universiti putra malaysiapsasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/51582/1/fk 2012 149rr.pdf · panjang adalah...
TRANSCRIPT
UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA
MANAL M. ABOOD
FK 2012 149
MODELING RIVER SEDIMENT DEPOSITION INTO THE KENYIR RESERVOIR, MALAYSIA
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
MODELING RIVER SEDIMENT DEPOSITION INTO THE KENYIR
RESERVOIR, MALAYSIA
By
MANAL M. ABOOD
November 2012
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
ii
Abstract of thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia in Fulfillment of the Requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
MODELING RIVER SEDIMENT DEPOSITION INTO THE KENYIR RESERVOIR, MALAYSIA
By
MANAL M. ABOOD
November 2012
Chair: Professor Thamer Ahmed Mohammed, PhD
Faculty: Engineering
Assessment of the amount of sediment inflow from the Berang river and the Kenyie river
and the total quantity deposited to the Kenyir reservoir was made. Kenyir reservoir is the
biggest man-made lake in Southeast Asia. Kenyir dam and reservoir are mainly designed
for hydroelectric power generation and flood mitigation purposes.
This study was made to find an alternative solution to monitor the elevation changes with
less cost and less efforts by using a computer program that can simulate the elevation
accurately. For this purpose, the GSTARS3 program has been chosen. Due to limitation
on data available, the prediction was undertaken using the hydrological modeling (HEC-
HMS program) to fill the missing data in historical record and obtain a full set of data
that is used in sediment transport modeling (GSTARS3 program). GSTARS3 was
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
iii
integrated with GIS to display the output as sequences of grids. ArcView was used to
convert the GSTARS3 output to Arc View GIS grid format.
GSTARS3 program was validated using two terms of validation, short term validation
(ST validation ) for the period from 1995 to 1998, and long term validation (LT
validation) for the period from 1995 to 2006 for both Berang river and Kenyir river
thalweg profiles and their selected cross sections. The results show a good agreement
between the simulated and measured data with an error ranges from 5.5 % to 13.1 % for
short term validation and ranges from 6.3 % to 14.7 for long term validation for both
Berang and Kenyir rivers. Although, LT validation errors have higher values than that in
ST validation, they have not increased more than 15 % in all cases
Statistical analysis was applied to check the accuracy of HEC-HMS output. The results
show a reasonable agreement with an errors equal to 0.41 m3/sec for Berang basin and
equal to 0.67 m3/sec for Kenyir basin. It was found that the combination of two programs
(HEC-HMS and GSTARS3) helps to simulate the sediment when the hydrological data is
limited and the results show that the computed values agreed well with the historical
recorded data for the thalweg profiles and selected cross sections.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
iv
Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakan kepada Senat Universiti Putra Malaysia sebagai memenuhi keperluan unuk ijazah Doktor Falsafah
PEMODELAN SEDIMEN SUNGAI PEMENDAPAN KE RESERBOR KENYIR, MALAYSIA
Oleh
Manal M. Abood
November 2012
Pengerusi: Professor Thamer Ahmed Mohammed, PhD
Fakulti: Kejuruteraan
Kajian mengenai jumlah aliran kemasukkan sedimen dari Sungai Berang dan Sungai
Kenyir dan jumlak kuantiti takungan yang disimpan di Tasik Kenyir. Tasik Kenyir
merupakan takungan buatan manusia yang terbesar di Asia Tenggara. Empangan Kenyir
direkan untuk Penjanaan kuasa hidroelektrik dan bagi mengelakkan banjir.
Kajian ini adalah untuk mencari alternatif lain untuk mengurangkan kos dan tenaga
dengan menggunakan sistem computer untuk menjana pengalirannya. Untuk tujuan ini,
program GSTARS3 dipilih. Disebabkan kekurangan data, ramalan telah dijalankan
menggunakan model hidrologi (HEC-HMS program) untuk mengisi data yang hilang dan
mendapatkan data penuh untuk digunakan dalam pemodelan pengangkutan sedimen
(GSTARS3 program). GSTARS3 program telah disepadukan dengan GIS program untuk
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
v
memaparkan output yang selari. ARCVIEW digunakan untuk menukar GSTARS3 output
kepada ARCVIEW GIS format.
Program GSTARS3 telah disahkan menggunakan dua kaedah pengesahan, pengesahan
jangka pendek (ST pengesahan) bagi tempoh 1995-1998, dan pengesahan jangka panjang
(LT pengesahan) bagi kedua-dua sungai berang dan sungai kenyir. hasil menunjukkan
pengabungan yang baik antara data simulasi dan data yang diukur dengan julat ralat
daripada 5.5% to 13.1% untuk pengesahan jangka pendek dan bagi pengesahan jangka
panjang adalah dari 6.3% ke 14.7% bagi kedua-dua sungai berang dan sungai kenyir.
Walaupun nilai LT pengesahan yang silap adalah tinggi daripada ST pengesahan tetapi
nilai tersebut tidak lebih dari 15% dalam semua kes.
Analisis statistik digunakan untuk mengesan ketepatan output HEC-HMC. Hasil
menunjukan ketepatan adalah sama diantara 0.40m³/sec untuk kawasan tadahan Berang
dan 0.67 m³/sec bagi tdahan kenyir. Ini menunjukkan bahawa gabungan diantara dua
program (HEC-HMS dan GSTARS3) membantu untuk mensimulasikan enapan
walaupun data hidrologi yang diterima adalah terhad dan hasil menunjukkan nilai yang
dikira adalah sama dengan data lama yang telah direkod bagi thalweg profil dan keratan
rentas yang dipilih.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It gives me great pleasure to acknowledge the assistance of the following people for their
advice, guidance and help. First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Thamer
Ahmed Mohammed, my supervisor, for his support, advice and encouragement
throughout the development of this thesis.
I also wish to express my appreciation to Dr Abdul Halim Ghazali , Dr. Ahmed Rodzi
Mahmud and Dr. Lariyah Mohd Sidek, my co-supervisors, for their contributions,
comments and suggestions.
Financial support from the School of Graduate Studied, and the Department of Civil
Engineering, University Putra Malaysia is highly appreciated to complete this research.
My deepest gratitude goes to my husband, Mohamad Hussain, my daughter, Marwa and
my son, Mustafa, for their endless love and support during my study.
To all these cited people, my sincere acknowledgement. God bless you.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
vii
APPROVAL
I certify that a thesis Examination Committee has met on 19th November 2012 to conduct the final examination of Manal Mohsen Abood on her thesis entiteled “Modeling River Sediment Deposition Into The Kenyir Reservoir, Malaysia” in accordance with the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 and the Constitution of the UniversitiPutra Malaysia [P.U.(A) 106] 15 March 1998. The Committee recommends that the student be awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Members of Thesis Examination Committee were as follows:
Chairperson, PhDDr. Zainuddin bin Md YusoffFaculty: EngineeringUniversity Putra Malaysia(Chairman)
Examiner 1, PhDProfessor Dr. Lee Teang ShuiFaculty: EngineeringUniversity Putra Malaysia(Internal Examiner)
Examiner 2, PhDAssociated Professor Dr. Wan Nor Azmin b SulaimanFaculty: Environmental study.University Putra Malaysia(Internal Examiner)
External Examiner, PhDProfessor Dr. Chih Ted YangFaculty: Engineering University Colorado state universityCountry: United State.(External Examiner)
SEOW HENG FONG, PhD Professor and Deputy Dean School of Graduate Studies University Putra Malaysia
Date:
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
viii
DECLARATION
I declare that the thesis is my original work except for quotations and citations which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it has not been previously, and is not concurrently, submitted for any other degree at Universiti Putra Malaysia or at any other institution.
-----------------------------------
MANAL M. ABOOD
Date: 19 November 2012
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PageABSRACT ii
ABSTRAK iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Vi
APPROVAL Vii
DECLARATION viii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES xix
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Reservoir Sedimentation 1
1.2 Problem Statement 5
1.3 Objective 7
1.4 Scope and limitation 7
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 11
2.1 Introduction 11
2.2 Mechanism of Sedimentation in Reservoir 16
2.3 Sediment Transport Models 18
2.3.1 One Dimensional Models 20
2.3.1.1 HEC 6: Scour and Deposition in Rivers and Reservoirs
22
2.3.1.2 GSTARS3 (Generalized Sediment Transport Model for Alluvial River Simulation)
24
2.3.1.3 FLUVIAL (Mathematical Model for Erodible Channel)
27
2.3.2 Two Dimensional Models 29
2.3.3 Three Dimensional Models 33
2.4 (HEC-HMS program) Hydrologic Engineering 37
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
x
Center-Hydrologic Modeling System
2.5 Geographic Information System (GIS) 42
2.6 Summary 50
3 METHODOLOGY 55
3.1 Introduction 55
3.2 Study area 57
3.3 Hydrological Modeling using HEC-HMS program 61
3.4 HEC HMS theory 62
3.5 HEC-HMS and Model Set-ups 63
3.5.1 Loss Model using SCS Curve Number 64
3.5.2 Snyder’s Unit Hydrograph (Direct Runoff model)
66
3.5.3 Recession Method to model the Baseflow 69
3.5.4 Muskingum Routing Method 70
3.6 HEC HMS Project Configuration 7
3.6.1 Basin Model 72
3.6.2 Metrological Method 74
3.6.3 Control specification 76
3.7 Sediment Transport Modeling using GSTARS3 program
77
3.7.1 GSTARS3 Theoretical Background 77
3.7.1.1 Streamlines and Stream Tubes 78
3.7.1.2 The Backwater Model 80
3.7.1.3 Sediment Routing Model and Channel Geometry Adjustment
82
3.8 GSTARS3 Program Set Up 89
3.8.1 Channel geometry 90
3.8.2 Flow Resistance 93
3.8.3 Hydrological Data 95
3.8.4 Sediment Data and Laboratory Work 96
3.8.5 Sediment Transport Formula 99
3.8.6 Temperature 101
3.8.7 GSTARS3 program Testing 102
3.9 Integrating GSTARS3 with ArcView 102
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xi
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 108
4.1 Introduction 108
4.2 Rainfall Runoff Hydrological Modeling (HEC-HMS program)
108
4.2.1 Calibration of HEC HMS 109
4.2.2 Validation of HEC HMS 112
4.3 Sediment Transport Modeling (GSTARS3 program) 119
4.3.1 GSTARS3 Setup 119
4.3.1.1 Discharge Rating Curve 119
4.3.1.2 Sediment Rating Curve 121
4.3.1.3 Manning’s Roughness coefficient 123
4.3.2 Calibration 123
4.3.3 Validation 130
4.3.4 Statistical Analysis 139
4.4 Integrating GSTARS with ArcView GIS 152
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 157
5.1 Summary 157
5.2 Conclusions 159
5.3 Recommendations 164
REFERENCES 166
BIODATA OF THE STUDENT 178
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 179
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1.1 World wide dams and Annual loss due to sedimentation (Source: Oguz Kagan C., 2006)
3
1.2 Hydropower dams in Malaysia 4
2.1 Applications for Selected 1D Models 28
2.2 Applications for Selected 2D Models 32
2.3 Applications for Selected 3D Models 36
3.1 Rainfall and streamflow gages and their locations in the study area
61
3.2 Table 3.2: Sediment transport formula implemented in GSTARS3 and its type (B= bed load; BM= bed material (bed load + suspended load), (Source: Yang and Simŏes, 2002)
83
3.3 Selected Manning’s n for both Berang river and Kenyir river
94
3.4 Sediment Grain Size Rang and their Percentage in Berang river and Kenyir river
97
3.5 Mean monthly temperature at Kenyir dam site 101
4.1 HEC-HMS Parameter Values for Calibration Run 109
4.2 Rainfall Events Used for Calibration (event 1) and Validation (event 2) for Berang and Kenyir catchments
112
4.3 Statistical analyses for the study area 114
4.4 Suspended sediment concentration from laboratory work
122
4.5 Discharge rating curve parameter values for the calibration run
126
4.6 Sediment rating curve parameter of the calibration run
126
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xiii
4.7 Manning’s roughness coefficient of the calibration run
126
4.8 Performance statistics of the comparison of the elevations (Measured Vs. Simulated)
127
4.9 Statistical Analysis for the GSTARS3 simulation 141
4.10 Sediment accumulation exit the reach by size fraction
151
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1.1 Regional distribution of dams at the end of 20th centaury (Source: WCD, 2000)
2
2.1 Cross section of a conventional hydroelectric dam 12
2.2 A typical turbine and generator 13
2.3 Schematic presentation of principle sedimentation processes in storage reservoirs. (Adopted from Sloff, 1997
17
2.4 a, b Past and predicted cross-sectional changes within Six-Mile Pool of the Kankakee River at a) RM 33.14, and b) RM 34.01 (Source: Bhowmik et al. 2004)
24
2.5 Comparison of measurements and GSTARS3 computation for two cross sections in the Tarbela reservoir region. (Adopted from GSTARS3 Users Manual)
26
2.6 Integrating GIS with hydrological modeling (Adopted from: Sui and Maggio, 1999)
46
3.1 Study flowchart 57
3.2 Locations of Berang and Kenyir rivers 59
3.3 Available hydrological stations at Berang and Kenyir catchments (study area)
60
3.4 Selected methods to run the HEC-HMS 65
3.5 Curve number and initial abstraction values for Berang basin
65
3.6 Curve number and initial abstraction values for Kenyir basin
66
3.7 values for direct runoff model for berang basin 68
3.8 values for direct runoff model for kenyir basin 69
3.9 Recession model for Berang and Kenyir basin 70
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xv
3.10 Muskingum routing method calibrated values for Berang basin
71
3.11 Muskingum routing method calibrated values for Kenyir basin
72
3.12 Berang basin , Kenyir basin and methods used to run the HEC-HMS
74
3.13 Metrological model and precipitation gages for Berang basin
75
3.14 Metrological model and precipitation gages for Kenyir basin
75
3.15 Control specification for calibration 76
3.16 Control specification for Validation 77
3.17 Top view of hypothetical river reach illustrating the use of equal conveyance stream tubes in GSTARS3, (Source: Yang and Simŏes, 2002)
79
3.18 Definition of variables in the sediment routing equation applied to one stream tube (Source: Yang and Simŏes, 2002)
87
3.19 Flow chart of GSTARS3 program (Source: Yang and Simŏes, 2002)
88
3.20 Flow chart for GSTARS sediment transport model 89
3.21 a, b Representation of a river reaches by discrete cross sections in GSTARS3, (Source: Yang and Simŏes, 2002)
91
3.22 (a) Survey 1990 for Berang river cross-section, and (b): Representation of a cross section by a discrete set of points
92
3.23 Grain size Distribution Curve for Berang river 97
3.24 Grain size Distribution Curve for Kenyir river 98
3.25 GSTARS 3 and ArcView integration 104
3.26 Part of Attribute for Berang Cross section in ArcView 105
3.27 Part of Attribute for Kenyir Cross section in ArcView 106
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xvi
3.28 Auto Cad format for the study area 107
4.1 Calibrated discharges of Berang catchment 111
4.2 Calibrated discharges of Kenyir catchment 111
4.3 Validation result of measured and simulated discharges for Berang catchment
113
4.4 Validation result of measured and simulated discharges for Kenyir catchment
113
4.5 Scattering for HEC-HMS simulation in Berang catchment 115
4.6 Scattering for HEC-HMS simulation in Kenyir catchment 115
4.7 discharge for sixteen years for Berang catchment 117
4.8 discharge for sixteen years for Kenyir catchment 118
4.9 Rating curve for Berang River (2000) 120
4.10 Rating curve for Kenyir River (2000) 121
4.11 Top view shows the Manning’s roughness coefficient values and their distribution between the cross section along the reach
124
4.12 Calibration for Berang river at cross section (1) 127
4.13 Calibration for Berang river at cross section (6) 128
4.14 Calibration for Berang river at cross section (14) 129
4.15 Calibration for Kenyir river at cross section (1) 129
4.16 Calibration for Kenyir river at cross section (8) 129
4.17 Calibration for Kenyir river at cross section (12) 130
4.18 Comparison between measurement and computed thalweg profile for GSTARS3 simulation of Berang river 1998
131
4.19 Comparison between measurement and computed thalweg profile for GSTARS3 simulation of Kenyir river 1998
131
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xvii
4.20 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (1) for GSTARS3 simulation of Berang river1998
132
4.21 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (6) for GSTARS3 simulation of Berang river1998
132
4.22 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (14) for GSTARS3 simulation of Berangriver 1998
133
4.23 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (1) for GSTARS3 simulation of Kenyir river
133
4.24 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (8) for GSTARS3 simulation of Kenyir river1998
134
4.25 Comparison between measured and simulated elevation at cross section (12) for GSTARS3 simulation of Kenyir river 1998
134
4.26 Comparison between measurement and computed thalweg profile for GSTARS3 simulation of Berang river 2006
135
4.27 Comparison between measurement and computed thalweg profile for GSTARS3 simulation of Kenyir river 2006
136
4.28 Comparison between measured and computed elevation for GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 1, Berang river2006
136
4.29 Comparison between measured and computed elevation GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 6, Berang river 2006
137
4.30 Comparison between measured and computed elevation for GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 14, Berang river2006
137
4.31 Comparison between measured and computed elevation for a twelve-year GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 1, Kenyir river
138
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
xviii
4.32 Comparison between measured and computed elevation for a twelve-year GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 8, Kenyir river
138
4.33 Comparison between measured and computed elevation for a twelve-year GSTARS3 simulation at cross section 12, Kenyir river
139
4.34 Scattering for GSTARS3 thalweg profile simulation for Berang river, a- ST validation, b- LT validation
142
4.35 Scattering for GSTARS3 thalweg profile simulation for Kenyir river, a- ST validation, b- LT validation
143
4.36 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Berang river cross section (1) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
144
4.37 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Berang river cross section (6) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
145
4.38 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Berang river cross section (14) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
146
4.39 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Kenyir river cross section (1) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
147
4.40 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Kenyir river cross section (8) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
148
4.41 Scattering for GSTARS3 simulation for Kenyir river cross section (12) a- ST validation, b- LT validation
149
4.42 Sediment amount enter the reservoir from two rivers (Ton) 150
4.44 Elevation for Berang River at intersection point with Kenyir reservoir
155
4.45 Elevation for Kenyir River at intersection point with Kenyir reservoir
156
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Reservoir Sedimentation
Reservoir sedimentation is the process of sediment deposition into a lake formed
after a dam construction. Reservoir sedimentation involves entrainment, transport
and deposition. They originate from the catchments area, rivers system and settle
in reservoir. As a river enters the reservoir its cross section of inflow is enlarged.
Thus it causes a decrease in the water flow velocity. Subsequently the sediment
carrying capacity of water is reduced. The major part, or all, of the sediment
transport will deposit in the upstream part of the reservoir influenced by the
backwater curve.
The sediment deposition within the reservoir depletes live storage and develops
deltaic- shaped deposit in the upper reach of the reservoir. Such deposits may or
may not be transported towards the dam at a faster rate when reservoir storage is
small and flood flow enters the reservoir. As sediment accumulate in the reservoir,
the reservoir gradually losses its capacity to store water for the purpose of which it
is built.
There are more than 45,000 large dams (height more than 15 m) built all around
the world for several purpose such as power generation, flood control, domestic or
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
2
industrial water supply. The top five dam-building countries account for nearly
80% of the dam world wide. China alone has built around 22,000 dam or closer to
half the world’s total number. Other countries among to top five dams building
nation include United States with over 6390 dam, India with 4000, and Spain and
Japan with between 1000 and 1200 dams each. Figure 1.1 shows distribution of
dams world wide at the end of 20th
century. Today, 19% of world energy is from
hydropower. Nearly half the world dams were built exclusively or primarily for
irrigation (WCD, 2000). Every year 0.5-1 % of the world reservoir capacity is lost
due to sedimentation. Table 1.1 shows world wide number of dams and their
annual loss due to sedimentation.
Figure 1.1: Regional distribution of dams at the end of 20th
century (Source:
WCD, 2000)
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
3
Table 1.1: World wide dams and Annual loss due to sedimentation (Source:
Oguz. 2006)
Region Number of dams Annual loss due to
sedimentation
(% of residual storage)
Europe 5,497 0.17-0.2
North America 7,206 0.2
South and Central America 1,498 0.1
Africa 1,246 0.23-1.5
Middle East 895 1.5
Asia( excluding china) 7,230 0.3-1.0
China 22,000 2.3
Malaysia had a total of 56 dams, of which 32 were more than 15 m high (large
dams). The total dam capacity is estimated as 23.72 km3 (FAO, 2010).
In 2009, the Department of Irrigation and Drainage, at the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environmental, manage 16 dams having a total capacity of 450
million m3, located in various states. These dams fulfill the department’s role in
providing adequate irrigation water, flood mitigation and silt retention (FAO,
2010).
In 1995, the gross theoretical hydropower potential of peninsular Malaysia was
123,000 GWh/year, and that of Sabah and Sarawak together 107,000 GWh/ year.
In 1995, total hydropower generation was about 5,800 GWh or 30 percent of all
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
4
power production in Malaysia. Some of dams in Malaysia, their capacity, purpose
and construction date are shown in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2: Major Dams in Malaysia (Source: FAO, 2010)
Dams Capacity(million
m3)
Purpose Construction
date
Bakun 4,380 Electric power 1980
Batang Ai 750 Electric power 1985
Chenderoh 95 Electric power 1920
Kenyir 13,600 Electric power 1986
Temenggor 6,050 Electric power 1972
Pergau 6,060 Electric power 2000
Beris 122 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
2004
Bukit Merah 75 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
1985
Timah Tasoh 40 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
1992
Pontain 40 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
1985
Enak Endau 38 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
1985
Batu 37 Irrigation and
flood mitigation
1985
Klang Gate 25 Water supply 1958
Sg. Kinta 29.9 Water supply 2006
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
5
Some of reservoirs in Malaysia have been subjected to increasing losses of their
storage. According to Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID), it is estimated
that Bukit Merah reservoir which is constructed for the purpose of irrigation in
Perak, loss 0.4 % of its volume every year due o sedimentation and the capacity of
reservoir only remain about 60-65 % ( IEA, 2006). Tenaga National Berhad (TNB)
reported that Ringlet reservoir in Cameron Highlands which is man made lake
created upstream of the concrete dam (Sultan Abu Bakar dam) on Bertam River
has lost nearly 53% of its gross storage due to sedimentation since its operation in
1963, which is presently estimated as reaching a volume of about 3.5-4.0 million
m3. The currently estimated sediment deposition rate in the Ringlet reservoir is in
the range between 350,000 to 400,000 m3 per year (IEA, 2006).
1.2 Problem Statement
All rivers carries sediments. A river can be considered a body of flowing sediment
as much as flowing water. When the flowing water is stilled behind a dam, the
carrying sediment sinks to the bottom of reservoir. As the sediments accumulate in
a reservoir, it gradually loses its capacity to store water for the purpose for which it
was built. Sediments accumulation in a reservoir also causes problems to dam
operators due to the abrasion of turbine and other dam components.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
6
Sediment affects water quality and suitability for human consumption or use in
various enterprises. Numerous industries cannot tolerate even the smallest amount
of sediment in the water that is necessary for certain manufacturing processes and
public pays a large amount price for the removal of sediment from the water it
consumes every day. Sediment not only considers as a major water pollutant, but
also serves as a carrier and storage agent of other forms of pollution. Sediment also
degrades water quality for aquatic life.
In Malaysia and due to extensive development and deforestation, the sediment
load in rivers is high, this cause extensive sedimentation of dam reservoirs. And
reduction of reservoir design age. Continuous dredging of reservoir is costly and
needs surveying for reservoir sections. Modeling of the sediment deposition area
in the reservoir will help in reducing the cost of reservoir dredging.
This study will help to reduce the cost of dredging by predicting the sediment
deposition using appropriate models. Kenyir reservoir has been selected to
demonstrate the proposed methodology.
Kenyir dam is one of the most important hydroelectric power generation and flood
mitigation dams in Malaysia. One operational problem is the increase of sediment
accumulation in front of the intake structure and murky water has been discharged
from the turbine during the rainy seasons. This area should be monitored and extra
survey works should be done, therefore using a computer program to predict the
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
7
sediment deposition to Kenyir reservoir as alternative solution than the survey
works will save a lot of time and costs. The study area is located in a tropical
region and it has a limited hydrological data, thus the chosen program should have
an ability to run with a small amount of data for calibration and testing.
1.3 Objectives
The main objective of the present study is the prediction and visualization of the
sediment inflow into Kenyir reservoir and its deposition. This will be achieved
through the following specific objectives:
1- To predict the rainfall-runoff for Kenyir and Berang rivers using HEC-HMS to
obtain a complete set of discharge data that is necessary to run the GSTARS3.
2- To predict the quantity and location of sediment deposition by using GSTARS3
Sediment Transport Program.
3- To produce visualization maps of the sediment deposition by integrating the
output from GSTARS3 program with ArcView GIS.
1.4 Scope and Limitation
Generally the scope of this study includes the following:
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
8
1- Selection of study area, data collection and field survey
Kenyir reservoir, Terengganu, Malaysia is selected as a case study. The daily
data from four rainfall gage stations within the study area for the period from
1st September 1990 to 31
st December 1990 and daily data from two streamflow
gage stations within the study area for the same period of time were collected
from Department of Irrigation and Drainage, Malaysia (DID) and Tenaga
National Berhad research center (TNB) are used to calibrate and validate the
hydrological program (HEC-HMS), in addition to the topographic and
bathymetric data (contour line, landuse, soil map and vegetation cover). A
field survey was done to collect and analyze the particle size distribution of
different soil types of the catchment area. All these data are used together to
run the GSTARS3 sediment transport program.
2- Sedimentation Modeling (GSTARS3)
The sediment transport program GSTARS3 is selected to predict sedimentation
deposition. The input data are the hydrological data (discharge and rating
curve), channel reach geometry, and sediment data (sediment inflow, sediment
rating curve and particle size distribution). GSTARS3 was selected in this
study because it has never been applied to simulate the sediment movement in
a reservoir located in a tropical region, in addition to its ability to simulate the
sediment deposition and sediment movement with a minimum amount of field
data required for calibration and testing. Two limitations were faced in
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
9
applying GSTARS3, first limitation is the lack of available cross section along
the reach. This is needed in GSTARS3 process for defining the channel reach
geometry. This was overcome by using interpolation between available cross
sections. Second limitation is the shortage in the available discharge data; this
was overcome by applying the HEC-HMS program to fill all the missing data
in historical records. Sediment load, sediment rating curve and particle size
graduation were obtained from field data and experimental work respectively.
3- Hydrological modeling (HEC-HMS)
The rainfall data for the Kenyir and Berang rivers since the operation of Kenyir
dam is available, but unfortunately, there is inadequate data for streamflow. To
overcome this limitation the hydrological program HEC-HMS is used to
determine the surface runoff for the two rivers (Kenyir and Berang) and fill the
missing data in historical record for the period from 1991 until 2006. The
computed runoff data are used as input to the sedimentation program
(GSTARS3).
4- GIS database
Organize the sediment output from GSTARS3 in a raster-based database that
includes the topographic information, channel geometry as well as bathymetric
information to visualize the sediment deposition and to identify the amount and
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
10
location of sediment accumulation in the Kenyir reservoir. GSTARS3
integrated with ArcView were used for this purpose.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
166
REFERENCES
Adam, K. (1993). Application of GIS Methods in Soil Erosion Modeling.
Computer Environmental and Urban System. 17: 233-238.
Ali Liaghat, Seyed, A., Saeem, S. & Amirpouya, S. (2001). Prediction of the
Weekly Mean Discharge into Reservoir Doroudzan Dam Using HEC HMS
Model and its Comparison with Observed Data (1992-2001). International
Conference on Environmental and Industrial Innovation. IPCBEE.
LACSIT Press. Singapore.
Andres, G., Angle, S., Jose, A., & Cesar, A. (2008). Surface Water Resources
Assessment in Scarcely Gauged Basin in the North of Spain. Journal of
Hydrology. 356: 312-326.
Athanasios N., Mohamed E., George K., Shwet P., & John E. (2008).Sediment
Transport Modeling Review;Current and Future Developments, Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 134(1): 1-14.
Bedient, P.H. & Huber, W.C. (1992). Hydrology and Floodplain Analysis. New
York: Addison-Wesley.
Bhowmik, N.G., Christina, T., Paminder, P., & Misganaw, D.(2004). HEC-6
Modeling of the Main Stem of the Kankakee River in Illinois from the
Stateline Bridge to the Kankakee Dam, Prepared for the Illinois
Department of Natural Resources, Office of Resource Conservation..
Blumberg, A F. & Mellor, G.L.(1987) is cited by Athanasios N., Mohamed E.,
George K., Shwet P., and John E. (2008).Sediment Transport Modeling
Review;Current and Future Developments, Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 134(1): 1-14.
Bo Xiao, Oing, H.W., Jun, F.,Feng, P.H., & Quan, H.D.(2008). Application of
SCS CN Model to Runoff Estimation in a small watershed with high
spatial heterogeneity. Agriculture Water Management. 98(6): 1020-1026.
Chang, H.H.(1984). Generalized Computer Program, Fluvial-12, Mathematical
Model for Erodible Channels,
http: // redac.eng.usm.my/EAD/EAD513/fl12_users_manual.pdf.
Chen Y., Xu Y. & Yin Y., (2009). Impact of Land Change Scenarios on Storm-
Runoff Generation in Xitiaoxi Basin, China. Quaternary International,
186(1): 32-42.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
167
Chen,C.N., Tsai, C.H. & Tsai, T.C.(2005). Simulation of Sediment Yield from
Watershed Physiographic Soil Erosion Deposition Model. Journal of
Hydrology. 327(3-4): 293-303.
Childs, E. C. & Bybordi, M.(1969). The Vertical Movement Water in Stratified
Porous Material: 1. Infiltration. Water Resource Research. 5(2): 446–459.
Chow, V.T. (1959). Open channel flow. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Chris, M. & Graeme, A. (2006). Land-Use Forecasting and Hydrologic Model
Integration for Improved Land-use Decision Support. Journal of
Environmental Management. 84: 494-512.
Curtis, J.A., Flint, L.E., Alpers, C.N. & Yarnell, S.M. (2004). Conceptual Model
of Sediment Processes in the Upper Yuba River Watershed, Sierra
Nevada,CA. Geomorphology. 68: 149-166.
Danish Hydraulic Institute (1993). Prediction of the spreading of dredged spoils in
the Øresund Link. Denmark & Sweden.
Fan, J. & G.L. Morris, G.L. (1992). Reservoir Sedimentation II: Reservoir
desiltation and long-term storage capacity. Journal of Hydraulic
Engineering, 118(3): 370-384.
Fang, H. & Wang, G.(2000). Three Dimensional Mathematical Model Of
Suspended Sediment Transport. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. 126(8):
578-592.
FAO, (2010). International System on Water and Agriculture.
http//
www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries_regions/malaysia/print1.stm
Frenette, M.& Julien, P.Y.(1996).Physical Processes Governing Reservoir
Sedimentation Proceeding of the International Conference on Reservoir
Sedimentation. Colorado.
Fu, G., Chen, S., McCool, D. (2004). Modeling the Impacts of no till practice on
soil erosion and sediment yield with RUSLE, SEDD, and Arc View GIS.
Soil and Tillage Research. 85: 38-49.
Gesesse, A. & Yonas, M. (2008). Prediction of Sediment Inflow to legedadi
Reservoir Using SWAT Watershed and CCHE1D Sediment Transport
Models. Nile Basin Water Engineering Scientific Magazine,1: 65-74.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
168
Gholami V., Joker E., Azodi M., Zabardast H.A., and M. Bashrigonbad
(2009).The Influence of Anthropogenic Activities on Identifying Runoff
Generation and Flood Hazard in Kasillian Watershed. Journal of Applied
Science, 9(20): 3723-3730.
Guillermo, A.B., & Consuelo, C.R. (2006). Assessment of Erosion Hotspot in a
watershed: integrating the WEPP Model and GIS in A Case Study in the
Peruvian Andes. Enviromental Modeling and Software. 22: 1175-1183.
Goodchild, M.F., Park O.P., & Steyaert L.T. (1993). Environmental Modeling
with GIS. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hamrick, J.M. (1992). EFDC1D: A One Dimensional Hydrodynamic and
Sediment Transport Model for River and Stream Networks, Model
Theory, and Users Guide.
HEC, 2000, Hydrologic Engineering Center. Hydrologic modeling system HEC-
HMS: Technical references manual, US Army Crops of Engineers,
hydrologic Engineering Center, 2000.
http// www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-hms/download.html
Howard, D. (2005). Rainfall Runoff Changes Due to Urbanization: A comparison
of Different Spatial Resolutions for Lumped Surface Water Hydrology
Models Using HEC HMS. Master Thesis. University of North Texas
Huang, B. and Jiang, B. (2002). AVTOP: A Full Integration of TOPMODEL into
GIS. Environmental Modeling and Software. 17(3): 261-265.
Julien, Y. (1999). Erosion and Sedimentation. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kale,R.Y.& Sahoo, B.(2011). Green-Ampt Infiltration Models for Varied Field
Conditions: A Revisit. Water Resources Management. 25(14): 3505-3536.
Kalita, D.N., (2009). A Study of Basin Response Using HEC-HMS and Sub-zone
Reports of Cwc
http// www.scribd.com/doc/19489415/A-Study-of-Basin-Response-using-
HECHMS
Knebl M.R., Yang Z.L., Hutchison K. & Maidment D.R. (2004). Regional
Scale Flood Modeling Using NEXRAD Rainfall, GIS, and HEC-
HMS/RAS. Journal of Environmental Management 75 (20): 325–336.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
169
Lee, H.Y., Hsieh, H.M., Yang, J.C., & Yang, C.T. (1997). Quasi-Two
Dimensional Simulation of Scour and Deposition in Alluvial Channel.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering , 123(7): 600-609.
Linsley, R.K., Kohler, M.A., & Paulhus, J.L.H. (1982). Hydrology for engineers.
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Lim, K. J., Sagong, M., Engel, B.A., Tang, Z., Cai, J. & Kim, K.S. (2005). GIS
Based Sediment Assessment Tool. Cantina. 64:61-80.
Loi, N.K. (2010). Assessing the Impact of Land-Use Cover Changes and Practice
on Water Discharge and Sediment Using SWAT: Case Study in DongNai
Watershed, Vietnam. International Symposium on Geoinformation for
Spatial infrastructure Development.
Luettich, R.A. & Westerink, J.J.(2004). Formulation and Numerical
Implementation of the 2D/3D ADCIRC Finite Element Model Version
44.XX,
http// www.adcirc.org/adcirc_theory_2004_12_08.pdf
www.nd.edu/~adcirc/manual.htm
Maidment, D.R. (2002). Arc Hydro: GIS for Water Resources. New York: ESRI.
Mashriqui, H.S. (2003). Hydrodynamic and Sediment Transport Modeling of
Deltaic Sediment Processes. PhD Thesis. Louisiana State University.
Martin, J.J. & McCutcheon, S.C. (1999). Hydrodynamic and Transport for Water
Quality Modeling. Lewis Publication. Boca Raton, Florida.
Mahmood, K. (1987). Reservoir Sedimentation, Extent, Mitigation. Technical
Paper.Washington:USA:International Bank of Reconstruction and
Development.
Millward, A.A. & Mersey,J.E. (1999). Adapting the RUSLE to Model Soil
Erosion potential in a Mountainous Tropical Watershed. Catena. 38: 109-
129.
Morris, G.M. & Fan, J. (1999). Reservoir Sedimentation handbook, design and
Management of Dams, Reservoir, and Watershed for Sustainable Use, New
York: Mc Graw Hill.
Molinas, J. & Yang, J.C.1(986). Computer Program User Manual for GSTAR,
generalized stream tube model for alluvial river simulation, U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
170
Mohamad Taghi D., Robabeh K., Ali Talibi, Mahdi Vafakhah and Jamal D.(2011).
Determination of the Ability of HEC-HMS Model Components in Rainfall
Runoff Simulation. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences. 5(10):
790-799.
Mohamad Ali, Khan, S.J., Aslam, I.,& Khan,Z. (2011). Simulation of the impacts
of land-use change on surface runoff of Lai Nullah Basin in Islamabad,
Pakistan. Landscape and Urban Planning. 102 (30): 271-279.
Mohd Latif, R. & Sobri, H. (2007). Hydrologic Modeling Using HEC HMS for
Sungai Padang Terap, Jitra Kedah. Mater Thesis. University Technology
Malaysia.
Molnar, D.K. & Julien, P.Y. (1997). Estimation of Upland erosion Using GIS.
Computer and Geosciences. 24(2): 183-192.
Momcilo, M., James, R., Lin, Y., & Mohamad, I. (2007). Changing Estimate of
Design Precipitation in Northeastern Illinois: Comparison between
Different Sources and Sensitivity Analysis. Journal of Hydrology. 347:
211-222.
Mood, A., Graybill, F. & Boes, D. (1974). Introduction to the Theory of Statistic.
Third Addition, McGraw Hill.
Munthali, K., Irvine, B.J., & Murayama, Y. (2011). Reservoir Sedimentation and
Flood Control: Using a Geographic Information System to Estimate
Sediment Yield of the Songwe River Watershed in Malawi.
Sustainability.(3)254-269
Neteler, M. & Mistasova, H. (2002). Open Source GIS: A GRASS GIS Approach.
Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
Noredin, R. & Ghobad, R. (2011).Comparison Methods Green & Ampt and Initial
and Constant Rate Loss for Estimate Precipitation Loss to Simulation
Runoff. International Journal of Agricultural Research and Review. 1 (1):
33-37.
O′ Connor, B.A. & Nicholson, J. (1988). A Three Dimensional Modeling of
Suspended Particular Sediment Transport. Coastal Engineering. 12(2):109-
189.
Oguz, k.C. (2006). Management of Reservoir Sedimentation: Case Study from
Turkey. Master Thesis. Middle East Technical University.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
171
Olsen, N.R.(1994), is cited by Athanasios N., Mohamed E., George K., Shwet P.,
& John E. (2008).Sediment Transport Modeling Review;Current and
Future Developments, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 134(1): 1-14.
Ortt, R.A., Van Ryswick, S. & Well, D. (2008). Bathymetry and Sediment
Accomulation of Triadelphia and Rocky Gorge Reservoir. Coastal and
estuarine Geology Technical Report.
Osten, A.T.(1979). Sediment Transport in Stream: Sampling, Analysis and
Computaion. Cited by Kusmi, J.M.(2008). Analysis of Sedimentation
Rates in the Densu River Channel. West African Journal of Applied
Ecology. 14 : 1-14.
Patrick, M. C. (1996). Sedimentation Problem with Dams,
http:// www.ing.org/basic/ard/index
Rogerio, C. (2001). Three Dimensional Reservoir sedimentation Model. Doctorial
Research, University of Newcastle, UK.
Rosenthal, W.D., Srinivasan, R. & Arnold, J.G. (1995). Alternative River
Management Using A Linked GIS-Hydrology Model. Transaction of
ASAE. American Society of Agricultural Engineering. 38(3): 783-790.
Salas, J.D.& Shin, H.S. (1999). Uncertainty Analysis of Reservoir
Sedimentation.Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. 125(4): 339-350.
Simon & Sentük (1992). Sediment Transport Technology, Water and Sediment
Dynamic. USA: Water Resources Publication.
Sina A., Rozi bin Abdullah and Ismail A., (2011) .Selecting the Best Value in
Calibration Process for Validation of Hydrological Modeling: A case Study
in Kayu Ara River Basin, Malaysia. Research Journal of Environmental
Sciences, 5(4): 354-365.
Sloff, C.J, Modeling reservoir Sedimentation for Sediment Management Studies,
Proc. Conf., Hydropower into Next Century, Portoroz, Solvinea, Sept. 15-
17, 1997.
Spasojevic, M. & Holly, F.M. (1990), is cited by Hong, Y. L. & Hui, M.H.(2003).
Numerical Simulations of Scour and Deposition in a Channel Network.
International Journal of Sediment Research, 18(1): 32-49.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
172
Sui, D.Z. & Maggio, R.C. (1999). Integrating GIS with Hydrological Modeling:
Practices, Problems, and Prospects. Computer, Environment and Urban
Systems. 23(1999) 33-5.
Thomas, W. A., & Prashum, A. I. (1977), is cited by Hong, Y. L. and Hui, M.
H.(2003). Numerical Simulations of Scour and Deposition in a Channel
Network. International Journal of Sediment Research, 18(1): 32-49.
Toniolo, H. & Parker, G. 1D Numerical Modeling of Reservoir Sedimentation,
Proceedings, IAHR Symposium on River, Coastal and Estuarine
Morphodynamics, Barcelona, Spain, 2003, 457-468.
Thomas, W.A.,& McAnally, W.H.(1985), is cited by Morris G.M. & Fan J.(1999),
Reservoir Sedimentation Handbook, Design and Management of Dams,
Reservoir, and Watersheds for Sustainable Use, New York: McGraw Hill.
TNB research: Ulu Terengganu Hydroelectric Project. Final report, Vol: 3 1997.
USACE, (2000). HEC Geo-HMS User Manual,
http:// www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-geohms/documentations.
USACE, (2002). HEC Geo-RAS User Manual,
http:// www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-georas/documents.
US Army Corps of Engineering (1993), HEC-6, Scour and Deposition in Rivers
and Reservoirs, Hydrology Center Engineering, User's Manual.
USACE, (2000). HEC-HMS hydrologic modeling system user’s manual.
Hydrologic Engineering Center .CA: Davis.
Van Rigin, L.C.(1986). Mathematical modeling of Suspended Sediment in
Nonuniform Flows. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. 112(6): 433-455.
Van Rigin, L.C., Van Ro Soum, H. & Termes, P.P. (1990). Field Varification of
2D and 3D Suspended Sediment Model. Journal of Hydrology ASCE.
116(10): 1270-1288.
Warren, V. & Gary, L. L. (2003). Introduction to Hydrology. Fifth Edition. Harper
Collins College Publishers.
WCD, (2000). The Report of the World Commission on Dams: Earthscan
Publication.
Wu, W., Rodi, W., & Wenka, T. (2000). 3D Numerical Modeling of Flow and
Sediment Transport in Open Channels. Journal of Hydraulic.
Engineering.126(1): 4–15.
© COPYRIG
HT UPM
173
Yang, C.R. & Jiang, C.T. (2000). Development of A GIS-Based Flood Information
System for Floodplain Modeling and Damage Calculation. Journal of the
American Water Resources Association. 36 (3): 567-677.
Yang, C.T., Trevino, M.A., & Simões, (2000). F.J.M., User Manual for GSTARS
2.1, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center, Denver,
Colorado.
Yang, C. T, & Simões F. J.M., (2002), Generalized Sediment Transport Models
for Alluvial Rivers and Reservoirs, US-China Workshop on Advanced
Computational Modeling in Hydroscience & Engineering, September 19-
21, USA: Oxford, Mississippi.
Yener, M., Sorman, A., Sensong, A. & Gezgin, T. (2006). Modeling Studies with
HEC HMS and Runoff Scenario in Yuvacik Basin, Turkey. International
Congress on River Basin Management.
Yosup, Z., Chan, C.H., & Katimon, A. (2007). Runoff Characteristic and
Application of HEC HMS Modeling Storm Flow Hydrograph on Oil palm
Catchment. Water Science & Technology. 56(8): 41-48.
Zhi, H.S.(2008). Research on the SCS-CN Initial Abstraction Ratio Using Rainfall
Runoff Event Analysis in the Three Gorges Area China. Catena.77 (1): 1-
7.