Existing labyrinths One drawback of free overflow spillways is their low specific discharge. A standard Creager type profile has a unit flow in m’/s per metre length of spillway close tol215/h!, where h is the upstream head over the spillway crest in metre. Most usual spillways are therefore costly due directly to their length and/or indirectly due to the loss of storage or head corresponding to the significant upstream head required for the extreme flood. For over 50 years, labyrinth weirs have been used to increase specific discharge at weirs. They are generally conceived as vertical walls with trapezoidal lay out. Most are for spillways with design discharges of between 100 and 1 000 m’/s and walls under 4 m high. The behaviour of these structures has been good. The vertical walls of such labyrinths may be built easily but they have three drawbacks: = Vertical walls are not hydraulically favourable for large discharges. - They require significant reinforcement - Thebase area they require cannot be found on typical gravity dam sections. This solution has thus been used only for one per thousand of existing dams. Anew solution: P.K. Weirs Since 2000, studies and model tests have been made in: France, Algeria, China, India, Vietnam and ‘Switzerland for labyrinth structures which _may be placed upon usual _gravity dams cross sections. The designs tried to optimise hydraulic efficiency as well as structural requirements and construction facilities. Over 100 shapes were studied and tested: many solutions proved possible, but the most favourable designs are based upon two principles: ~ The lay out of walls has a rectangular shape similar to piano keys, justifying the proposed name of Piano Keys Weirs (or P.K. Weirs). - Those walls orthogonal to the flow are inclined. This is favourable hydraulically especially for large discharges and also allows the base width of the structure to be reduced, thus allowing its utilization upon most spillways or gravity dams. A cost efficient design AP. Weir design which appears cost efficient for most existing or new spillways is represented below. This model has an upstream and a downstream overhang of same length. The proposed ratio N between the developed plan length of wall and the overall spillway length is close to 5. An increase of this ratio does not usually seem cost effective. Where this ratio of 5 is used, the proportions of other aspects of the PK Weir can be taken as follows, based on Pa (in metres) which is the maximum height of the labyrinth walls (see Fig.1 overleaf). The Suggested upstream head over the weir crest, h, should be between 0.4 Pm and 2 Pr Within these limits, the discharge q (in m°/s) per metre of spillway is close to q=43H4PR as compared to oS hh for a Creager Weir. As compared to a Creager weir, the saving in term of required head above spillway crest level is close to 0.45 P,,.or the discharge increase is close to the discharge of a Creager Weir with a nappe depth Py. As with Creager weirs, this estimated discharge may be reduced by 5 or 10%in the case of short weirs due to interference effects from the end abutments.