DD Pre-Feasibility Study Report AFColenco 2012

THE REPUBLIC OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR
MINISTRY OF ELECTRIC POWER

DEPARTMENT OF HYDROPOWER IMPLEMENTATION
DEEDOKE
HYDROPOWER PROJECT
PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY
Report no. DED-00-PFS-PREL/DEC2012
DECEMBER 2012
AF-Colenco Ltd.
Hydropower Plants
DEEDOKE HPP
Preliminary Feasibility Study
2/57
Table of Contents
Page
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................7
1.1 General ..............................................................................................................................7
1.2 Objectives of the Study .....................................................................................................8
1.3 Available information........................................................................................................8
2 TOPOGRAPHY ..............................................................................................................10
2.1 Topographical map ..........................................................................................................10
2.2 SRTM Digital Elevation Model ......................................................................................10
2.3 Topographic survey .........................................................................................................10
3 HYDROLOGY ................................................................................................................12
3.1 Deedoke HPP Catchment Area .......................................................................................12
3.2 Water availability ............................................................................................................13
3.3 Floods ..............................................................................................................................13
4 GEOLOGY ......................................................................................................................16
4.1 General ............................................................................................................................16
4.2 Expected Conditions at Dam Site ....................................................................................17
4.3 Construction Materials ....................................................................................................17
4.4 Seismicity ........................................................................................................................18
5 LAYOUT AND CIVIL DESIGN ....................................................................................19
5.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................19
5.2 Dam Site Locations .........................................................................................................19
5.2.1 Cross Section 44 ..............................................................................................................21
5.2.2 Cross Section 44c ............................................................................................................21
5.2.3 Cross Section 46 ..............................................................................................................22
5.2.4 Selected dam site location ...............................................................................................24
5.3 River hydraulics ..............................................................................................................24
5.4 General Layout ................................................................................................................27
5.4.1 Alternative 1 at XS 46: Construction of plant outside of river bed .................................27
5.4.2 Alternative 2 at XS 46: Construction of spillway outside of river bed ...........................28
5.4.3 Alternative 3 at XS 44c: Plant constructed in river bed ..................................................29
5.5 Power house ....................................................................................................................30
5.6 Spillway ...........................................................................................................................32
5.6.1 General Arrangement ......................................................................................................32
5.6.2 Characteristics .................................................................................................................32
5.6.3 Discharge Capacity..........................................................................................................32
4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

DEEDOKE HPP
3/57
5.6.4 Stilling Basin ...................................................................................................................33

5.7 River Diversion ...............................................................................................................34
5.7.1 Diversion through spillway structure ..............................................................................34
5.7.2 Alternative 1 at Cross section 46 .....................................................................................34
5.7.3 Alternative 2 at Cross section 46 .....................................................................................35
5.7.4 Alternative 3 at Cross section 44c ...................................................................................36
6 ELECTRO-MECHANICAL WORKS ............................................................................38
6.1 Turbine and Generator.....................................................................................................38
6.1.1 Main Hydraulic Data .......................................................................................................38
6.1.2 Type of turbine ................................................................................................................38
6.2 132 kV Switchyard ..........................................................................................................38
6.3 Transmission Lines..........................................................................................................39
7 HYDRAULIC STEEL STRUCTURES ..........................................................................40
7.1 Main Gantry Cranes ........................................................................................................40
7.2 Spillway ...........................................................................................................................40
7.2.1 Radial Gates ....................................................................................................................40
7.2.2 Upstream Stop Logs ........................................................................................................40
7.2.3 Downstream Stop Logs ...................................................................................................40
7.3 Power Intakes ..................................................................................................................41
7.3.1 Trashracks .......................................................................................................................41
7.3.2 Trash Rack Cleaning Machine ........................................................................................41
7.3.3 Maintenance Gate ............................................................................................................41
7.4 Draft Tube Gates .............................................................................................................41
7.4.1 Gates ................................................................................................................................41
7.4.2 Draft Tube Gantry Crane .................................................................................................42
8 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM .....................................................................................43
8.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................43
8.2 Construction Phases ........................................................................................................43
8.2.1 Alternative 1 ....................................................................................................................43
8.2.2 Alternative 2 ....................................................................................................................45
8.2.3 Alternative 3 ....................................................................................................................45
8.3 Construction Schedule .....................................................................................................47
9 PROJECT COST .............................................................................................................48
9.1 General ............................................................................................................................48
9.2 Quantities.........................................................................................................................49
9.3 Unit Prices .......................................................................................................................50
9.4 Total Investment Costs ....................................................................................................50
10 ENERGY EVALUATION ...............................................................................................53
11 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................56

DEEDOKE HPP
4/57
11.1 Summary .........................................................................................................................56

11.2 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................56
11.3 Further Studies and Investigations ..................................................................................57

DEEDOKE HPP
5/57
Tables:
Table 3-1: Inflows to Deedoke HPP, daily and monthly values ........................................................13
Table 3-2: Yeywa Reservoir Inflow Peaks ........................................................................................14
Table 3-3: Deedoke HPP Design Flood Peaks ...................................................................................15
Table 4-1: Summary of peak ground accelerations (Yeywa) .............................................................18
Table 5-1: Tailwater level results for Cross-section 44c....................................................................26
Table 5-2: Discharge Capacity Deedoke Spillway ............................................................................33
Table 5-3: Required height of coffer dams vs. spillway gate opening for 1:50 year flood................34
Table 9-1: Assumptions for excavation material ...............................................................................49
Table 9-2: Assumed Unit Rates Deedoke Pre-Feasibility..................................................................50
Table 9-3: Total Investment Cost Alternative 1 .................................................................................51
Table 10-1: Energy Simulation Parameters .......................................................................................53
Table 10-2: Energy Simulation Results .............................................................................................54
Figures:
Figure 1-1: Locality map for Deedoke HPP (1 square = 1 km) ...........................................................8
Figure 2-1: Location of surveyed cross-sections................................................................................11
Figure 3-1: Derivation of Deedoke HPP catchment area using ArcGIS 10.0 (ESRI, 2010) .............12
Figure 3-2: Design flood hydrographs used for flood routing ...........................................................14
Figure 4-1: Location of the foreseen dam site (red) and existing quarries for HPP Yeywa ..............16
Figure 5-1: Locality map showing considered locations for the proposed Deedoke HP scheme ......20
Figure 5-2: Cross Section 44 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey) .........................................21
Figure 5-3: Photo of cross section 44 .................................................................................................21
Figure 5-4: Cross Section 44c (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey) ........................................22
Figure 5-5: Photo of cross section 44C ..............................................................................................22
Figure 5-6: Cross Section 46 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey) .........................................23
Figure 5-7: Photo of cross section 46 .................................................................................................23
Figure 5-8: Longitudinal Profile before construction of Deedoke Dam ............................................25
Figure 5-8: Longitudinal Profile after construction of Deedoke Dam ...............................................25
Figure 5-9: Tailwater curve for Cross-section 44c and XS 46 ...........................................................26
Figure 5-10: Layout Alternative 1 at cross section 46 .......................................................................28
Figure 5-11: Layout Alternative 2 at cross section 46 .......................................................................29
Figure 5-12: Layout Alternative 3 at cross section 44c .....................................................................30
Figure 5-13: Typical arrangement bulb turbine (source Rheinfelden) ...............................................30
Figure 5-14: Cross Section Spillway..................................................................................................32
Figure 5-15: Stilling Basin Type IV (USBR).....................................................................................33
Figure 5-16: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 1 at XS 46 (not to scale) ....................................35
Figure 5-17: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 2 at XS 46 (not to scale) ....................................35
Figure 5-18: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 3 at XS 44c (not to scale) ..................................36
Figure 10-1: Average Inflow used for the Energy Simulation ...........................................................53
Figure 10-2: Tailwater Levels at Cross Section 44c ..........................................................................54
Figure 10-3: Water Losses .................................................................................................................55
Figure 10-4: Energy Production .........................................................................................................55

DEEDOKE HPP
6/57
Annexes:
Annex 1: Alternative dam sites
Annex 2: Layout at u/s Dam site
Annex 3: Construction Program – Alternative 3

DEEDOKE HPP
7/57
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
In October 2012, AF-Colenco Ltd. (AFC) was retained by DHPI to carry out a pre-
feasibility study for the construction of Deedoke low-head hydropower plant (HPP)
downstream of the existing Yeywa Hydropower Plant (commissioned in 2009).
Yeywa HPP is located on the Myitnge River (lower reach of Nam Tu River),
approximately 50 km southeast of Mandalay in central Myanmar. The main
components of the 790 MW Yeywa Hydro Power Plant (HPP) include the Yeywa 134 m
high RCC Dam with a Reservoir of 2630 million m3 and a 790 MW capacity Power
Station (4 No. Bulb Turbines, each with design discharge 210 m3/s). The Yeywa
Reservoir is operated to reach optimal energy production during the wet and dry
seasons. During the wet season, the reservoir often spills and the target energy
production is easily reached. During the dry season, however, the target energy
production is constrained by the available inflows to the reservoir and subsequent lower
reservoir levels. The purpose of the Deedoke low-head HPP is to supplement energy
production from Yeywa HPP, particularly during the dry season.
In May 2012, a site visit was undertaken by AF-Colenco Ltd. together with DHPI to
identify possible locations of the proposed Deedoke HPP. During the site visit, the
general hydraulics and geomorphology of the river reach were inspected. Based on the
site visit, a preliminary site located approximately 16 km downstream of Yeywa Dam on
the Myitnge River was identified as a possible location for Deedoke HPP (refer to
Figure 1-1). The site is located downstream of the Deedoke Rapids, to take advantage
of the additional head.
In October 2012, DHPI performed a survey of river cross-sections from Yeywa
Reservoir to Deedoke area (approximate distance of 18.5km). The additional
topographical information indicated that Deedoke scheme should be located further
downstream, where the valley widens into the left bank. After investigation as part of
this prefeasibility study, cross-section 46 (XS 46) and cross-section 44c (XS 44c) were
identified as preferred locations of Deedoke HPP.
In November 2012, a second site visit was realized by AFC geologists jointly with
DHPI team. During this Site Visit, the surveyed profile 44C was identified as the
preferred candidate location for the dam axis. The following surveys and investigations
were agreed: detailed topo survey of the area including pagoda and village, one
borehole on the right bank and two boreholes along the axis on the left bank; 3 seismic
refraction profiles (along dam axis and 2x from upstream to downstream on left bank).
At the time of preparation of this report, these surveys were still ongoing.

DEEDOKE HPP
8/57
A locality map of the Study Area is shown in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1: Locality map for Deedoke HPP (1 square = 1 km)

This Report presents the Pre-feasibility Study for the proposed Deedoke HPP at location
XS 46 and XS 44c. A run-of-river scheme is proposed consisting of a gated weir, a
separation wall and powerhouse with 3 bulb turbines. For XS 46, two layout
alternatives are considered (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2). For XS 44c, one
alternative is considered in this phase (Alternative 3).
1.2 Objectives of the Study

The objective of this Study is to carry out the Pre-feasibility Study for the proposed
Deedoke Hydro Power Plant, which includes the following:
 investigation of alternative locations and layouts of the scheme;
 assessment of the technical feasibility of the scheme, including preliminary
design of the major structures;
 estimation of the project’s energy production potential;
 preliminary cost estimate and economic evaluation for the project.
1.3 Available information

The following documents are available for this Study:
 Site Visit Report, May 2012, AF-Colenco Ltd

 Geological Survey Report, May 2010, AF-Colenco Ltd
 Topographical map with 20m contours of Deedoke reservoir area
 Satellite information of the area

DEEDOKE HPP
9/57
 River cross-section survey, September 2012, updated in October 2012, DHPI

 Yeywa Project Design Data, AF-Colenco Ltd
 Yeywa Water Management Model, updated October 2012, AF-Colenco Ltd.
As part of the Yeywa Feasibility Study, a detailed hydrological analysis was undertaken
for the estimation of a range of design flood events (1:2 to 1:10 000 years Recurrence
Interval) based on high-quality flow data measured at Shwesaye gauging station. These
findings were also used in this Study for the estimation of the design flood peaks at
Deedoke HPP.
The Yeywa Water Management Model (developed by AF-Colenco Ltd for the operation
of Yeywa Reservoir) was updated in October 2012 with an additional 11 years of flow
data (total of 37 years). The Model was also re-calibrated based on actual measured
outflows and power output from Yeywa Power plant since its commissioning in 2009.
The updated model was used to determine the estimated releases from Yeywa Dam
during the dry and wet season. The releases from Yeywa Reservoir equal the inflows to
Deedoke HPP as the inflow of the intermediate catchment area is negligible.

DEEDOKE HPP
10/57
2 TOPOGRAPHY
2.1 Topographical map
A topographical map (20m contour interval) was sourced from the Yeywa Feasibility
Study. The map covers the area from approximately 5km upstream of the existing
Yeywa Reservoir to approximately 4km downstream of Shwesaye gauging station
(Refer to Figure 1-1, only partly shown).
2.2 SRTM Digital Elevation Model
A 90m x 90m NASA Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM) DEM for Myanmar
was sourced from the internet. The SRTM DEM was used in ArcGIS 10.1 to determine
the intermediate catchment area from Yeywa Reservoir to Deedoke HPP.
2.3 Topographic survey
Following from the initial Site Visit in May 2012, a geodetic survey was carried out on
the river reach between Yeywa Reservoir and Deedoke area. DHPI conducted a geodetic
survey and results were provided to AFC in September 2012. Details of the survey are
as follows:
 Cross-sections were measured at 500 m intervals from Yeywa Reservoir to
14.5 km downstream of the reservoir (approximate start of Deedoke Rapids)
 Cross-sections were measured at 100 m intervals from 14.5 km to 17 km
downstream of the Yeywa Reservoir
 Cross-sections were measured at 500 m interval from 17km to 18.5 km
downstream of Yeywa Reservoir.
For the above survey, only the stretch above the water level was surveyed. As the
knowledge of the full channel to the bottom elevation is essential for the hydraulic
analysis of the river reach AFC further requested that all cross-sections were to be
resurveyed to include the full river section. In October 2012, a re-survey to include the
full river section was undertaken for cross-sections from 15km to 16.5km downstream
of Yeywa Reservoir only (Cross-sections 33 to 44
Figure 2-1 shows the location of the surveyed cross-sections.

DEEDOKE HPP
11/57
Figure 2-1: Location of surveyed cross-sections

DEEDOKE HPP
12/57
3 HYDROLOGY
3.1 Deedoke HPP Catchment Area
The incremental catchment area between Yeywa Reservoir and the proposed
Deedoke HPP (based on Cross-section 44) was estimated using ArcGIS 10.1 (ESRI,
2010) based on the 90 m SRTM DEM (refer to Figure 3-1). The incremental catchment
area was estimated at 290 km2, which is about 1% of Yeywa Reservoir catchment area.
The total catchment area of Deedoke HPP is therefore at 28,496 km2.
From the above findings, it can be assumed that any contribution with respect to runoff
from the incremental area between Yeywa Reservoir and Deedoke HPP is negligible in
comparison to the runoff at Yeywa Reservoir and thus can be ignored for the purpose of
this Study.
Thus, outflows from Yeywa Reservoir can be considered as inflows to Deedoke HPP.
Also, the outflow design flood peaks from Yeywa Reservoir can be considered as the
inflow design flood peaks to Deedoke HPP.
Figure 3-1: Derivation of Deedoke HPP catchment area using ArcGIS 10.0 (ESRI,
2010)

DEEDOKE HPP
13/57
3.2 Water availability

The water available at Deedoke HPP is the outflow from Yeywa Reservoir, i.e. the
controlled releases from the powerhouse and spills.
For the purpose of this Study, the outflow from Yeywa Reservoir was calculated based
on the output from the recently updated Yeywa Water Management Model (YWMM).
The model was developed by AF-Colenco Ltd in April 2009 as part of the Yeywa
Feasibility Study. In September 2012, the model was updated based to the following:
 An additional 11 years of measured inflow data was included (total flow record
of 37 years from 1972 - 2008)
 A new tailrace rating curve was used based on the actual measurements since
commissioning of the dam in 2009
The optimized operation of Yeywa Reservoir according to defined Operation Curves
(for the wet and dry season) was assumed in the Yeywa WMM to determine inflows to
Deedoke HPP. The inflows to Deedoke HPP are thus available as both, daily and
monthly values. The monthly flow values are presented in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: Inflows to Deedoke HPP, daily and monthly values

Powerhouse Flow (m3/s) Spills (m3/s)
Month
Maximum Average Minimum Maximum Average Minimum
January 430.21 252.64 229.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
February 480.28 282.79 225.32 0.00 0.00 0.00
March 478.07 266.16 218.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
April 474.40 293.90 156.34 0.00 0.00 0.00
May 460.44 310.42 171.58 0.00 0.00 0.00
June 443.87 340.49 152.23 0.00 0.00 0.00
July 821.14 467.77 148.84 557.72 18.26 0.00
August 824.83 672.50 204.72 736.00 113.69 0.00
September 824.57 787.55 435.62 660.64 211.95 0.00
October 824.59 703.09 219.26 985.34 107.90 0.00
November 824.58 560.90 225.92 359.07 31.17 0.00
December 634.46 352.96 228.89 0.00 0.00 0.00
Maximum 824.83 787.55 435.62 985.34 211.95 0.00
Average 626.79 440.93 218.11 274.90 40.25 0.00
Minimum 430.21 252.64 148.84 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.3 Floods
As mentioned in chapter 3.1 the additional runoff generated from the incremental
catchment between Yeywa Reservoir and Deedoke HPP can be considered negligible in
comparison to the catchment area of Yeywa Reservoir. Thus it can be assumed that the
outflow peaks from Yeywa Reservoir are representative of the inflow peaks to Deedoke
HPP. The inflow peaks to Yeywa Reservoir are shown in Table 3-2. The peaks were

DEEDOKE HPP
14/57
derived based on a probabilistic analysis of the annual maximum flow record at Yeywa
HPP (scaled from Shwesaye gauging station) for period 1972-2008.
Table 3-2: Yeywa Reservoir Inflow Peaks

Recurrence Interval Flood Peaks
3
(years) (m /s)
2 2,200
5 2,700
10 3,100
20 3,400
50 3,900
100 4,200
500 5,000
1,000 5,400
10,000 6,600
The attenuation through Yeywa Reservoir was determined to be approximately 3%,

which is considered as negligible. The inflow to Yeywa can thus be assumed as the
inflow to Deedoke HPP. Table 3-3 presents the flood hydrographs relevant to
Deedoke HPP.
7000
Q10000,w
6'600
Q1000,w
6000 Q100,w
Q50,w
Q50,d
5000
4'200
4000
3'900
Flow (m3/s)
3000
2000 1'815
1'145
1000
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Hours
Figure 3-2: Design flood hydrographs used for flood routing

DEEDOKE HPP
15/57
Table 3-3: Deedoke HPP Design Flood Peaks

Deedoke HPP Inflow
Peak (m3/s)
Safety Evaluation Flood = 1:10 000 yr 6600
Spillway design flood peaks 1:1000 yr 5400
Design Flood = 1:100 yr 4200
1:50 yr_wet 3900
Diversion design floods peaks
1:50 yr_dry 1140

DEEDOKE HPP
16/57
4 GEOLOGY
4.1 General
The candidate dam sites are located at the upstream end (Section 44C) or downstream
end respectively (Section 46) of a large flat terrace carrying the Tha yet pin village and
downstream of the river rapids. The project site is in the vicinity of the High Tech
Quarry for Yeywa HPP on the right bank of the river. Therefore the general bedrock
conditions at the site can be well characterized by analogy to the existing quarry. The
Deedoke river rapids are located at the upstream toe of the quarry hill, along the cross
section passing through the former army quarry on the slope of the right bank. The MSP
and Asia World quarries are located further downstream on the left bank. Therefore the
general geological conditions of the project site are well known and can be
characterized by Permo-Triassic dolomitic limestone, covered by river deposits. The
only Unknown related to the geology of the project site is the depth of rock surface
beneath the alluvial cover.
MSP Quarry High Tech Quarry
Rapids
Figure 4-1: Location of the foreseen dam site (red) and existing quarries for HPP
Yeywa

DEEDOKE HPP
17/57
4.2 Expected Conditions at Dam Site

Due to lack of any subsoil investigation at this early stage, the geological knowledge is
limited to surface observations made during the second site visit in November 2012.
There is no rock outcrops observed at either river bank in any of the relevant cross
sections. However, the proposed cross section 44C is located in close vicinity to the
rocky slope of the quarry hill on the right bank; therefore only a shallow overburden is
expected there. A water spring observed below the road is likely originating directly
from fractured bedrock. It bears noting that the “Big Tree” at this location is protected
and should not be destroyed by excavation works for the project. On the left side of this
dam axis, hilly rock outcrops are observed on far left abutment. The width of the river
terrace along the cross section 44C is about 400 m.
A key question regarding the foundation conditions at the dam axis, regardless of its
final location, is the depth of the bedrock below the alluvial deposits covering the valley
bottom. A very rough estimate would be in the range of 5 to 10 m below the river
bottom, assuming “normal” conditions to be expected (i.e. no hidden deep channels,
considered as highly unlikely). At both river banks, old alluvial terraces are exposed,
reaching a height of approximately 10 m above the water line. These terrace deposits
are usually cemented by a calcareous tuff matrix (secondary sediments). Several flooded
mining pits can be seen in the flat terraces, probably witnessing alluvial gold mining.
The bedrock in the river bottom is likely composed of fractured dark grey dolomitic
limestone, frequently brecciated. Undisturbed rock represents a competent and strong
foundation, which is however permeable due to high secondary permeability and voids
within fractures. Therefore curtain grouting will be required to a limited depth, say of
15m below the foundation line.
The alluvial deposits, which may reach a significant thickness below the terrace on the
left bank, are also permeable. They need to be removed below the foundation of
concrete gravity structures (gravity dam, spillway, and powerhouse). Elsewhere they
would require a positive cut-off to avoid seepage and erosion underneath the structures.
The depth of bedrock in the active river channel and below the terrace on the left bank
will be the major issue to determine by forthcoming site investigations in order to
confirm the foundation conditions. At cross section 44C the depth to bedrock
underneath the terrace is estimated to reach 20m approximately, if a subhorizontal rock
surface is assumed, gently rising towards the left abutment (left bank road).
At the Section 46, less favourable conditions are to be expected due to lack of rocky
abutments on both extremes of the profile. The surface elevation of the natural ground is
somewhat lower than at 44C Site.
The geotechnical and hydrogeological conditions of the soil land bedrock are
comparable at both candidate sites.
4.3 Construction Materials

The construction materials for the planned project are readily available in the immediate
vicinity. For concrete aggregates, any one of the existing Yeywa quarries can be used.
The High Tech Quarry on the right bank might be too close to the construction area, but
a new working face may be opened further upstream, at the location of the former Army

DEEDOKE HPP
18/57
quarry.
Construction materials for the embankments (coffer dam, wing dams etc.) can be
obtained from the terrace deposits, i.e. at least partly from foundation excavations for
the dam, spillway and powerhouse. Low-permeable core material has to be confirmed
by test pits or trenching in topsoil covering the alluvial terraces. High-quality rockfill
and rip-rap material shall be obtained from quarried rock in the vicinity.
4.4 Seismicity
The project is located in the same seismic region as Yeywa HPP, therefore the same
seismic design parameters shall be used as for Yeywa calculations in 2005.
The peak ground accelerations (PGA) are summarized in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Summary of peak ground accelerations (Yeywa)
Event OBE MCE

PGA horizontal – peak 0.10 g 0.25 g
PGA vertical – peak 0.07 g 0.17 g
To mention is a new Seismic Zoning Map of Myanmar published in 2012 by Myanmar

Earthquake Committee, which represents a third-generation map, first time based on
probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (according to international standards). This map
suggests PGA values in the range of 0.11 - 0.2 g for a 475 yrs earthquake (10%
probability of exceedence in 50 years).

DEEDOKE HPP
19/57
5 LAYOUT AND CIVIL DESIGN

5.1 Introduction
The present Section presents:
- the site selection
- the arrangement of plant components
- river hydraulics as base of
- the preliminary design of powerhouse and spillway
-
5.2 Dam Site Locations
Based on the two site visits in Mai 2012 and November 2012 the selection of dam site
was limited to a region in between 16 km and 17.5 km downstream of Yeywa dam.
Three possible dam sites were considered as part of the prefeasibility study (refer to
Figure 5-1 and Annex 1):
- Cross-section 44 (XS 44), located 16 km downstream of Yeywa
- Cross-section 44c (XS 44c), located 16.3 km downstream of Yeywa Reservoir
- Cross-section 46 (XS 46), located 17 km downstream of Yeywa Reservoir
All sites are located downstream of the Deedoke Rapids, in order to take advantage of
the additional head caused by the rapids.

DEEDOKE HPP
20/57
XS 46
XS 44c
XS 44
Figure 5-1: Locality map showing considered locations for the proposed Deedoke HP scheme

DEEDOKE HPP
21/57
5.2.1 Cross Section 44

XS 44 was initially identified as a possible location of the Deedoke HPP, based on the
findings of the May 2012 Site Visit due to favorable geological conditions.
The survey data indicated steep left and right banks at XS 44 (Figure 5-2, left side).
As part of this prefeasibility study, this site was rejected based on the detailed
topographical information made available by the DHPI geodetic survey (provided in
September 2012) and the space requirements for the spillway structure.
Figure 5-2: Cross Section 44 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey)
Figure 5-3: Photo of cross section 44
5.2.2 Cross Section 44c

Downstream of XS 44, the river valley widens into the left bank fulfilling the space
requirements of the spillway structure.
XS 44c was identified as a possible site for Deedoke HPP, based on a second AF-
Colenco Ltd Site Visit in November 2012. At XS 44c, the left bank widens to flat
terrace of approximately 400m width. (Figure 5-4). The right bank is constituted by
only a narrow terrace, followed by steep rocky slope of the Quarry Ridge. Geological
conditions shall be determined in bore holes tests.

DEEDOKE HPP
22/57
Figure 5-4: Cross Section 44c (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey)
Figure 5-5: Photo of cross section 44C
Boundary conditions at XS 44c are as follows:

 A pagoda and a small village are located on the left bank about 300m
downstream of XS 44c. The structures shall be retained and protected during
construction and operation of Deedoke HPP.
 Sacred tree on the right bank upstream of XS 44c shall be retained. The exact
location shall be included in the topographic survey.
 The narrow part of the river located downstream (at XS 46) will be widened to
increase available head at the power plant and to keep tailwater levels low
during flood events.
5.2.3 Cross Section 46
XS 46 is located below the village. The left bank widens to a fairly flat floodplain for
approximately 700 m (Figure 5-6). The right bank is fairly steep. XS 46 is also located
at a river gorge (sudden narrowing), which presents a control section, i.e. controls the
water levels upstream of the section. Thus, by placing the Deedoke scheme at this

DEEDOKE HPP
23/57
section, the river would be artificially widened and the control removed. The
geomorphology of the river at XS 46 is also favorable for the reshaping of the river to
the extents of the permanent structure, seeing that this section is located at a wide bend
of the river.
Boundary conditions at XS 46 are as follows:
 High flow velocities are expected within the original river reach at XS 46 due to
the presence of the gorge. At the gorge, the flow regime enters critical, and is
associated with high velocities (expected to be in the range of 6 m/s). Thus,
should coffer dams be built along the banks or within the river as part of the
river diversion works during construction, it may be necessary that the toe of the
dams be protected with riprap.
 A Pagoda is located on the left bank about 400m upstream of XS 46. The
Pagoda must be protected from being flooded during the construction and final
commissioning of the Deedoke Scheme.
 Geological conditions of the left bank might be unfavorable.
Figure 5-6: Cross Section 46 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey)
Figure 5-7: Photo of cross section 46

DEEDOKE HPP
24/57
5.2.4 Selected dam site location

Based the above discussions, XS 44 has been rejected due to insufficient space
requirements. XS 44c and XS 46 will be taken further in this prefeasibility study.
It should be noted that at this stage of the project a geological profile (core sample) is
not yet available for the above sites. During the November 2012 Site Visit, borehole
locations were identified by the AF-Colenco geologist in the vicinity of XS 44c: two
borehole sites on the left bank; and one on the right bank. The results of the borehole
tests are still not available, and thus can only be considered during the feasibility phase
of this study.
It shall be noted that the selected dam location is indicative with regards of the limited
available information. The dam axis – in particular for the alternative at XS 44c can be
moved upstream or downstream after survey data is available.
5.3 River hydraulics

A river stretch of 17’000 m from Yeywa downstream has been modeled with the HEC-
RAS river analysis program in order to analyze:
- The river levels in actual situation
- Normal discharges based on turbine outflow of Yeywa to define the maximum
operation level for Deedoke without influence to Yeywa power station
- Flood discharges
- Tail water elevations at Deedoke for computation of available hydraulic head for
different outflow conditions
- River flow during floods with Deedoke station constructed
- Flow conditions during construction of the low head plant
The HEC-RAS model for Deedoke was configured utilizing 20 river cross-section
profiles, obtained from recent surveys undertaken in September and October 2012. The
location of the cross-sections (refer to Figure 2-1) were informed based on specification
provided by the Engineer following the Site Visit in May 2012. In the case of XS 44c,
dummy cross-sections were also inserted from XS 45 to XS 47 to artificially widen the
river at the existing gorge (located at Cross-section 46). The model was used to
interpolate additional cross-sections between the surveyed sections.
The Manning roughness coefficients were determined based on observations made
during the May 2012 Site Visit. In general, a Manning roughness coefficient of 0.03
was used for the river bed and 0.035 for the river banks. The downstream boundary
condition type was selected as normal depth, with an approximate energy slope of
0.0005 m/m (based on the slope of the channel calculated over the full longitudinal
section).

DEEDOKE HPP
25/57
A steady-state analysis was performed for the river reach. The following figure shows
the longitudinal profile downstream of Yeywa .
The water levels for the following discharges are presented:
 Q =900 m3/s representing the maximum plant discharge

 Q100 = 4200 m3/s
 Q10’000= 6600 m3/s
Figure 5-8: Longitudinal Profile before construction of Deedoke Dam
Figure 5-9: Longitudinal Profile after construction of Deedoke Dam
The tailwater level results for Cross-section 44c and 46 can be viewed in Table 5-1 and
Figure 5-10.

DEEDOKE HPP
26/57
Table 5-1: Tailwater level results for Cross-section 44c

TWL (masl)
Q (m3/s) XS 44c XS 46
300 71.2 70.9
600 72.0 71.7
900 72.7 72.3
73.0
72.5
Water Level (masl)
72.0
71.5
71.0
70.5
70.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Discharge (m 3 /s)
XS 44c XS 46
Figure 5-10: Tailwater curve for Cross-section 44c and XS 46

DEEDOKE HPP
27/57
5.4 General Layout

In this chapter some typical possibilities are shown of arranging the Deedoke
hydropower plant. It needs to be mentioned that final setting of the scheme can only
take place after survey results regarding topography and Geology.
The main elements of a run-off-river plant like in Deedoke are:
 Power house
 Gated spillway with adjacent stilling basin
 Lateral closure dams
5.4.1 Alternative 1 at XS 46: Construction of plant outside of river bed
Figure 5-11 shows the general layout of Alternative 1 at XS 46.
The spillway with 7 bays of 20 m each and adjacent stilling basin are located on the left
river bank. The left river bank upstream and downstream of the spillway will be
excavated to a depth of approximate 69 masl (equal the existing river bed elevation.
Behind the stilling basin the river bed will be protected with rip-rap for some extend.
The power house is located left of the spillway also on the left river bank. The space in
between powerhouse and left abutment can be back-filled with excavation material.
High excavation volumes are expected in this Alternative. But construction of the Power
House can start from the beginning, possibly reducing the overall construction time.
In the existing river section a dam has to be built of approximate 15-20 m height and a
length of little less than 200 m. The optimal dam type has to be figured out in the
Feasibility Study.
The tree is not affected by this alternative. The level of the pagoda is to be surveyed. If
required some permanent dams can be constructed around it to protect it from increased
water level during flood events.

DEEDOKE HPP
28/57
Figure 5-11: Layout Alternative 1 at cross section 46
5.4.2 Alternative 2 at XS 46: Construction of spillway outside of river bed

Figure 5-12 shows the general layout of Alternative 2 at XS 46.
The spillway with 7 bays of 20m each and adjacent stilling basin are located on the left
river bank. The left river bank upstream and downstream of the spillway will be
excavated to a depth of approximate 69 masl (equal the existing river bed elevation.
Behind the stilling basin the river bed will be protected with rip-rap for some extend.
The power house is located in the existing river bed in order to reduce the total
excavation volume. The space in between powerhouse and right abutment can be back-
filled with excavation material.
The tree is not affected by this alternative. The level of the pagoda is to be surveyed. If
required some permanent dams can be constructed around it to protect it from increased
water level during flood events.

DEEDOKE HPP
29/57
Figure 5-12: Layout Alternative 2 at cross section 46

5.4.3 Alternative 3 at XS 44c: Plant constructed in river bed
Figure 5-13 shows the general layout of Alternative 3.
The spillway with 7 bays of 20 m each and adjacent stilling basin are located partly on
the left river bank and partly in the existing river bed. The left river bank upstream and
downstream of the spillway will be excavated to a depth of approximate 69 masl (equal
the existing river bed elevation. Behind the stilling basin the river bed will be protected
with rip-rap against erosion.
The power house is located on the right side of the river bed in order to reduce the total
excavation volume. The space in between powerhouse and right abutment can be back-
filled with excavation material.
The tree and the pagoda are not affected by this alternative.
Alternative to this layout it would be possible to locate the powerhouse on the left river
bank and the spillway on the right side of the river. Further this Alternative could be
moved slightly upstream or downstream. Adoptions of this Alternative can be evaluated
after topography and bore-hole results are available – in the feasibility study.

DEEDOKE HPP
30/57
Figure 5-13: Layout Alternative 3 at cross section 44c
5.5 Power house

For a low head plant with high discharge, an arrangement with Kaplan turbine or with
bulb turbine can be considered. Due to the smaller dimensions of the civil structures, the
bulb turbines arrangement was selected for this prefeasibility study.
Figure 5-14: Typical arrangement bulb turbine (source Rheinfelden)

DEEDOKE HPP
31/57
The arrangement in Figure 5-14 shows a bulb turbine with direct driven generator
without gear box. Especially the vertical dimension of the PH is reduced considerably
compared with Kaplan units; therefore the costs for the civil structure are smaller.
The components of the power house include:

- Inlet with trash rack
- Inlet stop logs
- Generator with vertical access from PH
- Wicket gates and turbine
- Draft tube with stop logs
- Machine hall
- Transformer
- Outside gantry crane covering PH and spillway

DEEDOKE HPP
32/57
5.6 Spillway
5.6.1 General Arrangement
The spillway of Deedoke is a broad crested weir with seven openings equipped with
radial gates and a stilling basin. A section of the spillway is shown below in Figure
5-15.
Figure 5-15: Cross Section Spillway
5.6.2 Characteristics
The key characteristics of the spillway are as follows:
Crest: Number of openings 7
Type of gates radial
Sill elevation 72.5 m a.s.l.
Width of openings 20 m
With of intermediate piers approx. 5 m
Length of piers approx. 30 m
Number of intermediate piers 6
Stilling Basin: Type Type IV (USBR)
Blocks at beginning
Total Length 45 m (40 m from end of piers)
Width 170 m
Floor Elevation 67.0 masl
5.6.3 Discharge Capacity
The weir is calculated as broad crested weir. The effect of submergence has been
considered. Upstream flow velocity has been neglected (conservative assumption).

DEEDOKE HPP
33/57
Table 5-2: Discharge Capacity Deedoke Spillway

Event Discharge Open Max. Water Approx. Req. Min. Dam
Gates Level Freeboard Elevation
- m3/s - masl m masl
Q 100 4200 (n-1) = 6 80.2 3.5 83.8
Q 100 4200 (n) = 7 80.0 3.5 83.5
Q 10’000 6600 (n) =7 81.9 1.5 83.4
With a design flood of 4200 m3/s (Q100) and a check flood of 6600 m3/s (Q10000) the
minimum crest elevation is 83.8 masl. The deck elevation of all structures is set at
84.0 masl.
5.6.4 Stilling Basin
The Froude Number at the Beginning of the Stilling Basin together with the tail water
conditions is governing the type of hydraulic jump to be contained inside of the stilling
basin.
For Deedoke the Froude Numbers at the beginning of the stilling basin are about 3.4 for
the 100 year flood and 2.5 for the 10’000 year flood. For the conditions at Deedoke an
oscillating hydraulic jump is expected and a Type IV stilling basin is recommended by
USBR – Design of Small Dams (see Figure 5-16).
Due to the big reservoir Yeywa upstream of Deedoke no major sedimentation problems
are expected allowing the installation of baffle blocks in the stilling basin. Type IV
stilling basin is selected.
The shape of the stilling basin and the dimension of the stilling basin shall be optimised
in a hydraulic model test.
Figure 5-16: Stilling Basin Type IV (USBR)

DEEDOKE HPP
34/57
5.7 River Diversion

The river diversion works are designed to safely pass the 1:50 year wet season flood
event, i.e. 3900 m3/s. The diversion structures can be damaged by a larger flood event,
but the structure under construction must not fail. The diversion structures should not be
overtopped by waves etc., and thus a freeboard of 1 m is foreseen.
5.7.1 Diversion through spillway structure
For Layout Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 the river gets diverted through some of the
spillway bays. Hydraulic calculations were performed to determine the number of open
spillway spans required such that coffer dams of maximum elevation 84.0 masl
(corresponding to the maximum height of the weir structure) can pass the diversion
flood. From Table 5-3, it can be seen that 4 spans of the spillway (gates fully opened or
not yet installed) are required to meet these requirements.
Table 5-3: Required height of coffer dams vs. spillway gate opening for 1:50 year flood
No. gates for diversion
3 gates 4 gates 5 gates 6 gates 7 gates
3
Discharge (m /s) 3900 3900 3900 3900 3900
Upstream reservoir level (masl) 83.83 81.78 80.53 79.68 78.93
Freeboard (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Required cofferdam level
84.83 82.78 81.53 80.68 79.93
(masl)
5.7.2 Alternative 1 at Cross section 46

The scheme of Alternative 1 (refer to Figure 5-11) is located completely within the left
river bank, i.e. the construction of the civil works does not (or only marginal) encroach
on the existing river during the construction, and thus no significant river diversion
works (coffer dams etc.) are required. The water level of the Q 50 flood rises to an
elevation of about 76.7 masl. A minimum freeboard of 1-2 m shall remain on the left
river bank during construction.
The construction of all civil works can start at the same time. Especially the power
house construction can start immediately at the binning of the works resulting in a
reduced construction period.
Nevertheless the excavation volume and land use for the project is considerably higher
with this approach.

DEEDOKE HPP
35/57
Figure 5-17: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 1 at XS 46 (not to scale)
5.7.3 Alternative 2 at Cross section 46

With this arrangement only the spillway is constructed outside of the river channel. The
first construction Phase of the spillway bays 1-6 takes place on the left river bank, no
major coffer dams are required.
Figure 5-18: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 2 at XS 46 (not to scale)

After completion of the spillway bays, coffer dams will be constructed to enable
powerhouse construction and the river will be diverted through spillway bays 1-4. The
cofferdams will have the following characteristics:
 Max water level Q50 < 82 masl (during wet season)
 Crest elevation 83 masl

DEEDOKE HPP
36/57
 Crest width 4m
 Height above ground 14 m
 Crest length approx. 500 m
 Foundation Width 46 m
 Embankment volume approx. 170’000 m3
Construction of the power house will in this case only start in the second diversion
phase.
5.7.4 Alternative 3 at Cross section 44c

Most of the scheme of Alternative 3 (refer to Figure 5-13) is located inside the river
section. Coffer dams are required to (1) construct the spillway on the left river bank and
(2) to construct the power house on the right side of the river bed once the river is
diverted through the spillway bays. The two steps are schematically shown in Figure
5-19.
Figure 5-19: Sketch diversion concept Alternative 3 at XS 44c (not to scale)

Construction of the coffer dams for spillway construction starts in a dry season with the
following characteristics:
 Crest width 4m
 Height above ground approx. 12 m

DEEDOKE HPP
37/57
The river is diverted in the remaining right part of the river. According to HEC-RAS
analysis the maximum water level for the Q50 flood will be below 80 masl
After completion of the spillway bays a new coffer dam will be constructed to enable
powerhouse construction and the river will be diverted through spillway bays 1-4. The
cofferdam will have the following characteristics:
 Crest width 4m
 Height above ground 14 m

DEEDOKE HPP
38/57
6 ELECTRO-MECHANICAL WORKS
6.1 Turbine and Generator
It was decided to arrange a power house capable of running with only one turbine
during the dry period, when the release from Yeywa is about 300 m3/s. During wet
season, the maximum outflow from Yeywa is close to 900 m3/s and three units are
required at Deedoke to handle the flow.
6.1.1 Main Hydraulic Data
Rated discharge per unit: 300 m3/sec
Gross Head at rated Discharge: 9.07 m
Frequency: 50 Hz
Rated Speed: 85.71 rpm
Suction Head - 6.5 m
Runner Diameter: 6.1 m
Output (at rated discharge and head) 22.7 MW
Number of units 3
Assumed total efficiency (For energy simulation) 0.88
6.1.2 Type of turbine

With such hydraulic data the optimal turbine type is a bulb turbine. A bulb turbine is a
variation of the propeller type turbine (similar to the Kaplan turbine).
Higher full-load efficiency and higher flow capacities of bulb turbines can offer many
advantages over vertical Kaplan turbines. In the overall assessment of a low head
project, the application of bulb turbines results in higher annual energy and lower
relative construction costs.
In the bulb turbine arrangement, the generator is encapsulated and sealed within a
streamlined watertight steel housing mounted in the center of the water passageway.
The generator is driven by a propeller located on the downstream end of the bulb. The
propeller (runner) is equipment with adjustable runner blades (in our case 4 blades are
applied). Such, together with the adjustable wicket gates, the bulb turbine is double
regulated, hence very well adaptable to the respective hydraulic conditions.
6.2 132 kV Switchyard

It is foreseen to install an AIS 132 kV (Air Insulated Switchyard) on the right bank side.
The switchyard is foreseen with the single busbar arrangement with the following
number of bays;
- one transmission line bay
- one measuring bay
- three transformer

DEEDOKE HPP
39/57
6.3 Transmission Lines

One 132 kV single-circuit transmission line is foreseen for transmission of energy from
Deedoke HPP to the existing 230/132kV Shwesaya Substation.
The transmission line of approximate length of 35 km will follow the road Yeywa HPP-
Shwesaya, on the right river bank.
The spare transmission line bay in Shwesaya Substation shall be equipped with 132 kV
equipment to receive the line from Deedoke.
The line will be equipped with the standard ACSR conductor, single IBIS 397.5 MCM
(300/33 mm2) with thermal transmission capacity (540 A, 120 MVA) higher than
Deedoke HPP requirements.
The transmission lines shall be equipped with galvanized steel lattice type towers with
the two earth-wires on the top.

DEEDOKE HPP
40/57
7 HYDRAULIC STEEL STRUCTURES

7.1 Main Gantry Cranes
Two (2) Gantry Cranes at the Power Intake and Spillway deck could be installed,
traveling on rails allowing handling, placing and removal of the gates and
EM equipment of Spillway and Power House. For heavy equipment the two gantry
cranes would be used together.
Design Basis:
 Capacity: approx. 2 x 60 tons
(to be defined by EM contractor)
7.2 Spillway
7.2.1 Radial Gates
Seven (7) radial gates shall be installed.
Design Basis:
 Total number of gates: 7
 Number of gates with flap: 2
 Sill elevation: 72.5 masl
 Full Supply Level: 80.0 masl
 Clear width of opening: 20.0 m
 Height of gates: 8.0 m
7.2.2 Upstream Stop Logs

One (1) set of Upstream Stop Logs shall be provided for closure of one spillway bay for
maintenance.
Design Basis:
 Number of sets: 1
 Total height: 8.0 m
7.2.3 Downstream Stop Logs
One (1) set of Downstream Stop Logs shall be provided for closure of one spillway bay
for maintenance.
Design Basis:

DEEDOKE HPP
41/57
 TWL at 900 m3/s: 72.5 masl

 TWL at 2000 m3/s: 74.5 masl
 Total height: 6.0 m
7.3 Power Intakes
7.3.1 Trashracks
The inclined trashracks are installed in front of the power intake to prevent floating
materials from entering into the Units. The panels are supported by concrete beams. The
net water velocities in front of the trash rack shall be smaller than 1.0 m/s.
Design Basis:
 Max discharge per Intake : 300 m3/s
 Clear surface of one trash rack: min 300 m2
 Clear spacing of rack bars: approx. 150 mm
 Number of trashracks: one for each power intake
 Design pressure: 5 m water column
7.3.2 Trash Rack Cleaning Machine
A trash rack cleaning machine shall be installed for removal of floating debris.
7.3.3 Maintenance Gate
One (1) set of maintenance gates shall be provided for closure of the waterway for
maintenance of the Power Intake Service Gates. They shall be able to close against
flowing water; therefore they are of the wheeled type and will be lowered under its own
weight. The maintenance gate is placed and removed by means of a lifting beam hooked
to the main gantry crane.
Design Basis:
 Sill elevation: approx. 58 masl
 Maximum flood level (PMF): 82.5 masl
 Clear width of opening: approx. 13.0 m
 Clear height of opening: approx. 13.0 m
7.4 Draft Tube Gates
7.4.1 Gates
One (1) set of draft tube gates is foreseen downstream of the draft tubes to enable
inspection and maintenance of the turbines and draft tubes. The gates shall be stored at
the top of each gate slot.
The gates will be placed and removed under equalized water pressure. The gates are of

DEEDOKE HPP
42/57
the sliding type.

Design Basis:
 Sill elevation: approx. 59.5 masl
 TWL at 900 m3/s: 72.5 masl
 TWL at Q50 = 3900 m3/s: 76.6 masl
 Clear width of opening: approx. 13.5 m
 Clear height of opening: approx. 10.5 m
7.4.2 Draft Tube Gantry Crane
The handling and the placing of the gate elements shall be done with a separate gantry
crane on the downstream side of the power house.
Design Basis:
 Capacity: approx. 45 tons
depending on size of stop logs used
to be defined by contractor

DEEDOKE HPP
43/57
8 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
8.1 Introduction
The construction program is outlined for the 3 different alternatives presented in this
study. Only the main activities are shown. In reality construction phases can overlap
depending on the detailed construction program to be identified in a later stage. The
following notation is used in graphical presentation:
8.2 Construction Phases

8.2.1 Alternative 1
All phases of construction are to be protected against the 1:50 year flood event, i.e.
3900 m3/s. Alternative 1 is located at section 46 shown below.
PHASE 1
 A platform will be cut into the left bank at elevation 79 masl. This elevation
corresponds to the 1:50 year flood level (about 76.7 masl) plus 1 m freeboard. The
platform will serve as access route to the construction site.
 From the left edge of the platform, the ground will be excavated at a slope of about
1:1.5 to form a coffer dam protecting the construction works in the left bank.
 The slopes of the excavation of the powerhouse area depend on the material
properties (rock or loose material). If rock is not present, or the rock is fractured
(poor quality), then a 1:1.5 to 1:1 slope will need to be excavated on the left side of
the powerhouse.

DEEDOKE HPP
44/57
PHASE 2
 The powerhouse is to be constructed with first priority since it is on the critical path
regarding the overall time schedule
 In parallel construction of the spillway and stilling basins can start.
PHASE 3
 The excavated area to the left of the completed structure is to be back-filled to an
elevation of 84.0 masl and in line with the powerhouse / weir bridge to allow access
to the structure.
 The gantry cranes shall be installed
 Start of spillway gate installation
PHASE 4
 The approach channel and tailwater channel, upstream and downstream of the
powerhouse, respectively, are to be finalized.
 Closing of river, diversion of river through Spillway Bays 1-7
 Construction of river closure dam

DEEDOKE HPP
45/57
PHASE 5
 The upstream and downstream coffer dams located along the river bank are to be
disassembled.
 Installation of EM equipment, test and start of operation
8.2.2 Alternative 2
The construction phases of Alternative 2 are basically the same as for Alternative 3
(refer to chapter 8.2.3) and therefore not presented in particular. The difference to
Alternative 3 is as follows:
 Phase 1 requires no coffer dams. The river bed will remain untouched and
spillway bays 1-6 will be fully constructed on the left river bank.
8.2.3 Alternative 3
Alternative 1 is located at section 46 shown below.
PHASE 1:
 During dry season build cofferdams on the left river bank with excavation
material from the spillway area.
 Remaining river section is about 50-60 m at level 69 masl and 100 m at 80 masl.
 Water level is lower than 80 masl for the 50 year flood.
 After completion of the left bank cofferdam, excavation for 6 spillway bays is
possible also in wet season.

DEEDOKE HPP
46/57
PHASE 2:
 Construction the 6 spillway bays with stilling basin and connection dam to left
bank. This work could already start while excavation (Phase 1) is still ongoing
 Installation of gantry crane
 Start of spillway gate installation
PHASE 3:
 Closing of bays 5 and 6 to be connected to the power house cofferdam
 Removal of left bank coffer dams
 Diversion of river through bays 1-4
 Construction of power house cofferdams.
 Excavation works in powerhouse area
PHASE 4:
 Construction of power house structure

DEEDOKE HPP
47/57
PHASE 5:
 Construction of spillway bay 7
 Connection power house to spillway
 Filling works, connect powerhouse with right river bank with connection dam
 Remove fill in bays 5 and 6
 Remove cofferdams
 Start installation of power house equipment
PHASE 6:
 Complete installation of power house equipment
 Take all spillway gates in operation
 Dissembling of power house coffer dams
 Commissioning of units
8.3 Construction Schedule
A typical construction schedule is presented in Annex 3. The schedule is given for

Alternative 3. The whole construction schedule from preparatory works, acces roads to
erection and operation of the units would take 6 years.

DEEDOKE HPP
48/57
9 PROJECT COST
9.1 General
For the prefeasibility study a preliminary cost estimate has been carried out. The cost of
the tree alternatives have been calculated: Alternative 1 and 2, both at cross section 46
and Alternative 3 at cross section 44-c.
No details about the underground conditions have been available at the time of this
report such the calculated costs are only indicative.
The following break-down has been made in order to determine the total plant cost:
 Direct Cost
o Civil Works
o Hydraulic Steel Structures
o Electromechanical Equipment
o Transmission Lines
 Site Installation/ Preparatory Works
 Contingency
 Land Acquisition and Compensation
 Administration and Engineering Services
Interest Costs are considered in the Economic Evaluation in Chapter 10.

DEEDOKE HPP
49/57
9.2 Quantities
The basis of the quantities of the civil works is the corresponding sketches being part of
this report and the cross section 46 from the topographical survey in October 2012.
The expected type of excavation material can only be estimated at this time as no
drillings have been carried out yet. As a first approximation the following assumptions
where made:
Table 9-1: Assumptions for excavation material

ALTERNATIVE 1 location Loose Material Weathered Rock Rock
CS 46 % % %
Care of River left bank 60 10 30
Spillway left bank 60 10 30
Stilling Basin left bank 60 10 30
Power House left bank 30 10 60

CS 46 % % %
Power House river bed 20 10 70

CS 44c % % %
Power House river bed 20 10 70

DEEDOKE HPP
50/57
9.3 Unit Prices

The unit prices considered are shown in Table 9-2. They are derived from unit prices
used for other projects in Myanmar and South East Asia.
Table 9-2: Assumed Unit Rates Deedoke Pre-Feasibility
Unit Rates Deedoke, Pre-Feasibility Unit US $/ Unit

Excavation works (mucking up to a distance of 500 m)
Clearing, Grubbing and stripping (deep up to 25 cm) m2 2.00
2
Preparation of foundation m 3.00
Common open excavation in loose material m3 4.00
Open Excavation dam foundatin incl. foundation preparation m3 6.00
Common open excavation on weathered rock m3 6.00
Open excavation in rock m3 10.00
Filling works (transport up to a distance of 5 km)
Rock fill m3 15.00
3
Earth/Random fill (excavation material) m 12.00
Compacted Backfill (random material) m3 7.00
Concrete works
Lean concrete m3 60.00
3
Mass concrete m 90.00
Structural concrete (including formwork) m3 140.00
Structural concrete (including formwork), high demands m3 250.00
Reinforcement bars kg 1.40
Steel works
Steel for embedded parts kg 2.50
Steel for trash rack kg 4.00
Steel for hydraulic steel structures (gates) kg 8.00
Steel for hydraulic steel structures (stop logs) kg 6.00
Roads
Construction Road m 300.00
Bridge m 1500.00
Permanent Access m 400.00
Power transmission lines
132 kV, single circuit m 90.00
9.4 Total Investment Costs

The Total investment costs are shown in Table 9-3 for Alternative 1 at XS 46, Table 9-4
for Alternative 2 at XS 46 and Table 9-5 for Alternative 3 at XS 44c.
For the site installation 15 % of the civil costs have been assumed. Contingencies are
considered with 15 % for the Civil and Hydro mechanical Works and 10 % for
Mechanical and Electrical equipment. Whereas the costs for alternatives 2 and 3 are

DEEDOKE HPP
51/57
similar, the costs for Alternative 1 are higher due to significant excavation volumes and
due to a bigger closing dam (it must be mentioned, that construction time could be
reduced for this solution as powerhouse construction can start earlier). Nevertheless the
difference in cost of the Alternatives is sensitive to underground conditions which shall
be investigated for the Feasibility Study.
Table 9-3: Total Investment Cost Alternative 1

103 US $
Civil Hydromechanical Mechanical Eletrical Total
Works Works Equipment Equipment
Part C Part H Part M Part E
1 CARE OF RIVER 10'702.0 10'702.0

2 DAM 3'487.6 - 3'487.6
3 SPILLWAY 6'877.7 7'124.9 50.0 14'052.6
4 STILLING BASIN 3'511.5 3'511.5
5 POWER HOUSE 16'338.8 4'933.1 27'225.0 22'275.0 70'771.9
6 SWITCH YARD 187.5 1'062.5 1'250.0
7 GRID CONNECTION 904.5 2'110.5 3'015.0
Intermediate Total: 42'009.6 12'058.0 27'225.0 25'498.0 106'790.6

a Site Installation and Camp (only on civil costs) 15.0% 6'301.4 6'301.4
b Contingencies for C&H parts 15.0% 6'301.4 1'808.7 8'110.1
c Contingencies for E&M parts 10.0% 2'722.5 2'549.8 5'272.3
A Total Construction and Equipment Costs 54'612.4 13'866.7 29'947.5 28'047.8 126'474.4
Rate with respect to total cost A 43.2% 11.0% 23.7% 22.2% 100.0%
B Reimbursement for Land Acquisition --- -
C Reimbursement for Resettlement --- 200.0
D Reimbursement for Relocation of State Road --- -
E Various Expenses 0.8% 1'011.8
F Investigations 1.0% 1'264.7
G Feasibility Study, Final Design and Tendering 2.0% 2'529.5
H Design, Supervision and Administration 7.0% 8'853.2
TOTAL INVESTMENT COSTS: 140'334

103 US $
1 CARE OF RIVER 8'228.3 8'228.3

2 DAM 1'797.4 - 1'797.4
3 SPILLWAY 6'890.0 7'124.9 50.0 14'064.8
5 POWER HOUSE 14'860.0 4'933.1 27'225.0 22'275.0 69'293.1
6 SWITCH YARD 187.5 187.5 375.0
7 GRID CONNECTION 904.5 2'110.5 3'015.0

E Various Expenses 0.8% 945.4

DEEDOKE HPP
52/57

103 US $
1 CARE OF RIVER 5'910.0 5'910.0

2 DAM 3'487.6 - 3'487.6
3 SPILLWAY 6'616.1 7'124.9 50.0 13'791.0
5 POWER HOUSE 15'821.3 4'933.1 27'225.0 22'275.0 70'254.5
6 SWITCH YARD 187.5 1'062.5 1'250.0
7 GRID CONNECTION 904.5 2'110.5 3'015.0

E Various Expenses 0.8% 950.5

DEEDOKE HPP
53/57
10 ENERGY EVALUATION
An energy evaluation was performed based on the hydrology presented in chapter 3.2.
The inflow used in the simulation corresponds to the average monthly inflow from 1972
to 2008 with a total inflow volume of 15200 Mio m3.
Figure 10-1: Average Inflow used for the Energy Simulation

The following additional parameters were used:
Table 10-1: Energy Simulation Parameters
Design Discharge m3/s 300 600 900

Number of units - 1 2 3
Overall efficiency: - 0.88
Water Level of the Reservoir - Max water level masl 80
Total Losses m 0.3
The tailwater levels used for the energy simulation at the cross section 44c are presented
in the following figure. These values were computed by using the HEC-RAS model as
introduced in chapter 5.3.

DEEDOKE HPP
54/57
Figure 10-2: Tailwater Levels at Cross Section 44c
The following table presents the main results of the energy simulation:
Table 10-2: Energy Simulation Results

Design Discharge m3/s 300 600 900
Number of units - 1 2 3
Installed Capacity MW 22.1 39.8 54.6
Total Energy (for the average year) GWh 188.5 253.6 279.6
Total hours with full capacity: h 8505 6065 4612
Total inflow hm3 15200 15200 15200
Total Outflow (turbines) hm3 9186 13100 14945
Total Outflow (spill) hm3 6014 2100 255
Water losses % 40 14 2
The total produced energy for an average year and for the studied alternative (3 units,
900 m3/s) is 279.6 GWh. In this alternative it is almost possible to turbine the total
inflow. Consequently the water losses (through the spillway) are only of 2%. This is to
be compared to the 14% of water losses if only 2 units are installed (600m3/s) or 40%
with only one unit (300 m3/s).
The following figures show the monthly energy production and the total water losses for
each month in an average year for the different design discharges.

DEEDOKE HPP
55/57
Figure 10-3: Water Losses

The losses or spill water occur mainly during the wet season (see Figure 10-3), thus as
expected by installing 3 units we are able to operate in a more optimal way and utilize
almost all the inflows. Therefore it is also normal that the total produced energy during
the year is higher as show in the following figure:
Figure 10-4: Energy Production

DEEDOKE HPP
56/57
11 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

11.1 Summary
Based on the preliminary investigations and studies carried out in view of a low-head
power plant downstream of Yeywa, it resulted that an economically interesting plant
without environmental impact can be foreseen. The foreseen reservoir occupies only the
area of the riverbed during floods.
The proposed Deedoke hydropower plant makes use of the hydraulic head between
Yeywa and produces with the outflow of Yeywa power house average 280 GWh per
year with three bulb turbines of resulting in installed capacity of 54 MW.
Additional investigations are required with respect of topography and geology in order
to produce a comprehensive feasibility study and to develop the optimum scheme.
11.2 Conclusion
The key data of the proposed scheme are:
- Reservoir FSL: 80.0 m a.s.l.
- Powerhouse with 3 bulb turbines, 22 MW each
- Average power production per year 279.6 GWh
- Discharge 3 x 300 m3/s
- Hydraulic head 8.5 m
- Spillway with 7 tainter gates H = 8 m, W = 20 m
The scheme will be located near the small Tha Yet Pin village close to the former MSP-
Quarry. Final location will depend on the optimization of the construction phases and
river diversion. A possible location some 3 km downstream should also be considered as
additional head could be gained resulting in higher installed capacity and energy
production.
The construction of the scheme will last about 6 years if the power house civil works
can only be started after diversion of the river through the spillway. Shorter construction
period could be reached by placing all structures on the left bank of the river bed. After
completion of the spillway and the civil works of the power house the river section
would then be closed by a closure dam.
The estimated cost of the scheme is between 130 and 140 mio. USD. The electro-
mechanical part is more than 50% and hydraulic steel structures represent about 10%.
The remaining 40% for civil works are relatively moderate as usual for this type of
schemes.
Energy production during the dry season (December to May) can be handled with only
one of the three units. With one unit, the produced power is 188.5 GWh per year. The
other two units will only be used during wet season and will produce additional
91 GWh per year.

DEEDOKE HPP
57/57
11.3 Further Studies and Investigations

The key target of the feasibility study is to analyze different possible alternatives
regarding overall layout, river diversion concept and installed capacity. Beside the
technical feasibility, the economic feasibility also has to be analyzed in detail. Detailed
studies shall start immediately after issuing of this prefeasibility study.
Before design works on this next level can start, the following site investigations have
to be carried out:
- Topographic map up to 1.5 km upstream of section 44c up to elevation 100.0
- Topographic map up to 4.0 km downstream of cross section 44c also up to El.
100.0 also covering the village and pagoda
- Geodetic investigations with refraction seismic profiles along both sides of the
river as well as cross section: about 5.5 km on both river banks + sections from
river to rock surface on the abutments (the first information received from
drillings on the river terraces indicates an old river channel some 50 m deep. The
location of this channel has an important influence on the layout of the scheme
at any possible dam axis)
- 3 drillings at every possible dam site down to bedrock
- Geotechnical investigations with respect to foundation properties and
construction material
Detail instructions for the investigations will be provided by AFC based on the actual
available information.
The Feasibility Study will include the following principal items:
- Different dam axis and influence on existing structures and environment,
including required protection measures during construction and operation
- Optimization of river diversion and spillway structure
- Comparison of power house alternatives (bulb turbine and conventional Kaplan
turbines) and optimization of installed capacity
- Possible dam types and definition of foundation treatment
- Layout alternatives and influence on construction program
- Project cost, economic analysis and financial evaluation resulting in financial
feasibility

ANNEX 3
ID Task Name Duration 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
1 Start of the Project 1 dy 05.01
2 Preparatory Works 40 dys
3 Access Roads 30 dys
4 RIVER DIVERSION 1212 dys
5 Excavation 200 dys
6 Cofferdam 1 477 dys
7 Construction 80 dys
8 Removal 30 dys
9 Cofferdam 2 735 dys
10 Construction 50 dys
11 Removal 30 dys
12 POWER HOUSE 945 dys
13 Excavation 120 dys
14 Foundation Preparation 60 dys
15 Civil Structure 415 dys
76 Powerhouse Crane Installation 80 dys
77 Control Builidng 50 dys
78 Erection of Turbines 370 dys
82 Switchyard 85 dys
83 Finishing 240 dys
84 SPILLWAY 1026 dys
85 Excavation (initial) 70 dys
86 Excavation - Foundation Preparation (1 to 6) 130 dys
87 Excavation - Foundation Preparation (7) 29 dys
88 Concrete Spillway 801 dys
89 Base Slab & Pier & Weir (1 to 6) 265 dys
108 Base Slab & Pier & Weir (7) 150 dys
111 Stilling Basin 666 dys
116 Gate Installation - HSS 709 dys
130 DAM Right Side 160 dys
Task Project Summary Inaktiver Vorgang Nur Dauer Nur Ende
Project: Deedoke - Alternative 3 Split External Tasks Inaktiver Meilenstein Manueller Sammelrollup Progress
Date: Tue 18.12.12 Milestone External Milestone Inaktiver Sammelvorgang Manueller Sammelvorgang Deadline
Summary Inaktiver Vorgang Manueller Vorgang Nur Anfang
Page 1

DD Pre-Feasibility Study Report AFColenco 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

DD Pre-Feasibility Study Report AFColenco 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE REPUBLIC OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR

MINISTRY OF ELECTRIC POWER

PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY

Report no. DED-00-PFS-PREL/DEC2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

5.6.4 Stilling Basin ...................................................................................................................33

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

11.1 Summary .........................................................................................................................56

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

A locality map of the Study Area is shown in Figure 1-1.

Figure 1-1: Locality map for Deedoke HPP (1 square = 1 km)

1.2 Objectives of the Study

1.3 Available information

 Site Visit Report, May 2012, AF-Colenco Ltd

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

 River cross-section survey, September 2012, updated in October 2012, DHPI

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Figure 2-1: Location of surveyed cross-sections

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

3.2 Water availability

Table 3-1: Inflows to Deedoke HPP, daily and monthly values

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Table 3-2: Yeywa Reservoir Inflow Peaks

The attenuation through Yeywa Reservoir was determined to be approximately 3%,

Figure 3-2: Design flood hydrographs used for flood routing

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Table 3-3: Deedoke HPP Design Flood Peaks

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

MSP Quarry High Tech Quarry

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4.2 Expected Conditions at Dam Site

4.3 Construction Materials

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Table 4-1: Summary of peak ground accelerations (Yeywa)

Event OBE MCE

To mention is a new Seismic Zoning Map of Myanmar published in 2012 by Myanmar

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

5 LAYOUT AND CIVIL DESIGN

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

5.2.1 Cross Section 44

Figure 5-2: Cross Section 44 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey)

Figure 5-3: Photo of cross section 44

5.2.2 Cross Section 44c

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Figure 5-5: Photo of cross section 44C

Boundary conditions at XS 44c are as follows:

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Figure 5-6: Cross Section 46 (based on DHPI 11/2012 geodetic survey)

Figure 5-7: Photo of cross section 46

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

5.2.4 Selected dam site location

5.3 River hydraulics

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

 Q =900 m3/s representing the maximum plant discharge

Figure 5-8: Longitudinal Profile before construction of Deedoke Dam

Figure 5-9: Longitudinal Profile after construction of Deedoke Dam

4763_0001_Deedoke_Pre-Feasibility Report_Draft_20121218 December 2012

Table 5-1: Tailwater level results for Cross-section 44c