1 / 46

Hydrology and Hydraulics

Hydrology and Hydraulics. Reservoir Configuration. Table 3 Dam and Outlet Configuration for Alternatives . Notes: 1 The spillway weir coefficient was calculated from the given spillway length and a spillway capacity requirement of 50,000 cfs.

annona
Télécharger la présentation

Hydrology and Hydraulics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Hydrology and Hydraulics

  2. Reservoir Configuration

  3. Table 3Dam and Outlet Configuration for Alternatives . Notes: 1 The spillway weir coefficient was calculated from the given spillway length and a spillway capacity requirement of 50,000 cfs

  4. Table 7Multi-Purpose Reservoir Power Release Schedule

  5. Table 8Multi-Purpose Reservoir Overall Release Schedule (November 24 to March 31)

  6. Table 9Multi-Purpose Reservoir Overall Release Schedule (April 1 to November 23)

  7. Flood Modeling

  8. Figure 3 Reservoir Water Surface Elevation and Outflow – 100-year Event, Flood Storage Alternative

  9. Figure 2 Comparison of Flood Storage Alternative to Current Conditions – 100-year Event, USGS Gage at Doty

  10. Table 6Flood Storage Reservoir Emptying Time after Flood Events Notes: Time is calculated starting from the time when the reservoir begins storing water (reservoir inflow > 2000 cfs) and ending at the time when reservoir outflow is equal to reservoir inflow.

  11. Table 5Comparison of Flood Storage and Current Conditions Modeling Resultsat the USGS Gage at Doty Notes: Current = current conditions alternative Flood = flood storage alternative

  12. Figure 14 1996 Flood Hydrograph at Mellen Street

  13. Figure 19 1996 Flood Water Surface Elevation Profile, Existing and Proposed

  14. Figure 13 100-year Hydrograph at Mellen Street

  15. Figure 15 100-year Flood Profile, Existing and Proposed

  16. Figure 16 50-year Water Surface Elevation Profile, Existing and Proposed

  17. Figure 17 10-year Water Surface Elevation Profile, Existing and Proposed

  18. Figure 18 2-year Water Surface Elevation Profile, Existing and Proposed

  19. Flow Exceedance Analysis

  20. Figure 7 Exceedance Curves for the Flood Storage and Current Conditions Alternatives – USGS Gage at Doty

  21. Table 10Comparison of Flood Control and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statisticsat the USGS Gage at Doty Notes: Flood = flood storage alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  22. Table 13Comparison of Flood Control and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statistics at the USGS Gage at Grand Mound Notes: Flood = flood storage alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  23. Table 14Comparison of Flood Control and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statisticsat the USGS Gage at Porter Notes: Flood = flood storage alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  24. Figure 5 Comparison of Multi-purpose Alternative to Gage Records – USGS Gage at Doty – Water Years 2001 to 2003

  25. Figure 6 Reservoir Results for Multi-purpose Alternative – Water Years 2001 to 2003

  26. Figure 8 Exceedance Curves for the Multi-purpose and Current Conditions Alternatives – USGS Gage at Doty

  27. Table 11Comparison of Multi-Purpose and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statistics at the USGS Gage at Doty Notes: Multi = multi-purpose alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  28. Table 15Comparison of Multi-Purpose and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statistics at the USGS Gage at Grand Mound Notes: Multi = multi-purpose alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  29. Table 16Comparison of Multi-Purpose and Current Conditions Alternatives Monthly Flow Statistics at the USGS Gage at Porter Notes: Multi = multi-purpose alternative Current = current conditions alternative

  30. Water Quality/Temperature Modeling

  31. Figure 20 Inflow Hydrographs Used at the Upstream Boundary (Doty Gage) for Temperature Modeling

  32. Locations of Temperature Probes/Water Quality Data

  33. Figure 25 Riverwide flows simulated on July 15, 2010 for the baseline and multi-purpose reservoir scenarios

  34. Figure 26 Riverwide flows simulated on August 22, 2010 for the baseline and multi-purpose reservoir scenarios

  35. Example of Reservoir Output – CE QUAL 2 Model

  36. Calibration of Water Quality Model

  37. Number of days Average Water Column Temperature Exceeds 18°C For Various Reaches

More Related