RESERVOIR / RIVER MODELS

APC’s Hydro Energy BudgetEnergy and Capacity Analyses

COE’s HEC-5 Reservoir System AnalysisSeasonally Reservoir Elevation - Flow Analysis

COE’s HEC-RAS River Analysis SystemRiver Routings - Single Event River ElevationsFlood Analysis - Flow Parameters

RESERVOIR / RIVER MODELSApplications

APC’s Hydro Energy BudgetAPC Coosa Projects – Energy Budget Run

COE’s HEC-5 Reservoir System AnalysisACT Basinwide Analysis

COE’s HEC-RAS River Analysis SystemWeiss Bypass Channel - Logan to Lay Flood Routing

Coosa Basin: 1939-1993 Flow Dataset

Developed for the ACT-ACF Comprehensive Study

55 Years – Covers at least three hydrologic cycles

Developed by Mobile District COE in the mid 1990’s

Reviewed by State Agencies in AL, GA, FL along with Federal agenciesand Stakeholders (3 year process)

Warrior Basin: 1940-99 Flow Dataset

Developed by Alabama Power Company

60 Years – Covers at least three hydrologic cycles

Based on USGS records and Plant operational data

Provided to Mobile District COE for Section 22 Study in 1990’s

FLOW DATA

COE’s HEC-5 MODEL

• Developed by US Army Corps of Engineers – Hydrologic Engineering Center in Davis, CA

• First version issued in 1973

• Two modes of application:• Single Event• “Period of record” routings

• Will capture various reservoir operations• Reservoir Systems• Flood Control• Hydro Power Operations• Water Supply• Water Quality Analyses

• Utilized in Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) RiverBasin Compact

Other Toolswill address

COE’s HEC-5 MODEL

INPUTS:

• Up to 40 Reservoirs

• Up to 80 Control Points

• Up to 35 Power Plants

• Up to 40 Diversions

• 7 Hydrologic Routing Methods

• Hourly or Daily Time Step

• Linked to HEC-DSS (Data Storage Systems)• Inputs ( i.e., flow data)• Results

COE’s HEC-5 MODEL

DELIVERABLES:

• Model Reservoir Systems

• Evaluate Rule Curve Changes (Not Flood Aspects)

• Evaluate Water Supply Operations

• Evaluate Minimum Flows (Seasonal Reservoir Elevations)

ACT MODEL

140 SMITH DAM 150 INLAND

110SELDEN

110 OLIVER

120 HOLT

130 BANKHEAD

WARRIOR MODEL

LOGAN MARTIN ELEVATIONAvg. Summer Elevation Avg. Annual Elevation

ACT2030R Logan 464.75 462.92HISTORICAL Logan 464.27 462.37Difference 0.48 0.55

Logan Martin Average Elevation

457

458

459

460

461

462

463

464

465

466

Janu

ary

Februa

ry

March

April

May

June Ju

ly

Augus

tSep

tembe

r

Octobe

r

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

ACT2030R Logan HISTORICAL Logan

Logan Martin Elevation

455

457

459

461

463

465

467

469

Jan-39 Jan-49 Jan-59 Jan-69 Jan-79 Jan-89Elevation (feet)

HISTORICAL Logan ACT2030R Logan Martin

HEC -5MODELINGRESULTS

Average Minimum 5-Percent 10-Percent 25-Percent 75-Percent 90-Percent 95-Percent22,917 1,756 4,985 5,999 8,362 27,313 54,667 72,12423,602 255 5,000 6,210 9,000 28,600 53,707 72,500-686 1,501 -15 -211 -638 -1,287 960 -376

MONTGOMERY FLOW

Difference

ACT2030RHISTORICAL

Montgomery Average Daily Flow (cfs)

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

Jan-39 Jan-49 Jan-59 Jan-69 Jan-79 Jan-89

HISTORICAL Montgomery ACT2030R Montgomery

Montgomery Flow Duration CurveAverage Daily Flow (cfs)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percent Exceedence

HISTORICAL Montgomery ACT2030R Montgomery

HEC -5MODELINGRESULTS

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

• Developed by US Army Corps of Engineers – Hydrologic Engineering Center in Davis, CA

• Hydraulic Analysis Package (since 1998)

• Based on HEC-2 Model (1960’s)

• Two modes of application:• Steady State

• Unsteady State

• Will capture various riverine conditions• Bridges

• Dams – Weirs - Culverts• ‘Ineffective Flow Areas’ – Obstructions in Channel

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

INPUTS:

• Single or Network of River Channels

• Single Event Flows (either Steady or Unsteady State)

• Cross Sectional Definitions

• Channel Roughness Definitions

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

DELIVERABLES:

•River Elevations (Depth)

• Flow Parameters DeterminationVelocities

Wetted Perimeter

• Timing of Flow Wave (Flood)

Arrival

Peaks

Duration

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800555

560

565

570

575

580

585

590

595

NW GA Coosa Bas in Plan: Plan 05

Station (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)Legend

EG Max WS

WS Max WS

Ground

Bank Sta

.1 .04 .1

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000120000140000 160000180000520

530

540

550

560

570

580

NW GA Coosa Basin Plan: Plan 05

Main Channel Dis tance (ft)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

EG Max WS

WS Max WS

Crit Max WS

Ground

ROME-AL

COE’s HEC-RAS MODEL

60 65 70 75

495

500

505

510

515

Weiss Bypass Channel with 2002 XSects Plan: 1) 100-1000 2) 3U + 100S Geom: Weiss to H Neely Henry w/ 2002 XSects

Main Channel Distance (mi)

Elev

atio

n (ft

)

Legend

100 CFS

200 CFS

300 CFS

400 CFS

500 CFS

1000 CFS

3 Units + 100 Spill

Ground

WEISS PH

WEISSSPILLWAY

TERRAPINCREEK

PRELIMINARY

APC’s HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET MODEL

The Hydro Energy Budget Model is an analytical model for the determination of powerproduction and its value by simulating actual reservoir operation. Parameters includeturbine discharge ratings and efficiencies, generator efficiencies, head loss, andoperating guidelines.

• Developed by APC (Reservoir Management) in 1984

• VMS FORTRAN Model

• Used for:• Reservoir Siting Studies• Impacts of Rule Curve Changes or Minimum Flows• Unit Upgrades• Yates and Thurlow Relicensing Process in the early 1990’s• Impacts due to Water Withdrawals

• Recognized by FERC (18 CFR 11.10)

APC’s HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET MODEL

INPUTS:

• Daily Inflow from USGS records, or Historical APC records, or various simulated records (i.e., ACT-ACF database)

• Hourly System Lambdas use to calculate most economic use of inflows

• Rule Curve, Surcharge, or Zone Control Methodologies

• Flood Control Operations

• Minimum Releases

• Optimize to minimize weekend releases

• Model downstream constraints

APC’s HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET MODEL

DELIVERABLES:

• Peak and Off Peak Accounting

• Daily outputs as well as monthly totals

• Hourly information if desired

• Evaluation of Various Scenarios

APC’s HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET MODEL

Average Monthly Energy MWh

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

Average Monthly Turbine & Spill

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

Annual Energy (MWhrs)

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1940

1942

1944

1946

1948

1950

1952

1954

1956

1958

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

APC’s HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET MODEL

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

MODEL APPLICATIONfor RESERVOIR / RIVERINE SYSTEMS

HEC-5 RESERVOIR SYSTEM ANALYSIS• Seasonal Reservoir Elevation Impacts

• Flow (duration) Impacts

HEC-RAS RIVER ANALYSIS SYSTEM• Single Event River Elevations

• Flood Analysis

• River Flow Parameters

APC HYDRO ENERGY BUDGET• Energy Impacts

• Monetary Impacts