# Hydraulic Laboratory Report HL-2004- 06



# Roza Fish Screens Facility:

V e locity Measurement s at a High

Canal Flow Rate

U.S. Depar t ment of the Interior

Bure au of Reclamation

Technic a l Ser v ice Cente r

Wa ter Resou r ces Rese ar ch Labor ator y

Denv er, Colorado Dec e mber 2 004

### Standard Form 298 **(Rev. 8/98)** 

## REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

**Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18** 

### Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

**The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,** 

**gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding th is burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of** 

**information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorat e for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188),** 

**1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provisio n of law, no person shall be subject to any** 

**penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.**



### PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S)

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

REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 17. LIMITATION OF

ABSTRACT 18. NUMBER

OF

PAGES 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 

## 15-12-2004 Technical Jul - Dec 2004

Roza Fish Screens Facility: Velocity Measurements at a

High Canal Flow Rate

DeMoyer, Connie

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation

Water Resources Research Laboratory

P.O. Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 HL-2004-06

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation

Pacific Northwest Region-Yakima Field Office

1917 Marsh Rd., Yakima, WA 98901 USBR

Available from National Technical Information Service, Operations Division, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161

http://www.ntis.gov

A hydraulic evaluation was conducted in August 2004 at the Roza Fish Screens Facility at a high canal diversion rate of 1911 cf s. The primary objective of this evaluation was to determine whether primary bypass flow rates can be reduced from the

recommended operating criteria of 65 cfs to 50 cfs during high canal diversion operations while maintaining drum screen velocit y criteria. For both operational bypass conditions, approach and sweep velocities were measured near drum screens in two bays at

five vertical locations and seven lateral locations per screen. Velocity data were analyzed for compliance with facility desig n criteria and federal fish protection criteria. Field weir ratings were developed for the full range of primary bypass weir ope rations.

In the final bypass channel, bypass flow rates were measured for two operational water surface elevations in the secondary

screening facility.

fish screens, drum screens, screen criteria, velocity measurements, water diversion, fish bypass, sediment sluicing, weir ratin g

UL UL UL SAR 58 Clifford A. Pugh

303-445-2151

# Hydraulic Laboratory Report HL-2004- 06



# Roza Fish Screens Facility:

V e locity Measurement s at a High

Canal Flow Rate

Connie DeMoyer

U.S. Depar t ment of the Interior

Bure au of Reclamation

Technic a l Ser v ice Cente r

Wa ter Resou r ces Rese ar ch Labor ator y

Denv er, Colorado Dec e mber 2 004

## Mission Sta t ements

The mission of the Department of the Interior is t o protect an d provide access

to our Nation's natural a nd cultural h e ritage and honor our trust

responsibilities to Indian Tribes and o u r commitments to islan d communities.

___________________________

The mission of the Bureau of Recla m ation is to manage, develop, and protect

water and related resour ces in an en vironmentally and economically sound

manner in the interest of the American public.

Acknow led g ments

The assista n ce of Billy Baca of Reclamation’s Water Resources Rese arch Labora t ory

and Allen Kastl of Recla m ation’s Yakima Field Office with the field evaluation is gre a tly

appreciated. This report was peer reviewed by T r acy Verme y en of Reclamation’s Water

Resources Research L aboratory.

Hy d r aulic Laboratory Reports

The Hydraul ic Laborator y Report series is prod u c ed by the Bureau of Reclamation’s

Water Resources Rese arch Labora t ory (Mail Code D-8560), PO Bo x 25007, Denver,

Colorado 80225-0007. At the time of publicat io n, this report was also made available

online at htt p :// www .us b r.gov/pmts/h y d raulic s_lab/pubs/HL/HL-2004 -06.pdf

Disclaimer

No warranty is expresse d or implied regarding th e usefulness or complet eness of the

information contained in this report. References to commercial products do not imply

endorsement by the Bureau of Reclamation and may not be used for advertising or

promotional purposes.

This work was conducte d by Reclamation’s Wate r Resources Research

Laboratory In Denver, CO for Reclamation’s Pacific Northw est Region- Yakima

Field Office in Yakima, WA.

# CONTENTS

STUDY SUMMARY..........................................................................................1

Primary Fish Bypass Weirs..............................................................................1

Final Fish Bypass Weirs................................................................................. 2

Drums Screens.............................................................................................2

INTRODUCTION........................ ...................................................................... 4

INSTRUMENTATION AND METHODS................................................................ 9

Primary Fish Bypass Weirs............................................................................ 10

Final Fish Bypass Weirs.................................................................................12

Drums Screens........................................................................................... 14

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................... 18

Primary Fish Bypass Weirs............................................................................ 18

Final Fish Bypass Weirs................................................................................ 24

Drums Screens............................................................................................. 24

RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................................... 36

REFERENCES.............................................................................................. 38



# TABLES

1 Summary of primary fish bypass data collected in Bays 1, 3, and 5 with a

forebay elevation of 1220.4 ft and a water surface elevation of 1213.0 ft

in the secondary screening facility............................................................ 20

2a Average rating table and equation for all primary bypass weirs......................... 22

2b Bay 1 bypass weir rating table and equation................................................. 22

2c Bay 3 bypass weir rating table and equation................................................. 23

2d Bay 5 bypass weir rating table and equation................................................. 23

3 Final fish bypass velocities and flow rates with an optimal tailwater pool............... 24

4 Percentage of 7 lateral measurement locations where approach velocity (V

a 

## )

measurements exceed NOAA criteria of 0.4 ft/s and facility design criteria

of 0.5 ft/s............................................................................................. 33

5 Percentage of 7 lateral measurement locations where the sweep-to-approach

velocity ratio (V

s 

## /V

a 

## ) does not meet NOAA criteria....................................... 34



# FIGURES

1 Roza Diversion Dam allows water to be diverted through the Roza Fish

Screens Facility at the headworks of the Roza Canal.................................... 4

2 Schematic of Roza Diversion Dam and Roza Fish Screens Facility..................... 5

3 Bay of rotating drum screens at Roza screening facility with sluice gates

installed.................................................................................................9

4 Adjustable rectangular weir in pr imary fish bypass channel............................... 10

## 5 Water flowing freely at a low head over the 2-in-wide, 1.85-ft-long

rectangular bypass weir into the downwell................................................. 11

6 Final fish bypass located downstream of the traveling screens in the

secondary screening facility....................................................................... 12

7 Profile view of secondary screening facility with four vertical traveling

screens and a juvenile trapping facility with an adjustable final bypass

weir and downwell...... ...........................................................................13

8 Rotating drum screen with recessed floor in front of the screen and sluice

gate installed downstream of the screen..............................................................15

9 Positioning of ADV at 0.05 times the water depth with the 10-cm sampling

location at 3 inches from the drum screen................................................... 16

10 ADV instrument positioned approximately 3 inches from the screen face

with the deployment mount...................................................................... 17

11 The deployment mount was attached to a gantry crane that moved laterally

across each drum screen in the bay. ADV data were collected at

each location........................................................................................ 17

12 Primary fish bypass weir rating curve. Measured field data is compared

to standard suppressed rectangular weir rating curve for free flow,

partially submerged, and subm erged conditions.......................................... 21

13a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 20 at a

Bay 2 fish bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)............27

13b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 20 at a

Bay 2 fish bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s........................................................27

14a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 18 at a

Bay 2 primary bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)...... 28

14b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 18 at a

Bay 2 primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s.................................................. 28

15a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 17 at a

Bay 2 primary bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)...... 29

15b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 17 at a

Bay 2 primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s............................................................ 29

16a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 5 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)........30

16b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 5 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s............................................................... 30

17a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 3 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)........31

17b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 3 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s....................................................31

18a Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 2 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s)........32

18b Sweep (V

s 

## ) and approach (V

a 

## ) velocity distributions on Screen 2 at a

Bay 5 primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s.................................................. 32

19 Ratio of sweep-to-approach velocity in front of Bay 2 screens.......................... 35

20 Ratio of sweep-to-approach velocity in front of Bay 5 screens.......................... 35



# APPENDIX I: Velocity Measur ements at Drum Screens

APPENDIX II: Velocity Distributio ns in Front of Drum Screens

# STUDY SUMMARY

A hydraulic evaluation was conducte d in August 2004 at the Roza Fish S c reens Facility

at a high ca nal diversio n rate of 19 11 ft 3 

## /s. Th e primary ob jective of th e evaluation was

to determine whether primary b y pas s flow rates can be redu ced to 50 ft 3 

## / s during hig h

canal diversion operation s while minimizi ng stress on downst r eam-migrat i ng salmon and

maintaining drum screen velocity criteria. In ord e r to accurat e ly set bypass flow rates in

the screenin g bays, weir ratings were developed for the full r ange of weir operations. In

the final bypass channe l, appropriat e weir heights were set f o r two operational water

surface elev ations in the secondary screening fa cility. The correspondin g bypass flo w

rates were measured in the final bypass chann el.

Approach and sweep velocitie s were measured in Bays 2 and 5 near six rotating dru m

screens und er two operational cond itions:

• Reco mm en ded operatin g prim ary by pass flow ra te – bypass weirs set to 4.4 ft of

head on the weir crest to pass appro x imately 65 ft 3 

## /s.

• Reduced primary bypass flow rate

– bypass weirs set at 3.35 ft of head o n the

weir crest to pass appro x imately 50 ft 3 

## /s.

Velocities w e re measured near each drum screen at five ve rtical lo catio n s (0.05, 0.2

, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9 times the water depth) and seven lateral lo cations acro ss the screen at

a distance o f approximat ely 3 inches in front of th e drum screen face. Fo r both bypass

flow rate co nditions, vel o city data were analyzed for compliance with fa cility design

criteria and National Oceanic and At mospheric Administratio n (NOAA) fish protectio n

criteria.

Conclusions from this evaluation in clude:

Primary Fis h Bypass Weirs

• Primary b y p a ss weirs ar e generally operated as submerged weirs.

• The onset of submergence occurs at approximat ely 2.8 ft of head on the weir

(39.6 ft 3 

## /s) with a water surface elevation of 1213. 0 ft in the se condary screening

facility.

• The bypass weirs canno t be conside r ed suppressed rectang ular weirs since the

weir crest is partially con t racted by 0.15 ft and the vertical side walls of the

downwell are wider than the sidewalls of the appr oach chann el, allowing f o r

lateral contr a ction or expansion of t he overflow jet. The sta ndard weir rating for

a partially contracted weir cannot b e applied for several reasons: the ad justable

weir blades are not shar p-crested, a n aerated nappe is not maintained during

operation in a partially submerged conditi on, an d the weirs are typically operated

in a submerged conditio n

.

• An average leakage rate of 1.5 cfs e x ists at the adjustable w e ir gates.

• Field weir ra tings for Bays 1, 3, and 5 are consist ent when free flow and partially

submerged conditions e x ist. Under s ubmerged conditions, upstream bays (Bay

1) with long er fish bypass pipes become less eff i cient due to pipe headlo sses.



# 1

## • Although weir ratings vary slightly between bays, the general primary b y p a ss

weir rating equation can be used to calculate primary b y pas s flow rates or set

bypass weirs with a water surface elevation of 1213.0 ft in th e secondary

screening fa cility:

Q = 1.5537 – 1.3761 H + 8.4316 H 2 

## – 1.1012 H 3



## where H is the head on t he weir in fe et and Q is t he bypass flow rate in ft 3 

## /s.

• From the we ir ratings, th e primary b y pass flow ra te for the re commended weir

setting of 4. 4 ft of head is 64.9 ft 3 

## /s. To achieve a reduced b y pass flow rate of 50

ft 3 

## /s, the primary b y pas s weirs shou ld be set to 3.35 ft of he ad.

Final Fish Bypass Weirs

• At a second ary screening elevation of 1213.0 ft with no juvenile fish ram p

installed, 3. 0 ft of head on the final bypass weir is needed to maintain an optimal

tailwater po ol for safe fish passage. Thi s corre sponds to a final bypass flow rate

of 40.4 ft 3 

## /s.

• At a second ary screening elevation of 1213.8 ft with the juvenile fish ram p

installed, 3. 6 ft of head on the final bypass weir is needed to maintain an optimal

tailwater po ol for safe fish passage. Thi s corre sponds to a final bypass flow rate

of 39.9 ft 3 

## /s.

• Measured final bypass flow rates are 25 percent higher than measureme n ts in

previous evaluations, p o ssibly due t o difference s in the dow nwell condition set by

the weir operator or bypass pipe b l o ckage in pre v ious evaluations.

Drums Screens

• A more deta iled velocity distribution across the d r um screen faces provid es a

better understanding of f l ow conditio n s near the screens.

o Approach velocitie s measured at 0. 05 and 0.5 times the water depth are

represented by measure m ents at 0.2 times the depth.

o Approach velocitie s measured at 0. 8 times the water depth are typically

higher than velocities measured at shallower depths.

o Approach velocitie s measured at 0. 9 times the water depth are significa ntly

higher than velocities measured at shallower depths. The sluice gate

placement and/or recessed floor may contribute t o high velocities near the

drum screens at the bott o m of the water column.

• At the operating criteria of 4.4 ft of h ead on the p r imary b y pa ss weirs, ap proach

velocities measured at d epths below the curvature of the scre en exceed criteria

more frequently than shallower measurements.

o Approach velocitie s exceed the 0.4 f t/s NOAA screen criteria at 75 percen t

of 189 total measureme n t location s and 100 percent of locat i ons at the

deepest measurement depth.

o Approach velocitie s exceed the 0.5 f t/s facility design criter ia at 58 percen t

of 189 total measureme n t location s and 100 percent of locat i ons at the

deepest measurement depth.

• At the operating criteria of 4.4 ft of h ead on the p r imary b y pa ss weirs:

o For all data collected in Bays 2 and 5, 49 percen t of 189 total measureme n t

locations an d 100 perce nt of locatio n s at the de epest measurement depth

have sweep-to-approach velocity ratios less tha n 2:1.

o For data collected in Bay 5, 73 perce nt of 84 total measureme n t location s

and 100 percent of locat i ons at the d eepest measurement depth have

sweep-to-approach velocity ratios le ss than 2:1.



# 2

## o For data collected in Bay 2, 30 perce nt of 105 tot a l measurement locatio n s

and 100 percent of locat i ons at the d eepest measurement depth have

sweep-to-approach velocity ratios le ss than 2:1.

• When the primary b y pass flow rate was reduced f r om 65 ft 3 

## /s to 50 ft 3 

## /s, sweep

velocities de crease and, at some scr eens, appro a ch velocitie s increase

. Sweepto-approach velocity ratios are less t han 2:1 at 8 2 percent of 168 total

measureme n t location s in Bays 2 and 5 and app roach velocities exceed 0.4 ft/s

at 92 percen t of 168 measurement locations.

• At both bypass flow rat e s, sweep velocitie s do not produce a clear acce leration

along the screens into th e fish bypass channel.

• At both bypass flow rat e s, velocity distribution s across the screens are

nonuniform with the hig hest velocities occurring at the most upstream screen in

each bay.

• Drum screen submergence was 76 percent of th e water depth at the scre en seat

for all test s.



# 3

# INTRODUCTION

Roza Diversion Dam is part of the Roza Division of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Yakima

Project. Th e dam is located 12 miles north of th e city of Yakima on the Yakima River at

River Mile 1 27.9. The d a m diverts up to 2,200 ft 3 

## /s of water f r om the Yakima River int o

the Roza Canal to provide water for irrigation and power generation. The canal

headworks consist of a concrete str u cture in the right abutment with a trashrack at t he

inlet to prote c t a serie s o f rotating fish screens (F igure 1). Th e Roza Fish Screens

Facility prot ects fi sh fro m being entrained in the Roza Canal.

The facility consists of 2 7 drum screens (17 ft di ameter, 12 ft width) in 5 bays with 7

screens in t he upstream bay and 5 screens in ea ch of the following bays. Bays are

numbered from upstream to downstream and scr eens are n u mbered from right to left

looking dow nstream with Screen 1 on the right side of the most downstream Bay 5

(Figure 2). Each bay contains a primary fish bypass (referr ed to as an intermediate fish

bypass in so me previous reports). An adjustable rectangular weir gate in each primary

bypass cont rols flow thr ough the fish by pass system. The closed condu it primary

bypasses co nverge into a secondary screening f a cility where excess water is recovered

through four vertical traveling screen s. The final fish bypass returns fish t o the Yakima

River at an outfall down s tream of Roza Diversion Dam.

Figure 1. – Roza Diversion Dam allo ws water to be di verted thro ug h the Ro za

Fish Scree n s Facility at the head works o f the Roza Ca nal.



# 4Drum Screen #5Drum Screen #21Drum Screen #27Figure 2. –Schematic of Roza Diversion Dam and Roza Fish Screens Facility.5

## A forebay elevation of 1220.5 ft is maintained thr ough automatic contro l of the roller

gates at the Roza Diversion Dam. At the fish scr eening facilit y, the forebay water

surface elev ation is mea s ured at the staff gage in Bay 1. Since the staff gage datum is

0.1 ft lower at the scree ning facility, the forebay elevation reads 1220.4 f t at the stan dard

operating water level. Operating Criteria for th e Roza fish bypass system was

recommend ed in 1989 b y the National Marine Fisheries Service (Pearce, 1989). The

National Marine Fisherie s Service (NMFS), the previous name designatio n for the

fisheries d i vision of the National Oceanic and At mospheric Administratio n (NOAA), is

currently referred to as NOAA. This document specifies that the five primary b y pas s

weir gates should be set to an elevation 4.4 ft below the upstream water surface to

promote fish passage. T he surplus weir gates i n the secon dary screening facility sh ould

be equally set such that the water surface elev ation in front of the traveling screens is

1213.0 ft. When the ju venile trap is installed in the final fish bypass during juvenile

migration season, the se condary water surface elevation should be set to 1213.8 ft to

provide adequate flow into the trap.

The fisherie s division of NOAA has developed fish screen crit eria and guidelines to

promote safe passage o f fish throug h screening facilit ies (N OAA draft, 2 004). Criteria

relevant to this particu la r study inclu de:

• Approach velocity normal to the scr een face must be less th an 0.4 ft/s.

• Sweeping velocity parallel to the scr een face must be greate r than approach

velocity. Op timally, sweeping velocit y should be 0.8 ft/s to 3. 0 ft/s (minimum

sweep-to-approach velocity ratio of 2:1).

• A uniform velocity distribution shoul d be maintained over the screen surf ace

to minimize approach velocitie s . Ap proach and sweep velocities sho u ld be

measured approximatel y 3 inches fr om the screen face for e v ery 5 perce nt of

the screen a r ea. Uniform approach conditions a r e achieved when no

individual ap proach velocity measurement exce eds 110 per cent of the 0

. 4 ft/s

criteria, or 0. 44 ft/s.

• At no point shall flow decelerate alon g the screen face or in th e bypass

channel. Th e minimum bypass entrance flow velocity should be greater than

110 percent of the maxi mum velocity upstream of the bypass entrance.

• For rotating drum screens, the desig n submergence must be between 65 and

85 percent o f the drum diameter.

The NOAA f i sh passage criteria also states in Se ction 12.3 th at if a fish screen was

constructed to NOAA crit eria established August 21, 1989 (prior to the est ablishment of

these criteri a ), approval of these scr eens will be considered, providing that all of the

following co nditions are met:

1) The entire screen facility is still fun c tioning as de signed.

2) The entire screen facility has been maintained an d is in good condition.

3) When the screen media wears out, it shall be rep l aced with screen media

meeting the current crite r ia stated in this docume n t.

4) No mortality, injury, entrainment, impingement, migrational delay or harm

to anadromous fish ha s been noted that is being caused by the facility.

5) No emergen t fry are likely to be located in the vicinity of the screen, as

agreed to by a NOAA re source biolo g ist familiar with the site.



# 6

## Original fish passage facility design i n formation from the Bureau of Recl amation Pacific

Northwest Region Fish S c reen Desig n Criteria Manual specifies that the maxi mum

design appr oach velocit y is 0.5 ft/s and that sweep velocitie s should be between 1.6 ft/s

and 1.9 ft/s. Field velocit y measure m ents near th e drum screens and in t he fish

bypasses sh ould be obta i ned periodically or when operationa l or structura l changes

occur at the screening fa cility to assu re that origin al design cri t eria and/or NOAA fish

passage cr it eria are satisfied.

Pacific Nort hwest National Laborato r y (PNNL) h a s conducte d many fish screen

evaluations in the Yakima River Basin since 198 5. Methods to evaluate screening

facilit ies wer e developed and applied during the PNNL studies (Abernathy et al., 1989,

1990; Blanton et al., 19 98, 1999; Carter et al., 2002; Chamness et al., 2001). In Ju ly

2003, Battelle-Pacific No rthwest Division measured water velocities in fro n t of drum

screens in t w o of the five screening bays, in their associat ed primary fish bypasses, and

in the secon dary screening facility an d final bypass at a cana l flow rate of approximately

1,850 ft 3 

## /s. This evaluat ion was con ducted unde r two operational condit i ons (McMichael

et al., 2003):

1.) Fish bypasses set to the recommend ed operating criteria of 4. 4 ft of head on the

weir (corresponding to a pproximatel y 65 ft 3 

## /s per bypass) at a forebay elevation

of 1220.4 ft and a secon dary screening water surface elevation of 1213.0 ft.

2.) Fish bypasses set to half of the reco mmended o perating crit eria (corresponding

to approximately 32 ft 3 

## /s per bypass) at a forebay elevation of 1220.4 ft an d a

secondary screening water surface e l evation of 1213.8 ft.

Results sho w that NOAA screen crit eria were not met at several screens when the fish

bypass flows were operated both in and out of o perating crit eria. Before the evaluation,

sluice ga tes (porosity boards) were installed beh ind the drum screens in nonuniform

configuratio ns. The slu i ce gates we re suspecte d to be a pot ential cau s e for the adverse

and inconsistent hydraulic conditions at the scree n faces.

In March 2004, velocitie s were mea s ured near t o the drum screens at 0. 2 and 0.8 times

the water depth and thre e lateral lo cations per screen. Velo cities were collected in fr ont

of all drum screens in a l l bays to determine the effect of the sluice gate s on the hydraulic

performance of the dru m screens a t a canal flo w rate of 820 ft 3 

## /s (DeMoyer & Vermeyen,

2004). Sluice gates were installed in a uniform configuration prior to the evaluation.

Tests were conducted with sluice g a tes insta lle d and removed at the op erating bypass

criteria of 4. 4 ft of head on the primary bypass weirs and a secondary screening water

surface elev ation of 121 3.8 ft. Resu lts indicated that sluice g a tes did not have a

negative impact on hydraulic cond itions at the dr um screens. However, t he estimated

flow rate through the drum screens was lower than the reported canal discharge, wh ich

suggested t hat high velocity region s on the dru m screens may ha ve b een missed.

Results also showed that downstream primary b y pass chan nels pass more water than

upstream bypasses at th e same weir setting.

The primary objective of the August 2004 hydraulic evaluatio n was to determine whet her

primary b y p a ss flow rat e s can be re duced durin g high canal diversion o perations to

minimize stress on dow nstream-mig rating salmon while maintaining drum screen

criteria. The following da ta was colle cted in supp ort of this eff o rt:



# 7

## 1.) Field ratings of primary and final bypass weirs.

Before this evaluation, bypass flow rates were estimated using a standar d weir

rating for a suppressed r e ctangular weir (Bureau of Reclamation, 2001). More

accurate bypass rating s were developed for Bays 1, 3, and 5 to better q uantify

bypass flow rates.

2.) Detailed velocity measurements in front of screens in Bays 2 and 5

. During the July 2003 and March 2004 evaluations, velocity data were collected at

standard measurement locations of 0.2 and 0.8 t i mes the water depth at three

lateral loca tions per scre en. Results indicated th at six measurements per screen

may not be sufficien t to thoroughly define the flo w field near to the drum screens.

For this evaluation, velocities were measured at 5 depths an d 7 lateral lo cations

in an effort t o more accurately define velocity dist ributions. T h is detaile d

collect ion scheme was used to deter mine if primary bypass flow rates ca n be

reduced wit hout negatively impacting the hydraulic performance of the dr um

screens. D a ta were collected with:

 Primary fish bypasses se t to the oper ating criteria of 4.4 ft of h ead on the

weir (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s).

 Primary fish bypasses se t to a reduce d bypass flo w rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s.

Using the fie l d ratings, th e primary b y pass weirs were accurately set and the effect of

reducing the primary b y p a ss flow rat e on compliance with NOAA fish screen criteria was

documented.



# 8

# INSTRUM ENTATION AND MET H ODS

A hydraulic evaluation was conducte d from July 27 – August 4, 2004 at t he Roza Fish

Screens Fa cility during a canal dive rsion of 191 1 

# ± 4 ft 3 

## /s. Th e forebay elevation was

1220.38 0.0 2 ft with corr esponding f o rebay wate r depths of 1 1 .99 

# ± ± 0.02 ft. Drum

screen sub m ergence was 76 perce nt of the water depth at t he screen seat. Sediment

sluice ga tes (porosity boards) were installed dow nstream of each rotating drum screen in

the stoplog slots. The sluice gate s were placed 1 ft above the channel bottom to

increase velocities n ear the bed as a means of reducing fine sediment deposits in fro n t

of the scree ns. The top of the sluice gates was about 1 ft be low the water surface,

allowing overtopping flo w . The sluice gates were installed t h roughout this study.

Figure 3. – Bay of rotating drum screens at Roza screening facility with sl ui ce gates install ed.



## The water surface in the secondary screening fa cility was maintained at the design

elevation of 1213.0 ft which correspo nds to a 12. 0 ft water depth. At the onset of test ing,

primary b y p a ss weirs w e re set to th e operating criteria of 4. 4 ft of head on the weir.

A downlooking 10-MHz SonTek Acoustic Dopple r Velocimeter (ADV) was used to collect

three-dimensional velocity data at a location 10 cm below the receiver at a sampling rate

of 25 Hz for 60 seconds. The data were then time-averaged to obtain mean velocities at

each measurement location with an accuracy of approximate l y 1 percent of the

measured velocity rang e of 3 ft/s.

Velocity data were mea s ured with t he ADV in the following locations:

1.) Velocity data were mea s ured at the bypass cent erline at 0.2 and 0.8 times

the water depth in primary bypass channels 1, 3, and 5 and in the final

bypass. Data collect ed in May 2004 showed that centerline v e locitie s

adequately represented velocities across the wid t h of the bypass channe l

(DeMo y er a nd Vermeye n , 2004).



# 9

## 2.) Approach and sweep velocitie s were measured approximate l y 3 inches ( o r as

close as possible) in fron t of Screens 17, 18, 20 in Bay 2 and Screens 2, 3, 5

in Bay 5. Data were collected at 0.0 5 , 0.2, 0.5, 0

. 8, and 0.9 times the water

depth and la terally at 0.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 1 0 , and 11.5 f t from the upstream edge of

each screen

.

Primary Fis h Bypass Weirs

To develop weir rating tables and e quations, A D V velocities were mea s ured over a

range of head values in the primary bypasses of Bays 1, 3, and 5. Water sweeping p a st

the drum screens rounds 90-degree bend from the screenin g bay into a 2-ft wide fish

bypass cha nnel. A ramped floor increases the fish attraction flow over an adjustable

partially con t racted recta ngular weir (Figure 4). T he weir frame obstructs 0.075 ft of flow

on both side s of the cha nnel so that the effective length of th e weir blade is 1.85 ft.

Leakage occurs along t he bottom and sides of t he adjustable weir frame

. The steel weir

blade is a 2- in-wide, cur v ed blade. Water passing over the weir enters a downwell with

a 30-inch st eel bypass pipe to convey bypassed water and fish to the secondary

screening fa cility (Figure 5).

Figure 4. – Adjusta b le re ct angul ar weir i n prima r y fish bypass ch an nel.



# 10

# Weir blade

Figure 5. – Water flowin g freely at a low head ove r the 2-in-wid e, 1.85-ft-lo ng re ctangula r

bypass weir i n to the down w ell.



## Reclamation’s Water Measurement Manual (B ureau of Reclamation, 2001) defines t he

measureme n t of head o n a weir as t he diffe rence between the weir crest elevation and

the water surface elevation upstream of the weir at a distance of at least four times the

maxi mum h ead on the weir crest. Since the ap proach chan nel upstrea m of the weir is

shorter than the require d distance f o r the upstr eam water surface elevation

measureme n t and water depths do n o t vary significantly between bays, the forebay

elevation was measured at the staff g age in Bay 1.

Free flow occurs when t he weir blade is at a hig her elevation than the ta ilwater elevation

and the overflow nappe is fully aerat ed. The upstream water surface elev ation controls

the amount of flow that passes over the by pass weirs at a given weir setting. For

rectangular weirs operating in a free flow conditio n , the stand ard power law equation is

of the form:

Q = C L H 3/2



## where Q = d i scharge ov er weir (ft 3 

## /s), L = length of weir crest (ft), H = head

above the weir crest (ft), C = coefficient of disch arge (ft 1/2 

## /s).

The weir is partially sub m erged whe n the weir blade elevation is higher t han the tailwater

elevation and the nappe is not fully aerated, causing the napp e to attach t o the

downstream weir blade. Under partially submerged conditio n s, the downstream water

surface elev ation may af fect weir per formance and the standa rd weir equation may not

produce accurate values. A fully submerged condition exists when the tailwater

elevation is higher than t he weir blade elevation. When weirs are submerged, both th e

upstream and downstream water surface elevatio ns control w e ir performance and the

standard weir equation cannot be ap plied.

The steel mount support i ng the ADV was inserte d into stoplo g slots just u p stream of the

onset of the ramped floor. For each bypass, velocity data were measured at the bypass



# 11

## channel cen t erline at 0.2 and 0.8 of t he water depth to obtain a mean byp a ss channe l

velocity over the cross sectional f l ow area. Velocity data were collecte d from 0.0 ft head

(including o n ly gate leakage) to 5.0 ft head (maximum achievable head between the weir

crest and th e Bay 1 staff gage water surface elev ation) at incr emental head increase s of

0.5 ft. The upstream water surface elevation and weir blade elevation were used to

calculate th e head on th e weir. Due to heavy turbulence in t he downwell, the tailwat er

surface elev ation could not be precisely measured. The ap proximate ta ilwater elevation

for each weir setting wa s used to de termine whe t her the weir was operating in a free

flow, partially submerge d, or submerged condition.

Final Fish Bypass Weirs

The 2-ft-wide final bypass channe l is located do wnstream of the second ary screening

facility (Figu r e 6). A metal ramp transitions f l ow f r om the 1201.0 ft floor el evation of the

secondary screening facility to the fin a l bypass flo o r elevation of 1207.5 ft. An

adjustable r e ctangular weir with a 2-inch-wide curved weir b l ade (similar to the primary

bypass weirs) controls t he flow rate into the final fish bypass conduit that returns fish t o

the river (Figure 7).



# Final fish b y pass

entrance

Figure 6. – Final fish bypa ss located do wnstre am of the traveling screen s in the seco nda ry

screening facility.



# 12Figure 7. – Profile view of secondary screeningfacility with four vertical traveling screens anda juvenile trapping facilitywith an adjustablefinal bypassweir and downwell.13

## The water surface elevation in the secondary screening facility and the operational weir

setting contr o ls the head on the final bypass weir. Under standard operations, the

design-specified water surface elevation in front of the traveling screens is 1213.0 ft.

During the juvenile migration seaso n , a temporary grated metal ramp i s installed in the

final bypass to guide fish into a juvenile trap. Wh en the juvenile trap is installed, the

water surface elevation must be set to 1213.8 ft t o provide adequate flow into the trap.

The final bypass weir is only operated such that f i sh have an adequate tailwater pool f o r

safe passag e into the fin a l bypass pipe. An unacceptable d o wnwell condition means

that an insuf f icient ta ilwater pool is a v ailable for juvenile fish and water passes dire ctly

into the final bypass pip e or too much water floods the juvenile trapping f a cility, maki ng it

inaccessible and ineffect ive. With these operatio nal restraint s , a full rat i n g of the final

bypass weir could not be performed. For each o perational water surface elevation

(1213.0 ft or 1213.8 ft), t he weir could be set to o n ly one head value to maintain an

optimal tailwater pool for fish passag e

.

Velocity me asurements were taken near the ent rance of the final bypass channel

immediately upstream from the temp orary juvenile trap ramp. Like the primary

bypasses, velocity measurements were collect e d at the bypass center line at 0.2 an d 0.8

times the water depth. The water depth was measured wit h a staff gag e at the

measureme n t location. Data were collected at 1 213.0 ft with the juvenile ramp remo ved

and at 1213. 8 ft with the juvenile ramp installed

.

Drum Scre ens

Approach and sweep velocitie s are the typica l velocity components analyzed during fish

screen evaluations. According to N O AA, the ap proach velocity in a fish screen

evaluation is defined as t he water velocity component perpendicular to an d

approximate l y three inch es in front of the screen f a ce. The sweeping velocity is defin ed

as the water velocity component parallel and ad jacent to the screen face

.

Three-dimensional velo city data were measured with the ADV in front of Screens 1 7 , 18,

20 in Bay 2 and Screens 2, 3, 5 in B a y 5. Data was collecte d at 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9

times the water depth a nd laterally at 0.5, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 11.5 ft from the upstrea m

edge of each 12-ft-wide screen. Dat a were also collected at 0.05 times the water depth

during the fir s t test in Ba y 2 at the operating fish bypass crite r ia. Since th e velocity data

collected at 0.05 depth were similar to velocity data at 0.2 de pth, data was not collect ed

at 0.05 for a n y other conditions. During the same first test, da ta was colle cted laterally

at 0 ft and 1 2 ft from the edges of th e screens. Since rubbe r seals alo n g the outsid e

edges of the screens b l o cked flow th rough the screen, data was colle cted laterally at 0

. 5

ft and 11.5 ft for the remaining test s.

To determine the mean velocity in a channel gre a ter than 2 f t deep with a fully

developed velocity profile, velocity data is typically measured at 0.2 and 0

. 8 times the

water depth. In a previous PNNL study at the Roza facility by Abernathy et al. (1989 ),

velocities measurements were mad e near to th e drum screens at depth s of 0.05, 0. 2,

0.5, 0.8a, an d 0.9. Since velocity data is difficult t o collect un derneath the curvature of

the drum screen, additio nal measurements we re made by PNNL at 0.8 times the depth

on a vertical plane in fro n t of the dru m screen (point 0.8). Results from t he 1989 stu d y

indicated th at velocities measured at 0.05 and 0. 5 were accu rately represented by the



# 14

## standard measurements at 0.2 and 0. 8 of the water depth. Limited velocity data

collected ne ar to the scr een face at 0.8a and 0.9 indicated th at sweep and approach

velocities may be higher at these locations.

Since measurements at 0.2 and 0.8 often accura tely represent the vertical velocities

experienced over the height of the dr um screen, this method has become the standar d

for evaluating velocities near fish scr eens in the Yakima River Basin. In this evaluation,

a more detailed velocity distribution

, like the 198 9 study, was performed in order to fully

evaluate the impact of reducing the p r imary b y pa ss flow rate, particularly in areas

affected by the sluice ga tes and cent ral dividing piers betwe en screens.

Upstream of the drum screen seat, th e forebay floor drops by 1 ft (Figure 8). Fraction al

water depths are based on the foreb a y floor elevation as measured from the water

surface. Wit h 76 percent screen sub m ergence, the 0.05, 0.2, and 0.5 dep th

measureme n ts are at or above the centerline of t he drum and the ADV can be easily

positioned close to the screen face ( F igure 9). Since the 0.8 and 0.9 dept hs are well

below the curvature of the drum screens, acce ss to the scre en face is d i fficult for lar ge

diameter drum screens such as the Roza scree ns (Figure 8 )

.

Figure 8. – Rotating dru m scree n with rece ssed floo r in front of the screen a nd sluice g a te

installe d downstre a m of the scree n

.



# 15

## Figure 9. – Positioni ng of ADV at 0.05 time s the water depth with the 10-cm sa mpling

locatio n at 3 inch es fro m the drum scree n

.



## Maintaining an upright p r obe orienta t ion, it was n o t possib l e t o obtain nea r-screen

measureme n ts of 3 inch es from the rotating fish drum at the 0.8 and 0.9 depths in this

study. Due to limitations in the ADV m ount and the body shape of the ADV instrument,

velocity mea s urements could only be taken appro x imately 19 i n ches at 0.8 depth and 2 8

inches away at 0.9 depth from the screen face. In verting the probe was co nsidered but

not performed due to th e high proba bility of equi pment dama ge from unprotected pro be

transducers contacting t he screen fa ce, the prob e cable han ging up on b o ttom debris,

and silt dep osition restricting latera l move ment.

The ADV de ployment mount was reused from the July 2003 evaluation (McMichael et

al., 2003). The 23-ft-lo ng L-shaped steel frame allowed adju s tments for the depth of t he

ADV in the water column and the distance from the screen f a ce (Figure 10). Once the

ADV was po sitioned at t he proper depth, the assembly was fixed to a gantry crane and

positioned laterally along the screen s (Figure 11 ). In each b a y, all latera l location s were

measured at one depth b e fore the mount was detached from the gantry crane and

removed fro m the water. The probe was repositioned on the mount and the instrument

was redeployed to meas ure all latera l location s at another depth.



# 16

# ADV instrument

Figure 10. – ADV instru m ent positio ne d approx imat ely 3 inche s from the scree n face

with the depl oyment moun t.



# ADV deploy ment

mount

Figure 11. – The depl oym ent mount wa s attach ed to a gantry cran e that moved laterally

across ea ch drum scree n in the bay. ADV data we re colle cted at each location

.



# 17

## RESULT S AND DISCU SSION

Primary Fis h Bypass Weirs

Results of th e primary fish bypass evaluation for Bays 1, 3, and 5 are given in Table 1.

Field rating data were collected with a water surface elevatio n of 1213.0 f t in the

secondary screening facility and an upstream water surface elevation of 1220.4 ft at t he

staff gage in Bay 1. The water depth at the staff gage in Bay 1 was approximately 11. 99

ft. Measured leakage ra tes were 1.2, 1.4, and 1. 9 ft 3 

## /s for bypass weirs 1

, 3, and 5,

respectively. The average leakage r a te was approximately 1

. 5 ft 3 

## /s with zero head

above the weir crest.

The bypass weirs canno t be conside r ed suppressed rectang ular weirs since the weir

crest is partially contract ed by 0.15 ft and the vertical sidewalls of the downwell are wider

than the sid e walls of the approach channel, allo wing for late ral contraction or expansion

of the overflow jet. The standard weir rating for a partially contracted weir cannot b e

applied for several reasons: the adju s table weir blades are n o t sharp-cre s ted, an aer ated

nappe is not maintained during oper ation in a pa rtially submerged condit i on, and the

weirs are typically oper ated in a su bmerged condition. Sin c e the stand ard suppressed

weir equation was used to estimate bypass flow rates before field weir ra tings were

developed, a comparison of the stan dard suppre ssed weir e quation and the measured

field rating d a ta is prese n ted in Figur e 12.

The conditio n of the nap pe was difficult to observe due to the site layout. For head

values less t han 1.5 ft, th e nappe app eared to spring free of th e weir blade such that fr ee

flow conditio n s existed. For head values between 1.5 ft and 2.8 ft, the na ppe did not

appear to sp ring free of t he weir blade, but the weir blade was not submerged by the

tailwater. T herefore, the weir condition is classified as partially submerged. The o n set

of weir sub m ergence occurs at app roximately 2

. 8 ft of head on the primary bypass weir

when the water surface elevation in the seconda ry screening facility is 12 13.0 ft. For

head values greater than 2.8 ft, the weir operates in a subm erged condit i on.

The weir ratings for Bays 1, 3, and 5 are consiste nt when free flow and partially

submerged conditions e x ist. The Bay 1 bypass weir shows slightly grea ter efficien cy

than the bypass weirs in Bays 3 and 5. This cou l d be a result of the weir blade condit i on

or a slightly higher upstr eam water surface elevation. During the transitio n from a

partially sub m erged to fully submerged weir , the primary b y pass weir b e comes less

efficient per incremental increase in t a ilwater level such that t he shape of the rating

curve changes from the standard po wer law relationship to a polynomial relationship.

Under submerged condit i ons, the Ba y 1 bypass weir becomes less efficient than Bays 3

and 5 since the length of the bypass pipe between the primary screening bay and the

secondary screening facility is longe st, and there f ore has the greatest pip e headloss.

Rating table s , equations, and curve-fit R-squared values are given in Table 2a for dat a

averaged from all primary bypasses, Table 2b fo r Bay 1 byp a ss only, Ta ble 2c for B a y 3

bypass only, and Table 2 d for Bay 5 bypass only. Although t he weir ratings are slig ht ly

varied, the average bypa ss rating eq uation in Ta ble 2a should be sufficie n t for

calculat ing p r imary b y pa ss flow rates or setting b y pass weirs. The developed rating

curves can be accurately applied when the facilit y operates with a water surface

elevation of 1213.0 ft in t he secondar y screening facility. Wh en the water surface

elevation is operated at 1213.8 ft du ring juvenile trapping, th e onset of submergence can



# 18

## be expected to occur at a lower head value. The change to the weir rating should b e

minimal. Field testing w ould be requ ired to deter mine the ext ent of the ch ange.

The 1989 NMFS Operating Criteria r e commends that the bypass weirs be set to 4.4 ft of

head on the weir (Pearce, 1989). T he weir is su bmerged at this sett ing. From the field

ratings, the average byp a ss flow rat e for 4.4 ft o f head is 64. 9 ft 3 

## /s. This value closely

compares to the primary bypass flow rate s report ed in the July 2003 eval uation. To

achieve a reduced primary bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s, the b y pass weirs should be set at

3.35 ft. Like operation at 65 ft 3 

## /s, the bypass weirs operate in a submerged condition at

50 ft 3 

## /s.



# 19Table 1. – Summary of primary fish bypass data collected in Bays1, 3, and 5 with a forebay elevation of 1220.4 ft and a watersurfaceelevation of 1213.0 ft in the secondary screeningfacility.Head AboveWeir CrestEstimated TailwaterOperationalMeanVelocity(ft/s)Mean ChannelMeasured BypassWeir Crest (ft)Elev. (ft)Elevation (ft)Weir Condition0.2 depth0.8 depthVelocity(ft/s)FlowRate (ft3/s)01220.441212.88Freeflow0.030.070.051.20.531219.861213.22Freeflow0.140.080.112.61.031219.361214.13Freeflow0.290.350.327.71.531218.861215.47Freeflow0.490.680.5813.92.031218.361217.13Partiallysubmerged0.771.180.9723.3BAY12.531217.861217.47Partiallysubmerged1.471.561.5136.33.031217.361218.30Submerged1.911.961.9446.43.531216.861218.80Submerged2.322.402.3656.54.031216.361219.55Submerged2.442.592.5160.24.361216.021219.63Submerged2.582.582.5861.84.861215.521219.97Submerged2.742.762.7565.801220.401213.05Freeflow0.060.060.061.40.481219.901213.38Freeflow0.140.130.143.30.981219.401214.22Freeflow0.390.360.389.01.481218.901215.13Freeflow0.570.530.5513.21.981218.401216.30Partiallysubmerged1.040.880.9623.0BAY32.481217.901216.30Partiallysubmerged1.471.231.3532.32.981217.401217.47Submerged1.941.641.7942.83.481216.901218.47Submerged2.312.142.2353.43.981216.401219.30Submerged2.572.522.5460.94.311216.071219.63Submerged2.672.702.6964.34.901215.481220.05Submerged2.902.742.8267.601220.391213.05Freeflow0.060.090.081.90.411219.971213.13Freeflow0.150.150.153.60.911219.471213.88Freeflow0.300.380.348.11.411218.971214.97Freeflow0.640.510.5813.81.911218.471216.17Partiallysubmerged0.930.810.8720.9BAY52.411217.971217.38Partiallysubmerged1.421.141.2830.63.001217.391217.76Submerged1.881.581.7341.53.501216.891218.26Submerged2.292.062.1852.14.001216.391218.72Submerged2.612.482.5460.94.371216.011219.38Submerged2.792.592.6964.44.951215.431219.97Submerged3.012.852.9370.120010203040506070800 0.51 1.52 2.53 3.54 4.55 5.5HeadAboveWeir Crest(ft)

By p ass F l o w Rat e ( f t

3 /s)Bay1BypassWeirBay3BypassWeirBay5BypassWeirStandard SuppressedWeirRatingFieldData Curve-Fit EquationPartiallySubmergedZoneSubmerged ZoneQ=3.33 LH3/2Q=1.5537 -1.3761H+ 8.4316H2-1.1012H3R2=0.9982Free FlowZoneFigure 12. – Primary fish bypass weirrating curve. Measuredfield data is compared tostandard suppressed rectangularweirrating curvefor free flow,partially submerged, andsubmergedconditions. H isthe head onthe weircrest in feet and Q is the bypass flowrate in ft3/s.21Table 2a. – Average rating table and equation for all primarybypassweirs. H is the headon theweircrest infeetand Q isthe bypass flowrate in ft3/s. “---” indicatesthatbypass flowrate cannot beaccuratelyestimated.Q = 1.5537 -1.3761H + 8.4316H2- 1.1012 H3R2= 0.9982Head AbovePrimaryBypass FlowRate (ft3/s)Weir Crest(ft)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.90------1.61.92.32.83.54.35.36.317.58.810.111.613.114.716.418.220.021.8223.725.627.629.631.633.635.637.639.641.6343.645.547.449.351.152.854.556.157.759.1460.561.862.964.064.965.866.467.067.467.7Table 2b. – Bay1 bypassweirratingtable and equation. H is the head ontheweir crest in feet andQ is the bypassflowrate in ft3/s. “---” indicatesthatbypass flowrate cannot be accuratelyestimated.Q = 1.2064 -3.2817H + 10.1719H2- 1.4026 H3R2= 0.9986Head AbovePrimaryBypass FlowRate (ft3/s)Weir Crest(ft)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.90---------1.11.41.92.63.44.45.516.78.09.511.012.714.416.318.120.122.1224.126.228.330.432.534.736.838.941.043.0345.047.048.950.752.554.255.857.358.759.9461.162.162.963.764.264.664.864.964.764.322Table 2c. – Bay3 bypass weirrating table and equation. H is the head ontheweir crest in feet andQ is thebypass flowrate in ft3/s.“---” indicatesthatbypass flowrate cannot beaccuratelyestimated.Q = 1.4816 -1.3849H + 8.4372H2- 1.0988 H3R2= 0.9994Head AbovePrimaryBypass FlowRate (ft3/s)Weir Crest(ft)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.90------1.51.82.22.83.54.35.26.317.48.710.111.513.114.716.418.119.921.8223.725.627.629.631.633.635.637.639.641.6343.645.547.449.351.152.954.656.257.859.2460.661.963.164.265.166.066.767.367.768.0Table 2d. – Bay5 bypassweirratingtable and equation. H is the head ontheweir crest in feet andQ is thebypass flowrate in ft3/s.Q = 1.9808 -0.0301H + 7.0487H2- 0.8611 H3R2= 0.9996Head AbovePrimaryBypass FlowRate (ft3/s)Weir Crest(ft)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.902.02.02.22.63.03.64.35.16.07.018.19.310.612.013.414.916.518.119.721.5223.225.026.928.730.632.534.436.338.340.2342.144.045.847.749.551.353.054.756.458.0459.561.062.463.765.066.167.268.169.069.823

## Final Fish Bypass Weirs

Operation of the final bypass weir is subject to o perational constraints. Operating criteria

requires a minimum of 2.0 ft of head on the final bypass weir. When the water surface

elevation in the seconda ry screening facility is se t to the design stage of 1213.0 ft, th e

final bypass weir can only be set to a head value of 3.0 ft in or der to maintain an optimal

tailwater po ol in the do wnwell for fish passage. Head values lower tha n 3.0 ft do n o t

provide an adequate tailwater pool for safe fish passage. H ead values greater than 3.0

ft cannot be achieved because the w e ir cannot b e physically lowered any farther.

When the temporary ra mp to the juvenile trap is installed, t he water surface elevation in

front of the t r aveling scr eens must be raised to 1 213.8 ft to p r ovide flow into the trap ping

facility. Wit h the ramp installed at a water elevation of 1213. 8 ft, the weir can only be set

to a head value of 3.6 ft t o maintain an optimal tailwater pool in the downwell. Like th e

previous co ndition, the weir cannot be physica lly lowered to pass higher bypass flows.

Results of th e final bypass analysis f o r current o perational secondary water surface

elevations o f 1213.0 ft a nd 1213.8 ft are shown in Table 3:

Table 3. – Fin a l fish bypa ss velocities a n d flow rate s with an optimal tailwater po o l

. Head on Veloc i ty (ft/s ) Water Bypas s Flow

Weir (ft) 0.2 depth 0.8 depth Mean Depth (ft) Rate (ft 3 

## /s )

Wate r Surfa c e

Elev. 1213.0 ft

No R a mp 3

. 0 3

. 7 3 3

. 9 5 3

. 8 4 5

. 2 6 4 0

. 4

Wate r Surfa c e

Elev. 1213.8 ft

With Ramp 3

. 6 3

. 1 6 3

. 3 2 3

. 2 4 6

. 1 6 3 9

. 9



## In August 2 004, velocities in the fin a l bypass ch annel were significantly higher than

velocities measured during previous evaluations

. In July 2003, the juvenile fish ramp

was not inst alled and th e upstream water surface elevation was set to 1 213.0 ft. Th e

measured flow rate was 30.0 ft 3 

## /s. During the March 2004 evaluation, the juvenile ramp

and trap were installed in the trapping facility with a secondary water surface elevation of

1213.8 ft. T he final bypass flow rat e was calculated as 28.8 ft 3 

## /s.

It is unclear why this eva l uation yield s final bypass flow rates that are 25 percent high er

than previous measurements. Possible ex planations include bypass pipe blockage in

previous evaluations or a difference in the downwell conditio n set by the weir operator.

Great care was taken d u ring these experiments to properly set an optimal tailwater pool.

The differen c e between a minimum acceptable t a ilwater pool and an optimal tailwater

pool is subje c tive. If the weir was not set at a low enough ele v ation to provide for an

optimal tailwater pool, a lower bypass flow rate would be expected.

Drum Scre ens

Velocity Me asurements w i th Primary By pass Flo w s of 6 5 ft 3 

## /s

Detailed late ral and vertical velocity distribution s across the drum screens are displa yed

in Figures 1 3 -18 and Figures II-1 a nd II-2 in Appendix II. Figures 13a-1 8a show the

sweep and approach velocity distrib u tions for th e operating f i sh bypass weir setting of

4.4 ft of hea d (approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s per bay). Figures 13a, 14a, and 15 a show velocity



# 24

## data in Bay 2 on Screens 20, 18 and 17, respectively. Figures 16a, 17a, and 18a sho w

velocity data in Bay 5 on Screens 5, 3, and 2, respectively. Approach velocities

measured in Bay 2 at 0.05 times the water depth were sufficiently represented by

measureme n ts at 0.2 an d 0.5 times the depth (Figures 13a, 1 4a, and 15a ). Therefore,

these near-surface measurements were not colle cted for all conditions. A pproach

velocities measured at 0

. 8 times the water depth were typically higher than velocities

measured at 0.2 and 0.5.

Approach velocitie s measured at 0. 9 times the water depth were significantly higher than

velocities measured at shallower depths. Velocities at 0.9 t i mes the depth also

contained higher downward vertical velocity components tha n velocity measurements at

other depths (Appendix I). Vertical velocity components were not include d in figures f o r

clarity. The forebay floor drops from elevation 1208.39 ft in fr ont of the dr um screens to

elevation 1207.35 ft at th e drum screen seat (Fig ure 8). Sluice gates in stalled in the

stoplog slots behind the drum screens were placed 1 ft from the channel bottom to

promote sediment mo ve ment past the screens a nd 1 ft from the water surface to allo w

debris and flow to pass over the boards. It is like l y that both the recessed floor in front of

the drum screens and th e placement of the sluice gates cont ribute to hig h approach and

downward velocitie s nea r the drum screens at th e bottom of the water column.

Table 4 sho w s the percent of measurement locations that e x ceed the current NOAA fish

screen appr oach velocit y criteria of 0.4 ft/s and t he facility de sign criter ia of 0.5 ft/s. At

the operatin g criteria of 4.4 ft of hea d on the primary b y pas s weirs, the approach

velocities in Bay 5 are g enerally higher than the approach velocitie s in Bay 2 and exceed

criteria more frequently. Approach velocitie s measured at de pths below t he curvature of

the screen ( 0 .8 and 0.9 depths) exceed criteria more frequently than shallower

measureme n ts. Approach velocities exceed t he 0.4 ft/s NOAA criteria at 75 percent o f

189 total measurement locations an d 100 perce nt of locatio n s at the de epest

measureme n t depth. Approach velocities exce ed the 0.5 ft/ s design crit eria at 58

percent of 1 89 total measurement locations and 100 percent of location s at the deepe st

measureme n t depth.

Sweep velo city magnitudes were similar between Bays 2 and 5. Sweep velocities do not

exhibit a cle a r acceleration along the screens int o the fish bypass chann el. Table 5

shows the p e rcent of measurement locations wh ere the sweep-to-approach velocity ratio

is less than t he current NOAA screen criteria. N O AA require s a 1:1 swe ep-to-approach

velocity ratio and strongly advocates a 2:1 sweep-to-approach ratio (NOAA draft, 2004).

On all scree ns, several locations ha ve sweep-to-approach velocity ratios of less than

2:1. Since sweep velocities were oft en lowest at the 0.9 dept h and approach velocitie s

were often highest, ratio s were less t han criteria on all scre e n s. At the o perating crit eria

of 4.4 ft of h ead on the p r imary b y pa ss weirs, 49 percent of 1 89 total measurement

locations an d 100 perce nt of locatio n s at the de epest measurement depth have sweepto-approach velocity ratios less than 2:1. For da ta collected only in Bay 5, 73 percen t of

84 total measurement locations and 100 percent of location s at the deepe st

measureme n t depth have sweep-to-approach velocity ratios less than 2:1

. For data

collected only in Bay 2, 3 0 percent of 105 total measurement locations an d 100 perce nt

of location s at the deepe st measurement depth have sweep-to-approach velocity ratios

less than 2: 1.



# 25

## Velocity dist ributions a c ross the scre ens are non uniform. NOAA fish passage crit erion

(Section 16) specifie s th at a uniform approach velocity is ach i eved when no individual

velocity mea s urement exceeds 110% of the 0.4 ft/ s criteria, or 0.44 ft/s. In this

evaluation, approach velocitie s exceed the 0.5 ft/ s criteria a t all depths o n Screens 2

, 3,

5, and 20 an d at some depths on Screens 17 an d 18. Approach and sw eep velocitie s

are highest and least un iform on the most upstream screen in each bay (Screen 20 for

Bay 2 and Screen 5 for Bay 5). The highest velocities o n th ese screen s occur at the

most upstream measure m ent locatio n (Figures II -1 to II-4 in Appendix II). Approach and

sweep velocities are more consistent vertically and laterally a c ross scree n s in the ce nter

of the bays (Screens 18 and 17 in Bay 2 and Screens 3 and 2 in Bay 5). Generally,

approach an d sweep velocities are slightly higher at the leading edge of e a ch screen

and slightly l o wer at the trailing edge of the scree n. The concrete support piers betwe en

screens may be a factor in this varia b ility.

Velocity Me asurements w i th Primary By pass Flo w s of 5 0 ft 3 

## /s

Figures 13b, 14b, 15b, 1 6b, 17b, and 18b and Fig u res II-1 an d II-2 in Appendix II show

velocities measured at a primary b y p a ss flow rat e of 50 ft 3 

## /s per bay. In Appendix II,

Figures II-3 to II-6 show velocity patterns for each screen wit h iso-velocit y lines. Wh en

the primary bypass flow rate is reduced from 65 to 50 ft 3 

## /s, ap proach velocity

magnitudes in Bay 2 exc eed design criteria more frequently, while approach velocitie s in

Bay 5 do not change co nsiderably (Table 4). Approach velocities exce ed 0.4 ft/s at 92

percent of 1 68 measurement locatio n s.

In Bays 2 and 5, sweep velocities de crease. At a bypass flo w rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s, sweep- toapproach velocity ratios are less tha n 2:1 for 82 percent of all measurement location s, as

compared to 49 percent of all measu r ement lo cations when t he bypass flow rate is 6 5

ft 3 

## /s. The ef fect of reducing the bypass flow rate is clearly illu strated in Figure 19 for Bay

2 and Figur e 20 for Bay 5. At both 65 and 50 ft 3 

## /s bypass flows, lateral and vertical

velocity distributions are nonuniform and flow does not acce lerate into th e bypass

intakes.

In 2003, Battelle measured velocities in Bays 2 and 5 at bypass flow rates of 65 and 3 2

ft 3 

## /s (McMichael et al., 2 003). At approximately 65 ft 3 

## /s, Batt elle documented high

approach velocitie s with large vertical and lateral variations o v er the screen faces in Bay

5. Approach velocities were lower and less var i able in Bay 2. This hydraulic evaluat ion

shows a similar pattern a t a similar b y pass flow rate. When Battelle red u ced the bypass

flow rate to 32 ft 3 

## /s, Bay 2 sweep velocities d e cr eased and a pproach velocities

increased. I n Bay 5, the opposite occurred. This evaluation shows a similar trend to t he

data colle ct ed in Bay 2, but not Bay 5.



# 26

## BAY 2, SCREEN 20

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Loc ation A c r o s s Sc ree n (ft)Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 0

. 05 dept h - Va

0

. 2 dept h - Va

0

. 5 dept h - Va

0

. 8 dept h - Va

0

. 9 dept h - Va

0

. 05 dept h - Vs

0

. 2 dept h - Vs

0

. 5 dept h - Vs

0

. 8 dept h - Vs

0

. 9 dept h - Vs

NOAA Scr een C r it eria

Fac i lit y D e s i g n C r i t er ia



## Figure 13a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 20 at a Bay 2 fish

bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (ap p r oximately 65 ft 3 

## /s ).

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Loca t ion A c r o ss Sc re en (ft)Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 0. 2 dept h - Va

0. 5 dept h - Va

0. 8 dept h - Va

0. 9 dept h - Va

0. 2 dept h - Vs

0. 5 dept h - Vs

0. 8 dept h - Vs

0. 9 dept h - Vs

NO A A

Scr een Cr it er i a

F a ci li t y D e si g n C r i t eri a



## Figure 13b. - Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 20 at a Bay 2 fish

bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 27

## BAY 2, SCREEN 18

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Locat ion A c ross Scree n 1 2



### ( ft )Velocity(ft/s) 

### 0. 05 de pt h - V a



### 0. 2 dep th

- Va



### 0. 5 dep th

- Va



### 0. 8 dep th

- Va



### 0. 9 dep th

- Va



### 0. 05 de pt h - V s



### 0. 2 dep th

- Vs



### 0. 5 dep th

- Vs



### 0. 8 dep th

- Vs



### 0. 9 dep th

- Vs

NO AA Scr een Cr it er ia

Fa c ilit y Des i g n Cr it er ia



## Figure 14a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 18 at a Bay 2

prima r y bypa ss weir settin g of 4.4 ft of h ead (a pp roxi mately 65 ft 3 

## /s).

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

024 6 8 1 0



### Lo c a tion A c ros s S c re en ( f t )Velocity(ft/s)



### 1 2 

### 0

. 2 dep t h - V a



### 0

. 5 dep t h - V a



### 0

. 8 dep t h - V a



### 0

. 9 dep t h - V a



### 0

. 2 dep t h - V s



### 0

. 5 dep t h - V s



### 0

. 8 dep t h - V s



### 0

. 9 dep t h - V s

NO A A

Scr een Crit eria

F a cili t y Desig n Cr i t er i a



## Figure 14b. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 18 at a Bay 2

prima r y bypa ss flo w rate o f 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 28

## BAY 2, SCREEN 17

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Loc a t i on A c r o ss Scr een 1 2



### ( ft )Velocity(ft/s) 

### 0. 05 dept h - Va

0. 2 d ept h - V a

0. 5 d ept h - V a

0. 8 d ept h - V a

0. 9 d ept h - V a

0. 05 dept h - Vs

0. 2 d ept h - V s

0. 5 d ept h - V s

0. 8 d ept h - V s

0. 9 d ept h - V s

NO AA Scr een Cr it er ia

F a c ilit y Des i g n Cr it er i a



## Figure 15a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 17 at a Bay 2

prima r y bypa ss weir settin g of 4.4 ft of h ead (a pp roxi mately 65 ft 3 

## /s).

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Loc ation A c ross Scre en (ft)Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 

### 0.2 de p t h - V a



### 0.5 de p t h - V a



### 0.8 de p t h - V a



### 0.9 de p t h - V a



### 0.2 de p t h - V s



### 0.5 de p t h - V s



### 0.8 de p t h - V s



### 0.9 de p t h - V s

NO AA Sc r e e n Cr it er ia

F a c ilit y De s i g n Cr i t e r ia



## Figure 15b. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 17 at a Bay 2

prima r y bypa ss flo w rate o f 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 29

## BAY 5, SCREEN 5

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12



### L o cati on A c r o ss S c r e en (ft)Velocity(ft/s) 0. 2 depth - Va

0. 5 depth - Va

0. 8 depth - Va

0. 9 depth - Va

0. 2 depth - Vs

0. 5 depth - Vs

0. 8 depth - Vs

0. 9 depth - Vs

NO AA S c r e en Cr it er ia

Facil i t y Desig n Cr i t eria



## Figure 16a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 5 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (ap p r oximately 65 ft 3 

## /s ).

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

024 6 8 1 0



### L o cat i o n A c ross S c r e en (f t)Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 

### 0. 2 de pt h

- Va

0. 5 de pt h

- Va

0. 8 de pt h

- Va

0. 9 de pt h

- Va

0. 2 de pt h

- Vs

0. 5 de pt h

- Vs

0. 8 de pt h

- Vs

0. 9 de pt h

- Vs

NOAA S c ree n Cr it er i a

Fac i lit y Desig n Crit er ia



## Figure 16b. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 5 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 30

## BAY 5, SCREEN 3

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0



### Loca t ion A c ros s Scre en (f t)Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 0. 2 dept h - Va

0. 5 dept h - Va

0. 8 dept h - Va

0. 9 dept h - Va

0. 2 dept h - Vs

0. 5 dept h - Vs

0. 8 dept h - Vs

0. 9 dept h - Vs

NOAA Scr een C r it eria

Facilit y Desig n Cr it er ia



## Figure 17a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 3 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (ap p r oximately 65 ft 3 

## /s ).

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0

L o ca tion A c ro ss S c r e en (ft )Velocity (ft/s)

1 2 0. 2 dept h - Va

0. 5 dept h - Va

0. 8 dept h - Va

0. 9 dept h - Va

0. 2 dept h - Vs

0. 5 dept h - Vs

0. 8 dept h - Vs

0. 9 dept h - Vs

NOAA S c r e en Cr it er ia

Fac ilit y Des i g n Cr i t e r ia



## Figure 17b. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 3 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 31

## BAY 5, SCREEN 2

0 0. 5

1 1. 5

2 2. 5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Location A c ross Screen (ft )Velocity(ft/s) 

### 0. 2 dept h - Va

0. 5 dept h - Va

0. 8 dept h - Va

0. 9 dept h - Va

0. 2 dept h - Vs

0. 5 dept h - Vs

0. 8 dept h - Vs

0. 9 dept h - Vs

NO AA Sc reen C r it eria

Facilit y Desig n Cr it er ia



## Figure 18a. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 2 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass weir setting of 4.4 ft of head (ap p r oximately 65 ft 3 

## /s ).

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

0 2 4 6 8 1 0

L o cation A c ro ss S c re en (ft )Velocity(ft/s)

1 2 

### 0. 2 d ept h - Va



### 0. 5 d ept h - Va



### 0. 8 d ept h - Va



### 0. 9 d ept h - Va



### 0. 2 d ept h - Vs



### 0. 5 d ept h - Vs



### 0. 8 d ept h - Vs



### 0. 9 d ept h - Vs

NOAA Scre en Crit er ia

F a ci l i ty D e si gn C r i t eri a



## Figure 18b. – Sweep (V

s 

## ) a nd app roa c h (V

a 

## ) velocity d i stributio ns o n Screen 2 at a Bay 5 primary

bypass flow rate of 50 ft 3 

## /s

.



# 32Table 4. - Percentage of 7 lateral measurement locations where approach velocity (Va) measurements exceed NOAA criteria of 0.4 ft/s andfacility design criteriaof 0.5 ft/s.Bypass Flow Rate = 65 ft3/sSCREENINGBAY 2SCREENINGBAY 5Screen 20Screen 18Screen 17Screen 5Screen 3Screen 2DepthVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/s0.0571%43%14%0%29%0%------------0.286%43%29%0%57%0%86%86%86%71%86%86%0.557%14%0%0%0%0%86%86%86%86%86%71%0.886%86%100%43%71%0%100%86%100%86%100%86%0.9100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%Bypass Flow Rate = 50 ft3/sSCREENINGBAY 2SCREENINGBAY 5Screen 20Screen 18Screen 17Screen 5Screen 3Screen 2DepthVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/sVa> 0.4ft/sVa> 0.5ft/s0.05------------------------0.286%71%86%29%86%43%86%86%86%86%86%86%0.586%86%86%71%86%71%86%86%86%86%86%86%0.886%86%100%86%86%57%100%86%100%100%100%71%0.9100%100%100%100%100%100%100%86%100%100%100%86%33Table 5. – Percentage of 7lateral measurement locationswhere the sweep-to-approach velocity ratio (Vs/Va) does not meet NOAA criteria.Bypass Flow Rate = 65 ft3/sSCREENINGBAY 2SCREENINGBAY 5Screen 20Screen 18Screen 17Screen 5Screen 3Screen 2DepthVs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2.1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2.1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:10.0514%29%0%0%0%0%------------0.20%0%0%14%0%0%0%14%0%43%0%14%0.50%0%0%0%0%0%0%86%0%71%0%71%0.80%57%0%43%0%0%0%100%0%86%0%86%0.971%100%14%100%0%100%57%100%29%100%14%100%Bypass Flow Rate = 50 ft3/sSCREENINGBAY 2SCREENINGBAY 5Screen 20Screen 18Screen 17Screen 5Screen 3Screen 2DepthVs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:1Vs/Va< 1:1Vs/Va< 2:10.05------------------------0.20%0%0%71%0%14%0%71%0%57%0%71%0.50%86%0%86%0%86%0%86%0%86%0%86%0.80%100%0%100%0%71%43%100%29%100%14%100%0.943%100%57%100%0%100%29%100%14%100%14%100%340 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0

. 5 2468 1 0 1 1

. 5 0

. 5 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 1

. 5 0

. 5 2468 1 0 1 1

. 5Sweep-to-ApproachVelocityRatio 0.05 depth, 65 ft3/s by pass

0.2 depth, 65 ft3/s by pass

0.2 depth, 50 ft3/s by pass

0.5 depth, 65 ft3/s by pass

0.5 depth, 50 ft3/s by pass

0.8 depth, 65 ft3/s by pass

0.8 depth, 50 ft3/s by pass

0.9 depth, 65 ft3/s by pass

0.9 depth, 50 ft3/s by pass

NO AA S w e ep Velocity C r iteria

NO AA T a r g e t S w eep V e l o city Ratio

SCREEN 20 Lo c a t i on ( f t ) S C RE EN 1 8 Loc at ion ( ft) SCREEN 17 Loc a t ion ( f t) P I ER PIE R



## Figure 19. - Ratio of swe e p

- to-a pproa ch velocity in front of Bay 2 screen s.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

0

. 5 2468 1 0 1 1

. 5 0

. 5 2468 1 0 1 1

. 5 0

. 5 2 468 1 0 1 1

. 5Sweep-to-ApproachVelocityRatio 0.2 dept h, 65 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.2 dept h, 50 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.5 dept h, 65 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.5 dept h, 50 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.8 dept h, 65 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.8 dept h, 50 ft3/s

0.9 dept h, 65 ft3/s b y p a ss

0.9 dept h, 50 ft3/s b y p a ss

NO AA Sw eep V e lo city C r it eria

NO AA T a r get Sw eep V e lo city R a t i o

SC R EEN 5 Loc a t ion ( f t) SCR EEN 3 Lo c a tion ( f t) SCREEN 2 Loc a ti on ( f t) PI ER P I ER



## Figure 20. - Ratio of swe e p

- to-a pproa ch velocity in front of Bay 5 screen s.



# 35

# RECOMMENDATIONS

The general weir rating t able or equa tion dev eloped from this evaluation should be used

to calculate primary b y p a ss flow rat e s and set b y pass weirs when the forebay water

surface elev ation is 122 0.4 ft and th e secondary water surface elevation is 1213.0 ft.

The transitio n between a partially su bm erged and submerged weir condition should

occur at a lo wer head va lue when the secondary water surface elevation is set to 1 2 13.8

ft during juvenile trappin g . Field test ing would b e required t o quantify the extent of this

change on t he weir rating. The stan dard suppre ssed rectan gular weir equation sho u ld

not be used to set bypass weirs sin c e the adjust able bypass weirs at the facility do n o t

satisfy requirements for application of the equation.

Velocities should be collected near t o the drum screens at vertical lo catio n s of 0.2, 0. 5,

0.8, and 0.9 times the water depth t o describe t he range of velocities over the water

column. Since velocities collecte d at 0.05 times the water depth were well represente d

by measure m ents at 0.2 and 0.5 times the dept h

, near-surfa ce velocity measureme n ts

are not nece ssary at the Roza drum screens. Ve locitie s colle c ted at 0.9 times the water

depth represent the hig her velocitie s present at the bottom of the water column,

particularly when sluice gates are in stalled.

Velocities should be collected latera lly near to the concrete d i vider piers at 0.5 ft and

11.5 ft from the leading edge of the screen. Measuring velocities at thre e to five other

lateral loca tions across t he drum screen face is r e commende d to show how velocities

vary o v er smaller grid sections. Sin c e flow patt e rns across the screen f a ce are well

defined by seven locatio n s, measuring more locations will m o st like l y not improve

knowledge of flow behavior.

The costs a nd benefits of altering high canal flo w operations by reducin g the primary

bypass flow rate should be carefully considered by fisheries biologist s an d facility

managers. A primary b y pass flow reduction fro m 65 ft 3 

## /s to 50 ft 3 

## /s prod uces less

desirable flo w conditions at the drum screens a s indicated by an increase in the number

of measurement locatio n s that exceed criteria. At 50 ft 3 

## /s, t he primary bypass weirs still

operate in a submerged condition wh ich does not provide mu ch benefit fo r improving

passage of downstream-migrating salmon.

During the May 2004 h y draulic evaluation at a canal flow rat e of 820 ft 3 

## /s, the influen ce

of the sluice gates on dr um screen performance at 0.2 and 0. 8 times the water depth

was neutral, or even favorable. During this evaluation at a canal flow rat e of 1911 ft 3 

## /s,

velocities co llected close r to the bed at 0.9 times the water depth were higher than

velocities at shallower d epths and e x ceeded crit eria more frequently. Since this

evaluation included only velocity measurements with sluice gates insta l led, the effect of

the sluice g a tes on dru m screen performance under these conditions is not known.

However, sl uice gates w e re installed at the facilit y to reduce sediment build-up in fron t of

the screens by increasin g near-bed velocities. By impro v in g sediment move ment, it is

likely that th e increased near-bed velocities impact drum scre en performance at the

deepest locations of the screen.

Since equip m ent access to measurement loca tions below t he curvature of the drum

screens is difficult and n u merous me asurement locations are needed to f u lly define

velocity fields with and without slu i ce gates, the ef fect of the sluice gates o n screen

performance is not fully described th rough field e v aluations. Numerical modeling of the



# 36

## Roza drum screens is st rongly recommended. Numerical modeling should provide a

clear visualization of flo w conditions near to the screens in cluding the eff e cts of the

sluice ga tes and recesse d floor on th e flow field. In the model, the sluice gates can b e

raised or lo wered to identify a configuration that balances sediment mo vement with

reasonable f l ow conditio n s near the screen face. To accomplish this, a sediment

analysis may need to be conducted. The sluice gates can b e reposition ed, resized,

removed, or redesigned with a differ ent material in the model. Numerical modeling

should be le ss time consuming and less expensive than full-scale fie l d e v aluations f o r

various sluice gate configurations.



# 37

# 38 REFERENCES

Abernathy, C. Scott, Duane A. Neitzel, and E. William Lusty (1989). “Velocity

Measurements at Six Fish Screening Facilities in the Yakima River Basin, Summer

1988, Annual Report.” Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

Abernathy, C. Scott, Duane A. Neitzel, and E. William Lusty (1990). “Velocity

Measurements at Three Fish Screen Facilities in the Yakima River Basin, Washington,

Summer 1989.” Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

Blanton, S.L., G.A. McMichael, and D.A. Neitzel (1998). “Washington Phase II Fish

Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1997.” Pacific Northwest

National Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

Blanton, S.L., D.A. Neitzel, and C.S. Abernathy (1999). “Washington Phase II Fish

Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1998.” Pacific Northwest

National Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

Bureau of Reclamation (2001). “Water Measurement Manual – Third Edition.” U.S.

Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Water Resources Technical Publication,

Denver, Colorado.

Carter, J.A., G.A. McMichael, and M.A. Chamness (2002). “Yakima River Basin Phase II

Fish Screen Evaluations, 2001.” Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Portland,

Oregon.

Chamness, M.A., E.V. Arntzen, G.A. McMichael, and P.S. Titzler (2001). “Washington

Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 2000.” Pacific

Northwest National Laboratory, Portland, Oregon.

DeMoyer, C.D. and T.B. Vermeyen (2004). “Roza Fish Screens Facility Velocity

Measurements With and Without Porosity Boards at an Intermediate Canal Flow Rate.”

Report No. PAP-928. Bureau of Reclamation, Water Resources Research Laboratory,

Denver, Colorado.

McMichael, G.A., J.A. Vucelick, and C.S. Abernathy (2003). “Roza Dam Fish Screen

Evaluations, Summer 2003.” Battelle-Pacific Northwest Division, Richland, WA.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2004). “Anadromous Salmonid

Passage Facility Guidelines and Criteria – February 2004 External Review Draft.”

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon.

Pearce, R. (1989). Operating Criteria: Roza Canal Fish Screens Bypass System.

National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon.

# APPENDIX I: Velocity Measurements at Drum Screens

## BAY 2, SCREEN 20, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.05 0 -0.073 -0.011 -0.069

0.05 2 1.263 1.342 -0.127

0.05 4 0.696 1.493 -0.051

0.05 6 0.521 1.492 -0.012

0.05 8 0.468 1.524 -0.002

0.05 10 0.418 1.448 -0.003

0.05 12 0.189 1.133 0.003

0.2 0 0.802 1.811 0.178

0.2 2 0.739 1.533 -0.010

0.2 4 0.616 1.537 0.016

0.2 6 0.499 1.476 0.058

0.2 8 0.452 1.424 0.083

0.2 10 0.408 1.313 0.116

0.2 12 0.194 1.057 0.162

0.5 0.5 0.524 1.885 0.244

0.5 2 0.482 1.814 0.275

0.5 4 0.417 1.592 0.242

0.5 6 0.352 1.521 0.216

0.5 8 0.339 1.415 0.212

0.5 10 0.274 1.210 0.148

0.5 11.5 0.182 1.059 0.134

0.8 0.5 0.787 2.037 0.243

0.8 2 0.980 2.014 0.348

0.8 4 0.959 1.659 0.411

0.8 6 0.799 1.263 0.384

0.8 8 0.694 1.211 0.280

0.8 10 0.518 1.006 0.187

0.8 11.5 0.365 1.034 0.139

0.9 0.5 1.658 1.469 0.491

0.9 2 1.633 1.362 0.520

0.9 4 1.311 1.044 0.498

0.9 6 1.087 0.868 0.366

0.9 8 0.988 0.893 0.268

0.9 10 0.742 0.833 0.214

0.9 11.5 0.662 0.921 0.209

## BAY 2, SCREEN 18, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.05 0 0.414 1.629 0.146

0.05 2 0.365 1.120 0.011

0.05 4 0.297 1.200 -0.012

0.05 6 0.315 1.117 -0.018

0.05 8 0.332 1.159 -0.002

0.05 10 0.337 0.915 0.005

0.05 12 0.111 0.515 -0.012

0.2 0 0.413 1.229 0.107

0.2 2 0.386 1.168 0.098

0.2 4 0.393 0.944 0.025

0.2 6 0.397 0.989 0.048

0.2 8 0.406 0.930 0.071

0.2 10 0.365 0.673 0.029

0.2 12 0.148 0.642 -0.007

0.5 0.5 0.352 1.040 0.040

0.5 2 0.310 1.039 -0.010

0.5 4 0.331 1.035 0.076

0.5 6 0.300 0.981 0.029

0.5 8 0.346 0.995 0.103

0.5 10 0.330 1.013 0.110

0.5 11.5 0.228 0.942 0.148

0.8 0.5 0.441 1.058 0.082

0.8 2 0.492 1.032 0.044

0.8 4 0.514 0.958 0.100

0.8 6 0.510 0.954 0.100

0.8 8 0.515 0.954 0.111

0.8 10 0.470 0.949 0.143

0.8 11.5 0.425 1.002 0.196

0.9 0.5 0.866 0.914 0.095

0.9 2 0.750 0.838 0.155

0.9 4 0.831 0.815 0.126

0.9 6 0.842 0.868 0.150

0.9 8 0.778 0.788 0.160

0.9 10 0.767 0.859 0.192

0.9 11.5 0.778 0.971 0.222

## BAY 2, SCREEN 17, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.05 0 0.456 1.326 0.024

0.05 2 0.397 1.158 -0.015

0.05 4 0.410 1.037 -0.008

0.05 6 0.383 1.005 0.007

0.05 8 0.358 1.090 -0.015

0.05 10 0.393 1.039 0.019

0.05 12 0.145 0.710 -0.017

0.2 0 0.370 1.313 0.085

0.2 2 0.425 1.140 0.065

0.2 4 0.423 1.069 0.069

0.2 6 0.414 1.183 0.083

0.2 8 0.427 1.090 0.098

0.2 10 0.345 0.931 0.098

0.2 12 0.088 0.923 0.021

0.5 0.5 0.306 1.347 0.126

0.5 2 0.284 1.254 0.128

0.5 4 0.288 1.087 0.137

0.5 6 0.280 1.159 0.118

0.5 8 0.246 1.058 0.076

0.5 10 0.240 0.937 0.045

0.5 11.5 0.157 0.845 0.119

0.8 0.5 0.446 1.147 0.113

0.8 2 0.465 1.126 0.101

0.8 4 0.478 1.045 0.108

0.8 6 0.439 1.051 0.070

0.8 8 0.461 1.057 0.062

0.8 10 0.381 0.961 0.085

0.8 11.5 0.317 1.020 0.154

0.9 0.5 0.850 0.932 0.191

0.9 2 0.926 1.034 0.179

0.9 4 0.806 0.873 0.172

0.9 6 0.766 0.835 0.163

0.9 8 0.767 0.796 0.124

0.9 10 0.667 0.830 0.148

0.9 11.5 0.622 0.932 0.173

## BAY 2, SCREEN 20, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.834 1.717 0.017

0.2 2 0.737 1.501 -0.018

0.2 4 0.629 1.387 0.026

0.2 6 0.543 1.297 0.004

0.2 8 0.516 1.302 0.059

0.2 10 0.414 1.074 0.077

0.2 11.5 0.268 0.996 0.073

0.5 0.5 0.965 1.429 0.225

0.5 2 0.922 1.371 0.212

0.5 4 0.876 1.240 0.243

0.5 6 0.775 1.053 0.224

0.5 8 0.658 0.886 0.209

0.5 10 0.591 0.957 0.152

0.5 11.5 0.345 0.748 0.157

0.8 0.5 1.047 1.974 0.390

0.8 2 1.210 1.664 0.450

0.8 4 1.110 1.356 0.509

0.8 6 0.903 1.102 0.424

0.8 8 0.705 0.764 0.255

0.8 10 0.500 0.616 0.228

0.8 11.5 0.397 0.728 0.211

0.9 0.5 1.463 1.596 0.409

0.9 2 1.596 1.384 0.545

0.9 4 1.395 1.115 0.516

0.9 6 1.074 0.980 0.373

0.9 8 0.946 0.984 0.293

0.9 10 0.810 0.890 0.221

0.9 11.5 0.649 0.959 0.219

## BAY 2, SCREEN 18, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.437 1.107 0.027

0.2 2 0.449 0.763 0.058

0.2 4 0.294 0.666 0.041

0.2 6 0.503 0.962 0.044

0.2 8 0.483 0.907 0.000

0.2 10 0.526 0.876 0.021

0.2 11.5 0.464 0.783 0.005

0.5 0.5 0.539 0.962 0.057

0.5 2 0.518 0.845 0.004

0.5 4 0.627 0.901 0.114

0.5 6 0.667 0.968 0.161

0.5 8 0.619 0.931 0.129

0.5 10 0.487 0.781 0.148

0.5 11.5 0.353 0.980 0.191

0.8 0.5 0.507 0.919 0.141

0.8 2 0.554 0.985 0.157

0.8 4 0.734 0.982 0.172

0.8 6 0.759 0.987 0.188

0.8 8 0.633 0.916 0.183

0.8 10 0.562 0.876 0.191

0.8 11.5 0.472 0.939 0.215

0.9 0.5 0.778 0.789 0.099

0.9 2 0.888 0.820 0.181

0.9 4 0.834 0.762 0.134

0.9 6 0.864 0.772 0.165

0.9 8 0.833 0.745 0.159

0.9 10 0.779 0.826 0.210

0.9 11.5 0.745 0.938 0.223

## BAY 2, SCREEN 17, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.459 1.304 0.088

0.2 2 0.522 1.173 0.050

0.2 4 0.508 1.116 0.087

0.2 6 0.509 1.065 0.047

0.2 8 0.441 0.960 0.055

0.2 10 0.421 0.763 0.083

0.2 11.5 0.237 0.760 0.064

0.5 0.5 0.752 1.104 0.140

0.5 2 0.699 0.994 0.088

0.5 4 0.671 0.974 0.069

0.5 6 0.645 0.898 0.082

0.5 8 0.631 0.899 0.085

0.5 10 0.441 0.840 0.109

0.5 11.5 0.388 0.989 0.134

0.8 0.5 0.567 1.057 0.185

0.8 2 0.628 1.097 0.159

0.8 4 0.552 1.006 0.188

0.8 6 0.553 0.882 0.132

0.8 8 0.481 0.818 0.144

0.8 10 0.438 0.968 0.129

0.8 11.5 0.350 0.936 0.157

0.9 0.5 0.883 1.030 0.183

0.9 2 0.886 1.010 0.166

0.9 4 0.835 0.947 0.132

0.9 6 0.815 0.966 0.125

0.9 8 0.761 0.873 0.116

0.9 10 0.667 0.854 0.164

0.9 11.5 0.646 0.964 0.161

## BAY 5, SCREEN 5, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.882 1.704 0.033

0.2 2 0.824 1.654 0.000

0.2 4 0.772 1.595 0.067

0.2 6 0.683 1.463 0.096

0.2 8 0.658 1.431 0.104

0.2 10 0.571 1.273 0.086

0.2 11.5 0.297 1.155 0.056

0.5 0.5 0.934 1.554 0.347

0.5 2 0.882 1.471 0.329

0.5 4 0.847 1.265 0.336

0.5 6 0.729 1.126 0.370

0.5 8 0.661 1.026 0.333

0.5 10 0.500 0.762 0.348

0.5 11.5 0.363 0.870 0.158

0.8 0.5 0.922 1.834 0.283

0.8 2 1.282 1.771 0.442

0.8 4 1.163 1.392 0.519

0.8 6 0.948 1.192 0.414

0.8 8 0.822 0.990 0.265

0.8 10 0.555 0.785 0.284

0.8 11.5 0.455 0.826 0.214

0.9 0.5 1.436 1.512 0.306

0.9 2 1.620 1.330 0.472

0.9 4 1.390 1.100 0.500

0.9 6 1.020 0.878 0.350

0.9 8 0.877 0.855 0.293

0.9 10 0.739 0.833 0.222

0.9 11.5 0.559 0.906 0.225

## BAY 5, SCREEN 3, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.553 1.407 0.145

0.2 2 0.524 1.194 0.096

0.2 4 0.467 0.991 0.051

0.2 6 0.535 0.962 0.034

0.2 8 0.510 0.843 0.046

0.2 10 0.537 0.849 0.126

0.2 11.5 0.316 0.876 0.037

0.5 0.5 0.501 1.004 0.047

0.5 2 0.520 0.860 0.031

0.5 4 0.554 0.882 0.101

0.5 6 0.562 0.870 0.097

0.5 8 0.620 0.902 0.091

0.5 10 0.588 0.879 0.109

0.5 11.5 0.351 0.888 0.146

0.8 0.5 0.577 1.106 0.081

0.8 2 0.611 0.996 0.102

0.8 4 0.598 0.888 0.098

0.8 6 0.654 0.950 0.107

0.8 8 0.660 0.934 0.135

0.8 10 0.588 0.896 0.158

0.8 11.5 0.464 0.942 0.188

0.9 0.5 0.754 1.028 0.125

0.9 2 0.784 0.895 0.096

0.9 4 0.808 0.865 0.145

0.9 6 0.858 0.831 0.170

0.9 8 0.871 0.809 0.196

0.9 10 0.746 0.766 0.207

0.9 11.5 0.695 0.915 0.188

## BAY 5, SCREEN 2, Bypass Flow Rate = 65 cfs

Velocity data collected with bypass weirs set to the design bypass flow rate at 4.4 ft head.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.518 1.425 0.068

0.2 2 0.586 1.295 0.087

0.2 4 0.581 1.180 0.081

0.2 6 0.612 1.277 0.062

0.2 8 0.525 1.152 0.070

0.2 10 0.517 1.013 0.060

0.2 11.5 0.241 0.909 0.008

0.5 0.5 0.634 1.371 0.208

0.5 2 0.671 1.179 0.122

0.5 4 0.625 1.099 0.083

0.5 6 0.565 1.065 0.050

0.5 8 0.543 0.937 0.066

0.5 10 0.497 0.908 0.119

0.5 11.5 0.281 0.922 0.168

0.8 0.5 0.621 1.256 0.142

0.8 2 0.673 1.116 0.100

0.8 4 0.638 1.058 0.073

0.8 6 0.608 0.988 0.069

0.8 8 0.626 0.958 0.150

0.8 10 0.553 0.881 0.136

0.8 11.5 0.465 0.903 0.170

0.9 0.5 0.800 1.028 0.167

0.9 2 0.751 0.807 0.063

0.9 4 0.767 0.909 0.051

0.9 6 0.793 0.887 0.093

0.9 8 0.686 0.675 0.114

0.9 10 0.594 0.656 0.144

0.9 11.5 0.571 0.714 0.174

## BAY 5, SCREEN 5, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.994 1.748 -0.090

0.2 2 0.886 1.530 -0.096

0.2 4 0.813 1.435 -0.035

0.2 6 0.729 1.391 -0.003

0.2 8 0.662 1.304 0.011

0.2 10 0.590 1.300 -0.005

0.2 11.5 0.356 1.022 0.026

0.5 0.5 0.951 1.515 0.381

0.5 2 0.888 1.352 0.375

0.5 4 0.793 1.094 0.390

0.5 6 0.793 0.945 0.342

0.5 8 0.717 0.967 0.007

0.5 10 0.616 0.957 0.011

0.5 11.5 0.317 1.171 0.071

0.8 0.5 1.333 1.562 0.582

0.8 2 1.283 1.252 0.642

0.8 4 1.092 1.025 0.592

0.8 6 0.931 0.891 0.372

0.8 8 0.833 0.840 0.229

0.8 10 0.676 0.764 0.010

0.8 11.5 0.495 0.798 0.061

0.9 0.5 1.383 1.576 0.471

0.9 2 1.401 1.285 0.564

0.9 4 1.187 1.029 0.501

0.9 6 0.938 1.071 0.201

0.9 8 0.837 0.838 0.163

0.9 10 0.619 0.649 0.093

0.9 11.5 0.456 0.605 0.057

## BAY 5, SCREEN 3, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.584 1.308 -0.036

0.2 2 0.525 1.060 -0.059

0.2 4 0.555 1.030 -0.006

0.2 6 0.583 1.015 -0.059

0.2 8 0.563 0.925 -0.047

0.2 10 0.529 0.826 -0.092

0.2 11.5 0.345 0.755 -0.007

0.5 0.5 0.624 0.980 -0.058

0.5 2 0.627 0.895 -0.133

0.5 4 0.606 0.842 -0.156

0.5 6 0.646 0.890 -0.125

0.5 8 0.631 0.919 -0.100

0.5 10 0.597 0.906 -0.153

0.5 11.5 0.396 0.939 -0.171

0.8 0.5 0.842 0.844 -0.228

0.8 2 0.732 0.751 -0.247

0.8 4 0.789 0.770 -0.237

0.8 6 0.870 0.881 -0.201

0.8 8 0.816 0.786 -0.229

0.8 10 0.742 0.821 -0.231

0.8 11.5 0.621 0.939 -0.248

0.9 0.5 0.810 0.831 -0.208

0.9 2 0.829 0.851 -0.225

0.9 4 0.921 0.912 -0.222

0.9 6 0.862 0.884 -0.194

0.9 8 0.765 0.876 -0.186

0.9 10 0.746 0.953 -0.223

0.9 11.5 0.617 0.933 -0.215

## BAY 5, SCREEN 2, Bypass Flow Rate = 50 cfs

Velocity data collected with a bypass flow rate of 50 cfs.

Measurement Distance from Approach Velocity Sweep Velocity Vertical Velocity

Depth Upstream Edge Toward Screen Toward Bypass Downward

(fraction of total) of Scre en (ft) (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft/s)

0.2 0.5 0.566 1.390 0.066

0.2 2 0.676 1.279 0.052

0.2 4 0.649 1.191 0.033

0.2 6 0.589 1.093 0.025

0.2 8 0.597 1.118 0.022

0.2 10 0.507 1.006 0.013

0.2 11.5 0.360 0.907 0.035

0.5 0.5 0.662 1.257 0.060

0.5 2 0.626 1.076 0.037

0.5 4 0.633 1.079 0.015

0.5 6 0.593 0.987 0.053

0.5 8 0.525 0.919 0.025

0.5 10 0.442 0.871 0.044

0.5 11.5 0.257 0.920 0.117

0.8 0.5 0.768 1.087 0.096

0.8 2 0.757 0.980 0.111

0.8 4 0.660 0.815 0.020

0.8 6 0.665 0.852 0.077

0.8 8 0.670 0.629 0.102

0.8 10 0.446 0.472 0.052

0.8 11.5 0.436 0.587 0.184

0.9 0.5 0.754 1.077 0.150

0.9 2 0.640 0.792 0.087

0.9 4 0.578 0.706 -0.005

0.9 6 0.563 0.573 0.016

0.9 8 0.552 0.554 0.082

0.9 10 0.521 0.510 0.118

0.9 11.5 0.445 0.475 0.120

# APPENDIX II: Velocity Distributions in Front of Drum Screens-0.500.511.522.501020 3040 5060 70 80Location (ft)

V e l o c i ty ( ft/ s )0.05depth - Va0.2depth -Va0.5depth -Va0.8depth -Va0.9depth -Va0.05depth - Vs0.2depth -Vs0.5depth -Vs0.8depth -Vs0.9depth -VsNOAA ScreenCriteriaFacilityDesign CriteriaSCREEN 20SCREEN19SCREEN18SCREEN 17SCREEN 16-0.500.511.522.5010 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Location (ft)

V e l o c i t y (f t/ s )0.2depth- Va0.5depth- Va0.8depth- Va0.9depth- Va0.2depth- Vs0.5depth- Vs0.8depth- Vs0.9depth- VsNOAA Screen CriteriaFacilityDesignCriteriaSCREEN 20SCREEN 19SCREEN18SCREEN 17SCREEN16Figure II-1. - Comparisonof sweep (Vs) and approach (Va) velocitydistributionson screens inBay 2 at afishbypass weir setting of65 ft3/s (top)and 50 ft3/s(bottom).-0.500.511.522.501020 304050 6070 80Location(ft)

V e l o c i ty (ft / s )0.2depth-Va0.5depth-Va0.8depth-Va0.9depth-Va0.2depth-Vs0.5depth-Vs0.8depth-Vs0.9depth-VsNOAA ScreenCriteriaFacilityDesign CriteriaSCREEN5SCREEN4SCREEN3SCREEN2SCREEN1-0.500.511.522.501020 30 4050 6070 80Location(ft)

V e l o c i ty (f t/ s )0.2 depth - Va0.5 depth - Va0.8 depth - Va0.9 depth - Va0.2 depth - Vs0.5 depth - Vs0.8 depth - Vs0.9 depth - VsNOAAScreenCriteriaFacilityDesignCriteriaSCREEN5SCREEN4SCREEN3SCREEN2SCREEN1Figure II-2. – Comparisonof sweep (Vs) and approach (Va) velocitydistributionson screens inBay 5 at a fishbypass weir setting of65 ft3/s (top)and 50 ft3/s(bottom).0 0

. 2

0

. 3 0

. 3

0 . 4 0

. 4

0 . 5 0 . 5

0 . 5

0 . 6

0 . 6 0

. 6

0 . 7 0

. 7

0 . 8

0 . 8 0 . 8 0

. 9

1 1

1 . 1 0

. 2 0

. 3

0

. 4 0 . 5

0 . 6 0

. 2 0 . 3

0

. 3 0 . 4 0 . 4

0 . 4Location(ft)

F r a c t i on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Va1.21.110.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.10

PI E R PI ER PI ERScreen19Screen20Screen18Screen17Screen16

PI E R

0 . 6 0 . 8 1 . 2

1 . 2

1 . 4

1 . 4

1

. 6 1

. 6

1

. 8 0

. 8

1

1 1 0 . 8

1 1

1

. 2Location(ft)

F r a c t i on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Vs21.81.61.41.210.80.60.40.2

PI ER PI ER PI ERScreen19Screen20Screen18Screen17Screen16

PI ERFigure II-3. –Approach (Va, top) and sweep (Vs, bottom) velocity distributions inBay 2at a primary bypassflow rate of 65ft3/s.Black dots represent measurement locations at fractional water depths of 0.05,0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9.0

. 4

0 . 5

0

. 6 0

. 6

0

. 7 0

. 7

0

.

8 0

. 8

0

.

9 0

. 9

1 1 . 1 0

. 4

0 . 5 0

. 5

0 . 6 0. 6 0 . 7 0

. 3

0 . 4 0 . 5

0 . 6

0 . 6 0

. 6

0

. 7Location(ft)

F r a c t i on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Va1.21.110.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.10

PI ER PI E R PI ERScreen4Screen5Screen3Screen2Screen1

PI E R

0

. 8 0

. 8 1

1

1 . 2

1 . 2

1

. 4

1 . 6 1

. 6

1 1

1 1 . 2Location(ft)

F r a c t i on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Vs21.81.61.41.210.80.60.40.2

PI E R PI ER PI ERScreen4Screen5Screen3Screen2Screen1

PI E RFigure II-4. –Approach (Va, top) and sweep (Vs, bottom) velocity distributions inBay 5at a primary bypassflow rate of 65ft3/s.Black dots represent measurement locations at fractional water depths of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9.0 . 4

0

.

5 0 . 5

0

. 6

0

. 7 0 . 7

0

.

8 0

. 8

0

. 9

1 1

1 . 1

1 . 2 0

. 4 0 . 4

0

. 5 0

. 5 0

. 5 0 . 5

0 . 6 0

. 6

0

. 7 0

. 4

0

. 5 0 . 5

0 . 6

0 . 7Location(ft)

F r a c t i o n o f D e p t h f r o m W at er S u r f ac e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Va1.21.110.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.10

PI E R PI ER PI E RScreen19Screen20Screen18Screen17Screen16

PI ER

0 . 8 1

1

1 . 2

1

. 2

1

. 4

1 . 6 1

. 8 0

. 8 0 . 8

0

. 8 0 . 8

1Location(ft)

F r ac t i o n o f D e p t h f r o m W at er S u r f ac e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Vs21.81.61.41.210.80.60.40.2

PI E R PI ER PI E RScreen19Screen20Screen18Screen17Screen16

PI ERFigure II-5. –Approach (Va, top) and sweep (Vs, bottom) velocity distributions inBay 2at a primary bypassflow rate of 50ft3/s.Black dots represent measurement locations at fractional water depths of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9.0

. 8 1

1 1 . 2

1 . 2

1 . 4 1

. 4 1 . 6 0

.

8

0

. 8 0

. 8

1

1 . 2 0

. 8

0 . 8 1

1 1 . 2Location(ft)

F r a c t i on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Vs21.81.61.41.210.80.60.40.2

PI E R PI E R PI E RScreen4Screen5Screen3Screen2Screen1

PI E R

0 . 4 0

. 5 0

. 6 0 . 6

0

.

7 0

. 7

0

.

8 0

. 8

0 . 9 0

. 9

1 1

. 1 0

. 4

0

. 5

0

. 6 0

. 6

0 . 7 0 . 7

0 . 8 0 . 9 0 . 4 0 . 4

0 . 5 0

. 5

0

.

6

0

. 7Location(ft)

F r a c ti on of D e pt h f r o m W a t e r S u r f a c e ( f t )02040608000.20.40.60.81Va1.21.110.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.10

PI E R PI ER PI E RScreen4Screen5Screen3Screen2Screen1

PI E RFigure II-6. –Approach (Va, top) and sweep (Vs, bottom) velocity distributions inBay 5at a primary bypassflow rate of 50ft3/s.Black dots represent measurement locations at fractional water depths of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9.