US 0632A Roadway Water Management

October 2006
Translate August 2007
Technical guide
Roadway water management

The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety (Service
d'études techniques des routes et autoroutes - Sétra) is a technical department within the Ministry of
Transport and Infrastructure. Its field of activities is the road, the transportation and the engineering
structures.
The Sétra supports the public owner

The Sétra supplies State agencies and local communities (counties, large cities and urban
communities) with informations, methodologies and tools suited to the specificities of the networks in
order to:
• improve the projects quality;
• help with the asset management;
• define, apply and evaluate the public policies;
• guarantee the coherence of the road network and state of the art;
• put forward the public interests, in particular within the framework of European standardization;
• bring an expertise on complex projects.
The Sétra, producer of the state of the art

Within a very large scale, beyond the road and engineering structures, in the field of transport,
intermodality, sustainable development, the Sétra:
• takes into account the needs of project owners and prime contractors, managers and operators;
• fosters the exchanges of experience;
• evaluates technical progress and the scientific results;
• develops knowledge and good practices through technical guides, softwares;
• contributes to the training and information of the technical community.
The Sétra, a work in partnership

• The Sétra associates all the players of the French road community to its action: operational services;
research organizations; Scientific and Technical Network (Réseau Scientifique et Technique de
l'Equipement – RST), in particular the Public Works Regional Engineering Offices (Centres
d'études techniques de l'Equipement – CETE), companies and professional organizations;
motorway concessionary operators; other organizations such as French Rail Network Company
(Réseau Ferré de France – RFF) and French Waterways Network (Voies Navigables de France -
VNF); Departments like the department for Ecology and Sustainable Development…
• The Sétra regularly exchanges its experience and projects with its foreign counterparts, through
bilateral co-operations, presentations in conferences and congresses, by welcoming delegations,
through missions and expertises in other countries. It takes part in the European standardization
commissions and many authorities and international working groups. The Sétra is an organization for
technical approval, as an EOTA member (European Organisation for Technical Approvals).
Technical guide
Roadway water management
This document is the translation of the work "Assainissement

routier" published in october 2006 under the reference 0632.
Roadway water management – Technical guide
This technical guide on road improvements has been prepared by a working group set up by
representatives of the Scientific and Technical Network of the Ministry of Infrastructure and
consulting engineers. It was technically validated by (Sétra).
Members of the working group:
• David Gaillard (Sétra),
• J. Ranchet (DREIF - LREP),
• Jean Béréterbide (CETE Sud-Ouest),
• Marc Valin (CETE Nord-Picardie),
• Jacques Hurtevent (CETE Méditerranée),
• Alain Costille (DDE (District-level Offices for Infrastructure) 95),
• Gilles Cartoux (DDE 58),
• René Marcaud (Sté SILENE),
• Alain Limandat (SEEE).
Editing and layout were carried out by:

• Marie Odile Cavaillès (Sétra).
• Serge Criscione (DREIF - LREP),
• Jacques Hurtevent (CETE Méditerranée),
• Marc Valin (CETE Nord-Picardie),
•
Bruno Van-Hauwaert (CETE Nord-Picardie) prepared the diagrams.
On reading the guide

• the glossary, in appendix 4.3 gives the definitions of main special terms (marked with *) used;
• the abbreviations and symbols encountered in the text are clarified in appendix 4.4;
• bibliographic references: in the text, the numbers in brackets [ ] correspond to the documents
listed in the bibliography in appendix 4.6.
Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 4 – September 2007

Contents
The Sétra supports the public owner ............................................................................2
The Sétra, producer of the state of the art....................................................................2
The Sétra, a work in partnership..................................................................................2
Contents..................................................................................................................... 5
Preamble ................................................................................................................... 7
1 - Technical design of structures ........................................................................... 8
1.1 - Re-establishment of natural flows (catchment areas < 100 km2).............. 8
1.1.1 - General principles.............................................................................................9
1.1.2 - Determination of the project flow ...................................................................11
1.1.3 - Design of hydraulic structures ........................................................................18
1.1.4 - Maintenance and operation of the hydraulic structures .................................19
1.2 - Surface drainage of the platform.................................................................. 20
1.2.1 - General principles...........................................................................................20
1.2.2 - Nature and function of systems .......................................................................20
1.2.3 - Choice of drainage structures and hydraulic design calculation ...................26
1.1.4 - Maintenance and operation of the structures [11] .........................................26
1.3 - Road structure drainage................................................................................ 27
1.3.1 - Definition ........................................................................................................27
1.3.2 - Who does what? ..............................................................................................27
1.3.3 - Summary of the effects of water on the road...................................................27
1.4 - Controlling road pollution............................................................................ 27
1.4.1 - Definition ........................................................................................................27
1.4.2 - Who does what? ..............................................................................................27
1.4.3 - Summary of risks and challenges....................................................................28
2 - Sequence of studies ........................................................................................... 29

2.1 - Preliminary studies....................................................................................... 29
2.1.1 - Hydraulics*.....................................................................................................29
2.1.2 - Protection of Water Resources........................................................................29
2.2 - Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies .................................................. 30
2.2.1 - Choice of scales for the plans of the routes studied........................................30
2.2.2 - Road surface drainage at the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) study stage30
2.3 - Project studies .............................................................................................. 33
2.3.1 - Height setting constraints ...............................................................................33
2.3.2 - Validation of the general principles................................................................33
2.4 - Water Law Dossiers (DLE) or water police [police de l’eau] dossier......... 35
2.4.1 - At the project study stage ................................................................................35
2.4.2 - At the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level ..............................................35
3 - Study quality approach .................................................................................... 36

3.1 - Notions of process and progression, of inputs, outputs and tasks................ 38
3.1.1 - Process ............................................................................................................38
3.1.2 - Progression .....................................................................................................38
3.1.3 - Required "inputs" and expected "outputs"......................................................39
3.1.4 - Main tasks .......................................................................................................39
3.2 - Issuing an order ............................................................................................ 41
3.2.1 - General principles...........................................................................................41
3.2.2 - Progression of studies .....................................................................................41

3.3 - Traceability of choices/decisions, archives.................................................. 55
3.4 - Validating the production............................................................................. 55
4 – General technical appendices.......................................................................... 56
4.1 - General elements of hydrology .................................................................... 56
4.1.1 - Rainfall data....................................................................................................56
4.1.2 - Numerical example of application for the calculation of a project flow of a natural
catchment area ...........................................................................................................58
4.2 - Elements of general hydraulics .................................................................... 65
4.2.1 - On the theory of flows .....................................................................................65
4.2.2 - ABAC design charts for small hydraulic structures for re-establishing natural flows
....................................................................................................................................74
4.2.3 - Constructional arrangements and protection of hydraulic structures............84
4.2.4 - Dimensioning of a hydraulic structure for re-establishing natural flows - application
example.......................................................................................................................86
4.2.5 - Surface drainage of the platform - calculation method ..................................94
4.2.6 - Surface drainage of the platform - hydraulic calculations - application examples 97
4.3 - Glossary...................................................................................................... 105
4.4 - Abbreviations and symbols ........................................................................ 108
Abbreviations (French) ............................................................................................108
Symbols.....................................................................................................................108
4.5 - Table summarizing principle formulae ...................................................... 110
4.6 - Bibliography (non-exhaustive list)............................................................. 112
Technical documents:...............................................................................................112
Regulatory texts: ......................................................................................................112
For information ........................................................................................................112

Preamble
Road construction hydrology covers the re-establishment of natural flows, the drainage of roadways,
drainage and the control of road pollution. The recommendation on road improvements of 1982 dealt
essentially with the first two fields. The collection of guides "Water and road construction" deals with
the protection of water resources and aquatic environments in the context of road infrastructure.
A working group made up of hydraulic experts was set up by Sétra to collect up-to-date knowledge in
the field of hydrology and take account of environmental protection-related impacts.
This work took shape in a guide in three main sections:
• the technical design of structures;
• studies;
• the quality procedure.
General technical appendices give calculation examples and ABAC calculation charts to be used.
It was devised to meet the needs and expectations of prime contractors. Its primary purpose is as a
tool that assists in the design of drainage structures for new road projects and improvement planning
studies on existing roads.
This guide puts forward a methodological approach to the technical design of structures to re-establish
natural run-offs, drain the platform and drain off road use generated pollution. It can also provide
assistance in drawing up an improvement project and in applying the quality approach at the study
level.
In must be noted that this document deals only with the re-establishment of natural flows in
small catchment areas (catchment area smaller than 100 square kilometers or so). For larger
catchment areas or where there are specific hydraulic problems, a specialist must be consulted.
It is for the project designer to co-ordinate the various aspects to be taken into account in the design
of structures (road safety, signage, multi-functional structures etc.).
The present document includes the aspects of maintenance, operation and management of structures
at the project design stage. The chapters dealing with internal drainage and road pollution are
summarized in the present document, as these topics are the subject of specific guides, one on
drainage and the other on pollution management, to be published by Sétra at the same time as this
one.

1 - Technical design of structures

Roadway water management covers the following aspects:
• the re-establishment of natural flows,
• the collection and evacuation of surface water within the footprint of the road,
• the collection and evacuation of internal water i.e. internal drainage,
• the management of road pollution.
1.1 - Re-establishment of natural flows

(catchment areas < 100 km 2 )
The re-establishment of natural flows consists in ensuring the continuity of surface run-off in
catchment areas through which the road passes.
This re-establishment must be commensurate with local risks, conditions and requirements (flooding,
erosion or sedimentation, durability of the infrastructure, safety of users and respect for the aquatic
environment), which should be identified, and must be designed in accordance with the regulations in
force.
The road can present an obstacle to natural water flows and, conversely, these can cause damage to
the road (see diagram No. 1). The hydraulic structures re-establishing natural flows must therefore be
correctly sized to limit the risks
• of flooding and submersion of or damage to the road within acceptable limits,
• of flooding upstream of the road,
• of breaches in the road structure.
We can distinguish three cases of interaction between a water course and the road:
• a part of the road line encroaches on the flood plane or high water channel of a significant water
course; a specific study is required, which goes beyond the scope of the present document,
• the road line crosses a water course that is significant or poses specific hydraulic problems;
here, too, a study by a specialist is required,
• the road line crosses a water course with a catchment area not exceeding some hundred square
kilometers, with no particular challenges, which is the subject of the present chapter; above this limit,
the study requires the intervention of specialists in hydrology, hydraulics and hydrogeomorphology.
Initially the water concentration point was downstream of point A

The realization of the infrastructure displaced this point upstream of point B
Cours d'eau = water course Ouvrage hydraulique de rétablissement=Hydraulic structure re-establishing flow
Diagram No.1: displacement of the point of concentration of run-off

1.1.1 - General principles

The hydraulic re-establishment of natural flows is one of the greatest constraints on road projects,
especially on the longitudinal section. Consequently, particular attention should be paid to it at the
pilot project stage.
Apart from the regulatory aspect, which requires checking, the various stages in determining the
hydraulic structure to be installed are:
• the estimation of the project flow as a function of a recurrence interval and an exceptional flow,
• the dimensioning, selection and setting of the hydraulic structure (checks of upstream water level,
flow speeds, free space, hydrological impact and, where required, the free movement of the
icthyofauna).
Choice of the recurrence interval (T)

.The recurrence interval, T, to be taken into account must, in each case, be the subject of an analysis
setting the infrastructure investment costs against the consequences of an overflow for users,
landowners adjacent to the road and the water course, road structures (local and temporary traffic
perturbations and risk situations) and, finally, on the natural environment.
In all cases, knowledge of the regulations and consultation with the water authorities (water police and
the Mission Inter-Service de l’Eau [Inter-department Water Mission] (MISE)) will be necessary.
In the absence of this type of analysis, it is recommended to adopt the following values for recurrence
intervals:
• under motorways: 100 years,
• under roads or restored communication links: 100 years, 50 years or even 25 years for catchment
areas where floods are limited in time and subject to a low or zero incidence of overflow, depending
on the case,
• roads and motorways in flood zones: the height of the infrastructure must take account of the risks
and challenges connected with the flood zone.
For each type of infrastructure, the run-off conditions and the effect of an exceptional flood level must
be assessed.
Upstream water level (HAM) and speed of flow (Ve) in hydraulic structures
The upstream water level must be compatible with the height setting of the infrastructure and the flood
risk. In all cases, the upstream water level must not exceed 1.2 times the height of the structure for
the project flow for structures with an opening of ð 2 m.
The speeds must meet the following criteria with regard to the durability of the structures:
• concrete structures: ≤ 4 m/s,
• metal structures: ≤ 2.5 m/s => see appendix 4.6 [8].
To take account of the fish population, lower speeds must be demonstrated (approximate speed of 1
m/s).
If it is impossible to satisfy these conditions, protective arrangements should be considered.
Free space (TA) of the hydraulic structure

The free space corresponds, strictly speaking, to the free height between the water line and the upper
generatrix of the structure (see diagram No. 2). In our case, it is measured with respect to the notional
water level
ye + HAM
____________
2
For an opening ≤ 2.00 m: to be assessed according to the nature of the catchment area.
For an opening > 2.00 m: TA of 0.50 to 1.50 m.
The fill ratio of the hydraulic structure for the project flow must not exceed 0.75.

Diagram No. 2: free space of the hydraulic structure

Impact of the hydraulic structure

The rise in the water line upstream of the hydrological structure relative to the existing situation and
the speed of flow out of the structure are to be assessed with respect to the local risks and challenges.
Open channel flow within the hydraulic structure must be ensured for the project flow.
Free movement of the ichthyofauna

The minimum water level with limited speed of flow must make adequate provision for the upstream
migration of fish during low-water periods.
It is often necessary to arrange for the base of the structure to reconstitute a natural river bed.
Reference should be made to the works "facteurs biologiques à prendre en compte dans la conception
des ouvrages de franchissement" ("biological factors to be taken into account in the design of bridging
structures") [1] and "Passes à poissons : expertise, conception des ouvrages de franchissement"
("Fish-passes: appraisal, design of bridging structures") [2].
Location of the hydraulic structure

In plan, the hydraulic structure is generally located on the axis of the low-level bed of the water
course; its opening must be at least equal to that of the low level bed. It may, nevertheless, be
necessary to straighten the natural course of flow beneath the infrastructure to achieve a more direct
crossing. It is a question of establishing its feasibility in both environmental and regulatory respects.
The continuity of flow must be respected and protection must be provided in areas susceptible to
erosion.
In longitudinal elevation, the setting of the hydraulic bridging structure is conditional on the natural
topography of the terrain and the flow conditions (gradient of bed). So far as possible, the hydraulic
structure should be set to follow the gradient of the natural bed of the water course.
Evaluation of the project flow and the exceptional flow

The following chapter sets out some simple methods that can be used to evaluate the project flows.
The exceptional flow to be taken into account is at least equal to 1.5 times Q100. An evaluation of its
impact (with the hydraulic structure dimensioned for the project flow) on the safety of users, on the
durability of the infrastructure and on the environment must be carried out with a view to assessing the
measures to be taken.
1.1.2 - Determination of the project flow

(an application example of the calculation of the project is given in appendix 4.1.2)
The project flow corresponds to the peak flow for a given recurrence interval, on the basis of which the
dimensions of the hydraulic structure are determined.
The calculation methods proposed below use the "rational" and "crupidex" formulae with a "transition"
formula to make the link between the two. They are simple and can be applied to natural catchment
areas.
They were developed by experts for the realization of the Mediterranean TGV. The same applies for
the run-off coefficient, the concentration time* and the transition formula. Other proven methods can
also be applied.
Whatever the chosen method, the results of project flow calculations for a natural catchment area are
subject to uncertainties (precipitation values, complexity of phenomena etc.).
An investigation in the field must be carried out to ensure that the calculation results are consistent
with reality.
Rational formula
Range of validity
Its range of validity is as follows:
• up to 1 km2 in mainland France, except for the Mediterranean sea-board,

• up to 10 km2 on the Mediterranean sea-board (zone with rainfall intensities similar to the regions of
PACA, Corsica, Languedoc Roussillon).
Formula
where:
: recurrence interval project flow m3/s
: run-off coefficient* weighted for the recurrence interval, T
: rainfall intensity in mm/h for the recurrence interval* T during the concentration time* tC
: total area of the catchment area in km2.
AJ: partial area of the natural catchment area with coefficient CJ in km2
tc: concentration time* tc in minutes
where Lj: length of flow (in m) on a section where the speed of flow is Vj (en m/s).
The Montana coefficients, a and b are obtained by statistical adjustment from the water levels
observed during a given time. The base data or the reconstituted Montana coefficients can be
obtained from the weather service.
Run-off coefficient, C10

For T = 10 years (indicative values)
(see table No. 1)
Variability of the run-off coefficient*

The values of the coefficients increases with the intensity of the precipitation but this variation differs
with the degrees of permeability and retention of the ground making up the catchment area.
Thus, a highly impermeable natural catchment area will have a high coefficient C(10) and this will
increase little with the recurrence interval under consideration.
Conversely, a highly permeable natural catchment area or one with a high retention capacity will have
a run-off coefficient* of almost zero until a threshold is reached and then increase very rapidly and
may reach values comparable with those for an impermeable catchment area. This behavior is
characteristic of natural catchment areas with a threshold effect.
The variability of the run-off coefficient is a function of the initial retention, Po of the natural catchment
area:
• For C(10)< 0.8 on a
P0 in mm and P10 = the 10-year daily rainfall in mm

• If C(10) ≥ 0.8, we generally take: P0 = 0 and C(T) = C(10)
Run-off coefficient CT for a recurrence interval, T > 10 years
P(T) = daily rainfall of the recurrence interval, T

An application example of the variation of the run-off coefficient* of the rain is given in appendix 4.1.2.
Rainfall parameters
These parameters (see appendix 4.1.1) can be obtained from Météo France (the French weather
service).
–b
These are the Montana coefficients a(T) and b(T) of the rain i(T) = a(T) x tc (T)
with i in mm/h and tc in minutes
Ten-year daily rainfall of the recurrence interval
Daily rainfall of a given recurrence interval PT in mm.
Vegetation Morphology Gradient % Sandy Alluvial terrain Clayey terrain

cover coarse terrain
almost flat p<5 0,10 0,30 0,40

Wooded undulating 5 ≤ p < 10 0,25 0,35 0,50
mountainous 10 ≤ p < 30 0,30 0,50 0,60
almost flat p<5 0,10 0,30 0,40

Grazing undulating 5 ≤ p < 10 0,15 0,36 0,55
mountainous 10 ≤ p < 30 0,22 0,42 0,60
almost flat p<5 0,30 0,50 0,60

Arable undulating 5 ≤ p < 10 0,40 0,60 0,70
mountainous 10 ≤ p < 30 0,52 0,72 0,82
Table No. 1: run-off coefficient for T = 10 years

Determination of the concentration time*, tc, for T = 10 years

The determination of this parameter requires the evaluation of the speed of run-off of the water on the
natural catchment area*. The run-off can be :
• very gentle: run-off in a surface layer (see diagram No. 3), characterized by run-off spread out over
the natural catchment area or
• more rapid: concentrated run-off (see diagram No. 4), characterized by talwegs* and ravines fed by
the valley slopes and by the low-water beds of the water courses.
Diagram No. 3: run-off in a surface layer Diagram No. 4: concentrated run-off

The speeds shown in tables 2 and 3 could be used.
These values are determined from:
V in m/s
p in m/m
V = k x p 1 / 2 x Rh 2 / 3 (see appendix 4.2.1)
Table No. 3 below was drawn up for k = 15 and Rh =1, values generally accepted for pilot projects.
Slope in
m/m 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.30
Speed
in m/s 0.14 0.20 0.24 0.31 0.44 0.54 0.62 0.76
Table No. 2: evaluation of the speed of run-off in a surface water layer
Slope in 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.15 0.20
m/m 0.01
3 5 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Speed in 1.2 1.8 3.3 4.7

m/s 0.8 1.1 1.5 2.1 2.6 3 4 5.8 6.7
5 5 5 5
Table No. 3: evaluation of the speed of concentrated water run-off
Determination of the concentration time* for a recurrence interval > 10 years
where:
tc(T) : concentration time* for the ten-year recurrence interval, in minutes.
Tc10 : ten-year concentration time* , in minutes.
P(T) : daily rainfall of recurrence interval T, in mm.
P10 : ten-year daily rainfall, in mm.
P0 : initial retention, in mm.

The value of the concentration time* is an approximate value, which depends, in part, on the
precipitations and the morphology of the natural catchment area. In the interests of simplification, it is
generally accepted that, for studies up to the pilot project stage, the empirical formulae in appendix
4.5 can be applied.

Crupedix formula
This comes from the Ministry of Agriculture (Cemagref, 1980).
Range of validity:
• from 10 km2, except for the Mediterranean sea-board (50 km2), and up to 100 km2,
• formula valid only for the ten-year flow,
• the interval (Q/2 - 2Q) represents confidence interval with a probability of more than 80 % of
including the calculated value.
Formula:
The flow
where:
Q10 : ten-year flow, in m3/s,
R : regional coefficient reflecting the aptitude for run-off
P10 : daily rainfall of ten-year recurrence interval, in mm
SBV : area in km2
Evaluation of the hundred-year flow from the ten-year flow of the Crupedix formula
We obtain the hundred-year flow from the correlation:
Q100 = b’ . Q10 a priori: 1.4 ≤ b’ ≤ 4
The parameter b’ depends on the area of the catchment area:
• up to 20 km2, b’ is determined using the rational formula (calculation of Q10 and Q100 as if the rational
formula were applicable),
• above 20 km2, b’ is determined from data obtained from gauged water courses on catchment areas
near the project. Failing this, b’ = 2 minimum.
Choice of the parameter R

The regional coefficient, R, is to be checked locally. If this is not possible (absence of gauged water
courses in representative catchment areas near the project), the following coefficient values can be
used:
R = 0.2 for permeable areas (Champagne, Beauce),
R = 1.5 to 1.8 for impermeable areas (Lorraine plateau, Vendée),
R = 1 for intermediate areas.
Evaluation of the flow, QT, of recurrence interval*, T

The evaluation of a flow of recurrence interval, T, between 10 and 100 years can be obtained from the
following formula, assuming that the statistical distribution of the observed values follows Gumbel's
law:
where Δ Q = Q100 – Q10 y = (-ln (-ln (1- 1 )))

T
if T = 20 years y = 2.97
if T = 30 years y = 3.38
Transition formula
This formula can be justified to the extent that the ten-year flow yielded by the rational formula can
sometimes be twice that yielded by the Crupedix formula.
The flow yielded by the transition formula is written:

where:
: project flow with recurrence interval T,
: flow yielded by the rational formula, recurrence interval T,
: flow yielded by the Crupedix formula, recurrence interval T,
α, β : weighting coefficients
• α varies linearly from 1 to 0 as the surface area (S) increases from 1 to 10 km2, from which:
α= France except Mediterranean sea-board
and β = 1 - α
• α varies linearly from 1 to 0 as the surface area (S) increases from 10 to 50 km2
α= Mediterranean sea-board
and β = 1 - α
The ranges of applicability of the three formulae presented above are as follows: (see table No. 4).
An application example is shown in appendix 4.1.2 on a fictional natural catchment area.
Area of
catchment 1 10 50 100
(in km2)
France except
Rational Transition Crupedix Crupedix
Mediterranean
formula formula formula formula
sea-board
Mediterranean Rational Rational Transition Crupedix

sea-board formula formula formula formula
Table No. 4: ranges of applicability for each of the three formulae

1.1.3 - Design of hydraulic structures

Structures are generally classified in 5 families: circular ducts, box culverts*, arched culverts*, large
arched structures and major structures.
So far as possible, production stock items should be chosen rather than the more costly structures
cast in place. Reinforced concrete structures, provided they are correctly designed and built with due
care, are assured of excellent strength and longevity.
The structural design of proposed structures is a task for civil engineering consultants.
Factors influencing the choice of hydraulic structures

In choosing the structure to be used, the longevity of the road, the safety of users, investment costs
and methods for subsequent maintenance of the structure must always be borne in mind. The factors
influencing the choice are:
• the quantity of the flow to be discharged, which fixes the flow cross-section and the type of structure,
• the hydraulic characteristics of the structure: roughness factor (K), funneling coefficient (Ke )
creating a loss of head at the entry, shape of the flow section,
• the width of the bed; a unique structure, adapted to the flow to be discharged and the width of the
bed of the water course is generally preferable to multiple structures, which increase head losses and
obstruct the passage of floating bodies,
• the available height between the project height and the talweg*,
• the static and dynamic loads acting on the hydraulic structure,
• the foundation conditions of the structures,
• the speed and ease of implementation: production stock items supplied in transportable sections and
assembled on site can be an interesting solution for reducing completion times and in cases where
site access is difficult,
• the resistance to chemical agents,
• the shock resistance: massive structures withstand best the shocks and abrasion from solid
materials carried by the current.
Protection of hydraulic structures (see appendix 4.2.3)

Consideration can be given to setting the invert* of the structure 0.30 m or more below the deepest
part of the water course to allow the reconstitution of a natural bed in the structure (ascent of fish).
The raised upstream level of flows and the increased speed of flow at the exit from the structure most
frequently require protective measures both upstream and downstream of the structure. Any
straightening of the course will require:
• continuity of flow,
• effective protection of the banks against changes of direction by durable techniques with a priority on
vegetation based systems [10] "Protection des berges de cours d’eau en techniques végétales
[Protection of the banks of water courses by means of vegetation]". Reinforcement techniques using
rock lining and gabions* should be used only on sections other wise heavily eroded by the current if
there are significant risks to personal safety or high value-added assets,
• flows on steep gradients, p = 4%, pose special problems (determination of the upstream water level,
speed in the structures etc.) that are not discussed in this guide.
Calculating the structures

Calculation of the structures can only be carried out after determining the constraints on natural flow
up to at least 100 m downstream of the hydraulic structure.
Furthermore, the openings of the hydraulic re-establishment structures are generally narrower than
the current section of the stream or talweg* for reasons of cost. This narrowing is not without
consequences for its operation, especially when discharging the peak flood flow.
What must be borne in mind:

• the structure must be able to discharge the flood quantity corresponding to the project flow* with an
upstream water level* (HAM) of the structure compatible with the setting of the project and the
preservation of private property,
• the verification for an exceptional flow must be examined,
• in the context of the present guide, the upstream water level (HAM) is confused with the total energy
head line,
• the setting of the longitudinal section requires knowledge of the rise in the water line inherent in this
narrowing of the flow; it is therefore necessary to determine the flow régime,
• the setting of the structure must not engender a hydraulic jump*,
• the calculation is carried out from downstream to upstream, i.e. the first thing to look for is the flow
régime in the stream downstream of the hydraulic structure,
• the speed of flow must not exceed 4 m/s for concrete structures and 2.5 m/s for metal pipes.
The method presented in the present guide is a simplified method (simplified Bernoulli theorem). It
draws on the basic notions of hydraulics* (taking account of the flow régimes). The basic data required
to understand the calculation method are shown in appendix 4.2.1.
The principle of the method consists in determining, in the first place, the flow régime downstream of
the proposed structure in order to calculate the upstream water level, HAM, of the structure:
• if the flow is in fluvial régime*, the proposed structure must be set in fluvial régime (application of
ABAC charts 1 to 5 – see appendix 4.2.2),
• if the flow is in torrential régime*, the proposed structure can be set in fluvial régime* (application of
ABAC charts 1 to 5 – see appendix 4.2.2),
The general relationship giving HAM is the following:
where:
ye = water level at the entry and immediately inside the hydraulic structure, in meters.
Ve = speed at the entry to the structure in meters per second under ye.
Ke = head loss coefficient at the entry to the hydraulic structure (function of the type of head).
G = acceleration due to gravity in m/s2
and Ve =
SEM = stream cross-section at the entry to the hydraulic structure under ye in m2

A numerical application example is shown in appendix 4.2.4.
1.1.4 - Maintenance and operation of the hydraulic structures

Access to the hydraulic structures must take account of the operating constraints.
An annual inspection and an inspection after a flood event are necessary in order to plan, if needed,
maintenance of the structure and clearance of any silt.
The minimum diameter of hydraulic structures under motorways is 800 mm. This dimension should, in
all scenarios, be compatible with the managing body's maintenance capabilities.
For 2 or 3-lane roads, this diameter may be reduced to 600 mm while still guaranteeing the operating
conditions.

1.2 - Surface drainage of the platform

This is the collection and evacuation of surface water within the footprint of the road.
An essential component of the road project, the three objectives of the platform drainage are:
• the safety of users through the evacuation of water from the roadways and embankments,
• the longevity of the infrastructure, by collecting the water and evacuating it from the road,
• the management of road pollution.
A badly designed network will lead to surface disorders (system overflows, floods etc.) and major
structural disorders of the roadway in the medium term. These situations are aggravating factors for
the safety of users and the integrity of the road. Furthermore, any road run-off transferred off the
platform is not environmentally neutral.

The environmental constraints (outfalls*, environmental vulnerability), the hydrogeology*, the
engineering geology (nature of the ground) and the mapping of the project (high and low points,
banked roadways) and the safety of users all come into the overall design of the systems.
It is recommended to adopt the following principles:
In questions of road design:

• in grazing profile, the longitudinal profile must be set so that the roadway and subgrade structures
are embanked and platform run-off can be evacuated by gravity in the drainage system,
• avoid gradients less than 0.5 % as they may lead to water stagnating at changes of crossfall,
• avoid deep excavated sections (cuttings); these are often critical points for drainage and sometimes
subject to drawdown of surface water,
• proscribe low points in cuttings.
In questions of drainage:
• respect the criteria for the placing of structures with regard to the safety of users (see Guide sur le
traitement des obstacles latéraux [Guide on dealing with lateral obstacles] [6]),
• adapt sealing of the collector structures to the requirement to protect water resources (see Guide sur
le traitement de la pollution routière [Guide on the management of road pollution] [13]),
• equip the tops of cutting banks of longitudinal structures in the case of run-off in a natural catchment
area (bank erosion and overload of the system at the foot of the bank),
• proscribe pumping stations (reversing or lifting stations) except in exceptional cases (costly
installations, complex to operate and maintain),
• always try to keep water moving under gravity and on the surface,
• use as many discharge points as possible to avoid flow concentrations to be weighed against
environmental considerations,
• study the possibility that infiltrations overflow (if this is consistent with the protection of water
resources) and of downstream flows (water meadows*, intermediate holding basins etc.),
• dimension systems for rainfall with a recurrence interval of at least ten years (T = 10 years),
• check that the roadway will not be submerged for a recurrence interval of 25 years; on the contrary,
this can be permitted for the shoulder for T = 25 years,
• avoid discharging into the road platform* drainage system any water from natural catchment areas or
surface water layers,
• plan for a clad structure if the gradient is ≤ 1 % or if the speed of flow is likely to cause erosion (the
critical gradient is often of the order of 3.5 %),
• in regions subject to frost, give the preference to concrete or masonry structures,
• turfed structures slow the downstream passage of flows, favor infiltration and tend to reduce
pollution.
1.2.2 - Nature and function of systems

The drainage network must collect the run-off water from roads and their enclosing
banks/embankments to evacuate them towards the outfalls*. The main development of its architecture
is along the infrastructure, using gravity driven hydraulics (between a high point and a low point), by
assembling unitary structures (linear or at points, buried or superficial).
The platform* systems have the peculiarity of mainly being linear systems, parallel to the axis of the
road (a distinction must, however, be made between off-platform systems and systems on the
platform). Diagram No. 5 shows the situation of these systems on the transverse section of a two-lane
dual roadway.
The architecture of a drainage system can, conventionally, be broken down into 5 main parts: the
longitudinal collection system, the transverse structures, the connecting structures, the containing and
pollution control structures and the outfalls*.
Longitudinal collection system
Cutting bank top system

The role of the cutting bank top system (see diagram No. 6) is to avoid erosion of the bank and feed
run-off to the system at the foot of the bank.
Generally, this structure is clad to avoid its erosion and infiltrations that might jeopardize the stability
of the bank. It intercepts the run-off water of the natural catchment area as modified by the road
construction. It is set back somewhat (1 to 2 m) from the crest of the bank. This structure should
dimensioned for an adequate capacity of each contiguous section. Arrangements for its maintenance
should be planned.
Diagram No. 5: situation of the systems on the transverse Diagram No. 6: position of the cutting bank top system
section of a four-lane bidirectional highway.
Réseau du TPC Median system

Descente d'eau Downdrain
Traversée ou 1/2 traversée Crossing or half-crossing
Réseau de crête de talus de remblai Embankment top system
Réseau de pied de talus de remblai Embankment foot system
Raccordement bourrelet/descente Ridge/downdrain connection
Regard avaloir Drainage opening
Raccordement descente/cunette Downdrain/channel connection
Raccordement fossé/descente Ditch/downdrain connection
Réseau de crête de talus de déblai Cutting bank top system
Réseau de pied de talus de déblai Cutting bank foot system
Ouvrage longitudinal de crête de talus de déblai Cutting bank top
Cunette de réception de la chaussée et du talus de déblai Roadway and cutting bank reception channel
Cutting bank foot system

The function of this system is to collect the run-off water from the cutting bank, the roadway, the
emergency lane and the verge*.
As a general rule and in current sections, a gully* is made, grassed or lined depending on the
constraints (gradient). In its design, the gully* must not compromise the safety of users. It must be
watertight to an extent compatible with the required level of protection of water resources. At regular
intervals, the gully* must be connected to a buried collector. The latter could serve to recover, via the
manholes, the clear drainage water.

Hydraulic dimensioning has been shown to be indispensable.

Depending on the size of the intake area* formed by the bank, a double system might be considered:
• a system collecting only the bank run-off with direct discharge to the outfall*,
• a system bringing together run-off from the roadway and passing it to a treatment arrangement
before discharge to the outfall*.
Median (TPC) system

The function of the median system is to collect and evacuate water from the median and the banked
up roadway.
Although not used by traffic, this part of the platform* must be carefully designed and constructed to
prevent run-off from the higher roadway reaching the lower (risk of aquaplaning) and to protect the
roadways from infiltration (case of unlined medians):
• case of unlined medians: on straight sections, the run-off shall be channeled by a longitudinal
transport structure (clad or not) of type flat ditch* or prefabricated gutter. To complete this surface
collector, drainage provision shall be made to protect the body of the roadways from the migration of
water through the median towards the pavement structures and the roadbed (see diagram No. 7).
In banked curves, a concrete gutter* along the edge of the median can intercept, if necessary, run-off
from the banked up roadway. Depending on the position of the safety barrier, if there is one, this
gutter* should be covered (with a slit grill or openwork concrete). So far as possible, this structure
should not be beneath the barrier for practical reasons of access and maintenance (see diagram No.
8).
• case of lined medians: on straight sections ("roof" cross-section) gravity run-off from each roadway
will be towards the outer edges of the road. In banked curves, a concrete gutter* should be installed in
a position to drain the maximum possible area of the banked up roadway.
In the case of successive resurfacing of the roadways (apart from the median), an outfall at the low
point of the longitudinal elevation should be planned in from the project stage.

Diagram No. 7: unlined median Diagram No. 8: banked curve: a surface structure
completes the arrangement. Its location must take account
of the safety devices and subsequent resurfacing of the
roadway
TPC non revêtu > 3m Unpaved median> 3m

- Bande médiane en "V" - V-shaped median strip
- Bande médiane en "V" équipée d'un fil d'eau revêtu - V-shaped median strip with a lined gutter
Bande médiane Median strip
géomembrane éventuelle geomembrane as required
Drain Drain
Fil d'eau revêtu type fossé plat symétrique Symmetrical lined ditch-type gutter
En alignement droit: On straight sections:
Le TPC doit être assaini pour protéger la chaussée des The median must be drained to protect the roadway from
infiltrations. infiltration.
Le positionnement du drain doit tenir compte de l'implantation The position of the drain must take account of the layout of
des équipements de sécurité et des zones plantées safety equipment and planted areas
Caniveau à grille si apports importants Grated drainage channel if significant inflows
Dans le cas contraire fossé plat type "CC" Otherwise a flat ditch CC type
Embankment top system

The function of this part of the longitudinal system is to channel run-off water from the roadway to avoid
its being discharged to the embankment slope. It thus protects the road embankment from any alteration
(formation of gullies, erosion and, in the limit, collapse). As a general rule, this type of structure is to be
provided:
• where the height of the embankment is ≥ 4 m; this limit value is reduced to 2 m in regions exposed to
intense rainfall (Mediterranean region in particular),
• to evacuate run-off from the platform* at a favorable point along the road.
In running section, the structure can consist of ridged elements* (bituminous concrete, hydraulic
concrete) or of concrete borders type T1 or T2. The profiles must be compatible with safety rules.
Downdrains must be provided to discharge the run-off to the foot of the embankment (Embankment
foot system). Except in special cases, the spacing of these downdrains is generally:
• 50 m in oceanic and continental regions,
• 30 m in regions of intense rainfall,
• 30 m when the gradient of the longitudinal elevation is ≤ 0.5 % or ≥ 3.5 %.
In all cases, the following points should be taken into account:

• the hydraulic saturation of this system for rainfall with a recurrence interval of ten years must not
lead to submersion of the roadway (submersion of the emergency lane or lay-by tolerated for T = 25
years),
• the toe of a concrete retaining device can serve as a gutter in certain road configurations (provide
water passages or absorption grid),
• to take account of the protection of water resources, a gutter* or a collector to evacuate the run-off at
a given point would replace the ridge*.
Embankment foot system

Located at natural ground level, this system must collect all the water from the road intake area by
gravity and direct it towards the outfall* without posing a threat to lower ground. On certain stretches,
this system also intercepts the run-off water of a natural catchment area to direct to crossing
structures.
This part of the system also protects the foot of the embankment against erosion. The structure is
generally a grassed, trapezoidal ditch with high hydraulic capacity, or a lined ditch* where there is risk
of erosion (the critical gradient is often of the order of 3.5 %).
Transverse structures
Classified under this heading are structures for transferring run-off from one longitudinal system to
another. Classically, this family of structures includes surface structures, such as tiled downdrains as
well as transverse structures beneath the roadway (buried collectors). Their location is subject to
examination of the following points: the mapping of the road, the direction of run-off (from the platform
and the associated catchment areas), the flows to be carried and the positions of outfalls*.
A few rules to apply:
• the water from a cutting bank must be discharged, as soon as possible, off the platform via a cross-
drain under the roadway,
• where the infrastructure includes a median, an inspection hatch for the cross-drain should be
provided in the median,
• tiled downdrains are to be preferred to pipes (significant risk of obstruction),
• the feet of tiled downdrains must be connected to the ditch* in such a way as to avoid erosion
(concrete molding).
Connecting structures
These are the manholes and the various connections between longitudinal and transverse structures,
the proper execution of which is critical to the correct operation of the drainage system and its
longevity. Most frequently, these structures are prefabricated but may sometimes be cast in situ.
These are:
• inspection manholes, required for the inspection and maintenance of buried collectors,
• drainage openings to into which the water falls,
• pipe header walls to funnel the water and retain the earth,
• various connections (ridges* / downdrains, downdrains / ditches etc.),
• others.
A few rules to apply:
• a manhole is obligatory at any change in direction of the line of the collector, at a change in gradient
in the longitudinal elevation or at a change in collector diameter,
• in these structures, provide decantation channels (at least 10 cm deep) to trap sand and gravel.
Retaining and pollution control structures

Retaining structure refers to balancing tanks (surge limiting, storm or retaining), the main function of
which is to store and delay downstream flows towards the outfall. They play a multiple role:
desedimentation and the minimization of accidental pollution. The retaining and pollution control
structures are a matter for the specialist.
Outfalls*
The outfalls* to which the discharge can be directed in terms of quantity and quality must be identified
before designing the system.

1.2.3 - Choice of drainage structures and hydraulic design calculation
Choice of drainage structures

There is, a priori, no ready-made and reproducible solution for all road projects. However, there are
four main criteria to be satisfied in the choice of a drainage structure:
• its hydraulic capacity,
• its insertion in the longitudinal and transverse sections of the road project and thus its mapping,
which must also take account of the user safety aspect,
• its level of protection with regard to water resources,
• the ease of operation and maintenance of its structures.
Hydraulic design calculation of the structures

The method of dimensioning the drainage structures is based on the application of the rational
formula.
Equation 1
where:
Q = flow in l/s produced by the road catchment for a frequency equal to the frequency of i
C = dimensionless run-off* coefficient of the de platform
i = intensity in mm/h for a chosen frequency
A = surface area in ha of the platform
The calculation principle is thus to determine the drainage structure with the capacity to evacuate this
flow. o this end, the flow capability* of the structure Qc (full-bore flow) given by the Manning Strickler*
formula (see appendix 4.2.1):
where:
Q : flow in m3/s
K : roughness coefficient
Rh: hydraulic radius with: in meters
Sm: wetted cross-section in m2

Pm: wetted perimeter in m
p : gradient in m/m
is compared with the run-off flow found from equation 1 above.
Appendix 4.2.5 explains the principle of the calculation method and appendix 4.2.6 shows the
calculation of classical structures, namely, the dimensioning of a grassed gully*, of a median channel,
of a succession of two collecting structures and of the feed to a basin by association of system
branches.
The calculation is carried out by iteration.
1.1.4 - Maintenance and operation of the structures [11]

Some recommendations must be taken into account at the preliminary project design:
• surface structures are to be preferred to buried structures,
• reduce as far as possible the different types of structures,
• choose simple and accessible structures and durable materials,
• do not use diameters of less than 600 mm for cross-drains under the full road width and 400 mm for
cross-drains under half the road width for reasons of maintenance and desedimentation as well as to
cope with settlement problems. Do not forget that these structures are generally seated on the natural
terrain and subject to high loads (embankment, traffic etc.) and can be deflected out of their installation
line,
• in cases where the outlet is down a grassy bank, provide a tiled downdrain,
• as cross-drains under the roadway are subject to high loads (static and dynamic loads), use suitable
pipes; as a minimum, select a pipe in reinforced concrete, series 135A (see fasc. 70 [4]). Provide for its
protection in the building phase.
• Provide access to the structures for their maintenance (tracks, stairs, refuges etc.),
• in straight sections, the spacing between manholes can be increased to 80 m, taking account of the
performances of jetting maintenance equipment,
• it is essential to place visitable manholes along the line of the system; smaller accesses for
maintenance can, where appropriate, be placed between the visitable manholes,
• when locating the structures, always bare in mind the safety of the operating personnel and minimize
any nuisance to the user.
1.3 - Road structure drainage

The reader should refer to the technical guide "Drainage routier [Road drainage]" [12], which deals
with the subject.
1.3.1 - Definition
Road drainage consists in the collection and evacuation of water within the substructure of the road.
1.3.2 - Who does what?

The decision to drain lies within the competence of geotechnicians and roadway mechanical
engineers.
The main consideration of road drainage is to set all the structures so as to ensure the evacuation of
all the drains.
1.3.3 - Summary of the effects of water on the road

It is an illusion to think that a roadway will be free of water. It is, however, possible to make drainage
provisions that collect water from the road surface and channel it off the road platform* as quickly as
possible.
A Road drainage system is not necessarily a part of all new road projects (roadways with low traffic,
absence of heavy good vehicles, favorable hydrogeological* and hydrological* conditions, quality of
materials etc.). However, rigorous analysis and detailed investigations must first be carried out with
roadway specialists regarding the following:
• water infiltration into/under a roadway (lack of substructure drainage or surface drainage) can soon
provoke structural damage,
• the effect of alternating expansion and contraction due to freeze-thaw cycles can degrade materials
performance and lead to long-term breakdown of the structure,
• flexible roadways are particularly sensitive to the water content, especially those surfaced with untreated
gravel,
• road surfaces in bituminous concrete are not watertight; imperfect routine maintenance and the ageing
of coatings increase the permeability,
• interfaces between materials and roadway boundaries are critical area,
• variations in the water content of the materials making up the body of the roadway have a
considerable influence on its mechanical characteristics.
1.4 - Controlling road pollution

The reader should refer to the technical guide "Traitement de la pollution routière [Dealing with road
pollution]" [13], which sets out all the procedures to be followed in order to take proper account of the
protection of water resources in road projects.
1.4.1 - Definition
The management of road pollution consists in the provision of all measures to be implemented to meet
water resource protection requirements.
1.4.2 - Who does what?

The environmental specialists define and rank the risks with respect to water resources (RE).
The designer dimensions the structures to achieve the water resource protection objectives.
1.4.3 - Summary of risks and challenges

Work site, chronic, seasonal and accidental pollution can adversely affect water quality, water habitats
and its use.
Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that the management of road pollution imposes environmental
obligations on the project manager. Any failure to meet these obligations can lead to disputes that
may involve the responsibility of the project owner.

2 - Sequence of studies
The establishment of a surface drainage project must not take priority over the definitive mapping and
setting of the road.
The required procedure, therefore, is one of joint iteration with the geometric study of the road line, the
geological study and the environment. It is advisable to involve the regional environmental directorate
[DIREN] and the water police at the start of the study procedures or no later than the stage at which
environmental studies are carried out in detail.
The main objective is to establish the constraints on the altitude of the road line relative to the re-
establishments of natural run-off, the protection of water resources, surface drainage and drainage of
the platform. The future operating company shall be associated with the project team (design of
structures, working methods, operation, maintenance and management).
This procedure shall be initiated from the preliminary study stage and be applied up to the definitive
project.
2.1 - Preliminary studies

Circular No. 94-56 of May 5, 1994 states: "the purpose of the preliminary studies is to determine the
functions to be satisfied and to verify the technical and financial feasibility of the proposed
infrastructure. The main aim of these studies is thus to define not only the road planning option but
also its forecast budget".
They are generally prepared from plans at a scale of 1:50,000 or 1:100,000.
With regard to road surface drainage, the preliminary studies must make clear any constraints relating
to hydraulics* and water resource protection having a significant financial impact on the project. This
type of issue is raised by an expert assessment.
The project should give particular attention to the hydraulics and the protection of Water Resources.
2.1.1 - Hydraulics*
By planning:
• the location of outfalls* (flow, qualitative and quantitative aspects),
• the definition of flood planes (environmental study) and listing of the flood zones (expansion, depth of
flooding, duration, frequency),
• the proposal of structures for bridging water courses and their flood areas,
• the analysis of sections crossing flood planes and their approximate heading up (estimation of
embankment and protection work).
2.1.2 - Protection of Water Resources

From the listing of the water resources with high asset value (environmental study), the impact of the
presence of these resources on the mapping of the road line. The types of protection measures must
then be defined.
Apart from the "hard point" zones, estimates are based on ratios.

2.2 - Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies

"The purpose of these studies is to define more precisely the chosen option, choosing the solution and
setting a ceiling on costs. The content of these studies is limited to what is necessary to start the
public inquiry procedure".
The Outline Preliminary Project (APS) is complete with the "description of the route variants and the
justification of the proposed choice (300-m strip for a new interurban route, precise route for
developments in an urban or suburban environment so that the footprint can be included in town-
planning documentation)".
The proposed choice is justified on the basis of a multi-criterion analysis of the variants studied.
2.2.1 - Choice of scales for the plans of the routes studied

• studies of variants:
- in rural areas: 1:10,000 (1:5,000 for difficult sectors)
- in urban areas: 1:5,000 (1:2,000 for difficult sectors)
• proposed variant:
- in rural areas: 1:5,000 to 1:10,000
- in urban areas: 1:1,000 to 1:2,000
These indications do not exclude the use of larger scales at the level of certain "hard points".
2.2.2 - Road surface drainage at the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) study stage
The road surface drainage study consists, in the first place, of:
• precisely locating the outfalls* with their specific characteristics,
• within the boundary of the chosen study zone, investigate the environmental data relating to surface
and ground water, in particular those that may cause future difficulties. These data can represent a
constraint or introduce obligations. At this stage, the hydrological* and hydrogeological* investigations
should have been started, as these must be summarized in the dossier,
• list the setting constraints on all the routes studied, defined in table No. 5.
These constraints are established from plans to the scales already mentioned.
In the majority of cases, the engineering consultancy will base its work on existing information with
regard to flood planes or on summary calculations. Modeling shall be used only for hard points. The
delays, sometimes considerable, in completing these studies imply that they should be undertaken
very early.
The analysis of the constraints connected with road surface drainage (and other aspects of the road)
can be used to optimize the settings of the routes. These can then be used as a basis for the definitive
road surface drainage study.
They can then be classified on the basis of the equipment, the costs, the modifications imposed on
run-offs and the impact of the project on water resources for each of the variants.

The dimensioning of the water protection structures shall be refined for the proposed solution1
in longitudinal in transverse
in plan
elevation section
Establish
Links with
natural run- water course crossing the height setting
the nomenclature
offs points, flood planes constraints
of the Water Act
by defining HAM
Determine steep
Platform gradient zones, Zones requiring
Discharge points or
surface height settings for large-scale
constraints
drainage median discharges, structures
low points
Ground Zones requiring ground

Setting outfall height
drainage drainage
of the drains
of the platform (see laboratory study)
From
Protection Low points Types of
the vulnerability ranking of Types of
of water to be prohibited, structures off
water resources along structures
resources direction of gradients platform
the route
See appendix 4.4 for abbreviations and symbols
Table No. 5: height setting constraints for all routes
1
Note, the threshold of 1,830,000 Ä for the overall cost of the project conditions the way in which the public inquiry is started (cost of project < 1,830 kÄ:
common law inquiry, cost of project > 1,830 kÄ: inquiry under Bouchardeau rules [law No. 83-630, 12 July, 1983]).

Contraintes liées à la protection de la RE Constraints linked to the protection of the water resources
Esquisse de tracé ou fuseau d'étude Outline route proposal or design envelope
Etude de labo définissant les sols sensibles à l'eau Laboratory study defining soils sensitive to water
Contraintes de calage du tracé Routing constraints
- établissement des EN - re-establishment of natural flows
- protection de la RE - protection of water resources
- assainissement/drainage - drainage
Remise d'un nouveau tracé par le MO Submission of a new route by the project owner
Propositions d'aménagements par le BE Development proposals by the consultants
Validation par le MO Approval by the project owner
- Analyse et chiffrage des propositions retenues - Analysis and costing of retained proposals
- Définition de la procédure d'enquête publique - Definition of the public inquiry procedure
-Choix du tracé soumis à l'enquête d'utilité publique - Choice of route submitted to public inquiry
Enquête d'utilité publique Public inquiry
Avis favorable Favorable opinion
Etude de projet Project design
Oui Yes
Non No
Diagram No. 9: summary of the sequence of Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies

2.3 - Project studies

The purpose of the project studies is to define the solution in detail, make the technical choices and fix
the cost ceiling for the project. They lead up to the individual land inquiries and the execution studies.
The overall plan of the project is generally studied at a scale of from 1:500 to 1:2000.
2.3.1 - Height setting constraints

At this point in the studies, the height setting constraints of the route must be defined precisely:
• for the re-establishment of natural flows, HAM is defined as a function of the flow régime downstream
and in the proposed structure (height setting of proposed structures at 1:500 horizontally and 1:100
vertically),
• the influence of off-platform* structures for water protection is assessed by dimensioning the
structures and including the height calculations on the water streams from sub-platform* discharges.
The longitudinal elevation of the infrastructure is also to be adjusted according to the heights assigned
to the low points (preferred discharge points),
• The surface drainage of the platform must include any safety arrangements on the footprint required
for the surface drainage as well as discharge from the median(s). Particular attention must be paid to
setting the heights of the streams of water at intersections, depending on banking and equipment. The
drains must be able to empty by gravity.
2.3.2 - Validation of the general principles

• it is desirable, where appropriate, for the principles of the re-establishment of natural flows and water
resource protection to be validated by the water police services at this stage in the study,
• analysis of the overall constraints relating to road surface drainage makes it possible to optimize the
height settings of the routes; exchanges (on the level or with change of level) must also be set in
height from these constraints,
• for this height setting, the main contractor should also include the other constraints (environment,
geology, ground stability, road safety etc.).
The road surface drainage consultants must then check that the height setting proposed by the main
contractor (this height setting most frequently results from a compromise between the various
constraints) causes no major difficulties for the road surface drainage (design, impact on the natural
environment, safety, servicing, access and maintenance aspects).
The main contractor must then be informed of these difficulties (example: installation of a pumping
station, risk of flooding of the infrastructure and (or) adjoining land, risk of aquaplaning, unsatisfactory
operation of the drainage system, difficulties of access to a basin etc.).
• once the route is validated by the main contractor, the "applicative" surface drainage study can be
carried out.

Contraintes liées à la protection de la RE Constraints linked to the protection of the water resources
Esquisse de tracé ou fuseau d'étude Outline route proposal or design envelope
Etude de labo définissant les sols sensibles à l'eau Laboratory study defining soils sensitive to water
Définition des principes de protection de la RE Definition of water resource protection principles
Définition des principes de rétablissement des EN Definition of principles of re-establishment of natural flows
Definition des zones à drainer en liaison avec les "terrassements Definition of areas to be drained in conjunction with "roads and
et chaussées" en fonction de la nature des ouvrages earthworks" according to the type of platform surface drainage
d'assainissement de PF structures.
Validation par services de PE Approval by the water police
Calage "fin" du projet en fonction (points de rejets, types) "Fine" setting-out of project according to discharge points, types
Calage "fin" du projet lié aux rétablissements des EN "Fine" setting-out of project according to re-establishment of
natural flows
Calage "fin" du projet pour assurer le drainage et "Fine" setting-out of project to ensure drainage of the platform
l'assainissement de PF avec les exutoires with the outfalls
Remise des contraintes d'AR au MO Submission of roadway water management constraints to the
project owner
Prise en compte de l'ensemble des contraintes par le MO Consideration of all constraints by the project owner
Remise d'un tracé calé au BE AR par le MO Submission of route setting-out to the road surface drainage
consultants by the project owner
Vérification du calage par BE AR Checking of layout by the road surface drainage consultants
Faire part au MO de l'incidence du calage sur AR Advise project owner of the implications of the setting-out on the
road surface drainage scheme
Nouveau calage éventuel du tracé Further adjustment of the route setting-out if necessary
Etude du projet d'AR d'après la géométrie validée par le MO Design of a road surface drainage scheme based on the
geometry approved by the project owner
Oui Yes
Non No
(1)
or refinement relative to the Outline Preliminary Project
(2)
it also concerns constraints other than those connected with the road surface drainage (geology, countryside, noise etc.)
Diagram No. 10: summary of the sequence of project studies

2.4 - Water Law Dossiers (DLE) or water police dossier

The guide "Nomenclature de la loi sur l’eau – application aux infrastructures routières [Nomenclature
of the Water Act – application to road infrastructures]" [9] summarizes the regulatory and legislative
framework of the Water Act and gives details of the use of the main topics in the field of linear
infrastructures.
2.4.1 - At the project study stage

At the project study stage, the line of all projected roadways (links, interchanges, rerouted roads,
access roads) is fixed. Incidentally, the project level supplies the definitive nature and characteristics
of the structures and certain points of detail that may prove necessary for drawing up the Water Law
Dossier (DLE).
Furthermore, at the level of the project, taking the Water Act into account in the realization of the road
works [14] is realistic (provisional installations, site tracks, need for a water drawing point etc.). The
inclusion of site impacts in the Water Law Dossier (DLE) must be taken into account.
Depending on the risks and challenges with regard to water resources and the complexity of the
structures to be planned or the level of detail to be supplied, the Water Law Dossier (DLE) can be
drawn up:
• from the completed project study, in which case the delay for drawing up the Water Law Dossier
(DLE) is added to the time taken to complete the project study,
• in anticipation of the project study, in which case the principles will be supplied (for example,
schematic position of basins on a plan, basin type, table giving the characteristics of each basin etc.).
A contact with the water police services is desirable in the event of any query on the feasibility of the
second case.
In all cases, the Water Law Dossier (DLE) presented must be drawn up with an eye to clarity,
transparency and technical readability by a wide public.
2.4.2 - At the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level

Strictly speaking, the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level does not correspond to the Water Law
Dossier (DLE) level. Indeed, the project route is not fixed (ink, interchange etc.) and the scale of the
Outline Preliminary Project (APS) (1:5000 in general) is too small to respond to points of detail where
necessary. It is also "difficult" to deal with the site aspect in the Water Law Dossier (DLE) at the
Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level.
However, in the event of a tight deadline for the launch of an operation (or "in place" improvement
operation where the route is already fixed), experience shows that the Water Law Dossier (DLE)s can
be drawn up at the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level, at the same time as the public utility
inquiry (DUP).
In such cases, it is appropriate to carry out two simultaneous but separate inquiries (the public utility
and Water Law Dossier (DLE)s are separate, as are the inquiry registers). Such a case can be
envisaged where there is no serious problem with regard to the impact of the project on water
resources, where the projected road line is relatively fixed or where a change in the route of the road
does not lead to problems different from those presented in the Water Law Dossier (DLE).
This does not exclude a detailed study of certain aspects. For example, the re-establishment of a run-
off in which there are fish runs can be affected, as might the modeling of a flood plane and the
structures for re-establishing this flood plane for a given constraint on the maximum flood level. These
studies are not necessarily carried out in the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at a topographic scale
compatible with the Water Law Dossier (DLE).
This being the case, when the Water Law Dossier (DLE) is drawn up at the Outline Preliminary Project
(APS) level, the applicant is exposed, in particular, to the application of article 15 of order No. 93-742
of Mar 29, 1993 (new application for authorization with public enquiry where appropriate).
The advice is to contact the water police service to jointly assess the feasibility of a Water Law
Dossier (DLE) at the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level.

At the project study level (in parallel) Project study completed At the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) level
The Outline Preliminary Project (APS) study,
approved solution, is concluded. During the study,
the Water Police services have been consulted on
the proposals for re-establishment of natural flows
and the protection of water resources and have
been able to react.
Collection « Les outils » – Sétra

Géométrie globale du projet
Contraintes liées à la protection de la RE
– 36 –
Overall geometry of the project
(3) (1)
(1) where appropriate or details
Constraints linked to protection of water resources

or details (2)
(2) complete the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) dossier
or degree of precision
if it is "not of a sufficient level". For example: with typical
sections of re-establishment of natural flows (covering the
various cases of re-establishment), describe the types of bank
Diagram No. 11: summary of the sequence of drawing up the Water Law Dossier (DLE)
September 2007
protection at the structure outlet (vegetation etc.), use typical
Définition des principes de rétablissement des EN et de Definition of principles of re-establishment of natural flows and
protection de la RE protection of water resources
Définition du contenu et du niveau technique du DLE Definition of the content and technical level of the Water Law
Dossier
Validation par le service de PE Approval by the water police
Elaboration du DLE Elaboration of the Water law Dossier
Compléments topographiques de "détail" et études Additional "detailed" topographical information an additional
complémentaires de "détail" "detailed" design studies.
Non No

3 - Study quality approach

The circular of December 22, 1992, which deals with road quality, that each phase in the process of
elaborating a road project must be complete in order not to compromise the later stages. This requires
sufficient knowledge of the field of road surface drainage and of the interactions with other fields
(mapping of the route, environment, geotechnics, safety, operation, maintenance etc.).
With regard to road surface drainage, each phase (or study level) of the elaboration process calls on a
progression that uses elementary data (called inputs), applies tasks and produces results (called
outputs).
The approaches presented hereafter are deliberately simplified in the interests of clarity. The end
points mentioned in the tables that follow are so-called "technical" end points and not procedural.
They do not exclude possible additions from various guides dealing with the quality of studies.
These approaches must serve as a guide for drawing up the specifications to be submitted to
consultant offices with a view to making an order.
3.1 - Notions of process and progression, of inputs, outputs and

tasks
3.1.1 - Process
The process represents all those study levels that take place one after the other to arrive at a project
meeting the needs expressed by the project owner.
3.1.2 - Progression
In the context of the present guide, at each study level, the progressions apply to the four following
fields (see diagram No. 12):
• re-establishment of natural flows,
• protection of water resources,
• platform surface drainage,
• ground drainage of the platform.
Note: the term progression applies here to the macro-tasks necessary to successfully complete each
technical stage at each road project study level. It differs from the term of chapter 2 "Sequence of
studies", which, in this chapter, dealt with "collective entities" (e.g. setting the longitudinal elevation).

Diagram No. 12: progression of studies
Processus Process
Progression Progression
Entrées Inputs
Sorties Outputs
Etudes préliminaires Preliminary studies
APS Outline Preliminary Project
Etude de projet Project study
Dossier loi sur eau Water law dossier (DLE)
3.1.3 - Required "inputs" and expected "outputs"

The inputs consist of all the documents that must be to hand in order to proceed with the technical
study. The outputs consist of all the documents expected at the end of the technical study: plans,
calculation notes, functional diagrams, technical notes.
The inputs are supplied by the main contractor and the outputs are supplied by the design
consultancy.
3.1.4 - Main tasks

The tasks are carried out by the design consultancy.
As it is not the purpose of the guide to constitute a training manual, the description of the tasks is
limited the essential "macro-tasks" without going into all the details of the elementary tasks. The
interest of this presentation is to:
• draw attention to the "unavoidables",
• facilitate the programming of the designer's work,
• encourage uniformity of practices,
• identify the most pertinent stages at which to carry out the various checks.
Table No. 6 gives an example of the main tasks.
Inputs Tasks Outputs

(Project owner) (Design consultancy) (Design consultancy)
1. Geometry of project validated 1. Evaluation of project flows 1. Note
2. Studies: 2. Choice of type and 2. Catchment area plan with number of

- geological and geotechnical characteristics of the hydraulic catchments, position of hydraulic
- environmental structure (as a function of the structures, specialized information
characteristics of the project of regarding geology and the environment
the water course, of the project
quality and respect for the
hydraulic characteristics of the
run-off) and of the layout.

3. Recurrence interval of project 3. Technical drawings 3. Technical drawings defining all

flow and constraints relating to proposed measures
the hydraulic structure Tentative bill of quantities / Tentative bill of quantities / estimate
Water protection orders if the estimate
Water Law Dossier (DLE) was
prepared
at the pilot project level

Table No. 6: example of a natural flow at the project level

3.2 - Issuing an order

The operational principles of issuing an order remain the same, whether the order is issued
internally to a specialist department or CETE [TECHNICAL E NGINEERING CENTERS FOR
I NFRASTRUCTURE], to teams working in partnership or to a private consultant engineering office. Only
the legal procedure is different. The deadline for submitting the study is counted from the "letter of
order". It must take account of the end points and the deadlines for submission of inputs by the project
owner. The inputs and basic guidelines required for satisfactory progress of the study are indicated in
tables 7, 8, 9 and 10 and diagram No. 13 with the tasks and required outputs for each study level.
3.2.2 - Progression of studies
Elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project (A t t h e l e v e l o f r e - e s t a b l i s h i n g n a t u r a l f l o w s )
Inputs (Project owner) Tasks (Design consultancy) Outputs (Design consultancy)
1. Mapping of the proposed • Delimitation of the Catchment • Catchment area maps with
project (with Natural Terrain) Areas positions of hydraulic structures,
- plans • Field investigation (verification zones liable to flooding etc.
- longitudinal evaluation of critical catchment area limits, • Plans and longitudinal elevation:
typical longitudinal and transverse census of existing hydraulic •Brief note showing, in particular:
sections. structures, flood levels and flood
- summary of inputs
planes, operation of these
2. Environmental study: summary - assumed pattern of rainfall
hydraulic structures in flood
of aspects having an influence on
periods, type of bed, obstacles - calculation of Qp and Qex, QMNA5,
the re-establishment natural flows
etc.) and collection of data and Q annual average
and aquatic environments, PPRN
information - principles of re-establishment of
[Natural risk prevention plan].
(regional environmental natural flows underlying the types
3. PLU [Local town plan] directorate, district agricultural of structures
and forestry directorate)
- Consequences of Qex
4. Recurrence interval of project • Knowledge of rainfall
flow (Qp) - the hard points (e.g. request to
• Evaluation of Qp and Qex, QMNA5, substantially raise the longitudinal
5. Account taken of exceptional Q annual average elevation and the consequences
flows (Qex) • Types of projected hydraulic of not doing so)
structures
6. Minimum characteristics of • Pre-dimensioning of hydraulic Note: for the constraint on setting the height
structures and account taken of structures with definition of values of the road, the outputs can be submitted to
maintenance and operation of HAM the project owner in the form of a working
aspects document (documents, minutes).
• Passage of Qex through the
7. Validation by the Water Police projected hydraulic structures
services of the selected options • Recommendations for line and • Catchment area maps with
(optional: can apply, for example, elevation of the route in plan and positions of hydraulic structures
to the assumptions made longitudinal elevation submitted to - Plans and longitudinal elevation
regarding the raising of zones the project owner of the road with positions and
liable to flooding) • End point* characteristics of the hydraulic
structures, Qp, Qex and HAM
8. Validated definitive mapping • Re-adjustment:
• Justificatory technical note with,
- plan representing all re- - of the limits and areas of in particular, a listing of the inputs
established roadways with catchment areas
positions of the structures... • Estimate
- of Qp values
- typical longitudinal and
transverse sections - of Qex values
• Pre-dimensioning of structures
• Supporting measures
(recalibrations, falls, protections
etc.)
• Tentative bill of quantities
• Estimates


Table No. 7: elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the level of re-establishment of natural flows

Elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project

At the level of re-establishment of natural flows

1. Mapping of the proposed • Classification over the length of • Graphical documentation of the
project the projected mapping of the ranking of the vulnerability of
vulnerability of water resources water resources
2. Environmental studies:
• Assignment of a type of water • Diagrams of typical water
vulnerability of receiving surface
resource protection structure to resource protection structures
environments, water course
each class of resource with an • Plans and longitudinal
quality targets, position of
inadequacy recurrence interval elevation showing recommended
harnessing points and protection
associated with the structure. changes of route
perimeters, SAGE [Water
development and management • Recommendations for setting • Brief note explaining the
scheme] guidance, general the height of the road (plan and proposals
measures aimed at protecting longitudinal elevation)
• Positions of harnessing points
water resources etc. End point* and their protection perimeters
• Application of water resource on the catchment area plan (or a
3. Geological: protection measures separate plan)
- nature of subsoils – thickness - Tentative bill of quantities • Water course quality target
of ground water protection - - Estimate (Catchment area plan)
vulnerability of ground water
resources, see appendix 4.6 [13] • Classification of water resource
vulnerability
4. Road traffic • Typical water resource
protection structures
5. On-site intervention times in • Project plans longitudinal
the event of Accidental Pollution, elevation
and account taken of - positions of discharge points
maintenance and operation - positions of off-platform
aspects watercourse protection
structures
6. Validation by the Water Police
services of the measures taken • Zones of application of the
to protect water resources projected measures on the
(optional) platform (zones to be sealed)
• Evaluation of the pollution
7. Definitive mapping of all loads (if necessary) and the
roadways resulting concentrations
- plans- typical longitudinal and - Technical note
transverse sections. - Tentative bill of quantities
- Estimate

Table No. 8: elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the water resource protection level


At the platform surface drainage level

1. Geometry of the proposed • Definition by uniform classes of • Typical clad sections with
project the nature and first order typical surface drainage
of all roadways characteristics of the surface structures
- plan drainage • Plan with discharge points and
zones of application of the
transverse sections
typical sections
• Appreciation of the specific
• Brief note explaining the
zones having an impact on the
2. Study of water resource proposals
project footprint or (and) a
protection significant cost increase of the
- ranking of the vulnerability of structures and on the height
water resources setting of the road.
- discharge points
3. Geological study
- nature of subsoils (sensitivity to • Recommendations for the
water) height setting of the road
- nature of permeability of
subsoils (protection of ground
water against accidental • End point*
pollution)
4. Account taken of maintenance

an operation aspects • Adaptation of previously • Technical note
defined measures - Tentative bill of quantities
5. Definitive mapping of all - Tentative bill of quantities - Estimate
roadways - Estimate
- plans
transverse sections.

Table No. 9: elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the platform surface drainage level


At the platform surface drainage level

1. Mapping of the proposed • Identification of zones requiring • Zones of longitudinal elevation

project ground drainage as a function to be raised
of:
2. Regional climate (freeze/thaw - guidance provided by the
aspect) account taken for the • Brief note explaining the
geological study
roadway structures proposals
- the climate
- the nature of the surface
3. Geological and geotechnical drainage structures (platform
study sealing aspect)
- nature of subsoils (sensitivity to
water)
- drainage of banks • Depth of draining devices as a
function of the thickness of the
4. Typical transverse sections roadway structures and capping
with layer
- nature of surface drainage
structures • Recommendations for setting
(Project owner or design office) the height of the project
and longitudinal elevation
- roadway structures
• Plan and (or) longitudinal
5. Account taken of maintenance • End point* elevation with zones to be
and operation aspects drained and application
6. Definitive mapping of all
roadways • Definition of ground drainage • Typical transverse sections
- plans- typical longitudinal and zones with position of the drainage
transverse sections. systems
- Technical note
- Tentative bill of quantities
• Position of type of drainage on - Estimate
typical transverse sections
- Tentative bill of quantities
- Estimate

Table No. 10: elaboration of the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the platform ground drainage level
Summary of the progression of Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies

This progression relates to the technical aspects.
The design office should, in any case, keep within the context of the study level and concentrate, in
particular, on aspects that weigh significantly in the estimate.
The design office's investigation must therefore remain at the scale of the study and not overreach
itself by seeking after an illusory level of precision.
Let it be remembered that the main impact of road surface drainage on the project costs results from
resetting the height of the road. This re-adjustment can affect the amounts of cutting and banking to
an extent that is not negligible and for which an estimation from the ratios is difficult.

This summary uses the elements from the four preceding tables.
PROJECT OWNER DESIGN OFFICE
Re-establishment of natural flows
Geometry of the proposed

project Recurrence interval Qp
1
Environmental
Account taken
study
of Qex
2
Protection of water resources
1+2 Traffic
Intervention time in the

Geological study
event of accidental
2
pollution
Platform surface drainage
1 + 2 + 3 + result of B
Platform ground drainage
1 + 3 + result of C Climatic conditions

Diagram No. 13: summary of the progression of Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies
BV Catchment area
Enquête Terrain et recueil d'infos Field survey and collection of information
Pluviométrie Rainfall
Evaluation Qp Evaluation of Qp
Choix typologie des OH Choice of type of hydraulic structures
Prédimension OH avec Ham, Qp Initial design of hydraulic structures with Ham and Qp
"passage" Qex dans OH "passage" of Qex in hydraulic structures
Hiérarchisation de la vulnérabilité de la RE Classification of vulnerability of water resources
Affectation d'un type d'ouvrage par classe de vulnérabilité Assignment of a type of structure for each vulnerability class
Définition d'une typologie d'ouvrage d'assainissement par zone Definition of a surface water drainage structure type per zone
Vérification de la faisabilité des points de rejet Verification of feasibility of discharge points
Recommandation pour le calage du projet Recommendation for project setting out
Point d'arrêt Stop point
Géométrie validée Geometry approved
Etude proprement dite Design
- Zone nécessitant un drainage - Area requiring to be drained
- Profondeur du dispositif de drainage - Depth of drainage structure
- Vérification des possibilités de rejets des drains (exutoires) - Verification of drain discharge options (outfalls)

Note: the progression described for the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) applies for the variants and
the proposed solution.
This progression relates to the technical aspects.
The design office should, in any case, keep within the context of the study level and concentrate, in
particular, on aspects that weigh significantly in the estimate.
The design office's investigation must therefore remain at the scale of the study and not overreach
itself by seeking after an illusory level of precision.
Let it be remembered that the main impact of road surface drainage on the project costs results from
resetting the height of the road. This re-adjustment can affect the amounts of cutting and banking to
an extent that is not negligible and for which an estimation from the ratios is difficult.

Elaboration of the project

La progression of the project studies is similar to that of the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) studies
The inputs, tasks and outputs are, however, more closely defined.
Tables 11, 12, 13 and 14 and diagram No. 14 mention that which is to be supplied in addition in the
project study progression as compared with that of the Outline Preliminary Project.
Project/additional requirements as compared with the Outline Preliminary Project (APS)

at the level of the re-establishment of natural flows

As for Outline Preliminary As for Outline Preliminary As for Outline Preliminary

Project (APS) plus: Project (APS) plus: Project (APS) plus:
1. Geometry • Longitudinal elevation of water • Longitudinal elevation of water

- plan with ground interface of all course (CE) with the project of course with dimensioned
roadways. Water courses, all roadways concerned longitudinal section of the
streams and talwegs* must also hydraulic structures and
be shown, enabling transverse roadways (see sheet)
sections to be read off. • Choice of the type of structure
- resized zones of the water
- transverse and longitudinal course
sections • Characteristics of the structure - zones where bed and bank
(OH) protections are applied
2. PLU [Local town plan]
3. Outline Preliminary Project • Dimensioned section of the • Additional reconnaissance of

(APS) study and observations hydraulic structure (shown on the terrain
on the Outline Preliminary the longitudinal elevation of the
Project (APS) study watercourse with the project)
• Sections and definitions of the
protections and resizing
4. Water Law Dossier (DLE) and • Hydraulic flow characteristics
Water Police orders upstream of the hydraulic
(if Water Law Dossier (DLE) • Typical head drawings
structure, in the structure and
drawn up in Outline Preliminary downstream of the structure
Project) (height of flow, speeds, régimes) • Plan (at study scale) with:
- the position of the hydraulic
5. Details of mixed passages structures
- hydraulic structure / fauna • Information from the project
- the typical heads
- hydraulic structure / tractor owner if incompatibility with
- types of protection
passage the road height setting and
- resizing of the water course
- hydraulic structure with fish end point
passage
- etc. • Technical note with, in
• Protection of the water course
particular, list of inputs.
(bed and banks) against erosion
6. Additional topographic
readings on water course
(on request from the design • Detail drawings
office)
• Typical drawings of upstream
7. Situation in sections
and downstream heads
8. Lifting of end point*
• Addition to the project

plan view of
- the hydraulic structure
- types of head
- types of protection
- resizing of the water course

Table No. 11: elaboration of the project at the level of re-establishment of natural flows

Project / additions relative to Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the Water Resources
Protection level


1. Geometry of the project • Structuring of platform systems • Plan view:

- plan with ground interface of as a function of the possible - platform discharge points
all roadways discharge points - off-platform water resource
- footprints (if already protection structures
determined) with earth inputs
- equipped transverse sections • Discharge points of the ground
drainage system - hydraulic junctions between
(noise
platform discharge points and
protection dykes etc.)
the structures
- longitudinal elevation • Location and dimensioning of
- access to structures
the off-platform water resource
2. PLU [Local town plan] protection structures
• Plans defining structures
3. Outline Preliminary Project (see tasks)
(APS) study and observations
Note: the foregoing tasks must be worked on
on the Outline Preliminary
in the context of surface drainage if the • Plans defining junctions
Project (APS) study project is "complex".
- vulnerability ranking of water between discharge points and
resources and type of structure structures
assigned to each vulnerability • Information from the project
rank owner if incompatibility with • Plans defining pumping
- forbidden discharge points the road height setting and stations
end point
4. Water Law Dossier (DLE) and
Water Police orders (if Water • Technical note:
• Plans defining the off-platform - list of inputs
Law Dossier (DLE) drawn up in
water resource protection - assumptions
Outline Preliminary Project)
structure with NGF [French - rainfall data
National Survey heights] - recurrence intervals
5. Additional topographic
- longitudinal section of inadequacy of the structures
readings on water course
- transversal sections - calculation of structures
(on request from the design
- inputs - calculation of residual loads at
office)
- outputs structure outputs and
- access ramp concentrations (if necessary)
6. In sections
- screens - description constructional
- structure of bed and banks provisions and structures
7. All elements required for
- degassing - justification for pumping peak
structuring the systems for
- drainage flow or of overflow from each
platform surface drainage
- access accumulation section etc.
(definition of the discharge
- etc.
points, structure of the surface
drainage system, evaluation of
the characteristics of the intake • Plans defining pumping
area at each discharge point) stations
and ground drainage (any
drainage discharge into basins,
for example) (see infra "Project /
Surface drainage and Project /
Ground drainage")
8. Landscape constraints
9. Possibility of evacuation
other than by gravity?

Table No. 12: elaboration of project at water resource protection level

Project / additions relative to Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the platform surface
drainage level


1. Mapping of the project • Elaboration of the structural • Defining plans as defined in

- plan with ground interface, constraints on plan by position: the column "Tasks" with the
positions and types of noise - of the high and low points of structural constraints
protection, of civil engineering the longitudinal elevation and in
structures, tunnels, borders in intersections
islands, roundabouts, retaining - direction of banking by lane
walls (including type), - points of change of banking by
landscaping with artificially lane
created high and low points - gradient classes (ex.
- typical cross-sections with intermediate gradients
sections of the roadways and all < 0.5 %, > 3.5 %)
equipment (safety devices,
- height classes of
borders, lighting, noise
embankments
protection etc.)
(ex. h ² 2 m,
- pebble traps, verges
h > 4 m, h intermediate)
- cross-sections, current types
with equipment - zones sensitive to water
- longitudinal elevations with - zones ranked by
indication of banking water resource vulnerability
- dimensioned plans of
- points (or zones) of forbidden
intersections
discharge
- dimensioned plans of the
various existing or projected
networks • Choice of structures and fine
- the footprints (if already structuring of systems (taking
determined) account of water resources)
2. For memory:
- structuring of the measures • Hydraulic calculation
taken for water resource
protection • Information from the project
- definition of the structures for owner if incompatibility with
re-establishing natural flows the road height setting and
end point
3. recurrence interval of project
• Technical note:
flow of the surface drainage
• Plans defining structures: - list of inputs
systems
- route in plan with positions and - rainfall data
characteristics of the various - project flow
4. Possibility of evacuation
isolated systems and structures - recurrence interval of
other than by gravity?
- dimensioning of the structures inadequacy of the structures
(plan or (and) longitudinal - structuring of systems
elevation) - choice and calculation of
- typical structures structures
- typical transverse sections with - description of constructive
typical positions of surface measures
drainage structures - justification of pumping peak
flow or overflow per
accumulation cistern etc.
• Plans defining pumping
stations

Table No. 13: elaboration of the project at the platform surface drainage level

Project / additions relative to Outline Preliminary Project (APS) at the platform surface
drainage level


- elements enumerated for the • Details of the zones to be • Plan with positions of the
platform surface drainage drained various drainage devices and
at the project level manholes, suppliers quotes
where appropriate
• Choice of drainage devices
• Typical drawings
• Typical drawings of drainage
devices and manholes
• Memo with, in particular, listing
of inputs and decision
• Transfer to plan of the various
parameters
types of drainage devices and
their manholes
• Supplier's quotation for

drainage devices (if necessary)

Table No. 14: elaboration of the project at the platform surface drainage level

Summary of the progression of project studies

This summary is in addition to the "summary of the progression of Outline Preliminary Project (APS)
studies" (diagram No. 13) and goes into more detail on certain aspects.
PROJECT OWNER DESIGN OFFICE
Re-establishment of natural flows
- Mapping of the project of all roadways and

interchanges with ground interfaces 1
- Observations on the Outline Preliminary Project
- Details of: mixed structures hydraulic + fauna...
1 + footprints + equipped transverse sections +

landscape constraints + structures of surface an
ground drainage systems (if from another design
office) 2
2 + all equipment
- safety, borders, noise protection....
- positions and plans of civil engineering structures
- positions and plans of walls
+ typical transverse sections with equipment and
roadway structures
+ current transverse sections with equipment and
top bedding of earthworks
+ dimensioned plans of the various existing or
projected systems
Platform ground drainage
(les zones of terrain sensitive to water are

assumed to be defined in the Outline Preliminary
Project (APS) 3

Diagram No. 14: summary of project studies
PL du CE avec projet routier et OH projeté Longitudinal elevation of water course with road scheme and
projected hydraulic structure
Caractéristiques hydrauliques de l'écoulement Hydraulic flow characteristics
Recommandation pour le calage fin de projet Recommendation for detailed project setting-out
Point d'arrêt Stop point
Géométrie validée Geometry approved
Etude proprement dite Design
Altimétrie des points de rejet Discharge point levels

Calage des ouvrages hors PF Setting-out of works outside the platform
Elaboration des contraintes structurelles Elaboration of structural constraints
Choix des ouvrages Choice of structures
Applications au projet Applications to the project
Calculs hydrauliques Hydraulic calculations
Cotes f.e aux points de rejet Gutter levels at discharge points
Choix des dispositifs drainants Choice of drainage devices
Application au projet Application to the project
Cotes f.e aux points de rejet Gutter levels at discharge points

3.3 - Traceability of choices/decisions, archives

The various phases of the study (setting the road height and studies as such) are carried out by
iteration. Each document drawn up and the choices of the project owner to proceed to the next
iteration must be available for consultation at any time. The working documents, design office
proposals and choices made to arrive at the final height setting of the project must be kept by making
up usable archive files.
3.4 - Validating the production

This is a question of being able to draw up a "certification of service rendered" (in the case of a study
for which an external design office is engaged) or carry out a "project review" (if the study is carried
out internally).
The validation elements are described, non-exhaustively, hereafter:
• number of paper dossiers submitted,
• reproducible format (paper and/or computer medium),
•
geometric format of the study (A3 landscape for example),
• graphic chart,
• documents making up each dossier,
• consistency between documents,
• consistency of references to various documents, appendices, paragraphs etc,
• account taken of inputs,
• scales of plans,
• format and content of computer media,
• presence of all documents making up the dossier,
• suitable format of software used.

4 – General technical appendices

4.1 - General elements of hydrology
4.1.1 - Rainfall data

The rainfall characteristics enter into the estimation of the input flows from the road catchment area
and the natural catchment area crossed by the road by means of the various calculation methods, the
most frequently used being the rational formula and the Crupedix method (see § 1.1 and 1.2). The
rainfall information used for road projects is of two types:
Intensity-duration relationships of the rain for given frequencies (IDF curves)

Drawn up from rain gage readings (height of water per time interval), these are used to calculate run-
off flows using the rational formula. The average intensity i(T,tc) of the rainfall over the concentration
time tc for a recurrence interval T is represented by the Montana formula:
i(T,tc) = a(T) x tc–b(T) (tc in minutes).
The values of the coefficients a and b depend, for each station, on the recurrence interval (T) and the
range of validity corresponding to an interval of duration of precipitation (D).
The relationship i(T,tc) = a(T) x tc –b(T) is generally adjusted for the following time intervals:
• 6 to 30 minutes (couple a(T) and b(T)),
• 15 to 360 minutes (couple a’(T) et b’(T)),
• 360 to 24 minutes (couple a"(T) and b"(T)),
For the calculations, the values of the coefficients a and b should thus be taken for the time interval
that corresponds to the concentration time of the catchment area under consideration.
Remarks:
• the coefficients a and b must not be used outside their range of validity,
• in all cases, it is advisable to use local rainfall data,
• the rainfall data values change with time, altering the coefficients a and b. They can be obtained
from the national meteorological service (METEO-FRANCE),
• in each study, the location of the reference rain gage used, the observation period and the units of
the coefficients a and b with their recurrence interval must be shown for each range of validity (D)
applied in the study.
Daily water heights for a given frequency

These values P(T) come from the operation of the rain gages and represent a height of uncentered
water falling in 24 hours as a function of a recurrence period. They are used essentially in the
formulae for calculating the input flows of natural catchment areas.
As in the previous paragraph, knowledge of the local values of P(T) can be obtained from the national
meteorological service.

As an example, table No. 15 gives the values of the Montana coefficients obtained from the Météo
France office of Lille-Lesquin (59) for the period: 1955-1997 (years 1989, 1991, 1992 and 1993
incomplete).
Remark:
the use of these values in the Montana formula:
i(T,tc) = a(T) x tc–b(T) gives the result of the intensity i in mm/minute with a concentration time tc
expressed in minutes). To obtain a result in mm/hour, value a must be multiplied by 60.
Table No. 16 gives the daily water heights for a given frequency.
Recurrence
Height in mm
intervals
10 years 47.5
20 years 53.6
25 years 55.5
50 years 61.3
75 years 64.7
100 years 66.4

Table No. 16: daily water heights for a given frequency
D (validity ranges of the Montana coefficients)

T
(recurrence
intervals)
a b a b a b
2 years 3.276 0.586 5.842 0.766 5.417 0.756
5 years 4.727 0.596 9.194 0.804 6.152 0.738
10 years 5.669 0.600 11.417 0.819 6.686 0.730
20 years 6.592 0.603 13.699 0.832 7.249 0.725
25 years 6.864 0.603 14.391 0.835 7.397 0.723
50 years 7.749 0.604 16.700 0.845 7.891 0.718
75 years 8.319 0.607 17.977 0.849 8.208 0.716
100 years 8.650 0.606 18.992 0.853 8.390 0.714

Table No. 15: values of Montana coefficients from Météo France, Lille-Lesquin, for the period: 1955-1997

4.1.2 - Numerical example of application for the calculation of a project flow of a natural catchment
area
Characteristics of the natural catchment area crossed by the project

Essentially, information about the natural environment is collected, together with the characteristics of
the catchment area concerned. To the extent that there is no rain gage station on the stream in
question, this work is based essentially on map data, a reconnaissance on foot of the terrain and the
collection of information from the various services and locally.
The first step is to delimit the catchment area upstream of the projected road. From this delimitation
and a reconnaissance on the ground, the principal characteristics of the catchment area concerned
can be obtained.
The map below shows the natural catchment area of the Quievelon stream, crossed by the road
project that links the communes of Quievelon and Colleret. It gives the future location of the hydraulic
structure required to re-establish natural flows. Incidentally, it is important to note that there is no
ichthyofauna present in this stream. Consequently no special provision need be made for the transit
and reproduction of species. Diagram No. 15 shows the cross-section at the level of the crossing point
(point c).
Description of the catchment area

The project is in the south of the northern district in the region of Avesnes. The catchment area
crossed is part of the Sambre river basin and is drained by the Quievelon stream. It consists
essentially of hedgerows, wet meadows, arable land and small wooded areas. The presence of a
small conurbation should also be noted.

Map of the natural catchment area crossed and location of the re-establishment structure
Zone urbanisée Urbanized areas

Zones boisées Wooded areas
Cultures Crops
Pâturages Pasture
Projet Project
Limite de bassin versant Catchments area boundary
Ecoulement concentré Concentrated flow
Ecoulement en nappe Sheet flow
Point A TN Point A natural terrain
Distance AB Distance AB
Pente AB Slope AB

In photo No. 1, we note the presence of a structure

located 0.6 km downstream of the project. This
stonework structure has never been subject to
overflow, according to evidence collected in the
neighborhood. The hydraulic cross-section of this
existing structure (see diagram No. 16), which is of
the order of 5.70 m2, gives us a good indication of
the size of the structure to be installed (all the
more so since inquiries in the neighborhood
indicate that it has never overflowed, making this a
ceiling cross-section for the structure in the
project).
Photo No. 1: Quievelon stream Morphology of the catchment area

The nature of the ground encountered shows a
sedimentary facies. The principal characteristics of
the catchment area are as follows:
• Surface area: S = 2.53 km2
• Average gradient: = 0.0191 m/m or 2 %
Diagram No. 15: cross-section of the stream at the level of the
crossing point (point C) with: ΔΗ: height difference between high point and low point of
the catchment area equal to 49 m
L: length of water course equal to 2565 m from A to C
Ground use
• wooded areas SB = 0.71 km2
• built-up areas SU = 0.17 km2
• grazing areas SP = 0.98 km2
• arable land SC = 0.67 km2
Rainfall parameters used

For the purposes of the study, we obtained the
Diagram No. 16: existing structure necessary rainfall data from the Météo France
service of the Lille-Lesquin station (59), which are
Profil chaussee Roadway profile
representative and close to the project. They give
profil tn Natural terrain profile us the values of the coefficients a and b used in
the Montana formula with i intensity in mm/minute
and t temps in minutes (see table No. 17).
The ten-year and hundred-year daily rainfalls in
mm are:
P(10) = 48 mm and P(100) = 67 mm
Ranges of validity of the Montana coefficients

Period: 1955-1997 (1)
Recurrence
intervals 6 min< t <30 min 15 min< t <360 min
a b a b
10 years 340,14 0,600 685,02 0,819
100 years 519,00 0,606 1139,52 0,853
(1)
Years 1989, 1991, 1992 and 1993 incomplete

Table No. 17: ranges of validity of the Montana coefficients as a function of the recurrence interval

Determination of the project flow of the natural catchment area
By application of the rational method

1) for T = 10 years
• evaluation of the run-off coefficient C(10) (with the aid of table No. 1, section 1.1.2);
C(10): calculated by considering a gradient of less than 5 % (almost flat) with sedimentary soils. For the
built-up area, we took the ration of the sealed surface area to the total area. The elementary
coefficients obtained were as follows:
- wooded areas (SB = 0.71 km2): 0.30
- built-up areas (SU= 0.17 km2): 0.55
- grazing areas (SP = 0.98 km2): 0.30
- arable areas (SC = 0.67 km2): 0.50
from which
• calculation of the concentration time tc(10) (method described in section 1.1.4),

tc(10): calculated bearing in mind that on the upstream section (section AB) there is little or no run-off
(layer run-off) and on the downstream section (section BC) the run-off is almost continuous and more
marked (concentrated run-off).
- Section AB: (run-off in layer)
Heights: point A = 227.00 NGF,
point B = 197.00 NGF
Length LAB = 1210 m, gradient pAB = 0.025 m/m
- Section BC: (concentrated run-off)

Heights: point B = 197.00 NGF,
point C = 178.00 NGF
Length LAB = 1355 m, gradient pAB = 0.014 m/m
which gives a concentration time

• calculation of the critical intensity i(10)

i(10): determined from the Montana equation using the rainfall parameters, a and b, of the region of the
study for a recurrence interval of 10 years as a function of the range of validity that includes the
concentration time tc(10) of the natural catchment area, i.e:
from which
• ten-year peak flow Q(10)
2) for T = 100 years

• summary of known parameters
for: T = 10 years
P(10) = 48 min C(10) = 0.37 tc(10) = 104 min
for: T = 100 years
P(100) = 67 min
• calculation of the initial retention P0 (method described in section 1.1.4)
As we have C(10) = 0.37 < 0.8 we have
• evaluation of the run-off coefficient C(100) (method described in section 1.1.2)
• calculation of the concentration time tc(100) (method described in section 1.1.4),
• calculation of the critical intensity i(100)

i(100): determined from the Montana equation using the rainfall parameters, a and b, of the region of
the study for a recurrence interval of 100 years as a function of the range of validity that includes the
concentration time tc(100) of the natural catchment area
i.e:
from which
• hundred-year peak flow Q(100)
We see that the ration obtained is

Q(100) / Q(10) = 8.5 / 4.0 = 2.12 .
This value reflects the threshold effect on a small catchment area (excepting overflow into zones
subject to flooding).

By application of the Crupedix formula

• summary of known parameters
Surface area of the natural catchment area: SBV = 2.53 km2
Ten-year uncentered daily rainfall: P(10) = 48 mm
Regional coefficient: R = 1 (the nature of the ground being semi-permeable, the selected value is that
for intermediate subsoils, as recommended in section 1.1.4).
hundred-year peak flow Q• (100)

Using the ratio Q(100) /Q(10) = 2.12 obtained using the rational method, we obtain:
By application of the transition formula

Results of calculation by the rational method: QR(10) = 4.0 m3/s QR(100) = 8.5 m3/s
Results of calculation by the Crupedix method: QR(10) = 0.8 m3/s QR(100) = 1.7 m3/s
Surface area of the natural catchment area: (SBV) = 2.53 km2
• calculation of parameters α and β
and
• hundred-year peak flow Q(100)
For dimensioning the hydraulic structure to re-establish the Quievelon stream under the project, we
therefore take the project flow Q(100) = 7.4 m3 .
By way of comparison, the flow Q(100) = 7.4m3 / s corresponds to a water level of 1.40 m in the
existing structure located downstream of the project (by using the Manning Strickler formula with an
estimated roughness coefficient, K, of 40 and a gradient p = 0.0030 m/m). To the extent that this
structure permits a water level of up to 2 m, the selected flow seems consistent. The inquiries made in
the neighborhood confirmed that this structure has never shown itself inadequate, making the result of
our calculation acceptable.

4.2 - Elements of general hydraulics
4.2.1 - On the theory of flows

The re-establishment of natural flows calls on the theory of free surface flow*. A flow is said to be "free
surface" if the upper surface is open to atmospheric pressure (for a pipe, the flow water line does not
reach the top of the pipe).
Flows are classified into two types:
Uniform flows
A flow is uniform if the flow, the gradient, the cross-section (form and nature of the walls) are constant
(see diagram No. 17).
The flow in the platform surface drainage structures is nevertheless considered as uniform.
In such conditions, the Manning – Strickler formula can be applied:
where:
Q : flow in m3/s
K : roughness coefficient
Rh : hydraulic radius in m where
Sm : wetted cross-section in m2
Pm : wetted perimeter in m
p : gradient in m/m
This formula can be used to determine the height of the waterline at a point of flow through a given
section. This water level is then called the normal level* (it is symbolized as yn in the case of a
hydraulic structure and hn in the water course)
Choice of the roughness coefficient* K

The usual values of roughness coefficient for road surface drainage structures, mentioned in table
No. 18, take account of the aging of the structure and the architecture of the system. These are values
commonly used for roads.
For the types of structure not mentioned in table No. 18, refer to the data sheets produced by the
manufacturers and include the aspects of aging and architecture of the system.
Recurrence intervals Height in mm

Flat, grassed in, shallow
structures
h ð 0.15 m 10
h ð 0.20 m 15
h: height of water in the

structure in m
Grassed in ditches
(trapezoidal and 25
triangular ditches)
Surface structures in
concrete (ditches, gullies 70
and gutters)
Smooth pipes (concrete,
PVC, PEHD etc.) 80
Diagram No. 17: cross-section of a surface drainage structure Table No. 18: roughness coefficients, K, in surface drainage
structures

Gradually varying flows

A flow is gradually varying if its various parameters (gradient, cross-section and speed) vary in a
continuous, progressive and slow fashion.
In the context of the present guide, it is considered that the flow passing from a water course to a re-
establishment structure (via the head of the structure) takes place in a gradually varying flow and that
the fluid is perfect.
Bernoulli's equation
Under the conditions defined above, BERNOULLI'S equation applies on a flow line at each section of the
free flow:
where:
H : total head in meters
z : level of bed relative to a reference plan in meters
y : pressure head in meters (real height of the flow level)
V : speed of flow in m/s
g : acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/s2 (usually rounded up to 10 m/s2)
: represents the kinetic energy in m
Taking account of the drop in head along the flow, Bernoulli's equation (see diagram No. 18) is
written:
(∆H drop in head in m)
Applying Bernoulli's theorem at the entry to the projected structure, the water level, HAM, upstream of
the structure can be evaluated:
ye: water level at immediate entry to the structure (in m)

Ke: funneling coefficient
Ve: speed at the entry to the structure in m/s
Specific head
Specific head is the value
Replacing , we obtain
The variation of Hs, as a function of y for a constant flow is represented by the curve (diagram No. 19):
The specific head passes through a minimum for a water level called the critical level*. The specific
head is then called the critical specific head.
The level yc satisfies the equation:
Lc is the width at the water surface for the water level yc.
• if the water level y of the flow < yc, the flow is in torrential régime*,
• if the water level y of the flow = yc, the flow is in fluvial régime *.
• if the water level y of the flow = yc, the flow is in critical régime *.
The waterline in fluvial régime* rises in an upstream direction, which is not the case in torrential
régime*. The critical régime* along the flow in the structure is to be proscribed.

For the flow régime within the structures, the following configurations are aimed at (see table No. 19):
Régime
Régime
downstream
within the structure
of the structure
Fluvial Fluvial
Torrential Fluvial or torrential
Table No. 19: configurations for the flow régime within the structure
Note: when the régime changes from torrential to fluvial, a jump* is created which is prejudicial for the
longevity of the projected structure. This configuration must be the exception.

Diagram No. 18: representation of Bernoulli's equation
Diagram No. 19: variation of Hs as a function of y
Ligne de charge Energy line

Ligne piézométrique Pressure line
Fond Bottom
Plan de référence Reference plane
Critique Critical
Torrentiel Torrential
Fluvial Fluvial
Constante Constant

Diagram No. 22: procedure for hydraulic dimensioning
Dimensionnement hydraulique Hydraulic design

Débit de projet Project flow
Régime a l'aval de l'OH par calcul de hn et hc abaques 1 et 2 Regime downstream of the hydraulic structure by calculation of
hn and hc design charts 1 and 2
Comparaison de hn et hc Compare hn and hc
Régime fluvial Fluvial regime
Régime torrentiel Torrential regime
Calage de l'OH en fluvial Hydraulic structure designed for fluvial flow
Calage de l'OH en torentiel Hydraulic structure designed for torrential flow
Recherche caractéristiques de l'OH: Find hydraulic structure characteristics:
Section, ... Cross section
Abaques 1 à 5 Design charts 1 to 5
Tels que Such that

hauteur OH height of hydraulic structure
Comparaison yn et hn Compare yn and hn

Procedure for dimensioning the structures

The procedure consists in finding:
• the downstream flow régime. Diagrams 20 and 21 summarize the possible scenarios, namely:
- fluvial régime* downstream (structure designed for fluvial),
- torrential régime* downstream (structure designed for fluvial or torrential),
• the design of the structure for the régime appropriate to the downstream régime (which determines
the water level ye at the entry to the structure),
• the upstream water level* HAM of the structure.
The flow chart of diagram No. 22 summarizes this procedure:
Diagram No. 20: case of fluvial régime downstream of the structure
Diagram No. 21: case of torrential régime downstream of the structure
1er (2eme, 3eme) calcul Calculation 1 (2, 3)

Recherche du régime du ruisseau aval Find the regime of the downstream stream
OH Hydraulic structure
FLUVIAL FLUVIAL
Cas de la figure ye=yn Case shown in the figure ye=yn
si hn avait été supérieur à yn alors ye=hn if hn had been greater than yn, then ye=hn
TORRENTIEL TORRENTIAL
Si l'OH est calé en torrentiel (cas de la figure ci-dessus) alors If the hydraulic structure is designed for torrential flow (case
ye=yc shown in the above figure) then ye=yc
Si l'OH est calé en torrentiel (yn>yc) alors (ye=yn) If the hydraulic structure is designed for torrential flow (yn>yc)
then (ye=yn)

Funneling coefficient* Ke
This coefficient varies according to the type of entry to the structure. Take the values from table No. 20:
These funneling coefficients Ke of table No. 20 do not take account of the sometimes important
narrowing of the flow due the embankment of the road and the structure. Also, for these more complex
scenarios, other equations must be used that are given in specialist works not mentioned in this
document.
Type of entry Ke
Ends cut on the

slope (diagram No. 0.7
23)
End with head wall

and wing walls 0.5
(diagram No. 24)
Table No. 20: pummeling coefficient* Ke as a function of the type of entry to the structure
Diagram No. 23: ends cut on the slope Diagram No. 24: end with head wall and wing walls
Mur en retour Return wall

Mur parafouille Cut-off wall
Radier facultatif Optional raft

4.2.2 - ABAC design charts for small hydraulic structures for re-establishing natural flows
Trapezoidal channels, box culverts (m=0)
ABAC design chart No. 1: determination of the normal water level
Calculer N = Calculate N =
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
l et h en m l and h in m
p en m/m p in m/m
Déterminer m (dalots rectangulaires m=0) Determine m (rectangular box culverts m=0)
lire X sur l'abaque Read X from the design chart
En déduire hn=l/X Deduce hn=l/X
Canal rectangulaire Rectangular channel
ABAC design chart No. 2: determination of the critical level
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
g ~ 10m.s2 g ~ 10m.s2
Déterminer m (dalots m=0) Determine m (box culverts m=0)
En déduire hc=l/X Deduce hc=l/X

Arched culverts*. Passes. Arches (ABAC design charts 3, 4 and 5)

Determination of normal and critical water levels and the flow section.
To use these ABAC design charts, the dimensionless parameters must be calculated from the
characteristics of the chosen structure.
The shape of the arched culverts and passages has been approximated with a semicircle crowning a
semi-ellipse (see diagram No. 25). The error relative to the real cross-section is very small once the fill
factor exceeds 0.50.
P0: span of the arched culvert,
F: overall height of the culvert,
R= (different from the hydraulic radius)
Fill ratio τ =
The flattening coefficient of the pipe is defined by the relationship

= F – R (semi-minor axis of the ellipse) from which
- circular pipes: λ = 1
- arched culverts and passages: λ varies from 1.25 to 5
- semi-circular arches: we include λ = ∞
Diagram No. 25: arched culvert
λ λ
1.2 1.62 2.75 2.34 3.2 1.04 1.86 1.72

1.3 1.55 2.64 2.26 3.3 1.03 1.85 1.71
1.4 1.49 2.55 2.20 3.4 1.02 1.83 1.70
1.5 1.44 2.46 2.14 3.5 1.01 1.82 1.69
1.6 1.39 2.39 2.09 3.6 1.00 1.80 1.68
1.7 1.35 2.33 2.05 3.7 0.99 1.79 1.67
1.8 1.32 2.27 2.01 3.8 0.99 1.78 1.67
1.9 1.28 2.22 1.98 3.9 0.98 1.77 1.66
2.0 1.25 2.18 1.95 4.0 0.97 1.76 1.65
2.1 1.23 2.14 1.92 4.1 0.96 1.75 1.64
2.2 1.20 2.10 1.89 4.2 0.96 1.74 1.64
2.3 1.18 2.07 1.87 4.3 0.95 1.73 1.63
2.4 1.16 2.04 1.85 4.4 0.94 1.72 1.62
2.5 1.14 2.01 1.83 4.5 0.94 1.71 1.62
2.6 1.12 1.98 1.81 4.6 0.93 1.71 1.61
2.7 1.10 1.96 1.79 4.7 0.93 1.70 1.61
2.8 1.09 1.94 1.78 4.8 0.92 1.69 1.60
2.9 1.08 1.92 1.76 4.9 0.92 1.68 1.60
3.0 1.07 1.90 1.75 5.0 0.91 1.68 1.59
3.1 1.05 1.88 1.74

Table No. 21: interpolation elements for ABAC design charts 3, 4 and 5 for τ = 0.75

ABAC design chart No. 5: determination of yn (normal

water level)
Calculate ; τn is read off from ABAC design
chart No. 5
yn = τn x F
Remarks:
• the oblique straight line indicates the practical limit of
the fill ratio in fluvial régime (). Any increase in flow
beyond the value corresponding g to et risks fully
loading the structure,
• where the flattening coefficient of the pipe does not
appear in the ABAC, table No. 21 gives, pour τ = 0.75,
the elements for interpolation. Draw the curve
corresponding to the closest to that of the pipe in the
region of the value τn = 0.75,
• if τn < 0.5: try a smaller structure.
ABAC design chart No. 5: determination of the normal

water level (yn) ABAC design chart No. 3: determination of yc (critical
water level) The procedure is the same as for ABAC
No. 5; here we calculate the value of:
; from which τc and yc =τc x F.
Q en m3/s : débit du projet Q in m3/s: project flow

R en m : demi-portée R in m : half span
p en m/m : pente de l'ouvrage p in m/m: slope of the structure
K : coef de Manning Stricler K: Manning Stricler coefficient
Buses métalliques Metal culverts
Buses béton Concrete culverts
ABAC design chart No. 3: determination of the critical water

level (yc)

ABAC design chart No. 4: determination of the wetted section (Sm).
S en m2 S in m2
R en m R in m
ABAC design chart No. 4: determination of S (flow cross-section) for the water level (or, more simply,
for the fill ratio) determined previously.
From this we deduce the average speed for this level
V=

Cylindrical pipes (ABAC design charts 6 to 11)

ABAC design charts 6, 7 and 8 relate to concrete pipes.
ABAC design charts 9, 10 and 11 relate to cylindrical metal pipes.
These ABAC design charts apply where the flow downstream of the hydraulic structure does not
provoke a downstream reaction (see diagram No. 26)
Method of use:
For the chosen structure, calculate the ratio
ou = where
Compare this ratio with the index numbers shown on the two curves (full and dashed) corresponding
to each diameter.
There are three possible cases:
1. upstream index (full line curve).
The upstream water level is read off from the full curve.
2. upstream index < downstream index (dashed curve).
Find a curve linearly interpolated between the two curves of the ABAC to determine the upstream H.
3. > downstream index.
These ABAC design charts are unusable. Proceed as for arched culverts and box culverts.
Diagram No. 26: application of ABAC design charts 6 to 11 for a flow downstream of the hydraulic structure not creating a
downstream reaction
Remark:
• the horizontal dotted lines on ABAC design charts 6 to 11 indicate, for each curve, the precision
limits not to be exceeded. These limits are essentially located at the upstream water level equal to
two diameters (HAM = 2 ∅),
• the flow must be free at the exit from the pipe (Hdownstream < ∅),
• These ABAC design charts correspond to simple head structures. The use of a profiled upstream
head, an assumption different from that of the ABAC design charts, is possible: refer to the
methodology explained for arched culverts and box culverts.

ABAC design chart No. 6: concrete pipes from 0.40 to 1.50 m in diameter. Upstream check.
Mètres Meters
Courbe "amont" "Upstream" curve
Courbe "aval" "Downstream" curve
Q en L/sec. Q in L/sec.

Mètres Meters
Extension du graphe inférieur Extension of the lower graph

Mètres Meters

Mètres Meters
Extension du graphe inférieur Extension of lower graph
Q en L/sec. Q in m3/sec.

4.2.3 - Constructional arrangements and protection of hydraulic structures
Setting
A structure is set, as a priority, in the bed of a water course. If this is not possible (sinuous course,
pronounced oblique angle), attention must be given to:
• maintenance of a good hydraulic flow upstream and downstream of the structure (diversion of the
bed may prove necessary),
• protection of bends in the new bed and of the filled parts of the old bed.
If the flow is permanent, the project must also take account of the provision of a temporary deviation of
the water course or, where appropriate, construction of the structure alongside the existing bed
(see diagram No. 27).
The setting of the structure is linked with the gradient of the bed and the possible constraints relating
to the level of the longitudinal elevation of the road.
If the gradient of the bed is low (0.5 % to 6 %) and there are no constraints relating to the level of the
longitudinal elevation of the road, the structure shall be set in line with the longitudinal elevation of the
water course (bottom at about -0.20 m relative to this theoretical longitudinal elevation).
In all scenarios, the setting of the structure should take account of the ichthyofauna.
If the gradient of the bed is too steep, other types of solution are possible:
• make arrangements to slow the water (energy dissipaters) while keeping to the longitudinal elevation
of the bed (see diagram No. 28); This solution, only usable in box culverts, may require anchoring of
the structure (see diagram No. 29),
• set the structure with a lower gradient than that of the water course with its outlet part way up the
embankment or its inlet excavated below normal ground level (see diagram No. 30).
Diagram No. 27: diversion of the bed to reduce the obliqueness of the Diagram No. 29: anchoring of the structure
crossing
Diagram No. 28: energy dissipating arrangements Diagram No. 30: solutions for reducing the gradient in the
absence of ichthyofauna
Ecoulement d'origine Original flow
Solution économique Economical solution
A éviter To be avoided
Protections Protections
Voie franchie Road crossed
Ancrage sur assise en béton Anchored on concrete base
Dispositifs dissipateurs d'energie Energy dissipaters
Dalots uniquement Box culverts only
Radier en escalier Stepped raft
Radier muni de plots Raft with blocks

The choice between these solutions depends on the flow and the nature of the terrain.
If the gradient is small or zero, the structure shall be set with the maximum gradient
permitted by deepening of the bed by washing out (see diagram No. 31).
If the longitudinal elevation of the road requires deepening of the structure, we may
consider:
• low structures: arched culverts or box culverts *,
• several structures of smaller capacity (less satisfactory solution hydraulically),
• deepening of the bed if downstream dredging will permit evacuation of the water,
• in extreme cases, a siphon or an aqueduct after studying all other solutions, including an adaptation
of the longitudinal elevation of the infrastructure.
Protections
These are, essentially, those placed at the inlet and outlet of the structure.
The upstream end is protected by a cutoff and a head wall, the embankment by wing walls and a head
wall up to the previously determined upstream water level (taking account of exceptional flood levels).
The downstream end is also protected by a cutoff and a head wall. Furthermore, the bed and banks
are to be protected, preferably by vegetation or, if required by a cladding or rip-rap where the water
speed at the outlet is such that there is risk of erosion (V> 2 to 4 m/s, depending on the ground), or
where there is an elbow in the water course downstream of the structure.
It is essential that the road or motorway embankment crossed by the hydraulic structure is protected
up to the project upstream water level or exceptional flood level.
Diagram No. 31: gradient too low
Approfondissement Deepening

4.2.4 - Dimensioning of a hydraulic structure for re-establishing natural flows - application example
Following the calculation of the flow from the natural catchment area, a project flow, Q(100), of
7.40 m3/s is retained for dimensioning of the hydraulic structure. The verification of the flow conditions
is also carried out for an exceptional flow equal to 1.5 x Q(100), i.e. a flow of 11.10 m3/s, with the
purpose of evaluating the impacts on the longevity of the infrastructure and the safety of adjacent
property owners and users. It is thus a question of determining the nature and size of the hydraulic
structure and the associated upstream water level (HAM) permitting re-establishment of the natural flow
through the embankment and the emplacement of the necessary protective measures, taking account
of the following elements:
Mapping data of the terrain in the proximity of the crossing:
Longitudinal elevation of the stream at the crossing point (see diagram No. 32)
Cross-section of the stream at the crossing point (see diagram No. 33):
The representative cross-section (diagram No. 33) of the Quievelon stream downstream of the
crossing can be represented as a trapezium (see diagram No. 34). In line with the nature of the walls
consisting of grassy earth, we took a roughness coefficient K = 25 (see table No. 18 appendix 4.2.1).
The estimated gradient of the banks is 1/1 (45 degrees), which gives m = cotg 45° = 1
The current gradient of the stream downstream of the crossing is 0.004 m/m or 0.4 %.
The permissible upstream level has been fixed at 179,75 NGF, which represents the overflow limit of
the low-level bed. The exceptionally permissible upstream level has been fixed at 182.00 NGF. This
level corresponds to the threshold of the closest dwellings and ensures that the roadway structure is
above water.
Diagram No. 32: longitudinal elevation of the stream at the level of the crossing point
Diagram No. 33: cross-section of the stream at the level - Diagram No. 34: representative cross-section of the stream
of the crossing point trapezium approximation
Largeur au droit de l'ouvrage Width at structure

Chaussée Roadway
Talus Slope
AMONT UPSTREAM
AVAL DOWNSTREAM
profil moyen des berges actuelles Mean profile of the existing banks
profil du lit de la rivière Profile of the river bed
pente moyenne Mean slope
Profil chaussée Roadway profile
Profil TN Profile of natural ground

Flow régime downstream of the hydraulic structure

The first task is to define the flow régime of the stream downstream of the hydraulic structure.
Determination of the normal water level hn (use of ABAC design chart No. 1)
Value of
where: Q = Q(100) = 7.4m3/s, K = 25 (roughness of the stream bed), p = 0.004 m/m (stream gradient
downstream of the crossing), l = 3.80 m (width at bottom of the ditch) and m = cotg 45° = 1 (slope of
walls)
From ABAC design chart No. 1, we read off: X = 3.4

The normal level is:
Example of the use of ABAC design chart No. 1
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
p en m/m p in m/m

Determination of the critical level hc (using ABAC design chart No. 2)

Value of
where: Q = Q(100) = 7.4m3/s, l = 3.80 m (width at bottom of the ditch) , m = cotg 45¡ = 1 and g
acceleration due to gravity = 9.81m/s2

The critical water level is:
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
g ~ 10m.s2 g ~ 10m.s2
Flow régime of the stream downstream of the hydraulic structure

The flow régime of the stream is determined by comparison of the normal (hn) and critical (hc) water
levels: hn = 1.12 > hc = 0.66 so the flow régime is fluvial.
Since the flow régime of the stream is fluvial, the hydraulic structure must be designed for fluvial
régime.

General characteristics of the hydraulic structure

A hydraulic structure must be defined such that its geometric characteristics, its installation and its
hydraulic operation ensure a fluvial régime in this structure while respecting the general conditions of
upstream level for the project flow, the exceptional flow and the free space.
Choice of hydraulic structure

From these data, it must be checked whether the flow conditions are satisfactory (fluvial régime, speed,
proportions between normal water level yn and the critical water level yc and upstream water level HAM).
If the chosen structure is not satisfactory, the calculation process must be repeated with different
characteristics for the structure.
In our case, the hydraulic structure chosen for an initial approach is a concrete box culvert 3 m wide
and 2 m high with a roughness coefficient K = 70 (by analogy with the existing structure downstream
from the project, see appendix 4.1.2). The choice was for a rectangular box culvert as this allows a
low water level for the magnitude of flow and meets the geotechnical constraints (foundation
conditions of the structure, height of embankment). To facilitate flow, we decided to place a head wall
and wing walls at each end of the structure.
Determination of the critical level yc (using ABAC design chart No. 2)

Value of
where: Q = Q(100) = 7.4m3/s, l = 3 m (width of box culvert), m = cotg 90° = 0 (vertical walls) and g
acceleration due to gravity = 9.81m/s2
The critical water level is:
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
g ~ 10m.s2 g ~ 10m.s2

Determination of the normal water level yn to give to the hydraulic structure

Since the structure must operate in fluvial régime, we shall take yn = 1.2 x yc (according to the
general rules, the normal level yn should be at least 20 % higher than the critical level yc)
From knowledge of the critical level: yc = 0.86 m, we obtain, for the normal level:
yn = 1.2 x 0.86 = 1.032 m
Flow régime in the hydraulic structure

The flow régime in the structure is determined by comparison of the normal (yn) and critical (yc) water
levels: yn = 1.032 m > yc = 0.86 m
Consequently, the structure operates in fluvial régime, which is consistent with the régime downstream
in the Quievelon stream.
Calculation of the gradient to be given to the hydraulic structure (using ABAC design
chart No. 1).
The normal level so
From ABAC design chart No. 1, we read off: N = 0.12

Since , we can obtain the value
of the gradient:
where Q = Q(100) = 7.4m3/s, l = 3.00 m (width of culvert) , m = cotg 90° = 0 (vertical walls), K = 70
(roughness of culvert) and N = 0.12 (obtained using ABAC design chart No. 1).

We can thus give the hydraulic structure a gradient of 0.0022 m/m.
avec where
Q en m3/s Q in m3/s
p en m/m p in m/m

Calculation of the speed of flow in the hydraulic structure

Situation:
• the flow régime in the stream is fluvial: hn downstream = 1.12 m,
• the flow régime in the structure is fluvial: yn =1.03 m.
The normal water level in the structure (yn) and the water level at the entry to the structure (ye) is
equal to the normal water level (hn) downstream in the Quievelon stream, i.e. 1.12 m (see diagram
No. 22). We have the case of a structure in fluvial régime with a downstream reaction.
Calculation of the wetted section and the speed of flow in the hydraulic structure
The water line being at 1.12 m and the width of the box culvert: l = 3 m, we can calculate the wetted
section (Sm) in the structure:
Sm = hn downstream x l = 1.12 x 3 = 3.36 m2
We obtain the speed of flow in the structure:
where, Q = Q(100) = 7.4m3/s et Sm = 3.36 m2
This speed of 2.20 m/s is acceptable as it is well below 4 m/s and does not require the installation of
any special protection in the structure.
Calculation of the upstream water level (HAM ):

It must be ensured that the upstream water level (HAM) is acceptable with respect to the project
constraints.
We have a fluvial régime in the structure and in the stream with a downstream water level: hn
downstream in the stream higher than the normal water level: (yn) in the structure (case of a structure
in fluvial régime with a downstream reaction, see section 4.2.1).
The funneling head loss coefficient Ke is taken as equal to 0.5 (use of a classical head to the structure
with wing walls) from which:
The upstream altitude is 178.10 + 1.49 = 179.59 m.

The permissible level being 179.75 m NGF, setting the structure with a gradient of 0.22 % is
suitable.
Verification of the free space (TA):

The free space is measured from the water level to the upper generatrix of the structure. The water
level is calculated by considering this level to be equal to the mean of the upstream water level of the
structure: HAM = 1.49 m and the level at the entry to the structure: hn downstream = 1.12 m, which
gives 1.30 m.
The structure has an opening of 2 m; the free space (TA) is therefore 0.70 m.
The fill ratio is 0.65, which does not exceed the value of 0.75 (see section 1.1.2).
Verification of the hydraulic structure for an exceptional flow

For an exceptional flow equal to 1.5 x Q(100) = 11.10m3/s, the calculation procedure remains similar and
leads to the following results:
• Flow régime downstream of the hydraulic structure:
- normal water level hn: 1.41 m
- critical water level hn: 0.93 m
hn = 1.41 > hc = 0.93 so the flow régime is fluvial in the stream

• Flow régime in the hydraulic structure:

- normal water level hn: 1.40 m
- critical water level hn: 1.13 m
yn = 1.40 > yc = 1.13 so the flow régime is fluvial in the structure
• Speed of flow in the hydraulic structure:
The normal water level hn downstream (1.41 m) being higher than the normal water level yn in the
structure (1.40 m), the water line in the structure will establish itself at the same level as the normal
water level hn downstream, which is 1.41 m
- wetted section Sm: 4.23 m2
- speed of water in the structure: 2.63 m/s
• Calculation of the upstream water level:
- funneling head loss: 0.53 m
- upstream water level (HAM): 180.04
The exceptionally permissible upstream level, fixed at 182.00 NGF, is respected. The level
(HAM=180.04 m) reached corresponds to a slight overflow of the stream, which remains acceptable.
• free space:
- free space: 0.23 m
- fill ratio: 0.83
The fill ratio exceeds the recommended value of 0.75. To comply with this value, a box culvert 2.30
m high will have to be installed.
Diagrammatic representation of the water line in the crossing

From the results of the calculations carried out, we can produce a diagrammatic representation of the
water line for this re-establishment (see diagram No. 35).

4.2.5 - Surface drainage of the platform - calculation method

The purpose of the systems is to collect and evacuate water from a linear "geometric" impluvium* of
which the surface area can be approximated by S = L x l (see diagram No. 36). They are calculated
for a recurrence interval T = 10 years.
Having organized the systems to comply with the structural constraints (high points, low points,
discharge point, change of banking…), the minimum points of calculation are known (break in slope,
discharge to another system from a transverse structure...). The general approach to dimensioning
thus consists in verifying that the flow to be evacuated is less than or equal to the flow capability of the
chosen structure along the whole length of flow.
Flow capability* of the structure (at saturation) symbol Qc:

The structure is saturated when it runs full bore. The MANNING STRICKLER equation gives the full bore
flow capability, Qc, of the structure:
Qc = 1000.K.rh2/3 .p.1/2 .Sm
Qc = full bore flow capability in l /s
K = roughness coefficient* (see table No. 18)
Rh = hydraulic radius in m where
Sm = wetted section in m 2
p = gradient in m/m
V = full bore flow speed in m/s
where Qc (at saturation)

V=
Sm
Diagram No. 35: longitudinal section of the hydraulic structure
Largeur au droit de l'ouvrage Width at structure

Chaussée de 7 m Roadway 7m wide
AMONT UPSTREAM
AVAL DOWNSTREAM
Talus Bank
Ligne d'eau pour Waterline for

Calculation of flow to be evacuated (symbol Qev):

The flow to be evacuated is obtained by the rational method:
Qev is expressed in l/s

C = weighted run-off coefficient of the impluvium
C = 1 for the carriage ways and surfaced/clad parts
C = 0.8 for verges in treated, stabilized gravel
C = 0.5 for verges in untreated, stabilized gravel
C = 0.7 for grassed soil receiving water from the roadway
C = 0.3 for soil not receiving water from the roadway and for embankments outside the Mediterranean region.
C = 0.5 for soil not receiving water from the roadway and for embankments in the Mediterranean region.
At the Outline Preliminary Project (APS) stage, the embankments can be neglected in most cases. We
can also take C = 1 for the whole impluvium to pre-dimension the systems.
i = average intensity of the ten-year rainfall in mm/h, corresponding to the concentration time at the point of calculation and
given by the MONTANA formula:
-b
i = a x tc (tc in minutes).
A = area of the impluvium in ha (A = length of project x width)
At a given point of calculation, we observe that, once the structure is chosen, the only unknown is the
intensity i; which is a function of the concentration time tc at this point. The concentration time in
minutes tc is calculated as follows:
where - t1 = time required for the water from the platform to reach the collecting structure.
In practice, t1 is taken as equal to 3 minutes:
- t2 = time in minutes taken for the flow in the structure to cover a length L
L = length of the structure in m,

V = projected full bore speed of the structure in m/s, at the point of calculation, 0.85 is a coefficient of
reduction of V to take account of unequal filling of the structure between the origin of the system and
the point of saturation.
Comparison of Qev and Qc

The procedure consists in first choosing a structure up to a certain length and calculating whether its
characteristics are sufficient, insufficient or excessive for the evacuation of the arriving flow. In the
latter two cases, a structure with a larger or smaller capacity should be proposed:
• if Qev > Qc, the capacity of the selected structure is insufficient: the length L of the structure should
be reduced and a structure of larger capacity should be inserted between this structure and the outfall,
• if Qev = Qc, the structure is suitable, the flow to be evacuated being equal to the flow capability of the
structure,
• if Qev < Qc, the structure has an excessive capacity. For reasons of economy, it is appropriate to
assess whether the structure can be reduced by one or more classes.

Diagram No. 36: impluvium
Chaussée Roadway
point de calcul Design point

4.2.6 - Surface drainage of the platform - hydraulic calculations - application examples
Gully at cutting bank foot

The characteristics of the project are as follows (see diagram No. 37):
"roof" cross-section:
- cutting 200 m long: L = 200 m
- width of platform: l = 13.50 m
- gradient of longitudinal elevation: p = 0.01 m/m
- weighted run-off coefficient of the platform:
- grassed gully 2 m wide and 0.25 m deep (with K = 15); this structure is imposed by the cross-section,
- I.D.F. curve of the region of study for T =10 years: i in mm/h and tc in minutes.
The first iteration for the structure at saturation leads to the following results:
1) calculation of the flow capability of the structure:
2) calculation of the flow to be evacuated:

•
where:
from which tc ≈ 13.66 minutes

•
•
where:
Qev (69 l/s) < Qc (92 l/s): the structure is suitable but is not saturated where it leaves the cutting.
Diagram No. 37: gully at cutting bank foot
TPC revêtu Paved median

Chaussée Roadway
Accotement engazonné Grass-verge
Ouvrage engazonné Grass-covered structure

If we wish to gain "more precise" knowledge of the flow at the end of the cutting area, a second
iteration is required, taking as input parameter Qc = Qev = 69 l/s.
We require to know the speed of the water in the structure for a flow of 69 l/s, using the MANNING
STRICKLER formula. The results are obtained by constructing the graphs 1 and 2 (or by using a
computer program). It is also interesting to know the level of water generated in the structure (general
principle for assessing whether the characteristics of the structure can be reduced).
For a grassed gully 2 m wide, 0.25 m deep, gradient 1 %, we have:
Graph No. 1: flow / level ABAC design chart
Graph No. 2: flow / speed ABAC design chart
Thus, for a flow of 69 l/s, we obtain a water level of 22.50 cm with a speed of 0.343 m/s in the gully.
From this, we can calculate a new value of tc.
• where which gives tc ≈ 14.43 minutes
•
• Qev =2.78 x 89 x 103 x 0.27 = 67 l/s
In conclusion, the ten-year peak flow at the end of the half platform in cutting is 67 l/s.
Note: this iteration is given by way of a possible step; in our scenario, the difference in flow is
negligible. This procedure can prove interesting in other situations.
Graph No. 1: flow / level ABAC design chart of the gully
Graph No. 2: flow / speed ABAC design chart of the gully
Débit en l/s Flow in l/s

Hauteur en m Height in m
Vitesse en m/s Velocity in m/s
Courbe Débit/Hauteur Curve of Flow against Height
Courbe Débit/Vitesse Curve of Flow against Velocity

Ditch at foot of embankment

The characteristics of the project are as follows: (see diagram No. 38)
"roof" cross-section:
- embankment 400 m long: L = 400 m
- width of platform: l = 14.00 m
- gradient of longitudinal elevation: p = 0.01 m/m
- weighted run-off coefficient of the platform: C = 0.88
- grassed, trapezoidal ditch, 1.5 m wide at the top, 0.5 m at the bottom and 0.5 m deep with roughness
coefficient K = 25
- I.D.F. curve of the region of study for T =10 years: i in mm/h and tc in minutes.
The first iteration for the structure at saturation leads to the following results:
1) calculation of the flow capability of the structure:
Qc = 1000.K.Rh2/3 .p.1/2 .Sm = 1000 x25 x 0.2612/3 0.011/2 x 0.5= 510 l/s
2) calculation of the flow to be evacuated:
• where:
tc » 10.69 minutes
•
• Qev =2.78 x 0.88 x 117 x 0.56
(A = 400 m x 14 m = 5600 m2 = 0.56 ha)
Qev = 160 l/s
Qev (160 l/s) < Qc (510 l/s): the structure is suitable but is not saturated where it leaves the
embankment.
If we wish to gain "more precise" knowledge of the flow at the end of the embanked section, we can,
as in the previous example, proceed to a second iteration, taking as input parameter
Qc = Qev = 160,l/s.
For a grassed, trapezoidal ditch, 1.5 m wide at the top, 0.5 m at the bottom and 0.5 m deep with a
gradient of 1 %: see graphs 3 and 4.
Thus, for a flow of 160 l/s, we obtain a water level of 27.5 cm with a speed of 0.75 m/s in the ditch.
From this, we can calculate a new value of tc.
• from which tc » 13.46 minutes
where V = 0.75 m/s

•
• Qev =2.78 x 0.88 x 104.1 x 0.56 = 143 l/s

In conclusion, the ten-year peak flow at the end of the half platform in embankment is 143 l/s.
Diagram No. 38: ditch at foot of embankment
TPC revêtu Paved median

Chaussée Roadway
Accotement engazonné Grass verge
Talus Slope
Fossé engazonné Grass-lined ditch

Graph no. 3: flow / level ABAC design chart for a trapezoidal ditch
Graph no. 4: flow / speed ABAC design chart for a trapezoidal ditch
Débit en l/s Flow in l/s
Hauteur en m Height in m
Vitesse en m/s Velocity in m/s
Courbe Débit/Hauteur Curve of Flow against Height
Courbe Débit/Vitesse Curve of Flow against Velocity

Succession of two structures

Considering the two previous examples placed end to end (the part in cutting upstream and followed
by the part below the embankment) (see diagram No. 39), the calculations can be carried out as
follows:
From the point of calculation P0 (high point of road impluvium) to point P1 (change of embanked side),
the section is in cutting (as in 1st calculation example with collection by a grassed gully over 200 m)
and we have the following results:
• Qev= 67 l/s,
• A = 0.27 ha,
• C = 0.89,
• tc1 = 14.43 minutes
From the point P1 up to the point of calculation P2, the section is embanked (2nd example with
collection by a grassed, trapezoidal ditch over 400 m).
The calculation data are as follows:
• Total area of impluvium (part in cutting + embanked part): 0.27 + 0.56 = 0.83 ha,
• weighted run-off coefficient:
• ditch at foot of embankment of which the flow/level and flow/speed laws are given by graphs 3 and 4.
To find the flow to be evacuated at point P2, the new concentration time at this point must be
calculated; it is equal to:
tc = tc1 + tc2
• tc1 is known and corresponds to the time of transfer between the high point haut of the road
impluvium up to point P1 to cover the 200 m of the part in cutting, i.e. 14.43 minutes
• tc2 corresponds to the time of transfer between P1 and P2 to cover the 400 m of the embanked part,
i.e:
where:
- V1 speed at start of ditch at point P1 for 67 l/s, => V1 = 0.60 m/s (value obtained by calculation or by
using graph No. 4),
- V2 speed at saturation at point P2 for 510 l/s, => V2 = 1.02 m/s.
We obtain an average speed:
Note: in our case, the average speed found is lower than 0.85 V. At the practical level, this calculation
procedure is accepted.
The concentration time tc2 is:
•
• tc ≈ 14.43 + 8.23 = 22.66 minutes

• i10 = 392 x 22.66-0.51 = 79.8 mm / h
• Qev =2.78 x 0.88 x 79.8 x 0.83 = 162 l/s
Qev (162 l/s) < Qc (510 l/s): the structure is suitable but is not saturated where it leaves the
embankment.
Making a second iteration using graph 4, we obtain, for a flow of 162 l/s a speed of 0.76 m/s.
from which an average speed: , which gives:
tχ » 14.43 + 9.80 = 24.23 minutes

•
• Qev =2.78 x 0.88 x 77.1 x 0.83 = 156 l/s
In conclusion, the ten-year peak flow at the end of the half platform in embankment is 156 l/s.
Note: in our case, the ditch used has a very large evacuation capacity (510 l/s) relative to the inflow
(156 l/s); however, as it is a conventional ditch, this structure is retained.
Diagram No. 39: succession of two structures
point haut BVR High point of road catchments area

point de transition déblai/remblai Cut/fill transition point
point de rejet Discharge point
partie en déblai sur 200 m Cut section 200 m long
partie en remblai sur 400 m Fill section 400 m long
Utilisation d'une cunette enherbée pente 1% Use a grass-lined channel at a 1% fall
Utilisation d'une fossé trapézoïdal enherbé pente 1% Use a grass-lined trapezoidal ditch

Association of several systems (in the neighborhood of a low point, for example)
The low point at the level of the crossing is the result of two interchange slip roads. Branch 1 has the
characteristics mentioned in the preceding example, branch 2 has a larger impluvium than branch 1
and branches 3 and 4 are the symmetrical slip roads of the interchange (see diagram No. 40 ).
The characteristics of the branches studied separately are as follows:
Branche = Branch
Knowledge of the input flow to the basin requires summation of the contributions from the four
branches: this is not a simple sum of the separate contributions, which would give a flow of 503 l/s.
In fact, the rational method being based on the longest transit time where there is an association of
catchment areas, the concentration time to be considered in our case is the longest concentration
time, i.e. tc = 34.50 minutes (branch No. 2).
The input parameters to the rational formula become:
weighted C = 0.91
i10 = 64.4 mm/h
A = 2.49 ha (sum of impluvia)
• Qev =2.78 x 0.91 x 64.4 x 2.49 ≈ 406 l/s (flow less than the sum of elementary contributions)
In conclusion, the ten-year aggregate peak flow is 406 l/s.
Note: in some rare cases, the resultant flow can be less than the contribution of one branch alone; the
highest contribution should be retained in such cases.
Diagram No. 40: symmetrical interchange slip roads
Bassin Basin
Branche Branch
Traversée Crossing

4.3 - Glossary
Roadway water management: All constructional measures contributing to the clearance of the
road in three respects, namely:
- the collection and evacuation of surface water,
- the drainage of internal water (ground drainage),
- the re-establishment of natural flows.
Sedimentation: Accumulation of earth, sand or other sediment carried by water courses or
the sea.
Alluvium, sediment.
Catchment area: Area of a form such that any water falling within it flows to a single point:
the discharge point of the catchment area.
Retaining basin: Generic term for a structure installed in series or parallel with a system for
the temporary storage of run-off water.
Other terms used: buffer, storage, holding etc. basin/tank.
Verge: Unsurfaced strip either side of a road
Containment ditch: Linear storage structure intended to contain accidental pollution.
Ridge gutter: Small linear constructional device placed at the top of an embankment,
generally made of concrete or bituminous concrete serving to guide a runoff
water along the side of the road to a downdrain.
Arched culvert: Concrete or metallic hydraulic structure for the re-establishment of natural
flows and characterized by its span and its peak height.
Pipe: Family of structures for the collection and longitudinal transport of run-off
water from the road (see Acsare).
Funneling coefficient Ke: Parameter characterizing the transition into the hydraulic structure and
characterizing head loss at the upstream end of the structure.
Roughness or
Manning Strickler coefficient: Coefficient indicating the impediment to flow presented by a hydraulic
structure.
Run-off coefficient: Theoretical fraction of the gross rainfall that appears as run-off
.
As a first approximation, it is the ratio of the sealed surface area to the total
area of a catchment area (sealing coefficient).
Water course: No technical criterion. The existence of a water course is recognized only if
the following 3 conditions are satisfied:
- persistent natural character of the bed,
- a certain flow that depends on the local climatic conditions without
necessarily being permanent,
- normal route for run-off water.
Flood: Phenomenon characterized by a more or less abrupt rise in the level of a
water course with an increase in flow to a maximum level. This
phenomenon can be accompanied by an overflow of the low-water bed.
Floods are part of the régime of a water course. Floods are also
characterized by their recurrence interval. The hundred-year flood has a
recurrence interval of 100 years.
Gully: Shallow, grassed or clad ditch with a gentle shape in the interests of user
safety.
Box culvert: Hydraulic structure of rectangular section, prefabricated or cast in place and
with a high capacity.
Flow capability: Maximum flow through a structure running full bore.

Project flow: Flow value used for the dimensioning of hydraulic structures. In general,
hundred-year flows are used for hydraulic structures re-establishing natural
flows and ten-year flows for platform surface drainage.
Free surface flow: Term referring to a flow with the upper surface in contact with the air.
Closed conduit flow: As opposed to free surface flow, this term refers to, for example, full bore
flow in a pipe, i.e. with no remaining air space.
Edge effect: Lateral movement of water in the ground at the edge of the surfaced part of
the road.
Outfall: In general, point of discharge of water outside the road footprint. Also refers
to the downstream end of a drainage structure.
Ditch: Simple, longitudinal hydraulic structure for the collection of run-off water
dug in the ground beyond the shoulder, characterized by its cross-section
and gradient.
Gabion: Structural element consisting of a metal mesh basket filled with pebbles or
small pieces of rock and used to stabilize loose ground and the banks of
water courses.
Geomembrane: Product suitable for civil engineering, thin flexible, continuous and
impervious to liquids, even under working loads.
Upstream water level: HAM, height of the waterline at the entry to a hydraulic structure.
Downstream water level: HAV, height of the waterline immediately downstream of a hydraulic
structure. Its value depends on
the régime downstream of the structure.
(see 4.2.1 On the theory of flows).
Critical water level: Theoretical value determined from an ABAC design chart to define the flow
régime (fluvial, torrential or critical).
Normal water level: as above.
Hydraulics: Study of the flow of liquids and of water in particular.
Hydrogeomorphology: Scientific discipline consisting in the detailed study of the morphologie of
alluvial planes and identifying on the ground the physical limits associated
with the various ranges of floods that have formed them.
Hydrogeology: Scientific discipline that concerns itself with the movements of ground water
and the behavior of surface water.
Hydrology: Scientific discipline that concerns itself with the water cycle.
Aquaplaning: Loss of road adhesion due to the intrusion of a thin layer of water between
the tire and the road surface.
Impluvium: Delimited area receiving rainfall (sometimes synonymous with catchment
area).
Water meadow: Rich, wet ground – often at the end of a backwater.
Platform: In the geometric sense, road surface, including roadways and shoulders.
Permeability: Ease with which the ground (or other material) allows the passage of a fluid.
Wetted perimeter: In a flow section, length of contact between the water and the wall of the
structure.
Recurrence interval: Average time interval between two occurrences of a specific event. Symbol
T, it is the inverse of frequency.
Daily rainfall: Uncentered rainfall measured from 06:00 (UTC) on day D to 06:00 (UTC)
on day D+1.
Rain gage: Apparatus for recording rainfall. It yields data from which, in particular,
intensity-duration rainfall curves can be obtained for various frequencies.
End point: Point defined in an appropriate document beyond which an activity must not
continue without the agreement of an organ or a designated authority.
Bearing capacity: Ability of ground, prepared or not, to withstand loads without deformation
beyond a required limit.
Radier (rd): French term for the bottom (floor/bed) of a hydraulic structure.
Hydraulic radius: Ratio of the wetted area to the wetted perimeter.
Critical régime: Theoretical boundary régime between fluvial and torrential (Froude number
= 1).
Fluvial régime: Free surface flow with a Froude number less than 1 (a perturbation can
propagate against the current). In fluvial régime, a head loss leads to a fall
in the waterline.
Torrential régime: Free surface flow with a Froude number greater than 1 (a perturbation
cannot propagate against the current). In torrential régime, a head loss
leads to a rise in the waterline.
Hydraulic jump (or Jump): Rise in the waterline due to a change from torrential to fluvial régime.
Wetted section: Cross-sectional area of a structure occupied by the flow.
Substratum: Rock underlying and more or less masked by surface deposits.
Fill ratio: Ratio between the water level and the nominal water level or the nominal
diameter of a hydraulic structure.
Concentration time: Time taken by water to cover the distance between the point furthest from
an outfall and the outfall.
Talweg: Line joining the lowest points of a valley (valley line).
Free space: Free height between the waterline and the high point of a conduit-like
hydraulic structure.

4.4 - Abbreviations and symbols
Abbreviations (French)
AEP: Adduction d’Eau Potable [drinking water supply]
APS: Avant Projet Sommaire [Outline Preliminary Project]
AR: Assainissement Routier [roadway water management]
BAU: Bande d’Arrêt d’Urgence [emergency lane]
BE: Bureau d’Etudes [design office, consultancy]
BV, BVR, BVN: Bassin Versant, Bassin Versant Routier, Bassin Versant Naturel [catchment area,
road catchment area (impluvium), natural catchment area]
CE: Cours d’Eau [water course]
CETE: Centre d’Etudes Techniques de l’Equipement [Technical Engineering Centers for
Infrastructure]
DIREN: Direction Régionale de l’Environnement [regional environmental directorate]
DDAF: Direction Départementale de l’Agriculture et de la Forêt [district agricultural and
forestry directorate]
DLE: Dossier Loi sur l’Eau [water law dossier]
DUP: Déclaration d’Utilité Publique [declaration of public utility]
EN: Écoulement Naturel [natural flow]
GNT: Grave Non Traitée [untreated gravel]
MISE: Mission Inter-service de l’Eau [inter-district water mission]
MO: Maître d’Ouvrage [project owner]
NGF: Nivellement Général de la France [French national survey / national height datum]
OA: Ouvrage d’Art [civil engineering structure]
OH: Ouvrage Hydraulique [hydraulic structure]
PDC: Perte de Charge [head loss]
PE: Police de l’Eau [water police]
PF: Plate-forme [platform]
PL: Profil en Long [longitudinal elevation]
PIPO: Passage Inférieur à Portique Ouvert [open-ended underpass]
PPRN: Plan de Prévention des Risques Naturels [natural risk prevention plan]
PT: Profil en Travers [transverse elevation/section]
PLU: Plan Local d’Urbanisme [local town plan]
RE: Ressource en Eau [water resources]
SAGE: Schéma d’Aménagement et de Gestion des Eaux [water development and
management scheme]
TPC: Terre-Plein Central [median]
Symbols
A: area of catchment area
a et b: Rainfall or Montana coefficients
α et β: Weighting coefficients in the transition formula
b’: Regional coefficient for the calculation of Q100

C(T): Run-off coefficient for recurrence interval T

F: Height, vertical axis
f.e: Fil d’eau, channel
g: Acceleration due to gravity m/s²
HAM: Upstream water level
hC: Critical water level outside structure
hn: Normal water level outside structure
hr: Fill level
i(T): Rainfall intensity for recurrence interval T
I.D.F: Intensity Duration Frequency curve
K: Roughness coefficient* or Manning Strickler coefficient
Ke: Funneling coefficient*
L: Length of longest hydraulic path
m: Value of cotg ø (ABAC design charts 1 and 2)
N: Input calculation parameter to ABAC design charts 1 and 2
λ: Flatness coefficient of an arched culvert
p: Gradient, slope
P0, P10, P100: Daily rainfall for indicated recurrence intervals
Po: Span of an arched culvert
Pm: Wetted perimeter
Qc: Flow capability
Qev: Flow to be evacuated
Q10: Ten-year flow
Q100: Hundred-year flow
Qex: Exceptional flow
QMNA5: Average monthly dry season flow with a recurrence interval of 5 years
QP: Project flow
R: Regional coefficient in the Crupedix formula
Rd: Radier [bottom/floor of hydraulic structure]
Rh: Hydraulic radius
S: surface area of catchment area
S, SEM: Section of ac structure – Wetted section
T: Recurrence interval
TA: Free space
TN: Natural terrain
τ: Fill ratio
tc: Concentration time
Ve: Speed of flow
X: Index (calculation of hn and hc ABAC design charts 1 and 2)
yc : Critical water level in hydraulic structure
ye: Water level at entry to hydraulic structure
yn: Normal water level in hydraulic structure

4.5 - Table summarizing principle formulae

Formulae Designation
Fundamental formula of hydraulics
Manning Strickler formula
Bernoulli's equation
Rational formula
Montana formula
Crupedix formula
Empirical formulae
for the calculation of concentration time
Passini
Ventura

Speeds method

4.6 - Bibliography (non-exhaustive list)
Technical documents:
[1] M. Larinier. Facteurs biologiques à prendre en compte dans la conception des ouvrages de
franchissement [biological factors to be taken into account in the design of crossing structures],
Bulletin Français de la Pêche et de la pisciculture [French bulletin of fishing and pisciculture] (BFPP) –
1992 – vol 65 – No. 326-327.
[2] C. Gosset, M. Larinier, J.P. Porcher, F. Travade. "Passes à poissons: expertise, conception des
ouvrages de franchissement [Fish passes: expertise, design of crossing structures]" (compilation)–
available from Conseil Supérieur de la Pêche, 134, avenue de Malakoff, Paris.
[3] Guide L’eau et la route [Guide to water and roads] - Sétra - 1994 to 1999. Volume 1: problems of
aquatic environments, volume 2: elaborating the project, volume 3: management of the road, volume
4: Impacts on aquatic environments, volume 5: laws and regulations on water resources, volume 6:
accidental pollution on large infrastructures, volume 7: arrangements for the treatment of rainwater.
[4] CCTG - ouvrages d’assainissement [water management structures] - leaflet 70. Title I: réseaux
[systems] – title II: ouvrages de recueil, de restitution et de stockage des eaux pluviales [structures for
the collection, return and storage of rainwater] – November 2003.
[5] Réhabilitation des voies rapides urbaines: thème assainissement [Rehabilitation of urban freeways:
topic water management] – Sétra technical guide – 2001-
Ref. D 0025
[6] Traitement des obstacles latéraux [Treatment of lateral obstacles] – Sétra technical guide – 2002 –
Ref. E0233
[7] Aide au Choix des Solutions d’Assainissement et de drainage des Routes Existantes (ACSARE)
[Selection aid for solutions for the improvement and drainage of existing roads] - Sétra technical guide
– 1993 – Ref. D9232
[8] Buses métalliques: recommandations et règles de l’art [Metal culverts: recommendations and
engineering rules] – Guide technique Sétra/LCPC technical guide – September 2001,– Ref. F8105
[9] Nomenclature de la loi sur l’eau: application aux infrastructures routières [Nomenclature of the
water law: application to road infrastructures] – Sétra guide – June 2004,– Ref. 0412
[10] B. Lachat. Protection des berges de cours d’eau en techniques végétales [Protection of the banks
of water courses using vegetation techniques] – Ministry of the Environment Editions – 1994.
[11] L’entretien courant de l’assainissement de la route [Running maintenance of road surface
drainage]. Sétra practical guide – 1998 - Ref. D9841
[12] Drainage routier [Road drainage] – Sétra technical guide – 2006,– Ref. 0605
[13] Traitement de la pollution routière [Treatment of road pollution] – Sétra technical guide – to be
published shortly.
Regulatory texts:
Law No. 92-3 of January 3, 1992 on water (included under title I of book II of the Code of the
Environment) and its implementation orders.
Order No. 93-742 of March 29, 1993 regarding the authorization and declaration procedures provided
by the article of the law No. 92-3 of January 3, 1992 on water.
Circular No. 94-56 of May 5, 1994 defining the procedures for drawing up, instruction and approval of
investment operations in the unassigned national road network.
Roads Directorate Circular No. 18 581 of December 22, 1992 on road quality – available from Sétra –
Ref. A 9353.
For information
Technical instruction regarding drainage systems in agglomerations – interministerial circular
77.284/INT of June 22, 1977 replaced by "la ville et son assainissement [the town and its drainage]"
from Certu – June 2003.

Ouvrages routiers et inondations: « des idées pour mieux gérer les écoulements dans les petits
bassins versants » [Road structures and floods: "ideas for the better management of flows in small
catchment areas"] – Sétra information note No. 56,– économie environnement conception [economy
environment design] – June 1998 (available for download from the Sétra Web-site).

This technical guide on roadway water management
proposes a methodical approach to the technical design of
structures to accommodate natural flows, for surface drainage
of the platform and for internal ground drainage.
This guide is intended for project owners and main
contractors and for design offices and consultants concerned
in the design of water management structures for new road
projects and in rehabilitation studies for existing roads.
The Sétra belongs

This document is available and can be downloaded from the Sétra Web-site: to the scientific and
technical network
http://www.setra.equipement.gouv.fr of the French Public
Works Ministry (RST)
The Sétra authorization is required for reproduction of this document (all or even part)
© 2007 Sétra - Reference: 0744A - ISRN: EQ-SETRA--07-ED41--FR+ENG

US 0632A Roadway Water Management

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

US 0632A Roadway Water Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

October 2006

Translate August 2007

Roadway water management

The Sétra supports the public owner

The Sétra, producer of the state of the art

The Sétra, a work in partnership

Roadway water management

This document is the translation of the work "Assainissement

Editing and layout were carried out by:

On reading the guide

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 4 – September 2007

2 - Sequence of studies ........................................................................................... 29

3 - Study quality approach .................................................................................... 36

3.2.2 - Progression of studies .....................................................................................41

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 6 – September 2007

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 7 – September 2007

1 - Technical design of structures

1.1 - Re-establishment of natural flows

Initially the water concentration point was downstream of point A

Diagram No.1: displacement of the point of concentration of run-off

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 8 – September 2007

1.1.1 - General principles

Choice of the recurrence interval (T)

Free space (TA) of the hydraulic structure

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 9 – September 2007

Diagram No. 2: free space of the hydraulic structure

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 10 – September 2007

Impact of the hydraulic structure

Free movement of the ichthyofauna

Location of the hydraulic structure

Evaluation of the project flow and the exceptional flow

1.1.2 - Determination of the project flow

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 11 – September 2007

tc: concentration time* tc in minutes

Run-off coefficient, C10

Variability of the run-off coefficient*

P0 in mm and P10 = the 10-year daily rainfall in mm

Run-off coefficient CT for a recurrence interval, T > 10 years

P(T) = daily rainfall of the recurrence interval, T

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 12 – September 2007

Vegetation Morphology Gradient % Sandy Alluvial terrain Clayey terrain

almost flat p<5 0,10 0,30 0,40

almost flat p<5 0,10 0,30 0,40

almost flat p<5 0,30 0,50 0,60

Table No. 1: run-off coefficient for T = 10 years

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 13 – September 2007

Determination of the concentration time*, tc, for T = 10 years

Diagram No. 3: run-off in a surface layer Diagram No. 4: concentrated run-off

Table No. 2: evaluation of the speed of run-off in a surface water layer

Speed in 1.2 1.8 3.3 4.7

Table No. 3: evaluation of the speed of concentrated water run-off

Determination of the concentration time* for a recurrence interval > 10 years

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 14 – September 2007

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 15 – September 2007

Choice of the parameter R

Evaluation of the flow, QT, of recurrence interval*, T

where Δ Q = Q100 – Q10 y = (-ln (-ln (1- 1 )))

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 16 – September 2007

Mediterranean Rational Rational Transition Crupedix

Table No. 4: ranges of applicability for each of the three formulae

Collection « Les outils » – Sétra – 17 – September 2007

1.1.3 - Design of hydraulic structures

Factors influencing the choice of hydraulic structures

Protection of hydraulic structures (see appendix 4.2.3)