Design of Operation Strategy for Canal Structures

Simple operation strategies make the users capable of regulating standard gates, such as overshot and undershot gates. For complicated operation, a control algorithm must be used, almost always done by programming the control algorithm within a programming software and coupling it with a canal simulator. In this research, a new operation strategy was designed to regulate inline water structures in the Alborz canal in Mazandaran province (Iran). Simple operation strategies make the users capable of regulating standard gates, such as overshot and undershot gates. For complicated operation, a control algorithm must be used, almost always done by programming the control algorithm within a programming software and coupling it with a canal simulator. In this research, a new operation strategy was designed to regulate inline water structures in the Alborz canal in Mazandaran province (Iran). Simple operation strategies make the users capable of regulating standard gates, such as overshot and undershot gates. For complicated operation, a control algorithm must be used, almost always done by programming the control algorithm within a programming software and coupling it with a canal simulator. In this research, a new operation strategy was designed to regulate inline water structures in the Alborz canal in Mazandaran province (Iran). To this end, the classic proportional integral derivative controller was coded in the rules boundary condition, being called by HEC-RAS during the canal simulation. The HEC-RAS model of the canal was prepared designing a controller for each inline gate to regulate upstream water depth. Performance indicators and statistical indices were used for evaluation. The calibration results of the controller gains indicated that k_p is 5, 4.5, 3.5, and 5 for regulating gates 1-4, respectively. The k_i and k_d gains were also calibrated. The results showed that the designed model can simultaneously simulate the canal and regulate the gates successfully, obtaining maximum and average depth errors of 7.5% and about 1% which are quite acceptable. The adequacy was 1 in almost all cases, and the efficiency was more than 0.97 with equitable distribution.