GOVERNMENT OF TAJIIILNAD U PUBLIC WORI(S DEPARTMENT WATM. RESOU RCES ORGANISATIO N
INSTITUTE OF HYDRAI'LICS AND HYDROLOGY POONDT 602023 i
W[rr nsnEo MANAGEMENT BoA RD POLLACHI
SEDIMENTATION STUDIES IN ALTYAR RESERVOIR
FOURTH CAPACITYSURVHT
I.H.H.REPORT No: 9 /2018
-:
I l
: GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WATER RESOURCES ORGANISATION
INSTITUTE OF HYDRAULICS AND HYDROTOGY POONDI 6020?3.
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BOARD POLLACHI
SEDIMENTATION STUDIES IN ALTYAR RESERVOIR FOURTH CAPACITYSURVET
I.H H.REPORT No: 9 / 2018
For official use only
Poondi - 602023 2018 OFFICERS IN.CHARGE OF THE STUDY
CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD, WRD DESIGN RESEARCH AND CONS'TRUCTION SUPPORT, CHENNAI
Er.'R.VIIAYARAGHAVAN, M.E(Srnc.), F.t.E., F.t.V.,
SI.JPERINTENDING ENGINEER / DIRECTO& PWD, WRD INSTITUTE OF FIYDRAULICS & HYDROLOGY, FOONDI
ET,KVENKATESWARALU A.M.I.E ET.V.SRIDHAMN, B.E.,
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER" PWD, WRD, WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BOARD DIVISION, POLLACHI
ET.SPMBHAMf,AN, B.E, (i/c) ET.S.MALUKA, B.E, .J;
ASSISTANT EXECUTTVE ENGINEER, PWD, WRD WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BOARD SUB DIVISION, POLLACHI
Er.KARULMOZIII,B.E,
1 ASSISTANT ENGINEE& PWD, WRD WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BOARD SECTION, POLLACHI
Er.G-ASHWINI, B.E., 1
\s CONDUCTING SEDIMENTATION STUDIES IN ALIYAR RESERVOIR IN COIMBATORE DISTRICT
FOURTH APACITY SURVEY COI{TEITTS
Chapter TitIE Page No Synopsis I 1.0 Sedimentation Studies 2 2.O Reservoir Sedimentation l0 3.0 Hydrology t4 3.1 Reservoir Details l4 3.2 Watershed Area r6 3.3 Climate l6 3.4 Rainfall l6 3.5 Analysis of Rainfall t7 3.6 Inflow and Outflow t7 4.0 Surveying l8 4.t Methodology 18 4.2 Preparation of Base Maps l8 4.3 Reconnaissance Survey l9 4.4 Topographical Survey l9 4.5 Hydrographic Survey 20 4.6 Analysis of Sediment Samples 2t 4.7 Preparation of Contour Map 2t 4.8 Computation of Capacity 2l 4.9 Analysis of Data 2L 4.9.r Sedimentation Rate 22 4.9.2 Elevation Vs Capacity Relationship 23 4.9.3 Classification of Reservoir 23 4.9.4 Trap Efficiency 23 4.9.5 Life of Reservoir 24 5.0 Results of the Study 26 6.0 List of Annexure 27 7.O List of Figures and Charts 28 8.0 List of Photographs 29 References 30 SYNOPSIS The Fourth capacity survey has been taken up by watershed Management Board Division under Dam Rehabilitation Improvement project (DRIp) in A]iyar Reservoir of coimbatore District, Tamil Nadu in the year of 2016-2o17.The object of this study is to assess the quantum of silt d.eposited, present capacity and useful life of the Reservoir. The resurt of this capacity survey is compared with that of the original data during the inception year 1962.
This report'narrates briefly about the need of the study, methodology adopted besides the hydraulic features and rainfail in detail. preparation of the contour map and computation of the present capacity are clearry brought out in this report. The results are analyzed for the sedimentation rate, Depth versus capacity relationship, Trap Efficiency and usefur life of reservoir.
The capacity of the reservoir as on 2017 is gl.zg74 M.cum as against the original capacity rr2.7s4 M.cum. Total quantity of sediment deposited in between 1962 and 2or7 (s6 years) is r4.9s66 M.cum. The average annual silting load is 0.2671 M.cum,/year. The average annual silting load per Sq.Km is 0.0014 M.cum/yearlSq.Km. As per analysis of Capacity Vs Watershed Area the trap efficiency of Aliyar Reservoir in the year 20r7 is 93%. The usefur life of reservoir is estimated as 301 years. SEDIMENTATION STUDIES 1.0 General
The watershed Management Board Division was formed in 1973 vide G.o Ms pw No 857 Dept Dated 26 May 1973 to conduct sedimentation survey and watershed studies for the selected reservoirs / tanks in Tamilnadu. From b inception (1975), so far the sedimentation and watershed studies for the following reservoirs / tanks had been completed.
I Phase (1975 to 1985) Estimate Rs.39.0O Lakhs - As per G.O.Ms.No.tZO4 pWD dated 26.11.1974 1. Emerald Avalanche (I Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 2. Kundha Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 3. Pegumbahalla Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 4. Pillur Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 5. Upper Bhavani Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 6. Krishnagiri Reservoir (I,[ & III Capacity survey - Krishnagiri District) 7. Sathanur Reservoir (l & II Capacity survey - Thiruvannamalai District) 8. Vaigai Reservoir (I,[ & III Capacity survey - Theni District) 9. Aliyar Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 10. Mettur Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Salem District) 11. Manimuthar Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) I 2. Lower Bhavani Reservoir 0n & ry Capacity survey - Erode District)
tr Phase (1985 to 1997) Esrirnate Rs.255.00 Lakhs - As per G.O.Ms.No.925 plfD dated 8.4.1986, Est.Rs.l26 lakhs & c.O.Ms.No.2s PW (Rl) dated 8.1.1999, Revised Est. Rs. 255 Lakhs 1. Amaravathy Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 2. Thirumoorthy Reservoir (I & U Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 3. Willingdon Reservoir (l & II Capacity survey - Cuddalore District) 4. Berijam Iake (l Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 5. Barur Tank (I Capacity survey - Krishnagiri District) 6. Parson Valley Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 7. Ooty Lake (I Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 8. Ponnaniar Reservoir (I & II Capacity survey - Trichy District) 9. Kaveripakkam Tank (I & II Capacity survey _ Vellore District) l0.porthimund Reservoir (I & II capacity survey - Nilgiris District) ll.uppar Reservoir 0 & II capacity survey - Erode District - currently Thiruppur Disrrict)) l2.pechiparai Reservoir (r & II Capacity survey - Kanyakumari Distric0 y l3.Manjalar Reservoir (l & II Capacity survey _ Theni District) l4.Mukurthy Reservoir (I Capacity survey _ Nilgiris District) lS.perunchani Reservoir (r capacity survey - Kanyakumari Dis'ict) lo.Veeranam tank (I Capacity survey _ Cuddalore District) 17. Wallajah Tank (I Capacity survey _ Cuddalore District)
Itr Phase (1997 to 20Ol) Estirnate Rs.2S.00 Lakhs under WRCP (parr I) - As G.O.Ms.No.347 PW (Rt) Dept. dated 19.06.1997 l. Varathamanadi Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 2. Glenmorgan Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 3. Maruthanadhi Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Theni District) 4. Chittar - I Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Kanyakumari District) 5. Perumal Tank (I Capacity survey - Cuddalore District) 6. Chittar - II Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Kanyakumari District) 7. Palar-Porandalar Reservoir(l Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 8. Pykara Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 9. Poondi Reseivoir (As per G.O.Ms.No.56 pW (Rl) Dept. dated 6.2.1998 for Rs.l.90 lakhs) (l Capacity survey - Thiruvallur District)
IV Phase (2O01 to 2003) Estinrare Rs.18.00 Lakhs under WRCP (part II) - As per G.O.Ms.No.103 PW (R1) Dept. dated 1.3.2002 l. Kuthiraiyar Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 2. Kamarajsagar Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 3. Parappalar Reservoir (l Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 4. Gadana Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) 5. Gomuki Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Cuddalore District)
From the inception year of 1975 up to 1996, Central and State funds were provided for the above studies. For 3rd & 4th Phase during the year 1997 to 2003, the above studies for 14 reservoirs were conducted under Water Resources J project Consolidation (WRCP) aided by World Bank vide G.O. Ms. No.347 pW (Rl) Dept dated 19.06.1997 WRCP (parr-t).
V Phase (2003 to 2OOZ) Estimate Rs.80.0O Lakhs (As per G.O.Ms.No.645 pW (R1) Dept. dated S.12.2003) l. Kadamba Tank (I Capacity & Watershed study- Tuticorin District) 2. Manimuthar Reservoir (III Capacity_ Tirunelveli District) 3. Maravakandi Reservoir (I capacity & watershed study- Nilgiris District) 4. Mukkurthi Reservoir 0I Capacity - Nilgiris District) 5. Maduranthagam Tank (I capacity & watershed study- chengalpet District) 6. Kodaganar Reservoir (I capacity & watershed study - Dindigul District) 7. Mettur Reservoir (III capacity by Conventional - salem District) 8. Aliyar Reservoir (III Capacity- Coimbatore District) 9. Amaravathi Reservoir (III Capacity- Coimbatore District) l0.Krishnagiri Reservoir (IV Capacity - Krishnagiri District)
The above studies for all the Reservoirs/Tanks were completed. For Sathanur Reservoir - IBS survey completed upto +21 1.98M (FRL+222.20)
VI Phase (2OO7 to 3O.O9.2O09) Estimate Rs.34.O0 Lakhs i The following six reservoirs had been taken for Sedimentation survey and watershed studies,at an estimated amount of Rs.34 Lakhs as per the G.O.(2D) No.29 PW (Rl) Dept dated lt-07-2008 for ZOOZ-ZOO9. The proposal contains Sedimentation survey and Watershed Studies for selected five Reservoirs by conventional method and by Remote Sensing for Sathanur Reservoir. 1. Moyar Reservoir (instead of Pillur Reservoir) (I Capacity Survey - Nilsiris Distrid) 2. Thirumurthy Reservoir (III capacity Survey - Coimbatore District) 3. Manjalar Reservoir (lII Capacity Survey - Theni District) 4. Pechiparai Reservoir (III Capacity Survey - Kanyakumari District) 5. Veedur Reservoir (I Capacity Survey - Villupuram District) 6. Sathanur Reservoir (Remote sensing - III Capacity - Thiruvannamalai District) Due to non completion of sedimentation survey for the above reservoirs within the stipulated time that is 3l-03-2009, the Government approved the extension of time upro 30-09-2009 pw vide in c.o. (D) No.229 (Rl) Dept dated 22-06-2009. The above works had been completed on 30-09-2009 in arl respects, except sathanur Reservoir.
VII Phase (From Ot.IO.2OO9 to 31.03.2011) Estimate Rs.26.50 lakhs The following six reservoirs was taken for sedimentation survey and watershed studies at an estimate cost of Rs.26.50 Lakhs as per G.o.Ms.No.l8 pw (R2) Dept. dated 20.01.2010 during 2oo9_2orr (0r.10.09 to 31.03.201I) 1. Varattupallam reservoir (I Capacity survey - Erode District) 2. Pykara dam (U Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 3. Maruthanathi reservoir (II Capacity survey - Dindigul District) 4. Chittar II reservoir (II Capacity survey - Kanyakumari District) 5. Vaniar reservoir (I Capacity survey - Dharmapuri District) 6. Sathanur Reservoir (Remote sensing - III Capacity - Thiruvannamalai District)
AII the above works had been completed including the sedimentation study in Sathanur Reservoir through Remote Sensing Technique which was taken up by Maharastra Engineering Research Institute, Nashik.
During this pbriod, additionally sedimentation studies for three more reservoirs were conducted under DRIP as per G.O.Ms.No.88 PW (I.Spl) Dept. dated 15.03.2010, estimate cost of Rs.75.00 Lakhs. The reservoirs are l. Sathaiyar Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Madurai district) 2. Adavinainar Koil Reservoir (I Capacity survey-Tirunelveli district) 3. Gunderipallam Reservoir (I Capacity survey - Erode district) The above works were completed and the report published.
Wtr Phase (from Ol.O4.L1 to 31.03.2013) Estirnate cost of Rs.35.O0 lakhs During 27th Board Meeting the following six reservoirs were suggested for conducting sedimentation and watershed studies during the year 2011-2013 and in 28th WSMB meeting the following six reservoirs had been approved for the year 2011-20r3. 5 l. Kuthiraiyar Reservoir (Dindigut District) 2. Vembakottai Reservoir (I capacity survey - Viruthunagar District) perunchani 3. Reservoir (II Capacity survey _ Kanyakumari District) 4. Manimukthanathi Reservoir (I capacity survey - Villupuram District) 5. Glenmargan Reservoir (II Capacity survey _ Uthagamandalam District)
The Administrative sanction for the above studies had been obtained from the Government vide G.o.Ms.No.23 (Rt) PW Department dated 19.01.201I for Rs.35.00 Lakhs. The Chief Engineer (DR&CS) inspected the Kuthiraiyar Reservoir on 29'01'2011 and 30.01.2011 and instructed to identify an alternate Reservoir instead of Kuthiraiyar Reservoir since the rate of siltation in the Reservoir iryas very Iess and also the sedimentation study work was compreted only in 2003. The chief Engineer (DR&cS) inspected and selected perumpallam Reservoir in sathiyamangalam Taluk, Erode District for studies instead of Kuthiraiyar Reservoir.
Further the Chairman, cauvery Technicar Cell advised not to take up the Mettur Reservoir at MDDL sedimentation study work since it lies within the intersrate problem. Hence it was proposed to take up Nagavathi Reservoir and Thoppaiyar reservoir in Dharmapuri District instead of Mettur Reservoir work. The proposal for the same had been approved by the Chairman, wsMB in the 29th wsMB Board Meeting held on r4.10.20rr and revised Government order for the change of Reservoirs, Perumpallam Reservoir instead of Kuthiraiyar Reservoir, Nagavathi and rhoppaiyar Reservoirs instead of Mettur Reservoir at MDDL had been issued by the Governmenr vide G.O.Ms.No.l87 pW(Rl) depafiment dared 26.03.2012. All the above works were completed and the report published.
D( Phase - DRIP WORKS ZOt3-ZOt4 Estimate cost of Rs.85.0O lakhs public In G.O. M.S.No:73 Works (t.Spl.l) Dept. date:23.05.2013 had accorded administrative sanction for conducting sedimentation study in lo wRD dams under DRIP during the year 2013-14, at an estimared cost of Rs 85.00 Lakhs. Subsequently in rhe G.O. (M.S) No:48 public Works (t.Spl.l) Depr dared ZS.OZ.z}t4, certain amendments had been issued substituting l0 wRD Dams as g wRD and 2 TANGEDCO (Glenmorgan Dams (Kariappa) and pillur Dams) and replacing the poigaiyar Perunchani Dam by Dam in the WRD Dams list. l. Parambikkulam Dam (I Capacity survey- palaghat District) 2. Thunakkadaw Dam (lCapacity survey _ palaghat District) 3. Pillur Dam (II Capacity survey - Coimbatore District _ TANGEDCO) Glemorgan (Kariappa) 4' Dam (I capacity survey- Nilgiris District - TANGEDCo) 5. Anaimadavu Dam (I Capacity survey _ Salem District) 6. Pambar Dam (I Capacity survey- Krishnagiri District) periyar 7. Pilavukkal Dam (I Capacity survey_ Viruthunagar District) 8. Anaikuttam Dam (I Capacity survey - Viruthunagar District) 9. Pechiparai Dam 0V Capacity Survey - Kanyakumari District) lo.Poigaiyar Dam (I Capacity Survey- Kanyakumari District) All the above works were completed and the report published.
X. Phase - DRIP WORKS 2Ot4-2OtS. Esttrnate cost of Rs.58.O0 lakhs The Empowered committee Meeting for Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (DRIP) was held on 08.10.2014. In this meeting the proposal for conducting sedimentauon studies in l0 Dams ( 8 wRD + 2 TANGEDCo dams -Kundha pallam and Pegumbahallah Dam) under Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement project for the Year 2014-15 for an estimate cost of Rs.5g.00 Lakhs was placed and got v approved. The Government had accorded the administrative sanction for the above proposal for Rs.58.00 lakhs vide G.O. (MS) No.253 public works (Lspt l) Dept. Dated: 18.12.20L4 for the following lO Dams. Based on the above G.O.,s Sedimentation study for the following dams taken up in the year 2014-15. l. Sholaiyar Dam (I Capacity Survey - Coimbatore Disftict) 2. Peruvarippallam Dam (I Capacity Survey - Palaghat District) 3. Kundha Pallam Dam (III Capaciry Survey - Nilgiris District) 4. Pegumbahallah Dam (III Capacity Survey - Coimbatore District) 5. Thumbalahalli Dam (I Capacity Survey - Dharmapuri District) 6. Kesarigulihalla Dam (I Capacity Survey - Dharmapuri District) 7. Golwarpatti Dam (I Capacity survey - Viruthunagar District) 8. Pilavakkal Kovilar Dam (I Capacity survey - Viruthunagar District) 9. Nambiyar Dam (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) l0.Vadakupachaiyar Dam (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) All the above works were completed and the report published. :ynate XI. Phase - DRIP WORXS 2015-2016. Es cost of RS.4S.O0 lakhs The Empowered committee Meeting for Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (DRIP) was held on 13.07.20rs. In rhis meeting the proposal for conducting Sedimentation g Studies in ll Dams ( WRD + 3 TANGEDCO ) dams under Dam project Rehabilitation and Improvement for the year 20ls-16 for an estimate cost of Rs.45.00 Lakhs was placed and got approved. The Government had accorded the administrative sanction for the above proposal for Rs.45.00 Lakhs vide public G'O'(MS) No. 201 works (wRtl psparlmenr dated 5.11.2015 for the following 1l Dams. Based on the above G.o. sedimentation study for the following dams were taken up in the year 20f S-f 6. l. Lower Nirar Dam (l Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 2. Kadamparai Dam (I Capacity survey - Coimbatore District) 3. Maravakandi Dam (II Capacity survey - The Nilgiris District) 4. Kamarajsagar Dam (II Capacity survey - The Nilgiris District) 5. Chinnar Dam (I Capacity survey - Dharmapuri District) 6. Kariyakoil Dam (I Capacity survey - Salem Districr) 7. Sothuparai Dam (l Capacity survey - Dindigul Districr) 8. Kullursandai Dam (I Capacity survey - Viruthunagar District) 9. Ramanadhi Dam (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) l0.Karuppanadhi Dam (l Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) l l.Gundar Dam (I Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District)
All the above works were completed.
)flI. Phase - DRIP WORNS 2OL6-2O17, Estimate cost of Rs.54.O0 lakhs The Empowered Committee Meeting for Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (DRIP) was held on 8.08.2015. In this meeting the proposal for conducting Sedimentation Studies in 12 Dams ( 7 WRD + 5 TANGEDCO ) dams under Dam Rehabilitation and Improvement Project for the Year 2016-17 for an estimate cost of Rs.54.00 Lakhs was placed and got approved. The Government had accorded the administrative sanction for the above proposal for Rs.S4.00 Lakhs vide G.O.(MS) No. 175 Public Works (WRl) Department dated 14.12.2016 for the following 12 Dams. Based on the above G.O. Sedimentation study for the following dams were taken up in the year 2016-17 . l. Aliyar Dam (Mapacity survey - Coimbatore. District) 2. Kuthiraiyar Dam (II Capacity survey - Dindigul Disuict) 3. Gomukhinadhi D* (tt Capaciry survey - Villupuram Disrrict) 4. Willingdon Dam (III Capacity survey - Cuddalore District) 5. Chittar{ D* (tt Capaciry survey - Kanyakumari District) (II € 6. Gadana Dae Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) 7. Manimuthar Dam (IV Capacity survey - Tirunelveli District) 8. Vennirar Dam (I Capacity survey - Theni District) 9. Manalar Dam (I Capacity survey - Theni District) 10. Eravangalar Dam (I Capacity survey - Theni District) 11. Parson's Valley Dam (III Capacity survey - Nilgiris District) 12. Porthimund Dam (III Capacity survey - Nilgiris Disrrict)
The sedimentation study for Aliyar Dam was executed by Pollachi Sub Division. Accordingly this report is prepared for sedimentation studies conducted in Aliyar Reservoir,
v RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION 2.O Introduction water is one of the most varuable natural resources. The rapid growth of uncontrolled population and the development activities, both domestic and Industrial, throughout the worrd, have put tremendous pressure on the I development and management of water resources. In our country, the economic development of various sectors is dependent upon the indispensable water resources development. The water Resources of a country mainly depends on the rainfall, which is most erratic in nature.
In the state of Tamil Nadu the surface and ground r4/ater is being totally harvested for the purpose of agriculture, domestic and industrial uses. This leads to chronic water crisis due to increased use of water for irrigation purposes, industrial and domestic needs of the increasing population. Most of the dams constructed in Tamil Nadu, are several years ago and due to natural process of erosion in the catchment area, movement of sediments deposits in various parts of the reservoir has reduced the storage capacity of the reservoir.
Reduction in the storage capacity beyond a limit prevents the reservoir .r from fulfillment of rhe purpose for which it is designed. periodical capacity surveys of reservoir helps in assessing the rate of sedimentation and reduction in storage capacity. This information is necessary not only for efficient management of the reservoir, but also helps in taking a decision about treatment of catchment area, if the rate of siltation is excessive. periodical capacity surveys of reservoirs in a basin are also necessary to arrive at a realistic sedimentation index for planning of future xeservoir projects in the basin and also to know how to use the available water in a better manner.
2.1 Sources of Sedimenrc The principal sources of sediments are as follows: l) Deforestation 2) Excessive erosion in the catchment 3) Disposal of industrial and public wastes 4) Farming
l0 5) Channelizationworks 6) Human activities 7) Land development, highways, and mining
2,2 Economic Imp6rtance of Sedimentation analysis The dynamic features like suspended sediment and its distribution concentration, water spread, density currents, aquatic vegetation, etc. are parameters important for multi-purpose river valrey projects. These parameters have a bearing on the life of the reservoir and storage capacity due to the deposition of the transported bed{oad, suspended load and wash load, which ultimately cause serious economic and social losses. The hazards like siltation in the man-made reservoir are of great concern because sometimes it affects the engineering structures also. on the other hand, there may be improvement in the quality water downstream due to the sediments trapped in a reservoir and found economical for irrigation. The turbidity of the stored water in a reservoir also hinders recreational activities, municipal and industrial uses and fisheries. Another important aspect of reservoir sedimentation is formation of delta at the foreshore area of the reservoir, which ultimately affects upstream backwater and inundated lands.
A storage or conservation reservoir retains water during high floods for the use in lean season. sediment distribution and deposition within the reservoir gives an idea to the planners, about the available assured adequate water supply.
The main sources of sediment are the erosion or washed up soil from watershed of the river/tributaries, abrasion and land sliding of the shores. Sediments, in many areas are choking the streams, filling in lakes,/ reservoirs/ponds,/ canals/ drainage ditches/ harbours and burying vegetations. The monitoring of these parameters is essential. In the case of a very large reservoir, the trap efficiency of these transported materials is near about 100 percent because very few particles can pass the dam. The trap efficiency of the reservoir decreases with time due to reduction in the reservoir capacity because of sedimentation. Reservoir operation plays an important role in the process of sedimentation
II 2.3 Reservoir Sedimentation The schematic diagram of sedimentation deposit in a reservoir is shown in the below figure. The process of sediment deposit in reservoirs takes place where the course particles with highest unit mass are deposited first and finest particles with low unit mass are deposited at later. This leads to the segregation of sediments of different sizes and density. The grain size, its unit mass and shape influence the mobility and the settling capacity. The variation in the sizes of the deposited materials in the reservoirs also depends on the climate, drainage area and geology of the area,/region. The density of water in the reservoir is heterogeneous. The coarser particles mainly, gravel, boulder and partly sand move as bed Ioad and form delta at relatively short distance from the estuary. This delta extends to the point where the maximum water level intercepts the original river bed.
Turbid inflow
-\ Floating debris j, Sluice lake bed x=------*-; Density cunent
Fine
The seasonal changes in the runoff cause the formation of multi-delta. The bottom sediments, which consist of finer particles, are deposited throughout the reservoir. The finest particles (silt, clay, colloids) often get flocculated and affected by dynamic viscosity of water. These particles sink to the bottom very slowly. They have a tendency to form density currents, which are generally moving towards spillways, turbines and outlets. In many reservoirs, sediment- laden inflow may move through the pool as a density current or layer of water with a density slightly different from that of the main body of rhe reservoir water. The density difference may result due to the sediments, dissolved minerals and temperature. The water of the density current does not mix readily with the reservoir water and maintains its identity for a considerable time because of the density differences.
2.4 Control of Sedimentation Due to the multiple variables involved in reservoir sedimentation, no single control measure can be considered as the most effective. The measures which can be employed to limit sedimentation and turbidity are as under: 1) soil and water conservatioo measures within the drainage basin, contour plowing, strip cropping, suitable farming practices, improvement of agriculture land, construction of small dams ,/ ponds / terraces ,/ check dams on gullies. 2) Revetment and vegetation cover 3) Evacuation of sediment 4) Reservoir shoreline protection 5) Stream bank and flood plain protection 6) Ridge plantation such as pasture development and reservoir shoreline protection.
2.5 Objectives ofthe Study The study has been programmed to achieve the following specific objectives: l) To determine the present capacity of the reservoir 2) To determine annual storage loss 3) To find out the probable future life of the reservoir and 4) To periodically correct the stage Vs capacity curve for efficient operation of the reservoir.
r3 HYDROLOGY 3.0 GENERAL The Aliyar Reservoir in essentially a part of the comprehensive Parambikulam Aliyar Project and it is the lower most reservoir formed in the Parambikulam Aliyar Project. This reservoir fits in excellently well not only for Y impounding the available Aliyar flows, but also to serve as a balancing reservoir to receive and utilize the water diverted from Nirar, Sholayar and parambikulam basins of the P.A.P complex for irrigating the ayacut commanded on the eastern plains of western Ghats. It is located at Latitude to"-30'N and Longitude 76-7, E. The cost of the proiect is 297 lakhs and project was completed in the year 1962 and commissioned from October, 1962. The location of the Reservoir is shown in tFiryre Wo.1.
3.1 TIYDRAI'LIC PARTICTJLARS OF RESERVOIR General: River : Aliyar Basin. : Bharathapuzha Nearest town : Pollachi District : Coimbatore Construction period 1959 - 62 Cost Rs.297 Lakhs
Reservoir: Catchment area 195 Sq.Kms. Design flood 1160 Cumecs F.R.L. +320.04m M.W.L. +320.04m Minimum draw down level : 283.00m Area at F.R.L. 6.475 sq.km. Capacity at F.R.L. 112.754 M.cu.m. (As per Ist capacity report) Dead Storage :8.795 M.cum.
t4 Dam:
Type Masonry - cum Earth dam Top of roadway +323.992m Width of roadway over dam 3.657m Maximum height 44.00m Length: Earth Dam 2218.88m (Left lOOS.Sm and Right r213.08m) Masonry Dam 9l1.00m Soillway:
Vents ll Nos. Size 9.2 x 3.0m Crest : +316.992m Capacity at Crest level 89.9 M.cu.m Type Radial gates Discharge capacity I160 Cumecs Length of spillway 128.02m
River Sluices:
Vents 2 Nos. Size 1.5 x l.8m silt +283.0m Discharge capacity I 17.94 Cumecs Deepest river bed level 279.810m
Canal Sluice: V.K.tudur canal (Left side) Vents I No. Size 1.5 x 1.8m silt +299.0m Discharge capacity 44.63 Cumecs Pollachi canat (Right side) Vents 2 Nos. Size 1.5 x l.8m siu +299.0m Discharge capacity 85.25 Cumecs I5 Avacut: 14155 ha District benefited Coimbatore Taluk benefited Pollachi (in Ayacut Hec.) V.K.Pudur canal: 4566.57ha Pollachicanal :958g.83ha
3.2 WATERSHED AREA The Aliyar ieservoir watershed lies between 10"15, and ro"3o,N Latitude and 76'50', and 770r0'E Longitude. The complete catchment area of Aliyar Reservoir lies in the Eastern slopes of the western Ghats in porachi and udumalpet Taluks of Coimbatore district. The catchment area of Aliyar reservoir is 195 Sq.km. This includes the catchment area of the Upper Aliyar Dam which is about 139.g6 Sq.km. The entire watershed is covered with forest plantadons. and tea
3.3 CUMATE
The temperature during the day varies from 23"c to 4o"c at the foot of the hils. The night temperature varies from l8.C to 30"c. At higher erevations, the temperature is lower after dropping below the freezing point in the Grass Hills during winter' December and January are the coorest months of every year and climate on the h,rs is often marred by dense ch,ry mists. Towards the end of February' the climate becomes sultry on the plains. March to May being the hottest period' A few thunder showers that usua,y record during Aprir and May have little effect in mitigating the oppressiveness of the weather, but are useful in reducing forest fire-risks. Towards the end of May, the South lryest monsoon brings wercome rerief and the crimate continues to be pleasant and cool until August when the monsoon abates. september again is sultry, but october and November experience an equable climate during North East monsoon period.
3.4 RANFALL The catchment area exhibits the widest variation in annuar rainfa, among its different parts. The annual precipitation varies from 400mm to s500mm. The catchment receives both the south-west and North-East monsoons. The former is active from late May to earry september and the latter from october to December.
l6 The rainfall is conrrolled by the topogaphy, as the high hills lying across the parh of the south west monsoon help to precipitate their moisture on the wind wards side, whereas the areas of leeward side receive comparatively rittre rain from south-west monsoon, the bulk of the precipitation being from the north-east monsoon. Monthly rainfan readings ,62 of Ariyar dam site is colected from Jan to Nov 'l 7 and the same is furnished as statement in nnnc4ne No.14 { ,.6 and annual rainfall is enclosed in the form of a bar chart as in aFfure ffo.6 4z of this report.
3.5 ANALYSIS OF RNNFALL The annual maximum rainfalr in the Aliyar dam site rainfall station is 4273.g0 mm occurred in the year lg62 and the annual minimum rainfal is 3gl.l0 mm which occurred during the yeat 2017. The average annuar rainfau for the period of lg62 to 2017 is 979.02 mm- The monthry maximum rainfalr of 3315.00 mm was occurred during the month of April rg62. In this report Jnac4rcgfo.2 shows the Maximum, Minimum and Average Rainfall for Aliyar dam site.
3.6 INTLOW AND OUTFLOW The inflow and outflow of the Aliyar Reservoir ,62 were collected from July to Nov 2017 and, were enclosed in this report in the form of statement in Amqre vfo.j.q 3.b, 4'4 4 4'6 and annual inflow and outfrow are furnished in the form of bar chart in riga No r o l1,1zr3 4,r4, The average annual inflow and outflow are calculated as 302.37 M.cum and 301.12 M.cum respectively.
l7 SURVEYING 4,O General For conducting sedimentation survey of any reservoir, a water spread map prepared at the time of construction of the reservoir or at the time of completion of the same should be cbllected. This wil form the basic map for the carculation of the sediment deposited over the years. After sudying the plan, reconnaissance a survey along the entire reservoir should be made. The present bed level should be found out by conducting hydro graphic survey as welr as ground survey depending.upon the water level in the reservoir. After present finding out the bed level of the reservoir, by computation the present capacity, and there by the reduction in capacity or the total quantity of silt deposited over years from the date of construction to the present day or from the previous sedimentation survey to the present day can be calculated.
4.1 Methodology The sedimentation studies involve the following: l. Preparation of base map (water spread map) 2. Reconnaissance survey. 3. Topographic survey. 4. Hydrographic survey to find out the present bed level. 5. Collection of soil samples and their analysis. 6. Preparation of contour map for the present survey. 7. lvorking out the present capaciry of the reservoir and silt deposit rate. 8. Analysis of data and presentation of results.
4.2 PREPARATION OF BASE MAPS 4.21. Itrdex map: The index map was drawn to a scale of l" = 4 mile and is attached in this report as figut, $to. I.
4.2.2. Catchrnent Area Dlap The catchment map was drawn and is attached in this report as qigaftjlo.2.
t8 4.2.3 Waterspread Area Map: The water spread area map was prepared from the GI sheet and it is copied into section sheet. From the section sheet, the East and North co-ordinates were taken along the periphery of FRL line. By adopting software Auto cadd the new water spread area map was prepared and enclosed as ai*m N,.3. This map is used as the base map for this survey for preparing contour map and worked out the capacity calculation.
4.3 Reconnaissa n ce survey Reconnaissance survey is done to examine the generar character of the area for the purpose of determining the most feasible routes for further more detailed investigations. It provides data that enables to study the advantages and disadvantages of a variety of routes and then to determine which routes are feasible. Usuarly reconnaissance survey begin by finding alr existing maps that shows the area to be surveyed and finding all the possibirities for executing the survey works like Topography and Hydrographic survey.
In reconnaissance survey, studying existing maps is as important as the acrual field work' studying these maps and aerial photographs, if any exist will often eliminate an.unfavorabre route from further consideration, thus saving the reconnaissance field survey much time and effort. Reconnaissance consists of general examination of ground by warking or riding along the probabre routes and collecting alr availabre informaton necessary for evaluating the study. In the case of hill sections, it may be advantageous sometime to start the reconnaissance from an obligatory point situated crose to the top. If an area is inaccessible for the purpose of ground reconnaissance, aerial method should be used to clear the doubts.
4,4 Topographical survey The waterspread area has been reconnoitered to fix the ranging rods at M'W.L of the reservoir. After erecting the ranging rods, their actuar positions at the site have to be marked with reference to the dam line, so that the correct distance of the range lines can be found out, in addition to the correct locations of the range points. Therefore, Triangulation survey with Totar station was started
t9 with the known distance of baselines conveniently chosen on the top of the darn (roadway) whose horizontal distances have been determined.
A base line was fixed by marking two points namely A and B on the dam line. Using section sheet, the East and North co-ordinates of the two points A and B were arrived. Taking these co-ordinates as input to Total station as station point and Back sight point the survey was continued by adopting various change points. with the completion of this survey, the co-ordinates of the position of ranging rods were determined.
These co-ordinates were given to Software Surfer version g, each ranging rod position was fixed in the new waterspread map. using section sheet, the horizontal distance between all range lines were determined.
4.5 Hydrographic survey: The period during hydrographic survey water level in the reservoir was 3LL.224 m. Hence the survey has been conducted by using BATHy 500 singre beam Echo sounder (dual frequency) equipment. Single beam echo sounders (SBES) also known as depth sounders determine water depth by measuring the travel time of a short sonar purse. The sonar pulse is emitted from a transducer positioned just below the water surface, and the sBES listens for the return echo from the bottom. Hydrographic survey single beam echo sounders are abre to provide accurate bottom depths by distinguishing the real bottom from any spurious signals in the returned echo. Hydrographic survey singre beam echo sounders record a digital water column echogram or echo envelope that provides a graphical representation of the return echo.
SBES may use various different sonar frequencies; typically 200 kHz is used shallow in water under 100m. As the attenuation of sound in water decreases at lower frequencies, 24-33 kHz is commonly used for deeper water surveys. often, two frequencies are combined for convenience into a single dual frequency transducer, eg 33 /2oo kHz. For surveys when suspended particurates are very high. The low frequency sonar is abre to penetrate the thick re-suspended layer and measure the undisturbed hard bottom beneath.
20 4.6 Analysis ef gs.tirnsnl Samples During the survey, thirty number of soil samples were collected near the boundary of FRL which were analyzed using the standard size of sieves. The map showing the location of the soil sampres colrected is marked iD figu. N-o.4 of this report. The particle size Distribution curve, classification of soil groups and soil Analysis chart are drawn and appended in rigure \fo.IE, tg d 20 respectively. A statement showing the percentage particres of size distribution is prepared for the 30 samples ii n?tflq,e ito.6.a & 6.6. From this statement it is seen that the sediment contains a maximum of 73.03% of 600 - 212 microns coarse Sand and a minimum of 2.35% of 63 microns Fine Sand.
4.7 Preparation of Contour map The data colrected within the waterspread area by Hydrographic survey are computed in the x, y & Z co-ordinates and processed with software Surfer- g for preparation of contour map. The contour map was prepared at an interval of I meter elevation and shown i\ rwre No.5. By inputting the X, y and z values in the surfer-8 software, the contour map and capacity of each contour have been arrived.
4.8 Computation of Capacity The data was fed into the computer and processed by using Surfer_g software, which was specially designed for contour map, capacity and area calculation. The software y converts the x, & z co-ordinates into grid format and computes the data. The results of the computation of volume and area of each contour at an interval of l meter were calculated. From this survey the present capacity of the reservoir is computed as g7.7g7M.cum against the original capacity of 112.754 M.cum during the year 1962 the commission of the reservoir.
4.9 Analysis of the Data sedimentation data of Aliyar Reservoir collected based on the observation made during sedimentation survey have been presented in the following paragraphs. Thesg data have been analyzed for different aspects, like sedimentation rate, Elevation vs capacity relationship, Trap efficiency and Life of reservoir.
2l 4.9. 1. 5edimentation Rate The original catchment area as found in the Hydraulic particulars of the Dam is 195 Sq.km.
I (a) Original capacity/watershed Ratio in 112.754 M.cum,/ 195 Sq.Km
1962 0.5782 M.cum / Sq.Km (b) For the First capacity survey = l07.382M.cum / 195 Sq.Km Capacity ,/ Watershed ratio in lg77 = 0.5506 M.cum / Sq.Km
(c) For the Second capacity survey = 108.262 M.cum,/I95 Sq.Km Capacity / Watershed ratio in lgSl = 0.5551 M.cuml/Sq.Km
(d) For the Third capacity survey = 103.4L4 M.cum,/195 Sq.Km Capacity ,/ Watershed ratio in 2006 = 0.5303 M.cum / Sq.Km (e) For the Fourth capacity survey = 97.797 M.cum /195 Sq.Km
Capacity,/ Watershed ratio in 2017 = 0.5015 M.cum,/ Sq.Km II (a) Original capacity of the Reservoir in = 112.754 M.cum. 1962
O) Fourth capacity of the Reservoir in = 97.797 M.cum. 2017
(d) Silt deposition for 56 years = 14.957 M.cum. III Average annual silt load (for 56 years) = 14.9s7 / 56 = 0.2671M.cum. / year
IV SiIt deposition in % = (14.957 / ll2.7s4 )x100 = t3.27%
Average annual silting rate in % = 13.27 / 56 = O.24 % per year VI Average annual silting rate/Sq.km. = O.24 / t9s catchment = 0.00123 M.cum/yearlSq.km
VI (a) Capacity,/ Inflow ratio for 1962 = 1t2.754 / 302.37 = 0.37 (b) Capacity,/ Inflow ratio for 2017 = 97.797 / 302.37 = O.32
22 4,9.2. Elevation Vs Capacity ReLationship Elevation vs capacity relationship graph drawn for the existing relationship during construction and for this fourth capacity survey was drawn and appended with this report in ri$re No.lZ.
I 4.9.3 Classification of Reservoir M,/s.Whitney, M.Boreland & Corl.L.Miller of U.S.A. have evolved a method to classify the reservoir type based on the analysis of data of different reservoirs. In this method depth vs capacity is plotted on log-log sheet keeping reservoir depth as ordinate and the classification is made as follows.
STANDARD VALT'E OF M NESERVOIR TYPE CI.ASSIFICATION l.O to 1.5 Gorge w 1.5 to 2.5 Hill III 2.3 to 3.5 Flood plain foot hilt tr 3.5 to 4.5 Lake I
For Aliyar Reservoir similar plot has been made and from graph the value of M obtained is 3.6 (rigrnt z2), which indicates it can be classified as Lake Type. Considering similar previous results, it is understood that the Aliyar Reservoir is classified as lake Type under standard classification.
4.9.4 Trap Efficiency The Trap Efficiency of a reservoir is defined as the ratio of deposited sediment to the total sediment inflow. The trap efficiency is commonly used to get a rough idea of probable sedimentation, Trap efficiency is a function primarily the ratio of the storage capacity to inflow and depends upon the sediment load characteristics and detention time.
The important sediment characteristics are the grade, size disftibution and the behavior of the finer fractions under the influence of varying concentration, dissolved load, temperature, etc., in aggregating and in forming 'Density Currents'. The detention time depends primarily upon the ratio between the storage capacity and inflow, the shape of the reservoir basin, and the type of 23 outlets and operation schedule. Trap efficiency has been assessed by two methods: i. Trap efficiency by Gottas Chalk curve with the capacity watershed ratio. ii. Trap efficiency by Gunner.M.Brune curve with the capacity inflow ratio.
Trap Efficiency as per Gottas chalk curve it was gz.z% in tgTz and 93% in zotT for Aliyar Reservoir. Trap Efficiency as per Gunner.M.Brune curve it was 95% in 1977 and 95% in 2Ol7 for Aliyar Reservoir.
Even though capacity inflow ratio would be a better factor to specify sedimentation, records of inflow are lacking for so many existing reservoirs that the conveniently determinable ratio of capacity to watershed area has proved to be the most usable index. Here the Trap efficiency for Aliyar Reservoir is taken as 93% in the year of 2ol7 by Gottas chalk curve with the capacity watershed area ratio. The Trap Efficiency curve by Gottas Chalk and Gunner M.Brune are drawn in lFignt 9to.17 in this report.
4.9.5 Life of Reservoir Life of the reservoir is the period of its usefulness to the designed purpose. The useful life depends upon the operation level between minimum draw down level (M.D.D.L) and full reservoir level. The Life of the Aliyar Reservoir was assessed by the following methods. Hachiro Kira of Khagwa University, Japan has arrived at certain empirical relationship between the rate of annual sediment and the capacity inflow ratio and number of years when the reservoir will be fully silted up. Vs = 0.214(C / 11 n.o,, Where Vs = Annual mean silt deposition rate in percent C = Original capacity of the reservoir = I12.754 M.cum I = Annual mean inflow into the reservoir = 302.01 M.cum r12.754 ThereforeC/l = = 0.3729 302.37 Vs = 0.214 (0.37291 '0"' = 0.341 % per year
24 Life of reservoir adopting the above percentage of silt deposit . lO0/ 0.34r = 293.25 or 293 years
Ys = 467(C / J) o'"3 Ys = Number of years during which the silt will fill up the reservoir completely Ys = 467 (O.3729'1o.,,, = 292.87 or 292 Years
T.V. TAYLOR of LINIVERSITY OF TEXAS, USA has suggesred the following procedure to find out the life of reservoir. V" = VR' R"= V"/v R = (V./ V) ,/. Where R = The ratio of the reservoir capacity at the end of one year to that of the capacity before the end of the previous year. V = Original Capacity = 112.754 M.cum V. = Capaciry after 'n' number of years (i.e) 97.797 M.cum after 56 years R = (97.797 / I 12.7 541vsa = 0.997 Mean annual rate of siltation = (l-R)*100 = (l- 0.997)*100 = 0.3 % Life of reservoir adopting the above percentage = 100/0.3 = 333 years
TRAP EFFICIENCY METIIOD: Gunner.M.Brirne has developed envelope curves keeping the capacity inflow ratio as abscissa and trap efficiency as ordinate on a semi log paper. Using the median curve of the graph and capacity inflow ratio for different capacities the average trap efficiency is found out. Sediment load trapped is calculated from the above value and dividing the volume interval by the sediment load will give the number of years to fill the volume. Thus the years required to fill up the volume interval up to 30% of its original capacity is worked out and added to get the useful life of the reservoir. The life of reservoir of Aliyar Reservoir is worked out as 301 years and given it lnnqre 9.
25 RESULTS OF THE STUDY 5.O Conclusion Based on the data collected and the sedimentation survey conducted in the year 2Ol7, the following conclusions have been arrived at 1. Name of the Reservoir Aliyar
2. Year of completion 1962
3. Original capacity in M.cum. I12.54 M.cum 4. Present capacity in M.cum. 97.797 M.clm
5. Capacity loss in M.cum. 14.957 M.cum
6. Capacity loss in % 73.27 %
7. Average Annual capacity loss in % o.24%
8. Water spread area in Sq.km. 6.475 Sq.km
9. Life of Reservoir in years 301 years (Trap Efficiency Methoit)
r0. Trap Efficiency 93 % Gotta's Chatk Curve) Rate of sedimentation in ll. 0.3% ffaylors uethod) percentage per annum
The rate of silt deposit considerably reduces by providing necessary check dam along the stream and formation of silt trap while entering into the waterspread area. The officials concern may be checked the above facts periodically.
However, the rate of silting and reduction in the capacity of reservoir would be correctly assessed only after conducting repetition of capacity surveys and watershed studies.
sd/- sdl- sd/- sd/- Assistant Engineer Assistant Executive Engineer Executive Engineer Superintending Engineer WSMB Section WSMB Sub Division WSMB Division lnstitute of Hydraulics and Pollachi Pollachi Pollachi Hydrology, Poondi- 602 023
26 6.0 LIST OFANNEXURES
Annexure.No Description Page No.
1.a Monthly Rain Fall (1962 - 1989) 3r
r.b Monthly Rain Fall (1990 - 20r7) 32
2 Annual Maximum, Minimum And Mean Rainfall 33
3.a Monthly Inflow (1962 - 1989) 34
3.b Monthly Inflow (1990 - 2Ot7) 35
4.a Monthly Outflow (1962 - 1989) 36
4.b Monthly Outflow (1990 - 2017) 37
5 Annual Maximum, Minimum and Mean Inflo/Outflow 38
6.a Percentage of Particle Size Distribution 39
6.b Cumulative percentage of soil particles passed 40
7 Report on Water Sample 4t
8 Elevation Vs Capacity 42
I Ufe of Reservoir Using Trap Efficiency Method 43 7.0 LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS
Figure ,/ Chart No. Description Page No.
I Index Map 44
2 Catchment Map 4S
3 Water Spread Area Map 46
4 Location of Soil Sample 47
5 Contour Map 48
6 Annual Rain Fall (1962 - 1989) 49
7 Annual Rain Fall (1990 - 2017) 50
8 Monthly Average Rain Fall 51
9 Annual Inflow (1962 - 1989) 52
10 Annual Inflow (1990 -2Ot7) 53
1t Monthly Average Inflow S4
t2 Annual Outflow (1962 - 1989) 55
l3 Annual Outflow (r990 - 20f7) 56
t4 Monthly Average Outflow 57
15 Inflow Vs Outflow (1962 - 1989) 58
16 Inflow Vs Outflow (1990 - 2017) 59
17 Elevation Vs Capacity Curve 60
l8 Particle Size Distribution Curve 61
19 Classification of Soil Groups 62
20 SoiI Analysis Chart 63
2t Trap Efficiency Curve 64
22 Depth Vs Capacity Curve 65
28 8.0 LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
S.No Description Page No.
1 A view of Aliyar Dam 66 .i2 , Aliyar Dam - Waterspread Area 66 power 3 Inlet from Navamalai House 67
4 Reconnaissance Survey at Aliyar Dam 67
5 Hydrographic Survey at Aliyar Dam 68
6 Inspection of SE and EE during Survey 68
7 Fixing of Benchmark 69
8 Topdgraphical Survey at Aliyar Dam 69
29 REFTRENCES 1. Capacity Survey of Storage Reservoir _ B.N.Murthy 2. Technical reirort publication ia on Life of Reservoir - CBIP No.lg (edition 1977) 3. Technical report on Sedimsalx6.r Studies in Reservoirs - CBIp pubtication No.20 (edition 1981) First 4. capacity survey in Kuthiraiyar Reservoir-LH.H. Report No.2/2003 5. First capacity survey in Aliyar reservoir_I.H.H. Report No.U/7g7g First 6. capacity survey in Kadamparai reservoir-I.H.H. Report No.5/2017
- 30 ,,! I i
ANNEXURE 1.a ALTYAR DAM - MONTHLY RAINFALL (A962 - 1989) vear / ,anuary February March Aprll May June July August September October November -./uo*n December Total 1952 1.52 16.44 2.79 3315.00 118.13 9.3s L77.49 94.55 69.08 251.19 177.12 4L.L4 4273.80 1953 69.s9 L2.70 33.52 32.51 40.89 41.88 83.33 52.83 28.7r t27.90 50.61 116.s9 685.05 7964 0.00 o.00 4.32 14.90 27.4? 28.19 188.21 133.85 42.L6 171.s9 L67.64 90.15 868.44 1955 0.00 0.00 28.19 67.?6 24.63 L4.73 47.O3 51.33 8.89 8.89 67.00 93.14 4t1.79 1966 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.35 73.75 6,00 130.40 5.25 13,00 378.24 243.76 89.46 893.21 L967 0.00 0.00 77.52 48.25 63.49 80.93 73.14 62.OL 10.15 L29.O4 r47.82 24.96 657.31 1968 0.00 43.43 35.58 1L4.29 69.85 66.80 2t9.71 29.2r 30.86 103.16 49.00 57.00 818.89 1969 0.00 o.00 21.08 13.20 86.62 22.35 762.87 236.23 30.48 1s3.39 151.88 40.70 9t8.74 1970 8.54 o.o0 0.00 82.03 94.20 88.30 60.60 67.20 27.OO 224.20 127.20 17.00 796.27 7977 2.40 0.00 27.00 84.20 376.OO 91.00 34.00 78.O0 34.O0 307.50 45.80 193.54 7273.44 7972 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.00 202.OO 63.00 97.00 10.00 87.00 118.00 115.50 86.00 799.s0 1973 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 10.o0 101.00 119.00 44.00 70.70 188.90 12.00 169.40 680.00 L974 o.00 0.00 5.00 5.O0 25.90 20.50 178.30 1r.3.50 52.s0 29.50 4s8.00 2L.50 910.70 t975 0.00 0.00 62.50 203.00 69.00 124.50 138.20 98.00 147.00 6.50 47.30 25.50 921,50 L976 o.00 o.o0 0.00 42.30 18.OO 18.00 69.30 42.5O 7.30 297.00 223.50 7.OO 724.90 1977 0.00 3.30 0.00 40.50 9L.20 37.20 t28.70 18.00 42.50 376.70 385.20 0.00 1063.30 1978 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 77.70 707.20 6s.00 89.90 3.00 68.80 144.50 137.00 7L7.70 7979 0.00 !3L.21 16.60 27.40 36.70 155.20 100.20 39.00 105.20 76.20 469.80 0.00 1167.50 1980 0.00 0.00 13.00 99.50 130.50 38.00 90.00 53.00 38.50 275.50 L77.00 11.00 936.00 1981 1.00 0.00 60.00 15.00 11.00 135.00 52.00 47.OO t47.O0 196.00 37.00 23.00 724.00 1982 0.00 0.00 14.50 6.00 82.40 49.70 44.40 58.80 44.45 315.30 70.20 21.60 7L7.35 1983 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.80 131.00 96.40 94.40 93.60 44.OO 112.00 96.00 74.00 746.20 1984 0.00 26.50 92.00 28.50 30.oo 66.60 49.00 13.00 103.00 58.00 68.00 52.00 506.60 1985 84.00 0.00 0.00 19.40 0.00 88.00 21.00 50.10 4L.20 55.00 113.00 39.00 527.70 1986 16.O0 0.00 7.00 28.00 L4.OO 83.00 56.00 10s.00 6.O0 80.00 72.OO 3.00 470.00 7987 0.00 0.00 35.00 51.00 33.00 50.s0 23.00 59.00 99.50 293.50 149.00 205.00 1009.s0 1988 0.00 0.o0 10.80 281.60 293.00 40.40 727.40 76.20 90.80 28.90 55.s0 13.60 1019.20 1989 4.20 1.80 115.50 50.30 65.60 34.80 255.70 26.00 27.sO 126.801 38.90 1.50 749.60 Total 171.25 25r,.?7 603.90 4758.39 2235.99 177a,53 2885.32 1867.06 1391.48 45t2,70 tgst^al rssrzS 26081,00
11 ANNEXURE l.b ALTYAR DAM - MONTHLY RAINFALL (1990 - 2017)
Year January February March Aprll Month May June July August September October November December Total 1990 99.80 0.00 25.50 90.90 83.50 62.00 54.30 35.44 0.00 264.60 159.20 20.30 895.s4 1991 18.00 0.00 0.00 38.O0 85.00 112.60 200.60 119.00 32.20 72.30 44.70 4.10 727.50 1992 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.50 165.40 92.s0 111.00 50.50 79.90 54.40 281.90 6.10 853.20 1993 0.00 15.40 0.00 10.50 L7L.70 143.s0 62.00 36.90 1.00 179.00 387.90 75.40 1023.30 1994 44.60 2s.50 0.00 62.00 64.20 L77.00 153.80 62.60 7r.70 270.O0 253.60 0.00 7L24.40 1995 0.00 0.00 11.00 90.00 69.50 52.10 64.10 43.50 87.40 65.10 77.40 0.00 560.10 1996 0.00 20.00 0.00 76.70 32.70 95.60 75.20 39.80 30.20 214.80 7L8.70 92.O0 796.70 7997 0.00 0.00 4.40 3.00 75.80 52.40 77.40 92.80 44.80 295.20 288.s0 49.50 983.90 1998 0.00 0.00 o.o0 135.40 75.00 97.60 102.10 L42.60 22.40 91.80 305.40 2.40 974.70 1999 0.o0 0.00 2.00 97.00 53.O0 36.80 161.00 29.00 12.60 461.90 150.80 22.40 1026.50 2000 L2.20 39.00 0.00 68.00 41.O0 126.10 64.20 195.80 85.20 15.00 106.80 109.50 853.80 2001 0.00 74.70 22.40 139.60 1.80 89.30 57.50 32.30 30.10 119.00 192.50 20.70 789.90 2002 0.00 6.20 0.00 18.20 25.00 53.10 39.80 L07.40 3.00 168.40 31.80 30.00 482.90 2003 0.00 18.80 116.60 0.o0 0.00 34.40 71.60 43.70 6.30 205.30 101.30 1.00 601.00 2004 4.00 0.00 59.40 41.80 1L7.O0 110.10 47.90 97.60 0.00 99.20 222.30 0.o0 799.30 200s 2.60 2.40 16.20 151.50 85.80 s0.50 153.50 81.60 49.60 152.00 159.50 102.80 1008.10 2006 15.60 0.00 26.80 44.20 1o2.20 47.00 52.30 6L.20 50.10 50.50 276.40 0.00 677.30 2007 3.60 0,00 0.00 58.20 15.00 105.10 20s.20 146.60 96.00 238.70 42.40 161.40 7072.20 2008 0.00 15.20 111.10 L9.20 2.50 79.40 100.00 4,..20 19.10 224.90 13.60 48.10 674.40 2009 0.00 0.00 72.91 25.20 59.20 40.60 166.60 47.90 47.60 14.40 285.50 29.60 729.60 2010 17.00 0.00 0.00 44.20 43.00 66.80 160.80 51.80 75.80 138.00 367.70 34.40 998.90 20t! 0.00 60.00 48.70 99.90 6.40 119.40 68.90 67.20 40.70 151.20 299.90 L3.70 976.00 2072 0.o0 0.00 1.00 120.40 5.00 32.20 14.30 78.60 13.80 253.00 106.00 0.00 624.30 2073 0.00 24.00 L7.aO 70.70 17.60 743.40 135.00 55.00 35.00 85.00 57.00 13.00 595.50 2074 0.00 7.20 13.00 0.00 187.00 91.00 132.00 99.00 201.00 181.00 30.00 40.00 975.20 2015 0.00 0.00 0.00 110.00 145.00 161.00 85.00 170.00 75.60 91.60 L76.60 120.80 1135.60 20L5 0.oo 0.00 2L.60 17.00 119.00 58.90 28.60 2.00 5.00 97.00 16.00 26.00 391.10 20L7 3.00 0.o0 61.00 95.00 103.00 63.00 59.00 68.00 267.OO 26.OO 36.O0 782.OO Total ,11.40 30r.40 5?1,
32 f t ff
ANNEXURE 2
AI;IYAR DAM . ANNUAT MAXIMUM, MINIMUM AND MEAN MINFALL
Milatt h rwl,
Ralnf.ll Annu.l Maxlmum Ralntall Annuat Mlnlmum Ralnfall and Annual Me.n Ralnfell and Maxlmum ralnfrll ln durlng a S.No Statlon and year year perlod slngle month
Aliyar 4273.80 391,10 879.O2 3315.00 1 dam site @ ffi Adim6- -2tr
33 I
ANNEXURE 3.a ALTYAR DAM - MONTHLY INFLOW (1962 - 1989) Year -- January February March Aprll May June -/no*n July Au8ust September October November December Total 1962 98.63 43.52 26.93 2r.7A 9.26 r.78 ?nl qa 1963 13.37 o.7t o.7t 0.93 1.10 8.33 50.49 25.93 14.92 31.97 27.63 16.59 a', Rt 1964 7.67 5.10 2.83 3.A2 3.34 4.90 44.9r 746.40 34.7 4 32.37 30.44 23.84 1955 13.34 5.51 3.37 3.85 5.51 8.13 27.4a 17.05 8.01 7.56 6.14 25.53 111 nr 1966 6.29 4,45 6.80 7.O5 0.93 2.38 32.73 18.26 43.47 56.41 73.7t L7.98 ,6q q L967 28.74 6.14 2.52 3.20 14.64 !7.27 47.60 44.80 8.72 71.o7 20.33 6.48 ?1.t
34 ANNEXURE 3.b ALIYAR DAM - MONTHLY TNFLOW (1990 - 2017)
Year ,anuary February March Aprll Month May June July Autust September Octobel November Decemb€r Total 1990 50.55 38.60 19.96 14.07 2.29 L2.32 22.77 26.s0 26.O2 43.75 36.75 27.72 32t3r 1991 44.L2 24.9s 21.o7 18.94 8.04 3.88 41.06 60.71 31.83 25.88 15.66 20.39 315.s2 1992 24.97 39.44 15.55 6.94 6.74 2L.61 58.87 58.70 39.02 31.63 70.76 28.80 406.97 1993 2L.04 27.35 21.74 23.87 13.56 13.17 10.45 25.82 37.21 4L.34 69.72 24.27 323.57 1994 17.73 27.7s 55.84 4]..37 9.40 27.s5 71.9A 54.14 40.27 26.42 43.58 20.90 436.92 1995 14.L3 2r.oL 32.42 35.99 7.L9 11.61 28.51 36.98 58.50 27.41 27.33 20.19 32L.28 1995 23.73 23.67 27.M 9.06 2.94 !4.64 46.55 35.17 24.49 26.0s 25.54 27.O4 286.34 1997 42.76 56.03 22.06 7.79 3.94 7.67 28.46 25.20 28.83 ?4.21 40.92 23.53 331.39 1998 39.59 26.79 22.48 6.L4 70.17 19.99 43.38 35.31 39.35 45.86 52.9s 39.22 382.2s 1999 18.55 L6.28 22.54 16.82 7.48 o.L7 33.84 30.92 17.22 35.79 36.19 18.80 254.59 2000 16.54 22.43 31.15 26.\4 17.47 15.04 30.50 76.40 30.72 14.38 28.80 23.50 333.06 2001 15.63 48.51 23.O2 13.05 L2.52 30.27 34.44 3!.23 22.72 77.32 25.69 22.85 297.25 2002 37.32 23.80 33.0s L7.74 L2.r4 6.29 27.43 38.89 30.31 27.52 33.88 15.51 304.01 2003 54.50 9.6S 20.9s 6.81 2.30 3.47 7.16 28.27 20.42 27.89 27.7a 36.85 246.16 2004 22.54 15.35 2.87 7.O2 9.49 56.49 18.03 69.L4 22.87 38.73 37.2s 74.67 318.45 2005 29.63 2r.or 16.26 9.58 4.80 22.60 61.53 54.55 83.33 26.4O 58.55 9.15 398.01 2005 24.29 2,..87 20.89 72.37 8.52 27.2L 51.50 35.66 36.63 34.80 25.62 40.89 340.24 2007 20.42 78.32 26.14 22.49 18.60 13.08 78.94 60.01 62.26 51.51 31.02 42.47 445.27 2008 24.90 25.77 21.47 22.98 15.94 5.81 22.OO 45.37 26.s5 38.28 25.05 28.50 302.63 2009 13.78 20.t2 24.26 14.50 4.76 7.79 70.r8 32.38 42.L6 57.37 40.73 23.69 345.82 2010 28.37 14.83 12.02 16.O4 12.38 t4.24 25.67 34.64 26.54 34.26 34.47 42.79 303.66 20t7 19.28 23.98 L5.7s 10.38 L.2a 20.o2 20.84 36.93 57.88 29.08 33.31 25.1'1 293.90 20L2 30.0s 23.86 9.78 5.54 2.57 6.77 3.2r 14.18 27.82 26.93 24.75 17.24 192.69 20t3 13.83 6.65 14.08 10.02 4.73 23.57 77.39 58,82 29.L6 28.94 30.s2 16.31 3L4.O4 2014 14.18 16.88 21.93 15.15 7.74 13.50 29.06 7,..34 51.10 35.45 29.44 29.52 346.43 2015 3 2.35 24.94 31.5s 22.48 9.63 t6_o7 23.34 14.85 19.33 13.90 27.07 52.67 288.17 2016 26.24 2].52 2]..75 9.64 38.08 5.21 10.8S t2.27 22.08 33.80 20.09 19.05 240.5a 2017 12.66 2134 22.32 25.60 7.63 2.52 7.49 20.o5 42.79 31.23 32.37 225.95 T.t"l ?3?.?0 618.00 6
35 ANNEXURE 4.a ALIYAR DAM - MONTHLY OUTFLOW (1962 - 1989) Year -/ January February March Aprll May June July Au8ust September October November December Total -.4omn t962 0.00 57.85 18.75 15.11 77.73 12.80 70.79 L34.02 1963 11.41 7.05 5.38 4.70 6.37 10.o0 27.81 16.06 18.43 22.29 21.80 22.O3 173.33 1964 25.88 23.08 77.27 72.46 3.57 0.96 11.13 91.52 29.59 35.03 33.70 32.00 316.19 1955 2437 18.18 6.42 7.39 16.48 t7.87 24.95 26.99 12.54 7.95 9.63 8.13 185.31 1966 14.53 L2.12 16.34 13.08 0.88 2.27 6.60 10.68 22.57 25.09 39.24 22.23 205.5s 7967 27.sO 24.O4 19.06 3.03 15.48 24.46 25.09 26.11 35.45 22.4O 14.74 19.62 258.82 1958 23.90 8.61 2.78 1.53 3.91 20.19 33.44 46.27 42.2A 29.31 20.78 28.L2 261.11 1969 29.t4 9.57 10.87 6.t4 3.26 14.02 5.05 9.09 30.27 20.44 77.08 25.46 181.40 L970 27.a6 9.66 22.O3 6.14 18.58 29.28 32.20 26.93 51.59 31.80 7L.02 38.50 305.68 L971 23.13 8.85 16.68 10.08 1o.70 74.O2 15.97 t8-24 39.05 33.53 12.94 37.77 234.97 1972 26.22 11.04 t7.o7 r.27 20.59 42.79 22.OO 35.42 5L.73 25.39 L2.49 23.90 290.92 t973 34.49 1o.22 77.16 o.42 12.09 13.79 12.la 13.88 43.24 28.43 77.64 30.81 234.35 L974 43.66 15.O0 19.14 0.34 7.73 76.57 14.67 14.30 46.4\ 63.06 39.47 45.42 326.77 1975 45.56 27.49 15.52 o.85 2.27 21.63 16.L7 29.31 54.31 44.29 37.29 39.36 334.45 !976 46.69 19.51 18.83 1.08 25.26 39.11 24.38 31.35 56.46 28.83 7.90 30.41. 329.80 7977 39.56 17.19 8.3s 2.O4 10.48 29.85 24.!8 33.s0 50.01 17.4L 47.88 27.76 307.60 L978 44.34 20.93 25.05 15.96 18.35 19.40 22.L4 19.88 52.30 38.88 75.t2 21.32 314.58 7979 33.05 13.82 t7.79 15.18 12.43 14.o7 16.48 95.12 51.37 34.91 40.78 28.L2 37 2.51 1980 23.84 22.97 24.49 15.49 23.70 21.35 36.25 46.16 40.53 35.76 34.15 34.83 359.56 1981 31.54 22.26 23.36 18.41 26.45 12.52 74.47 23.08 45.36 32.25 31.55 43.2t 324.56 7942 45.59 24.38 14.13 2.21 4.13 77.73 77.16 L5.72 57.50 47.69 30.15 43.66 320.1s 1983 39.39 11.13 4.16 o.62 o.76 0.74 20.73 20.s3 57.17 49.53 28.68 43.59 277.73 1984 46.98 30.41 12.54 4.13 3.79 2L.75 26-11 25.97 51.54 37.32 34.74 39.64 334.33 1985 33.07 23.t6 8.83 8.24 15.32 L8.72 13.90 18.07 47.43 52.92 30.33 49.98 319.98 1986 55.89 2t.M 7.36 1.33 15.69 14.50 1"1.92 17.73 55.89 48.19 37.97 50.35 346.26 1987 49.72 12.2a 7.62 0.59 14.98 77,24 19.85 20.16 49.74 23.67 18.04 19.43 273.37 1988 46.10 43.04 18.43 4.92 t6.76 2s.29 21.56 18.04 27.L3 22.29 25.03 44.57 3r7.26 1989 s2.24 37.63 17.50 13.42 8.55 23.O2 15.80 20.39 47.77 26.05 74.47 49.10 323.89 Total 950.67 s26.41 394.00 L76.ot 319.ss s02.90 s97.14 ta9.L9 1178.96 903.84 zE.sr goiio--JgsipE
?6 ANNEXURE 4.b ALTYAR DAM - MONTHLY OUTFLOW (199O -2017)
Yea? /./ January February March Aprll -.-Monlh May June July AuSust September Octob€r November December Total 1990 48.34 42.79 18.60 11.95 21.69 18.09 75.L2 t7.78 39.78 23.36 7t.44 33.16 302.11 1991 49.61 36.44 30.47 72.74 17.70 16.28 9.81 7.85 39.46 27.65 25.95 45.58 320.53 1992 50.05 37.34 16.85 a.M 9.40 13.63 10.55 15.32 38.82 33.81 73.09 3s.99 353.39 1993 59.61 45.05 35.25 15.55 18.35 17.42 13.93 2L.A3 37.75 t9.62 6.46 38.65 329.O7 1994 47.52 42.53 36.13 r6.06 t9.79 13.55 63.77 s0.57 41.26 31.37 41.O0 33.70 437.35 L995 56.43 40.66 26.67 19.93 16.11 38.50 11.33 22.62 L7.39 15.23 27.78 54.68 340.85 1996 55.95 46.89 28.65 7.87 4.84 74.47 75.74 11.98 33.10 70.22 20.47 34.57 284.78 1997 61.55 50.23 40.o4 77.92 L4.84 19.05 13.17 12.06 36.75 12.88 2.to 15.60 296.22 1998 54.28 50.23 45.79 25.50 19.7L 18.04 10.48 15.63 26.36 27.4t 49.7A 38.62 381.93 1999 33.O2 35.8s 25.99 10.39 74.24 9.15 25.37 23.73 46.92 4.47 16.03 24.69 270.25 2000 s5.93 52.27 36.13 74.87 16.99 !7.t3 22.51 2132 29.O2 28.32 39.42 36.53 370.44 2001 46.r3 39.81 40.7a 12.26 9.83 L7.70 79.77 2L.95 44.64 27.97 13.78 29.90 318.50 2002 35.69 31.89 31.94 13.65 16.t4 12.33 32.05 27.44 46.31 20.19 25.95 33.57 327.79 2003 36.47 31.68 11.00 9.84 2.94 5.10 2.94 437 37.35 2L.27 35.77 30.80 234.36 2004 30.98 17.44 s.60 3.37 3.48 23.50 32.34 L2.66 50.96 32-77 28.01 62.20 302.72 2005 48.91 28.15 15.01 o.91 3.48 23.47 8.06 28.99 78.L7 30.57 54.59 16.70 337.01 2006 52.61 36.70 16.16 L7.10 14.72 28.15 14.05 22.Ot 38.21 32.92 19.57 58.72 350.93 2007 50.31 37.53 27.37 8-47 L7.90 30.53 7.55 54.42 63.55 50.72 35.98 38.50 427.04 2008 45.20 32.36 16.48 10.55 20.89 30.83 24.90 23.74 25.r4 27.L2 29.08 46.s2 332.22 2009 50.39 28.03 9.85 3.19 11.35 15.05 9.62 34.L7 40.77 51.57 38.3s 42.30 334.65 2010 46.84 14.83 13.89 6.32 25.67 t7.56 9.2L 13.02 21.98 34.06 38.27 44.17 285.83 2011 45.57 24.O7 13.40 7.74 16.85 L7.59 lL.74 75.26 52.13 29.48 32.7L 33.71 300.25 2012 33.72 20.29 15.45 2t.70 L3.27 20.23 77.30 19.77 14.89 734 18.80 47.r2 245.84 2013 39.99 15.26 11.45 7.14 10.03 5.78 8.06 49.69 29.36 37.48 28.34 40.58 283.16 2074 47.76 29.2A 75.L2 10.50 18.55 13.0s 14.40 10.84 61.50 35.55 30.23 36.O7 322.96 20r5 43.69 40.21 23.34 13.98 11.53 14.45 72.94 t4.45 24.97 18.48 12.88 6t.7L 292.64 20L6 57.67 47.36 25.57 72.43 18.38 19.39 15.14 20.27 26.90 32.aO 24.26 18.91 319.09 2077 15.91 77.72 16.77 13.34 9.75 Lr.22 9.55 14.85 18.38 34.34 36.20 ht"l 1310,54 ,?r.43 197.53
?7 ,l
ANNEXURE. S
ALIYAR DA"IU . MAXIMUM, MINIMUM AND MEAN INFLOW AND OUTFLOW DATA
Flow ln Mm'
Annual Maxlmum Flow Annual Mlnlmum Flow S,No Flow Annual Average Flow Monthly Maximum Flow and Year and Year
445.27 133,00 I lnflow 302.37 706.73 2007 196s July 1968
437.35 t73.33 2 Outflow 30L.r2 95.12 \994 1953 Aug 1979
38 ANNEXURE 6.a
ALIYAR DAM . PERCENTAGE OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Type of Soil in % Sample Medium Fine Number Gravel Coarse Sand silt Sand Sand 1O0 - 2mm 600-212 mic below 75 mic 63 mic 53 mic s1 7.91 69.64 20.55 7.27 0.64
s2 1.10 72.OO 27.60 4.O0 1.30 s3 0.50 76.20 77.OO 4.80 t.40
s4 2.50 63.60 29.60 2.20 2.10
s5 4.20 73.00 16.90 3.50 2.40
s6 0.70 74.N 19.40 2.60 2.90
s7 2.60 67.40 22.70 3.70 3.60
s8 2.70 71.00 20.20 2.s0 3.60
s9 5.00 76.00 15.30 1.50 2.20
s10 1.30 67.30 23.00 4.70 3.70
511 2.90 72.20 18.40 3.20 3.30
s12 10.10 75.80 11.30 1.10 L.70
s13 1.40 69.80 20.60 3.80 4.40
514 2.70 75.50 77.90 1.60 2.30
s15 3.80 77.80 14.90 t.20 2.30
s16 2.90 80.30 13.10 1.40 2.30
s17 3.10 86.44 8.50 0.70 7.20
s18 2.50 71.70 18.20 3.50 4.10
s19 \3.70 77.40 11.30 1.50 2.10
s20 1.60 69.70 22.20 3.10 3.40
s21 5.90 73.60 15.80 1.40 3.30
s22 7.70 65.10 21.50 2.30 3.40
s23 4.00 78.20 15.10 0.90 1.80
s24 8.30 57.70 28.30 2.40 3.30
s25 5.00 72.1O 20.60 0.90 t.40
s26 4.10 73.80 17.to 1.70 3.30
s27 3.10 78.00 14.50 1.50 2.90
s28 6.30 7L.20 18.00 1.70 2.80
s29 3.30 80.30 12.80 1.10 2.s0
s30 3.90 79.80 9.00 4.80 2.50
AVEMGE 4.16 73.03 17.85 2.35 2.60
39 ANNEXURE 6.b ALIYAR DAM - CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE OF SOIL PARTICLES PASSED Samplo Retalnod 63 mlc Numb6r 75 mlc 212 mlc 600 mlc 2.0 mm 4.75 mm 6.3 mm 20 mm 63 mm 100 mm 1 0 0.64 1.91 22.45 76.42 92.09 95.64 98.36 100 100 100 2 o 1.30 5.30 26.90 9s.60 98.90 99.60 99.90 100 100 100 3 1.40 0 6.20 23.20 90.70 99.40 99.80 99.90 100 100 100 4 0 2.10 4.30 33.90 84.70 97.50 99.50 99.90 100 100 100 5 0 2.40 5.90 22.N 79.80 95.80 98.50 . 99.70 100 100 100 6 0 2.90 5.50 24.90 95.50 99.30 99.80 99.90 100 100 100 7 0 3.60 7.30 30.oo 83.90 97.40 99.20 99.80 100 100 100 8 0 3.50 6.10 26.30 77.30 97.30 99.50 99.90 100 100 r.00 9 0 2.20 3.70 19.00 70.50 95.00 98.70 99.50 100 100 100 10 0 3.70 8.40 31.40 95.60 98.70 99.60 99.90 100 100 100 11 0 3.30 6.50 24.90 77.1O 97.tO 99.40 99.90 100 100 100 t2 0 r.70 2.80 14.10 59.80 89.90 96.70 99.00 100 100 100 13 0 4.40 8.20 28.80 90.40 98.60 99.50 99.90 100 100 100 74 0 2.30 3.90 21.80 85.00 97.30 98.80 99.50 100 100 100 15 0 2.30 3.50 18.40 75.50 96.20 98.80 99.70 100 100 100 16 0 2.30 3.70 16.80 73.70 97.LO 98.80 99.70 100 100 100 o t7 1.20 1.90 10.50 54.60 95.90 99.20 99.60 100 100 100 18 0 4.10 7.60 25.80 81.80 97.50 99.s0 99.90 100 100 100 19 0 2.70 3.60 14.90 53.90 85.30 95.60 98.60 100 100 100 20 0 3.40 6.50 24.70 95.00 98.40 99.10 99.90 100 100 100 2t 0 3.30 4.70 20.50 69.50 94.10 98.50 99.50 100 100 100 22 0 3.40 5.70 27.20 70.70 92.30 97.20 98.80 100 100 100 23 0 1.80 2.70 17.80 83.70 96.OO 98.20 99.30 100 100 100 24 0 3.30 5.70 34.00 74.5O 91.70 97.50 98.70 100 100 100 25 o 1.40 2.30 22.90 85.10 95.OO 97.20 99.00 100 100 100 26 0 3.30 5.00 22.70 78.50 95.90 98.70 99.40 100 100 100 27 o 2.90 4.40 18.90 79.70 96.90 99.20 99.90 100 100 100 28 0 2.80 4.50 22.5O 70.50 93.70 98.50 99.20 100 100 100 29 0 2.50 3.60 16.40 83.70 95.70 98.90 99.50 100 100 100 30 o 2.50 7.30 16.30 67.60 95.10 99.30 99.90 100 100 100
40 ANNEXURE 7 ALIYAR DAM - REPORT ON WATER SAMPLE
S.No Particulars quantity Unit L Electrical Conductivity 60 uS/cm @ 25'C 2 pH 8
3 Calcium (Ca) 5 mclL
4 Magnesium (Mg) 2 'II.EIL 5 Sodium (Na) 2 'n,E/L 6 Potassium (K) 2 If,l.E/L
7 Bicarbonate (HCO3) L2 me/L
8 Carbonate (COr) 0 m8/L 9 Sulphate (SO.) 5 mglL
10 Chloride (Cl) 7 mc/L
11 Nitrate (No3) 8 mE/L
12 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 38 mg/L
13 Total Hardness as CaCO3 (TH) 25 mclL
t4 Calcium Hardness as caCO3 15 mc/L
15 Total Alkanity 10 'I:,EIL 16 Colour Colourless
L7 Odour Odourless
18 Temperature 28'C
19 Fluoride o.77 rng/L
20 Sodium Adsorption ration 0.3 mclL
4t ANNEXURE 8
ALIYAR DAM . STATEMENT OF ELEVATION Vs CAPACITY
Cqryctty tn Mm,
S.No Elevation Original Capaclty lst Capaclty in 1977 llnd Capacity ln 1981 lllrd Capacity in 2005 lvth Capacity in 2017
1 284 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0050 0.0000
2 287 0.1800 0.0520 0.0000 0.0970 0.0048
3 290 0.1820 0.3940 0.58s0 0.8620 0.3222
4 293 t.23LO 1.7040 2.2890 2.6080 0.5805
5 296 3.8270 5.0010 5.5110 5.7470 2.5844
6 299 8.8040 10.9350 11.1680 70.77sO 6.7801
7 302 16.4580 19.3400 19.661.0 18.1610 13.3925
8 305 26.8260 30.2030 30.7290 27.6770 22.3t57
9 308 39.8000 43.1650 43.7ss0 39.3420 33.4706
10 311 54.8020 57.8570 58.4370 52.9220 47 .0377
11 3L4 7L.6L20 74.7720 7 4.8220 68.0720 62.4499
T2 3t7 89.9800 91.9510 92.5940 84.7970 79.4229
13 320 7L2.7540 to7 3azo to8.2620 103.4140 97.7974
42 t-
ANNEXURE 9
LIFE OF RESERVOIR USING TRAP EFFICIENCY METHOD
Capaclty ln Capacity lnflow Average trap Annual sedlment Reduction ln S.No Trap efficlency Years to flll M.cum ratlo efficlency ln % trapped ln M,cum volume (M.cum)
'1 LLz.754 0.3729 95
2 97.797 0.3234 95 95.5 0.267L L4.957 56.00
3 90 o.2976 95 95 0.26s7 7.797 29.34
4 80 o.2646 94 94.5 o.2643 10 37.83
5 70 0.2315 94 94 o.?629 10 38.03
6 60 0.1984 93 93.5 0.261s 10 38.24
7 50 0.1554 92 92.5 0.2587 10 38.65
8 40 0,1323 91 91.5 0.25s9 10 39.O7
9 33.825 0.1119 90 90.5 0.2531 6.175 24.39
Ufe of reservoir 301.57
Average annual inflow= 302.37 M.cum
Average annual sift inflow=(112.754 - 97.7971/56 = O.267L r Sediment f low=(0.2671 ( 100/95.5)l=O.27 97 Useful life of reservoir is worked out when 70% of storage is lost (i.e.)When the capacity is 33.825 M.cum
41 INDEX MAP OF ALIYAR DAM Figure No.I
* ,..r s3. ct. os' To P.llrda EI 3PG to. as' lr-ileEffi a5,
1- To o|r..+rur.r l--r
I
; Y-LPu.lr i
i
to. i ,0'
?o ?*
t g ts' t. ,
Erlat.
!o. p
t' j [. XERAIA STATE ts'
Scale : 1 inch = 4 miles
INSTITUTE OF Sdxr Sdu Sdlr WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & G.A t(A s.M HYDRAULICS BOARD DIVISION,POLTIICEI HYDROLOGY, P1OONDI A.E A.E.E E.E
M Figwe Na2 CATCHMENT MAp oF ALIYAR DAJu
GIEETTIlpCl|.|rTEE!C| I -s I *t"9
rb, llt-
C.td-.rii ra. - lta S.L..
Scr..'t:l.ra.[60
Sdxr Sdrx Sdrr INSTITUTE OF HYDRAI'LICS G.A ICA s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & IIYDROI,OGY, POONDI BOARD DIVISION,POLLACHI A.E A.E.E E.E
-+--
45 41 ) d,
ALIYAR DAM. WATERSPREAD AREA MAP Figure No3
Sdxx Sdrx Sdxx TNSTITUTE OF HYDRAULICS G.A ICA s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & HYDROLOGY, FOONDT BOA,RD DIVISION,POLLACHI A.E A.E.E E.E
46 S&r Sdrr Sdrr INSTITUTE OT HYDRAULICSI c.A ICA s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT E IIYDROL(rcY, PIOONDT EOARD DryISIO$PIOLLACHI LE F.E ^"E.E
47 G1 t, d,
qwlroi ALIYAR DAM - ANNUAL RAINFALL: 1962 - 1tg8g
4500.00
i(m,m
. 3s00.00
3{m.m E I ,,,., J J $ zoo.m Z c rsoo.oo [email protected] lrlril**p tselll 500.00 il,lllll
0.00 (o (, vt ro d (n r, (E r.oi\r (!lrn tDtt rlr !,r r3 e,N |€co (oor F r\t-{ N F rn l\ Ftt I\ r\ F r\ao ot F 6o 0 00N C) O!i O \o O Ol\ 6 ot 0 ch gr q! gt or dr (h or dr or (n dr g) or or clt cD or or o! o) gr o g! ot or o crr Fl rl t{ r{ .{ F{ .l r-{ .a .l !-{ r-l r{ -l .{ rt r{ el d Fl .{ Fl ri ti rl .l Fl r{ YEAR lS.rlrsl $du Sdt! Sdrr TNSMUTEOFf,YDnAT'UCS GA l(a sil WATERSf,EIIMANACEMNT & f,YDROLOGY,PIOONDI BOAnD DWISION,PoLL/ICII A.E A.E.T t.n I .1 )t- ,1,
tn$utlNo 7 ALIYAR DAM - ANNUAL RAINFALL:I99O - 2017 I 12m.00 SH B HI EeE ,arr.* flti Ir E I -cr I Ba rR q E 8{rc.m DI3R = = 600.m ztf E 4m.m
2m.m
0.00 O -l e.ll ln tl l, r.D N O gr O H l\l llt tt !n rll t\ O Ot O r{ N lYl 50 (1 I rl ALIYAR DAM . MONTHLY AVERAGE RAINFALL Ait tlfo, 150.00 120.m E E rm.oo = Bo.m 2d 1 60.00 40.(D 20.00 0.m Sdtr Sdrr Sdrr INSNTUTE OT EYDMULICS G.A KA SM WATERSIIED MANACEMENT & f,YDROLOGY,POONDI EOAnD DMSION,POLLACf,I AJ A.F.E E.E 51 t + ? qt',,'fl{o 9 AttyAR DAM - ANNUAL INFLOW: !962 - 1989 sqat (r, ao 400.m rfi 3s0.@ l* lll 3m.00 "'* 3-i rg E 200.00 E = E r$.(xt lr 2 lm.m vr.00 0.m d d d f,e,P",4" 91 9e .,f ,4t $t rc"^,S d",f .d 9s etr .f "t&""ce "iI -.& d ^f ^"rf d ""rs YEAR Sdrt SdI! Sdtt INSTITUTE OT EYDNAULICS G.A R^A s.M WATEN, SEED MANAGEMENT & EYDROLOGY, BOONI'I BOARD DTVISIONPOLL/\CBI A.E A.E.E E.E -- 52 ( ) ? tai|n,{o ALIYARDAM -ANNUAT INFLOW:1990 - 2017 10 450.m f; t$ 4m.m arr.* | fr llul* 300.m 25{r.m -E 200,00 .= o 150.m 2 r@,m 50.00 0.00 .,.f d'rd'd .,f d d'"d ,S'"d'rd d rd9 ,e" rd9 ro9 d,of,&" "d "f "f "S "d "di "d ""+ "d YEAR Sdrt Sdrr Sdrr INSTITUTE Otr IIYDRAULICS c.A ICA s,M VgATER SEED MANAGEIuEII T & EYIIROLOGY, POO|aDI BOARI' DIVISION,POLLACIII A.E A.E.E E.E 53 ALIYAR DAM . MONTHLY AVERAGE INFLOW Figm|{o 11 s0.00 4s.00 4,67 /$.00 :lil.11 35.00 n.5r l'') 30.00 E E 25.90 ; 2s.00 o rlt.30 3 ro.oo 17.41 r5.00 10.00 5.00 0-00 January February March Ap.il May June ,uly AuSust S€plember October Novembe, oecember MONTH *"1'-l_"1-"n1' Bo^R"D_Drvrsrol''"_:1'"' L l ffi l 54 !i n, t8tgnllo 12 ATIYAR DAM - ANNUAL OUTFLOWT 1962 - 1989 tt00.00 .8 350.00 in e j*ilHEr rlxB r! di , 300.m rlH- lli 250.00 200.00 1s0.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 HB$HH}fi$EStssHHHHHsBESS*HHHH$Fl .r d F{ r-l Fl t{ r-{ F{ .{ t-{ -{ t-t Ft !-{ ii i - - ;i - - ;i ;i ;i ; ;i ;i YEAR Sdrr Sdxr Sdrr INSTITUTE OT HYDRAT,ILTCS G.A K.A s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & IIYDROT,OGY, POONI'I BOARD DTVISION,POLLACIII A.E A.E.E E.E 55 {; 1i t, AIIYAR DAM - ANNUAL OUTFTOW: 1990 -2017 Aigwxll{o 13 9RN3 450.00 t rux).00 63 'ri q sq 1,,) s :3 Ee 3s0.00 5E s Hil i.i6 ra at R .Bsg B g 300.00 tR E rd 250.00 l$,lll 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.m 0.00 fiSHS$HHHH$E5EE$HEEEEBEBBEBEBFl r-l Fi il r{ !-,1 .i .{ Fl r{ N N 6t 6t NttN N6l NN.\|N N N- N N YEAR Sdrr Sdtt Sdrr INSTITI.TTE OF IIYDRAULICS G.A I<.A s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & HYDROLOGY, POONDI BOARD DIVISION,POLLACIII A,E A.E.E E.E 56 tl ) f ALIYAR DAM - MONTHLYAVERAGE OUTFLOW /r5.@ {o,00 35.00 E 30.00 E z 2stx, o; l! 5 2o.oo o 15.00 r0.m 5.00 0.@ Sdu Sdrr Sdtt INSTITUTE OF I(YDRAULTCS G.A x.a s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMENT & ITYDROLOGY, POONDI BOARD DryISION,POLLACHI A.E A.E.E E.E 57 (l t ALIYAR DAM . ELEVATION Vs CAPACITY Aist^{o 17 ETEVATION IN M Capaclty Capaclty ln 1977 -*llnd Capaclty ln 1981 Capaclty ln 2006 Capaclty ln 2017 -Orlglnal -lst -lllrd -lvth gdtt Sd!t Sdrt INSTITUTE OT EYDNAULICS G.A TCA &M WATER SEED MANAGEMENT & EYDnOLOGY, POON| t BOAND DIVISIONPOLLI,CEI A"E E"f ^.E"E 60 I t 4 ) rbur{o 18 ALIYARDAM - PARTICLESIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVE +-s1 +s2 +-s3 ..tss4 t, .-+- s5 2 -+si6 6 +s7 A? o -..4-s10-s8 (, +-sl1 , ---+-s'12 U --rFS13 gl4 +s14 A --"."- ,+s15s15 F s s17 5 - I -.- s l9 a "--s20-s18 ..r- s21 .-+ts-972 ---n- s23 ----- s24 ,-_ s25 s27 ': F - s28 s29 s30 800 mic 2.0 mm 6RAIN SIZE Sdu Sdrr Sdrr INSMUTEOT EYDnAUUCS GI KA s.lr! WAruR SEf,D MANAGf,MENT e EYDROIOGy, tOONDt BOARI' IIIVNION,POruICtrI .df AJJ EJ 61 t-'------.-- I ALI}I{II DAM . S()II, ANAIYSIS Aiun No 20;l I I i i I 1'to rA'LG I l I I I I I I C 100 - 2 mm Gravel o500 - 212 mic Course sand 75 mic Medium sand o 63 mic Fine sand , Retained sllt & clay I\STITI TE OT HI DRAI'LICS \}.AT[R SHED TIA\AGE}IT\T & H}'DROLOGI', POONDI BOARD DIVISION,POLL,{CHI 63 ALIYAR DAM - TRAP EFFICIENCY CLTRVE *iptNo2l (By Gottachalk and Gunner M.Brune) t ,10 ., =a' l) :40+ E Em.r I I 0 75 I t50 225I 300 375I 450IilIIIl. s25 600 675 750 Res€noir Storage capacitr rn lo{nCum f,.y sq tm- drairage Capacity Watershed Area Capacity/Watershed Sediment Trapped Year in M.cum in Sq.km Ratio In Perc€nt€e 19"17 to1 342 195.00 550 68 92 20/" l98l t08.262 195 00 555.18 92 40/" 2006 103.414 195 00 530.33 9't ff/o 2017 9',7 797 195.00 501 52 930/0 =10 \ nrnuril\ Iugirh Iocculaled a.rt Ls) Coars€ Era[ed S€dimetrLs E \ Mcdiutrr Curr€ ?50a i 4.0 l']i,nrrr1\ CollorJJl aod (lrs|{ri.d l n. gr.irncJ ScJrments l30 '|, zo =tl{'^tr=}r!tr-.t-.o: c53io- Ratio ofcepacltr to Annl,al Iniou Capacity Average annual inflow Capacity/Annual Year Sediment trapped in in M.cum In M cum lnflow ratio Percent 1977 107.3 E2 261 06 041r3 95 ff/o l98l to8 262 276 6'l 0 3913 94 3yo 2006 t03.4r4 303 55 0.3410 94.8o/'o 201'1 97 '197 302 0l 0.3238 95 U/" Sdu Sfrr Ser INSTITUTD, OF EYI'RAIruCS GA I(A s.M WATER SEED MAI{AGEMENT & HYDROI,IrcY, FOONI'I BOARD DIVISIONJOII.{Cf,I AE af,'..r' EE 64 \ ALIYAR DAM - DEPTH VS CAPACITY CURVE tFigm No 22 325 320 310 il :ros 300 Depth in 295 meters 290 245 0.6 0.8 1.0 56810 Capacity in M.cum '---t sdxx Sdrq Sdlu II{STITUTE OF HYDRAUTICS & G.A K.A s.M WATER SHED MANAGEMETTIT HYDROTOGY, POONDI BOARD DIVISION,POLTACHI A.E A.E.E E.E 55 A VIEW OF ALIYAR DAM ALIYAR DAM - WATER SPREAD AREA 66 L9 hIVO UVAI'IV IV AflNUNS IIf,NVSSIVNNOfIIU IISOOH UiUV\Od IV'IVhIVNVN hIOUJ III'INI 68 FIXING OF BENCHMARK t I TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEYAT ALIYAR DAM 69