TECHi:ICAL REPOW STAlID4RD TITLE PAG

.EC-OCE-70-3
Report No. 2. Government Accession Na. 3. R e c i p i e n t ' s Catalog KO.

.Hydraulic
T i t l e and S u b t i t l e
Model Studies of S i l v e r Jack Dam
5. Report Date
January 1970
Spillway S t i l l i n g Basin, Bostwick Park 6 . Performing Organization
P r o j e c t , Colorado Code

.hthor(a)' 6. Performing Organization

E e p r t No.

I.
T. J. Rhono
Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No.
-
D i ~ r i e i o nge P e e e z c h
Office of Chief Engineer
Bureau of Reclamation
Denver, Colrrrado
12. Sponsoring Period Covered

4. Sponsoring Agency Code

I
5. Supplementary Notes

6. Abstract
A massive l a n d s l i d e destroyed t h e n e a r l y completed spillway s t i l l i n g
b a s i n a t S i l v e r Jack Dam i n Colorado. A c i r c u l a r curve i n an i n c l i n e d
plane w a s used t o connect the undamaged approach conduit and t h e r e -
l o c a t e d s t i l l i n g basin. Hydraulic model s t u d i e s were performed t o
a s s u r e s a t i s f a c t o r y flow conditions i n t h e conduit and s t i l l i n g b a s i n
under l i m i t e d t a i l w a t e r conditions an3 with unsymmetrical approach flow
r e s u l t i n g from a c i r c u l a r curve i n t h e upstream conduit. A d e f l e c t o r
vane w a s i n s t a l l e d i n t h e crown of t h e tunnel downstream from t h e curve
t o prevent t h e flow from crossing over t h e t o p and s e a l i n g t h e p o r t a l .
Vanes were developed f o r the s t i l l i n g b a s i n approach chute t o improve
flow d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e basin. Unique b a f f l e blocks were developed t o
provide good energy d i s t r i b u t i o n i n a b a s i n t h a t had i n s u f f i c i e n t t a i l -
water depth t o form a conventional hydraulic jump. Pressure measure-
ments were made on t h e conduit bend,-conduit vane, chute vanes, and
b a f f l e blocks.

- ,\
.y,
<, 1

7. Key Words I
DESCRIPTORS--/ *model t e s t s / *hydra& modelsi/ * s t i l l i n g basins/ :,;i.
conduits/ pipe bends/ piezometers/ measurement'/ :Colorado/ &irdemand/ .,
*energy d i s s i p a t i o n / h y d r a u l k s / spillways/ l a b o r n t o r y tests/ hydraulic
design 11 18

:IDZ~~TIFIERS--/' S i l v e r Jack Dam, Colo/ Bostwick Park Project, Colo/

d e f l e c t o r s / b a f f l e blocks , . . ~,
;I
I

b. ~ i s t r i b u t i o nStatement No l i m i t a t i o n
9. S e c u r i t y C l a s s i f . 20. S e c u r i t y Classif. 21. No. o f Pages 2. P r i c e
(of t h i s r e p o r t ) (of this, p g e )
;;j .,
xon< ,: None 20
S!LVE!? JACK DAM SP!LLWAY
STILLING BASIN, BOSTWICK
PARK PROJECT, COLORADO

by
T. J. Rhone

January 1970

HYDRAULICS BRANCH
DIVISION OF RESEARCH

UNITED S T A ~ E SDEPARTMENT OF THE I N T E R I O R *. BUREAU O F RECLAMATION

il

Office of Chief Engineer . Denver, Colorado

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The studies were conducted by the author and supervised by Mr. W. E.

Wagner. Head of the Applied Hydraulics Section. The testing program
was materially aided by the cooperation of the Spillway and Outlet
Works Section, Dams Branch, Division of Design.

Reclamation.
. ,
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Model
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2
Ine invesiigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c

Conduit Bend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Open Channel Chute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Stilling Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Figure

Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Sp~llwayPlan and Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Flow in Conduit Chute. and Stilling
Basin-Preliminary Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Deflector Vane in Conduit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Stilling Basin Performance-Preliminary Design . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Chute Guide Vane; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Stilling Basin Performance-Recommended Vanes i n
Conduit and Chute-Preliminan/ Baffle Block
Arrangement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Pressures at Chute Deflector Vanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
St~llingBasin Baffles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Stilling Basin Performance-Recommended Design . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Pressures on Baffle Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
stilling basin under limired tailwater conditions and only to structures having flow conditions and
with unsymmetrical appmach flow resulting from a construction limitations similar to those found at Silver
circular curve in the upstream conduit. Jack Dam.

RESULTS
1. The centrifugal force of the highvelacity flow in
circular curve caused the flow to rise over the top of
the conduit at maximum discharge. The flow appeared
to fill the conduit a t the portal, apparently sealing off
the air to the conduit.

2. A guide vane suspended normal t o the conduit roof

and 28-112~to right of center, Figure 4. prevented the
flow from crossing over the conduit crown. Pressures
measured along the.vane indicated nominal impact
forces.

3. Flow entered the stilling basin approach chute at an

angle, resulting in very uneven flow distribution i n the
stilling basin. Deflector vanes developed and placed i n
the chute greatly improved the flow distribution in the
basin.

4. Pressure measurements and air demand tests

indicated that air vents should be placed on the lee side
of the deflector vanes in the chute and the vanes
should be clad with steel plates for protection.

5. The location of h e basin and the need t o minimize

the amount of excavation resulted i n a basin limited in
length and with insufficient tailwater depth for
standard hydraulic jump basin design. Large baffle
blocks with concave upstream faces were developed
that provided excellent energy dissipation. The
location, spacing, and size of the blocks were
developed by trial and error methods specifically for
the unusual flow conditions in this basin.

6. Pressure measurements on critical areas o f the

blocks indicated that in some locations pressures as
high as 75 feet (22.85 m) o f water above atmospheric
and as low as 19 feet (5.79ml of water below
atmospheric could be expected.

7. Because o f the large range in pressures and the

turbulence in the flow, the blocks should be armored
with steel plates.
 INTRODUCTION bend, the circular-to-horseshoe transition, the
open-channel chute, the stilling basin, and a section of
Silver Jack Dam, a feature o f the B ~ s w i c kPark Project the excavated channel downstream from the rtilling
in western Colorado, is located on Cimarroil Creek basin. The correct flow depth and velocity in the
about 25 miles (40.25 km) southeast of Montrose. circular conduit were obtained by regulating the flow
Figure 1. The earthfill dam has a height of 150 feet with a slide gate at the upstream end of the circular
(45.7 m) above the creekbed, a length of 1,070 feet conduit.
(326.2 m) a t the crest, and a fill volume of 1,260,000
cubic yards (963,500 cu. m). The principal hydrualic THE INVESTIGATION
features are a spillway and an outlet works. The
spillway i s the subject o f this report. Conduit Bend

The spillway i s a 41-foot-diameter (12.48 m) morning The theoretical flow velocity a t the start of the vertical
glory with its crest at elevation 8925.60. 136 feet curve is expected t o be about 74 fps (22.55 mps), 77
(41.50 m) above the creek channel, Figure 2. Flow fps (23.46 mps), and 80 fps (24.38 mps) for the three
from the spillway crest falls about 44 feet (13.4 m) test discharges of 1,650 cfs 146.75 cms), 3.140 cfs
into a 16.5-foot-diameter (5.03 m) circular conduit. (89.0 cms), and 6,280 cfs (177.8 cms). The 1,650 cfs is
The circular conduit is about 563 feet (171.5 m) long the discharge resulting from routing the computed
and terminates in an open channel chute leading t o the 100-year flood through the reservoir, spillway and
stilling basin. The conduit flares and connects i o a outlet works. The 6,280 cfs is the discharge resulting
diverging chute leading to the stilling basin. The stilling from routing tt5 computed inflow design flood.
basin floor i s about 147 feet (44.8 m l below the
spillway crest. For the inflow design flood, the flow climbed the
outside of the conduit bend starting a short disance
I n the spring of 1969, the morning glory crest and downstream from the P.C. The flow crossed over the
circular condvit had oeen complete0 down to Station top of the conduit in the transition and seemed to
-
7-26 A massive lanoslide enou fed and destroved . .oarts completely fill the conduit at the portal. Figure 3. The
of the nearly completed stilling basin and chute, and flow appearance was similar for discharges of 1,650 cfs
cracked about 38 feet (11.6 m l of the completed (46.75 cms) and 3,140 cfs (89.0 cms), but did not
circular conduit. A new site for the stilling basin was cross over the top.
selected t o the l e f t of the initial location, adjacent to
and parallel to the outlet woi ksstilling basin, Figure 2. Severa~deflectors were tried to prevent the flow from
A conduit bend having a 165-foot (50.4 m) radius and crossing over the top of the conduit. The first trial was
a deflection angle of 17-112' to connect the existing a deflector normal to the side of the conduit along the
undamaged conduit with the relocated stilling basin. spring line. The deflector extended from about the
The floor of the relocated stilling basin is 16.5 feet midpoint of the bend downstream to a point about 10
(5.04 m) higher than the original basin floor. feet (3.05 m) beyond the end of the bend. This
deflector did not intercept a sufficient amount of the
Because of the curved approach conduit and the very flow so it was lengthened about 5 feet (1.52 m) in the
shallow basin, hydraulic model studies were initiated t o upstream direction. The deflector still was ineffective
thoroughly investigate the flow conditions in the and a further increase i n length would result in an
curved conduit and basin. impractical structure from the construction viewpoint.

THE MODEL ~):i A narrow wall suspended from the conduit crown was
next installed. The initial deflector wall was 1 foot (.3
T o p n s e r v e time, some readily available 11.5-inch m) wide, 6 feet (1.83 m) high and extended from the
(28.2 &I inside-diameter, clear plastic tubing was P.T. of the bend downstream t o the end of the
'selected tq,represent the 16.5-footdianeter (5.03 m ) transition. The wall prevented the flow from crossing
prototype conduit, resulting in a model scale ratio of over the crown of the conduit. However, it deflected
1:17.22. The maximum discharge of 6,280 cfs (177.8 the flow vertically downward into the part of the flow
cms) was represented i n the model by 5.10 cfs (0.14 moving along the conduit invert and the merging of the
crns). w o high-velocity flows resulted in an excessive amount
of splashing and spray downstream from the conduit
The model included a 5-foot 11.52 m) length of portal.
circular conduit approaching the conduit bend, the
To prevent the direct impingement of the deflected Longitudinal guide vanes dividing the chute in thirds
flows, the wall was moved t o the right of the crown. were developed to provide symmetrical distribution of
Three trials were made with the wall off center 15O the flow entering the stilling basin. Both vanes are 2
28-112' and 45' from vertical. All of the off-center feet ( 6 1 m) wide and extend between Station 7+99.50
locations reduced the splash and spray, but the 28-1/2O and Station 8+50.00. The height of each vane and the
localim, Figure 4, caused the minimum amount of configuration a t the upstream end were developed by
disturbance and also improved the flow distribution at cut and f i t until the optimum distribution of the flow
the tunnel portal. entering the stilling basin and the minimum amount of
disturbance near the upstream end of the vane were
Moving the deflector to the offcenter position alx, o b t a i n e d f o r all three test discharges. The
required that it be extended upstream 7.5 feet (2.25 configurations of the vanes are shown on Figure 6 and
m) into the curved portion of the conduit t o intercept the flow appearance in the basin is shown on Figure 7.
all of the flow crossing over the top o f the tunnel.
Tests were made to determine the minimum slant Piezometers were installed in the floor on both sides of
height for the deflector wall. These tests showed that each vane and two air vents were placed on the left side
the slam height could be reduced to 4 feet (1.22 m) of each vane. The location of the piezometers and air
without reducing the wall's effectiveness. vents i s shown on Figure 8. The general direction of
the flow at the upstream end of the chute was
Six piezometers were placed along the right side of the diagonally from right to left. The piezometers oil the
deflector wall near the roof. Pressure measurements at right side of the vanes were to determine the
the maximum discharge indicated that at the upstream magnitude of the impact forces, the piezometers on the
end where the wall intercepted most of the flow, the left side of the vanes were t o detect any potential
pressure would be equivalent to about 14 feet (4.27 m) subatmospheric pressure areas and t o determine the
of water, Figure 4. All of the other piezometers pressure differential across each vans. The air vents
indicated pressures near atmospheric. were t o determine if air was demanded on the lee side
of the vanes and, i f so, the effect that supplying air
One piezometer was placed on the outside of ihe bend would have on the pressures.
near the spring line about 20 feet (6.1 m) upstream
from the P.T. o f the bend. This piezometer was used t o The lowest pressure occurred on the left side at the
determine if excessive pressures due to the centrifugal upstream end of the right vane, Figure 8. The pressuie,
force of the water should be considered i n the equivalent to about 11 feet (3.35 m) of water below
structural design of the bend. Pressure measurements atmospheric, was measured at the maximum discharge.
showed that the pressures in this area were about The lowest pressure at the left vane was about 8 feet
hydrostatic at all discharges. A t 1,650 cfs (46.75 cms) (2.44 m l of water below atmospheric. also measured at
the pressure was atmospheric, at 3.140 d s (89.0 cms) the maximum discharge. The greatest pressure
the pressure was about 1 foot (0.3 m) of water above differential was measured at the upstream ends of the
atmospheric, and at 6,280 cfs (177.8 cms) the pressure vanes during the maximum discharge. On the left vane,
was about 8 feet (2.44 m) of water above atmospheric. the differential was equivalent to about 19 feet (5.79
m) of water, and on the right vane, the differential was
Open Channel Chute about 22 feet (6.71 m) of water.
,: ,

Flow entering the diverging chute leading t o the stilling The upstream air vents supplied air at all discharges.
basin was very unsymmetrical and the unequal However, occasionally the downstream vents would fill
distribu!ion carried into the stilling basin. In the with water and once filled, they would not voluntarily
preliminary, design, the flow was concentrated on the empty and start drawing air agai,;. There was no
left side of the basin with the 1,650 cfs (46.75 cms) significant difference in the piezometer readings with
and 6.280 cfs (177.8 cms) discharges, but with the the air vents open or closed.
3.140 cfs (89.0 cms) discharge the flow was more
concentrated on the right side, Figure 5. The deflector The air vents were connected t o water manometers to.
wall in the conduit did not affect the flow at the two determine the pressure on the side of the vanes. A t the
low test discharges; at the maximum discharge, the maximum discharge, the upstream vent on the lee side
deflector wall slightly improved the flow distribution. of the right vane indicated a pressure equivalent to
but the flow still tended t o concentrate along the lsft vapor pressure when both ventswere closed; when the
side. *\
$
:- downstream vent was opened, the pressure at the

3
 upstream vent was about 10 feet (3.05 m) of water blocks in the first row and 7-foot-high (2.13 pi blocks
bolow atmospheric. The downstream vent in the left in t h e second row. There was very little imp.ovement
vane indicated a pressure of about 4 feet (1.22 m ) of in the energy dissipation with any of these s\ mmetrical
water below atmospheric when no air was supplied; arrangements o f blocks.
when air was supplied through the upstream vent, the
pressure at the downstream vent was about 2 feet (.61 The flow entering the basin was not t r d y symmetrical
m! of water below atmospheric. The results of the and the flow concentration changed from the leftside
pressure measurements have been tabulated on Figure to the right side and then back to the left side 2s the
8. discharge increased. Tnese flow conditions indicated
that a n unsymme;:ical block arrangement might be
Based on these studies, it was recommended that air necessary to obtain adequate energy dissipatiun. On
vents be provided on the l e f t side of both vanes and this premise, t h tests
~ were continued oi;-z:'.'tfi?.a?d
that the vanes be steelclad as shown on F~gure6. error" basis to develop an effective block arrangement.
1:
The locition of the rows and the spacing and locatinn
Stilling %sin
,~... of individual blocks were adjusted and changed many
.-.... .~.~
-2;.>
times in arriving at the recommended arrangement with
The theoretical Row velocity and depth at the toe of thde rows of blocks as shown i n Figure 9. The flow
I;
I the chute are 90 feet (27.43 m) per second and 1.99 appearance with tne recommended arrangement for the
feet (.61 m), respectively. These values assume uniform stilling basin is shown on Figure 10. The excellent flow
flow distribution o n the chute and a Manning's conditions were prevalent for all discharge?:,:and the
roughness coefficient n = 0.008. Idealiy, for these tailwater could be lowered about 3 feet (0.92 m) at
entrance conditions, a Type 111 stilling basin should be which point the model channel became the control,
128 feet (39 m) long with a tailwater depth of 29.5 without adversely affecting the basin efficiency.
feet (8.99 m) and a Type Ill stilling basin should be 70
feet (21.32 m ) long with a tailwater depth of 25 feet Eleven piezometers were installed i n critical locations
(7.63 m). Due t o the landslide on the right side and the in one block to determine if dangerous subatmospheric
space limitations caused by the proximity of the outlet prssures or exceptionally high impact pressures could
works stilling basin and discharge channel, the basin be detected. Figure 11. Pressures were measured with
length was restricted to 84.50 feet (25.75 m) and to a the block in each of the four positions in the first two
tailwater depth of only 19 feet (5.29 m). rows and in the centerline position of the third row.

To compensate for the inadequate tailwater depth, The highest pressure was measured with the block in
large baffle blocks with concave upstream faces were the two first row positions on the left second.row
installed in the basin. These blocks were patterned position. These pressures, located in the center of the
after blocks that had been used successfully i n another concave face, were equivalent to 70 to 75 feet (21.3 t o
structure where sufficient tailwater depth was not 22.8 rn) of water. The lowest observed pressure was
a~ailable.~ equivalent to about 19 feet (5.79 m) of water below
atmospheric. The low pressures occurred on the sides
In the initial arrangement, two rows of blocks were of the block near the top, with the block in the left
installed, The first row contained three 3-foot-wide second-row position. The pressure readings have been
(.91 m ) and two 2.foot-wide (.61 m) blocks with their tabulated on Figure 11.
upstream faces about 10 feet (3.05 m ) downstream
from the toe of the slope. The second row contained Dynamic pressure readings were not taken; however,
four 3-foot-wide blocks 14 feet (4.27 m) downstream due t o the turbulence of the hydraulic jump and the
from the first row. All blocks were 7 feet (2.13 m l low vpressures that were measured with water
high. manometer, it was recommended that the blocks be
protected with steel plate,?'asshown on Figure 9.
._ ./..
This arrangement provided unsatisfactory stilling i!.,~
by.--
-..: ',Y=.
action i n the basin. The lack of energy dissipation was
evident whether or not the deflector vanes were
installed on the approach chute, Figures 5 and 7. A
similar block arrangement was tried with 5-foot-high
(1.52 m) blocks in both rows and with 5-foot-high

' USER Engineering Monograph No. 25 "Hydraulic Design of Stilling Basins and Energy Dissipators."
'Beichley, G. L., Report HYD-394, "Hydraulic Model Studies of the Outlet Works at Carter Lake Reservoir Dam
No. 1 Joining theSt. Vrain Canal."

4
Figure 1
Report R EC-OCE-70-3
Discharge = 1650 cfs Discharge = 3140 cfs Discharge = 6280 cfr
Photo P860-D-65951 Photo P860-D-65952 Photo P860.065953

SILVER JACK DAM

Hydraulic Model Studies
1: 17.25 Scale Model
Flow in Conduit, Chute
and Stilling Basin-Preliminary Deqign
Figure 4
Repart REC-OCE-7G-3
 Discharge = 1650 d s
T. W. Elev. = 8792.6
Photo P860-D-65960
Photo P860D659.57

Discharge = 3140 d s
T. W. Elev. = 8793.8
Photo 860-D-65961

Discharge = 6280 cfs

SILVER JACK DAM

Hydraulic Model Studies
1 :17.25 Scale Model
Stilling Basin Performance
Figure 8
Report REC-OCE-70-3
\! ufi!;aa papuauloo3a~

\,!
a3uelumpad u!seg Su!ll!ps
ii lapow alms 51.~1: L
\!,\i sa!pnis lapow 3 ! 1 n e ~ p h ~
wva 13vr ~ 3 ~ 1 :. 1 s
'tj
 Table I
QUAIdTTlES AND UNITS OF SPACE
Muitldv BY TOehtrln
LENGTB
Mil. . .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. .. - 25.4 (ernti;.). . . . . . . . Mlcron
Inches 25.4 (ernupl. . . . . . . . MilUnetezs
...........
Feet . . . . . . . . . . . .
............
2.54 (exactiy)..
30.48 (exactly) . .. ... ... ... ... ... Centimeters
0.3248 !exactly)*.
Centimeters
Meters
Y&
. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. O.COU048(exacUy)*.
.. : : :. :. :. MeLerr
0 9144 ( c a c t i )
KUccleters
Metem
M l e s (statute). . . . . . . . 1.609.344 kgctiyr.
............ 1.609344 (elractiv) . . . . . Kiiometers
- AREA
Square inches.
Square feet . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 929. M*. . .. .. .. ... ... ... ......... Square
6.4516 ( W y I centimeters
Square cenU~eterm
.........
Square iar* . . . . . . . .
0.092903 Square nrters
Acres . . . . . . . . . . .
0.816lZT
O.4MBQ. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Square meters
Iieztares
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4,WE. g. . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Square Mometers
O.W0469*
Square meters
Soul- miles . . . . . . . . Z.S@W& . . . . . . . . . S w a m kllometera
a>-&-
Cublc inches
Cublc feeL . ... ... ... ... ............ 16.3871 . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Cublc
0.028318e.
cenumeters
Cublc meters
'S
Cublc wdq. 0.764555 . . . . . . . . . Cublc meters
 ~ U A W I T I E Z AND U N I OF
~ MECM~CS

--
Mu?llill~ BY To alilaln
WORK AND ENERGY* ,

B~IIIS
h r~l n a l vlllla IBW.
. . . . . ................1,056.08
.
0.262.
. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..Ioulol
Kllwrn,s rslarlos
x.320 lomcllyl . . . . . . . Iouleu wr g r a 8 ~
etu pi paund.
Fmt-~aunds . . . . . . . . . . . . i.3668Z.. . . . . . .,_lada!i ..-
POWR
. 7 ~ . . . . . . . . . . Walls
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. :. 7 40.6%V3071. .
~iorsepouer
Blu r hour
F ' ...
. . .,. . . . .. .W~tl.
1,3668P . . . -
Wslll;
-
IIBA'p TRANSFER
Blu h / h r lid dcu F lk
t b r d :O~UCIIYIIYI' .. .. ,. .. .. .. .. I. 442 . .. .. .. .. .. : : : : Mllllwott~/cm do C
e ~ h x nr de E
mu ~ t / h rfia dc F
n w h r na d, 8. . . . . . . .' .' .' .' .
0.1240.
1.4880' . . . . . . . . . .~g ~g cnl m/nr n!f*cg c
eonductanecY
IC '&mL'
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..MK(leal/hr
0.608
4.888
I I I I W ~ I ~ ~ ~c >
n~
de
doq
mu F p flZ/B& (k 'tic;;
r".lslancol . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ibml
' ' '
BLu/lb d e g F ic hcol erprcllyl . . . .
'
. . . . . .
I080 . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
e t v n a b g P '. . . . . . . . . . ~ . m * . . . . . . . . . .
4.
E+d/hc [ 1 l l e n h dl!halvlui . . . . . 0.2681 . . . . . . . . . :
. . w s u o . o . . . . . ........
WATER VA~RTRANEWESION -
BENDlNG MOMENT CR TOR2UE
. . . . .. . . . . . .
(irnlnalhr '1 water YBPOP
lreralnlssloA .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..flmmn/Z4
Perms @crme.wcl. r
~ e r ~ - ~ n c( a~e,ieo ~ 1:: :
a oM~~Yj
18.7
0.860
1.87 . . . . . . . . . . .Melrlc prm hram2
~ o ~ rmrm-cont~motoro
l e -

-
Table ,,I
OTIIEA QUANTITIES AND UNIT8
B" 'TO obtalln
ACCELERATLON' MulLl~l~ -
reekmr slc~ndd . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3MnI . . . . . . . . . .Meters rrr i&ond2 . . . . . . . . . . . 304.8, . . . . . . . . . . .u t r r u p r ownre inelor pol i'oy
Cuhk feel p.r square fool per
day lzeepa94
~YIT~LISIIYI . . . . . . . . . ... -. (1.002CQ3..
:%Jnd-aecandr par s q u r o lad
4.8824.. . . . . . . . : . KUcqrrm
. . . . . . . . Sguara rnelers parprnccond
uquare 8ilelr.r
mcod
. .
Square feel i meond i v l s e ~ l l y l .
. . 6/8cxoctly . . . . . . . .Cclaluaar Kolvlndogicer lchmngel.
. . . . . . . . . . . 0.03037, . . . . . . . . .~llmioltrpr mllllmclcr
~ a h r ~ n h a l l ~ g rlchnngd..
vdts p r d l .
ees
Lumens r agusrs foal (fan-
eandlss~. . . . . . . ....... . . 10.784. . . . . . . . . . .Lumono par square
W108S . . . . . . . . . Ohm-squaru mllllmrloru yr.r inotel'
molar
Ohm-clrcular mlla r DO1
MUllcvrles wr cubfloot
M U i l ~ m pw~
r 8 9 ~ 1001
.. .. .. .. .: . 0.36.3117. . . . . . . . . . Mllllcurles p r cuble lnclor
10.1030t . . . . . . . . . MIUlnmps p~aquaro
. . . . . . 4.627210, . . . . . . . . ulora per square meter
~ s ~ O ~ C P

Pounils oer Inch. . . . . . . . . . . 0.17868*. . . . . ,, . . KllmrRtue

flailma p r z q u r s yani.
Wr c a l l m o l a r
01'" 116.84
 i ,. i
!
...:, ,:

' s y q q alHsq pue 'rauen qnqo 'euen llnpuo3 'rys~lq pue ' y e n alnq3 'wen i!npuo3
'puoq l!npuo> UO BPBU alaM I I U ~ W B J ~ BlnEIBld
~ ~ .dun! 311nwpAq isuo!luanuo= e w m j 'puaq i l n p u o ~aql uo spew aJaMnuaut.WIlS@aU
alnssald .dwn! o!~n&u ~euo!iuanuo~ e u.
01 q~dav~ I B M I ! ~ lua!l!l)llru!
~ peq l e q l upcq u u! oollnq!ns!p h6laua pa06 apyoid a l padolanap
anm ~ y q qqj j e q enP!uri 'u!seq aql ul uo!lnq!m!p M O I ~ enoldu! 01 amqa llJeoldde yreq
fiu!(l!ls aql ~ opadopnsp
j alaM saueA '!ellad aql Bulleas pue d0l aql lano 6u!nam u o l j M O ~ ) aq; .
iuanald 01 a n m aqt u o l j weallsUMop lauuni aql jo 11~013oqi U! p a l p w ! S ~ M B U O A1013alfap v
'l!npuo> uesordn aql UI anln3 l e l n w s u o l j fiu!llnra~MOIJ qocoldda l q r i s u w A s u n q i ! ~PUF,~)
sunlllpoo3 lals~!!nlpal!U!l lapun u!req fiu!l!!ls pue l!npuoJ aqr u! suo!i!pua~M O ! ~ A I o i o e j r p
alrlrse or p a u l o j l l d e l m ra!pnl: lopou allnelpAH 'u!req 6u!11!ir paieoolal sqi pue i!npuo~
qwaldde pa6cucpun 01!1 13auuo3 01 pasn seM weld pou!lou! us u! anln3 lelnalla v 'opelolo3
u! u c a yasp lan(!S l e u!seq Bu!!l!l~hoMll!dr pals!dwo3 Alleau aql pahomap ap!lrpuel an!srew v

.1.3VllLLS1lV
.>
, . . :1

r.2 .,' '.

........................................................................................................................................................................
0
jsq pue 'sauen ainq3'auan 1lnpuo3 'sy3olq a l p q pue 'sauen a
In! o!lnelpAq leuo!luanum s wlaf 'puaq l!npum aql uo spew a ~ nualualllieaw
a ~ alnrrald .dun! qnerpAq (el
! u! uo!lnq!JL!p A6ma poofi ap!nold a l padolanap or qidap Ialeml!el lua!3ljjnsu! peq i a q l u!seq e u! uo!lnq!rrs!p A61aua poa6 ap!nold 01 padolmap
elsM ryoqq o l t j ~ qunblun 'u!soq 041 u! uo!lnq!lls!p Molf anoldw! a1 wnqo qoeoldde ulseq BlaM sq30lq aljfeq anb!un 'u!req aql u! uo!lnqllls!p ~ o l anoldw! f a1 slnqa q3eoldde u!rsq
fiu!ll~isaq1 l o j p a d o l s n a p a l a ~ s a u '!sllod
s~ aql 6qear pue d o l aql leno 6ulsson wo,) Molj aql 6u!11!1saqr l o j padolanepala~saue~ 'laimd aql fiu!lear pue d o l aqlrano 6u!non u o l ) MOIJ aqr P
iuenwd o i sun3 aql w o ~ ,l u c o n r u ~ o p u n 1 04) jo UMOla aqi u! pallqru! rsM a w n mloaljap v 8uensld 03 aNn3 a10 w o ~weanrump
j lauuril aqi lo UMOIJ aql u! pallel&! S ~ Menen m r q j a p
'IInPUOJ
.. wwJ~lsdnaul . ul.auno ~eln3113
, .
P WOlI . . ~ o...
. fiulllnral l uoeo~dde
r ~mnawwASun
. . . vu .~
. . l l Due
suo!i!puoD laleMl!el pax!w!! la'pun upsq 6u!11!lspue a!npum aql u! ruo!t!puoz MOIJ ~ o l ~ e j r !iiw
alnne o l pawloflad alam sJ!pnis lapow qlneJpAH :u!seq 6u!l!!ir p a l e q a aql pue i!npuo3
qoeoddde pa6euepun aql rmuuoo o l parn SeM auald pau!!m! ue u! e w n ~ q n w p v 'ope10103
u! v e r Jaws i e u~seqfiu!l!!a As~l!!dspa~aldu03Alleau aqipa~e~lral;'aP!ls~ue~ sn!aew v.
 . .

REC OCE.70 3 REC-OCE.703

Rhonc. T J Rhane. T J
HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SILVER JACK DAM SPILLWAY STILLING BASIN. HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES CF SILVER JACK DAM SPILLWAY STILLING BASIN. 1
BOSTWICK PARK PROJECT COLORADO BOSTWlCK PARK PROJECT. COLDRADO
Bur Rccli~mLab Rep REC-OCE-70-3.Hydraul Br, Jan 1970. Bureau of Rcclamation, Denver, Bur Reclam Lab Rep REC.OCE.70.3. Hydraul Br. Jan 1970. Bureau of Reclamation. Denvgr.
20 p. 11 fig. 3 tab. 2 ref 20 p. 11 fig. 3 tab. 2 ref

DESCRlmORS-I 'model testrl 'hydraulic models/ 'stilling basind conduitd pipe bendd
piszometerrl mearurernentl Colorado1 air demandl 'energy dissipation1 hydraulics1 splllwayd
lsborolary testrl hydraulic dcrign laboratory tests1 hydraulic design
IDEPITIFIERS-I Silver Jack Dam, Colol Borhvick Park Project. Colol baffle blocksldellectors IDENTIFIERS-I Silver Jack Dam, Colo/Bortwlck Park Project, Co!al baffle hlackJdsflectars

, .

- .

REC.OCE.703
Rlione, T J Rhone. T J
HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SILVER JACK DAM SPILLWAY STILLING BASIN. HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES OF SILVER JACK DAM SPILLWAY STILLING BASIN,
EOSTWICK PARK PROJECT. COLORADO BOSTWICK PARK PROJECT; COLORADO ~. .
Bur R ~ l a mLab Rep REC.OCE.70.3. Hydraul Br. Jan 1970. Buroau of Reclamatian, Denver, Bur Reclam Lab Rep REC.OCE.70.3. Hydraul Br. Jan 1970. Bureau of Recl~mation,'Denver. ',
20 p. 11 fig. 3 tab. 2 ref 20 p. 11 fig. 3 tab. 2 ref

DESCRIPTORS-/ 'model torts1 'hydraulic models1 'rtiliing basins/ conduits1 pipe bends/ DESCRIPTORS4 'model tests1 'hydraulic models1 'stilling basins/ conduits/ pipe bendd
plazomotursl mcasursmentl Colorado1 alr demand1 'energy diss~pationlhydraullcrl spillways/ plezomnters/ measurement1 Colorado1 air demandl 'energy dissipation1 hydraulbil spillways/
laborntory torts1 hydrvulic derlgn laboratory tertd hydraulic design
IDENTIFIERS-I Silver Jock Dam, Colol Ourwick Park Project. Colol baffls blockrldeflectorr IDENTIFIERS-/ Silver Jack Dam, Colol Bostwick Park Project. Colol baffle blockrldeflect~ri