ML19329F065: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 718: | Line 718: | ||
~ :, - | ~ :, - | ||
n,.,, | n,.,, | ||
[ | [ ((.[ , | ||
. / ),...+r n, | . / ),...+r n, | ||
~. f,. ' ~ ' sca... m | ~. f,. ' ~ ' sca... m | ||
)y hY,[" d M h'f b | )y hY,[" d M h'f b (('c | ||
:' -Qcu'-ad,Q fl, a [ | :' -Qcu'-ad,Q fl, a [ | ||
: u. n .u : \ .- ' s z: .. | : u. n .u : \ .- ' s z: .. | ||
Latest revision as of 23:27, 15 March 2020
| ML19329F065 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1974 |
| From: | BECHTEL GROUP, INC. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006190862 | |
| Download: ML19329F065 (34) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:.
~
'. e .-
g G
- 4. ' ~.'V*..L . 4, ; }-e - f -* ey ' m
- 4t. {,g.
- f. ., f . * ,
&m ,._ *.6; .,;3 :?. 'i. Q . s. *., _ .c
- Y) hf.} .*4. ;
; $~;Y . , . }'f, $. f.. .. z*m ' Q,r&g:k'. ,
s
-' l. " $ ' b$y . j. - 3
- _j.)f'?,- pf . ' fis;
~
^'
; k,$; . .;.
"e.
!j' [- ,f . ' , ,!.h4 I .i 4 f h C ';;%'T ( ],'A j / .
(
' f .. ( >; ) [ y N .. g '
. ?u? W O
*Wl', *NNSW..,? 'fTMTMg h .
I < ,. . .' .
,] -
7$. - }*f "*,q.-
.y,
, y P* p_ j.u Q .h,.yj - .a .
g Q y . , . q - is - ', , 6.y v < c. . -
,: 2
- j; .Q . w 3(%) .
_ ~ . '.,,; p. ,, ' , , , % , 7t, ;., . y ;; ,y n hon
. - , y' ,,~.
- . + ' ... y c;. .g .,
'* A ~ ' - ' 3s .,._-r 5 4N ' .~., . 2
' h ' )s; '
- Mr;? ; , .',~W,. y g5p ,;.'. . p * 's,. .$.. -
L.' yr . 3.f .. ,(
, ch- -
, - g i.-
r , 3,% :s c- - vQ*. :. . ' ' [? -
,N,.1 OlL g a, T HQ T- +. ..- '.-
- s b;
.. k.4er .
- ~ A* ,c h I 4 e
' ._'Y..
q I ..,;
> s
.e
. . ,:g 4' ,Q; p.'j:
y, q .. w ,,.o, , . .
;r . s ,1 ..l jh V. . ., ^ . >l l
' [ f.. M,' fl$g
. a. 4~.. s mp ...,,, L,,.. y 4,n ~,, q c..6.. ,.A yL .;. p; , ,. ,.. ,. .
1 .-..
. . . , ,. y>
,g,.
- e. - q. ,
..,s .. .
3 ...s.. ., . ar ,, . .. <. . .
- w. s - se o
?,k , ~* %q' 'L' f,pg* . * . G ,p' ,' ' ? , } " * *;} ' .*, _ ,. ) - J.j ,~ u Q, 9' i, [*g .
." ,. ,... w'> ..)F * '
&',.. _ - : ' p, ).f
>. a . r.
> ;., .. W.
.h, , . . .
4 ,.. ' 1-.* .
+ '- . .e f ' :. r* .... -',.,
.. ...s .- ,. J ;v.
,.i Y . u ; :) . .. ;+~
Q . ,. . f
->' wW. , .y ; .'/'. ys. '.
rgj.n $. ,, 8 . , .
> s y , [< - ,
; .s .
>y -
; . . < f,7 -
. A w, K. 4.. a- g *-
', j'd..
. / ,,, f 3
. * . . , , .. . p .. , ,;.:,..
e. g,t,. y ., t ., ,;. v ,, es , ..... #
.J '
,., s n. 4 , , ,
*4 i.. , <,,...',.; i q s., . -] . g w .. s g; . , '- *<[
; <* .g .' .~,(/ ,".,.,p$
,, - ; ,, ,',cf%,).4 4.;
f.*( , . + t. . ;4 s - . , . .. r,. . . , j..,,, . . .,
,p .t.
p ", ' , . '. p
,. [
. c. 4 .
' ,1
. .( a; .. . .
... *.. .p cw. ,.
c .4,
k T[.- f
. : .. , , . h . . . ; .
7 4,y
. ,, h,
.~g . p. a . . ,r.,. . ,s . r.. , .. .g.e.1, . . .. . ..
, , y ,,w. j- ? . ' l , >.l W c,' ' ' . * . .
..- ', ~ ; Qt'
'3. .. y, . .' . %l'p , . ' . . . *Q.> . .y'aj.
~ < s
,.l.%.
. . . ~ _ _
.,4..
.~ L ' . . eq. 4}, - , : % q. ,s; . . . , .,c
- 3 ., 3 ,,...p., .,
,;+.,,,-
- t. -
g ..
, ,, .. . .. . 4,
,; y. . ;,.- j '
.C j, , , , x ;e. .
U- -j - k" Igy . * ' ' ' '- l .. y gpnu.. +
,, - 7. . - . ',. ' .
~,a
.,,~ c .
O,n a e...
, .,,,c
. n.
u r. ,. .
. .: :- .1. .y
... .- . p :v .' -
W
?*. , to . . . . ,,T. .'.. ,. i' . , .
M .f . [Q j*p , .[ ., 1','..,? +.. , .g , - 4 ..- ., . . , . -
~ "
f ' l L f } ; , .\ * '*
' . , . ' , , ' ;' e , - .
- l. 4 h), -f. f. .l_=w. '.4 v
'.'2*
$.;;'- * &l ll,, . ' i-
. . .. . ;s ;> : 4 'f .' )b .*
..e ,
.- . - c. ,
r g ...< .. . . 4_Yw
-[:[ g kh , .JQ.h. ..,~ .g$ [llh .g 1." - ' , },Vh.
?,@.'h.',.h h1 J. )" .-
r ' {e : . N Pgw. x i ;q ggw wwc .. n . . . s _ M,]. -
- g. .~' y... ;+ ,,%,
-s -
. 10,1 a yn ' ' ' ' . ' -) . . (,'s t,,,4 4,
% e.Q[ :,,1 %u.,..'",'!<
q* i ,,, .
+ ., ,
' ',' -'$...S,I,,U,A k' .i. * . g.p . -
. . y*,c e
- ... , f., i.3b
- ' , .;,, f;3..m.,. '
..# . *;[]," ,.-
. . .s
,, .,c
.. g/6
'...P... *'
.y a-
' .M ' :' 'M
, j4 , . I .5 e $ en
* .- i . -
- tg
. he r ,
- Q .3,p i .- -
. es t, * 'N a k 4'. . . b . 4 ' , er . \ .
? .- - .f , , . . > .y.; . , ss y .- . .'..~e,4 'n. .v ,s
.a
.y ; , ' .j
., Y. . ,. - ; e 4. . . . . . ;
. a .n.s e
(
- -. a -
m 'L e 2 y. . _jR'.I
.n
' '.7 ?' : [. ' ' y- - '
,., }, ,l ,l$, '
_ f r.ll g&k. 3 c;7y; - 3 . g 2 ' m .. < s g %.t c-
.ny u; .. . . : .y e- ~,
wm3cw
- .; n... g ,A z y v. .a n .; m. +
- w. .
m,sn ,em . . s.s; v. .e. ( r,
. m, x; , ,. n, .
., .~ . .,
., ,r. ... , .W. .,,~g,.,, ..
;A >
. c y .* ,. ' . .
.. ~
, g 3es
. ty,~
s 5 s y 7 - . -, .; ... g ;.. . c.. , .c;. . L . . ,
.n
;p 7{ .g
..,,,n.
;y s.3,,
'f.
' *'m.3 ,, .
. ,_ .. .; , .~. n. t s 737 _ s2 -
C- . yo- (y ..(* .'.,./, - - y(. ' g. '.' ' "'
,'. **q - ' -.,. . '. '
p - ',
.. . r 3.)
*: ,p , - .<.. - } . c.. .
q.s. -
, g- . ,.-
.. . g. ,.. . . . .
',eA i .
, a- 3- . yg j,, . 1,s4.v % g.
p.g . yy. .
- 9. q ,,4 j , 4 . c .
.s. ..
, 7 'g. <
u m _- . t
- a.+ .
- 4,. w
-r
- m. .
^4 % . e
v l l Consumers Power Company Midland Units 1 & 2 Job >7220-PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOODING NEAR THE MIDLAND SITE O i THIS DOCUMEt4T C0tiTAINS l POOR QUAUTY PAGES BECHTEL August 1974 (Revision 2) i l
PROBABLE FRX1 MUM FLOODING NEAR THE MIDLAND SITE Introduction The main hydrologic concern regarding the safety of vital installations is the probable maximum water level at the plant site. Five parts are 1 involved in this problem:
- 1. What would be the natural I,robable maximum flood (PMF) discharge in the Tittabawassee River?
- 2. What would be the effect of upstream dam failures at the time of the PMF?
- 3. What would be the maximum water level resulting from the PMF (or PMF plus dam failure)?
- 4. What design features are necessary to protect the plant against concurrent wind activity? I
- 5. Could a Bullock Creek PMF with a 100-year flood on the River give a higher water level?
Conclusion The Midland Plant's safety-related facilities will be immune from 1 hazards associated with probable maximum flooding.
Natural Probable Mas.imum Flooding The hydrograph of the Tittabawassee River's natural PMF near the plant site was developed using:
- 1. The unitgraph shown in Figure 1
- 2. Probable maximum precipitation (PMP) and infiltration losses as shown in Figure 2 Rainfall excesses were obtained by subtracting the losses from the rainfalls and were applied to the unitgraph to obtain the PMF hydro-graph of Figure 2. This hydrograph does not include the effects of substantial overbank storage which would occur just upstream of the i plant. This le discussed under Probable Maximum Flood, below.
1
. I Dam Failure A reasonable mode and time of failurs is required to evaluate the effect [
of dam failure upon the maximum water level at the plant site. The i1 worst condition would be if the four dams on the river were to fail successively downstreamward. To allow for a possible "demino" effect in the failure of upstream dams, the total storage behind all four dams 1 could be treated as concentrated at the dam farthest downstream -- Sanford Dam. Figure 2.1 gives the location and pertinent features of Sanford Dam. 2 Study of the Sanford Dam design and records, and a brief site investigation indicated that failure would probably be by overtopping -- on which there is a dearth of usable information. A theoretical approach was tried for getting the logical mode and duration of failure by using the bed load transport ability of flowing water. However, this did not give logical results after the first 20 to 30 minutes of the failure process. A search of the technical literature of the past 15 years regarding dam failure by overtopping duration were given. The failure pattern finally selected is shown in Figure 3. It assumes that: e Failure starts at the low point ne2r the right abutment e The dam is completely removed in one hour 2 e The amount of material removed at intermediate crages of degradation follows a geometric progression. (This is reasonable because the rate of erosion increases with the area exposed to the flow.) It seems logical that failure would start as the headwater level rises over the low point in the crest at the right end of the dam, and that the water level would continue to rise over the remaining length cf the crest due to two factors:
- 1. A high rate of inflow to the reservoir from upstream dam failure, in addition to the natural flood. (The rate of inflow from upstream failures was not studied since all
, storage to be released was assumed concentrated at Sanford.) l
- 2. Increasing restriction on the outflow through and over the dam -- from high tailvater levels that would results from a constriction in the channel about 1/2 mile downstream at l the C&O Railroad. i2 l
It was found that the latter condition would reduce the headwater-tailwater differential at the dam to less than 11 feet so that peak outflow through the break would be less than 210,000 cfs. It would also limit the amount of total stored water released through the break to about 167,000 ac-ft. Figure 4 shows how this value was arrived at, and Figure 5 shows the hydrograph resulting from the dam failure. The rising limb of the failure hydrograph is a result of weir overflow calculations based on the assumed mode and duration of failure, and the recessive limb has been determined by trial, assuming all' storage is released in about 24 hours. s
1 l 1 The next step was to determ!.ne a reasonable point in time at which !
- - overtopping could be expected. Logically, this would occur when l the rate of inflow to the reservoir exceeded the ultimate capacity of ;
the spillway. This capacity was determined to be 25,000 cfs with ; headwater 0.5 feet over the low point in the dam crest. Sanford Dam spillway has 6 gated bays - 2 of them 25.35 feet wide and four 22 feet wide. Its ogee crest is 13.5 feet lower than the embanicnent low point and probably has a discharge coefficient of 4.0 at that head. Tailwater would be about 2.5 feet over the spillway crest and its effect is still negligible at that discharge. The PMF hydrograph at Sanford Dam was then developed to obtain the time (from start of runoff) at which the discharge from Sanford would begin to exceed 25,000 cf s. It was assumed outflow = inflow since the storage capability is small with respect to the flood volume. The hydrograph was developed using:
- 1. The unitgraph shown in Figure 6
- 2. PMP and infiltration losses as shown in Figure 7 Rainfall excesses were applied to the unitgraph to obtain the PMF hydrograph at Sanford Dam as shown in Figure 7. The hydrograph shows that overtopping would start about 1.5 days af ter the start of runoff.
l1 (
Combined Probable Maximum Flood (' The topography of the area just upstream of the plant is such that flooding would occur over an extensive area during an event such as the probable maximum flood. See Figure 8. The region between Sanford Dam and the plant site was thus treated as a reservoir for purposes of determining flow past the plant. The elevation-storage curve was obtained from the USGS 15-minute topographic sheet, "Sanford, Mich", which has a contour interval of 10 feet. The outflow rating curve was developed from the backwater computations discussed below under Maximum Water Level. The inflow hydrograph was taken as the natural PMF hydrograph (Fig. 2) plus the Sanford dambreak hydrograph (Fig. 5). The resulting outflow 1 hydrograph as well as the inflow, storage, and outflow rating curves are shown on Figure 9. The peak flow past the plant was thus computed to be 188,000 cfs--some 82,000 cfs less than that obtained by Brater and Wisler. This demonstrates one of the prime difficulties associated with the use of unit hydrograph theory. That is that changes in channel storage are not properly taken into account. The greatest flow from which Brater and Wisler determined their unit graph was 34,000 cfs which was not affected by the great storage available in the " super-flood-plain". There may well be additional regions upstream from Sanford which would provide similar storage, and neglecting them (as has been Jone berein) has possibly added additional conservatism to this analysis. l x
-S-
Maximum Water Level '. It has been determined that the water level that would result at the plant site from the PMF peak of 188,000 cfs in the Tittabawassee River would be about Elevation 625.7 -- say 626 in round numbers -- under post- y project conditions. This is the result of rating curve calculations made using conservative assumptions regarding channel and flood plain flow resistance and downstream water levels. Calculations were made using a USCE-originated computer program which uses the standard step backwater method. For the calculations, the following were used:
- 1. Cross-sections obtained from four sources -- USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles with 5-foot contours, 1 foot contour maps by Abrams Aerial Survey, USCE surveys of 1948-49, and Bechtel surveys of April,1970. Figures A-1 through A-5 of the appendix show these cross-sections.
2
- 2. Channel and flood plain roughness values at each cross-section as shown on Figure 10.
- 3. Starting water surface elevations for 5 different discharges arrived at by several trial runs for each discharge, selecting the higher of the pair of runs showing the best convergence.
For the cross-sections, the USGS maps were used generally above Elevation 610, sometimes higher. The use of USCE survey information was limited to the channel proper plus 200 to 300 feet of the flood plain. Abren's maps were used to fill in between USGS and USCE data, and Bechtel surveys were used for sections 7 through 10. In all, there were 11 cross-sections for computation of post-project water levels. The cross-section locations are shown in Figure 10. !'1 For the purpose of developing judgement for "n" values in the area of concern, calculations were made to duplicate the water surface profile of the record flood of March, 1948 (34,000 cfs), checking at four points where the water level had been determined by the U.S. Corps of Engineers, Detroit District. The observed and the calculated water levels for pre-project conditions are listed in Table 1, together with Manning "n" values used in the calculations. However, roughness values indicated by this study could not be applied blindly to the post-project conditions. A study of recent aerial photographs showed that for some reaches of the eastern flood plain it would be on the unsafe side to use the roughness indicated in the pre-project study. In other reaches it would be ridiculously conservative to apply the "n" value determined in the pre-project study to the entire eastern flood plain. The cross-sections were therefore divided into sub-sections and conservative but reas:aable "n" values assigned to the eastern flood plain portions (Fig. 10). l1 The "n" value applied to the western flood plain is also conservative because construction of the cooling pond dikes eliminates the shallow, high "n" flood plain to the west as a flood flow area, leaving the c deeper, lower "n" area to the east so that the right overbank "n" should be lower than in any historical flood that inundated areas to the west. Also, because the computed pre-project water levels were slightly lower than the observed levels (Table 1), the channel "n" for cross-sections 10 through 6 was raised to 0.028 for post-project conditions.
To be conservative it was assumed that the new railroad bridge and the Smith's Crossing bridge (at Section 10 on Figure 10) would not be
~
l1 destroyed by the PMF prior to the flood peak. However, Smith's Crossing bridge would almost certainly be destroyed. The result would be a lower-than-assumed water surface elevation at Section 10. It was assumed that the railroad bridge piers would gather debris so that the effective thickness of each pier would be about 30 feet. The discharges shown for Section 4 on Table 1 were used for the rating curve shown on Figure 9. The water level for the 188,000 cfs maximum 1 flow past the plant was obtained by interpolation between the levels computed for 170,000 and 270,000 cfs. l J N l _ , , , _ .. _- . _ . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ -
Concurrent Wind Activity It was postulated that an overland wind of 40 mph could occur from any direction during the PMT. The most adverse directions would bc from the northwest, over the " pond" described above, or from the southeast, directed upriver. In either case, the great extent of flooding would provide an effective fetch of 3.5 miles over which the wind would produce setup and waves. Pertinent aspects of the two wind events are shown in Table 2. The plant grade of 634 provides one foot of freeboard against runup frem the higher significant wave, and the structure layout provides for setback from the maximum runup. Only the worst waves from upstream could reach Elevation 634, but they would not come closcr than 30 feet to any of the vital facilities under even the worst combinations of wave height and period. Fever than 1 wave in 100,000 of those which could occur would approach this close (140 feet in from the edge of the plant fill). The following paragraphs discuss the development of the various items shown in Table 2. The principal reference for this portion of the analysis is the U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center's (CERC) Shore Protection, Planning and Design, Technical Report No. 4, Third Edition,1966. It is referred to henceforth as "TR-4". 1 Maximum fetches and average depths were obtained from the USGS 15-minute topographic sheets Sanford, Mich. (see Fig. 8) and St. Clarles, Mich. and their 7.5-minute sheet Midland South, Mich. Effective fetches were calculated using the sum-of-cosines approach shown on Fig 1-14 of TR-4. For ease of computation, 5-degree segments were used over the 90-degree sector. (The construction for the upstream computation is shown on Fig. 8. A similar one was employed downstream, orienting it to produce the maximum fetch.) Overwater wind speeds were deter =ined from Exhibit 12 of the Office of the Chief of Engineers' "Ccmputation of Freeboard Allowances for Waves in Reservoirs" (ETL 1110-2-8),16 December 1966, using the effective fetches. For the down-stream wind effect, the stream velocity (as determined from earlier backwater computations) was added to the wind speed. But upstream, no stream effect was considered because of the great width of the pond. Setups were determined from TR-4's Table 1-13 using the effective wind, the maximum fetch, and the average depth. To determine the features of the significant waves, depths were obtained by considering the bottoms at Elevations 600 and 605 for the downstrea= and upstream events respectively. From the topographic sheets, these elevations appear representative of the deeper regions where waves could form. Setups were added to the PMF flood level of 625.7 before obtaining depths. Heights of the significant waves were obtained from Figures 1-36, 1-37, and 1-38 of TR-4 using these depths, effective fetch, and effective wind. Maxtmum wave heights were taken as 1.67 ti=es the significant, in accordance with TR-4's Equation 4.1. Significant wave periods were obtained from Fig.1-43 and maximum periods were taken as twice the significant (Table 1-3, TR-4).
For the wind from the north, runup was obtained as follows. The depth used ,.- was that between the setup stillwater level, 626.5, and the bottom, which was taken as 614. (A large area to the north and west of the plant fill is built up to this elevation.) With this depth, and the deepwater wave lengths (5.12 times the square of the period), Table D-1 of TR-4 was used to get the equivalent deepwater wave height. With this, runty was determined from Exhibit 8 of ETL 1110-2-8 for the rip-rapped slope of 2.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. This type of computation showed some overtopping for the combination of mahimum wave and maximum period. The distance such overtopping would travel in from the edge of the fill wes calculated using Bretschneider's 1 equivalent slope method (p. 190, TR-4). The 140-foot encroachment conservarively assumed smooth slopes and considered the scale effset shown on Figure J-11 of TR-4. Waves coming from the scuch would be traveling upriver parallel to the affected plant slopes. Thus, there would be no runup in the conventional sense. The maximum height to which water would rise against these slopes was taken as the elevation of the wave crests. These were obtained from TR-4's Figure 4-14. A search of the wave period spectrum indicated the highest crests would result from periods of 2.3 seconds and 3.0 seconds for the significant and maximum waves, respectively.
\
Slope Protection ( The final slope protection design will result from an economic evaluation of various alternatives. Current plans are to provide an armor coat 1.5 1 to 2 units thick of rough quarrystone. Sizing will be done in accordance with accepted Corps of Engineers procedures. y
Bullock Creek PMF Computations were made using 5 cross-sections and the standard step method to determine the maximum water level that would result if there were to be a Bullock Creek PMF concurrent with the arrival at the plant site of the 100-year flood peak on the Tittabavassee River. That maximum level was determined to be about Elevation 620 at the west dike of the cooling pond and poses no threat to vital installations since they are at Elevation 634. Figurc A-6 of the Appenc'ix shows the channel cross-sections used. 2 The Bullock PMF was developed using:
- 1. The 2-hour unitgraph shown in Figure 11
- 2. PMP and infiltration loss rate shown in Figure 12 Application of the maximum 24-hour rainfall excess to the unitgraph resulted in the PMF hydrograph in Figure 12.
The corresponding Bullock Creek water surface profile was calculated using the same computer program as used in the river backwater compu-tations, with cross-sections located as shown in Figure 13. i
r . x. ,
/
i r TABLE 1 OBSERVED AND CALCULATED WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS SMITH'S CROSSING TO PLANT SITE AND USGS GAGE Section Station Pre-Project Post-Proj ec t No. W.S. Elevations Manning's "n" W. S. Elevations 34,000 cfs Obsrv. Calc. LOB CH ROB 55.000 75.000 100,000 170.000 270.000 10 0+00 606.59 606.59 0.150. 0.027 0.045 608.0 609.0 613.5 619.0 625.0 9 10+00 606.79 608.2 609.3 613.7 619.2 625.2 8 26+50 607.32 609.2 610.6 614.3 619.7 625.6 7 41'50 607.62 609.7 611.3 614.8 620.2 626.1 7.05 52+00 607.70 610.0 611.7 615.0 620.2 625.8 1 7.1 62+00 608.22 610.6 612.5 615.6 620.8 626.1 6 76+00 608.56 608.39 0.040 0.027 0.045 611.0 613.0 616.2 621.7 627.7 6.05 87+50 608.57 611.2 613.3' 616.6 622.4 628.6 0 6.07 90+50 611.1 613.2 616.4 621.9 628.1 7 6.1 ds 93+50 611.1 613.1 616.3 621.7 628.0 6.1 us 94+00 611.4 613.7 619.8 623.2 628.0 5 102+50 608.51 611.6 614.0 620.3 624.1 629.1 5.1 121+00 609.03 612.1 614.6 620.7 624.8 630.0 42 144+50 609.10 609.15 0.040 0.027 0.06 612.2 614.8 620.9 625.1 630.4 i 23 179+50 609.78 609.63 ( Smith's Crossing a Plant site USGS gage
TABLE 2 Wind Activity Concurrent with PMF Elevation of 625.7 Wind blowing from Upstream Downstream Maximum f etch, mi 7.9 21 Effective fetch, mi 3.5 3.5 Overwater wind, mph 51 51 Stream velocity vector, nil +3 mph Effective wind, mph 51 54 Average depth, ft 15 23 Setup, ft 0.8 1.5 Depth for waves, f t 21.5 27.0 1 Wave heights, ft Significant 4.4 4.8 Maximum 7.3 8.0 Wave periods, see Significant 6.2 7.0 Maximum 12.4 14.0 Runup Elevation at significant wave 633.0 630.4 at maximum wave 634.0 632.6 / 89, 18 i 17 MIDLAND power PLANT 16 1-DAY LNITGRAPH TITTABAWASSEE RIVER 15 AT MIDLM O MICHIGAN GAGE 14 i FIG. 1 13 NOTE: BASED ON DISTRIBUTION GRAPH BY WISLER & BRATER FOR REPORT 56-21 OF DOW OEMICAL CD. NDV. 1956 12 uggTGRApH CLCSELY MATCHES THAT IN
' ENGINEERING INVESTIGATIONS, tNIT
- 11 HYDROGR/#HS' BY USCE DETROIT DISTRICT b ,
FOR TITTABAWASSEE AT MIDLNO DWG - D SAG 12/194 SHEET 13 8 o gg DRAINAGE AREA 2400 SQ MI I 9 - 0 8 i
\
7 - I 6 I \ 5 I \ 4 3 2 3 1 ( t l 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 TIME - DAYS F;OM START OF RtNOFF
PffETDtBUPH , 0 iet 0-1 = 2-3 4 260 -m 6-I y QMAX = 248,000 CFS 240 8- 7 220 *q 10 a - 0: 200 12 180 ( b 160
\ -
8 140 1 120 0 0 100 80 60 40 , 20 7 O N o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 tim - DAYS FROM START CF RUNCFF MIDLAND POWER PLANT NOTE: DOES NOT INCLLCE EFFECT CF Apr DAM FAILtJuE NATURAL PRCEABLE MAXIML74 ( FLOCI) HYDROGRAPH TITTABAWASSEE RIVER ABOVE MIDLNO PLANT FIG. 2
l g z s -
., A 8 .
d 20 $ b k2 l
$N d x
~ =
;[ s. e "u. d m m
! ::s!g 1
/
/
4s
, ug !> <* \ a::
N ** a yli F I W o oo=9
\ .. s 1 _
o- o a < 1 g > w tz -
\ s .% < d ' m O z
o
- g~O s . J o
=
" w$ o < . p
\ ; Oo J V g .
g \
\.51 0
$4..
55 o s S N g g / " a 5gp 1 PEss
/
- 5555 Nh# p
/ 3 C
~%/
N./ .
= ; r -x ,/ . I . g. ' Tt 3.c - ;__ms- - .-fe 1.1
- k. /. . k >uyl,-Mw ~; .
g 1C
,t, -
<gn. _:e .
,0.
..g j ."
' l ', h
/ .-
7
+_'
w" s..,. I g
.O,. -
, s I
A :> .r i , o b.<$* Mf1 g,qq..,m<% T.$,.- .
*M @. g =Id;1 i
r3 ;,.e.. c w a,u;qp.4Le.,3, y--e.9 cd - } g e v ._ .1. , s .," ,
;.._' kh
[ Lg?vcN
/ _hhh / (j
\ 3; i- "!!
5d#',I"p[Q,. 4 /rM, 5 if 5 %' . N - " _n A w # f mI
*k ., p -)s :
.w .. ...&,f"_f .a ' ; bn jl
. I ha ) '.3 mnaw
. ~ :-
. m a p . .. ;;;7 19 ?.x., ]d,- ~ . ~ , . . - u . u ~ ,.
'N lykY !*. ' ~ Nkbh Y *
..Y'
~
J 8 2 .5 J
" , = J . C "tS: 4 i: 5 d
- 5. $ h*** ' * .
- P -
k
.8 os , :: .sf .-
o .. . = -St. , 90 ., E
*o ) . J 3 *a 1 a /' "
h.a::. y4 s
.a :
. : .i o,o ; 9 "
5
" %:b A.
*e./ , . 5 g e :. 5.a g - -
oo ./ ., 1 2 :: D U - = =
,, / ,, -
3
,,+/ , 'O g
- o. / c, , 5g g ,i .
~ af y
.../,* ' .. a5 8 <r i. :. 5 :. :.
.r-J 8 * . w
.. * . E
*@ g/ O' U d
.a
' ~
, n.+j o.
oo ./,y , a i-EJ
** e, l~4
\
NOTES 1. WOLVERINE POWER CO. DATtJ1 ADOUT 6.1 LOWER MIDLAND POWER PLANT THAN USGS DATUM (W.P. CD. DATUM + 6.1 = USGS DATUM)
- 2. STATICFJING IS EQUAL TO TFE OEGItNING POINT 3 ASSUPED FAILLRE PODE VERTICAL DISTORTIO4 10:1 FIG. 3 CONCRETE g . ASStJCD NO FAILLAE _UTM @
^
(TD CG4'ENSATE FOR - f O CUT-OFF WALL ON' WALL N UTVER f 640 - F SIDE)~' F o rFEADWATER ELEVATIONS 5 - 640 g 630.0 E
~
l (CREST PROFILE f 631.0 7 630.S EF NT POWER SPILLWAY I IA- w / - 630 HOUSE I AT 20 MIN / b620-A TAILWATER EL 620 lAT30 MIN
~
l AT 60 MIN . A 40 MIN [ 610 - EM1AWPENT
- 610 UI 600 l I I I I 600 I I I i l l l l l l g 2-00 3-00 4-00 5-00 6-00 7-00 8-00 9-00 10-AC 11-00 12-00 13-00 14-00 1S-00 16-00 17-00 18-00 STATIONS
O 135 - 71ollT'A3*.3 o o S e $ S Ol 2b 3 . . -.
,$ ,e
# 4 Y G 4 8 si #
#. g
.. a o
*u s
-4 f
/ b
- o cf 0
a O'
?
cf O 4 6 b be $3 6 N A u El 94 ~1[ ill Y > M o O ? f T d a -E 3 8'- 5 "0
\S s e A 0 W
t1. Q 6 c 0 *
\ '
gj o
'.}
p $, p tv Q $ <1 d d 0 W 8 0 C' N. o e *j o , y o on e in o 3 $e + = gj d o e- R I t, S 6 6& D 0 O bli e 3 T o y b e J 4 e $ 2x 8r O 5 9 h\ i\ ( rO s i d S i h 8 , o N O. A ed % O w a 9 Y - k cf U k M 3 t- 2 g d d ' O 4 N a
- + [e o .o ..
4 3 m+ R 0 G O 2 $ 04 1 s 8 g til
- O $x <0 s
; e sa3 m 2 I o 5 E
$ N 1 N 113 6 3 %
-j ' 4 o O s < + n s o
o o 4 o 4 w 3 d N h k J sS $ 3 DN $ Sl
- 0 63 $ $ VNN $ su l > >
Oo e d e= g 8a89 o4' 0'
- g Oe
- O o" "*h O' t- + c' 0' sa e-e-o o N2 D ~
WI d y W
$bN E 4
c as 3 23 s oo Q
-i s
( ii) y.
$r el 3 0
2
.i8 la tv P!G . /.-
I
+210,000 CFS 1
I s.80 N 16C k 140 M If0 b 8 2 8 100 1 8 80 60 40 k 20 k i O'
\
1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 TIME - DAYS FROM START OF PW RUNCFF , MIDLAND POWER PLANT i FAILURE HYDROGRAPH AT SANFORD DAM FIG. 5
1i l S H w7 6 P A
. R T G G N I S
A R F S ) E 6 L H V M ER P P I LTE R R A A I f R G D O A I R M E T D S B OS W O I NS O WR N & P L AW Fr E I R 2 0 D RA A D E L 1 0 L B S N A OA M S O I A F T T R W E S
, L 4 T A R D I F T M A I
DO M E R E F G F I A L K A N WE E P R I A D I D y 4 O F F E N T t O R N F O T R A T S M 3 O R F S Y A D N I 2 T . _ 1 0 2 0 a 6 4 _ 1 1 2 0 2
- 9u,
I l 0 I W 2LTRAT2ON: 00 08 IN/4 HR
- 2
- ~
f 4 5 c g 6 E U w 8 E 10 _ 180 Op 177,000 CFS 160 140 h 120 8 a 100
)
80 0 e i O 60
\
40 START OF OVERTOPPING 20 ' O O 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 TIPE - DAYS FROM START OF RUNCFF MIDLAND POWER PLANT PRCEABLE >%XIMLN FLOCD TITTABA4dASSEE RIVER AT SAW ORD DAM FIG.7
f , l a.
- A 3 . I. ogf M
?a 2 o
% / o g
r, t d*I w g
=
W
- 4' I ~ ~,w og. o gw <>2J gw -E c_-
$'~
y oD
<A m33 13 <5 g4 2 Z _
y of M, u o-2 g n ww m
'ga g gig ~? f i
z 53 m> - s* g wr5 qg 4.-
" ",g. . , . , ' '
E ,t. at / ,!
*6"*, "r i i ,ft '. < l $
sq l f ' Q': *Q - *I'.' .b: J ': m j 1.y
- e. e nW.yL,.,--,a%)..
7 1 J^ ( h, .2'fs' g' *. j i, a,JW{M'i, $ m .s
' de'.4 a. i"r
@'6m. a~_m. \ W , g'w' ' M -. ,,
3 Q -d N. ' i yf W 'g &f f.=? J C-
,g n' %,. 2 ;.Qyfyg ' " R ' g,*Q ? O n n~
o.. u-m w ,~ _$'x' y&./ /
.-. m _ _.,f r
+ \s ,,
,., < Y r, ,,f : ' \g' jy
.i. ,
,,, ,d ; * ' l'b'\.d,)cc
-f.,
j ,_m ..l Nw . l r>y
,. e\f u
l/.y--} ,))e' IQ, ~ ^*+ 0 )&,f.f;{h! b _! .:(. :< f, 4
- l &<s-ll" ' ,Ct.,.,!
s o
' L y.
x . > . .a I
. e
~
u - 'zy
-t
- v. , q z% a
~ v u .
'V.]~ . l -N..[i y l b'#
g r m-/ s. , *g a w<
? .q. . . 7,5 ' %;f 8f
. . u-*
r *Il ' ,= gs,') .y _ ,
/.
-m
' . ~ j. L ,h. { ,f p/
, .g-A w t-g _ p,ff j.
s-o d II./ r w,
-] - % - tV
.f,h ,.. ..',,,,'f
.s4
, ,j* %; h gt -
H
, , ,[/~ ;% { .*,,,-('[:ge . , ; ; --
y,o ;j.g ,[M '
-j d . f'/ 'M . 4 y /,
~ :, -
n,.,, [ ((.[ ,
. / ),...+r n,
~. f,. ' ~ ' sca... m
)y hY,[" d M h'f b (('c
- ' -Qcu'-ad,Q fl, a [
- u. n .u : \ .- ' s z: ..
r
, a., . , -
s,e y m,ot:/ . ,, y( : w
>t y, m} :,r - .a
, s1
- s, ,,
),
e, ,r c + 1 t . ~. > .
., iw Ii h . 'I]
\. ,_W. '
,Q.'..
t% 'k, m..s. :;h ', I
...%..<...,..s..
,. /.,,/. =w-. .'. . i 54w.
, _.. j l-hc,.
; {4
.[,,., rr .,,g;- i,, ej: . \[ q,1 j
,f.....- g., ,.
,{ gj g , .e N q=- g., .
.k ,
w 1 m ': ..tth- W,g , f '
~ 3,,...- d,i!.,% . y .. ph.a .: ;.' 4, :
; w.- Ce .p.<f) , n 01% d, .J l
~
,l i Acrf'..g m. ; ; ;
en
- f. e f ij
, ..., 5 /: - - '
" , - - *i.h :
u.b : i , 6 . f. s /f - -
? \ ;,
. . Y* f l_f s[
Wpr ,_
. i. r4,..
4.3 ,
,p er. 2
. y m.. .
m=.sl i e,\ ,\,\s , s u} gm s ,-
. :l )
lp .- .t - f.. . . :i fj it ~ e.___
\ 8s -;f -O.
.- ..:. 4 -w % - .
;g t . .
* =
- f. e < l v q;h. a * --. 9 :.4 k .O
, g /$."(([p$c i l l
.1
% k i.. .g' 2 A s ,,wj,J ;. y-1
.m/'
j 1, L ..m .. . m-? l=.. ,:x .:.Q .(b-/Lcggi3 jj"
- g
- s%.!'t
- i-p,r Ag e f '
f-
- 1. .
. T ' y.'
.* , .x .
.'. ~ ..t '
s ,c ., ; sw -9
- i. '% , %, \.1-$.e _' - h' f P' l
f ] i.a . i
'I
, s . ^J Yh ,
.% - 4 ;- . - y- 6 , pf a w i ,g %- ,, p @ s, :.y)]
i !
- 5. -- , ,, s4.p 4s,., ,,,4
,, ;, ,q. . ;-* .
.o , .s ,. ,n - - _:
tV w
=
~ # y/ \e , dy g, ; =Qm . :, - .
ll' A's
-4 /h j,.
7
,, w[ w +-n m, .- g 'jf D ,pL --@ n( n ][g'U ,, . [.'g t
,.i p ( _ ,7 -- -
3 l' 4%."Nd ! t 3
}h}n? 'E f.}'f Y? &. ~< I h. i:0.~% yen'Y-l;*,Y,t$dhl.h lkvY bi En a
260 g i i MAXIP"J4 ' ItFLOW' = 248,000 CFS 240 [\ t g i g , SUM OF FIG. 2 (, FIG. 5 220 200 ; MAXIMUM FLOW PAST PLANT = 188,000 CFS
,/ ', '
180 , -
/ 't J ,
160 ,- , in a s b l '. '
'g 140 l g i
8 120
} [l S f ! h \
g i 100 i / ,
\ '
a l ' 8 e 80 ,
- s g , s' s O I 60 l
I a 40 . I I i 20 BREACH OF SANFORD DAM 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 TIME - DAYS FROM START OF R N F PONDAGE - 1000'S OF ACRE-FT 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 630 " gM J l
" NOTE: INCLUDES UPSTREAM DAPEREAK 620 Abo EFFECT CF PONDING BETWEEN STORAGE f, OUTFLOW
- 610 '
/ TITTABAWASSEE RIVER SANFORD DAM APO PLANT SITE $ q SANFORD DAM TO MIDLAND PLANT w
MIDLAND POWER PLANT w 600 d PROSA2!I MAXIMUM FLOOD 590 TITTABAWASSEE RIVER 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 MmW W DISCHARGE - 1000'S OF CFS FIG. 9 ]
l
; 'M '
j '2
\' ' J
- j, A n,.y}.x; *Q .( { $ ff 0*080 x ] *
.s. . %;
r ?\ x y
,y .p?g?j,'::/.}::. :'?l 1 %.i ,Q . .
- j. .
y% b
$\U \ , & ' f. , , R*\'> ,
) :.
l
@ 'r'n ,_ ~~~' W_, ~1 c.
.,~;{ \} f *" Q.W \
- c. .
C 0.,045 4 s s . g yo ,W .
,. y J[ , l v-'
~
-~
~ s\' g\. ,I' / 0.080-4 *p ,8
.,j, PLANT STATICN j ,e fr _, y ,,, ,o .
g., . g {9
<, hA \l. / '2;/,. %Q-
#4 &
- N ,,
A ' . x \'\<,p .
^% ,y
-7 0 %
', '.xs/ q 53; s '
- 4 A g.n v
}
</'
, r. j i
'..,s 0 . 0, y, 7
)p*,f t %j k 0.080. J/ Nt c % +'
./, 's J * / t>
$,g V j [
f M m ' ega
, + , / rn s : . ,,, .
W tc
,. \ .i o Y- ,,
f/ ' 6.1.\y " 0.080 * *j V o ,'15 . o.07 -1>{
/f, *
^ ., ' '* M.
X . ') O.045
% .\ I* *' *.' ,, f ' /
e s % .'~ . - 30.15 0.07, 6.Y /
- 0. 07e * .4 A -
,3 - COOLING PONDg . , , 3,
' (, n. ," ,, 6.07)
,5 0.045 P f .
; g,/ e,\ . .
(.'o.15 i t 0
- N ~ 0 045'
/ g
/ 0.06 * [
^
, os
.- s n 6 .. e ., 6 g ;4 S% (
' > ' l f. . J / % L r ,.
b 71 , dh
- 46.08 Ilo.~15P M 6 ,
h , Ni g , ,, 4.h0*045 0.
.06" /*
, i- k.15t_ j o','o'15'. 7 g c'- d l A:- f % W. I v.c
- d. .
.t
- t. /* 4r acs %. '
l
. 0.04,5 0.045 5
- g. } ,.15! ,* f sp ._ / c- .
= . - .
E s. 2 4' '
!, \
*i j / ?s
'8 9
*jl['
, .I
+/ ,
,* ' 43 *.g. -'
N 0.08 s s, j- . f.15o,o^ , ? [4.q*j
;,. % - o x p i 1..
- g' / 0.045N ' c %g_m t, , g o,
*- s : .s ., '
*f Q N - \\ ' 0.045 '- 10 p
,N, 68 - i }0.15" $y 0.08, w c54 ., % s N 0.'0 45 o' s
$d Mih ,
, ~ , ~
oe
., s, 5 "
,_ .0.045j-[."T* l ' '
.. T- .
' / *s / N g
h, [ c, t FIGLRE IC
,s s 4 7 /, .. .; yi Y.A -
/
I O [L / N['k ,h a _ NIDLAND - TITTABAWASSEE RIVER tg%/ l 1 MA IN CHWEl. ' n ' = 0. 027 'e i LOCATICN OF X-SECTI'JNS USED IN
~y/. qN .:__
'n' l FCR SECTICNS 2 THOUGH $ BACKWATER CALCU ATIONS AND 6.05, 0.028 FCR SECTICNS ,.- VALLES FCR POST-PRO ;ECT CONDITIONS Q
6 m 10 y/h ,j , FIG. co l 1
16 l I
/
12 s 10 m b S ga \ s T i 6 8 d O 4 2 4 , i l 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 TIME - HOURS ." U4 START T RUNOFF l NOTE: BASED ON SNYDER'S HITHOD MIDLAND POWER PLANT DRAINAGE AREA = 36 S0 MI ( EXCLUDING 4 SQ MI CF WAITE & 2-HOL.R UNITGRAPH ( DEBOLT DRAIN AREA) FOR B h p CRE E L= 19.2 MI, LC= 11.1 MI , tr = 10 m AT PLANT SITE i l l FIG. 11 i
_ I I _ Of = 32,600 CFS 32 2 f A
/
m 30 3-4 l y - r 28 '6- _J k 26 :;- 8 24 10 22 i m O 20 b \1
$ 18 4
16 14 1 8
$ 12 0
10 1 l l 8 6 I 4 A s t 2 1 F l s u O O 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 TIE - HOURS FROM START OF RUNOFF MIDLAND POWER DLANT PMF - HYOROGRAPH FOR BULLOCK CREEK l NOTE: IPFILTRATION = 0.02 IN M I AT PLANT SITE l FIG. 12 g
* ~
V - 6 4 L ' x I [ P a ._ . , g KV .hLP- 7 {
} #g\ W v~
'd 5, @hMr lI - - \
g6 - ~d = 3 , m
- Jgg* U Q M n, f MIDLAND.yvW rd g,\ .g* 'fgo 1 .3, s
s n9,,, , , gU 1 se&u[+ 1.6, t_ ._ W I : 4 ..rggm.,,- 22n
- I
' a_ .!. .; * . * *. .. m ., c 3 0
= 23 ... 2 ;
,si;p L.4 '5 n.: : *g- a-
-q ,?, - 3 tim.. m. ;W-lagq2?i,*-c; t p -
.. I . A ).. : : . .
c.,. u. .
- - - - -mn n
_q _=J...,, - w\::w. , s.. ._. 7. s ee. --
-w
-8_g . :
m.: i-n :, w :[=...:.. c l nJ.',
'? y--a Q. A1 d.., . .' p p g*g]_k g
. ,. .a yt t i,* g w*9 q ql? g= gi .g.B Tg,Np "I Ll r"<@ , nim r e ,. as .y: n
,3 p *
. s l-~~ ._,a g. . ,,
y,a, s ~p* _ #g .
-Onl*9. arl t ,d7; i . ,
f < V ~ *
=. narrrigm Je
,$~no P . ~ ';ie" T ~ K '**\f~j' %
!pg .i:ct=.= .Q g. &.ncf~ T.a:.- F
- e. =ce -e 4.p$
". - Q cygxn pP .. s%w.. ,a' = -A_ r ,i , s - f, ...
r
- x. y>
.x.
' : .--, %.q~) W
.w
- u. m c-
,.. - am.-~y. a, a, % = A ,J
" y G- = = , ?v
- w. .v ."-.a s
- n. - -
v 2 n- m 7 %. %K
~
.- g C ' li-) .^$. Q.7
.E '
y '. f b;\ _ _. 3rine P3nd No 6 s
- i fj Q j r rf-g L gg Y' % g n ' k, {,
*a -
h- (Np k o K s %k \'"~Nm .
'" #"1' T ~ PLAg-lT STATIO-f f.- _
N '@ - x
'W gI-ELW'*
~WP Se . 0=C" '
- W $y rxN b4
! UM_ / rec
-- ^
E s h
__4
- W eNE' -- sw s
r m L( #w F w '_ '- -
,mg-%, -
il I i D A xL I A. m e- =y.=. . . .. . a. -
. a.. .. 'I, K u .
~ 8 6 _,,
s r+ Gj ,
% T L % i =. t ! ..'. e . u COOLING POND % .TQ" . . . . . 'W 4'
j,i .. l _. ci '
. . , %nrm-n.
a3 _ .
't m.p; \ 34.,. ,, . , 3 5..,, - L sm -
g
? ,
.w .
s I
=e
_ :; -%. - ' ~ . o , , . .% 'h yl c~ l 'T g'- g".K< lid:- j -
,, c' 4 '
e
-W wagL S
~~~~~'
,J -
L ._ a gi ! 'N u
/
s % ys q.
' #., , l ; ~ z..
, A I i \ r V/ 1
, = A ^ 7
p ; \i t L_ __. .u . _ m em1 : w ; - Yhdmf ?[ l""" 3 '- j} [. l
. j:2 i!Eul ~ ~~M \'T C*C ,
W - _, i i TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 'g 1' C~Q-
< A<-
l 'I~-- Br' ' ' MIDLAND, MICHIGAN -~ V m f *i f
+ -
l l Scale: 1" = 2000" ..
, %y l
.4 s CA1 Q; 3
$ch~ -
~~ -I H 'g ,1
%,hp reproduced Midland South from Quadrangle, USGS Michi-quad sheets, h[ j(-- ,, i dl.
1 6'
, wsi~N i 3 gan (7.5 Minute Series) 1962
- .r_:a _ e ~;p wQ I,
Fl& 13
a 6 e APPENDIX t a
"f.
- n. .
v.u. r :: : r g h. :- I ferge nn.. tu-li*u;T::}d W- " o' m -
- t gs>. q
.j uip;.
- g
, t::.t :..ttt t: u. ' :
- f
[.._d , d *
.' . :. 4 5 ' *
- } -}
j-4..< n r ().! Ll._.<.;:t 1 3:
~! :~1 j $-:.;--; j' ------
~~'
{}' y
- Lt Hi! g t . ,@ -
i.. . -
.j r
o
. ., e n .
k : e 1 : 4 2
.f.i
% m_.
,-1. . .--.... ---
L 8
-.Mr l ..,, ,
i - y p 7
+t
-f 4 _ _
g
~ ~ ~
[". ' : 2__ .._4. .._. j+~.L I. :.
. p T J _ ,::.
g
/r .'. fi-MT: .r d- i:_
L 0
}E ,. ,, ;
( k j.- 3 8 7 O s : ------ g 9 H:: : t, it [ 4 L .-. 1 o < , m' [ g p g g . ._ E _ _ _ _ +-E, n c a* a R : 4 1::t -k H g e
-.T :.
m . r
+..--. . -~ e. ----- ---. ------ ---
4 - ---
- g :
.y: . .
p-
.ry p :-
S g o pR.; 3 . [- y
-a y t
..t- .y N , ; 4;J 1.- '
' 'i
; l
" k( ,
b SECTrosV 2 USED OVLY q3.-. - -- y .
~ ,oeiusraeicsi. etooo f . .
) ;_L$,
s .. e e -
*g m }.
y M 4_-4..4 g
-g-.- - ---- -
,+ - - -
3 l : y- p
- / :
BECHTEL 4
, g asas anece 4
' (j
) ..j ,.
- j. MIDLAND POWER PLANT f TITTASAWA3SEE hivER
, f.
' CROSS-SECTIONS $HEET I DF S 0 Dd 'n O{ d [ k j d $ k $ 7220 FIGURE A-1
O b E C g e C 49k
% _J d
g E
- w .!!:@<
j v) W w wY& 5 it N" C Z O a. OE C- z N W3 O e O a~ do
- K E z =N 4 * *0
- gN *-
3 c > a; s e O
". i
/ *L h0d ~)2:
;gy p-..
~~'
I . . _I . I
,f- f -
i_ i .-
. r M
- n ___f .-_1
.7 w .
'1 y _.I.-
& [_
4.- - i j :! CZ9 EWD&l-w-r
\ -. a u.a....... .'
r
.1 -..t_
- l1 : ,
y'.y .; - - - - ~ - - -
-ms ,
'M
, - - t-_..
.~% .. 3 .
A, h WW oMh m e 4 .m + e e .. <~~s nwe e .e e. . , - .
.g
+- . e.g . :.,,--
yg r-.~.. -
. .~e.-o.e-6+. .y - - - , .
9 .M L 9 S & E & / O
.Ld OW$n0Hi 9 MUD W
- D
, .v, M:
I
. . A I_ .
i
# 'a - I 1 i i .~m 1A
- . l ^ $
' W? g
~
'K: '
.I ~f.
_ f.* I 1 I 7 j'
-*!. ,l/
- i A. - . !-
i 1m =w. im
- - ~]
- g. 1, , g+1h_ s i
,.,,i_,
l d
~x
{ 4 r g !. p
}_ i J-
- l_- ~ 2 3A'AJJ h m _'_""" '. .m b ii .. R. ._I.;phu .. .___;___
+-+ w gg--+r- t , ,_.m + . - + , . . . , __..._ , . _ . __ ,;
L* 9 E b $ O $ Q
-LA WN fMW1
.50 ~9 NOU03S 1
ce
- 5 M.
~;/! -- T
[
'1' f ,]:!! . : - . .
-0 09
_; _ ";_,-;.___f:
' . II
- r. . : i _2
' 1 .. . i.
A I. 1 I1 Q I . .
'rg]y u, j -
' -! S t~~'4- V !: -s-i_ 1. .
.._ .1 #F.c '
I; . I f I. ' _f.. ' A . ~ ~ 1.
.A -
i_
- - m -
'!. g -
4 d !~ n
~. N.
I 4f : , M".?K ] . _ 1L I .
; mp.. +^
- 1. s. L "%
M ,. .E_. tem _._.E _ _.-.I._..+..~.~ d M . -. E_. 5 .
- w. .
,, =,=. ,..-, _ ,- .
.m .-.
G L 9 3 k E & / C Jd QWSfCHL r k
O k M Z e o e 4 =c y W m3 1 $ p lI
.J g
- wt Id g w =Y 8 pI O n e 3 M e w b
I Og A {Z 4 m o e o ~do , 2 *u
- N 4 w N J U* b o .
e E O e U h [.[ h 7_ T
~ _
^}; _ n_
I - I ,-] , 3 ,
#* I .
* * + ~ -t i i ri.. ,
NT
- i : I. -_1'1.
A 1 1 ..I
- .1...'. g 3 .
I e_ I ~ / ~ t _a m~ m; n 1 5 1
, .: ,d;
' 1 .. :1 ;
ai 11 z :. : i: .& -; .----'
' ". ~
x x ge -
- i r I T . <_i.- \ 'i
- / :. ' II : 4 ~_ ..
I- y y . ."- ] ,+ e .- + ,.
N-,'/ , ,
I - i .k
+- ,
+--- m. e-. h-UA -al E b_ 1 t% - , . ,r
.-..i M Mt. Q , R n ka
#_ [vdw , -
l o* 9 la 1 S & E & I
.LJ GW. Snow.1 L manw 1 .
- . W l ;
. I .
y a
- i I . l y I i. .1 . ,
. I
- I.
k . k e 1: . . . , i
;1 . '
C.
.:-M 4. 7 I'1 ;[
- I r
. I .
I y -
. - l : 1 . . . 1 I
~f._#: 'I :
T . I
~ T- 1 'T '
1
'.m7mrNmN.
I
-Q* .- ,
Y .. m.._,=. u L. . ~!
- i. .
~
n
, '{
. .j -ia;'tsci i _
C7 --- m d h,,{ 1G:"N 7. m --
, i x wa ._ .i t. i a
,n c . , , - - , . . - . .-, . ,
m m - . , . -.
- _.cd .=
ce? L 9 3 h E C / 0 L2 QVHnoH1
.90;6 MouM
. op.s
; I~.:
j%. . .. I.
- ly}~ : ! . - ;-
l-
-m W-jl 1
- I
-l -
f: .--h - M . = + 'Mf. ' Wo.mehe+ e--
~
00*'
% ..^ h< - j- :
1 -
, ~ _ , m 4 ; , - --4.
j ,qH -
; i j: -- '4
- : I i
.,I
{-. . . ;
- u,_
-, I
- 1 . i.l . W ~ 'r---
),e j-
- 4-
&-k' r
, j.
m.-.--,im 1 _-s < .-m .= m %_
. 1 _.
.</ _w -
- ++ L W A..ny Mi w{)
- _ ~ , - - -
M e 61@ UMl UNE. . .Li .) i
~
- I -
1 4 4 .- ,J - _ . ~ ~"_
= t em:nf T-= ters:c'r-t+ - - -
+,:em +~ --+
~y' 0 9 S V G & l Q k CWS00W.L k
~.
n;T [T
,y -Q'[.
~
o l JL.. i t
- -1 '
- t ': t p, .t
- i : ;
. 4 1'
, 7 y- -
g . ; - a u
/.
- f-t u: s C._ _ ..-.
! L. .g... ..__
f t : s - s
; t . .
j: f j {.. ;[:; L .._..
; . .i
[.
; L
}. _
.]1 t.;
. _:'Lu ' ' . :
L l 't ; 9 nL, ,. T-
.L. p J
., _.,yr=- : ,
! 't i
j.. (
+ ,
z
, t.
.)
p ( G "' . - tj .
- { g y --.---_j
.g g, .m_-..__-
f _ .._ __. g h . y--__-. 7 3- g , L 4 m
) ;
t'
.?..
)
. . .-.._. . .$4..- .. _ -
.g ..
/.
..,--.c,j.
, r.. .
-lt f 1 .
M 1 .. jj M ' h '-
}
l } 4 . n I : !! ; .! --..
, e, --.
i / , V t' y
) g p
~
. BECHTEL
% mo.
%.A I 1
[ j ; ( + , ! ! f . MIDLAND POWER PLANT
- f. - . . .
{ T8TT***"" 8 "3*E"
-l{- i
' l caoS$* SECTIONS St( E T 4 OF S O{--{g 4
o / y,
! i y
u D,i 1, hf
"'.z f [. ! ; o
{ g - m mL 7220 Wa@-- FaunE A-4
., 'l s,
6
- 1 2 h l Le.i I 4
.J e
eI< g L =*T y J * "2 o W, C = *I S DA Mg 3 $ ' g a Ze O ** y Wl 'c Yf o O 'E C CL E 2 *3 U 3:N c4 o < e a. C
- .30:
,. . .E ,
'. S N.
gk.k Lo*9 hot.2112 A I s' 1 T ^ Y b I, Mx x.T_ Ta. K + x - 1 A 'n . 1 x
~4 11 s e c : , $"
-u easxws
/7 ,w/J sf r.:
. .r ~ ,
g jmo q
^w"
_lM:{; 1 h
,_ .g_ g;;
M' o - ~ - n.n wm. s m - '_ m-
;} N x
N t 1 A > 3 9 [ Z l g
.ts owsoow:
k
4 . . o
" j
- .5 i
s z m. S' : 1 4 J
., *u g 4
- .]- '
J Q- U NI w a: w ;; .! {
%r.. . . .
h g g O
=
. I o.
o
- a. 05
*~ ~ - W8
- y
~ __.:
o 8D z 52 "8E N
~; 4 o >
,,J J * %m5
..' O bb a- .l 3 =v e .-
,,1
, _.+
M' 1e n , y vm D [ ( ~ 1 g tv
.+.e+- -
FM_ _.._
'_i._*_.
m
,, o. y
;+-.-- -- ,r y IN- V) o Z -.4 N f
_ m.+.r, @' ' w.
.~....
O w
.o.
;j $ a
_v .
. .W , 4 4
- . .-~, m.. _..
g I .
._ o
. j ,V
- Q) w,,^:
.~5& m
; ~ k %
~
g Q s' I o a
] g nu_ : , /-,+i. o Q
q[l
$ li ' 9 8 -
o$ . o
- a o
=h+
eb "i 4TN .
-+--'
- m. . ,,: ,i .-
- i: g
% h ,
+ + -- ; y
~
['m _ _. M L" -~++ 1 eo
. 1 o c.
h 3 g b 1 1 1 .
\
.w
'~
M h ,, g I o l h I I: ., 1
- ,5 o b
4 ii 1"
!/.
.s.
1 :
.1:1 Il ,'
% ,. I. :
g -
-1
- I.
y- 0 .,'- R
~ -r..-,
,4--- .<
-}+-'
, e'! -I og . *g . . .
3 m J U S S r}}