228 DAM OUTLET WORKS

4.7.6 Stepped spillways

Stepped spillways (ordinary overfall spillways followed by steps on the

spillway face) have been used for a very long time – the earliest was built
around 700 BC (Chanson, 1995). In modern times their use was rather
limited but during recent decades they have been attracting increased
attention mainly because of new material technologies (RCC dams and
prefabricated blocks); they are used mainly for auxiliary but also for main
spillways, where their enhanced energy dissipation contributes to the
economy of overall design. For examples of stepped spillways see Chanson
(1995).
For stepped spillways the crucial problems are the flow régime (nappe
or skimming flow) and the associated questions of air entrainment (and thus
cavitation protection) and energy dissipation. In the skimming flow régime
water flows over the stepped spillway as a stream skimming the steps and
cushioned by recirculating fluid trapped between them, whereas the nappe
flow with fully developed hydraulic jumps and a succession of free fall jets is
essentially a flow in a series of drop structures – see Section 10.3.
The early systematic investigation of hydraulic conditions on cas-
cades with a slope 1:1 was carried out by Essery and Horner (1978) who
produced useful design curves for nappe flow.
Denoting the step height h and the length l Chanson (1995) showed
that full onset of the skimming flow régime is characterized by a value of
critical depth yc ( (q2/g)1/3) given by

yc/h  1.057 0.465h/l. (4.63)

Chamani and Rajaratnam (1999) suggest the equation

h/l  0.405(yc/h) 0.62

(4.64)

for the upper boundary of nappe flow and

冪0莦.8莦9莦莦莦
冤冢 h 莦冣 莦莦冢莦
y
莦
h冣
y
莦莦莦1.5莦莦冥 莦莦1
1 0.34
c c
h/l  (4.65)

as the lower boundary for the skimming flow. Equation (4.65) gives results
agreeing with experiments for h/l  1; for h/l  0.8, yc/h was found to be
almost constant at 0.8 Boes and Hager (2003b) suggest for the onset of
skimming flow:

yc/h  0.91 0.14 tan  (4.66)

There is a transition zone between the two flow regimes and any differ-
ences between the experimentally derived equations 4.63–4.66 are mainly
 SPILLWAYS 229

due to the difficulties in the definition of the onset of skimming flow as

well as to possible scale effects.
The same as for any rough spillway surface, the point of inception of
self-aeration on stepped spillways is closer to the crest than in the case of
smooth spillways due to the faster growth of the turbulent boundary layer
thickness (equation (4.37)). According to Boes and Hager (2003a) the
blackwater distance Li from the crest to the air entrainment inception
point is

Li  5.9 yc6/5/((sin )7/5 h1/5) (4.67)

(this can be compared with equation (4.23) for smooth spillways).

Equation 4.67 demonstrates again the great importance of the unit
discharge q and the relatively small influence of the step height h.
The uniform equivalent clear water depth yw can be computed from
(Boes and Hager 2003b):

yw/h  0.215 (sin ) 1/3

(4.68)

i.e. yw is independent of the step height.

The uniform flow depth for the mixture of air and water y90 (import-
ant for spillway side wall height) as given by the authors is:

y90/h  0.5 Fr*(0.1 tan   0.5) (4.69)

where Fr*  qw/(g sin  h3)1/2

Although the enhanced aeration and earlier air inception point on
stepped spillway surfaces act as cavitation protection, there still is a risk of
cavitation (due to negative pressures on the vertical step faces) in the
region of blackwater flow upstream of the inception point and particularly
downstream of it before sufficient entrained air reaches the spillway
surface. According to the discussion of the Boes and Hager (2003a) paper
the velocity at the inception point should not exceed about 15 m/s to avoid
risk of cavitation.
For further details of the design of stepped spillways and their flow
structure see Chanson (1995, 2001), Chanson and Toombes (2002), Boes
and Hager (2003a, 2003b) and Chanson (2004). For energy dissipation on
stepped spillways see Section 5.2.
Although superficially similar in terms of type of flow, spillways
using prefabricated blocks have lower steps, smaller slopes and present
additional design problems to stepped spillways on large (RCC) dams.
Gabion stepped spillways may have a rather limited life, but earth dam
spillways protected by prefabricated interlocking concrete blocks have been
used quite extensively. Russian engineers pioneered the design of concrete
wedge blocks and Pravdivets and Bramley (1989) described in some detail
230 DAM OUTLET WORKS

several configurations; Baker (1994) included in his investigations flat blocks

and reinforced grass and reported stability for downward sloping wedge-
shaped blocks for velocities up to about 7 m s 1. In spite of their proven
stability attention must be paid to the detailing of the block edges, the
drainage slots connecting the low pressure zone on top of the blocks to the
drainage layer below them and to the subsoil or underlayer consisting of
granular material and possibly geotextiles (Hewlett et al., 1997).

4.7.7 Other spillways

The previous six sections have dealt with the main and most frequent
types of spillways. Their combinations, as well as other types of spillways,
are also sometimes used. If of unusual shape, their design should be
developed with the aid of model studies (Chapter 16), particularly if they
are intended to convey major discharges.
Unusual spillway shapes (in plan) are often associated with the
desire to increase the effective spillway length (even if the specific dis-
charge, q, may be decreased owing to interference to flow); examples are a
spillway with a ‘duck bill’ crest, labyrinth or special shape (shaft) spillways
(Fig. 4.19 – note also the aeration vent for the shaft bend). The discharge
coefficients of these spillways are usually (but not always) somewhat
smaller than those of conventional spillways described earlier. The main
objective of model studies is to ascertain these coefficients and the
modular limits of the spillway.
Fuse plugs are used as auxiliary spillways. They are basically broad-
crested weirs with a crest higher than the main spillway crest but below the
maximum water level, and an earth embankment on top of the spillway,
designed to fail at a predetermined reservoir level. The sudden flow after
the fuse plug failure must be taken into account when choosing the site of
the auxiliary spillway, which usually discharges into a (side) valley other
than the main spillway. The downstream face of the weir must be suitably
protected, e.g. by concrete plain or wedge-shape blocks (Section 4.7.6) or
reinforced grass (CIRIA, 1987).
Tunnelled spillways, free flowing or under pressure, usually convey
flow from side channel or shaft spillways (Sections 4.7.2, 4.7.3 and 4.7.4).
Large-capacity outlets placed below the dam crest and controlled by gates
are usually called orifice or submerged spillways (Fig. 4.20). Apart from
the gates (Chapter 6) their important design features are the inlet arrange-
ment and associated head losses and the prevention of vortices (Section
4.8), and the control and effect of the outflow jet (Chapter 5). All of these
aspects are again best studied on suitable scale models.
The elimination of a conventional spillway is a unique feature of
some rockfill dams; this is achieved by the inclusion of an impervious wall,
 BOTTOM OUTLETS 231

Fig. 4.19 Oued Sarno dam, Algeria; general arrangement of spillway

and outlets (after ICOLD, 1987)

lower than the upstream water level, inside the dam, with flow passing
through the main body of the rockfill (Lawson, 1987).

4.8 Bottom outlets

Bottom outlets are openings in the dam used to draw down the reservoir
level. According to the type of control gates (valves) (see Section 6.3) and
the position of the outflow in relation to the tailwater, they operate either
under pressure or free flowing over part of their length. The flow from the
bottom outlets can be used as compensating flow for a river stretch down-
stream of the dam where the flow would otherwise fall below acceptable
limits: outlets can also serve to pass density (sediment-laden) currents
through the reservoir (Section 4.5).
232 DAM OUTLET WORKS

Fig. 4.20 Kariba dam spillway, Zimbabwe (after ICOLD, 1987)

Large bottom openings serve as submerged spillways (Section 4.7.7)

and their capacity can be used for flushing sediment from the reservoir
(Section 4.5) and during the dam construction (if only one opening is
available its blockage must be prevented). A typical arrangement for a
large bottom spillway is shown in Fig. 4.21, and for a bottom outlet of a
smaller capacity in Fig. 4.22. Note the inlet construction and shape
designed to reduce the head loss, the flared outflow section (to aid energy
dissipation downstream of the outlet) and the air vent to protect the junc-
tion of the spillway and outlet against possible cavitation damage (in case
of their joint operation). The outflow area has in this case been reduced to
85% of the bottom outlet area to provide cavitation protection (at the cost
of a 10% reduction in outlet capacity). Should the outlet terminate in a
regulating valve, then a similar area reduction should be provided (for the
full valve opening see Section 6.3).
The head loss at an inlet is expressed as h  V2/2g; for an inlet with
grooves and a screen, 0.15    0.34. Although the lower values of the
coefficient  are usually associated with inlets with curved walls (giving a
gradually decreasing cross-section), sometimes the same (or an even
better) result can be achieved by a transition formed by several plane sur-
Fig. 4.21 Sainte-Croix arch dam bottom spillway (Thomas, 1976)

Fig. 4.22 Bicaz dam outlet works (Novak and Čábelka, 1981)
234 DAM OUTLET WORKS

faces, at the expense of allowing small negative pressures to develop on

them. To prevent the formation of vortices in the water level upstream of
the inlet, its axis should be submerged sufficiently and/or vortex suppres-
sion devices (e.g. floating rafts) should be used (Knauss, 1987). It may be
advantageous to combine the outflow part of bottom outlets with the spill-
way energy dissipator; in many cases, however, a separate outlet energy
dissipator is provided (Section 5.5). For further details of bottom outlet
model testing and design, see Novak and Čábelka (1981); for details of the
protection of inlets against ice and their operation in winter conditions, see
Ashton (1988).
The flow in the outlet downstream of a gate can be free with or
without a hydraulic jump (see also Fig. 4.17). In their study of the jump
in circular conveyancies, diameter D, with a free downstream surface
Stahl and Hager (1999) defined the supercritical Froude number as
Fr1  Q/(gDy14)1/2 and obtained experimentally a simple relationship for
the sequent depths ratio for 1.5  Fr1  6.5 and 0.2  y/D  0.7:

y2/y1  1.00 Fr10.9 (4.70)

The important choking discharge can be approximated from equation 4.70

by putting y2  D and D/y1  Fr1.
The air demand of a hydraulic jump in a conduit where the flow
downstream of the jump is under pressure has been well researched and
the original Kalinske and Robertson (1943) equation has been shown to
be valid for a range of conditions (  Qa/Q):

  0.0066 (Fr1 1)1.4 (4.71)

However, Haindl (1984) points to an increase of the entrainment capacity

of a jump with increasing conduit size and quotes a coefficient 0.015 in
equation (4.71) for the envelope of field data.
For further details of flow at tunnel bends see Gisonni and Hager (1999).
For a comprehensive discussion of air demand and entrainment in
bottom outlet tunnels, see Speerli (1999) and Hager (1999) (see also
Section 6.6).

Worked Example 4.1

The inflow hydrograph into a reservoir is given by the first two columns in
the lower table on this page. The relationship between the storage volume
in the reservoir (taking storage at crest level as zero) and the head above
the crest is given by the first two columns of the upper table (this was
obtained from equation (4.5)). A simple overfall spillway is to be designed
which would limit the maximum head on the spillway crest to 3.00 m.
 WORKED EXAMPLES 235

Solution
Initially, assume a spillway length of 200 m and a constant discharge coeffi-
cient of 0.75. Thus, the spillway capacity is given by (equation (4.19))
2 2
Q   Cd兹2苶g1/2bH3/2   0.75  4.43  200H3/2  443H3/2 (m3 s 1).
3 3
Note that the maximum inflow of 3300 m3 s 1 has to be reduced by flood
routing to 443  33/2  2300 m3 s 1 or less.
Taking the time step in the computation (routing period) as 10 h 
36 000 s, compute the following:

2V
H (m) V ( 106 m3) O (m3 s 1)   O (m3 s 1)
∆t

0.5 045 0156 02 656

1.0 090 0443 05 443
1.5 138 0814 08 480
2.0 188 1253 11 697
2.5 243 1751 15 251
3.0 300 2302 18 969

Using the above values and the given inflow hydrograph, now compute the
following table (interpolating values from above as necessary) – equation (4.8):

2V 2V
T (h) I (m3 s 1) I1  I2 O (m3 s 1)  O (m3 s 1)   O (m3 s 1)
∆t ∆t

0 0200 0000 00 000 00 000

10 0960 1160 0068 01 024 01 160
20 1720 2680 0263 03 176 03 704
30 2480 4200 0679 06 018 07 376
40 3240 5720 1259 09 220 11 738
50 2860 6100 1761 11 798 15 320
60 2480 5340 2031 13 076 17 138
70 2100 4580 2107 13 441 17 656
80 1720 3820 2049 13 163 17 261
90 1340 3060 1895 12 433 16 223
100 0960 2300 1678 14 733

The maximum outflow is 2107 m3 s 2 (2300 m3 s 1) and the maximum

head on the spillway is H  (2107/443)2/3  2.83 m. For a preliminary design
this is a satisfactory result. Note that the maximum outflow is equal to the
inflow at that time. Should a more accurate result be required, a slightly
shorter spillway could be considered, as well as the variation of the coeffi-
cient of discharge (see worked example 4.3).