My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD03254
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD03254
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:26:44 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 11:34:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Logan
Community
Sterling
Stream Name
Pioneer Ditch
Basin
South Platte
Title
Master Drainageway Plan Pioneer Ditch at Sterling
Date
12/1/1995
Prepared For
Sterling
Prepared By
US Army Corps of Engineers
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.
/
42
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 />3.2.8 A 75-foot weir at elevation 3920.0 feet ms1 was designed to pass flow from <br />Pioneer Ditch to the detention pond. The weir is located at the upstream end (west end of the <br />south side) of the detention area. The weir itself would be part of the rock drop structure into <br />the detention pond. It would be 7S feet wide and S feet long. Sides10pes would be 1 V:3H from <br />the crest elevation of 3920.0 feet ms1 to elevation 3922.5 feet ms1 and 1V:SH to elevation <br />3923.5 feet msl. Riprap should be placed on the Pioneer Ditch bank in the vicinity of the weir <br />entrance. It would be protected by a riprap layer coinciding with the slope chosen for the drop <br />structure. Plate 7 shows the section at the crest of the weir, and Plates 8 and 9 show the profile <br />in relation to the channel and the drop structure alternatives. <br /> <br />3.2.9 Several drop structures into the detention area were analyzed--alternatives with <br />a lo-percent slope, a 5-percent slope, and a 2-pereent slope. The drop structure was designed <br />based on guidance from references listed in paragraphs 2.7 through 2.11. The lO-percent slope <br />alternative resulted in very high velocities, and the size of rock needed for riprap protection <br />was large. The 5- and 2-percent slopes were more reasonable and are both presented here so <br />that the City may choose the alternative that best suits its resources. Plates 8 and 9 show the <br />general profile of the rock drop structures. The cross section is the same as that shown for the <br />weir, except it should flatten out at the downstream end. Note that the tota11ength of the <br />structure for a 2-percent drop is approximately 150 feet and the riprap layer thickness required <br />is 18 inches. The tota11ength of the structure with a S-percent slope is approximately 75 feet <br />and the required riprap layer thickness is 24 inches. Because turbulent flow will be a factor <br />during a flood event, riprap gradations are based on 1.5 times the normal maximum rock size <br />(D.,,). Table 3 shows the gradations that should be used. A filter may be required under the <br />riprap layer. <br /> <br /> TABLE 3 <br /> OVERFLOW WEIR DROP STRUCTURES <br /> RlPRAP GRADATIONS * <br />2% DROP STRUCTURE 5% DROP STRUCTURE <br />1S-INCH RIPRAP LAYER 24-INCH RlPRAP LAYER <br />% LIGHTER BY LIMITS OF STONE % LIGHTER BY LIMITS OF STONE <br />WEIGHT WEIGHT WEIGHT WEIGHT <br />(percent) (pounds) (percent) (pounds) <br />100 86-35 100 205-82 <br />50 36-17 50 86-41 <br />15 18-5 15 43-13 <br /> <br />* Based on a specific weight of 165 pounds per cubic foot and a thickness 1.5 times the DlOO' <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.