KAYRAKTEPE DAM AND HEPP, ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ÖZGÜR SEVER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING DECEMBER 2010 Approval of the thesis: KAYRAKTEPE DAM AND HEPP, ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION submitted by ÖZGÜR SEVER in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering Department, Middle East Technical University by, Prof. Dr. Canan Özgen _____________________ Dean, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Prof. Dr. Güney Özcebe _____________________ Head of Department, Civil Engineering Asst. Prof. Dr. Şahnaz Tiğrek _____________________ Supervisor, Civil Engineering Dept., METU Examining Committee Members: Prof. Dr. Melih Yanmaz Civil Engineering Dept., METU Asst. Prof. Dr. Şahnaz Tiğrek Civil Engineering Dept., METU Asst. Prof. Dr. Elçin Kentel Civil Engineering Dept., METU Dr. Işıkhan Güler Civil Engineering Dept., METU Gültekin Keleş, M.Sc. Çalık Energy Date: 16.12.2010 ii I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Özgür Sever Signature : iii ABSTRACT KAYRAKTEPE DAM AND HEPP, ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION Sever, Özgür M.Sc., Department of Civil Engineering Supervisor: Asst. Prof. Dr. Şahnaz Tiğrek December 2010, 275 pages In this study, alternative solution of Kayraktepe Dam is investigated. Kayraktepe Dam was planned more than 30 years ago, but due to various reasons the construction could not be realized. In this study, an alternative feasible formulation was developed. Former Kayraktepe Dam was planned for multiple objectives: flood control, energy generation and water supply for irrigation. The newly developed formulation was designed to meet these objects as well. Keywords: Kayraktepe, dam, flood, hydropower, HEPP iv ÖZ KAYRAKTEPE BARAJI VE HES İÇİN ÇEVRESEL AÇIDAN KABUL EDİLEBİLİR ALTERNATİF ÇÖZÜM Sever, Özgür Yüksek Lisans, İnşaat Mühendisliği Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi: Yard. Doç. Dr. Şahnaz Tiğrek Aralık 2010, 275 sayfa Bu çalışmada, Kayraktepe Barajı için alternatif çözüm arandı. 30 yılı aşkın süredir gündemde olan baraj çeşitli nedenlerden dolayı yapılamamıştır. Bu sebeple Kayraktepe Barajı’nı yapılabilir kılabilmek için yeni bir formülasyon geliştirilmiştir. Kayraktepe Barajı taşkın, enerji ve sulama amaçlı bir projedir. Yeni formülasyon da, bu ihtiyaçları karşılayacak şekilde tasarlanmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Kayraktepe, baraj, taşkın, hidroelektrik, HES v To My Wife and My Parents vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research has been carried out under the supervision of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şahnaz TİĞREK in the Hydromechanics Laboratory of the Department of Civil Engineering in the Middle East Technical University. The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şahnaz TİĞREK for her guidance and helpful advice throughout the research. Special thanks go to Kamil Karaağaç (Pro-Sem Eng. Arc. Con.) and Dr. Yaşar Kutoğlu for their kind assists. The technical assistance of author’s colleagues is gratefully acknowledged. The author offers sincere thanks to his family for their unshakable faith in him, their patience and confidence in him. They receive many indebted thanks. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................IV ÖZ .............................................................................................................................V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................VII TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................ VIII LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... X LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................XII CHAPTERS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 II. DAM DEBATES ................................................................................................. 6 III. KAYRAKTEPE DAM (KAYRAKTEPE – 1982 AND 1997)............................ 9 III.1. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA............................................................. 11 III.1.1. Geographical Features........................................................................ 11 III.1.2. Natural Conditions ............................................................................. 12 III.1.3. Social Conditions ............................................................................... 13 III.2. PROJECT FORMULATION ................................................................................ 13 III.2.1. Kayraktepe – 1982............................................................................. 13 III.2.2. Kayraktepe – 1997............................................................................. 14 III.2.3. Geological Features............................................................................ 18 IV. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION........................................................................... 19 IV.1. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS.......................................................................... 21 IV.1.1. Kayraktepe I Diversion Weir and HEPP............................................ 21 IV.1.2. Kayraktepe II Diversion Weir and HEPP .......................................... 21 IV.1.3. Kayraktepe III Diversion Weir and HEPP......................................... 22 IV.1.4. Kurtsuyu Diversion Weir and HEPP.................................................. 23 IV.1.5. Kayraktepe Dam and HEPP............................................................... 24 viii IV.1.6. Kayraktepe V Diversion Weir and HEPP .......................................... 25 V. SEDIMENT ....................................................................................................... 30 V.1. ESTIMATION SEDIMENTATION LOAD IN KAYRAKTEPE-2010 .......................... 32 V.2. EVACUATION OF SEDIMENTS FROM RESERVOIR BY FLUSHING ....................... 36 V.3. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS ......................................................................... 38 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND THE FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ................ 40 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 43 APPENDICES A. FLOOD CALCULATIONS............................................................................... 47 A.1. FLOOD HYDROGRAPH CALCULATION ............................................................. 47 A.1.1. EİE’s Approximate Method for Hydrograph Generation .................. 50 A.1.2. Calculating the Inflow Flood Hydrograph of Ermenek Dam............. 55 A.1.2.1. Ermenek Dam Inflow Hydrograph Calculation by Using Point Flood Frequency Analysis (PFFA) .................................................................... 57 A.1.3. Calculating the Inflow Flood Hydrograph of Mut Dam .................... 58 A.1.3.1. Calculation of Mut Dam Inflow Hydrograph by Using Regional Flood Frequency Analysis (RFFA) .................................................... 58 A.1.4. Sub – Basin Flood Hydrograph Calculations..................................... 59 A.1.4.1. Ermenek Creek Sub – Basin Flood Hydrographs Calculation....... 60 A.1.4.2. Gökçay Creek Sub – Basin Flood Hydrograph Calculation by Using Regional Flood Frequency Analysis (RFFA).......................................... 61 A.1.5. Kayraktepe Dam Inflow Flood Calculation In Case Of Mut Dam in Operation........................................................................................................ 62 A.1.6. Kayraktepe Dam Inflow Flood Calculation in Case Mut Dam Is not in Operation ................................................................................................. 67 A.2. Discussion of the Results ....................................................................... 69 B. RIVER SURFACE PROFILE CALCULATIONS.......................................... 265 ix LIST OF TABLES TABLES Table III-1 Kayraktepe – 1982 Project Characteristics.............................................. 14 Table III-2 Kayraktepe – 1997 Project Characteristics.............................................. 15 Table III-3 Comparison of Kayraktepe 1982 and 1997 Alternatives......................... 16 Table IV-1 Kayraktepe – 2010 Formulation Characteristics Table........................... 27 Table V-1 Kayraktepe Dam Sediment Calculations .................................................. 35 Table A-1 Comparison Table of the Studies Related to the Flood Calculations ....... 70 Table A-2 Stream Gauging Stations at the Project Area............................................ 71 Table A-3 Annual Instantaneous Peak Discharges of the Stream Gauging Stations at the Project Area ......................................................................................... 72 Table A-4 DSİ 17-14 SGS 1, 3, 5,….23, 25 Day Maximum Average Discharges for Different Return Periods...........................................................................