My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD06381
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
FLOOD06381
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:08:50 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 2:13:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Otero
Community
La Junta
Stream Name
Arkansas River & Tributaries
Basin
Arkansas
Title
La Junta, Colorado Local Protection Project Phase I GDM Sediment Investigation
Date
9/1/1985
Prepared For
US Army Corps of Engineers
Prepared By
The Hydrologic Engineering Center
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.
/
187
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 />2) A simulation similar to the "existing condition" simulation with the <br />diversion of water (hence sediment also) at the Ft. Lyon Canal set to zero. <br />This reflects the situation anticipated if the Ft. Lyon Canal were to cease <br />operation entirely. The results of this simulation are shown on Figures 4.23 <br />and 4.24. This simulation is shown on Table 4.4 as "NOFL". <br /> <br />4.6 Interpretation of simulation Results <br /> <br />Results of long-term numerical simulations of stream bed profile evolution <br />should always be interpreted comparatively rather than absolutely. Thus, the <br />predicted changes in bed elevation, for example. at various locations within <br />the study reach under project conditions, should be compared with those <br />predicted under "existing" conditions to obtain an understanding of relative <br />project performance. <br /> <br />Conclusions reached from analyzing the simulation results are highlighted <br />below: <br /> <br />. Although aU four projects exhibit net aggradation over the study <br />period, it is significantly less than would be expected without the <br />project (about two-thirds). <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Levee alignments two and three produce slightly <br />deposition than do alignments one and three. This <br />the deposition occurring over a lesser width. <br /> <br />more depth of <br />is probably due to <br /> <br />. The levees plus the l75-foot low-flow channel produce slightly more <br />depth of deposition than without the low-flow channel. Again this is <br />probably due to the deposition being placed over a smaller area. <br /> <br />. The implication of the above two points is that the differences <br />between the two north bank levee alignments is not significant for <br />the long-term analysis. It may be for the single event analysis, <br />however. <br /> <br />. A slight reduction in aggradation (about 5~) would occur if the Ft. <br />Lyon Canal retained all the sediment it diverted. <br /> <br />. An increase in aggradation (10-15~) would occur if the Ft. Lyon Canal <br />ceased operation entirely. <br /> <br />. A decrease in deposition within t1., project subreach is likely to <br />result in an increase in deposition downstream of the project. <br />Compare for example, in Table 4.5, the change in bed elevations at <br />section U93.0-U94.2for projects 1 and 2 to existing conditions. <br /> <br />42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.