Where a proposed land development will be discharging stormwater runoff to a receiving drainage system, any potential impacts to the receiving drainage system or the highway drainage system must be examined. Since impacts are assessed through a hydrologic or hydraulic analysis of the highway drainage works, every proposed land development should provide some form of hydrologic or hydraulic analysis. It is recognised that the level of detail required in the hydrologic or hydraulic analysis will vary, depending on the type of land development and the region of the province where it is located. So, before proceeding review the following.
Where a lower level of detail is proposed for the hydrologic or hydraulic analysis, the SWM report should provide rationale on why the lower level of detail is appropriate. As a guide, review the following land development attributes.
A more detailed hydrologic or hydraulic analysis may be needed where any of the following may occur (typically, a higher level of detail involves the input of more data):
Having considered the level of detail, review the following sections for details on hydrologic or hydraulic analysis that are applicable to land development proposals. MTO recognises that the documentation of computational methodology is within the interests of all the regulatory agencies, not just MTO. However, the hydrologic and hydraulic methods specified within this section are accepted industry practices, and can be applied to the appropriate component of the receiving drainage system.
Flows rates are calculated as part of the hydrologic analysis and are typically determined at key locations along the receiving drainage system for a range of frequencies. The results are generally used as an input to the hydraulic analysis, which involves the calculation of water surface elevations and flow velocities. Table 7 presents the typical range of flow rate frequencies that should calculated at the reference points (i.e. in the receiving drainage system) presented in the table.
Inputs to the flow rate calculation include:
The methods that can be used for the flow rate calculation as classified in Figure 2 are:
Where a runoff hydrograph has been calculated, it may be necessary to route the flows though the channels or reservoirs to determine the affects of storage and roughness on the shape of the hydrograph. If computer models have been used, possible application errors should also be reviewed.
These methods calculate the peak flow rate based on statistical analysis of the precipitation record or stream flow records. Refer to Selecting Precipitation Data for information on the different types of precipitation data input.
The most common methods used to assess the peak flow rates are those based on modelling of the precipitation-runoff process. Some of these methods are empirical. These methods use statistical representations of the precipitation record, from a rainfall gauging station (e.g. Intensity-Duration-Frequency IDF curve), combined with physical parameters representing the catchment (e.g. area, length, slope, and runoff coefficient), to calculate the peak flow rate at a particular location in a catchment area. These methods can be classified into two types:
Of these methods, the Rational Method is the most suitable method for small land development sites and is therefore, discussed in this section. The Modified Index Flood Method is for watersheds greater than 25 km2 and the Northern Ontario Method is for watersheds between 1 and 100 km2 in area. For information on the use and application of the Modified Index Flood Method and the Northern Ontario Method refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 8, page 43.
The Rational Method calculates the peak flow rate at a particular location in a catchment due to the runoff contributed from the entire upstream catchment area. The Rational Method is represented by then following equation:
When applying the Rational Method it is important to demonstrate the applicability of the method. For this purpose, it is important to note the following.
If the Rational Method is not applicable a hydrographic method should be used.
Refer to the DMM, Chapter 8 page 39 for more details and for an example on the application of the Rational Method.
Hydrographic methods calculate the time distribution of flow rate (hydrograph) at any location in a catchment. These methods calculate the response of a catchment to precipitation and snow melt. They apply mathematical representations of the specific physical hydrological processes in a catchment area, such as infiltration, evaporation and detention.
The two basic types of hydrograph methods are based on the two forms of precipitation data that are available:
Refer to the information sheet on Selecting Precipitation Data for more details on rainfall data.
Hydrograph simulation methods are required under the following circumstances:
When using hydrographic methods it is essential to provide the specific information on the basis of which the modelling was based. This typically includes the following:
For details refer to Identifying Catchment Inputs for details on the parameters presented above.
Single event hydrographic modelling simulates the precipitation/runoff process using a short duration precipitation event (i.e. durations ranging from 1hr to a few days). The storm event may be the regulatory storm (Hurricane Hazel, the Timmins Storm or the 100-year storm event) as described in the “Highway Drainage Design Standards” (MTO 2008).
Single Event Methods are used when:
Refer to the DMM, Chapter 8 page 77, for more details.
Single event computer models acceptable to MTO include:
Refer to Computer Model Characteristics for more additional information on these models, Identifying Catchment Inputs for information on the input parameters to these models, and Selecting Precipitation Data for details on rainfall data.
Continuous event hydrographic methods calculate the flow rate using the entire long term precipitation record as input. Typical periods of rainfall data ranges from 10 to 40 years. Continuous simulation is expected to generate runoff with a frequency which best approximates reality; however, calibration is required to achieve accuracy.
Continuous simulation can be an expensive, complex and time consuming process. It is used:
The following are the most common continuous event hydrographic computer models accepted by MTO:
Refer to the DMM Chapter 4, pages 81 and 86 for more detail. Methods not covered in the DMM may be used if it can be demonstrated, through independent recognised references, that these methods are in agreement with the principles outlined in the DMM and are applicable to Ontario conditions.
Where the hydrologic analysis involves a hydrographic method, the runoff hydrograph should be routed through the channel and reservoir components of the receiving drainage system for the following reasons.
Typically, channel or reservoir routing is completed as part of the hydrologic analysis. Most hydrologic computer models include channel and reservoir routing options that can be applied with minimal input data. Refer to Computer Model Characteristics for more details.
Channel routing can also be completed as part of the hydraulic analysis where flow in the channel reach is unsteady (e.g. for very steep or very slopes). Hydraulic channel routing generally requires the use of different computer models. Refer to Computer Model Characteristics for more details.
To assess the major drainage system (i.e. for roadway surface flooding), it is necessary to separate the roadway surface flow into major and minor hydrographs. The minor flow hydrograph is then input into a hydraulic grade line (storm sewers) or backwater analysis (roadside ditches) to determine the total depth of flow and a time history output of velocity. The major flow runoff hydrograph is routed along the roadway surface to determine the total depth of flow and time history of runoff. Refer to Assessing Roadway Surface Flooding for more details.
The actual flow in a storm sewer system (i.e. the minor flow) will depend on the spacing of the catchbasins on the roadway surface and/or the rate at which the catchbasins will capture surface flow from external areas. The flow not captured by the catchbasins will remain on the surface and will become the major flow. To determine an accurate assessment of the storm sewer, the major and minor flow should be separated. For convenience, the minor flow can be assumed to be equal to the surface flow (i.e. stormwater runoff form the roadway surface and/or external areas); however this method can result in a possible over estimation of the hydraulic grade line. Refer to Assessing Flow in Storm Sewers for more details.
Computer Model Characteristics presents the hydrologic computer programs that are capable of separating major and minor flow hydrographs.
Computer application errors can generally be attributed to the following:
Catchment inputs are parameters that are determined at the reference points in the receiving drainage system as noted in Table 7, and are used as an input to the flow rate calculation.
| Sw = 100 |
|
= difference in elevation, m, between the 85% point and the 10% point obtained from contours, air photos, etc.
|
Sw = 100 |
|
| Land Use | % Impervious | |
|---|---|---|
| Rural | 0 to 20 | |
| Residential | Single Family | 20 to 50 |
| Multiple Detached | 40 to 60 | |
| Multiple Attached | 60 to 75 | |
| Commercial: | Light | 50 to 80 |
| Heavy | 60 to 90 | |
| Industrial: | Light | 50 to 80 |
| Heavy | 60 to 90 | |
| Land Cover | Typical Values | |
|---|---|---|
| Impervious | 2 mm | |
| Pervious: | Lawns | 5 mm |
| Meadows | 8 mm | |
| Woods | 10 mm | |
Horton Equation - Typical Values
| Soil Group |
Minimum Infiltration
Rate (mm/hr) |
Maximum Infiltration
Rate (mm/hr)* |
|---|---|---|
| A | 25 | 250 |
| B | 13 | 200 |
| C | 5 | 125 |
| D | 3 | 75 |
* dry soil conditions, Decay Parameter = 2 hr-1
Green-Ampt Method - Typical Values
| Soil Group | IMD3(mm/hr) | Su3 (mm) | Ks2(mm/hr) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A (sand) | 0.34 | 250 | 25 |
| B (silt loam) | 0.32 | 200 | 13 |
| C (sand clay loam) | 0.26 | 125 | 5 |
| D (clay) | 0.21 | 180 | 3 |
or
| log Kt = | (log Qt - log Q0) |
|
|
| (tt - t0) |
| tc = | 3.26 (1.1 - C) L0.5 |
|
|
| Sw0.33 |
| tc = | 0.057 L |
|
|
| Sw0.2 A0.1 |
| tc = |
|
ieff-0.4 |
Flows rates are calculated as part of the hydrologic analysis and are typically determined at key locations along the receiving drainage system for a range of frequencies, as noted in Table 7. Since precipitation data will serve as an input to the flow rate calculation, the frequency of the selected precipitation event must correspond to the flow rate frequency is that is to be calculated. Key characteristics of the precipitation data include type, distribution over time, duration and land use. The precipitation data may be one of the following depending on the type of analysis required and the data available.
Rainfall intensity from a representative IDF curve is applicable when using the Rational Method for calculating the peak flow rate, or for determining the distribution of a synthetic storm event. A representative IDF curve includes one of the following:
A single representative storm obtained from the historical record, usually the regulatory storm, is applicable when using a single event modelling technique for assessing the impact of the regulatory storm (Hurricane Hazel, Timmins Storm or the 100-year event). “Highway Drainage Design Standards” (MTO 2008) specifies the applicable regulatory storm based on the geographic location of the catchment area under investigation.
Synthetic storm events are typically used when a hydrographic flow rate calculation method is necessary. A synthetic storm is produced by distributing the total precipitation volume over the duration of the storm based on a defined mathematical distribution (e.g. Chicago, AES or SCS distributions). Refer to the DMM, Chapter 8 page 10, for more details and to Example 8.1 page 11 for the method of developing a Chicago Storm. Input parameters include the following.
Table 9 provides the acceptable synthetic storm events, applicable storm duration and rainfall time step for each of these storm events based on land use. These parameters should always be provided to support the selection of a storm event. For additional information on representative designstorms, refer to DMM, chapter 8 page 10-17.
Table 9: Synthetic Storm Events
| Storm Event | IDuration | Time Step | Land Use1Applicability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago (Keifer & Chu) | Variable (usually 3hr or 4hr) | Variable | Urban |
| SCS Type II | 6hr, 12hr or 24hr | 15 min | Rural |
| AES (30%) - 1 hr | 1 hr | 5 min | Urban |
| AES (30%) - 12 hr | 12 hr | 15 min | Rural |
| AES/Hydrotek | 1 hr | 5 min |
Note: 1 Urban >20% impervious area , Rural<20% impervious area
A continuous storm record for a representative meteorological station is used when performing continuous hydrological modelling. Typical periods of rainfall data is 10 to 40 years. An alternative to using the entire continuous storm record is the use of a series of individual historical storm events. Each event is analyzed statistically and a frequency analysis of the results is then performed. Refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 3 Appendix 3A for more details.
Culvert analysis is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the receiving drainage system, (culvert components), or to check the capacity of the highway culvert.
Peak flows rates are determined from the hydrologic analysis and are calculated for a range of frequencies as specified in Table 7.
Culvert analysis is used to calculate the headwater level upstream of a culvert based on the flow rate, culvert characteristics and tailwater elevation. Refer to Table 6 for culvert characteristics that are required to complete the culvert analysis. Refer to the DMM, Chapter 5, page 17 and Chapter 8 page 134, for details on culvert analysis.
A culvert will operate in either inlet control or outlet control depending on the magnitude of the flow rate. For each flow rate, the headwater depth is computed for both the inlet and outlet conditions. The headwater level is determined from the condition that governs (i.e. the condition yielding the higher headwater level).
In the case of outlet control, an accurate assessment of tailwater elevation is essential as it has a significant effect on the headwater level. The two main methods of calculating the tailwater elevation are as follows.
If the calculated tailwater elevation is below the top of the culvert outlet the governing tailwater level will be the greater of the following two levels:
Culvert analysis can be conducted either using hand calculation methods or computer models.
Where the capacity of the highway culvert is being checked, the analysis need only be completed for the design flow frequency.
Where headwater levels or flow velocities are being determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7, a separate culvert analysis should be completed for each flow rate. The results can be presented on a culvert performance curve, which plots the headwater level against the flow rate (refer to pg 144 in Chapter 8 of the DMM for more details on performance curves). Where relief flow occurs, weir flow will occur and the performance curve should reflect this condition.
Flow velocities should be determined for each of headwater levels determined in the culvert analysis. The exit velocity from a culvert should not result in erosion downstream of the culvert, otherwise, erosion protection should be provided. Refer to the section Assessing the Potential for Erosion for more details.
Bridge analysis is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the receiving drainage system, and the bridge components, and to check the capacity of the highway bridge.
Peak flow rates are determined from the hydrologic analysis and are calculated at the upstream section of the bridge for the range of frequencies specified in Table 7. The results will serve as an input to the analysis.
Bridge analysis is used to calculate the headwater level upstream of a bridge based on the flow rate and bridge characteristics. Refer to Table 6 for the bridge characteristics that are required to complete the bridge analysis. Refer to the DMM, Chapter 5, page 17 and Chapter 8 page 134, for details on bridge analysis.
The Two basic methods of bridge analysis are:
When analysing a bridge structure, the flow through the bridge should be checked for the following cases:
The number subscripts refer to the section locations. For a subcritical flow analysis, the calculation should start from the downstream end and proceed upstream. Refer to the DMM, Chapter 5 Page 12, for more details.
Where a bridge soffit is fully submerged, pressure flow, Qp, through waterway openings, may be analyzed using the following equation:
Assuming that the roadway performs like a broad-crested weir, using the following equation:
Refer to the DMM, Chapter 5 page 12 for more details.
Computer models accepted by MTO are HEC2/HEC-RAS and WSPRO. Refer to Computer Model Characteristics for more information on these models. The user manuals of these models should be consulted for details on their application. Other models, not mentioned in this document or the DMM, may be used provided it can be demonstrated, through independent recognised references, that these methods are in agreement with the principles outlined in the DMM.
Where the capacity of the highway bridge is being checked, the analysis need only be completed for the design flow frequency.
Where headwater levels or flow velocities are being determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7, a separate bridge analysis should be completed for each flow rate. The results can be presented on a bridge performance curve, which plots the headwater level against the flow rate (refer to pg 144 in Chapter 8 of the DMM for more details on performance curves). Where relief flow occurs, flow over the roadway will act as a weir flow and the performance curve should reflect this condition.
Flow velocities should be determined for each of headwater levels determined in the bridge analysis. The velocity through a bridge and the exit velocity from a bridge should not result in erosion downstream of the bridge, otherwise, erosion protection should be provided. Refer to the sections Assessing Potential for Scour and Assessment Channel Erosion for more details
Open Channel analysis is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the receiving drainage system, for the stream channel and roadside ditch components, or it is used to check the capacity of the highway roadside ditch.
Peak flows rates are determined from the hydrologic analysis and are calculated at the upstream section of the open channel for the range of frequencies specified in Table 7. The results will serve as an input to the analysis. Channel routing may be required as part of the analysis. Refer to Routing the Hydrograph through Channels and Reservoirs for more information on flow routing.
Open channels flow analysis is used to calculate the depth of flow and flow velocities in the steam channel or roadside ditch, when water is flowing under the influence of gravity with a free water surface. Refer to Table 6 for stream channel or roadside ditch characteristics required to complete the analysis.
The water surface elevation in an open channel can be determined using the Manning's equation or other similar method, such as the Chazy formula, if the flow is steady and uniform.
The Manning Equation is given by:
However, due to variations in channel cross section, slope and meander pattern, uniform flow condition can not be assumed. In such cases, gradually varied flow condition will govern and backwater analysis would have to be conducted.
Backwater analysis applies the continuity and energy equations in assessing the water surface elevation at each cross-section starting from a point of known water level, which will become the starting water surface elevation.
When assessing drainage impacts, backwater analysis should be conducted for a distance upstream or downstream where there will be no appreciable difference between the pre-development and post-development water surface elevations. Refer to Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis of the Receiving Drainage System for further details.
Backwater analysis can be conducted either using hand calculation methods or computer models.
Where the capacity of the highway roadside ditch is being checked, the analysis need only be completed for the
Where water surface levels or flow velocities are being determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7, a separate analysis should be completed for each flow rate. Water surface levels, storage volume, and flow rates can be presented on stage-storage and stage-discharge curves for both the predevelopment and post-development scenario(s).
Flow velocities should be determined for each of the water levels determined in the analysis. The velocity in a stream channel or roadside ditch should not result in erosion, otherwise, erosion protection should be provided. Refer Assessing Channel Erosion for more details
If changes to a channel slope, shape or meander patterns are being considered, channel stability should be assessed. If a channel becomes unstable, it will attempt to return to an equilibrium state through the processes of aggradation and degradation. The result of these processes will be erosion or sedimentation that can occur at the immediate location of the channel or anywhere within an appreciable distance upstream or downstream. For more details, refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 9 or to a reference on natural channel design.
.An assessment of channel erosion is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the receiving drainage system. The purpose of the analysis is to determine if stormwater runoff discharging from the proposed land development will increase flow velocities such that erosion will occur. Erosion will occur if the lining material is inadequate to resist any increase in flow velocity.
The flow velocities calculated as part of the hydraulic analysis for culverts, bridges, open channel, storm sewers, or stormwater management detention facilities , and serve as an input to the channel erosion analysis. Refer to Table 6 for erosion protection characteristics that are required to complete the analysis.
The susceptibility of a channel to erosion can be assessed using one of the following methods:
The assessment of scour at a stream crossing is discussed in Assessing the Potential for Scour.
Maximum permissible velocity is the maximum flow velocity that a channel can withstand without serious deformation of the channel bed or bank. The maximum permissible velocity depends on a number of factors including the bed material, flow depth, velocity, sediment load, channel alignment and vegetation.
When checking the lining of an existing channel the flow velocity should be less than maximum permissible velocity. When designing a channel the hydraulic radius (R) should be less than the hydraulic radius corresponding to the maximum permissible velocity calculated using the Manning equation.
Refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 5, page 111 for design details and to Design Chart 2.17, for typical maximum permissible velocities for different lining materials.
Tractive force is the shear force exerted by the flow on to the wetted channel surfaces. Tractive stress (N/m2) is the tractive force (N) per unit area (m2). If the tractive force caused by the flow is greater than the resistive forces holding the material, erosion will occur.
The tractive stress varies along the bed and sides of a channel. The following equation can be used to determine the maximum tractive stress along the bed:
= maximum tractive bed stress, N/m2
= unit weight of water, 9810 N/m3
The maximum tractive stress along the side of a channel can be calculated using the following equation:
= maximum tractive bank stress, N/m2
, R, S as above
Refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 5 page 112, for more details and to Design Chart 2.25, for permissible unit tractive force values for different soil types.
.Storm sewer flow analysis is typically completed to determine if stormwater runoff discharging from the proposed land development will cause the capacity of the storm sewer components to be exceeded, possibly leading to flooding of the roadway surface. The concern for MTO is the potential for surcharging of the highway storm sewer system causing flooding on the highway surface. Consequently, the capacity of the highway storm sewer system should be checked where stormwater runoff discharging from the proposed land development will discharge directly into the highway surface drainage system.
Where a storm sewer component of the receiving drainage system has been designed to convey a major storm (i.e. trunk storm sewer), the storm sewer may have to be analyzed to as part of the receiving drainage system. The purpose of the analysis is to determine if increased water surface elevations or flow velocities will be caused by stormwater runoff discharging from the proposed land development.
The storm sewer analysis must account for the fact that storm sewers are arranged as a network with flow inputs entering at multiple catchbasin or maintenance hole locations. Peak flow rates are determined as part of the hydrologic analysis and are calculated at the locations in the storm sewer system where stormwater runoff from external areas and/or the roadway surface runoff will enter the storm sewer system, for the range of frequencies presented in Table 7. The results will serve as an input to the storm sewer analysis. Where the external flow is conveyed through a stream channel system or reservoir before entering the storm sewer, flow routing may be required as part of the peak flow calculation. Refer to Routing the Hydrograph through Channels and Reservoirs for more information on flow routing.
The actual flow in the storm sewer (i.e. the minor flow) will depend on the spacing of the catchbasins on the roadway surface and/or the rate at which the catchbasins will capture surface flow from external areas. The flow not captured by the catchbasins will remain on the surface and will become the major flow. To determine an accurate assessment of the storm sewer, the major and minor flow should be separated. This will be completed as part of the peak flow calculation.
For convenience, the minor flow can be assumed to be equal to the surface flow (i.e. stormwater runoff form the roadway surface and/or external areas); however this method can result in a possible over estimation of the hydraulic grade line.
Storm sewer flow analysis calculates the depth of flow and flow velocities in the storm sewer. Refer to Table 6 for storm sewer characteristics that are required to complete the analysis.
To assess the impact of increased flow rates from a proposed land development on storm sewer capacity, the water surface elevation should be checked.
Storm sewers are arranged as a network with flow inputs occurring at multiple locations. In addition, friction and minor losses in the system may account for significant changes in the hydraulic grade line. Therefore, the hydraulic grade line is not necessarily parallel to the pipe slope and a hydraulic grade line analysis is conducted rather than an analysis of the water surface elevation.
In general, a hydraulic grade line analysis for storm sewers may be necessary where:
Hydraulic grade line analysis applies the continuity and energy equations in assessing the hydraulic grade line at each storm sewer cross-section. It accounts for energy losses as a result of changes in storm sewer slopes, diameters and roughness, as well as, the existence of maintenance holes, catchbasins and junctions. The analysis starts from a point of known water level, and depending on whether the flow is subcritical or supercritical, the analysis proceeds up-stream or down-stream, respectively.
Friction and minor losses in the system may account for significant changes in the hydraulic grade line and should be accounted.
A storm sewer may function as:
Open Channels (free flowing condition)
Refer to the section Computer Model Characteristics for more information on these models. The user manuals of these models should be consulted for the details on their application. Other models, not mentioned in this document or the DMM, may be used provided it can be demonstrated, through independent recognised references, that these methods are in agreement with the principles outlined in the DMM.
This method is most commonly completed with the use of SWMM/EXTRAN; however this method assumes that the storm sewer captures all of the surface runoff (major and minor flows are not separated). OTTSWWM/EXTRAN can separate major and minor flows based on catchbasin capture rates.
Refer to the section Computer Model Characteristics for more information on these models. The user manuals of these models should be consulted for the details on their application. Other models, not mentioned in this document or the DMM, may be used provided it can be demonstrated, through independent recognised references, that these methods are in agreement with the principles outlined in the DMM.
The capacity of the highway storm sewer should be assessed for the design flow frequency.
Where a storm sewer component of the receiving drainage system conveys flow rates equal to or greater than 25 yr event (i.e. trunk storm sewer), the storm sewer should to be analyzed to as part of the receiving drainage system. In this case, the hydraulic grade line and flow velocities should be determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7.
The exit velocity from a storm sewer should not result in erosion downstream of the storm sewer, otherwise erosion protection should be provided. Refer to the section Assessing Channel Erosion for more details.
.Roadway surface flooding analysis is typically completed when stormwater runoff discharging from the proposed land development will cause the capacity of the storm sewer or roadside components to be exceeded. The concern for MTO is the safety of the travelling public: the major system drainage from an external land development and the highway should be assessed to ensure safe driving conditions on the highway for flows up to and including the regulatory event. Part of this assessment should include the identification of the major flow path from the land development site to the highway and from the highway to the receiving drainage system.
Peak flow rates are determined in the hydrologic analysis and are calculated using the frequencies presented in Table 7, which will serve as an input to the analysis.
To assess the major drainage system, it is necessary to separate the roadway surface flow into major and minor hydrographs. The minor flow hydrograph is then input into a hydraulic grade line (storm sewers) or backwater analysis (roadside ditches) to determine the total depth of flow and a time history output of velocity. The major flow is used in the roadway surface analysis to determine the total depth of flow. For convenience, the minor flow can be ignored (i.e. equal to zero) however this method can result in an over estimation of the depth of flow on the roadway surface. Major and minor flow separation can be completed as part of the peak flow calculation.
Refer to Table 6 for roadway surface characteristics that are required to complete the analysis.
The capacity of the highway major system should be completed for the design flow frequency.
Where a storm sewer component of the receiving drainage system conveys flow rates equal to or greater than 25 yr event (i.e. trunk storm sewer), the major system portion of the storm sewer may have to be analyzed as part of the receiving drainage system. In this case, the depths of flow or flow velocities should be determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7.
The exit velocity from a roadway surface should not result in erosion downstream in the receiving drainage system. Refer to the section Assessing Channel Erosion for more details.
.The analysis of stormwater management detention facilities is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the receiving drainage system, for the stormwater management control components, or it is used to check the capacity of the highway stormwater management detention facility.
Peak flows rates are determined as part of the hydrologic analysis, and are calculated at the upstream inlet to the stormwater management detention facility for the range of frequencies specified in Table 7. The resulting hydrograph(s) should be routed through the detention facility. Refer to Routing the Hydrograph through Channels and Reservoirs for more information. The analysis of the stormwater management detention facility will require the corresponding stage-storage-discharge relationship as an input.
The water surface elevations in the stormwater management detention facility will be determined from the results of the reservoir routing of the inflow hydrograph. The analysis is completed with the use of a hydrologic computer program. The storage volume and outflow rate can also be determined from the analysis.
Where the capacity of the highway stormwater management detention facility is being checked, the analysis need only be completed for the design flow frequencies.
Where water surface elevations or flow velocities are being determined for the range of flow rate frequencies specified in Table 7, a separate analysis should be completed for each flow rate.
Flow velocities should be determined for the water surface elevations determined in the analysis. The exit velocity from a stormwater management detention facility should not result in downstream erosion, otherwise erosion protection should be provided. Refer to Assessing Channel Erosion for more details.
.An assessment of scour is completed as part of the hydraulic analysis of the bridge or culvert. Scour may undermine the foundations of a structure, possibly leading to its failure. Particular attention should be given to the natural stream characteristics. A stream may be unstable due to meandering, degradation or aggradation.
The flow velocities calculated as part of the hydraulic analysis for culverts and bridges serve as an input to the scour analysis. Refer to Table 6 for culvert or bridge characteristics that are required to complete the analysis.
Scour in a stream channel is defined as the lowering and/or widening of the streambed due to erosive forces exerted by flowing water. Flowing water in a stream channel exerts force in the direction of flow on the channel boundary surface. If the boundary force due to flow exceeds the resisting force of the boundary material, bed material particles are dislodged, resulting in scour of the streambed. Refer to the "Drainage Management Manual" (MTO 1997), Chapter 5, pages 43-65 and Chapter 9 (Basic Stream Geomorphology for Highway Applications) for more information.
Natural Scour: The occurrence of scour in the absence of any structural interference is commonly referred to as natural scour. A stream channel goes through progressive bank and bed scour over time due to naturally occurring flows and stream processes, resulting in sediment transport and channel adjustment.
General Scour: The local lowering of a channel bed in the vicinity of a structure waterway opening is called general scour.
Local Scour: Bed degradation that is generally localised around an obstruction, such as piers or groins is called local scour. The depth of local scour is in addition to the depths of natural or general scour in the vicinity.
The main purpose of completing a scour analysis is to assess the change in scour vulnerability of a stream channel bed at a water crossing and the adequacy of the existing or proposed scour protection works. When conducting a scour analysis the following are the main factors to be considered:
The methods for predicting scour depth are empirical and based on experience and judgement. These methods are:
These methods are not generalised or universally applicable. Therefore, as a minimum when assessing the scour at the bridge crossing or in a channel these methods should be used to assess the potential for scour. When assessing the applicability of the different methods, the following aspects should be considered:
Scour may be determined from field measurements such as probing affected areas, surveying the streambed and underwater sounding. Despite extensive research and development, methods for measuring scour in the field are not exact.
.| Applications | Computer Program | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOBED | HYCHAN | FERNS | FLOW 1-D | HEC-2 | HEC-6 | HEC-15 | WSPRO | EXTRAN | DWOPER | |
| Flow Conditions: | ||||||||||
| Steady | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Unsteady | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | Yes | Yes |
| Gradually Varied | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Rapidly Varied | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Subcritical | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Supercritical | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Two Dimensional | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Tractive Force | - | - | - | - | - | Yes | Yes | - | - | - |
| Energy | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Momentum | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Output: | ||||||||||
| Water Surface | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Profile | Yes | - | - | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | - | - |
| Velocity Profile | - | - | - | - | Yes | - | - | - | - | - |
| Ice | - | - | - | - | Yes | - | - | Yes | - | - |
| Cross Section | ||||||||||
| Flow Distribution | ||||||||||
| Options: | ||||||||||
| Tributary Profile | - | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Multiple Profile | - | - | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | - | Yes | - | - |
| Automatic | - | - | - | - | Yes | - | - | Yes | - | Yes |
| Calibration | - | - | Yes | - | Yes | - | - | Yes | - | Yes |
| Bridge/Culverts | ||||||||||
Legend: Y - Yes; L - Low; M - Medium; H - High
| Applications | Single Event | Continuous Event | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HYMO | OTTHYMO | OTTSWMM | ILLUDAS | MIDUSS | HSP-F | QUALHYMO | STORM | SWMMIV | |
| Land Use: | |||||||||
| Urban | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| Rural | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
| Infiltration | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Temperature | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Evapotranspiration | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Subsurface Flow | Yes | Yes | |||||||
| Water Balance | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||||
| Water Quality | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||||
| Hydrograph Method | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Routing: | |||||||||
| Watercourse/Channel | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| Reservoir | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
| Water Quality | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||
| Major/Minor System | Yes | ||||||||
| Receiving Water | Yes | Yes | |||||||
| Ontario Suitability | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Level of Effort | L | L | M | L | L | H | M | M | M |
| Data Requirements | M | M | H | M | M | H | M | M | H |
| Welcome | Document Map | About this Document | Quick Reference Guide | Checklist |
| MTO Approvals | Drainage Issues | Drainage Impacts | Capacity | Mitigating Impacts |
| Construction and Operation | Computational Methods | MTO Drainage Policy | Glossary |
| Disclaimer | Authors & Contacts |
This site is maintained by the Government of Ontario
Privacy | Important Notices | External Links Disclaimer
© Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2009
Last modified: November 05, 2009