FLOOD07117 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . F" 6"", +k. f....\~I.j\.....A. J, I P\JOQOS;a..r, -~ ~ Following this introductory narrative, a proposed scope of work for the project is presented. In order to develop a foundation or basis for this scope, it is worth discussing the proposed drops and design considerations for the whitewater pottion. We have performed some preliminary analyses as supporting data for the approach rationale. INTROOUCTlON Based on the recent project meetings with the Corps of Engineers, they have proposed three sloping rock drops with a grouted rock chute for the whitewater bypass. As a starting point, we analyzed the regular dam and chute sections for approximately 100, 1,000, 3,000 and 5,400 cfs. Table I summarizes key results. Table I Analysis Summary of Present Proposal Regular Dam Section Whitewater Chute Jump Location Flow Jump Location Description (relative to toe) Description 100+ On Face Submerged Washes Conv enti onal Jump Downstream Rev erse Roller Wave Form 1,000 On Face Submerged Washes Conventional Jump Downstream Reverse Roller Wave Form 3,000 Washes Conventional Starts at end Conventional Downstream Reverse Roller of basin Reverse Roller Wave Form Wave Form 5,400 On Face Submerged Begins Conventional Jump 20+ Ft. Down- Reverse Roller stream of toe Wave Form One key point that can be made is that the hydraulic jump occurs in different locations relative to the whitewater bypass and the regular dam. That is, the jump for the dam is at or near the dam while the jump in the whitewater bypass moves downstream. This flow condition is more favorable than the conditions at Union Avenue because its non-linearity provides for the possibility of lateral escape. Also, the flow in the whitewater bypass would wash downstream, burning off energy and jumping at a low Froude Number. From a boating perspective, this is better as a