1

Global
Warming Elninyo Effect


1
1.1
1.2
1.3
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
3
3.1
3.2
3.2.1

3.2.2 Rational Method

3.3
3.4
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.5
3.6
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
5
5.1

5
5
5
15
16
16
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
19
19
20
22
23
23
24
27
31
41
45
45
47
48
49
49
3

5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5 pump
7

50
52
52
52
53
53
53
55
56
58
59

72

1.1

(Gutter) (Grating Inlet)
(Pipe Inlet)
PVC HDPE (Catch
Inlet)
1.2
(Gutter)
(Grating Inlet) (Pipe Inlet) PVC HDPE
(Catch Inlet)

1.1

 1.2 Grates with formed concrete inlet chamber

1.3 Grates with cast-ironed inlet chamber

6

 1.4 Grates with welded-steel inlet chambers

1.5 Mortar Pipe Slab Type

 1.6 Mortar Pipe Slab Type

1.7 Mortar Pipe Slab Type

1.8 Mortar Pipe Slab Type

8

 1.9 Mortar Pipe Plank Beam

1.10 Mortar Pipe Plank Beam

1.11 Mortar Pipe Plank Beam

 1.12 PVC Box Beam

1.13 PVC Box Beam

1.14 PVC Box Beam

10

 1.15 HDPE I-Girders

1.16 Drain Pipe HDPE I-Girders

11

 1.17 Drain Pipe HDPE I-Girders

1.18 Drain Pipe PVC

1.19 Drain Pipe PVC

12

 1.20 Grating Inlet I-Girders

1.21 Grating Inlet I-Girders

13

 1.22 HDPE Box Girders

1.23 HDPE Box Girders

14

 1.24 HDPE Box Girders

1.25 HDPE Box Girders

1.3

15

2.1

Rainfall Intensity Rational Method

Spread (T)
0.8

Rational Method
2.2

Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC) www.hec.usace.army.mil
2.3

Lvey et al (1975)
16

 Sv
I
V

 =

2000 40
x
 .

= (ft)
= Railfall Intensity (in/hr)
= (mi/hr)

Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC) www.hec.usace.army.mil
2.4

2.5

17


Fin Parapet

2.6

2.7

Texas Department of Highways (Texas DOT)

Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification
AASHTO Model Drainage Manual

18

3.1



Rational Method Rainfall Intensity

3.1
3.2
3.2.1
(T)
0.8

(Return Period)

- 5
19

- 25
(Cross Drain)
- 50 1,000 ..

25

3.2.2 Rational Method

Rational Method
Q = 0.278CIA

= ../

= (
0.9)
= ./.
= .

I
A

./.
(Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curve) IDF
Curve

20

 3.2 -- (IDF Curve)

(Time of Concentration)

( ).
 = 0.93
( ).
.
484 (
)
 =
 

Wp =

n = Manning
Sx =
S =
21

T
C

=
=
( 0.9)

3.3

Manning Formula
Q=

0.376 1.67 0.5 2.67

Cr S T
n

n = Manning
Cr = Sx =

S =
T =

Deck Drain
Capacity



Qi = Cw Pd 1.5

Qi
P
Cw
d

=
=
=
=

../
(Inlet)
1.66
0.05

22

3.4

3.2 3.3


3.4.1

3.3

1 5
2 (Lc)

LC =

1312
1.44
S x T 2.11
0.67
(nCiWp )

n
Sx

= Manning
=

T =
Wp =

C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.
23

 3 2


P=

(CiW p ) 0.33 T 0.61

102.5S x

0.06

n 0.67

n
Sx

= Manning
=

T =
Wp =

C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.
P = (Inlet)

Slab Type Mortar Drainage Pipe
2x(0.1+0.2) = 0.6
Slap Type (DWG NO. ST-01)
3.4.2

3.4
24



1
IDF Curve
(WP n) 0.6
t0 = 0.93
(Ci ) 0.4 S 0.3

t g = 484

( SxT ) 2
CiW p

Wp =

n = Manning
Sx =
S =
T =
C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.

2

Qf =

0.56 1.67 0.5 2.67

Sx S T
n

n = Manning
Cr = Sx =

S =
T =

3 (Lo)

L0 = (

43,560Q f
CiW p

)E

25

Wp =

C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.
Qf = 2
E = 1.0

Lo LB

Lo LB 6
4
E = Eo (Rf )

Eo Rf 3.6 3.8
5
( 0 < E < 1)
LC = (

43,560Q f
CiW p

(Lc)

)E

6
7
8

26

3.4.3

3.5
1
2 LE1 LE 2
2
IDF Curve
(WP n) 0.6
t0 = 0.93
(Ci) 0.4 S 0.3
( SxT ) 2
t g = 484
CiW p

Wp =

n = Manning
Sx =
S =
T =
C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.
27

 tc= to+tg
3

S=

g 2 g1
x + g1
LB

4 (gutter flow)

Qf =

0.56 1.67 0.5 2.67

Sx S T
n

n = Manning
Cr = Sx =

S =
T =

5 (Lo)

L0 = (
L=(

43,560Q f
CiW p

43,560Q f E
CiW p

Wp =

C = (
0.9)
I
= ./.
Qf = 2
E = 1.0

Lo LB

Lo LB 6
28

 6
E (inlet)

E = Eo(Rf )

Eo

3.6 Eo
Rf V Inlet
Grating V
V=

1.12 0.67 0.5 0.67

Sx S T
n

29

 3.7 Inlet Grating

3.8 Rf

30

 7 6

8
9
10
3.5

(castiron pipe) (Plastic Pipe) HDPE

6 8
1/8

2.5
6-8 8% 2.5

31

 3.9

3.10
32

2 (Major losses)
(Minor losses)

1) (Major losses, Hf)

1.1) Darcy-Weisbach (! )
( 3.14) ("! )

"! = #

f
L
D
V
g

=
=
=
=
=

$ &
% 2'

(m)
(m)
(m/s)

3.11 (Federal Highway Administartion,2001)

33

1.2) Manning

1
V= R23 S 12
n

n
R
S0

= ( 3.7)
= (m)
= (m/m)
2

(m /Wetted perimeter)
, R
.=

2=

0
/ 41 %
0%

%
4

0.312
/ 4/
%



34

 3.1 Mannings Coefficients for Strom Drain (Federal Highway

Administartion,2001)

2) (Minor loss, Hm)

2

(V /2g)
(3.61)
2.1)
(3.61) V
35

(immediately upstream)

Hm
Kah
V
G

=
=
=
=

&
"5 = 678
2'

( 3.8)

3.2 head loss Coefficients (Federal Highway Administartion,2001)

2.2)
"! =
! $

Hf
Sf
L

=
= (friction slope)
=

S0 Sf

"!
2

! =
=9
;
$
0.312%. :

2.3) (Bend losses)

&
< = 0.0033() > ?
2'

36

 = (angle of curvature in degrees)

2.4)

3.12 (Federal Highway Administartion, 2001)

hc
he
Kc
Ke
V1
V2

=
=
=
=
=
=

& &4
@ = 6@ > ?
2' 2'
&4 &
B = 6B > ?
2' 2'

, (m)
, (m)
( 3.9)
(0.5Kc) ( 3.10)
(m/s)
(m/s)

37

 3.3 Kc (Federal Highway Administartion,2001)

3.4 Ke (Federal Highway Administartion,2001)

D2/D1
V1
2.5) (Inlet
and Access Hole Losses for EGL calculations)


38

"CD

&
= K> ?
2'

6 = 6 F G H  <

K =
K0 =
CD = (
)
Cd =
CQ =
Cp = benching
V0 =

K0 (3.68) (access
hole size) 3.16

3.13
(Federal Highway Administartion, 2001)

I
I .4N
6 = 0.1 9 ; (1 sin L) + 1.4 9 ;
sin L
%
%

=
b =
D0 =

39

 daho/D0 3.2 CD

F = 9

% 
;
%

CD 1

D0 =
Di =
Cd
daho/D0 3.2 3.2 Cd 1
Hydraulic grade line

P78Q .
G = 0.5 9
;
P

daho =
D0 =

(Relative Flow) ,CQ

3 1

R = (1 2 sin L) 91

CQ

Qi
Qo

2 .:N
;
+1
2

=
=
=
=

(plumping Flow)
(3.73)
Cp h > daho (3.73) Cp
(h < daho) Cp 1
40

 = 1 + 0.2 9

P78Q
;9
;
%
%

Cp = plunging Flow
h = plunging

CB
3.11
3.5 Correction for Benching (Federal Highway Administartion,2001)

3.6

Approach

(Upslope) Approach
Approach
(Downslope) Approach

downslope
(100% of the bridge deck drainage)
Sag Curve

Upslope Downslope Grate

Inlets Curb opening inlets slotted drain inlets
41


(embankment)





riprap
3.11 3.15

3.14

3.15 A-A
42

 3.16 CMP Drop Inlet

3.17 End Shoulder Slot Inlet with Plastic Pipe

43

 3.18 V-Ditch Drop Inlet

44

4.1

Slab
Bridge Mortar Drainage Pipe
2x(0.1+0.2) = 0.6

Slap Type
(DWG NO. ST-01)

4.1 Mortar Drainage Pipe DWG NO. ST-01

ST

4.2

4.3 Precast Mortar Drain Pipe

45


1) 10
2) 14
3) 0
4) 1.5 % ()
5) . .
6) 25
7) (Time of Concentration) 5

4.4 IDF

I = 210/25.4 = 8.27 /
C = 0.9 ()
N = 0.016
Sx = 0.015 /
Wp = 14/2/0.0254/12 = 22.97
T = 0.8 = 2.62

LC =

1312
1.44
S x T 2.11
0.67
(nCiWp )

Lc = 12.11 3.69
46

 Slab Type 10
/4 10/4 2.5 3.69

P=

(CiW p ) 0.33 T 0.61

102.5S x

0.06

n 0.67

P = 1.97 0.6
Mortar Pipe 0.1 x 0.2 0.6

4.2
Slab Type
11.1 4.1)
Wp = 7 Sx = 1.5% T = 0.8 C
= 0.9 Mortar Drainage Pipe 0.1
x0.2 0.6
2.5 310
(210 ) IDF Curve

4.5

47

4.3
Slab Type
11.2 4.1)
Wp = 7 Sx = 1.5% T = 0.8 C
= 0.9 Mortar Drainage Pipe 0.1
x0.2 0.6
2.5 310
(210 ) IDF Curve

4.6

48

5.1

Underpass

RC Ditch (Pump Sump)

5.2
(Gutter)
(Grating Inlet) (Pipe Inlet) (Pump Sump)

5.1 Dry-Pit Pump Station

49

 5.2 Dry-Pit Pump Station

5.3 Pump Sump Dry-Pit Pump Station

5.4 Plan Dry-Pit Pump Station

50

 5.5 Wet-Pit Pump Station

5.6 Plan Wet-Pit Pump Station

51

5.3

5.4

Underpass Rational Method Return Period

50 tc 10
0.8

5.5

Texas Department of Highways (Texas DOT)

Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification
AASHTO Model Drainage Manual

52

6.1



Rational Method Rainfall Intensity

6.1
6.2
Rational Method

Q = 0.278CIA

Q = ../
C = (
0.9)
53

I = tc = 10 ./.
A = .
./.
(Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curve) IDF Curve

6.2 -- (IDF Curve)

(Time of Concentration)
Time of Centration (tc) 10

54

6.3



Spread (T)
Spread 0.8

Qs =

0.376 5 / 3 1/ 2 8 / 3
S x SL T
n

Qs =
n = Manning
Cr = Sx =

SL =
T =

Composite Gutter (Sw)

Composite Gutter

Q = Qw + Qs =

Qs
1 Eo

Sw / S x

Eo = 1 /
= Qw / Q
2/3

Sw / S x

1
1 + T
1

Qs =
Sx
Qw =
Sw
55

Q = ../
Rational Method
W =

Eo = Composite Gutter
T =
Sx =
Composite Gutter
Sw = Depressed
Segment Composite Gutter Sx + a/w
a = Depressed Segment
W = Depressed Segment


V=

1 2 / 3 1/ 2
R S
n

V =
R =
n = Manning
0.013
SL =
SL
(V)
0.6

6.4

Curb (LT)

56

 Gutter Non-Composite
LT = 0.817Q

0.42

SL

0.3

nS
x

0.6

LT = Curb
Q
Q = ../
Rational Method
SL =
Sx =

Gutter Composite
LT = 0.817Q

0.42

SL

0.3

nS e

0.6

LT = Curb
Q
Q = ../
Rational Method
SL =
Se = Sx+SWEo
SW = Sw Sx

LT
(E)

L
E = 1 1
LT

1.8

E =
L =

57


Curb Inlet
6.5 pump
TEXUS DOT

Q=

Q
CiA
D
Z

=
=
=
=

CiAD
Z

.

360

58

(Gutter)
(RC Ditch) (Curb Inlet) (Pump
Sump) (Pump Machine)

1.035
22.60
4
2 (-) Safety Barrier

22.60 195
Plan . 44+038.5 .
44+233.5 Plan

7.1

59

.
7.2

7.3 Plan

7.4

60

 7.5

7.6
Gutter
Curb Inlet
RC Ditch (Pump Sump)
(Pump Machine)

Rational Method Return Period
50 Time of Concentration (tc) 10
IDF tc = 10
Return Period 50 (i) 190

61

 7.7 -- (IDF Curve)

Plan Profile


STA.43+770.5270 STA.44+005.000 STA.44+301.000 STA.44+665.8530

62

 7.8 Plan Prole ( 1)

7.9 Plan Prole ( 2)

63

 7.10 Plan Prole ( 3)

(RC Ditch)
RC
Ditch
L1 L14

1
V = R 2 / 3 S 1/ 2
n

V =
R =
64

n = Manning
0.013
SL =
SL

(V) 0.6

7.11 RC Ditch
Inlet

65

 7.1 RC Ditch

7.2 RC Ditch

(Gutter)
(Curb Inlet)
L1 L14
66


Qs =

0.376 5 / 3 1/ 2 8 / 3
S x SL T
n

Qs =
n = Manning
Cr = Sx =

SL =
T =
1.5

Composite Gutter (Sw)

Q = Qw + Qs =

Qs
1 Eo

Sw / S x

Eo = 1 /
= Qw / Q
2/3

Sw / S x

1
1 + T
1

Qs =
Sx
Qw =
Sw
Q = ../
Rational Method
W =

Eo = Composite Gutter
T =
67

Sx =
Composite Gutter
Sw = Depressed
Segment Composite Gutter Sx + a/w
a = Depressed Segment
W = Depressed Segment

RC Ditch
7.3 (Gutter)

(Curb Inlet)
Curb (LT)

Gutter Non-Composite
LT = 0.817Q

0.42

SL

0.3

nS
x

0.6

LT = Curb
Q
Q = ../
Rational Method
SL =
68

Sx =

Gutter Composite
LT = 0.817Q

0.42

SL

0.3

nS e

0.6

LT = Curb
Q
Q = ../
Rational Method
SL =
Se = Sx+SWEo
SW = Sw - Sx

LT
(E)

L
E = 1 1
LT

1.8

E =
L =

69

 7.4

RC Ditch

TEXUS DOT

Q
CiA
D
Z

=
=
=
=

.

360

30 .

tc

0.3 .
70

 7.5

0.3 . 4
0.3/4 4.5 .
4 6 .

21 tc = 10
0.353 .
0.388 .
7.6

71

1) AASHTO-AGC-ARTBA Joint Cooperation Committee Task Force No. 13, A Guide

to Standardized Highway Drainage Products, December 1986
2) AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification (2007)
3) Bridge Deck Drains, FHWA/CA/SD-81/15, Division of Transportation Facilities
Design, Sacramento, California, August 1981
4) Chow, Ven Te, Open Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1964
5) Colorado Department of Highways, Drainage Inlet Details, Eastbound Walnut
Viaduct, Denver, Colorado, May 1986.
6) Department of Highways, Thailand, Standard Drawings for Highway Construction,
1994
7) Federal Highway Administration, Standard Bridge Drains Used by Maine, Memo
from H.H. Davis, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1968
8) Federal Highway Administration, Bridge End Drainage, Internal Memo from M.F.
Maloney, Washington, D.C., January 4, 1971
9) HEC 21, Design of Bridge Deck Drainage
10) Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipators for Culverts and Channels, HEC-14,
Washington, D.C., 1983
11) Jens, S.W., Design of Urban Highway Drainage, FHWA-TS-79-225, Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, D.C., August 1979
12) Marsalek, J., Road and Bridge Deck Drainage Systems, Ontario Ministry of
Transportation and Communications, Ontario, Canada, 1982
13) North Dakota State Highway Department, Bridge Approach Drain Details,
Bismark, North Dakota, January 1975
14) Young, G.K., et al., Bridge Deck Drainage Guidelines, Report to FHWA, FHWA/RD87/014, Washington, D.C., December 1986

72