My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03196
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03196
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:49:07 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:36:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8443.600
Description
Narrows Unit - Studies
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
6/30/1975
Author
Dames and Moore
Title
Flood Study Narrows Dam South Platte River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
125
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />DAME5i. 8: (M,OORE <br />...\)QU <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br />The Inflow Design Flood (IDF) <br /> <br /> <br />With the above policy in mind, we'consider that the IDF should <br /> <br /> <br />be near the maximum flood calculated as being probable, that is, the <br /> <br /> <br />probable maximum flood (PMF). <br /> <br />We have checked the rationale of the USBR probable maximum <br /> <br /> <br />precipitation (PMP) together with their estimates ofPMF. l~e conclude <br /> <br /> <br />that the basic approaches are correct; the principal differences 'between <br /> <br />. '. '.' . <br /> <br />our estimate and theirs are, we believe, ,due to the greater amount of <br /> <br />time we have had in reviewing the details. With less time available to <br /> <br /> <br />them, the nec6ssary approximations by the USBR have 'been on the con- <br /> <br /> <br />servative side. The details of these differences are documented in the <br /> <br />attached report. <br /> <br />In considering the appropriate IDF for the Narrows Dam, all <br /> <br /> <br />of the facets involved should be considered in a systems context, i.e. <br /> <br /> <br />Pill', PMF, design of the dam and spillway, the risks to life through <br /> <br /> <br />failure, and the safety factors inherent in the calculations. Included <br /> <br /> <br />in the design aspects is the possibility of use 'of a parapet wall to <br /> <br /> <br />serve as part of the freeboard, Each factor needs to be con,sidered in <br /> <br /> <br />relation to the others, rather than in a step.-by-step process in which <br /> <br /> <br />each val.ue is determined separately. We know of no mathematical pro-' <br /> <br /> <br />cedure that will allow an'optimization of all of the factors involved <br /> <br /> <br />as tradeoffs between costs -and risks. Instead, we consider that only <br /> <br /> <br />judgment can be used to appropriately weigh the factors involved,' <br /> <br />Taking into account these factors with respect to safety of, <br />the dam,' we conclude: <br /> <br />1) <br /> <br />The dam should be desigried for anIDF having a <br />volume ,of 1,960,,000, acre-feet (75 percent of <br />USBR's IDF). This corresponds to a PMP of 94 <br />percent of USBR PMl', as given on Table III-IS <br />i,n the body nf the report. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.