Model studies of the Chucs hydroelectric project

L. Capuozzo(1), M. Gil Flores(1), O. Jimnez(2) & D. Bacchiega(3)

(1)

ENEL Green Power PH Chucs, (2) Carbon Ingeniera S.A., Costa Rica, & (3) INA, Argentina

ABSTRACT
The Chucs hydroelectric project under construction by Enel Green Power Costa Rica, is located about
40 km west of San Jos, the capital. It consists of damming the Trcoles river by a 63 m height dam, then
the water is transported about 400 m downstream by a 6.5 m penstock, up to a powerhouse where 2
Francis type units will generate a total output of 50 MW. For flood control, the dam is equipped with four
radial gates, with dimension 15x12,4 m, capable of discharging 5,680 m3/s, under design conditions and
8,100 m3/s, as a verification flood. This large discharge is handled through a sky-jump spillway chute
discharging in the rock bed downstream of the dam. A critical point of this kind of spillway is the plunge
pool, which ineffably will form because rock scour under the free falling jet. A big deal of research have
been done to assess the extension of this scour, first by empirical formulae and more recently, by a
detailed experimentation of the dynamic pressures in the rock joints. Despite of all these advances, for
important dams like Chucas, a physical model study is still indispensable. This model, on a scale 1:65,
was tested at the hydraulic laboratory of INA, Argentina. The model includes a good deal of the
approaching reservoir, the complete dam and spillway, and a large section downstream, covering the
zone of the plunge pool plus a zone where the powerhouse discharges back to the river. This paper
presents the results regarding the necessity of a pre-excavated plunge pool with the aim of avoiding
future uncontrolled scouring. Also, the effects of the spillway discharge into the powerhouse area were
tested, requiring some modification to the original project.
INTRODUCTION
The Chucs hydroelectric project, owned by ENEL Costa Rica, is located about 40 km west of San Jos,
the capital. The project, now is under construction, dams the Trcoles River by a 63 m height dam, then
the water is transported about 400 m downstream by a 6.5 m penstock, up to a powerhouse where 2
Francis type units will generate a total output of 50 MW. Fig. 1 shows the general layout of the project.
For flood control, the dam is equipped with four radial gates, with dimensions 15x12.4 m, capable of
discharging 5,400 m3/s under design conditions and up to 8,100 m3/s, as a verification flood. These large
discharges are handled through a sky-jump spillway chute discharging in the rock bed downstream of the
dam. A critical consideration in this kind of spillway is the plunge pool, which ineffably will form
because rock scour under the free falling jet. In this particular case, because of the exposed penstock
layout, there is a risk that the lateral expansion of plunge pool could affect this structure. Additional, there
is always the risk that a backward erosion of the plunge pool may affect the dam foundations.
As may be seen in Fig. 1, the powerhouse is located about 200 m downstream of the plunge pool, and that
location coincides with an abrupt 90 bend in the river. This particular condition means that the
powerhouse will be very exposed to the residual energy of the sky jump, as well as the effect of the strong
flow curvature. These conditions for the plunge pool formation and risk of erosion were very difficult to
assess by theoretically or by numerical means, and therefore, a physical model study was warranted.
HYDROLOGICAL AND GEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The drainage area up to the dam site is about 1683 km2. The basin covers the main population centres of
Costa Rica, including the capital San Jos, with elevation from about 2800 masl to 250 masl at the dam
site. The rainfall is characterized by a defined rainy season between the months of May to November with

a relative decrease in the months of July and August; and a defined dry season in the months of December
to April. The annual rainfall varies from 2000 to 3500 mm.
Figure 1. General Layout of the Chucs Hydroelectric Project

The flood discharges were calculated based on about 50 years of data from the Balsa hydrometric station,
located few kilometres upstream of the project site. Based on standard statistical methods, the flood
discharges were estimated: the design discharge (1:1,000 yrs.) 5,400 m3/s, and the safety check flood
(1:10,000 yrs.) 8,100 m3/s.
The area were the Chucs Project is located consists mainly of volcanic rocks as andesitic lava, ignimbrite
pyroclastic flows and occasionally thin layers of tuff and ash deposits. Good outcrops are observed on
both banks of the river where the plunge pool is placed, however, at the river bedrock is not observed due
to the constant water flow. The rock mass consists of aphanitic (fine grain) and aphanitic porphyritic
(coarse grain) andesitic lava flow. The aphanitic mass is hard, highly fissured, and has good weathering
resistance. The aphanitic porphyritic contains abundant calcite as joints filling giving a brecciated texture
appearance (called the "coarse grain"), it is soft to moderately hard, moderately fissured andesite,
susceptible to weathering (ISRM. 1978). The rock mass has been affected by hydrothermal process that
makes it very susceptible to accelerated weathering when exposed to environmental conditions of the area
(rain and sun).
Local site investigation with boreholes indicates a variable RQD, however, at the left abutment rock is
observed more fissured. The RQD percentage at the left abutment ranges from 0-76% with an overall
average of 40%, which qualifies the rock mass as poor quality. At the right abutment rock conditions
slightly improves, the RQD varies between 21 and 70%, with an average of 56%, although it is noted that
the rock is more fissured between elevations 256.5 to 241.9 masl (RQD < 47%). The joints spacing
produces rock blocks from 0.04 to 0.5 m length. These results would indicate that a plunge pool
formation is very likely to occur relatively rapid; however, on the other hand, the hydrological

characteristics of the basin indicate that floods normally have relative short duration, in the order of few
hours.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Energy dissipation downstream of high dams is a very delicate problem. According to Mason (1993), for
medium heads from 30 to 50 m stilling basins are usually provided. For larger heads, cavitation becomes
a problem and trajectory basin or ski jumps are currently widely used because they are a technically
sound and economical way to control large quantities of water during flood season (Vischer & Hager
1998). This device is used mainly to increase the distance from the spillway to the place where the high
velocity jet hits the channel bed, thus avoiding the danger of excessive scour immediately downstream of
the structure. Due to the throw of the jet in the shape of a trajectory, energy dissipation takes place by
internal friction within the jet, by the interaction between the jet and surrounding air, by the diffusion of
the jet in the tailwater, and mainly by the impact on the channel bed. Inevitable, even in the hardest
materials, rock erosion takes place creating natural plunge pools. In many cases, it is necessary to preexcavate the terrain in order to ensure the stability of the resulting pool.
A deal of research has been done to assess the depth and extension of the scour caused by jets,
particularly sky jumps. In order to evaluate the ultimate scour depth, many empirical and semi-empirical
expressions have been developed, based on physical model tests or in prototype measurements. In
general, scour formulae valid for plunging jet impact express the ultimate scour depth Y [m], defined as
the scour depth beyond the original bed level, t [m], plus the tailwater depth, h [m], according to the
specific discharge, q [m2/s], the fall height, H [m], and the characteristic particle diameter of the
downstream riverbed, d [m], see Figure 2. Mason and Arumugam (1985) compared the application of 25
such formulas to 26 sets of scour data from prototypes and 47 sets of scour data from model tests. Their
best fit of both model and to prototype conditions resulted in the following general form (A):

Where K = 6.42-3.1*H0.1, x = 0.60-H/300, y = 0.05+H/200 ,v = 0.30, w = 0.15, and z = 0.10. It gives

results with a standard deviation of 25% for model test conditions and 30% for prototype test conditions,
with median values of 1.01 and 1.07. Other formulas that were tried in relation to Chucs H.P. are: the
Veronese (Mason 1993) which was developed mainly for alluvial material, and it is include here mainly
for historical reasons. The Martins formula (Mason 1993) which was developed from data of 18
prototypes in rock beds. The Mason & Arumugan formula (B) (Mason 1993) which was quoted as the
best fit for all model data. The Mason formula (1993) that was developed taking into account the effect of
air entrainment into the plunge pool, as represented by the air/water ratio . The Damle formula
(Khatsuria 2005) based on model and prototype data from Indian dams; it is an upper bound of the data.
Finally, the INCYTH (Lopardo & Sly 1992) formula that was tested against 50 prototype data, with a
26% standard deviation; it is also an upper bound of all the data but one case. Table 1 shows the
coefficients and exponents for each one of these.
In any case, most empirical equations are applicable to the specific case for which they were developed,
and therefore very often physical models are used to evaluate the problem. However, laboratory tests are
very sensitive, requiring to simulate the rock foundation by a material that adequately represents the
dynamic behaviour of jointed rock. For this reason, most scour tests assume that the rock mass is already
broken up and make use of crushed granular material to represent the scaled broken-up rock. However,
such test conditions favour the formation of a downstream material bar, which generally results in an

underestimation of the total scour depth. Nevertheless, reasonable results can be obtained in terms of the
ultimate scour depth (Balloert & Schleiss 2003), but the extension of the scour hole is often
overestimated.
Table 1. Coefficients and exponent used in formula [1]
Formula
K
x
y
w
V
Z
Veronese (1937)
1.900 0.540 0.225
0
N/A
0
Martins (1975)
1.500 0.600 0.100
0
N/A
0
Mason & Arumugam (1985) A
Given in the text
Mason & Arumugam (1985) B 3.27
0.60
0.050
0.15
0.3
0.10
Mason (1993)
3.39
0.60
N/A
0.16
0.3
0.06
Damle (1966)
0.65
0.50
0.500
0
N/A
0
INCYTH (1992)
1.84
0.50
0.250
0
N/A
0
N/A: not applicable.
Figure 2. Main Parameters in the plunge pool problem
(H=fall height, h=tailwater depth, t=scour, =angle of flip-bucket)

1+
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.3
N/A
N/A

More recently, the physical-mechanical processes that govern the phenomenon have been investigated. In
short (Balloert & Schleiss 2003), scouring is a highly dynamic process, governed by the interaction of
three phases: air-water-rock, intervening in a consecutive series of physical-mechanical processes: (1)
aerated jet impact, (2) turbulent shear-layer diffusion in plunge pool, (3) fluctuating dynamic pressures at
the water-rock interface, (4) propagation of these pressures into underlying rock joints and hydraulic
fracturing of the rock, (5) dynamic uplift of single rock blocks, and finally (6) downstream displacement
and/or deposition (mounding) of the broken-up material. On this line of research are worth mentioning the
works of Spurr's (Spurr, 1985) and Annandale's (1995) methods, both corresponding to the erodibility
index (EI) methods; Fiorotto and Rinaldo (1992); and Bollaert & Scheiss (2003) which aimed to include
the dynamic pressures acting at a plunge pool bottom, and the resulting significant transient amplification
when transferred into underlying rock joints.
One important conclusion is that despite all the advances in the understanding of the physical
phenomenon, these methods require extensive data about the rock condition, and calibration of several
parameters. If, in addition, there exist constrains in the geometry of the scour hole, clearly a physical
model study is still indispensable, as it was the case for the Chucs sky jump.

INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PLUNGE POOL FORMATION

The total head of the Chucs dam from the upstream reservoir to the bottom of downstream river bed is
49 m. The velocity at the end of the flip bucket was estimated at about 20 m/s, and therefore no air intakes
were deemed necessary. The location of the flip bucket insures that there would be no interference with
the tailwater depth, up to a discharge of 5,400 m3/s, which is the design discharge of the spillway.
The spillway comprises 4 tainter gates, 15 m wide by 12.4 m height. For the design flood the theoretical
water level profiles resulted in a water height of 3.76 m and a velocity of 21.9 m/s at the end of the flip
bucket; the corresponding Froude number was 3.6. A flip bucket radio of 16 m and a take-off angle of 40
were selected based on several recommendations given in the literature (Vischer & Hager 1998). Jet
trajectory calculation indicates a trajectory length of about 54 m when hitting the downstream water
elevation, and 72 m when reaching the original river bed (see Figure 2). In principle, this was considered
good enough to protect the dam foundation.
Table 2 lists results obtained with several formulas for estimating the scour depth. This if further
illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 2. Spillway and initial plunge pool geometry

Table 2 and Figure 3 show results for three conditions: the 200, 500 and 1000 years floods. As mentioned
before, the floods in Chucs are of relative short duration (few hours), therefore it is estimated that the
scour process will developed along several years, and not in a single event. Mason (1993) suggests that it
is uneconomical to proportion the plunge pool for their optimum performance at the maximum flood; in
fact, it can be just as important to look at much more frequent floods, for returns periods from 200 to 1000
years.
Based on the above, and in consideration of the rock conditions a value of maximum scour of around t
20 m was adopted as a feasible result. For the different formulas, only two of them slightly exceed this
value. Then, using relationships to estimate the development of the longitudinal erosion on the scour pool
(Khatsuria 2005), the geometry shown in Fig. 2 was calculated.

Table 3. Scour computation data

T
Return period
years
200
500
3
Q
Discharge
m /s
3626
4650
H
Total head
m
35.74
33.74
H
Tailwater depth
m
13.26
15.26
Z
Head up to flip bucket
m
29
29
B
Width
m
69
69
Q
Unit discharge
m2/s
52.6
67.4
Dm
Material mean diameter
m
0.3
0.3

Angle of take off

46
45

Air/Water ratio

0.33
0.30

1000
5400
33.89
16.51
30.4
69
82.32
0.3
44
0.29

ScourDepth(m)

Figure 3. Scour depth results

35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0

100yr
500yr
1000yr

Figure 4. Estimation of lateral scour

Very difficult to assess is the lateral extent of the pit scour, because the few available relationship do not
exhibit adequate validity. This is very critical for Chucs scour pit since the right hand margin is a very

steep rock scarp, and the left margin, although not as steep, supports the 6.5 m diameter steel penstock.
Fig. 4 shows the initial assumption regarding the lateral extend of the pit. In any case, it was decided from
early stage, that the only way to determine the area of influence of the erosion pit with an appropriate
degree of accuracy, was by use of a hydraulic model.
THE HYDRAULIC MODEL
The process of local erosion downstream of dissipation structures, such as the resulting from the operation
of a ski jump, vortexes large dimensions and low frequencies are the most important, being the macroturbulence responsible for the phenomenon. Since viscosity has no significant influence on these swirls,
the situation is well simulated if the model reproduces the turbulence structure of the prototype. It is
noteworthy to mention that the local erosion in general is not dependent, in the long term, of the diameter
of the particles involved in the bed material.
In addition to the above, it is important to evaluate the behaviour of the bed downstream around the
plunge pool area, this in order to ensure that the model will make a proper diagnosis of the maximum
depths of erosion and establish an approximation of the behaviour of the material removed from the
riverbed. The particles present in the bed may be defined by two main parameters, the geometrical
dimensions and the specific weight. The parameter representative of the size is the average diameter of d50
grading curve, as other features such as its shape, are very difficult to represent.
The selection of the length scale of the model took into account several aspects:
Availability of physical space for the implementation of the physical model and accessibility to the
model.
Availability of the required discharge of laboratory facilities, in order to represent the maximum
discharge in the prototype: 8,100 m3/s.
Quantification of the number of Reynolds to be larger than 104,
Features of water feeding circuit, and the available discharge capacity.
Constructive aspects of the model.
A scale 1:65 was selected. The model was built at the Hydraulics Laboratory of the Instituto Nacional del
Agua, Argentina, in their Large Model Workshop, which counts with 10,000 m2 of covered area. The
model includes a good deal of the approaching reservoir, the complete dam and spillway, and a large
section downstream, covering the zone of the plunge pool plus a zone where the powerhouse discharges
back to the river. The maximum required discharge is 365 l/s.
MODEL RESULTS
The investigation program covered the following topics:
1) Testing the behaviour of the approaching flow to the dam, discharge, rapid channel, and flip
bucket. Several cases with one or two closed gates were also tested.
2) Testing the model with fixed bed and pre-excavated plunge pool, with the initial geometry shown
before. With this, the adequacy of the initial assumption about the plunge pool may be tested.
3) Testing the model with fixed bed without a plunge pool. This helps to verify the consequences of
delaying the construction of a pre-excavated pool by few years.
4) Testing the model with movable bottom but considering limits in lateral movement, under the
assumption of construction of rock reinforcement in the plunge pool. This tests the effect of a
lateral restriction in the plunge pool evolution.
On each case, the behaviour of the flow around the powerhouse bend was tested, in order to evaluate the
impact on the structures. The following aspects were measured or evaluated:

Reservoir
Trajectories and streamlines of approaching flow to the dam.
Flow into each spillway span, and study of flow asymmetries.
Qualitative influence of piers and abutments.
Spillway and ski jump
Discharge capacity.
Influence of piles on the spillway water profiles.
Water level profiles.
Operation with 1, 2 or 3 gates.
Pressures along the spillway chute.
Performance of the sky jump.
Minimum take-off discharges at the end of bucket
Effect of lateral deflectors to limit the impact area of the jet
Plunge pool and downstream reach
Jet trajectories
Impact area on the river and on both side slopes.
Flow configuration in the impact zone and energy dissipation in the plunge pool.
Flow configuration in the downstream reach including powerhouse area.
Affectations on the penstock.
Water levels at the powerhouse and tailrace area
Measurements of mobile bed scour in the plunge pool area
Measurements of fluctuating pressures in the lateral walls of the plunge pool

MAIN RESULTS
Results as very numerous to describe in this paper, but some of the main findings and conclusion will be
briefly described:

The spillway, approaching flow, and gates work well for all range of discharges, except for the
verification flood. For this discharge, the most left bank gate shows a separation profile,
creating a recirculation zone. Figure 5 shows the behaviour for the design discharge. This
situation is abnormal although it may accepted since occurs at very high discharge, above the
design value.
Figure 5. Spillway behaviour for 5400 m3/s (design discharge)

The jump sky jet impinges slightly on the side valley walls. This situation needed the
introduction of lateral deflectors in the end chutes, in order to concentrate the jet toward the
plunge pool. They were tested, and a deflection angle of 15 was found adequate (see Fig. 6)
Figure 6. Deflector of 15; impingement at downstream valley Q=5,400 m3/s

The pre-excavated pool is very effective in the dissipation of energy (see Fig. 7), for the range
of operational discharges, but for the verification flood, where high residual energy is
observed.

As design criterion for the penstock, it had been accepted that the 1000-year flow (5,400 m3/s)
water levels should stay just below the bottom of the pipe. In this sense, what is seen in the
model is acceptable; some flow waves overtop the level of the penstock terrace, but only
slightly.
Figure 7. Behaviour of pre-excavated plunge pool=5400 m3/s

For discharges above the 500 years flood, some water waves seem to affect the powerhouse
terrace (see Fig. 8). As a design criterion for the powerhouse, no affectation should occur up to
de 1000 years flood. Therefore, this situation was addressed by means of a parapet to be built
around the end of the penstock and powerhouse terraces. This parapet was also tested.

Tests were carried out without the pre-built plunge pool, considering a fixed bottom as it is
river now. This test is important in order to evaluate the possibility of delaying the
construction of the plunge pool. In generally, the behaviour is good, except for increased
turbulence around the downstream area.

Testing of pressure fluctuation along the river valley walls was carried out. These tests showed
the possibility of lateral rock erosion for discharges larger than 3,080 m3/s, the 1:100 year
flood.
Mobile bed tests showed that the maximum estimated scour depth is reached for discharges
above the 1:100 year flood.

CONCLUSIONS
The results clearly demonstrated the necessity to perform physical modelling in case of complex situation,
as it is the case for the Chucs spillway. As a result, some important modifications were taken, like the
introduction of lateral deflectors, and of a parapet for protection of the powerhouse. Finally, the
excavation of the plunge pool will be delayed for about 10 years after commissioning, in view that only in
case of large floods important erosion starts to take place.
Figure 8. Behaviour of pre-excavated plunge pool Q = 4,650 m3/s

REFERENCES
Annandale, G.W., 1995 Erodibility. J. Hydr. Research, v.33, n. 4.
Fiorotto V., Rinaldo A., 1992, Fluctuating Uplift and Lining Design in Spillway Stilling Basins, J. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 118(HY4)
Balloert E., 2002, Transient water pressures in joints and formation of rock scour
due to high-velocity jet impact. Communication 13. Laboratoire de Constructions Hydrauliques,
Ecole Polytechnique Fdrale de Lausanne.
Balloert E., Schleiss A., 2003, Scour of rock due to the impact of plunging high velocity jets Part I: A
state of the art review, J. of Hyd. Research, v 41, n 5.
Balloert E., Schleiss A., 2003, Scour of rock due to the impact of plunging high velocity jets Part II:
Experimental results of dynamic pressures at pool bottoms and in one- and two-dimensional
closed end rock joints, J. of Hyd. Research, v 41, n 5.
Khatsuria R.M., 2005, Hydraulics of Spillways and Energy Dissipators, Marcel Dekker, N.Y.
Lopardo R.A., Sly E., 1992, Constatacin de la profundidad mxima de erosin aguas abajo de
aliviaderos con salto esqu. Revista Latinoamericana de Hidrulica, no. 4.
Mason P.J., Arumugan K., 1985, Free Jet Scour below dams and flip buckets, J. Hydr. Engrg, v.111, n. 2
Maison P.J., 1993, Practical guidelines for the design of flip buckets and plunge pools, Water Power &
Dam Construction, Sep/Oct.
Spurr, K.J.W, 1985, Energy Approach to Estimating Scour Downstream of a Large Dam, Water Power
and Dam Construction, v 37, n11.
Vischer, D.L., Hager W.H., 1998, Dam Hydraulics, Wiley.