Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

Science, Technology & Development

Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series (A Case Study of Munda Multipurpose Dam Project)
S. M. Saeed Shah*, Muhammad Kaleem Sarwar ** and Sohail Saleem***
ABSTRACT

Munda Multipurpose Dam Project is runoff river hydropower project on Swat river near Munda headwork. The study aimed to generate the long term inflow time series for the planning of Munda Multipurpose dam project. Data collected for this study includes rainfall, stream flow, river diversions, etc. It was difficult to update the isohyets of the area because of unavailability of the data required for making isohyets. Instead of regional analysis as done in the previous studies, the modified correlation technique was developed employing the short duration available data. For this development, the major sub-catchments were included which were not considered in the previous studies. Short term data of Zulam Bridge and Munda site was extended from 1956 to 1990, as a case study. As an outcome of the study, the expected inflows to the Munda dam reservoir were simulated which extended inflows available from previous reports. Effort was really beneficial for the planning of dam and its appurtenant structures. Key-words: Headworks, Multipurpose dam, River diversion, Modified Co-relation
1. INTRODUCTION

water strategy prepared by Government of Pakistan calls for a rational approach to develop the new resources employing the efficient management of existing supplies. The options for new resources, through additional storage, have been controversial and require an in depth analysis as part of an integrated approach. Munda Multipurpose Dam Project may be regarding as good Hydropower project, to get the maximum benefits from the project, the study was conducted through
HE

conservative and precise mode by keeping in view the pros and cons of the respective site and its surrounding. The estimation of reservoir inflows has been done using the correlation method established between the sub- basins having similar meteorological and topographic characteristics, to enable the planner to be precise in reservoir capacity and other allied parameters. Figures 1 and 2 show, respectively, the location map and gauging stations of Munda multi-purpose dam and swat river basin.

*Head of Hydrology Division, **Lecturer, ***Research Scholar, Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering, University of Engineering & Technology, Lahore, Pakistan. Correspondence to: M. Kaleem Sarwar, Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, G.T. Road, Lahore-54890, Pakistan. E-mail: eng_kaleem@yahoo.com

13

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

Figure 1: Location Map of Swat River Basin 14

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long Long-Term Inflows Time Series

Figure 2: Irrigation Scheme of Swat River Basin with Gauging Stations

15

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

NESPAK (1993) estimated the reservoir inflows on the basis of regional analysis and flow data observed at Munda Headworks. The mean annual inflows at Munda Dam site by gauged data and regional analysis are 255.6 m3/s and 239 m3/s respectively. Nippon Koei (2000) reviewed the estimates made by NESPAK and assessed the inflow value of 206.2 m3/s for Munda Dam site. Falkland (1991) indicated that when surface records are unavailable or if records are missing, surface runoff can be estimated by most commonly used correlation method. Chow (1964) pointed out that one must assume while using rational formula that maximum rate of flow due to certain rainfall intensity over the drainage area is produced which is maintained for a time equal to the period of concentration at the point under consideration. Shaw (1988) showed that rainfall runoff relationship depends upon climatic and catchment conditions of the area. Singh and somkid (1977) compared the four methods including the Phi index, Horton equation, Kostiakov and Philip method to predict surface runoff from two natural agricultural watersheds. Mutreja (1986) noted that runoff in a region depends upon rainfall input, physical, vegetation and climatic characteristics of the region. Awan (1986) observed the runoff for Baran Dam by measuring the time to peak, peak discharge and storm duration. 2. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this study includes the 1. Extension of flow series from 1956 to 2005 using correlation technique. 2. Assessment of inflows for Munda Dam reservoir. 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Plausibility and Consistency Tests The observed records of the new stream gauges at Munda dam site and Zulam Bridge were tested for the consistency with the concurrent records of other stations. While scrutinizing the daily flow series of Zulam Bridge, an anomaly was detected in its daily time series starting from 30 June to 28 August 2000 that were caused by using an incorrect (old) flow rating equation. The flow-values were, therefore, adjusted. According to WMO (1974), if a short

record is to be used in design, it can be extended to a longer period by correlating the monthly flows with the concurrent monthly-flows at a long-term station. Unless the coefficient of correlation (R2) is greater than 0.8, extension/ adjustment is usually not worth the effort. Linear regression analysis was carried out between the naturalized monthly flows of Zulam Br. and Chackdara minus Kalam for each month for the concurrent period of record. Q zulam Br. Vs Q chakdara Q kalam

Linear regression analysis was conducted between naturalized monthly flows of Zulam Bridge plus Chakdara and Munda dam site, for the concurrent period of record (April 1999 to March 2005). The monthly regression curves are illustrated in Figures 7 & 8. Regression coefficients, R2 for January through November are satisfactory, being greater than 0.8 but is 0.76 for December. Q Munda Vs Q Zulam Br. + Q chakdara

3.2 Reviewing and Updating the Rainfall and Flow Data Rainfall records of the 8 rain gauges, Abazai, Charbagh, Dir, Kalam, Karora, Malakand, Totakhan and Zulam Bridge, have been used in Thiessens polygons to compute areal rainfall of individual sub-basins. Peshawar, Utmanzai and Mardan have little or no influence on the rainfall of the sub-basins, being considerably outside the catchment area. Amandara and Totakhan are very close to each other. Kalangi and Saidu Sharif have short period records. Hence, the rainfall-data of these 6 gauges (Peshawar, Utmanzai, Mardan, Amandara, Kalangi and Saidu Sharif) have not been used. Mean monthly rainfall values of various rain gauges in the study area, for upto March 1999 period and April 1999 to March 2005 period are summarized in Table 1. Mean annual rainfall at most of the stations is greater in upto March 1999 period than that in the April 1999 to March 2005 period. Hence the latter period was evidently a dry period. So areal rainfall amount of summer (Apr-Sep) and winter (Oct-Mar) seasons were computed for Swat and Panjkora river sub-basins by using Thiessens polygons and their bar graphs drawn in Figures 3 and 4 for the two sub-basins.

16

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

Table 1: Summary of Mean Annual Rainfall (mm) Gauging Stations Period of Recorded Data 1961-2005 1961-2005 1961-2005 1990-2005 1962-2005 1974-2005 1961-2005 1974-2005 1964-2005 2000-2005 Up to March 1999 514 650 1005 1544 942 1374 801 724 515 April 1999 to March 2005 489 821 763 1201 947 1251 701 513 439 774

Abazai Amandara Charbagh Dir Kalam Karora Malakand Totakhan Utmanzai Zulam Br.

1600

1400

Apr. - Sep Rainfall Oct - Mar. Rainfall Annual Average Apr. - Sep. Average Oct. - Mar. Annual Average

1200

Seasonal Rainfall (mm)

Annual Average = 1016

1000

800

600

Average=530 Average =486

400

200

0 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Year

Figure 3: Seasonal Annual Rainfall of Swat Sub Basin

17

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

1800

1600

1400

Apr. - Sep Rainfall Oct - Mar. Rainfall Annual Average Apr. - Sep. Average Oct. - Mar. Annual Average

Seasonal Rainfall (mm)

1200

Annual Average = 1168

1000

800 Average=613 Average =554

600

400

200

0 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Year

Figure 4: Seasonal Annual Rainfall of Panjkora Sub Basin

The bar graphs as shown in figures 3 and 4 for seasonal Rainfall reveal that: Rainfall was below average during the period of April 1999 to March 2005, especially in Panjkora sub-basin; Several low-rainfall years were followed by high-rainfall years; In very few cases, October-March is low rainfall period but overall there is high rainfall in Oct-March as compared to AprSep. period. Average annual rainfall amounts over Panjkora and Swat sub-basins for post 1999 period are 983 mm and 951 mm respectively (slightly higher on Panjkora sub-basin) but average annual runoff is 103.7 m3/s at Zulam Bridge on the Panjkora river and 153.8 m3/s at Chakdara on the Swat river, for the same period. It is interesting to note that runoff at both stations are roughly equal from October

to April. In fact, March runoff is slightly greater at Zulam Br. than at Chakdara. But from May to September, Chakdara flows are much greater than those at Zulam Br. This implies that the Swat river flows are dominated by snow-melt but the Panjkora river is not. The bar graph of the daily flows (cumecs) of Munda dam site and that of Zulam Bridge for the period April 1999 March 2005 is shown in Fig.5(a-b). Generally, flows at Munda dam site are larger than those at Zulam Br. except on 1st March 2000 that is probably due to rather poor fitting of flow rating equation at the lowest limb of the curve. However, its impact is insignificant on the result. Double-mass curve of the monthly flow volumes at Zulam Bridge versus those at Kalam + Chakdara + Munda dam site is shown in Fig. 6. It reveals some minor departure from a straight line, probably due to shifting of bed at very high flows.

18

Mean Daily Flows (cumecs) - Munda Site

100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 0.0

Mean Daily Flows(cumecs) - Munda Site

700.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

800.0

0.0

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

Figure 5(a): Daily Flows Bar Graphs for Munda Dam vs. Zalum Bridge (Apr. 99 Mar. 02)

Figure 5(b): Daily Flows Bar Graphs for Munda dam vs. Zalum Bridge (Apr. 02 - Mar. 05)
Munda Zulam
1-Apr-99 1-May-99 1-Jun-99 1-Jul-99 1-Aug-99 1-Sep-99 1-Oct-99 1-Nov-99 1-Dec-99 1-Jan-00 1-Feb-00 1-Mar-00 1-Apr-00 1-May-00 1-Jun-00 1-Jul-00 1-Aug-00 1-Sep-00 1-Oct-00 1-Nov-00 1-Dec-00 1-Jan-01 1-Feb-01 1-Mar-01 1-Apr-01 1-May-01 1-Jun-01 1-Jul-01 1-Aug-01 1-Sep-01 1-Oct-01 1-Nov-01 1-Dec-01 1-Jan-02 1-Feb-02 1-Mar-02

19

Munda Zulam

1-Apr-02 1-May-02 1-Jun-02 1-Jul-02 1-Aug-02 1-Sep-02 1-Oct-02 1-Nov-02 1-Dec-02 1-Jan-03 1-Feb-03 1-Mar-03 1-Apr-03 1-May-03 1-Jun-03 1-Jul-03 1-Aug-03 1-Sep-03 1-Oct-03 1-Nov-03 1-Dec-03 1-Jan-04 1-Feb-04 1-Mar-04 1-Apr-04 1-May-04 1-Jun-04 1-Jul-04 1-Aug-04 1-Sep-04 1-Oct-04 1-Nov-04 1-Dec-04 1-Jan-05 1-Feb-05 1-Mar-05

Mean Daily Flows(cumecs) - Zulam Br.

Mean Daily Flows(cumecs) - Zulam Br.

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

7,000

6,000 y = 0.2001x + 10.649 R2 = 0.9985 5,000

Z u la m B r. (M C M )

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000

Munda + Chakdara + Kalam

(MCM)

Figure 6: Double Mass Curve of Monthly Flows (April 99 - March 2005)

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 4.1 Extension of River Flows at Zulam Bridge The analysis of flow and rainfall records indicates no direct overall relationship between rainfall and runoff on an annual or monthly basis as flows of this area depend in most of the cases on snowmelt runoff. The average annual runoff coefficients at Kalam and Chakdara were estimated at 1.5 and 1.1 respectively. These unrealistic coefficients cannot be used to generate runoff from rainfall because heavy snowfall in the upper basin of the Swat and Panjkora rivers are not recorded. Therefore, the application of a rainfall-runoff type hydrologic model to estimate river flows would be misleading.

A new stream flow measuring station was established at Zulam Bridge on the Panjkora river in March 1999 and a staff gauge was installed to take hourly observation of gauge heights from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily. The data were collected and compiled from April 1999 to March 2005. Monthly stream flow data of the Swat river at Kalam and Chakdara are available from January 1956 to March 2005. Drainage areas of the Panjkora river at Zulam Br. and the Swat river at Kalam and Chakdara are 5793, 2020 and 5770 km2 respectively. Upstream of Chakdara, 3 irrigation canals (Fatehpur, Nipkikhel and Badwan Kharif) have been abstracting 2.72 m3/s annually in the past and about 4.60 m3/s presently. Similarly, Darora and Ganidigar canals

20

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

were abstracting 1.92 m3/s annually in the past and 2.21 m3/s presently from Panjkora river. There is no irrigation canal upstream of Kalam gauge. These data are of great value, enabling the synthesis of historic monthly flows of the Panjkora river at Zulam Bridge, through linear correlation with flows at Kalam and Chakdara. 4.2 Basis of Correlation The assessment of record for longer period was done in accordance with the WMOs Guide to Hydrological Practices (WMO, 1974). Physiography and meteorology of the Panjkora and Swat river sub-basins are similar. Both are hilly areas and adjacent to each other. Upper parts of both sub-basins have high annual rainfall. Dir in Panjkora river sub-basin has 1410 mm of annual rainfall and Karora in Swat river sub-basin has 1346 mm of annual rainfall. Lower parts of both sub-basins have rather low annual rainfall. However, the upper part of the Swat sub-basin is almost completely covered by snow during winter and hence snowmelt contribution during summer is substantial. This is not the case with Panjkora sub-basin which generates significantly less

snowmelt. This is reflected by a high runoff depth (838 mm) from Chakdara catchment as compared to runoff depth (564 mm) from Zulam Bridge catchment. Hence the correlation between Zulam Bridge and Chakdara might be questionable. If Kalam flows are subtracted from Chakdara flows, the impact of snowmelt is significantly reduced and the similarity between Panjkora and Swat sub-basins below Kalam improves appreciably. Hence monthly flows at Zulam Bridge were correlated with flows generated between Kalam and Chakdara, Fig.7.The idea of correlating the rainfall and runoff of the two sub basins was conceived from Falkland (1991), Mutreja (1986) and Shaw (1988). Adding irrigation abstractions upstream of the gauging station has naturalized the flows. Monthly flows of Chakdara (naturalized) minus Kalam were calculated, for April 1999 March 2005 period. The observed and naturalized annual flows at different gauges are summarized in

Table 2.

Table 2: Summary of Mean Annual Flows Period 1956Mar 1999 Apr.1999Mar 2005 1956Mar 2005

Observed Flows(m3/s) Kalam Chakdara Munda Site Zulam Bridge Chakdara Munda Site Zulam Bridge 182.6 91.0 182.6 77.4 153.7 216.4 101.8 Naturalized Flows(m3/s) 153.8 280.8 103.8 179.0 89.4 179.1

21

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

February
January
90.0 80.0 70.0 100.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 ( a) M ean M o nt hly F lo w s at C hakd ar a- Kalam ( b ) M ean M o nt hl y F lo ws at C hakd ar a- Kal am 80.0 60.0 140.0

y = 0.9986x + 12.05 R2 = 0.93

120.0

y = 0.5165x + 40.177 R2 = 0.9626

March
500.0 450.0 Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br. 400.0 350.0 300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0

April
300.0 275.0 Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br. 250.0 225.0 200.0 175.0 150.0 125.0 100.0 75.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 (d) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam 250.0

y = 1.5079x + 17.03 R2 = 0.9854

y = 1.0332x + 73.046 R2 = 0.9613

(c)Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

May
265.0 250.0
Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br.

June
255.0 235.0
Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br.

235.0 220.0 205.0 190.0 175.0 160.0 145.0 130.0 115.0 100.0 75.0

y = 0.8633x + 88.629 R2 = 0.971

y = 1.2101x + 22.293 R 2 = 0.8588

215.0 195.0 175.0 155.0 135.0 115.0 95.0 75.0

105.0

135.0

165.0

195.0

225.0

50.0

70.0

90.0

110.0

130.0

150.0

170.0

190.0

210.0

(e) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

(f) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

22

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

July
225.0
190.0

August

y = -0.1112x + 128.4
170.0 150.0 130.0 110.0

200.0 175.0 150.0 125.0 100.0 75.0

y = 1.1971x - 39.81 R2 = 0.3817

R2 = 0.0074

90.0 70.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0

50.0 25.0 0.0 50.0 70.0 90.0 110.0 130.0 150.0

(g) M ean M o nthly F lo ws at C hakdara-Kalam

(h) M ea n M o nt hly F lo ws a t C ha kdara -Kala m

September
100.0

October
180.0 160.0
Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br.

90.0

y = -0.0927x + 57.672 R2 = 0.0969

140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0

y = 1.6436x + 0.4455 R 2 = 0.883

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0

0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0

( i ) Mean Mont hl y Fl ows at Chakdar a- Kal am

(j) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

November
90.0 80.0 Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br. 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 10.0

December
80.0 70.0

Mean Monthly Flows at Zulam Br.

y = 2.1386x - 11.058 R2 = 0.5144

y = -0.9226x + 53.89 2 R = 0.3333

60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

(k) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

(l) Mean Monthly Flows at Chakdara-Kalam

Fig.7: Monthly correlation between Zulam Br. and Chakdara minus Kalam

23

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

Mean annual rainfall values at Dir compiled in Table 3 for pre and post 1999 periods indicates that April 1999 March 2005 was a dry period for the Panjkora river sub-basin consequently less flows occur at Zalum Bridge for the same period Table 3: Mean Annual Rainfall Values at Dir
Period Jan 1990 Mar 1999 Apr 1999 Mar 2005 Mean Annual Rainfall (mm) 1544 1201

4.3 Synthesized Flows at Zulam Bridge Linear regression analysis was carried between the naturalized monthly flows of Zulam Br. and Chakdara minus Kalam for each month

for the concurrent period of record. Results of the regression analysis are depicted in Table 4 and illustrated in Figure 7. The regression coefficients (R2) for January through June and October are satisfactory, but for the remaining months (July through September, November and December) is unsatisfactory being less than 0.8. For these months, arithmetic ratios of corresponding flows at Zulam Br. and Chakdara minus Kalam is considered more appropriate for reconstitution of flows at Zulam Bridge. The monthly ratios are given in Table 5. Synthesized flows at Zulam Br. for the period January 1956 March 1999. The mean annual flow (naturalized) is 121.9 m3/sec and after irrigation subtractions is 119.9 m3/sec.

Table 4: Linear Regression between Monthly Flows of Zulam Br. and Chakdara Minus Kalam Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Equation Between Zulam Br. & Chakdara Kalam. QZ = 0.9986 QCl + 12.05 QZ = 0.5165 QCl + 40.18 QZ = 1.5079 QCl + 17.03 QZ = 1.0332 QCl + 73.046 QZ = 0.8633 QCl + 88.63 QZ = 1.2101 QCl + 22.29 QZ = -0.1112 QCl + 128.4 QZ = 1.1971 QCl 39.81 QZ = -0.0927 QCl + 57.672 QZ = 1.6436 QCl + 0.4455 QZ = 2.1386 QCl 11.06 QZ = -0.9226 QCl + 53.89 Reg. Coeff. R2 0.93 0.96 0.99 0.96 0.97 0.86 0.01 0.38 0.097 0.88 0.51 0.33 Remarks Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Table 5: Monthly Ratios between Flows at Zulam Br. and Chakdara minus Kalam Average Monthly Flows(m3/sec) Month
Zalum Bridge Chakdara-Kalam

Monthly Flow Ratios 111.90 109.00 64.50 46.60 38.80 122.60 105.20 50.30 26.50 19.20 0.910 1.040 1.280 1.760 2.020

July August September November December

24

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

4.4 Estimation of River Flows at Munda Dam Site Following seven steps used in establishing a long record of river flows at the Munda dam site: (i) First combined (naturalized) monthly flows at Zulam Bridge and Chakdara were computed for April 1999 March 2005 period. For the concurrent period, monthly flows at Munda dam site were naturalized in Table 2, by adding corresponding historic monthly diversions into various canals upstream of the Munda dam site. Q Munda = Q Munda + Irrigation Diversions It is noted that 23.7m3/sec (747.4 MCM) of mean annual flow was generated in the lower sub-basin downstream of Chakdara and

Zulam Br. during April 1999 March 2005 period. This is about 289 mm of annual runoff depth from 2584 km2 of drainage area. The annual areal rainfall amounts of Ambahar and incremental sub-basins are 491 mm and 569 mm respectively. Therefore runoff-rainfall coefficient (between 0.4 and 0.5) of these lower sub-basins appears satisfactory. (ii) Linear regression analysis was conducted between naturalized monthly flows of Zulam Bridge plus Chakdara and Munda dam site, for the concurrent period of record (April 1999 to March 2005). The monthly regression curves are illustrated in Fig. 8.

January
200.0

February
300.0

Munda Dam Site

160.0 120.0 80.0 40.0 0.0 0.0

Munda Dam Site

y = 0.9013x + 14.313 R = 0.933

250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 0.0

y = 0.8492x + 26.81 R = 0.8854

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

(a) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

(b) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

March
700.0 700.0

April

Munda Dam Site

Munda Dam Site

600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

y = 0.7959x + 53.735 R = 0.9818

600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

y = 1.3041x - 38.787 R = 0.9688

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

(c) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

(d) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

25

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

May June

800.0

Munda Dam Site

Munda Dam Site

700.0 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

y = 1.2533x - 72.186 R2 = 0.8762

1000.0 800.0 600.0 400.0 200.0 0.0 y = 1.4208x - 174.23 R2 = 0.9808

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

(e) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

(f) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

July
800.0

August
500.0

Munda Dam Site

700.0 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

Munda Dam Site

y = 1.5393x - 217.15 R = 0.904

400.0

y = 0.446x + 192.1 R = 0.9248

300.0

200.0

100.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

0.0 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0

(g) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

(h) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

Septem ber 350.0 Munda Dam Site y = 1.371x - 46.035 R2 = 0.8975 300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 (i) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

October

300.0 250.0 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0

y = 1.0356x + 9.6579 R2 = 0.9879

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

(j) Chakdara + Zulam Br. Novem ber

December

140.0

Munda Dam Site

120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 0.0

Munda Dam Site

y = 0.7158x + 32.483 R2 = 0.9362

140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0

y = 0.7227x + 29.667 R = 0.7827

50.0

100.0

150.0

(k) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

(l) Chakdara + Zulam Br.

Fig.8: Monthly Correlation between Munda vs Chakdara plus Zulam Br.

26

Modified Correlation Technique for Simulation of Long-Term Inflows Time Series

(iii) Regression coefficients shown in Table 6 for January to November are satisfactory, being greater than 0.8 and for December is 0.76. Table-6 represents the summary of linear regression between Munda Dam site and Zalum Bridge + Chakdara with coefficient of correlation and remarks for the acceptance of equation. (iv) A series of composite river flows, covering the period January 1956 March 1999 was derived by adding together the synthesized series at Zulam Bridge and naturalized series at Chakdara.

(v) Using the afore-said monthly regression equations and monthly flow series of Zulam Bridge plus Chakdara, the synthesized monthly naturalized flow series at Munda dam site was derived for January 1956 March 1999 period. This series was then supplemented by superimposing the naturalized flow series for the period April 1999 March 2005.
Q Munda = Q Munda Naturalized Canal Diversions

Table 6: Regression Between Monthly Flows of Munda dam site and Zulam Bridge + Chakdara
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Equation Between Zulam Br. & Chakdara Kalam QM = .9013 Qz+c + 14.313 QM = 0.8492 Qz+c+ 26.81 QM = 0.7959 Qz+c + 53.74 QM = 1.3041 Qz+c 38.79 QM = 1.2533 Qz+c 72.19 QM = 1.4208 Qz+c 174.23 QM = 1.5393 Qz+c - 217.15 QM = 0.446 Qz+c + 192.10 QM = 1.371 Qz+c - 46.04 QM = 1.0356 Qz+c + 9.66 QM = 0.7158 Qz+c + 32.48 QM = 0.7227 Qz+c + 29.67 Reg. Coeff. R2 0.93 0.89 0.98 0.96 0.87 0.98 0.90 0.92 0.89 0.99 0.94 0.76 Remarks Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory

(vi) Feasibility Report of the project by Nippon Koei (2000) estimates the diversions from the Swat river basin (u/s of the dam site), are summarized in Table-7. Present annual diversions are estimated at 70.1 m3/sec. Note that Nippon Koeis estimated future diversions are our present diversions. (vii) Estimated present monthly diversions from Panjkora and Swat rivers upstream of Munda dam stations were then subtracted from the flow series to get final inflows values for dam site. Table-8 shows the monthly reservoir inflows and their comparison with previous estimates.

Table 7: Present Diversions

Month January February March April May June July August September October November December Present Diversions (m3/sec) 31.87 38.35 47.49 91.61 108.76 117.42 72.05 74.03 108.70 74.29 42.39 34.02

Source: Nippon Koi (2000).

27

Science, Technology & Development Vol. 30, No. 3 (July-September) 2011

Table 8: Comparison of Reservoir Monthly Inflow (m3/s) Estimates

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1 2

Current Study (m3/sec) 53.4 81.6 202.8 423.4 478.2 626.9 617.7 308.1 142.0 75.2 59.7 64.0

Nippon Koei Co1. (m3/sec) 29.7 34.8 100.9 250.2 337.3 530.3 623.2 372.4 88.0 35.8 36.1 34.1

NESPAK2 (m3/sec) 38.0 48.0 111.6 290.7 438.2 562.7 616.0 464.8 293.8 96.2 48.8 43.6

Results of Feasibility Study on Development of Munda Multipurpose Dam Project, conducted by Nippon Koei Co. Ltd. & Nippon Giken Inc., Volume I-IV, 2000. Results of Pre-feasibility Study Report of Munda Dam Project conducted by National Engineering Services of Pakistan & Pakistan Engineering Services, Lahore, 1992.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS The mean annual flow estimated by Nippon Koei is 206.2 m3/sec as compared with 261 m3/sec for present conditions indicates that inflows estimated by this study are on higher side as during previous studies no single gauging station was established in Punjkora river sub basin which represents the 42.9% of the total catchment of proposed Munda dam. Although the outcome of this study is quite promising but for its more generalization is required to obtain comprehensive data of reasonable number of sites. Without this it would be a site specific case and could be used only for the site having the similar hydro metrological conditions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Authors are thankful to the Director, Centre of Excellence in Water Resources Engineering, Lahore to provide the opportunity to conduct a very useful study. In addition to this at last but not least authors are extremely thankful to SWH directorate WAPDA and project Consultants to provide required data for the study. REFRENCES
1. Awan, N.M. Hydrologic Analysis for Rising of Baran Dam in NWFP Centre of Excellence in

2. 3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Water Resource Engineering, U.E.T. Lahore, Technical Report No.8, Publication No.44, 1985. Chow, V.T., Handbook of Applied hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp.1418, 1964. Falkland, A. Hydrology and Water Resources of Small Islands a Practical Guide, Studies and Reports in Hydrology, UNESCO, Australia, 1991. Mutreja, K.N., Applied Hydrology, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company, Ltd., New Delhi, 1986. NESPAK (Pvt.) Ltd. and PES (Pvt.) Ltd., Prefeasibility Report of Munda Multipurpose Dam Project National Engineering Services Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd. and Pakistan Engineering Services, Lahore, 1992. Nippon Koei Co. Ltd and Nippon Giken Inc., Feasibility Study on Development of Munda Multipurpose Dam Project Nippon Koei Co. Ltd and Nippon Giken Inc., Lahore, Volumes I-IV, 2000. Shaw, M., Elizabeth. Hydrology in Practice, Second Edition, Van Nestrand Reinhold International Co. Ltd., 1988. Singh, V. P. and Smokid Buapeng, Effect of Rainfall-Excess Determination on Runoff Computation, Water Resources Bulletin 13, Vol.3, 1977, pp. 499-514. WMO, Guide to Hydrological Practices, Secretariat of World Meteorological Organisation, Geneva, WMO No.168, 1974.

________________________________________

28