ANNEXURE Va

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER AND POWER RESEARCH STATION P.O.
: KHADAKWASLA RESEARCH STATION, PUNE 411 024
RIVER ENGINEERING LABORATORY
Technical Report No. 4665 October 2009
1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek due to development of proposed International Airport at Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra
REPORT DOCUMENTATION SHEET Report No.4665 Title 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek due to development of proposed international airport at Navi Mumbai. Month and Year: October 2009 Type of Report Final
Name and address of organization conducting the studies RIVER ENGINEERING LABORATORY Government of India Central Water & Power Research Station PO : Khadakwasla Research Station, Pune 411 024 Name and Address of Authority sponsoring the studies Shri Satyendu Sinha Additional Chief Engineer City and Industrial Development Corporation, Maharashtra CIDCO Bhavan, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai Key words Unsteady flow, Sprig tide, Neap tide, Flood hydrograph, Peak flood, Storm Water Discharge, High Flood Levels, Holding Ponds, Outfall, Safe-grade elevation, Model calibration and validation, High water level, Low water level. Synopsis The City and Industrial Corporation Limited (CIDCO) has proposed development of an International Airport in Navi Mumbai in Panvel creek. About 1600 ha land will be reclaimed in tidal reaches of Panvel creek in which five rivers namely Gadhi, Kalundri, Kasadi, Taloja and Ulwe join. The Ulwe river will be diverted downstream of Devla island and Gadhi river will be trained by providing a cut-off. The 1-D mathematical model studies were carried out earlier in 2001 to predict changes in the flow conditions due to development of proposed international airport. In view that lot of reclamations / developments had taken place as a part of development of Navi Mumbai by CIDCO along these five rivers the CIDCO authorities desired 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies with the latest survey data to study the impact of development of international airport on flow conditions in Panvel creek and also to decide safe-grade elevation for the airport area. In view of the 26th July 2005 extreme rainfall event in Mumbai and Navi Mumbai, the review of hydrology was also desired by CIDCO authorities. These studies were carried out on 1-D and 2-D mathematical models. The results of these studies indicate marginal rise in the water levels in the Panvel creek reach along the proposed airport boundary. Along the Ulwe river however, the rise in the water levels will be slightly over 1.5 m due to diversion along the longer route with flatter slope. The safe-grade elevation of 8.0 m to 8.5 m was proposed for the airport complex and the guidelines for storm water drainage design and bank protection works were given.
PREFACE
Studies for 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek due to development of proposed International Airport at Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra was referred by Additional Chief Engineer, City and Industrial Development Corporation, Maharashtra, CIDCO Bhavan, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai. This report has been prepared mathematical model results. on the basis of analysis of data and
These studies were carried out in Surface Water Hydraulics (SWH) Division of River Engineering Laboratory headed by Shri P. K. Khare, Joint Director.
Shri D. N. Deshmukh, Chief Research Officer carried out the studies alongwith Shri U. C. Roman, Senior Research Officer, Shri S. Naveed Ali Assistant Research Officers, Mrs. K. V. Katte Research Assistant. Shri B. M. Rokade, Shri N. D. Shinde, Shri Y. N. Karanjikar Laboratory Assistants provided necessary help for data processing, analysis and report preparation.
Dr. I. D. Gupta was the Director, CWPRS, during the period of this study and preparation of report.
Discussions and interaction with officers of CIDCO were very useful for this study.
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 4665
October 2009
1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek due to development of proposed International Airport at Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter No. Summary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Introduction Scope of studies River valleys in Panvel creek Data Analysis of tidal data Analysis of hydrological data Estimation of Flood hydrographs One Dimensional (1-D) Mathematical model studies Two Dimensional (2-D) mathematical model studies Safe grade elevation Design of Ulwe and Gadhi diversion channels and bank protection works Discussions and conclusions of 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies Recommendations Annexure I Photos Annexure II Charima Tables 1 to 23 Figures 1 to 79 34 36 25 1 3 4 6 8 8 13 16 Topic Page No.
9 10 11
12 13
41 45
List of Figures, Tables & Annexures for Tech Rep No.4665 of Oct 09 (Intl Airport)
Figures : 1. Index map of Navi Mumbai showing CIDCO development around Panvel creek and location of proposed international airport. 2. Topography of region around Panvel creek and natural drainage. 3. 3a. Satellite imagery showing index map of Panvel creek. 3b. Satellite imagery showing details of Panvel creek and proposed international airport location. 4. Index plan of proposed site for International Airport. 5. Gadhi river catchment 6. Kalundri river catchment 7. Kasadi river catchment. 8. Taloja river catchment. 9. Ulwe river catchment. 10. Reach length and number of cross sections in different channels of Panvel creek network. 11. Location of water level measurements in Panvel creek. 12. Location of velocity measurements in Panvel creek. 13. Observed water levels at MDL jetty during 16th May 15th June 2007. 14. Comparison of tidal water levels as per tide table and those observed during field studies at Ulwe rail bridge (16th 28th May 2007) 15. Observed water levels at Ulwe bunder jetty during 16th May 15th June 2007. 16. Observed water levels at Kharghar during 16th May 15th June 2007. 17. Observed water levels & velocities at MDL jetty (Nhava) during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007). 18. Observed water levels & velocities at Ulwe rail bridge during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007). 19. Water levels and velocities at Ulwe bunder jetty during spring tide (Fig.22 of field studies report) (16th 19th May 2007). 20. Observed water levels & velocities at Kharghar during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007). 21. Observed water levels & velocities at Waghiwali during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007). 22. Isopluvial map of IMD showing 50 year and 100 year return period 24 hour rainfall for Konkan region. 23. Isopluvial pattern on first day of 3 day storm during 01st to 03rd July 1941 and PMP rainfall of Konkan region. 24. Isocrone diagram for Gadhi river catchment 25. Isocrone diagram for Kalundri river catchment 26. Isocrone diagram for Kasadi river catchment 27. Isocrone diagram for Taloja river catchment 28. Isocrone diagram for Ulwe river catchment
29. Gadhi river flood hydrographs for rainfall of different return periods and storm duration. 30. Kalundri river flood hydrographs for rainfall of different return periods and storm duration. 31. Kasadi river flood hydrographs for rainfall of different return periods and storm duration. 32. Taloja river flood hydrographs for rainfall of different return periods and storm duration. 33. Ulwe river flood hydrographs for rainfall of different return periods and storm duration. 34. Panvel creek reach simulated in 1-D and 2-D mathematical model. 35. Schematic of Panvel creek channel network for 1-D model under existing condition. 36. Schematic of Panvel creek channel network for 1-D model with reclamation for airport. 37. Spring tide and neap tide used as downstream boundary condition. 38. Validation of model for July 1991 flood. 39. Comparison of mathematical model predicted and observed water levels at Ulwe rail bridge during spring tide. 40. Comparison of mathematical model predicted and observed water levels at Ulwe bunder jetty during spring tide. 41. Comparison of mathematical model predicted and observed water levels at Kharghar during spring tide. 42. Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Taloja confluence to Kalundri confluence. 43. Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Kalundri confluence to Expressway bridge. 44. Taloja river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to 16 km upstream. 45. Kasadi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach upstream of Taloja confluence. 46. Kalundri river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach upstream of Gadhi confluence. 47. Ulwe river water surface profile f at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall. 48. Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP and 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Taloja confluence to Kalundri confluence. 49. Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Kalundri confluence to Expressway bridge. 50. Taloja river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to 16 km upstream. 51. Kasadi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 period rainfall for reach upstream of Taloja confluence. 52. Kalundri river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach upstream of Gadhi confluence. 53. Ulwe river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall. 54. Bathymetry of 2D Mathematical Model Reach of Panvel Creek (existing condition) 55. Details of Bathymetry of Panavel Creek around area proposed for Airport Site. 56. Maxima Water Level Pattern for Existing condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Without Airport).
57. Maxima Velocity Pattern for Existing condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Without Airport). 58. Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Ulwe River Diversion of 80 m). 59. Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Ulwe Diversion of 80m). 60. Maxima Water Level Pattern under Existing Condition for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL (Without Airport). 61. Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide. 62. Details of Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide. 63. Details of Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide. 64. Maxima Water Level Pattern under Existing Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL (Without Airport). 65. Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide. 66. Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide. 67. Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide. 68. Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL plus Storm Water Drainage from Airport Area and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide. 68a. Detail maxima Velocity Pattern under existing conditions for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL. 69. Detail Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide 70. Detail Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide. 71. Comparison of water level with and without airport at u/s of Ulwe-Belapur road bridge for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model). 72. Comparison of water level with and without airport between Gadhi Taloja confluence and Ulwe bridge for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model). 73. Comparison of water level with and without airport at Gadhi Taloja confluence for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model). 74. Recorded yearly maximum one day rainfall at Santacruz and Colaba. 75. Recorded yearly maximum hourly rainfall at Santacruz and Colaba. 76. Schematic for Bank / Embankment Protection Works. 77. Details of Maximum Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Neap tide LWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide.
78. Maxima Water Level Pattern for Belapur storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL 79. Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for Belapur Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide. Tables : 1. 2. 2a. 3. 4. Recorded yearly maximum one day rainfall at Santacruz. Recorded yearly maximum one day rainfall at Colaba Highest recorded 24 hour rainfall in and around Panvel creek. Hourly / 3 hourly rainfall (mm) at Santacruz and Powai during 25th 27th July 2005. Hourly rainfall records for various rain-gauge stations around Panvel creek on 26th July 2005. 5. Yearly maximum 1 hour rainfall (mm/year) at Santacruz and Colaba 6. Point to areal rainfall ratios (percentages). 7. Ratios of 24 hour point rainfall to short duration rainfall. 8. Hourly distribution co-efficient of areal rainfall 9. Hourly rainfall distribution for storms of different return period and duration. 10. Prediction of rainfall intensities by different norms. 11. Hydrographs of Gadhi river for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. 12. Hydrographs of Kasadi river for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. 13. Hydrographs of Taloja river for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. 14. Hydrographs of Kalundri river for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. 15. Hydrographs of Ulwe river for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. 16. Details of various bridges in Panvel creek. 17. Widths of river channels in Panvel creek without and with reclamations for airport. 18. Predicted water levels in Gadhi river from 1-D model with and without airport (for PMP 6 hour, PMP 12 hour, 100 year 6 hour, 100 year 12 hour, 26th July 2005). 19. Predicted water levels in Taloja river and Taloja creek from 1-D model with and without airport (for PMP 6 hour, PMP 12 hour, 100 year 6 hour, 100 year 12 hour, 26th July 2005). 20. Predicted water levels in Kasadi river from 1-D model with and without airport (for PMP 6 hour, PMP 12 hour, 100 year 6 hour, 100 year 12 hour, 26th July 2005). 21. Predicted water levels in Kalundri from 1-D model with and without airport (for PMP 6 hour, PMP 12 hour, 100 year 6 hour, 100 year 12 hour, 26th July 2005). 22. Predicted water levels in Ulwe river from 1-D model with and without airport (for PMP 6 hour, PMP 12 hour, 100 year 6 hour, 100 year 12 hour, 26th July 2005). 23. Comparision of Maxima Water Levels Predicted from 2-D Mathematical Model at Different Locations for Different Conditions.
TECHNICAL REPORT No.4665
OCTOBER 2009
SUMMARY
The City and Industrial Development Corporation Limited (CIDCO) has proposed development of an international airport in Navi Mumbai in the Panvel creek. It is proposed to reclaim land in Panvel creek and divert Ulwe river and train Gadhi river as a part of this project. As desired by CIDCO, the CWPRS had earlier carried out 1-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in river network of Panvel creek due to development of international airport at Navi Mumbai. The technical report No.3815 of August 2001 on these studies was submitted to CIDCO. These studies were carried out on the basis of topographical / cross section data of year 1991 93. Considering that lot of development have taken place in last 15 20 years in and around Panvel creek and the extreme rainfall event of July 2005, CIDCO authorities desired further model studies with latest topographical data and review of hydrology. The CIDCO has awarded the work of 1-D and 2-D Mathematical model studies for development of international airport at Navi Mumbai to Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS). The required topographic, hydraulic and hydrological data were supplied by CIDCO. The scope of studies was as follows : a. Review of hydrology taking into consideration extreme rainfall event of 26th July 2005 in north Mumbai as well as in Panvel creek. b. Estimation of revised 100 year return period rainfall and corresponding flood discharges for five rivers in Panvel creek. c. 1-D mathematical model studies for prediction of flow conditions in Panvel creek with and without development of the airport considering floods corresponding to 100 year return period rainfall and PMP and spring / neap tide as boundary conditions. d. Estimation of safe-grade elevation for international airport area and other reclaimed area around the airport. e. 2-D mathematical model studies to predict detail flow conditions in Panvel creek reach on upstream, downstream and around proposed international airport. Based on these
Summary
Pg 1 of 3
studies, safe-grade elevation / reclamation levels for airport development and the bank protection works along the reclamation boundary were designed.
In May 2007 one month continuous tidal water level data were collected at five locations under joint programme of MMB and CWPRS. The velocity data was collected during spring and neap tide period. The work carried out by CWPRS in respect of hydrological data analysis, estimation of one day maximum rainfall of different return periods and corresponding flood hydrograph, the 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies is presented in this report.
The available daily rainfall data, yearly maximum one day rainfall data and yearly maximum intensities for Santacruz, Colaba and number of rain-gauge stations in and around Panvel creek (Panvel, Karjat, Matheran, Thane, Bhira, Navi Mumbai, Vashi, Nerul, Kharghar, NOCIL and Morbe) were statistically analysed using Gumbel and Log Pearson Type III distribution. On the basis of this analysis the 50 year and 100 year return period one day rainfall of 456 mm and 531 mm respectively were estimated. These rainfall and PMP rainfall of 700 mm as per IITM atlas were adopted for estimation of corresponding flood hydrographs. The peak flood discharges for 6 hour duration PMP storm for the five rivers in Panvel creek namely Gadhi, Kalundri, Taloja, Kasadi and Ulwe were 2082 cum/s, 1973 cum/s, 1234 cum/s, 1001 cum/s and 916 cum/s respectively. These flood discharges were used as upstream boundary conditions for the 1-D and 2-D mathematical models for prediction of water levels along different river channels in Panvel creek under existing conditions as well as with airport. Alongwith these, flood hydrographs estimated for extreme rainfall event of 26th July 2005 at Belapur (998 mm) for these five rivers were used for checking adequacy of safe-grade elevation decided on the basis of PMP rainfall.
1-D mathematical model of entire Panvel creek reach from its mouth near MDL jetty to about 15 to 20 km upstream along these five rivers was developed using software CHARIMA capable of handling unsteady flows in network of channels. The spring tide with high water and low water level of 3.25 m and (-)2.0 m respectively and neap tide with high water and low water level of 1.3 m and -0.20 m respectively were used as downstream boundary conditions. The model was calibrated and then validated for the flood events of July 1991 and July 2005. After that, the prediction runs were taken with flood hydrographs corresponding to 100 year return period and PMP for different storm durations under existing conditions and with airport (i.e. with reclamation). Similarly, for study of detail flow condition, 2-D model was developed for the reach downstream of Gadhi-Kalundri confluence and Kasadi-Taloja confluence upto the same downstream boundary using MIKE-21 HD model of DHI, Denmark. Using same boundary Summary Pg 2 of 3
conditions, the flow conditions were predicted with and without airport. These 1-D and 2-D studies have shown that the flood levels in these river channels except Ulwe and in the Panvel creek channel along north boundary of airport area were more or less unaffected. In the Panvel creek reach between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to Belapur-Ulwe bridge, a marginal rise in the flood levels of about 0.15 to 0.20 m was predicted for a very short duration at the time of high water. For remaining period, the water levels were more or less same or even slightly lower as a result of channelization of flow, reduced tidal prism and diversion of Ulwe river. Along Ulwe river, due to diversion of river the rise in water level at location of diversion (Panvel Ulwe road bridge on SH54) will be about 1.6 m for 6 hour duration PMP rainfall and 120 m wide Ulwe diversion channel.
From 2-D studies, the detail velocity distribution at different locations was studied which was useful for design of the bank protection works along the reclaimed area for the airport as well as Gadhi and Ulwe diversion channels.
Based on analysis of results of these studies the safe-grade elevation of RL 8.0 m to 8.5 m was proposed for the entire airport complex including airstrips, ATC towers, Hangers and all buildings. The designs of Ulwe and Gadhi diversion channels were suggested alongwith appropriate bank protection works. Guidelines were also given for design of necessary flood / bank protection works along area reclaimed for proposed airport and design of storm water drainage system for the reclaimed area of airport.
Summary
Pg 3 of 3
TECHNICAL REPORT No.4665
OCTOBER 2009
1.0
INTRODUCTION
City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (CIDCO) is executing an ambitious Urban development project around Navi Mumbai on an area of about 344 sq.kms. along banks of Thane creek and various river channels discharging into Panvel creek in Raigarh district of Maharashtra. These developments include reclamation and development of land on tidal flats for construction of roads / railways and residential and commercial nodes/townships. The Navi Mumbai area near Belapur and Panvel comprise such townships developed around Panvel creek. As a part of these developments some of these nodes namely Kharghar, Kalamboli, New Panvel, CBD and Kamothe have been developed along Taloja, Kasadi and Gadhi rivers in Panvel Creek (Fig.1). Most of this region is under influence of tides from Thana creek and floods of Gadhi, Kasadi, Taloja, Kalundri and Ulwe rivers. Fig.2 shows detailed topography of the region including streams, creeks, hills and high and low water lines during tidal flows. The large part of the region proposed for developments along creek is inundated during tide and high floods. Therefore, knowledge of likely changes in the flow conditions due to development works including reclamation activity is necessary for the design of reclamation works, storm drainage systems, roads, bridges and other works related to these developments. Alongwith the development of above residential and commercial nodes in and around Panvel creek, the CIDCO authorities had proposed development of an international airport near Ulwe on the left bank of Panvel creek reach between NH4B road bridge and Ulwe Belapur road bridge as shown in Fig.3a, 3b and 4. Therefore, CIDCO authorities had referred to CWPRS one dimensional mathematical model studies in the year 2000 to predict the changes in the flow conditions in Panvel creek under combined influence of flood and tide after the development of proposed international airport and various nodes. The report on these studies was submitted vide CWPRS Technical Report No.3815 of August 2001. For development of international airport, it is proposed to reclaim land in Panvel creek and divert Ulwe river and Gadhi river as a part of this project (Fig.4). The 1-D mathematical model studies
CWPRS Technical Report No.4665 Pg 1 of 47
1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek due to development of proposed international airport at Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra
reported vide CWPRS Technical Report No.3815 of August 2001 were carried out on the basis of topographical / cross section data of year 1991 93 and 2001. Considering that lot of development have taken place in last 15 20 years in and around Panvel creek and the extreme rainfall event of July 2005, CIDCO authorities desired further 1-D and 2-D model studies with latest topographical data and review of hydrology. The CIDCO has awarded the work of 1-D and 2-D Mathematical model studies for prediction of changes in flow conditions due to development of international airport at Navi Mumbai to Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune in August 2007. The required topographic, hydraulic and hydrology data was supplied in September October 2007. From the Fig.2 showing the topography of Panvel creek, it could be seen that the Panvel creek serves as drainage channel for the catchment area of about 450 km2. The five major natural drainage channels are Gadhi, Kasadi, Taloja, Kalundri and Ulwe (Fig.2, 3a and 3b). The 100 year return period 24 hour rainfall for this region is 450 mm to 480 mm as per IMD iso-pluvial maps. The rainfall resulting from Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) is about 700 mm in 24 hours as per PMP atlas of Indian Insititu of Tropical Meteorology (IITM), Pune. The rainfall observed during extreme rainfall event on 26th July 2005 was about 760 mm at Panvel, Kharghar, Nerul and about 998 mm at CBD Belapur. The highest rainfall intensity of 105 mm/hour was recorded during this storm at CBD Belapur. Prior to this, the highest one day rainfall recorded during period 1950 2005 was 575.6 mm at Colaba in 1974 and 399 mm at Santacruz in the year 1991. Prior to 26th July 2005, the Panvel city and surrounding area had experienced heavy flood in July 1991 resulting from rainfall of around 400 mm in the upstream hilly catchment in Matheran hills and around Panvel. Rainfall of 450 mm was recorded at NOCIL near Panvel during this storm. The Panvel city as well as surrounding urban and rural areas are prone to inundation due to flooding in the five rivers mentioned above even earlier of CIDCO developments in this reach. The tidal flow travels in Panvel creek and through the five rivers namely Gadhi, Kasadi, Taloja, Kalundri and Ulwe in the upstream reach. The maximum tidal range in Thane creek near outfall / mouth of Panvel creek is about 5.8 m. The highest high water level at spring tide is at RL 3.25 m (w.r.t. GTS) and lowest low water level at RL (-)2.5 m (w.r.t. GTS). The flow in the Panvel creek therefore becomes complex due to combination of floods from upstream from these five rivers and tide from Thane creek entering into Panvel creek. For the proposed international airport, reclamation of about 1650 ha land will be made along left bank of Panvel creek by diverting Ulwe river and training of Gadhi river (Fig.3b and 4). Most of this land is in inter tidal zone. In view of this situation, CIDCO authorities referred to CWPRS One dimensional (1-D) and Two dimensional (2-D) mathematical model studies to
predict changes in flow conditions in Panvel creek especially along reclaimed reach and on upstream reach. The 1-D model was developed for the longer reach extending from MDL Jetty near JNPT to about 25 km upstream i.e. about 5 10 km upstream of tidal reach along the five rivers mentioned above. The 1-D model gives cross section averaged values of water levels and velocities along the reach and is good for longer river reaches in which flow is nearly one dimensional with practically no variation across the width. Results of 1-D model were utilized for such river reaches on upstream of NH4 bridges on the rivers mentioned above. On downstream of NH-4 bridges, the flow is more dominated by tides, flow widths are also more and flow may no longer be one dimensional. Also all reclamations for airport are in this region therefore use of depth averaged 2-D model was considered necessary in this reach for study of detail flow conditions around the airport development. The 2-D mathematical model was developed for predicting detail flow conditions in this tide dominated wider reach reach downstream of Kasadi Taloja confluence and Gadhi Kalundri confluence upto MDL jetty in Thane creek (Fig.3a). The studies were carried out with and without airport development to assess impact on flow conditions in and around Panvel creek. Tide and flood hydrographs were used as downstream and upstream boundary conditions respectively. This report includes hydrological data analysis, estimation of one day maximum rainfall for different return periods and corresponding flood hydrographs and analysis of results of 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies on basis of predicted flow conditions (water levels and velocities). The safe-grade elevation for the proposed airport, the reclamation levels along different river channels and design of necessary bank protection works have also been proposed.
Note : All levels mentioned in the report are with reference to GTS unless specifically mentioned.
2.0
SCOPE OF STUDIES
After interaction with CIDCO authorities, the scope of studies was decided as give below : a. Review of hydrology of Panvel creek catchment taking into consideration extreme rainfall event of 26th July 2005 in north Mumbai as well as in Panvel creek. b. Estimation of revised 100 year return period rainfall and corresponding flood discharges for five rivers in Panvel creek. c. 1-D mathematical model studies for prediction of flow conditions in Panvel creek with and without development of the international airport considering probable maximum
flood (PMF) resulting from PMP and 100 year return period flood and spring / neap tide as boundary conditions. d. Estimation of safe-grade elevation for international airport area and other reclaimed area around the airport. e. 2-D mathematical model studies to predict detail flow conditions in Panvel creek reach on upstream, downstream and around proposed international airport. Based on results of these studies, safe grade elevation/ reclamation levels for airport developments and the bank protection works along the reclamation boundary will be designed.
3.0
RIVER VALLEYS IN PANVEL CREEK The drainage area of Panvel creek includes four main valleys (Fig.2) as described
3.1 below :
3.1.1
Gadhi River Valley
Gadhi is the main river of Panvel creek originating on western side of Parsik hill ranges at an altitude of 400 m. It joins the river Morbe, a major tributary at about 12 km from origin. At about 8 km downstream from this location the river flows south of Panvel city and another tributary Kalundri joins from south-east about 0.5 km downstream of NH4 (National Highway 4) road bridge on the river (Fig.2, 3a and 3b). After this, the river takes right angle turn and flows from west of Panvel town till it joins Kasadi-Taloja creek near Vaghiwali island. The independent catchment of Gadhi river upto Kalundri junction shown in Fig.5 is about 123 sq.km. Between Kalundri confluence and Vaghiwali island, an additional catchment of about 30 sq.km exists. The Panvel town is situated on the right bank of Gadhi in the reach between Expressway bridge and NH4B bridge (Fig.3a). Tidal effect reaches some distance upstream of NH4 bridge on Gadhi, Kalundri, Kasadi and Taloja rivers.
3.1.2
Kalundri River Valley This is one of the major tributaries of Gadhi. The total independent catchment area
upto Gadhi junction is about 95 sq.km. Most of the catchment is underdeveloped at present. Kalundri joins Gadhi about 0.5 km downstream of NH4 bridge on Gadhi (Fig.2 and 3b). Fig.6 shows independent catchment of Kalundri river.
CWPRS Technical Report No.4665
Pg 4 of 47
3.1.3
Kasadi-Taloja River Valley Kasadi is the main river in this valley originating at an altitude of 600 m. It flows for a
distance of 18 km till it joins Taloja river, the main tributary. The independent catchment area of Kasadi and Taloja basin upto confluence is 60 sq.km and 80 sq.km respectively. Fig.7 and 8 show independent catchments of Kasadi and Taloja rivers. About 4 km further downstream, another tributary Taloja Minor joins. The reach between Kasadi-Taloja confluence to minor Taloja confluence is called as Taloja creek. Immediately downstream of minor Taloja confluence, the Gadhi river from adjacent valley joins Taloja creek from left and then both merge in the Panvel creek (Fig.2). The tidal effect reaches some distance upstream of Kasadi Taloja confluence.
3.1.4
Ulwe River Valley
Ulwe river has a very small catchment of about 35-sq. km to the south of Vaghiwali island (Fig.2 and 9). Ulwe river joins Panvel creek channel on south of Vaghiwali island.
3.2
CIDCO Developments in Panvel Creek
The reclamation works by CIDCO are in progress at Kharghar, Kamothe and Kalamboli along Taloja and Kasadi rivers (Fig.4). Along Gadhi river near Khanda and upstream of railway bridge, the new Panvel township has been developed on the right bank (Fig.4). Reclamation work along Panvel creek near Belapur / Ulwe and around Vaghiwali island are also proposed. A large portion of the above region gets submerged during high tide (Fig.2). The creek channel north of Vaghiwali island is relatively deeper than the south channel and carries major discharge. The Waghiwali island is a shallow, flat, area with ground levels varying between 1.0 m (GTS) to 4.0 m. The Panvel creek portion near Ulwe Belapur road bridge is initially narrow (about 350 to 400 m wide) and bed levels at about -8 to -10 m GTS and then gradually expands to about 3 km (where Panvel creek merges into Thana creek) and the bed levels rise upto -3 m to -5 m GTS. Beyond this, the bed levels drop to levels -10 to -20 m in deep channel of Thane creek passing from JNPT and Elephanta island. Alongwith various township developments, CIDCO had carried out infrastructural developments such as road, bridges, railways etc. As a part these developments an International Airport has been proposed keeping in view present and future needs of the region. As shown in Fig.3b and
Fig.4 the area proposed for Airport lies along Panvel creek left bank between Belapur Ulwe road bridge on Panvel creek and NH4B bridge on river Gadhi (Fig.3b). This region is bound by Gadhi river on East and North East boundary and by Panvel creek main channel (on north of Vaghiwali island) on North and North West side. The river Ulwe flows through this region (proposed airport area) before joining Panvel creek channel on south of Vaghiwali island (Fig.2 and 3a). To reclaim the area shown for airport (Fig.3b and Fig.4) following major civil works will be essential : 1) Training of Gadhi river by providing a cutoff as shown in Fig.3b and Fig.4. 2) Closure of Panvel creek minor channel south of Vaghiwali island 3) Diversion of Ulwe river along south boundary of airport so as to connect it to Panvel creek near village Moha (please see Fig.2 and 3b). It is essential to study the effect of these development works along different river channels on the flow conditions in Panvel creek especially during floods coupled with spring and neap tides. Photo 1 to 16 vide Annexure - I show views of the some river reaches in Panvel creek along with some bridges.
4.0
DATA
The CIDCO authorities had supplied following data required for the studies :
4.1
Topographical Data a) Cross Sectional Data : The survey cross sections were supplied for the reach from MDL Jetty on downstream to about 5 to 10 km upstream of tidal reach along five rivers in the Panvel creek. These survey cross sections were at the interval of 100 to 200 m. The levels along the cross sections were at an interval of 5 to 10 m in deep channel. The cross sections were extended on both sides upto high flood level (HFL) / high tide level or high bank level where reclamation works had been carried out. Figure 10 shows the number of cross sections and the length of river reach surveyed in the different channels of Panvel creek network. b) Maps showing layout of the proposed international airport and Gadhi and Ulwe river diversions.
Pg 6 of 47
4.2
Hydrological Data a. Yearly maximum 1 day rainfall for rain-gauge stations in and around Panvel creek. These included rain-gauge stations at Panvel, Karjat, Matheran, Thane, Bhira, Colaba, Santacruz, Navi Mumbai, Vashi, Nerul, Kharghar, Nocil and Morbe Dam (Table I and Table II of this report show long term data for Colaba and Santacruz. For short duration data available for other stations please refer Table II to IV of CWPRS Technical Report No.3815 of August 2001. b. Hourly rainfall records of rain-gauge stations at Santacruz, Powai, Panvel, Kharghar, Nerul, Vashi and CBD Belapur during 26th July 2005 (Table III and Table IV). c. Yearly maximum rainfall intensity (mm/hr) records of Colaba and Santacruz rain-gauge stations for the period 1969 2004 (Table V).
In addition to above, CWPRS collected the iso-pluvial maps for the Konkan region for 25, 50 and 100 year return period rainfall and rainfall for PMP from IMD publications.
4.3
Hydraulic Data a. Recorded flood levels at different locations in Panvel creek on 26th July 2005 and July 1991. b. Gauge-discharge data for only one season on Gadhi and Kasadi river for low discharges. c. Suspended sediment data for the bulk samples collected during spring tide at three locations in Panvel creek. d. Tidal water level and velocity data at an interval of 15 minutes at five locations (MDL Jetty, Railway bridge, Ulwe Belapur road bridge, Kharghar and Waghiwali village) for the period of one month (16th May 15th June 2007). CWPRS and MMB had jointly collected these data with co-operation of CIDCO.
Out of above data, the one season gauge-discharge data was for very low discharges and hence could not be utilized for model calibration. The suspended sediment data for 3 locations in Panvel creek indicated low concentration in the range 300 to 500 ppm. The grain size distribution for suspended sediment was however not available.
Pg 7 of 47
5.0
ANALYSIS OF TIDAL DATA
The analysis of the tidal water level and velocity data has been reported vide CWPRS Technical Report No.4627 of March 2009. Summary of analysis of tidal data collected during 16th May 15th June 2007 is presented below for ready reference. Fig.11 and 12 show the locations of water level and velocity measurements in Panvel creek. Fig.13 16 show continuous water levels observed at MDL Jetty, Ulwe rail bridge, Ulwe Bunder Jetty and Kharghar respectively. Fig.17 to 21 show water levels and velocities at above four locations and near Waghiwali respectively during spring tide. These tidal data were utilized for calibration / validation of 1-D and 2-D mathematical models for the tidal flow condition in Panvel creek during non-monsoon period. Analysis of 30 days tidal data at these five locations indicated range of various tidal flow parameters during spring and neap tide as given below.
Spring Tide Flooding LWL velocity -3.14 0.67 -2.85 -2.57 -2.84 -2.63 0.82 0.82 0.70 0.48 Neap tide Flooding LWL velocity -0.85 0.40 -0.60 -0.66 --0.13 0.35 0.37 0.24
S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Location MDL Jetty Ulwe rail bridge Ulwe Bandar jetty Kharghar Waghiwali
Tidal range 5.74 5.49 5.19 5.44 5.12
HWL 2.60 2.67 2.62 2.64 2.49
Ebbing Velocity 0.75 0.90 0.86 0.90 0.75
Tidal range 2.25 2.00 2.16 2.50 2.17
HWL 1.40 1.40 1.50 1.20 0.67
Ebbing Velocity 0.40 0.26 0.28 0.37 0.24
6.0
ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGICAL DATA
CWPRS has analysed following hydrological data supplied by CIDCO as well as collected from other sources : a. Yearly maximum 1 day rainfall for rain-gauge stations in and around Panvel creek. These included rain-gauge stations at Panvel, Karjat, Matheran, Thane, Bhira, Colaba, Santacruz, Navi Mumbai, Vashi, Nerul, Kharghar, Nocil and Morbe Dam (Table I and Table II present data for Santacruz and Colaba respectively). b. Hourly rainfall records of rain-gauge stations at Santacruz, Powai, Panvel, Kharghar, Nerul, Vashi and CBD Belapur during 26th July 2005 (Table III and Table IV). c. Yearly maximum rainfall intensity (mm/hr) records of Colaba and Santacruz rain-gauge stations for the period 1969 2004 (Table V).
Pg 8 of 47
6.1
Analysis of one day maximum rainfall
The long duration records of 1 day maximum rainfall at Colaba, Santacruz alongwith various other rain-gauge stations were analyzed using Gumbel (EV-1) and Log Pierson Type III distribution to estimate 1-day rainfall for different return periods as given in the table below. For data set of some of rain-gauges LP-III distribution was not applicable. One day maximum rainfall estimates Rain-gauge station & Period of Data Santacruz (1950 2004) Return Period (Yrs) 20 50 100 200 20 50 100 200 20 50 100 200 25 50 100 200 25 50 100 200 25 50 100 200 25 50 100 200 25 50 100 200 Rainfall (mm) using EV-I Distribution LP-III Distribution 333 370 380 456 415 531 451 615 364 422 420 550 462 667 503 806 342 368 399 446 442 510 484 578 470 LP-III Not applicable 515 560 640 329 372 358 420 387 470 416 525 445 LP-III Not applicable 498 551 604 372 LP-III Not applicable 412 451 490 503 LP-III Not applicable 566 627 691
Santacruz (1950 2005)
Colaba (1901 2004)
Matheran (1951 1991)
Panvel (1974 2000)
NOCIL (1965 2000)
Morbe (1974 1991)
Khopoli (1974 1991)
Long duration data was available only for Colaba, Santacruz and Matheran rain-gauge stations which could be utilized for prediction of 100 year return period rainfall. For other gauging
stations, the period of data was relatively less (10 to 25 years). Based on these statistical estimations using EV-I distribution (which is also used by IMD), CWPRS had adopted 50 year and 100 year return year rainfall of 400 mm and 450 mm for earlier studies reported in August 2001. These rainfall estimates are in good agreement with IMD iso-pluvial maps (Fig.22). These rainfall estimates were reviewed on the basis of above analysis and now 50 and 100 year return period one day rainfall have been adopted as 456 mm and 531 mm respectively on the basis of Santacruz data (1950 2004) and LP-III distribution. This appears to be reasonable considering that for this region the 50 and 100 year return period 1 day rainfall indicated by the isopluvial map of IMD are of the order of 400 450 mm and 450 480 mm respectively. Also, the 100 year return period values for NOCIL, Morbe and Panvel are 551 mm, 451 mm and 387 mm respectively. But the period of data for these three gauging stations is less than 25 years. The Santacruz data is available for over 50 years. The Colaba data is available for 100 years and the 50 and 100 year return period rainfall estimated at Colaba is 446 mm & 510 mm with LP-III distribution and 399 mm & 442 mm with Gumbel EV-I distribution respectively. Thus, the value of 531 mm adopted by CWPRS is somewhat higher but still close to the value estimated using over 100 year records of Colaba rain-gauge station. It may be mentioned here that the highest ever recorded 1 day rainfall at Colaba was 575.6 mm in 1974 (Table II). Apart from this, the rainfall of 548.1 mm (year 1930), 544.3 mm (year 1984) and 477.6 mm (year 1991) was experienced at Colaba rain-gauge station. Whereas at Santacruz, upto 2004 the highest recorded 1 day reainfall was 399 mm (year 1991). The Colaba rain-gauge station is located very close to coast and on relatively flat terrain whereas Santacruz rain-gauge station is near the foot-hill of the hilly region away from the coast. The rain-gauge stations in the catchment of Panvel creek are also away from the main coast and close to the foot-hills of western ghats. The rainfall pattern is expected to be similar to that of Santacruz as was experienced on 26th July 2005. On 26th July 2005, rain-gauge stations in Panvel creek received extreme rainfall varying from 998 mm at CBD Belapur to 760 mm at Panvel, 764 mm at Kharghar, 732 mm at Nerul (as could be seen from Table IV) and over 600 mm at Thane. This trend was very similar to Santacruz rain-gauge station. Thus the storm during extreme event of 26th July 2005 extended over large area covering Ulhas river and Panvel creek catchment with similar rainfall pattern. During this period, the Colaba rain-gauge station however recorded very marginal rainfall. Therefore, the Santacruz data was adopted for deciding 1 day rainfall. From the table above, it could also be seen that the inclusion of Santacruz data of year 2005 changes the 50 and 100 year return period 1 day rainfall to 550 mm and 667 mm. It may be noted that the 667 mm value is close to the PMP value of 700 mm as per IITM (Fig.23) which is also considered in these studies for estimating extreme flood levels. Therefore, for 50 and 100 year return period, the
rainfall values of 456 mm and 531 mm adopted by CWPRS on the basis of Santacruz data and LP-III distribution appear to be reasonable. The IMD record of highest recorded 24 hour rainfall in and around Panvel creek shown in Table IIA also justifies these adopted rainfall values. CWPRS has considered PMP rainfall of 700 mm for Panvel creek catchment as per the PMP atlas of IITM (Fig.23). Also, it may be noted that the highest 1 day rainfall of about 700 mm was recorded at Matheran in July 1941 and subsequently during extreme hydrological event on 26th July 2005 the rainfall of 618 mm (Vashi), 732 mm (Nerul), 764 mm (Kharghar) and 760 mm (Panvel) were recorded in and around Panvel creek. Therefore, the adopted value of 700 mm for PMP rainfall is reasonable. In addition, CWPRS has also considered the hourly distribution of total rainfall of 998 mm at CBD Belapur on 26th July 2005 for computing the flood hydrograph for this extreme event. This flood hydrograph was used for carrying out model runs to check adequacy of safe-grade elevation (decided from PMP) for the extreme events similar to that on 26th July 2005. Such model run with extreme rainfall was carried out keeping in view another earlier extreme rainfall event on 01st July 1941 when rainfall of 880 mm (Fig.23) was recorded at Dharampur (at about 150 km north of Mumbai) in Gujarat during 01st day of 3 days storm (during 01st 03rd July 1941) with total rainfall of 1380 mm during three days.
6.2
Analysis for rainfall intensities
CWPRS also carried out the analysis for computing hourly rainfall (intensity) of different return periods using Santacruz and Colaba data (Table V) of yearly one hour maximum rainfall for the period 1969 2004. This analysis was carried out using Gumbel EV-I and LP-III distributions. The results of this analysis are as given below.
Hourly rainfall estimations (mm) for different return periods Rain-gauge station & Period Santacruz (1969 2004) Return Period (Yrs) 20 50 100 200 20 50 100 200 Rainfall intensity (mm/hr) using EV-I Distiribution LP-II 94 100 108 119 119 134 129 150 92 101 106 125 116 145 126 167
Colaba (1969 2004)
Pg 11 of 47
As per CWPRS analysis, the hourly maximum rainfall of 105 mm (Kharghar), 72.5 mm (Nerul), 105 mm (CBD Belapur), 100 mm (Vashi) had occurred during 26th July 2005 rainfall. On the same day at Santacruz the maximum rainfall of 380 mm in 3 hours (1430 hrs 1730 hrs) was recorded. The maximum intensity of about 190 mm/hr has been reported during this period. As per hourly rainfall data of Powai rain-gauge station, maximum hourly rainfall of 136 mm was recorded on 26th July 2005 during same period. Thus, the observed hourly maximum rainfall was close to the 100 year return period intensity of 134 mm / hr (as per Santacruz data with LP-III distribution) and 145 mm / hr (as per Colaba data with LP-III distribution). The highest hourly rainfall observed at Colaba and Santacruz during 1969 2005 was 113 mm and 153 mm respectively (Table V). The maximum rainfall intensity of 123 mm / hour was recorded at NOCIL during July 1991 storm resulting in heavy inundation in Panvel region. For developing the flood hydrographs for the five rivers in Panvel creek, CWPRS had adopted hourly distribution of rainfall of 100 year return period and PMP rainfall for the storm durations of 6 hours, 12 hours and 24 hours. The hourly distribution of adopted 1 day rainfall for different storm periods was found on the basis of procedures recommended by IMD (Flood estimation report for West Coast region, Konkan and Malabar coast, Sub zones 5a and 5b, Report No.K8M/19/1992 of CWC and IMD). The one day rainfall for a given rain-gauge station for given return period is first converted from point rainfall to aerial rainfall on the basis of catchment area as per Table 6. Then from the total one day rainfall computed above, the expected rainfall for storm duration of 6 hours, 12 hours and 24 hours could be computed from Table 7. This total rainfall for given storm duration could then be distributed into hourly rainfall using Table 8. Table 9 shows hourly distribution of rainfall for storms of different return period and duration. Study of these hourly distribution in Table IX indicate that maximum intensities of 125 mm/hour, 145 mm/hour and 192 mm/hour are reflecting in hourly distribution for 6 hours duration storms of 50 year return period, 100 year return period and PMP respectively. These intensities are in the range of 100 year or more return period intensities indicated in the table above. These are also in close agreement with CIDCO norms for rainfall intensities for different storm duration and return period (Please refer Table 10). The peak rainfall intensities will however be lower than the above in the hourly distribution for 12 and 24 hours duration storms (Table 9). For 26th July 2005 event hourly distribution as per the data supplied for Belapur and Santacruz was used for generating flood hydrographs. An attempt was also made to distribute 998 mm rainfall of extreme event of 26th July 2005 as per IMD norms and to compare it with observed hourly rainfall pattern during the storm. The
study of hourly rainfall at CBD Belapur for 26th July 2005 storm indicates that the storm was of about 18 hours duration. Therefore, the total one day point rainfall of 998 mm was converted to aerial rainfall for 18 hour storm using tables mentioned above and then hourly distribution was worked out. The comparison of observed and computed hourly distribution is shown in the table below. For the purpose of this comparison, the storm period during 8 hours to 24 hours (i.e. total 18 hours) of 26th July 2005 was considered.
Time Hours Observed Rainfall (mm) on 26th July 2005 Computed rainfall (mm) as per IMD
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
32
80
105
90
95
85
95
85
80
80
60
16
10
24
16
--
--
110
110
76
85
68
68
59
42
42
42
25
25
25
25
17
17
17
The above table shows that the computed hourly values for the total one day rainfall of 26th July 2005 are in fairly good agreement with the observed values atleast during high intensity period which is more important for the peak flood estimation purpose. Therefore, adoption of IMD pattern of hourly rainfall distribution was considered reasonable and was used for distribution of rainfall of different return periods and duration as shown in Table 9. Thus in general the hydrological analysis of CWPRS for estimation of 1 day rainfall and hourly distribution of rainfall for storms of different duration and return period reflect intensities higher than the maximum intensities observed at Santacruz and Colaba and are in order for estimation of flood hydrographs. The intensities reflecting in hourly distribution adopted for flood hydrograph generation are somewhat higher than CIDCO and CWC norms as well as GardeKothyari criteria (Table 10).
7.0
ESTIMATION OF FLOOD HYDROGRAPHS
The catchments of five rivers in Panvel creeks are relatively small having areas 35 125 sq.km. No hourly rainfall runoff data corresponding to heavy storms was available as there were no permanent gauging stations on these relatively small streams. Therefore, isochrone method was adopted for estimation of flood hydrographs. In this method the catchment area is divided into different hourly / half hourly time zones on the basis of time of concentration at the outlet of
the catchment. Using hourly rainfall data for selected storm, volume of rain water falling on each time zone in each time interval is computed. Using convolution integral procedure, the discharge at the outlet of the catchment is estimated as function of time (i.e. flood hydrograph) adopting an appropriate runoff co-efficient. Thus, time of concentration at a given location, hourly rainfall distribution during storm period and catchment area map / toposheets are the important inputs for computing flood hydrographs using isochrone methods.
7.1
Time of Concentration (tc)
Using the hourly rainfall intensities computed for the storm of given return period and the time area diagram developed for the catchment area, the hourly discharge values of hydrographs could be derived at the outlet of basin. For development of time-area diagram for a given catchment, the estimation of time of concentration is necessary. This time of concentration (tc) could be computed using Kirpich, Bhatnagar and California formula. These formulae contain two catchment characteristics namely length of catchment (L) and difference in ground elevation (H) form upstream to outlet of catchment. The general nature of formulae is Tc = [x L3/H]y Where x and y are constants which vary in each formula. Using toposheets the catchments of Gadhi, Kasadi, Ulwe, Kalundri and Taloja rivers were studied to estimate parameters (L) and (H) in above formula. Following table gives comparison of time of concentration estimated by above three different formulae for the five river basins in Panvel creek : Table 7.1 Time of Concentration Time of concentration (Hrs) Bhatnagar Kirpich California X=2.45, X=0.8, X=1.19, y=0.343 y=0.385 y=0.385 08.50 10.40 10.46 03.91 04.35 04.38 03.03 03.27 03.29 03.50 04.33 03.87 02.47 02.90 02.92
River Basin Gadhi Kasadi Taloja Kalundri Ulwe
L (km) 27.2 12.8 10.0 11.5 09.0
H (m) 40 40 40 40 40
Adopted Tc (Hrs) 10 04 03 04 03
Flood discharge and water level measurements on Gadhi river for September 1992 flood
indicate time of concentration of about 10 hours at NH4 bridge which is equal to estimated value as per earlier studies reported vide CWPRS Technical Report No.3815 of August 2001. Thus, the estimated values of time of concentration for other catchment were also expected to be realistic. The time of concentration mentioned in last column of above table was finally adopted to develop time area diagrams for five river catchments.
7.2
Time Area Diagrams for Rivers in Panvel Creek
The time area diagrams for Gadhi, Kalundri, Kasadi, Taloja and Ulwe rivers were developed using time of concentration computed in Table 7.1 above. Fig.24 to 28 show isochrone diagrams for catchments of the above five rivers. Depending on time of concentration the each catchment was divided into number of time zones (each of one hour). Area of each time zone was computed.
7.3
Flood Hydrographs
The flood hydrographs for the catchments of five rivers Gadhi, Kasadi, Kalundri, Taloja and Ulwe were estimated using isochrone method as explained above. Using the time-area relationships and hourly rainfall distribution for storms of different duration (as explained in Chapter 6.0) and return period, the flood hydrographs were estimated. The runoff co-efficient of 0.8 was used for this purpose. Considering that major part of the catchment on upstream of express way is underdeveloped, this run-off co-efficient though appear somewhat higher it is appropriate in view of possibility of urbanization / developments in the upstream catchment in near future. For local storm water drainage systems for the area reclaimed for airport, run-off co-efficient of 0.9 is proposed to be used. Figures 29 to 33 show the estimated flood hydrographs for the five rivers in Panvel creek for PMP and storms of different durations and return periods. The flood hydrographs for extreme event of 26th July 2005 have also been estimated (Fig.29 to 33) for model simulation. Tables 11 to 15 show statements of estimated flood hydrographs for all five rivers for rainfall of different return periods and storm durations. It could be seen from these tables that the peak flood discharges for the five rivers under
Pg 15 of 47
consideration for rainfall corresponding to PMP (700 mm), 100 year return period (531 mm) and 50 year return period (456 mm) will be as below : Estimated peak flood discharges (m3/s) for 100 year Return Period 50 year Return Period 6 hours storm 1580 1497 759 936 695 12 hours storm 1445 1272 703 762 510 6 hours storm 1356 1585 651 803 597 12 hours storm 1241 1091 603 654 438
PMP River 6 hours storm 2082 1973 1001 1234 916 12 hours storm 1905 1676 927 1004 673
Gadhi Kalundri Kasadi Taloja Ulwe 8.0
26th July 2005 rainfall 2515 1978 1270 1060 722
ONE DIMENSIONAL (1-D) MATHEMATICAL MODEL STUDIES
8.1
Methodology
8.1.1
Choice of Model
The choice of any prediction or simulation technique mostly depends on desired accuracy and extent and quality of data available for representing the prototype topography and boundary conditions. In the present study, there is necessity of flow simulation with tidal wave and This situation demands a mathematical model flood wave in Panvel creek network system.
capable of simulating gradually varied unsteady flow in the channel network, comprising river junctions, bifurcations, looped channels, islands and also a weir as an internal boundary. The CHARIMA model of Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research (IIHR), University of Iowa, Developed by Prof.F M Holly (1985) was used for these studies. CHARIMA deals with unsteady water and sediment flows in channel network. Keeping present requirements in view, i.e. only hydrodynamic studies for water flow simulation, the CHARIMA model was adopted for these studies. Sediment flow has not been simulated in present model studies.
8.1.2
Mathematical Model CHARIMA
As mentioned earlier the model is capable of handling one dimensional unsteady water and
sediment flows in multiply connected channels involving highly non-uniform sediment and grain sorting and armoring process. More detailed description about and model are given separately various governing equations used, the assumptions in these equations schemes and solution algorithm description is pertaining to water flow computations only. formulation, numerical
in Annexure II. The following
8.1.3
Governing Equations for Water Flow
One dimensional unsteady water flow is represented by Saint Venant equations as follows :
A Q + =0 t x
Continuity Equation :
Momentum Equations :
Q Q 2 + t x A
QQ y + gA + gA 2 = 0 x k
Q t k c Water Discharge Time Momentum Correction Factor Conveyance = c(AR) Chezys resistance coefficient
Where A - Cross Section Area x y - Distance Along Channel - Water Surface Elevation
g - Gravitational acceleration R - Hydraulic radius
These
equations are nonlinear
partial
differential equations with Q and y as dependent
variables and x and t as independent variables. The exact solutions of these equations are not possible since these equations are not in standard forms. Therefore, approximate solutions are obtained using numerical methods such as finite difference, finite element etc.
8.1.4
Solution of Governing Equations
The model uses widely applied Preissman 4 point weighted implicit finite difference scheme for solution of these equations. Using the Preissman 4 point implicit scheme the terms in the equation are discretised in x-t plane and a system of linearised simultaneous difference equations is obtained. This system of equations has banded structure (i.e. coefficient matrix is a banded matrix).
Pg 17 of 47
This set of linearised equations can either be solved by iterative procedures or by adopting lately developed double sweep alogorithm which is relatively faster technique. CHARIMA Model uses double sweep algorithm. The entire network of channels is schematised into Links (Channels) and Nodes (i.e. junctions or bifurcation points or end or beginning of the channels) so that each link has one node at each end and each node has at least one link (channel) starting from it or ending at it. In each link there are grid points where the cross sectional data is given. The nodes could be of different types. The nodes representing junction or bifurction of channels or structures link are called as internal nodes. Rest of the nodes are boundary nodes. In general, solution of water flow equations include : formulation of set of linearised difference equations for each link. carryingout forward and backward sweep in coefficients formulation of node matrix solution of node matrix to obtain the waterlevels each node computing the water level and discharge at each grid point in each channel using the coefficients stored and water levels at nodes. During these computations the numerical parameter such as distance step (x) time step (t), time weighting coefficient (), and space weighting coefficient () are involved. In the present studies x was variable depending upon gridpoint spacing. T time step was adopted as 10 minutes. Value of and were 0.55 or 0.50 respectively. The value of 0.55 was adequate to avoid the damping of flood or tidal wave. each channel and storing the
8.1.5
Input Data Requirement
Model needs the following type of input data :
1. Topographic or Topologic Data : Channel Cross Sections Channel layout & connectivity Configuration of weirs etc.
Pg 18 of 47
2. Hydrologic / Hydraulic Data : Estimates of inflow hydrographs to be used as upstream boundary conditions Downstream boundary conditions (discharge or water level or G-Q relation) Estimation of bed roughness
3. Sediment Data : Definition of Sediment Size Classes Specification of Sediment Properties Initial bed Sediment Distributions( Surface and Sub-surface) Sediment inflow hydrographs by class
4. Calibration and Verification Data : Observed stage / discharge hydrographs Observed sediment transport rates by size class Observed changes in bed levels and composition
8.2
Schematization of Panvel Creek
The Panvel Creek channel network reach for which the present model is formulated is shown in Fig.34. Fig.35 shows schematization of this channel network. The model grid points in each channel indicating the locations of corresponding river cross sections at these grid points are also shown. The Channels in the network are named as follows : i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi) vii) Taloja upstream of Kasadi confluence Kasadi upstream of Taloja confluence Taloja Creek from Kasadi confluence to Gadhi confluence Gadhi upstream of Kalundri confluence Kalundri upstream of Gadhi confluence Gadhi from Kalundri confluence to Vaghiwali island Link on south of Waghiwali island connecting Ulwe river and Gadhi river
- Link 10 - Link 20 - Link 30 - Link 40 - Link 50 - Link 60 - Link 110

Pg 19 of 47
viii) ix) x) xi) xii)
Panvel creek Channel on north of Vaghiwali island Channel south of Waghwali island Panvel creek downstream of confluence of channel on north and south of Waghwali island Ulwe river Gadhi river reach on east of Waghiwali island between Node 8 and 10
- Link 70 - Link 80 - Link 90 - Link 120 - Link 100 All these
The topography of the various rivers in Panvel creek was reproduced using river cross section survey data and some toposheets supplied by the project authorities. The structures such as bridges cross sections were extended on either sides into the flood plains using available toposheets. and reclamation works were represented by providing appropriate river widths at the relevant cross sections. Widths equal to clear waterway were adopted at different bridges for simulations in mathematical model. Table 16 gives details of various bridges in Panvel creek network as per data supplied. For these studies the proposed reclamations along various river channels were taken into consideration and accordingly widths of river channels were constricted in different reaches as shown in Table - 17. The channel links No.120 (Ulwa river), 100 (Gadhi - Taloja creek connection), 110 (Ulwa - Gadhi connection) and 80 (channel south of Vaghiwali island) were assumed to be totally closed during the studies for airport development. With these changes in the cannel geometries the mathematical model studies for proposed reclamation for airport were carried out. Schematisation of Panvel creek channel network with airport development is shown vide Fig.36.
8.3
Boundary Conditions
8.3.1
Upstream Boundary Conditions
The hydrographs corresponding to PMP and 100 year return period rainfall for 6 hours / 12 hours storm duration for river Gadhi, Kalundri, Kasadi, Taloja and Ulwe derived under para 7 and presented vide Fig.29 to 33 were used as upstream boundary conditions for model runs. The timing of peak discharge of flood hydrograph was matched either with the time of high water or low water of spring / neap tide depending upon the condition.
Pg 20 of 47
8.3.2
Downstream Boundary Conditions The spring tide and Neap tide levels shown in Fig.37 were used as downstream
boundary conditions. These tides have following high water and low water levels.
Water Level HWL LWL
Spring Tide 3.25 m -2.00 m
Neap Tide 1.30 m -0.20 m
From study of spring tide and neap tide of Apollo Bunder above tides were selected. The highest High Water level recorded at Apollo Bunder was 2.89 m and the highest low water was 0.28 m. Considering the fact that Panvel creek is a sub creek of Thane creek and is about 20 kms away from Apollo Bunder, therefore the tidal curve at mouth of Panvel creek could be somewhat different. Due to amplification of tide, rise in HWL of about 0.3 m it is expected during spring tide. Therefore spring tide with high water level of 3.25 m was kept as downstream boundary condition. Natu committee report of CIDCO also recommends highest HWL of 3.25 m for design. For validation of model for flood of 27th July 1991, the tidal water levels as per tide table were adopted at downstream boundary.
8.4
Model calibration and validation
The CHARIMA model was used earlier for similar studies for prediction of flow conditions in Panvel creek to study effect of reclamation for international airport using topographical data of 1993 and 2001. During these studies reported vide Technical Report No.3815 August 2001, the model was calibrated in the different river reaches with the data of September 1992 flood and then validated for 27th July 1991 flood which was slightly lower than 100 year return period flood. More details of these calibration are available in Chapter 6 of this earlier report. During these studies, the Mannings roughness values varying from 0.025 to 0.033 adopted were found reasonable. Figures 38 shows the validation of the model for the event of 27th July 1991 flood as per earlier studies. Since there are no major changes in the river bed as well as the river width especially upstream of NH-4 bridges on these rivers the same roughness values were adopted in the present studies.
Pg 21 of 47
For the present studies, CIDCO authorities had supplied recent survey data along the Panvel creek and the above five major rivers. The topographical data was also supplied in the reach near mouth of the Panvel creek downstream of Ulwe upto MDL jetty near Nhava village. Alongwith the topographical data as per the suggestions of CWPRS, in May 2007 the CIDCO authorities had also taken up a joint program with CWPRS and MMB for collection of tidal water level and velocity data in Panvel creek at five locations (Fig.11 and 12) including one at the downstream boundary of the model near MDL jetty and four locations around proposed development of international airport. The analysis of these data were reported by CWPRS vide technical report No. 4627 of March 2009. The abstract of analysis of these data has already been presented in Chapter 5 earlier. These data were utilized for model calibration / validation for tidal conditions in Panvel creek without flood from upstream. Figures 35 and 36 show schematic of Panvel creek channel network for 1-D model runs under existing condition (i.e. without proposed airport) and with proposed airport respectively. The roughness values for different channels were adopted as per previous studies as mentioned above. These were as follows :
Reach Kasadi River Taloja River Taloja Creek downstream of Sion Panvel road bridge Channels around Waghiwali island and reach downstream of Ulwe bridge Gadhi River upstream of NH4 bridge Kalundri River upstream of Gadhi confluence Gadhi river from Kalundri confluence to Waghiwali island Ulwe River
Mannings roughness value 0.033 0.030 0.030 0.025 0.033 to 0.035 0.033 0.030 to 0.033 0.030
8.5
Validation of model for tidal conditions
The mathematical model was developed with the recent survey data and was initially run for only tidal flow i.e. without any flood discharges from upstream. Simulations in mathematical model were made for the observed spring and neap tide conditions during the period of one month tidal observations in May 2007. Comparison of predicted water levels at different
locations (Figures 39 to 41) indicates good agreement with observed water levels during spring tide. Similar validation was also done for neap tide conditions. Thus it could be concluded that the model was appropriately calibrated and validated for the tidal flow conditions.
8.6
Prediction Runs
For the prediction runs, the spring tide of high water level of RL 3.25 m and low water level of RL (-)2.0 m and neap tide with high water level of RL 1.3 m and low water level of RL -0.2 m were used as downstream boundary condition. The respective flood hydrographs (Figures 29 to 33) with peak of the flood hydrograph approaching at the time of high water (of third tidal cycle) were used as upstream boundary conditions at respective river channels. These model runs with and without airport development were carried out for following combinations of the boundary conditions: a) Spring tide at downstream boundary with peak of the flood hydrograph for PMP 6 and 12 hour storm arriving at the time of HWL. b) Spring tide at downstream boundary with peak of the flood hydrograph for PMP 6 hour storm arriving at the time of LWL. c) Spring tide at downstream boundary with peak of the flood hydrograph for PMP 6 hour storm arriving between HWL and LWL. d) Spring tide at downstream boundary with peak of the flood hydrograph for 100 year return period 6 and 12 hour storm arriving at the time of HWL. e) Neap tide at downstream boundary and peak of flood hydrograph for PMP 6 hour storm arriving at low water level. The width of the Ulwe river diversion was initially kept as 80 m in these runs with 1-D model. Figures 42 to 47 show predicted water surface profiles along different river channels of Panvel creek under existing conditions (i.e. without airport) for 100 year return period rainfall for different storms. Fig.48 to 53 show water surface profiles for PMP rainfall with 6 hour / 12 hour storm and 26th July 2005 rainfall. Water surface profile with airport are nearly same with marginal difference which cannot be seen in plots. Tables 18 to 22 give the detail water levels predicted at the time of spring tide HWL along the different channels of the Panvel creek river network for the condition with and without airport development.
Pg 23 of 47
8.7
Model validation for 26th July 2005 flood event
The model was already validated for July 1991 flood in Gadhi river during earlier studies reported in 2001. An attempt was also made to validate the model for the 26th July 2005 extreme rainfall event. For this purpose, the flood hydrograph derived from observed hourly rainfall at CBD Belapur was utilized as upstream boundary condition (Fig.29 to 33). Figure 48 and 49 show the predicted water surface profile along Gadhi river reach for 26th July 2005 conditions. From these figures, the observed water levels along Gadhi river at Panvel port, SH54 road bridge, NH-4 road bridge, in New Panvel area and at Expressway bridge are in good agreement with the predicted water levels. Similarly the predicted water surface profile for Taloja creek shows that water levels predicted at Sion Panvel road bridge and at NH4 bridge are in good agreement with observed flood levels (Fig.50). In general, it could be seen that the water levels predicted at different locations under existing conditions (i.e. without airport development) for 26th July 2005 event are in good agreement with the observed / reported water levels along Gadhi, Taloja and at Kasadi NH4 bridge. Also, the water surface profiles predicted for 700 mm PMP and 100 year return period rainfall evolved for 6 hours and 12 hours storm duration also appear to be in order when compared with observed flood levels of 26th July 2005. Further studies with the airport development inclusive of Gadhi and Ulwe diversion were carried out. These studies indicate marginal change (0.15 to 0.20 m) in the water levels in the Panvel creek reach between Belapur - Ulwe road bridge and GadhiTaloja creek confluence (i.e. Panvel creek channel on north of Waghiwali island). The water surface profile for Gadhi river reach reach between Gadhi - Taloja creek confluence to Gadhi Kalundri confluence, shows marginal reduction in the water levels upto NH 4-B bridge due to cut-off channel (Table 18). Water levels on upstream of NH 4-B bridge on Gadhi river remain practically same for all conditions with and without airport. As compared to the results reported in Technical report of August 2001, there is marginal change in the predicted water levels due to changes in the inflow hydrographs as well as survey data. The detail results of 1-D mathematical model studies indicating water levels along the various channels under existing conditions as well as with airport and for different flood hydrographs are given in Table 18 to 22. All these results give water surface profiles at the time of spring tide and peak of the flood hydrograph arriving at the time of HWL. The flood levels with the neap tide are obviously lower especially in the reach around the airport area and hence these results not included in the report. In the upstream reach however, especially above NH-4 bridge on all rivers the flood
Pg 24 of 47
levels are not affected by tide as well as airport development and are mostly governed by the flood discharges as already indicated in earlier report of August 2001. The cross section averaged maximum velocities in different channels as per 1-D model will be as given in table below :
River Taloja Kasadi Gadhi Kalundri Ulwe Panvel creek
Link 10 30
PMP Flood 4.25 3.10
100 Yr Return Period 4.39 2.62 4.57 3.80 3.31 3.97 5.89 3.52 1.87 1.32
5.47 20 4.48 40 4.88 60 4.55 50 6.89 120 4.26 90 2.22 70 1.35 100 Please refer Fig.35 for link positions.
9.0
TWO DIMENSIONAL (2-D) MATHEMATICAL MODEL STUDIES
For 2-D mathematical model studies, the MIKE-21 HD (Hydro Dynamic) model was of Danish Hydraulic Institute (DHI) was adopted. The mathematical model reach was from MDL jetty as a downstream boundary to Gadhi-Kalundri confluence and Kasadi-Taloja confluence at upstream boundary. Along Ulwe, the model reach extended upto the Panvel Dapoli road bridge on upstream of Panvel Uran railway bridge (Fig.34).
9.1
MIKE-21 HD Model
For these studies, mathematical model MIKE-21 HD (Hydro Dynamic module) was used for simulation of hydrodynamics in Panvel creek. The MIKE-21 HD is developed by Danish Hydraulics Institute (DHI), Denmark and is widely used commercial software all over the world. Brief description of these models is given below :
Pg 25 of 47
9.1.1
Hydro Dynamic model MIKE-21 HD
The hydrodynamic model MIKE-21 HD is a depth averaged two dimensional (2-D) model capable of simulation of water flows in coastal and tidal areas. It is based on the following nonlinear vertically integrated 2-D equations of conservation of mass and momentum :
S t + Px + Q y
= 0
(1)
gP P 2 + Q 2 P 2 PQ 1 (h xx )x + (h xy )y Q fVV y + h ( pa )x Pt + 2 2 h + h + ghS x + w w C h y x
= 0
(2)
gQ P 2 + Q 2 Q2 1 PQ + (h yy )y + (h xy )x P fVV X + h ( pa ) y Qt + + ghS y + h h x w w C 2h2 y
= 0
(3)
Where, S = surface elevation (m) P, Q = flux densities in x, y direction (m2/s) h = water depth (m) C = Chezy resistance (m1/2/s) V, Vx, Vy = wind speed and components in x, y directions (m/s) F = wind friction factor = coriolis parameter pa = atmospheric pressure, Txx, Tyy, Txy = components of effective shear stress (kg/m2) x, y = space coordinates (m) t = time (s) The above equations are obtained by vertically integrating the three dimensional (3-D) Navier Stokes equations of motion making the following simplified assumptions :i) The flow is incompressible
Pg 26 of 47
ii) The flow is well mixed (no variation in density) iii) Vertical accelerations are negligible iv) Bed shear stress can be modeled. These equations are numerically solved by Alternate Direction Implicit (ADI) finite difference technique leading to formation of tri-diagonal matrices, which can be solved efficiently by finite difference schemes. MIKE-21 HD uses ADI Scheme based on Crank Nicholson scheme. Appropriate size grid / mesh is generated over the model area to solve above equations using numerical shceme. 9.2 2-D Mathematical Model Studies
9.2.1
Model topography and boundary conditions
The purpose of 2-D model was to get idea about the detail flow conditions in the Panvel creek reach around the airport boundary as well as on some reach upstream and downstream. Using MIKE-21 HD model, the bathymetry of the Panvel creek in the model reach from MDL jetty to Gadhi-Kalundri confluence and Taloja-Kasadi confluence was reproduced. Figure 54 shows the bathymetry of the Panvel creek in the 2-D model. The grid of 50 m x 25 m (50 m in east-west direction along flow and 25 in south-west direction across the flow in general) was used for generating the bathymetry. The upstream and downstream boundary conditions imposed were same as those for 1-D mathematical model i.e. spring / neap tide from downstream and flood hydrographs from upstream. Figure 55 shows the bathymetry of Panvel creek simulated in 2-D model runs with proposed airport development which include diversion of Ulwe river and training of Gadhi river with 450 m wide channel.
9.3
Model calibration and validation
9.3.1
Calibration and validation with only tidal flows and no floods
The tidal data at four locations in Panvel / Thane creek was used for calibration of the tidal reach of the model without any flood discharge from upstream. The spring / neap tide water level at MDL jetty in Thane creek was used as downstream boundary condition and the predicted water levels were compared with the observed water levels at remaining 3 locations in the Panvel creek. Initially, the model runs were made without the flood discharge from
upstream and with observed tide on downstream boundary. Average Mannings roughness value of 0.03 (same as adopted in 1-D model in this reach) was found to be appropriate for simulation of observed tidal conditions. Since in most of the reach the flow velocities were relatively low, the change in the roughness value did not much affect the water levels. The predicted and observed water levels with respect to time at new railway bridge downstream of Ulwe road bridge, at Ulwa Bander and at Kharghar using spring tide as downstream boundary are shown vide Fig.39 to 41 alongwith results of 1-D mathematical model. It could be seen that predicted water levels with 1-D as well as 2-D model were in close agreement with observed water levels at the time of high water. The water levels predicted with 1D and 2D models were also in good agreement with each other. At the time of low water, however, there was some difference between observed and predicted values. This could be because of the turbulent flow conditions at the time of low water, very irregular rocky bed topography in this reach as well as inherent water level fluctuations in the flow. Also, the prototype measurements represent water level at a single point where as 1D mathematical model gives cross section averaged value. This is also one of the reasons for difference in the observed and predicted values apart from instrumental and manual errors in the field measurements. Figure 56 and 57 show predicted maxima water levels and velocities respectively during spring tide (without floods from upstream) under existing condition. The predicted maxima velocities were 2.0 m/s to 2.4 m/s in deep channel 0.8 m/s to 1.0 m/s along the banks in the reach between Ulwe bunder and railway bridge. It may be mentioned that maximum velocities near the bank recorded during tidal observations in Panvel creek were in the same range as predicted. (The current meters were installed relatively closer to bank due to site constrains). The velocities at analogous locations in model and prototype were in good agreement. Thus in general, the 2-D mathematical model was also adequately calibrated and validated for the observed tidal data. Figures 56 to 59 show predicted maxima water levels and velocity patterns (under influence of spring tide and no floods) without and with proposed airport development.
9.3.2
Model runs with flood hydrographs
These model runs were taken for the similar conditions as already explaind under 1-D model i.e. for spring tide with 6 hour duration storms for PMP and 100 year return period rainfall. The width of the Ulwe diversion was kept at 80 and 120 m in order to see the change in the water level along the southern boundary of the proposed airport. The width of Gadhi river cut-off channel (diversion) was kept as 450 m as described earlier.
Pg 28 of 47
In the 2-D mathematical model, the model runs were carried out with following conditions : 1) Spring tide (with HWL 3.25 m and LWL -2.0 m) as downstream boundary condition and no flood discharge at upstream boundaries under existing conditions (without airport). 2) Spring tide (with HWL 3.25 m and LWL -2.0 m) as downstream boundary condition and no flood discharge at upstream boundaries with airport development. 3) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of 100 year return period with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary condition under existing condition (without airport). 4) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of 100 year return period with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary condition with airport and Ulwe river diversion channel width of 80 m / 120 m. 5) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of PMP with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary condition under existing condition (without airport). 6) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of PMP with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary condition with airport and Ulwe river diversion channel width of 80 m / 120 m. 7) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of PMP with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary conditions with airport and Ulwe river diversion channel width of 120 m and storm water discharge from airport area at two locations on western boundary corresponding to 100 year return period rainfall intensity (Fig.68). For the sake of safe grade elevation studies, maxima water levels in the reach of study are more important than instantaneous water levels at the time of HWL. This is because the effect of flood and tidal wave reach at different locations at different time. Therefore, the maximum water level at different location will be at different time. Especially in the reach around proposed airport, the effect of peak flood discharges on water levels will not be realized at the time of spring tide HWL. Therefore, maxima water levels were extracted from 2-D model results. Figures 60 to 63 show the maxima water level pattern in the model reach during spring tide with 6 hour storm for 100 year return period rainfall. Figures 64 to 70 show more details of the maxima water level and velocity pattern in the Panvel creek river channels with and without
proposed international airport for PMP 6 hour storm. Figures 69 and 70 show maxima velocity during spring tide with flood peak arriving at high water level. From study of results of 2-D model presented vide Fig.56 to 68, a comparative statement of maxima water level at different locations in the model reach for various conditions is presented vide Table 23. Comparison of water level vs. time plots for PMP 6 hour storm under existing condition (i.e. without airport) and with airport for three locations around proposed airport in channel north of Waghiwali island namely at : (i) upstream of Ulwe bridge (ii) At confluence of Taloja creek and Gadhi river (iii) At a location between above two. are shown vide Figures 71 to 73. These figures indicate that in this reach the maximum rise in water levels will be to the tune of 15 to 20 cm that too for very short duration of less than halfan-hour. There will be some decrease in low water levels by about 20 to 25 cm in this reach probably due to decrease in tidal prism, diversion of Ulwe river and better channelization of flow.
Figure 77 shows predicted maxima water levels with peak of flood corresponding to PMP 6 hour storm arriving at the time of low water of neap tide. This run was specifically taken in view of design of storm water drainage outfalls.Figures 78 and 79 show predicted maxima water levels under existing condition and with airport for 26th July 2005 flood hydrograph with peak arriving at the time of spring tide HWL.
9.4 9.4.1
Analysis of results of 2-D model studies Water level analysis
From the comparison of maxima water levels presented vide Table 23 and study of water levels shown in Fig.56 to 68 for different conditions, following conclusions are drawn :
For only tides and no flood conditions (i) Reclamation of airport do not affect water levels at the mouth of Panvel creek and further downstream reach near Elephanta island / JNPT in Thane creek near downstream boundary.
(ii)
During spring tide, the rise in the maxima water levels in the reach from Belapur Ulwe railway bridge to NH-4 bridge on Gadhi, Kasadi, Kalundri and Taloja rivers on upstream will be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3 m after reclamation of the airport (under no flood condition).
(iii) Along Ulwe river reach upstream of location of proposed diversion, there will not be any rise in the water levels for no flood conditions.
For tide with floods due to 100 year return period and PMP rainfall for 6 hour storm duration (i) (ii) There will be no rise in flood levels at Panvel creek mouth and the reach downstream. The rise in the maxima water levels at different locations in Panvel creek during spring tide and different flood discharges will be as summarized in the table below : Rise in maxima water levels due to airport reclamation Rise in maxima water level (m) due to Spring tide with 100 year Spring tide with PMP return period 6 hour storm 6 hour storm Nil Nil 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.22 0.13 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.23 Nil 0.33 0.22 0.18 1.52 0.90 0.25 0.11 0.20 0.15 Nil 0.55 0.20 0.25 2.58 1.60
Location Mouth of Panvel creek Belapur Ulwe rail bridge Belapur Ulwe road bridge North of Waghiwali island Belapur-Panvel rail bridge Upstream of Sion-Panvel road bridge Downstream of NH-4 bridge on Taloja river Upstream of rail bridge on Taloja river 500 m downstream of Kasadi NH-4 bridge Upstream of Kasadi rail bridge NH-4B bridge on Gadhi river Upstream of SH-54 bridge on Gadhi river Gadhi- Kalundri confluence Upstream of SH-54 bridge on Ulwe river Rail bridge on Ulwe river
(iii) With addition of storm water discharge from airport area on western boundary under PMP conditions will marginally (0.08 to 0.10 m) increase the water levels in the
upstream reach. Thus, under this condition, the water levels at Belapur Ulwe rail bridge will be 3.80 m which will increase to 4.16 m on north of Waghiwali island and 4.30 m at Belapur-Panvel rail bridge, 4.40 m on upstream of Sion-Panvel road bridge. The water level of 4.4 m on upstream of Sion-Panvel road bridge is close to the observed HFL of 4.5 m on 26th July 2005 in this reach. (iv) Comparison of time history of water levels with and without airport at Belapur - Ulwe road bridge, at Taloja-Gadhi confluence and at a location in between the north channel (Fig.71 to 73) indicates that marginal rise of 15 to 20 cm in water level for very short duration less than half-an-hour. These figures also indicate that during flooding period the water levels with and without airport nearly coincide and for a very short duration at the time of high water level, there is marginal rise of 15 to 20 cm in the water level with airport condition. However, for rest of the period, especially during ebbing the water levels with airport condition remain marginally lower than those under existing condition. Results of 1-D model also indicate similar situation. The maxima water levels in this northern channel with airport condition will be in the range of RL 3.8 to 4.3 m during spring tide and PMP 6 hours duration storm (Fig.68). It may be mentioned here again that the results presented for 2-D model (vide Fig. 56 yo 70 and Table 23) are the maxima water levels (or velocities) and not the instantaneous water levels at the time of HWL as in the case of 1-D model studies. Therefore, comparison of results of 1-D and 2-D model show that the water levels predicted by 1-D model at the time of HWL are somewhat lower than those predicted by 2-D model. The reason for this difference has already been discussed in detail earlier. Also the reach simulated in 2-D model is shorter than 1-D model but at the upstream boundary same discharge hydrographs are given as upstream baoundary conditions in both the models. Therefore in the upstream reaches close to boundary the water levels in 2-D model are somewhat higher than the water levels predicted by 1-D model in the reach. This explains relatively higher water levels in 2-D model near Gadi Kalundri confluence and Taloja Kasadi confluence. However, for the reach upstream of NH-4 bridges on the four rivers (Gadhi, Kalundri, Kasadi and Taloja) the results of 1-D model will be fairly close to the maxima water levels and therefore could be utilized for the reach upstream of 2-D model reach. For the reach upstream of NH-4 bridge these rivers, the flow conditions practically remain more or less same as those with existing conditions. The details of these results could be seen in the Tables 18 to 22 for 1-D model studies. Along Gadhi river upstream of Gadhi Taloja confluence also there is marginal change in the water levels. Table 23 and Figures 65 to 68 show the detail changes in the water levels along the Gadhi river, Taloja creek and the Panvel
creek around Waghiwali island under existing conditions and with the airport for PMP 6 hour storm conditions with flood peak arriving at high water level of spring tide. It could be seen that along the boundary of the area of proposed international airport, the maximum flood levels of 5.5 to 6.0 m could be experienced at NH-4B bridge which will gradually reduce to 4.1 m in the northern corner of reclaimed area and then water level will reduce to 4.1 to 3.8 m in the channel west of the reclaimed area (Fig.68). Also in the Ulwe river at the point of diversion, the flood levels will be of the order of 6.0 to 6.5 m (for 80 m wide channel) 5.0 to 5.5 m (for 120 m wide channel). Considering these flood levels and minimum free board of about 1.5 m to 1.8 m, the safe-grade elevation for the proposed international airport complex including Airstrips, ATC towers and all buildings, hangers and roads should be kept at minimum level of 7.5 to 8.0 m. Rest of the area could also be reclaimed with the same safe-grade elevation or in slope or by terracing with finished ground levels varying along reclamation boundary.
9.4.2
Velocities
The predicted velocities at different locations for following conditions are shown in different figures as mentioned below : 1) Spring tide (with HWL 3.25 m and LWL -2.0 m) as downstream boundary condition and no flood discharge at upstream boundaries under existing conditions (without airport) (Fig.57). 2) Spring tide (with HWL 3.25 m and LWL -2.0 m) as downstream boundary condition and no flood discharge at upstream boundaries with airport development (Fig.59). 3) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of PMP with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary conditions under existing condition (without airport) (Fig.68a). 4) Spring tide as above as downstream boundary and flood hydrograph of 6 hours storm of PMP with peak arriving at the time of HWL as upstream boundary conditions with airport and Ulwe river diversion channel width of 80 m / 120 m (Fig.69 & 70). The range of maxima velocities in different channel reaches predicted for above four conditions is presented in the table below :
Pg 33 of 47
Range of maxima velocities (m/s) Results of 2-D model Reach Belpur - Ulwe rail bridge to Panvel creek mouth Belapur-Ulwe road bridge Ulwe bridge to 1.5 km u/s North of Waghiwali Taloja creek from Gadhi confl. to Kasadi confl. Gadhi d/s of NH4B bridge Gadhi from NH4B bridge to Kalundri confl. Ulwe Kasadi rail bridge Condition 1 1.4 to 2.0 2.4 to 2.6 2.0 to 2.2 1.0 to 1.6 0.8 to 1.2 1.2 to 1.4 0.8 to 1.2 0.6 to 0.8 -Maxima velocity range (m/s) for condition Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4 0.8 to 2.0 2.0 to 2.4 1.2 to 1.6 1.2 to 1.6 0.8 to 1.2 0.8 to 1.2 0.8 to 1.2 0.4 to 0.8 -1.8 to 2.4 3.0 to 3.6 3.0 to 3.6 1.8 to 2.4 2.4 to 3.0 2.4 to 3.0 5.0 to 6.0 1.2 to 3.0 5.0 1.8 to 2.4 2.4 to 2.8 2.8 to 3.0 1.6 to 2.0 2.0 to 2.8 2.0 to 4.0 4.0 to 5.0 1.2 to 3.0 (in diversion channel) 5.0
The study of above table shows that with the airport development the maximum velocities will be in the range of 4.0 m/s to 5.0 m/s in the vicinity of Kasadi rail bridge, NH4B road bridge on Gadhi, SH54 road bridge on Gadhi and Kalundri for spring tide with PMP condition and 6 hour storm duration. At remaining locations the maximum velocities will be in the range of 2.0 to 3.0 m/s. Therefore the bank protection work in these critical reaches as well as in the remaining reach should be designed for velocities of 5.0 m/s. For most of the conditions with airport, there will be marginal decrease in velocity to the tune of 10% to 15% in the reach around airport due to decreased outflow on account of Ulwe diversion and reduction in tidal prism. Without flood and only tide conditions, velocities around airport boundaries and in upstream reach are practically not affected. Therefore, there appears to be no possibility of siltation in this reach.
10.0
SAFE-GRADE ELEVATION
The free board for deciding safe-grade elevation for any strategic installation is normally decided from various considerations such as : a. Maximum flood level
b. Cyclone induced surges c. Wind generated waves d. Wind setup e. Land subsidence natural and due to over burden f. Embankment settlement g. Sea level rise h. Tsunami In the present case, the maxim flood level is the major factor which needs consideration. The storm surges are very rare on west coast of India around Mumbai. The cyclonic storm movement in northern hemisphere is normally from east to west and therefore such storms are more common on eastern coast of India but very rare on western coast. The effect of wind generated waves and wind setup is also negligible in Panvel creek for following reasons : i) The Thane creek as well as Panvel creek are not on the main sea shore but well inside and relatively less affected by waves. Therefore, the ports have been developed in Thane creek. ii) The prominent wind direction is south-west i.e. along the Thane creek and the Panvel creek is normal to Thane creek. Therefore waves generated will not travel in Panvel creek. iii) At the mouth of the Panvel creek, large sand bars exist which get exposed during period of low water. The deep channel is relatively narrow. Therefore, the waves, if any, approaching the mouth are likely to break near mouth. iv) The opening of the waterway of Panvel creek at Ulwe bridge is hardly 300 m at HWL. Therefore, waves coming from Thane creek will not enter in Panvel creek and if at all enter, there will be considerable reduction in wave height due to diffraction. v) Fetch within the Panvel creek under existing condition is also very small to generate waves. With the airport development, there will not be large water body but only channel network which will not generate any waves. vi) The Elephanta and Bucher islands are situated just outside the mouth of Panvel creek in south-west direction. These islands provide protection from wind generated waves coming from south-west direction. For wind setup, sustained wind atleast for 3 to 4 hours is required alongwith a large fetch. With a fetch of about 20 km, water depth of 15 m and wind speed of 100 km/hr the setup will be of
the order of 0.2 to 0.3 m. The probability of simultaneous occurrence of sustained wind condition and extreme flood event due to PMP rainfall coinciding with HWL of spring tide all together is very small. During 3 to 4 hours period of sustained wind conditions the tide water levels can reduce considerably. The land subsidence and embankment settlement will depend upon the type of material on the river bed and in foundation and type of material used for embankment construction. There are no established criteria to compute the sea level rise. The estimates by different researchers vary from 2.0 to 3.0 mm per year and more. The Tsunami waves / storm surges are also not common in this region and its effect inside the Panvel creek will be negligible due to various reasons discussed above. Considering all above factors and the estimated maximum water levels along the boundary area to be reclaimed for the proposed airport, the free board of about 1.8 m from flooding consideration (as per IRC norms the minimum free board of 1.8 m is recommended for streams with discharge more than 3000 cumecs), 0.2 m for sea level rise and 0.5 m for all other remaining factors including storm surges, embankment settlement and subsidence could be adopted. Thus total free board of 2.5 m will be quite conservative for the important establishment of international airport. On the basis of this free board, the safe-grade elevation for the reclamation levels in the main airport area considering airstrips, ATC towers, administrative buildings and allied facilities could be considered as 8.0 m to 8.5 m. The remaining area for airport activity centre on north of main airport could either be reclaimed with the same level or at somewhat lower level at RL 6.0 to 6.5 m considering relatively lower flood levels predicted along this region. This could be done by providing gradual slope or terracing.
11.0
DESIGN OF ULWE AND GADHI DIVERSION CHANNELS AND BANK PROTECTION WORKS
From the studies it was seen that the Gadhi diversion with 120 m width provides relief in water level of about 1.0 m at the starting point of the diversion channel. This diversion channel with top width of 120 m and side slopes of 1V:3H or 1V:2.5H with bed level variation from about -0.6 m to -2.0 m in a distance of about 3 km appears to be adequate for the design discharge corresponding to peak discharges 6 hours duration PMP rainfall. The 450 m wide (top width) Gadhi diversion with appropriate transition with widths varying from 180 m at NH4B to 450 m (in distance of about 800 m or more) also appears to be adequate. The side slopes of the banks of the Gadhi diversion / training should also be 1V:3H preferably. Wherever the channels are
Pg 36 of 47
passing through cutting in rock and hard strata, the steeper slopes could be adopted with necessary transition. For the design of bank protection work the grain size distribution of bed and bank material is required. In the present case, most of the river bed is rocky and the data about the material to be used for reclamation works as well as bank is not available. Therefore, certain assumptions have been made in respect of these data. Following data is considered for design of bank protection works : 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Maximum velocity (Vmax) 5.0 to 6.0 m/s 40 to 50 m3/s/m 1(V) : 3(H) ( = 18.430) 220. 10 to 25 kg (corresponding mean dia of 192 mm to 260 mm) Specific gravity of stone (Ss) Specific weight of stone (s) D50 for river bed material 2.65 2650 kg/m3. 0.5 mm assumed arbitrarily for bed for scour calculation
range along the reach Discharge intensity (q) Embankment bank slope () Angle of repose () Weight of stone used in crates
Weight (W) of stone / crate required As per BIS Code IS8408 (1994),
0.02323 (S s )V 6 K (S s - 1)
3
where
[ 1 - Sin ]
2
1 2
Sin 2
This formula is to compute weight of stone for loose stone pitching. Also velocity (V) is mean velocity of flow. For these calculations, Vmax is used. For 1(V):3(H) slope, = 18.430 and K = 0.536 for = 220
Weight of stone for different Vmax with K = 0.536 V 6.0 m/s 5.0 m/s 4.0 m/s Weight of stone (W) 1193 kg 400 kg 105 kg
Size of stone filled GI wire Gabions proposed is 1.5 m x 1.0 m x 0.6 m thickness. The mean size of stone (Ds) for 10 kg to 25 kg varies from 192 mm to 260 mm (as per formula Ds = 0.124 x (weight/Ss)1/2 proposed in IS8408) and corresponding porosity (P) of Gabion will be about 27%. Therefore, Weight of single gabion = Volume x Ss x (1-P) = (1.5 x 1.0 x 0.6) x 2650 x (0.73) = 1740 kg
This weight of single gabion is much more than that is required for velocity of 6 m/s (1193 kg). Also formula is for weight of stone for loose stone pitching. Since gabions are laid in group and tied to each other from all side there will not be any possibility of any gabion dislodged even at higher velocity if laid properly with appropriate geo-fabric / geo-synthetic filter below. Also for horizontal apron (for which = 0 and K = 1) required weight will further reduce by nearly 50%. Thus proposed size of gabion is adequate for almost entire reach for design velocity.
Thickness of protection work (T) IS8408 suggests following relationship to compute thickness of loose pitching :
V2 , 2 g (S s - 1)
g = gravitational acceleration = 9.8 m/s2
Thickness required for different flow velocities will be as below : Average Velocity 4.0 m/s 5.0 m/s 6.0 m/s Thickness (T) 0.50 m 0.77 m 1.11 m
The average velocity of flow is 5.0 m/s or below in almost entire reach. Also the pitching is with stone filled wire / rope gabions tied to each other. Therefore gabion thickness of 0.6 m proposed
is adequate for most of the reach. The thickness should be increased to 0.9 to 1.0 m for the reach where average velocities are about 5.0 m/s or above.
Depth of Scour (DL) This is sample calculation for computing depths of scour As per Laceys formula, DL = 0.473 x (Q/f)1/3 Where, f = silt factor = 1.75 x D50, Using D50 = 0.5 mm and f = 1.25 Also, DL = 1.33 x (q2/f)0.33 Where, q is discharge intensity. For different discharge intensities DL will be as below : q (m3/s/m) 30 45 60 DL 12.0 m 15.0 m 19.0 m D50 is mean grain-size of bed material.
Depth of scour normally considered for design of apron is 1.5 DL maximum. Width of Apron The width of apron to be provided should be normally equal to 1.5DL. However the depth of apron should be decided from following practical considerations : i) ii) iii) The bed material grain size may become coarser as depth increase and depth of scour will reduce considerably in that case Hard strata may be encountered at larger depths Very high discharge intensities will occur in restricted reach (The maximum discharge intensity in the reach under consideration will be about 60 m3/s/m.
Pg 39 of 47
Depending upon the actual grain-size of the bed material in the river bed material in non rocky strata, the depth of scour and width of apron could be decided. In the hard rocky strata the nominal apron width of 6.0 m is adequate.
Construction of stone filled GI wire gabions Guidelines in IS8408 should be followed for construction of stone filled GI wire gabions. Crates should be laid with longer dimension along the slope of the bank. The size of the mesh of crate should be smaller than the smallest stone in the crate. The mesh should be double knotted. GI wire of minimum diameter 4 mm should be used for crates. Crate units may be tied to each other by 5 mm GI wire as additional precaution. If crates are provided in layers, each layer should be tied to lower and upper layer at suitable intervals with 4 mm GI wire. Launching apron should not be tied to crate on slope. For the protection works in tidal reach / marine environment the U.V. Stabilized polypropylene rope gabions or GI wire gabions with anti-corrosive coating should be used for protection below spring tide HWL.
Filter Synthetic / geo-textile filter may be used from point of view of quality control and convenience of laying. A 150 mm thick sand layer should be provided over the filter fabric to prevent mechanical rupture of the fabric by revetment stones. The criteria for design of geo-fabric filter as proposed in IS8408 (1994) and IS14262 (1995) is given below :
Criteria for selection of filter fabric Geo-textile filters may be recommended because of ease in installation and their proven effectiveness as an integral part of the protection works. The following criteria depending upon the gradation of bed material, may be used to select the correct filter fabric : a) For granular material containing 50% or less fines by weight, the following ration should be satisfied :
85% passing size of bed material (mm) Equivalent opening size of bed of fabric (mm)
1.0
Pg 40 of 47
In order to reduce the chances of clogging, no fabric should be specified with an equivalent opening size smaller than 0.149. Thus the equivalent opening size of fabric should be equal to or less than 85% passing size of the bed material. b) For bed material containing atleast 50% but not more than 85% fines by weight, the equivalent opening size of filter should not be smaller than 0.149 mm and should not be larger than 0.211 mm. c) For bed material containing 85% of more of particles finer than 0.074 mm, it is suggested that use of non-woven geo-fabric filter having opening size and permeability compatible to the equivalent values given in (a) above may be used. Geo-fabric filter with opening size 0.15 mm will be suitable below gabions on apron and slope.
Note : The following BIS Codes may also be referred for planning, construction and maintenance of the bank protection / embankment works : 1. 2. 3. 4. IS14262 : 1995 Planning and design of revetment guidelines. IS11532 : 1995 (Reaffirmed 1997) Construction and maintenance of river embankments (levees) guidelines (First revision). IS8408 : 1994 Planning and design of groynes in alluvial river guidelines (First revision). IS12094 : 2000 Guidelines for planning and design of river embankments (levees) (First revision).
12.0
DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS OF 1-D AND 2-D MATHEMATICAL MODEL STUDIES
Based on the analysis of results of 1-D and 2-D mathematical model studies, following conclusions / discussions are presented : 1. The 100 year return period rainfall of 531 mm adopted in these studies is higher than the IMD estimate of 450 to 480 mm (as per isopluvial maps) for the Panvel creek catchment. This appears to be reasonable considering the overall rising trend of rainfall and rainfall intensities (Fig.74 and 75).
Pg 41 of 47
2. The PMP estimate of 700 mm in 24 hours by IMD for the Panvel creek catchment has still not been revised. Same has been adopted for estimation of PMF hydrograph which was used for predicting HFLs to design safe-grade elevation. However, in addition 998 mm rainfall during extreme storm of 26 July 2005 has also been considered for simulation to check adequacy of designed safe-grade elevation for extreme flood event. Consideration of such highly extreme rainfall event was essential for deciding safe-grade elevation keeping in view importance of airport facility. Another reason was that a storm nearly similar to 26 July 2005 at Mumbai had occurred near Dharampur in Gujarat (about 150 km north of Mumbai) with 24 hour rainfall of nearly 880 mm in July 1941 (Fig.23). 3. The rainfall intensities of 192 mm / hour (for PMP 6 hour storm) and 145.8 mm / hour (100 year return period 6 hour storm) considered for estimation of flood hydrographs are higher than statistically estimated 100 year return period intensity of 134 mm / hour at Santacruz and 145 mm / hour at Colaba. These adopted intensities are also higher or very close to the observed maximum intensity of 153 mm at Santacruz. Also, intensity of 192 mm / hour considered for PMP 6 hour storm duration is at par with reported intensity of 190 mm / hour at Santacruz during 26th July 2005 storm at Mumbai. It may also be mentioned that the adopted intensities are also higher than the CIDCO and CWC norms (Table 10). Estimated peak discharges are as below : River Gadhi Kasadi Taloja Kalundri Ulwe PMP 6 hour storm 2082.60 m3/s 1000.77 m3/s 1233.80 m3/s 1972.80 m3/s 916.48 m3/s 100 year RP 6 hour storm 1579.79 m3/s 759.16 m3/s 935.94 m3/s 1496.52 m3/s 695.22 m3/s
4. The 1-D mathematical model was already validated for flood levels along Gadhi, Kasadi and Taloja rivers for July 1991 flood conditions in Panvel creek. Under the present studies with recent survey data of Panvel creek channel network, 1-D model was validated for 26 July 2005 flood condition. The predicted flood levels along Gadhi river in the reach from Panvel port to the bridge on expressway were in close agreement with reported flood levels (Fig.48 and 49). Also the reported flood levels of 4.1 m and 4.5 m in the Taloja creek in the reach between Sion Panvel road bridge and Taloja Kasadi confluence were in good agreement with predicted flood levels.
Pg 42 of 47
5. The flood levels predicted with airport for extreme conditions of PMP (700 mm) 6 hour storm and 26 July 2005 storm (998 mm at Belapur) along the different channels varied as given below. It could be seen that the flood levels with 26 July 2005 rainfall are higher by about 0.2 to 0.5 m than the predicted water levels for PMP (700 mm) 6 hour rainfall. Panvel creek north channel from Ulwa port to Gadhi Taloja confluence - 4.0 to 4.25 m Gadhi river diversion between Taloja confluence to Kalundri confluence 4.25 to 9.5 m Gadhi river reach from Kalundri confluence to expressway bridge - 9.5 to 13.5 m Taloja creek from Gadhi confluence to Kasadi Taloja confluence 4.25 to 4.5 m
6. Figure 68 shows that the extreme flood levels under PMP conditions will result in flood levels along the boundary of proposed international airport varying from 5.5 to 6.5 m on upstream of NH-4B bridge to about 4.1 m in northern channel. The flood levels in Ulwe river near point of diversion will also be about 6.5 m with 80 m diversion channel. With Ulwe diversion channel width of 120 m these flood levels reduce to 5.5 m at the location of diversion. Therefore, with the Ulwe diversion channel width of 120 m the safe-grade elevation for the airport complex comprising Airstrips, ATC tower buildings and other important buildings and roads should be kept at an 8.0 to 8.5 m with consideration of predicted HFLs and minimum free board of 2.5 m for various reasons already discussed under para Safe-grade Elevation (Fig.68). Such a high safe-grade elevation will also be beneficial from remotely possible threat of Tsunami and storm surges which are not common on west coast. For rest of the area, the reclamation levels could vary from RL 7.5 m to 6.0 m by providing a slope or terracing towards waterfront. Such an arrangement will be also helpful for design of storm water drainage system. 7. Study of velocity variation along the different channels in Panvel creek and maximum velocities along the boundary of international airport vide Fig.70 for PMP 6 hour storm condition indicate the following : a. In general the maxima velocities along the boundary of airport will be in the range of 3.0 to 4.0 m/s. However at some locations, e.g. near NH-4B bridge, Kasadi bridge and in the vicinity of Ulwe bridge, high velocities of the order of 5.0 m/s could occur for short duration. b. Along Gadhi river, high velocities of the order of 3.0 to 5.0 m/s will occur in the reach between NH-4B bridge and Gadhi Kalundri confluence.
Pg 43 of 47
8. Considering the local high velocities and general velocity of 3.0 to 5.0 m/s, the bank protection for the slope of the reclamation along the water edge will have to be designed for a velocity of 5.0 m/s. 9. A general bank slope of 1V:3H to 1V:2.5H will be adequate. Bank protection with stone filled GI wire gabions of size 1.5 m x 1.0 m x 0.6 m laid over geo-fabric filter as per BIS specifications will be adequate. This could be replaced by a thin mattress of 0.3 m thickness but with larger size where velocities are less than 3.0 m/s. All these units of gabions / mattress should be tied to each other in both the directions. An apron of adequate width as per design or nominal width of about 15 m should be provided on the river bed at the toe of the slope protection if coarser bed material or hard strata is expected at shallow depths below river bed. Where the rocky river bed is available, the nominal apron width of 6.0 m should be provided. 10. The storm water drainage system for the reclaimed area for airport and other utilities should be designed for atleast 100 year return period rainfall intensity of 134 mm / hour or 158 mm / hour adopted for short duration storms as per CIDCO norms. For deciding sill levels at the outfall of storm water drainage channels in the reclaimed area for airport, the maximum water levels with peak flood corresponding to PMP 6 hour storm duration arriving at the time of low water level of neap tide may be taken into consideration (Fig.77 showing the maxima water levels under this condition could be utilized for this purpose). 11. IT may be mention that right bank levels along Gadi river reach between SH54 bridge and NH4B bridge are much lower than predicted flood level. This region as well as Panvel city areaon upstream of NH4 brigeds on Gadi Kalundri Kasadi and Taloja are flood prone zones which are inundated due to over bank flows during high floods even under existing conditions. The present studies have shown that the flood levels in this reach will not increase due to air port development. Hese reaches need special attention from the consideration of flood protection. In these se reaches along Gadhi, Kalundri, Taloja, Kasadi and Ulwe appropriate reclamation levels be adopted considering the predicted high flood levels and adequate bank protection works as proposed above should also be provided. 12. The channel width of 450 m be provided on downstream of NH4B bridge for cutoff / training of Gadhi river with the bed appropriately dressed to give the gradual bed slope considering the natural deep channel bed levels at upstream and downstream ends as already discussed. Appropriate transition with width varying from 180 m at NH-4B bridge to 450 m be provided with adequate transition length (about 900 m or more).
13. The Ulwe diversion channel of minimum 120 m width will be necessary to keep flood levels low along southern boundary of international airport. The bank slopes of both Ulwe and Gadhi diversion channels should be 1V:2.5H to 1V:3.0H in average soil strata without rock. Wherever rock / hard strata is encountered, steeper slopes could be adopted. The banks should be well protected with the stone filled gabions with filter below as described earlier in para 11. 14. The predicted water levels under these studies are more or less same as those reported in the earlier technical report number 3815 of August 2001. Whatever little variations are observed, those could be because of the different survey data and modified flood hydrographs and due to slight changes in the catchment areas adopted.
13.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The safe-grade elevation for the proposed international airport complex comprising airstrips, ATC tower building and all other important structures may be kept at RL 8.0 to 8.5 m. 2. The remaining area could be reclaimed by filling in slope or by terracing with levels varying from RL 8.5 to 6.5 m. 3. The reclamation level along the water edge will vary between RL 8.0 m to 8.5 m at NH-4B bridge on upstream to RL 6.0 m near Ulwe port / bridge on downstream. Appropriate bank and bed protection works as discussed in para 11 (Fig.76) may be provided along the water edge of reclaimed area. 4. The Gadhi cutoff channel of 450 m width and side slopes 1V:2.5H to 1V:3.0H and bank slopes protected with stone filled GI wire / nylon rope gabions of size 1.5 m x 1.0 m x 0.6 m and filter below as per BIS specifications should be provided (Fig.76 as discussed in para 11). The channel should be provided with gradual slope by joining natural deep channel bed levels at upstream and downstream edge of cutoff reach. The width of apron on river bed at the toe of bank slope be provided as per design discussed in para 11. However, if coarser bed material and hard river bed is expected at shallow depths below river bed then nominal apron of 15 m width may be provided in stone filled gabions with filter below in the reach without exposed rock in river bed. The provision of nominal apron could be restricted to 6.0 m if the natural channel bed is rocky. 5. Adequate gio-physical investigations including bore hole data collection is necessary within and along the boundary of area proposed for reclamation to finalize the design of bank and bed protection works.
6. The Ulwe river diversion channel of minimum 120 m width and the side slopes and the bank protection works similar to that for Gadhi river diversion channel should be provided. The channel should be provided with gradual slope by joining deepest natural bed levels at upstream and downstream end of the diversion. Appropriate bank protection works as discussed earlier may also be provided for these channels. 7. Along the Gadhi, Taloja, Kasadi, Kalundri rivers the reclamation levels upstream of NH4 bridges should be decided from the predicted maximum flood levels for PMP 6 hour or 26 July 2005 storms and provision of appropriate minimum free board of 1.8 m to 2.0 m from different considerations discussed earlier. 8. Similar bank protection should also be provided in these river reaches where the maximum velocities will be about 4.0 m/s 1.0 m/s. 9. The existing right bank levels along Gadhi river between NH-4B bridge and SH-54 bridge are very low along right bank and should be raised above the predicted high flood levels. 10. Along Gadhi and Kalundri river reach between NH4 bridge to expressway bridge at many locations, the bank levels along both banks are lower than predicted flood levels for extreme conditions. Water spills on banks and inundates low lying areas of old and new Panvel city even under existing conditions (i.e. without air port development) as experienced during flood of July 1991 and July 2005. Retaining walls or raised banks may be necessary to reduce this inundation. 11. Along Ulwe river reach upstream of diversion location flood embankments of appropriate height will be necessary in view of rise in flood levels to the tune of 1.5 m after air port development. 12. The storm water drainage system for the reclaimed area for airport and other utilities should be designed for atleast 100 year return period rainfall intensity of 134 mm / hour or 158 mm / hour adopted for short duration storms as per CIDCO norms. For deciding sill levels at the outfall of storm water drainage channels in the reclaimed area for airport, the maximum water levels with peak flood corresponding to PMP 6 hour storm duration arriving at the time of low water level of neap tide may be taken into consideration (Fig.77 showing the maxima water levels under this condition could be utilized for this purpose). 13. For design, construction and maintenance of the bank protection works / flood embankments, the IS guidelines as per the BIS codes referred under para 11 may please be followed.
Pg 46 of 47
14. After implementation of reclamation and bank protection works pre and post monsoon site inspection may be carried out every year to assess damages, if any, and necessary action for repairs may be taken.
Pg 47 of 47
Annexure I Photos
Photo 1 : NH-4B bridge on river Gadhi
Photo 2 : Belapur Ulwe road bridge on Panvel creek
Photo 3 : View of Panvel port from NH-4B bridge
Photo 4 : View of NH-4B bridge from Panvel port
Photo 5 : NH-4 road bridge on Gadhi river in Panvel city
Photo 6 : Upstream view of NH-4 road bridge on Gadhi river (Rock outcrops on bed are seen)
Photo 7 : View of rocky bed of Gadhi river on upstream of NH4 bridge
Photo 8 : Rock outcrops in Gadhi river reach downstream of Kalundri confluence
Photo 9 : View of Gadhi river reach downstream of SH-54 bridge
Photo 10 : View of Gadhi river reach downstream of SH-54 bridge alongwith flood marks of year 1991
Photo 11 : Downstream view of SH54 bridge on river Gadhi at the time of high water
Photo 12 : Upstream view of SH54 bridge on river Gadhi at the time of low water
Photo 13 : Low lying right bank along Gadhi river downstream of SH54 bridge as seen during summer (i.e. without floods)
Photo 14 : Distant view of NH-4B bridge and high approach road embankments
Photo 15 : Taloja railway bridge upstream of NH4 bridge
Photo 16 : NH4 road bridge on river Kasadi
Annexure II CHARIMA
ANNEXURE II
MATHEMATICAL MODEL - CHARIMA (1 DIMENSIONAL)

CHARIMA is 1-D Mathematical model for Numerical simulation of unsteady water and sediment movement in multiply connected network of mobile bed channels. The model was developed at Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research (IIHR) in 1988 to study the braided river channel network of Susitna river (Alaska) .The model is capable of handling highly non uniform sediment. The model can simulate processes such as; sediment sorting, bed armoring, flow dependent friction factor and alternate drying and flooding of perched channels. The flow over the weir can also be handled.
Model Assumptions and Limitations
a) St.Venant Hypothesis for water flow are assumed (i.e uniform velocity and horizontal water level over cross section, hydrostatic pressure distribution, applicability. of steady state resistance law for unsteady flow and small bed slopes). b) Channel network pattern assumed (i.e. total no. of channels and their interconnections) must remain same during a particular simulation c) Cross sections are assumed to rise or fall without changing its shape d) Effects of bends cannot be accounted in present formulation e) Continuous lateral flows not considered. However, in reach additions due to rainfall could be represented by channels joining at regular interval. f) Other restrictions/assumptions associated with sediment routing processes(e.g. those required for sorting, armoring, sediment discharge, friction factor prediction etc.).
MODEL EQUATIONS
Model uses St. Venant equations for water flow, Exner equations for sediment continuity and provides alternatives for sediment discharge and friction factor predictions. General form of these equations and the equations for channel geometry, hydraulic sorting and armoring of bed surface are given below :
Annexure II
Page i of vi
CHARIMA model Governing Equations
Water Continuity Equation :
A t
Q x
= 0
...(1)
Momentum Equation
Q t
QQ Q 2 y A + gA x + gA 2 x k
= 0
...(2)
Sediment Discharge Predictor
F 1 Q , D , Q, A, d , sf , ACF = 0
s 50
...(3)
Friction Factor Predictor
F 2 Q, A, d , sf , D, ACF = 0
50
...(4)
Sediment Continuity Equation
(1 P ) B
dz dt
dQs dx
= 0
...(5)
Channel Geometry Equation
A = A (d , x ) B = B (d , x )
...(6) ...(7)
Hydraulic Sorting of Bed Material

Dn Dn + 1
50 50
...(8)
Annexure II
Page ii of vi
Armoring of Bed Surface

ACF N = ACF N + 1
...(9)
Where Q = A = y z = = Water discharge Cross sectional area Water surface elevation Bed elevation Energy slope Momentum correlation factor Gravitational acceleration B d k D50 x t P = = = = = = = Water surface width Flow depth Conveyance Median size of bed material Distance along channel Time Porosity of bed material
sf =
=
g =
SOLUTION PROCEDURE / SCHEMES
In general model follows Preissmann Implicit Scheme for discritising the water flow and sediment continuity equations. The solution procedure includes water routing with forward and backward sweeps in each branch, formulation of node matrix, solution of sediment continuity equation and then grain sorting and armoring. The analytical simultaneous solutions of all 9 equations used in this model is not possible due to following reasons :
a) Inherent non-linearities b) Tabular nature of equations for channel geometry \i.e. equations 6 & 7) c) Ad-hoc procedure (as against mathematical relationships) for equations for bed material sorting and armoring of bed surface (equations 8 & 9). d) Necessity to solve equation of sediment continuity (5) for each size friction followed by reconstitution of total change in bed elevation.
Therefore, for solution of these equations decoupled solution approach is adopted as described below: The solution precedes in three stages:
Annexure II
Page iii of vi
STAGE I
Equations for sediment discharge (equation 3), friction factor (equation 4) channel geometry {equations 6 and 7) and discritised equations of water flow are solved in a hydraulic sweep. During this sweep bed elevation (2), median dia m (D50) of sediment and armoring factor (ACF) are kept constant as if bed is frozen temporarily. Thus during this sweep at grid point (i), water flow (Qi), water level (y) and sediment transport capacity Qs(i,j) for each size fraction j of bed material are computed.
STAGE II
During this stage discritised equation of sediment continuity is solved in downstream sweep to yield new bed levels at each grid point i. The sediment discharge Qsn+1 computed in stage-I is treated constant assuming that it is unaffected by bed evolution process (bed level changes), armoring and grain sorting (change in DSO) .
STAGE III
In this stage accounting procedure is executed using aggradation or degradation computed in stage-II (i.e. sorting of bed material to compute new DSO and computation of ACFn+1 new armoring factor)
The above procedure is called uncoupled as it assumes that these processes (in above three stages) occur sequentially and not concurrently in a given time step. This violation of simultaneity of all mechanisms involved becomes necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the lack of closed form of representation of armouring and sorting processes.
Such decoupled approach models are based on assumption that change in anyone variable during a time step is small enough that its effects on other variables during the time step can be ignored. Required sequence of operations is as follows (and also shown in flow chart below) :
1. Load boundary conditions (water and sediment inflow and downstream water levels) 2. Using latest 2, D50, ACF compute water depth, flow area, friction slope, water surface width and water and sediment discharge at all grid points (through simultaneous solution of equations 1,2,3,4,6,7)
Annexure II
Page iv of vi
3. Using estimated sediment discharge (Qs) and water surface width (B) computed in step 3 a new estimate of bed surface elevation obtained by solution of equation (5) i.e. sediment continuity. 4. Using changes in bed elevation in step 3 new estimates of Armoring factor and median dia are computed using equations (3) and (9). Steps 2 to 4 are repeated till successive estimates of bed elevation (zn+1) no longer change.
FLOW CHART
Load Boundary Conditions
Compute bed level changes, Sediment continuity equations
Execute sorting and armoring procedure
Supplementary relations used in CHARIMA :
The model uses following supplementary relations for simulating different processes :
1. Total Sediment load prediction: For this purpose following sediment transport formulae have been coded in CHARlMA : a) TLTM formula by Karim & Kennedy
Annexure II
Page v of vi
TIME LOOP
Compute friction factor and sediment discharge
ITERATION LOOP
Compute water level, discharge etc., solution of continuity and momentum equations
b) Engelund and Hanson formula c) Modified Ackers and White formula d) Power Law Predictor 2. Dune height predication : a) Yalin's relation b) Allen's relation 3. Hydraulic sorting of bed material. 4. Changes in bed material composition. 5. Armoring of bed surface / armoring factor (Fraction of bed, bed surface covered by nonmoving armoring particles) 6. Effects of bed forms on armoring. 7. Effect of armoring on Sediment discharge and mixed layer thickness.
Most of these procedure and relation are similar to those used for IALLUVIAL MODEL developed at IIHR.
Annexure II
Page vi of vi
TABLE 1 & 2 Recorded Yearly Maximum One Day Rainfall (mm) at Santacruz and Colaba
Table 1
Year 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Santacruz Rainfall Year (mm) 154.9 1985 129.5 1986 308.6 1987 310.6 1988 256.0 1989 183.4 1990 175.8 1991 161.5 1992 241.2 1993 176.0 1994 121.2 1995 157.8 1996 212.4 1997 192.6 1998 137.8 1999 372.9 2000 291.3 2001 201.1 2002 173.8 2003 201.4 2004 194.0 2005 244.6 203.0 163.2 375.2 223.4 264.7 136.8 156.9 139.1 151.1 318.2 275.6 253.4 240.1 Rainfall (mm) 223.6 194.5 125.7 144.9 192.1 150.2 399.0 215.4 312.4 157.2 180.0 171.7 346.2 211.5 134.4 351.5 161.0 186.0 192.9 187.4 944.2 Year 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 Rainfall (mm) 144.3 151.6 127.8 86.4 82.3 119.1 254.5 129.3 120.1 304.0 111.3 164.3 201.9 178.1 248.9 165.6 148.6 135.6 277.4 182.4 216.2 215.1 304.8 85.6 116.8 147.1 216.9 250.7 170.9 548.1 242.8 174.0 153.2 118.9 148.3
Table 2
Colaba Rainfall Year (mm) 1936 133.9 1937 93.5 1938 181.1 1939 231.6 1940 163.1 1941 105.2 1942 178.6 1943 203.5 1944 181.1 1945 246.4 1946 217.4 1947 265.4 1948 172.7 1949 432.8 1950 147.8 1951 138.4 1952 156.7 1953 173.7 1954 249.9 1955 149.4 1956 222.3 1957 158.2 1958 233.4 1959 134.1 1960 238.3 1961 144.5 1962 199.0 1963 189.1 1964 112.1 1965 249.4 1966 156.5 1967 179.7 1968 58.6 1969 109.6 1970 288.8 Year 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Rainfall (mm) 291.2 175.6 171.6 575.6 417.2 123.5 184.4 175.7 206.2 125.9 241.6 180.9 173.4 544.3 345.5 128.7 153.9 138.2 183.3 421.2 477.6 175.9 206.9 148.6 162.8 165.4 244.2 261.9 233.0 243.7 184.9 138.3 147.7 159.6
Table 2a HIGHEST RECORDED 24 HOURS RAINFALL IN AND AROUND PANVEL CREEK

Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Station Khandala Lonavala Matheran Karjat Kalyan Vada Bhivandi Shahapur Murbad Mokhada Kurla Rainfall (mm) 516.4 493 657 605 458.5 459.5 469.1 441.2 386.6 394.7 354.3 Date 19.07.1958 02.08.1956 24.07.1921 18.07.1958 17.07.1885 19.06.1953 17.07.1885 06.07.1905 23.07.1921 02.07.1941 27.06.1915 Sr. No. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Station Mahim Kolaba Dahanu Panvel Pen Roha Igatpuri Trimbak Alibag Mangoan Rainfall (mm) 356.6 548.1 481 458.5 500 629.9 450.9 410.7 407.7 460 Date 21.09.1923 10.09.1930 01.09.1858 17.07.1885 07.09.1973 18.06.1886 21.07.1894 02.07.1941 23.09.1949
TABLE 3 Three Hourly Rainfall (mm) at Santacruz during 25th 31st July 2005 Time (Hr) 11.30 14.30 Hourly Rainfall (mm) 000.0 001.1 000.9 018.4 012.8 005.1 000.1 005.0 000.5 002.5 000.8 000.9 041.6 005.3
Date 25-Jul 26-Jul 27-Jul 28-Jul 29-Jul 30-Jul 31-Jul
2.30 000.1 Trace 116.2 000.0 004.1 007.0 004.6
5.30 001.8 000.1 011.0 000.0 008.8 003.6 010.2
8.30 000.1 Trace 048.2 000.0 001.2 023.5 034.6
17.30 010.0 380.8 001.1 000.0 006.4 006.8 042.9
20.30 000.0 267.6 Trace 000.0 000.0 008.6 009.2
23.30 000.7 101.1 000.0 000.0 014.2 000.2 006.1
Hourly Rainfall (mm) at Powai and Santacruz during 25th 27th July 2005 Powai Rainfall Date (mm) --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 8.00 26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --26/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 5.00 27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 8.00 27/07 --27/07 --27/07 --27/07 Santacruz Rainfall Time (mm) 15 Hr 100.20 16 Hr 190.30 17 Hr 90.30 18 Hr 100.40 19 Hr 95.00 20 Hr 72.20 21 Hr 60.20 22 Hr 22.20 23 Hr 18.40 24 Hr 40.00 1 Hr 42.50 2 Hr 33.70
Date 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 25/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07
Time 1 Hr 2 Hr 3 Hr 4 Hr 5 Hr 6 Hr 7 Hr 8 Hr 9 Hr 10 Hr 11 Hr 12 Hr 13 Hr 14 Hr 15 Hr 16 Hr 17 Hr 18 Hr 19 Hr 20 Hr 21 Hr 22 Hr 23 Hr 24 Hr 1 Hr 2 Hr 3 Hr 4 Hr 5 Hr 6 Hr 7 Hr 8 Hr 9 Hr 10 Hr 11 Hr 12 Hr
Time 13 Hr 14 Hr 15 Hr 16 Hr 17 Hr 18 Hr 19 Hr 20 Hr 21 Hr 22 Hr 23 Hr 24 Hr 1 Hr 2 Hr 3 Hr 4 Hr 5 Hr 6 Hr 7 Hr 8 Hr 9 Hr 10 Hr 11 Hr 12 Hr 13 Hr 14 Hr 15 Hr 16 Hr 17 Hr 18 Hr 19 Hr 20 Hr 21 Hr 22 Hr 23 Hr 24 Hr
Rainfall (mm) ----90.00 136.00 91.00 83.00 77.00 109.00 120.00 123.00 20.00 44.00 96.00 32.00 13.00 --7.00 8.00 5.00 7.00 13.00 6.00 7.00 --20.00 ------4.00 ---------------
Date 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 26/07 27/07
Table - IV Hourly rainfall records at various rain-gauge stations on 26th July 2005 Time (hrs) 0.00 to 1.00 1.00 to 2.00 2.00 to 3.00 3.00 to 4.00 4.00 to 5.00 5.00 to 6.00 6.00 to 7.00 7.00 to 8.00 8.00 to 9.00 9.00 to 10.00 10.00 to 11.00 11.00 to 12.00 12.00 to 13.00 13.00 to 14.00 14.00 to 15.00 15.00 to 16.00 16.00 to 17.00 17.00 to 18.00 18.00 to 19.00 19.00 to 20.00 20.00 to 21.00 21.00 to 22.00 22.00 to 23.00 23.00 to 24.00 Total Panvel 14 0 1 19 5 16 65 68 60 62 64 50 76 62 50 35 35 6.5 19 14 6 21 7 4.5 760
Rainfall (mm) at Nerul Vashi
Kharghar
CBD Belapur
1 13 8 8 70 80 60 40 60 60 105 70 50 50 30 6 7 5 5 8 6 3 14 5 764
1 8.5 4 4 40 55 62 65 50 45 55 70 75 80 72.5 7 2 4 4 6 4 4 8 6 732
0.5 0.5 1.5 7.5 10 10 70 100 40 20 30 30 40 40 70 50 40 20 15.5 3.5 5 6 5 3 618
2 0 0 1 5 8 8 32 80 105 90 95 85 95 85 80 80 60 16 10 6 24 16 15 998
TABLE 5
Recorded Yearly Maximum Hourly Rainfall (mm) at Santacruz and Colaba

At Santacruz Year Rainfall (mm) 1969 93.0 1970 45.0 1971 58.1 1972 57.5 1973 27.0 1974 57.3 1975 63.5 1976 43.1 1977 68.9 1978 43.8 1979 45.5 1980 60.8 1981 43.0 1982 47.0 1983 42.5 1984 67.5 1985 63.7 1986 36.0 1987 48.0 1988 46.7 1989 43.5 1990 55.3 1991 92.5 1992 41.0 1993 94.0 1994 70.0 1995 80.0 1996 44.9 1997 93.0 1998 153.0 1999 60.9 2000 67.5 2001 52.0 2002 45.0 2003 43.5 2004 51.4 2005 189.0 Year 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 At Colaba Rainfall (mm) 28.3 48.7 86.2 40.0 38.3 89.0 110.0 43.0 66.2 50.5 57.5 48.6 80.0 56.8 64.6 68.3 89.0 58.8 42.6 53.3 39.0 113.0 48.3 53.5 40.0 37.4 46.5 52.3 46.0 100.0 40.0 40.0 73.5 34.5 44.2 38.0
Table - 6 POINT TO AREAL RAINFALL RATIOS (PERCENTAGES)

Area in Storm Duration in hours 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Sq. km 0 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 50 87.00 89.50 92.00 93.00 94.00 95.00 95.33 95.67 96.00 96.33 96.67 97.00 97.01 97.08 97.15 97.17 97.21 97.25 97.29 97.33 97.38 97.42 97.46 97.50 100 81.00 84.50 88.00 89.00 90.00 91.00 91.50 92.00 92.50 93.00 93.50 94.00 94.04 94.08 94.15 94.17 94.21 94.25 94.29 94.33 94.38 94.42 94.46 94.50 150 76.00 80.00 84.00 85.33 86.67 88.00 88.58 89.17 89.75 90.33 90.92 91.50 91.58 91.67 91.75 91.83 91.92 92.00 92.08 92.17 92.25 92.33 92.42 92.50 200 80.50 82.17 83.83 85.50 86.08 86.67 87.25 87.83 88.42 89.00 89.17 89.33 89.50 89.67 89.83 90.00 90.17 90.33 90.50 90.67 90.83 91.00 250 77.50 79.33 81.17 83.00 83.75 84.50 85.25 86.00 86.75 87.50 87.67 87.83 88.00 88.17 88.33 88.50 88.67 88.33 89.00 89.17 89.33 89.50 300 81.00 81.83 82.67 83.50 84.33 85.17 88.00 86.17 86.33 86.50 86.67 86.83 87.50 87.17 87.33 87.50 87.67 87.83 88.00 350 79.00 79.92 80.83 81.75 82.67 83.58 84.50 84.71 84.92 85.12 85.33 85.54 85.75 85.96 86.17 86.38 86.58 86.79 87.00 400 77.50 78.50 79.50 80.50 81.50 82.50 83.50 83.71 83.92 84.12 84.33 84.54 84.75 94.96 85.17 85.38 85.58 85.79 86.00 450 76.00 77.08 78.17 79.25 80.33 81.42 82.50 82.71 82.92 83.12 83.33 83.54 83.75 83.96 84.17 84.38 84.58 84.79 85.00 500 75.00 76.08 77.17 78.25 79.33 80.42 81.50 81.71 81.92 82.12 82.33 82.54 82.75 92.96 83.17 83.38 83.58 83.79 84.00 600 80.00 80.21 80.42 80.62 80.83 81.04 81.25 913.46 81.67 81.88 82.08 82.29 82.50 700 77.50 77.83 78.17 78.50 78.83 79.17 79.50 79.83 80.17 80.50 80.83 81.17 81.50 800 77.00 77.29 77.58 77.88 78.17 78.46 78.75 79.04 79.33 79.63 79.92 80.21 80.00 900 76.00 76.29 76.58 76.88 77.17 77.46 77.75 78.04 78.33 78.63 78.92 79.21 79.50 1000 75.00 75.29 75.58 75.88 76.17 76.46 76.75 77.04 77.33 77.63 77.92 78.21 78.50 1100 74.00 74.33 74.67 75.00 75.33 75.67 76.00 76.33 76.67 77.00 77.33 77.67 78.00 1200 73.00 73.38 73.75 74.13 74.50 74.88 75.25 75.63 76.00 76.38 76.75 77.13 77.50 1300 77.30 1400 77.00 1500 76.50 2000 75.00 2500 75.00 Area in Sq. km 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 2000 2500
Ref. - Flood estimationreport for west coast region , Konkan and Malbar coast sub zones 5a and 5b, report No. K8M/19/1992 of CWC and IMD
Table - 7
Ref. - Flood estimationreport for west coast region , Konkan and Malbar coast sub zones 5a and 5b, p g , report No. K8M/19/1992 of CWC and IMD Duration (Hr) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Duration in Hrs. 20 21 22 Ratio 0.32 0.42 0.485 0.525 0 525 0.57 0.61 0.64 0.67 0.70 0.73 0.755 0.78 0.805 0.83 0.85 0.87 0.89 0 89 0.91 0.925 0.94 0.955 0.97 0.985 1.00
RATIOS OF 24-HOURS POINT RAINFALL TO SHORT DURATION RAINFALL
23 24
Table - 8 HOURLY DISTRIBUTION CO-EFFECIATIONTS OF AREAL RAINFALL

TIME HOURS 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 DISTRIBUTION CO EFFICEIANTS FOR DIFFERENT STORM DURATION OF 2 -24 HOURS 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 TIME HOURS 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
19
20
21
22
23
24 1.00 0.98 0.96 0.94 0.92 0.89 0.87 0.84 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.74 0.70 0.68 0.64 0.60 0.55 0.51 0.46 0.40 0.34 0.27 0.19 0.10
1.00 0.82
1.00 0.91 0.68
1.00 0.96 0.81 0.57
1.00 0.95 0.87 0.73 0.50
1.00 0.96 0.90 0.81 0.66 0.45
1.00 0.96 0.89 0.82 0.71 0.56 0.36
1.00 0.96 0.91 0.85 0.77 0.66 0.53 0.31
1.00 0.97 0.92 0.87 0.80 0.72 0.62 0.49 0.30
1.00 0.97 0.94 0.89 0.84 0.77 0.69 0.59 0.46 0.28
1.00 0.97 0.94 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.73 0.65 0.55 0.43 0.26
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.91 0.87 0.82 0.77 0.70 0.62 0.51 0.39 0.24
1.00 0.97 0.94 0.90 0.86 0.82 0.77 0.72 0.65 0.57 0.47 0.36 0.19
1.00 0.97 0.95 0.91 0.87 0.84 0.79 0.75 0.69 0.62 0.54 0.44 0.33 0.18
1.00 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.77 0.73 0.67 0.80 0.52 0.42 0.30 0.17
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.86 0.83 0.79 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.57 0.50 0.40 0.28 0.16
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.93 0.90 0.87 0.84 0.81 0.77 0.73 0.68 0.63 0.55 0.48 0.38 0.27 0.15
1.00 0.98 0.96 0.93 0.91 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.78 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.53 0.45 0.35 0.26 0.13
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.92 0.89 0.86 0.83 0.80 0.77 0.73 0.68 0.64 0.60 0.54 0.48 0.41 0.33 0.24 0.12
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.87 0.84 0.81 0.78 0.74 0.71 0.66 0.63 0.58 0.53 0.46 0.40 0.32 0.23 0.12
1.00 0.98 0.95 0.93 0.90 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.72 0.69 0.64 0.60 0.56 0.51 0.44 0.38 0.30 0.21 0.12
1.00 0.98 0.96 0.93 0.91 0.88 0.86 0.83 0.80 0.77 0.74 0.70 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.54 0.49 0.42 0.36 0.29 0.20 0.11
1.00 0.98 0.96 0.94 0.91 0.89 0.86 0.84 0.81 0.78 0.76 0.72 0.69 0.65 0.61 0.57 0.53 0.48 0.41 0.35 0.28 0.19 0.10
Ref. - Flood estimationreport for west coast region , Konkan and Malbar coast sub zones 5a and 5b, report No. K8M/19/1992 of CWC and IMD
Table - 9 Hourly rainfall distribution for storms of different return periods

4 hour storm duration Hourly Rainfall (mm)
Time hours Cumulati ve Coeff. Hourly Coeff. 50 year Return Peroid 100 year Return Peroid PMP Time hours Cumulati ve Coeff. Hourly Coeff.

50 year Return Peroid 100 year Return Peroid PMP Time hours

Cumulati ve Coeff. Hourly Coeff. 50 year Return Peroid 100 year Return Peroid PMP Time hours

Cumulati ve Coeff. Hourly Coeff. 50 year Return Peroid 100 year Return Peroid PMP
1 2 3 4
0.57 0.81 0.94 1
0.57 0.24 0.13 0.06 Total
136.46 57.46 31.12 14.36 239.40
158.90 66.91 36.24 16.73 278.78
209.48 88.20 47.78 22.05 367.50
1 2 3 4 5 6
0.45 0.66 0.81 0.9 0.96 1
0.45 0.21 0.15 0.09 0.06 0.04 Total
125.17 58.41 41.72 25.03 16.69 11.13 278.16
145.76 68.02 48.59 29.15 19.43 12.96 323.91
192.15 89.67 64.05 38.43 25.62 17.08 427.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
0.24 0.39 0.51 0.62 0.7 0.77 0.82 0.87 0.91 0.95 0.98 1
0.24 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 Total
85.36 53.35 42.68 39.12 28.45 24.90 17.78 17.78 14.23 14.23 10.67 7.11 355.68
99.40 62.13 49.70 45.56 33.13 28.99 20.71 20.71 16.57 16.57 12.43 8.28 414.18
131.04 81.90 65.52 60.06 43.68 38.22 27.30 27.30 21.84 21.84 16.38 10.92 546.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
0.1 0.19 0.27 0.34 0.4 0.46 0.51 0.55 0.6 0.64 0.68 0.7 0.74 0.76 0.79 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.89 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Total
45.60 41.04 36.48 31.92 27.36 27.36 22.80 18.24 22.80 18.24 18.24 9.12 18.24 9.12 13.68 13.68 9.12 13.68 9.12 13.68 9.12 9.12 9.12 9.12 456.00
53.10 47.79 42.48 37.17 31.86 31.86 26.55 21.24 26.55 21.24 21.24 10.62 21.24
70.00 63.00 56.00 49.00 42.00 42.00 35.00 28.00 35.00 28.00 28.00 14.00 28.00
10.62 14.00 15.93 21.00 15.93 21.00 10.62 14.00 15.93 21.00 10.62 14.00 15.93 21.00 10.62 14.00 10.62 14.00 10.62 14.00 10.62 14.00 531.00 700.00
Adopted 24 hour rainfall 1 hour (32.0%) 50 yr RP 100 yr RP PMP 456 mm 531 mm 700mm 145.92 169.92 224.00
Corresponding rainfall for storms of different durations 4 hours (52.5%) 6 hours (61.0%) 12 hours (78.0%) 24 hours (100%) 239.40 278.78 367.50 278.16 323.91 427.00 355.68 414.18 546.00 456.00 531.00 700.00
TABLE - 10 PREDICTION OF RAINFALL INTESITIES BY DIFFERENT NORMS

T a1 t
a2
CIDCO norms Rainfall duration (hours)
CWC norms C = 6.61 a1 = 0.15, a2 = 0.62 Return Periods
T a1 t
a2
Garde and Kothyari Norms C = 8.31
T a1 t a2
(R )
2 0 .33 24
C = 6.4 upto 1 hourr & C = 8 after 1 hour rainfall duration a1 = 0.25, a2 = 0.48 upto 1 hr & a2 = 0.63 after 1 hr rainfall dur. Return Periods 2 years 5 years 186.17 133.48 95.70 77.30 59.88 49.95 38.69 32.28 25.00 19.36 16.15 10 years 221.40 158.74 113.81 91.93 71.20 59.40 46.01 38.38 29.73 23.03 19.21 25 years 278.39 199.60 143.11 115.59 89.53 74.69 57.85 48.26 37.38 28.96 24.16 50 years 100 years 331.06 237.37 170.19 137.46 106.47 88.82 68.80 57.40 44.46 34.44 28.73 393.70 282.28 202.39 163.47 126.62 105.63 81.82 68.26 52.87 40.95 34.16 2 years 173.23 112.72 73.34 47.72 37.11 31.05 24.15 20.20 15.71 12.22 10.22 5 years 198.76 129.33 84.15 54.75 42.58 35.63 27.71 23.18 18.03 14.02 11.73
a1 = 0.20, a2 = 0.71, R = 218 Return Periods 50 years 100 years 280.75 182.68 118.86 77.34 60.15 50.32 39.14 32.74 25.47 19.81 16.57 311.51 202.69 131.89 85.81 66.74 55.84 43.43 36.33 28.26 21.98 18.39 2 years 150.98 92.30 56.42 34.49 25.86 21.09 15.81 12.89 9.67 7.25 5.91 5 years 181.35 110.86 67.77 41.43 31.07 25.33 18.99 15.48 11.61 8.71 7.10 10 years 208.32 127.35 77.85 47.59 35.69 29.09 21.82 17.79 13.34 10.00 8.15 25 years 250.21 152.96 93.51 57.16 42.86 34.95 26.20 21.36 16.02 12.01 9.79 50 years 100 years 287.42 175.71 107.41 65.66 49.24 40.14 30.10 24.54 18.40 13.80 11.25 330.16 201.83 123.38 75.43 56.56 46.11 34.58 28.19 21.14 15.85 12.92
10 years 220.54 143.50 93.37 60.75 47.25 39.53 30.74 25.72 20.00 15.56 13.02
25 years 253.03 164.64 107.13 69.70 54.21 45.35 35.27 29.51 22.95 17.85 14.93
0.25 0.50 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 12.00 18.00 24.00
148.06 106.15 76.11 61.48 47.62 39.72 30.77 25.67 19.88 15.40 12.85 Where,
(R
2 24
I = Rainfall intesity (mm/hr) T = Return Period (years) a1 = constant )0 . 33 = 24 Hr Rainfall for 2 yr RP
C = Constant t = Rainfall duration (hours) a2 = constant
Table - 11
Estimated Hydrographs of Gadhi river for storms of different return periods and duration
Adopted Runoff coefficient =0.8
Time Hrs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
24 Hr
23.02 71.59 125.02 239.73 374.90 584.13 860.18 1098.72 1388.97 1407.20 1254.57 1124.79 1006.32 924.59 838.04 766.38 717.59 653.52 600.71 533.71 542.22 506.94 495.93 491.51 454.49 443.86 407.21 372.23 315.92 249.32 181.66 114.92 33.44
PMP 12 Hr
43.10 122.16 194.92 378.48 567.17 872.18 1260.92 1534.42 1905.15 1732.82 1363.73 1133.69 921.61 756.53 621.46 517.30 414.50 310.14 199.56 102.68 26.09
Hourly Discharges in m /s 100 year R P 50 year R P 6 Hr 24 Hr 12 Hr 6 Hr 24 Hr 12 Hr 6 Hr

63.20 17.46 32.69 169.12 54.30 92.66 253.18 94.84 147.86 488.94 181.85 287.10 699.43 284.39 430.24 1066.23 443.10 661.60 1500.93 652.50 956.48 1727.88 833.46 1163.95 2082.58 1053.63 1445.17 1602.62 1067.46 1314.46 954.84 951.68 1034.46 581.35 853.23 859.96 322.33 763.37 699.09 160.61 701.37 573.88 40.80 635.71 471.45 581.35 392.46 544.35 314.47 495.74 235.29 455.68 151.39 404.86 77.88 411.31 19.78 384.55 376.20 372.84 344.76 336.70 308.90 282.36 239.65 189.13 137.80 87.18 25.37 47.94 128.29 192.06 370.90 530.56 808.81 1138.57 1310.72 1579.79 1215.69 724.31 440.99 244.49 121.84 30.96 15.00 28.07 41.17 46.63 79.57 110.17 81.44 126.97 164.92 156.16 246.54 318.50 244.22 369.46 455.61 380.52 568.14 694.55 560.34 821.36 977.71 715.74 999.51 1125.54 904.82 1241.01 1356.60 916.69 1128.74 1043.93 817.26 888.31 621.97 732.72 738.46 378.69 655.55 600.31 209.98 602.31 492.80 104.65 545.92 404.81 26.59 499.24 336.97 467.46 270.02 425.72 202.04 391.32 129.98 347.67 66.87 353.22 16.99 330.24 323.06 320.18 296.07 289.14 265.27 242.48 205.80 162.42 118.34 74.87 21.79
26 July2005 Belapur Rainfall Discharge 3 (mm) (m /s)

2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 80.00 105.00 90.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 85.00 80.00 80.00 60.00 16.00 10.00 6.00 24.00 16.00 15.00 0.66 1.45 1.74 3.99 6.98 14.26 24.29 44.28 97.90 181.00 309.89 505.00 774.27 1118.84 1531.30 1960.18 2344.28 2515.32 2437.64 2333.09 2187.83 2021.41 1786.51 1468.45 1138.26 783.98 462.99 332.62 303.98 302.78 221.95 125.52 35.83
Table - 12
Estimated Hydrographs of Kasadi river for storms of different return periods and duration
Adopted Runoff coeficient =0.8
Time Hrs. 24 Hr
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 267.24 441.34 570.47 668.16 731.90 663.58 588.62 511.17 485.78 445.34 412.21 342.94 354.45 291.54 280.87 269.31 256.64 250.62 240.82 248.84 226.38 222.12 206.30 204.52 136.64 96.48 61.29 28.87
Hourly Discharges in m /s PMP 12 Hr 6 Hr 100 year R P 24 Hr 12 Hr 6 Hr

202.72 334.79 432.74 506.85 555.20 503.38 446.51 387.76 368.50 337.82 312.69 260.14 268.87 221.16 213.06 204.29 194.68 190.11 182.68 188.76 171.73 168.49 156.49 155.15 103.65 73.18 46.49 21.90 379.49 522.37 617.81 702.84 730.95 563.44 453.49 382.01 310.18 270.59 227.30 189.99 127.53 83.76 44.81 17.08 556.48 677.85 746.99 759.16 738.02 431.27 253.72 137.68 70.08 26.73
50 year R P 24 Hr 12 Hr 6 Hr
174.09 287.50 371.62 435.26 476.78 432.28 383.45 332.99 316.45 290.11 268.52 223.40 230.90 189.92 182.97 175.44 167.18 163.26 156.87 162.10 147.47 144.69 134.39 133.23 89.01 62.85 39.93 18.81 325.89 448.57 530.54 603.54 627.68 483.85 389.42 328.02 266.35 232.36 195.16 163.14 109.51 71.92 38.47 14.66 477.87 582.10 641.44 651.89 633.76 370.34 217.87 118.24 60.19 22.95
26 July2005 Belapur Rainfall Discharge (mm) (m 3 /s)

7.64 5.74 5.03 8.45 26.08 47.40 68.38 178.87 446.17 745.83 936.50 1136.02 1231.37 1270.24 1216.27 1180.78 1143.83 1052.38 794.82 585.10 395.72 294.76 201.17 198.00 151.19 124.24 67.73 30.93 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 80.00 105.00 90.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 85.00 80.00 80.00 60.00 16.00 10.00 6.00 24.00 16.00 15.00
500.28 733.59 688.62 893.60 814.45 984.72 926.54 1000.77 963.62 972.93 742.79 568.53 597.85 334.46 503.61 181.50 408.89 92.38 356.68 35.22 299.60 250.44 168.11 110.41 59.07 22.52
Table - 13
Estimated Hydrographs of Taloja river for storms of different return periods and duration
Time Hrs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
24 Hr
266.47 508.31 690.17 613.14 536.11 485.72 435.54 382.04 358.31 334.97 331.66 254.83 254.43 207.76 227.78 207.56 204.45 204.24 180.91 204.24 180.91 177.60 154.06 154.06 100.77 47.07
PMP 12 Hr
498.83 814.38 1004.13 755.30 616.93 514.96 397.38 337.14 279.64 258.69 219.55 177.83 96.96 36.72
6 Hr
731.45 1078.35 1233.80 693.45 460.28 292.50 151.65 57.43
Hourly Discharges in m /s 100 year R P 24 Hr 12 Hr 6 Hr

202.13 385.59 523.54 465.11 406.68 368.46 330.39 289.81 271.80 254.10 251.59 193.31 193.00 157.60 172.79 157.45 155.09 154.93 137.23 154.93 137.23 134.72 116.87 116.87 76.44 35.71 378.38 617.76 761.70 572.95 467.97 390.61 301.42 255.74 212.14 196.26 166.58 134.91 73.55 27.84 554.86 818.00 935.94 526.03 349.14 221.87 115.04 43.57
173.58 331.13 449.60 399.42 349.24 316.41 283.72 248.87 233.41 218.21 216.05 166.00 165.74 135.34 148.38 135.21 133.18 133.05 117.85 133.05 117.85 115.69 100.36 100.36 65.64 30.66 324.94 530.49 654.09 491.99 401.85 335.44 258.84 219.60 182.15 168.53 143.04 115.84 63.15 23.91 476.48 702.44 803.70 451.69 299.81 190.54 98.81 37.42
26 July2005 Belapur Discharge Rainfall (mm) (m 3 /s)

7.61 7.67 6.72 3.81 22.87 52.99 77.95 179.40 454.17 814.14 1014.31 1059.87 990.54 1007.07 973.73 949.97 897.17 804.22 560.02 301.17 114.99 148.00 173.13 199.16 111.33 50.43 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 80.00 105.00 90.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 85.00 80.00 80.00 60.00 16.00 10.00 6.00 24.00 16.00 15.00
Table- 14
Estimated Hydrographs of Kalundri river for storms of different return periods and duration
Time Hrs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
24 Hr
130.51 508.37 947.78 1179.38 1182.61 1047.29 938.02 838.80 749.82 693.42 656.41 600.66 529.08 469.06 435.66 415.46 412.55 392.23 382.90 372.73 369.12 359.68 330.03 310.52 270.64 192.45 94.14 27.56
PMP 12 Hr
244.32 884.48 1499.72 1676.16 1524.42 1209.78 985.69 797.72 652.64 559.47 489.45 422.81 322.87 197.58 84.18 21.50
6 Hr
358.25 1240.24 1969.49 1972.80 1516.90 925.93 584.15 317.44 131.67 33.63

99.00 385.64 718.96 894.64 897.10 794.45 711.55 636.29 568.80 526.01 497.94 455.65 401.34 355.82 330.48 315.15 312.95 297.54 290.46 282.74 280.00 272.84 250.35 235.55 205.30 145.99 71.41 20.91 185.33 670.93 1137.63 1271.48 1156.37 917.67 747.67 605.09 495.07 424.42 371.33 320.79 244.95 149.88 63.85 16.30 271.76 940.81 1494.01 1496.52 1150.68 702.36 443.11 240.80 99.89 25.52
85.02 331.17 617.41 768.28 770.39 682.24 611.05 546.42 488.46 451.71 427.61 391.29 344.65 305.56 283.80 270.64 268.75 255.51 249.43 242.80 240.45 234.30 214.99 202.28 176.30 125.37 61.33 17.96 159.15 576.16 976.92 1091.85 992.99 788.02 642.05 519.61 425.11 364.43 318.85 275.45 210.32 128.69 54.82 14.00 233.37 807.91 1282.94 1285.07 988.08 603.13 380.53 206.81 85.79 21.91
26 July2005 Belapur Discharge Rainfall 3 (mm) (m /s)

3.73 11.17 14.04 11.38 18.84 49.86 99.46 186.26 431.92 921.03 1483.87 1860.50 1977.84 1953.64 1914.87 1882.21 1811.93 1711.67 1474.48 1067.28 622.23 342.70 285.05 334.07 322.07 228.68 102.84 29.53 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 80.00 105.00 90.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 85.00 80.00 80.00 60.00 16.00 10.00 6.00 24.00 16.00 15.00
Table -15
Estimated Hydrographs of Ulwe river for storms of different return periods and duration
Time Hrs.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
24 Hr
161.78 403.98 472.87 419.77 366.66 329.73 302.46 260.45 239.70 238.26 223.52 180.07 160.75 157.89 144.57 148.23 143.14 133.48 132.05 133.48 132.05 117.30 106.21 106.21 73.86 22.18
PMP 12 Hr
302.85 672.96 661.35 510.41 426.45 344.72 273.38 224.42 194.50 174.34 153.07 120.30 66.26 17.30
6 Hr
444.08 916.48 783.46 467.31 302.54 194.93 103.64 27.06

122.72 306.45 358.71 318.42 278.14 250.12 229.44 197.57 181.83 180.74 169.55 136.60 121.94 119.77 109.67 112.44 108.58 101.26 100.17 101.26 100.17 88.98 80.57 80.57 56.03 16.83 229.72 510.49 501.68 387.18 323.48 261.47 207.36 170.24 147.55 132.27 116.14 91.27 50.26 13.12 336.87 695.22 594.31 354.49 229.49 147.86 78.62 20.53
24 Hr
50 year R P 12 Hr
197.28 438.37 430.81 332.48 277.77 224.54 178.08 146.17 126.69 113.58 99.73 78.36 43.15 11.27
6 Hr
289.28 597.01 510.34 304.39 197.06 126.99 67.53 17.63
26 July2005 Belapur Rainfall Discharge 3 (mm) (m /s)

4.62 7.38 3.17 2.31 15.25 38.53 55.94 116.16 315.68 588.66 722.32 718.12 689.70 683.82 681.78 649.16 614.86 560.71 385.20 177.24 76.13 93.46 135.07 131.75 80.72 23.77 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 32.00 80.00 105.00 90.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 85.00 80.00 80.00 60.00 16.00 10.00 6.00 24.00 16.00 15.00
105.39 263.16 308.04 273.45 238.85 214.80 197.03 169.66 156.14 155.21 145.61 117.30 104.72 102.85 94.18 96.56 93.25 86.95 86.02 86.95 86.02 76.42 69.19 69.19 48.11 14.45
Table - 16 Details of bridges on rivers in Panvel creek

River reach between Nodes Chainage (m) in the link from d/s 8425.458
Name of the river
Link No.
Bridge No. 1
Span 14 Nos. x 49 m 2 Nos. x 32.5 m 1 No. x 40 m + 5 No. x 46 m + 1 No. x 48 m 1 No. x 44 m + 1 No. x 38 m 2 Nos. x 37.5 m + 5 Nos. x 46 m
Clear Opening (m) 751
Remarks
Belapur - Uran railway bridge
2A Panvel Creek 6 TO 12 8802.064
446
Belapur - Ulwe Road Bridge
2B 70 Gadhi R. 60 Taloja Creek 30 8 TO 7 10 TO 9 3 4 5 6 7 8 8857.306 3719.542 5506.82
397 1 Nos. x 48 m + 1 No. x 44 m 4 Nos. x 45 m 4 Nos. x 45 m 13 Nos. x 11.8 m 12 Nos. x 28.5 m 4 Nos. x 35 m 7 Nos. x 16.0 m 2 Nos. x 8.45 m. 8 Nos. x 9.0 m. 7 Nos. x 12.20 m. 2 Nos. x 6.50 m. 2 Nos. x 7.55 m. 2 Nos. x 7.35 m. 2 Nos. x 7.60 m. 2 Nos. x 4.10 m. 4 Nos. x 4.8 m. 5 Nos. x 8.00 m 5 Nos. x 8.80 m 2 Nos. x 13.75 m 2 Nos. x 12.80 m 2 Nos. x 5.60 m 10 Nos. x 7.20 m 2 Nos. x 6.20 m 3 Nos. x 6.40 m 2 Nos. x 7.35 m 1 No. x 8.05 m 2 x 6.55 m 1 x 6.90 m 2 X 6.55 m 10 x 8.15 m 2 x 12.90 m 4 x 13.75 m 2 x 9.00 m 3 x 9 .90 m 8 x 12.20 m 1 x11.50 m 2 x 9.00 8 x 13.00 2 x 13.10 m 3 x 14.10 m 2 x 11.70 m 2 x 12.40 m 2 x 12.90 m 3 x 13.50 m 2 x 10.50 m 2 x12.10 m 2 x 13.00m 2 x 14.10m 2 x 5.50 m 10 x 5.70 m 2 x 12.20 m 3 x 13.70 m 2 x 11.90 m 3 x 14.10 m 2 x 9.30 m 3 x 9.85 m 342 140 112 180 180 153.4
Belapur - Ulwe Road Bridge
NH-4B road bridge SH54 road bridge SH54 road bridge (New) Belapur - Panvel Rail bridge Sion - Panvel road bridge Pipeline bridge Mumbra - Panvel road bridge
1930.862 3447.419 3505.481
Taloja river u/s of Kasadi confluence
9 10 Link 10 7 TO 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
7340.568 7446.164 9411.623 10954.888 12722.686 2129.266 2832.316 4369.06 4963.962 6950.944 7946.582 518.437 2049.762 2341.197
89 84 28 30 30 94 53.1 83.2 31.6 22.75 20 94.6 80.8 47.7 109.1 122 68.5 48 66.3 45 54 68 65.5 66 48
Diva - Panvel rail bridge Majkur road bridge Ghotchal to Ghotcamp road bridge MIDC Road bridge NH-4 Road bridge Diva - Panvel rail bridge MIDC - Kalamboli road bridge MIDC - Padghe road bridge MIDC - Olap road bridge MIDC - Olap / Kanpoli road bridge Mumbai - Pune NH4 road bridge Mumbai - Ratnagiri Rail bridge Road bridge Mumbai - Pune expressway bridge Pipeline bridge Panvel - Uran JNPT rail bridge NH4 road bridge Railway bridge Mumbai - Pune expressway bridge Railway bridge Panvel - Ulwe road bridge (SH54) Panvel - Uran JNPT rail bridge Panvel - Uran JNPT rail bridge Dapoli road bridge
Kasadi river
Link 20
7 TO 2
Gadhi River
Link 40
9 TO 3
22 3777.18 23 24 23 Kalundri river 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 63.989 850.511 2695.905 3785.315 6223.862 7232.449 2510.954 3627.718 3639.866 3728.982
Link 50
9 TO 4
Ulwe river
Link 120
11 TO 5
Table 17 Widths of river channels in Panvel creek without and with reclamations for airport
Sr. No.
River Reach
Channel/Link No. (Fig 35)
Width (m) Without Airport With Airport Same as without Airport
Tolaja River U/S of Kasadi Confluence
10
500 to 200 m from Kasadi confluence upto NH4 bridge.
Kasadi River on U/S of Taloja Confluence
20
150 to 75 m in 9 km reach U/S of railway bridge. 400 to 500m in 1.3km reach Same as without from confluence. Airport 150 to 200 m in 7 km reach U/S of NH4 bridge. 400 to 1000 m in 2 km reach upto Belapur Panvel rail bridge
Taloja creek from Gadhi Taloja Confluence at Waghiwali island to Taloja Kasadi Confluence Gadhi river from Kalundri Confluence to 4 km U/S upto Express way bridge Kalundri river U/S of Gadhi Confluence
30 500 to 600m in remaining 2 km reach upto Taloja Kasadi Confluence 40 50 160 to 100 m
Same as without Airport
4 5
Same as without Airport
Gadhi river reach from Waghiwali island to Kalundri Confluence
60
150 to 75 m in reach of about 7 Same as without km Airport This part will be 500 to 100m for 3.6 km reach reclaimed and a 450m diversion channel upto proposed diversion proposed(link 65 fig. location 36) 450 to 100 m in remaining 4km reach upto Kalundri 450-650m confluence 400-900 m 400-900 m 400-3500 m 900-1600 m 400-650 m Closed 400-3500 m Closed
7 8 9 10
Panvel creek channel north of Waghiwali island Channel south of Waghiwali Island Panvel creek from BelapurUlwe Road bridge to mouth Gadhi river
70 80 90 100
Table - 18 Comparision of water levels along Gadhi River (Channel 60 and 40) under existing condition and with airport at spring tide HWL with flood peak arriving at time of HWL
Chainage Bed Predicted Water Levels (m) with peak discharge at spring tide high water Remark Link from d/s Level 100 year Flood (6 hrs) PMP ( 6 hrs ) Belapur rainfall 26 July 2005 and location Old km m Existing Airport Existing Airport Existing Airport 60 0.00 -3.21 3.28 3.27 3.42 60 0.10 -3.86 3.35 3.36 3.50 60 0.20 -4.22 3.42 3.44 3.59 60 0.30 -3.15 3.46 3.49 3.65 60 0.40 -2.80 3.50 3.55 3.72 60 0.50 -3.54 3.52 3.58 3.76 60 0.60 -4.46 3.52 3.59 3.78 60 0.70 -2.59 3.52 3.59 3.79 60 0.80 -2.39 3.55 3.63 3.83 60 0.90 -2.66 3.57 3.68 3.88 60 1.00 -2.55 3.59 3.71 3.92 60 1.10 -2.63 3.60 3.72 3.92 60 1.20 -2.33 3.62 3.75 3.95 60 1.30 -2.41 3.64 3.80 3.99 60 1.40 -1.58 3.63 3.77 3.95 60 1.50 -1.54 3.70 3.88 4.06 60 1.60 -1.93 3.75 3.97 4.16 60 1.70 -2.28 3.84 4.10 4.30 60 1.80 -1.37 3.85 4.12 4.32 60 1.90 -1.49 3.87 4.14 4.34 60 2.00 -1.56 3.90 4.18 4.39 60 2.10 -2.35 3.92 4.21 4.41 60 2.20 -2.63 3.94 4.23 4.44 60 2.30 -1.98 3.95 4.25 4.46 60 2.40 -2.02 3.97 4.27 4.48 60 2.50 -2.16 3.98 4.28 4.49 60 2.60 -1.84 3.99 4.29 4.50 60 2.70 -1.75 3.99 4.30 4.51 60 2.80 -1.81 4.00 4.30 4.51 60 2.90 -2.44 4.01 4.32 4.54 60 3.00 -2.37 4.02 4.34 4.55 60 3.10 -2.66 4.03 4.35 4.56 60 3.20 -3.45 4.03 4.35 4.57 60 3.30 -4.59 4.02 4.34 4.55 60 3.40 -1.53 3.95 3.43 4.23 3.72 4.43 3.90 60 3.50 -1.82 3.91 3.43 4.17 3.72 4.37 3.90 60 3.60 -1.51 4.02 3.61 4.31 3.98 4.53 4.18 60 3.72 -0.78 4.00 3.65 4.30 4.00 4.48 4.16 NH 4B road bridge 60 3.80 -0.71 4.44 4.22 4.94 4.81 5.22 5.09 60 3.90 -0.66 4.32 4.09 4.74 4.59 4.96 4.82 60 4.00 -0.82 4.48 4.30 4.95 4.84 5.19 5.07 60 4.10 -0.49 4.55 4.38 5.03 4.93 5.28 5.17 60 4.20 -0.69 4.71 4.57 5.23 5.14 5.48 5.40 60 4.30 0.10 4.62 4.48 5.10 5.01 5.34 5.25 60 4.40 0.42 4.89 4.80 5.41 5.35 5.65 5.60 60 4.50 0.30 5.11 5.05 5.67 5.63 5.93 5.89 60 4.60 0.06 5.27 5.22 5.86 5.83 6.13 6.09 60 4.70 0.26 5.22 5.17 5.77 5.74 6.03 5.99 60 4.80 -0.08 5.44 5.40 6.04 6.02 6.32 6.29 60 4.90 0.31 5.57 5.53 6.17 6.15 6.45 6.42 60 5.00 0.67 5.72 5.70 6.35 6.33 6.63 6.61 Panvel port 60 5.10 0.21 5.77 5.74 6.40 6.39 6.69 6.67 60 5.20 0.07 5.93 5.91 6.58 6.56 6.87 6.85 60 5.30 -0.50 6.03 6.02 6.69 6.68 6.98 6.97 60 5.40 -0.15 6.10 6.08 6.75 6.73 7.04 7.02 60 5.51 0.22 6.01 5.99 6.65 6.64 6.94 6.93 SH 54 60 5.60 0.23 6.49 6.48 7.15 7.14 7.45 7.44 60 5.70 0.48 6.53 6.52 7.20 7.19 7.50 7.49 60 5.80 1.00 6.54 6.53 7.20 7.20 7.50 7.49 60 5.90 1.10 6.60 6.59 7.28 7.27 7.58 7.57 60 6.00 1.56 6.64 6.64 7.33 7.32 7.64 7.63 60 6.10 -1.88 6.77 6.77 7.47 7.47 7.79 7.78 60 6.20 1.65 6.67 6.66 7.35 7.34 7.66 7.65
Bank Levels (m) Left bank -3.18 -3.45 -1.10 -0.92 -0.54 0.94 3.39 3.38 3.50 3.50 3.30 3.50 3.36 3.50 3.36 3.30 3.30 3.50 3.36 3.46 3.34 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.39 3.39 3.39 3.29 3.50 3.37 3.42 3.50 3.36 3.41 3.37 3.46 3.46 3.30 3.40 3.39 3.36 3.36 3.39 3.46 3.40 3.49 1.70 3.40 3.46 3.50 3.46 3.42 3.50 3.37 3.54 4.58 3.40 3.46 3.42 3.46 3.49 3.42 3.92 Right bank 0.49 1.22 1.98 2.11 2.11 2.20 2.25 2.31 2.29 2.31 3.50 1.50 1.51 1.71 0.39 3.00 1.92 3.64 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.49 3.50 3.81 3.62 3.92 3.62 3.40 3.42 3.43 3.46 3.43 3.42 4.71 4.90 6.34 8.91 11.03 5.93 4.12 3.43 3.46 3.37 3.50 3.39 3.47 3.24 3.46 3.50 3.40 3.40 3.39 1.03 3.35 3.36 3.50 3.40 3.40 3.43 3.50 3.35 4.96 3.61
Table - 18
Page 1 of 2
60 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
6.30 0.02 0.19 0.33 0.39 0.52 0.64 0.75 0.88 1.01 1.16 1.31 1.43 1.54 1.64 1.73 1.81 2.05 2.34 2.53 2.63 2.70 2.78 2.88 2.97 3.11 3.16 3.24 3.33 3.43 3.55 3.63 3.78 3.93 4.13 4.37 4.70 4.93 5.12 5.30 5.51 5.66 5.96
1.02 0.77 1.12 0.68 1.64 1.71 2.14 1.26 3.19 3.26 2.22 2.37 3.66 1.36 2.63 2.92 3.01 2.50 5.11 3.49 3.70 3.49 3.36 3.55 3.70 3.46 3.93 3.36 3.75 3.02 4.30 4.08 7.55 5.01 5.10 4.84 4.88 4.55 6.12 7.41 7.50 7.55 7.15
6.92 6.92 6.68 7.13 7.12 7.43 7.60 7.64 7.70 7.87 7.91 8.36 8.67 8.99 8.82 8.87 9.11 9.64 10.32 10.88 10.91 11.03 11.03 11.14 11.18 11.22 11.49 11.52 11.62 11.64 11.61 11.67 11.67 11.96 12.14 12.19 12.83 12.85 13.22 13.42 13.55 13.68 13.94
6.92 6.92 6.68 7.13 7.12 7.44 7.60 7.64 7.70 7.87 7.91 8.36 8.68 8.99 8.82 8.87 9.11 9.65 10.32 10.88 10.91 11.03 11.03 11.14 11.18 11.22 11.49 11.52 11.62 11.64 11.61 11.67 11.67 11.96 12.14 12.19 12.83 12.85 13.22 13.42 13.55 13.68 13.94
7.62 7.62 7.70 7.85 7.82 8.21 8.40 8.46 8.48 8.63 8.60 9.03 9.36 9.40 9.49 9.42 9.75 10.43 11.13 11.60 11.64 11.77 11.76 11.88 11.93 11.96 12.24 12.29 12.40 12.42 12.39 12.45 12.44 12.75 12.94 12.93 13.58 13.58 14.03 14.27 14.40 14.54 14.82
7.62 7.62 7.70 7.85 7.82 8.21 8.39 8.46 8.47 8.63 8.59 9.03 9.36 9.40 9.48 9.42 9.75 10.43 11.13 11.60 11.64 11.77 11.76 11.88 11.93 11.96 12.24 12.29 12.40 12.42 12.39 12.45 12.44 12.75 12.94 12.93 13.58 13.58 14.03 14.27 14.40 14.54 14.82
7.93 7.93 8.00 8.31 8.25 8.76 8.99 9.07 9.05 9.22 9.12 9.58 9.94 10.00 10.05 10.10 10.29 11.10 11.84 12.26 12.30 12.44 12.43 12.55 12.60 12.63 12.91 12.95 13.08 13.09 13.07 13.12 13.11 13.43 13.62 13.57 14.22 14.17 14.68 14.95 15.09 15.22 15.52
7.93 7.93 8.00 8.31 8.25 8.75 8.98 9.07 9.05 9.22 9.12 9.58 9.94 10.00 10.05 10.10 10.29 11.10 11.84 12.25 12.30 12.44 12.43 12.55 12.60 12.63 12.91 12.95 13.08 13.09 13.07 13.12 13.11 13.43 13.62 13.57 14.22 14.17 14.68 14.95 15.09 15.22 15.52
Confluence
NH 4 road bridge
Rly. Bridge Mum to Ratnag Road bridge
Pune -Mum Expressway
Rd. br. Panvel to Nere
3.36 4.74 6.89 5.28 4.75 6.30 5.97 7.94 6.45 6.27 6.42 7.82 9.70 6.98 7.56 8.01 9.60 9.12 9.71 8.14 9.14 8.56 8.74 8.69 9.21 9.77 9.65 9.82 9.15 9.03 10.88 11.13 11.45 9.88 9.32 11.90 9.14 13.35 12.92 15.45 13.39 11.92 14.56
3.46 4.50 5.40 5.98 5.02 6.00 5.11 6.77 6.52 6.69 6.84 7.63 9.77 8.36 8.30 9.77 10.23 10.87 9.93 9.84 10.05 9.33 10.23 11.69 11.05 11.27 10.82 12.31 10.02 9.47 9.54 10.82 11.20 10.43 9.48 11.19 10.94 12.81 12.56 14.44 12.97 13.09 13.71
Table - 18
Page 2 of 2
Table - 19 Comparision of water level along Taloja creek and Taloja River (Channel 30 and 10) under existing condition and with airport at spring tide HWL with flood peak arriving at time of HWL
Link Cs Bed level Chainage Predicted Water Levels (m) with peak discharge at spring tide high water Remark Belapur rainfall 26 July 2005 No. m from d/s 100 year Flood (6 hrs) PMP ( 6 hrs ) and location km Existing Airport Existing Airport Existing Airport 30 1 -5.62 0.00 3.27 3.10 3.19 3.19 3.30 3.23 2 -5.57 0.10 3.28 3.11 3.21 3.21 3.33 3.26 3 -5.32 0.20 3.29 3.12 3.22 3.22 3.34 3.27 4 -5.57 0.30 3.29 3.12 3.22 3.22 3.34 3.27 5 -5.25 0.40 3.29 3.11 3.22 3.21 3.33 3.26 6 -4.81 0.50 3.27 3.09 3.18 3.18 3.28 3.22 7 -4.58 0.60 3.29 3.10 3.21 3.20 3.31 3.25 8 -4.79 0.70 3.31 3.12 3.24 3.23 3.34 3.29 9 -3.93 0.80 3.32 3.13 3.26 3.24 3.35 3.31 10 -4.12 0.90 3.33 3.14 3.27 3.26 3.37 3.32 11 -3.88 1.00 3.33 3.14 3.28 3.26 3.37 3.33 12 -3.95 1.10 3.34 3.15 3.29 3.27 3.38 3.34 13 -3.68 1.20 3.35 3.15 3.30 3.28 3.39 3.35 14 -4.47 1.30 3.35 3.15 3.30 3.28 3.39 3.35 15 -4.34 1.40 3.36 3.17 3.32 3.30 3.40 3.37 16 -3.65 1.50 3.37 3.17 3.32 3.30 3.41 3.38 17 -3.04 1.60 3.38 3.18 3.33 3.32 3.42 3.39 18 -2.75 1.70 3.39 3.19 3.35 3.34 3.44 3.41 19 -2.66 1.80 3.40 3.21 3.38 3.36 3.47 3.44 20 -2.54 1.90 3.41 3.22 3.39 3.37 3.49 3.46 21 -2.43 1.93 3.43 3.23 3.42 3.40 3.52 3.49 Rly.bri. Belapur to Panvel 22 -2.63 2.10 3.46 3.27 3.48 3.46 3.59 3.55 23 -2.41 2.20 3.48 3.31 3.52 3.50 3.63 3.60 24 -1.73 2.30 3.49 3.32 3.54 3.52 3.65 3.62 25 -4.51 2.40 3.50 3.34 3.56 3.54 3.67 3.63 26 -3.35 2.50 3.51 3.34 3.56 3.55 3.68 3.65 27 -2.75 2.60 3.52 3.35 3.57 3.55 3.69 3.66 28 -2.51 2.70 3.52 3.35 3.58 3.56 3.69 3.66 29 -2.08 2.80 3.53 3.36 3.58 3.56 3.70 3.67 30 -1.82 2.90 3.53 3.36 3.58 3.56 3.70 3.67 31 -2.28 3.00 3.54 3.38 3.60 3.59 3.72 3.69 32 -1.80 3.10 3.55 3.39 3.62 3.60 3.74 3.71 33 -1.78 3.20 3.56 3.41 3.65 3.63 3.77 3.74 34 -2.09 3.30 3.59 3.44 3.69 3.68 3.82 3.78 35 -2.76 3.40 3.61 3.46 3.72 3.70 3.85 3.81 30 36 -2.75 3.45 3.46 3.28 3.43 3.41 3.53 3.47 Sion Panvel Expressway 37 -2.53 3.60 3.64 3.52 3.79 3.78 3.93 3.90 38 -2.59 3.70 3.65 3.53 3.81 3.79 3.95 3.92 39 -1.71 3.80 3.69 3.57 3.87 3.85 4.00 3.98 40 -1.23 3.90 3.70 3.59 3.88 3.87 4.02 3.99 41 -1.42 4.00 3.72 3.61 3.91 3.90 4.05 4.02 Confluence 10 1 -0.84 4.09 3.72 3.61 3.91 3.90 4.05 4.02 2 -0.20 4.19 3.73 3.63 3.93 3.92 4.06 4.04 3 -0.28 4.29 3.75 3.65 3.97 3.95 4.09 4.06 4 -0.75 4.39 3.77 3.67 3.99 3.98 4.11 4.08 5 -0.64 4.49 3.78 3.69 4.02 4.00 4.13 4.11 6 -0.71 4.59 3.79 3.71 4.03 4.02 4.14 4.12 7 -0.78 4.69 3.80 3.72 4.05 4.04 4.15 4.13 8 -1.14 4.79 3.81 3.73 4.07 4.05 4.16 4.14 9 -0.83 4.89 3.82 3.74 4.07 4.06 4.17 4.15 10 -0.23 4.99 3.82 3.74 4.08 4.06 4.17 4.15 11 -0.34 5.09 3.82 3.74 4.08 4.06 4.17 4.15 12 -0.47 5.19 3.82 3.75 4.08 4.06 4.17 4.15 13 -0.42 5.29 3.83 3.75 4.08 4.07 4.17 4.16 14 -0.79 5.39 3.82 3.73 4.06 4.05 4.16 4.14 15 0.06 5.49 3.84 3.76 4.09 4.08 4.18 4.16 16 -0.08 5.59 3.88 3.82 4.17 4.15 4.23 4.22 17 -0.20 5.69 3.93 3.87 4.22 4.20 4.28 4.26 18 -0.38 5.79 3.97 3.91 4.27 4.25 4.32 4.30 19 -0.37 5.89 4.00 3.95 4.31 4.29 4.35 4.33 20 0.12 5.99 4.02 3.97 4.34 4.32 4.37 4.36 21 -0.16 6.09 4.03 3.99 4.36 4.33 4.38 4.37 22 -0.20 6.19 4.04 4.00 4.37 4.34 4.39 4.38 23 0.32 6.29 4.04 4.00 4.37 4.34 4.39 4.38 24 0.26 6.39 4.07 4.03 4.40 4.37 4.41 4.40 25 -0.96 6.49 4.10 4.07 4.44 4.41 4.45 4.44 26 0.39 6.59 4.10 4.06 4.42 4.40 4.44 4.42 27 -0.02 6.69 4.16 4.14 4.51 4.48 4.50 4.49 28 -0.16 6.79 4.16 4.14 4.50 4.48 4.50 4.49 Table - 19
Bank Levels (m) Left bank Right bank -5.52 -1.90 -1.45 -1.31 -1.75 -2.62 -2.16 -3.25 -2.42 -1.45 -1.32 -1.14 -1.01 -1.08 -0.60 2.43 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.88 3.62 3.36 3.46 3.56 3.39 3.59 3.34 -0.66 -0.20 -0.26 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.55 1.60 2.81 3.45 3.55 3.55 3.45 3.42 3.44 2.59 2.63 3.50 3.50 3.55 3.46 3.46 3.50 3.50 3.45 3.50 3.29 Page 1 of 2 3.50 3.50 3.50 0.75 3.50 3.50 3.56 3.81 4.20 3.50 3.97 4.44 3.94 4.08 3.88 4.01 3.95 4.60 3.56 4.65 3.15 3.50 3.42 3.30 3.61 3.12 3.45 3.45 3.68 3.46 3.50 3.31 3.45 2.32 3.49 2.71 4.77 4.80 4.86 4.55 4.42 4.89 5.14 4.40 4.86 3.59 3.50 3.55 3.50 3.55 3.49 3.46 3.50 3.50 5.04 5.18 4.97 5.00 5.30 5.45 4.83 5.91 5.67 5.74 3.79 5.67 2.94 3.50 3.46
10
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77
-0.11 0.33 0.35 0.41 0.59 0.59 0.86 1.23 1.50 1.60 1.80 1.69 2.69 1.80 2.21 2.26 1.73 1.89 4.65 5.32 5.96 4.91 5.50 5.13 5.21 6.19 7.10 6.14 6.70 4.00 6.54 6.04 8.01 8.02 8.46 8.66 9.94 9.86 11.00 10.23 10.82 10.82 11.81 10.89 12.00 14.19 13.84 15.12 15.70
6.89 6.99 7.09 7.19 7.36 7.45 7.96 8.16 8.46 8.66 8.85 9.02 9.25 9.31 9.41 9.86 10.09 10.33 10.60 10.82 10.95 11.21 11.40 11.59 11.78 12.00 12.28 12.54 12.72 12.88 13.06 13.11 13.22 13.44 13.56 13.75 13.90 14.19 14.39 14.58 14.79 15.00 15.34 15.56 15.77 15.96 16.17 16.37 16.54
4.18 4.26 4.23 4.34 4.28 4.78 5.08 5.12 5.24 5.52 5.48 5.68 5.71 6.08 6.18 6.91 7.46 7.76 7.99 8.02 8.11 9.42 9.72 10.20 10.84 11.12 11.60 11.93 12.01 12.84 13.16 13.41 13.35 13.58 13.72 14.22 14.32 15.02 15.45 15.71 15.82 16.05 17.15 17.30 17.62 17.93 17.87 18.11 18.26
4.15 4.24 4.21 4.32 4.27 4.77 5.07 5.11 5.23 5.51 5.48 5.67 5.70 6.07 6.18 6.90 7.46 7.75 7.98 8.02 8.10 9.42 9.72 10.20 10.83 11.11 11.59 11.92 12.01 12.84 13.16 13.41 12.71 14.18 14.23 14.50 14.38 15.34 15.62 15.85 15.93 16.13 17.13 17.29 17.61 17.93 17.86 18.11 18.25
4.51 4.62 4.56 4.69 4.57 5.28 5.62 5.64 5.74 6.08 6.00 6.22 6.18 6.67 6.75 7.31 7.92 8.29 8.55 8.57 8.59 9.79 10.06 10.64 11.29 11.63 12.15 12.48 12.51 13.24 13.57 13.84 13.75 14.01 14.15 14.69 14.81 15.52 15.93 16.27 16.35 16.52 17.71 17.90 18.24 18.59 18.50 18.75 18.88
4.49 4.59 4.54 4.66 4.55 5.22 5.55 5.58 5.68 6.01 5.94 6.15 6.11 6.58 6.66 7.24 7.84 8.20 8.45 8.47 8.52 9.72 9.99 10.55 11.19 11.52 12.02 12.36 12.40 13.15 13.47 13.74 13.75 14.01 14.15 14.69 14.81 15.52 15.93 16.27 16.35 16.52 17.71 17.90 18.24 18.59 18.50 18.75 18.88
4.51 4.59 4.55 4.65 4.56 5.13 5.45 5.48 5.58 5.88 5.83 6.03 6.01 6.44 6.52 7.14 7.72 8.05 8.30 8.33 8.38 9.61 9.89 10.43 11.07 11.38 11.88 12.21 12.26 13.03 13.36 13.62 13.54 13.79 13.93 14.45 14.56 15.26 15.68 15.98 16.07 16.27 17.41 17.58 17.90 18.23 18.16 18.40 18.54
4.50 4.58 4.54 4.64 4.55 5.13 5.44 5.47 5.57 5.88 5.82 6.02 6.00 6.43 6.51 7.13 7.71 8.05 8.29 8.32 8.37 9.61 9.88 10.42 11.06 11.37 11.87 12.20 12.26 13.03 13.35 13.61 13.54 13.79 13.93 14.45 14.56 15.26 15.68 15.98 16.07 16.27 17.41 17.58 17.90 18.23 18.16 18.40 18.54
Mumbra to Panvel rd. br Diva Panvel rly.br
Majkur rd. br.
Ghotcamp rd. br.
MIDC road bridge
Road bridge
3.36 2.02 3.50 3.56 3.21 7.61 7.80 8.13 8.03 4.65 4.59 3.49 5.22 5.94 6.67 6.35 7.72 5.50 6.58 7.60 7.77 9.00 9.60 10.73 8.16 10.09 11.02 10.77 12.65 11.65 12.23 11.02 12.27 14.71 13.65 12.12 14.15 14.08 14.05 14.47 14.36 15.35 15.65 17.30 18.41 15.86 21.07 21.16 17.47
3.50 6.85 5.41 3.50 4.60 3.88 4.64 4.61 4.21 8.42 8.48 4.91 4.89 6.23 6.23 5.98 4.90 6.25 7.27 8.07 8.18 8.80 9.65 10.13 9.35 10.22 10.47 10.05 11.92 10.78 11.58 10.67 12.19 13.80 12.59 11.95 12.48 13.81 14.09 14.45 14.65 15.23 15.27 15.84 16.96 15.71 20.00 20.76 17.30
Table - 19
Page 2 of 2
Table - 20 Comparision of water levels along Kasadi River (Channel 20) under existing condition and with airport at spring tide HWL with flood peak arriving at time of HWL
Link Cs Bed level Chainage Predicted Water Levels (m) with peak discharge at spring tide high water No. m from d/s 100 year Flood (6 hrs) PMP ( 6 hrs ) Belapur rainfall 26 July 2005 km Existing Airport Existing Airport Existing Airport 20 1 -1.25 0.10 3.72 3.61 3.91 3.90 4.05 4.02 2 -0.52 0.20 3.73 3.62 3.93 3.92 4.07 4.05 3 -1.02 0.30 3.74 3.64 3.95 3.93 4.10 4.07 4 -0.73 0.40 3.74 3.64 3.95 3.94 4.11 4.08 5 -0.87 0.50 3.75 3.65 3.97 3.96 4.13 4.11 6 -0.75 0.60 3.76 3.66 3.98 3.96 4.14 4.11 7 -0.31 0.70 3.76 3.66 3.98 3.97 4.14 4.12 8 0.40 0.80 3.76 3.66 3.98 3.97 4.15 4.13 9 0.00 0.90 3.77 3.67 3.99 3.98 4.16 4.14 10 0.11 1.00 3.77 3.67 3.99 3.98 4.15 4.13 11 0.44 1.10 3.79 3.70 4.02 4.01 4.19 4.17 12 0.63 1.20 3.84 3.74 4.06 4.06 4.24 4.23 13 0.58 1.30 3.86 3.77 4.09 4.08 4.28 4.26 14 0.76 1.40 3.81 3.72 4.01 4.00 4.16 4.15 15 0.69 1.50 3.89 3.82 4.12 4.11 4.29 4.28 16 1.36 1.60 3.77 3.70 4.25 4.25 4.50 4.50 17 1.31 1.70 4.34 4.33 4.76 4.76 5.00 5.00 18 1.35 1.80 4.49 4.49 4.90 4.90 5.14 5.14 19 2.21 1.90 4.99 4.99 5.12 5.12 5.28 5.28 20 2.57 2.00 6.46 6.45 7.22 7.22 7.80 7.80 21 3.73 2.10 6.75 6.76 7.40 7.40 7.94 7.94 22 2.78 2.16 7.29 7.29 7.66 7.66 8.14 8.14 23 3.15 2.30 7.82 7.82 8.32 8.32 8.82 8.81 24 2.82 2.40 7.83 7.83 8.33 8.33 8.83 8.83 25 3.16 2.50 7.84 7.84 8.34 8.34 8.84 8.83 26 2.39 2.60 7.88 7.88 8.38 8.38 8.89 8.89 27 2.52 2.70 7.88 7.88 8.38 8.38 8.89 8.89 28 2.48 2.83 7.79 7.79 8.27 8.27 8.75 8.76 29 3.25 2.90 8.08 8.08 8.54 8.54 9.01 9.01 30 3.42 3.00 8.10 8.10 8.56 8.56 9.03 9.03 31 1.61 3.09 8.10 8.10 8.55 8.55 9.01 9.02 32 1.84 3.52 8.19 8.19 8.67 8.67 9.15 9.15 33 1.86 3.71 8.23 8.23 8.72 8.72 9.21 9.21 34 2.20 3.93 8.26 8.26 8.75 8.75 9.24 9.24 35 2.34 4.07 8.31 8.31 8.82 8.82 9.32 9.33 20 36 1.95 4.37 8.21 8.21 8.71 8.71 9.35 9.36 37 4.46 4.58 8.63 8.63 9.21 9.21 9.80 9.81 38 3.17 4.96 8.91 8.91 9.47 9.47 10.04 10.05 39 3.19 5.07 9.15 9.15 9.69 9.69 10.24 10.24 40 4.40 5.22 9.36 9.36 9.88 9.88 10.42 10.42 41 3.80 5.49 9.68 9.68 10.18 10.18 10.71 10.71 42 4.36 5.69 9.86 9.86 10.35 10.35 10.84 10.84 43 3.62 5.90 10.21 10.21 10.74 10.74 11.26 11.26 44 4.76 6.12 10.26 10.26 10.79 10.79 11.31 11.31 45 5.29 6.33 10.36 10.36 10.85 10.85 11.33 11.33 46 5.33 6.54 10.99 10.99 11.46 11.46 11.92 11.92 47 6.11 6.83 11.44 11.44 11.91 11.91 12.36 12.36 48 6.12 6.95 11.69 11.69 12.13 12.13 12.56 12.56 49 6.89 7.29 12.23 12.23 12.64 12.64 13.05 13.05 50 7.39 7.62 12.93 12.93 13.36 13.36 13.78 13.78 51 7.65 7.86 13.54 13.54 14.04 14.04 14.51 14.51 52 8.39 7.95 13.70 13.70 14.20 14.20 14.68 14.68 53 9.04 8.47 14.26 14.26 14.79 14.79 15.27 15.27 54 9.18 8.68 14.66 14.66 15.17 15.17 15.63 15.63 55 9.14 8.93 15.23 15.23 15.73 15.73 16.18 16.18 56 10.28 9.25 15.48 15.48 15.97 15.97 16.42 16.42 57 10.77 9.62 16.03 16.03 16.51 16.51 16.97 16.97 58 11.86 9.91 16.49 16.49 17.02 17.02 17.53 17.53 59 12.13 10.25 17.17 17.17 17.65 17.65 18.04 18.04 60 13.35 10.51 18.39 18.39 18.80 18.80 19.14 19.14
Remark and location
Bank Levels (m) Left bank Right bank 0.48 3.40 3.50 3.50 3.29 3.60 3.50 3.50 3.30 3.40 3.20 3.30 3.45 2.98 3.40 3.50 2.90 3.30 3.57 3.65 3.73 5.23 5.77 5.66 5.10 4.89 2.68 4.24 4.24 4.25 5.33 5.43 3.80 5.11 5.67 6.23 6.09 8.36 8.63 9.24 8.29 9.38 6.34 9.12 10.12 9.75 9.74 10.14 11.26 12.48 12.72 14.89 14.05 14.18 14.52 14.26 16.84 14.64 17.49 17.74 -0.24 -0.21 0.02 -0.05 -0.35 0.47 2.01 0.40 0.00 2.00 1.93 2.96 3.30 3.35 3.39 3.35 3.36 3.29 3.30 4.25 6.14 5.62 4.27 3.56 4.56 6.01 6.01 6.28 3.59 4.94 4.99 6.88 5.07 6.21 5.28 7.64 8.23 6.58 7.66 7.98 9.02 10.67 8.87 10.25 11.92 10.27 9.64 10.37 11.12 13.18 11.25 11.92 14.22 15.33 13.14 15.12 14.74 14.18 17.49 18.61
NH 4 road br.
Diva Panvel rly.br
MIDC to Kalamboli road b MIDC to Padge road bridg
MIDC to Olap Rd bridge
Kanpoli rd bridge
Table - 21 Comparision of water level along Kalundri River (Channel 50) under existing condition and with airport at spring tide HWL with flood peak arriving at time of HWL
Link 50
CS No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
Bed level (m) 1.43 1.32 1.31 1.40 1.61 1.86 1.76 1.88 1.74 2.28 1.99 2.77 0.23 -1.09 2.09 2.89 2.29 2.48 3.53 3.27 3.63 3.76 5.12 4.25 5.26 5.65 5.46 6.05 6.20 7.31 8.02 9.44 7.90 7.88 7.78 8.33 9.39
Chainage Predicted Water Levels (m) with peak discharge at spring tide high water Belapur rainfall (26/07/2005) PMP ( 6 hrs ) from d/s 100 year Flood (6 hrs) Existing Airport Existing Airport Existing Airport (km) 0.12 6.92 6.92 7.62 7.62 7.93 7.89 0.20 7.04 7.04 7.65 7.65 7.93 7.89 0.30 7.26 7.26 7.92 7.91 8.14 8.11 0.38 7.42 7.42 8.10 8.10 8.30 8.26 0.64 7.62 7.62 8.31 8.31 8.47 8.44 0.84 7.54 7.55 8.23 8.22 8.40 8.36 0.93 8.37 8.37 9.06 9.06 9.10 9.07 1.17 8.40 8.40 9.06 9.06 9.09 9.06 1.23 8.69 8.69 9.42 9.42 9.44 9.40 1.37 8.55 8.55 9.22 9.22 9.25 9.21 1.46 8.73 8.73 9.44 9.44 9.46 9.43 1.68 8.95 8.95 9.63 9.63 9.64 9.60 1.91 9.20 9.20 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.81 2.06 9.68 9.68 10.41 10.41 10.38 10.35 2.28 9.87 9.87 10.57 10.57 10.55 10.52 2.70 10.83 10.83 11.69 11.69 11.64 11.60 2.86 11.39 11.39 12.36 12.36 12.31 12.27 3.11 11.74 11.74 12.78 12.78 12.72 12.68 3.31 11.77 11.77 12.80 12.80 12.75 12.70 3.50 11.87 11.87 12.89 12.89 12.83 12.79 3.67 11.97 11.97 13.01 13.01 12.95 12.91 3.79 12.13 12.13 13.16 13.16 13.10 13.06 4.10 12.18 12.18 13.18 13.18 13.13 13.09 4.33 12.47 12.47 13.44 13.44 13.39 13.34 4.61 12.53 12.53 13.51 13.51 13.46 13.41 4.93 13.08 13.08 13.97 13.97 13.93 13.89 5.19 13.55 13.55 14.37 14.37 14.34 14.30 5.45 13.74 13.74 14.57 14.57 14.54 14.51 5.66 13.93 13.93 14.78 14.78 14.75 14.71 5.84 13.95 13.95 14.77 14.77 14.74 14.70 6.04 14.31 14.31 15.14 15.14 15.12 15.08 6.22 14.31 14.31 15.07 15.07 15.04 15.01 6.46 15.04 15.05 15.72 15.72 15.71 15.68 6.76 15.20 15.19 15.87 15.87 15.86 15.83 6.86 15.31 15.31 15.99 15.99 15.98 15.95 7.04 15.73 15.74 16.43 16.43 16.42 16.40 7.23 15.87 15.87 16.58 16.58 16.57 16.55
Bank Levels (m) Remark and location Left bank Right bank 6.40 6.73 4.87 4.30 5.09 4.92 5.88 6.52 5.87 6.79 7.16 6.94 7.82 8.28 7.78 8.16 8.29 7.66 8.07 8.47 8.94 8.15 8.99 9.14 10.51 10.77 10.46 11.13 10.86 12.46 12.36 12.72 12.23 13.67 15.56 13.05 15.54 5.89 6.08 6.32 6.19 6.62 7.35 6.96 7.89 8.17 7.23 7.15 8.09 8.09 9.35 8.48 8.45 8.97 7.14 7.89 7.94 9.58 8.18 9.23 9.59 10.37 10.57 10.35 11.33 10.88 12.40 12.50 12.82 12.59 13.25 13.57 12.56 15.20
Pipeline bridge
Panvel to Uran Rly br ONGC colony road br
NH 4 road bridge
Rly.line
Chilke to mumbai rd br
Expressway bridge
Rly.line
Table - 22 Comparision of water levels along Ulwe River (Channel 120) under existing condition and with airport at spring tide HWL with flood peak arriving at time of HWL
CS No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Bed level (m) -1.74 -1.96 -1.71 -0.90 -0.48 -0.72 -0.70 -1.15 -0.60 -0.98 -0.82 -1.45 -0.18 -0.55 -0.37 -0.63 -0.17 -1.13 -0.20 0.59 0.08 0.77 0.66 0.31 0.68 0.61 0.02 0.00 -0.11 0.57 0.36 0.59 0.36 0.48 0.69 0.69 0.69 Predicted Water Levels (m) with peak discharge at spring tide high water Chainage Belapur rainfall (26/07/2005) PMP ( 6 hrs ) from d/s 100 year Flood (6 hrs) Existing Airport Existing Airport Existing Airport (km) 0.00 3.35 3.16 3.32 3.17 3.40 2.98 0.10 3.36 3.32 3.40 0.20 3.38 3.34 3.41 0.30 3.37 3.34 3.41 0.40 3.36 3.32 3.39 0.50 3.39 3.35 3.41 0.60 3.39 3.34 3.41 0.70 3.41 3.61 3.38 3.80 3.44 3.90 0.80 3.45 3.44 3.50 0.90 3.47 3.48 3.55 1.00 3.49 3.51 3.58 1.10 3.51 3.57 3.63 1.20 3.52 3.62 3.67 1.30 3.58 3.63 3.67 1.40 3.66 3.73 3.73 1.50 3.65 4.70 3.99 6.18 3.89 5.35 1.60 3.69 4.70 3.64 6.18 3.68 5.35 1.70 4.01 4.78 4.56 6.29 4.21 5.44 1.80 4.07 4.81 4.68 6.32 4.31 5.47 1.90 4.23 4.85 4.81 6.34 4.47 5.50 2.00 4.46 4.89 5.03 6.36 4.70 5.53 2.10 4.66 4.99 5.26 6.43 4.90 5.61 2.20 4.75 5.05 5.40 6.49 5.02 5.67 2.30 4.75 5.03 5.38 6.48 5.00 5.66 2.40 4.78 5.06 5.40 6.48 5.03 5.66 2.51 4.82 5.08 5.42 6.48 5.06 5.66 2.62 4.84 5.08 5.40 6.44 5.07 5.65 2.74 4.86 5.29 5.05 6.52 4.96 5.74 2.95 5.42 5.57 6.25 6.66 5.71 5.96 3.09 5.70 5.77 6.46 6.80 5.94 6.12 3.22 5.75 5.83 6.52 6.86 6.00 6.17 3.32 5.77 5.83 6.52 6.85 6.01 6.17 3.40 5.74 5.87 6.53 6.85 6.04 6.19 3.50 5.83 6.00 6.55 6.96 6.08 6.33 3.63 6.46 6.34 7.04 7.06 6.61 6.46 3.64 6.54 6.36 7.13 7.14 6.74 6.64 3.84 6.95 7.07 7.29 7.29 7.05 6.98
Link 120
Remark and location
with airport levels are on diversion channel
Panvel to ulwe rd bridge
Panvel to Uran rly bridge Rd br Dapoli
Table - 23 Comparision of Maxima Water Levels Predicted from 2-D Mathematical Model at Different Locations for Different Conditions.
Location Sr. No. Condition Thana Creek Panvel Creek Belapur MDL Jetty d/s Mouth 4 Km u/s of Ulwe Rail Boundry MDL Jetty Bridge Belapur Ulwe Road Bridge u/s of 500 m d/s of u/s of Belapur u/s of Sion d/s of Taloja North of Taloja Rail Kasadi NH4 Kasadi Rail Panvel Rail Panvel Road NH4 Bridge Waghiwali Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge Bridge Gadhi NH4B Bridge u/s of Gadhi SH54 Bridge Gadhi Kalundri Confluence u/s Ulwe SH54 Bridge Ulwe river Rail Bridge
1 2
Existing condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge Airport condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge Existing Condition for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL Airport Condition for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide Airport Condition for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide Existing Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL Airport Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide Airport Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide Airport Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide and Storm Water Drainage from airport area at 2 Locations Existing Condition for 26th July 2005 Belapur Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL Airport Condition for 26th July 2005 Belapur Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide
3.25 3.25
3.50 3.52
3.40 3.55
3.25 3.50
3.25 3.35
3.25 3.45
3.27 3.46
3.35 3.65
3.37 3.68
3.25 3.55
3.25 3.55
3.27 3.52
3.32 3.60
3.32 3.60
3.25 3.25
3.25 3.25
3.25
3.60
3.63
3.63
3.70
3.82
3.90
4.25
4.86
5.11
7.20
4.12
7.53
8.50
3.90
4.60
3.25
3.60
3.75
3.80
3.82
3.95
4.00
4.35
5.00
5.34
8.20
4.45
7.75
8.68
5.42
5.50
3.25
3.60
3.76
3.77
3.82
3.95
4.00
4.35
5.00
5.34
8.20
4.45
7.75
8.68
4.75
5.10
3.25
3.52
3.68
3.68
3.83
3.95
4.05
4.58
5.45
5.35
7.57
4.45
9.00
9.75
4.05
5.05
3.25
3.52
3.80
3.82
4.05
4.20
4.30
4.67
5.65
5.50
8.50
5.00
9.20
10.00
6.63
6.65
3.25
3.52
3.80
3.82
4.05
4.20
4.30
4.68
5.65
5.50
8.50
5.00
9.20
10.00
5.50
5.65
3.25
3.55
3.80
3.82
4.16
4.30
4.40
4.75
5.80
5.50
8.50
5.05
9.20
10.05
5.50
5.65
10
3.25
3.55
3.68
3.72
3.88
4.00
4.12
4.70
5.75
5.85
8.00
4.65
9.70
10.50
4.08
5.10
11
3.25
3.60
3.80
3.84
4.13
4.20
4.40
4.70
5.75
6.00
8.60
5.00
9.80
11.00
4.88
5.25
Scale 0 3.5 7 km
Proposed Navi Mumbai Airport Thane creek
Fig.1 : Index map of Navi Mumbai showing CIDCO development around Panvel creek and location of proposed international airport
Taloja creek Taloja minor
Panvel creek
Fig.2 : Topography of Panvel creek
Scale
km
Taloja river
NH4 Road Bridge`
Kasadi river
Taloja Creek CBD Belapur Thane Creek Rail bridge Mouth of Panvel creek Elephanta Caves MDL Jetty Panvel creek Waghiwali Island Panvel City
Bridge on Gadhi
Ulwe river NH4
Gadhi river Kalundri river NH4
1.5
3 km
Fig.3a : Index plan of Panvel creek
Panvel creek
Rail bridge Belapur-Ulwe Road bridge NH4B bridge
SH54 bridge
Ulwe diversion
NH4 bridge
SH54 bridge
Rail bridge
1.7
3.4 km
Fig.3b : Layout of proposed airport
Fig.4 Fig 4 : Index plan of proposed site for International Airport
Scale 0 1 2 km
PANVEL
Fig.5 : Gadhi river catchment on toposheet
Scale 0 1 2 km
PANVEL
Fig.6 : Kalundri river catchment on toposheet
Scale
Kalamboli
2 km
Fig.7 : Kasadi river catchment on toposheet
Kharghar
Scale 0 1 2 km
Kalamboli
Fig.8 : Taloja river catchment on toposheet
Scale 0 1 2 km
Waghiwali
PANVEL
Fig.9 : Ulwe river catchment on toposheet
TALOJA RIVER
155 500
1050 0
1450 0
12
13
12000
0 50
11 50
90
00
1250 0
11500
1 0 10 0
00
1200
85
85 00
90
7000
7500
80
00
95
00
6500
6000
4000
45
00
5000
5500
5000
15 00
10
500
2000
2500
40 00
45 00
00
7
11 02
30
00
35 00
3500
30
00
5500
6500
6000
70 00
20
00
200 00 0
150 0
200 3.7
8
5
11 0
500
50
10
70
9500
00 0 90 00
23.
80
7500 70 00
0
20 00
0 0
50
00
400 0
30
45
35 00
2092
00
6500
50 0 10 00
150 0
200 0
300 0
35 00
20 00
20 00
250 0
40 00
45 00
50 00
5500
1000
1.2 km
30
00
6000
11
.18
50
25
4500
00
1500
5000
50 00
THANA CREEK
1 00
00
15
55
0 85
00
10
500
13
60
12
0
0 1000 0.37 0 1006
500
50 0
2 18 7.9 8 2000 0 0
1500
100 0
60
00
02
00
6500
75
00
00
00 80
00
60
2500
30 00
00
63 8 06 .6
1000
5 500
5
KALUNDRI RIVER
30
250 0
1500
3500
7000
9
50
00
3500
40 00
LINK 50
45 00
7.8 8
850 0
00
10 00
105 00
00
1000
15 00
GADHI RIVER 3
00 90
95
25 00
10000
75 00
00
KASADI RIVER
8 00
10 50 0
13000
1350 0
1100
14 00
14
00
0 00
1350 0
14
15 00
00
1655 5.99 16 50 0
50
16000
2
0
1480 6 99 806.
0 0
10 00 0
1000
1500
20 00
4000
1500
2000
55 00
70
00
Fig.10 : Reach length and number of cross sections in different channels of Panvel creek network
0 10 00
00 25
0 00
35 00
00 4 40
5500
8500
6500
8000
7500
9000
9500
10000
50
00
60
00
10 0 00
55
00
45
00
6 10058.9
5000
37 cross sections
0 0 650
600
7500
8000
8500
5
900 0
9500 99 99 .71
ULWE RIVER
Site 4 Belapur-Ulwe Rail Bridge (CWPRS)
CBD BELAPUR
Taloja j creek
Waghiwali island/village Site Sit 5 MDL Jetty (MMB) Site 2 Waghiwali village (CWPRS) Gadhi river
PANVEL CITY
Ulwe River Elephanta Caves
2.5
5 km
Fig.11 : Location of water level measurements in Panvel creek
Site 4 Belapur-Ulwe Rail Bridge (CWPRS) Site 5 MDL Jetty (MMB)
CBD BELAPUR
Taloja j creek
Waghiwali island/village Gadhi river Site 2 Waghiwali village (CWPRS)
PANVEL CITY
Ulwe River Elephanta Caves
2.5
5 km
Fig.12 : Location of velocity measurements in Panvel creek
T Tide Level (m wrt GTS m)

-3.25 0.75 1.75 2.75 0 48 96 144 192 240 288 336 384 432 480 528 576 624 672 16-Ma ay-07 18-Ma ay-07 20-Ma ay-07 22-Ma ay-07 24-Ma ay-07 26-Ma ay-07 28-Ma ay-07 30-Ma ay-07 1-Jun-07 3-Jun-07 5-Jun-07 7-Jun-07 9-Jun-07 11-Jun n-07 13-Jun n-07 720 15-Jun n-07 768 17-Jun n-07 -2.25 -0.25 0 25 -1.25
Time (hrs) Ti (h )
Fig.13 : Observed water levels at MDL jetty (Nhava) (16th May 15th June 2007)
3
Predicted (Tide Table) CWPRS Observed
Tide Level (m) wrt GTS S
-1
-2
-3 0 24 48 72 96 120 144 168 192 216 240 264 288
Time (hrs)
Fig.14 : Comparison of tidal water levels as per tide table and those observed during field studies at Ulwe rail bridge (16th 28th May 2007)
16-M May-07
18-M May-07
20-M May-07
22-M May-07
24-M May-07
26-M May-07
28-M May-07
30-M May-07
11-J Jun-07
13-J Jun-07
15-J Jun-07
3.0 2.5 2.0
Tide Le evel (m) wrt GTS G
1.5 1.0 10 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 -3.0 0 48 96 144 192 240 288 336 384 432 480 528 576 624 672 720 768
Time (hrs)
Fig.15 : Observed water levels at Ulwe Bandar Jetty during (16th May 15th June 2007)
17-J Jun-07
1-Ju un-07
3-Ju un-07
5-Ju un-07
7-Ju un-07
9-Ju un-07
Tide Level (m) wrt GTS S

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 -3.0 0 48 96 144 192 240 288 336 384 432 480 528 576 624 672 16-May y-07 18-May y-07 20-May y-07 22-May y-07 24-May y-07 26-May y-07 28-May y-07 30-May y-07 1-Jun-0 07 3-Jun-0 07 5-Jun-0 07 7-Jun-0 07 9-Jun-0 07 11-Jun-07 13-Jun-07 720 15-Jun-07 768 17-Jun-07 -2.0 -1.0
Time (hrs)
Fig.16 : Observed water levels at Kharghar during 16th May 15th June 2007
4.0
Water Level Velocity
1.00
3.0
0.75
2.0
0.50
Tide Level (m) wrt GTS
1.0
0.25
0.0
0.00
-1.0
-0.25
20 -2.0
0 50 -0.50
-3.0
-0.75
-4.0 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
-1.00
Time (hrs)
Fig.17 : Observed water levels & velocities at MDL jetty (Nhava) during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007)
Velocity (m m/s)
1.00
0.75
0.50
Tide Level w.r.t. GTS (m) G
0.25
0.00
-1
-0.25
-2 2
-0 50 0.50
-3
Water Level Velocity
-0.75
-4 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
-1.00
108
Time (hrs)
Fig.18 : Observed water levels & velocities at Ulwe rail bridge during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007)
Velocity (m m/s)
Tide
Velocity
1.0 10 0.8
2 0.6
Tide Level (m) wrt GTS w
0.4 0.2 0 0.0 -0.2 -1 -0.4 -0.6 -2 -0.8 -3 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 -1.0
Time (hrs)
Fig.19 : Observed water levels & velocities at Ulwe Bandar Jetty during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007)
Velocity (m m/s)
Tide
Velocity
1.2 12
0.8
Tide Level (m) wr GTS L rt
0.4
0.0
-1
-0.4
-2
-0.8
-3 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95
-1.2
Time (hrs) Ti (h )
Fig.20 : Observed water levels & velocities at Kharghar during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007)
Velocity (m m/s)
Water Level
Velocity
3.0
1.20
2.0 20
0.80 0 80
Tide Level (m) wr GTS rt
0.0
0.00
-1.0
-0.40
-2.0
-0.80
-3.0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
-1.20
Time (hrs)
Fig.21 : Observed water levels & velocities at Waghiwali during spring tide (16th 19th May 2007)
Velocity (m/s s)
1.0
0.40
Ref : Flood estimation report for west coast region CWC Publication of March 1992 ( (Konkan and Malabar Coast subzones 5a and 5b)
Fig.22 : Isopluvial map of IMD showing 50 year and 100 year return period 24 hour rainfall (mm) for Konkan region
Contours indicate rainfall in cm Contours indicate rainfall in cm
Fig.23 Probable maximum precipitation in Konkan region around Mumbai

(Ref : Plate No.11 of PMP atlas of IITM Pune (1989))
Isopluvial pattern on first day of 3 day storm during 01st to 03rd July 1941
(REF: FIG 7.2 FROM SEVERE RAINSTORMS OF INDIA I.I.T.M. PUBLICATION (JULY 1994))
Fig.24 : Isochrone diagram for Gadhi river catchment
Fig.25 : Isocrone diagram of Kalundri river
Fig.26 : Isochrone diagram for Kasadi river catchment
Fig.27 : Isocrone diagram of Taloja river
Fig.28 : Isochrone diagram for Ulwe river catchment
PMP_24Hrs 100_6Hrs 100 6H
100_24Hrs 50_6Hrs 50 6H
100_12Hrs 26/07/05
2800 2600 2400 2200 2000 1800 Discharg (m3/s) ges 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
Legend explanation : PMP_6Hrs = PMP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration 100_6Hrs = 100 yr RP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration 50_6Hrs = 50 yr RP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration
10
15
20
Time (Hrs)
25
30
35
Fig.29 :Flood Hydrographs for storms of different Return Period and duration for Gadhi river
PMP_24Hrs 100_6Hrs
PMP_12Hrs 50_24Hrs
PMP_6Hrs 50_12Hrs
100_24Hrs 50_6Hrs
100_12Hrs 26/07/05
2200 2000 1800 1600 Discha arges (m3/s) 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
Legend explanation : PMP_6Hrs = PMP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration 100_6Hrs 100 6Hrs = 100 yr RP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration 50_6Hrs = 50 yr RP rainfall 6 hrs storm duration
10
15
Time (Hrs)
20
25
30
Fig.30 : Flood Hydrographs for storms of different Return Period and duration for Kalundri river
PMP_24Hrs PMP 24Hrs 100_6Hrs
100_24Hrs 100 24Hrs 50_6Hrs
100_12Hrs 100 12Hrs 26/07/05
1400
1200
1000 Discharg (m3/s) ges
800
600
400
200
10
15
Time (Hrs)
20
25
30
Fig. 31 : Flood Hydrographs for storms of different Return Period and duration for Kasadi river
PMP_24Hrs 100_6Hrs
PMP_12Hrs 50_24Hrs
PMP_6Hrs 50_12Hrs
100_24Hrs 50_6Hrs
100_12Hrs 26/07/05
1400
1200
1000 Discharge (m3/s) es
800
600
400
200
10
15
Time (Hrs)
20
25
30
Fig.32 : Flood Hydrographs for storms of different Return Period and duration for Taloja river
PMP_24Hrs 100_6Hrs
PMP_12Hrs 50_24Hrs
PMP_6Hrs 50_12Hrs
100_24Hrs 50_6Hrs
100_12Hrs 26/07/05
1000
800
Discharg (m3/s) ges
600
400
200
10
15
Time (Hrs)
20
25
30
Fig.33 : Flood Hydrographs for storms of different Return Period and duration for Ulwe river
1-D Model u/s boundary
Scale 2
4 km
2D 2-D Model u/s boundary
Taloja R.
1-D Model reach

Kasadi R.
Gadhi R.
Downstream boundary at MDL Jetty in Thane creek for both 1-D & 2-D models
Ulwe R.
2-D Model reach
Kalundri R.
Fig.34 : Panvel creek reach simulated in 1-D and 2-D mathematical model
TALOJA RIVER
155 500
1050 0
1450 0
12
13
12000
0 50
11 50
90
00
1250 0
85
11500
1 0 10 0
00
1200
85 00
7500
70 00
90
7000
80
00
95
00
6500
6000
4000
45
00
5000
5500
5000
15 00
10
500
2000
2500
40 00
45 00
00
7
11 02
30
25 00
00
35 00
3500
30
00
5500
6500
6000
20
00
200 00 0
1 50 0
200 3.7
8
5
11 0
500
50
10
70
00
9500
00 0 90 00
23.
12
0
0 1000 0.37 0 1006
500
50 0
2 18 7.9 8 2000 0 0
1500
80
7500 70 00
0
20 00
0 0
50
00
400 0
30
45
2092
6500
50 0 10 00
150 0
200 0
300 0
35 00
20 00
20 00
250 0
40 00
45 00
50 00
5500
1000
30
00
6000
11
.18
35 00
35 00
00
50
25
4500
1500
00
5000
50 00
THANA CREEK
1 00
00
15
55
0 85
00
10
500
100 0
60
00
02
13
6500
00 80
00
75
00
60
2500
30 00
00
63 8 06 .6
1000
5 500
5
KALUNDRI RIVER
30
250 0
1500
3500
7000
9
50
00
3500
40 00
LINK 50
45 00
7.8 8
850 0
00
10 00
105 00
00
1000
15 00
GADHI RIVER 3
00 90
95
10000
75 00
00
KASADI RIVER
8 00
10 50 0
13000
1350 0
1100
14 00
14
00
0 00
1350 0
15 00
14 00
1655 5.99 16 50 0
50
16000
2
0
1480 6 99 806.
0 0
10 00 0
1000
1500
20 00
4000
1500
2000
55 00
70
00
Fig.35 : Schematisation of Panvel creek network for 1-D model under existing condition (without airport)
0 10 00
00 25
0 00
00 4 40
5500
8500
6500
8000
7500
9000
9500
10000
50
00
60
00
10 0 00
55
00
45
00
6 10058.9
5000
37 cross sections
0 0 650
600
7500
8000
8500
5
900 0
9500 99 99 .71
ULWE RIVER
TALOJA RIVER
15500 15500 0
9 9 321.4 321.4
10500 10500
1450 1450 0 0
0 250
000 13
13500
12000 12000
00 95
00 90
12500
11500
00 11 0
0 1200
85 85 00 00
8500
7500
7700 000 0
7000 7000
00 80
00 95
6500 6500
6000 6000
4000 4000
00 45
5000
5500 5500
5000 5000
1500
00 10
500
2000
2500
7
11 11 02 02 7.8 7.8 8 8
3300 0000
335 500 00
40 40 00 00
45 45 00 00
3500 3500
30 30 00 00
5500 5500
6500 6500
00 60
00 20
8
0 150
2000 0 0 2003.75
8500
0 1000
105 00
1100 0000
0 70 0
12 THANA CREEK
7000
9000
00 85 00 80
9 9500
0 0
0 1000 0.37 1006 0

1500
500 500
0 50 0 10 00
6500 60 00
16
00 75
4000
3500
0000 3355
45 00
1500
2000
3000
3500
20 20 00 00
2500
4000
4500
5000
5500
0 000 3300
250
50 00
50 50 00 00
10
60
0 0
5555 0000
6500 6500
7755 0000
0 0 800 800
4000
00 15
2000 2000
LINK 125 (Ulwe diversion)
11
2500
3000
600 0
100 1000
63 8 0 6.6 5
KALUNDRI RIVER
00 30
2500
500
1500 1500
3500
50 0
LINK 50
3500
40 00
11 11 00 00 0 0
500
1000
1500
GADHI RIVER 3
00 90
95 00
2255 0000
10000 10000
75 75 00 00
00 90
KASADI RIVER
8000 8000
10 10 50 50 0 0
13000 13000
0 0
1350 1350 0 0
0 0
1100 0
11500
16555.99 165 00
1400
145 145 00 00
1500 0
16 16000
14806.99
00 00 140 140
0 0 00 00 10 10
7000 7000
0000 2200
00 500 225
0000 3300
00 00 40 40
4500 4500
5500 5500
0 0
4500
500 0
6 00
6500
8000
8500
9000
9500
550 0
7500 7500
10000 10000
00 00 10 10
6 6 10058.9 10058.9
0 0
0 450
37 cross sections
6000 0 650
7700 000 0
5000
5555 0000
7500
8000
8500
9000
ULWE RIVER
9500 9999 .71
Fig.36 : Schematisation of Panvel creek network for 1-D model with proposed airport
Fig.37 : Spring tide and neap tide used as downstream boundary
Fig.38 Fig 38 : Validation of model for July 1991 flood (as reported in CWPRS Technical Report No.3815 of August 2001)
Charima
MIKE21
Observed
3.5 35 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water level (m) l 0.5 0.0 00 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 -3.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Time (min)
Fig.39 : Comparision of predicted and observed water levels at Ulwe New Railway Bridge
Charima
MIKE21
Observed
3.5 3.0 2.5 25 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water lev (m) vel 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1 0 1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 -3.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Time (min) 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Fig.40 : Comparision of predicted and observed Water Levels at Ulwe port
Charima
MIKE21
Observed
3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 Water lev (m) vel 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 10 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 -3.0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 Time (min)
Fig.41 : Comparision of predicted and observed Water Levels at Kharghar
Fig.42 Fig 42 : Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Taloja confluence to Kalundri confluence (Channel 60, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.43 : Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Kalundri confluence to Expressway bridge (Channel 40, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.44 : Taloja river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to 16 km upstream (Channel 30 & 10, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.45 : Kasadi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach upstream of Taloja confluence (Channel 20, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.46 : Kalundri river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall for reach upstream of Gadhi confluence (Channel 50, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.47 : Ulwe river water surface profile f at the time of spring tide HWL with 100 year return period rainfall (Channel 50, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.48 Fig 48 : Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP and 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Taloja confluence to Kalundri confluence (Channel 60, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.49 : Gadhi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Kalundri confluence to Expressway bridge (Channel 40, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.50 : Taloja river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach between Gadhi-Taloja confluence to 16 km upstream (Channel 30 & 10, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.51 : Kasadi river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 period rainfall for reach upstream of Taloja confluence (Channel 20, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.52 : Kalundri river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall for reach upstream of Gadhi confluence (Channel 50, refer schematic Fig.35)
Fig.53 : Ulwe river water surface profile at the time of spring tide HWL with PMP & 26th July 2005 rainfall (Channel 50, refer schematic Fig.35)
CIDCOBATHY
450
Taloja River
400
Kasadi River
350
rid No. of grids (Gr spacing 25 meter) .
300
MinorTaloja River
250
Waghiwali Island Dewala Island Sea Mouth NH4 Bridge
200
150
100
SH54 Bridge B id Ulwe Riv ver
50
0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Panvel Creek Bathy [m] CIDCOBATHY [m] Above 12.5 10 - 12.5 7.5 - 10 5- 75 7.5 2.5 5 0 - 2.5 -2.5 0 -5 - -2.5 -7.5 -5 -10 - -7.5 10 75 -12.5 - -10 -15 - -12.5 -17.5 - -15 -20 - -17.5 -22.5 - -20 Below -22.5 B l 22 Undefined Value
No. of grids (Grid spacing 50 meter)
Fig. 54: Bathymetry of 2D Mathematical Model Reach of Panvel Creek (existing condition)
All Levels are W.R.T. GTS
450
Taloja River
400
Kasadi River
350
Fig. Fi 55 : Details of Bathymetry of D t il f B th t f Panavel Creek around area proposed for Airport Site
300
cing 25 meter r) No. of grids (Grid spac
MinorTaloja River
250
200
150
Airport A Ai t Area
Reclamation levels to be decided from Water Levels
100
120 m wide Ulwe Diversion
SH54 Bridge NH4 Bridge
50
0 150
250 No. of grids (Grid spacing 50 meter)
200
300
PANVEL CREEK BATHY [M] CIDCOBATHY [m] Above 12.5 10 - 12.5 7.5 7 5 - 10 5 - 7.5 2.5 5 0 - 2.5 -2.5 0 -5 - -2.5 -7.5 75 -5 5 -10 - -7.5 -12.5 - -10 -15 - -12.5 -17.5 - -15 -20 - -17.5 -22.5 - -20 Below -22.5 Undefined Value All Levels are W.R.T. GTS
Ulwe River e
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
Dista ance (m)
6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
NH4 Bridge SH54 Bridge
Water Surface Elevation [m] Surface Elevation
Above 3.6 3.575 - 3.6 3.55 - 3.575 3.525 - 3.55 3.5 - 3.525 3.475 - 3.5 3.45 - 3.475 3.425 - 3.45 3.4 - 3.425 3.375 - 3.4 3.35 - 3.375 3.325 - 3.35 3.3 - 3.325 3.275 - 3.3 3.25 3.275 3 25 - 3 275 Below 3.25 Undefined Value
Distance (m)
Fig. 56: Maxima Water Level Pattern for Existing condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Without Airport)
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
NH4 Bridge SH54 Bridge Flow Velocity [m/sec] Current speed Above 2.6 2.4 - 2.6 2.2 - 2.4 2- 22 2.2 1.8 - 2 1.6 - 1.8 1.4 - 1.6 1.2 - 1.4 1 - 1.2 0.8 - 1 0.6 - 0.8 0.4 - 0.6 0.2 - 0.4 0 - 0.2 -0.2 - 0 0.2 Below -0.2 Undefined Value
Dista ance (m)
Distance (m)
Fig. 57 : Maxima Velocity Pattern for Existing condition with Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Without Airport)
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
Dista ance (m)
6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
NH4 Bridge SH54 Bridge
Above 3.68 3.64 - 3.68 3.6 - 3.64 3.56 3.6 3 56 - 3 6 3.52 - 3.56 3.48 - 3.52 3.44 - 3.48 3.4 - 3.44 3.36 - 3.4 3.32 3.36 3 32 - 3 36 3.28 - 3.32 3.24 - 3.28 3.2 - 3.24 3.16 - 3.2 3.12 - 3.16 Below 3.12 Undefined Value
Distance (m)
Fig. 58: Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Ulwe River Diversion of 80 m)
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
NH4 Bridge SH54 Bridge Flow Velocity [m/sec] Current speed Above 5.2 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4- 44 4.4 3.6 - 4 3.2 - 3.6 2.8 - 3.2 2.4 - 2.8 2 - 2.4 1.6 16- 2 1.2 - 1.6 0.8 - 1.2 0.4 - 0.8 0 - 0.4 -0.4 - 0 Below -0.4 Undefined Value
Dista ance (m)
Distance (m)
Fig. 59: Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for Spring tide and no Flood discharge (Ulwe Diversion of 80m)
_
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
Dista ance (m)
6000
5000 4000 3000

SH54 Bridge
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Above 9.2 8.8 - 9.2 8.4 - 8.8 8-84 8.4 7.6 - 8 7.2 - 7.6 6.8 - 7.2 6.4 - 6.8 6 - 6.4 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4 - 4.4 3.6 36- 4 Below 3.6 Undefined Value
Distance (m)
Fig. 60 :Maxima Water Level Pattern under Existing Condition for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL (Without Airport)
NH4 Bridge
_
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
Dista ance (m)
6000 5000 4000 3000

SH54 Bridge
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Above 9.2 8.8 - 9.2 8.4 - 8.8 8-84 8.4 7.6 - 8 7.2 - 7.6 6.8 - 7.2 6.4 - 6.8 6 - 6.4 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4 - 4.4 3.6 - 4 Below 3.6 Undefined Value
Distance (m)
Fig. 61: Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000

Ulwe Rail Bridge e Ulwe Ro Bridge oad 3.98 m 4m
8m 4.4 m
6500 6000
All Levels are W.R.T. GTS 3.82 m
Dista ance (m)
5500 5000 4500 4000
4m 3.77 m
4.4 m
3500 3000 2500 2000
3.74 m 4m 4.5 m 5.2 m 5.4 m
5.2 52m 6m 7m
SH54 Bridge
5.42 m 8.8 m 8m
1500 1000 8000 10000

5.55 m
Above 9.2 8.8 - 9.2 8.4 - 8.8 8 - 8.4 7.6 - 8 7.2 7.6 72-76 6.8 - 7.2 6.4 - 6.8 6 - 6.4 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 5.2 48-52 4.4 - 4.8 4 - 4.4 3.6 - 4 Below 3.6 Undefined Value
12000 14000 Distance (m)
16000
Fig. 62: Details of Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000

Ulwe Rail Bridge e 3.98 m 4m
8m 4.4 m
Ulwe Ro Bridge oad
6500 6000
3.82 m
Dista ance (m)
5500 5000 4500 4000
4m 3.77 m
4.4 m
3500 3000 2500 2000
3.74 m 4m 4.15 m 4.5 m 4.75 m 4.75 m
5.2 m 6m 7m
SH54 Bridge
8.8 m 8m
1500 1000 8000 10000

5.2 52m
Surface Elevation Water Surface Elevation [m] [ ] Above 9.2 8.8 - 9.2 8.4 - 8.8 8 - 8.4 7.6 - 8 7.2 7.6 72-76 6.8 - 7.2 6.4 - 6.8 6 - 6.4 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4 - 4.4 3.6 - 4 Below 3.6 Undefined Value
12000Distance (m)14000
16000
Fig. 63: Details of Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for 6 Hrs. Storm of 100 years Return Period with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide
_
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
_p p
Dista ance (m)
6000 5000 4000 3000

SH54 Bridge
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Above 10.5 10 - 10.5 9.5 - 10 9- 95 9.5 8.5 9 8 - 8.5 7.5 8 7 - 7.5 6.5 7 6 - 6.5 5.5 6 5 - 5.5 4.5 5 4 - 4.5 3.5 4 Below 3.5 Undefined Value
Distance (m) ( ) Fig. 64: Maxima Water Level Pattern under Existing Condition for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL (Without Airport)
_p p
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000
Dista ance (m)
6000 5000 4000 3000

SH54 Bridge
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Above 10.5 10 - 10.5 9.5 - 10 9 - 9.5 8.5 9 8 - 8.5 7.5 8 7 - 7.5 6.5 7 6 - 6.5 5.5 6 5 - 5.5 4.5 5 4 - 4.5 3.5 354 Below 3.5 Undefined Value
Distance (m) ( ) Fig. 65: Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
8.5 m
9000
5.5 m 4.5 m
8000
4.4 m
7000
4.2 m All Levels are W.R.T. GTS 4m 4.15 m 3.95m 4.5 m Ulwe R Road Bridge Ulwe Rail Bridge
6000
5000
4000
5m 3.8 m 55 5.5 m 6.5 m 7.5 m 6.63 m 9m 6.66 m 9.5 m
3000
4m
4.5 m 5.6 m 6m
6.5 m
SH54 Bridge
2000
1000
10.5 m 6.70m
Surface Elevation Water Surface Elevation [m] Above 10.5 10 - 10.5 9.5 - 10 9 - 9.5 8.5 9 8- 85 8.5 7.5 8 7 - 7.5 6.5 7 6 - 6.5 5.5 6 5 - 5.5 4.5 5 4 - 4.5 3.5 4 Below 3.5 Undefined Value
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 Fig. 66: Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
8.5 m
9000
5.5 m 4.5 45m 4.3m
8000
7000
4.2 m All Levels are W.R.T. GTS Ulwe R Road Bridge Ulwe Rail Bridge 3.89 m 4.5 m 3.8 m 4m 4.5 m
6000
4m 4.16 m Water Surface Elevation [m] Surface Elevation
5000
4000
5m 5m 5.5 m 5.5 m 6.5 m 7.5 m 5.5 m 9m 9.5 m
3000
SH54 Bridge
2000
6.66 m
10.5 m
1000
Above 10 5 10.5 10 - 10.5 9.5 - 10 9 - 9.5 8.5 9 8 - 8.5 7.5 8 7 - 7.5 6.5 7 6 - 6.5 5.5 6 5- 55 5.5 4.5 5 4 - 4.5 3.5 4 Below 3.5 Undefined Value
8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 Fig. 67:Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide
8.5 m
9500 9000 8500 8000 7500 7000 6500 6000

4.3 m Ulwe Roa Bridge ad Ulwe Ra Bridge ail 4.5m 4.4m 5.5m
4.1 m 4.25 m 4m 4.5 m 3.8 m Outfall of Drains of 360Cumec Discharge each 5m 5.5 m
Dista ance (m)
5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
3.77 3 77 m 4m
4.5 m
5m
5.5 m 5.5 m
6.5 65m 7.5 m
SH54 Bridge
9m
9.5 95m 10.5 m
5.86 m
Surface Elevation Above 10 5 10.5 10 - 10.5 9.5 - 10 9 - 9.5 8.5 9 8 - 8.5 7.5 758 7 - 7.5 6.5 7 6 - 6.5 5.5 6 5 - 5.5 4.5 5 4 - 4.5 3.5 4 Below 3.5 Undefined Value
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Distance (m) Fig. 68:Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL plus Storm Water Drainage from Airport Area and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide
_
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000
_p p
SH54 Bridge
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Current speed Above 9 8.4 - 9 7.8 - 8.4 7.2 - 7.8 6.6 - 7.2 6 - 6.6 5.4 - 6 4.8 - 5.4 4.2 - 4.8 8 3.6 - 4.2 3 - 3.6 2.4 - 3 1.8 - 2.4 1.2 - 1.8 0.6 1.2 06-12 Below 0.6 Undefined Value
Fig.68a : Detail maxima Velocity Pattern under existing conditions for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL
9000
1.7m/sec
4.4m/sec
8000
7000
Ulwe R Road Bridge Ulwe Rail Bridge e
2.5m/sec
6000
2 m/sec
Distan (m) nce
1.65m/sec 2.6 m/sec
5000
4000
2.5m/sec 2.6 m/sec 3 m/sec 4.5 m/sec 2.8 m/sec 1.6 m/sec
5m/sec
3000
SH54 Bridge
4.5m/sec
2000
4.5m/sec
1000 8000 10000
1.7m/sec
Flow Velocity Current speed [m/sec] Above 6 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4 - 4.4 3.6 - 4 3.2 - 3.6 2.8 - 3.2 2.4 - 2.8 2 - 2.4 1.6 16- 2 1.2 - 1.6 0.8 - 1.2 0.4 - 0.8 Below 0.4 Undefined Value
12000
Distance (m)
14000
16000
Fig. 69: Detail Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
9000
1.7m/sec
4.4m/sec
8000
7000
Ulwe Road Bridge Ulw Rail Bridge we
2.5m/sec
6000
2 m/sec
Distan (m) nce
1.65m/sec 2.6 m/sec
5000
Flow Velocity [m/sec] Current speed
4000
2.5m/sec 2.8m/sec 2.8 m/sec 4.5m/sec 2.8 m/sec 1.2m/sec SH54 Bridge 4.5m/sec 5m/sec
3000
2000
4.5m/sec
1000 000 8000 10000
2m/sec
Above 6 5.6 - 6 5.2 - 5.6 4.8 - 5.2 4.4 - 4.8 4-44 4.4 3.6 - 4 3.2 - 3.6 2.8 - 3.2 2.4 - 2.8 2 - 2.4 1.6 - 2 1.2 - 1.6 0.8 - 1.2 0.4 - 0.8 Below 0.4 Undefined Value
14000 16000 Distance (m) Fig. 70: Detail Maxima Velocity Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide
12000
Fig. 71 : Comparison of water level with and without airport at u/s of Ulwe-Belapur road bridge for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model)
Fig.72 : Comparison of water level with and without airport between Gadhi Taloja confluence and Ulwe bridge for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model)
With Airport
Fig.73 : Comparison of water level with and without airport at Gadhi Taloja confluence for PMP 6 hour storm (2-D model)
Fig.74 : Recorded yearly maximum one day rainfall at Santacruz and Colaba
Fig.75 : Recorded yearly maximum hourly rainfall at Santacruz and Colaba
Top Level of Embankment as per the Safe Grade Elevation
2.5 m free board Design Water Level Slope 1V: 2.5H Berm 3 to 5 m Wide at every 4 to 5 m Height Slope 1V: 2.5 to 3 H
Stones in GI Wire /Nylon rope crates/Gabions of size 1.5 m X 1 m X 0.6 m
River Bed Level
Geofabric Filter of appropriate Mesh Size as per BIS below gabions
Launching Apron (Nominal Length of 5 to 6 m if nonerodable /rocky Bed)
Figure not to scale
Fig.76: Schematic for Bank / Embankment Protection Works
11000 10000 9000
4.4 m
8.5 m
5m 3.35 m
8000
Ulwe R Road Bridge Ulw Rail Bridge we
Fig. 77: Details of Maximum Water Level Pattern with Airport for PMP 6 Hrs. Storm with peak of hydrograph at Neap tide LWL and Ulwe diversion channel 80 m wide
7000 6000
2.66 m
2m Water Elevation (m) SurfaceSurface Elevation [m] Above 10.4 9.6 - 10.4 8.8 - 9.6 8 - 8.8 7.2 728 6.4 - 7.2 5.6 - 6.4 4.8 - 5.6 4 - 4.8 3.2 4 2.4 - 3.2 1.6 - 2.4 0.8 - 1.6 0 - 0.8 -0.8 0 Below -0.8 Undefined Value
5000
0.6m 0.5m 1.5m 2.8 m
4000 3000 2000

0.47 m 3.05 m 5.2 m 6.15 m 6.42 m
4.25 4 25 m 5.2 m
SH54 Bridge
9m 10.4m 9.6 m
1000 0
6.66 m
8000 10000 12000 12:40:00 PM Time Step 445 Of 726.
14000
16000
11000 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000

SH54 Bridge g
2000 1000 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Surface Elevation S f El ti Above 11.4 10.8 - 11.4 10.2 - 10.8 9.6 - 10.2 9- 96 9.6 8.4 9 7.8 - 8.4 7.2 - 7.8 6.6 - 7.2 6 - 6.6 5.4 546 4.8 - 5.4 4.2 - 4.8 3.6 - 4.2 3 - 3.6 Below 3 Undefined Value
Fig.78 : Maxima Water Level Pattern for Belapur storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL
8.5 m
9000
4.4 m
4.8 m
8000
7000
4.2 m All Levels are W.R.T. GTS 4.13 m 4.215 m Ulwe R Road Bridge Ulwe Rail Bridge
6000
5000
3.95m 4.5 m
Surface Elevation Water Surface Elevation [m] Above 11.4 10.8 - 11.4 10.2 - 10.8 9.6 - 10.2 9 - 9.6 8.4 849 7.8 - 8.4 7.2 - 7.8 6.6 - 7.2 6 - 6.6 5.4 6 4.8 - 5.4 4.2 - 4.8 3.6 - 4.2 3 - 3.6 Below 3 Undefined Value U d fi d V l
4000
5m 3.8 m 55 5.5 m 6.6 m 8m
3000
4m
4.2 m 4.3m
4.5 m 4.88 m 4.89 m
SH54 Bridge
2000
5m
9.6 m
10.2 m
1000 8000 10000
5.5m 5 5m
11.4 m
12000
14000
16000
Fig.79 : Detail Maxima Water Level Pattern with Airport for Belapur Storm with peak of hydrograph at Spring tide HWL and Ulwe diversion channel 120 m wide

ANNEXURE Va

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANNEXURE Va

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER AND POWER RESEARCH STATION P.O.

: KHADAKWASLA RESEARCH STATION, PUNE 411 024

RIVER ENGINEERING LABORATORY

Technical Report No. 4665 October 2009

TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 4665

TECHNICAL REPORT No.4665

TECHNICAL REPORT No.4665

Gadhi River Valley

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Ulwe River Valley

CIDCO Developments in Panvel Creek

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

ANALYSIS OF TIDAL DATA

Tidal range 5.74 5.49 5.19 5.44 5.12

HWL 2.60 2.67 2.62 2.64 2.49

Ebbing Velocity 0.75 0.90 0.86 0.90 0.75

Tidal range 2.25 2.00 2.16 2.50 2.17

HWL 1.40 1.40 1.50 1.20 0.67

Ebbing Velocity 0.40 0.26 0.28 0.37 0.24

ANALYSIS OF HYDROLOGICAL DATA

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Analysis of one day maximum rainfall

Santacruz (1950 2005)

Colaba (1901 2004)

Matheran (1951 1991)

Panvel (1974 2000)

NOCIL (1965 2000)

Morbe (1974 1991)

Khopoli (1974 1991)

Analysis for rainfall intensities

Colaba (1969 2004)

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

ESTIMATION OF FLOOD HYDROGRAPHS

Time of Concentration (tc)

River Basin Gadhi Kasadi Taloja Kalundri Ulwe

L (km) 27.2 12.8 10.0 11.5 09.0

Time Area Diagrams for Rivers in Panvel Creek

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Gadhi Kalundri Kasadi Taloja Ulwe 8.0

26th July 2005 rainfall 2515 1978 1270 1060 722

ONE DIMENSIONAL (1-D) MATHEMATICAL MODEL STUDIES

Mathematical Model CHARIMA

in Annexure II. The following

Governing Equations for Water Flow

g - Gravitational acceleration R - Hydraulic radius

equations are nonlinear

differential equations with Q and y as dependent

Solution of Governing Equations

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Input Data Requirement

Model needs the following type of input data :

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Schematization of Panvel Creek

- Link 10 - Link 20 - Link 30 - Link 40 - Link 50 - Link 60 - Link 110

viii) ix) x) xi) xii)

- Link 70 - Link 80 - Link 90 - Link 120 - Link 100 All these

Upstream Boundary Conditions

CWPRS Technical Report No.4665

Water Level HWL LWL

Spring Tide 3.25 m -2.00 m

Neap Tide 1.30 m -0.20 m