Keeping water upstream

A survey of the effects of retention orifices.

M. Tilma,

P.E.V. van Walsum

P.J.T. van Bakel

A.G.M. Hermans

L.C.P.M. Stuyt

Constance

• The model SIMGRO

• The study area

• The orifice

• Results

• Conclusion

SIMGRO

Ro o t zo n e

Sp ri nk li ng f romg ro un dw ater Pu bl ic

w ater su pp lyLand use

Sp rin k lin g fr omsur fac e w ater

Su pp ly c apac ity

Surf ace w atersystem

Sub catc hm entbo un dar y

Sub sur face ir rig atio nor d rai nag e

Surf ace ru no ff

C api llar y riseo r per co latio n

A qu itar d

Phreat iclevel

252

H 0

2

H yd ro log ic al base

N od e po int fin iteelem ent g rid

1 A q uif er

A q u itard

st

Hydro lo gic al base

2 A q ui fern d

D e e lg e b ie d s -g r e n s

D e e lg e b ie d s -g r e n s

S le c h td o o r la te n d ela a g

C a p i l la ir eo p s t i jg in g

O p p e r v la k k ig ea fs t r o m in g

B e r e g e n in g u i to p p e r v la k te w a te r

L a n d g e b r u ik

w o r te lz o n e

G r o n d -w a te r -s p ie g e l

E e r s te w a te r v o e r e n d e la a g

T w e e d e w a te r v o e r e n d e la a g

H y d ro lo g is c h e b a s is

S le c h td o o r la te n d e la a g

O p p e r v la k te -w a te rg r e n s

In f i lt r a t ie o fd r a in a g eg r e n s

D r in k w a te r -o n t t r e k k in g

K n o o p p u n t v a ne in d ig e e le m e n te n -n e tw e rk

A a n v o e r

B e r e g e n in g u i tg r o n d w a te r

A a n v o e r o f a f v o e r

1. Ground water (Finite elements)

2. Surface water

3. Irrigation

4. Land cover

5. Drainage

The Beerze and Reuzel

Eindhoven

's-Hertogenbosch

TilburgBreda

StudiegebiedGrote steden Noord-Brabant Provinciegrenzen

N

20 0 20 40 Kilometers

Sandy area on the border between the Netherlands and Belgium which is distinct for a Dutch sandy area.

The Orifice in practise

h

Q

The orifice in the model

The Dam

The orifice

Placement of the orifices

Evaluation

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

18/10/'9

8

20/10/'9

8

22/10/'9

8

24/10/'9

8

26/10/'9

8

28/10/'9

8

30/10/'9

8

1/11/'9

8

3/11/'9

8

5/11/'9

8

7/11/'9

8

9/11/'9

8

11/11/'9

8

13/11/'9

8

15/11/'9

8

17/11/'9

8

19/11/'9

8

21/11/'9

8

23/11/'9

8

25/11/'9

8

date (dd/mm/jj)

afv

oe

r (m

3/s

)

Duiker

Dam

Duiker + Dam

Bovenstrooms

Discharge reduction

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

01/12/93 16/12/93 31/12/93 15/01/94 30/01/94 14/02/94Datum (dd/mm/jj)

afvo

er (

m3/

s)

Referentie

2,0 x Ma

1,0 x Ma

0,05 x Ma

When it goes wrong!

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

datum (dd/mm/jj)

afvo

er (

m3/

s)

Referentie

2,0 x Ma

1,0 x Ma

0,05 x Ma

The effect of the orifice size on the discharge

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49orde van maxima

De

bie

t (m

3/s

)

Referetie

0,05 X Ma

1,0 X Ma

2,0 X Ma

Effect of the size of the dam on the discharge

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49

orde van maxima (-)

de

bie

t (m

3/s

)

50cm

35cm

20cm

10cm

referentie

Conclusion

• Reduction of the peek flow can be obtained

• Increase in water table height is a possible side effect

• For extreme peeks an increase in peek discharge is possible

• Careful planning is necessary