Conversion Factors, Non-SI to SI Units of Measurement
Foreword - EP-1110-2-140007
Introduction - EP-1110-2-140008
Introduction (cont) - EP-1110-2-140009
Introduction (cont) - EP-1110-2-140010
Figure 1-1. Shallow-draft Inland Waterways System, United Sates
Planning For Canalization
Mississippi River
Figure 2-2. Forty-eight-barge tow, Lower Mississippi River (U.S. Army, Corps of Engineering, Vicksburg District)
Navigation Locks and Dams
Lock size affects the economic success of a water ways.
Figure 3.2. How Locks operate
Physical Factors Affecting Sitting of Navigation Structures
Ground Water
Environmental Resources
Figure 4-1. Cross section, typical low-head navigation dam
Inland Navigation Criteria
Table 1. Recommended channel width
Freedom from Hazardous Currents
Terminal Facilities
Figure 5-1. Minimum channel clearance in straight reaches
Other Design Requirements
Sewage Contamination
Recreation
Figure 6-1. Effect of pool operation on water surface elevations
Figure 6-2. Multiple-Purpose Reservoir Operation for Vector Control, Wilson Project, Tennessee Valley Authority.
Navigation Dams
Spillways
Spillways Gates
Spillways Gates (cont)
Spillways Piers
Figure 7-1. Movable dams.
FIGURE 7-2. Navigable movable dam (wicket gates), spillways and stilling basin, Olmsted Locks and Dam. Ohio River
Figure 7-3. Typical non-navigable movable dam (gated spillway), Arkansas River.
Figure 7-4. Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 7-5. Possible flow regimes, low-head navigation weirs.
Figure 7-6. Spillway tainter gates
Figure 7-7. Submersible tainter gate, Marseilles Lock and Dam, Illinois River.
Figure 7-8. Roller gates.
Figure 7-9. Typical vertical lift gate
Navigation Locks
Cofferdams for Construction
Lock Design Criteria
Lock Types
Lock Depth and Lock Floor
Lock Gates and Sills
Lock Gates and Sills (cont)
Miter Gates
Lock Walls
Lock Chamber Walls
Culvert-discharge Walls
Lock Filling and Emptying Systems
Hawser Stresses
Filling and Emptying Over, Between, or Around Lock Gates
Filling and Emptying through Wall Culverts and Ports or Laterals
Intake manifolds
Intake manifolds (cont)
Control Valves
Wall culverts
TVA multiport system
Lock emptying systems
Bottom Longitudinal Filling and Emptying Systems
Culvert area ratios
Closure Facilities for Locks
Emergency closures\
Figure 8-1. Typical lock layouts
Figure 8-2. Typical low-lift navigation lock and dam (Ables and Boyd, 1966)
Figure 8-3. Melvin Price Locks and Dam, Mississippi River (Replacement for Lock and Dam 26)
Figure 8-4. Lock in deep part of bend
Figure 8-5. Cofferdams for stage construction
Figure 8-6. Three-stage cofferdam scheme, Replacement for Lock and Dam 26, Mississippi River
Figure 8-7. Four-stage diversion plan, Dardanelle Lock and Dam Arkansas River.
Figure 8-8. Red River Locks and Dams constructed in dry in cutoffs on rectified river alignment
Figure 8-9. Lock walls, gates, and sills
Figure 8-11. Lock miter gates, Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam Upper Mississippi River
Figure 8-12. Submergible tainter gates (56 ft. long), Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock, Upper Mississippi River
Figure 8-13. Sector gates
Figure 8-14. Prototype vs model filling time
Figure 8-15. Permissible filling time to keep hawser stresses within 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7-ton limits, 110- by 1200-ft lock
Figure 8-17. Typical lock Filling Systems
Figure 8-19. Lower Granite Lock, Snake River. (Murphy, 1980)
Figure 8-21. Typical intake manifolds (U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers)
Figure 8-22. Intake head loss coefficient (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-23. Intake ports with trash racks in place during construction Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River
Figure 8-24. Alternative filling schemes, Gallipolis Locks and Dam, Ohio River (Davidson, 1987)
Figure 8-25. Intakes for alternative filling schemes, Gallipolis Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 8-26. Culvert control valve ("reverse" tainter gate)
Figure 8-31. TVA multiport system (Elder et al., 1964)
Figure 8-32. Typical lock emptying systems
Figure 8-34. Discharge manifolds, New Cumberland Lock, Ohio River (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-35. Discharge manifold with baffles, Arkansas River (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-36. Outlet system, Olmsted Locks, Ohio River (Stockstill, 1992)
Figure 8-37. Bottom longitudinal " side-by-side" filling and emptying system, Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River.
Figure 8-38. Bottom longitudinal "over-and-under" filling and emptying system, Bankhead Lock, 69-ft lift, Black Warrior River, Alabama (Murphy, 1980)
Figure 8-40. Bay Springs Lock under construction, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway
Navigation Hazards at Locks
Dardanelle Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Temporary Lock 52, Ohio River
Bay Springs Lock and Dam
Bay Springs Lock and Dam (cont)
Lock and Dam 17, Verdigris River (Choteau Lock and Dam, Arkansas River Navigation Project)
Shoaling
Figure 9-2. Flow patterns and velocities downstream of Dardanelle Lock and Dam, Arkansas River.
Figure 9-3. Upstream lock approach, Lock and Dam 2, Red River
Figure 9-4. Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River (Franco and Glover, 1968)
Figure 9-5. Velocities and currents, original design, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-6. Velocities and currents, Plans C and C1, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-7. Velocities and currents, lower lock approach, with modification to improve navigation conditions, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-8. Depth-averaged velocities, river outlet Olmsted Lock and Dam, Ohio River (Stockstill, 1992)
Figure 9-9. Riprap protection at river outlet Olmsted Lock and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 9-10. Temporary Lock 52, Ohio River (Maynord, 1987)
Figure 9-11. Squat mechanisms (Maynord, 1987)
Figure 9-12. Comparison of squat for entering and exiting tows with and without emptying culvert open
Figure 9-13. Bay Springs Lock and Dam,Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, dam, lock and canal alignment (Tate, 1978)
Figure 9-14. Outlet diffusers and lower lock approach, Bay Springs Lock
Figure 9-15. Expected prototype surge, no tow, Bay Springs Lock
Figure 9-16. Emptying system, Bay Springs Lock (Ables, 1978)
Figure 9-17. Intake system, Bay Springs Lock
Schematic of Filling Valve Culvert
Figure 9-19. Location Maps, Lock and Dam 17, Arkansas River Navigation Project (Huval, 1980)
Figure 9-20. Tow in canal, Lock and Dam 17, Arkansas River Navigation Project
Figure 9-22. Effect of increasing canal dimensions on tow squat. (Huval, 1980)
Figure 9-23. Effect of canal size on tow squat at 0.9 V
Figure 9-25. Wing dike to minimize shoaling in lower lock approach, Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River. (Franco, 1976)
Dredging
Arkansas River Dredging
Arkansas River Dredging (cont)
Arkansas River Dredging (cont)
Mississippi River Dredging
Missouri River Dredging
Dredging Equipment
Hydraulic Suction Dredges
Dredged Material Disposal
Figure 10-2. Dike systems, Arkansas River Navigation Project
Figure 10-4. Arkansas River Navigation Project (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 10-5. Major maintenance dredging reaches at head of Pool 2, Arkansas River Navigation Project (Schemidgail, 1972)
Figure 10-6b. Annual maintenance dredging in McClellan-Kerr Navigation System and flow at Van Buren gage
Figure 10-8. Upper Mississippi River Canalization Project (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 10-9. Lock and Dam 1, Red River Navigation Project, as constructed
Figure 10-11. Types of mechanical dredges
Figure 10-13. Cutterhead dredges
Figure 10-15. Dustpan dredge
Innovative Lock Design
Increasing Lock Capacity
Need for Innovations in Lock Design
Winfield Locks and Dam, Kanawha River
Marmet Lock and Dam, Kanawha River
Other Innovative Concepts
Figure 11-2. Profile of Ohio River Navigation Pools (Corps of Enginners)
Figure 11-3. Profile of Upper Mississippi Navigation Pools (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 11-5. Intakes in Upper Miter Gate Sill
Appendix A. References - EP-1110-2-140159
Appendix A. References (cont) - EP-1110-2-140160
Appendix A. References (cont) - EP-1110-2-140161
Appendix B. Red River Waterway, Louisiana
Sediment
Hinged Pool Operation
Reaeration
Optimization of spillway design
Figure B-1. Red River Waterway, Louisiana, plan and profile (Combs and Espey, 1990)
Figure B-3. Bed elevations 20 days after dike construction Lock and Dam 1, Red River Waterway (Lttle, 1987)
Figure B-5. Hinged pool operation, Lock and Dam 3, Red River Waterway
Figure B-6. Hinged gate and baffled spillway chute, Locks and Dams 4 and 5, Red River Waterway
Attachment B-1. Typical Spillway Optimization Study, Red River, Louisiana
Flowage Easements
Comparative Costs
Table D-3. Comparative Costs
Index - EP-1110-2-140175
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140176
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140177
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140178
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140179
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140180
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140181
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140182
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140183
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140184
EP 1110-2-14
Foreword - EP-1110-2-140007
Introduction - EP-1110-2-140008
Introduction (cont) - EP-1110-2-140009
Introduction (cont) - EP-1110-2-140010
Figure 1-1. Shallow-draft Inland Waterways System, United Sates
Planning For Canalization
Mississippi River
Figure 2-2. Forty-eight-barge tow, Lower Mississippi River (U.S. Army, Corps of Engineering, Vicksburg District)
Navigation Locks and Dams
Lock size affects the economic success of a water ways.
Figure 3.2. How Locks operate
Physical Factors Affecting Sitting of Navigation Structures
Ground Water
Environmental Resources
Figure 4-1. Cross section, typical low-head navigation dam
Inland Navigation Criteria
Table 1. Recommended channel width
Freedom from Hazardous Currents
Terminal Facilities
Figure 5-1. Minimum channel clearance in straight reaches
Other Design Requirements
Sewage Contamination
Recreation
Figure 6-1. Effect of pool operation on water surface elevations
Figure 6-2. Multiple-Purpose Reservoir Operation for Vector Control, Wilson Project, Tennessee Valley Authority.
Navigation Dams
Spillways
Spillways Gates
Spillways Gates (cont)
Spillways Piers
Figure 7-1. Movable dams.
FIGURE 7-2. Navigable movable dam (wicket gates), spillways and stilling basin, Olmsted Locks and Dam. Ohio River
Figure 7-3. Typical non-navigable movable dam (gated spillway), Arkansas River.
Figure 7-4. Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 7-5. Possible flow regimes, low-head navigation weirs.
Figure 7-6. Spillway tainter gates
Figure 7-7. Submersible tainter gate, Marseilles Lock and Dam, Illinois River.
Figure 7-8. Roller gates.
Figure 7-9. Typical vertical lift gate
Navigation Locks
Cofferdams for Construction
Lock Design Criteria
Lock Types
Lock Depth and Lock Floor
Lock Gates and Sills
Lock Gates and Sills (cont)
Miter Gates
Lock Walls
Lock Chamber Walls
Culvert-discharge Walls
Lock Filling and Emptying Systems
Hawser Stresses
Filling and Emptying Over, Between, or Around Lock Gates
Filling and Emptying through Wall Culverts and Ports or Laterals
Intake manifolds
Intake manifolds (cont)
Control Valves
Wall culverts
TVA multiport system
Lock emptying systems
Bottom Longitudinal Filling and Emptying Systems
Culvert area ratios
Closure Facilities for Locks
Emergency closures\
Figure 8-1. Typical lock layouts
Figure 8-2. Typical low-lift navigation lock and dam (Ables and Boyd, 1966)
Figure 8-3. Melvin Price Locks and Dam, Mississippi River (Replacement for Lock and Dam 26)
Figure 8-4. Lock in deep part of bend
Figure 8-5. Cofferdams for stage construction
Figure 8-6. Three-stage cofferdam scheme, Replacement for Lock and Dam 26, Mississippi River
Figure 8-7. Four-stage diversion plan, Dardanelle Lock and Dam Arkansas River.
Figure 8-8. Red River Locks and Dams constructed in dry in cutoffs on rectified river alignment
Figure 8-9. Lock walls, gates, and sills
Figure 8-11. Lock miter gates, Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock and Dam Upper Mississippi River
Figure 8-12. Submergible tainter gates (56 ft. long), Lower St. Anthony Falls Lock, Upper Mississippi River
Figure 8-13. Sector gates
Figure 8-14. Prototype vs model filling time
Figure 8-15. Permissible filling time to keep hawser stresses within 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7-ton limits, 110- by 1200-ft lock
Figure 8-17. Typical lock Filling Systems
Figure 8-19. Lower Granite Lock, Snake River. (Murphy, 1980)
Figure 8-21. Typical intake manifolds (U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers)
Figure 8-22. Intake head loss coefficient (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-23. Intake ports with trash racks in place during construction Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River
Figure 8-24. Alternative filling schemes, Gallipolis Locks and Dam, Ohio River (Davidson, 1987)
Figure 8-25. Intakes for alternative filling schemes, Gallipolis Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 8-26. Culvert control valve ("reverse" tainter gate)
Figure 8-31. TVA multiport system (Elder et al., 1964)
Figure 8-32. Typical lock emptying systems
Figure 8-34. Discharge manifolds, New Cumberland Lock, Ohio River (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-35. Discharge manifold with baffles, Arkansas River (Davis, 1989)
Figure 8-36. Outlet system, Olmsted Locks, Ohio River (Stockstill, 1992)
Figure 8-37. Bottom longitudinal " side-by-side" filling and emptying system, Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River.
Figure 8-38. Bottom longitudinal "over-and-under" filling and emptying system, Bankhead Lock, 69-ft lift, Black Warrior River, Alabama (Murphy, 1980)
Figure 8-40. Bay Springs Lock under construction, Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway
Navigation Hazards at Locks
Dardanelle Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River
Temporary Lock 52, Ohio River
Bay Springs Lock and Dam
Bay Springs Lock and Dam (cont)
Lock and Dam 17, Verdigris River (Choteau Lock and Dam, Arkansas River Navigation Project)
Shoaling
Figure 9-2. Flow patterns and velocities downstream of Dardanelle Lock and Dam, Arkansas River.
Figure 9-3. Upstream lock approach, Lock and Dam 2, Red River
Figure 9-4. Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River (Franco and Glover, 1968)
Figure 9-5. Velocities and currents, original design, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-6. Velocities and currents, Plans C and C1, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-7. Velocities and currents, lower lock approach, with modification to improve navigation conditions, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam, Arkansas River
Figure 9-8. Depth-averaged velocities, river outlet Olmsted Lock and Dam, Ohio River (Stockstill, 1992)
Figure 9-9. Riprap protection at river outlet Olmsted Lock and Dam, Ohio River
Figure 9-10. Temporary Lock 52, Ohio River (Maynord, 1987)
Figure 9-11. Squat mechanisms (Maynord, 1987)
Figure 9-12. Comparison of squat for entering and exiting tows with and without emptying culvert open
Figure 9-13. Bay Springs Lock and Dam,Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, dam, lock and canal alignment (Tate, 1978)
Figure 9-14. Outlet diffusers and lower lock approach, Bay Springs Lock
Figure 9-15. Expected prototype surge, no tow, Bay Springs Lock
Figure 9-16. Emptying system, Bay Springs Lock (Ables, 1978)
Figure 9-17. Intake system, Bay Springs Lock
Schematic of Filling Valve Culvert
Figure 9-19. Location Maps, Lock and Dam 17, Arkansas River Navigation Project (Huval, 1980)
Figure 9-20. Tow in canal, Lock and Dam 17, Arkansas River Navigation Project
Figure 9-22. Effect of increasing canal dimensions on tow squat. (Huval, 1980)
Figure 9-23. Effect of canal size on tow squat at 0.9 V
Figure 9-25. Wing dike to minimize shoaling in lower lock approach, Dardanelle Lock, Arkansas River. (Franco, 1976)
Dredging
Arkansas River Dredging
Arkansas River Dredging (cont)
Arkansas River Dredging (cont)
Mississippi River Dredging
Missouri River Dredging
Dredging Equipment
Hydraulic Suction Dredges
Dredged Material Disposal
Figure 10-2. Dike systems, Arkansas River Navigation Project
Figure 10-4. Arkansas River Navigation Project (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 10-5. Major maintenance dredging reaches at head of Pool 2, Arkansas River Navigation Project (Schemidgail, 1972)
Figure 10-6b. Annual maintenance dredging in McClellan-Kerr Navigation System and flow at Van Buren gage
Figure 10-8. Upper Mississippi River Canalization Project (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 10-9. Lock and Dam 1, Red River Navigation Project, as constructed
Figure 10-11. Types of mechanical dredges
Figure 10-13. Cutterhead dredges
Figure 10-15. Dustpan dredge
Innovative Lock Design
Increasing Lock Capacity
Need for Innovations in Lock Design
Winfield Locks and Dam, Kanawha River
Marmet Lock and Dam, Kanawha River
Other Innovative Concepts
Figure 11-2. Profile of Ohio River Navigation Pools (Corps of Enginners)
Figure 11-3. Profile of Upper Mississippi Navigation Pools (Corps of Engineers)
Figure 11-5. Intakes in Upper Miter Gate Sill
Appendix A. References - EP-1110-2-140159
Appendix A. References (cont) - EP-1110-2-140160
Appendix A. References (cont) - EP-1110-2-140161
Appendix B. Red River Waterway, Louisiana
Sediment
Hinged Pool Operation
Reaeration
Optimization of spillway design
Figure B-1. Red River Waterway, Louisiana, plan and profile (Combs and Espey, 1990)
Figure B-3. Bed elevations 20 days after dike construction Lock and Dam 1, Red River Waterway (Lttle, 1987)
Figure B-5. Hinged pool operation, Lock and Dam 3, Red River Waterway
Figure B-6. Hinged gate and baffled spillway chute, Locks and Dams 4 and 5, Red River Waterway
Attachment B-1. Typical Spillway Optimization Study, Red River, Louisiana
Flowage Easements
Comparative Costs
Table D-3. Comparative Costs
Index - EP-1110-2-140175
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140176
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140177
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140178
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140179
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140180
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140181
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140182
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140183
Index (cont) - EP-1110-2-140184
EP 1110-2-14
