HYDRAU LICS BRANCH OFFICIAL FILE COPY

Lah &/4 :~·- ., MA ST££!_

C >­::c:

. .

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

FILE COPY BUilEAU OF RECLAMATION HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

NO'r 'fO EE REMOVED li'ROM .li'ILE~

HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF TULE RIVER

PARSHALL FLUME--FRIANT-KERN CANAL

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA

Hydraulic Laboratory Report No. Hyd ~406

DIVISION OF ENG JN E ElHN n L ABORATORIES

COMMISSION'ER 1S OFFICE DENVER, COLORADO

Nove mber ·14, 1955

UNI'l'ED STABS DEP.AR'.ft4DT OF TB IITDIOR

BU.DAD Of RECLAMATION

Commissioner's Office Division ot Engineering

Laboratories Denver, Colorado Nevem.ber 14, 1955

Laboratory Report Ne. lf3d-lt.o6 liyd.raulie Lao0ratory Com,piled by: W. E. Wagner Reviewed and

cheeked ay: A. J. Peterka

Subject: Hydraulic model studies 0f Tule River Parshall flume--Friant­Kern Canal--Central Valley Project, ealifornia

Hydraulic model studies to rea.uce the turbulence in the sub­ject flume llla.ve been cOJQletea. This report contains a discussion ef the essential tests made iD. developing the necessary corrective measues, together With the conclusions and recommendations.

The Problem

Water releases during the past SWlllll.er thl'ou.gb. the Tule River Parshall flume have shown that turbulence and surface waves in the flume approach made aeeurate measurement of the flow in the flume impossible. Differences up to 39 percent between current meter measurements and the theoretical discharge as measured. by the &1:1tomatic recorder were observed, Figure 1. The jets from the gate openiJlgs struck the 7-foot 5-inch step at the entrance to the flume, causing large boils and sur­face disturbances.which extended dcmastream. into the converging section of' the flume, Figure 2. Surface undulations at tJae flume staff' gage varied between 0.25 and o.60 foot du.ring prototype test Nns.

A complete report from Region 2 on the operation of the pro­totype flume is contained in the .A;ppendiX. Essential data from. this report is tabulated below:

Canal Drop across w.s. variatiodepth Ha 1'heoret1eal Actual Percent gates at staff gage

{feetl {teetl flume g Q variation (teetl ~feetl

11t-.7 2.0 175 243 39 4-1/2-5 0.25 14.3 3.75 478 500 5 2-2-1/2 .6o 14.o 4.61i- 636 673 6 1-1-1/2 .60

Model studies were undertaken to determine the corrective meanres necessary to eliminate or reduce the turbw.lenee in the flume anroach and thereby make the flume an accurate measuring device.

'.rhe Model

A 1:18 scale med.el of the structure was used in the studies, Fipre 3. The m.o4el included a 216-tOG>t length of the Friant-Ke:rn Cani.l between Stations 5l.6o+95.93 am. 5163+u.93, the f'lum.e gate strac­ture, am. the Parsl3all flume. The extent qt tlle med.el is outlined by the·laeavy black 11».e in Fignre J+.

The quantity ef water flowing in the Fri.ant-Kera Canal was aeasurecl by a venturi meter. Releases tllrough the Par.shall flume were measured by a staff gage in the flume.

Test Procedure

'fhe tests were aade with 3,500 second-feet flowing throlll.gb. tae Friant-Kem C&D&J.. The" c1eptll of water in the canal was varied With an ad.justable tail gate 1;o correspaud te depths observed·in the proto­type. Beleases thr8tlgb. tm Parshall flume were controlled by slide gates and. were varied. between 250 seeoDd-feet and the JM.Ximm design discharge of 700 seconcl-feet.

!he efficiency- of the various corrective aeanres was eval.u.tecl "by visual observaticm.s of the flow in the flume approach and by •a.suring the heigb.'t et waves or surges at the flue statt gage. The Yater surface fluctuations were measured w1 th a J)Oint gage as the vertical distance laetveen the m1Bimml trough am. the maXiDIIIDl crest of the waves or surges passing the gage in a period of about l miDute.

The.Investigation

To verity tl1at the -.edel accurately representecl flow condi­tiOlls 1a tlLe prototy,pe, the mec1el first was operated With the flume approach similar to the prototype, Figure 5, and checked later vi th lb-mm. motion pictures f'uraished by the field. For com,parisen With the prototype, discllarges of 250, 500, 630, and 700 seconcl-f'eet With canal depths vary1ag from 14.1 to 17 feet were set up in the model flume. TM c:tose sim1lar1 ty between aodel u.d. prototype 1s apparent by com­parbg Figures 2 and 5. The boils at the entrance to the flume am. the waves and nrges 1D the flume are veey pronounced in both model sad pro­totype. Water surface i"luctuaticms measurecl in the m.oclel varied frm. 0.25 to o.5lt, foot as cOJll)al'ed to 0.25 te 0.60 foot in the protGtype.

Gbservations of the prototype design indicated. that the boils in the tlwae approach were caused. primaril.y by the 3ets tl"Oll the gates striking the ,rertical step at the fllllle entruce. It appeared. that by replacing the vertical step With a curved floor, the boils veulcl be red.uced. Six appnach tlOGrs, 4esigaate4 .A;pproaehes l throllgh 6, were tested.. wave la.eights measured with each approach ill place indicated

2

that Approaches l and 5, Figare 6B and F, reduced the fluctuation at the gage the greatest aaount. Approach 5, which is a simpler design au4 mre easily censtractecl il:l the f1el4, red.ttced the wave heights to 0.09 foot tGr a clischarge of 630 seccma-feet and to 0.23 toot tor 500 secoDCl-feet. The boils at the.thme entruce were mteria.lly reaueed and the flow 1n the flwlle was · ta1rl.y mdfo:rm, Figure 7.

It was evident frQD1 the above tests that the approach f'loor alone wOllld not sufficiently re4uce the surges in the tlae to permit accurate measurement of' the flow. Several types of wave suppressors iD the form. ot sloping a.ad vertical curtain. valls were tested in com­bination With .Approach 5, Fipre 611, I, aad J. !rhe cu.rte.in walls pro­videcl only slight :I.Qrovem.ent 1a the flow approaclwag the flue. !he jets trom tl1e gates were iireeted unier the cu.rtain wall aaa. contuuea dGWDstream With no appreciable redu.ctio:n in the height ef boils or surges at the fllune e:m.trance.

It therefore became appareat that sue meaus shoald. be pro­vided to break up the jet as it left tlle gates. Tests cm slotted. walls (J>esip.s 5-D and 5-E, Figure 6IC am. L) sh.mre4 that SOile form Of baffle placed cm the floor of the approau. w011ld. reduce the boils ~r surges from 0.23 foet to appnximately 0.10 f'oet, a ccmsidera1ille improvement over aq of the designs previously tested..

Therefore, tests were eoDClueted cm various sizes ud spacing of baffle piers placed. cm tlle apprQaah channel. floor. Prel1ndaary tests sla.owed tu.t tlae best effect was outail&ei wluta the· piers were laeated QP:roximately 2 feet cl.Gwnstreaa from the gates. ~sts were macle cm piers vary:Lng from 12 te 18 iDciles in wid.tll am. f:ra 3 feet 9 1.aches to 6 feet 9 imcaes in heip.t. 1e• upstream a.ad clOWDStreaa faces of the pier were vertical With a sill 9 inches nigh placed between the piers, Figue 611 tlaroap P.

The battle piers lua~d mterially iD f'llrtaer reucing the tlw.ctuatiGAS in the flume. !lley serve4 w break: up the t'J.cnr from the gates ~ prevented the Jets. t'roll strikiDg the approaca floor u4 caasiag the boils and turlmlence at the flmle entraee. Wave heipts meanre4 with tae piers iutalled var1ea. from o.oJI. te 0.13 t00t an.i tlt.e:re was very lit'tle titte:reace in perfol'IIU.Ce for piers 4 feet 9 inches to 6 teet 9 inues in a.eight. Since the tests on tlt.e pre-11JD1 nary pier shapes shewec1. tbat tlle height of pier had no appreciable effect a the amoant ot turbulence, a pier heipt of 5 feet was arbi traril.1' ehGsen for mre ietailed study.

CoDTeatioaal.J.y s:taaped piers hav111g a Wiclth of 12 aa4 18 iaches were tested., Figure 6Q tlaro1lgb. T. !rests, vhiea were male beth with aad Withou.t a sill placed between. the piers, shewed that the sills

3

were desirable and helped to rea.uee the wave heights a max:flDWll ef approximately o.<)7 foot. Also, slightly lower wave heights were observed when. piers having a Widtll of 18 iDches were installed..

Figure 8 sbns that the f'lum operatioa with 18-ineh-wide piers aud 9-incll sills ucl Approach 5 iJlstalled in tl1e mod.el. For flows below 600 second-feet, the water surf'aee was CGllP&l'&.ti vely SJII.OOth with surges varying between e.o4 aud. o.e, f'oot, depenoing 011 the dis­charge. There was no evidence of the PZ'QJIWlent boils obsel"led in the prototn,e design., Figure 5. Wh.ea the caual a.epta was im.e:reasecl to 17 feet and. 700 seeon4-feet was released. througll the fl'liUDe, a. slight hump ill tla.e water surface was netei near the flume entrance, Figare 8. However, the mAJd:umm surge at the flume staff gage was 0.09 foot, or the same as tla.at observed. for a clisellarge of 620 seccmd-feet a.ad a ca:aal d.epth of 14.l feet. A fluctuation of 0.09 foot in the staff gage reaa.­ing represeats aa error-ill tischarge ot less thaD l perceat, which is well witlwa the accuracy of tlle theoretical disclilarge tables for a Parshall fllme.

To dete:rmiae if farther re4uetion. of the surges cum.lei. be ebtain.ed.1 a slotted wall was pl.aced. between the 'baf'fle piers and the apprea.eh to the f'l'Wlle. Tests were mad.e using Walls D aml. E having slets 12 and 18 inches Wide, Fipre 6v aDCi. V. The slotted wall sligb.tly reaeed the turbulence 1D the flow en:tering the flume, Figure 9. The flw downstream. f:rem the slotted. wall appeared more uniform es~eia.J.J.y at the maximWll discharge of 700 second-feet. Observed wave heights shGW'ed that the nrges im the flume were further recluced approximately o.G2 foot when the slotted wall was used. ··

The model study indicated that the turbulence in tllle flume was caused. lq the jet from the gates strikir,.g tlle vertical step at the entrance tG the flume. By replacing the step with a sloping approach floor, the 'b&ils and surfaee clisturbaaees were materially reducea.. Furtlller reductiG11 of the turbulemce was obtaiD.ed by placing a row et baffle piers iJrlmecliately clewBstreea from the gate openings. With the appreael:l floor and the baffle piers installed in the moclel, the surges at the Parshall f'llUIIS gage were reduced to a 118:ximum of 0.09 toot. T.b.is variatien mi the gage ameunts to less than 1 percent ef the total iniicatecl diselaarge. Minor impnvement of the fluetue.tiag. water nr­f'ace can be obtainetl by installing a slotted Vall between the baffle piers and the sloping approaeh floor.

A sumar, of the wave lleigb.ts e'bse:rved in the model for the mre im;portaut designs is shown below:

• • Height ot waves • • Gaul • Flume • {teet1 ;erototne) • . depth • Q • • Mod.el • • •

ft • ets • Proto .. • Proto • Design • Desiga : Design • • • • • • • type • clesign •· 2 • .. -~-5A • ~--D-5A • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

14.8 • 25() • 0.25 • 0.25 • 0.14 • o.o4 • e.o4 .. . • • • . 14.4 500 .60 .38 .23 .07 • . • • : : .05 • • . • 14.l • 630 • .6o • .54 • .09 • .09 • .07 • • • • • • 17.0 • :zoo • ·• • 61 • . . ·22 • .02 • .. • • • •

It is recommencle4 tl!lat the stracture be modif'iecl to include aa approach floor (Appreach 5) aad a row of 'baffle piers 5 feet high and 18 illehes wide _with a 9-ineh--lngb. sill 'between the piers (Pier 5A), Figure 6s. · Details of tae approach tleor and tlle battle are shown ia Figare 10. If the best possible flow cor.ulitions are desired a slotted. wall, shown in Figu.re 10, may be installed at the upstreaa toe et the approach floer. :e:ewever, tlle sligla.t iJl;provement in the tlw conditions gained 'by t.b.e slotted wall is proaa.bl.7 not 31Astified by the ad.di tional eost of the wall.

Appl'GXimatel.7 15G teet of blaelt aad wlaite, 16-• motion picture fila was taken c,f the mere 1.JQortant desigms tested d.llrilllg the model stu'11'. It is requested tllat motion pictures of the pertor.maace of the pn>tot:,pe structure be obtained after the corrective •anres :bave been installed. Motion pictures of t1le revised structure, com­binecl With tlle pictures of the origi!lal structure and the model which are al~ available, Will provicle a.a excellent OP.P(;)rtunity for lll0del-prototype COJlll&.risons.

5

October 6, 1955

To: Regional Engineer Through: Read, Canals Section and Chief', Design Branch

From: c. G. Liden

Subject: Observatisn of flow conditions during test operation of Tille

River Parshall flwae--Friaut-lCem Canal.--Central Valley Project

A test operation Gf the Tille River Parshall. flume Ci>ll the Friant-Kern Canal was ma4e on September 29, 1955 for the pur,pose of observing the flow conditions through the fhune for varying discharges. The follOWing personnel were present during the test:

Fresno Office William Meyer

Lindsay Office T. R. Meyer, Canal Superintendent Richard Lawrence Jack Rosenthal Rex Moore

As noted in correspondence relative to this matter, it has been f'OW!d that current meter measurements macle durimg this year reveal. that the fJ.ows through the flume were eonsistentl.y higher at releases ranging between 240 cfs and 500 cfs than the theoretical rated dis­charges. Turbulence of the water and increased approach velocity at the entrance to the flume, resulting from increased drop in the water surface across tlle tul'llOl.tt gates upstream from. the flume with areater eanal depths, have been advanced. as the principal factors which. have caused the variation in discharge. Former current meter measurements made in 1950 inticated close agreement between the observed flow and the rated diseharge for a release of 200 cubic feet per second. The water depth in the canal was 12.5 feet during the ,ear 1950, wliereas it was 14. 9 feet when the measurements of this year were made.

In the letter of Se~r 20, 1955 to the Regi.oll&l Director from. Assistant Commissioner and. Chief' Engineer, subject 11Tu.rbulence in Tille Biver Parsaall flwne--Friant-Kern Oanal--Central Valley P.rojeet," it was requested that data pertaining to f'lwae cliscbarges of 200 cfs and 500 efs with caaal d.ep'._ths at 12.5 feet am. at 15 feet be obtained 4uring the test operation. Since it is necessary to keep the canal water surface checked to an approximate 15.0-foot a.epth iB order to satisfy deliveries to the L1m<bnGre Irrigatie>m District, it was :aot possible to run 881' test releases at a canal depth of 12.5 feet. Fur­ther, simce no current meter measurements had been made for releases lower than 240 efs, it was believed that extrapelation of the diseur,ae

1

curve based on such measurements to detera:Lne the head fC!>r a flow of 200 cfs could intl"Gi1lee some error. It was tlma eonelucled that the J.ol!est. tlow to be used 1D the tests should. be that correspondiag to a head of 2.0 feet. Test releases were made fer discharges of 21f.3 efs, 500 efs ,_ and 636 efs. . The canal water 4epth 4ropped f:raa 1.lt-. 9 feet te 14.o feet iving tile te,t.

For the first test release the tul'BOllt gates upstream fl"OJll the flume were opeae4 uatil a readiag of 2.0 feet was o"btaiaed oa the stage reeorder wld.cll measures the head in the cenvergiag section of the flWIIII. De flGW for this Jaea4., based. on tJae rating cv.rve e\ltaiae4 from current •ter aasuremeats ma4e in 1955, was 2Jt.3 cts. The theo­retical tree f'lw disuarge curve sacnrs the flow fer this 1lea4 to 'be 175 cfs, Yl'lieh inticates the actual 41.sdaarge exceeds the taeoretieal by appro:ld.Jaately 39 percent. TM canal c!eptll wa• J.4.9 feet at tlle begiu:Sng et tllds teat nlease.aad llad uoppecl to llt-.65 dllrillg the perioct the release vu hel4 at 243 cfs. 918 water sv:tace below tbe t1araotlt gates aml upstream fra the entraace w the flue was fairly suotll for this flow. A drop in tile water ·surf'ace estilllated to be apprnillately 6 iaches occvrea. abeut l foot a.ovnst:re• fZ'Qll the eatraace te the flue. The tJ.ow tlarGup the· flae 'belcnr this point was somewhat tv'b11.leat, a.ad. tae iepta et flow anearecl to vary. fid.s variation in 4epth w.a · aot iaticatea. · ea the aatematie recorder operated by the float ill tbe atilliq well. GpentiJlg :,ersoJlll'lel stated that a plv:g ha4 beea 1Dserte4 ia tlle Jt.-1ncla pipe lead.1Dg to tlle stillillg well, reaeillg tile iatalte eJ)eDiDg to 3/JJ iaell 1B eriler to elimute tlle fluctuatiGBS et tlle· -reco$:r.· Du1.llg tJae tim8 the flow was aailltained. at 2a..3 eta the recorar regiatel'd a coastaat upt1i·et 2.0 teet. Ol>servation of the viau.l 4eptll pp on the left s:Lc1e of tile flume indicated that the deptla fl.utuatei. between a Jda1nm •t 1.95 feet aa a mu:lama of 2.20 feet. The critical 4eptl& tor a flov fJf 243 eta tuw.p tlle 15-f'oot 'tllroat nald be 2.e3 teet. It tJms a.nears tut tlle eontrel _,. ·sll1ft Qstream troa the throat duiq :periods of 'the depth flucaaticms Ul4 flow at critical '1e:,tll at a sec-ti• wicler thaa the taroat oeeun at certain times Yhicl& 1IOIIJ.cl accRat fer a flow 1B excess of the thee:retical. Baaed oa tile 4ittezeace in the ieptu of water nrtace at tbe eat:raace · w the flame Yld.ell, aa notecl abcwe OOtll.4 Ollly 'be eati.mated, ·t11e 4rop ill water nrface ae:rosa the turaGtlt gates was iadicatet to be Ja..5 to 5.0 feet. It was not :,ossible to ietend.ae the tu.moat gate opening as the stems are tally eul.oeed an4 no calibrating evieea l1aft Deea Pl9Yi4e4 tor tlae gates.

!fhe tul'JIGl!lt gates were next raiae4 at11 tlle stage recOl'der registe:rea a llea4 ot 3.75 feet aieh eorreQends to a fl.GIi' ef 590 eta l>ase4 oa data e'btaine4 trca 1955 current meter Jl8Ullftlleats. TM

8

theoretical tiscllarge eurve iJldicates the f'J.ow te De 478 ets at W.s head. Fer the flew at W.s head tae water aui'aee upatre• from the tlwDe was turDUlell"t With a lmllp or ••n41ng wave occurring approxi­mtely l f'oot back of the eatrauee w the·flule. fld.a crest of' tae lm1Q was estimate4 to be a inches above the Qstre• water surface au. 12 iMhea a'bove the 4Gwnstream water surface. 8bservaticm et the tl.Gw at tlle nrtaee indicated water mvement apstrea aad. aowaatrea from 'the crest et tlle llmQ. FJ.ow in the flume appeared to be somew1'19.t tvlNlea't aDd. water nrtaee lad a white foamy appearance imlletiately beln tae fl.lllle entrance. Be ·variat:la from the 3. 75-f'eot :b.eacl was shoo. en tlle au-tematic reeorier. Fl.u.et'lllatioaa troa a ldn1mma et 3.50 feet to a maximwll ot Ji..10 feet in the head. were idieatea. en tlle "f'inal statt gage. !lie critieal iepth tor this quaat:lty at tbe tlaroat is 3 .26 feet. It is. tlms 1Bcl.1oate4 that tae eatnl remaias at the tlaroat fer releases at this stage. The 4epth of water in tile cual clropped. tra llf-.65 feet to 14.3 feet dviDg the periG4 nlease of 500 ef's was DM1e. Based. cim estimated titferences in water nrtaees, it appears that tlae 4.rop · ill water surface aeross 1;lle tura<Nt gates was 'between 2.0 feet u.4 2.5 feet.

!he tun.wt gates were then raised to hll opelliDg 8llf1 for this c-.cliticm the aatomatic stage recorder illiieatecl. tlle aeu. oa tJae flume te be 4.64 feet. Be current meter aeasuemeats ave beea mate tor a flow et this aapituie. llxtrapelatiea of the tiaclaarge carve based-.oa current meter -meanremeats 1Dclicate4 tlae flew to be 636 cf's. lle''poiats fer tlais curve llave beea obtained tor !leads ia excess of lt..o feet am 1 t, is tJms en.cleat that t1le actual disclaarge my be appreeiably different tban tllia flov. The tlleoretical tree flow diselaarge nne saws the flow to be 673 ets tor this lied. For this coatittoa of f'la, the water sartace upstream. tra the eatrance to tl!te flume appeared level an4 ae standing wave or hap was netei. Just eel.ow tile entrance to flume tl2e water surface c1rone4 aa est:l.llated . 8 :l.acJl.es. !ftlere was • White teaa ·on tb.e water svface iD. tile flume.-· 'ftae av.tomatic recor4er iDdicated a ccm.sta.Bt llee4 ef Jt..6JI. feet dar1Dg tlile period ot the teat at this tl.R'. A heaa variatiea from a a::La1am of' Jt..5e feet to a max1mum of 5.10 feet was iaiicated fNlll obsena;tiou. ot tlle "rinal statt gage. For a flew ot 63' cf's the critical depth thrw.gh the throa:t is 3.83 teet. Basecl • these data, it appears that control. 7'em8-1ns at tl)e. throat for tais fl.GW'. 'ftae clepth et water 1a the canal droppei. from 1.Jt..3 feet to 14.0 feet cmr1q tu perio4 et this test fl.ow. It was estimated. that the drop in water nrf'ace across tlle turDCNt gates was be-t.veen 1.0 tGOt and 1.5 feet.

9

Conclusions

Observation of the !l.'lue ti:ver Parshall flume duriq test disolaarges om Septem'ber 29, 1955 indicates that, UDder eperatioa at canal depths ot appreximately 15.0 feet, some turbalenee caecurs at flows iD the range tra 240 ets to 6lt.o ets. A rather Wi.4e variation in flow between the theoretical and actual at tlle lonr tiscaarges has been nete4. Based Oil e'bserved flume beads at an actual fl.w of 21t.3 cfs, it appears "that control may shift Qstream f'roa tJa.e throat am. flow at critical depth 11&y occur 1D a section somenat Wider tllan the tllreat~ An appreeiabl.e veloc:ity ot approach to the flume maJ' exist at this tischarp lf'bic:h could cause a11eh a contitioD of flow in the flue. For actual flows of 500 cfs aad 636 efs, the eeservea flume heails are appreciably greater tllaB cOJQate4 critical cileptas at tJa.e throat for these cliseharges. Fairly elese agreement between theoretical. &114 actual tiseharges is iD.d.icated tor these flows, and. it tlm.s appears that tlle velocity- of approach flees not affect the operation of the flume to Acll a marked dep-ee Withia tllis range of tisuarges.

/s/ c. G. Lid.ea

Netecl: --~·-·~· ... J ... -iiiMi--eC~· .. rzs~tl__,,e_, __ , (Begicaal ED.gimer)

' 10-7-55 Date

10

Flow at vertical step Flow in flume Q = 243 cfs

Q = 500 cfs

Q = 636 cfs

TULE RIVER PARSHALL FLUME Operation of Prototype

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 3

THE 1:18 MODEL

I

I

f-,.

I I. I•

Head (Ho) 1n reef

I

t:

. J: __ : . . . ~-:. : ___ +· :J , 1 -, -~ · ..•. · · 1 , '1·· .. ·•.·· · !. .. I .. 1 . . __,._ ' ' .

+--....._.! -r-.L~j_---:-1: - i :r-

T t. -- • -+:..: --1 '. 1.·

: ---+-+-. .

: -+·:+-. t

·- j i.

. . t· ' _..._..,_.........,.. __ _,_ -:--;.-·-1-·-,···· .. • : t: · 1· .:~ .:. • .:.l_____:

:. · :P : . : ...

•·. ·t- : _j. __ :

I

J.__ __ .._ __ _

..

I I

• -·-1

• --L--- . 1 -- -.J...'.._ -

,.-1

+---·-·+ i . i • .. . l

1·

PROTOTYPE DESIGN

Q = 250 cfs. d = 14.8 1 Q = 500 cfs. d = 14.41

Q = 630 cfs. d = 14.1 1 Q = 700 cfs. d = 1 7. 0'

TULE RIVER PARSHALL FLUME Operation of Prototype Design

1:18 Model

FIGURE 5

S'l

\. ·\.

SECTION K-K

f;/ I I t i ·f / j_,,~:d ia,/ct,oti os directed

i'//', c~ ;,t~ ;

f ,' / / ! .....

ci, :' ~ ~ / .l'

! /' { \

\, \\· .•.. •, \t ·---...... _ .......... __ .. \

<'~~·· ..... :·\ r·\' 398.r \ _ . .,•'°' \ \ l \ t i . . . ' . ~ ..

.. ~- o : I ~ ¥ o -.. ... ~; i r .. r ··\ ~ '~ : T ' , .: !

• 'o I • • •

\.'"~\ .• l i :)! .' ,/ !

_i::;5:<t'.\{. 1,,

g .. :

1 •• 1 ·. )i

i ..;, .:! " • ... -ii .. 0 .. c:: c:: i " .. ~ 0

" .. .., j 'c· ,·· \ '

·,.·E1t,nd i,rot,ct1011 os direcftd.

/ \ )i '~!0! ;\\ '>:.:

c'-> : [ Tule R,ver · Channel

~1 .1 <

.., ~

ii' .., ...J ::, ....

i~cr(o , ... ~ :' //' :· / f j [,tend protect,on

( \ os d,rected·-·· ...

'\\

• ; . !f &\ i • : ~

ll

~

,!l/ : ... --···\. .... I /// .... /\,

: ~ · ..... ...- f l/ l \ \ .... ::····· .

.. i ~ ~-. ~--

....... ·.:..../

! .. ·/·· .. ..... - .. ~ e~ . Q_ _, :

~~ \ .. . ...... ~ ~ \

... .

• .....

..... ,~ ../·· ~-f o o \ i t, t .., 00 . ··:..... .. .... .... ... ~. ~ .... .

i ···-';----::~-,,t,nd channel i,covot,on and ,mbon•m,nt as dt

l ..... \.j \ \ ........ ,Cfld-. ····· % .

PLAN I

~ ·"

.. .. r°IGVRE 4

•. -£,tend and connec1 10 t8" ,--· concrete pipe . l

.. ,. .. ~ ~ .. co ~ 0 0 ., • 00 • .. ·Safety fencing

: not shown " ~ ii / For deta ,ts of safety fenc ing at outlet

., , 1 lrons1t1on see Owg No F· 6359 · C

I-ii '. / .' ..•• ,~·,;i.-..:.:.:.::·{ 1s· 0 D Steel pipe ig ,· •.• -3'- f...-1 '~

..._ --El.412 .9 ),, r 7

N.G.!T:· ; ;\-..Lm --- - --

_ __ i ~~t0 :--z :5 ( r . /·B:Z-v .;;>

.., : .. ~ . : .: .~: ' : _: _. . : . : 0-vi: , ; .:. .. ,~···E1 41? 9. :' 1 ·' 1.s

' •. ' I ' ' .' /, . / •, ~~ ,, ' ~ f I : • i ,'I r ' f ~:;.;: ___ _

~ Sta 5169.09 04

El 391 92\

.~i.. ,2·

SECTION G-G

8acH1/I

SECTION C-C

st,wo,--.___i

•• -··r Pipe railing / \ not shown··-··· Bodfil

: ... . ,i;:. . .,. ... .!!E~~ t· lllttfi1 ~-- ------

~~\

{l 0 0 ..

\ ..... ooO •••

.. 9: si ~i~· .. ~ ...

Top of lining : ·•• ---!f'-...,l·~- ·22'-• ··· EL 409.81·, ./ El414.2~···l:'\-H~7J"....:_ .1 · .••.•••••• .j,t5f r---,j!o~- ~,

: / · , : •1 ~ '

.' £T- : - ("·"·;;~409 "J ,.4r, I ···= I ! -1 "",... c:."' ,h ,cEl-~10.15 .~ I ··- ,rf~d and conn,;t to 'l ,.-:a;::,L.... ___ -.J

!' cone"!'' p,pe. ·~ 0 • ,-..: 'llt I -

I i i. ·-- ---·-r ~ T W CURVE DATA :

P.1 Sta,5168•60.63 .l·6-<f16:o'Slide , ½j I. • ,• 47' Rt. gates tt0f shown -: R• ,co.oo· /is' L 1 • •t "" ) _: T• 48 4,' . ne~ . , s ru..S •

L• '6.90'

' Cano! 1tnm9

_N. fi.J:.."i. _

~

·El J!J2 . .S,

Pom19 slab· _.-

i: Cllann,t Tut, R1v1r- -

SECTION E-E

SECTION F-F

Waste war

•

~--,,.-= ,1 ·:r--­_:l,__ --:t---tr-

- !l i! :1 i! :: i: !': !I :: ! I •i

ESTIIIATED OUAIITITl£S C-rm III llff#lf-------·----·.100 ca r• Collcreft i• 11•1"9-----·---·-.. ·--·-'50 C& Y*­Con,,.t, '" stnict11re•---·---.. ·--·--.5,400 C. ,.._ Rrinfara'"nt s'"'-··-·---·-·· ···--',000,000 OI. Gotts olld /IOfsts_. __ ·_··--·-·· .. -·-·'J,fOO Lk lllisu/1011Hus atrfo'-i-·-·······-···-'',100 Us.

REFERE#CE DRAWINGS ~ft!~''lJM'=,:.~~-~':_W_A.". ~ ~~:-:-: ~:UU:i

·--c,,,t £1 Jt, 21 ,o 0 to ,oo .-Backf ,11 as : directed

Sl,WO# lfftfT ntAIISIT/Olf_ ••••••••• -··-· •••• -1 ...... flN -Olf OUTlCT ntA#SITIOlf • • ···-·. ·····--··--_.,.+191N wurc-111LCT r•,t11S/T/ON_ ••••• --·-···-· __ • ..; ... ~ tJASTEWAY·,._..,.u nu•r-c.arr sr11ucnas.-.~­wASTE1JAY-1tA01A1. MT( MO HOIST INSTAUAT/Oll __ ,_40. WAST(WA'f•OI/TlET ntA.,TIOII. - · . ..... ··--·- •• • - 114-

-·El Jlt ti

Safety ftrrc,,19 110t shown .

~ ··~O'· ··r~J~4:.: .. ~-,{-.::.::::::::::.:· ·'.~·:~~· P,Pf ro1l1ng ""' shown-.., ' \ ,,J~~:9~ . .rz··o·~,r-,· Rod10I got,

SC ALE Of FEET

.· Tute R,v,r { Channel i-' st, 5165. eo

·· --: 38'-o' .:

Et Jte 5!

. /J.r ·· Et J9J OM~,

SECTION J-J .. -·· <9J·e-f · · .

1.

*' -4J·8 . -·······J<»-o'·· ........ ······ 16,n' • . · Sof~y fencin g not shown

.. -BG Channel Max Et J99 0 ·• ~ co· t,j,-;;'" 1~ .. ·_.1·ao. Steel p,pt o, 4000

~=~~-ltAOI~ MT£ ANO HOIST lllSTAI.UT/011.. •••• -::::. lfOX TltANSIT/OlfS-~•• ANO SECTIOIIL ••••• - •• -..;.e..+ eo,r SECTIO#·T.,,.C C ••••••• ·-··-···--· ·· ~···- ~ TltMSITIOlf ll#OlltOltAllfL-- -· •••• -· -·· •••• ~----CA#A L 1..1111/lfS ......... ____ • ----··· •••• --- - ..... . ME TAL WATEltSTOl"S ••••• •••• ···- _ •••• ___ • -·--·eM-. TltllClt A.1110 ~~ ltAILIIH •.•... - .. . .•.. - .• - •.•• I ... ... JOl"T DETAILS ••• •••••••••• -·· ••••••• ~. -·· _ _._. .... , ltllHElt WATlltSTO,. -IIIITlltSECT/0# TYl"CS ••.••• .;_ .• 114•0• lfASTEWA'f·IArE STIIUCTUltt'.•STII.L.M IIOOL-_,."5HAU /l'L-···-··· •••••... ••••••••••••••...•. 4 .. •0-II ...

THIS Oft., .. 9~"lf0O OW9. _l/4 •

0•4,00 Ltm,t of c01J1pacted 'b«tf1II· •. ~1/· : r-·6:o· I If S El .a, e:u e: t ~ j·f 2~_M1n r ,prap

--- _.Jil,; -----·-::1, •. -Lt- --------- -

i 24·fr11n r,prap -·~. t;; ·:{(412 92 I r·N w s Et 409 tJ

I '' &~ , W j J frl1n r,p~O~·:c, _ _,,_:,~~=--~\ ~ -..,v f,.:,. · • ... --- "'

i. ' J ·-6· Iron flop-110lv,s

SECTION H-H , .,_.Ta lMT~I

~0,T,C--·-­CCHntM. ~L.U' .... CT'-~

Stot,ons and ,1trofioM of cur~, data lo i11~ert of 1tructurt

~' f:! .. k-~- --?· t $•0£0)] J .], Jrr jJ .:;-f:: ·~l ; ·Et J,O 7;-.~1 391 92

!o', JOO' o'· •.•. .......•.. .... .,.,:. .. ,.._ 21~f._:.. nderdra,ns not shown

·······:----~··~·~·;·t~··5~~~·:;; ·;;·· ;,·::: ~-~ct,~n Tr~~ ;;~·;;6;:;~·;~ ·;,· ; ·;; 0;}--·:\;;,;,, .; ~oct,d :{;; ;~: ;!!::~: i~ f\ ~:f :: '. P I Stw $/ti4, 2J 86 Et J77 OJ

I PI Sta 5161• 36 64 Et J77 OJ : bodf,11 ' PT s,, 5167 • 79 48 El J9I 92

• PT Stw. ''" .JO 00 Et J77 OJ PT Sta 5167• 42 ,1 Et J79 J4 4' 20• 2t' R• 15 oo· A,,,.,o· R• J700 ' 4 , 20'21' R•JToo· r , 2 69 ' L•5 JJ '

T, ti 14 ' L• 12 16' T• 6 64' LdJ 14'

SECTION A-A

,o

SCALE ~ FEET

HYDRAULIC HCTION A V

Lined S,ct,a~ Ho 4 976.3' 461

Siphon 5,016 6.78 L, .. , S,ct10,, No 5 989 79 4 04

It# CAUL. -na...., .....

PROPERTIES 'It__,..._

0 r n • 4,00 10 ,. .014 MMII 4000 J /0 014 -J999 10 86 .014 00006

DESIGN 5.

Q = 250 cfs. d = 14.8'

Q = 500 cfs. d = 14.4'

TULE RIVER PARSHALL FLUME Operation of Design 5

1:18 Model

FIGURE 7

DESIGN 5-5a

Q = 250 cfs. d = 14.8 1 Q = 500 cfs. d = 14.4 1

Q = 620 cfs. d = 14.1 1 Q = 700 cfs. d = 17.01

TULE RIVER PARSHALL FLUME Operation of Design 5-5a

(Recommended) 1:18 Model

FIGURE 8

DESIGN 5-D-5a

Q = 250 cfs. d = 14.8' Q = 500 cfs. d = 14.4 1

Q = 610 cfs. d = 14. 1 1 Q = 700 cfs. d = 17. 0 1

TULE RIVER PARSHALL FLUME Operation of Design 5-D-5a

1:18 Model

FIGURE 9

i

-·- --·------ --·-+

1' • ·-1:.

i . : ' r· . ·---- --·

' '. .. ·.I',·,

I I·

. I

-1

.. i

, _ _.... ___ ~---~---~- ·---r-- -~--+-----l . lo -·• _______ J.. ____ _

I I i 1 I I . - j : L

I I ; i I I , i j 1 I , t , I ·-·---r---7·---,-----0------.-- --,--, ·-·· , .. --· ----· .. -----:--~----r-----' !

- ;--~--· --•-- - ---

. : . I I ! I ··j - - : ____ J_ I

~~ iri ~v:a '( : i

-- - ----. - .. -_i_ --------- -- ---- '.-~---- : -- - _r ___ -p -: --1 -- =T , , , .. ..r-__ _ ..._·-.25~·1P12 .. ~---~·: .. .. ii ,- ~ - . ~. ;.; ...... ~ ..... ~ -- ..;. ;.. -~:.:. - ,- .--~ -.. , I :, I I ! ~--... ·----- -· -~- - ---

_T--~-

-- -- I - --- - -4 -~-- ----

_P,e r Ve/a; I

Lsis _____ ·

..... ~

_ _L _~ .... ~~ ... ~~-i . j

c-'.J J..JG 1 ; Yir".,. / 1 . --..,__(_a I.L~ ..J1 . - ~..u,LJ.L.

' C6,n?.~ on!J ... ~ I ,)h +- improve m e.nt} PAR:rf/2.L ~. r k.~!.l.·tC

RECoMM ENOCO /1,:;01,:1.:/iTIONS /: /8 ~:;;q,'c:, ,,_.,,,_,41!:.r

(PF~l~N .s-.. s-a..) -~·.-: /.

Ii I

I>, I . , '

T I

I I j

1--- -I ,

I i 1----j ! I

_ _J_ I

I ··- -- ·-+-··--

-+---+--+--+--·---­!

---+--+--~----- --- 1· --- ~ ~

-+-i~'l-7 ...... ~t--+-i-----+---l-:i!...,--4~,-.,IP\-

I