DAMS AND HYDROPOWER DEPARTMENT

NEW ESNA PROJECT

WATER LEVEL REGULATION SYSTEM

5 w

Paper for the Internationa Workshop on Reguation of Irrigation Canals (April 22-24, 1997 Marrakesh Morocco)
-

Novembre 1996

SOGREAH
INGENIERIE

NEW ESNA BARRAGE (EGYPT) WATER LEVEL REGULATION SYSTEM

P. JEI-IANNO
hydraulics enin eer

P. BERNARD
project niana gel

C. ODEYER hydra UI! CS eligin eel.

SOGREAH IngCnierie (France)

I. INTRODUCTION Fhe Nile, the worlds longest river (6800 km) has the oldest and
moSt

complete series of hydrological data in existence.

For more than 7000 years, the Egyptians have done their utmost to control and limit its flods which are a sourCe of life but cab at the same time be devastating. It was at the start of the 19th century that the Egyptians began to build embankments with the aim of impounding water and barrages to raise the water level, hence guaranteeing supplies to the irrigation canals that are the mainstay of their agriculture. The barrage at Esna, a town situated 700 km to the south of Cairo, is one of the structures built on the Nile in Upper Egypt. tts maib purpose is to control the rivers discharge and to raise the upstream water level sufficiently to supply the irrigation canal networks without having to pump water or carry out extra excavation work. In all, three barrages of this type were built along the Nile downstream of Aswan, namely Esna (1908, overhauled in 1945), Naga Hammadi (1930) and Asyut (1902, overhauled in 1934), raising the head between 2.5m and 5m. With the growing need for water to satisfy agricultural demand in the Governorate of Qena, the changes in irrigation practices and the increase in the amount of land under cultivation, the existing barrages could no longer cope and were becoming outdated. The road crossing the Nile across the old Esna barrage had been designed for live loads of less than 20 tonnes, whereas nowadays they reach nearly 70 tonnes. There is also anew factor, that of the tourist boats sailing between Luxor md Aswan. They are now so numerous and large that lock operations have become difficult and too lengthy. For all these reasons, the Ministry of Public Works and Water Resources decided that it was necessary to construct a new barrage. One of the attractive points of the project is the energy generated by the hydropower plant associated with the barrage (installed power 00 MW)

2. TFIE OLD ESNA BARRAGE mis barrage is one the oldest irrigation structures in the country. It was built in 1908 near the towii of Esna, 167 km to the north of Aswan dam and about 60 km from Luxor. The aim was to raise the water level and provide water supplies by gravity to the irrigation canal network. The barrage is 900 m long and
was

equipped with 120 gates (gate width: 5m) and a navigation lock (80 m long and 16 3. TI-IL NEW ESNA BARRAGE

iii

wide).

The New Esna barrage was commissioned in 1994. It is located 1200 the construction of the new barrage were the following:

in

downstream of the old structure. The main reasons that led to

the possibility it affords of raising the water level to the height required for irrigation,

saving 1.5 thousand million cuhic meters of water that formerly spilled through the barrage each year; this was needed to keep the (lillerence between upstieam and downstream levels within reasonable limits, for reasons of stability of the structure.

use of

the water saved to reclaim new agricultural land.

product on of electricity (634 GWh/year),

development ol

navigation,

by replacing the old lock with a new one that is sut ticiently wide and long to accommodate two large

tourist ships at the samc time,

improvement

in trat tic, hy constructing a new road across the barrage crest.

4. GENERAL DESCRIPTION Ol TI-IE STRUCTURES

lhe complete engineering services, from prel mi nary design studies through to preparation of tender documents were carried SOGREAI I troni 1984 to 986.
0111

by

New Esna barrage comprises tour maui structures: the navigation lock, a liydropowcr plant, a flood spillway and a rocktill embank ment. The main characteristics of the structures are the following: a) navigation lock:

length 150 in, width I 7m, draught 3 in, locking cycle: about 25 minutes.

b) hydropower plant: 6 bulb units, 6.25 in diameter, output 6 x 13MW. e) flood spillway: regulation level: 79m, design flood discharge: 7000 m3ls, crest length: 173m, 11 radial gates (12 in wide x 12.9 m high). d) rockfill embankment made of gravelly material, with a central core of quarry run. e) irrigation intakes the New Esna barrage allows for irrigation of 125 000 ha. 5. WATER LEVEL REGULATION
.
. . .

5.1 Introduction
The aim of the water level regulation system is to maintain the water level in Esna reservoir witlun a range 01 selected values, in order to ensure proper operation of the irrigation intakes and power plant. The physical variables of the regulation system are mainly:
-

the inflow discharge (almost equal to the flow released by Aswan, less the discharge diverted through the irrigation intakes), the discharge liowing through the power plant, the discharge (or gate opening) of the spillway, the water level in the reservoir.

Provided that irrigation needs are satisfied, one of the objectives of the regulation system is to divert the maximum discharge through the power plant, with a quasi constant upstream water level, in order to ensure proper operation of the irrigation intakes. Taking into account the fact that inflow is regulated by Aswan dam, there are no rapid variations in discharge, and level regulation in relation to inflow variations poses no problent. The main problem was that of designing a regulation system able to cope with total load rejection by the power plant

(Q=

1800 m3/s).

In the event of load rejection, and in order to avoid overspill at the barrage, the spillw:iy gates must be manocus red. 1-lowever, if the gates are opened too quickly, the stilling basin md associated protection may be damaged, and in irtit icial 110011 will be created downstream of the barrage, which could cause damage along the river banks and emmd:inger people and boats downstream. On the other hand, if the gates are opened too slowly, the water level in the reservoir rises too I ir md nily damage the structures as a result of overspill.

lhe aim o the s udy was to exam ne whether it was ioss I hi e to open the gales slow! y enough wit hon I excessively ra sing the water level in the The maximum permissible rise in level is 70cm.
reservoir.

This study was carried out in 1992 in the lrarnework of quality control. It did not included all the aspects of the regulation and provides only indications to the constructor in the way to achieve its regulation system.

This study was carried out with the help of a simulation systeni, allownig to desci he correctly the hydraulic phenomena in the reservoir (unsteady fows, surges etc.), associated with a steerine interface allowm: to simulate the operation of the water level regulation system.
It should be noted that the hydraulic phenomena in the reservoir are conipl cater! (large upsurges in front of the posver plant, reflection in the reservoir and, generally speaking, two-dimensional effects) and, in this case, a study with the help of a simulation system appeared necessary.

5.2 Hydrodynaniic simulation system The simulation system used is the CARIMA system, developed by SOGREAH. CARIMA is a modelling system which simulates unsteady flOw (e.g. flood wave propagation, water transportation for irrigation, tide propagation) in rivers, estuaries and open channels, including loopecf river networks. The basic equations used for unsteady flow are those of BurrO Dc Saint Venant The simulation is mainly one-dimensional, flow in the flood plains being represented without inertia. The numerical method for solving the equations is the Preissmann Scheme, developed by SOGREAII. This method is now of common use in different software, developed by French of foreign companies or universities. The CARIMA system simulates flow in looped river networks, including the main hydraulic tatures, for example: weirs, barrages, bridges, special head losses, automatic regulation gates, fuse plugs etc. Of course, pressure flow can he simulated using the Preissmann double slot method.
,

With regard to regulation studies, the CARIMA system has been used with success tor different barrages or canals all over the world, for example for:
-

the Rhone barrages in France (for the CNR), the large Kirkuk irrigation canal in traq, the Bini hydropower project in Cameroon

5.3 Steering interface

The steering interlace is the CASCADE system, developed by the LHF (Laboratoire dFlydraulique de France, a subsidiary of SOGREAII and of Grenoble Science University). This interface, connected to the CARIMA system, simulates any hydraulic system including regulation. The purpose of the steering interface is to otter the user of the CARIMA/CASCADE system the general framework for defining a specific behaviour at a number of sites in his river or canal model (programmed in the control niodules), antI allowing the control modules and hydraulic simulator to communicate during the unsteady flow simulation. In practice, the regulation modules are included in the CARIMA/CASCADE system. During the simulation run, the hydraulic simulator (CARIMA) solves the unsteady flow equations in a normal way at each calculation time step. At regular intervals (i.e. at each regulation time step), the simulation is partially interrupted and regulation modules are activated. Just as on the prototype, the regulation procedure has access to water levels and discharges at different locations of the hydraulic network. These values are taken into account to force a discharge, a water level or the operation of hydraulic devices, for example gates, at the regulation points A number of regulators have already been programmed in the CASCADE system, for example PID regulatorN. constant upstream Water levels, AVIO or AVIS gates, sector or flat gates, etc. Special regulators (not included in the above list) can easily he programmed in the CASCADE system.
5.4 Special features

of

the Esna regulation system

of

4. I I lydraulic representation The hydraulic model represents:

-

the Nesv Lsn:i prEj.ct

the Nile over

distance of 100 kin upstreani of the barrage,

the Nile over a distance of 20 km downstream of the barrage,

the precise geonietry of the reseivoir

iii

the vicinity

iii

the barrage and power plant.

Ihe general layout of the project is presented on lig. I In oider to repiesent surge propanatioli and ret lection correctly upstream of the power plant and generally in the reservoir. repiesentation of the reservoir by rneaiis of a looped network was dupted as shown in Fit!. 2. in order to represent the twodimensional Ilows in the reservoir properly 5.4.2 Modelli.pgghition

1 lie general modelling network is shown on lig. 2. II can be noted that:

go we r is represe n tcd as a function Q:=l ( t ) ta k

,

tip

in to aecou itt the Sl) a I features of the power plant,

spi llway discharge is calculated as a function of the upstream water level (P1 formulation).

Ott the prototype, the water levels are detected m three different locations in the reservoir: two in front of the power plant (points WL I and WI 2) and one I 50 in upstream of the power p1 atit (point WL3) In the sintulation this ieference level (WR) was calculated as a balancin of these three diffetent levels (calculated by the sitnul:itor): WR 0.05 x WP1
+

005x WP2

0.9*Wp3

These coefficients were selected due to the fact that the water level 150 rn tipstrearn of the structures is really less affected than levels in front of the power plant, tn the event ot swift power plant discharge changes (in tour minutes, the effect of sss ill changes in local levels is elttriinatecl).

Different formulations of the regulation procedure were tested. In the present paper, only a classical P1 regulator formulation is ptesetited. This is: p *(y_ cons )+ K

Q=
where:
-

to

5 dt cons)

Q is the discharge to be drawn off by the power plant or the spillway, Y is the water level, cons is the target water level, K is the proportional term, Ki is the integral term, ,t is the time, 0 t dt is the regulation time step.

lly differentiation and discrettsation. the formula becomes:

DQ= K(Y-Y)+ Ki(YYcons) where: DQ: change of (lischarge to be drawn off during the comitig regulation step, Yp: water level at the previous regulation step. (The CARIMAJCASCADE simulation being of discrete type, the formulation has a differential form).
-

The (ithet features of regulation were the following:

-

calculation time step: l5s, regulation time step: 240s (4 minutes),

ncutr,il hand of the target level (green zone): t).02m (rio action if the difference betweeti reference level and target level is less than 2cm, in absolute value),
-

yellow zone: 0.05m; if the difference between reference level :ittd target level is higher than Sctti. the P and I coefficients are ch:ingecl, in order to restore the level quickly to almost the target level,

seitsitivity (liseharge of the spillway. 90 m3/s (if spillway discharge is less than 990 m3/s) and .30 m3/s (if spillssay discharge is more than 990 m3/s): no action if the discharge variation calculated by the regulation procedure is less thiiri this value, time necessary for starting activation of the spillway gates after load rejection: 12 mm,
limit of discharge changes :iccepted at the power plant for load acceptance two values were tested: 5 and 1.5 m3/s/s.

The aim of the neutral hand of the target level and in order to minimise equipment wear.

sensitivity discharge of the spiliway is mainly to limit gate and turhine manoeuvres,

Furthermore, in some cases, calculation ol the real discharge through the spill way can take into account gate openings, upstream water level and downstream water level.

6. MAIN RESULTS
The main simulations were carried out with an initial power plant discharge of I 800 ni3/s and Different regulation parameters and general conditions were tested. Only here.
6.1 Case of a single load
ii

tot:tl ulistreani discliaigc ot 2500 in3/s.

few

conhgurations of

simulation conditions are presented

rejection

In the case presented, the power plant discharge varies from 1800 m3/s to 0 in about 3 mm, in two steps, as shown on Fig. 3. In order to make it easier to understand the results, the sensitivity discharge of the spillway was fixed other simulations, the sensitivity discharge was taken into account. The main results of the simulation (run ret, no. 9) are summarised on Figs. 3 to 5. On Fig. 5, water levels in front of the power plant displays two quick peaks, due to the two surges generated by the two closures of the power plant. Upstream of the power plant, the surges are almost absorbed by the reservoir and the peak level is limited (see water level 150 in upstream of the power plant, Fig. 4) or negligible (see water level downstream Old Esna, Fig. 5). This explains why it was decided to calculate the reference water level mainly from that measured 150 in upstream of the power plant (see subsection 5.4.2). Fig. 3 and 4 show that:

it

zero in this simulation. For the

the regulation is stable and the target level is reached in about one. hour, the maximum rise in water level is less than 40cm, which corresponds easily to the fixed objective,

the maximum discharge downstream of the barrage is 2900 m3/s. which rcpresents in iucrcasc of 400 nO/s in comparison with the initial discharge. In fact, arm increase in discharge after a load rejection is unavoidable: As the closure of the power plant is almost instantaneous, and as it is not possible to open the spillway gates quickly, there is an accumulation of water upstream of the barrage. Consequently, a supplementary discharge is necessary to empty the reservoir partially and reach the target level. 6.2 Case of load rejection followed by load

acceptance

In the case presented (rtin ref. 13), the discharge from the power plant varies iS shown on Fig. 9 (load rejection Irom 1800 m3/s to zero in about 3 mi lollowed by a load acceptance from zero to 1800 m3/s in 6 mi beginning one hotir after load rejection). The main results of the simulation are summarised on Figs. 6 to 9.
The simulation carried out shows that the regulation is stable and that the surges generated by gate amid represent a hindrance for proper operation of the regulation system.
turbine manoeuvrmng

do not

The effect of the sensitivity discharge can be seen on Figs. 9 (discrete variations of the spillway discharge), and on Fig. 8, where the effects of small surges generated by the discontinuous gate manoeuvring can be observed on water levels near the power plant (for example from time0.4h to lh). With regard to the water level drop due to load acceptance, this remains well within acceptable limits (drop 01 I 0cm). The main problem is the maximum discharge released in this case, which reaches 3770 in3/s (initial discharge: 2500 rn3/s), I.e. an increase of some 1200 m3/s in 5 to 6 mm. It is not certain that such in increase would be acceptable br the river, the population and navigation downstream, it should be noted that, in the case of this simulation, the load acceptance took plicc in the niost adverse conditions, i.e. when the spillw:iy discharge was close to a maxmmnuni. A significant decrease in spillway discharge takes place at least 2 hours alter load rejection. Consequently, it appears difficult to limit the downstrcam discharge by trying to improvc the regulation lormulation md parameters. The variation in power plant discharge occurs 1.4 times laster than that of the spmllway at the beginning of the load acceptance. the spillway gates cannot be manoeuvred quickly enough to limit the downstream discharge A second simulation sas carried out (run ref. 19), assuming a slower variation in power plant discharge (1.5 in3/s/s, i.e. load acceptance lasting 20 mm).

The iesults ire shown ieee pta h Ic

on

Fins

10 md I I

In this

case,

the inaxoitum downstream discharnc is loitited to 2)0() m3Is, which is

mole

7. CONCLITSIONS
Ihe sinmul:itions carried classical P1 procedure.
0111

show that it is possible to linut watei level rise in the reservoir

hv regulating the spiliway gates with a

In the event of load rejection lol owed by load acceptance, the study shows I hat to avoid an artifIcial flood downstream ol the barrage.

it

is necessary to increase the load acceptance, in order

REFERENCI S p SauviigeV(LI-IF): CASCADE / steering interlace and control modules. Users manual I.Meillancl, P. Jehanno and P. Bernard (SOGRIiAI-I): New Esna Prolect. Works and Waler Resources. October 1992
Water
.

September 1990

level regulation system. Report to Ministry of Public

5 (LHF), F.M. Holly (Iowa State Univ.) and A. Verwey (lIl-IE, Delft): Practical aspects of computational hydraulics. iA. Cunge Pitman. 1980.
C) presiousl SOGREA I-I stall.

-9 -9
-s

-h

C)
Cl-)

m z m m
0
C-)

I I 0

0 C -4

U/S

LIMIT

o : ID
D

CALCULATION

POINT

REGULATION

POINT

WL: WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT

W L3

WL2 WL1 SPILLWAY Q = f(WLI ,WL2 ,WL3)

POWER PLANT Q= F(t)

D/S LIMIT
Fig 2 TOPOLOGY OF THE MODEL

DOWNSTREAM POWER PLANT

DISCHARGE DISCHARGE

UPSTREAM

DISCHARGE

20

40

6}

FO

00

70

40

60

Fig 3 : RUN 9

(LOAD REJECTION)

WATER THE
79400
71739

LEVEL POWER

150m

U/S

PLANT

19 I0

19.00

I
0 40 60 00 00 0 *0 60 %2
11*7

17971

Fig 4

RUN 9

(LOAD REJECTION)

.67016

1*1

79.7(7

WATER_LEVELS
19 74Drn

0/S U/S

OLD THE

ESNA
POWEI? ILANF

79 70_

7 9.I0

79(00

70900

70

411

00

00

00

I 20

*0

60

I3

71*1

Fig5

RUN9

(LOAD REJECTION)

OIl

.4

DISCHARGES DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM NEW ESNA

10

40

67

IV

(10

I0

.0.60100

100

II.,)

Fig 6 : RUN 13

(LOAD

REJECTION AND LOAD TAKING)

LEV0L

:::
,

WATER THE

LEVEL POWER

150rn

U/S

PLANT

Fig 7

RUN 13

(LOAD

REJECTION

AND LOAD TAKING)

LOVEL

79 80 79 70_

WATER LEVELS

79 50_

u/s

OLD THL

ESNA POWER
PLANT

-079-40

0930
79 20.

79 0

7070

40

00

00

00

40

I 00

I&7

Fig 8 : RUN 13

(LOAD

REJECTION

AND LOAD TAKING)

POWER
015107101467

PLANT

0 SPILLWAY

ZIQO

0 UPSTREAM

ooj

I
00
40

00

SO

00

10

(40

60

(00

774414.1

Fig 9 : RUN 13

(LOAD

REJECTION AND LOAD TAKING)

OISCh4flCi

(,,3,.)

DISCHARGES DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM NEW ESNA

FIg 10: RUN 19

(LOAD

REJECTION AND LOAD TAKING)

O POWER

PLANI

U SPTLLWAY O UPSTREAM

--

--

- --

70

1/)

11

flO

00

20

00

60

80

00

FIg 11: RUN 19

(LOAD

REJECTION AND LOAD TAKING)