Prospect 2 Penstock Rockfall Mitigation
Prospect, Oregon
Powerhouse and Rockfall Protection Measures
PacifiCorp Energy's Prospect 2 Penstock is comprised of two, side-by-side, 6.5-foot O.D. pipes. The penstock is roughly 850 feet long with an elevation drop of 484 feet. The facility was constructed in 1927. Early photographs of the site prior to penstock construction show a completely cleared slope with no vegetation. The slopes are steep (nearly vertical) near the top and flattens as it nears the powerhouse. Overall, the slopes are bowl-shaped with the penstocks located in the center. The drawback to this arrangement is that rockfall from the surrounding slopes is funneled towards the penstock powerhouse below.
The initial upslope inspection revealed the presence of a failing 125-foot long, tied back, timber crib wall aligned roughly perpendicular to the penstock. The wall was in such a secluded location that its existence had passed from the knowledge base of current employees. The wall was extremely deteriorated and there was a reasonable concern that it could completely fail releasing a large quantity of rock backfill. If this occurred, it would likely damage the penstock and possibly the powerhouse.
Following the reconnaissance, LT recommended removal of the actively failing timber crib wall. To do this without damage to the facility required construction of two Brugg rockfall fences and two draped mesh curtains followed by slope scaling and careful demolition of the timber crib wall. This approach allowed the timber wall to be removed and prevented damage to the powerhouse, transformers, or penstocks due to rockfall.
The initial upslope inspection revealed the presence of a failing 125-foot long, tied back, timber crib wall aligned roughly perpendicular to the penstock. The wall was in such a secluded location that its existence had passed from the knowledge base of current employees. The wall was extremely deteriorated and there was a reasonable concern that it could completely fail releasing a large quantity of rock backfill. If this occurred, it would likely damage the penstock and possibly the powerhouse.
Following the reconnaissance, LT recommended removal of the actively failing timber crib wall. To do this without damage to the facility required construction of two Brugg rockfall fences and two draped mesh curtains followed by slope scaling and careful demolition of the timber crib wall. This approach allowed the timber wall to be removed and prevented damage to the powerhouse, transformers, or penstocks due to rockfall.
Services Provided:
|
|