Quite correct, but the adjacent land is required for housing developement it was all part of the deal so no room, hence the back pump. Incidentialy this was a secondary site at the 1988 IWA National Rally. sorry festival. CKP
----- Original Message ---- From: Adrian Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, 22 September, 2008 8:55:14 Subject: [canals-list] Re: Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal Martin Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED] co.uk> wrote: >Adrian Stott wrote... > >"Ralph Rawlinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] plus.com> wrote: >>> Locks 1 and 2, originally next to the junction with the River Irwell, >>>have been replaced >>>by a single deep lock situated to the west of the railway further away >>>from the river. >> >>(sort of XP from URW) >> >Since you have copied and pasted your reply to me in URW, I shall copy >and paste my reply to you, for the benefit of any readers here who don't >receive URW... Ditto (sort of). One answer is side ponds on the deep locks. If a lock with no side ponds requires W m3 of water to be filled, the same lock with S side ponds requires W x (1 - (S/S+2)) m3. e.g. if there is one side pond, the lockage water required is reduced by 1/3; with two, by 1/2. So if the double-depth lock is equipped with two side ponds, no backpumping is required, as its use will consume the same amount of water as the standard-depth lock (with no side ponds) above it.. Adrian Adrian Stott 07956-299966 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
