Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <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 />2 <br /> <br />half of the crest to understand the difference In flow patterns. Those In attendence <br /> <br /> <br />agreed that the flow patterns over the crest were much Improved for a I.rge range <br /> <br /> <br />of flows with the sill In place. <br /> <br />To l1Iustrete the difference In the performance of the upstream and downstream <br />boatchutes, the downstream boatchute was used with a wide crest width of 64 feet. <br />The upstream chute at the existing USACE dam has a crest width of 32 feet, then a <br />narrowing to 20 feet In a length of 20 feet. It was noted by David Walker and others <br />that the flow patterns In the downstream chute were less desirable than those in the <br />upstream chute. The concensus of the group was to make the dimensions of both <br />chutes the lime, I.e., using a crest width of 32 feet. <br /> <br />At flows of 300 cfs to 800 cfs, the central wave In the upstream boatchute was about <br />1.0 to 1.5 faet high. Scott Tucker, Ben Urbonas, and Mark Hunter of the UDFCD were <br />concerned that this would give boaters a jolt. They recommended using a sill simi- <br />lar to that mentioned above. Ben found a small, flat board and Inserted It Into the <br />flow to determine Its effect on the flow patterns In the upstream boatchute. There <br />was a marked decrease In the height of the wave. The best position for the sill <br />appeared to be Immediately downstream of the rocks which narrowed the chute <br />width to 20 feet. Cliff Pugh of the USBR commented on the need to maintain the spe- <br />cified low flow notch In the chute If a sm was selected. <br /> <br />The nominal elevation of the boatchute at the USACE dam is 5088.75 while the nomi- <br /> <br />nal elevation of the boatchute at the downstream embantment crest Is 5085.0. <br />