..

HYDRAULICS BRANCH

OFFICIAL FILE COPY

UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF TH[ INTERIOR

BUR EAU OF RECLAMATION

QF/=/GF-

Fll[ COPY BUREAU OF RECLAMATION HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

- --- '-- -- ·--- � --=-- . ·-- -- -

� HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF MEDICINE CREEK DAM SPILLWAY--FRENCHMAN­CAMBRIDGE UNIT--MISSOURI RIVER

BASIN PROJECT, NEBRASKA

Hydraulic Laboratory Report No. Hyd.-279

RESEARCH AND GEOLOGY DIVISION

BRANCH OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

DENVER, COLORADO

JULY 6, 1950

CONTENTS

Purpose of Study • . • • • • • . . • • • • • • 1 Conclusions . . . . • ,, • . " . o • • • • • • • • • • • o 1 Recormnendations . • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Acknowledginent • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 Introduction .. o " • " " o • o • • • o • • • • • • " o o o 2

Description of Prototype Structure • • • • • • • • • 2 Two Types of Spillway Considered • • • • • • • • • • 2

Investigation of Original Spillway Using Radial Gates o $ 2 Description of Gate-Controlled Spillway • • • c � • • 2 Description of Spillway Model • � • • ., • • w •• • • • 3 Initial Tests .. ,, •. .. o .. ,.. " •. .. � .,. ,. .. .. � � " .., 3 Stilling Basin Studies • ,, a " r, ., ., � .. � • � -• " ,. 3 Flow in Spillway Chute • . � .. � �. "' .. • 7 ., ,. ,, " 4 Wing Wall A--Vertical Wall, 3O-Foot Upstream Radius . 4 Approach Wing Wall on Left Side • c- � ,, ., ,, " e • � .. 4 Spillway Capacity � .• • • c � • • • � ,. " • , � ., .. , 4

Investigation of Uncontrolled Spillway ,, ., .• . ,, , • • , � 5 Description of Uncontrolled Spillway • � • C " 0 5 Study of the Right Approach Wing Wall . � , , ,, ., ., 5 Wing Wall B--Vertical Wall, 525-Foot Radius ... .. . . -r 6 Wing Wall C-Vertical Wall, 45° with Respect to

Spillway Axis • . • • • · • • • • • .. q • .. ,, • • 6 Wing Wall D-Vertical Wall, 45° with Respect to

Spillway Axis, 15-Foot Upstream Radius • • • • • 7 Wing Wall E--Warped Surface • • • • • • • • • • • . • 7 Wing \fall F--Vertical Wall on Elliptical Curve,

25-Foot Upstream. Radius • • ,,, • • • • • • • • • 7 Wing Wall G---Vertical Wall of C:ircuiar Arcs, 2O-Foot

Upstream Radius • ., • • • , * • • • • • • . ,, • 7 Wing Wall H-Recommended Design-Vertical Wall of

Circular Arcs, 2O-Foot Upstream Radius . • • • • 8 F low Conditions in the Approach Channel--Recommended

D�ign 8 Flow Conditions at the Crest--Recorrunended Design 8 Water-Surface Profile Adjacent to Piers 9 Flow Conditions Below Crest Piers--Recommended Design 9 Capacity of Recommended Design 9

Figure

1 Location Map

LIST OF FIGURES

2 1:60 Model of Original Design 3 Stilling Basin Wave Height 4 Water-Surface Profiles 5 Spillway--Discharge of 139,000 and 75,000 cfs 6 Approach Channel--Discharge of 139,000 and 75,000 cfs 7 Spillway Capacity Curves-Radial Gate Controlled 8 Final Design--Medicine Creek Dam Spillway 9 Right Approach Wing Wall Designs

10 Flow Conditions for Wing Wall C 11 Flow Conditions for Wing Wall D 12 Flow Conditions for Wing Wall E 13 Flow Conditions for Wing Wall F 14 Flow Conditions for Wing WaJ.1 G 15 Flow Conditions for Wing Wall H 16 Spillway Crest-Recommended Design 17 Water-Surface Profiles--Recommended Design 18 Water-Surface Profile on Piers 19 Capacity Curves--Recommended Design

UNITED STATES DEPAR'IMENT OF '!HE JNTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Branch of Design and Construction Research and Geology Division Denver, Colorado

Laboratory Report No. Hyd-279 Hydraulic Laboratory Compiled by: J. c. Schuster Reviewed by: J. W. Ball and Ju:cy 6, 1950

W. C. Case

Subject: Hydraulic model studies of Medicine Creek Dam spillway­Frenchman-Cambridge Uni t--Mis souri River Basin·. Project, Nebraska.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

The hydraulic model studies discussed in this report were made to determine the ca.pacity and to �vestigate the £low conditions in the approach channel., over the crest., in the chute., and in the still­ing pool of the Medicine Creek Dam spillway to assure its satisfactory performance,

CONCLUSIONS

1. 'lbe use of a vertical approach wing wall., constructed of cir­cular arcs with radii vaeying from 192 feet at the crest to 20 feet at the upstream and., on the right-hand side of the approach channel ot the Medicine Creek Dam spillway will provide satisfactory flow condi­tion• in the channel and at the crest for floods up to and including the deoign oapaoity of 98,000 cubic feet per second (Figures 8 and 9H),

2, '.t'h111 best flow conditions at the crest were obtained when a vortioal approaoh wing wall with its top above the reservoir surface a.nd having a plan 1eotion of an elliptical curve (Figure 9F) was used up1troM\ on tho rilht ... hand side of the spillwa;v, It ia believed that tho 1am, typo of wall would operate eq,ual.J,1' ao well on other struotures who:rc the dmn fo:mm oru, 1ide of the 1pillwa,y and the approach flow is &0:ro1H1 and :pa:rallel to tho taoe of the dam,

3, PN@li'IW'@I on tho o:r@1t1 of tho 1"filOOffifflfindad liJ pillway will be &bove &tffion�o:rio tor Lil. flcnffl,

DCOMM'.filNDA'rlONS

l, U11 tho ri�t &pproaoh wing wall designated. Design H (Figure 9) which :Lo & ve:rtioal wall having a. plan section of circula1" a.res.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The design of the hydraulic features of the Medicine Creek Dam spillway were evolved through the cooperation of engineers of the Dams Division and the Hydraulic Laboratory .

INTRODUCTION

Description of Prototype Structure

Medicine Creek Dam and Reservoir are located approximately 10 miles north of Cambridge, Nebraska, on Medicine Creek (Figure 1). This reservoir is linked with Enders Reservoir for flood control and irriga­tion storage. The dam is a compacted earth structure having a length of 4,000 feet, a thickness at the base of approximately 650 feet, and a height of 102 feet above the stream bed.

The flow from the reservoir is passed over a spillway at the left abutment of the dam or through an outlet works located approximately 1,600 feet to the right of the spillway and passing through the dam. Nor­mal discharges of the creek are handled by the outlet works or by a 13-foot wide normal-flow crest at elevation 2366 . l in the center of the spillway, while flood discharges are released over a 200-foot wide flood­flow crest at elevation 2386.20 (Figure 8). Spillway discharges will flow into a concrete-lined stilling basin having a constant width of 262 feet and designed for a maximum of 98,000 cfs. Water is supplied to the outlet works by a tunnel and 44-inch pipe from the reservoir . A 3-foot 3-inch by 3-foot 3-inch high-pressure slide gate controls the discharge from the outlet and releases it into the outlet stilling basin. A report of the hydraulic studies for the design of the outlet works will be pub­lished at a later date.

Two Types of Spillway Considered

Two crest designs for controlling the spillway discharge were studied, one at elevation 2362.2 controlled by four 50- by 24-foot radial gates, and the other 24 feet higher and uncontrolled. Both designs con­tained a 13-foot section of uncontrolled crest at elevation 2366.1 on the center line of the spillway.

INVESTIGATION OF ORIGINAL SPILLWAY USING RADIAL GATES

Description of Gate-Controllerl Spillway

Four float-controlled 50- by 24=foot radiaL gates were included in the original design of Medicine Creek spillwayo A maximum discharge of 139,000 second-feet was to be passed by these gates and the short length of uncontrolled cresto The gate=controlled flood-flow crest at elevation 2362.2 had a net length of 200 feet, while the uncontrolled

2

section 3.9 feet higher at elevation 2366.1, designed to pass the normal flow of the creek, had a length of 13 feet. All water discharged by the spillway flows into a 278�foot-wide concrete-lined rectangular stilling basin, which discharges 500 second-feet per foot of width at the maximum flow. Chute blocks, 6 feet 9 inches high by 6 feet wide, were placed at the upstream end of the stilling basin and a dentated sill 8 feet high was used at the downstream end. The training walls of the stilling basin were designed with a height of 55 feet to provide 8 feet of freeboard 'above the norma}tail water elevation for the maxim1mi. design discharge.

Description of Spillway Model

The hydraulic model of the gate-controlled spillway (Figure 2) was built to a scale of 1:60. The model consisted of a portion of the reservoir, the upstream approach channel, all of the spillway; including the stilling basin, and a.section of the channel downstream. Topography upstream of the spillway was constructed of concrete and the topography downstream was formed in sand. The spillway crest, chute, and stilling basin apron were formed of concrete using metal templates as guides. The radial gates of the original design were made of metal and the piers of wood. Water for the model was supplied by a 12-inch centrifugal pump and measured by Venturi meters. The flow approaching the crest was uni­formly distributed by discharging the water behind and passing it through a rock baffle. Point gages, with vernier graduations to thousandths of a foot, were used to measure reservoir and tail water elevations. Pie­zometers were located in both the flood-flow and normal-flow crest sec­tions for determining water pressures during operation.

Initial Tests

When the model of this design was placed in operation, a dis­turbance caused by the right approach wing wall resulted in an unequal flow distribution at the crest. Also wave action in the stilling basin showed evidence of overtopping the training walls. The original approach wing wall for the right side of the spillway was studied only qualita­�ively by observing its effect upon the flow of the approach channel. In determining the effectiveness of the stilling basin the location and appearance of the hydraulic jump and the water surface profile with re­spect to the training waJ.ls were studied.

Stilling Basin Studies

There was danger that the waves in the s tilling pool would top the training walls and remove the backfill. However, some economy would be realized if the height of stilling basin training walls could be re­duced and tests were conducted to see if this could be done. Observa­tions and measurements of the waves were made by painting the walls with a paint which retained evidence of being wetted and by the use of a point gage. The wetted surface of the training walls, as shown in Figure 3, was photographed after 1 minute 1 s operation. After 10 minutes' operation the walls were completely wetted throughout the full length of the stilling

3

basin. Some water splashed to the top of the wall in the downstream end of the basin but in such small quantities as not to endanger the fill behind the wall. The results of this study (Figure 4A and B) showed that the wall was of sufficient height but could not be lowered.

No erosion tests were made concerning the downstream channel because the design called for riprap below the stilling basin and opera­tion of the stilling basin was satisfactory. To determine how a lower­ing of thEo tail water by retrogression of the downstream channel would affect the stilling basin action, a test was made with the tail water lowered various amounts. This test showed that the jump moved to the center of the basin with a tail water depth 13.2 feet below the maxi­mum (elevation 2332.0) for a discharge of 139,000 cubic feet per second.

Flow in Spillway; Chute

Water-surface profiles for both the left and right side of the spillway are shown in Figures 4A and B. The difference in the pro­files for the sections upstream of the crest was the result of the surface depression in the eddy area at the upstream end of the wing wall on the right side . After the water passes the crest, the depth along the training wall is approximately the same for both sides. In Figure 4C the maximum steady water-surface profile taken transversely across the spillway at the downstream end of the piers is shown. The flow of water f rom the crest to the stilling basin was uniformly dis­tributed across the spillway chute with the exception of the large fins downstream from the piers caused by the impingement of the flow from adjacent crest sections. The flow pattern in the spillway chute was essentially the same for both 139,000 and 75,000 second-feet (Figure 5).

Wing Wall A-Vertical Wall. 30=Foot Upstream Radius

Water flowing parallel to the dam and at right angles to the spillwaJ' center line, resulted in an area of eddying and a surface de=

pression along the right approach wing wall (Design A, Figure 9A). At the maximum discharge of 139,000 second-feet, the disturbance affected the flow on the right side for approximately one-fourth the width of the approach channel (Figure 6). Even at a flow of 75,000 second=feet, the surface depression was appreciable as shown in Figure 6B and this was considered objectionable.

Approach Wing Wall on Left Side

The approach wing/wall on the left side of the spillway crest was entirely satisfactory.

Spillway Capacity

Discharge curves were obtained for both crests operating si­multaneously and for the normal-flow crest alone as shovm. in Figure 7,

4

These curves are for the spillway with right approach Wing Wall A (Figure 9). The capacity for the normal-flow crest with the reservoir at elevation 2386. 2 was 3,960 cfs and for the total crest with reservoir elevation 2394,8, 139,000 cfs .

INVESTIGATION OF UNCONTROIJ..ED SPIIJ..WAY

Description of Uncontrolled Spillway

Medicine Creek Dam spillway was first designed to control the flood flow through the reservoir by radial gates. The design of the spillway crest was later changed by the designers to el:iJninate the ra­dial gates. In this design, the flood-flow and normal-flow crests were expected to discharge a maximum flood of 98,000 second-feet. The 200-foot long crest at elevation 2386.2 was 24 feet higher than the original design or at the same elevation as the top of the fully closed radial gates in the previous design. The 13-foot crest section was maintained at elevation 23 66 . 1.

No tests were planned for the chute and stilling basin in the uncontrolled crest design (Figure 8) for the changes from the original design were of a nature that would aid in the stilling action. The orig­inal stilling basin design discharged 500 cubic feet per second per foot of width while the design with th� uncontrolled crest discharged 373 cubic feet per second per foot . The width of the basin was changed from 278 feet to 262 feet, while the length of the basin was left at 165 feet. Chute and sill blocks were kept the same dimensionally with the excep­tion of the end blocks and the number of blocks, The original design contained twenty-one 6-foot-wide blocks with one 8-foot-wide block at each training wall, while the uncontrolled crest design contained twenty 6-foot blocks with one 7 -foot-wide block at each training wall. The floor of the basin was raised from elevation 2285 to 2287. The top of the training wall was lowered from elevation 2340 to elevation 2334 giv­ing a stilling basin depth of 47 feet compared to 55 feet for the origi­nal design . The maximum tail water elevation for a discharge of 98.9 000 cubic feet per second was 23 28, which allowed a 6-foot freeboard.

Study of the Right Approach Wing Wall

When the 1:60 model of the uncontrolled spillway crest was placed in operation, the right approach wing wall indicated the need of further study. The approach channel flow on the right side was dis­turbed by the conditions at the right wing 1vall and the disturbance car ... ried across the crest into the spillway ch,.te.

There was no apparent improvement in the approach flow condi­tions at the right side, although the approach channel was increased in depth by 24 feet from the original design and the maximum discharge was decreased from 139, 000 cubic feet per second to 98,000 cubic feet per second . The position of the spillway with respect to the dam was the

5

same in both designs, thus, part of the water from the reservoir side still flowed at right angles to the spillway center line with the same relatively shallow depth at the end of the wing wallo The use of a wall that extended farther upstream into the reservoir where velocities were lower was prevented by the excessive depth to proper foundation ma­terial and the cost of the structureo

Seven additional designs of the right approach wing wall were studiedo

Wing Wall B==Vertical Wall==525m.Foot Radius

A vertical wall constructed on a radius of 525 feet was ex� tended about 170 feet upstream into the reservoir, Design B, Figure 9Bo The ·top of the wall was horizontal at elevation 2410 for 60 feet upstream and then sloped to elevation 2355 for the remaining 110 feet, both measurements being perpendicular to the upstream face of the cresto

The flow disturbance caused by this wall covered approximately one­half the width of the approach channelo Within this region of disturbance, there was an upstream velocity along the channel side of the wall and an eddy near the upstream end of the wallo This design was abandoned for three reasonsi (1) nonuniform change in velocity along the wing wall, (2) possible erosion of the channel, and (3) ob9ectionable turbulence of the water sur= face on the right side of the approach channelo

During the study of Wing Wall Design B, it was found that the elevation of the approach channel could be increased by 5 feeto This change raised the approach channel floor elevation from 2355 to 2360, resulting in no apparent difference in the approach flow conditions or in the capacity of the spillwayo

Wing Wall C==Vertical Wall. 45° with Respect to Spillway Axis

The appearance of the flow around and past Wing Wall B pointed out that the change in direction of flow at the upstream end of the right wall was still too abrupt.

To give a more uniform change in the velocity of the water approach­ing the spillway crest, Wing Wall c, Figure 9C was constructed. The wall was vertical. It started at the crest on a 45° arc of 60-foot radius and continued upstream for approximately 120 feet on a tangent to the arc and at an angle of 45° with the axis of the crest. The top of the wall was horizon­tal at elevation 2410 except for the last 50 feet which was sloped to elevation 23950 The surface depression occurred at the upstream end of the wall as shown in- Figure l0o - In addition, there -was a flow disturbance where the water passed· over tl1e sloped upstream end of the wall. An eddy formed near the upstream end of the wall and extended out into the approach channelo This design did not appear satisfactory although it proved to be slightly better than A or B at lower discharges. The change in velocity in the approach channel still was not uniformo

6

Wing Wall D-Vertical Wall. 45o with Respect to Spillway Axis. 15-Foot Upstream Radius

Wing Wall D, Figure 9D., was constructed at the same angle with respect to the upstream face of the spillway as C, but a 135° , 15-foot­radius curve was added to the upstream end. The action of the water around this wall is shown in Figure 11. Some of the disturbance at the upstream end was eliminated, but a turbulent condition existed along the straight portion of the wall. This design was abandoned when it was found that it extended 15 feet too far upstream where the depth to satis­factory foundation material was excessive.

Wing Wall E--W'arped ·_Surface

Wing Wall E, Figure 9E, was then proposed. It was a warped surface extending from vertical at the crest on a 50-foot radius curve to the 2�1/2:1 slope at the upstream face of the dam. In the field this wing wall would be constructed with a vertical retaining section on the channel side and the curved surface which extended to the face of the dam would be covered with h�d-placed riprap. The approach was considered entirely unsatisfactory except at low discharges because of excessive turbulence which extended from the beginning of the 50-foot �adius around the wall to the crest. As shown in Figure 12., the tur­bulence carried out into the channel affecting the flow in the right one-half of the approach channel.

Wing Wall F-Vertical Wall on Elliptical Curve. 25-Foot Upstream Radius

Upon completion of the study of Wmg Wall E, a modification of Wing Wall D seemed to be the logical solution of this problem. A 140-foot-radius arc, tangent to the training wall at the upstream face of the flood-flow crest, was extended approximately 107 feet upstream. A 135°, 25-foot-radius arc, tangent to the 140-foot-radius arc, ex­tended the wall back to intersect with the face of the dam. A small concrete retaining wall was placed at the outer end of the wing wall with its base at elevation 2360 and its top sloping from elevation 2380 at the wing wall to elevation 2360 at its outer end. Its purpose was to retain the upstream face of the dam where it intersected the wing wall. This wing wall design. proved to be the mos.t satisfactory tested thus far, but there was still an excess of turbulence at the upstream end which extended to about the middle of the wall and approximately 10 feet into the channel. To elim.iJ.Late as much of this disturbance as possible, a false wall was placed in the eddy area along the original curve. It was found that the resulting wing wall, Figure 9F, had co­ordinates approximating the equation of an ellipse. Figure 13 shows the flow in the channel for this design.

Wing Wall G--Vertical Wall of Circular Arcs, 20-Foot Upstream Radius I

Wing WaD. Design F was altered when it was found that foun­dation conditions were not satisfactory. The resulting Wing Wall G

7

is shown in Figure 9G. This wall was formed by the use of circular arcs which approximated the elliptical curve of Wall F. A 20-foot radius in­stead of a 25-foot-radius curve at the upstream end reduced the distance from dam to the upstream extremity of the wall by approximately 5 feet. The upstream end of the wall sloped from elevation 2410 to elevation 23 90 in approximately 50 feet. The space behind the wing wall was filled to elevation 2407, leaving the top 3 feet of the wall extending above the fill to form a parapet. The small wall for retaining the upstream face of the dam was similar to that used with Wing Wall Design F.

Surface disturbance along the channel side of the wall. re=

mained essentially the same as that found for Wing Wall F. An increased disturbance resulted from the water pouring over the top of the sloped portion of the wall at the upstream end, as shown in Figure 14. If this design were used, it would be desirable to riprap the 2�1 slope behind the end of the wall to prevent erosion :in this area.

Wing Wall H-RecOJIDD.ended Design-Vertical Wall of Circular Arcs, 20-Foot Upstream Radius

A final change was made in the wing wall (Design H, Figure 9H) when the top of the 20-foot-radius section of wall at the upstream end was maintained at elevation 2410. 'Ibis revision eliminated the sloped portion of the wall and thus prevented the overflow that occurred in Design G. Good flow conditions were obtained in the channel (Figure 15) and the design was recommended for Medicine Creek spiilway.

Flow Conditions in the Approach Channel--Recommended Design

With the completion of the studies on Wing Wall Design H, the approach channel and crests shown in Figures 15A and 16A were considered to be hydraulically acceptable. Further studies were made to record op­e rational characteristics, such as water-surface profile, pressures on the crests, and flow capacity of the spillway.

Figure 17A shows the water=surface profile on a developed length of Wing Wall H. ·The slight surface depression noted at the up= stream end was not considered objectionable.

Figure 17B shows the water-surface profile for the left side of the spillway. The approach on the left side was the same as the orig= inal design which was considered satisfactory. There was very little turbulence with this wall because the water approached parallel to the spillway center line with a uniform increase in velocity.

Flow Conditions at the Crest=-Recommended Design

Transverse surface profiles were taken at two stations across the spillway crest as shown in Figure 17c. The first corresponding to the end of the piers or Station A� the second, at the point of tangency of the lower part of the crest and spillway chute, or Station B. The

8

surface profile at A3 for the water flowing between the piers, varied approximately 4 feet from the highest point in water surface to the lowest. The contractions at the leading edges of the piers accounted for some of this variation while the approach conditions caused slight rises in the water surface at the left and right ends of the spillway crest. A vortex=like swirling disturbance occurred on the surface at a point coinciding with the intersection of the upstream face of the spillway at each training wall for all wing wall designs. That on the left was slight, while that ©TI the right was larger but not objec­tionable. This disturbance passed over the crest and down into the chute, the effect being shown in the raised water surface at each end of the crest (Figures 16B and 17). The cause of this action was be­lieved to be the result of the complex currents at the intersections of the walls with the crest; and the disturbance was eliminated when gravel fillets were placed in the corners made by the approach floor, the train­ing wall and the spillway face. Observations of the pressure conditions on both the flood= and normal-flow crests showed that the pressures were positive for all discharges.

Water=Surface Profile on Piers

Other water=surface profiles were taken on each side of the four piers, Figure 18. These profiles indicate good flow distribution at the crest and no objectionable angularity in the approaching flow.

Flow Conditions Below Crest Piers--Recommended Design

At Station B3 the surface profile reflects the interference as water from adjacent crest sections flows together behind the piers. This interference is shown in the form of small peaks in the water sur­face downstream of Piers 1 and 4 (Figures 16B and 17C)G Tests on other similar structures indicate that these peaks could be reduced by stream­lining the downstream end of the crest piers so no tests wPre made for the Medicine Creek spillway. From the base of these peak� toward the center of the spillway, the depth of the water increased to a maximum of 14 feet at the center as a result of the spreading action of the water emerging from the low normal-flow crest section.

CaEacity of Recommended Design

The discharge capacity curves of Figure 19 are for the recom­mended spillway design shown in Figure 8. The capacity was the same as that obtained for the same crest with Wing Wall Designs F and G.

The capacity of the normal-flow crest section with the reser­voir at elevation 2386.2 was 3,770 cfs or slightly less than for the original design. This difference was attributed to the changing of the upstream face of the crest from vertical to approximately a 1:1 slope to eliminate the negative pressures found on the original design. The ca­pacity of t he spillway with the reservoir at elevation 2408 . 9 was 99,700 cfso

9

L

R A W L I

,------- -------.......,. .. / N E

__,.,...,"""_...:

l< E Y M A P

C U

,-------

F U R

w s 0 N

10 0

FIGURE I Hyd. Report No. 279

' s H , E R · M - A N

_ _L _ _ _ _ _

A N

10

U F F A L 0

F R A N K L I N

rank l i n

20

SCALE OF M I LE S

U N I TED STATES

DEPA RTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECL. A M A TION

M I S S O U RI BA SIN P R O J EOT

FRENOHMAN•OAMBR IDSE UNI T - NEBRASKA

MEDI CIN E CREEK DA M

LOCATION MA P

A. Approach Charmel Original Design Discharge O second-feet

B . Spillway Original Design Discharge O second-feet

l : 6O .M::JDEL OF ORIGINAL DESIGN

FIGURE 2

Hyd . Report 279

A . Wave Height-Right Training Wall

FIGURE 3 Hyd. Report 279

l minute operation at discharge 139, 000 second-feet

B . Wave Height-Left Training Wall l minute operation at discharge l39, 000 second-feet

STil..LING BASIN WAVE HEIGHT

EL. 239l0-::,

' - -- '-- -- - - ...... r----.._ i

20

:,:

A ...... :---�

ER SURFACE. EL.236�: ', -

0 _V

E l -........ ..._

- ,-,__ -- - .L�-1 u_ I_ I I rt--.... EL 235.5.C -�

i CREST £ ; 7 7 I I I 1 • lt--4 ... "r._ ' :e i

� ,.fJ.......J.___ r M:- 1 I � ;

A - W A TER SURFA CE PROFIL E RIGHT SIDE GATE CONTROLLED SPILLWA Y

EL2397.0--._

I I I I I I 1 -t-:tt.tj t I I I 11---i-,__ I

•0

� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r T-r--t , __ J Al 1 1 :p--, ......

O� I I I I I !, o! •• L 1 1 l:7 ._," * I I II I 1 -=r I +:...l-± I /Ti I j I I -,_

PIER-4 30

8- WA TER SURFA CE PROFILE L EFT SIDE GATE CONTROLLED SPILLWAY

PI ER-3

I

PIER -2

!

'-l._ J'·,k_ - l '-1..._.._

I

- ----.....__

--.....__

. - - - -

..... __ • t

"'

--f-,-- ---

;: �

'!' ":' 'l' I . RES�RvolR EL�V. 2194.B

:,: l­o. .., 0 -

0

--

-

_,

I

-- ,-.------ -- ----

24 36 48 60

N O T E

DISCHARGE 139.000 SECOND-FEET RESERVOIR ELEVATION 2394. 8

· ---�

·-

72

! I I

C"",...,.T �, 366. I I WAT.ER SURFACE PROFILE LOOKING UPSTREAM·, - -->--___ -- ,,. ___ _ _i 0...- ----- ---t- ·--t -.r.-

- ---- -� -- CREST E L 2 3 6 .2···· - - - - -n ,... T T T

·- · - - - - - - -

I I EL 2.3:s 3.0-t·;: .. 96 108 "o 132 144 156 168 180 192 204- 216 ,.

S T A T I O N (FE ET)

C- TRANS VERSE WA TER SURFA CE PROFILE AT POINT A G A TE CONTR OLLED SPILLWAY

M E D I C I N E CREEK D A M S PILL WA Y 1:60 M ODEL

-· -

EL.2340.0"'i,

EL 2285.0·,

;

EL . 23 40··;

--

•u

Afo.t.

� ;1

:,: -< 0 ..

;.. Q '" C .. ., 0 '" ., ... 4>

IO

A . Spill-way Original Design Discharge l39, ooo second-feet

B . Spillway Original Design Discharge 75, 000 second-feet

SPILLWAY-DISCHARGE OF l39, OOO AND 75 , 000 CFS

FIGURE 5 Hyd. Report 279

A. Approach Channel Original Design Discharge 139, 000 second-reet

�- Approach Channel Original De sign Discharge 75 , 000 second-feet

FIGURE 6 Hyd. Report 279

APPROACH CHANNEL-DISCHARGE OF 139, 000 AND 75 , 000 CFS

0. 5

2 3 9 5 --

2 3 9 0

� 2 3 8 5

w

w

lJ..

z 0

� <[ 2 3 8 0 > w

..J w

a:: 0

> 2 3 7 5

a:: w

(/) w

a:: /

/

2 3 7 0 ... V

/ .. v / , ,,,,.

I /

I / /

2 3 65

J I '

p

2 3 6 0 1 0

N O R M A L F L O W C R E S T D I SC H A R G E - T H O U S A N D S O F S E C O N D F E E T

1 .0 I . 5 2.0 2. 5 3.0 3. 5 4.0 -

-MA X. R ES E R VO I R W. S. EL. 2 3 9 4 . 8

--. .--

T O P O F R A D IA L GA T E E L . 2 3 8 6. 2 - - - - - -� .....

\ -----

• --�-----v

1..---' � V ..........

V -- 1..---' v

i..--- --

--..... --_......-' [.....--" /

,;'

,J" .,,.,.,. .... �/ - � � - --- /

V ,;' .,,.-

./

v...- / .,/ /

/

/ / ,.,,. / /'

/ /

.. v /

,,,,.

, - - - N O R M A L F L O W C R ES T EL . 2 3 6 6 . I

- - C ON TROL L ED C R E S T E L . 2 3 6 2. 2

I

2 0 30 '4 0 5 0 6 0 10 8 0 9 0 1 0 0

T O T A L S P I L LW A Y D I S C H A R G E - T H O U S A N D S O F S E C O N D F E E T

_...-'

� -

--_... V

--

1 1 0 1 2 0

: -� -� -

_...

1 3 0

- ---

F I G U R E 'T

H Y O . R E PO RT 279

v

1 4 0

S PI L L WA Y C A PA C IT Y C U R VE S

RA D I A L G A T E C O N T R O L L E D

o.

z

E \93,�oo

CI. Slotted dome strainer-., \ �18" Continuous screened qravel··-._', 1

6" Graded sand and pea .. ;.:'· ' · · qravel over qravel droin.·····f s.;;,lii1'1!'i:i':' e=..,c;j

4" S�we r -p,pe dram w,tt, 6 qravel cover----- - --- ---

DE TA/L Z

P L A N

SECTION F-F

SEC TION A -A

11 , 18 °

R, 318.33' T , 50. 42' l ' /00. o'

ELE VA TION E-E

F IG URE 8

Hyd. Report No. 27!;3

Pipe handro,1-··, 0. 2415 (}0-, _,-Et.2410.00

: Cutoff·--' : re- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -229'-o"- - - -- -- - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - �

ELE VA TION 8-8

j

.-·Oriqinal qround surface · at axis.

,·Dom embankment \,,

1 a • ·- I - -

18 Anchor bars @ 5'crs:·,.._: 4'-o"Min. into chalk .,i

CONCRE TE FINISHES Surfaces covered by fl/I-Formed - Ft, Unformed Ut

0 2410

2400 z

� 2390 3:

a: 2380

2370

2365

/

v...-..,_ .i'..

I I - -

Exposed surfoces-Formed-F2, Unformed-spillway crest and floor -U3, hiqhwoy bridqe floor- U2, concrete qutter -U1

NOTE

Reinforcement not shown.

SECTION D-D

NORMAL FLOW CREST OISCHARGE-THOUSANOS ' OF SEC. FI 2 4 6 8 10

I I Max. r;eservoir W. ' ,y . El 2400.9 ·

'.-· l3--1 -� -� -

./

12

C7'"" Flood /low )

crest d1scharqe- I>-)....--- 1./ V 2340

V V Normal floH v1 cresr discharqe -1·.v ,jMax , W E/. 2328.0

V V kD--t- -·Floo flow ./ cres E/ 2 86. 20

V V L-- ···To,!w fer-Eleva/ion [..-- I

/ V I

1/v I

I 2310

I -Normal flow

I _ i. _ cre'st El 2366 to' w w w w =

FLOOD FLOW CREST DISCHARGE- THOUSANDS OF SEC. F T. 120

2300

TAl!...WATE R DISCHARGE - THOUSANDS OF SEC. FT.

S PILL WAY DIS CHA R GE CUR VES

THIS DRAWING SUPERSEDES DRAWING 328-D-274

UNITED S TATES DEPA R TMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF RECLAMA TION 1,/ISSOURI BA SIN PROJECT

FRENCHMAN -CAMBRIDGE UNIT-N£BRASKA

MEDICINE CR EEK DAM SPIL L WAY

PLAN AND S E C TIONS

. .Fl':: 1-., . .

f.M-.f . . . . . . . . . . . SUBMIT TED . . � . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . RECOMMENOE0 .. 1'��- . . . . . . . .#. APPROVED . . x . . .. 'Jf.�·-

328-0-580

SPILLWAY FACE. --------

,,I ,-., ·-/

'),, ··EL . 2410·--'

)>'-

,. --SPIL L WA Y FA CE. /

__ ,,, - -STA TION l0 + 15.00

PL A N S TA TION 9 t-22. 50 ---. �· /-EL . 2397

/ lrrrrrr-r-r-------2;'

,,E L .2355 I

u.u.J...1-'-..J......1.-------'---i EL E VA TION

WING WA L L A - GA TE CON TROLLED SPILLWA Y

� - - - - - - - - 11 0 ' - - - - � - - - -� - - - - 60'- - - --' I I __ -,----,---...j I I I I I I I I : �

P L A N

P L A N

,-.:c-- - - - - - - - - - - 160 ' - - - - - - - - - - -- - -' � - - - 50 '- - - - � - - - - 62. 88'- - - - - - 4i' 12'---'

I I I I

: I I

EL . 2395--, 1

t ___ :

,-STATION 10 + 48.65 /

,--EL. 2410 ,--

,- ·EL . 2360 '

'•EARTH DAM CONTOURS.--'/

,,,, I ' ' ' ' '

\ '

y ' I

.__ _________ _L,_ ___ __J _ _ _ _ ,; _.,,-<'--------------

EL . 2360 -,, __."'------- _, -' ,-

, -STA TION /0 +48. 65

P L A N

EL EVA TION SEC TION A -A j_ ____ �-----�--=----------------------...J

-- - SPIL L WA Y FACE

,.--STATION 10 +48.65

WING WA LL · C - UNCON TROLLED SPILLWA Y EL E VATION

WING WALL E - UNC ON TROLLED SPILLWA Y

_,-SPiL L WA Y FACE. /

CU T - OFF WA LL---.,

' · EL . 2410\

··- ·SPILL WA Y FA CE.

I . ,-STATION 10 + 48.65

_.,.-EL . 24 10 ,- S TA TION 10 + 4 8. 65

,' P L A N

_,,EL. 2410

1' _ _,-EL . 24 10

EL . 2360\

EL. 2355·: i ___ ,c_ _______________ _J

E L E V A T I O N

WING WALL 8 - UNCONTROLLED SPILLWA Y

EL . 2360\ ' L_

EL . 2380 -,,

j�.;."-----EL. 2360•, � -----

. y _ _ � _________________ _J

IN TE RSEC TION.

EL E V A TION CL E V A T ION

WING WALL D - UNCONTR OLLED SPILL WA Y WING WALL F - UNC ON TROLLED SPILL WA Y

P L A N

F I G U R E 9

H Y D. R EPO R T 279

SPILLWAY FA CE::.·

./' � ,._, -' ,:... C\J 0 � �

\ � ' . \�:;/

J,-;

STA TION 10 t48.65·; .-EL . 2410

,'

EL .2407-·'

E L EVA T I O N

WING WALL G - UNCONTROLLED SPIL. L WAY

EL E VA T I O N

--RUBBLE WALL --- EL 2407

WING WALL H - UNCONTRO-LED SP/Lf_WA Y

RI G H T APPROA CH WI N G WA LL DES I G N S

•

A. Wing Wall C-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge O second-feet

L· . I

... 7""""-- . . . -

B . Wing Wall C-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 60, 000 second-feet

C . Wing Wall C-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 97, 800 second-feet

FIDW CONDrrIONS FOR WING WALL C

FIGURE 10 Hyd. Report 279

A. Wing Wall D-Modified Spillway Design Discharge O second-feet

B . Wing Wall D-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 60, 000 second-feet

C . Wing Wall D-Modified Spillway Design Discharge 97,800 second-feet FLOW CONDITTONR li\'YR 1JT11Tfl lJ' llT.T. n

FIGURE ll Hyd. Report 279

A. Wing Wall E-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 0 second-feet

B . Wing Wall E-Modified Spillway Design Discharge 60 , 000 second-feet

FIGURE l2 Hyd. Report 279

- . . ..... -I ' I

•

' ' ' ..

C . Wing Wall E-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 97 .800 second-feet

FLOW CONDrrIONR WYR 'WTN/'! 'WAT.T, W.

A. Wing Wall F-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge O second-feet

B . Wing Wall F-Modified Spillway Design Discharge 60 , 000 second-feet

C·. Wing Wall F-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 97 , 800 second-feet

FLOW CO:rIDITIONS FOR WING WALL F

FIGURE 13 Hyd. Report 279

•

A. Wing Wall G-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge O second-feet

B . Wing Wall G-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 60, 000 second-feet

c . Wing Wall G-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge 97 , 800 second-feet

FLOW CONDITIONS FOR WING WALL G

FIGURE 14 Hyd. Report 279

A. Wing Wall. H-Modified Spillway De sign Discharge O second-feet

B . Wing Wall. H-Modified Spillway Design Discharge 60 , 000 second-feet

C . Wing Wall R-Modified Spillway Design Discharge 97 , 800 second-feet

FLOW CONDITIONS FOR WING WALL H

FIGURE 1.5 Hyd. Report 279

A. Spillway Crests Recommended Design Discharge O second-feet

B . Spillway Crests Recommended Design Discharge 97, 800 second-feet

SPilJ..WAY CREST RECOMMENDED DE3IGN

FIGURE 16 Hyd. Report 279

..... - - - -

220 200 1 8 0

20

10

I- 0 l&J

IL 10 z

20

30

RIGHT

....

120

-

-- -- --

0 20

160

>- -

- --1 0 0

�

I J I I I I . I .......... "

WA TER SURFA CE PROFIL E - - -11

-,--r--, � �

20

'� 10

CREST El. 23 86.20-"'v r ............ ',

0 I-i'.. I l&J

10 IL " '

Max. W.S. El 2408. 6 4 - - - -

'- I',_

'\., ', 20 El. 2360 - -!/

:--- 30

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 D E VE LO P E D LE N G TH IN F E E T

A - R I GH T TR A INING WA L L SCA L E : 1"= 20'

Max. W. S El. 2408.64 •-I- . 4- , -I- ... , I- - I I ..........

---� -r--..... 2 0

WA TER SURFA CE PROFILE- � .....,___ ' 10 CRES T El. 2386.20•-,

., -� .. r ---........ I '\

0

l&J

"'i I\. ', 10 l&J

El. 2360· '\., , _ 20

\. 30 ----

DISCHA RGE =97, 800 SEC. FEET.

80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 D E V E L O P E D L E N G TH IN F E E T

8 - LEF T TRA INING WALL SCALE: I " =20"

PIER 4 PIER 3 � PIER 2 PIER I

-

... _ f--

4 0

� �

ii:

�

I I I I WATER SURFA CE _

PROFILE AT POIN T ';Q' I J ..J.. L �

I I I I WATER SURFACE

PROFILE AT POINT "s:, '

-:-

� - o: � �-�

- -

,l

� ., - -� '

- -

--

PRE '

� - � -- - CRES T El. 2386.2 �

T El. 2366. I

\_+--1--t-r� - --

----1-- J\_ -- ---------

El. 2353.0 - -. ---

6 0 V

80 100 120 I ,o

F E E T

C-TRA NSVERSE PR O FI L E O F CH U TE LOOKING UPSTREAM

1 6 0 1 80 200 2 20 L E FT

WATER S URFA CE PROFI L E S -RE C OMMENDED DES IG N

WIN G WA L L D E S I GN H

:i:: -< 0

� :!! Ill GI "11 C O ;u ;u Ill -I ...,­.... .... co

0 10 20 30 Max, W �.fJ. 2408. 6 4

°

�o ...... ,

J;; l--+---+'-·---"., d---+---+------1

l!9 1--+--+----+-----'' l'-,---t--l '

! '· .,:-CREST E:L. 2 3 86. 2 '

V

0 1 0 20 30

1 5 ' 10 1---+---+---+-'-..... -,c-_+-------l

',

10

0 10 20 30

0 10 20 30

Max, W,§,_g_l 2408 6 4°

-==- -�o ,__...,._,-+---+-----+---+------<

1 5 ,_ _ _,_ _ _,__�-+-----+---+------i

1 0 l--+--+---+--'-�--11-----J ..... ,

N O TE PI ERS ARE: N U M B ERED FROM LEFT TO

RIGHT LOOKING DOWNSTREAM

F I G U R E 1 8 H Y O, R E PO R T 279

0 10 20 30

0 10 20 30

Mox.

Max. W S. E:I, 2408.64' -- �20 l--+--.t--+---+---+------1

P I ER 4

1 5

WA TER SURFA CE PRO FI L E O N PIERS WING WA LL DES IGN H

1-LLJ LLJ LL

z 0

1-<I > LLJ _J LLJ

2 4 1 0

2 4 0 5

2 4 0 0

2 3 9 5

2 3 9 0

o 2 3 8 5

> 0:: LLJ (/) w 0::

2 3 8 0

2 3 7 5

2 3 7 0

--

� -

I � -

2 3 6 5 O

�

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8 90

I I

T O T A L S P I L LWA Y D I SC H A R G E - T H O U S A N D S O F S E CO N D F E E T

0 1 00 F I G U R E 1 9 .

HYO. R E P O R T 2 79

i-...... -� l I --

-M A X. R ES E R V O I R W. S. i.-----EL . 2 4 08. 9 � J.--i--

--

1..-V v- I

-- I \

-i..-,--- --N E T C R ES T L EN G TH 2 1 3 FEE T

� -i...------

I v L--'

I .,. -< -.... /

_J'

_/ L--'

./ V

./ V

v V

V V

./ V

�/ :/

,,.

.JV NO T E : When res e r v o ir is a b o v e Elevatio n 2386 . 20

th e dis ch a rge is fo r both normal an d flood crests

I F L OOD F L O W CRE S T EL. 2386. 20 - - ' � - - -� - - � -

L----" �

1.,.,,-"' -

-rr-J .......

.-v r- _ N E T C R E S T L E N G TH 1 3 F E E T -

v V'

v -<,

n ..... .,.,,...

/ 1,.,,,. 'v

1./ V

./ V

J ........

J ...........

/_,,. /

M E D I C I N E C R E E K D A M N ORMA L F L O W CRES T EL. 2 3 66. 10 - -

S PI L L WA Y C A PA C I T Y C U R V E S _ 1 J J _Ll_ _ 1 i ... -

I I I I DA T A F R O M 1 : 6 0 M O D E L

0. 5 1 .0 1 . 5 2 .0 2 . 5 3.0 3 .5 4.0

N O R M A L F LO W C R E S T D I SC H A R G E - T H OU S A N D S O F S E C O N D F E E T