Model Storm-Sewer Drop Shafts: Studies of

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

LORENZ G. STRAUB, Director
Technical Paper No. 35, Series B
MODEL STUDIES OF STORM-SEWER

DROP SHAFTS
by
SIGURD H. ANDERSON
Prepared for
DEPARTMENT OF. PUBLIC WORKS
City of St. Paul
. December 1961
Minneapolis, Minnesota
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

LORENZ G. STRAUB, Director
Technical Paper No. 35, Series B
MODEL STUDIES OF STORM-SEWER

DROP SHAFTS
by
SIGURD H. ANDERSON
Prepared for
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
City of st. Paul
December 1961
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Repro ductio n in whole or in part is perm itted

for any purpo se of the Unite d State s Government
PREFACE
The llipartment of Public. Works of the City of St. Paul, Ninnesota,
sponsored the work herein reported.
Hr. George Shepard, Engineering Co-ordi-
nator, gave general direction to the program.
Other Public \'lorks llipartment
staff members concerned with the development were the late Arthur
vI.
Tews,
Chief Engineer; Eugene Avery, present Chief Engineer; John Holmboe; and John
Des Lauriers.
This study was conducted at the St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory of the University of Ninnesota, under the general direction of Dr. Lorenz
G. Straub, Director.
Mr. C. E. Bowers of the Laboratory staff guided the in-
itial phases of the model study program and reviewed the several reports issued.
I~J.
W. Parmenter performed many of the model tests and photographed many of the
models.
iii
ABSTRACT
A long-range program of storm-sewer construction prompted the Department of Public Works of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota, to develop an
improved design for high-head drop shafts.
Past designs required frequent
inspection and maintenance at the base of the shaft to prevent failure of the
structure.
Preliminary model tests indicated that destructive forces of the
falling water were primarily responsible for the damage to the base of the
shaft.
An experimental study led to the development of an impact-type of
energy dissipator which removed excess energy from the

outflow conditions, with a minimum air entrainment.
iv
now
and created stable
CONTENTS
--------
Preface
Abstract.

List of Illustrations

III.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.
REVIEW OF PAST WORK
V.
VI.
3
3
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION PROGRAM. . . . . . . . . ..
DESCRIPTION OF THE MODELS
DEVELOFMENT OF BASIC DESIGN

A. Inlets . .
8
8
9
10
10
10
11
11
12
12
B. Elbow Inlet 9
C. Straight Drop Shafts.

D. Modified Drop Shafts.

1. straight Shaft with Contraction
2. Taper Shaft
3. Radius Elbow.
E. Sump Chamber.
1. Prelirrri.nary Design.
2. Variable-Hodel Sump
F. Sump 1l3sign
1. Diameter of Impact Cup.

2. Impact Pressures
3. Location. 0
h. Cup Sidewall.
5. Baffle Slab
6. Sump Diameter
7. Vents.
..
VII.
A. vlell Hole
B. Cascades

C. Backdrops
D. Energy-Dissipating Structures

..
IV.
iv
vii
I. INTRODUCTION
II.
Page
iii
DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL DESIGN.

A. Series 11

B. Series 12

C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Series
Series
Series
Series
Series
Series
Series
Series
Series
.0. .
..

13
Ih.
15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
18
19
0
20. 0
21.
22
4
h
13
15
15
16
16
16
17
J.7
18
18
19
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
21
22
22
VIII.
Sffi.1MA.RY
List of References.
Figures 1 through 54.
Appendix
I. REVIEW OF "FLOW IN VERTICAL SHAFTS"
A. Models........
B. Model Tests
1. Shaft Entrance.
2. Spiral (Vortex) Entrance (Unflooded Shaft).
3. Vortex-Type Entrance.
4. Stilling Chamber.
5. Air Entrainment
C. Comments on Vortex Inlet.
II. REVIEW OF "VORTEX FLOW THROUGH HORIZONTAL ORIFICES"
Figures~-l throughA-3
0
vi
Page
22
24
27
57
57
57
57
57
58
58
58
59
59
61
n
I
Figure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1.5
o
_F....
-------
I L L'U S T RAT
ION S
........ -----
1'-1e11 Hole at St. Paul

Well Hole, Minneapolis
Well Hole, Cleveland.,.

''I
Flight Sewer, Philadelphia.

Cascade for 1'-Tater
Backdrop. '. .
Typical Sumps Used for Air Removal, and Energy
French Water Power Collecting Systems
Typical. Sumps Used for Air Removal and Energy
French vIa tel' :Power Collecting Systems. '.
18
19
20
21
22
23
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
29
29
30
Rectangular Sump, 22 ft Wide, 30 ft Long and 40 ft Deep.

Jet ~enetrates to Bottom of Sump. Discharge 600 cfs.
31
Re.ctangular Sump (20 f't Deep) With Perforated Impact Plate

h ft Below End of Drop Shaft. Discharge 600 cfs.
'I. . . . .
31
Rectangular Sump 22 ft by 1.5 ft and 20 ftDaep , with Solid

"lall Impact Cup 9 ft in Diameter. Discharge 600 cfs .
31
Rectangular Sump, 22 ft by 1.5 ftand 20 ft Deep, with Perforated Impact Cup. Discharge 600' cfs..
Circular Sump with Perforated Impact Cup. Sump Diameter
18 ft
"
Vortex Type Inlet 16 ft in Diameter with 8-ft Drop Shaft
and Deep Water Cushion. Discharge 600 cfs. .'.
'I
17
" " " " "

Dissipation in
.0:
Dissipation in
'I..
Typical Sumps Used for Air Removal and Energy Dissipation in
French Water Power Collecting Systems
Typical Sumps Used for Air Removal and Energy DiSSipation in
French Water Power Collecting Systems "
Drop Shaft DeSign Based on Preliminar,r Model Studies
'I'
16
Page
'
. ........ .
'
31
32
32
Vortex Inlet 22 ft in Diameter. Depth in Chamber Greatly Increased as ComPared with Fig. 17. Discharge 600.cfs "
32
Vortex Inlet 22 ft in Diameter.
Discharge 300cfs
Eight-ft Diameter Shaft with Elbow Inlet and Deep Sump.
Discharge 600 cfs. High Ratio of Air to Water in Interceptor Tunnel " " 0 0 Ii
32
Elbow Inlet with Deep Water Cushion.
33
Discharge 900 cfs

Elbow Iri1et, 8 ft Diameter Shaft with 16 ft Diameter Sump.
Impact Cup in Low Position. Discharge 600 cfs
Ci.rcular Sump ~and Perforated Impact Cup with Discharge
Conduit at Base of Chamber. Discharge 600 cfs.
vii
33
33
33
I
I.
FigUre
24
25
26
27
28
~
.29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Page
Circular Sumps and Perforated:Impact Cup with Restriction in
Drop Shaft at the Top of Sump. Diameter of Sump 16 ft. Discharge 600 cfs.
Vortex Inlet and Tapered Shaft. Vortex Extends to Base
of Shaft. Discharge 300 cfs.
~.~\I.~t',r" .
Vortex Inlet and Tapered Shaft. Discha~ge"Increased to
450 cfs With Large Increase in Head at Inlet.
Drop Shaft With 1-1/2 D Radius Elbow at Ba'se. Unsteady
Flow in Discharge Conduit. Discharge 600 crs
Drop Shaft with 1-1/2 D Radius Elbow. Energy Dissipating
Sill Placed in Discharge Conduit. Discharge 300 cfs.
_.-Drop Shaft with 1-1/2 D Radius Elbow. Energy- Dissipating
Sill Placed in Discharge Conduit. Discharge 600 cfs.
Drop Shaft Without Water Cushion. High Air-Water Ratio in
Discharge Conduit. Discharge 600 cfs
Drop Shaft with Deep Water Cushion. Air-Water Ratio SimUar
to Fig. 30. Discharge 900 cfs.
Rectangular Sump 22 ft by 15 ft by 20 ft Deep, With Inclined
Baffle on Right Side.
Circular Sump and Impact Cup and Curved Baffle Open at Top
and Bottom. Discharge 600 cfs.
Circular Sump and Impact Cup ~lith Curved Baffle Open at
Bottom Only. Discharge 600 cfs
Circular Sump (18ft in Diameter) With Perforated Impact
Cup . Baffle Open Top and Bottom. Discharge Conduit at
,Base of Sump. Discharge 600 cfs.
Pressures on Perforated Cup Sidewall.
Air-Water Discharge from Sump Chamber
Series 11. Straight Drop Shaft with irlaterCushion Sump.
Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft.
Series 12. Drop Shaft with l6-ft Diameter Circular Sump and
Perforated Impact Cup Based on Preliminary reSign as Shown
in Fig. 11. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
Series 13 Drop Shaft with l6-ft Diameter Circular Sump and
Perforated Imp?ct Cup with Extended Discharge Chamber. Scale
1 :24. Drop 100' ft. \. ,.
Series 14. Drop Shaft with 23-ft Diameter Circular Sump and
Perforated Impact Cup and Short Discharge Chamber. Scale
1:24. Drop '100 ft
Series 15. Drop Shaft with 23-ft Diameter Circular Sump and
Perforated Impact Cup. Discharge Conduit Increased from 8
ft to 11 ft in Diameter. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft.
viii
34
34
34
34
35
35
35
35
36
36
36
36
37
37
38
39
40
42
Page
Figur e
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Serie s 17. Drop Shaft with 23-ft Circu lar Sump and Perforate d Impac t Cup. Slopi ng Roof Disch arge Chamber. Scale
1:24. Drop 100 ft

Serie s 18. Drop Shaft with 19-1! 2-ft Diame ter Circu lar
Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Slopi ng Roof Disch arge
Chamber. Scale 1:24. ' Drop 100 ft
Serie s 19. Drop Shaft with 16-ft Diame ter Circu lar Sump
and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Slopi ng Roof Disch arge Chamber.

Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft.
Serie s 20. Normal Grade Line. Recommended Desig n with 23ft Diame ter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Scale 1:24.
Drop 100 ft ' _

Serie s 20. Grade Line 30 ft. Recommended Desig n with 23ft Diame ter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup_ Drop 100 ft.
Scale 1:24. . . .
Serie s 20. Grade Line 50 ft. Recommended Desig n with 23ft Diam eter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 100 ft.

Scale 1:24. .'.
23Serie s 21. Normal Grade Line. Recommended Desig n with
ft.
135
Drop
Cup.
ft Diame ter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t

Scale 1:24.
Serie s 21. Grade Line 40 ft. Recommended Desig n with 23-ft
Diam eter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 135 ft. Scale
1:24 '
Serie s 21. Grade Line 60 ft. Reco~~nded Desig n with 23-ft
Diame ter S~p and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 135 ft.
Scale 1:24. ~
Serie s 22. Normal Grade Line. Recommended Desig n with 23ft Diame ter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 62 ft.
Scale 1:24
Serie s 22. Grade Line 20 ft. Recommended DeSign with 23ft Diame ter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 62 ft.

Scale 1: 24. _ _ _
Serie s 22. Grade Line 30 ft. Recommended DeSign with 23-
ft Diam eter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 62 ft
ix
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
HODEL
STUDIES
OF
----------STORM-SEWER
DROP
SHAFTS
--------- --------I.
INTRODUCTION
Through the increased urban development and growth of freeways wi thin urban limits has come a need for more soundly designed storm-water disposal
systems. In heavily populated areas with many demands on available space the
surface runoff must be removed by underground networks of conduits or tunnels.
Final disposal elevations of the drainage system usually determine
the depth of the subterranean net-work.
It is not unusual for outlet condi-
tions to require tunnels to be located 100 ft or more below the surface.
Con-
ductance of surface discharges to the underground interceptot's has been of

necessity, for space and economic reasons, by means of vertical drop shafts.
These shafts have been constructed in many forms, largely by "rule of thumb"
methods, and due to their unobservable locations little is known of their
hydraulic behavior.
Many structures in use for a number of years have shov.m deterioration and damage--either because of faulty construction or improper consideration of the high amounts of kinetic energy derived from :the free fall of
water through large vertical distances.
The Department of Public \vorks of the City of St. Paul, Minnesota,
presently engaged in a program of enlarging their storm-sewer system, has
found it desirable to develop a drop-shaft design which will reduce the pos sibility of impact damage to the structure and also insure stable flov.r conditions in the underground interceptors. Through their sponsorship a program
of study of the hydraulic action of large drop-shaft structures was undertaken
at, the St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory of the University. of Minnesota.
By means of hydraulic model studies a number of past design types were inves-
tigated, after which a development study to design an efficient energy-dissipating type of structure was carried out.
II.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBlEM
The hydraulic design of a drop structuremnst consider the following factors:

\
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Capac ity of the inlet and drop shaft

Energ y dissip ation after the drop
De-ae ration of the flow and venti ng of the S,Ystem
Stabi lity of the outflo w
Loads applie d by hydra ulic force s
Odor preve ntion or septic actio n
Of forem ost impor tance is the proble m of dissip ation

of kinet ic
energ y of the water fallin g down the drop shaft . Damag
e to the lower end of
the drop shaft is large ly due to the high impac t force s
actin g on the surfa ces
at the bottom of the shaft . Unles s these force s can be
absor bed or reduc ed
by scatt ering over a large r area, severe weari ng by impac
t and erosi on is
likely to occur on even the harde st surfa ces.
Inlet capac ity of the shaft is of lesse r impor tance and
gener ally
adequ ate if the shaft area is equal in area to the surfa
ce interc eptor . A
90-de gree straig ht or round ed inters ectio n of the upper
condu it with the drop
shaft may be used with assura nce that a drop shaft of equal
diame ter will be
suffi cient to carr.y the maximum open- chann el flow of the
upper interc eptor .
If j,t is desira ble to limit the disch arge of the drop shaft
, an inlet of the vortex -cham ber type will give good contr ol for
this purpo se. This
type of inlet limit s the flow throug h actio n of the vorte
x, and disch arges above the system 's capac ity are by-pa ssed by an overfl ow
weir.
Stabi lity of the flow and disch arge sectio n of the dropshaft chamber is of major impor tance for the follOW ing reaso ns. Unco
ntroll ed disch arge
from the sump chamb er witho ut de-en ergiz ation of the flow
resul ts in large scale surge s withi n the lower condu it S,Ystem. This surgin
g combi ned with the
entrai nmen t of large amoun ts of air will affec t the opera
tion of other drop
shaft s locat ed downs tream. Entra ined air will accum ulate
in the lower inter cepto r and eithe r blow downs tream when exces s press ure is
reach ed or vent back
throu gh the origin ating drop shaft . Unco ntroll ed disch
arges may also resul t
in high maint enanc e c'osts throu gh actio n of large hydra
ulic force s occur ring
at unsus pecte d locat ions.
The sump type of drop shaft , while appea ring to offer a
Simpl e solutio n of energ y diSSi patio n, has the disadv antag e of creati
ng a septic body
of water at the bottom of the shaft durin g perio ds of
low or interm ittent
flow. Offen sive odors resul ting from these insta llatio ns
are certa inly to be
avoid ed in popul ous distr icts.
3
III.
REVn:1tf OF PAST WORK
Over a period of years many types of drop structures have been built
for the disposal of sewage and storm-runoff water.
divided into three main types.
'lhese structures can be
The well hole consisting of a vertical shaft
leading to an underground interceptor line is probably the most common type

in use.
A second type of drop is a system of steps or cascades by which the
sewage flows down a number of small drops,

ling pool.
step being in effect a stil-
A third type is the backdrop, which is a drop shaft .located out-
side of a manhole.
A.
ea~h
Discharge enters at the base of the manhole.
Well Hole
The well hole may assume several shapes and can be subdivided into
three component parts: the inlet area at the top of the shaft, the drop shaft,
and the outlet or sump chamber.
The inlet of the drop shaft may be designed to pass a maximum quantity to the drop shaft, or it may be used as a flow-limiting device to limit
the discharge to the interceptor when it becomes necessary not to overburden
a sewage treatment plant during periods of high runoff.
Well hole drop shafts have been designed with a uniform diameter,
tapered diameter, and with a number of restrictive projections extending out
from the walls and intended to dissi.pate the energy of the falling water (Figs.
~f.
1,2 and.3) [1,2]
Most shafts'were no doubt overdesigned as to capacity
due to a lack of understanding of the hydraulics of the structure.

questionable whether most shafts ever experienced full pipe flow.
It is
In most
cases the storm discharge occupies only a fraction of the area of the drop
shaft.
. The sump or discharge section of the drop shaft often takes the shape
of a pit or well at the bottom of the shaft with a pool of water extending
some distance below the lower interceptor line.
The purpose of this pool or
well is to absorb the excess energy of the free fall.

B.
Cascades
The step or cascade drop is another method of conveying sevlage to
underground conduits. It consists of a number of steps which may be level or
*Numbers
in brackets refer to the List of References on p. 24.
inclin ed oppos ite to the direc tion of flow, each step being
in effec t a stilling pool. The disad vanta ges of this desig n are that it
is diffic ult to de3ign for opera tion over a wide range of disch arge due to
the possi bility of
the pool being tt,washed out't by high rates of flow; high
drops requi re long
slope s or the altern ative of spira ling the flow aroun d
a centr al shaft ; and
durin g the perio ds of low rates of flow the indiv idual
pools become ponds of
stagn ant sewage which gener ate objec tionab le odors (Figs
. 4 and 5) [2, 3].
C.
Backd rops
The backd rop type of struc ture has a main shaft or manho
le with an
auxil iary shaft locate d outsid e the manho le. The auxil iary
shaft conve ys the
disch arge to the bottom of the manho le as a sump or stilli
ng basin . This type
of struc ture is limit ed to relati vely small insta llatio
ns and is not of great
impor tance. The au,"'Ciliary shaft would have the same disad
vanta ges as a straig ht
drop shaft (Fig. 6) [3].
D.
Energ y-Dis sipati ng Struc tures
Durin g the explo ratory model study progra m inform ation

conce rning
a more recen t innova t:i.on of energ y dissip ation was found
in the work of several inves tigato rs in other parts of the world [4, 5].
In Franc e drop shaft s
have been used in conju nction with under groun d netwo rks
of tunne ls conve ying
water to power plant s in moun tainou s areas . Runof f from
small water sheds is
colle cted and carrie d to the gathe ring system by shaft s
drive n, in most cases ,
throu gh sever al hundr ed feet of rock. Water fallin g great
distan ces, such as
these , entra ins large amoun ts of air which must be remov
ed so that the turbin e
opera tion will not be distur bed.
A number of metho ds of handl ing this proble m were
devel oped, the
choic e being determ ined large ly by the local situa tion

and the econo mfc feasibil i ty. Inclin ed drop shaft s, which are in effec t
steep , open chann els,
were one metho d used . Keepi ng the lower end of the shaft
flood ed perm itted
de-ae ration of the flow in the lower portio n of the shaft
. Venti ng of the
inclin ed shaft was accom plishe d witho ut interf erenc e
by the fallin g water
(Fig. 8) (4].
Under groun d side chamb ers or galle ries equip ped with baffl
es and
vent pipes leadin g to the surfac e were anoth er method used
in dealin g with the
de-ae ration proble m. In this instan ce air remov al took
place under press ure
(Fig. 7) [4].
&
5
A third scheme used was the suppression of air entrainment by preventing the water from falling in air, either by use of a siphon or by floatcontrolled inlet or through a shaft
~ompletely
under pressure at all times
(Fig. 8) [4].
A fourth device and one which parallels the work in this study eliminates'the air in the falling water by de-energizing the flow by means of impact on a rigid surface, followed by a reduction of velocity sufficient to
eliminate penetration of air into the outflow. This is accomplished by either
a flat table-like surface or cup-shaped unit either submerged or above the
level of the outflow.
The ltimpactcupU is surrounded by a solid wall sump
chamber with a minimum diameter several times the drop-shaft diameter.
Re-
duction of excess energy is obtained and velocities reduced sufficiently so

that bubble rise can be accomplished before the discharge reaches the outflow
section of the chamber (Figs. 9 and 10) [4].
The above methods are cited here not for their importance as deaerating devices but because they have demonstrated an important approach to
the problem of energy dissipation at the base of a vertical shaft.
The abil-
ity of a structure to remove entrained air at the base of a drop shaft is a

good measure of its value as a de-energizing chamber.
IV. LABOHATORY INVESTIGATION PROGRAM

A preliminary investigation of drop-shaft designs was made, guided
by the review of past work.
The principal designs appearing in literature
were briefly studied by means of
a small-scale
hydraulic model.
These eXI,er-
iments, though simply done, gave abetter understanding of the basic problems
involved. A model constructed of transparent plastic materials made possible
observations of the various sections of the drop structure.
The model had a
fixed upper interceptor and a fixed lower interceptor. The inlet, drop shaft,
.and sump chamber were designed for easy alteration and had simple connecting
joints sealed by standard O-rings.
Features such as the vortex inlet, stepped shaft, tapered shaft,
water cushion, sump, and radius elbow were readily observed and compared o
These exploratory observations preceded development of the impacttype energy-dissipating chamber.
The first tests involved a relatively deep
6
sump chamber of large cross-sectional area.
This was done to establish the
active area surrounding the falling water.

The deep sump or water cushion was easily penetrated by the force
of the jet and indicated that the water cushion above was not an effective
means of energy dissipation unless the surrounding pool was large in relation
to the shaft diameter and the point of outflow located at a distance from the
jet impingement area (Fig. 12).
By experimentation it was found that a per-
forated plate placed horizontally a short distance below the termination of

the drop pipe was qui te effective in limiting the penetration of the jet (Fig.
13).
(:L
With this primary interfering surface the depth of the water cushion
couldoe greatly reduced; however, such a surface completely covering the

cross sedion of the chamber is not practical since it is subject to plugging
and excessive restriction of the flow area.
To provide an interfering surface and not wholly restrict the flow
area, the perforated plate idea was modified and led to the substitution of
a solid-wall circular cup slightly larger than the diameter of the drop shaft
(Fig. 14).
Following this improvement, perforated sidewalls were added to
the horizontal plate forming a cup-like unit (Fig. 15).
With addition of a
vertical baffle wall, which forced the outflow to the lower part of the chamber, and vent pipes leading to the top of the shaft, a generalized design for
an energy-dissipating and de-aerating chamber was obtained.
Consideration of
the proper shape for a sump chamber led logically to the circular form which
was more adaptable for both ~draulic and construction purposes (Fig. 16).
Restr:i.ction of the drop shaft to create a column of nonaerated water
for purposes of air removal was also studied. However, since the rate of discharge through the system would vary, it would be difficult to maintain stable
levels of the hydraulic grade line that would be required to insure necessary
levels in the drop shaft.
other drop
structures.~n
In addition, changes in the grade line caused by
the system would make restricti've controls undepend-
able.
Favorable results obtained from these tests on the small-scale model
(1:48) encouraged a more detailed investigation of the impact-cup idea with a

larger model where more accurate observations of the hydraulic forces could
be made.
A 1 :24 scale model (based on a drop-shaft diameter of 8 ft) was
constructed with a simulated vertical drop of lOO-ft prototype, round sump
7
sump floor was lochamb er, and perfo rated -wall impac t cup. The level of the
e test serie s were
cated above the inver t of the main interc eptor line. Twelv
diffe rent .sump diperfor med with this model with varia tions which includ ed
baffl e and venti ng
amete rs, shape of outle ts, trans ition sectio n, and variou s
the heigh t of the
condi tions. In addit ion, for test serie s 20, 21, and 22,
to 50 ft above the
hydra ulic grade line was varie d from full pipe condi tion
in the accep ted
bottom of the lower interc eptor . Serie s 20, which resul ted
derat ion was given
deSig n, was based on the prece ding tests , but speci al consi
ses. Test serie s 21
to devel oping a pract ical deSig n for' const ructio n purpo
ed to 135 and 62 ft
and 22 were perfor med with the heigh t of the drop chang
respe ctive ly.
with deThe prelim inary work on the 1:48 scale model was conce rned
improvement or cortermi ning areas of the struc ture which were in need of
iority of one desig n
rectio n. Visua l obser vation s 'were used to judge the super
crite rion used to
over anoth er. Effec tive de-ae ration by the sump was the
ation and flow
measu re the effici ency of a parti cular desig n 'in energ y dissip
stabi lizati on.
bubbl es
In the photo graph s of the vario us tests a large number of
ined air, while
appea ring in the outflo w condu i t indic ates poor remov al of entra
very few bubbl es
for the deSig ns havin g a high degre e of ,energ y dissip ation
are seen in the outflo w condu it.
the floor
On the large r scale model (1: 24) press ure measu remen ts on
s. Press ure flucand sidew alls of, the sump were made by the use of piezo meter
ed by strain gage
tuatio ns at the perfo rated wall of theim paot cup were record
ing the sump champress ure picku p cells . In addit ion, the volume of air escap
atmos pheric presberwa s measu red volum etrica lly by means of a bell jar under
sure.
v.
DESCRIPTION OF ,THE.MODELS
arent
The model s and the,ir compol).ent parts were con~tructed of transp
n perm itted obpJ,ast ic sheet and tubin g mate rial. This method of const ructio
the use of photo serva tion of all parts of the flow area and made possi ble
ts.
graph ic recor ds as an adjun ct to' conve ntiona l measu remen
where .the
Excep t for the prelim inary work on the 1: 48 scale model
the remai ning tests
actio nof a vorte x chamber inlet was teste d, the inlet for
8
was limited to a single design as shown on the plan of Fig. 11.
Since this
inlet was found to have a capacity of $0 per cent above the design now, it
was adequate for all of the tests o
To determine the effect of the water cushion the 1:48 scale model
was first constructed with an adjustable sump whose depth could be varied by
raising or lowering a piston in the bottom of the sump shaft.
The 1:24 scale model was limited to the development of the energydissipating chamber and transition section. The sump bottom was located at
an elevation above the invert of the lower interceptor to provide drainage and
avoid--septic conditions in the prototype. The hydraulic grade line was controlled by an adjustable weir located in the waste box at the outflow end of
the model.
Pressures at the base of the 'sump and at the sidewall were measured
by piezometers connected to a common manometer board.
Pressure fluctuations
on the sidewalls of the impact cup were recorded by means of a diaphragm-type

strain gage.
VI.
DEVELOPMENT OF BASIC DESIGN
The 1:48 scale model was used primarily for exploratory studies into the action of existing structures and also for development of the basic
design of the impact-type energy-dissipat:tng chamber. These first tests were
largely used in evaluating the effectiveness of typical structures of past use
and were chiefly of a qualitative nature.
The findings of these tests are
presented to point out the inadequacies of many of the past deSigns and reveal
probable causes of structural failure.
A.
Inlets
Recently, eonsiderable interest has been shown in a circular inlet

which employs a vortex flow to conduct the storm runoff from the below-surface
interceptor to the head of the drop shaft.
Two studies have been made deal-
ing with th:i.s principle and are summarized in the Appendix [6, 7] .
Development of vortex flow in a drop shaft would appear to have considerable merito
Since the vortex would force a spiral flow to follow the
wall of the drop shaft, the frictional losses would necessarily be greater
d with diame ters

than for free- fall Qond itions . Two circu lar inlet s were teste
of ,2 and 2.75 times the diame ter of the drop shaft .
n in
The theor y of vorte x flow state s ,that the veloc ity distri butio
s and isa const ant
a free vorte x is a produ ct of the veloc ity and the radiu
of the vorte x, the
quant ity (vr = 0). Thus, with an incre ase in the radiu s
incre ased. This is
ve10c i ty would be reduc ed and the' depth of flow would be
ns in which the
confir med by oomparing- Figs. 17 and 18 which show two desig
For the same disonly differ ence is in the diame ter of the inlet chamb er.
chamber is more than
charg e, 600 cfs, it can be seen that depth in the large r
r diame ter chamb er,
twice that of the small er. Figur e '19, showing the 'large
disch arge is only
has a depth of flow appro ximat ely equal to Fig. 17, yet the
vorte x chamber is
one-h alf that of the small er chamb er. The inflow to the
er. As the flow
in a tange ntial direc tion along the circum i'eren ce of the chamb
erate d and after
appro aches the cente r of the chamb er, the veloc ity is accel
l motio n, leavdropp ing into the shaft follow s the walls in a verti cal spira
entra ined air. Aling,th e cente r of the shaft open to provi de venti ng of the
made for eithe r
thoug h no measu remen ts of the quant ity of air entra ined were
does int'rod uce the
type of inlet , it is appar ent that the vorte x-typ e inlet
-type inlet . Howflow to the drop shaft with less turbu lence than the elbow
is no signi fican t
ever, if Fig. 20 is compared with Figs. 17 and 18, there
reduc tion of entra ined air by use of the vorte x inlet .
than
The chief drawback to the use of the vorte x-typ e inlet , other
size as compared to
requi ring a great er head on the inlet , would be its large
repor t on "Flow in
the elbow inlet . Based on inform ation from Mr. L'aus hey's
requi re an inlet Verti cal Shaft s" [7],a desig n disch arge of 600 cfs would
28 ft,. deperiding on
chamber diame ter of from 32 to 48 rt and a depth of 18 to
Fig. 30f the Apthe ratio of the shaft diame ter to the inlet chamb er. (See
trainm ent reduc tion
pendi x.) It would appea r that the sligh t gain in air-en
.
would be great ly overb alance d by incre ased const ructio n costs
B.
Elbow Inlet
on of
A more conve ntion al type of inlet is the 9O-de gree inter secti
of this inlet
the near Sllrfa ce interc eptor wi.th the drop shaft . The shape
ct to a stree t mancorres ponds to a pipe e1bow,and may be modif ied to c_onne
The inver t of the
hole, above the shaft , perm itting ,acces s to the struc ture
, thus givin g a
inter secti on is often curve d downward t.oward the drop shaft
tion.
smoot her trans ition from the horiz ontal to verti cal direc
'
---- .1:0 .
The elb ow inl et use d on all

oth er tes ts, exc ept the vor tex
inl et,
was mo del ed fro m the des ign of
inl et shown on the pre lim ina ry
pla n for the St.
Antho:qv Fre ew ay str uct ure (Fi
g. 11 ). In com bin atio n wit
h an 8-f't dia me ter
str aig ht dro p sha ft, it 'Was fou
nd to hav e a cap aci ty of app
rox ima tely 900 cfs
wit hou t rai sin g the gra de lin
e abo ve the crown of the top
int erc ept or (Fi g.
21) . For the des ign flo'W of
600 cfs thi s inl et is ver y sta
ble and when ven ted
shows no ten den cy for pri min
g to occ ur in the dro p sha ft.
For a now of 100 0
cfs the inl et may at tim es flo
od , and the dro p sha ft wo uld
mo me nta rily flo w
as a ful l pip e Oth er tes ts,
usi ng an elb ow of rad ius one
and one -ha lf tim es
the pip e dia me ter , ind ica te
tha t thi s elbo'W is as sat isf
act ory as the St.
An tho ny des ign and 'Would po
ssi bly be somewhat more eco
nom ica l to con str uct
(Fi g. 22) .
c.
Str aig ht Drop Sh aft s
A str aig ht dro p sha ft of the

same dia me ter as the inl et ser
ves as
lit tle more tha n a bou nda ry
to sur rou nd the fal lin g jet
un les s the hyd rau lic
gra de lin e in the low er int
erc ept or is ma int ain ed hig h
eno ugh to cau se the
sha ft to be flo ode d to some
ex ten t. In mo st cas es of a
lar ge dro p and a fre e
fal l, the flo wa ge are a is onl
y a fra cti on of the are a of the
sha ft. The hig h
vel oci tie s dev elo ped in the
sha ft pro vid e exc ell ent con
dit ion s for the entra inm ent of air . In add itio
n, the jet usu all y ent ers the
sha ft in a dir ect ion
not pa ral lel to the axi s of
the sha ft and as a res ult reb
oun ds fro m sid e to
sid e in the sha ft fur the r
inc rea sin g the tur bul enc e of
the jet (Fi g. 20) .
When a vor tex -ty pe inl et is
use d the tur bul enc e in the
dro p sha ft
is ma ter ial ly red uce d and a
hig her hea d los s res ult s tha
n tha t obt ain ed wit h
the elb ow inl et (co mp are Fig
. 20 wit h Fig . 17 ). However,
the tot al tur bul enc e
at the bot tom of the sha ft doe
s not app ear to be app rec iab
ly les s.
D. Mo dif ied Drop Sh aft s
1.
Str aig ht Sh aft wit h Co ntr act

ion
An oth er typ e of dro p sha ft wh

ich has cer tai n ben efi cia l
qu ali tie s
is a sha ft in wh ich the> dia me
ter is abr upt ly red uce d. Sev
era l var iat ion s of
thi s arr ang em ent wer e tri ed
inc lud ing con tra cti ng the pip
e dia me ter fro m 8
to 4 ft at the top qu art er po
int of the sha ft, nea r the low
er qu art er pO int ,
and fin all y pla cin g the con tra
cti on at the low er end of the
sha ft. In gen era l,
the con tra cti on cau ses the
hyd rau lic gra de lin e to be
rai sed in the sha ft
11
formi ng a pool, to abso:r b,the, -impact of ,the fallin g jet.
It also reduc es the
veloc ity to some exten t an<i thus promo tes de-ae ration of
the flow by givin g
oppor tunity for the entra ined air to rise to the free surfa
ce o A compa rison
of Figs. 23 and 24 shows that althou gh the contr actio n at the
base of the shaft
does raise the hydra ulic grade li:ne in the shaft , the flow
condi tions intqe
lower interc eptor do not appea r to be much bette r than for
a straig ht shaft .
The contr acted shaft , of cours e, would reduc e the total capac
ity of the system
depen ding upon the amount of area reduc tion place d in the
shaft . For simpl icity of desig n and over- all freedo m from maint enanc e and
erosiv e effec ts of
the high- veloc ity flow, the straig ht un;ifo rm-di amete r shaft
shoul d be most
favor ably consi dered .
2.
Taper Shaft
A taper shaft is shown in Figs. 25 and 26. The core of the

vorte~
exten ds down the ~ntire lengt h of the shaft , and thoul.1;~ the
shaft is essen tially full, the press ure at the base of the shaft is only sligh
tly
above. atmos
.
..
pheri c indic ating that
the
entir e lengt h of shaft is near atmos pheric press ure.
.
.
The major disad vanta ge of the taper ed shaft is that it acts as
a flow restr ictor
and. limit s the disch arge under a given head. When used
in conju nction with
an elbow inlet the ~apershaft has no merit over a straig
ht shaft .
,
3.
Radiu s Elbow
As a means of inves tigati ng the possi bility of utiliz ing

the hydraul ic jump to obtai n energ y diSSi patio n, the model was altere
d to subst itute
a 90-de gree radiu s elbow at the base of the drop shaft .
This elbow was the
same diame ter as the drop shaft . The radiu s of the cente
rline was equal to
1-1/2 shaft diame ters. Figur e 27 shows this model with a disch
arge of 600 cfs.
With the hydra ulic grade line raise d above the' top of the pipe
no def'in ed jump
exist s and a sligh t change in the grade -line will cause the
tUrbu lent area to
move in eithe r direc tion. The unsta ble floW condi tions devel
oped by the elbow
would no doub:t exten d a great distan ce ,downstream in the
lower inter cepto r.
- Contr ol 'of the hydra ulic jUmp was' attem Pted by locat ing an
obstru c":
tion in the bottom of the interc eptor pipe a short distan
ce below the radiu s
elbow . Figur e 28 shows the ei:fe etof' the obstr uctio n on
a flow of' 300 cfso
The jump is incom pletel y f'ormed and unsta ble with a great
amount -of turbu lence being trans mitte d downstream~Figure 29 'revea ls the
large amount of
air that would be carri ed down stream 'when the disch arge
is incre ased to 600
cf's.
12
Although a hydraulic jump might be established for one set of discharge and grade line conditions, it is unlikely that satisfactory performance
could be obtained throughout the complete range of florIS.
In addition, past
experience has shown that the radius elbow would be especially vulnerable to
damage by the high velocities developed by the falling jet.
Although many
large power projects have utilized drop shafts terrninati.ng in radius elbows
operating without damage, they are not subject to the high volume of abrasive
materials which exist in storm discharges from urban areas.
Also, the power-
project drop shafts normally discharge into tunnels without regard to energy
dissipation which is generally accomplished downstream of the tunnel portal.
E.
Sump ChamberAfter the inlet tests had been performed, it was evident that in-
let conditions had little influence on flow diversion at the bottom of the
drop shaft.
The excess kinetic energy developed in the drop was the chief
destructive force acting on the lower portion of the model.
Attention was
subsequently directed toward a practical means of absorbing this excess energy.

1.
Preliminary Design
The preliminary model had a sump at the base of the drop shaft of
the same diameter as the shaft with the flow diverted from the vertical to
horizontal direction 'Vri thin the boundaries of this sump_ Below the horizontal
outlet a continuation of the shaft allowed for a cushion of water to absorb
the impact of the jet.
The model was so constructed that the depth of the
cushion could be varied by raiSing or lowering a self-sealing piston in the

bottom of the shaft.
Figures 30 and 31 indicate that the depth of water cushion is of no
great value as far as reduction of air entrainment and stability of flow is
concerned; however, it is benefi.cial in reducing scour or erosion.
Due to the' "bulking" in volume caused by the combined Dow of air
and water, the flow area is in effect greatly reduced; consequently, the water
veloci ties remain quite high and sweep the entrained air along into the lower
interceptor pipe o
The nonuniform entrainment of air in the drop shaft causes
an unstable pattern of flow in the
su~p.
The high energy content of the air-
water mixture makes it difficult to obtain satisfactory energy dissipation and

flow diversion in the limited space of the sump.
13
2.
Varia ble-M odel Sump
base of the
To facil itate compr ehens ive study of the area at the
d so that byal teradrop shaft , a rectan gular -shap ed enclo sure was const ructe
affec ting the flow
tion of the inter ior of this unit the sever al varia bles
each v~riation. The
could be studie d witho ut requi ring a separ ate model for
30 it long and 40 ft
over- all dimen sions of this chamb er were 22 ft wide by
use .
in depth , a volum e which would be most uneco nomic al for
shaft disThe initi al tests were made with an 8-ft diame ter drop
separ ated by a solid
charg ing direc tly into the chamb er with the outflo w pipe
12 shows that in spite
baffl e exten ding to withi n 4 ft of the bottom . Figur e
exten ds 40 ft below
of the great depth of water cushi on the jet penet ration
the chamb er remov es
the end of the drop shaft . Howev er, the large volum e of
much of the fluctu ation in flow.
and add a
The first step was to reduc e the' depth of the chamb er
perfo ration s in the
perfo rated plate 6 ft below the top of the chamb er. The
l-tria ngle patte rn.
plate were 9 inche s in diame ter space d on a 15-in . equil atera
Figur e 13 shows the
The poros ity of the perfo rated plate was 33 per cent.
the penet ration of the
effec tive manne r in which the perfo rated plate reduc es
wi th the above arjet. The stead iness of the flow is also great ly incre ased
quite beyon d eco:r.omic
range ment; howev er, the volume of the chamb er is still
was made by insta lling
desir abili ty. An addit ional reduc tion in chamb er volume
ded from the bottom
two walls 15 ft apart . The left or upstre am wall exten
the ventin g of air.
to withi n 3 ft of the top of the chamber and perm itted
the bottom for outThe right or downs tream 't.;rall had an openi ng 4 ft high at
wall could also be
flow and .a 3-ft openi ng at the top for air venti ng. This
disch arge patter no
inclin (;;d from the verti cal if this was found to impro ve the
featu re of a horiFigur e 32 shows the above -descr ibed. chang es plus the added
direc tly below the
zonta l plate suppo rted in the cente r of the chamber area
d the interc eptor
drop shaft . The downs tream baffl e wall is inclin ed towar
e force of the fall
pipe. The arrang ement is quite effec tive in break ing'th
only a sligh t amount
water and promo tes a stable flow out of the cha.mber with
of air carrie d to the interc eptor pipeo
a circu lar
To the basic desig n of the flat or impac t plate was added
ft with a depth of 4
sidew all makin g a cup-s haped unit whose diame ter was 9
energ y dissi. patio n to
ft. Figur e 14 shows that the impac t cup confi nes the
14
the upper part of the chamber. To reduce the stress in the cup sidewalls, the
solid wall was replaced wi th a perforated wall having physical characteristics
previously described for the perforated-plate baffle.
Compare Fig. 15 with
Fig. 14.
Design variations in the drop shaft show that the action derived
from the impact cup was not significantly affected by tapering the shaft or
the contractions placed at various levels.
The impact cup was found to be
most effective if located near the top of the chamber.

For discharges up to 600 cfs the rectangular chamber and circular
impact cup would remove nearly all the air before the discharge reached the
,t
lower interceptor pipe.
In addition, enough energy was lost in the chamber
to bring the hydraulic grade line down to slightly above the top of the pipe,
thus creating a comparatively stable flow. If some air could be tolerated in
the lower interceptor, the capacity of the drop shaft could be increased to
900 cfs vd.thout serious instability developing in the system.
At this point in the test program it became apparent that the key
to the successful operation of the drop shaft was in the elimination of all
energy not required for flow in the lower interceptor line and that the impact cup seemed the most likely means to accomplish this requirement.
As a
refinement toward a more symmetrical flovT pattern and also for a practical
construction design, the sump chamber was changed from a rectangular to circular cross section with a reduction of 15 per cent in area (Fig. 16).
Outflow
was from a 4-ft high opening at the bottom and the air release was a 3-ft
opening at the top venting through a 5-ft diameter tube. These openings covered
one quadrant of the circumference of the chamber. The impact cup was adjustable vertically to determine the optimum operating position.
of the outlet pipe were provided.
Two positions
Figure 33 shows operation with much air
being vented and with only a small portion being drawn down along the top of
the interceptor.
stream.
Th~s
air is quickly vented wi thin 10 pipe diameters down-
The impact cup is in a high position with the sidewall at the level
of the top wall vent. Figure 34 shows another modification of the sump chamber.
The top of the exit chamber has been closed to prevent air from entering the
interceptor pipe. Also, a horizontal baffle plate restricts air from passing
under the chamber wall at the outflow.
The drop shaft has been reduced to
ft in diameter at the top of the chamber, raising the grade line to near the
top elbow.
Air discharge is almost completely through the upper vents.
IS
level of
The possi bility that the sedim ent could colle ct below the
red chang ing the outthe interc eptor line and cause plugg ing of the sump requi
e has the effec t of
floW to the low posit ion as shown in Fig. 23. This chang
nced by the incre ased
lower ing the grade line in the sump chamb er and is evide
exit chamb er open to
amount of air. Figur e 28 shows flow with the top of the
air flO1-1 with resul ts equal to Fig. 35.
F.
Sump Desig n
sipati ng
The basic varia bles affec ting the actio n of an energ y-dis
1:24 scale model s.
drop- shaft sump have been inves tigate d by means of the
impac t cup, heigh t of
These facto rs are diame ter of the sump, diame ter of the
siz;e of the condu it
the impac t cup, locat ion of the horiz; ontal baffl e slab,
vents . 'Where possi leadin g to the interc eptor main, and locat ion and size of
been determ ined,
ble, force s which will gover n the struc tural desig n have
es such ,as press ure
eithe r by direc t press ure measu remen t or by use of devic
cells .
in mulSince it seemed likel y that a drop struc ture would be used
cepto r, the model
tiple , i.e., more than one unit feedin g into a common inter
main interc eptor and
was built with the drop shaft place d along side of the
on of the drop- shaft
the disch arge condu cted to the main throug h an inter secti
have the sump selfoutle t and the main. Also, it was deemed advis able to
above the bottom of
drain ing, so the bottom of the sump was place d sligh tly
the main inter cepto r.
study inObser vation s of the two inters ectio ns used in the model
emen t, and a slope
dicat ed that no parti cular proble m arose with this arrang
the opera tion of the
suffi cient for draina ge of the sump would not affec t
300 cfs to 900 cfs
struc ture. Photo graph ic recor ds of disch arges rangin g from
those for the desig n
have been made for all serie s of tests repor ted, but only
s chart .
disch arge of 600 cfs are prese nted with each test serie
1.
Diame ter of Impac t Cup
appea red
Sever al diame ter sizes vIere tried and the optimum diame ter
vation s made with a
to be 9 ft, orl ft. large r than the drop shaft . Obser
ter was suffi cient to
strob escop ic light sourc e revea led that the 9-ft diame
previ ous repor t, the
conta in the jet at all disch arges . As menti oned in the
and the surfa ce of
fallin g water never fills the cross sectio n of the shaft
16
the jet is ext rem ely rou gh
and uns tea dy in sha pe.
the pho tos inc lud ed in the tex
t.
2.
Th is is rea dil y see n in
Imp act Pre ssu res
Imp act pre ssu res on the fac e

of the imp act cup nev er rea ch
ret ica l maximum val ues wh ich
mig ht be exp ect ed. Fo r the
low flo ws
dis cha rge en ter s the dro p sha
ft rat he r sm oot hly , the hig hes
t imp act
are rec ord ed. As the flo w
inc rea ses , the se pre ssu res dec
rea se to
for dis cha rge s nea r the des
ign flo w, and the n ris e sli
gh tly wit h
inc rea se in dis cha rge .
the the owh ere the

pre ssu res
a minimum
a fur the r
The dec rea se in imp act pre ssu

re as the dis cha rge inc rea ses
is expla ine d by the manner in wh
ich the wa ter ent ers the top
of the dro p sha ft.
At the low er dis cha rge s the
tra jec tor y' of the jet car rie
s the now to the far
wa ll wh ere it fol low s alo ng
the sha ft down to the imp act
cup wit h les s mix ing
wit h air and a hig her den sity
tha n for the lar ge r flo ws .
As the flo w incre ase s, the sha ft are a bec
om es more tur bu len t wit h gre
ate r air ent rai nm ent
and an ens uin g dec rea se in den
sit y. Th is pro ces s con tin ues
un til lar ge r dis cha rge s fil l the sha ft are a mo
re com ple tely and the flo w bec
omes more "so lid . tf
Pre ssu res wer e me asu red at the
cen ter , at the mid poi nt bet we
en the
cen ter and out sid e edg e, and
nea r the ou ter edg e of the
cup . The, hig hes t
pre ssu res we re rec ord ed at the
ou ter edg e, and it is the se pre
ssu res tha t are
sholrffi on the cha rts of eac h
ser ies . Va ria tio ns in siz es
of hol es and dia mete rs of the imp act cup we
re tes ted for ov er- all per for
ma nce , but the 9-f t
dia me ter cup wit h 9-i n. hol
es spa ced on l-f t cen ter s was
jud ged to be mo st
eff ect ive . On ly the 9-i n. dia
me ter per for ati on s we re use d
in ma kin g me asu reme nts of the for ces inv olv ed
in the imp act cup .
34 Lo cat ion
The imp act cup was pla ced at
a number of po sit ion s in the
cha mb er,
fro m nea r the no or to clo se
to the roo f. For loc ati on s
nea r the fio or, the
amount of air esc api ng the sum
p was hig h due to the sho rte
r pat h of tra ve l,
wit h les s tim e for the bub ble
s to ris e to the sur fac e bef ore
ent eri ng the ex it
sec tio n. Po sit ion s nea r the
roo f of the sump ten ded to
fil l the upp er are a
wit h tur bul enc e and pre ven t
eff ici en t de- aer ati on .
4.
Cup Sid ew all
The sid ew all of the imp act cup

had pre vio usl y bee n sub jec ted
to stu dy
in the 1:4 8 sca le mo del , and
the per for ate d wa ll cup was
jud ged to giv e the
17
best performance. Several variations of hole spacing and size were tested and
their relative effectiveness was observed. As a result of these observations,
a pattern having 9-in. diameter holes spaced 12 in . apart in rovw on l2-in.
centers was chosen, and was used throughout the subsequent test series.
Forces due to the impact of the falling water have been determined
at four vertical positions in the circumference of the cup and are shown in
Fig. 36.
The pressures shown are the maximum found around the perimeter of
the cup.
In general, the highest values are found at the bottom of the cup.
5.
Baffle Slab
Test observations indicated that considerable air was drawn into
the exit section of the sump on the outlet or downstream side of the impact
cup.
This was the result of the flow taking the shortest path to the outlet
and giving insufficient time for
de~aeration
to take place.
As a measure to
correct this Situation, a horizontal slab was extended from the sump wall to
the impact cup, blocking the downstream half of the chamber and forcing the
flow to take a considerably longer path to the exit section.
Further tests
indicated that the best position for the baffle slab ,,ras to have the underside even with the top of the exit conduit.
The impact cup and baffle slab
could, in this fashion, be made an integral unit, thus eliminating any lateral
ties to the other side of the sump, and at the same time providing a means of
lateral stability to the impact cup.
6. Sump Diameter
The diameter of the sump has an important influence on the energydissipating capacity of the structure.
If the sump diameter is too small,
the velocities of the flow below the impact cup will remain high and the necessary de-aeration of flow will not be accomplished.
Merely increasing the dia-
meter until complete de-aeration is accomplished is neither practical from a

structural viewpoint nor economical of materials and excavation quantities.
Various modifications and additions to the sump were studied and are reported
in detail under "Test Results.1I
One of the first modifications to the round
SUJllp was to add a section between the sump and the outlet conduit.
This unit
also served as a transition from the sump area to the outlet conduit and provided an additional area in which the entrained air had an opportunity to
separate from the water.
In addition, this area or exit chamber served as a
collecting and venting area.
18
7. Vents
Venting of the air from the top of the sump and the exit chamber is
an important phase of the design.
Uriless this air can be carried away, it

\
-v1ill be drawn along the outlet condujj-t

into the main inter,. and discharged
,
ceptor.
It is anticipated that an access shaft will be driven alongside the
drop shaft and that this will be utili zed for the removal of air to the surface.
Actually, the vented air can be
retur~'ed
to the top of the drop shaft and be
allowed to recirculate in the system. In this manner the vented air would replace the air normally drawn down the, drop shaft by the falling water.
By
this method, objectionable discharges of air at the ground level would be kept
to
a~
mini.mum and large unsightly surface vents would not be required.
volumes
of air gathered at the top of
.
th~
Large
sump were easily vented by an opening
in the downstream side near the top of the sump wall.

VII.
DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL DESIGN
Following the preliminary
t~sts,
the program was enlarged to in-
corporate the findings in a larger scale model (1:24).

A series of tests (numbers 11 through 19) were run using modifications of the impact-cup design to investigate the effect of varying the principal dimensions of the model.
Series 11 was a typical design of a water-cushion type of structure
and was studied to provide a comparisOj!l with the subsequent tests.
The sump diameter for series 12, 13, and 19 was 16 ft; for series
14, 15, and 17 the diameter was increased to 23 ft.
Test series 18 was per-
formed with the diameter at 19-1/2 ft;midway between the other two groups.
~ump
In general, the larger the

for air removal.
diameter the greater its capacity
Two other variables influencing the air removal are the
volume of the exit'chamber and the diameter of the outflow conduit.
Since
velocities in the sump below the impac!;t cup affect the rate of air riSing in
a unit distance, any scheme that would reduce these velocities would promote
de-aeration of the discharge.
Using this premise, test series 15 was made
with the diameter of the outlet conduit increased from 8 ft to 11 ft.

results in a velocity reduction of
50
percent of the previous rates.
This
Com-
, '
parison of test series 14 and 15 for a design now of 600 cfs shows equivalent
19
performance although the exit chamber in series 14 was eliminated from series
15.
Figure 37 gives the relation of water to air discharge for all the
models tested at the 1:24 scale. The larger diameter sumps are more effective
in removing entrained air; however, the volume of the exit chamber also has
an influence on .total air removed.
For test series 11 through 19, the proportions were selected to conform to a drop structure having a vertical drop of 100 f't and a drop-sp.aft
diameter of 8 ft.
Other dimensions of the model were varied as necessary to
develop satisfactory action of the' structure.
As previously mentioned, the
exit conduits included both 8-ft and Il-ft diameter pipes.

To determine hydrostatic loadings on various parts of the structure
a number of pressure-measuring taps were included in the model It 1-1all pressures
were measuredat eight points on the sidewall and are plotted in proper location on each test series chart. These pressures were found to be steady and
are assumed to be average loads at these points. Impact pressures on the face
of the impact cup were me.asured at three points.
Since slow fluctuati~ns of
the pressure 1r1ere observed, the maximum pressure was recorded and shown on
the chart.
.'),
The difference between the pressure on the impact-cupnoorand the

pressure on the sump floor is the measure of the amount of energy diSSipated
by the structure.
All the tests in this series were made with the main interceptor
flowing full.
Although the design discharge for this construction was speci-
fied as 600 cfs, the test flows were carried to 50 per cent higher than this
value to provide for a safety factor.
A.
Series 11
This model simulates a uniform diameter drop shaft and sump without
air vents and energy-dissipating devices. The only measurements made on this
model were air discharge determinations which are included in Fig. 37.
Figure
38 shows this model with a flow of 600 cfs and is presented solely for purposes
of comparison with other designs.
20
B.
Ser ies 12
Th is model was the fir st imp

act -ty pe des ign tes ted at a 1:2
4 sca le
and rep res ent s the minimum
in siz e tha t was con sid ere d
pra cti cal . A sho rt
tra nsi tio n of str aig ht sid ew
all s con nec ts the cir cu lar cha
mb er wit h the ex it
con dui t. The sho rt tra nsi tio
n and hig h ve loc itie s (12 fps
for 600 cfs ) re::;u lted in con sid era ble am oun
ts of air bei ng car rie d dow
nst rea m to the ma in
int erc ept or. The pho to shows
tha t app rox ima tely a 50 -ft len
gth of con dui t is
tra ver sed bef ore all the air
ris es to the top of the int erc
ept or (Fi g. 39 ).
c. Se rie s 13
Fea tur es of thi s deS ign are
sim ila r to ser ies 12 wit h the
exc ept ion
tha t the tra nsi tio n or ex it
cha mb er len gth was inc rea sed
by 8-1 /2 ft and an
add itio nal ven ted sec tio n was
add ed at the beg inn ing of
the con dui t. The
cha nge pro vid ed gre ate r cap aci
ty for air rem ova l and res ult
ed in a red uct ion
of air esc api ng the sump cha
mb er of ove r 85 per cen t (Fi
g. 40) .
D.
Se rie s 14
Th is mo del is an enl arg ed ver

sio n of ear -ies 12. The dia me
ter of the
sump was inc rea sed fro m 16 ft
to 23 ft wh ile the len gth of
the ex it cha mb er
rem ain ed app rox ima tely equ al
to tha t of ser ies 12 . Due to
the inc rea sed sump
dia me ter the volume of the
ex it cha mb er was inc rea sed by
abo ut 20 per cen t.
i<lhile ser ies 14 was not as eff
ect ive in rem ova l of air for
the 600 cfs flo w,
the dif fer enc e bet we en ser ies
13 and 14 is pro bab ly not Sig
nif ica nt. Hmvever,
at dis cha rge s of 750 and 900
cfs thi s model was app rox ima
tely 15 per cen t more
eff ici en t in air rem ova l tha
n ser ies 13 (Fi g. 41) .
E.
Se rie s 15
Th is des ign inc lud ed a 23 -ft

dia me ter sump dir ect ly con nec
ted to an
ll- ft ex it con dui t. A sho rt
ex it se cti on , ft lon g and the
wid th of the con du it ext end ed to the top of the
sump chamber and ter ini nat ed
in a 5-f t dia me ter
ven t sha ft. As see n,i n the tes
t pho to, be tte r de- aer ati on
occ urs in the bot tom
of the sump tha n in any of the
pre ced ing mo del s. Are as of
cle ar wa ter ex ist
nea r the jun cti on of the sump
and the con dui t. The eff ici
enc y of air rem ova l
is app rox ima tely equ al to ser
ies 14 (Fi g. 42, ).
21
F.
Series 17
By adding a 5- by Il-ft vent section in the top of the conduit to.
the series 15 model a greater amount of air was removed than for any other
test series.
Only a negligible amount of air passes to the main interceptor.
Due to the construction :recessary in the model the vent area was divided into
two chambers; however, it is quite probable
th~t
the separating wall could be
eliminated, making a single vent crIamber (Fig. LI.3).

G.
Series 18
The diameter of the sump charnberof series 17 was reduced from 2.3
to 19-1/2 ft with a reduction in volume of slightly
mOTe
than 25 per cent.
The air discharge rate for a 600 cfs discharge increases from 5 cfs to 4.3 cfs.
For higher rates of flow this design compares favorably with series 17 (Fig.
44)
H.
Series 19
This model is a revi.sion of series 12 to include an additional air
vent in the top of the exit conduit.

tent with a
The performance is improved to some ex-
25 per cent reduction in air discharge at the design flow (Fig.
45).
I.
Series 20
At the conclusion of the testing program covering test series 11 to

19, the design of series 17 was selected for further consideration. Construction problems encountered in excavating a sump chamber wi.th a flat ceiling
led to the proposal of a chamber with a cone-ohaped roof.
This shape would
permit a stepped-back method of rock excavation and allow the lower ledges to
support the rock layers above.
The side slope of the cone is 1:1.
circular roof section is used in the exit chamber.
A semi-
Another change is that
. the impact cup is supported on four columns rather than by a single central
pedestal as in the previous designs.
The enlarged volume of the sump and exit chambers resulted in almost
complete air removal before the flow entered the outflow conduit.
Figure.37
shows that the amount of air. escaping from the sump to the outflow conduit is
far less for this design than any of the preceding arrangements.
22
Additional tests were run with the grade line raised at the foot
j.ntervals from the top of the conduit to a maximum of 50 ft above the conduit
floor.
An increase in the height of the grade line results in a considerable
porti.on of the energy dissipation taking place in the drop shaft.
Pressures
on the sump fioor are essentially the same as in the exit conduit, proving
that the impact cup is working efficiently as an energy dissipator. Figures
46, 47, and 48 show the action of the chamber with normal grade line or full
pipe flow and with the grade line 30 and 50 ft above the floor of the chamber.
J.
Series 21
Thi.s series of tests was performed with the height of the drop increased from 100 to 135 ft with the desi.gn of the sump chamber the same as for
series 20.
The hydraulic action encountered in the higher drop is quite similar
to the 100-ft drop and the impact cup continues to do an efficient job of
energy dissipation.
The pressures on the impact cup are of course greater
than for the smaller drops but again not as large as could be expected from
the fall height.
K.
Series 22
The height of the drop for this series was reduced to 62 ft from the
centerline of the upper interceptor to the base of the sump chamber.
Again,
as in the series 21 test, the action of the chamber is very similar to that
observed for the 100-ft and l35-ft drops.
The pressures on the impact cup
are also less than the maximum that could be expected. Air flow escaping from
the sump is the sma11est of any of the tests observed, Since it is practically
zero for the design discharge.
VITI
SUMMARY
These t'e'sts have shown. that the impact-cup type of drop structure
can be effe ctively used to cOrNey storm run-off waters from the surface to
subterranean collecting 5,Ystems with a minimum of air entrainment and a reduction in possible damage at the base of the drop.
The design presented in
test series 20 is the recommended design as developed during the study.
Its
ample volume in the cone area of the sump chamber and exit section give excellent conditions for air removal. Test series 21 and 22 have shown that it
23
can be used with either higher 0:r lower drops without impairing its effectiveness as an energy dissipator.
Air escaping to the discharge conduit is the
least for any of the designs tested.

The data collected by this study have been used to design a specific
structure and can be used within limits for higher or lower drops than were
used in these tests.
However, a number of factors, which are all interrelated
in the action of the structure, make it difficult to extrapolate this information to a wide variety of discharges and drop-shaft sizes.
For example, the
impact pressures on the horizontal surface of the cup are influenced by the
rate of flow into the top of the drop shaft and the manner in which the flow
~haft.
enters the
For lower discharges the fl0Y1 tends to cling to the sides
of the drop shaft and not entrain as high a volume of air as for the la:rger
discharges.
The higher unit density of the low flows would account for the
relatively high impact pressures observed for some low rates of discharge.
As the discharge rate increases, the entrainment of air also increases and
the impact forces appear to be near the minimum for the design discharge of
600 cfs.
A further increase in the rate of flow is accompanied by an apparent
increase in the Il/solidity" of the bulk flow, and the impact forces rise to
greater values.
Throughout the tests the amount of entrained air escaping to the
discharge conduit waS used as a criterion in judging the efficiency of the
particular design.
This measure is a good indicator of the completeness of
energy dissi.pation obtained by the impact cup and of the stability of the flow
leaving the sump chamber.
Although the models utilizing impact cups indicate in most cases
that the air discharge into the outflow conduit is very small, the prototype
can be expected to have larger volumes of entrained air carried to the interceptor.
It is known that the rate of rise of single or chains of bubbles
reach a maximum rate of rise.
However, little is known at present of the rate
of rise for an aggregate of bubbles or how they are affected by variable pressure gradients.
Figure 37 is presentedas a valid comparison of the relative
performance of the various designs tested.
24
LIST
----
OF
REFERENCES
~-~-------
[1]
Babbitt, H. E.Sewerage and Sewage Treatment.
[2J
Metcalf ,L. and Eddy, H.

Hill. 1914.
John 'Hiley.
American Sewerage Practice,
1932.
Vol. 1.
McGraw-
[3] Escrit, L. B. "Use and Design of Drop-Manholes,lI The Surveyor, pp. 671673.
November 11, 1949.
[4] . Cotillon, J. ItSupply Shafts for Power Tunnels and the Problem of Air Entrainment," Proceedings of the 8th Congress of the International
Association of nydraulic Research. Montreal. August 1959.
[5]
Boughton, N. O. "Laboratory Studies on the Use of Siphons and Vortex

Chambers for Exclusion of Air atSecondary Intakes,1t Proceedings
of the 8th Con ress of the International Association of If draulic Research. Montreal. August 19 9.
[6]
[7]
Laushey, Louis M. Flow in Vertical Shafts. Carnegie Institute of Technology, D3partment of Civil Engineering. August 1952.
25
!!Q!I..!1E!
(1 through .54)
Page 26 was blank in the original document - the back side of this
page, which was also unnumbered. BJM Jan 10, 2011.
.....
27
~
i._v
.
J"';';;'
~
.,'
~':"
4:'"
.'.'
",
Surface of Street
:~-
,,".
;,
Overflow
Chamber
~"
Fig. l-Well Hole at St. Paul
]C
. '. ' ' . ',
,
,'~
!'
Fig. 3 - Well Hole, Cleveland

il"
I'
Fig. 2 - Well Hole, Minneapolis
28
Section
a-a
~
Section A-A
~;~:F.E%i
'.
. ' .
1.
I?>
Section C-C
Fig_ 4 - Flight Sewer, Philadelphia
Fig. 6 - Backdrop
'.
Fig. 5 - Cascade for Water
29
Drop
Shoft
Discharge
Conduit
_1 mpact
, - = " . _ ...
1~!!!!IiIiIlCiUiPIt
Discharge
Conduit
Fig. 7
Pi
Fig. 8
~~
Drop
Shaft
~
(f
f-
Vent
~~\
I~_ _' ~ Shaft
/,
\~
,\
\'\"
ff
~
1\/0/
./
J\.'--' /
....... I
~~
\L j,I,
~0~>/o
Impact3~
Cup==~
~ Sump
I.
~ Cham be r
~~~~~~~~i_i~~~~~Discharge
~
Conduit
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Source: J. Cotillon
"Supply Shafts for Power Tunnels and the Problem of Air Entrainment."
Proceedings of 8 th Congress I A H R - Montrea I
August, 1959
Figs. 7 through 10 - Typical Sumps Used for Air Removal and Energy Dissipation in French
Water Power Collecti ng Systems
30
F",m_ wif!. ,/pH.d

H.I ..... I'IlIfil,I>"" ,
f.
liD,.
tJd
1>&
r,_p~HI"
IU~_$$
. ...
~:
~~
'
..::"
'.. to
",
A '0
.1
~
/J'-()" lJiIJ,
Pip&
-t-i~
8--
_.
....
SECT. IJ-IJ
,',
Ii-:I-_-"ll.:;:'-",dj-'Do:::::'::.,_ - I
~:
"
......
.,.
,"
,~
'
:U;CT. E-E
Fig.
-'Drop Shaft fJesi'9n Based on Preliminary Mode'l Studies
SECT. .8-.8
31
Fig. 12 - Rectangular Sump, 22 ft Wide, 30

ft Long, and 40 ft Deep. Jet Penetrates to
Bottom of Sump. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 13 - Rectangul or Sump (20 ft Deep) With

Perforated Impact Plate 4 ft Below End of Drop
Shaft. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 14 - Rectangular Sump 22 ft by 15 ft

and 20 ft Deep, with Solid Wall Impact Cup
9 ft In Diameter. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 15- Rectangular Sump, 22 ft by 15 ft

and 20 ft Deep, with Perforated Impact Cup.
Discharge 600 cfs
32
Fig 16 - Circular Sump with Perforated Impact Cup. Sump Diameter 18 ft
Fig. 17 - Vortex Type Inlet 16 ft In Diameter

with 8-ft Drop Shaft and Deep Water Cushion.
Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 18 - Vortex Inlet 22 ft In Diameter.

Depth in Chamber Greatly Increased as
Compared with Fig. 17. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 19 - Vortex Inlet 22 ft In Diameter.

Discharge 300 cfs
33
Fig. 20 - Eight-ft Diameter Shaft with Elbow

Inlet and Deep Sump. Discharge 600 cfs. High
Ratio of Air to Water in Interceptor Tunnel
Fig. 22 - Elbow Inlet, 8 ft Dlamett;lr Shaft

with 16 ft Diameter Sump. Impact Cup In Low
Position. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 21 - Elbow Inlet with Deep Water

Cushion. Discharge 900 cfs
Fig. 23 - Circular Sump and Perforated Impact Cup with Discharge Conduit at Base
of Chamber. Discharge 600 cfs
314
Fig. 24 - Circular Sumps and Perforated Impact Cup with Restriction in Drop Shaft at
the Top of Sump. Diameter of Sump 16 ft.
Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 25 - Vortex Inlet and Tapered Shaft.

Vortex Extends to Base of Shaft. Discharge
300 cfs
Fig. 26 - Vortex Inlet and Tapered Shaff.

Discharge Increased to 450 cfs With Large
Increase In Head at Inlet
Fig. 27 - Drop Shaft With 1-1/2 D Radius

Elbow at Base. Unsteady Flow in Discharge
Conduit. Discharge 600 cfs
35
Fig. 28 - Drop Shaft with 1-1/2 D Radius

Elbow. Energy Dissipating Sill Placed in
Fig. 29 - Drop Shaft with 1-1/2 D Radius

Elbow. Energy Dissipating Sill Placed in
II, ,,'
Fig. 30 - Drop Shaft Without Water Cushion.

High Air-WQter Ratio in Discharge Conduit.
Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 31 - Drop Shaft with Deep Water Cushion. Air-Water Ratio Similar to Fig. 30.
Discharge 900 cfs
.36
Fig_ 32 - Rectangular Sump 22 ft by 15 ft

by 20 ft Deep, With Inclined Baffle on
Right Side
Fig_ 34 - Circular Sump and Impact Cup

With Curved Baffle Open at Bottom Only.
Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 33 - Circular Sump and Impact Cup and

Curved Baffle Open at Top and Bottom. Discharge 600 cfs
Fig. 35 - Circular Sump (18 ft in Diameter)

With Perforated Impact Cup. Baffle Open
Top and Bottom. Discharge Conduit at Base
of Sump. Discharge 600 cfs
37
r12~ 12"
Impact Cup
Sidewall
~~'Dia.
12"
O...L
20
40
60
80
Maximum Pressure
Ft. Water
Cup Base
Fig. 36 - Pressures on Perforated Cup Sidewall
200
175
(J)
150
(.)
Q}
...
:1
'I:
125
I' '
01
0
"
(.)
(J)
100
...
<:(
75
'I"
50
25
00
200
400
600
.800
1000
1200
Water Discharge - cfs

Fig. 37 - Air-Water Discharge from Sump Chamber
38
Fig. 38- Series 11. Straight Drop Shaft with Water Cushion Sump. Scale 1:24.
Drop 100 ft
39
Discharge - 600 cfs
/ - 9 i n Dla.
1/
O~-
oooo<i~
T
.::=
0000
10
12 In
II
SECTION A - A.
I'
,I,
IMPACT CUP
Drop Shaft
Vent Shaft
:
Iii
ii' , I
90
80
Iii
I
I
'I
+'
i 70 ~! 1.~t--tr-\-t I -
;"""'.:
r--~ I~pact Cup L-L ..
t:1- I
-I
60
=:
'I
- -
--
'j-~j
.-4~-
--
I!! 20
.... 10
CENTERLINE SECTION
,
FIOO
'
.
'
-,-t
-l--,--
=-t- - ,-
-~-~--
, Sump Floor - Av.
200
400
600
Discharge - cfs
Fig. 39 - Series 12. Drop Shaft with 16-ft Diameter Circular Sump and Perforated Impact
Cup Based on Prel iminary Design as Shown in Fig. 11. Scale 1 :24. Drop 100 ft
800
40
Discharge - 600 cfs
in Dia.
c?50o~
0<-.000
1.:::
SECTION A - A
IMPACT CUP
Drop Shaft
,-- Vent Shaft

I
100
~~<
co
:.:,~
24 1/2 ft ~2ftf-----12
ft
.
80
.i
60
N .
.......
~o.
-il-:
2!
-----I
...2!
CENTERLINE SECTION
-L-.____ .
40
-20-----------~
o
Wall Pressure
Ft. - Water
.
I
--;- Sump Floor - Ave;

'---"""'...-'--.-00---600
Dis~harge - cfs
Cup with Extended Discharge Chamber. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
__________________________________________________________________________c_
41
Discharge - 600 cfs
Dia.
------1
-i
It
-I
0<)
'-~M-~~Tr.'~~~~~
SECTION A-A
IMPACT CUP
__ Vent Shaft
Drop Shaft ---
\
--g..L-1..
11"'-8 ft D
:(
~
100
...
2 80 .
~
~
U.
60
:>
::l 40
.-
iJ~
Q...
20
! Sump Floor - Av.-Wall Pressure

Ft. - Water
CENTERLINE SECTION
200
'400
600
Cup and Short Discharge Chamber. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
-------------------
800
Di scharge - 600 cfs
IMPACT CUP
SECTION A- A
Drop Shaft
Vent Shaft
'"
.!
.i,
~
.:t:
.....
.....
30
Wall Pressure
~t. - Water
....!
20 ..- - - - . - - - - -.....".. ~
-.-:::::---.. -.-~'Sump Floor - Av. -
O'OL~~2-00---~~0~~~--~80~0~-J
Discharge - cfs
Fig. 42 - Series 15. Drop Shaft with 23.-ft Diameter Circular Sump and Perforated Impact
<;:up. Discharge Conduit Increased from 8 ft to 11 ft in Diameter. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
43
Discharge - 600 cf.
, 9 i.n. Dia.
12 in.
IMPACT CUP
SECTION A - A
Drop Shaft
.' Vent Shaft
.!
80
60
20
..
'
--t - -j
I ,
j .. -
~
,
--t- , Sump 'Flcot - Av.
Wall' ~reS$~r.
Ft. Water
o
CENTERLINE SECTION
200
400
600
Discharge - cf.
Fig. 43 - Series 17. Drop Shaft with 23-ft Circular Sump and Perforated Impact Cup.
Sloping Roof Discharge Chamber. Scale 1 :24. Drop 100 ft
800
44
Discharglll ,.. 600 cfs
9 in Dla.
12 In
000
0000.::1.5
OOOON
000 .-
IMPACT CUP
SECTION A-A
Drap Shaft -
._ _ Vent Shaft
~ 80
1;
~ 601--+---"'k~
it
I;
40
a
w
i
"--t---:-_.
II>
~ 20
r=~~~~sSum:p;;F~lo~or7-~AV~.~.
o~~~~~~~~-~
CENTERLINE SECTION
200
400
600
Olschal"\l8 - cfs
Fig. 44 - Series 18. Drop Shaft with 19-1/2-ft Diameter Circular Sump and Perforated
Impact Cup. Sloping Roof Discharge Chamber. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
800
Discharge - 600 cfs
- 9 in. Dia.
oooos
ooOOcpI
OOG)O
lITn.
IMPACT CUP
Drop Shaft
Vent Shaft
100
80
Lt,
60
OJ
~40
Impact Cup
Floor - Max.
..
II
~
J
~~i~
o'
CENTERLINE SECTION
200
400
600
800
Discharge - cfs
Fig. 45 - Series 19. Drop Shaft with 16-ft Diameter Circular Sump and Perforated
Impact Cup. Sloping Roof Discharge Chamber. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
---------
.~-----------
46
Oi scharge 600 cfs
1.
10
~
.:I:
Bol
40
...
.~
' . ' . ' ..
_....
iii
.t
Floor Max.
SECTION A-A
.. .Impaet, Cup
60
"-
... . . .
.
200
.':
..
400
600 800
Oi schcrge - efs
r - - - Vent Shaft
W'Jt
pia,.-:
B ft!
~~~~odiI
I;
..
_L
k'il
19 ft
80
60
40
20
Wall Pre..ure
Ft - Water
CENTERLINE
,..
S~CTION
Fig. 46 - Series 20. Normal Grade Line. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
and Perforated Impact Cup. Scale 1:24. Drop 100 ft
Di scharge 600 cfs
._----,---_ ..-,
Impact C~p
Floor Max.
SECTION A-A
Discharge - ds
-Vent Shaft
L9 ft
Dia.- - i'
'
8 ft.
~qt~~~. -.I.
900
..
450
.' ..
'
600
.....
0:,
,:
80
60
40
70
Wall Pressure
Ft - Water
19 ft
"
8 ft Dia;
11 ft
'
~.L
1
'
~,', , !:!,:;:.!=tl"':~'I&,'=="""c:;""''f~"-,:"~"""",,q,,,'t,,,':h''','~;'''':'"''':'I~~~;::~~~~:~"%~~~~~!~~~~:~~DU~
I
'
CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 47 - Series 20. Grade line 30 ft. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
and Perforated Impact Cup. Drop 100 ft. Scale 1:24
I,
48
Di scharge 600 cfs
100
. 80~
'E
.t
60
Sump Floor -,Av.
~
::>
ill
~
a.
SECTION A-A
200
,
o",p Shaft -
400
600 800
Discharge - cf.
,~--- Vent Shafl
\ i
'.8f'~~;~~f','~ft
'"
,
I
,
,.
r
150,300
75(j" ", , 450'
8 ft,
~qID~~~_~L
..... : .. ,
19 ft
600
II ft
"t"
1- ','
80
60
40
20
Wall Pressure
FI - Waler
aft Dia;
"
: l'
C::>=<=:l""",=>"""P,,",,==>"""~:"""".j1~:;~ii:,;:$}1?s~~~;;r<E~]j~@3~rgG116~:g~~b:2il:g.wk'iJ~
.. " 35 fl ,--_ .. -
_'
____ '-j-_"IO ft
-+--"
13 fl---j
CENTERLINE ?ECTION
Fig. 48 - Series 20. Grade Line 50 ft. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
49
Di sc harge 600 cfs
~'r--~--~ I~pact CUPW',

60
~ 40
Flaor- Max.
:.
:>
::!
d:"
~
Sump Floor:" Avo
200
600
400
SOO
Discharge - cf,
t;".
t.:l
W' ft pia. ~
~~~~~QJ-'- ... -+--...... _. --".,
SO
..
.....
\.:
19 ft
f:IJ
40
20
Wall Preosure
Ft - Water
CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 49 - Series 21. Normal Grade line. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
50
Di ,charge 600 cf,
10~l
80 1
60
>-
Impact
1:[l~'FI~-;"
Sl!CnON A-A
200
o.op
~:. ~
Floor-/ . .~
400
600
800
Di $Charge - cf.
ShO~}l;;.. - V """
"
If
W' ft pia,-,:
8ft
1900
~
.. ~~----1_.
450
l~~~
I
19 ft
600
11 ft
-> -
I
80
60
40
20
Wall Pressure
Ft - Water
8 ft Dia ~
==IoUi==1o;L;.4'!",~~:e;:o."': :~"': ;~"':~ :!~ :o.l!'~L':~';L'~dll~~:~!,~~~~~"'~<wk~

:r;.]
..
.CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 50 - Series 21. Grade line 40 ft. Recommended Design with 23-ft Dia~eter Sump
,1
Di ,charge 600 cf,
:::>
1::~ Cu~
.. Impact
: ,:
. Floor Ma~o .~
60' ,
Sump' Flaor-Av.
u.
I
Q)
!s
SEcnON A-A
40
i:!
Q)
ct 2
200
400
600
800
01 scharge - cf.
Lh
. / '
"~"'V''''
" "
5.5 ft '\
~. '----1.--' ,i I
//', l---'~-----] _.I .
Varies
~.
" .. >J.a
',~-ll ft ---i
',OK ' - "
, "
8ft
19 ft
11 ft
80
60
40
20
Wall Pressure
Ft - Water
CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 51 - Series 21. Grade Line 60 ft. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
and Perforated Impact Cup. Drop 135ft. Scale 1:24
8 ft Dla~
52
Discharge 600 ds
100.-----------,
80
. -t-
SECTION A-A
I"
:-T.~:.;~.~
,
200
Drop
~aft~ '._
'08 ft
.,.
,S~mp:Floor.A".
400
600 800
Discharge - efs
C--Vent Shaft
Dio.][5 ft
I
r' "-"-...-.__....8 ft:

I
~:J@1'~~~~ .. '
19 ft
11 ft
60
60
40
Wall Pressure
Ft - Watet
CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 52 - Series 22. Normal Grade line. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter
Sump and Perforated Impact Cup. Drop 62 ft. Scale 1:24
Dla
53
Di sc harge 600 cfs
impact~'up.
' '. '
Floor M(1X...
SECTiON A-A
~
Sunjp Floo~ - Av.
200
0.
.. Vent Shaft
."
"
"0 . . . .
.~
/ "
5,05 ft '\
'
< i --'-'V-J '

//.
/'
400
600
800
Di scharge - cf.
""
--1-.
'
>, .. , >.6 OK.
,<.~-. II ft
--1
"
Varies
-..
8 ft;
900
~~~~~;QJ-1.
600
750
19 ft
II ft
Fig. 53 -Series 22. Grade line 20 ft. Recommended Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
and Perforated Impact Cup. Drop 62 ft, Scale 1 :24
8 ft Dia~
I-J
54
Discharge 600 cfs
Impact;up.
. . .
Floor.- M.ax:
SECTION A-A
-. .
"
"
.
.
!j
V
5.5 ft'\
.. __ .J ~___
".F.".b.DR.
~il f t - j
8 Ft
900
. Sump
400
FI~or
600
~
Varies
_I -
~qj1J
.. ~gE~'--I
", ",
75Q
80
800
Discharge - cf.
~,
19 ft
.-1--
;.. Av.
'I-v~J
! .
" ..
...
i .'
'_._..11.__
W' ft pia ..;
200
60
.0\()
20
Wall Pressure
Ft - Water
CENTERLINE SECTION
Fig. 54 - Series 22. Grade Line 30 ft. Recommenc:'ed Design with 23-ft Diameter Sump
and Perforated Impact Cup. Drop 62 ft
..
55
APPENDIX
--------
57
APPENDIX
--------
I.
REVIEW OF "FLOW IN VERTICAL SHAFTSIt
The purpose of this study was to provide aid for the Allegheny County
Sanitary Authority in the design of a new interceptor s.ystem.
The study was
to cover the flow in the vertical shafts, dissipation of kinetic energy, and
control of air entrained in the interceptor s.ystem.
A.
Models
Two models were studied:
the shaft-interceptor model and the diver-
sion-structure model.
The shaft-interceptor model had a shaft diameter of :5.6 in. and a
vertical drop of 32 ft ending in a stilling chamber at the bottom of the shaft.
A horizontal pipe representing the lower interceptor line carried the flow
from the stilling chamber.
The hydraulic grade line on the system could be
varied by regulation of a butterfly valve at the end of the lower horizontal

interceptor line.
Air vents were provided in the stilling chamber and also
in the horizontal interceptor line.

'l'he diversion-structure model was used to determine the adequacy
of the design of the gate stilling tank with respect to the shaft inlet chamber.
The results of the diversion-chamber tests have no bearing on the remainder
of this study.
B.
Hodel Tests
1.
Shaft Entrance
Three types of shaft entrances were studied. Radial-entrance inlets
gave high rates of discharge for small heads but resulted in negative pressures
below the intake which were possible sources of cavi tation,and air entrairnnent.
The flow
't-18S
also unsteady and large slugs of air were drawn into the shaft.
The additj.on of guide fins or vanes would have been required to insure "steady!!
radial flow.
2.
Spiral (Vortex) Entrance (Unflooded Shaft)

In this model the flow was guided from the inlet at the chamber wall
to the shaft by a spiral-shaped wall. This design resulted in a smoother water
58
surface with less air discharge than the radial flow design, but a greater head
was required.
The pressures in the shaft above the hydraulic grade line were
atmospheric.
:3. Vortex-Type Entrance

The shaft inlet tank for this series of tests was circular in plan,
and the inlet was located in one corner and was a rectangular vertical slot
the full depth of the inlet tank. The v1idth of the inlet slot was varied from
3/4 to 1 diameter of the drop shaft. Inlet-tank diameters recommended varied
from
4 to 6
times the drop-shaft diameter.
Tests on this type of inlet were
made with various levels of the hydrauli.c grade line from open-channel flow
'QL
in the horizontal interceptor to full-pipe flow with the inlet being flooded
out.
'When the freely falling water reached the hydraulic grade line in
the shaft a "boil" developed sirr.ilarto the hydraulio jump.
kinetic energy occurred at the boilo
Large losses in
Air entrained at the boil was carried
through the interface and down the shaft in amounts varying with the position
of the. hydraulic grade line.
The 1m-reI' the grade line the greater the a ir-
water ratio.
Pressures in the shaft "rere measured by means of piezometers for
the range of flow from open-channel flow in the interceptor to full
inlet tank was
t~flooded
now.
The
out" by the boil in the shaft at approximately the
same time that the hydraQlic grade line reached the inlet.
h. Stilling Chamber
Very little cOIT'Jllent is made on the de-<;leration of the flow in the
stilling chamber at the bottom of the shaft, and it vlOuld appear that since
the grade line was kept qu:i.te high this area was not considered important.
An estimate of the velocities at the bottom of the shaft developed by the free
fall of the water from the inlet places a reduction at approximately 50 per
cent due to the frictional losses of the spiraling water against the sides of
.the shaft.
50 Air Entrainment
Air carried down the shaft was collected in the stilli.ng chamber
and metered through an orifice.
Figure A-l shows the relation between air-
water discharge ratios and the height of the hydraulic grade line above the
stilling basin for both vortex and radial flow.
59
For high grade lines in the vertical shaft the volume of air entrained
is relatively small, but as the grade line falls the air entrainment becomes
greater and is a maximum for the condition of open-channel flow in the horizontal interceptor.
It is apparent
~hat
the vortex-type entrance causes the
least air entrainment; however, no indication of the relative size and arrangement of the stilling basin is given in the report.
Figure A~2 sh()ws the effect of inlet-chamber diameter on the entrainment of air in the vertical shaft . The small-size chamber, while giving a
greater discharge for a
c.
giv~n
head, also produces a larger air discharge.
Cornment s on Vortex Inlet

FigureA-3 is a stillimary of the test data showing the head.... discharge
relationShip for vortex-type inlets of three diameter ratios.

Based on this information an inlet chamber for the maximum design
flow of 600 cfs would have to be from 32 to
drop-shaft diameter of 8 ft.
48
ft in diameter, assuming a
The head required would range from 18 to 28 ft
to obtain the desired design discharge of 600 cfs.

Obviously, the vortex inlet isa flow-limiting device and has been
so used in other reported designs. The reduction in air entrainment secured
with this device is far overshadowed by the increased cost of this inlet chamber as compared to the elbow-type inlet.
At
~his
point in our study the
stilling-chamber area should be intensively explored with emphasiS on air removal and energy dissipation.
n.
REVIEW OF "VORTEX FLO"u:J TtIROUGH HORIZONTAL ORIFICES"
The purpose of this study was to investigate vortex-type flow in

connection with the diversion of sewage from combined sewers.
A large part
of the study concerns the theoretical aspects of vortex flow through an orifice
and the discharge coefficient-vortex number relationship is presented.
Hodel
studies were performed both at the University of \'Jisconsin and at Portland,

Oregon.
The 'Wisconsin studies were concerned with flo,", through the orifice
and used a series of tank-diameter to orifice-diameter ratios in determining
the flow characteristics.
presented in Fig. A-l.
A composite curve of all data from these tests is
60
The Portland tests were concerned with the application of vortex
flow to sewage diversion.
The 'Vortex chamber was placed adjacent to the main sewer line, and
flow was diverted to the interceptor line through this chamber. As far as can
be determined from this report only a small drop existed between the vortex
chamber and the interceptor line.
,
"
Sanitar,y flows were diverted through the vortex chamber by placing

a dam in the main sewer line of such height that the maximum sanitar,y flow
would'be completely diverted, but during storm flows
would be carried to the treatment plant.
o~
a limited discharse
This work has little bearing on the drop-shaft type of structure.
32~~-.----,------.------,------,------,-----,
0_
-Q)
.... Q)
OLL
1i
Q)
241
III
~ I
'\
oQ)
100
Q)'-
.... C
_-1
.=
Q)
Q)"O
\Ik '.\
161
> c
Radial Flow
Vortex Flow I
/
r--Dt~
~
o ....
.c<.!)
<!
~.;
c
cc ....
.!!? >-
--
-"0
O::I:
01
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Volume Ratio - Air to Water
1.0
-,
0.8,
Dp
Q2
=Dia.
/:",Y
//
,,'"
II
Q =600 cfs
Dt =8 ft
~/
~~
;'-'
Dt = 4"
Dp
~I'
//
Ot = Dia. Tank
Dp= Dio. Pipe
I
I
Data from C.I.T. -ACSA

Report on flow in vertical shafts
II
8 10
20
40
60
100
Q 5/2
(-)
Dp
Shaft
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.4
Discharge of Water
cfs
~//
//
,,/
I. y '
'v
Dt = Dia. Inlet
.!!?
Dt = 6
Dp
fA"
~
-b'
V/
/ ,
Q)
0.21
61,S
4f
...ell
-5c
20)
7, r'-1 . I'
'00.41
,..- Dp
H 10
Dp 8
c::(
/Ii'
Dp
.!!
''''/
QA/QW
17
...
1.2
Fig.A-l
LDt- 4
o 0.6
Dp -
~
~
r--L
~.
81
V/
V'
~ '"
1.2
Fig. A-3
Fig. A-2
f!J'

Model Storm-Sewer Drop Shafts: Studies of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Model Storm-Sewer Drop Shafts: Studies of

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Model Storm-Sewer Drop Shafts: Studies of

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA

ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

Technical Paper No. 35, Series B

MODEL STUDIES OF STORM-SEWER

ST. ANTHONY FALLS HYDRAULIC LABORATORY

Technical Paper No. 35, Series B

MODEL STUDIES OF STORM-SEWER

Repro ductio n in whole or in part is perm itted

Hr. George Shepard, Engineering Co-ordi-

nator, gave general direction to the program.

Other Public \'lorks llipartment

Mr. C. E. Bowers of the Laboratory staff guided the in-

Past designs required frequent

Preliminary model tests indicated that destructive forces of the

An experimental study led to the development of an impact-type of

energy dissipator which removed excess energy from the

and created stable

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.

REVIEW OF PAST WORK

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION PROGRAM. . . . . . . . . ..

DESCRIPTION OF THE MODELS

DEVELOFMENT OF BASIC DESIGN

1. Diameter of Impact Cup.

DEVELOPMENT OF FINAL DESIGN.

1'-1e11 Hole at St. Paul

Flight Sewer, Philadelphia.

Rectangular Sump, 22 ft Wide, 30 ft Long and 40 ft Deep.

Re.ctangular Sump (20 f't Deep) With Perforated Impact Plate

Rectangular Sump 22 ft by 1.5 ft and 20 ftDaep , with Solid

" " " " "

Vortex Inlet 22 ft in Diameter.

Elbow Inlet with Deep Water Cushion.

Discharge 900 cfs

1:24. Drop 100 ft

Drop 100 ft ' _

ft Diam eter Sump and Perfo rated Impac t Cup. Drop 62 ft

It is not unusual for outlet condi-

tions to require tunnels to be located 100 ft or more below the surface.

ductance of surface discharges to the underground interceptot's has been of

STATEMENT OF THE PROBlEM

The hydraulic design of a drop structuremnst consider the following factors:

Capac ity of the inlet and drop shaft

Of forem ost impor tance is the proble m of dissip ation

REVn:1tf OF PAST WORK

'lhese structures can be

The well hole consisting of a vertical shaft

leading to an underground interceptor line is probably the most common type

A second type of drop is a system of steps or cascades by which the

sewage flows down a number of small drops,

step being in effect a stil-

A third type is the backdrop, which is a drop shaft .located out-

Discharge enters at the base of the manhole.

1,2 and.3) [1,2]

Most shafts'were no doubt overdesigned as to capacity

due to a lack of understanding of the hydraulics of the structure.

The purpose of this pool or

well is to absorb the excess energy of the free fall.