Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/34007
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRay, Jason D.-
dc.contributor.authorBrown, Richard D.-
dc.contributor.authorEvans, James A.-
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-10T18:28:33Z-
dc.date.available2019-09-10T18:28:33Z-
dc.date.issued2019-09-
dc.identifier.govdocERDC/ITL SR-19-16-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11681/34007-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.21079/11681/34007-
dc.descriptionSpecial Report-
dc.description.abstractAs part of the Oroville Dam reconstruction effort, The Sensor Integration Branch (SIB) at the Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) performed non-destructive testing (NDT) on the trunnion anchor rods at Oroville Dam, Oroville, California, Thermalito Bypass, Oroville-Thermalito Complex, and Pyramid Dam, near Castaic, Southern California, through the use of ultrasonic guided waves. The results of the testing on every rod will be discussed along with qualitative analysis in determining whether a rod is intact or compromised. Analysis is based upon the expected results from other rods at the sites and data gathered from the trunnion rod research test bed at ERDC.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipCalifornia. Department of Water Resources.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontentsAbstract ..................................................................................................................................................... ii Figures ....................................................................................................................................................... iv Preface........................................................................................................................................................ v Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................... vi 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Approach ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Scope ................................................................................................................................ 2 1.5 The guided wave test system ................................................................................................ 2 2 Pre-Test .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Possible issues ................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Drilled tendons ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Rod curvature ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Pre-arrival validation ........................................................................................................... 7 3 Results ............................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Oroville Dam ...................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.1 Condition ................................................................................................................................. 9 3.1.2 Results .................................................................................................................................... 9 3.2 Thermalito bypass ............................................................................................................. 20 3.2.1 Condition ............................................................................................................................... 20 3.3 Pyramid Dam .................................................................................................................... 22 3.3.1 Condition ............................................................................................................................... 22 3.3.2 Results .................................................................................................................................. 23 4 Conclusion and Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 26 Report Documentation Page-
dc.format.extent35 pages / 4.644 Mb-
dc.format.mediumPDF-
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherInformation Technology Laboratory (U.S.)en_US
dc.publisherEngineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)-
dc.relation.ispartofseriesSpecial Report (Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)) ; no. ERDC/ITL SR-19-16-
dc.rightsApproved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited-
dc.sourceThis Digital Resource was created in Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat-
dc.subjectHydraulic structures--Californiaen_US
dc.subjectHydraulic gates--Nondestructive testingen_US
dc.subjectOroville Dam (Calif.)en_US
dc.subjectPyramid Dam (Calif.)en_US
dc.subjectThermalito Bypass (Calif.)en_US
dc.titleGuided-wave inspection of California Department of Water Resources tainter gate trunnion rods : inspection of Oroville Dam, Thermalito Bypass, and Pyramid Damen_US
dc.typeReporten_US
Appears in Collections:Documents

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ERDC-ITL SR-19-16.pdf4.76 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open