.rft: COPy

( Modeling Ice Passage ThroughSubmergible and Non-submergibleTainter GatesGordon Gooch, John Rand, Ben Hanamoto and Jon Zufelt November 1990

00~~ Lf

V)

DITICELECTE.. SJAQr- -_rl -- - ---

REH

AOPpw. forp rg

UQU~buUd aft es

This report is printed on paper that contains a minimum of50% recycled material.

Special Report 90-39

U.S. Army Corpsof EngineersCold Regions Research &Engineering Laboratory

Modeling Ice Passage ThroughSubmergible and Non-submergibleTainter GatesGordon Gooch, John Rand, Ben Hanamoto and John Zufelt November 1990

Aooession ForrNTIS GRA&I

DTIC TABUnannouncedJustification

By - -

Distribution/

Availability Codes

iDist Special

Prepared for

ARU. AR 1 4":j1'.EER DISTRICT, ROCK ISLAND

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

PREFACE

This report was prepared by Gordon Gooch, Civil Engineering Technician, JohnRand, Research General Engineer, Ben Hanamoto, Research General Engineer, andJon Zufelt, Research Hydraulic Engineer, all of the Ice Engineering Rc,:arzch Branch,Experimental Engineering Division, U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engi-neering Laboratory. Funding for this research was provided by the U.S. ArmyEngineer District, Rock Island.

Dr. Jean-Claude Tatinclaux and Dr. James Lever technically reviewed themanuscript of this report.

The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising or promotionalpurvoses. Citation of brand names does not constitute an official endorsement orappi'oval of the use of such commercial products.

CONVERSION FACTORS: T.S.CUSTOMARY TO METRIC (SI) UNITS OFMEASUREMENT

These conversion factors include all the significant digits given in the conversiontables in the ASTM Metric Practice Guide (E 380), which has been approved for useby the Department of Defense. Converted values should be rounded to have thesame precision as the original (see E 380).

Mu1tipl! By To obtain

inch 25.4 millimeterfoot 0.3048 meterfoot 3 /second 0.02831685 meter 3 /secondgallon/minute 0.00006309020 meter3 /seconddegrees Fahrenheit t°C=(t°F-32)/1.8 degrees Celsius

iii

Modeling Ice Passage ThroughSubmergible and Non-submergible

Tainter Gates

GORDON GOOCH, JOHN RAND,BEN HANAMOTO AND JON ZUFELT

INTRODUCTION that the vertical and horizontal scales be equal andthus we used an undistorted model.

This study examined ice passage through two In a Froude model, the Froude number of thetypes of tainter gates using CRREL's Starved Rock model and the full-scale structure must be equal.Lock and Dam model (Fig. 1). Our objectives wereto model the flow of ice through the existing Fr (Fr) P Vtainter gates and through submergible tainter gates (Fr)in the same location (Fig. 2), to move the sub- (Fr)m rh r

mergible gates to a location closer to the lock wherechamber and model the ice passage at that new Fr = Froude numberlocation, and finally to compare, when possible, V velocityplastic ice and real ice and to observe the effect of g = acceleration due to gravityeach. 1i depth

All tests simulated typical low flow conditions Vr = velocity ratio = V p!V mof approximately 6000 ft 3/s with normal winter r = ratio full scale/model scaleice conditions of 6 to 18 in. of brash ice in the ship p = prototype (full scale)track. Near-surface water velocities wereobtained m = model.with each gate setting to evaluate any changes inthe flow pattern and velocity. The scale of a model is often represented by means

Each test was documented by still photographs of its length ratio Lr which is equal to the charac-and 1/2-in.VHSvideo.Asummaryofthevideois teristic horizontal length ratio Lp/Lm, the flowavailable from CRREL. Reference photographs depth ratio hr = hp /hm, discharge Q and area ofare included here as Appendix A. cross section A. Since the acceleration due to grav-

Throughout this report, submergible tainter ity is the same in the model and in the proto-gates will be called just that, while the normal type, gr (the gravity ratio) = gp/gm = 1, and sincetainter gates will be simply tainter gates. hr = Lr in an undistorted model, we see that Vr =

(Lr) 1/ 2 . Since Qr = ArVr and Ar = Lr, then Qr =

Lr5 / 2.

SCALE MODEL HYDRAULIC DESIGN The mean winter discharge at Starved RockLock and Dam is approximately 6300 ft3 /s, with a

The Starved Rock Lock and Dam physical mod- minimum shipping channel depth of 12 ft. Theel, built in tie refrigerated research area of CRREL's maximum scale for a model (large model) is de-Ice Engineering Facility, is an undistorted Froude pendent on the space and pumping capacitymodel, constructed at a length scale ratio of 25:1. available and the minimum scale (small model) is

Ice conveyance and transport can be studied as dependent on measurement accuracy and the re-a two-dimensionalprocessineitheran undistorted quirement to avoid viscous and surface tensionor dikterted model. 'The passage of ice over and scale effects. Based on these requirements, a lengthunder gates, however, is inherently a three-di- scale ratio of 25:1 was chosen, which resulted in amensional process. To maintain model similarity mean winter model discharge of approximatelynear the gate structures, it was necessary to ensure 900 gal./min (about mid-range of the facility's

Figure 1. Starved Rock Lock and Dan model. Lock approach on right; submergiblegates at site 2 in center; existing tainter gates, site 1, on left.

III

Figure 2. Model submergible gates.

2

pumping capacity). With this model scale, the Table 1. Tainter gate openings for January andmodel depths would range from 0.1 ft (over sub- February 1989.merged Leopold Island) tre.m of th~e dam toapproximately 1.0 ft in the ,deepest sections, whichare suitable to refain mneasurenent accuracy. 24-hour 24-ho;

At this scale, though, a model covering the full ItO ttil0gate Ol U l o p ' l'lill.,river width would be too large to fit in the refrig- Iiuttiy t F,'! ru6y 'tj

erated research area. However, during the wintermonths, when ice passage is a problem at Starved 1 8.0 I 6.

Rock Lock and Dam, only the first one or two 2 7.0 2 ,.2

tainter gates are operated, with an average total 3,. 4 3.h

4 5.7 4 ;.3opening of about 4.0 ft. The entire river freezes 5 4.3over except for the continually rebroken shipping 7. 6 3.7

lane hugging the right bank. The areas of interest 7 8.2 7 4.3

when the river is ice covered are the shipping ) 12., 8 4.6channel and the portion of the river extending 9 13.6 9 i.5

over to tie first two tainter gates of the dam. 11 11.1 11ovrtote11 12.1 11 4,0

Submerged Leopold Island also forms somewhat 12 10.3 12 4.6

of a separation line down the center of the river. 13 9.1 13 3.(

Based on this information, we decided to build the 14 8.3 14 4.2

model for only a portion of the river and to calibrate 15 7.3 15 5.016 7.1 16 4.7

the model to the mean winter discharge, velocities 17 .9 17and ice conditions. Is 6.2 18 4.2

The model is 40 ft wide by 130 ft long, which is 19 6.2 19 4.8

a full-scale size of 1000 by 3250 ft (Fig. 3). It in- 20 .7 2 1 4.4

cludes the lock approach guide wall, the upper 5.3 22 4.4

miteratesand threeof theen tainter gates on the 5.3 22 4.4m a 23 5.3 23 4.2

dam. Since only the first two tainter gates are 24 5 1 24 4.1

operated during the winter (ice problem periods), 25 5.5 25 4.2

no adjustments were necessary to the model dis- 26 6.0 26 4.027 6 .2 27 4.3charge. The use of a partial model, however, re- 28 .2 28 37

duced the flow area and made it possible that the 29 61.7 Average 4.5

30 6.5

31 7.3Average 7.2

0° Illinois Waterway

* Mooring Cells model velocities could be too high and thus not beC

I representative of full-scale conditions. A detailedC)C.)E field survey of two-dimensional water velocitiescL •was conducted to calibrate the model velocities.

o We used flow dividers, aligners and roughnesselements to adjust the model velocities to match

Miter Gates the full-scale measurements (at Vr = 5).

]I The entire series of tests was based on theI typical winter-time hydraulic conditions experi-

enced at Starved Rock. Monthly flow records wereprovided by the lockmaster and are shown in

Position Two Appendix B. From these data, we found that the(at headgate 8) (existing tainter gates) average 24-hour gate opening for Starved Rock for

151 f the month of February 1989 was 4.5 ft. The recordof the various daily settings is provided in Table 1.

Figite .3. Model linits. According to the USGS stage-discharge rating

3

Table 2. USGS stage-discharge curve for Starved Rock Dam. After USCS (1981) Stage discharge relation-ships at dams on the Illinois and Des Plaines rivers in Illinois. U.S. Geological Survey Report 81-1009.

Gate Di-chargtl (ft3 /s) for do'onstrean pool elevations of:opening

(ft) 442 444 446 448 450 452 454 456 458 °

0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00.5 781 686 594 521 454 387 315 211 1021.0 1,560 1,490 1,290 1,130 987 84: '86 502 2211.5 2,340 2,340 2,030 1,780 1,550 1,330 1,080 791 3482.0 3,110 3,110 2,820 2,470 2,150 1,830 1,490 1,090 4812.5 3,880 3,880 3,630 3,180 2,770 2,360 1,910 1,400 6173.0 4,620 4,620 4,460 3,910 3,400 2,900 2,360 1,720 7573.§ 5,340 5,340 5,340 4,660 4,060 3,460 2,810 2,040 8994.0 6,020 6,020 6,020 5,430 4,730 4,030 3,280 2,400 1,0404.5 6,540 6,540 6,540 6,220 5,410 4,610 3,760 2,750 1,1905.0 7.210 7,210 7,210 7,030 6,120 5,210 4,240 3,100 1,3405.5 7,780 7,780 7,780 7,780 6,840 5,830 4,740 3,470 1,4906.0 8,320 8,320 8,320 8,320 7,590 6,460 5,260 3,840 1,6'm6.5 8,860 3,860 8,860 8,860 8,380 7,110 5,780 4,230 1,8007.0 9.'380 9,380 9,380 0,380 9,170 7,800 6,320 4,620 1,9507.5 9,880 9,880 9,880 9,880 9,880 8,500 6,870 5,030 2,1108.0 10,400 10,400 10,400 10,400 10.400 9,220 7,490 5,440 2,3908.5 10,800 10,800 10,800 10,800 10,800 9,960 8,040 5,860 2,5809.0 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 1,300 10,700 8,710 6,360 2,7709.5 11,800 11,800 11,800 11,800 11,800 11,500 9,360 6,830 2,970

10.0 12,200 12,2' 0 12,200 12,200 12,200 12,200 10,000 7,320 3,17010.5 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 12,700 10,700 7,820 3,38011.0 13,100 13,100 13,100 13,100 13,100 13,100 11,500 8,350 3,59011.5 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 12,300 8,900 3,81012.0 13,900 13,900 13,900 13,900 13,900 13,900 13,100 9,550 4,03012.5 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 14,300 10,200 4,26013.0 14,500 14,500 14,500 14,500 14,500 14,500 submerged weir13.5 14,500 14,500 14,500 14,500 14,500 flow

* Feet above mean sea level.

curve for a tainter gate at Starved Rock (Table 2), a Consequently, the heads across the gates and theirdischarge rate of 6020 to 6540 ft3 /s corresponds to effects on the discharge are also quite different.a gate setting between 4 and 4.5 ft and a down- The tainter is raised to allow flow to pass beneathstream pool elevation of 446 ft above mean sea level, it, resulting in a high head (the difference between

Information obtained from the daily navigation the water surface elevations above and below thereport and from personal conversations with the gate), forcing flow through an orifice beneath theLockmaster disclosed that the ice that typically gate. Discharge is generally given by a formulaforms in the ship tracks is broken floating ice about relating orifice area and the head across the gate6 to 18 in. thick.

Qt = CtAg (2gH)1/ 2

GATE HYDRAULICS whereQt = discharge under the tainter gate

We assessed the hydraulics and ice passage Ct = discharge coefficient forataintergatecapabilities of two types of gates during this model A = area of the gate openmngstudy: standard tainter gates and submergible = head across the gate, i.e., the differ-gates. The hydraulics of the two gate types are ence in water surface elevations be-quite different, with the tainter operating in a tween the upstream and down-pressure flow situation while the submergible stream pools.operates in the gravity-free overfall condition. g = acceleration due to gravity.

4

For the taintur gate,, at 5tarv-d ,ocl, the di>-charge coefficient (t was 0.78 for winter condi-

tions and the area of the gate openin, .1,. is the width of the gate (60 ft) times thc gate lift. Thus,for a tainter gate, tile dischlarge varies with the zcte

head to the 1/2 power. Experience at St,,rved Rock l, V e,

hasshowx'n that a tainter gate must be rise!-tt least4 ft before ice willbegin to be drawn under the gate Z .. e p aqa ,-

and pass;ed downstream. At this opening, how- -g' 1eq a! cpe rmng

ever, ice passage is slow and ice bridges typicallyform at the gate opening, roquiring repeated assis- 8

tance from tow boat> to break them im.A submergible gate is operated bv lowering the -' -,,

gate below the water surface and allowing flow topass over its crest. This type of gate is similar to an -, 2.0.0 40 600 .

ogee crest overfall spillway and thus the head is DSch'ge , T' S'measured as the differe.nce between the watersurface elevation upstream and the top of the ['Iu V 4. Plot ff',itcop'niiig zs discIir \c11 tlic -o,submerged gate. Discharge is generally given by a of ict, passagc.formula relating this head, gate width and a dis-charge coefficient

spond to a discharge of about 1100 ft 3/s fora 60-ft-Q, = C BH- '/ wide gate). Figu re 4 is a plot of gate openings vs

where discharge for the two types cf gates. The zone> of

Q, = discharge over the submergiblegate icc passage are also marked for each type of gate.C, = discharge coefficient for the sub- The most appropriateposition ofstbmergible gates

mergible gate at Starved Rock Lock and Dam, as well .., the

B = gate width probability of ice bridging, are discussed later.I = head on the gate or gate opening.

For the model, the discharge coefficient C,. was MODEL CALIBRATIONfound to be about 3.4 for the range of winter flowsassociated with ice passage problems. The sub- The Starved Rock model was calibrated by

mergible gates were slightly narrower than the matching the model water surface elevation and

tainter gates (52 ft, full-scale) because of the gate velocities to the measured Cull-scale elevation andlowering mechanism. Therefore, thedi,,charge for velocities at a full-scale mean winter discharge of

a submergible gate varies with the head to the 6300 ft 3 /s. As stated above, for a-n undistorted3/2 power. Froud model, the discharge scale ratio is Qr =

What we see from these formulae for the dis- Lr5 /2 or for the Starved Rock Lock and Dam modelcharge through the two types of gates is that, for a (25) 5 '2 = 3125. Since Qr = Qp/Qm, for a full-scalegiven discharge, the submergible gate must have discharge of 6300 ft3 /s

a greater opening. This is beneficial in times of lowflow when ice passage is difficult. For example, for 6300 ft 3/s

the mean winter discharge of 6300 ft3/s, one tainter 3125 =

gate must be raised 4.1 ft. At this opening, the Q:1tainter will pass ice. For the same discharge, a orsubmergible gate of the same width must be, or Q, 2.01 ft 3 /s x 449 (gal./min)/(ft3 /s) =

more aptly expressed, c.n be lowered 9.7 ft. 902 gal./minSimilarly, one could lower two submergible gates6.1 ft each to accommodate the same flow. With To be assured of standard co, ,-itions for the

submergible gates, ice passage is not a problem at model flow calibration, we maintained runs of 90

these openings. Experience at other facilities with gal./in and an upper pool elevation of 458.75submergible gates has shovwn adequate ice pass- withasingle tainter gate opening of4 ft (full scale).age at gate openings of 3 ft (which would corre- Similar tests with the submergible gates provided

5

individual full-scilegatesettin!-sof6.75 it foreach a ccnstant pool el vation of 458.75 ft was main-of two submergible gates. tai,ied with a model flow of 900 gal./min. In this

test, gate openings that correspciided to full-scalesettings for low flow, winter conditions were used

TESTING SEQUENCF for both the tainter gate and the submergible gates.ihe full-scale gate openings were 4 it for a single

The tost sequence is summarized in Table 3. As tainter gate or 6.75 ft for each of two submergiblopreviously stated, the model flow condlions were gates. As a comparison to later tests, the water900 sal./min (0300 ft3 /s tull scale) and for the last velocities near the surface were obtained with twowo tests we used a lower flow of 315 gal./min tainter gates open to a 2-ft depth each. Figure 5

(1972 ft 3 /s full scale).Thelocationsof thegates for ,hows 'he flow pattern that developed with thisthe various tests are identified as position I and latter condition.position 2. Position 1 is the location of the existing Test2 was the first of three tests using the plastictainter gates at Stai ved Rock Lock and Dam. Po- ice with the tainter gates in position 1. Two iaintersition 2 is a new location, which is proposed as an gates were each opened 2 it (full scale). The plasticalternate site for the construction of two new ice was placed in the model at mid-pool and al-submergible tainter gates. The location of the po- lowed t,) float down to the dam. It was unable tosition 2 is at headgate 8, which is 151 ft from the pass under the' inter gates with the 2-ft setting. Itramp up to the headgates (Fig. 3). should be noted that experience at Starved Roc!

Another variable in the test sequence was. the Lock and Dam shows that they are unable to passtype of ice used. Our initial tests were conducted ice with a single gate opening less than 4 ft.with 4-in. squares of i/4-in.-thick low density Test 3 was our first test with the submergiblepolyethylene plastic ice. The scaled thickness of gates. Plastic ice was pooled upstream of the dam.this ice was 0.5 ft. In addition, freshwater ice was As expected, with the increased opening requiredused for ai number if tests. Its scaled thickness for the submergible gates and the flow being overranged from 0.5 to 1.3 ft. the gate, the ice quickly passed. This run was also

Test 1 is the open water calibration test in which used to calibrate the submergible gates. Tt- total

Table 3. Test summary.

Total "veraQ gat' We

(gal./ Ice open11n," thickiiess Tenp. Da t,"

Test nin) Gate Position type (f[ ( (t) F) ( 19S9

I 90- Standard 1 None 4* open water :;, 27 junecalibration

2 900 Standard 1 Plastic 4' 0.3 50 28 June3 900 Submergible I Plastic 11 .* 0.5 50 29 1une4 900 Submergible I None 13.5* ',locitv 50 6 July

measurements5 900 Submergible I Plastic 13.5* 0.5; boom 50 8 luly

test6 '90 Submergible 2 Natural 13,5" 0.6 25 3 Aug7 900 Submergible 2 Natural 13.5" 1.3 25 4 Aug8 900 Submergible 2 Natural 13.5' 1.2 25 7 Aug9 900 Submergible 2 Natural 13.5* 1.2 15 8 Aug

10S 900 Submergible 2 Natural 13.5" 0.6 25 9 AuglOT 900 Standard I Natural 4" 0.6 25 9 Aug11S 900 Submergible 2 Natural 13.5' 1.3 25 10 Augi IT 910 Standard I Natural 4- 13 25 I0 Aug12A 315 Submergible 2 Natural 6.75' 1.1 20 11 Aug12B 315 Submergible 2 Plastic 6.75' 0.3 20 I1 Aug

*Two gates**One gate

6

05 09 so that thev extended from the gates to the area

between the second and third mooring ceh,

09 simulating the channel. The area in back cf thebooms was filled with irregularly shaped pieces ofplastic ice. The area between the boom: was filled

with the 4-in. uniform squares of plastic ice. Dui-03 ing the test, all of the mode! ice cleared the channel,

!partly because the ice booms werc flexible enoughto provent the ice blocks from arching and stoppingthe ice flow. Had the channel remained rigid,arching might ha . been experienced.

0 Test 6 v,,, the first with the gates in the newlocation, and the first using randomly shaped

freshwater ice The gatt- settings were established1 2 at a total opening of 13 5 ft (full scale). An ice

channel was broken out that was approximately120 ft wide (full scale) in front of the submergib'e

Fig,,ire5. Vchcity )rof!lc ft/s) with two tainter gates ga tfc and extended to an area between the first and

ope;: to a 2-Ft depih (fdl scale). second mooring cell. After the initial conditions, ere set, the irregularly shaped, broken ice was

allowed to pass. lie ice arched in the channelgate setting needed to maintain the constant pool approximately 700 ft upstream from the gates.elevation was 13.5 ft full sca!e (6.75 ft x 2 gates). This arch was easily broken by the passage of a

I est 4 was used to document the flow patterns model barge in the ship trac'<. Once the initial archaround the two subnergible gates with a total gate was broken, the flow in the ict channel w,s suchopening of 13.5 ft. The flow pattern developed in that a second arch never formed. Figuie 7 showsopen water arounJ the submergible gates in po- the resulting velocity profile.sition 1 is shown in Figure t). Test 7 was conaucted with an equivalent full-

Test 5 analyz-,d how the submergible gates in scale ice thickness of 1.3 ft. This test indicates that,position 1 passed plastic ice with ice booms pl ced with simulated barge traffic, a clear passage can be

00.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.806 0.4

1.2\ J C 2 1 2

100.4 0...r 011

0.2

1.2k \ ~ Ice Sheet02 1.0 0.

1.2 1.6 1.4 13LL X _6

Figure 7. Vlocity profile (t/si witt two subm',irgibhcFigure 6. Veloci,y profile (ft/s) wb;, two suonergi.e gates,each witha67-ftopeiganda 12(,-ft icecfannelgates, each with a 6.7-ft opening (full sua!e) in position 1. (all fidl scale) at postin 2.

7

maintained to the submergible tainters in posi-tion 2.

Test 8 was the initial test lo compare how wellice passed through a channel of half the width ofthat used in test 6. Both submergibles were set atthe standard 6.75 ft but the ice channel was only 0.6 Ice Sheetbroken out to a width of approximately 60 ft (full 04scale). In the initial period of the test, the ice archedcloser to the gates than previously noted, andarching continued even after the initial arch was 0.2broken. The ice passed freely again once the chan-nel was widened to 120 ft. 0.4

Test 9 was conducted at a lower room tem- 0.6perature, which caused some difficulties. First, we 0.8noted that once the ice had been broken it wouldquickly knit back together. Also, we noticed thatthe barge had a much harder time maneuvering inthe ship track. The ice was more inclined to form Figure 9. Velocity profile (ft/s) with two subiner1ible

larger pancakes, yet would be broken into smaller gates, each with a 3.3-ft opening (full scale) at position 2.

floes upon impact with the dam piers and couldpass over the gates easily.

Test 10 was a comparisen test between the The room temnperature was 25°F, which was typi-submergible tainters in position 2 and the tainter calofmost of the tests. A sequence identical to'testgates in position 1. After the ice test, surface velocity series 10 was conducted. Initially, the submergiblemeasurements were taken for the submergible gates in position 2 were operated after t ice wastainter (Fig. 7) and the tainter gate in position I broken.Thebargemadeseveraltripsupahodown(Fig. 8). the river to simulate normal traffic. After the ice

Test 11 was conducted with Donald Bycznski, had cleared from part of the ship track, a channelLockmaster, and Edward Leuch, Assistant Chief, was broken to the tainter gate in position 1, whichProject Operations, Rock Island District, present. was opened after the two submergible gates were

closed. We noticed that flow velocities were muchlower and the ice could not pass as freely as whenthe submergible gates were open in position 2.

Test 12 examined a reduced flow of 315 gal./min (1972 ft3 /s full scale). Our primary purpose

1 2 was to monitor the ice passage over a full-scale

submergible gate opening of 3.4 ft per gate. IceIce Sheet continued to pass over in spite of the reduced

08 velocities (Fig. 9).

06

06 0A 06SUMMARYOur first five tests were conducted at location 1,

S0, /- -the existing location of the fainter gates at Starved0 Rock Lock and Dam. Tests 6-12 moved the sub-

1.0 Nmergible gates to location 2. Ice flushing improved

0.13 greatly with the submergible gates at this location.,,, ,, ,, L Velocities more than doubled, and a 30% decrease

in the broken ice surface area would result if a clearchannel was maintained for ice passage. The final

Fi,,tire 8. Velocity profile (fits) of a single tainter gate test reduced the twosubmergible gateopenings towith a 4-ft gate openi (full scale) and an ice channel a total of 6.75 ft. The flow was reduced to 315 gal./open to the third Inoorin: cIl. min (1972 ft 3 /s full-scale). The tainter gate open-

ing for this flow would be about I ft. Even with this ing tainter gates. Flow velocities immediately up-reduced flow, ice could pass over the crest of the stream of ea-ch gate type showed no appreciablesubmergible gates. difference from one gate style to another. The

A model tow barge simulated the effect of river major advantage of the submergible gate is that ittraffic on fragmented ice. This disruption of the ice provides three times the flow depth for the samehelped heavy ice concentrations move toward the discharge and pool elevation, allowing for easiergates. We did not simulate the propeller wash ice passage. This in turn would mean lesseffect that would gu along with barge and tow boat icebreaking requirements from the shippingtraffic, but this additional flushing would only channel to the dam gates, more ice removal fromimprove ice conveyance. Weevaluated icepassage the shipping channel lock approach area and anthrough a previously cut 60-ft channel. Because of overall improvement in ice management for winterthe arching of the broken ice in this channel, this navigation. Gate icing problems may also be re-widthhadtobeincreasedto120fttoallowefficient duced with the use of submergible dam gates.and continued ice passage. Simulated barge traffic increased ice movement

towards the dam gates, resulting in an ice-freechannel from the shipping lane to the dam gate.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We feel that suomergible gates located at thesecond location, which is closer to the lock chain-

The model study of Starved Rock Lock and ber, will prevent ice problems in the lock approachDam has shown conclusively that submergible andallowefficientand timelywinteroperationsatgates will effectively pass more ice than the exist- Starved Rock Lock and Dam.

APPENDIX A: REFERENCE PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure Al. Submetrg'ible gates before ihistallationi.

Fgre A2. Iunstalled submiiergible'gat's, site 2, with unbroken ice cover'.

I I

Figulre'A3. SlII,)l-ible 'gates at site 1, with plastic icL'.

F:iure A4. Suibmergible' gate's (it site 1, gates submeitrged, plasic ice.

12

Figure A5. Ope'l-wah'r faze calibratiOln, suri ble~,iIh gate's at site 2.

Figure A6. Ice' cover intact; shipping channel on left,mooring cells in center, suibmergible gate pier at bottomcen,11f flow diversion with blocks between cells.

13

Figure A7. Ice' c()k'

broken iii s/ipiigvw channel (7nd inl ice

c ea l m m111el floi

ShiX'jjf, Z:\ C111711110I to d17u,,

Figumre A8. Ice passaugeover sumegbum,Ile gates 17t

14

ISI

Fig~11 e All. SI;),,t4d tz4,o Iar& ii/i

Figurt' A 12. Sitilulatid air biibbh'rs,, ilt cLen rnz'g gIaIL1 b a t es; ice-freji'

C011djlj 01js dI'rm icc Cover build,,;, pri -Or to tsig

16

u "0

rPS

5l)

f-4

t V'- *'-

0 0

1 10 to

17

rrv

,2

1348

tol

N 'j..A.4 *j8-

21,0 Il IIP

rri

J

-4t

'I IL

440 00r-

H ~ I

- - - - -

jQi

(44

pl

to -a

Vi1

'.3'

20)

44 jJ

ri0

-' I"i

, rI'

A t

6)0

- '- ' -'

T") - I "Jo0 a J

2!* co * Z1

I~

-0,-

01~.- '-

A0

L, LLtl-l , L

if3F

C)C

F~v-n~g~i DO

23j

k[

NA

tot

®r4

ri IAi

IQI

E4 'D

o G

0 0 og4

'44.

-44

25

C)

0 U Q.-k OR0

)W44

a 0a

26

N. j

(41

14 1

N

NO 0 0Nlbo 4.081 :~b

H4 I

I27 I

5rI

<2 I -H zI 'IAII-

r33

H

V

NO 0

t'-4

28

-- 4 J

1410

erC

L.4- M- -6

Y% - - -_ -Y A

29

0 Gt

-- 4

IN

E.()

L44')J1

'-4

141

-H Ti

-I NO

4 -

PSS

zJj

lw .

1 4'1

W 00 x CI

"M#0*l I *i h-48

cl okOQ 0

t32

"4C

V)L.AvV)1

-~0

Cs,

.10

01

sj.0 -T 0 S 0N

IdI

IT

33

CJI

L PS 2

00

to4

kt-4

34ctc

:1 j1K

I It

C'

-,

VIC

35

-~~~ f4i2

- Q1

. <~.

a44

0 0N

4~~~~0 -t 14n- 0 0 .4i

6-

1.0~

I-1L

psJ

t

EOn

W.37

I0fe j V) J I

i LL L U Lul~

lkK

iiL

IN N

tf 1-,k

M,~ ~~ 4~ 44C, 0A-A

It I -1,01TH 1

3 v,

--I'k0

LqV

L:

E-4

O 0 IV

q, Mo-i44

a l)Q , - !

39

0 14

-ZOI

dI 4'

L I

!12~

-IT

in8 *t.e

TC -

4 "No OA

i I H 4P

ITITI

z D 0

-r -

'-41

o-

0%4

Mfl3

0 -C

E-42

ILI

00

JOI 0

0 I

'a'

43

AA

tL C)

001

)I - - - i

*w 00

N 9-4

01.- '-

44 &

NN

C16

LjLL)I

I00

lot

do.10

I- - C

'Jo~~ N ~

Z-

AA5

- - - 1 4 - I

4 A

131

'D H

;C. 41

-' - - - - - - - -

II-.

-4 44u L5)

01 11

Jol 0

N~~ -1-, (- O-I.-

94-

47

01%1

V

(I) q

:10

3r.'

48

~I ~-bj j-Ja -iJ~j~j 4

I,) ku i3

I-.j 4~ Ai L, 2

ej -2 2 '2 3

'01

0 C, ta

(49

U 1 2 2

ZS4

.1o\l

TiQ

01.- I *~ .iii

1.19

NN

*W .

I.3

ba

-4 ?4

04

u 9jiyF

-4 -J4

tol

-4 -4'

30101

dol I I I2

-1 A

114

CISI

tA i" A

53

4 J U A.4 44

'-f4

p41

4

0Jo

V3

54 1i

t44

1-40

N

55

pi~

'Il I r

'h0

4.0 ONt~

(-

kA , 4v

1.1 N

1*)

Jo!

9.1I I-

A. gtow

57

-JJ

o C

IAI

'-44

-. 1

u )' ~ L

j4

w~

>.

-k

IP tn

enA rd--S.ZH

59

k-

01 44--4, j-

060

0'4

NNcc.

A..Q lp cU

61

00

'oU

-tl -4,

6C2

it-4

01

(IT

rimi

01. M VF 1-T11 oa9DC j 4f ,w W

63

J ;,.j JA 4 ,

-.4 j -

~J 401 .

F44

A 414

%LrllAkj ,U

'-II

0 N

a. Ant41

.

65

J - l

o 0

II I3

4.4

'-.4 4

I~pi

104a

IILI

U) V)

4 \4

I67 W&

'A -1 -j 4 i-

01 IA

at a

Nj

e44 ) 00 4 1 lU

10"

68

f-

r'. T

d 3.-6 t,- f,-

nL44'1 1 - 1

In 10 41 ',C 0P

re

69

v,I

I~so

z

tV)

010 c4'

70L

VI q-1.1

.e (9

'Lo0

F 4 o

v) 6

71

ps 4,

0 CC

-I ' I

F- 72

. rt~

40

'.4

0 N~ l o go7 3

to1

(DO

CL

r.

1401 o4 T6-

W 4 1

QL q

Ogs

(1

c\14

t:1 at 01t 60

C

75

Form Approved

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188Public 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 andmaintaining 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.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

November 19904. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

Modeling Ice Passage Through Submergible andNon-submergible Tainter Gates

6. AUTHORS

Gordon Gooch, John Rand, Ben Hanamoto and Jon Zufelt

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

U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory72 Lyme Road Special Report 90-39Hanover, New Hampshire 03755-1290

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

U.S. Army Engineer District, Rock IslandRock Island, Illinois 61201

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

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

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Available from NTIS, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

1. In the'colderaregions of th U.S., ice accumulation in the approach area of navigation locks has been a constantproblem. This ice is often pushed into the lock ahead of a towboat, sometimes requiring a separate lock cycle. Thisreduces the efficiency of the lock and slows down ship traffic. By modeling this problem and testing the solutionto it, the research team has been able to conclusively show that submergible tainter gates located near the approachwill solve the above-mentioned ice problems. .

14. SUBJECT TERMS Ice Rivers 15. NUMBER OF PAGES 81Ice problems River ice managementNavigation locks River transportation 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITv CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACTOF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UL

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)2-Prescbed by ANSI Sc Z39-18298-102