Friday, April 29, 2011

EXPERTS MISLEAD ON BACKWATER IMPACTS OF ALAMATTI DAM

EXPERTS MISLEAD ON BACKWATER IMPACTS OF ALAMATTI DAM
Prof.T.Shivaji Rao, Director, Center for Environmental Studies, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam

WHY CWC IS NOT GIVING  DATA ON ALAMATTI BACK WATER CURVE AND DAMBRERAK ANALYSIS?
 see website: http://www.asianage.com/india/cwc-cic-draw-swords-over-info-979
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.com/2011/02/alamatti-back-water-curve-at_4653.html
It is shocking for people of Kolhapur, Sangli and Karad of Maharashtra and  Belgaum of Karnataka to know that hundreds of their  villages including major cities like Sangli and Kolhapur will be forcibly drowned frequently during rainy seasons and cyclonic periods due to heavy downpours that are bound to cause extreme floods such extreme floods have to be calculated on scientific lines and by using internationally accepted envelop cures as published by the top most experts like Lempererie of France and L.Berga of Spain who worked as Chairman, Technical Committees on Floods and Dams  of the International Commission on large Dams (ICOLD).  Unfortunately the Engineering experts of the CWC and the State Governments of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh chose to ignore the state-of-art technology on estimating the extreme floods expected in the catchment areas of Krishna river and its tributaries and they did not even consider the Probable Maximum Precipitation estimates made by International Hydrology expert like PR Rakhecha and others.  Consequently these Indian experts are deliberately underestimating the extreme floods expected in Krishna river basin and Godavari river basin inspite of the fact that the October 2009 floods in Krishna river proved that the spillway design floods estimated upto the previous decade do not hold good anymore after 2010 when the state-of-art technology must be followed to estimate the Probable Maximum Floods for calculation of backwater cures and to avoid dam collapses and to plan for safety of lakhs of people, their properties and agricultural wealth.  In the present case of Alamatti dam a comparative statement of the backwater calculations made by the CWC and the independent experts is presented in the following pages to create awareness among the people and particularly the farmers, the non-Governmental organizations, the intellectuals and the patriots like Anna Hazare who have to fight against the social evils being perpetrated by some of the unethical and immoral scientific and engineering experts who occupy possession of power and use the garb of development to destroy the life and culture of the farmers and farm workers who form the backbone of the social democratic welfare state.  Unless the people exert pressure over the elected representatives in panchayats, state legislatures and the parliament.  The present and future generations of Indian will stand to lose their right to life and the right to livelihood and right to natural resources as envisaged by the constitution of India.see the impact of previous floods situation on flooding of Sangli and kolhapur during August floods of 2005 when serious loss of life and properties occured as can be seen from web sites;
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2217/stories/20050826006413100.htm

CWC violates NarmadaTribunal  Award[NWDT] ON:BACK WATER CALCULATIONS from MWL/MAX.Flood Levels
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/Official%20report.pdf  [see Expert;s Report on violations on calculations done for Sardar Sarovar project .SUPREME COURT must  apply Sec.45 of the EVIDENCE ACT in giving  undue weightage to CWC as an Expert authority ]
Sub-Clause II - Lands Which are to be Compulsorily Acquired.  
II(1) : Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra shall acquire for Sardar Sarovar Project under the provisions of  the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, all lands of private ownership situated below the FRL + 138.68 m (455') of  Sardar Sarovar and all interests therein not belonging to the respective States. If on the basis aforesaid, 75 per cent or more land of a contiguous holding of any person is required to be compulsorily acquired, such person shall have the option to compel compulsory acquisition of the entire contiguous holding.  
II(2) : Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra shall also acquire for Sardar Sarovar Project under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, all buildings with their appurtenant land situated between  FRL + 138.68 m (455') and MWL + 141.21 m (460') as also those affected by the backwater effect resulting from MWL + 141.21 m (460').  
II(3) : The backwater level at the highest flood level in Sardar Sarovar shall be worked out by the Central  Water Commission in consultation with Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat.
 Central Water Commission[CWC],  F.E. & S.A Directorate
Backwater study for Alamatti and Hippargi Reservoirs
1.      INTRODUCTION:  Director, Project Appraisal (S), CWC vide U.O. No.21/10/99-PA(S)/585 dated 29th May 2003 requested for an independent study by FE&SA Dte.. CWC regarding the backwater effects and submergence in Maharashtra territory due to  construction of Alamatti and Hippargi Reservoirs in Karnataka, in pursuance of the decision taken in the meeting held on 23-2-99 under the chairmanship of Chairman, CWC.  The original study regarding backwater effects and submergence in Maharashtra territory due to construction of Alamatti and Hippargi Reservoirs in Karnataka was carried out by Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore which was submitted by the Karnataka Government.  The then Direcotr (FE &SA) vide lr.No.CWC/DBAG/FE&SA/2001/602 dt.11th June 2003 observed that the methodology adopted for the back water study and the value of the rugosity co-efficient taken for the study were found to be in order.  However, in cae an independent confirmation of the result is required then necessary data/information may be supplied to FE&SA directorate. Subsequently, necessary data comprising of cross sections of Krishna river upstream of Almatti dam and Hippargi Barrage and rating curve of Almatti spillway submitted by Government of Maharashtra  and Karnataka were forwarded to this Directorate vide U.O.No.21/10/2004-PA(S)/1246 dated 22nd December, 2004.
Accordingly, a study was carried out in FE&SA Directorate using one-dimensional mathematical model MIKE 11.
2.      SCENARIOS STUDIED: Following scenarios were considered for study of backwater effects and submergence in Maharashtra territority due to construction of Almatti and Hippargi Reservervoirs in Karnataka;
1.      PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and 24609 cumecs (proportionate discharge proportional to square root of catchment area as per suggestion of the February, 1999 meeting at CWC as mentioned in back water study report of IISC, Bangalore) at Hippargi taking Almatti FRL at 524.25m, considering both Almatti and Hippargi reservoirs.
2.      PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and 24609 cumec at Hippargi taking Almatti FRL at 524.25m, considering Almatti reservoir only, as Hippargi is yet to be constructed.
3.      PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and PMF discharge of 25485 cumec at Hippargi taking Almatti FRL at 519.60m, considering both Almatti and Hioppargi reservoirs.
4.      PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and PMF discharge 25485 cumec at Hippargi taking Almatti FRL at 519.60m, considering Almatti reservoir only, as Hippargi is yet to be constructed.
5.      This yars discharge of 10100 cumec at Almatti and 9000 cumec u/s of Hippargi taking Almatti FRL  at 519.60m, considering Almatti reservoir only.
3.      STUDY RESULTS: The results of hydrohynaci modeling of Krishna river upstream of Almatti dam under various scenario, enumerated above, are tabulated in Tables 1 to 5 respectively.  The corresponding plots of water surface profiles are given in plate 1 to 5 .  From the above tables and plates it can be seen.
i)        The backwater profile of Almatti dam for FRL at 524.25m PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and 24609 cumec at Hippargi, considering both Almatti and Hippargi reservoirs merges with water profile in the natural condition of Krishna river, just downstream of the Hippargi barrage (Table 1 and Plate 1).  Hence the backwater effect of Almatti reservoir is upto the downstream of Hippargi barrage is upto about 221 km upstream of Almatti dam.
ii)      The backwater profile of Almatti dam for FRL at 524.25m, PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and 24609 cumec at Hippargi, considering Almatti reservoir only merges with water profile in the natural condition of Krishna river at about 145 km upstream of Almatti dam (Table 2 and Plate 2)
iii)    The backwater profile of Almatti dam for FRL at 519.60 PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and PMF discharge of 25485 cumec at Hippargi considering both Almatti and Hippargi reservoir, merges with water profile in natural condition of Krishna river  just downstream of the Hippargi barrage (Table 3 and Plate3).  Hence the backwater effect of Almatti reservoir is upto the downstream of Hipprgi barrge only.  The backwater effect of Hippargi barrage is upto about 221km upstream of Almatti dam.
iv)    The backwater profile of Almatti dam for FRL at 519.60 , PMF discharge of 31000 cumec at Almatti and PMF discharge of 25485 cumec at Hippargi, considering Almatti reservoir only merges with water profile in the natural condition of Krishna river at about 126km upstream of Almati dam (Table 4 and Plate 4)
v)      The backwater profile of Almatti dam for FRL at 519.60m for this years flood of 10100 cumec considering Almatti reservoir only merges with water profile in the natural condition of Krishna river at about 175km upstream of Almatti dam (Table 5 and Plate 5).
4.      COMPARISION WITH IISC STUDY: The study carried out for case 1 and above has been compared with IISC, Bangalore study.  The trend of profile has been found to be matching.  However, there is a difference of 1-2m in water level at different cross sections of Krishna river u/s of Almatti dam.  This is due to difference in method of backwater calculation.  The IISC Bangalore has used the standard step method, which is an approximate method to calculate the profile.  In the above method, first the trial value of water level at the upstream location is assumed based on the known water level at the downstream location.  The velocity is then calculated dividing the discharge with the cross section area corresponding to assumed water surface.  This gives a lower velocity in comparison to the velocity calculated by MIKE 11 model using finite difference solution of St.Venants’s equations of conservation of mass and momentum.  Hydrodynamic modeling used in MIKE11 models the complete river stretch together to provide physically balanced water surface profile, which is more accurate than the approximate standard step method.

According to the international Irrigation expert Dr.Lempererie, Chairman of ICOLD committee for France, the extreme flood is calculated by the formula S>3000Km2, Q=10,000(S/300)0.4 as published in his paper under the website:
The extreme Probable Maximum Flood for Alamatti dam with a catchment area of 35,200 sq.km works out to 67,300 cumecs.  However we opted to use 50,000 cumecs as PMF  value for calculating the backwater curve for Alamatti Dam by using Mannings coefficient of 0.05


According to table-6 in the website the PMF in cumecs could be 2 to 3 times the catchment area measured in sq.km as in the case of Gandhi Sagar catchment area on Chambal river in Madhya Pradesh.  Hence the peak flood assumed by the CWC for Alamati dam is an underestimate and the backwater calculations are also under estimated and hence the engineers of the Karnataka and Maharashtra state are completely mislead on the issue of submersion of Sangli and Kolhapur areas due to backwater impacts of Alamatti dam.

Roughness Coefficients (Manning’s “n”) for Overland Flow
Surface Description
n
Dense Growth
0.4 - 0.5
Pasture
0.3 - 0.4
Lawns
0.2 - 0.3
Bluegrass Sod
0.2 - 0.5
Short Grass Prairie
0.1 - 0.2
Sparse Vegetation
0.05 - 0.1
Bare Clay-Loam Soil (eroded)
0.01 - 0.0
Concrete/Asphalt - very shallow depths
(less than ¼ inch)
- small depths  (1/4 inch to several inches)

0.10 - 0.1
0.05 - 0.1
Roughness Coefficients (Manning’s “n”) for Channel and Pipe Flow                 
Reach  Description
n
Natural stream, clean, straight, no rifts or pools
0.03
Natural stream, clean, winding, some pools or shoals
0.04
Natural stream, winding, pools, shoals, stoney with some weeds
0.05
Natural stream, sluggish deep pools and weeds
0.07
Natural stream or swale, very weedy or with timber underbrush
0.10
Concrete pipe, culvert or channel
0.013
Corrugated metal pipe
0.012 – 0.024*
Spiral rib metal pipe
0.012
Corrugated polyethylene pipe
0.020
Smooth-lined corrugated polyethylene pipe
0.012
* Based on pipe diameter and manufacturer’s design specifications
 Table-1: Back water calculations for Almatti FRL at 524.25m with  Almatti and Hippargi
(Discharge considered 31000 cumec at Almatti, 24609 cumec at Hippargi)
Cross-Sec No. As per data Supplied
Ch.U/S of Almatti dam (km) as per input data
Cn (km) as per MIKE  11 Set up
Manning’s “n” considered
Discharge considered (cumecs)
Bed  level (m)
Water level (m) without Almatti dam and Hippargi
Water level (m) with Almatti dam and Hippargi
14-14
250.64
0
0.0264
18785
524.33
543.97
543.97
13-13
246.64
4
0.0252
18808
523.92
543.31
543.31
12-12
229.84
20.8
0.0252
--
--
540.56
540.56
11-11
221.04
27.6
0.0268
21065
519.35
539.29
539.30
10-10
216.64
34.0
0.0242
21097
518.31
538.27
538.28
9-9
192.40
48.24
0.0242
22594
517.46
537.23
537.26
8-8
180.50
58.24
0.0242
22782
514.76
536.60
536.64
7-7
174.80
75.84
0.0242
23006
516.42
535.01
535.13
6-6
170.80
80.64
0.0259
23100
512.85
534.57
534.74
5-5
159.20
91.44
0.0257
23166
512.45
532.96
533.35
4-4
154.24
96.40
0.0245
23174
512.33
532.49
533.00
3-3
145.60
105.04
0.0245
24282
511.54
531.62
532.50
2-2
139.20
111.44
0.0245
24443
513.19
530.89
532.20
*A

126.00



529.24
531.75
*B
124.00
126.64
0.0245
24609
511.66
529.21
529.33
10B-10B
115.50
135.14
0.0245
24676
508.99
528.28
528.51
10A-10A
108.00
142.64
0.0245
24745
510.13
527.29
527.75
9A-9A
97.25
153.39
0.0245
25106
508.10
526.62
527.30
8A-8A
91.00
159.02
0.0245
25310
509.02
526.30
527.11
7B-7B
77.50
173.14
0.0245
25361
506.04
524.57
526.22
7A-7A
67.75
182.89
0.0245
25583
506.97
523.09
525.64
6A-6A
58.00
192.64
0.0241
25741
498.76
521.37
525.15
5A-5A
45.25
205.39
0.0244
25866
505.28
519.13
524.65
4A-4A
34.30
222.14
0.0239
25962
501.01
514.02
524.42
3A-3A
21.25
229.39
0.0257
26183
502.85
510.28
524.31
2A-2A
10.00
240.64
0.0283
30794
496.04
507.04
524.28
1-1
6.00
244.64
0.0267
30822
495.34
505.60
524.28
Almatti
0
250.64
0.0267
31000
489.12
502.95
524.25
*A -  C/S inserted for specifying Hipp.Barr
*B -  1-1 /11A-11A (Hippargi Barrage)
 Table-2: Back water calculations for Almatti FRL at 524.25m with  Almatti
(Discharge considered 31000 cumec at Almatti, 24609 cumec at Hippargi)

Cross-Sec No. As per data Supplied
Ch.U/S of Almatti dam (km) as per input data
Cn (km) as per MIKE  11 Set up
Manning’s “n” considered
Discharge considered (cumecs)
Bed  level (m)
Water level (m) without Almatti dam and Hippargi
Water level (m) with Almatti dam and Hippargi
14-14
250.64
0
0.0264
18785
524.33
543.97
543.97
13-13
246.64
4
0.0252
18808
523.92
543.31
543.31
12-12
229.84
20.8
0.0252
--
--
540.56
540.56
11-11
221.04
27.6
0.0268
21065
519.35
539.29
539.29
10-10
216.64
34.0
0.0242
21097
518.31
538.27
538.27
9-9
192.40
48.24
0.0242
22594
517.46
537.23
537.23
8-8
180.50
58.24
0.0242
22782
514.76
536.60
536.60
7-7
174.80
75.84
0.0242
23006
516.42
535.01
535.01
6-6
170.80
80.64
0.0259
23100
512.85
534.57
534.57
5-5
159.20
91.44
0.0257
23166
512.45
532.96
533.96
4-4
154.24
96.40
0.0245
23174
512.33
532.49
532.49
3-3
145.60
105.04
0.0245
24282
511.54
531.62
531.63
2-2
139.20
111.44
0.0245
24443
513.19
530.89
530.92
C/S inserted

126.00



529.24
529.36
1-1/11A-11A
124.00
126.64
0.0245
24609
511.66
529.21
529.33
10B-10B
115.50
135.14
0.0245
24676
508.99
528.28
528.51
10A-10A
108.00
142.64
0.0245
24745
510.13
527.29
527.76
9A-9A
97.25
153.39
0.0245
25106
508.10
526.62
527.31
8A-8A
91.00
159.02
0.0245
25310
509.02
526.30
527.13
7B-7B
77.50
173.14
0.0245
25361
506.04
524.57
526.25
7A-7A
67.75
182.89
0.0245
25583
506.97
523.09
525.67
6A-6A
58.00
192.64
0.0241
25741
498.76
521.37
525.19
5A-5A
45.25
205.39
0.0244
25866
505.28
519.13
524.69
4A-4A
34.30
222.14
0.0239
25962
501.01
514.02
524.46
3A-3A
21.25
229.39
0.0257
26183
502.85
510.28
524.36
2A-2A
10.00
240.64
0.0283
30794
496.04
507.04
524.33
1-1
6.00
244.64
0.0267
30822
495.34
505.60
524.33
Almatti
0
250.64
0.0267
31000
489.12
502.95
524.25
 Table-3: Back water calculations for Almatti FRL at 519.6 with  Almatti
(Discharge considered 31000 cumec at Almatti, 25485 cumec at Hippargi)

Cross-Sec No. As per data Supplied
Ch.U/S of Almatti dam (km) as per input data
Cn (km) as per MIKE  11 Set up
Manning’s “n” considered
Discharge considered (cumecs)
Bed  level (m)
Water level (m) without Almatti dam and Hippargi
Water level (m) with Almatti dam and Hippargi
14-14
250.64
0
0.0264
18785
524.33
543.98
543.98
13-13
246.64
4
0.0252
18906
523.92
543.32
543.32
12-12
229.84
20.8
0.0252
--
--
540.59
540.59
11-11
221.04
27.6
0.0268
21261
519.35
539.34
539.35
10-10
216.64
34.0
0.0242
21391
518.31
538.34
538.35
9-9
192.40
48.24
0.0242
22986
517.46
537.30
537.33
8-8
180.50
58.24
0.0242
23272
514.76
536.67
536.71
7-7
174.80
75.84
0.0242
23594
516.42
535.11
535.25
6-6
170.80
80.64
0.0259
23786
512.85
534.68
534.87
5-5
159.20
91.44
0.0257
23950
512.45
533.06
533.52
4-4
154.24
96.40
0.0245
24056
512.33
532.58
533.17
3-3
145.60
105.04
0.0245
25262
511.54
531.72
532.69
2-2
139.20
111.44
0.0245

513.19
531.00
532.40
*A

126.00

25485

529.35
531.97
*B
124.00
126.64
0.0245
25581
511.66
529.32
529.33
10B-10B
115.50
135.14
0.0245
25648
508.99
528.40
528.43
10A-10A
108.00
142.64
0.0245
25717
510.13
527.42
527.49
9A-9A
97.25
153.39
0.0245
26008
508.10
526.77
526.87
8A-8A
91.00
159.02
0.0245
26212
509.02
526.46
526.58
7B-7B
77.50
173.14
0.0245
26263
506.04
524.74
525.05
7A-7A
67.75
182.89
0.0245
26485
506.97
523.27
523.88
6A-6A
58.00
192.64
0.0241
26573
498.76
521.56
522.62
5A-5A
45.25
205.39
0.0244
26698
505.28
519.29
521.13
4A-4A
34.30
222.14
0.0239
26794
501.01
514.99
520.16
3A-3A
21.25
229.39
0.0257
26945
502.85
511.26
519.79
2A-2A
10.00
240.64
0.0283
30864
496.04
507.84
519.71
1-1
6.00
244.64
0.0267
30892
495.34
506.24
519.68
Almatti
0
250.64
0.0267
31000
489.12
502.95
519.60
*A -  C/S inserted for specifying Hipp.Barr
*B -  1-1 /11A-11A (Hippargi Barrage)
 Table-4: Back water calculations for Almatti FRL at 519.6 with  Almatti
(Discharge considered 31000 cumec at Almatti, 25485 cumec at Hippargi)

Cross-Sec No. As per data Supplied
Ch.U/S of Almatti dam (km) as per input data
Cn (km) as per MIKE  11 Set up
Manning’s “n” considered
Discharge considered (cumecs)
Bed  level (m)
Water level (m) without Almatti dam and Hippargi
Water level (m) with Almatti dam and Hippargi
14-14
250.64
0
0.0264
18785
524.33
543.98
543.98
13-13
246.64
4
0.0252
18906
523.92
543.32
543.32
12-12
229.84
20.8
0.0252
--
--
540.59
540.59
11-11
221.04
27.6
0.0268
21261
519.35
539.34
539.34
10-10
216.64
34.0
0.0242
21391
518.31
538.34
538.34
9-9
192.40
48.24
0.0242
22986
517.46
537.30
537.30
8-8
180.50
58.24
0.0242
23272
514.76
536.67
536.67
7-7
174.80
75.84
0.0242
23594
516.42
535.11
535.11
6-6
170.80
80.64
0.0259
23786
512.85
534.68
534.68
5-5
159.20
91.44
0.0257
23950
512.45
533.06
533.06
4-4
154.24
96.40
0.0245
24056
512.33
532.58
532.58
3-3
145.60
105.04
0.0245
25262
511.54
531.72
531.72
2-2
139.20
111.44
0.0245

513.19
531.00
531.00
*A

126.00

25485

529.35
529.36
*B
124.00
126.64
0.0245
25581
511.66
529.32
529.33
10B-10B
115.50
135.14
0.0245
25648
508.99
528.40
528.43
10A-10A
108.00
142.64
0.0245
25717
510.13
527.42
527.49
9A-9A
97.25
153.39
0.0245
26008
508.10
526.77
526.87
8A-8A
91.00
159.02
0.0245
26212
509.02
526.46
526.58
7B-7B
77.50
173.14
0.0245
26263
506.04
524.74
525.05
7A-7A
67.75
182.89
0.0245
26485
506.97
523.27
523.88
6A-6A
58.00
192.64
0.0241
26573
498.76
521.56
522.62
5A-5A
45.25
205.39
0.0244
26698
505.28
519.29
521.13
4A-4A
34.30
222.14
0.0239
26794
501.01
514.99
520.16
3A-3A
21.25
229.39
0.0257
26945
502.85
511.26
519.79
2A-2A
10.00
240.64
0.0283
30864
496.04
507.84
519.71
1-1
6.00
244.64
0.0267
30892
495.34
506.24
519.68
Almatti
0
250.64
0.0267
31000
489.12
502.95
519.60
*A -  C/S inserted for specifying Hipp.Barr
*B -  1-1 /11A-11A (Hippargi Barrage)
 Table-5: Back water calculations for Almatti FRL at 519.6 with  Almatti
(Discharge considered 10100 cumec at Almatti, 9000 cumec at Hippargi upstream)

Cross-Sec No. As per data Supplied
Ch.U/S of Almatti dam (km) as per input data
Cn (km) as per MIKE  11 Set up
Manning’s “n” considered
Discharge considered (cumecs)
Bed  level (m)
Water level (m) without Almatti dam and Hippargi
Water level (m) with Almatti dam and Hippargi
14-14
250.64
0
0.0264
9000
524.33
541.52
541.52
13-13
246.64
4
0.0252

523.92
540.83
540.83
12-12
229.84
20.8
0.0252


536.95
536.95
11-11
221.04
27.6
0.0268

519.35
535.18
535.18
10-10
216.64
34.0
0.0242

518.31
534.26
534.27
9-9
192.40
48.24
0.0242

517.46
533.48
533.48
8-8
180.50
58.24
0.0242

514.76
532.89
532.89
7-7
174.80
75.84
0.0242

516.42
531.00
531.00
6-6
170.80
80.64
0.0259

512.85
530.39
530.39
5-5
159.20
91.44
0.0257

512.45
529.50
529.53
4-4
154.24
96.40
0.0245

512.33
529.10
529.11
3-3
145.60
105.04
0.0245

511.54
528.24
528.29
2-2
139.20
111.44
0.0245

513.19
527.61
527.69
C/S inserted

126.00



525.96
526.10
1-1/11A-11A
124.00
126.64
0.0245
10100
511.66
525.91
526.05
10B-10B
115.50
135.14
0.0245

508.99
524.91
525.12
10A-10A
108.00
142.64
0.0245

510.13
523.88
524.20
9A-9A
97.25
153.39
0.0245

508.10
522.62
523.29
8A-8A
91.00
159.02
0.0245

509.02
521.92
522.78
7B-7B
77.50
173.14
0.0245

506.04
519.71
521.41
7A-7A
67.75
182.89
0.0245

506.97
518.24
520.71
6A-6A
58.00
192.64
0.0241

498.76
516.77
520.20
5A-5A
45.25
205.39
0.0244

505.28
515.29
519.86
4A-4A
34.30
222.14
0.0239

501.01
512.04
519.68
3A-3A
21.25
229.39
0.0257

502.85
508.37
519.62
2A-2A
10.00
240.64
0.0283

496.04
503.27
519.61
1-1
6.00
244.64
0.0267

495.34
501.64
519.61
Almatti
0
250.64
0.0267

489.12
497.45
519.60

BACKWATER CALCULATION MADE INDEPENDENT EXPERTS.  SEE http://tshivajirao.blogspot.com/2011/02/alamatti-back-water-curve-at_4653.html
ALMATTI Back water profile Calculations 15-01-2011 (for n=0.05, 50,000 cumecs, 524.25 m  stage near Alamatti dam widths 1500 m)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Station
No. Trail
Elv. BL
depth,m
Elv.stage
Width
Area
Discharge
Velocity
Vel.Head
Total H
R
Sf term1
Sf term2
Sf
ALMATTI
0
489
35.25
524.25
1500
52875
50000
0.945626
0.045576
524.2956
33.66762
6250000
3.00395E+11
2.08059E-05
NH218
3
491
34.08388
525.0839
1500
51125.82
50000
0.977979
0.048748
525.1326
32.60226
6250000
2.69092E+11
2.32263E-05
N to Res Approach
1
494
31.13
525.13
1500
46695
50000
1.070778
0.058439
525.1884
29.88939
6250000
1.99976E+11
3.12537E-05
N to Res Approach
2
494
32.2211
526.2211
1500
48331.66
50000
1.034519
0.054548
526.2757
30.89386
6250000
2.23869E+11
2.79182E-05
A Res approach
3
494
32.2292
526.2292
1500
48343.8
50000
1.034259
0.05452
526.2837
30.9013
6250000
2.24053E+11
2.78952E-05
Res App to Algur
1
498
28.28
526.28
1500
42420
50000
1.178689
0.070811
526.3508
27.2524
6250000
1.45959E+11
4.28204E-05
Algur
4
498
30.39464
528.3946
1500
45591.96
50000
1.096685
0.061301
528.4559
29.21084
6250000
1.84906E+11
3.3801E-05
Al to Hippargi
1
508
20.45
528.45
1500
30675
50000
1.629992
0.135417
528.5854
19.9072
6250000
50263485051
0.000124345
Hippargi
4
508
24.35977
532.3598
1500
36539.66
50000
1.368376
0.095436
532.4552
23.59347
6250000
89400931672
6.99098E-05
Hi to Halyal
1
513
19.45
532.45
1500
29175
50000
1.713796
0.149699
532.5997
18.95835
6250000
42608510058
0.000146684
Halyal
4
513
23.90094
536.9009
1500
35851.42
50000
1.394645
0.099135
537.0001
23.16279
6250000
83981691905
7.4421E-05
Ha to Kudichi
1
514
23
537
1500
34500
50000
1.449275
0.107054
537.1071
22.31565
6250000
74009754815
8.44483E-05
Kudichi
4
514
25.91604
539.916
1500
38874.06
50000
1.286205
0.084318
540.0004
25.05043
6250000
1.09583E+11
5.70343E-05
Ku to Diggerwadi
1
515
25
540
1500
37500
50000
1.333333
0.09061
540.0906
24.19355
6250000
97360537527
6.41944E-05
Ku to Diggerwadi
2
515
23.96622
538.9662
1500
35949.34
50000
1.390846
0.098596
539.0648
23.2241
6250000
84738443941
7.37564E-05
Old Diggerwadi
3
515
26.56713
541.5671
1500
39850.69
50000
1.254683
0.080236
541.6474
25.65824
6250000
1.18889E+11
5.25698E-05
Odigg to Shaharpur
1
518
23.64
541.64
1500
35460
50000
1.410039
0.101336
541.7413
22.91764
6250000
81003413824
7.71572E-05
Shaharpur
7
518
28.1521
546.1521
1500
42228.15
50000
1.184044
0.071456
546.2236
27.13361
6250000
1.43803E+11
4.34621E-05
Shr to Narsobawadi
1
520
26.22
546.22
1500
39330
50000
1.271294
0.082375
546.3024
25.33431
6250000
1.13863E+11
5.48907E-05
Narsobawadi
3
520
27.28208
547.2821
1500
40923.12
50000
1.221803
0.076086
547.3582
26.3245
6250000
1.29723E+11
4.81797E-05
Nar to Ankali
1
525
22.35
547.35
1500
33525
50000
1.491424
0.113371
547.4634
21.70324
6250000
67346548672
9.28036E-05
Nar to Ankali
2
525
23.8858
548.8858
1500
35828.7
50000
1.395529
0.099261
548.9851
23.14857
6250000
83806770070
7.45763E-05
Ankali
3
525
25.8827
550.8827
1500
38824.04
50000
1.287862
0.084536
550.9672
25.01927
6250000
1.09121E+11
5.72761E-05
Ank to Sangli
1
528
22.96
550.96
1500
34440
50000
1.4518
0.107427
551.0674
22.278
6250000
73587073961
8.49334E-05
Ank to Sangli
2
528
21.14007
549.1401
1500
31710.11
50000
1.576784
0.12672
549.2668
20.56054
6250000
56070098083
0.000111468
Sangli
3
528
24.25576
552.2558
1500
36383.65
50000
1.374244
0.096256
552.352
23.49588
6250000
88151855212
7.09004E-05
















Comments :The information in this table clearly shows that Sangli city will experience floods due to backwater curve upto an elevation 552.25m while the backwater levels presented by the CWC experts show an elevation of flood only upto 544.0m . This difference is due to differences in the input data used by the different authors. The calculations made by the independent authors show that Sangli and Kolhapur will be submerged under the depth of more than 8m of floods due to backwater curve. Consequently hundreds of villages all along the course of the river between Kolhapur, Sangli and Karad districts and Alamatti dam will be submerged resulting in great losses.




About Me

My photo
Born in 1932 at Mudinepalli, near Gudivada, Krishna Dist. Andhra Pradesh, received Bachelors degree in Civil Engg., from Viswesaraiah Engineering College, Banglore (1956) and Masters Degree in Environmental Engineering from Rice university, Houston, Texas, (USA) (1962), Ph.D (Hony). Former Head of the Department of Civil Engineering and principal of College of Engineering, Andhra university.Formerly Hony.Professor in Andhra University,Manonmanian Sundarnar University,JNT University. Fellow of the Institution of Engineers,India Recipient of the University Grants Commissions National Award "Swami Pranavananda Award on Ecology and Environmental Sciences" for the year 1991. Recipient of Sivananda Eminent Citizen Award for 2002 by Sanathana Dharma Charitable Trust, Andhra Pradesh state. Presently Working as Director, centre for Environmental Studies, GITAM University, http://www.geocities.com/prof_shivajirao/resume.html http://www.eoearth.org/contributor/Shivaji.rao