HYDRO POWER PLANT With Medium Head PDF

DUGAR HYDRO POWER LIMITED
(A Joint Venture of Tata Power & S N Power)
DUGAR HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT

CHAMBA DISTRICT, HIMACHAL PRADESH | INDIA
DRAFT DETAILED PROJECT REPORT

VOLUME I
MAIN REPORT
November 2014
Dugar Hydro Power Limited

Dugar Hydro Electric Project
Index
1
DUGAR HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT

DRAFT DETAILED PROJECT REPORT
VOLUME I
: MAIN REPORT
VOLUME II
: HYDROLOGY
VOLUME III
: GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES
VOLUME IV
: DRAWINGS
VOLUME V
: APPENDIX
VOLUME V [A]
VOLUME V [B]
DPR Volume I: Main Report
:
:
GLOF STUDY
ROUTE SURVEY REPORT
November 2014

Index
2
TABLE OF CONTENT
1.1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1.2

GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 1.2
1.2
PROJECT LOCATION & ACCESS ........................................................................................................ 1.2
1.3
CLIMATIC CONDITION .......................................................................................................................... 1.3
1.4
TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 1.4
1.5
GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................... 1.4
1.6
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ........................................................................... 1.5
1.7
NEED OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................................................... 1.7
1.8
ALTERNATIVE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 1.7
1.9
INTER STATE, INTERNATIONAL OR DEFENCE ASPECT ........................................................... 1.8
2
2.1
SALIENT FEATURES ..................................................................... 2.2

PROJECT LOCATION .............................................................................................................................. 2.2
2.2
HYDROLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 2.2
2.3
RESERVOIR ................................................................................................................................................. 2.2
2.4
DAM AND SPILLWAYS .......................................................................................................................... 2.3
2.5
RIVER DIVERSION AND DIVERSION TUNNEL (DT) ................................................................... 2.3
2.6
POWER INTAKE (ON LEFT BANK) ..................................................................................................... 2.4
2.7
PRESSURE TUNNEL/ PRESSURE SHAFT ......................................................................................... 2.4
2.8
POWERHOUSE .......................................................................................................................................... 2.5
2.9
TRANSFORMER CAVERN ..................................................................................................................... 2.6
2.10
SURGE CAVERN/DRAFT TUBE GATE OPERATION CHAMBER .............................................. 2.7
2.11
TAIL RACE TUNNELS (TRT) .................................................................................................................. 2.7
2.12
POWER BENEFITS .................................................................................................................................... 2.8
JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT ..................................................... 3.4
3.1
POWER SCENARIO IN INDIA .............................................................................................................. 3.4
3.2
POWER SCENARIO IN THE NORTHERN REGION ...................................................................... 3.7
3.3
POWER SCENARIO IN HIMACHAL PRADESH............................................................................3.13
3.4
HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT .....................................................................................................3.16
3.5
NECESSITY AND JUSTIFICATION ....................................................................................................3.19
3.6
POWER EVACUATION FOR THE PROJECT ..................................................................................3.22
BASIN DEVELOPMENT................................................................ 4.2
4.1
MAJOR RIVER SYSTEMS ....................................................................................................................... 4.2
4.2
ASSESSMENT OF HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL ........................................................................... 4.2
November 2014

Index
3
4.3
INDUS BASIN ............................................................................................................................................ 4.4
4.4
CHENAB BASIN ........................................................................................................................................ 4.5
4.5
FITMENT OF DUGAR HEP IN CHENAB BASIN DEVELOPMENT............................................ 4.6
5
5.1
INTERNATIONAL ASPECT - INDUS WATER TREATY............... 5.2

GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 5.2
5.2
THE TREATY ............................................................................................................................................... 5.3
5.3
PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS.............................................................................. 5.4
5.4
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS ON WESTERN RIVERS ................................................................. 5.4
5.5
COMMUNICATION WITH PAKISTAN ............................................................................................5.10
5.6
SETTLEMENT OF DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES ......................................................................5.11
6
6.1
SURVEY & INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................... 6.3

TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY .................................................................................................................. 6.3
6.2
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................6.11
6.3
ARCHAEOLOGICAL & MINERAL SURVEY....................................................................................6.17
6.4
COMMUNICATION SURVEY .............................................................................................................6.17
6.5
CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SURVEY ...........................................................................................6.18
6.6
HYDRLOGICAL & METEOROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .....................................................6.18
7
7.1
HYDROLOGY ................................................................................ 7.8

GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 7.8
7.2
DATA VALIDATION AND CONSISTENCY CHECK .....................................................................7.29
7.3
WATER AVAILABILITY ..........................................................................................................................7.58
7.4
DESIGN FLOOD ......................................................................................................................................7.67
7.5
DESIGN FLOOD FOR RIVER DIVERSION WORKS .....................................................................7.90
7.6
SEDIMENTATION STUDY ...................................................................................................................7.99
7.7
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY ................................................................................................................. 7.104
8
8.1
GEOLOGY ................................................................................... 8.10

INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................8.10
8.2
REGIONAL GEOLOGY...........................................................................................................................8.14
8.3
SEISMICITY AND SEISMOTECTONICS ..........................................................................................8.19
8.4
SITE GEOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................8.25
8.5
ALTERNATIVES STUDIES .....................................................................................................................8.42
8.6
GEOLOGICAL & GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ..............................................................8.45
8.7
GEOLOGICAL & GEOTECHNICAL ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT COMPONENTS ...........8.72
8.8
RESRVOIR RIM STABILITY ............................................................................................................... 8.106
November 2014

Index
4
8.9
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................... 8.119
10
POWER POTENTIAL & INSTALLED CAPACITY ....................... 10.4
10.2
SALIENT FEATURES ...............................................................................................................................10.4
10.3
POWER POTENTIAL STUDY...............................................................................................................10.7
11
DESIGN OF CIVIL STRUCTURES ............................................... 11.5
11.1
GENERAL ...................................................................................................................................................11.5
11.1
PONDAGE .................................................................................................................................................11.5
11.2
DAM AND APPURTENANT STRUCTURES ...................................................................................11.7
11.3
RIVER DIVERSION STRUCTURES .................................................................................................. 11.15
11.4
POWER INTAKES................................................................................................................................. 11.25
11.5
PRESSURE SHAFTS ............................................................................................................................. 11.26
11.6
POWERHOUSE AND TRANSFORMER CAVERNS................................................................... 11.26
11.7
SURGE & DRAFT TUBE GATE CAVERN ...................................................................................... 11.28
11.8
TAILRACE TUNNEL ............................................................................................................................. 11.30
11.9
POTHEAD YARD .................................................................................................................................. 11.31
10.1
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................10.4
November 2014

Index
5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Long Term Region wise Forecast ...................................................................................................... 3.6
Table 3.2: Installed Capacity of Northern Region as on 31st December, 2013 in MW .................... 3.7
Table 3.3: Availability/Requirement of Energy & Peak Power in Northern Region during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12) ................................................................................................................................... 3.8
Table 3.4: Growth in Energy Generation in Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03 to
2011-12) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3.10
Table 3.5: Growth in Installed Capacity in Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03 to
2011-12) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3.10
Table 3.6: Energy and Peak Load Demand for the Northern Region (Period 2016 2022) ............... 3.12
Table 3.7: Installed Capacity of Himachal Pradesh as on 31st December, 2013 in MW ............... 3.13
Table 3.8: Energy and Peak Load Demand for Himachal Pradesh (Period 2016 2022) ............ 3.16
Table 3.9: Capacity Addition Planned during 11th Plan for All India in MW ..................................... 3.18
Table 3.10: Projected Electricity Demand of All India ................................................................................ 3.19
Table 4.1: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per First Survey ............................................................ 4.2
Table 4.2: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per Re-assessment Study ........................................ 4.3
Table 4.3: Hydroelectric Potential of Indus Basin............................................................................................ 4.4
Table 4.4: Hydro Power Projects on Chenab River ......................................................................................... 4.6
Table 5.1: Aggregate Storage Capacity Allotted to India ............................................................................ 5.9
Table 6.1: Survey Station Established by Survey of India ............................................................................ 6.4
Table 6.2: Control Stations in the Project Area ................................................................................................ 6.8
Table 6.3: Reference SOI Bench Mark ............................................................................................................... 6.10
Table 6.5: Details of Geological Plan and Sections...................................................................................... 6.12
Table 6.6: The Details of Borehole Investigations Completed at Dugar HEP ................................... 6.13
Table 6.7: Details of Exploratory Drifts Excavated at Dugar Project Area. ......................................... 6.14
Table 6.8: Details of Seismic Refraction Traversing (SRT) at Dugar Project Area ........................... 6.15
Table 6.9: Details of Electrical Resistivity Traversing (ERT) at Dugar Project Area ......................... 6.15
Table 6.10: Details of In-situ Rock Mechanics Tests Completed/ Proposed for Dam/Powerhouse
Exploratory Drifts ......................................................................................................................................................... 6.16
Table 7.1: Project Parameters .................................................................................................................................. 7.8
Table 7.2: Hypsometric Data at Dugar Diversion Site ................................................................................ 7.11
Table 7.3: Estimation of Zero Degree Isotherms .......................................................................................... 7.15
Table 7.4: Bar Chart showing Availability of Discharge & Rainfall Data ............................................. 7.17
Table 7.5: Catchment Characteristic of various G&D sites ....................................................................... 7.18
Table 7.6: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (Oct 2011 Dec 2012) at Killar ........................... 7.23
Table 7.7: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2001) at Koksar ........................................... 7.24
Table 7.8: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2002) at Gondla.......................................... 7.25
Table 7.9: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall at Keylong .................................................................. 7.26
Table 7.10: Mean Monthly Temperature ......................................................................................................... 7.27
November 2014

Index
6
Table 7.11: Specific Yield at G&D Sites ............................................................................................................ 7.56

Table 7.12: Daily Observed Discharge Record of Chenab River in at Dugar HEP .......................... 7.61
Table 7.13: 10-Daily flow summary at Dugar HEP ....................................................................................... 7.62
Table 7.14: Detail of 50% and 90% Dependable Flow Year ..................................................................... 7.64
Table 7.15: Dependable Flow at Dugar Project and various G&D Sites in Chenab Basin .......... 7.65
Table 7.16: Unit Hydrograph Ordinates ........................................................................................................... 7.72
Table 7.17: Temporal Distribution ...................................................................................................................... 7.74
Table 7.18: Design Storm for Dugar HEP ........................................................................................................ 7.75
Table 7.19: 12-hr Bells of 24-hr Design Storm .............................................................................................. 7.76
Table 7.20: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site ........................................................................... 7.77
Table 7.21: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site ........................................................................... 7.78
Table 7.22: Observed Annual Maxima Flood Peaks at Udaipur Site .................................................... 7.80
Table 7.23: Details of Tests .................................................................................................................................... 7.86
Table 7.24: Statistical Parameter ......................................................................................................................... 7.86
Table 7.25: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Observed Flood Peaks of Udaipur.................. 7.87
Table 7.26: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Instantaneous Flood Peaks of Udaipur ........ 7.87
Table 7.27: Different Return Period Floods at Dugar Diversion Site.................................................... 7.88
Table 7.28: Comparison of Design Flood by Different Approach at Dugar HEP Site ................... 7.89
Table 7.29: Detail of Non-monsoon (Oct-May) Flood Peaks, Udaipur ............................................... 7.92
Table 7.30: Details of Tests .................................................................................................................................... 7.95
Table 7.31: Statistical Parameter, Non-Monsoon ........................................................................................ 7.96
Table 7.32: Result of Flood Frequency of Non monsoon Flood Peaks of Udaipur ....................... 7.96
Table 7.33: Result of Flood Frequency of Non Monsoon Instantaneous Flood Peaks of Udaipur
............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7.97
Table 7.34: Different Return Period Non Monsoon Floods at Dugar Diversion Site .................... 7.97
Table 7.35: Yearly Sediment Rate ..................................................................................................................... 7.100
Table 7.36: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity at Dugar Diversion Site ............................................. 7.101
Table 8.1: Stratigraphic sequence of the area around the project site ............................................... 8.15
Table 8.2: Discontinuity Sets and their Engineering Properties in Dam/Power house sites ......... 8.39
Table 8.3: Discontinuity Sets and their Engineering Properties in Reservoir area ............................ 8.40
Table 8.4: The List of Geological Plan and Sections, enclosed with Volume III-B. ............................ 8.47
Table 8.5: The Details of Borehole Investigations Completed at Duagr Project area................... 8.49
Table 8.6: In-Situ Permeability Status at Dam Site ...................................................................................... 8.57
Table 8.7: Details of Exploratory Drifts Excavated at Dugar Project Area .......................................... 8.58
Table 8.8: Details of Seismic Refraction Traversing (SRT) at Dugar Project Area. ............................ 8.65
Table 8.9: Details of Electrical Resistivity Traversing (ERT) at Dugar Project Area. .......................... 8.65
Table 8.10: Average representative index properties of core samples. .................................................. 8.66
Table 8.11: Average representative geotechnical parameters. ................................................................. 8.66
Table 8.12: Average representative Elastic Properties of core samples................................................. 8.67
Table 8.13: Average representative Shear Strength Parameters of core samples............................. 8.67
November 2014

Index
7
Table 8.14: Average representative Shear Wave Velocities of core samples ...................................... 8.67
Table 8.15: Details of in-situ rock mechanics tests conducted/proposed at site ........................... 8.69
Table 8.16: Estimated modulus of deformations of rock mass from Exp. drifts ............................. 8.70
Table 8.17: Estimated Shear Strength Parameters of Rock to Rock Interface ............................... 8.70
Table 8.18: Estimated Shear Strength Parameters of Concrete to Rock Interface ...................... 8.71
Table 8.19: Shear Seams details, Right Abutment ....................................................................................... 8.78
Table 8.20: Rock mass rating assessment parameters for Dam site ...................................................... 8.82
Table 8.21: Rock mass quality (Q) assessment for Left Abutment of Dam. ..................................... 8.83
Table 8.22: Rock mass quality (Q) assessment for Right Abutment of Dam. ................................... 8.83
Table 8.23: Rock mass classes likely to be encountered in DT. ................................................................ 8.90
Table 8.24: Rock Support measures for Diversion Tunnels. ....................................................................... 8.90
Table 8.25: Rock Mass Rating adopted for Pressure Tunnel/Shaft ...................................................... 8.95
Table 8.26: Rock Mass Quality (Q) adopted for Pressure Tunnel/Shaft ............................................. 8.95
Table 8.27: Rock mass classes likely to be encountered in Pressure Tunnel.................................... 8.95
Table 8.28: Rock Support measures for Pressure Tunnel/Shaft ............................................................. 8.96
Table 8.29: Rock Mass Rating adopted for power house complex .................................................... 8.100
Table 8.30: Rock mass classes likely to be encountered in Powerhouse complex ...................... 8.100
Table 8.31: Primary rock support system designed for Power house complex ............................ 8.101
Table 8.32: Rock mass classes likely to be encountered ......................................................................... 8.103
Table 8.33: Rock Support measures for Tailrace Tunnel ........................................................................... 8.103
Table 10.1: Statistics of 90% & 50% Dependable Years............................................................................ 10.8
Table 10.2: Annual Unrestricted Energy in Descending Order ............................................................... 10.8
Table 10.3: Pattern of Flow in 50% and 90% Dependable Years........................................................... 10.9
Table 10.4: Results of Flow Duration Curve .................................................................................................. 10.10
Table 10.5: Required Environmental Flow ..................................................................................................... 10.11
Table 10.6: Data for Area-Capacity Elevation Curve ................................................................................. 10.12
Table 10.7: Pondage Calculations as per IWT.............................................................................................. 10.16
Table 10.8: Results of Incremental Energy Study ....................................................................................... 10.19
Table 10.9: Flow Pattern for Auxiliary Units .................................................................................................. 10.22
Table 10.10: Approximate Weights of E&M Equipment ......................................................................... 10.24
Table 11.1: Features of the Reservoir ................................................................................................................ 11.5
Table 11.2: Main Features of Gravity Dam ...................................................................................................... 11.7
Table 11.3: Characteristics of Low Level and Upper Level Spillway ................................................... 11.10
Table 11.4: Computation of Water Level at Inlet for different DT Diameter .................................. 11.17
Table 11.5: Cost Comparison of Upstream Cofferdam ............................................................................ 11.18
Table 11.6: Cost Comparison for the Diversion Tunnel ........................................................................... 11.19
Table 11.7: Main Features of the Power House Cavern .......................................................................... 11.27
Table 11.8: Main Features of the Downstream Surge Chamber .......................................................... 11.29
November 2014

Index
8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Location of The Project........................................................................................................................ 1.3
Figure 3.1: Shares in Installed Capacity December 2013 ......................................................................... 3.4
Figure 3.2: Region Wise Power Supply Position during Year 2013-14 .................................................. 3.5
Figure 3.3: Region Wise Peak Demand Position during Year 2013-14 .................................................. 3.5
Figure 3.4: Region Wise Installed Generation Capacity................................................................................ 3.7
Figure 3.5: Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past Decade (200203 to 2011-12) ................................................................................................................................................................. 3.9
Figure 3.6: Peak Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03
to 2011-12)........................................................................................................................................................................ 3.9
Figure 3.7: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region for FY 2011-12 ............. 3.11
Figure 3.8: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Northern Region for FY 2011-12 ............... 3.12
Figure 3.9: Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past Decade
(2002-03 to 2011-12) ................................................................................................................................................. 3.14
Figure 3.10: Peak Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past Decade (200203 to 2011-12) .............................................................................................................................................................. 3.14
Figure 3.11: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12 ............. 3.15
Figure 3.12: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12 .................. 3.16
Figure 3.13: Plan-wise Growth and Share of Hydropower ....................................................................... 3.17
Figure 3.14: Planned vs. Actual Commissioned Capacity of All India during 11th Plan ............... 3.18
Figure 3.15: Growth of Per Capita Electricity Consumption .................................................................... 3.20
Figure 3.16: Peak Percentage Deficit of States in Northern Region for FY 2011-12 .................... 3.21
Figure 4.1: Region-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential ............................................................................. 4.4
Figure 4.2: Basin-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential................................................................................. 4.5
Figure 4.3: Major Hydropower Projects in Chenab Basin ............................................................................ 4.7
Figure 5.1: Rivers of Indus Water System ........................................................................................................... 5.2
Figure 7.1: Digital Elevation Model of the Study Area ............................................................................... 7.10
Figure 7.2: Hypsometric Curve-Distribution of Catchment Area at Proposed Diversion Site... 7.12
Figure 7.3: A View of Chenab River .................................................................................................................... 7.12
Figure 7.4: Automatic Weather Station at Project Site .............................................................................. 7.20
Figure 7.5: Annual Flow regime of Chenab River at Udaipur .................................................................. 7.21
Figure 7.6: Non-Monsoon Flow Regime of Chenab River at Udaipur ............................................... 7.21
Figure 7.7: Monthly Flow Distribution at Udaipur ....................................................................................... 7.22
Figure 7.8: 10-Daily average Flow Distribution at Udaipur ...................................................................... 7.22
Figure 7.9: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Killar ...................................................................... 7.24
Figure 7.10: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Koksar ............................................................... 7.25
Figure 7.11: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Gondla .............................................................. 7.26
Figure 7.12: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Keylong ............................................................ 7.27
Figure 7.13: Mean Monthly Temperature at Killar, Badarwah and Banihal....................................... 7.28
November 2014

Index
9
Figure 7.14: Annual Flow Comparison of Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar ................................... 7.30
Figure 7.15: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Udaipur ................................................ 7.31
Figure 7.16: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Gulabgarh ........................................... 7.31
Figure 7.17: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Benzwar ............................................... 7.32
Figure 7.18: Double Mass Curve of Annual Flow at Gulabgarh & Udaipur ...................................... 7.33
Figure 7.19: Double mass curve of annual flow at Benzwar and Udaipur ......................................... 7.33
Figure 7.20: Average 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar ................... 7.35
Figure 7.21: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Benzwar for 1973-74 .................................... 7.36
Figure 7.34: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Benzwar for 1986-87 ................................. 7.42
Figure 7.39: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar for 1991-92 ............ 7.45
Figure 7.44: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh & Benzwar for 1996-97 ............... 7.47
Figure 7.51: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Gulabgarh for 2003-04 ................................ 7.51
November 2014

Index
10
Figure 7.60: Comparison of derived series with observed data ............................................................ 7.60
Figure 7.61: 10-daily max, min and average computed flow at Dugar HEP ..................................... 7.63
Figure 7.62: Flow pattern in 50% and 90% dependable Year at Dugar HEP .................................... 7.63
Figure 7.63: Flow duration curve at Project site (10 daily basis) ........................................................... 7.66
Figure 7.64: Unit Hydrograph for Dugar H E project.................................................................................. 7.73
Figure 7.65: Temporal Distribution Curve of 24-hour Design Storm for Dugar HEP Site .......... 7.75
Figure 7.66: Design Flood (PMF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP .................................................................. 7.78
Figure 7.67: Design Flood (SPF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP.................................................................... 7.79
Figure 7.68: Time Series Graph, Udaipur Site ................................................................................................ 7.82
Figure 7.69: Time series graph, Udaipur site.................................................................................................. 7.84
Figure 7.70: Variation of discharge in the river ............................................................................................. 7.90
Figure 7.72: Time series graph, Udaipur site.................................................................................................. 7.93
Figure 7.72: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity curve at Dugar diversion site ................................ 7.101
Figure 7.73: Type of reservoir ............................................................................................................................. 7.102
Figure 8.1: Location Map of Dugar HEP ........................................................................................................... 8.11
Figure 8.2: MCT at Atholi/Gulabgarh, J&K. ..................................................................................................... 8.18
Figure 8.3: MBF as seen from Jammu-Srinagar highway (NH-44) near Nashri............................... 8.18
Figure 8.4: The Major Tectonic Features in the Himalaya and The Great (M>8.0) Earthquakes in
India................................................................................................................................................................................... 8.20
Figure 8.5: Seismic and Neotectonic activity map of NW Himalayas .................................................. 8.21
Figure 8.6: Seismotectonic Domains of NW Himalayas ............................................................................ 8.22
Figure 8.7: Chenab River at the Dam site (U/S view) .................................................................................. 8.25
Figure 8.8: Rocky cliffs downstream of dam site on left bank (D/S view) ......................................... 8.26
Figure 8.9: Coarse Grained Biotite Gneiss ....................................................................................................... 8.28
Figure 8.10: Medium Grained Granitic Gneiss ............................................................................................... 8.29
Figure 8.11: Outcrop of Biotite Gneiss on Killar Road ............................................................................... 8.29
Figure 8.12: Granite Gneiss .................................................................................................................................... 8.30
Figure 8.13: Outcrop of Granite Gneiss on Chamba Road....................................................................... 8.31
Figure 8.14: Banded Gneiss ................................................................................................................................... 8.31
Figure 8.15: Outcrop of Banded Gneiss ........................................................................................................... 8.32
Figure 8.16: Outcrop of Augen Gneiss ............................................................................................................. 8.32
Figure 8.17: Micaceous Quartzite ....................................................................................................................... 8.33
Figure 8.18: Outcrop of Micaceous Quartzite at the end of Punto Road .......................................... 8.34
Figure 8.19: Biotite Schist ....................................................................................................................................... 8.35
November 2014

Index
11
Figure 8.20: Outcrop of Biotite Schist in Road Cut Upstream of Mahal Nala.................................. 8.35
Figure 8.21: A major discordant pegmatite intrusive in Killar road section at KRD 4.7............... 8.36
Figure 8.22: Pegmatite ............................................................................................................................................ 8.37
Figure 8.23: Pegmatite exposure on right bank at dam site ................................................................... 8.37
Figure 8.24: Local structural terrace type of tight fold .............................................................................. 8.38
Figure 8.25: Major shear downstream of the dam site on left bank ...................................................... 8.41
Figure 8.26: Sheared contact of biotite gneiss and pegmatite on right bank ..................................... 8.42
Figure 8.27: Location of Project Alternatives ................................................................................................... 8.42
Figure 8.28: RQD vs. Core recovery correlations of DH-01 hole ........................................................... 8.50
Figure 8.29: RQD vs. Core recovery correlations of DH-03 hole.............................................................. 8.51
Figure 8.30: Drilling platform of river centre drill hole DH-06 ............................................................... 8.52
Figure 8.31: Exploratory drift DL-02 .................................................................................................................. 8.59
Figure 8.32: Exploratory drift DR-01. .................................................................................................................. 8.60
Figure 8.33: Exploratory Drift DR-02 ................................................................................................................. 8.61
Figure 8.34: Exploratory drift DR-02. From clockwise, shear seam along foliations, plant roots,
shear seams, and iron staining/soil leaching along open joints ............................................................. 8.62
Figure 8.35: In Progress Power House Drift (PHD) ...................................................................................... 8.63
Figure 8.36: From clockwise a) view of rock core samples after UCS with Modulus b) Core after
Tensile Strength c) Core samples after Point Load Test d) Samples after Modulus of Elasticity (Dry
Condition). ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8.68
Figure 8.37: Plate Load Test Assembly-In-situ Tests .................................................................................. 8.69
Figure 8.38: Sheared test blocks, Concrete to Rock & Rock to Rock (Block Shear Test) ............ 8.70
Figure 8.39: Right Abutment.................................................................................................................................. 8.74
Figure 8.40: Stereographic projection of Right Abut. discontinuities, cut slope and fiction circle.
............................................................................................................................................................................................. 8.74
Figure 8.41: Right b showing blocky nature of exposed litho-units & Geological investigation
details................................................................................................................................................................................ 8.75
Figure 8.42: Approximate Shear seams location (red dash-Pg & Gg (S1), blue dash-Pg-Sc-Gg
(S2)) ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8.78
Figure 8.43: Left Abutment .................................................................................................................................... 8.79
Figure 8.44: Stereographic projection of left Abut. discontinuity, cut slope and fiction circle. .... 8.80
Figure 8.45: Approx. Location of D/s Cofferdam. .......................................................................................... 8.86
Figure 8.46: Approx. Location of U/s Cofferdam............................................................................................ 8.87
Figure 8.47: Stereographic Projection, Diversion Tunnel ......................................................................... 8.88
Figure 8.48: Diversion Tunnel, Inlet Portal ...................................................................................................... 8.89
Figure 8.49: RQD Vs. Core Recovery is drill hole DH-16 ........................................................................... 8.89
Figure 8.50: Intake Portal Area............................................................................................................................. 8.91
Figure 8.51: RQD Vs. Core Recovery in DH-19 drill Hole.......................................................................... 8.92
Figure 8.52: Schematic Sketch showing L-Section of Pressure Tunnel/Shaft .................................. 8.93
Figure 8.53: Stereonet showing joints and alignment of tunnel ........................................................... 8.94
Figure 8.54: Layout Power House Complex ................................................................................................... 8.97
November 2014

Index
12
Figure 8.55: Stereonet Showing Discontinuity Pattern .............................................................................. 8.98

Figure 8.56: Tailrace Tunnels Outfall Area .................................................................................................... 8.102
Figure 8.57: MAT Portal Location ..................................................................................................................... 8.105
Figure 8.58: Slide zone just downstream of the Mahalu road bridge ................................................. 8.107
Figure 8.59: Rocky valley faces in reservoir area.......................................................................................... 8.107
Figure 8.60: Exposed V-shaped valley, reservoir area .............................................................................. 8.109
Figure 8.61: Stereoplot of the discontinuities exposed along the Reservoir Rim....................... 8.112
Figure 8.62: Right and left bank slope of reservoir area ....................................................................... 8.113
Figure 8.63: Chart for Stability Analysis of Circular Failure .................................................................... 8.114
Figure 8.64: Left Bank Slope, stability analysis (for detail refer geol dwg, volume IIIB) ............ 8.115
Figure 8.65: Material properties derived from back analysis .................................................................. 8.117
Figure 8.66: Factor of Safety of cut slope in normal loading condition .............................................. 8.117
Figure 8.67: Factor of Safety of cut slope in seismic loading condition .......................................... 8.118
Figure 10.1: Pattern of Flow in 90% & 50% Dependable Years............................................................ 10.9
Figure 10.2: Long Term Flow Duration Curve for Ten Daily Available Discharges from 1974-75
to 2011-12 (38 years) ............................................................................................................................................... 10.10
Figure 10.3: Area-Capacity Elevation Curve for Dugar Reservoir ........................................................ 10.12
Figure 10.4: Tail Water Rating Curve ............................................................................................................... 10.13
Figure 10.5: Daily Load Curves in Northern Region-Representative week in December 2004
........................................................................................................................................................................................... 10.15
Figure 10.6: Annual Energy vs. Installed Capacity ..................................................................................... 10.20
Figure 10.7: Incremental Energy/ Per MW Increase in Installed Capacity ....................................... 10.20
Figure 10.8: Annual Plant Load Factor vs. Installed Capacity................................................................ 10.21
Figure 10.9: Rating Curve at TRT outlet of Auxiliary Units ..................................................................... 10.23
Figure 11.1: Area-Elevation Capacity Curve for Dugar Reservoir.......................................................... 11.6
Figure 11.2: Rating Curve at 100 m downstream of Dam ........................................................................ 11.8
Figure 11.3: Upper Spillway Discharge Capacity vs. Reservoir Level.............................................. 11.11
Figure 11.5: Lower Level Spillway Discharge Capacity vs. Reservoir Level .................................. 11.13
Figure 11.5: Rating Curve at Diversion Tunnel Outlet ............................................................................. 11.16
Figure 11.6: Optimisation Curve for Diversion Tunnel Diameter ........................................................ 11.20
November 2014

Index
13
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex 10.1: Average 10-daily flows at Dugar Dam Site (m3/s) on River Chenab (1974-75 to
2011-12) ........................................................................................................................................................................ 10.27
Annex 10.2: Unrestricted Power for Hydrological Years from 1974-75 to 2011-12 ................... 10.29
Annex 10.3: Unrestricted Energy for Hydrological Years from 1974-75 to 2011-12 .................. 10.31
Annex 10.4: Utilization of Inflows during 90% Dependable Year ....................................................... 10.33
Annex 10.5: Parameters for Head Loss Calculations of Main Plant ................................................... 10.34
Annex 10.6: Head Loss/Net Head Computations for Different Installed Capacity ...................... 10.35
Annex 10.7: Energy Calculations in 90% Dependable Year for Installed Capacity as 380 MW
........................................................................................................................................................................................... 10.39
Annex 10.8: Energy Calculations in 50% Dependable Year for Installed Capacity as 380 MW
........................................................................................................................................................................................... 10.40
Annex 10.9: Plant Operability during Monsoon ......................................................................................... 10.41
Annex 10.10: Plant Operability during Lean Season ................................................................................ 10.42
Annex 10.11: Plant Operability during Lean Season considering Auxiliary Units ........................ 10.44
Annex 10.12: Available Peaking Time during Lean Season in 90% Dependable Year ............... 10.45
Annex 10.13: Parameters for Head Loss Calculations of Auxiliary Units ......................................... 10.46
Annex 10.14: Head Loss Computations for Auxiliary Units ................................................................... 10.47
Annex 10.15: Energy Calculations for Auxiliary Units .............................................................................. 10.49
November 2014
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary
2
TABLE OF CONTENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................... 3
PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................................................. 3
ABOUT THE PROJECT ........................................................................................................................... 4
CLIMATE 5
HYDROLOGY ........................................................................................................................................... 5
INDUS WATER TREATY ........................................................................................................................ 7
GEOLOGY 7
PROJECT FEATURES .............................................................................................................................. 8
POWER PLANT...................................................................................................................................... 10
DESIGN ENERGY .................................................................................................................................. 11
INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS .............................................................................................................. 11
The Copyright remains with AF-Consult Switzerland Ltd.
November 2014

Executive Summary
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT LOCATION
Dugar HEP is located on Chenab River near Killar village in Chamba district of
Himachal Pradesh. The latitude and longitude of project site are N 33 07 05 and E
76 21 20.7 respectively. The Dugar project site lies between the Sachkhas HEP (267
MW) at its upstream and the Kirthai-I HEP (390 MW) at downstream. The project site
is located near Luj village which is about 10 km from the nearest town, Killar.
The nearest rail heads are the railway stations Udhampur and Pathankot. Udhampur
Railway Station is in Udhampur city in the state of Jammu & Kashmir, while
Pathankot Railway Station is in Pathankot city in the state of Punjab. The distance
from Udampur to project site is about 270 km.
The nearest airports are Kullu-Manali and Jammu. The distance from Kullu to project
site is about 279 km and from Jammu to project site is about 332 km.
The location of the project is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Location Plan of Dugar HEP
November 2014

Executive Summary
4
ABOUT THE PROJECT

This greenfield project has been awarded to the consortium Tata Power Company
Ltd. and SN Power Holding Singapore Pte. Ltd. (Owner) in May 2011, by Directorate
of Energy - Government of Himachal Pradesh on Build-Own-Operate-Transfer
(BOOT) basis for a period of 40 Years from Commercial Operation Date. To
implement the project, the Owner has constituted a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)
by the name of M/s Dugar Hydro Power Limited (DHPL).
The Dugar Hydro Electric Project (449 MW) is envisaged as a run-of-river scheme for
utilizing the flows of Chenab River to harness the head created by constructing a
128 m high (from deepest foundation) dam near Luj village with FRL of EL
2114.00 m asl and the proposed underground power house located on the left bank
of Chenab River just downstream of dam. It is a medium head scheme with rated net
head of 91.21 m having Full Reservoir Level (FRL) and Minimum Draw Down Level
(MDDL) as 2114.00 m asl and 2102.35 m asl respectively. It is essentially a run-ofriver scheme with diurnal storage for generation of electricity. The project comprises
of a 128 m high concrete gravity dam (from deepest foundation level), 2 Nos.
underground circular pressure shafts of length 270 m and 307 m. Each pressure
shaft is bifurcated upstream of the unit valves. An underground power house is
envisaged followed by a tailrace surge chamber and two tail race tunnels of finished
diameter as 7.8 m. The tail race tunnels, located on the left bank of the Chenab River,
are discharging back into Chenab River at a distance of about 725 m downstream of
dam axis with normal tail water level as 2015.00 m asl (under normal operating
condition) and minimum tail water level as 2012.26 m asl.
To harness the environmental flow during lean season and non-lean non-monsoon
season three units each of 23 MW are housed in the power house cavern. Therefore
the total capacity of plant shall be 449 MW (380 +69 MW).
The main components of the project are:
A 128 m high concrete gravity dam (from the deepest foundation level) located
on River Chenab at Latitude N 33 07 05 and longitude E 76 21 20.7.
Two numbers main intakes and one intake for auxiliary power house located at
the left bank.
Two numbers main pressure shafts and one pressure shaft for auxiliary power
house.
Underground cavern housing four number main units of 95 MW each and three
units of 23 MW each for auxiliary power house.
Transformer Cavern located upstream of power house cavern.
November 2014

Executive Summary
5
Four number main TRTs having Surge Chamber at the upstream end and one TRT
for auxiliary power house discharging downstream of dam.
To facilitate the construction and operation of the project components, suitable
adits and access roads have been proposed.
CLIMATE
The sources of runoff in the Chenab basin are both rain and snowmelt. The flows
during March to June are largely contributed by snowmelt, although pre-monsoon
rainfall also contributes to a certain extent. From July to September, the river carries
high discharges due to monsoon precipitation combined with snow melt. The
minimum flows occur during the winter months of December, January and February
as in all snow fed Himalayan Rivers.
DHPL has installed an Automatic Weather Station near the project site. Average
maximum temperature at diversion site ranges from -2.50C in January to 20.20C in
July.
HYDROLOGY
The catchment area of Chenab River upto Dugar diversion site is estimated as 7,823
km2 from the SRTM data. With the permanent snowline at 4500 masl, the snow fed
catchment is 4,458 km2 and the remaining 3,365 km2 is rain fed.
For the various data consistency checks it is found that the discharge data of
Udaipur G&D site is consistent and reliable. The proposed Dugar HE Project is
located downstream of Udaipur Gauge & Discharge site. The catchment area ratio of
Dugar HEP (7823 Km2) and Udaipur G&D site (5910 Km2) is 1.32. The observed 10daily flow at Udaipur for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12 has been considered for the
computation of long-term flow series at Dugar HEP. The 10-daily observed flow
series at Udaipur G&D of CWC for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12 has been utilized
for the present study and transferred to Dugar diversion site in catchment area
proportion. The flow series of Dugar HEP has been conveyed by Central
Electricity Authority (CEA) vide their letter no. 2/HP/52/CEA/2013-PAC/682628 dated 12th December 2013.
The 90% and 50% dependable years works out to 1993-94 and 1980-81 respectively.
The total available flows at the diversion site are plotted as flow duration curve in
Figure 2 and also given in Table 1.
November 2014

Executive Summary
6
Table 1: Results of Flow Duration Curve
Exceedance (%)
Discharge (m3/s)
Exceedance (%)
Discharge (m3/s)
1050
55
106
10
897
60
95
15
771
65
87
20
645
70
81
25
511
75
75
30
381
80
68
35
267
85
60
40
198
90
52
45
156
95
44
50
127
100
29
3000
Discharge (m3/s)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0
20
40
60
Exceedance (%)
80
100
Figure 2: Flow Duration Curve for Ten Daily Available Discharges at Dugar HEP Dam
Site (1974-75 to 2011-12)
The design floods for the project are worked out from hydro-meteorological
approach and frequency approach. The following design floods for Dugar HEP
has been conveyed by Central Electricity Authority (CEA) vide their letter no.
2/HP/52/CEA/2013-PAC/868-70 dated 5th March 2014.
Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)
9,425 m3/s
25 Year return period (~Q 25 ) monsoon flow
2,700 m3/s
November 2014

Executive Summary
7
INDUS WATER TREATY

Dugar HEP lies on the Chenab Main River in district Chamba, Himachal Pradesh and
is governed by the relevant provisions of Indus Water Treaty 1960 (IWT) signed
between India and Pakistan. The maximum pondage as per IWT shall not exceed
twice the Pondage required for Firm Power. Central Electricity Authority (CEA)
vide their letter no. 2/HP/52/CEA/2013-PAC/163-64 dated 9th January 2014 has
conveyed the maximum pondage as 19.58 Mm3. The live storage has been kept
as 16.57 Mm3 which is less than the maximum pondage as per IWT. The reservoir
area-capacity curve is given in Figure 3 below.
Volume (MCM)
40
60
20
2135
2135
2115
2115
2095
2095
2075
2075
2055
2055
2035
2035
2015
Elevation (masl)
Elevation (masl)
80
2015
0
40
80
120
Area (Ha)
Area-Elevation
160
200
240
Capacity-Elevation
Figure 3: Reservoir Area-Capacity Curve
GEOLOGY
Regional Geology
The Dugar HEP is located within the Central Crystallines represented by the Vaikrita
Group of rocks. Regionally, the area around the project comprises litho-stratigraphic
sequence from Proterozoic to the Quaternary in age including Salkhala Group and
Chamba, Manjir, Katarigali, Bhaderwah and Dul Formations. The regional lithostratigraphic sequence has been summarized in Table.1 The rock formations in the
immediate vicinity of the project area include granitoids belonging to the Rohtang
Crystalline Complex towards north and east, and Batal Formation of Haimanta
Group further north and towards south.
November 2014

Executive Summary
8
Project Geology
The project area lies in the zone of Central Crystallines belonging to Vaikrita Group
and hence dominated by a variety of gneissic rocks. Large areas on right bank are
under the colluvium cover for which rock outcrops along the roads are rather
infrequent and limited in extent. Extensive rock outcrops are found exposed along
Punto road. In general, biotite gneiss is the most dominant rock type in the mapped
area. The strata have been intruded by a number of pegmatite and granite bodies
which are both concordant as well as discordant. In addition to the biotite gneisses,
beds of banded gneiss, augen gneiss, granite gneiss, micaceous quartzites and mica
schist are found in the reservoir area.
In general, the broad lithological sequence in the mapped area from upstream to
downstream comprises coarse grained biotite gneiss at the tail end of reservoir,
followed by fine grained, dark micaceous quartzite, biotite schist, micaceous
quartzite and finally medium to coarse grained biotite gneiss that continues upto
and beyond dam site. The biotite gneiss towards downstream is the most prominent
lithological unit occupying almost downstream half of the combined area of the
project and reservoir.
Dam
The River valley at the proposed dam site is characterized by steep rocky cliffs on
both banks. The cliff is developed mainly within massive bed of pegmatite which is
found exposed from river bed level to the top of the cliff on right bank and from
River bed level to the portal of the upper drift on left bank. Biotite gneiss is found
exposed above this pegmatite bed on both banks at dam site. The biotite gneiss is
also found as an approximately 9 m thick xenolithic bed on the right bank and in
view of gentler slopes on the banks is found widely exposed.
Pressure Tunnels & Power House Complex
Almost the entire layout of the water conductor system and the powerhouse
complex lies within thickly forested area developed over a gentle slope & confined
between rock cliffs both towards the River as well as mountain side. A part of this
forested area around the dam axis is particularly flatter where a rock terrace could
be expected. By virtue of the thick forest cover and the consequent inaccessibility,
the geological details are limited, but, based on the well exposed geological setting
in the dam abutment area, it is interpreted that the layout lies within biotite gneisses
with overwhelming cover of colluvium. The traverses within the accessible zones of
the forest reveal the presence of thick overburden.
PROJECT FEATURES
After examining possible alternatives optimal layout has been considered as shown
in attached drawings. The proposed Dugar HEP comprises of the following
structures:
November 2014

Executive Summary
9
Concrete Gravity Dam: The dam is located near Luj village. The waterway is
provided with seven orifice spillways with crest elevation 2074 m asl and two upper
level overflow spillway with crest level 2102.30 m asl.
Main features include:
- Dam height from deepest foundation level
128.0 m
- Top width of dam
214.8 m
- Design Flood (PMF)
9,425 m3/s
- Maximum Reservoir Level (MRL)
2114.00 m asl
- Full Reservoir Level (FRL)
2114.00 m asl
- Minimum Draw-Down Level (MDDL)
2102.35 m asl
- Energy Dissipation
Flip bucket
Pondage: Since Dugar HEP lies on Chenab River, therefore it is governed by Indus
Water Treaty (IWT). The pondage i.e. live storage of the project has been worked out
as per the prevailing provisions of IWT. Live storage of 16.57 x 106 m3 has been
provided between FRL of 2114.00 m asl and MDDL of 2102.35 m asl. The gross
storage at FRL is 61.58 x 106 m3 and dead storage at MDDL is 45.01 x 106 m3. The
total extent of reservoir is about 12.2 km from the dam axis.
Intake: The intake structures are located at the left bank of the Chenab River about
25 m upstream of the dam axis. To guarantee the submerging criteria with respect
to the MDDL of 2102.35 m asl, the invert level is fixed at an elevation of
2084.65 m asl. The main intake structure comprises of two segments and each
segment is designed for a design discharge of 229.58 m3/s. Intake gates, trash rack
and trash rack cleaning machine have been provided.
One intake for auxiliary plant is also provided along with the main intake structure
with the design discharge of 87.25 m3/s.
Pressure Shafts/Tunnels (HRT): Two underground circular pressure shafts of
length 260 m and 290 m are proposed to convey water from reservoir two power
house. The upper horizontal portion and the vertical shaft upto lower bend are
proposed to be concrete lined. The lower bend of vertical shaft and the lower
pressure tunnel are proposed to be steel lined. The internal diameter of concrete
lined and steel lined pressure shaft is proposed as 8.1 m and 6.7 m respectively. Each
pressure shaft is bifurcated upstream of the unit valves. The internal diameter of
bifurcated pressure shaft is 4.75 m.
For three auxiliary units one combined pressure tunnel/shaft if proposed bifurcated
just upstream of MIV. The total length of pressure tunnel/shaft is about 229 m. The
upper horizontal portion and the vertical shaft upto lower bend are proposed to be
concrete lined. The lower bend of vertical shaft and the lower pressure tunnel are
proposed to be steel lined. The internal diameter of concrete lined and steel lined
pressure shaft is proposed as 5.6 m and 4.1 m respectively. The internal diameter of
trifurcated pressure shaft is 2.4 m.
November 2014

Executive Summary
10
Power House Cavern: An underground power house is foreseen on the left bank of
Chenab River just downstream of the dam. Power house will accommodate four
units of 95 MW each and three units of 23 MW each. The overall dimensions of
power house cavern are 173.0 m (L) x 22.5 m (W) x 44.5 m (H). The turbine setting
elevation for units of 95 MW is 2002.50 m asl and for 23 MW units it is 2006.50 m
asl. Access to power house is through 665 m long Main Access Tunnel (MAT).
Transformer Cavern: The transformer cavern is located 40 m upstream of power
house cavern. In total fourteen transformers, thirteen single phase transformers of
43 MVA each for the main power house and three three phase transformer of
13.5 MVA for the auxiliary plant will be housed in an underground cavern. The
overall dimensions of transformer cavern are 155 m (L) x 14.0 m (W) x 20.5 m (H).
Transformer cavern will house the 400kV GIS.
Surge & Draft Tube Gate Cavern: The underground surge cavern is located
approximately 40 m downstream of the powerhouse cavern. For inspection and
maintenance of the turbines, four draft tube gates are provided, within surge
chamber, which will be operated from the deck at EL 2036.00 m asl. The dimensions
of the each compartment are 28 m (L) x 22 m (W) x 37 m (H). The cavern comprises
of four individual surge chamber of finished size 28 m (L) x 22 m (W).
Tail Race Tunnels: Four numbers unit tailrace tunnels of finished diameter 5.7 m
are provided starting from the downstream of power house upto downstream surge
chamber. The length of the each unit tailrace tunnel is 87.4 m. After the downstream
surge chamber two unit tailrace tunnels are merged into one tailrace tunnel of 8.1 m
diameter. Lengths of the two tailrace tunnels of 8.1 m diameter are 385 m and
408 m for right and left tunnel respectively. Tailrace tunnels are fully concrete-lined.
Finished shape of tailrace tunnels is circular whereas the excavated profile in
modified horseshoe type. At the downstream end tailrace tunnel of 8.1 m diameter
is again bifurcated to two D- shape tunnels of diameter 5.7 m to reduce the size of
TRT outfall structure. The tail race tunnels, located on the left bank of the Chenab
River, are discharging back into Chenab River at a distance of about 725 m
downstream of dam axis.
POWER PLANT
Central Electricity Authority (CEA) has conveyed the capacity of Dugar HEP as
449 MW (380 MW + 69 MW).
The generating equipment, the group of four turbines and generators each unit of
95 MW and three units of 23 MW will be of vertical shaft type accommodated in the
machine hall. The centre to centre spacing of Turbine-generator units is kept as
18.5 m for 95 MW units. The lengths of Unit-1 to Unit-4 bays are kept as 18.50 m.
The Erection Bay will be 26 m long and control block will be 20 m long proposed
longitudinally adjacent to Unit # 7.
November 2014

Executive Summary
11
DESIGN ENERGY
In order to maximize the benefits of the project the optimization of installed
capacity has been carried out by studying incremental energy with increase in
installed capacity for 90% dependable year and takes into account the following
features:
a.
The hydraulic average gross head has been considered with an average
reservoir level corresponding to level as 2/3(FRL-MDDL) + MDDL and
considering normal Tail Water Level.
b.
All major head losses which include friction loss in pressure shaft/tunnel and
tailrace tunnel are determined for each installed capacity. In addition to major
losses, the minor losses are also considered.
c.
The combined efficiency factor for the electro-mechanical equipment is taken

as 92.5%
d.
The design energy for the project evaluation is considered as annual energy
available in a 90% dependable year with installed capacity restricted to 95%.
The reservoir created by the dam located near the Luj village will operate between
FRL 2114.00 m asl and MDDL 2102.35 m asl. The installed capacity of the main
power house will be 380 MW (4 x 95 MW). The rated head of the scheme is 91.21 m
and the nominal discharge is 114.79 m3/s for each unit of 95 MW. Plant load factor
for 90% and 50% dependable years are 40.5% and 46.9% respectively. The design
energy during 90% dependable year at 95% plant availability is 1315 GWh. The rated
head for auxiliary power plant is 89.57 m and the rated discharge is 29.08 m3/s for
each unit of 23 MW. The auxiliary power plant will have an installed capacity of
69 MW. The design energy at 95% plant availability works out to be 302.4 GWh. The
total design energy from main plant as well as auxiliary plant is 1617.4 GWh (1315.0
+ 302.4 GWh).
INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS
Since the project components are on the left bank of Chenab River, a permanent
bridge is proposed downstream of the dam to approach the left bank and power
house complex construction adits through this bridge. The road to this bridge
(about 4.5 km) is planned from the existing road at right bank which is at higher
elevation. One more permanent bridge is proposed to access the MAT and TRT gate
operation chamber. One temporary bridge is proposed upstream of the dam axis to
access the intake structure.
In addition to the permanent access roads, temporary access roads to DT inlet, DT
outlet, u/s and d/s cofferdams etc., strengthening and widening of existing roads,
bridges and culverts are also foreseen. One new permanent bridge is foreseen in
place of the existing Shukrali Bridge (connects Killar to Chamba via Sach Pass) which
is coming under submergence.
November 2014
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Introduction
1.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
1
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 1.2
1.1
GENERAL .................................................................................................................................. 1.2
1.2
PROJECT LOCATION & ACCESS ...................................................................................... 1.2
1.3
CLIMATIC CONDITION........................................................................................................ 1.3
1.4
TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY ................................................................................. 1.4
1.5
1.5.1
1.5.2
GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 1.4

Regional Geology ................................................................................................................. 1.4
Project Geology ..................................................................................................................... 1.4
1.6
1.6.1
1.6.2
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT .......................................................... 1.5

Pre-Feasibility Study ............................................................................................................ 1.5
Detailed Project Report ...................................................................................................... 1.6
1.7
NEED OF THE PROJECT....................................................................................................... 1.7
1.8
ALTERNATIVE STUDY .......................................................................................................... 1.7
1.9
INTER STATE, INTERNATIONAL OR DEFENCE ASPECT ........................................... 1.8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Location of The Project .................................................................................................................... 1.3
The Copyright remains with AF- Consult Switzerland Ltd.
November 2014

INTRODUCTION
1.1
GENERAL
Introduction
1.2
The state of Himachal Pradesh has vast Hydro Power potential. The main rivers that
flow through Himachal Pradesh are Satluj, Beas, Ravi and Chenab. The Chenab River,
also known as Chandra Bhaga River in its upper reaches is formed by the confluence
of two rivers viz. Chandra and Bhaga at Tandi near Keylong in Lahaul & Spiti district
of Himachal Pradesh. Chenab River enters Pangi valley of Chamba district in
Himachal Pradesh near Bhujind and leaves the district at Sansari Nala to enter Podar
valley of Kashmir. Dugar Hydro Electric Project is in Pangi valley on Chenab River
and is a run-of-river scheme.
1.2
PROJECT LOCATION & ACCESS

76 21 20.7 respectively. The Dugar project site lies between the Sachkhas HEP
(267 MW) at its upstream and the Kirthai-I HEP (390 MW) at downstream. The
project site is located near Luj village which is about 10 km from the nearest town,
Killar.
The location of the project is shown in Figure 1.1.
November 2014

Introduction
1.3
Figure 1.1: Location of The Project
1.3
CLIMATIC CONDITION
The sources of runoff in the Chenab basin are both rain and snowmelt. The flows
during March to June are largely contributed by snowmelt, although pre-monsoon
rainfall also contributes to a certain extent. From July to September, the river carries
high discharges due to monsoon precipitation combined with snow melt. The
minimum flows occur during the winter months of December, January and February
as in all snow fed Himalayan Rivers.
Dugar Hydro Power Ltd. (DHPL) has installed an Automatic Weather Station near
the project site. Average maximum temperature at diversion site ranges from -2.5 0C
in January to 20.2 0C in July.
November 2014

1.4
Introduction
1.4
TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY

The Chenab, a major drainage basin, lies between the Pir Panjal Range towards
south and the Great Himalayan Range towards north. The terrain is essentially
mountainous and the landscape has been shaped in the Quaternary period by
glacial and fluvial activities. It is characterized by lofty mountains and deep valleys
with gradual blending of different forms of relief and slopes. Over the State of
Himachal Pradesh, elevations above mean sea level vary from as low as 300 m in the
south, adjacent to the great plain of Indus-Ganga Alluvium, to as high as 7000 m at
the peaks of Great Himalayan Range in Kinnaur District bordering Tibet.
There are plentiful of grazing lands on the upper reaches of high mountains. A
number of meadows and pastures on the uplands are well known. The region is full
of vegetation with dominance of conifers. The local population have extended their
settlements in these thick forests at high reaches.
Rocks are strongly folded at certain places and are mainly composed of granite,
gneiss, schist, quartzite and phyllite. Some hot springs along river course have been
observed in the area from where the water is emerging from the earth in its natural
form.
1.5
GEOLOGY
1.5.1
Regional Geology
The Dugar HEP is located within the Central Crystallines represented by the Vaikrita
Group of rocks. Regionally, the area around the project comprises litho-stratigraphic
sequence from Proterozoic to the Quaternary in age including Salkhala Group and
Chamba, Manjir, Katarigali, Bhaderwah and Dul Formations. The regional lithostratigraphic sequence has been summarized in Table.1 The rock formations in the
immediate vicinity of the project area include granitoids belonging to the Rohtang
Crystalline Complex towards north and east, and Batal Formation of Haimanta
Group further north and towards south.
1.5.2
Project Geology
The project area lies in the zone of Central Crystallines belonging to Vaikrita Group
and hence dominated by a variety of gneissic rocks. Large areas on right bank are
under the colluvium cover for which rock outcrops along the roads are rather
infrequent and limited in extent. Extensive rock outcrops are found exposed along
Punto road. In general, biotite gneiss is the most dominant rock type in the mapped
area. The strata have been intruded by a number of pegmatite and granite bodies
which are both concordant as well as discordant. In addition to the biotite gneisses,
beds of banded gneiss, augen gneiss, granite gneiss, micaceous quartzites and mica
schist are found in the reservoir area.
November 2014

Introduction
1.5
In general, the broad lithological sequence in the mapped area from upstream to
downstream comprises coarse grained biotite gneiss at the tail end of reservoir,
followed by fine grained, dark micaceous quartzite, biotite schist, micaceous
quartzite and finally medium to coarse grained biotite gneiss that continues upto
and beyond dam site. The biotite gneiss towards downstream is the most
prominent lithological unit occupying almost downstream half of the combined
area of the project and reservoir
1.5.2.1
Dam
The River valley at the proposed dam site is characterized by steep rocky cliffs on
both banks. The cliff is developed mainly within massive bed of pegmatite which is
found exposed from river bed level to the top of the cliff on right bank and from
River bed level to the portal of the upper drift on left bank. Biotite gneiss is found
exposed above this pegmatite bed on both banks at dam site. The biotite gneiss is
also found as an approximately 9m thick xenolithic bed on the right bank and in
view of gentler slopes on the banks is found widely exposed.
1.5.2.2
Pressure Tunnels & Power House Complex

Almost the entire layout of the water conductor system and the powerhouse
complex lies within thickly forested area developed over a gentle slope & confined
between rock cliffs both towards the River as well as mountain side. A part of this
forested area around the dam axis is particularly flatter where a rock terrace could
be expected. By virtue of the thick forest cover and the consequent inaccessibility,
the geological details are limited, but, based on the well exposed geological setting
in the dam abutment area, it is interpreted that the layout lies within biotite
gneisses with overwhelming cover of colluvium. The traverses within the accessible
zones of the forest reveal the presence of thick overburden.
1.6
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
1.6.1
Pre-Feasibility Study
This greenfield project has been awarded to the consortium Tata Power Company
Ltd. and SN Power Holding Singapore Pte. Ltd. (Owner) in May 2011, by Directorate
of Energy - Government of Himachal Pradesh on Build-Own-Operate-Transfer
(BOOT) basis for a period of 40 Years from Commercial Operation Date on
successfully bidding the highest amount of additional free power to the state of
Himachal Pradesh. To implement the project, the Owner has constituted a Special
Purpose Vehicle (SPV) by the name of M/s Dugar Hydro Power Limited (DHPL).
The pre-feasibility study of the Dugar HEP was carried out by DHPL. As per prefeasibility study, Dugar HEP a run-of-river scheme located in the District Chamba of
Himachal Pradesh, envisaged construction of a concrete gravity dam 97 m high
(from river bed level) across Chenab River near Luj village (33 07 10.3N, 76 19
November 2014

Introduction
1.6
35.7E), four intakes followed by four HRTs of about 150 m long and 6.5 m finished
diameter, four Nos. steel lined pressure shafts about 152 m long & 5.5 m internal
diameter, an underground powerhouse (150 m (L) x 23 m (B) x 46 m (H)) near dam
axis on the left bank of Chenab River to accommodate 4 units of 95 MW each and a
concrete lined horse shoe shaped tail race tunnel of about 350 m length and 12.0 m
finished diameter for discharging the water back into Chenab River. An
underground tailrace surge chamber (150 m (L) x 14 m (B) x 45 m (H)) is provided
downstream of the power house cavern and transformer cavern is accommodated
above the surge chamber.
Rated head and rated discharge were estimated as 93 m and 113 m3/s respectively.
With FRL at 2105 m asl and MDDL at 2096 m asl, 11 Mm3 live diurnal storage was
provided. Gross head is considered as 99 m with FRL as 2105 m asl and normal TWL
as 2006 m asl. In PFR the annual energy generation was estimated as 1552 GWh for
90% dependable year.
1.6.2
Detailed Project Report

The stage-I clearance of the project was obtained by DHPL from Ministry of
Environment & Forest (MoEF), Govt. of India in the month of December, 2012 as per
layout and project features envisaged in PFR.
In November 2012 AF Consult Switzerland Ltd. (AFC) was entrusted with the work of
detailed investigations and preparation of the Detailed Project Report for Dugar
HEP by DHPL. Subsequently the investigations are carried out by AFC and the
Detailed Project Report is prepared.
The Dugar Hydro Electric Project (449 MW) is envisaged as a run-of-river scheme
for utilizing the flows of Chenab River to harness the head created by constructing a
128 m high (from deepest foundation) dam near Luj village with FRL of EL
2114.00 m asl and the proposed underground power house located on the left bank
of Chenab River just downstream of dam. It is a medium head scheme with rated
net head of 91.21 m having Full Reservoir Level (FRL) and Minimum Draw Down
Level (MDDL) as 2114.00 m asl and 2102.35 m asl respectively. It is essentially a runof-river scheme with diurnal storage for generation of electricity. The project
comprises of a 128 m high concrete gravity dam (from deepest foundation level), 2
Nos. underground circular pressure shafts of length 270 m and 307 m. Each
pressure shaft is bifurcated upstream of the unit valves. An underground power
house is envisaged followed by a tailrace surge chamber and two tail race tunnels of
finished diameter as 8.1 m. The tail race tunnels, located on the left bank of the
Chenab River, are discharging back into Chenab River at a distance of about 725 m
downstream of dam axis with normal tail water level as 2015.00 m asl (under normal
operating condition) and minimum tail water level as 2012.26 m asl.
November 2014

Introduction
1.7
To harness the environmental flow during lean season, non-lean non-monsoon

season and monsoon season three units each of 23 MW are housed in the power
house cavern. Therefore the total capacity of plant shall be 449 MW (380 +69 MW).
1.7
NEED OF THE PROJECT

India has been facing electricity shortages in spite of appreciable growth in
electricity generation. The demand for electrical energy has been growing at a much
faster rate and is expected to increase further to match with the projected growth of
Indian economy. The per capita electricity consumption which was 18.17 kWh
during 1950 has increased to 733.54 kWh during the year 2008-09.
Keeping in view the future electricity demand central government and the state
governments has planned to increase the energy generation in their annual and five
year plans.
As per annual plan 2008-09 of Government of Himachal Pradesh the total identified
hydro potential is 20415.62 MW. Out of this 2251.0 MW is in Chenab basin. All the
available hydro potential of Chenab Basin is unexploited so far. In the annual plan
2008-09, 24 projects have been identified for allotment to IPPs, out of 24 project, 14
projects are in Chenab basin. Dugar HEP is of these 14 projects identified by
Government of Himachal Pradesh for allotment to IPP.
Dugar HEP also fits well in the development of Chenab basin as the project located
between the Sach Khas HEP on the upstream and Kirthai-I HEP on the downstream
utilizes the head available in between upstream and downstream project
boundaries.
The implementation of the proposed Dugar HEP (449 MW), will contribute to
meeting the power and energy demand in the Northern Region which comes under
the purview of Northern Eastern Western and North-Eastern (NEWNE) grid and will
displace electricity that would otherwise have to be produced through the
construction of fossil fuel based thermal power plants.
1.8
ALTERNATIVE STUDY
Four different dam sites have been taken into consideration during Alternative
Study. Dam axes have been selected within the concession limits of Dugar HEP
defined in between FRL as 2105.0 m asl and normal tail water level as 2006.0 m asl.
The site of Alternative-I is located at km 5+510 (starting from the upstream
concession limit). Alternative-II is situated approximately 1.06 km downstream of
the bridge (Shukrali Bridge) of the Sach-Pass road at km 8+240 while Alternative-III
is positioned at km 10+309. Alternative-IV is located after the 90 bend of the river
at km 11+010. Water conductor system is planned at left bank of Chenab River. An
underground power house is planned just downstream of Alternative-III dam axis.
The layout of the surge shaft, pressure shaft and pressure tunnel, the powerhouse
November 2014

Introduction
1.8
including transformer cavern and tailrace tunnels has been kept the same for all
three alternatives.
Alternative-I is not considered for the further study as the total storage capacity of
Alternative-I is only 5.884 hm3 whereas as per IWT the required live storage is
evaluated as about 15 hm3.
Based on the techno-economical evaluation it was found that Alternative-III is the
most attractive solution. Alternative-III is further optimized for the dam height
varying in between FRL from 2105.0 m asl to 2114.0 m asl keeping the gross head
same (99.0 m). It is concluded that most attractive solution is the dam at
Alternative-III axis with increase in height by 9.0 m i.e. FRL as 2114.0 m asl. DHPL
requested Directorate of Energy - Government of Himachal Pradesh for the change
of concession limits of Dugar HEP from FRL as 2105.0 m asl and normal TWL as
2006.0 m asl to FRL as 2114.0 m asl and normal TWL as 2015.0 m asl keeping the
gross head same as 99.0 m and without affecting the upstream and downstream
projects. Directorate of Energy - Government of Himachal Pradesh has given the
approval for the above stated changes in the concession limits of Dugar HEP vide
their Letter No. HPDOE/CE (Energy)/Dugar HEP/2014-3596-3600 dated 30th July
2014.
Based on the revised concession limits the capacity of Dugar HEP is estimated as
449 MW. The main components of the project are:
A 128 m high concrete gravity dam (from the deepest foundation level) located
on River Chenab at Latitude N 33 07 05 and longitude E 76 21 20.7.
Two numbers main intakes and one intake for auxiliary power house located at
the left bank.
Two numbers main pressure shafts and one pressure shaft for auxiliary power
house.
Underground cavern housing four number main units of 95 MW each and three
units of 23 MW each to harness the ecological release.
Transformer Cavern located upstream of power house cavern.
Four number main TRTs having Surge Chamber at the upstream end and one
TRT for auxiliary power house discharging downstream of dam.
To facilitate the construction and operation of the project components, suitable
adits and access roads have been proposed.
1.9
INTER STATE, INTERNATIONAL OR DEFENCE ASPECT

Since the project is located on Chenab River, this shall be governed by the relevant
provisions of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) which is an International Treaty signed
between Government of India and Pakistan in 1960.
November 2014
CHAPTER 2: SALIENT FEATURES

Salient Features
2.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
2
SALIENT FEATURES .................................................................... 2.2
2.1
PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................................ 2.2
2.2
HYDROLOGY........................................................................................................................... 2.2
2.3
RESERVOIR .............................................................................................................................. 2.2
2.4
DAM AND SPILLWAYS ........................................................................................................ 2.3
2.5
RIVER DIVERSION AND DIVERSION TUNNEL (DT) ................................................... 2.3
2.6
2.6.1
2.6.2
POWER INTAKE (ON LEFT BANK).................................................................................... 2.4

Power Intakes for main powerhouse ............................................................................. 2.4
Tunnel intake for auxiliary powerhouse ....................................................................... 2.4
2.7
2.7.1
2.7.2
PRESSURE TUNNEL/ PRESSURE SHAFT ........................................................................ 2.4

Main Pressure Tunnels/shafts .......................................................................................... 2.4
Auxiliary Pressure shaft/tunnel ........................................................................................ 2.5
2.8
2.8.1
2.8.2
POWERHOUSE ....................................................................................................................... 2.5

Main powerhouse (4 x 95 MW) ....................................................................................... 2.5
Auxiliary powerhouse (3 x 23 MW) ................................................................................ 2.6
2.9
TRANSFORMER CAVERN ................................................................................................... 2.6
2.10
SURGE CAVERN/DRAFT TUBE GATE OPERATION CHAMBER............................... 2.7
2.11
2.11.1
2.11.2
TAIL RACE TUNNELS (TRT) ................................................................................................ 2.7

Tail Race Tunnels for Main Plant (4 x 95 MW) ........................................................... 2.7
Tail Race Tunnels for Auxiliary plant (3 x 23 MW) .................................................... 2.7
2.12
2.12.1
2.12.2
POWER BENEFITS ................................................................................................................. 2.8

Main Plant (4 x 95 MW) ...................................................................................................... 2.8
Auxiliary Plant (3 x 23 MW) ............................................................................................... 2.8
November 2014

SALIENT FEATURES
2.1
PROJECT LOCATION
2.2
State
Himachal Pradesh
District
Chamba
River
Chenab River
Vicinity
Luj village
Latitude
33o 07 05 N
Longitude
76o 21 20.7 E
Nearest Railhead; Udhampur (J&K)
270 km
HYDROLOGY
Catchment Area
Snow fed Catchment Area
Total annual inflow in 90% dependable year
2.3
Salient Features
2.2
km2
7,823
km
4,458
3
10 m
8,161
Average discharge in 90% dependable year
m /s
257.8
Average Annual Rainfall

Flood Discharge for River diversion (~Q 25 ) Non
monsoon Flow
Flood Discharge for River diversion (~Q 25 ) monsoon
Flow
Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)
mm
m3/s
859.5
870
m3/s
2,700
m3/s
9,425
RESERVOIR
Full Reservoir Level (FRL)
m asl
2114.00
Minimum Draw Down Level (MDDL)
m asl
2102.35
Design Flood Level (corresponding to PMF)
m asl
2114.00
Gross Storage at FRL
106 m3
61.58
Gross Storage at MDDL
10 m
45.01
Live Storage
106 m3
16.57
November 2014

2.4
Salient Features
2.3
DAM AND SPILLWAYS

Type
Concrete Gravity
Design Flood (PMF)
m3/s
9,425
Maximum Water Level (MWL)
m asl
2114.0
Full Reservoir Level (FRL)
m asl
2114.0
Average River Bed Level at Dam Axis
m asl
2016.0
Bridge Deck Level
m asl
2116.0
Dam Top Level
m asl
2116.0
Height of Dam (Above deepest foundation level)
128.0
Length of Dam Crest
214.8
Crest elevation
m asl
2062.50
Gate type and Number of Gates
---
Radial, 5 (Five)
Size (W X H)
8.2 x 11.0
Energy Dissipation System
---
Flip bucket
Radius of Bucket
32
Lip Level of Bucket
m asl
2049.15
Crest elevation
m asl
2102.30
Gate type and Number of Gates
---
Radial, 2 (Two)
Size (W X H)
8.2 x 11.7
Energy Dissipation System
---
Radius of Bucket
Flip bucket
22.5
Lip Level of Bucket
m asl
2045
Lower level spillway
Upper level spillway
2.5
RIVER DIVERSION AND DIVERSION TUNNEL (DT)

No. of Diversion Tunnels
---
Location
---
Right Bank
Diversion flood (non-monsoon)
870.0
m /s
Diversion flood (monsoon)
m /s
2,700.0
Diameter
10.5 (Circular)
Average Length
615
Inlet and outlet invert Elevations
m asl
2022.0, 2016.0
November 2014

Salient Features
2.4
Upstream Cofferdam Elevation
m asl
2049.00
Height of upstream Cofferdam
~29.0
Downstream Cofferdam Elevation
m asl
2026.50
Height of downstream Cofferdam
m asl
~10.5
DT intake gate type and number in each DT
---
Fixed wheel type, 2
Size of diversion tunnel gates (W X H)
4. 75 x 10.5
--
2.6
POWER INTAKE (ON LEFT BANK)
2.6.1
Power Intakes for main powerhouse

Number of openings
m /s
229.58
Type
--
Fixed Wheel
- Sill elevation
m asl
2084.65
- Dimensions (W x H)
7.0 X 8.1
--
Design discharge per intake

Intake Gate
2.6.2
Tunnel intake for auxiliary powerhouse

Number of openings
m /s
87.25
Type
--
Fixed Wheel
- Sill elevation
m asl
2094.85
- Dimensions (W x H)
4.4 x 5.6
---
Design discharge
Intake Gate
2.7
PRESSURE TUNNEL/ PRESSURE SHAFT
2.7.1
Main Pressure Tunnels/shafts

No. of Pressure Tunnels/ Shafts
Design Discharge
Internal Diameter of Concrete Lined Pressure
Tunnel/Shaft
Length of Concrete Lined Pressure Tunnel/Shaft
m /s
229.58
8.10
183.5, 161
Thickness of Concrete Lining
mm
500
Internal Diameter of Steel Lined Pressure Tunnel
6.70
Quality of Steel
--
ASTM A- 537 Class -2
Length of Steel Lined Pressure Tunnel (each)

No. of Unit Pressure Tunnels
68, 78.5
---
November 2014

2.7.2
Salient Features
2.5
Internal Diameter of Unit Pressure Tunnel
4.75
Length of Unit Pressure Tunnel (each)
28.4
---
Auxiliary Pressure shaft/tunnel

No. of Pressure Tunnels/ Shafts
Design Discharge
Internal Diameter of Concrete Lined Pressure
Tunnel/Shaft
Length of Concrete Lined Pressure Tunnel/Shaft
m /s
87.25
5.60
134.7
Thickness of Concrete Lining
mm
200
Internal Diameter of Steel Lined Pressure Tunnel
4.10
Quality of Steel
Length of Steel Lined Pressure Tunnel
--
ASTM A- 537 Class -2
73.7
No. of Unit Pressure Tunnels
---
Internal diameter of Unit Pressure Tunnels
2.40
Length of Unit Pressure Tunnel (each)
20
2.8
POWERHOUSE
2.8.1
Main powerhouse (4 x 95 MW)

Type
Underground
Size (L X W X H) including auxiliary powerhouse
163 x 22.5 x 44.5
Gross Head
99.0
Length of Main Access Tunnel (7m D Shaped)
665
Turbine type
Number of units
---
Francis
Turbine setting elevation
m asl
Design discharge per unit
m /s
114.79
Rated head
91.21
Installed capacity per Unit
MW
95
Main Inlet valve type
2002.50
Butter fly type
Number
--
Diameter
4.0
Generator type
Number
---
3 Phase
4
Nominal speed
rpm
166.67
Voltage / Frequency
kV / Hz
13.8/50
Power factor
cos
0.9
November 2014

2.8.2
Salient Features
2.6
Normal Tail Water Level
m asl
2015.00
Minimum Tail Water Level
m asl
2012.26
Probable maximum Tail Water Level
m asl
2031.500
Auxiliary powerhouse (3 x 23 MW)

Type
Underground
Gross Head
96.12
Turbine type
Number of units
---
Francis
Turbine setting elevation
m asl
Rated discharge per unit
m /s
29.08
Rated head
89.57
Installed capacity per Unit
MW
23
Main Inlet valve type
2.9
2006.50
Butter fly type
Number
--
Diameter
2.05
Generator type
Number
---
3 Phase
2
Nominal speed
rpm
500
Voltage / Frequency
kV / Hz
11/50
Power factor
0.9
Normal Tail Water Level
cos
m asl
2017.88
Minimum Tail Water Level
m asl
2017.26
Probable Maximum Tail Water Level
m asl
2042.20
Type
---
Underground
Cavern Size (L x W x H)
155 x 14 x 20.5
Transformers for 100 MW machines
---
1 phase
Location
---
Indoor
Number
---
13
Unit capacity
MVA
43
Voltage ratio
kV / kV
13.80/400
Transformers for 10.5 MW Auxiliary machine
---
3 phase
Location
---
Indoor
Number
---
Unit capacity
MVA
25
TRANSFORMER CAVERN
November 2014

Voltage ratio
2.10
Salient Features
2.7
kV / kV
11/400
SURGE CAVERN/DRAFT TUBE GATE OPERATION CHAMBER

Type
Finished size (L x B x H)
Underground
m
118 x 22 x 47
Number of compartments
Size of each compartment (L x B)
28 x 22
Operation platform level
m asl
2036.00
Bottom of surge chamber
m asl
1998.35
2.11
TAIL RACE TUNNELS (TRT)
2.11.1
Tail Race Tunnels for Main Plant (4 x 95 MW)

Number of Main TRTs
Finished diameter of Main TRTs
2
m
3
8.1 (Circular)
Nominal discharge
m /s
229.58
Length of TRT-1
Length of TRT-2
385
408
No. of draft tube tunnels
Length of each draft tube tunnel
87.4
Finished diameter of draft tube tunnels

No. of unit tailrace tunnels
5.7 (Circular)
Length of each unit tailrace tunnel
100.3
Finished diameter of unit tailrace tunnel
5.7 (Circular)
TRT Gates
2.11.2
Number
Type
Vertical
Size (W x H)
4.5 x 5.7
Sill elevation
m asl
2012.00
Tail Race Tunnels for Auxiliary plant (3 x 23 MW)

Number
Finished diameter
1
m
3
5.6 (Circular)
Nominal discharge
m /s
87.25
Length of TRT
149.3
No. of draft tube tunnels
Length of draft tube tunnel
19, 24
Finished diameter of draft tube tunnels
3.5 (Circular)
November 2014

Salient Features
2.8
TRT Gates
No.
Type
Vertical fixed wheel
Size (W x H)
2.75 x 3.5
Sill level
m asl
2017.00
2.12
POWER BENEFITS
2.12.1
Main Plant (4 x 95 MW)
2.12.2
Annual Energy (in 90% dependable year)
GWh
1348.50
Design Energy (at 95% plant availability)
GWh
1315.00
GWh
302.40
Auxiliary Plant (3 x 23 MW)

Energy with 95% plant availability
November 2014
CHAPTER 3: JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT

Justification of Project
3.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
3
JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT..................................................... 3.4
3.1
POWER SCENARIO IN INDIA ............................................................................................ 3.4
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
POWER SCENARIO IN THE NORTHERN REGION ...................................................... 3.7

Power Supply Position during Past Decade ................................................................ 3.8
Power Supply Position for FY 2011-12 ....................................................................... 3.11
Long Term Forecast for Northern Region ................................................................. 3.12
3.3
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
POWER SCENARIO IN HIMACHAL PRADESH ........................................................... 3.13

Power Supply Position during Past Decade .............................................................. 3.13
Power Supply Position for FY 2011-12 ....................................................................... 3.15
Long Term Forecast for Himachal Pradesh ............................................................... 3.16
3.4
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.4.4
HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................... 3.16

Growth of Hydropower upto 9TH Plan......................................................................... 3.17
10TH Plan Hydro Development....................................................................................... 3.17
11TH Plan Hydro Development Programme .............................................................. 3.18
Strategy for Hydro Development for Benefits during 12TH Plan ....................... 3.19
3.5
NECESSITY AND JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................... 3.19
3.6
POWER EVACUATION FOR THE PROJECT ................................................................. 3.22
November 2014

3.2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Long Term Region wise Forecast ................................................................................................... 3.6
Table 3.2: Installed Capacity of Northern Region as on 31st December, 2013 in MW ................... 3.7
Table 3.3: Availability/Requirement of Energy & Peak Power in Northern Region during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12) ............................................................................................................................... 3.8
Table 3.4: Growth in Energy Generation in Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03 to
2011-12) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3.10
Table 3.5: Growth in Installed Capacity in Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03 to
2011-12) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3.10
Table 3.6: Energy and Peak Load Demand for the Northern Region (Period 2016 2022)................ 3.12
Table 3.7: Installed Capacity of Himachal Pradesh as on 31st December, 2013 in MW ............... 3.13
Table 3.8: Energy and Peak Load Demand for Himachal Pradesh (Period 2016 2022) ............ 3.16
Table 3.9: Capacity Addition Planned during 11th Plan for All India in MW..................................... 3.18
Table 3.10: Projected Electricity Demand of All India ............................................................................... 3.19
November 2014

3.3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1: Shares in Installed Capacity December 2013 ....................................................................... 3.4
Figure 3.2: Region Wise Power Supply Position during Year 2013-14................................................. 3.5
Figure 3.3: Region Wise Peak Demand Position during Year 2013-14 ................................................ 3.5
Figure 3.4: Region Wise Installed Generation Capacity ............................................................................. 3.7
Figure 3.5: Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past Decade (200203 to 2011-12) ............................................................................................................................................................. 3.9
Figure 3.6: Peak Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past Decade (2002-03
to 2011-12) ................................................................................................................................................................... 3.9
Figure 3.7: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region for FY 2011-12 ............. 3.11
Figure 3.8: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Northern Region for FY 2011-12 ............... 3.12
Figure 3.9: Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past Decade
(2002-03 to 2011-12).............................................................................................................................................. 3.14
Figure 3.10: Peak Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past Decade (200203 to 2011-12) ........................................................................................................................................................... 3.14
Figure 3.11: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12 ............. 3.15
Figure 3.12: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12 .................. 3.16
Figure 3.13: Plan-wise Growth and Share of Hydropower ..................................................................... 3.17
Figure 3.14: Planned vs. Actual Commissioned Capacity of All India during 11th Plan................ 3.18
Figure 3.15: Growth of Per Capita Electricity Consumption ................................................................... 3.20
Figure 3.16: Peak Percentage Deficit of States in Northern Region for FY 2011-12 .................... 3.21
November 2014

3.4
JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT
3.1
POWER SCENARIO IN INDIA
240
100
100
200
160
80
68.3
60
120
40
80
17.1
40
20
12.6
Installed Capacity (%)
Installed Capacity (MW)
Thousands
As per CEA report the total installed generation capacity in our country, which was
only 1,358 MW at the time of Independence, is 233,929.94 MW as on 31st December
2013. The share of hydro with 39,893.40 MW capacities is only 17.1%. Thermal
(including gas and diesel) accounts for the maximum share of 68.3% with
159,793.99 MW. Nuclear capacity is about 2.0% with 4,780.00 MW and other
renewable sources with a capacity of 29,462.55 MW i.e. 12.6%. This is graphically
depicted in Figure 3.1.
2.0
0
0
Thermal
Hydro
Nuclear
RES
Total
Figure 3.1: Shares in Installed Capacity December 2013

(Source: CEA website)
The contribution of private sector in the total installed capacity is 76,095.30 MW

(32.5%). Share in state sector is maximum with 90,836.70 MW (38.8%) and the
remaining share lies with central sector which is 66,997.94 MW (28.7%).
About 68% of Indias total installed capacity is thermal-based. However expansion
of this energy source is encountering difficulties because of the burden it places on
the infrastructure for supply (mines) and transportation (railways) of coal.
The region-wise distribution of the total power supply and demand position in the
country during 2013-2014 (From April 2013 to December 2013) is depicted in
Figure 3.2 and the peak demand during this period is shown in Figure 3.3.
November 2014
3.5
800
10
7.3
700
600
6.3
6.3
6
4.5
500
400
1.4
0.9
300
200
-2
100
-4
Energy Deficit (%)
Energy Requirement/Available (MU)

Thousands

-6
Northern
Western
Southern
Energy Requirement (MU)
Eastern
NorthEastern
Energy Available (MU)
All India
Energy Deficit (%)
Figure 3.2: Region Wise Power Supply Position during Year 2013-14
160
15
12.5
140
12
120
100
80
6.9
5.4
6
4.2
2.5
2.2
60
40
-3
20
-6
-9
Northern Western Southern
Peak Demand (MW)
Eastern
Peak Met (MW)
NorthEastern
Peak Deficit (%)
Peak Demand/Met (MW)
Thousands
All India
Peak Deficit (%)
Figure 3.3: Region Wise Peak Demand Position during Year 2013-14
November 2014

3.6
Most of the regions of the country are suffering from power shortages leading to
irregular and unreliable supply. The problem becomes acute during peak hours.
Based on the projections made in the 17th Electric Power Survey (2007), the all India
peak demand will reach to 298253 MW by the year 2021-22, which means an
additional generating capacity of about 64,323 MW needs to be added to ensure
Power on Demand during the next 10 years. This, in effect, means increasing the
present installed capacity by 27.5%. Not only the capacity has to be added but also
the present hydro-thermal imbalance of 25:75 has to be corrected and brought to
40:60 to meet the peak load requirements, achieve frequency and voltage stability
and provide system operating flexibility under changing seasonal and diurnal load
pattern. Presently the share of thermal and hydro in the total installed capacity of
India is about 85%. If same share (85%) is adopted and for achieving a 40:60 hydro
thermal ratio in an additional installed capacity of about 64,323 MW, required by
2021-22, the total requirement of hydro capacity will be 101,400 MW which means
about 61,510 MW additional hydro capacity has to be created in the next 10 years.
Beside the proper hydro-thermal balance, with increasing fossil fuel prices and
increasing environmental concerns the policy makers are insisting on increasing the
dependence on hydro power and other forms of renewable energy. Hydro power in
particular has a vast unexploited potential estimated at over 84000MW and is a
cleaner source of electricity in long run.
CEA in their 17th Power Survey has indicated long term (2021-22) projections of
power demand in the country as shown in Table 3.1 below which indicates that
regional distribution of demand for power would be more or less at the current
level.
Table 3.1: Long Term Region wise Forecast
(Source: 17th EPS)
Energy Requirement (Gwh)
Peak load (MW)
Region
2011-12
2016-17
2021-22
2011-12
2016-17
2021-22
NR
294841
411513
556768
48137
66583
89913
WR
294860
409805
550022
47108
64349
84778
SR
253443
380068
511659
40367
60433
80485
ER
111802
168942
258216
19088
28401
42712
NER
Total
(All India)
13329
21143
36997
2537
3760
6180
968659
1392066
1914508
152746
218209
298253
The demand for power in Northern Region is expected to be about 30% of the total
demand of India by 2021-22. This is indicative of the need of special efforts to spur
the growth of power demand in Northern Region. Such increased demand for
power in the region would create employment opportunities and economic activity,
which would be beneficial to the Northern Region.
November 2014

3.2
3.7
POWER SCENARIO IN THE NORTHERN REGION

Presently the installed capacity of the Northern Region is 26.8% of the total installed
capacity of the country. The region-wise distribution of total installed generation
capacity of 233,929.94 MW is shown in Figure 3.4. This includes allocated shares in
joint & central sector utilities. Installed capacity of Northern Region as on 31st
December 2013 was 62,670.12 MW, comprising 39,627.75 MW (63.2%) of thermal,
15,692.75 MW (25.1%) of hydro, 1,620.00 MW of nuclear (2.6%) and 5,729.62 MW
from renewable energy sources (9.1%). Thermal includes 5,031.26 MW of gas
turbine, 12.99 MW of diesel generation units and the remaining 34,583.50 MW is
based on coal. Sector wise details of the installed capacity of 62,670.12 MW are
given in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Installed Capacity of Northern Region as on 31st December, 2013 in MW
Thermal
Hydro
STATE
7052.55 14713.00
PRIVATE
2148.00
7870.00
108.00
CENTRAL
6492.20 12000.50
2344.06
0.00 14344.56
15692.75 34583.50
5031.26
12.99 39627.75

Thousands
TOTAL
Coal
Gas
2579.20
Diesel
Total
12.99 17305.19
0.00
7978.00
240
Nuclear
RES
Total
0.00 1221.81 25579.55

0.00 4507.81 14633.81
1620.00
0.00 22456.76
1620.00 5729.62 62670.12
100
100.0
200
80
160
60
120
80
26.8
40
34.7
24.7
20
12.6
40
1.2
0
Northern Western Southern Eastern
North
Eastern
0.03
Islands
Sector
0
All India
Figure 3.4: Region Wise Installed Generation Capacity

November 2014

3.2.1
3.8
Power Supply Position during Past Decade

The availability and requirement of energy and peak power in Northern Region
during the past decade is given in Table 3.3. These statistics are also shown in
Figure 3.5 & Figure 3.6. During year 2011-12 the energy requirement of the
Northern Region was 758.53 MU/day against the available energy of 709.93 MU/day
thus leaving a shortage of 48.60 MU/day (6.85%). The maximum requirement in the
Northern Region during 2011-12 is reported as 40,248 MW in August 2011 in place
of 37,431 MW observed in September 2010 for the previous year. Maximum
availability in the Northern Region for 2011-12 was 37,117 MW in July 2011.
Table 3.3: Availability/Requirement of Energy & Peak Power in Northern Region

during Past Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12)
(Source: NRPC Annual Report 2011-12)
Year
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Energy (MU)
Peak Power (MW)
Availability Requirement % ShortageAvailability Requirement % Shortage
143029.09
153712.68
159261.41
168979.86
180538.31
196813.39
202693.43
225334.72
237986.00
258382.00
155640.67
163320.18
177065.84
190950.37
202742.75
220463.39
227846.43
254705.72
258775.00
276121.00
8.10
5.88
10.06
11.51
10.95
10.73
11.04
11.53
8.03
6.42
21773
22746
24209
25362
26644
29495
29504
31439
34101
37117
24092
24067
26808
29044
31516
32462
33034
37159
37431
40248
9.63
5.49
9.69
12.68
15.46
9.14
10.69
15.39
8.90
7.78
November 2014
300
14
11.5
250
10.1
11.0
10.7
11.0
12
11.5
10
8.1
200
Energy (MU)
3.9
8.0
6.4
5.9
150
2
100
0
-2
50
Energy Shortage (%)
Thousands

-4
0
-6
Availability
Requirement
Year
% Shortage
Figure 3.5: Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12)
45
18
40
15.46
35
14
12.68
30
25
16
15.39
10.69
9.63
9.69
20
15
10
9.14
12
10
8.90
7.78
5.49
8
6
4
Peak Shortage (%)
Peak Power (MW)

Thousands
Year
Availability
Requirement
% Shortage
Figure 3.6: Peak Availability and Requirement of Northern Region during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12)
November 2014

3.10
Growth in energy generation and installed capacity in Northern Region during the
past decade as per the Annual Report 2011-12 of Northern Regional Power
Committee (NRPC) is given in Table 3.4 & Table 3.5 respectively.
Table 3.4: Growth in Energy Generation in Northern Region during Past Decade
(2002-03 to 2011-12)
Year
Thermal
Hydro
Gas
Nuclear
Total Energy
Generation*
2002-03
98724.42
30139.99
17261.41
8418.52
154544.34
2003-04
102704.29
37996.94
20251.12
7157.49
168109.84
2004-05
106451.80
39269.60
19890.54
7069.64
172681.60
2005-06
112572.79
42109.98
19949.49
6221.68
180853.94
2006-07
123797.80
45239.51
20051.05
4520.16
194440.00
2007-08
129111.00
50886.65
19692.06
3147.95
202837.00
2008-09
136233.08
53446.29
20235.15
2995.77
216526.80
2009-10
139393.64
50899.32
23089.88
4320.35
222096.14
2010-11
143604.11
55849.77
21521.64
9591.01
231572.22
2011-12
140925.82
65696.01
21524.26
9862.12
279553.82
(All Figures in MU)

*Total Energy includes RES
Table 3.5: Growth in Installed Capacity in Northern Region during Past Decade
(2002-03 to 2011-12)
Year
Thermal
Hydro
Gas
Nuclear
Total Installed
Capacity
2002-03
15469.50
8699.10
3213.20
1180.00
28618.09
2003-04
16004.50
10105.10
3213.20
1320.00
30699.09
2004-05
16789.50
10845.40
3213.20
1180.00
32327.83
2005-06
17592.50
11061.88
3213.20
1180.00
33757.16
2006-07
18027.50
13000.38
3323.20
1180.00
36359.44
2007-08
18877.50
12975.15
3543.20
1180.00
37879.11
2008-09
18807.50
13425.15
3531.19
1180.00
38723.20
2009-10
21275.00
13310.75
3563.26
1620.00
42189.33
2010-11
24232.50
13822.75
4134.76
1620.00
46988.55
2011-12
28357.04
15122.75
4421.26
1620.00
53925.50
(All Figures in MW)

November 2014

3.2.2
3.11
Power Supply Position for FY 2011-12
35
11.4
30
4.7
25
4.0
3.9
2.6
5.1
15
9.4
6.6
9.1
7.2
6.7
5.8
10
5
Energy Deficit (%)
Energy (MU)
Thousands
Actual monthly energy requirement/availability in Northern Region for FY 2011-12 is

shown in Figure 3.7. Overall deficit in the Northern Region from April 2011 to
March 2012 is 6.4%. Broadly the monthly deficit in the Northern Region lies
between 2 to 12%.
20
15
-5
10
-10
-15
-20
Energy Deficit (%)
Figure 3.7: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Northern Region for FY 2011-12
Actual monthly peak demand/availability in Northern Region for FY 2011-12 is

shown in Figure 3.8. Maximum monthly peak demand in the Northern Region for
FY 2011-12 is observed in August 2011 as 40,248 MW which accounts for deficit of
8.8%. Broadly the peak deficit in the Northern Region lies between 4 to 11%.
November 2014
3.12
60
9.8
50
8.8
6.0
6.4
9.0
10.7
5.9
15
8.5
9.9
8.8
9.6
10
4.5
Peak (MW)
40
5
0
30
-5
20
-10
10
-15
-20
Peak Met (MW)
Peak Demand (MW)
Peak Deficit (%)
Thousands

Peak Deficit (%)
Figure 3.8: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Northern Region for FY 2011-12
3.2.3
Long Term Forecast for Northern Region

On the basis of the addition of capacity during the 11th & 12th Plan period, the CEA
has estimated the requirements of energy and peak load of the Northern Region as
shown in Table 3.6.
Table 3.6: Energy and Peak Load Demand for the Northern Region (Period 2016 2022)
(Source: 17th EPS)
Period
Energy (GWh)
Peak Load (MW)
2016 - 17
411513
66583
2021 - 22
556768
89913
From the above table it can be seen that the peak demand in Northern Region over
a period of 10 years is likely to be increased by around 123% from 40248 MW in
2011 12 to as much as 89913 MW in 2021-22.
November 2014

3.3
3.13
POWER SCENARIO IN HIMACHAL PRADESH

Himachal Pradesh along with the States of Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab,
Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Chandigarh and Delhi is part of the Northern
Region. Installed capacity of Himachal Pradesh as on 31st December 2013, including
allocated shares in joint & central sector utilities, was 3824.96 MW, comprising
214.03 MW (5.6%) of thermal, 34.08 MW (0.9%) of nuclear, 2950.94 MW (77.1%) of
hydro and 625.91 MW (16.4%) from renewable energy sources. Thermal includes
0.13 MW as gas based, 61.88 MW as diesel based and the remaining 152.02 MW is
based on coal. Sector wise details of the installed capacity of 3824.96 MW are given
below:
Table 3.7: Installed Capacity of Himachal Pradesh as on 31st December, 2013 in MW
Thermal
Sector
STATE
Hydro
Coal
Gas
Diesel
Total
Nuclear
RES
Total
393.60
0.00
0.00
0.13
0.13
0.00
625.91
1019.64
PRIVATE
1748.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1748.00
CENTRAL
809.34
152.02
61.88
0.00
213.90
34.08
0.00
1057.32
2950.94
152.02
61.88
0.13
214.03
34.08
625.91
3824.96
TOTAL
In thermal & nuclear, the installed capacity is allocated from central sector. In
thermal the allocation to Himachal Pradesh is mainly from Rihand STPS, Unchahar
TPS and Dadri NCGPS etc. In nuclear the allocated installed capacity is from Narora
APS and Rajasthan APS.
The coal required for thermal projects is not available in Himachal Pradesh.
Therefore pit head power stations are not feasible in the state. For load centre
stations the distance from pit head to load centre will increase the cost of coal at
load centre. In case of imported coal, apart from its much higher cost as compared
to domestic coal, the freight charges for the distance from port to load centre
(Himachal Pradesh) will increase the cost of coal at load centre tremendously. Thus
use of imported coal is not an economically viable solution for Himachal Pradesh.
Further for load centre stations, the rail network is also not well developed in
Himachal Pradesh, which is required for coal movement from pit head. Thus the
development of thermal power is not very much feasible in the state.
3.3.1
Power Supply Position during Past Decade

Availability and requirement of energy and peak for Himachal Pradesh during past
decade are shown in Figure 3.9 & Figure 3.10 respectively.
November 2014

3.14
35
30
2.9
2.8
2.3
2.1
1.1
25
0.7
0.3
0.0
20
3.4
4.1
15
10
5
0
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
Energy Deficit (%)
Average Energy (MU/Day)
40
Year
Requirement
Availability
% Deficit
Figure 3.9: Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12)
7.8
5.8
1600
1200
0.0
4.9
0.0
4.8
3.9
3.5
7.1
10
8
6
4
2
0.0
800
-2
-4
400
Peak Deficit (%)
Peak Power (MW)
2000
-6
-8
-10
Year
Availability
Requirement
% Deficit
Figure 3.10: Peak Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh during Past
Decade (2002-03 to 2011-12)
November 2014

3.15
During year 2011-12 the energy requirement of Himachal Pradesh was 22.36
MU/day against the available energy of 22.21 MU/day thus leaving a shortage of
0.15 MU/day (0.7%). However, the deficit in meeting the peak requirement was
about 7.1%. The maximum requirement in the state during 2011-12 is reported as
1397 MW in February 2012, whereas the maximum availability in the state for 201112 was 1298 MW in February 2012.
3.3.2
Power Supply Position for FY 2011-12

Actual monthly energy requirement/availability in Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12
is shown in Figure 3.11. Maximum monthly deficit in Himachal Pradesh is observed
as 4.8% in December 2012.
10
1200
1.6
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.6
1.9
2.9
4.8
0.9
0.4
Energy (MU)
1000
0.0
0
-4.7
800
-5
600
Energy Deficit (%)
1400
-10
400
-15
200
0
-20
Energy Deficit (%)
Figure 3.11: Actual Energy Availability and Requirement of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12
Actual monthly peak demand/availability in Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12 is

shown in Figure 3.12. Maximum monthly peak demand in Himachal Pradesh for FY
2011-12 is observed in February 2012 as 1397 MW which accounts for deficit of
7.1%. Maximum peak deficit in Himachal Pradesh is observed as 24% during April
2011.
November 2014

30
24.0
1800
20
1600
Peak (MW)
1400
0.0
0.0
3.7
9.2
0.1
6.3
0.0
0.0
3.0
7.1
8.8
10
0
1200
1000
-10
800
-20
600
-30
400
Peak Deficit (%)
2000
3.16
-40
200
0
-50
Peak Met (MW)
Peak Demand (MW)
Peak Deficit (%)
Figure 3.12: Actual Peak Availability and Demand of Himachal Pradesh for FY 2011-12
3.3.3
Long Term Forecast for Himachal Pradesh

On the basis of the addition of capacity during the 11th & 12th Plan period, the CEA
has estimated the requirements of energy and peak load of Himachal Pradesh as
shown in Table 3.8.
Table 3.8: Energy and Peak Load Demand for Himachal Pradesh (Period 2016 2022)
(Source: 17th EPS)
Period
Energy (GWh)
Peak Load (MW)
2016 - 17
13135
2194
2021 - 22
17657
2907
From the above table it can be seen that the peak demand in Himachal Pradesh
over a period of 10 years is likely to be increased by around 108% from 1397 MW in
2011 - 12 to as much as 2907 MW in 2021-22.
3.4
HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT

Assessment of demand is an important pre-requisite for planning capacity addition.
As per Section 3 (4) of the Electricity Act 2003, Central Electricity Authority (CEA)
shall frame a National Electricity Plan once in five years and revise the same from
time to time in accordance with the National Electricity Policy. Growth of hydro
power during these plans is discussed below.
November 2014

3.4.1
3.17
Growth of Hydropower upto 9TH Plan

The plan wise growth of hydro power in the total installed capacity of the country is
shown in Figure 3.13. For 11th plan (2007-12) the data shown in figure is upto 28th
February 2011, whereas for other plans the installed capacity is at the end of plan. It
could be seen from Figure 3.13 that hydro share was above 45% at the end of 3rd
Plan (1961-66) which was reduced to 25% at the end of 9th Plan (1997-02).
3.4.2
10TH Plan Hydro Development

The Working Group of power for the 10th Plan had recommended need based
capacity addition of 41,110 MW which included hydro capacity addition of
14,393 MW comprising of 8,742 MW in central sector, 4,481 MW in state sector and
1,170 MW in Private Sector. However, hydro capacity of 7,886 MW comprising of
4,495 MW in Central Sector, 2,691 MW in State Sector and 700 MW in Private Sector
could actually be commissioned during the 10th Plan. Thus only 55% of the planned
hydro capacity could be achieved. The main reasons for slippages in 10th Plan are
delay in supplies / erection by suppliers / contractor, delay in award of works, delay
in clearances / investment decisions, law & order problems and such other reasons
like delay in environmental clearances, geological surprises, natural calamities, R&R
issues, delay in signing of MOU, court cases, etc.
Hydro Capacity (MW)
Total Capacity (MW)
200
40
150
30
100
20
50
10
(At the end of First
12th Plan (2012-17)
11th Plan (2007-12)
10th Plan (2002-07)
9th Plan (1997-02)
8th Plan (1992-97)
Two Annual Plans
7th Plan (1985-90)
6th Plan (1980-85)
Annual Plan (1979-80)
5th Plan (1974-79)
4th Plan (1969-74)
Three Annual Plans
3rd Plan (1961-66)
2nd Plan (1956-61)
1st Plan (1951-56)
Hydro Capacity (%)
50
Capacity (MW) Thousands
250
Figure 3.13: Plan-wise Growth and Share of Hydropower

November 2014

3.4.3
3.18
11TH Plan Hydro Development Programme

A capacity addition of 78,700 MW comprising of 59,693 MW from thermal projects,
15,627 MW from hydro projects and 3,380 MW from nuclear projects was planned
during the 11th Plan period (2007-12) (Refer Figure 3.14). Only about 70% of the
total planned capacity is commissioned at the end of 11th Plan.
Table 3.9: Capacity Addition Planned during 11th Plan for All India in MW
Sector
Hydro
STATE
Thermal
Nuclear Wind
Total
Diesel
Total
3482.0
19985.0
3316.4
0.0
23301.4
0.0
0.0
26783.4
PRIVATE
3491.0
9515.0
2037.0
0.0
11552.0
0.0
0.0
15043.0
CENTRAL
8654.0
23350.0
1490.0
0.0
24840.0
3380.0
0.0
36874.0
TOTAL
15627.0
52850.0
6843.4
0.0
59693.4
3380.0
0.0
78700.4
78.7004
Gas
70
60
50
48.5399
59.6934
80
54.9639
90
10
0.88
20
3.38
30
5.544
40
15.627

Thousands
Coal
0
Hydro
Thermal
Planned
Nuclear
Total
Commissioned
Figure 3.14: Planned vs. Actual Commissioned Capacity of All India during 11th Plan
Out of 15,627 MW of hydro envisaged for commissioning during 11th Plan,

7,488 MW was planned in Northern Region and 1,672 MW in Himachal Pradesh.
Only 1,292 MW is commissioned in Himachal Pradesh by private sector out of
planned hydro capacity of 1,672 MW.
November 2014

3.4.4
3.19
Strategy for Hydro Development for Benefits during 12TH Plan

As per the studies carried out by CEA to assess the requirement of additional
capacity during the 12th Plan (2012-2017), the requirement of installed capacity to
meet the all India peak demand and energy requirement at the end of 12th Plan
would require a capacity addition of over 98,400 MW in the 5 years period of 201217. About 23,500 MW is achieved by the end of 1st year of 12th Plan. In pursuing low
carbon growth strategy, efforts are to maximize exploitation of hydro power
potential. This is also necessary for energy security of the country.
3.5
NECESSITY AND JUSTIFICATION

India has been facing electricity shortages in spite of appreciable growth in
electricity generation. The demand for electrical energy has been growing at a much
faster rate and is expected to increase further to match with the projected growth of
Indian economy. The report of the 17th Electric Power Survey, published by CEA,
unlike earlier EPS Reports has considered National Electricity Policy target for
providing power to all by 2012. In the 17th EPS report the various growth rates have
been worked out giving higher weightage to the latest power consumption trend to
capture the technological changes and energy conservation efforts in all categories
of electricity consumption.
The report has projected electrical energy demand of 1392 Tera Watt Hours for
2016-17 and peak electric demand of 218 Giga Watts. The electrical energy demand
for 2021-22 has been estimated as 1915 Tera Watt Hours and peak electric demand
of 298 Giga Watts. The demand projections have been made assuming that the
utilities would be able to make rigorous efforts in containing T&D losses and
adopting Demand Side Management Techniques to achieve high load factors.
The demand projections on all India basis for the year 2016-17 and 2021-22 are
given below:
Table 3.10: Projected Electricity Demand of All India
(Source: 17th EPS)
Year
Electrical Energy Requirement

at Power Station Bus Bars
(GWh)
Annual Peak Electric Load at

Power Station Bus Bars
(MW)
2016-17
1392066
218209
2021-22
1914508
298253
The peak demand during 2013-14 has been reached to 135561 MW which is likely
to increase to 298253 MW during 2021-22 as projected in the 17th EPS report. In the
current financial year i.e. 2013-14, the peak demand has reached to 135561 MW
November 2014

3.20
upto December 2013 with a deficit of 4.2% and the energy requirement has reached
to 753829 MU with a deficit of 4.5%.
The per capita electricity consumption which was 18.2 kWh during 1950, has
increased to 917.2 kWh during the year 2012-13. The growth of per capita electricity
consumption form the year 1950 to 2012-13 is presented in Figure 3.15.
2012-13 (End of 1st Year of 12th Plan)
917.2
2011-12 (End of 11th Plan)
883.6
2007 (End of 10th Plan)
671.9
559.2
464.6
1992 (End of 2 Annual Plans)
347.5
Plan/Year
329.2
228.7
1980 (End of Annual Plan)
172.4
171.6
126.2
1969 (End of 3 Annual Plans)
97.9
1966 (End of 3rd Plan)
73.9
1961 (End of 2nd Plan)
45.9
1956 (End of 1st Plan)
30.9
1950
18.2
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Per Capita Consumption (kWh)
Figure 3.15: Growth of Per Capita Electricity Consumption

(Source: CEA Website)
The deficit in peak power for all the states in Northern Region for FY 2011-12 is
shown in Figure 3.16. It is clear for this figure that there is peak deficit of upto 24%
the state of Himachal Pradesh and peak deficit of about 8% the Northern Region
during FY 2011-12.
From the growth of peak demand and anticipated installed generating capacity on
the basis of schemes proposed for benefits under construction/consideration, it is
observed that there is a dire need to provide additional capacity to the Northern
grid to meet the increasing demand of the grid. Thus new schemes have to be taken
up immediately and be implemented to drive timely benefits.
November 2014

3.21
Considering the present and projected energy and peaking power shortages,
addition of Dugar HEP in national grid is very much justified.
-40
-35
-30
Peak Deficit (%)
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
Chandigarh
Himachal Pradesh
Rajasthan
Northern Region
Delhi
Jammu & Kashmir
Uttar Pradesh
Mar-12
Feb-12
Jan-12
Dec-11
Nov-11
Oct-11
Sep-11
Aug-11
Jul-11
Jun-11
May-11
Apr-11
Haryana
Punjab
Uttarakhand
Figure 3.16: Peak Percentage Deficit of States in Northern Region for FY 2011-12
As per annual plan 2008-09 of Government of Himachal Pradesh, the total identified
hydro potential is 20415.62 MW. Out of this 2251.0 MW is in Chenab basin. All the
available hydro potential of Chenab Basin is unexploited so far. In the annual plan
2008-09, 24 projects have been identified for allotment to IPPs, out of 24 project, 14
projects are in Chenab basin. Dugar HEP is of these 14 projects identified by
Government of Himachal Pradesh for allotment to IPP.
Dugar HEP also fits well in the development of Chenab basin as the project located
between the Sach Khas HEP on the upstream and Kirthai-I HEP on the downstream
utilizes the head available in between upstream and downstream project
boundaries.
The implementation of the proposed Dugar HEP (421 MW), will contribute to
meeting the power and energy demand in the Northern Region which comes under
the purview of Northern Eastern Western and North-Eastern (NEWNE) grid and will
November 2014

3.22
displace electricity that would otherwise have to be produced through the

construction of fossil fuel based thermal power plants.
3.6
POWER EVACUATION FOR THE PROJECT

As per power system planning of Northern region grid, generation step-up is
proposed at 400 kV level and LILO of one circuit of Reoli Kishtwar 400 kV D/C at
Dugar Generating station. Switchyard capacity to be kept for 1500 MW at Dugar
power house. Accordingly, 400 D/C outgoing feeders are considered at Dugar
pothead yard.
9 nos 400kV GIS bays i.e. 6 nos for units, 1 no bus-coupler and 2 nos for outgoing
feeders shall be installed in GIS hall, located above generator step-up transformers
in transformer cavern.
HV side of the generator step-up transformers shall be connected to the GIS
through gas to oil bushing and GIB limbs, whereas the LV side of the generator step
up transformers shall be connected to the generator terminals through a 13.8 kV
isolated phase busduct for 95 MW unit and 11 kV segregated busduct for 23 MW
unit. GIS shall be connected to the Pothead yard through 400 kV single phase XLPE
cables.
November 2014
CHAPTER 4: BASIN DEVELOPMENT

Basin Development
4.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
4
BASIN DEVELOPMENT ............................................................... 4.2
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
MAJOR RIVER SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................... 4.2

ASSESSMENT OF HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL .......................................................... 4.2
First Survey (1953-59) ......................................................................................................... 4.2
Re-assessment Studies (1978-87) ................................................................................... 4.3
INDUS BASIN.......................................................................................................................... 4.4
CHENAB BASIN ...................................................................................................................... 4.5
FITMENT OF DUGAR HEP IN CHENAB BASIN DEVELOPMENT ............................ 4.6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per First Survey ........................................................... 4.2
Table 4.2: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per Re-assessment Study........................................ 4.3
Table 4.3: Hydroelectric Potential of Indus Basin .......................................................................................... 4.4
Table 4.4: Hydro Power Projects on Chenab River ....................................................................................... 4.6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Region-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential............................................................................ 4.4
Figure 4.2: Basin-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential ............................................................................... 4.5
Figure 4.3: Major Hydropower Projects in Chenab Basin........................................................................... 4.7
November 2014

BASIN DEVELOPMENT
4.1
MAJOR RIVER SYSTEMS
Basin Development
4.2
India is endowed with a vast hydropower potential. For the purpose of hydro
electric potential survey, the country has been classified into six major river systems.
These river systems been further divided into 49 basins. The six major river
systems/basins are as follows:
Indus Basin
Ganga Basin
Brahmaputra Basin
Central Indian River System
West Flowing River System
East Flowing River System
4.2
ASSESSMENT OF HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL
4.2.1
First Survey (1953-59)

The first systematic and comprehensive study to assess the hydro-electric resources
in the country was undertaken during the period 1953-1959 by the Power Wing of
the erstwhile Central Water and Power Commission on the basis of prevailing
technology of hydro construction and the constraints imposed by topographical
and hydrological considerations etc. These studies placed the economical utilizable
hydro power potential of the country at 42100 MW at 60% load factor
(corresponding to an annual energy generation of 221 billion units). The basin-wise
potential was assessed as below:
Table 4.1: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per First Survey
River Basin
Potential at 60%
Load Factor (MW)
Indus
6583
Brahmaputra
13417
Ganga
4817
Central Indian River System
4300
West Flowing Rivers of Southern India
4350
East Flowing Rivers of Southern India
8633
Total
42100
November 2014

4.2.2
Basin Development
4.3
Re-assessment Studies (1978-87)

The re-assessment studies of hydro-electric potential of the country, completed by
Central Electricity Authority in 1987, have placed the hydro power potential at
84044 MW at 60% load factor. A total of 845 hydroelectric schemes have been
identified in the various basins which will yield 442 billion units of electricity. With
seasonal energy, the total energy potential is assessed to be 600 billion units per
year. In addition, the reassessment studies have also identified 56 sites for Pumped
Storage Schemes (PSS) with total installation of about 94,000 MW. The hydro
potential of 84044 MW at 60% load factor when fully developed would result in an
installed capacity of over 1,50,000 MW on the basis of probable average load factor.
The estimated potential of 84,044 MW is distributed across six major basins. About
78% of the estimated hydro potential of the country comes from the Himalayan
river systems comprising three basins, namely, Indus, Ganga and Brahmaputra out
of which 53% is located in Brahmaputra basin and 47% in Indus and Ganga basins.
The remaining 22% potential is distributed in three basins, namely, the central
Indian rivers, west flowing rivers and east flowing rivers. The basin wise hydroelectric
power potential of the country as per reassessment studies is as under:
Table 4.2: Basin-wise Hydroelectric Potential as per Re-assessment Study
No. of
Schemes
Potential at 60%
Load Factor (MW)
Probable Installed
Capacity (MW)
Indus
190
19988
33832
Brahmaputra
226
34920
66065
Ganga
142
10715
20711
53
2740
4152
94
6149
9430
140
9532
14511
845
84044
148701
River Basin
Central Indian River

System
West Flowing Rivers of
Southern India
East Flowing Rivers of
Southern India
Total
Region-wise distribution of this potential is shown in Figure 4.1. The hydro

potential of the Northern Region is 30,155 MW at 60% load factor, which is 35.9%
of the total assessed hydro potential of the country. In the Northern Region,
hydropower is the most suitable source of power since both thermal and nuclear or
other fuel-based source of energy involves carriage of raw material over long
distances making the cost of development uneconomical. In the Northern Region,
November 2014

Basin Development
4.4
Jammu & Kashmir with hydro potential of 7487 MW at 60% load factor stands
second after Himachal Pradesh with estimated hydro potential of 11647 MW.
North Eastern, 31857,
37.9%
Haryana, 64, 0.1%

Jammu & Kashmir,
7487, 8.9%
Punjab, 922, 1.1%
Himachal Pradesh,
11647, 13.9%
Northern; 30155;
35.9%
Rajasthan, 291, 0.3%

Uttaranchal, 7453,
8.9%
Uttar Pradesh, 2291,
2.7%
Eastern, 5590, 6.7%

Southern, 10763,
12.8%
Western, 5679, 6.8%
Total Hydroelectric Potential 84044 MW

(At 60% Load Factor)
Figure 4.1: Region-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential

4.3
INDUS BASIN
The Indus, which is one of the greatest rivers of the world, rises near Mansarovar in
Tibet and flows through India and Pakistan before fall in the Arabian Sea. Its
important tributaries flowing in Indian Territory are Shyok, Nubra, Indus, Satluj,
Beas, Ravi, Chenab and Jhelum. The total catchment area of Indus River is 1165500
km2 out of which 321289 km2 lies in India.
As per the reassessment study the hydro potential of Indus basin is estimated as
19988 MW at 60% load factor with a total of 190 hydroelectric schemes.
Distribution of this hydro potential in the sub-basins of Indus is given in Table 4.3.
The basin has some large multipurpose projects like Bhakra Project; Pong Dam (360
MW); and Ranjit Sagar (600 MW) project and a few large size ROR schemes like
Dehar (990 MW); Nathpa Jhakri (1500 MW); Salal (690 MW); Dulhasti (390 MW);
Baglihar (450 MW) and various other medium and small ROR schemes.
Table 4.3: Hydroelectric Potential of Indus Basin
(Source: Ministry of Water Resources website)
No. of
Schemes
Potential at 60%
Load Factor (MW)
Probable Installed
Capacity (MW)
Indus
47
1205
2377
Jhelum
22
1632
2657
Chenab
37
5932
11318
Ravi
20
1577
2534
River Basin
November 2014

Basin Development
4.5
No. of
Schemes
Potential at 60%
Load Factor (MW)
Probable Installed
Capacity (MW)
Beas
34
1981
3372
Sutlej
30
7661
11574
Total
190
19988
33832
River Basin
West Flowing
Rivers, 6149, 7.3%
East Flowing Rivers,

9532, 11.3%
Brahmaputra, 34920, 41.5%
Indus, 1205, 1.4%

Jhelum, 1632, 1.9%
Chenab, 5932,
7.1%
Indus; 19988;
23.8%
Ravi, 1577, 1.9%

Beas, 1981, 2.4%
Sutlej, 7661, 9.1%
Central Indian
Rivers, 2740, 3.3%
Ganga, 10715,
12.7%
Total Hydroelectric Potential 84044 MW

(At 60% Load Factor)
Figure 4.2: Basin-wise Distribution of Hydro Potential

4.4
CHENAB BASIN
Chenab is the sub-basin of Indus River System. The Chenab River, also known as
Chandra Bhaga River in its upper reaches, is one of the major rivers in Jammu &
Kashmir. It is formed by the confluence of two rivers viz. Chandra and Bhaga at
Tandi near Keylong in Lahaul & Spiti district of Himachal Pradesh. After flowing
through Pangi valley in Himachal Pradesh, Chenab River enters into the Paddar area
of Kishtwar district of Jammu & Kashmir at EL 1980 m a.s.l. Subsequently it is joined
by the largest tributary Marusudar at Bhandarkot at EL 1100 m asl and flows further
down upto Akhnoor in Indian Territory. Thereafter it enters into Pakistan. The
Chenab River traverses about 584 km in Indian Territory from its source to Akhnoor
and is joined by various tributaries in its course.
The Chenab River lying within the Indian Territory is generally rocky as almost the
entire river flows through the Himalayan ranges. A small part of the river near
Akhnoor, where river emerges out of Himalayan Mountains is comparatively plain.
The major portion of the basin receives a considerable amount of snowfall and most
of the part of upper reaches remains under snow cover throughout the year. The
November 2014

Basin Development
4.6
main river as well as various tributaries are fed from number of glaciers which make
these rivers perennial. The catchment receives rainfall during monsoon as well as
during winter periods. Major part of the valley experiences cold climate.
Out of 190 schemes in the Indus basin, 37 schemes are identified in the Chenab
basin with a hydroelectric potential of 5932 MW at 60% load factor. Major
hydropower projects planned on River Chenab are listed in Table 4.4 and their
locations are shown in Figure 4.3.
Table 4.4: Hydro Power Projects on Chenab River
S. No. Name of Scheme Installed Capacity (MW)
4.5
Chhatru
108
Seli
400
Reoli-Dugli
420
Purthi
300
Sachkhas
267
Dugar
449
Kirthai-I
390
Kirthai-II
930
Kiru
600
10
Kwar
520
11
Dulhasti
390
12
Ratle
850
13
Baglihar I & II
14
Swalkot
1200
15
Salal
690
450 + 450
Status
Commissioned
450 MW
Commissioned
Commissioned
FITMENT OF DUGAR HEP IN CHENAB BASIN DEVELOPMENT

Dugar HEP is one of the scheme identified in the Chenab basin as given in Table
4.4. The project is located near Luj village in district Chamba, Himachal Pradesh. The
upstream project (Sachkhas HEP) has tail water level as 2149 masl and Kirthai-I HEP
is on downstream of Dugar HEP having full reservoir level as 1895 masl. That means
the plants running in tandem will not have any negative effect on their performance
and there will be no interference with upstream or downstream projects. Dugar HEP
fit well in the Chenab basin between these two projects. Inter-basin transfer is not
involved in Dugar HEP.
November 2014

Basin Development
4.7
Figure 4.3: Major Hydropower Projects in Chenab Basin
November 2014
CHAPTER 5: INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS INDUS WATER TREATY

International Aspect Indus Water Treaty

5.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
5
INTERNATIONAL ASPECT - INDUS WATER TREATY............... 5.2
5.1
GENERAL .................................................................................................................................. 5.2
5.2
THE TREATY ............................................................................................................................ 5.3
5.3
PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS ............................................................. 5.4
5.4
5.4.1
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS ON WESTERN RIVERS ................................................. 5.4

Annexure D of IWT ............................................................................................................... 5.5
5.4.1.1
5.4.1.2
Design Considerations .........................................................................................................................5.6

Plant Operation Considerations .......................................................................................................5.8
5.4.2
Annexure E of IWT ................................................................................................................ 5.8
5.5
COMMUNICATION WITH PAKISTAN .......................................................................... 5.10
5.6
SETTLEMENT OF DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES ...................................................... 5.11
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5.1: Aggregate Storage Capacity Allotted to India .......................................................................... 5.9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5.1: Rivers of Indus Water System ........................................................................................................ 5.2
November 2014


5.2
INTERNATIONAL ASPECT - INDUS WATER TREATY
5.1
GENERAL
The Indus Basin is one of the largest river basins in Asia with an approximate area of
1million km2. It extends over four countries in South Asia including China in the
north-east, India in the east, Afghanistan in the north-west and Pakistan in the west.
More than 50% area of the Indus basin lies within Pakistan.
The largest river in the basin is the Indus River with Chenab, Jhelum, Beas, Ravi and
Sutlej Rivers as major tributaries. The major component of the annual flow for these
rivers is derived from snowmelt, originating in the Hindukush-Himalayan region. All
of the Indus Basin Rivers either originate or pass through India before flowing into
Pakistan. A riparian dispute erupted soon after the independence of the two
countries in 1947, which was settled in a water sharing treaty. This treaty, called the
Indus Water Treaty (IWT), was signed in 1960.
Figure 5.1: Rivers of Indus Water System

Dugar HEP lies on Chenab Main River in Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh, India
and is governed by The Indus Water Treaty 1960 between India and Pakistan. The
River Chandra and Bhaga combined near Tandi in Himachal Pardesh, India
November 2014


5.3
considered as tributaries of Chenab, thereafter River is known as The Chenab Main.

The Jhelum, The Ravi, The Satluj (The Beas combines in Satluj in India) combines the
Chenab in Pakistan and is known as Panjnad. Finally, it combines with The Indus in
Pakistan. Rivers of Indus Water System are shown in Figure 5.1.
Planning of Hydro Projects in the Chenab basin has to take into consideration the
provisions of the Indus Water Treaty, 1960 (IWT) between India and Pakistan. The
Treaty limits the total permissible storage in the Chenab basin at 1.7 Maft. Apart
from the storages the IWT permits provision of weekly pondage for ROR schemes
located upstream of Ramban (located in Jammu & Kashmir) on the Chenab Main.
The relevant details of the Treaty with implication on Dugar HEP are detailed in this
chapter.
5.2
THE TREATY
The Treaty comprises of a Preamble and following 12 Articles and 8 Annexures:
Article I
Definitions
Article II
Provisions Regarding Eastern Rivers
Article III
Provisions Regarding Western Rivers
Article IV
Provisions Regarding Eastern Rivers and Western Rivers
Article V
Financial Provisions
Article VI
Exchange of Data
Article VII
Future Co-Operation
Article VIII
Permanent Indus Commission
Article IX
Settlement of Differences and Disputes
Article X
Emergency Provisions
Article XI
General Provisions
Article XII
Final Provisions
Annexure A
Exchange of Notes between

Government of Pakistan
Annexure B
Agricultural Use by Pakistan from Certain Tributaries of the Ravi
Annexure C
Agricultural Use by India from the Western Rivers
Annexure D
Generation of Hydro-Electric Power by India on the Western

Rivers
November 2014
Government
of
India
and

5.3

5.4
Annexure E
Storage of Waters by India on the Western Rivers
Annexure F
Neutral Expert
Annexure G
Court of Arbitration
Annexure H
Transitional Arrangements
PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS

As per definitions given under Article I, the Indus Basin Rivers are categorized in two
groups viz. Eastern Rivers (Satluj, Ravi and Beas) and Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum
and Chenab). Under the Treaty, the waters of the Eastern Rivers stand allocated to
India and those of Western Rivers largely to Pakistan.
Dugar HEP is located on Chenab River which is under Western Rivers as per IWT.
The provisions regarding the utilization of Western Rivers as per the Article III of
IWT are given below:
i.
Pakistan shall receive for unrestricted use all those waters of the Western Rivers
which India is under obligation to let flow under the provisions of Section ii
below.
ii.
India shall be under the obligation to let flow all the waters of the Western
Rivers, and shall not permit any interference with these waters, except for the
following uses:
a.
Domestic Use
b. Non-Consumptive Use
c.
Agricultural Use (As set out in Annexure C of IWT)
d. Generation of Hydroelectric Power (As set out in Annexure D of IWT)

e.
iii.
5.4
Permitted aggregated storage for single or multipurpose reservoirs as per

Annexure E.
Except as provided in Annexure D and E of IWT, India shall not store any water
of, or construct any storage works on, the Westerns Rivers.
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS ON WESTERN RIVERS

Annexure D of IWT is about the generation of hydroelectric power by India on
Western Rivers. As per Paragraph 1 of the Annexure D, use of waters of Westerns
Rivers for generation of hydroelectric power by India, subject to provisions of
November 2014


5.5
Annexure D, shall be unrestricted, provided that the design, construction and

operation of new hydro-electric plants which are incorporated in a Storage Work (as
defined in Annexure E) shall be governed by the relevant provisions of Annexure E.
5.4.1
Annexure D of IWT
Annexure D of IWT comprises of following parts:
Part 1
Definitions
Part 2
Hydroelectric Plants in Operation or Under Construction as on

Effective Date
Part 3
New Run-of-River Plants
Part 4
New Plants on Irrigation Channels
Part 5
General
The relevant definitions mentioned in Part 1 of Annexure D are given below:

a.
"Dead Storage" means that portion of the storage which is not used for
operational purposes and "Dead Storage Level" means the level
corresponding to Dead Storage.
b.
"Live Storage" means all storage above Dead Storage.
c.
"Pondage" means Live Storage of only sufficient magnitude to meet

fluctuations in the discharge of the turbines arising from variations in the daily
and the weekly loads of the plant.
d.
"Full Pondage Level" means the level corresponding to the maximum Pondage
provided in the design in accordance with Paragraph (c) above.
e.
"Surcharge Storage" means uncontrollable storage occupying space above the

Full Pondage Level.
f.
"Operating Pool" means the storage capacity between Dead Storage level and
Full Pondage Level.
g.
"Run-of-River Plant" means a hydro-electric plant that develops power

without Live Storage as an integral part of the plant, except for Pondage and
Surcharge Storage.
h.
"Regulating Basin" means the basin whose only purpose is to even out
fluctuations in the discharge from the turbines arising from variations in the
daily and the weekly loads of the plant.
November 2014

i.

5.6
"Firm Power" means the hydroelectric power corresponding to the minimum

mean discharge at the site of a plant, the minimum mean discharge being
calculated as follows:
The average discharge for each 10-day period (1st to 10th, 11th to 20th and 21st
to the end of the month) will be worked out for each year for which discharge
data, whether observed or estimated, are proposed to be studied for purposes
of design. The mean of the yearly values for each 10-day period will then be
worked out. The lowest of the mean values thus obtained will be taken as the
minimum mean discharge. The studies will be based on data for as long a
period as available but may be limited to the latest 5 years in the case of Small
Plants (as defined in Paragraph 18 of Annexure D) and to the latest 25 years in
the case of other Plants (as defined in Paragraph 8).
j.
5.4.1.1
"Secondary Power" means the power, other than Firm Power, available only
during certain periods of the year.
Design Considerations
Dugar HEP is a new Run-of-River plant and qualifies the definition of "Run-of-River
Plant" as stated above, therefore, Part 3 of the Annexure D applies for the Dugar
HEP. Part 3 of the Annexure D has 16 Paragraphs from "8" to "23". Design
considerations for Run-of-River plants are given in Paragraph 8, but, as stated in
Paragraph 18, these design considerations do not apply to a "Small Plant" which is
defined as new Run-of-River plant located on a tributary and which conforms to the
following criteria:
a.
The aggregate designed maximum discharge through the turbines does not
exceed 300 cusecs;
b.
No storage is involved in connection with the Small Plant, except the Pondage
and the storage incidental to the diversion structure ; and
c.
The crest of the diversion structure across the Tributary, or the top level of the
gates, if any, shall not be higher than 20 feet above the mean bed of the
Tributary at the site of the structure.
Since the design discharge of Dugar HEP is 459.15 m3/s (16,215 cusec) and is more
than 300 cusec, Dugar HEP does not qualify the criteria of "Small Plant" and hence
the design considerations of Paragraph 8 of Annexure D will be applicable to
Dugar HEP. As per Paragraph 8 the Run-of-River plant shall conform to the
following criteria (Provisions made in Dugar HEP are furnished below):
a.
The works themselves shall not be capable of raising artificially the water level
in the Operating Pool above the Full Pondage Level specified in the design.
November 2014


5.7
The pondage i.e. live storage of Dugar HEP is 16.57 Million m3, which is
provided to meet the fluctuations in the discharge of the turbines arising from
variations in the daily load of plant (as per CEAs Letter No.2 /HP/52/CEA/2013PAC/163-64 dated 9th January 2014) . The Full Pondage Level of the Dugar HEP
is 2114.0 masl and there is no rising of water in the operating pool of Dugar
HEP above the Full Pondage Level.
b.
The design of the works shall take due account of the requirements of
Surcharge Storage and of Secondary Power.
There is no surcharge storage in Dugar HEP. The power other than firm power is
considered as secondary power.
c.
The maximum Pondage in the Operating Pool shall not exceed twice the
Pondage required for Firm Power.
The firm discharge (Minimum discharge value of average of total discharge
series) of Dugar HEP has been worked out as 61.72 m3/s. Twice the pondage
required for firm power is worked out as 16.57 MCM. Pondage in operating pool
does not exceed twice the pondage required for firm power (as per CEAs Letter
No.2 /HP/52/CEA/2013-PAC/163-64 dated 9th January 2014).
d.
There shall be no outlets below the Dead Storage Level, unless necessary for
sediment control or any other technical purpose; any such outlet shall be of
the minimum size, and located at the highest level, consistent with sound and
economical design and with satisfactory operation of the works.
No outlets are foreseen below the dead storage level.
e.
If the conditions at the site of a Plant make a gated spillway necessary, the
bottom level of the gates in normal closed position shall be located at the
highest level consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory
construction and operation of the works.
In Dugar HEP spillway gates arrangement has been provided accordingly.
f.
The intakes for the turbines shall be located at the highest level consistent
with satisfactory and economical construction and operation of the Plant as a
Run-of-River Plant and with customary and accepted practice of design for
the designated range of the Plant's operation.
The invert level of main intake is 2085.75 m asl and that of intake for auxiliary
unit is 2095.30 m asl. The invert elevation of intake is fixed based on the
minimum required submergence criteria from minimum drawdown level of
2102.35 m asl.
November 2014

5.4.1.2

5.8
Plant Operation Considerations

The operation of the works connected with the plant is subject to provisions given
in Paragraph 15. Following conditions are applicable to Dugar HEP:
a.
The volume of water received in the river upstream of the Plant, during any
period of seven consecutive days, shall be delivered into the river below the
Plant during the same seven-day period, and
b.
In any one period of 24 hours within that seven-day period, the volume
delivered into the river below the Plant shall be not less than 30%, and not
more than 130%, of the volume received in the river above the Plant during
the same 24-hour period.
Provided that:
i. where a Plant is located at a site on the Chenab Main below Ramban, the
volume of water received in the river upstream of the Plant in any one
period of 24 hours shall be delivered into the river below the Plant within
the same period of 24 hours ;
ii. where a Plant is located at a site on the Chenab Main above Ramban, the
volume of water delivered into the river below the Plant in any one period
of 24 hours shall not be less than 50% and not more than 130%, of the
volume received above the Plant during the same 24-hour period.
Paragraph 16 states that for the purpose of above conditions, the period of
24 hours shall commence at 8 A.M. daily and the period of 7 consecutive days shall
commence at 8 A.M. on every Saturday and the time shall be Indian Standard Time.
While applying the above stated conditions a tolerance of 10% in volume shall be
permissible and the Surcharge Storage shall be ignored as stated in the provisions
made in Paragraph 17. The Paragraph 17 also states that the above two conditions
shall not apply during the period when the Dead Storage at a Plant is being filled in
accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 14. The filling of Dead Storage shall be
carried out in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 18 or 19 of Annexure E.
5.4.2
Annexure E of IWT
The provisions for construction and operation of storage for single or multipurpose
reservoirs for India on western rivers are given in Annexure E of Treaty. As per
paragraph 7 of Annexure E, the aggregate storage capacity allotted to India on
western rivers and its tributaries is shown in Table 5.1.
November 2014


5.9
Table 5.1: Aggregate Storage Capacity Allotted to India

Conservation Storage
S. No.
River system
(1)
(2)
(a)
The Indus
(b)
The Jhelum
(excluding the
Jhelum Main)
The Jhelum Main
(c)
(d)
(e)
The Chenab
(excluding the
Chenab Main)
The Chenab Main
Flood Storage
General
Storage
Power Storage
MAF (hm3)
MAF (hm3)
MAF (hm3)
(3)
(4)
(5)
0.25 (308.37)
0.15 (185.02)
Nil
0.50 (616.74)
0.25 (308.37)
0.75 (925.11)
Nil
Nil
As provided in
Paragraph 9
0.50 (616.74)
0.60 (740.09)
Nil
Nil
0.60 (740.09)
Nil
Provided that
The storage specified in Column (3) above may be used for any purpose
whatever, including the generation of electric energy.
The storage specified in Column (4) above may also be put to NonConsumptive Use (other than flood protection or flood control) or to
Domestic Use.
India shall have the option to increase the Power Storage Capacity specified
against item (d) of Table 5.1 by making a reduction by an equal amount in
the Power Storage Capacity specified against items (b) or (e) of Table 5.1.
Storage Works to provide the Power Storage Capacity on the Chenab Main
specified against item (e) above shall not be constructed at a point below
Naunut (Latitude 33 19' N . and Longitude 75 59' E.).
The Dugar HEP is situated upstream of the Naunut however no power storage
capacity has been provided as per the treaty at this project.
Initial filling of reservoir will be done as per paragraphs 18 & 19 of Annexure E, as
given below:
Paragraph 18: The annual filling of Conservation Storage and the initial filling below
the Dead Storage Level, at any site, shall be carried out at such times and in
accordance with such rules as may be agreed upon between the Commissioners. In
November 2014


5.10
case the Commissioners are unable to reach agreement, India may carry out the
filling as follows:
a.
if the site is on The Indus, between 1st July and 20th August;
b.
if the site is on The Jhelum, between 21st June and 20th August; and
c.
if the site is on The Chenab, between 21st June and 31st August at such rate as
not to reduce, on account of this filling, the flow in the Chenab Main above
Merala to less than 55,000 cusecs.
Paragraph 19: The Dead Storage shall not be depleted except in an unforeseen
emergency. If so depleted, it will be refilled in accordance with the conditions of its
initial filling.
5.5
COMMUNICATION WITH PAKISTAN

As per paragraph 9 of Annexure D, India shall communicate in writing to Pakistan
the information of any new Run-of-River Plant atleast six months in advance of the
beginning of construction of river works connected with the Plant as per format
specified in Appendix II to Annexure D. The information to be sent to Pakistan
broadly includes location of the plant, hydrologic data, hydraulic data and the
design particulars pertaining to plant.
As specified in the paragraph 10 of Annexure D, Pakistan shall communicate in
writing to India about any objections regarding the design of Plant on the ground
of the design criteria specified in paragraph 8 (See section 5.4.1.1) within three
months of the receipt of the information submitted by India.
If no objection is received by India from Pakistan within the specified period of
three months, then Pakistan shall be deemed to have no objection.
If a question arises as to whether or not the design of a Plant conforms to the
criteria set out in Paragraph 8, then either Party may proceed to have the question
resolved in accordance with the provisions of Article IX which deals with the
settlement of differences and disputes as given in Section 5.6.
Paragraphs 12 (a) and (b) deals with the alteration in design before and after the
plant comes into operation respectively. As per paragraph 12 (a) if any alteration
proposed in the design of a Plant before it comes into operation would result in a
material change in the information furnished to Pakistan under the provisions of
Paragraph 9, India shall immediately communicate particulars of the change to
Pakistan in writing and the provisions of Paragraphs 10 and 11 shall then apply, but
the period of three months specified in Paragraph 10 shall be reduced to two
months.
If any alteration proposed in the design of a Plant after it comes into operation
would result in a material change in the information furnished to Pakistan under the
November 2014


5.11
provisions of Paragraph 9, India shall, at least four months in advance of making the
alteration, communicate particulars of the change to Pakistan in writing and the
provisions of Paragraphs 10 and 11 shall then apply, but the period of three months
specified in Paragraph 10 shall be reduced to two months.
5.6
SETTLEMENT OF DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES

In case there are differences between the two parties regarding the interpretation or
application of the treaty, first the Permanent Indus Commission will make an effort
to resolve the differences by agreement. If the Commission does not reach
agreement on the differences between two parties then the differences will be dealt
by a Neutral Expert in accordance with the provisions of Annexure F of IWT.
Neutral Expert shall be a highly qualified engineer and shall be appointed as per the
provisions of paragraph 4 (b) of Annexure F as follows:
(i)
jointly by the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, or
(ii)
if no appointment is made in accordance with (i) above within one month

after the date of the request, then by such person or body as may have been
agreed upon between the two Governments in advance, on an annual basis,
or, in the absence of such agreement, by the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development.
If the Neutral Expert informed the Commission that in his opinion, the difference
should be treated as dispute, then the dispute will be resolved in the Court of
Arbitration. Establishment of Court of Arbitration shall be in accordance with
Annexure G of IWT. As per paragraph 4 of Annexure G Court of Arbitration shall
consist of seven arbitrators appointed as follows:
1.
Two arbitrators will be appointed by each party.
2.
Three arbitrators will be appointed from each of the following categories:

(i)
Persons qualified by status and reputation to be Chairman of the Court

of Arbitration who may, but need not, be engineers or lawyers.
(ii)
Highly qualified engineers.
(iii)
Persons well versed in international law.
November 2014
CHAPTER 6: SURVEY & INVESTIGATIONS

Survey & Investigations

6.1
TABLE OF CONTENT
6
SURVEY & INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................... 6.3
6.1
6.1.1
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.1.4
6.1.5
TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY................................................................................................. 6.3

Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 6.3
Control Survey by GPS Trilateration ............................................................................... 6.4
Control Survey by Total Station Traverse ..................................................................... 6.6
Levelling.................................................................................................................................... 6.9
Topographical Surveys ..................................................................................................... 6.10
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.5
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS........................................ 6.11

Regional Geological Studies .......................................................................................... 6.11
Surface Geological Mapping.......................................................................................... 6.11
Sub-Surface Investigations ............................................................................................. 6.12
Laboratory and In-Situ Tests .......................................................................................... 6.16
Site Specific Seismic Studies .......................................................................................... 6.17
6.3
ARCHAEOLOGICAL & MINERAL SURVEY .................................................................. 6.17
6.4
COMMUNICATION SURVEY ........................................................................................... 6.17
6.5
CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SURVEY.......................................................................... 6.18
6.6
HYDRLOGICAL & METEOROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .................................... 6.18
November 2014


6.2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 6.1: Survey Station Established by Survey of India............................................................................ 6.4
Table 6.2: Control Stations in the Project Area ............................................................................................... 6.8
Table 6.3: Reference SOI Bench Mark ............................................................................................................. 6.10
Table 6.5: Details of Geological Plan and Sections .................................................................................... 6.12
Table 6.6: The Details of Borehole Investigations Completed at Dugar HEP ................................... 6.13
Table 6.7: Details of Exploratory Drifts Excavated at Dugar Project Area.......................................... 6.14
Table 6.8: Details of Seismic Refraction Traversing (SRT) at Dugar Project Area ........................... 6.15
Table 6.9: Details of Electrical Resistivity Traversing (ERT) at Dugar Project Area ......................... 6.15
Table 6.10: Details of In-situ Rock Mechanics Tests Completed/ Proposed for Dam/Powerhouse
Exploratory Drifts ...................................................................................................................................................... 6.16
November 2014

SURVEY & INVESTIGATIONS
6.1
TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY

6.3
76 21 20.7 respectively. The Dugar project site lies between the Sachkhas HEP
(267 MW) at its upstream and the Kirthai-I HEP (390 MW) at downstream. The
project site is located near Luj village which is about 10 km from the nearest town,
Killar.
Topographical survey of the project area is carried out with the objectives of
preparing grid maps, establishing ground control points, fixing alignments and
obtaining the L-sections and X-sections of the river. To prepare the Topographical
maps for this area, the survey agency used advanced survey equipments and
techniques including Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS). The latter works
on satellite based aerial triangulation methods and collects reference information
from the local reference stations placed all over the world. This is a fast and most
reliable solution till date for various engineering and navigational purposes. This is
mostly used for collection of height (z) values at micro level to be extrapolated into
regional level analysis with better accuracy. This is a cost and time effective method.
6.1.1
Objectives
Extensive survey was carried out to cover all project components and fulfil the
following objectives:
1.
Establishing ground control points at selected places
2.
Preparing large scale grid maps at different contour intervals of the proposed
dam site, reservoir area, along water conductor system and power house area
3.
Obtaining X-sections and L-sections of Chenab River in the entire project

length
4.
Confirming gross head for power generations
5.
Transferring drill holes location to the drawing
6.
Confirming the location of exploratory drifts and cross cut
7.
Preparing geological map of the area
November 2014

8.

6.4
Planning of the layout of the infrastructural facilities required for the project
6.1.2
Control Survey by GPS Trilateration
6.1.2.1
Introduction
Trilateration is a method of control survey in which a net work of triangles is used as
in Triangulation. However, in trilateration all the three sides of each triangle are
measured in the field. This is in contrast to a triangulation system in which all the
horizontal angles are measured and sides are computed trigonometrically with one
base measured in the system. The angles in a Trilateration system are computed
trigonometrically from the lengths of the sides of the triangle. Trilateration is
adjusted after computation of the angles and then the coordinates are determined.
Trilateration is a highly accurate and precise method of establishing and expending
horizontal control for precision Engineering Projects. Well shaped strongest system
of triangles is maintained to achieve desired strength of figure. The geometrical
figures normally used in Trilateration are braced quadrilaterals. These figures are
adjusted by the method of least squares. This adjustment removes all
inconsistencies and gives most probable values of the angles.
6.1.2.2
Methodology
DATA- Control survey by GPS Trilateration was carried out based on survey station
Silar h.s. established by Survey of India. (Ref Table 6.1)
Table 6.1: Survey Station Established by Survey of India
Station
Latitude
Longitude
Ellipsoidal
Height
Geoidal
Height
Silarhs
330 0639.39689N
760 2306.57022E
3473.0099
3489.746
Instruments Used
1. Leica GPS Sensors (SR-299E)-2Nos.
2. Leica GPS Controllers (CR-244)-2Nos.
3. External Chock Ring Antennas (ATS-303)-2Nos.
4. Psychrometers (Wet and Dry Thermometers)-2Nos.
5. Thommen Barometers (2A2.01.1)-2Nos.
6. Laptop Computers-2Nos.
November 2014


6.5
7. Software- SKI, TGO and Auto Desk Land.
Reconnaissance
Paper Reconnaissance - Map Planning was carried out on the topographical map
Sheet and project map General Layout of Dugar HEP by drawing lines between likely
Trilateration points and then studying the strength of proposed Trilateration net.
Ground Reconnaissance - Area of project was visited for sites selection of planned
points of Trilateration. Ground locations were selected keeping in view of the
following:(a)
That there should be no obstruction below 15 cut of angle i.e., 15 above the
horizon all around. The Sky must be clear enough to track the satellites for
receiving the signals.
(b)
That the presence of any reflecting surface like glass window, water body,
shining surface, etc. should be avoided near the observation station, as there
is a risk of multi-path error being introduced in the collection of data by the
receiver.
(c)
That there should be no powerful transmitter like radio/television antenna,

high-capacity electric line and other electromagnetic field near the station.
These would affect the signals.
(d)
That the instrument should be in a safe place and away from the traffic and
the passers-by.
(e)
Making observation in a very deep valley should be avoided as the sky will be
visible much above much above the 15 cut-off angle and only few satellites
will be available to the antennae.
With the help of SKI software for selecting the suitable window with four or more
satellites above 15 cut-off angle with GDOP<8 and whenever possible 5 or more
satellites above 20cut-off angle with GDOP<5 at both reference and roving
receiver.
6.1.2.3
Observations
Differential GPS Static mode method of surveying was used in the field which is a
primary technique. This involves more than one receiver simultaneously collecting
data from at least 4 satellites during observation sessions that usually last from 30
minutes to 2 hours for determination of vectors, or baselines between the different
static receivers on stations. Thus all the vectors forming the planned figures were
November 2014


6.6
observed for sufficient time. Metrological observations were taken at the beginning
and closing of the observations at each station.
6.1.2.4
Data Processing
Field data from Leica Controllers was downloaded into the Computer through SKI
software. The data was processed under automatic mode from reference point to
rover points. After processing all the base lines, a summary was available for
scrutinizing the result. All the results were in fixed solution. The efforts to get the
fixed solution of all baselines were done by eliminating the different satellites which
were not located during the observation and which sent noisy signals.
6.1.2.5
Computation
(i)
Height adjustment was performed for each triangle of the figures from the
difference of heights (h=height of Reference station-height of Rover station)
obtained from the post processing summary of results in WGS84.
(ii)
Calculations for height misclosure in each triangle in the network were cried
out and discrepancy adjusted proportional to vector distances.
(iii)
Conversion of slope distance to arc distance on WGS84 ellipsoid was carried

out using edit & View of SKI software.
(iv)
Misclosure in the individual triangle of the Trilateration network coordinates in

WGS84 was adjusted proportionate to the ellipsoidal distances obtained.
(v)
Trilateration network finally adjusted by Least square method.
(vi)
Adjusted Spherical coordinates in WGS84 were computed by TGO software.
(vii) Computations of Plane Grid coordinates were also calculated with the help of
TGO software after applying all necessary corrections for curvature,
convergence, ellipsoid or elevation factors and Grid distances were obtained
by applying the required scale factor.
(viii) Orthometric heights were determined by connecting the network with
available Geoidal height of Survey of India Bench mark.
(ix)
Ellipsoidal heights were also determined from the available data summary of
results in WGS84.
6.1.3
Control Survey by Total Station Traverse
6.1.3.1
Introduction
TOTAL STATION TRAVERSE-is a method of for providing supplement to control
network of Trilateration and to provide closer and more adequate spacing of
horizontal control points. Trilateration net provides a frame work for traverse net of
November 2014


6.7
first and second order accuracies .It is neither economical nor feasible to use
Trilateration for closer spacing where traverse can be used efficiently to subdivide
the basic network and provide fundamental spacing of control. The traverse is
preferably connected to Trilateration stations for closer and adjustment of
accuracies.
Total Station Traverse was carried out to provide control points for topographical
survey of the components of the proposed structures of Dugar HEP.
6.1.3.2
Methodology
Reconnaissance was carried out in the field based on the planning on the map and
stations were selected and marked on the ground keeping in view of the intervisibility of traverse stations and their suitability for Topographical survey works.
Instruments Used
a. Total Station GPT- 7501 of Topcon make with accuracy 1
b. Retro directive Prismatic reflectors
c. Binoculars
d. Psychorometers (Wet and Dry Thermometers)
e. Thommen Barometers (2A2.01.1)
f.
Laptop Computers
g. Software- TGO and Auto-cad Land Development

Data
Traverse is based on the Trilateration station DG-1 with an arbitrary co-ordinates
and true azimuth as given below, obtained from processing of DGPS line
DG1DG13.
6.1.3.3
Station
Northing.
Easting.
MSL Height
Bearing
DG1DG13
DG1
50000.000
50000.000
2487.737
3290 5414
Observations
1. Traverse observations were started from Trilateration station DG1. Angular
measurements were taken using GPT-7501 Total Station of 1 least count.
Observations were taken on both faces and two sets of traverse angle were
measured. Maximum difference of 5 between two sets was kept.
November 2014


6.8
2. Reciprocal vertical angles were also observed with both sets of traverse angle
measurement.
3. Slope distances were also measured in both forward and back directions.
4. Height of Instrument, Height of reflector was recorded at the time of
observation of horizontal and vertical angles at both the Instrument and
reflector stations.
6.1.3.4
Computations
1. Observed slope distances were reduced to horizontal distances after correcting
for refractive index and then applying the slope corrections.
2. Plane rectangular projection was adopted with origin at Trilateration point DG1
true north Azimuth.
3. Traverse Computations were carried out for computation of co-ordinates of
traverse stations.
(a) Mean traverse angle and horizontal distances were entered.
(b) Bearings were run down and traverse angles were adjusted for difference of
closing bearing by applying the corrections uniformly.
(c) Components of for E and N were computed and closing difference in the
co-ordinates was adjusted using the law of proportionate.
(d) Heights were also computed following the trigonometric formula
h=tanVxD. Where V stands for vertical angle and D stands for horizontal
distance.
6.1.3.5
Results
Following is the list of control stations established in the project area.
Table 6.2: Control Stations in the Project Area
November 2014

S. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
6.1.4
STN NO
DG-1
DG-2
DG-3
DG-4
DG-5
DG-9
DG-10
DG-11
DG-12
DG-13

6.9
NORTHING
50000.000
52493.290
54408.043
55390.695
56294.350
56581.994
56595.965
52179.560
50948.422
51297.465
EASTING
50000.000
46528.655
45424.907
46834.466
43516.010
43871.649
45231.855
46081.734
48342.886
49247.907
HEIGHT
2487.737
2400.759
2412.927
2690.712
2297.258
2500.280
2680.109
2143.346
2124.193
2768.084
Levelling
Trigonometric leveling involves observing the vertical and either the horizontal or
slope distance between two points. The difference in elevation can then be
calculated by using the trigonometric formula.
Leveling was carried out to establish the height control network for Dugar
Hydroelectric project for subsequent topographical surveys.
6.1.4.1
Procedure
This levelling work was executed by dividing the total reach in 29 closing loops by
following single territory method by using Digital Level of Model No Leica Sprinter
250M (accuracy level 1 mm) and bar coded Gauge pole. The permissible closing
error for each loop should not exceed 24K mm, where k is the loop distance in
km. Total distance from SOI BM at Gondhla to Killar is about 156 Km.
1. Instruments used
The digital level (automatic level) is an optical instrument that provides a height
reference. This reference is a horizontal plane through the axis of the telescope,
known as the height collimation. Once the height of collimation has been
measured the height of other station can be founded by measuring from this
plane with staff. The staff reading of back site is added to the bench mark value
to obtain the height collimation and then the reading of foresight is subtracted
from height of collimation to obtain the height of foresight. Digital levels
detect/scan the reading on the bar code printed on staff and calculate the
height of foresight automatically. Model No Leica Sprinter 250M accuracy
level 1 mm has been used along with bar coded Gauge pole in this
assignment.
November 2014


6.10
2. Data used :
Survey of India Bench Mark situated in veranda of PWD Rest-House at Gondhla,
District Lahul & Spiti, Himachal Pradesh (Ref Table 6.3).
Table 6.3: Reference SOI Bench Mark
6.1.4.2
Description
Level (masl)
PRIMARY PROTECTED BENCH MARK (Type B),

GEODETIC & RESEARCH BRANCH, SURVEY OF
INDIA, DEHRADUN at Gondhla
3081.23
Computations
There are two method of booking and reduction of level namely Rise and Fall
Method- Height of Instrument Method (Height of Collimation Method).
Height of Collimation Method is adopted for computations. The following is the
computation procedure:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
6.1.4.3
B. S + R. L = H. I
H. I I .S = R. L (new)
H. I. (old) F. S = R. L (new) at change point
R. L. (new) + B.S = H. I. (new)
Results
After complete calculation and error distribution level of control point DG2 is
computed as 2400.759 masl. While transferring bench mark from Gondhla the
prefixed pillar (PH3) of Sachkhas HEP (upstream of Dugar HEP) in connected (TBM
82) and the difference is +4.8 cm is observed.
6.1.5
Topographical Surveys
Detailed survey was conducted after the horizontal and vertical controlling of the
Traverse Points, in order to obtain the highest levels of accuracy of the Survey.
Collection of details of manmade and natural features of the area with help of Total
station radiation methods. The collected data was down loaded in the computer and
further processed for digitization and preparation of digital maps on different scale
for different proposed structures of the project. The final survey sheets were plotted
with Auto plotter.
November 2014


6.11
The longitudinal section of Chenab River was developed from suspension bridge
near Phindro village to Sansari Nala and the cross section of river was developed at
various spacing up to elevation of 2120.
6.2
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS

The surface and sub-surface investigations, which includes surface geological
mapping, exploratory drilling, drifting and geophysical profiling, carried out at
various project locations with pre defined objectives to delineate the foundation
level/grades and to assess the geological conditions of foundation and tunnelling
media, which helps in formulating the treatment plan and design recommendations.
Geological investigations have been planned with following objectives:
6.2.1
Surface geological mapping of project components as well as the reservoir

area to delineate all the geological features exposed at surface.
Borehole investigations along the river channel, abutments and

tunnel/cavern grades to assess the deepest foundation level, foundation
condition, and in- situ permeability of rock mass. The recovered core samples
have been subjected to laboratory rock mechanics test to arrive at design
geotechnical parameters.
Geophysical Survey to assess sub-surface foundation condition, which further

corroborated with borehole data.
Exploratory drifting on both the abutments, Intake and power house cavern
to access sub surface geological conditions and to conduct various in-situ
rock mechanics tests.
Site Specific Seismic studies to derive earthquake parameters and seismic coefficient
Regional Geological Studies

For understanding of tectonic and litho-stratigraphic disposition in the project area,
the regional geology has been compiled from standard literature by Geological
Survey of India & Geological Society of India. The maps are attached as Regional
Geological Map (Plate.1, Report on Geological Mapping) and Regional Structural
and Tectonic Map (Plate.2, Report on Geological Mapping).
The regional geological studies have been detailed in Geological Mapping Report.
6.2.2
Surface Geological Mapping

Detailed geological mapping of the project area has been carried out with an
objective to define the various litho-units along with geotechnical characteristics
anticipated to be met at major components of the Project.
November 2014


6.12
The different types of rock and overburden material around project components
have been classified to prepare a geological map of the area. Geotechnical
parameters of rock outcrops have also been recorded to assess the overall
characteristics of rock mass. The data have been utilized in geotechnical evaluation
of each component.
The lists of geological plan and sections have been provided in Table 6.5 and
geological drawings have been enclosed as Annexure 5, Report on Geological
Mapping.
Table 6.4: Details of Geological Plan and Sections

Structure
Scale
Reference
Regional Geological Map
1:500
Plate 1
Regional Structural and Tectonic Map
1:1000
Plate 2
Investigation Plan
1:2500
Plate 3
Geological Map of Dam & Power House Complex Area
1:2000
Plate 4
Detailed Geological Map of Reservoir Area (Sheet 1 to 6)
1:5000
Plate 5
Geological Map Of Project and Reservoir Area
1:15000
Plate 6
Geological Map Of Dam Site
1:1000
Plate 8
Geological Section Along Dam Axis (A-A)

Geological Section Across The River D/S of Dam Axis (BB)
Geological Section Across The River D/S Of Dam Axis
(Section C-C)
Geological Section Along Proposed Water Conductor
System (S-S)
Geological Section Along Longer Axis of Power House
Cavern (X-X)
1:2000
Plate 9
1:2500
Plate 10
1:2500
Plate 11
1:2000
Plate 12
1:500
Plate 13
Geological Section Across Power House Cavern (N-N)
6.2.3
1:500
Plate 14
Geological Map Of HRT Intake Portal
1:500
Plate 15
Geological Wall Log of MAT Portal
1:500
Plate 16
Geological Wall Log of CVT And ADIT Portal
1:500
Plate 17
Geological Wall Log Of TRT Portal
1:500
Plate 18
Geological Map of Diversion Tunnel INLET Portal
1:500
Plate 19
Geological Map of Diversion Tunnel OUTLET Portal
1:500
Plate 20
Geological Section Along DT (Section E-E)
1:2000
Plate 21
Geological Section Across Reservoir (Section G-G)
1:5000
Plate 22
Geological Section Across Reservoir (Section H-H)
1:5000
Plate 23
Geological Section Across Reservoir (Section K-K)
1:5000
Plate 24
Sub-Surface Investigations
The sub-surface geologic investigations have been completed, which includes the
borehole investigations, exploratory drifting and geophysical profiling in order to
decipher the foundation level; bedrock depth and thickness of the overburden
material and underneath rock profiles at dam and other components. All along the
November 2014


6.13
river channel, series of holes have been drilled to assess the foundation grades and
rock mass quality along with in situ permeability tests. Further data was augmented
by number of seismic profiles and shear wave.
The borehole logs and drift 3D geological logs have been enclosed as Annexure 1-2,
Field and Laboratory Investigation Report.
a.
Core Drilling
In project area and its various alternatives, series of boreholes have been completed
to assess the sub-surface geological and hydrogeological conditions. The borehole
details of the completed hole are given in Table 6.6. The borehole investigation
plan has been shown as Plate 1, Field and Laboratory Investigation Report. The
geological logs and permeability test data have been enclosed as Annexure 1, Field
and Laboratory Investigation Report.
Out of total 16 boreholes (approx. 1280m drill length), 13 have been drilled at dam
complex. This includes 3 on each of the abutments, both left and right bank, 5 holes
at river gorge, 3 holes on tunnel portals (DT inlet, outlet and Intake-HRT), 1 hole at
U/s cofferdam. Based on drill holes at river gorge, the deepest foundation has been
assessed.
In-situ permeability tests, both in rock and overburden have been conducted in all
the boreholes.
Table 6.5: The Details of Borehole Investigations Completed at Dugar HEP

Borehole
No
Location
Ground
Eleveation (m)
DH-01
Bed Rock Level Total Depth

(m)
(m)
Dam Axis, Right Abt.
2129.10
2128.05
70.00
DH-03
Dam Axis, Right Abt.
2041.50
2039.64
80.00
DH-04
Dam Axis, Right Bank
2023.00
2011.99
90.00
DH-05
Dam Axis, River Centre
2023.64
1991.65
65.00
DH-06
Dam Axis, River Centre
2017.30
1990.80
80.00
DH-07
Dam Axis, Left Abt.
2040.00
2038.00
80.00
DH-09
Dam Axis, Left Abt.
2080.00
2090.00
60.00
DH-10
Dam Axis, Left Abt.
2101.30
2096.63
70.00
DH-11
Flip Bucket
2020.65
1994.65
143.50
DH-13
Plunge Pool
2017.00
1994.94
50.00
DH-15
U/s Cofferdam
2019.22
1998.22
31.00
DH-16
DT-Inlet
2073.10
2072.10
55.00
DH-18
45.00
DT-Outlet
2060.00
2056.80
DH-19
Intake-HRT
2124.74
2118.74
50.00
DH-21
Power House Complex
2234.59
2192.44
260.00
DH-01 (IVA)
Alternate Dam Axis
2011.53
1976.63
50.00
November 2014

b.

6.14
Exploratory Drifts
The rocks across the project area are well exposed and this provides substantial
opportunity to assess the overall geological structure and to assess the location of
any weakness zones which will be critical for abutment conditions. Two exploratory
drifts on both abutment of dam have been excavated to assess physico-mechanical
properties of the rock and rock mass classification, and to delineate stripping limits
to define foundation grades, while a 366m long drift to power house cavern
(including three cross cuts) is excavated up to 100m length and are under progress.
The 3D Geological logging of excavated drifts have been enclosed as Annexure 2,
Field and Laboratory Investigation Report. The details of exploratory drifts excavated
so far are given in Table 6.7.
c.
Exploratory Drift Locations
DL-1 (Left Abut. at El. 2046.86m)
37.5
DL-2 (Left Abut. at El. 2071.28m)
45m
DR-1 (Right Abut. at El. 2045.00m)
45m
DR-2 (Right Abut. at El. 2065.38m)
47m
IN-01 (Intake at El. 2085.00m)
11m
PHD (Powerhouse Drift at El.

2036.50m)
366m
Alignment
Deatils
Length (m)
S No
Total Length (m)
Table 6.6: Details of Exploratory Drifts Excavated at Dugar Project Area.
Straight
31m
Cross Cuts
6.5m
Straight
28m
Cross Cuts
17m
Straight
31m
Cross Cuts
14m
Straight
30m
Cross Cuts
17m
Straight
11m
Straight
309m
Cross Cuts
57m
Status
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed
Completed up
to 100m length
Geophysical Survey
In project domain, the bedrock is exposed predominantly and further detailed subsurface investigations contribute an important amount of factual data, thus
restricting the extensive use of geophysical techniques. However, there are few
critical issues and concerns, where geophysical data supplement the already
acquired sub surface data base from boreholes and drifts, which will further be
helpful in developing a geological model.
November 2014


6.15
Geophysical Investigations using Seismic Refraction techniques as well as Electrical

Resistivity sounding have been carried out for Dugar HPP. The geophysical survey
has been carried out
considering project geological and topographical conditions, specific objectives and
data requirement, depth of interest and operational constraints during the
performance of the tests.
A series of Seismic Refraction Test (SRT) and Electrical Resistivity Test (ERT) have
been carried out for delineation of sub-surface stratification around the proposed
dam complex. Geophysical seismic refraction technique was used in conjunction
with Electrical Resistivity Survey to delineate sub-surface stratification at the
proposed location. The SRT conducted on the right bank of the river along the river
axis and at TRT area while ERT performed at right bank of the river only on 7 profiles
along and perpendicular to the river axis.
Table 6.7: Details of Seismic Refraction Traversing (SRT) at Dugar Project Area
S No
Profile ID
Location
Length (m)
SRT-1, SEC-1
Dam Site, Left Bank
90
SRT-1, SEC-2
Dam Site, Left Bank
90
SRT-2
Dam Site, Left Bank
90
SRT-3,SEC-1
Power House NSL
90
SRT-3,SEC-2
Power House NSL
90
SRT-4
Power House NSL
90
SRT-5,SEC-1
Tailrace Tunnels
90
SRT-5,SEC-1
Tailrace Tunnels
90
SRT-6,SEC-1
Tailrace Tunnels
90
10
SRT-6,SEC-1
Tailrace Tunnels
90
11
SRT-7
Dam site, Right Bank
90
12
SRT-8
90
Table 6.8: Details of Electrical Resistivity Traversing (ERT) at Dugar Project Area
S No
Profile ID
Location
Length (m)
ERT-1
180
ERT-2
180
ERT-3
Borrow Site
180
ERT-4
Alt IV Dam Site
240
ERT-5
Borrow Site
60
ERT-6
Alt IV Dam Site
20
ERT-7
Alt IV Dam Site
60
November 2014


6.16
The geophysical investigations comprising of SRT and ERT technique were carried
out using Seistronix RAS-24, 24-channel Engineering Seismograph and Resistivity
MeterAquameter CRMAUTO C respectively. SRT has been conducted at 8 proposed
profiles while ERT has been at 7 profiles In ERT, both sounding and profiling
techniques has been used for delineation of vertical and lateral resistivity variations
in the sub-surface (Table 6.8 & Table 6.9).
The detail geophysical report has been enclosed as Annexure 3, Field and Laboratory
Investigation Report
6.2.4
Laboratory and In-Situ Tests

The drill core samples have been subjected to various tests in laboratory to
determine the mineralogical and geotechnical properties necessary to provide
design data on foundation conditions of various structures. The drill core samples
from various locations has been collected for laboratory tests, such as, physical
properties, slake durability index (SDI), Compressive Strength (Uniaxial and Triaxial)
Elastic parameters along with Petrographic Analysis have been conducted. The Shear
Parameters (C & ) and Modulus and Elasticity (E) and Poissons Ratio (v) were
estimated. The preliminary report has been enclosed as Annexure 6, Field and
Laboratory Investigation Report.
The in-situ tests in exploratory drifts on both abutments of dam have been
completed however the test at power house cavern will be carried out once drift is
excavated to entire stretch. For evaluation of deformability characteristics of rock
mass in abutment drifts, Plate Load Test (PLT) has been conducted. To have an
average and representative value to define design modulus, a minimum of two set
(one horizontal and vertical direction in one set) in each drift has been completed.
For determining the shear strength characteristics of rock mass in abutment drift,
block shear tests have been conducted at least on minimum of five test blocks in a
drift for determining the shear strength parameters for rock to rock and rock to
concrete interfaces with each test block sheared at a different but constant normal
stresses.
The details of the in-situ rock mechanics tests have been provided in Table 6.10.
Table 6.9: Details of In-situ Rock Mechanics Tests Completed/ Proposed for
Dam/Powerhouse Exploratory Drifts
S. Component
No.
1.
Dam
Location
Left
Abutment
Drift
No
DL-02
Tests
1.
2.
3.
Shear Test (Rock to Rock)

Shear Test (Concrete to
Rock)
Deformability test (PLT)
Status
Completed
Completed
Completed
Right
Abutment
DR-01
1.
2.
Shear Test (Rock to Rock)

Shear Test (Concrete to
Completed
November 2014


6.17
3.
Rock)
Deformability test (PLT)
1.
2.
3.
Shear test (Rock to Rock)

Plate load test
Hydro-fracture Test
Completed
Completed
2.
Power House
Power
House
Cavern
PHD
In Progress
One drift each on each abutments (DL-02 & DR-01) have been selected for in-situ
tests and results are summarized in Annexure 5, Field and Laboratory Investigation
Report
6.2.5
Site Specific Seismic Studies

As per map of India showing Seismic Zones (IS: 1893 (Part-I) 2002), the Dugar
hydroelectric project area is located in the Seismic Zone IV considered as seismically
active area. The Site Specific Seismic Design studies have been carried out for
determination of MCE and DBE condition by IIT Roorkee. The Peak Ground
Acceleration (PGA) values for Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) and Design
Base Earthquake (DBE) conditions are estimated as 0.47g and 0.24g for horizontal
and 0.31g and 0.16g respectively for vertical components.
The interim report on site specific seismic studies has been enclosed as Annexure 4,
Field and Laboratory Investigation Report.
6.3
ARCHAEOLOGICAL & MINERAL SURVEY

There is no site in the project area which is notified by archaeological survey of
India. No economic mineral deposits are reported in the catchment area of the
Chenab River, especially in the reservoir area of the project.
6.4
COMMUNICATION SURVEY
The approach roads to various components of the project for construction as well as
permanent access roads are planned from the existing road which is on the right
bank of Chenab River. To approach the left bank three bridges are proposed, one
temporary bridge upstream of the dam axis and other temporary bridge
downstream of the dam axis. One permanent bridge is proposed to reach the power
house on the left bank. The detailed planning of roads and bridges is given in
Chapter 17 Infrastructure Facilities of this report.
The detailed route survey has been conducted from Jammu to Dugar HEP site as
well as from Manali to Dugar site to assess the condition of existing roads and
bridges for transferring the materials (including Over Dimensioned Consignments)
and machineries etc. to the site. Based on the route survey, required measures will
be taken to improve the condition of existing roads & bridges (widening,
strengthening etc.) during the pre-construction phase of the project.
November 2014

6.5

6.18
CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SURVEY

The construction of Dugar hydroelectric project envisages construction of 128 m
high concrete gravity dam (from deepest foundation level), cofferdams, two
diversion tunnels, two intake, twin pressure tunnel, underground power house
complex and two tailrace tunnels with installed capacity of 449 MW.
The construction material survey has been made for construction materials, which
includes coarse and fine aggregates and borrow area for impervious material in and
around the project area. The total requirement of the construction materials for
various project components is tentatively estimated to be 18.0 lac cum. A detailed
review for the requirement and availability of construction materials for various
project components was made. Accordingly, detailed survey has been conducted to
identify potential rock quarries / borrows areas for coarse, fine aggregate and
impervious clay (refer quarry and borrow area location plans, Annexure 2). The
suitability of aggregates have been assessed by laboratory tests and test result have
been enclosed as Annexure 7, Field and Laboratory Investigation Report
6.6
HYDRLOGICAL & METEOROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

The hydrological studies for Dugar HE Project have been carried out based on the
hydrological and meteorological data of the sites located in the project area and its
vicinity on river Chenab as discussed in Volume-II Hydrology. Site specific data is not
available. However, Long term discharge is available at Udaipur G & D site on River
Chenab. The site is being maintained by CWC and is near to Dugar dam site.
Therefore, observed discharge data at Udaipur G & D site has been considered for
studies after checking the consistency of the data shared with Pakistan under IWT.
Therefore, the discharge data of Udaipur G & D site for the period from 1974-75 to
2011-12 (38 years) has been transposed to Dugar Dam site in catchment area
proportion.
In addition to the above, a suitable G&D site has been established at about 800 m
upstream of project site near Sukrali bridge on River Chenab. The G&D site is being
established along with automatic weather station (near Luj village) to collect
hydrological and meteorological data. The G&D site is under operation from midMay 2013 and the automatic weather station is under operation from June 2012.
Sophisticated arrangement is being made to observe gauge and discharge data with
the help of current meter and automatic water level recorder and to collect
suspended sediment and water quality data.
November 2014
CHAPTER 7: HYDROLOGY

Hydrology
APPROVAL NOTE
(HYDRLOGY)
November 2014

Hydrology
7.1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
7 ..........................................................................................................................HYDROLOGY
.................................................................................................................. 7.8
7.1
GENERAL ......................................................................................................... 7.8
7.1.1
7.1.2
7.1.3
7.1.4
7.1.5
7.1.6
7.1.7
7.1.8
7.1.9
7.1.10
7.1.11
7.1.12
7.1.13
Project Proposal..................................................................................................................................... 7.8

Project Catchment ................................................................................................................................ 7.9
The River System ................................................................................................................................. 7.13
Climatological Characteristics ........................................................................................................ 7.13
Permanent Snowline .......................................................................................................................... 7.14
Pre-Feasibility Study........................................................................................................................... 7.15
Present Study ........................................................................................................................................ 7.15
Hydrological Data ............................................................................................................................... 7.16
Meteorological Data .......................................................................................................................... 7.18
Discharge Measurement Methodology...................................................................................... 7.19
Flow Regime.......................................................................................................................................... 7.20
Rainfall Pattern ..................................................................................................................................... 7.23
Mean Monthly Temperature ........................................................................................................... 7.27
7.2
DATA VALIDATION AND CONSISTENCY CHECK ...................................... 7.29
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.2.3
7.2.4
7.2.5
7.2.6
7.2.7
7.2.8
7.2.9
Annual Yield Comparison................................................................................................................. 7.29

Mass curve ............................................................................................................................................. 7.30
Double Mass Curve ............................................................................................................................ 7.32
Statistical tests ...................................................................................................................................... 7.34
Long-Term Averages 10-daily Flow at G&D Sites .................................................................. 7.35
10-Daily Flow of G&D Sites ............................................................................................................. 7.35
Specific yield at G&D sites ............................................................................................................... 7.56
Quality of Data ..................................................................................................................................... 7.57
Snow studies ......................................................................................................................................... 7.57
7.3
WATER AVAILABILITY ................................................................................. 7.58
7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
Site specific data comparison......................................................................................................... 7.59

Max., Min., Average, 50% and 90% dependable flow at Dugar diversion site............. 7.61
Available Flows ..................................................................................................................................... 7.64
7.4
DESIGN FLOOD ............................................................................................. 7.67
7.4.1
7.4.2
7.4.3
7.4.4
7.4.5
7.4.6
7.4.7
General .................................................................................................................................................... 7.67

Design Flood Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 7.67
Present Study ........................................................................................................................................ 7.67
Hydro-Meteorological Approach.................................................................................................. 7.68
Frequency Analysis of Annual Flood Peaks ............................................................................... 7.80
Comparison of Flood by Different Approach ........................................................................... 7.89
Earlier Flood Studies in the Basin .................................................................................................. 7.89
November 2014

Hydrology
7.2
7.4.8
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 7.90
7.5
DESIGN FLOOD FOR RIVER DIVERSION WORKS ...................................... 7.90
7.5.1
7.5.2
7.5.3
7.5.4
7.5.5
Design Flood Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 7.91

Data Available....................................................................................................................................... 7.91
Statistical Parameters ........................................................................................................................ 7.96
Probability Distribution ..................................................................................................................... 7.96
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 7.98
7.6
SEDIMENTATION STUDY............................................................................. 7.99
7.6.1
7.6.2
7.6.3
7.6.4
7.6.5
7.6.6
Average annual Sediment Rate ..................................................................................................... 7.99

Original Elevation Area- Capacity curve .................................................................................7.101
Type of reservoir................................................................................................................................7.102
Sediment Analysis .............................................................................................................................7.103
Trap Efficiency Computation.........................................................................................................7.104
Estimation of New Zero Elevation ..............................................................................................7.104
7.7
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY ........................................................................... 7.104
November 2014

Hydrology
7.3
LIST OF TABLES
Table 7.1: Project Parameters............................................................................................................................... 7.8
Table 7.2: Hypsometric Data at Dugar Diversion Site............................................................................... 7.11
Table 7.3: Estimation of Zero Degree Isotherms ........................................................................................ 7.15
Table 7.4: Bar Chart showing Availability of Discharge & Rainfall Data ............................................ 7.17
Table 7.5: Catchment Characteristic of various G&D sites...................................................................... 7.18
Table 7.6: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (Oct 2011 Dec 2012) at Killar........................... 7.23
Table 7.7: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2001) at Koksar .......................................... 7.24
Table 7.8: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2002) at Gondla ......................................... 7.25
Table 7.9: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall at Keylong ................................................................. 7.26
Table 7.10: Mean Monthly Temperature ....................................................................................................... 7.27
Table 7.11: Specific Yield at G&D Sites .......................................................................................................... 7.56
Table 7.12: Daily Observed Discharge Record of Chenab River in at Dugar HEP .......................... 7.61
Table 7.13: 10-Daily flow summary at Dugar HEP ..................................................................................... 7.62
Table 7.14: Detail of 50% and 90% Dependable Flow Year ................................................................... 7.64
Table 7.15: Dependable Flow at Dugar Project and various G&D Sites in Chenab Basin .......... 7.65
Table 7.16: Unit Hydrograph Ordinates ......................................................................................................... 7.72
Table 7.17: Temporal Distribution.................................................................................................................... 7.74
Table 7.18: Design Storm for Dugar HEP ...................................................................................................... 7.75
Table 7.19: 12-hr Bells of 24-hr Design Storm ............................................................................................ 7.76
Table 7.20: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site .......................................................................... 7.77
Table 7.21: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site .......................................................................... 7.78
Table 7.22: Observed Annual Maxima Flood Peaks at Udaipur Site ................................................... 7.80
Table 7.23: Details of Tests ................................................................................................................................. 7.86
Table 7.24: Statistical Parameter....................................................................................................................... 7.86
Table 7.25: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Observed Flood Peaks of Udaipur.................. 7.87
Table 7.26: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Instantaneous Flood Peaks of Udaipur......... 7.87
Table 7.27: Different Return Period Floods at Dugar Diversion Site ................................................... 7.88
Table 7.28: Comparison of Design Flood by Different Approach at Dugar HEP Site ................... 7.89
Table 7.29: Detail of Non-monsoon (Oct-May) Flood Peaks, Udaipur .............................................. 7.92
Table 7.30: Details of Tests ................................................................................................................................. 7.95
Table 7.31: Statistical Parameter, Non-Monsoon....................................................................................... 7.96
Table 7.32: Result of Flood Frequency of Non monsoon Flood Peaks of Udaipur ....................... 7.96
Table 7.33: Result of Flood Frequency of Non Monsoon Instantaneous Flood Peaks of Udaipur
......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7.97
November 2014

Hydrology
7.4
Table 7.34: Different Return Period Non Monsoon Floods at Dugar Diversion Site .................... 7.97
Table 7.35: Yearly Sediment Rate ...................................................................................................................7.100
Table 7.36: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity at Dugar Diversion Site ............................................7.101
November 2014

Hydrology
7.5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 7.1: Digital Elevation Model of the Study Area ............................................................................. 7.10
Figure 7.2: Hypsometric Curve-Distribution of Catchment Area at Proposed Diversion Site ... 7.12
Figure 7.3: A View of Chenab River ................................................................................................................. 7.12
Figure 7.4: Automatic Weather Station at Project Site ............................................................................. 7.20
Figure 7.5: Annual Flow regime of Chenab River at Udaipur................................................................. 7.21
Figure 7.6: Non-Monsoon Flow Regime of Chenab River at Udaipur .............................................. 7.21
Figure 7.7: Monthly Flow Distribution at Udaipur...................................................................................... 7.22
Figure 7.8: 10-Daily average Flow Distribution at Udaipur..................................................................... 7.22
Figure 7.9: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Killar..................................................................... 7.24
Figure 7.10: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Koksar .............................................................. 7.25
Figure 7.11: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Gondla ............................................................. 7.26
Figure 7.12: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Keylong ........................................................... 7.27
Figure 7.13: Mean Monthly Temperature at Killar, Badarwah and Banihal ...................................... 7.28
Figure 7.14: Annual Flow Comparison of Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar .................................. 7.30
Figure 7.15: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Udaipur ............................................... 7.31
Figure 7.16: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Gulabgarh .......................................... 7.31
Figure 7.17: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Benzwar............................................... 7.32
Figure 7.18: Double Mass Curve of Annual Flow at Gulabgarh & Udaipur...................................... 7.33
Figure 7.19: Double mass curve of annual flow at Benzwar and Udaipur ........................................ 7.33
Figure 7.20: Average 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar ................... 7.35
Figure 7.21: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Benzwar for 1973-74.................................... 7.36
Figure 7.34: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Benzwar for 1986-87 ................................. 7.42
November 2014

Hydrology
7.6
Figure 7.41: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar for 1993-94............. 7.46
Figure 7.44: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh & Benzwar for 1996-97 ............... 7.47
Figure 7.54: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Gulabgarh for 2006-07 ............................... 7.52
Figure 7.60: Comparison of derived series with observed data ........................................................... 7.60
Figure 7.61: 10-daily max, min and average computed flow at Dugar HEP .................................... 7.63
Figure 7.62: Flow pattern in 50% and 90% dependable Year at Dugar HEP.................................... 7.63
Figure 7.63: Flow duration curve at Project site (10 daily basis) .......................................................... 7.66
Figure 7.64: Unit Hydrograph for Dugar H E project ................................................................................ 7.73
Figure 7.65: Temporal Distribution Curve of 24-hour Design Storm for Dugar HEP Site........... 7.75
Figure 7.66: Design Flood (PMF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP................................................................. 7.78
Figure 7.67: Design Flood (SPF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP .................................................................. 7.79
Figure 7.68: Time Series Graph, Udaipur Site .............................................................................................. 7.82
Figure 7.69: Time series graph, Udaipur site................................................................................................ 7.84
November 2014

Hydrology
7.7
Figure 7.70: Variation of discharge in the river ........................................................................................... 7.90

Figure 7.72: Time series graph, Udaipur site................................................................................................ 7.93
Figure 7.72: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity curve at Dugar diversion site................................7.101
Figure 7.73: Type of reservoir ..........................................................................................................................7.102
November 2014

HYDROLOGY
7.1
GENERAL
Hydrology
7.8
The hydrological inputs are very important for the planning, execution and
operation of any water resources development project. The hydrological studies are
carried out at all the stages of project development starting from the pre-feasibility
stage, detailed investigation and are continued even during the operation of the
project. Hydrological studies usually carried out for the assessment of quantities of
available water at project site and its time variation, estimation of expected flood
(usually required for the hydraulic design as well as for safety of the structure) and
sedimentation studies, important from life point of view of the project as well as its
effect on the live storage.
The catchment of Dugar hydropower project in Chenab basin lies in the state of
Himachal Pradesh, a mountainous state in India. The state is situated in Northern
India. This state is enriched with several rivers like Satluj, Ravi, Beas and Chenab etc.,
which originates from mighty Himalayas. They are mostly snow fed and perennial in
nature and carry with them floods almost every year during monsoon and have
huge hydro potential.
The estimated hydro power potential in Chenab basin is about 22000 MW within
Indian Territory. About 34% of this hydro power potential has been identified in
Himachal Pradesh alone and balance in Jammu & Kashmir.
7.1.1
Project Proposal
Dugar hydroelectric project is located in Himachal Pradesh on the River Chenab
near Killar town as shown in Plate 1. Chenab River is formed after the confluence of
two rivers namely Chandra and Bhaga near Tandi. This project envisages an installed
capacity of 449 MW (380 MW + 69 MW). The project component comprises of a
concrete gravity dam and pressure tunnel with an underground powerhouse on the
left bank of Chenab River. Basic project parameters are given in Table 7.1:
Table 7.1: Project Parameters
Nearest Town
Killar
District
Chamba
Latitude at Dam Site
33 07 10.3 N
Longitude at Dam Site
76 19 35.7 E
River Basin
Indus
River/ Tributary
Chenab
Catchment Area
7823 km2
Snow fed area
4458 km2
November 2014

7.1.2
Hydrology
7.9
Rain fed area
3365 km2
Installed Capacity
449 MW (380 MW+ 69 MW)
Full Reservoir Level
2114 m asl
MDDL
2102.06 m asl
River Bed Elevation
2015 m (approx)
Gross Storage
53.97 x 106 m3
Live Storage
12.1 x 106 m3
Project Catchment
The project is planned on river Chenab near Killar town. The project basin lies in
upper Chenab basin. To assess the catchment area at the proposed dam site, Digital
Elevation Model (DEM) data derived from remote sensing data was used for
delineation of the catchment and estimation of catchment parameters such as
contours river length etc. NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
has provided 90 m (3-arc second) DEM data for nearly 80% of Globe under the
program SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission): The mission provides near
Globe topographic coverage of earth surface with consistency, reliability and
accuracy. The DEM data is very useful for hydrological studies where it is difficult to
get SOI (Survey of India) topo-sheets of classified area. The DEM data are available
in public domain and can be accessed easily.
For the catchment area, the 90m SRTM DEM was used for delineating the
catchment whose elevation ranges between 2200m in to 6500m. The DEM of the
area is shown in Figure 7.1.
The DEM was analysed using GIS (Geographical Information System). The sinks were
filled in the DEM and flow directions and flow accumulation point were identified
before the delineation of main river and their watersheds upto the project site (i.e.
project sites whose location and coordinates are known). The stream network for
each river catchment was delineated using flow direction method in GIS. In this
method, each pixel discharges into one of the eight neighbouring direction having
steepest slope. The flow directions are determined by identifying the adjacent
neighbouring cell which has the highest positive distance weighted drop. Flow
accumulation values of neighbouring surfaces are used for delineating the streams
and watersheds. The delineated watershed of Dugar HEP is shown in Plate 2.
November 2014

(A Joint Venture of Tata Power & SN Power)
7.10
LEGEND
Catchment
Boundary
Stream
Figure 7.1: Digital Elevation Model of the Study Area

November 2014

7.11
The delineation of stream network and watershed for proposed HEP project reveals
the catchment area as under
Total catchment area
Snow fed area
Rainfed area
Permanent snowline
=
=
=
=
7823 Km2
4458 Km2
3365 Km2
4500 m
The catchment area indicating hydro meteorological stations, snowfed area is at

Plate 2.
The total length of Chenab River up to project diversion site is about 238.25 km in
between the diversion site and 4500 m elevation (rain fed area). The slope of the
river is about 1 in 115.75. The river bed elevation at dam site is 2015 m. The
important streams joining the Chenab River are Miyar Nalla, Chandra, Bhaga,
Sansari, Sach Nalla etc.. The distribution of the catchment area against the altitude
and hypsometric curve at Dugar diversion site is given in Table 7.2 & Figure 7.2.
Table 7.2: Hypsometric Data at Dugar Diversion Site
S. No.
Elevation
(masl)
Catchment
below
Elevation
(km2)
S. No.
Elevation
(masl)
Catchment
below
Elevation
(km2)
2250
23
11
4600
3721
2500
100
12
4750
4275
2750
203
13
5000
5304
3000
400
14
5250
6376
3250
681
15
5500
7272
3500
1009
16
5750
7699
3750
1395
17
6000
7809
4000
1916
18
6250
7822.6
4250
2570
19
6500
7823
10
4500
3365
November 2014

7.12
6500
6000
5500
Elevation (masl)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
Area ( Above Elevation,
5000
6000
7000
8000
km2)
Figure 7.2: Hypsometric Curve-Distribution of Catchment Area at Proposed Diversion Site
Figure 7.3: A View of Chenab River
November 2014

7.1.3
7.13
The River System

Chenab River is one of the main tributaries of Indus, which drains through LahaulSpiti valley of Himachal Pradesh and J&K before joining with Indus in Pakistan. It is
formed by confluence of by two streams namely Chandra and Bhaga, which joins
West of Keylong at Tandi at El 2820 m. Chandra originates from South of Baralacha
Pass and flows through Lahul Valley, whereas Bhaga originates from North of the
Baralacha Pass and flows through Spiti valley of Himachal Pradesh in India. During
the flow, Chandra changes its course from Northern direction to Western direction,
whereas Bhaga directly flows in western direction. Koksar and Keylong are the
important places enroute of Chandra and Bhaga respectively. These two streams
join at Tandi in Lahaul and form Chandrabhaga or Chenab River which flows
through Pangi valley in Himachal Pradesh, Peddar area in J&K towards Indo-Pak
Border. During its course of journey various tributaries joins the Chenab, of these,
Miyar Nalla from right side at El 2,590 m near Udaipur, Sach Nalla on the right and
Luj Nalla near Killar are the main tributaries in Himachal part of Chenab. Sansari
Nalla, which joins the Chenab from the right, forms the boundary between HP and
J&K. After Sansari Nalla, Chenab enters into Kishtwar area of J&K at El 1,980 m, and
is joined by Bhut Nalla at Arthal at El 1785 m. About 55% of the catchment area at
the project site remains covered with snow and glaciers and contribute to high
flows between March to June due to snow melting. High discharges in the river
between July to September are further observed due to monsoon precipitation.
During December, January and February when precipitation in the form of rain is
negligible and melting of snow is also very low, the discharge in the river is
minimum.
7.1.4
Climatological Characteristics
The climate of Chenab basin is affected by the hot tropical weather systems and
the cold weather systems known as Western Disturbances. The prime sources of
moisture of these disturbances are Mediterranean and the Caspsian seas. The
Western disturbances move in the westerly wind regime along Himalayan latitudes
during the winter season and have their origins near the Mediterranean Sea. These
disturbances may be in the form of a depression or a low-pressure area or an
upper air cyclonic circulation or a trough in lower isobaric levels. They shift towards
more northern latitudes as the summer season approaches.
This region is a low rainfall area as most of the precipitation in the region is in the
form of snow. The rainfall takes place during the monsoon months only and the
catchment experiences snowfall during the remaining period of the year. The
Southwest monsoon is dominant during July to September, and most of the
precipitation is in the form of rainfall. Though total precipitation recorded in this
season is only about 29% of the annual precipitation, extreme rainfall floods are
also experienced during this season. Severe floods are sometimes recorded during
first week of October also. Three raingauge stations namely Keylong, Gondla and
November 2014

7.14
Koksar exist in the catchment. It is observed that the significant runoff in the river
results from the melting of snow.
Average maximum temperature at Killar area which is at diversion site ranges from
-2.50C in January to 20.20C in July.
Based on available information from different sources the project basin broadly
experiences four distinct seasons:
7.1.5
i) The Winter Season
: December to March
ii) The Summer/Pre-monsoon
: April to June
iii) The Southwest Monsoon
: July to September
iv) The Post-monsoon
: October to November
Permanent Snowline
Flood Estimation Report for Western Himalaya, Zone 7, covers Indus river system
and Ganga river system. Under the Indus river system river Indus, Jhelam, Chenab,
Ravi, Beas and Sutluj has been covered and under the Ganga river system river
Ganga Jamuna, Ram Ganga and Sharda have been covered for the purpose of
analysis of flood. The permanent snow lines for all these river have been fixed at an
elevation of 4500 m. During winter season the snow line dip to height about EL+
1800M.
Considerable portion of the basin receives precipitation in the form of snow.
Estimation of snowline is important to delineate areas contributing snowmelt from
the area and the balance area contributing rainfall storm runoff during monsoon.
Mean daily temperature data of Killar and Badarwah (outside the catchment of
Dugar HEP) are the two high altitude stations in the basin which have been used to
estimate the altitude of zero degree isotherms. These two stations are assumed to
represent thermal conditions in the basin. Monthly lapse rates and the
corresponding altitude of the zero degree isotherms are given in Table 7.3. The
lowest position of the snowline on ground/Stevenson screen level is taken to
correspond to the elevation of zero degree isotherms. The altitudes given in Table
7.3 correspond to zero temperature at the height of Stevenson screen.
November 2014

7.15
Table 7.3: Estimation of Zero Degree Isotherms

Baderwah Elevation
Killar Elevation
1.7 Km
2.03 km
Month
Mean Daily Temperature
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Killar (Oct 2011Dec2012)

Badarwah (1977-1989)
(Elev. 2.03 km)
(Elev. 1.7 km)
-2.5
5.3
0.2
5.6
4.5
9.0
8.7
14.7
4.5
17.9
15.7
22.2
20.2
22.9
19.4
22.9
16
20.0
10.4
15.3
7.3
10.8
2.6
6.8
Altitude of
Lapse rate
Zero degree
in Degree C iso therm
per Km
(m)
Altitude of
Zero degree
iso therm
(m)
Killar &
Badarwah
based on
Killar
based on
Baderwah
23.52
16.26
13.57
18.12
40.67
19.57
8.18
10.71
12.19
14.86
10.54
12.76
1923.72
2042.30
2361.51
2510.01
2140.66
2832.27
4498.89
3842.09
3342.26
2729.78
2722.90
2233.82
1923.72
2042.30
2361.51
2510.01
2140.66
2832.27
4498.89
3842.09
3342.26
2729.78
2722.90
2233.82
The above table indicates the altitude of zero degree isotherms as 4498.89 m
during the month of July. As such, for the present the permanent snowline has
been considered as 4500m. However, an average value of 4500 m above mean sea
level has been taken as the permanent snowline for design flood studies of Kirthai I
project which is located on the river Chenab.
7.1.6
Pre-Feasibility Study
The Pre- Feasibility study of the Dugar HEP Project has been done earlier by Dugar
Hydro Power Limited., which broadly envisaged construction of concrete gravity
dam along with intakes on the left bank followed by pressure shafts and an
underground power house on the left bank of Chenab River to utilize a gross head
of 99 m and to generate 380 MW.
7.1.7
Present Study
The present study aims to carry out hydrological studies based on detailed hydrometeorological data available in the region so that the proposed project is
designed optimally and meets the power requirements.
November 2014

7.1.8
7.16
Hydrological Data
Chenab River and its tributaries are well gauged along its course within state of
Himachal Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir. Meteorological data is being collected by
India Meteorological Department (IMD) in the region besides state irrigation
department. Most of the gauge discharge measurement sites are maintained by
Central Water Commission (CWC). The locations of the G&D station used and the
data availability for the study are as under.
November 2014

7.17
Table 7.4: Bar Chart showing Availability of Discharge & Rainfall Data
The discharge data at the G&D sites is at Annexure I to VI.

The monthly rainfall data is at Annexure IIA to VA.
The monthly temperature data is at Annexure VIA.
The monthly silt data is at Annexure VIIA toVIIIA.
November 2014

7.1.9
7.18
Meteorological Data
Precipitation
The precipitation data is being collected at various locations in the Chenab basin.
The Dugar HEP is located in the upper reaches of the Chenab basin. Koksar ,
Keylong and Gondla are the rain gauge stations located within the project basin
where long-term rainfall data is available. The period of availability of the rainfall
data at Koksar and other stations are given in bar chart in Table 7.4. The monthly
rainfall data is at Annexure IIA to VA.
No short term rainfall data is available in or near the catchment.
In addition IMD Pune was requested to supply the list of rain gauge stations whose
data is available in the region bounded between latitude 31o 50 to 33o 36 and
longitude 75o 8 to 78o22. IMD Pune vide email dated 13th Dec 2012(Appendix I)
informed the availability of 7 rain-gauge stations. However, an examination of IMD
data availability reveals that Udaipur rain-gauge station data is available for only
two years. As such the same was not procured.
Discharge Data
There exist six G&D sites in Chenab basin where long term discharges are available.
However two G&D stations namely Gulabgarh and Benzwar are located
downstream of proposed HEP site. The details are given in Table 7.4 and Table
7.5. The 10 daily discharge data as available are at Annexure I to VI. No short
term gauge or discharge data is available in the catchment or in the region.
Table 7.5: Catchment Characteristic of various G&D sites
Gauge and
Discharge
Site
Total
Catchment
Area (Km2)
Snow fed
area
(Km2)
Rain fed
Area
(Km2)
% Snow fed
area of total
area
% Rain fed
area of total
area
Tandi
1653
1125
528
68.00 %
32.00 %
Ghousal
2465
1675
790
67.90 %
32.10 %
Miyar
955
610
345
63.87 %
36.13 %
Udaipur
5910
3758
2152
63.58 %
36.42 %
Dugar
7823
4458
3365
56.97 %
43.01 %
Gulabgarh
8526
4565
3961
53.54 %
46.46 %
Benzwar
10792
5650
5142
52.35 %
47.65 %
Temperature data (Annexure-VIA)

Temperature data for three sites namely Killar, Badarwah and Banihal for varying
periods are available in the region. Killar station is located in catchment while
November 2014

7.19
others are outside the catchment. The detail of data availability is indicated in
succeeding paras.
Silt Data (Annexure VIIA and VIII A)
Monthly silt data at Benzwar (1973-74 to 2002-03) and Ghousal (1990-91 to 201112) are available in the region.
7.1.10
Discharge Measurement Methodology

Two most commonly methods of discharge measurement in India are by the
current meter and by float methods. Though, the discharge measurement by the
current meter is more reliable but in hilly regions where the river bed slopes are
steep and velocity encountered easily go up to 5-6 meter/sec and due to various
constraints faced in lowering the current meter in the river at desired location and
depth, the float method is often resorted to.
Discharge measurement at Udaipur site is made by float method once a day.
However, multiple gauge readings are taken daily. For measurement of discharge
by floats, the flowing portion of river is divided in different segments and up to
three floats are thrown in these segments. The surface velocity in each segment is
computed by measuring the average time taken by the floats in covering a fixed
distance. The surface velocity, thus obtained, is converted in to average velocity for
the whole depth by multiplying it with a suitable coefficient. Flow in each segment
is calculated by multiplying the cross sectional area of the segment with the
average velocity of the segment. Then the segmental discharges are summed up to
compute the total discharge in terms of cumec.
DHPL has installed a state of the art Automatic Weather Station along with
discharge and silt measurements recently at the Dugar site. The following data is
being collected at the site:
(i)
Hourly Temperature
(ii) Wind Speed

(iii) Wind Direction
(iv) Sunshine Recorder
November 2014

7.20
Figure 7.4: Automatic Weather Station at Project Site

DHPL is in the process of installing a state of art automatic water level recorder
together with cradle and ropeway arrangement for carrying out discharge
measurement by current meter. The water level being recorded at short interval will
be received automatically at project Head Quarter through VHF link. Silt laboratory
will be established for measuring silt concentration and gradation analysis of silt.
One ordinary rain gauge (ORG) and one Self Recording Rain Gauge (SRRG) will also
be installed at site and will be operational soon from ensuing monsoon season..
7.1.11
Flow Regime
Daily flow data of Chenab River at Udaipur site is available from January 1974 to
Sept 2012 i.e. about 38 year. The flow regime of Chenab River can be predicted
based on this flow data as under.
A base flow regime is observed from mid October to March. During this period,
water originates from soil drainage and limited snowmelt at low altitude during
warmer days;
The flow progressively increases from April and May without any rainfall
contribution. It is generated by progressive snowmelt and glacier melt. The gradual
flow increase during this period corresponds to the increase in daily temperature;
November 2014

7.21
The flow remains high during June to September. The source of inflow is still snow
and glacier melt, augmented by monsoon rain on the lower parts of the watershed;
The flow progressively decreases from October to November, except very few
isolated event. The sources of water are glacier melt, some post monsoon rain and
delayed ground water contribution.
February is the driest month of the year, having only 1.68 % of the total annual flow
and minimum water balance carry over.
Figure 7.5: Annual Flow regime of Chenab River at Udaipur
Figure 7.6: Non-Monsoon Flow Regime of Chenab River at Udaipur

November 2014

7.22
Figure 7.7: Monthly Flow Distribution at Udaipur

The two extreme months over the year are July and February. Maximum flow in the
stream remains during the July i.e. 24.83 % and minimum flow i.e. 1.68 % in the
month of February as shown in Figure 7.7.
The 10- daily flow data is available from 1974-75 to 2011-12 i.e. about 38 years.
Average 10 daily flows based on observed 38 years of available data is plotted in
Figure 7.8 below. A perusal of the same indicates that the region experiences
heavy flows during the period of June to September. Low flows occur during
October to March. The flow starts increasing during April to May due to
contribution of snowmelt.
Figure 7.8: 10-Daily average Flow Distribution at Udaipur

November 2014

7.1.12
7.23
Rainfall Pattern
In Himalayan region spatial precipitation distribution shows high variations.
Research studies have shown that these variations are the result of catabolic and
thermal winds which causes localized winds with strong circulation. As a result less
precipitation occurs in the lower reaches of the valley in comparison to mountain
ridges.
The collection of daily rainfall data of most of the rain gauges are done manually in
India. Keeping in view the convenience in collection of daily rainfall record and
maintenance and safety of instrument mostly rain gauges in mountains are placed
near the population in the valley floor. Very few rain gauges are located on the
mountain ridges, where access and daily logging of the rainfall data is difficult. As a
result actual estimation of the catchment precipitation is very difficult for the
mountainous region.
Koksar, Killar, Gondla and Keylong are the rain gauge stations located within the
project basin where monthly rainfall data is available as shown in Table 7.4. Besides
these stations, rainfall data of Kishtwar rain gauge stations located outside the
catchment in J&K is also available whose details are in Table 7.4. The available
rainfall data at rain gauge stations have been analyzed. The average monthly and
annual rainfall, highest amount of rainfall and monthly distribution of rainfall
received at (available) rain gauge stations are illustrated below in the tables and
figure.
Table 7.6: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (Oct 2011 Dec 2012) at Killar
Average Monthly Rainfall
S. No.
Month
1.
(mm)
% of Annual
value
JAN
35.3
4.11
2.
FEB
140.0
16.29
3.
MAR
4.
APR
141.6
16.47
5.
MAY
162.8
18.94
6.
JUN
19.2
2.23
7.
JUL
19.3
2.25
8.
AUG
44.6
5.19
9.
SEP
82.9
9.65
10.
OCT
19.1
2.22
11.
NOV
15.5
1.80
12.
DEC
16.5
1.91
859.5
100
Total
162.8
18.94
November 2014

7.24
Figure 7.9: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Killar

Following conclusion may be drawn from above analysis:
The highest amount of rainfall is received in the month of March and May.
The minimum rainfall during the month of November.
The average annual rainfall at Killar is 859.5 mm.
Table 7.7: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2001) at Koksar
S. No.
Month
1.
(mm)
% of Annual
value
JAN
159.2
12.53
2.
FEB
167.0
13.14
3.
MAR
169.7
13.36
4.
APR
97.2
7.65
5.
MAY
103.5
8.15
6.
JUN
53.4
4.21
7.
JUL
134.5
10.59
8.
AUG
107.7
8.48
9.
SEP
109.5
8.62
10.
OCT
66.3
5.22
11.
NOV
34.6
2.73
12.
DEC
67.6
5.32
1270.2
100
Total
November 2014

7.25
Monthly Rainfall distribution at Koksar in

percentage
16.00
14.00
12.53
13.14
13.36
12.00
Monthly Rainfall %
10.59
10.00
7.65
8.00
8.48
8.15
8.62
6.00
5.32
5.22
4.21
4.00
2.73
2.00
0.00
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 7.10: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Koksar

The highest amount of rainfall is received in the month of March and
February.
The minimum rainfall during the month of November.
The average annual rainfall at Koksar is 1270.2 mm
Table 7.8: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall (1951-2002) at Gondla
S. No.
Month
(mm)
% of Annual value
1.
JAN
116.8
12.72
2.
FEB
110.3
12.01
3.
MAR
146.9
16.00
4.
APR
111.7
12.16
5.
MAY
90.0
9.80
6.
JUN
28.4
3.09
7.
JUL
64.7
7.04
8.
AUG
49.1
5.35
9.
SEP
61.4
6.69
10.
OCT
48.6
5.30
11.
NOV
32.2
3.51
12.
DEC
58.2
6.34
918.3
100
Total
November 2014

7.26
Monthly Rainfall distribution at Gondla in

percentage
18.00
16.00
16.00
14.00
12.72
Monthly Rainfall %
12.00
12.16
12.01
9.80
10.00
8.00
7.04
6.00
6.69
5.35
4.00
6.34
5.30
3.51
3.09
2.00
0.00
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 7.11: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Gondla

The highest amount of rainfall is received in the month of March.
The average annual rainfall at Gondla is 918.3 mm
Table 7.9: Mean Monthly Percentage of Rainfall at Keylong
S. No.
Month
1.
(mm)
% of Annual value
JAN
67.3
8.66
2.
FEB
56.1
7.22
3.
MAR
139.6
17.97
4.
APR
91.3
11.76
5.
MAY
80.5
10.37
6.
JUN
37.6
4.84
7.
JUL
76.3
9.82
8.
AUG
45.3
5.83
9.
SEP
81.5
10.49
10.
OCT
39.4
5.07
11.
NOV
19.5
2.51
12.
DEC
42.3
5.45
776.6
100
Total
November 2014

7.27
Figure 7.12: Distribution of Mean Monthly Rainfall at Keylong

The highest amount of rainfall is received in the month of March.
The average annual rainfall at Keylong is 776.6 mm
An examinations of rainfall data of the three rain-gauge stations located in-side the
catchment reveals similar trend i.e maximum precipitation occurs during the month
of March ( non-monsoon period) and minimum during the month of November.
7.1.13
Mean Monthly Temperature

The temperature records (long term) are available at Killar, Badarwah and Banihal
stations located in the Chenab river basin. The minimum mean monthly
temperature is recorded in the month of January. The hottest month in the basin is
July. Killar station is located in the catchment while the others are located outside
the catchment.
Table 7.10: Mean Monthly Temperature
Mean Monthly Temperature ( oC )
Month
Killar
(Oct 2011-Dec 2012)
Badarwah
(1977-1989)
Banihal
( 1962-2002)
Jan
-2.5
5.3
4.9
Feb
0.2
5.6
6.1
November 2014

7.28
Mean Monthly Temperature ( oC )

Month
Killar
(Oct 2011-Dec 2012)
Badarwah
(1977-1989)
Banihal
( 1962-2002)
Mar
4.5
9.0
10.1
Apr
8.7
14.7
15.0
May
4.5
17.9
18.2
June
15.7
22.2
21.8
July
20.2
22.9
23.0
Aug
19.4
22.9
22.5
Sept
16.0
20.0
19.7
Oct
10.4
15.3
15.4
Nov
7.3
10.8
11.0
Dec
2.6
6.8
7.2
Figure 7.13: Mean Monthly Temperature at Killar, Badarwah and Banihal

The above table and plot reveals that Killar experiences extremely low temperature
during the month of January. The maximum temperature is recorded during the
month of July at all locations. Winter season is during the period of November to
March except at Killar where low temperature was noticed during the month of
May also.
November 2014

7.2
7.29
DATA VALIDATION AND CONSISTENCY CHECK

The inconsistency in the data may be either due to human or instrumental error. If
inconsistencies are identified in the observed data, then it may be removed and
data may be adjusted with the help of some well established hydrological
techniques. The rainfall data is available at three rain-gauge stations which are
located unevenly in the catchment. Their locations are such that it is difficult to
carry out isohyetal or Theissen polygon analysis for assessment of catchment
rainfall. The rain gauge stations namely Koksar, Gondla and Keylong are located
nearby while no station is located in upper and lower reaches of the catchment.
The rainfall data availability is not concurrent even for these three rain-gauge
stations with the observed discharges. As such runoff data validation with rainfall
was not carried out. The observed flow data of river Chenab where long term
discharge data are available namely Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar shall be
utilized for the present study and accordingly the same have been examined for
their consistency by some of the hydrological practices/techniques as given below:
7.2.1
Annual Yield Comparison of G&D sites
Mass curve
Double Mass curve
Statistical Tests
Long-term averages 10-daily flow at G&D sites
10-daily flow of G&D sites
Specific yield at G&D sites
Annual Yield Comparison

The annual volumes of the nearby G&D sites are plotted on the same graph for
checking the consistency/trend in the pattern of annual flow volumes. The Udaipur
G&D site of CWC is located on river Chenab in the upstream of Dugar diversion site
while Gulabgarh and Benzwar sites of CWC are located downstream of Dugar
diversion site. The annual flow volumes of Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar sites in
MCM are plotted on the same plot for the comparison.
November 2014

7.30
Figure 7.14: Annual Flow Comparison of Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar

Pattern of annual flow volumes of river Chenab at Udaipur are showing consistency
and trend with the annual flow volumes of river Chenab at Benzwar but shows
inconsistency with Gulabgarh data for the period 2000 to 2004. Both Benzwar and
Udaipur shows rising trend from 2002-03 onwards while Gulabgarh indicates falling
trend. It appears that the data during this period at this site contains some
observational errors.
7.2.2
Mass curve
The consistency of the annual flow volumes of a particular G&D site may also be
checked with the help of plotting the mass curve of annual observed flow. The
straight line of the mass curve indicates the consistency in the annual flow
measurement. The change in the slope of the mass curve generally due to the
upstream utilization or change in the method of discharge observation. The mass
curve of annual flow volumes at Udaipur, Gulabgarh & Benzwar stations are shown
below.
November 2014

7.31
Figure 7.15: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Udaipur
Figure 7.16: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Gulabgarh

The above Mass curve for Gulabgarh indicates a kink during the year 2003-04.
Discrepancy was noticed in the annual yield comparison in earlier para also. This
November 2014

7.32
correlates the findings made in earlier para. The utilization of Gulabgarh data
therefore needs more detailed examination.
Figure 7.17: Mass Curve of Annual Flow of Chenab River at Benzwar
7.2.3
Double Mass Curve

The consistency of the annual flow volumes of one G&D site may also be checked
with the annual flow volumes of another G&D site located either on the same river
or in the vicinity in hydro-meteorological similar region. In the present case, the
annual flow of Udaipur site which is located on the same river have been plotted
for same period with Gulabgarh and Benzwar in double mass curve. Double mass
curve between Udaipur and Gulabgarh shows kink, where as Udaipur and Benzwar
curves are nearly in straight line. It suggests that the data of Udaipur and Benzwar
are more consistent as compared to Gulabgarh. Udaipur and Benzwar has very
good correlation, but correlation between Udaipur and Gulabgarh is not that good.
It shows that data at Gulabgarh is not consistent with respect to other stations. This
was noticed in earlier paras. As such Gulabgarh data is not considered for
hydrological studied for the proposed HE project. However, the Double mass curve
of annual flow between Gulabgarh and Benzwar are indicated in Figure 18 and 19
below.
November 2014

7.33
Figure 7.18: Double Mass Curve of Annual Flow at Gulabgarh & Udaipur
Figure 7.19: Double mass curve of annual flow at Benzwar and Udaipur
November 2014

7.2.4
7.34
Statistical tests
Student T test and F test have been carried out for the observed 10 daily flows of
Udaipur G&D site for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12. The flow series have been
bifurcated in two equal parts while carrying out the relevant tests. The results
indicated below reveals that the test values are within the permissible critical limits.
T test
F test
An examination of above table indicates that T-test corresponding to two tails is

less than the critical value. Further since F statistics is 0.8813 ( nearly equal to unity)
signifies that both the series are not significantly different and null hypothesis is
true. Also the T statistics is less than T-critical thereby indicating better data quality.
November 2014

7.2.5
7.35
Long-Term Averages 10-daily Flow at G&D Sites

Long term averages of 10-daily flows observed at G&D sites are plotted on the
same plot to indicate an idea of variability of the stream flow with in the year time.
Long term averages of 10-daily flow observed at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar
G&D sites are plotted on the same plot.
The flow in the river is maximum in the month of July. Lowest flows are recorded in
the month of January, February and March. The river flow start rising by the end of
March when probably contribution from snow melting start. The three discharge
observation sites exhibit similar 10 daily trend. However variations were noticed
during year to year basis in succeeding paras.
Figure 7.20: Average 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar
7.2.6
10-Daily Flow of G&D Sites

The validation and the consistency checks carried out on the annual flow series at
the Udaipur site in the earlier paras have shown that the annual flow series at
Udaipur is consistent. The 10-daily flow of all the G&D sites is plotted on the same
graph during each year to check the consistency of the flow in each 10-daily
period. The 10-daily flow observed at Benzwar, Gulabgarh and Udaipur G&D sites
are plotted year wise on the same figure as under.
November 2014

7.36
Figure 7.21: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Benzwar for 1973-74
November 2014

7.37
November 2014

7.38
November 2014

7.39
November 2014

7.40
November 2014

7.41
November 2014

7.42
November 2014

7.43
November 2014

7.44
November 2014

7.45
Figure 7.39: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh and Benzwar for 1991-92
November 2014

7.46
November 2014

7.47
Figure 7.44: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur, Gulabgarh & Benzwar for 1996-97
November 2014

7.48
November 2014

7.49
November 2014

7.50
November 2014

7.51
Figure 7.51: 10-daily observed flows at Udaipur and Gulabgarh for 2003-04
November 2014

7.52
November 2014

7.53
November 2014

7.54
November 2014

7.55
An examination of the above plots on 10 daily basis (yearly basis) at the three G&D
sites viz. Udaipur (CA = 5910 Sq.km), Gulabgarh (CA = 8526 Sq.km) and Benzwar
(CA = 10792 Sq.km) exhibits variable flows as under: Gulabgarh though intercepts less area as compared to Benzwar experiences
more runoff during the month of July and August for the period 1994-95
till 1998-99.
Similarly, the flows recorded at this site during 1999-2000 till 2004-05 and
2010-11 were either equal or less than the flows recorded at Udaipur.
Gulabgarh recorded a high flow during July (Ist 10 daily) of 2006-07 while
other sites recorded normal flows.
Udaipur during 3rd 10 daily period of January 1976-77 and also Ist 10 daily
period of Aug2010-11 recorded high flows while other sites recorded
normal flows during this period. The abnormal high value at Udaipur site
may be due assessment made from the rating curve by CWC instead of
actual discharge observation.
Benzwar though intercepting more than 183% of Udaipur catchment area
received nearly equal or less runoff/flows as compared to Udaipur during
the lean period of 1978 -79 to 1980-81.
November 2014

7.56
High flows were noticed at Benzwar during July 1988-89 (3rd ten daily
period) of 1988-89 and Jan (3rd 10 daily period) of 1989-90.
Broadly, it was noticed from the above plots that trend on 10 daily basis at all the
three sites were similar and identical. But Gulabgarh flows do not match with flows
recorded at other sites. The specific yield at Gulabgarh even do not match with the
specific yield of other G&D sites (next para). Benzwar G&D site data also suffers
from observational error as indicated in earlier/above para. Thus it is felt that under
the present conditions, the observed data of Udaipur site is consistent and reliable.
This will be verified at latter date when sufficient site specific data is collected.
However, the discrepancies noted and missing data for Udaipur site have been
corrected by using the regular data infilling procedure before utilization in the
present study. The modified and gap filled discharge data of Udaipur G&D site is at
Annexure I.
7.2.7
Specific yield at G&D sites

Specific yield of annual observed flow at G&D sites are compared to know the
variations in the yield of the basin with catchment area. The annual average yield at
Ghousal, Miyar Nala, Udaipur, Tandi, Gulabgarh and Benzwar sites are computed
below in the table.
Table 7.11: Specific Yield at G&D Sites
S. No.
Name of G&D
site
Annual avg.
Flow, MCM
Specific
yield
mm
2465
3422
1338
955
1155
1209
Catchment
area, sq km
Ghousal
Miyar Nala
Tandi
1653
1808
1094
Udaipur
5910
7600
1286
Gulabgarh
8526
9126
1070
Benzwar
10792
13165
1220
A perusal of the above table indicate low specific yield for Gulabgarh G&D site. The
Benzwar site is located downstream of proposed Dugar HEP site. The data at these
sites appears inconsistent and the same have been corroborated with double mass
curve analysis carried out in earlier paras.
The monthly and annual specific yield and their details are given in Annexure VII
to Annexure XII.
November 2014

7.2.8
7.57
Quality of Data
An examination of the above paras and analysis/studies carried out to assess the
consistence and reliability of data available at G&D sites indicates that Gulabgarh
data is inconsistent and unreliable as the flows recorded at this site exhibit erratic
behavior/trend i.e the observed flows are ever less than Udaipur (although
intercepted area is much more). This can be seen from specific yield computation
also.
Similarly the flows observed at Benzwar site are also less than flows recorded at
Udaipur G&D site in several years (refer to earlier paras).
It is only Udaipur data which shows consistency. The data observed is considered
reliable as seen from the specific yield of Udaipur. The same is proposed to be
utilized for the proposed study. The missing data of Udaipur and erratic flows have
been filled/modified as per standard infilling techniques. The original observed and
modified/filled in data at Udaipur G&D site is available in Annexure-IA and
Annexure-I.
7.2.9
Snow studies
Long term observed discharges are available at Udaipur G&D site (CA = 5910
Sq.km) for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12. The snowfed area is appx. 3758 Sq.km.
As such an assessment has been carried out to assess the snowfed contribution in
observed flows at this site with details as under: It has been indicated in earlier paras that base flow regime is observed
during the period of October to March. The lowest flow observed during
this period is considered as above flow in each 10 daily/ monthly period.
The period June to September is considered as monsoon period. Efforts
were made to draw isohyetal curve and Thiessen polygon for assessment of
catchment rainfall. Since the locations of rain gauge stations are not evenly
distributed and are nearby, so this study could not be carried out. As such
arithmetic average method has been utilized to estimate catchment rainfall
(tentatively).
Concurrent rainfall data of two stations viz Gondla and Koksar for the period
1974-75 to 2000-01 on monthly time step with Udaipur G&D site data have
been considered for the study. The rainfall data availability of third rain
gauge station viz Keylong is meager. Even during the period of
consideration, some rainfall data is missing. As such only such period where
concurrent rainfall and runoff data are available at these stations is used in
the study. The details are at Annexure-XIIA.
November 2014

7.58
Runoffs have been estimated from this catchment rainfall considering centper-cent runoff factor in absence of relevant and site specific data for its
assessment as contribution from rainfed area.
Snowmelt runoff has been estimated after deducting the contributions of
flow from rainfed area and base flow from observed data.
The snowmelt study in Annexure XIIA has been carried out for the months
of April and May only when there is positive contribution of snowmelt and
also snow melt occurs. From the available data, it has been noticed that
after consideration of concurrent rainfall, only positive snowmelt
contribution (in cumec) has been noticed in few years during the month of
April and May in the entire data period .
The base flow during the month of April and May (minimum observed)
being 51.84 cumec and 72.32 cumec respectively and average being 62.08
cumec.
The average snowmelt rate varies between 0.3 mm/day to 2.7 mm/day
during the month of April and May. This transforms into an average
snowmelt flow of 17.7 cumec and 119.2 cumec during the month of April
and May.
Thus flow due to the rainfall from above snowmelt study is 2.32 cumec
(82.08-62.08-17.7) against 43.79 cumec due to rainfall in month of April.
Similarly the average flow in May being 40 cumec and 54.61 cumec. The
details are in Annexure XIIA.
A perusal of above snowmelt study reveals that the study now being carried out
considering the 100% runoff factor and estimation of snowmelt contribution may
not be realistic. The study has been carried out considering an average base flow
during the period. Though the estimated runoff during the month of May matches
with observed flows as compared to assessed runoff during April yet consideration
of cent-per-cent runoff factor needs verification with observed concurrent reliable
rainfall data before utilisation. As such this snowmelt study has not been
considered /utilized presently. The observed flow collected at G&D site has been
utilized for carrying out the yield assessment study for Dugar HE Project.
7.3
WATER AVAILABILITY
The assessment of water availability at the diversion site of any hydro-electric
project is very important study. Due care should be taken while computing the flow
series at the project site. Long-term observed flow data at any hydro-electric
project site are rarely available. The flow series at the diversion site may be
computed either by developing a rainfall runoff model and corresponding long
term runoff series or by transferring the long-term observed flow data from nearby
November 2014

7.59
G&D site on the same river using catchment area and rainfall proportion. The flow
data of the G&D site used for the study is required to be validated and any
inconsistency in the data may be corrected before transferring it to project site.
The location of raingauge stations and their data availability in the region is such
that it is difficult to compute monthly catchment rainfall for G&D site and proposed
project location for utilization in rain fall runoff model. Further, approximately 55%
of catchment area is covered under permanent snow cover. As such, rainfall runoff
model could not be developed. So Assessment has to be carried out based on
either developing runoff-runoff model (in case flow extension is required) or by
transposition of observed flows utilizing catchment and rainfall proportion. It is
reiterated that long term observed discharge data is available in the catchment
upstream of the proposed Dugar HEP site at Udaipur site.
The flow of river Chenab is observed at Udaipur G&D site by Central Water
Commission. Long term 10-daily observed flow series is available at this site from
1974-75 to 2011-12 (38 years). No extension of data is required for carrying out
simulation studies. The discharge data of Udaipur G&D site is consistent and
reliable as indicated in earlier paras. The proposed Dugar HE Project is located
downstream of Udaipur Gauge & Discharge site. The catchment area ratio of Dugar
HEP (7823 Km2) and Udaipur G&D site (5910 Km2) is 1.32. The observed 10-daily
flow at Udaipur for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12 has been considered for the
computation of long-term flow series at Dugar HEP. Since the catchment area of
proposed project and Udaipur G&D site lays in same hydro-metorological region,
the flow characteristics at the Dugar site are be considered to be same as Udaipur
site for all practical purposes. Keeping in view the above facts and due to nonavailability of sufficient rain gauge stations for assessment of catchment rainfall for
Udaipur G&D site and Dugar HEP site, the 10-daily observed flow series at Udaipur
G&D of CWC for the period 1974-75 to 2011-12 has been utilized for the present
study and transferred to Dugar diversion site in catchment area (direct) proportion.
The same is given in Annexure XIII.
7.3.1
Site specific data comparison

DHPL had established a G&D/ hydro meteorological site at the proposed Dugar
diversion site since Sept 2011. Daily discharges (using float method) are available
for the period Sept 2011 to Aug 2012 (12 months and available in Table 11).
An examination of the observed Dugar site specific data during the period of
December 2011 to April 2012 reveals that constant flows were noticed/recorded
for several days in each months i.e. during December 2011 it is 43.34 cumec and
going to 54.45 cumec during April 2012 (for several days). This aspect was
discussed in detail with DHPL who clarified that constant discharges during these
periods may be due to non-measurement of flow discharges. No observer/human
November 2014

7.60
being stays at the site in this period due to extreme harsh climatic conditions i.e.
low temperature and heavy snowfall. The assessment of discharge thus has been
estimated/carried out based on the remotely sensed data from water level
recorder. Since it was first year of observation, efforts have been made now (by
DHPL) to collect real time data both through an observer and also through remote
sensing techniques from this year. The earlier assessed data will be modified/
rectified based on observations being carried during the ensuring year.
The computed flows (average and concurrent period) based on the Udaipur G&D
transposed data for the concurrent period was plotted with observed flows at
Dugar HEP site. A perusal of the plot below reveals similar identical trend except
during the third ten daily period of July 2012 when the project site had experienced
a heavy flood. During non-monsoon period, the trend between computed and
observed flows is identical.
Figure 7.60: Comparison of derived series with observed data
November 2014

7.61
Table 7.12: Daily Observed Discharge Record of Chenab River in at Dugar HEP
(Unit - m3/s)
7.3.2
Max., Min., Average, 50% and 90% dependable flow at Dugar diversion
site
The 10-daily flow summary of water availability series (1974-75 to 2011-12)
computed at Dugar HEP diversion is given below in the table and chart. The annual
flow with 50% and 90% dependable flows are found to be in year 1980-81 and
1993-94 respectively. The details of the 10-daily flow in 50% and 90% dependable
year are also given below.
November 2014

7.62
Table 7.13: 10-Daily flow summary at Dugar HEP

(Unit - m3/s)
November 2014

7.63
Figure 7.61: 10-daily max, min and average computed flow at Dugar HEP
Figure 7.62: Flow pattern in 50% and 90% dependable Year at Dugar HEP
November 2014

7.64
Table 7.14: Detail of 50% and 90% Dependable Flow Year
7.3.3
Available Flows
The total available flows at Dugar HEP site from 1974-75 to 2011-2012 is given in
ANNEXURE XIII. The average flow duration curve for Dugar HEP site together with
the G&D sites in Chenab basin are plotted using ten daily discharges The details
are given below in Figure 63 and Table 14 .
November 2014

7.65
Table 7.15: Dependable Flow at Dugar Project and various G&D Sites in Chenab Basin
November 2014

7.66
Figure 7.63: Flow duration curve at Project site (10 daily basis)
A perusal of the above table/figure indicates that discharges observed at Miyar
Nala, Tandi and Ghousal are similar. Similarly the flows observed at Benzwar,
Gulabgarh, Udaipur and Dugar are alike. However at low percentage of
dependability they do not follow the same pattern/match. Further, Gulabgarh
flows at low dependability are less than Dugar flows though Gulabgarh intercepts
more catchment areas as compared to Dugar HEP. Further, at high dependability
the flows are identical at all sites.
November 2014

7.4
DESIGN FLOOD
7.4.1
General
7.67
Estimation of design flood for the design of different type of structures is very
significant component of the hydrological study. Proper estimation of the design
flood value is very important. The underestimation of design flood may risk the
safety of the diversion structure as well as the population and other resources in
the downstream of the structure whereas, overestimation of the design flood may
result in the increase in cost of structure and wastage of valuable resources.
7.4.2
Design Flood Criteria

As per the Manual on Estimation of Design Flood (CWC, 2001) as well as BIS:
11223-1985, Guidelines for Fixing Spillway Capacity, the following criteria applies
to determine the design flood of a spillway for a particular category of diversion:
Gross
Storage
( x106 m3)
Hydraulic
Head (m)
Small
0.5 - 10
7.5 12
100 year
period
Intermediate
10 - 60
12 30
SPF
> 60
> 30
PMF
Classification
Large
Inflow
Design Flood
return
As Dugar hydro electric project envisages construction of a concrete gravity dam of

height of 92 meters above river bed level. Therefore it falls under the category of
Large Dam and consequently inflow Design Flood for the project is Probable
Maximum Flood (PMF). The same is considered in the present study.
7.4.3
Present Study
The design flood study for the project has been carried out using following two
approaches.
a)
Hydro-meteorological approach.
b)
Probabilistic approach (i.e. flood frequency analysis)
The Hydro-meteorological approach is the most rational method for flood

estimation and generally recommended. The short term rainfall-runoff records at
project site as well as of upper catchment along with physiographic characteristics
November 2014

7.68
are required for this study. Short term rainfall and runoff data is not available
presently at the proposed HEP site..
The Probabilistic approach is the most common procedure for the analysis of
annual flood peak data of sufficiently longer duration at a gauged location. This
approach can be applied to any type of hydro-meteorological data also, but it is
widely used with flood data. Therefore, it is sometimes designated as flood
frequency analysis.
7.4.4
Hydro-Meteorological Approach
This approach has been widely used for the estimation of design flood for the
medium and large project. The design flood study by this approach takes in to
account all the vital physiographic as well as hydro-meteorological parameters of
the project basin. The main advantage of this approach as compared to
Probabilistic approach is that it gives a complete flood hydrograph which allows
making a realistic determination of its moderating effect while passing through a
reservoir or in a river reach.
The hydro-meteorological approach needs two basic inputs i.e. unit hydrograph
and the design storm to arrive at the required flood. The unit hydrograph is the
discharge hydrograph resulting from the 1 cm excess rainfall experienced uniformly
over the basin at a uniform rate during a specific period of time. The unit
hydrograph may be computed from the project specific observed hydrograph for
few high flood events. In absence of the essentially required hydro-meteorological
data, a synthetic unit hydrograph is developed using catchment physiographic
characteristics.
The design storm input in the present case is Standard Project Storm (SPS) and
Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP). The SPS is the one, which is severe most
rain storm on record yielding highest rainfall depth over the catchment or in the
meteorologically homogeneous neighborhood of the catchment. The PMP is the
one, which is greatest depth of precipitation for a given duration that is physically
possible over a given size storm area at a particular geographical location at a
certain time of a year i.e. it is the physical upper limit of the rainfall which is not
likely to be exceeded in the years to come.
In absence of site specific short interval rainfall runoff records, the procedure for
estimation of unit hydrograph given in Flood Estimation Report for Western
Himalaya zone 7, Central Water Commission, 1994 is generally adopted.
The river flood in the Himalayan catchment are constituted by two basic
component i.e. runoff contribution from the rain fed part and snow melt
contribution snow/ glaciers. Therefore in the present study, the design flood is
consisting of two component i.e. flood due to rainfall from the rain fed catchment
and flood contribution from snow fed area.
7.4.4.1
Derivation of the Unit Hydrograph
November 2014

7.69
The Central Water Commission (CWC) in association with Indian Meteorological

Department (IMD), Ministry of Railway and Ministry of Surface Transport has
prepared Flood Estimation reports for small & medium rain fed catchments for
efficient hydro-meteorological homogenous sub-zones. These reports illustrate the
procedure for derivation of synthetic unit hydrograph based on physiographic
parameters. The unit hydrograph for the project rain fed catchment area have been
derived as per procedure and guidelines given in the following regional flood
report.
CWC sub zone-7 report has been referred for the estimation of the Synthetic Unit
Hydrograph Parameters. The details of the same are given below.
i)
The following units are consistently used unless specified otherwise

Parameter
Unit
Length
Area
km
Rainfall
mm
Discharge
m /s, cumec
Level
Slope
m/km
Hour
h or hour
Second
ii)
s or sec
Physiographic Parameters of Project Catchment

Parameter
Catchment area
Length of longest stream
Length of the stream from CG
Equivalent stream slope
Symbols
Value
Unit
A rainfed
3365
km2
A snowfed
L
Lc
S
4458
238.25
91.56
8.64
km2
km
km
m/km
The lowest elevation of the project basin is nearly 2015 m. Heavy snowfall is
reported in the basin during winter and project site/ catchment become
inaccessible. The permanent snow line elevation during storm conditions for the
purpose of design flood study have been considered at 4500 m based on the
available regional information. The details are available in earlier paras.
The catchment area below 4500 m elevation is considered as rain fed. The
physiographic parameter of the rain fed catchment has been used for the
derivation of the SUG for the project.
November 2014

iii)
7.70
Equivalent slope of stream
Sl No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Reduce
d Level
(m)
2015.00
2100.00
2250.00
2500.00
2750.00
3000.00
3250.00
3500.00
3750.00
4000.00
4250.00
4500.00
Height
above
Datum, Di
(m)
0.00
85.00
235.00
485.00
735.00
985.00
1235.00
1485.00
1735.00
1985.00
2235.00
2485.00
Total
Reduced
Distance
(km)
0.00
12.95
28.25
63.20
97.29
135.62
164.62
174.01
181.88
197.82
225.25
238.25
Thus, equivalent stream slope, S =
Length of
each
segment,
Li
(km)
0.00
12.95
15.29
34.95
34.10
38.33
29.00
9.39
7.87
15.95
27.42
13.01
238.25
L (D
i
( i 1)
2
+ Di )
Li x (Di1+Di)
Di-1 + Di
(m)
0.00
85.00
320.00
720.00
1220.00
1720.00
2220.00
2720.00
3220.00
3720.00
4220.00
4720.00
(km x m)
0.00
1100.84
4894.08
25164.00
41595.90
65931.04
64382.22
25529.92
25334.96
59319.12
115725.06
61393.04
490370.18
8.64 m/km
This is one of the physiographical parameters used in the derivation of Synthetic

Unit Hydrograph. The catchment, snow fed area and L section of the river is derived
from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) 90m Digital Elevation Data
which is a high- resolution digital topographic database of earth. The same was
analyzed in the ARC GIS environment to assess the relevant parameters.
iv)
1-Hour Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Parameters (CWC Manual)

SUG
Formula
Value
Unit
November 2014

7.71
Parameters
0.156
tp
2.498*(L*Lc/S)
qp
1.048*tp
W 50
1.954*(L*Lc/S)
W 75
-0.178
0.72
0.099
4.24
0.124
0.972*(L*Lc/S)
2.57
1.769
W R50
0.189*(W 50 )
W R75
0.419*(W 75 )
TB
7.845*tp
Tm
8.48
2.44
1.246
1.36
0.453
20.66
tp+0.5
8.98
Say
Qp
q p *A
9
2410
hour
cumec
hour
hour
hour
hour
hour
hour
hour
cumec
Where;
A
= Total rain fed catchment area up to diversion site in Km2
Ar
= Rain fed catchment in Km2
As
= Snow fed catchment in Km2
= Length of longest stream in rain fed catchment in Km
LC
= Length of longest main stream from a point opposite to

centroid of the catchment area to point of study in Km
= Equivalent stream slope in m/Km
tr
= Unit duration in hour
tp
= Time from the centre of effective rain fall duration to the

Unit Hydrograph (U.G) Peak in hour
Tm
= Time from start of rise to the peak of U.G. in hour
TB
= Base width of U.G. in hour
qp
= Peak Discharge in m3/s/sq.km
Qp
= Peak Discharge of unit hydrograph in m3/s
W 50
= Width of U.G. measured at 50% of Peak Discharge

Ordinate
November 2014

W 75
W R50
7.72
= Width of U.G. measured at 75% of peak discharge in hour

= Width of the rising limb of U.G. measured at 50% of Peak
Discharge Ordinate in hour
Width of the rising limb of U.G. measured at 75% of Peak
W R75
v)
= Discharge Ordinate in hour
Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (CWC Sub Zone-7 report)
Synthetic Unit Hydrograph (SUG) has been plotted using above parameters. The
runoff volume of the SUG is checked for the 1 cm depth over the catchment. The
ordinates of the SUG are adjusted to give runoff depth of 1.0 cm. While adjusting
the ordinates the values of Qp, Tm and TB are not changed.
Table 7.16: Unit Hydrograph Ordinates
Time
(hr)
1-hr
SUG
(cumec)
Time
(hr)
1-hr
SUG
(cumec)
11
600
12
175
10
13
87
30
14
40
50
15
20
125
16
15
300
17
10
1000
18
2250
19
2410
20
10
2200
21
November 2014

7.73
Figure 7.64: Unit Hydrograph for Dugar H E project
7.4.4.2
Design Storm
IMD New Delhi was requested to carry out the design storm studies so as to assess
the 1 day SPS and PMP values for the Dugar site along with the short term storm
distribution. The detailed storm study by IMD in Appendix II reveals the following
storm depths.
S. No.
Return Period
of Design
Storm
Value
1.
1-day PMP
11.4 cm
1.
1-day SPS
7.8 cm
Source
Report on Design Storm Study by IMD (August

2012) for Dugar HEP
Report on Design Storm Study by IMD (August
2012) for Dugar HEP
The 1-day PMP and 1- day SPS values for the project catchment have been
adopted as supplied by IMD for the present study.
November 2014

7.4.4.3
7.74
Clock Hour Correction

The Clock Hour Correction Factor of 1.15, as recommended by IMD has been
adopted for conversion of 1 day rainfall into 24 hour rainfall.
7.4.4.4
Time Distribution Coefficients

Temporal distribution coefficients are used for breaking the 24-hour rainfall value
in to hourly rainfall values. These coefficients are estimated from the hourly rainfall
information of the severe storms experienced in the past over a basin.
In the present study, the temporal distribution of the 24-hour rainfall has been
adopted as supplied by IMD.
Table 7.17: Temporal Distribution
Duration
(hr)
Temporal
Distribution
(%) 24-hr
Design
Storm
Duration
(hr)
Temporal
Distribution
(%) 24-hr
Design
Storm
0.00
13
74.33
10.00
14
77.67
20.00
15
81.00
30.00
16
83.67
35.33
17
86.33
40.67
18
89.00
46.00
19
91.33
50.67
20
93.67
55.33
21
96.00
60.00
22
97.33
10
63.67
23
98.67
11
67.33
24
100.00
12
71.00
November 2014

7.75
Figure 7.65: Temporal Distribution Curve of 24-hour Design Storm for Dugar HEP Site
7.4.4.5
Single Bell
The short term distribution of 24 hours as supplied by IMD is utilized to assess the
design flood using single bell. The details are given in Annexure XIV.
Table 7.18: Design Storm for Dugar HEP
Design Storm (cm)
Clock Hour Correction
Design
Storm
SPS
PMP
7.4.4.6
1.15
1-day
24-hr
8.6
12.6
9.89
14.49
12 hr Bells of 24 hr design storm (Two Bells)

24-hr design storm is distributed in 2-bells of 12 hour (Annexure XV) each in ratio
of 0.71 and 0.29 respectively according to the hourly percentages of 24-hour
rainfall i.e. temporal distribution as given below in the table.
November 2014

7.76
Table 7.19: 12-hr Bells of 24-hr Design Storm

Type
1-Day
SPS
PMP
cm
8.6
12.6
Clock-hr
correction
factor
1.15
1.15
24-hr
Ratio of 12-hr to 24 hr
rainfall
Storm Distribution
(cm)
cm
9.89
14.49
I-Bell
0.71
0.71
I-Bell
7.02
10.29
II-Bell
0.29
0.29
II-Bell
2.87
4.20
The details are given in Annexure XV.
7.4.4.7
Design Loss Rate

Direct surface runoff is the end product of the storm rainfall after the deletion of
infiltration in to sub surface soils, initial ground losses and evaporation etc. The
design loss rate has been adopted as 0.25 cm/hr as approved by CWC in respect of
Seli HE Project in Chenab basin.
7.4.4.8
Critical sequencing of Rainfall Excess

The critical sequencing of the rainfall is done as per the prevailing practice. The
highest rainfall ordinate is placed against the maximum UG ordinate and next
ranking rainfall against the next ranking UG ordinate. This critical sequence is
reversed to obtain the maximum peak. The details of the critical and reversed
critical sequencing are given in the Annexure XIV-XV.
7.4.4.9
Base Flow & Snow Melt

The base flow value chosen should be characteristics of the storm season and
should preferably be based on observed flood hydrograph. The base flow for the
study has been taken as per the recommendation of the sub zone-7 report i.e. @
0.05 cumec/ sq km of the rain fed catchment area. The base flow contributed from
the rain fed area of 3365 sq km is estimated as 168 cumec.
The snow melt contribution has been adopted as per WMO no. 168, equation for
heavily forested area adopted from US Army Corps of Engineers for snow/ glaciers
melt due to rain.
h =( 0.3+0.012 p)*Tav +1.0

M = Daily snowmelt in mm
P = Daily rain in mm
T = mean daily temperature in C
November 2014

7.77
The rainfall values have been adopted as 24-hour PMP value of 144.9 mm and 24
hour SPS value of 898.9 mm. The mean temperature of the snow fed area of 4458
km2 has been taken as 2.5 C and the snow melts contribution have been
computed as 314.59 cumec and 243.38 cumec corresponding to PMP and SPS
rainfall values.
7.4.4.10
Flood Hydrograph
The direct surface runoff hydrograph has been computed by convoluting 1-hour
rainfall excess increments with the ordinates of the 1-hr unit hydrograph. The flood
hydrograph of the project basin has been computed by adding base flow and snow
melt components to the direct surface runoff. Details of the same are given at
Annexure-XIV and XV for 1 bell and 2 bell storm distribution. However, the design
flood peaks assessed from both the methods are identical (with minor difference).
The ordinates of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) Dugar HE project are given
below in the table.
Table 7.20: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site
Time
PMF (m3/s)
Time
PMF (m3/s)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
482.8
482.8
483.0
483.2
484.2
487.3
494.5
512.6
556.2
658.7
835.7
1244.0
1940.2
2613.0
2967.7
2514.7
1873.0
1223.1
1027.6
1185.6
1905.2
2985.4
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
5559.8
7357.6
9033.1
9902.1
8757.8
7107.5
5289.8
4273.2
3329.3
2273.4
1472.5
811.6
619.8
558.1
524.6
506.8
497.0
491.3
487.5
485.1
483.7
482.8
November 2014

22
7.78
4220.7
Figure 7.66: Design Flood (PMF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP

The ordinates of the Standard Project Flood (SPF) Dugar HE project are given below
in the table.
Table 7.21: Design Flood Ordinates at Dugar Dam Site
Time
SPF (m3/s)
Time
SPF (m3/s)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
411.6
411.6
411.6
411.6
411.6
412.4
413.9
418.6
425.5
443.2
484.8
631.0
958.2
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
3160.0
4374.7
5512.8
6104.2
5324.4
4201.1
2969.8
2299.2
1733.9
1191.6
836.2
559.6
476.4
November 2014

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
7.79
1283.6
1470.0
1220.3
885.1
581.8
548.3
683.9
1054.2
1616.4
2290.7
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
448.2
432.2
423.2
418.2
415.4
413.6
412.5
412.0
411.6
Figure 7.67: Design Flood (SPF) Hydrograph of Dugar HEP
November 2014

7.4.5
7.80
Frequency Analysis of Annual Flood Peaks

Flood frequency analyses are used to predict design floods for sites along a river.
The technique involves using observed annual peak flow discharge series to
calculate statistical information such as mean values, standard deviations, skewness,
and recurrence intervals. These statistical data are then used to construct frequency
distributions, which are graphs and tables that tell the likelihood of various
discharges as a function of recurrence interval or exceedance probability. The
reliability of outcome based on this approach depends upon the accuracy and
length of observed flood peak series. Flood frequency distributions can take on
many forms according to the equations used to carry out the statistical analyses.
Four of the common forms are:
i.
Gumble Distribution
ii.
Log-Normal Distribution
iii.
Log-Pearson Type III Distribution
iv.
Least Square method
Each distribution can be used to predict design floods; however, there are
advantages and disadvantages of each technique. Judgment to adopt the particular
distribution/ method is based on the assessment carried out by assessing the
Goodness of Fit method. Generally, Chi Square test is carried out in this regards.
In the present case, frequency analysis is done for annual maxima flood peak series
available only at Udaipur G&D observation site of CWC for about 39 years keeping
in view of the proximity of this site to Dugar HE Project diversion site. The results
obtained will be transposed to Dugar diversion site by Dickenss formula. The detail
of annual flood peak series is given below:
Table 7.22: Observed Annual Maxima Flood Peaks at Udaipur Site
S. No.
Year
Annual Flood
3
Peak (m /s)
S. No.
Year
Annual Flood
3
Peak (m /s)
16-Jul-74
975.0
21
01-Jul-94
1262.0
18-Jul-75
1200.0
22
05-Sep-95
1083.0
25-Jul-76
860.0
23
28-Jun-96
806.0
15-Jul-77
987.0
24
12-Aug-97
826.0
30-Jun-78
1076.0
25
05-Jul-98
1097.0
16-Jul-79
993.0
26
20-Jul-99
1382.0
14-Jul-80
1116.0
27
01-Aug-00
1199.0
November 2014

7.81
S. No.
Year
Annual Flood
3
Peak (m /s)
S. No.
Year
Annual Flood
3
Peak (m /s)
29-Jun-81
989.0
28
14-Aug-01
1278.0
30-Jul-82
1129.0
29
04-Jul-02
1388.0
10
03-Aug-83
986.0
30
27-Jun-03
1206.0
11
27-Jun-84
785.0
31
09-Jul-04
1177.0
12
13-Jul-85
760.0
32
01-Jul-05
1131.0
13
07-Jul-86
1081.0
33
06-Aug-06
1200.0
14
25-Jul-87
1144.0
34
1023.0
15
22-Jul-88
1739.0
35
29-Jun-07
NA
16
30-Jul-89
1750.0
36
37
17
25-Jun-90
1235.0
18
20-Jul-91
1238.0
19
23-Jul-92
1284
20
08-Jul-93
911
NA
857.0
1220.4
06-Aug-10
3785.1
38
28-Jun-11
928.3
39
03-Aug-12
1008.5
The above flood peaks are annual maxima flood-peak series derived from the flows
observed once in a day at the G&D site.
7.4.5.1
Data Check
Annual flood peak series data is required to be checked for its randomness, Chi
Square distribution, Jump and outlier in order to satisfy the basic assumption of the
flood frequency analysis. There are two basic assumption of the flood frequency
analysis i) It is assumed that the natural process is stationery ii) And the series is
random
Randomness (Turning point)

A random series is the one in which the value of the next discrete value is unknown
i.e. the next value in the series is not predictable. There are number of statistical
tests to check the randomness of the data series. In the present case, same has
been carried out to check the randomness of the data.
November 2014

7.82
P - E ( p)
var( p )
where p = number of turning points in the AMS.

= number of peaks + number of troughs
E(p) =
2/3 (N-2)
16N - 29
90
Var(p) =
Where N = no. of data points in a series .

If [] < 1.96, series is random at 5% significance level
P = 12+11 =
23 ( from Chart)
Ep =
24.667
Var (p) =
6.611
=
-0.648
< 1.96
Hence, the series is random at significance level of 5%.
From above randomness test it is found that the series is random.
Jump
The presence of any jump may in some cases be detected by simply plotting the
time series. The Time-Series graph of the available peak series is shown below.
From the figure it may be concluded that there is one jump in the data.
Annual Peak Flood Series at Udaipur Site
4000
3600
3200
Discharge (cumec)
2800
2400
2000
1600
1200
800
400
0
0
10
15
20
Year
25
30
35
40
45
Figure 7.68: Time Series Graph, Udaipur Site
November 2014

7.83
Outlier Test
The outlier test has been carried out to assess the outliers in the observed flow
peak data series. The result indicates that the flood peak series has an outlier i.e.
3785.1 m3/s.
High outlier threshold
Xh =
e^(x+kn *
Low outlier threshold
XL =
s
e^(x-kn
*
n
Kn
Xh =
XL =
Mean of Log series
For
=
=
=
S.D of log series

39
2.671
From Table (CWC)
2350 > 3785.10

(highest value in the series)
542.03 < 760.00
(Lowest value in the series)
Hence the series has an outlier
After eliminating the outlier i.e 3785.1 m3/s (6 August 2010 peak flood value) from
the flood peak series, the test are carried out again on data series of 38 flood peak.
Randomness
P - E ( p)
var( p )
E(p) =
2/3 (N-2)
Var(p) =
16N - 29
90

P = 10+11 =
21 ( from Chart)
Ep =
24.000
Var (p) =
6.433
=
-1.183
< 1.96
From above randomness test it is found that the series is random.

November 2014

7.84
Jump
The Time-Series graph of the available 38 years peak series is shown below. From
the Figure 7.69 it may be concluded that there is no jump in the data.
Annual Flood Peaks at Udaipur Site

2000
1900
1800
1700
1600
1500
Discharge (cumec)
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Year
25
30
35
40
Figure 7.69: Time series graph, Udaipur site
Outlier Test
The outlier test has been carried out to assess the outliers in the observed flow
peak data series. The result indicates that the flood peak series has no outlier.
e^(x+kn *s )
Xh =
s
e^(x-kn
*s )
XL =
X
Mean of Log series
For

n
Kn
=
=
=
Xh =
XL =
Hence the series has no outlier
S.D of log series

38
2.661
From Table (CWC)
1822 > 1750.00

656.06 < 760.00
November 2014

7.85
Chi square Test

The chi square test has been carried out on flood peak series of 38 years using LPT
III distribution and Gumbel distribution. It is found that both distributions are fitting
on the present flood peak series.
I)
LPT III DISTRIBUTION

X
7.00
(Log series)
0.1919
(Log series)
Ej
7.6
( The number of classes selected are 5)
Prob of
non
Exceeden
ce
Kt Range
Q RANGE
(Oj -Ej ) (Oj -Ej )2
Oj
930.22
0.4
0.16
-0.84162 to -0.25336
930.22
1041.40
-0.6
0.36
0.4-0.6
-0.25336 to 0.25336
1041.40
1147.76
0.4
0.16
0.6-0.8
0.25336 to 0.84162
1147.76
1284.94
11
3.4
11.56
0.8-1.0
0.84162 to
Total =
1284.94
4
38
-3.6
12.96
25.2
0-0.2
- to -0.84162
0.2-0.4
X 2 com =
3.32
X 2 critical =
X 2 0.95 =
5.99
Since X 2 com < X 2 critical, the distribution is
II)
fitting
GUMBEL DISTRIBUTION
X
s
Ej
1113.43
(observed series)
221.7763
(observed series)
7.6
Prob of
Kt Range
non
Exceeden
0-0.2
- to -0.84162
Q RANGE
Oj
(Oj -Ej ) (Oj -Ej )2
926.78
0.6
0.36
0.2-0.4
-0.84162 to -0.25336
926.78
1057.24
-0.4
0.16
0.4-0.6
-0.25336 to 0.25336
1057.24
1169.62
-0.4
0.16
0.6-0.8
0.25336 to 0.84162
1169.62
1300.08
11
-3.4
11.56
0.8-1.0
0.84162 to
Total =
1300.08
4
38
3.6
12.96
25.2
X2 com =
3.32
X2 0.95 =
X2 critical =
Since X
com <
critical, the
5.99
distribution is fitting
November 2014

7.86
Table 7.23: Details of Tests
S. No.
Critical Value
for Test
statistics
Test
Test
statistics
Remark
Z EST
Z CRIT
RANDOMNESS TEST
i.
Turning Point Test
ii.
Jump
1.96
-1.183
Upper limit for

high outlier is
XU = 1822
cumec
lower limit for
high outlier is
XU = 656,06
cumec
The highest
observed
peak is 1750
cumec
The lowest
observed
peak is 760
cumec
Series random at
5% significance
level
No jump detected
in time series plot
OUTLIER
i.
Upper Limit
ii.
Lower Limit
CHI SQUARE TEST
7.4.5.2
i.
LPT III distribution
ii.
Gumbel distribution
critical
= 5.99
critical
= 5.99
com
= 3.32
com
= 3.32
No outlier
detected
No outlier
detected
Distribution is
fitting
Distribution is
fitting
Statistical Parameters of Observed Series

The statistical parameters of the observed annual flood peak series such as mean,
standard deviation, coefficient of variance, skewness and kurtosis are important
parameters to judge the behavior of a given extreme event series. These
parameters are helpful in finding the fitness of the time series to different
probability distributions. The values of these estimated parameters are shown in
table below.
Table 7.24: Statistical Parameter
S. No
Statistical
Parameter
Value
1.
Mean
1113.43
2.
Standard deviation
221.78
3.
Variance
0.2
4.
Skewness
0.97
5.
Kurtosis
4.95
November 2014

7.4.5.3
7.87
Probability Distribution
In order to model the extreme hydrological flood event, the following distributions
are very common. In the present analysis also, these distributions have been used
for modeling to assess the extreme flood events.
i.
Gumble Distribution
ii.
iii.
iv.
Least Square method
The outcome of these distributions is shown in the Table 24 below. The Detailed
calculation has been annexed at Annexure-XVI.
Table 7.25: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Observed Flood Peaks of Udaipur
SL.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Return Period
2
5
10
20
25
50
100
200
500
1000
Gumbel
Log Normal
1091
1289
1447
1510
1560
1632
1769
1906
1728
2245
2357
1950
2012
LOG Pearson
Typ-III
1083
Least Square
1405
1435
1558
1669
1778
1886
2020
2141
1613
1746
1877
2181
2311
The flood estimated for the various return periods in the table above are for the
annual observed flood peaks at Udaipur. In order to compensate for the effect of
the instantaneous flood peak (annual), the estimated flood values above are
increased by 25 % in magnitude. This percentage increase is a figure generally used
for Himalayan region where diurnal variation in the river flow is significant in view
of the substantial contribution of snow-melt component in the total flow generated
from the basin particularly in the summer.
Table 7.26: Result of Flood Frequency of Annual Instantaneous Flood Peaks of Udaipur
November 2014

7.88
The flood peaks for different return periods at Udaipur site are being transposed to
Dugar diversion site by giving due consideration to variation in catchment area.
The Dickenss formula QP = CA
values. The detail is shown below:
3/ 4
where:
has been used for transposition of flood
Q SHEP = ( A Dugar / A Udaipur ) 0.75 * Q Udaipur
A Dugar = 7823 km2, catchment area for Dugar diversion site

A Udaipur = 5910 km2, catchment area for Udaipur site
Q Udaipur = Instantaneous Flood discharges at Udaipur site
The transposed flood peaks at Dugar diversion site is shown in the Table 7.27
below:
Table 7.27: Different Return Period Floods at Dugar Diversion Site
November 2014

7.4.6
7.89
Comparison of Flood by Different Approach

The design flood at Dugar site has been estimated by flood frequency analysis of
annual observed flood peaks of 38 years and hydro meteorological approach. A
comparison of flood peaks assessed by different approaches is given below:
Table 7.28: Comparison of Design Flood by Different Approach at Dugar HEP Site
7.4.7
S. No.
Return
Period
(Year)
1
2
3
4.
5.
6.
25
100
500
1000
SPF
PMF
Flood peak (cumec)

Hydro-Met.
Approach
6104
9902
Frequency
Approach
2517
2939
3463
3635
-
Earlier Flood Studies in the Basin

There are several existing and planned project in Chenab basin in the state of
Himachal Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir. The flood studies for these projects have
been approved by CWC. The detailed studies for these projects were carried out by
several agencies basedon available extensive data including site specific data. The
approved design floods for various projects in the Chenab basin are as under.
S. No.
1
2
3
4.
5.
6.
Design
flood
Project
Name
Catchment Area
Km
m /s
Dul hasti
Baglihar
Seli
Ratle
Kirthai-1
Such khas
10500
17325
6053
14209
8530
6588
8000
16500
8086
13814
9140
9046
Status
Completed
Completed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Kirthai I is approved by CWC recently and intercepts an area of 8530 km2.The

approved PMF is 9140 cumec. The estimated flood for Dugar HEP (located
upstream of Kirthai-I) is thus in conformity with CWC approved flood of proposed
downstream project.
November 2014

7.4.8
7.90
Conclusion
The flood peak results at Dugar diversion site shown in Table 7.28. The flood peaks
worked out based on hydro-meteorological approach is always considered to be
reliable than those arrived by frequency approach. Therefore, flood peaks derived
by the hydro-meteorological approach are proposed for the planning purpose.
7.5
DESIGN FLOOD FOR RIVER DIVERSION WORKS

The river diversion works during construction generally are planned for the nonmonsoon floods. Generally heavy rainfall is experienced during monsoon (Jun-Sept)
and river stages are high in the most of the rivers in India during this period. Nearly
70-80% of the total annual rainfall experienced during this period. However in
Chenab basin, heavy precipitation is experienced during the in month of March
also. The river flows to lower stages generally during non-monsoon i. e. from
October to May. The construction in the river bed is generally carried out during
low flows in view of the safety of the man and resources, cost of operation and
convenience.
10-DAILY FLOW PATTERN OF CHENAB AT UDAIPUR

800
10-DAILY FLOW (CUMEC)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
I
II
III
0
Jun.
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Figure 7.70: Variation of discharge in the river

The Dugar HEP is located at nearly 2015 m elevation where weather is hostile in the
non-monsoon period also due to heavy snow fall activity during this period. The
catchment is either having good amount of rainfall or snowfall in a particular
month. The principal season of snowfall can be taken from December to April
months when substantial amount of snowfall occurs in the region. Similarly,
principal monsoon months can be taken from June to September. Therefore from
the river flow, rainfall and snowfall pattern, it can be concluded that diversion works
at project site cannot be executed during snow accumulation period. It is possible
November 2014

7.91
to execute good amount of project works at diversion site only in monsoon months
because of prevailing weather conditions near the diversion site.
Therefore, design flood for Dugar project has been worked out for both the periods
and planning may be carried out keeping in view the prevailing weather conditions
at diversion site as well as cost of the diversion works in addition to the in-built risk
of machinery as well as human life during the project work.
7.5.1
Design Flood Criteria

Since the headwork structure is a barrage, as per BIS: 14815-2000, Design Flood
for River Diversion Works Guidelines, the diversion capacity has to be the higher
of the two following values and shall be used as design flood for diversion works
subjected to condition that construction period is fixed as non-monsoon period:
Maximum non-monsoon flow observed at the diversion site; (OR)
25 years return period flow, calculated on the basis of non-monsoon yearly peaks
If construction is carried out during the whole or monsoon period, then diversion
flood is decided based on monsoon flood peaks.
Here the following criteria govern the finalization of diversion flood:
Maximum monsoon flow observed at the diversion site;
(OR)
25 years return period flow, calculated on the basis of monsoon yearly peaks
However, assessment have been carried out, both by considering monsoon and
non monsoon peak floods.
7.5.2
Data Available
The observed non-monsoon flood peaks for 38- years are available on river Chenab
at Udaipur G&D site of CWC located Upstream of Dugar project. The monsoon
flood peaks are given in Table 21 in the previous section, and the non-monsoon
flood peaks are given in the Table 28 below:
November 2014

7.92
Table 7.29: Detail of Non-monsoon (Oct-May) Flood Peaks, Udaipur

Year
Annual Flood
Peak (m3/s)
S.No.
Year
Annual
Flood Peak
(m3/s)
1974-75
1975-76
1976-77
1977-78
1978-79
1979-80
1980-81
1981-82
1982-83
1983-84
1984-85
1985-86
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
259
309
350
285
264
225
362
264
403
438
285
268
219
404
425
360
213
426
211
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
264
204
310
398
307
409
501
452
531
453
426
488
300
455
331
260
263
477
363
S.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
7.5.2.1
Data Check
Non monsoon flood peak series data is required to be checked for its randomness,
Chi Square distribution, Jump and outlier in order to satisfy the basic assumption of
the flood frequency analysis. There are two basic assumption of the flood
frequency analysis i) It is assumed that the natural process is stationery ii) And the
series is random
Randomness
A random series is the one in which the value of the next discrete value is unknown
i.e. the next value in the series is not predictable. There are number of statistical
tests to check the randomness of the data series. In the present case, same has
been carried out to check the randomness of the data.
November 2014

7.93
P - E ( p)
var( p )

E(p) =
2/3 (N-2)
16N - 29
90
Var(p) =

P = 12+13 =
25 ( from Chart)
Ep =
24.000
Var (p) =
6.433
=
0.394
< 1.96
Jump
The presence of any jump may in some cases be detected by simply plotting the
time series. The Time-Series graph of the available peak series is shown below.
From the figure it may be concluded that there is no jump in the data.
Non Monsoon flood Peaks at Udaipur Site

600
Discharge (cumec)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Year
25
30
35
40
Figure 7.71: Time series graph, Udaipur site
November 2014

7.94
Outlier Test
The oulier test has been carried out to assess the outliers in the observed flow peak
data. The result indicated the absence of any outliers.
Xh e^(x+kn *s )
s
XL =e^(x-kn
*s )
X
Mean of Log series
s
=
S.D of log series
For
n
Kn
=
=
Xh
38
2.661 From Table (CWC)
696 >531.00
Low outlier threshold XL = 162.74 <204.00
Hence the series have no Outlier
Chi square Test

The chi square test has been carried out on non monsoon flood peak series of 38
years using LPT III distribution and Gumbel distribution. It is found that both
distributions are fitting on the present flood peak series.
I)
LPT III DISTRIBUTION

X
5.82
(Log series)
0.2730
(Log series)
Ej
7.6
Prob of
non
Exceeden
ce
Kt Range
Q RANGE
Oj
(Oj -Ej )
(Oj -Ej )2
267.42
10
2.4
5.76
-0.84162 to -0.25336
267.42
314.00
-0.6
0.36
0.4-0.6
-0.25336 to 0.25336
314.00
360.58
-3.6
12.96
0.6-0.8
0.25336 to 0.84162
360.58
423.40
-1.6
2.56
0.8-1.0
0.84162 to
Total =
423.40
11
38
3.4
11.56
33.2
0-0.2
- to -0.84162
0.2-0.4
X2 com =
X
critical
4.37
X
0.95
5.99
Since X2 com < X2 critical, the distribution is
fitting
November 2014

II)
7.95
GUMBEL DISTRIBUTION
X
348.61
(observed series)
92.0448
(observed series)
Ej
7.6
Prob of
Kt Range
non
Exceeden
0-0.2
- to -0.84162
Q RANGE
Oj
(Oj -Ej )
(Oj -Ej )2
271.14
11
-3.4
11.56
0.2-0.4
-0.84162 to -0.25336
271.14
325.28
1.6
2.56
0.4-0.6
-0.25336 to 0.25336
325.28
371.93
1.6
2.56
0.6-0.8
0.25336 to 0.84162
371.93
426.07
0.6
0.36
0.8-1.0
0.84162 to
Total =
426.07
8
38
-0.4
0.16
17.2
X2 com =
2.26
X2 critical =
Since X
X2 0.95 =
2
com <
critical, the
5.99
distribution is fitting
Table 7.30: Details of Tests
S. No.
Test
Critical Value
for Test
statistics
Test
statistics
Remark
Z EST
Z CRIT
RANDOMNESS TEST
i.
Turning Point Test
ii.
Jump
1.96
0.394
Upper limit for

high outlier is
XU = 696
cumec
Lower limit for
high outlier is
XU = 162.74
cumec
The highest
observed
peak is 531
cumec
The lowest
observed
peak is 204
cumec
Series random at
5% significance
level
No jump detected
in time series plot
OUTLIER
i.
Upper Limit
ii.
Lower Limit
CHI SQUARE TEST

i.
LPT III distribution
ii.
Gumbel distribution
critical
= 5.99
critical
= 5.99
com
= 4.37
com
= 2.26
No outlier
detected
No outlier
detected
Distribution is
fitting
Distribution is
fitting
November 2014

7.5.3
7.96
Statistical Parameters
The detail of important statistical parameters for the observed non-monsoon flood
peaks is given in the Table 7.31 below:
Table 7.31: Statistical Parameter, Non-Monsoon
Statistical
S. No
7.5.4
Parameter
Value
1.
Mean
348.61
2.
Standard deviation
92.04
3.
Variance
0.26
4.
Skewness
0.14
5.
Kurtosis
2.11
Probability Distribution
In order to model the extreme hydrological flood event, the following distributions
are very common applications. In the present analysis also, these distributions have
been used for modeling to assess the extreme flood events.
i.
Gumble Distribution
ii.
iii.
iv.
Least Square
The outcome of these distributions is shown in the Table 7.32 below. The Detailed
calculation has been annexed at Annexure-XVII.
Table 7.32: Result of Flood Frequency of Non monsoon Flood Peaks of Udaipur
Return Period
2
5
10
20
25
50
100
200
500
1000
Gumbel
Log Normal
337
419
487
564
621
677
865
516
525
616
753
LOG Pearson
Typ-III
340
Least Square
474
482
531
571
608
643
556
610
665
720
791
845
The non monsoon flood estimated for the various return period in the table above
are for the non monsoon flood peaks at Udaipur. In order to compensate the effect
November 2014

7.97
of the non monsoon instantaneous flood peak, the estimated flood values above
are increased by 25 % in magnitude. This percentage increase is a figure generally
used for Himalayan region where diurnal variation in the river flow is significant in
view of the substantial contribution of snow-melt component in the total flow
generated from the basin particularly in the summer.
Table 7.33: Result of Flood Frequency of Non Monsoon Instantaneous Flood Peaks
of Udaipur
SL.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Return Period Gumbel

2
5
10
609
20
25
705
50
776
100
847
200
500
1000
1081
LOG Pearson
Log Normal Typ-III
421
425
524
593
645
656
664
713
770
759
804
941
900
Least Square
602
694
763
831
988
1056
The flood peaks for different return periods at Udaipur site are being transposed to
Dugar diversion site by giving due considration to variation in catchment area. The
Dickenss formula QP = CA
The detail is shown below:
3/ 4
has been used for transposition of flood values.
Q SHEP = ( A Dugar / A Udaipur ) 0.75 * Q Udaipur

where:
A Dugar = 7823 km2, catchment area for Dugar diversion site
A Udaipur = 5910 km2, catchment area for Udaipur site
Q Udaipur = Instantaneous Flood discharges at Udaipur site
The transposed flood peaks at Dugar diversion site is shown in the Table 33 below:
Table 7.34: Different Return Period Non Monsoon Floods at Dugar Diversion Site
November 2014

7.98
The maximum values of non monsoon flood at Dugar diversion site are computed
by Gumbel Distribution.
The diversion flood for the monsoon and non-monsoon period may be adopted as
2517 cumec and 870 cumec respectively as per BIS criteria.
7.5.5
Conclusion
The design flood for river diversion works is based on the flow data of Chenab
River observed at Udaipur site, having long term observed flow data for 38 years.
Therefore, arrived values of 2517 m3/s and 870 m3/s are proposed for planning of
diversion works.
November 2014

7.6
7.99
SEDIMENTATION STUDY
Dugar HE project is proposed to be planned as run-of the river scheme. Though
detailed sedimentation study is not needed for runoff river projects, yet considering
the height of diversion structure as 101 m from river bed level, detailed
sedimentation study have been carried out to assess the New Zero Elevation and
revised Elevation- Area- Capacity as per BIS standard. The detailed sedimentation
study is done as per IS: 12182-1987 Guideline for determination of effect of
sedimentation in planning & performance of reservoir and IS: 5477 (Part 2)-1994
Fixing the capacities of reservoirs- Methods. However particle size analysis and
petrography of the silt load is necessary for the safety of the turbines as well as in
view of operation and maintenance.
As per BIS 12182-1987, full service time for a hydropower project supplying power
to grid shall not be less than 25 years while the feasible service time shall not be
less than 70 years.
7.6.1
Average annual Sediment Rate

So far, adequate site specific data of sediment load is not available on basis of
which the planning for sedimentation would be done. It is a normal practice to
consider rate of sedimentation for the stations in the hydro meteorologically similar
region.
The suspended silt load data at Udaipur G&D site for the period 2003-04 to 201213 has been analyzed. The monthly silt data at Udaipur G&D site is plotted below
to indicate the monthly sediment inflow at this site. The details are in Annexure
VIIA. It indicates that heavy sediment load is experienced during the monsoon
period while sediment concentration is low during non-monsoon period.
November 2014

7.100
The year wise total suspended silt load at Udaipur site is analysed and based on
observed silt data, the silt rate is assessed as 0.058 Ham/Sq.Km/year. The details
are indicated in Table 7.35 below:
Table 7.35: Yearly Sediment Rate
Since site specific observed silt data is not available, tentatively sediment study has
been carried out based on an annual silt rate of 0.058 Ham/Sq. Km/year for Dugar
HEP site. While carrying out the sedimentation study, New Zero Elevation and
revised elevation-Area- Capacity curve based on project operation studies have
been estimated to assess the MDDL/DSL for the Dugar HEP.
November 2014

7.6.2
7.101
Original Elevation Area- Capacity curve

The elevation-area-capacity of present diversion site is tabulated below:
Table 7.36: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity at Dugar Diversion Site
Elevation Original Original

Area
Capacity
m
ha
ha-m
1
2
3
2015
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
2096
2100
2105
2110
2114
2120
0
2
12
26
37
53
75
92
110
123
131
150
169
188
217
0
3
64
247
558
1004
1641
2476
3487
4187
4695
5397
6194
6963
8117
Figure 7.72: Original Elevation-Area-Capacity curve at Dugar diversion site
November 2014

7.6.3
7.102
Type of reservoir
Figure 7.73: Type of reservoir
November 2014

7.6.4
7.103
Sediment Analysis
The Reservoir sedimentation problem has been classified as serious. Hence variable
trap efficiency has been considered for computing sediment volume given in para
1.6.5. The New Zero Elevation after different length of period works out to as given
in para 1.6.6.
November 2014

7.6.5
Trap Efficiency Computation
7.6.6
Estimation of New Zero Elevation
7.104
New zero elevation after 25, 50 years and 70 years have been computed by
Empirical area Reduction Method as 2060.54 m, 2080.34 m and 2084.30 m
respectively
Revised Area Capacity Curve and calculation after 25, 50 and 70 Years of
sedimentation are given in Annexure XVIII.
The FRL provided is 2114 m while MDDL is 2102.06m.
7.7
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
The study has been carried out based on hydro meteorological data as available in
the region in absence of site specific data. DHPL has already installed a hydro
meteorological station at Dugar HEP diversion site since Sept 2011. When sufficient
site specific data is available, it is suggested that hydrological provisions may be
reviewed.
November 2014

7.105
ANNEXURES
November 2014

7.106
ANNEXURE IA 10 daily discharge data at Udaipur G&D Site
November 2014

HYDRO POWER PLANT With Medium Head PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HYDRO POWER PLANT With Medium Head PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DUGAR HYDRO POWER LIMITED

(A Joint Venture of Tata Power & S N Power)

DUGAR HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT

DRAFT DETAILED PROJECT REPORT

Dugar Hydro Power Limited

DUGAR HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT

: GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES

DPR Volume I: Main Report

Dugar Hydro Power Limited

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 1.2

PROJECT LOCATION & ACCESS ........................................................................................................ 1.2

CLIMATIC CONDITION .......................................................................................................................... 1.3

TOPOGRAPHY & PHYSIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 1.4

GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................................................... 1.4

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT ........................................................................... 1.5

NEED OF THE PROJECT ......................................................................................................................... 1.7

ALTERNATIVE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 1.7

INTER STATE, INTERNATIONAL OR DEFENCE ASPECT ........................................................... 1.8

SALIENT FEATURES ..................................................................... 2.2

HYDROLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 2.2

RESERVOIR ................................................................................................................................................. 2.2

DAM AND SPILLWAYS .......................................................................................................................... 2.3

RIVER DIVERSION AND DIVERSION TUNNEL (DT) ................................................................... 2.3

POWER INTAKE (ON LEFT BANK) ..................................................................................................... 2.4

PRESSURE TUNNEL/ PRESSURE SHAFT ......................................................................................... 2.4

POWERHOUSE .......................................................................................................................................... 2.5

TRANSFORMER CAVERN ..................................................................................................................... 2.6

SURGE CAVERN/DRAFT TUBE GATE OPERATION CHAMBER .............................................. 2.7

TAIL RACE TUNNELS (TRT) .................................................................................................................. 2.7

POWER BENEFITS .................................................................................................................................... 2.8

JUSTIFICATION OF PROJECT ..................................................... 3.4

POWER SCENARIO IN INDIA .............................................................................................................. 3.4

POWER SCENARIO IN THE NORTHERN REGION ...................................................................... 3.7

POWER SCENARIO IN HIMACHAL PRADESH............................................................................3.13

HYDRO POWER DEVELOPMENT .....................................................................................................3.16

NECESSITY AND JUSTIFICATION ....................................................................................................3.19

POWER EVACUATION FOR THE PROJECT ..................................................................................3.22

BASIN DEVELOPMENT................................................................ 4.2

MAJOR RIVER SYSTEMS ....................................................................................................................... 4.2

ASSESSMENT OF HYDRO POWER POTENTIAL ........................................................................... 4.2

DPR Volume I: Main Report

Dugar Hydro Power Limited

INDUS BASIN ............................................................................................................................................ 4.4

CHENAB BASIN ........................................................................................................................................ 4.5

FITMENT OF DUGAR HEP IN CHENAB BASIN DEVELOPMENT............................................ 4.6

INTERNATIONAL ASPECT - INDUS WATER TREATY............... 5.2

THE TREATY ............................................................................................................................................... 5.3

PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS.............................................................................. 5.4

HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS ON WESTERN RIVERS ................................................................. 5.4

COMMUNICATION WITH PAKISTAN ............................................................................................5.10

SETTLEMENT OF DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES ......................................................................5.11

SURVEY & INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................... 6.3

GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................6.11

ARCHAEOLOGICAL & MINERAL SURVEY....................................................................................6.17

COMMUNICATION SURVEY .............................................................................................................6.17

CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SURVEY ...........................................................................................6.18

HYDRLOGICAL & METEOROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .....................................................6.18

HYDROLOGY ................................................................................ 7.8

DATA VALIDATION AND CONSISTENCY CHECK .....................................................................7.29

WATER AVAILABILITY ..........................................................................................................................7.58

DESIGN FLOOD ......................................................................................................................................7.67

DESIGN FLOOD FOR RIVER DIVERSION WORKS .....................................................................7.90

SEDIMENTATION STUDY ...................................................................................................................7.99