Text

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1.1 General
Pakistan has been victimized by the disaster of super floods many times,
which damaged the important networks of Roads, Railways, Telephones, Electricity.
Moreover hundreds of people lost their lives during the flood season. Irrigation Network in
the country is the biggest of its kind in the world. In order to pass the flood safely and to meet
with the flood emergency every year, the field formation is facing very acute problems during
flood season. Keeping this factor in mind, a research has been taken up to analysis the flood
data by considering the two methods i.e. Gumbel & Log Pearson type-III distribution which
will be helpful to reflect the return period of every recorded flood peak in the history. In this
way, Engineer,s would be able to prepare future flood fighting plan for the safety of
infrastructure and local dwellers settled along both banks of rivers. During the process of
computation of the data of rivers, peak flood discharges ever recorded in the history of Indus,
Jhelum & Chenab rivers are being used in the Gumblel & Log Pearson type – III method to
analysis the return period of flood peaks.
1.2 Problem Statement
Comparative study is to be carried out to provide accurate and reliable

information regarding future expected flood heights. In this context, following two methods
are to be used to calculate the expected discharges with respect to different return periods:-
i) Gumble Method
ii) Log – Pearson Type –III Distribution
These two methods are world widely used in computations of flood data for calculations of
discharges Vs return periods.
1
1.3 Methodology of Research
A comprehensive research methodology shall be evolved to suit the objectives.

Following stepwise approach is used to undertake this study:
1. To study the relevant literature.
2. To collect all relevant data for river Indus, Jhelum and Chenab at different
gauging stations .
3. To perform all mathematical calculations using computer application as per
standard procedure adopted on Gumbel and Log – Pearson Type – III
distribution method.
4. To draw all relevant graphs like discharges Vs return period etc by using
calculations based on Gumble and Log – Pearson Type – III distribution
method for graphical analysis of data collected.
5. To conclude the study.
1.4 Utilization of Research Work
The research work will be of practical importance and will be beneficial for water
resources engineering problems in following ways:
1. The field engineers may be able to get guidance from the data analysis for
proper regulation of the flood discharges during flood seasons every year by
preparing flood fighting plans according to the expected floods which can
occur in future.
2. The newly proposed structures which are to be constructed across the rivers
may be designed after considering the flood analysis data as communicated in
this research.
3. The main structures like barrages and other allied infrastructure constructed
across and along the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers may be monitored after
considering the flood peaks of 100 year return period according to the
computation of data as elaborated in this research .
2
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
2.1 Significance of Return Period
Probability analysis seeks to define the flood with a probability of being

equaled or exceeded in the year. Return period is commonly used instead of probability to
define the designed flood. Therefore return period indicates the average interval of time
between flood events equal to or greater than a given magnitude, or the probability that such
a flood will occur in any year.
Pegram and Parak, 2004 conclude that flood frequency analysis involves the fitting of a
probability model to the sample of annual flood peaks recorded over a period of observation,
for a catchment of a given region. The model parameters established can then be used to
predict the extreme events of large recurrence interval.
Tumbare, 2000 states the reliable flood frequency estimates are vital for floodplain
management, to protect the public, minimize flood related costs to government and private
enterprises, for designing and locating hydraulic structures and assessing hazards related to
the development of flood plains.
Law and Tasker, 2003 conclude that nevertheless, to determine flood flows at different
recurrence intervals for a site or group of sites is a common challenge in hydrology. Although
studies have employed several statistical distributions to quantify the likelihood and intensity
of floods, none had gained worldwide acceptance and is specific to any country.
Zelenhasic, 1970; Haan, 1977; Shaw, 1983 states that Gumbel distribution is a statistical
method often used for predicting extreme hydrological events such as floods .
3
Mujere, 2006 states that (a) peak flow data are homogeneous and independent hence lack
long-term trends; (b) the river is less regulated, hence is not significantly affected by reservoir
operations, diversions or urbanization; and (c) flow data cover a relatively long record (more
than 10 years) and is of good quality.
Prasad, 1970 computed flow profile by solving the differential equation of gradually varied
flow by numerical integration without any initial condition. The method has been thoroughly
tested and found to have no limitations on its use.
2.2 Gumble Method
To analyze the flood frequency, the available data of annual peak discharges is
arranged in descending order of magnitude. Every item is then assigned a ranking number ‘m’
taking the highest as 1, the next highest as 2, and so on.
The return period Tr (years) of each event is computed from the equation
n +1
Tr = … …. … (I)
m
Where
n= number of years
Probability percentage of non-occurrence p’ % is computed by the equation
1
P '% = (1 - ) �100 …. …. …. (II)
Tr
2.3 Log – Pearsons Type - III Distribution Method
The Log – Pearson Type – III distribution has been recommended for the use
of flood analysis by the United States Water Resources council to its federal agencies. The
recommended procedure for use of this distribution is as follows:
4
First convert the Annual Peak Flood X data series to logarithms and then
compute:
Mean
�log( X )
log( X ) = … …. …. (III)
n
Standard Deviation
s log( X ) = �(log( X ) - log( X )) 2 … …… (IV)

( n -1)
Skew Co-efficient
n �(log( X ) - log( X ))3

'g' = … … (V)
( n - 1)( n - 2)(s log( X ) )3
The value of x for any probability level is computed from:
log( X ) = log( X ) + K s log( X ) … … (VI)
Where K is a frequency factor defined by a specific distribution and is a

function of the probability level of X.
2.4 Causes of Floods on Pakistan
The major cause of floods in Pakistan is heavy concentrated rainfall in the

river catchments, which sometimes is augmented by snowmelt flows and generally result into
floods in rivers during the monsoon season. Occasionally, monsoon currents originating in
the Bay of Bengal and resultant depressions often result in heavy downpour in the Himalayan
foothills additionally affected by the weather system from the Arabian Sea (Seasonal Low)
and from the Mediterranean Sea (Western Wave) which cause destructive floods in either or
all of the main rivers of the Indus System.
5
2.5 Large Historical Floods
All the main rivers in Pakistan are perennial. The discharges vary from a few
hundreds of cusec in the winter season to hundreds of thousands of cusec during flood
season. This trait of the river, amongst other things, makes it almost impossible to control and
harness them completely. Due to limited storages in the upper catchments, there is a rapid
built up of flood peaks. The flood period is mainly from mid June to mid September in all
these rivers. The floods are thus a normal feature of these rivers. The floods occur almost
every year to varying extent. Details of main rivers and years of occurrence of Super Floods
are given as below:-
Table 2.1 : Large historical floods
EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH
CATCHMENT FLOODS
TOTAL OBSERVATION
AREA IN THE
RIVER LENGTH LIMIT STARTED
MOUNTAINS
(MILES) ABOVE YEARS OF SINCE YEAR
(SQ. MILES)
(cfs) OCCURRENCE
Indus Main 1,18,400 1958 8,00,000 1929, 1942, 1928

1950. 1992, (Kalabagh
2010 Barrage)
Jhelum 12,445 528 3,00,000 1928, 1950, 1922

1954, (Rasul
1959, 1960, Barrage)
1992 & 1997.
Chenab 11,399 807 6,00,000 1928,1929, 1922

1950, 1954, (Khanki weir)
1957,1959,
1960,1966,
1973,1976,
1988&1992
Ravi 3,562 626 1,80,000 1947, 1950, 1922

1955,1959, (Balloki
1966,1973 Barrage)
1976 & 1988
Sutlej 30,550 964 2,25,000 1942, 1947, 1928

1950, (Sulemanki
1955 & 1988 Barrage)
6
CHAPTER 3
Case Study for River Indus
3.1 General
The Indus is one of the mightiest rivers of the world. It traverses through
Tibet, Kashmir and Pakistan before it falls into the Arabian Sea. The Indus drains the
mountain slopes of many famous Peaks i.e. Alling Kangri (24000 feet), Masherburm (25,660
feet), Gasherburm (26,360 feet), K2 (28,250 feet), Nanga Parbat (26,620 feet), Haramosh
(24,270 feet), Rakaposhi (25,550 feet), and Tirichmir (25,426 feet). The Principal tributaries
in the mountaineous course are Singhgi, Zaskar, Dras, Shyok, Shigar, Gilgit and Kabul. The
drainage basin of the Indus is estimated at 393903 sq. miles and its total length is 2,089 miles.
3.2 Course of the River
Indus River rises in Tibet at an elevation of 20,900 feet, 81 O North and 32O
East behind the great mountain wall of the Himalayas. After traversing the mountaneous
region it enters the Hazara District of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Flowing in South West direction,
the river enters the plains near Tarbela where the multi-purpose Tarbela Dam has been
constructed on this river. It will store the surplus flows in summer season to be released in the
following winter months for irrigation.
Almost opposite Attock, it receives the waters of its main tributary known as
Kabul River (catchment area 32,000 sq. miles) from right side. The Kabul River brings down
the waters of South Western part of Afghanistan. The two rivers have almost an equal volume
of water; both are very swift and bring down broken rocks. Attock is the first important city
on the bank of the Indus River. After traversing about 12 miles, in Mianwali District, River
Indus approaches Kalabagh Barrage. This is the first Barrage on the river in the Punjab area.
The confluence of Indus River and its tributary Kurram is 30 miles down stream from
Kalabagh. Twelve miles below this junction, Chashma Barrage has been constructed.
After traversing about 155 miles at the foots of Suleman Ranges the river
approaches Taunsa Barrage. Due to severe retrogression downstream of the barrage the safe
discharge capacity has been fixed at 750,000 Cusec. Maintenance of normal river approach
conditions at the barrage necessitated construction of spurs on both right and left banks
7
upstream from the barrage. Just above Mithankot about 60 miles downstream Taunsa Barrage
in the south of Dera Ghazi Khan District it receives the accumulated waters of the 5 rivers of
the Punjab. These are Sutlej, Beas, Ravi, Chenab and Jhelum Mithankot has an elevation of
only 288.8 feet above the sea level.
The river enters Sind near Kashmor. Here the river Indus crosses Guddu
Barrage. To protect the area from inundation, Kashmore embankment, the largest protection
work has been constructed. The river then crosses Sukkur Barrage. The last barrage on this
river is the Kotri Barrage near Hyderabad. Finally it empties itself through many mouths into
the Arabian Sea near Karachi after a south western course of 626 miles through Sind.
3.3 Slope of the River
The slope of a river is an important factor in determining its discharge and

sediment carrying capacity. As far as the slope of the bed is concerned the river is divided
into two portions:-
1. The mountaineous basin i.e. from source to Kalabagh and
2. From Kalabagh to outfall into Arabian Sea.
In plains the slope flattens and the average slope from Kalabagh to sea comes
out to be 0.71 foot per mile.
3.4 Analysis of data
The expected return periods for the recorded peak floods since 1928 to 2010
are computed for Indus River by selecting its two sites i.e. Kalabagh and Taunsa Barrage. The
details of the ever recorded peak discharges for Indus River are elaborated in Table 3.2 to
3.5.
Gumble method is used to analyze the flood frequency. The available data of
annual peak discharges of the said sites are arranged in the descending order of magnitude.
Every item is then assigned a ranking number 'm' taking the highest as 1, the next highest as
2, and so on. The probability percentage of non-occurrence P' %' is computed by using the
following equation:-
8
1
P '% = (1 - ) �100
Tr
The calculated return periods for the sites of Kalabagh and Taunsa (pre & post
dam periods) are given in Table 3.6 to 3.9 and graphs between discharges vs. return periods
are plotted as shown in Figure 3.1 to 3.4.
Log pearson Type – III distribution has been used to determine the expected
flood peaks against the assumed return periods. First we converted the peak flood series into
logarithms and also computed arithmetic mean log( X ) , standard Deviation s log( X ) and the
skew co-efficient 'g' with the formulae III, IV and V. Finally, expected flood peaks for
different return periods by using equation – VI in which the values of "K" are taken from the
standard table against the values of "g" as given in Table 3.11, 3.13, 3.15 & 3.17. The semi
log curve between return periods and expected discharges are plotted in Figure 3.7 to 3.8 for
post-dam period.
3.5 Graphical Comparison
A comparison between values attained from Gumble and log pearson methods
has been shown by curves plotted in Figure 3.5 to 3.6 which indicates the trend line of return
periods Vs discharges upto 100 years. The two curves show the similar pattern from which
the reader can conclude the objective of the flood frequency study and ultimately apply the
conclusion on the existing structures of the Irrigation network for its improvements.
3.6 Histogram
To understand the limits of discharges occurring in different years by

considering the different class intervals for the sites of Indus River, the histogram has been
plotted which classified the distribution of the discharges ever recorded in the history of
Indus Basin (Figure 3.9 to 3.10).
9
3.7 Results & Discussions
A couple of opinions have been derived from the other analysis in the shape of
following recommendations for consideration:-
1. The frequency of distribution bars as shown in Figure 3.9 to 3.10 indicate

that the medium flood (2 lakh to 5 lakh) persisted for a long duration in the
Indus River as observed from the data analysis for Post-Dam period since
1974.
2. The estimated maximum discharges for different return periods and

probability percent for Log-Pearson Type – III & Gumble Method for Post-
Dam of Indus River are given as below:-
Table 3.1 : Return period vs probability percentage for river Indus
Log-Pearson Type – III (Discharge in Gumble Method

Return lakh-cusec) (Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Probability
Period
Percent
(Year)
Kalabagh Taunsa Kalabagh Taunsa
100 1 10.8 10.05 10.96 10.90
50 2 9.6 9.14 9.80 9.80
25 4 8.5 8.23 8.60 8.70
10 10 7.06 6.97 7.10 7.20
5 20 5.99 5.96 5.90 6.00
2 50 4.5 4.41 5.00 5.00
1.25 80 3.43 3.24 3.80 3.70
1.0101 99 2.3 1.86 --- ---
10
The ever highest peak flood of 10,76,294 cusec was recorded in the year 2010
and the second highest flood was recorded as 8,61,965 cusec in 1976 which
occurred before an interval of 34 years of the highest peak.
3. It is predicted from the data analysis that the flood peaks like the year 2010
may be repeated in Indus River after an interval of 100 years. Therefore, it is
suggested that infrastructure constructed across and along the river must be
kept under strict observations regarding its wear & tear and the barrage
functioning especially working of its gate operation. The other upstream and
downstream pertinent infrastructure may also be checked on regular basis to
avoid any seepage flow across the bunds for their safety and avoidance of
event link natural breaches at Taunsa and Jinnah Barrages respectively.
11
Table 3.2 : Yearly peak discharges for river Indus at Kalabagh (Pre-dam Period)
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1928 357077 1966 547378
1929 819000 1967 548135
1930 448145 1968 440000
1931 33907 1969 469128
1932 569573 1970 415352
1933 520212 1971 420000
1934 590863 1972 400000
1935 535475 1973 546000
1936 640272
1937 47319
1938 502152
1939 54000
1940 491000
1941 467784
1942 917015
1943 562000
1944 691181
1945 708000
1946 510619
1947 527373
1948 772000
1949 698837
1950 744849
1951 555149
1952 515000
1953 695138
1954 421829
1955 52333
1956 569507
1957 460845
1958 781011
1959 599804
1960 53365
1961 523144
1962 428439
1963 446933
1964 576129
1965 496669
12
Table 3.3 : Yearly peak discharges for river Indus at Kalabagh (Post-dam Period)
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1974 389800 1993 370346
1975 588975 1994 496379
1976 861695 1995 544555
1977 574391 1996 441410
1978 639792 1997 654179
1979 456780 1998 492653
1980 373759 1999 456146
1981 354328 2000 237297
1982 465104 2001 259980
1983 492931 2002 379599
1984 491280 2003 399352
1985 313340 2004 245067
1986 471073 2005 427486
1987 351268 2006 497586
1988 598303 2007 359912
1989 557811 2008 336530
1990 546260 2009 348320
1991 445887 2010 1036453 13
1992 846040
Table 3.4 : Yearly peak discharges for river Indus at Taunsa (Pre-dam Period)
14
Discharge
Year
(Cusec)
1958 788644
1959 512731
Table 3.5 : Yearly peak discharges for river Indus at Taunsa (Post-dam Period)
1960 507016
1961 476374
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1962 212769
1974 337410 1993 334344
1963 554631
1975 524495 1994 573520
1964 503891
1976 675233 1995 617096
1965 432000
1977 459748 1996 518208
1966 513257
1978 508422 1997 534199
1967 450000
1979 396069 1998 519881
1968 436087
1980 425233 1999 397175
1969 464700
1981 392091 2000 205125
1970 368304
1982 375499 2001 281876
1971 406703
1983 802189 2002 306665
1972 375702
1984 509694 2003 421177
1973 567323
1985 306680 2004 182372
1986 505069 2005 531177
1987 313204 2006 612269
1988 560916 2007 335370
1989 558650 2008 263458
1990 502152 2009 320292
1991 456562 2010 1084991 15
1992 654579
Table 3.6 : Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Indus at Kalabagh (Pre-dam Period)
16
Discharge
Peak Flood Tr = Probability
Sr. no. Discharge (Cusec) ( in descending m
(Lakh Cusec) (n+1)/m (% age)
order)
1 357077 917015 9.170 1 40 98
2 819000 819000 8.190 2 20 95
3 448145 781011 7.810 3 13 93
4 33907 772000 7.720 4 10 90
5 569573 744849 7.448 5 8 88
6 520212 708000 7.080 6 7 85
7 590863 698837 6.988 7 6 83
8 535475 695138 6.951 8 5 80
9 640272 691181 6.912 9 4 78
10 47319 640272 6.403 10 4 75
11 502152 599804 5.998 11 4 73
12 54000 590863 5.909 12 3 70
13 491000 576129 5.761 13 3 68
14 467784 569573 5.696 14 3 65
15 917015 569507 5.695 15 3 63
16 562000 562000 5.620 16 3 60
17 691181 555149 5.551 17 2 58
18 708000 547378 5.474 18 2 55
19 510619 535475 5.355 19 2 53
20 527373 527373 5.274 20 2 50
21 772000 523144 5.231 21 2 48
22 698837 520212 5.202 22 2 45
23 744849 515000 5.150 23 2 43
24 555149 510619 5.106 24 2 40
25 515000 502152 5.022 25 2 38
26 695138 496669 4.967 26 2 35
27 421829 491000 4.910 27 1 33
28 52333 467784 4.678 28 1 30
29 569507 460845 4.608 29 1 28
30 460845 448145 4.481 30 1 25
31 781011 446933 4.469 31 1 23
32 599804 428439 4.284 32 1 20
33 53365 421829 4.218 33 1 18
34 523144 357077 3.571 34 1 15
35 428439 54000 0.540 35 1 13
36 446933 53365 0.534 36 1 10
37 576129 52333 0.523 37 1 8
38 496669 47319 0.473 38 1 5
39 547378 33907 0.339 39 1 2
Table 3.7 : Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Indus at Kalabagh (Post-dam Period)
17
Discharge
order)
1 389800 1036453 10.365 1 38 97
2 588975 861695 8.617 2 19 95
3 861695 846040 8.460 3 13 92
4 574391 654179 6.542 4 10 89
5 639792 639792 6.398 5 8 87
6 456780 598303 5.983 6 6 84
7 373759 588975 5.890 7 5 82
8 354328 574391 5.744 8 5 79
9 465104 557811 5.578 9 4 76
10 492931 546260 5.463 10 4 74
11 491280 544555 5.446 11 3 71
12 313340 497586 4.976 12 3 68
13 471073 496379 4.964 13 3 66
14 351268 492931 4.929 14 3 63
15 598303 492653 4.927 15 3 61
16 557811 491280 4.913 16 2 58
17 546260 471073 4.711 17 2 55
18 445887 465104 4.651 18 2 53
19 846040 456780 4.568 19 2 50
20 370346 456146 4.561 20 2 47
21 496379 445887 4.459 21 2 45
22 544555 441410 4.414 22 2 42
23 441410 427486 4.275 23 2 39
24 654179 399352 3.994 24 2 37
25 492653 389800 3.898 25 2 34
26 456146 379599 3.796 26 1 32
27 237297 373759 3.738 27 1 29
28 259980 370346 3.703 28 1 26
29 379599 359912 3.599 29 1 24
30 399352 354328 3.543 30 1 21
31 245067 351268 3.513 31 1 18
32 427486 348320 3.483 32 1 16
33 497586 336530 3.365 33 1 13
34 359912 313340 3.133 34 1 11
35 336530 259980 2.600 35 1 8
36 348320 245067 2.451 36 1 5
37 1036453 237297 2.373 37 1 3
18
Table 3.8 : Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Indus at Taunsa (Pre-dam Period)
Discharge Peak Flood Tr = Probability

Sr. no. Discharge (Cusec) m
( in descending order) (Lakh Cusec) (n+1)/m (% age)
1 788644 788644 7.886 1 17 94
2 512731 567323 5.673 2 9 88
3 507016 554631 5.546 3 6 82
4 476374 513257 5.133 4 4 76
5 212769 512731 5.127 5 3 71
6 554631 507016 5.070 6 3 65
7 503891 503891 5.039 7 2 59
8 432000 476374 4.764 8 2 53
9 513257 464700 4.647 9 2 47
10 450000 450000 4.500 10 2 41
11 436087 436087 4.361 11 2 35
12 464700 432000 4.320 12 1 29
13 368304 406703 4.067 13 1 24
14 406703 375702 3.757 14 1 18
15 375702 368304 3.683 15 1 12
16 567323 212769 2.128 16 1 6
19
Table 3.9 : Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Indus at Taunsa (Post-dam Period)

1 337410 1084991 10.850 1 38 97
2 524495 802189 8.022 2 19 95
3 675233 675233 6.752 3 13 92
4 459748 654579 6.546 4 10 89
5 508422 617096 6.171 5 8 87
6 396069 612269 6.123 6 6 84
7 425233 573520 5.735 7 5 82
8 392091 560916 5.609 8 5 79
9 375499 558650 5.587 9 4 76
10 802189 534199 5.342 10 4 74
11 509694 531177 5.312 11 3 71
12 306680 524495 5.245 12 3 68
13 505069 519881 5.199 13 3 66
14 313204 518208 5.182 14 3 63
15 560916 509694 5.097 15 3 61
16 558650 508422 5.084 16 2 58
17 502152 505069 5.051 17 2 55
18 456562 502152 5.022 18 2 53
19 654579 459748 4.597 19 2 50
20 334344 456562 4.566 20 2 47
21 573520 425233 4.252 21 2 45
22 617096 421177 4.212 22 2 42
23 518208 397175 3.972 23 2 39
24 534199 396069 3.961 24 2 37
25 519881 392091 3.921 25 2 34
26 397175 375499 3.755 26 1 32
27 205125 337410 3.374 27 1 29
28 281876 335370 3.354 28 1 26
29 306665 334344 3.343 29 1 24
30 421177 320292 3.203 30 1 21
31 182372 313204 3.132 31 1 18
32 531177 306680 3.067 32 1 16
33 612269 306665 3.067 33 1 13
34 335370 281876 2.819 34 1 11
35 263458 263458 2.635 35 1 8
36 320292 205125 2.051 36 1 5
37 1084991 182372 1.824 37 1 3
Table 3.10 : Statistical analysis for Indus at Kalabagh (Pre-dam Period)
20
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ( in ______ ______ ______
no. (Cusec) descending log(x) (log(x) - log(x)) (log(x) - log(x))2 (log(x) - log(x))3
order)
1 357077 917015 5.962 0.347 0.121 0.042
2 819000 819000 5.913 0.298 0.089 0.027
3 448145 781011 5.893 0.278 0.077 0.021
4 33907 772000 5.888 0.273 0.074 0.020
5 569573 744849 5.872 0.257 0.066 0.017
6 520212 708000 5.850 0.235 0.055 0.013
7 590863 698837 5.844 0.229 0.053 0.012
8 535475 695138 5.842 0.227 0.052 0.012
9 640272 691181 5.840 0.225 0.050 0.011
10 47319 640272 5.806 0.191 0.037 0.007
11 502152 599804 5.778 0.163 0.027 0.004
12 54000 590863 5.771 0.156 0.024 0.004
13 491000 576129 5.761 0.145 0.021 0.003
14 467784 569573 5.756 0.141 0.020 0.003
15 917015 569507 5.755 0.140 0.020 0.003
16 562000 562000 5.750 0.135 0.018 0.002
17 691181 555149 5.744 0.129 0.017 0.002
18 708000 547378 5.738 0.123 0.015 0.002
19 510619 535475 5.729 0.114 0.013 0.001
20 527373 527373 5.722 0.107 0.011 0.001
21 772000 523144 5.719 0.104 0.011 0.001
22 698837 520212 5.716 0.101 0.010 0.001
23 744849 515000 5.712 0.097 0.009 0.001
24 555149 510619 5.708 0.093 0.009 0.001
25 515000 502152 5.701 0.086 0.007 0.001
26 695138 496669 5.696 0.081 0.007 0.001
27 421829 491000 5.691 0.076 0.006 0.000
28 52333 467784 5.670 0.055 0.003 0.000
29 569507 460845 5.664 0.049 0.002 0.000
30 460845 448145 5.651 0.036 0.001 0.000
31 781011 446933 5.650 0.035 0.001 0.000
32 599804 428439 5.632 0.017 0.000 0.000
33 53365 421829 5.625 0.010 0.000 0.000
34 523144 357077 5.553 -0.062 0.004 0.000
35 428439 54000 4.732 -0.883 0.779 -0.688
36 446933 53365 4.727 -0.888 0.788 -0.700
37 576129 52333 4.719 -0.896 0.803 -0.720
38 496669 47319 4.675 -0.940 0.884 -0.831
39 547378 33907 4.530 -1.085 1.177 -1.276
21
n= 39
∑log(x)= 218.986
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.615
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 5.361
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = -4.001
______
σlog(x) = SQRT[∑(log(x) - log(x))2] / (n-1) = 0.376
22
______
Skew cofficient "g" = (n ∑(log(x) - log(x))3) /
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = -2.094
Table 3.11 : Expected floods for different return periods for Indus at kalabagh (Pre-dam Period)
Value of "g"
= -2.094
_______
log(x) = 5.615
σlog(x) = 0.376
_______
X = antilog {log(x) + K(σlog(x))}
VALUE OF "K" FOR DIFFERENT EXPECTED FLOODS FOR DIFERENT RETURN

Sr.
RETURN PERIOGS AGAINST VALUE PERIODS (CUSECS)
no.
OF "g"
1 K100 0.868 X100 873103
2 K50 0.865 X50 870840
3 K25 0.855 X25 863341
23
4 K10 0.819 X10 836875
5 K5 0.738 X5 780253
6 K2 0.34 X2 553021
7 K1.25 -0.555 X1.25 255016
8 K1.0101 -3.752 X1.0101 16059
Table 3.12 : Statistical analysis for Indus at Kalabagh (Post-dam Period)
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ______ ______ ______
( in descending
no. (Cusec) log(x) (log(x) - log(x)) (log(x) - log(x))2 (log(x) - log(x))3
order)
1 389800 1036453 6.016 0.356 0.127 0.045
2 588975 861695 5.935 0.276 0.076 0.021
3 861695 846040 5.927 0.268 0.072 0.019
4 574391 654179 5.816 0.157 0.025 0.004
5 639792 639792 5.806 0.147 0.022 0.003
6 456780 598303 5.777 0.118 0.014 0.002
7 373759 588975 5.770 0.111 0.012 0.001
8 354328 574391 5.759 0.100 0.010 0.001
9 465104 557811 5.746 0.087 0.008 0.001
10 492931 546260 5.737 0.078 0.006 0.000
11 491280 544555 5.736 0.077 0.006 0.000
12 313340 497586 5.697 0.038 0.001 0.000
13 471073 496379 5.696 0.037 0.001 0.000
14 351268 492931 5.693 0.034 0.001 0.000
15 598303 492653 5.693 0.033 0.001 0.000
16 557811 491280 5.691 0.032 0.001 0.000
17 546260 471073 5.673 0.014 0.000 0.000
18 445887 465104 5.668 0.008 0.000 0.000
19 846040 456780 5.660 0.001 0.000 0.000
20 370346 456146 5.659 0.000 0.000 0.000
21 496379 445887 5.649 -0.010 0.000 0.000
22 544555 441410 5.645 -0.014 0.000 0.000
24
23 441410 427486 5.631 -0.028 0.001 0.000
24 654179 399352 5.601 -0.058 0.003 0.000
25 492653 389800 5.591 -0.068 0.005 0.000
26 456146 379599 5.579 -0.080 0.006 -0.001
27 237297 373759 5.573 -0.087 0.007 -0.001
28 259980 370346 5.569 -0.091 0.008 -0.001
29 379599 359912 5.556 -0.103 0.011 -0.001
30 399352 354328 5.549 -0.110 0.012 -0.001
31 245067 351268 5.546 -0.114 0.013 -0.001
32 427486 348320 5.542 -0.117 0.014 -0.002
33 497586 336530 5.527 -0.132 0.017 -0.002
34 359912 313340 5.496 -0.163 0.027 -0.004
35 336530 259980 5.415 -0.244 0.060 -0.015
36 348320 245067 5.389 -0.270 0.073 -0.020
37 1036453 237297 5.375 -0.284 0.081 -0.023
n= 37
∑log(x)= 209.388
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.659
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 0.721
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = 0.027
Table 3.13 : Expected floods for different return periods for Indus at kalabagh (Post-dam Period)
______
Value of "g" 0.278
=
_______ 5.659 ______

Skew cofficient= "g" =
log(x) (n ∑(log(x) - log(x))3) /
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 0.278
σlog(x) = 0.142
25
_______

Sr.
RETURN PERIOGS AGAINST VALUE OF PERIODS (CUSECS)
no.
"g"
1 K100 2.579 X100 1057156
2 K50 2.235 X50 945050
3 K25 1.864 X25 837431
4 K10 1.313 X10 699792
5 K5 0.819 X5 595739
6 K2 -0.057 X2 447796
7 K1.25 -0.853 X1.25 345483
8 K1.0101 -2.066 X1.0101 232679
Table 3.14 : : Statistical analysis for Indus at Taunsa (Pre-dam Period)
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ( in ______ ______ ______
order)
1 788644 788644 5.897 0.236 0.056 0.013
2 512731 567323 5.754 0.093 0.009 0.001
26
3 507016 554631 5.744 0.083 0.007 0.001
4 476374 513257 5.710 0.049 0.002 0.000
5 212769 512731 5.710 0.049 0.002 0.000
6 554631 507016 5.705 0.044 0.002 0.000
7 503891 503891 5.702 0.041 0.002 0.000
8 432000 476374 5.678 0.017 0.000 0.000
9 513257 464700 5.667 0.006 0.000 0.000
10 450000 450000 5.653 -0.008 0.000 0.000
11 436087 436087 5.640 -0.021 0.000 0.000
12 464700 432000 5.635 -0.025 0.001 0.000
13 368304 406703 5.609 -0.052 0.003 0.000
14 406703 375702 5.575 -0.086 0.007 -0.001
15 375702 368304 5.566 -0.095 0.009 -0.001
16 567323 212769 5.328 -0.333 0.111 -0.037
n= 16
∑log(x)= 90.574
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.661
27
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 0.211
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = -0.024
______
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = -1.078
Table 3.15 : Expected floods for different return periods for Indus at Taunsa (Pre-dam Period)
Value of "g"
= -1.078
_______
log(x)= 5.661
σlog(x) = 0.119
28
_______
X= antilog {log(x) + K(σlog(x))}

Sr.
no.
OF "g"
1 K100 1.507 X100 691301
2 K50 1.42 X50 675065
3 K25 1.312 X25 655438
4 K10 1.101 X10 618725
5 K5 0.846 X5 577090
6 K2 0.183 X2 481484
7 K1.25 -0.741 X1.25 374072
8 K1.0101 -3.102 X1.0101 196261
Table 3.16 : Statistical analysis for Indus at Taunsa (Post-dam Period)
Discharge
=x
Sr. Discharge ______ ______ ______
( in
descending
order)
1 337410 1084991 6.035 0.393 0.154 0.061
2 524495 802189 5.904 0.262 0.069 0.018
3 675233 675233 5.829 0.187 0.035 0.007
4 459748 654579 5.816 0.173 0.030 0.005
5 508422 617096 5.790 0.148 0.022 0.003
29
6 396069 612269 5.787 0.144 0.021 0.003
7 n=
425233 37573520 5.759 0.116 0.013 0.002
8 392091 560916 5.749 0.106 0.011 0.001
9 375499 558650 5.747 0.105 0.011 0.001
∑log(x)= 208.774
10 802189 534199 5.728 0.085 0.007 0.001
11 509694 531177 5.725 0.083 0.007 0.001
_______
12 306680 524495 5.720 0.077 0.006 0.000
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
13 505069 519881 5.716 0.073 0.005 0.000
14 313204 518208 5.715 0.072 0.005 0.000
_______
15 560916 509694 5.707 0.065 0.004 0.000
log(x)= 5.643
16 558650 508422 5.706 0.064 0.004 0.000
17 502152 505069 5.703 0.061 0.004 0.000
18 456562 502152 5.701 0.058 0.003 0.000
______
19 654579 459748 5.663 0.020 0.000 0.000
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 0.895
20 334344 456562 5.659 0.017 0.000 0.000
21 573520 425233 5.629 -0.014 0.000 0.000
22 617096 421177 5.624 -0.018 0.000 0.000
23 518208 ______ 397175 5.599 -0.044 0.002 0.000
3
∑(log(x) - log(x)) =396069 -0.025
24 534199 5.598 -0.045 0.002 0.000
25 519881 392091 5.593 -0.049 0.002 0.000
26 397175 375499 5.575 -0.068 0.005 0.000
27 205125 337410 ______
5.528 -0.114 0.013 -0.001
2
28 σ =
281876
log(x) SQRT[∑(log(x)
335370 - log(x))
5.526 ] / (n-1) =
-0.117 0.158
0.014 -0.002
29 306665 334344 5.524 -0.118 0.014 -0.002
30 421177 320292 5.506 -0.137 0.019 -0.003
31 182372 313204 5.496 -0.147 0.022 -0.003
32 531177 306680 5.487 ______
-0.156 0.024 -0.004
Skew cofficient "g" = (n ∑(log(x) - log(x)) 3
) /
33 612269 306665 5.487 -0.156 0.024 -0.004
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = -0.184
34 335370 281876 5.450 -0.192 0.037 -0.007
35 263458 263458 5.421 -0.222 0.049 -0.011
36 320292 205125 5.312 -0.331 0.109 -0.036
37 1084991 182372 5.261 -0.382 0.146 -0.056
30
Table 3.17 : Expected floods for different return periods for Indus at Taunsa (Post-dam Period)
Value of "g"
= -0.184
_______
log(x) = 5.643
σlog(x) = 0.158
_______

Sr.
RETURN PERIOGS AGAINST PERIODS (CUSECS)
no.
VALUE OF "g"
1 K100 2.279 X100 1004411
2 K50 2.019 X50 913930
3 K25 1.728 X25 822291
4 K10 1.274 X10 697325
5 K5 0.844 X5 596526
6 K2 0.0103 X2 440722
7 K1.25 -0.838 X1.25 323891
8 K1.0101 -2.371 X1.0101 185636
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
CHAPTER 4
Case Study for River Jhelum
4.1 General
The River Jhelum has been changing its name from the past ages. Arabian
called it the Vitasta. Alexander's historians named it Hydaspes and Muslim historians referred
it as Behat. The Jhelum River is one of the big rivers of the Indus Basin and contributes a
good part of supply to the system. Two main streams in the upper reach are Ahan and
Sandran. Both the tributaries start from the same altitude (13,775') and join below Anantnag.
Length of each of these streams is 34 miles with a fall of 232 feet a mile.
The combined river flows in a north-westerly direction across a wide alluvial

plain through Srinagar until it enters the Wular lake which is the largest fresh water lake in
the Indo-Pak sub-continent. At its exit from the Wular lake, the river assumes south-westerly
direction down to Baramula. The Neelum or Kishanganga joins the Jhelum at Muzaffarabad.
Lower down, the Kunhar River which drains Kaghan valley meets the Jhelum near village
Pattan. Kanshi Nallah joins it from right side near village Bathar at an altitude of 980.
Another major tributary Punch Nallah joins it at an altitude of 955 feet. The river approaches
Mangla at an altitude of 869 feet. The total length of the river in hilly area is about 308 miles.
The Jhelum River at Mangla has a total catchment of about 13,000 sq. miles and carries a
mean annual flow of 23 million acre feet. There are no known large storage sites on the
Jhelum River and its tributaries within the Pakistan territory except Mangla which is the only
site on the main river having a substantial storage potential.
The Mangla Dam was completed in 1967 with a gross storage of 5.88 m.a.f.
and live storage of 5.34 m.a.f. with elevation 1040. The crest length is 11,000 feet and
maximum height of the dam is 380 feet. The maximum recorded flood at Mangla is 1100,000
cusecs. Entering into the Jhelum district, it receives waters of the Suketar, Jabba Kas and
42
other torrents of Pabbi Hills. Lower down Rasul Barrage is located. The river Jhelum then
enters the district of Jhang and finally joins the Chenab at Trimmu i.e. 15 miles to the south
of Jhang town, after traversing a total distance of 524 miles, out of which about 372 miles lie
within Pakistan and Azad Kashmir territory and remaining in India or Indian occupied
Kashmir.
The slope plays an important part in the river regime and its discharge
carrying capacity. It controls meandering valley storage, sedimentation, erosion, time lag
between two stations, velocities, intensities and flood heights. It is therefore very essential to
have an idea of the river slopes in its different reaches. The slopes along the course of river
Jhelum are given below:-
Table 4.1 : Reach vs length & slope for river Jhelum
SR. REACH LENGTH IN SLOPE IN FEET
NO. MILES PER MILE
1. Sources of Anantnag 34 232
2. Anantnag to Wular Lake 68 10.70
3. Wular lake to Baramula 12 --
4. Baramula to Muzaffarabad 70 35.82
5. Muzaffarabad to Kohala 20 58.20
6. Kohala to Mangla 96 9.98
7. Mangla to Jhelum 25 5.24
8. Jhelum to Rasul 20 1.85
9. Rasul to Malikwal spillway Bridge 26 1.73
10. Malikwal to Khushab Railway Bridge 60 1.28
11. Khushab Railway Bridge to Chela Discharge site 85 1.20
12. Chela to Trimmu 8 1.25
4.4 Analysis of Data
are computed for Jhelum River by selecting its two sites i.e. Mangla and Rasul. The details of
the ever recorded peak discharges for Jhelum River are elaborated in Table 4.3 to 4.6.
Gumble method is used to analyse the flood frequency, the available data of
2, and so on. The percentage probability of non-occurrence P' %' is computed by using the
43
1
P '% = (1 - ) �100
Tr
The calculated return periods for the sites of Mangla and Rasul (pre & post
dam periods) are given in Table 4.7 to 4.10 and graphs between discharges vs. return periods
are plotted as shown in Figure 4.1 to 4.4.
different return periods by using equation – VI in which the values of "K" are taken from the
standard table against the values of "g" as given in Table 4.12,4.14,4.16 & 4.18. The semi log
curve between return periods and expected discharges are plotted in Figure 4.7 to 4.8 for
post-dam period.
A comparison between values attained from Gumblel and Log Pearson

methods has been shown by curves plotted in Figure 4.5 to 4.6 which indicates the trend line
of return periods Vs discharges upto 100 years. The two curves have the similar pattern from
which the reader can conclude the objective of the flood frequency study and ultimately apply
the conclusion on the existing structures of the Irrigation network for its improvements.
4.6 Histogram

considering the different class intervals for the sites of Jhelum River, the histogram has been
4.7 Results & Discussion
44
1. The frequency of distribution bars as shown in Figure 4.9 to 4.10 indicate that
the medium flood (2 lakh to 3 lakh) persisted for a long duration in the Jhelum
River as observed from the data analysis for Post-Dam period since 1967.

probability percent for Log Pearson Type – III and Gumble Method for post
dam of Jhelum River are given as below:-
Table 4.2 : Return period vs probability percentage for river Jhelum

Return lakh-cusec) (Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Probability
Period
Percent
(Year)
Mangla Rasul Mangla Rasul
100 1 6.97 8.24 8.40 9.10
50 2 5.30 6.17 7.10 7.85
25 4 3.96 4.51 5.70 6.10
10 10 2.58 2.83 3.90 4.20
5 20 1.77 1.87 2.40 2.60
2 50 0.92 0.89 1.10 1.35
1.25 80 0.52 0.46 0.50 0.40
1.0101 99 0.23 0.17 --- ---
The ever highest peak flood of 11,oo,ooo cusec was recorded in the year 1929
and second highest flood was recorded as 9,32,700 cusec in 1992 which
occurred after an interval of 63 years of highest peak.
45
3. It is predicted from the data analysis that the flood peaks like 2010 may be
repeated in the Jhelum River after an interval of 100 year. Therefore it is
avoid any seepage flow across the bunds.
Table 4.3 : Yearly peak discharges for River Jhelum at Mangla (Pre-dam Period)
46
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1922 102950 1960 150500
1923 84120 1961 157000
1924 155600 1962 155000
1925 107000 1963 80150
1926 147600 1964 85186
1927 165200 1965 88190
1928 601000 1966 89115
1929 1100000
1930 290000
1931 355000
1932 270000
1933 216000
1934 190936
1935 152000
1936 151247
1937 104704
1938 148000
1939 115806
1940 118676
1941 165726
1942 134694
1943 182762
1944 206610
1945 144406
1946 231315
1947 130801
1948 440684
1949 155412
1950 278700
1951 120500
1952 232500
1953 311300
1954 222900
1955 175000
1956 302900
1957 156530
1958 730500
1959 811000
Table 4.4: Yearly peak discharges for River Jhelum at Mangla (Post-dam Period)
47
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1967 76500 1986 162900
1968 59990 1987 140050
1969 104510 1988 243070
1970 20460 1989 154420
1971 22460 1990 98760
1972 114020 1991 113530
1973 219790 1992 932700
1974 49638 1993 108320
1975 109000 1994 148990
1976 197810 1995 223250
1977 68700 1996 147230
1978 104420 1997 463560
1979 76180 1998 79350
1980 85960 1999 40300
1981 117410 2000 38100
1982 104410 2001 42800
1983 206500 2002 71920
1984 119160 2003 85254
1985 38800
Table 4.5: Yearly peak discharges for River Jhelum at Rasul (Pre-dam Period)
48
Discharge
Year
(Cusec)
1951 136330
1952 136920
1953 153600
1954 131600
1955 156715
1956 208850
1957 514200
1958 874200
1959 248600
1960 271100
1961 112559
1962 141144
1963 148500
1964 114500
1965 180000
1966 96699
Table 4.6: Yearly peak discharges for River Jhelum at Rasul (Post-dam Period)
49
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1967 105500 1986 113528
1968 62963 1987 125185
1969 101173 1988 254848
1970 43340 1989 167865
1971 24336 1990 118484
1972 105159 1991 89140
1973 269976 1992 952170
1974 72657 1993 102596
1975 125597 1994 144240
1976 269330 1995 285071
1977 58956 1996 133129
1978 101382 1997 549598
1979 66597 1998 71294
1980 80852 1999 19702
1981 111807 2000 37786
1982 86393 2001 37786
1983 241284 2002 34715
1984 98396 2003 52938
1985 64226
Table 4.7: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Jhelum at Mangla (Pre-dam Period)
50
Discharge
order)
1 102950 1100000 11.000 1 40 98
2 84120 811000 8.110 2 20 95
3 155600 730500 7.305 3 13 93
4 107000 601000 6.010 4 10 90
5 147600 440684 4.407 5 8 88
6 165200 355000 3.550 6 7 85
7 601000 311300 3.113 7 6 83
8 1100000 302900 3.029 8 5 80
9 290000 290000 2.900 9 4 78
10 355000 278700 2.787 10 4 75
11 270000 270000 2.700 11 4 73
12 216000 232500 2.325 12 3 70
13 190936 231315 2.313 13 3 68
14 152000 222900 2.229 14 3 65
15 151247 216000 2.160 15 3 63
16 104704 206610 2.066 16 3 60
17 148000 190936 1.909 17 2 58
18 115806 182762 1.828 18 2 55
19 118676 175000 1.750 19 2 53
20 165726 165726 1.657 20 2 50
21 134694 165200 1.652 21 2 48
22 182762 156530 1.565 22 2 45
23 206610 155600 1.556 23 2 43
24 144406 155412 1.554 24 2 40
25 231315 152000 1.520 25 2 38
26 130801 151247 1.512 26 2 35
27 440684 150500 1.505 27 1 33
28 155412 148000 1.480 28 1 30
29 278700 147600 1.476 29 1 28
30 120500 144406 1.444 30 1 25
31 232500 134694 1.347 31 1 23
32 311300 130801 1.308 32 1 20
33 222900 120500 1.205 33 1 18
34 175000 118676 1.187 34 1 15
35 302900 115806 1.158 35 1 13
36 156530 107000 1.070 36 1 10
37 730500 104704 1.047 37 1 8
38 811000 102950 1.030 38 1 5
39 150500 84120 0.841 39 1 2
51
Table 4.8: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Jhelum at Mangla (Post-dam Period)
Discharge
order)
1 76500 932700 9.327 1 38 97
2 59990 463560 4.636 2 19 95
3 104510 243070 2.431 3 13 92
4 20460 223250 2.233 4 10 89
5 22460 219790 2.198 5 8 87
6 114020 206500 2.065 6 6 84
7 219790 197810 1.978 7 5 82
8 49638 162900 1.629 8 5 79
9 109000 154420 1.544 9 4 76
10 197810 148990 1.490 10 4 74
11 68700 147230 1.472 11 3 71
52
12 104420 140050 1.401 12 3 68
13 76180 119160 1.192 13 3 66
14 85960 117410 1.174 14 3 63
15 117410 114020 1.140 15 3 61
16 104410 113530 1.135 16 2 58
17 206500 109000 1.090 17 2 55
18 119160 108320 1.083 18 2 53
19 38800 104510 1.045 19 2 50
20 162900 104420 1.044 20 2 47
21 140050 104410 1.044 21 2 45
22 243070 98760 0.988 22 2 42
23 154420 85960 0.860 23 2 39
24 98760 85254 0.853 24 2 37
25 113530 79350 0.794 25 2 34
26 932700 76500 0.765 26 1 32
27 108320 76180 0.762 27 1 29
28 148990 71920 0.719 28 1 26
29 223250 68700 0.687 29 1 24
30 147230 59990 0.600 30 1 21
31 463560 49638 0.496 31 1 18
32 79350 42800 0.428 32 1 16
33 40300 40300 0.403 33 1 13
34 38100 38800 0.388 34 1 11
35 42800 38100 0.381 35 1 8
36 71920 22460 0.225 36 1 5
37 85254 20460 0.205 37 1 3
Table 4.9: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Jhelum at Rasul (Pre-dam Period)

1 136330 874200 8.742 1 17 94
2 136920 514200 5.142 2 9 88
3 153600 271100 2.711 3 6 82
4 131600 248600 2.486 4 4 76
5 156715 208850 2.089 5 3 71
6 208850 180000 1.800 6 3 65
53
7 514200 156715 1.567 7 2 59
8 874200 153600 1.536 8 2 53
9 248600 148500 1.485 9 2 47
10 271100 141144 1.411 10 2 41
11 112559 136920 1.369 11 2 35
12 141144 136330 1.363 12 1 29
13 148500 131600 1.316 13 1 24
14 114500 114500 1.145 14 1 18
15 180000 112559 1.126 15 1 12
16 96699 96699 0.967 16 1 6
Table 4.10: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Jhelum at Rasul (Post-dam Period)

1 105500 952170 9.522 1 38 97
2 62963 549598 5.496 2 19 95
3 101173 285071 2.851 3 13 92
4 43340 269976 2.700 4 10 89
5 24336 269330 2.693 5 8 87
6 105159 254848 2.548 6 6 84
7 269976 241284 2.413 7 5 82
8 72657 167865 1.679 8 5 79
9 125597 144240 1.442 9 4 76
10 269330 133129 1.331 10 4 74
11 58956 125597 1.256 11 3 71
12 101382 125185 1.252 12 3 68
13 66597 118484 1.185 13 3 66
54
14 80852 113528 1.135 14 3 63
15 111807 111807 1.118 15 3 61
16 86393 105500 1.055 16 2 58
17 241284 105159 1.052 17 2 55
18 98396 102596 1.026 18 2 53
19 64226 101382 1.014 19 2 50
20 113528 101173 1.012 20 2 47
21 125185 98396 0.984 21 2 45
22 254848 89140 0.891 22 2 42
23 167865 86393 0.864 23 2 39
24 118484 80852 0.809 24 2 37
25 89140 72657 0.727 25 2 34
26 952170 71294 0.713 26 1 32
27 102596 66597 0.666 27 1 29
28 144240 64226 0.642 28 1 26
29 285071 62963 0.630 29 1 24
30 133129 58956 0.590 30 1 21
31 549598 52938 0.529 31 1 18
32 71294 43340 0.433 32 1 16
33 19702 37786 0.378 33 1 13
34 37786 37786 0.378 34 1 11
35 37786 34715 0.347 35 1 8
36 34715 24336 0.243 36 1 5
37 52938 19702 0.197 37 1 3
Table 4.11: Statistical analysis for Jhelum at Mangla (Pre-dam Period)
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ( in ______ ______ ______
order)
1 102950 1100000 6.041 0.731 0.534 0.390
2 84120 811000 5.909 0.598 0.358 0.214
3 155600 730500 5.864 0.553 0.306 0.169
4 107000 601000 5.779 0.468 0.219 0.103
5 147600 440684 5.644 0.333 0.111 0.037
6 165200 355000 5.550 0.239 0.057 0.014
7 601000 311300 5.493 0.182 0.033 0.006
8 1100000 302900 5.481 0.171 0.029 0.005
9 290000 290000 5.462 0.152 0.023 0.003
10 355000 278700 5.445 0.134 0.018 0.002
11 270000 270000 5.431 0.121 0.015 0.002
12 216000 232500 5.366 0.056 0.003 0.000
13 190936 231315 5.364 0.053 0.003 0.000
14 152000 222900 5.348 0.037 0.001 0.000
55
15 151247 216000 5.334 0.024 0.001 0.000
16 104704 206610 5.315 0.004 0.000 0.000
17 148000 190936 5.281 -0.030 0.001 0.000
18 115806 182762 5.262 -0.049 0.002 0.000
19 118676 175000 5.243 -0.068 0.005 0.000
20 165726 165726 5.219 -0.091 0.008 -0.001
21 134694 165200 5.218 -0.093 0.009 -0.001
22 182762 156530 5.195 -0.116 0.013 -0.002
23 206610 155600 5.192 -0.119 0.014 -0.002
24 144406 155412 5.191 -0.119 0.014 -0.002
25 231315 152000 5.182 -0.129 0.017 -0.002
26 130801 151247 5.180 -0.131 0.017 -0.002
27 440684 150500 5.178 -0.133 0.018 -0.002
28 155412 148000 5.170 -0.141 0.020 -0.003
29 278700 147600 5.169 -0.142 0.020 -0.003
30 120500 144406 5.160 -0.151 0.023 -0.003
31 232500 134694 5.129 -0.181 0.033 -0.006
32 311300 130801 5.117 -0.194 0.038 -0.007
33 222900 120500 5.081 -0.230 0.053 -0.012
34 175000 118676 5.074 -0.236 0.056 -0.013
35 302900 115806 5.064 -0.247 0.061 -0.015
36 156530 107000 5.029 -0.281 0.079 -0.022
37 730500 104704 5.020 -0.291 0.085 -0.025
38 811000 102950 5.013 -0.298 0.089 -0.027
39 150500 84120 4.925 -0.386 0.149 -0.057
n= 39
∑log(x)= 207.120
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.311
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 2.534
56
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = 0.738
______
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 1.189
Table 4.12: Expected floods for different return periods for Jhelum at Mangla (Pre-dam Period)
Value of"g"= 1.189
_______
log(x)= 5.311
σlog(x) = 0.258
_______
57
Sr.
no.
OF "g"
1 K100 3.106 X100 1296510
2 K50 2.598 X50 958528
3 K25 2.072 X25 701110
4 K10 1.34 X10 453708
5 K5 0.74 X5 317578
6 K2 -0.184 X2 183343
7 K1.25 -0.846 X1.25 123688
8 K1.0101 -1.49 X1.0101 84341
Table 4.13: Statistical analysis for Jhelum at Mangla (Post-dam Period)
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ______ ______ ______
( in descending
order)
1 76500 932700 5.970 0.960 0.922 0.885
2 59990 463560 5.666 0.656 0.431 0.283
3 104510 243070 5.386 0.376 0.141 0.053
4 20460 223250 5.349 0.339 0.115 0.039
5 22460 219790 5.342 0.332 0.110 0.037
6 114020 206500 5.315 0.305 0.093 0.028
7 219790 197810 5.296 0.287 0.082 0.024
8 49638 162900 5.212 0.202 0.041 0.008
9 109000 154420 5.189 0.179 0.032 0.006
10 197810 148990 5.173 0.163 0.027 0.004
11 68700 147230 5.168 0.158 0.025 0.004
12 104420 140050 5.146 0.137 0.019 0.003
58
13 76180 119160 5.076 0.066 0.004 0.000
14 n=
85960 37 117410 5.070 0.060 0.004 0.000
15 117410 114020 5.057 0.047 0.002 0.000
16 104410 113530 5.055 0.045 0.002 0.000
∑log(x)= 185.360
17 206500 109000 5.037 0.028 0.001 0.000
18 119160 108320 5.035 0.025 0.001 0.000
_______
19 log(x)= 38800 104510 5.019 0.009 0.000 0.000
∑log(x)/n
20 162900 104420 5.019 0.009 0.000 0.000
21 140050 104410 5.019 0.009 0.000 0.000
_______
22 log(x)= 243070 98760 4.995 -0.015 0.000 0.000
5.010
23 154420 85960 4.934 -0.075 0.006 0.000
24 98760 85254 4.931 -0.079 0.006 0.000
25 113530 79350 4.900 -0.110 0.012 -0.001
______
26 932700 76500 4.884 -0.126 0.016 -0.002
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 3.903
27 108320 76180 4.882 -0.128 0.016 -0.002
28 148990 71920 4.857 -0.153 0.023 -0.004
29 223250 68700 4.837 -0.173 0.030 -0.005
30 147230______ 59990 4.778 -0.232 0.054 -0.012
3
∑(log(x) - log(x)) = 49638 0.415 4.696
31 463560 -0.314 0.099 -0.031
32 79350 42800 4.631 -0.378 0.143 -0.054
33 40300 40300 4.605 -0.404 0.164 -0.066
34 38100 38800 ______
4.589 -0.421 0.177 -0.075
2
35σ log(x) = 42800 SQRT[∑(log(x)
38100 - log(x)) ] / (n-1)
4.581 = -0.429 0.329 0.184 -0.079
36 71920 22460 4.351 -0.658 0.433 -0.285
37 85254 20460 4.311 -0.699 0.488 -0.341
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 0.342
59
Table 4.14: Expected floods for different return periods for Jhelum at Mangla (Post-dam Period)
Value of"g"= 0.342
_______
log(x)= 5.010
σlog(x) = 0.329
_______

Sr.
RETURN PERIOGS AGAINST VALUE OF PERIODS (CUSECS)
no.
"g"
1 K100 2.671 X100 774819
2 K50 2.3 X50 584844
3 K25 1.903 X25 432832
4 K10 1.321 X10 278409
5 K5 0.809 X5 188841
6 K2 -0.079 X2 96317
7 K1.25 -0.855 X1.25 53480
8 K1.0101 -1.96 X1.0101 23139
60
Table 4.15: Statistical analysis for Jhelum at Rasul (Pre-dam Period)
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ( in ______ ______ ______
order)
1 136330 874200 5.942 0.676 0.457 0.309
2 136920 514200 5.711 0.446 0.199 0.089
3 153600 271100 5.433 0.168 0.028 0.005
4 131600 248600 5.396 0.130 0.017 0.002
5 156715 208850 5.320 0.055 0.003 0.000
6 208850 180000 5.255 -0.010 0.000 0.000
7 514200 156715 5.195 -0.070 0.005 0.000
8 874200 153600 5.186 -0.079 0.006 0.000
9 248600 148500 5.172 -0.094 0.009 -0.001
10 271100 141144 5.150 -0.116 0.013 -0.002
11 112559 136920 5.136 -0.129 0.017 -0.002
12 141144 136330 5.135 -0.131 0.017 -0.002
13 148500 131600 5.119 -0.146 0.021 -0.003
14 114500 114500 5.059 -0.207 0.043 -0.009
15 180000 112559 5.051 -0.214 0.046 -0.010
16 96699 96699 4.985 -0.280 0.078 -0.022
61
n= 16
∑log(x)= 84.245
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.265
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 0.959
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = 0.354
______
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 1.666
Table 4.16: Expected floods for different return periods for Jhelum at Rasul (Pre-dam Period)
62
Value of"g"= 1.666
_______
log(x)= 5.265
σlog(x) = 0.253
_______

Sr.
no.
OF "g"
1 K100 2.943 X100 1022393
2 K50 2.488 X50 784419
3 K25 2.013 X25 594867
4 K10 1.337 X10 401291
5 K5 0.771 X5 288614
6 K2 -0.144 X2 169400
7 K1.25 -0.854 X1.25 112035
8 K1.0101 -1.675 X1.0101 69458
Table 4.17: Statistical analysis for Jhelum at Rasul (Post-dam Period)
63
Sr. Discharge Discharge ______ ______ ______
no. (Cusec) (log(x) - log(x))2 (log(x) - log(x))3
n= 37 =x log(x) (log(x) - log(x))
( in
descending
order)
1 ∑log(x)=
105500 185.212 952170 5.979 0.973 0.947 0.921
2 62963 549598 5.740 0.734 0.539 0.396
3 _______
101173 285071 5.455 0.449 0.202 0.091
log(x)=
43340 ∑log(x)/n
4 269976 5.431 0.426 0.181 0.077
5 24336 269330 5.430 0.425 0.180 0.077
6 _______
105159 254848 5.406 0.401 0.160 0.064
log(x)= 5.006
7 269976 241284 5.383 0.377 0.142 0.053
8 72657 167865 5.225 0.219 0.048 0.011
9 125597 144240 5.159 0.153 0.024 0.004
10 269330 ______ 133129 5.124 0.119 0.014 0.002
11 ∑(log(x)
58956- log(x))2 =125597 4.3855.099 0.093 0.009 0.001
12 101382 125185 5.098 0.092 0.008 0.001
13 66597 118484 5.074 0.068 0.005 0.000
14 80852______ 113528 5.055 0.049 0.002 0.000
3
15 ∑(log(x) -
111807 log(x)) =111807 0.7255.048 0.043 0.002 0.000
16 86393 105500 5.023 0.018 0.000 0.000
17 241284 105159 5.022 0.016 0.000 0.000
18 98396 102596 5.011
______ 0.005 0.000 0.000
2
19 σlog(x) =
64226 SQRT[∑(log(x) - log(x))
101382 5.006 ] / (n-1) 0.000
= 0.3490.000 0.000
20 113528 101173 5.005 -0.001 0.000 0.000
21 125185 98396 4.993 -0.013 0.000 0.000
22 254848 89140 4.950 -0.056 0.003 0.000
23 167865 86393 4.936 -0.069
______ 0.005 0.000
24 Skew cofficient
118484 "g" =80852 4.908 (n ∑(log(x) - log(x))
-0.098 3
) / 0.010 -0.001
3
25 89140 72657 4.861 (n-1)(n-2)(σ
-0.144log(x)) = 0.021 0.501 -0.003
26 952170 71294 4.853 -0.153 0.023 -0.004
27 102596 66597 4.823 -0.182 0.033 -0.006
28 144240 64226 4.808 -0.198 0.039 -0.008
29 285071 62963 4.799 -0.207 0.043 -0.009
30 133129 58956 4.771 -0.235 0.055 -0.013
31 549598 52938 4.724 -0.282 0.080 -0.022
32 71294 43340 4.637 -0.369 0.136 -0.050
33 19702 37786 4.577 -0.428 0.184 -0.079
34 37786 37786 4.577 -0.428 0.184 -0.079
35 37786 34715 4.541 -0.465 0.216 -0.101
36 34715 24336 4.386 -0.619 0.384 -0.238
37 52938 19702 4.295 -0.711 0.506 -0.360
64
Table 4.18: Expected floods for different return periods for Jhelum at Rasul (Post-dam Period)
Value of"g"= 0.501
_______
log(x)= 5.006
σlog(x) = 0.349
_______
X= antilog {log(x) + K(σlog(x))}

Sr.
no.
VALUE OF "g"
1 K100 2.585 X100 808886
2 K50 2.239 X50 612542
3 K25 1.867 X25 454266
4 K10 1.313 X10 291050
5 K5 0.818 X5 195531
6 K2 -0.059 X2 96638
7 K1.25 -0.853 X1.25 51056
8 K1.0101 -2.06 X1.0101 19356
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
CHAPTER 5
Case Study for River Chenab
5.1 General
The Chenab is one of the biggest rivers of the Indus Basin, and it contributes a
good part of supply to the system. Its source of perennial supply is the melting of snow,
glaciers and springs. The two main streams in the head reach are Chandra and Bhaga. The
Chandra drains Lahul valley of Kangra district and is fed by perpetual snow from ranges
which are, on the average, 15,000 feet to 18,000 feet high Baga, the other main stream,
coming from North-East joins the Chandra, at Tandi, a place 9087 feet above sea level.
The combined river flows in the north-westerly direction for a distance of

about 135 miles and then takes a sharp turn to the south, near Kishtwar. River then forming a
loop, crosses the lower Himalyas and flows in a south westerly direction and leaves the
mountains at Akhnur, which is 127 miles below Kishtwar. The total length of the river in
hilly catchment (from source to Akhnur) is about 354 miles. The river enters Pakistan
territory in Sialkot district near village Diawara.
Two more tributaries viz; Jammu Tawi and Munawar Tawi join the main river
upstream of Marala Barrage. It is the first important Barrage on river Chenab in Pakistan.
Below Marala headworks, the river flows in plain country where it attains flatter slope and
flows in the south west direction for a distance of about 26 miles. Here the river passes near
an important town Wazirabad and crosses two important works , a railway bridge
(Alexandera) and a road bridge on G.T. Road.
About 10 miles downsteam of Alexandera Bridge, it crosses second important

Headworks i.e. Khanki. Palkhu and Bhimber are two main Nallahs which outfall into this
river on the left and right side respectively.
From Khanki Headworks, it covers a distance of 19 miles in a South West

direction when it reaches newly constructed Qadirabad Barrage. From Qadirabad, it covers a
77
long distance of 65 miles in south west direction, till it reaches Chiniot Town. Here rail-cum-
road bridge exists over the river and the stream divides itself in two channels separated by a
hillock. Below Chiniot, it continues to flow in the same direction and covers a distance of
about 46 miles till it reaches Chund, where it crosses Rivaz Railway Bridge. From Rivaz
Bridge it flows towards south and covers a distance of 19 miles before it reaches Trimmu
Barrage which is another important structure on this river. River Jhelum joins Chenab from
the right side just one mile upstream of Trimmu Headworks. River Ravi joins it from the left
side near village Sawanwala about 40 miles downstream of Trimmu Headworks. After
covering 65 miles it reaches Sher Shah Rail-cum-road Bridge. This bridge is the fourth
railway bridge on this river. River Sutlej joins river Chenab on its left side about 4 miles
upstream of Panjnad Barrage. It joins river Indus near Basti Barkhurdar about 40 miles
downstream of Panjnad. The total length of the river in Plain (Akhnur to Basti Barkhurdar) is
about 419 miles.
The slope of the river, after entering into Pakistan varies from 3 feet per mile
to 0.5 foot per mile, as it travels from sub-mountainous regions to the plains. The slopes of
river Chenab observed at high flood stages are given below:-
Table 5.1 : Reach vs length & slope for river Chenab
SR. REACH LENGTH IN SLOPE IN FEET

NO. MILES PER MILE
1. Marala Headworks to Alexandra Bridge 25 1.96
2. Alexandra Railway Bridge to Khanki Headworks 10 2.00
3. Khanki Headworks to Qadirabad Barrage 19 1.58
4. Qadirabad Barrage to Chiniot Railway Bridge 65 1.65
5. Chiniot Railway Bridge to Rivaz Railway Bridge 46 1.59
6. Rivaz Railway Bridge to Trimmu Headworks 19 1.89
7. Trimmu Headworks to Sher Shah Railway Bridge 115 0.86
8. Sher Shah Railway Bridge to Panjnad Headworks 75 0.63
9. Panjnad to Mithankot 45 0.41
Total: 419
78
5.4 Analysis of Data
are computed for Chenab River by selecting its three sites i.e. Marala, Qaidrabad and
Punjnad. The details of the ever recorded peak discharges for Chenab River are elaborated in
Table 5.3 to 5.5.
Gumble method is used to analyse the flood frequency, the available data of
2, and so on. The percentage probability of non-occurrence P' %' is computed by using the
1
P '% = (1 - ) �100
Tr
The calculated return periods for the sites of Marala, Qaidrabad and Punjnand
are given in Table 5.6 to 5.8 and graphs between discharges vs. return periods are plotted as
shown in Figure 5.1 to 5.3.
different return periods are computed by using equation – VI in which the values of "K" are
taken from the standard table against the values of "g" as given in Table 5.10,5.12 & 5.14.
The semi log curves between return periods and expected discharges are plotted in Figure 5.7
to 5.9.
A comparison between values attained from Gumble and log pearson methods
has been shown by the curves plotted in Figure 5.4 to 5.6 which indicate the trend line of
return periods Vs discharges upto 100 years. Both the curves show the similar pattern from
79
which the reader can conclude the objective of the flood frequency study and ultimately apply
the conclusion on the existing structures of the Irrigation network for its improvements.
5.6 Histogram

considering the different class intervals for the sites of Chenab River, the histogram has been
5.7 Results & Discussion
1. The frequency of distribution bars as shown in Figure 5.10 to 5.12 indicates

that the medium flood (2 lakh to 3 lakh) persisted for a long duration in the
Chenab River as observed from the analysis of data since 1979.
probability percent for Log-Pearson Type – III and Gumbel Method for
Chenab River are given as below.
Table 5.2 : Return period vs probability %age for river Chenab
Log-Pearson Type – III Gamble Method

Return (Discharge in lakh-cusec) (Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Probability
Period
Percent
(Year)
Marala Qadirabad Panjnand Marala Qadirabad Panjnand
100 1 12.05 15.57 11.87 10.50 12.90 10.70
50 2 9.87 12.57 9.85 9.20 11.10 9.30
25 4 7.95 9.92 7.89 7.70 9.30 7.90
10 10 5.72 6.90 5.46 5.80 7.00 6.10
5 20 4.24 4.93 3.74 4.30 5.10 4.70
2 50 2.45 2.61 1.66 3.00 2.80 3.20
80
1.25 80 1.45 1.40 0.65 1.60 1.70 1.80
The ever highest peak flood of 9, 48,520 cusec was recorded in the year 1992
and second highest flood was recorded as 8,92,299 cusec in 1988 which
occurred before the interval of 4 year of highest peak.
3. It is predicted from the data analysis that the flood peaks like 2010 may be
repeated in the Chenab River after an interval of 100 year. Therefore it is
avoid any seepage flow across the bunds.
81
Table 5.3: Yearly peak discharges for river Chenab at Marala
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1979 249409 1997 770525
1980 199981 1998 109725
1981 527462 1999 187920
1982 257801 2000 223475
1983 242333 2001 132480
1984 156904 2002 224780
1985 267130 2003 165161
1986 301435 2004 93150
1987 94383 2005 333744
1988 743580 2006 330000
1989 395410 2007 148627
1990 205170 2008 163536
1991 110246 2009 94168
1992 792765 2010 282418
1993 399030
1994 407005
1995 431380
1996 624335
82
Table 5.4: Yearly peak discharges for river Chenab at Qadirabad
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1979 240785 1997 873442
1980 178582 1998 144451
1981 575440 1999 122447
1982 245030 2000 291349
1983 276988 2001 106500
1984 108976 2002 226398
1985 318117 2003 169296
1986 342758 2004 90043
1987 77279 2005 369847
1988 892299 2006 443206
1989 498474 2007 135326
1990 244272 2008 190437
1991 104726 2009 76366
1992 948520 2010 319733
1993 434754
1994 425567
1995 644697
1996 853231
83
Table 5.5: Yearly peak discharges for river Chenab at Panjnad
Discharge Discharge
Year Year
(Cusec) (Cusec)
1979 139362 1998 149578
1980 171460 1999 36436
1981 367220 2000 63405
1982 138948 2001 37465
1983 319420 2002 56778
1984 151122 2003 81379
1985 245370 2004 19438
1986 355480 2005 87630
1987 151038 2006 189000
1988 507345 2007 27996
1989 421350 2008 37145
1990 189168 2009 17833
1991 158929 2010 310117
1992 744152
1993 355136
1994 256799
1995 605523
1996 571746
1997 527662
84
Table5.6: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Chenab at Marala
Discharge
order)
1 249409 792765 7.928 1 33 97
2 199981 770525 7.705 2 17 94
3 527462 743580 7.436 3 11 91
4 257801 624335 6.243 4 8 88
5 242333 527462 5.275 5 7 85
6 156904 431380 4.314 6 6 82
7 267130 407005 4.070 7 5 79
8 301435 399030 3.990 8 4 76
9 94383 395410 3.954 9 4 73
10 743580 333744 3.337 10 3 70
11 395410 330000 3.300 11 3 67
12 205170 301435 3.014 12 3 64
13 110246 282418 2.824 13 3 61
14 792765 267130 2.671 14 2 58
15 399030 257801 2.578 15 2 55
16 407005 249409 2.494 16 2 52
17 431380 242333 2.423 17 2 48
18 624335 224780 2.248 18 2 45
19 770525 223475 2.235 19 2 42
20 109725 205170 2.052 20 2 39
21 187920 199981 2.000 21 2 36
22 223475 187920 1.879 22 2 33
23 132480 165161 1.652 23 1 30
24 224780 163536 1.635 24 1 27
25 165161 156904 1.569 25 1 24
26 93150 148627 1.486 26 1 21
27 333744 132480 1.325 27 1 18
28 330000 110246 1.102 28 1 15
29 148627 109725 1.097 29 1 12
30 163536 94383 0.944 30 1 9
31 94168 94168 0.942 31 1 6
32 282418 93150 0.932 32 1 3
85
Table 5.7: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Chenab at Qadirabad
Discharge
order)
1 240785 948520 9.485 1 33 97
2 178582 892299 8.923 2 17 94
3 575440 873442 8.734 3 11 91
4 245030 853231 8.532 4 8 88
5 276988 644697 6.447 5 7 85
6 108976 575440 5.754 6 6 82
7 318117 498474 4.985 7 5 79
8 342758 443206 4.432 8 4 76
9 77279 434754 4.348 9 4 73
10 892299 425567 4.256 10 3 70
11 498474 369847 3.698 11 3 67
86
1047
2631
198734422407852.40819242
9733
3.197
1336
1149
4852
03181
173.1 244272 342758 3.428 12 3
8114
2581
5434
7542
9134
92.91
3152
5512
2 16
7
6
9
8
8
2
.
7
7
0
1
6
2
5
2
1
3
425567
17 644697 245030 2.450 17 2 48
18 853231 244272 2.443 18 2 45
2263982.2642023920
2114
122447 190437 1.904 21 2 36
4451
87
1785821.7862223322
291349
23169296135326
25 1065001692961.3532512426
1.693231302490043122447 1.22426121
226398144451 1.44524127
27 369847 108976 1.090 27 1 18

28 443206 106500 1.065 28 1 15
1047261.0472911229
7636
6772
790.7
190437 90043 0.900 30 1 9
7331
16301
35326
3231 319733 76366 0.764 32 1 3
Table 5.8: Return period and probability %age of non occurrence for Chenab at Panjnad
88
Sr. no.Discharge (Cusec)Discharge ( in descending order)Peak Flood (Lakh
Cusec)mTr = (n+1)/mProbability (% age)
1 139362 744152 7.442 1 33 97

2 171460 605523 6.055 2 17 94
3 367220 571746 5.717 3 11 91
4 138948 527662 5.277 4 8 88
5 319420 507345 5.073 5 7 85
6 151122 421350 4.214 6 6 82
7 245370 367220 3.672 7 5 79
8 355480 355480 3.555 8 4 76
9 151038 355136 3.551 9 4 73
10 507345 319420 3.194 10 3 70
11 421350 310117 3.101 11 3 67
12 189168 256799 2.568 12 3 64
13 158929 245370 2.454 13 3 61
14 744152 189168 1.892 14 2 58
15 355136 189000 1.890 15 2 55
16 256799 171460 1.715 16 2 52
17 605523 158929 1.589 17 2 48
18 571746 151122 1.511 18 2 45
19 527662 151038 1.510 19 2 42
20 149578 149578 1.496 20 2 39
21 36436 139362 1.394 21 2 36
22 63405 138948 1.389 22 2 33
23 37465 87630 0.876 23 1 30
24 56778 81379 0.814 24 1 27
25 81379 63405 0.634 25 1 24
26 19438 56778 0.568 26 1 21
27 87630 37465 0.375 27 1 18
28 189000 37145 0.371 28 1 15
29 27996 36436 0.364 29 1 12
30 37145 27996 0.280 30 1 9
31 17833 19438 0.194 31 1 6
89
32 310117 17833 0.178 32 1 3
Table 5.9: Statistical analysis for Chenab at Marala
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ( in ______ ______ ______
order)
1 249409 792765 5.899 0.502 0.252 0.126
2 199981 770525 5.887 0.489 0.239 0.117
3 527462 743580 5.871 0.474 0.225 0.106
4 257801 624335 5.795 0.398 0.158 0.063
5 242333 527462 5.722 0.325 0.105 0.034
6 156904 431380 5.635 0.237 0.056 0.013
7 267130 407005 5.610 0.212 0.045 0.010
8 301435 399030 5.601 0.204 0.041 0.008
9 94383 395410 5.597 0.200 0.040 0.008
10 743580 333744 5.523 0.126 0.016 0.002
11 395410 330000 5.519 0.121 0.015 0.002
12 205170 301435 5.479 0.082 0.007 0.001
13 110246 282418 5.451 0.053 0.003 0.000
14 792765 267130 5.427 0.029 0.001 0.000
15 399030 257801 5.411 0.014 0.000 0.000
16 407005 249409 5.397 -0.001 0.000 0.000
17 431380 242333 5.384 -0.013 0.000 0.000
18 624335 224780 5.352 -0.046 0.002 0.000
19 770525 223475 5.349 -0.048 0.002 0.000
20 109725 205170 5.312 -0.085 0.007 -0.001
21 187920 199981 5.301 -0.096 0.009 -0.001
22 223475 187920 5.274 -0.123 0.015 -0.002
23 132480 165161 5.218 -0.180 0.032 -0.006
24 224780 163536 5.214 -0.184 0.034 -0.006
25 165161 156904 5.196 -0.202 0.041 -0.008
26 93150 148627 5.172 -0.225 0.051 -0.011
27 333744 132480 5.122 -0.275 0.076 -0.021
28 330000 110246 5.042 -0.355 0.126 -0.045
29 148627 109725 5.040 -0.357 0.128 -0.046
30 163536 94383 4.975 -0.423 0.179 -0.075
31 94168 94168 4.974 -0.424 0.179 -0.076
32 282418 93150 4.969 -0.428 0.183 -0.079
90
n= 32
∑log(x)= 172.719
_______
log(x)= ∑log(x)/n
_______
log(x)= 5.397
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 2.268
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = 0.114
______
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 0.199
91
Table 5.10: Expected floods for different return periods for Chenab at Marala
Value of"g"= 0.199
_______
log(x)= 5.397
σlog(x) = 0.270
_______

Sr.
no.
OF "g"
1 K100 2.472 X100 1164409
2 K50 2.159 X50 958172
3 K25 1.818 X25 774832
4 K10 1.301 X10 561521
5 K5 0.83 X5 418762
6 K2 -0.033 X2 244646
7 K1.25 -0.85 X1.25 147079
8 K1.0101 -2.178 X1.0101 64320
92
Table 5.11: Statistical analysis for Chenab at Qadirabad
Discharge =x
Sr. Discharge ______ ______ ______
( in descending
order)
1 240785 948520 5.977 0.556 0.310 0.172
2 178582 892299 5.951 0.530 0.281 0.149
3 575440 873442 5.941 0.521 0.271 0.141
4 245030 853231 5.931 0.510 0.261 0.133
5 276988 644697 5.809 0.389 0.151 0.059
6 108976 575440 5.760 0.339 0.115 0.039
7 318117 498474 5.698 0.277 0.077 0.021
8 342758 443206 5.647 0.226 0.051 0.012
9 77279 434754 5.638 0.218 0.047 0.010
10 892299 425567 5.629 0.208 0.043 0.009
11 498474 369847 5.568 0.147 0.022 0.003
12 244272 342758 5.535 0.114 0.013 0.001
13 104726 319733 5.505 0.084 0.007 0.001
14 948520 318117 5.503 0.082 0.007 0.001
15 434754 291349 5.464 0.044 0.002 0.000
16 425567 276988 5.442 0.022 0.000 0.000
17 644697 245030 5.389 -0.031 0.001 0.000
18 853231 244272 5.388 -0.033 0.001 0.000
19 873442 240785 5.382 -0.039 0.002 0.000
n= 32
20 144451 226398 5.355 -0.066 0.004 0.000
21 122447 190437 5.280 -0.141 0.020 -0.003
22 291349
∑log(x)= 173.461178582 5.252 -0.169 0.028 -0.005
23 106500 169296 5.229 -0.192 0.037 -0.007
24 _______
226398 144451 5.160 -0.261 0.068 -0.018
25 log(x)=
169296 ∑log(x)/n 135326 5.131 -0.289 0.084 -0.024
26 90043 122447 5.088 -0.333 0.111 -0.037
27 _______
369847 108976 5.037 -0.383 0.147 -0.056
28 log(x)=
443206 5.421106500 5.027 -0.393 0.155 -0.061
29 135326 104726 5.020 -0.401 0.160 -0.064
30 190437 90043 4.954 -0.466 0.217 -0.101
31 76366______ 77279 4.888 -0.533 0.284 -0.151
2
32 ∑(log(x) - log(x)) = 76366 3.265
319733 4.883 -0.538 0.289 -0.156
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = 0.068
______
93
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = 0.068
94
Value
Sr. _______ OF1K

X =no.VALUE 1002.377X
"K" 10015564202K
FOR DIFFERENT 4K
5K10RETURN
1.288X
0.837X
50
5 2.091X510492390
50689738
12569083KAGAINST
PERIOGS 251.774X25991788 antilog
VALUE OF "g"EXPECTED
FLOODS FOR DIFERENT RETURN PERIODS (CUSECS) {log(x) + K(σlog(x))}
95
6 K2 -0.011 X2 261267
7 K1.25 -0.84 X1.25 140614
8 K1.0101 -2.273 X1.0101 48188
Table 5.13: Statistical analysis for Chenab at Panjnad
Discharge
=x
Sr. Discharge ______ ______ ______
( in
descending
order)
1 139362 744152 5.872 0.689 0.475 0.328
2 171460 605523 5.782 0.600 0.360 0.216
3 367220 571746 5.757 0.575 0.330 0.190
4 138948 527662 5.722 0.540 0.292 0.157
5 319420 507345 5.705 0.523 0.273 0.143
6 151122 421350 5.625 0.442 0.196 0.087
7 245370 367220 5.565 0.383 0.146 0.056
8 355480 355480 5.551 0.368 0.136 0.050
9 151038 355136 5.550 0.368 0.135 0.050
10 507345 319420 5.504 0.322 0.104 0.033
11 421350 310117 5.492 0.309 0.096 0.030
12 189168 256799 5.410 0.227 0.052 0.012
13 158929 245370 5.390 0.207 0.043 0.009
14 744152 189168 5.277 0.094 0.009 0.001
15 355136 189000 5.276 0.094 0.009 0.001
16 256799 171460 5.234 0.052 0.003 0.000
17 605523 158929 5.201 0.019 0.000 0.000
18 571746 151122 5.179 -0.003 0.000 0.000
19 527662 151038 5.179 -0.003 0.000 0.000
96
20 149578 149578 5.175 -0.007 0.000 0.000
21 n=
36436 32139362 5.144 -0.038 0.001 0.000
22 63405 138948 5.143 -0.039 0.002 0.000
23 37465 87630 4.943 -0.240 0.057 -0.014
∑log(x)= 165.835
24 56778 81379 4.911 -0.272 0.074 -0.020
25 81379 63405 4.802 -0.380 0.145 -0.055
_______
26 19438
log(x)= 56778
∑log(x)/n 4.754 -0.428 0.183 -0.078
27 87630 37465 4.574 -0.609 0.371 -0.226
28 189000 37145 4.570 -0.612 0.375 -0.230
_______
29 27996
log(x)= 36436
5.182 4.562 -0.621 0.385 -0.239
30 37145 27996 4.447 -0.735 0.541 -0.397
31 17833 19438 4.289 -0.894 0.799 -0.714
32 310117 17833 4.251 -0.931 0.867 -0.807
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))2 = 6.458
______
∑(log(x) - log(x))3 = -1.419
______
______
(n-1)(n-2)(σlog(x))3 = -0.513
Table 5.14: Expected floods for different return periods for Chenab at Panjnad
Value of"g"= -0.513
97
_______
log(x)= 5.182
σlog(x) = 0.456
_______

Sr.
no.
VALUE OF "g"
1 K100 1.954 X100 1186343
2 K50 1.777 X50 984969
3 K25 1.567 X25 789901
4 K10 1.215 X10 545645
5 K5 0.856 X5 374156
6 K2 0.0825 X2 165961
7 K1.25 -0.808 X1.25 65096
8 K1.0101 -2.685 X1.0101 9054
98
99
100
101
102
103
CHAPTER 6
Conclusion & Recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
After doing the exercise on the data of discharges, the flood frequency analysis
for Indus, Jhelum and Chenab Rivers the following general conclusion is derived as below:-
1) The maximum expected floods which could occur in Indus at Kalabagh after
the interval of 100 years as computed by log-pearson type-III is 10.8 lac cusec
vs 10.96 lac cusec as computed by Gumble method with % age difference of
1.5 % whereas for Taunsa difference between computed floods by Gumble and
log-pearson methods is 0.5% as depicted in table given below:-
Table 6.1 : Maximum expected flood for river Indus

Return
Probability lakh-cusec) (Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Period
Percent
(Year)
Kalabagh Taunsa Kalabagh Taunsa
100 1 10.8 10.05 10.96 10.90
2) The maximum expected floods which could occur in Jhelum at Mangla after
the interval of 100 years as computed by log-pearson type-III is 6.97 lac cusec
vs 8.40 lac cusec as computed by Gumble method with % age difference of
18% whereas for Rasul difference between computed floods by Gumble and
log-pearson methods is 10% as depicted in table given below:-
Table 6.2 : Maximum expected flood for river Jhelum
Return Probability
Period Percent Log-Pearson Type – III (Discharge in Gumble Method
(Year) lakh-cusec) (Discharge in lakh-cusec)
104
Mangla Rasul Mangla Rasul
100 1 6.97 8.24 8.40 9.10
3) The maximum expected floods which could occur in Chenab at Marala after
the interval of 100 years as computed by log-pearson type-III is 12.05 lac
cusec vs 10.50 lac cusec as computed by Gumble method with % age
difference of 15% whereas for Qadirabad difference between computed floods
by Gumble and log-pearson methods is 20% as depicted in table given below:-
Table 6.3 : Maximum expected flood for river Chenab
Return Period
(Year)Probability Percent
Log-Pearson Type – III
(Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Gamble Method
(Discharge in lakh-cusec)
Marala
QadirabadPanjnand
Marala
QadirabadPanjnand
100112.0515.5711.8710.5012.9010.70
105
6.2 Recommendations
1) The main structures like barrages and other allied infrastructure constructed
across and along the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers may be monitored after
considering the flood peaks of 100 year return period according to the
computation of data as elaborated in this study.
2) This study reveals that both Gumbel and Log-Pearson methods can be
employed to calculate the frequency for expected floods with the condition
that data used need to be consistent over the recording period/interval. In case,
consistent data is not available for any river both methods are to be employed
for accurate results as well as cross-checking of results.
3) The historic flood record of the rivers indicates that the major damages
occurred in the country are along the banks of Indus river. All the four rivers
ultimately become the part of mighty Indus after emerging from Trimmu and
Punjnad Barrages respectively. So the field engineers who regulate the flood
through Indus River should remain very vigilant by preparing flood fighting
arrangements to pass the floods safely.
4) The newly proposed structures which are to be constructed across the rivers
may be designed after considering the flood analysis data as computed in this
study.
5) The field engineers may also be able to get guidance from the data analysis for
proper regulation of the flood discharges during flood seasons every year by
preparing flood fighting plan according to the expected floods which can
occur in future.
106
References
1. Koutrouvelis, G.C.Canavos ,2000, Journal of Hydrology, Volume 234, Pages 71

2. Hans Thodsen , 2007, Journal of Hydrology, Volume 333,Pages226-23
3. S.Rocky Durrans , 1992 ,Journal of Hydrology, Volume 133, Pages 215-232
4. Bullard K. W., 1986, Journal of Hydrology, Comparison of Estimated Probable
Maximum Flood Peaks with Historic Records. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S.
Department of the Interior.
5. Yuichi Nagahara , 2004, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Volume
47,Pages1-29
6. R.K Wilson , 1988 , Journal of Hydrology, Volume 98, Pages 205-224
7. Chow, V. T. 1959, Open-Channel Hydraulics. New York: McGraw Hill.
8. Linsley, R.K., M.A. Kohler and J.L.H. Paulhus,1975, Hydrology for Engineers,
McGraw Hill Book Company.
9. Amein, M. and Farrg, C.S. 1970, Implicit flood routing in natural channels. Journal of
Hydraulic Division, ASCE 96(5) pp. 2481-2500.
10. Pegram and Parak, 2002, Journal of Hydrology, Volume 65, Pages 112-116
11. Tumbare, 2000 ,Flood Frequency Analysis ,McGraw Hill Book Company.
12. Law and Tasker, 2003, IAHR Journal of Hydraulic Research. Vol. 36(4):371-395
13. Tumbare and Agritex, 2000 , research paper , Frequency Analysis for predicting
extreme hydrological events.
14. Zelenhasic, 1970; Haan, 1977; Shaw, 1983 research paper, Gumbel distribution for
predicting extreme hydrological events.
15. Mujere, 2006, research paper, flow data cover for relatively long record (more than 10
years).
16. Prasad, 1970, Journal on computing flow profile by solving the differential equation.
17. Annandale, G.W. 1995. Flood Routing, IAHR Journal of Hydraulic Research. Vol.
33(4):471-494
18. Chaudhry, M.H. 1993. Open Channel Flow. Perintice Hall International PHI
Englewood Cliffs New Jersey. U.S.A: 253,417-25.
107
19. Chen, Y.H. 1979. Water routing - In Shen H.W. (ed.) Modelling of Rivers. John
Willey and Sons, New York, USA.
20. Chunge, J.A., Holly, F.M. and A. Verwey. 1980. Practical aspects of computational
river hydraulics. Pitman Publ. London, England.
21. Simons and Li Assoc. 1986. Engineering Analysis of Fluvial Systems. Water
Resources Publications Fort Collins Colorado. U.S.A: 11.19-11.22.
22. Relevant literature available on the web.
108

Text

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Text

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

CHAPTER 1

1.2 Problem Statement

Comparative study is to be carried out to provide accurate and reliable

A comprehensive research methodology shall be evolved to suit the objectives.

1.4 Utilization of Research Work

2.1 Significance of Return Period

Probability analysis seeks to define the flood with a probability of being

2.2 Gumble Method

2.3 Log – Pearsons Type - III Distribution Method

s log( X ) = �(log( X ) - log( X )) 2 … …… (IV)

n �(log( X ) - log( X ))3

The value of x for any probability level is computed from:

log( X ) = log( X ) + K s log( X ) … … (VI)

Where K is a frequency factor defined by a specific distribution and is a

2.4 Causes of Floods on Pakistan

The major cause of floods in Pakistan is heavy concentrated rainfall in the

Indus Main 1,18,400 1958 8,00,000 1929, 1942, 1928

Jhelum 12,445 528 3,00,000 1928, 1950, 1922

Chenab 11,399 807 6,00,000 1928,1929, 1922

Ravi 3,562 626 1,80,000 1947, 1950, 1922

Sutlej 30,550 964 2,25,000 1942, 1947, 1928

Case Study for River Indus

3.2 Course of the River

3.3 Slope of the River

The slope of a river is an important factor in determining its discharge and

1. The mountaineous basin i.e. from source to Kalabagh and

2. From Kalabagh to outfall into Arabian Sea.

3.4 Analysis of data

3.5 Graphical Comparison

To understand the limits of discharges occurring in different years by

1. The frequency of distribution bars as shown in Figure 3.9 to 3.10 indicate

2. The estimated maximum discharges for different return periods and

Log-Pearson Type – III (Discharge in Gumble Method

100 1 10.8 10.05 10.96 10.90

50 2 9.6 9.14 9.80 9.80

25 4 8.5 8.23 8.60 8.70

10 10 7.06 6.97 7.10 7.20

5 20 5.99 5.96 5.90 6.00

2 50 4.5 4.41 5.00 5.00

1.25 80 3.43 3.24 3.80 3.70

1.0101 99 2.3 1.86 --- ---

1974 389800 1993 370346

1975 588975 1994 496379

1976 861695 1995 544555

1977 574391 1996 441410

1978 639792 1997 654179

1979 456780 1998 492653

1980 373759 1999 456146

1981 354328 2000 237297

1982 465104 2001 259980

1983 492931 2002 379599

1984 491280 2003 399352

1985 313340 2004 245067

1986 471073 2005 427486

1987 351268 2006 497586

1988 598303 2007 359912

1989 557811 2008 336530

1990 546260 2009 348320

1991 445887 2010 1036453 13

1986 505069 2005 531177

1987 313204 2006 612269

1988 560916 2007 335370

1989 558650 2008 263458

1990 502152 2009 320292

_ 5.659