ENCV3FB PRACTICAL REPORT 2025

RESERVOIR ROUTING
GROUP 4
GROUP MEMBERS STUDENT NUMBER
MLULEKI MTSOTSOYI 220023078
SIPHESIHLE MATHABA 222013437
SANELE NGCOBO 223007828
JABULANI SIBIYA 223078835
Declaration page
We hereby declare that the work presented in this assignment is our own original work. We have
not copied or plagiarized any part of the content, and all sources and references used have
been properly acknowledged. We understand that any violation of this declaration may result in
penalties as per the institution's academic integrity policies.

Group members Student numbers Signatures: Date:

Sanele Ngcobo 223007828 S. Ngcobo 30/09/2025

Jabulani Sibiya 223078835 J. Sibiya 30/09/2025

Mluleki Mtsotsoyi 220023078 [Link] 30/09/2025

Siphesihle Mathaba 222013437 S. Mathaba 30/09/2025

1
Table of Contents

DECLERATION PAGE……………………………………………………………………………………………….….1
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 3
AIM AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 3
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 4
APPARATUS:................................................................................................................................. 5
PROCEDURE: ............................................................................................................................... 6
RESULTS: ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Phase 1 Calibration ..................................................................................................................... 6
Phase 2: Storage Calibration ........................................................................................................ 9
Phase 3: Routing ....................................................................................................................... 10
DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................. 12
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 13
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDIX A: .............................................................................................................................. 15

2
 INTRODUCTION

Flood routing is a procedure used to calculate the outflow hydrograph by using a known
inflow hydrograph and storage outflow characteristics. This procedure is a fundamental tool
used by engineers to estimate the effects of floods originating from different upstream
tributaries and evaluate the performance of flood control systems, such as reservoirs. There
are two distinct types of flood routing ([Link], et al., 1987), which include:
• Channel routing: Used to determine the outflow hydrograph from a particular length
of a channel using a known inflow hydrograph
• Reservoir Routing: Used to determine the outflow hydrograph over a spillway using a
known hydrograph.
Reservoir routing focuses specifically on analyzing a flood's impact as it enters a
reservoir. This analysis is essential for designing the capacity of outlet structures like
spillways.

Aim and objectives

The main objective of this experiment is to investigate the movement of flood waves
through a reservoir by comparing the measured inflow and outflow hydrographs to the
outflow hydrograph determined using the level-pool routing method that is based on the
continuity equation.

3
 Theoretical Background

There are different types of flood routing, however they are grouped into two main
categories which are:
• Lumped system routing
• Distributed system routing
The main difference between the two is that in a lumped system model, the flow is
determined as a function of time alone, while in a distributed system routing the flow is
determined as a function of space and time throughout the system ([Link], et al.,
1987). The level pool method falls under the lumped system routing.
For a lumped system, inflow(I), outflow (Q), and storage S are related by the continuity
equation:
𝑑𝑆
=𝐼−𝑂 (1)
𝑑𝑡

This basically means that the rate of change in storage equals the difference between the
inflow rate and the outflow rate.
Expressing the equation above in a finite differential form gives:
(𝐼𝑗 +𝐼𝑗+1 ) (𝑂𝑗 +𝑂𝑗+1 )
∆𝑡 − ∆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑗+1 − 𝑆𝑗 (2)
2 2

Which can be written as:

2𝑆𝑗+1 2𝑆
+ 𝑄𝑗+1 = (𝐼𝑗 + 𝐼𝑗+1 ) + ( ∆𝑡𝑗 − 𝑄𝑗 ) (3)
∆𝑡

Where:
𝐼𝑗 and 𝑂𝑗 are the inflow rate and outflow rate at time t

𝐼𝑗+1 and 𝑂𝑗 + 𝑂𝑗+1 are the inflow and outflow rates at time 𝑡 + ∆𝑡

4
 Apparatus:

Figure 1: Picture of apparatus used (from ENV3FB PRACTICAL GUIDE)

The apparatus used in this experiment is:

• Reservoir model with a spillway
• Inflow tank with a V-notch weir
• Measuring stick
• Collector tank under the spillway
• Stopwatch
• Cover plate
• Ruler

5
 Procedure:
1. Open the inlet valve at different time intervals
2. Use the measuring stick to measure the water level in the weir, reservoir, and in the
collector tank
3. Make sure that the collector tank is drained and the water height in the reservoir is
below the spillway.
4. Block the spillway using the cover plate, then open the inlet valve
5. Imitate a flash flood event by opening and quickly closing the inlet valve, taking
down the readings of the water level in the weir, reservoir, and tank
6. Imitate the prolonged flood event by opening and then slowly closing the inlet valve,
and then take the readings of the water level in the weir, reservoir, and tank

Results:
Phase 1 Calibration
Refer to the appendix for the data used to produce the results.

logQ vs logΔh
0
-1,8 -1,6 -1,4 -1,2 -1 -0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0
-0,5

-1

-1,5
logQ(m^3)

-2

-2,5
y = 2,245x - 0,221
-3

-3,5

-4
logΔh(m)

Figure 2: Graph of logQ vs logΔh.

6
 Chart Title
0
-2,5 -2 -1,5 -1 -0,5 0
-0,5

-1

-1,5

-2

-2,5
y = 1,8266x - 0,0472
-3

-3,5

-4

Figure 3: Graph of logQ vs logΔH.

Inflow vs Δh
0,0016
0,0014
0,0012 y = 0,6012x2,245
Inflow (m³/s)

0,001
0,0008
0,0006
0,0004
0,0002
0
0 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08
Δh(m)

Figure 4: Graph of inflow vs Δh.

7
 Outflow vs ΔH
0,0016

0,0014
y = 0,8969x1,8266
0,0012

0,001
Outflow (m³/S )

0,0008

0,0006

0,0004

0,0002

0
0 0,005 0,01 0,015 0,02 0,025 0,03 0,035
ΔH(m)

Figure 5: Graph of outflow vs ΔH.

8
Phase 2: Storage Calibration
Refer to the appendix for raw and calculated data

(2S/ΔT)+O vs O
0,001800
0,001600
0,001400
0,001200
2S/ΔT+0 (m³)

0,001000
0,000800
0,000600
0,000400
0,000200
0,000000
0 0,0001 0,0002 0,0003 0,0004 0,0005 0,0006 0,0007 0,0008 0,0009
O(m³/s)

Figure 6: Graph of storage vs outflow.

Storage vs Head
0,004
0,0035
0,003
Storage(m³)

0,0025
0,002
0,0015
0,001
0,0005
0
0,26 0,265 0,27 0,275 0,28 0,285
Head(m)

9
Phase 3: Routing
Hydrograph
0,00045

0,0004

0,00035

0,0003
Flow (m³/S)

Inflow
0,00025
Outflow
0,0002
Routed Outflow
0,00015

0,0001

0,00005

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (s)

Figure 7: Hydrograph for low intensity flow.

From figure 7 above, the following results can be determined:

Peak flow:

• Inflow(I)= 0,000389613 m³/s

• Outflow(O)= 8,41421E-05 m³/s
• Routed Outflow=0,00031598 m³/s

Time to peak:

• Inflow=10s
• Outflow=10s
• Routed flow=20s

Attenuation:

• Observed=0,000389613-8,41421E-05=0,0003054709 m³/s
• Routed=0,000389613-0,00031598=0,000073633 m³/s

10
 Hydrograph
0,00045
0,0004
0,00035
0,0003
Inflow
Flow(m³)

0,00025
0,0002 Outflow

0,00015 Routed Outflow

0,0001
0,00005
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time(s)

Figure 8: Hydrograph of high intensity flow

From figure 7 above, the following results can be determined:

Peak flow:

• Inflow(I)= 0,000389613 m³/s

• Outflow(O)= 7,06977E-05 m³/s
• Routed Outflow=0,00029709 m³/s

Time to peak:

• Inflow=10s
• Outflow=10s
• Routed flow=20s

Attenuation:

• Observed=0,000389613-7,06977E-05 = 0,0003189153 m³/s

• Routed=0,000389613-0,00029709=0,000092523 m³/s

11
Discussion

The calibration stage (Figures 2–5) established reliable relationships between water levels and
discharges for both the V-notch weir (inflow) and the spillway (outflow). The log–log plots of
discharge versus head difference demonstrated nearly linear behaviour, consistent with the
power-law relationship expected from hydraulic theory. This calibration step was essential to
ensure that the measured head differences could be translated into accurate inflow and outflow
hydrographs.

The storage–outflow relationship (Figure 6) provided further confirmation of theoretical

expectations. As reservoir storage increased, the outflow also increased in a nonlinear fashion.
This curve served as the key input for applying the level-pool routing method, which assumes a
horizontal water surface across the reservoir at any instant in time.

The routing results clearly demonstrated the attenuation and translation of flood waves. For the
low-intensity hydrograph (Figure 7), the inflow reached a peak discharge of approximately
0.00039 m³/s at 10 seconds. The observed outflow peaked at a much lower value of 8.41×10⁻⁵
m³/s, reflecting strong attenuation, but occurred without a significant lag. The routed outflow, by
contrast, peaked at 0.00032 m³/s at 20 seconds, correctly predicting the lag but
underestimating the observed attenuation.

A similar pattern was found for the high-intensity hydrograph (Figure 8). The inflow again peaked
at 0.00039 m³/s at 10 seconds, while the observed outflow was 7.07×10⁻⁵ m³/s. The routed
outflow peaked later (20 seconds) at 0.00030 m³/s. As with the low-intensity case, the routing
procedure reproduced the timing delay but not the full magnitude of attenuation.

The discrepancies between routed and observed results can be attributed to several factors.
First, the level-pool method simplifies reservoir hydraulics by assuming a uniform water surface
and neglecting short-term dynamic effects such as turbulence and momentum exchange near
the spillway. Second, experimental limitations including manual readings of water levels,
potential timing errors, and imperfect sealing of the apparatus likely introduced measurement
inaccuracies. Finally, scale effects inherent in laboratory models may exaggerate or dampen
certain processes compared with full-scale reservoirs.

Nevertheless, the essential hydrological behaviour was captured, reservoirs act to lower and
delay peak discharges, thereby reducing downstream flood risk. The experiment reinforces the
theoretical basis of flood routing and provides students with a practical understanding of how
inflows are transformed into outflows through the combined effects of storage and controlled
release.

12
 Conclusion

This practical successfully illustrated the application of the level-pool method for reservoir
routing. Both low and high-intensity inflows demonstrated attenuation of peak discharge and a
delay in hydrograph response, thereby confirming the reservoir’s moderating effect on flood
waves. While the routed hydrographs did not fully reproduce the degree of attenuation observed
in the experiment, the timing and general shapes were consistent with theory.

The findings underscore the value of flood routing techniques in hydrology and water resources
engineering. Reservoir routing is a critical tool in the design and management of flood control
infrastructure, enabling engineers to estimate downstream hydrographs and evaluate spillway
and outlet capacities.

Future work should focus on improving measurement precision through automated data
logging, reducing experimental uncertainties, and testing alternative routing methods such as
the Muskingum or distributed routing approaches. These refinements would provide a deeper
understanding of the strengths and limitations of simplified lumped models like the level-pool
method and improve their applicability in real-world flood management scenarios.

13
 References

• Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R. and Mays, L.W., 1987. Applied Hydrology. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

• Chadwick, A., Morfeit, J. and Borthwick, M., 2013. Hydraulics in Civil and Environmental
Engineering. 5th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

• Gioia, A., 2016. Reservoir routing on double-peak design flood. Water, 8(12), p.553.

14
 Appendix A:
Phase 1: Calibration
• Length of tank = 0,6m
• Breadth of tank=0,35m
• Area of tank=0,21m²

Hi=0,26m

hi=0,142m

Time(s) H(m) ΔH(m) h(m) Δh(m) A(m²) V(m³) Q(m³/s) LogQ(m³/s) LogΔH(m) logΔh(m)
60 0,27 0,168
0,01 0,026 0,21 0,00987 0,00016 -3,783841 -2 -1,59
30 0,275 0,189
0,015 0,047 0,21 0,01659 0,00055 -3,2572749 -1,82 -1,33
20 0,287 0,2
0,027 0,058 0,21 0,02877 0,00144 -2,8420901 -1,57 -1,24
10 0,290 0,21
0,03 0,068 0,21 0,01155 0,00116 -2,9374180 -1,52 -1,17
Table 1: Calculations for calibration of the v-notch weir and spillway.

From the graphs in Phase 1, the equations to calculate the inflow outflow are determined as:

• 𝑂 = 0,8969𝛥𝐻1,8266
• 𝐼 = 0,6012𝛥ℎ2,245

Phase 2: storage calibration

2𝑆
T(s) h(m) hi(m) Δh(m) H(m) Hi(m) ΔH(m) O(m³/s) I(m³/s) S=I∆𝑡 (m³) +𝑂
∆𝑡
0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0,164 0,142 0,022 0,265 0,26 0,005 5,61931E-05 0,0001143 0,001143001 0,000285
20 0,169 0,142 0,027 0,269 0,26 0,009 0,000164423 0,000181017 0,00181017 0,000526
30 0,173 0,142 0,031 0,274 0,26 0,014 0,00036852 0,00024684 0,002468396 0,0008622
40 0,175 0,142 0,033 0,278 0,26 0,018 0,00058321 0,000284035 0,002840348 0,001151
50 0,177 0,142 0,035 0,28 0,26 0,02 0,000706977 0,000324146 0,003241459 0,001355
60 0,179 0,142 0,037 0,282 0,26 0,022 0,000841421 0,000367215 0,003672152 0,001576
Table 2: Storage-outflow function.

15
Phase 3: Routing
Low intensity:
Time(s) Hi(m) H(m) ΔH(m) Hi(m) h(m) Δh(m) Y(m) V(m³) O(m³/s) I(m³/s)
0 0 0 0
10 0,26 0,282 0,022 0,142 0,18 0,038 0,01 0,0021 8,41421E-05 0,000389613
20 0,26 0,279 0,019 0,142 0,17 0,028 0,02 0,0042 6,43747E-05 0,000196286
30 0,26 0,278 0,018 0,142 0,163 0,021 0,043 0,00903 5,8321E-05 0,000102897
40 0,26 0,277 0,017 0,142 0,16 0,018 0,058 0,01218 5,2539E-05 7,27957E-05
50 0,26 0,275 0,015 0,142 0,156 0,014 0,07 0,0147 4,18015E-05 4,14073E-05
60 0,26 0,273 0,013 0,142 0,154 0,012 0,083 0,01743 3,21864E-05 2,92941E-05
70 0,26 0,272 0,012 0,142 0,152 0,01 0,095 0,01995 2,78084E-05 1,94545E-05
80 0,26 0,271 0,011 0,142 0,149 0,007 0,1 0,021 2,3722E-05 8,73502E-06
90 0,26 0,27 0,01 0,142 0,149 0,007 0,104 0,02184 1,99317E-05 8,73502E-06
100 0,26 0,27 0,01 0,142 0,149 0,007 0,115 0,02415 1,99317E-05 8,73502E-06
110 0,26 0,268 0,008 0,142 0,147 0,005 0,122 0,02562 1,32595E-05 4,10399E-06
120 0,26 0,267 0,007 0,142 0,147 0,005 0,128 0,02688 1,03896E-05 4,10399E-06
130 0,26 0,267 0,007 0,142 0,145 0,003 0,13 0,0273 1,03896E-05 1,30364E-06
140 0,26 0,266 0,006 0,142 0,145 0,003 0,132 0,02772 7,83998E-06 1,30364E-06
150 0,26 0,266 0,006 0,142 0,145 0,003 0,133 0,02793 7,83998E-06 1,30364E-06
160 0,26 0,266 0,006 0,142 0,144 0,002 0,134 0,02814 7,83998E-06 5,24604E-07
170 0,26 0,265 0,005 0,142 0,144 0,002 0,134 0,02814 5,61931E-06 5,24604E-07
180 0,26 0,263 0,003 0,142 0,144 0,002 0,135 0,02835 2,21031E-06 5,24604E-07
Table 3: Experimental results for low intensity flow, with derived outflow and inflow hydrograph values.

Low intensity:
2𝑆 2𝑆
time I(m³/s) 𝐼𝑗 + 𝐼𝑗+1 (m³/s) + 𝑂 (m³/s) O (m³/s) − 𝑂 (m³/s)
∆𝑡 ∆𝑡
0 0
10 0,0003896127 0,000389613 0,000389613 0,0001 0,000189613
20 0,0001962857 0,0005858985 0,00077551 0,00031598 0,000143551
30 0,0001028967 0,0002991824 0,00044273 0,000127026 0,000188683
40 0,0000727957 0,0001756924 0,00036437 9,18361E-05 0,000180703
50 0,0000414073 0,0001142030 0,00029491 0,0000606 0,000173706
60 0,0000292941 0,0000707014 0,00024441 0,000048 0,000148407
70 0,0000194545 0,0000487486 0,00019716 3,88737E-05 0,000119408
80 0,0000087350 0,0000281895 0,00014760 2,91021E-05 8,93937E-05
90 0,0000087350 0,0000174700 0,00010686 2,10694E-05 6,47249E-05
100 0,0000087350 0,0000174700 0,00008219 0,0000162 4,9795E-05
110 0,0000041040 0,0000128390 0,00006263 1,23487E-05 3,79367E-05
120 0,0000041040 0,0000082080 0,00004614 9,09735E-06 2,795E-05
130 0,0000013036 0,0000054076 0,00003336 6,57753E-06 2,02026E-05
140 0,0000013036 0,0000026073 0,00002281 4,49741E-06 1,3815E-05
150 0,0000013036 0,0000026073 0,00001642 3,2375E-06 9,94728E-06
160 0,0000005246 0,0000018282 0,00001178 2,32264E-06 7,13024E-06
170 0,0000005246 0,0000010492 0,00000818 1,61283E-07 7,85688E-06
180 0,0000005246 0,0000010492 0,00000891 1,75677E-06 5,39255E-06
Table 4:Routing procedure for low intensity flow.

16
High intensity:
Time(s) Hi(m) H(m) ΔH(m) Hi(m) h(m) Δh(m) Y(m) V(m³) O(m³/s) I(m³/s)
0
10 0,26 0,28 0,02 0,142 0,18 0,038 0,018 0,00378 7,06977E-05 0,000389613
20 0,26 0,28 0,02 0,142 0,168 0,026 0,039 0,00819 7,06977E-05 0,000166201
30 0,26 0,279 0,019 0,142 0,165 0,023 0,056 0,01176 6,43747E-05 0,000126211
40 0,26 0,277 0,017 0,142 0,16 0,018 0,068 0,01428 5,2539E-05 7,27957E-05
50 0,26 0,276 0,016 0,142 0,159 0,017 0,08 0,0168 4,70316E-05 6,4029E-05
60 0,26 0,275 0,015 0,142 0,157 0,015 0,09 0,0189 4,18015E-05 4,83441E-05
70 0,26 0,273 0,013 0,142 0,155 0,013 0,099 0,02079 3,21864E-05 3,50608E-05
80 0,26 0,272 0,012 0,142 0,152 0,01 0,109 0,02289 2,78084E-05 1,94545E-05
90 0,26 0,271 0,011 0,142 0,15 0,008 0,115 0,02415 2,3722E-05 1,17884E-05
100 0,26 0,27 0,01 0,142 0,149 0,007 0,12 0,0252 1,99317E-05 8,73502E-06
110 0,26 0,269 0,009 0,142 0,149 0,007 0,126 0,02646 1,64423E-05 8,73502E-06
120 0,26 0,268 0,008 0,142 0,147 0,005 0,131 0,02751 1,32595E-05 4,10399E-06
130 0,26 0,268 0,008 0,142 0,147 0,005 0,135 0,02835 1,32595E-05 4,10399E-06
140 0,26 0,268 0,008 0,142 0,146 0,004 0,138 0,02898 1,32595E-05 2,48682E-06
150 0,26 0,268 0,008 0,142 0,146 0,004 0,14 0,0294 1,32595E-05 2,48682E-06
160 0,26 0,267 0,007 0,142 0,146 0,004 0,145 0,03045 1,03896E-05 2,48682E-06
170 0,26 0,266 0,006 0,142 0,146 0,004 0,147 0,03087 7,83998E-06 2,48682E-06
180 0,26 0,265 0,005 0,142 0,145 0,003 0,149 0,03129 5,61931E-06 1,30364E-06
Table 5:Experimental results for high intensity flow, with derived inflow and outflow hydrograph values.

High intensity :
2𝑆 2𝑆
time I 𝐼𝑗 + 𝐼𝑗+1 +𝑂 O −𝑂
∆𝑡 ∆𝑡
0 0 0 0 0 0
10 0,000389613 0,000389613 0,000389613 0,0001 0,000189613
20 0,000166201 0,000555814 0,000745427 0,00029709 0,000151247
30 0,000126211 0,000292412 0,000443659 0,00012342 0,00019682
40 7,27957E-05 0,000199007 0,000395827 0,000103 0,000189827
50 6,4029E-05 0,000136825 0,000326652 7,38684E-05 0,000178915
60 4,83441E-05 0,000112373 0,000291288 5,88641E-05 0,00017356
70 3,50608E-05 8,34049E-05 0,000256965 5,06717E-05 0,000155622
80 1,94545E-05 5,45152E-05 0,000210137 4,14375E-05 0,000127262
90 1,17884E-05 3,12429E-05 0,000158505 0,00003125 9,60046E-05
100 8,73502E-06 2,05235E-05 0,000116528 2,29785E-05 7,0571E-05
110 8,73502E-06 1,747E-05 8,80411E-05 1,73611E-05 5,33189E-05
120 4,10399E-06 1,2839E-05 6,61579E-05 0,000013 4,01579E-05
130 4,10399E-06 8,20799E-06 4,83659E-05 9,53741E-06 2,92911E-05
140 2,48682E-06 6,59081E-06 3,58819E-05 7,07565E-06 2,17306E-05
150 2,48682E-06 4,97363E-06 2,67042E-05 5,26588E-06 1,61725E-05
160 2,48682E-06 4,97363E-06 2,11461E-05 4,16986E-06 1,28064E-05
170 2,48682E-06 4,97363E-06 1,778E-05 3,50609E-06 1,07679E-05
180 1,30364E-06 3,79045E-06 1,45583E-05 2,87079E-06 8,81672E-06
Table 6:Routing procedure for high intensity flow.

17
18