Professional Documents
Culture Documents
T31544-00
OCTOBER 2014
REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE
REVISION HISTORY
0.1
0.2
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1
2 SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................................................................... 1
3 DELIVERABLES .......................................................................................................................................... 1
4 EXISTING INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................... 3
4.1 MAPS AND PLANS ......................................................................................................................................... 3
4.2 REPORTS AND STUDIES .................................................................................................................................. 3
4.3 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 3
6 HYDROLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 7
6.1 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 7
6.2 FLOOD PEAKS .............................................................................................................................................. 8
6.3 INFLOW HYDROGRAPHS ................................................................................................................................. 9
7 RESERVOIRS ............................................................................................................................................. 9
7.1 CAPACITY OF DAM ........................................................................................................................................ 9
7.1.1 Full capacity .................................................................................................................................... 9
7.1.2 Effective capacity .......................................................................................................................... 10
7.2 STAGE STORAGE CAPACITY ........................................................................................................................... 10
7.3 STAGE OUTFLOW CAPACITY .......................................................................................................................... 10
7.4 HYDROGRAPH ROUTING............................................................................................................................... 11
7.5 EVALUATION OF SPILLWAY CAPACITY .............................................................................................................. 11
8 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................... 11
9 ANNEXURE A .......................................................................................................................................... 12
9.1 ANNEXURE A1 – CATCHMENT AREA 698 HA AND DAM 01 ................................................................................ 12
9.2 ANNEXURE A2 – CATCHMENT AREA 223 HA AND DAM 02 ................................................................................ 13
9.3 ANNEXURE A3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT AREA 1 700 HA AND DAM 03 .................................................................... 14
10 ANNEXURE B – PEAK DISCHARGES CALCULATION RESULTS ................................................................ 15
10.1 ANNEXURE B1 – 698 HA CATCHMENT ............................................................................................................ 15
10.1.1 Rational method 698 ha ............................................................................................................... 15
10.1.2 SCS method 698 ha ....................................................................................................................... 16
10.1.3 Alternative rational method 698 ha.............................................................................................. 17
10.1.4 Unit hydrograph method 698 ha .................................................................................................. 18
10.1.5 SDF method 698 ha ....................................................................................................................... 19
10.1.6 Empirical method 698 ha .............................................................................................................. 20
10.2 ANNEXURE B2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT ............................................................................................................ 21
10.2.1 Rational method 223 ha ............................................................................................................... 21
10.2.2 SCS method 223 ha ....................................................................................................................... 22
10.2.3 Alternative rational method 223 ha.............................................................................................. 23
10.2.4 Unit hydrograph method 223 ha .................................................................................................. 24
10.2.5 SDF method 223 ha ....................................................................................................................... 25
10.2.6 Empirical method 223 ha .............................................................................................................. 26
10.3 ANNEXURE B3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT .............................................................................................................. 27
iii
10.3.1 Rational method Total catchment ................................................................................................ 27
10.3.2 SCS method Total catchment ........................................................................................................ 28
10.3.3 Alternative rational method Total catchment .............................................................................. 29
10.3.4 Unit hydrograph method Total catchment ................................................................................... 30
10.3.5 SDF method Total catchment........................................................................................................ 31
10.3.6 Empirical method Total catchment ............................................................................................... 32
11 ANNEXURE C – HYDROGRAPHS .......................................................................................................... 33
11.1 ANNEXURE C1 – 698 HA CATCHMENT ............................................................................................................ 33
11.2 ANNEXURE C2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT ............................................................................................................ 35
11.3 ANNEXURE C3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT .............................................................................................................. 37
LIST OF TABLES
iv
1 INTRODUCTION
BVi Consulting Engineers were requested to undertake a Hydrological Assessment for a catchment
area situated in the Nacala-a-Velha district in the Nampula province of Mozambique. The catchment
co-ordinates are 14 38' 47" South and 40 23' 49" East. The locality of the catchment is shown on
the map in figure 1.
The site is in the transition area between the coastal plain and the higher plateau to the western
interior of Mozambique. The site is between 25 km and 45 km from the coast line.
2 SCOPE OF WORK
A water balance taking into account the irrigation and animal farming water requirements has not
been conducted due to the absence of local information.
3 DELIVERABLES
1
Figure 1: Locality of the catchment in the Nacala-a-Velha district
2
4 EXISTING INFORMATION
No information that is directly associated with the site has been found.
Grid plans with contours has been extracted from Google Earth and was used for the high
level overview and calculation of the storm water runoff and hydrographs.
For the SCS runoff curve number determination and the percentage of pervious/impervious
areas, the following soil maps of Mozambique has been consulted:
o Mozambique National Soil Map, FAO classification, prepared by INA-DTA in 2002
o Annexure to “Soil resources inventory of Mozambique” Ministry of Agriculture, INIA
FAO Project MOZ 75/011, 1982
o Carta dos solos, D Godinho Gouveia and A Sá e Melo Marques, 1972
Topographical map of Mozambique, prepared by Sadalmelik for Wikipedia commons.
Dam development options, Appendix A, Guidelines for the preliminary sizing, costing and
engineering economic evaluation of planning options, South Africa, Department of Water
Affairs,
South Africa, DWA Regulation GN704, 1998
South Africa, DWA Best Practice Guidelines, G1 – Storm Water Management
South Africa, SANRAL, Drainage Manual, 2013.
Small dams, Designs, surveillance and rehabilitation, CIGB/ICOLD, 2011.
Guide to Hydrological Practices, Volume II, Management of Water Resources and Application
of Hydrological Practices, World Meteorological Organization WMO-168, 2009
USA department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Engineering hydrology training
services, Reservoir flood routing, September 1989.
Schmidt, E.J., Schulze, R.E., 1987. SCS-based design runoff. ACRU Report No. 24, Department
of Agricultural Engineering, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, RSA.
Design of Small dams, United States Bureau of Reclamation, 3rd edition 1987.
3
5 SITE DESCRIPTION AND RAINFALL DATA
The site is situated about 30 km west south west of Nacala town and one of the dam sites within the
catchment area are at co-ordinates 14 38' 47" South and 40 23' 49" East. The Mozambique road no
514 runs diagonally across the western side of the catchment. Figure 2 show the catchment relative
to Nacala and the coast line
The catchment consist of various sub catchments which have been identified in association with
different proposed dam positions as follows:
Dam 01 with catchment of 698 ha. See Annexure A1.
Dam 02 with catchment of 223 ha. See Annexure A2.
Dam 03 with catchment of 1 700 ha. See Annexure A3. The original position of Dam 03 was
not viable so the position has been moved about 150 m in a south easterly direction as shown
on the Annexure.
4
5.2 TOPOGRAPHY
The general topography was determined using 5 m contours. Cross sectional data was extracted from
the contour maps to model the water courses. See Annexure A1 to A3 for examples.
The site is reasonably flat with heights varying from 150 m on the eastern side up to 205 m above sea-
level on the western side and no hilly areas evident on the site.
The dominant flora consist of tropical savannah park land with open forest and grass areas. The water
courses are flat and well-defined and mostly devoid of trees. The woodland areas are interspersed
with open areas for villages and agriculture. Substance agriculture for own consumption is mostly
practised in the catchment area.
The catchment is underlain by geology of the Nampula Group of the Nampula Supergroup. The
Nampula Group comprises mostly of granulitic and migmatitic gneisses, migmatites and their
weathered derivatives. Gneiss is a common type of metamorphic rock formed from the local Nampula
Supergroup. Where encountered the Gneiss should be a slightly weathered, coarse grained, hard rock
with tight medium and widely spaced joints.
The Nacala dam EIA performed by Jeffares and Green provides the following soil classifications for the
region:
Binomial classification -
Namib - Sandy type soil, medium to high permeability
Clovelly - sandy to loam - same as above
Hutton - sandy to loam, same as above
From the Mozambique FAO soil map, 1982 the Nacala-a-Velha area is classified as follows:
LF1- ferric luvisols - soils with a high clay content that is washed down from the surface horizons to
form an accumulation at depth
It is assumed that the soil in the areas of interest would mostly be sandy with some loam potential
thus an A, A/B to B type soil according to the SCS classification.
Nacala-a-Velha has as a tropical climate with two seasons, a wet season from November to April and
a dry season from May to October. Annual precipitation varies from east to west over the Nampula
province with averages of 800 mm along the coast and up to 1 200 mm west of Nampula. The rainfall
is influenced by tropical cyclones from the Mozambique Channel.
The average climatic records are presented in Table 1 below and the description of the columns follow
after the table:
5
Table 1: Climate data for Nacala-a-Velha
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prc. Wet Tmp. Tmp. Tmp. Grnd Rel. Sun Wind 12 13
Month 1 Prc. 2 Prc. cv days mean max. min. Frost hum. shine (2m) ETo ETo
mm/m mm/d % days °C °C °C days % % m/s mm/m mm/d
Jan 200 6.4 54.4 16.1 26.8 30.8 22.9 0.0 78.7 54.4 2.2 148 4.8
Feb 176 6.3 52.2 14.4 26.7 30.9 22.5 0.0 79.5 55.3 2.0 130 4.6
Mar 179 5.8 52.9 15.1 26.3 30.4 22.3 0.0 80.7 61.0 1.9 137 4.4
Apr 100 3.3 70.8 10.3 25.5 29.8 21.2 0.0 79.4 69.6 2.1 125 4.2
May 28 0.9 111.7 4.7 23.7 28.4 19.1 0.0 76.1 75.1 2.2 116 3.7
Jun 31 1.0 98.7 4.6 22.0 26.9 17.2 0.0 74.2 72.5 2.5 103 3.4
Jul 34 1.1 112.0 4.5 21.6 26.6 16.6 0.0 74.8 70.9 2.6 107 3.4
Aug 13 0.4 157.4 2.3 22.3 27.4 17.3 0.0 72.4 75.6 2.5 125 4.0
Sep 12 0.4 163.2 1.4 23.6 28.9 18.4 0.0 69.8 78.5 2.5 145 4.8
Oct 11 0.3 141.2 2.6 25.3 30.2 20.4 0.0 68.7 79.1 2.8 174 5.6
Nov 51 1.7 107.7 5.7 26.5 31.2 21.9 0.0 71.2 74.4 2.6 170 5.7
Dec 133 4.3 54.5 11.7 26.9 30.9 22.9 0.0 76.1 60.4 2.4 158 5.1
Total 967 1 637
1 Precipitation in mm/month
2 Precipitation in mm/day
3 Coefficient of Variation of precipitation in percentage
4 Wet days
5 Mean temperature in °C
6 Maximum temperature in °C
7 Minimum temperature in °C
8 Days of ground frost
9 Relative humidity in percentage
10 Sunshine fraction in percentage
11 Wind speed at 2 metre above the surface in m/s
12 Reference evapotranspiration in mm/month.
13 Reference evapotranspiration in mm/day
6
Columns 12 and 13 are superseded by the evaporation figures given in Table 2
Table 2: S-pan evaporation data for the Nampula district area
Average S-pan evaporation for indicated month (mm) Total
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep (MAE)
157 150 160 156 127 127 104 98 81 91 111 135 1 497
(From - Baker, 2006. Nacala Dam and Reservoir Revised Technical Review and Interim Report 1.
October 2006. Report prepared by Michael Baker Jr, Inc as part of the Millennium Challenge
Corporation (MCC) Mozambique Water & Sanitation Project (Contract W912ER-05-D-0002) for the
Transatlantic Programs Centre US Army Corps of Engineers.)
In order to calculate the runoff hydrographs, the 24 hour storm for various return periods are required.
Data for Nacala has been based on similar data and rainfall from the Kwazulu-Natal coastal and
adjacent inland areas. South African Weather Bureau regions 338, 339, 374, 375 and 411 cover the
area. After inspection and comparison, Hlabisa SAWB station no 0338668, was elected to model the
rainfall for Nacala.
6 HYDROLOGY
6.1 METHODOLOGY
Several methods of calculating rainfall runoff peak flows and volumes are available to the engineer
these days. The following methodologies have been utilised to calculate the runoff peaks:
1. The rational method
2. The SCS method
3. The alternative rational method
4. Unit hydrograph
5. Standard Design Flood (SDF)
6. Empirical methods
In order to simulate the conditions at the Nacala catchment, the following assumptions have been
made:
Generalised veld type region 8 – savannah woodland
General rainstorm type 2 – Inland summer thunderstorm areas
Kovac’s number 5.8 for calculating the Regional Maximum Flood (RMF)
In order to evaluate the different methods, test runs were conducted for each catchment. After
carrying out the test runs using alternative methods it has been decided that the rational method and
SCS method is the best for the three catchments being analysed for this report. The rural nature of
the catchments is well suited to the rational method and the original development of the SCS method.
Both are accepted methods for catchments up to 15km² areas, which covers all the catchments. The
results for all the calculations are presented in Annexure B.
7
The Utility Programs for Drainage developed by the University of Pretoria and distributed by Sinotech
cc have been created to carry out the calculation methods used in the South African National Road
Agency Limited (SANRAL) Drainage Manual except for the SCS method. This software has been used
to generate the calculation results presented in Annexure B. The methodology for the various
calculations are well known and fully documented in the SANRAL manual so will not be repeated here.
The parameters chosen for the applicable variables form part of the calculation printouts provided.
The TR 55 program, developed by the NRCS of the USA department of Agriculture has been utilised to
model the SCS method. The SCS results are presented in Annexure B with the results of the other
calculations. The methodology for the SCS method is well known and documented in various
publications. For the methodology utilised in this report please refer to the “Small Watershed
Hydrology, WinTR–55 User Guide” and the general SCS references documented in Section 4.3.
Various rainfall input methods are available for run-off flows. The triangular hyetograph using the
relationship i = (7, 5 + 0,034 MAP) R0,3 / (0, 24 + td) 0,89 for the inland region
It should be noted that a complete, or exact correlation of flow results between different calculation
methods is not possible. The parameters for the various methods are not directly interchangeable and
so the flows do differ. In terms of this report the average results of the “Rational Method” and the
“SCS Method for all the catchments are intended for general use for broad planning purposes. For
the detail design of specific structures in depth calculation and modelling would need to be carried
out.
For the purposes of this report the flood peaks calculated by the Rational and SCS methods have been
averaged and is presented in Table 4 below.
8
6.3 INFLOW HYDROGRAPHS
For the sizing and high level design of the three proposed dams, the inflow hydrograph that will be
routed through the reservoir needs to be calculated. To meet the requirements for the recommended
design flood (RDD) and the safety evaluation flood (SED) for freeboard and spillway design, only the
1:50 year and 1:100 year hydrographs are presented in Table 5.
The dimensionless unit hydrographs are based on the SCS standard UDH.
7 RESERVOIRS
The dam and reservoirs need to be designed with reference to maximum capacity, depth at maximum
capacity (full service level FSL), height of dam wall, freeboard and spillway size and capacity.
The annual results for the three catchment areas are summarised in Table 7 and the monthly
calculations are presented in Annexure D.
9
Table 7 – Mean Annual Runoff
Catchment Mean Annual Runoff m3
698 ha 739 880
223 ha 312 700
Total catchment 1 240 412
The stage storage capacity has been determined from the site contour maps at 5 m intervals and
interpolated for 1 m intervals. A summary of results is presented below in Table 9 and the detail
information and staging curves are presented in Annexure E.
Table 9 – Stage storage capacity at selected FSLs
Volumes (m3) at different FSL heights
Catchment
5m 6m 10 m
698 ha 139 400 898 680
223 ha 265 209 386 729
Total catchment 285 297 1 494 942
In order to route the flood hydrographs through the reservoirs a stage outflow capacity must be
generated for each of the dams. The stage outflow curve is a function of the spillway design. The
following assumptions will be made:
Recommended design flood RDD: Routed 1:100 flood peak
Recommended safety evaluation curve SED: Regional maximum flood RMF (routed?)
Recommended freeboard – 2.1 m (Table 6.8 P 258 Design of Small Dams USBR)
The stage outflow curve calculation was performed by using the online calculator presented by the
San Diego State University of the USA at
http://onlinecalc.sdsu.edu/onlineogeerating.php
and is presented in Annexure F with maximum outflow at full (overtopping) height presented in Table
10 below.
10
Table 10 – Stage outflow capacity at selected heights above spillway sill
Selected Spillway parameters
Catchment Flow volume m3 at selected heights
Length m
1.05 m 2.1 m
698 ha 35 78.19 243.71
223 ha 30 67.02 208.89
Total catchment 40 89.36 278.52
The 1:100 year hydrographs have been routed through the 3 different dams by using the level pool
routing (modified Puls) technique and a Runge Kutte technique in a spreadsheet developed by Chris
Brooker of CBA Specialist Engineers.
The results and hydrographs are presented in Annexure G and summarised in Table 11 below. The
spreadsheet determines a runoff hydrograph using the method of James (Estimation of Urban Flood
Hydrographs, Proc 2nd Intl Conf Urban Storm Drainage, Illinois '81) and the inflow hydrographs values
calculated differ marginally from the hydrographs values presented in Table 5. The biggest difference
is 7% which is deemed as acceptable.
The Regional Maximum Flood has been calculated as 250 m3/s, 115 m3/s and 354 m3/s for the 698 ha,
223 ha and Total catchment areas respectively.
Based on the spillway capacities in Table 10 all the spillways can pass both the 1:100 and the regional
maximum floods without overtopping the embankment.
8 CONCLUSION
A hydrological model has been developed for 3 different dam sites in the same area at Nacala-a-Velha.
The results show that each of the 3 sites can be utilised for a reasonable dam. To determine the
optimum and efficient size and dam height an in depth study will have to be conducted.
11
9 ANNEXURE A
12
9.2 ANNEXURE A2 – CATCHMENT AREA 223 HA AND DAM 02
13
9.3 ANNEXURE A3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT AREA 1 700 HA AND DAM 03
14
10 ANNEXURE B – PEAK DISCHARGES CALCULATION RESULTS
15
10.1.2 SCS method 698 ha
16
10.1.3 Alternative rational method 698 ha
17
10.1.4 Unit hydrograph method 698 ha
18
10.1.5 SDF method 698 ha
19
10.1.6 Empirical method 698 ha
20
10.2 ANNEXURE B2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT
21
10.2.2 SCS method 223 ha
22
10.2.3 Alternative rational method 223 ha
23
10.2.4 Unit hydrograph method 223 ha
24
10.2.5 SDF method 223 ha
25
10.2.6 Empirical method 223 ha
26
10.3 ANNEXURE B3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT
27
10.3.2 SCS method Total catchment
28
10.3.3 Alternative rational method Total catchment
29
10.3.4 Unit hydrograph method Total catchment
30
10.3.5 SDF method Total catchment
31
10.3.6 Empirical method Total catchment
32
11 ANNEXURE C – HYDROGRAPHS
Volume m3 237 674 457 204 748 035 1 156 170 2 011 798 2 952 528
33
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
T
0
0.532
1.064
1.595
2.127
2.659
3.191
3.722
2
4.254
4.786
5.318
5
5.849
6.381
6.913
10
7.445
34
7.976
8.508
20
9.040
9.572
698 ha Hydrographs
10.103
50
10.635
11.699
12.762
13.826
100
14.889
15.953
17.016
18.080
19.143
20.207
21.270
23.929
26.588
11.2 ANNEXURE C2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT
Tc 0.401 hr
Return periods (years) 2 5 10 20 50 100
qp m3/s 4.79 9.44 15.82 24.82 42.83 62.44
D = 0.053333 hr L 1600 m
Tl = 2.203513 hr S' 323.2727
tp = 2.23 hr y 2%
tr = 3.72 hr
Volume m3 122 415 241 252 404 302 634 309 1 094 580 1 595 740
35
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
T
0
0.223
0.446
0.669
0.892
1.115
1.338
1.561
1.784
2
2.007
2.230
5
2.453
2.676
2.899
10
3.122
36
3.345
3.568
20
3.791
4.014
4.237
223 ha Hydrographs
50
4.460
4.906
5.352
5.798
100
6.245
6.691
7.137
7.583
8.029
8.475
8.921
10.036
11.151
11.3 ANNEXURE C3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT
Tc 1.595 hr
Return periods (years) 2 5 10 20 50 100
qp m3/s 12.33 24.02 39.53 61.56 106.18 155.53
D = 0.212135 hr L 5900 m
Tl = 9.081434 hr S' 323.2727
tp = 9.19 hr y 0.95 %
tr = 15.34 hr
Volume m3 315 110 613 864 1 010 243 1 573 250 2 713 576 3 974 783
37
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
T
0
0.919
1.838
2.756
3.675
4.594
5.513
6.431
2
7.350
8.269
5
9.188
10.106
11.025
11.944
10
38
12.863
13.781
14.700
20
15.619
16.538
17.456
50
18.375
Hydrographs Total catchment
20.213
22.050
100
23.888
25.725
27.563
29.400
31.238
33.075
34.913
36.750
41.344
45.938
12 ANNEXURE D – MEAN AND EFFECTIVE ANNUAL RUNOFF
Total runoff 739 880 m3 219 000 1 497 327 843 412 037
39
12.2 ANNEXURE D2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT
Total runoff 312 700 m3 120000 1 497 179 640 133 060
40
12.3 ANNEXURE D3 – TOTAL CATCHMENT
Total runoff 1 240 412 m3 350000 1 497 523 950 716 462
41
13 ANNEXURE E – STAGE STORAGE CAPACITY
698 ha Catchment
Area behind dam wall at different contour heights
Contour level m Area m2 Volume m3
160 0 0
165 55 760 139 400
170 247 952 898 680
175 589 258 2 991 705
180 1 167 984 7 384 810
42
43
13.2 ANNEXURE E2 – 223 HA CATCHMENT
223 ha Catchment
Area behind dam wall at different contour heights
Contour level m Area m2 Volume m3
160 0 0
165 0 0
170 88 403 265 209
175 237 968 1 081 137
180 419 572 2 724 987
44
45
13.3 ANNEXURE E3 –TOTAL CATCHMENT
46
Total catchment rating curve
14000000
12000000
10000000
8000000
Volume m3
6000000
4000000
2000000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
FSL m
47
14 ANNEXURE F – STAGE OUTFLOW CAPACITY
48
49
14.2 ANNEXURE F2 –223 HA CATCHMENT
50
51
14.3 ANNEXURE F3 –TOTAL CATCHMENT
52
53
15 ANNEXURE G – FLOOD HYDROGRAPH ROUTING
54
15.2 ANNEXURE G2 –223 HA CATCHMENT
55
15.3 ANNEXURE G3 –TOTAL CATCHMENT
56