Upload
cedric-stephenson
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Eric Hockersmith ,Gordon Axel, and Earl Prentice (NOAA Fisheries Service)
Development of an Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System for Spillbays
Roger Anderson, Alex Artyukhov, and Eric Waters (Destron Fearing)
Don Warf, Scott Livingston, Darren Chase (PSMFC)
Presenter: Sandra Downing
Jack Sands, Jon Lomeland, Stuart Gregory, & Mark Plummer (Corps)
Scott Bettin (BPA)
Why are PIT-tag systems needed for spillbays?
Outline of Presentation
Design considerations
Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system
Development process
Installation schedule
The spillway has long been considered the safest passage route for migrating juvenile salmonids at Columbia and Snake River dams.
A review of 13 estimates of spillway mortality published through 1995 concluded that the mortality rates for fish passing standard spillbays range from 0 to 2%.
Radiotelemetry has shown that the RSWs attract ~50-60% of the fish using the spillways.
Why are PIT-tag systems needed for spillbays?
25-35% of the salmonids detected as adults do not have any detection records as juveniles except for tagging information
More detections could help with survival estimates for reaches and specific ESUs
Detections would provide route specific information
• RPA 55.7 – Investigate the feasibility of developing PIT-tag detectors for spillways and turbines.
With spill being used as the preferred passage route, fewer PIT tagged fish are being detected at the dams.
A PIT-tag system in spillbay could potentially help to return the precision of smolt survival indices back to historical levels.
Spillbay Tainter gate
Spillbay
Dam
Spillbay Crest
Unmodified Spillbay
Spillbay Tainter gate
Spillbay
Dam
Spillbay Crest
Unmodified Spillbay
Ogee
Unmodified Spillbay
Spillbay vertical rising gate
Spillbay
Dam
Spillbay Crest
Unmodified Spillbay
Spillbay vertical rising gate
Spillbay
Dam
Spillbay Crest
Ogee
Where to install PIT-tag antennas?
Forebay side, on spillbay gate, or in ogee?
Design considerations
Ogee faceOgee-based design is attractive for several reasons:
1) it will not affect hydraulics;
2) there will be no debris issues;
3) the design will permit multiple antennas to be installed across the length of the ogee and therefore reduce the impact of tag collisions (i.e., multiple tagged fish being in the field simultaneously);
4) the design will permit multiple antenna arrays to be installed, which is important from an O&M perspective and to reduce the impact of tag collisions; and
5) the design will potentially worked for all styles of spillbays
Nice laminar flow along ogee face in RSW Spillbay
390 ft
350 ft
380 ft-water depth is 4.0 ft velocity is 62 fps
372 ft- water depth is 3.7 ft, velocity is 66 fps
360 ft
370 ft
Black arrows represent every 5’ on face of ogee
Ogee-based design is difficult for several reasons
350 ft
380 ft
353 ft-water depth is 3.2 ft velocity is 75 fps
363 ft -water depth is 3.5 ft, velocity is 71 fps
How fish pass down the ogee is unknown
Design Considerations for the Ogee-based PIT-Tag Detection System
Want flexibility in generating field shapes to help minimize tag collisions and dealing with unknown fish passage behavior
Multiple antenna arrays
Test a faster tag
Need powerful antennas
Multiple antennas within each array
Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System
Four antenna arrays
Four or five antennas in each array
Transceivers will be under water
Faster 16-msec PIT tag
This design is actually similar to the corner-collector antenna design. The design also uses what Destron Fearing learned with the antenna tests done with the spillbay gate in the repair bay at Bonneville Dam.
Antenna Design: Vertical Flat Plates Each antenna has 3 subantennas
X
Y
Why are Tag Collisions an Issue?
For ogee-based systems, this can happen in the X, Y, and Z directions.
Multiple antennas within the trenches
What to do to minimize tag collisions in different directions?
X direction
Y direction
Z direction
Multiple trenches
Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ wide (possible? 2 subantennas?)
Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ deep
Y and Z directions at same time
Reduce power so antenna field is only 2’ deep
Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ wide and 2-3’ deep (possible?)
water depth: 4 feetwater velocity: 65 fpsDistance for 2 messages: 4 feet
Easy to imagine multiple fish being in such a large field
Top Antenna Array
5.5’-wide at bottom and 4-5’-wide field for top foot of water
Full power – option 1
water depth: 4 feetwater velocity: 65 fpsDistance for 2 messages: 4 feet
Top Antenna Array
5’-wide for most of field and covering 3’ of water
Middle power – option 1
This shape only helps minimize tag collisions in Z direction
water depth: 4 feetwater velocity: 65 fpsDistance for 2 messages: 4 feet
Top Antenna Array
5’-wide for most of field and covering 2’ of water
Low power – option 1
This shape only helps minimize tag collisions in Z direction (Most likely would get non-reading gaps between antennas).
water depth: 4water velocity: 65Distance for 2 messages: 4 ftDistance for 2 short messages: 2 ft
Top Antenna Array
3’-wide at bottom and covering 3’ of water
Middle power – option 2
This shape helps minimize tag collisions in Y and Z directions
water depth: 4water velocity: 65Distance for 2 messages: 4 ftDistance for 2 short messages: 2 ft
Top Antenna Array
Low power – option 2
3’-wide at bottom and covering 2’ of water
Adjust power down even more to minimize tag collisions in Y and Z directions
Development process
New ogee transceiver finished in March 2011
Testing at Pasco with transceivers and 6 subantennas
Dry and submerged testing
Faster 16-msec tag completed in 2010
Installation schedule
If installed at Ice Harbor Dam, 2012
If another dam is chosen, 2013 at earliest
MOU between BPA and Corps will dictate the schedule
How do we evaluate how well the system detects tagged fish?
How do we determine what modifications are needed for future systems?
Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system
Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system
PIT-tag only fish released above spillbay using pipes inserted at depths used for evaluation of RSWs or TSWs.
Fish double tag with PIT and an active tag released into the forebay.
S1 S2S3S4
D1
D2
Test Release point & GroupThree different water depths D1-A, D2-A, S1-A
Three or four different locations across the entrance
S1-A, S2-B, S3-B, ?: S4-B
Fish tagged with 31-msec and 16-msec tags S1-A, S1-C ?: also S2
Evaluate 2 or 3 different power settings or field shapes with both tag types
S1-A, S1-C , S1-D, S1-E ?: also S2
Evaluate groups of fish at 2 or 3 different power settings with both tag types
S1-F, S1-G, S1-H, S1-I ?: also S2
S=surface and D=depth
Preseason Evaluation of Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System
Minimum of 12 tests with yearling Chinook salmon, 5 tests with Steelhead and subyearlings
Preseason Evaluation of Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System
Release individually tagged hatchery into the capture velocity
Individual trenches
Evaluate detection efficiencies for
Combination of individual trenches (e.g., 1&2; 1&3; 1&4; 1,2,&3; 1,2,&4)
All trenches together
Determine number of reads per tagged fish for
Different antenna sizes, trenches, species, tag types
Use above data to determine how many antenna arrays are needed
Release double-tagged fish at Lower Monumental Dam
Release 500 double-tagged yearling Chinook salmon
Release 500 double-tagged steelhead
Release 1,000 double-tagged subyearling Chinook salmon
Monitor double-tagged fish at RSW Spillbay at Ice Harbor Dam
Fish will be double-tagged with PIT tags and either acoustic or radio active tags
Inseason Evaluation of Ogee PIT-tag Detection System
Inseason Evaluation of Ogee PIT-tag Detection System
If preseason testing indicated a large significant difference between power settings, use a block design to compare two settings during the normal outmigration season.
Monitor number of fish detected
Monitor number of reads per tagged fish over time
Monitor noise measurements for the transceivers over time
Ice Harbor Dam Spillway RSW BypassTurbineNav Lock
PIT-tag system
NEWPIT-tag system
Depending on the salmonid group and spill pattern, 5-20% of the fish use the bypass and 60-90% use the spillway. The RSW attracts ~50% of the spillway fish.
Therefore, we are currently detecting 5-20% of the tagged fish with the full-flow PIT-tag system.
Adding the new ogee-based PIT-tag detection system, we hope to detect around 50% of the tagged fish passing the dam.
Questions?
Anten
na
Tren
ches