Department Of Engineering

Graduation project
(Urban drainage system design)
Name: Mohammad AL-Abdallat Rakan Nayef Al_Taflawi

ID : 110301 120593
Instructor: Dr.Assal Haddad
 Abstract

This report contain an urban drainage system design of the area

of American university of Madaba. The basis for design is
guided by the local requirements for permitting and international
standards with regards to similar developments.
Contents

Abstract .................................................................................................................... 2
Contents .................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5
Project Description &objective .............................................................................. 5
Location ................................................................................................................ 6
System components ................................................................................................... 7
Sewers ................................................................................................................... 7
Manholes ............................................................................................................... 7
Gully Inlets ............................................................................................................ 8
Ventilation ............................................................................................................. 8
Design procedure ...................................................................................................... 9
Various stages of urban drainage design procedure .............................................. 10
Hydrologic Data ...................................................................................................... 12
Rainfall Characteristics ........................................................................................ 12
Soil Types and Infiltration ................................................................................... 12
Land Use ............................................................................................................. 12
Runoff ................................................................................................................. 13
Horizontal and Vertical Alignment .......................................................................... 14
Curved Sewer Alignment ..................................................................................... 14
Cost saving .......................................................................................................... 15
Maximum Depth .................................................................................................. 16
Sewers along Streams .......................................................................................... 18
Minimum limitation ............................................................................................. 19
Hydraulic Design .................................................................................................... 20
Rainfall Analysis ................................................................................................. 21
IDF relationships ................................................................................................. 22
Definition ......................................................................................................... 22
Derivation ........................................................................................................ 22
Rational method ...................................................................................................... 25
Assumption of the rational method....................................................................... 26
Application of the rational method........................................................................... 28
Description of the Rational Method input variables .............................................. 28
 Runoff coefficient ................................................................................................ 29
Catchment areas distribution ................................................................................... 32
General lay out .................................................................................................... 33
Catchment areas location ..................................................................................... 33
Manholes location................................................................................................ 34
Calculations & Results ............................................................................................ 35
Profiles and sections ................................................................................................ 44
References ............................................................................................................... 48
Introduction

Project Description &objective

Built-up areas need to be drained to remove surface water runoff.

Traditionally this has been achieved by using gullies and underground
pipe systems designed to convey the water away as quickly as possible.
The alteration of natural flow patterns can lead to problems elsewhere in
the catchment.

Water quality issues have become increasingly important, due to

pollutants from urban areas being washed into rivers or the groundwater.
Once polluted, groundwater is extremely difficult to clean up. Traditional
drainage systems cannot easily control poor runoff quality and may
contribute to the problem.

The amenity aspects of drainage such as water resources management,

community facilities, landscaping potential and provision of varied
wildlife habitats have largely been ignored by traditional urban drainage.
This is why we should embrace Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) to
deliver a more holistic approach to managing surface water and where
ever possible mimic natural drainage.

Urban drainage is a very old profession, dating back to around 3000 BC.
Over recent decades, the international urban drainage literature has seen
the development and adoption of a range of ‘new’ terms (and jargon) that
attempt to describe the management of urban water and surface water
runoff in a more holistic manner.
Location
The project to be designed in the American university of Madaba

With coordinates
Madaba
31.661224, 35.800805
System components
This chapter gives an overview of the elements that make up urban
drainage and sewer system components.

Sewers
Sewer pipes are available in a variety of materials, they can be made of
cast and ductile iron, PVC (polyvinyl chloride), concrete, asbestos
cement, HDPE (high density polyethylene), brick, and vitrified clay.
Most new sewer pipe has a circular cross section; however, many older
sewers, especially those made from brick, have different cross-sectional
shapes.

Manholes
Manholes are structures designed to provide access to a sewer. Access is
required for testing, visual inspection of sewers, and placement and
maintenance of flow or water quality monitoring instruments.

Manholes are usually provided at heads of runs, at locations where there

is changes in direction, changes in gradient; changes in size, at major
junctions with other sewers and at every 90 to 200 meter intervals
depending on the size of the sewer pipes. The diameter of the manhole
will depend on the size of sewer and the orientation and number of inlets.
Gully Inlets
Gully inlets are inlets where surface water from roads and paved areas
are entering the sewer system. Gullies consist of a grating and usually an
underlying sump to collect heavy material in the flow. A water seal is
incorporated to act as an odour trap for those gullies connected to
combined sewers. Gullies are connected to the sewer by lateral pipes.

Gully inlet

Ventilation
It is important to have adequate air ventilation in all urban drainage
systems, but particularly in foul and combined sewers. It is needed to
ensure that aerobic conditions are maintained within the pipe, and to
avoid the possibility of build-up of toxic or explosive gases.
Design procedure

This chapter gives an overview of the main stages in the design process,
design consideration and data requirements are described. Initial system
layouts of urban drainage systems are also discussed.

Methods and procedures are given for the hydraulic design of urban
drainage systems.

A number of fundamental stages need to be followed to design a rational

and cost-effective urban drainage system.

The first stage is to define the contributing area (catchment area and
population) and mark it on a topographical map. The map should already
include contours, but other pertinent natural (e.g. rivers) and man-made
(e.g. buildings, roads, services) features should also be marked up.
Possible outfall or overflow points should be identified and investigations
made as to the capacity of the receiving water body.

The next stage is to produce a preliminary horizontal alignment aiming

to achieve a balance between the requirement to drain the whole
contributing area and the need to minimize pipe run lengths. Least-cost
designs tend to result when the pipe network broadly follows the natural
drainage patterns and is branched, converging to a single major outfall.
Having located the pipes horizontally, the pipe sizes and gradients can
now be calculated based on estimated flows from the contributing area.
Generally, sewers should follow the slope of the ground as far as possible
to minimize excavation.

However, gradients flatter than 1:500 should be avoided as they are

difficult to construct accurately. A preliminary vertical alignment can
then be produced, again bearing in mind the balance between coverage of
the area and depths of pipes. The alignment can be plotted on longitudinal
profiles.

Pumping should be avoided, particularly on storm sewer systems, but

will be needed if excavations exceed about 10m. The final stage involves
revising both the horizontal and vertical alignment to minimize cost by
reducing pipe lengths, sizes and depths whilst meeting the hydraulic
design criteria. Longer sewer runs may be cost-effective if shorter runs
would require costlier excavation and/or pumping.
Various stages of urban drainage design procedure
Stage 1. Data collection and analysis

• Identify the area(s) to be served.

• Collect regulatory codes and design guidelines and set system design
criteria.

• Collect topographic map, geologic and geographic data.

• Add location and level of existing or proposed details such as:

a) Contours
b) Physical features (e.g. rivers) o road layout
c) Buildings o sewers and other services o outfall point (e.g. near
lowest point, next to receiving water body).
d) Railroads,

• Undertake field investigations, including feature surveys and ground

truthing at sites that potentially conflict with other services.

• Identify the natural drainages, streets, and existing or planned

wastewater inflow points at the boundaries of the area to be sewered.
Locate all proposed sources of wastewater. Identify likely elevations of
customer laterals.
Stage 2. Preliminary horizontal layout

• Design the horizontal layout of the sewer, including manholes and

possible pumping station locations. If necessary, prepare alternate
layouts.

Stage 3. Preliminary sewer sizing

• Divide the total area into logical subareas, as needed, and develop
design flow rates for each section in the system.

• Select pipe sizes, slopes, and inverts. Perform the hydraulic design of
the system. Revise selections until the design criteria are met.

• Draw preliminary longitudinal profiles (vertical alignment):

a) ensure pipes are deep enough so all users can connect into the
system
b) try to locate pipes parallel to the ground surface
c) ensure pipes arrive above outfall level
d) avoid pumping if possible Stage

Stage 4. Revise design

• Modify the design or develop alternate designs, or even alternate

layouts. This cycles the designer back to the appropriate earlier step.

• Complete the plan and profile construction drawings and prepare the
specifications and other bid documents.
Hydrologic Data

Rainfall Characteristics

The project site has a Mediterranean-type climate characterized by two

climatic types: valley marginal and high desert. Summers are generally
hot and dry, while winters are generally temperate and semi-moist.
Overall, the area’s climate is relatively mild, with summer daytime high
temperatures averaging about 29°C, with overnight lows of 11 °C. Winter
daytime high temperatures are up to around 12 °C on average, with
overnight lows of 1 °C; during this season, rain is common. The average
annual precipitation is approximately 320 mm.

Based on the Na'our station Hydrology database (2006), the 10-year

24-hour rainfall depth is 88.5 mm per year.

Soil Types and Infiltration

The soil is classified as HSG Type D soil throughout the project study
area. Type D soils have low infiltration rates and poor-drained soils.
These soils have a high runoff potential after saturation.

Land Use
Current land uses within the proposed project areas reflect a mixture of
residential and open space.
Runoff

The Clark Unit Hydrograph Method was used to develop runoff

hydrographs for the analysis. The use of this method requires the
estimation of three input parameters; the time of concentration (Tc), the
storage coefficient (R), and a time-area relation.

The following equations were used to determine the input parameters:

Time of Concentration for desert/mountain areas:

Tc = 2.4 ∗ 𝐴0.1 ∗ 𝐿0.25 ∗ 𝐿𝑐𝑎0.25 ∗ 𝑆 −0.2

Where,

Tc = time of concentration

A = Watershed Area

S = Watercourse Slope

L = Length of watercourse to the hydraulically most distant point

Lca = Length measured from the concentration point along L to a point

on L that is perpendicular to the watershed centroid

Storage Coefficient (R):

R = 0.37 ∗ 𝑇𝑐 1.11 ∗ 𝐿0.8 ∗ 𝐴−0.57

Where R is in hours, and the remaining variable are as defined in the

time of concentration equation.

The time-area relation was determined by the use of synthetic time-area

relations.
Horizontal and Vertical Alignment

Once sewer system layouts and design flows have been determined, the
engineer can proceed with designing the vertical sewer alignment and
sizing the pipes.

Pipe Slopes A minimum velocity must be maintained to prevent solids

build-up during low flows and is determined by the tractive force method.
Alternatively, the minimum slopes may be used. These minimum slopes
vary according to pipe diameter. Usually it is recommended that flow
velocities be less than 3m/s at peak flow.

Higher velocities may be tolerated if proper consideration is given to the

pipe material, abrasive characteristics of the wastewater, turbulence, and
thrust at changes in direction. Minimum slopes for house connections are
often specified in local codes. In addition to the real need for somewhat
steeper slopes for self-cleansing given the small flow rates in most
laterals, the steeper minimum slopes cover a multitude of shortcomings
commonly encountered with laterals, such as poor slope control,
alignment, bedding, placement, and backfill, leading to pipe differential
settlement and joint separation.

Curved Sewer Alignment

Typically, sewer piping is installed in straight segments, with changes in

the vertical or horizontal alignment occurring at manholes. However, in
some cases, a good solution may be to use a curved sewer alignment to
change direction. For example, a vertically curved alignment might be
used to maintain a reasonable depth without the need for additional
manholes where the ground surface makes a fairly large change in slope a
short distance. A horizontal or vertical curve may be used to avoid
obstructions or give future access for lateral connections or repair.
Hydraulically, there is little to prohibit curved alignment as long as the
minimum slope meets capacity and self-cleansing needs.
The main objections to curved alignment are the extra effort and cost for
field survey staking and construction, as well as the extra location
information needed to avoid damage during future digging, connect
laterals, or provide maintenance.

Cost saving

When the cost savings resulting from fewer manholes and shallower
construction outweighs these problems, curved sewers should be
considered. Minimum Depth of Cover Sewer pipe should be placed as
shallow as possible while still being located

• Deep enough to provide gravity service whenever feasible

• Below the frost line (in permafrost areas, the sewer must be insulated,
perhaps even heated)

• A reasonable distance below other utilities, especially potable water

lines, unless special features are used to protect against contamination

• Deep enough to adequately distribute traffic and other moving surface

loads without causing loading stress breaks in pipes or connections

The cover depth is the distance from the soil surface to the top of the
outside surface of the pipe. Minimum cover in no trafficked areas is
generally 0.45–0.6 m and in trafficked areas is 1.2–1.5m, depending on
the pipe type.

In areas with basements needing gravity sewer service, minimum depths

have traditionally been 2.4–2.7 m.

Modern basements are often used as living areas and may be several feet
deeper than they were in the past.

Sewers serving these deeper basements may need to be 3.4–3.7 m deep or

more. Utilities may have a specification such as “top of sewer must be at
least 1 m below basement floor,” although requiring a service line slope
of 1 to 2 percent may be a more appropriate way of specifying minimum
depth.
If very few buildings have significantly deeper basements, individual or
local-area pumps that discharge to the street sewer might be a more
economical lifecycle solution.

A significant cost issue relative to minimum depth sometimes occurs in

relatively flat service areas, where the required pipe slope is greater than
the slope of the ground surface. As the gravity sewer proceeds
downstream, it is forced deeper. An alternative approach, especially
where the water table is high or shallow rock is encountered, is to raise
the upstream end of the sewer and service buildings with pumps.

In such cases, the cost of pumped lateral services on the upstream end
should be weighed against the increased construction cost of the deeper
system.

A rough approximation of the costs of raising the upstream end of a

sewer can be made by multiplying the difference in depth by the
incremental estimated excavation and pipe placement cost, adding the
incremental cost of manholes in the deeper alternative, and comparing
this value with the construction and operation costs of the pressurized
service line.

Maximum Depth

Maximum sewer depths are often set at 6–8 m. Common factors that have
historically limited depth are as follows:

• Groundwater makes construction more expensive and hazardous, and

makes high quality pipe bedding and pipe placement more difficult.

• Soil layers, rock layers, or other subsurface conditions make excavation

very difficult, the cave-in hazard high, or pipe structural loadings too
high.

• Trench stability is more difficult to manage with greater depth. Often

extreme (costly) measures are needed for deep sewers, such as special
cutoff walls and piling support walls.

• Maximum depth capability of excavation and other maintenance

equipment available to the owner may be exceeded. A limitation on
maximum depth can be viewed primarily as a cost issue, to be weighed
against the cost of increased pumping or alternative horizontal alignment.
Since the cost of pumping, including construction and O&M, is very
high, even deep sewer placement may cost less than additional pumping
stations. In areas where few or no service laterals are needed, trenchless
sewer construction using horizontal directional drilling or boring and
jacking may prove cost effective.

Trenchless construction can also be used (and is often required) for

service laterals where they cross railroads, streams, or major highways.
Special Installations Sewers must sometimes be installed in steep terrain
or along or across streams or other obstructions.

The subsections that follow describe some special installation types.

Sewers in Steep Terrain If steep terrain results in velocities in excess of
4.6 m/s, the engineer should consider using more durable pipe materials
such as ductile iron and an energy-dissipation manhole at the end of the
steep slope.

Alternatively, flatter slopes can be maintained through the use of drop

manholes. With a drop manhole configuration, pipes are commonly
sloped to prevent velocities in excess of approximately 3 m/s. The water
drop in the manhole dissipates energy without causing extremely high
velocities, which are both a hazard to workers in the manhole and
abrasive to the pipes. However, drop manholes do cause turbulence,
which can release hydrogen sulfide from the wastewater, resulting in odor
and corrosion problems.
Sewers along Streams

When sewers must be routed along waterways, extra care is needed to

protect the sewer from erosion and breakage. Sewers placed parallel to
streams or drainage channels are typically constructed of lined ductile
iron or plastic pipe. The sewer is normally still designed as an open-
channel flow conduit, but an inverted siphon may be required when
crossing under a waterway. If the probability of breakage and spills is
deemed significant, the stream bank may need to be stabilized to prevent
washout of the pipe. Stabilization is preferably achieved using a method
based on the stream’s natural geomorphology.

Elevated Crossings Sometimes the best solution to crossing an

obstruction such as a canal, stream, or gully is to use an elevated, above-
grade structure. In some cases, open-channel flow can be maintained.

If the flow must be pressurized at the crossing (i.e., there is a sag in the
pipe), then it is an inverted siphon. A true elevated sewer will have the
same slope as the upstream and downstream pipes. The designer should
examine the ground profile to identify the segment of pipe that is above
grade.

Special pipe materials and construction techniques may be required for

the exposed pipe. For example, some plastic pipes may be damaged by
ultraviolet light, while metal pipe may need a wrap or coating. Inverted
Siphons (Depressed Sewers) An inverted siphon is a sag in a sewer used
to avoid an obstruction such as a gulley, stream, canal, depressed railway,
or roadway. However, this type of structure is not really a siphon, and the
term depressed sewer has been suggested as more appropriate. Because
the pipe(s) comprising the inverted siphon are below the hydraulic grade
line, it always contains sewage, and its hydraulic behavior is that of a
pressure-flow conduit.
Minimum limitation

Minimum diameters for depressed sewers are the same as for gravity
sewers: 150 or 200 mm. Depressed sewers require a larger sediment
carrying capacity for self-cleansing than do normal, open-channel sewers,
because it is desirable to scour larger particles out of the siphon to avoid
build-up and clogging, and also because particles must be suspended in
the turbulent flow to be successfully removed. To make them as
maintenance free as possible, velocities of at least 0.9 m/s need to be
achieved at a minimum of every few days.

Higher velocities can be induced by placing a splitter box with different

weir levels at the inlet and using two or more parallel pipes in the siphon
section. All flow goes into the smaller pipe until it surcharges, then the
overflow spills into the next pipe, and so on. Depressed sewers are
usually constructed using lined ductile iron or plastic pressure pipe. The
hydraulic design is best handled by applying the energy equation from the
inflow section at the entrance to the depressed section, through the
transitions (bends), to the outlet where flow enters the open-channel pipe.
Head loss resulting from changes in velocity at the entrance must be
accounted for.
Hydraulic Design

Storm drainage networks physically connect storm water inlet points such
as road gullies and roof downpipes to a discharge point or outfall, by a
series of continuous and unbroken pipes.

Flow into the sewer results from the random input over time and space of
rainfall runoff. Generally, these flows are intermittent, of relatively long
duration and are hydraulically unsteady.

Separate storm sewers will stand empty for long periods of time. The
extent to which the capacity is taken up during rainfall depends on the
magnitude of the event and conditions in the catchment. During low
rainfall, flows will be well below the available capacity, but during very
high rainfall the flow may exceed the pipe capacity inducing pressure
flow and even surface flooding.

Design is accomplished by first choosing a suitable design storm. The

physical properties of the storm contributing area must then be quantified.

A number of methods of varying degrees of sophistication have been

developed to estimate the runoff flows resulting from rainfall. The
concepts of statistically analyzed rainfall and the design storm give
statistically representative rainfall that can be applied to the contributing
area and converted into runoff flows.

Once flows are known, suitable pipes can be designed. The choice of
design storm return period therefore determines the degree of protection
from storm water flooding provided by the system. This protection should
be related to the cost of any damage or disruption that might be caused by
flooding.

In practice, cost–benefit studies are rarely conducted for ordinary urban

drainage projects, a decision on design storm return period is made
simply on the basis of judgment and precedent.

Although we can assess and specify design rainfall return period, our
greatest interest is really in the return period of flooding. It is normally
assumed that the frequency of rainfall is equivalent to the frequency of
runoff.
 However, this is not completely accurate. For example, antecedent soil
moisture conditions, areal distribution of the rainfall over the catchment
and movement of rain all influence the generation of storm water runoff.
These conditions are not the same for all rainfall events, so rainfall
frequency cannot be identical to runoff frequency.

However, comprehensive storm runoff data is less common than rainfall

records, and so the assumption is usually the best reasonable approach
available.

Urban drainage systems deal with both wastewater and storm water.
Most storm water is the result of rainfall. Other forms of precipitation –
snow for example – are contributors too, but rainfall is by far the most
significant in most places. Methods of representing and predicting rainfall
are therefore crucial in the design, analysis and operation of drainage
systems.

Rainfall Analysis

Rain data measured at an individual rain gauge is most commonly

expressed either as depth in mm or intensity in mm/h. This type of point
rainfall data is therefore representative of one particular location on the
catchment. Such data is of greater value if it can be related statistically to
two other important rainfall variables: duration and frequency (or
probability).

The rainfall duration refers to the time period D minutes over which the
rainfall falls. However, duration is not necessarily the time period for the
whole storm, as any event can be subdivided and analyzed for a range of
durations.

It is common to represent the frequency or probability of the rainfall as a

return period. An annual maximum rainfall event has a return period of T
years if it is equaled or exceeded in magnitude once, on average, every T
years. Thus a rainfall event that occurs on average twenty times in 100
years has a probability of being equaled or exceeded of 0.2, and a return
period of 5 years.

Annual maximum storm events are normally used to determine return

period because it is assumed that the largest event in one year is
statistically independent of the largest event in any other year.
IDF relationships

Definition

A convenient form of rainfall information is the intensity-duration-

frequency (IDF) relationship. For an event with a particular return period,
rainfall intensity and duration are inversely related. As the duration
increases, the intensity reduces. This confirms the common-sense
observation that heavy storms only last a short time, but drizzle can go on
for long periods. Also, frequency and intensity are related, as rarer events
(greater return periods) tend to have higher intensities (for a given
duration).

Derivation

When local rainfall data are available, IDF curves can be developed using
frequency analysis.

Steps for IDF analysis are:

1. The IDF analysis starts by gathering time series records of different

duration. ( eg. 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min).

2. After time series data is gathered, annual extremes are extracted from
the record of each duration.

3. The annual extreme data is then fit to a probability distribution in order

to estimate rainfall quantities.
where

• X T represents the magnitude of the T-year event,

• µ and σ are the mean and standard deviation of the annual maximum
series and

• K T is frequency factor depending on the return period T. Note that the

frequency factor is distribution-specific.

For example K T for Gumbel’s extreme value distribution is given by

• Calculate the average intensities

• Construct the IDF curves.

Methods of plotting positions can also be used to determine the design

storm depths. Most of these methods are empirical. Rainfall depths
monitored during individual storms are abstracted from recording gauges
and the annual maximum values ranked from 1 to n (the number of years
of record) in decreasing order of magnitude. The expedience probability
(relevant return period in years) of the 𝑚𝑡ℎ largest value, Xm, for large n,
is then estimated using, for example, Weibull’s plotting position formula:
The exceedence probability for other distributions is given in the
following table.
Rational method

Historically, ‘‘Rational method’’ has been the tool of choice for most
practicing engineers around the world. Although the method definitely
has its place in hydrologic design, it is routinely misapplied and
overextended. The concept is attractive and easy to understand. If rainfall
occurs over a basin at a constant intensity for a period of time that is
sufficient to produce steady state runoff at the outlet or design point, then
the peak outflow rate will be proportional to the product of rainfall
intensity and basin area.

Mathematically, the rational method relates the peak discharge (q,

m3/sec) to the drainage area (A, ha), the rainfall intensity (i, mm/hr), and
the runoff coefficient (C).

In SI units the rational formula is given as;

q = CiA/360

Where

q = design peak runoff rate in m3 /s

C = the runoff coefficient

i = rainfall intensity in mm/h for the design return period and for a
duration equal to the “time of concentration” of the catchment.
Assumption of the rational method

• The rate of runoff resulting from any constant rainfall intensity is

maximum when the duration of rainfall equals the time of concentration.
That is, if the rainfall intensity is constant, the entire drainage area
contributes to the peak discharge when the time of concentration has
elapsed.

• The frequency of peak discharge is the same as the frequency of the

rainfall intensity for the given time of concentration.

• The rainfall intensity is uniformly distributed over the entire drainage

area. • The fraction (C) of rainfall that becomes runoff is independent of
rainfall intensity or volume. Limitation of the rational method

• For large drainage areas, the time of concentration can be so large that
the assumption of constant rainfall intensities for such long periods is not
valid, and shorter more intense rainfalls can produce larger peak flows.
Additionally, rainfall intensities usually vary during a storm. In semi-arid
and arid regions, storm cells are relatively small with extreme intensity
variations.

• Frequencies of peak discharges depend on rainfall frequencies,

antecedent moisture conditions in the catchment and the response
characteristics of the drainage system.

• For small, mostly impervious areas, rainfall frequency is the dominant

factor. For larger drainage basins, the response characteristics are the
primary influence on frequency. For drainage areas with few impervious
surfaces (less urban development), antecedent moisture conditions
usually govern, especially for rainfall events with a return period of 10
years or less.

• In reality, rainfall intensity varies spatially and temporally during a

storm. For small areas, the assumption of uniform distribution is
reasonable. However, as the drainage area increases, it becomes more
likely that the rainfall intensity will vary significantly both in space and
time.
• The constant runoff coefficient assumption is reasonable for impervious
areas, such as streets, rooftops, and parking lots. For pervious areas, the
fraction of runoff varies with rainfall intensity, accumulated volume of
rainfall, and antecedent moisture conditions. Thus, the art necessary for
application of the Rational Method involves the selection of a coefficient
that is appropriate for storm, soil, and land use. By limiting the
application of the Rational Method to 80 hectares, these assumptions are
more likely to be reasonable.

• Modern drainage practice often includes detention of urban storm runoff

to reduce the peak rate of runoff downstream and to provide storm water
quality improvement. The Rational Method severely limits the evaluation
of design alternatives available in urban and, in some instances, rural
drainage design because of its inability to accommodate the presence of
storage in the drainage area.
Application of the rational method

Taking in to account the various assumptions and limitations in the

application of the rational method, the method is applicable in estimating
storm water runoff peak flows for the design of hydraulic designs on very
small catchments, design of gutter flows, drainage inlets, storm drain
pipes, culverts and small ditches. It is most applicable to small, highly
impervious areas. It is worthy of nothing that the method is applied to
small areas to guarantee homogeneity and should not be used for
calculating peak flows downstream of major hydraulic structures like
bridges, culverts and storm sewers that may act as a restrictions and
impact the rate of discharge

Description of the Rational Method input variables

Runoff Coefficient C It is a dimensionless ratio intended to indicate the

amount of runoff generated by a catchment given an average intensity of
precipitation for a storm.

This variable represents the ratio of runoff to rainfall. It is the most

difficult input variable to estimate. It represents the interaction of many
complex factors, including the storage of water in surface depressions,
infiltration, antecedent moisture, ground cover, ground slopes, and soil
types. In reality, the coefficient may vary with respect to prior wetting
and seasonal conditions. The use of average values has been adopted to
simplify the determination of this coefficient. Where a drainage area is
composed of subareas with different runoff coefficients, a composite
coefficient for the total drainage area is computed by dividing the
summation of the products of the subareas and their coefficients by the
total area.
Runoff coefficient
Rainfall Intensity - i is a function of geographic location, design
exceedence frequency (return interval), and storm duration. Rainfall
intensity at a duration equal to the time of concentration (TC) is used to
calculate the peak flow in the Rational Method. The rainfall intensity can
be selected from the appropriate intensity-duration- frequency (IDF)
curves.

Area – A is defined as the drainage surface area in hectares, measured in

a horizontal plane. The area is usually measured from plans or maps
using a plan meter. The area includes all land enclosed by the
surrounding drainage divides. In highway drainage design, this area will
frequently include upland properties beyond the highway right-of-way.

Time of Concentration - Tc - is defined as the time it takes for runoff to

travel from the most hydraulically distant point in the catchment to the
outlet. Most drainage paths consist of overland flow segments as well as
channel flow segments. Urban drainage basins often will have one or
more pipe flow segments. The travel time is computed for each flow
segment and the time of concentration is equal to the sum of the
individual travel times.

Usually, Tc is taken as the sum of the overland flow time, to (or the "time
to entry" or the "inlet time"), and the time of travel, td, in sewers or the
main channel. td can be estimated using the flow formulae. For small
fully-sewered areas, some drainage authorities specify to as a constant
typically ranging from 5 to 15 minutes.

In more complex situations, it is recommended to use the kinematic wave

formula in the following form (Geiger et al., 1987):

Where to is in minutes, L is the travelled length (m), n is the Manning's

roughness coefficient, i is the rain fall intensity (mm/hr), and S is the
slope (m/m).
As the calculations progress downstream, the times of concentration at
any inlet point must be estimated along all the possible flow paths and the
longest time is generally retained in the calculations. The longest time is
not necessarily obtained for the longest flow path. For example, at inlet
point number 7 in the figure below, the various flow times to that point
are as follows:
Catchment areas distribution
General lay out
Catchment areas location
Manholes location
Calculations & Results

Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Profiles and sections
References

 Beller-Simms, N., H. Ingram, D. Feldman, N. Mantua, and K.L.

Jacobs, 2008: Preface. In: Decision-Support Experiments and
Evaluations using Seasonal-to-Interannual Forecasts and
Observational Data: A Focus on Water Resources. A Report by the
U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on
Global Change Research [Nancy Beller-Simms, Helen Ingram,
David Feldman, Nathan Mantua, Katharine L. Jacobs, and Anne
M. Waple (eds.)]. NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center,
Asheville, NC, pp. XI–XII.
 Bergeron A (2011) Verbal communication. Anthony Bergeron,
Road Agent, Town of Sunapee
 Brown SA, Stein SM, Warner JC (2001) Urban drainage design
manual: Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 22, second edition.
United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration. Publication No. FHWA-NHI01-021 HEC-22
 Carter, T.R., R.N. Jones, X. Lu, S. Bhadwal, C. Conde, L.O.
Mearns, B.C. O’Neill, M.D.A. Rounsevell and M.B. Zurek, 2007:
New Assessment Methods and the Characterisation of Future
Conditions. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der
Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK, 133-171.

 Caspary, H. and Katzenberger, B. (2006) Adaptation of Design

Flood Calculation Standards to Climate Change in Southern
Germany using Downscaling from ECHAM4. Paper presented to
the European Geophysical Union General Assembly, Vienna.
 Coles S, Pericchi L (2003) Anticipating catastrophes through
extreme value modelling. Appl Statist 52(pt. 4):405-416
 Diaz-Nieto J, Wilby RL (2005) A comparison of statistical
downscaling and climate change factor methods: impacts on low
flows in the river Thames, United Kingdom. Climatic Change
69:245-268
 Durrans, SR (2003) Stormwater Conveyance Modeling and
Design, 1st Edition. Haestad Methods Press. Waterbury, CT
 Gunderson J, Roseen R, Janeski T, Houle J and M Simpson, 2011.
Cost effective LID in Commercial and Residential Development.
Stormwater. March-April: 38-45; retrieved at:
http://digital.stormh2o.com/publication/?i=61938&p=&pn=
 Hayhoe K, Wake C, Huntington T, Luo L, Schwartz MD, Sheffield
J, Wood EF, SARP/Lake Sunapee: final project report