1 / 20

Fish Screen Cleaning Using Underwater, Stationary Nozzles A Case Study……

Fish Screen Cleaning Using Underwater, Stationary Nozzles A Case Study……. Michael Lambert, Fish Passage Engineer, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife John Dummer, Project Engineer, Black & Veatch Portland, Oregon Gary Myzak, Project Manager City of Salem, Oregon. Today’s Presentation.

yoko-moran
Download Presentation

Fish Screen Cleaning Using Underwater, Stationary Nozzles A Case Study……

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Fish Screen Cleaning Using Underwater, Stationary Nozzles A Case Study…… Michael Lambert, Fish Passage Engineer, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife John Dummer, Project Engineer, Black & Veatch Portland, Oregon Gary Myzak, Project Manager City of Salem, Oregon

  2. Today’s Presentation • Site used for case study • Variables associated with underwater cleaning system • Nozzles in use and available • Approach to testing nozzles • Data from nozzle testing • Insights gained from data gathered • Questions

  3. Site used for case study • Mill Race Fish Screen, Salem, Oregon • Purpose: • Aesthetics • Historic hydro facility • Flow through screen ~ 25 to 30 cfs • 10 bays with vertical screens • Each screen 4’ wide x 5.25’ tall • Hendrick profile bar screen • Cleaning system • Nozzle manifold controlled by solenoid valves • 15 Hp pump

  4. Nozzle Manifold Array

  5. Variables associated with underwater cleaning system • Pressure • Area • Velocity • Distance from screen • Nozzles

  6. Nozzles in use and available • Nozzles in use • Eductor nozzles • ~ 11 inches from screen • Other Nozzles available • Solid spray nozzles • Spiral nozzles

  7. Approach to testing nozzles • Consistent Approach for Evaluation • Pressure gauge • Flutter Frame • Introduction of Common Media • Grass Clippings • Underwater Video Camera • Nozzles/Nozzle Configurations • No Nozzle • Eductor • Solid Spray, with and without straightener • Solid Spray with fan • Spiral • Modify distance from screen

  8. all ports open, no nozzles spiral nozzle showing spray pattern in air Solid Spray w/ flow straightener, H1/4U-0070 Solid Spray w/ flow straightener, H1/4U-0070

  9. Data from nozzle testing • Area cleaned by existing nozzles ~ 4 to 6 inches in diameter • Spiral nozzle • 10-inch width of flutter • Weak force • 15 degree spray angle w/stabilizer • 6 inch wide by 10 inches high flutter area • Strong force • Moving eductor nozzle further from screen • Did not provide consistent increase in area cleaned • Difficult to evaluate due to piping

  10. Screen Coverage

  11. Screen Coverage

  12. Insights gained from data gathered • Little data available describing submerged nozzles • Nozzles designed to spray into atmosphere • Difficult to quantify performance of submerged nozzles • Submerged nozzle effectiveness depends on several variables • Of the nozzles and nozzle configurations tested none were found to be definitively superior to the eductors

  13. Thanks • Cooperative Effort • Special Thanks to the City of Salem • Gary Myzak, Senior Project Manager • Brandon Clarke and Angel Garcia, City Maintenance Staff

  14. Questions

More Related