Laserfiche WebLink
<br />T ._J <br /> <br />4 & 5 were kept separate. Spill from Rides 1-3 were small in comparison to lhe <br />water orders and the daily changes in water orders. This would seem to <br />indicate that fluctuations are passed down lhrough Ride 4 (which is consistent <br />with uls conn-ol). Large precipitation events influenced water orders and spills. <br />This can be seen for the August 8, 1993 and September 15, 1994 time frames. <br />Water orders drop and spills increase during lhese events. <br /> <br />. Attachment D and E include lhe same analysis.as Attachment C. Attachment D <br />is for 1993 and Attachment E is for 1994. <br /> <br />. Attachment F is the analysis of the Savings potential from August to October <br />based on using CHECKS ONLY. The analysis was done by determining a <br />rule of operation of lhe Highline Canal for maximum water orders during lhe <br />inigation season (August-October only). The amount of spill required for <br />CHECKS ONLY was detennined by comparing the water orders from 1992- <br />1994 to lhe maximum water order limitation. The limitation was set high <br />enough to take care of ALL demands for inigation water during lhis time frame. <br />Future analysis will involve using a lower limitation in conjunction with <br />reservoir(s) ro handle lhe demand. <br /> <br />Main Points: <br /> <br />1992 <br /> <br />1993 <br /> <br />1994 <br /> <br />Avg. <br />of3 <br />Years <br /> <br />. Table I is a summary of the analysis of lhe data. The data confIrm lhe canal <br />flow rates are high (average 573 cfs) for August and lhen taper ro smaller flow <br />rates (average 402 cfs) in Ocrober. Water orders are consistently lower lhan lhe <br />flow rate in lhe canal indicating pOlemial for savings wilh the installation of <br />additional checks. <br /> <br />M h <br /> <br />Table 1 <br />Government Highline Canal <br />All values in CFS <br />Average <br />Water Balance <br />S '11 <br /> <br />Average <br />Difference <br />B S ill <br /> <br />Average <br />C a(Q <br /> <br />Average <br />Recorded <br />S '11 <br /> <br />Average <br />W O~d <br /> <br />1 om an ater r ers , )Pl s )Pl s etween )Pl S <br />August 610 403 186- 160 -25 <br />Sept 458 251 185 194 9 <br />Oct 414 209 184 200 16 <br />August 543 333 189 151 -38 <br />Sept 450 260 169 143 -27 <br />Oct 396 157 219 214 -4 <br />August 565 446 97 101 4 <br />Sept 409 268 119 163 44 <br />Oct 395 163 211 237 26 <br />August 573 394 157 138 -20 <br />Sept 439 260 158 166 8 <br />Oct 402 176 205 217 12 <br /> <br />. The spill calculated using a water balance matches Closely wilh lhe recorded <br />spill data. The average difference between the water balance spill and lhe <br />