My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD03313
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
FLOOD03313
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 6:26:55 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 11:38:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Denver
Basin
South Platte
Title
Drop Structures in the Denver Metropolitan Area
Date
12/1/1986
Prepared For
UDFDC
Prepared By
McLaughlin Water Engineers, Ltd.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
259
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 />II <br /> <br />- <br /> <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />SECTION III <br />VERTICAL DROP WITH LOOSE RIP RAP BASIN <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Energy dissipation IS achieved In thIs type of drop by flow plunging Into a pool <br /> <br /> <br />where the energy IS expended by turbulence. The pool IS created by specific <br /> <br /> <br />placement and construction of a baSin, or by a "planned" rearranqement of rock by <br /> <br /> <br />the flow. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The present UDFCD standards IS descrIbed In, DeSign Criteria for Rlprap Drop <br /> <br /> <br />Structures (ref. 63). The criteria was based upon a presentation by Stevens, Hydraulic <br /> <br /> <br />DeSign Criteria for Rlprapped Chutes and Vertical Drop Structures (ref. 58) which <br /> <br /> <br />was based upon phYSical model testing. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The structural deSign for the vertICal crest wall IS complicated by the lack of <br /> <br /> <br />downstream support, seepage, soil saturation and hydraulic loading on the upstream <br /> <br /> <br />Side. In sandy or erosive sOils, It IS qUite common to use sheet pile for crest wall <br /> <br /> <br />construction, whIle caissons may prove acceptble for certain other appl1catIons. <br /> <br /> <br />Commonly a retaInIng wall IS used after evaluating seepage control. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />CASES <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />There IS a Wide varIety of crest wall alternatives for vertical drops. The follOWing <br />cases Illustrate a number of eXisting appl1ctlDns. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Case 29 - Little Dry Creek at Krameria, Arapahoe County <br /> <br /> <br />ThiS deSign is referred to as a check drop and is intended to control the hydraulic <br /> <br /> <br />grade line while leaving the invert slope at a natural Of steeper gradient. The <br /> <br /> <br />concept works best with deeper confined channels with steep side slopes, and utilizes <br /> <br /> <br />the downstream crest to cause backwater submergence of the upstream drop. In <br /> <br /> <br />some ways thiS IS SimIlar to the Corps' approach for "Derrck Stone" protection of <br /> <br /> <br />sheet pile drops whIch also requires crest submergence (ref. 13, 23, see diSCUSSion <br /> <br /> <br />In Section X). <br /> <br />II <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />III-I <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.