V) \ ~ , UNITED ST ATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
MODEL-PROTOTYPE CONFORMANCE OF
RADIAL GATE DISCHARGE CAPACITY
Hydraulic Laboratory Report No. Hyd 433
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING LABORATORIES
t. l
COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE DENVER, COLORADO
March 4, 1957
CONTENTS
Page Purpose .•• ...... 1
Introduction • • • ...... 1
Acknowledgment ...... • • ...... 2
Laboratory Study • • • . . • • ...... • • • • • • . . . . 3 The Model • • • • • ...... 3 Model Flow Conditions ...... 3 Field Study. • • • • • • • ...... 3 Prototype Measurements • • • . • . . • • • • • • • • • . 3 Gate Openings • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 Water Levels...... 4 Turbine Discharge • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • 4 River Discharge Measurements • • . • • • • • • • • • • • 4 Gate Discharge Capacity. • • • . • • • . • • • • • • • • • 5 Prototype Flow Conditions • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • 5
Concl us ions • • • ...... • • • • ...... 6
. Appendix 1 • • . . • • . . • • • • . . • • • • • • • • . . . . 8
Appendix 2...... • • • . . 10 Figure Canyon Ferry Dam--Plan Elevations and Sections • . . . . 1
Laboratory F'acilities for Model Calibration . • • . . . . . 2 Spillway DiE:Jcharge Curves for One !51- by 34. 5-foot Radial Gate . . . ·...... ~ . . . . 3 Discharge Comparison of Model-prototype 4 Gate Opening-discharge Curves for Constant Reservoir Elev~tions ...... 5 Spillway Flow Conditions for a Discharge of 24, 000 cfs Four Gates 4. 2 Feet Open • • . • • • · • . • • . . 6 Flow Conditions on Spillway Face for Discharges of 24,000 cfs and 13, 800 cfs. • • • . . . . . • . . • • • • . . 7 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAl! OF, RECLAMATION .
Commie sioner' s Office - -Denver Laboratory Report No. Hyd-433 Division of Engineering Laboratories Colllpile.d by: J. C. Schuster Hydraulic Laboratory Branch · Checked and Hydraulic .I~vestigations Section reviewed by: c. W. Thomas Denver, Colorado ·· Submitt~.d. by: H •. M.·. Martin March 4, 1957
. MODEL -i:>ROTOTYPE CO'.NfORMANCE. OE . RADIAL GATE DisdBARGE CAPACITY · . cANYON FERRY DAM, MONT.ANA PURPOSE
. The purpose of this report; is to compare ~he .mea~ured discharge capacity of the Canyon F:erry Dani radi·a1- gates with th.at_predfoted from its model.
. . ' INTRODUCTION
Canyon Ferry Dam and Powe-rplant al'.e located.on the. Missouri River about 17 miles east of Helena, Montana. The multipurpose project generates power, provides for ir~:j,gation ,and some meas:µre of flood con- trol. · ·
The dain is a concrete g;i:-avity fltructure, a,pproximately 1,000 feet long at the crest, with a maximum ·height of· about 22,5 feet above the excavated foundation, Figure 1. The spillway consists of an overflow sec tion in the central portion of the dam, controlled by four 51- by 34. 5-foot high radial gates. The spillway crest is designed for a maximum discharge of approximately 150. 000 cubic feet per second.· The top of the radial gate in the seated position is elevation 3800, the maximum, high water surface for the reservoir. · ·
1· ' • ' . . ... Four river outlets, each ,84 inches in diameter,. are installed· through the spillway section of the· clam .. , The outlets are control~edby 77 -inch regulating· gates and are protected by fixed-wheel .·g~t~s~ ... • Model studies of the spillway al)d river outlets of Canyon Ferry Dani were performed in the Hydraulic I,..aboratory dilri~g the.year 1ij45 ..... The results were published in March 1946 In Hydraulic Laboratory Report . No. 197. Hydraulic Model Studies of the Spillway and Rive.r Outlets of Canyon Ferry Dam~ 'Missouri River Basin P;r:-oject, ,1\1011ta.n.~. .During the studies a calibration of the uncontrolled spillway was obtained but a· calibration of the proposed five 51 - by 34. 5-foot radial gates was not completed. The prototype spillw~y as constructed contained four 51- by 34. 5-foot gates for which capacity curves were predicted from a model
. study in 1953. These curves were later contained in the Designers' Oper ating Instructions pubHshed in August 1954. In June of 1956, it became possible through the cooperation of Region 6 to make field discharge meas urements at Canyon Ferry Dam for comparison with the laboratory studies. This report brings together the results of the laboratory and field measure - ments. ·
ACKNOWLEDGMENT The information and data used in compiling the Fielc;l Study sec - tion of this report were taken from a copy of a letter dated June 29, 1956, . to Regional Director, Billings, ·Montana, from the Project Superintendent, · Canyon Ferry, Montana. The subject of this letter was "Spillway dis charge. at Canyon Ferry Dam--Canyon Ferry Unit- -Missouri. River Basin Project. " This copy 9.f the letter had the following enc~osures:
·1. Prints of original test data (7 sheets)
2. Prints of wattmeter calibration tests (2 sheets) · 3~ · Caiculation of vertical gate ppening versus arc 'travel of gate skin plate (2 sheets) 4. Letter dated June 25, 1956, from U. S. Geological. Survey, Helena, Montana, to Mr. H. M. Gronhovd, Canyon Ferry Dam, with attached test data sheet 5. One print .each of 11 ·turns t~en June· 2, l95Ei, ' with· 4 gates· open 4 •. 2 feet~.: spilling a total of 24, 000 cubic feet per second · · ·
6. One print each of 7 films taken June 10, 1956, with Number 2 gate open 1 o ·feet, spilling 13, 7 00 cubic feet per second · 7. One print of tabulation of turbine dischar·ge versus megawatt load. · · ·
Statem~nts from the letters have been used in this reporf where applicable. These statements are signified by quotation marks or by a credit phrase. The cooperation of Mr. H. M. Gronhovd, Project Super intendent, ·canyon Ferry Project; Mr~ Frank Stermitz., District Engin~er.,.. U. S. Geological Survey; Helena;, Montana, and.their assistants is gt;ELte- fully acknowleoged......
• Data used in.the Laboratory Study section of the report. wer.e ob- tained·by:pera.onnel of the: Hydraulic Laboratory~ · · .. , , · .. Photo~aJ?h~ q(the flo~ conditions at Canyon; -:I?erry Dam were taken by P •. · M. Schwartz, .. Canyo??, Ferry Project. · ·· , ·. . .
2 LABORATORY STUDY
The Model Only one radial gate and equivalent spillway length were cali brated in the second study of Canyon Ferry. The type of construction used for the 1 :40 scale model is shown in Figure 2A. An approach chan nel equal to the width of the gate directed the water from the head box to the test section which contained the gate and profile of the spillway, Figure 2B. A hook gage with vernier graduations to 1 / 1000 of a foot was used to measure the head .on the gate. Discharges were measured by cal~ brated Venturi meters. Gate openings were measured vertically from the spillway crest to gate bottom with -an allowance for the vertical distance between the seat and crest. Model Flow Conditions The flow in the model, directed parallel to the test section center line from the head box, differed from the radial flow pattern of the water flowing to a single gate discharging from the reservoir. This difference of flow pattern would not be evident in a comparison of the model and pro totype· gate capacity at small openings but could become apparent at large openings for the same accuracy of measurement. Prototype discharges scaled from the model would tend to be lower than the measured values because of the model approach channel head loss. Because of these differ ences in physical setting and flow conditions between the single gate of the model and a single gate or multiple gates of the prototype, it was of con- siderable interest to compare the model and prototype measurements. ·
FIELD STUDY
Prototype Measurements Seven discharge determinations were made at Canyon Ferry Dam in the period June 6 to June 17 1 19561 under the direction of the Project Superintendent assisted by the District Engineer, U. S. Geological Survey. The setting of the gates, reservoir elevations and turbine discharge meas urements were made by project personnel. Total flow in the river was · measured by Survey personnel. Gate Openings
11 Gate openings were set by measuring with a steel tape, along the arc of the skin plate of the gate, the length which would give the de - sired vertical gate openings. These measurements are believed to be accurate to within one -sixteenth inch. 11 1 / The arc lengths c.orresponding to the vertical rise were established previously by the sketch and formu las and Table 1 in Appendix 1.
1/Letter of June 29 1 1956
3 Water Levels
"The reservoir and tail water elevations were read on the gages on the main control board. These gages are checked frequently and are very accurate. '' 1 / A float-operated forebay level indicator, recorder and transmitter are located in a chamber in the dam above a 30-inch inside diameter lined stilling well. This instrument transmits the forebay water level to an indi cating receiver located on a panel in the control room of the Canyon Ferry Powerplant. !/
A stilling well, lined with 1/4-inch thick steel pipe, 18 inches out side diameter, is provided in the powerhouse and connected to the tail water by a 1-inch pipe extending downstream from the end of the draft tubes approxi mately 50 feet to its inlet. A float-operated tail water level indicator and transmitter are located at the top of the 18-inch well and tail water levels are transmitted to an indicating receiver mounted in the control room.!/ Turbine Discharge
"The discharge through the turbines was obtained by taking an average reading of generator megawatts and using the table (Enclosure 7)3/ which has been made up from the drawing entitled 'Canyon Ferry Powerpla.m--Turbine Operation Curves--Derived from Gibson Test.' Those curves were drawn up in the Reservoir Regulation Branch of your office. The generator indicating wattmeters were calibrated against the generator watthour meters, which are believed to be accurate within one-half of one percent. Corrected values of megawatts were recorded on the original test data. During the tests the tur bine governor limit switches were set to block the wicket gates, thus main taining a constant load on the machines."!_/ River Discharge Measurements \ "Current-meter measurements were made from the upstr~am side of the timber bridge below the dam and appreciable turbulence was. encountered. Velocity surges appear to vary in character and location with the various gate settings and considerable care was taken in defining the mean velocity for each sounding. We found through study of vertical velocity curves, as well as by comparison of velocities at O. 2, O. 6 and O. 8 of the depth, that the effect of turbulence on the current meter was compensated, taking the cross-section as a whole. We believe that while measuring conditions were only fair that our results may be rated good and within probable errors of less than 5 per cent. The discharge measurements are being retained in our files. Copies will be furnished, if desired." 4/
1/Letter of June 29, 1956. "2'/Designers' Operating Instructions, Canyon Ferry Dam, Power - Plant and Switchyard, Bureau of Reclamation, August 1954. 3 / Appendix 2". 4/Letter of June 25, 1956.
4 Gate Discharge Capacity
The discharge capacity of the gates was taken as the difference between the river discharge and the turbine discharge measurements. The results are contained in Table 1. Since the curves in the Designers' Operating Instructions, Figure 3, correspond to one gate and spillway section, the discharges of Table 1 have been reduced to the same basis. As noted in Column 2, Table 1, discharges were measured for 1 to 4 gates opened. When more than one gate was open the individual gate discharge was determined from the total discharge divided by the number of equally opened gates. No attempt was made to separate the gate capacity accord ing to position on the spillway.
A comparison of the field measurements and the curve resulting from the model study is shown in Figure 4. Good agreement resulted for gate openings of 10, 6 and 4 feet. To obtain a curve corresponding to_ the 3 -foot prototype gate opening, · a fairing was made .of the predicted dis - charge curves for various gate openings at four different reservoir eleva-· tions, Figure 5. This fairing assumed that a zero discharge would occur at a zero gate opening and that interpolation of a 3-foot opening was valid in lieu of model data at that opening. The resulting curve shows sati's factory agreement with the prototype measurements, Figure 4. An inspection of Figure. 5 discloses the possibility that the pre dicted 2 ".'foot opening curve might justifiably be moved to the left. A de - crease in the indicated discharge for a given re.servoir elevation would . result. This decrease would vary between 150 and 190 cubic feet per · second. A relocation of the curve might be further justified by the agree ment of model and prototype measurements at the larger gate openings. Such -a shift would result in satisfactory accordance of the model and pro totype discharges at a 2-foot gate opening, Figure 4, Curve a. Prototype Flow Conditions Flow conditions of the prototype during the capacity tests are shown in Figure 6 and 7. In Figure 6A, all four gates were open 4. 2 feet and the total discharg~ was approximately 24, 000 cubic feet per sec ond for a reservoir elevation of approximately 3,798 feet. The head on the center line of the gate opening was approximately· 30 feet. Spi~lway flow appears satisfactory with no undue spreading of the flow from the gate as evidenced by the absence of fins along the training wall and piers or in the flow downstream of the piers. Energy dissipation in the ~till ing basin for the 24,000 cubic feet per second discharge also appears satisfactory, Figure 6B. · A closer view of the water on the spillway face for the 4. 2-foot gate opening, Figure 7A, shows a serrated surface with air entrainment beginning at the gate. The quantity of air entrained does not appreciably in crease as the flow progresses down the face of the spillway.· Air entrainment at the surface in the main body of the flow appears to be reduced for larger openings. With a 10-foot opening of the Number 2 gate for a discharge
5 of 13,800 cubic feet per second, Figure 7B, less air is evident at ·the surfac~ than for the 4. 2-foot opening, Figure 7A. Some transverse spreading of the jet is evident from the fins of water at the pier walls for the increased flow depth, Figure 7B. These fins apparently do not rise high enough to strike the gate hinge directly and thus are not objec tionable. The overall flow conditions for the spillway discharging 24, 000 cubic feet per second from uniformly opened gates and 13,800 cubic feet per second from a single gate appear to be satisfactory.
CONCLUSIONS · 1. The agreement between the predicted and measured discharge capacity of the gates at Canyon Ferry Dam is good except for the_ 2-foot gate opening.
2. .A modification of the predicted 2-foot gate openi~g ~urve to indicate a smaller discharge for at least the higher reservoir elevations may be !n order based on the review of ·model data and the comparison with the prototype measurements, Figures 4 and 5. 3. · Field discharge measurements for the 2-, 3-, 4-, 6- and ·-IO-foot gate openings for a reservoir elevation between 3785 and 3790 would be valuable for a correlation of the model and prototype at -a head lower than available for this -$tudy... ____ _ • 4. The sectional model such as used. in this experiment was capable of predicting prototype discharges within the degree of accuracy of laboratory and field measurements. ·
6 Net
5,-78-0
2,890 3,010
8,450 4,-280 Per
4~400
Gate
(CFS)
13,800
Flow
(CFS)
Total
5,~280 5,250 5,240 1,150 S-:-250
5,-2"00 1,650
Penstock
.8d
&
Flow
4.,660
From (CFS) Total
Meas.
13~'700 16.,800 13.,800 14~00-0 14.,900 28.,400
.2
&
6
meas.
.8
by
4,-690
From (CFS) Total
16,600 14,-000 14~900
.2,.
INTERIOR
Tests
Flow
Br~ch
THE
1
prepared
RESERVOIR
.s·o
Survey
6.68
1.24
3.73 3.-53
Montana 3----:-58 3 Vel.
4.23
OF
Mean
Discharge
table
Table
..
FERRY
Resources
'
'
Gate
Helena,
4-_
Area
4,250 3,970
3~-880
Total 3,860 s.1rno 3,-770 -r:-r
4,000 from
Geological
right.barpc.
Water
Radial
Taken
CANYON
DEPARTMENT
of
35 35 35 35 32 35 34
·
Number
~VJ
.
. l
Soundings
7
\,-
U.S.
!
-
")
\
\,
-i.
)
,,,
/i
#1.nearest
P
..
y1
I
_,
,1.:,,
.-50
.-44-
wlth
·.
&k
(
97.87 97 87"
97.88 97.82 97-:-95 99.01
(Ft)
7
Elev.
Pond
;3
~.
ft
ft
2
·2
~~
at
ft
3-
3
numbered.
at & ft at &. ft. ft at
ft
.
~
(Ft)
10
6
2
2 Vert. Open. 4 at
at
AII
All.at
#1 #2 #2
*Gate #2 #1
are
y--{g
u,..,.,,;j
6
7
8 6
10 17 lI
)"l>
1956
June
Date
*Gates
$'"'
~
it,.()()
~
'37
17 APPENDIX 1
- .
I I
I I
I I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
8_5' 8_5'
-]I -]I
D D
·-· ·-·
•. •.
------* ------*
. .
skin skin
. . . '
29 29
of of
o< o<
_lt.------
------
arc arc
June June
--1------~~~o· --1------~~~o·
openings openings
of of
OC. OC.
gate gate
along along
tables tables
. .
69813 69813
Letter Letter
------· ------·
O. O.
GATES GATES
POWERPLANT POWERPLANT
trig trig
3, 3,
tr~vel tr~vel
-
RECLAMATION RECLAMATION
-.
feet feet
- a
vertical vertical
OC. OC.
OF OF
565 565
from from
FERRY FERRY
8. 8.
feet feet
8.565 8.565
SPILLWAY SPILLWAY
= =
= =
0.69813 0.69813
various various
Enclosure Enclosure
8.5 8.5
BUREAU BUREAU
= =
AB AB
40' 40'
determining determining
CANYON CANYON
296-D-86 296-D-86
degrees degrees
for for
-
------
4o 4o
f'rom f'rom
211"4o 211"4o
Arc Arc
in in
degrees degrees
for for
n n
------
-
21T 21T
X X
· ·
ct. ct.
X X
plate plate
69 69
Drawing Drawing
opening= opening=
Taken Taken
2
ABC ABC
of of
•
360 360
12.269 12.269
i i
3
------~=------
12
Formulas Formulas
Arc Arc
gate gate
~ ~
= =
= =
= =
= =
value value
.ADC= .ADC=
BC BC
Reference Reference
AB AB
ABC ABC
______
· . . ·
Arc Arc
Arc Arc
Arc Arc
Sin_d. Sin_d.
Obtain Obtain
Vertical Vertical
Angle Angle
------
______
. .
---~-
I I
la la
l l
: :
' '
fr: fr:
A A
:, :, 0:, 0:, SPILLWAYGATES CANYONFERRY POWERPLANT BUREAUOF RECLAMATION Taken from Enclosure 3, Letter of June 29 Gate opening measured along Vertical Arc AB skin plate arc gate 0 8.5 %,g.= 0.2125 12.269 8.565 0 0 1 7.5 7Jl6= 0.1875 10.8o7 7.545 1.020 12.24 2 6.5 646= 0 .1625 9.352 6.529 2.036 24.43 C0 3 5.5 ~ = 0.1375 7.903 5.517 3.048 36.58 4.5 4 4.5 To= o. 1125 6.459 4.509 4.056 48.67 3.5 · 5 3.5 To= 0.0875 5.020 3.505 5.000 00.72 2.5 6 2.5 To = o.o 625 3.583 2.501 6.064 -72.77 7 1.5 ~ = 0.0375 2.149 1.500 7.065 84.78 8 0.5 ~ ~0.0125 0.7161 0.500. 8.065 96.78 8.5 0 0 0 0 0 8.565 102.78 575 960 655 250 735 290. 890 425 1590 1670 1760 1200 1355 1040 2040 965 660 149 150 735 815 815 895 495 490 425 1920 1900 1205 1280 1275 1365 1445 1435 1600 1775 1050 1125 1115 2060 970 580 580 900 660 740 148 345 345 345 250 250 820 425 495 1530 1520 1510 161ij 1055 1795 1940 1210 1290 1455 1695 1680 1130 2085 · 29 900 975 585 665 147 740 250 825 345 425 495 1295 1380 1375 1540 1620 1710 1810 1960 1215 2105 1135 . June s. f. 905 585 980 500 146 825 745 345 290 290 290 290 425 1725 1830 1985 1225 1300 1390 1470 1460 1635 1065 1060 1140 c. letter - 2 7, 910 500 670 665 985 145 345 750 250 250 830 290 POWERPLANT 1305 1475 1555 1550 1645 1740 1070 1850 1150 1230 2155 2130 1395 2005 Head-Feet Discharge Appendix 990 590 6.75 585 915 144 755 835 250. 290 430 425 FERRY i315 1405 1570 1660 1760. 1870 1'155 1235 1490 1080 2030 Enclosure · Gross 920 500 500 595 143 755 250 290 840 from Turbine 1245 1325 1415 1770 1000 1085 1895 2050 1165 CANYON Taken 595 925 505 675 760 675 142 840 250 1675 1670 1790 1090 1915· 1420 1505 1495 1590 1580 1000 1170 . 930 505 600 680 141 765 250 845 350 350 350 350 290 290 430 430 430 1515 1605 1095 1260 1250 1340 1330 1430 1700 1810 1010 1950 1180 2105 2075 · l · 9 5 6 2 1 3 7 8 0.5 4 18 19 11 13 14 15 16 17 10 12 20 21 22 I CIS 0 CIS ~ Cl) Cl) tll bO ~ ~ ~ 't:S :jj t-l c5 0 .... FIGURE I REPORT HYD. 4,3 -1 0 "'+ ,, I -1 I -+-~I --Intermediate pier ' ' [' --r---- Axi, of dam- , -Parabolic curve / ,,-Left training wall ' _,-0.15°I PARKING AREA ,-Top of reta;ning ,p~. : wolf-El 3663 _ -Intermediate ~ ,-Topof ,nfermed,ate (;, ""-'O"O .... , tram1nq wall ,·Et 3673 E13653.50- '- : trakunq wall·E/3646.50 f /,~o ; , r , , 1 'I II/' I \ -1'. h I I , ' --..,v,·, ___ ~ :_ i_'\ I ,,,.,1}\~:};f Jr~··cCO· E/3600 IE!.3605- -;:: I i \ I ,v,\ ' \ \ \ I \ ~ J:{j_-l_ I ·, .;i \ '\'-'--.___" 5'Min:-' ;-- \'"'~ ~~~ 159'-9"- ', '":"· 243'·6"- '--._ '··Assumed line of excavat,an _lfc---;,,t---;;;;;~~rja1nts------, -:. ,Ir3~:~;-~ !g_~1n~, I ~~±~ri7t~Bu1 _u '--._ MAXIMUM SPILLWAY SECTION .,, ---ei-~--r-~ -:o: , J./ - ::1: "' : ' : l!'J' "' ' ' . /, ',fl ~! mI,:: r :¥- I l~: ~ : ~-fr:-:::--1-----R,ver ___-1J1 : : ({) 10 - Ton gantry crane q -E 1 ".' I,'I''"' I I , outlets--- ··-,;1,I ',1·, ·, :::::I: 'I: iI . :·~·::u· : : -- · -,: Roadwar, El 3808.50 : 1 : I l, :·: ! I , :·i 1'1 ; ~I, I ~6 ,II:, /Sta. /+OO --1:t tr :i:_: __ , 5', 7' Inspection ,' gallery -•·· ·/25-Tan crane Q:; ,---Max TW.S.EI3665 ~ !~--~--- ~ .--·fl 3648 _,,_ (Min rw.sn 3640 "" ~ ,·El.36f!(J __ , rDurnped ' ,-·¾ v r,pra, 1// ', I ""' ~ ~ I ~ 1 5' x 1' Foundation CJ ::/ gallery. -- - :,a ,>' \ I I ~ '··El. 3650:: - ', ) I ,U('/if!;( ! I ( I MAXIMUM SECTION THRU POWERPLANT I I ~ I l !) / / I -;.oo . I PLAN _under-·-~ separate con tractI NOTE Actual required foundations may vary widely ,·Elevator from profile and assumed excavation lines ~ tower \. ____ .- · -Entrance ta shown. gallery system Axis afdom-, ,. 19 RESERVOIR AREA-1000 ACRES 15 20 25 30 35 40 OUTLET DISCHARGE- 1000 SEC 3 4 5 6 7 60'· -40.'- -·-; (j_ Per;stocks .--El. 3706.CJ r. UNITED ,_TATES \-Original ground DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR sur-foce BUREAU OF RECLAMATION '--lPensJock \ / _,,;.'i5t,111nq well MISSOURI BASIN PRO.JECT El.3690, i trashrocksL-· intake CANYON FERRY UNIT-MONTANA y::;:/ ..i tm:ltlt;1:~ 0 ,, 1 L------l-_,,, CANYON FERRY DAM AND POWERPLANT PLAN, £L£VATION AND S£CTIONS - I ~Assumed fine ,._ of excavation 10 DRAWN. A:'?·. SUBMITTED . . ... 1 . ,-5'x7' Foundation tunnel o 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 e 9 10 '11 12 13 14 15 16 r7 rB 1 7.~~- RESERVOIR CAPACITY-100,000 ACRE FEET TRACED. .,,._ ... co,·_R._v._s, . ___ _ TAILWATER ANO SPILLWAY OfSCHARGE-10,ooosEC.FT. .RECOMMENDED4~,,.,~ SECTl~-;~RU PUMPING INTAKE · -·5 [!/acks@60'·· ~- -so'-----+--so·-----~ ~ AR£A, CAPACITY AND DISCHARG£ CURV£S CHECKED. . ~/1-~: .cJ.#. APPROVED. ·!c);N/./:f,~~. UPSTREAM ELEVATION DENVER, COt_ORADCJ, APRIL 15, 1946 296 _0 _47 A. 1 .. Typical Spillway Section and Radial Gate Pre pared for Installation 2. Typical Radial Gate and Plastic Template of Spillway Section Be fore Assembly with Side Walls &'~ B. Typical Model Installed and Operating 'g~ ~ ...... (I) CANYON· FERRY: DAM ~~ Laboratory Facilities for Model Calibration Q. ii,. ~ ~ '· > a:: (fJ .... a:: "- w w .... '!:: > Q w z w 0 a:: w w ..J 38001 3795 3790 3775 377 37660 10 Fl~~ TO. ·~~ o'? .·~tfs ~· ~/ ~ 12 ~~~" .:..) \'. \ '- '/ ..,) ,./ 0 '\ 15 ,, \ ": ··; I 14 \ ~SCHARGE " t DISCHARGE / /\--~ (FREE ~ Gates Gate I" .v obtain the between - opening IN .,./ CRESl)( bottom should 16 THOUSANDS CURVE equal the is H of ., be w gate openings. ,, ' the the NOTES operated :q::;:: tH r ~ Fl- difference )l"t, seat gate. OF ,I ,,.,. (E1. r \__' SECOND simultaneously 1 1.~. 3765.5) c/\. in ~' :i: elevation '. FEET and H H to 25 2( ?2 Axis 30 Crest of dam" El. ,7" 3766.00·__,:i,..,..,c,--,~.i;.,, iliJ:%~IT:~Jt~i:~}2 ··,-----14.273' 1:-~: .)P: \:": .. Mox. - :_ -: ·.·:-· .:~:_:. :\~:~ H .. w • .. s :_:.-: El SECTION :'v'·:;:.:.: 10 3800 I 35 .c(:. y · .. /~ , b._ ·:·::_9:·::::·: c;Spil/woy ! 0 I ...... THRU -:e7 SCALE -_~_._:.._--:~_~::: bridqe ·, : 10 SPILLWAY OF I . ·.. not FEET :::i·:.· ... TffACEO DRAWN CHECK£D_f2./l:"~------ 40 shown ·:·:~: HELENA-GREAT .·::c;i/:· :-· ~ ,:.:q :1:i" .,, •· "( DENVER, _:_Q::.·_ -····· 20 FOR C ::. _____ _ SPILLWAY 0 __ •) CANYON -~~~ :-: < CREST _ - .f'._V!;~------ f!,_fi-.f:_ COLORAuu, ONE ~:-··::.·;,.. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT 30 ______ FALLS -- BUREAU 5/'Jt~4.5' .,.,.._, .. RECOMIIIIENDEDrJ-&~~ SUBIIIIITTED--~$-~'f:...~-- APPROVED---c°H/~,-t~~- , • UNITED DISCHARGE RIVER .,,. DIV.- ,, OF FERRY . ID•.• OF --- RECLAMATION STATES CANYON BASIN THE }. RADIAL INTERIOR I REPORT PROJECT FERRY iili1:>-u-1058 --- CURVES FIGURE DAM UNIT-MONT. -·~--- GATE - HYD. ______ 3 433 _ C ... II!' .... ?..., - :a:,.. --16 ,.. .... / 15 J r .I , l . r - 10 -- . ; PROTOTYPE FEET . AND j 10 ' I r 8. SECOND 1 DAM . .. . OF I I I I ' -FEE MODEL .. I I I I I -· OF FERRY -· 1•1 .. ·s OPENING THOUSANDS -- . IN GATE I I I I I I a - CANYON 5 . 4 ~ I ~, I I ~- 0 I .. I -- I I -- j I . COMPARISON ;- "f- DISCHARGE . I 1--- 3 - _1 . -- - . - I - I I n I I .. I - .. - -- -2 .. - Q -· ... . DISCHARGE 3795 3800 37900 a: a: > 0 j:: UJ UJ UJ UJ a: z ..J (/) z ~ UJ 0 UJ u.. 1- :a :a ,,_ ,,_ "'"11 "'"11 -1:u -1:u :ac: :ac: oG) oG) p(II p(II ,c:, ,c:, 16 16 / / / / V V / / I/ I/ V V 14- / / / / V V V V CURVES CURVES ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS DAM DAM / / ~ ~ V V 12 12 / / / / / / V V FEET FEET ~ ~ FERRY FERRY / / -DISCHARGE -DISCHARGE RESERVOIR RESERVOIR V V ,r,ro ,r,ro vv:::v vv:::v 10 10 / / 4-J\~ 4-J\~ SECOND SECOND ,.,,.. ,.,,.. OPENING OPENING [?~ [?~ CANYON CANYON OF OF , , ~ ~ ,.v ,.v CONSTANT CONSTANT 4j)' 4j)' GATE GATE o+ o+ 8 8 V V FOR FOR ~~~~ ~~~~ 1/ 1/ / / l0V l0V . . THOUSANDS THOUSANDS )~/~'.1/" )~/~'.1/" .. .. / / ~ ~ . . IN IN ,.~" ,.~" ~ ~ 6 6 / / l"L,' l"L,' "~--:- /2 /2 ...... I I I I I 1 1 "' "' from from JI~ JI~ 1/. 1/. / / i. i. DISCHARGE DISCHARGE 296-0-1058 296-0-1058 ,~ ,~ I I I I ,. ,. -Points -Points I, I, 4 4 ,. ,. I I Dwa. Dwa. ' ' ,. ,. I, I, L, L, "" "" ,, ,, ...... 1, 1, ~ ~ 2 2 ~ ~ -b -b / / 00 00 2 2 4 4 6 6 8 8 12 12 10 10 C) C) z z w w ~ ~ 0 0 a.. a.. z z C) C) w w 1- w w LL LL w w I- 1;, 1;, t t / / "-. "-. ·Figure 6 Report Hyd 433 A. Performance of Spillway B. Stilling Basin Operation at Approximately 16 percent of Design Capac:iiy CANYON FERRY DAM Spillway Flow Conditions for a Discharge of 24,000 cfs Four Gates 4. 2 Feet Open Figure 7 Report 11yd 433 A. Flow Conditions for Discharge of 24,000 cfs with Four Gates Open 4. 2 Feet B. Blow Conditions for Discharge of 13,800 cfs--Gate Number 2, 10 Feet Qpen CANYON FERRY DAM Flow Conditions on Spillway Face for Discharges of 24,000 cfs and 13,800 cfs