My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
DWR_2717593
DWR
>
Dam Safety
>
2015
>
03
>
DWR_2717593
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/11/2017 11:09:13 AM
Creation date
3/3/2015 11:31:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Dam Safety
Document Date
2/27/2015
Document Type - Dam Safety
Report
Division
5
Dam ID
040110
Subject
CARRIAGE HILLS #2 (LOWER) DAM - FAILURE FORENSIC REPORT REVISED
DWR Send/Recipient
DSB
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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).
View images
View plain text
CARRIAGE HILLS NO. 2 DAM, Dam Failure Forensic Investigation Report Page 22 <br />February 27, 2015 <br /> <br />Photo 19: Flood photo from Lakeshore Drive resident, reportedly taken on the morning of Thursday, Sept. 12, 2013, <br />showing inflows to Carriage Hills No. 1 Dam (dam overtopping in foreground). <br /> <br />Matrix Design Group (August 2014) estimated a natural (i.e. absent the Carriage Hills No. 2 dam breach flood) <br />peak flow during the Sept. 2013 flood of 2,400 cfs over the 15.9 sq.mi. drainage area for Fish Creek. The <br />resulting yield is approximately 152 cfs/sq.mi. Our estimate for the Sept. 2013 peak flow into the Carriage Hills <br />No. 2 reservoir yields 192 cfs/sq. mi. We believe our estimate is reasonable but probably on the high side. <br />7.3 Spillway Discharge Rating: The existing spillway at the time of the Sept. 2013 flood did not match the <br />spillway on the approved C‐1195 construction plans. The plans showed a spillway with a 10‐foot bottom width <br />and 5 feet of freeboard; the estimated discharge capacity on the plans was 377 cfs. The existing spillway control <br />section, as surveyed on Sept. 26, 2013, was found to have a 4‐foot bottom width and approximately 3.4 feet of <br />freeboard to the low point of the dam. The spillway was also found overgrown with brush. Figure 16 shows a <br />cross‐section of the spillway drawn from our Sept. 26th survey. <br /> <br />We modeled the existing spillway in USACE’s HEC‐RAS open channel hydraulics program to estimate the spillway <br />discharge capacity at the time of the flood. We used a roughness coefficient of 0.1 to account for brush in the <br />spillway. We used the following four cross‐sections: <br />River Section (RS) 0: Downstream end of spillway control section and dam crest <br />RS 6.5: Upstream end of spillway control section and dam crest <br />RS 20: Spillway approach section, with rock weir about 1‐ft higher than the spillway crest <br />RS 40: Reservoir section to determine the full static head for spillway discharge rating
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.