0 0 5 0,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
23 31,0 15,0 6 2 0 8 0 0 0 0 6,7 8,0
24 0,0 0 0,0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 69,8 0
25 69,0 0,0 7,8 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 9 0,0
26 47 0 3,7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3,8 5,2
27 0,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 6 0,0
28 14 0,0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
29 0,0 - 0,0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0 0
30 0,0 - 0 8 0 0 0 3 0 23 0 0
31 20,0 - 2 - 0 0 0 0 - 51 0 0,0

Hujan Maksimum 69,0 57,4 46 52,2 62,7 8,3 0 3 78 79 69,8 67,0 79,0
Jml Curah Hujan 269,8 259,7 139,3 166,1 228,8 19,2 0 5,2 254 306,4 194,2 358,3 2200,9
Jml. Hari Hujan 10 13 17 15 11 3 0 2 8 14 14 16 123
Rata-rata 8,7 9,3 4 5,5 7,4 0,6 0,0 0,2 8,5 10,2 6,5 11,6
Hujan (1-15) 89,0 199,1 102,9 126,3 220,3 6,8 0 0,0 61 184,2 80,8 325,4
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 180,8 60,6 36,4 39,8 8,5 12,4 0 5 193 122,2 113,4 32,9
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 24 Precipitation 2003



54
TAHUN DATA 2004
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 5 0 0 25,0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 33 77 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 15 0 48 30 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 0,0
5 5 3 2,0 0 80 0,0 0 0 3 6 0,0 0
6 5 17 0 0 80,4 10 0 0 0 0 32 0,0
7 0,0 13,7 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 28 0
8 0,0 0 0 14 0,0 7 0 0,0 0 0 35 43,0
9 0,0 9,8 0,0 36,0 5,0 7 11 0 0 14 0 0,0
10 9,7 0,0 0 0,0 7,0 0 0 0 0 0 3,4 20,0
11 0,0 0 14,6 2,3 11 0 2 0 0 0 0,0 38,2
12 30 14 68,2 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0
13 19,0 30,0 0,0 0,0 0 0,0 6 0 0 0 0 0,0
14 0 0 0 4 9 0 6 74 0 0 4,0 9,0
15 0,0 15 0 0,0 4,7 0 21 0 0 0 17,6 15,0
16 0 27 42 21 8,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 15 10,0
17 35 3 0,0 5,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 39,0
18 12,0 0 0 0,0 20 0 0 0 0 4 3 47
19 39,9 14 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 28
20 0 0,0 0 20,0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0
21 12,7 4,6 17 40,6 0 1 0 0 0 7 2 2
22 0 0 0 0,0 0 8,0 0 0 0 0 30,6 9,8
23 22,2 4,2 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 1 16,6 1,2
24 5,7 3 15,8 0 0 1 0 0 0 19 1,0 19
25 0,0 21,0 0,0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0
26 5 26 0,0 0 18 3 0 0 0 0 22,0 19,8
27 0,0 14 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0,0 19 22,8
28 0 0,0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,0 1,9
29 0,0 0 16,0 2 1 0 0 0 2 0,0 14,6 0
30 4,1 - 0 70 0 0 0 0 34 0 25 19
31 4,1 - 0 - 1 - 0 0 - 0 - 12,5

Hujan Maksimum 39,9 33,0 77 70,2 80,4 10,0 21 74 34 19 35,0 47,4 80,4
Jml Curah Hujan 230,9 252,4 306,5 312,4 287,7 36,1 67 74,0 55 50,4 282,0 356,9 2311,3
Jml. Hari Hujan 16 17 10 15 16 7 7 1 5 6 19 18 137
Rata-rata 7,4 9,0 10 10,4 9,3 1,2 2,2 2,5 1,8 1,7 9,4 11,5
Hujan (1-15) 89,6 135,3 209,1 116,9 220,7 23,6 67 74,0 5 19,7 120,3 125,2
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 141,3 117,1 97,4 195,5 67,0 12,5 0 0 50 30,7 161,7 231,7
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 25 Precipitation 2004




55
TAHUN DATA 2005
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 56 4 3,2 0 0 16 32 0 0 47 14
2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 8
3 0 0 22 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 11 28 14 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 6,6
5 7 18 13,5 0 2 0,0 0 0 0 0 8,9 55
6 40 13 19 0 5,4 0 0 0 0 0 16 0,0
7 1,5 0,0 25 33 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0 2
8 38,3 0 0 16 34,0 0 0 0,0 0 0 0 14,6
9 14,7 0,0 0,0 9,7 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,6
10 0,0 0,0 0 32,7 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 75,4 43,0
11 10,5 3 2,0 5,0 0 0 4 14 8 0 0,0 2,0
12 2 7 4,3 9 25 23 20 10 0 48 0 0
13 0,0 6,5 19,0 0,0 0 4,0 2 0 5 15 9 15,0
14 27 2 3 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
15 8,6 0 0 1,0 17,0 55 0 0 0 9 0,0 0,0
16 53 18 0 0 1,4 0,0 21 0 0 0 0 0,0
17 29 15 15,7 45,8 0 0 5 0 0 12 2 11,0
18 31,2 46 0 6,8 0 0 0 0 36 6 0 9
19 1,7 32 67 9 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 2
20 25 28,9 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 6 0 71,3 1
21 0,0 0,0 5 1,0 0 7 0 48 11 0 0 0
22 0 74 27 0,0 0 23,6 0 0 0 5 8,6 0,0
23 9,3 63,5 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 3,6 16,7
24 25,6 1 0,0 0 0 22 0 0 19 0 11,5 0
25 0,0 13,3 14,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0,0
26 0 4 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0,0 15,8
27 0,0 2 4,0 0 0 0 0 66 0 16,4 0 0,0
28 2 4,0 39 0 0 6 0 3 0 0 59,3 0,0
29 3,3 - 11,0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0,0 64,8 22
30 0,0 - 43 0 0 4 0 0 29 0 0 9
31 0,0 - 7 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0,0

Hujan Maksimum 52,6 73,9 67 45,8 34,0 55,4 21 66 36 80 75,4 55,4 79,5
Jml Curah Hujan 340,9 435,4 371,6 233,4 85,6 151,0 67 173,9 113 223,9 423,0 258,6 2876,9
Jml. Hari Hujan 19 20 21 15 6 10 6 6 7 10 15 18 153
Rata-rata 11,0 15,6 12 7,8 2,8 5,0 2,2 5,8 3,8 7,5 14,1 8,3
Hujan (1-15) 161,3 133,5 126,0 170,6 84,2 86,8 41 56,4 13 72,6 193,6 172,6
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 179,6 301,9 245,6 62,8 1,4 64,2 26 118 100 151,3 229,4 86,0
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 26 Precipitation 2005




56
TAHUN DATA 2006
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 56 4 3,2 0 0 16 32 0 0 47 14
2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 8
3 0 0 22 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 11 28 14 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 6,6
5 7 18 13,5 0 2 0,0 0 0 0 0 8,9 55
6 40 13 19 0 5,4 0 0 0 0 0 16 0,0
7 1,5 0,0 25 33 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0 2
8 38,3 0 0 16 34,0 0 0 0,0 0 0 0 14,6
9 14,7 0,0 0,0 9,7 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,6
10 0,0 0,0 0 32,7 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 75,4 43,0
11 10,5 3 2,0 5,0 0 0 4 14 8 0 0,0 2,0
12 2 7 4,3 9 25 23 20 10 0 48 0 0
13 0,0 6,5 19,0 0,0 0 4,0 2 0 5 15 9 15,0
14 27 2 3 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
15 8,6 0 0 1,0 17,0 55 0 0 0 9 0,0 0,0
16 53 18 0 0 1,4 0,0 21 0 0 0 0 0,0
17 29 15 15,7 45,8 0 0 5 0 0 12 2 11,0
18 31,2 46 0 6,8 0 0 0 0 36 6 0 9
19 1,7 32 67 9 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 2
20 25 28,9 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 6 0 71,3 1
21 0,0 0,0 5 1,0 0 7 0 48 11 0 0 0
22 0 74 27 0,0 0 23,6 0 0 0 5 8,6 0,0
23 9,3 63,5 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 3,6 16,7
24 25,6 1 0,0 0 0 22 0 0 19 0 11,5 0
25 0,0 13,3 14,4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0,0
26 0 4 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0,0 15,8
27 0,0 2 4,0 0 0 0 0 66 0 16,4 0 0,0
28 2 4,0 39 0 0 6 0 3 0 0 59,3 0,0
29 3,3 - 11,0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0,0 64,8 22
30 0,0 - 43 0 0 4 0 0 29 0 0 9
31 0,0 - 7 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0,0

Hujan Maksimum 52,6 73,9 67 45,8 34,0 55,4 21 66 36 80 75,4 55,4 79,5
Jml Curah Hujan 340,
9
435,4 371,6 233,4 85,6 151,0 67 173,9 113 223,9 423,0 258,6 2876,9
Jml. Hari Hujan 19 20 21 15 6 10 6 6 7 10 15 18 153
Rata-rata 11,0 15,6 12 7,8 2,8 5,0 2,2 5,8 3,8 7,5 14,1 8,3
Hujan (1-15) 161,
3
133,5 126,0 170,6 84,2 86,8 41 56,4 13 72,6 193,6 172,6
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 179,
6
301,9 245,6 62,8 1,4 64,2 26 118 100 151,3 229,4 86,0
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 27 Precipitation 2006




57
TAHUN DATA 2007
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 8 0 0,0 0 3 0 0 0 0 7 12
2 0,0 4 0 15 0 6 34 0 0 0 3 0
3 0 1 0 5 47 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
4 0 40 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 28,0
5 0 5 0,0 2 0 1,9 0 0 0 0 10,5 12
6 0 0 0 0 36,4 11 0 0 0 0 12 15,9
7 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 11 9
8 0,0 0 0 5 0,0 16 0 0,0 3 15 12 0,0
9 0,0 0,0 0,0 6,6 25,5 0 0 0 0 6 71 0,0
10 0,0 0,0 0 0,0 0,0 17 0 0 0 6 61,5 0,0
11 0,0 2 0,0 9,4 4 0 0 0 0 0 140,0 83,8
12 0 35 0,0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 9
13 0,0 47,0 0,0 11,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 11 1,0
14 16 6 0 59 0 0 0 0 0 12 30,3 86,0
15 0,0 21 0 5,0 1,0 7 0 0 1 5 40,0 8,8
16 0 15 0 0 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 37,0
17 0 3 0,0 3,0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0
18 0,0 15 0 4,3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 0,0 27 0 38 2 13 0 0 0 0 0 88
20 0 53,0 0 66,0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0,0 5
21 0,0 12,0 0 15,0 0 28 0 3 0 0 0 6
22 16 11 0 5,5 0 0,0 0 0 0 34 0,0 3,4
23 6,0 17,0 0 20 16 18 0 0 0 0 13,8 0,0
24 0,0 0 0,0 5 0 0 0 0 0 57 0,0 0
25 27,0 16,0 0,0 84 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8,9
26 9 15 0,0 52 0 0 0 16 0 0 16,7 0,0
27 14,0 0 0,0 33 0 0 0 0 0 17,7 22 0,0
28 13 0,0 0 10 0 9 0 0 0 0 0,0 2,9
29 8,0 - 0,0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 6,7 3
30 2,0 - 0 82 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0
31 14,0 - 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 1 - 0,0

Hujan Maksimum 27,0 53,0 0 84,0 46,8 27,8 34 16 3 57 140,0 87,9 140,0
Jml Curah Hujan 125,
0
353,0 0,0 575,1 134,7 130,8 34 18,5 5 209,8 531,2 418,4 2535,0
Jml. Hari Hujan 10 20 0 25 9 12 1 2 3 10 19 18 129
Rata-rata 4,0 12,6 0 19,2 4,3 4,4 1,1 0,6 0,2 7,0 17,7 13,5
Hujan (1-15) 16,0 169,0 0,0 151,0 113,6 62,0 34 0,0 3 43,9 472,5 264,8
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 109,
0
184,0 0,0 424,1 21,1 68,8 0 19 1 165,9 58,7 153,6
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 28 Precipitation 2007




58
TAHUN DATA 2008
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 38 13 0 1,4 10 4 0 0 7 0 15 3
2 68,3 7 22 4 30 0 0 0 0 1 1 87
3 17 12 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 17
4 11 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6,5
5 2 0 0,0 0 19 1,2 0 0 0 8 3,9 20
6 0 0 8 0 12,5 0 0 0 0 0 18 15,2
7 13,3 0,0 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 0,0 31 4
8 0,0 4 4 20 19,3 0 0 0,0 11 3 0 5,5
9 0,0 3,5 0,0 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 26 12 0,0
10 0,0 0,0 33 6,8 1,3 0 0 0 0 0 37,2 0,0
11 0,0 23 47,3 0,0 3 46 0 0 26 0 14,4 5,5
12 0 0 5,4 8 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0
13 0,0 6,0 35,0 24,8 0 17,0 0 0 0 0 20 0,0
14 0 15 39 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 45,8 0,0
15 0,0 0 0 3,1 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 15,9 33,5
16 6 0 70 0 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 40 2,9
17 0 3 1,7 0,0 0 0 0 0 12 0 121 0,0
18 0,0 2 59 22,8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
19 0,0 11 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0
20 0 3,8 22 90,9 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,3 0
21 0,0 7,6 0 11,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
22 2 8 0 9,5 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 3,4 5,5
23 13,3 0,0 41 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 17,9
24 0,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 110,4 4
25 2,6 5,2 23,8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0
26 25 2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0,0
27 12,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,0 0 0,0
28 29 5,6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7,5 2,3
29 1,5 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 67 0 90,5 0,0 0
30 0,0 - 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 17 21 0
31 5,5 - 34 - 0 - 0 173 - 0 - 0,0

Hujan Maksimum 68,3 22,9 70 90,9 30,0 46,0 0 173 26 91 120,5 86,8 173,0
Jml Curah Hujan 246,
4
129,8 472,4 239,0 101,7 67,9 0 257,2 56 164,7 582,5 228,9 2546,3
Jml. Hari Hujan 15 17 20 14 9 4 0 4 4 10 22 15 134
Rata-rata 7,9 4,6 15 8,0 3,3 2,3 0,0 8,6 1,9 5,5 19,4 7,4
Hujan (1-15) 150,
2
82,9 209,4 68,8 101,7 67,9 0 17,2 44 38,6 268,1 196,5
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 96,2 46,9 263,0 170,2 0,0 0,0 0 240 12 126,1 314,4 32,4
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 29 Precipitation 2008




59
TAHUN DATA 2009
Tanggal BULAN Tahunan
Jan Peb Mar Apr Mei Jun Jul Agt Sep Okt Nov Des
1 0 2 9 0,0 68 0 0 0 0 0 4 19
2 0,0 31 0 42 5 0 0 0 15 22 0 0
3 0 4 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 14
4 0 16 5 55 21 70 0 0 0 0 0 0,0
5 0 1 34,9 0 0 2,5 0 0 0 162 0,0 7
6 0 6 24 3 0,0 0 0 0 13 42 0 32,5
7 0,0 8,7 0 12 6 0 0 0 0 12,0 0 1
8 0,0 0 0 21 1,3 0 0 0,0 0 3 0 23,5
9 21,4 12,2 2,0 5,0 4,5 14 0 0 0 0 0 0,0
10 0,0 19,5 0 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 30,0
11 0,0 2 25,0 0,0 0 4 0 0 11 0 3,4 66,5
12 2 23 0,0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 39 0
13 15,5 1,0 21,5 0,0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 4 0,0
14 52 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 48 62,0 0,0
15 49,5 0 0 0,0 8,1 3 0 0 0 51 0,0 0,0
16 9 0 0 0 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 4 0,0
17 9 5 0,0 0,0 0 0 0 0 64 0 12 41,5
18 6,3 3 0 0,0 9 0 0 15 11 10 82 0
19 0,0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 27 0
20 28 21,7 8 66,0 0 0 0 0 5 0 50,0 0
21 0,0 15,3 0 0,0 118 0 0 0 0 0 143 0
22 0 53 0 23,0 3 0,0 0 0 0 32 15,5 0,0
23 0,0 6,1 10 6 2 0 0 0 1 0 5,5 0,0
24 0,0 20 0,0 69 0 37 0 0 0 0 0,0 0
25 22,4 2,0 0,0 0 0 0 59 0 63 0 0 0,0
26 14 0 25,0 27 0 0 4 0 58 0 5,5 163,5
27 50,4 0 9,0 9 0 0 0 0 0 27,0 65 23,0
28 0 4,0 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 3,5 39,0
29 17,7 - 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92,5 0,0 2
30 31,5 - 22 0 11 16 0 0 22 0 41 0
31 2,8 - 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 44,5

Hujan Maksimum 52,3 53,0 35 69,0 118,0 70,3 59 15 64 162 142,5 163,5 163,5
Jml Curah Hujan 332,4 254,7 200,6 396,8 269,6 201,7 63 15,0 260 501,5 564,9 505,0 3565,2
Jml. Hari Hujan 15 21 13 14 14 8 2 1 10 12 17 14 141
Rata-rata 10,7 9,1 6 13,2 8,7 6,7 2,1 0,5 8,7 16,7 18,8 16,3
Hujan (1-15) 141,0 125,0 119,9 191,8 120,3 149,2 0 0,0 38 339,0 112,4 192,0
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hujan (16-31) 191,4 129,7 80,7 205,0 149,3 52,5 63 15 223 162,5 452,5 313,0
Jml. Data Kosong 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 30 Precipitation 2009
Appendix L Land Runoff Formula
The rational formula consists of the q as discharge (m
3
/s), the empirical constant 0.0028, the
c as coefficient of runoff (-), the i for rainfall (mm/h) and A for the watershed surface (ha). The
rational formula is in the next step combined with sediment in the derived runoff. This tool is
normally used for watershed surface area of 800 ha or smaller.

q = 0.0028ciA

The used average precipitation in i is 0.29 mm/h (Appendix K). The parameter c with A is
divided in 3 kinds of land use (minimum precipitation of 25 mm/h). For instance, precipitation
data of 2010 does not show rainfall higher than 100 mm/h. The values are mostly around 25
mm/h. The outcome of 3 land types, the coefficients A and c are shown in table 31.

Land Type Percentage (%) A (ha) Cover & Hydrologic Condition c (-) cA (-)
Barren 15 765 Bare, poor practice 0.8 612
Cultivated 70 3570 Row crop, good practice 0.47 1678
Forest 15 765 Woodland 0.02 15
Total 2305
Table 31 Land Type Surface and Runoff Coefficient

The surface is calculated by the percentage for the land type of the sub-watershed area of
5100 ha (= 51 km
2
). The cover & hydrologic conditions and c-values partly come from the
rational method, described by Schwab et al. [1983]. For example, the Chzy coefficient in the
land type barren is assumed to be 0.8, because buildings, roads and sandy paths occupy
this surface. This lead to the calculation of the discharge on land.

q = 0.0028cAi = 0.0028! 2305! 0.29 =1.87 m
3
/ s

The discharge by rainfall is almost three smaller than the average discharge in the river of
5.54 m
3
/s from (Appendix P), used for the sediment transport. These values should be at
least the same considering that the amount of water is higher rainfall, because normally
water is partly stored in the underground. Difference occurs due to the formula for an 800 ha
watershed, rainfall of Cisomang watershed, an empirical sediment transport concentration
and global land conditions.
The Q
sed
is the amount of sediment per unit of time (kg/s) with c
sed
(kg/m
3
). c
sed
is the
sediment transport concentration of 9.7 kg/m
3
based on the watershed of the nearby
Cisomang [Fakultas Teknologi Industri Pertanian, Universitas Padjadjaran, 2009].

Q
sed
= qc
sed
=1.87! 9.70 =18.14 kg/s

The amount of sediment of land in the river (Q
vsed
) is given in years (seconds, minutes,
hours/day, days/year):

Q
vsed
=
Q
sed
t
!
w
=
18.14! (60! 60! 24! 365)
1973
= 289946 m
3
/year

The calculated 300 thousand m
3
/year is approximately 2% of the 13.6 million m
3
/year of the
Cilalawi River sediment. These amount could be three times or more on the grounds that of
high uncertainty in the used formula and data.



61
Appendix M Parameter List
Parameter Description Unit
A Surface m
2
b Width m
C Chzy coefficient m
1/2
/s
Fr Froude number -
g Gravitation m/s
2
h Water depth m
H Specific energy m
i Gradient m/m
k Wall Rougness m
Q Discharge m
3
/s
R Hydraulic radius m
Re Reynolds number -
s Bed transport m
3
/s/m
v Flow velocity m/s
! Viscosity m
2
/s
Table 32 Parameter List and Units



62
Appendix N River Profile
The river profile (wet and dry) at the location of the check dam is measured during the survey.
This is the profile that gives the width for the model and check dam design. There are larger
and smaller widths to be found in other sections of the river down- and upstream. The river
structure will be similar to the other three points in the upstream (Chapter 6) by making this
profile a rectangle for calculations.
The necessary equipment for this survey is two jalon of 2 m and 3 m, and one
polysan of 30 m. The polysan is strained above the river with marks of red tape every single
meter. With the jalon the height is measured from the polysan to the bed. The result is the
next river profile (figure 34).


Figure 34 River Profile of Cilalawi River

The values are given in table 33. The water level en wet profile starts at the depth (h) of 3.75
m from the height, where inundation takes place when water rise above line. The most used
surface of the river is estimated to be between point 4 and 17 (13 m) from visiting the
location, assuming this will be where the average discharges are, because there is no
vegetation to be found on this surface area.
A schematic presentation of this river profile is a rectangle. The width of the
measured wet profile is between point 14 and 8 (6 m).
Averaged with the average width of 13 m the width of this schematic rectangle is
assumed to be equivalent to 10 m. The residual of wet circumference is partly occupied by
the rectangle height. The maximum water depth (h
max
) is, from the figure, 5.15 m. This
number is used for the check dam design.

Point Height (m) Water Level (m)
0 0.00 0
1 0.90 0
2 1.90 0
3 2.30 0
4 2.70 0
5 3.10 0
6 3.40 0
7 3.50 0
8 3.75 0
9 4.10 0.35
10 5.15 1.40
11 5.00 1.25
12 4.20 0.45



63
13 4.00 0.25
14 3.85 0.1
15 3.75 0
16 3.60 0
17 3.00 0
18 2.70 0
19 2.80 0
20 2.60 0
21 0.70 0
22 0.20 0
22.4 0.00 0
Table 33 Measurements River Profile



64
Appendix O Flow Velocity
Knowledge of the current stream is required to make the first estimation of the Chzy
coefficient for the sediment transport model. Therefore, a current meter is used to see the
flow velocity in the wet river profile (figure 35). With a better look it can be seen that this is
the lowest part of the profile in figure 34. The height and surface area for each point is given
in table 34. The nine flow velocities in this profile are shown in table 35.


Figure 35 Flow Velocities in River Profile

Point Height (m) Surface Area (m
2
)
0 0.00 !"#$%%
1 0.35 !"$$%%
2 1.40 #"&&%%
3 1.25 !"$'%%
4 0.45 !"&'%%
5 0.25 !"#$%%
6 0.10 !"!'%%
7 0.00 !"#$%%
Total ! "#$%!
Table 34 Measurements River Profile with Water

Point Flow Velocity (m/s)
A 0.30
B 0.20
C 0.15
D 1.30
E 1.00
F 0.80
G 0.90
H 0.35
I 0.10
Average 0.55
Table 35 Flow Velocities During Survey



65

The width (b
w
) of the schematic rectangle profile is designed to be 4 m, because that is
where the majority of the stream is. This results in the surface area (A
w
) for the section.

A
w
= h
w
b
w
!h
w
=
A
w
b
w
=
3.80
4.00
= 0.95 m


This leads to the data for the profile filled with water, including the water depth (h
w
), the
average flow velocity (v
w
) and the associated discharge (Q
w
).

A
w
= 3.80 m
2
b
w
= 4.00 m
h
w
= 0.95 m
v
w
= 0.55 m/s
Q
w
= A
w
v
w
= 3.80! 0.55 = 2.10 m
3
/ s


With the previous variables the Reynolds number can be calculated. The Reynolds number
will indicate turbulent and laminar water flow. The hydraulic radius (R) is used with the
viscosity (!) of water and the flow velocity. The water viscosity of 20C water is 1.00e
-6
m
2
/s
(30C is the local temperature).

R
w
=
h
w
b
w
2h
w
+b
w
=
0.95! 4.00
2! 0.95+ 4.00
= 0.64 m

Re
w
=
v
w
! R
w
!
=
0.55! 0.64
1.00!10
"6
= 352000

The Reynolds number is larger than 800, which means that the flow is turbulent. This will
cause disturbance on the riverbed and will set the sediment in motion.



66
Appendix P Discharges
The next data is derived from the PSDA checkpoint 500 m downstream of the railway bridge.
Discharges data of the years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 are
presented in the tables 37 to 43. The years 2003 are 2004 are lost in the archiving. The
average discharge is needed to make calculations for the sediment transport over the years
(table 36). The discharges are:

Years Averages Discharge (m
3
/s)
2000 ("$#%
2001 $"((%
2002 )"$'%
2005 &"*!%
2006 &"**%
2007 &"*)%
2008 +"((%
2009 +"$*%
2010 ##",%
Average &#&'!
Table 36 Average Discharges
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& !"#!$ %#&'$ &#"($ !)#)$ )#!*$ %#''$ (#+'$ (#+!$ &#+($ %#''$ '#!$ (#+!$
<& &#,%$ )#)%$ %#&($ !,#)$ %#&($ (#++$ (#(,$ %#"!$ %#&($ (#++$ !,#,$ (#(,$
)& %#%,$ )#'*$ !*#)$ !)#+$ !+$ (#,%$ (#%)$ %#),$ !*#)$ (#,%$ '#()$ %#),$
=& !*#!$ &#,+$ '#*$ !)#($ !"#%$ (#,!$ (#+!$ &#*+$ '#*$ (#,!$ !"#+$ &#*+$
>& '#+)$ !!$ !,#!$ !!#'$ !(#+$ *#&'$ )#"+$ %#'($ !,#!$ *#&'$ &#"($ %#'($
?& )#(*$ &#)%$ &#,&$ !%#%$ )#*+$ *#&!$ (#%*$ (#%*$ !*#)$ (#%,$ '#+)$ %#!+$
@& &#&!$ &#'($ ,*#&$ '#+!$ !%#+$ *#'*$ %#"!$ (#*$ )#"%$ *#'*$ '#'&$ (#*$
A& )#)&$ !!#+$ !%$ !"#%$ )#'*$ *#&*$ )#"%$ !,$ %#!%$ *#&*$ &#,+$ !,$
B& !"#($ )#!!$ )#+'$ !)#)$ '#+!$ *#&'$ %#!!$ !!$ (#*'$ *#&'$ )#"&$ !!#+$
;C& !"#%$ %#"'$ !"#,$ %#),$ !"#%$ %#'($ (#*+$ %#&$ (#*+$ %#'($ '#"!$ %#&$
;;& (#'!$ )#"%$ !+#%$ &#*%$ (#&%$ %#),$ %#)($ %#&+$ (#*+$ %#),$ '#,$ %#&+$
;<& %#%&$ '#)!$ %#&($ %#'($ )#&,$ %#*%$ %#,&$ '#"%$ (#*($ %#*%$ !"#*$ )#')$
;)& )#)%$ !"#($ (#'!$ (#%,$ '#+)$ %#+*$ (#&%$ '#+!$ (#(($ %#+*$ !+#!$ '#+!$
;=& (#&&$ '#!*$ %#&$ (#*$ %#&'$ %#(!$ (#(&$ )#"&$ (#(&$ %#(!$ !'#'$ )#"&$
;>& !!$ )#!)$ %#*%$ %#(*$ %#%*$ )#!!$ )#"%$ )#)$ (#*+$ %#&'$ '#%($ )#)%$
;?& !+#)$ '#+)$ %#,!$ !,$ )#*+$ %#'($ (#*+$ )#"!$ (#*+$ %#'($ !,#%$ )#"!$
;@& )#!*$ !"#!$ (#*+$ !!$ !"#'$ %#,&$ (#,&$ %#!+$ (#*($ %#,&$ !)#%$ %#!+$
;A& (#&&$ )#"%$ %#''$ '#,+$ '#!,$ (#(,$ %#',$ %#(*$ (#,&$ (#+'$ !+#%$ %#(*$
;B& %#&($ (#*($ (#*+$ %#&$ %#*!$ (#%&$ (#*+$ )#*%$ (#*+$ *#!+$ !"#)$ )#*%$
<C& )#++$ (#(,$ (#&&$ !(#+$ (#%)$ (#++$ (#&&$ )#"+$ !!#*$ (#++$ '#"!$ )#"%$
<;& %#&+$ %#'$ !!#&$ %#&+$ (#()$ (#(($ (#*+$ (#%)$ )#!&$ (#(($ )#')$ (#%)$
<<& !!#!$ (#'%$ )#"!$ )#)&$ (#++$ (#*$ (#'%$ (#(($ )#!!$ (#*$ )#!!$ (#(($
<)& &$ (#%,$ %#!'$ '#+!$ (#,&$ (#,%$ %#"'$ (#++$ %#+&$ (#,&$ )#)%$ (#++$
<=& !*#)$ %#%*$ &#"+$ )#"&$ (#*+$ (#+'$ (#($ (#'&$ (#%,$ (#++$ !!#,$ (#'&$
<>& !)#($ (#'&$ )#"!$ )#)$ (#(,$ (#&*$ (#*+$ %#',$ (#*+$ (#&%$ )#&'$ %#%&$
<?& '#)!$ (#!)$ &#',$ )#"!$ (#++$ (#($ (#'*$ (#*+$ (#+!$ (#($ )#*&$ (#*($
<@& '#"+$ (#*+$ %#&($ )#(&$ (#,&$ )#!!$ %#&+$ (#'&$ (#++$ !*$ &#"+$ (#&!$
<A& !"#+$ %#"'$ !"#)$ %#&+$ (#,&$ %#'($ %#!'$ %#!%$ (#*+$ ,%#%$ )#!&$ %#,%$
<B& !"#'$ )#&'$ )#(*$ )#)+$ (#+!$ %#,%$ (#++$ (#*$ (#*'$ ,!#($ '#"!$ (#)*$
)C& '#%'$ $ (#*'$ )#%,$ (#,&$ (#,%$ %#!!$ %#!+$ )#"%$ ,!#!$ (#*($ %#)($
);& !!#($ $ )#%,$ $ )#"%$ $ (#*($ )#'*$ $ &#&($ $ $
Table 37 Discharges 2000





68
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& (#')$ '#%($ )#%&$ '#*)$ (#)!$ )#&($ %#!!$ *#&,$ (#)!$ '#+'$ !"#($ (#')$
<& (#&($ !!#&$ %#%'$ !"#*$ '#+'$ )#%!$ %#%$ %#+($ !"#*$ )#)'$ !!#'$ (#*)$
)& !!#*$ !(#&$ )#)'$ &#,)$ !!#'$ )#%!$ )#%&$ %#(,$ !+#,$ %#(,$ !*$ %#,)$
=& )#**$ &#(*$ !*#*$ !!#*$ )#"!$ (#)!$ %#&+$ %#%'$ !(#($ &#,)$ !*#*$ %#!!$
>& &#),$ '#*)$ !%#($ !"#%$ '#(%$ )#"!$ '#*)$ )#+($ !!#'$ &#(*$ &#(*$ %#"+$
?& )#(,$ %#&+$ )#%&$ '#+'$ !!#%$ '#*)$ )#'%$ %#%'$ !!#&$ '#%($ !"#,$ '#+$
@& )#&($ )#!'$ !+#($ '#,!$ '#)+$ '#!,$ )#(,$ '#+$ %#+($ )#%!$ !+$ !!#+$
A& )#+($ !!#($ !,#%$ !!#&$ %#"+$ !'#+$ '#!,$ )#'%$ )#'%$ )#,)$ !*#!$ )#)'$
B& &#*($ !%#%$ !*#'$ '#%($ )#**$ %#%'$ )#'%$ )#'%$ !!#($ '#)+$ '#*)$ (#&($
;C& )#"!$ &#,)$ !+#&$ '#*)$ )#&($ %#(,$ &#"&$ )#(,$ '#',$ )#**$ !,#!$ (#%,$
;;& )#(,$ )#%&$ !"#!$ )#'%$ '#%($ )#&($ )#'%$ '#*)$ '#"*$ %#'($ !,#)$ (#*)$
;<& %#%$ !(#)$ )#%!$ &#'!$ '#!,$ (#*)$ '#+'$ )#'%$ )#'%$ )#%!$ !*#+$ (#%,$
;)& '#)+$ !"#*$ '#+$ ,!#*$ !"#'$ (#')$ )#'%$ )#%!$ %#%'$ '#+'$ ,)#*$ )#%!$
;=& )#%!$ )#%&$ )#)'$ !*#%$ !,#!$ )#!$ )#%&$ )#!'$ %#!!$ !"#!$ !*#&$ )#**$
;>& )#+($ )#"!$ )#&($ &#,)$ !!#%$ (#')$ &#(*$ %#%'$ '#+$ !,#'$ !&#%$ %#&+$
;?& %#)%$ )#!'$ %#'($ !(#,$ )#%&$ (#%,$ )#%&$ %#!!$ )#%&$ &#+%$ !(#%$ )#(,$
;@& %#!!$ '#+'$ !+#%$ &#"&$ '#"*$ (#&($ '#!,$ (#%,$ '#)+$ )#%!$ ,"#)$ )#!$
;A& !(#!$ )#(,$ !&#&$ !+#)$ !,$ (#')$ !!#+$ (#,+$ )#%&$ '#*)$ ,"#)$ )#%&$
;B& '#!,$ %#,)$ !"#,$ )#'%$ !!#,$ (#%,$ )#)'$ ($ )#**$ !"#!$ ,!#*$ )#"!$
<C& '#,!$ (#')$ !"#($ )#**$ '#"*$ %#)%$ )#**$ (#)&$ '#',$ &#&$ !%#&$ %#"+$
<;& )#!$ )#%&$ )#%&$ !"#!$ '#+$ %#!&$ )#)'$ %#(,$ )#%!$ !,#%$ ,!#*$ %#(,$
<<& %#%$ !!#($ %#(,$ '#&!$ &$ (#)!$ )#+($ (#&($ '#"*$ &#(*$ !,#'$ '#,!$
<)& (#&($ )#+($ (#&($ )#&($ !'#+$ (#+!$ %#&+$ (#,+$ )#(,$ !,#,$ !*#&$ )#&($
<=& %#,)$ %#+($ %#*+$ (#(*$ %#(,$ (#,+$ %#!!$ *#'*$ %#%$ ,,#*$ !'#%$ '#,!$
<>& '#(%$ )#%!$ )#!$ (#!($ )#)'$ (#+&$ (#&($ *#'*$ %#"+$ ++#($ '#!,$ )#'%$
<?& %#'($ )#**$ '#"*$ (#,+$ )#"!$ (#&($ (#)&$ *#'*$ (#%,$ !*#%$ %#(,$ %#)%$
<@& )#!'$ )#+($ !"#*$ (#)&$ (#%,$ )#,)$ (#+&$ *#'*$ (#")$ !&#,$ (#&($ (#&($
<A& (#%,$ %#'($ '#+'$ (#+!$ )#(,$ %#+($ (#!($ *#'*$ *#&,$ !)#'$ (#')$ (#)!$
<B& !)#'$ $ %#&+$ (#")$ %#'($ %#*+$ (#")$ *#&,$ *#))$ !!#,$ (#)&$ %#*+$
)C& )#%&$ $ &#(*$ (#!($ !!$ %#%'$ *#&,$ *#))$ *#))$ !($ %#*+$ %#%$
);& %#(,$ $ )#'%$ $ &#"&$ $ *#&,$ *#'*$ $ !"#%$ $ $
Table 38 Discharges 2001





69
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& ,#)'$ !"#&$ +#)+$ *#)($ !#%)$ !#"+$ "#)%$ "#'($ "#*,$ "#+!$ "#%+$ )#,)$
<& *#+)$ !"#($ +#&+$ '#*%$ !#&$ !#"+$ "#),$ !#!*$ "#*,$ "#+$ "#%($ &#"!$
)& +#&+$ !(#&$ ,#&*$ ,&#*$ !#'%$ !#"%$ "#),$ "#&'$ "#*,$ "#+$ "#%,$ '#*,$
=& +#+($ !(#+$ !,#,$ (#%&$ !#'%$ !#"+$ "#)!$ "#'!$ "#*,$ "#+$ "#%)$ '#%($
>& +#)+$ &#!$ ,#'&$ *#&&$ !#',$ !#()$ "#%)$ "#),$ "#*!$ "#+$ "#%($ )#,)$
?& *#,&$ !!#*$ &#&$ (#(!$ !#)($ !#,($ "#%)$ "#%,$ "#*!$ "#+!$ "#%+$ !"#($
@& &#*&$ !,$ ,#+'$ +#!)$ ,#'&$ !#"&$ !#+)$ "#()$ "#*!$ "#+!$ "#(($ &#%,$
A& (#!%$ !(#,$ *#**$ ,#'&$ ,#%,$ "#&'$ !#!)$ "#(,$ "#*!$ "#+!$ "#(,$ ,"#!$
B& )#(,$ !"$ ,#++$ *#,&$ *#")$ !#"&$ !#"&$ "#%)$ "#*$ "#+,$ "#&*$ &#)($
;C& !*#'$ '#*%$ ,#*)$ +#,&$ *#!*$ !#!)$ !#"!$ "#('$ "#*$ "#+!$ !#"&$ !"$
;;& +#,+$ ,"#'$ ,#*+$ (#*,$ ,#'&$ !#&*$ !#+!$ "#(,$ "#*$ "#+,$ "#&*$ &#+'$
;<& %#+%$ ,!$ (#)'$ *#**$ ,#+'$ !#()$ !#*$ "#(!$ "#*$ "#+,$ "#'&$ !+#*$
;)& &#*&$ !!#!$ +#%$ %#"%$ !#%)$ !#*$ !#,,$ "#*%$ "#+'$ "#+,$ !#"!$ ,+#!$
;=& (#')$ !"#($ *#&&$ (#%$ ,#*+$ !#!!$ !#!!$ "#*($ "#+%$ "#++$ "#')$ ,*#+$
;>& +#'$ !&#'$ (#')$ +#(*$ +#,&$ "#&*$ !#*+$ "#(!$ "#+%$ "#+,$ "#),$ ,,#,$
;?& *#,&$ +!$ ,#*+$ )#!&$ (#,($ "#&*$ !#+!$ "#(!$ "#+%$ "#+!$ "#%$ ,"#'$
;@& *#+)$ !+#($ ,#%)$ ,#++$ %#!%$ "#&!$ !#!!$ "#*&$ "#+%$ "#+,$ "#%($ $
;A& )#(,$ +(#&$ (#%&$ *#&&$ )#(,$ "#'&$ !#"!$ "#*'$ "#+%$ "#+,$ "#)*$ $
;B& !*#,$ ))#)$ *#)($ ,#+'$ !#)($ !#"!$ "#'&$ "#*'$ "#+($ "#+,$ !#!!$ $
<C& !&#'$ ,(#($ +#)+$ ,#%)$ )#*!$ "#&'$ "#'+$ "#*%$ "#+*$ "#++$ !#()$ $
<;& !+$ !'#)$ +#,&$ *#,&$ !#)'$ !#!*$ "#)*$ "#*%$ "#+*$ "#+,$ !#,'$ $
<<& !"$ )#(,$ *#'+$ +#,&$ !#%)$ !#,,$ "#%&$ "#*($ "#+*$ "#+,$ "#),$
<)& !(#)$ !*#,$ %#)%$ +#!)$ !#+)$ !#"!$ "#%,$ "#*($ "#++$ "#++$ "#&*$
<=& !!#)$ !,#'$ '#,,$ +#%)$ !#!&$ "#&*$ "#%$ "#*($ "#++$ "#++$ "#&'$
<>& !!#($ +!#*$ !,#+$ +#,&$ !#"&$ "#&*$ "#'($ "#*($ "#++$ "#+*$ "#'+$
<?& '#'*$ !!#*$ !!#*$ *#%)$ !#!)$ "#')$ !#"%$ "#*($ "#++$ !#!!$ "#%,$
<@& +,#*$ %#!%$ +#'$ +#*)$ !#!*$ "#'+$ !#"%$ "#**$ "#++$ !#"!$ "#'!$
<A& !'$ +#(*$ ,#++$ *#+)$ !#!!$ "#)%$ "#&'$ "#**$ "#+!$ "#'&$ "#%&$
<B& !*$ $ !*#,$ *$ !#!!$ "#)&$ "#'+$ "#**$ "#+!$ "#)&$ !#)!$
)C& !'#,$ $ !+#&$ !#',$ !#"&$ "#'!$ "#)!$ "#**$ "#+!$ "#)!$ !#(+$
);& '#(&$ $ '#(&$ $ !#"&$ $ "#)'$ "#*,$ $ "#%($ $
Table 39 Discharges 2002





70
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& ,#))$ ,#"*$ ,#")$ ,!#(($ !#&'$ ,#"!$ !#(($ !#,!$ !#&%$ "#%+$ +#%!$ +#"%$
<& !(#*%$ ,#,$ +#*,$ ,#'($ )#!+$ !#)($ !#&%$ !#"%$ !#,'$ "#(%$ +#,%$ +#"+$
)& *#&)$ *#)!$ ,#)($ !#*,$ *#&&$ !#(&$ ,#!!$ "#&+$ !#,'$ "#(+$ %#!$ ,#!!$
=& '#',$ *#%)$ !#&%$ !#")$ ,#!+$ !#*)$ ,#",$ !#!)$ "#&%$ "#(!$ +#*,$ )#)$
>& ,#,($ &#&+$ !#%*$ !#'($ !#%*$ !#,($ !#&'$ !#&*$ "#',$ "#*&$ +#!'$ !*#+)$
?& %#*'$ !,#!&$ &#,($ !#&)$ !#,+$ !#!($ !#)($ !#&+$ "#'*$ !#+($ +#+($ !"#*+$
@& ,#,($ ,)#,'$ ,#+)$ ,#(*$ !#&$ !#"&$ !#(($ !#%)$ ,#"%$ ,#+%$ ,#"+$ *#"!$
A& !#*,$ !!#(($ ,#+*$ !#))$ %#!+$ !#%'$ !#%,$ !#(!$ !#&'$ ,#"'$ !#'*$ ,#)%$
B& +#!)$ +#&!$ ,#"+$ !#,*$ ,#,'$ !#&%$ ,#"&$ !#,&$ !#%)$ !#'&$ +#!'$ %#))$
;C& (#,'$ ,#"*$ '#&,$ !#&*$ )#)&$ !#%$ !#'($ !#"&$ !#*)$ !#'*$ !+#&$ *#"!$
;;& %#''$ !#(,$ (#)%$ ,#",$ ,#+&$ !#*+$ *$ "#&$ !#*)$ ,#"!$ +#)*$ &#'&$
;<& +#&*$ ,#%,$ ,#!%$ %#*'$ ,#!%$ ,#*%$ ,#!($ !#'&$ !#,&$ !#)!$ ,#'*$ ,#+&$
;)& ,#"&$ !#&%$ +#&*$ %#($ %#!*$ ,#*%$ ,#!($ ,#"%$ !#"&$ !#(!$ +#*$ ,#&%$
;=& ,#+&$ +#+%$ +#+&$ !!#!)$ ,#(!$ ,#(%$ !#'&$ !#%*$ "#&+$ !#+,$ &#''$ ,#"%$
;>& ,#!,$ ,#!%$ ,#!,$ +#++$ !#'%$ ,#*%$ !#%+$ !#**$ "#',$ !#!&$ )#&+$ '#+!$
;?& )#)$ +#+!$ *#(%$ ,#",$ !#,)$ !#))$ !#!!$ !#,($ "#)&$ !#+$ ,#))$ *#',$
;@& !(#+'$ (#+)$ *#'!$ *#'($ ,#%%$ !#*'$ "#&%$ !#!($ "#)%$ '#*'$ +#()$ ,#!)$
;A& +#%'$ ,#,($ ,#!+$ ,#!*$ ,#!*$ *#%!$ "#')$ !#),$ !#!$ )#,!$ )#+'$ +#"'$
;B& '#%%$ !#%'$ %#)*$ %#)*$ ,#",$ ,#!)$ "#',$ !#(&$ !#),$ ,#,)$ )#!%$ !'#**$
<C& !!#!($ ,#%,$ !,#'+$ !#')$ !#&+$ !#),$ "#)*$ !#"*$ !#(($ !#)($ '#',$ %$
<;& ,'#)$ +#!$ ,#(!$ !#&%$ !#''$ !#(!$ "#)+$ "#&+$ !#,&$ !#(&$ (#!,$ %#!&$
<<& )#*&$ *#%'$ %#!*$ !#&+$ !#%)$ !#,+$ "#)!$ "#',$ !#,'$ !#*$ !(#*$ +#*,$
<)& %#!($ ,#"'$ !#'&$ !#)!$ !#(($ ,#%!$ "#)!$ "#)&$ !#"%$ !#,($ %#%$ &#,!$
<=& !,#*!$ +#")$ ,#('$ *#(($ !#*)$ ,#*%$ "#)!$ "#)&$ "#&$ ,#')$ !+#'&$ ,#*!$
<>& +#%,$ ,#!!$ !#))$ ,#!+$ !#,($ !#&($ "#%*$ "#)&$ "#)!$ %#&'$ !,#+($ *#"!$
<?& +#&,$ (#)&$ ,#"($ ,#,$ !#!($ ,#"%$ "#%,$ "#)&$ "#%*$ )#&$ !!#!)$ !#&)$
<@& !#)&$ ,#&($ !#&'$ ,#!%$ !#"&$ !#%$ "#%$ "#'!$ "#(%$ (#(($ !,#)*$ *#)$
<A& ,#,+$ %#*+$ !#&+$ ,#(*$ "#''$ !#('$ "#(%$ "#'!$ "#(+$ ,#)'$ !!#(($ ,#,,$
<B& +#)%$ $ *#(%$ '#,,$ "#',$ !#')$ "#)$ ,#+*$ !#!&$ ,#&+$ ,"#,&$ ,#%&$
)C& ,#,,$ $ ,#!+$ +#(!$ "#)*$ !#%$ !#"!$ ,#!,$ !#&&$ +#!!$ !'#',$ *#&($
);& ,#(&$ $ ,"#%!$ $ "#)+$ $ ,#%($ !#)($ $ +#+($ $ ,#!*$
Table 40 Discharges 2005





71
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& ,#,)$ &#!,$ +#"($ !#&!$ !#''$ "#)'$ !#"+$ "#%,$ "#)!$ "#+!$ "#+$ !#+*$
<& ,#*($ +#**$ %#"!$ !#(($ !#),$ "#)'$ !#!+$ "#%!$ "#),$ "#+!$ "#+($ !#,'$
)& %#(&$ )#!+$ ,#)%$ !#+'$ !#&+$ "#)($ !#($ "#%!$ "#%&$ "#+!$ "#,)$ %#*%$
=& ,#)+$ )#))$ %#''$ ,#**$ %#('$ "#)$ !#(($ "#%!$ "#%&$ "#,&$ "#,+$ )#%$
>& ,#(!$ *#,$ +#!!$ +#+$ *#(($ "#%*$ !#*!$ "#(&$ "#%($ "#,&$ "#+%$ !#'%$
?& &#!)$ !,#,%$ %#"&$ +#&)$ ,#!)$ !$ !#,+$ "#(&$ "#%($ "#,)$ "#+,$ )#%'$
@& ,#)'$ %#%$ ,#+)$ +#&+$ !#%!$ !#%,$ !#!+$ "#(&$ "#%($ "#,)$ "#*!$ '#,+$
A& +#*+$ (#&,$ !#%!$ %#**$ !#,&$ !#+&$ !#%($ "#(&$ "#%($ "#,)$ "#('$ !"#+&$
B& (#,'$ +#*+$ ,#'+$ )#!'$ ,#"'$ !#!'$ !#(,$ "#()$ "#%,$ "#,)$ "#%*$ +"#!*$
;C& '#*+$ %#"($ ,#"!$ ,#(,$ %#&%$ !#"'$ !#*$ "#()$ "#%,$ "#,($ "#(!$ (#"&$
;;& &#'*$ %#'%$ ,#*&$ !#'+$ %#+($ "#'&$ !#,&$ "#()$ "#%,$ "#,($ "#)!$ !#%'$
;<& ,%#(($ ,#*!$ !#&($ ,#"+$ ,#,'$ "#'!$ !#!%$ "#()$ "#%$ "#,*$ "#(&$ !#,+$
;)& ,%#"*$ !#&!$ ,#%+$ '#')$ !#'($ "#)($ !#"+$ "#(($ "#%$ "#,*$ "#(,$ !"#*)$
;=& &#'%$ *#%($ ,#"&$ (#%*$ ,#++$ "#)$ !$ "#(($ "#%$ "#,,$ "#+'$ ,,#&,$
;>& ,(#)$ ,#*,$ !#%$ *#''$ +#+'$ "#'$ "#&+$ "#(($ "#%$ "#,!$ "#+%$ +"#'($
;?& &#*%$ !#)$ !#')$ +#"*$ !"#!$ "#)'$ "#&$ "#(($ "#('$ "#,,$ !#(!$ !%#()$
;@& !!#!,$ *#*,$ !#%)$ +#,$ ,#))$ "#),$ !#(%$ "#(+$ "#('$ "#*%$ !#**$ ,,#+'$
;A& !!#,!$ ,#'($ ,#*,$ ,#*!$ !#&$ "#%($ "#'($ "#(+$ "#('$ "#*$ !#,$ ,,#"&$
;B& &#!%$ +#(*$ '#&+$ (#"*$ !#)!$ "#%+$ "#',$ "#(+$ "#('$ "#($ !#")$ +*#'&$
<C& !!#),$ ,#+%$ !#**$ '#()$ !#(!$ "#(&$ "#)&$ "#(+$ "#('$ "#*$ "#''$ ,'#+)$
<;& *#(!$ ,#*!$ !#%)$ (#+)$ !#%&$ "#(+$ "#)&$ "#($ "#(%$ "#+,$ "#))$ "#"%$
<<& )#,'$ !'#%,$ !#%%$ ,#*'$ !#!!$ "#($ "#)%$ "#($ "#(*$ "#,)$ "#%+$ !(#%)$
<)& ,+#*'$ %#)%$ !#&!$ (#,$ "#&+$ "#*!$ "#)%$ "#($ "#($ "#,,$ "#)+$ ,(#(($
<=& +"#'*$ +#,$ !#,*$ '#+)$ "#'*$ "#+%$ "#)%$ "#($ "#+&$ "#,,$ !#"($ !(#"($
<>& !&#'+$ ,#+&$ ,#,&$ '#%$ "#'*$ "#++$ "#)+$ "#($ "#+&$ "#+'$ "#&!$ *#&)$
<?& '#)%$ (#+*$ ,#&$ )#'$ !#%,$ "#+($ "#)+$ "#($ "#+)$ "#('$ "#))$ ,)#+,$
<@& ,,#(&$ (#%,$ (#&'$ +#!($ !#*+$ "#++$ "#)!$ "#($ "#+%$ "#%&$ "#%($ '#,*$
<A& !'#+%$ (#*)$ ,#*&$ !#'&$ !#!&$ "#,($ "#%%$ "#($ "#+*$ "#(!$ "#(*$ +#($
<B& !"#&&$ $ ,#"%$ !#%*$ !#"($ "#,,$ "#%*$ "#($ "#+,$ "#+!$ "#(%$ &#'+$
)C& !,#(*$ $ !#&%$ !#(&$ "#')$ "#,*$ "#%,$ "#($ "#+,$ "#,*$ ,#%'$ !+#**$
);& !(#%($ $ !#'+$ $ "#'*$ $ "#%,$ "#(,$ $ "#,!$ $ !,#%%$
Table 41 Discharges 2006





72
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& &#!'$ *#+$ !#&+$ ,$ ,#+($ ,#"%$ ,$ !#(!$ "#'!$ "#',$ "#(*$ !#%($
<& *#(%$ *#*'$ ,#"%$ !#)($ ,#&!$ !#)($ !#'*$ !#+&$ "#)&$ "#)%$ "#*!$ !#,($
)& ,#"'$ &#*'$ )#+,$ !#(&$ +#!!$ !#(&$ !#%+$ !#,'$ "#)*$ "#)!$ "#+*$ !#"&$
=& !#(,$ ,*#&&$ (#))$ !#*)$ *#!!$ !#*)$ !#(!$ !#!%$ "#)+$ "#%*$ "#*$ ,#($
>& !#*)$ !"#&'$ ,#,!$ !#,($ ,#()$ !#,($ !#+&$ !#"%$ "#)+$ "#('$ "#''$ ,#!+$
?& !#('$ !!#%&$ !#()$ !#!($ !#&!$ !#!($ ,#!+$ "#&+$ "#)!$ "#)'$ ,#%&$ ,#(&$
@& !#')$ !*#(,$ ,$ !#"&$ %#+!$ !#"&$ !#&'$ "#')$ "#)!$ "#)!$ %#%$ !#&%$
A& !#+$ )#!%$ "#)%$ !#!,$ ,#')$ !#%'$ ,#!($ "#',$ "#)!$ "#)+$ (#%%$ !#'*$
B& ,#&+$ %#++$ (#)%$ ,#")$ ,#()$ !#&%$ +#&*$ "#)%$ "#%%$ "#")$ ,#,!$ ,#!$
;C& ,#!($ !"#&+$ ,#)+$ !#(+$ +#+&$ !#%$ (#(($ "#'&$ "#%%$ "#&+$ !#%'$ +#!*$
;;& !#%*$ !*#"'$ %#!%$ !#,%$ ,#%&$ !#*+$ ,#!%$ "#',$ "#%*$ "#',$ !#,&$ ,#!!$
;<& ,#*,$ ,,#'&$ &#))$ +#&)$ ,#!'$ ,#"*$ !#)!$ "#)&$ "#%*$ "#)%$ *#'&$ !#%*$
;)& )#)!$ !%#!*$ !%#&%$ ,#!($ +#%&$ !#'($ !#(!$ "#)*$ "#%*$ "#%%$ (#)($ !#%,$
;=& ,*#),$ !%#!+$ !!#!+$ !#()$ %#+'$ !#(%$ !#+,$ "#)!$ "#%,$ "#%,$ '#*%$ ,#&*$
;>& !)#*+$ !'#&)$ !"#')$ !#,%$ ,#),$ !#*+$ !#($ "#)!$ "#%,$ "#%$ *#+&$ '#(($
;?& )#(($ !+#'($ +#&)$ *#%$ !#(&$ !#,($ ,$ "#%*$ "#%$ "#(%$ ,#!!$ (#&$
;@& (#%'$ !"#%,$ ,#"&$ ,#,,$ !#,%$ !#!,$ ,#!($ "#%,$ "#%$ "#*&$ !#%$ *#,,$
;A& '#,*$ !+#!$ !#%$ !#'($ !#&&$ ,#"+$ %#,+$ "#%$ "#('$ "#*!$ !#,%$ +#,'$
;B& !(#+&$ !!#%'$ !#'+$ !#*!$ !#'&$ !#&+$ +#!&$ "#('$ "#(%$ "#+%$ "#&%$ ,#,($
<C& +,#%$ )#)$ ,#"!$ ,#!+$ !#(,$ !#%)$ ,#"%$ "#(%$ "#(+$ "#+*$ !#"($ !#&'$
<;& !'#"($ *#&,$ !#%$ +#',$ !#,%$ ,#+)$ !#&'$ "#(+$ "#(+$ ,#*)$ ,#%$ ,#%&$
<<& '#),$ !#'%$ !#*+$ )#))$ !#'!$ ,#!,$ !#%*$ "#(($ !$ !#&!$ (#!'$ +#+&$
<)& (#*!$ ,#"($ !#,($ )#%($ )#&&$ !#&*$ !#(!$ "#&!$ !#)!$ !#%)$ +#+'$ ,#)*$
<=& %#,)$ +#(($ !#"&$ %#!&$ +#"*$ !#%)$ !#('$ ,#**$ !#,)$ !#(!$ ,#!,$ *#'$
<>& ,"#)'$ )#%)$ !#",$ (#"!$ ,#!*$ !#(!$ ,#+)$ ,#!)$ !#"%$ ,#"*$ !#%'$ ,#!'$
<?& !&#($ (#+!$ "#&+$ ,#!*$ !#'&$ !#+,$ ,#!)$ !#&'$ "#&$ ,#!!$ !#%,$ ,#)*$
<@& ,"#&%$ +#*&$ "#',$ !#)!$ !#%+$ !#!%$ ,#"+$ !#(%$ "#))$ (#'$ '#%$ )#%+$
<A& !'#+*$ ,#"'$ "#)&$ +#"!$ !#,%$ !#'($ !#'*$ !#,+$ "#%,$ ,#'$ !(#)!$ (#"'$
<B& ,,#($ $ "#('$ (#!,$ !#&*$ !#%)$ ,#"!$ !#"+$ "#(,$ ,#"($ !,#(($ +#'$
)C& !&#+&$ $ "#($ )#&,$ !#&+$ !#(!$ !#'&$ "#''$ "#+,$ !#%'$ '#,!$ (#,,$
);& !)#%($ $ "#*)$ $ !#&)$ $ !#%+$ "#)*$ $ ,#"&$ $ +#%$
Table 42 Discharges 2007





73
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& ,#"($ ,#"!$ ,#(($ ,#('$ ,#!)$ !#&+$ !#&!$ !#'%$ !#'%$ !#&+$ ,#%&$ ,#!'$
<& !#%)$ !#),$ ,#!%$ ,$ ,#(+$ !#&$ !#&,$ !#'($ !#')$ !#',$ +#*($ !#'&$
)& !#(*$ !#&%$ !#'&$ )#(+$ ,#"($ ,#"+$ !#''$ !#'*$ !#)$ !#('$ (#!+$ !#'!$
=& )#",$ )#!+$ !#%+$ +#)'$ *#'+$ !#&%$ !#'($ !#'*$ !#%$ !#*,$ ,#!&$ !#%)$
>& +#+*$ +#+&$ !#+&$ ,#!%$ ,#,!$ !#'*$ !#)!$ !#)+$ !#(($ !#,)$ ,#!($ !#%!$
?& ,#,$ ,#"!$ )#&*$ &#!%$ ,#"!$ !#%+$ !#%)$ !#(&$ !#(!$ !#!($ ,#+!$ !#(&$
@& !#&)$ !#()$ *#''$ )#++$ !#%($ !#(&$ !#%*$ !#%%$ !#*)$ ,#(*$ +#(%$ !#%%$
A& !#)$ !#+,$ +#(+$ ,#,$ !#($ !#(,$ !#(&$ !#%,$ !#**$ ,#!+$ '#%($ ,#"*$
B& !#($ ,#),$ ,#!)$ ,#)($ !#*+$ !#($ !#('$ !#%,$ !#*$ !#&,$ &#&($ !#&,$
;C& *#"&$ '#%*$ !#%,$ ,#!'$ *#**$ !#*%$ !#(($ !#%$ !#,*$ &#+$ !,#',$ !#),$
;;& ,#,+$ *#+%$ '#+&$ &#)&$ ,#,$ !#+&$ !#(!$ !#()$ ,#%,$ (#!($ %#"!$ !#('$
;<& !#'*$ ,#!!$ ,#++$ %#!,$ !#&'$ !#,)$ !#*'$ !#(($ +#&($ ,#,%$ ,#'*$ !#(,$
;)& !#%$ !#&$ !#%$ *#"'$ !#)*$ !#!&$ !#*%$ !#*)$ ,#")$ ,#"*$ +#,,$ '#*&$
;=& !#*'$ ,#%,$ +#%%$ ,#!&$ !#%,$ !#!'$ !#*,$ !#*,$ !#&*$ !#'+$ +#%)$ ,#++$
;>& ,#!+$ (#',$ ,#)*$ !#'+$ !#(($ !#!($ !#+%$ !#,*$ !#%*$ !#(%$ ,#,,$ !#&$
;?& ,#"!$ &#"!$ ,#!*$ !#*'$ !#($ !#!,$ !#,'$ !#,!$ !#*,$ !#+$ (#&)$ !#%)$
;@& !#),$ ,#+%$ !#),$ +#")$ !#+'$ !#"&$ !#,($ !#!'$ !#,)$ !#!%$ &#+,$ !#(*$
;A& !#(!$ !#&&$ ,#%&$ !(#%)$ !#,)$ !#"&$ !#,,$ !#!%$ !#!&$ ,#"*$ !!#))$ !#*,$
;B& !#,'$ !#&%$ !#'&$ ,#%&$ !#,!$ !#"&$ !#!'$ !#!*$ "#&$ (#!%$ +#()$ !#,%$
<C& !#,!$ !#)*$ !#(&$ '#**$ !#!)$ !#"%$ !#!'$ !#"&$ "#'%$ ,#,+$ '#*%$ !#,*$
<;& !#"&$ !#(+$ ,#%*$ !!#+$ !#!($ !#"!$ !#!,$ !#"%$ "#',$ !#&,$ (#!&$ !#!&$
<<& "#&,$ !#,'$ ,#!,$ ,)#&,$ !#!!$ "#&+$ !#"&$ !#"+$ "#)&$ !#%!$ *#!)$ !#!%$
<)& "#'*$ !#"'$ !*#%%$ &#%($ !#"%$ "#&,$ !#"($ "#&+$ "#)%$ ,#!'$ ,#!,$ !#"*$
<=& "#)%$ "#')$ ,#(($ *,#&$ !#",$ "#&$ !#",$ "#&,$ "#)+$ ,#"*$ )#!$ +#",$
<>& ,#"*$ !#!)$ (#&&$ !*#)%$ "#&,$ "#&$ !#",$ "#'&$ "#%&$ '#'($ '#'%$ ,#"&$
<?& ,#!&$ !#%&$ )#%!$ !"#"%$ "#''$ "#')$ "#&,$ "#')$ "#%!$ '#'$ +#,($ !#%+$
<@& ,#"*$ !#*+$ )#,&$ '#+!$ "#'($ "#')$ "#&$ "#'($ "#(&$ ,#*!$ ,#!&$ !#($
<A& !#%($ !#,!$ ,#+,$ !,#)($ "#'!$ "#'*$ "#')$ "#',$ "#('$ !#&*$ !"#'($ !#,&$
<B& !#*($ "$ !#()$ ,#*)$ "#)%$ "#',$ "#'*$ "#'!$ "#(%$ !#%%$ +#,($ !#,!$
)C& *#"&$ $ ,#!$ +#)+$ "#)+$ "#)&$ "#',$ "#)'$ "#(+$ +#!%$ %#('$ !#!)$
);& ,#,+$ $ ,#!*$ $ "#%%$ $ "#%%$ "#%%$ $ +#*+$ $ (#,$
Table 43 Discharges 2008





74
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& *#&*$ ,#'*$ ,#%($ ,#*&$ ,#+,$ ,#%!$ ,#,,$ ,$ !#(*$ ,#,($ ,#!($ +#"%$
<& !!#+$ !#'($ (#%,$ '#(+$ %#&,$ ,#+($ ,#"+$ ,#"'$ !#(+$ ,#(!$ ,#"%$ )#*($
)& *#(*$ !#%$ ,#)*$ %#!'$ ,#)+$ '#%$ !#'%$ !#'+$ !#+&$ ,#*)$ !#'+$ +#+'$
=& !*#%%$ !#*$ ,#"*$ ,#,)$ ,#'+$ +#++$ !#))$ !#)%$ !#+!$ ,#,%$ !#(!$ +#*,$
>& +#&*$ !#,($ !#),$ ,#!($ !+#*)$ ,#"($ !#%($ !#%*$ !#,'$ ,#!!$ !#+&$ ,#+($
?& +#'+$ !#!%$ !#(!$ +#+!$ (#"'$ !#'!$ !#(($ !#(&$ !#,!$ !#''$ !#,'$ !#''$
@& !"#+%$ '#+%$ +#%($ +#%'$ %#+&$ ,#!%$ !#*!$ !#(($ !#!($ !#%,$ !#,'$ %#%'$
A& +#)$ %#!,$ ,#'$ ,#*&$ ,#)&$ !#'($ !#+,$ !#*!$ "#&)$ !#+&$ ,#,+$ ,#+$
B& ,#+&$ ,#)%$ ,#,!$ !#''$ ,#"'$ !#('$ !#,'$ !#+%$ "#'%$ ,#()$ ,#")$ *#"!$
;C& '#&'$ ,#,!$ ,#"!$ !#%!$ !#%'$ ,#",$ !#,*$ !#+!$ "#'+$ +#!+$ !#''$ ,#'+$
;;& +#('$ !#&&$ &#+'$ !#**$ !#(*$ (#'*$ !#!&$ !#,)$ "#)'$ %#),$ !#)+$ ,#,&$
;<& ,#)&$ &#++$ (#,'$ +#&,$ !#*$ ,#)!$ !#!($ !#,!$ "#)+$ ,#,&$ )#*($ ,#(*$
;)& !!#%&$ +#()$ ,#)$ +#&*$ !#,&$ ,#!)$ !#!$ !#!%$ "#%*$ !#')$ +#+%$ !(#',$
;=& *#+'$ *#,'$ ,#+'$ )#,*$ !#,'$ !#&,$ "#&'$ !#!,$ "#(&$ !#(,$ ,#!*$ +#"%$
;>& ,#'($ ,#'%$ !#&&$ ,#%($ ,#,'$ !#),$ "#&+$ !#"%$ "#()$ !#,)$ &#,'$ !#,)$
;?& *#%)$ ,#,&$ !#),$ ,#"+$ )#*!$ !#($ "#&!$ "#&'$ "#(($ !#"%$ ,#'&$ !#!%$
;@& '#)*$ ,#+*$ !#(,$ !#%)$ +#+&$ !#,'$ "#'%$ "#&+$ "#))$ "#&%$ !,#%&$ *#"!$
;A& *#+,$ +#,&$ ,#,&$ !#%,$ ,#++$ !#,$ "#'+$ "#&!$ *#*($ ,#,*$ %#(,$ ,#*&$
;B& +#*,$ !(#,)$ !#'$ *#'($ ,#&$ +#'*$ "#)&$ "#')$ !#',$ ,#!*$ ,#%!$ !#''$
<C& ,#)'$ (#*,$ !#%+$ %#+($ ,#&!$ ,#)+$ "#)%$ "#'+$ ,#!,$ !#'&$ ,#!&$ +#&$
<;& +#'*$ +#"*$ ,#+&$ +#!!$ (#(%$ ,#'+$ "#)$ "#)&$ ,#"($ !#)+$ %#(!$ !#)+$
<<& +#"&$ ,#**$ ,#!,$ ,$ ,#(%$ !!#"'$ "#%$ "#)%$ !#))$ !#('$ +#!,$ !#+($
<)& ,#(%$ ,#!'$ !#)($ !#%%$ ,#!%$ (#*'$ "#(%$ "#),$ ,#%!$ !#&*$ ,#"($ )#*,$
<=& ,#!%$ +#+,$ !#(($ !#*!$ ,#"($ ,#('$ "#(*$ "#%$ ,#*%$ !#+&$ !#)&$ ,#)'$
<>& ,#")$ ,#',$ !#*,$ !#,'$ ,#!$ ,#!%$ "#($ "#(%$ ,#,)$ !#&'$ +#),$ !#%)$
<?& *#(!$ ,#,!$ +#&($ ,#!)$ !#'($ !#'%$ "#*)$ "#(*$ ,#,($ !#'$ ,#,,$ +#,$
<@& '#)$ ,$ +#($ ,$ !#%'$ !#%+$ "#**$ "#*&$ ,#")$ !#%)$ ,#*)$ !#(%$
<A& *#%!$ !#'+$ ,#(!$ ,#'&$ )#+%$ !#+'$ "#*!$ "#*%$ +#)&$ !#*($ !!#+,$ !#!($
<B& ,#'!$ $ ,#!$ ,#!,$ +#+$ !#,'$ "#+'$ "#*+$ *#&&$ !#,+$ ,#),$ !!#*&$
)C& )#)%$ $ ,#*($ !#'*$ +#+!$ ,#,,$ "#+!$ "#*$ ,#*$ !#"($ %#*!$ (#)*$
);& )#%$ $ ,#*+$ $ +#(%$ $ "#+'$ "#**$ $ "#&($ $ ,#)+$
Table 44 Discharges 2009





75
!"#$%&'()*+"%,& -./& 0"#& (.1& .21& (.3& -4/& -45& .46& 7"2& 89%& /8:& +"9&
;& +#,($ !)#!$ )#,($ %#",$ ,*#!$ )#",$ )#",$ (#'!$ (#&!$ %#!+$ )#,($ +#%)$
<& ,#&)$ !!#)$ !,#!$ !'#,$ !'#&$ !+#%$ !+#%$ !"#*$ !%#%$ ,'$ !!#'$ *$
)& ,#)($ ,*#+$ !+#&$ !"#'$ !,#,$ !'#)$ !'#)$ %#!+$ !(#'$ !&#'$ (#)$ (#'$
=& *#!&$ ,"#!$ !*#($ %#!+$ &#**$ )#,($ )#,($ (#'!$ !%#!$ !(#,$ )#&%$ +#)*$
>& +#+!$ &#%$ +,#)$ (#*&$ (#*&$ '#',$ '#',$ (#%$ ,)#+$ +&#%$ !"#*$ !*#&$
?& %#,&$ %#,*$ !(#+$ *#'&$ *#!&$ %#!+$ %#!+$ (#!&$ !+$ !+#%$ %#!+$ &#'($
@& +#'$ )#",$ !(#($ +"#)$ '#&+$ '#"'$ '#"'$ *#%$ !(#+$ !+#*$ !!$ !%#*$
A& *#!&$ %#!+$ %#",$ !!#,$ (#+*$ ,+#)$ ,+#)$ *#,+$ (#)$ +&#!$ !"#($ *#&%$
B& +#!&$ !*#,$ (#,&$ %#,*$ *#"%$ !%#+$ !%#+$ *#%$ )#&%$ !%#%$ ,!#'$ *#)($
;C& )#+,$ &#"'$ !,#!$ (#'!$ ,#+'$ ,+#)$ ,+#)$ %#!+$ !+#%$ )#,($ !'#($ %#*%$
;;& (#"*$ !)#%$ (#)$ %#%'$ ,$ !&#,$ !&#,$ (#&!$ ,*#)$ (#&!$ ,'#'$ !"#!$
;<& +#"'$ ,%#&$ !&#%$ %#!+$ !#&%$ '#&($ '#&($ (#!&$ !&#*$ +%#)$ ,+#($ !"#&$
;)& ,#)($ !,#($ !&#&$ (#*&$ ,#"($ !!#($ !!#($ !*$ !+#*$ !+#&$ (#&!$ )#($
;=& ,#**$ +"#)$ ,+#($ *#&&$ !#'+$ !*#*$ !+#&$ *#(!$ ,*#)$ !,#*$ ,"#($ !(#,$
;>& (#'$ !,#,$ !*#)$ &#+*$ +#*+$ '#()$ '#()$ +#&%$ ,'#,$ ,*#&$ ,,#,$ &#+*$
;?& +#,($ '#+,$ %#!+$ +!#%$ )#(&$ '#',$ '#',$ +#%!$ !(#'$ &#+*$ ,"#)$ )#)'$
;@& ,#'$ (#)$ (#+&$ !*#,$ !(#,$ &#)+$ &#)+$ %#",$ !!#'$ *+#+$ %#",$ &#**$
;A& ,#(*$ (#*&$ (#+&$ %#,*$ !+#($ !,#'$ !,#'$ (#%$ ,+#($ !(#($ &#%$ ,"#+$
;B& +#'$ +'#%$ !*#*$ (#%$ &#,+$ %#!+$ (#'!$ (#!&$ +"#!$ ,,#)$ !+$ &#&%$
<C& ,#&)$ !%#($ !"#+$ (#"&$ %#,&$ (#&!$ (#&!$ *#(!$ !+#)$ !)#($ !(#+$ )#%&$
<;& ,#%&$ (#&!$ !+#%$ *#%$ (#%*$ (#"&$ (#"&$ *#"($ %#!+$ !&$ ,&#,$ +#!&$
<<& '#**$ (#!&$ !,#!$ *#!*$ )#*!$ *#(!$ *#(!$ *#"($ (#*&$ !,#'$ ,+#($ *#)($
<)& +#",$ %#,*$ %#",$ +#%&$ *#)($ %#*($ %#*($ (#*&$ +*#+$ !!#'$ +(#)$ %#(*$
<=& !($ !'$ (#,&$ +#**$ +#!*$ !!#,$ !!#,$ *#&&$ !!#)$ ,!#*$ !%#+$ %#(*$
<>& %#+)$ !,#'$ ,!#'$ +#,)$ !#($ !+#&$ !+#&$ *#)$ (#'!$ !(#,$ +($ ,#&!$
<?& +#,($ (#&!$ +'#!$ (#&!$ +#",$ !)#+$ !)#+$ *#+,$ +(#)$ '#)$ !%#($ *#,%$
<@& ,#'$ (#!&$ !!$ (#+&$ ,#+*$ !,#*$ !,#*$ +#')$ !'#,$ !+#*$ !%#!$ )#)'$
<A& ,#**$ !*$ '#',$ *#&&$ +#%!$ *"#'$ *!$ +#(,$ !,#'$ !!#'$ )#!+$ +#,($
<B& !!#*$ $ !"#($ *#)&$ )#"%$ +%#)$ +%#)$ !(#,$ !%#'$ !(#%$ ,&#)$ '#!($
)C& +#!&$ $ &#)+$ *#*!$ !(#*$ *&#%$ *&#%$ '#',$ ,(#($ !*#)$ ,,#)$ *#*$
);& +#"'$ $ %#!+$ $ !(#%$ $ *%#&$ %#",$ $ +($ $ *#'&$
Table 45 Discharges 2010
Appendix Q Flow Type
This appendix treats the type of flow (by average discharge of 5.54 m
3
/s) and the estimation
of the Chzy coefficient, which is used for making assumptions about the river transport in
the past 10 years. For instance, subcritical flow secures a thrust curve with an exact end of
water level rising, whereas supercritical flow makes a thrust impossible. The Chzy
coefficient is determined by the wet profile height (Appendix O) and the properties complete
profile (Appendix N). Input values are the next parameters: the average discharge (Q
gem
), the
total surface of the profile (A
tot
), the average width and the river gradient (i).

Q
gem
= 5.54 m
3
/s
b =10 m
i = 0.004


The water depth (h) and specific energy (H) are
presented to determine several parameters for
the use in the sediment transport. The flow will be
given in subcritical or supercritical. The graph in
figure 36 is used with the critical values of the
water level (h
c
) These calculations provide values
for the formulas of Meyer-Peter & Muller and
Engelund & Hansen [Nortier & de Koning, 1996].

h
c
=
Q
2
gb
2
3 =
5.54
2
9.81!10
2
3
= 0.32 m

The Chzy coefficient is needed and can be
derived from using the d
90
, which is coming from
the sediment classification in Chapter 7. The C
value can be read from the graph (figure 37) with
the wall roughness (k). To estimate the Chzy
coefficient, the wet river profile height (h
w
).

k = d
90
= 4.00 mm

h
w
k
=
0.95
0.004
= 238

C = 25
h
w
k
!
"
#
$
%
&
1
6
= 25 238
( )
1
6
= 62 m
1
2
/s

With the first estimation of the Chzy
coefficient, new data can be derived
from the average discharge. It is about
the equilibrium water depth (h
e
), which
will be compared with the critical depth.
Therefore, the coefficient of Chzy
need to be determined in the under
Figure 36 Diagram in Water Depth and
Specific Energy by Nortier & de Koning [1996]
Figure 37 Chzy coefficient from h/k factor by Nortier & de
Koning [1996]



77
mentioned iterative procedure. The iteration from equilibrium depth, to the h/k factor, to the C
is shown in table 46. The first equilibrium depths are transcribed in the formulas.

h
e
=
Q
gem
2
b
2
C
2
i
3
=
5.54
2
10
2
! 62
2
! 0.004
=
3
0.27 m


h
k
=
0.27
0.004
= 68

C = 25
h
k
!
"
#
$
%
&
1
6
= 25 68
( )
1
6
= 51 m
1
2
/s


h
e
=
Q
gem
2
b
2
! C
2
! i
3
=
5.54
2
10
2
! 51
2
! 0.004
=
3
0.31 m


Accordingly, the Chzy coefficient is 52 after iteration (it.) 2 and the equilibrium depth is set
to be 0.31 m. As a result, the critical depth

of 0.32 m exceeds the equilibrium depth of 0.31 m.
This means that the river is in the phase of supercritical flow against the transition phase.
A confirmation is that a stone was thrown into the river to see the direction of the
disturbance. This impact was completely moving downstream, indicating supercritical flow.
In short, the two parameters point to supercritical flow and the transition phase. There
is uncertainty in all the used parameters (b, i, h
c,
k, h
e
) except the discharge. With this
uncertainty, the close values and the stone test can be said that the water is supercritical in
the narrowest profile.
This entire means that upstream, where the river is wider and the flow velocity are
lower, the flow is subcritical with the security of a thrust curve, when the check dam is built.
!"#$ %
&
$ %'($ )$
*$ $+$ $+$ ,-$
.$ *#-/$ ,0$ 1*$
-$ *#2.$ !"# $%#
&# '(&)# !!# $%#
*# '(&)# !!# $%#
$# '(&)# !!# $%#
+# '(&)# !!# $%#
!# '(&)# !!# $%#
Table 46 Iteration for Chzy coefficient



78
Appendix R Sediment Motion
This appendix speak about the sediment transport approached by Meyer-Peter & Mller and
Engelund & Hansen. Every grain diameter needs a different force of the flow to move it. The
d
50
is used to make assumptions about the total sediment transport of all the sizes treated.



Input values for the bed movement are summed up here.

Q
gem
= 5.54 m
3
/s
C = 52 m
1
2
/s
b =10 m
h = 0.31 m
i = 0.004


Chzy is used to determine the average flow velocity by friction losses due to the bed
roughness. This leads to the minimum speed for erosion (v
er
) given in the next formula. The
variable 'a' is an empirical bed roughness constant.

v
er
= a! C d
50
= 0.28! 52! 0.00053 = 0.34 m/s


The hydraulic radius (R) is required to determine the flow velocity for the treated section of
the river.

R =
hb
2h +b
=
0.31!10
2! 0.31+10
= 0.29 m

v = 0.66C Ri = 0.66! 52! 0.29! 0.004 =1.17 m/s

The minimum velocity is exceeded by the cross-section average velocity (v), which means
sediment transport at this section of the river.
This assumption is followed by Meyer-Peter & Mller. This formula calculates the bed
load transport (Q
mpm
) with the next equation with an uncertainty of 50%.

Q
mpm
=16b!
v
C
"
#
$
%
&
'
2
(0.08d
50
"
#
$
$
%
&
'
'
3
2
=16!10!
1.17
52
"
#
$
%
&
'
2
(0.08! 0.00053
"
#
$
$
%
&
'
'
3
2
=1.61!10
(3
m
3
/s

This number excludes the pores of 0.46 from Appendix I. The total quantity of bed load
transported is given in the next formula.

Q
mpm
= Q
mpm
! (1+!
p
) = 3.0!10
"2
! (1+0.46) = 2.35!10
"3
m
3
/s

This means 74.2 thousand m
3
/year and 742 thousand m
3
in 10 years for the bed load to
arrive in the reservoir.
Engelund & Hansen combined the bed load and suspended load, excluding wash load,
d
90
= 4 mm
d
50
= 0.53 mm



79
in one formula [Bezuyen, Stive, Vaes, Vrijling & Zitman, 2007]. This number will be used for
the design of the check dam and its expiration time. s
eh
is the total bed and suspended load
supply per meter of width. Multiplied by the width is the volume per unit of time.

s
eh
= 0.03!
g
C
2
"
#
$
%
&
'
3
2
!
v
5
g
2
! d
50
= 0.03!
9.81
52
2
"
#
$
%
&
'
3
2
!
1.17
5
9.81
2
! 0.00053
= 2.8!10
(4
m
3
/s/m

Q
eh
= s
eh
! b = 2.8!10
"2
!10 = 2.8!10
"3
m
3
/s

This number is the same with sedimentation of 88.9 thousand m
3
/year and 889 thousand m
3

in 10 years in the reservoir. Similarly, suspended load is more than twice the amount of the
bed load.
In the formula of Meyer-Peter & Mller there is already an uncertainty of 50%. The
scarce data provided, the low quantity of measurements, the diversity of the river
characteristics and the fluctuations of the discharges throughout the year can cause more
uncertainty in the obtained numbers. Furthermore, wash load is not taken into account, which
can be more than double the total amount of sedimentation.





80
Appendix S Expiration Time
The sedimentation starts at 160 m (l
tot
) upstream of the check dam. This layer of sand will be
approximately horizontal. The amount can be calculated by a triangle (section 9.2). The
lengths and widths in front of the check dam (l
ch
, b
ch
), the reservoir (l
la
, b
la
) and the remainder
(l
rm
, b
rm
) come from figure 38. Moreover, the maximum height of the soil against the dam
(h
max
) will be 1.5 m. The next formula will determine the maximum volume for the sediment
beginning at the check dam.

V
sed
=
1
2
lb
gem
h
max
=
1
2
A
tot
h
max


There will be a small reservoir after the built
construction of the dam, which is stimulating
the sedimentation, because the large river
profile will result in extra reduction in flow
velocities as result of decreasing slopes. The
reservoir area (A
la
) can be approached by the
rectangle of 30 m in width and 80 m in length.
The residual sections of the river, which
concern the channel (A
ch
), are 20 m in width.
The total surface (A
tot
) can be determined for
the sedimentation layer. This is

l
ch
= 20 m
l
la
= 80 m
l
rm
= l
tot
!(l
ch
+l
la
) =160 !(80 +20) = 60 m


A
tot
= l
ch
b
ch
+l
la
b
la
+l
rm
b
rm
= 20! 20 +80! 30 +60! 20 = 4000 m
2


V
sed
=
1
2
A
tot
h
max
=
1
2
! 4000!1.5 = 3000 m
3


The volume of sand catched by the designed
check dam thus will be 3000 m
3
.
Figure 38 Cilalawi River Widths



81
Appendix T Apron Length
The length and presence of the apron depends on the highest water level differences
between the downstream and upstream. For this calculation the maximum discharge of 77.7
m
3
/s (Q
max
) is applied, the Chzy coefficient of 50 m
1/2
/s (C), the width of 15 m (b), maximum
height above the dam 2.1 m (a) and the bed slope of 0.004 (i).
The first formulas calculate the equilibrium height downstream (h
e,max
) and lastly the
specific energy on top of the water depth.

h
e,max
=
Q
max
2
b
2
C
2
i
3
=
77.7
2
10
2
! 51
2
! 0.004
3
=1.80 m


R =
A
O
=
hb
2h +b
=
15!1.80
2!15+1.80
= 0.85 m

v = C Ri = 51 0.85! 0.004 = 2.97 m

The water level difference can be calculated for the maximum discharge. The specific energy
will be used for the comparison with the hydraulic jump diagram in figure 39.


H
max,upstream
= h
cd
+a = 2.10 +2.10 = 4.20 m
H
max,downstream
= h
e,max
+
v
2
2g
=1.80 +
2.97
2
2! 9.81
= 2.25 m
!H = H
max,upstream
" H
max,downstream
= 4.20 "2.25 =1.95 m

The specific discharge (q
max
) stands for the curve with the number 5. This number is
combined with the specific energy of 2.10 m on the y-axe and gives the 1.4 m for the
minimum water level difference needed for a the hydraulic jump.



The conclusion is that a stilling basin is not essential, because the height difference of 1.95
m (< 1.4 m) creates the hydraulic jump. This phenomenon in nature is whimsical and can
manifest further downstream, where it will damage the bed and banks. Therefore, the apron
dimensions are determined using Vlotman [1989].
The formulas used will provide the flow velocity at the point where the flow is entering
the stilling basin (v
u
) and eventually the length of the stilling basin (L
sd
).

v
u
= 2g!H = 2" 9.81"1.95 = 6.2 m/s

h
u
=
q
max
v
u
=
5.2
6.42
= 0.81 m

L
sb
= 6.9(h
e,max
!h
u
) = 6.9(1.80 !0.81) = 6.83"7 m
q
max
=
Q
max
b
=
77.7
15
= 5.2
m
3
/s
m
! q is 5-line



82

Figure 39 Water Depth and Specific Energy for Hydraulic Jump by Bendegom [1971]



83
Appendix U Grain Size Velocities
In this appendix the law of Darcy is applied with the flow velocity under the stilling basin (and
dam) for the d
10
grain size, which is 0.19 mm from Chapter 7 [Nortier & de Koning, 1996].
The smallest diameter is used to create the most favorable circumstances in which sediment
is easily transported.
The line used in figure 40 to hold the grain is situated between 'Transport as bed load'
and 'Deposition'. The minimal flow velocity to obtain the grain movement is compared with
the length apron. In the figure on the chosen line the number 0.014 m/s can be found for the
minimum flow velocity. The k-value is the permeability coefficient of the soil. This is combined
with the slope.

k = d
2
10
!10
4
= 0.00019
2
!10
4
= 3.61!10
"4
#h = #H =1.95 m
v
d
10
=1.40!10
"2
m/s
v = ki = k
#h
l
= 3.61!10
"4
!
1.95
7
=1.00!10
"4
m/s (< 1.40!10
"2
)


The 7 m stilling basin reduces the minimum velocity of d
10
. This means that the total check
dam length (dam with stilling basin) prevent sediment transport under the dam and assure
stability.


Figure 40 Hjulstrm Curve for Grain Velocities by Coolgeography [2011]



84
Appendix V Stability
The position of the check dam is always fixed and stable. The balance between the water
hydrostatic pressure with flow strength and the dam shear forces on the underground will
draw conclusions concerning this subject (figure 41).
When the dam is completely under and surrounded by water (!
w
= 10 kN/m
3
) the
volume weight will be different from what it was with only the concrete (!
c
= 25 kN/m
3
). The
result is a lifted dam with the difference between concrete and water that is 15 kN/m
3
(!
c
).
The content of the dam is the length with the surface of the side view. This side view is
divided in four parts: the half circle (A
c
), the rectangle and the two triangles (A
f
). The weight
of the dam is the volume with the volume weight (!
c
).
There are no data known about the soil under the riverbed. In the worst case there
will be clay, which has the shear coefficient with tan 20 [Bischoff van Heemskerk, 1964].
The weight of the dam and the soil shear coefficient must resist the water pressure.
The maximum shear force against the water is will be 543 kN.


Figure 41 Shear and Water Forces


m=!
r
! V =15! 99.48 =1492.15 kN
T = m! tg" =1492.15! tan(20) = 543 kN


The water will give an opposite force from the hydrostatic pressure and flow strength (X)
combined in the next formula with the water level above the spillway (h
1
) and equilibrium
water level downstream (h
2
), both with the same reference level (Appendix P).



The water is unable to push the dam away, because the force working on the construction
(65.6 kN) is smaller than the concrete and soil shear force (543 kN).
A = A
c
+ A
f
A =
1
2
!r
2
+((h! 2r) +tan("
1
)! h +tan("
2
)! h
=
1
2
! !1.79
2
+((0.31! 2!1.79) +tan(30)! 0.31+tan(45)! 0.31) = 6.63 m
2
V = Al = 6.63!15 = 99.48 m
3
m=#
r
! I =15! 99.48 =1492.15 kN
T = m! tg$ =1492.15! tan(20) = 543 kN
q =
Q
max
l
=
77.7
15
= 5.18 m
3
/ s / m
X =1000!
1
2
! 9.81(h
1
2
"h
2
2
) "q
2
(
1
h
1
"
1
h
2
)
#
$
%
&
'
(
=1000!
1
2
! 9.81(4.20
2
"1.74
2
) "5.18
2
(
1
4.20
"
1
1.74
)
#
$
%
&
'
(
=1000! (71.67"6.03) = 65644 N = 65.6 kN



85
Appendix W Technical Drawings