Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Deliverables: <br />1. Prepare a first Draft Technical Memorandum to include: <br />• Outline approach for meander belt width analysis <br />• Brief literature review on constructed meandering channels <br />• Preliminary summary of data available <br />• Initial thoughts on feasibility of meander belt width concept <br />2. Prepare a second Draft Technical Memorandum to include: <br />• Description of approach for meander belt width analysis <br />• Processing of data for input in meander belt width analysis <br />• Meander belt width analysis <br />• Stabilization alternatives, including grade-control measures, non-structural <br />measures (e.g., vegetation), widening of main diversion channel in certain <br />reaches, among other considerations, to ensure low-flow channel <br />migration occurs within prescribed meander belt width <br />• Determination of need for rock toe protection along the entire length of <br />the inner diversion toe to prevent erosion <br />• Suggestions for future field investigations <br />• Recommended design criteria for Final Design <br />3. Consult with Professor Gary Parker (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) <br />during development of the meander belt width analysis and recommendations. <br />4. Develop a brief, graphics-rich, PowerPoint presentation of the background and <br />results. This presentation must be suitable for a non-technical audience. <br />5. Determine timing of tributary contributions to the low flow channel by <br />reviewing and comparing the Phase 1 HEC-HMS model results for the Rush and <br />Lower Rush Rivers, and Drains 14 and 21C for the 2-year and 5-year 24-hour <br />rainfall events. Compare model results to low flow channel hydrology <br />developed by USACE. <br />6. Prepare a Technical Memorandum presenting summarizing results. <br />II. EXTREME EVENT EVALUATIONS <br />1. Evaluate the following for extreme (103,000 cfs and Probable Maximum Flood <br />[PMF]) events <br />a. Adequacy of aqueduct openings <br />b. Lowering the left EMB to reduce the amount of flow in the Diversion <br />Channel <br />c. Head differential across raised road in the staging area <br />d. For VE-13 Option D, sloping the Diversion Channel from the Wild Rice <br />River toward the Diversion Inlet <br />III. TRIBUTARY PEAK MODEL RUNS TO SUPPORT THE MAPLE RIVER AQUEDUCT PHYSICAL <br />MODEL <br />Background: To provide 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year tributary peak hydrographs in the <br />current version of the unsteady RAS model to obtain the best available tributary peak <br />flow information for the Maple River physical modeling effort. These updated tributary <br />peak model runs will aid in the effort of determining the flow combinations to be <br />modeled during maple River physical modeling effort. <br />HMG_TO9-A13_Long.docx 6 <br />DR <br />A <br />F <br />T <br /> <br />3/6 <br />/ <br />2 <br />0 <br />1 <br />5 <br />