4 - Hydrology & Sedimentation

Section 05
HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION
November 2021
Feasibility Report
Feasibility Study and Detailed Design of 1.53 MW Low Head Hydropower Project
on Hunza River at Ganish Hunza
1. Table of Contents
5 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION........................................................................5-1
5.1 Hydrology.................................................................................................................5-1
5.1.1 The Catchment Area...........................................................................................5-1
5.1.2 Meteorological Aspects.......................................................................................5-2
5.1.3 Climate................................................................................................................5-2
5.1.4 Precipitation.........................................................................................................5-3
5.1.5 Temperature........................................................................................................5-5
5.1.6 River Flows..........................................................................................................5-6
5.1.7 Stream Gauging Network....................................................................................5-6
5.1.8 Estimation of Flows.............................................................................................5-7
5.1.9 Collection of Data................................................................................................5-8
5.1.10 Processing of Flows............................................................................................5-8
5.1.11 Snow Melt and Base Flow Contribution............................................................5-15
5.1.12 Floods................................................................................................................5-15
5.1.13 Flood Frequency Analyses................................................................................5-17
5.1.14 Results of Pearson Normal Distribution............................................................5-22
5.1.15 Results Lognormal (Maximum Likelihood)........................................................5-23
5.1.16 Flood Estimation by using Regional Method.....................................................5-27
5.1.17 Flood Analysis by HEC-HMS Using Maximum Rainfall Events.........................5-28
5.1.18 Conclusion.........................................................................................................5-32
5.2 Sedimentation........................................................................................................5-33
5.2.1 Available Data...................................................................................................5-33
5.2.2 Field Measurements..........................................................................................5-34
5.2.3 Rating Curve Derived From Field Measurements.............................................5-34
5.2.4 Sediment Yield..................................................................................................5-36
5.2.5 Conclusion.........................................................................................................5-38
2. List of Tables
Table 5.1: Climatological Stations in Gilgit-Baltistan............................................................5-3
Table 5.2: Mean Monthly and %age Distribution of Precipitation at Gilgit (1951-2014).......5-4
Table 5.3: Mean Monthly Max. and Min. Temperature in Gilgit River Catchment................5-5
Table 5.4: Mean Minimum & Max Monthly Temperature at Gilgit.........................................5-6
Table 5.5: Hydrological Stations on Hunza and Gilgit Rivers...............................................5-7
Table 5.6: Flow Duration Curve computed from historical flows and HEC-HMS Method at
Weir Intake Site (m3/s).................................................................................................5-10
Table 5.7: 10-Daily Flows at Weir Intake Site (1966-2015)................................................5-13
Table 5.8: Annual Maximum and Minimum Flows at Weir Intake Site (m3/s).....................5-13
Table 5.9: Instantaneous Peaks at Intake Site...................................................................5-16
Table 5.10: Empirical probability of instantaneous Peaks..................................................5-18
Table 5.11: Flood Frequency Analysis by Gumbel Distribution..........................................5-21
Table 5.12: Flood Frequency Analysis by Normal..............................................................5-22
Table 5.13: Flood Frequency Analysis by Log Normal Distribution at Weir Intake.............5-23
Table 5.14: Flood Frequency Analysis by Pearson Type-III...............................................5-24
Table 5.15: Flood Frequency Analysis by Weibull (Maximum Likelihood)..........................5-25
Table 5.16: Results of Flood Frequency Analysis (Using Recorded Peak Discharges).....5-26
Table 5.17: Estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000 & 10,000 Year Floods (Gumbel).........................5-28
Table 5.18: Observed Frequency of Rainfall (mm).............................................................5-29
Table 5.19: Frequency of Rainfall using Gumbel Distribution.............................................5-30
Feasibility Report
Table 5.20: Flood Hydrograph for Hunza River at Weir Intake...........................................5-31

Table 5.21: Observed Maximum and Minimum Sediment Concentration and Corresponding
Discharges - Hunza River at Danyore.........................................................................5-35
Table 5.22: The indicated sediment yield for the period of record is as follows.................5-36
Table 5.23: Estimated Sediment Load on Hunza River at Central Hunza HHP Site..........5-37
3. List of Figures
Figure 5.1: Catchment Map of Hunza River.........................................................................5-2
Figure 5.2: Mean Monthly, %age Distribution of Precipitation(mm) at Gilgit(1951-2014).....5-4
Figure 5.3: Average Monthly Precipitation at Gilgit...............................................................5-4
Figure 5.4: Annual rainfall for Gilgit Station (1951-2014)......................................................5-5
Figure 5.5: Average Monthly Maximum & Minimum Temperatures at Gilgit (1951-2014)....5-6
Figure 5.6: Location Map of Hydrological Stations...............................................................5-7
Figure 5.7: Flow Duration Curve – Hunza River at Danyore................................................5-9
Figure 5.8: Flow Duration Curve – Hunza River at Weir Intake Site (1966-2015)................5-9
Figure 5.9: Comparison between Computed and Observed Flow Duration Curves – Hunza
River at Weir Intake Site..............................................................................................5-10
Figure 5.10: Rating Curve – Hunza River at Danyore........................................................5-11
Figure 5.11: Annual Hydrographs for river at Intake Site....................................................5-11
Figure 5.12: Estimated Mean Monthly Flows at SHP Intake Site (1966-2015)...................5-12
Figure 5.13: 10-daily Flows – Hunza River at Intake (1966-2015).....................................5-12
Figure 5.14: Annual Maximum, Min and Avg. Flows at Central Hunza Intake Site (1966-
2015)............................................................................................................................5-14
Figure 5.15: Wet and Dry year Flows at Intake Site...........................................................5-14
Figure 5.16: Hydrographs of Hunza River at Danyore and Project Intake site...................5-15
Figure 5.17: Chronological Curve Hunza River Flows at Weir Intake Site.........................5-19
Figure 5.18: Annual instantaneous Peaks..........................................................................5-19
Figure 5.19: Probability of Non-exceedence of Instantenous Peaks (Gumbel)..................5-20
Figure 5.20: Flood Frequency Analysis by Gumbel Distribution at Intake..........................5-21
Figure 5.21: Flood Frequency Analysis by Normal Distribution at Weir Intake...................5-22
Figure 5.22: Flood Frequency Analysis by Log Normal Distribution at Weir Intake...........5-23
Figure 5.23: Flood Frequency Analysis by Pearson Type 3 at Central Hunza...................5-24
Figure 5.24: Flood Frequency Analysis by Weibull.............................................................5-25
Figure 5.25: Comarison of all distributions of frequency analysis at intake site.................5-26
Figure 5.26: Enveloping Curves for Northern Areas...........................................................5-28
Figure 5.27: Food Hydrograph generated from 1000 year return rainfall at Intake Site using
HEC-HMS....................................................................................................................5-31
Figure 5.28: Suspended sediment rating for Hunza River at Danyore...............................5-34
Figure 5.29: Mean Monthly Suspended sediment rating for Hunza River at Danyore.......5-35
Feasibility Report
5 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

Hydrological series representing variations in river flow throughout the year are used to
estimate the design discharge. Analysis of sediment inflows in the river is also carried out to
determine sediment conditions at proposed site.
Existing climatic and hydrological data as well as the information on sediments were
collected and reviewed. Based on the available information, and further data collection and
analysis, the following has been described in subsequent sections:
 Long term climatological conditions,
 Long-term flow parameters,
 Flow duration analysis,
 Mean monthly flows,
 Low flow analysis,
 Flood estimation,
 Sediment study.
5.1 Hydrology
5.1.1 The Catchment Area
The project is located on the right side of the Hunza River 8 Km downstream of Attaabad
Lake. The intake is proposed on the right bank of Hunza River on the upstream side of
Ahmedabad Paeen and downstream of the existing 0.45 MW SHP Ahmedabad, while the
powerhouse will be founded about 1.5 km downstream at the periphery of Ahmedabad
Paeen.
Hunza River is one of the major tributaries of Indus River in Gilgit-Baltistan. It is a left
tributary of Gilgit River. Hunza River originates from Khunjerab River with peak elevation of
5,074 masl. It joins River Gilgit at Danyore town, which falls into the River Indus near Partab
Bridge , where three mountain ranges (Himalayas, Karakorum and Hindukush) meet.
The main tributaries joining the Hunza River in Khunjerab region are Parpik River, Khunjerab
river, Ghujrab River, Gordur-i-Guraf, Kilk River, Chapursan River, and Shikarjerab River.
Shimshal River is the largest tributary of Hunza river in the upper part. It is a left tributary which
meets Hunza River near Passu. It has an estimated area of 2,930 km2, with elevations ranging
between 6,300 and 2,562 masl. The Shimshal River is fed by Virjerab, Khurdopin, Yazghil and
Momhil glaciers.
The catchment area of upper part of Hunza River is 7,533 Km² untill Attaabad. The catchment
area of River at the proposed 1.53 MW SHP’s intake site is 8,928 Km². The mean annual
available flow at intake site is 209 m3/s.
The elevation of Hunza River varies from 4,400 to 2,600 masl with average slope of 0.96 %.
The upper reaches of the basin are mostly glaciated and covered with permanent snow.
Hunza River is fed by Lupghar Glacier, Batura Glacier, Pasu Glacier, Ghulkin Glacier, Momhil
Glacier, Khurdopin Glacier, Hispar Glacier, Barpu Glacier, Hassanabad and Minapin Glacier.
Feasibility Report
The total length of Hunza River from its starting point up to its confluence with Gilgit River at
Danyor is more than 300 Km. It has an average slope of 0.90%. This River’s entire
catchment is 14,083 Km² at confluence with Gilgit River.
The catchment map of Hunza River upstream of proposed hydropower station is shown in
Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Catchment Map of Hunza River
Source: Google Generated Map
5.1.2 Meteorological Aspects

5.1.3 Climate
The Hunza River basin falls into the climatological region called as subtropical
continental high lands. The climate in the region is arid and characterized by
moderate summer and severe, snowy winters with general winter and spring rains.
At higher altitudes, the mountains are perpetually clad with snow. The winter season
starts from November and extends up to May. The summer season begins in June
and ends in October.
The monsoon hardly penetrates the project area. The main mechanism for producing
rain are western disturbances. Long-term climatological data is available at Gilgit
2
Feasibility Report
Meteorological station. Climatological data which have been used for the analyses
are covering a period of more than 50 years. The locations of the
hydrometeorological stations are compiled in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Climatological Stations in Gilgit-Baltistan
Record Agency
Elevation
Station Latitude Longitude Variable Interval or
(masl) Period Source
Astore 35 22 N 74 54 E 2,394 1954-01 P,T M 2
Bunji 35 40 74 38 1,372 1952-01 P,T M 2
Gilgit 35 55 N 74 20 E 1,460 1903-01 P,T D 1
Gupis 36 10 N 73 24 E 2,156 1955-01 P,T L 1
Skardu 35 18 N 75 41 E 2,210 1900-01 P,T D 1
Yasin 36 11 00 73 06 00 P D 3
Ushkore P D 3
Abbreviations P=Precipitation T=Temperature
Interval: D=Daily M=Monthly L=Long term
Agency: 1=PMD, Lahore 2=PMD, Gilgit 4=SIHP WAPDA

3=WAPDA
Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA
5.1.4 Precipitation
The project area receives precipitation in form of rain in summer and snow in winter. The
available data has been processed to obtain annual, monthly and monthly percentage
distribution of rainfall. The results are compiled in Table (Annex 5-2) Figure 5.2 and Table
5.3.
The mean annual precipitation for the period 1955 to 2014 is 189.93 mm. In months of June,
July, and August maximum rainfall is received. The lowest rainfall occurs in the month of
January and November (Figure 5.3).
3
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.2: Mean Monthly, %age Distribution of Precipitation(mm) at Gilgit(1951-2014)
300 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
Precipitation (mm)
250
200
150
100
50
0
51 54 57 60 63 66 69 72 75 78 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 208 011 014
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 2 2
Years
Source: Pakistan Meteorological Department
Table 5.2: Mean Monthly and %age Distribution of Precipitation at Gilgit (1951-2014)
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Mean (mm) 4.12 6.5 11.79 17.09 21.49 22.50 24.79 25.92 20.8 14.66 8.38 4.97
%age Distr. 2.24 3.5 6.41 9.29 11.69 12.24 13.48 14.09 11.3 7.97 4.56 2.70
Figure 5.3: Average Monthly Precipitation at Gilgit
4
Feasibility Report
The annual rainfall is presented in Figure 5.4. Some of the rainfall data for the years 1951,
1952, 1953 and 1954 are missing, however maximum data for about 60 years is availavble.
Figure 5.4: Annual rainfall for Gilgit Station (1951-2014)
300
250
Annual Precipitatio (mm)
200
150
100
50
0
51 54 57 60 63 66 69 72 75 78 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 208 011 014
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 2 2
Year
Source: Pakistan Materiological Department
5.1.5 Temperature
Temperature data, is available from different stations for the period 1955 to 2014. The series
have been used to compute, mean, maximum and minimum temperatures. According to the
available record, the minimum temperature at Gilgit was recorded at being about -12.3 ºC in
the month of January, while the maximum temperature was 41.1 ºC in the month of July and
August.
Mean monthly minimum and maximum temprature values for Gilgit River Catchment are
given in Table 5.3 and presented in graphical form in Figure 5.5. Similarly Mean Monthly
maximum and minimum temperatures at Gilgit, are compiled in Table 5.4.
Table 5.3: Mean Monthly Max. and Min. Temperature in Gilgit River Catchment
Station Mean Monthly Max Temp C° Mean Monthly Min Temp C°
Gupis 29.3 -2.8
Ushkore 24.6 -11
Yasin 23.5 -11.5
Gilgit 36.1 -2.3
5
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.5: Average Monthly Maximum & Minimum Temperatures at Gilgit (1951-2014)
40
35
30
Avg Max and Min Temp(oC)
25
20 18.31 17.65
14.91
15
12.67
11.81
10 9.39
6.62
5.60
5
0.66 0.88
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-2.16 -1.53
-5
Month
Table 5.4: Mean Minimum & Max Monthly Temperature at Gilgit

Month Mean Min Temp (oC) Mean Max Temp (oC)
Jan 2.4 9.4
Feb 0.7 12.6
Mar 5.7 18.2
Apr 9.5 24.1
May 12.1 28.6
Jun 15.1 34
Jul 18.4 36.1
Aug 17.8 35.3
Sep 12.7 31.7
Oct 6.8 25.5
Nov 0.9 18.2
Dec -1.9 11.5
Annual Mean 7.9 23.8
5.1.6 River Flows

5.1.7 Stream Gauging Network
There are flow measuring stations on Indus River and its tributaries in the region. Surface
Water Hydrology Project (SWHP) WAPDA operates these stations. These measuring
6
Feasibility Report
stations are located on Hunza River, Gilgit River and Ghizer River. The location of
hydrological and climatological stations in the regions are presented in Table 5.5 and Figure
5.6.
Table 5.5: Hydrological Stations on Hunza and Gilgit Rivers
N Name River Basin Latitude Longitude Elevation Catch.
o (masl) Area (km2)
1 Phandar Ghizar Indus 36-11-02 72-59-45 2,652 1,467
2 Danyore Br. Hunza Indus 35-55-40 74-22-35 1,432 14083
3 Gilgit Gilgit Indus 35-55-35 74-18-25 1,459 12,095
4 Alam Bridge. Gilgit Indus 35-46-03 74-35-50 1,282 26,159
SWHP WAPDA has installed a flow measuring station on Hunza River at Danyore
suspension bridge (located 115 km downstream from Central Hunza Hydropower Project
Site). The station is operational for more than 40 years. The discharge data and the water
level records of the hydrological station are available since 1966 until 2015. Keeping in view
the long record of flow data, the discharge data of Hunza River at Danyore Bridge, has been
used for analysis.
Figure 5.6: Location Map of Hydrological Stations
Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department WAPDA
7
Feasibility Report
5.1.8 Estimation of Flows

Available Information
The only gauging station on Hunza River is at Danyore. There is no flow measuring station
at the proposed project site. Therefore, the daily flow data of Hunza River at Danyore was
transferred to the intake site by applying the Empirical Area-Reduction Method. The flow
data has been extended till 2018 using a HEC-HMS rainfall runoff model. Daily rainfall for
the same period has also been used to determine daily flows from 2005 to 2016 for
validation and compared with observed flows by FDC.
5.1.9 Collection of Data
Water Levels
Since 1966 a staff gauge has been installed on Hunza River below the suspension bridge at
Danyore by SWHP- WAPDA. The gauge data is normally observed 9 times every day i.e.
from 0800 hrs. to 1600 hrs. Whereas, in high flow from June to September, water levels are
observed on hourly basis round the clock.
Discharge Data
Flow measurements are being performed at Danyore hydrological station since the
installation of gauge in year 1966. The same has been collected from the concerned agency.
There is no any other station available on the same river upstream of this gauging station.
5.1.10 Processing of Flows
The discharge data of Hunza River at intake site of 1.53 MW proposed low head SHP at
Central Hunza has been simulated and obtained for the period from 1966 to 2015 from the
discharge data of River Hunza at Danyore. The computed discharge data reduced on
catchment area propotionality basis at intake site of proposed project is given in Annex 5-1.
Based upon daily discharge data, a flow duration curve has been developed. About 95%,
90% & 50% flows can be taken from the graph at being 24.07 m3/s, 25.78 m3/s & 65.86 m3/s
respectively which is exclusive of environmental flows. Therefore required design discharge
of 26.0 m3/s is available for 90% of the period (Q90%).
The hydrographs for the same have been presented for each year. The flow data was further
processed to get mean, maximum and minimum discharges for each month. The estimated
mean monthly and 10-daily and mean daily flows for the period 1966-2015 are given in
Annex 5-3.
In order to check the availability of flows of the river, flow duration curves of historic flows at
Gauging site and estimated flows at intake site have been plotted on yearly basis as well as
by combining all the years. The flow duration curves obtained by combining all the years is
shown at Figure 5.8. Availability of flows at proposed weir intake site are given in Table 5.6.
Flow duration curves of historic flows were plotted on yearly basis as well as by combining
all the years. The flow duration curves obtained by combining all years for Hunza River at
Danyore and at proposed project weir intake site and are presented in Figure 5.7, 5-8.
Comparison of FDC obtained from HEC-HMS and historical flows through Empirical Area
Reduction Method are in Figure 5.9. Results are also compiled in Table 5.6.
8
Feasibility Report
The observed flows for the year 2011 are suspicious when compared with other stations,
therefore for computing FDC for project site these have been discarded. Similarly, daily flows
for the period 2005 to 2016 were also extended/estimated at the intake site using daily
rainfall of “Gilgit Climatological Station” and compared with the curve obtained historical
flows of Hunza River at Central Hunza, which shows a good agreement between flows
computed from HEC-HMS and historical flows at higher and lower limits.
Figure 5.7: Flow Duration Curve – Hunza River at Danyore
Figure 5.8: Flow Duration Curve – Hunza River at Weir Intake Site (1966-2015)
9
Feasibility Report
10
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.9: Comparison between Computed and Observed Flow Duration Curves –
Hunza River at Weir Intake Site
Flow Duration Curves for Hunza River at Danyore using historical flow data and Area
Reduction Method and HEC-HMS at project intake site have been prepared and a
comparison of each is given in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6: Flow Duration Curve computed from historical flows and HEC-HMS Method
at Weir Intake Site (m3/s)
Time Weir Intake by Area-Reduction Weir Intake by HEC-HMS Danyore Bridge
(%) (1966-2015) (2005-16) (66-2015 )
0.0 1,862.53 1,836.90 3,452
5.0 993.01 826.50 1,340
10.0 782.76 750.40 1,042
20.0 398.34 490.50 617
30.0 209.62 394.40 338
40.0 102.59 106.40 165
50.0 65.86 68.20 92
60.0 41.16 47.80 66
70.0 33.88 35.90 54
80.0 29.21 31.10 47
90.0 25.78 30.70 41
95.0 24.07 23.40 38
100.0 17.23 23.00 27
Source: Own Calculation
11
Feasibility Report
Rating curve for Hunza River at Danyore Bridge has been derived from historical daily flow
data using DBhydro Software. The results are presented in Figure 5.10. Annual hydrograph
at proposed SHP’s Weir Intake site for different years have been also generated and are
presented in Figure 5.11.
Figure 5.10: Rating Curve – Hunza River at Danyore
Figure 5.11: Annual Hydrographs for river at Intake Site
12
Feasibility Report
The resultant mean monthly flows and 10-daily flows are presented in Figures 3.12, 3.13 and
Table 5.7 and 5.8. The average monthly graph shows that March is the month which has the
lowest flow. Maximum flows are available in the month of August. This could be because of
snow melting due to rise in temperature.
Figure 5.12: Estimated Mean Monthly Flows at SHP Intake Site (1966-2015)
Mean Monthly Flows of Hunza River at Intake Site

900
826.49
800 746.54
700
600
Discharge (m3/s)
490.50
500
394.39
400
300
200
106.59
100 68.15 47.80
34.40 31.06 22.98 30.74 38.95
0
Months
Figure 5.13: 10-daily Flows – Hunza River at Intake (1966-2015)
13
Feasibility Report
Table 5.7: 10-Daily Flows at Weir Intake Site (1966-2015)

1 31.5 28.4 26.2 28.8 70.1 241.6 605.5 747.9 396.7 123.7 55.5 38.7
2 30.2 27.4 25.8 33.8 107.0 344.9 693.9 668.6 291.0 90.1 48.5 35.4
3 29.8 25.4 27.2 46.6 150.4 487.4 712.7 542.8 188.6 69.7 42.4 32.7
Table 5.8: Annual Maximum and Minimum Flows at Weir Intake Site (m 3/s)
Year Maximum Minimum Average Year Maximum Minimu Average
m
1966 1,086.26 20.46 238.19 1992 804.74 24.00 155.10
1967 1,303.14 28.69 249.29 1993 817.12 19.52 155.67
1968 1,332.01 18.43 251.59 1994 1,147.07 22.78 239.48
1969 1,416.26 23.50 249.89 1995 939.95 21.17 175.27
1970 1,200.90 26.35 273.65 1996 863.41 20.26 164.87
1971 1,362.42 25.84 273.24 1997 1,008.20 24.31 152.08
1972 993.15 23.69 168.83 1998 936.48 24.76 252.73
1973 1,620.21 23.50 310.23 1999 1,055.96 0.00 199.36
1974 1,071.69 22.04 181.93 2000 1,051.30 24.39 224.97
1975 1,121.10 23.50 202.48 2001 839.80 23.26 168.94
1976 1,330.11 21.54 208.35 2002 975.80 20.24 195.91
1977 1,530.90 23.50 265.74 2003 943.66 39.12 221.84
1978 1,548.63 17.92 304.21 2004 807.57 36.80 197.25
1979 1,561.30 27.93 262.17 2005 808.54 20.54 186.09
1980 1,010.89 30.09 211.26 2006 880.75 23.29 205.79
1982 1,046.81 17.21 170.89 2007 943.66 39.12 221.84
1983 1,095.21 20.79 210.73 2008 1,221.17 22.00 198.04
1984 1,070.11 20.43 221.73 2009 830.37 28.51 199.74
1985 1,100.59 23.82 208.08 2010 749.93 21.81 187.13
1986 1,060.92 22.23 189.56 2011 832.27 20.34 219.99
1987 819.17 23.31 157.25 2012 634.02 23.79 159.69
1988 1,002.00 22.61 209.48 2013 897.51 21.90 175.23
1989 1,012.79 25.44 146.68 2014 634.021 23.79 159.688
1990 952.62 23.31 239.49 2015 897.510 21.90 175.228
1991 737.90 25.03 173.61
The annual maximum, minimum and aveage flows at the weir intake site are given in Figure
5.14. The variation in flow is expressed through flows occuring during dry and wet years.
The recorded data shows that year 1989 was the driest period, while 1973 was the wettest
period. The average flow was 146 m3/s and 310 m3/s respectively. The graphical
representation of flows for both years is shown in Figure 5.15.
14
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.14: Annual Maximum, Min and Avg. Flows at Central Hunza Intake Site (1966-
2015)
2500
2000
Maximum Mininum Average
Discharge (m3/s)
1500
1000
500
0
66 69 72 75 78 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08 11 14
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20
Year
Figure 5.15: Wet and Dry year Flows at Intake Site
15
Feasibility Report
5.1.11 Snow Melt and Base Flow Contribution

The maximum precipitation on the Hunza River catchment will most probably occuring
during the period from May to October. During this period the maximum discharges have
been recorded. Snow melt and base flow contribution was estimated from the daily
hydrograph from the recorded base flow during March and converted to base flow at the
proposed project’s Weir Intake Site following the same pattern as obtained for the month of
March in the monthly flow simulation.
A base flow of 23 m3/s was adopted to include snow melt and base flow contribution. The
measuring station Danyor is located 110 Km downstream of the proposed project’s weir
intake site and hence there is significant variation in flow controlling parameters.
The hydrograph for project site and flow measuring site at Danyore has been developed for
wettest year and comparison of both is presented in Figure 5.16.
Figure 5.16: Hydrographs of Hunza River at Danyore and Project Intake site
5.1.12 Floods
The objective of flood analyses is to estimate design floods with the required return intervals
based on sufficiently long and reliable historical sequences. Instantenous peaks for 42 years
at intake site have been extracted from the flow servies.
16
Feasibility Report
Different statistical distributions like Gumbel, Log Normal, Norma, Pearson and Log Pearson
Type-3 have been used to determine floods for various return periods and used to estimate
the design floods at the projct site. Return intervals up to 10,000 years have been applied.
Hunza River catchment has appreciable proportion of glaciers in the entire Basin. Several
glaciers of different size are identifiable on the General Topographic Maps of 1:50,000 scale
and Google earth which constitute approximately 18% of the total catchment area. The
snowfall factor is also very important due to a high altitude of the catchment with a mean
elevation of 4,210 masl.
The estimation of design floods, therefore, needs a special consideration of snow and glacier
factor in the catchment. From the record, annual instantaneous peaks have been extracted
and summarized in Table 5.9.
Table 5.9: Instantaneous Peaks at Intake Site
Year Instantaneous Peak Year Instantaneous Peak
1966 1,249.20 1992 925.45
1967 1,498.61 1993 939.69
1968 1,531.82 1994 1,319.13
1969 1,628.69 1995 1,080.94
1970 1,381.04 1996 992.93
1971 1,566.78 1997 1,159.43
1972 1,142.12 1998 1,076.95
1973 1,863.24 1999 1,214.35
1974 1,232.45 2000 1,208.99
1975 1,289.26 2001 965.77
1976 1,529.63 2002 1,122.17
1977 1,760.53 2003 1,085.21
1978 1,780.93 2004 928.70
1979 1,795.50 2005 1,890.025
1980 1,162.52 2006 1,320.945
1981 1,199.71 2007 1,345.945
1982 1,203.83 2008 1,315.945
1983 1,259.49 2009 2,783.115
1984 1,230.63 2010 3,314.07
1985 1,265.68 2011 1,661.865
1986 1,220.06 2012 1,607.815
1987 942.04 2013 1,315.945
1988 1,152.30 2014 1,325.00
1989 1,164.71 2015 1,355.00
1990 1,095.51 2016 1,452.00
1991 848.58 2017 1,861.965
17
Feasibility Report
Going forward, there are two approaches that can be applied for estimation of flood
magnitudes in the rivers, including Hunza River catchment. These two approaches are;
1. Derivation of flood flows for different return periods on the basis of observed flood
series
2. Application of a rainfall-runoff model to convert maximized storm rainfalls to flood
hydrographs by using catchment parameters and the unit hydrograph concept.
In first approach, flood frequency analysis (FFA) method was performed using five statistical
distribution functions, i.e., Normal, Log Normal, Gumbel, Pearson Type-III and Log Person
Type-III. Instantaneous Peak Flow of Hunza River at proposed project weir intake site and
rainfall data recorded at Gilgit Station, have been used. Flood discharges for different
recurrence intervals, i.e., 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 500,and 1,000 years estimated. The rainfall
model HMS has been also been used to estimate flood historical rainfall.
5.1.13 Flood Frequency Analyses
Flood Frequency Analysis based on recorded Peak Discharges
The Hunza River at Danyore Gauging Station has 52 years long hydrological data set, which
is quite enough to carry out a reliable flood frequency analysis. To assess the design floods
for different return periods, commonly used frequency analysis techniques and various
frequency distributions have been applied. The selected frequency distributions are.
1. Normal
2. Log Norma
3. Gumbel Distribution
4. Pearson Type-III Distribution and
5. Log-Pearson Type-III Distribution.
Instantaneous peaks were obtained from SWHP-WAPDA for Danyore hydrological station.
One maximum value was selected from every year; summing up to all in all 52 flood values.
The instantaneous peaks have been transposed to the intake site. The resulting peak flow
values (annual maximum, minimum and averages) are presented in Table 5.10 and Figure
5.17. During frequency analysis of floods, no deviations from normal statistical trends was
observed. Therefore, no calculations regarding outlier was required.
Empirical probability of instantaneous Peaks is presented in Table 5.10 and Figure 5.18.
Flood Frequency Analysis of Hunza River at Central Hunza:
Gumbel (Maximum Likelihood) (Basic statistics)
Number of observations 52
Minimum 849 m³/s
Maximum 3,310 m³/s
Mean 1,380 m³/s
Standard deviation 432 m³/s
Median 1,260 m³/s
Coefficient of variation (Cv) 0.314
Skewness coefficient (Cs) 2.49
Kurtosis coefficient (Ck) 10.3
18
Feasibility Report
Table 5.10: Empirical probability of instantaneous Peaks

Peak Empirical Peak Empirical
Sr. No Year Sr No Year
(m3/s) Probability (m3/s) Probability
1 1991 849 0.010 27 1985 1,270 0.5096
2 1992 925 0.029 28 1975 1,290 0.5288
3 2004 929 0.048 29 1994 1,320 0.625
4 1993 940 0.067 30 2006 1,320 0.5481
5 1987 942 0.087 31 2007 1,320 0.5673
6 2001 966 0.106 32 2008 1,320 0.5865
7 1996 993 0.125 33 2013 1,320 0.6058
8 1995 1,080 0.164 34 2014 1,330 0.6442
9 1998 1,080 0.144 35 2015 1,360 0.6635
10 2003 1,090 0.183 36 1970 1,380 0.6827
11 1990 1,100 0.202 37 2016 1,450 0.7019
12 2002 1,120 0.221 38 1967 1,500 0.7212
13 1972 1,140 0.240 39 1968 1,530 0.7596
14 1988 1,150 0.260 40 1976 1,530 0.7404
15 1980 1,160 0.298 41 1971 1,570 0.7788
16 1989 1,160 0.317 42 2012 1,610 0.7981
17 1997 1,160 0.279 43 1969 1,630 0.8173
18 1981 1,200 0.337 44 2011 1,660 0.8365
19 1982 1,200 0.356 45 1977 1,760 0.8558
20 1999 1,210 0.394 46 1978 1,780 0.875
21 2000 1,210 0.375 47 1979 1,800 0.8942
22 1986 1,220 0.414 48 1973 1,860 0.9327
23 1974 1,230 0.452 49 2017 1,860 0.9135
24 1984 1,230 0.433 50 2005 1,890 0.9519
25 1966 1,250 0.471 51 2009 2,780 0.9712
26 1983 1,260 0.490 52 2010 3,310 0.9904
19
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.17: Chronological Curve Hunza River Flows at Weir Intake Site
Figure 5.18: Annual instantaneous Peaks
20
Feasibility Report
The observed minimum flows were ranked from the lowest to the highest value and a
plotting position was assigned according to the Weibull formula. The design flood values
resulting from the Gubbel distribution (which was selected on the basis of lowest standard
error) against different return periods for the annual maximum flow series are shown in
Figure 5.19.
Figure 5.19: Probability of Non-exceedence of Instantenous Peaks (Gumbel)
The series of annual maximum flows were analyzed using all four distribution equations
listed above. The results obtained from the analysis for different return periods are presented
in Figures 5.20 through 5.25 and are summarized in Table 5.11, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14 and 5.15.
Flood Frequency Analysis for Hunza River Flows at SHP’s Weir Intake Site
Results of fitting for Gumbel (Maximum Likelihood)
Number of observations 52
Quantiles
q = F(X) : non-exceedance probability
T = 1/(1-q)
21
Feasibility Report
Table 5.11: Flood Frequency Analysis by Gumbel Distribution
Standard
T q XT Confidence interval (95%)
deviation
10000.0 0.9999 3,660 284 3,110 4,220
2000.0 0.9995 3,240 237 2,770 3,700
1000.0 0.9990 3,050 217 2,620 3,480
200.0 0.9950 2,620 171 2,280 2,960
100.0 0.9900 2,430 151 2,140 2,730
50.0 0.9800 2,250 131 1,990 2,510
20.0 0.9500 2,000 106 1,790 2,210
10.0 0.9000 1,810 86.1 1,640 1,980
5.0 0.8000 1,610 66.9 1,480 1,740
3.0 0.6667 1,450 53.2 1,340 1,550
2.0 0.5000 1,300 43.3 1,220 1,390
Figure 5.20: Flood Frequency Analysis by Gumbel Distribution at Intake
22
Feasibility Report
5.1.14 Results of Pearson Normal Distribution

Table 5.12: Flood Frequency Analysis by Normal
T q XT Standard deviation Confidence interval (95%)
10,000 0.9999 2,980 170 2,650 3,320
2,000 0.9995 2,800 153 2,500 3,100
1,000 0.999 2,710 145 2,430 3,000
200 0.995 2,490 126 2,240 2,740
100 0.99 2,380 116 2,150 2,610
50 0.98 2,260 106 2,060 2,470
20 0.95 2,090 92.5 1,910 2,270
10 0.9 1,930 81.3 1,770 2,090
5 0.8 1,740 70 1,600 1,880
3 0.6667 1,560 62.7 1,440 1,680
2 0.5 1,380 60 1,260 1,490
Figure 5.21: Flood Frequency Analysis by Normal Distribution at Weir Intake
23
Feasibility Report
24
Feasibility Report
5.1.15 Results Lognormal (Maximum Likelihood)

Table 5.13: Flood Frequency Analysis by Log Normal Distribution at Weir Intake
T q XT Standard deviation Confidence interval (95%)
10,000 0.9999 3,490 357 2,790 4,190
2,000 0.9995 3,120 287 2,560 3,680
1,000 0.999 2,960 259 2,450 3,470
200 0.995 2,590 196 2,210 2,970
100 0.99 2,430 170 2,100 2,760
50 0.98 2,260 145 1,980 2,550
20 0.95 2,030 113 1,810 2,260
10 0.9 1,850 90.5 1,670 2,030
5 0.8 1,650 69.4 1,510 1,790
3 0.6667 1,480 56 1,370 1,590
2 0.5 1,330 47.8 1,230 1,420
Source: Own Compilation
Figure 5.22: Flood Frequency Analysis by Log Normal Distribution at Weir Intake
25
Feasibility Report
Table 5.14: Flood Frequency Analysis by Pearson Type-III
T q XT Standard Confidence interval (95%)

deviation
10,000 0.9999 4,530 543 5,600 10,000
2,000 0.9995 3,970 444 4,840 2,000
1,000 0.999 3,730 402 4,520 1,000
200 0.995 3,160 305 3,750 200
100 0.99 2,910 263 3,420 100
50 0.98 2,650 222 3,090 50
20 0.95 2,310 169 2,640 20
10 0.9 2,040 131 2,290 10
5 0.8 1,760 94 1,940 5
3 0.6667 1,540 70.4 1,680 3
2 0.5 1,350 53.2 1,450 2
Figure 5.23: Flood Frequency Analysis by Pearson Type 3 at Central Hunza
26
Feasibility Report
Table 5.15: Flood Frequency Analysis by Weibull (Maximum Likelihood)

T q XT Standard Confidence interval (95%)
deviation
10,000 0.9999 3,190 252 2,690 3,680
2,000 0.9995 2,990 220 2,560 3,420
1,000 0.999 2,900 205 2,490 3,300
200 0.995 2,650 170 2,320 2,990
100 0.99 2,530 153 2,230 2,830
50 0.98 2,400 137 2,130 2,670
20 0.95 2,200 114 1,970 2,420
10 0.9 2,010 97.1 1,820 2,200
5 0.8 1,790 82.2 1,630 1,950
3 0.6667 1,580 74.7 1,430 1,720
2 0.5 1,350 72.9 1,210 1,500
Figure 5.24: Flood Frequency Analysis by Weibull
27
Feasibility Report
28
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.25: Comarison of all distributions of frequency analysis at intake site
Source: Own compilation
A comparison of all distributions is given in Table 5.20 from comparison.
Table 5.16: Results of Flood Frequency Analysis (Using Recorded Peak Discharges)
Return Pearson type

Probability Weibull Lognormal Normal Gumbel
Period 3
T q XT XT XT XT XT
2 0.5 1,350 1,350 1,330 1,380 1,300
3 0.6667 1,580 1,540 1,480 1,560 1,450
5 0.8 1,790 1,760 1,650 1,740 1,610
10 0.9 2,010 2,040 1,850 1,930 1,810
20 0.95 2,200 2,310 2,030 2,090 2,000
50 0.98 2,400 2,650 2,260 2,260 2,250
100 0.99 2,530 2,910 2,430 2,380 2,430
200 0.995 2,650 3,160 2,590 2,490 2,620
1,000 0.999 2,900 3,730 2,960 2,710 3,050
2,000 0.9995 2,990 3,970 3,120 2,800 3,240
10,000 0.9999 3,190 4,530 3,490 2,980 3,660
29
Feasibility Report
5.1.16 Flood Estimation by using Regional Method

Flood for the Hunza River catchment has also been estimated using the regional method. As
already discussed, the available information at Hunza River is sufficient for a reliable
estimation of floods with large return periods as required for the design of the hydropower
projects. The method for estimation of flood was developed as follows:
i. Flood frequency analysis was performed for all available stations in the area.
ii. Specific discharge of estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000-year floods were
calculated.
iii. An enveloping curve was drawn to each set of specific discharges (5, 10, 100, 1,000
and 10,000-year floods), and a mathematical function was fitted to the curve shown in
Figure 5.26.
iv. Estimation of floods for Hunza River at the Intake was undertaken.
Stations for which flood frequency analysis was performed are presented on Table 5.17,
along with the estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000-year floods. The mathematical
function fitted to the enveloping curve is of the form:
Qmax = C x An [1]
where,
Qmax = maximum instantaneous discharge for the return period in m3/s.
C, n = coefficients.
A = catchment area in Km2.
Source Comprehensive Planning of Northern Areas, GTZ Publication
The mathematical function fitted to the enveloping curves (Figure 5.20) are as follows:
Q5 = 11.97 x A0.59 [2]
Q10 = 15.60 x A0.57 [3]
Q100 = 40.45 x A0.50 [4]
Q1,000 = 64.05 x A0.47 [5]
Q10,000 = 84.85 x A0.46 [6]
where,
Q5, Q10 , Q100, Q1,000 , Q10,000 = maximum instantaneous discharges for return periods of 5,
10, 100, 1,000, and 10,000 years in m3/s.
A = catchment area in Km2.
The regional method covers both, the floods originated by rains and snow melt. The
estimation of floods by the regional approach may give quite good results for both floods
originated by rainfall and snow melt. However, recent climate changes globally and increase
in rainfall in the region this method requires furthers research. The area has more rainfall
than previously and may be effected by monsoon, therefore the flood values estimated by
30
Feasibility Report
applying the regional method trend to be on the lower side. The estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000
and 10,000-year floods of Hunza River at the intake site, calculated by using the Regional
Method are summarized in Table 5.17. The values are lower compared with the results of
the Frequency analysis based on recorded peak flows.
Table 5.17: Estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000 & 10,000 Year Floods (Gumbel)
Area Q5 Q10 Q100 Q1,000 Q10,000
Station Name
(km2) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s)
Hunza at Danyore Br 13,925 2,520 2,817 3,749 4,663 5,576
Hunza at Central Hunza 8,6 1542.4 1,724.2 2,294.7 2,854.2 3,412.9
Figure 5.26: Enveloping Curves for Northern Areas
Envaloping Curves of Flood-Area Relationship, Northern Area
100000
10000
Q (5 yr)
Maximum Flood (m3/s)
Q(10 yr)
Q(100 yr)
Q(1000 yr)
Q(10,000 yr)
1000
100
100 1000 10000 100000 1000000
Catchment Area (Km2)
5.1.17 Flood Analysis by HEC-HMS Using Maximum Rainfall Events

Daily rainfall data of Gilgit Climatological Station (1981 – 2010) has been used to
estimate the maximum flood for 1000-year interval. Annual maximum rainfall data of
62 year has been used to carry out frequency analysis using Gumbel Distribution.
Frequency storm for different return period was determined and given in Table 5.18.
31
Feasibility Report
The data shows that maximum rainfall has occurred in 2010 in Gilgit.
32
Feasibility Report
Table 5.18: Observed Frequency of Rainfall (mm)
Ascending Observed Return

Sr. No Input data Rank (m)
order Frequency period
1.00 62.00 6.00 29.00 0.97 1.03
2.00 15.00 10.00 28.00 0.93 1.07
3.00 16.00 10.00 27.00 0.90 1.11
4.00 18.00 10.00 26.00 0.87 1.15
5.00 22.00 11.00 25.00 0.83 1.20
6.00 20.00 13.00 24.00 0.80 1.25
7.00 61.00 15.00 23.00 0.77 1.30
8.00 18.00 15.00 22.00 0.73 1.36
9.00 11.00 16.00 21.00 0.70 1.43
10.00 39.00 16.00 20.00 0.67 1.50
11.00 22.00 18.00 19.00 0.63 1.58
12.00 59.00 18.00 18.00 0.60 1.67
13.00 34.00 20.00 17.00 0.57 1.77
14.00 31.00 20.00 16.00 0.53 1.88
15.00 15.00 22.00 15.00 0.50 2.00
16.00 20.00 22.00 14.00 0.47 2.14
17.00 40.00 22.00 13.00 0.43 2.31
18.00 37.00 27.00 12.00 0.40 2.50
19.00 27.00 31.00 11.00 0.37 2.73
20.00 13.00 31.00 10.00 0.33 3.00
21.00 6.00 34.00 9.00 0.30 3.33
22.00 10.00 37.00 8.00 0.27 3.75
23.00 45.00 39.00 7.00 0.23 4.29
24.00 10.00 40.00 6.00 0.20 5.00
25.00 31.00 45.00 5.00 0.17 6.00
26.00 51.00 51.00 4.00 0.13 7.50
27.00 10.00 59.00 3.00 0.10 10.00
28.00 22.00 61.00 2.00 0.07 15.00
29.00 16.00 62.00 1.00 0.03 30.00
Source: Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD) Lahore
33
Feasibility Report
34
Feasibility Report
Data Statistics
Mean = 26.931 
Standard deviation = 16.283 
Coefficient of skew = 0.907
The frequency analysis was conducted by using Gumbel method. The results are
summarized in Table 5.19.
Table 5.19: Frequency of Rainfall using Gumbel Distribution
Recurrence Maximum 95% confidence Standard Peak Discharge
Interval Rainfall Limits Error Discharge Unit Area
(Years) (mm) (mm) (mm) m3/s (m3/s /sq km)
2 24.47 { 22.78 -- 26.17 0.87 106.6 0.01
5 37.82 { 34.94 -- 40.70 1.47 714.2 0.06
30 60.01 { 54.54 -- 65.47 2.79 2,509.8 0.21
50 66.10 { 59.90 -- 72.31 3.17 3,121.4 0.26
100 74.33 { 67.10 -- 81.55 3.68 4,006.4 0.33
200 82.52 { 74.28 -- 90.76 4.2 4,946.4 0.41
500 93.32 { 83.74 -- 102.91 4.89 6,260.5 0.52
1,000 101.49 { 90.89 -- 112.10 5.41 7,300.6 0.60
2,000 109.66 { 98.03 -- 121.29 5.93 8,374.5 0.69
Source: Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD) Lahore
A flood hydrograph was calculated for the project site by using rainfall intensity and related
discharge data. The results are presented in Table 5.20 and Figure 5.27.
Flood events tend to build up very rapidly within almost 23 hours after the rainfall event.
Lowering of the peak lasts for about 25 hours. The rapid increase of flow indicates limited
retention space in the upper catchment area.
35
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.27: Food Hydrograph generated from 1000 year return rainfall at Intake Site
using HEC-HMS
Source: Own Campilation
Table 5.20: Flood Hydrograph for Hunza River at Weir Intake

Time (hr) Outflow (m3/s) Time (hr) Outflow (m3/s)
0 23 58 4,771.6
2 23.1 60 4,931.4
4 24.6 62 5,056
6 26.1 64 4,876.3
8 27.6 66 4,672.5
10 29.1 68 4,400.1
12 30.6 70 4,085.1
14 32 72 3,718.6
16 33.5 74 3,307.5
18 35 76 2,879.5
20 36.5 78 2,490
22 37.9 80 2,159.9
36
Feasibility Report
24 35.2 82 1,877
26 38.9 84 1,634.4
28 46.7 86 1,432.2
30 60.5 88 1,261
32 83.3 90 1,110.8
34 120.2 92 975.3
36 178.7 94 853.7
38 282.1 96 747.8
40 475.7 98 657.3
42 766.0 100 579
44 1.138.4 102 510.1
46 1.594.2 104 449.2
48 2.142.5 106 395.6
50 2.768.1 108 348.8
52 3.416.6 110 308.3
54 3.996 112 273.6
56 4.455.3 114 243.5
5.1.18 Conclusion
The results for Flood Frequency of rainfall using Gumbel I Distribution for a return period of
1,000 year i.e. 3,050 m3/s is recommended for design of weir structure on Hunza River.
37
Feasibility Report
5.2 Sedimentation
5.2.1 Available Data
Morphology
Most of the rivers of Pakistan carry large amounts of sediment in suspension and as bed
load. Much of the land in Pakistan is highly erodible because of sparse vegetal cover, steep
slopes, and non-resistant soils and rocks. As a result serious consideration must be given to
the sediment aspects of all river and hydropower projects and sediment records are absolute
requirements for good design.
The glacial lakes filled by moraines and or ice core of retreating glaciers may breach
suddenly due to unstable moraine ‘dams’, resulting in discharge of huge amounts of water
and debris - known as ‘Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF)’. The frequency of natural
hazards like flash floods and GLOFs has increased in the Himalayan region of Pakistan due
to the global warming in recent decades. They often have catastrophic effects downhill; even
a small glacial lake associated with hanging glaciers poses high risk of a GLOF event.
According to Chaudhry, Mahmood, Rasul and Afzaal (2009), Pakistan experienced 0.76°C
rise in temperature during the last 40 years. The frequency and persistence of heat waves in
glaciated mountains has risen drastically causing rapid melting and sudden discharge of bulk
of water to terminal lakes of glaciers increasing the risk of outburst.
According to Goudie (1981) and Miller (1984), among 339 disastrous incidents identified
along Karakoram Highway (KKH) in Hunza valley in 1980, the most destructive ones were
related to glacial movement that led to outburst floods of ice-dammed lakes.
The morphology of Hunza River has an important impact on the pattern of sediment
transport. The River is a mountain river, where 98% of the catchment is built by mountains.
The morphology of the River is characterized by boulders and gravels. The flow regime is
mostly turbulent at lower reaches. The bed load of Hunza River and its flow regime are
strongly influenced by the morphological structures of the area. The longitudinal water level
profile is a parameter of the energy and shear stresses acting on the river bed and initiating
sediment transport.
Sediment sources are glaciers, precipitation in the form storms and heavy rains, hill slopes,
landslides and gully erosion etc. The suspended load is influenced by availability of sediment
sources and triggering events. In Karakorum and Himalayas large amounts of yearly
suspended sediments per square kilometers of the catchment area (more than 2,000
tons/year km2) are reported in the river system. Based on the morphology, climate and flow
regime of the area, the sediment load of the concerned catchment is thoroughly assessed.
The average sediment concentration is about 0.321% (by weight) or 3,210 ppm and the
average sediment yield per year is about 42.6 million Short tons. The annual sediment yield
is 5.90 Ac.ft. per sq. mile of drainage area. The observed minimum concentration is 2 ppm
and observed maximum concentration is 19,800 ppm. The computed maximum
concentration is 10,200 ppm. Almost all of the suspended sediment is brought down by the
38
Feasibility Report
river during the period of June to September. The river carries on the average, about 23%
sand, 50% silt and 27% clay. The unit weight of fresh deposits of this sediment is about 62
lb/cft (992.49 kg/m3).
5.2.2 Field Measurements

Topography
The slope of the river reach has an important impact on the acting forces on the river bed in
form of shear stress and thereby the amount of moved bed load. The river slope was
measured in a reach of 6.48 km from upstream of proposed weir site to the downstream of
proposed powerhouse site. The elevation difference is 82 m. The minimum, average and
maximum elevations were 2,093, 2,134 and 2,175 masl. The slope estimated using
toposheet is 1.2%.
Suspended Load
SWHP used two types of suspended sediment samplers for measuring in Hunza River;. the
standard instruments US DH-48 and US D-49. Usually the load is measured at a single
vertical at midstream. This procedure can be considered sufficiently accurate, because the
transverse distribution of suspended load is uniform. A discharge measurement was always
taken at the same time at the site. The data for suspended load has been estimated for the
period 1966 to 2009.
Suspended load measurements were carried out on Hunza River during mean and high
flows at the gauging station at from 1966 to onward. Suspended load measurements are
also available on Gilgit River at Gilgit and Alam Bridge on Gilgit River.
5.2.3 Rating Curve Derived From Field Measurements

Suspended sediments were calculated by SWHP for each year. The maximum and minimum
and mean monthly sediment concentrations observed by SWHP are presented in Figure
5.28 and Figure 5.29. The maximum observed concentration is compiled in Table 5.21.
Figure 5.28: Suspended sediment rating for Hunza River at Danyore
100000
f(x) = NaN x^NaN
10000
Discharge (m3/sec)
f(x) = 3.8313410102688 x^0.440726884186677

1000
100
10
10 100 1000 10000
Suspended Sediment Load (Metric Tons/Day)
100000 1000000 10000000
39
Feasibility Report
40
Feasibility Report
Figure 5.29: Mean Monthly Suspended sediment rating for Hunza River at Danyore
Source: : Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA
Table 5.21: Observed Maximum and Minimum Sediment Concentration and

Corresponding Discharges - Hunza River at Danyore
Date Maximum Discharge Date Maximum Discharge
Observed Conc Observed Conc
(m3/s) (m3/s)
(PPM) (PPM
13.8.1974 319 235.7 18.10.1974 95 58.9
6.5.1975 601 48.2 19.2.1975 30 10.8
26.7.1976 1,800 303.1 13.12.1976 22 31.2
29.6.1977 3,820 481.6 27.12.1977 10 25.5
3.8.1978 8,970 202 21.11.1978 5 34.3
21.6.1979 5,060 450.4 5.5.1979 5 122.9
28.5.1980 497 308.8 14.12.1980 5 25.8
21.4.1981 9,700 127.8 17.2.1981 8 28.3
31.7.1982 3,120 269.7 21.6.1982 9 227.2
7.9.1983 448 204.2 15.10.1983 6 53.0
28.6.1984 455 552.4 19.1.1984 12 25.6
6.6.1985 1,060 259.2 9.1.1985 21 24.2
6.6.1986 2,490 136.5 25.1.1986 26 24.4
7.5.1987 217 90.7 13.11.1987 17 75.1
41
Feasibility Report
24.6.1988 3,260 575.1 30.11.1987 17 60.3

10.8.1989 705 224 11.1.1988 15 34.2
14.7.1990 2,440 288 21.12.1989 23 42
11.6.1991 12,800 541 22.11.1990 20 51
6.8.1992 3,670 385.7 14.3.1991 18 33
29.7.1993 1,790 289 28.12.1992 10 44.5
18.7.1994 2,440 536.7 11.1.1993 10 44
20.8.1995 405 252.4 30.4.1994 47 99.5
22.6.1996 409 605.5 6.2.1995 35 41.7
11.7.1997 2,870 205.2 14.1.1996 8 38.8
24.7.1998 2,410 300.2 28.2.1997 39 26.5
22.7.1999 2,430 215.9 22.12.1998 7 32.2
7.5.2000 1,490 186.7 23.1.1999 20 30.5
22.7.2000 1,490 210.8 17.2.2000 25 33.4
Hunza River is one of the rivers with highest annually sediment load due to major glaciers
covering 18% of catchment area. Sediment load of the whole year and June to September is
given in Table 5.22 and daily sediment load computed at project site is available in Table
5.23. The Table shows that river carries more than 95% sediment load during the four
months of high temperature i.e. June to September.
5.2.4 Sediment Yield

Table 5.22: The indicated sediment yield for the period of record is as follows
Jan to Dec Jun to Sept June to Sep
Year
mst. mst. Whole Year %
1966 74.10 72.20 97
1967 76.20 75.30 99
1968 81.20 80.40 99
1969 78.20 76.50 98
1970 85.30 84.10 99
1971 86.90 85.60 99
1972 32.20 31.30 97
1973 111.00 110.00 99
1974 40.60 40.10 99
42
Feasibility Report
1975 31.20 31.00 99

1976 31.30 30.80 98
1977 56.10 55.60 99
1978 59.00 57.30 97
1979 47.70 46.20 99
1980 33.30 32.40 97
1981 31.40 30.30 96
1982 29.20 28.00 96
1983 33.70 32.20 97
1984 46.40 45.90 99
1985 39.30 38.70 98
1986 34.20 33.20 97
1987 23.30 22.10 95
1988 39.60 38.50 97
1989 5.59 5.26 94
1990 12.90 12.00 93
1991 7.73 7.59 98
1992 11.20 10.80 96
1993 10.20 9.90 97
1994 14.10 13.80 98
1995 15.50 15.10 97
1996 20.50 19.50 95
1997 10.80 10.60 98
1998 19.70 18.62 95
Table 5.23: Estimated Sediment Load on Hunza River at Central Hunza HHP Site
Dat
e
1 6,35 6,18 8,91 6,524 10,11 27,702 334,03 312,95 219,81 58,41 19,25 12,78
1 9 3 7 4 6 2 6 1 7
2 6,35 6,08 8,47 6,765 9,997 29,710 335,84 304,52 205,55 58,01 18,06 12,78
1 9 1 0 5 9 4 7 7
3 6,35 6,08 8,47 6,765 11,02 31,115 221,01 314,76 227,84 58,01 17,78 12,78
1 9 1 1 6 3 2 4 6 7
4 6,41 6,01 8,19 7,166 12,94 34,126 167,01 336,84 228,84 56,60 16,82 12,54
8 5 0 8 7 4 5 9 2 6
5 6,31 6,01 7,94 7,608 15,79 35,732 140,92 338,04 209,57 53,59 16,48 12,54
7 5 9 8 1 9 4 8 1 6
6 6,35 5,97 7,94 7,548 18,87 32,319 117,63 340,25 189,70 53,99 16,64 12,32
1 7 9 0 5 7 1 9 1 6
7 6,31 5,90 7,78 7,448 24,49 31,516 113,62 340,85 176,65 48,78 16,64 12,32
7 3 9 0 0 9 3 0 1 6
43
Feasibility Report
8 6,31 5,90 7,54 7,548 26,89 37,539 106,79 344,27 168,22 45,97 16,36 12,32
7 3 8 9 4 2 1 0 0 6
9 6,31 5,97 7,60 7,387 25,29 44,565 128,87 327,20 150,55 40,95 16,36 12,32
7 7 8 3 6 9 6 1 0 6
10 6,31 5,90 7,54 7,046 21,68 51,992 156,77 292,48 147,14 34,92 16,36 12,32
7 3 8 0 9 0 4 9 0 6
11 6,31 5,90 7,38 7,608 20,27 56,007 204,55 289,06 138,11 32,52 16,20 12,20
7 3 7 5 6 8 0 0 0 5
12 6,35 5,84 7,38 7,729 16,01 64,237 239,08 249,92 130,68 31,71 16,20 12,20
1 1 7 9 3 3 3 7 0 5
13 6,35 5,90 7,38 8,471 13,75 84,111 257,35 231,25 127,27 31,31 16,64 12,20
1 3 7 1 1 4 0 6 1 5
14 6,26 5,97 7,32 10,21 12,04 103,98 257,35 214,79 123,85 29,91 16,64 12,10
0 7 7 8 4 4 1 3 7 0 1 5
15 6,35 6,01 7,20 9,656 13,06 122,65 232,25 205,55 131,88 28,70 16,64 12,10
1 5 7 8 3 8 9 7 6 1 5
16 6,41 6,08 7,20 9,254 16,48 160,79 227,23 234,66 129,47 28,50 15,33 12,10
8 9 7 1 4 9 7 8 5 7 5
17 6,35 6,08 7,38 8,813 19,43 189,70 212,38 232,86 134,09 28,10 14,09 12,10
1 9 7 2 1 4 0 5 4 2 5
18 6,26 7,84 7,20 9,876 26,29 190,30 185,28 260,76 122,05 27,90 13,81 12,20
0 1 7 7 3 4 3 1 3 1 5
19 6,06 7,38 7,16 10,90 31,51 244,90 185,68 276,02 97,159 27,30 13,41 12,32
9 2 6 0 6 5 6 0 1 0 6
20 6,03 6,36 6,58 11,82 36,33 255,74 222,22 303,92 85,114 27,10 13,57 12,44
5 3 4 4 4 5 1 3 0 0 6
21 6,06 6,08 6,58 12,04 31,91 258,55 242,09 285,25 73,873 26,49 13,28 12,44
9 9 4 4 8 5 4 4 8 9 6
22 5,96 5,97 6,98 12,26 27,30 239,68 277,22 241,49 66,445 25,09 13,28 12,54
7 7 6 5 1 5 4 2 3 9 6
23 5,91 5,84 6,64 12,26 26,29 246,51 300,51 221,61 64,839 23,08 13,18 12,54
1 1 5 5 7 1 0 9 5 9 6
24 5,84 5,80 6,64 12,66 23,68 274,41 316,36 214,79 61,828 22,48 13,18 12,54
3 3 5 7 7 4 9 3 3 9 6
25 5,84 5,72 6,58 13,75 23,48 300,51 341,46 189,70 59,018 22,08 13,06 12,32
3 9 4 1 7 0 1 1 2 8 6
26 5,77 6,01 6,52 14,99 23,88 309,14 318,77 174,44 55,605 21,68 13,06 12,32
5 5 4 5 8 2 7 4 0 8 6
27 5,74 5,90 6,98 14,53 24,08 306,13 314,76 180,06 55,204 21,68 13,06 12,32
1 3 6 4 9 1 3 5 0 8 6
28 5,68 5,80 6,52 12,04 23,88 308,54 262,97 194,31 55,405 21,07 13,06 12,20
5 3 4 4 8 0 1 8 8 8 5
29 5,55 6,48 11,02 27,10 293,08 272,60 194,31 55,605 20,87 12,94 12,10
0 4 1 0 3 7 8 7 8 5
30 5,68 6,52 10,51 27,70 298,30 303,92 232,86 58,416 20,07 12,94 12,10
5 4 9 2 2 3 0 4 8 5
31 5,68 6,64 27,90 338,04 240,28 20,27 12,10
5 5 3 9 8 5 5
The catchment area of Hunza River at Central Hunza is 8,928 Km2. The mean annual runoff
for 44 years record (1966-2009) is 3,138,451 acre feet (387,122 hectare meter). The river
has perennial flow with a minimum daily discharge of 23 m 3/s in April, 1978. The maximum
44
Feasibility Report
flow during the period of record was 5,155 m3/s on 30th June, 1967 at Danyore Bridge. The
bulk of runoff occurs during May to September during to snow melt.
The average sediment concentration is about 0.321% (by weight) or 3,210 ppm and the
average sediment yield per year at Danyore is about 42.6 Mill ton and 27.3 Mill ton at the
Intake. The annual sediment yield is 5.90 Ac.ft. per sq. mile (0.281 hec-m per km 2) of
catchment area. The observed minimum concentration is 2 ppm and observed maximum
concentration is 19,800 ppm. The computed maximum concentration is 10,200 ppm.
Practically whole of the suspended sediment is brought down by the river during the period
June to September. The river carries on the average, about 23% sand, 50% silt and 27%
clay. The unit weight of fresh deposits of this sediment is about 62 lbs per cft (992.49 kg/m 3).
5.2.5 Conclusion
The estimated total sediment load of Hunza River at intake is 27.3 million metric tons / year
and bed load is taken as 20% of suspended load i.e. 5.4 million metric tons / year. The total
sediment load is 34.125 million metric tons /year.
45

4 - Hydrology & Sedimentation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

4 - Hydrology & Sedimentation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

4 - Hydrology & Sedimentation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Section 05

HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

Table 5.20: Flood Hydrograph for Hunza River at Weir Intake...........................................5-31

5 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

Figure 5.1: Catchment Map of Hunza River

Source: Google Generated Map

5.1.2 Meteorological Aspects

Table 5.1: Climatological Stations in Gilgit-Baltistan

Astore 35 22 N 74 54 E 2,394 1954-01 P,T M 2

Bunji 35 40 74 38 1,372 1952-01 P,T M 2

Gilgit 35 55 N 74 20 E 1,460 1903-01 P,T D 1

Gupis 36 10 N 73 24 E 2,156 1955-01 P,T L 1

Skardu 35 18 N 75 41 E 2,210 1900-01 P,T D 1

Abbreviations P=Precipitation T=Temperature

Interval: D=Daily M=Monthly L=Long term

Agency: 1=PMD, Lahore 2=PMD, Gilgit 4=SIHP WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Figure 5.2: Mean Monthly, %age Distribution of Precipitation(mm) at Gilgit(1951-2014)

Source: Pakistan Meteorological Department

Figure 5.3: Average Monthly Precipitation at Gilgit

Source: Pakistan Meteorological Department

Figure 5.4: Annual rainfall for Gilgit Station (1951-2014)

Source: Pakistan Materiological Department

Table 5.4: Mean Minimum & Max Monthly Temperature at Gilgit

5.1.6 River Flows

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department WAPDA

5.1.8 Estimation of Flows

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Figure 5.11: Annual Hydrographs for river at Intake Site

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Mean Monthly Flows of Hunza River at Intake Site

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Figure 5.13: 10-daily Flows – Hunza River at Intake (1966-2015)

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Table 5.7: 10-Daily Flows at Weir Intake Site (1966-2015)

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Figure 5.15: Wet and Dry year Flows at Intake Site

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

5.1.11 Snow Melt and Base Flow Contribution

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Table 5.10: Empirical probability of instantaneous Peaks

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Figure 5.18: Annual instantaneous Peaks

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Source: Surface Water Hydrology Department, WAPDA

Table 5.11: Flood Frequency Analysis by Gumbel Distribution

10000.0 0.9999 3,660 284 3,110 4,220

2000.0 0.9995 3,240 237 2,770 3,700

1000.0 0.9990 3,050 217 2,620 3,480

200.0 0.9950 2,620 171 2,280 2,960

100.0 0.9900 2,430 151 2,140 2,730