SPECIAL REPORT 95-21

Improvement of Operations and Management Techniques Research Program

Automation Opportunities at

Corps of Engineers Locks and Dams

Kevin L. Carey September 1995
Abstract

In an investigation to determine the feasibility of automating some of the

operations at navigation locks and dams of the Corps of Engineers, a scheme

of five categories composed of seventeen characteristics was developed to

evaluate candidate automation measures. As a result of both a survey of Corps

water resources projects and field visits to seven lock and dam projects, 43

navigation project functions that could be automated to varying degrees are

identified and described (24 associated with lock operations, 15 associated

with dam operations, and four related to navigation operations). The 43 project

functions are assessed according to the evaluation scheme, and presented in

a matrix format. The matrix can be used for selections, comparisons, sortings,

or rankings of the various project functions and automation alternatives. The

matrix is readily adaptable to a database when and if it grows larger. Thus, an

initial framework has been established for evaluating operations and functions

commonly occurring at navigation locks and dams offering opportunities for

automation. This framework should prove useful for operational planning and

management decision-making.

For conversion of SI units to non-SI units of measurement consult Standard

Practice for Use of the International System of Units (SI), ASTM Standard E380-

93, published by the American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race St.,

Philadelphia, Pa. 19103.
US Army Corps

of Engineers®

Cold Regions Research &

Engineering Laboratory

Special Report 95-21

Improvement of Operations and Management Techniques Research Program

Automation Opportunities at

Corps of Engineers Locks and Dams

Kevin L. Carey September 1995

Prepared for

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
ii

PREFACE

This report was prepared by Kevin L. Carey, Research Hydraulic Engineer, of

the Ice Engineering Research Division, Research and Engineering Directorate, U.S.

Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL). It derives

from an investigation conducted for Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

(HQUSACE) under the Improvement of Operations and Management Techniques

(IOMT) Research Program, as part of CWIS Work Unit 32722, “Navigation and

Lock & Dam Automation Alternatives.”

IOMT Coordinator for the Directorate of Research and Development,

HQUSACE, was Jesse A. Pfeiffer, succeeded by David Mathis, and the Technical

Monitors are James E. Crews and Robert M. Daniel. The IOMT Program Manager is

Robert Athow, Hydraulics Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (WES).

The author thanks F. Donald Haynes of the Ice Engineering Research Division,

CRREL, and John H. Rand of the Programs and Resources Directorate, CRREL, for

their technical review of this report.

The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising or promotional

purposes. Citation of brand names does not constitute an official endorsement or

approval of the use of such commercial products.
iii

CONTENTS

Preface .................................................................................................................................. ii

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1

Automation characteristics................................................................................................ 1

Level .............................................................................................................................. 2

Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 2

Difficulty of implementation ..................................................................................... 3

Cost of implementation .............................................................................................. 3

Departure from existing procedure .......................................................................... 3

Navigation lock and dam functions subject to automation ......................................... 5

Lock operations............................................................................................................ 5

Dam operations............................................................................................................ 8

Navigation operations ................................................................................................ 10

Guidelines for choosing automated functions ............................................................... 11

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix A: Automation survey of Corps of Engineers water resources projects.. 17

Appendix B: Field visits to Corps lock and dam projects............................................. 21

Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 27

TABLES

Table

1. Evaluation categories and characteristics of automation measures ................... 2

2. Lock operations identified as candidates for automation measures .................. 4

3. Dam operations identified as candidates for automation measures .................. 9

4. Navigation operations identified as candidates for automation measures ....... 10

5. Matrix of navigation project automation alternatives .......................................... 13
operating personnel from continuous observation, visual feedback, and consequent adjustment of the control of the process being conducted. The purpose of automation is to achieve consistent, safe, and dependable operation of lock

and dam facilities.

Automation measures can fall within an extremely wide range in terms of complexity, immediate purpose, cost, etc. While this study

must remain generalized, there still needs to be

a set of characteristics or criteria by which various measures can be described or distinguished

within this wide range. These characteristics can

be used, then, to discriminate among various

levels of complexity, utility, cost, etc., and thereby form judgments concerning automation implementation.

To codify or categorize candidate automation

measures, there is need for a scheme of criteria

or determinative characteristics by which any

particular measure can be described or evaluated. This study has developed a scheme comprising five categories to describe an automation

measure. These categories are 1) type or level of

automation measure, in terms of the complexity

or sophistication of the measure; 2) the purpose

for which the automation measure may be

adopted, expressed in terms that have significance for operational management decisions; 3)

the qualitative difficulty of installing or implementing the automation measure; 4) the relative

(qualitative) cost of the measure; and 5) the degree by which operating with the new automation measure departs from operations using

present methods. This latter category may give a

rough indication of anticipated personnel acceptance of an automation measure.

The scheme of evaluation categories and the

INTRODUCTION

The navigation lock and dam facilities of the

Corps of Engineers encompass a wide range of

designs, ages, conditions, traffic levels, and

operating characteristics. This examination of

adapting or extending automation to such a diverse population of facilities must necessarily be

quite general. It will be the task of future studies

to apply the general findings of the present

study to the specific facilities found in a particular division or district or on a given waterway.

While a broad program to adopt automation

measures could eventually result in the need for

fewer operating personnel, the most important

outcome of such a program would be to better

utilize the skills of existing operating personnel.

Personnel resources are much more valuable

and productive when applied to overall surveillance of the safety and efficiency of operations,

rather than to the tweaking of machinery components involved in the operations.

Important parts of this study were a survey of

Corps projects to identify automation systems

and needs, and visits to several lock and dam

projects to examine automation systems and assess automation applications to project operations. The survey of Corps projects is the subject

of Appendix A, and Appendix B contains accounts of the field visits.

AUTOMATION CHARACTERISTICS

For the purposes of this report, automation is

considered to be any measure or equipment employed to control a procedure or operation with

some degree of planned or programmed function. As such, automation is meant to relieve

Automation Opportunities at

Corps of Engineers Locks and Dams

KEVIN L. CAREY
2

place automatically. Moreover, due to interlocking, the program would ensure that any necessary but separate conditions, normally verified

by the operator, are fulfilled during the operation being conducted. For example, an interlock

could be verification that a lower miter gate is

closed before an upper miter gate is allowed to

open. An automation measure at this level

would be expected to be employed remotely if

desired, and provide remote readout or status

reports. Although capable of manual override, a

Level A measure would normally require this

only in emergency situations.

A Level B measure is less comprehensive than

Level A in that it would control a smaller number of steps or operations, and have correspondingly fewer interlocks. Remote operation and

readout would be present, but manual override

would be used only in rare cases.

At Level C, only one step or operation would

be controlled (or two closely related steps), and

remote control or remote readout or both would

be present. Manual override capabilities would

be used more frequently due to normal variations in operating conditions (weather, stages,

day vs. night, traffic, etc.).

The simplest form of automation, Level D,

would have no remote features when deployed

by itself (i.e., when not in combination with other automation measures), and would always require operator initiation for the process being

conducted. This level contemplates close supervision by an operator, but frees the operator

from making adjustments in the middle of an

operation, because the automation measure

would monitor the condition(s) adjusted for and

make the adjustments according to a program

inherent in the equipment. To put this in familiar terms, a Level D system might control and

vary the speed at which a gate opens, and bring

the gate to a stop at the end of its travel without

overloading the machinery to a point that limit

switches are invoked.

Purpose

Three distinct purposes for adopting automation measures at navigation projects have been

identified. A measure may be desirable for more

than one reason or purpose. However, the use of

the three purpose characteristics will allow for

ranking or sorting to aid in planning and decision-making.

 Safety is labeled Purpose a. Safety is considered to apply broadly to project operating perTable 1. Evaluation categories and characteristics

of automation measures.

Category Symbol Characteristic

Level A Fully programmed control with

a high degree of interlocked

operation, remote control and

readout, emergency override

B Programmed operation with

remote readout; may have some

degree of interlocking, and

would have manual override

C Remote readout and programmed control, remote control, or some combination

D Local installation for programmed control; would

require manual initiation of

operation

Purpose a Safety

b Simplification

c Staff reallocation

Difficulty of H High

implementation M Medium

L Low

Cost of H High

implementation M Medium

L Low

Departure from H High

existing operational M Medium

procedure L Low

determinative characteristics associated with

each category are presented in Table 1. In the

following paragraphs the evaluation categories

and characteristics are described in detail.

Later in the report the candidate automation

measures that have been identified in this study

are described or labeled by these categories and

characteristics in a matrix format.

Level

The wide range of automation measures has

been divided into four levels based on the complexity of the measure or the degree of automated operation that the measure would provide.

Level A is the most ambitious degree of automation, representing measures that have a large

number of individual steps incorporated into a

programmed sequence that includes “interlocking” or coordination with other simultaneous

functions occurring at the navigation project. In

plain terms, a Level A automation measure

would require an operator to simply push a button and an entire operation normally requiring

several actions on the operator’s part would take
sonnel and to users of a navigation project, as

well as to capital equipment making up the navigation project. One of the great promises of automation is the reduction of mishaps due to operator error or inattention. Through the use of

interlocks in programs, the conditions under

which accidents happen should be substantially

reduced in number.

Simplification of procedures is designated as

Purpose b. This means, for example, a reduction

in time needed for an operator to accomplish a

procedure, or a reduction in the operator’s surveillance of the procedure. It could also apply to

a reduction in skill necessary to carry out certain

operations.

Purpose c is staff reallocation. This may mean

a reduction in the number of personnel needed

overall or for a particular operation. It could also

involve the reassignment or redistribution of

tasks to personnel.

Difficulty of implementation

Three qualitative levels of difficulty of implementation of any proposed automation measure

are defined, namely high (H), medium (M), and

low (L). Difficulty of implementation involves

several factors, such as the extent of construction

needed, the accessibility of locations where components or equipment need to be installed, the

length of time needed for installation of equipment, the degree of interference with customary

operations during installation, the technical difficulty of personnel training, etc. The Level (A,

B, C, or D) of the automation measure, as defined earlier, is likely to correlate roughly with

the level of difficulty, but there are definite exceptions to any such correlation.

A high level of difficulty corresponds to an

automation measure that would likely be implemented only during original construction or

during a major rehabilitation or reconstruction,

due to the extensive amount of component installation expected or the complexities of the

navigation project that would be affected by the

installation.

A medium level of difficulty would be characterized by construction activities less extensive

than project rehabilitation, and would generally

affect only a limited portion of the project’s facilities. For example, automation implementation

that would involve only work on gate lifting

machinery, or only on filling and emptying

valve machinery, might be termed M.

Implementation rated low in difficulty would

require no interruption in operations, and

would include minor procedures, such as the

simple replacement of components in a limited

area, or the running of wires through existing,

easily accessed conduit ways or chases.

Cost of implementation

As with the difficulty of implementation,

three relative levels of cost of implementation of

any proposed automation measure are defined.

Again, these are designated as high (H), medium (M), and low (L). The cost of implementation

may depend on many of the same factors as the

difficulty of implementation, but there are additional factors, such as the complexity and sophistication of the actual automation components, the cost of training necessary for personnel, and possibly such factors as the need for

system support personnel. The cost of implementation may correlate roughly with the difficulty of implementation, but again there would

be exceptions.

While the cost category must remain qualitative in this study, costs can still be expressed in

terms that are relative to customary practice.

Therefore, a high cost level is one for which the

cost of implementation of an automation measure is estimated to be more than twice the cost

of non-automated equipment (e.g., relay-based

rather than programmable logic controllers),

along with the installation and training required

to control and conduct the same operation(s). At

the medium level, the cost would be estimated

to fall between one and two times the cost of the

corresponding non-automated approach, and at

the low level, the automation measure is estimated to be less expensive than the non-automated alternative.

Departure from existing procedure

The four levels of departure from existing

procedures are defined as high (H), medium

(M), low (L), and none (N). These are highly

qualitative indicators of such matters as the actual work patterns of operating personnel (e.g.,

remaining at one station vs. moving among several stations to accomplish an operation), the acceptance of automation measures by operating

personnel (who may have reasons to fear or oppose automation), the ease with which automated procedures can be adopted to replace or supplant present techniques (e.g., can the change be

transparent to navigation project users, or will

they have to learn new practices?), and the dura3
4

Table 2. Lock operations identified as candidates for automation measures.

Filling and emptying Gate opening and closing General machinery operation Debris and ice control

Timing and monitoring valve Controlling rate of gate motion Monitoring and controlling hydraulic Programmed operation of pneumaticmovements systems debris or ice flushers and screensControlling valve opening and Latching gates in their recesses Establishing and operating an alarm Interlocks between components of

closing rates system pneumatic debris control or ice

control systems

Varying valve operation as a func- Interlocking gate operation between Monitoring and controlling sump Temperature-triggered operatingtion of chamber stage upper and lower gates pumping equipment programs for ice control systemsBalancing flows between chamber Interlocking gate operation with Warning system for ice accumulasides filling and emptying valve operation tion on barge bottoms at entrance

to chamber

Programming valve operation for Interlocking gate opening with gagevarious vessel types readings on both sides of a gateEstablishing and remotely resetting Interlocking gate operation withlimit positions of valves vessel position in chamberInterlocking valve operation with Monitoring and controlling gateupper and/or lower gate operation skew

Controlling closure of miter gatesneeding a specific sequenceEstablishing and remotely resettinglimit positions of gatesProgramming sector gates toachieve optimum flow-through
fects on the gates, gate operating components,

culvert walls, and intake screens may become

excessive. Also, the transition from stable to

varying water stages in the lock chamber must

be accomplished gradually to minimize turbulence and oscillation in the chamber. This is of

particular importance for certain older lock designs that have the filling/emptying system only

on one side of the chamber. Automated mechanisms on the gate operating machinery could be

programmed with the optimum rates for valve

opening or closure, based on experience or experimentation.

Varying valve operation as a function of chamber

stage. At most locks the stage in the chamber is

varied more rapidly by the lock operator during

the middle of a filling or emptying operation

than near the beginning or the end of the operation. In other words, there is a stage-dependence

for the maximum allowable flow rate into or out

of the chamber. With automated control of filling and emptying valves, the amount of valve

opening (and thus the flow rate) could be governed or moderated, according to a program, by

feedback of chamber stage differential compared

to upper or lower gages.

Balancing flows between chamber sides. Irregular

and turbulent flows in the lock filling or emptying processes can result from significant flow

differences between the filling/emptying systems on each side of a lock. These may result, for

example, from inherent differences in the efficiency of the intakes or outlets of the systems, or

from differently regulated filling/emptying

valves, etc. The consequence is that excessive

turbulence and adverse currents can exist in the

chamber. This condition can place vessel mooring lines under undue loads and can make small

recreational craft difficult to control. With the

flows balanced automatically by means of flow

measurement sensors giving feedback to the operation of the filling/emptying valves, all operating according to a program, the possibility of

adverse unbalanced flow effects should be eliminated.

Programming valve operation for various vessel

types. Larger vessels, such as tows, can tolerate

more rapid filling or emptying of the lock chamber than smaller craft, such as recreational boats.

Also, the number of recreational boats in a

chamber influences the rate at which an operator

will fill or empty the chamber, based on the idea

that the closer the boats are to each other, the

greater the danger for contact in stronger cur5

tion of training necessary to enable operating

personnel to employ the automated measures.

The assignment of these indicators has been

based on many observations of operations at a

variety of navigation projects. It has been a judgmental process, and no further discrimination

between the four levels is attempted.

NAVIGATION LOCK AND DAM

FUNCTIONS SUBJECT TO AUTOMATION

Based on the survey of Corps navigation

projects and the visits to selected locks and

dams, as well as prior familiarity, the functions

common to the great majority of lock and dam

projects have been identified with a view toward adaptation to automation. Not all functions are present at every navigation project.

Discussed below are these functions and the elements of each that invite consideration of automated control.

Lock operations

The various lock operations that may be considered for automated operation are discussed

below and are shown in Table 2.

Filling and emptying

There are many different designs of filling

and emptying systems. All of them, however,

have certain considerations in common that contribute to optimum operation. These include

keeping stresses and loads on the operating machinery within acceptable limits, and minimizing adverse currents and turbulence in the lock

chamber during filling and emptying.

Timing and monitoring valve movements. For

most lock projects the position of filling and

emptying valves is shown by mechanical or

servomechanical indicators, if it is shown at all.

These indicators are usually located only at the

lock stands and have no remote readouts elsewhere. Automation equipment on the filling and

emptying valves would allow valve position

information to be delivered to any desired location at the project, and would allow valve movements to be monitored so as to be input into programs for other related operations, and vice

versa.

Controlling valve opening and closing rates. At

most locks the opening and closing of the filling

and emptying valves must be performed carefully to avoid too-abrupt variations in flow

rates; otherwise, the loading and hydraulic ef-
rents set up during the filling or emptying process. For these reasons, filling and emptying

valves that are operated according to pre-established programs can be made to function according to two or more programs of different durations, adapted to various vessel types and their

responses to the rate of change in lock chamber

water levels.

Establishing and remotely resetting limit positions

of valves. Limit switches are vital safety features

on filling and emptying valve mechanisms for

protecting components from damaging overloads. It is likely that these electromechanical devices would be employed as separate backups

even with fully automated operation of filling

and emptying valves. The setting or adjustment

of limit switches is often troublesome due to difficult accessibility and the need for fine tuning. Remote setting of limit switches could be accomplished by relatively simple automated means.

This would facilitate setting of limit switches, but

especially would allow ease in changing the settings to meet temporary needs imposed by such

conditions as worn or damaged machinery components or foreign material (debris or silt) interfering with valve operation.

Interlocking valve operation with upper and/or lower gate operation. At almost all lock projects it is

the operator’s responsibility to ensure that the

lock gates are fully closed before filling or emptying operations are begun. Serious accidents and

equipment damage are possible if filling or

emptying operations are attempted prematurely.

By having automated equipment monitoring the

operations of the lock gates, operational programs can be designed to prevent filling or

emptying operations from being attempted until

a specified condition or position is achieved at the

lock gates.

Gate opening and closing

While there is a variety of lock gate designs in

use at Corps projects (e.g., miter gates, sector

gates, lift gates, guillotine gates, tainter gates), the

operation of them is critical to the efficiency of

lock operation. Some operational concerns apply

to all types of gates, while others apply only to

certain gate types.

Controlling rate of gate motion. Operators control

the speed of motion of most types of lock gates.

Motion is begun and ended slowly, and in the

middle ranges of motion the lock gates are generally permitted to move at maximum speed, barring any unusual conditions that would require

slower motion. Gate motion could be programmed so that the acceleration and deceleration would take place identically every lockage

cycle without operator input (other than initiating the motion). Gate motion would thus become dependent on gate position within its

range, according to a program.

Latching gates in their recesses. Some locks have

latches for the lock gates that must be secured

when the gates are in the opened position and

before lock traffic is permitted. Some of these

projects also latch the gates when passing ice

over submergible bulkheads, to ensure that the

gates are not damaged by the flow through the

chamber. Latching is a manual procedure, or an

automatic mechanical procedure; unlatching is

manual in all cases. Latching and unlatching can

be automated by programming latching to occur

at a certain gate position and unlatching to occur

at the beginning of gate closure motion. Automated latching/unlatching could also be chosen

as an interlock condition for other programmed

operations.

Interlocking gate operation between upper and

lower gates. In ordinary operations, the upper

and lower gates are never open at the same time.

The closed gate must be fully closed before the

other gate is opened. Usually this is verified visually by the operators, and may be done with

or without reference to indicators in the lock

stands. A mistake by an operator could be quite

damaging to the gates and the lock. Automation

equipment on the gate operating mechanisms

will input gate position information to a program, and it would be an easy matter to create

an interlock in the program that requires one

gate to be fully closed before the other can be

opened.

Interlocking gate operation with filling and

emptying valve operation. One of the potentially

most hazardous and damaging operator errors

that can occur at a lock is to begin opening an

upper gate before the chamber is substantially

filled, or to begin opening a lower gate before a

chamber is substantially emptied. The gates are

vulnerable to damage, and if they were to become inoperative, there could be an uncontrolled flow situation through the lock. This is

essentially the same problem that was stated

earlier under filling and emptying operations,

but in this case from the point of view of operating the lock gates. Thus, by having automated

equipment monitoring the operations of the filling and emptying valves, operational programs

6
can be designed to prevent lock gate movement

until a specified condition or position is achieved

at the filling or emptying valves.

Interlocking gate opening with gage readings on

both sides of a gate. At some locks it is difficult for

the operators to observe when the chamber water

level matches the upper pool stage at the end of a

filling operation, or when it matches the lower

pool stage at the end of an emptying operation.

They want to have the stages match quite closely

before opening the gate. For example, it is good

to avoid the opening of miter gates against a

head of water, or to avoid a surge of water past

the gate upon opening. With water level monitors installed on each side of the gates, information could be fed to a program requiring a match

of stages before gate opening could be accomplished, thus preventing the problems encountered with moderate head differences. This situation is the continuation of the condition stated

immediately above, but it occurs closer to the

end of the filling or emptying process.

Interlocking gate operation with vessel position in

chamber. Certain designs of lock gates are vulnerable to damage by vessels such as towboats or

barges if they are too close to the gate during

chamber filling or emptying. For example, an

accident once occurred in which a vessel in the

chamber was too close to its upper end, and

upon chamber filling the vessel hooked the

underside of the upper gate structure (a tainter

gate) and destroyed it. Another accident

occurred when a submerged upper lift gate was

raised inadvertently while a tow was entering

the chamber. These occurrences could be prevented by sensors installed in the lock chamber

and in the upper and lower approaches that determine whether a vessel or tow is clear of the

gate areas before the gate would be allowed to

move. This would be an interlock condition that

would have to be satisfied to proceed with programmed gate operation.

Monitoring and controlling gate skew. Guillotine

gates, and to a lesser extent tainter gates, are subject to skew because separate operating machinery is used to move each side of the gate. In some

cases there are skew indicators that an operator

must monitor to keep skew within tolerable limits, and there are also limit switches that will stop

the lifting machinery if skew becomes excessive.

What is suggested here is automated equipment

that will use skew information as input in order

to feed back adjustments to the lifting equipment

to correct or minimize skew, thereby freeing personnel from monitoring skew, and ensuring gate

movements that are uninterrupted.

Controlling closure of miter gates needing a specific

sequence. The design of some miter gates or their

seals requires that the gate be closed in sequence,

e.g., left before right. Current manual procedures

could be eliminated if gate movements were automated, since the closure sequence could be made

a part of the program.

Establishing and remotely resetting limit positions

of gates. As with filling and emptying valves, limit

switches would continue to be used as backups

with automated operation of lock gates, but their

setting or adjustment might be annoying due to

accessibility problems and fine tuning. Remote

setting of limit switches could be accomplished

by relatively simple automated means, facilitating

the setting of limit switches, and allowing ease in

changing the settings to meet temporary needs

imposed by such conditions as worn or damaged

machinery components or foreign material (debris, silt, or ice) interfering with gate operation.

Programming sector gates to achieve optimum

flow-through. The flow between sector gates as

they open is a function of head differential and

the width of the opening. Since the rate of change

of the width of the opening is dependent on the

speed of the sector gates’ movement, programming speed variations into the initial stages of

gate opening could be employed to achieve optimum flow velocities for the benefit of minimizing

hydraulic forces on waiting vessels and their

mooring lines.

General machinery operation

There are several categories of equipment associated with a lock to support the overall operation. These include hydraulic systems, drainage

systems, etc. The operation of these systems and

equipment can lend itself to automation that will

contribute to the best utilization of personnel.

Monitoring and controlling hydraulic systems.

Many locks have hydraulic systems for powering

part or all of the lock machinery. The hydraulic

systems may range widely in age and sophistication. Most of these systems do not have automated monitoring and control, but automation could

be added to many to make them easier to operate

and more foolproof.

Establishing and operating a machinery alarm system. Most lock machinery is equipped with

alarms to indicate malfunction or out-of-range

operation. Without automation, an alarm usually

requires a response from an operator and the op7
8

erator’s intervention in other ongoing procedures

affected by the alarm condition. An automated

alarm system would be designed to stop, modify,

or adjust ongoing procedures without operator

response, increasing safety and reliability. Equipment to monitor and control gate skew, as described earlier, would be an example of an automated alarm system.

Monitoring and controlling sump pumping equipment. Sump pumping equipment is just one category of general lock machinery, but it is highlighted here because it is usually a constant operational task to maintain. Automation of such

equipment, with monitoring and alarm provisions, would therefore contribute to an important

reallocation of personnel resources.

Debris and ice control

Virtually all locks have systems for the control

of debris and/or ice. These systems are deployed

on an as-needed basis, which for some projects

means infrequently.

Programmed operation of pneumatic debris or ice

flushers and screens. Pneumatic systems (“bubblers”) for controlling debris or ice are usually

made up of several individual components. They

are usually not designed to operate simultaneously, because this would require unnecessarily large compressor capacities. However, certain

designs are intended to be operated in specific

sequences, now under manual control. For example, cross-chamber air screens are operated to

create an ice-free area upstream of miter gates,

and then gate-recess air flushers are operated to

remove ice from behind the opening gates, with

the ice moving into the area just developed by

the operation of the cross-chamber screen. The

sequences could readily be programmed into automated controls to allow operational personnel

to give greater attention to monitoring system

performance rather than actual operation.

Interlocks between components of pneumatic

debris control or ice control systems. As noted

above, certain components of pneumatic debris

and ice control systems are not usually operated

together. Programmed operation could provide

for interlocks to prevent the operation of selected

components together.

Temperature-triggered operating programs for ice

control systems. Under many winter conditions

the operation of ice control systems could be optimized if they operated frequently for short periods, but operating personnel are generally too

busy to follow such schedules. Thus, automated

and programmed operation, triggered for example by air temperatures, could allow such pneumatic or heating systems to produce beneficial

results when otherwise they might be underutilized.

Warning system for ice accumulation on barge

bottoms at entrance to chamber. Some locks experience groundings of barges in winter, either on

the lock chamber floor or over gate sills, due to

the buildup of ice on the bottom surface of barges. It is usually impossible to determine if a

barge is so affected until a problem arises. Experimental systems have been developed for detecting this ice by remote-sensing means. These

techniques could be further perfected to be part

of an automated detection and alarm system that

would signal the problem before the barge entered the chamber, in time for the barge to be removed from the queue.

Dam operations

The various dam operations that may be considered for automated operation are discussed

below and are listed in Table 3.

Gate operation and control

There is a wide variety of gate designs and

operational sequences. Gates at many Corps

dams have some degree of remote operation

and/or position indication, but any significant

level of programmed operation would call for

greater degrees of automation.

Remoting of gate position information and gate

operation. As indicated above, many dams already have this minimum level of automation. It

is a virtual necessity wherever a project’s operations are part of coordinated basin management

under a water control center. Options that may

serve overall automation objectives involve

choices as to where remote operation may be

conducted, such as only at the local project’s

control room, at one project for a number of

nearby projects, or at a water control center for

most or all projects in a basin.

Controlling rate of gate motion, including provision for variable rates. With gate movement controlled by programmed automation equipment,

it would be possible to choose rates of gate

movement and select gate speeds to achieve hydraulic or environmental objectives. For example, very gradual gate movements could eliminate surges that might increase the risks of bed

scour below the dam, or might affect water quality for fish.
9

Table 3. Dam operations identified as candidates for automation measures.

Gate operation and control Coordination with navigation Operation of fish facilities Debris and ice control

Remoting of gate position Interlocking selected gates with Automating the operation of Automated periodic debris

information and gate operation lock operations fishway weirs passage or scavenging

Controlling rate of gate motion, Interlocking selected gates with Programming and controlling Programmed operation of

including provision for variable vessel operations the operation of traveling fish pneumatic debris or ice

rates screens flushers and screens

Maintaining upper pool gage Interlocks between comlevel automatically ponents of pneumatic debris

control or ice control systems

Programming gate opening Temperature-triggered

sequences for water-quality or operating programs for

scour protection purposes ice control systems

Monitoring and controlling

gate skew

Alarm generation for gate

overload, skew, etc.

Establishing and remotely

meeting limit positions of

gates

Maintaining upper pool gage level automatically.

Most pools or reservoirs are maintained at the

desired stage (or raised or lowered) manually. In

other words, the operators consult a pre-established gate-sequence plan to determine which

gates to operate, and then make the gate movements needed to maintain or achieve the chosen

stage. Automated control of upper pool stages is

possible by means of gage inputs to a program

that contains the gate sequences and that issues

commands to the gate operating mechanisms. A

program such as this can provide for various levels of tolerance to suit particular conditions.

Programming gate opening sequences for water

quality or scour protection purposes. There may be

times when customary gate opening sequences

need to be varied to meet special needs relating

to scour protection downstream or water quality

criteria. These occasions may arise due to extreme temperatures, abnormal contaminants

(e.g., a hazardous chemical spill), prior flows at

unusually high or low discharges, etc. With automated dam gate control, several alternative gate

opening sequences could reside in the operational program, and the appropriate program could

be selected by the operators or directed by the

water control center to meet current needs.

Monitoring and controlling gate skew. Large

tainter gates may suffer distortion or problems

such as torsional “windup” if they become

skewed during operation. As with certain designs of lock gates, automation could provide

a means to overcome this problem. Refer to the

earlier discussion of this topic in connection

with lock gates, on page 7.

Alarm generation for gate overload, skew, etc. System alarms for abnormal conditions could be

automated to correct certain alarm conditions

(e.g., skew) and return the equipment to normal

status. For other conditions, automation could

rely on interlocks to prevent other operations

that should not be undertaken until the alarm

condition is corrected, to prevent adverse consequences that might arise if an alarm is ignored.

See also the discussion on page 7 concerning

machinery alarms.

Establishing and remotely resetting limit positions

of gates. This is the same matter that was presented earlier on pages 6 and 7, but dealing here with

dam gates. Please refer to those discussions.

Coordination with navigation

Lock operations are sometimes affected by

flows past navigation dams. Where this occurs it

is necessary to meet the needs of the lock operation by modifying the dam operation, or vice versa. Presently this is entirely initiated by operations personnel.

Interlocking selected gates with lock operations. At

some navigation projects, and for certain pool

stages, flow rates, and magnitudes of dam gate

opening, there can be adverse currents or outdrafts that cause difficulty for vessels entering or

departing lock chambers. These conditions may
10

stream side of the dam. Their operation is controlled manually. Automation would tie the operation of the screens to the operation of the related generators, so that when a generator goes

on or off line, the fish screen would begin or end

its operation.

Debris and ice control

This is closely related to the same topic under

Lock operations, and the functions are largely

similar.

Automated periodic debris passage or scavenging.

Debris passage or scavenging systems at dams

are operated manually on an as-needed basis.

They could be operated automatically on schedules developed through past experience. Operational schedules could be driven by time, river

stages, precipitation events, etc., according to

local conditions.

Programmed operation of pneumatic debris or ice

flushers and screens. Such systems serving dams

are not usually made up of as many components as those at locks. The use of a diagonal air

screen across the upper approach to a lock diverts ice or debris toward the adjacent dam

gates. Programmed operation could consist of

operating diverting air screens in conjunction

with the nearby gate operation.

Interlocks between components of pneumatic

debris control or ice control systems. The discussion on page 8 applies equally here.

Temperature-triggered operating programs for ice

control systems. See the discussion on page 8.

Navigation operations

The various navigation operations that may

be considered for automated operation are discussed below and given in Table 4.

Coordination with locks

Vessel movements and status conditions govern lock operations and vice versa. Some of the

communications involved in this coordination

could be accomplished automatically.

make it difficult for a tow to maintain an alignment in the lock approach areas, leading to potentially hazardous situations. With automated

programmed gate operation, there could be a

built-in alternative gate operation scheme that

would be invoked only when lockages occur.

This alternative scheme would reduce or stop

flows past appropriate dam gates, and perhaps

compensate by initiating or increasing flows

through other gates, in order to reduce the adverse currents or outdrafts. Such an alternative

gate scheme would be used only for the duration

of a tow’s approach, lockage, and departure, and

it would require operations personnel to initiate

and terminate the process.

Interlocking selected gates with vessel operations. It

has been proposed from time to time that, at certain critical locations on the inland waterways,

vessel monitoring systems should be developed

and operated to promote safe and efficient waterborne traffic management. If these proposals

were to be implemented, vessel movements

could be used as the initiating and terminating

actions for use of the alternative gate operational

schemes discussed in the foregoing paragraph.

(See the discussion of automated vessel monitoring on page 11, under Navigation operations.)

Operation of fish facilities

Certain Corps dams have facilities for the passage of anadromous fish. Generally the operation

of these facilities is operator-initiated and controlled. There are patterns of operations that are

adaptable to programmed operation.

Automating the operation of fishway weirs. The

setting of the height of fishway weirs is generally

done as a function of stage, but it is done manually and intermittently. Providing automated weir

machinery driven by stage variations would be a

fairly straightforward matter.

Programming and controlling the operation of

traveling fish screens. These screens capture fish in

the draft tubes of generators at hydroelectric

facilities, and deliver the fish safely to the downTable 4. Navigation operations identified as candidates for automation measures.

Coordination with locks Vessel monitoring Information

Sending automated messages, Vessel position monitoring with Automated trip, cargo, and lockage

instructions, or signals to vessels automatic messages and alarms as information for the Lock Performance

required Monitoring System (LPMS)

Automated vessel speed monitoring,

with automatic warning messages to

vessels and/or alarms at projects
11

Sending automated messages, instructions, or signals to vessels. Many of the communications between lock operators and vessels are repetitive

and predictable, based on the status of the lock

and the vessel position. These communications

could be triggered automatically. For example,

when a tow reached a certain point in approaching a lock, a message reporting the lock status

could be broadcast automatically, or upon the

vessel’s use of an inquiry code. The message

content would vary according to whether the

lock is in use, ready for upbound lockage, ready

for downbound lockage, etc. General cautions

about temporary conditions could be included

in these transmissions.

Vessel monitoring

Knowledge of vessel positions and movements is essential to lock and dam operators.

Presently this is reported via voice communications, but automated monitoring would remove

the inherent weak links in a voice-based system,

especially under irregular or emergency conditions.

Vessel position monitoring, with automatic messages and alarms as required. Where river traffic is

heavy and conditions are difficult, safe and efficient waterborne traffic management by means

of a vessel monitoring system may be attractive.

Such a system already exists in the Louisville

area on the Ohio River, where it is termed the

Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) system. Elsewhere

in the United States, VTS systems exist at certain saltwater ports, where they may include

the Vessel Movement Reporting System

(VMRS). Functioning similarly to an aircraft

traffic control system, a vessel monitoring system would display vessel locations, speeds, directions, etc. With a sufficient level of sophistication, such systems could automatically generate messages to vessels to announce lock status,

approaching traffic, fixed hazards, etc. Such a

monitoring system would operate under the direct observation and with the interaction of traffic control personnel. Thus, it would be more

descriptive to term it a semi-automated system.

Acting as a supplement to onboard radar, a vessel monitoring system would be particularly

valuable in bad weather, or during congested

periods.

Automated vessel speed monitoring, with automatic warning messages to vessels and/or alarms at

projects. A vessel monitoring system could calculate vessel speeds and issue warnings directly to

vessels and to navigation projects that may be at

risk. Restricted speed zones could be enforced,

rather than in effect be merely advisory, as at

present.

Information

Vessel and tow activity generates large

amounts of data that are passed through lock

personnel. These processes are very good candidates for automation.

Automated trip, cargo, and lockage information

for the Lock Performance Monitoring System. Lock

personnel have the task of collecting trip and

cargo information from passing traffic, and also

recording the physical details describing each

related lockage. This information is essential input to the Lock Performance Monitoring System

(LPMS) and the broader Inland Navigation Systems Analysis (INSA) Program. Currently the

trip and cargo information is collected from vessel crew members and, along with lockage details, entered manually into the district’s computer network. This can be a large commitment

of time for lock personnel. After editing at the

district level, the data are entered monthly into

the LPMS library by the district. Much or all of

this process is open to automation, reducing the

collection, editing, and maintenance tasks now

performed by lock and district office personnel.

Cargo and trip information could be entered

into the automated system by vessel operators,

maintained up-to-date as barges and cargos

vary during the course of a trip, and keyed to

barcodes on barges and towboats scanned as

each tow transits the lock. The corresponding

lockage information could be input automatically as the lockage is accomplished, assuming the

lock operation is controlled by automated means.

Ideally, the edit process at the district level

would be eliminated, and data would flow directly to the LPMS in real time.

GUIDELINES FOR CHOOSING

AUTOMATED FUNCTIONS

Forty-three navigation project functions that

could be automated to varying degrees have

been discussed in the preceding section; 24 of

these are associated with lock operations, 15 associated with dam operations, and four related

to navigation operations. There is a very broad

range of complexity and utility in the automation opportunities for the functions discussed.
veals that the following measures are selected

for consideration:

Departure

from

existing

Automation measure Level Purpose procedure

Controlling the opening D b N

and closing rates of lock

filling and emptying valves

Latching lock gates in their C a M

recesses

Interlocking lock gate open- C a L

ing with gage readings on

both sides of the gate

Controlling closure of D b L

miter gages needing a

specific sequence

Monitoring and controlling B b L

sump pumping equipment

at locks

As another example, suppose a proposal for

automation was desired that was based primarily on improving the safety of operations, and yet

would represent little or no departure from existing operating procedures. A sorting of the

data of Table 5 for Safety in the Purpose category, and for L or N in the Departure from Existing

Procedure category, would yield the following

automation measures for consideration:

Difficulty of Cost of

Automation measure Level implementation implementation

Balancing filling and A M M

emptying flows between

lock chamber sides

Programming filling and A M M

emptying valve operation

for various vessel types

Interlocking lock gate C L L

opening with gage readings on both sides of the

gate

At present, the data contained in Table 5 are

not extensive enough to place in a database, and

the sortings of the foregoing examples were

done manually. However, if additional lock, dam,

or navigation functions are identified as amenable to automation in the future, or if new determinative characteristics are developed for more

thoroughly evaluating automation measures, the

development of a database is indicated. This

would permit more versatile use of the automation matrix for planning and management purposes and for decision support.

12

Some could be adopted easily, while others

would involve large expenditures and ambitious

construction or rehabilitation programs. Moreover, since there is such a wide range of navigation project ages, conditions, traffic levels, functional designs, and operating equipment, a

project function that would be straightforward

to automate at one project could prove complicated to automate at another project. These distinctions cannot be addressed in detail in this report.

However, a portrayal of the candidate automated project functions is needed that allows

them to be described according to the automation characteristics (level, purpose, etc., described in Table 1). Therefore, Table 5 has been

prepared to present the navigation project functions and their associated automation opportunities in a matrix format along with the determinative characteristics that have been judged to

best describe each of the 43 potential automation

measures. The judgments used in assigning the

determinative characteristics to each automation

measure have been based on analysis of the automation survey and on the information collected during project visits. These judgments could

change as further studies are performed.

It is important to emphasize that the judgments made in developing Table 5 are general.

When a specific navigation project is considered,

a different profile of characteristics is likely to

emerge from the same judgmental process, due

to that project’s unique set of features.

The matrix format of Table 5 allows selections, comparisons, sortings, or rankings to be

made among the project functions and automation alternatives. These processes can be done on

a global basis for developing general Corps of

Engineers policy and guidelines for operations

and management. Or, on a project-specific basis,

the selections, comparisons, sortings, or rankings could be performed after development of a

new project-specific matrix modeled after Table

5. Results of the project-specific approach would

provide decision support for an automation plan

for that particular navigation project.

Some examples will illustrate the uses of the

matrix of Table 5. For the first example, assume

that it was decided to consider a program of automation at navigation projects involving only

those automation measures that were judged

low in difficulty of implementation and also low

in cost of implementation. A sorting of the contents of Table 5 on these two characteristics re-
13

Table 5. Matrix of navigation project automation alternatives.

Departure

from

Navigation project function Primary Secondary Tertiary Difficulty of Cost of existing

Automation measure Level purpose purpose purpose implementation implementation procedure

Lock operations

Filling and emptying

Timing and monitoring valve movements C b a L M L

Controlling valve opening and closing D b a L L N

rates

Varying valve operation as a function of A b a M M L

chamber stage

Balancing flows between chamber sides A a b M M N

Programming valve operation for A a b M M L

various vessel types

Establishing and remotely resetting B b a M M L

limit positions of valves

Interlocking valve operation with upper A a b c H H H

and/or lower gate operation

Gate opening and closing

Controlling rate of gate motion D b a L M L

Latching gates in their recesses C a b L L M

Interlocking gate operation between A a b c M M H

upper and lower gates

Interlocking gate operation with filling A b a M M H

and emptying valve operation

Interlocking gate opening with gage C a b L L L

readings on both sides of a gate

Interlocking gate operation with vessel B a b c M H M

position in chamber

Monitoring and controlling gate skew D b a L M M

Controlling closure of miter gates D b a L L L

needing a specific sequence

Establishing and remotely resetting B b a M M L

limit positions of gates

Programming sector gates to achieve D b c L M L

optimum flow-through

General machinery operation

Monitoring and controlling hydraulic B b c L M M

systems

Establishing and operating an alarm B b a c M M L

system

Monitoring and controlling sump pumping B b c L L L

equipment

Debris and ice control

Programmed operation of pneumatic debris B b c M M L

or ice flushers and screens

Interlocks between components of pneumatic C b c M M L

debris control or ice control systems

Temperature-triggered operating programs C b c L M L

for ice control systems

Warning system for ice accumulation on B a M M H

barge bottoms at entrance to chamber
Dam operations

Gate operation and control

Remoting of gate position information and B c b a H H H

gate operation

Controlling rate of gate motion, including B b a L M N

provision for variable rates

Maintaining upper pool gage level automatically A c b H H H

Programming gate opening sequences for B c b M M H

water-quality or scour protection purposes

Monitoring and controlling gate skew D b a L M M

Alarm generation for gate overload, skew, etc. B a b c M M M

Establishing and remotely resetting limit B b a M M L

positions of gates

Coordination with navigation

Interlocking selected gates with lock operations A a b H H M

Interlocking selected gates with vessel A a b H H H

operations

Operation of fish facilities

Automating the operation of fishway weirs C b c M M L

Programming and controlling the operation of C b c M M L

traveling fish screens

Debris and ice control

Automated periodic debris passage or A c b H H M

scavenging

Programmed operation of pneumatic debris or B b c M M L

ice flushers and screens

Interlocks between components of pneumatic C b c M M L

debris control or ice control systems

Temperature-triggered operating programs C b c L M L

for ice control systems

Navigation

Coordination with locks

Sending automated messages, instructions, C a c b M H H

or signals to vessels

Vessel monitoring

Vessel position monitoring with automatic B a c b H H H

messages and alarms as required

Automated vessel speed monitoring, with A a c b H H H

automatic warning messages to vessels and/or

alarms at projects

Information

Automated trip, cargo, and lockage information A b c L H M

for the Lock Performance Management

System (LPMS)

Table 5 (cont’d). Matrix of navigation project automation alternatives.

Departure

from

Navigation project function Primary Secondary Tertiary Difficulty of Cost of existing

Automation measure Level purpose purpose purpose implementation implementation procedure

14

CONCLUSION

An initial framework has been established for

evaluating operations and functions commonly

occurring at navigation locks and dams that

may offer opportunities for automation. This

framework, presented in a matrix format, offers

a straightforward method for describing and

evaluating candidate automation measures in

terms that are useful for operational planning

and management decision-making.
15

This study has been largely qualitative in nature. Future efforts could further develop the

study in a quantitative direction. In particular, it

was hoped that this study would develop methodologies for evaluating automation costs and

effectiveness, but this objective proved too elusive, given the level of generalization that had to

be maintained. This objective may never be

achievable on a general scale, and may be practical only on a project-specific basis.

It is important to add the final comment that,

if any degree of automation and programmed

operation at navigation locks and dams is going

to become common, whether in the near or distant future, an essential step toward that end is

to adopt the requirement that all control functions be accomplished by programmable logic

controllers (PLCs). In other words, electromechanical relays should be phased out in existing

facilities and not specified for new facilities or

for rehabilitation projects. Even without any significant level of automation, PLCs offer sufficient advantages over relay-based controls to

warrant this policy.
17

APPENDIX A: AUTOMATION SURVEY OF CORPS OF ENGINEERS

WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS

The present study was a companion to another

study titled Automation Alternatives for Hydraulic

Structures and Flood Control Projects, also conducted under the Improvement of Operations and

Management Techniques (IOMT) Program, and

under the direction of Dr. Frank Neilson of the

U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station. The

two efforts cooperated in the management and

analysis of the automation survey described in

this appendix, but otherwise were conducted

separately.

The initial task facing the principal investigators of this study and the companion study was

to collect information about the current use of

automated procedures at Corps water resources

projects. At the same time, views were to be solicited regarding the need for new or additional

automation at the Corps projects. The means

chosen to obtain this information was a questionnaire or survey, intended to reach the level

of the local lockmaster or project manager.

Dr. Neilson and Mr. John Rand of U.S. Army

CRREL, the initial principal investigator for this

study, collaborated on the design of the survey,

a sample of which is provided below. It was distributed with a Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps

SURVEY OF EXISTING CORPS PROJECTS

TO IDENTIFY EXISTING AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

Purpose: To determine the potential of automated applications at Corps projects. The

information you provide will encourage practical solutions through the Improvement of

Operation and Management Techniques (IOMT) Program.

Our definition of an automated system: Any system that either provides information

or allows some action to take place remotely. For example, river stage reading, gate

control from central location, automated pumps, alarms for equipment, deicing equipment

activation, etc.

Project: Name: ___________________________________________________________________

Type: ___________________________________________________________________

Location: _______________________________________________________________

River: ___________________________ Mile: _______________________________

NEW SYSTEMS: What can be automated at this project?

(Your suggestins will be appreciated!)

Physical description of system (its function): ___________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Possible value (the economics or safety factors): ________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

General comments you care to make: _______________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

EXISTING SYSTEMS: Are there existing automated systems at this project?

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Is there documentation available? ________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

PROPOSED SYSTEMS: Are there any systems currently being automated by your District?

If so, identify the system(s) and please provide a point of contact:

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Name, address, and telephone number of person completing this survey:

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Please return survey to either of the persons listed below:

* John H. Rand, USACRREL, 72 Lyme Road, Hanover, NH 03755-1290

Tel: 603-646-4309 Fax: 603-646-4477

* Frank Neilson, CEWES, 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS 39180

Tel: 601-634-2615 Fax: 601-634-2818
of Engineers cover letter from the Chief of the

Operations, Construction, and Readiness Division in August 1991 to field elements throughout

the country. As the cover letter directed, each receiving Operations Office was to distribute copies of the questionnaire to all lockmasters, dam

operators, operators of other hydraulic structures, and other pertinent personnel. No replies

were sought from the division level. Replies were

received through November 1991.

Survey response data

Considering only the 49 states exclusive of

Hawaii, and treating the New England Division

as equivalent to an Engineer District, the survey

brought replies from projects and elements within 28 districts. This is out of a possible total of 37

districts, for an overall reply rate of 76%.

From among the 28 responding districts, replies to the survey were received from a total of

235 Corps water resources projects.* In some

cases more than one reply was received from a

single project. This usually involved replies from

one or more of the following elements: lock and

dam operations, hydroelectric generation, natural resources management, mechanical maintenance, electrical maintenance, etc. When these

multiple replies were tallied, they were considered as a single detailed reply from a single

project. Table A1 is provided to show both the

districts with responding projects and the number of projects responding from each.

Of the 235 projects that generated replies to

the survey, 94 (or 40%) are lock and dam navigation projects. This number (94) should be compared with the 239 lock sites† owned and/or operated by the Corps of Engineers, translating to a

survey coverage of 39% of all U.S. lock and dam

navigation facilities. This response rate is considered quite satisfactory for providing a good overview of present automation techniques in use at

navigation projects, as well as for gleaning opinions from personnel at the operating level concerning future automation directions.

18

*A small number of what are termed “extraneous” replies

are not included in this 235 number. Extraneous replies came

from office personnel addressing needs such as office management systems, improved uses of Corpsmail or fax, or administrative report transmission over computer networks.

Also in this category were replies from repair facility and

floating plant personnel concerned with floating plant systems such as pumps and alarms.

† The U.S. Waterway System—Facts, USACE, November 1991.

Table A1. Automation survey responses by district.

Project

Division/District replies

Project

Division/District replies

LMVD

Memphis 1

New Orleans 13

St. Louis 5

Vicksburg NR

MRD

Kansas City 7

Omaha 7

NED NR

NAD

Baltimore NR

New York NR

Norfolk 1

Philadelphia 4

NCD

Buffalo 1

Chicago 1

Detroit 1

Rock Island 17

St. Paul 23

NPD

Alaska NR

Portland 6

Seattle 5

Walla Walla 3

ORD

Huntington 28

Louisville 19

Nashville 20

Pittsburgh 25

SAD

Charleston NR

Jacksonville NR

Mobile 9

Savannah 3

Wilmington 3

SPD

Los Angeles 5

Sacramento 2

San Francisco NR

SWD

Albuquerque 1

Fort Worth 7

Galveston NR

Little Rock 13

Tulsa 5

Note: The number of projects replying to the automation

survey within each district is shown, grouped according to

divisions. Also shown are the districts in which none of the

projects responded (NR).

Survey findings

Considering the 94 responses from lock and

dam navigation projects as the entire field for

analysis with respect to the present study, the

following statistics summarize the results that

were found:

• 74% (70 projects) have some form of automation of lock and dam operations already in

place;

• 26% (24 projects) report that there are plans

for new automation or additional automation at their projects;

• 65% (61 projects) provide suggestions for

new or additional automation at their projects, generally unrelated to any automation

that is currently planned.

Specific findings of the automation survey are

not enumerated here. The general findings of the

survey, along with the results of the several field

visits to lock and dam projects (see App. B), are

principally expressed in the Matrix of Navigation Project Automation Alternatives, which has

been developed using these information sources.

The word “automation” was interpreted

widely by the survey respondents. While the in-
19

terest of this study has been the essential operational procedures necessary to carry on navigation

lock and dam activities, several other additional,

more or less separate, activities were the subject

of some of the comments given in the returned

questionnaires. In other words, activities that are

not unique to lock and dam operations were

mentioned as already being in place, or planned,

or suggested for future installation. While no

further examination of these uses of automation

was conducted, examples of these uses were a)

security or surveillance systems (e.g., remote

control of entrance gates, cameras), b) facilities

management systems (e.g., routine maintenance

scheduling, CAD drawings, property inventories, FTE forecasting, historical data), c) lawn watering systems, and d) fax servers.

Another outcome of the survey that was peripheral to the study objectives, but bears mention

nonetheless, is the attitude or reaction that personnel may have concerning the automation

subject. A few negative reactions to both automation and the solicitation of the opinions of

field personnel were revealed by remarks such

as the following:

• “Possibility of replacement of ‘people’ with

‘machines’ has a negative connotation within management circles.”

• “People, not machines!”

• “No one would listen anyway.”

• “I believe that very little attention is paid to

an operator’s input.”

It is clear that any initiatives to introduce automation to navigation lock and dam projects on

a broad and comprehensive scale will have to

address attitudes that may be uninformed and

hostile. Important as it is, this subject was not

dealt with in the present study.
21

Seven Corps of Engineers navigation lock and

dam projects were visited in support of the automation study. The purpose of these visits was to

examine existing automation installations and

learn about their successes and shortcomings,

and to examine a wide variety of lock and dam

designs of various ages to better assess the applicability of future automation techniques. The

first two sites visited served to fulfill mainly the

first portion of the stated objective. Correspondingly, the findings of those visits are given in

greater detail.

Marseilles L&D, Marseilles, Illinois

This project on the Illinois Waterway was visited on 22 July 1991, because it has automated

functions that are operated remotely. The interest under the study, therefore, was to become familiar with these automation systems.

In recent years the dam at Marseilles was rehabilitated, and new submergible tainter gates

were installed. This dam is about two miles upstream from the lock, and it had an on-site operator before rehabilitation. In an effort to reduce

manpower requirements and consolidate the

management of operations, the rehab included

installation of dam operating equipment that allowed for the remote automated control of the

dam from the lock operating building, two miles

away. This equipment was designed to automatically operate the tainters based on inputs from

water-level gages, thus maintaining a specified

upper pool elevation. Alternatively, manual operation, either from the lock control building or

on-site at the dam, is possible. The system was

accepted by the Rock Island District in the

spring of 1990.

The system was designed by an outside consultant, under contract to the Corps. The current

lockmaster had about ten years of previous service at Marseilles, so he witnessed the planning

and execution of the rehab and the automation,

and is the single person on the lock crew most

acquainted with the system. However, he felt his

acquaintance was not sufficient.

There are two separate but parallel operating

systems, each having separate underground

fiber-optic data lines running from the dam to

the lockhouse. Thus, one system backs up the

other. One of the operating systems is made up

of a large control panel in the lockhouse, displaying gate and gage information on digital

readouts, indicating equipment status by means

of lights (e.g., gate moving, up or down, fully

closed, etc.), and having manual switches to conduct dam operations. The other system is composed of a keyboard and monitor; various

menus and screens on the monitor mimic information on the control panel of the first system.

As explained, at the time of the visit the system was not fully usable as designed or intended. Remote manual operation is generally possible and free of serious problems. However, the

automatic operation is not reliable because the

upper gage information used by the system for

control of the gates is not always accurate. As a

result, automated operation is allowed to occur

only during the day shift, Monday through Friday, when there are enough persons on duty to

keep an eye on the system and be sure it does

not stray too far from acceptable gate openings

and hence desired gage levels.

There are two separate upper pool gage sensors and corresponding gage readings transmitted by each of the two separate systems, for a total of four upper gage values. The four readings

for the upper pool may vary by as much as 0.25

ft in random fashion, and lock personnel do not

know which is reliable. The lockmaster believes

the problem originates in the adapters that input

signals to the system as a result of their connection to shaft encoders, which in turn are driven

by manometer (“bubbler”) gages. He believes

his main upper pool gage at the dam (which is

not a part of the automatic system) is very reliable; it is a gage driven by a float in a stilling

well. This gage does not produce a reading at

the lockhouse. The lockmaster wants to see a selsyn motor and telemark installed on this gage so

he can read it at the lockhouse. When this is accomplished, he would rely on that reading as accurate. At the time of the visit, there was a proposal being considered by the District from a

vendor to do this, to tie this reading into the auAPPENDIX B: FIELD VISITS TO CORPS LOCK AND DAM PROJECTS
tomated system, and to discontinue the use of the

manometer gages. The cost was estimated to be

$40,000.

There is not an entirely satisfactory procedure

for servicing or solving problems with the system. Although there is a technical contact in the

District office, the lockmaster does not think the

technical familiarity with the automated equipment at the District level is any better than his

own. The lockmaster at Lockport Lock upstream

has been able to provide some technical assistance to the Marseilles crew, since there is some

similar equipment on the upper lift-type gate at

Lockport. In general, however, the Marseilles

lockmaster has been on his own to troubleshoot

or repair the system, and he is able to replace minor components. A new electrician had joined the

crew shortly before the visit, and this man had

experience with automated industrial control

equipment, so the lockmaster was familiarizing

him with the system as much as possible.

The lock crew has no users’ manual or troubleshooting guide, because none were provided as

part of the contract. When problems cannot be

solved, the manufacturer of the components is

called, and while there is no service or maintenance contract, a technical representative is available within 72 hours—usually much sooner. The

manufacturer’s technical representative has been

out a few times, but the undependable upper

gage problem remains. If the system were to become totally inoperable, the lockmaster could station someone in an overtime status at the dam to

operate the facility manually.

Some problems have been encountered with

weather effects on components: high temperatures in input/output (I/O) boxes on each dam

gate pier, water leakage into cable connections,

etc. The lockmaster is also concerned that excessive temperatures occur in large control boxes at

the dam and at the lockhouse; he has wondered if

there should be artificial cooling for these components.

There are three remote TV cameras at the dam

that allow remote observation of the dam on

monitors at the lockhouse. However, these cannot be used to verify gate operation. A short time

earlier the lock crew had installed a staff gage

that can be seen by one of the cameras, and is

readable to a tenth of a foot. So far the cameras

have given satisfactory performance, except

when their video tubes have been destroyed by

excessive light (such as sunlight reflected from

the water).

The Marseilles lockmaster’s opinion is that the

remote dam operation is a valuable asset, but

that the automation part of the system is excessive and unnecessary technology. With the unreliability of upper gage readings, he believes that

the automation system could actually prove to be

dangerous.

Melvin Price L&D, Alton, Illinois

This Mississippi River project is quite new,

built in recent years to replace the failing Lock

and Dam No. 26 located about two miles upstream, and it was designed to have modern

automated control technology. The site visit on

23 July 1991 was hosted by an electrical engineer

from the St. Louis District, who conducted a thorough tour of the project and demonstrated the

automated systems. This engineer came to the

Corps after the system at Melvin Price was designed and specified, but he had been closely

involved with inspecting the system during construction and installation, working out the relatively few problems with the system since

completion, and modifying the system as actual

operating experience dictates.

The extensively automated project offers lockhouse control of all tainter gates, filling and

emptying gates, miter and lift gates, etc. The

automated control system at Melvin Price is

made up of sensors of various types (e.g., limit

switches, inclinometers on tainters, etc.), “cards”

in input/output (I/O) boxes (or panels) at each

controlled device, cables (two four-strand cables

linking each I/O box with the central computer),

programmable logic controllers (PLCs), and the

central computer.

Any changes to operational procedures that

are to be controlled by the system are made by

modifying the programs in the PLCs. The lead

electrician on the lock crew can program PLCs on

site, or the electrical engineer can program the

PLCs from his office at District headquarters via

modem. In fact, one could program/reprogram

or operate any part of the automated system

from anywhere in the District or even the country via modem.

The system of PLCs has never given any problems, but individual sensors have given a few

problems. If a new operation or function is needed, all that is required is to install a sensor, limit

switch, or whatever device is needed, and then

run wires to the nearest I/O box. There is never

any need to string new cables back to the lock

operations building. The operation or function

22
then is programmed into the system so that it

can be operated from the lock control room.

Many new tasks were added to the system since

the original design and since the project went

into operation in the late 1980s.

The central computer system has a master

program known as a “ladder-and-rung” type,

with about 1100 rungs. In this program, any desired sequence of processes or operations can be

arranged. Also, “interlocks,” or steps that can

proceed only after some particular condition is

met (e.g., other devices open, closed, on, off),

can be chosen as desired and incorporated into

any part of the program. Any conceivable variety of operational procedures thus can be

achieved with a few minutes of software revision, either at the lock or at the District office,

and either by qualified local lock personnel or

by an appropriate engineer at the District.

The automated control system for Melvin

Price L&D was designed and specified by St.

Louis District personnel. No outside consultant

was used. In a few instances the contractor substituted inferior equipment (encoders, cards,

switches, etc.), most of which have failed and

been replaced with better equipment.

There is no users’ manual. The lock operators

need to learn very little. The main burden of the

system falls on the programmers—they have to

be sure all operations are sequenced and interlocked appropriately.

St. Louis District personnel strongly believe

that developing a system such as that at Melvin

Price with the use of an outside consultant is not

likely to give satisfactory results. This would be

especially true if the consultant is primarily an

expert in the electronics of process control. What

is essential, they believe, is that the designer,

and especially the programmer, be intimately familiar with the details of lock and dam operations, the hazards, and the rationales that govern

operations under all river and seasonal conditions.

Ice Harbor Project, Pasco, Washington

On 7 January 1992, the Ice Harbor Project was

visited. This is Walla Walla District’s most

downstream hydroelectric and navigation dam

on the Snake River. It is also the oldest project

on the Snake, having been opened to navigation

in 1962. As with all of the Walla Walla District

and Portland District projects visited during January 1992, hydroelectric generation is the dominant activity at this installation. In addition, fish23

handling facilities are an important adjunct to

this project and the others visited in the Northwest. Navigation is very important also, but in

terms of man-hours to operate and maintain the

facility, navigation is a secondary activity.

The tour of the project was conducted by the

chief of maintenance and the chief of tech services/contract services. From the standpoint of

navigation, very little automation exists at this

project. The tainter gates of the dam are automated as part of the overall hydroelectric control system, a highly automated system (networked with other projects in the Columbia Basin) that was at the time undergoing complete

upgrading. Readout of tainter gate position is

available in the hydroelectric control room, and

remote operation from the control room is customary. Preprogrammed sequencing and coordination of gate operation is theoretically possible, as is remote operation from the McNary

Project at Umatilla, Oregon, or the Bonneville

Power Administration’s control center in Vancouver, Washington, but none of this is done,

mainly as a matter of policy.

Lock operation is done from the lock stands,

and is largely manual/visual. For the most part

the lock components are operated by means of

electromechanical, relay-based systems. Along

with a lift of 103 feet, a noteworthy feature of the

Ice Harbor lock is the lower gate, a “guillotine”

or vertical lift gate of very substantial size and

weight. (This type of lower lock gate is also

present at the Lower Monumental Project, just

upstream on the Snake River, and at the John

Day Project on the Columbia River.) The gate

poses several operational problems, one of

which is controlling skew. This kind of problem

is quite amenable to a fairly simple automated

monitoring and control system, but at present

the operators must watch a readout giving skew

indication, and make manual corrections in operating the separate left and right lifting machinery. Operator inattention is covered by limit settings for skew values, which if exceeded will result in shutdown of gate movement.

The upper lock gate is a tainter gate. This gate

also is subject to skew during movement, but it

is generally not a serious difficulty.

On the same day that Ice Harbor was visited, a

brief stop was made at the Lower Monumental

Project, which is also under the supervision of the

Project Manager located at Ice Harbor. Lower

Monumental is 32 miles upstream from Ice Harbor. This project is nearly as old as Ice Harbor,
and the level of automation is substantially the

same.

Lower Granite Project, Pomeroy, Washington

This project, visited on 8 January 1992, is Walla Walla District’s most upstream dam on the

Snake River, being about 97 miles above Ice Harbor and 30 miles downstream from Lewiston,

Idaho. It is also the newest project on the Snake

River, having opened to navigation in 1975. The

inspection of this project was hosted by the chief

of operations/maintenance and the chief of maintenance engineering/contract services.

As with the Ice Harbor Project, the major presence of automation at Lower Granite is in the

hydroelectric area. Although over a decade newer than Ice Harbor, the lock machinery operations

are accomplished with traditional non-solid-state

equipment, calling for conventional manual/visual operations.

The lower lock gates at Lower Granite are

miter gates. In spite of their large size (there is a

105-foot lift here), they function well. The upper

lock gate is a tainter, similar to that at Ice Harbor.

McNary Project, Umatilla, Oregon

The McNary Project is on the Columbia River

at Umatilla, Oregon, the most downstream

project in the Walla Walla District. It was visited

on 9 January 1992, with the chief of technical

staff/contract administration conducting a tour

and handling inquiries.

Navigation at McNary has been conducted

since 1953; it is an older project with very little

automation involved in the lock operation. The

lift at McNary is 83 feet and is accomplished

using miter gates at both the upper and lower

ends of the lock.

The principal automation item, which has

been in place for just a short time, is a PLC-based

system for operating the opening of the left and

right filling valves. Prior to this installation, filling valve operation had to be watched closely by

the operator to balance the inflows from each

side, and thus minimize hazardous cross-currents

in the lock chamber. Now the openings and

opening rates of the filling valves are monitored

and kept in balance automatically by the PLC.

The operator simply has to initiate the filling operation, and the system manages the process according to a program that has been developed to

maintain balanced flows.

As described previously for the other Walla

Walla District projects, hydroelectric production

at McNary is heavily automated. McNary serves

as the central control facility for all power generation in the District, although its capability to actually remotely operate the upstream Walla Walla

District projects is not extensively employed.

John Day Project, Rufus, Oregon

This project is the most upstream facility under

the jurisdiction of the Portland District. Navigation through the 113-foot-lift lock began in 1968.

John Day was visited on 10 January 1992, under

the guidance of two powerplant control room

managers.

The lower lock gate is of the guillotine type, as

is present at Ice Harbor and Lower Monumental

Projects. The upper gate is a submergible vertical

lift gate. The latter gate has been subject to accidents that occur as follows: When a tow in a filling pool is too close to the upper end of the chamber, the prow of the lead barge strikes the gate’s

superstructure from beneath. The most recent instance of this happening was in July 1990. The

gate was damaged beyond use, and lockages had

to be made using a floating bulkhead to effect an

upper closure. This continued for several months

until a convenient service outage could be scheduled for replacing the gate.

It is possible to visualize automation schemes

where this kind of incident could be guarded

against. Such a scheme would include a means of

monitoring the precise location of a vessel or a

tow in the chamber. As a practical matter, the District placed large concrete buttresses in contact

with the floor and the walls of the lock chamber at

the upper end, preventing an upbound tow from

stationing itself too far forward during lock filling.

The Dalles Project, The Dalles, Oregon

This project is about 25 miles downstream from

John Day; it was opened for navigation in 1957

with a lift of 90 feet. The power plant superintendent coordinated this visit on 10 January 1992, as

well as the visit to John Day on the same day.

Both projects are under the same supervisory

team, based at The Dalles. The tour of the project

was conducted by an operator.

The lower lock gate at The Dalles is a conventional miter gate, while the upper gate is a submergible tainter gate. As at John Day, the lock

machinery operations are accomplished with conventional non-solid-state equipment and manual/

visual procedures. While all of the Columbia/

Snake projects visited in January 1992 are large,

24
The Dalles Project is particularly extensive. It is a

drive of 11/2 miles from the administration building to the lock along the top of the structure. If

such a trip also included a stop at certain fishway

weirs to change control settings, for example, the

25

one-way travel would exceed three miles. It is

easily seen that, for reasons as simple as reducing

travel and travel time, it would make sense to

equip various items of equipment with remote

readout and remote and/or programmed control.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

6. AUTHORS

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

 REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

 OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

298-102

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

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 this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,

including suggestion for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington,

VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

September 1995

Automation Opportunities at Corps of Engineers Locks and Dams CWIS WU: 32722

Kevin L. Carey

U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory

72 Lyme Road Special Report 95-21

Hanover, New Hampshire 03755-1290

Office of the Chief of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Available from NTIS, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

In an investigation to determine the feasibility of automating some of the operations at navigation locks and

dams of the Corps of Engineers, a scheme of five categories composed of seventeen characteristics was developed to evaluate candidate automation measures. As a result of both a survey of Corps water resources

projects and field visits to seven lock and dam projects, 43 navigation project functions that could be automated to varying degrees are identified and described (24 associated with lock operations, 15 associated with

dam operations, and four related to navigation operations). The 43 project functions are assessed according to

the evaluation scheme, and presented in a matrix format. The matrix can be used for selections, comparisons,

sortings, or rankings of the various project functions and automation alternatives. The matrix is readily

adaptable to a database when and if it grows larger. Thus, an initial framework has been established for evaluating operations and functions commonly occurring at navigation locks and dams offering opportunities for

automation. This framework should prove useful for operational planning and management decision-making.

29

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UL

Automation Navigation projects

Dams Operations

Locks