·r A'l

• {)J3<-/ .
nO , t~ -:J.'~{-
EO

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U. S. ARMY

- - - - - - -- - - - -----·- -·-

CONDUITS AND HOWELL-BUNGER VALVES

NARROWS DAM, LITTLE MISSOURI RIVER, ARKANSAS

MODEL INVESTIGATION

TECHN I CAL MEMORA~DUM NO . 2-294

WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION

VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI

ARMY-MRC VICKSBURG. MISS.

JU L Y 1951

PROPERTY OFU. S. ~
OFF! OE CHIEF O!!i' ENQI!NIElEJBS
-LIB:RA.RY .
 Form Approved
Report Documentation Page OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington
VA 22202-4302 Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it
does not display a currently valid OMB control number

1. REPORT DATE 3. DATES COVERED

2. REPORT TYPE
JUL 1951 00-00-1951 to 00-00-1951
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
Conduits and Howell-Bunger valves, Narrows Dam, Little Missouri 5b. GRANT NUMBER
River, Arkansas: Model Investigation
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Waterway Experiment Station,3903 Halls
Ferry Road,Vicksburg,MS,39180
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT

NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF
ABSTRACT OF PAGES RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a REPORT b ABSTRACT c THIS PAGE Same as 49
unclassified unclassified unclassified Report (SAR)

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
 PBEFACE

A model study of the conduits and Hewell-Bunger valves for Narrows

Dam was authorized by the Chief of Engineers in the third indorsement,

dated 19 August 1948, to a letter from the Division Engineer, Lower

Mississippi Valley Division, to the Chief of Engineers, dated 4 April

1946, subject: "Specifications and Drawings for Narrows Dam." The

study was accomplished during the period March 1947 - April 1948 at

the Waterways Experiment Station for the Division Engineer, Lower

Mississippi Valley Division.

During the course of the study Messrs. E. J. Williams, Jr., J. E.

Sanders, C. L. Sumrall, Jr., and F. B. Toffaleti, engineers of the Lower

Mississippi Valley Division, visited the Experiment Station at frequent

intervals to discuss the testing program and to correlate test results

with design and construction work concurrently being accomplished. The

study was conducted in the Hydraulics Division of the Waterways Experi-

ment Station by Messrs. C. Kestenbaum and H. H. Sadler, Jr., under the

general supervision of Messrs. F. R. Brown and T. E. Murphy,

Results of a previous model study on the spillway stilling basin

for Narrows Dam are contained in Technical Memorandum No. 209-1, "Model

Study of Stilling Basin, Narrows Dam, Little Missouri River, Arkansas,"

revised 1 October 1944.

 CONTENTS

PREFACE

SUMMARY

PART I: INTRODUCTION. l

Tho Prototype . . . . 1
Need for and Purpose of Model Analysis 2
The Model. . . 3

PART II: NARRATIVE OF TESTS. 5

Valves Discharging Free, Original Design Basin 5
Hooded Valves, Original and Modified Basins. 8
Diversion Flows. 15
PART III: DISCUSSION. 17
TABLE 1

PLATES 1-19

APPENDIX: PHOTOGRAPHS OF FLOW FROM TYPE 4 HOODS INTO TYPE 5 EXIT

 SUMMARY

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the over-all per-

formance of the conduits and 84-in. Rowell-Bunger valves to be used to

regulate flow through the outlet conduits of Narrows Dam, with particular

attention to discharge coefficients, velocities in the exit area, and

pressures on the end sill of the stilling basin.

Tests, which were conducted on a 1:16-scale model, demonstrated the

need for some type of hood over the valves to prevent flow from being

projected onto the access road along the right side of the stilling basin.

Hoods having semicircular tops of 8.75-ft radius supported by vertical

walls from the basin floor gave satisfactory results. The coefficient of

discharge for the combination of the valves without the hoods and the con-

traction immediately above the valves was found to vary between 0.87 and

0.88. The use of a hood on the valves did not impair the discharge

capacity. It was necessary to replace the sloping end sill of the

original design with a vertical-faced end sill to maintain a cushion of

water in the stilling basin. Pressures on the end sill were not of seri-

ous proportions.
 CONDUITS AND HOWELL-BUNGER VALVES

NARROWS DAM, LITTLE MISSOURI RIVER, ARKANSAS

Model Investigation

PART I: INTRODUCTION

The Prototype

1. Narrows Dam, which was designed by the Fargo Engineering Com-

pany for the Division Engineer, Lower Mississippi Valley Division, is

located on the Little Missouri River, a tributary of the Ouachita River,

in southwestern Arkansas. Figure 1 is a vicinity map of the area. The

dam is of the concrete-gravity type and has an over-all length of about

940 ft and a maximum height of

about 185 ft. The reservoir

created by the dam has a maxim~~

capacity of lJ.08,000 acre-ft, of

which 128,000 acre-ft is to be

used for flood control and

280,000 acre-ft (including

78,000 acre-ft of dead stor-

age) is to be used for gen~ra­

tion of hydroelectric power.

The general layout of the dam Figure 1. Vicinity map

is shown on plate 1.

2. Normal flow regulation is afforded by two 84-in. Rowell-

Bunger valves on the downstream end of tw·o 8.5-ft-diameter conduits.

2

Details of a conduit and valve are shown on plates 2 and 3. The combined

capacity of these valves is about 5,000 cfs at pool elevation 548

(maximum po"rer pool).

3. An uncontrolled concrete overflow spillway section with its

crest at elevation 563* is located in an interior portion of the dam.

The spillway crest is 150 ft long and is designed to pass a maximum

discharge of 42,000 cfs under a head of 17 ft.

4. Three 10.0-ft-diameter steel-lined penstocks have been provided

for generation of power, and two vertical-type turbine units have been

installed. The third penstock, provided for future use if required, has

been sealed at each end by temporary concrete bulkheads.

Need for and Purpose of Model Analysis

5. Little was known about the action of a stilling basin down-

stream from large Rowell-Bunger valves. It was feared that there might

be considerable energy concentrated at certain points downstream from the

stilling basin resulting from the intersection of the jets from the two

valves and from waves set up by the side walls. Also, with high veloc-

ities over the end sill, cavitation on the top of the sill was considered

possible. Further, conclusive data on the discharge coefficient for a

Rowell-Bunger valve were not available. Therefore a model study was au-

thorized to examine the over-all performance of the conduits and Rowell-

Bunger valves with particular attention directed to the questions enu-

merated above.

* All elevations are in feet above mean sea level.

 3

The Model

6. The investigation was conducted on a model built to a scale

ratio of 1:16 (figure 2) . There were reproduced in the model the entire

conduits including the intakes and Rowell- Bunger valves, the stilling

basin, and approximately 250 ft of the exit channel . The reservoir area

was represented by a steel pressure tank of sufficient size and properly

baffled to provide quiet approach conditions . Tho intakes and conduits

were fabricated of transparent plastic, whi l e the Rowell-Bunger valves

wore machined in stool (figure 3). The stilling basin and exit channel

were molded in coment mortar.

Figure 2 . General view of tho model

 Closed position

Open position

Figure 3. Model ~alve

 5

PART II: NARRATIVE OF TESTS

7. Tests were conducted with the reservoir at three elevations:

minimum power pool, 504; maximum power pool, 548; and spillway crest, 563.

Tailwater elevations were set in accordance with the improved channel

tailwater rating curve shown on plate 4. During the course of the study
investigations were made of the valves discharging free and with four

hood designs confining the flow from the valves to the stilling-basin

area. Details of the hoods are shown on plate 5. Six modifications to

the stilling basin and exit area, details of which are shown on plate

6, were tested.

Valves Discharging Free, Original Design Basin

8. Flows from the valves discharging free into the stilling basin
of original design (plate 6) are shovm by figure 4. It was found that

even with the pool at elevation 504, flow from the right valve was pro-

jected onto the access road along the right side of the stilling basin.

Also, it was found that the trajectory of the flow from the valves was

dependent upon the pool elevation and was changed very little by changes

in the valve opening. Another item of interest noted during the initial

tests was the fins of water on the main jet caused by the metal ribs in

the valve. At first it was thought that this might'be a model condition

which would not occur in the prototype. However, it ·was found that simi-

lE'.r fins of water were produced by the ribs of the 60- in. valves at Nim-

rod Dam, Arkansas.

9. Positive pressures existed throughout the sluice. Table 1

 Valve full open; pool 563 Valve one-quarter open; pool 563
Discharge 2665 cfa Discharge 980 cfs

Valves full open; pool 563 Valves one-quarter open; pool 563
Discharge 5330 cfs Discharge 1960 cfs

Valves full open; pool 548 Valves full open; pool 504
~ischarge 5035 cfs Discharge 4064 cfs

Figure 4. Flov conditions, valves discharging free. Original design

 7

lists pressures measured, while piezometer locations are shown on plate

7. Also, it was found that pressures on the top of the end sill were not
of a serious nature since the minirn.um pres sure measured was only -1.0 ft

of water.

10. A straight horizontal section of conduit was used for studies

to determine the discharge coefficient of the Hovrell-Bunger valves. The

valve -was connected first to a 102-in. -diameter conduit with a transition

immediately upstream from the valve to simulate the Narrows Dam condi-

tions. Additional tests vmre conducted with the transition eliminated

and an 84-in.-diameter conduit, the same diameter as the valve. With the

valve at full opening, the coefficient of discharge for the above two con-

ditions varied from about 0.87 to 0.88 (plates 8 and 9). With the 102-
in.-diameter conduit, the coefficient of discharge was based on a piezometer

just upstream from~ the transition and on one in the transition 2 ft upstream

from the valve. Coefficients based on the latter piezometer are believed

to be affected somewhat by the curvature of flow in the transition. The

coefficient of discharge was about 0.88 (plate 9) with the transition

eliminated and the 102-in.-diameter conduit replaced with one the same

size as the valve. Comparison of plates 8 and 9 indicates that the loss

through the transition is negligible. Plate 10 shows the variation in

discharge coefficient as the valve is closed. Full opening of the valve

is referred to the maximum travel of the outer sleeve which at Narro1vs

Dam was limited by the operating machinery. The maximum travel was only

about 95 per cent of the travel necessary to place the outer sleeve in
the fully retracted position. All coefficient valuea vrere computed from

the equation, C :::: Q/A.J 2gH, where C is the coefficient of discharge, Q

8

is the discharge, A is the area of an 84-in. circle, and H is the total

head at the control piezometer.

11. Head-discharge relations for Narrows Dam conditions were com-

puted on the basis of the valve coefficient data presented on plate 10

and the pressure data in table 1. Head-discharge plots with the valve

set at 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, and full openings are shown on plate 11. These

data vary slightly from the information presented in the title of the

photographs of flow conditions. The difference is caused by the use of

a more schematic-type valve during tests with the general model. The

valve coefficient data and the computed head-discharge curves were based

on an accurately constructed valve.

12. A few prototype measurements have been made on one of the valves

at Narrows Dam subsequent to the model studies. Data obtained thus far are

in general agreement with the valve coefficient data shown on plate 10.

However, actual discharge measurements for the conduit and valve appear to

be less than the computed values presented on plate 11. Additional pro-

totype measurements are scheduled and will be the subject of a subsequent

report.

Hooded Valves, Original and Modified Basins

Type 1 hoods -- original exit area

13. Anticipating objectionable spray from the valves, the Fargo

Engineering Company designed rectangular hoods to be placed over the

valves for the purpose of confining flow to the stilling-basin area.

General details of these hoods, which are listed as the type 1 hoods in

this report, are shown on plate 5.

14. Flows from the type 1 hoods are shown by figure 5· While the
 Pool 563
Discharge 5500 cfe

Pool 548
Discharge 5190 cfs

Pool 5o4
Discharge 4090 cfs

Figure 5. Flow conditions, type 1 hoods

10

type 1 hoods confined flow to the stilling area, they also caused con-

centrations of flow off the sides of the hoods . Flow swept through the

stilling basin and into the exit area with very little energy being dis -

sipated in the stilling basin . Use of the valve hood did not impair·the

capacity of tho valve; in fact a small increase in discharge capacity was

noted .

Type 2 hood -- original exit area

15 . The type 2 hoods consisted of circul ar tubes 17 .5 ft in diam-

eter . The valve was placed i n

the lower portion of the tube

offset 1.75 ft from the center .

See plate 5 and figur e 6. Air

vents were provided to the rear

of the tube.

16. With the type 2 hood

insta lled flow distribution at

the end sill appeared to be im-

Fi gure 6. Type 2 hoods
proved but flow still swept

through the stilling bas in and into the exit area with very little energy

dissipated in the still ing basin .

Type 2 hoods -- type 2 exit area

17. In an effort to obtain more energy dissipation in the stilling

basin the 4 - ft -high sloping end sill was replaced by a 4 -ft -h igh vertical

end sill . From observations of flow with the end sill at sever al locations

it was determined that the optimum location for the 4- ft -high vertical end
 11

sill was at a distance of 222 ft

from the axis of the dam. Also,

the left wall of the stilling

basin was extended 20 ft to pre -

vent currents from attacking the

exit area at the base of the end

sill of the spillway stilling

basin. A profile of the type 2

exit area is shown on plate 6.

18. The 4 - ft -high vertical

end sill caused a cushion of

water to remain in the stilling

basin (figure 7) . However, the Pool 563; discharge 5475 cfs

configuration of the rock in the Figure 7- Flow conditions, type

2 hoods, type 2 exit area
exit area caused currents to

sweep laterally in front of the spillway stilling basin and into the

power tailrace (plate 12).

Tyre 2 hoods -- type 3 exit area

19. All rock in the exit area above elevation 410 was removed

in order to reduce the lateral currents downstream from the spillway

stilling basin . Also the end sill height was increased to 6 ft . A

profile of type 3 exit area is shown on plate 6.

20 . Although velocities as high as 30 ft per sec were measured

in the type 3 exit area, these h i gh velocities generally were confined

to the right side of the channel and a slow eddy was formed in the
12

Pool 563; discharge 5475 cfs Pool 563; discharge 5475 cfs

Figure 8. Flow conditions; type Figure 9. Flow conditions, type

2 hoods, type 3 exit area 3 hoods, type 3 exit area

power tailrace . See figure 8 and plate 13.

Type 3 hoods - - type 3 exit area

21 . The type 3 hoods were identical to the type 2 except that for

type 3 the 17.5- ft -diamet er tubes wer e pl aced concentrically with the

valves (plate 5) . With this a lteration, impact on the end sill seemed to

be l essened and f low distribution across the end sill improved (compar e

figures 8 and 9) . However velccities in the exit area were not changed

mat erially (compare plates 13 and 14) .

Type 4 hoods - - type 3 exit area

22 . ft~though the type 3 hood appeared satisfaatory, engineers of

the Lower Mississ ippi Valley Division desired for structural reasons to

use a hood having a semicircular top supported by vertical walls from

the basin floor . Details of this hood, the type 4, are sho~m on pl ate 5 ,

while figure 10 is a view of the hoods in the model . As in the types 2

 13

Pool 563; discharge 5440 cfs

Fi gure 11 . Flow conditions, type

Figure 10 . Type 4 hoods 4 hoods, typo 3 exit area

and 3 hoods air vents were provided to the rear of the hoods. The type

4 hoods produced flow conditions in the stilling basin and exit area
similar to thoso produced by the type 3 hoods . Compare figure 9 and

figure 11, and plates 14 and 15 . Discharge capacity of the valves was

not impaired by use of any of the hoods investigated .

Type 4 hoods - - types 4 - 6 exit areas

23 . At this stage of t he tes ting pr ogram t he Lower Mississippi

Valley Division informed the \o/aterways Experiment Station that founda-

tion conditions were such as to make it desirable to lower the stilling

basin 2ft to elevation 404 . Also it was explained that _steel had been

ordered for construction of a stilling basin which would extend a dis -

tance o~ 215ft downstream from the axis of the dam and that it would be

desirable to terminate the basin at this point . The types 4, 5 and 6

exits involved horizontal aprons at elevation 404, extending downstream

215 ft from the axis of the dam, and terminated by vertical end sills
 Type 4 exit area Type 4 exit area

Type 5 exit area Type 5 exit area

Type 6 exit area Type 6 exit area

Figure 12 . Flow conditions, type 4 hoods, types 4-6 exits.

Pool elevation 563; di scharge 5440 cfs
 15

6, 8 and 10ft high , respectively (plate 6).

24. Figure 12 shows flow conditions in the types 4 , 5 and 6 exits,

while vel ocities produced in the exit area are shown on plates 16, 17

and 18, respectively. Of these three exits the type 5 produced the least

turbulence at the end sill and the lowest velocities over and immediatel y

downa tream f rom the end sill . For these reasons the type 5 exit area w!ls

recommended for construction in the prototype . For record purposes, ad -

ditional photographs of flow from the type 4 hoods i nto the type 5 exit

are included as an Appendix hereto .

Type 4 hoods with wedge

25 . The Office , Chief of

Engineers , proposed that wedges,

as shown by figure 13, be in-

stalled on the roofs of the

hoods to split the issuing flow

and all ow air to reach the cen-

t ers of the jets. These wedges

Fi gure 13 . Type 4 hoods with vredges
did split the flow and allowed

a i r passages to the centers of the jets but did not produce noticeable

effects on discharges, pressures, or flow conditions . Thus the wedges

were not considered necessary with the type 4 hoods .

Diversion Flows

26. During construction of Narrows Dam it was planned to pass flow

through the conduits with the Rowell -Bunger valves removed . Figure 14
16

shows flow conditions in the stilling basin and exit area produced by

flows through the conduits without Rowell-Bunger valves. Pl ate 19 is a

rating curve for diversion conditions. These flows produced no condi-

tions like ly to endanger the prototype structure.

Pool 465; discharge 35l0 cfs Pool 480; discharge 4160 cfs

Pool 5o4; dis charge 5050 cfs Pool 548; discharge 6350 cfs

Figure 14. Diversion flows, valves removed

 17

PART III: DISCUSSION

27. The most satisfactory design as developed from the model study
includes valve hoods having semicircular tops, concentric with the valves,

supported by vertical walls from the basin floor (type 4 hoods, plate 5).
The stilling-basin floor is at elevation 404 and is terminated by an 8-
ft-high, vertical-faced end sill located 215 ft downstream from the axis

of the dam (type 5 exit, plate 6). It is the opinion of the vJaterways

Experiment Station that this arrangement gives as satisfactory performance

as can be expected without making major changes in the arrangement of the

s true tureo .

28. The discharge coefficient for the combination of the valve and

the contraction immediately abov~ was found to be about 0.875. The addi-

tion of the valve hood caused a slight increase in the discharge coeffi-

cient.

29. It is felt that the necessity for placing hoods over Howell-
~~I

Bunger valves creates an undesirable feature in that it detracts from the

energy dissipating characteristics of the valve. However, the hoods were

necessary, for the case at hand, to prevent flow from being pro,jected on-

to the access road along the right side of the stilling basin, and to

confine all spray to the stilling-basin area.

TABLE
 Table 1

PRESSURES IN CONDUIT -- NO VALVE HOOD

Pressures (in prototype ft of water)

Piez. Piez. Pool elevation 563 Pool elevation 548 Pool elevation 504
No. Zero Discharge -- 2665 cfs Discharge -- 2518 cfs Discharge -- 2032 cfs
--
1 458.2 105.0 89.2 45.8
2 456.0 106.8 91.6 48.0
3 448.8 108.3 95-5 53.0
4 446.6 100.9 89.0 50.4
5 445.5 87.8 78.2 44.4
6 438.6 85.4 75.4 46.3
7 435-3 89.1 78.1 50.4
8 432.1 91.7 80.7 52.8
9 429 1 93.4 82.1 55-3
10 427.4 85.3 77-3 51.4
11 426.6 60.0 54.8 36.5

NOTE: Locations of piezometers are shown on plate 7.

PLATES
 EAST BUL KHEAO

I
/ I

I J>------ -4 i iII. .AP~Ow

I I I . CQI'ICRCT£

~====;
tl.( V 41*",0

yV, )
""
~
>
1

~ IJ.l.!===:::!.,
I
~I' ~-___, ,~ \ CLtV.~l\·1·· -Jle~~g~~;:;::;~ )
I1 e~11I \
( ( f - -- - - - l
~---; ! <' 1

I {\
~ ~

I
!
J
~

II
~

( \ \I
I II
I
I '

! \\ \ \ \ \
I

\ I \I
.

\ \ \ GENERAL PLAN
1J
r
~ T
fTI I 6.d2 S" I. ~Z$'

N
:
~ ~~
I
I
I SECTION B-8 SECTION 0-0 ¢ OF t COND_UIT_ 1 -
AXIS OF DAM

I
S.OO' S.SO'

~I
r·· I
£LEV 44.J, 7S

I
84* HOWELL-BUNGER VALVE
1 SECTION A-A
i
I
I

I
~
19.00~

-··-r
CLEV ~2<1. 81

AXIS OF DAM IJ.oo- I

DETAIL A

t. OF CON,P:::.:,
UIT . !--+J·-- . _
IJJ,If.'
_~._ __] -~.1_ _~.[__1_L
SYMM ETRICAL ABOUT CENTERLINE
S'ECTION C-C

SCALE IN FEET
oo DETAILS OF CONDUIT
__,
I
SECT ION 6 - B

SECTION A-A

ELEVAT ION

VALVE DETAIL S
SCAL E
-, - . •n
 418 41 8

1-- +·-- ... ··- -- L · ~~

416 41 6
............... ~
I --~
-
j.--
r-- ....-. ....-
4 14 ..... ~ 4 14
..... v . . .-
r--
;

NAT(!RA CHAN EL - ~
v- -~ =-
1-- ~ ..- ~
4 12
v---- _...,....-
....- 4 12

J.I .......- -
I ~ J....-....-
iil 0::
v ......... ....-
4 10 4 10

~+-
~ :::;
~ .... ....
....... ............
~!-- .......
"-
:z IMPRO~ '[) CHA/oi tv££
; 408
r-t- / 1--
408
:z
z
+· ~~
0 I I 0
i=
~
t-· ~- · I -·- r---- i=
~
w w
d 406
I 406 d
),/
!/
I /'I -

---+-
404 404
I
~ --:r-
16 18 20
/
-· -~--- .. - ·· - -
4 02
/
402
I
I
~- t- ··-··· - I
4 00 l
I J 400

398 ~
u---r-·--
I
·-- ---
!
L
I
.. r---
398
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
DISCHARGE I N 1000 CFS TAILWATE R
RATING C URVES
 ...
,;' . ill't..4.f2§,q ir ---11'.$"- i
~.~:-:._,,~_q~A...:~~~;g~.: :ii·~t~~.;.~;.b:: i'9~.;..~.~f.~ .
- Ii

SECTI ON THR OUGH SEC TI ON A-A SECTION THROUGH SECT ION B-8
CENTE RLIN E OF CONDUIT CEN TERLINE OF CONDUIT
TYPE HOOD TYPE 2 HOOD

i-+-;·
I

;I' ' . ;i---'..:

~
. "-'--_·-; !I
to :

'I
~-m·-f-ff-...,...--ll'-1

SECTION T HROUGH SECT ION C-C SECT ION THROUGH SECT ION D -D
CENTERLINE OF CONDU IT C ENT ERLINE OF CONDUIT

TYPE 3 HOOD TYPE 4 HOOD

"'0
r
~ HOOD DESIGNS
rn
(J1
2 1$ • TOA)I.I $ OF DAM

ORIG INAL TYPE 3

2 15 ' TO AYI S OF OAM

TYP ~ 2 TYPE 4

NOTE; TYPE $ AND 6 SAME AS TYPE 4

EXCEPT T YPE: 5 HAS 6 .0 FT SI L L
ANO TYP( 6 H AS 10.0 rT S f LL.

PROFILES OF EXIT AREAS

 r - - - -- - - ,6..---

J 30.32' ··~---·-------
3-EJj
- - - - , r ---"-110

.
"

.
__

ELEV 443. 75

SIDE ELEVATION
£U:.v 4 24.8r

SCALE I N FEET
. 10

PIEZOMETER LOCATIONS
 480,-,,-.,-,--,-,-,~,--,--~~_,--,-~-,,-~_,--,-"-,,-~-,~480

460 HI-+:-+-+--1 f--+~-+~r-+-+t+-+

. - -+- ~- -~ '~- t- -1- -+ rT- ,1--fr-+1.--j1----l----_r --i-+4-----fl - ~-~- -~- -·)_H~-t--~----,-JH---l---c--l--1++-t-'-.l-J.
~t-~--~-\- 460
, ' .:_j_
1 rl 1 \-- -
I
·- -r ---r-- I
6 -~ t-!
1
Ll_
1 1
I~
1 , I \--
l
·-;-,
I
--~l·-1---···-
1

c-,'-
I
440~~~~~--+-+-+-,-+--+-H+-+--~-+~+-~-+~+-l-J.~+-~-+~+-l-J.-I--l440

t ~- I
~t· r-T -t-i
. I
+-c- -1--c
I
-
H-1 -·' -
I ! !
I
1
1 1
420H-+-+-+-t-+-t-t-++-+-+-+-H~c-~--l-~+-l--+-+~~-+--j---i-~----l---~-+----i-~420
f--+~+-1--c--~
i I
I i- -- I! ---+-+---+-1I I
-+1--i-f---1-
'
--+--l____;...l H-
f---l I I I
-+--+--+1--f.--1-__j
400~-+--l---+-~+--j---i-+-t--l---l---+-H+-+·+-+,-L+-l-J.~--~_l~+-+-+-++-~-+~+-~400

- ! I I
·- --j! f--i :-~ -\-- i-- I j--1! c-.
380 ' I I
380

360c-ri-t-lf1-h-t ~c- -~ ~- l-~-1-l-. ~ ~ _j_~ ~--~

360

3401-~-'1
I

H- '

I I +-1----"
i
-f-:- I
1
! 1

j i I I
l_
I H
I
;____ -- - 340

320 +-j-~-~--~!-;-1---++n~-- -\!+I -t-t - ;~ ~- ,-- h- ~. rl_j_320

5 300 I I 1-r I - +++ I f / ~ H~ ; L i _, ! t+ I- R---r Cf+ _J_ 300

5
il'5 ~---1-L 1-~-c--- -~I I I! /Ij-l->- I 6+-t- II 'IlI T}V- 'f 1:+= ~~- - il'5
1
1
1-
280 I I i I I I I I • I i I ' I 280

9 111 --r-n--1.- i/-i- ~-~-- 1 ~~ ~-- H /: i -~- H 1 ~

t- I ff-.!"
f 1. 1
LL
~
:J
260
I I ~t
I I
-COEFFICIENT OF VALVE-- --,-- ·
I I J t- -!
· 1
I 7~H I I !
-
T T T I
CO,EFFICIENT OF VALVE - - - 1 -
260
c:,
:J
:£ 240- AND TRANSITION- ' 1
, I 1 I I i I I 1 1 I 1 240 1 :£
5
~ 220
I
!
i ~0 I
'
- -
I
+-- --t-~
I I I
+II ~ -!I JI
I i I
- i ~ I ~ l__~-1-
I i I i . I
1

I
-
220
~
~
i 200 I i -- -I -41 -t i- i-i i -- 1 ti I 1- H- I - -! ~IL . . I f 1 200 i
1-
180
-~+
! . I I
M- -t-H--~
' I
-1 j f' +-I
I
-/ -
1

I 'I
+I ~ . I
I
i
1-l- !
I I
I
I I II 180
1-

w_ --H-ill 16 j___ 1 1 1---

ITT , · n - - , 1 ~-~
-1- 1 _I
TT- i ·-·~
_ : _ _
160 ! , 1 1
1 160
. I~ I I ! '--~ I_ l __ Ill___ 1.1... ... - ·---~- ---+J_J
140 l I i I I I I II I ! I I ! !
140
~J_ ~~
I,
n ~ 'TTl- I
+:;~, -,1 I
1
1. ! I i !;> I I ' ! ! I I
I l 1
1 -I 1 .L- 1 : , I

+ .--c-! t-:-! - i I
120 120

i I~ 1- -~-~I Ii I ~+-Wj !;> I i f [

100

~
- 9 . , : :\ -1-+--+-' t+ \ '-f f .! ~-, l !- __L~-f-t
100

t---+-+-+! l i- f\H- 1--:--- - l-1 i ' I li ~-

NOTE• DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT FOR VALVE AND TRANSITION

CALCULATED FROM MEASUREMENTS ON PIEZOMETER
140FT UPSTREAM FROM VALVE ON 102-INCH DIA.CONDUIT
HEAD-COEFFICIENT CURVES
DISCHARGE COEFFICIENT FOR VALVE CALCULAT£D FROM 102-INCH CONDUIT WITH TRANSITION
MEASUREMENTS ON PIEZOMETER 2.0 FT UPSTREAM
FROM VALVE 84-INCH HOWELL- BUNGER VALVE
FULL VALVE OPENING

PLATE 8
 440 440

420 420

400 400

380 380

360 360

340 340

320 320

a: a:
w 300 300 w
t;: t;:
3:: 3::
"- "-
0 280 280 0
f- f-
w w
w w
"- "-
I 260 260 I
w w
~ ~
~ ~
:::;: 240 240 :::;:
0 0
a:
.._ a:
"-
:::;: 220 220:::;:
<{ <{
w w
a: a:
f-
~ 200 200
Iiig;
:::>
~ <i.
Cl 0
w 180 180 !2!
z 0
0
Cl Cl
<{ <{
w 160
I
160 'l!
...1
...1
;! ~
~ 140 140 ~

120 1\ 120
'\
100 100
1\
80
\ 80

\
60 . >\
60

40
" ~
40

20 20

0 0
0.8P5 0.870 0.875 0.880 0.885 0.890 0.895 0.900
COEFFICIENT OF DISCHARGE- C = A'~
•2gH

NOTE: Q=DISCHARGE IN CFS HEAD- COEFFICIENT CURVE

A=AREA OF84 -INCH PIPE IN SQ FT
H=PRESSURE PLUS VELOCITY HEAD 84-INCH CONDUIT
ONE DIA. UPSTREAM OF VALVE IN
FEET OF WATER 84-INCH HOWELL-BUNGER VALVE
FULL VALVE OPENING

PLATE 9
 110 I 10

l
~AJ£ ~L)£v~ F~LL~ R~rLJnJ
I d

100
FULL 0~£)' p 'wJ..LQ,'L :i, I 00
,f"
-/
~
.t_
90 90
[..6
_f_
0

I
_j 80
) 80 _j
w
>
<(
~ w
>
<(
a:
f- 19" a:
f-
w
~
'1 w
~
<(
> IJ :;
_j
70 o/ 70 ::J
_j
::>
""
v ::>

""0 ""
f-
lL ""0
f-
z J z
w
u
a: v w
u
a:
w
IL
I
<)
60 L 60
w
IL
I
<)
z J z
z
w v zw
IL
0
w
I IL
0
w
~ J ~
~
50
v 50
<(
>
1/
I

v
40 1/ 40
/
/
/

- f-- /
30 '/ 30

!-- - -
7
V"' - r--
/
v
20 20
0.300 OAOO 0. 500 0.600 0700 0.800 0900
COEFFICIENT OF DISCHARGE - C = A</~g H

NOTE: Q DISCHARGE IN CFS

A ,;REA OF 84-INCH PIPE IN SQ. FT.
VALVE OPENING VS COEFFICIENT
H PRESSURE PLUS VELOCITY HEAD 84-INCH CONDUIT
ONE DIA. UPSTREAM OF VALVE IN
FEET OF WATER.
84-INCH HOWELL- BUNGER VALVE

PLATE 10
 6 10 6 10

600 I I ' I I 60 0

!;9 0 '
1
' l! I !
I

'
59 0

I
58 0

5 70
lj
'
I
/i I !/ / '
580

! v ;/ '
$10

I I I I I' i / I
J

;
!>60

:;:;o
I I I I I
I
I I v I
i/ v !>60

550 ::.
.J

"'
)I OPE~-::; /
1-
w
:: ~40
i i
j fo1£N - 4
3 dPEN
~,
Vi (FVLL OPEIYV I
: I
;
; 540
1-
w
~

6 I i
I I / I ! 1i / l /i I I
~
~
..,J
530

5 20
v /f /f
!/ /
v! !
i
!
!
;
530

520
6
~
~

I /
/ i
J
w
-' /1 I I I i ;
60
0 5 10
v 5 t0
I
v, I
;
0
n.
' / '
/ ! I
0.

500

I I I / / /
v I i I
500

v
490

I
v
I L
v /
v !
I I i I '
490

v v
I
4 80
I!
/
v / v /
I ! !
! i
4 80

470 470
'
460 l ;
4 60

I 10 15 20
l I I i 30
4 !;0
35
DI SCH ARGE IN 100 C f S

"'0
NOTE : RATINC CURVE COMPU TED fROM DATA
PRESENTED I N TABL E I AND ON PLATE 10 . RAT lNG CURVES
r ORIGINAL CONDUIT AND VALVE
~
(TI
NO HOOD
-u
r
~ 300
;o- ,..-
300

rn 280
J 23 0
1\)
~, "'~ ..j
260 a:
..J I ON 10 "~ b/ v ..; 2 80

~ ,.
2~0
...~ v v ..j L- L-
240

220
.!9--' !Y' v _,_ .,; 220

z TEST CON D IT IONS z

.,..ill
200
DISCHARGE 547~ CFS
200
..
;;;
II)
IJI

":::;
% 180 POOL ELEVAT ION 563 .0 FT
': ,j .,j 180 "z
..J
TAILWATER ELEVATION 407.9 ~ FT
~ ·l 3
;:
~ :::;
... 160
z ~; ~I
180
..."'0
0 v; v
w NOT E : VELOCI T I ES ARE PROTOTY P E ...J < "'z
z
:; 14 0
a:
FT PER SEC , I.O FT ABOVE BOTTOM.
w
0
<0
<)
" ,..; I
"I v
140
:;
~
w
... * WATER TOO SHALLOW TO M(ASURE 0 ~ .......
~
...J z
~ 12 0 .J
"~ 120 ....

~-
v
VELOCITY.
;: .,j u
~
f? 100
"'1( "' :2
100 0
,/lffd!fO
....., ...J
~ ..."'
::: 80 0:: 80 "':::
! SECTION A- A
"' ~
80 ..,
"'uz 60 u
..... .....
z

•o "'0
"'0 'I()

'"ff'""
71""
::!Z
Zl
20 20
C LC-' 4060

0 BA:iltl 0
4'10 400 480 !>00 ~20 !>4 0
J!_ -l5
<!()
?-•

40
BOTTOM VELOCITIES
TYPE 2 VA LVE HOODS
60
24 0 ~eo 4 00 4 20
T YPE 2 EXIT AREA
20 40 60 ao 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 280 ' 300 320 340 360 380
()I STANC.C IN Fr.ET F'RO ~ AXI S 01' OAM POOL EL EVATIO N 563 FT
 ~00 300
~ ~ - Cl

~'F'
zso 2 80

...u -.J.
260 <
<r
...J
I ON /0 ..=! l
()

...J ~
260

Z40 ~ ~
1 } 240
~ v J
220 \ l - 220

~...
y V'
z
Vi zoo TEST COND I TION S ~ 200
z
;;;
.,• .,<
.,z DISCHARGE
POOl. (I.EVATION
547$ CfS
"',...
j
ISO
TAII.\VAHR EL(VATION
~63.0 fT
407.95 fT
~
160 "z
::;
~ '-- ..J
...., ::; ;::
0
~
160
z
160
"'(5
..,z iii L.- L... Ill--
NOTE : VElOC I T I ES ARE PROTOTY PE ..J < ...z
:::; 140 w 140
fT PER SEC , l OfT ABOV!: BOTTOM
0 "' <> :::;
~ ~/ ;.V
5...
~
0
J:
":::;z :..
L.- "',.."'
,.....
12 0 ...J 120 ~
v .,_,/ ~
~
al'v 4 / ZO Cl£V .1100 ~ u
0 000
tJ.fV 106Q
.. ~; ~ .. { .. . -· .. ?;: 100 0
~

"'... \~~ ·~~..

~ ..."'
E .,...,_
..
...J
... 80
SECT ION A-A ii:
U)
eo
!': ~

"'z
u
60 00 .,u
z
...< "
1-

0"' •o 40
"'0
20

20
0 ,. CL£Y 40 $ .0
CONDUIT S
uifc BASIN
li-
uo 460
""" :)01) ~20 ~
0
20

40 BOTTOM VELOCITIES
"U
r TYPE 2 VALVE HOODS
60
)> 20 .. 0 60 eo 000 120 14 0 160 oao 200 Z20 240 260 280 300 320 3..0 360 380 400 420 T YPE 3 EXI T AREA
~ ;.I STANCE IN rE:£T FROM A X IS OF OAM POOL ELEVATION 563FT
rn

VJ
 300 300
-2 --2 __z

~'
280 280

w -....!. ._J

~~ v
.. I
\---)
260 <! 2&0

---)
()
a: I ON 10
-'
~
ii'J (
240 ...>. ~ "l .._ '--" 240
c:: .:1
{
_........
) _,z .,f
~
%
220

TEST CO [')JOlT IONS

---
!_..... ~
......__
v 220

%
z;
..
iii 200
<
0
DtSCHARCE 5440 crs (/)
200
<
"'0
z rT
180 POOL ELEVATION 563 .0
~ 180 2
:::;
-'
TAILWATER ELEVAT ION 407.92 fT ~
\, :::;
..J

~
...0 160
J
!';
\ 160 ~
...0
.... NOTE: : V E LOCI TI ES ARE: PROT OTYPE: ..J
(/)
<!
<.._ ~
w
z z
::J
140
FT P ER S EC, 1.0 FT ABOVE BOTTOM.
w
0
aJ
()
.J y 140
:;
0:
w
1-
:z
0
::;:
":;z ,.
!.-
120 ~
0:
w
w 120 -' w
":::E ~ ... v .,j ~ "::;
'"~!::: ~ll.!2 00
0 ELCV 4Q6.0
..."'
100 ~ 100 0
tr

t;;
3J
a:
...........
...
w 80
SECTION A-A (/)
80 ...
; 3
w
..., 60 eo
z "'2
u
<
1- .,...<
"'0 40 40
0

20 20

0 BAS I ~
Jr- It !!..._

!4. !!.._
440 460 4 80 $00 $20
0
$40

20 u
6 ~

40 BOTTOM VELOCITIES
"U TYPE 4 VALVE H OODS
r 60
40 60 eo 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 TYPE 3 EXIT AREA
~
20
DI STANCE I N r E£T rROM AXI S OJ' DAM POOL ELEVATION 563 FT
rn
(}1
"'0
r
)> JOO ""'1300
-l
1"11
~.
t'
2&0 280

0'>
260 "'a:~ () 2&0
..J ~
..,
240 ~ ...
~
240
~

220 220

z TEST CONDITIONS z
;;; 200 200 ;;;
c
"'.., DISCHARGE !>440 crs <II
..
<(

z
:::;
180 POOL ELEVATION 563.0 F"T 1- 18 0 ":::;z
-' TAILWATE:R ELEVATION 407.92FT ::!
;:: -'
;:
::;
..."'0 160
z 160 "'...
;;; g_ 0
w <l...... ..,
....
_J
z
::; 14 0
NOTE : VEL OC I T IES ARE P ROTOTY PE:
.... al.., 140 z
::;
a:
H PE:R SEC, t OFT ABOVE BOTTOM , 0
z ~ .£......
.,/ "~
,.,"""v
0
~
1-
120 ::; ~ ~
"'"'
120

~ ~
~ -: _.1 ¥' u
~

.....
0
0: 100
~d'-'Q.v~
~-- ll -~>}~
l;:
~
100 0
.."
1-
..J
..."'w 80
SECTION A-A
;;:
Ill
1!0
~
:!: ~
...v 6l) eo ...
w
% z
... .,1-•
<(

"'0 40 40
c
20 20

0 BAS IN 0
4 40 4 60 4&0 !.00 ~20 MO

20

40 BOTTOM VELOCITIES
TYPE 4 VALVE HOODS
60 TYPE 4 EX IT AREA
20 •o 60 60 100 120 140 lEO 180 20~ 220 240 260 280 300 320 34 0 360 380 400 420
O l 5 TANC.E I N ,.tE T , ROM AXI S OF D AM POOL ELEVATION 563 FT
-o
r
)> 3 00 300
-j
rn
280
~,, 260

()l
~,
2 60 tl< ..l 260
cr
:!
~
..
"'~'
240 240

220 220

z TEST CONDITIONS z
iii 200 200 ;;
< .,<
"'~ ISO
OSCt-'MC<:
POOL ELEVATI::N
5440
5630 fT
c rs VI
t- 160 " ~
:::; :::;
TAILWATER ELCVATION 407.92 F T ::!
-'
;:-'
~
~
160
:::i
?;
160
.."'
"'":::; NOTE: VELOC I T I ES ARE P ROTOTY PE ...J
:;"' z.. ?_ 0
..,

-
~~ 0 w 140 7
:::;
FT PI!:R SEC, 10 r T A BOVE BOTTOM. 0 ~
::"' 0
::!
"::iz :; .e._
b/
~
...
"'"
' ?.0 ~ 120 ?E
.J
o,)
~ ";:: ~
<.)

2 HE"V 4/1,0 ~
0
~ 100 0
~~~\i!-~~(-
100
...a: ~
«
~

t; .,~ ~·7k'$'~~. ...J ...

~ 80 a: eo ..,
"'...
~ SECT ION A-A "' !
60 50
"'uz "'z
<.)

...< ...<
"'Q •o 40
"'0
20 rJ 20
"\
0 0
""0 460 •ao ~00 ~ ~·o

20

40 BOTTOM VELOCITI ES
T YPE 4 VALVE HOODS
60
z=o--~•o~--~6o~--~eo~~~7
oo~~~z~o~~~~~o~~,6~0--~
Ie7o--~z~o7o --~z~zo~~z~•o~~z7•o~~zo~o~-3~o~o--~J~2~0--~3...J•7
o--~3~eo~~J~eo~--.oo~--~
.2o TYPE 6 EX IT AREA
l#'ff '!' F ROM .&.XIS 0~
OlSTANC.E I N OAM POOL ELEVATION 563 fT
 I
620 I I 620
i i
I
610 610

600 I 600

590 I
i I

590
I
! i
i I i
580 580
I
I I i I I i
570 I i I
I I
I I / 570
I /~ _j
_j
U)
560 I I I
560
U)

v
I
:::;;; i i ! :::;;;
! I
f-
w 550
w
LL.

~
540 I I
I
I
I
I

/
v 550 f-
w
w
540 LL.
~
I I
!
! I ./
z 530 i 530 z
2 l /
0

~
I

~ 520
>
w I
I
I
I
I
i ./
v 520
w >

v
..J _j
w 510 I I
510 w
..J
0 500
! I ! I 500 0
__)

0 I i / 0
n_
490
I I I i
I
/ 490
n_

i i
v
480 I I / 480
f.cY I

470
/ 470

460 rC v .D'

460

450 ~
..n. ~ v 450
I
I I l u

440 v-i 440

430 i 430
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
DISCHARGE IN 100 CFS
1J
r
LEGEND RATING CURVES
)> 0 FALLING POOL ORIGINAL CONDUIT- NO VALVE
-l
rn D RISING POOL DIVERSION FLOW

~ ~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
APPENDIX
 Pool 548; dischar ge 5140 cfs; tailwater elev 407 .7

Photograph 1 . Type 4 hoods - type 5 exit . Valves ful l open .

 Pool 504; discharge 4050 cfs; tailwater elev 406.3

Photogr aph 2 . Type 4 hoods - type 5 exit. Valves full open.

 Pool 548; discharge 4510 cfs ; tailwater elev 407 .1

Photograph 3. Type 4 hoods - type 5 exit . Valves 3/4 open.

 Pool 548; discharge 3440 cfs; tailwater elev 406 .1
Photograph 4 . Type 4 hoods _ type 5 exit. Valves 1/2 open .
 Pool 548; discharge 2015 cfs ; tailwater elev 403 .8

Photograph 5. Type 4 hoods - type 5 exit . Valves 1/4 open .