7/28/2019 HYD-509

1/64

PREPARED FOR T E E ,USE O F DEPARTMENT OFWATER RESOURCES, S T A T E O F CALIFORNIABUREAU OF -3ZCBMFiAULIC '

U N I T E D S T A T E SD E P A R T M E N T O F T H E I NT E RI ORB U R E A U OF R E C L A M A T I O N FL$ ~pkqa .%

DO 1Ja%BETXI7;Z FROM TiiIS FIL

HYDRAULIC MODEL STVDIES O F T H E ORCWILLE DAM PO WER PLA iiT-I\

INTAKE STRUCTURES--C>-LIFORP-UADZPARTMENT O F WATER ,RESOURCES--STATE OF' CALIFORNIA

Report N o . Hyd-509

Hydraul ics Bran chDIVISION O F RESEARCH

OFFEI: OF CHIEF E N G I N E E KD E N V E R , COLORADO.

June 15, 1965

7/28/2019 HYD-509

2/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

3/64

Hydraulic model stud ies of fe atu re s of Orovil le Dam and Powerplantwe re conducted in the Hydraulic Labor ato ry in Denver, Colorado.The studies wer e made under Contract No. 14-06-D-3399 etweenthe California Department of Wat er Re sour ces and the Bureau ofReclamation.

rThe design s we re conceived and pre par ed by Depart ment of Wate rResourc es engineers. Model studies verified the general adequacy

. of th e designs and also le d to modifications needed to obtain mo resatisfa ctory perfor mance. Th e high degree of cooperation thatexisted between the staff s of th e two orga nizati ons helped mate -*rial ly in speeding final res ult s .During the co urse of the s tudies Me ss rs . H. G. Dewey, J r . ,D. P . Thayer , and othe r me mb er s of the California staff visitedthe laboratory to observe the tes ts and discus s model resu lts .Mr. K. G . Bucher of th e Fluid Mecha nics Section of the De part -ment was ass igned to the Bureau Laboratory for t ra ining and forass is t ing in the te s t p rogram. M r . G . W. Dukleth provided lia i-son between the Bureau and the Depar tment .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

4/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

5/64

Abstract ........................................... iiiPurpose ........................................... 1Conclusions ........................................ 1........................................Introduction 3

Design1 ......................................... 4DesignII ........................................ 4DesignIIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4General ......................................... 5

Models . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 5Design1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Design11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Design111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Investigation ........................................ 7Design1 ......................................... 7

Head loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Vortexstudy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Shutter vibration ............................... 8Generalpressures ' ............................. 9Design11 ......................................... 9

Head loss ..................................... 1 0Vortexstudy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Differential pre ssur es acr oss shutters ........... 11General p ressure s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12DesignIII ........................................ 12

Channelbearns ................................ 12Leadineedge shapes ............................ 13., Bibliography 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Table-Differential P re ss ur es Acro ss Control Shutters. ...-Design1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Manometer P re ss ur e s Along Channel and PenstockTransitions. Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

i

7/28/2019 HYD-509

6/64

CONTENTS.. Continued

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ubmergence T es t ObservationsManometer Pr es su re s Along Channel and PenstockTransitions. Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Project Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i te PlanPlan and Profile-Intake System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Plan and Profile-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Suggested Shutter Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Structura l Deta i ls-Pesign I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Struc tu ra lLayout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Channel Transi tion-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Penstock Transi t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Intake Gate and Gate O perator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Discharge Rating Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ModelLayout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .onstruction of Headbox and TopographyGeneral Views of Model-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Semicylindrical Shutters-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Gen eral Views of Tra sh ra ck Section and IntakeModel-Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......omp ari son of Cro ss- Sect ion s of Design I1 and 111Segmented Arch T rashr acks-D esign III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Elevation of Intake Structure and Definition ofHead Loss Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Head Loss Tests-Desigx I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vortex Study-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . .: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Conditions and Shutter P ositi ons fo r Vibration Study .....Piezoineter Locations-Design I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Head Lo ss and Lo ss Coefficients-Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . .Base Deflector-Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VortexStudy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .i fferentia l Pr es su re s Acr oss Shutters-Design I1 !ifferential Pressures-Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Piezometer Locations-Design I1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Head Loss and Differential Pressures. 6 Shutters- J

Design I11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Effect of Gap Between Shutter and Channel Be am . . . . . .Leading Edge Head Loss-Design I11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Differen t ia l Pre ss ur es Across 1 3 and 4 Shutters-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .esign111

Table.Fig u re

7/28/2019 HYD-509

7/64

Hydraul ic model s tudies he lped de term ine head los ses , d i f ferent ia l pres -su re s , vo r tex act ion , and gene ra l p re s su r es fo r th r ee p roposed des ignsfo r the in take s t ruc tur e of the Orovi l le Dam unde rgro md powerplant .Agricul t ure and f ish propagat ion downstream fr om :ne dam r equ ire con-

C t ro l of the temp era tur e of wate r re lea sed through the powerplant. Th iscon t ro l is accomplished by withdrawing water f r om se lec te d re se rv oi rdepths through p or ts o r opened sh ut te rs p laced a long in take s t ruc tur es. which sl ope up the side of the re se rv oi r . Design I consisted of 650-foot-long t rapezoida l channel with se mi c ir cu l ar cover ing sh e l ls , a 60-foot-long tras hrac k-co vere d port a t the base, and five additional 40-foot-long po rt sFlow through each por t was contro l led by th in s emicyl in dr ica l sh ut t e rs .The design was abandoned because of possible ins tabil i ty of the se mi -cy l ind r ica l shu t te r s and compl ica ted, submerged mechan isms ne ces sa r yto engage, move, and la tch the shut te r s . Design I1 con sist ed of slopingchannels with la rg er t rapezoida l c r o ss sec t ions and continuous archedtrashracks the fu l l length of the s t ruc tures . Under the t r a s h rack s , f l a t40-foot-long by 45-foot-wide con tro l shu tte rs cov ered the intake channels .The shut te r s could be removed f rom the channels o r re in s ta l led as r e s -e rvo i r l eve l o r t empera t u re requ i reme n ts changed . Design I1 wa s t este dthoroughly and accepted fo r prototype us e. However, unexpec ted foun-dat ion problems req uired s t ru c tu ra l modif ica t ions , cu lminat ing inDesign 111. This ,design u ti l ized rec tangula r channels with l ig hter t ras h-rack a rc hes supp lemented by tens ion beams ac ro ss the channel a t the bas eof each ar ch . Design I11 wa s ado pted .DESCRIPTORS-- "hyd raul ics / :::head lo ss es / :$pr essu res / hydraul icmod els/ flow control/ trap ezoi dal chan nels / :: :vortices/ hydraulic st ru c-t u r e s / underground powerplants / in take ga tes / trashracks 'kintakes t r u c tu r e s / t e m p e r a tu r e 1 m o d el t e s t s / t e m p e r a tu r e c o nt r ol / i n l e t s /re s ea r ch and developmen t/ f i sh / ag r ic u l tu re / po r t sIDENTIFIERS-- : :'Oroville Dam powerp lant/ s loping intake s t r u c t x e s /Ca l i fo rn ia / r een t ran t in le t s / sh u t t e r s / hydrau lic des ign / t emp era tu recon t ro l shu t te r s

7/28/2019 HYD-509

8/64

UNITED STATESDEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORBUREAU OF RECLAMATIONCffice of Chief EngineerDivision of ResearchHydraulics BranchDenver, ColoradoJune 15, 1965

Report No. Hyd-509Author: K. G . BucherChecked by: W. P. SimmonsReviewed by: W. E. WagnerSubmitted by: H. M. MartinHYDRAULIC MODEL STZTDIES OF THE OROVILLE DAM POWERPLANTINTAKE STRUCTURES--CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATERRESOURCES--STA TE OF CALIFORNIA

PURPOSEModel studies were made to investigate pr es su re conditions and headlosses i n the Oroville Powerplant intake structures, differential pres-su re s acting on the control shutters, and vortex action in the re se rvo irabove the intakes.

CONCLUSIONSDesign I1. The head los s through the in iti al design was 4.2 feet of wa ter a tthe maximum discharge of 8,600 cfs (cubic feet pe r second) in oneintake.2. The addition of a deflector to eliminate the re ce ss at the end blockat the bottom of the intak e channel reduced head lo ss es by 30 perc entor 1 .3 feet of water (Figure 21 ) .3 . A shallow vortex formed above Port 2 for submergences up to118 feet . The vortex did not draw air until the water l eve l was lowenough to expose the crown of the po rt (Figur e 22).4. Tes ts indicated that long-period pr ess ur e rever sals were presenton the semicylindrical temperature control shutters (Table 1).

*%

5 . A l l pre ss ur es meas ured along the channel transition and penstocktransi tion were positive and, hence, satisfa ctory (Table 2) .6 . Design I was abandoned at the recommendation of the Board ofConsultan ts due to questions about stabil ity of the lightweight sh ut te rsand the complicated handling equipment.

7/28/2019 HYD-509

9/64

1. The head lo ss with four shu tte rs in place was 2.8 feet at maximumdischarg e. This design reduced the head lo ss 33 percent o r 1 .4 fee twhen c omp ared to the operation of Design I through Po rt 2 (Figures 262. The addition of a curved defle ctor at the bas e of the channels re -duced the head lo ss through the s yste m by only 5 percent o r 0.2 foot

3 . Qualitative test s indicated that 40 feet of su bmerg ence was req uire dto avoid vortex problem s fo r operation with five sh utte rs and a d is-cha rge of 8 ,270 cfs.4. The bas es of the two intake st ru ct ur es on the right abutment shouldbe placed s o that flow can s ta rt a t about res er vo ir elevation 685 toallow 45 feet of submergence for vortex-free operation at re se rv oi relevation 730.5. Vortices form ed inside the intake charmels slightly upstream from theleading edge of the sh utt ers (F igu re 27).6. The different ial pre ssu re c urves of the control shutters a re s im -i l a r to curves on a re-entran t inlet (Fig ure 28).7 . A maximum d ifferential of 6 .1 feet w i l l oc cu r when operating withone shutter at maximum disch arge (Fig ure 28).8 . No subatmospheric p re ss ur es were found in the channel transitio no r in the penstock transition . The minimum p re ss ur e was 98 feet ofwate r above atmosp heric (Table 4) .9. Design II was abandoned when foundation conditions we re found tobe unsuitable for the trapezoidal-shaped channels.Design 1111. Incr easi ng the depth of the leading edge of the s hu tte rs to reduc eree ntr an t flow reduced the head lo ss by about 0.3 foot, and reducedthe pre ss ur e differential ac ro ss the leading edge of the gates by 1.0foot (F igur e 31). The increa sed depth simulated having the gate nose -dir ect ly below a channel beam with no clea ran ce s pa ce between thm-I.2. Th e reduction in head los s due to the pre sen ce of the channel beam -decreas ed a s the clearanc e between the shu tter and beam increased(Fig ure 32).

7/28/2019 HYD-509

10/64

3 . With a cle ara nce of 5-112 inch es between the sh ut te rs and bea ms ,the head losse s and pres sure differentials ac ros s the shutters werethe sa me for a 90" c o m e r , a 1-foot radi us and a 2-foot radius on thebottom leading edge of the shutters.4. Under optimum conditions, with a 5-112-inch cl ea ranc e and withfive shu tte rs in place, the addition of channel beam s reduced the headlo ss by 0 .4 foot (Fi gu res 26 and 3 3 ) .

INTRODUCTIONOroville Dam is located on the Feather River about 4 miles northeastof Orovil le, California ( ~ i g u r e). This 747-foot-high ea rt h and rockf i l l multipurpose dam is the key fea ture of the California Water P roj ec t.Water from the 3,500, 000-acre-foot Oroville Re serv oir w i l l flowthrough 700 mi les of ri v e rs , aqueducts, pipeline s, and tunnels tosouthern California (Figure 2).A flood control outlet works and an emerg ency spillway ar e locatedon the right abutment of the dam (Figure 3;. Two 35-foot-diameterdive rsio n tunnels and a 600-megawatt underground powerplant a r elocated in the left abutment. At a higher elevation on the left ah t m e n ta r e sloping intake str uc tu re s which connect to the underground power-plant with 22-foot-diameter concrete-lined penstocks (Figures 3 and 4 ) .Tunnel plugs w i l l be placed in the diversion tunnels to co nvert the tun-nels into a tailr ace system fo r the powerplant. After initial diversionis completed, and until the powerplant is completed, r iv er relea seswil l be ma de through two Howell-Bunger va lves located in the tunnelplug of Tunnel 2 .Rice production in lands irri gat ed by the Fea ther R iver requ ires w armwa ter fro m the re se rv oi r during the months of Apr il through August.The California Department of F ish and Game requ ire s w ater at about53" F during the months of October through Fe bru ary f or fish prop-agation at a hatchery at the city of Oroville. These requirem ents f orcontrolled water tem pera ture s necessitated an intake stru ctur e withprovisions to control the level, and hence, tem pera ture , at which wa teris taken from the rese rvo ir. Intake str uc tur es that sloped up the sideof the re se rv oi r a t an angle of 28" and utilized movable ga tes o r shut-te r s wer e selected a s the most economical method of ac quiring tem-perature control .The unique shape of the intake st ru ct ur es pre sented many design prob-lem s, and hydraulic model studies were considered the most practicabltmethod of answering specific questions on sh utt er vibr atio n, head lo ss ,boundary pr es su re s, and vortex action. The California Department ofWater Resources negotiated a co ntr ac t with the Bureau of Reclamationto conduct comprehensive hydraulic model studies on the proposedintake str uct ure s. The model tes ts made m d the results obtained fromthese stu dies a re discussed in this rep ort. During the cou rse of the modelstud ies, thre e designs of the left abutment intake str uc tu re s we re tested.

7/28/2019 HYD-509

11/64

Design IIn cr os s section, the lower half of each channel was es sen tially tra p-ezoidal and the upper half semicircular (Figure 5). Six trashra ck-covered ports w ere located along each intake. The lowest port was60 feet long. The 84-foot sp ace to the next port was covered by asemicy lindrical concrete shell . The remaining five ports were 40feetlong, spaced 80 feet cent er to center, with 40 feet of conc rete s he llbetween adjacent por ts. The po rt could be closed by movable se mi -cylindrical shutters (Figures 5 and 16). Two 20-foot-long shutterswe re used in each 40-foot port and th re e 20-foot-long shu tte rs wer eused in the 60-foot po rt. When a 40-foot port was to be opened, amech anical ope rato r would engage the upper shu tter and move i t upthe intake into position under the conc ret e sh el l with the end of theshu tte r flush with the edge of the p ort . The operator would then latchthe shu tter in place. Next, it would move to the second shu tte r andmove it down the intake to a si m il ar position under the she ll and lockit in place. When the 60-foot port w a s to be opened, the oper ato rwould move a ll thr ee sh utt ers up the intake unde r the 84-foot-longconcrete shel l .

The initial concept of this design proposed a larger open-topped trap-ezoidal channel with flat sh utt ers along the e nti re axis of the intake(Figure 6). A continuous tr as hr ac k was als o provided. The sh utt erswe re coupled together with rods that telescoped into the sh ut te rs .When the uppermost shut ter was drawn uphill, the rod slac k was takenup, leaving about a 40-foot opening between it and the following shutter.Withdrawal of su cce ssiv e shu tte rs would continue as the r es er vo irreceded o r i f ?n opening at a lower elevation was de sire d. Full with-drawal of the s hutte rs require d hoisting trackage alm ost triple thelength of the intake. Aft er study, the Department of Water Re so urc es

Iadopted the basic idea of th is proposal, but the shut ter tra in" wasabandoned because of length of trackage and s iz e of the hoisting mech-anis m required to draw the sh utter s up the intake.The intake was redesig ned with s hu tte rs that would be individuallyhoisted up the structure a s the water surface receded o r as the tem-perature requirements changed. The tem pera ture control shut terswere l arg e flat panels 40 fee t long by 45 fee t wide. The removedshut ters would be sto red in bays a t the serv ice level of the s truc ture(frontispiece). Design I1 is shown in Figu re 7.Design IIIUnexpected foundation conditions &overed during field excavationrequi red elimination of the s loping walls of the trapezoida l channelof Design 11, and the cross section of the channels was changed from

7/28/2019 HYD-509

12/64

t rapezoidal to rectan gular . Segmented ar ch es mad e frorr. :. stainlesss t ee l were speci f ied for suppor t ing the t ras hra cks . E ach a rc hreq uire d the addit ion of a channel beam ac ro ss the in t ake channelt o ac t a s a t en si on m em b er (F i g u re s 8 and 19) .Genera lTwo t ransi t ions we re requi r ed in the bas e of each intake channel tolead the flow f ro m the channels into the penstocks. T he f i r s t t r ans i -t ion consis ted of su rf ac es that warped fro m the main channel c ro s ssect ion to a bel lmouth-l ike sh ape (Figur e 9 ) . The second was aver t ica l t ransi t io n that changed fr om the 17.5 - by 22-foot recta ngleat the channel ba se to the 22-foot d iam eter of the penstock (Fig ure 10) .A coa s te r ga te was posi tioned a t t he en t ranc e to each pens tock t ran -s i tion to se rve a s an emergency c losure ga te and to be used to se a loff the penstocks fo r rout ine inspect ions and maintenance (F igu re 11).Concrete- l ined penstocks extend from the b as es of the intake channelsto the underground powerplant . Maximum dis charg e through theturb ines and , the refore , t h rough the in t akes occu rs a t water sur f aceelevation 730 (F igu re 12). At this maximum discharge, 8, 600 and7 . 900 cf s ,flow into the left and right intakes, res pec t ive ly, fo r a totaldischa rge of 16.500 cfs . T he max im um w a t e r su r f ace i n t he r e se r vo i rwil l be at elevation 900 feet .Detai led dis cus sio ns of hydraulic stu dies on the OroviUe divers iontunnels , ta i l ra ce syste m, outle t work s, spi llway, shu t ter re l ief panelsys t em , and in take ga te downpull fo rce s a r e d i scussed in o therr e p o r t s .-1.-1, -1,~/reports.ll.21,31,41.s/,61~/,~I

MODELSDesign IThe model , buil t a t a sca le of 1:24 using the Froud e cr i te r ia , re pr e-sented the lower 360 feet of the intake s t r uc tur es and surrou ndingtopography (F igur es 13 and 14 ) . The no de l was contained in a sheet -metal-l ined headbox 22 feet long , 16 feet wide, and 9 fee t deep. Thefloor of the box, which rep res ente d elevation 602, wa s placed 7 feetabove the l abora tory f loor to a llow c learan ce f or the pens tock t ra ns i -t ion and d i scharge sy s t e m.The lef t in take in the model r epr ese nte d Intake No. 1 of the prototype(Fig ure 3) . Intake No. 1, which has the gr ea te r discharg e of the twoin takes fo r a given r es erv o i r e l eva tion, w a s buil t to exact sc ale and11N umbers r e fe r t o i t em s in the bibl iography.

7/28/2019 HYD-509

13/64

was used fu r detai led test ing (Fi gur e 15-A). Included in this s t ru ctu rewe re the cont rol shu t ter s , in take gate , channel and penstock t ra ns i -t ions, and a sh or t length of 22-foot-diameter penstock.The t rapezoidal and sem ici rc ula r sect ions of the intake channel we reshaped f rom ga lvanized shee t mera l and re inforced by heavy gageshee t meta l s t i f feners . The t ran si t ion in the lower 150 feet of ChannelNo. 1 was shaped fr om waterproofed su ga r pine wood. The t rans i t ionwarped f rom the t rapezoida l c r os s se c t i o :~ n the in t ake channel to thebel lmouth-type ent ran ce above the vert ic al penstock (Figur e 9) . Remov-ab le in se r t s cou ld be p laced at the ba s t of the tower s o the effect ofdi fferent end shap es could be determined. The recta ngula r portionof the penstock t ransi t ion was m ade fr om galvanized she et meta l andthe t ransi t ion fro m the rectan gular sect ion t o the round penstock w a smade f ro m t ransp aren t p l as ti c . Thi r ty- four p i ezometers wer e p lacedalong the channel and penstock t ran si t ions (Figur e 24) .The semicy l indr i ca l con t ro l shu t t e rs fo r In take No. 1 w ere f ab r i ca t edby fastening rol led No. 16-gage b r as s skinplates to machined b r a ss endrings (Fig ure 16-A). Fourteen piezome ters we re placed in one of theshu t t e r s t o m eas u re p re s su r e s on t he shu t t e r w hen i t w a s placed atvar iou s loca t ions under the concre te she l l ne ar the edge of the por t(Figure 16-B).Th e r ight intake repres ented Intake No. 2 and was modeled in gen era lshap e only (Figu re 15-A!. I t w a s used when both intakes w er e operat ingsimultaneously and w a s fabricated as a cylind er with openings at prope rlocat ions to rep res en t in t ake por t s . Tra shr ack s were provided . Ahinge was welded to the bas e of the c ylinder s o the intake could bet i l ted up to provide ac ce ss fo r piezome ter connections underneath.Topography was co nstru cted by cutt ing wooden contours and placingthem to thei r appro priate e levation in the headbox. Expanded me tall a th w a s formed ov er the contours and a 314-inch la ye r of concr etewas placed ove r the la th to produce the f inished su rfa ce (F igu re 14-B).Water was supplied to the model through the c en t ra l labora tory supplys y s t e m . Flow r at es into the headbox were m eas ure d by permanent lyinstal led and cal ibrated Venturi me te rs . Flow through the model wasdischa rged through two 12-inch pipes, one located below the bas e ofeac h intake (Fig ure 13). An ori fice plate was cal ib rated and placed onthe end of the disc ha rg e pipe of the Intake No. 2. During s imul taneou soperat ion, the total ,d ischarge for a speci f ic r es er vo i r e levation for thetwo inta kes w as s upplie d to the headbox; flow through Intake No. 2 wasmeasu red by the a r i f i ce and th ro t tl ed to g ive the appropr i a t e d i schargefo r that in take, the remaining water p ass ed through Intake No. 1 .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

14/64

Design I1Design I1 required construction of a new channel for Intake No. 1 andmodification of the channel fo r Intake No. 2. The inver t half of IntakeNo. 1and the tra sh ra ck ar ch es wer e fabricatedfrom No. 18-gage gal-vanized sheet metal. Stru ts between the tra shr ack arc he s wer emachined from aluminum b a r stoc k (F igure 17-A). Two control sh ut-te rs were represente d in detail with piezometers along the undersideof the shu tte r. The channel trans ition was fabricated by formingNo. 28-gage sh eet metal over tem plate s. The penstock transitio n wasunchanged. Forty-five pie zom eters we re placed along the su rfa ce sof the channel and penstock tr an siti on s. The completed model ofDesign I1 is shown in Figu re 17-B.Design 111The c r o s s sectio ns of the intake chann els of Designs I1 andIII, while notthe sa me , we re sufficiently si m il ar that new chann els did not have tobe fabricated fo r the Design I11 hydraulic te st s ( Fig ur e 18). The heavyhaunched trashra ck ar ch es of Design I1 wer e replaced by accurate lybuilt models of tne proposed lightweight st ee l ar ch es , and a channelbeam was added to the base of each a rc h to act a s a tension mem beracr oss the channel (Figu re 1 9 ) . In total, two 3-foot model sections ofsegmentedlightweight ar ch es were fabricated fro m No. 18-gage gal-vanized shee t metal.

INVESTIGATIONDesign IModel studies were m ade to evaluate head lo sse s, determin e minimumsubmergence for vortex-free operation at maximum discharge, inves-tigate tendencies of the shu tters to vibrate, and to determine the pr es -sures acting on the channel and penstock transitions.Head lo ss . --Head lo ss was determined by measuring the pr ess uredifference from the r ese rvo ir wa ter s urfa ce to the hydrostatic head atthe piezom eter ring below the penstock transition and sub tracting thevelocity head in the 22-foot-diameter penstock from the diffe renc e(F igu re 20). The lo ss was exp ress ed by the equation:

K v2HL = 2g

whereK = lo ss coefficient determined by model studyV = ave rage velocity in 22-foot-diameter penstock ( Q/ A)g = acceleratio n of gravity (32.2 feet per second per seco nd)

7

7/28/2019 HYD-509

15/64

Head lo ss me asur eme nts wer e made f or the following conditions:1. Flow through Ports 1:: and 2 with the in itia l end block a t th eba se of the intake struc tur e2 . Flow through Port 2 with a cu rved deflector in the ba se of thein take s t ruc tur e3. Flow through P o rt 2 with a ve rtic al de flector in the Lase of thein take s t ruc tu re

The tes ts determined that the los s coefficient, K, was 0.24 when ope r-at ing through P or t 1, and 0.53 when operating through P o rt 2 when theinitia l end block was use d. Thi s was equivalent to lo ss es of 1.9 and4.2 f eet , resp ectiv ely, at the maximum dis cha rge of 8. 600 cfs throughthe intake (Fig ure 21). Deflectors were tried in the base of the str uc -tu re to el iminate the r ec es s at the end block and reduce the head l os s.T e st s with flow through P o rt 2 showed that K was reduced from 0.53to about 0.37 fo r both the curved and ve rtic al d eflec tors. This is areduction i n lo ss of 1 . 3 feet of wa ter , o r 30 perc ent, at maximumciischarge.Vortex study. --Quali tat ive tes ts w ere m ade to obse rve the vortexact ion in the rese rv oi r above the po rts . The te st s were made with8, 600 c fs flowing through Intake No. 1 and 7.90 0 c fs flowing throughIntake No. 2 . The maximum re se rv oi r elevation i n the headbox was820 feet and the elevation of the crown of the upstream edge of Port 2was 702 feet . Small shal low vor t ices without a ir t ra i ls formed ov erPo rt 2 when the re ser vo ir was at elevation 820. This sa me vortexact ion pers is ted a s the re se rv oi r was reduced to elevation 720. Belowelevation 720, the vortex action incre ase d until at elevation 710 ala rg e clockwise vortex formed ove r Intake No. 1 and a counterclock-wise vorte x formed ov er Intake No. 2 (Figu re 22-A). No a i r trailswer e visible at this submergence. The vor t ices decreased to s t rongeddies a s the water surfa ce was lowered to approach the t ra sh ra ckme mb ers . When the water su rface was decre ased to elevat ion 700,a la rge clockwise vortex formed insi de the channel of Intake No. 1 ata point upstr eam from the port (F igu res 22-B and 22-C). A n air t r a i lwas visible.Shutter vibration. --Qualitative te st s w ere m ade to evaluate the tendencyof the semicylind rical shu tters to vibra te. Water-f i lled manom eterswere connected to the 14 piez om eters in the downstream shutter:::In thi s r ep or t, the lowest o r 60-foot opening is r e f er r e d t o a s P o r t 1and the f i r s t and second 40-foot por ts a re r efe r re d to a s Po r t s 2 and 3.respect ively (Figure 23).

7/28/2019 HYD-509

16/64

Head lo ss m eas ure me nts w ere made fo r the following conditions:1. Flow through Ports 1::: and 2 with the initial end block at thebase of the intake st ruc tur e2. Flow through P or t 2 with a curved deflector in the ba se of theintake structure3. Flow through P or t 2 with a ver tical deflector in the base of theintake structure

The tests determined that the loss coefficient, K , was 0.24 when oper-ating through P or t 1, and 0.5 3 when ope rating through Po rt 2 when theinitial end block was used. This was equivalent to lo ss es of 1 . 9 and4 .2 fee t, respec tively, at the maximum discha rge of 8, 600 cfs throughthe intake (Figure 21). Deflectors were tr ied in the ba se of the struc -tu re to eliminate the re ce ss at the end block and reduce the head l os s.Tests with flow through Port 2 showed that K was reduced from 0.53to about 0.37 fo r both the curve d and vert ica l deflec tors . This is areduction in lo ss of 1. 3 feet of water, o r 30 percen t, at maximumdischarge.Vortex study. --Qualitzcive tes ts were made to observ e the vortexa n n the res erv oir above the por ts. The tes ts were made with8, 600 cf s flowing through In take No. 1 and 7, 900 cf s flowing th rr -'-Intake No. 2. The maximum r es er vo ir elevation in the headbox wad820 feet and the elevation of the crown of the up str ea m edge of P or t 2w a s 702 feet. Small shallow vor tice s without a i r tr ai ls formed overPo rt 2 when the res er vc ir was at elevation 820. This sa me vortexaction persis ted a s the res er vo ir was reduced to elevation 720. Belowelevation 720, the vortex action inc rea sed until at elevation 710 ala rg e clockwise vortex form ed ov er Intake No. 1 and a co unterclock-wise vorte x form ed ove r Intake No. 2 (Figure 22-A). No a i r tr ai lswe re visible at this submergence. The vortices decreas ed to strongeddies as the water su rface was lowered to approach the trash rac kme mb ers . When the water surf ace was decreased to elevation 700,a l arg e clockwise vortex form ed inside the channel of Intake No. 1 ata point ups trea m from the port (Fig ures 22-B and 22-C). An air t r a i lwas visible.Shutte r vibration. --Qualitative te st s we re made to evaluate the tendencyof the semi cylindr ical sh utte rs to vib rate . Water-fil led man omete rs -we re connected to the 14 pie zom eter s in the downstream sh utte r::In th is re po rt , the lowest o r 60-foot opening is r e f e r r e d to a s P o r t 1 -and the first and second 40-foot por ts a re refe rred to a s P or ts 2 and 3 .respectively (Figure 23).

7/28/2019 HYD-509

17/64

of Port 2 of Inta ke No. 1 (Fig ure 16-B) . The tes t shut t er w a s placedin var ious pos it ions under the cen te r t r a shrac k a r ch and a t va r iousdis tances under the concre te sh el l (F igur e 23). T h e r e s e r v o i r e l ev a-tion was maintained a t 790 feet; disc harg e through Intake No. 1 w a s8, 600 cfs; Po rt 1 was always closed; and P o rt s 2 and 3 wer e posit ionedas indicated in the te s t schedule (Fi gure 23).The dif ferent ia l pr es su re s (difference between re se rv oi r and piezo-met r ic heads) were measured a t each p iezomete r . Resu l t s fo r the1 0 t e s t s p e rf o rm e d a r e l i s t e d i n T a bl e 1. Some of the pre ss ur eswere unsteady and fluctuated between 2 l imi t s (Tes t s 6. 8 , 9, and 10).In Tes t 10, the p re ssu res a t P i ezomete rs 1 and 10 fluctuated in oppositedirect ions; Piezometer 1 inc reased f rom 4 .8 to 8 .8 fee t while P iezom-e t e r 10 d e c r e a s e d f r o m 9 .4 t o 5 .0 f e et . T h e s e p r e s s u r e s h eld s t e a d yfor about 1 minute (m odel) and then re ve rs ed in about 2 minutes (model)and continued this cycl e throughout thi s par ticu lar t es t .The testing of Design I was discontinued before dynamic pr es s ur ereadings wer e made on the control shu t ters and before detai led inves-tigations wer e made of any vibration tendencies.Genera l p ressure s . - -Pre ssu res were measured on the su r fa ces of thechannel and penstock tran sit io ns (Fi gu re 24) at the maximum dischargeof 8, 600 cfs fo r th re e flow conditions: through P or t 1, through Port 2,o r w ith a ver t i ca l def lector in the ba se of the in take. T h e p r e s s u r e sfo r these condi tions were sa t is factory and a r e l is ted in Table 2. T helowest p re ss ur e found w a s a positive 97 feet of water.Fu rt he r testin g was discontinued when the Oroville Dam Board ofConsultants recommended to the Departm ent of Water Re sou rce s thatthis design be abandoned. The Consultants questioned the stab ility ofthe thin sem icyl indr ical shut ter and the feasibil i ty of using complicated,submer ged mechanical l inkages to engage, move, and latc h th e shu tte rs.Design I1The intake ch annels of Design I1 were t rapezo ida l a s in Des ign I, but ofg r e a t e r cr o s s - s e c t io n a l a r e a . T h e s e m ic i r c u l a r s h e ll s an d c o n t ro lsh utt ers of Design I were replaced by 40-foot-long flat shutters. Thesh utt ers w ere placed end to end along the ent ire length of each channel.Above the s hut te rs we re t ra shr ack s that a lso covered the ful l length ofeach channel (Figure 7).Afte r the model was altere d to rep re se nt intake Design 11, stud ies wer emade of head los s , vor tex act ion, t ransi t ion pre ss ur es , and the dif fer-en t ia l p ress ure s ac t ing ac r oss the con t ro l shu t te r s .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

18/64

Head lo ss . --Te sts we re made to determine the los s coefficient, K,with up to s ix sh utt ers in place on the intake channel. A table of thevalues of K is shown in Figu re 25-A. At maximum discha rge ,8, 600 cfs, with no sh utt ers in place, the head lo ss to the ring ofpiez ome ters below the penstock transition was 1 . 7 feet. The headloss , a s defined by Equation 1, i nc rea sed to 3.6 fee t with the additionof one shutter, decrea sed to 2.8 feet with thre e shu tters and graduahyincreased to 3 . 1 feet a s up to six shu tters wer e used.The loss coefficient, K, is plotted, and projecte d fo r up to 12 shu tte rsalong the intake channel ( Figu re 25-B). The dip in the coefficient cur veis consistent with the pre ss ur e cur ve of a re -ent rant inlet. The addi-tion of one shu tt er formed a type of r e- en tran t inl et, but one which wastoo sho rt to allow full pr es su re r eco very . As a second and thi rdshutter were added, the increased passage length allowed better pres-su re rec overy and lower lo ss es . The addition of mo re shu tters did notimprove the pr ess ure recovery and merel y added friction loss, hencethe slowly risi ng coefficient curv e.A curved def lector was added to the underside of the lowest sh utt erto elim inat e a zone of stagnation in the intake at the intey section of thesh utt er and end block (Fig ure 26). The deflector reduced the head lossa t maxim um disc harg e by only 0.2 foot (F igu re 26). Thus, the additionof s deflector to Design I1 did not reduce loss es a s markedly as theaddition of a si m il ar deflec tor to Design I (Figure 21). The gre ate reffect of the defl ect or in Design I lay primarily in the fact that i t elim-inated the re ce ss in the end block. The re was no re ce ss in Design 11.A tes t was made with five sh utt ers in place and the intake gzte removed .The value of K changed slightly fro m 0.36 to 0.33, a d ec rea se in headlo ss of 0.3 foot at maximum discharg e.

Qualitative tes ts w er e made to determine the minimumortex studf. -- .re se rv oi r e evation at which no a i r was drawn into the intake by vor tic es .These tests were made with the following conditions:1. All shut ters removed, single intake operation.2. Five sh utt ers in place, single intake operation.3 . Five shutters in place, both intakes operating.

The tests with all shutters removed for single intake operation weremade to determ ine the minimum su bmerg ence to pa ss 8,60 0 cfs withouta i r being drawn into the penstock by vorti ce s. Tests indicated that theminimum submergence should be about 45 feet . At a 37-foot sub-mergence, a l arg e unstable vortex start ed to form in the intake channel;at a 31-foot subme rgence, a lar ge sta ble vortex formed with an a i rtr a il extending down into the penstock (Fi gu re 27-A). Obse rvations atother submergences a r e l is ted in Table 3 .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

19/64

During single intake operation with five shu tte rs in place, shallowvo rtic es without air tr ai ls formed when Intake No. 1 was operatingat r es er vo ir elevation 745 a t a disch arge of 8,2 70 cfs. A l a rge vor texwith an a i r tra i l extending under the shu tter s formed when the r e s -er vo ir was lowered to elevation 740 with a di sch arg e of 8, 380 cf s(Figu re 27-B).During test s with both intakes o perating, flows into each intake we revaried with r es er vo ir elevation a s shown in the discharge cur ves ofFigure 1 2 . Eddy action was str on g in Intake No. 1, and a shallowvorte x formed in Intake No. 2 at re se rv oi r elevation 750. The eddyand vortex action increase d a s the res er vo ir elevation decre ased .Larg e vortices with air tr ai ls wer e prominent in the channels of bothintakes when re se rv oi r elevation 740 was reached (Fig ure 27-C). Itis intere sting to note that the vor tice s have formed within the intakechannels and that they a r e somewhat upstream from the leading edgeof the shutters.The upst ream o r leading edge of a group of five sh utt ers is a t aboutelevation 705 (left abutment). Th ere for e, the above qualitative te st sindicate that when op erating at ne ar maximum discharge , 40 feet ofsubmergence is requ ired fo r single intake operation, and 45 feet ofsubmergence is required when both intakes a r e operating.The requirement fo r 45 feet of submerge nce to prevent se ve re vorte xaction when the re se rv oi r is at elevation 730 nec ess itat es placing theba se s of the two inta kes on the r ight abu tment a t elevation 685.Differential pre ss ur es a cr os s shutters . --The relatively thin 40- by45-foot sh ut te rs we re designed fo r a uniform loading of 5 feet ofwater (auniform differential pr es su re of 5 feet between the upper andunderside of the shutter) . Piezo meter s were placed on the undersideof the shu tter s along the cente rline, and model studi es were made todetermine the actual pr ess ure di f ferences .Te st s with one, th re e and four shutte rs on the intake were m ade witha d ischa rge of 8, 600 cf s. The maximum differentials we re 6.1, 4. 8and 4 . 1 feet of water, resp ective ly (Fig ur es 28-A, 28-B, and 28-C).Te sts with five shu tter s were run at a d ischarge of 8.270 cfs ( re se rv oi relevation 745). A t this condition, a maximum differential pressure of3 .8 feet of water occu rred a t the leading edge of the upstream shu tter(Figu re 28-D). A seco ndar y, peak differential of 3 .2 feet occu rredin the a r e a above the intake gate. When the te st was repe ated with thepenstock intake gate remo ved, the maximum differential at the leadingedge remained the sam e but the secondary peak decr eased 0.4 foot(Figu re 28-D).

7/28/2019 HYD-509

20/64

The pa t t e rn of pre ss ure in tens i ty under the shu t t e r s is essent i a l lyt he sa me a s a re - en t ran t i n le t . In a r een t r an t i n le t , s epa r a t ion a t t heleading edge cau se s a local reduct ion of piez ome tr ic head. Maximumpr es su re r ec over y occurs about two p ipe d iam eter s downst ream f romthe leading edge.-/A curv e of d i f f eren t i al p re ssu re for f ive shut t e r s , us ing the valuesfo r piezom etric head found in a dimensionless cu rve for a r e -en t ran tinlet , is shown in F igure 28-E. Thes e va lues comp are c lose ly to theexper imental values found at the leading edge with f ive sh ut te rs on theintake (F igu re 28-D). The p r e s su r e i n t ensi t y unde r t he shu t t e r sdeviated f ro m that of the id eal re-en t rant inlet because the c ro ss -sect ional ar ea of the channel is constantly changing due to the c hanneltransi t ion and intake gate.A curved def lector was instal led on the underside of the lowest sh ut t erof a f ive-sh ut ter t ra in to el iminate an a r e a of s tagnat ion a t the inte r -sect i on of the sh ut te rs and end block (Fig ure 29-A). The differe ntialp r e s su r es a t a d i scha r ge of 8 ,270 c f s wer e t he s ame a s t he di f-fere ntia ls without the d eflecto r up to a point about 60 feet ups tre amfrom the end block (F igure 29-A) . The pres su res a long the sur fac eof the def l ec tor r emained about the sa me a s the s t agnat ion pres su reon the end block. However, the differenti als ne ar the end of the deflec-tor , a t t he ga te r ec es s , we re s l igh t ly lower than the pres su res wi thoutthe deflecto r (Fig ur es 29-A and 29-C). The indicated red uction ofhead l os s was noted in the head los s s tudy.Gener a l p r e s s u r es . - - Tes t s wer e made of t he p r e s su r es on t he channeland penstock t ransi t ion surf ace s wi th zero, one, two, and four sh ut te rsin place, a r es er vo i r elevat ion of 730 feet , and a di scharge of 8 ,60 0 cf s .A tes t with five shu t ter s was made a t a discharge of 8 , 600 cfs but a ta higher r e se rv oi r e l eva t ion , 760 feet , to avoid form ation of vo rt i ce s.NO adve rse p re ss ur es w ere found in the t es t s , and the lowest pr es su rewas a posi tive 98 .3 fee t of water . Thi s pres su re occur red a t P iezom-e t e r 1. A l i s t of p res su re s for the above t es t s is presented in Table 4 .Piezo mete r loca tions a r e shown in F igur e 30 .Design 111Vortex and genera l pr es su re s tudies were not r epea ted for Design 111.However, addit ional test s we re made to evaluate head los s and dif -f e ren t i a l p res su res with the r es t r i c t e d c l ea rance s between the bottomof the channel be am s and the top of the sh ut te rs , and the shap e of theleading edge of the shu tte rs.Channel beams. - -Pre l imin ary t es t s w ere made wi th the o ld haunchedtra sh ra ck a rc he s of Design I1 in place to s ee i f the channel be am sshown in F igu re 8 (Sect ion B-B) could be used to l es se n reen t rantlos se s at the leading edge of the control shut t ers . T e s t s w e r e m a deby at tach ing an extension to the leading edge of a shu tter s o that the

7/28/2019 HYD-509

21/64

top of the extension c orr esp ond ed to the to? of the channe l bea m(F i gu re 31 ). The ex tens ion reduced head lo ss by 0 .3 foo t a t maximumdischa rge (F igur e 31-A ). A compar i son of di f fe ren t i a l p r es su re sac ro ss s ix shu t t e rs showed tha t t he ex tens ion reduced the d i f feren-t ia ls by about 1 . 0 foot under the upst rea m shu t ter and about 0 .4 footunder the remain ing shu t t e r s (F ig ure 31-B) . These pre l imina ry t es t swe re m ade with no cle ara nce o r gap between the shu t ter and the bot -tom of the channel be am .Channel beams w ere then p laced in the model and t es t s w ere madewith clea ran ces between the shut te r and the beam of 0 , 5-112, and9 inches . The d i f fe ren t i al p r es su re s fo r these c l earan ces , and withthe beam removed , a r e shown in Figure 32. It can be se en tha t ast he gap be tween the shu t t e r and beam in cr ea se s , t he d i f fe ren t i al sincrease s l igh t ly .The min imum c leara nce be tween the shu t t e rs and channel bea ms wass e t a t 5- 112 inches by the Department of Water R eso urc es. Withfive shu t ter s in place, the addi t ion of the channel be am s reduced thehead los s by about 0 .4 foot . The los s coeff ic ient was reduced to 0 .33(F i gu re 33) .Leading-edge sh apes. - -Studies we re made of th re e leading-edge s hap eson t he ups t r ea m sh f it te r t o de t e rm i ne i f a sm al l degree of s t re aml in ingwould reduc e head lo ss . T e s t s w e r e m a d e w ith a 90" co rn er , and wi th1- and 2- foo t -rad ius curves . The lo ss was 2 . 55 fee t at m axi m um d i s -cha rg e fo r a l l t h ree sha pes (F i gu re 33) .D if f eren ti al p r e s s u re m easu rem en t s w e re m ade at 8,600 c fs us ing theshu t t e rs with the 1- foot rad ius on the l ead ing edge. Te s t s wer e madewith wr~e, hre e, and four sh ut t ers in place. The maximum di fferen-t i a l s were 4 .8 , 3 .8 , and 3 .5 fee t of water , respec t ive ly (F ig ure 34) .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

22/64

am, I' Re po rt No. Hyd-502, by W. P. immons2. "Hydraulic Model Studies of th e Draft Tube Connections andSurge Chara cter is t ics of the Ta i l ra ce Tunnels fo r Orovi l le

I tPowerplant, Report N,,. yd-507, by W. P. SimmonsII3 . Hydraulic Model Studies of the Outlet Works for Oroville Dam, "Re po rt No. Hyd-508, by Donald Colg ate a

4. "Hydraulic Model Studies of the Spil lway fo r Or o v i l le , ,D a ~... ',i,.._., ,_ :.,....__ ~Re po rt No. Hyd-510, by T. J . Rhone and W. F. ,,.,.I,5 . Hydraulic Model Studies of Downpull Fo rc es on the Or oville

I 3Dam Powe rplan t Intake Ga te s, Report No. Hyd-540, byK . G. Bucher

6 . "Hydraulic Model Studies of th e Relief Pan els fo r the OrovilleDam Powerplant Intakes, " Re po rt No. Hyd-549, by Donald Colg ate7. Rouse, H. , Elem entar y Mechanics of Fluid s, New York: JohnWiley and Sons, Inc orp ora ted , 1957

7/28/2019 HYD-509

23/64

T A B L E ID I F F E R E N T I A L P R E S S U R E S A C R O S S C O N T R O L S H U T T E R S

D E S I G N ID I F F E R E N T I A L P R E S S U R E S , F E E T O F W A T E R , P R O T O T Y P E

T E S TN U M B E R

T E S T C O N D I T I O N S S H O W N I N F I G U R E 2 3P I E Z O M E T E R L O C A T I O N S S H O W N I N F I G U R E 16D I F F E R E N T I A L P R E S S U R E = MRE S E RVO I R- H P I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~R E S . E L E V . 7 9 0 , D I S C H A R G E = 8 , 6 0 0 C F S

O R O V I L L E DAMPOWER PLANT INTAKES

DATA FROM 1 : 24 MODEL

7/28/2019 HYD-509

24/64

M A N O M E T E R P R E S S U R E S A - O N G C H AN N E LA N D P E NS T OC K T R A N S T I O N S - D E S IG N IF E E T O F W A TE R, P R O T O TY P E

I 7 - r c . 7 I I I I1 T;J II C O N D I T I O N S I A I I I

T E S T C O N DI TI ON S : R E S . E L E V . 7 3 0 D I S C HA R G E - 8 , 600 C F SA F L O W THR OU GH P O R T 2 , I N T 1 A L E N D B L OC K ,B. F L O W T H RO U G H P O R T 2 , V E RT IC A L E N D B L O C KC. F L O W T H R O U G H P O R T I, I N T I A L E N D B L O C K

P I E Z O M E T E R L O C A T I O N S S H O W N I N F IG U R E 24

O R O V I L L E DAMPOWER P LAN T I N TAKES

D A T A F R O M 1 : 24 M O D E L

7/28/2019 HYD-509

25/64

T A B L E 3

S U B M E R G E N C E T E S T O B S E R V A TI O N S

SUBMERGENCEIE T u.n\ R E M A R K S

9 4 S M A L L V O RT EX A BO VE P EN S TO C K; C O N F E T T I B O B S I N E Y E O FV O R T E X , N O A I R T R A I L . . ' _-90 SMALL C LO C KWISE V O R T E X A B O V E P E N S T O C K ; NO AIR TRAII~:: -,,::BZ VORTEX AND EDDY ACTION INCREASED. A COUNTERCLOCKWISE EDDYFORMING ON SHORE S ID E OF VORTEX. VO RTEX OCCASSIONALLYP U L L E D C O N F E T T I A B O U T 0 . 5; F EE T ( M O D E L ) B EL O W W A T E R S U R F A C lV O R TE X S M A L L , N O A I R ' T R A I L .7 1 S A M E A S 8260 V O R T E X A B O V E P E N S T O C K I S D I M I N I S H I N G,50 S M 4 L L . V O R TI C ES , NO A IR T R A I L . B I T S O F C O N F E T T I O C A S S I O N A L L YDRAWN DOWN.

S A M E A S 5 0 , W I T H M O R E E D D Y A C T I O N A R O U N D T R A S H R A C K/ 46 1 M E M B E R S .I 3 7 L A R G E V O R T E X M A K I N G A ND B R E A K IN G . V O R T E X L O C A T E D I N C H A N N E LBE HI ND EXPOS ED TRASHRACK MEMBERS. C ,ONFETTl DR AW N IN , A IRT R A I L I N T O P E N S T O C K.I3 1 1 L A R G E V O R T E X I N C H A N N E L ( F I G U R E 1. A IR A N D C O N F E T T I V I S I B L EI I N T R A N S P A R E N T P E N S T O C K T R A N S I T I O N .

C O N D I T I O N S :S I N G L E I N T A K E O P E R A T I O N ?D I S C H A R G E - 8,600 C F S

O R O V I L L E D A MPOWER P L A N T I N T A K E S

S U B M E R G E N C E T E S T S - D E S I G N I1D A T A O F 1 : 24 M O D E L

7/28/2019 HYD-509

26/64

T A B L E 4M A N O M E T E R P R E S S U R E 5 AL ON G C H A N N E LAN D PENCyOCK TRANSITIONS - DESIGN I1

Fk ' O F WA TE R , P R O TO TY P E

P IE ZO ME T E R LO C A TIO N S S H OWN IN F IG U RE 3 0

O R O V I L L E D A MP OW ER P L A N T I N T A K E S

DATA FROM 1 . 24 M O D E L

7/28/2019 HYD-509

27/64

FIGURE 1REPORT HYC-509

L O M I O N YAP

..,

OROVILLE DAMPOWER PLANT INTAKE STRUCTURE STUDIES

LOCATION MAP

342

7/28/2019 HYD-509

28/64

2 OROVILLE FACILITIES3 NORTH BAY AQUEDUCT4 DELTA PROJECT5 Y HlTHBAY * W E m6 SAN LU IS PROJECT l Joinl with U.S.)

R O V l l L E 7 WASTALAQUEDUCT8 CASTAIC RESERVOIR9 CEDAR SPRINGS RESERVOIR10 PERRIS RESERVOIR

. . A . . I . .

4 . 1 1 1 1

O R O V I L L E D A MPOWER P L A N T I N T A K E S

C A L I F O R N I A S T A T E W A T E R P R O J E C T

7/28/2019 HYD-509

29/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

30/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

31/64

FIGUREREPORTH I

7/28/2019 HYD-509

32/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

33/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

34/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

35/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

36/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

37/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

38/64

F I G U R E 12REPORT H Y D - 5 0 9

4 6

D I S C H A R G E - C F S x 1000

O R O V I L L E D A MP O W E R PLANT I N T A K E SD I S C H A R G E R A T I N G C U R VE

7/28/2019 HYD-509

39/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

40/64

FIGURE 14R e por t Hyd-509

POWERPLANT INTAKESConstruction of Headbox and Topography

7/28/2019 HYD-509

41/64

F IGURE 15Report Hyd-509

7/28/2019 HYD-509

42/64

F I G U R E 1 6REPORT HYD-509

A . C O N TR O L S H U T T E R S W E RE F A B R I C A T E D B Y F A S T E N I N GR O L L E D S K I N P L A T E S TO M A C H I N E D E N D R IN GS . F O U R T E E NP I E Z O M E T E H S W E RE P L A C E D I N T H E R I G H T SH U T T E R .

F R O N T V I E W6. P I E Z O M E T E R L OC A T I ON S

E L E V A T I O N

O R O V I L L E D A MPOWER P L A N T I N T A K E S

S E M I C Y L I N D R I C A L S H U T T E R S- D E S IG N I1 : 24 SC A L E M O D E L

7/28/2019 HYD-509

43/64

FIGURE 17Rep ort Hyd-509

A . Haunched trash rack arch es wer e fabricatedfr o m No. 18-gage she et met al. St;.-3s betweenthe arc he s we re machined from aluminumbar stock.

B. General view of ir itakes. Eight shut ters ar ein place under tra shr ack ar ch es of Intake No. 1.

OROVILLE DAMPCNERPLANT INTAKEGeneral Views of Tr as hr ac kSection and Intake M odel--Design I .1:24 Scale Model

7/28/2019 HYD-509

44/64

C R O S S - S E C T I O N O F I N T A K E C H A N N E L

C R O S S - S E C T I O N T H R O U G H FULLY D E V E L O P E D T R A N S I T I O N

O R O V I L L E D A MPGW ER P L A N T I NT A K E S

C O M P A R I S O N OF C R O S S - S E C T I O N SOF D E S I G N n A N D m

7/28/2019 HYD-509

45/64

FIGURE 19Repcrt Hyd-509

Struct ural elements of the segmented archt rashra ck were fabricated i rom No. 18-gagegalvanized sheet metal. A channel beamform ed the tension mem ber a t ba se of eacharch .

OROVILLE DAMPOWERPLANT INTAKESSegmented Arch Trashracks--Design m1:24 Scale Model

7/28/2019 HYD-509

46/64

=? H = Losses + Veloci ty headorRes. Elev.-Hp. I

' - - -R ing of 4 piezometersv n model.O R O V I L L E D A M

POWER P L A N T I N T A K E SE L E V A T I O N O F I N T A K E S T R U C T U R E A N D

D E F I N I T I O N O F H E A D L O S S M E A S U R E M E N T

7/28/2019 HYD-509

47/64

D I S C H A R G E G F S r 1,000H E A D L O S S VS D I S C H A R G E

DATA FROM 1 2 4 M O D E L

O R O V I L L E D A MP OW ER P L A N T I N T AK E S

H E A D L O S S T E S T S - D E S I G N Ii 29 S C A L E M OD EL

7/28/2019 HYD-509

48/64

F I G U R E '22R E P O R T H Y D - 5 0 9

A . R E S E R V O I R E L E V A T I O N 710L ARG E CL O CKW I SE V O RT EX F O RM E D O V E R I NT AKE N0 . I W H I L EC O U N T E R C LO C K W I SE V O R T E X F O R M E D OV ER I N T A K E N 0 . 2

( % S EC O ND T I M E E X P O S U R E 1

P O RT 2AIR TRAIL- ----

G. L O C A T I O N O F V O R T E X IN I N T A K E C H A N N E L SS I M U L T A N E O U S O P E R A T I O N - 8 , 6 0 0 C F S I N T A KE NO I ,7 , 9 0 0 C FS I N TA K E N 0 . 2 .

O R O V I L L E D A MPOWER P L A N T I N T A K E SV O R T E X S T U D Y - D E S I G N I

1 . 2 4 S C A L E M O D E 1

7/28/2019 HYD-509

49/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

50/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

51/64

F I G U R E 2 5R E P O R T H Y D - 5 0 9--

NUMBER OFSHUTTERS K DISCHARGE H~

A - H E A D L O SS - 0 T O 6 S H U T T E R S

4 8 12N U M B E R O F S H U T T E R S

B - H EA D L O S S C O E F F I C I E N T SO R O V I L LE D A M

P OW ER P L A N T I N T A K E SLO SS COEFFICIENTS AND HEAD LOSS FOR SHUT TER S - D E S I G N 11

DATA FR3M 1 : 24 MODEL

7/28/2019 HYD-509

52/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

53/64

A . Reserv oir elevation 646- -La rge vortex inchannel. Ai r drawn into penstock. Allshutters removed, 3 1 feet submergence.(112-second time exposure .)

B. Single intake operation, re se rv oi r eleva-tion 740, dischar ge 8,380 cf s. Five shutter si n place. Large vortex formed with a ir tra ilextending m a e r shutters , 35 feet submer-gence. (112-second time exposure. )

Simultaneous operation, re se rv oi r elevation740, 8375 cfs Intake No. 1; 7. 730 cfs IntakeNo. 2. La rge vortices with ai r tr ai ls formedin both channels. 35 feet subme rge nce (112-second time exposure).OROVILLE DAMPOWERPL.4NT INTAKESVortex Study--Design I1194 Sca le Model

7/28/2019 HYD-509

54/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

55/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

56/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

57/64

F I G U R E 31R E P O R T H Y D - 5

. , W i t h i p Extens ion- i thout L ip Extens ionD i c h o r g e 7 9 6 0 C F S - Rer. Elev. 7606. D I F F E R E N T I A L P R E S S U R E S A C R O S S 6 S H U T T E R S011 // I I I 1 I 1 1 1 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 D E T A I L A

D I S C H A R G E - C FS x 1,000 (L IP EXTENSlONIA. H E A D L O S S V S D I S C H A R GE P E A 0 L O S S AND D l F F E R E N T i A L P R E S S U RE S ,

6 S H U T T E R S - D E S I G N mDATA FROM i 24 M O D E L

8 '' : ,,.-Channel B e a m

7/28/2019 HYD-509

58/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

59/64

F I G U R E 33RE P O RT HID-505

IIIIIIII

D I SC H A R GE = C F S x 1 0 0 00 1 I10 2 0 30 4 0 50 60 70 8 0 9 0

V E L O C I T Y - F P S . ( Q / A lO R O V I L L E D A M

POWER PLP.NT INTAKESL E A D I N G E DG E r I E A 0 L O SS - D E S I G N 111

D A T A F R O M 1 2 4 M O D E L

7/28/2019 HYD-509

60/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

61/64

Zmwm (nab=.. . . . . . . . 6.4516 ( 1 -us) . . . . . . Smvn cmtinatsr.splurs r ~ t . . . . . . . . 929.03 . . . . . . wam = & M o m. . . . . . . 0.092903 (-tlJ) . . . . . wamawe&. ........ 0 . w l a . . . . . . . . . Squarr.strrs&-a. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . W . . . . . . . . . . n t u e .. . . . . . . . . . . 4.ru6.q;. . . . . . . . . . Smvnmbra0.kC.m" Spurrr n1-tern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .rmurr dles . . . . . . . . 2 . 5 m . . . . . . . . . . . Smvn kll-tareCubic i m m m . . . . . . . . . 16.3873. . . . . . . . . . . CuMs c w. . . . . . . . .bic fcot O . W W 6 E . . . . . . . . . uble -tern. . . . . . . .ubic yard.. 0.W555. . . . . . . . . .WE r .

7/28/2019 HYD-509

62/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

63/64

7/28/2019 HYD-509

64/64