LAB

3 A Flood Routing Problem

FABE 3150 SYSTEM DYNAMICS
Olivia Cremeans
February 9, 2017




























Figure 1: Simulink Block Diagram created using Lab 3 form "A Flood Routing Problem" to analyze equations a nd derive graphs.

Ode 1 (Euler) method was used as the integration method with a time interval of 0-
10 seconds and a fixed step-size of 0.0001.

Case Constant Variable Variation

Between 24 and 36 pipe

7b-1 Constant (d) Gain2 (AdivK)
diameter

7b-2 Gain2 (AdivK) Constant (d) Between 5, 6.5, 8 ft depth

Table 1: Gains varied for Figure 4

2


Graph 1: Storage capacity of reservoir over spillway crest

Graph 2: Inflow effect over time through a reservoir

3


Graph 1: Effect on system due to inflow

Graph 2: Effect on system performance of pipe size and drop-box inlet depth

4


Graph 3: Effect of amount of storage due to pipe diameter and discharge height

Discussion of results:

Graph 1 indicates that as the elevation above the spillway crest increases,
storage capacity also increases.
Graph 2 shows that the inflow rate for the system decreased rapidly as time
increased.
Graph 3 demonstrates a rapid increases and decrease of the inflow over
about 3 hours. Reservoir stage is increased due to the increase of inflow. Discharge
rate increases, levels out, and then decreases with time. Both, reservoir stage and
discharge rate, decrease slowly, demonstrating the relationship between them in
the design of the reservoir.
Graph 4 shows that increasing the pipe size increases the flow rate, in turn
limiting the time necessary to discharge. The downfall of this approach is that there
is a loss of control of the water with it flowing at such a high rate. Decreasing the
pipe size slows down the flow rate, allowing for more control of the water. The pipe
size should be dictated based on where it will be implemented. An area with more
flooding may find it necessary to have a larger pipe size to ensure that the storage
capacity does not reach its limit, and vice versa.

5

 Graph 5 reinforced the discussion about Graph 4, showing that the result of a
smaller pipe size is a longer time available for water storage and a slower rate of
discharge.


Change of time base:

Rates were given in ft3/s and the data was requested to be in hours. Storage
capacity was in hundreds of thousands of ft3, so the following conversion was used:

! 3600 10! ! 10! !
= 0.036
10! !


Assumptions for equation 1:

The assumptions used to describe the problem by equation 1 in the Lab #3
form A Flood Routing Problem are as follows:

1. Water velocity in the reservoir is neglected
2. The surface of the reservoir is assumed to be horizontal
3. The spillway outlet is 6.5 feet below the spillway crest and not
submerged.
4. The pond is assumed just full at the start of the storm.


Assumptions for equation 4 and the advantages of this design:

The assumptions that justify equation 4 in the Lab #3 form A Flood Routing
Problem and the advantages of the design used can be found by looking at Figure 3
of Computers in AE. Overall, the assumption is that the capacity of the reservoir
would not be exceeded by rainfall. If the capacity was exceeded it would result in
backed up water, and essentially, flooding where it was meant to be prevented.

6

MATLAB Script

clear all
clc
disp('Olivia Cremeans')
disp('FABE 3150')
disp('A Flood Routing Problem')
disp('February 9th, 2017')

b=9; %length of effective edges of the box inlet, ft

c=3; %approach coefficient to box inlet, ft^(1/2)/sec
L=150; %pipe length, ft
A=4.91; %CSA of outlet pipe, ft^2
d=6.5; %distance from spillway crest to center of pipe outlet
AdivK=22.36; %30 in pipe area with loss coefficients
g=32.2; %acc due to gravity
s=[0 0.3 0.5 0.8 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.3 2.6 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10];
e=[0 0.8 1.1 1.7 1.9 2.25 2.5 2.8 2.9 3 3.35 3.5 3.8 4.05 4.3 4.45 4.8
5.05 5.15 5.45 5.6 5.7 5.95 6.05 6.15 6.25];
t=[0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4
4.3 4.65 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 10];
i=[0 22 45 76 130 152 180 189 168 151 116 89 67 52 44 37 29 23 17 15 9
6 3 1 0 0 0];

sim('lab3model')

figure(1)
plot(t,i)
xlabel('TIME (hrs)')
ylabel('INFLOW RATE (ft^3/sec)')
title('Inflow Hydrograph')

figure(2)
plot(s,e)
axis([0 10 0 10])
xlabel('STORAGE (in hundreds of thousand ft^3')
ylabel('ELEVATION ABOVE SPILLWAY CREST (ft)')
title('Storage Capacity of Reservoir')

figure(3)
hold on
plot(t,i)
[AX,H1,H2]=plotyy(time,out,time,storage);
axes(AX(1));ylabel('INFLOW RATE AND OUTFLOW (ft^3/sec)');
axis([0 10 0 200]);set(gca,'YTick',([0:20:200]))
legend('Inflow','Outflow')
axes(AX(2));ylabel('RESERVOIR STAGE (ft)');axis([0 10 0
10]);set(gca,'YTick',([0:1:10])),legend('Reservoir Stage')
xlabel('TIME (hrs)')
title('Effect of Flowrate on Inflow, Resevoir Stage and Discharge')
hold off

7

figure(4)
for d=[5.0 6.5 8]
AdivK=22.36;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,in,time,out);
hold on
end
for AdivK=[13.17 34.16]
d=6.5;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,in,time,out);
end
hold off
xlabel('Time (hrs)')
axis([0 10 0 200])
ylabel('Flowrate (ft^3/sec)')
title('Effect of Pipe Size and Depth on System Performance')

figure(5)
for AdivK=[13.17 22.36 34.16]
d=6.5;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,storage)
hold on
end
for d=[5.0 6.5 8]
AdivK=22.36;
sim('lab3model')
plot(time,storage)
end
hold off
xlabel('Time (hrs)')
axis([0 10 0 10])
ylabel('Reservoir Stage (ft)')
title('Effect of Pipe Diameter and Discharge Height on the Reservoir
Stage')