ML20054J900
| ML20054J900 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1982 |
| From: | WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES, LTD. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054J898 | List: |
| References | |
| 13050, NUDOCS 8206300181 | |
| Download: ML20054J900 (100) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:5
.,+,,i 1 ::,
i O LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY j WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT 3 i i MODEL TESTING OF TFE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM SUMP l C ! i
. FOR i
EBASCO SERVICES INC. b I i i j BY WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. i PORT COGUITLAM, B.C. l 13050 JUNE 1982 O. , J 8206300181 820628 PDR ADOCK 05000382 PDR A _.
, _ _ _ _ ._. E
- v. t ,T t u, t a,r,rir e m a, .c
' e n o tTo l
{ , TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. l.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY l ! 2.0
SUMMARY
2
3.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4
4.0 INTRODUCTION
5
5.0 DESCRIPTION
OF SIS SUMP AND INTAKES 7 6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING ECCS RECIRCULATION SUMP PERFORMANCE 8 6.1 Regulatory Guide 1.82 Requirements 8 6.2 Factors Cousing increased Entrance Losses 8 6.3 Factors Affecting Vortex Formation 8 7.0 RATIONALE FOR MODEL CONFIGURATION AND TEST PROGRAM iI 7.1 Model Scale iI ! 7.2 Model Boundary Selection 12 i 7.3 Containment Flow Distribution 13 8.0 TEST FACILITY I4 ! 8.1 General 14 i 8.2 Model Construction 14 I 8.3 Intoke Description 15 f 8.4 Screen Blockage 16 8.5 Test Observations 17 [ 8.6 Test Measurements 17 , 9.0 TEST PROGRAM 19 9.1 Objectives 19 9.2 Test Conditions 19 9.2.1 Test Series 1 19 1 d 9.2.2 Test Serles 11 20 f : i tj 9.2.3 Test Series ill 21 i Test Procedure 9.3 21 L l l
1 1 i : <.T [ ; * , ;, , ,,iti, , ; t , i. , ; 0,0 !. h t T r, TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) I Page No. i l 10.0 TEST RESULTS 24 l 10.1 Calibration 24 10.2 Test Series i 24 10.2.1 Tests ! - I to 1 - 20 24 10.2.2 Tests 1 -21 to I - 28 25 10.3 Test Series ll 26 10.4 Test Seiies ill 28 10.S Experimental Accuracy 28 , REFEREN S l l l TABLES C - FIGURES I I l l APPENDIX A t l f O , i : i
..i' & f.';, , r i'. ( , .(, , , t I f,
. LIST OF TABLES C
TABLEI TEST SERIES I VORTEX TESTS - TEST CONDITIONS AND RESULTS TABLE 2 TEST SERIES 11 HEAD LOSS TESTS - TEST CONDITIONS AND RESULTS TABLE 3 TEST SERIES 111 CONFIDENCE LIMITS TESTS - TEST CONDITIONS AND RESULTS l O l ! I i
. I l
I l l I I l i i I f i , s O . ;
e
* . ,i t, LIST OF FIGURES -
O ,
- l. LOCATION OF SIS INTAKE SUMP IN CONTAINMENT BUILDING
, 2. PLAN OF MODEL AND TEST FACILITY l 3. SECTION OF MODEL AND TEST FACILITY
- 4. GRATING FLOOR AND STAIRS
- 5. PLAN OF FLOOR AT EL. -4'-0"
- 6. CONTAINMENT WALL, SCREEN CAGE AND TSP BASKETS
- 7. TRAIN A INTAKE SHOWING SHIELD PIPE
- 8. VIEW OF TEST FACILITY AND SUCTION PIPING I 9. SCREEN BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS
- 10. LOCATION OF PRESSURE TAPS FOR INTAKE LOSS MEASUREMENTS I1. VORTEX ENTERING TRAIN A INTAKE
- 12. CLOSEUP OF VORTEX " HEAD"
- 13. GRATING CAGES AWAITING INSTALLATION
- 14. GRATING CAGE DESIGN AS TESTED i
O' l l I l ! I l l l
= = - -
'(+,e*
- t APPENDIX A i
Page No. { l~ METHOD FOR CALCULATING INTAKE LOSS COEFFICIENT A-l l LIST OF REFERENCES FIGURE Al l l ! l l l 1 r i I , O' : I i i i i i i l , I l l 0 I I O . f.
v,t mrn;ce.y.: .e ,
,4 . a. t Ata mic mu, L T D g 1.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY -
V, I The purpose of the hydraulic model study was to test and modify, if necessary, the i Safety injection System (SIS) sump to " demonstrate that the sump design will permit < operation of the Safety injection System (SIS) and Containment Spray System (CSS) without vortex formation". In addition, the head loss across the screen cage and at each intake was measured for use in the Net Positive Suction Head calculation. Authorization to proceed with the study was received by telex July 2,1981 quoting = Contract No. NY-403687. The terms of reference for the study were set out in Ebasco Specification No. LOU 1564.11I entitled Safety injection System Sump Model Test. l i I i
, 4 i
! k i
1 \ i l t l l i i
+
4 i
'k 1
3
+i t
l
c.; : u, : c/ w ,nt. o v m estu ic tet , la 0 8 " U. L ~ ' ' 2 2.0
SUMMARY
p) v.
- l. Western Canodo Hydraulic Laboratories Ltd. was retained by Ebasco Services Inc.
! to test the design of the SIS sump for Louisiano Power and Light Company's Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit 3 to assure vortex control and acceptable head losses.
- 2. A I:1 scale model was constructed of the SIS sump, intakes, screen cage and all containment geometry significantly affecting the approach flow conditions.
i I
- 3. To investigate the susceptibility of the intakes to vortexing, the vertical and horizontal screens were extensively blocked to create sump flow conditions which l are much worse with respect to vortexing than any expected in the plant. Without l the grating cage in place, vortices originating from the sump walls were observed I
in the model for various 90 percent blockage configurations. When grating cages ,, encapsulating the intakes were installed, no vortices developed under any f!ow
! conditions tested. ,
N 4. Head losses across the screens and at the intake were measured for five rationally I (Jl chosen 50 percent blockage conditions under the following test conditions: j lJ, l l Postulated for plant Tested i l LOCA/MSLB !
! Minimum Water Level, El MSL -3'-8 -3'-l I to -3'-8 Maximum Water Level, El MSL O'-6 0'-4 to 0'-7 Flow at runout, US gpm CS 2250 2898 - 3372 .
CS, HPSI 3140 4017 - 4906 I CS, HPSI, LPSI 8640 11084 - 13199 Water Temperature, OF 217 159 - 179 l I Intake Pipe Reynolds No. CS l.10 x 106 1.02 - 1.12 x 106 CS,HPSI l.S3 x 106 1.34 - I.66 x 106 CS, HPSI, LPSI 4.22 x 106 3.66 - 4.44 x 106 ! 5 O ; ; m_
V.EST ERN C AN AD A H VI:h M '. !C L AfW' A T ORiES LT D
- 5. The maximum screen loss was found to be 0.098 f t at a prototype total discharge of -
(j iI,780 US gpm cod 50 percent screen blockage.
- 6. The maximum intake head loss coefficient measured with the grating cage in place and 50 percent screen blockage corresponded to the prototype head losses shown below:
Maximum Head loss, f t i Prototype Flow Rote Train A Train B US gpm l l 2250 0.063 0.064 3140 0.127 0.150 i l 8640 0.905 0.892 O!
- 7. A separate series of tests under one selected 50 percent blockage condition was #
conducted to establish the mean intake head losses and screen loss with the
, associated 95 percent confidence intervals. The results con be summarized as '
I i , follows: l + { l ' l > i i i i j i Prototype Flow Rate 95% Confidence Limits ; US gpm l
, l Train A 8640 0.842 ft < head loss < 0.849 f t ;
, l Train B 3140 0.108 ft < head loss < 0.110 ft I t > l . Screens 1I780 0.030 f t < head loss < 0.03 I f t
- 8. The effectiveness of the grating cage in providing vortex control was demonstrated repeatedly.
- ~ ' ' '
- c. i - .. nnn ,,.i,,, nir.t,a ,.c o,"ibL :4
3.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS pJ The following conc;usions and recommendations resulted from the study of the Waterford - 3 SIS sump:
- 1. The sump and intakes with grating cages will not develop vortices even with 90 percent of the screen cage's open area blocked and single intake discharges up to iI,000 US gpm.
- 2. The maximum measured intake head loss referred to a prototype discharge of 8640 US gpm and with 50 percent screen blockage was 0.905 ft for the train A intake and 0.892 ft for the train B intake.
- 3. The maximum measured screen loss referred to a prototype discharge of l1,780 US gpm and with 50 percent screen blockage was 0.098 f t.
- 4. Based on the test results, it is recommended that the intakes be protected from vortex formation by grating cages as shown in Figure 14.
i O' a l 1 l : O- ,
V.LST E RN C AN ADA tiVP4 AU L lC L A B A T G alf S L T D 5
4.0 INTRODUCTION
O G-Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit 3 is a nuclear power plant being built by i Ebosco Services incorporated for Louisiana Power and Light Company. Western Canada Hydraulic Laboratories Ltd. (WCHL) was contracted by Ebasco to test the design of the SIS sump with respect to possible vortex formation, and to measure head losses across the screens and at the intakes. The SIS sump is an important part of the emergency cooling systems for the reactor. In the event of a Loss Of Coolant Accident (LOCA) or a Main Steam Line Break (MSLB), water is pumped from the Refueling Water Storage Pool (RWSP)into the Reactor Containment Building (RCB) to cool the reactor. The water eventually collects at the lowest levels of the RCB. Once the RWSP is emptied, the pumps switch to the recirculation mode during which they take suction from the SIS sump. The spent water lying in the RCB is recirculated after cooling through the emergency systems to remove heat from the reactor during cooldown. Although the Containment Spray (CS), High Pressure Safety injection (HPSI) and Low Pressure Safety injection (LPSI) pumps all discharge water into the RCB from the RWSP, only the CS and HPSI pumps normally p v operate in the recirculation mode. l i The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Regulatory Guide 1.79 states that "A ! comprehensive preoperational test program on the Emergency Core Cooling System ; (ECCS) and its components should be performed to provide assurance that the ECCS will accomplish its intended function when required." Specifically, "the (preoperational) testing should include taking suction from the sump to verify vortex control and ; j occeptable pressure drops across screening and suction lines..." The SIS sump could not be tested in plant because flooding the RCB was not feasible. Furthermore, even if the building could be flooded, there is no access for observation of the sump during operation. Instead, WCHL proposed to construct and test a 1:1 scale model of the sump and intakes with provision to observe any vortex activity at { G the intakes. The head losses associated with the screen cage and pipe intakes would be ; measured directly on the model. The model included both 24 inch diameter intakes, the l SIS sump, the screen cage and the immediate geometry of the RCB to assure accurate 1 reproduction of prototype flow conditions. n o i i
?
I
,, .? - , , .<. .
. ~L , ,
v Model tests undertaken for the Davis Besse, J.M. Farley, ANO-2, Son Onofre, Midiond, Polo Verde and Comanche Peck nuclear plants have demonstrated the
; ef fectiveness of a suitably placed grating coge in preventing the development of vortex , octivity at the intokes. A similar grating cage was used to preclude vortex formation at the intakes in the Waterford - 3 SIS sump model study.
A description of the SIS sump and intakes, o discussion of factors which offect sump performance, the rationale for the test program, o description of the test facility, test program and test results is presented in the remainder of this report. i
.1 a
3 R I f I
?
' i U ..
~<
v,Lo um cArmc A m wouucLAtum w Er.tm 7 S.0 DESCRIPTION OF SIS SUMP AND INTAKES O) ( Waterford Unit 3 contains a single SIS sump located on the south side of the RCB, see Figure 1. The sump is 10 ft 6 in wide and 17 ft 6 in. long. The sump depth varies from 4 f t iI in. on the south side to 5 ft 0 in. on the north side. The sump contains two 24 in. diameter intakes located along the outer wall 4 ft 0 in. on either side of the sump centerline, Figure 2. Eoch intake serves one redundant half of the CSS and SIS. The CS pump draws 2250 US gpm at runout. The SIS consists of a LPSI and a HPSI pump drawing S500 US gpm and 890 US gpm, respectively, at runout. Only the CS and HPSI pumps normally take suction from the SIS sump during the recirculation mode. The SIS sump is covered by a screen cage in the form of a rectangular box, Figure
- 3. The cage is located symmetrically with respect to the SIS sump. Another screen divides the SIS sump and interior of the screen cage vertically along the north-south center axis. The support steel is all on the west side of the center screen. All screen used in the prototype was 18 go. square wire mesh at 8 wires per inch.
(
- Large debris is prevented from entering the SIS sump area by a grating floor, l
} Figure 4, at elevation -4'-0 MSL supported on a grid of strue. ural steel beams, Figure 5. !
l {'I The grating is rectangular, welded type with 15 in. by 3/16 in. bearing bars spaced I 3/16 j I I l i e in. on centers with crossbars spaced not more than 4 in. on centers. The only opening in ' I the grating floor in the vicinity of the SIS sump is the stairs. The SIS sump is bounded by concrete shield walls on the east, west and north sides, l and by the containment vessel wall on the south, Figure 6. The main flow paths are through partial openings on the east and west sides. Immediately outside the screen cage the sump is surrounded by a ring of Trisodium Phosphate Dodecchydrate (TSP) baskets as . shown in Figure 2. l i b v i l L____ _ _ . _ _ . _ _. - _ - _ - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - -
E v.LLitan cANAr>A em , x tauonommEs tTo g 6.0 FACTORS AFFECTING ECCS RECIRCULATION SUMP PERFORMANCE 6.1 Regulatory Guide 1.82 Requirements Regulatory guide 1.82 states that: " Pump intake locations in the sump should be carefully considered to prevent degrading effects, such as vortexing, on the pump per formance". Two degrading actions are possible, ingestion of air and/or high intake head losses, which con lead to the avai! bie Net Positive Suction Head (NPSH) at the pumps being less than required. 6.2 Factors Cousing increased Entrance Losses intake head losses are traditionally accounted for in the design of a pumping system by calculating the entrance loss based on published intake loss coefficients for a particular intake configuration. Such coefficients are normally based on measurements taken with near ideal approoch flow conditions. Intake head losses may be increased above design values by adverse flow conditions i
'O s /
in the vicinity of the intake, including: i f , i h31
- a. increased approach velocities; k i b. asymmetric approach flow; i j
- c. separated flow and/or cavitation;
- d. strong circulation and/or vortices.
1
, The Waterford - 3 SIS intake velocity will be 2.53 fps for operation of both the CS {
and HPSI pumps. In the unlikely event that the LPSI pumps also take suction from the ! sump, the intake velocity will increase to 6.97 fps. With the velocity head as a function f of the square of the velocity, on increase in the loss coefficient above design values will { I only result in significantly higher losses in absolute terms for high intake velocities. ' h
, Neither of the above values is considered to be a high intake velocity. I l ;
i 6.3 Factors Affecting Vortex Formation I
)
i i : 1 There are two classes of vortices which occur at pump intakes, internal vortices and air entraining vortices. Intemal vortices form from solid boundaries such as the sump i l l I Q. y/ floor or sidewalls. Intake losses are inevitably higher when on internal vortex is present. y
. y:
I 4
, Air entraining vortices form from a free surface and cause the same degrading ef fects as ;
c.i b7 E mJ C AN ADA mN AL'UC L ABC 4 AT ONE F LT 9 intemal vortices. In addition, air entraining vortices cause air to be ingested into the q pump which could result in decreased flow. LJ Studies of vortex formation have been conducted by several investigators, see list , of selected references. The majority present test results as a function of CL, the intake head loss coefficient; the depth of water over the intake; the circulation number of the flow approaching the intake; the Reynolds Number; some combination of the above parameters. The performance of an intake, as represented by the head loss coefficient CL, is usually described (Amphlett (1976) and Chang (1976)) as: CL = f (local geometry, rmax,NR, N7 , Nw) where: j Local Geometry = f (D, h, b)
= Radial Reynolds No. = 20 NR vD i
Np = Circulation No. = Dr l q ! 2 0h ' o Nw = Weber No. = 24 { nD o , i rmax = radius of the tank (or sump in which the intake is located or maximum I l ; radius of circulation in the vicinity of the intake) D = intake diameter ;
! h = depth of submergence of intake !
1 > b = height of intake above sump floor I O = discharge ; i
- P = circulation strength = 2 n Vt r i
i l Vt = tangential velocity ! I i j r = radial distance 1
= kinematic viscosity of water l- v
! 0 = density of water I i i ,
o = surface tension of water
- i Studies by Dcggett and Keulegan (1974) and Anwar et al (1977) have clearly shown
() that circulation is necessary near an intake for a vortex to form. Circulation is caused by j 9 asymmetric approach flows, dead zones with the associated recirculation and eddy ! '
1 1 1 V.E ST E RtJ CMJ A D A HYDP, i h iC L A E:OR ATORIES L T D shedding in the wake of flow obstructions. Any increase in circulation enhances the () liklihood of vortex formation md development. The Reynolds number can be used to estimate the relative extent to which viscous forces influence the flow conditions. The effect of viscosity is twofold. On the one hand, viscosity resists the developrnent of vortices by dissipating energy near the core of the vortex. On the other hand, viscosity tends to promote circulation and hence vortex formation at irregular boundaries cnd shear zones as mentioned above. The Weber number is a measure of the relative influence of surface tension on the flow. Surface tension effects are restricted to flows with free surfaces. : For approach flows characterized by a free surface, the effect of the depth of . submergence, h, is expressed by the Froude number ,
~
NFr
- 1
/ gh (o) where V is the intake velocity and g is the acceleration due to gravity. The work of l
Daggett and Keulegan (1974), Anwar g o_I (1977), and Zielinski and Villemonte (1968) have shown that the circulation required to initiate an air entraining vortex decreases as the submergence decreases. In other words, the required circulation for the onset of an air I entraining vortex decreases as the Froude number increases. ! Circulation, viscosity, surface tension and local geometry are not all of equal importance in vortex formation for the range of intake operating conditions considered. I Work by Dagget and Keulegan (1974) and others have shown that for high radial Reynolds l number (N R > 104) and moderate vclues of circulation, typical operating ranges for the recirculation intakes, the effects of surface tension and viscosity are relatively small. For this operating range, vortex formation is essentially independent of the Reynolds and l Weber numbers. The intake performance and hence formation of vortices reduces to a j function of three parameters: the local geometry; the maximum circulation radius; the ,
! I strength of circulation of the approaching flow. ,
J
. Il i
h U
,t C)
J q q q
'I_
'/,'EST E hf 4 C AN ADA HYCH AULIC L ABOR AT ORIES LT D 7.0 RATIONALE FOR MODEL CONFIGURATION AND TEST PROGRAM (o) 7.1 Model Scale it had been found in previous studies by WCHL for the Davis Besse NGS that the vortex formation process cannot readily be modelled at scales below I:l; that is, reliable predictions as to presence or obsence of vortices cannot be made below this scale. A 1:1 scale model was used for this study to minimize scale effects in modelling vortex formation.
The model flow rates were based on the following prototype flow rates for three pmp suction combinations: Pumps Prototype Flow Rate US gpm i T I CS 2250 ; CS + HPSI 3140 i CS + HPSI + LPSI 8640 ! 4 j Vortex formation was evaluated in the model at various flow rates for both cold water and water heated up to 1800F. Increasing the water temperature reduced the viscosity and hence its retarding effect on vortex formation. i Within the prototype Reynolds number range, the variation of the intake loss coefficient with temperature and small changes in flow is small. For test purposes the intake loss coefficient was measured at the prototype Reynolds number corresponding to i
; the maximum postulated containment temperature.
Water temperatures in the containment after a postulated LOCA could reach as ; high as 217 F. The maximum water temperature attainable in the facility was 180 F I with testing at lower temperatures (150 - 180 F) of ten desirable. To overcome the p difference in fluid kinematic viscosity between prototype temperature and model y , A
v.t ~ m.L:.r.,v: w : ~, t us
- w i2 temperature for the purpose of achieving the prototype Reynolds number range, the fl model flow rates in each intake were enhanced beyond prototype flow rates in the following manner:
! QM=OPx vM "P
where: QM = model flow rate OP = prototype flow rate VM = kinematic viscosity of water at model temperature vp = kinematic viscosity of water at 2170 F. The degree of subcooling has an important effect on the prototype NPSH since the j vapor pressure changes significantly with temperature below the saturation point.
' However, the SIS sump study only investigated the head loss associated with the intakes.
Since the degree of subcooling has no significant effect on the intake loss coefficient, the s effect of subcooling on the NPSH was outside the scope of the SIS sump model study. I i 7.2 Model Boundary Selection ; i , I i l in section S.2 the factors offecting head loss and vortex formation were discussed. ' Intake head losses are mainly a function of circulation and non-uniform flow in the ! I vicinity of the intake. Thus to successfully model intake losses and vortex - formation, the far-field conditions must be duplicated only so for as they influence the near-field flow. f In most ECCS sump designs, the screen cage is constructed of one or more layers of grating as well as screens to act as a trash rack. WCHL has demonstrated in the past that grating is an effective flow-straightener and largely decouples the flow conditions in the containment area from the flow conditions in the sump, especially with the trash rock in a blocked condition. On this basis, the trash rack itself may of ten be considered as ! the model boundary, and it is therefore unnecessary to model details of the containment i outside the trash rack. i i
?
The screen cage design for the Waterford - 3 SIS sump does not include any grating, so no credit can be taken for flow straightening by the cage. The grating floor installed above the cage does not affect flow below this floor level. Therefore, the containment !
l
, . , : e. % , " . , - ,m )
13 area in the vicinity of the SIS sump must be included in the model since it could offect Q Q. flow conditions in the SIS sump. l The dominant effect on opproach flows is provided by the interior shield walls to the east and west of the SIS sump, particularly the west wall which provides only two relatively small flow paths, Figure 2. The flow occelerating effect of these two walls on the opproach flow will remove any influence of conditions outside the immediate vicinity of the SIS sump. Therefore structural members, piping, volves, etc. on the upstream sides of the east and west shield walls were not modelled. Only a single 3 in. NPS pipe crossing both flow openings in the west wall was included, Figure 2. The reactor drain tank was also not modelled; instead a vertical wall was installed, Figure 2, to simulate the dead zone created by the tank. i
! All electrical boxes, piping and conduit larger than 2 inches in diameter were modelled in the area between the two shield walls and the sump. The IS prototype TSP baskets which surround the screen cage are constructed of 80 mesh screen. Since flow through these baskets would be negligible, the baskets were modelled as solid boxes constructed of galvanized sheet metal, Figure 6. This approach is conservative.
i 7.3 Containment Flow Distribution l I There are only two flow paths to the SIS sump in the Waterford - 3 containment area, Figure 2. The distribution of flow in these paths will depend on a number of factors
! including location of any pipe breaks and flow blockage in the containment area. There ! are three extreme conditions:
a) flow evenly distributed b) flow all from east c) flow all from west i
; These extreme cases are expected to lead to the worst hydraulic conditions and thus were L i i l tested on the model. [
l : O !
l l
. v. i m n c m.;% m : .. u i c v., +-iv%st70
,4 l 1
1 1 8.0 TEST FACILITY (h v 8.1 General The test facility consisted of a 1:1 scale model of the SIS sump, two intakes, screen cage with sump dividing screen and containment geometry as shown in Figure 2. The sump model was bounded on the south side by the containment vessel wall and included both the east and west shield walls. The shield wall separating the containment and SIS sumps was located just beyond the model boundary represented by the tank wall. Plan and section views of the test facility are shown in Figures 2 and 3. The concrete tank is 60 f t long, 25 f t wide and 14-l/2 ft deep. A 24 in, diameter diffuser at each end of the tank provided approach flow to the model. These diffusers were independently controllable via butterfly valves on the outside of the tank. Two gas furnaces, each rated at 2.4S x 106 BTU /hr, were used to heat the water in the facility. 8.2 Model Construction All items such as electrical boxes, TSP baskets, stairs, piping and conduit greater 3 i
' than 2 inches in diameter - referred to hereafter as bric-a-brac - were modelled in the i I
vicinity of the SIS sump. As explained in Section 7.2 only items located between the east l and west shield walls and the SIS sump were reproduced in the model. The water level j detector was located in the northeast corner of the SIS sump as shown in Figure 2. i i The screen cage, grating support steel, handrails, stairs and other bric-a-brac were i all constructed from prototype drawings. In some cases the structural members on the t model were thinner than but of the same major dimensions as the prototype, e.g., 3"x3"x3/16" angle iron was used instead of 3"x3"x3/8". The conduit and piping were i modelled with galvanized sheet metai duct. The interior shield walls and containment j j vessel wall were constructed of galvanized sheet metal on an aluminum angle frame. l i Installation details for minor bric-a-brac items conformed to information collected on a '
} site visit to the Waterford - 3 plant during construction in July 1981.
l ' l r 1 During model construction the location of the TSP basket directly north of the ' n (j screen cage door on the east side of the SIS sump was found to conflict with the electrical j ; r l I
~
l
- . c u m c :, a :, w ' u m m i t ' -.T g box along the east shield wall. Af ter consultation with Ebasco the TSP basket in question
, was moved approximately 2 inches further west, nearer the SIS sump.
8.3 Inteke Description The sump was formed of welded steel plate with clear acrylic viewing windows set flush into two sides. The intakes themselves were modelled in nominal 24 in. diameter FRP pipe. The actual ID of this pipe was 24-l/4 in while the ID of the prototype intake is 22-l/2 in. (24 in. OD with 3/4 in. woll). The difference between the pipe sizes is not significant in terms of their approach flow conditions and vortex formation. A correction for the difference in diameters was made in the calculations of prototype velocity head and head loss, see Section 9.3. For test purposes the west and east intakes were designated train A and train 3, respectively, Figure 2. The original design called for the intake pipes to be mitered at an angle of 45e. However, based on previous experience with intake designs, WCHL recommended that the ends of each intake be left squa're unless model testing indicated modifications were O required. The lengths of train A and train B intake were 52 5/8 and 52 3/4 in., respectively, measured from the face of the south SIS sump wall. The shield pipes which enclose the 24 in. suction lines were modelled by 36 in. l fiberglass pipe with a 375 in. OD, Figure 7. An ellipsoidal pipe cap completed the !
! shoulder of each shield pipe. The model shield pipes terminated at the SIS sump wall. '
The two intake suction lines were reduced to 16 in. diameter outside the SIS sump (see Figures 2 and 3). These lines then exited the tank via pipe sleeves mounted in the , steel tank door. l I To accomodate the postulated failure condition of a LPSI pump taking suction from the SIS sump either through train A or train B, a piping system was developed permitting the largest of the three recirculating pumps in the facility to draw from either intake, i with a pair of butterfly valves controlling the suction source. This piping configuration is
; shown in Figure 8. !
Discharges from the three recirculating pumps were measured by mecns of ' ! stainless steel orifice meter plates and U-tube monometers. These meters were ; O iedividueiix caiibreted in site egarest a re8cretery standard erifice before the test projram commenced. 1
a i m u ww w . . , + a.u n tw
!C 8.4 Screen Blockoge f
The Waterford - 3 screen ccge uses screen on the top as well as on the sides. l However, according to Regulatory Guide 1.82, "no credit should be taken in computation of the available surface area for any top horizontal screen". Therefore the top of the l screen cage was completely blocked for all tests except those specifically designed to l create vortices by testing extreme blockage conditions. Fifty percent blockage j configurations were calculated on the basis of the vertical screen area only. l In order to simulate screen blockage by floating debris, neutrally buoyant debris and sinking debris, different sections of the screen cage could be fitted with blockage panels of various configurations, see Figure 9. The blockage panels were constructed of sheet metal and attached directly to the screens using sheet metal screws inserted into the wire mesh. The 3 in. vertical strips were connected at top and bottom to form panels which were then attached in the same manner. The design of the model required provision for changing the blockage on the screen n) ( cage without draining the water from the tank. This was accomplished by building the ; grating floor directly above the screen cage in two removable sections which could be i stored on a rack at the end of the tank. One section included part of the stairway i adjacent to the sump. A single hook was carefully located on each floor sections so that , it could be engaged by a ring on the monorail crane which runs above the tank centerline. l t With these floor sections removed, the screen cage itself could be lif ted out and blockage i plates changed. I Four guide-posts were welded to the steel floor just outside the SIS sump and inside l the corners of the screen cage. These posts leaned inwards at the top for easier positioning and guided the screen cage as it was lowered so that it would always be : accurately located with respect to the SIS sump af ter every change in blockage. Removal of the two sections of grating floor - the grating along with its support l ! steel - necessitated the introduction of structural members not present on the prototype. ' Two 12 in. by 3 in.1-beams were used to frame the sections of grating to be removed on f their north and south sides, as shown in Figure 5. l Ine presence of the guide posts for the cage and two additional structural members I (~ , l \ V further obstructed the flow. The flow disturbances thus created make the results of these l t o tests conservative. ;
m I '
,,I t
- m - dd?At1't i* o. r i ' ' IE lh LIO g7 8.5 Test Observations (v) Surface flow phenomena were observed from the v,alkways surrounding the model.
Flow phenomeno within the SIS sump could only be observed from the observation chamber which formed the north and west walls of the SIS sump. The chamber, constructed of 3/16 in. steel plate on a channel frame, was of rectangular cross-section measuring 5 f t 2 in. x 3 f t 2 in. inside. Access to the chamber wns via a ladder in a vertical shaf t built into the west interior shield wall. The six windows in the viewing chamber were each 34 in. x 14 in. and were mounted vertically in pairs, one pair directly facing each intake and one pair in the SIS sump wall adjacent to the train A intake, Figure 7. The windows employed 5/8 in. toughened glass as the pressure giczing and a 3/4 in. acrylic safety window on the chamber side, as well as a second 3/4 in. acrylic panel mounted in the sump wall. All three panes were mounted within a single frame. O Lights were set up at unused windows in the viewing chamber to provide illumination for photography and videotoping, and for vortex observation. 8.6 Test Measurements intake and screen losses were determined from the piezometric pressure ; , measurements indicated on Figure 2. l l l Tops I and 2 on the diffusers at the ends of the tank were connected to either side l of a U-tube monumeter and, after individual calibration, were used to balance the flow l distribution from each end of the tank as required. l Top number 3 terminated on the inside of the steel door in the tank wall, and was used to determine the reference water level outside the screen coge. ; The static head inside the screen cage was determined by four interconnected ! pressure tops in the floor of the SIS sump, close to the walls and removed from any impinging flow paths. These lines were combined into one, designated number 4.
- t, t ./ The standard method for intake loss measurement required that sets of pressure .
Y, taps be mounted on straight runs of suction line a minimum of 20 to 30 pipe diameters ;
1
- uc .,v, w,: ,
_to u. L u i: gg 1 downstream of any bends or other flow disturbances. The pipe friction factor and hence friction losses were calculated from these piezometric readings. Bend losses were O caiceieted esimo enoineeries desien seides. sebtrecting the frictioe iesses, bend iosses, and velocity head from the measured piezometric head loss gave the head loss associated with the intake. The difficulty with this method is that interactions between piping components must be carefully calculated, allowing for different axial planes, spacing, etc.. In addition, the sum of these component losses is often larger than the intake loss resulting in a large uncertainty in the intake head loss measurement obtained. Since numerous bends in different planes were required to bring the suction lines from the model SIS sump outside the tank, a different approach to intake loss measureraent was taken on the Waterford - 3 model. Pressure taps were installed in the walls of each intake pipe directly downstream of the lip, Figure 7; tops 5 to iI on train A and tops 12 to 18 on train B as shown in Figure 10. Th6 pressure readings from these taps were used to determine the location of the vena contracta downstream of the intake lip, (} and to derive values for the pressure and hence the velocity at the vena contracta. Knowledge of the velocity at the vena contracta and the mean pipe velocity derived from the discharge allowed the intake head loss to be obtained. For a detailed discussion of the intake head loss calculation, see Appendix A. Tcps 3 through 18 were all connected to a vertical manometer board mounted on i the outside of the tank. The scale of this board was carefully referenced to the model so that prototype elevations could be accurately derived from the readings. 1 Additional taps were located upstream and downstream of the discharge orifice on I each of the three pumps. U-tube monometers filled with Mercury (SG 13.55) were connected to these tops to enable the discharge of each pump to be measured. t l' l I i O 4 f ( -
, J . n n c t. . e.
. c;,. , , . t .. t ..- mts tm l
9.0 TEST PROGRAM 0 9.i objectives The purpose of the hydraulic model studies was to test the Waterford - 3 SIS sump and to modify the design, if necessary, to assure vortex control and acceptcble head losses. This objective was achieved through the following test program: ,
- i. Series I - Vortex Tests k
~
Ascertaining any modifications to the intakes required to ensure that the intakes will be free of vortices and other unacceptable hydraulic conditions. i i Documenting the effectiveness of any modifications and of the grating cage ' over the intakes in preventing vortices and other poor hydraulic conditions. i /G ii. Series 11 - Headioss Tests %J Directly measuring on a full scale model the head losses incurred by the screen cage, grating cage and intakes during a variety of postulated flow , conditions with 50 percent of the screen area blocked by simulated debris. ; I iii. Series ill - Confidence Limits Tests Establishing, through the repeated performance of a single test from Series l 11, the repeatability and standard deviation of error of the results obtained i in the intake loss measurements. , 9.2 Test Conditions . The test conditions for Series I,11 and 111 are tabulated in Tables I, 2 and 3. A description of each test series appears below. [ t i 9.2.1 Test Series i O wits tse imtewe vmoretected sx e oretim9 ccoe. verievs scree" siecuc9es -ere imposed. SIS sump flow conditions much worse with respect to vortexing than any m
. . .7 m .
.ou : Au - ' aia! '
?n expected in the plant were obtained by blocking approximatelv 90 percent of the screen
, cage area including both horizontal and vertical screens. Sht. t metal panels were fitted C over the cage leaving one panel open to reproduce blockage configurations A to K in Figure 9.
Each blockage condition was tested without the grating cage at minimum water level, El - 3 f t 8 in. MSL, with cold water and flow from both ends of the facility. Train A and B flows were first set to 8640 and 3140 US gpm, respectively, and then reversed for each blockage condition. The two flows, 8640 and 3140 US gpm, represented the largest prototype intake flow rates, and as such, the most favorable conditions for possible vortex formation. These tests are tabulated in Table I, Tests I - 20. The two " worst-case" conditions chosen from the twenty tests were then repeated with hot water and grating cages over the intakes to verify vortex suppression. Approach flows from both ends of the facility were tested to determine any flow distribution effect. The ef fect of flow discharge was demonstrated by testing at the facility maximum for each intake.
/s
/
9.2.2 Test Series !! l This test series was carried out to establish loss coefficients for the screens, grating cage and intakes, with 50 percent vertical screen blockage in four rationally determined configurations, namely:
- a. debris which is uniformly distributed throughout the water column;
- b. floating debris;
- c. non-buoyant entrained debris;
- d. a combination of floating and non-buoyant debris which is directed at a particular location on the screen cage by the approach flow, i.e., from the east or from the west, Figure 2.
In addition tests were carried out with no blockage of the vertical screens. Blockage configurations are shown in Figure 9 L-R, and do not take credit for the horizontal screen area. i : Series 11 tests considered seven different intake discharge combinations bt m () four postulated prototype flow rates: 0, 2250, 3140 and 8640 US gpm. In each ca . . i h
'I
,.i it a e , , , , ..4 4 ,, u' .. Et'D 7;
i water temperature was close to the facility maximum, and the model flow rates were
- t ex augmented to achieve the prototype Reynolds number range, see section 7.l. i b ,
Series ll tests were carried out with water at 159 to 179 0F; at the minimum water l level of El -3 f t 8 in. MSL; of the maximum water level of El + 0 ff 6 in. MSL; and with flow from the east, west, and evenly distributed. Test conditions are tabulated in Table 2, Tests 11-1 to 11-252. The grating cages were in place throughout Test Series ll to provide vortex suppression. 9.2.3 Test Series Ill Reproducibility in the test results was assessed by the determination of the mean I head loss coefficient and 95 percent confidence limits obtained from a series of 20 tests carried out at one of the 50 percent blockage conditions chosen from Series 11. The configuration chosen was M, Figure 9; the test was a repetition of test il - 31. p V Test Series til was carried out with water at 174 - 175 oF. Test conditions are tabulated in Table 3. l 9.3 Test Procedure g The procedure used in operating the model was as follows: With the relevant combinations of blockage, flow origin, grating cages and operating intakes set as required, the pumps were started. l Manometer lines were bled, and flow meter manometer readings were checked to , ensure correct flow in the two intakes given the operating tcnk water temperature. Af ter necessary adjustments, the flow was allowed to stabilize before the required measurements were taken md flow observations made and recorded. Video and/or j photographic records were taken if required. l
, l l \
During a sequence of tests for a given blockage configuration, discharges werc / ,i chcnged without shutting off the pumps in between tests. However, for Test Series ill, all .i V three pumps were throttled down to shutoff af ter each test cad the discharge monometers were bled. [' i
~ ~~ '
,, :: , .. :. i . .
22 Piezometer and manometer readings were corrected for temperature differences
,-- before final data reduction. Fitting a curve to the individual pressure measurements at Y the piezometer taps on each intake enabled the piezometric head at the vena contracta to i
be obtained. The velocity at the vena contracta was then calculated using the following l equation: l l Vvc = Cy / 29 (hs - hve) where: l Vvc = velocity at vena contracta of intake h ve = piezometric head at vena contracta of intake
, hs = piezametric head in SIS sump i i
Cy = velocity coef ficient g = acceleration of gravity = 32.174 f t/s2 l Use of the velocity coefficient in the coove expression accounts for the head losses upstream of the vena contracta. The velocity coefficient is defined as the ratio of the ' actual velocity at the vena contracta, Vve, to the ideal velocity, Vvc', I e- i l I < l Cv = Vvc i Vve' , I An overage value of Cy equal to 0.975 was used (see Appendix A). Knowing the velocity at the vena contracta and the pipe velocity downstream, the ; intake loss coefficient was calculated as follows: ! CL= l - 2 +1 ; 2 Cv Cc2 Cc : i
,' where: ,i ' ; i i
i CL = intake loss coef ficient Ce = contraction coefficient, by continuity equal to the ratio of the pipe , a velocity to the velocity at the vena contracta. j
't See Appedix A for details of the intake loss calculation. ;
I l
.,i r r n u ces.t.t v. m r av u t ic t t.uc n e.1 on f :, t T D 23 Prototype head losses were calculated from model loss data by: ,
O Prototype head loss = model loss coefficient CL x prototype velocity head l i l l i l O . 1 1 l l t 1 1 O . l . 1
w Tt o n w u r>A n i n <^ ht m m ;i 5 L T U 24 10.0 TEST RESULTS (-- D) 10.1 Calibration For calibration of the orifice meters on the three pump discharge lines, a standard orifice plate was installed in the 24 in return line at the back of the tank (see Figure 2). Two U-tube manorneters were connected in parallel across this orifice meter. A 50 in. manometer using Meriam fluid (SG 2.95) was used for the lower discharges, and a 36 in. manometer using Mercury (SG 13.55) was used for the higher range of discharges. All three orifice meters were individually calibrated against the standard orifice meter at discharges ranging from 3,007 to 7,531 US gpm. For each discharge, O, a differential pressure head, ah , was recorded. All calibration data for each line were then combined, and a " power curve" formula derived for each in the form of Q= a ( A h)b, where o and b are constants. Af ter calibration was complete, the standard orifice was removed from the 24 in. line. These formulae were used for calculations of discharge for y the remainder of the test program. i The dif fusers at the ends of the tank were each similarly calibrated against known orifice flows. The discharge-head curves derived for each each were then combined so that balanced flow from both ends could be set for any discharge using a differential monometer. 10.2 Test Series I g Test Series I investigated the susceptibility of the intakes to vortexing by extensively blocking both the vertical and horizontal screens creating SIS sump flow cond;tions w'iich are much worse with respect to vortexing than any expected in Waterford - 3. Since the flow acceleration caused by the 90 percent blockage condition effectively removed the influence of flow conditions upstream, the grating sections above the screen cage were removed during Series i Tests to expedite testing and better facilitate model observation. 3 i 10.2.1 Tests I-I to I-20 O V Tests I-I to 1-20 were carried out with cold water at the minimum water level. A , series of 90 percent blockage schemes were imposed on the screen cage without a grating ,
a ;i v.c y ,e . 1 o . , 11-25 cage protecting the intakes for two discharge combinations and evenly distributed f.ow from both ends. ~ g3 V t i in each test careful and thorough observations were made over a period of ten to twenty minutes to determine the presence and severity of vortices and other unocceptable k l flow phenomena. Of ten visual observation of a vapor-core vortex wa . accompanied by a
" crackling, sizzling" sound. The observations for Test Series I are summarized in Table 1.
Vapor-core vortices originating from the SIS sump walls and observation windows were observed in 9 of the 20 tests. Vortices were observed on both intakes but never at the same time. The most intense vortexing occurred in Tests 1-5,1-10 and 1-13. Vortices in these tests were recorded on video-tape in addition to the written description on the test data sheets. Typically, a vortex would consist of a relatively large vapor-core head at the wall ' with a gradual reduction in diameter and visibility along the tail. The vortex was i
.; observed to move within a limited region, alternately growing and decaying with time.
p Depending on the vortex size and strength, the vapor-core was observed to enter the intake or terminate short of the mouth of the pipe. { Photographs of the sidewall vertex in test 1-13 appear as Figures 11 and 12. f. 1 i
; 10.2.2 Tests 1-21 to I-28 l
l The two " worst case" vortices selected for the vortex-control tests were tests 1-10 and 1-13. Crating cages were fitted over the intakes to demonstrate the effectiveness of the grating in eliminating these " worst case" vortices. The grating cages were constructed of steel grating made from I-l/4 in. x 3/I6 in. bars,1-3/16 in. o.c., with round bar at 4 in. o.c. as shown in Figures 13 and 14. In accordance with the preference stated by Ebosco, the grating cage was supported off the SIS sump floor. e i i Af ter the grating cages were installed on the intakes, the water in the facility was ! heated to approximately 160 0F to reduce the retarding effect of viscosity on vortex
\ l O
f
, P l
v.i m m cuane en r o tu o m m stin 26 formation. Four different tests were performed on each worst case blockage
~
em configuration. In each of these tests, prolonged observations were made from the viewing (V) chamber to ensure the absence of vortices. At the beginning of test 1-24, a brief bubble-core approximately 1/32 in. in diameter was observed originating from the east wall of the SIS sump. This incipient vortex core did not develop further, did not reach the grating cage and was not observed again during this test despite close scrutiny. The fact that the vortex core stopped short of the grating cage demonstrated the ability of the grating to eliminate the circulation required to sustain vortex activity. During this test the discharge on the train B intake was 1267I US gpm, the facility maximum. No vortex action was observed at any other time with the grating cages in place over the intakes. The grating cages were completely effective at eliminating all vortices at the intakes for the " worst case" conditions. No flow discharge or approach flow distribution effects were observed with respect to the grating cage performance.
/~
(j 10.3 Test Series 11 4 Tests ll-l to 11-252 were run with the blockage conditions and discharges noted in Section 9 and tabulated in Table 2. Blockage configurations are shown in Figure 9, L-R. . For test series ll-l to 11-42, blockages L and M, the grating sections above the { screen cage were lef t outside of the model by mistake. They were in place for all other i test s. The effect of this omission on the test results is not significant since at minimum water level the ef fect of the grating floor on the approach flow is negligible. In addition, operational difficulties with the diffusers forced tests 11-64, 11-67, 11-70, 11-73, 11-76, 11-79, , ll-82, ll-193, and 11-199, all with even flow distribution, to be initially postponed. These l tests were rescheduled for later in the test program. Inspection of the data, however, 1 showed no unusual head losses associated with the even distribution flow condition thus i these tests were omitted from the test program which was already rather extensive. l
; No vortices were observed in any test. The range of measured intake head losses, i
corrected tc prototype discharge are noted below: j _
- /m.
~
l
a unn .; ; ,, or 4 iet .. ,1o,o s t m 27 (V
)
Head Loss, f t Prototype Flow Rate Train A Train B US gpm 2250 0.053 - 0.063 0.050 - 0.064 3140 0.08 l - 0.127 0.065 - 0.150 8640 0.810 - 0.905 0.788 - 0.892 The upper limit for the head loss on train B at 3140 US gpm,0.150 f t, appears to be on anomalous value. If the results for tests 10 and iI on train B are discorded, then the ] upper limit for the prototype head loss drops to 0.123 f t. This value is in close agreement with that measured on train A at the same prototype flow rate. The head loss across the screens corrected to prototype discharge ranged from
, 0.000 f t to 0.098 f t for combined flows of 3140 and 11,780 US gpm, respectively. The smaller screen flow represented operation of only one intake at 3,140 US gpm. The larger flow of II,780 US gpm corresponded to combined intake flows of 3140 and 8640 US gpm.
At low flows, the screen loss was less than the smallest head that could be measured on the model,0.005 f t. i The highest values obtained for the screen loss occurred at blockage configurations O and R with the maximum discharge on train B and A, respectively. For these configurations, the maximum flow and 50 percent blockage were both on the same side of the SIS sump. In order to reach the intake on the blockage side of the SIS sump, the flow was required to pass through both the cage screens and the SIS sump dividing screen resulting in higher screen loss values. i l { !
- r I
' ~
- e. . n m cr.n e, n e, o u m o t t '+ ~ -
28 10.4 Test Series 111 b Test Series lil was designed to define the 95 percent confidence limits on the experimentally determined head losses using the worst condition from Series 11. Since no blockage configuration in Series 11 showed significantly larger head losses than any other configuration, Test 11-31 was arbitratily chosen for Series Ill. Test Il-31 was repeated 20 times to obtain mean intake head losses and screen loss with the associated 95 percent confidence intervals. The tests showed the following results: Prototype Flow Rate 95% Confidence Limits US gpm (o) Train A 8,640 0.842 f t < head loss < 0.849 f t Train B 3,140 0.108 ft < head loss < 0.l l0 f t i Screens I I,780 0.030 f t < head loss < 0.031 f t l 10.5 Experimental Accuracy - I Discharges measured by the orifice meters were accurate to within 1 I percent. e Temperature measurements were within 1 i F, and piezometric levels and manometer
- readings were within 10.005 ft of water.
l i The intake head loss was derived from measurement of the head at the vena i contracta and calculation of the overage pipe velocity from the pipe discharge. A ! l velocity coefficient of 0.975 was used. The estimated error in the head measurement at i the vena contracta was approximately 10.01 f t. The velocity derived from the discharge ' measurement was accurate to within 1 l%. The maximum vcriation in the velocity O coefficient is estimated to be less than 12% (see Appendix A for the range of values). t l > i l
- - - - - _ ____ _ . . _ -_-- - - - - - - - - - - - =
v.t -T f ? *. L AN AD A in ! ' . t Ab: I T ORIES LT D Based on the above estimates of error in the test data, the error in the maximum recorded head loss of 0.905 f t at a prototype discharge of 8640 US gpm is estimated to be 10.10 f t. At a prototype discharge of only 2250 US gpm, the error in the maximum head loss measurement of 10.064 is estimated to be 10.01 f t, a relatively larger value. The estimated error in the screen loss is 10.003 f t. Prepared By: v
^v7 4'D "
D.J. Bergstrom, P.Eng. Project Engineer Approved By: S.R.M. Gardiner, Ph.D., P.Eng. - Manager, Special Projects 5 i I i h F , t t' O :
w n . u .r. w. w w : m m t w" :n ni s L w LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES l I l. A j. son, H. 1948; " Centrifugal and Other Rotodynamic Pumps." (Chapman and Hall, London).
- 2. Akers and Crump; "The Vortex Drop," Joumal, institution of Civil Engineers, August,1960, p. 443.
- 3. Al'Tshul, A.D., and Margolin, M.S.; "Effect of Vortices on the Discharge Coefficient for Flow of a Liquid Through an Orifice:" (translation),
Gidrotekhnieheskoe Stroitel'stvo, No. 6, June,1968, p. 32.
- 4. Amphlett, M.B.; " Air Entraining Vortices at a Horizontal Intake", Report No.
OD/7, Hydraulic Research Station, Wallingford, April,1976.
- 5. Anwar, H.O., Wellur, J.A. and Amphlett, M.B.; " Similarity of Air Entraining Vortices at a Horizontal intake," Report # IT 166, BHR Station, Wallingford, June, 1977.
- 6. Anwar, H.O.; " Flow in a Free Vortex", Water Power, April,1965.
- 7. Anwar, H.O.; " Formation of a Weak Vortex", Joumal of Hydraulic Research, Vol.
4, No. I,1966. w 8. Anwar, H.O.; " Vortices at Low Head intakes", Water Power, Nov.,1967, p. 455 - (J x 457.
- 9. Anwar, H.O.; " Prevention of Vortices at intakes", Water Power, Oct.,1968, p.
393.
- 10. Anwar, H.O.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow:" by Paul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE.
Vol. 95, No. HY 1. Proc. Paper 6323, Jan.,1969, p. 568 - 570. fl. Baines, W.D., and Peterson, E.G.; "An Investigation of Flow Through Screens", Trans. ASME, Vol. 73,194,1948, p. 527.
- 12. Berge, J.P., "Enquete sur la Formation de Vortex et Autres Anomalies d'ecoulements dans une enceinte avec ou sans Surface Libre", Societe Hydrotechnique de France - Section Machines - Group de travail No.10, Nov.,
!964.
- 13. Berge, J.P. "A study of Vortex Formation and Other Abnormal Flow in a Tank With and Without a Free Surface", La Houille Blanches, Grenoble, France, No. I,1966, p.13 - 40.
- 14. Binnie, A.M., and Hockings, G.A.; " Laboratory Experiments on Whirlpools", ;
Proceedings, Royal Society, London, Series A, Vol.194, Sept.,1948. p. 398 -415. I
- 15. Binnie, A.M., and Davidson, J.F., "The Flow Under Gravity of a Swirling Liquid Through an Orifice Plate", Proceedings, Royal Society, London Series A, Vol.199, 1949, p. 443 - 457.
O is. Brewer, D. " vortices in eumn Sumns". The Aiien Eeeineerins Review. Merch. i957.
~^ ~~
l v.twn m ctw xa oa>w an t;i~ w 'Lw
- 17. Chang, E.; Review of Literature on Drain Vortices in Cylindrical Tanks, Report TN1342, BHR A, March 1976.
- 18. Cornell, W.G; " Losses in Flow Normal to Plane Screens." Trans. ASME, J. of Basic Engineering, Vol 80,1958, pp. 791 - 799.
- 19. Denny, D.F., 1953, British Hydromechanics Research Assoc. Report, RR. 430, Preliminary Report on the Formation of Air-entraining Vortices in pump Section Wells.
- 20. Denny, D.F.,1953, British Hydromechnaics Research Assoc. Research Report R.R.
465, " Experiments with Air in Centrifugal Pumps".
- 21. Denny, D.F., and Young, C.A.J. "The Prevention of Vortices and Swirl in Intakes",
Proceedings, lAHR 7th Congress, Lisbon,1957.
- 22. Denny, D.F., "An Experimental Study of Air Entraining Vortices in Pump Sumps",
Proceedings of Inst. of Mechanical Engineers, Vol.170, No. 2,1956.
- 23. Dagget L.L. and Keulegan, C.H., " Similitude Conditions in Free Surface Vortex Formations", Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol.100, No. HYI I, Nov.
1974, pp.1565 - 1581.
- 24. Donaldson, C. du p., and Sullivan, R.D. " Examination of the Solutions of the
- Novier-S tokes Equations for a Class of Three-dimensional Vortices, Part 1:
3 Velocity Distribution for Steady Motion". Proceedings, Heat Transfer and Fluid (d Mechanics Institute, Stanford University Press, Calif.,1960, p.16 - 30.
- 25. Einstein, H.A., and Li, H.: " Steady Vortex Flow in a Real Fluid", La Houille Blanche, Vol.10, No. 4, Aug. - Sept.,1955, p. 483 - 496.
- 26. Folsom, R.C.,1940 University of California, Pump Testing Laboratories, Technical Memo. No. 6, HP-14, "Some Performance Characteristics of Deep-well Turbine Pumps".
I 27. Fraser, W.H. 1953 Trans. ASME, Vol. 75, No. 4, p. 643, " Hydraulic Problems ) Encountered in intake Structures of Vertical Wet-Pit Pumps and Methods Leading ! to Their Solution".
- 28. Gordon, J.L.; " Vortices at intakes." Water Power, April,1970, p.137 - 138.
l 29. Guiton, P., "Covitation dans les Pompes", La Houille Blanches, Nov.,1962, No. 6. l 30. Haindi, K., " Contribution to Air-entrainment by a Vortex", Paper 16-D, International Association for Hydraulic Research, Montreal,1959. l 31. Hattersley, R.T., " Hydraulic Design of Pump Intakes", HY 2, March,1965, p. 223 - 249. l l l 32. Hattersley, R.T., " Factors of Inlet Channel Flow affecting the Performance of a : l ! Pumping Plant", Report No. 23, Water Research Lab., University of New South 'l Wales, Australia, Sept.,1960. I 1 Y l Holtorf, G., "The Free Surface and the Conditions of Similitude for a Vortex", La " 1 (g) 33. Hoviille Blanche, Vol.19, No. 3,1964, p. 337 - 384. i j
-- - "~ ~ ' ' '
i
! l
..t. m ; o ce. .em ., s t ea
- 4 istm
- 34. lversen, H.W.; " Studies of Submergence Requirements of High Specific Speed .
Pumps", Transactions, ASME, Vol 75,1953. i 35. Kaufman, Fluid Mechanics McGraw-Hill, p. 265 and 279.
- 36. Keulegan, C.H., and Daggett, L.L., "A Note on Gravity Head Viscometer",
Miscellaneous Paper H-74-3, United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Miss., Mar.,1974.
- 37. Kolf, R.C. " Vortex Flow from Horizontal Thin-Plate Orifices", thesis presented to the University of Wisconsin, at Madison, Wis., in 1956, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philisophy.
- 38. Kolf, R.C., and Zielinski, P.B., "The Vortex Chamber as on Automatic Flow Control Device", Journal of the Hydraulics Divison, ASCE, Vol. 85, No. HYl2, Proc. Paper 2310, Dec.,1959.
- 39. Lawton, F.L.; " Factors influencing Flow in Large Conduits", Report of the Task Force on Flow in Large Conduits of the Committee on Hydraulic Structures.
Transactions ASCE, Paper 4543, Vol. 91 HY 6 - Nov.,1965.
' 40. Lennart, R. " Flow Problems with Respect to Intakes and Tunnels of Swedish Hydro Electric Power Plants", Transactions, of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, NR 71,1953.
(]' 41. Lewellen, W.S.; "A Solution for Three-Dimensional Vortex Flow with Strong Circulation", J. Fluid Mechanics., Vol. 14, 1962.
- 42. Long, R.R.; "A Vortex in an Infinite Fluid", Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. II.
- 43. Marklund, E. and Pope, J.A.; " Experiments on acmall Pump Suction Well, with Particular Reference to Vcrtex Formations", Proceedings, The Insitution of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 160, 1956.
- 44. Marklund, E.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow", by Paul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, NO HYI, Proc. Paper 6323, Jan.,1969, p. 567 - 568.
- 45. Messina, J.P.; " Periodic Noise in Circulating Water Pumps", Power, Sept.,1971, p.
70 - 71.
- 46. McCorquodale, J.A.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow," by Paul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol 95, No. HYI, Proc. Paper 7323, Jan.,1969, p. 567 - 568.
- 47. MicCorquodale, J.A.; " Scale Effects in Swirling Flow", Joumal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, HYI, Disc. by Marco Pico, HY 1, Jan.,1969.
, 48. Pickford, J.A., and Reddy, Y.R.' " Vortex Suppression in a Stilling Pond Over-flow" i Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol.100 No. HYI 1, Nov.,1974, pp.1685
- 1697.
- 49. Quick, M.C., "A Study of the Free Spiral Vortex", thesis presented to the p
V University of Bristol, England, in 1961, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. M
u:u- muu m cuouc tm *'<mi m
- 50. Quick, M.C.; " Scale Relationships between Geometrically Similar Free Spiral Vortices", Civil Engineering and Public Works Review, Part I, September,1962, Q Part II, Oct.1962, p.1319.
- 51. Quick, M.C.; " Efficiency of Air Entraining Vortex Formation at Water intake",
Journal of the Hydraulics Div., ASCE. No. 96, HY7, July 1970, p.1403 - 1416.
- 52. Reddy, Y.R., and Pickford, J.A.; " Vortices at intakes in Conventional Sumps",
Water Power, March 1972, p.108 - 109.
- 53. Rouse, H., and Hsu, H.; "On the Growth and Decay of a Vortex Filament",
Proceedings,1st National Congress of Applied Mechanics, 1952, p. 741 - 746.
- 54. Richardson, C.A.; 1941 Water Works and Sewerage Reference and Data, Port I, Water Supply, p. 25, " Submergence and Spacing of Suction Bells".
- 55. Springer, E.K., and Patterson, F.M.; " Experimental Investigation of Critical Submergence for Vortexing in a Vertical Cylindrical Tank" ASME paper 69-FF-49, June,1969.
- 56. Stepanoff, A.J.,1948 " Centrifugal and Axial-flow Pumps", p. 963 (Chapman and Hall, London).
- 57. Stevens, J.C.; discussion of "The Vortex Chamber as an Automatic Flow-Control Device". by R.C. Kolf and P.B. Zielinski, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 86, No. HY6 Proc. Paper 2525, June,1960.
- 58. Stevens, J.C. and Kolf, R.C.; " Vortex Flow Through Horizontal Orifices", Journal !
of the Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol 83, No. SA6, Proc. Paper 1461, ; Dec., I 957. : 1
- 59. Streeter, V.L.: Fluid Mechanics, 5th edition, McGraw-Hill, 1971 Weighardt, ,
K.E.G., "On the Resistance of Screens", The Aeronautical Quarterly, Vol. 4,1953, j pp.186 - 192.
- 60. Weighart, K.E.G., "On the Resistance of Screens"; The Aeronautics Quarterly, Vol.
4,1953, pp.186 - 192.
- 61. Weltmer, W.W.,1950, Power Engineering, Vol. 54, No. 6, p. 74. " Proper Svetion intakes Vital for Vertical Circulating Pumps".
- 62. Young, C.A.H., " Swirl and Vortices at Intakes", Report No. SP 726, British Hydro- !
Mechanics Research Association, April,1962.
- 63. Zelinski, P.B. and Villement, J.R.; "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow", .
Vol. 94, HY3, May,1968, p. 745 - 751. Disc. on above in Jan.1969, by Marklund, , E., McCorquodale, J.A. and Anwar, H.O. l l 4 t ,~, .
~/
I
5 $ k! .
' E G
O l l TABLES O l i l I i l l-1 l I l l l i l i I l O i I e
~ '
e
-- - . ~ - - - - - . - - -- - . - _.. . . _ - . - .
a 1 TABLEI TEST SERES 1 -VORTEX TESTS
, . TEST COPOITKIN5 AtO REStLTS .
TRAIN A TRAIN B Test water Wateel Flow Bikg2 N8*
'[
b** Vortem Description 3
$ Vortex Description 3 PART I WITHOUT GRATieJG CAGES None observed 3196 None observed I 48 -3.650 Both A 90 8599 3865 None observed 8780 Intermittent fine vwor-core, 2 48 -3.650 Both A 90 facing woli 1
8476 None observed 3!82 None observed 3 48 -3.660 'Both B 90 3175 None observed 8584 None observed I 4 48 -3.655 Both B 90 Persistent i18" dia, vapor-core, focing wall 3182 None observed
, 5 48 -3.660 Both C 90 8533 None observed 864l None observed 6 48 -3.665 Both C 90 3180 r
8649 None observed 3158 None observed 7 50 -3.670 Both D 90 t None observed 8705 None observed 8 50 -3.670 Both D 90 3149 i J None observed 3223 Persistent tneble-string, 9 51 -3.690 Both E 90 8632 i focing wall Continuous e dia. vapor-core, t 3170 Hone observed 8749 10 51 -3.690 Both E 90 focing wall 8697 None observed 3166 None observed il 51 -3.695 Both F 91 None observed 8564 None observed 12 79 -3.715 Both F pl 3165 Continuous 3/8* dio. vapor-core, side wall 3214 None observed 13 78 -3.720 Both G 98 8657 None observed 8769 None observed 14 78 -3.720 Both G 91 3180 Intermittent 1/8"dio. vapor-core, 3239 None ctwved 15 78 -3.725 Both H 90 8669
- facing wall Occasional l /8" dio. vopor-core. corner 8757 None observed i 16 78 -3.730 Both H 90 3275 Occasional l/32" dio. vopor-core side woll 3174 None noserved 17 76 -3.765 Both J 91 8641 !
) 8697 None observed 18 76 -3.735 Both J 91 3170 None observed tione observed 3158 Nom eserved 19 76 -3.770 Both K 91 8704 i
- Occt+ano! I/16" dio. vapor-cene, i
3160 None observed 8760 20 76 -3.770 Both K 91 . faci. : wo!! O i
-, -= _ _ _
T ABLE I (continuca TEST SERES 1 - VORTEX TESTS TEST COtHTIOr6 Aro REstA.T5 O Test Water w aterl Flow Bthg2 SC Vorles Description 3 Vortea Description 3
~
PART ll- wlTH CRATING CAGES 160 -3.720 Both E 90 3217 None observed 8817 None observed 21 161 -3.725 East E 90 3897 None observed 8776 None observed 22
-3.730 West E 90 3207 None observed 8861 tene observed 23 161 164 -3.730 Both E 90 4781 tb w observed 12826 None observed i 24 158 -3.795 Both G 94 8730 None observed 3168 None observed 25 159 3.800 East G 91 8731 None observed 3185 None observed 26 ,
1 160 -3.800 West G 91 8714 None observed 3185 None observed 27 1 0 28 161 -3.795 Oct* G 91 12360 None observed 5604 None observed l NOTES l
- 1. Water level refers to water surface elevation, Mean Sea Level, at Waterford - 3. Maximum postulated water level is El + 0* - 6 MSL (+ 0.500 f ti, rninimum postulated water level is El - 3' - 8 MSL (-3.667 fil.
- 2. For blockage conditions see Figure 9. Blockage is expressed as percentoge of total screen area including both harirontal and wertical screens.
- 3. Terminology used to describe vortices is as follows:
Continuous - continuously present, i.e., rnare than approximately 90% of observation time. Persistent - persistently present. i.e., rnore than approximately 50% of observation time but less than 90% intermittent -intermittently present, i.e less than approximately 50% of observation time but more than 10%. Occasional - occasionally present, i.e., less than approximately 10% of obwrvation time. O W - W E E 'Y'
Table 2 Test Seraes 33 - Headless Tests Test Condatsons a .d fR e s u14.s l
............,v ........... ......................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7....... Scree.. Los* lhelm 6 INiahE T6 Alm i lefaaf Test u.ter 61k n Flow I seeo Head' Vel Vel Lu=6 5eoto Disth 7 awe he.4 Wel 6el tes. Ites. O no. 7een 1 Free Tan 6 5.a* nodel fectu Dasth t a s d, fa*. 6e Head W.C. V.C. Isee Coeff l e.t .s e Lost Le W.C. W.C. Fsee C ,eff !..t es e Loss des fem fes ft ft ft ft ft USs.m 144 ft fes fes ft USere E46 ft F .... ...... 4023 1.34 -4.247 5.45 2 79 1 255 0 125 4037 1.34 -4.204 L.41 2.79 1 077 0.107 te? 0 bsth -3.720 -3.725 0.000 0.003 1 L 4077 3 34 -4 259 5 66 2.80 1.242 0.126 4054 1.3" -4.212 5.40 2 82 1.034 0.103 167 0 East -3.730 -3 735 0.005 0.003 2 L 403 1.35 -4.241 5.48 2 80 1 269 0.1?7 4017 1 34 -4.217 5.44 2.79 1 096 0.109
- best -3.729 -3.734 0.005 0.003 3 147 L 0 4057 1.38 -4.318 5 60 2.82 1 180 0.118 11434 3.90 -7.774 15 59 7.94 1.125 0.850 4 170 L 0 toth -3.785 -3.804 0.000 0.032 16 27 8.32 1.112 0.040 0.015 0.008 4040 1.37 -4.310 5.57 2 82 1.102 0 115 11979 4.03 -8.133 5 148 L 0 East -3.788 -3.803 st??2 3.99 -8.023 16 0; 8.18 1.124 0.851 0 hest -3.782 -3.t12 0.03 0.027 4043 3.38 -4.319 5.57 2 82 1.101 0 115 e 149 L 4041 t.38 -4.308 5.58 2 82 1 156 0.110 3:32 1.10 -4.094 4.20 2 25 0.981 0.000 170 0 both -3.794 -3.800 0.005 0.003 7 L 4?75 . 47 -4.373 5.91 2.97 1.184 0 118 347 1.09 -4.099 4.25 2.20 1.04 0.0;5 171 L 0 East -3.798 -3.803 0.005 0.003 4 22 2.20 1.c29 0.053 8
0 005 0.003 4274 1.48 -4.376 5.90 2 97 1 37e 0.317 3:48 1.10 -4.098 9 172. L 0 west -3.802 -3.807 1.47 -4.472 6 30 2 96 1.504 0.150 both -3.793 -3.823 0.031 0.017 11752 4.06 -0.026 16.03 8 14 1.130 0.853 4264 10 172 L 0 1.48 -4.474 6 28 2 94 1.483 0.148 0 East -3.809 -3.830 0.020 0.012 12377 3.94 -7.777 15.54 7.90 1 134 0.857 4267 11 173 L 4278 1 50 -4.401 5 88 2 97 t.162 0.11e 0 best -3.805 -3.836 0.031 0.018 11243 3.94 -7.474 15.32 7.81 1.125 0.850 12 174 L 2940 1.07 -4.029 3.92 2 04 1.033 0.053 4044 1 47 -4.277 5.52 2.81 1 135 0.113 0 Soth -3.773 -3.778 0 005 0.003 13 179 L 2940 1 07 -4.028 3.96 2.04 1 075 0.055 4044 1 47 -4.235 5.32 2 81 0.983 0.098 0 East -3.747 -3.772 0.005 0.003 14 179 L 0.005 0.003 2940 1 07 -4.027 3.96 2.04 1.080 0.055 4044 1.47 -4.237 5 34 2 81 0.999 0.100 15 179 L 0 West -3.765 -3.770 - . - 4100 1.49 -4.304 5.ed 2.85 1.!?? 0.137 14 179 L 0 Soth -3.783 -3.783 0.000 0 000 - - . - 4100 3 49 -4.308 5.67 2.85 1.188 0.119 17 179 L 0 East -3.782 -3.782 0.000 0.000 - - - - 4190 1.49 -4.310 1.45 2 85 1.174 0 117
- ()
18 179 L 0 best -3.787 -3.787 0.000 0.000 1.142 0.114
- - - - 4073 1.47 -4.295 5.07 2.83 179 L 0 &oth -1.787 -3.787 0.000 0.000 - - -
19 - - - - 4073 1.47 -4.293 L.03 2.83 1 114 0.stl 20 179 L 0 East -3.743 -3.793 0.000 0.000 - - - 5.57 2.84 8.328 0.813 0.000 0.000 - - - - - 4084 1.48 -4.300 21 179 L 0 West -3.793 -3 793 - - 1 46 -4.440 5 67 2.90 1.108 0.181 n 50 both -3.914 -3.914 0.000 0.000 4109 1.44 -4.412 5.52 2 85 1.065 0 106 4178 22 174 1.43 -4.236 5.86 2.96 1.170 0.117 n 50 East -3.669 -3 475 0.005 0.003 4?95 3.44 -4.246 5.91 2.98 1.149 0.117 4255 23 168 1.43 -4.237 5.84 2.96 1 151 0.115 n 50 best -3.469 -3.680 0.010 0.006 4280 1.44 -4.244 5.88 2.97 1.142 0 136 42L5 24 168 4.03 -8.123 16.45 8.38 1 129 0.803 50 both -3.648 -3 498 0.031 0.034 4290 3.43 -4.247 5.90 2.98 8.163 0 116 12059 25 167 n 3.98 -7.981 16.19 8 28 1.111 0.839 East -3.678 -3.696 0.020 0.011 4400 1.47 -4.301 4.e7 3.06 1.180 0.818 11917 26 167 n to 3.93 -7.852 15.74 8.18 1.048 0.791 n 50 West -3.765 -3.800 0.034 0.029 4333 1.45 -4.281 5.42 3.01 0.811 0.081 11774 27 167 1.00 -4.017 4.43 2.23 1.167 0.060
-3.686 -3.697 0.010 0.005 4295 1.44 -4.292 4.04 2.98 1.260 0.126 3215 28 148 n 50 toth 3t&* 1.0a -4.013 4.39 2 20 1.201 0.047 East -3.492 -3.697 0.005 0.003 4318 1.45 -4.280 5.97 3.00 1.18e 0.818 29 168 n 50 1.04 -4.018 4.37 2.20 1.185 0.041 best -3.695 -3.705 0.010 0.005 4309 1.44 -4.278 5.92 2.99 1.160 0.116 3165 30 167 n 50 8.45 -4.301 5.84 2.97 1.140 0.114 31 R 50 Soth -3 713 -3.743 0.031 0.015 12312 4.37 -0.349 16.78 8.55 1 124 0.851 4268
-4.303 5.84 2 97 1.137 0.113 tot 4774 1 44 32 168 n 50 East -3.719 -3.745 0.026 0.014 11448 3.85 -7.730 15.41 7.95 1.128 0.852 -4.315 5.91 3.00 1 142 0.1 4 1.45 33 168 n 50 West -3.708 -3.744 0.036 0.021 11212 3.77 -7.597 15.35 7.79 1.145 0.865 4317
-4.300 5 89 2.98 1.155 0.115 3103 3.05 -4.024 4.23 2.15 1.124 0.058 4294 1.45 34 169 n 50 toth -3.727 -3.732 0.005 0.003 -4.300 5.80 2.97 1.16 0.114 3138 1.07 -4.038 4.30 2.18 1.347 0.009 4275 1.44 35 170 n 50 East -3.731 -3.736 0.005 0.003 1 44 -4.298 5.84 2.97 1.158 0.116 50 West -3.731 -3.736 0.005 0.003 3138 1.07 -4.042 4.33 2.18 1.180 0.060 4249 36 170 m - - -
4292 1.44 -4.314 5.95 2.98 1.194 0.119 37 170 m 50 both -3.734 -3.734 0.000 0.000 - - - - 4270 1.46 -4.304 5.89 2.97 8 879 0.118 38 170 n 50 East -3.734 -3.736 0.000 0.000 - - - - 4270 1.46 -4.303 5.89 2 97 1.170 0.118 170 n 50 kest -3.734 -3.736 0.000 0.000 5.91 2 97 1.179 0.118 39 - - - - 4282 1.46 -4.304 n 50 toth -3.733 -3.733 0.000 0.000 - - - 5.84 2.94 8.164 0.13e 40 171 - - - - 4258 1.45 -4.299 171 50 East -3.738 -3.738 0.000 0.000 - - - 5.86 2.97 1.152 0.115 41 R - - - - 4270 1 44 -4 299 42 171 n 50 West -3.738 -3.738 0.000 0.000 - - -
----~------ ----- ---- ----- ------
~..~ ..--.~.----...------, ----- - --- +----- ---- -----~-----
Dioc6ase aree as expressed .s terces.tase of eertas.1 scree.. are o..tv. 0 1 For bloc 6ase cordttsons see Favure 9. Hortrontal screens were teloc6ed throushout these tests. at heterford - 3. 2 Alt elezoneter head me.suresents see eneressed in teres of the attual Pretutw&e elevataan, neas. See tevels l l 1 . _ _ - -
Table 2 ( Cor.t'd ) Test Series II - Headless Tests , Test Condations and Results
............g.-....-............. ,.............. ............................................ .........................................
Test Water 61ks Flom Faean Need' Scree.. Los. TA6!N e INient isolo E lefant O no. Tee, 1 Free Tare Swee model frotu Lasch Lasch Fa*= Ee Hvas U.C. Ve1 v.C. Wel toss fruto Faee Coeft tr.t as e
.................-.....~.. .
D e st h Fnee Ee he.d v.C. wel W.C. vel Pape
.....m......
Less freto Coeft I. tate des Loss Loss F ft ft ft ft u5 men E46 ft fes fes ft USs.e E+4 ft f*s fr. ft 43 177 N 50 Both -3 684 -3.701 0.015 0.009 4107 1.47 -4.225 5 66 2.85 1.172 0.117 4056 1 45 -4.213 5.60 2.82 1.176 0 117 44 177 N 50 East -3.490 -3.701 0.010 0.004 4126 1.48 -4.230 5.at 2.87 1.175 0.117 4148 1.48 -4 233 5.71 2.88 1.165 0.116 45 177 N 50 West -3.690 -3.708 0.010 0.004 4111 1.47 -4.229 5 69 2 84 1.189 0.119 4341 1.48 -4.231 5.e9 2.48 1.162 0.ste 46 176 N 50 toth -3.488 -3.740 0.051 0.029 4125 1.47 -4.248 5.49 2.87 8.173 0.117 18490 4.08 -7.786 15.73 7.98 1.145 0.865 47 17e N 50 East -3.703 -3.739 0.034 0.021 4213 1 50 -4.293 5.82 2.93 1.185 0.118 11326 4.02 -7.473 15.51 7.87 1.146 0.846 1 48 17e N 50 West -3.488 -3.739 0.051 0.031 4173 1.48 -4.283 5.77 2.90 1.185 0.118 11084 3.94 -7.519 15.21 7.7C I.153 0.871 l 49 174 N 50 both -3.704 -3.715 0.010 0.006 4094 1.45 -4.239 5.66 2.84 1.189 0.119 2979 1.06 -3.997 4.14 2.07 1.228 0.043 1 50 176 N 50 East -3.710 -3.720 0.010 0.004 4029 1.43 -4.223 5.55 2.80 1.149 0.117 2943 1.05 -3.992 4.06 2.04 1.199 0.061 SI 176 N 50 West -3.710 -3.720 0.030 0.004 4025 1.43 -4.223 5.55 2.80 1.174 0.117 2943 1.05 -3.987 4.05 2.04 1 162 0.0e0 52 177 N 50 toth -3.703 -3.745 0.042 0.032 81974 4.28 -8.822 14.32 8.32 1.124 0.850 4440 3.59 -4.362 4.05 3.08 1.12 0 312 53 174 N 50 East -3.720 -3.761 0.041 0.024 1135e 4.03 -7.684 15 49 7.89 1.130 0.854 4082 1.45 -4.245 5.55 2.84 1.814 0.111 54 177 N 50 hest -3.703 -3.759 0.054 0.034 13212 4.01 -7.598 15.32 7.79 1.137 0.859 4024 1.44 -4.251 5.49 2.80 1.128 0.113 55 177 N 50 toth -3.724 -3.734 0.010 0.004 2950 1 05 -4.011 4.12 2.05 1.227 0.043 4147 1.49 -4.265 5.70 2.48 1.140 0.114 56 174 N 50 East -3.726 -3.734 0.010 0.004 2915 1.04 -4.003 4.04 2.03 1.196 0.081 4114 1.46 -4.257 5.45 2.84 1.154 0 115 57 177 N 50 West -3.724 -3.734 0.010 0.004 2981 1.04 -4.001 4.04 2.02 1.203 0.062 4109 8.47 -4.25e 5.65 2.85 1.161 0.816 58 177 N 50 toth -3.729 -3.734 0.005 0.003 4381 1.47 -4.258 5.64 2.84 1.169 0.117 - - - - - - - 59 177 N 50 East -3.729 -3.734 0.005 0.003 4091 1.44 -4.252 5 63 2.84 1.167 0.tle - - - - - - - 40 177 50 West -3.729 -3.734 0.005 0.003 4095 1.46 -4.252 5.e3 2.84 1.163 0.116 - - - - - - (]) N el 177 N 50 both -3.739 -3.739 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4224 1.51 -4.295 5.83 2.93 1.182 0 818 42 174 N 50 East -3.741 -3.741 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4179 1 49 -4.290 5.79 2.90 1.199 0.120 43 176 N 50 West -3.740 -3.745 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4191 1.50 -4.292 5.78 2.91 1.177 0.117 44 - P 50 both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45 175 P 50 East -3.774 -3.77* 0.000 0.000 4065 1.43 -4.297 5.66 2 82 1.214 0.121 4191 1.48 -4.328 5.82 2.91 I.205 0.120 44 175 P 50 West -3.749 -3.774 0.005 0.003 4041 1.43 -4.292 5.63 2.88 1.219 0.122 4171 1 47 -4.317 5 74 2.90 1.181 0.118 47 - P 50 Soth - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 48 173 P 50 East -3.805 -3.825 0.020 0.012 4160 1.45 -4.379 5.82 2.89 1.234 0.123 18270 3.92 -7.711 15.42 7.83 1.141 2 842 69 173 P 50 West -3 795 -3.836 0.041 0.024 4183 1.46 -4.397 5 86 2.91 1.241 0.124 18352 3.95 -7.793 15.55 7.09 1.147 0.847 70 - P 50 both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 71 175 P 50 East -3.780 -3.780 0.000 0.000 4:49 1.46 -4.324 5.77 2.8) 1.208 0.121 2996 1.06 -4.045 4.17 2.38 1.221 0.043 72 17e P 50 West -3.773 -3.778 0.005 0.003 4158 1.48 -4.327 5.79 2.89 1.220 0.122 3049 1.08 -4.078 4.23 2.82 1.194 0.061 73 - P 50 both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 74 173 P 50 East -3.812 -3.847 0.034 0.021 11156 3.88 -7.462 15.28 7.75 1.145 0.845 4215 1.47 -4.389 5.74 2.93 1 134 0.113 75 173 P ~ 50 West -3.799 -3.845 0.044 0.027 18237 3.91 -7.682 15 32 7.81 1 126 0.851 4177 1.45 -4.387 5.74 2.90 1.173 0 117 74 - P 50 Both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 77 174 P 50 East -3.778 -3.784 0.005 0.003 2989 1.06 -4.057 4.09 2.08 1.137 0.058 4254 1.51 -4.344 5.87 2.9e 8.175 0.117 78 17e P 50 West -3.778 -3.784 0.005 0.003 2944 1.05 -4.051 4.05 2.04 1.140 0.059 4205 1 49 -4.324 5.74 2.92 1.146 0.114 79 - P 50 Both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 80 175 P 50 East -3.790 -3.790 0.000 0.000 4137 1.44 -4.328 5 74 2.87 1.201 0.120 - - - - - - - 81 175 P 50 West -3.790 -3.790 0.000 0.000 4121 1.45 -4.329 5.74 2.84 1.218 0.121 - - - - - - - 82 - P 50 Both - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 83 174 P 50 East -3.797 -3.797 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4209 1.49 -4.348 5.80 2.92 1.174 0.117 84 175 P 50 West -3.794 -3.794 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4191 1.48 -4.340 5.77 2.91 1.170 0.117
..... ..... . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . ...... ..... ~ .....,......-...........~...... ..... .................. .......--- ...... ..... ....~............~
l For bloebase condatsons see Fanure 9. Stochase ares an ese resmec es percentase of vertacal screes. area ontw. Hor:20ntal screens wete bloc 6ed throushout these tests. 2 411 Paeroe=ter head seasurements are expressed an teres of the actual protviv*e elevatsen. Pean See Levels at Wateiford - 3. y ., , 7-,
Table 2 4 C o r.t d ) Test Seraes I3 - Headloss Tests
.. Test. Condataons and Results
........-...7_..... ...........7-...........--.........................................
TRAla A tufAnF TRAlm b lu1A&E
.I Test W.ter 61ks Flo. Faer Mead Screen Ls..
(-} ...... ...... .....-..... .......... ...... ..... .... ..... ..... .....u. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ...... me. Iree I Fros Tank Sune Model Ftoto basch Fter head Vel Vel 6. ss F rs.ti. Desca. Fnee h..d Wet Wet loss Frute b a sel. Ee U.C. W.C. Fare Coeff Intake Re v.C. W.C. Fa*e Cveff Ini.6 e des toss tes. F ft ft ft ft USnes E46 ft fes fes ft uss,e E+6 ft fes tes ft 175 0 50 Both -3.787 -3.802 0 015 0.009 4255 1.50 -4.341 5 85 2.96 1.141 0.11e 4191 1.48 -4.354 5.81 2.91 1.398 0.120 85 84 175 0 50 East -3.787 -3.797 0.010 0.006 4157 1 47 -4.336 5 74 2.89 1.181 0.118 4127 1.46 -4.335 5.74 2.87 1.210 0.124 175 0 50 mest -3.782 -3.797 0.015 0.009 4145 1.46 -4.331 5 71 2.88 1.173 0.117 4114 1.45 -4.331 5.71 2.06 1.205 0.120 87 173 50 both -3.810 -3.912 0 102 0.058 4156 1.45 -4.394 5 43 2.89 0.958 0.096 18552 4.02 -8.019 15.85 8.02 1.153 0.871 88 0 173 0 50 East -3.825 -3.923 0.097 0.055 4156 1 45 -4.394 5.37 2.89 0.919 0.092 11517 4.01 -7.958 15.71 B.00 1 129 0.853 89 0 50 best -3.815 -3.948 0.133 0.078 4119 1.43 -4.399 5 25 2.86 0.872 0.087 11317 3.94 -7.879 15.51 7.86 1.148 0.847 i 90 173 50 both -3.787 -3.297 0.010 0.004 4157 1.47 -4.336 5.74 2.89 1.18 0.118 3066 1.08 -4.096 4.28 2.13 1.226 0.063 91 175 0 175 0, 50 East -3.792 -3.802 0.010 0.004 4341 1.46 -4.332 5 69 2.88 1.161 0.186 3031 1.07 -4.092 4.21 2.11 1.2c8 0.062 l 92 93 174 0 50 West -3.794 -3.804 0.010 0.006 4132 1.45 -4.333 5 49 2.87 1.170 0.117 3031 1.04 -4.098 4.24 2.13 1.237 0.0o3 I 94 173 0 50 both -3.812 -3.878 0.067 0.035 12065 4.20 -B.292 16.43 8.38 1.122 0.848 4208 1.44 -4.439 5.84 2.92 1.214 0.171 95 173 0 50 East -3.827 -3.873 0 046 0.026 11423 3.98 -7.831 15 56 7.94 1.123 0.848 4234 1.47 -4.443 5.90 2.94 1.225 0.122 96 173 0 50 West -3.817 -3.878 0.061 0.034 11246 3.91 -7.734 15 34 7.81 1.133 0.856 4183 1.46 -4.437 5.85 2.91 1.233 0.123 both -3.800 -3.810 0 010 0.004 3054 1.07 -4.092 4.15 2.12 1.116 0.057 4253 1.49 -4.384 5.94 2.95 1.230 0.123 97 174 0 50 98 174 0 50 East -3.799 -3.809 0.010 0.004 3011 1.06 -4.082 4.09 2.09 1.106 0 057 4203 1.47 -4.363 5.82 2.92 1 193 0.119 99 174 0 50 West -3.794 -3.809 0.015 0.009 2999 1.05 -4.081 4.08 2.06 1.114 0.057 4184 1 47 -4.363 5.82 2.91 1 213 0.121 100 174 0 50 both -3.812 -3.812 0.000 0.000 416! 1 44 -4.350 5 74 2 89 1.175 0.117 - - - - - - - () -4.345 5 74 2.88 1.19e 0 119 - - - - - 4140 1.45 101 174 0 50 East -3.807 -3.807 0.000 0.000 102 174 0 50 West -3.807 -3.807 0.000 0.000 4136 1.45 -4.345 5.74 2.87 1.201 0.120 - - - - - - - 174 0 50 toth -3.799 -3.809 0 010 0.004 - - - - - - - 4151 1.45 -4.353 5.77 2.88 1.209 0.121 103 174 0 50 East -3.805 -3.810 0 005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4139 1.45 -4.350 5.74 2.88 1.203 0.120 104 0 50 West -3.807 -3.812 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 439 1.45 -4.355 5.74 2.88 1.217 0.171 105 174 50 both -3.400 -3.694 0.015 0.009 4152 1 46 -4.244 5.79 2.88 1 277 0.122 4190 1.47 -4.238 5.76 2.91 1.163 0.116 106 174 R 50 East -3.686 -3.701 0.015 0.008 4184 1.47 -4.255 5.82 2.91 f.214 0.121 4328 1.52 -4.270 5.90 3.01 1.874 0.112 107 874 R 50 West -3.686 -3 707 0.021 0.011 4161 1.46 -4.2
- 77 2.89 1.197 0.119 4303 1.51 -4.270 5.87 2.99 1.129 0.113 108 174 R 50 -3.702 -3.763 0.061 0.035 4356 1.45 -4.1 '4 2.89 1.179 0.318 11494 4.00 -7.788 15.49 7.99 1.131 0.854 109 173 R toth 50 East -3.711 -3.762 0.051 0.029 4204 1.46 -s .82 2.92 1.188 0 819 11428 3.98 -7.732 15.58 7.94 1.827 0.852 110 173 R
' 50 West -3.701 -3.757 0.054 0.032 4835 1 44 -- 5 78 2.87 1.180 0.118 11422 3.98 -7.717 15.5e 7.93 1.124 0.849 111 173 R R 50 Soth -3.686 -3.707 0.028 0.011 4222 1.48 -4.246 5 85 2.93 1.194 0 119 3048 1.07 -3.982 4.10 2 12 1.075 0.055 112 174 50 East -3.691 -3.707 0.015 0.009 4141 1.46 -4.245 5 74 2.89 1.17e 0.117 3014 1.04 -3.974 4.05 2.09 1.064 0.054 113 174 R 50 West -3.486 -3.701 0.015 0.009 4152 1 46 -4.245 5 77 2.88 1.20e 0.120 3014 1.06 -3.979 4.12 2.09 1.137 0.0.8 134 174 R 3.97 -7.824 15 62 7.92 1.144 0 866 4183 1.46 -4.303 5.33 2 98 0.872 0.0R7 115 173 R 50 both -3.708 -3.836 0.128 0.073 11406
-3.724 -3.842 0.110 0.068 11330 3.94 -7.759 15 48 7.87 1.13e 0.858 4158 1.45 -4.296 5.27 2.89 0.854 0.085 116 173 R 50 East
-3.714 -3.842 0.128 0.075 11234 3.91 -7.682 15 33 7.80 1.130 0.853 4106 1 43 -4.279 5 18 2.85 0.834 0.083 117 173 R 50 West both -3.687 -3.702 0.015 0.009 3038 1.04 -3.987 4.17 2.11 1.157 0.059 4158 1.46 -4.229 5 68 2.89 1.132 0.113 118 174 R 50 50 East -3.692 -3.702 0.010 0.004 3038 1.06 -3.989 4.19 2.11 1.178 0.060 4728 1.48 -4.254 5.81 2.94 1.158 0.116 119 174 R 50 West -3.692 -3.707 0.015 0.008 3033 1.04 -3.989 4.15 2.11 1.147 0.059 4221 1.48 -4.254 5.78 2.93 1.140 0.114 120 174 R 128 174 k 50 toth -3.698 -3.708 0.010 0.006 4199 1.47 -4.242 5.02 2 92 1.200 0 120 - - - - - - -
122 173 R 50 East -3.699 -3.780 0.010 0.004 4183 1 44 -4.258 5 79 2.91 1.192 0.119 - - - - - - - 123 173 k 50 West -3.700 -3.710 0.010 0.004 4179 1.45 -4.259 5 79 2.90 1.19e 0.119 - - - - - - - 174 R 50 toth -3.693 -3.698 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4209 1 47 -4.246 5.79 2.92 1.165 0.116 124 174 50 East -3.693 -3.693 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4196 8.44 -4.240 5.79 2.93 1.17e 0.187 125 R
!?4 50 West -3.692 -3 692 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4190 1.46 -4.239 5.79 2.91 1.182 0.118 12e R
' - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - -" - - - - - - - - - -" - - - - - ' - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - -
- O 1 For blochase conditions see Fasure 9. Bioc6 ase area as expressed as cercentase of vertical st reer. area ontw.
Horazontal screens were blocked throushout these tests. 2 All enerometer head esasurements are empressed an teres of the actual esolvtc e elevataune Pean See tevel, at batee f oed - 3.
,v _ .. - , - , - , - - - - - - - .
-- - .- . - . -- .- _ _ _ _ , ~ . _ _ .
l f Tab 3e 2 < C or.t ' d > [ Test Seraes 3I - Head 3oss Tests ; Test Cond6tions and Results ***~~~
. . . . . . . . .. 2 ' ' ' S'- 166 a In'iskE- --
---**-------*-TE61m ----'-'utanE 9l c *r eee. L o s s* --**--'"----~~~~~~~~~~~'1m p . ....
7..... Fiero head e Ieat eater 8lae Flo.
..........,.........._..~....m....., ...... .......... ...... .....,.... .....,......
t,eto j tasci. fae heaa vel wel Los. nooe t f-rote 6,sch Face h 44 Wel Vel Less trote W.C. 8 nee Cveff int.6 e 1 From T ara Eve
- 6e U .C .
me. ten, Dasch 6e U.C. U.C. Pace Cceff Int.se m.. L..s fe, tes ft
.e4 ft U 5see E46 ft ft ft ft U$see E46 ft fes fes F
ft ...... ..... .... ...... ..... .... .. . . . . ...... 4301 1 48 -0.074 5.93 2 99 1.171 0.117 4275 1 47 -0.073 5922.97 1......1970.119 127 171 L 0 toth 0.504 0.500 0.005 0.003 5 98 3.00 1.189 0.119 4302 1.49 -0.077 5.92 2.99 1.149 0.317 East 0.502 0.497 0.005 0.003 4371 1.49 -0.087 4289 1.48 -0.071 5.90 2.98 1.143 0.116 128 172 L 0 0.497 0.005 0.003 430s 1.49 -0.082 5.95 2.99 1.285 0.338 0 best 0.502 0 317 11872 4.10 -3.839 16.22 8.25 1.136 0.858 129 172 L Doth 0.477 0.462 0.015 0.000 4302 1.49 -0.!!2 5.'2 2.99 3.149 0.317 11691 4.04 -3.704 15.96 8.12 1.131 0.855 130 172 L 0 0.458 0.026 0.014 4352 1.50 -0.130 4 00 3.02 1.175 11567 4.00 -3.603 15.78 8.04 1.129 0. B*.2 133 172 L 0 East 0.484 5 92 2.78 3.388 0.119 best 0.492 0.464 0.026 0.0le 4283 8.48 -0.to? 3083 1.07 0.200 4.25 2.14 1.179 0.060 132 172 L 0 0.501 0.496 0.005 0.003 4359 1.51 -0 098 d.03 3.03 1.189 0.339 3047 1.05 0.207 4.21 2.12 1.184 0.064 133 172 L 0 toth 5 93 2.98 1.189 0.119 4283 3.48 -0.077 172 - L 0 East 0.502 0.497 0.005 0.003 5 90 2.97 1.177 0.117 3039 1.05 0.207 4.22 2.11 1.201 0.062 134 427e 1.48 -0.072 172 L 0 best 0.502 0 497 0.005 0.003 15 45 7.97 1.129 0.853 4259 1.47 -0.106 5.87 2.94 1.173 0.117 135 0.472 0.457 0.015 0.009 11472 3.97
-3.544 172 L 0 both 15.57 7.9e 1.334 0.842 4258 1.47 -0.114 5.86 2.96 1.164 0.116 134 0.476 0.445 0.031 0.017 11454 3.96
-3.519 0.113 172 L 0 East 15 48 7.88 1.183 0.841 4220 1 46 -0.098 5.76 2.93 1.134 137 0.474 0.445 0.031 0.018 1134: 3.92
-3.437 172 L 0 best 4.20 2.33 1.239 0.058 4351 1.50 -0.088 5.98 3.02 1.160 0.116 138 3070 1.04 0.208 0.118 both 0.501 0.496 0.005 0.003 0.059 4289 a.48 -0.078 5.93 2.98 1.183 3010 1 04 0.218 4 12 2 09 1.247 139 172 L 0 0.501 0.496 0.005 0.003 4277 1 48 -0.071 5.89 2.97 1 169 0.117 140 172 L 0 East 1 04 0 218 4.12 2.09 1.14e O.C59 0.501 0.494 0.005 0.003 3030 - -
141 172 L 0 best -a a 59' 2 99 i>" a >2a - - - a <'s a *95 a *** a aaa asia *' - - - i42 $72 ' 0 9 ia 4283 1 48 -0.084 5.95 2.98 1.208 0.121 - O 0.493 0.493 0.000 0.000 - - - East 0.121 - - 4283 1 48 -0.084 5.95 2.98 1.208 143 172 L 0 best 0.493 0 493 0.000 0.000 43?0 1.49 -0.085 5.95 3.00 1.172 0.117 144 172 L 0 - - - - 5.93 2.99 1 170 0.117 0.495 0 495 0.000 0.000 145 172 L 0 both - - - - 4302 1 49 -0.078 0.496 0 496 0.000 0.000 4296 1.49 -0.077 5 91 2 98 1 166 0.116 144 172 L 0 East - - - - 0.495 0 495 0.000 0.000 4289 1.48 -0.092 5.87 2 98 t.144 0.114 147 372 L 0 best 4304 1 49 -0.105 5.94 2.99 3.374 0.317 50 both 0.482 0.472 0.010 0.005 0.116 4338 1.50 -0.111 5.98 3 01 1 170 0.117 4291 1 48 -0.097 5 91 2 98 1 147 148 172 M 0.483 0 473 0 010 0.005 4326 1.49 -0.806 5 94 3 00 1 159 0.116 50 East 0. !!7 - 4275 1 47 -0.098 5.90 2 97 1 178 149 172 m best 0 481 0.471 0.010 0.005 0. 19 11565 4.01 -3 680 15 68 8.05 1 148 0.867 150 !?! n 50 4298 1 49 -0.138 5 95 2 99 3 392 0.854 50 toth 0.461 c.441 0 020 0.081 0.117 11489 4.07 -3.731 15.95 8.12 1.130 4299 1.50 -0.147 5.92 2 99 1 272 151 172 M East 0 463 0.427 0.036 0.019 c.118 11468 4.04 -3 708 15.91 8 11 1 124 0.850 4329 1 51 -0.157 5.98 3.01 3 300 152 173 m to n 50 best 0.443 0 427 0 036 0.019 c.319 342 1.09 0.167 4.36 2 18 1 202 0.062 153 173 0 483 0 478 0.005 0.003 4317 1 49 -0.10e 5.98 3 00 1 193 0.064 n 50 toth 0.318 3116 1.00 0.167 4.36 2 16 3.240 154 172 0.483 0 478 0 005 0.003 4344 1.50 -0.111 a 00 3.02 3 386 1.08 0 868 4.34 2 16 1.223 0.043 50 East 0.189 3314 172 4337 1 50 -0.113 4.00 3 01 1 197 155 M 15e 172 n 50 best 0 482 0.477 0.005 0.003 17.00 8.48 1 117 0.844 4273 1.49 -0.145 5.04 2.97 1 137 0.113 157 373 n 50 both 0 448 0.412 0.036 0.018 12496 4.35 -4.311 7.92 1 116 0.043 4244 1.48 -0.141 5 84 2 95 1 165 0.116 East 0.458 0.417 0.041 0.023 11408 3.97 -3.517 15.53 4195 1.46 -0.124 5 75 2 91 1.158 0.115 158 173 n 50 11238 3.91 -3.399 15.28 7.81 1 125 0.842 373 m 50 West 0.463 0.417 0.046 0.027 4338 t.50 -0.111 5 97 3.01 1.144 0.184 159 140 172 n 50 Both 0.477 0.472 0.005 0.003 3092 1 07 0.884 4.20 2.15 3 109 0.057 4264 1.47 -0.092 5.87 2.94 1.168 0.117 M $0 East 0.477 0 472 0.005 0 003 3037 1.05 0.190 4.15 2.11 2 13M 0.058 0.040 417e 1.44 -0 049 5.78 2.90 1.189 0.119 tot 172 3024 3.05 0.194 4.14 2 10 3 1&> 172 n 50 West 0.482 0.477 0.005 0.003 5.98 2.91 1.;&4 0.120 - - - - - - - 162 4306 3.49 -0.110 both 0.474 0.474 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - 163 172 M 50 0.473 0.473 0.000 0.000 4779 348 -0.101 5.92 2.9711 0.119 - 164 172 n 50 East 0 119 - - - 145 172 m 50 West 0.474 0.474 0.000 0.000 4279148 -0.100 5.92 2.97 - - - - 1 153 - - 4244 1.47 -0.090 589294 1 181 0.118 0.477 0.477 0.000 0.000 lee 372 n 50 toth - - - 4239 t.47 -0.083 585 2.94 1.175 0.117 4314 1.49 -0.104 5.95300 1.177 0.117 0.4?S 0.475 0.000 0.000 147 172 n 50 East - - - - - 172 M SO hest 0.475 0.475 0.000 0.000 - 168 ......,............,........... .... ......
.....,.........o....
area ents. I f or blockase condations see Fisurg 9. Dioch ase area as ens sessed as Perceret ese of vertical st rees. Nortrontal screens were bloc 6ed throushout 14ese tests. been Se. Level, at h. ten f ord - 3. 2 411 pierceeter heae seasurements are empressed an teres of the actual protetwee elevatione _,,v., . - . - . . - -. -
Table 2 ( C or.t ' d i Test Seraes II - Headloss Tests Test Conditions a rid Results
..... ,.....~....g..................7............. .......................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Test Water Bits Flo. faero Mead Steeen tems 16 elm a InfenE 16 elm ) Int e> E 7 ............. . . . . . ....... .....,..... .......... ..............,....... ..... .... ............ ....,..... ...... no. Teen 3 From fare Swee nosel frote Dasch face m.ad Wel Wet L6ss fruto Dasch Pape mead vel wel Loss freto S a se t. Ee U.C. U.C. Fame Coeff Intee, se w.C. W.C. f lee Coeff te.t aa e des Loss Less F ft ft ft ft U5see E46 ft fes f>s ft USeen E+6 ft fps fes ft 177 m 50 toth 0.389 0.379 0.010 0.006 4178 1.49 -0.144 5.77 2.90 1 184 0.118 4186 1.50 -0.141 5.75 2.98 1.154 0.115 149 177 u 50 East 0.386 0.376 0.010 0.004 4087 1 46 -0.143 5.63 2.84 1 175 0.117 4:22 1.47 -0.152 5.49 2.84 1 17e 0.117 170 50 best 0.386 0.376 0.010 0.006 4070 1.46 -0.138 5.41 2 83 1 173 0.317 4128 1.48 -0.842 5.63 2.87 1 128 0.113 171 177 m 0.372 0.341 0.031 0.015 45e4 3.42 -0.316 e.34 3.17 1.204 0.120 12289 4.37 -4.271 te.8s 4.54 1 137 0.859 172 17e N 50 bott East 0.381 0.340 0.041 0.024 4217 1 50 -0.214 5.83 2.93 1.185 0.110 11234 3.99 -3.538 15.40 7.81 1 149 0.848 173 176 m 50 50 best 0.389 0.348 0.041 0.024 4159 1.49 -0.191 5.74 2.89 1.180 0.118 11270 4.03 -3.400 15.14 7.83 1 047 0.004 174 177 m 0.358 0.353 0.005 0.003 4242 1.50 -0 207 5.86 2 95 1 179 0.118 340 1.12 0.045 4.34 2 20 1 159 0.0* 9 175 175 m 50 toth 0.347 0.354 0.010 0.004 4173 1.48 -0.185 5.75 2.90 1.173 0.117 3118 1.11 0.059 4.27 2.17 t.141 0.058 176 176 m 50 East 50 mest 0.372 0.341 0.010 0.006 4158 8.48 -0.172 5.71 2.89 1 160 0.116 3110 1.10 0.067 4.24 2.16 1 131 0.058 177 174 - m 0.432 0.391 0.041 0.024 11339 4.03 -3.447 15.72 7.88 1 197 0.905 4723 1.50 -0.146 5.73 2.93 1.109 0.113 178 17e u 50 Doth East 0.442 0.396 0.044 0.024 11475 4.04 -3.601 15.e4 7.94 1.143 0.863 4134 1 47 -0.128 5.64 2.87 1.144 0.114 179 176 N 50 50 best 0.458 0.406 0.051 0.029 11292 4.01 -3.457 15.37 7.84 1.121 0.847 4286 1.52 -0.140 5.78 2.98 1.082 0.108 180 176 m both 0.478 0.473 0.005 0.003 2950 1.05 0.211 4.00 2 05 1 105 0.057 4160 1.48 -0.061 5.72 2.89 1 161 0.116 181 17e N 50 0.478 0.468 0.010 0.004 2904 1.03 0.215 3.93 2.02 1.096 0.056 4108 1.44 -0.048 5 62 2.8% t.137 0.113 182 174 m 50 East 0.115 175 50 best 0.470 0.465 0.005 0.003 2898 1.02 0.212 3.93 2.01 1 103 0.054 4094 1.44 -0.052 5.42 2.84 1 154 183 N 184 17e N 50 both 0.468 0.468 0.000 0.000 4158 1 48 -0.071 5.74 2.89 1.180 0.118 - - - - - - - 185 17e N 50 East 0.473 0.448 0.005 0.003 4134 1.47 -0.041 5.49 2 87 1.164 0.11e - - - - - - O 184 376 m 50 West 0.473 0.468 0.005 0.003 4134 1 47 -0.041 5 69 2.87 1 144 0.:16 4172 1.48 -0.058 5.75 2.90 1 17L 0.117 187 176 h 50 Both 0.483 0.483 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - 50 East 0.483 0.483 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4153 1.48 -0.056 5.74 2.88 1 184 0.118 188 17e N 50 best 0.483 0.483 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4153 1.48 -0.053 5.73 2.88 8 174 0.!!? 189 174 N both 0.414 0.404 0.010 0.005 4428 1.47 -0.215 4.15 3.08 1.208 0.121 4431 1.47 -0.207 6.11 3.00 1 177 0.117 190 tee P 50 6.17 3.12 1 162 0.114 144 P 50 East 0.409 0.399 0.010 0.005 4425 1 47 -0.211 4.11 3.07 1 178 0.118 4491 1.49 -0.224 191 West 0.409 0.399 0.010 0.005 4425 1.47 -0 215 4.13 3 07 1 193 0 819 4474 1.48 -0.214 4.14 3.13 1 151 0.115 192 See P 50 - - - - - - - - 193 - P 50 toth - - 50 East 0.402 0.348 0.041 0.017 4904 1.e4 -0.397 e.81 3 41 1 203 0.120 13122 4.44 -4.887 17.92 9.12 1 133 0.854 194 149 P 50 best 0.404 0.368 0.036 0.019 4329 1 44 -0.224 4.02 3.01 1.200 0.121 11795 3.97 -3.689 15.75 8.19 1.043 0.789 195 168 P 0.399 0.005 0.003 4439 1.47 -0.222 4.16 3 08 1.203 0.120 3230 1.07 0.073 4.46 2.24 1 185 0.041 19e See P 50 both 0.404 0.409 0.399 0.010 0.005 4480 1.49 -0.233 4.22 3.11 1.204 0.120 3334 1.11 0.050 4.42 2.32 1.191 0.061 197 lee P 50 East P 50 West 0.409 0.399 0.010 0.005 4466 1.48 -0.230 e.20 3.10 1.207 0.120 3319 1.10 0.054 4.58 2.31 1.180 0.040 198 lee 39, . P 50 toth - - - 0.031 0.016 4.06 -3.834 16.03 8.27 1 072 0.810 4294 1.46 -0.206 5 89 2.98 1.119 0.112 200 170 P 50 East 0.383 0.353 11898 0.024 3.84 -3.504 15.35 7.82 1 128 0.852 4275 1.46 -0.180 5.47 2.97 1.018 0.102 201 170 P 50 West 0.387 0.346 0.041 18253 0.005 0.002 1.08 0.074 4.48 2.25 1.190 0.061 4597 1.54 -0.253 4.33 3.19 1.149 0.117 202 167 P 50 toth 0.407 0.402 3234 0.005 1.05 0.090 4.33 2.19 1.154 0.059 4527 1.51 -0.235 e.22 3.14 1 159 0.814 203 167 P 50 East 0.407 0.397 0.010 3158 0.005 0.003 1.08 0.079 4.43 2.24 1.144 0.059 4383 1.46 -0.195 4.02 3.05 1.154 0.815 204 147 P 50 best 0.402 0.397 3221 - - 205 148 P 50 both 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000 4445 1.49 -0.221 6.14 3.09 1.197 0.119 - - - - - 204 148 P 50 East 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000 4415 1.48 -0.214 4.13 3.07 1.204 0.120 - - - - - 207 168 P 50 West 0.405 0.400 0.005 0.003 4418 1 49 -0 214 4.13 3.07 1.201 0.120 - - - - - i 168 P 50 toth 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4492 1 51 -0.222 4.17 3.12 1.155 0.115 1 208 4.14 3.30 1 171 0.117 148 50 East 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4457 1 50 -0.216 l 209 P 6.14 3.09 1.177 0.117 168 P 50 best 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000 - - - - - - - 4451 1.50 -0.216 210 ---- ---- ----- ------
...... ..,.......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , ...............................,...--.-----.~ ----..---- -----
O I For blockase condations see Fasure 9. Dioc6ase area as expressed as percentase of weitical st reer. area ents. Horazental screens were blocked thsouchout these testh. 2 ell piezometer head measuresents are expressed ar. teres of the actual prototver elevation. riean S. , tevele at baterford - 3. . e=yv"-=gr y , , p 1 j - -1 2 -.
T at> 3 e 2 4 Cont'a n ,' Test Series 31 - Headloss Tests Test Condetions and Resu3ts a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ........... ---*~~~~~-~ ----------'-*---*******' ~~~~******-----***-**-----***-*--**-*----
..... 7. TEelm A IntAst Thats 6 letant Test Water bit s Flo. Fsero Head 2'" Screen Lossl****-
No. Teme I Fece Tank Swee Mo6el Proto basch Fsee Me.d Vel Vel Lust Fruto latch Fnee head Vel Vel Loss Preto
$ s set. Le U.C. W.C. Pape Coeff 1s.t ak e be U.C. v.C. Fe,e Coeff Intat e des Lots Loss F ft ft ft ft U$sen E46 ft fra fes ft US *e E46 ft fas fes ft 211 159 0 50 toth 0.415 0 605 0.010 0.005 4557 1.44 -0.048 4.32 3.17 1.200 0.120 45ctit.44 -0.049 e.32 3 17 1.193 0.119 282 159 0 50 East 0.415 0.405 0.010 0.005 4545 1.44 -0.053 4 35 3.17 1 210 0.121 463:'t.44 -0.080 6.47 3.22 1.233 0.123 213 159 0 50 West 0.615 0.605 0.010 0.005 4550 1.43 -0.048 6.32 3.14 1.204 0.300 4425 1 46 -0.075 4.45 3.21 1.222 0 122 214 143 0 50 both 0.584 0.453 0.133 0.059 4489 1.46 -0.078 5 70 3 12 0.859 0.084 13199 4.28 -4.853 18.02 9.17 1.132 0.855 215 te2 0 50 East 0.597 0.490 0.107 0.054 4400 1.42 -0.044 5.73 3.04 0.944 0.094 11875 3.83 -3.905 14.40 8.25 1.181 0.892 214 142 0 50 West 0.60 0.514 0.087 0.044 4329 1 40 -0.027 5.75 3.01 1.024 0.102 11819 3.81 -3.777 16.20 8.21 1 150 0.848 217 140 0 50 both 0.612 0.401 0.010 0.005 4591 1.46 -0.057 4.35 3.19 1.187 0.188 3356 8.07 0.748 4.45 2.33 1.198 0.0At 218 160 0 50 East 0.413 0.603 0.010 0.005 4612 1.44 -0.041 6.37 3.20 1.182 0.118 3372 1.07 0.244 4.48 2 34 1.208 0.042 219 159 4 50 West 0.410 0.400 0.010 0.005 4593 1.45 -0.058 4.35 3.19 1.183 0.118 3354 1.04 0.?45 4.45 2.33 1.200 0.041 220 143 0 50 both 0.580 0.534 0.046 0.021 12631 4.10 -4.280 17.14 8.77 1.112 0.840 4649 1.52 -0.142 6.43 3.24 1.149 0.117 221 143 0 50 East 0.591 0.540 0.051 0.027 18469 3.72 -3.412 15.55 7.97 1.103 0.833 4423 1.50 -0.121 6.34 3.21 8 145 0.186 222 163 0 50 West 0.590 0.534 0.056 0.031 11286 3.64 -3.326 15.34 7.84 1.121 0.847 4564 1.48 -0.107 4.26 3.17 1.152 0.115 223 140 0 50 Both 0.408 0.403 0.005 0.002 3318 1.05 0.259 4.58 2.30 1.181 0.061 4534 1.44 -0.043 6.29 3.15 1.199 0.120 224 160 0 50 East 0.408 0.403 0.005 0.002 3323 1.04 0.259 4.58 2.31 1.175 0.060 4592 1.44 -0.044 e.40 3.19 1.219 0.822 225 160 0 50 West 0 408 0.598 0.010 0.005 3313 1.05 0.259 4.55 2.30 1.154 0.059 4587 1.44 -0.044 e.34 3.19 1.200 0.120 226 let 0 50 Both 0.411 0.406 0.005 0.002 4626 1.48 -0.048 4.42 3.21 1.203 0.120 - - - - - - -
0.406 0.005 0.002 4591 1.47 -0.053 e.35 3.19 1.18e 0.118 - - - - - - - 227 141 0 50 East 0.411 228 160 0 50 West 0.408 0.603 0.005 0.002 4587 1.46 -0.054 6.35 3.19 1.390 0.119 - - - - - - - ([) 229 141 0 50 toth 0.411 0.404 0.005 0.002 - - - - - - - 4478 1.49 -0.084 6.51 3.25 1.212 0 121 230 tot 0 50 East 0. ell 0.604 0.005 0.002 - - - - - - - 4456 1.48 -0.001 6 48 3 23 1 217 0.121 231 tot 0 50 West 0.411 0.606 0.005 0.002 - - - - - - - 4654 1.48 -0.083 6 48 3 23 1.217 0 121 232 172 R 50 loth 0.474 0.443 0.031 0.017 4204 1.45 -0 110 5 82 2 92 1.189 0.119 4251 1 47 -0.094 5.73 2 95 1.081 0.108 233 172 R 50 East 0.474 0.438 0.036 0.019 4248 1 48 -0.130 5.90 2.96 1.185 0.118 4302 1.49 -0.109 5.79 2 99 1.072 0.107 238 172 R 50 West 0.475 0.440 0.036 0.019 4259 1.47 -0.119 5.84 2 94 1 154 0.115 4263 1.48 -0.099 5.74 2.98 1.055 0.105 235 172 R 50 toth 0.447 0.385 0.041 0.033 4263 1.47 -0.183 5.90 2.94 1.187 0.118 11898 4.11 -3.903 16.20 8.27 1.120 0.844 236 172 R 50 East 0.445 0.373 0.072 0.040 420e 1 45 -0 184 5.84 2.92 1.207 0.320 11425 4.02 -3.704 15.79 8.08 1.112 0.840 l' 237 172 R 50 West 0.445 0.379 0.067 0.037 4217 8.46 -0 174 5.81 2 93 1.175 0.317 11434 4.02 -3.724 15.84 8.06 1.121 0.847 238 172 50 both 0.474 0 443 0.031 0.017 4214 1.44 -0.110 5.82 2.93 1.180 0.118 3064 1.04 0.171 4.08 2.13 1.030 0.053 ( R 4217 3.46 -0 115 5.84 2 93 1.197 0.119 3201 1.11 0.149 4.24 2.22 3.015 0 052 l 239 172 R 50 East 0.474 0.443 0.031 0.016 240 172 R 50 West 0.474 0.443 0.031 0.016 4204 1.45 -0.110 5.82 2 92 1.188 0.139 3192 1 10 0.149 4.24 2.22 1.026 0.053 241 173 R 50 both 0.433 0.249 0.184 0.092 12414 4.35 -4.482 17.01 8.68 1.121 0.847 4221 1.47 -0.160 5.00 2 93 0.648 0.045 242 173 R 50 East 0.443 0.269 0.174 0.098 11454 3.99 -3 709 15.40 7 96 1.121 0.847 4244 1.48 -0.169 5.17 2.95 0.729 0.073 243 172 R 50 West 0.445 0.284 0.159 0.092 11241 3.09 -3.568 15.35 7.82 1.127 0.851 4239 1.47 -0 164 5.25 2 94 0.778 0.078 i 244 172 R 50 both 0.444 0.444 0.020 0.011 3113 3.08 0 149 4.24 2.te 3.145 0.059 4418 1.53 -0.14e 4.02 3.04 8.127 0 112 245 172 R 50 East 0.444 0 446 0.020 0.011 3059 1.04 0 159 4.19 2 13 1.144 0.059 4345 1.50 -0.130 5.93 3.02 1.133 0.113 246 172 R 50 West 0.448 0 442 0.024 0.014 3048 1.05 0 145 4.12 2 12 1.089 0.056 4324 1 50 -0.12 5.87 3.01 1.106 0.110 247 173 R 50 toth 0.462 0.448 0.020 0.011 4238 1.48 -0 117 5.84 2 94 1.175 0.117 - - - - - - - 248 173 R 50 East 0.442 0.44I 0.020 0.011 4215 1.47 -0.112 5.82 2 93 1.179 0.118 - - - - - - - 249 173 R 50 West 0.448 0.448 0.020 0.011 4210 1.47 -0 104 5.82 2 92 1.183 0.188 - - - - - - - 250 172 R 50 both 0.444 0.461 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4227 1.47 -0.090 5.81 2.94 1 160 0.316 251 172 R 50 East 0.464 0.441 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4202 1.44 -0.088 5.80 2 92 1.17e 0.117 252 172 50 West 0.444 0.441 0.005 0.003 - - - - - - - 4202 8.44 -0.088 5 80 2 92 1 174 0 117 ( R l . . . . . .- . . . . . . ~ . . - . . . . . - ~ . . . . , l . I ! 1 For biochase condittons see Fasure 9. Blochase area as expressed as tercentase of vertical screen area entw. Mortrontal screens were blocted thrsushout these tests. 2 All Pterometer head seasurements are eurressed in teres of the actual Protutwar elevatnon. Mean Sr.: tevel, at baterford - 3.
-., n 4 - .- 3 , ., . . . . _
,i ,,I Table 3 Test Seraes III - Confadence Limats Tests Test Conditions and Results I ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,
......,............g....... ............ 7 6
rest Water Die s Flom Paeza Head Screen toss 1&olu e INient 16 elm 6 ImTest
' O No. Tes* 1 Free Ianh Swee nodel Proto Desch Fape head Vel Vel toss Frete Basch Pape Head Vel vel Loss prete Disch ne W.C. V.C. Ia*e Coeff 1 s.t at e ne v.C. v.C. F ee coeff Intane des Lost Loss F ft ft ft ft USame Ete ft fem fes ft U$see E+6 ft fes frs ft I 174 n 50 both -3.780 -3.832 0.051 0.029 11587 4.04 -7.875 15.73 8.05 1.10P 0.837 4215 1.48 -4.367 5.72 2.93 1.108 0.131 , 2 174 n 50 toth -3.787 -3.838 0.051 0.028 11621 4.07 -7.916 15.00 8.07 1.114 0.841 4228 3.48 -4.373 5.72 2.94 1.096 0.109 3 174 n 50 toth -3.789 -3.840 0.051 0.028 11577 4.04 -7.bse 15.73 0.04 1.113 0.841 4241 1.49 -4.382 5.76 2.95 1.109 0.181 4 174 n 50 toth -3.789 -3.841 0.051 0.028 11565 4.05 -7.871 15.70 8.03 1.109 0.8 38 4246 1.50 -4.387 5.78 2.94 1.102 0.110 5 174 n 50 both -3.790 -3.846 0.054 0.031 11552 4.05 -7.844 15.68 0.02 1.108 0.837 4247 1.49 -4.384 5.74 2.95 1.089 0.109 a 174 n 50 toth -3.797 -3.848 0.051 0.028 18602 4.07 -7.912 15.77 8.06 1 183 0.841 4209 1.48 -4.379 5.70 2.92 1.100 0 110 7 874 n 50 toth -3.797 -3.854 0.056 0.031 18452 4.08 -7.948 15 83 8.09 1.111 0.039 4171 1.44 -4.377 5.44 2.90 1 106 0.110 e 175 n 50 toth -3.807 -3.863 0.054 0.031 11542 4.08 -7.897 15.71 8.03 1.112 0.840 4359 1.54 -4.437 5.93 3.03 1.114 0.111 9 175 M 50 both -3.807 -3.844 0.056 0.031 11e?8 4.30 -7.943 15 80 8.08 1.117 0.840 4171 1.47 -4.388 5.44 2.90 1.108 0.111 to 175 r n 50 both -3.812 -3.849 0.054 0.031 18635 4.11 -7.953 15.83 0.08 1.112 0.840 4247 1.50 -4.408 5.74 2.95 1.090 0.109 il 175 n 50 loth -3.838 -3.874 0.054 0.031 11654 4.11 -7.974 15.84 8.10 1.113 0.841 4159 8.47 -4.387 5.60 2.89 1.077 0.107 12 175 n 50 both -3.818 -3.874 0.054 0.031 11580 4.09 -7.933 15.74 8.04 1.118 0.845 4261 1.50 -4.416 5.76 2.94 1.090 0.109 13 175 n 50 Both -3.823 -3.879 0.054 0.030 18605 4.09 -7.953 15.79 8.04 1.117 0.844 4414 1 54 -4.443 5.88 3.07 1.030 0.103 14 175 n 50 both -3.833 -3.889 0.054 0.031 18636 4.11 -0.010 15.88 8.08 1.130 0.853 4310 1.52 -4.442 5.82 2.99 1 084 0.108 35 175 n 50 toth -3.833 3.889 0.054 0.031 18635 4 11 -0.010 15.88 8.08 1 130 0.854 4133 1 46 -4.398 5.58 2.87 1.085 0.108 14 175 a 50 toth -3.838 -3.894 0.054 0.032 11422 4.03 -7.871 15.40 7.93 1.133 0.854 4185 1.48 -4.417 5.45 2.91 1.088 0.109 17 175 m 50 toth -3.848 -3.905 0.056 0.032 18440 d.04 -7.887 15.41 7.95 1.129 0.853 4133 1.46 -4.411 5.54 2.87 1.075 0.107 18 175 n 50 both -3.848 -3.905 0.056 0.031 11411 4.10 -0.020 15.87 8.07 1.134 0.858 4235 1.49 -4.442 5.73 2.94 1.098 0.110 O^ 19 175 M 50 toth -3.848 -3.905 0.056 0.031 11411 4.10 -0.020 15.87 8.07 1 134 0.858 4396 1.55 -4.480 5.93 3.05 1.085 0.108 20 175 n 50 Both -3.849 -3.904 0.054 0.031 31749 4.15 -0 127 14.07 0.18 1.133 0.854 4171 1.47 -4.428 5.45 2.90 1.102 0 110
_... ,..................~. . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , , 1 For blochase condations see Fisure 9. Slockase area is expressed as percentaae of wertical screen area ontu. Horazontal screens were bloc 6ed throushout these tests. 2 ell piezonete" head esasurements are espressed in teres of the actual prototwee elevatione nean Sea Levele at Waterford - 3. O m.y .. , . . 1
- v. - i f r.r; c e N r. n is n . + f,u o c. t . -
r :. t m i I l . l 1 l l l
*)
i i. t i i i i 4
.' l p
1 l FIGURES : 6 {
, i i i i
l
.t i
9 1 t t l 9
! t r
L O' m i n
^
FidURE I
' b, PLANT 4 Tv-If ' ',
1 I i e REACTOR CAVITY l I O r -------
- I S.I.S SUMP q l l t
~
I
._ - l
' I E_ ,
'l [i f_ __
' ,L _ _ _
MODEL BOUNDARY yd TRAIN A TRAIN 8 INTA K E INTA K E SCALE : I" = 20'- 0" WATERFORD STEA M ELECTRIC STATION i 1 UNIT 3 O LO C ATION OF S. I.S. INTAKE SUMP ) IN CONTAINMENT BUILDING 1 WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. exil 6639 A-wCH sm 82
.'Jl) l1 jt P. - D v E
# )(T -
T E ' V O M n E s A R O a e F s O i O R g lI E
- _ G l I A
l C 0 N _ j _ I
.'M 4 I 5 E
E R ) I L d h s.1 ,. ;! C S "0 _ E '- R . VR 1 ' -
)
O O __ L _ EU LT R C E h B+cI [- 1 D N *5 A = T ( P. Y F R _ E _ D I I E TT AE wD [ 4 iP(J. r I R "I O N _ o X O U _ r i,l !! .'! . l i t' :: A O E L L B R_ 0 F A 4 L A E B _ M_ I 4 I
- l. L iI.
4 G S C A N N _ ilU C I l ( A RI C _ E 5 3.;e l 1 A I T T G
- i$,: - il C N_
I: A E E L O I T _ x A C) G P. 7lE l- - A ,1T 1
.i\-
- !:' R G
- A V _
I NY IT f cl l
- R I T A(
i i H E _ R T S G 4 I B O _ g W _ - R s < O O N
" I i
a/
~- [ -
- _ iU D L
E A L P EG CN
) ,,
. g,J' -
l !1l1
]
' , 3 E T
S FITI I S RE OT
~ -
N R
~
i OO IF A T AD RE Y B V AG _ IO w nO N w'O O _ LM A E RNLA OEEL CR N O OPBE DO S I T P A A p(/ V R E SR R O T E ,
/l g-BE Osu T
C A R U OA LE S LR TN A n S SC WF E O R h S A E C C A L AE T CC IAI N TLA N\ P E T D T RPR E VNI D
%. A C
I D N L S E I R
\
I O
,g3i-Q 'O O T
\\w1l %t D E
A R O B
. R L E A O B L R M T C N) U I O . N L C P U Y A R T R E( D SE Y UV H FL FiA A T Dw D
N E- A A i N A L C P 2-N R E T S E W f , t ' 1 l h i I' g . l
Y T I L I N C OI A T F A T S T C S RI E 3 o T C T N P E H L3 D P E N
- hi }
P M 5 U 2 1 MI AN T A 3 - V EU T L _ S E D D M (P 2 i R O F O M R o P E N H F ( T A O 3 O} } vP P 57 M U i W N A L ) P P. Y T M A ( I ) E P V Y L A V ( T ( S R R E L E T O T A R E E T M H N O C E E C FI l, 1 S G RI O o p D LI L R N A H OA FT H W0 I E ND C S , S } U 6 P A MR T l O O _ } v LF O l (" R
' TS.S NE E
~
@ t_ ,
- Ov ClA G R
U l EV IF K H A TE T lE ( NaS I [
'?
g X.
,= E5 z
o
) D
/ P.
Y T ( T E K S
\
E V O M E R A o B F P O S T O R rf E _ - - _ G A N I I C W O ' N f D ;. ' l 0 E
- 4 E
- I I R I
!;l C S "0 pEm B tf I
f
' I
! 1 '
D N '5 R - - O O - Yo . i
) L - E I '
A = P. Y T F R - E - I I 7E E Y"C iVLy R "I O ( D N - J_ - x U 1 N' O E L L Il I 0 B R - I _I il!l ' i IrI[l
!I I
F A:
/ s I l WA X . W. L . + O*- 6
- 7 e
4 ___ s (:. -
-g .
um. w. L. - s'. e"
- v. __
__________.9___.....__.__ _ E < le
~
1 l . A ,.
.~,
r_ -
\ h .
3' _. -m 9 7 '
..~..*.
08S. .
. ' . .. * ..h'~
...+. - :-
..__ CHAMBER . ' * . .' '
J .,e
, '-~ . . Ik L_. . ,J
, //..; ~-
-'.. . ; -)
. q .. . . .; . ; .;
; . . . ;: ,:e_. , .
SECTION A - A (SCALE : I"= 5'-0")
,1 WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION O NOTE : Grc. ting cage, details of sump screen UNIT 3 C and bric-o-broc not shown, 7 g
SECTION OF MODEL AND TEST FACILITY ta WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. b616638 A-WCH sm 82
-~ ~ -- .. . . - - ~ .. .
44 W" i?j
.h ?
hj Tl<j g@k 5 f at + g -# g g-i Ns l f!-flgll!,!:' a A sEadi w' a 3 ,o N!i!
,a3" s = _
y
? , ;
y,%24E74% 7 2nyc, ill is
-s Ja h S 4 1 h..wg,cr :i ;
- s:2 O . w_ WM l hl h 'se k +BMw. j aj L ljj .9 ]' "
& E th l !! 2 M.
m 43 u ; N(3b4[/
%y. 97-pa:.f ;. .
nt! j.I j 29.., tu ' lIl I fhi ! $ n; st y 3.- 7 - l l l \ 2 {
, ! y 7
in "
' ,n* xe .
1 11 E' kip;ga. gg }'}y 1 m - wm NW .
,. i
[h! f k. e hM3E.d g m$ w01 .q$6h we I
= w w w" "y " y * "' ;+a O &dI??WhiM5k*?3
' 4 25 it u 4 w:4 9 KD J eg Mg' ; d;;;NE'9
'~"r0 :t '~ '" - ': s u n FUlt;ig:?n w@
q
- =_ _ L
ll l i /
"O N -
0 4 T '4 A - T S C L I E R T C T E L 3 A E l le MI T R c p A N O ty EU O T i S L a F t
-l" G D m R F
A O M F O [/ R E T A N W A _NP IN L
. I '
I 0- P
.fI ' j I
.I' e I1!liIii8l1_
7 w:.T* HIl l9 _
#H. u
.I
.}
T-Z
#~ N W
- i O
H 6 ,il,!i1l-_ S x _ Y T) O "0 c _ N G
'5 a _
N *s I l _ T A : 6 _ _ RE G L A
- SC
_ NI A L
.I :i'! ' I ,e etl* lt P
.l *
= "
~
tl. l. illll
\'j d
eroee n D . T
=
L n. e eH e , l-s ,.N. l. S E en I . s te R
, dcee O es e T .
A . _ _lr k. s [i'llt' 'l
- ,!.. l!l-e egn .
yt e i ae sagr h
- R O
B A
.l e s ape en L 1
. lee f .osv e C
.m, e IL sr e6 U A
- R t D L T Y L o H A m w A s D m A a N T
A C ae m s N * ,, R , E T S E
- a. ,
Wu
%f h g
FIGURE 6 i O f. , ,n
. QiVb: 0,%% .1:: I".V 8
n- .24'
- N&t-f k
?.h.i.e.
R. k b??,'fnE :l. qs'[h
, , .. - 'A{??A.5kk' ' > m.i v$. .h.th.i'M
. 0 c es , $ ' bq,. m y $ ;! $ i k N S Y I :t N~ & p W e E'
_$..&,.._.k 3 b
.m ah_. mYhhh c.;
5
.~ ..
.'? '..
,' 6,' 2,g.y mm.
- . , e.L.. 3 it,5 .3. ,r s ..1
' ~, 6.IF,ff i #',Y,' { ;',h, N.. kg,4
*.... c: ; *, m ; ... r
'+
ul ps y,
. ..:*. Ja ? ~
- u. :.y,ye y,eg. ,. , g,9;*,
.vg y
- Ys Ii s -t. 5, ,$;
(.,p.g.,n ,> .mc. ,3:. c .~w m"fy_- e- ;L.. .- T , - .. h ' '
' ;.W
. s.
?'; j!n .
c y
, . i.
=
1 j, r . . .g
. . ,4
- ;, z. ; ,
[ fjj " ,
" ([1y.ie: ff r_t . .. , 3"b , -
, i'_ f y,1 gt:1 1 .$ 4 t, I',s .. y 4I -*
.y. tn-2:~ + .Q 4' / ; ' A'~ : .
, , .? ,
;;}f&e'f-[p !: v , ';,n:. Qf},j)'
.Q q!U,?Uf:{:h. >. ? . ~1
.- m ' '
f}nf&, - y$p . 99 jay y?? // s,t 4s' L .x . ~ gn s M L ,j'{ g,L ? s's ?;;W t*l
. . . , 'I spln t?f !',;.-5 ,v' {i l- cx,n . ..e M& V' > - ji 4(, M t
'" % ' H km %), l%r e ' g:l.[ffr::, \. 't G 5{kn- p/tC/2'#f7 W N hfAN -
Y
'( . i *
',',j jf l^ M.%$f} ~ . *:- ~
}$h?'./ $
'* I f.'k$ % ,e s..o,r +;;, ,. s
-~~~..___. '. y , .; i:hk
- l}=@ vE .
~
+t : c.
' Sp- ~ j
.v 2, <s.-n t<
,.'- . : sy.. 4
=
w f )r e <:v' s.p r 8
- e. r.. .
..e.tr s a .
~-
?
6fe dW > " -
'd :
Ns"uMf
% :1 N' hth.d wFf* - ~
~s~h,%-#e 4 t- w ~&,) M ='
O CONTAINMENT WALL, SCREEN CAGE AND TSP BASKETS WATERFORD-3 SIS SUMP MODEL STUDY
- - - ---A--- + --. - . . _ _ .,,,_,, _ __ __
FIGUPE 7 o s.n . ue ,,mp28$ w n .L.a <~, 1 fd%" . Y - *
,r ,
." p. ..
5 ,-y (:: f .
*i ,i.Y
~ * ,
, ., :q %
- t
, y-
/
..s-w a ..
l , 2 r-is - WW.,,'C N - L q, a :sps, e . I ,. - L.J
.. n') -h -
l t, A, a. \
.b,?j . ~ >- 1 b c C I l t c. .b I-, ' . + t"J ". ? D l e.
.. o r
,8%***'9 - *f '
b ' I'. ' 3'- m' o rdi -g [.M. . ~f 1 - # r y 'id'f M..'af.A C;D. N' ./; 9 3 - .% 5 $ j e - - *, . g 1 o ; s-C, ,d. ,. / ,
. .n. w - ' 52- ;
N 'L ' . ( .s. .k *' ' ( wg
. g w- a m O
+- . d% . '- , L m,; ,-
=,, . :- m
** m
' .I9 i RQy'
+-er . .' P , '] .(.,. f. *
- e
.y, m
nl(. 7 ; g w
- g. = .. - _= ,
.1 ,o w gh m,t .k 4r u m h ;.- . . .,
r
' _ ','*E.-(
' 4 e
',k .b J/ 4'=f'g't
- v. g m '
+-
*t.a
- l , ,' r d h d s s '., q. y " gi,.S.: !M < 5 2 b,-~TG,4. . _ ,
. ..{f. _
m E
.r_ - w43
,. g, fy p ,pY, - L.J P g '; f , .
sta=.w~ - . f.,'I f. 5's
- sfn ,- < W ys " w, *i
- Y
,A : *
.q
, ..s.' ..
.~ .- r s ., tM i :~i /g .'
I x H 3 t J%s.w,pp , 4- [ c', ,; u- -t a t! Q 42.'. > t
.R v.
t . c.
/ .N '.%q
( g l.1 Y!q,, .i. 4.',..T; ,
,'~
s.
} .Y .. f)
, 9
>, . k
, .s
( #h
.a,-. \*
s y s h'.5 !,'" Q.'in *. .,f-;c. Eq yrs ~
,'- l
' ' lV}
l j
,1 lf-h?-$
"hgQ..w' -* 4m i-
>m.m 9; ;\. .. e;y n 4.Q.
sw &.,a{f kh h;; w:h. ,b h . n.;,:$n:$h E it f 't. w m'
' Rf < *; ..' A'\ ' & <.
~ .
ry -
. N'fyt:
h$ u+., n.hh0h, , ..kB,y h .m0 ' www. . n.. .
- ~. . w. ., j.
a.u
. .; 1 f *. c~**'-
e ,&~~.%_..~e~s;t T;.
~L - v g- 'p t
lhp_ cA+ gog g.* ?j ,f ^. f f~') . r
% 4.sw. h .At** ,mt.ff', 'i'.'T 3 4%., .kpf
&*;OG3/~
N p - [%, Y 4 t, ,W . ;.r . m,
..,..>s~:n ?,.
;e- -p~ y:.Q
,.,Q y t se
-s w$b.h'.?Y? p.$* .' w(;M'd> . c:"(*-sm &y;e. ?)
- s. n! e ,:. -
~ ' ~ , ..,, y.y k,,,.p Y t Y Y? ~ #WAYU??k A
e> u + an.;. :.aag;a .. c w . ..
- v. .t. q g ., ,%[v. v..,...a.. .
- - i... ,.,.
.{ g
-A y'['p::T.?Qi %. Q.};,. 73LTsh 4: ;.@TQW 1 m'm'7%DMU. - ,Q.j ~ -. .-.
t'W 4 0'5'L5 ,1 f
- , , . a *a _ , - , _ _ .
FIGURE 8 7
. .s e i f .
=~
, ;gn a
w
} ' ;d ' ;,'.h$0 c , .
e 8 2 1ran ", J , ju ( N'/
/' ,
-wd lTHGb.
. -~ ?:45 X.
; >i i': .
\ ,M 3 L ,'? f mc. s
*3n';l.
=y _n, 4 fi.; 3 Wd..' .
- a. ,7j ,
E 8 l
% %se h -h
. .; g3
; z AL O. r; % g' ,p "g- ,
l z.
-. 5 i au L wb_bkk g- 1 kw s LW.i
- m.
. .. -.a :
ee L 1 A r.a. t @w / . TS, ~f, I E c.
.. 1 j
-,w a,n,,,
.. n, ..i u- :
-. )vd , A ;, mm g., *k t w.~1
_.. , 3 e : J *"' 4 mQ4 \ .y ,%.. < s--. ch ;
]M:,b}' i
- j. i!: NA/ '
bh! gnyg (h h ;"'*g 4.t): i 4' 2 3. :
$ 9 g-,
-.- 4: # 9' m o n
l 8g w
.; '.Q h w' .n. ].
j ,
.-. r n l MD , waw - . .: .c. uu xp, NN kh i swux kk$a 6 ig. s gal fl fki u
~
npuruxw
-r
. 4 ~
f tb..,,- k g}j[32 &4 g*'q '
- s ef addk &,4 n a.
O
-w.,
$$$: @ d- ..
J.:p$fW$a$;ymsw,n$Mi@ e _ _ = - - -$ s6fM60 - . i 1 i
~ ~
FIGURE 9 TEST SERIES 1 CONFIGUR ATIONS A - VERT: CAL SCREENS secCutD soo % O - o eo 'A' $c ir a'oc ro 'is TO TAL SCREEN SLOCAAGE 90 % >+.
. , , ., , f ' g, f,', ,,
E - MoeJONTAL SCNEE% SLOCsED 00% a' cA sc << > 'oc ro i s TOTAL SCREEN e.0CnAGE 90 *,e ' -- H SawE As E PLANT
~
y/G' ' '7'.;'/'
%.'ff-{
B-Sake AS A F - Mo*izomT AL SCREEN eLOCato soo% J - sauf As r l
/e,, _ _ , , , . . . .: . . . . . _
;'/, vf RTiC AL SCREENS SLOCRED 84 % .-
~j i j l[ ~- l TOTAL SCRifN BLOCa AGE 98 % [
? i' ( $ ! i[/4 ghM: ^'4fl['- 7/ '
C - 5Aut as A 7
- - - - - G SAME A$ F K-Sauf ASF O - - - .
o -sA E As A TEST SERIES II 8 M CONFIGURATIONS L- MORi20NTAL SCREEN eLoCato 100% N - NORIZONTAL SCREEN BLOCKED 100%
,'//
// 7,-[//.. ,. VERTICAL SCREENS umstoCuto.
4,,fjV,' TOP 50% or VERTICAL SCREENS stoCnEn
. . . . . Q - NORs70NTAL SCREEN BLOCEED BOO %
,p/?.5:. . . :,f'5 'gO/Zf@_, , . ;, RisnT e.Atr or VERTICAL SCREENS
'/,( g' I',h ? b i
y ,/,, ',, ,,i M - HORIZONTAL SCREEN BLOCKED 800% P MoRizoNTAL sCRtEN etoCmEo soo% , - - - - - - - , . . R-nomizomTAL sCREtm stoCato soo% e vfRTICAL SCREENS SLOCNED 50% ' 80TTOne SO% OF VERTICAL SCREEDS [. LEFT MALF OF wtRTICAL SCREENS l l s SV ALTERN ATE 3" WIDE OPEN AND : g gLOCKED. l : q SLOCRED. l,.. j a SLOCKED STRIPS.
/,/j
.no , - ---,,
wATERFORO STEAhl ELECTRIC STATION SCREEN BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS
,]ESTrqN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD
O O PRESSURE TAP NUMBERS rt TRAIN A hhhhh h h Ta^i" e EFJB EE Liij 8 e
/
\
I p-Em t -- i t- <t-e--o-
/
l 4
/
\ n il i
14"
,/
I 1 s H+H-M-IN TAKE LIP SCALE I/"= I 2 l ' - 0" WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT 3 ] c) C LOCATIONS OF PRESSURE TAPS FOR $ INTAKE LOSS M E ASUREMENTS WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. bail 6638 A.WCH sm82 o _ . . . , _ _ . . . . . = = . -
FIGURE 11 1
+
0 b O . a >
.e g 1- -
.- w4. #g4 EIb De J a* s'9 u
i, pry; v y,r E xd f$@M:. Mdesj.? inW}yp?'fdy'Mhe fQ4 Wit /, f='ptwp i
; Mu .
g[
]$k ?$ggs:;t.gN 'L -
I g.
. %,) .
c h..y.M.k+}Wk.fi . c mm L > s; jksQ:2he m
- wy - s., w .w, r s @. e,. ,..y R._a,b.m..
n '5vs.* 8 Y';~-'.','"
.c .
~. .s .a -
I % [*: ,c a- ,8 y-;3 g 3 o s}. y,t. : %. r. <% y' - e - Q?[i.. qs irfj
~
.h. - Mdh w,r . s q -),,g- J.c.',e:m- '.,,,-D--,, .-. .
,i t
%'n.a..v,g.c%
. ' i c.* gf vhvg;',44,.
f . I 4'
- y' t,.> 't
'[i ,. MF l
l - ( T
,A . -?l%WQ,'6ll9,
[ ps * ,T ir * ;t y" 4. ,I k#l kNh[ ' , ' j
~
' $0 th/;'<
is :- $$' 'M:.^.Y'3
- ?
.(Q~ *"?' O 0h%}.CT ' ';N f i.wl,l;a - y F
\
. ,7.
-s p; t. pg. 4~ u
%, , , n,.- A .
- ix
- . e.c.-f; , >. m#,
s.~ - q.- '
,s :
'.A . 3 .m, ,. . < . . m ,.4:.
. ;),4 -,% s w ,. ~ : 3.,9,.ted v4 9 4 ~;. a..u..g % .
.g+'(*[,( D -w?s [ 5 '
y eq a
)= f
.;f) ,9 p
[.^. M.) b
.i y[--k'c,,s( ',?
*_ > , - ;, y;
, , N '#
m .. ' w E w ., i I q,g,;>k.
' gk'cf,: c.w('? k . ~.4jN . t . 4 -. , ,,' t l. v
, w g
.a-
. . . v cw r
- s. ..-
. k+? -.. .: a' .- - >
r . 4
~> .= ~
.s m.
wusm. . i e - x z
.. e
.. c '" **i H ")
O 1
, . . . . *r JJs s-ng4 w:7.,.. s '
)_
7 ., y. = m
.\. ' 4, r-s
.- m.
c
.**J. $, *
, .- e Z M 49 -'
- i - -
m l 4 1.,. . I E 2 . ,3.; . . W f s m q ' .* e. jW ,' z e 6, y;% ' ' W c
..r P l E
. . x o i
.. -I W t.a_
*f W W
- d W
.F o r 1 f,t ( , :>
4 c= E
-n.y ,
, ,)
a,*
.,t3 0 ,,
1 8
. '*f ,
't-6.o,
- na. y- . 3 ;-
Q, ,' - [. } * * #
- i e;
** 3
.* 4 s
* , ,s . , ,-w
.s t ' ,
^
> ,, , - ~sk +loe e
' -T 3r , . ' [h aa -, ' . ,
, - [ a su j
-y,, ,
s -
. 4, .y . ,
,j- .6 s {
c... .s[
-.s..
4
%'- Y. ) I
.l y-
,..L'
# ' . -7 i i W. ,}
. [
L k ~ t;',.- ,*7
- e%, * (6.. , . ' .,
' " ,. , s
.. / y -
4 ?. .'C.*.i ,, y ,c
- ,s ! % i
* . p' - -
. e, #.% 4e ,* -
i i
,, .g '
' * * > 'e . F, ; i*
- i . - . y+1,.> .n.4
' ' a l -
j , ,.7.;, i
.. , - ~ > .', <;., n,,, g:% g
. 4 ., ,= er I
'l SJ,' 6
*)
< - 8 g
J,.. ' 1 r,
, "g. ., .#- - .
#_ ,, ; 5 l I
e ', j .
's * *
"lf.%
s , r,. .,
' J- ". .
s
?
.^'# , ... .#,. . ..
f.
* - , , .; ;y
.,, :s:; e
- .f P
- q'
- ( ,O.,a- .d.*!
- .: s l
.L .~ 5 i ,
.s 1 I gP
- f* { ,
. . . , t, ; . ,
4 - -
.- 0 l
- l j},
l g;-;- y ,%. 1 _ .m x , n ,. e ..f.. -r.c.-e.m,m. _ ..,,..v. .. --, -- -
FIGURE 12 O p ,L w,.a, m * .
.f N'% y m M,4- '" M .W W % -,DM$%'MA.w M. Qd?.MDMfi-w.wv4 mC xt:4f
,,n c.A V #4s m y6.bIJ kNc.;..v e9 m- p;,?. ~ m e,W.w .a w y w..,'$4 ja.y ar;- .
. .. y,h-(.1i..
; s st u.v?W3 e v , - rY
-r o*w W L.$ s $.U .q+
L' s. j.* i a W +,
, , .;+4. F nM'm 5 .Y. . ,,...*:,>,.
^*je h,r &~
- v. s .U.cf,g.,
e
. . u,K .
et iq,w l q's . -;. o pg w . *
. . a. t +
. m. c .y
..-w -.
- jg
! 3 ,et;;r = y~;ysu, y.,, , s :.3 y -s m; . s q,, D.~y
- u. p? , ., . . g., g. . w p o, p.; .ya, .;y u , $ .;. W.m ye*
.. y, ; wag g Q ,
w , Y t n e .s
,s s, , m;u. ;4 p t. & g%g,.s?~y .
,; = y. m 3;r qy 4
.. . tyl
...,......r......,, ,
- s.%o.ym:n Q% % :n.Wh+f,y&, .sngH.$dk:g, #g&.e..
+ g . u . w. ,. mg. 'hww.. m.
.o S .3 s,- - - v. .y .
'sf* [ y yF s - -
t .~ L
. ~ i p ^* K
[}l
.t..7 y w e. v. e.,r,9; c -
y ,,- $ , y.. 1 - . l , . r
- u.
- a -
a .a.J.w.o,: P*>, r .u. - l ..3 y.,
, y 9.s,,..- g.
h. p y 2
.i.s..- . ,3,: , . .W ..
.s..,wss e . nsc c . . .
- M. .1, , 44 ..4. g y
' w% . ...-y 4;v. * . g t ...,.g
*g .c} 1d. .
e.,. n . - r w-
,.6y,p #--
+: 5; ,s* rJ;gy m a..he.44.m
' - ~* .
n 4 g u.
,y n,g,.
l
- 9 16 yy l
I ( #h D k N[ gtft hdy. yk ?_f5 $fjk)bGr f
., ;G s OR.n. . h y- n ,.%.-
.s -
m m.. ppd. . c. O e rw ,}. Q.w-t ,po t.%^* .c *}% tn. .- 4 7
- h ' i,vs'.4 M. ahl A? fhp.67Mt.n 44'["
' ' .?wpg.g. . w .. - v g ~.4
.gy W 7 ,[. .%.: .o.'
M 4 s I +MQ.h.f g 4$.N (w ;i
* -"i *..
y 'Wv
' [ [. f ' '., g%Qbp >;;
i l .
. 4,
, - t ?n , %5q
.c -- . a; l .
, e .- n. '. ;_.;r dp x , '. _
, . t.e9., -j pa.a m, 3...wpc ,.,. 3 _ i 4
. . d,. ,; 9G, -+f, y ywnAhur
- Qy%%dQ4,4g $
. *" -p'
[il Ql J y&>.Q'U % Q'k j $$pe
. A.. . p w t.f ;M.; 3,. _ e. . ,
n ; u
'13'.tg*
e.3 4
- .(.b! - ww c ut 'i
- m. .f -. .~, ... .m, ..wg.m... ,93.w%w
. amAw. . . y.e 4. 9,,.. m , %.x.'
%, .n rg th.,, .u.d,.
-e'
- 3 ,:,.unA*, , x; ;* : h cf, af r. ,f.:~n vAs,n.g .&:r ~wgh5
.e : .
- T e' .? " X %'% Mv .&
- , -4: .
- 3. . - - . -
u,yagpf e>% .
*, , - .. s -n <
y nm;n q ., - 4,hy
.. ae
., - - p .e . y w:bm(6 +M.
e _. ..,..p. - g M :: .n ~R d W*%. g n c ., 9i
.= c f M -' p.,f.,., , .) . es ..s.A h .t A e f
. i
;y A.
9 4. il
- c , 4'.. w
, ,l ,
,n..
- .q :v.u.. *.L ( w . .L.(w,: %;, s.,( e. s n:J.V c. P ,m, _.
g
.. y . .
4 i oj, p.3
, . . ', r a
e
.c 4,* . , - c . . c.m %,,. g, . . igYg .
- g. .qw g4 ,,.
r u <
;t....i. a n p u%4 s. . +- +
3, ,q- ,On d y, W
. i r .
s .
- ... s'n- ,:_ . ~ .,.w,n, & r
-+ ~
m y . . ;, j ,, . e 6.J 3 6 i ,
.4 n.pqu, .w,m.wk .r. . %n a
... , .. r- >s .
=. .
-...s.n . ..g . :. m q 3 4+;.QB.2 i.25~ W Q M Q .M f9 & y~f 3' u .fo iqA 1 M gy.
? & & h h ;f@. 4 h.:,,
# v. n ., m n
..K, a $.w: oihw. w.h~&aw..
r J .c w +, w: .g' s - .Wv m.g. .- T' J-w?'r4dw ,n,, w
. .a. . -
. u.
i%.,m M.syv4M' - ^9 aa. k &W
' r' '
v N U &j f
<S*
n w ms c r.y'*^5 un.yp .i,-4 'm4., w '. 6 . A e h, e $ .5
" K !.-a s
n 4 I i M - d .e 4 c&r s ^ yr*
' - i. ; '1 % d ; , : ? . !
.s-3.:n1yw;'. tE
.c m+ e w*r ::',:,. ,w ?. +R"'sm** * :
fMSYN]Q.. (i~sD "p%; ~D k;W; G.u sulM, i.i cMl p' , :B'. M. v s .. ., ;p ., , 'n I
^
'~
ji S. ' AY.~j ' I '. ^ . : ;;c . . Y b n $n $n& '5 i d p W h.Wy%n 0 ._._.__Z.
. ..e k : M. ; R u n
..._ _ = c.1 a
~
2 d 4 CLOSEUP 0F V0RTEX " HEAD" i i WATERFORD-3 SIS SUMP MODEL STUDY a
FIGURE 13
+ .. '
. . .e ~.g '. .
f.; .. h ; pi.' i g 9 lE$' . O ' ,: - A (p ' 7I'[ T 0U.'
, ',7 , e ..I [
.~4
' ., u ,.
* *j J
': * , .i
- n. ,
b 4 f 4 7, j s ,, . . = , , ,, i r .r .,or r n ,r
/ ,
dihf.b,fD!:E!!ENIEik m .. .. . . . . J, , . ..< , m
-.. t
,d, . ),,9U MW A . A LL AW W hd 7'!
'. h N1~C .
; - - d ,
- u. 3 ,
Ih, 4 - ti
'. s / q#ca!
L m t n ir o e'! I ]e 4.!bl@ 4
- f. :n pf,s %,.L
. 2.. g u grj pw..
a J1 O 'p I d IT ' Y L.' i< nI
*. iih
#! !jllljL!jS;'!'ILDTid,I' .3 H ,' !?.
1,; a ily my JO / TTrrrirrff li J Wriqqqqqrjrirf";mg
/
. i N J T, rrrrr*rrrrrr,rrE,rrE.rr, ,.. i ,ri ,:r rJ 18
, _ i .
}
s .O
.d [
w
. : .a '
~ s,I; ,t. J U
.> , d, y .
, c . :.. } u ;f; g f J
N) g , a.- y.m.):y..:' . y..r, 3 . 0
. ,,7 . # y ,
-;' q
~-
,y - ' k,I I
, . }
- .. ,~ t e ~
i
\
9 M h* ., . y O <'#' m" ~- '
']
GRATING CAGES AWAITING INSTALLATION WATERFORD-3 SIS SUMP MODEL STUDY 11
e e O
>B y j- 45* , ,
/ .
A [ -
,'s lt s
..- #:;;;r i
__. pr. f f
~
b nou, is - [ " I y PIPE - _ _. 9 _ _ T A ( l \ ) >B SECTION B-B ALONG q, EL E VATION SCALEt I" : 2'-0" '
-~~
n
.=. _ L'" i.
5 5 it i s.i: f: 24" 5 5 - 5 I t i ! If y hf h k k'! ! hf sa" is " 'l O C SECTION A-A 0 WATERFORD STE AM ELECTRIC STATION P1 UNIT 3 b GRATING CAGE DESIGN AS TESTED WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. W:16638 A-WCH sm82
a w
, , f f S -
g I O l APPENDIX A METHOD FOR CALCULATING INTAKE LOSS COEFFICIENT l l I l l l I ! l l i i I 0
l APPENDIX A - O seTsOo roa CALCULATING INTAKE LOSS COEFFICIENT Consider a square-edged re-entrant intake as shown in Figure Al. The momentum of the convergent flow at the lip of the intake tends to force the fluid away from the wall of the pipe. When separation occurs, the flow streamline at the lip separates from the wall of the pipe and then reattaches at some point further downstream. Along the wall of the pipe between the lip and the point of reattachment exists a " dead zone" characterized by slow recirculating flow. The point of maximum constriction of the flow is called the vena contracto. At the vena contracta the flow area is a minimum and the flow velocity is a maximum. The loss coefficient associated with the intake con be expressed in terms of the parameters characterizing the flow at the vena contracta. l The loss coefficient, K, is defined as the ratio of the head loss, ht , to the velocity head, i.e. 3 1 (0 K= hL V2/2g l where V is the average velocity at some section of the flow. In the notation adopted, subscripts are used both to define the flow region the loss coefficient applies to, and to identify the velocity head on which the loss coefficient is based. In general, (K ij)k denotes the loss coefficient between points i and j in the flow evaluated in terms of the velocity head at k. The head loss at the intake con be broken down into two components: the head loss upstream and head loss downstream of the vena contracta. Consider expressions for the loss coefficients for these two regions of flow. 1 Let the subscripts I and 3 denote flow conditions at locations for upstream and for downstream of the vena contracta. Assume the velocity at point I upstream of the vena contracta to be negligible, i.e. assume flow from a plenum. Also let point 3 be taken far enough downstream for fully developed flow to be re-established in the pipe. Subscript 2 I { i O will be used to denote flow conditions at the vena contracta. f 4
A-2 l l First consider an expression for the loss coefficient upstream of the vena
~
contracta, (K12)2, based on the velocity head at the vena contracta. Define a velocity coefficient Cy = V2 V'2 where V 2 cnd V2 ' are the actual and ideal velocities, respectively, at the vena contracta. Then, the loss coefficient can be expressed as (K l2)2 = l -I Cv2 i The head loss - and hence loss coefficient - upstream of the vena contracta tends to be relatively small. Typical values for the velocity coefficient range between 0.959 and ' O.994; on average value of 0.975 is of ten used (Benedict et al 1966). O C The head loss downstream of the vena contracta is that associated with the ! i expansion of the flow between points 2 and 3. Define a contraction coefficient t C=A2 e A3 where A 2 is the flow crea at the vena contracta and A 3 s i the internal area of the pipe. The loss coefficient for a sudden expansion based on the velocity head at the larger flow section is (Streeter and Wylie,1975): (K23)3 = 1 - 1 2 Cc and is much larger than that associated with a sudden contraction. l i The loss coefficient (K 12)2 given above is based on the velocity head at the vena { contracta, point 2. To obtain a loss coefficient, (Kl2)3, referenced to the velocity head $ O :
A-3 at point 3 where the pipe is flowing full, (K l2)2 is multiplied by the ratio of the velocity heads at points 2 and 3, i.e. - O (Kl2)3=[l
\Cy2
-I}[V 2 j gy3 /
}2 From continuity and the definition of the contraction coefficient, Vj, = ,A_1 = l V3 A2 Cc.
Then, the expression for (K 12)3becomes (Vl2)3= l -1 I Cy2 Cc2 Combining the expressions for the loss coefficients upstream and downstream of the vena contracta yields the following expression for the tota! loss coefficient, (Kl3)3, based on the velocity head for full flow in the pipe: (Kl3)3= I _2_ +l Cy2Cc2 Ce Using the expression above it is possible to calculate the intake loss coefficient I once the velocity and contraction coefficients are known. Since the losses upstream of the vena contracta are relatively small compared to those downstream, Cy can be approximated by its average value, 0.975, without introducing significant error. The contraction coefficient, Cc, is defined as the ratio of the area of the vena contracta to the area of the pipe. From cantinuity, the ratio of the areas is equal to the inverse ratio of the velocities. I l O
i
~
LIST OF REFERENGS
- l. Benedict, R.P., Carlucci, N. A., and Swetz, S.D.; " Flow Losses in Abrupt Enlargements and Contractions", Journal of Engineering for Power, Trans. ASME, Series A, Vol. 88, January 1966, p. 73-81.
- 2. Streeter, V.L., and Wylie, E.B.; " Fluid Mechanics", McGraw-Hill, New York, 6th edition,197S, p. 30S.
O l l l l O
FIGURE A1 O 1
)
DE AD ZONE WITH SLOW [ RECIRCULATING FLOW INTAKE PIPE STRE AM LINE
=.
t . O "e"" W~
/ vi IT l
@VENA CONTRACTA l
l WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION ! UNIT 3 ! O TYPICAL SQUARE RE-ENTRANT INTAKE l WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LA80RATO71ES LTD. bcil e639 A wCH}}