KALANGA HPP

PRE- FEASIBILITY STUDY OF
KALANGA HYDROPOWER
PROJECT
(9.672 MW)
PROJECT SUPERVISOR
ER. SATYA RAM JYAKHWA
NEPAL ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY
PROJECT GROUP MEMBER

ALISON SHILPAKAR (073BCE02)
AVISEK KOJU (073BCE06)
KAMAL KARKI (073BCE16)
MUKESH SUWAL (073BCE21)
SUJAN TYATA (073BCE48)
OUTLINES
• Objectives
• Hydropower Potential in Nepal
• Problem Definition
• Stages of Hydropower Development
• Project Site Description
• Hydrological Analysis
• Design of Components
• Economic analysis
• Financial analysis
04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 2

OBJECTIVES
• To perform the hydrological analysis of the project.
• To design the hydraulic components of the hydropower plant.
• To perform quantity and cost estimate of the hydropower project.
• To check the financial analysis of the project and check viability of the
project.

HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL IN
NEPAL
Theoretical Generation 83280 MW
Capacity
Economical Feasibiltiy 44000 MW from 66 feasible

Capacity sites
Likely Annual Energy Potential 190-195 Billion units

(At 50% Load factor)
Present Hydro Installed About 1045 MW

capacity

PROBLEM DEFINITION
• Suitable RoR hydropower site
• Basin Characteristics
• Hydrology governing factors
• Topography and Geology
• Design Procedures
• Suitable Site for Components
• Rate Analysis
• Feasibility

Stages Of Hydropower Development
1. Reconnaissance studies
Planning Phase 2. Pre-feasibility study
3. Feasibility study
1. Detail design and procurement

2. Construction of civil structure
Construction 3. Installation of electromechanical
and hydro mechanical
Phase equipment
Operation 1. Commissioning and start up

Phase 2. Maintainence and operation

PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION
• Sunkuda and Khiratadi VDCs of Bajhang district of Seti Zone of Far –

Western Region, state-6 of Nepal.
License area
80˚50’45” E to
80˚54’45”E
29˚30’41” N to
29˚34’12” N

Alignment of hydropower

Phase of pre feasibility
Hydraulic
Design
• Design of Components
• Weir
• Average Rainfall • Intake • Rate Analysis
Computation • Approach Canal • Quantity / Cost
• Flow Analysis • Gravel Trap Estimate
• Flood Analysis • Settling Basin • Financial Analysis
• Forebay/Headpond
• Tunnel
Hydrological • Surge Tank Economic
• Penstock
Analysis • Anchor Block and Support Pier Analysis
• Turbine
• Powerhouse and Tailrace
• Head Calculation
• Energy Table

Hydrological Analysis
Average
Flood
Rainfall Flow Analysis
Analysis
Computation
Instantaneous
Long Term Daily Long Term Daily
Maximum and
Precipitation Discharge
Minimum Discharge

CATCHMENT AREA
Location intake powerhouse
Precipitation(mm) 1621.72 1608.966

Catchment area(sq km) 449.868 483.033
Catchment Area At intake Catchment Area At Powerhouse

COMPUTATION OF AVERAGE
RAINFALL
Isohyetal at head work(1621.72)mm Isohyetal at Powerhouse (1608.966)mm

Flow analysis
1. Catchment Area Ratio (CAR) method
2. Water and Energy Commission Secretariat

(WECS)/Department of Hydrology method (DHM)
Q mean(month) = C x (Area of Basin)A1 x (Area below 5000m+1)A2 x (Mean

monsoon precipitation)A3
3. MIP

Hydrograph Without ppt efffect
80.000
70.000
60.000
50.000
Discharge (m3/s)
chamelia (Nayal Badi)

Seti (gopaghat)
40.000
Sailigad (Gautada)
Langur Khola (Channa)
30.000
20.000
10.000
0.000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Months

Hydrograph
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
Discharge
Headwork
Powerhouse
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Month

FDC at Headwork
70
60
50
40
Discharge
Design discharge Q40=12.822

30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage exceedence

FDC at powerhouse
90
80
70
60
50
Discharge
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Percentage Exceedence

FLOOD ANALYSIS
METHODS USED FOR THE ANALYSIS
Gumbel’s Extreme value distribution
Log Pearson type III
Log Normal
Normal
Pearson III

HIGH FLOOD PROBABILTY GRAPH
HIGH FLOOD ANALYSIS AT INTAKE
350.0
300.0
250.0
Discharge (m3/s)
200.0
150.0
100.0
STANDARD ERROR
50.0 log Pearson log Pearson
gumbel normal
III normal III
6.2254 9.4180 12.3930 14.7872 8.9006
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Time in Years
gumbel log pearson iii log normal normal pearson

HIGH FLOOD PROBABILTY GRAPH
HIGH FLOOD ANALYSIS AT POWER
350.0
300.0
Discharge (m3/s)
250.0
200.0
150.0
100.0
STANDARD ERROR
50.0 log Pearson
gumbel log normal normal
pearson III III
6.6918 10.1235 13.3214 15.8949 9.5674
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Time in Years
gumbel log pearson iii log normal
normal pearson

LOW FLOOD PROBABILITY GRAPH
LOW FLOW ANALYSIS AT INTAKE
7.0
6.0
5.0
Discharge (m3/s)
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Time in Years
gumbel log pearson iii log normal normal

RATING CURVES
1.6
Rating Curve at Headwork
1.4
1.2
1
Stage
0.8
River bed level= 1072 masl
0.6 Depth of River = 1.205m
HFL at intake= 1073.205 masl
0.4
Flood Discharge = 212.33 m3/s (100 years)
0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
DIscharge

Rating curve at Power house
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
Stage
0.8
0.6
River bed level= 974 masl
0.4
Depth of River = 1.153m
HFL at power house= 975.153 masl
0.2 Flood Discharge = 228.24 m3/s (100 years)
0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Discharge

Hydraulic Design of Components
WEIR
DESIGN RESULTS
Type Ogee shaped
Length*Height 40*4 m
Design Discharge for the Weir 212.34 m3/s
Crest Level 1076masl
River Bed Level 1072masl

SECTION OF WEIR

UNDERSLUICE
DESIGN RESULTS OF UNDERSLICE

Gate Type Vertical
No of Opening 1
Gate Opening (B*H) 3*3m

INTAKE AND TRASH RACK
INTAKE DESIGN RESULTS
Type Side Intake
Profile Bell Mouth Profile
No of Opening 3
Size of each Opening (B*H) 3m*2 m
Intake Discharge 15.384m3/s
TRASH RACK DESIGN RESULTS

Thickness 10 mm
Bar Spacing 100 mm
Inclination with Vertical 15 degree

PLAN AT HEADWORK

STILLING BASIN
DESIGN RESULTS OF STILLING BASIN
Type USBR Type II
Length 14 m
Depth before jump 0.50009 m
Depth after Jump 3.148 m

Normal depth 3.06 m
Critical Depth 1.42 m
Jump level 1074.869
Tail water level 1074.783
19/06/2077
GRAVEL TRAP
DESIGN
CONSIDERATIONS
Particle Size to settle >2 mm
Specific Gravity 2.65
Longitudinal slope 1 in 50
DESIGN RESULTS
Type Gravity Continuous
Flushing
Size (L*B*H) 21 * 5.2 * 4m

APPROACH CANNAL
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Bed slope 1 in 1000
Manning’s coefficient 0.017
Free board 0.5 m
DESIGN RESULTS
Type Rectangular Open Channel
Size (B*H) 5.2 m*3.1 m

Length 120.718 m

SETTLING BASIN
Diameter of particle to be >0.2 mm
removed
Value of constant “a” 0.44
Length/ Breadth 4
Velikanov’s constant, λ 1.5
Packing factor 0.5

Sediment Concentration 5 kg/m3

SETTLING BASIN
DESIGN RESULTS
Type Hopper Bottom
Size of each bay (L*B*H) (75m*10.5m*8)m
No of bays 2
Flushing system Intermittent System
EFFICIENCY
Hazen’s Method 88.8%
Vetter’s Method 91.4%

SETTLING BASIN

HEADPOND
Construction design discharge 12.822 m3/s
Detention time 2 minutes
Limiting velocity 0.2 (0.2 -0.8)m/s
Storage depth 1m
Free board 0.5 m
RESULTS
Volume 1538.640 m3
Submergence head 1.5 m
L*B*H (13*21.5*11)m3

TUNNEL
Design Consideration
Manning's Coefficient 0.017
Project Life 30 years
Interest Rate 10%
0.16%
Bed Slope (1:600)
RESULTS
Type of flow Pressure flow
R1.45 Geometry Inverted D-shape
Length 4200m
Diameter 2.9m
1.45
Velocity 1.708m/s
2.9
TUNNEL OPTIMIZATION
80
70
60
Incremental Cost (In Million NRS)
50
40
30
20 Optimized tunnel diameter=2.9m

10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Tunnel Diameter(m)
Total Construction Cost(in Miliions) Energy Loss Cost(in Miliions)

Total Cost (in Millions optimized

Cross section at tunnel alignment
Tunnel layout
SURGE TANK
Length of tunnel 4200m
Wave velocity in 897.81m/s
penstock
Time of oscillation 399.464second
Friction factor in 0.017
tunnel
Submergence for 4.45 m
penstock
Freeboard 2m
NWL of Fore bay 1075.992 masl
RESULT
Type Vertical Cylindrical, open
Diameter 9.5 m
Height 21 m
Zmax up 9.19 m
Zmax down 4.18 m

OPTIMIZATION OF PENSTOCK
DESIGN CONSIERATIONS
Penstock Optimization Pipe Roughness 0.025

90000000 Cost of pipe per kg 200 Rs/ kg
80000000 Interest rate 10%
70000000 Project life 30 years
60000000 Allowable hoop 1200 kg/cm2
50000000 stress
Cost NRs
40000000 Efficiency 0.85

30000000 Wet energy cost per 4.8 Rs./ Kwhr
unit
20000000
Dry energy cost per 8.4 Rs./ Kwhr
10000000
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 RESULT
Daiameter Optimum diameter 2.3m
Cost of penstock Thickness 1.5 cm

Energy loss cost
Velocity 3.09 m/s
Total
Length 298. 654m

PENSTOCK ALIGNMENT

TURBINE SELECTION & EFFICIENCY
No of turbine Rated flow per Minimum flow Discharge ratio Turbine

turbine Efficiency
1 12.822 6.268 0.48 74
2 6.411 6.268 0.977 86
3 4.247 6.268 1.466 84

TURBINE
Type Francis, reactive
Numbers 2
No. of poles 8
Frequency 50 Hz
Width to Diameter 0.25
ratio(0.1-0.4)
Hydraulic Efficiency 0.89 RESULT

DRFT TUBE Diameter of runner 1m
Specific speed 230.259
Outlet Rectangle
Rotational speed 750
Efficiency of turbine 0.8
Setting height 3.38 m below
TWL

POWERHOUSE AND TAILRACE
POWERHOUSE
Size 29.7m*10. 6
m*20m
TAILRACE CANAL
Length of tailrace canal 140m
Flow type Open channel
Width 3.6 m
Height 2.2 m

HEAD CALCULATION
Head Calculation
NWL at Intake 1076 masl
NWL at Headpond 1075.759 masl
Tunnel Head Loss 3.824 m
Static water level at Surge Tank 1072.331 masl
Penstock Head Loss 1.23 m
Gross Head 96 m
Net Head 90.464 m
04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch)

47
ENERGY TABLE
Power and Energy Details

Gross Head 96 m
Net Head at design Flow 90.464 m

Installed Capacity 9.672 MW
Dry Saleable energy 12.91 Gwhr
Wet Saleable Energy 47.90 Gwhr
Anuual Saleable Energy 60.81 Gwhr
Dry Season Revenue 108.43 NRs. in Million
Wet Season Revenue 229.94 NRs. in Million
Gross Annual Revenue 338.36 NRs. in Million

48
Economic Analysis
 Rate Analysis
 Quantity / Cost Estimate
 Financial Analysis

RATE ANALYSIS
S.N. Description Unit Rate (NRs.)
1 Earthwork in Filling cum 728.065
2 Earthwork in Excavation in Ordinary Soil cum 50.152
3 Earthwork in Excavation in Soft Rock cum 651.47
4 Earthwork in Excavation of Hard Rock cum 575.89
5 Stone Soling cum 6997.98
6 (Dry) Stone Masonry cum 9802.7
7 Plum Concrete cum 9393.33
8 Reinforcement Work MT 136017
9 Formwork sq. m 658.32
10 Filling With Gravel cum 1826.78
11 Plain Cement Concrete (P.C.C.) M10 (1:3:6) cum 28917.5
12 Plain Cement Concrete (P.C.C.) M20 (1:1.5:3) cum 11946.1
15 Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C.) M25 cum 13329.38
16 Reinforced Cement Concrete (R.C.C.) M35 cum 13705.99
17 Supply and Laying of Boulder Riprap cum 1936.6
18 12.5 mm thick plaster work Sq. m 3752.79
19 First Class Brick Work cum 13979.05
20 Stone Masonary with Cement cum 10378.62
50
BOQ
Summary
Description Amount
Amount
Weir 119172957.7
Undersluice 936810.9442
Intake 7348249.24
Weir
Flood Protection work 50410127.38 1% Undersluice
6% Intake
12% 0%
Gravel Trap 6650139.158 4%
1% Flood Protection work
Gravel Trap
Approach Canal 13507446.85 7%
5% Approach Canal
1%
Settling Basin
Settling Basin 116619505.7 3%
1%
Headpond
2%
Tunnel
Headpond 14191513.71 Surge Tank
12% Penstock
Tunnel 424512196.7 Anchor Block and support
piers
Surge Tank 15618093.09 Powerhouse
Tailrace
Penstock 32662854.15 1%
Total Earthwork
Anchor Block and support piers 73009821.7
43%
Powerhouse 35914890.32
Tailrace 7552190.47
Total Earthwork 60393663.84
TOTAL IN NRS. 978500460.9
KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 51
04/03/2021
BOQ
Results
Sector Amount (NRs.) Remarks
Total Civil Cost 978500460.9
Hydromechanical Cost 78631702.6 5% of base cost 12%

2
Electromechanical Cost 333684000 Dollar 300 per KW % 4%
Total Civil Cost
Transmission and
9785004.609 1% of Civil Cost Hydromechanical Cost
Substation 8% Electromechanical Cost
Transmission and Substation
Contingencies 157263405.2 10% of base cost 1 52% Contingencies
%
EIA
Sub-Total Cost 1557864573 Development and Super-
vision
18% VAT Amount (13%)
2% of Sub-total
EIA 31157291.47
Cost
Development and 5% of Sub-total 4%
77893228.66
Supervision Cost
Total Cost 1666915093
VAT Amount (13%) 216698962.1
Total Financial Cost 1883614056
KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch)

04/03/2021 52
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Basic Data
Basic Data Value Unit Remarks
Installed Capacity 9.672 MW MW
Salable Dry Energy 12.91 Gwhr
Salable Wet Energy 47.9 Gwhr
Total Salable Energy 60.81 Gwhr
Total Equity 565084217 NRs.
Total Debt 13185298.39 NRs.
Total Financial Cost 1883614056 NRs.
Bank Fee 13185298.39 NRs. 1% of Debt Cost
Interest During Construction 1331852984 NRs.
Grand Total 2028652338 NRs.
Construction Period 3 Years
Dry Season Energy Sale Price 8.4 NRs.
Wet Season Energy Sale Price 4.8 NRs.
Escalation Parameter
Inflation of Foreign Currency 3%
Inflation of Local Currency 3.50%
Escallation on Dry Season Benefit 3% upto 1st 8 years
Escallation on Wet Season Benefit 3% upto 1st 8 years
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Basic Data
Financial Parameter
Interest Rate on Debt 10%
Expected Rate of Return 12%
Equity Investment 30%
Loan Duration 12 Years
Financial Analysis Duration 30 Years
Tax Parameter
0% for 7 years
Corporate Tax 12.50% for next 3 years
25% after first 10 years
Operation and Maintenance 1.50% of total construction
Insurance Cost 0.50% of total cost
Bonus and Welfare Fund 3% of Net Profit
150 NRs./KWfor 1-15 years
Royalty on Capacity
1200 NRs./KWfor 16-30 years
1.85% for 1-15 years
Royalty on Revenue
10% for 16-30 years
Increment on O/M cost 5%
KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 54

04/03/2021
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Description Value Unit
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 18.01%
Simple Payback Period 5.76 Years
NRs. In
Net Present Value of the Project 547.44
Million
NRs. In
PW of O& M 312.72
Million
NRs. In
PW of Revenue 2516.70
Million
NRs. In
PW of Expenses 1408.65
Million
Simple B/C ratio 1.26
Modified B/C ratio 1.41
NRs. In
Cost per MW Power Generation 211.7
Million

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Total Cost Total Cost
Annual Revenue IRR Annual Revenue NPV
Interest Rate
Interest Rate 1,200.00
30.00%
1,000.00
25.00%
800.00
NPV variation
20.00%
600.00
IRR variation
15.00% 400.00
10.00% 200.00
5.00% 0.00
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
-200.00
0.00%
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Percentage change
Percentage change
Total Cost
Annual Revenue B/C Ratio Total Cost
Interest Rate Annual Revenue
Payback Period
2.50 Interest Rate
14.00
2.00 12.00
Payback period variation
B/C ratio variation
10.00
1.50
8.00
1.00 6.00
4.00
0.50
2.00
0.00
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 0.00
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Percentage change
Percentage change

56
CONCLUSION
• Design Discharge(Q40) = 12.822m3/s
• High Flood Discharge (100 years) = 212.34 m3/s
• Tunnel Length = 4200m of 2.9m diameter Inverted-D with 1
audit tunnel at midway of same diameter
• Surge tank = 21 m ht. of 9.5m diameter
• Penstock length = 298.654m of 2.3m diameter
• Net head = 90.464m
• Turbine = francis, 2 units
• Power generated = 9.6 MW
• Overall project cost = 2047885163NRs.
• Project feasibility = Feasible with modified B/C ratio of 1.32
• Project highly sensitive towards change in revenue generation.
57
RECOMMENDATION
• Surface geological mapping and sub-surface geological investigation
should be carried out.
• A physical hydraulic modeling of the head work, its performance in
all different flow condition.
• EIA should be carried out for project more than 5 MW. So EIA must
be conducted in this project.
• Local Participation should be encouraged.
• Rain gauge and discharge measurement instrument should be set up

REFERENCES
• Keshav Prasad Sharma and Naba Raj Adhikari, Hydrological Estimations in Nepal
Main Report and Appendix I, His Majesty Government of Nepal, Department of
Hydrology and Meterology, June 2004
• Dulal, Dr. K.N, Baral, Er. Sanjeeb, Engineering Hydrology, 1st edition, Engineering
and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd., Kathmandu
• Subramanya, K. (2011). Engineering Hydrology. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill

EducationPrivate Limited.
• DHM (Department of Hydrology and Metrology ), Nagpokhari ,Kathmandu Nepal
• Civil works guidelines for micro hydropower in Nepal - Practical Action
• Micro-Hydro design manual, Adam Harvey

Thank you!!

KALANGA HPP

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

KALANGA HPP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KALANGA HPP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRE- FEASIBILITY STUDY OF

PROJECT GROUP MEMBER

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 2

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 3

Economical Feasibiltiy 44000 MW from 66 feasible

Likely Annual Energy Potential 190-195 Billion units

Present Hydro Installed About 1045 MW

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 4

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 5

1. Detail design and procurement

Operation 1. Commissioning and start up

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 6

• Sunkuda and Khiratadi VDCs of Bajhang district of Seti Zone of Far –

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 7

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 8

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 9

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 10

Precipitation(mm) 1621.72 1608.966

Catchment Area At intake Catchment Area At Powerhouse

Isohyetal at head work(1621.72)mm Isohyetal at Powerhouse (1608.966)mm

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 12

1. Catchment Area Ratio (CAR) method

2. Water and Energy Commission Secretariat

Q mean(month) = C x (Area of Basin)A1 x (Area below 5000m+1)A2 x (Mean

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 13

chamelia (Nayal Badi)

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 14

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 15

Design discharge Q40=12.822

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 16

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 17

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 18

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 19

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 20

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 21

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 22

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 23

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 24

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 25

DESIGN RESULTS OF UNDERSLICE

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 26

TRASH RACK DESIGN RESULTS

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 27

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 28

Depth after Jump 3.148 m

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 30

Size (B*H) 5.2 m*3.1 m

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 32

Packing factor 0.5

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 33

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 34

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 35

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 36

20 Optimized tunnel diameter=2.9m

Total Construction Cost(in Miliions) Energy Loss Cost(in Miliions)

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 38

04/03/2021 KHWOPA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (073BCE Batch) 40

Penstock Optimization Pipe Roughness 0.025

40000000 Efficiency 0.85

Size (BH) 5.2 m3.1 m