mÙkjk[k.

M
ljdkj
 TIUNI-PLASU HYROELECTRIC
PROJECT(72 MW)
ad

N Kh
an
ed
aG

d
Ga
di

12
Na

ni

R.L.35
rha
pin

r
Na
Ru

ive
Hat Koti
Rohru

r
pin

un
Arakot
iver

Harkid
Su
la

Tons r
im
Sh Barrage
To
Arakot

Ga ur
t
d
Ma
Arakot
Pa

Taluka Bandar Poonch

Power House ri
Sanka Glacier
bar

Shimla ar
Naitw E.L. 6315 m
rive

Mori
Ga
ru Ga
District Dehradun
r

d
To
Pur
l
no

ola
Ha

Barrage Tiuni - Plasu

Tehsil Tiuni
Tiuni HEP(72 MW)
TUNNEL
POWER HOUSE
sh
i
Nearest DEHRADUN

r
ka
Airport/ 216 m/166Km

ve
SURGE TANK ar

Ri
t
Ut

a
la
Atal er Na ri,

un
S ukh ot

m
Railhead
Chakrauta n
Ya To amu rola
Meenus Y Pu
&
Proposed Kishau
Dam site Accessibility Project site is
Ichari Dam
well
Kalsi
connected by
r
tha
Da
kp
a LEGEND metalled road.
ar

ROAD
ag
sN

r r RIVER
pu Rive
Ha Vika

ran
Pu

una
ha Yam HEP
at

Sa
Stream River Tons- a
rb

To Mussorie BRIDGE
ib El. 2003m
m
Fro ta Sah
Pon
pu
er DISTANCES FROM DEHRADUN tributary of
m ran Dehradun
o
Fr aha El. 597m VIKAS NAGAR 40 Km.
river Yamuna
 Pabar
Tons

Proposed Barrage

Longitude: 770 50’20”E to 770 51’30”E

Latitude : 300 55’0’’ N to 30057’20” N Image from Google Earth
 Project History
 Site identified by U. P. I. D. in 1971-72
 PFR was prepared in 1992 and submitted to
CEA.
 In 2000, the project was transferred to UJVNL.
 A PFR was prepared by UJVNL in Aug 2007.
 In Aug 2008, the project was transferred to
Uttarakhand Irrigation Department.
 DPR submitted to CEA in Aug. 2010.
 DPR-Agencies Involved
S.No. Chapter Agency
1 Hydrology Irrigation Deptt. and vetted by
I.I.T. Roorkee.
2 Civil & Hydro-mechanical I.I.T., Roorkee
design, Power Potential
Studies, Cost Estimate

3 Geology GSI, Dehradun. Geological

Investigations were conducted
by Irrigation department as
per directions of G.S.I.

4 E.I.A. Studies RITES, Gurgaon.

Layout Plan of Tiuni Plasu HEP
 Salient Features of Tiuni Plasu HEP
LOCATION
State Uttarakhand
District Dehradun
Tehsil & Place Tiuni
Stream Tons, a tributary of river
Yamuna
Nearest Dehradun
HYDROLOGY
Gross Catchment Area 3320 km2
Snowbound Area 962 km2
Rain fed Area 2358 km2
Max Design Flood for Hydraulic Design 6946 cumec
Max Design Flood for Structural Design 7810 cumec
 DIVERSION ARRANGEMENTS
Location 200m d/s of confluence of
Pabar & Tons river
Type of Diversion Barrage
River Bed Level 908.00 m
Pond Level 929.50 m
Height from foundation 29.8 m
Length of Barrage 138.0 m
No of Bays 8-15mX18m; 1-15mX21.5m
Type of Gates Radial
Live Storage Capacity of Reservoir 0.44 Mm3
INTAKE ARRANGEMENT
Type Side Intake on Left Bank
Design Discharge 181 cumec
Crest Level 917.50 m
DESILTING CHAMBER
Type Underground Basin
No. & Size 2 No.-360m x 20m x 21m
Particle size to be removed 150 micron
HEAD RACE TUNNEL
Size Circular of 7.60 m diameter
Discharging Capacity 145.0 cumec
Length 1.850 Km
SURGE TANK
Type Restricted Orifice type
Dimension 35.0m dia & 28.0m deep
PRESSURE SHAFT
Penstock 3 No. - 4.0m dia.
Length of each Penstock 110 m
POWER HOUSE
Type Surface Power House
Location On left bank of river Tons near
village Newal & u/s of Sukher Khad
Type of Turbines Vertical Francis
Maximum Gross Head 65.1 m
Installed Capacity 3 x 24 MW
Annual energy generated in 279.20 MU
90% dependable year
Annual energy generated in 423.29 MU
50% dependable year
Levellised Tariff Rs 3.55 per kWH
Construction Period 5 Years
Estimated Cost of Project 826.81 Crore with IDC
 DATA USED
 Daily & Ten daily discharge data of river
Tons from 1976 to 2007 at G&D site Tiuni, just 1
Km d/s of proposed Barrage

 Daily & Ten daily discharge data of river

Tons at Ichari dam observed by Irrigation
Department was used for checking consistency of
data.
(Ichari Dam on river Tons, about 70 Km d/s of
proposed Barrage). There is no major tributary
joining in between Tiuni and Ichari.
 WATER AVAILABITY
 Ten daily discharge data observed at Tiuni G&D site is
used for estimating water availability.
 Water availability in 90% dependable year (2006-07) and
50% dependable year (1988-89) is as under:
90% dependable 50% dependable
year year
Water Availability 2344 MCM 3503 MCM

Max Ten Daily 256.05 cumec 255.70 cum

Discharge
Min Ten Daily 24.82 cumec 46.97 cumec
Discharge

Observed Peak Discharge - 1700.56 cumec (1994)

DESIGN FLOOD ANALYSIS

Method Design Flood

(Cumec)
1. Empirical Approach (1 in 100 Return Period) 3104
2. Envelope Curve 12484
3. Frequency Approach – Gumbel Method (Upper 95% 3254
confidence level)
4. Unit Hydrograph Approach using 1 day SPS:
a) CWC Guidelines 12799
b) Isolated Peak Approach 6946
c) Dimensionless Approach 6790
5. By Catchment area proportion from Dakhpathar 6404
Barrage
6. Catchment area proportion from different Himalayan 6902
Projects
Summary of Probable Maximum Flood

Design Flood computed from Isolated Peak 6946 Cumec

Method has been adopted as Probable
Maximum Flood for Hydraulic Design

Design Flood computed from area correlation of 7810 Cumec

flood adopted for Dakpathar Barrage for
Structural Safety has been adopted as PMF of
Structural Design of the Project

Design Flood computed from CWC Guidelines 12799 Cumec

has been adopted for Design of Free Board
 Design Flood for Diversion Works
 The maximum diversion flood for 1 in 25 years
frequency has been computed as 543.15 cumec.

 The maximum observed instantaneous

discharge at Tiuni in non-monsoon months from
1977 to 2007 is 558.19 cumec.

 Therefore, according to IS:14815-2000, Design

flood for diversion works is adopted as
560 cumec.
Sedimentation Analysis
 The daily suspended inflow data of 1986-87 to
2006-07 are available at Ichari dam.

 As Ichari Dam is constructed across the same river

d/s of the project and no major river meet in river
Tons in between these two projects, the
sedimentation analysis done at Ichari dam site has
been used for this project.

 Rate of Average sediment transport-

13.75 ha-m/100 km2/Year
 As the Project is a run-of-the-river scheme,
the reservoir capacity is very less in
comparison to the average annual inflow.
 As per Brune’s & Churchil’s method, trap
efficiency of the reservoir tends to zero.
 Therefore,NO Siltation Problem is foreseen.
 Moreover, Sill Level of Intake is 8m above
Sill Level of Under Sluice Bay, therefore
Silting of Reservoir is not envisaged.
Power Potential Studies
 Power Potential Studies have been carried out for
the 90% dependable year.
 In the 30% year data 90% dependable year is

computed as 2006-07 with an annual discharge of

2344 Mm3.
 For computation of energy in 90% dependable

year the following assumptions are considered:

 Gross Head available 65.1m
 Environmental Flow 3.3 cumec
 Flushing Discharge 20% of Design
Discharge
 Efficiency of Generator 96%, Efficiency of
Francis Turbine 92% and Combined efficiency
88.32%
 Range of Installed Capacity studied 60 MW to
84 MW
 Incremental energy per MW remains almost
constant from 60 MW to 72 MW and
decreases sharply after 72 MW.
 On the basis of incremental energy per MW
and average annual energy generation over a
period of 10 years period, an Installed
Capacity of 72 MW is adopted.
 The following Geological Investigations have been
carried out:
 Detailed Geological mapping of the area of about
1,00,000 m2 on 1:1000 scale at barrage & surface
power house site.
 Drill core logging of six holes aggregating to 247m
length, at barrage, surge tank and power house site.

 3-D geological mapping on 1:200 scale of four drifts

aggregating to 143m length at barrage, at the
intermediate adit and between surge tank & power
house site.
 Pit logging of 4 pits of 3m x 3m x 3m size
aggregating to 27m2 at the barrage & powerhouse
site.

 Geological traverse on 1:1000 scale of the

proposed desilting arrangement covering 500m &
geological traverse in the reservoir area on
1:50,000 scale covering 2 Km.

 Apart from above geological investigations,

Regional Geology of the project area has been
assessed.
Civil Structures of the Project

Barrage
 Intake
 Intake Tunnel
 Desilting Chamber
 Head Race Tunnel
 Surge Shaft
 Pressure Shaft
 Power House
 Tail Race Channel
 Design of Barrage has been carried out as per
IS:6966

• Total No. of Bays 8

• Width of each Bay 15
• Total No of Piers 7
• Under Sluice Bay 1
• Overall Length of Barrage 138m
• Maximum height above
foundation 29.8m
BARRAGE
Head Race Tunnel
 Design Discharge 145.0cumec
 Diameter optimised using economic
considerations
 Finished diameter - 7.6m Circular
 Tunnel length 1.850 Km
 Tunnel aligned to optimize rock
cover
 One adit is proposed
Surface Power House Complex
 Surge Shaft
Circular Restricted Orifice 35m dia., 28m
deep
 Pressure Shaft
Three Nos.- each 4m dia., 110m long
 Power House
Surface Power House
No. of Turbines 3x24 MW
Type of Turbines Vertical Francis
 Abstract of Cost
ITEM COST, Crore

Civil Works 481.87

Electrical Works 120.00
Sub Total 601.87
Escalation during Construction 88.57
Interest during Construction 139.09
Total Project Cost 829.53
 Tariff Calculations
Tariff Parameters Energy
Total Cost of Project 829.53 Annual Energy in 50% 445.57 MU
with IDC depend year
Loan 622.40 Ancillary Consumption 1%
Equity 207.13 Transformation losses 0.5%
Interest on Loan 11.25% Net salable Energy 414.82 MU
Return on Equity 16% Useful life of Project 35 Years
Loan Repayment 10 Years Tariff in the first Year Rs 3.97 kWh
Period
O & M Charges 2% of Levellised Tariff Rs 3.55 per
Cost kWh
O&M Escalation Rate 5.72%
Weighted average 3.08%
depreciation rate