Developing Expert System for Operating Haditha Dam Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 1 DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM Nariman Yahya Othman, E-mail:www.nariman81 @yahoo.com Ass. Instructor, Civil Engineering Department Engineering College, Babylon University This search presents the development and application of an Expert System for operating Haditha dam, which is considered the second biggest dam in Iraq. Haditha dam is a multi – purpose hydro – development designed to control the Euphrates River flow in the interests of irrigation, electric power generation and for partial accumulation of extreme Euphrates River inflows into Haditha reservoir. Haditha dam was constructed on the Euphrates River in the Middle West of Iraq (8km) upstream from Haditha town. In 1988 the project was completed. Central and southern parts of Iraq get the benefit of irrigation water from its reservoir. It is consist of the body of the dam, hydro-power station generates (660 Mw) from (6 generator units), Spillway with (6 opening controlled by radial gates) and two Bottom outlets. Ministry of Water Resources denoted that year (2009) is a drought year for that reason the good management for water resources is very important. Haditha dam was taken as case study because the important of the project and its [water level elevation became (116 m.a.s.l.) for the mentioned year while its dead water level is (112 m.a.s.l.),(G.S.D.R.),(2012)] which means that the reservoir is almost empty, where the hydro-power station is stopped for (4 months) (from 9/2009 to 12/2009) and the release was just from the Bottom outlets. Therefor an Expert System is developed to operate the dam. Expert System (ES) is a branch of artificial intelligence (AI) that has achieved considerable success in recent years. The area of expert systems involves investigation into methods and techniques for constructing human-machine systems with specialized problem solving expertise. Expert system has many applications in the field of water engineering such as construction, design, planning, operation and maintenance of hydraulic structures. The language used to program the Expert System in this search is (VISUAL BASIC) program within windows environment. The Expert System has developed depending on actual data for operating dam for (21 years) from 1991 to 2011),[G.S.D.R.,(2012) ]. It is found that using the developed Expert System for operating Haditha dam monthly and daily was very efficient where randomly the measured average monthly water levels for (10/1991) and (9/2011) were (136.95 and 135.72, respectively) while the calculated by the program (136.80 and 135.59, respectively) were the results calculated showed that the difference between the calculated water levels and the measured water levels was as average (15 cm) which means that the development of expert system is correct. KEY WORDS: Dam, Operation, Expert, System, Haditha, Operation Rules. تطوير نظام خبير لتشغيل سد حديثة ناريمان يحيى عثمان مدرس مساعد , قسم الهندسة المدنية كلية الهندسة , جامعة بابل DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 2 حيث يعتبر ثاني اكبر سد في العراق. تم وألهميتهالبحث يتناول تطوير وتطبيق نظام خبير لتشغيل سد حديثة , الري و ألغراضعلى نهر الفرات واالستفادة من مياهه تصميم سد حديثة كسد متعدد االغراض اهمها السيطرة توليد الطاقة الكهربائية و خزن المياه في خزان سد حديثة. كلم عن مدينة حديثة وتم االنتهاء من تشييده عام 8تم انشاء سد حديثة في الغرب االوسط في العراق ويبعد ي في السد الغراض الري يتالف السد من جسم تستفيد المناطق وسط وجنوب العراق من المخزون المائ 8888 فتحات 6وحدات توليد و مسيل مائي يحوي على 6ميكا واط ( متألفة من 666السد ومحطة كهرومائية بقدرة ) الى منفذي تفريغ . باإلضافةمسيطر عليها بواسطة بوابات شعاعية جب ايجاد ادارة جيدة للموارد المائية في القطرر هي سنة جفاف ولذلك يستو 9668اعلنت وزارة الموارد المائية عام ( بسبب اهمية السد ولكون منسوب الماء في السد للسنة المرذكورة قرد كحالة مدروسة) . وقد تم استخدام سد حديثة فرروق مسررتوح 889فرروق مسررتوح سررطر البحررر( فرري حررين ان المنسرروب االدنررى للسررد ) 886وصررل الررى منسرروب ) وذلررررك يعنرررري ان خررررزان السررررد كرررراد ان يفررررر , وان المحطررررة (( 9689ود و الخزانررررات, ))هيئررررة السرررردسررررطر البحررررر ( وكررران االطررر ق فقرررط مرررن منافرررذ 9668/ 89و لغايرررة 9668/ 8الكهرومائيرررة ترررم ايقافهرررا لمررردة اربعرررة اشرررهر مرررن الرذي اثبرت و التفريغ ولذلك تم تطوير نظام خبير لتشغيل السد. و النظام الخبير هو احد فررو الرذكاء االصرطناعي نجاح في السرنوات االخيررة وباالعتمراد علرى مسراحة التحريرات للحالرة المدروسرة لعمرل نظرام يحراكي الخبررة البشررية لحل المشاكل في المجاالت المختلفة. تم تطبيق نظام الخبير في الكثير من مجاالت الهندسة المائية كاإلنشاء والتصميم و التخطيط والتشغيل واالدارة الهيدروليكية وقد تم استخدام لغة ) فيجوال بيسك ( لبرمجة نظام خبير ضمن بيئة ويندوز وتم تصميم للمنشآت و السدود )هيئة 9688ولغاية 8888سنة من 98للسد خ ل النظام الخبير بناءًا على بيانات تشغيلية حقيقية النظام باستخدام( والتي تم التوصل اليها حيث كانت النتائج التشغيلية ) الشهرية واليومية (( 9689, )الخزانات لشهري المقاس فمث عشوائيا كان معدل منسوب الماء الخبير مقاربة جدا مقارنة مع البيانات التشغيلية للسد المنسوب المحسوب لكل شهر كما يلي ( بينما كان891.39( و)896.81كما يلي)( 86/9688( و )8/8888) وب المياه المقاس كمعدل ن الفرق بين منسوب المياه المحسوب مع منسحيث كا ( 891.18( و )896.86) ( سم مما يدل على صحة بناء النظام الخبير. 81) 1. INTRODUCTION Water is a very important resource, which makes its management one of the greatest challenges facing us globally; therefore, the human beings constructed dams to have a most benefit from water. Haditha Dam is an earth-fill dam on the Euphrates River, north of Haditha, creating Lake Haditha. Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 3 The purpose of the dam is to generate hydroelectricity, regulate the flow of the Euphrates and provide water for irrigation. It is the second-largest hydroelectric contributor to the power system in Iraq behind the Mosul Dam. All that mentioned above show the importance of good dam operation. Since reservoir operation involves very complex decision-making processes; thus, an Expert System will be very efficient to make the decisions of operation. Artificial intelligence is the science of making machines do things that would require intelligence if done by men (Kumara and Soyster (1986)). Expert system is a branch of artificial intelligence that makes extensive use of specialized knowledge to solve problems at the level of a human expert. It is an intelligent computer program that uses knowledge and inference procedures to solve problems that are difficult enough to require significant human expertise for their solution. Expert system depends on the knowledge acquired from human experts. The user supplies facts or other information to the expert system and receives expertise in response. Internally, the expert system consists of two main components. The knowledge base contains the knowledge with which the inference engine draws conclusions. These conclusions are the expert system's responses to the user's queries for expertise (Giarratano and Riley (1962)).The knowledge of an expert system may be represented in many ways. It can be encapsulated in rules and objects. One common method of representing knowledge is in the form of IF... THEN type rules. Expert systems have experienced tremendous growth and popularity since their commercial introduction in the early 1980s. Expert systems have been applied to many fields of knowledge such as: chemistry, electronics, medicine, engineering, and geology. The use of expert system has many advantages including increased availability of expertise at reduced cost, reduced risk, improved permanence, the use of multiple expertise, increased reliability, fast response, availability of intelligent tutor, intelligent database and steady, unemotional, and complete response at all times. However, lack of knowledge and expertise is considered the main limitation of building expert systems (Giarratano and Riley (1962)). 2. THE PREVIOUS RESEARCHES (Simonovics , S. P. (1990)) in his paper discussed issues involved in both phases of the development of an expert system for flow measurement method selection. Where development of the system was done in two phases with very different emphasis. During the first phase, the emphasis was on the selection process, while during the second phase logic control was the major issue. The advisory system for flow measurement method selection has been designed to aid the user in the selection process . Two aspects of selection are considered: physical characteristics of the gauging site and/or structures at the gauging site. The system has been designed for potential use by Environment Canada. (Mohan, S. and Arumugam, N. (1995)) presented a hybrid expert system that has been developed for operation of a tank irrigation system in South India. The heuristics and optimal knowledge are integrated with algorithmic techniques to operate the system under real-time conditions. (Varas, E.A. and Chrismar, M. V. (1995)) presented an expert system to help select the best method to estimate design flood flows for civil engineering works based upon the procedures available, the nature and characteristics of the basin and existing hydrological records. The system presents the user with a list of possible methods ranked in descending grade order and optionally presents explanations which support the selected choices. Ordering is achieved using the knowledge base provided by the expert. The system recommends procedures for both preliminary estimates and final designs. The system also constitutes a valuable aid for junior engineers and experienced hydrologists in the selection of methods. Its conceptual structure can be easily generalized to treat other problems of a similar nature in the field of hydrology and water resources. (Al-Matlabie, A.H. (1999)) produced the Expert System (ESORSA) which means (the Expert System for Operation of the Multi-Purpose Reservoir System of Al-ADHEEM Dam), where this system developed to give the advice to operate the reservoirs depending on the knowledge of the DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 4 experts and the previous researches on operating reservoirs, Al-Adheem reservoir is used as a case study. The researcher focused to optimize the operation of the multi-purpose reservoir system using the (DDDP)(Discrete Differential Dynamics Programming) to prevent flood, provide water requirements and generating electric energy from the hydro-power station. The (ESORSA) built by (CRYSTAL) which is software has the ability of taking knowledge. (Tospornsampan , J., Kita, I. , Ishii, M. , and Kitamura, Y. (2005)) proposed and developed a combination of genetic algorithm and discrete differential dynamic programming approach (called GA-DDDP) which is used to optimize the operation of the multiple reservoir system. The demonstration is carried out through application to the MaeKlong system in Thailand. The objective of optimization is to obtain the optimal operating policies by minimizing the total irrigation deficits during a critical drought year. The performance of the proposed algorithm is compared with the modified genetic algorithm. The results show that the proposed GA-DDDP provides optimal solutions, converging into the same fitness values within a short time. The GA is able to produce satisfactory results that are very close to those obtained from GA-DDDP but required a lot more computation time to obtain the precise results. The difficulties in selecting optimal parameters of GA as well as finding a feasible initial trial trajectory of DDDP are significant problems and time- consuming. The significant advantage obtained from GA-DDDP is saving of computational resource as GA-DDDP requires no need for optimizing parameters and deriving feasible initial trial trajectories. Because DDDP is a part of GA-DDDP, the good performance of GA-DDDP is obtained when applied to a small system where numbers of discretization and variables have no influence to the dimensionality problem of DDDP. (Emiroglu, M. E.(2008)) the objective of his study is making Expert System to discuss the factors influencing the selection of the type of dam by giving examples from rules of thumb and also to present typical cross sections for types of dams to be constructed on different foundations. (Swart, H. S. ,Van Rooyen, P. G. , Mwaka, B. and Ntuli, C. (2009)) purposed in his assessment general and drought curtailment rules for the major dams situated within the Great Marico River System. The climate of the Marico catchment is semi-arid with the result that flow in the Marico River is highly variable and intermittent. The Water Resources Yield Model (WRYM) was used for the historic as well as the longer and short-term stochastic yield analyses that were undertaken for each of the major dams. (Abd-Elhamid, H. F., Javadi, A.A. Negm, A.M. Elalfi,A.E. and Owais,T.M. (2011)) developed Expert System for maintenance and repair of masonry barrages. The CLIPS 6.0 software was used for building the expert system and a user interface was implemented using Visual Basic 6.0. The advantages of using an expert system are that facts and rules can be easily modified to respond to changes and new rules can be added to deal with unconsidered problems. The developed expert system can help users to identify the possible causes of problems and suggest a suitable method of repair. The proposed system was verified using field data collected from MWRI for barrages on the Nile River in Egypt. The use of the proposed expert system will save time in the process of taking maintenance decisions and will help in making the expected life of the structure as long as possible. 3. CASE STUDY The dam is situated in a narrow stretch of the Euphrates Valley where a small secondary channel branched off the main channel. The width of the main channel was (350 m) whereas the secondary channel was (50 m) wide. The hydroelectric station is located in this secondary channel. The Haditha Dam is (9,064 m) long and (57 m) high, with the hydropower station at (3,310 m) from the dam's southern edge. The crest is at (154 m.a.s.l.) and (20 m) wide, (Kamnev, N. M.; Sonichev, and N. A.; Malyshev, N. A. (1984)). In cross-section, the dam consists of an asphaltic concrete cutoff wall at its core, followed by mealy detrital dolomites, and a mixture of sand and gravel. These materials were chosen because they are readily available near the construction site. This core is protected by a Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 5 reinforced concrete slab revetment on the upstream side of the dam, and a rock-mass revetment on the downstream side, (Kamnev, N. M.; Sonichev, and N. A.; Malyshev, N. A. (1984)). The power station contains six Kaplan turbines capable of generating (660 MW). The turbines are installed in a hydro-combine unit that comprises both the spillway and the hydro-power plant in one structure. Maximum discharge of the spillway is (11,000 m 3 /s) ),[G.S.D.R.,(2012) ]. Two bottom outlets on the dam can discharge (3,000 m 3 /s) irrigation. Both these outlets and the spillway are controlled by radial gates Iraqi Ministries of Environment, Water Resources and Municipalities and Public Works (2006) Haditha Reservoir has a maximum water storage capacity of (8200 million m 3 ) and a maximum surface area of (500 million m 2 ). Actual capacity is however (6591 million m 3 ), at which size the surface area is (415 million m 2 ), [G.S.D.R.,(2012) ]. The details of the dam data which are required for the expert system are tabulated in (Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7). 4. MATHEMATICAL MODEL For the operating Haditha Dam reservoir's two curves represented (the upper rule and the lower rule for operating Haditha dam, Figure 1, which is produced by(Ali, A.A.,(1994)) (Ali, A.A. is prof. PhD in water resources engineering ) he used one of the best Mathematical Models (DDDP) (Discrete Differential Dynamic Programing) for representing the previous curves where he found the upper value of storage for Haditha reservoir and the lower value of storage for each month, therefore the program of (Expert System for Operating Haditha Dam) (ESOHD) is based to make sure that the storage in the reservoir will be no more than the upper rule and not less than the lower rule, in normal and flood operation and made the storage not less than the minimum storage in the drought operation, the equations used to reach that aim , are: Water balance equation for monthly operation: Sm (i,j+1)=Sm (i,j)+[I(I,j)-O(i,j)]*t+[P(j)-E(j)]*A(i,j) (1) where: j=No. of months :1,2,…,12 i=1,2,…,n And for daily operation: S d(k,l+1)=Sd (k,l)+[I(k,l)-O(k,l)*t+[p(k)-E(k)]*A(k,l) (2) where: l=No. of days according to the month:1,2,…,(28,29,30,31days) k=1,2,…m where: Sm(i,j)=average monthly storage,(m 3 ). I(i,j)=average inflow to the reservoir,(m 3 /s). O(i,j)=average outflow from the reservoir,(m 3 /s). P(j)=average monthly precipitation,(m). E(j)=average monthly evaporation,(m). A(i,j)=surface area of reservoir,(m 2 ),where it is change with elevation of water in the reservoir. t = period of time,(s). n =No. of operating years. where: S d(k,l)=daily storage,(m 3 /s). DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 6 I(k,l)= daily inflow to the reservoir for day(l) and month(k),(m 3 /s). O(k,l)=average outflow from the reservoir for day(l) and month(k),(m 3 /s). P(k)=average monthly precipitation on the reservoir,(m). E(k)=average monthly evaporation from the reservoir,(m). A(k,l)=surface area of reservoir (for day(l) and month(k),(m 3 /s),where it is change with elevation of water in the reservoir. t =period of time,(s). n =No. of operating months. (Ishaq,(1998)) produced two equations representing the relationships between volume with water level and surface area with water level, Fig. 2 represent the previous relationships, the two equations are: V=0.24114(elev-100.062) 2.7114 (3) with R 2 =0.99553 A=0.000588(elev-81.992) 3.252 +37.018 (4) with R 2 =0.9947 The limits of these equations are (110-150) m.a.s.l. a. operating the power station is related directly by the water requirements downstream the dam where the release from the dam is used for operating by the power station to generate electric power then the excess water will be released from the bottom outlets or from the spillway if the water level in the reservoir is above the crest level of the spillway. To calculate the production power , ( Ali, A.A., (1994)) produced: P= (9.81 * Qp* hn*e*10 -3 ) (5) where: P= power production , ( mw). Qp = Discharge the station , ( m 3 /s ). hn = net water head ( m ). e = Efficiency of the generated units (0.9). hn = hg – hl (6) where: hg = gross water head ( m ). h1 = losses in head ( m ). h1 = 3.0 m , ( Ali ,A.A., ( 1994)) hg = USWL – DSWL (7) where: USWL = is the elevation in the reservoir ( m.a.s.l. ) DSWL = is the water level downstream the dam , ( in the river), ( m.a.s.l.) Downstream water level can be calculated by : Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 7 DSWL = 0.14063886 * ( Q + 919.4654 ) 0.56108517 + 94.049683 (8) This equation is produced by (Ali, A.A., (1994)). Where: DSWL = downstream water level ( in the river ) , ( m.a.s.l.). Q = the total discharge (release) from the dam, (m3/ s). The limits for this equation are water level elevation (118 – 129.5) (m.a.s.l.) where (118) is enough to operate just one unit from the power station while 129.5 is the minimum operation elevation enough to operate the all six units. b. operating the Bottom outlets means finding gate opening of the Bottom outlets with required specific discharge depended to reach that aim, a diagram represent the relation between ( discharge and gate's opening, Figure 3, the diagram have (8 curves) each curve represent a special water elevation . After analysis of the diagram ( 8 equations produced ) to represent each one of the curves to find the gate opening as shown in Figure 4 and for other water elevations a ( linear interpolation) can be down , the equations are: opeb1 =( Qb- 11.921)/45.108 (9a) with R² = 0.9854 opeb2 = ( Qb- 12.929) / 71.624 (9b) with R² = 0.9892 opeb 3= ( Qb - 11.723) / 127.31 (9c) with R² = 0.9876 opeb4= ( Qb - 12.22) / 163.14 (9d) with R² = 0.9907 opeb5 = |(Qb + 14) / 220.8 (9e) with R² = 0.99 opeb6 = (Qb+ 22.352) / 247.8 (9f) with R² = 0.9889 opeb7 = (Qb+ 9.3514) / 255.53 (9g) with R² = 0.9855 opeb8 = (Qb+ 1.2505) / 264.18 (9h) DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 8 With R² = 0.9788 Figure 4 showed that the fitting curves are linear while the real curves are almost linear but the results of R² are very high therefore the obtained equations are used. c. Operation of the spillway means finding the opening gate of the spillway for a specific discharge, (Al- Janabi, W.K.K.,(2004)) produced a very efficient mathematical procedure to calculate the gate opening and as follows: 1. Specified the released discharge from spillway (Qsp). 2. Calculating (hsp) depending on the water level in the reservoir. 3. Calculating (cd) depending on (hsp) and assuming of the open of gate (a) by using the relationship shown in Figure 5. 4. After finding (hsp) and the values of (cd) then spillway flow equation can be used as follows: a = Qsp / cd *ng*b*√2ghsp (10) The previous steps are repeated until having good agreement between the calculated and the assumed open gate. Where: Qsp = discharge (m 3 / s) a= opening the gate (m) cd = discharge coefficient ng = number of gates b = width of one gate (m) g = acceleration gravity (9.81 (m / s)) hsp = operating head upstream the gate ( m ). 5. MECHANISM OF OPERATING HADITHA DAM BY USING THE EXPERT SYSTEM (ESOHD) The style and mechanism for operating Haditha dam have been developed using latest scientific technology ( Artificial Intelligence ) represented by expert system which programmed using up to date programming language ( VISUAL BASIC ) within windows environment the expert system has developed on analyze of real working data from 1991 to 2011 and as follows: 1- The first window of (ESOHD) is the main menu demands the user to enter his name and choose the type of operation (daily or monthly) by choosing one of the options, as shown in, Figure 6 and 10. In the same window the button “Help" showed the help window Figure 14 and button "Exit" will end the program. 2-1 For the monthly operation the second window Figure 7 will appear when (option one is chosen and welcome the user by his name and demand him to enter the required data which are (the file name including (average monthly inflows (m3/s) for the required period of time) the initial outflow (release), the average monthly precipitation and the average monthly demand (m 3 )), the No. of years required for operating and the initial water level (m.a.s.l.). 2-2 After entering the required data ("the result "button) must choose to make the program calculating the required results and as the following mechanism: Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 9 a. The first storage S (1,1) and the first surface area A (1,1 ) by equation ( 4-3 ) depending on the first entered measured water level , then ( the water balance equation ( 4-1 ), will calculate the storage for one of the next months, for each year the last storage S ( i , 12 ) will be the first storage S ( i+1, 1) for the followed year. b. The calculated storage will be compered by the [upper rule (Sup) and lower rule (Slow) of (Ali, A.A., (1994))]. If the storage S(i,i) more than (Sup) for that month then the program will take it equal to the (Sup ) and if the S(i,i) is less than the(Slow) then the program will take it equal to the (Slow) then the program will calculate a new ( water level Eq.(4-3) and release from Eq.(4-1) according to the correct storages. c. The program (ESOHD) will sure that the calculated releases (Rel (i,i)) are not excess on the maximum river capacity and not less than the water demands for each month. d. Then the storage will be calculated again by Eq.(4-1) according to the corrected releases and compered with Smax ( not more than it ) and ( not less than Smin). e. Calculated depending on the amount of release in step (b.). if the release is more than the capacity of the power station (2034 m 3 /s),), [G.S.D.R.,(2012) ] then the power station will take just the enough discharge and the excess water will be released from bottom outlets or from the spillway, While if the release is less than the capacity of the power station then the power station will take all the release for its operation, if the water level in the reservoir is enough . f. Then (ESOHD) will calculate [DSWL by Eq. (4-8), hg by Eq. (4-7), hn by Eq. (4-6) to find the production power (Mw) (P) by Eq. (4-5)]. g. All the steps above will be return for the daily operation, if (option two) will be chosen except Eq (4-2) will be used instead of Eq (4-1) as water balance equation. h. At last the second window Figure 7 have another two Buttons ( "main menu" which return the user to the main menu window if he want to change the option and "Exit" Button to end the program). 3- The results of the monthly operation will appeared in window three Figure 8 where the [ calculated storage ( million m 3 ) , calculated water level ( m.a.s.l.) , release ( m 3 /s) , DSWL ( m.a.s.l.) and the prediction power ( MW)] will be listed for each year . The results window having four control Buttons [ " Back" ( which able user to return to the previous window ) , " Main menu" ( able the user to return to the first window ( main menu)), " Details of operation " ( which open new window to show the user how to operate the structures of the dam ) and "Exit" to end the program]. 4- The fourth window is the (details of operation window) Figure 9 when the user click on any year in the ( results window) then the program ( ESOHD ) will show the user the mechanism of operating each part of the dam ( power station , Bottom outlets depending on equations (4-9(a-h)) and/or the spillway depending on equations (4-10) for each month and for the specific year. 5- For daily operation all the steps above will be returned and Figures 10, 11, 12 and 13 will show the mechanism of operating. 6. THE RESULTS The results obtained by running (ESOHD) for the monthly operation for the total period (1991-2011) are listed in Tables 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12(water level (m.a.s.l.), release (m 3 /s), storage (million m 3 ), production Power (Mw ),and DSWL (m.a.s.l.)),it is found: DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 11 1. The maximum calculated storage is (8339.8 million m 3 ) where it is less than the maximum storage of the reservoir (9850 million m 3 ) while the minimum storage was (474.0 million m 3 ) for (the drought year) which is more than the minimum storage of the reservoir (188 million m 3 ). 2. The maximum calculated water level is (147.27 m.a.s.l.) where it is less than the maximum water level of the reservoir (150.2 m.a.s.l.) while the minimum water level was (116.46 m.a.s.l.) which is more than the minimum water level of the reservoir (112 m.a.s.l. ). 3. The maximum calculated release is (1163 m 3 /s) which is less than the maximum capacity of the river (4730 m 3 /s) while the minimum calculated release was (188 m 3 /s) which is more than the minimum discharge of the river (70 m 3 /s). 4. The maximum power production was (520.4 Mw)less than (660 Mw) while the minimum power production was (0.0 Mw) where the power station stopped for three months in (the drought year) because the water level was less than (118 m.a.s.l.) which is the minimum elevation of water can operate one turbine of the power station and the release was just from the bottom outlets. 5. The spillway has not operate all the period of time and that because all the releases for each month are less than the maximum capacity of the power station therefor they used to generate electric power. 6. The Bottom outlets are operate for (2 months) because the water level was less than the minimum water level for operating power station. And the results obtained by running (ESOHD) for the daily operation for ( two sequence drought months) (9-10/2009) are listed in (Tables 13 and 14 ,respectively) ,it is found: 1. The maximum calculated storage was (776.55 million m 3 ) while the minimum storage was (426.50 million m 3 ) for which is more than the minimum storage of the reservoir (188 million m 3 ). 2. The maximum calculated water level is (119.73 m.a.s.l.) while the minimum water level was (115.83 m.a.s.l.) which is more than the minimum water level of the reservoir (112 m.a.s.l. ). 3. The maximum calculated release is (400.95m 3 /s) while the minimum calculated release was (350.12 m 3 /s) which are more than the minimum discharge of the river (70 m 3 /s). 4. Power station was not operated because the water level was less than (118 m.a.s.l.) which is the minimum elevation of water can operate one turbine of the power station and the release was just from the bottom outlets. 5. The spillway has not operated for the same reason above. 6. The Bottom outlets are operating for (all the two months) because the water level was less than the minimum water level for operating power station. For both monthly and daily operations it is found that the calculated water level was just (0.10 m) more than the measured water level which is calculated from the correct storage and release which mean that the building of the program is correct. 7. CONCLUSIONS From the results obtained by running (ESOHD), the next conclusions are deduced: 1. The (ESOHD) gave results with a good agreement for the monthly and the daily operation with the real operation of Haditha dam which mean that the building of the program is correct. 2. The program able the user to update the data that used for operating Haditha dam by taking the new data from a [File]. Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 11 3. For normal operation years the (ESOHD) program shall take the lower limit of the storage is the minimum operation storage and minimum operation water level (2300 million m 3 ) with water level (129.50 m.a.s.l.) while in drought years the (ESOHD) program shall take the lower limit of the storage is (188 million m 3 ) with water level (112 m.a.s.l.) which is the minimum storage and minimum water level of the reservoir. 4. For the (21 years adopted in the search) almost the years were drought years which means that the program satisfying the water requirements for more than a drought year which means it is dependable for operating the dam. There are many causes for the droughts in Iraq in the last years one of them is the dams built on Euphrates river in Turkey and Syria, the increasing in population in Iraq which means increasing in water demands and at last the global increasing in heat temperature. 8. REFERENCES Abd-Elhamid, H. F., Javadi, A.A., Negm, A.M. Elalfi, A.E. and Owais,T.M. (2011):" Development of an Expert System for Maintenance and Repair of Masonry Barrages ",Intelligent Computing in Engineering – ICE08 212. www./ state.awra.org/.../2012AWRA-AK_Program_FINAL. Al-janabi, W. K. K. , ( 2004 ) : " Preparation of Decision Support System for Haditha Dam System" , M.Sc. Thesis, College of Engineering, University of Baghdad. Ali, A.A.,(1994) :"studying Empty Al- Razaza Lake",Furat Center, Irrigation Ministry, Baghdad,(Arbic). Al-Matlabie, A.H.,(1999): "the Expert System for Operation of the Multi-Purpose Reservoir System of Al-ADHEEM Dam", M.Sc. Thesis, University of Baghdad. Chow,V.T., (1959) :"Open Channel Hydraulics ", McGraw Hill Company, New York. Emiroglu, M. E., (2008) :” Influences on Selection of the Type of Dam” , International Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 3, No 2, P.173-189. Giarratano, J. and Riley, G. (1962). “Expert System Principles and Programming.” PWS Publishing Company, a division of International Thomson Publishing Inc. (G.S.D.R.),(General Staff of Dams and Reservoirs),(2012):"Data of Haditha Reservoir ", Water Resources Ministry, Iraq, not puplished. Ishaq, M.B.,(1998):"Optimum Operation Rules for Tigris – Euphrates System in Iraq",Ph.D. Thesis, College of Engineering, Baghdad University. Kamnev, N. M., Sonichev, N. A., Malyshev, N. A. ,(1984): "Earth dam of the Al-Hadithah hydropower development on the Euphrates River". Power Technology and Engineering 17 (10): 530–33. doi:10.1007/BF01425184. Kumara, S. and Soyster, A. (1986): “An Introduction to Artificial Intelligence.” Industrial Engineering. DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 12 Mohan, S. and Arumugam, N. (1995): “Hybrid expert system for operation of a small surface storage system”, Modelling and Management of Sustainable Basin-scale Water Resource Systems (Proceedings of a Boulder Symposium, July 1995), 1AHS Publ, no. 231, P. 241-246. Simonovics , S. P. (1990) :” Issues in developing an expert system for flow measurement”, The Hydrological Basis for Water Resources Management, IAHS Publ, no. 197, P. 335-343. Swart, H. S. ,Van Rooyen, P. G. , Mwaka, B. and Ntuli, C. (2009) :” Operating Rules for Dams with High Evaporation Losses”, International Journal of Science & Technology, Volume 4, No 3, P.150- 162. Tospornsampan , J., Kita, I. , Ishii, M. , and Kitamura, Y. (2005):"Optimization of a multiple reservoir system operation using a combination of genetic algorithm and discrete differential dynamic programming: a case study in Mae Klong system, Thailand", Paddy Water Environ (2005) 3: 29–38. www./isha.info/redbooks/a231.pdf. Varas ,E.A. and Chrismar,M.V. (1995): "Expert system for the selection of methods to calculate design flood flows",Hydrological Sciences -Journal- des Sciences Hydrologiques,4Q,6, December. www.itia.ntua.gr/hsj/redbooks.g311.pdf Table 1 The basic data of Haditha Reservoir ( G.S.D.R.( 2012)) Storage in reservoir (m 3 *10 6 ) value Reservoir water level (m.a.s.l.) value Maximum(Smax) 9850 Maximum(wlmax) 150.2 Minimum(Smin) 188 Minimum(wlmin) 112 Designed operated (SD) 8200 Designed operated (Dwl) 147 Normal operated(SN) 6591 Normal operated(Nwl) 143 Minimum operated(SM) 2362 Minimum operated(Mwl) 129.5 Table 2 The basic designed concepts of Haditha Dam structures and River (Ali,A.A.,(1994)) Property value Maximum designed discharge of the river (m 3 /s) 4730 Minimum designed discharge of the river (m 3 /s) 70 Maximum designed discharge released from Power station (m 3 /s) 2034 Maximum designed discharge released from Bottom outlets (m 3 /s) 4000 Maximum designed discharge released from Spillway (m 3 /s) 11000 * *This discharge will be at waterlevel (154 m.a.s.l.). http://www./isha.info/redbooks/a231.pdf http://www.itia.ntua.gr/hsj/redbooks.g311.pdf Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 13 Table 3 The water demands downstream Haditha Dam (m 3 *10 6 ) (Ali,A.A.,(1994)) The month Irrigation , artificer , hygiene requirement Environmental requirement Total 10 1241.5 187.5 1429 11 859.8 187.5 1047.3 12 391.8 187.5 579.28 1 559.8 187.5 747.3 2 1034.6 187.5 1222.1 3 1526 187.5 1713.5 4 1969.9 187.5 2157.4 5 1846.6 187.5 2034.1 6 2489.8 187.5 2677.3 7 2569.5 187.5 2757 8 2122.4 187.5 2309.9 9 1241.9 187.5 1429.4 Table 4 The average monthly perception and evaporation for Haditha reservoir (From 1991 – 2011) The month Perception ( mm ) Evaporation (mm) 10 5.7 198 11 9.8 132 12 22.5 88 1 18.8 44 2 16.9 66 3 20.4 110 4 22.2 154 5 5.7 220 6 0 286 7 0 330 8 0 308 9 0 264 Table 5 Upper rule and Lower rule curves for Haditha dam (m 3 *10 6 ) The month Upper rule Lower rule 10 4811.4 2296.6 11 5300.2 2560.3 12 6051.1 3574.6 1 6781.4 4288.9 2 7036.6 4288.9 3 7430.6 4320.4 4 7520.1 4913.7 5 7930.8 5445.4 6 7520.1 4811.4 7 6656.0 3602.7 8 2734.0 5630.3 9 2426.2 5264.3 DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 14 Table 6 The measured inflow ( m 3 / s ) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 Inflow 345 434 410 387 427 194 381 399 510 551 475 457 1991 221 247 280 343 293 296 351 552 496 547 277 274 1992 256 366 408 401 497 337 392 358 414 468 405 340 1993 733 517 418 356 334 458 442 626 486 527 427 432 1994 528 513 376 296 351 704 861 1235 1286 1232 1150 950 1995 663 753 696 502 815 1497 1411 1309 1169 920 1083 590 1996 493 586 809 771 732 1073 1127 1345 1056 903 873 750 1997 644 675 589 580 865 817 1443 1350 1132 1220 989 713 1998 303 258 262 310 370 429 623 945 1013 1045 832 698 1999 250 262 339 336 343 366 802 1187 934 751 611 355 2000 281 606 331 153 213 214 287 377 310 303 285 285 2001 287 273 335 303 229 299 216 391 616 613 247 238 2002 457 308 282 288 367 548 788 635 663 825 582 348 2003 650 569 349 554 1207 665 1789 1214 710 547 742 515 2004 339 525 495 465 358 493 665 859 925 903 700 648 2005 679 873 809 603 574 512 623 1331 934 537 731 625 2006 584 821 716 379 621 555 581 751 1173 958 643 382 2007 548 542 403 355 307 343 436 758 879 532 374 386 2008 305 288 310 293 263 225 259 278 310 402 312 296 2009 333 756 461 315 314 337 288 405 350 385 386 349 2010 455 551 475 457 475 312 423 576 592 493 446 282 2011 Table 7 The measured water level ( m.a.s.l.) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 w.l. 137.12 137.04 135.96 134.32 132.59 131.03 133.12 135.88 137.28 137.11 136.90 136.95 1991 143.08 143.55 143.99 144.36 144.35 144.09 143.82 142.64 140.41 137.55 136.23 136.90 1992 144.61 145.82 145.99 146.65 146.52 145.94 145.62 145.06 144.78 144.40 143.92 143.09 1993 144.22 144.14 144.89 145.87 146.49 146.36 146.09 145.90 145.34 145.11 144.63 144.22 1994 141.45 142.17 142.44 143.69 145.22 146.03 146.35 146.27 145.73 144.97 144.81 144.20 1995 139.82 141.98 144.04 146.28 147.00 147.11 147.27 145.28 143.61 143.49 142.33 141.42 1996 140.80 143.26 145.72 146.90 147.03 146.36 144.54 143.67 142.33 141.53 141.07 139.98 1997 138.71 141.38 143.85 146.18 147.27 147.06 146.55 145.52 143.95 142.35 140.27 139.25 1998 131.46 137.17 140.20 144.54 146.37 146.45 145.96 144.83 143.63 141.83 139.41 138.44 1999 142.15 140.63 142.34 143.77 144.61 144.80 144.55 141.26 135.99 132.31 128.45 128.55 2000 134.45 133.91 133.25 134.73 135.96 135.93 136.28 136.13 134.89 133.83 135.17 136.62 2001 137.81 139.09 140.14 140.29 140.20 139.55 139.74 139.29 135.92 131.20 129.83 132.60 2002 135.74 137.21 139.62 141.61 143.00 143.05 142.72 142.14 142.41 140.80 138.64 137.61 2003 143.70 144.15 145.25 146.72 146.90 146.38 146.17 143.51 140.60 139.48 138.01 136.45 2004 140.84 142.45 143.65 144.72 145.48 146.16 146.43 146.14 146.05 144.93 144.03 143.77 2005 144.70 145.53 145.88 146.68 146.51 146.59 146.27 146.02 143.44 141.79 141.38 139.81 2006 143.81 144.71 145.02 146.11 146.96 146.83 146.78 146.22 145.55 142.73 142.07 143.35 2007 135.29 136.52 138.51 140.31 141.39 142.22 143.27 142.32 139.89 138.99 140.21 142.30 2008 118.66 121.19 123.42 123.96 123.96 124.68 125.75 127.04 127.65 127.33 128.68 131.80 2009 131.69 130.56 128.83 129.22 129.13 127.94 127.04 126.23 122.40 119.12 116.46 116.47 2010 135.72 136.76 136.29 136.80 136.26 135.25 135.58 134.05 131.56 128.53 129.11 129.87 2011 Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 15 Table 8 The calculated water level (m.a.s.l.) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 w.l. 137.12 137.04 135.96 134.32 132.59 131.03 133.06 135.88 137.28 137.06 136.90 136.80 1991 143.08 143.44 143.99 144.36 144.35 144.09 143.82 142.64 140.41 137.55 136.23 136.90 1992 144.55 145.67 145.99 146.65 146.52 145.94 145.62 145.06 144.78 144.40 143.92 143.09 1993 144.02 144.14 144.89 145.87 146.49 146.36 146.00 145.90 145.34 145.11 144.63 144.17 1994 141.45 142.17 142.44 143.69 145.22 146.03 146.35 146.27 145.58 144.97 144.81 144.20 1995 139.82 141.98 144.04 146.28 147.00 147.04 147.27 145.28 143.61 143.49 142.33 141.31 1996 140.80 143.26 145.72 146.90 147.03 146.36 144.54 143.67 142.33 141.53 141.07 139.98 1997 138.62 141.30 143.85 146.18 147.22 147.06 146.55 145.52 143.80 142.35 140.27 139.05 1998 131.46 137.17 140.20 144.54 146.21 146.45 145.96 144.83 143.63 141.83 139.41 138.44 1999 142.15 140.63 142.34 143.77 144.61 144.80 144.55 141.26 135.99 132.31 128.45 128.55 2000 134.45 133.91 133.25 134.73 135.96 135.93 136.28 136.13 134.89 133.83 135.17 136.62 2001 137.81 139.09 140.14 140.29 140.20 139.55 139.74 139.29 135.92 131.20 129.83 132.60 2002 135.74 137.21 139.62 141.61 143.00 143.05 142.72 142.14 142.41 140.80 138.64 137.61 2003 143.70 144.15 145.25 146.72 146.72 146.38 146.07 143.51 140.70 139.48 138.01 136.59 2004 140.84 142.45 143.65 144.72 145.48 146.16 146.43 146.14 146.05 144.93 144.03 143.77 2005 144.70 145.53 145.88 146.68 146.51 146.59 146.27 146.02 143.44 141.79 141.38 139.91 2006 143.81 144.71 145.02 146.11 146.96 146.83 146.63 146.22 145.55 142.73 142.07 143.35 2007 135.95 136.52 138.41 140.31 141.39 142.22 143.12 142.39 139.89 138.99 140.04 142.20 2008 118.66 121.19 123.42 123.96 123.96 124.68 125.75 127.04 127.65 127.33 128.68 131.80 2009 131.69 130.56 128.83 129.22 129.13 127.94 127.04 126.23 122.40 119.12 116.46 116.47 2010 135.95 136.76 136.29 136.80 136.26 135.25 135.58 134.05 131.56 128.53 129.11 129.87 2011 Table 9 The calculated release (m 3 / s) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 release 342 304 225 205 188 198 217 792 926 446.4 439.0 351 1991 312 308 367 374 260 233 253 230 204 219 318 341 1992 408 432 437 406 347 264 218 223 329 431 279 291 1993 572 440 464 485 304 325 346 470 399 403 325 347 1994 564 474 339 523 504 679 817 1163 1100 1063 893 688 1995 732 988 863 715 694 1519 1088 845 818 839 715 480 1996 705 918 991 722 593 643 777 1044 783 790 689 521 1997 746 1019 867 830 722 682 1123 930 787 783 684 734 1998 606 654 794 813 366 342 429 574 673 697 441 576 1999 441 446 452 444 332 386 423 370 232 380 405 399 2000 327 360 330 291 212 160 296 256 173 219 460 417 2001 289.6 386 326 223 130 160.6 233 184.6 134.2 211 387.4 411 2002 319.7 469.9 457.2 446.3 367.4 337.6 514.7 542.9 558.8 236.5 290 225 2003 536.9 538.1 511.8 587.0 633.3 577.2 1127.4 344.0 272.5 329.8 292.2 258.3 2004 471.9 598.0 628.6 486.1 406.5 531.5 571.1 654.0 705.6 537.3 471.6 500.6 2005 631.1 685.4 664.2 556.7 399.0 400.5 505.8 881.8 364.6 397.7 400 400.5 2006 683.7 700.5 633.5 555.2 568.7 438.2 443.3 665.9 639.2 433.2 609.1 652.7 2007 649.7 612.4 600.4 459.1 400.2 353.0 419.0 408.8 415.8 527 609.1 614.6 2008 398.3 400 372.4 278.3 205 250 276 300 300 371.4 413.7 546.1 2009 488.2 436.8 362.9 282.5 200 200 202.1 300 211 240.3 360.3 369.7 2010 561.3 446.4 439.0 351 255.9 292.57 338 241.3 384.1 399.9 515.9 468.0 2011 DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 16 Table 10 The calculated storage (million m 3 ) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 Storage 4326.4 4302.6 3968.2 3496.1 3037.9 2659.4 3158.6 3945.1 4376.6 4290.6 4268.7 4226.0 1991 6481.8 6630.9 6863.2 7019.1 7014.4 6902.6 6789.3 6304.1 5447.4 4463.9 4049.0 4256.9 1992 7101.4 7594.1 7740.9 8048.4 7988.4 7716.4 7571.7 7324.0 7199.5 7038.3 6830.4 6487.5 1993 6875.0 6925.7 7249.3 7686.5 7972.5 7911.3 7744.3 7699.5 7449.5 7346.2 7134.3 6937.4 1994 5839.3 6119.2 6224.5 6736.1 7396.2 7758.3 7906.6 7869.8 7554.6 7284.0 7214.2 6950.5 1995 5234.3 6041.9 6881.7 7876.0 8210.2 8229.3 8339.8 7421.3 6700.8 6652.2 6181.2 5784.1 1996 5593.8 6556.1 7618.5 8164.3 8225.3 7913.5 7096.5 6727.1 6181.5 5868.3 5692.5 5291.7 1997 4818.4 5781.3 6802.5 7828.0 8314.5 8240.7 8001.0 7527.5 6781.3 6188.1 5396.6 4966.5 1998 2760.5 4342.2 5372.4 7097.6 7843.8 7951.7 7728.8 7223.4 6709.4 5984.7 5089.6 4757.9 1999 6110.9 5529.3 6185.6 6770.4 7127.1 7209.4 7099.4 5764.3 3977.2 2966.6 2100.1 2121.5 2000 3533.7 3383.6 3207.5 3611.3 3969.0 3960.0 4065.4 4021.6 3655.7 3361.7 3735.3 4169.9 2001 4548.4 4978.8 5350.4 5404.9 5372.2 5139.5 5206.9 5049.1 3955.8 2699.2 2388.7 3040.6 2002 3903.5 4355.5 5165.0 5898.9 6448.1 6471.2 6335.9 6103.8 6213.5 5592.8 4824.7 4483.4 2003 6738.8 6930.4 7406.5 8081.6 8080.0 7919.1 7776.2 6661.7 5555.0 5113.1 4615.3 4161.6 2004 5608.2 6228.3 6719.6 7176.8 7512.5 7819.9 7945.6 7810.3 7768.8 7267.2 6879.8 6769.5 2005 7165.0 7534.2 7691.4 8060.6 7980.1 8018.0 7870.5 7753.4 6630.1 5970.3 5811.2 5265.9 2006 6785.4 7168.7 7305.3 7794.3 8191.2 8129.6 8038.3 7844.8 7541.6 6342.3 6079.5 6593.9 2007 3772.1 4140.3 4748.6 5411.6 5814.8 6135.3 6497.2 6203.8 5260.9 4944.4 5312.9 6128.0 2008 666.9 942.8 1237.9 1317.2 1316.5 1427.4 1601.6 1829.7 1943.8 1884.0 2146.0 2843.0 2009 2816.0 2550.4 2176.9 2257.6 2240.0 1999.7 1828.7 1684.6 1096.6 713.0 474.0 475.1 2010 3896.6 4212.6 4068.7 4226.0 4060.2 3760.5 3854.9 3421.7 2784.3 2116.9 2235.5 2397.0 2011 Table 11 The calculated power produced (MW) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 power 97.7 87.0 62.8 54.3 47.1 46.8 55.0 207.4 250.7 64.2 88.5 96.7 1991 105.8 105.5 126.8 130.3 91.5 81.7 87.9 77.7 65.1 149.7 97.0 98.9 1992 142.5 154.8 157.8 149.3 127.9 96.6 79.4 80.1 116.3 142.8 114.5 120.6 1993 194.4 151.6 162.7 173.9 112.3 119.5 125.9 168.9 142.2 356.3 301.9 232.6 1994 179.0 154.7 112.8 176.9 177.6 240.7 288.9 400.3 373.6 275.1 229.4 152.9 1995 218.3 306.9 286.6 254.4 251.7 520.4 386.1 290.2 269.5 246.3 213.9 159.2 1996 216.9 297.2 340.5 260.7 216.9 230.5 263.2 338.5 249.8 250.0 207.6 213.9 1997 214.3 309.7 286.4 292.0 262.7 247.9 390.4 319.3 261.2 220.9 133.5 167.3 1998 138.1 181.2 238.2 274.6 133.6 125.8 154.9 199.1 224.5 91.9 83.9 83.1 1999 144.2 139.8 148.4 151.5 116.9 135.9 147.5 118.9 64.7 57.0 121.8 116.3 2000 85.8 92.4 83.1 77.4 59.2 44.9 82.7 71.6 46.9 50.1 85.2 100.1 2001 84.9 116.4 101.9 70.7 41.5 50.2 72.7 57.2 37.8 76.0 87.2 66.0 2002 87.6 132.8 139.1 143.8 123.7 114.1 169.8 175.9 182.2 101.2 86.2 73.2 2003 181.4 184.0 180.3 213.2 229.2 208.0 387.0 117.6 87.0 187.4 161.7 170.0 2004 148.4 194.4 210.5 169.4 145.3 191.2 206.2 233.0 249.8 129.3 128.6 123.5 2005 217.2 239.9 234.9 202.5 146.3 147.1 182.9 307.8 124.2 144.0 195.9 216.4 2006 228.9 239.8 219.7 199.1 208.0 161.4 162.5 237.4 224.6 156.3 184.9 198.2 2007 169.3 166.8 173.8 142.4 128.7 116.6 140.9 134.9 128.0 73.6 86.4 127.0 2008 48.1 57.3 61.0 47.7 35.6 44.6 51.7 59.4 61.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 113.9 98.2 76.8 61.5 43.9 41.8 40.6 57.2 33.7 83.2 108.2 101.9 2010 149.7 124.7 120.9 99.1 71.8 79.2 92.0 63.1 90.3 115.5 121.2 129.6 2011 Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 17 Table 12 The calculated DSWL (m.a.s.l.) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 12 11 10 dswl 101.78 101.64 101.37 101.29 101.23 101.27 101.34 103.22 103.61 101.34 101.69 101.77 1991 101.67 101.66 101.86 101.89 101.49 101.39 101.47 101.38 101.29 102.08 101.56 101.60 1992 102.00 102.08 102.10 101.99 101.79 101.50 101.34 101.36 101.73 101.98 101.72 101.79 1993 102.54 102.11 102.19 102.26 101.64 101.72 101.79 102.21 101.97 104.01 103.52 102.90 1994 102.51 102.22 101.77 102.38 102.32 102.87 103.29 104.29 104.11 103.36 102.98 102.24 1995 103.04 103.79 103.43 102.98 102.92 105.23 104.08 103.38 103.30 103.21 102.90 102.37 1996 102.95 103.59 103.80 103.01 102.60 102.76 103.17 103.95 103.19 103.19 102.89 103.04 1997 103.08 103.88 103.44 103.33 103.01 102.88 104.17 103.63 103.20 102.93 102.11 102.55 1998 102.65 102.80 103.22 103.28 101.86 101.78 102.07 102.54 102.85 101.91 101.99 101.97 1999 102.11 102.13 102.15 102.12 101.74 101.93 102.05 101.87 101.39 101.34 102.17 102.03 2000 101.72 101.84 101.73 101.60 101.32 101.13 101.62 101.48 101.18 101.31 101.93 102.01 2001 101.59 101.93 101.72 101.36 101.02 101.13 101.39 101.22 101.03 101.41 101.60 101.37 2002 101.70 102.21 102.16 102.13 101.86 101.76 102.35 102.44 102.49 101.73 101.60 101.48 2003 102.42 102.43 102.34 102.58 102.73 102.55 104.19 101.78 101.53 102.43 102.21 102.31 2004 102.21 102.62 102.72 102.26 102.00 102.41 102.53 102.80 102.96 101.97 101.97 101.97 2005 102.72 102.89 102.83 102.49 101.97 101.97 102.32 103.49 101.85 102.08 102.65 102.79 2006 102.89 102.94 102.73 102.48 102.53 102.10 102.12 102.83 102.75 102.39 102.65 102.67 2007 102.78 102.67 102.63 102.17 101.97 101.81 102.04 102.00 102.03 101.88 102.02 102.45 2008 101.97 101.97 101.88 101.55 101.29 101.45 101.55 101.63 101.63 101.42 101.84 101.87 2009 102.27 102.10 101.85 101.57 101.28 101.28 101.28 101.63 101.31 101.97 102.36 102.20 2010 102.50 102.13 102.10 101.81 101.48 101.60 101.76 101.42 101.92 102.10 102.30 102.35 2011 Table 13 The daily operation for (month 9/2009) Storage (million m3) Relaese (m3/s) water elevation (m.a.s.l.) 2009/9 776.55 401.22 119.73 1 760.60 400.71 119.58 2 746.94 400.28 119.45 3 738.61 400.01 119.37 4 731.38 399.77 119.3 5 721.11 399.44 119.2 6 715.00 399.24 119.14 7 711.96 399.14 119.11 8 708.92 399.04 119.08 9 707.91 399.00 119.07 10 710.94 399.10 119.1 11 709.93 399.07 119.09 12 704.88 398.90 119.04 13 698.86 398.70 118.98 14 693.86 398.53 118.93 15 683.93 398.20 118.83 16 665.32 397.56 118.64 17 649.90 397.03 118.48 18 638.48 396.62 118.36 19 DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 18 626.26 396.19 118.23 20 611.42 395.65 118.07 21 602.26 395.32 117.97 22 594.08 395.02 117.88 23 582.41 394.58 117.75 24 572.64 394.21 117.64 25 562.97 393.84 117.53 26 553.41 393.47 117.42 27 542.25 393.04 117.29 28 525.35 392.37 117.09 29 520.34 392.17 117.03 30 Table 14 The daily operation for (month 10/2009) Storage (million m3) Release (m3/s) water elevation (m.a.s.l.) 2009/10 506.33 400.95 116.86 1 491.75 400.33 116.68 2 479.81 399.81 116.53 3 466.50 399.23 116.36 4 456.48 398.79 116.23 5 445.09 398.27 116.08 6 434.62 397.79 115.94 7 426.50 397.41 115.83 8 427.24 397.45 115.84 9 431.65 397.65 115.9 10 435.36 397.82 115.95 11 437.59 397.93 115.98 12 438.34 367.20 115.99 13 444.33 362.40 116.07 14 451.14 358.21 116.16 15 458.78 355.55 116.26 16 467.27 352.00 116.37 17 476.66 351.21 116.49 18 484.56 350.95 116.59 19 488.55 350.72 116.64 20 490.15 350.52 116.66 21 490.15 350.15 116.66 22 491.75 350.12 116.68 23 490.95 350.10 116.67 24 489.35 350.21 116.65 25 485.36 350.46 116.6 26 481.39 350.79 116.55 27 478.23 350.42 116.51 28 477.44 350.89 116.5 29 475.87 350.99 116.48 30 474.30 350.69 116.46 31 Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 19 Figure 1 The upper and the lower rule curve by ( Ali A.A. , (1994) ) Figure 2 The relationship between storage, surface area and water level of the reservoir by (Ishaq, (1998)) DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 21 Figure 3 Curves represented the relation between gate opening and the discharge for the bottom outlets for different water level by (G.S.D.R. (2012)) Figure 4 Analysis of previous figure . Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 21 Figure 5 The relation between Cd and ratio of (open gate/pressure head)by (Chow,(1959) Figure 6 The main menu of (ESOHD) for monthly option DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 22 Figure 7 The welcome window of monthly operation Figure 8 The results for monthly operating Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 23 Figure 9 The details for operating year (2009) Figure 10 The main menu with daily operating option DEVELOPING EXPERT SYSTEM FOR OPERATING HADITHA DAM 24 Figure 11 The welcome window of daily operation Figure 12 The result for operating two month (9-10/2009) Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 1, Year 2013 25 Figure13 The details for daily operating