Civil Insight: A Technical Magazine Volume 3 | Page 68

Tandon S.S. et al.
Civil Insight (2019) 64-70
8.33
16.67
25.00
33.33
41.67
50.00
58.33
66.67
75.00
83.33
91.67
100.00 3.59
3.01
1.99
1.53
0.73
0.54
0.45
0.39
0.27
0.27
0.20
0.14 0.39
0.27
0.20
0.14
0.27
0.45
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.73
0.54 13.87
9.52
9.42
0.39
0.27
0.20
0.14
0.27
0.45
1.99
3.69
3.07
1.53
0.73
0.54 0.401
0.279
0.21
0.148
0.279
0.464
2.004
3.7
3.083
1.542
0.74
0.555 Discharge
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
(kWh)
Discharge
(m 3 /s)
Table 3. Energy table of Roshi and Ghyalku Rivers combined
8323.45
5333.15
5651.06
4.85
9.52
16.12
33.15
33.15
33.15
33.15
25.96
25.82
3009.30
5714.09
9993.28
19891.07
19891.07
20554.11
19891.07
16093.21
15489.66
34797.32
115037.20
The Table 4 shows the comparative study of energy and revenue generated from the Roshi River
individually and with combined with Ghyalku River. However, the final result indicates that the energy and
revenue generated from Roshi River alone is more economic than generated by Roshi and Ghyalku
combined.
Table 4. Energy and Revenue calculation under independent and merged condition
Roshi
River a Roshi and Ghyalku
Rivers Combined b 85 85 0.75 0.93 0.18
Gross Head, m 6.5 4.5 2
Dry Energy, kWh 33,815.57 34,797.32 Wet Energy, kWh 133,367.01 115,037.20 Total Energy, kWh 167,182.58 149,834.52 Dry Energy, % 20.2 23.2 Wet Energy, % 79.8 76.8 Dry Season Rate (NRs./kWh) NRs.8.4 NRs.8.4 Wet Season Rate (NRs./kWh) NRs.4.8 NRs.4.8
Parameters
Efficiency (K), %
Design Discharge (Q 40 %),
m 3 /s
Revenue (NRs.)
924,212.00
844,476.04
68
Difference
(a – b)
Remarks
Increased discharge in
merged condition
Decreased head in
merged condition
17,348.06 About 10% less energy
generated in merged
condition
79,736.39 Decreased revenue in
merged condition by
about 8%