Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OC1021 <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />2. Study Prooedure 'l HI. <br />(<jh~-"Uj....".,,,,,,,, l<.JY.( <br />'T1il.iI" first Rt.udy we,Jttt~~..t~l~t.lY by the Kansas and Colorado <br /> <br />representatives on the oOllUllUtee and the work oarried on for the most <br /> <br />part d! Topeka, Kansas. <br /> <br />The work in carrying out a study whioh would aocurately assess the <br /> <br />1'63111t8' of the operating assumptions, outlined above, involved a number of <br /> <br />teohnioal expedients which grew out of discussion~ and analysea~~f conditions <br /> <br />'---....:.-.-'_.,-. <br /> <br />as they would probably exist if the reservoir beoame fully operative, Ulider's; <br /> <br />plan 0 f operation suoh as Study No. I oontemp1ates'. <br /> <br />?; <br /> <br />The procedure followed oan best be 'discussed under fo~. topios~ <br /> <br />namelYI, inflows to the reservoir; reservoir stora!;e, lossel!: and spills; <br /> <br />demands' on watar supplies; and statel1ne flows. <br /> <br />Three condi ti ons relating to lnrlo...' were encountered I <br /> <br />(1) Direct flow conditions, where reservoir was empt:\' and inflow <br /> <br />and outflow was equivalent to historic Caddoe. flow' (Table 5). <br /> <br />were considered to prevail when, <br /> <br />a. Monthly flows; were smaller than demands. <br /> <br />b. Small amounts; of water could' be stored in one month <br /> <br />but would be required to be released the subsequent <br /> <br />month. <br /> <br />o. It wa~; apparent from study of daily records, that <br /> <br />no storable peaks arrived at the reservoir throughout <br /> <br />a seasonJ even though, in some months, the available <br /> <br />usable supply was slightly in exoess of the ideal, <br /> <br />,'i, <br />! <br /> <br />demand" <br /> <br />..12.. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />...:' .' ~ ,. <br />