Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INVESTIGATION REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Chapter 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
General ...........................................................................................................................1
Project Background ........................................................................................................1
Project Rationale .............................................................................................................1
Scope of Work .................................................................................................................2
Design Approach .............................................................................................................2
1.5.1
Agency Coordination .........................................................................................2
1.5.2
Field Reconnaissance Survey ..........................................................................2
1.5.3
Data Collection .................................................................................................3
1.5.4
Hydrologic Analysis ...........................................................................................3
1.5.5
Hydraulic Design ..............................................................................................3
1.5.6
Design Documentation ......................................................................................4
Contents of the Report ....................................................................................................4
Chapter 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.3
General ...........................................................................................................................5
Previous Study ................................................................................................................5
Topographic Map ............................................................................................................5
Field Reconnaissance Survey .........................................................................................5
2.4.1
General .............................................................................................................5
2.4.2
Existing Cross - Drainage Structure ..................................................................5
2.4.3
Field Observations ............................................................................................5
Basic Data Acquisition .....................................................................................................5
2.5.1
Rainfall Data .....................................................................................................6
2.5.2
Climatological Data ...........................................................................................6
Chapter 3
3.1
3.2
Introduction ..........................................................................................................1
Page i
Page No.
Chapter 4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
General .........................................................................................................................12
Catchment Parameters..................................................................................................12
Time Parameter.............................................................................................................13
Frequency Analysis .......................................................................................................14
4.4.1
Rainfall Analysis ..............................................................................................14
Runoff Analysis .............................................................................................................22
4.5.1
Basin Characteristics ......................................................................................22
4.5.2
Storm Rainfall .................................................................................................23
4.5.3
Design Storm Frequency ................................................................................24
4.5.4
Delineation of Catchment Areas ......................................................................27
Runoff Calculation .........................................................................................................27
Selecting Run Off to be Consider in this Project ............................................................29
Chapter 5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
Hydraulics ..........................................................................................................30
General .........................................................................................................................30
Design Standards ..........................................................................................................30
Design Criteria...............................................................................................................30
5.3.1
Design Flood Frequencies ..............................................................................30
Highway Hydraulics Structure........................................................................................30
Culvert Design Analysis .................................................................................................31
5.5.1
Inlet Control ....................................................................................................31
5.5.2
Outlet Control ..................................................................................................31
Mannings Roughness n For Culvert ............................................................................31
Sizing of Culvert (Closed Conduit) .................................................................................32
Open Channel ...............................................................................................................33
5.8.1
Hydraulic Considerations ................................................................................33
5.8.2
Hydraulic Design of Channels .........................................................................33
5.8.3
Open Channel Flow Equations ........................................................................33
5.8.4
Mannings Roughness n For Open Channel ..................................................34
5.8.5
Permissible Velocities for Unlined Channel .....................................................34
Open Channel Hydraulics ..............................................................................................35
Box Culvert ....................................................................................................................36
5.10.1 Existing Box Culvert ........................................................................................36
Chapter 6
Summary of Results...........................................................................................37
6.1
6.2
Page ii
Page No.
List of Tables
Table2.5.1a
Table 2.5.1b
Table 4.4.1.3.3a
Table 4.4.1.3.3b
Table 4.5.1.1
Table 5.6.1
Table 5.8.4.1
Table 5.8.5.1
Table 6.1.1
List of Figures
Figure 3.1.1
Figure 3.3.1
Figure 4.2.1.
Figure 4.4.1.3.2a
Figure 4.4.1.3.2b
Figure 4.4.1.3.3a
Figure 4.4.1.3.3a
List of Annexes
Annex A
Annex B
Annex C
Annex D
Annex E
Annex F
Annex G
Annex H
Page iii
General
This report presents the updated technical information on the drainage, hydrological and
hydraulic aspects of the Detailed Engineering Design and Construction Supervision of LRT Line
2 East (Masinag) Extension Project located along Marcos Highway. The report is one of a series
of documents produced during the conduct of study and the detailed design of the LRT Line 2
East (Masinag) Extension Project. The required services are provided by the joint venture firms
of Foresight Development and Surveying Co. in Joint Venture with Soosung Engineering Co. Ltd
and Korea Rail Network Authority. This is prepared based on and in accordance with the scope
of services stipulated in the Terms of Reference (TOR) and the Consultants appreciation of the
project requirements.
The findings and results of the field investigation and study will provide the necessary inputs to
support the detailed design and construction supervision of the LRT Line 2 project and
appurtenant drainage structures and its eventual construction.
1.2
Project Background
The Government of the Philippines plans to expand the mass transit system in the Manila
Metropolitan area to solve the increasingly serious transportation problem. The LRT Line 2
Extension Project ("the Project") is a top priority project under DOTC's Manila Metropolitan Area
Transportation Master Plan and cited in the Comprehensive Integrated Infrastructure Program
(CIIP) of the National Economic Development Authority} (NEDA).
Based on these plans, the Philippine Government in 2011 sought the assistance of the
Japanese Government by requesting through Japan's Individual National Assistance for a
complete preparatory study for LRT Line 2 East Extension to Masinag. The study will focus on
the serious traffic congestion issue, air pollution and greenhouse gas reduction and climate
change mitigation that will address the aims LRT Line 2 by the extension of LRT Line 2 to the
east and to the west.
After more than five years in operation, it has been observed that the LRT Line 2 system greatly
contributed to the decongestion of the Recto Avenue-Legarda-Magsaysay-Aurora-Marcos
Highway corridor. However, it has also been noted that passengers boarding/alighting at the
existing Santolan Station are mostly from the eastern parts of Rizal (e.g. Antipolo, Cainta,
Taytay, and other towns).
Thus, the implementation of this project is being pursued to maximize the potential of the
existing Line 2 alignment from Recto to Santolan. It is envisioned that the extension will attract
117,000 additional daily passengers in 2015.
The LRT 2 East Extension Project is one of the identified priority projects included in the NEDA
Comprehensive Integrated Infrastructure Program (CIIP) 2009-2013. This project involves the
construction of a 4.2-km elevated rail extension from Santolan Station to Masinag in Antipolo
City along Marcos Highway. Two (2) additional passenger stations to be located at Emerald
near Sta. Lucia Mall and Masinag near SM Antipolo are to be constructed.
1.3
Project Rationale
To maximize the operations and capability of the existing LRT Line 2.To enable the commuters
coming from the eastern side of Rizal to have easier access to faster mode of transportation. To
enable more commuters to use public transport system to ease the road traffic and save on cost
Consultancy Services for the Civil Works
of the LRT Line 2 East (Masinag) Extension Project
Page 1
Scope of Work
The following hydrologic and drainage undertaking is deemed necessary to carry out the
required above scope of work.
1.5
To assess/evaluate the existing drainage structures along the project in terms of its
workability and hydraulic adequacy.
To delineate physical characteristics of watershed areas and carry out flood flow
estimation of peak flow of major and minor waterways.
To establish flood level for Railway vertical geometric design purposes;
To undertake hydraulic analysis to determine the required waterway conveyance
structures such as side ditches, sizes of pipes and box culverts cross-drainage.
Design Approach
Railway drainage design is an integral component in the design of railway network. Drainage
design for the project facilities must strive to maintain compatibility and minimize interference
with existing drainage patterns, control flooding of the project surface for design flood events.
The design of the project drainage facilities is a process which evolves as an overall railway
design develops. The primary elements of the process include agency coordination, data
collection and field investigation, hydrologic analysis, hydraulic design and final design
documentation. Each of these elements is briefly described in the following:
1.5.1
Agency Coordination
Prior to the detailed design of railway drainage facilities, it is essential to coordinate with
concerned line agencies and other local entities that have interests in project and drainage
matters. The concerns of these agencies are generally related to potential impacts resulting
from the project drainage. Other entities with interests in project drainage as well as storm
drainage systems include local municipalities and developers. The local municipalities are
generally aware of proposed development in the vicinity of the project which may impact
drainage design.
1.5.2
Field reconnaissance involved field review of information from maps and plans, ocular
inspection and investigation of existing drainage structures, channels/structures condition
and flood flow characteristics, type and extent of vegetation, the limit and extent of flooding
condition and topographic features.
Page 2
Data Collection
The analysis and design of the hydrological and drainage aspects of the project cannot be
successfully conducted without the availability of a wide range of secondary base data. This
process involves assembling and reviewing technical data, background information, previous
studies and relevant documents including the following information:
The abovementioned data are further supplemented by primary data at the project site by
means of actual site inspection/investigation of existing structures.
1.5.4
Hydrologic Analysis
The establishment of elevation along floodplains and the design of drainage structures are
based on hydrological criteria which are predominantly estimates of flow and flood levels.
The method of frequency analysis is undertaken to quantify the uncertainty inherent in
hydrologic data. The objective of frequency analysis of hydrologic data is to relate the
magnitude of extreme events to their frequency of occurrence or recurrence interval. The
recurrence interval, which is also called return period, is defined as the average interval of
time within which a hydrologic event of given magnitude is expected to be equaled or
exceeded exactly once. The hydrologic data subject to frequency analysis are assumed to
be independent and are gathered to provide inputs for the design of drainage and flood
mitigating structures in the project area. The data are processed statistically and are
analyzed and evaluated accordingly to come up with a design flow parameters based on
designated return periods. These shall serve as inputs for the determination of flood level as
well as the design of structures capable of withstanding the flow which passes through a
specific point or reach of the river that could be expected near the proposed projects site.
1.5.5
Hydraulic Design
The design of drainage structures consisting of bridges, pipes and box culverts and drainage
canals/ditches on identified waterways is based on hydraulic principles used to economically
carry out the selected design discharge. The hydraulic design opening to determine the span
and elevation of major structures such as bridges will be designed using the HEC-RAS
computer program. The sizes of drainage structures will be designed using Mannings
equation for open channel flow and further facilitated using nomographs.
Page 3
Design Documentation
This process includes the preparation of documentation for the preliminary design plans
related to the hydrology and drainage aspects of the project. Design documentation includes
here to design report and its supporting hydrology and hydraulics analysis.
1.6
The report contains the following sections with a brief description of each chapters contents.
Chapter 1: Introduction - Provides background information for the report and presents
the scope of work performed including contents of the report.
Chapter 3: Project Area Features - Provides general description of the project areas
physical and natural environment.
Page 4
General
This section outlines the different types of information utilized in the detailed design of road
drainage including reference reports and documents as well as data, both previously available
and collected specifically for this road project.
2.2
Previous Study
A previous study was conducted by Parsons Brinkerhoff and TCGI Engineers. The Detailed
Engineering Design, Package 4, Marcos Highway (Evangelista to Masinag). The Drainage
Structure Designed by Parsons Brinkerhoff and TCGI Engineers was considered in this project.
2.3
Topographic Map
Topographic maps of the project road were secured from National Mapping & Resource
Information Authority (NAMRIA)in the scale of 1:50,000.
2.4
2.4.1
General
The inventory of existing drainage structures (box culverts, and pipe culverts) were obtained
from actual site investigation, as shown in Annex A.
2.4.3
Field Observations
In order to identify actual flood and inundation conditions in the project road, interviews of
residents along the whole stretch of the road were also undertaken to determine the extent
or depth of flooding, duration and direction for the yearly as well as the largest flood
experienced in the area.
2.5
The update, analysis and design of the hydrological and drainage aspects of the project cannot
be successfully conducted without the availability of a wide range of secondary base data. The
data collected include climatological and rainfall data, climatological data and topographic maps.
Page 5
Rainfall Data
The nearest rainfall station reckoned from the project site record is situated in Science
Garden. Daily Rainfall From 1993 to 2013 is considered in this project. The RainfallIntensity-Duration-Frequency Data (27 years of record) was also obtained from PAGASA.
Raw Rainfall Data from 1993 to 2013 is shown in Annex B and Tables 2.5.1a and 2.5.1b
shows the Computed Extreme Values of Precipitation and Intensity of Computed Extreme
Values respectively (based on 27 years of records).
Table2.5.1a Computed Extreme Values of Precipitation (mm)
(Based on 27 years of records)
T
10
20
30
12
24
(yrs)
mins
mins
mins
hr
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
20.3
31.1
38.7
53
77.1
93.3
120.1
143.9
164.1
29.4
46.2
58.5
81.4
113.8
136.7
175.3
210.5
240.9
10
35.5
56.2
71.6
100
138.1
165.4
211.9
254.5
291.8
15
38.9
61.8
79
110.7
151.9
181.6
232.5
279.4
320.5
20
41.2
65.7
84.1
118.1
161.5
193
246.9
296.8
340.6
25
43.1
68.8
88.1
123.8
168.9
201.7
258
310.3
356
50
48.7
78.1
100.4
141.3
191.6
228.6
292.3
351.6
403.7
100
54.3
87.4
112.6
158.8
214.3
255.4
326.2
392.6
451
10
20
30
12
24
(yrs)
mins
mins
mins
hr
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
121.8
93.3
77.4
53
38.5
31.1
20
12.0
6.8
176.4
138.6
117
81.4
56.9
45.6
29.2
17.5
10.0
10
213
168.6
143.2
100.1
69.1
55.1
35.3
21.2
12.2
15
233.4
185.4
158
110.7
76.0
60.5
38.8
23.3
13.4
20
247.2
197.1
168.2
118.1
80.8
64.3
41.2
24.7
14.2
25
258.6
206.4
176.2
123.8
84.5
67.2
43
25.9
14.8
50
292.2
234.3
200.8
141.3
95.8
76.2
48.7
29.3
16.8
100
325.8
262.2
225.2
158.8
107.2
85.1
54.4
32.7
18.8
2.5.2
Climatological Data
The nearest synoptic station for the project road is Science Garden. Climatological data
were obtained such as daily rain fall, temperature, relative humidity and wind data.
Page 6
The LRT Line 2 Extension Project is situated along Marcos highway from Santolan Station to
Sumulong highway (Masinag) junction. The Project intercepts two (2) Creek namely Balante and
Halang Creek. The two (2) creeks are the most important drainage system that crosses the
project alignment.
The project starts at K023+000 (Santolan Station) and ends at K027+200 (Sumulong Highway
(Masinag) junction. The LRT Line 2 project location is shown in the Figure 3.1.1.
3.2.1
Balante Creek
The Balante Creek has significant large watershed draining the area of Marikina city
including Marikina Heights in the North. Balante Creek has a catchment area of 11.88 sq.
km. (11880.00 hectares).
3.2.2
Halang Creek
Halang Creek drains the immediate area north of Marcos Highway as well as the
southeastern area after Masinag Junction. Halang Creek has a catchment area of 4.55 sq.
km. (455.00 hectares)
Page 7
Meteorological Characteristics
3.3.1
Air Stream
The principal air streams, which significantly affect the area, are the southwest monsoon,
northeast monsoon, and Pacific trade winds. The southwest monsoon originating from the
north side of the Indian Ocean affects the area during the months of May to October. During
this period the distribution of rainfall is influenced by the vertical situation of shear line
between the South Pacific trade and southeast monsoon. The air mass is classified as
equatorial maritime and is warm and very humid. The northeast monsoon, which affects the
area from October to March, is most dominant during January and February. The North
Pacific trade winds generally prevail during April and May whenever the northeast and the
southwest monsoons are weak. In the Philippines, the northeast monsoon is associated
with the dry season while the southwest monsoon is linked with the wet season.
3.3.2
Tropical Cyclones
Tropical cyclones are the most influential factors that bring considerable rainfall in the
Philippines. There are three classifications of tropical cyclones, namely: depressions which
have wind speed of 45 to 63 kph, storms which have wind speed of 64 to 119 kph and
typhoons which have maximum speed of 120 kph or stronger. Typhoons usually occur from
June to December with highest frequencies in July and August. The mean annual number of
tropical cyclones that pass through the Philippine Area of Responsibility (PAR) is about 20.
The cyclones originate in the region of Marianas and Caroline Islands in the Pacific Ocean
usually between 125E and 170E. Their movements follow westerly or northwesterly
course over the country and deposit substantial amount of rainfall. The most frequent
disastrous typhoons generally occur during the months of October and November.1
Tropical cyclones are classified according to their intensity. The World Meteorological
Organization (WMO) provides the following classification:
Classification
Tropical depression
Tropical storm
62-88
89-117
Typhoon
118 or more
Studies at selected stations in the Philippines have shown that 47% of the average yearly
rainfall is due to tropical cyclones, 14% to monsoons and 39% to other weather disturbances
such as thunderstorm, easterly waves, International Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) and
fronts.
3.3.3
Cyclone Tracks
Tropical cyclone tracks vary from year to year. In general, tracks during the months of
January, March, April, and May are located over northeastern Mindanao and the Visayas.
About 55 to 60 percent of tropical cyclones that form in the Pacific Ocean move westward. In
February, about 80 percent of cyclones have westward movement but dissipate before
reaching the east coast. In June, the track is across Luzon with 70 percent moving in a
generally westward direction.
Page 8
Climate
The Climate of the Philippines is tropical and maritime. It is characterized by relatively high
temperature, high humidity and abundant rainfall. The Philippine climate is classified into four
types depending on rainfall distribution and pattern (Figure 3.3.1). The four climate types are
described as follows:
Type I:
Two pronounced seasons. Dry from November to April, wet during the rest of the
year.
Type II: No dry season with a very pronounced rainfall from November to April and wet
during the rest of the tear.
Type III: Seasons are not very pronounced, relatively dry from November to April, wet
during the rest of the year.
Type IV: Rainfall is more or less evenly distributed throughout the year.
The project site is classified under Type I.
Page 9
3.3.5
Rainfall
The nearest rainfall station reckoned from the project road with considerable and reliable
rainfall record located in Science Garden. Based on the 29-year record the area receives a
total (average) of 2,574.4 mm annually. The rainfall is evenly distributed throughout the year.
Highest monthly mean rainfall is about 504.2 mm in August. The months from June to
September generally experience intense rainfall. The monthly average maximum rainfall
values based on the record from PAGAGSA are shown as follows.
Rainfall, mm
Average
Month
3.3.6
Jan
18.5
Feb
14.6
Mar
24.8
Apr
40.4
May
186.7
Jun
316.5
Jul
493.3
Aug
504.2
Sep
451.2
Oct
296.6
Nov
148.8
Dec
78.7
Temperature
The temperature data for the project area are reckoned at PAGASAs synoptic station
located at Science Garden. The monthly mean, minimum and maximum temperature are
shown as follows:
Month
Max
Temperature, C
Min
Mean
Jan
30.6
20.8
25.7
Feb
31.7
20.9
26.3
Mar
33.4
22.1
27.8
Apr
35.0
23.7
29.4
May
34.7
24.7
29.7
Jun
33.1
24.6
28.8
Jul
31.9
24.1
28.0
Aug
31.3
24.2
27.8
Sep
31.6
24.0
27.8
Oct
31.6
23.5
27.6
Nov
31.4
22.7
27.1
Dec
30.5
21.6
26.0
Page 10
Relative Humidity
The average annual relative humidity for the project area reckoned at the station is about
77.6%. The mean monthly values of the relative humidity range from a low of 67 percent to a
high of 84 percent. The most humid months usually occur during July to November while the
month of April is the least humid. The monthly relative humidity data for the project area is
shown below.
3.3.8
Month
Rel. Humidity, %
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
76
73
69
67
72
79
83
84
84
83
82
79
Winds
The easterly winds generally affect the project area throughout the months except during the
month of August where the prevailing wind direction is westerly. The average wind speed is
about 2.0 m/s.
The monthly normal and extreme wind speed and direction reckoned at nearest synoptic
station are shown below:
1
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Normal
Speed (mps)
Direction
1
N
1
NE
1
SE
1
SE
1
S
1
SW
2
SW
2
SW
1
SW
1
N
1
N
1
N
Source: PAGASA
Page 11
General
This section discusses the various procedures used in estimating peak discharge to be
conveyed across and along the project site. The study activities consist of familiarization on the
present site conditions, field investigations, data gathering and hydrologic analysis.
Relevant and important items noted during this study, are as follows:
4.2
The size of the watershed or catchment basin is the most important parameter affecting the
determination of the total runoff. For given conditions, the peak flow at the proposed site is
approximately proportional to the drainage area.
The shape of a basin affects the peak discharge. Long, narrow basins generally give lower peak
discharges than pear-shaped basins. A basin orientation with respect to the direction of storm
movement can affect peak discharge. Storms moving upstream tend to produce lower peaks
than those moving downstream. The mean elevation of a drainage basin is an important
characteristic affecting runoff. Higher elevation basins can receive a significant amount of
precipitation.
The location of this divide and thus the perimeter of the basin is determined from the
topographic maps in the available scale of 1:50,000. The delineated waterways crossing the
project road is shown in Figure 4.2.1.
Page 12
Time Parameter
The main effect the slope has on water flow is the time of concentration, or the time it takes the
rainfall to flow from the farthest point in the watershed to the point under consideration (bridge
and culvert sites). Steep slopes cause a shorter time of concentration and, thus higher peak
discharge than do flatter slopes.
The time of concentration is a variable often used in computing surface runoff. The variable
indicates the response time at the outlet of a watershed for a rainfall event, and is primarily a
function of the geometry of the watershed. In flood hydrology, the time of concentration of a
watershed is normally considered as constant, independent of the magnitude of the flood.
The time of concentration is defined as the time required for a drop of water to flow to the
watershed outlet from the most distant point in the watershed. It is influenced by surface
roughness slope and flow patterns.
Estimating the time of concentration for the watershed is expressed as;
Tc = L1.15 /51*(H) 0.385
Where:
Tc
time of concentration, the time required for storm runoff to travel from
the most remote point of the drainage basin to the point of interest in
minutes.
Page 13
The minimum Tc for moderate slopes and paved is 10minutes, for areas which do not afford
surface storage and are steeper than 1:10 is 5 minutes.
Once the time of concentration Tc is estimated, the rainfall intensity (I), corresponding to a storm
of equal duration, obtained from Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (RIDF) table or graph.
4.4
Frequency Analysis
Frequency analysis is concerned with estimating the relationship between an event and
corresponding return period of that event. It is generally based on assumed (population)
probability distributions and sample estimates of the population parameters.
4.4.1
Rainfall Analysis
4.4.1.1
Data Availability
The Rainfall Data Considered in this project is the raw Daily Rainfall Data from 1993 to 2013.
The Raw data will be analyze to come up with Probable Rainfall Intensity and probable
discharge at a given return period. Rainfall gauging stations are found available from the
following locations.
Rainfall Stations and Years of Record
Sta. No./Location
Science Garden.
Quezon City
4.4.1.2
Coordinates
Latitude
0
14 3841.0N
Longitude
0
121 0231.0E
Years of
Record
Station
Type
1993-2010
Synoptic
Rainfall Data
145.4
1994
131.2
1995
143.2
1996
104.4
1997
156.6
1998
137.2
1999
204.8
2000
267
2001
110.4
2002
246.4
2003
137.4
Page 14
135.6
2005
104.6
2006
159.6
2007
147
2008
125.6
2009
455
2010
122
2011
250.9
2012
391.4
2013
225.7
Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
1993
11.6
12.2
1.4
109.2
145.4
79
94.6
118.2
89.6
32.4
1994
24.8
23.6
30
13
25.4
123.8
101.4
131.2
97.1
78.7
87.2
1995
16.1
5.4
1.8
61.2
64
74.8
115.8
143.2
58.2
70.8
49.4
1996
17
8.6
29.6
37
33.6
53.2
89.8
104.4
65.6
34.4
7.2
1997
4.2
25.3
14
156.6
35.7
80.4
145
47.5
56.7
34.4
1998
11.8
2.5
1.2
78.3
91
60
49
137.2
128.1
36.6
84.2
1999
10.2
3.4
20.3
38.5
48.8
40
103.2
196.2
204.8
152.1
46.6
36
2000
9.2
25.7
23.4
17.8
96.1
35
175.1
115.1
267
160.6
102.8
33.6
2001
19.8
35.8
5.3
17.2
48.8
49.5
107.4
110.4
34
57.8
39
30.2
2002
8.4
8.6
15.4
10
18.8
36
246.4
99.7
64.6
76
76.5
18.4
2003
1.4
5.2
5.2
20.6
137.4
55.6
38.4
100.2
120.2
52.2
30.4
5.4
2004
3.6
25
33.4
61.2
24
40.6
135.6
79
32.2
126.7
45.4
2005
8.4
9.8
16.8
65.2
85.3
54.6
59.6
86.9
104.6
34.6
12.9
2006
24.2
2.4
26.8
54.8
69.4
116.4
58.9
159.6
36.5
30.4
53
2007
1.4
24.1
15.3
14.6
107
21
42.4
147
53.5
78.6
65.4
26.3
2008
30.2
19.4
7.1
49.6
125.6
38.6
52.4
74.7
91.4
61.4
25
2009
22
7.8
37.1
40.4
86
75.7
153.5
93
455
79
15.5
2010
2.4
15.2
52.8
56.5
105.9
122
120.6
88.2
45
67
2011
51.5
0.2
16.6
1.2
75
250.9
99
109.5
121.2
70.7
105.6
58.4
2012
41
65
1.6
46.7
84.4
116.9
391.4
159.3
98.9
7.9
18
2013
13.7
61.7
55.3
45.6
61.6
78.7
84.4
225.7
148.8
80.8
27.2
34.8
Page 15
7.06
1994
7.08
1995
8.74
1996
5.58
1997
6.07
1998
7.36
1999
9.14
2000
11.05
2001
6.24
2002
8.13
2003
5.98
2004
6.08
2005
6.47
2006
7.27
2007
6.27
2008
6.49
2009
9.62
2010
7.28
2011
8.61
2012
12.03
2013
9.62
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Aug
Sep
Oct
1993
0.00
0.04
0.52
0.53
0.05
10.85
16.03
15.31
17.28
11.33
7.47
5.34
1994
1.59
0.88
1.36
1.00
5.96
14.06
25.79
11.14
14.22
5.02
0.26
3.65
1995
0.56
0.29
0.07
0.18
9.76
13.09
11.60
20.87
24.95
11.26
6.16
6.12
1996
0.63
0.00
0.34
2.68
3.73
4.75
12.90
10.96
16.18
8.93
5.40
0.42
1997
0.38
1.16
0.03
1.01
15.60
5.56
18.22
18.05
7.82
3.15
1.53
0.34
1998
0.56
0.00
0.17
0.05
6.00
9.64
6.46
8.81
20.61
15.70
5.97
14.3
1999
1.25
0.14
2.67
4.59
6.48
8.19
22.84
27.92
14.53
11.08
5.56
4.37
2000
0.56
1.31
3.34
1.25
19.10
5.91
32.36
16.78
20.14
17.32
8.50
6.06
2001
0.68
3.76
0.40
1.04
8.42
8.28
16.74
17.72
6.10
6.16
2.44
3.13
2002
0.27
0.48
0.70
0.68
1.60
6.14
42.27
14.34
14.21
7.79
7.83
1.21
2003
0.05
0.26
0.31
0.74
15.03
7.73
8.65
12.27
16.59
5.96
3.94
0.22
2004
0.19
1.26
0.00
2.95
6.66
7.15
10.83
22.13
10.28
2.79
6.82
1.94
2005
0.41
0.43
0.52
1.19
4.45
17.63
7.14
11.05
13.79
15.74
2.55
2.79
Nov
Dec
Page 16
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
2006
1.82
0.24
2.53
0.00
5.57
11.12
21.37
10.00
22.25
6.85
2.96
2.48
2007
0.07
0.86
0.71
0.86
8.33
3.31
6.64
21.61
14.59
7.10
9.49
1.68
2008
1.52
0.82
1.25
1.18
8.45
12.05
7.27
13.88
14.92
8.05
6.26
2.26
2009
1.39
0.37
3.02
4.62
8.66
14.60
21.32
13.16
37.45
8.78
1.80
0.21
2010
0.16
0.00
0.08
0.67
2.00
11.85
13.24
20.26
12.89
13.34
8.48
4.42
2011
2.59
0.00
0.57
0.40
6.04
18.00
15.46
20.71
13.88
11.24
8.74
5.75
2012
1.33
4.43
6.31
0.07
10.57
10.44
28.59
44.75
24.54
10.94
0.89
1.55
2013
1.52
3.18
4.26
1.79
5.48
18.56
8.65
31.05
22.78
11.43
2.99
3.75
4.4.1.3
The process is undertaken in two stages, namely; (a) probable point rainfall frequency
analysis, (b) rainfall intensity duration frequency (RIDF) analysis.
4.4.1.3.1 Probable Point Rainfall Frequency Analysis
Probable rainfall analysis has two sub-parts, namely frequency analysis and selection of the
best fit frequency distribution.
Frequency Analysis
This involves the fitting of theoretical frequency distributions to the annual maximum rainfall
data. Two types of theoretical distributions are used in this study, namely Extreme Value
Distribution (Gumbel), and Log Pearson Type III Distribution.
1. Extreme Value Distribution (Gumbel)
This distribution utilizes the Fisher-Tippet extreme value function, which relates
magnitude linearly with the logarithm of the reciprocal of the exceedance probability.
Working equations are the following:
RTr = R + KTr S
KTr =
(YTr Yn )
Sn
RTr =
R=
S =
KTr =
YTr =
Yn, Sn =
n
Tr
Tr 1
Page 17
Yn
Sn
Yn
Sn
Yn
Sn
0.49522
0.94963
21
0.52519
1.06938
31
0.53714
1.11588
10
0.49522
0.94963
22
0.52673
1.07547
32
0.53803
1.11927
11
0.49969
0.96753
23
0.52819
1.08115
33
0.53889
1.12245
12
0.50348
0.98327
24
0.52959
1.08648
34
0.53959
1.12557
13
0.50699
0.99712
25
0.53084
1.09143
35
0.54026
1.12849
14
0.51000
1.00951
26
0.53202
1.09615
36
0.54107
1.13127
15
0.51285
1.02055
27
0.53326
1.10048
37
0.54177
1.13391
16
0.51542
1.03058
28
0.53419
1.10471
38
0.54243
1.13649
17
0.51770
1.03972
29
0.53533
1.10860
39
0.54294
1.13900
18
0.51978
1.04806
30
0.53616
1.11238
40
0.54363
1.14130
19
0.52177
1.05575
20
0.52352
1.06282
5 yrs.
10.yrs.
300
15 yrs
25 yrs.
200
50 yrs.
100 yrs.
100
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Page 18
2yrs.
5yrs
200
10yrs
15yrs
150
25yrs
50yrs.
100
100yrs
50
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
825.301
10
0.64239
1354.58
11.9
0.65959
10
1753.36
13.3
0.66948
15
1989.69
14
0.67441
25
2320.51
15
0.6822
50
2604.68
15.5
0.67489
100
3144.45
16.5
0.69248
Regression Analysis for Rainfall Intensity versus Rainfall Duration Equation of data from
PAGASA is presented in Annex C.
2. Log Pearson Type III Distribution. (See Annex E for Calculation)
This distribution belongs to the family of distribution suggested by Pearson with log
transformation of rainfall data. The parameters used are the mean, standard deviation
and skewness coefficient. The working equations are the following:
Consultancy Services for the Civil Works
of the LRT Line 2 East (Masinag) Extension Project
Page 19
RTr = R + KTr S
KTr =
2
G
{[( Kn
G
6
G
6
+ 1]3 1}
Where:
RTr =
R=
KTr =
S=
Kn =
G =
Probability
Table for Normal Frequency Factor
Kn
-3.71902
-3.29053
-3.09023
-2.87816
-2.57583
-2.32635
-2.05375
-1.95996
-1.75069
-1.64485
-1.28155
-0.84162
-0.52440
-0.25335
-0.17733
0.00000
P
0.99990
0.99950
0.99900
0.99800
0.99500
0.99000
0.98000
0.97500
0.96000
0.95000
0.90000
0.80000
0.70000
0.60000
0.57040
0.50000
Tr
1.000
1.001
1.001
1.002
1.005
1.010
1.020
1.026
1.042
1.053
1.111
1.250
1.429
1.667
1.753
2.000
Kn
0.00000
0.17733
0.25335
0.52440
0.84162
1.28155
1.64485
1.75069
1.95996
2.05375
2.32635
2.57583
2.87816
3.09023
3.29053
3.71902
P
0.50000
0.42960
0.40000
0.30000
0.20000
0.10000
0.05000
0.04000
0.02500
0.02000
0.01000
0.00500
0.00200
0.00100
0.00050
0.00010
Tr
2.000
2.328
2.500
3.333
5
10
20
25
40
50
100
200
500
1000
2000
10000
Page 20
10
20
30
12
24
(yrs)
mins
mins
mins
Hr
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
23.0
35.2
43.8
60.0
87.3
105.6
136.0
162.9
185.8
30.7
48.3
61.1
85.0
118.9
142.8
183.1
219.9
251.7
10
36.9
58.4
74.4
104.0
143.5
171.9
220.3
264.5
303.3
25
45.7
72.9
93.4
131.2
179.1
213.8
273.5
329.0
377.4
50
53.1
85.2
109.5
154.1
208.9
249.3
318.7
383.4
440.2
100
61.3
98.7
127.2
179.3
242.0
288.4
368.4
443.3
509.3
10
20
30
12
24
(yrs)
mins
mins
mins
hr
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
hrs
137.9
105.6
87.6
60.0
43.6
35.2
22.7
13.6
7.7
184.3
144.8
122.2
85.0
59.4
47.6
30.5
18.3
10.5
10
221.4
175.2
148.8
104.0
71.8
57.3
36.7
22.0
12.6
25
274.2
218.8
186.8
131.2
89.5
71.3
45.6
27.4
15.7
50
318.6
255.5
218.9
154.1
104.5
83.1
53.1
31.9
18.3
100
367.9
296.1
254.3
179.3
121.0
96.1
61.4
36.9
21.2
400
5 yrs.
10.yrs.
300
15 yrs
25 yrs.
200
50 yrs.
100 yrs.
100
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Page 21
5yrs
10yrs
200
15yrs
25yrs
150
50yrs.
100
100yrs
50
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2
5
10
25
50
100
890.5
1416.98
1825.49
2358.02
2935.59
3551.31
9
12
13.3
14
15.5
16.5
0.63455
0.65951
0.66988
0.67559
0.68567
0.69252
Regression Analysis for Rainfall Intensity versus Rainfall Duration Equation of Raw Rainfall
data from PAGASA is presented in Annex D.
4.5
Runoff Analysis
Runoff is the amount of water that flows out of a watershed sub-area as a result of a storm
event. This value is equal to the amount of rainfall that occurs on the area, minus the amount of
rainfall that is infiltrated into the ground, intercepted by foliage, is lost through evaporation and
evapotranspiration or is held in small depressions.
4.5.1
Basin Characteristics
1. Basin Area the area of a drainage basin is the most important watershed characteristic
affecting any surface runoff calculation. Determining the size of the watershed area that
contributes to flow generation at the site of the drainage structure is the basic step in a
Page 22
4.5.2
Value Proposed
0.9 1.0
0.7 0.9
0.3 0.6
0.3 0.6
0.2 0.5
Rocky surface
0.7 0.9
0.7 0.9
0.3 0.5
0.3 0.5
0.5 0.7
0.7 0.8
Storm Rainfall
As for long duration rainfall, the standard rainfall duration is an important factor to develop a
model hyetograph, which will be used for the evaluation of flood runoff analysis within the
drainage basin. In this case, mostly duration of rainfall was considered.
Rainfall event characteristics which are considered important to any highway drainage
design are:
Intensity (rate of rainfall), in mm/hr
Duration (time rainfall lasts), minutes
Frequency (statistical probability of how often rainfall will occur) a return period
Page 23
The rainfall intensity from which the frequency of recurrence is based, dictates the design
frequency. Presented below are various selected standards to illustrate the principle.
Cases
Bridge (MFWL)
1 in 50 years
1 in 25 years
1 in 15 years
Embankment (HFL)
Road Surface (Drainage)
1 in 10 years
1 in 10 years
1 in 10 years
These design frequencies, which were used, are not totally dependent on economic
consideration alone but also based on guidelines used in similar projects in the different
regions of the country.
The runoff model adopted in this context are the Rational Formula, which has been widely
used in the Philippines for the design of the rural or urban drainage improvement project with
an area less than or equal to 20 square km. and Unit Hydrograph for the areas greater than
20 square kms. The parameters necessary for the estimation using the said formula are as
follows:
1. Rational Method
Q = 0.278 CIA
Where:
Q
C
I
A
=
=
=
=
Rainfall Intensity is estimated based on the calculated rainfall depth and duration. The
relationship between duration, intensity and frequency at any location maybe obtained
from analysis of rainfall records obtained at the location.
The rainfall intensity-frequency-duration data are useful in peak flow estimation of runoff.
The general equation for rainfall intensity derived for the project area is:
I = A / (tc + d)b
Where:
I
Tc =
A,d,b =
average rainfall intensity in mm/hour for the selected frequency and for
a duration equal to the time of concentration.
storm duration, in minutes
constants depending on the frequency of occurrence and usually
derived by analytical method.
Page 24
H =
The minimum Tc for moderate slopes and paved is 10minutes, for areas which do not
afford surface storage and are steeper than 1:10 is 5 minutes.
Once the time of concentration Tc is estimated, the rainfall intensity (I), corresponding to
a storm of equal duration, obtained from Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency (RIDF)
table or graph.
2. Unit Hydrograph
Peak floods of rivers or stream with catchments areas larger than 20sq. km. may be
computed using the Snyder Method and U.S. Soil Conservation Services (SCS) Method
Unit Hydrograph principle.
Existing bridge with long span or wide riverbed, with drainage area of more than 20 sq
km. may be hydrologically analyzed by the more accurate unit hydrograph method in
order to determine more accurately the new bridge opening and safe span.
The instantaneous unit hydrograph for each individual watershed may be derived from a
dimensionless graph prepared by the basin physiographic characteristics of respective
project sites as inputs.
For each watershed, the 50-year rainfall values at intervals equal to D the duration of
excess rainfall in hours ranging from 1/4 to1/5 of basin lag time may be derived from
designed rainfall intensity curves. The increments will be computed and rearranged into
a pattern that would yield maximum run-off.
The results of this analysis give the effective rainfall values to be used in the computation
of the flood hydrograph. For relatively small size watersheds along the project roads,
adjustment factors for area and duration may not be applied to the rainfall data furnished
by PAGASA, i.e. point rainfall is assumed equal to area rainfall.
In the absence of specific base flow data for each river or stream, mean monthly flows
from July to October which are generally the wet months in the country from stream
Consultancy Services for the Civil Works
of the LRT Line 2 East (Masinag) Extension Project
Page 25
Lca =
S
Ct
=
=
Page 26
Qj = R(i) U (j-i+1)
i=1
Where:
Qj= run-off at time j, cms
R (i)
= excess rainfall during time j-i+1
U (j-i+1) = unit graph ordinate, cms
4.5.4
The drainage areas of each waterway were delineated from the scale 1:50,000 topographic
map produced by the NAMRIA which is basically the main source of information necessary
in the determination of the watershed area. The drainage areas were determined with the aid
of AutoCAD software. Delineation of the drainage watershed is done by connecting the high
points that enclosed the limit of drainage area. The continuous line defined is then allowed to
intersect with the road alignment, using the latter as the final line of closure. The delineation
of each waterway drainage areas is presented in Figure 4.2.1.
4.6
Runoff Calculation
The method use in the computation of the discharge of the two creek namely Balante and
Halang creek is Rational method because the catchment area is less than 20 sq. km.
1. Using RIDF data from PAGASA (27 years of record, 1983-2010)
NAME OF
WATERSHED
NO.
CREEK
AREA
1.
2.
Balante
Creek
Halang
WATERSHED
ELEVATION
UP
ha
km2
1188.00
11.880
18.4
27.8
455.00
4.550
21.1
30
LENGTH
AVERAGE
TIME OF
OF STREAM
SLOPE
CONCEN.
Ls
Tc
m/m
mins
9.40
7616.00
0.00242
185.98
8.90
5222.00
0.00404
114.31
DN
Page 27
BASIN
NAME OF
RAINFALL INTENSITY
RUNOFF
NO.
CREEK
COEFF.
2-year
5-year
10-year
15-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
Balante Creek
27.80
41.41
50.63
55.84
62.29
72.55
79.51
0.40
Halang
37.25
55.71
68.24
75.33
84.15
97.61
107.60
0.50
2.
BASIN
NAME OF
DISCHARGE
NO.
CREEK
Q
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
1.00
Balante Creek
56.48
66.89
82.28
95.85
105.04
2.00
Halang
36.37
43.16
53.22
61.74
68.05
Using RAW RAINFALL DATA FROM PAGASA (21 years of record, 1993-2013)
NAME OF
WATERSHED
NO.
CREEK
AREA
WATERSHED
ELEVATION
ha
km2
UP
DN
LENGTH
AVERAGE
TIME OF
OF STREAM
SLOPE
CONCEN.
Ls
Tc
m/m
mins
1.
Balante Creek
1188.00
11.880
18.4
27.8
9.40
7616.00
0.00242
185.98
2.
Halang
455.00
4.550
21.1
30
8.90
5222.00
0.00404
114.31
BASIN
NAME OF
RAINFALL INTENSITY
RUNOFF
NO.
CREEK
COEFF.
2-year
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
mm/hr
1.00
Balante Creek
31.37
43.32
52.60
65.77
77.22
89.78
0.45
2.00
Halang
41.96
58.27
70.91
88.76
104.39
121.50
0.50
Page 28
4.7
BASIN
NAME OF
DISCHARGE
NO.
CREEK
Q
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
1.00
Balante Creek
64.39
78.18
97.75
114.77
133.43
2.00
Halang
36.85
44.84
56.14
66.02
76.84
In selecting Run Off to be considered in the Detailed Drainage Design of this project, we need to
consider the latest rainfall occur. Among the two alternatives that were used to determine the
Runoff, the calculated Runoff using the raw rainfall data from 1993 to 2013 is more reliable. This
data includes the rainfall occur in four (4) consecutive days. This happened on August 18,19,20,
and 21, their respective rainfall are as follows, 174.8,108.8,225.7 and 166.1mm. This event
rarely happens. From the raw rainfall data, it only happens once in 21 years.
The two (2) alternatives are reliable in computing probable rainfall intensity, therefore, in this
alternatives, we will consider whichever is larger. Runoff used in this project is presented table
below;
BASIN
NAME OF
DISCHARGE
NO.
CREEK
Q
5-year
10-year
25-year
50-year
100-year
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
m3/s
1.00
Balante Creek
64.39
78.18
97.75
114.77
133.43
2.00
Halang
36.85
44.84
56.14
66.02
76.84
Page 29
General
This document outlines and discusses the procedure of various hydraulic analyses in assessing
to determine and understand how different drainage facilities can be integrated to provide
complete drainage control. It also discusses the design standard and criteria adopted for the
design.
5.2
Design Standards
The following references were heavily relied on during the design process:
1. DPWH Design Guidelines, Criteria and Standards
2. AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines
3. HDS 4 Introduction to Highway Hydraulics
5.3
Design Criteria
5.3.1
One way to select the design flood frequency is through the concept of economics by
establishing the least total expected cost for the structure. This concept considers the capital
cost, maintenance costs, and the flood hazard costs that are incurred due to damage by a
range of flooding events. The flood frequency that generates the least total expected cost for
the life of the project would be the one chosen for the design of the structure. The following
design flood frequency:
Structure
Bridge
Box culvert
Pipe Culvert
Pavement
Road Surface
Ditches
5.4
Highway hydraulics structure, perform the vital function of conveying, diverting, or removing
surface water from the highway right of way. One type of drainage facility will rarely provide the
most satisfactory drainage for all sections of a highway. Therefore, the designer should know
and understand how different drainage facilities can be integrated to provide complete drainage
control. They should be designed to be commensurate with risk, construction cost, importance
of the road, economy of maintenance and legal requirements.
Based on the study the drainage facilities adopted for this project are classified into two major
categories:
1. Cross Drainage involves the conveyance of surface water and stream flow across or
from the highway right of way. This is accomplished by providing a culvert to convey the
flow from one side of the roadway to the other side or past some other type of flow
obstruction.
Page 30
Outlet control analysis was done to minimize excessive velocities at outlet and to design the
headwater depth. Each proposed cross-culvert were analyzed as to whether inlet or outlet
control condition.
5.5.1
Inlet Control
Inlet Control occurs when the culvert barrel is capable of conveying more flow than the inlet
will accept.
A culvert flowing in inlet control has shallow, high velocity flow categorized as supercritical.
For supercritical flow, the control section is at the inlet of the barrel.
5.5.2
Outlet Control
Outlet Control occurs when the culvert barrel is not capable of conveying as much flow as
the inlet opening will accept.
A culvert flowing in outlet control will have relatively deep, low velocity flow termed subcritical flow. For sub-critical flow the control is at the outlet of the culvert. The tail water
depth is either critical depth at the culvert outlet or the downstream channel depth,
whichever is higher.
5.6
Wall Description
Smooth Walls
Smooth Walls
Manning (n)
0.010-0.013
0.012-0.015
0.022-0.027
0.022-0.025
0.025-0.026
0.027-0.028
0.033-0.035
0.033-0.037
Page 31
5.7
Design capacity is determined by the use of the Bernoullis energy balancing equation. Sizing of
Culverts was done by aid of AutoCAD Land Development Desktop software. There are two (2)
controls of flow in culvert namely:
1. Flow with Outlet Control
For tail water (TW) elevation equal to or greater than the top of the culvert at the outlet,
set ho culvert height type equal, D or TW and find HW by the following equation.
HW = H + ho LSo
Where:
HW
H
H = 1 + K (29 LN / R 1.33) V / 2g
ho
So
L
=
=
For tail water (TW) elevation less than the top of the culvert at the outlet, use the
following equation of find HW:
HW = H + ho Lso
Where:
ho
dc
D
=
=
=
=
=
=
Page 32
Open Channel
5.8.1
Hydraulic Considerations
The hydraulic design of open channel consists of developing a channel to carry the design
discharge under the controlling condition as follows:
1. Adding freeboard as needed
2. Determining the type of channel protection required to prevent erosion.
3. Provide channel linings to increase the hydraulic capacity of the channel by reducing
the channel roughness.
The hydraulic capacity of a drainage channel is dependent on the size, shape, slope and
roughness of the channel section. For a given channel:
The hydraulic capacity becomes greater as the grade or depth of flow increases.
The channel capacity decreases as the channel surface becomes rougher.
A rough channel can sometimes be an advantage on steep slopes where it is
desirable to keep flow velocities from becoming excessive high and reduce the flow
velocities
Open channel designs which lower the water surface elevation can result in excessive flow
velocities and cause erosion problems. A planned rise in water surface elevation can cause:
5.8.2
Open channel hydraulic design is of particular importance to highway design because of the
interrelationship of channels to most highway drainage facilities.
The hydraulic principles of open channel flow are based on steady state uniform flow
condition.
5.8.3
The Equations of open channel flow are based on uniform flow conditions. The Equation was
adopted:
Page 33
=
=
=
=
=
=
n value
Unlined Channel:
Clay Loam
Sand
Gravel
Rock, Grouted Riprap
Lined Channels:
Portland Cement Concrete
Air Blown Mortar (troweled)
Air Blown Mortar (untroweled)
Air Blown Mortar (roughened)
Asphalt Concrete
Sacked Concrete
Pavement and Gutters:
Portland Cement Concrete
Asphalt Concrete
0.023
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.014
0.012
0.016
0.025
0.018
0.025
0.015
0.016
Depressed Median:
Earth (without Growth)
Earth (with Growth)
Gravel/ Riprap
5.8.5
0.040
0.050
0.055
Intermittent
Flow
Sustained Flow
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
Page 34
5.9
Intermittent
Flow
Sustained Flow
Fine Loam
Volcanic Ash
Fine Gravel
Stiff Clay (Colloidal)
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.4
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.4
An important factor in flood analysis is to estimate characteristics of the flow during flood times.
In order to do this, cross-sections of waterways are identified and representative cross sections
of the river channel are obtained by actual field survey. Mean bed slope of the stream is
obtained from actual survey of the waterway cross sections.
For a river or waterway where conventional stream gauging data are not available, the average
velocity for a given stage-height can be estimated using the Mannings formula. The Mannings
formula is essentially an empirical formula, based upon field observations and laboratory
measurements. This formula states that in steady uniform flow:
V = R2/3 S1/2/n
and,
Q = A R2/3 S1/2/n
Where:
V
Q
R
S
n
A
P
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
The use of the above equation to estimate the peak discharge for a flood in which various
characteristics of the flow have been measured is often called the slope-area method. The
hydraulic slope of the river based on field survey is given as follows;
In reality, the value of n is highly variable and depends on a number of factors. The factors that
exert the greatest influence upon the coefficient of roughness include the surface condition,
vegetation, channel irregularity, variation of channel cross-sections and obstruction. Typical n
values that can be used in the project design are given below:
Page 35
Range
0.030 0.035
0.030 0.040
0.045 0.055
0.017 0.025
Dredged
0.025 0.033
0.012 0.018
0.017 0.030
Asphalt pavement
0.013 0.016
Drainage Area
(sq. km)
Slope
(m/m)
Balante
24+962
11.88
0.01119
Time of
Concentration
(min)
103.09
Halang
25+892
4.55
.00596
98.45
Sites
Flood Level
For the box culvert crossing Marcos Highway, the design flood levels of 5, 10, 25, 50, and
100 year return period were estimated using the HEC-RAS. The cross section at box culvert
site was used to derive the elevation and discharge relationship. Mean bed slope of the
Consultancy Services for the Civil Works
of the LRT Line 2 East (Masinag) Extension Project
Page 36
24+400
Emerald Station
24+300
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
10.616
10.616
10.616
10.616
10.616
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
-0.25
0.36
0.59
0.76
0.95
10.24
10.24
10.24
10.24
10.24
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.13
0.74
0.97
1.14
1.33
10.10
10.10
10.10
10.10
10.10
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.27
0.88
1.11
1.28
1.47
24+500
24+600
24+700
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.84
9.84
9.84
9.84
9.84
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.53
1.14
1.37
1.54
1.73
9.76
9.76
9.76
9.76
9.76
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.61
1.22
1.45
1.62
1.81
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.93
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.44
1.05
1.28
1.45
1.64
Page 37
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
10.31
10.31
10.31
10.31
10.31
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.06
0.67
0.90
1.07
1.26
10.40
10.40
10.40
10.40
10.40
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.00
0.58
0.81
0.98
1.17
10.01
10.01
10.01
10.01
10.01
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.37
1.56
25+100
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
5
10
25
50
100
25+000
25+200
25+300
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
9.77
9.77
9.77
9.77
9.77
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.00
0.00
1.44
1.61
1.80
9.37
9.37
9.37
9.37
9.37
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.00
1.61
1.84
2.01
2.20
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.67
10.37
10.98
11.21
11.38
11.57
0.00
0.00
1.54
1.71
1.90
25+400
25+500
25+600
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.01
0.23
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.26
0.50
-0.22
0.02
25+700
25+900
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.04
0.30
0.56
0.74
0.98
8.73
8.73
8.73
8.73
8.73
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.34
0.60
0.86
1.05
1.29
8.88
8.88
8.88
8.88
8.88
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.18
0.44
0.70
0.89
1.13
Page 38
26+100
26+200
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.01
0.27
0.46
0.70
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.16
0.40
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.30
0.54
26+300
26+400
26+500
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.16
0.35
0.59
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.26
0.50
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.25
0.49
26+600
26+700
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.39
12.52
12.52
12.52
12.52
12.52
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
24+400
Emerald Station
24+300
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
10.616
10.616
10.616
10.616
10.616
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.304
10.24
10.24
10.24
10.24
10.24
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.28
0.68
10.10
10.10
10.10
10.10
10.10
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.82
Page 39
24+500
24+600
24+700
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.84
9.84
9.84
9.84
9.84
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.27
0.68
1.08
9.76
9.76
9.76
9.76
9.76
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.35
0.76
1.16
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.93
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.18
0.59
0.99
24+800
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
5
10
25
50
100
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
10.31
10.31
10.31
10.31
10.31
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.61
10.40
10.40
10.40
10.40
10.40
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.12
0.52
10.01
10.01
10.01
10.01
10.01
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.51
0.91
25+100
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
5
10
25
50
100
25+200
25+300
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
9.77
9.77
9.77
9.77
9.77
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.34
0.75
1.15
9.37
9.37
9.37
9.37
9.37
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.15
0.74
1.15
1.55
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.67
9.47
9.52
10.11
10.52
10.92
0.00
0.00
0.44
0.85
1.25
25+400
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
5
10
25
50
100
25+000
25+500
25+600
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.99
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.02
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.78
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.23
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.26
0.50
Page 40
25+900
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.03
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.04
0.30
0.56
0.74
0.98
8.73
8.73
8.73
8.73
8.73
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.34
0.60
0.86
1.05
1.29
8.88
8.88
8.88
8.88
8.88
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.18
0.44
0.70
0.89
1.13
26+000
26+100
26+200
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.31
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.01
0.27
0.46
0.70
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.61
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
-0.03
0.16
0.40
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.47
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.30
0.54
26+300
26+400
26+500
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.42
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
-0.10
0.16
0.35
0.59
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.51
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.07
0.26
0.50
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.52
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.25
0.49
26+600
26+700
Return
Period
(Yrs.)
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
Road
Elev.
Flood
Elev.
Flood
Depth
5
10
25
50
100
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.62
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.39
12.52
12.52
12.52
12.52
12.52
9.06
9.32
9.58
9.77
10.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
The corresponding Flood Depth Map for the 5-years, 10-years, 25-years, 50-years and 100years return period is shown in Annex G.
6.2 Drainage Along Viaduct and at Grade Surface.
Schedule of Drainage Structures is Presented Annex H.
Consultancy Services for the Civil Works
of the LRT Line 2 East (Masinag) Extension Project
Page 41