HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 460; KOOP RESIDENCE; HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS; 1989-10-17FLE -.
V E D
SDE 3644
0176 .MIS NOV 13 9 OCTOBER 17, 1989
CTY OF CARLSBAD
DZLCP. R33. SERV. Y.
HYDROLOGY & HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
FOR
THE DONAHOE RESIDENCES
DESCRIPTION: PARCELS 3& 4 OF P.M. 12016
CITY OF, CARLSBAD PERMIT NO.
DRAWING NO. 299-8-& 299-9
I
ENGINEER OF WORK
RECEIVED
9 2Ld JUL 251997
ENGINEERING 7 si
c
. \\
DEPARTMENT
- .............
...........
* SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17,
PAGE 2
1989 /\•*
p
J:-
,' ':_•.-_ -
HYDROLOGY STUDY
PARCELS 3 & 4, P.M. 12016
DRAWING NO 299-8 & 9 D
ASSUMPTIONS
BASED UPON A SITE INVESTIGATION, IT IS MY DETERMINATION THAT
AN OVERALL HYDROLOGY STUDY WOULD BE THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY
TO ANALYZE THESE PROPERTIES. THE COUNTY "DESIGN & PROCEDURE
MANUAL" WAS EMPLOYED, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
-SOIL TYPE - GROUP D (WORST CASE)
LAND USE - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
C=0.55
II. DESCRIPTION OF LAND .& HISTORY
THE MAJORITY OF THE DRAINAGE BASIN CONSISTS OF GENTLY ROLL-
ING TERRAIN WITH A MIXTURE OF BOTH OLDER AND NEWER HOMES.
THE VEGETATION SEEMS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFOR-
NIA, ie, SCRUBS, GRASS LAWNS, MIXTURE OF IMPERIOUS SURFACES
TREES ETC.
EXPLANATIONS OF CALCULATIONS
THE DRAINAGE BASIN IN QUESTION WAS DIVIDED INTO SUB-
WATERSHEDS. THESE WATERSHEDS WERE DETERMINED WITH CON-
SIDERATION GIVEN TO THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE AREA AND THE
PRESENSE OF STREETS AND "GUTTER" FLOW. (NOTE THAT BOUND-
ARIES FOR THE WATERSHEDS NOT LYING ON EXISTING STREETS CROSS
THE TOPOGRAPHICAL LINES AT RIGHT ANGLES.
THE DRAINAGE BASIN HAS BEEN DIVIDED INTO FIVE MAIN SECTIONS
A-E. SECTION A HAS BEEN SUBDIVIDED INTO SIX AREAS TO CALCU-
LATE THE APPROPRIATE Tc, TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND Q FLOW
FOR THE AREA.
ALL CALCULATIONS TO FIND Tc AND Q FOR AREAS Al - A6 -E WERE
DONE IN FOLLOWING MANNER. THE RESULTS ARE PRESENTED IN
TABULAR FORM.
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 3
EXAMPLE: AREA Ac
AREA (A2) 2.4 Ac
DELTA H = MAX HEIGHT - MIN HEIGHT
= 320' - 245'
= 75.'
OVERLAND LENGTH = DISTANCE FROM MAX HEIGHT TO MIN HEIGHT
L = 650'
% SLOPE = DELTA H/L (100%) S
= 75'/650' (100%)
= 11.5%
USE URBAN DRAINAGE CHART WITH % SLOPE. ABOVE AND OVERLAND LENGTH
TO FIND OVERLAND TRAVEL TIME .
T=15MIN
USE INTENSITY-DURATION DESIGN. CHART WITH DURATION, T TO FIND IN-
TENSITY. .
I = 3.4 IN/HR
USE RATIONAL METHOD Q = CIA WHERE C = 0.55
Q100 = 0.55 X 3.4 X 2.4.= 4.5 cfs
CHECK FOR GUTTER FLOW AND GUTTER FLOW APPLIES FOR THIS AREA.
/
£ 2-
)
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 4
GUTTER FLOW:
DELTA H = MAX STREET HEIGHT - MIN STREET HEIGHT
= USE ELEVATION @ INLET FOR MIN STREET HEIGHT
= 2451 - 205'
=40'
GUTTER LENGTH = 1100'
% STREET SLOPE = DELTA H/L (100%)
= 40/1100 (100%)
3.6%
USE Q100 = 4.5 cfs (FROM OVERLAND PART), THE GUTTER AND ROADWAY
DISCHARGE - VELOCITY CHART INCLUDED AND THE % STREET SLOPE TO
FIND THE VELOCITY OF Q.
V=4.4fps
S
TIME = DISTANCE/VELOCITY
= 11001 /4.4 fps
= (244 SEC) / 60
=4MIN..
Tc ='Toverland+ Tgutter .
= 15 MIN. + 4 MIN. S
= 19 MIN.
= 2.9 IN/KR
Q100 = CIA S
= 0.55 X 2.9 X 2.4 = Q100.= 3.8 cfs
.- •-;' 0
_r
-
OVERLAND FLOW: GUTTER FLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW
SUBAREA AREA H I S T I 'QIOO APPLIES H I S V I Ic Ic QlOO
• (AC) (Fl) (FT) (%) (MIN) (IN/HR) (cfs) (YES,NO) (Fl) (Fl) (%) (fps) (HIM) (HIM) (IN/HR) '(CFS)
Al' 2.9 40 750 5.3 18 3.1 4.9 NO - - - - - 18 3.1. 4.9
A2 2.4 75 650 11.5 15 3.4 4.5 YES 40 1100 3.6 4.4 4 19 2.9 3.8
PU 8.5 97 1000 9.7 19 3 14' YES 15 400 3.8 5.5 1.2 20 2.8 13
A4 5.7 65 350 186 10 4.5 14 YES 55 1800 3.1 5 6 16 ' 3.4 10.7
AS 4.1 65 450 14.4 11 4.2 9.5 YES 60 2500 2.4 4.5 9 19 3 6.8
A6 • 3.1 30 550 5.6 16 3.4 5.9 YES 55 800 6.9 "6 2.2 18, 3.1 5.3
TOTAL 44.5 cfs
8 4 40 1000 4 23 2.6 5.7 YES 15 400 3.8 4.6 1.4 24 2.6 5.7
C 2.6 25 600 4.2 8 4.5 .6.4 NO - - - - - 8 4.5 6.4
0 0.35 10 250 4 11. 4.1, 0.8 NO - - - -. - 11 4.1 0.8
E 0.8 10 250 4 11 4.1 1.8 NO - - - - - 11 4.1 '1.8
COLH(TY OF SAHDIEGO
D
FLOOD C011TAOL
EPARTMENT OF SANITATION
100vEic HU PRECIP ITATIMN .
20..-' ISOP1.UVIALS OF 100-YEAR 6-II00fl
S P[1ECIPLTitTIOI INET1S O U1 lCII 451
2 5-71
12 u
301,1 • 30 'S ( L_____
SAN \k
2
t3 Iq
151
a
252'
..,j '-:,'r'.' l:L,.H:' . S.
1.0 .25
25
30
\
)(L MARS))
S
• 23'r 4'Mw 451 S 2 ICAX)u
20'
U
- - =
SPECIAL I IIRYCC SAI Ito
11.0
301 20
118' • I15' 30' 15'
•
117' 1 5' 30'
•
15' 116'
J:irusITy-ouMTiou DESIGN CHART 0
:1I14I!TJTImrITrITrnnmh II,4I'1)nmrn'irrmIrnlr—.- FTI I.I.I 1iI,ITflflhlflI
Directions for Application: '. ...IlI j Equationi I •• 7,44 p 0
FR • . 6 1) From-precipitation naps determine 6 hr. and
Intensity (In. /Hr
'
) 24. hr. amounts for the selected frequency.
a . These maps are printed In the County Hydro10 P6 u 6 Hr. Precipitation (In.) Jiarival (10, 50 ,nd 100 yr. maps included In U
" I I Design and Procedure Manual).
••! 1 H1'i jr i'Ifl' 9 2) Adjust 6 hr. precipitation (If necessary) so
that i t is wt thin' the- range of 45Z to 65%-of
the 24 hr. C lo l l it to -Dusert)
Cn
3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the riq~t tide L of the chart.
ht
4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the
h . plotted lines.
5) This line'.1s. the intensity-duration curve for
+ +f1 fill "h1Ji Il 1 1ib &I11' , 0 Application Form. ,* — — — --I. 4 14141 .h,!1.... ''%._• 3 5 fl • :; -; .. Ii. ..:I : 'ir: • ' 0) Selected Frequency I 00 yr3.0 .
-
24
Zk- 7 - 7 to 3) t min.
* 4).. J in/hr.
I 1. 0 *tlot Applicable to Desert Region
jjJ-j_1. 4-- :-i
15 20 30 40 50 I 2 3 4 APPENDIX 10 xl ,...- •d •.,S..•.?/ Minutes .4,, Hours
/
1 Revised 1/85
I - I
RUNOFF.COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METhOD)
LAND USE Coefficient, 'C .
- . Soil Group (1)
Undeveloped .30 .35 .40 .45 ••.
Residential:
Rural .30 .35 .40 ..:5
Single Family .40 .45 .50 .55.
Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70
Mobile Homes (2) .45 .50 .55 •.. .65
Commercial (2) .70 .75 .80 .35 80% Impervious
Industrial (2) . .80 .85 .90 .95
90% Impervious
NOTES:.
Obtain soil group from maps on file with the Department of Sanitation
and Flood Control.
Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated
imperviousness values of 80% or 90%, the values given for coefficient
C, may be revised by multiplying 80% or 90% by the ratio of actual
imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case
shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider
commercial property on D soil group.
• Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 30"
0 L)j;) Revised C = X 0 85 = 0 53 ..2. ou
II 2 1
.
APPENDIX IX
z•• -_--:- --.;rj.
a
-a
£
Jfo
a'>
.
60
1•i
<
rl
V :
• A ,0
, 0
I4 0
I Y '
E •
.0 • C • Zia
J-0
1 ••
. 2 io
SO
_____ - s • :
-t. 4 g5 •A
___ •
r' . ,, 'S'-\ • risk \\V U( ;ç•'
:.r -• 3.c :.1? rp;4 •
0
F1w03.10 OvsrfindVm. of flow graph.
F
fr.\. L5 -H
.015
wit D*Pcb 0.13 RESIDENVAL STREET ONLY
20
Is
I6L :F:
__
4?1•
. / r
L-
k-J_ i -
:•• I: :.
/
S) -.
ri
0.
i,*j
TZ/
:j — 7 :7
/ zu-
--.••,••-- .;-_. ..... —- -- — .
6 —_Th. .-4:1• —. —
4 i
to "•' - •. ...::r4J$:::!: 0
!:
EH / : LLTi:.:
—
04
I 2 3 4 5 6 789 10
DISCHARGE (c.Fs.) 1:P Dl't4\
EXAMPLE:
-Given s 0=10 5 - 2.59 ? rO 23O
Chart Depth 04, Velocity 4.4 f AIL Ex 3-')i
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL. DISTRICT SERVICES
DESIGN MAL-
APPROVED i4
tz-
GUTTER AND ROADWAY
DISCHARGE—VELOCITY CHART
DATE F2/a/?._• APPENDIX X-D
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 12
HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
PARCEL 3, P.M. 12016
-- '\
1'i•-"••
I. ASSUMPTIONS
DRAWING NO. 299-8
THE FLOW ONTO THIS PROPERTY IS VIA AN EXISTING 18" CMP CULVERT
SYSTEM, COLLECTING DRAINAGE FROM AREAS A & B AND OVERLAND FLOW
FROM AREA C.
AREA A'S FLOWS COLLECT INTO THE RIGHT GUTTER OF PARK DRIVE AND
AREA B'S FLOWS COLLECT INTO THE LEFT GUTTER OF PARK DRIVE.
II, CALCULATIONS
AREAS A, B & C.
THE FOLLOWING CALCULATE THE DEPTH OF FLOW AND CAPACITIES ALONG
PARK DRIVE TO DETERMINE. THE FLOWS ENTERING THE 18" CMI' AND TO
'S DETERMINE IF THERE IS ANY OVERFLOW FROM PARK DRIVE ABOVE THE SUB-
JECT PROPERTY THAT WOULD. AFFECT THE FLOWS ONTO THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
FIVE SECTIONS WERE CHOSEN - ABOVE THE INLETS, AT THE UPPER INLET,
ONE BETWEEN THE INLETS, AT THE LOWER INLET AND AT THE DRIVEWAY
WITH THE LOWEST --- BELOW THE STATION INLETS. .
STATION UPSTREAM
oF
INLETS
0.0 +14.8
-ZO -iS -tO -5 0 *5 -HO
SLOPE - 3.0%
LEFT GUTTER= 5.7 CFS- RIGHT GUTTER 39.6 CFS
WATER DEPTH= 0.33 FT WATER DEPTH= 0.63 FT
WATER SURF= 207.38 ELV WATER SURF= 207.05 ELV
u
N-1
SDE 3644 - No.
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 13
STATION 8+10 - INLET ON RIGHT
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 #10 +IS
•
SLOPE = 2.3%
LEFT GUTTER 5.7 CFS RIGHT GUTTER= 44.5 CFS
WATER DEPTH= 0.40 FT WATER DEPTH= 0.63 FT
WATER SURF= 205.29 ELV WATER SURF= 205.27 ELy
THE INLET CAPACITY IS CALCULATED FROM THE "CAPACITY OF GRATE IN-
LET IN SUMP." CHART AS
S P = 2(a+b) = 2(1.6+3.0) = 9.2
Q = p*3o*H(3/2) = 9.2*3.0+(0.63)3/2 = 13.8 CFS.
* THIS IS THE MAXIMUM FLOW INTO THIS INLET, NOT- DEDUCTING ANY-
THING FOR THE CMP PIPE BLOCKING FLOW FROM THE 2 SIDES.
THE FLOW REMAINING IN THE LEFT GUTTER IS 44.5 - 13.8 OR 30.7 CPS
STATION 8+00 - BETWEEN INLETS
205.18 : W.s.205.il 05.
0.0
-20 -15 -10 -5 +0 +5 410 4-15
SLOPE = 2.3%
LEFT GUTTER= 5.7 CFS RIGHT GUTTER= 30.7 CFS
WATER DEPTH= 0.4 FT WATER DEPTH=. 0.51 FT
WATER SURF= 205.11 ELV WATER SURF= 205.17 FT
SINCE THE FLOW IN THE RIGHT GUTTER IS DEEPER THAN THE CENTERLINE
OF PAVEMENT, WATER FLOWS FROM THE RIGHT GUTTER TO THE LEFT GUT-
TER. THE CAPACITY OF THE RIGHT GUTTER -AT THIS POINT IS 22.2 CFS.
THEREFORE 8.5 CFS FLOWS INTO THE LEFT GUTTER, BRINGING THE TOTAL
FLOW IN THE LEFT GUTTER TO 13.2 CFS.
ID
'k SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 14 -* , A-
STATION 7+85 INLET ON LEFT
204.58
1 -7 -15.5 204.13
-eo -15 -10 -5 0 +5 +10 *15 4ZO
SLOPE = 2.3%
LEFT GUTTER= 13.2 CFS RIGHT GUTTER= 22.2 CFS
- WATER DEPTH= 0.37 FT WATER DEPTH 0.45 FT
WATER SURF= 204.25 ELV WATER SURF= 204.73 ELV
THE INLET CAPACITY OF THE LEFT INLET CALCULATED FROM THE
"CAPACITY OF GRATE INLETS IN SUMP" CHART IS: -
P= 2(a+b) = 2(.2.2+3.6)= 11.60 FT
Q= p*30*H(3/2) = 11.:6*3.0*(0.37)312 = 7.8 CFS
THE FLOW REMAINING IN THE LEFT GUTTER IS 13.2 - 7.8 CFS OR 5.4
CFS.
THE LOWEST DRIVEWAY CREST IS AT STATION 7+55 BELOW THE INLETS,
THEREFORE THE WATER DEPTHS ARE CALCULATED AT THIS POINT.
STATION 7+55 w.g.'a04.t5
203.T1 O4-.tO \ 2O.(o5
14Z:~_ Z
+15
SLOPE = 2.15%
LEFT GUTTER= 5.4 CFS RIGHT GUTTER= 22.2 CFS
WATER DEPTH= 0.26 FT WATER DEPTH= 0.45 FT
WATER SURF= 203.42 ELV WATER SURF 204.15 ELV
GUTTER CAP= 45.7 CFS GUTTER CA= 14.6 CFS
EVEN THOUGH THE RIGHT-GUTTER CAPACITY IS DECREASED AS THE SLOPE
FLATTENS, THE LEFT GUTTER HAS AMPLE CAPACITY TO RETAIN THE FLOWS
WELL PAST THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 15
THE TOTAL FLOW IN THE 18" CMP SERVING THE INLETSTh THE SUM OF
THE FLOW FROM THE 2 INLETS PLUS AREA C OR
Q100= 13.8 CFS + 7.8 CFS.+ 6.4 CFS = 28 CFS
THE FLOW ENTERING THE PROPOSED 24" CMP IS 28 CFS. THE HYDRAULIC
CALCULATION FOR THE FLOW IS:
DIAMETER (INCHES) 24 •' MANNINGS N ........ 013
SLOPE (FT/FT) ........0.0175 Q, (cfs) ...........28
DEPTH (FT) ............1.53 DEPTH/DIAMETER.... 0.77
VELOCITY (fps).; ..... VELOCITY HEAD ..... 1.82
AREA (Sq> Ft.) .......2.59
CRITICAL DEPTH.......1.83 CRITICAL SLOPE.... 0.0133
CRITICAL VELOCITY.... 9.30 FROUDE NUMBER.....1.54
THE CAPACITY OF THE' 24" AT THIS SLOPE IS 37.5 CFS WHICH IS
GREATER THAN THE 'REQUIRED CAPACITY.
AREA D Q100 = 1.8cfs - FROM HYDROLOGY STUDY
THIS FLOW IS FROM ALTHEA IN AND ENTERS PROPOSED CURB OUTLET PER
IMPROVEMENT PLAN DWG. NO. 292-4
-CAPACITY OF TYPE "A" (D'-25) '
CURB OUTLET
A = 0.75 S.F.
R = 0.75/6.5 = 0.115 N = 0.014 5 = .017
Qcap = 1.486 X 0.75.X 0.115X .011 '2.43 CFS
0.014
Q cap > Q100 O.K.
THE 'FLOW EXITING THE 24" CMP INTO THE ENERGY DISSAPATER 'HAS A
VELOCITY OF 10.8 FPS. BASED UPON S.C.S. TABLE 200-1.6.1 SELEC-
TION OF ' RIPRAP AND FILTER. BLANKET MATERIAL, A ROCK CLASS OF "LIGHT" IS REQUIRED.
SDE 3644
OCTOER 17, 1989
PAGE 16A
CHECK VELOCITY AND Q FOR PROPOSED EARTHEN SWALE ALONG THE EAST
PROPERTY LINE OF PARCEL 3 TO VERIFY BERMUDAGRASS AS BEING A
SUITABLE SLOPE PROTECTION. THE SWALE EMPTIES INTO CATCH BASINS
AT THE NORTH AND SOUTH ENDS OF PARCEL 3 AND THE HOST CRITICAL
SLOPE IS 7.07%.
TRIANGULAR CHANNEL
INVERT WIDTH (feet) 0.00
SLOPE (feet/foot) '.0707
LEFT SIDE
SLOPE (X to 1) ........4.0.
DEPTH (feet) ...........0.30
VELOCITY (fps) .........3.02
AREA (square feet)....' '0.26
CRITICAL DEPTH ......... 0.34
CRITICAL VELOCITY 2.32
TIHE:12:46:08
MANNINGS n .035
Q(cfs) .........0.80
RIGHT SIDE
SLOPE (,X to 1)... 2.00
'TOP WIDTH (feet). 1.78
VEL. HEAD (feet). 0.14
P + H (pounds)... 6
CRITICAL SLOPE... 0.0344,
FROUDE NUMBER.... 1.38
THE VELOCITY FOR THE EARTHEN SWALE AT A SLOPE OF 7.07% IS 3.0
F.P.S. WHICH IS LESS THAN THE 8.0 F.P.S. ALLOWABLE FOR BUR-
MUDAGRASS, THEREFORE IT IS SUITABLE TO BE USED FOR SLOPE PROTEC-
TION.
SN
F—
c:C-J -.
-; 2;
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 16B
CHECK CAPACITY AND VELOCITY OF D-75 (TPYE A) BROW DITCH AT•
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 3 AND WHICH EMPTIES INTO PROPOSED DIS-
SIPATOR BOX. USE Q100= 0.8 C.F.S. AND A SLOPE OF 2.0%.
BROW DITCH D-75 (TYPE A
DIAMETER (inches) ......
SLOPE (ft/ft) .........
DEPTH (ft) ............
VELOCITY (fps) ........
AREA (Sq. Ft.) ........
CRITICAL DEPTH........
CRITICAL VELOCITY.....
24 MANNINGS N..........013
0.0200 Q(cfs) ............0.80
0.22 DEPTH/DIAMETER 0.11
4.31 VELOCITY HEAD..... 0.2a
0.19
0.31 CRITICAL SLOPE 0.0048
2.62 FROUDE NUMBER.....1.97
THE CAPACITY AND VELOCITY IS SIGNIFICANTLY. LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM
ALLOWABLE1 THEREFORE THE BROW DITCH DESIGN IS SUITABLE.
....
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 17
HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS
PARCEL 4 P.M. 12016
DRAWING NO. 299-9
CHECK VELOCITY AND Q FOR PROPOSED EARTHEN SWALE AT NORTH SIDE OF
PARCEL 4 TO VERIFY BERMUDAGRASS AS BEING A SUITABLE SLOPE PROTEC-
TION. THE MOST CRITICAL SLOPE OF THE SWALE Is 14%.
-
TRIANGULAR CHANNEL
INVERT WIDTH (feet) 0.00 HANNINGS n.......035
SLOPE (feet/foot) ........1400 Q (cf s) .........1.80
LEFT SIDE RIGHT SIDE SLOPE (X to 1) ...........2.00 SLOPE (X to 1).. 2.00
DEPTH (feet) ...............0.42 TOP WIDTH. (feet) 1.67
VELOCITY (fps) ...........5.18 VEL. HEAD (feet) 0.42
AREA (square feet) ......0.35 P + M (pounds).. 21
CRITICAL DEPTH..........0.55 CRITICAL SLOPE.. 0.0319
CRITICAL VELOCITY ........ 2.98 FROUDE NUMBER... 2.00
THE VELOCITY FOR THE EARTHEN SWALE AT A SLOPE OF 14% IS 5.18
F.P.S. WHICH IS LESS THAN THE 6.0 F.P.S. ALLOWABLE FOR BUR-
MUJDAGRASS, THEREFORE IT IS SUITABLE TO BE USED FOR SLOPE PROTEC-
TION
L
SDE 3644
OCTOBER 17, 1989
PAGE 18
CHECK VELOCITY AND Q @ PROPOSED CURB OUTLET @ SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
PROPERTY.
DIAMETER (INCHES)...
SLOPE (FT/FT) ........
DEPTH (FT) .............
VELOCITY (fps) .......
AREA (Sg> Ft.)........
CRITICAL DEPTH.......
CRITICAL VELOCITY.....
MANNINGS N ....... .016
0150 Q (cfs) .............1.8
38 DEPTH/DIAMETER.... Q.1-9
29 VELOCITY HEAD.....0.29
42
46 CRITICAL SLOPE.... 0.0068
25 FROUDE NUMBER 1.46
BASED ON CURB OUTLET CALC FOR D.P. #3
Qcap 243 > Q100 = 2 (0.9) 1.8 CFS
3 \
-
HE-
p:a(o+b)
A. 6 C V
iLL'
.-. ________l•I. I I I / • - • I - - - I
.711,T1J
ILIL I
utj
L I Ir
9
i .
Z) !41?iEE EEl E 1EEE EE E'E E[t'____
HE&DSUI?O 1 1:: L; E i (d 1 P.UES
HEA6SAh0''E I I).!3'7. E C,' TA ??L1ES
__ BET1EENô.iji ,jr STIO1 _14
SEC IO?FTJ!OJJ ) 1JDIT
1101
0]J
.
PL;,~ C.C;.: I P 7-! OdT S A-R A .?4
IT
,_
-- . - - - - • ••• • . . z r.
/ .
t - 107302
-
. 0.1 .t .. • .w b .1 •U.J I." -. -. .. __l - - - • - -
uuu OF p1:LC no,', CAPACITY OF GRATE INLET I SUMP
) DI Y SI C T 10 WA SH. D. C. WATER P 011 D £0 ON G RAT E
1+00.00, 191.1000 ci.. Park & Tamarac
00 -0
215.4200
1+80.50, 21 9.9700 ci Park & Monroe
ADS Pipe Hydraulics - Capacity Comparison 24"(300 mm) N.12 vs. 24" Corrugated 200(6).
ADS N 12 HDPE
.1 .2 slope .3 .4 .5
ADS Recommended Manning's 'In" For Design
Pipe
Diameter ADS Corrugated Polyethylene ADS-M-12
Polyethylene Concrete Pipe* Corrugated Metal Pipe*
4,6,8,10,12" .018 .010-.012 .011 -.015 .022-026
15" - .018 .010 -.012 .011-.015 .022-.026
18" .020 .010-.012 .011-.015 .022-026
24" .020 .010-.012 .011-.015 .022-.026
30" .020 .010-.012 .011-.0IS .022-.026
36" .020 .010-.012 .011-.015 .022-.026
ASCE Manual and Report on Engineering Practice #37
ADS N-I 2 Pipe Stiffness
Pipe Diameter
In. (mm) Minimum Pipe Stiffness*
PSI (kPa)
4,6,6(100,150,200) 50 (345)
10"(250) 50(345)
12(300) 50(34 S)
15"(375) 42 (289)
18"(450) 40(276)
24"(600) 34(23S)
30"(750) 28 (193)
36"(900) - 22 (152)
"Per ASTM 02412
Weight Comparison Pounds/Linear Foot
Inside Diameter (inches) ADS N42 HOPE Pipe Clay or Concrete Corrugated Metal
10" 2.0 50 9.0
12" 3.2 79 10.5
IS" 4.6 103 12.9
18" 6.4 131 15.8
24" 11.5 217 19.4
30" 15.4 384 30.0
36" 18.1 524 36.0
'Standard Length of N.12 Pipe is 20'
Height of Cover Table for ADS
N-I 2 or Corrugated Pipe
—Depth of Cover for Corrugated Polyethylene Pipe
—1120 or E80 Live Load
—Pipe Manufactured to AASHTO M.294 or M.252
Diameter Minimum Cover Maximum Cover In. (mm) H20 in. (mm) EBO feet (meters)
4,6,8,10,12"(100.300) 12(300) 24 (600) 58 (18)
15"(375) 12(300) 24 (600) 59 (18)
18"(450) 12(300) 24 (600) 62 (119)
24"(600) 12(300) 24 (600) 61 (19)
30(750) 12(300) 24(600) 61 (19)
36"(900) 12(300) 24 (600) 61 (19)
Notes:
I. Cover limitations calculated using load factor design
per AASHTO Procedures.
Soil density of 1001/cu. ft. (1600 kg/ml) Is assumed.
Backfill around the pipe must be compacted to a density
of 90% per AASHTO T.99.
Use reasonable care in handling and installation.
S. Cover limitations are measured from the top of the pipe.
6. Special situations such as cover less than 12" (300mm)
or fills greater than 60 ft. (18 meters) should be
discussed with an ADS Regional Engineer.