1 ·-.J

...

- ..

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJECTION

OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT, SAN LUIS UNIT

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA

Report No. Hyd-546

Hydraulics Branch DIVISION OF RESEARCH

OFFICE OF CHIEF ENGINEER DENVER, COLORADO

November 1, 1965

The information contained in this report may not be used in any publication, advertising, or other promotion in such a manner as to constitute an endorsement by the United States Government or the Bureau of Reclamation, either explicit or implicit, of any material, product, devic1e, or process that may be referred to in the report.

,

CONTENTS

Abstract ................................................ . Purpose ................................................. . Conclusions .............................................. . Definition of Terms ....................................... . Acknowledgment ......................................... . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . .

iii 1 1 3 5 5

Description of Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 The Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2, 073-foot Side Weir .......... • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Effects of Surface Tension and Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Backflow from the Pump Discharge Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1, 500-foot Weir between Stations 3+50 and 18+50 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Attenuation and Reflection Characteristics of Canal

Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Effect of the Angled Transition to the Pumping Plant . . . . . . . . 16 Effect of the Turnout to the Delta-Mendota Canal . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 Effect of the Siphon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 Effect of the Dead End at Check 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 Other Observations . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Surge Propagation in the Forebay Canal without the

Side Weir ......................... _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Observations on the Longitudinal Form of the Surge Wave . . . 18 Attenuation of the Rejection Surge by Friction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Summary of Operation of the System Following Rejection

of the Maximum Discharge of 4, 200 cfs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Development of the Side Weir Crest Shape • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Details of the Recommended Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Metric Equivalents ........... ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Table

Complete Rejection of Flow to Six Pumps, Three Pumps, and One Pump, No Backflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Complete Rejection of Flow to Six Pumps, Three Pumps, and One Pump, 150 Percent Backflow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Complete Rejection of Flow to Six Pumps, Three Pumps, and One Pump, 200 Percent Backflow . . • . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

i

CONTENTS- -Continued

Table

Rejection of Flow to Three Pumps with Six Pumps Operating. No backflow. 150 Percent Backflo\Y. and 200 Percent Backflow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Rejection of Flow to One Pump with Six Pumps Operat­ing. No Backflow. 150 Percent Backflow. and 200 Per-cent Backflow ............................................. .

Metric Equivalents of Important Quantities 5 6

Figure

Loe at ion Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Forebay Canal and Wasteway. General Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Laboratory Model Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Model Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Model Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Backflow Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Attenuating Effect of 2, 073-foot Weir on Surge Caused by

Complete Rejection of 4, 200 cf s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Effects of Viscosity and Surface Tension on Weir Discharge

Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 · Effect of Wetting Agent on Attenuating Ability of Weir . . . • . . . . . • . 9

Attenuation of Maximum Peaks by 1. 500-foot-long Side Weir . . . . 10 Variation of Maximum Peak along Channel, With and Without

Side Weir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Variation of Average Surge Height with Froude Number of

lrlitial Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Variation of Average Surge Velocity with Froude Number of

Initial Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... · . . . . . . . . 13 Variation of First Wave Length with Surge Velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Average Surge Height-Maximum Peak Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . • 15 Variation of Backflow Surge Height with Backflow Discharge

Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 Longitudinal Wave Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 Surge Wave· for Rejection of 4, 200 cfs Plus Backflow of

6,300 cfs ................................................ . Development of Side Weir Profile Shape--Preliminary

De signs . . .. . . . . . . . . . .................................... . Development of Side Weir Profile Shape--Recommended

Design .................................... o ••••••• ........

Flow over Recommended Weir Profile ........................ . Waves Impinging on Recommended Weir Profile ............... . Forebay Canal and Wasteway. Plan. Profile and Sections ...... . Forebay Canal and Wasteway, Overflow Structure ............. . Forebay Canal and Wasteway. Baffled Apron Drop ............ . Delta-Mendota Canal, Modifications--Mile 69. 25 to

Mile 70. 04, Plan, Profile, and Sections ................... .

ii

18

19

20 21 22 23 24 25

26

ABSTRACT

Data from a 1:48 scale model supplied the magnitudes and velocities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of flow at the pumping plant. San Luis Forebay. California. and showed that a side weir was effective in reducing the surges. Data were obtained with capacitance wave probes for partial and complete rejection of flow with and without backflow from the pump discharge lines. Max­imum surge peak heights were 5. 4 ft for complete rejection of the maximum discharge plus 200% backflow. 4. 5 ft with 150% backflow. and 1. 9 ft without backflow. Velocities of propagation were 20. 7. 20. 7. and 19.1 fps. respectively. for the 3 conditions. A 1,500 ft­long weir on the canal sideslope reduced the maximum surge height to 1. 0 ft without backflow and 1. 3 ft with either 150 or 200% backflow. The reflecting and attenuating characteristics of canal structures were observed and steady-state conditions after flow rejection with the entire flow discharging over the weir were meas_ured. The undular form of the surge wave was analyzed and several comparisons were made with theory. A 1:10 scale sectional model was used to develop the weir crest shape.

DESCRIPTORS-- *pumping plants/ *canals/ *model tests/ *surges/ *trapezoidal channels/ *weirs/ hydraulic transients/ freeboard/ / bore/wave// discharge coefficients/ viscosity/ Reynolds number/ Froude number/ surface tension/ translatory waves/ unsteady flow/ weir crests/ calibrations/ instrumentation/ laboratory equipment/ measuring instruments/ recording s7stems I capacitance/ dielectrics/ electronic equipment/ oscillographs research and development IDENTIFIERS-- wave probes/ Weber number/ Central Valley Proj­ect, California/ San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant

iii

/

UNITED STA TES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Office of Chief Engineer Division of Research Hydraulics Branch Denver. Colorado November 1. 1965

Report No. Hyd-546 Author: D. L. King Checked by: T. J. Rhone Reviewed by: W. E. Wagner Submitted by: H. M. Martin

HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJECTION OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT. SAN LUIS UNIT

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA

PURPOSE

. These studies were conducted to determine the magnitudes and veloc­ities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of flow at the pumping plant. and to investigate a proposed method of alleviating the surges.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Surges developed in the Forebay Canal were found to have a maxi­mum peak height of 5. 4 feet for rejection of the maximum pumped discharge (4. 200 cfs (cubic feet per second)) plus an assumed backflow of 200 percent of the pumped discharge. 4. 5 feet with an assumed back­flow of 150 percent, and 1. 9 feet for rejection of the pumped discharge with no backflow. Figure 11. Corresponding average surge velocities were 20. 7, 20. 7. and 19. 1 fps (feet per second). respectively. The average height of the bore following the maximum peaks was 1. 5 feet in all three cases.

2. Surface tension and viscosity affected the flow over the weir for heads less than 0. 016 foot, corresponding to a prototype head of 0. 77foot. Clinging of the nappe to the downstream face of the weir resulted in an increased discharge coefficient. A residual surge height of 1. 0 foot. following attenuation by a 2, 073-foot-long weir, was corrected to 1. 1 feet, Figure 7.

3. A 1, 500-foot-long side weir located between Stations 3+50 and 18+50 on the Forebay Canal was effective in reducing the maximum height of the surge to approximately 1. 0 foot without backflow and 1. 3 feet with backflow, Figure 11. Average surge velocities were 20. 1, 20. 4, and 18. 3 fps, for the .conditions of the preceding paragraph.

4. After attenuation by the side weir, the positive wave split at the turnout; a positive wave with approximately 70 percent of the height of the residual surge traveled upstream in the Delta-Mendota Canal, and a positive wave with a height of approximately 55 percent of the residual surge height traveled downstream. With backflow. these values were approximately 60 and 35 percent, respectively. A small negative surge was reflected back down the Forebay Canal toward the pumping plant.

5. The inverted siphon at Station 3002+50, Delta-Mendota Canal, elim­inated the peaks of the surge wave but had no effect on the average bore height. Check 13, at Station 3023, Delta-Mendota Canal, Figure 2, reflected the wave at approximately double its previous height.

6. Friction effects in the model could not be accurately determined. It is recommended that equations developed by other experimenters be used to estimate the attenuation of the wave due to friction. (See foot­notes J:!./ and ~/.)

7. The maximum water surface in the system (measured at the upstream end of the siphon) was 1. 6 feet above the normal pooled water surface approximately 8 minutes (prototype) after initiation of the surge (including backflow).

8. Steady-state conditions occurred with the entire discharge flowing over the side weir about 45 minutes (prototype) after initiation of the surge. The steady-state water surface was 1. 1 feet above the normal water surface elevation near the downstream end of the 1, 500-foot-long weir, 1. 2 feet above normal at the upstream end of the Forebay Canal, and 1. 3 feet above normal in the pooled Delta-Mendota Canal.

9. A 1: 10 model was used to develop a weir crest shape which will provide adequate discharge capacity and reflect wind-generated waves during normal canal operation. Figures 19 through 22.

2

DEFINITION OF TERMS

a - -area of orifice in backflow tank

A - - reciprocal of Froude number of initial flow

At - -area of backflow tank

C - -discharge coefficient of backflow tank orifice

C --wave celerity

Cd - -weir discharge coefficient

Cw --dimensionless weir discharge coefficient (Cd/ ~2g)

c* --ratio of height of spillway crest above canal bottom to initial depth of flow

1 - - specific weight of water

Fo --Froude number of initial flow. V0 / ~gH0

Fw --Froude number of surge wave. Vw/ ~gH0

g --acceleration of gravity

Ho - -initial depth of flow

h - -average surge height

ho --head on backflow tank orifice at time. t = 0

h1 - -head on backflow tank orifice at later time

hmax--maximum surge height

hw --head on weir

L - -length of weir

1 --channel width a~ elevation of weir crest

>. - -wave length. distance between wave crests

µ - -dimensionless weir discharge coefficient ( same as Cw)

,c - -pi. 3. 1416

3

Q - -discharge over weir

R --Reynolds number of flow over weir

P - -mass density of water

a --surface tension of water

t --time

VO --velocity of initial flow

Vw--velocity of surge wave

W --Weber number of flow over weir

Yi --ratio of maximum surge depth to initial flow depth. before attenuation by weir

Yf --ratio of maximum surge depth to initial flow depth. after attenuation by weir

4

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The studies described in this report were accomplished through coop­eration between the Canals Branch, Division of Design, and the Hydraulics Branch, Division of Research. Photography was by W. M. Batts. Office Services Branch.

INTRODUCTION

The San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project in California, Figure 1, includes a system to store surplus water for later release. The Fore bay Canal and Forebay Pumping Plant. Figure 2, as parts of this system. will divert water from the existing Delta-Mendota Canal at the maximum rate of 4, 200 cfs into the Forebay Reservoir. The water will then be lifted by pump-generator units into the San Luis Reservoir. Subse-quent releases back into the Forebay Reservoir will generate power and provide irrigation flows. This report is concerned with the inves­tigation of surges which would be developed in the Forebay Canal and a portion of the Delta-Mendota Canal if the flow to the Forebay Pump-ing Plant was rejected due to pump stoppage caused by malfunction or power failure.

Description of Problem

Although safeguards have been included in the design, the possibility exists that power failure might occur at the Forebay Pumping Plant, resulting in stoppage of the pumps. Should such a power failure occur, a surge would be propagated in the Forebay CiU}al due to rejection of the canal flow and backflow dra~nage of the pump discharge lines. This surge could not be allowed to t:itavel unreduced into the Delta-Mendota Canal.

When fl.ow in a channel is suddenly halted. due to closing a gate or stopping a pump, a surge wave develops and moves upstream in the channel. The height and velocity of the wave are dependent upon the depth and velocity of the initial incoming flow and on the shape of the channel cross section. Following complete rejection of the inflow. the stream comes to rest after passage of the wave and the discharge in the wave is equal to the discharge of the initial incoming flow. If only a portion of the flow is rejected, the velocity in the channel following passage of the wave is proportional to the unrejected portion of the dis­charge and the wave discharge is again equal to the rejected discharge. By applying the equations of continuity ,and momentum (as in develop­ment of the hydraulic jump formula) the theoretical height and velocity of the surge wave are obtained. The maximum height of oscillations which occur above the main body of the surge wave can also be esti­mated through theoretical considerations. All of the aforementioned relationships have been investig-,;;d by many experimenters.

5

Alternative methods of reducing the surge to an allowable height were considered. The first alternative consisted of radial gates located in the bifurcation from the Delta-Mendota Canal to the Forebay Canal. These gates would open automatically upon power failure at the pump­ing plant, draw down the water surface to accommodate the initial surge wave. and remain open to divert the rejected canal discharge. The second alternative. which was the subject of this model investigation. consisted of a side weir along the Forebay Canal which would reduce the surge to an allowable value before reaching the bifurcation. The side weir has the advantages of essentially maintenance-free operation and freedom from reliance on mechanical devices.

Citrinil / developed a theoretical approa9h to the action of a lateral spillway in reducing the height of a positive surge. The development is beyond the scope of this report and will not be presented. The validity and limitations of the theory have been proven by other Italian exper­imenters,!/ ,E_/.

Experimental data from this study are compared with the theoretical derivation in the Investigation section of this report.

It should be noted that the theoretical equations fo·r development and propagation of a surge are, in most cases. applied to prismatic channels with symmetrical alineme'nt and involve complete rejection of flow by rapid closing of a downstream control gate. In reality, as in the case of the Forebay Canal and Pumping Plant, conditions differ from the usual case to such an extent as to warrant hydraulic model studies to insure accurate prediction of prototype behavior.

1/ "Attenuation of a Positive Wave by Means of a Lateral Spillway" by Duilio Citrini. L'Energia Elettrica, Vol 26, No. 10, pp 589-599, 1949. (Translated from Italian by Language Service Bureau.) 2/ ''The Action of a Side Weir on the Positive Wave Moving Upstream in an Open Channel, " by Bruno Gentilini, Memorie e Studi Dell' Istituto Di ldraulica e Costruzioni Idraulica Del Politecnico Di Milano, No. 78, 19 50. ( Translated from Italian by Language Service Bureau.) 3/ "Action of Side Weirs and Tilting Gates on Translation Waves in Canals, " by Guilio De Marchi, Proceedinffs of the Minnesota Inter­national Hydraulics Conference, August 1 53.

6

THE MODEL

The 1 :48 scale model. Figures 3 and 4. included the Fore bay Canal and the canal transition to the pumping plant intakes. the turnout from the Delta-Mendota Canal to the Forebay Canal. a section of the Delta­Mendota Canal downstream from the turnout to Station 3023 (Check 13) including the inverted siphon at Station 3002+50, and a section of the Delta-Mendota Canal upstream to Station 2978+70. The Forebay Canal model alinement was on the opposite side of the Delta-Mendota Canal from that of the prototype alinement. Figure 3. because of laboratory space limitations. Most of the model was fabricated from plywood with the exception of warped transition sections formed in concrete. The siphon barrels were made of sheet metal and a slide gate was installed at Check 13. Backflow devices in the model were formed of sheet metal. The overflow side weir was built to elevation tolerances of plus or minus O. 002 foot and consisted of sheet metal formed over wood templates.

Basic model instrumentation consisted of six capacitance-type wave probes with plasticized-enamel coated wire. connected to a six-channel. direct-writing oscillograph. Figure 5. Each wire was 6. 25 inches long. mounted in a U-frame. The frames were attached to modified point gage staffs in rack and pinion devices with verniers reading to 0. 001 foot. Calibration was accomplished by raising and lowering the probes known distances in a stable pool of water.

Early in the model study some difficulty was experienced in calibrating the probes. Nonlinearity occurred because of wetting and drying char­acteristics of the plastic dielectric4/. and a careful calibration routine was necessary to obtain linearity. -Separate calibrations were made for each test run to ensure accurate data. After establishing the zero datum. the wire was immersed by lowering the probe a known distance. (By lowering the probe more than the required amount. waiting for several seconds. then raising the probe to the correct position. the wetting effect was partially suppressed by prewetting the wire.)

Fifteen to thirty minutes were required for the wire to reach a stable condition. The probe was then raised in increments to the initial zero position to check the linearity. It was also necessary to carefully insulate the impedance bridge circuit of each probe because of zero datum drift caused by room temperature variations. According to other experimenters. 5 / meniscus effects result in an error of approximately · plus or minus 0:-015 inch (plus or minus 0. 06 foot (prototype) for this model). which is not considered significant in measurement of the crest height. The errors in the cited study were found to be greatest at the troughs, (minus O. 01 to plus 0. 02 inch) which were not of primary importance in this study.

4 / "Dynamic Calibration of Wave Probes" by Michael D. Pearlman, MIT De artment of Naval Architecture and Marine En ·neerin • July 1963. 5 Experiments on Surge Waves by J. A. Sandover and 0. C. Zienkiewicz. Water Power. November 1957.

7

Water was supplied to the model by a centrifugal pump with discharge rate measured by a volumetrically calibrated orifice meter. The recirculated water caused some difficulty by allowing waterborne materials to be deposited on the wave probes.

Backflow drainage from the discharge lines was simulated by flow from head tanks located above the pumping plant intake bays. Figure 6. A pressure transducer was used to record the head-time characteristics of orifices in the bottoms of the tanks for determination of discharge coefficients and rates of discharge. Initial rates of backflow were con­trolled by filling the tanks to a predetermined level, then allowing them to drain immediately after rejection of the canal flow.

Depth of flow in the canal was maintained by adjusting the slide gates downstream from the intake bays, Figure 6. Water surface elevations during normal operation of the canal were measured with a point gage at Forebay Canal Station 23+23.

THE INVESTIGATION

2, 073-foot Side Weir

The initial phase of the investigation was concerned with determining the minimum length of side weir necessary to reduce the surge h~ight to an allowable value of approximately 1. 5 feet. To obtain general information on the attenuating effect, a weir was installed along the entire length (2, 073 feet) of the Forebay Canal to determine at what point along this length the surge wave was reduced to an allowable height. These data were then used to determine the next trial weir length. Initial tests were made to observe the attenuation of a surge caused by rejection of the maximum canal discharge of 4, 200 cfs, without backflow. Later, similar measurements were made with various backflow rates.

Initial operating conditions in the canal, before generation of the surge, required a maximum flow depth of 15·. 09 feet at the upstream end of the weir, so that the water surface was 6 inches (prototype) below the crest of the weir. (The weir crest was at elevation 1 73. 7 in the preliminary design.) Friction head loss in the model canal resulted in a water sur­face elevation difference of 1.15 inches (prototype) so that the water surface was about 7 .15 inches below the crest at the downstream end of the weir. This head loss corresponds to a prototype value of Manning's "n" coefficient of approximately 0. 018, which is close to the suggested coefficient of 0. 01 7 for large canals.

8

The surge was initiated by rapid closure of the downstream control gates. Figure 7 shows a reduction from an initial height of 1. 8 feet to a final value of 1. 0 foot at the upstream end of the 2, 073-foot weir. The curve is based on the maximum peaks recorded on the weir side of the canal above the intersection of the canal invert and the 1-1 / 2: 1 side slope. The surge was propagated through the canal at an average veloc­ity of 18. 3 feet per second. Upon reaching the turnout, a positive surge with a height of 0. 7 foot was propagated upstream in the Delta­Mendota Canal, a positive surge of 0. 6-foot height traveled downstream. and a small negative surge was reflected back toward the pumping plant in the Forebay Canal. The surge heights in the Delta-Mendota Canal were measured at the canal centerline.

Effects of Surface Tension and Viscosity

The effects of surface tension and viscosity on formation of the surge and the efficiency of the side weir in the relatively small model were inves­tigated. Experiments on V-notch and sharp-crested weirs6/. 7 / indicate a marked increase in the discharge coefficient at very low heads due to the nappe clinging to the downstream face of the weir. The clinging effect is caused by surface tension and viscosity of the fluid. Similar tests on round-crested weirs8 / showed a decrease in the discharge coefficient for low heads. Assuming that similar effects existed in the 1:48 model. tests were made to determine the heads above which the effects of surface ten­sion and viscosity were negligible. Figure 8, which illustrates the var­iation in a dimensionless coefficient of discharge for a range of values of the Weber and Reynolds numbers. indicates that surface tension and vis­cosity cause an increased coefficient below a head of approximately 0. 016 foot (measured upstream from the crest where velocity head is negligible). A model head of 0. 016 foot corresponds to a prototype head of 0. 77 foot. In other words, for prototype heads less than 0. 77 foot the model will indicate a weir efficiency greater than that which will actually exist in the prototype. The weir profile in the model was terminated immediately downstream from the crest. allowing the overflow to spill down a vertical face. The vertical face corresponded to the downstream face of a sharp-crested weir. thus causing the increased coefficient at low heads.

6 / "Precise Weir Measurements" by E. W. Schoder and K. B. Turner. "rransactions. ASCE, 1929, Vol93. 7/Engineering Hydraulics. edited by Hunter Rouse. John Wiley and Sons, me .. New York. 1958. p 214. 8/ "On the Influences of Curvature, Surface Tension and Viscosity on "Flow Over Round-Crested Weirs. "by G. D. Matthew. Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers (England), Vol 25 May-Aug 1963.

9

The residual surge height of 1. 0 foot following rejection of 4, 200 cfs with no backflow corresponds to a head on the weir crest of approx­imately 0. 5 foot, which is less than the critical value. This head rest1!ts in a Reynolds number of 500 and a Weber number of 1. 35 with corresponding values for C of O. 29 on the lower line and 0.44 on the upper line in Figures BA and B.

Cw1 1

Cw2 = Chw1)3/2 1

Chw2> 3 / 2, with the subscripts

referring to the upper and lower lines respectively. As computed above, hw2 = 0. 5 foot (0. 0104 foot, model). Therefore,

0.29 1

0 · 44 = Chw1>3/2 1

( 0 . 0 10 4) 3 / 2

or (hw1)3/2 = o. ~gci~oo) = o. 00152

hwl = O. 0132 foot (model) = 0. 6 foot (prototype)

1000

Therefore, the true head on the weir is O. 6 foot and the true residual surge height is

O. 5 + 0. 6 = 1. 1 feet

The dashed line in Figure 7 shows the attenuation by the weir with cor­rection for surface tension and viscosity.

Subsequent tests with larger initial surge heights resulted in residual heights large enough to warrant neglect of the surface tension and vis­cosity effects. Tests made with a detergent wetting agent added to the model water supply substantiated the above conclusions, as shown in Figure 9. The initial difference between the curves is probably due to errors in discharge or calibration rather than the wetting agent. The figure shows that, at a surge height of approximately 1. 4 feet (0. 8 foot above the weir crest at this station), the curves begin to diverge, with the weir being less effective with the wetting agent. At the upstream end of the weir the residual surge height is 1. 3 feet with the wetting agent, which is a larger correction than that obtained from Figure 8. The amount of data is limited, and additional tests should be made before definite conclusions are drawn.

10

Computations showed that capillary effects were negligible in the for­mation of the surge wave. The equation for the celerity of a surface wave is

C • 9/

where the first term under the radical is governed by gravity, ( !) and the second term by c~pillarity, ( *) · , P

>. = distance between wave crests (wave length), feet;

1 = specific weight, pounds per cubic foot;

p = mass density, slugs per cubic foot;

a = surface tension, pounds per foot.

For ). = 3. 0 feet (within range of model wave lengths),

-, = 62.4,· p = 1. 94, and " = 0. 005:

). 1 = 3. 0 62. 4 ~ P 2 (3.1416) 1. 94

= 15.358

2'c .2. = 2 (3. 1416) o. 005 = o. 0054 "r° P 3. 0 1.94

Thus, the influence of capillarity is considerably less than one percent of the gravity influence.

9/Elementary Mechanics of Fluids, by Hunter Rouse, John Wiley and 'Sons, Inc., New York, 195·9, p. 324.

11

Backflow from the Pump Discharge Lines

The volume of backflow from the pump discharge lines depends on the position of the pump impeller vanes at the time of power failure and the time required for the vanes to be feathered following the power failure. The exact backflow characteristics of the pumps were unknown at the time of the model study; however, it was possible to describe the oper­ation in general terms and to estimate the characteristics.

immediately after power failure, a: short period of time is required to overcome the forward inertia of the impellers and allow for acceleration of the backflow to the maximum rate. Upon power failure, it is assumed that the impeller vanes will begin to move to a feathered position. Under a head of 5 0 feet, the corresponding total backflow volume for six units was assumed to be about 90, 000 cubic feet and the maximum backflow rate approximately 6,300 cfs (150 percent of the maximum pumping dis­charge). If the vanes became stuck in the most adverse position due to a control unit malfunction, the backflow rate could be as high as 8, 400 cfs (200 percent of the maximum pumping discharge). Although the latter condition was considered improbable, tests were conducted for both 150 and 200 percent backflow to span the range of possible conditions.

Independent measurements showed that the velocity of propagation of the backflow surge was about 24 fps as compared to 19 fps for the rejection surge, indicating that in the 150-foot distance between the intakes and the end of the weir, the backflow surge would overtake the rejection surge if initiated about 1. 6 seconds (prototype) after rejection. It was. therefore, desirable to determine the attenuating effect of the weir on the combined rejection and backflow surges, the most adverse condition that could occur in the prototype.

The size of each backflow tank was determined according to the required volume and head for 150 percent backflow. The required size of the orifice in the bottom of each tank was estimated by assuming a discharge coeffic~ent and eomputing the required area by using Q = Ca~ 2g ho The assumption was then checked by recording the time-discharge rela­tionships for the tanks with the calculated orifices in place. The equation for the discharge coefficient of an orifice discharging under a falling head is

C = 1 At 'fa

2

12

where

h0 = initial head in tank at t = 0,

h 1 = head in tank at later time t,

At = area of tank,

a = area of orifice, and

g = acceleration of gravity.

The variables, t, ho, and h1 were recorded, thus allowing the com­putation of C and the calculation of the discharge rate. It was found that the original assumption of the orifice size was too small. The head was increased to produce the required initial rate of discharge, resulting in a total simulated backflow volume greater than that of the prototype. However, the backfl.ow surge height is affected only by the maximum rate of backfl.ow discharge. The total volume affects the length and shape of the backflow surge wave which were, for purposes of this study, relativelunimportant. ·

After completion of the model study, aqditional information was received . regarding the backfl.ow characteristics of the pumps. Manufacturer's model tests indicated that at 50-foot head and 24° vane angle (wide open), the maximum backfl.ow rate would be 3, 720 cfs for six units, or about 89 percent of the maximum pumping discharge. At the feathered position (minus 5° vane angle) the maximum backflow rate would be 630 cfs for six units, which is only about 15 percent of the maximum pumping discharge.

The original estimates of 200 and 150 percent backfl.ow for the described conditions were therefore not supported by the manufacturer's test data. However, since the model studies described in this report included data for surge formation without backflow, it is possible to interpolate for the correct conditions.

Another condition which was not included in the model investigation was that of sustained backflow with the pumps operating as turbines. Occur­rence of this type of operation is relatively rare. With the siphon retaining its prime, the sustained backflow would be about 3,700 cfs or about 88 percent of the pumping capacity. The surge formed by this sustained backflow would be nearly identical in form to that ini­tiated by rejection of an equal amount of inflow.

13

If power interruption occurred during turbine operation, the reverse speed of the pumps would be controlled by the siphon and the backflow rate of 3, 700 cfs would continue to prevail. If the siphon breaker actuated and the discharge lines were allowed to drain, the maximum rate of backflow would again be about 3, 700 cfs according to the manu­facturer Is tests.

1, 500-foot Weir between Stations 3+50 and 18+50

The initial tests had indicated that the weir could be reduced in length while still maintaining adequate attenuation. Since Figure 7 indicates that a 1, 500-foot-loJ?.gweirwillproduce a residual surge height of about 1. 2 feet, it was decided to determine the effect of a 1, 500-foot-long weir between Stations 3+50 and 18+50.

A series of tests determined surge characteristics and weir attenuation following (1) complete rejection of maximum discharge with and without backflow. (2) complete rejection of partial discharge with and without backflow, and (3) partial rejection of maximum discharge with and with­out backflow. The initial flow conditions at Station 23+23 were maintained the same as in the tests on the 2, 073-foot weir; thus. the normal water surface was about 7. 2 inches (prototype) below the crest at the down­stream end of the weir. Surge heights, peak heights, and wave velocities for the 1, 500-foot-long weir are summarized in Tables 1 through 5, along with data for no weir which will be described later. Comparison of the residual surge heights at Station 2+85 for rejection of 4, 200 cfs with no backflow indicates that the 1, 500-foot-long weir is nearly as effective as the 2, 073-foot weir for this condition. The largest residual surge at Station 2+85 was 1. 3 feet, with either 150 or 200 percent back­flow; this surge height is considered to be within allowable limits. The 1, 500-foot-long weir was, therefore, recommended for inclusion in the final design.

Figure 10 illustrates the weir attenuation for various values of the Froude number of the canal flow and Figure 11 shows the variation of maximum peak height along the weir following rejection of the maximum inflow. with and without backflow. Figures 10 and 11 actually show both the com­bined attenuating effect of the side weir and the decay of the maximum backflow peak due to instability (illustrated by the solid lines in Figure 11). The unfortunate scatter of data points in Figure 10 is at least partially due to the inability to duplicate the backflow from the manually operated head tanks for all test runs. The experimental data points are compared to corresponding theoretical curves obtained from the solution of Citrini's.!Q/ equation:

10/op. cit.

14

~ i A(yt + 71>2 ( 7 t + 71 - 2c*)J ~7t +y1)(7t + 71 - 2c*)

----.;;==----p[--::--,1---;:;:===0 Y'r +y-1 +A(~ •l)~ ~Y't + l)+ A(y1 - l) l+f(Y'1 - l) j + A(yt + 71)J ½(yt + 71)

in which

Y' 1 = ratio of surge depth to initial depth at downstream end of weir;

Y't = ratio of surge depth to initial depth at upstream end of weir; . Ca

fJ = dimensionless weir discharge coefficient, y'""2g

L = weir length;

J = channel top width;

A = reciprocal of Froude number of initial flow;

c* = ratio of height of spillway crest above channel floor to initial · depth of flow.

The channel top width was taken as the channel width at the elevation of the weir crest. Although the equation was developed for rectangular channels, no attempt was made to modify it for trapezoidal channels because of the length of the equation. Solution of Citrini 's equation is extremely complicated and subject to errors in calculation. A computer program, presented in the appendix to this report, was prepared to facilitate rapid calculation and to obtain a high degree of reliability in the solution.

15

Figure l0A show~ that the experimental data points lie below the theo­retical curve. As mentioned above, this was partially due to the decay of the backflow peaks which would have occurred in the absence of the weir. Also, Citrini 's relationship was intended for use in determining the attenuation of the average surge height. which was not measurable at the upstream end of the model weir because of reflections from the canal turnout. The equation was therefore applied to the maximum peaks, which could be determined in the model.

Figures l0B and C show that as the initial canal velocity decreases, the weir becomes less efficient than indicated by theory. Several points, for probe sections 1 and 2, lie to the left of the limiting asymp­tote and show an increase in the surge height as the wave travels upstream.

Citrini states that the accuracy of the equation deteriorates as i increases, with a maximum error of about 15 percent for i = 10. In the present study i = 11. 84 (based on a symmetrical section) The comparisons of Figure 10 demonstrate that Citrini's relationship allows an estimate of the attenuating effect of the weir, but that the model study was necessary to accurately evaluate the weir performance.

Attenuation and Reflection Characteristics of Canal Structures

Surge waves are partially reflected by changes in shape or cross­sectional area. Data and observations are presented with reference to specific structures in the Forebay Canal and in the reach of the Delta-Mendota Canal included in the model study. Because of the com­plicated configuration of the system, reflections were not followed beyond the initial reflection. Combining of negative (lower than the original water surface) and positive (higher than the original water sur­face) waves of small amplitude resulted in loss of identification of specific waves. A theoretical treatment (with graphical solutions) of the reflection characteristics of channel discontinuities can be found in Favre's classical paperll/. The solutions are relatively complicated and lengthy and will not be further discussed in this report.

Effect of the Angled Transition to the Pumping Plant

The change in cross-sectional area at the upstream end of the tran­sition undoubtedly caused a positive reflection of the initial surge wave resulting in a smaller positive wave traveling back toward the pumping plant. However. the undular form of the wave. with a long train of

11 / "'Etude Theorique et Experimentale des Ondes de Translation dans les Canaux De 'couverts (Theoretical and Experimental Study of Trans­latory Waves in Open Canals)" by Henry Favre, Dunod, Paris, 1935. Translated from French by the Language Service Bureau.

16

oscillations. made this reflection indistinguishable. As the wave was not fully developed upon reaching the upstream end of the transition. the reflection should have been of minor consequence. The angle of the transition had no apparent effect on the angle of propagation of the initial wave through the Forebay Canal. That is, the wave front was perpendicular to the canal centerline, which is contrary to an oblique form which might be expected. The wave seemed to "follow" the centerline through the transition. However, the transition influenced the form by causing a slightly higher wave on the side of the canal opposite the weir. This condition became less pronounced as the wave traveled away from the pumping plant and was barely noticeable by the time the wave reached the weir.

Effect of the Turnout to the Delta-Mendota Canal

As previously described, the initial wave. upon reaching the turnout. was split into three component waves. Surges were propagated both upstream and downstream in the Delta-Mendota Canal and a negative wave was reflected back toward the pumping plant. A series of meas­urements indicated that for rejection of the inflow without backflow a positive surge with a height of approximately 70 percent of the initial peak surge height was propagated upstream in the Delta-Mendota Canal and a positive surge with a height of about 55 percent of the initial surge traveled downstream; the size of the negative wave was indistinguishable because of the undulations following the initial positive wave. With 150-or 2O0-percent backflow. waves with heights of 60 to 65 percent and 35 to 40 percent of the initial surge height traveled upstream and down­stream, respectively.

Effect of the Siphon

The inverted siphon at Delta-Mendota Canal Station 3002+50 removed the peaks of the undulatory wave and flattened the wave front as the wave passed through the siphon barrels. The average height of the wave

. remained unchanged. Reflections from the transition leading to the siphon and from the siphon entrance headwall were indistinguishable.

Effect of the Dead End at Check 13

As predicted by theory (as in Favre's work), the surge height was approximately doubled upon reflecting off the dead end. This condi­tion is applicable equally to positive and negative surges and will con­tinue until the waves are attenuated to a negligible size by friction.

17

Other Observations

It was noted that although the siphon removed the oscillation peaks of the wave, the peaks reformed as the wave continued along the canal beyond the siphon. This observation was also true for small residual waves following splitting at the bifurcation. Curves in the canal aline­ment had no apparent effect on the wave form. The wave front remained perpendicular to the canal centerline.

Surge Propagation in the Forebay Canal without the Side Weir

A series of tests was made with no side weir to more effectively evaluate the effect of the weir. The characteristics of the surge wave as it traveled through the Forebay Canal unattenuated by artificial means were determined. The rejection surge wave height will be reduced by friction; however, in the length of channel under consideration the max­imum oscillation peak increased along the channel as the surge approached full development, Figure 11. The backflow surge, superimposed upon the rejection surge, was attenuated by energy loss due to friction and by a tendency for the initial peak of the wave to deteriorate due to instability; the latter influence was predominant. The backflow surge initially dem­onstrated an increase in size during development, which was followed by a fairly rapid decrease in size, Figure 11. The wave tended to become more stable as it traversed the canal.

In general, test conditions for the 1, 500-foot-long weir were duplicated. The data are summarized in Tables 1 through 5. Without the side weir, data for partial rejection were taken for only 150 percent backflow, which is the assumed operating condition. Data for conditions of no backflow and 200 percent backflow can be estimated from the available data. The tables should be adequate to estimate surge heights and velocities for design purposes.

Observations on the Longitudinal Form of the Surge Wave

The general form of the rejection surge, without backflow from the dis­charge lines, was undular, as observed by many experimenters. It is often assumed that the surge is always of direct form with a level water surface behind the initial front. This premise is, in general, incorrect except for values of h/H greater than approximately 0. 28 12/, for which the wave front becomes unstable and eventually breaks (his the average surge height, H is the initial channel depth). The undular form of the surge wave has been explained by Jones QI as an oscillatory movement

12/ "Mathematical Theory of Irrotational Translation Waves" by G. H. Keulegan and G. W. Patterson, Research Paper RP 1272, Journal of Research, National Bureau of Standards, Vol 24, January 1940. 13/ "Some Observations on the Undular Jump," by L. E. Jones, Journal of the H draulics Division, American Societ of Civil En neers,

ay 1964.

18

caused by the transition between the maximum and average surge heights. Relationships among average surge height, peak height, wave length, and surge velocity are presented in Figures 12 through 16, for the data in Table 1.

Figure 12 illustrates the variation of average surge height, following complete flow rejection, with the Froude number of the canal flow. The experimental data are supported by the accompanying theoretical curve, which was derived from the equations of continuity and momen­tum. The scatter in the data is probably due to slight variations in the initial inflow conditions, since the wave heights at each section were recorded at a different time.

Figure 13 shows the variation of average wave velocity through the canal reach with the Froude number of the canal flow. The accompanying theoretical curve, also derived from continuity and momentum principles, shows theoretical velocities up to 10 percent higher than the measured velocities without the weir, and up to 14 percent higher velocities than those measured with the weir. Measurements of the velocity distribution showed that near the upstream end of the canal transition to the pumping plant, the surface velocity was approximately 25 to 30 percent higher than the average velocity. The theoretical curve is based on the average velocity; therefore, the higher surface velocity could explain the apparent retardation of the surge wave. Figure 13 also demonstrates the effect of the side weir in reducing the velocity of the wave. The effect grows less as the wave velocity increases. The curves tend to a value of F w = 1. 00, which corresponds to the celerity of a gravity wave in still water (F0 = 0).

Figure 14 shows variation in wave length (Lin Figure 12) with wave velocity and illustrates the difference in wave length at two sections in the canal. For any given wave velocity, the wave length apparently increases as the wave is propagated upstream. The difference becomes negligible below a wave Froude number of approximately 0. 87. Sandover and Zienkiewicz14/ observed a decreasing wave length with an increase in wave velocitycontrary to Figure 14, but they hinted that this relation­ship was a function of the distance from the point of initiation of the surge by stating that "Along the length of the channel, however, for one run the wave length increases at first then steadily decreases. " Gentilini I s 12..I data also indicate that the wave length-wave velocity relationship is dependent upon the location of the measuring section. At a section more distant from the origin of the surge, therefore, a plot similar to Figure 14might also show a decreasing wave length for an increasing wave velocity.

14/Op. cit. 15/Op. cit.

19

Perhaps the most important relationship in the study of surges in open channels is demonstrated in Figure 15. Knowledge of the height of the peaks which form above the average surge height is essential to the proper design of canal freebroad requirements. Technical literature shows a wide variation in this relationship, due to the effects of several variables such as: (1) distance of the measuring station from the point of initiation of the surge, (2) methods of experimental measurement, and (3) velocity distribution in the channel before surge propagation. As shown in Figure 15, this study indicated an essentially linear relation­ship with the maximum oscillation peak being approximately 1. 18 times the average surge height. Other investigators have found this ratio to vary from 1. 1 to 2. 0, in rectangular channels.

Backflow from the discharge lines resulted in superimposing a wave of a modified solitary form on the average height of the rejection surge. The height of the backflow surge is a direct function of the maximum rate of backflow discharge. The measured relationship between back­flow surge height and maximum backflow discharge rate is shown in Figure 16. To find the total surge height due to rejection and backflow, the maximum backflow surge height from Figure 16 should be added to the average rejection surge height, h, (exclusive of the oscillatory peaks) from Figure 12. The theoretical curve for the average backflow wave height, developed by continuity and momentum principles, substantiates the experimental data. The experimental maximum curve indicates that the oscillation peaks of the backflow wave are approximately 1. 6 times the average backflow surge height at this particular measuring station.

Longitudinal wave forms following rejection of the maximum discharge with and without backflow are shown in Figure 1 7. The records illus­trate errors, encountered in relying on data from a single measuring section, such as the canal centerline. Differences in surge heights from one side of the channel to the other were nearly indistinguishable for small surges, either with or without the weir. As surge heights increased, particularly with the superimposed backflow surge, the initial peaks exhibited a concave form (lower in the center). The model wave, follow­ing rejection of the maximum discharge with 150 percent backflow, is shown in Figure 18. The breaking edges of the wave are caused by insta­bility due to the lesser depth over the canal side slopes.

The data presented should be applicable to other trapezoidal channels of this relative size and shape. It should be noted, however, that factors such as velocity distribution in the channel, friction, and the ratio of wave height to channel depth affect the formation and propagation of the surge waves.

20

Attenuation of the Rejection Surge by Friction

Friction effects could not be accurately evaluated in the model because of (1) the relatively small scale model which resulted in extremely small changes in wave height, and (2) the uncertainty that the wave had become fully developed at the measuring stations. Sandover and ZieJ)kiewicz16/ state that friction has little effect on the height of the initial peak, affect­ing primarily the troughs and distance between peaks (wave length). A straight prismatic channel, longer than that available for this study. would be necessary to properly evaluate the attenuating effects of friction. Sandover and Zienkiewicz present equations for the change in the undular profile and the attenuation of the oscillatiori peaks. After the oscillation peaks have been dissipated, the viscous damping of the stable wave form can be described by relationships presented by Keulegan.!.'.U. 1!_/.

Summary of Operation of the System Following Rejection of the Maximum Discharge of 4, 200 cfs

The water surface variation at the upstream end of the siphon was meas­ured to determine the maximum depth in the pooled Delta-Mendota Canal downstream from the bifurcation following rejection of the maximum discharge. The maximum water surface was about 1. 6 feet above the pooled water surface approximately 8 minutes (prototype) after initiation of the surge. The difference between 150 and 200 percent backflow was indistinguishable.

Steady conditions. with the entire discharge fl.owing over the weir. occurred about 45 minutes (prototype) after initiation of the surge. At this time, the water surface rise above the normal water surface eleva­tion was approximately 1.1 feet near the downstream end of the 1, 500-foot weir, approximately 1. 2 feet at the upstream end of the Forebay Canal, and about 1. 3 feet in the pooled Delta-Mendota Canal. The dimensions are ref erred to the normal water surface datum at elevation 173. 2 (Forebay Canal datum). and have been corrected for the effeqts of sur­face tension and viscosity.

Development of the Side Weir Crest Shape

Because of the relatively small scale model. the true discharge charac­teristics of the prototype weir were uncertain, -i.e .• the model weir might be either more or less efficient than the prototype weir (excluqing the range in which viscosity and surface tension are known to be impor­tant). Also, it was desired to develop a weir shape that would inhibit

16/~. cit. IT/ Characteristics of the Solitary Wave" by J. W. Daily and S. C. Stephan, Jr. Proceedings. American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 77. Separate No. 107, December 1951. 18/ "Gradual Damping of Solitary Waves" by G. H. Keulegan, Journal of Research, National Bureau of Standards, Vol 40. 1948~

21

spilling due to waves formed by wind during normal operation of the canal and still maintain a satisfactory discharge capacity during emer­gency operation.

A 1:10 scale model of a 25-foot-long section of the weir was installed in a glass-sided flume. Observations of wave reflecting characteristics and measurements of the discharge coefficient were made for various configurations. Tests were first made on the original profile as installed in the 1:48 model. This profile and its approximate discharge coefficient are shown in Figure 19A. The original shape was modified by extending the crest horizontally upstream to provide a 6-inch vertical wall for reflection of wind waves, Figure 19B. This change resulted in a lower discharge coefficient and inadequate discharge capacity.

The profile was further modified in an attempt to increase the discharge coefficient by including a 12-inch-wide notch at the normal canal water surface. which is 6 inches below the weir crest. This modification pro­vided a vertical face for reflection of waves but did not significantly alter the original crest shape. The profile and its coefficients are shown in Figure 20. Impingement of the flow on the upper portion of the vertical face was observed which could result in increased eddy losses and a reduced coefficient. The notch was therefore widened to 15 inches in an effort to aleviate this condition. The corresponding coefficients. Fig­ure 20. show an improvement for heads below about 2 feet. Flow over the weir is shown in Figure 21 and the wave reflecting capabilities are demonstrated in Figure 22. This profile was recommended for inclusion in the final design. It must be noted that the discharge coefficients were measured under steady-state conditions •. with stable heads. When the weir operates during passage of a surge wave, the vertical component of velocity should result in higher coefficients than those presented.

The coefficient of 3. 2 for the preliminarurofile of Figure 18 corresponds to a dimensionless coefficient (Cw= Cd/~ 2g) of approximately 0.4. The head of 1 foot (prototype) r~presents a Reynolds number of about 1, 420 and a Weber number of about 5. 4. From Figure 8, these values corre­spond to a dimensionless coefficient of approximately O. 38. These cal­culations show that for a head of 1 foot (prototype). the 1:48 weir and the 1: 10 weir exhibit essentially the same discharge coefficient. suggest­ing that data from the 1:48 weir are reliable above the critical head of about O. 77 foot (prototype).

Details of the Recommended Design .

The construction details of the recommended design are shown in Fig­ures 23 through 26. Figure 23 exhibits the general configuration of the overflow weir and accompanying structures. The weir shape is shown in Figure 24. The elevation of the weir crest was raised O. 1 foot (pro­totype) above the crest elevation used in the model tests. This difference

22

corresponds to only 0. 002 foot in the model and should have no significant effect on the test results, except for the condition of sustained weir over­flow. It can be assumed that water surface elevations for this condition would b'e 0. 1 foot (prototype) higher than those indicated by the model. During discharge over the weir, the flow is accumulated in an unlined basin, then discharged down a baffled apron drop, Figure 25, into a wasteway. The wasteway passes under the Delta-Mendota Canal, as shown in the general plan, Figure 2. The alinement of the Delta­Mendota Canal with sections showing the height of concrete lining is also indicated in Figure 26. After the model studies were completed, the alinement of the Delta-Mendota Canal was revised to permit the abandon­ment of San Luis siphon and allow Forebay wasteway to be passed under the canal.

METRIC EQUIVALENTS

Metric equivalents of important quantities referred to in this report are listed in Table 6.

23

t,:) .i:,..

Table 1

COMPLETE REJECTION OF FLOW TO SIX PUMPS, THREE PUMPS, AND ONE PUMP. NO BACKFLOW

.No weir 1, 500-ft side weir Ave Ave Ave

Inflow Rejection Backflow Probe Probe surge Peak surge Probe Probe surge Peak cfs cfs cfs · Station Section height height velocity Station Section height height

1 1. 63 1. 92 1 1.54 1.72 12+90 2 1. 54 1. 54 · 18+66 2 1.54 1. 87

3 1. 54 1. 73 3 1.54 1. 87 4,200 4,200 0 1 - 1. 92 19.1 1 - 1.08

2+85 2 - 1. 54 2+85 2 - 0.87 3 - 1. 92 3 - 1.01

1 o. 72 0.72 1 0.96 1.01 12+90 2 0.62 0.62 18+66 2 - 0.86

3 0.77 0.77 3 0.96 1. 10 2,100 2,100 0 1 - 0.77 19.4 1 - 0.96

2+85 2 - 0.48 2+85 2 - 1. 15 3 - 0.67 3 - 0.96

1 0.34 0.34 1 - 0.19 12+90 2 0.29 0.34 18+66 2 - 0.38

3 0.34 0.34 3 - 0.19 700 700 0 1 - 0.29 19.6 1 - 0.38

2+85 2 - o. 19 2+85 2 - 0.34 3 - 0.19 3 - 0.19

Surge heights are tn prototype feet. Surge velocities are in prototype feet per second.

Ave surge

velocity

18.3

18.9

19.5

Blank ·spaces ( - ) indicate that surge height could not be accurately determined because of small amplitude or interference by reflections.

Initial depth was 15. 08 feet at Sta. 2+50. See Figure l 7 for locations of probe sections.

t-:1 (JI

Table 2

COMPLETE REJECTION OF FLOW TO SIX PUMPS, THREE PUMPS, AND ONE PUMP, 150 PERCENT BACKFLOW

No weir 1, 500-ft side weir Ave Ave Ave

Inflow Rejection Backfl.ow Probe Probe surge Peak surge Probe Probe surge Peak cfs cfs cfs Station Section height height velocity Station Section height height

1 1. 63 3.50 1 1.54 4.48 12+90 · 2 1. 54 3.65 18+66 2 1. 54 4.02

3 1. 54 3.55 3 1. 54 4.61 4,200 4,200 6,300 1 - 3.15 20.7 1 - 1. 34

2+85 2 - 3.10 2+85 2 - 1.20 3 - 2.90 3 - 1. 34

1 0.72 2.11 1 0.96 2.26 12+90 2 0.62 1. 92 18+66 2 - 2.26

3 0.77 2.11 3 0.96 2.40 2,100 2,100 3,150 1 - 2.02 20.0 1 - 1. 30

2+85 2 - 1. 78 2+85 2 - 1. 44 3 - 1. 92 3 - 1. 34

1 0.34 0.77 1 - 0.77 12+90 2 0.29 0.63 18+66 2 - 0.67

3 0.34 0.77 3 - 0.91 700 700 1,050 1 - 0.72 19.8 1 - 0.67

2+85 2 - 0.63 2+85 2 - 0.86 3 - 0.72 3 - 0.86

See notes on Table 1.

Ave surge

velocity

• 20.4

20.1

20.0

I.\:) a.,

Table 3

COMPLETE REJECTION OF FLOW TO SIX PUMPS, THREE PUMPS, AND ONE PUMP, 200 PERCENT BACKFLOW

No weir 1, 500-ft side weir Ave Ave Ave

Inflow Rejection Backfl.ow Probe Probe surge Peak surge Probe Probe surge Peak cfs cfs cfs Station Section height height velocity Station Section height height

1 1. 63 4.50 1 1. 54 5.47 12+90 2 1. 54 5.20 18+66 2 1.54 4.90

3 1. 54 5.00 3 1. 54 5.57 4,200 4,200 8,400 1 - 4.03 20.7 1 - 1. 34

2+85 2 - 3.80 2+85 2 - 1. 20 3 - 4.03 3 - 1. 34

1 1 0.96 I

2.83 12+90 2 18+66 2 - 2.54

3 No 3 0.96 2.98 2,100 2,100 4,200 1 1 - 1. 34

2+85 2 2+85 2 - 1.15 3 data 3 - 1.44

1 1 - 0.96 12+90 2 taken 18+66 2 - 0.77

3 3 - 0.96 700 700 1,400 1 1 - 0.86

2+85 2 2+85 2 - 1.15 3 3 - 1.01

See notes on Table 1.

Ave surge

velocity

20.1

20.5

20.2

N -:i

Table 4

REJECTION OF FLOW TO THREE PUMPS WITH SIX PUMPS OPERATING NO BACKFLOW, 150 PERCENT BACKFLOW, AND

200 PERCENT BACKFLOW No weir 1, 500-ft side weir

Inflow Rejection . Backflow cfs cfs cfs

4,200 2,100 0

4,200 2,100 3,150

4,200 2,100 4,200

*Probes at centerline only. See notes on Table 1.

Probe ·station

12+96

2+23

12+96

2+23

12+96

2+23

· Ave Probe surge Section height

1 2 3 1 2 3

1 2 *0.96 3 1 2 -3

1 2 3 1 2 3

Ave Ave Peak surge Probe Probe surge Peak height velocity Station Section height height

1 0.82 0.96 No 18+66 2 0.91 1. 15

3 0.86 1. 01 data 1 - 0.77

2+85 2 - 0.62 taken 3 - 0.72

1 0.82 2.50 *2.63 18+66 2 0.91 2.16

3 0.86 2.64 19.9 1 - 1.06

*2.27 2+85 2 - 0.82 3 - 1.01

1 0.82 3.02 18+66 2 0.91 2.83

No 3 0.86 3.22 1 - 1. 25

data 2+85 2 - 1.06 3 - 1. 30

taken

Ave surge

velocity

17.7

19.0

19.0

~ 00

Table 5

REJECTION OF FLOW TO ONE PUMP WITH SIX PUMPS OPERATING NO BACKFLOW, 150 PERCENT BACKFLOW, AND

200 PERCENT BACKFLOW No weir 1, 500-ft side weir

I Ave Ave I

Inflow Rejection Backflow Probe Probe surge Peak surge Probe Probe cfs cfs cfs Station Section height height velocity Station Section

1 1 12+96 2 No 18+66 2

3 data. 3 4,200 700 0 1 taken** 1

2+23 2 2+85 2 3 3

1 1 12+96 2 - *1.18 18+66 2

3 3 4,200 700 1,050 1 18.0 1

2+23 2 - *0.73 2+85 2 3 3

1 1 12+96 2 No 18+66 2

3 data 3 4,200 700 1,400 1 taken 1

2+23 2 2+85 2 I 3 3

*Probes at centerline only. **Should be identical to data for 1, 500-ft weir since peaks are below weir crest. See notes on Table 1.

Ave surge: Peak height height

- 0.38 - 0.34 - 0.29 - 0.43 - 0.34 - 0.24

- o .. 96 - 0.72 - 0.91 - 0.77 - 0.77 - 0.77

- 0.96 - 0.82 - 1. 06 - 0.77 - 0.91 - 0.77

Ave surge

velocity

17.0

17.8

17.7

N co

Table 6

METRIC EQUIVALENTS OF IMPORTANT QUANTITIES

Bottom width of Forebay Canal Flow depth in Forebay Canal Maximum pumping plant capacity Length of preliminary side weir Length of recommended side weir Peak surge height following

rejection of maximum dis­charge (1)

Peak surge height with 150 percent backflow (2)

Peak surge height with 200 percent backflow (3)

Average surge velocity for (1) Average surge velocity for ( 2) and (3) Average surge height for (1).

(2). and (3)

80 feet 15 feet

4. 200 cubic feet per second 2, 073 feet 1. 500 feet

1. 9 feet

4. 5 feet

5. 4 feet

19. 1 feet per second 20. 7 feet per second

1. 5 feet

24. 4 meters 4. 6 meters

118. 9 cubic meters per second 631. 9 meters 457. 2 meters

0. 58 meters

1. 37 meters

1. 65 meters

5. 82 meters per second 6. 31 meters per second 0.46 meters

, SAN LUIS CANAL-/

KEY MAP

10

FIGURE I REPORT HYD-546

10 20

SCALE OF MILES

UNIT£0 STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE !Nl"t...fdOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

>O

WEST SAN JOAQUIN AND DCLTA DIVISIONS-CALIF"ORNIA

F'OREBAY CANAL AND WASTEWAY AND

DELTA-MENDOTA CANAL MODIFICATIONS MILE 69.25 TO MILE 70.04

LOCATION MAP

DRAWN ___ 9._s..:~:.-- --- sueMITTIEQ ____ (l!_#l _~~ _____ ------r,.ACl!!D- ----- - - --- Rl!COMMENDIED- .a/~ ., ____ _ CHl&CKl!O?f.f1J~~~-APPROVl!'D- _.J i_,.

• Ol!NVtrR, COLORADO lll!PT. 22 0 1884 805 - D -2605

N2!9,000

N

N217,000

j-0 0

0 <t <D

.;

+

T

€ SAN

~ I I 0 .._ I v, WATER TANK i: ,.. _,1 :.

\ ,--~ ACCESS ROAD '<> _, c;l<0 ci. "<' ,,.. ~ ,~

' ' ,: c,:"' - ;;,~~ \

>::1:,._,_ ~,,: ~. -loo~ "'",uo: -.,o - ~lo:"'" ' ;:a:, D ,q; <q ,-' q \ :,I<.,;..~ , c,a, 0, C, O le It C 0

,cl I!'! .:.;..;,~~ "':o: . o \ g1~ ~~ ,, .·,\,,.,_,~:, •,-. , "" ·1,,E ., // "L~-t-4,t::110 a:,,~ \:;::lll..~t

'o.,., 'ua, -, ~ ,.I:,;-""

Lu-~------l_ ----:._, \!18~ I • ', ',;l,182.4 ::ct,\\ I

; '' ,( ... _...J\ I

100

SCALE OF FEET

~-' ,-£ FOREBAY CANAL

',· --\ _., -f-r "f '\

I \.

\ I\

\

,~Ef.175.0 / / __..-- r7 !I

--; N 2 I 7, 8 4 7. 7 3 / ,._E 1,841,969.09

·. \ IT~/;\

'i I

\

*\

/6"UNIQN OIL LINE __ / \

Existing San Luis _,-\-----~ Creek Drain--~- \

-r- \ \ \ ~"'-,

"'"" "'"' ,,, "'"'

,is .. ,.: "' I~ C, ,.,, ii:

11 I~ .:1 i:ic:10 ; ,-~~:~ 01011.u ~I : O,...;I:::,.

~)o: ~~lo ,,..,, l't')l't')I~

. , .. ~~

) I

+ : ',

DEL TA MENDOTA CANAL

'-,, ·+J-"'"' .... /

---~,98

f ' .... Co'-, ,e,>

~-+-/ 4-r19-.:~s oe(~:,,,,..,, "'c,::-!',<e "s

O,:,,S,,O • .

'$,,

+I <?,9 P.l.2992+90.70 ,9~:/.,,. P.C.2991+93.43

'--'9~(. /4- s_,_ P.T.2993+84.26

f -, 0 c4°.,,,'R'.)' L1 "'27°20'07.5"Lr. --- '>QC: T=97.27'

---;-------:::.,. 4' L=/90.83' R "400. oo'

,,, "

--(-- -----Existing Delta Mendota Canal and San Luis Siphon to bs abandoned. Back fill to slop8s as shown and remove concr8te in Siphon transition and canal lining ta1.o'below finished ground surface.

I 7 0-­

,,---- 16!1 -

CROSSING

P. I. 46 t-50 .86 P.C.44+79.23 P. T. = 48 + l3.56F.W.= I 2 + 8 9. 9 I $. L. W. '3 = 31°5 5'.3 4" T = 171.63' L = 334 . .33' R ~ 600. oo'

.------ ,,,-

------------__________...

/i\~ ,,/ -------- -1/

,.o -, -~' t ...--/ , ,10

-- 't>-\ -+ ------- 1 6 0 --~-----~ C"),-___.-: -- ~:.-:-.,,;;::::>--

~~ : , .. . . " - c;f/~', :Jft'! ~ ~ "--'i_, :' c?~~ ' !(( ,_ >_":C~,.o

- S•~- STA 40+471 ';,'•~ \~_.:::>- ,,, -:::::--,.._~. ~·:c·- _____ _,.,-, - .- ". ----------- -----~· __ ~ ' 2 6 ~. . -~ - cc---- ,., '-.i-~50·:o

"--~ Remove existing! J

timber bridg/

,, ... Extend existing 2.5'x2'.s• 1 concrefe~ culvert.

__) --. , ..

--- ~1 ~-- Govt. storage / ./ .,'.":~/ ~o·ao ,10 ,::-

~~ .,.~,~-u~

P. I. 3011+69.9B'-..._ P.C. 3009 +16.63-... EQUATION P.T. 30/3+68.3/BK.= 3016 + .30.04AH. A= 64°41

1!54

11LT.

T" 2 !5 3. 3 5' L=451.68' R=400.00'

··:_>/~"o~ (), ,.., . ~

h;\,, '<,~ ~;_.'<~--_-.... __ ,ti;-:.__

,~1/~ '34

,,,

'Bo ,.,_o·

,1'>¼

~',JI 0

C) '-, I k ct, u,.),,,

,/"~~,': C\, "-,'Q

0 o~-J h;\u/O ,.,

, - . ~__:.·~·-N 7_~_:__o.4~-- -- o--~~~Y~:-----

------=-~ - ,--~- '~------)

~

0 . '~

•s, , ..

,.,..Jt,J'

"(~-:N LU _.-----~ IS WASTE WAY

I

"°

F~URE2 REPORTHYD~46

NOTES California Coordinate System, Zane No.3. Elevations shown are based on San Luis Datum. Elevations refer tainvert,unless otherwise

REFERENCE DRAWINGS

shown.

FOREBAY CANAL ________ _ ___________ _ 805-o-2607

FORE BAY WASTEWAY- - - -DELTA MENOaTA CANAL

__ 805-0-2614

MODIFICATIONS Ml.69.25 TO Ml.70.04-- ___ _

UNION OIL COMPANY CRDSSING _____ 8O5-O-2793,2794,2795

CHANGED STATIONING, CURVE OATA ANO BEARINGS TO AGREE WITH REVISED FIELD DATA. CONSTRUCT/ON ENGINEER'S LETTERS /-11-6!5 3-1,-6!5.

(f) ALWAYS nunK SAfETV UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OFT HE INTERIOR BURE AU OF RECLAMATION

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIV. SAN LUIS UNIT-CALIFORNIA

FOREBAY CANAL AND WASTEWAY

GENERAL PLAN

~·-'-Y:~·- ___ sutJMITTED---~-"-~~~

TRACED __ ~-- Y~ ?: __ __ REOOMMENDEQ_(J;?J-...~ ____ - - - --

OHE CKED -~ _ ____ APPROVED ____ o .. .:r_~---------c,.,,w,,. ow.,r,NtNO WNIJINWW"

"' ;,-7-;;..S REvisED ro AGREE w1TH DRAWING 805-2.36-1986. DENVER. ooLoRAoo.sEPr.2a.,..... 805-0·2606

697

Slide gate (Check 13)

I', I '-I ,

'- \ ''-\ \

\ \

( \\ \ \ \ \

\ \ \ -~\ \ \

\ \ \ \

\ ' \

\\\\ \ \ \ \

\ \

\ \ \ 'y< "\<\ Prototype alinement

\ \\\ Forebay canal

ID

--<7

\ \ \ \

\ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ (

J

\

" ' '-

· .. Delta-Mendota canal

--Delta-Mendota canal

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

LENGTH SCALE !N FEET {PROTOTYPE)

Pumping plant intakes.

-<

--<J ID

4 ;,"-...

-~ ....... ~~ c.§'

---Laboratory al,nement Forebay canal

MODEL PLAN

Top of prototype canal lining -

-/'---,__ <ri

;,' 1½ I ,- N.W.S f . ----=-----------:_ A

co

~

I foe,.., """"' ,

r-------~

C-' I 1,.1-

'!:

-L - - -- - - - - - - - - - -~-----~-__, ___ __, ____ ~

,--Supply head box

' ' ' ' I ~- - - - - - - - - - - 80. 0 - - - - - - - - - - ~

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LENGTH SCALE IN FEET (PROTOTYPE)

SECTION A-A

--1 ½: I

Top of prototype canal lining---- -, -t'--

"' ,__

~

/See Detail A

J --- - - -- - -- - - ---~-------~

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I: 48 SCALE MODEL

LABORATORY MODEL PLAN

:-::------ 48.o' -- ----::--:

SECT ION B-B

-4.0 1- ~ -g

' I - - - - - -~ - L -

, I' , f-l I I ' 2 I

1

2

:1-- 30R---; ·X -16Y --;,-_, ' ' 0 i ~

____ j

012345678910

LENGTH SCALE IN FEET {PROTOTYPE)

DETAIL A

I~ 1--

FIGURE 3 REPORT HYD-546

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

1:48 Scale Model

Model Configuration

~ 1-:1:j (1) ....

"tj ~ 0 11 l (1)

til ~ <.< 0.. I

CTI ~ 0)

Figure 5 Report Hyd-546

A. Wave probe and recorder B. Capacitance wave probe

C. Oscillograph recording of wave forms

SAN LUIS FOREBA Y CANAL SURGE STUDIES

1:48 Scale Model

Model Instrumentation

SAN LUIS FOREBA Y CAN AL SURGE STUDIES

1=48 Scale Model

Backflow Device

Figure 6 Report Hyd-546

697

IJJ a. IJJ >o I- <( 2 OIL I- a:: o=> :::(/) ._ a:: I- IJJ IJJ !;i ~:i': I

z...J -<(

::E ... 0: :co C>Z

IJJ IJJ :c > 0

0 IIJ ID C) <( 0: ::> (/)

---- Corrected for surface tension and viscosity.

I~

I 0

23t23

~------

500 1000 1500

DISTANCE ALONG WEIR IN FEET ( PROTOTYPE )

18+23 13+23 8+23

FOREBAY CANAL PROTOTYPE STATIONS

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

ATTENUATING EFFECT OF 2073-FOOT-LONG WEIR ON SURGE CAUSED BY COMPLETE

REJECTION OF 4200 CFS

-

2073

2+50

::0 111 ,, 0 'Tl ::0 ---1 G)

C :I: :::0 ;; IT1

I -.j 01

"" (Jl

FIGURE 8 REPORT HYO- 546

0.6....--......---.-----,---..---........ --....------,----,

~

Cvf Dimensionless coeff of discharge

a, 0.51----4---1-------1----1-----+--4-----!--~ Q = Total discharge over weir "'

~" :J 0.41----+---l----+:-""'oo::::::--+---+---+----l--=---I

L = Weir length hw= Head on weir g = Gravity ......

0

II 0.3 t----+---t---__._--~-+-+--4-----t----f

R = Reynolds number p = Mass density µ. = Dynamic vi scosify W = Weber number " 0

~

0.6

0 0.5 C\I

t" z; 0.4 ...J ...... 0 II 0.3

" 0

697

h~0.017 ft.--I

J

(J= Surface tension 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

R = h~2 g 112 p/µ.

A. EFFECT OF VISCOSITY

~~o 0

~0 0 -

~~

' ' ', ',h z0.015 ft.

2 3

W=pgh!/a-

4

8. EFFECT OF SURFACE TENSION

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

EFFECTS OF VISCOSITY AND SURFACE TENSION ON WEIR DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT

~

5 6

697

lLI iL lLI >-o I- <l 2 .----r-------"""T""-------...... --------.---------....---. 011.. I- a:: 0::::, fen

-a:: I I f I C I I I ~~ I - : \,

z-' '--WITHOUT WETTING AGENT -<l

... --WITH WETTING AGE NT

::E I- a:: :co C>Z

lLI lLI :::c> o o.__ _ __.1-______ ......_ _______ ..__ ______ ....._ ________ ...___.

lLI ID O 500 1000 1500 2073 (!) <l ~ DISTANCE ALONG WEIR IN FEET ( PROTOTYPE ) en

23t23 18t23 13+23 81-23

FOREBAY CANAL PROTOTYPE STATIONS

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

EFFECT OF WETTING AGENT ON ATTENUATING ABILITY OF WEIR FOR SURGE CAUSED BY

COMPLETE REJECTION OF 4200 CFS

2+50

'Tl

Ci)

C ~ ITI

0 1.10 . ..-----,-----r------,---7 "' + .., .., t-!? 1.08 a: i,j 3' ....

10 ...

~ l.061--~-4---.-.---1------t-------i z .... ::E .., .... a: ~ 1.041-~';__a_--!-----l------t-------i Q. :::, ,_ ..,

!11.02 NO ;:c .c

~ 1.o~.00 1.10 1.20 1.30

YL = hg,~~ +Ho AT OOWNSTRUM

ENO OF WEIR (STA.18 +501

A. INFLOW OF 4200 C.F.S. Fo = 0.123

NOTES Theoretical curve3 ore derived frcm Citrin is equation

(See Appendix to this report) .• for a weir discharge coefficient of 3.5.

e, A,• Probe Section I (See figure 17) o, "· a Probe Section 2 0, A, 121 Pro be Section 3

Ho . = Initial canal depth (Figure 12) hmax = Height af maximum surge peak

above initial con a I depth.

1AO

>

1.10 6

1.08 >----+-+---_.,..~>-----+-----<

1.06 >---+~<+-----+-----+-----<

> 1.04 .__.,__-+-----+-----+-----<

1.02 Hf-----+----+-----+------1

1.00~---~----~---~---~ 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40

YL

1.10

I.OB

1.06

1.04

1.02

1.10

/

1.20

YL

/

1.30

8. INFLOW OF 2100 C.F.S. C. INFLOW OF 700 C.F.S. Fo = 0.062

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

Fo = 0.021

1.40

Fo = Froude number of initial flow. ATTENUATION OF MAXIMUM PEAKS BY 1500-FOOT LONG SIDE WEIR

~ m ~ 0~

- ~~ ~c ~~ ~m c­,o m ~ m

laJ A. 6 >-... 0 ... 0 5 a:: A. --... laJ 4 laJ IL

I ~

3 ct laJ A.

laJ 2 C> 0:: :::, Cl)

::::E :::, ::::E X ct 0 ::::E

697

--- Without side weir ---- With side weir

I I I ~ ~ ,-REJECTION OF 4200 CFS WITH 8400 CFS BACKFLOW

" ~ ... ..... , ....... lf----~ ~ '·

~ ~ ....... ~~ ~

.............. ' <.._REJECTION OF 4200 CFS ....... ....._ WITH 6300 CFS BACKFLOW

....... ....... _

--- tf ~- .. ~-._ ___ ~ REJECTION OF 4200 CFS WITHOUT BACKFLOW-£ ~----- -----

23+45

--20+00 15+00 10+00 5+00 2+50

~--------- SIDE WEIR--------->i

FOREBAY CANAL STATIONS

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES I : 48 SCALE MODEL

VARIATION OF MAXIMUM PEAK ALONG CHANNEL WITH AND WITHOUT SIDE WEIR

I~ "Tl 0-::u Ci)

-tc ::c :;o -< ITI 0 1-ui-

~ en

~10 + :I: ~

697

1.12 ,-----,r--------r------,------

1.08

1;04

I I A A

1.oolLl 0 0.02

!t'

Vw

h r------------1 I I Ho

• Sta. 18+66 DEFINITION SKETCH

• Sta. 12+90

0.06 0.10 0.14

Vo Fo -= v' gHo

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

VARIATION OF AVERAGE SURGE HEIGHT WITH FROUDE NUMBER OF INITIAL FLOW

-Vo -~-

:u m "V ,, o­:u Ci) -I C:

::0 ::c fTI -< .• 0 ·~ (JI

~ a,

>'1~ II

0 LL

697

0.16 .------r----.--------,-----:r---7

\ 0.12' 'I!

0.08

I

0.04

I

I •

\ A

THEORETICAL-

• With 1500 ft. weir & Without weir

o-----------....._ ____ __,_ __________ _ 0.80 0.84 0.88

Fw

0.92

Vw = -v'g Ho

0.96

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE. STUDIES I : 48 SCALE MODEL

1.00

VARIATION OF AVERAGE SURGE VELOCITY WITH FROUDE NUMBER OF INITIAL FLOW

See Definition Sketch in Figure 12.

:a 111 ,, .,, o­::0 Ci)

-IC:

:c :::0 -<ITI o· I_,

UI (1,1

• a,

_JI~

697

14

12

10

FIGURE 14 REPORT HVD-546

.v ./

8 .,__ __ ....,,,-:::..--+------+------t------t---------t

• Sta. 12+ 90

• Sta. 18 + 66

6.__ ____ ...._ ____ ...._ ____ .,__ ____ .,__ ___ ---,1

0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.90

Fw =

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

VARIATION OF FIRST WAVE LENGTH WITH WAVE VELOCITY

See definition sketch in Figure 12.

·•

FIGURE 15 •REPORT HYD-546

697

0.16 ----------------------------

0.12 t------t---------,t----------,1-----,.-----,1---------1

'<),: • ,to ~o

i,l ,. ~"\. 'I) ------~~Zo, ________ ----1

o.oe V~"'.

• • Sta.12+90 • Sta. 18 + 66

0.04 0.08 0.12

h max. Ho

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 48 SCALE MODEL

AVERAGE SURGE HEIGHT -MAXIMUM PEAK RELATIONSHIP

0.16 0.20

See definition sketch in Figure 12.

O> co ..,,

-l&J Q. >-b 5 ,,,,,,"" b 8: .... 41 I .,_ I I l&J I I l&J I I IL . ,,_ I

, 31 I I .,_ I I ~ I I :1,u:: I - . I

~2r-~--+--L i_ i

l&J C!) a:: ::::, Cl)

3 9 "- 0 g o)-::::~::~-::j--}---;~-~,---l--1-I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

MAXIMUM BACKFLOW DISCHARGE RATE - THOUSANDS OF CFS

10

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES I : 48 SCALE MODEL

VARIATION OF BACKFLOW SURGE HEIGHT WITH BACKFLOW DISCHARGE RATE

NOTES Backflow surge heights measured

above average height of rejection surge.

o • Full rejection of 4200 cfs inf low t. & Full rejection of 2100 cfs inflow Measured at Sta. 18 + 66 on left

side looking downstream.

:::u 111 "ti "Tl o­:::u Ci)

-iC ::0

Xl"Tl -< 0

'en UI ~ O>

Figure 17 Report Hyd-546 ~I :;:.

Cl)

80 FT. 24.4M.

ii u, Ill

MEASURING SECTIONS LOOKING DOWNSTREAM

WEIR SIDE

ENGLISH UNITS ,~~~~--.---r--~ METR·,C UNITS

£ Q:j ._ !liftttttH i !I l l+f 3 t I I t !ITT"i~fffffi t ~ SECTION I 4200 CFS INFLOW SECTION I 118.9 CMS INFLOW SECTION 1 2 2,.....,..,.,...,,,,.,.,r==-::r--=-=-i 4200 CFS REJECTED 2,........,--,---,-"""T'"-,--,---,--, 118.9 CMS REJECTED 2.--,~~~--.---r--~

~ Cl5j i ~i;rrrtrm NO BACKFLOW ~1 1 1_ r 1 1 1 1 1 NO BACKFLOW ~l/tJvl '1 + f 1 1 ~ ~ SECTION 2 SECTION 2 SECTION 2

i 0·5j ~ ~llrtITt I t j ~I H-Q + F I I ~l/'r,~51 tH O OO 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BO °so 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 080 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

Time in Prototype Seconds Time in Proto.type_ Seconds Time in Prototype Seconds SECTION 3 SECTION 3 SECTION 3

. ~~ llAWII !la-EAtil-+Hl ~00¥.J.I li +- SECTION I 4200 CFS INFLOW SECTION I 118.9 CMS INFLOW SECTION I ; ·:l! :

1

~ ~ .:gg m mm~ ,........,--,---,-"""T'"~....-.......... N::; g~: ::~:g~~ ~ Q:j ~ !i ~~~~ !k+0 fdd I I I I !W#uJ J+J4~ ~ ~;~ k llnittu :1n ;:~-R !~~fflt~

O 0o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 ~ 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 °80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Time in Prototype Seconds Time in Prototype Seconds Time in Prototype Seconds

SECTION 3 SECTION 3 SECTION 3

1.5~ :ffiEEEE , •:j iff™ ll ,'{,~ Wi1J-J4Ml

,. +- SECTION I 4200 CFS INFLOW SECTION I 118.9 CMS INFLOW SECTION I ._ 11 6- 4200 CFS REJECTED 118.9 CMS REJECTED ! 1.5~ ~ 5 8400 CFS BACKFLOW 237.7 CMS BACKFLOW

i~j f j LtFt;H fl-3 ~j f a.. SECTION 2 SECTION 2 SECTION 2 ~::~ !Ill

O OO 10 20 30 40. 50 60 70 BO Time In Prototype Seconds

SECTION 3

STA. 18+66

~I .rt#f FR °ro 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Time in Prototype Seconds

SECTION 3

STA. 2+8!5

1!500-FOOi WEIR BETWEEN STA. 3+!50 AND STA. 18+!50

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES 1 :48 Scale Model

Longitudinal Wave Forms

~rJrffi+J °so 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Time in Prototype Seconds

SECTION 3

STA. 2+85

WITHOUT WEIR

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE. STUDIES

1:48 Scale Model

Surge Wave for Rejection of 4,200 cfs Plus Backflow of 6. 300 cf s

Note breaking leading edges

Figure 18 Report Hyd-546

0 I

2 3 4 5 I I I I

SCALE IN FEET ( PROTOTYPE )

697

'\ '\

'\

R = 3ft.

PRELIMINARY WEIR CREST Ci> ~ 3.2 at H = 1.0 ft.

PRELIMINARY CREST WITH 6 - INCH WAVE SCUPPER

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES I : 10 SCALE MODEL

Co,-, 2.9 at H = 1.0 ft.

DEVELOPMENT OF SIDE WEIR PROFILE SHAPE PRELIMINARY DESIGNS

::u fTI "11 'Tl o­::u G)

~c :I: ::0 -< rTI 0 I -

UI CD

• en

Figure 21 Report Hyd-546

A. hw=~. 0 foot.

B. hw = 3. 0 feet.

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

1: 1 O Scale Model

Flow Over Recommended Weir Profile

3.8

3.7

3.6 UJ (!) It:

--- <( 3.5 l: 0 (/)

O 3.4 I.L 0

~ 33 z . UJ

0 U:: 3.2 I.L UJ 0

.o 3.1

3.0

2.9 0

697

Note: 15-inch notch is included in the final design.

I 12 In. or 15· in. l!! _i!I. I x • • -9Y -, re-------~ -- J T-1---------t ... , I -

6 . I m. 1 I 1 i I I

' I I

2 9 J X = - 2 Y-

RECOMMENDED WEIR CRE.ST

2 3 4

HEAD ON WEIR CREST - FEET ( PROTOTYPE )

SAN LUIS FOREBAY CANAL SURGE STUDIES

I : 10 SCALE MODEL

DEVELOPMENT OF SIDE WEIR PROFILE SHAPE RECOMMENDED DESIGN

::o · m "D "Tl o­::0 G')

-I C:

:::c ::u -< ~ 0 I I\).

(JI 0 ~ CJ)

SAN LUIS FOREBA Y CANAL SURGE STUDIES

1: 1 O Scale Model

Waves Impinging on Recommended Weir Profile

Figure 22 Report Hyd-546

->--12'-J..!..//~-I 2.. I

-4o'-si." - -- - - ~- -

#4 @sj"Verf,'col Spc.( ·ri,· '6-~---- -- , _-~ 1 - 4 ~"'S .f,, v~rf-,"col .spa ... :n,

/ iliFJ ~r5§ r

-ii 4 @?_:f vn-f;co) !:p :r-' :t4 c- ."' -,-t;, ~, .5;-ci. ;_._ -,::1' JH - ---><

/ ' L,L_' , ' / . '

'o / ,._ - ,El. /6f!,f;!O / ,, , ~ ,,,7 _o7,rf rti..tj?· 5' / / O,,r5 77/ /I' #' - 0) , /)( / ,/ i O ' ' ,+ ' w--' -fi

, ' ,' ',' ' ""' ,,, , , , ' , , ' , ' , '

:>o'-1oj''

TQf ,:,+ bcir1k ... f

£1./75 .•

FIGURE 25 REPORT HYD-546

' .. ....,

C,.,";Q;Y

:..1+ ~I,, ,,.- - ,z''A,prc.p en G"f,, )_/i'tH : Jr

,' /7') f,.1~,.1 zo' N'yo" I _,tr: /1., 1 <2. t- --f)

/ ,, f ' -/ ' ' ' ' ' , ,,, , . ' ' '' °'"'· ',, , ,,,, " ' ' - • , .,,

O

,•, / /\_-, ' ' _ _,, _..,_ - - - -- - - ·-------·:-·----~ _ _L________ r_''F·Jlet n . - hur5 ,, ha1/,; ,/ 1,~~ .,'-, t,'co,f­

" /,/ ( • , T ,. ' '" , ,, ,~ "1l:lttlfl' , ,, ,'b ~-/ \ , / , ., - - ,~ - -7~ ·· I I - ---".--- _J ,,Level I , , J.'.' ~- • - '

/ / / ' .'-0 / I ·' ? ~-~~~-~~- f r-'--4-4--'.'"1 ~>I--.....

/• / \ __.___.L, I • ---· 'C) >' -~=--- -• '-- -~~,________,_,-, ~------~..,. ..,........_ -~- ,"' t ,- - -;-...._ _'.' 01-"

/·-.:~ Worpvndormiy\ ~ ---- -,----- ____________ -, 0 ~ -r-- ~=~-•r~-· · ____,..,......-,~~--,,,1'8 .1 -i--~+--~ "--~ / />' •row,Z'Jtovert)x , •, ' , ____ : ~-• '-:'---,.--- 't , ·--=~~~-~~;~-"'--~ -~::;;,,J'J~•,.,,_.,, T-{''_J-

,( / , , , ' ,~ ---- I, R,p-p ,j ,,,., ' ',,' -- ' -, , --:--- ' .. _, - '~--·-=· I ' • ,------·-/, ' 'I -- , ,,. 1__Jl ,.,,,, ,,,,,,, ·L H ' -:-.·- ' ,,

• ·-~··. , ' ' ' ' " " ,sJ ,,

' ~ ,, , // • • • ,,, ' - Q - . . •,;~ ' ,, SC""' '•,

: <-,> -.,,.,;:;::,h/.,i.' X '/ / .: Ne , " - "'"'ONA-A I ~ / ~~-- ""'.,.,,,,

, ' 'v '/~/ // , • I I -· - I' ,.. • ,, ' ' '

I "'•'·" ''// , ','' "~ Cl ~--- "'4<' - I I

1 1

' ::,.__,.-;;~ ~ , " , , . , , , " ,__ , . -- ' - -,

I _.r ', /~ /, 'i,;l,/ ,-,.,foce B//, •,, ,- "" - _ _ • , I ", ~-, ,', o; , - : - f f, , ,, ,. : • ~- .' -,, __ w_,,,, - - , , // - "'-- ,, -c:,s•> ·

I • : ' ' "\ I /~ / / . I / ; ;(. / I : , , -.- - -- " ,, " c- - - ,, - , - - - , '· " - - ,,, , , , ' - •"

I

I I

' >,

i -.. ,-El. lf/.J2.

W-"c 5°-.0CC2.1_C--..__

-.,... • . ' ,,, 1/,. ', "'·' < ,,,.,, ,- .. , - " '° --- ----- ' ,,,, .,-,,,,. -· .. -, ': , -~ 4B.,_.>''''"',srMI -~Y3/',Y I; 11/-..1,f_ ' ,_/<.._' ,,, ___ ----~~ __ ._,, -- '\ m ,,,.,, ~-·"f</"'~-~ ' . ·"' '""' ,.,,_ ,, q;

7, r,., , , ,' ... _ ~-·- ___ . '1//_ --~

"f L

0

1Vj,t.reinf.,h'1.s.h-'~·,., .J'"--....,. ·· .. (~1

,-"fi;',/;;r-:• ,. -,",;',,• ', , f , • , "- .· , I I ,' ~----- _ "jlf, t'"~' ,,, ,,. ·• I , -,,, 'h> 0,

' , •• ._,, ' ,, ,. ,,,,._ - " ,,.,.. ' ' S,,"¾, ' ,' .. . , ,,,,~. ,__ .. . ,: ,, --~

,- .";\ :.,~\\_,..,~1·,dl''·"----r- .• 1""'"" ,' ,.,,, :<.,

/ _ 'j' c/. 't--- ~,_:/ 1

;11///,/,f,//• . ' , , 'o -sew', ·

·c:o,.,

'-"4&,;~ --~ 1:, ... , .... - /

j,,, ,' A A s.sv,., ~,/

~- 'x .. _, -<·· f')(Cfcilqf,in /mt!

--~j<:',, •8a,k-",II

,., .,,, ,,i,,;C~,~ ' , J,-., --"'I,;, I/' I ,f,_ r Gr C •,, ' ,;,

atl~''alonyloo'~orc 1

,f:l'.J.< ------.;__, N{ c,:~ _ -------+------ _j'___" 7 "4@1i!.'Be -/

1

, ~,,,. ~•,I ,., ;,,;, :' ,S , : - #,' •,' " / / , _ Fon~, ... .,_.-;;; I <,fo ,,. ,,"' :

f_ ______ ~-- _ J

1

::'_ ~ , .;;._-__ i" , 1 1 11 '~ block •a ,.,all 5 ·0 ,-£/astic filler ,

, , - . -, ,-,• _, .. "' ,,c _ , " , , '"""" " , Ddo,'A-- < C ' . ,- Ir/ f f T I, ___,,. - -~ ,__ - , , ~ I I

' - - - - - - - - .l - - - - - +- J ' t ·1 · ':'.. -"-- fu . -. ""' , '' ... , ee - , ,.j " I •I

-....___ - 1:---: '---El. IS4.44 - --~12.~I-<-

6"Fil/et GRADATION OF Fil TER MATERIALS

" , • ., "" • - ' -.' •. ,,· - - ' t ' ' : ' ... ,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,.. ' ,,,,,,,, ',' -- - - , , ,_ " ' ·1

, • 1 6 ·,,-,,,J ,c.o'R. arc "' --T f-'5- -01- a,(] 'o

: '._,,, .. ,.,, .,, ···-· ,.,,N,,,,,, "'"' I : I,. - - '" : ' ' ·"i ,,.., ,~ ,, ... ' : ~ ,---' I Li ,

1

Lon3,I. rein~-nol.shawn, I: D] [] SECTION B-8 r<-~"

-,-, Br<-~:~AJNO_~ig~{j}_}_S-loNIUff_x_l{f-f341

~HU._11Y_NA~.iff-__ lQNtiS!Tit_f)_-"A~R~;:~E r;';~~ 97-100 93-97 74·BS 38·70 15-45 J5-Z5 0-5 .

5~Aa'FlsAr~-- ~-~i -~-- _ _L.. · 9s-lOOl7..f-,?~ ~c-s_o 40-Go 20-35 5 ECTION K-K

' I '<-------24'-Ji--- _,_ I []

: N -,"'-" _ _-_-_ ~.i;!''¾" - - ' - - -- I [] -, ,..,. ~ -- - - - - - - - - - . . 4 - - - - - ] D] [] -- ------ ---- ----- -70'-8{---~-:~:~~----~--Jo:~:.:~:~-- ___ : : ]! [] [I]

5 /0

SCA LE OF- FEE'T

,,f't/q.5/i...... filler

L~ i, ____ .., OJ [] ~-· ~ ~

O' , , _ • . • ' I ,_ [] ?i 12 R,p,-ap on 6 gravel bedd,n9 ---' ~ [Il ~ -) D] LOMJ,'fvd/n11I Z,_

con#racf:on jb;n't", V) []

I ; ry~ JD i-~~ ......'. I 1 ---- __ 'y I ,, . i: i -- : • - --T 7

; . 71 [] [] [] [] [] [I] I

AL i

:1 i

'-'I \9];

9 (;

'"'

"" - 6~ _ St-e<.3+44~J_ __ Symmetric a·, abo1.d f ~,1

_{_ .i

:l 1-r1J

[] [] __j A

m rn ___ _! L __ _

HALF PLAN .5 0 5 JO 15 L........i..... ____ ____J__ _1 ____ ______l______._

SC.ALE OF- FEET

ao I

as ___j

J ;'(;

ESTIMATU> G.UANTITIES Concrete- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -480 Cu, Yds.

Rein for-cement steel- -- - - -- - -S~OO0 Lbs.

.>-tt41/.:.sl/., ... ·,1

I ·\:!1 >t "

\ . 6 "1c· . . - ·QJ_· 7 '4@10

I J//ef------- .•i 1-- _ '4@/cO' ~

I :1<----- --3'-o"-· _____ -. 1··1 ,,

H4- -----· - ___ :;:3> 1<-8

SECTION C-C 5£CT!ON ii-H

--- t~-8"

1-Bos~ of wall varies from 8"ar

SECTION D-D l~eaY face/ '-::4/4@/o'~ Ben£/;,, fo -Flou·

15

NOTES Unless othf;-rw,·se. sho»11 1 plo.ce reinforcement so that the

c.lear olisfance befut'en face,--:·· concre-te and n~ares-T

rf!/nforcemen"f' ,'.s Ii_ inr::hes -fcrz±Sba.rsondless,and

2inches frr ..,,6 bars an,/ 9re<.Jfer .i e>-cc~t prrv.'de a cleor

di.stance From face ci-f ,oncrete p/ocf-:"d q9c,1/?st earth or

rock. of 2 ,riches 1,dit::re slab fhicknc.'5S is" 9/ndies or less;

and .3i'nche.s where slab fiml-.nf'-:-:;,.· /s jFP,..,ter -/han 9inchiv'5_

Lap all bars 24 ci,?meiFrS Qf s,,:,/u·~ Concrete des/sn based on a co,r,pr-c,-~,,-'r·~- .c:fr~:,!J-, of

3000 povnds per SJ- .'"ire ,flch c,t 2° --fn 1 .s.

-···--· ·-- --··-,r-:=- - 1

ADDED DJMENS/ONS DN TR.ANS!TION WALL AND BUTTRESSES. 4·.28-65'

D --

·-------- ---------j-

0

CONSTRUCTION ENG!NEER.'S LETrER 4 -z..'3-65

'Ctf-rT'....,,. .4ldtPt I coNsT11ucr104J EN~1,v1,lf'S LETTe/fS ,_ 11- c.s. , .. 1~- G.:I

ALWAYS nunK SAfETV UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE fNTER!OR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

CENT,~AL VALLEY PROJECT

WEST SAN JOA GUIN Of VISION-SAN LU! S UNl'!'-CAL I FORNI A

FORE BAY CANAL AND WASTEWAY OVERFLci•' W/4ST£WAY - STA.3•44.2.9

BAFFLED APRON DROP

DRAWN __ K,_/)_.5_. ____ ,,, .... SUIIMITTEO. ___ 4',/} ,c)~_.-'~-- __

TRACED- ____ • - - ••• -----..RECOMMENDED- _/l:7/-. ~.:- _ .. ___ --· __

CHECKED* ________ Afl'PlfOVEO-CrliEF,- i.~-,-,../G-i.NGiNE£,:f" --- --

V ' 0 1t_uf I o/f PT. az.,i%4- 80?_-D- 2_6/ 2

e1.1e .... ~ - -- , I

I I

I I

I I

I I

'-------£NO TURNOUT TRANSITION -z+so FOREIIAY C"NAL

I I

I I

I

/.. I ~ I

/</ ,_~~o/:,tt < 'l,.,_·o,•

,; <~l.,.t\,19

,ff,._1c~~e /"'~

I I

I

I I

I

I I

I I

I ,.., J...v-,,,'<"("

~..JIG Q<~'J..

~J''ID~ ~~'rl~

.,-:<>0/1,.0 Ol((J:?10

""~'I' ,o

~ ~

,;, ~

,...,If 1 • .'{i,.. ::,I !!f

<q~ ~o /J:-I"-" ~<

,.._::,(It) ~ ~ I

I I

1,._ Olk' ..JQ'

~':i~~,r~ ":'~ ~6°~:S / .!'~.?

Pl Z'!9Z•90.70 PC ~991 + 98.43

~"Tz ~'r.[d"-·~ T. T:a:97.27', L • 19O.6:l 'f\:a 't0O,OO 1

0:::,. ,.., .J".,,.,

o.,­~"' "'• IJ:-, / ~.!~:;

/ .!.>~~ I h~<f

/ ,¾f ."i'Pt<IIA

(i'tv / I '<io,I I

.,II./ I I I

~ .. )-~

l(l

": ;;, +I "'I g, "'I

', '

I

I I

I ~;g~~~~ r~'*-bl/, ~R,.._;_E CRs.- ,,' ', I Ar> I '

I ' I

.{

, ~ 00° 1o' g_s.s,:~ .-:

-~!'/II

/, /// :i

i //: I/ /\,flt/,'

·~;//,• I

-. 11~:TT~--=-=------1,,.---· :

fi f : nr--~~\\ :' .....

-fl .t 1 ···, \ ': '-E.\ 16'--" -, ~ .. \ . \\\el SAW CUT ANO JOINT,) ~ I SE!! JOUJ"Y O'e.\Pr,,,\\..-

~ --, ~----- _ fr:-+-1 fr~-- -

, El. lt5-Z..9- -'

,, __ 4.l'ORE6AYCANAL

"' Pl 30ll+h'9.'38 PC i!009+1f>.63 EQUATION PT 301'!+G8.31 aK:

30 I G, +30."4 AH O.= EJ't•41' 5'411'1. T. T =- 2"53.35 I.• 4~1.c&8 R• 1+00.00

f~o ~ ~o,~'o~

"'1--..._ .,..~.q,..,o : 1 ','!a1 -.., .. ·.,&,,._ +, -Ill, g, "" 20'-~

I !

~--/ '

I

-- ....... ,-!'?_.c?~~ ,.,,,I. ,,so

- SAW CUT ANO JOINT SEE JOIIJT OE TAIL

~;,~~~

-- EXISTING ?.s'xz.s' CU\.VERT 3011+18.SO ~ ll-l00lolCA"TI0NS REQUIREO. SEE. 2\<;.·0·20S'!-2,)

r, ,• C: 14"±32 ,-1::,

.';ii,u

'---'i_ El\l'STIN<, OEl.."TA MENOOTA CANAi..

_:..:J~ .f. .::.,'i.., 30• '

- - f--,. J i''+l." .., ,t -3Z

I PLAN

vt---:, ~-:- 200 0 'ZOO 400 &,00 4_:;; <~ ~ SC.ALE O~ FEET a~ ~..J w~ ~

Existinq concrete-- .-t,_:,

JOINT

:;;:bl :."' :.,.. ,---,---,---,--~--,--~;:,1-T--~-T--~--,---,-- :,t- ,---,---,---,---,--------,---,---,-----,-:,--=>.J,---,--~~----,---,--~--,--,

l J · ~5l=_ 1 1

1 , I ~;r~- 1 , i . I 1 , ~, ::-x1~s , , __l__ ; ~'

·Ill--. . .. ,.<., ., -· . ' . "•l<iil· l~l' I >- I --- ---+ -· --- - . "·--l!l .. '.,:lll~- . .,, 1- . zzo

Ill 200 2 0

f-<(

> IGO

Ill ..J Ill I 1\0

1-ZO 2980

"' i 21111_ N' r "° - I >-ID ' ~' -a..- - c _r I t-r , -- ,IO"I. __ .(11'1140- .1----. - · --(1\lln_ -~ 1- d<ft'--_ t .,._ i " --- lr-+f..;t- 21'Q!I - -- ::,<fo ____ \.J(!'Qi---;

-::~ -:::t::.+. __ q;,1_~-· ·-- ~1~ - ' ~t:;1:------+-- -t ~ 1 . _a:,1~~,~~- -~;.~1~--+- l _(!t:;~_f'/'11_~-'z)tl_

2?0

-iao

:::;•': '--'tO\o t • ~, i +1 o i dl~I- I i10"0o1 . omoJ .;3:fo 01 :!0'°1,

+lcrw ---~'°'·1-- -+1~- ' ~, ~- 1 ~w10--r--~- -----+- - .... +1·01co, ---.=:,J}rni· t -2w1+-~1~-cr2+1-.

0\1..! °'1:-: I 11:11

, v11

-: : <C18 zjl OR1G1NAL GROUNIO g;- \JI_: 1 0 0- 1-: : ' \fl<C o 2;'1 aooi

·-.NIii. -~--- -fi'ooiii T:1:1· t--- · - o.

11.:i -j l -=t3::"'i I : . SURFAEILtSE - ·1 +-111,iiiD.1111--l- -w"'21li ' 1 ·-,JS "'-ofll--u<ll'°:--

t_l _ ,.,,_ ... ' I I ' 'LI ' 'I - I ,., ! I

- L. . : ··t: . I -- -- -- ;·- I I '1: I - -+·-10.·;···t I :1180

j ; I 1 --s•-.oooos - -_cc- , -- ~=-.oc:s s=-.i>ooo,-·, 1

1 :·

- . - - 0- 100

: : I :: I I

I I I I I I I 1i

I F'ORE6AY C~t,J~\. I E~\Sl\tJU OELTA. I t I I EX,'5T\NC:r OE.LT,b,. 1 1J 14-0

k-°'TuR-tiouf 'TR~s,T"io.J..,..... ME°Nco-r..;,;;;iJ.;i.-->+<----- - - - -- -oEL, A ME'-'oo,A CANAi.. RE'- o, "T,ol'J-- - - - - - -- --- -2- ,--,-,--- - ----- - ---- - ->-k.- ----;;-iE,:, ooi'..:c.;..;:;;;;c- - .. ----:r- ·>11

29!5S STATIONS

2990 2995 '3000

PROFILE

O ->-1 t<-- CI-\ECK t"l,-'

"-----'--~-~-~-~~-~--~-~-~-~--~·-.___i___~ \~Q

3010 30'2.0 3025 300S

_,,.-4-" Crushed roc.k or

4" Crushed roe.I<. 0I"" EI.IBZ.9, gravel surfoc::ln g --~----2s.o' Min.- - --+>l ~ 10.0Min. :-,s-

1

_,:F'E Delta Menaota Cana: , . ~E\. \e,7._9 ( grovel surfacing

: 3 S-=<.02 'j.l: ->150'~ C... ..._ I I ' I

:S:,~~811 "

----------IL __ ---

------ ---::-l

' I I I

'I' ,n'l •'1 0\1 ~

+'"' -,o, "'' ... "'1(()

_ 1\JI 0 .,,,o "''"' ~:~

I ,'-E1.111o._2 Nor.Mox. ·; IO.OMin.;<·rc;--· 25.0'Min.--',- ->-: , : Operating W. S, -: s.o· ~- / : · ~2 -~ : :

~ / ;r;_.;;------------------~~~:;· ,-Refill I "'1~ // ~j.

+ «>,o, ~--/ ~-I

~:ro ----- ,--;,,.,-r ,-, '° \ _.,. -- -----G:+ ---- - 1-1---',~------------------

g1r'fl I \ ic,io , ,\ , ~ Compacted embankment

r-:;: \'"•,.: ·· '--Oriqincd ground surfoc« ~,.~

Vary lining heiqht uniformally from 19.25' at 3008+9Gc>.io3 to 19.15 ot ':!009+1.,.1o:;

K- -- --- ------- - 48.0'--- -

SECTION A-A

10 0 10 ?O 30

SCALE Ot= FEE.,-

DE."TAIL

·Rubber and mastic ((lier.

LINING

FIGURE 26 REPORT HYD-546

Space long t d groov , 'u inol

:-<-811->1 I I L- I

DETAIL

e~ il·O"cr$ --

,-Rubber a d n mastic fill•rs _,-lll+.!..11

1 K--,f_ -6 I I ->1 R- I.

r~.L-.,,1--~-:~ r Z -4

GROOVE. DETAIL FOR 1"URNOUT "TRANSITION

ANO RE\.OCATEO CAIJI>.\...

NOTE'S Elevations shown corre~pondtoDelta Mendota

as bu i\t e\evot·1ons.. Elevations 1·efer to ·.nvert unless otherwise shown.

~.--~---- .. --·-- .

.3-15-,S CHA/'161:D STATIONING, CVRYE ~r,11 1'9N0 8~All.1Wt.$ re R6R.66 WtrH R.IFl'ISIO ,..,ILD QArA. - ,

D - ,&!!J,,nt, Cc;>NSTJ:l.fJCru::,H /rA/~IA/46.t:l."S J.ErrEA 1-/<:,-'"',e. )

@ ALWAYS TMinK SAfE'rV ·· -- · --- · UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT DF THE INTERIOR BUREAU DF RECLAMATION

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT OELTA OIVISIOI.J-CALIFORNIA

DEL1A MENDO'TA CANAL MODIFl(.A-TIO\JS- Mlle. 69.25 TO MILE. 10,04-

'?\.t:>.N, '?ROI'"\\.£ AND SECTIOt-J'S

DRAWN . .R~~---u-----··SUBMITTED __ --~-r-~c:.f: _____ '_~---

::::::~;;~: ~: ::~::::~::DED: :Clcf;,~;N: ::·_-_-_·:_-i

OENVEf?1COLfHR~\ff' (~1?_2'Z, IHI+-

+ l El 1750- --

<t. OVERFLOW WJ'7STEWJ'7Y-,o (

JY

~7,q ·1-i- -r - - -\ ~ ;f; :j,~b~?lft/ , \ \"" '- /6" Union Oil line

"i '\ 1 , \,.- - l5'x 15' Valve box

-1 \ (--UOREB<< WfiSWMY ( Top of' l/1?1i?9 E/.175.'73

FIGURE 23 REPORT HYD-546

___,I

$1 ~"ti :::i~I

l.j ~I '11 ,I '\Ji ts.:, '01 "I C\J1 C\J1

6+57.oc -----------

,//. 217,8'77.7.3 E. l,8'71, 969.09

,~, ' "1

-r:;.-~ .. ':::::-\ ,' c:1.r it<:'! i vr;,,,.9B.o¢lt--t -~ 1 ~ ~C\J<cz,,,::,.,

r l---c5.0'...f, l:f:lorllatter-, , ,01 1:--i

(' , r:!:, l>(TI r)-,c FOREBJ'7Y Cf1A/.4L /

1/0riqlnal Ground Surface

I , / I

,- /0.p Min. E/ !7.3.801 ,' 1 -Top of Bank El. !8c.0 c: I AJormal-,, i--t:5.0~ f-El.1800

i50

( / 1./\ 1

\ 1 -t ... s--/j:!A/ormal

~I <::ii

~If--.;... I\: I \.j(\:

1'1~~ ~I~~ 15 I ,--::,<:::, '\JI '-''<l

I I__ ',

<:; I ()-

'<) 'i;;1'<> <:::, '\i"ll"-C:,: ()'<:;:'I:)'. I() ()-<::, <;:,I;) -\- l( I "l<>-,'

~~I~~ Cl- "1 '\J ,, l\J,;:,1'.:;i~

',

I l_

(--

~I I

' It Oe/to-Vendofa Canal

El ' ' c:,)~ ~'\i<;::>1<i::~ ,~1-:::,1<> <::,C\)<:::,11.J\"\

I ,11:, ____ • a,1-- :::s-\-.._l~:::s

,.:y ff:/--· I

: /nvertE/158.fl,, 1

(AIWS.El/7.3.2 ',_ :l. , _____ _ ' _. -- - _1_ - - - - - - - -- -, - - - - - - - .. \ -

18 "°J;_'.1£\ ~'~ 'l:'\J~I~~

... 1- %().is::,<:::, ,;I:::: ¼J'-'-1\,j~ -:() I

--.},__,--El/80.01 ~,--._,__ I

I , 1 1 """1 _____ T_

----7,~ -----/ \

(q·cr11s/Jed roc/eJr ',

l,

'

qrovel surtac1nqa . -, 1 ] I

Compacrecf Embankment)',-· - - - --BO'O"- -- --~

; R=50.0~"" ,:·s,.o,;, ~

E!.161.3- ~~~ .. ~~~~\ /

;(, .. (,/~.. 1~"'=:tt~=Li~ --~ -~ 30

. ' C) / /::::J 8 ' 1/t·OOFC.~ , ,: 1 \ --­" i I ' j ' Or-000.W \. ) ' CJl,s: ', <c :t:~ '<FORE8.4YCJ'7IJJ'7t. - ,q '--------·.l r" / <:::1<:::i,~ -El.!Bc.4

I \J'=<<s:ll)ll,~;_ l,/.C/8,,504.75 '~../ l,jl'-l\;)

I

I

I

I I

\

,_ E!./6880

->-j 1L- OVERFLOW STRUCTURE

SECTIOIJ B-B (Section C-C Similar)

0 30 60

SC'r'llE IA/ FEET

QO

,,-Oriqinal Ground Surf'ace /

r l7 ; I

1 1 '-c.10' 1

z:i--t-(_ I I

-~-,,,,

r-< O>ERFLOW WASTE WM

z:1

l?<:>C)Cli,:;;

0 Slope6ottom umformlyberween E.1,B'71,<?69.0<? I 1;:, 1'-i:(:::: ::,.,

~ r,j:::<:>""'1'0- ele//at,ons s//own I \ .<:::,to '<) I\:'-' C.:

~ cn<l:c;~··.st; ..-.J - ~1;:1 ... i~"' , : l<;t:

'\J y~';,'';.'~l!J PUUJ C \ ~I"- ~l1;:,', "'I I~ 1<::o

llJITl"lll:l\/") ~ 200 o c:oo ,;,00 600 "'I" 1 it11

1':2 11 I~

,. ·'<' If-.. I"' I O ,<::ii"- ~I I\J ""'CIS

~ 1... SCr'lLEIIJFEET ~II~ I ~I 1¼J ~~{11--_ i)I " Ii,_ '-; -, 1'-> <:::,"' I

~- ----- ico.o·- I _ _J

I \.j1..,

_ t.:i~ \;)l\(j ______ _

<:::,I'<)

,I :J::~I~ bl I I I ,CQ<:::,\J,

i9)<::,, C::1 :.?"<:ll:llkl< ~~I -":1~ o 1~ f--:'\i~I~--,

1;:,1~c:,-:;::~1::::: :::g,i;151;:,~ 4.:<:JI::::: ~:;:_ ~1~, ~'\J~:1-:~

'

--cco

zoo

-1- I'-' C:,i~---l----

(cil,.c'\ji"lY'Cljl-- I -<l'.i ~,r;; I I c,I_ ,,.--,<;:,.-1--1- ~" -1 'I- '"'<)l'<'iRi''tj <l:On-i1-~I--I("! <:;vi~ I <:::,1"-<Q ¼JCl-C).ls::;c--: -

I\J:c--:'l-1::::1:l,:,::i'<ll()l(J,\J°'; :;:'~', '<\i~'-l ""-1\.Jl.i.i

4J'\J\1-1-1-.:\'J1-+ <l>IIJ- 'c-s I l '-1-<J'- I

-----+-----,-' --+:~'\J-'+'~-=--:"-'ITl""ICQviliJ ::::_<:::,:L,j ,Oriqina!GroundSurf'ace

1 ~,:s.~ 1 I --------

-' cZO

~ <:::, f80

i::: "t 160 ~

'1J -) /<10 ,'!J

IZO

1- I I I

I I

1 1 (" I I I '--1(::) / ~

: J : \ I I I ! (

Ir "-----~-~-- t_' ____ -- : ~ I

\ ) ,, /

,[_J _(_

: I 1 TUPA/OUT 1

j

I I

;*'--TRJ'7/JS!T!OAI- - "7 1------ ------· I

I

0

I

STl't T!OAIS

I I

5 I

i'. 0 -I

<c " Ill.

I ~I <:::, ~ ~~ll'.l:~< I

<:)- :r::.:Q:

~ I '\jl ~ ~ j:::O~ 1Cl~

I

r\,: ~I '\J'y ~~~ 1t~ I '\JI C)--\- -,. 1111UJ r. , . I ) (Top of Bani: E/. l8c.0 IJ.J ..,., IIQvi ,rrop ol' /m1nq

_____ I I./

I /-l \ ....... , I

S•O--,.

- ------- OVERFLOW SEC T!ON---------------- -- --

"·,::1 I( 'J <;)I;) <;:)1;:, ,. ,. ' :::::1;:,

' 10

' 15

PROFILE c, ~ "' I l::1'-'~ ~!:ti~1i--_>-

¼,j \,(, 7i <:::,«)"-I.JC.:

Top of /il?inq 1;:,I'<'-- opof'Banl< E/./82.4, ;:::<Q~:~si:

E!. IB!.I/---, ~I~~ / g:~'<i1::::~ Crest \ Q:ii<.:)½ / ~ ',:-1~::::i

I

~ I I I I ~ ' ' I

- -.-1

cO

7 [

-- I (/ ,, ,-2,:/ : / El.175.C/.3

1

1 .-'>-~---Contract1on6rooves '"---------

56.18-, (i-tf.·; not shown - - - - -,7-- [ c-El.!58.II

f +s£~73n~ '~J,:~:,> / ,zr -----~--~---1

',;;:I ~'-(: t:;:~1

f---- ' '-.. ~- -- - I ""' I ~~I C)..I

~...._I C\JI

,!\JI SECTIOAJ 0-0 ;t:

1

1

- Ill 3 .; 1

£1168 BO -Top ot' Bank E/./75.0 I , , r-'l FOR1:;8,C/Y C/1A/ ,-Top or lininq E/175.4 fB k E!/82.o -Top ofBankEl./80.0 Ir- · ' s-.04 '-- t=1 b ,Or191oa/ , , 1

. • -E!.173.BO) 1-Top o an · (

1

1 __ _

t Ground Surface r- i'5:o -i ,7op ol' lm1n9 (~, / - - - - - - - - 1

' i ..£1. __ : 7 ,,AI.WS.El./7.3.c:,. / ------------- - --£/!6880_____ ------- S:-.00027 r,1

-_, -------------. - -------- - ( . . 1.4.,g,~~h~tc--~-----_;,;.,.. ____ _,,,,e,,;,,----i \

' "'-;c--=.-----~ ', . i } : ; , / E/./61./5-'

' ;f:l-o :_ l '-!2"Rlprapon6_ /2'R;prap on6·---7- , '', ,, •

q,"cr11shed rockor ) '=-+--"-=+---=-~ , 1 /50-, gravel beddinq 9

ravel beddinq '---BJ'7FFLEO J'7PROAJOROP - --r-20.oi -le R1prap on6

9ravel s11rf'acinq-' / _ _j f--OVERFL0/4' STRUCTURE ' qravel beddrn7-, ' '-Invert £1.15B.I! SECT/01.J ;CJ-/l

200

!BO

160

140

lcO

SECT/0/J E-E.

/./OTES

Elevations shown are based on San t.ulS Oat11m. Elevq//ons ref'er to in//ert unless otl?erwlse s/Jolt'n. DU.C - Oelta tlendofa Canal

0.14'= 0//erl'/o,v hlaste,vay F.C - Fore/Jay Canal

REFERENCE ORJ'7Wl/./6S

GENER.4L PUW-- - - - - - - -- 805-0-260~

TURNOUT TR.4NSITIOAJ- - - - - -- - c/</,-0-c0541 OVERFLOW STRUCTURE- - - --- - 805-0-26/0 BlfFFLEO/lPROJ./OROP- - - - --- 805-0-26/c OR.41/.JliJLET------------ - B05-0-2609

, ,.. --·~-····-

5-1-65 cH°ANGEO-cRAIN INLET FR011 srA, 1,+2s ro STA. 1r+2s.

D 7(,1}.$ J:.ONSTRUCTJON ENGINf6P.1S LETTER, 4·ZS·65

, - ,s·-· 6!- S.'f:Jf&'tY'~'Zo~iN!,~~~Hb1f~J~N.s ol/ER'FJ..OW BASI -"'

0 ..aont. COA/STJl.UCTIDAJ. t!NGJIJl!t!R',S L.t!rrER'S ,_,,_ 6S'~ !1-/S'•'-S'

ALWAYS TMlnK SAfETV UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECL.AIWA TION

CE1,JTRr'll //o4LLEV PROJECT WEST S.4A/ J0.4<;it//l,/ 0/V- S/IAI lt/lS t/A/IT-C.4UFIJl?AJ/I,

FOR£811Y Cll/J!9L 11110 W/lSTEWllY FOREB.4YCr'7J/J'7l sr,; cr5tJ.OO TO ST/1 /9+i'2.888k.

PL/ll.J, PROP LE /'?!JO SECT!OA/S

a ------- ----- -

r=----A

-<7 ~tr,-'f Overflow wasteway

F -'; :-,2" , E

--- ~--'IIL-~ ~--~ ~--=-=-=-=~t====-=-=-=-=-=--=--=,...;:::...,::/t::~:;;:==::;::::==::;=~ V I

I I

l 32Joinfs@Z4-'-0': : I ' I I - -- ,-,~~---<

1 Omit elosfic filler In ;._ A 32Joints @i?ti-'-o': 1

G I I I G alternate jofnts --- L. _. Omife/asticFi/lerin 1

r 1 ' 0 D t----+---f------+-----1 alternate joints--, F 1

'y I / ~ 7f----:1rr-;l--h=:==t==t=+=====+=====::p

Ef" ~>- - -I \

I I v"- - -~

~ I I I

: I (

··-

j l I~- ~j_:~~~:;;:~~~-~~ { ~-- --- ' -'''ll____ -----+-+ -- -- _r:~::,~;lJ : i : i

R======i=--=====+='"'J=r::::;L=T:c: _._±: H, ; J - --- - Le£ -c ~-~~i==::e::::-::t=-~=-=~ t=;;;;:::::;;-;;;;::~=:-~-:::::=-=;;;:;;-=H~=,..i~;::;-:l: i _ _LJ: ~ r -- --- +--

1 f= L+-- '/

I f---~-~ +----~ I

r

:---t- _r___ : ---z -- - ---1r-=-· - t-12'0~::_ -----r=-=-=-t

FIGURE 24 REPORT HYD-546

,-f ,, E/osf-ic Filler

DE.TAIL A

#,s@) 12• --, I I

#5.@12•--)/

-J'Chomfer I'---,..-#" Elo:sfic fi'/ler

//'_,. ,,-#5@1Z" .,/ I ' I

- I t

I l I I \I

1 _,.;_ 8 k-- Encase bar:s projectinq

Coot f/rstconcrefe I through jo,nt wtlh placement with seo/inq I poper sleeve, compound ----- _ _,,.

# 5@/Z", 5 E/Tl1o~ C -C #5@/2"-- \ f- /-;;:"Chamfer

~Coaff·rstconcrefe ·-.;.--- ._._-,:~ : __ -·:_· __ -,, - -~ ploce

1menfwilh =·= _ ;=== seolinq compound

#4=12" ' / ~ ' "' ' · t _ L~ --- t-><5 r<-- ''--EncosebarsproJec ing

f" £/asf!c f;/ler ~_,. -..,B"t<- throuqh joint wifh paper sleeve. 4~ ' I ""_: I 7---=-~-=--~:=----~ ~r 1----+-----lf~-+-J --+--~-,---1-/+::--FC-,z - I F<OWFO< I ~f' '~~it

u _ l,:-3+50 ' ---'-------1 ~ t 0+010 ow. _ _______,___ PUMPING ,-/8+50 i

-<.J 't Farebay canal - ~,,. 1 ~ ------'--+-

A B

Nor£: Omit elastic (flier in alternate Joints and coof first concrete

5ECTIO/\J D-0

PLA-"-l placemen+ with seol(nq , o I z :. 4

compound.

5 0 5 ,o IS

SCtii.LC. OF 1=EE.T

,.--Topofbonk El. IBZ.4-0

"~ CRE:ST O£TAIL

Fill with mastic {Iller - -, . _,

<l •. <I. -·-:- • .i·. __ .:.9..~ 'I'

N.W S.--. --'-===--

Topafboa/ ,,/- Top oflininq £/. /75.43

---·1 ' I I

' \J)

<]\

DETAIL B ,,.If ~ /::;:;:>-T-h-L---, ,-#4@!2"

\\ ,,/. ,,."' /~::

S' '°

/

,,.(()_er 0,e ,, 1

~ c() /' \ .\

;-f Fare bay canal . 00 ;,-·/ \J0 , oc.\' _.- '(

(1\( / ,,6 <\:.(,0,,/ '

.. ,-- o'-o / 'l,t.," ,-1 -'.".

~' ,' / / --- }--Protective drains not : \, y/ . ',I :shown, 5ee BOS·D-U,08

#5@/Z"-- I Q \. / ·rn \, "'1

'...#s@rz" , -,· _:!'. : L~ >#4@12"# ~ #4-@;z''..s_+ , , , ;[_ 5@/Z'!­

-.>1/Z:'>«-- , -,-,rz~-• ' I

- -,-For riprap profecfion \ :see 805-0-U,07 I I

I

I :-/\\ -, '. \· --El.158./1

t=+-¾==6:-.:!-~, _____ r_ I : I

I

I I I I

,,--Tap ofliningEl.181.II

:L/- Cre:st El. 173.80

,:..,_ ,.""-, ',i;-

' ~ ', <-c -1- #-5@/Z~ ' o..-.,

·- "'O!:, ~Q O,,, <:'J<. ', .... o,.,

,-NW.5 L-_:_:___ _:_ -

/.-! ', 9,..., r.: ~ '~o,._, -r=. Forebay canal-,,

.. ,.. / :~~~t..... :, .>-;

'v.:'', o~, ',

'-..:,~~": I~

''lr,._ y / t Protec.five drains nof shovvn. See B05-D-Z608-;;.,.-r -~-~x: ~ ·· .. I I ~I

El.l5B.11--j __ ~ -··· I

\/

i i I :

r-'-'-40'-o"- -~-- - - -- --- -- - ---- -- -Z4-'· oi"-- - - - -- - - - - - - - --+-------10'.. 2!;"- -- - - - -~- - - --- IO'O"----- -->< ' 0

: I I

~-----/0'-0"-- - -- -~- - -- - -IO'-Z¾" - - - ---.+----------------- : ~I

' 7 '

24.'- 0;;,," - - - - - - -- - - - -- - ->1<--4-o'O"-i·-

5 10

SECTION A-A SCA.LE OFF E.E.T SECTION B-B

~'-A~E. OF' FEE..,-

ESTIMATED QUANTITIES Concrete ________________ l~OOcuyd:;. Reinfarcemenf steel _________ 157,000 lbs

NOT£5 Unless otherwi.re shown, place reinforcement so

that the clear distance between f'ace of concr,;,112 and neoresf reinrorcemenf is if in.,,. except fhot where concrete ls placed aqainst earth or rock the minimum cleo,· distance shalt be ?in.

Lop of/ bars zti- diameters of splices. Concrete design bo,ed ono compressive sfrengfh

of :3000 lbs. p,;,r sq, /n, of Zi:J dovs-clevofions shown are bosed on Son Luis dofum.

© ALWAYS nunK SAfETV UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

CE.NTRAL VALLEY P!?OJE.CT WE: ST SAN JOAQUIN DIV.· SAN L UJ .S UAIIT-CALIFORNIA

FOREBAY CANAL AND WASTEWAY FOR EBAY CANAL STA.3+50 TO STA IBtSO

OVERFLOW STRUCTURE.

APPENDIX

Electronic Digital Computer Program to Solve Citrini's Equation for Attenuation of a Rejection Surge by a Lateral Spillway

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The program was developed to solve an equation derived by Citrini19/ for the attenuation of an open channel surge by a lateral spillway. The lengthy equation is presented in the Investigation Section of this report and will not be repeated here.

The program was written in the FORTRAN IV (FORmula TRANslation) language and can be used on most electronic digital computers. No special operating procedures are required.

Solution of the equation was accomplished by the bisection method. The required result was the surge height following attenuation by the lateral spillway (or side weir). Dimensionless forrp.s. YI and YF. were used in the computations. YI was the ratio of the surge depth (Y2) to the norm.al water depth (Yl) before attenuation by the weir. and YF was the corresponding ratio after attenuation by the weir. In the bisection method, upper and lower limits are chosen which are expected to bracket the correct solution. In this case. the upper limit (YFl) was the ratio of the surge depth before attenuation to the normal canal water depth (YI) and the lower limit (YF2) was assigned the value 1. o. which corre­sponds to complete destruction of the surge wave by the side weir. The trial value of YF is taken at the midpoint between the limits and substi­tuted in the equation. which appear$ in the form of a function statement (RESID). The correct solution is reached when the value of the function is equal to zero or is within an arbitrarily chosen limit on either side of zero. In this case. the absolute value of the function required for a correct solution was O. 00001. In the bisection method. the limits are adjusted and iterations continue until the solution is obtained. For each iteration. the trial value of YF was taken at the midpoint between the upper and lower limits. If the corresponding value of RESID was found to be positive. the upper limit was assigned the trial value of YF and the lower limit remained the same. If the value of RESID was negative. the lower limit was assigned the trial val~e of YF and the upper limit remained the same. Then a new trial YF was obtained at the midpoint between the new limits. The procedure was repeated and the range , between limits became smaller. until the correct solution was obtained or until 20 iterations (sufficient for the data used) had been accomplished. An error check was included. in case the method did not converge to the correct solution.

Input data consisted of the channel bottom width (BL the side slopes (S), the •discharge coefficient of the lateral spillway ( COEF), the initial flow depth (Yl), the surge depth (Y2), the distance of the spillway crest above

19/ op. cit.

30

the channel floor (SPWYD), the spillway length (XL), and the Froude number of the initial fl.ow (F). Each input variable was allotted an eight­character field, with the decimal point placed as required. A sample input data sheet is included in this appendix.

The output data included the input variables listed above and the ratio of the surge depth to the initial depth before (YI) and after (YF(2)) attenuation by the spillway. Ten eight-character fields were required for the output. Three characters to the right of the decimal point were specified for all variables except the spillway length, which required only two decimal places. A representative output listing is also included in this appendix.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The computer program was prepared by Paul W. Merkens from Region 2, Bureau of Reclamation, Sacramento, California, who was a rotation engi­neer in the Hydraulics Branch during the summer of 1964.

31

DEFINITION OF VARIABLES USED IN THE PROGRAM

YF and YF ( )--ratio of surge depth to initial depth following attenuation by the spillway (Yf),

DIFF ( ) - -value of equation for trial value of YF.

RESID - - statement function name.

YI --ratio of surge depth to initial depth before attenuation by the spillway (Yi),

XMU --dimensionless spillway discharge coefficient (1d .

XL --spillway length (L).

w --width of channel at elevation of spillway crest ( I, ).

AF --reciprocal of Froude number of initial flow {A).

CSTAR --ratio of SPWYD to YI (C*).

B --channel.bottom width.

s --channel side slopes.

COEF --spillway discharge coefficient.

Yl --initial depth.

Y2 --surge depth before attenuation by spillway.

SPWYD --height of spillway crest above channel floor.

F - - Froude number of initial flow.

xw - -ratio of spillway length to channel top width at spillway crest ( i).

I --subscript, fixed-point variable.

Terms in parentheses are those which appear in original equation.

32

697

PRI.NT B, S, COEF, YI, Y2, SPWYD, XL,

F, YI, YF (2)

DI ME;NSION

YF AND DIFF.

DEFINE RESID

PRINT HEADINGS

READ B, S, COEF, YI Y2, SPWYD, XL, F

COMPUTE XMU, AF CSTAR, W, XW, YI

DEFINE YF (I) AND YF (3)

COMPUTE DIFF (I) AND DIFF (3)

COMPUTE YF (2)

COM PU TE DI FF (2)

IS DIFF (2)

~ 0.00001 7 NO

IS DIFF (I)* DIFF (2) >0?

NO

ISDIFF(I)* DIFF(3)>0?

NO

DIFF(3) = DIFF(2) YF(3) = YF(2)

YES

PRINT 01FF (2)

AND DIFF(3)

DIFF(I) =DIFF(2) YF(I) = YF(2)

FLOW CHART FOR DIGITAL COM PUT ER SOLUTION OF CITRINl'S EQUATION FOR SURGE ATTENUATION

BY A LATERAL SPILLWAY

33

PROGRAM LISTING

FORTRAN IV SOURCE STATEMENTS FOR ELECTRONIC DIGITAL COMPUTER PROGRAM TO SOLVE CITRINI 1S EQUATION FOR ATTENUATION OF A RF.JECTION SURGE BY A LATERAL SPILllYAY

EF'~ PPOGRAM: HKATTN JOBI 0831HKATTN

C DETERMINATION OF SURGE AlTENUATION DUE TO CANAL SIDE SPILLWAY DIMENSION VF(3),DirFf3)

10010 RESID(YF,Yt,XMll,XL,W,AF',CST,'R): 1ccvFo<vr-1.o,oc1.o+o.1socvI-1.o,,, 2+ CCYJ002>-<Yfoo2))0(5QRT<O•l250(YF+YI))) 3•(YI•<(YF••2>•1.0)0(SQRT(0.1250(YF+l.O)))))• 4C((XMUl2.0)0(XL/W)OAFO((YF+Yl)002)0(YF+Yl•2eOCSTARI 50(SQRTCO.l25•CYF+YI)O(YF+Yl•2eO•CSTAR)))) / 6CYF+YI+AF•f CYF••2)•l•O)O(SQRTC0.125•CYF+1,0))) 7•AF•CYI-1.o,oc1.o+o.1socv1-1.o,, ~+AfO(YF+YJ)O(SQRTC0.50(YF+YI)))))

13030FORMATC1Hl,79H B S COEF Yl Vt SPWYD 1 L F YI VF)

1305 FORMAT(1X,~F8.3,F8,2,1X,3F8,3) 1330 FORMAT(8F8.0)

WRITE (6,1303) 1331 READ <5,1330> B,S,COEF,Yl,Y2,SPWYD,XL,F'

XMU: COEF/6.0199 AF=•l.O/F CSTAR = SPWYO/Yl w = e+2.o•s•sPwvn XW=XL/W Yt=Y2/Yl YF C 1) =YI VF C 3 > = 1. 0 DO 1003 t=l,3,2 DtF'F'Cl>=RESIDCYF(I),YI,XMU,XL,W,AF,CSTAR)

1003 CONTINUE 1005 DO 1950 J:1,20

YFC2>=<YF(l)+YFC3))/2.0 DIFF(2> : RESIDCYFC2),Yt,XMU,XL,W,AF,CSTAR) IF<<ARS(DIFFC2))) ,LE. n.ooOOl) GO TO 1951 IF((OIFrc1,on1rF(2)) .GT. 0,0) GO TO 1004 IF<CnIFF(l) 0 DIFF13)) .GT. 0,0) GO TO 1701 DtFFC3) = DIFF(2) YFC~) : VF(2) GO TO 1950

1004 IF<<nIFFC3> 0 DIFF<2>> .GT. 0,0) GO TO 1701 DIFFCl) : DIFFC2) YF ( l) : VF C 2)

1950 CONTINUE 1951 WRITE (6,1305) h,S,COEf,Yl,Y2,SPWVD•XLtFtYI,VFC2)

GO TO 1331 1700 FORMAT C9H DIFFCI):f9.~) 1701 WRITE <6,1700) CDIFFCl>.,1=1,3>

END

34

w c.n

I

I

-EAU Of' RECUMATICMI

USE PROBLEM ~'"-tion__e>L.Citnni,,~ EifU4--\a;,fL DETAIL A~\l(lllC)fl &f ~jec..±ion_Su~e_b'i ................

COLORED FEATURE L~ teral S2i llwC1"' CARDS

PROJECT csa" L,il-s u"·,-t '. cv~ dzbl• 51,lrl• , lrol11l12 13l1•l15l16 11 I 1sl1, 120 21 l22!ul2• 25 !26l21lzs 12, l3o, 31 I 32 33 !34! 35[3613713813,;f 40

- . - C.IM. 01¥.tl~KE.. T&\IT&A..L -~UR.U . 11111\n.a ..... ---#I t"~~T 1\-:P!TM Ll•'.1t'...,_T

. Al . <. ~ft, I! F. :YU . "rrt.

. I . I . I . I • I

. lcr. o ,,. S".' 3 .. S' /I'S,. o ,,, .o

. . . - ,,, . 4.

. . . - . ,,, • Jlt.

. . . . /17. L . . . . . /17 ·'

,Jilt. ,n

. . /ii .. L , . /IS. A . I I I . I I

I . I .. I I I

I . I . . I - I I

I I , I ' . I . 1 6A.1 I I . . I .. I I .

I I I ' ' I I I • I I I I ' I ,

I I I . . I I I

, I I I I I

REMARKS

BY DATE

LABORATORY PUNCH CARD DATA JOB NO.

:f RETURN TO

ROOM BLDG. PHONE

•1!.210144 .,1.,:471 .. 49!50l,,l,2 s3l54fsslS& S1!ssls,l60 &1 l,2163164 &5!&&!,1!&a :&,!70! r1; n n·1,:75 1& n:n:n ac ,,. ___ -"PI.U..,,-J,M ~.Y_Q£_ I . I

--U.\~MT. \,.l!.~Ta.l NW'llt~ I I - .. . . J(l F.' I I ~-wl~,

I . . , I , . I ' ' , , I I I

I S:. <"' . /.SOO •. 0 .~. I t.3 . I I

I I

I ' !

. I I

I I I I I I I I I I . I I

I I I ! I, , ,· I l

: ' . I I I I I I I I I I •

I I I I I

. I I I I I

tPLE C .ATA. ~ f-\ EE TLJ__ '.I I

. ... I I I ' . I

.. I , . , , , I I I I I ' I I

I ' ' I ' ' ' I

I I I I I I I

I I I I I

CHECKED SHEET OF

GO'OU

G> g DO

~ ;j co

C.:> C)

~ so.ooo 80.000 A0.000 ao.ooo A0.000 80.000 80.000 80.000

s COEF 1.soo 3.500 1.s;oo 3.500 1.500 3.500 1.soo 3.500 1.500 3.500 1.soo 3.500 1.500 3.500 1.soo 3.500

EXAMPLE OF PRIN'I'ED RESULTS

Yl V2 srwvn L 15.000 16.000 15.~00 1~00.00 15.000 16.400 is.soc tsrio.oo 15.000 16.eoo 15.500 1sc,o.oo 15.000 17.2CIO 1!-.SOO l!>Oo.oo 15.000 11.c,oo 1s.soo 1soo.oo 15.000 18,.000 15.50(1 1500.00 15.000 18.400 15.500 1500.00 15.000 18.8(\0 15.500 1500.00

F VI VF .123 1.067 1.0~l .123 1.093 1.o~t .123 1.120 1. O~.l' ,123 l.llt7 1.or~ .123 1.113 l•Oll ,123 1.200 1,0t'l .123 1.227 l.Ot\~ .123 1.253 1.0~~

ABSTRACT

Data from a 1:48 scale model supplied the magnitudes and velocities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of fl.ow at the pumping plant, San Luis Fore bay, California, and showed that a side weir was effective in reducing the surges. Data were obtained with capacitance wave probes for partial and complete rejection of flow with and without backflow from the pump discharge lines. Max­imum surge peak heights were 5.4 ft·for complete rejection of the maximum discharge 'plus 200% backflow, 4. 5 ft with 150% backflow, and 1. 9 ft without backflow. Velocities of propagation were 20. 7, 20. 7, and 19.1 fps, respectively, for the 3 conditions. A 1,500 ft­long weir on the canal sideslope reduced the maximum surge height to 1. 0 ft without backflow and 1. 3 ft with either 150 or 200% backflow. The reflecting and attenuating characteristics of canal structures were observed and steady-state conditions after flow rejection with the entire flow discharging over the weir were measured. The undular form of the surge wave was analyzed and several comparisons were made with theory. A 1:10 scale sectional model was used to develop the weir crest shape.

ABSTRACT

Data from a 1 :48 scale model supplied the magnitudes and velocities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of fl.ow at the pumping plant, San Luis Forebay, California, and showed that a side weir was effective in reducing the surges. Data were obtained with capacitance wave probes for partial and complete rejection of flow with and without backflow from the pump discharge lines. Max­imum surge peak heights were 5. 4 ft for complete rejection of the maximum discharge plus 200% backflow, 4. 5 ft with 150% backflow, and 1. 9 ft without backflow. Velocities of propagation were 20. 7, 20. 7, and 19 .1 fps, respectively, for the 3 conditions. A 1, 500 ft­long weir on the canal sideslope reduced the maximum surge height to 1. 0 ft without backflow and 1. 3 ft with either 150 or 200% backflow. The reflecting and attenuating characteristics of canal structures were observed and steady-state conditions after flow rejection with the entire flow discharging over the weir were measured. The undular form of the surge wave was analyzed and several comparisons were made with theory. A 1:10 scale sectional model was used to develop the weir crest shape.

ABSTRACT

Data from a 1:48 scale model supplied the magnitudes and velocities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of flow at the pumping plant, San Luis Forebay, California, and showed that a side weir was effective in reducing the surges. Data were obtained with capacitance wave probes for partial and complete rejection of flow with and without backflow from the pump discharge lines. Max­imum surge peak heights were 5. 4 ft for complete rejection of the maximum discharge plus 200% backflow, 4.5 ft with 150% backflow, and 1.9 ftwithoutbackflow. Velocities of propagation were 20.7, 20. 7, and 19.1 fps, respectively, for the 3 conditions. A 1,500 ft­long weir on the canal sideslope reduced the maximum surge height to 1. 0 ft without backflow and 1. 3 ft with either 150 or 200% backflow. The reflecting and attenuating characteristics of canal structures were observed and steady-state conditions after flow rejection with the entire flow discharging over the weir were measured. The undular form of the surge wave was analyzed and several comparisons were made with theory. A 1:10 scale sectional model was used to develop the weir crest shape.

ABSTRACT

Data from a 1:48 scale model supplied the magnitudes and velocities of surges developed in the canal system following rejection of flow at the pumping plant, San Luis Forebay, California, and showed that a side weir was effective in reducing the surges. Data were obtained with capacitance wave probes for partial and complete rejection of flow with and without backflow from the pump discharge lines. Max­imum surge peak heights were 5. 4 ft for complete rejection of the maximum discharge plus 200% backflow, 4.5. ft with 150% backflow, and 1.9 ftwithoutbackflow. Velocities of propagation were 20.7, 20. 7, and 19.1 fps, respectively, for the 3 conditions. A 1,500 ft­long weir on the canal sideslope reduced the maximum surge height to 1. 0 ft without backflow and 1. 3 ft with either 150 or 200% backflow. The reflecting and attenuating characteristics of canal structures were observed and steady-state conditions after flow rejection with the entire flow discharging over the weir were measured. The undular form of the surge wave was analyzed and several comparisons were made with theory. A 1:10 scale sectional model was used to develop the weir crest shape.

Hyd-546 King, D. L.

"'

HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJEC­TION OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT, SAN LUIS UNIT, CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA Laboratory report, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, including 36 p, 27 fig, 6 tab, 14 ref, 1965.

DESCRIPTORS-- *pumping plants/ *canals/ *model tests/ *surges/ *trapezoidal channels/ *weirs/ hydraulic transients/ freeboard/ / bore/wave// discharge coefficients/ viscosity/ Reynolds number/ Froude number/ surface tension/ translatory waves/ unsteady fl.ow/ weir crests/ calibrations/ instrumentation/ laboratory equipment/ measuring instruments/ recording s7stems/ capacitance/ dielectrics/ electronic equipment/ oscillographs research and development IDENTIFIERS-- wave probes/ Weber number/ Central Valley Proj­ect, California/ San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant

Hyd-546 King, D. L. HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJEC­TION OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT, SAN LUIS UNIT, CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA Laboratory report, Bureau of Reclamation; Denver, including 36 p, 27 fig, 6 tab, 14 ref, 1965.

DESCRIPTORS-- *pumping plants/ *canals/ *model tests/ *surges/ *trapezoidal channels/ *weirs/ hydraulic transients/ freeboard/ / bore/wave// discharge coefficients/ viscosity/ Reynolds number/ Froude number/ surface tension/ translatory waves/ unsteady fl.ow/ weir crests/ calibrations/ instrumentation/ laboratory equipment/ measuring instruments/ recording s7stems/ capacitance/ dielectrics/ electronic equipment/ oscillographs research and development ' IDENTIFIERS-- wave probes/ Weber number/ Central Valley Proj­ect, California/ San Luis Fore bay Pumping Plant

Hyd-546 King, D. L. HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJEC­TION OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT, SAN LUIS UNIT, CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA Laboratory report, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, including 36 p, 27 fig, 6 tab, 14 ref, 1965.

DESCRIPTORS-- *pumping plants/ *canals/ *model tests/ *surges/ *trapezoidal channels/ *weirs/ hydraulic transients/ freeboard/ / bore/wave// discharge coefficients/ viscosity/ Reynolds number/ Froude number/ surface tension/ translatory waves/ unsteady fl.ow/ weir crests/ calibrations/ instrumentation/ laboratory equipment/ measuring instruments/ recording s7stems/ capacitance/ dielectrics/ electronic equipment/ oscillographs research and development IDENTIFIERS-- wave probes/ Weber number/ Central Valley Proj­ect, California/ San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant

Hyd-546 King, D. L. HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SURGES DEVELOPED BY REJEC­TION OF FLOW AT THE FOREBAY PUMPING PLANT, SAN LUIS UNIT, CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNlA Laboratory report, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, including 36 p, 27 fig, 6 tab, 14 ref, 1965.

DESCRIPTORS-- *pumping plants/ *canals/ *model tests/ *surges/ *trapezoidal channels/ *weirs/ hydraulic transients/ freeboard/ / bore/wave// discharge co·efficients/ viscosity/ Reynolds number/ Froude number/ surface tension/ translatory waves/ unsteady flow/ weir crests/ calibrations/ instrumentation/ laboratory equipment/ measuring instruments/ recording s7stems/ capacitance/ dielectrics/ electronic equipment/ oscillographs research and development IDENTIFIERS-- wave probes/ Weber number/ Central Valley Proj­ect, California/ San Luis Forebay Pumping Plant