DIVERSION CHANNEL

a review study
by
Sirodzul Munir

BT3 2X5 MW MHPP PROJECT

Background and Purpose
• The land aquisition area for diversion
channel is limited.
• The diversion channel as per design
drawing lays on unaquisited area
• This presentation is purposed to give an
alternative choice in establishing
diversion channel by focusing in
reviewing width of diversion channel
(B)
• The question next, if the dimension of B
made shorter, is the height of Diversion
Channel Wall becoming higher? Lower
or same?
Technical Data

• Design Discharge (Qd) = 19.498 m3/sec • Soil Mechanical Properties

• Q 2year = 1265 m3/sec – g native soil = 1.8 t/m3
– F native soil = 20o
• Width of Spillway = 64 m – C native soil = 0 t/m3
• Width of Flushing Gate = 2x2m • Diversion Channel
• Elevation Top of Weir = +815.5 m – Length of Diversion Channel = 221 m
• Elevation of River Bed = +810.5 m – Elevation of River Bed upstream = +811 m
– Elevation of River Bed downstream = +805.569 m
 Review to DivChannel
• Planning of diversion channel
using the spillway design
approach.
• Assumed at Sta 0+050 made
Mercu Control Structure (MCS)
• Distance axis of MCS to
upstream (Sta 0+000) = 50 m
• Elevation MCS upstream (Sta
0+050) = +809.646 m
• Elevation MCS downstream (Sta
0+075) = +808.955 m
DivChannel @Sta0+050
Determine Critical Water level above MCS (Hcr)
• Qd = 19.498 m3/sec  used Q 2yr = 1265 m3/sec
• Width of DivChannel planned to be 20m

Hcr = 7.4 m

No Hcr m B B+mHcr (B+B+mHcr)/2 Q^2 Hasil

1 2 3 4 5 6 = 5x1 7=9.81*6^3 8 9=8*4/7
1 7.2 0.2 20 21.44 20.72 149.184 32571349.3 1600225 1.053344
2 7.3 0.2 20 21.46 20.73 151.329 33996600.7 1600225 1.010125
3 7.4 0.2 20 21.48 20.74 153.476 35464220.8 1600225 0.969226
4 7.5 0.2 20 21.5 20.75 155.625 36974907.9 1600225 0.930492
5 7.6 0.2 20 21.52 20.76 157.776 38529363.2 1600225 0.893782

• Height of MCS (W) = 1/5*Hcr = 1/5*7.3 = 1.46m ≈ 1.5 m

• Used Hcr = 7.3 m (trapezoidal divchannel)
Review Result
Height of
Elev. Width of Elev of
Sta Coff from Review Result
DivCh DivCh Coffer
River Bed
Hcr + W +
B B' Elev. DivCh
FB
0+000 811.000 25 817.000 6.000 20 9.1 820.100
0+025 810.323 25 817.000 6.677 20 9.072 819.395
0+050 809.646 25 817.000 7.354 20 9.044 818.690
0+075 808.955 25 817.000 8.045 20 9.016 817.971
0+100 808.278 25 817.000 8.722 20 8.988 817.266
0+125 807.592 25 817.000 9.408 20 8.961 816.553
0+150 806.937 25 816.000 9.063 20 8.933 815.870
0+175 806.246 25 815.000 8.754 20 8.905 815.151
0+200 805.569 25 814.000 8.431 20 8.877 814.446
0+221 805.000 25 814.000 9.000 20 8.849 813.849

Width (B) as per design Width (B) as per review

Conclusion & Suggestion
• Based on review study to width of diversion channel, the
shorter width, the wall become higher.
• Diversion channel as per design has calculated flood
risks
• Review to width of DivChannel is only taking shorter 5m
and will be 20m with 1m average wall higher
• Contractor is necessary to make a study for each
construction method of div channel to avoid risks during
execution period.
THANK YOU