model studies of the sugar pine dam energy dissipator … · 4. turbulence within the basin...

GR-79-3

MODEL STUDIES OF THE SUGAR PINE DAM ENERGY DISSIPATOR

Hydraulics Branch Division of Research

Engineering and Research Center Bureau of Reclamation

September 1979

/ "

MS-230 (1-76) B u r e a u o f R e c l a m a t i o n

I GR-79-3 , ........................................ ,., ..........................................................

I

4. T I T L E AND S U B T I T L E

Model Studies of the Sugar Pine Dam Energy Dissipator

7, AUTHOR(S)

John H. LaBoon

9. PERFORMING O R G A N I Z A T I O N NAME AND ADDRESS

Bureau of Reclamation Engineering and Research Center Denver, Colorado 80225

12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS

Same

TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 3. R E C I P I E N T ' S C A T A L O G NO.

5. REPORT DATE

September 1979 6. PERFORMING O R G A N I Z A T I O N CODE

8. PERFORMING O R G A N I Z A T I O N REPORT NO.

• G R-79-3

10. WORK UNIT NO.

11. C O N T R A C T OR GRANT NO.

13. T Y P E OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED

14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

15. S U P P L E M E N T A R Y NOTES

16. A B S T R A C T

Due to the configuration of the dam relative to the drainage creek downstream, it was not feasible to construct a conventional hydraulic jump stilling basin for the spillway at Sugar Pine Dam. Also, the earth material of the opposite bank was highly erodible. An energy dissipator was developed that would adequately still the flow and also turn the flow 62.5 ° off the centerline of the chute into the original river channel. A hydraulic model study was used to develop a stilling basin that would create acceptable flow dissipation for the maximum discharge of 480 mS/s, and desirable flow characteristics for lesser discharges. Chute blocks, directional vanes, sidewalls, end sill, and trapezoidal "vane" blocks placed at strategic locations separated, turned, and stilled the flow, and helped to force a hydraulic jump. Pressure measurements were made on the chute blocks, the left wall, and the vane blocks. Subatmospheric pressures occurred only at the maximum design discharge at the upstream end of the left wall near the floor. The tests showed that at maximum discharge, there would be severe river bank erosion downstream from the basin.

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS

O . D E S C R IPTORS--/ hydraulic models/stilling basins/hydraulic engineering/*energy dissipation/ pressure head/ spillways/ baffle piers/ chute blocks/ hydraulic jump

b. IDENTIFIERS-- / Sugar Pine Dam, Calif.

c, COSATI Field/Group 13B COWRR: 1313 18, D ISTRIBUTfON S T A T E M E N T 19, S E C U R I T Y CLASS 121. NO. OF PAGE. {

(THIS REPORT) / UNCLASSIFIED 4 |

20, SECURITY CLASS I (THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

22, PRICE

i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r

I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

M .

S] METRIC

GR-79-3

MODEL STUDIES OF

THE SUGAR PINE DAM

ENERGY DISSIPATOR

by John H. LaBoon

Hydraulics Branch Division of Research

Engineering and Research Center Denver, Colorado

September 1979

I I I I

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

On November 6, 1979, the Bureau of Reclamation was renamed the Water and Power Resources Service in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The new name more closely identifies the agency with its principal functions--supplying water and power.

The text of this publication was prepared prior to adoption of the new name; all references to the Bureau of Reclamation Or any derivative thereof are to be considered synonymous with the Water and Power Resources Service.

I I i I I I I

I I I I I I I l, I II

i m I m i m m i m m i i I i m i m r

&:

~t ~ 1 . ~ +' . , ~ ,

~ " ; t l ' , 0 ,

4" -' . I +.

-

Conception of Sugar Pine Dam, spillway at right. (artist, Anthony Rozalesl

I i !

I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I

C O N T E N T S

P u r p o s e ............................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I n t r o d u c t i o n ..........................................................

C o n c l u s i o n s ...........................................................

T e s t f a c i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................................

T h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n

S c h e m e 1, p r e l i m i n a r y d e s i g n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . .

S c h e m e 2 ...........................................................

S c h e m e 3 ...........................................................

S c h e m e 4 ...........................................................

S c h e m e 5 ..................................................... . . . . . .

S c h e m e 6 , r e c o m m e n d e d d e s i g n ........................................

P r e s s u r e m e a s u r e m e n t s ...............................................

E r o s i o n a n d d e b r i s t e s t s ...................................... . . . . . . . . .

B i b l i o g r a p h y ............................................................

P a g e

1

1

2

4

4

5

5

6

6

7

7

8

9

Figure

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

F I G U R E S

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Locat ion m a p . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Genera l plan and sections .....................................

Spillway, general plan and sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Overall view of the 1:36 m o d e l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Spil lway model energy diss ipator ...............................

View of pre l iminary design stilling basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Scheme 1 ...................................................

F low in basin, scheme 1 .......................................

Scheme 2 ...................................................

F low in basin, scheme 2 .......................................

Concave floor blocks .........................................

Scheme 3 . . . . . . . . ...........................................

F low in basin, scheme 3, 175 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

F low in

Flow in

Scheme

Flow in

F low in

F low in

Scheme

Flow in

F low in

F low in

Scheme

Flow in

F low in

F low in

basin, scheme 3, 340 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 3 , 4 8 0 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . , , o . , . . , . o . , I . . . o ° . . ° . o . . ° ° . ° . . . . . ° ° . . . ° o . . . . o o .

basin, scheme 4, 175 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 4, 340 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 4, 480 ma/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

***************************************************

basin, scheme 5, 175 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 5, 340 m i / s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 5, 480 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6, r e c o m m e n d e d design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 6, 175 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 6, 340 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

basin, scheme 6, 480 m3/s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

10

11

13

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

3O

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

I I I

I I I I I II I I I I I I II II II

I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I

Figure

28

29

3O

F IGURES - Continued

Chute block piezometer locations and pressure data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Left wall piezometer locations and pressure data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Vane block piezometer locations and pressure data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iii

Page

39

40

41

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

PURPOSE

Due to the orientation of the dam with respect to Shirttail Creek, an atypical spillway had

to be designed. This required a special hydraulic model study, to develop an adequate

stilling basin for the Sugar Pine Dam spillway. The stilling basin had to be designed to

still and contain the flow, and turn it 62.5 ° off the centerline. The flow had to be com-

pletely contained within the sidewalls to prevent splashing which would erode the soft

material of the stream banks. Several basin configurations were tested to create accept-

able flow conditions for the maximum discharge of 480 m3/s, and good flow conditions for

lesser discharges. When a design which operated adequately to warrant recommendation

was selected, pressures were tested for possible impact or cavitation problems.

INTRODUCTION

Sugar Pine Dam is located on the north fork of Shirttail Creek (fig. 1) ~ 14.5 km north of

Foresthill, Placer County, California. It is a feature of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit,

Central Valley Project. The earthfill dam would be approximately 55 m high and 181 m

long at the crest, and would impound about 9 x 106 m 3 of water for irrigation, municipal

and industrial use, and flood control. Principal hydraulic features include the spillway on

the left abutment, and a gated outlet works at the base of t hedam (fig. 2). This study is

concerned with the hydraulic performance of the spillway stilling basin.

The spillway crest, an uncontrolled ogee type, (fig. 3) is set at the normal water surface

elevation. The spillway at the crest is 13 m wide, has a 31-m-long transition to the

9-m-wide chute, which extends i23 m downstream to the stilling basin. The 0.53 slope of

the spillway chute steepens in the latter 46 m of the chute, before the flow enters the still-

ing basin. The dam was positioned relative to the drainage creek in a manner that re-

quired the stilling basin centerline to veer to the left of the spillway chute centerline by

All figures are at the end of the report.

62.5 °. Thus, the stilling basin must both dissipate a large amount of energy, and turn the

flow into the downstream channel. Preliminary design called for two directional vanes,

high sidewalls in the basin, and several vane blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Chute blocks, directional vanes, and vane blocks along the vanes and sidewall are reo

quired to achieve satisfactorily distributed flow within the stilling basin.

2. A vertical sill, rising 8.5 m from the stilling basin floor, is needed to maintain

submergence of the spillway jet and to ensure sufficient energy dissipation.

3. Piezometric measurements in the stilling basin indicate that pressures may range

from a positive head of 47 m of water to a subatmospheric level of 8 m of water in some

areas. For discharges above 340 m3/s, cavitation could occur near the base of the left wall

immediately downstream from the point of curvature.

4. Turbulence within the basin produced high impact pressures, which suggested it

would be desirable to add steel armor to the impact surfaces of the chute blocks, the vane

blocks along the inside curvature of the directional vanes, and the top faces of the vanes

along the curvature.

5. It would be advisable to widen the excavated river channel on the left channel bank

downstream of the sill, because of severe washout potential of the r iprapfor flows greater

than 340 m3/s. ~lso, it might be well to rotate the right retaining wall outward, nearly

perpendicular to the sill, or even eliminate the wall altogether.

6. Rocks, ranging in size from 0.25 to 3 m diameter, sometimes stay within the stilling

basin for flows less than about 340 m3/s. Flows of 175 m3/s did not flush them out, but

concentrated them near the left wall at the base of the sill. Some of the smaller rocks were

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I


flushed out with a 225 m3/s discharge, but the remainder stayed in the same location.

Discharges of 340 m3/s or more generally cleared the basin of all rocks.

7. Abrasive action caused by trees and rocks churning in the basin could be significant.

Impact of such debris on the upstream ends of the directional vanes could be reduced by

sloping the leading edge away from the flow. The test of this condition showed no adverse

changes in the hydraulic performance. If this is done, the upstream end of t he vanes

should be closer to the Chute to intercept the flow earlier.

TEST FACILITY

A 1:36 scale model (figs. 4 and 5) represented a portion• of the spillway chute, the stilling

basin, and a portion of the trapezoidal channel downstream from the sill. Thebas in ,

directional vanes, vane blocks, and sill are shown in figure 6. Maximum prototype

discharge of 480 ma/s was represented in the model by 0.062 m3/s discharge.

A short portion of the spillway chute was modeled and the depth of flow into the basin was

varied by adjusting a radial gate at the upper end of the chute, and each discharge was ob ,~

tained by changing the head on the gate. The model stilling basin including the end sill

was 1400 mm long, and the apron immediatelydownstream from the sill was 830 mm

long. Downstream from the apron was an excavated channel bounded on the lef tby a 2:1

gravel slope representing riprap, and on the right by a converging vertical retaining wall.

Channel floor width varied from 550 mm at the downstream edge of the sill to 150 mm at

the downstream end of the retaining wall. In the 530-mm-long floor section, the elevation

dropped 28 mm. Beyond the right retaining wall, a trapezoidal section 1500 mm long

represented the natural river channel. The cross section was unsymmetrical because of a

3:1 left side slope and a 1.5:1 right side slope. The river channel grade was 4 percent.

3

THE INVESTIGATION

\

The model study was based on empirically evaluating the preliminary design and apply-

ing curative procedures to improve performance where necessary. When a workable

design had seemingly been attained, pressure measurements were made at certain points

along the curved portion of the left wall, on one vane block adjacent to a directional vane,

and on a chute block at the toe of the chute. These measurements were made to detect

possible subatmospheric pressures which would necessitate further design modifications.

Scheme 1 Preliminary Design

The preliminary stilling basin had a 6.4-m-high sill, 3-m-high directional vanes, and

1.5-m-high vane and baffle blocks (fig. 7). Six baffle blocks were placed near the

downstream ends of the directional vanes, and three baffle blocks were placed near the

upstream ends.

At 175-m3/s discharge (fig. 8a), there was greater flow depth over the right side of the sill.

While the basin performed satisfactorily up to 255 m3/s, greater discharges dominated the

directional vanes, the sill, and the vane and baffle blocks. Flows of 340 m3/s and higher

• (figs. 8b, c) became more concentrated on the right side of the basin, intermittently over-

topping the right retaining wall. Little energy dissipation was evident. Also, submergence

at the toe of the chute was not maintained for discharges over 340 m3/s apparently

because the sill height was too low to force the hydraulic jump to occur over or upstream

from the toe. Turbulence, strong surges, and reverse flow occurred along the left wall, and

occasionally overtopped the wall. Performance at 495 m3/s (fig. 8c), 15 m3/s above max-

imum design discharge, was completely unsatisfactory. Distribution of flow over the sill

was unsymmetrical, and flow consistently overtopped the right retaining wall.

4

)


i i I I I I I I I I i I I i I I I I

Scheme 2

The original directional vanes were raised from 3 to 5 m for this scheme (fig. 9). The nine

baffle blocks were eliminated, but the two vane blocks remained, and three additional

vane blocks were installed. The block heights of 1.5 m and the sill height of 6.5 m, as well

as the vanes and walls, were unchanged.

Flow performances are shown (figs. 10a, b, and c) for discharges of 175, 340, and

480 m3/s, respectively. No discharge caused overtopping of either wall of the basin, but

there was asymmetry of flow over the sill. Along the left wall between the transition curve

and the sill turbulence, strong surges, reverse flow, and oscillations were again evident.

The hydraulic jump was swept downstream from the chute toe for flows of 340 m3/s and

higher.

Scheme 3

The various features previously tested were retained and one baffle block and four con-

cave floor blocks (fig. l l a ) were added (fig. 12). The size and shape of the baffle block was

the same as the vane blocks. The concave floor blocks [1, 2] 5 were added to induce t h e

hydraulic jump to remain upstream from the chute toe at all discharges. Height of the

concave blocks was chosen to approximate twice the flow depth at the toe of the chute for

the maximum discharge. The vanes and right wall were unchanged, but the sill height was

increased to 7.5 m. The left wall was moved into the basin by 1.3 m to provide a radius at

the transition instead of a sharp break. This wall extended the full height of the basin.

Flow conditions for three test discharges are shown (figs. 13, 14, and 15). (In the

photographs facing upstream, a photographic illusion appears where the left wall seems to

project into the flow. The photographs facing downstream and the plan drawing show the

Numbers in brackets refer to literature cited in the bibliography.

5

true position of the wall. ) Hydraulic performance was improved considerably over the

previous schemes. The hydraulic jump remained over or upstream from the chute toe, and

the baffle block and redesigned left wall seemed to decrease the reverse flows along the

wall between sill and transition curve.

Scheme 4

This scheme layout was identical to Scheme 3 except the concave floor block dimensions

were decreased (figs 16 and l l b L This change was made to avoid difficulties in con-

structing the larger blocks. The basin controlled discharges at 175 m3/s and 340 ma/s,

(figs. 17 and 18) but failed to control 480 m3/s, shown in figure 19.

Scheme 5

/

Because the hydraulic jump continued to be swept downstream from the chute toe during

maximum discharge, three baffle beams and a wave suppressor were positioned across the

full width of the channel below the chute toe (fig. 20). The baffle beam and wave sup-

pressor design evolved from studies of other energy dissipators and modification of the

dissipator proposed for the Friant-Kern Canal headworks [3, 4]. The vanes and sidewalls

remained unchanged from Scheme2, but two baffle blocks were added and the sill height

was decreased to 6.5 m. The baffle blocks were the same size and relative position, across

the basin, as the block added for Scheme 3.

This scheme generally confined flows successfully within the basin up to 480 m3/s

(figs. 21, 22, and 23); however, above 425 m3/s, energy dissipation at the beam suppressor

was sufficiently violent to cause splashing over the basin walls (fig. 23). Although

significantly more turbulence was evident near the chute toe, rather stable and smooth

flows were noted in the wider downstream section of the basin.

I i I i I i I I I i I I I I I I i !

I I I I i I i I i I i I I I I I

I I

Scheme 6, Recommended Design

This scheme, considerably simplified from scheme 5, would result in more economical

prototype construction and fewer maintenance problems {fig. 24). The directional vanes

were reduced to 3 m high, and the baffle blocks, baffle beams, and wave suppressor were

removed. Five ~hute blocks were installed at the chute toe; the sill height was increased to

8.5 m; and the left wall was curved with a 10-m radius to provide a much more gradual

change of direction.

The combination of the chute blocks and the higher sill caused submergence of the jet at

the chute toe, up to the 480-m3/s discharge (figs. 25, 26, and 27). The chute blocks helped

to corrugate the jet, lifting a portion of it from the floor to provide less jet concentration.

Strong boils were noted immediately upstream from the sill, and some return flow con-

tinued along the left wall. Because of the higher end sill, energy dissipation was well con-

fined within the stilling basin, although considerable turbulence occurred downstream

from the sill until it reached the downstream channel section that widens into the stream

bed.

Pressure Measurements

Having a seemingly acceptable design in Scheme 6, piezometers'were installed in the

chute blocks, along the toe of the chute, in a vane block, and along the left wall (figs. 28,

29, and 30). Pressure measurements were made for five discharges as shOwn in the tables

accompanying the figures. Downstream from the point of curvature on the left wall and

immediately above the floor (piezometer No. 9, fig. 29) pressures dropped significantly

below atmospheric for discharges above 400 m3/s. Comparison of pressures on piezometer

No. 9 with pressures on piezometers No. 10 and 11, indicates that subatmospheric

pressures will probably be experienced only in a small a r eanea r the basin floor.

Only On piezometer No. 7 (fig. 30) were other subatmospheric pressures encountered, but

the magnitude was not large enough to be of concern. Protecting the leading edge of the

vane block with angle iron should be'considered since subatmospheric pressures at the

edge may be somewhat less than at the location of piezometer No. 7.

Erosion and Debris Tests

Observation of the various tests indicated that erosion was more likely to occur

downstream from the sill on the left side. On that side, return flows behind the retaining

wall were possible in contrast to the right side where a wingwall projecting into the flow

prevented similar flow.

Gravel was placed on the left channel slope to simulate 2-m-thick riprap. A variety of

discharges were then run through the Scheme 6 model, starting with 175 m3/s, rising to

480 m3/s for several minutes, and then decreasing gradually to no flow. Much of the

gravel slope was eroded. Similar action could be expected in the prototype.

Several tests were made to study debris accumulation in the stilling basin. Various size

riprap, from 0.25 to 3 m, was dropped into the basin, allowing different discharges to con-

tinue for about 2 minutes each (equivalent to 12 minutes prototype). The sizes and loca-

tions of the pieces of gravel were then noted. Generally, most debris was removed by tur-

bulence for discharges above 255 m3/s. Below that rate of flow, accumulations occurred

near the left retaining wall at the base of the sill.

To test abrasive action of timber in the stilling basin, dowels were randomly dropped in

the chute. The dowels represented tree sections ranging from 0.25 m in diameter and 3 m

long to 1 m in diameter and 9 m long. For all discharges the dowels churned in the

hydraulic jump, eventually being ejected downstream. Considerable noise of impacting

dowels was heard, suggesting that damage to concrete surfaces could take place. To

minimize damage to the directional vanes from this hazard, the upstream ends of both

vanes were sloped 1:1 away from the flow. No adverse reactions in the hydraulic perform-

ance were noted; however, the slope should probably not exceed 1:1, because this could

a

I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I

! ! ! !

i

I I ! !

I I ! ! ! ! ! ! !

lessen the ability of the vanes to redirect the flows. Also, if this is done, the upstream end

of the vanes should be closer to the chute to intercept the flow earlier.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Beichley, Glenn L., "Hydraulic Model Studies of the Outlet Works at Carter Lake

Reservoir Dam No. 1 Joining the St. Vrain Canal," Report No. HYD-394, Bureau of "

Reclamation, Denver, Colo.. January 1955.

[2] Rhone, Thomas J., "Hydraulic Model Studies of Silver Jack Dam Spillway Stilling

Basin, Bostwick Park Project, Colorado," Report No. REC-OCE-70-3, Bureau of

Reclamation, Denver,.Colo., January 1970.

[3] _ _ , "Hydraulic Model Studies on the Wave Suppressor Device at the Friant-Kern

Canal Headworks," Report No. HYD-395, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo.,

August 1955.

[4] Peterka, A. J., "Hydraulic Desig n of Stilling Basins and Energy Dissipators,"

Engineering Monograph No. 25, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo., Fourth

Printing- Revised: January 1978.

9

. . . . . i

i / ~ ° ' ° ' ~ ~' ! ~' " ~ ' ° ~ " ~ / ' ~ o ~

E Ix 0 R E S T 0"* L

' • O ~ CRESt Sires " I ,;' Site / p l o 124 ',

, ' ~°°:"~" "" )2 K~k~'° " ' ~ k I ii' o . . . . " ° " -

I I

,,*y" ',,..~'~ co~ructed / \ - \ ~k - - f "~ " ~ -- by others J ¢• ~ ~ . /7 "eO_R_~W.

I I . Y , ~J t._:, ....... ~ , i

, , ! J Nil~

k ~00 0 soo rooo ,soo ' 1

I

~ To Auburn-Foresfh#/ Rood I //#' ,,o,ootS~A.~..m~" ~ II

~- UNII"irD ~ r £ $

,o . ,.~,.l,6 IC~_ ~ , II - , , , - < . . < < , , - o - o ,

- % . ~ . T \ __III - - ~ - - " " " . . . . . . . . . . . . ' " ~ 1 ..... ~ _ ~ _ _ t _ _ l l ._~~.~:.:~: KIY MAP "'" ""~'~""''e'lia~'*e'~"~"

F i g u r e 1. - - L o c a t i o n m a p . 1

,o I


; £ Dam Crest ~ " - \ ~ , ~ ' Access R o o d J ~ . ~

Spillwny Sfo. 1÷00.000 l Dam STA 5+51.295 ) ~.~. 5+ 80. 635 S U r Pine Oam . ~T_. 19+04.836 D .C .A .R . -~

~egin Roodwoy Ext. / Gnte chomber~"

£ Outlet works--

s ,o, , - w , e . ,o b, , . . o , , . . . . 0 0 . o . . 0 o o . . . o . . . . oo.o,. 0 . - - , - - s . , . . , . o , m . . , others Access Rood, see Drawing ~ "Re ° 8 5 9 - 2 4 5 - 6 5 7 6 ~ ~ I~, __ f - 0.15 m Aggregate bose, Close Z O--

Guordrnileoch side (See ~ : 0 5 /[0 54 I0 I

\ 0% 4 ° ~ '3"~-.~ ~.1 ":o J - - - - JH . . ~ . ~ . . . . . , ~ .L I . l ~ m - - ~ - \ ~ . / ~ J ~ - - - C r e s t E L 11/2.5 wifhoutcomber . . . . . . i ., ~ " " ~ ~ Slope ,,u~le depending "1 ~.J--'=-.---~.-~°-,W~-.L-'I~°-L.-'--.~g~. .%-X'b~ r ¢--Slooe ,aries wi~camber

_ / - . . . . . . . , ~/ope varies w i f h c n . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ × ~ . ~ / o . e . a . o b / e de.r id , rig on ooober M R * l a u r a . ,

. . . . . . - - Maximum wofer surfoce EL #09.1 -~ ~ ~ ~ "..~ " :~, : . ; - " ; ~ , . "~ - ~ > ~ ~ Larger moteriolmoy beploced adjacent J ~ ~ " ,~ ~ -Varies (without gntes; ~ ~ . ~ o ; :: .' ~ ' : ~ to downstream face

Pipeline ~ ~,1 ~ ~<~ 22 .1

Spillwoy -.~ . . . . - [ , ' " \ ~ ~ ~ Oom Cre~f Access" Rood, ~" " ° . ° . % • -- " ~ o ~ ~ • "

- - ~ / ~ ' ~ see Drawing 859-245-66#5

d lie .~ -Security fence, for eta" >J o.= ~ .~ o ~

HOO- I /

- . ~ / 3 ~ I ......... ( RESERVOIR AREA IN H E C T A R E S ioo iio 6o 40 zo

, > R E S E R V O I R C A P A C I T Y A L L O C A T I O N S ,,zo ~ , , 'e_~-/" . ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ " EMoximum water surfnce EL 1 1 0 9 , 1 ~

4 ~ _ onSTA 3+00 .000~ PURPOSE ELEVATIONS CAPACITY(m s )

- - ~ E 713 291.948 Active conservation 1085.0 fo 1102.8 7 300 000 . ~ ..... - I (-Upper infoke $ill, /

j , , -~~1 ! / ~ , 1 , , ~ ~ . . , - - 2 1 ~ ~ a . IOO5.ooo

Crest EL II 12.5 4 * 0 0 ~L_ S 28"00'E =~ ~ ; / s+oo t I Dead Sfreombed to 1076.0 3~0 000

~ £ Grout cop ~ Foundofion Excovofion Plon shown ~ ' ~ Totol reservoir copocity 8580000 on Orowin9 859-0-2162 ~-'D'~.~ / I A suPchorge of 4690 0(20 m~(Meximum water surface EL //09.1 wifhou¢ gates)

~/ - ~ providedfoprofecfagoinstfheinflowdesignfloodondbreoching ~ - ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . of Morning Star Dam. The perk of the combined inflow is re. ~ ~ ~Lower infoke sil/,

~omber " == / ~ I 342 mJ/ sac and the combined 3-dRy volume is 27 500 000 m{ / ~ ' " ; J ! I ~ / / e~ io~.ooo works ~ ~ , ~ I ,os~

,, ~/ /

, , . ~ / / / ¢/ OUTLET WORKS OISGHARGE IN m3 /s ~ .~ ._~ rm-EL 1080.0 / o ~o zo ~o 40 so I o

i / / / E M B A N K M E N T E X P L A N A T I O N o ~s ~so z z s ~oo , " end with b~clrfill ~ / ( ~ Selected cloy, silt, sand and grove/ compacted by tamping roller to ~C eosdirecfed SPILLWAY OISGHARGE IN m3/s

£ Intake NO. 3 - ~ / / o~ ~ ~o 0.15 m layers. I / ~ .~ thoroughly tabled in pugmi/I with 5 $ by ~o , o A R E A - C A P A C I T Y - D I S C H A R G E - C U R V E S S TA 1+ 4 6 . 0 0 0 ~ / / , ... ( ~ Setected c/ey, s//f, sand ond grevel

f / volume of dry powdered bentonite and compacted by tamping roller fake N o . 2 ~ ( to 0.15 m layers.

/ ST4 I+Z8.0 \ I/ N. 163 150.0 ( ~ Sand f i l ter- compacted by vibratory rol ler in 0.3 m / / ~ l n t ~ o k , / .E. 713471.2 layers.

e Nod / S ~-~-Abondoneddifch (2(~ Gravel f i l ter-minus 75ram-compacted by vibratory roller I O0-J~ "~o~ J~ nnelopprox, el.5 G E N E R A L P L A N in 0.6 m layers. N O T E S

,o o ,o zo ~o , .io ( ~ Rockfill- minus 75 ram- compacted by vibratory roller in Dimensions, unless otherwise stated, ore in meters. ~-*~/0?0 l u l d i t ' ' t , , , 0.6 m layers. All contour intervals ore in 5 m increments,

~ l o ~ ~ ~/~ @ Rockfil! - O/us 75 mm- compacted by vibratory roller Stations end elevations ore in meters. , ~. ~,o::----= = - . - ~ . . ,no.,m ,n,,ers

Maximum water surface, EL 1109.1 / ~ - £ Crest of dam • / S T A 3+63~ . . . . . . . Guordroil-bolh sides_ 20 I ~ I STA. 5 + 4 5 ~ - - ~ STA 4+75--~ .~---EL 1 1 1 3 . 1 ~ ~..~-STA 4+15 ~ ~ iw~rnour g o r e s l ~ - - EL 11~7 , \ ~ ¢~:~/--CrestEL 1112.5

,=, ,~, ~ _ _ ~ ~ , ~ ,,.o ,=, ~ ~,.11o2~'-h 7:'~3 (:'~2~:1 TOp of active conservaTiOn ~ " " ~ ~ I " ~ / 0.5 . . . . . . 0.5 co~,oEity. ~ 11o2 ~ ~ - - o,., _ k _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ .Zc~ , , o , . ~ A d j , f p lace .n* to o~ooo~ate

o.o C A M B E R O N C R E S T O F D A M . o.o ~ z ' ,

,,.o ..... . ~ ~pillwoy ~ .--.esf ..i,,5 ~ r ''° ,Or:#,~.m:tle:;:: .',10,'.,,~.~~;.~.....o.O; o " downst.e,m'm~/~;::L:~;:7~d"°'nft°f.c.

'-'-" - -L-./ 4 .,o,,.__ EL 1076.0 'EL 1 0 8 0 . 0 ~ . . ~ J o . ~ " v ~ 7 ~ " ~ ' ~ ' \ ( ~ ' ~ - ~ ( ~ " ~ I / left abutment as shown """ "" " . round -----~--~,/~:~ ~ ~ _-~.._,.,,,~..~--,, on ,,rowing ~,,,-0-2,,. " ........... , , o o - • ,, . - - . • , ~ o o ~ ~ _ ~ < . , ~ ~ - o 3 " , ~ - ~ . . ~ , , ~"- '" ~ ' - - ~ ' ' ~ ~ - ~ " ° ~ ' ~ ' " ' - ' ~ ' " " / ~ -- . . Orig,.o, gr=,nd s,,,-foEe o i g i n o l ~ . .y@ :~ ~ : ~ . ~ , ~.~=~..,~ °':::;:'.,:;.";.:::Z',.:Z °"

A U B U R N - F O L . S O M S O U T H U N I T - C A L I F O R N I A l o g o ~ . . . . . . . " " ¢ ~ - - ~ I . , / ~ lOSO

= £Out/et works~ ///Assumed f i r m ~ ~,, . " ~ ' ~ I ~ CantER/point for cutoff french ~ ~ ~ w - - - " - - : - ~ ' = - - - - - - P I N E D A M = ~ / / f°rmofi°nJl / / h ~ "". .OR,. S.,n,, . . . . / . ~ ," \ \ I e .~o .~e t .enoppro . / ~ ~ ~..~,u.*e: p'~ctd SUG A R / I / . / ~ ~ . . - , - ~ ~ ~ CREEK- , , ' ~ " " \ ~ | STA'S 3+80ond 5 * 0 0 ~ / I'~GrOUtco~JnnMIN ~ J ~ \ \ l \ ~ "3~d°wnstr~mobufmeofsunderzoneJ mafer/ol" G E N E R A L P L A N AND S E C T I O N

,o,o ~ / / / ~ ~ > ~ " I ' °°° I. 0 m Layer of Zone ( ~ " ~---------~-~='-~=~-~-~kk\\Confrol-~oinf for cutoffrtrench excavation

"Grout holes OS shown M A X ~ ~ ~ T ~ $ 3_+80 and 5 +00. on O.owing ~:,~°-g~-~,¢2L~ I ~ . m ~ su~ce of f i ~ :~ofio~

~03 - U - ~ o l ~ - - ~ f / 1040 IHIdHIll I I ( 1 i i i i io4o ,TATIONS 5 * 0 0 4~00 "Grou~ holes os shown On Dwg. 859-D-2162.

PROFILE ON ~ CREST OF DAM

- FLOOD ROUTING INFORMATION.

" ~ au~vs T.,nK F~.ETY iN

~ , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~_*:P_ _-.~_ _ _ , , e o o ~ , , . ~ , , . . . .

~ / A n t . ~ - i ~ r t m w j u J n ' ~ a ~ . J

= . , , ~ . = ~ _ o , . , ,o . . . . . . 8 5 9 - 0 - 2 1 6 1 I

F i g u r e 2 . - - G e n e r a l p l a n a n d s e c t i o n s .

I 11


d i f Zone 2A is compacted by roping or" surface vibrofioo I . i o ~ i die not required i f Zone 2A f R i ro M<,ximum voter surf<,ce EL 1109

/ l byso furo f ionond ; . p r o ~ r<,fioo ~ / . . . . . _~-

, . i . >

• u./o--~_{ [_0.65 w £ Z7 M & I Steel ~ ~ o ~ ,,o?

lateral ~ ' # .0 m Riprop S E C T I O N L - L ~ /

~n / /

. ... ~ O r i g i n o / ground surface =w ,,o,

i 2 1 . ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ . I ~ " /

K EL 1066.*00 ~ 3 . 2 0 EL 1102.80G

i io3

,~oce =t ,o" ~ o o ~ I o '~ o , s ; . % , , , , '%, "= S P I L L W A Y D I S C H A R G E C U R V E

S E C T I O N K - K ~8.00 Meosured olong ~ r o o d ~ --Slope to motch b r i d g e ~ \ EL 1112 62

' (-i~,;;;~'i . . . . . . . . . / " t ~,,'~hoinlin, fence .-A \ " ) O.15mEJrc<,vofionrefi l l~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ 1 I i i i i ' ~ , ~ i - /

£ ' ~ ~ EL I I I Z . 62~ . J -EL I / 12 .70~ I ' ~ " ~ l ' • I I '~II/ELtIIZTO.(;~I/ N O T E S - . . , , . . - _- . . . . . . . , , , , / ( ' . ~ P , / - - ~ Spl//w<,y ~ , "~ " ~ . . ~ .~,.,,, . . . . . . . . ., : . , , . .,. . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . , ~ - V , For generol no+es, see Dwgs. 4040-0 -7006 <,rid

I ~ ~.~ , .~ ~Origioolg,undsurooe - - A : " ' . "..:,'. ~et<,'gu<,~ I ~ - - ~ _ . ~ ": ~ ,o -o- , ,~ ,~< ,~ ,e , - , , , . Dimensions, unless otherwise shown, ore in meters. .1__~, ~. ( ~ ~ , ,s., ~o~oo, ~ ~ oo m ~,~ro~ ~ r~ °° 111~.~'-~ / . ~,O'Ch<,in/ink fe,,~ k . . ~ ~, . ~.~ ~i,o~os, I I::1~ X "' " 5 . • "

° f ' l ~ -'.1 to,p,l,,<,y~ , ~ ' , ~ / ~ . 1 , - , , > i ~ : ~ < ' : ' ,.omR.pTo~---q . . . . . . . _J j ( _ l r r , o m R i ~ p .:,.o ~ . ~ ~-.~.'.':V . ,j . , ( . . \ . - - S~.,onso<,dele~otio<,sorei<, me,,rs. • I : ,.~ : / ~ >5 \ • ~ \ ~ _ on concrete having o 28 d<,y compressive strength

o f 30 MP<,. .-~.. . . . . . . . . , :.:...~.; I ["1.. ° x ® . t'. , . - . . . • ~ , . 0 r o 0 , ~ 11- ~ , ~ ~,.~ ..:'>' ; . ~ : . . ' O ' ' " ' Y ~ I ~ - - ~ ' V ' O U ' ' C ' ' ' ' ~ [ ~ [--) ~ [ ' I ~ " :~ I " i i [ ~ ~ L ; m ' t O [ , ~ ,,, ' % : . ' III . : ~ • [ j [ ~ ~ ~ o.~ L,ooo H I "" I ' ' ' ~ :" ~ " MinJmum'i"c°'e''h"ll"'l~mu'l's'o'h'rwi'e shown Of di'c~d"

~ compQctlo<, ~ '~'" ~" r 6 h i ' \ I q _ , = I ~ ~ ( 1 . ~ . , . . . / , , . o o o . , . o o o ~ .ooo I ~ 1 . , . o o o ~ . . - - ~ STA 0 + 8 6 . 6 0 0 ~ I / E L 1112.700---. - - ~ . " P C STA 1+39400 ';'"'." : :

, , , o . , . , 0 o ~ ~ . ~ , , , , . o , . ~o~ < . • ,,mi, o , , p e c i o l c o ~ , c ' i o n - ~ ~ , O . ' O 0 . / ' . ~ ~ 1 ~ ~'-~':--.';÷' ~"JIterIdge 'el \ l s r ~ " ; z ' ~ : ~ ."-~ ~-~Z ~OmvC " ,.1 / ~ " ~. ~ _ ~ J " ~" /~-"}Ea"°z's°°~I:I:" .~" :"LZ_-~ .. \ ' ~ . . . . . . . . ..,. ,:: ,..;...: . . . ~ ; - ~ v ~

60"Chore link f e n c e - - - - - - ~ l i s h o w . ~ - . . . . - ~ F I ~ . . . " I ..-~STA 1+~9.~00 "~" ~ / \~ i,~1,~0 • " ~,~'~!/O/JO0"-~ I ~ ; ~ ' J ~ : i ' J ~ ] . ~ i. : ' . . t . " " " : , " ~ . , -~ .~ I ( ~ . . ~ I " ' , . ~ ", ~ ' ' l l £ S p i l l w o y ~ . . . . . . . . . . ' ~ . . . . "~~ DAM R E F E R E N C E D R A W I N G S

,,, ,, I ~ ~ ~ " \ - : - . ~-, ' 'S ' , ' - . ' oo I10~,~0 -- - - ~ ] ' I ~-- ' ' " - - -~- '~ FILTER DETAILS .8S9"D'216~ ' " ~ , ~ ~ ' - ,~ OUTLET o.~1. ,oo-~ ' \ / *OR~S,

~" ~ , , ~ t side only / "- [I~\~~- " ~ ~ ' ~ = " " ~ ~ - -Topofperviousbockfill,~ k~x ~ Groutholes ~ l . 5 m t _ : ~ GENERALDowNSTREAMPLANARE~AND SECTIONS . . . . . . . . . .e59-~ss'°-19s70 - ~SSl

• ~l " ~ .~Vories f rom 0.00 of Rood ST~ 19 + 05

Grout c<,p i1 I f Elevo lion varies from EL/IIZ.Z5 of Rood • , . A - A (" ~" Conduit encosement ond DAM CREST ACCESS ROAD . . . . . . . . . . 859-245- 664S

~ k "ight side on/) S EC T I O N ~ 3" ~ " ~ | / STA 19 * 05 tO EL I//Z.O0 Of drop inlet SPILLWAY: . I / _ ,o 'Rood ST, . . . . . . . . ,s -o- , ,s , - STA 0 + 7Z500 .~.'~OriginoI ground surfoce conduit, S TA 0 + 91. 25 iz : l 6 STA H:Z~3_qO0 TO STA 2+52.900 . . . . . . . 859 -D- 19SS

" - - dro,<,; not shown ~ "- ~ , " .~ ~ ;505 SAFETyTERMINALBooMSTRUCTURE . . . . . . . . 8598Sg'D-2SSO- 0- ISS6

~ $ T A Z+12,~O0 ~ 5" Condui £ 3" Woterline - -

-_. =--- "~ PC STA e + 15.000 in rock cuts as directed - - j

P R O F I L E A L O N G ~ S P I L L W A Y X o-~ s~c.o~s-=,~.o~i~,~coR~crlo~s.

P L A N G - G - ~ - _ ~ " ~ \ ~ ~1 0.40 Norm<,l to slope oJsT°P m°fgrotingA~regote(2545)'bose EL 1112.000~E ~ f E ~ 1112,550 SPtLLm~ m ' ~ C ~ CU~. imo~ CO..EcrmNs. - ~Originol ~nd,urf<,ce ~ ~ ' ~ l " -. "t-~

G " ~ To~ofperviousbockfill / ~ ~ . " S E C T I O N J - J (Closs 2 ) - - - - - - - - - ~ 7-" " ~ - . . . . ' " ~ \ 1.oo m Rip~.p ~ - 2"~ " ,~ :h~: : ; , , , : y ~ - . . . ~ A ~ ,er,ious~ckfi,,-~ . . . . . . .~ rights,, o n , , - - - ~ ~,10,,.000, , . O . 0 , _ _ . W ~ E L _ _ f - - D r o , iolef " ~ ' = ' " ' " ' ' ~ ' V

o.1oo .~. ...~1~:1 i r,O'~h<,inlink fence . ' ~ 'h<,,, ,,',* ~<,, ~ + = ~ - - ~ . t ) ~ . . . . E . . . . . ES GO_ ~ . DEPARTMENT OF r~E INFERIOR a,,os~ " __~,~"'~ '~... i ~l ~" '~--~Spillw<,~ : ~ - - Concre,~sur~ce--, ~.mVC ] )% ,11,0OO 2 + 74.400 OF RECL A MA FI<,N / / . EL 1107.700: ~/ "~]~l~ ~ " ~ ~ ~. ~ ) STA ~+JS.000~" I BUREAU

• CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT J-I , " ;~.% ~,-~ ~ - ~ l o p e ' 0500 m Squ<,re concrete ~ \ --~--~'-I ~ t. L~ T t' / / ~EL 1050.492 I . ~--EL 1042.000, ~" ~ ~ / q 24"CMP.~ ~ ' ~ 015( ~ 0 . 9 0 0 AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT-CALIFORNIA

~, ..>~ ~ - ' . " ~o . - . - . . . . : - : ~ < . encosement k " ' _ _ : ' l l ~ l r l ' ~ s S E G T I O N D - D . ] . . . . - : . . i . . , f ~ , ' . ~ . . I,I ~'1,,.~o, ,_.5oo_li .~.~oo I : ' / ~ T ~ ¢ s x2i Brossorsfoinless " S U G A R P I N E D A M ~ ..I t ~ ,.. - ~ - ~ I . F - I - - - " F ~ ~ . 1 i - m : I " . :~ .~ :1 steelcorriogebolf. Loo<,fe ~ 1"

,111,,,o ": - ~ o , ~ .. . . . . . . . _ ~ - - - - ~ - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -~ ' ~ . . . . ".J encoseme.t / "+~- -=~m ÷ ".- -PT STA Z* 61.OOO Drep i<,let fo be loc<,f~d Exfend woll O.30 m c . t . . . . . . ~ ~ . . . . . ~ m t o v t o . ~ / - ~ _ , _ ~ / ~ _ : _ _ _

i S E C T I O N H - H M E A S U R E M E N T by c o < , t r o c t i n g o f f i c e r ~ I ~ ~ ' ~ ~.-2:1 belowditch , . t ~ . ~ _ , ~ . . , , ,~,~.,,,,,~. S E C T I O N F - F P O I N T D E T A I L P L A N E - E o~,vte .coroe,oo , u , , , , , . , , , , 1 8 5 9 _ D _ 1 9 5 3

Figure 3. - - Spillway, general plan and sections.

I 1 3

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I i~,, 5 -

I ~ ~!

I Figure 4. -- Overall view of the 1:36 model. (Note the spillway chute on the right, stilling basin in center,

I and trapezoidal downstream channel in foregroundL Photo PS01-D-79100

I I

I I

I 15

Ch

•

- - E Sugor Pine mode/

Oirectionol

El. 1036.0 m - ~ S i l l

"1 10305m l ' / ~ \~ f-El'lO3LO+-m E~ /0300"*m

;,,2oo . I ~ . . . . - - : ~

E P R O F I L E

, o ? ,o ,~o.

Vone blocks. /

RePoining

channel

PL AN

Figure 5. - - Spillway model energy dissipator.

a l B m i ¸ I m I l ~ a i I I I I ¸ i I l l k

I I I I I

I I I :: ~ ] !

! J~

I ~ Figure 6. -- View of preliminary design stilling basin,

I [Note directional vanes, vane blocks, and sill}. Photo PS01-D-79101

I I I

17

ill (6.5 m)

Co

Direct ionol Vones (3.0 m

I0.0 m, R

I-I--I IO.O m, R

Flow

Toe of Chute

0.5 m ~ I-5 m

Vone Blocks (I.5 m)

~ - B o f f l e Blocks (I.5m)

F i ~ t r e 7. - - S c h e m e 1.

IO.O m, R

I 111 I I m i I I I U I m l I I m W

I I i I I I I I I I I I I II II I I II

a . - - 175 m'~/s. Photo P801-D-79102.

b.--340 m3/s. Piloto P801-D-T9103.

c.--495 ma/s. Photo P801-D-T9104.

Figure 8. - - Flow in basin, scheme 1.

19

ill (6.5 m)

New Vane Blocks (I.5m)

Directional Vanes (5.0 m)

Flow

\roe Of c,ut~

(

(

Vone Blocks (t.5 m)

F i g u r e 9. - - S c h e m e 2.

l 1 1 1 1 l , 1 l ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIl_JI 1

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

i

I

I

I

I

a.--175 m3/s. Photo P801-D-79105.

r , .~i :~

i b.--340 m3/s. Photo P801-D-79106.

il c.--480 m3/s. Photo P801-D-79107.

Figure 10. - - Flow in basin, scheme 2.

21

E t~ 2:1

1.0 m

FLOW

FLOW

J

/ 1.0 Meter Wide

\

¢ ¢

a . - S c h e m e 3

f l.

J

0 Meter Wide

E I;I

b . - S c h e m e 4

F i g u r e ] 1. - - C o n c a v e f loor b locks .

22

I I i I I I I I i

I I I I I I I I I

i ~ m U i R I ~ g Q R L I I

(7.5)

Blockout

-k

Directional Vanes -F

Concave Floor Blocks (5.0 m)-

"~Toe of Chute I

Baffle Block

I

(New)

I0.0 m, R

I0.0 m,

+

I0.0 m, R

Vane Blocks

F i g u r e 12. - - S c h e m e 3.

Photo P801-D-79108.

Photo P801-D-79109.

Figure 13. - - Flow in basin, scheme 3, 175 m3/s.

24


i I I !

I I I I I I I I I I I I i I

Photo P801-D-79110.

Photo P801-D-79111.

Figure 14. - - Flow in basin, scheme 3, 340 mVs.

25

Photo P801-D-79112.

Photo P801-D-?9113.


26

I l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I l

m B I I I a l l l i b m m B

Sil l (7.5 m)

Blockout

- +

">L

---I

Directional Vanes

Concave Floor Blocks (3.0 m ) - - - - - - - - - - - ~

I ,I, ~-|l.o m I I I Flow=

~ T o e of Chute Ba f f le Block

O.Om, R

"I-.

lO.O m, I~

+ 7"-

o.o m. R

Vane Blocks

Figure 16. - - Scheme 4.

Photo P801-D-79114.

Photo P801-D-79115.


28

I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I l i l

!

I ! ! | ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

I ! ! !

Photo P801-D-79116.

Photo P801-D-79117.


29

Photo PS01-D-79118.

Photo P801-D-79119.

Figure ltL - - Flow in basin, scheme 4, 480 m3/s.

30

I I I

I II |

II l I I I I II I

I tl i !

I m i m m m m m i m i m i m m m m

Bof f le Beoms ---~

L. 5m _j J- /

S E C T I O N A - A

I-- Wove Suppressor

Blockoui"

Direct ional Vanes

F low - ~_

A

~'~Toe of Chute

I

OJ

I-I--1 I0.0 m, R

I0.0 m, R

Baf f le Block

I0.0 m,R

Vane Blocks

i l l (6 .5 m)

F i g u r e 20. - - S c h e m e 5.

Photo P801,D-79120.

Photo P801-D-79121,


32

I I I I l I I i I I I I I I I I I l

i l I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I

Photo P801-D-79122.

Photo P801-D-79123.


33

Photo P801-D-79124.

Photo P801-D-79125.


34

l li l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I l

I m i ~m i m i m m I -m I

New Wall (widened basin and increased radius of curvature) ~ ,Sill (8.5 m)

Directional I

\

Vanes (3.0

¢jI

( - -

C

~Chute Blocks

( t F low ~--~]JE- ! S~emS rr I

.~.~ [Tiomm : " ~Toe of Chute

E o

o~

C

I .,, _ + - -

I0.0 m, R ~, I

I0.0 m, R

( q

• ~ , ' ~

Vane Blocks

I0.0 m, R

I

IO.O m, R

(3

Figure 24. - - Scheme 6, recommended design.

Photo P801-D-79126.

Photo P801-D-79127.


36

I

I I !

i !

I i I !

I I !

I I !

I I

I i !

I ! ! !

i I ! ! !

i !

i !

i !

l)hoto 1)80 l- D- 79128.

1)hoto 1)801-D-TqI2q.

Figure 26. - - Flow in basin, scheme 6. 340 m3/s.

37

!

Q

:+ .~", 1 1 1 ~

Photo P801-D-79130.

Photo P801-D-79131.


38

I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

l I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I

/ FLOW _ +3

14'

BL

,ocks

2

Chute

I, 2,4, 5

. _ _ ~ _ ~ 5 / S E C T I O N B-B

KEY: 5 Piezome,er end view -t-

P L A N Piezometer side v i e w l 5

(

DI SCHARGE (m3/s) ~ 175 255 540 425 480

PI E ZOMETER N U M B E R

I 2 3 4 5 1,4 15

PROTOTYPE PRESSURE H E A D ( r o o f water

27.68 9.58

12.47 26.26 II .08 7.55

13.53

36.17 11.66 16.09 33.97 12.76 9.47

16.51

38.69 15.76 19.53

37.34 16.42 11.66

20.30

45.25 21.39 24.45 42.09 20.26 14.41 25.62

44.18 24.94 27.03 45.04 25.55 16.99 27.98

Figure 28. - - Chute block piezometer locations and pressure data.

39

P.T 12,13

"9, I0, II

FLOW

PLAN

L e f t woII

_ /

KEY~ 9

Piezometer end view +

Piezometer side view I 9

/ /

/

\

+ ,° 1 p.c .--~-i

F LOW =~

(, +

P,(

C

9

I

+ 12 I

ELEVATION C-C

DISCHARGE (m3/s) 175 255 340 425 480

PROTOTYPE PRESSURE HEAD(m of water)

I I I I I I I I i I I I I

PIEZOMETER NUMBER

9 I0 II 12 13

:5.45 3.93 0.19 9.74 5.53

- 0194 2 . 4 5 0.81 9.30 5.34

-2.81 2.09 0.63 8.75 5.16

- 7 . 0 I

1.39 0.45 8.86 5.26

-7.70 I .06 0,52 9,30 5,01

Figure 29. - - Left wall piezometer locations and pressure data.

40

i i I I !

I I I I I I I i I I I I

8"~] E Left woll-~ ~

• / / ~ - 6 F l o w

I Right w o l ' - ~ r ~ v~k~ e blocks

PLAN Right" vone-----~

KEY" 6

Piezometer end view + Piezomet-er side view I 6

Vone

8

block 7 - ~ "

SECTION E-E

I I

DISCHARGE (m3/s) 175 255 340 42,5 480 PIEZOMETER

NUMBER 6 7 8

PROTOTYPE PRESSURE HEAD (m of woter)

18.30 6,70 6.29

26.78 3.89 4.61

55.57 I .73 2.71

42.86 -0.94

0.95

47,23 -I.67 0.18

I I I I

Figure 30. - - Vane block piezometer locations and pressure data.

41 G P O 8 5 5 - 5 6 9

model studies of the sugar pine dam energy dissipator … · 4. turbulence within the basin...

Documents