DRAINAGE OF HIGHWAY PAVEMENTS Hydraulic Englnoorlng

Circular No. 12

FHWA-TS-84-202

Maroh 1984

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Highway
Administration

EC ed -2
2
by la
iv
H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

is document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technieallnformation Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
 FOREWORD

This Technology Sharing Report provides guidelines and design

procedures for the drainage of highway pavements. The guidelines
should be of interest to roadway and hydraulic design engineers.
Safety specialists concerned with grate inlets and pavement
spread will also find this manual useful.

The report was prepared by Tye Engineering, Inc. with technical

guidance from the FHWA Office of Engineering's Hydraulics Branch
(HNG-31).

Sufficient copies of the publication are being distributed to

provide a minimum of one copy to each FHWA region office,

d
division office, and to each State highway agency. Additional
copies will be available to public agencies from the FHWA Office

2
of Engineering (HNG-31).

-2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a TaO,~~
R. J. Betsold
Director
Office of Implementation
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar

NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the

Department of Transportation in the interest of information
exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for
its contents or use thereof. The contents of this report reflect
the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the accuracy
pe
Ar

of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily

reflect the official views or policy of the Department of
Su

Transportation. This report does not constitute a standard,

specification or regulation.

The United States Government does not endorse products or manu-

facturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein only
because they are considered essential to the object of this
document.
 Technical ~eport Documentation Page
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Cotalog No.
~EC No. 12
~HWA-TS-84-202
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date
March 1984
prainage of Highway Pavements 6. Performing Organization Code

1 - - - : : - - - - : - - : - - - : - - : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ! 8. Performing Organization Report No.

7. Authorl s)
Frank L. Johnson and Fred F.M. Chang
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

rye Engineering, Inc 11. Contract or Grant No.

~entreville, Virginia 22020
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
~~--------~~~----------------~
12. Sponsorinjl_ Agency Name and Address
Federal Highway Administration

ed
Office of Implementation
Engineering & Highway Operations 14. Sponsoring Agency Code

2
McLean, Virginia 22101

-2
15. Supplementary Notes
COTR: John M. Kurdziel

EC
Technical Assistance: Stanley Davis, Daniel O'Connor, and Robert
Baumgardner (HNG-31) by la
16. Abstract
iv
This edition of Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 12 incorporates new
H
ed iv
design charts and procedures developed from laboratory tests of inter-
ception capacities and efficiencies of highway pavement drainage in-
ed ch

lets. A chart for the solution of the kinematic wave equation for
overland flow and a new chart for the solution of Manning's equation
rc Ar

for triangular channels are provided. Charts and procedures for using
ch
the charts are provided for 7 grate types, slotted drain inlets, curb-
opening inlets, and combination inlets on grade and in sump locations.
Charts, tables, and example problem solutions are included in the text
where introduced and discussed.
The text includes discussion of the effects of roadway geometry on
pavement drainage; the philosophy of design frequency and design spread
pe

selection; storm runoff estimating methods; flow in gutters; pavement

Ar

drainage inlets, factors affecting capacity and efficiency, and com-

parisons of interception capacity; median inlets; embankment inlets;
Su

and bridge deck inlets. Five appendixes are included with discussion
of the development of rainfall intensity-duration-frequency curves and
equations, mean velocity in a reach of triangular channel with unsteady
flow, the development of gutter capacity curves for compound and para-
bolic roadway sections, and the development of design charts for grates
of specific size and bar configuration.
17. KeyWords 18. Di stri but ion Statement
Pavement drainage inlets, inlet ~his document is available to the
interception capacity, inlet ~.s. public through the
efficiency, runoff, gutter flow ~ational Technical Information
spread, frontal flow, side flow ~ervice, Springfield, Virginia
bypass ~2161
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20, Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price
Unclassified Unclassified 151

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72l Reproduction of completed page authorized

 METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS

Approximate Conversions to Metric Measures "'

"' Approximate Conversions from Metric Measures
;:
Symbol When You Know Multiply by To Find Symbol
_Symbol When You Know Multiply by To Find Symbol ~

"' LENGTH
0

LENGTH "'
mm millimeters 0.04 inches in
~ em centimeters 0.4 inches in
in inches "2.5 m meters 3.3 feet It
centimeters em '-
It feet 30 centimeters em _, ~ m meters 1.1 yards yd
yd yards 0.9 meters m km kilometers 0.6 miles mi
mi miles 1.6 kilometers km ~

AREA
Su
AREA :e
c~ square centimeters 0.16 2
in2 square inches in
square inches 6.5 square centimeters cm2 m2
ft2 :2 square meters 1.2 square yards yd2
square feet 0.09 square meters m2 km2 square kilometers 0.4 square miles mi 2
pe
yd2 square yards o.a square meters m2 2
·ha hectares (10.000 m } 2.5 acres
mi 2 square miles 2.6 square kilometers km 2 :!:
Ar
acres 0.4 hectares ha
~
MASS (weight) MASS {vveight)
rc Ar
~
"'
oz ounces 28 grams g g grams 0.035 ounces oz
....... lb pounds 0.45 kilograms kg kilograms 2.2 pounds lb
ed ch
kg :::
....... short tons 0.9 tonnes tonnes {1000 kg} 1.1 short tons
(2000 lb} ... :::
VOLUME VOLUME
ed iv
ch
tsp teaspoons
a
milliHters ml ml milliliters 0.03 fluid ounces fl oz
Tbsp tablespoons 15 milliliters ml I liters 2.1 pints pi
fl oz fluid ounces 30 milliliters ml liters 1.06 quarts qt
cups 0.24 liters I I liters 0.26 gallons gal
by l
pt pints 0.47 liters m3 cubic meters 35 cubic feet ft3
qt quarts 0.95 liters m3 cubic meters 1.3 cubic yards yd3
gal gallons 3.8 liters
ft 3 cubic feet 0.03
Hcubic meters m3
yd3 cubic yards m3
0.76 cubic meters
iv TEMPERATURE (exact)
TEMPERATURE (exact) oc OF
Celsius 9/5 (then Fahrenheit
temperature add 32} temperature
EC
OF Fahrenheit 5/9 (after Celsius_ oc
temperature subtracting temperature
Of
32} 0 f 32 98.6 212
4 4 8 1 0 1 0 2 0
-2
- f I I I ~ I I ~1 1° I I I I I I I I ? I I I ~ ,,
"1 in= 2.54 (exactly). For other exact convers1ons and more deta1led tables, see NBS M1sc. Publ. 286, I I I 1
~ I !· I ~I ,I I I
Un1ts of We1ghts and Measures, Pr1ce $2.25, SO Catalog No. C13.10:286. -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 IOU
J 5
2 °C 37 °C
ed
METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Documentation Page i
Metric Conversion Factors ii
Table of Contents iii
List of Figures v
List of Charts viii
List of Tables ix
List of Symbols X
Glossary of Design Terms xiii
Preface XV

d
1.0 Introduction 1

2
2.0 Roadway Geometry 2

-2
2.1 Longitudinal Grades 2

3.0
2.2 Cross Slopes

2.5 Bridge Decks

veH
ed iv

EC
2.3 Curb and Gutter Design
2.4 Roadside and Median Ditches
by la
Design Frequency and Spread
3.1 Selection of a Design Frequency and Design Spread
6
2
3
4
5
ed ch

6
3.2 Selection of Check Frequency and Spread 9
i
ch rc Ar

4.0 Estimating Storm Runoff 11

4.1 Rational Method 11
4.1.1 Coefficient of Runoff 12
4.1.2 Rainfall Intensity 13
4.1.3 Time of Concentration 14
4.1.4 Computing Runoff 19
4.2 Other Runoff Estimating Methods 20
pe
Ar

5.0 Flow in Gutters 22

5.1 Gutters of Uniform Cross Slope 22
Composite Gutter Sections
Su

5.2 24
5.3 Gutters with Curved Cross Sections 26
5.4 Flow in Sag Vertical Curves 29
5.5 Shallow Swale Sections 29
5.6 Relative Flow Capacities 32

6.0 Pavement Drainage Inlets 36

6.1 Factors Affecting Inlet Interception Capacity
and Efficiency on Continuous Grades 39
6.2 Factors Affecting Inlet Interception Capacity
in Sag Locations 47
6.3 Comparison of Interception Capacity of
Inlets on Grade 48

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

7.0 Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade 53

7.1 Grate Inlets 53
7.2 Curb-Opening Inlets 59
7.3 Slotted Inlets 64
7.4 Combination Inlets 65

8.0 Interception Capacity of Inlets in Sag Locations 69

8.1 Grate Inlets 69
8.2 Curb-Opening Inlets 73

d
8.3 Slotted Inlets 80
8.4 Combination Inlets 82

2
9.0 Inlet Locations 84

-2
9.1 Inlet Spacing on Continuous Grades 84

10.0
9.2

ve
Inlets in Sag Locations

10.2 Embankment Inlets

ed iv
10.3 Bridge Deck Inlets

EC
Median, Embankment, and Bridge Inlets
by la
10.1 Median and Roadside Inlets

H
87

91
91
97
99
ed ch

11.0 References 104

i
I
ch rc Ar

Appendix A. Development of Rainfall Intensity Curves

and Equations 107

Appendix B. Mean Velocity in a Triangular Channel 123

Appendix c. Development of Spread-Discharge Relationship

for Compound Cross Slopes 126
pe
Ar

Appendix D. Development of Spread-Discharge Relationship

for Parabolic Cross Sections 128
Su

Appendix E. Development of Design Charts for

Grate Inlets 133

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1 - Spread greater than "allowable" spread on a

major arterial. 7

Fig. 2 - Design spread vs design recurrence interval 8

Fig. 3 - Conveyance-spread curves for a

composite gutter section. 28

Fig. 4 - Use of a shallow swale in lieu of a curb. 30

ed
Fig. 5 - Relative effects of spread, cross slope
and longitudinal slope on gutter flow capacity. 34

2
-2
Fig. 6 - Perspective views of grate and
curb-opening inlets. 37

EC
Fig. 7 - Perspective views of combination inlet
iv by l
slotted drain inlet.
a
38

H
ed iv
Fig. 8 - P - 1-7/8 and P - 1-7/8-4 grates. 40
ed ch

Fig. 9 - P - 1-1/8 grate. 41

rc Ar

Fig. 10 - Curved vane grate. 42

ch
Fig. 11 - 45° Tilt-bar grate. 43

Fig. 12 - 30° Tilt-bar grate. 44

Fig. 13 - Reticuline grate. 45

pe

Fig. 14 - Curb-opening inlet with intermediate top

Ar

slab supports. 47
Su

Fig. 15 - Comparison of inlet interception capacity,

slope variable. 49

Fig. 16 - Comparison of inlet interception capacity,

flow rate variable. 51

Fig. 17 - Depressed curb-opening inlet. 63

Fig. 18 - Slotted drain inlet at an intersection. 65

v·
 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

Fig. 19 - Combination curb-opening, 45° tilt-bar

grate inlet. 66

Fig. 20 - Combination inlet with portion of curb opening

upstream from grates. 67

Fig. 21 Curb-opening inlets. 75

Fig. 22 - Example use of depth at curb criteria

to establish location of flanking inlets. 89

ed
Fig. 23 - Median drop inlet. 92

2
Fig. 24 - Embankment inlet and downdrain. 98

-2
Fig. 25 - Bridge inlet. 100

EC
Fig. 26 - Interception capacity of 4-in scupper inlets
by la
on continuous grades. 102
iv H
ed iv
Fig. 27 - Capacity of 4-in scupper inlets in
ed ch

sump locations. 103

Fig. 28- 2-year, 60-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 108

ch rc Ar

Fig. 29 - 100-year, 60-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 109

Fig. 30 - 2-year, 5-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 110

Fig. 31 - 100-year, 5-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 111

Fig. 32 - 2-year, 15-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 112

pe
Ar

Fig. 33 - 100-year, 15-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35). 113

Su

Fig. 34 - Intensity-duration-frequency curves

for Charlotte, North Carolina. 115

Fig. 35 - Nomograph for estimating precipitation amounts

(Volume 3, NOAA Atlas 2). 117

Fig. 36 - Intensity-duration-frequency curves

for Colorado Springs, Colorado. 119

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

Fig. 37 - Development of precipitation intensity-

duration equations. 121

Fig. 38 - Conceptual sketch of spatially varied

gutter flow. 123

Fig. 39 - Properties of a parabolic curve. 128

Fig. 40 - Conveyance curve for a parabolic cross section. 132

d
Fig. 41 - Interception capacity of a 2-ft x 2-ft,
P - 1-1/8 grate. 135

2
Fig. 42 - Interception capacity of a 2-ft x 4-ft,

-2
P - 1-1/8 grate. 136

ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

vii
 LIST OF CHARTS

Chart 1 - Kinematic wave formulation for determining

time of concentration. 16

Chart 2 - Velocity in triangular gutter sections. 18

Chart 3 - Flow in triangular gutter sections. 23

Chart 4 - Ratio of frontal flow to total gutter flow. 25

ed
Chart 5 - Flow in composite gutter sections. 27

2
Chart 6 - Conveyance in circular sections. 31

-2
Chart 7 - Grate inlet frontal flow interception efficiency. 55

EC
Chart 8 - Grate inlet side flow interception efficiency. 57

Chart
iv by la
9 - Curb-opening and slotted drain inlet length

H
ed iv
for total interception. 61
ed ch

Chart 10 - Curb-opening and slotted drain inlet

interception efficiency. 62
ch rc Ar

Chart 11 - Grate inlet capacity in sump locations. 71

Chart 12 - Depressed curb-opening inlet capacity

in sump locations. 77

Chart 13 - Curb-opening inlet capacity in sump locations. 78

Chart 14 - Curb-opening inlet orifice capacity for

pe
Ar

inclined and vertical orifices. 79

Su

Chart 15 - Slotted drain inlet capacity in sump locations. 81

Chart 16 - Solution of Manning's equation for channels

of various side slopes. 94

Chart 17 - Ratio of frontal flow to total flow

in a trapezoidal channel. 95

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1 - Pavement cross slopes. 4

Table 2 - Values of runoff coefficient, c, for use

in the Rational Equation. 12

Table 3 - Spread at average velocity in a reach

of triangular gutter. 17

Table 4 - Average debris handling efficiencies

ed
of grates tested. 54

2
Table 5 Distance to flanking inlets in sag vertical

-2
curve locations using depth at curb criteria. 88

EC
Table 6 - Rainfall volumes, 2 - and 100-yr. 107

Table 7 ivby l
- Rainfall volumes, intermediate frequencies.
a
114

H
ed iv
Table 8 - Rainfall volume values. 114
ed ch

Table 9 - I-D-F values, Charlotte, NC. 114

rc Ar

Table 10 - 1-hr rainfall volumes. 118

ch
Table 11 - I-D-F values, Colorado Springs, Colorado. 118

Table 12 - I-D-F curve fitting table. 120

Table 13 - Conveyance computations, parabolic

street section. 130
pe
Ar

Table 14 - Conveyance vs spread, parabolic street section. 131

Su

ix
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

a Gutter depression, in (m).

A Cross sectional area of flow, ft2 (m2);

Drainage area, acres (hectares);
The algebraic difference in approach gradients to a vertical
curve, percent;
Orifice opening area, ft2 (m2).

B Bottom width in a trapezoidal channel, ft (m);

Half-width of a parabolic street section, ft (m).

ed
c Rational equation coefficient of runoff.

2
Orifice coefficient.

-2
Weir coefficient.

EC
d Depth of flow at the curb face, ft (m);
Depth of flow in an open channel, ft (m).
by la
d·1
iv H
Water depth at curb-opening lip, ft
ed iv
(m).
ed ch

Water depth to center of orifice opening, ft (m).

D Diameter of a circular section, ft (m).

ch rc Ar

E Interception efficiency of an inlet.

Ratio of flow in a chosen width, usually the width of a

grate, to total gutter flow.

g Acceleration of gravity, ft/s/s (m/s/s).

pe
Ar

h Height of curb-opening orifice, ft (m).

Su

H Crown height on a parabolic street section, ft (m).

i Rainfall intensity, in/hr (mm/hr).

K Conveyance; the quantity flow rate divided by the square

root of the longitudinal slope;
A constant describing the curvature of a vertical curve.

L Overland flow length in the kinematic wave equation,

ft (m) ;
Length of inlet, ft (m);
Vertical curve length, ft (m) •

X
 Length of curb-opening or slotted drain inlet required for
total gutter flow interception, ft (m).

n Coefficient of roughness in Manning's equation.

p Perimeter of a grate weir, ft (m).

Q Flow rate; discharge, ft3/s (m3/s).

Bypass or carryover flow; the portion of total gutter flow

which is not intercepted by an inlet, ft 3;s (m 3 /s).

Qi Intercepted flow; the portion of total gutter flow which is

d
intercepted by an inlet, ft 3 /s (m 3 /s).

2
Side flow rate; flow rate outside of width, w, ft3/s (m 3 /s).

-2
ve
Flow rate in width, W, ft 3 ;s (m 3 /s).

H
ed iv

EC
Frontal flow interception efficiency for grates; the ratio
by la
of intercepted frontal flow to total frontal flow.

Side flow interception efficiency for grates; the ratio of

ed ch

intercepted side flow to total side flow.

i
s Slope of overland tributary area, ft/ft (m/m);
ch rc Ar

Longitudinal slope of gutter or channel, ft/ft (m/m).

Equivalent straight cross slope for a gutter section with a

composite cross slope.

Pavement cross slope, ft/ft (m/m)

Cross slope of a depressed gutter, ft/ft (m/m).

pe
Ar

sw I Cross slope of a depressed gutter section measured from the

Su

normal cross slope of the pavement, ft/ft (m/m) •

Time of concentration for use in the Rational Method, min.

T Spread of water on the pavement, ft (m).

Spread where velocity is equal to average velocity in a

reach of triangular gutter, ft (m)

v Velocity, ft/s (m/s).

xi
V Average velocity in a reach of gutter, ft/s (m/s)

Velocity of flow at which splash-over first occurs over a

grate, ft/s (rn/s).
w Width of a grate, ft (rn);
Width of a depressed gutter, ft (m).

z Side slope ratio in a trapezoidal channel, horizontal to

vertical.

ed EC
-2
2
ivby la
H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

xii
 GLOSSARY OF DESIGN TERMS

Bypass - Flow which bypasses an inlet on grade and is

carried in the street or channel to the next
inlet downgrade.

Carryover - See bypass.

Chute - A steep, inclined open channel (flume).

Combination Inlet - Drainage inlet usually composed of a curb-

opening and a grate inlet.

Curb-opening Inlet- Drainage inlet consisting of an opening in

ed
the roadway curb.

2
Drop Inlet - Drainage inlet with a horizontal or nearly

-2
horizontal opening.

EC
Equivalent cross - An imaginary straight cross slope having con-
slope veyance capacity equal to that of the given
iv by l
compound cross slope
a
H
ed iv
Flanking Inlets - Inlets placed upstream and on either side of
an inlet at the low point in a sag vertical
ed ch

curve. The purposes of these inlets are to

intercept debris as the slope decreases and
rc Ar

to act in relief of the inlet at the low

ch
point.

Frequency -Also referred to as exceedance interval,

recurrence interval or return period; the
average time interval between actual occur-
rences of a hydrological event of a given or
greater magnitude; the reciprocal of the per-
pe

cent chance of occurrence in any one year

Ar

period.
Su

Frontal Flow - The portion of flow which passes over the

upstream side of a grate.

Grate Inlet - Drainage inlet composed of a grate in the

roadway section or at the roadside in a low
point, swale or ditch.

xiii
Gutter - That portion of the roadway section adjacent
to the curb which utilized to convey storm
runoff water. It may include a portion or
all of a traveled lane, shoulder or parking
lane, and a limited width adjacent to the
curb may be of different materials and have a
different cross slope.

Inlet Efficiency - The ratio of flow intercepted by an inlet to

total flow in the gutter.

Perimeter of a - The sum of the lengths of all sides of a

Grate grate, except that any side adjacent to a
curb is not considered a part of the perim-

ed
eter in weir flow computations.

2
Rainfall Intensity- The average rate of rainfall for a selected

-2
time interval measured in inches/hour (m/h).

Runoff Coefficient- As used in the Rational Method, the ratio of

EC
the rate of runoff to the rate of rainfall.

Scupper
iv by la
- A vertical hole through a bridge deck for the
H
ed iv
purpose of deck drainage. Sometimes, a
horizontal opening in the curb or barrier is
ed ch

called a scupper.

Side-flow - Flow which is intercepted along the side

ch rc Ar

Interception of a grate inlet, as opposed to frontal

interception.

Slotted Drain - Drainage inlet composed of a continuous slot

Inlets built into the top of a pipe which serves to
intercept, collect and transport the flow.

- Portion of the frontal flow at a grate which

pe

Splash-over
Ar

skips or splashes over the grate and is not

intercepted.
Su

Spread - Width of flow measured laterally from the

roadway curb.

Time of - The time of flow from the hydraulically

Concentration most distant point in the drainage area to
the design point under consideration.

xiv
 PREFACE

This second edition of Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 12

incorporates new design charts and procedures to more clearly
establish the interception capacity of roadway and median inlets.
Design aids were developed from data from the several research
reports cited in the text to apply to a wide range of design
conditions.

Design charts are distinguished from figures used to illus-

trate text material by designating the curves to be used as
design aids as Charts. Charts and tables are included in the
text where introduced and discussed. Illustrative examples are

ed
provided to aid in understanding the use of the design aids,
where appropriate.

2
Unit notations adopted for this publication are from the

-2
American Society of Testing Materials' "Standard for Metric
Practice," ASTM Designation E 380-76. Quantities and values are

EC
expressed in English units throughout the text followed by the
International System of Units (SI) equivalent in parenthesis.
by l
iv a
Metric conversion factors are furnished in the front material for

H
ed iv
conversion of English units used in figures, examples, and
Charts.
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

XV
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

DRAINAGE OF HIGHWAY PAVEMENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Effective drainage of highway pavements is essential to

maintenance of the service level of highways and to traffic safe-
ty. Water on the pavement slows traffic and contributes to acci-

ed
dents from hydroplaning and loss of visibility from splash and
spray. Free-standing puddles which engage only one side of a
vehicle are perhaps the most hazardous because of the dangerous

2
-2
torque levels exerted on the vehicle (1) 1 • Thus, the design of
the surface drainage system is particularly important at loca-

EC
tions where ponding can occur.
by l
Discussion in this Circular is limited to the subject of the
iv a
H
removal of storm water from highway pavement surfaces and median
ed iv
areas. It does not include the conveyance systems which carry
the water from the inlet to the point of discharge. Information
ed ch

on highway geometric design is taken from American Association of

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) policy (2).
ch rc Ar

Design charts were developed from data from comprehensive re=

search on drainage inlet interception sponsored by the Federal
Highway Administration at the Bureau of Reclamation hydraulics
laboratory (l-Z) .

In this Circular, roadway geometry as it affects pavement

drainage is discussed first. Estimating storm water runoff for
inlet design is next discussed and then flow in curbed gutter
pe
Ar

sections. Discussions of types of inlets, factors affecting

inlet interception capacity, inlet interception capacity compari-
sons, and design charts are included in sections 6 through 8.
Su

Median, embankment and bridge inlets are discussed in section 10.

Finally, procedures for developing design charts for parabolic
roadway sections and for standard inlet configurations and cross
slopes used by a highway design agency, rainfall intensity curves
and equations, and the derivation of the equation for mean
velocity in a gutter section are provided in appendixes.

1. Underlined numbers in parenthesis refer to publications

listed in the references in section 11.0.

1
2.0 ROADWAY GEOMETRY

Roadway design geometric features greatly influence the

feasibility of providing for satisfactory drainage of highway
pavement surfaces. These features include curbs, gutter config-
uration, longitudinal and lateral pavement slopes, shoulders, and
parking lanes. The effects of these geometric features on high-
way pavement drainage are discussed in the following sections.

2.1 Longitudinal Grades

It is more important to maintain a minimum longitudinal

d
gradient on curbed pavements than on uncurbed pavements in order
to avoid undue spread of storm water on the pavement. However,

2
flat gradients on uncurbed pavements introduce the problem of

-2
spread on the pavement where vegetation builds up along the
pavement edge.

ve
It may also be difficult to maintain sufficient

by l
H
ed iv

EC
fall in roadside channels to drain cut sections and medians
adequately where near-zero pavement gradients are used.
a
Gutter grades should not be less than 0.3 percent for curbed
pavements, and not less than 0.2 percent in very flat terrain.
Minimum grades can be maintained in very flat terrain by use of a
ed ch

rolling profile or by warping the cross slope to achieve a

i
rolling gutter profile.
ch rc Ar

To provide adequate drainage in sag vertical curves, a

m1n1mum slope of 0.3 percent should be maintained within 50 ft
(15.2 m) of the level point in the curve. (As used in this
Circular, sag vertical curves are only those between negative and
positive grades. Curves between two positive grades or two
negative grades are excluded.) This is accomplished where the
length of the curve, L, divided by the algebraic difference in
pe

grades, A, is equal to or less than 167 (L/A < 167). Although

Ar

ponding is not usually a problem at crest vertical curves, a

similar minimum gradient should be provided to facilitate drain-
Su

age.

2.2 Cross Slopes

Pavement cross slope is often a compromise between the need

for reasonably steep cross slopes for drainage and relatively
flat cross slopes for driver comfort. It has been found (1) that
cross slopes of 2 percent have little effect on driver effort in
steering, especially with power steering, or on friction demand
for vehicle stability.

2
 Water on the pavement is the principal cause of loss of tire
contact with the pavement in hydroplaning incidents. Horizontal
drag forces are imposed on the vehicle by the water, and, if the
forces are unevenly distributed laterally, e.g., by pending
against a curb, can cause hazardous directional instability (1).
Water depth on the pavement varies with pavement texture, length
of the flow path, rainfall intensity, and inversely with the
slope of the drainage path. The length of the flow path is
decreased and the slope increased with steeper cross slopes.
Therefore, adequate cross slope is a highly important counter-
measure against hydroplaning. An increase in cross slope for
each successive lane of multilane facilities is an effective
measure in reducing water depth on pavements. Where practicable,
inside lanes can be sloped toward the median; median areas should
not be drained across traveled lanes. A careful check should be

ed
made of designs to minimize the number and length of flat
pavement sections in cross slope transition areas, and considera-

2
tion should be given to increasing cross slopes in sag vertical

-2
curves, crest vertical curves, and in sections of flat longi-
tudinal grades. Where curbs are used, depressed gutter sections

EC
should be considered as an effective measure for increasing
gutter capacity and reducing spread on the pavement.
by l
iv a
Shoulders are generally sloped to drain away from the
H
ed iv
pavement, except with raised, narrow medians. Crossover from
superelevated curves to shoulders is limited to 8 percent.
ed ch

Table 1 shows the range in rates of cross slope for various

rc Ar

conditions (~).
ch
2.3 Curb and Gutter Design

A complete discussion of the geometries of curbs and gutters

is beyond the scope of this Circular and discussion here is
limited to the effects of curbs and gutters on the drainage of
pe

highway pavements.
Ar

Curbing at the right edge of pavements is normal practice

Su

for low-speed, urban highway facilities. Gutters may be 1 to 6

feet wide but are usually confined to a width of 1 to 3 feet
adjacent to the curb. Gutter cross slopes may be the same as
that of the pavement, or gutters may be designed with a steeper
cross slope, usually 1 inch per foot (0.083 m/m) steeper than the
pavement. Curbs should be at the outside edge of shoulders or
parking lanes, if used. The gutter pan width may be included as
a part of the parking lane.

3
 Table 1. Normal pavement cross slopes.

Range in Rate of Cross Slope

High-t;tpe Surface
2 - lanes 0.015 - 0.020
3 or more lanes 0.015 minimum;
in each direction increase 0.005 - 0.010/lane
0.040 maximum

Intermediate surface 0.015 - 0.030

Low-type surface 0.020 - 0.060

ed
Urban Arterials 0.015 - 0.030;
increase 0.010/lane

2
-2
Shoulders
B1tum1nous or Concrete 0.02 - 0.06

EC
With Curbs > 0.04
-
by l
iv a
Notes:
H
(1) With curbs, the lower values above are questionable.
ed iv
(2) With steeper gutters, lesser rates of cross slope are
permissible.
ed ch
ch rc Ar

Where practicable, it is desirable to intercept runoff

from cut slopes and other areas draining toward the roadway
before it reaches the highway, in order to minimize the deposi-
tion of sediment and other debris on the roadway and to reduce
the amount of water which must be carried in the gutter section.

Shallow swale sections at the edge of the roadway pavement

pe

or shoulder offer advantages over curbed sections where curbs are

Ar

not needed for traffic control. These advantages include a

lesser hazard to traffic than a near-vertical curb and hydraulic
Su

capacity that is not dependent on spread on the pavement. Swale

sections are particularly appropriate where curbs are generally
used to prevent water from eroding fill slopes.

2.4 Roadside and Median Ditches

Medians are commonly used to separate opposing lanes of

traffic on divided highways. On undivided, multilane facilities,
median areas may be used as turning lanes or paint stripes may be

4
used to control indiscriminate left turns. Where practicable, it
is preferable to slope median areas and inside shoulders to a
center swale to prevent drainage from the median area from
running across the pavement. This is particularly important for
high-speed facilities, for facilities with more than two lanes of
traffic in each direction, and where snow melt from median areas
would flow across traffic lanes.

Roadside ditches are commonly used with uncurbed roadway

sections to convey runoff from the highway pavement and areas
which drain toward the highway. Roadside ditches can not be used
on many urban arterials but can be used in cut sections,
depressed sections, and other locations where driveways and
intersections are infrequent. Curbed highway sections are rela-

ed
tively inefficient in conveying water, and the area tributary to
the gutter section should be kept to a minimum in order to

2
minimize the hazard from water on the pavement. Where practic-
able, it is desirable to intercept flow from all areas draining

-2
toward curbed highway pavements.

EC
2.5 Bridge Decks by l
iv a
H
Effective bridge deck drainage is important for several
ed iv
reasons including the susceptibility of the deck structural and
ed ch

reinforcing steel to corrosion from deicing salts, ice forming on

bridge decks while other roadway surfaces are still ice-free, and
the possibility of hydroplaning on decks with little surface
ch rc Ar

texture. While bridge deck drainage is accomplished in the same

manner as drainage of other curbed roadway sections, they are
often less effectively drained because of lower cross slopes,
uniform cross slopes for traffic lanes and shoulders, parapets
which collect relatively large amounts of debris, drainage inlets
which are relatively small, and clogging of inlets and drainage
systems.
pe
Ar

Because of the difficulties in providing for adequate deck

drainage and in providing for adequate maintenance of deck
Su

drainage systems, gutter flow from roadways should be intercepted

before it reaches a bridge. Where practicable, all deck drainage
should be carried to the bridge end for disposal. For similar
reasons, zero gradients and sag vertical curves should be avoided
on bridges.

5
3.0 DESIGN FREQUENCY AND SPREAD

Two of the more significant variables considered in the

design of highway pavement drainage are the frequency of the
runoff event for design and the spread of water on the pavement
during the design event. A related consideration is the use of
an event of lesser frequency to check the drainage design.

Spread and design frequency are not independent. The impli-

cations of the use of a criteria for spread of one-half of a
traffic lane is considerably different for one design frequency
than for a lesser frequency. It also has different implications
for a low-traffic, low-speed highway than for a higher classifi-

ed
cation highway. These subjects are central to the issue of
highway pavement drainage and important to highway safety.

2
-2
3.1 Selection of Design Frequency and Design Spread

EC
The objective in the design of a drainage system for a
ivby l
curbed highway pavement section is to collect runoff in the
a
gutter and convey it to pavement inlets in a manner that provides
H
ed iv
reasonable safety for traffic and pedestrians at a reasonable
cost. As spread from the curb increases, the risks of traffic
ed ch

accidents and delays and the nuisance and possible hazard to

pedestrian traffic increase.
ch rc Ar

The process of selecting the recurrence interval and spread

for design involves decisions regarding acceptable risks of
accidents and traffic delays and acceptable costs for the drain-
age system. Risks associated with water on traffic lanes are
greater with high traffic volumes, high speeds, and higher
highway classifications than with lower volumes, speeds, and
highway classification.
pe
Ar

Following is a summary of the major considerations that

enter into the selection of design frequency and design spread.
Su

1. The classification of the highway is a good starting point

in the selection process since it defines the public's
expectations regarding water on the pavement surface. Pend-
ing on traffic lanes of high-speed, high-volume highways is
contrary to the public's expectations and thus the risks of
accidents and the costs of traffic delays are high.

2. Design speed is important to the selection of design criter-

ia. At speeds greater than 45 mi/hr (72 km/hr), water on
the pavement can cause hydroplaning.

6
 ed EC
-2
2
iv by la
Figure 1.
H
Spread greater than "allowable" on a major arterial.
ed iv
ed ch

3. Projected traffic volumes are an indicator of the economic

importance of keeping the highway open to traffic. The
ch rc Ar

costs of traffic delays and accidents increase with increas-

ing traffic volumes.

4. The intensity of rainfall events may significantly affect

the selection of design frequency and spread. Risks asso-
ciated with the spread of water on pavements may be less in
arid areas subject to high intensity thunderstorm events
than in areas accustomed to frequent but less intense
pe
Ar

events.
Su

5. Capital costs are neither the least nor last consideration.

Cost considerations make it necessary to formulate a ration-
al approach to the selection of design criteria. "Trade-
offs" between desirable and practicable criteria are some-
times necessary because of costs. In particular, the costs
and feasibility of providing for a given design frequency
and spread may vary significantly between projects. In some
cases, it may be practicable to significantly upgrade the
drainage design and reduce risks at moderate costs. In
other instances, as where extensive outfalls or pumping

7
 stations are required, costs may be very sensitive to the
criteria selected for use in design.

Other considerations include inconvenience, hazards and nui-

sances to pedestrian traffic. These considerations should not be
minimized and, in some locations such as in commercial areas, may
assume major importance. Local design practice may also be a
major consideration since it can affect the feasibility of
designing to higher standards, and it influences the public's
perception of acceptable practice.

The relative elevation of the highway and surrounding ter-

rain is an additional consideration where water can be drained
only through a storm drainage system, as in underpasses and

d
depressed sections. The potential for pending to hazardous
depths should be considered in selecting the frequency and spread
criteria and in checking the design against storm runoff events

2
of lesser frequency than the design event.

-2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch

(/)
i
w
z
ch rc Ar

<(
_J

0
LL
LL
<(
0::
~
pe

z
Ar

0
0
Su

0
<(
w
0::
0... Hi
(f)
High

RECURRENCE INTERVAL
Figure 2. Design spread vs. design recurrence interval.

8
 Figure 2 shows the interrelationship of highway classifica-
tion, traffic volumes and speeds, and design frequency and
spread. The purpose of the figure is to illustrate that as the
risks associated with water on traffic lanes increase with
increasing speeds and traffic volumes, and higher highway class-
ifications, the need to design for lesser spread on the pavement
and lesser frequency storm events also increases. A multi-
dimensional matrix or figure would be required to represent all
of the considerations involved in selecting design criteria;
however, figure 2 can be taken to present some of the factors
which enter into decisionmaking. The figure illustrates that
high speed, high volume facilities, such as freeways, should be
designed to minimize or eliminate spread on the traffic lanes
during the design event. A relatively low recurrence interval,

ed
such as a 10-year frequency, is commonly used and spread can
usually be limited to shoulders.

2
Spread on traffic lanes can be tolerated more frequently and

-2
to greater widths where traffic volumes and speeds are low. A 2-
year recurrence interval and corresponding spreads of one-half of

EC
a traffic lane or more are usually considered a minimum type
design for low-volume local roads.
by l
iv a
H
The selection of design criteria for intermediate types of
ed iv
facilities may be the most difficult. For example, some arter-
ials with relatively high traffic volumes and speeds may not have
ed ch

shoulders which will convey the design runoff without encroaching

on the traffic lanes. In these instances, an assessment of the
rc Ar

relative risks and costs of various design spreads may be helpful

ch
in selecting appropriate design criteria.

3.2 Selection of Check Storm and Spread

The design frequency usually used in the design of depressed

sections and underpasses is greatly influenced by Federal Highway
pe

Administration policy which has required the use of a 50-year

Ar

frequency for underpasses and depressed sections on Interstate

highways where ponded water can be removed only through the storm
Su

drain system. This policy has also been widely used at similar
locations for other highways. The use of a lesser frequency
event, such as a 50-year storm, to assess hazards at critical
locations where water can pond to appreciable depths is commonly
referred to as a check storm or check event.

The use of a check event is considered advisable if a

sizeable area which drains to the highway could cause unaccept-
able flooding during events that exceed the design event. Also,
the design of any series of inlets should be checked against a

9
larger runoff event where the series terminates at a sag vertical
curve in which ponding to hazardous depths could occur.

The frequency selected for use as the check storm should be

based on the same considerations used to select the design storm,
i.e., the consequences of spread exceeding that chosen for design
and the potential for ponding. Where no significant ponding can
occur, check storms are normally unnecessary. Where significant
ponding can occur in the area of Federal Emergency Management
Agency-insured buildings, a 100-year recurrence interval storm
should be used for the check storm if the ponding could cause the
buildings to flood.

A criteria for spread during the check event is also

ed
desirable. Two criteria which have been used are: one lane open
to traffic during the check storm event, and one lane free of

2
water during the check storm event. These criteria differ sub-
stantively, but each sets a standard by which the design can be

-2
evaluated.

EC
ivby la
H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

10
4.0 ESTIMATING STORM RUNOFF

Areas contributing storm runoff to highway pavement drainage

inlets are usually small in size. Curbed highway pavements are
not designed to convey large discharges and water on the traffic
lanes impedes traffic and impairs highway safety. It has been
considered good practice, therefore, to intercept flow from
drainage areas of substantial size before it reaches the highway.

The most commonly used method for estimating runoff for

highway pavement drainage is the Rational Method. In recent
years, however, digital computers have made it possible to use
more sophisticated methods. In general, the methods are much too

d
complex, take more computer time than is warranted for the design
of pavement drainage, and the improvement in accuracy is problem-

2
atical (~).

-2
4.1 Rational Method

ve by l
EC
The Rational Method was first referred to in American
a
literature in 1889 by Kuichling (~).

Q = KCiA H
ed iv
The Rational formula is:

(1)
ed ch

where: Q =
ithe peak runoff rate, ft3/s (m3/s)
K = 1 (0.00275)
ch rc Ar

c = a dimensionless runoff coefficient representing

characteristics of the watershed
i = the average rainfall intensity, in/hr (mm/hr)
for a duration equal to the time of concentration
and for the recurrence interval recurrence chosen
for design
A = drainage area, acres (hectares) (l!).
pe
Ar

Assumptions implicit in the Rational Method are (~, l!>:

Su

1. The rate of runoff resulting from any rainfall intensity is

greatest when the rainfall intensity lasts as long or longer
than the time of concentration.

2. The probability of exceedance of the peak runoff rate as

computed is the same as the probability of the average
rainfall intensity used in the method.

3. A straight-line relationship exists between the maximum

rate of runoff and a rainfall intensity of duration equal to
or longer than the time of concentration, e.g., a

11
 2-inch/hour (5 mm/hr) rainfall will result in a peak dis-
charge exactly twice as large as a l-inch/hour (2.5 mm/hr)
average intensity rainfall.

4. The coefficient of runoff is the same for storms of all

recurrence probabilities.

5. The coefficient of runoff is the same for all storms on a

given watershed.

use of the Rational Method is described in references (l!),

(~), and elsewhere in the literature.

ed
4.1.1 Coefficient of Runoff

The runoff coefficient, c, characterizes antecedent precip-

2
itation, soil moisture, infiltration, detention, ground slope,

-2
ground cover, evaporation, shape of the watershed and other
variables. Various adjustments to the coefficient have been

EC
suggested (10, 12) to account for variability due to prior
wetting and-storm duration. For relatively small watersheds such
by la
as those dealt with in the surface drainage of highway pavements,
iv H
adjustments are probably unwarranted. Average values for various
ed iv
surface types, which are assumed not to vary during the storm,
ed ch

are commonly used. Values of C are given in table 2.

ch rc Ar

Table 2. Values of runoff coefficient, C, for use in

the Rational Equation

Type of Surface Runoff Coefficient, c

pe
Ar

Paved 0.7 - 0.9

Gravel roadways or shoulders 0.4 - 0.6
-
Su

Cut, fill slopes 0.5 0.7

Grassed areas 0.1 - 0.7
Residential 0.3 - 0.7
Woods 0.1 - 0.3
Cultivated 0.2 - 0.6

Note: For flat slopes and permeable soils, use the lower values.
For steep slopes and impermeable soils, use the higher
values. See reference (12) for a detailed list of coeffi-
cients currently in use.--

1~
 Where drainage areas are composed of parts having different
runoff characteristics, a weighted coefficient for the total
drainage area is computed by dividing the summation of the
products of the area of the parts and their coefficients by the
total area, i.e.,

Cw = C1 A1 + C2A2 + •••• + Cn An
----------~-----------

4.1.2 Rainfall Intensity

It is necessary to have information on the intensity,

duration, and frequency of rainfall for the locality of the

ed
design in order to make use of the Rational Method.

2
Precipitation intensity-duration-frequency (I-D-F) curves
can be developed from information in the following National

-2
Weather Service publications:

EC
NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS HYDR0-35, "5 to 60 - Minute
Precipitation Frequency for Eastern and Central United
by la
States," 1977.

NOAA Atlas 2.
iv H
ed iv
Precipitation Atlas of the Western United States,
ed ch

1973.
Vol. I' Montana Vol. II, Wyoming Vol. III, Colorado
Vol. IV, New Mexico Vol. v, Idaho Vol. VI, Utah
ch rc Ar

Vol. VII, Nevada Vol. VIII, Arizona Vol. IX, Washington

Vol. X, Oregon Vol. XI, California
Technical Paper 42, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, 1961
Technical Paper 43, Hawaii, 1962
Technical Paper 47, Alaska, 1963

HYDR0-35 contains precipitation and frequency information

for durations of 60 minutes and less for the 37 States from North
pe
Ar

Dakota to Texas and eastward. For durations greater than 60

minutes, the following publication is applicable for the above
Su

States:

Technical Paper No. 40. 48 contiguous states, 1961.

The greatest differences between HYDR0-35 and TP-40 are in

the 5-min map in which values differ substantially in Maine,
parts of the northern plains, along the Gulf Coast, and along the
Atlantic Coast.

Maps from HYDR0-35, an example development of an I-D-F curve

13
and a procedure for developing precipitation intensity-duration
equations are included in Appendix A.

The 11 volumes of NOAA Atlas 2 replace TP-40 for the eleven

western conterminous States. Investigations for the Atlas were
undertaken to depict more accurately variations in the precipita-
tion - frequency regime in mountainous regions.

It is impractical to include maps from the 11 volumes of

NOAA Atlas 2 in this Circular because of the number and size of
the maps. Differences in values from TP-40, particularly in
areas of orographic influences on precipitation, make it advis-
able for agencies to develop new I-D-F curves based on informa-
tion taken from the Atlas. An example development of an I-D-F

ed
curve and equations for the curves are included in Appendix A.

2
-2
4.1.3 Time of Concentration

EC
Time of concentration is defined as the time it takes for
runoff to travel from the hydraulically most distant point in the
ivby l
watershed to the point of reference downstream. An assumption
a
implicit to the Rational Method is that the peak runoff rate
H
ed iv
occurs when the rainfall intensity lasts as long or longer than
the time of concentration. Therefore, the time of concentration
ed ch

for the drainage area must be estimated in order to select the

appropriate value of rainfall intensity for use in the equation.
ch rc Ar

The time of concentration for inlets is comprise~ of at

least two components. These are overland flow time and gutter
flow time. If overland flow is channelized upstream of the
location at which the flow enters the highway gutter, a third
component is added.

A thorough study at the University of Maryland (13) found

that the most realistic method for estimating overlan~flow time
pe
Ar

of concentration was the kinematic wave equation:

Su

(2)

where: tc = the time of overland flow in seconds

L = overland flow length, ft (m)
n = Manning roughness coefficient
i = rainfall rate, in/hr (m/hr)
s = the average slope of the overland area
K = 56 (26.285)

14
 Chart 1 is a nomograph for the solution of the kinematic
wave equation for overland flow.

The kinematic wave theory is consistent with the latest

concepts of fluid mechanics and considers all those parameters
found important in overland flow when the flow is turbulent
(where the product of the rainfall intensity and length of the
slope is in excess of 500).

When using the nomograph, Manning roughness coefficients of

0.013 for concrete and 0.50 for turf were recommended. Since
these values are in close agreement with normal flow data,
Manning coefficients obtained from flow experiments on other
surfaces are satisfactory for use.

ed
In using the nomograph, the time of concentration and
rainfall intensity are unknown. The solution is one of iteration

2
or trial and error. A value for i is first assumed and the

-2
related time of concentration is read from Chart 1. The assumed
rainfall intensity must then be checked against the I-D-F curve

EC
for the frequency of the event chosen for the particular design
problem, and the procedure repeated until the assumed rainfall
by la
intensity is in agreement with the intensity associated with the
iv H
time of concentration. Example 1 illustrates the procedure.
ed iv
ed ch

Example 1:

Given: L = 150 ft
ch rc Ar

s = 0.02
n = 0.4 (turf)
Design frequency - 10 yr
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado

Find: Overland flow time, tc

Solution:
pe
Ar

(1) Assume i = 5 in/hr

tc = 23 min (Chart 1)
Su

i = 3.3 in/hr (figure 29)

(2) Try i = 3.5 in/hr

t = 20 min (Chart 1)
ic= 3.6 in/hr (figure 29)

Since the trial rainfall intensity is in close agreement

with the intensity read from figure 29, the time of concentration
for overland flow is 20 min. Use of Chart 1 in this example
requires that the second turning line be extended. A folded
arrangement of the turning lines would eliminate the

15
 s L 0.6 no.6
tc=0.93 I EXAMPLE:
0.2 i 0 .4s 03
·
(MIN) GIVEN: S=O.OI; n=O.Ij L= 100 FT; i = 5 IN/HR

w
z FIND: tc= 7. 7 MIN (IN/HR)
0.1
...J
0.08 n (..!) 10
z tc (MIN.)
0.06 z 8
0.6 0:::
::::> w 21 6
Su
1- z
0.04 1-0.4 L (FT) ::i
,-1o (..!)
0.03 r-o.3 /
pe
z
// 3
Ar
0.2
z /
0:::
::::> /
0.02 I I 1- /
rc Ar
/ 2
/
30 /
/
.......
ed ch ~20
'' :J
0\ ''
- 0.0 f ---- 0.08 ''
....
' /
, 06 ''
ch
0.008 ,10
/
-----r-°· ed iva ' '
/
0.006 t-0.04 / I 0.6
/
/
' '
/
by l
0.03 ' '
' ..... / 0.4
0.004 I /
I
' ..... /
0.02
H ' ' '/
/

0.003 I
iv
400
'-0.01 t600
EC
0.002 I
800
1000
-2
.001
I 2
ed
CHART 1. Kinematic wave formulation for determining time of concentration.
need to extend the turning lines, but Chart 1 was adopted because
use of a folded scale is more complicated.

In order to find the time of flow in the gutter flow

component of the time of concentration, a method for estimating
the average velocity in a reach of gutter is needed. The time of
flow in a triangular channel with uniform inflow per unit of
length can be accurately estimated by use of an average velocity
of flow in the gutter. Integration of the Manning equation for a
right triangular channel with respect to time and distance yields
an average velocity for the channel length at the point where
spread is equal to 65 percent of the maximum spread for channels
with zero flow at the upstream end. For channel sections with
flow rates greater than zero at the upstream end, as with

d
carryover from an inlet, the spread at average velocity (Ta) is
given by table 3 (See figure 38, Appendix B). In table 3, T 1 is

2
spread at the upstream end and T 2 is spread at the downstream end

-2
ve
of the reach of gutter under consideration. Chart 2 is a

by l
use of Chart 2 and table 3.

H
ed iv

EC
nomograph to solve for velocity in a triangular channel with
known cross slope, slope and spread. Example 2 illustrates the
a
ed ch

Table 3. Spread at average velocity in a reach

of triangular gutter.
i
ch rc Ar

Tl/T2 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Ta/T2 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.74 0.77 0.82 0.86 0.90
------
Example 2:
pe
Ar

Given: T 1 = 4 ft (bypass flow from inlet upstream)

T 2 = 10 ft (design spread at second inlet)
Su

s = 0.03
sx = 0.02
Inlet Spacing = 300 ft (estimated)

Find: Time of flow in gutter

Solution:
Tlj
T2 = 0.4
Ta/T = 0.74 (table 3)
T = 2 10 X 0.74 = 7.4 ft
va = 3.5 ft/s (Chart 2)
ta= 300/3.5 = 86 sec = 1.4 min

17
s V=~ s0.5 s 0.67 T0.67
n x
0.004
(J)
0.005 T ........
1- w

~~
u. 0
0.006 0

~
c II
T ( FT)
> > c
20
0.008 20
0.01

ed
15 15

2
Sx

-2
0.1 10
9

EC
'0.02 0.08 10
8
by l 9
0.06 7
a iv 8
'
'
H w 0.1
ed iv
0.03 '' z 6
0.04 :::::i 7
'
'' 5
ed ch

0.08
'' (!)
0.04 '' 0.03 z
' z 4
rc Ar

''
ch
a:: 0.06
0.05 '' 0.02 :::::>
'' t-
/

0.06
4
''
0.08 O.OJ
' 3
pe

0. I '
Ar

''
'' /
/

EXAMPLE ''
Su

'' /

'' /
/

GIVEN ' /

'' /
/
2
s = 0.02 '' /
/
/

' '
0.2 Sx= 0.015
T =6 FT
n = 0.016

FIND

Vn =0.32 FT/S
V = 1.95 FT/S

CHART 2. Velocity in triangular gutter sections.

18
 In practice, the two components of the time of concentration
are added to get the total time. For the examples here, the time
of concentration is 20 + 2 = 22 minutes.

The time of concentration for a drainage area composed

entirely of highway pavement is estimated in the same manner as
in the above examples. Because of the short distance of overland
flow, the total time of concentration for pavement drainage
inlets will be less than 5 minutes at most locations where the
drainage area is highway pavement.

Where overland flow becomes channelized upstream of the

highway pavement, it is usually good practice to intercept the
flow before it reaches the highway gutter. Interception may be

d
by a cross drainage structure, a roadside ditch, or a roadside
inlet. The time of concentration for such a drainage area is

2
computed by adding the time of overland flow from the hydraulic-
ally most distant point in the drainage area to the time of flow

-2
channel.

time.
ve
in the channel from the point at which overland flow enters the
Chart 1 can be used as illustrated to compute the

by l
H
ed iv

EC
overland flow time component of the time of concentration.
a Any
of many design aids available may be used to compute channel flow
Chart 16, section 10.1, is an example of the design aids
which can be used to compute flow depth in a channel. From flow
depth, the cross sectional area of flow can be computed and
ed ch

velocity can be computed by use of the continuity equation:

i
Q = AV (3)
ch rc Ar

where: A = cross sectional area of flow, ft 2 (m 2 )

V = velocity of flow, ft/s (m/s)

4.1.4 Computing Runoff

Runoff from a drainage area consisting of only one surface

pe
Ar

drainage type is computed as illustrated by the following exam-

ple:
Su

Example 3:

Given: A highway in Charlotte, NC; a 32 ft width of pavement

drains toward the gutter
s = 0.005
sx = 0.03
n = 0.016
T = 8 ft (width of parking lane)
Sx = 0.05 (parking lane)
c = 0.9

19
 Design frequency = 10 yr
tc = 5 min
Find: Rainfall intensity and runoff from 500 ft of pavement

Solution:
i = 7.2 in/hr (figure 34)
Q = CiA = 0.9 X 7.2 X (32 X 500)/43,560 = 2.4 ft 3/s

Computing the runoff from a non-homogeneous area is general-

ly accomplished by using a weighted coefficient for the total
area and rainfall intensity corresponding to the longest time of
concentration to the point for which the runoff is to be
determined. On some combinations of drainage areas, it is poss-

ed
ible that the maximum rate of runoff will occur from the higher
intensity rainfall for periods less than the time of concentra-

2
tion for the total area, even though only a part of the drainage
area may be contributing. This might occur where a part of the

-2
drainage area is highly impervious and has a short time of
concentration, and another part is pervious and has a much longer

EC
time of concentration. Unless the areas or times of concentra-
tion are considerably out of balance, however, the range of
by la
accuracy of the method does not warrant checking the peak flow
iv H
from only a part of the drainage area. For the relatively small
ed iv
drainage areas associated with highway pavement drainage, it can
ed ch

usually be assumed that the longest time of concentration for the

drainage area is appropriate for purposes of computing runoff.
ch rc Ar

4.2 Other Runoff Estimating Methods

Numerous runoff simulation models have been developed in

recent years because of the interest in stormwater management for
pollution and flood abatement. The more recent models require
the use of high-speed computers and output runoff hydrographs
from inputs of rainfall hyetographs and drainage basin data on
pe
Ar

infiltration, land use, antecedent rainfall, and other physical

data. Insofar as the mainframe computer programs developed to
Su

date are concerned, they are useful for flood routing and flood
storage planning, but because of the approximations used for
inlet interception, they are not particularly useful for pavement
drainage design.

Other runoff estimating methods which do not require the use

of computers are also available, including the British Road
Research Laboratory method (~RRL), the unit hydrograph method,
and the Soil Conservation Service methods. The unit hydrograph
method requires rainfall and runoff data to develop the unit
graph and has little applicability to pavement inlet design.

20
 The TRRL method can be used to estimate peak flow rates.
The method considers only the directly connected impervious
areas, i.e., impervious areas that drain to an intermediate area
that is pervious prior to interception are not considered. The
method requires a design hyetograph and mapping of isocrones, or
lines of equal time of travel to the catchment outlet. Runoff
computations are based on 100 percent runoff from impervious
areas from rainfall intensity increments corresponding to the
time interval between isocrones (!!).

The TRRL has little applicability to highway pavement drain-

age because inlet time is usually too short to develop isocrones
for the drainage area, pervious areas are neglected, and a
rainfall hyetograph is required. Where other impervious areas

d
are combined with highway pavement drainage, the method could be
used.

2
The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method in Technical

-2
ve
Release 55 (TR-55) is based on numerous computer runs using the
SCS continuous simulation model, TR-20.

by l
H
ed iv

EC
a It is applicable to
watersheds of 1 to 2,000 acres (0.4 to 809 hectares) and provides
a means for estimating peak discharge. The method has applica-
tion where design for storage is necessary but has little
application for pavement inlet design. The method can be used
for drainage areas which include areas outside the highway
ed ch

pavement, as for roadside ditches and drainage systems which

i
combine highway pavement drainage with other drainage. Applica-
tion of the method requires identification of hydrologic soil
ch rc Ar

groups, watershed area, percent impervious, and overall slope.

The 24-hour rainfall volume for the design recurrence interval is
selected from the SCS Type II Rainfall Hyetograph and runoff
volume is determined from a table using runoff curve numbers and
rainfall volume. Runoff volume is then converted to peak dis-
charge by use of a multiplier obtained from charts relating curve
number and slope to drainage area and peak discharge. Further
adjustments can then be made for the effects of imperviousness if
pe
Ar

the user is not convinced that all effects of imperviousness are

accounted for in the selection of the runoff curve number (l!) •
Su

21
5.0 FLOW IN GUTTERS

A pavement gutter is defined, for purposes of this Circular,

as the section of pavement next to the curb which conveys water
during a storm runoff event. It may include a portion or all of
a travel lane. Gutter cross sections usually have a triangular
shape with the curb forming the near-vertical leg of the tri-
angle. The gutter may have a straight cross slope or a cross
slope composed of two straight lines. Parabolic sections are
also used, especially on older pavements and on city streets.

Modification of the Manning equation is necessary for use in

computing flow in triangular channels because the hydraulic

d
radius in the equation does not adequately describe the gutter
cross section, particularly where the top width of the water

2
surface may be more than 40 times the depth at the curb. To
compute gutter flow, the Manning equation is integrated for an

-2
where: K ve
increment of width across the section (14).

= 0.56 (0.016)
H
ed iv
a
Q = flow rate ft3/s (m3/s)
The resulting equa-
tion in terms of cross slope and spread-on the pavement is:

by l
EC
(4)
ed ch

T = width of flow (spread) ,ft (m)

Sx = cross slope, ft/ft (m/m)
i
S = longitudinal slope, ft/ft (m/m)
ch rc Ar

Equation (4) neglects the resistance of the curb face, but

this resistance is negligible from a practical point of view if
the cross slope is 10 percent or less.

Spread on the pavement and flow depth at the curb are often
used as criteria for spacing pavement drainage inlets. Chart 3
is a nomograph for solving equation (4). The Chart can be used
pe
Ar

for either criterion with the relationship:

Su

d = TS X (5)

Chart 3 can be used for direct solution of gutter flow where

the Manning n value is 0.016. For other values of n, divide the
value of Qn by n. Instructions for use and an example problem
solution are provided on the Chart.

5.1 Gutters of Uniform Cross Slope

The use of Chart 3 to compute flow in a gutter of uniform

22
 -( !)
5
d
II
c

s
EXAMPLE: GIVEN:
n=O.OI6; Sx=0.03
- I...
0
........
0
S=0.04; T =6 FT
FIND:
a =2.4 FT3;s
Qn = 0.038 FT~S
0.1 w
0.08 z

ed
_J T ( FT)
0.06 (!)
z

2
z 30
'0.04 0:::

-2
Sx
''
''
'' 0.01
:::>
I-
-
~
( J)
10
8

EC
20
'' I-
0.02 0.1
'' by l LL 6
''
a
0.08

0.01
''
''
'' H
ed iv
iv
0.02
10
c
0 4
ed ch

0.008 '
0.006 8
'
0.0~ ---
ch rc Ar

--- 2
0.004 '' _6 -
0.06 '
0.08 0.02
4
0.1
3
pe

0.01
Ar

2 0.008
I__
Su

"' T
I) For V-Shape, use the nomograph with 0.006

~ Sx = Sxl Sx2 /( Sxl + Sx2)

0.004
2) To determinedischarge in gutter with
composite cross slopes, find Os using
Ts and Sx. Then, use CHART 4 to
find Eo. The total discharge is
Q=Qs/(1-Eo), and Ow=O-Os·

CHART 3. Flow in triangular gutter sections.

23
cross slope is illustrated in example 4.

Example 4:

Given: T = 8 ft
sx = 0.025
s = 0.01
n = 0.015
d = TSX = 8 X 0.025 = 0.2 ft

Find: (1) Flow in gutter at design spread

(2) Flow in width W = 2 ft adjacent to the curb

Solution:
(1) From Chart 3, Qn = 0.03

d
Q = Qn/n = 0.03/0.015 = 2.0 ft3/s

2
(2) T = 8 - 2 = 6 ft

-2
{Qn)2 = 0.014 (Chart 3) (flow in 6 ft width outside

Qw
=
= ve
0.014/0.015
by l
2.0 - 0.9
H
ed iv

EC
a =
=
of width W)

0.9 ft 3/s

1.1 ft3/s

Flow in the first 2 ft adjacent to the curb is 1.1 ft3/s and

ed ch
i
0.9 ft 3 ;s in the remainder of the gutter.
ch rc Ar

5.2 Composite Gutter Sections

Chart 4 is provided for use with Chart 3 to find the flow in

a width of gutter, W, less than total spread, T. It can be used
for either a straight cross slope or a composite gutter slope.
The procedure for use of the Chart is illustrated in example 5.
pe
Ar

Example 5:
Su

Given: T = 8 ft
sx = 0.025

Gutter depression = 2 in = 0.167 ft

w= 2 ft
sw = (0.167/2) + 0.025 = 0.108
s = 0.01
n = 0.015
d = TSX + 2/12 = 8 X 0.025 + 0.17 = 0.37 ft

24
 ed
0.81----+-

2
-2
EC
0.6
c:l by l
........
a
==
c:l
II
iv H
ed iv
ed ch

,
w 0.4
ch rc Ar

0.2
pe
Ar

f--W--j
Su

0 ----~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~~
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
W/T

CHART 4. Ratio of frontal flow to total gutter flow.

25
Find: (1) Total gutter flow
(2) Flow in the 2 ft depressed section

Solution:
T - W = 8 - 2 = 6 ft
Qsn = 0.14 (Flow in 6 ft section) (Chart 3)

Qs = Qsn/n = 0.014/0.015 = 0.9 ft 3;s

W/T = 2/8 = 0.25

sw = ~108 = 4.32
sx 0.025
E0 = 0.69 (Chart 4)

d
(1) Total flow in the gutter section:

2
Q = Qs/(1 - E0 ) = 0.9/(1 - 0.69) = 3.0 ft3;s

-2
(2)

ve
Flow in the 2 ft width, W:

EC
Ow = Q - Qs = 3.0 - 0.9 = 2.1 ft3;s
by l
Chart 5 provides for a direct solution of gutter flow in a

H
ed iv
a
composite gutter section. The flow rate at a given spread or the
spread at a known flow rate can be found from the Chart.
ed ch

Chart 5 is an exact solution of the equation for flow in a

i
composite gutter section, but the nature of the equation requires
rc Ar

a complex graphical solution. Typical of graphical solutions

ch
such as this, extreme care in using the Chart is necessary to
obtain accurate results. An alternative to Chart 5 is a series
of charts such as that illustrated in figure 3. A chart for each
depressed gutter configuration is necessary, and it is impracti-
cal to include all possible configurations in this Circular. The
procedure for developing charts for depressed gutter conveyance
is included as Appendix c.
pe
Ar

5.3 Gutters with Curved Cross Sections

Su

Where the pavement cross section is curved, gutter capacity

varies with the configuration of the pavement. For this reason,
discharge-spread or discharge-depth-at-the-curb relationships de-
veloped for one pavement configuration are not applicable to
another section with a different crown height or half-width.

Procedures for developing conveyance curves for parabolic

pavement sections are included in Appendix D.

26
 /Q
0·
.>) 0
-----Do:----------------------------------------....
/ 0 /
c"ooo
&''a. 0

d
0 o.o
i.p/·/0°
' 0
~

2
:

-2
ro
d
<D
0 .;-
0 "'0 "'0
by l
--: 00H
ed iv

EC
a
<D eq- !'()
ve C\l - ro <D
... "' "'
ed ch

Oo o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0
ddddd 0 gg 0
d
0
cj
0
d
i (S/£J..:O uo
ch rc Ar

..,_<f)

f--
LL
<D
o ro
ci !"')
c
0
"
0
pe
Ar Su

M/J.
0 ro <D

CHART 5. Flow in composite gutter sections.

27
 T

I ; , , >; ,..,-

1000
800
THESE CURVES ARE
600 FOR n=O.Ol6.
FOR OTHER VALUES
400 OF n, MULTIPLY

d
BY ( 0. 016/n) .

-
,........

2
C l)

....

-2
200
-
~
u.

w
........
d

Co)
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch

z
c
i
>
ch rc Ar

w
>
z
=
Co) 20
pe
Ar

8~~~~~~£-~-------+------~------~----~
Su

6~-n~~~----~-------+------~------~----~

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
SPREAD T (FT)

Figure 3. Conveyance-Spread curves for a composite gutter section~.

23
5.4 Flow in Sag Vertical Curves

The spread of water in sag vertical curves is of concern

because occasional water on the pavement is hazardous. Spread on
the pavement should be examined where the slope is relatively
flat at either side of the low point of a sag vertical curve to
determine whether the spread is acceptable. It is suggested that
spread be checked at a gradient of 0.3 percent.

Example 6:

Given: Q = 3.0 ft 3;s

n = 0.015
sx = 0.025
Qn = 0.045 ft3/s

d
s = 0.003

2
Find: T

-2
Solution:
T = 12 ft

ve
by l
EC
(Chart 3)

If, as in the example 4, section 5.1, the design spread is 8

H
ed iv
a
ft, consideration should be given to reducing the gutter flow
approaching the low point. Sag vertical curves and measures for
reducing spread are further discussed in sections 6 and 8.
ed ch
i
rc Ar

5.5 Shallow Swale Sections

ch
Where curbs are not needed for traffic control, it may
sometimes be advantageous to use a small swale section of
circular or V-shape to convey runoff from the pavement in order
to avoid the introduction of a curb. As an example, it is often
necessary to control pavement runoff on fills in order to protect
the embankment from erosion. Small swale sections may have
pe

sufficient capacity to convey the flow to a location suitable for

Ar

interception and controlled release, as illustrated in figure 4.

Chart 3 can be used to compute flow in a shallow v-section and
Su

Chart 6 is provided for part-circle sections. Examples 7 and 8

illustrate the procedures.

Example 7:

Determine whether it is feasible to use a shallow swale

section in an 8-ft shoulder, given the following conditions:

29
 d -2
2
Figure 4.
by l
ve
EC
a
Use of a shallow swale in lieu of a curb.

H
ed iv
ed ch

Given: T = 8 ft 3
Q
i= 1.5 ft /s
s = 0.01
ch rc Ar

n = 0.016

Find: Depth of v-section swale and cross slope required

Solution:
sx = 0.021 (Chart 3)
=
pe

0.021
Ar

8 x1 + 8 x2

Let sxl = sx 2
Su

2
Then
5
~ X1 ) = 0.021

and

sx 1 = 0.042; d = 4 x 0.042 = 0.17 ft

30
 5 /

4 /

3 ,.......~-""
~v
/
vv
2
/
/
v~-""
Su
~ ~
/
pe
d v
Ar
/
v I
D 6 D
/ I I
rc Ar
4
ev d ch
3 v ~v d
v
ed iv ' \:__)
i
ch
v v a
_,./
2
by l
v
i H I I I I I I I I I I

3 4 2 3 4 2 3 4 2
EC
ve
-2
2 d
CHART 6. Conveyance in circular channels.
 A swale section 8 ft wide and 0.17 ft deep with an average
foreslope and backslope of 0.04 ft/ft will be adequate to protect
the backslope.

Example 8:

Given the conditions in example 7, determine the depth and

top width of a circular swale with a diameter of 5 ft.

Given: S = 0.01
n = 0.016
Q = 1.5 ft 3 /s

Find: d, T

d
Solution:

2
D = 5 ft

-2
0

d/D
d

T
Qn
8/3 8 1/2

=
= 0.30 ft
= 2[2.5 2
=

by l
ve
1.5 X 0.016
73.1 X 0.1

EC
0.06 (Chart 6)

H
ed iv
a = 0.0032

(2.5 - 0.30) 2 ] 1 1 2 = 2(6.25 - 4.84) 1 / 2

ed ch

= 2.4 ft
i
rc Ar

A swale with a radius of 2.5 ft and a top width of 2.4 ft

ch
will convey a flow of 1.5 ft 3;s at approximately 0.3 ft of depth.

5.6 Relative Flow Capacities

The examples in sections 5.1 and 5.2 illustrate the capacity

pe

advantage of a depressed gutter section. The capacity of the

Ar

section with a depressed gutter in the examples is 50 percent

greater than that of the section with a straight cross slope with
Su

all other parameters held constant. A straight cross slope of 3

percent would have approximately the same capacity as the compos-
ite section with a cross slope of 2.5 percent and a gutter slope
of 10.8 percent.

Equation (4), section 5.0, can be used to examine the

relative effects of changing the values of spread, cross slope,
and longitudinal slope on the capacity of a section with a
straight cross slope.

32
 Q = 0.56 8 1.67 8 0.5 T2.67 (4)
n X

n
0.56 s0.5 T2.67

Then sx 1 • 67 = k1 Q
To examine the effects of cross slope on gutter capacity,
the following ratio is plotted in figure 5:

= klQl = Ql
klQ2 Q2

d
The effects of changing the longitudinal slope on gutter
capacity are plotted in figure 5 from the following relationship:

2
n
Let k2 =

-2
s
Then (~)
s2
0.5
0.56 sx

=
Ql
by l
Q2

H
ed iv

EC
a
ve
1.67 T2.67

The following relationship is plotted in figure 5 to illus-

ed ch

trate the effect of changes in the width of spread:

i
ch rc Ar

As illustrated by figure 5, the effects of spread on gutter

pe

capacity are greater than the effects of cross slope and longitu-
Ar

dinal slope. This is to be expected because of the larger

exponent. The magnitude of the effect is demonstrated by the
Su

fact that gutter capacity with a 10-ft (3.05 m) spread is 11.6

times greater than with a 4-ft (1.22 m) spread and 3.9 times
greater than at a spread of 6 ft (1.83 m).

The effects of cross slope are also relatively great as

illustrated by a comparison of gutter capacities with different
cross slopes. At a cross slope of 4 percent, a gutter has 10
times the capacity of a gutter of 1 percent cross slope. A
gutter at 4 percent cross slope has 2.2 times the capacity of a
gutter at 2.5 percent cross slope. ~ gutter with a cross slope

33
 100 I

80
I
60
~

I
-
40
I
~Lt-~1-
l

30

20

~
c:)
- I ~
~· ~

d
10
1- ~ t::,c:,~
8

2
1-
~ -

-2
6

d
N

........
-
4

2
-

by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ve I
III
~//-
II \\~~./
ed ch

~\.Y

~
v -
i 1-
ch rc Ar

0.8
-
/ ~
0,6
-
./
/ /lj
v ,/

V;
v /
pe

0.4
I I
Ar

0.3

I;
Su

v
0.2

1-

0.1
I I I I I I ' I
6
I I
8 10
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 I 2 3 4

T1 /T2, Sx1 /Sx2, S1/S2

Figure 5. Relative effects of spread, cross slope, and

longitudinal slope on gutter flow capacity.

34
of 6 percent has 6.3 times the capacity of a gutter at a cross
slope of 2 percent.

Little latitude is generally available to vary longitudinal

slope in order to increase gutter capacity, but slope changes
which change gutter capacity are frequent. Figure 5 shows that a
change from S = 0.04 to 0.02 will reduce gutter capacity to 71
percent of the capacity at S = 0.04. The capacity at extremely
flat gradient sections, as on the approaches to the low point in
a sag vertical curve, can also be compared with the capacity of
the gutter on the approach gradients. If an approach gradient is
2 percent, the capacity of the gutter in the sag vertical curve
where the gradient is 0.35 percent is 42 percent of the capacity
on the approach grades.

d -2
2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

35
6.0 PAVEMENT DRAINAGE INLETS

Inlets used for the drainage of highway surfaces can be

divided into three major classes. These three major classes are:
(1) curb-opening inlets, (2) gutter inlets, and (3) combination
inlets. Each major class has many variations in design and may
be installed with or without a depression of the gutter.

Curb-opening inlets are vertical openings in the curb cover-

ed by a top slab.

Gutter inlets include grate inlets consisting of an opening

in the gutter covered by one or more grates, and slotted inlets
consisting of a pipe cut along the longitudinal axis with a grate

d
of spacer bars to form slot openings.

2
Combination inlets usually consist of both a curb-opening

-2
inlet and a grate inlet placed in a side-by-side configuration,

grate.

ve
but the curb opening may be located in part upstream of the

by l
EC
Perspective drawings of the three classes of inlets are
shown in figures 6 and 7.
H
ed iv
a
Inlet interception capacity has been investigated by several
ed ch

agencies and manufacturers of grates. Hydraulic tests on grate

i
inlets and slotted inlets included in this Circular were conduct-
rc Ar

ed by the Bureau of Reclamation for the Federal Highway Adminis-

ch
tration. Four of the grates selected for testing were rated
highest in bicycle safety tests, three have designs and bar
spacing similar to those proven bicycle-safe, and a parallel bar
grate was used as a standard with which to compare the perform-
ance of the others.

References (3), (4), (5), and (6) are reports resulting from
pe

this grate inlet research study. Figures 8 through 13 show the

Ar

inlet grates for which design procedures were developed for this
Circular. For ease in identification, the following descriptive
Su

short nomenclature has been adopted:

P - 1-7/8 - Parallel bar grate with bar spacing 1-7/8-in on

center (figure 8)

P - 1-7/8 - 4 - Parallel bar grate with bar spacing 1-7/8-in on

center and 3/8-in diameter lateral rods spaced at 4-in on center
(figure 8)

36
 d -2
2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a GRATE INLET
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar
Su

CURB OPENING INLET

Figure 6. Perspective views of grate and curb-opening inlets.

37
Su
pe
Ar
rc Ar
ed ch
ed iv
ch
i by la
H
EC
ve
-2
d 2
P - 1-1/8 - Parallel bar grate with 1-1/8-in on center bar
spacing (figure 9)

CV - 3-1/4 - 4-1/4 - Curved vane grate with 3-1/4-in longitudinal

bar and 4-1/4-in transverse bar spacing on center (figure 10)

45 - 3-1/4 - 4 - 45° tilt-bar grate with 2-1/4-in longitudinal

bar and 4-in transverse bar spacing on center (figure 11)

45 - 3-1/4 - 4 - 45° tilt-bar with 3-1/4-in and 4-in on center

longitudinal and lateral bar spacing, respectively (figure 11)

30 - 3-1/4 - 4 - 30° tilt-bar grate with 3-1/4-in and 4-in on

center longitudinal and lateral bar spacing, respectively (figure
12)

d
Reticuline - "honeycomb" pattern of lateral bars and longitudinal

2
bearing bars (figure 13).

-2
ve
The interception capacity of curb-opening inlets has also

by l
EC
been investigated by several agencies. Design procedures adopted
for this Circular are largely derived from experimental work at
Colorado State University for the Federal Highway Administration,
a
as reported in reference (li) and from reference (~) •
H
ed iv
ed ch

6.1 Factors Affecting Inlet Interception Capacity and

i
Efficiency on Continuous Grades
ch rc Ar

Inlet interception capacity is the flow intercepted by an

inlet under a given set of conditions. Under changed conditions,
the interception capacity of a given inlet changes. The effi-
ciency of an inlet is the percent of total flow that the inlet
will intercept under a given set of conditions. The efficiency
of an inlet changes with changes in cross slope, longitudinal
slope, total gutter flow, and, to a lesser extent, pavement
pe

roughness. In mathematical form, efficiency, E, is defined by

Ar

the following equation:

Su

E = Qi ( 5)
Q
where: Q = total gutter flow,ft 3 ;s (m 3 ;s)

Qi = intercepted flow, ft3/s (m3;s

Flow that is not intercepted by an inlet is termed carryover

or bypass, ( Qb) :

39
 ( 17Je" CENTER TO CENTER
-~ 1/.
4 "X 4"
BEARING BARS ~ ~I 3/e
-""" l
T .v

~--- 3fe" OIA

(

d
RODS FLUSH
t WITH GRATE

2
SURFACE

-2
<I
<
z
0
....u
-co
q-
0
1-
by l
H
ed iv
a
ve
EC
P-1-7/8-4 GRATE
EXACTLY AS
SHOWN, P-1-7/8
GRATE AS
SHOWN EXCEPT
ed ch

-q-
(\j FOR OMISSION
w
i "
...J OF 3/8"
CJ)
TRANSVERSE RODS
ch rc Ar

One inch is 25.4mm

pe
Ar

~
0
...J
Su

IJ...

-~

-"~I' 13. BARS 17/e" CENTER TO CENTER

W= 15" TO 36"

Figure 8. · · P-1-7/8 and P-1-7 /8-4, grates.

40
 [olio .. L ~ 24" TO 48" / ,. .., """" " " " • .
& P:V.'Nut
c!M
t::t:t:t+I=P
rI .. ::::111:
rt:t::t:l:t.1:J
';t
-L o:tt:mJ
<0 -.- d:t:l:+ttJ
"'0
1- .§.
-L q::tt:1:::)::p
10
II
Su
u
• I I "7
:m
G:tt1+P
q::J::t::t::j:p
?; ,_j_

I I
::::::::
i ::i
•.,:e
r::t:J:tt::ltl
pe
I
ct+j::t::1::p
Ar
' ___u_ .JA c:t:m+P
... ! c:t+:!=ltP
=-·""=
Cl
I I ct:J:::I::I:+:P
rc Ar
.= I
,.,.·1 '!: - -,.;: c
e ,
d~
.,.· , . ~~v,· ~
.;::..
ch, .
......
.,
I 't.. Lon9 Standard \l'z.Ptpe Spacers (See Ottad)
't." Wtde Cost Steel Spacers {See Oetotl)
ch
I
ed iv
........
a
t
--
= -o--L 0 0 0'
Jruj 1_
by l
Lil i __
I»
=......
Cl
.
~;;.
i H SECT I ON A-A
FLOW

One inch is 25.4mm

EC
...
ve
-2
,,·-3 2 J 0.109' Wall

1
;lPIPE SPACER DETAIL
l~·
CAST STEEL SPACER DETAIL
Jl(ct= I
d
 ";tt
I

,-----· -~l ~ TI
·-::::
E

ed
ll.a
1
E
v

~~ I()

2
C\J
,-----·

-2
.s::.

~
(.J

rZJ "'

EC
1----· Q)

0"'
~~
by la
iv
H I
ed iv

co
~ CJ
ed ch

v
0
1-
-v
ch rc Ar

-·
N
"
_J
~ ZJ
-~ +-- ~~

- ~ 2:a
pe
Ar

T... \
Su

·-· :1! ~

J 3:

-----· \ 2J
J"'
0
...J
Lo..

I I I 1I I 1 II II
,, -~~-~ ..
~
.__-.Jl....-.....JL...--.JL..-....JL.....--ll-.-....JL_- "' .i

Figure 10. Curved vane grate.

42
 .
r--
,--1
I
I
L_
r-
I
I
L_
r- II I 11•1 I 11•1 I 101•1 I 111111 I 111111 1 111•1 I 1"1.1 I lltal I 11 . . 1 I II . . I I I -

CD

...,
Su
=
=...-·
L_
!
m
r-
1 ~.
I
I
Ar
L_
. r-
qip!il eir!ilc iil! iiA~ lil iil iil iil ii ~ i!I
I
--
.;:.
c.n
w:::..
ed rch
0
w
....
ed iv
ch
-.-·...
I
a
I»
=-... by l
=...
I»
FLOW
• /
....
m
H
iv Stt Dttotl
~2 06"___._.
EC
~

*These dimensions refer to the 45-2-1/4-4 grate.

-2
o These dimensions refer to the 45-3-1/4-4 grate.
2
32 14P
One inch is 25.4mm
454"----
ed
 E
E
v
10
N
Ill

d
..c
u
c:

2
"'c:
0

-2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar
Su

,........_
II 1 I
~

Figure 12. -30° Tilt-bar grate.

44
 ed
3/Js" x 2"
R E TIC U L I N E ---======::::±l~

2
BARS

-2
IX)
v
0

EC
I-

V
by l N
a
II
iv H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar

3t
0
....J
LL.
pe
Ar Su

W = 15" TO 36"

One inch is 25.4mm

Figure 13. Reticuline grate.

45
 (6)
The interception capacity of all inlet configurations increases
with increasing flow rates, and inlet efficiency generally de-
creases with increasing flow rates.

Factors affecting gutter flow also affect inlet interception

capacity. The depth of water next to the curb is the major
factor in the interception capacity of both gutter inlets and
curb-opening inlets. The interception capacity of a grate inlet
depends on the amount of water flowing over the grate, the size
and configuration of the grate and the velocity of flow in the
gutter. The efficiency of a grate is dependent on the same
factors and total flow in the gutter.

ed
Interception capacity of a curb-opening inlet is largely
dependent on flow depth at the curb and curb opening length.

2
Effective flow depth at the curb and consequently, curb-opening

-2
inlet interception capacity and efficiency, is increased by the
use of a gutter depression at the curb-opening or a depressed

EC
gutter to increase the proportion of the total flow adjacent to
the curb. Top slab supports placed flush with the curb line can
by l
substantially reduce the interception capacity of curb openings.
iv a
H
Tests have shown that such supports reduce the effectiveness of
ed iv
openings downstream of the support by as much as 50 percent and,
if debris is caught at the support, interception by the down-
ed ch

stream portion of the opening may be reduced to near zero. If

intermediate top slab supports are used, they should be recessed
rc Ar

several inches from the curb line and rounded in shape as shown
ch
in figure 14.

Slotted inlets function in essentially the same manner as

curb opening inlets, i.e., as weirs with flow entering from the
side. Interception capacity is dependent on flow depth and inlet
length. Efficiency is dependent on flow depth, inlet length and
total gutter flow.
pe
Ar

The interception capacity of a combination inlet consisting

of a grate placed alongside a curb opening does not differ
Su

materially from that of a grate only. Interception capacity and

efficiency are dependent on the same factors which affect grate
capacity and efficiency. A combination inlet consisting of a
curb-opening inlet placed upstream of a grate has a capacity
equal to that of the curb-opening length upstream of the grate
plus that of the grate, taking into account the reduced spread
and depth of flow over the grate because of the interception by
the curb opening. This inlet configuration has the added advan-
tage of intercepting debris that might otherwise clog the grate
and deflect water away from the inlet.

46
 ed EC
-2
2
Figure 14.
by la
Curb-opening inlet with intermediate
iv H
top slab supports.
ed iv
ed ch

A combination inlet consisting of a slotted inlet upstream

of a grate might appear to have advantages where 100 percent
ch rc Ar

interception is necessary. However, grates intercept little more

than frontal flow and would usually need to be more than 3-ft
(0.9 m) wide to contribute significantly to the interception
capacity of the combination inlet. A more practical solution
would be to use a slotted inlet of sufficient length to intercept
total flow.
pe
Ar

6.2 Factors Affecting Inlet Interception Capacity in Sag

Locations
Su

Grate inlets in sag vertical curves operate as weirs up to

depths dependent on grate size and configuration and as orifices
at greater depths. Between weir and orifice flow depths, a
transition from weir to orifice flow occurs. The perimeter and
clear opening area of the grate and the depth of water at the
curb affect inlet capacity. The capacity at a given depth can be
severely affected if trash collects on the grate and reduces the
effective perimeter or clear opening area.

47
 Curb-opening inlets operate as weirs in sag vertical curve
locations up to a depth equal to the opening height. At depths
above 1.4 times the opening height, the inlet operates as an
orifice and between these depths, transition between weir and
orifice flow occurs. The curb-opening height and length, and
water depth at the curb affect inlet capacity. At a given flow
rate, the effective water depth at the curb can be increased by
the use of a continuously depressed gutter, by use of a locally
depressed curb opening, or by use of an increased cross slope,
thus decreasing the width of spread at the inlet.

Slotted inlets operate as orifices in sag locations where

the depth at the upstream edge of the slot is greater than about
0.4 ft (0.12 m). Transition flow exists at lesser depths, and an
empirical orifice equation derived from experimental data can be

d
used to compute interception capacity. Interception capacity
varies with flow depth, slope, width, and length at a given

2
spread.

-2
6.3

veH
ed iv

EC
Comparison of Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade
by l
In order to compare the interception capacity and efficiency
a
of various inlets on grade, it is necessary to fix two variables
that affect capacity and efficiency and investigate the effects
of varying the other factor. Figure 15 shows a comparison of
ed ch

curb-opening inlets, grates, and slotted drain inlets with gutter

i
rc Ar

flow fixed at 3 ft3/s (0.08 m3/s), cross slope fixed at 3

ch
percent, and longitudinal slope varied up to 10 percent. Conclu-
sions drawn from an analysis of this figure are not necessarily
transferable to other flow rates or cross slopes, but some infer-
ences can be drawn that are applicable to other sets of condi-
tions. Grate configurations used for interception capacity com-
parisons in this figure are described in section 6.
pe

Figure 15 illustrates the effects of flow depth at the curb

Ar

and curb-opening length on curb-opening inlet interception capa-

city and efficiency. All of the curb-opening inlets shown in the
Su

figure lose interception capacity and efficiency as the longitud-

inal slope is increased because spread on the pavement and depth
at the curb become smaller as velocity increases. It is accurate
to conclude that curb-opening inlet interception capacity and
efficiency would increase with steeper cross slopes. It is also
accurate to conclude that interception capacity would increase
and inlet efficiency decreases with increased flow rates.

The effect of depth at the curb is also illustrated by a

comparison of the interception capacity and efficiency of de-
pressed and undepressed curb-opening inlets. A 5-ft depressed

48
 3.0 ......._ I

FOR: Q =3 FT 3 /s
n = 0.016
Sx= 0.03
2.5

P-1-7/8 (2X4 FT)

en
-
~ j~:.......::-___:::::-f:::::~~- P -1-7/8 ( 2X2 FT)
Su
.....
.....
--+--=====r.c- - P-1-1/8 (2X2 FT)
.....- ... L-~_...;;~~~=~"'::';;~~ J ./'Curved Vane ( 2X2 FT)
SDI or UCO (L=20 FT)
--
pe
Cl
Ar
-~04~~ld~gr~~)~tilt-BaK(2X2 FT)
...-- P- -171:5-4 2X2 FT)
3: .....- JO-qegr~e llt-Bar( 2X2 FT)
Q ~ Retlcullne
rc Ar
....
..... 1.5 t- SDI or UCO (L=15 FT)
''
Q
ed ch
!:~. I I I
'···-~
.....
.... ~t ......
a.. ..... ......
.....
ed ivI ===--1
u
ch
a:
a ~~---~ I
..... or UCO (L=lO FT)
....
z 1.0
by l -- I lJCU ( L=5 FT)

H
E
iv
0.51 I I I I tsDI or uc o ( L 5 FT)I I
C 1
SDI: Slotted Drain Inlet (W::: 1. 75 IN)
UCO: Undepressed Curb Opening (h~4.25 IN)
DCO: Depressed Curb Opening (h~4.25 IN; W=2 FT; a=2 IN)
-2
0
2
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
ed
LONGITUDINAL SLOPE S

Figure 15. Comparison of inlet interception capacity, slope variable.

curb-opening inlet has about 67 percent more interception capa-
city than an undepressed inlet at 2 percent slope, 3 percent

cross slope, and 3 ft 3;s (0.08 m3 /s) and about 79 percent more
interception capacity at an 8 percent slope.

At low velocities, all of the water flowing in the section

of gutter occupied by the grate, called frontal flow, is inter-
cepted by grate inlets, and a small portion of the flow along the
length of the grate, termed side flow, is intercepted. Water
begins to skip or splash over the grate at velocities dependent
on the grate configuration. Figure 15 shows that interception
capacity and efficiency is reduced at slopes steeper than the
slope at which splash-over begins. Splash-over for the less
efficient grates begins at the slope at which the interception

ed
capacity curve begins to deviate from the curve of the more
efficient grates. All of the 2-ft by 2-ft (0.61 m x 0.61 m)
grates have equal interception capacity and efficiency at a flow

2
-2
rate of 3 ft 3 ;s (0.08 m3 /s), cross slope of 3 percent, and slope
of 2 percent. At slopes steeper than 2 percent, splash-over

EC
occurs on the reticuline grate and the interception capacity is
reduced. At a slope of 6 percent, velocities are such that
by l
splash-over occurs on all except the curved vane and parallel bar
iv a
H
grates. From these performance characteristics curves, it can be
ed iv
concluded that parallel-bar grates and the curved vane grate are
relatively efficient at higher velocities and the reticuline
ed ch

grate is least efficient. At low velocities, the grates perform

equally.
ch rc Ar

The capacity and efficiency of grates increase with increas-

ed slope and velocity, if splash-over does not occur, in contrast
with slotted inlets and curb-opening inlets. This is because
frontal flow increases with increased velocity and all frontal
flow will be intercepted if splash-over does not occur.

Interception capacity and efficiency of curb-opening and

pe
Ar

slotted inlets decrease with increased slope because of reduced

flow depths at the curb. Long curb-opening and slotted inlets
compare favorable with grates in interception capacity and effi-
Su

ciency for conditions illustrated in figure 15.

Figure 15 also illustrates that interception by longer

grates would not be substantially greater than interception by 2-
ft by 2-ft (0.61 x 0.61 m) grates. In order to capture more of
the flow, wider grates would be needed.

Figure 16 can be used for further study and comparisons of

inlet interception capacity and efficiency. It shows, for exam-
ple, that at a 6 percent slope, splash-over begins at about 0.7

ft3/s (0.02 m3/s) on a reticuline grate. It also illustrates

50
 wa::
>W
-l. a::m
~(J o\o FOR: =:>::::!:
GRATES: L=2 FT; W=2 FT n=O.OI6 u=>
(J~ 0 z
1 P-1-7/8 & P-1-1/8 S=0.06 I ..,..,7
3 t- 2 . Curved vane 0«.."// / ,o OJo Sx=0.03 I
3. 450 Inclined Bars / '
2
/ /
4. P-1-7/8-4 / / II
/
/ /
coo 3
5. 30° Inclined Bars / /
/
/ / / 4
6. Reticuline / / / .r ~........ 5
/ :7 :;;;>' -= J.-=:;;;;» -=~
~6
/ /
/ /
/
/
Slotted Inlets W~1.75 IN or / / / 8
/ /
U) ' / /
- Curb Openings h~4.25 IN / / /
/ /
~ ,/
Su
7. L= 20 FT / /
.... / / /
/ /
/
8. L=15 FT /
/
2 / /
9. L=10 FT / /
pe
/ /
10. L= 5 FT / /
Ar
-.....a
/ /

3t Depressed Curb
Q
rc Ar
W=2 FT; a=2 ~~ening/s/>-~ L.d=::Jg
...
..... 11. L=10 FT / ' __,.., / / 12
ed ch 1//,/ I
lna 12 • L= 5 FT
...,loU
....A.
IIU
ch
ed iv
u
a:
IIU
a
....
l!
by l
HI + I I liO
EC
iv
0
0 2 3 4
-2
2 5
3
TOTAL GUTTER FLOW Q (FT /S)
ed
Figure 16. Comparison of inlet interception capacity, flow rate variable.
that the interception capacity of all inlets increases and inlet
efficiency decreases with increased discharge. Figure 15, with a
fixed flow rate, shows decreasing interception capacity and
efficiency for curb openings and slotted inlets, and increasing
capacity and efficiency for grates with increased slopes until
splash-over begins.

This comparison of inlet interception capacity and effi-

ciency neglects the effects of debris and clogging on the various
inlets. All types of inlets, including curb-opening inlets, are
subject to clogging, some being much more susceptible than
others. Attempts to simulate clogging tendencies in the labo-
ratory have not been notably successful, except to demonstrate
the importance of parallel bar spacing in debris handling effi-
ciency. Grates with wider spacings of longitudinal bars pass

ed
debris more efficiently. Except for reticuline grates, grates
with lateral bar spacing of less than 4-in (0.10 m) were not

2
tested so conclusions cannot be drawn from tests concerning

-2
debris handling capabilities of many grates currently in use.
Problems with clogging are largely local since the amount of

EC
debris varies significantly from one locality to another. Some
localities must contend with only a small amount of debris while
iv by l
others experience extensive clogging of drainage inlets. Since
a
partial clogging of inlets on grade rarely causes major problems,
H
ed iv
allowances should not be made for reduction in inlet interception
capacity except where local experience indicates an allowance is
ed ch

advisable.
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

52
7.0 INTERCEPTION CAPACITY OF INLETS ON GRADE

The interception capacity of inlets on grade is dependent on

factors discussed in section 6.1. In this section, new design
charts for inlets on grade and procedures for using the charts
are presented for the various inlet configurations.

Charts for grate inlet interception have been made general

and are applicable to all grate inlets tested for the Federal
Highway Administration (3 through 6). The chart for frontal flow
interception is based on-test results which show that grates
intercept all of the frontal flow until a velocity is reached at
which water begins to splash over the grate. At velocities
greater than "splash-over" velocity, grate efficiency in inter-

ed
cepting frontal flow is diminished. Grates also intercept a
portion of the flow along the length of the grate, or the side

2
flow. A chart is provided to determine side-flow interception.

-2
One set of charts is provided for slotted inlets and curb-

EC
opening inlets, because these inlets are both side-flow weirs.
The equation developed for determining the length of inlet
by l
required for total interception fits the test data for both types
iv a
of inlets.
H
ed iv

A procedure for determining the interception capacity of

ed ch

combination inlets is also presented for cases where it would

differ materially from the interception capacity of a grate only
rc Ar

and for use where partial or total clogging of the grate is

ch
assumed.

7.1 Grate Inlets

Grates are effective highway pavement drainage inlets where

clogging with debris is not a problem. Where debris is a
pe

problem, consideration should be given to debris handling effi-

Ar

ciency rankings from laboratory tests in which an attempt was

made to qualitatively simulate field conditions (3). Debris
Su

handling efficiencies were based on the total number of simulated

"leaves" arriving at the grate and the number passed. Results of
the tests are summarized in table 4.

Grate inlets will intercept all of the gutter flow passing

over the grate, or the frontal flow, if the grate is sufficiently
long and the gutter flow velocity is low. Only a portion of the
frontal flow will be intercepted if the velocity is high or the
grate is short and splash-over occurs. A part of the flow along
the side of the grate will be intercepted, dependent on the cross

53
 Table 4. Average debris handling efficiencies of
grates tested.

Rank Grate Longitudinal slope

0.005 0.04

1 cv - 3-1/4 - 4-1/4 46 61
2 30 - 3-1/4 - 4 44 55
3 45 - 3-1/4 - 4 43 48
4 p - 1-7/8 32 32
5 p - 1-7/8 - 4 18 28
6 45 - 2-1/4 - 4 16 23

ed
7 Recticuline 12 16
8 p - 1-1/8 9 20

2
-2
slope of the pavement, the length of the grate, and flow

EC
velocity.
by l
The ratio of frontal flow to total gutter flow, E0
a
iv , for a

H
straight cross slope is expressed by equation (7):
ed iv

= Ow = W/T)2.67
ed ch

Eo 1 - (1 ( 7)
0
rc Ar

= total
ch
where: 0 gutter flow
Ow = flow in width W, ft 3;s (m3/s)
W = width of depressed gutter or grate, ft (m)
T = total spread of water in the gutter, ft (m)

Chart 4, section 5.2, provides a graphical solution of E0

for either straight cross slopes or depressed gutter sections.
pe
Ar

The ratio of side flow, Os' to total gutter flow is:

Os = 1 - Ow = 1 - Eo ( 8)
Su

0 0
The ratio of frontal flow intercepted to total frontal flow,
Rf, is expressed by equation (9):

Rf = 1 - 0.09 (V - V0 ) ( 9)

where: V =velocity of flow in the gutter, ft/s (m/s)

V
0
= gutter velocity where splash-over first occurs

54
 13
I
EXA~1PLE:
I2 r GIVEN: RETICULINE GRATE
I I I- L= 3 FT
V= 8 FT/S

c:n
- 10 ~ FIND: Rf= 0.81
........
1-
u. 9
Su
- 0
> 8
pe
>
Ar
1- 7
-u
rc Ar
0
...
w 6
>
ed ch
(JI
U1 cc:
w 5
>
ed iv
0
ch
I
a
::c 4
c:n
by l
...cc
A. 3
c:n
2
i H
EC
ve
0 I I I I I I I I I I I/ 1· I I /I / I / I / I / II/ I/ I
-2
0 2 3 4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0. 9 1.0
2
LENGTH OF GRATE L (FT)
d Rt
CHART 7. Grate inlet frontal flow interception efficiency.,
 This ratio is equivalent to frontal flow interception effi-
ciency. Chart 7 provides a solution of equation (9) which takes
into account grate length, bar configuration and gutter velocity
at which splash-over occurs. The gutter velocity needed to use
Chart 7 is total gutter flow divided by the area of flow.

The ratio of side flow intercepted to total side flow, Rs,

or side flow interception efficiency, is expressed by equation
(10) :
l.8)
= 1/(1 + 0.15v ( 10)
S L2.3
X

where: L = length of the grate, ft (m)

d
Chart 8 provides a solution of equation (10).

2
A deficiency in developing empirical equations and charts

-2
from experimental data is evident in Chart 8. The fact that a

ciency is very small.

ve
grate will intercept all or almost all of the side flow where the

EC
velocity is low and the spread only slightly exceeds the grate
width is not reflected in the Chart.
by l Error due to this defi-
In fact, where velocities are high, side
a
flow interception can be neglected entirely without significant
error.
H
ed iv
ed ch

The efficiency, E, of a grate is expressed as equation (11):

i
ch rc Ar

The first term on the right side of equation (11) is the

ratio of intercepted frontal flow to total gutter flow, and the
second term is the ratio of intercepted side flow to total side
flow. The second term is insignificant with high velocities and
short grates.
pe

The interception capacity of a grate inlet on grade is equal

Ar

to the efficiency of the grate multiplied by the total gutter

flow:
Su

(12)

Use of Charts 7 and 8 is illustrated in the following

examples.

Example 9:

Given: Data from example 5 in section 5.2

56
 I
0.8 -
--- --- --
0.6 r-...~
~~
-- ~

...............
f'-...... .............
-........
"""'-
.........
~
0.4 ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 'I'<~
~ ~~ ~,c:)-
0.3

~~ ~ ~"'
""'
""""'"~ ~~
" "

~
0.2

~~~~~ ~ ~"

d
Rs
~

2
0.1
" " "s " " " " "' "'
"
"'"""- "'"'
··'-
"' """- "' """- "'"'

-2
0.08
"'
0.06

0.04
------ ----
by l
H
EC
a
ve
....... -"""- ~"'
~- -~--~- ~ ~-
- -

" ~""'~~~
/0 ·" ""'~
""" /~ ' ~~""'"
"'\~
6' """-
- - - ~- - \,.

"' ""' T"'

~"""
'""'"
"' '
"'"' b.,.

~ ~ ""' ""'~
ed iv
0.03
/6' "\:
~~"" ~ ~
ed ch

0.02
i
~"~ ~'~ ~
0.2 I
I

""'r\"
rc Ar

I
ch
0.1
~
"....... " " " ' <~
" "-""
'\,.
0.08 ~ """-.. " / '
0.06 ,__ EXAMPLE: '\""'
"
Sx
0.04
1--

GIVEN:
"'~"'' ' ~
""" "'
"'' l~s
""'-<';-
~
pe

~ """' ~~:
Ar

Sx = 0.025
0.03
--->:-:- ~~s--- ----~~---~-~- -- -~ ""' ~
Su

0.02 """ ~

~'~ ~ ~~
t- FIND: Rs =0.063
~

""
0.01

CHART 8. Grate inlet side flow interception efficiency.

Find: Interception capacity of:
(1) a curved vane grate, and
(2) a reticuline grate 2-ft long and 2-ft wide

Solution:
From example 5, section 5.2:
w = 2 ft
Gutter depression = 2 in
T = 8 ft
s = 0.01
sx = 0.025
E0 = 0.69
Q = 3.0 ft 3 ;s
V = 3.1 ft/s

ed
(1) Curved Vane Grate: Rf = 1.0 (Chart 7)
(2) Reticuline Grate: Rf = 1.0 Chart 7)

2
-2
Both grates: Rs = 0.1 (Chart 8)

EC
From Equation 12:
Qi = 3.0(1.0 X 0.69 + 0.1(1- 0.69)] = 3(.69 + 0.03)

=
iv
2.2 ft 3 /s
by la
H
ed iv

The interception capacity of a curved vane grate is the same

ed ch

as that for a reticuline grate for the stated conditions. Note

that if side interception were neglected, the results would be
rc Ar

within the range of accuracy of the runoff estimation method and

ch
gutter flow computations.

Example 10:
Given: T = 10 ft
sx = 0.025
s = 0.04
n = 0.016
pe

Bicycle traffic is not permitted

Ar

Find: Interception capacity:

Su

(1) P - 1-7/8 grate; width = 2 ft; length = 2 ft

(2) Reticuline grate; width = 2 ft; length = 2 ft
(3) Use length, L = 4 ft

Solution:
Q = 6.6 ft 3 ;s (Chart 3)
W/T = 2/10 = 0.20
E0 = 0.46 (Chart 4)
V = 5.3 ft/s (Chart 2)

58
 (1) Rf = 1.0 (P - 1-7/8 grate) (Chart 7)
(2) Rf = 0.9 (Reticuline grate) (Chart 7)
(3) Rf = 1.0 (Both grates)

( 1) and (2) Rs = 0.04 (Chart 8)

(3) Rs = 0.17 (Both grates)

From equation (12):

(1) Qi = 6.6(1.0 X 0.46 + 0.04(1 3 0.46)]
= 6.6 (0.46 + .02) = 3.2 ft /s (P - 1-7/8)
(2) Qi = 6.6(0.9 X 0.46 + 0.04(1- 0.46)]
6.6(0.41 + 0.02) = 2.8 ft 3 ;s
= (reticuline)
(3) Qi = 6.6[0.46 + 0.17(0.54)]

ed
= 3.6 ft 3;s (both grates)

2
The parallel bar grate will intercept about 14 percent more
flow than the reticuline grate or 48 percent of the total flow as

-2
opposed to 42 percent for the reticuline grate. Increasing the
length of the grates would not be cost-effective because the

EC
increase in side flow ~nterception is small.
ivby la
It may be desirable for agencies to develop design curves

H
ed iv
for the standard grates used. A step-by-step procedure is pro-
vided in Appendix E for this purpose.
ed ch

7.2 Curb-Opening Inlets

ch rc Ar

Curb-opening inlets are effective in the drainage of highway

pavements where flow depth at the curb is sufficient for the
inlet to perform efficiently, as discussed in section 6.1. Curb
openings are relatively free of clogging tendencies and offer
little interference to traffic operation. They are a viable
alternative to grates in many locations where grates would be in
traffic lanes or would be hazardous for pedestrians or bicy-
pe
Ar

clists.
Su

The length of curb-opening inlet required for total inter-

ception of gutter flow on a pavement section with a straight
cross slope is expressed by equation (13):

( 13)

where: K = 0.6 (0.076 in SI)

LT = curb opening length required to intercept 100
percent of the gutter flow

59
 The efficiency of curb-opening inlets shorter than the
length required for total interception is expressed by equation
( 14) :

( 14)

where: L = curb-opening length, ft (m)

Chart 9 is a nomograph for the solution of equation (13),

and Chart 10 provides a solution of equation (14).

The length of inlet required for total interception by

depressed curb-opening inlets or curb-openings in depressed gut-
ter sections can be found by the use of an equivalent cross
slope, Se, in equation (13).

ed
Se = Sx + S~E 0 (15)

2
-2
where: s~ = cross slope of the gutter measured from the cross
slope of the pavement, Sx

EC
= (a/12W)
by l
iv a
where: a = gutter depression, in (m)
H
ed iv
E0 = ratio of flow in the depressed section to total
gutter flow
ed ch

~
0 is the.sarne ratio as that used to compute the frontal
rc Ar

flow 1ntercept1on of a grate inlet.

ch
It is apparent from examination of Chart 9 that the length
of curb opening required for total interception can be signifi-
cantly reduced by increasing the cross slope or the equivalent
cross slope. The equivalent cross slope can be increased by use
of a continuously depressed gutter section or a locally depressed
gutter section, as in figure 17.
pe
Ar

Using the equivalent cross slope, Se, equation (13) becomes:

0.6
Su

LT = KQ0.42s0.3(_1_) (16)
nse
The values of K in equation (16) are the same as in equation
( 13) •

Equation (14) is applicable with either straight cross

slopes or compound cross slopes. Charts 9 and 10 are applicable
to depressed curb-opening inlets using Se rather than sx.

Equation (15) uses the ratio, E0 , in the computation of the

60
 _j_ Q
a
f (FT3/S)
f- w --j
50
FOR COMPOS! TE CROSS SLOPES, USE S9 FOR S x . 40
S 9 = Sx + s~ Eo ; s~ = a;w
w 30
z
..J Lr
(.!)
(FT)
z
- 20
z
0:::: 80
::J

ed
1- 70
w Sx, Se
z 60
s ..J

2
0.01 10
(.!) 50

-2
0.001 ~ 8
n z
0::::

EC
::J
0.01 1-
by laiv 0.03
--
H 0.04
ed iv
-- 0.01
ed ch

0.06 3
0.08
0.02
ch rc Ar

0.1 2
0.1
10
0.2 9
8
7
6 0.8
pe
Ar

5 0.6
Su

EXAMPLE: 4 0.5
GIVEN: n=0.016 j S=O.OI 0.4
Sx=0.02 ; Q= 4 FT 3/S
0.3
FIND: LT= 34 FT

CHART 9. Curb-opening and slotted drain inlet length

for total interception.

61
 ed EC
-2
2
0.6~------4-------~------~--------r-------.
ivby la
H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar

0.2 ~--..-+---4-----+------~-------r------.
pe
Ar

0 L---~--~--~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~~
Su

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

LILT

CHART 10. Curb-opening and slotted drain inlet interception efficiency ..

62
equivalent cross slope, Se. Chart 5 can be used to determine
spread and Chart 4 can then be used to determine E0 , as
illustrated in example 11.

d -2
2
by l
H
ed iv
ve
EC
a
ed ch
i
Figure 17. Depressed curb-opening inlet.
ch rc Ar

Example 11:

Given: Sx = 0.03
s = 0.035
Q = 5 ft 3 /s
=
pe

n 0.016
Ar

Find: (1) Qi for a 10-ft curb-opening inlet

Su

(2) Qi for a depressed 10-ft curb-opening inlet

a = 2 in
w = 2 ft
Solution:
(1) T = 8 ft (Chart 3)
LT = 41 ft (Chart 9)
L/LT = 10/41 = 0.24
E = 0.39 (Chart 10)
Qi = EQ = 0.39 X 5 = 2.0 ft 3 /s

63
 (2) Qn = 5.0 x 0.016 = 0.08 ft3/s
Sw/Sx = (0.03 + 0.083)/0.03 = 3.77

T/W = 3.5 (Chart 5)

T = 3.5W = 7.0 ft
W/T = 2/7 = 0.29
E0 = 0.72 (Chart 4)
Se = Sx + S~E 0 = 0.03 + 0.083(0.72) = 0.09

LT = 23 ft (Chart 9)
L/LT = 10/23 = 0.43
E = 0.64 (Chart 10)
Qi = 0.64 x 5 = 3.2 ft3/s

The depressed curb-opening inlet will intercept 1.6 times

d
the flow intercepted by the undepressed curb opening and over 60
percent of the total flow.

2
-2
7.3 Slotted Inlets

ve
EC
Wide experience with the debris handling capabilities of
by l
slotted inlets is not available. Deposition in the pipe is the

H
a
problem most commonly encountered, and the inlet is accessible
ed iv
for cleaning with a high pressure water jet.
ed ch

Slotted inlets are effective pavement drainage inlets which

i
have a variety of applications. They can be used on curbed or
rc Ar

uncurbed sections and offer little interference to traffic opera-

ch
tions. An installation is illustrated in figure 18.

Flow interception by slotted inlets and curb-opening inlets

is similar in that each is a side weir and the flow is subjected
to lateral acceleration due to the cross slope of the pavement.
Analysis of data from the Federal Highway Administration tests of
slotted inlets with slot widths > 1.75-in indicates that the
pe

length of slotted inlet required-for total interception can be

Ar

computed by equation (13). Chart 9 is therefore applicable for

both curb-opening inlets and slotted inlets. Similarly, equation
Su

(14) is also applicable to slotted inlets and Chart 10 can be

used to obtain the inlet efficiency for the selected length of
inlet.

use of Charts 9 and 10 for slotted inlets is identical to

their use for curb-opening inlets. Additional examples to demon-
strate the use of the charts are not provided here for that
reason. It should be noted, however, that it is much less
expensive to add length to a slotted inlet to increase intercep-
tion capacity than it is to add length to a curb-opening inlet.

64
 d -2
2
H
ed iv
ve
by l
EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar

Figure 18. Slotted drain inlet at an intersection.

7.4 Combination Inlets

pe

The interception capacity of a combination inlet consisting

Ar

of a curb opening and grate placed side-by-side, as shown in

figure 19, is not appreciable greater than that of the grate
Su

alone. Capacity is computed by neglecting the curb opening. A

combination inlet is sometimes used with the curb opening or a
part of the curb opening placed upstream of the grate as
illustrated in figure 20. The curb opening in such an installa-
tion intercepts debris which might otherwise clog the grate and
has been termed a "sweeper" by some. A combination inlet with a
curb opening upstream of the grate has an interception capacity
equal to the sum of the two inlets, except that the frontal flow
and thus the interception capacity of the grate is reduced by
interception by the curb opening.

65
 d -2
2
Figure 19. ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
Combination curb-opening, 45° tilt-bar
grate inlet.
ed ch
i
rc Ar

The following examples illustrate computation of the inter-

ch
ception capacity of a combination curb opening - grate inlet with
a portion of the curb opening upstream of the grate.

Example 12:

Given: Q 7 ft 3;s
=
s = 0.04
pe

sx = 0.03
Ar

n = 0.016
Su

Find: Interception capacity of a combination curb opening -

grate inlet. The curb opening is 10-ft long and the
grate is a 2-ft by 2-ft reticuline grate placed along-
side the downstream 2-ft of the curb opening.

Solution:
LT = 52 ft (Chart 9)
8 ft of the curb opening is upstream of the grate.

66
 d -2
2
H
ed iv
ve
by l
EC
a
ed ch

Figure 20. Combination inlet with portion of curb

opening upstream of grates.
i
ch rc Ar

L/LT = 8/52 = 0.15

E = 0.25 (Chart 10)
Qi = 0.25 x 7 = 1.8 ft 3 ;s (interception capacity of
the curb opening upstream of the grate)

Q - Qi = 7 - 1.8 = 5.2 ft3/s (Q at the grate)

pe
Ar

T = 8 (Chart 3)
W/T = 2/8 = .25
E0 = 0.54 (Chart 4)
Su

Rf = 0.91 (Chart 7)
Rs = 0.06 (Chart 8)
E = RfEo + Rs(l- E0 ) = 0.91(0.54) + 0.06(0.46) = 0.52

Qi = 0.52 x 5.2 = 2.7 ft 3 /s (interception capacity of

the grate)

Total Qi = 1.8 + 2.7 = 4.5 ft 3 /s

67
Example 13:

Given: Data from example 12.

Find: (1) Qi for a 10-ft curb opening

(2) Qi for a 2 x 2 ft reticuline grate

Solution:
(1) L~ = 52 ft (example 12)
L/LT = 10/52 = 0.19
E = 0.31 (Chart 10)
Qi = EQ = 0.31 X 7 = 2.2 ft3/s

(2) T = 9 ft (Chart 3)
W/T = 2/9 = 0.22

ed
V = 5.7 ft/s (Chart 2)
E0 = 0.48 (Chart 4)

2
Rf = 0.89 (Chart 7)
Rs = 0.04 (Chart 8)

-2
E = 0.89(0.48) + 0.04(0.52) = 0.45

EC
Qi = EQ = 0.45 X 7 = 3.2 ft 3 /s
by l
iv a
The combination inlet of example 12 has twice as much
H
ed iv
capacity as the curb opening only and 41 percent more capacity
than the grate only. The combination inlet, curb-opening inlet,
ed ch

and grate inlet intercept 64 percent, 31 percent, and 46 percent

of the total gutter flow, respectively.
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

68
8.0 INTERCEPTION CAPACITY OF INLETS IN SAG LOCATIONS

Inlets in sag locations operate as weirs under low head

conditions and as orifices at greater depths. Orifice flow
begins at depths dependent on the grate size, the curb opening
height, or the slot width of the inlet, as the case may be. At
depths between those at which weir flow definitely prevails and
those at which orifice flow prevails, flow is in a transition
stage. At these depths, control is ill-defined and flow may
fluctuate between weir and orifice control. Design procedures
adopted for this Circular are based on a conservative approach to
estimating the capacity of inlets in sump locations.

The efficiency of inlets in passing debris is critical in

ed
sag locations because all runoff which enters the sag must be
passed through the inlet. Total or partial clogging of inlets in

2
these locations can result in hazardous ponded conditions. Grate
inlets alone are not recommended for use in sag locations because

-2
of the tendencies of grates to become clogged. Combination
inlets or curb-opening inlets are recommended for use in these

EC
locations.
ivby la
H
ed iv
8.1 Grate Inlets
ed ch

A grate inlet in a sag location operates as a weir to depths

dependent on the bar configuration and size of the grate and as
an orifice at greater depths. Grates of larger dimension and
ch rc Ar

grates with more open area, i.e., with less space occupied by
lateral and longitudinal bars, will operate as weirs to greater
depths than smaller grates or grates with less open area.

The capacity of grate inlets operating as weirs is:

Q·
1
= CwPdl.S (17)
pe
Ar

where: P = perimeter of the grate in ft (m) disregarding bars

and the side against the curb
Su

Cw = 3.0 (1.66 for SI)

The capacity of a grate inlet operating as an orifice is:

where: C0 = orifice coefficient

= 0.67
A = clear opening area of the grate, ft 2 (m2)
g = 32.16 ft/s 2 (9.80 m;s 2 )

69
 Use of equation (18) requires the clear area of opening of
the grate. Tests of three grates for the Federal Highway Admin-
istration (5) showed that for flat bar grates, such as the
P - 1-7/8 --4 and P - 1-1/8 grates, the clear opening is equal to
the total area of the grate less the area occupied by longitudin-
al and lateral bars. The curved vane grate performed about 10
percent better than a grate with a net opening equal to the total
area less the area of the bars projected on a horizontal plane.
That is, the projected area of the bars in a curved vane grate is
68 percent of the total area of the grate leaving a net opening
of 32 percent. The grate performed as a grate with a net opening
of 35 percent. Tilt-bar grates were not tested, but extrapola-
tion of the above results would indicate a net opening area of 34
percent for the 30-degree tilt-bar and zero for the 45-degree
tilt-bar grate. Obviously, the 45-degree tilt-bar grate would

d
have greater than zero capacity. Tilt-bar and curved vane grates
are not recommended for sump locations where there is a chance

2
that operation would be as an orifice.

-2
bar grate are given on Chart 11.

grate sizes.
by l
H ve
Opening ratios for the grates tested and the 30-degree tilt-

EC
Chart 11 is a plot of equations (17) and (18) for various
a
The effects of grate size on the depth at which a
ed iv
grate operates as an orifice is apparent from the chart. Transi-
tion from weir to orifice flow results in interception capacity
ed ch

less than that computed by either the weir or the orifice

i
equation. This capacity can be approximated by drawing in a
rc Ar

curve between the lines representing the perimeter and net area
ch
of the grate to be used.

Example 14 illustrates use of Chart 11:

Example 14:

Given: A symmetrical sag vertical curve with equal bypass from

pe

inlets upgrade of the low point; allow for 50% clogging

Ar

of the grate.
Su

Qb = 3.6 ft 3 /s

Q = 8 ft 3 ;s, design storm

Qb = 4.4 ft 3 ;s

Q 11 ft 3 /s, check storm

=
T = 10 ft, design
sx = 0.05
d = TSX = 0.5 ft

70
 GRATE OPENING RATIO
6 · P-1-7/8-4 0.8
P-1-7/8 0.9
5
· P-1-1/8 0.6
Reticuline 0.8
4
• Curved vane 0.35
30° tilt-bar 0.34
3
• Tested

ed -2
2
"'I

EC
.....
by l
iva
c

H
0.6~--------+-----+---~--~~~~L,~L,~~~~~--
ed iv
:z:
I-
A. 0.5 ~--------...!......----+------17'--~~~4S.~~.L....,-/
.....
ed ch

CURB
Cl
0.4~------
T
w
ch rc Ar

1
r-- L ---1
A =CLEAR OPENING AREA

P = 2W + L (WITH CURB)

·P=2(W+L) (WITHOUT CURB)

pe
Ar

2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100
Su

DISCHARGE 0 (FT 3/S)

CHART 11. Grate inlet capacity in sump conditions.

71
Find: Grate size for design Q and depth at curb for check Q.
Check spread at S = 0.003 on approaches to the low point.

Solution:
From Chart 11, a grate must have a perimeter of 8 ft to

intercept 8 ft 3;s at a depth of 0.5 ft. Some assumptions

must be made regarding the nature of the clogging in
order to compute the capacity of a partially clogged
grate. If the area of a grate is 50 percent covered by
debris so that the debris-covered portion does not con-
tribute to interception, the effective perimeter will be
reduced by a lesser amount than 50 percent. For example,
if a 2-ft x 4-ft grate is clogged so that the effective
width is 1-ft, then the perimeter, P = 1 + 4 + 1 = 6 ft,

ed
rather than 8 ft, the total perimeter, or 4 ft, half of
the total perimeter. The area of the opening would be

2
reduced by 50 percent and the perimeter by 25 percent.
Therefore, assuming 50 percent clogging along the length

-2
of the grate, a 4 x 4, a 2 x 6, or a 3 x 5 grate would
meet requirements of an 8-ft perimeter 50 percent clog-

EC
ged.
ivby la
Assuming that the installation chosen to meet design

H
ed iv
conditions is a double 2 x 3 ft grate, for 50 percent
clogged conditions:
ed ch

p = 1 + 6 + 1 = 8 ft
ch rc Ar

For design flow:

d = 0.5 ft (Chart 11)

For check flow:

d = 0.6 ft (Chart 11)
T = 12.0 ft

At the check flow rate, pending will extend 2 ft into a

pe
Ar

traffic lane if the grate is 50 percent clogged in the manner

assumed.
Su

AASHTO geometric policy recommends a gradient of 0.3 percent

within 50 ft of the level point in a sag vertical curve.

Check T at S = 0.003 for the design flow, and check flow:

Q = 3.6 ft 3;s, T = 8.2 ft (design storm) (Chart 3)

Q = 4.4 ft3/s, T = 9 ft (check storm) (Chart 3)

72
Conclusion:

A double 2 x 3-ft grate 50 percent clogged is adequate to

intercept the design flow at a spread which does not exceed
design spread and spread on the approaches to the low point will
not exceed design spread. However, the tendency of grate inlets
to clog completely warrants consideration of a combination inlet
or curb-opening inlet in a sag where ponding can occur and
flanking inlets on the low gradient approaches.

8.2 Curb-Opening Inlets

The capacity of a curb-opening inlet in a sag depends on

water depth at the curb, the curb opening length, and the height

d
of the curb opening. The inlet operates as a weir to depths
equal to the curb opening height and as an orifice at depths

2
greater than 1.4 times the opening height. At depths between 1.0

-2
and 1.4 times the opening height, flow is in a transition stage.

ve EC
Spread on the pavement is the usual criterion for judging
the adequacy of pavement drainage inlet design.
by l It is also
convenient and practical in the laboratory to measure depth at

H
ed iv
a
the curb upstream of the inlet at the point of maximum spread on
the pavement. Therefore, depth at the curb measurements from
experiments coincide with the depth at curb of interest to
ed ch

designers. The weir coefficient for a curb-opening inlet is less

i
than the usual weir coefficient for several reasons, the most
rc Ar

obvious of which is that depth measurements from experimental

ch
tests were not taken at the weir, and drawdown occurs between the
point where measurements were made and the weir.

The weir location for a depressed curb-opening inlet is at

the edge of the gutter, and the effective weir length is
dependent on the width of the depressed gutter and the length of
the curb opening. The weir location for a curb-opening inlet
pe

that is not depressed is at the lip of the curb opening, and its
Ar

length is equal to that of the inlet. Limited experiments and

extrapolation of the results of tests on depressed inlets indi-
Su

cate that the weir coefficient for curb-opening inlets without

depression is approximately equal to that for a depressed curb-
opening inlet.

The equation for the interception capacity of a depressed

curb-opening inlet operating as a weir is:

(19)

73
where : Cw = 2 • 3 ( 1 • 2 5 for S I )
L = length of curb opening, ft (m)
W = lateral width of depression, ft (m)
d = depth at curb measured from the normal cross slope,
ft {m), i.e., d = TSX

The weir equation is applicable to depths at the curb

approximately equal to the height of the opening plus the depth
of the depression. Thus, the limitation on the use of equation
(19) for a depressed curb-opening inlet is:

d < h + a/12 (d ~ h + a , SI)

where: h = height of curb-opening inlet, ft (m)

a = depth of depression, in (m)

d
Experiments have not been conducted for curb-opening inlets

2
with a continuously depressed gutter, but it is reasonable to

-2
expect that the effective weir length would be as great as that

(W = 0) becomes:

Q·1 H
ed iv

= CwLd 1 • 5
ve
for an inlet in a local depression. Use of equation (19) will

EC
yield conservative estimates of the interception capacity.
by l
The weir equation for curb-opening inlets without depression
a
(20)
ed ch
i
The depth limitation for operation as a weir becomes:
rc Ar

d < h
ch
Curb-opening inlets operate as orifices at depths greater
than approximately 1.4h. The interception capacity can be com-
puted by equation (21):

Qi = C0 hL(2gd 0 ) 0 • 5 = C0 A[2g(di- %)]0.5 (21)

pe

where: C0 = orifice coefficient

Ar

= 0.67
h = height of curb-opening inlet, ft (m)
Su

d 0 = effective head on the center of the orifice

throat, ft (m)
A= clear area of opening, ft2 (m2)
di = depth at lip of curb opening, ft (m)
h = height of curb-opening orifice, ft (m)
= TSX + a/12
Equation (21) is applicable to depressed and undepressed
curb-opening inlets and the depth at the inlet includes any
gutter depression.

74
 do= d·-
I h/2

(a)
Horizontal throat

ed
L =LENGTH OF OPENING

2
-2
EC
by l
iv a
do= di -(h/2)Sin8
H
ed iv
ed ch

(b)
ch rc Ar

Inclined throat
pe
Ar

do
Su

(c)
--1hi
Vertical throat

Figure 21. Curb-opening inlets.

75
 Height of the orifice in equation (21) assumes a vertical
orifice opening. As illustrated in figure 21, other orifice
throat locations can change the effective depth on the orifice
and the dimension (di - h/2). A limited throat width could
reduce the capacity of the curb-opening inlet by causing the
inlet to go into orifice flow at depths less than the height of
the opening.

The orifice equation for curb-opening inlets with other than

vertical faces (see figure 21) is:

Q = C0 hL(2gd 0 ) 0 • 5 (22)

where: C0 = 0.67 = orifice coefficient

h = orifice throat width, ft (m)

d
d 0 = effective head on the center of the orifice throat,
ft (m)

2
-2
Chart 12 provides solutions for equations (19) and (21) for

by l
other than vertical orifice throats.

H
ed iv

EC
a
ve
depressed curb-opening inlets, and Chart 13 provides solutions
for equations (20) and (21) for curb-opening inlets without
depression. Chart 14 is provided for use for curb openings with

Example 15 illustrates the use of Charts 12 and 13.

ed ch

Example 15:
i
rc Ar

Given: Curb-opening inlet in a sump location

ch
L = 5 ft
h = 5 in

(1) Undepressed curb opening

sx = 0.05
T = 8 ft
pe

(2) Depressed curb opening

Ar

sx = 0.05
a = 2 in
Su

w = 2 ft
T = 8 ft

Find: Qi

Solution:
(1) d = TSX = 8 X 0.05 = 0.4 ft
d < h
Qi = 3.8 ft 3 ;s (Chart 13)

76
 FLOW

A _j
SECTION A- A

4 ~--~--~--~--~~~-~,------~--------~
.... ~
........; ,, '<.
3 t-------1---+----t--+-----+--+ "<
;I
-<:-.

d
j

2
-

-2
2 'I

I /1/
1-
-
u..

ca
+
"CI

II
by l
H
ed iv
a
ve
EC
j
'I
Y./t; ~
/I /I /I
}If

tl" -
ed ch

0.9
·- VI V; /1 /1 /1
"CI 0.8
i
,
rc Ar

0.7
ch
/

0.6
//
0.5
pe
Ar Su

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40

DISCHARGE Q (fT3/S)
CHART 12. Depressed curb-opening inlet capacity in sump locations.
77
 3
I I I I

,,a·<orv'
(" l ,,rv ,,"'> ,,\;)'- ,,(Q
'X'-= I 'X 'X 'X 'X
2 .
1./- I I I

Su
0.9
-......... 0.8
pe
- 0.7
Ar
-= 0.6
rc Ar
cc 0.5
L&.l
....
ed ch
-....J <
00 0.4
==
.....
ed iv
0
ch
0.3
a !f41!fllfl!A
:c
....
a.. h~
L&.l
by l
Cl
I 1
0.2
H
iv
L=LENGTH OF CURB OPENING
EC
o.'?~
A=Lh
-2
0.1 I

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2 20 30 40 50 60
ed
DISCHARGE Q (FT 3/S)
CHART 13. Curb-opening inlet capacity in sump locations.
 3
I I I I 7
1/ !/
j I /, 1/
2
v
fl I v I II I
-..t:::::'
;;;
I
II
Su i I 1I
0.9 If 17 1/ !f
I I j
0.8
1-
- 1/
1.&.
pe
0.7
Ar
- 0 0.6 II
"'CC
rc IAI r I I I I
0.5 I
:c
1-
ed/ ch
-...] a.
1.0 Ll.l 0.4
Q
I ed iv
a:
ch
Ll.l
1- 0.3
a
cc i
3: ...,I
by l
0.2 Q = 0.67 hL/2gdo
H -
I
iv
h =WIDTH OF ORIFICE I

L= LENGTH OF ORIFICE
EC
do=WATER DEPTH TO THE CENTER
OF ORIFICE
-2
0.1 2 I I I I I I I I
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 20 30 40 50
ed
DISCHARGE Q (FT 3 /S)

CHART 14. Curb-opening inlet orifice capacity for inclined and vertical orifice throats.
 (2) d = 0.4 ft < (h + a/12)
P = L + 1.8W = 5 + 3.6 = 8.6 ft

5 ft 3;s
Q·1 =
(Chart 12)
At a d = 0.4 ft, the depressed curb-opening inlet has about
30 percent more capacity than an inlet without depression. In
practice, the flow rate would be known and the depth at the curb
would be unknown.

8.3 Slotted Inlets

Slotted inlets in sag locations perform as weirs to depths

of about 0.2 ft (0.06 m), dependent on slot width and length. At
depths greater than about 0.4 ft (0.12 m), they perform as

d
orifices. Between these depths, flow is in a transition stage.
The interception capacity of a slotted inlet operating as an

2
orifice can be computed by equation (23):

-2
0.8LW(2gd) 0 • 5

where:
Qi =
w=
ve
width of slot, ft (m)
L = length of slot, ft (m)

d > 0.4 ft (0.12 m)

by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
d = depth of water at slot, ft (m)

g = 32.16 ft/s/s (9.08 m/s/s)

(23)
ed ch
i
For a slot width of 1.75 in, equation (23) becomes:
ch rc Ar

Q·1 = 0.94Ld 0 • 5 (24)

The interception capacity of slotted inlets at depths be-

tween 0.2 ft (0.06 m) and 0.4 ft (0.12 m) can be computed by use
of the orifice equation. The orifice coefficient varies with
depth, slot width, and the length of the slotted inlet.
pe

Chart 15 provides solutions for weir flow, equation (24),

Ar

and a plot representing data at depths between weir and orifice

flow.
Su

Example 16:

Given: Q = 5 ft 3 /s

Find: Length of slotted inlet required to limit maximum depth

at curb to 0.3 ft, assuming no clogging

Solution:
L = 15 ft (Chart 15)

80
 3
THESE ORIFICE CURVES A.RE FOR W: 1. 7& IN. !
FOR OTHER VALUES OF W, .ULTIP~Y WCIN)/1.7&.
I
2
tl I
,,~r>' '~! '1~1
"""' I

I
I I I I
0.9
I I I
1- I I I I
Su
~ 0.8
v 1/
I I
--
0.7 I'
~
pe
0.6 I
.
Ar
a: I
..... I
1- 0.5 "'
rc I IAr I I "' "'
c "'
00 ;= , ./ "'
...... 0.4 / ,.......,.,
edI ch,' "'
~
; ).
c "' o·
• q --1 t- w
:c 0.3 "' "' " "' "'
ed ,' ~ivv
"'
ch
1- .,~·~:~
, ". ..
f_.o0 ·~.·:,.·•.},;'f'.·::'.·'o ...·.~o.:
l& a
A. , , "'
.....
a ~v by l
0.2 "";;:> ~
~ ~
H L=LENGTH OF SLOTTED DRAIN INLET
iv
~ rz,O ..,..,,.
EC
0.1
I ~~" I -2 I I I I I

I 2 32 4 5 6 7 8 910 20 30 40 50 60

DISCHARGE Q (FT 3/S)

ed
CHART 15. Slotted drain inlet capacity in sump locations.
8.4 Combination Inlets

Combination inlets consisting of a grate and a curb opening

are considered advisable for use in sags where hazardous po~ding
can occur. The interception capacity of the combination inlet is
essentially equal to that of a grate alone in weir flow unless
the grate opening becomes clogged. In orifice flow, the capacity
is equal to the capacity of the grate plus the capacity of the
curb opening.

Equation (17) and Chart 11 can be used for weir flow in

combination inlets in sag locations. Assuming complete clogging
of the grate, equations (19), (20), and (21) and Charts 12, 13,
and 14 for curb-opening inlets are applicable.

ed
Where depth at the curb is such that orifice flow occurs,
the interception capacity of the inlet is computed by adding

2
equations (18) and (22):

-2
Qi = 0.67Ag(2gd) 0 • 5 + 0.67hL(2gd 0 ) 0 • 5 (25)

EC
where: Ag = clear area of the grate, ft 2 (m 2 )
g = 32.16 ft/s/s (9.08 m/s/s)
by la
d = depth at the curb, ft
iv H
h = height of curb opening orifice, ft (m)
ed iv
L = length of curb opening, ft (m)
ed ch

d 0 = effective depth at the center of the curb opening

orifice, ft (m)
ch rc Ar

Trial and error solutions are necessary for depth at the

curb for a given flow rate using Charts 11, 12 and 13 for orifice
flow. Different assumptions for clogging of the grate can also
be examined using these charts as illustrated by the following
example.

Example 17:
pe
Ar

Given: A combination inlet in a sag location.

Grate: P - 1-7/8, 2 x 4 ft
Su

Curb opening: L = 4 ft, h = 4 in

sx = 0.03
Q = 5 ft 3 /s

Find: Depth at curb and spread for:

(1) Grate clear of clogging
(2) Grate 100 percent clogged

82
Solution:
p = 2 + 2 + 4 = 8 ft
( 1) d = 0.36 ft (Chart 11)
T = d/Sx = 0.36/0.03 = 12 ft

(2) L = 4 ft
A = 4 X 0.33 1.33 ft 2
=
d = 0.7 ft (Chart 13)
T = 0.7/0.03 = 23.3 ft

Interception by the curb-opening only will be in a transi-

tion stage between weir and orifice flow with a depth at the curb
of about 0.7 ft. Depth at the curb and spread on the pavement
would be almost twice as great if the grate should become
completely clogged.

d -2
2
H
ed iv
ve
by l
EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

83
9.0 INLET LOCATIONS

Pavement drainage inlet locations are often established by

geometric features rather than by spread of water on the pavement
and inlet interception capacity. In general, inlets should be
placed at all low points in the gutter grade, at median breaks,
intersections, and crosswalks, and on side streets at intersec-
tions where drainage would flow onto the highway pavement. Where
pavement surfaces are warped, as at cross slope reversals and
ramps, gutter flow should be intercepted in order keep the water
from flowing across the pavement. Sheet flow across the pavement
at these locations is particularly susceptible to icing. Inlets
are also used upgrade of bridges to prevent pavement drainage
from flowing onto bridge decks and downgrade of bridges to

ed
intercept drainage from the bridge.

2
Runoff from areas draining toward the highway pavement

-2
should be intercepted by roadside channels, where practicable, or
inlets where open channels cannot be used. This applies to
drainage from cut slopes, side streets, and other areas alongside

EC
the pavement. Curbed pavement sections and pavement drainage
inlets are inefficient means for handling runoff and extraneous
by l
iv a
drainage should be intercepted before it reaches the highway
H
ed iv
pavement.
ed ch

9.1 Inlet Spacing on Continuous Grades

ch rc Ar

The interception capacity of inlets on grade is discussed in

sections 7.0 through 7.4. The location of inlets is determined
by the criterion for spread on the pavement, geometric controls
which require inlets at specific locations, and the use and
location of flanking inlets in the sag. Thus, design spread on
the pavement on grade becomes the criterion for locating inlets
between inlets required by other considerations, and the flow
pe

which can be intercepted in the sag without hazardous ponding

Ar

could become another consideration.

Su

For a continuous slope, it is possible to establish the

maximum design spacing between inlets of a given design if the
drainage area consists of pavement only or has reasonably uniform
runoff characteristics and is rectangular in shape. This assumes
that the time of concentration is the same for all inlets. The
following examples illustrate the effects of inlet efficiency on
inlet spacing.

84
Example 18:

Given: 26 ft pavement width

n = 0.016
sx = 0.03
s = 0.03
T = 8 ft
i = 10.7 in/hr
c = 0.8
Find: Maximum design inlet spacing for 2-ft by 2-ft curved vane
9rate

Solution:
Q =CiA= 0.8 X 10.7 X 26 X L/43,560 = 0.005L

d
= 0.005 ft 3 /s/ft

2
T = 8 ft
Q = 4.5 ft 3;s (Chart 3)

-2
L = Q
0.005

W/T = 2/8
Sw/Sx = 1
= 4.5 = 900 ft
0.005

=
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ve
The first inlet can be placed at 900 ft from the crest.

0.25;
ed ch
i
E0 = 0.54 (Chart 4)
rc Ar

v = 4.7 ft/s (Chart 2)

ch
Rf = 1.0 (Chart 7)
Rs = 0.06 (Chart 8)
E = RfEo + Rs(1- E0 ) = 0.54 + 0.06(0.46) = 0.57
Qi = EQ = 0.57(4.5) = 2.6 ft 3;s
Qb = Q - Qi = 4.5 - 2.6 = 1.9 ft 3;s
pe
Ar

The intervening drainage area between inlets should be

sufficient to generate runoff equal to the interception capacity
Su

of the inlet, i.e., Qb + Qi = Q.

Q = 0.005L

L 2.6 = 520 ft
=
0.005
Therefore, the initial inlet can be placed at 900 ft from
the crest and subsequent inlets at 520-ft intervals.

85
Example 19:

Given: Data from example 18.

Find: Maximum design inlet spacing for a 10-ft curb opening

depressed 2-in from the normal cross slope in a 2-ft wide
gutter.

Solution:
Q = 4.5 ft 3;s at initial inlet (example 18)

Q/s 0 • 5 = 26.0
T = 6.6 ft (figure 3)
E0 = 0.76 (Chart 4)
se = sw + S~E 0 = 0.03 + (0.083)0.76 = 0.09

d
LT = 20 ft (Chart 9)

2
-2
L/LT = 10/20 = 0.5
E = 0.7 (Chart 10)

Qb 4.5 - 3.2

H
ed iv
ve
EC
Qi = 4.5 x 0.7 = 3.2 ft3;s

= by la
= 1.3 ft3/s

The drainage area between inlets should contribute runoff

equal to the interception capacity of the inlets.
ed ch

L
i = Q/0.005 = 3.2/0.005 = 640 ft
ch rc Ar

10-ft curb-opening inlets depressed 2-in can be spaced at

640 ft intervals.

Example 20:

Given: Data from example 18

pe

Find: Maximum inlet spacing using a 15-ft slotted inlet

Ar

Solution:
Su

Q = 4.5 ft 3 ;s (example 18)

LT = 38 ft (Chart 9)

L/LT = 15/38 = 0.39

E = 0.59 (Chart 10)

Qi = EQ = 0.59 X 4.5 = 2.6 ft3/s

Qb = 4.5 - 2.6 = 1.9 ft3/s

86
 L = 2.6/0.005 = 520 ft

15-ft slotted inlets can be spaced at 520-ft intervals.

In these examples, the first inlet could be placed at 900-ft

downgrade from the crest. Curved vane grates could be spaced at
520-ft intervals, 10-ft depressed curb openings at 640-ft inter-
vals, and 15-ft slotted inlets at 520-ft intervals. These re-
sults demonstrate the effects of the relative efficiencies of the
selected inlet configurations for the chosen design conditions.

9.2 Inlets in Sag Locations

d
Sag vertical curves differ one from another in the potential
for pending, and criteria adopted for inlet spacing in sags
should be applied only where traffic could be unduly disrupted if

2
an inlet became clogged or runoff from the design storm were

-2
exceeded. Therefore, criteria adopted for inlet spacing in sag

ve
vertical curves are not applicable to the sag curve between two

EC
positive or two negative longitudinal slopes. Also, they should
not be applied to locations where pending depths could not exceed
by l
curb height and pending widths would not be unduly disruptive, as
in sag locations on embankment.
H
ed iv
a
Where significant pending can occur, in locations such as
ed ch

underpasses and in sag vertical curves in depressed sections, it

i
is good engineering practice to place flanking inlets on each
ch rc Ar

side of the inlet at the low point in the sag. The flanking
inlets should be placed so that they will limit spread on low
gradient approaches to the level point and act in relief of the
inlet at the low point if it should become clogged or if the
design spread is exceeded. Table 5 shows the spacing required
for various depth at curb criteria and vertical curve lengths
defined by K = L/A, where L is the length of the vertical curve
and A is the algebraic difference in approach grades. The AASHTO
pe
Ar

policy on geometries (2) specifies maximum K values for various

design speeds. -
Su

Use of table 5 is illustrated in example 21.

Example 21:

Given: A sag vertical curve at an underpass on a 4-lane divided

highway facility. Spread at design Q is not to exceed
shoulder width of 10 ft.
Sx = 0.05
K = 130

87
 Table 5. Distance to flanking inlets in sag vertical curve
locations using depth at curb criteria.

Speed 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
d \ K 20 30 40 50 70 90 110 130 160 167 18 0 220

0.1 20 24 28 32 37 42 47 51 57 58 60 66
0.2 28 35 40 45 53 60 66 72 80 82 85 94

0.3 35 42 49 55 65 73 81 88 98 100 104 115

0.4 40 49 57 63 75 85 94 102 113 116 120 133

0.5 45 55 63 71 84 95 105 114 126 129 134 148

0.6 49 60 69 77 92 104 115 125 139 142 147 162

d
0.7 53 65 75 84 99 112 124 135 150 153 159 176
0.8 57 69 80 89 106 120 133 144 160 163 170 188

2
x = (200dK) 0 • 5 , where x =distance from the low point.

-2
Notes:

Find:
ve
Drainage maximum K = 167

by l
EC
a
Location of flanking inlets if located: (1) so that they
H
ed iv
will function in relief of the inlet at the low point
when depth at the curb exceeds design depth, and (2) when
ed ch

depth at the curb is 0.2-ft less than depth at design

i
spread.
ch rc Ar

Solution:
Depth at the curb at design spread,
d = TS = 10 X 0.05 = 0.5 ft
(1) S~acing to flanking inlet = 114 ft (table 5)
(2) d - 0.2 ft = 0.5 - 0.2 = 0.3 ft
Spacing to flanking inlets = 88 ft (table 5)
pe

Figure 22 illustrates the results of using the second

Ar

criterion to locate the flanking inlets.

Su

The purpose in providing table 5 is to facilitate the

selection of criteria for the location of flanking inlets based
on the pending potential at the site, the potential for clogging
of the inlet at the low point, design spread, design speeds,
traffic volumes, and other considerations which may be peculiar
to the site under consideration. A depth at curb criterion
which does not vary with these considerations neglects considera-
tion of cross slope and design spread and may be unduly conserva-
tive at some locations. Location of flanking inlets at a fixed
slope rate on the vertical curve also neglects consideration of

88
speed facilities and not at all conservative for high speed
facilities.

d = DEPTH AT CURB
AT DESIGN SPREAD

LOW POINT INLET

ed 2
8 8 FT 8 8 FT----1·1

-2
Figure 22. Example use of depth at curb criterion

EC
to establish locations of flanking inlets~
by l
iv a
H
ed iv
Example problem solutions in section 8 illustrate the total
ed ch

interception capacity of inlets in sag locations. Except where

inlets become clogged, spread on low gradient approaches to the
low point is a more stringent criterion for design that the
ch rc Ar

interception capacity of the sag inlet. AASHTO (2) recommends

that a gradient of 0.3 percent be maintained within 50 feet of
the level point in order to provide for adequate drainage. It is
considered advisable to use spread on the pavement at a gradient
comparable to that recommended by the AASHTO Committee on Design
to evaluate the location and design of inlets upgrade of sag
vertical curves. Standard inlet design and/or location may need
adjustment to avoid excessive spread in the sag curve.
pe
Ar

Example 22:
Su

Given: A 2-ft x 2-ft P - 1-7/8 grate is to be placed in a

flanking inlet location in a sag vertical curve 250 ft
downgrade from the inlet in example 18.

Qb 1.9 ft 3 /s (example 18)

=
sx = 0.03
T = 8 ft
n = 0.016

89
 i = 10.7 in/hr
Slope on the curve at the inlet, S = 0.006

Find: Spread at the flanking inlet and at S = 0.003

Solution:
Q = 1.9 + 0.8(10.7) (26 x 250)/43,560 = 3.2 ft3/s
Spread at s = 0.006:
T = 9.5 ft (Chart 3)
W/T = 2/9.5 = 0.21
E0 = 0.46 (Chart 4)
d = TSX = 9.5 X 0.03 = 0.28 ft

A = 9.5 X 0.28/2 = 1.33 ft 2

V = Q/A = 3.2/1.33 = 0.24 ft/s

d
Rf = 1.0 (Chart 7)
Rs = 0.5 (Chart 8)

2
E = RfEo + Rs(1 - Eo) = 1.0(0.46) + 0.5(0.54)

-2
Qi

Qb
=
=
=
0.73

EQ

3.2
=
-
by l
H
EC
a
2.3
ed iv
ve
0.73 X 3.2

=
= 2.3 ft 3;s

0.9 ft 3 /s
ed ch

Spread at S = 0.003:
= 7 ft
T
i
ch rc Ar

Spread at the flanking inlet exceeds the design spread of

8 ft and spread from the bypass flow from the flanking inlet
approaches design spread at the gradient of 0.3 percent. The
design of the inlet upgrade could be modified to limit bypass
flow to a lesser amount in order to reduce spread in the sag
vertical curve, or the possibility of using a depressed gutter in
the low gradient approaches to the low point could be investi-
gated.
pe
Ar Su

90
10.0 MEDIAN, EMBANKMENT, AND BRIDGE INLETS

Flow in median and roadside ditches is discussed in Hydrau-

lic Engineering Circular No. 15 (15) and Hydraulic Design Series
No. 4 (16). It is sometimes necessary to place inlets in medians
at intervals to remove water that could cause erosion. Inlets
are sometimes used in roadside ditches at the intersection of cut
and fill slopes to prevent erosion downstream of cut sections.

Where adequate vegetative cover can be established on em-

bankment slopes to prevent erosion, it is preferable to allow
storm water to discharge down the slope with as little concentra-
tion of flow as practicable. Where storm water must be collected
with curbs or swales, inlets are used to receive the water and

d
discharge it through chutes, sod or riprap swales, or pipe
downdrains.

2
-2
Bridge deck drainage is similar to roadway drainage and deck

10.1
ve
drainage inlets are similar in purpose to roadway inlets.

H
ed iv

EC
deck drainage is discussed in section 10.3.
by la
Median and Roadside Inlets
Bridge

The design of roadside and median channels involves the

ed ch

design of stable channels, safe roadsides, and the use of inlets

i
to intercept flow that would erode the channels. Hydraulic
Engineering Circular No. 15 (15) contains extensive discussion on
ch rc Ar

the design of stable channels-.- The AASHTO Committee on Design

Task Force on Hydrology and Hydraulics Highway Drainage Guide-
lines, Volume VI (17) also contains much useful information on
the design of stable and safe roadside and median channels.

Safe roadsides have been the subject of much study and

research. It is impractical to include a comprehensive discus-
pe

sion of roadside drainage design as related to roadside safety

Ar

here, and it is improbable that this publication would become an

authoritative source of information on the subject because of its
Su

principal focus on pavement drainage. The absence of discussion,

however, should not be interpreted as a deemphasis on the
importance of roadside safety. Authoritative information should
be obtained by referring to current research reports and the
latest publications on the subject by state highway agencies, the
FHWA, AASHTO, and the Transportation Research Board (19, 20, 21).
Roadside drainage designs can be made traffic safe where know=-
ledge of the principals of safe roadsides is judiciously applied.

91
 Medians may be drained by drop inlets similar to those used
for pavement drainage, by pipe culverts under one roadway, or by
cross drainage culverts which are not continuous across the
median. Figure 23 illustrates a traffic-safe median inlet. In-
lets, pipes, and discontinuous cross drainage culverts should be
designed so as not to detract from a safe roadside. Drop inlets
should be flush with the ditch bottom and traffic-safe grates
should be placed on the ends of pipes used to drain medians that
would be a hazard to errant vehicles. Cross drainage structures
should be continuous across the median unless the median width
makes this impractical. Ditches tend to erode at drop inlets;
paving around the inlets helps to prevent erosion and may
increase the interception capacity of the inlet marginally by
acceleration of the flow.

d -2
2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
1/
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

Figure 23. Median drop inlet.

Pipe drains for medians operate as culverts and generally
require more water depth to intercept median flow than drop
inlets. No test results are available on which to base design
procedures for estimating the effects of placing grates on
culvert inlets.

92
 The interception capacity of drop inlets in median ditches
on continuous grades can be estimated by use of Charts 16 and 17
to estimate flow depth and the ratio of frontal flow to total
flow and Charts 7 and 8 to estimate the ratios of frontal and
side flow intercepted to total flow.

Small dikes downstream of drop inlets (figure 23) insure

complete interception of flow. The dikes usually need not be
more than a few inches high and should have traffic safe slopes.
The height of dike required for complete interception on .contin-
uous grades or the depth of ponding in sag vertical curves can be
computed by use of Chart 11. The effective perimeter of a grate
in an open channel with a dike should be taken as 2(L + W) since
one side of the grate is not adjacent to a curb. Use of Chart 11

d
is illus-trated in section 7.1.

The following examples illustrate the use of Charts 16, 17,

2
7, and 8 for drop inlets in ditches on continuous grade.

-2
Example 23:

Given: A median ditch, B by l

H
ed iv
a
ve
EC
= 4 ft, n = 0.03, Z

Q = 10 ft 3 /s; flow in the median ditch is to be

intercepted by a drop inlet with a 2-ft by 2-ft parallel
= 6, S = 0.02,
ed ch

bar grate; no dike will be used downstream of the grate.

i
Find:
ch rc Ar

Solution:
Qn = 10(0.03) = 0.3 ft 3 /s
d/B = 0.11 (Chart 16)
d = 0.11 X 4 = 0.44 ft
E0 = 0.30 (Chart 17)
A= 0.44[4 + (6 X 0.44)] = 2.92 ft 2
V = Q/A = 10/2.92 = 3.4 ft/s
pe

Rf = 1.0 (Chart 7)
Ar

Rs = 0.035 (Chart 8) (since the ditch bottom is nearly

flat, the least cross slope available on Chart 8 is
Su

used to estimate the ratio of side flow intercep-

tion)
E = RfEo + Rs(l - E0 ) = 1.0(0.30) + 0.035(0.70) = 0.32

Q·1 = EQ = 0.32(10) = 3.2 ft 3;s

Qb = 6.8 ft 3 ;s

In the above example, a 2-ft drop inlet would intercept

about 30 percent of the flow in a 4-ft bottom ditch on continuous

93
 NOTE: Project horizontally from Z= 0 scale
to obtain values for Z = I to 6

d
0 B
II
N (\j
'\!"(!)
s- 0.02
(FT)
s 0.03
~
0.1 40 0.04

ed
~
0.08 30 0.05
~

2
~ 0.06
0.06 20

-2
20 I'~ 0.07
~'r-- 0.08
~'r-- ~~

EC
0.04 w 0.09
10 z 0.1
0.03 8
by l ::J ['['-
a
0.02 H
6
ed iv

4
iv ~
z
z
0::
:::>
10
8 /
/
/
/
/
/-

1\
.I'
~'-r'

'I'
~
ed ch

/
I- /
/
1\ "~ 0.2
3 6 /

/
/ ,'\
rc Ar

/
\
ch
2 / "I'
'0.01
'' 4 /
/
/
\ ", 0.3
0.008
'
' -I /3
/
/
\
\
"I' '
0.006 ' ', /
/
\ \ "0.4
'' 0.8 /
/
/
'\
'' /
2
\\\ '\ 0.5
' ' ',, 0.6 /
/ \
0.004 / \I\ I"
/
\I'\ 1'- 0.6
pe

' ',, /
Ar

0.4 /
/

\f\
0.003 /
/
I' 0.7
', ,0.3 /
/
EXAMPLE:
"
Su

/
'\ 0.8
0.002 GIVEN: FIND: SOLUTION:
',
' /
S=OOI
. d Qn =0.3
',, / Q= 10 FT 3/S d/8=0.14
'/
0.1 n = 0.03 d =0.14(4)=0.56 FT
0.001 B= 4 FT
Z=4

CHART 16. Solution of Manning's equation for channels of various side slopes.

94
 1.4 I II ,' I I I I I rI I rI I/
r .,.1/ ~
_,. ..1

i=
1.1.
'""""' ! d •• --- ? z 1.0
1-W--1
4 --=
..,___ _ B
I:C 0.8
w
EXAMPLE: ... cc
GIVEN: d=0.7 FT; Z = 3 i 8=8 FT; W=2 FT 0.6
Su
FIND: Eo= 0.2 == 1.1.
0
0.4
pe
:c
Ar
a.
w
E0 =W/( B + dZ) Cl
rc Ar ...
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1
1.0
ed ch
U'1
ed iv
ch
by l a
H
EC
iv
-2
2
ed
· CHART 17. Ratio of frontal flow to total flow in a trapezoidal channel.
grade. Increased side interception would result from warping the
bottom of the ditch to slope toward the drop inlet.

For grate widths equal to the bottom width of the ditch, use
Chart 8 by substituting ditch side slopes for values of Sx, as
illustrated in example 24.

Example 24:

Given: Q = 10 ft 3 ;s
B = 2 ft
w= 2 ft; L = 2 ft
n = 0.03
z = 6; sx = 1/6 = 0.17
s = 0.03

ed
Use a p - 1-7/8 grate, 2 X 2 ft

2
Find:

-2
Solution:
Qn = 0.3 ft 3 /s

EC
d/B = 0.24 (Chart 16)
d = 0.24 X 2 = 0.5 ftby la
V = Q/A = 4 ft/s
iv
E0 = 0.4 (Chart 17)
Rf = 1.0 (Chart 7) H
ed iv
ed ch

Rs = 0.3 (Chart 8)
E = 0.4 + 0.3(0.6) = 0.58
ch rc Ar

Qi = 0.58 x 10 = 5.8 ft3/s

Qb = 4.2 ft 3;s
The height of dike downstream of a drop inlet required for
total interception is illustrated by example 25.
pe

Example 25:
Ar

Given: Data from example 24

Su

Find: Required height of berm downstream of the grate inlet

to cause total interception of flow in the ditch.

Solution:
P =
2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 8 ft (flow can enter the grate from
all sides)
d = 0.5 ft (Chart 11)

A dike will need to be 0.5 ft high for total interception.

96
If the grate should become partially clogged, transition or
orifice flow could result and as much as 1.0 ft of head might be
required.

10.2 Embankment Inlets

Drainage inlets ar~ often needed to collect runoff from

pavements in order to prevent erosion of fill slopes or to
intercept water upgrade or downgrade of bridges. Inlets used at
these locations differ from other pavement drainage inlets in
three respects. First, the economies which can be achieved by
system design are often not possible because a series of inlets
is not used; secondly, total or near total interception is
sometimes necessary in order to limit the bypass flow from

d
running onto a bridge deck; and third, a closed storm drainage
system is often not available to dispose of the intercepted flow,

2
and the means for disposal must be provided at each inlet.

-2
Intercepted flow is usually discharged into open chutes or pipe
ed iv
ve
downdrains which terminate at the toe of the fill slope.

EC
Example problem solutions in other sections of this Circular
by l
illustrate by inference the difficulty in providing for near
a
total interception on grade. Grate inlets intercept little more
H
than the flow conveyed by the gutter width occupied by the grate
and tandem installations of grates would possibly be the most
ed ch

practical way of achieving near total interception. Combination

i
curb-opening and grate inlets can be designed to intercept total
rc Ar

flow if the length of curb opening upstream of the grate is

ch
sufficient to reduce spread in the gutter to the width of the
grate used. Depressing the curb opening would significantly
reduce the length of inlet required. A combination inlet or
tandem grate inlets would not usually be economical solutions to
the need for near total interception, however. Perhaps the most
practical inlets for use where near total interception is necess-
ary are slotted inlets of sufficient length to intercept 85-100
pe

percent of the gutter flow. Design charts and procedures in

Ar

sections 7.1 to 7.4 are applicable to the design of inlets on

embankments. Figure 24 illustrates a combination inlet and down-
Su

drain.

Downdrains or chutes used to convey intercepted flow from

inlets to the toe of the fill slope may be open or closed chutes.
Pipe downdrains are preferable because the flow is confined and
cannot cause erosion along the sides, and because they can be
covered to reduce or eliminate interference with maintenance
operations on the fill slopes. Open chutes are often damaged by
erosion from water splashing over the sides of the chute due to
oscillation in the flow and from spill over the sides at bends in

97
 ·-...=
ca
-==
c
-=-===
=
ca
....,

·--....,=
Cl)

=
Cl)
E

ed
...llll::
=
ca
-=E

2
-2
LL.I

EC
...
by l
Cl)
a
=
iv
=
·- H
ed iv
L&.
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar
Su

• Q •• .a
• <:1 .. v

98
the chute. Erosion at the ends of downdrains or chutes is not
usually a problem if the end of the device is placed low enough
to prevent damage by undercutting. Small, localized scour holes
are usually formed which serve as stilling basins. Well-graded
gravel or rock can be used to control the size of the scour hole,
if necessary.

10.3 Bridge Deck Inlets

Bridge deck drainage is regarded by many bridge engineers as

a nuisance and a matter of continuing concern (~). Bridge deck
drainage may be more than a nuisance, however, if the effects of
icing on traffic safety and the corrosive effects of deicing
agents on vehicles and structures are considered. Reference (21)

d
is recommended for insight on the many problems associated wit~
bridge deck drainage, and design· measures that should be used to

2
facilitate maintenance of bjidge drainage systems. Bridge deck

-2
drainage could be improved immeasurably if cleaning of inlets and

personnel.

ve
drainage systems were given a higher priority by maintenance

by l
ed iv

EC
Bridge decks are possibly most effectively drained where the
a
gradient is sufficient to convey water off the deck for intercep-
H
tion. Dependent upon gradient, cross slope, and design spread,
inlets can be omitted from many bridge decks if roadway drainage
ed ch

is intercepted upgrade of the bridge. The length of bridge deck

i
that can be drained without inlets can be computed by runoff
rc Ar

methods in section 4 and gutter flow methods in section 5.

ch
Example 18, section 9.1, illustrates the method that can be used
to determine the length of bridge deck required for gutter flow
to reach design spread.

The principles of inlet interception on bridge decks are the

same as for roadway inlets. However, requirements in the design
of deck drainage systems differ in the following respects from
pe

roadway drainage systems: (1) total or near total interception

Ar

may be desirable upgrade of expansion joints; (2) deck drainage

systems are highly susceptible to cloggirig; (3) inlet spacing is
Su

often predetermined by bent spacing, and (4) .inlet si~es are

often constrained by structural considerations. Figure 25 illus-
trates a grate inlet that represents about the maximum size inlet
that can be used on many bridge decks.

It should be noted that small size inlets operate as

orifices at lesser depths than inlets of larger dimensions.
Experiments with 4-inch scuppers typically used on many bridges
(22) show that scuppers of this size operate as orifices at
depths of less than 0.1 ft on continuous grades. Interception

99
 A
T _j A

d
L c

2
·-

-2
1.()
-

ve by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
PLAN
1 Curb Line
ed ch
i
18 in ------1-l
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar
Su

SECTION A-A

Figure 25. Bridge inlet.

100
capacities of small scuppers are extremely small, as illustrated
by figure 26. Figure 27 is a plot of data for the same scupper
drain in a sump condition.

Use of a safety factor should be considered in computing the

interception capacity of bridge deck inlets because of their
propensity to clog. It has been recommended that grate inlets
should be twice the computed design size (21) • This recommenda-
tion has application only at the low point-rn a sag vertical
curve and structural constraints may not permit increasing the
size of the inlet. A safety factor could be incorporated into
designs, however, by considering clogging in computing inlet
spacing.

Design charts included in sections 7.1 and 7.2 are appli-

d
cable to inlets used on bridge decks. Short grate lengths have
been included on Charts 7 and 8 to make the charts useful for the

2
design of bridge deck inlets.

-2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

101
 0.3

0.2 4-in SCUPPER 'o

11:)
,
-.... =0.03 11:>'

."'
11:)

d
Sx 11:)

-
1.1. - ,, 11:)

2
ON A CONTINUOUS GRADE ~

~'IJ

-2
"C

a:
LLI
....
<
3:
0.1

0.08

0.06
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ve
~/'
~/ /
;¥"'"'
\\
~

....
""

/
1-'

/
,
,

/'
l
I I
ed ch

1.1.

=
i ~
/ / \\~
:c
0
rc Ar

.... \\' --
ch
0.04
v
a.
LLI
Cl 0.03 / /v/ ._Q ·:A·:
;,;:-~·;: ·-:~--~:;:.;
1---

0.02 I I I
0.01
pe

0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.2 0.3

Ar Su

DISCHARGE Q (CFS)

Figure Z6. interception capacity of 4-in scupper inlets on contin·uous grad·es.

102
 0.3

0.2
f-

4-in SCUPPER I
-""'
1-
Sx =0.03
I

d
1-

--= . --

IN SUMP CONDITIONS I

2
-2
cc: 0.1
L&.l
1-
c:a:
3:
""'
0

=
0.08

0.06
....
~
~
by l
H
ed iv
a
ve
EC
~
~ - ~
... .,.
1.-
ed ch

1-
a..

0
L&.l 0.04
i -
rc Ar

Q
ch
0.03 : ij '.<I; ;9.-~~·.o:
-
~ ..q··.o.
~
1-

0.02 I I I I I

0.01 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.2 0.3

pe
Ar

DISCHARGE Q (CFS)
Su

Figure 2 7. Capacity of ·4-in scupper inlets in sump locations.

103
11.0 REFERENCES

Galloway, B.M., et al, "Pavement and Geometric Design

Criteria for Minimizing Hydroplaning," Texas Transportation
Institute, Texas A & M University, Federal Highway Adminis-
tration, .Report No. FHWA-RD-79-30, A Technical Summary,
December 1979.

(~) American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials Subcommittee on Design, "A Policy on Geometric
Design of Highways and Streets," Review Draft #4, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials,
washington, D.C., May 1983.

ed
Burgi, P.H., D.E. Gober, ."Bicycle-Safe Grate Inlets Study,
Volume 1 - Hydraulic and Safety Characteristics of Selected

2
Grate Inlets on Continuous Grades," Report No. FHWA-RD-77-

-2
24, Federal Highway Administration, June 1977.

EC
Burgi, P.H., "Bicycle-Safe Grate Inlets Study, Volume 2-
Hydraulic Characteristics of Three Selected Grate Inlets on
iv by l
Continuous Grades," Report No. FHWA-RD-78-4, Federal High-
a
way Administration, May 1978.
H
ed iv

Burgi, P.H., "Bicycle-Safe Grate Inlets Study, Volume 3 -

ed ch

Hydraulic Characteristics of Three Selected Grate Inlets in

a Sump Condition," Report No. FHWA-RD-78-70, Federal High-
rc Ar

way Administration, September 1978.

ch
Pugh, C.A., "Bicycle-Safe Grate Inlets Study, Volume 4-
Hydraulic Characteristics of Slotted Drain Inlets," Report
No. FHWA-RD-79-106, Federal Highway Administration,
February 1980.

Pugh, C.A., "Bicycle-Safe Grate Inlets Study, Volume 5-

pe

Hydraulic Design of General Slotted Drain Inlets," Report

Ar

No. FHWA-RD-80/081, Federal Highway Administration, October

1980.
Su

(~) Chow, V.T., B.C. Yen, "Urban Stormwater Runoff: Deter-

mination of Volume and Flowrates," EPA-600/2-76-116, Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1976.

Chow, V.T., Editor-in-Chief, "Handbook of Applied Hydrol-

ogy, A Compendium of Water Resources Technology," McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1964.

104
 Jens, s.w., "Design of Urban Highway Drainage," FHWA-TS-
79-225, Federal Highway Administration, August 1979.

American Public Works Association Research Foundation and

the Institute for Water Resources, "Urban Stormwater Man-
agement," Special Report No. 49, American Public Works
Association, 1981.

Joint Committee, American Society of Civil Engineers and

the Water Pollution Control Federation, "Design and Con-
struction of Sanitary and Storm Sewers," WPCF Manual of
Practice No.9, ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering
Practice, No. 37, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Water Pollution Control Federation, 1970.

d
Ragan, R.M., "A Nomograph Based on Kinematic Wave Theory
for Determining Time of Concentration for overland Flow,"

2
Report No. 44, prepared by Civil Engineering Department,

-2
University of Maryland at College Park, Maryland State

December 1971.

ve
Highway Administration and Federal Highway Administration,

by l
EC
Izzard, c.F., "Hydraulics of Runoff from Developed sur-

H
a
faces," Proc. Highway Research Board, Volume 26, p. 129-
ed iv
150, Highway Research Board, washington, D.C., 1946.
ed ch

Bauer, W.J. and Woo, D.C., "Hydraulic Design of Depressed

i
Curb-Opening Inlets," Highway Research Record No. 58, High-
ch rc Ar

way Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1964.

(.!.§_) Li, W.H., "The Design of Storm-Water Inlets," Johns Hopkins

University, Baltimore, Maryland, June 1956.

Normann, J.M., "Design of Stable Channels with Flexible

Linings," Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 15, Federal
Highway Administration, October 1975.
pe
Ar

Searcy, J.K., "Design of Roadside Drainage Channels, Hy-

draulic Design Series No. 4," Federal Highway
Su

Administration, washington, D.C., 1965.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials Select Committee on Highway Safety, "Highway
Design and Operational Practices Related to Highway
Safety," Second Edition, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.,
1974.

105
(~) Transportation Research Board, "Traffic-Safe and
Hydraulically Efficient Drainage Practices," National
Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis of Highway
Practice 3, Transportation Research Board, Washington,
D.C., 1969.

(21) American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials Subcommittee on Design, Task Force on Hydrology
and Hydraulics, "Guidelines for the Hydraulic Analysis and
Design of Open Channels," Highway Drainage Guidelines -
Volume VI, American Association of State Highway and Trans-
portation Officials, washington, D.C., 1979.

(~) Transportation Research Board, "Bridge Drainage Systems,"

National Cooperative Highway Research Program Synthesis of

d
Highway Practice 67, Transportation Research Board,
washington, D.C., 1979.

2
-2
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

106
APPENDIX A. DEVELOPMENT OF RAINFALL INTENSITY CURVES
AND EQUATIONS

1. Precipitation Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves

Precipitation intensity-duration-frequency (I-D-F) informa-

tion is necessary for the specific locality in which the Rational
Method for estimating runoff is to be used. The two examples
which follow illustrate the development of I-D-F curves from
HYDR0-35 and NOAA Atlas 2.

HYDR0-35

HYDR0-35 maps included in this Appendix as figures 28

d
through 33 are for 2-year and 100-year frequencies and durations
of 5, 15 and 60 minutes. To estimate intensities for 10-minutes

2
and 30-minutes, the following equations are provided:

-2
ve
10-min value = 0.59 (15-min value) + 0.41 (5-min)

by l
H
EC
30-min value= 0.49 (60-min value)+ 0.51 (15-min)
a
Use equations (28) through (31) to compute values for return
ed iv
intervals intermediate to the 2-year and 100-year frequencies.
(26)

(27)
ed ch

5-yr = 0.278 (100-yr) + 0.674 ( 2-yr) (28)

i
rc Ar

10-yr = 0.449 (100-yr) + 0.496 (2-yr) (29)

ch
25-yr = 0.669 (100-yr) + 0.293 ( 2-yr) (30)

50-yr = 0.835 (100-yr) + 0.146 ( 2-yr) (31)

Example 26:
pe

Given: Location - Charlotte, North Carolina

Ar

Develop: I-D-F Curve for 2- to 100-year frequencies

Su

Step 1: Read 5-min, 15-min and 60-min rainfall volume values for
2-yr and 100-yr frequencies from figures 28-33 (table
6) :

Table 6. Rainfall volumes, 2- and 100-yr.

5-min 15-min 60-min

2-yr 0.47 0.97 1.72
100-yr 0.81 1. 75 3.60

107
 ~
Su
""
pe
C)
Ar
rc Ar
1-'
ed ch
tSl
I))

r.,
ed iv
ch
a ~ .
Legend: \
2-YEAR 60-MINUTE ·PRECIPITATION
1
(INCHESI
by l
*KEY WEST, FLORIDA VAL~E
REPRESENTATIVE FOR FLQRIDA KEYS.
H
£.,
EC
iv
0 '";:/''
M E X I C
G U L F 0 F

\
-2
""'.,,........loa 2
2.l'3*
HUU 1qUH . . . . P~Ol'CTIO~
'1 tU~OHO . . . <1-I.H' »'ANO <1'
ed
_ Figure 28. 2-year, 60-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35).
 *
'!'

~
Su
G

()
pe
Ar
rc Ar
i-'
Q
1..0
ed ch
f.,
ed iv
ch
a ~

Legend:
by l
100-YEAR 60-MINUl;E PRECIPITATION
!INCHES)
*KEY WEST, FLORIDA VALUE
H ~REPRESENTATIVE FOR Fld,RIDA KEYS.
EC
iv
,~;::/::-1
MEXIcO
G U L F 0 F
!,
-2
-~···-'"j,

A~ltU OQilAL ~UA . . OHCTtON

U>ND . . D . . RHUL5 WAND u'
2
ed
Figure 29. 1OO•y~ar, 60-minute precipi~tation (HYDR0-35).
 ';.;

J/~M
·)(
.30 4'·,.

'l'

~
Su
"
()
pe
Ar
rc Ar
(!

1-'
ed ch
1-'
\'Sl
;,
ed iv
ch
a ~

Legend:
2-YEAR 5-MINUTE PRECIPITATION
by l
(INCHES)
""'*KEY WEST, FLORIDA VALUE
REPRESENTATIVE FOR FLORIDA KEYS.
H !.,
EC
iv
-~~/ / '
X I C 0
0 F M E
G U L F
60 -- )•
'- (
-2
:.oo'""m'"'Joo '~1''
50
"I AlB<A' t~t'Al H[A .OOJ<n!ON
OhNO . . D '>OHUU I•" AND !1'
2 *'
ed
Figure 30. 2-year, 5-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35).
 (

)c.
/
\ )
\i.

...,..,,

*
'!'

~
Su
"
()
pe
Ar
(,
rc Ar
I-'
I-'
1-'
ed ch
f.,
ed iv
~
ch
a
Legend:';
100-YEAR 5-MINUTE PRECIPITATION
!INCHESI I
by l
*KEY WEST, FLORIDA VALUE
~ :PRESENTATIVE FOR FLORIDA KEYS.
i H \

'::

'"'Z<;;:-----l
0 F M E
G U L F
EC
I
ve
-2
ALUU EQUH &RU "ROUCTION '"*
JT&MDUD ••OAI.LH' 21"&ND<I'
d 2
Figure 31. 100-year, 5-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35).
 *
~
Su
(;

Cl
pe
Ar
rc Ar
f-'
ed ch
f-'
N
f.,
ch
ed iv
a ~
Legend:
2-YEAR 15-MINUTE ~RECIPITATION
by l
!INCHES) \
H
i *KEY WEST, FlORIDA VALUI;::
--REPRESENTATIVE FOR FLO~IDA KEYS.

\
EC
'---o:::':/:::1
0 F M E
G U L F
ve
\
-2
,.,.···~···k.

--
•LI~AIEQUAL H U r•OJECT!O>I
IU><OUO r•oHUL• , . •><D <I'
d 2
Figure 32. 2-year. 15-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35).
 ~

\
(J
Su
\l
pe
Ar
,_.
rc Ar
...... '"1,)"
~Y __
V.>
ed ch
"
(;,
ed iv
~
ch
a
I
15-MINUTE\PRECIPITATION
by l
H
iv
MEXIcO
#~
G U L F
EC
~ -
"" 100 200 -
-2
H I ! U !QUU ~RU r>;OHC'flON
- lh!<OUD PAULUL5 ll"&>iOoo·
2
ed
Figure 33. 1DO-year, 15-minute precipitation (HYDR0-35).
Step 2: Use equations (28) - (31) to compute 5-, 10-, 25-, and
50-yr frequency values (table 7):

Table 7. Rainfall volumes, intermediate frequencies.

5-min 15-min 60-min

5-yr 0.54 1.14 2.16
10-yr 0.60 l. 27 2.47
25-yr 0.68 l. 45 2.91
50-yr 0.74 1.60 3.26

Step 3: Use equations (26) and (27) to compute 10-min and 30-min
values; complete table 8:

ed 2
Table 8. Rainfall volumes.

-2
5-min 10-min 15-min 30-min 60-min

EC
2-yr 0.47 0.76 0.97 l. 34 1.72
5-yr 0.54
by l 0.89 1.14 1.64 2.16
10-yr 0.60 l. 00 l. 27 1.86 2.47
a
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
iv
0.68
H
ed iv
0.74
0.81
1.13
1.25
1.36
l. 45
1.60
1.75
2.17
2.41
2.66
2.91
3.26
3.60
ed ch
rc Ar

Step 4: Convert values in the table 8 to intensity in in/hr

ch
(table 9):

Table 9. I-D-F values, Charlotte, NC.

5-min 10-min 15-min 30-m ion 60-min

2-yr 5.64 4.56 3.88 2.68 l. 72
pe

5-yr 6.48 5.34 4.56 3.28 2.16

Ar

10-yr 7.2 6.00 5.08 3.72 2.47

25-yr 8.16 6.78 5.80 4.34 2.91
Su

50-yr 8.88 7.50 6.40 4.82 3.26

100-yr 9.72 8.16 7.00 5.32 3.60

Step 5: Plot I-D-F Curve for Charlotte, North Carolina,

figure 34.

114
 10~--~--~--~----~--~--~----------------------~~

CHARLOTTE
NORTH CAROLINA
8

ed
-
a:

2
::c
.......

-2
--z

EC
>
l-
by la
en
z
1.1.1
1-
iv H
ed iv
ed ch

z 4 1--------t--~----'k
....
....
c::c
ch rc Ar

Ll.
z
-
c::c
a:
pe
Ar Su

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

DURATION t (MIN)

Figure 34. Intensity-duration-frequency curves

for Charlotte, North Carolina.

llS
Western Contiguous States

Isopluvials for 2-year and 100-year frequencies and 6-hour

and 24-hour durations for the 11 western conterminous states are
provided in the 11 volumes of NOAA Atlas 2. Volume III, Color-
ado, Geographic Region 1, is used here to illustrate the develop-
ment of an I-D-F curve by the method in these publications.

Estimates for 1-hour duration precipitation are obtained by

use of the following equations:

Y2 = 0.218 + 0. 709 [ (X1) (X1/X2)] (32)

Y100 = 1.897 + 0.439 [ (X 3 ) (X 3 /X 4 )] - 0.008z (33)

ed
where: Y2 = 2-yr, 1-hr value
Y100 = 100-yr, 1-hr value

2
x 1 = 2-yr, 6-hr value from maps
x2 = 2-yr, 24-hr value from maps

-2
x = 100-yr, 6-hr value from maps
x34 = 100-yr, 24-hr value from maps

EC
z = point elevation in hundreds of feet
by l
iv a
A nomograph, figure 35, is provided for estimating precipi-
H
ed iv
tation amounts for return periods greater than 2 years and less
than 100 years. To use the nomograph, draw a straight line
ed ch

between the 2-yr and 100-yr values and read the values for
intermediate return periods. Use the ratios below to convert 1-
rc Ar

hr rainfall volumes to volumes for lesser time periods:

ch
Duration 5-min 10-min 15-min 30-min
Ratio to 1-hr 0.29 0.45 0.57 0.79

Example 27:

Given: Location - Colorado Springs, Colorado

pe

Elevation - 6000 ft
Ar

Develop: I-D-F Curve

Su

Step 1: Read 6-hour and 24-hour precipitation - frequency values

from maps

6-hr 24-hr
2-yr 1. 75 2.1
100-yr 3.5 4.5

Step 2: Use Equations (32) and (33) to compute 1-hr rainfall for
2-yr and 100-yr frequency

116
 15
t- -
f- -
t- -
1- -
14
1- -
1- -
1- -
t- -
13
r- -
r- -
r- -
1-- -
12
1-- -
t- -
1-- -
r- -
I I
- -

ed
-
- -
-
- -
10

2
--
-
-

-2
-,... -
-
9
- -

EC
- -
- -
- by l -
(f) 8
a
I
u
z
7
-
-
1--
r-
iv H
ed iv
--
-
-
ed ch

z r- -
1-- -
1-- -
1-- -
rc Ar

I
ch
f- 6
a... 1-- -
w r- -
0 1-- -
r- -
5
z
0
1--
t-
--
f-
1-- -
<( t- -
f- 4
0:: - -
- -
pe

uw -
- -
Ar

0:::
-
a... 3
'-- -
-
Su

'--
- -
2
- -
- -
- -
-
-
--
- -
t- -
1-- -
-
0 r-
2 5 I0 25 50 100
RETURN PERIOD IN YEARS, PARTIAL-DURATION SERIES

Figure 35. Nomograph for estimating precipitation amounts

(Volume 3. NOAA A-tlas 2}_.
117
 Y2 = 0.218 + 0.709[(1.75) (1.75/2.1)] = 1.25 inches

= 1.897 + 0.439[(3.5) (3.5/4.5)] 0.008 (60)

= 2.6 in
Step 3: Estimate 1-hr precipitation amounts for 5, 10, 25 and
50-year return periods by use of figure 35. Draw a
straight line between the 2-yr and 100-yr values to
obtain values for intermediate return periods. (table
10) :

Table 10. 1-hr rainfall volumes.

25-yr

d
2.1

2
Step 4: Estimate precipitation amounts for durations of less

-2
Table 11.
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ve
than 1-hr using ratios provided above and convert to
intensities (table 11):

I-D-F values, Colorado Springs, Colorado.

5 10 15 30 60
ed ch

2...;_yr 4.4 3.4 2.8 2.0 1. 25

i 5 5.6 4.3 3.6 2.5 1.6
10 6.3 4.9 4.1 2.8 1.8
ch rc Ar

25 7.3 5.7 4.8 3.3 2.1

50 8.4 6.5 5.5 3.8 2.4
100-yr 9.0 7.0 5.9 4.1 2.6

Step 5: Plot I-D-F Curves for Colorado Springs, Colorado,

figure 36.
pe
Ar

2. Development of Equations for Rainfall Intensity-Duration

Su

It is sometimes necessary to develop equations for the

rainfall intensity-duration curves for the various frequencies.
This is especially useful for computer solutions of runoff rates.
The equation for intensity curves is usually of the form:
i = ,.:;.a_ _
(34)
(t + b)m

118
 10~--~--~----~--~--~----~------------------------~

Colorado· Springs. Colorado

-

ed
cc
:c

2
........

--
z

-2
EC
ivby la
H
ed iv
ed ch

...<...
ch rc Ar

u.
-z<
cc
pe
Ar

o~--~--~----~--~--~----~--~--~----~--~--~--~

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Su

DURATION t (MIN)

Figure 36. Intensity-duration-frequency curves

for Colorado Springs, Colorado.

119
Example 28:

Given: Precipitation intensity vs duration data for 5-year re-

currence interval for Charlotte, North Carolina

Duration (min) 5 10 15 30 60
Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) 6.48 5. 34 4.56 3.28 2.16

Required: Develop an equation for rainfall intensity

Step 1: Make a table similar to table 12 with several columns

for trial and error solution and record the data in the
first 2 columns.

ed
Table 12. I-D-F curve fitting table.

2
-2
(1) (2) ( 3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
i t Duration = t + b

EC
in/hr min b = 5 b = 10 b = 12
6.48 5 10 15 17
5.34
4.56
10
15
iv by l
15
a
20
20
25
22
27
H
ed iv
3.28 30 35 40 42
2.16 60 65 78 72
--
ed ch
rc Ar

Step 2: Plot the data (columns 1 and 2) on 2-cycle logarithmic

ch
paper and draw a curve through the data points. Gener-
ally, the data points will not be on a straight line; if
the line is straight, go to Step 5. These data points
are plotted in figure 37.

Step 3: Add some constant value to column 2 and enter in column

3. For this example, b = 5 is used. Plot the values in
pe

columns 1 and 3 in figure 37 and draw a curve through

Ar

the data points.

Su

Step 4: If the data points are not on a straight line, change

the constant b and repeat step 3 until the data points
approximate a straight line.

Step 5: The value of a is then read as the ordinate at t = 1.

The value of m is the slope of the line. For this
example, b = 12, a = 57, and m =0.77. Thus, the
equation for a 5-year recurrence interval is:

120
 100

80

60 ~a=57
''
50
'
''

d
40 '
''
'
''

2
30
'' 5 em

-2
'
2
=
......
~
20

1-
by l
H
EC
a ''
''

1_1 ', , ve
, ,,
.....

''
''
'
E
(.)

10
~

""
--
3.85
m=--=0.77
5
i =
a

( t + b )m II
I
ed iv
>-
.... '
iii 10 "'
z
ed ch

....
"' ''
!!
8
i '
_,
_, -;a..._
~
ch rc Ar

!'--...
c.... 6
z
-t--
h ~
--.........._", ~
ca: 5

4 ~ -'.~ " "

3
DATA POl
~ r-.,_,
~~
~"'::
"' '-.::,_ ~
~ t:--
I I
p I-
pe
Ar

2
I
Su

I I

2 3 4 5 6 8 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100

DURATION t (MIN)

Figure 3 7. Development of precipitation intensity-duration equations ..

1:21
 57
i =
0.77
(t + 12)
Step 6: Confirm the constants derived for the equation by
checking against the original values of i. Adjust the
constants as necessary.

Step 7: Repeat the procedure for other frequencies.

d -2
2
veby l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

122
APPENDIX B. MEAN VELOCITY IN A TRIANGULAR CHANNEL

Flow time in curbed gutters is one component of the time of

concentration for the contributing drainage area to the inlet.
Velocity in a triangular gutter varies with the flow rate, and
the flow rate varies with distance along the gutter, i.e., both
the velocity and flow rate in the gutter are spatially varied.
Figure 38 is a sketch of the concept used to develop average
velocity in a reach of channel.

Time of flow can be estimated by use of an average velocity

obtained by integration of the Manning equation for a triangular
channel with respect to time. The assumption of this solution is
that the flow rate in the gutter varies uniformly from Q1 at the

d
beginning of the section to Q2 at the inlet.

2
-2
I I I I I I I I I I !L q I I I I I I I I I
X
ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
:T
02--+ T2
ed ch

:j
i
ch rc Ar

~----------------~----------------------~
CURB

Figure 38. Conceptual sketch of spatially

varied gutter flow.
pe
Ar Su

Q = 0.S6 8 0.5 8 xl.67T2.67 = K T2.67

1 (35)
n

K = 0.s6 8 0.s 8 1.67

1 n x

v = Q = K T0.67 (36)
2

123
 K = 1.12 8 0.s 8 0.67
2 n x

From equation (35):

T0.67 = {Q/Kl)0.25 (37)

Substituting equation ( 37) into equation ( 36) results in:

K
v = dx = or = 2 dt ( 38)
dt K 0.25
1

Here, Q = Q1 + qx and therefore dQ = qdx. Combining these with

ed
equation (38) and performing the integration, the following

2
equation results:
K 0.25

-2
t = 4/3(Q 0.75- Q 0.75)_1 (39)
2 1 K2q

EC
Then, the average velocity, V, can be computed by dividing the
by la
length, L, by time, t:

V = L/ t =
3K2q
(
iv H
ed iv
L
) (4 0 )
ed ch

4K 0.25 g 0.75 _ g 0.75

1 2 1

K1 T 2 • 67 , V becomes:
rc Ar

Upon substitution of L = (Q 2 - Q1 )/q and Q =

ch
(T 2.67 _ T 2.67
V = (3/4)K 2 l ) (41)
2
(T2 2 - Tl 2 )

To determine spread, Ta, where velocity is equal to the

=
pe

average velocity, let V V:

Ar Su

(42)

which results in:

Ta 1 - (Tl/T2)2.67 1.5
= 0.65[ ] (43)
T2 1 - (Tl/T2)2

124
 Solving equation (43) for values of T 1 /T 2 gives results
shown in the table below.

Spread at average velocity in a reach of triangular gutter.

Tl/T2 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Ta/T2 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.74 0.77 0.82 0.86 0.91 0.95 1.0

The average velocity in a triangular channel can be computed

d
by using the above table to solve for the spread, Ta, where the

average velocity occurs. Where the initial spread is zero,

2
average velocity occurs where the spread is 65 percent of the

-2
spread at the downstream end of the reach.

H
ed iv
ve
by l
EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar Su

125
APPENDIX C. DEVELOPMENT OF SPREAD-DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP FOR
COMPOUND CROSS SLOPES.

The computations needed to develop charts relating spread to

conveyance for a gutter section are not original with this
Circular. The purpose for including the procedure, as well as
the procedure for developing charts for parabolic sections, is to
encourage agencies to develop charts for sections which they use
as standards.

Computations for the development of charts involves dividing

the channel into two sections at the break in cross slope and use
of the integrated form of the Manning equation to compute the
conveyance in each section. Total conveyance in the channel is

d
equal to the sum of the parts. Following is a step by step
procedure for the computations.

2
-2
=
0.56S0.5d2.67

Example 29:
nSX
veby l
H
ed iv

EC
a ( 4)
ed ch

Given: w= 2 ft
i a = 2 in
rc Ar

T = 6 ft
ch
sx = 0.04
K = Q/S0.5

Required: Develop K - T relationship

Procedure:
pe
Ar

Step 1: Compute d 1 and d 2 where d 1 is the depth of flow at the

Su

break in the cross slope and d 2 is the depth at the

curb (See sketch, Chart 4)

d = (T- W)Sx = (6- 2)0.04 = 0.16

2
d 1 = TSx + a = 6(0.04) + 0.167 = 0.407

126
Step 2: Compute conveyance in section outside of gutter

= 0.56d22.67
nSX
= 0.56 X0.16 2 • 67
0.016 X 0.04

Step 3: Compute conveyance in the gutter

= 0.56(d12.67- d22.67)
nSW

d
= 0.56(0.407 2 • 67 - 0.162.67)
0.016(0.0833 + 0.04)

2
-2
= 23.61 ft 3 ;s

Step 4:

6.56 + 23.61
H
ed iv
ve
EC
Compute total conveyance by adding results from
Steps 2 and 3.
by la
= 30.18 ft 3 /s
ed ch

Step 5: Repeat Steps 1 through 4 for other widths of

ispread, T.
ch rc Ar

Step 6: Repeat Steps 1 through 5 for other cross slopes, Sx.

Step 7: Plot curves of K - T relationship as shown in

figure 3, section 5.2.
pe
Ar Su

127
APPENDIX D. DEVELOPMENT OF SPREAD-DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP FOR
PARABOLIC CROSS SECTIONS

A parabolic cross section can be described by the equation:

y = ax - bx 2 (44)

where: a = 2H/B

b= H/B 2
H = crown height, ft (m)
B = half width, ft (m)

d
The relationships between a, b, crown height, H, and half
width, B, are shown in figure 39.

2
-2
y

1 ve
by l
H
ed iv

EC
a
ed ch
i
ch rc Ar

Figure 39. Properties of a parabolic curve

pe
Ar

'
To determine total gutter flow, divide the cross section
into segments of equal width and compute the discharge for each
Su

segment by Manning's equation. The parabola can be approximated

very closely by 2 ft (0.61 m) chords. The total discharge will
be the sum of the discharges in all segments.

The crown height, H, and half width, B, vary from one design
to another. Since discharge is directly related to the config-
uration of the cross section, discharge-depth (or spread) rela-
tionships developed for one configuration are not applicable for
roadways of other configurations. For this reason, the relation-
ships must be developed for each roadway configuration.

128
 The following procedure illustrates the development of a
conveyance curve for a parabolic pavement section with a half
width, B = 24 ft (7.32 m) and a crown height, H = 0.48 ft (0.15
m). The procedure is presented with reference to table 13.
Conveyance computations for spreads of 2 ft, 4 ft and 6 ft are
shown for illustration purposes.

Procedure:

Column 1: Choose the width of segment, ~x, for which the vertical
rise will be computed and record in column 1.

Column 2: Compute the vertical rise using equations (44) - (46).

For H = 0.48 ft and B = 24 ft, equation (44) becomes:

d
y = 0.04x - 0.0083x 2

2
Column 3: Compute the mean rise, y, of each segment and record

-2
in column 3.

segment.
ve
H
ed iv

EC
Column 4: Depth of flow at the curb, d, for a given spread, T, is
equal to the vertical rise, y, shown in column 2. The
by l
average flow depth for any segment is equal to depth at
a
the curb for the spread minus the mean rise in that
For example, depth at curb for a 2 ft spread
is equal to 0.0767 ft. The mean rise in the segment is
ed ch

equal to 0.0384 ft. Therefore, average flow depth in

i
the segment, d = 0.767- 0.0384 = 0.0383. This will be
rc Ar

further illustrated for column 6.

ch
Column 5: Conveyance for a segment can be determined from the
equation:

K = 1.~ 9 Ad 2 / 3 = ~(AX) (d) 5 / 3 = ~(2) d 5 / 3

Only "d" in the above equation varies from one segment
pe

to another. Therefore, the equation can be operated on

Ar

with a summation of d5/3.

Su

Column 6: Average flow depth in the first 2 ft segment nearest

the curb is equal to the depth at the curb minus the
average rise in the segment,
d = y - y = 0.1467 - 0.0384 = 0.1083 ft.
Similarly, the average flow depth in the second 2 ft
segment away from the curb is:
d = 0.1467 - 0.1117 = 0.0350 ft

129
 Table 13. Conveyance computations, parabolic street section.
'
T = 2 ft* T = 6 ft*** .
-~1
Dist. vert Ave. T - 4 ft**
from Rise Rise Ave.Flow Ave.Flow Ave.Flow .
Curb y,ft y Depth, d d5/3 Depth, d d5/3 Depth, d d5/3
--
( 1) (2) ( 3) (4) ( 5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
0 0
.0384 .0383 .0043 .1083 .0244 .1716 .0527
2* 0.0767
.1117 .0350 .0037 .0983 .0208
4** .1467
.1784 .0316 .0031
6*** .2100
.2384

ed
8 .2667
.2917

2
10 .3167

-2
.3384
12 .3600

EC
.3784
14 .3967 by l
.4118 iva
16 .4268
H
ed iv
.4385
18 .4501
ed ch

.4585
20 .4668
rc Ar

.4718
ch
22 .4768
.4784
24 .48
E .0043 .0281 .0766
Q/80.5 = 0.8 5.23 14.27
pe
Ar

Q = KS0.5 = 1.49AR0.67 8 0.5

n
Su

K = 1.49(AX)dl.67
n

For n = 0.016 and ~x = 2 ft:

K = _Q___ = (186.25)ct 1 • 67
8 0.5

130
Columns 7, 8 and 9 are computed in the same manner as columns
4, 5 and 6.

The same analysis is repeated for other spreads equal to the

half section width or for depths equal to the curb height, for
curb heights <H.

Results of the analyses for spreads of 8 to 24 ft are shown

in table 14:

Table 14. Conveyance vs spread, parabolic street section.

T 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

d
d .267 .317 .360 .397 .427 .450 .467 .477 .480
K 27.53 44.71 64.45 85.26 105.54 123.63 137.98 147.26 150.49

2
-2
ve EC
The results of the computations are plotted in figure 40.
For a given spread or flow depth at the curb, the conveyance can
by l
be read from the figure and the discharge computed from the

H
a
equation, Q = Ks 0 • 5 • For a given discharge and longitudinal
ed iv
slope, the flow depth or spread can be read directly from the
ed ch
i
figure by first computing the conveyance, K = Q/s 0 • 5 , and using
rc Ar

this value to enter the figure. An example is given on figure

ch
40.
pe
Ar Su

131
 T ( FT)
o. 5 22 20 18 I~ 14 12 6 4 2

0.41---------r------~r-------------------~~----------~r--------+--------4
Su
1-
lL
~
pe
0.3
Ar
(I)
0:::
rc Ar
:::> EXAMPLE:
u
GIVEN: Q=3 FT3/S; S=O.OI
f-'
ed ch
w I- Q/fS = 3/10.0 I = 30
N
<( 0.2
I FIND: WATER DEPTH AT CURB=0.275 FT
ed iv
ch
I-
0...
a T = 8.4 FT
w
0
by l
0:::
w
~ 0.1
H
3 EC
iv
-2
00 20 40 60 80 1002 120 140
CONVEYANCE Q//S ( FT 3/S)
ed
Figure 40. Conveyance curve for a parabolic cross section.
APPENDIX E. DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN CHARTS FOR GRATE INLETS

The following step-by-step procedure may be used to develop

design curves relating intercepted flow and total gutter flow,
with spread as the third variable, for a given roadway geometry,
grate type and size.

Example 30:

Given: sx = 0.04
Grate - Type: P - 1-1/8
Size: 2 X 2 ft (W X L)

ed
n = 0.016

2
Required: Develop design curves relating intercepted flow, Qi, to

-2
total gutter flow, Q, for various spread widths, T.
Intercepted flow is a function of total gutter flow,

EC
cross slope, and longitudinal slope, s. A discharge of

3 ft 3 ;s and longitudinal slope of 0.01 are used here to

by l
iv a
illustrate the development of curves.
H
ed iv

Procedure:
ed ch

Step 1: Determine spread, T, by use of Chart 3 or the following

rc Ar

form of equation 4:
ch
nQ
T = [ ] 0.375 /Sx 0 • 625
0.56s 0 • 5
For this example, with S = 0.01,
T = [ 3 ]0.375/(0.04)0.625 = 7.08 ft
pe

0
35(0.01) • 5
Ar

Step 2: Determine the ratio, E0 , of the frontal flow to total

Su

flow from Chart 4.

W/T = 2/7.08 = 0.28

Step 3: Determine the mean velocity from Chart 2.

V = 3 ft/s

133
Step 4: Determine the frontal flow interception efficiency,
Rf, using Chart 7.

Step 5: Determine the side flow interception efficiency, Rs,

using Chart 8.

Step 6: Compute the inlet interception efficiency by using

equation (11).

ed
= 0.65

2
Step 7: Compute the intercepted flow.

-2
Qi = EQ = 0.65(3) = 1.95 cfs

EC
Step 8: Repeat steps 1 through 7 for other longitudinal slopes
by la
iv
to complete the design curve for Q = 3 ft 3 /s.
H
ed iv

Step 9: Repeat steps 1 through 8 for other flow rates. Curves

ed ch

for the grate and cross slope selected for this illus-
tration are shown in figures 41 and 42.
ch rc Ar

Design curves for other grate configurations, roadway cross

slopes, and gutter configurations can be developed similarly.
pe
Ar Su

134
 P-1-1/8 GRATE:
n=0.016; Sx=0.04; W=2 FT; L=2 FT
7~--------.---------.---------.---------.-------~,-------~

6r-------~r---------r---------r-------~r-------~--------~

ed
5
,.......

2
(/)
r0' 0 {FT 3/S)

-2
I-
LL.

EC
4
0
by la
iv
H
ed iv
ed ch

5
g 3r-------~~=-------r---------r-------~r-------~---
LL.
ch rc Ar

2
pe
Ar

oOio
Su

/ 9 .--
--,.~+--" ~c"<.--,..
/ ~,c,~
~<(;_ ....
..
---+~.::__--+----t------r------r- 0.5

0~--------~--------~--------~------~~------~--------~
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
LONGITUDINAL SLOPE s
Figure 41. Interception capacity of a 2x2-ft, P-1-1/8 grate.

135
 P-1-1/8 GRATE:
n=O.OI6; Sx =0.04; W=2 FT; L=4 FT
7

~
o_jo_ - Q (FT1S)
~0-
-- - -
6
- - - - - - - I0

- 9
-......-

--
...............

ed
8
(j) 5

2
~ 7 -

-2
I-

19 _of::---- -
LL

EC
- --
--- 6

a·-4
-...;

- - ----- --- -
by la
H
ed iv
iv 5 -
ed ch

~
__J
3 _............
- 4 -
rc Ar

LL
ch
0
w
- - ---
eo 'J_o_ _ -
1-
a.. -- - - -- - 3 -
w
(.)
2

-
0::
w
1-
z 2 -
pe
Ar

EFFICIENCY___ 9_0_ ~lo_

Su

-
----
I -
0.5 -
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
LONGITUDINAL SLOPE S

Figure 42. Interception capacity of a 2x4-ft, P-1-1/8 grate.

136
 fEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Publications listed below are not available from the Government Printing
Office. These publications are available in limited numbers to State
highway agencies and other public agencies from the federal Highway
Administration. Requests for these documents and suggestions on the
contents of any publications should be addressed tcrthe federal Highway
Administration, Office of Engineering, Bridge Division, "NG-31,
Washington, D.C. 20590
Hydraulic Design Series
HDS No. 1 HYDRAULICS Of BRIDGE WATERWAYS - Second Edition - Revised 1978
HDS No. 3 DESIGN CHARTS fOR OPEN-CHANNEL flOW- 1961, Reprinted 1973
HDS No. 4 DESIGN Of ROADSIDE DRAINAGE CHANNELS - 1965
Hydraulic Engineering Circulars

d
HEC No. 1 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Of HYDRAULIC AND HYDROLOGIC SUBJECTS -
July 1983
HEC No. 3 HYDROLOGY OF A HIGHWAY STREAM CROSSING - January 1961

2
HEC No. 5 HYDRAULIC CHARTS FOR THE SELECTION Of HIGHWAY CULVERTS -

-2
HEC No. 9
HEC No. 10
HEC
HEC
No.
No.
11
12 ve
December 1965
DEBRIS-CONTROL STRUCTURES - March 1971

EC
CAPACITY CHARTS FOR THE HYDRAULIC DESIGN Of HIGHWAY CULVERTS -
November 1972
by l
USE Of RIPRAP FOR BANK PROTECTION - June 1967
a
DRAINAGE Of HIGHWAYS PAVEMENTS - March 1969
H
ed iv

HEC No. 13 HYDRAULIC DESIGN Of IMPROVED INLETS FOR CULVERTS - August 1972
HEC No. 14 HYDRAULIC DESIGN Of ENERGY DISSIPATORS FOR CULVERTS AND
ed ch

CHANNELS - December 1975

i
HEC No. 15 DESIGN Of STABLE CHANNELS WITH FLEXIBLE LININGS - October 1975
ch rc Ar

HEC No. 16 ADDENDUM TO HIGHWAYS IN THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT - HYDRAULIC AND

ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS - JULY 1980
HEC No. 17 THE DESIGN Of ENCROACHMENTS ON flOOD PLAINS USING RISK ANALYSIS -
October 1980
Electronic Computer Programs
HY-2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF PIPE-ARCH CULVERTS - May 1969
HY-4 HYDRAULICS Of BRIDGE WATERWAYS - 1969
pe
Ar

HY-6 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Of CULVERTS (Box and Circular) - 1979

Calculator Design Series
Su

CDS No. 1 HYDRAULIC DESIGN Of IMPROVED INLETS fOR CULVERTS USING

PROGRAMABLE CALCULATORS, (COMPUCORP 325) - October 1980
CDS No. 2 HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF IMPROVED INLETS FOR CULVERTS USING
PROGRAMABLE CALCULATORS, (HP-65) - October 1980
CDS No. 3 HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF IMPROVED INLETS fOR CULVERTS USING
PROGRAMABLE CALCULATORS, (TI-59) - January 1981
CDS No. 4 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF PIPE-ARCH AND ELLIPTICAL SHAPE
CULVERTS USING PROGRAMABLE CALCULATORS, (TI-59) - March 1982
CDS No. 5 HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF STORMWATER PUMPING STATIONS USING
PROGRAMABLE CALCULATORS, (TI-59), May 1982
 ed -2
EC
2
iv by la
H
ed iv
ed ch
ch rc Ar
pe
Ar
Su

HT A-22/R5-92(500)E W
HHI-10/R5-93(1.5M)EW
HHI-10/R5-95(350)EW