LAB  3  –  A  Flood  Routing  Problem

FABE  3150  –  SYSTEM  DYNAMICS
Olivia  Cremeans
February  9,  2017

Figure  1:  Simulink  Block  Diagram  created  using  Lab  3  form  "A  Flood  Routing  Problem"  to  analyze  equations  a nd  derive  graphs.

Ode  1  (Euler)  method  was  used  as  the  integration  method  with  a  time  interval  of  0-­‐
10  seconds  and  a  fixed  step-­‐size  of  0.0001.

Case   Constant   Variable   Variation

Between  24”  and  36”  pipe
diameter

7b-­‐2   Gain2  (AdivK)   Constant  (d)   Between  5,  6.5,  8  ft  depth

Table  1:  Gains  varied  for  Figure  4

2

Graph  1:  Storage  capacity  of  reservoir  over  spillway  crest

Graph  2:  Inflow  effect  over  time  through  a  reservoir

3

Graph  1:  Effect  on  system  due  to  inflow

Graph  2:  Effect  on  system  performance  of  pipe  size  and  drop-­‐box  inlet  depth

4

Graph  3:  Effect  of  amount  of  storage  due  to  pipe  diameter  and  discharge  height

Discussion  of  results:

Graph  1  indicates  that  as  the  elevation  above  the  spillway  crest  increases,
storage  capacity  also  increases.
Graph  2  shows  that  the  inflow  rate  for  the  system  decreased  rapidly  as  time
increased.
Graph  3  demonstrates  a  rapid  increases  and  decrease  of  the  inflow  over
about  3  hours.  Reservoir  stage  is  increased  due  to  the  increase  of  inflow.  Discharge
rate  increases,  levels  out,  and  then  decreases  with  time.  Both,  reservoir  stage  and
discharge  rate,  decrease  slowly,  demonstrating  the  relationship  between  them  in
the  design  of  the  reservoir.
Graph  4  shows  that  increasing  the  pipe  size  increases  the  flow  rate,  in  turn
limiting  the  time  necessary  to  discharge.  The  downfall  of  this  approach  is  that  there
is  a  loss  of  control  of  the  water  with  it  flowing  at  such  a  high  rate.  Decreasing  the
pipe  size  slows  down  the  flow  rate,  allowing  for  more  control  of  the  water.  The  pipe
size  should  be  dictated  based  on  where  it  will  be  implemented.  An  area  with  more
flooding  may  find  it  necessary  to  have  a  larger  pipe  size  to  ensure  that  the  storage
capacity  does  not  reach  its  limit,  and  vice  versa.

5

Graph  5  reinforced  the  discussion  about  Graph  4,  showing  that  the  result  of  a
smaller  pipe  size  is  a  longer  time  available  for  water  storage  and  a  slower  rate  of
discharge.

Change  of  time  base:

Rates  were  given  in  ft3/s  and  the  data  was  requested  to  be  in  hours.  Storage
capacity  was  in  hundreds  of  thousands  of  ft3,  so  the  following  conversion  was  used:

?? ! 3600  ??? 10! ?? ! 10! ?? !
× × = 0.036
??? ℎ? 10! ?? ! ℎ?

Assumptions  for  equation  1:

The  assumptions  used  to  describe  the  problem  by  equation  1  in  the  Lab  #3
form  “A  Flood  Routing  Problem”  are  as  follows:

1. Water  velocity  in  the  reservoir  is  neglected
2. The  surface  of  the  reservoir  is  assumed  to  be  horizontal
3. The  spillway  outlet  is  6.5  feet  below  the  spillway  crest  and  not
submerged.
4. The  pond  is  assumed  just  full  at  the  start  of  the  storm.

Assumptions  for  equation  4  and  the  advantages  of  this  design:

The  assumptions  that  justify  equation  4  in  the  Lab  #3  form  “A  Flood  Routing
Problem”  and  the  advantages  of  the  design  used  can  be  found  by  looking  at  Figure  3
of  “Computers  in  AE”.  Overall,  the  assumption  is  that  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir
would  not  be  exceeded  by  rainfall.  If  the  capacity  was  exceeded  it  would  result  in
backed  up  water,  and  essentially,  flooding  where  it  was  meant  to  be  prevented.

6

MATLAB  Script

clear all
clc
disp('Olivia Cremeans')
disp('FABE 3150')
disp('A Flood Routing Problem')
disp('February 9th, 2017')

b=9; %length of effective edges of the box inlet, ft
c=3; %approach coefficient to box inlet, ft^(1/2)/sec
L=150; %pipe length, ft
A=4.91; %CSA of outlet pipe, ft^2
d=6.5; %distance from spillway crest to center of pipe outlet
AdivK=22.36; %30 in pipe area with loss coefficients
g=32.2; %acc due to gravity
s=[0 0.3 0.5 0.8 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.3 2.6 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10];
e=[0 0.8 1.1 1.7 1.9 2.25 2.5 2.8 2.9 3 3.35 3.5 3.8 4.05 4.3 4.45 4.8
5.05 5.15 5.45 5.6 5.7 5.95 6.05 6.15 6.25];
t=[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
4.3 4.65 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 10];
i=[0 22 45 76 130 152 180 189 168 151 116 89 67 52 44 37 29 23 17 15 9
6 3 1 0 0 0];

sim('lab3model')

figure(1)
plot(t,i)
xlabel('TIME (hrs)')
ylabel('INFLOW RATE (ft^3/sec)')
title('Inflow Hydrograph')

figure(2)
plot(s,e)
axis([0 10 0 10])
xlabel('STORAGE (in hundreds of thousand ft^3')
ylabel('ELEVATION ABOVE SPILLWAY CREST (ft)')
title('Storage Capacity of Reservoir')

figure(3)
hold on
plot(t,i)
[AX,H1,H2]=plotyy(time,out,time,storage);
axes(AX(1));ylabel('INFLOW RATE AND OUTFLOW (ft^3/sec)');
axis([0 10 0 200]);set(gca,'YTick',([0:20:200]))
legend('Inflow','Outflow')
axes(AX(2));ylabel('RESERVOIR STAGE (ft)');axis([0 10 0
10]);set(gca,'YTick',([0:1:10])),legend('Reservoir Stage')
xlabel('TIME (hrs)')
title('Effect of Flowrate on Inflow, Resevoir Stage and Discharge')
hold off

7

figure(4)
for d=[5.0 6.5 8]
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,in,time,out);
hold on
end
d=6.5;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,in,time,out);
end
hold off
xlabel('Time (hrs)')
axis([0 10 0 200])
ylabel('Flowrate (ft^3/sec)')
title('Effect of Pipe Size and Depth on System Performance')

figure(5)
d=6.5;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,storage)
hold on
end
for d=[5.0 6.5 8]
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,storage)
end
hold off
xlabel('Time (hrs)')
axis([0 10 0 10])
ylabel('Reservoir Stage (ft)')
title('Effect of Pipe Diameter and Discharge Height on the Reservoir
Stage')

8

9