My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD10319
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
FLOOD10319
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2010 10:12:08 AM
Creation date
2/27/2007 8:16:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Arapahoe
Jefferson
Stream Name
South Platte River
Basin
South Platte
Title
Chatfield Reallocation Study Storage Use Patterns
Date
2/1/2003
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
Brown and Caldwell
Floodplain - Doc Type
Project
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
138
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I' <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />SECTION 6 <br /> <br />MODEL AND RESULTS <br /> <br />6.1 MODEL DESCRIPTION <br /> <br />An Excel Spreadsheet model was developed to simulate the various inflows, demands and pools <br />sizes. The model was a direct solution, daily model. A starting storage value of zero acre-feet <br />was assumed for each simulation. The storage value for the next day was computed as: <br /> <br />6S = I - 0 <br /> <br />Where <br /> <br />6S = change in storage, <br />I = inflow, and <br />o = outflow (demand plus evaporation) <br /> <br />Evaporation was computed based on the reservoir area vs. capacity curve for Chatfield Reservoir <br />(D. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, August 7, 2000, see Appendix B herein) and <br />monthly evaporation rates. Evaporation was prorated between the conservation storage pool and <br />the reallocated storage pool. If the resulting total storage after netting out the evaporation was <br />less than zero, reservoir outflow was adjusted to set storage to zero. If the result was greater than <br />the maximum storage allowed, a spill was added to the outflow. This process was repeated for <br />every time step in the model. Charts were linked to the model to show the results in graphical <br />form. <br /> <br />The normal maximum level ofthe Denver Water operations pool in Chatfield Reservoir is <br />5432 feet MSL; however, this pool level fluctuates. The three reallocated Chatfield Reservoir <br />storage pools were assumed to be on top of the fluctuating Denver Water operations pool. <br />Consequently, the water surface levels for the reallocated Chatfield Reservoir storage pools will <br />also fluctuate. For example, the water surface elevation for the full 20,600 acre-feet reallocated <br />storage pool will not always be 5,434 feet MSL; actual elevation will depend on the volume of <br />storage in the Denver Water operations pool. <br /> <br />6.2 MODEL RESULTS <br /> <br />6.2.1 General <br /> <br />Modeling results for the combinations of three proposed reallocated Chatfield Reservoir storage <br />pools and five potential target releases are presented graphically in a series of five figures for <br />each reallocated storage pool/user: <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Figures I-A through 15-A present inflows to storage, spills and storage for each <br />scenano. <br />Figures I-B through 15-B present demand (target releases), the actual releases <br />from reallocated storage (met demand) and evaporation. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />P: \Data \GEN\CWCB\Chatfie ld\Report 12 ,02\RevisedChatReport 1 03\Report2-03 ,doc <br /> <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.