01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 1

Flow in drainage systems

This chapter outlines the basic design requirements of surface drainage systems,
with special reference to the traditionally applied open channels, and the more
recently introduced linear drainage channels. Since the adequacy of both systems
requires an efficient transportation of rainwater from the area to be drained, the
chapter includes the two prevailing methods for calculating the rainfall runoff, the
Lloyd-Davies formula, and the Wallingford procedure, with examples to illustrate
their application.

1.1 Highway drainage systems

The need for removal of storm water from road surfaces was realized
during early days of road construction. Romans, for instance, introduced
drainage to their road systems. Later, industrial advancement required
raising the standard of highways, which could not be achieved without
incorporating an efficient method of disposal of surface water, in addition
to cambering the road. Thus a surface drainage system became a necessity,
and its design is now an integral part of modern highway design.
The traditional, and still vastly popular, method for the disposal of surplus
water from road surfaces is by means of open channels built adjacent to the
kerb. These channels are preferably triangular, with the kerb face as the
vertical side, and a limited width of the carriageway, with a certain amount of
cross fall, as the sloping side (Fig. 1.1). Other shapes, such as rectangular or
trapezoidal, are less common. The allowable width of flow that can be allowed
in roadside channels is normally governed by the safety requirements, and
depends on the type of road construction. For instance, in trunk roads it
should not exceed 15 m if there is a hard shoulder, and 10 m if there is a hard
strip. For shopping precincts the value is limited to 05 m. The limitation on
the width of flow restricts the cross-sectional area of flow. Hence, in order to
keep the area of cross section of flow within the prescribed limits, the flow in
the channel has to be intercepted, at appropriate points, by means of gullies
1

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 2

Design of linear drainage systems

Road (pavement)

Channel
Kerb
Flow from gully
pot or kerb inlet
Plan
Kerb
Hard shoulder
with cross fall
Cross section

Figure 1.1 A conventional drainage system.

with grated tops, or by openings in the kerb, called kerb inlets. In this way, the
water is removed from the road surface, and is directed, sometimes through
French drains, to a receiving channel that may be, for instance, a natural
watercourse in the countryside, or a specially designed storm sewer in the
urban area (see Chapter 5 of reference [1.1]).
An alternative system of drainage that is becoming popular is the linear
drainage system. Linear drainage channels are closed conduits, constructed
by assembling precast units, and admit water through an inlet mechanism
incorporated into the system. A linear drainage channel may be one of the
following two types:
(a) Channels with grated top, flush with the road surface (Fig. 1.2). Such
a channel is made of precast units, each of length of the order of
2

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 3

Flow in drainage systems

Figure 1.2 A linear drainage channel with grated top.

05 to 10 m, and of the cross section, preferably, either circular with a
vertical neck, or of a U shape (Fig. 1.3).
(b) Channels combined with the kerb, the so-called combined kerbdrainage channels (Fig. 1.4). Such a channel is also made of units of the
same length as in (a) above, and manufactured in variously shaped
cross sections.
Each unit of a combined system consists of two parts, the top and the
base blocks (Fig. 1.5). An orifice, to allow free access of water into the channel,
is located in the top block. At a pedestrian crossing, the kerb is dropped, and
the top block dispensed with. In this situation, only the base block provides
the necessary drainage capacity (see Chapter 11).
The depth of flow in a linear drainage channel is also restricted by the
available depth of the channel, requiring the flow to leave the channel at
suitably located outfalls, and conveyed to a receiving channel. Thus, the
outfalls of a linear drainage system serve the same purpose as the gullies of
the traditional system. The growing popularity of linear drainage systems
is mainly due to their requirement of less amount of excavation and,
possibly, minimum obstruction with the services. A linear drainage system
is also more flexible in the sense that it is applicable to large paved areas
3

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 4

Design of linear drainage systems

Grating

Grating

Invert

Circular pipe

U-shaped channel

Figure 1.3 Preferred cross sections for linear drainage channels of type (a)
with grated tops.

Figure 1.4 A combined kerb-drainage system of type (b).

Orifice
Top

Orifice

Base
Base

Figure 1.5 Units of combined kerb-drainage channel (type (b)).

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 5

Flow in drainage systems

Figure 1.6 A roof gutter with two vertical outlet-pipes.

such as motorways and airport runways, as well as to restricted areas such

as car parks and shopping precincts.
The method of computing flow in linear drainage systems also applies
to roof gutters. A roof gutter (Fig. 1.6) admits rainwater from the roof
surface at a uniform rate over its entire length and, hence, the rate of
discharge increases linearly along the length of the gutter.

1.2 Design criteria of drainage systems

The basic design requirement of a drainage system is to maintain balance
between the volume of water to be removed, and the flow-carrying capacity
of the system. The volume of water required to be removed by a drainage
channel is routinely determined from the runoff formula of the type
Q max 

Cr IAs
36  10 5

(1.1)

where Cr  coefficient of runoff, I  average intensity of rainfall (mm/hr),

As  surface area to be drained (m2), and Qmax  rate of discharge (m3/s).
The coefficient of runoff is the ratio of the volume of water actually
transported by the drainage channel to the total amount of rainfall on the
surface, and its value depends on the permeability of the surface to be
drained. In the case of an impervious surface, the coefficient of runoff may
represent the loss of water due, for instance, to cracks in the surface, and
ponding.
A typical urban drainage scheme consists of a main channel, which is
usually a pipe, with several tributary channels. The total area to be drained
5

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 6

Design of linear drainage systems

is divided into sub-areas, each sub-area acting as a catchment area for a pipe
length that is defined by a manhole at each end. Hence, the only parameter
in Eq. (1.1) to be determined by external means is the intensity of rainfall.
This is discussed in the following section. In a highway drainage scheme,
the area to be drained depends on the length of the drainage channel,
which is, generally, not known at the start of the computation. Hence, there
is an element of trial and error in computing the area to be drained, and the
volume of flow to be carried by the channel. This is dealt with in Chapter 9.
It has been common practice to design a highway drainage system
on the assumption that the drainage channel flows full, that is, it occupies
the available area of cross section entirely. This allows the condition of
uniform flow to prevail (see Chapter 3), and the discharge-carrying
capacity of the channel is obtained by multiplying the mean velocity of flow
with the area of cross section of the channel. One implication of this
method is that the capacity of the channel is independent of the length of
the channel, which is not the case of a linear drainage channel.
In the event of rainfall, there is a regular inflow of water into the channel,
causing the rate of flow in the channel to rise, usually, from zero at the
upstream end, to a maximum value at the downstream end. The increase
in discharge causes both the depth and velocity of flow to also vary, notably,
if the channel is of constant cross section. The varied-flow theory takes this
into consideration. The theory assumes, however, that the flow entering the
channel laterally is constant, that is, the rate of the longitudinal flow
increases linearly.
In a normal situation, there is no lateral inflow at the upstream end of
a drainage channel, so that the discharge rate Q at a distance x from the
upstream end is given by the equation
Q  Q0

x
L

(1.2)

where L is the length of the channel, and Q0 is the discharge at the

downstream end of the channel (Fig. 1.7).
If U0 and A0 are, respectively, the velocity and the cross-sectional area of
flow at the outlet, then the capacity of the channel Q0 is defined by the
equation
Q0  U 0 A0

(1.3)

Hence, the above-mentioned balance between the volume of water to

be drained and the capacity of the transporting channel is translated into
the equality of Qmax determined from Eq. (1.1), and Q0 calculated from
Eq. (1.3).
6

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 7

Flow in drainage systems

L
Direction of channel gradient
x

Qmax
Q

Channel

Figure 1.7 Inflow to a linear drainage channel.

The focus in the design of a traditional drainage system is on the spacing

between the outlets, which is determined by the efficiency of the gully
grating, or of the kerb inlet. The gully efficiency is defined as the ratio of the
volume of flow entering the gully to the volume of flow approaching it. The
same applies to the efficiency of the kerb inlet. Gully gratings are classified
into various grades. For instance, a gully may either be of a heavy duty (D
type) with efficiency varying from 84% to 99%, or of a medium duty (E
type) with efficiency varying from 70% to 98% [1.2]. It is found that the
main parameters on which the efficiency of a gully grating depends are the
width of flow, and the longitudinal and side slopes of the channel estimated
immediately upstream of the gully. A linear drainage channel is provided
with one or more outfalls which are units specially built for the purpose of
expelling water. The efficiency at which the water enters and leaves a linear
drainage system is usually taken as 10, and the focus in design is on the
capacity of the channel.
From the varied flow theory, it is found that the location of the maximum
depth of flow in a drainage channel varies with the gradient of the channel.
For instance, if the channel is laid level then the depth of flow is maximum
at its upstream end. If a small gradient is introduced, then the location of
the maximum depth moves downstream. A small increase in the gradient
causes the deepest cross section of flow to move considerably downstream.
Having reached the downstream end at a certain gradient, the maximum
depth stays there at all steeper gradients.
For a channel of constant cross section, and laid at a uniform slope,
the magnitude of the maximum depth increases with the length of the
channel, a longer channel admitting more water. Since the depth of flow
cannot exceed the available depth of the system, the capacity of the
7

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 8

Design of linear drainage systems

drainage system must necessarily be related to the length of the channel.

Hence, before deciding upon the capacity of a linear drainage system, it is
important to find both the location and the magnitude of the maximum
depth for, although, the capacity is defined by the rate of discharge at the
outlet, the limiting depth of flow may, or may not be at the outlet.
As a preliminary to the computation of varied flow in a drainage
channel (to be discussed in later chapters), I consider the simple case of
a rectangular area to be drained by means of a rectangular channel, and
compare the results of the analysis using both the uniform flow and the
varied flow theories. I assume that the channel is laid at a uniform gradient
S0, which may have a value ranging from 0 to 1/10. Let other data be as
follows:
B  02 m
h  024 m

Width of channel
Depth of channel

The Mannings formula of the uniform flow theory (Chapter 3, Eq. (3.5)),
gives the mean velocity of flow
U

R 2 / 3 S0

(3.5)

in which R is the hydraulic radius, and n the coefficient of roughness. For

the channel flowing at full capacity,
A  area of cross section of flow  area of cross section of the channel
 02  024  0048 m2
P  wetted perimeter  02  048  068 m
R  hydraulic radius  A/P  00706 m
For n  0011, say, we obtain from Eq. (3.5)
U

007062 /3
0011

S0  15527 S0

The capacity of the channel Q0 (in litres/second) is then given by

Q0  AU  480  15527 S0  7453 S0
The values of Q0 at various slopes calculated by this equation, which is the
outcome of the uniform flow theory, and the corresponding values obtained
by the application of the varied flow theory are shown in Table 1.1.
8

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 9

Flow in drainage systems

Table 1.1 Comparison between channel capacities obtained from uniform and varied
flow theories (X  distance of deepest cross section of flow from the upstream end)
S0

Uniform flow

0
1/1000
1/500
1/200
1/100
1/50
1/20
1/10

Varied flow

U (m/s)

Q0 (l/s)

L (m)

X (m)

U0 (m/s)

Q0 (l/s)

0
0491
0694
110
155
220
347
491

0
2357
3333
5270
7453
10540
16665
23568

149
216
265
378
520
745
1188
1685

0
148
217
357
520
745
1188
1685

100
114
122
137
149
214
342
487

480
574
586
658
715
1027
1642
2338

Comparing these two sets of results, it is found that, for flat gradients, that
is, up to about 1/100 in the example considered, the capacities calculated by
the uniform flow theory are on the conservative side. At steeper slopes, the
difference in the capacities is not very significant. However, the table also
shows that, for a given slope, there is a maximum allowable length of the
channel, that is, if the length of the channel exceeds this value then the depth
of water will rise above the specified limit of 024 m. Therefore, these lengths
must represent the theoretical maximum spacing between outlets.

1.3 Intensity of rainfall

Rainfall records suggest that, given the total amount of rainfall in an area,
storms of shorter duration are more frequent than those of longer duration.
This led to the evolution of the Bilham formula [1.3]
N 10  125D(r  01)355

(1.4)

where N10  number of storms in 10 years, D  duration of storms in

minutes, and r  total rainfall in inches.
By a simple transformation, Eq. (1.4) can be written as
I

1
14
14( ND )1 / 3
55  2
54

(1.5)

where D  storm duration in hours, N  storm return period in years, and

I  intensity of rainfall in mm/hr.
9

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 10

Design of linear drainage systems

The Bilham formula is widely used in the United Kingdom, although

preference is sometimes given to a formula depicting the local rainfall
records, for instance, the Birmingham formula
I

40
D  20

20  D  120 minutes

However, in order to incorporate the local conditions in a general way,

it has been necessary to modify the Bilham formula, the modified version
is known as the Lloyd-Davies formula, or the rational formula.

1.3.1 The Lloyd-Davies formula

The feature which distinguishes the Lloyd-Davies formula from the
original Bilham formula is the replacement of the duration of rainfall by the
time of concentration, and the application of the Bilham formula for each
pipe length of the scheme, individually. This is to incorporate the evidence
available from the records of intense storms that indicate the storm giving
the highest discharge from a given catchment area occurs when the
duration of the rainfall is equal to the time of concentration. The time of
concentration is defined as the sum of the entry time (time taken by the
water to flow across the surface) that is, from the farthest point of the area
concerned to the point of entry to the channel, and the accumulated time of
flow of water within the confines of the channel, that is, between the
upstream and downstream ends of the channel. The normal range of the
entry time is taken from 2 to 4 minutes, the larger value is applied to
exceptionally large paved surfaces, and an accuracy of within 1/2 minute in
the estimated entry time is considered adequate.
As mentioned above, a drainage scheme consists of a main channel and
its several tributaries, and a tributary of the main channel may have its
own tributaries. The main channel, which is usually the longest, and the
tributaries are made up of various lengths of pipes separated by manholes
(see Fig. 1.8). Since the volume of flow increases with the distance from the
highest point of the area to be drained, heavier pipe sections are required
as the flow progresses. It is, therefore, usual to find that different pipe
lengths of a particular scheme have different times of flow and, hence,
different times of concentration. Normally, pipes are selected from
experience, assuming that they run just full, that is, without surcharge. This
allows the time of flow to be calculated from a uniform flow formula.
Alternatively, the velocity of flow can be obtained from the design tables
[1.4] based on the Colebrook-White formula (see Chapter 4).
Each pipe length is identified by two numbers, say, m and n, separated
by a dot. The first number m identifies the channel (main or tributary) to
10

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 11

Flow in drainage systems

2.1
4.1

2.2

3.1
5.1

2.3
1.1

4.2
1.2

1.3
1.4
6.2

1.5

6.1
To natural
watercourse

Manhole

Figure 1.8 Plan of a sewer system.

which the length belongs, and the second number n identifies its location
with respect to the most upstream manhole in the channel. Thus, assuming
that both m and n start from 1, a length labelled as 2.3 means that it belongs
to channel 2 in the scheme, and is third from the most upstream manhole
in the channel (Fig. 1.8).
Denoting the time of concentration and the time of flow for a length m.n
by Tm.n and tm.n respectively, and assuming that the entry time for all
lengths is the same, we have
Tm.n 

tm.i  entry time

i1

that is,
Tm.1  tm.1  entry time

(1.6)

and
Tm.n  Tm.n1  tm.n

(1.6a)

where tm.i is the time of flow in the length m.i.

The procedure based on the Lloyd-Davies formula, and adopted in
the design of a storm sewer system is described in reference [1.5]. In
the following example, the procedure is illustrated in greater detail. The
velocities of flow are calculated from the Mannings formula (Eq. (3.5)).
11

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 12

Design of linear drainage systems

Table 1.2 Determination of time of concentration from the Lloyd-Davies formula

(Example 1.1)
1
Ref. length
m.n
1.1
1.2
2.1
2.2
3.1
2.3
1.3
4.1
5.1
4.2
1.4
6.1
6.2
1.5

2
Lm.n
(m)

3
dm.n
(mm)

4
S0,m.n

5
Rm.n
(mm)

6
Um.n
(m/s)

7
tm.n
(min)

8
Tm.n
(min)

60
60
50
50
50
60
80
60
60
60
50
50
50
50

150
200
150
200
150
250
300
150
150
250
350
150
200
400

0017
0017
002
0017
0025
0025
003
0025
0017
002
003
0027
002
0025

375
500
375
500
375
500
750
375
375
625
875
375
500
1000

133
161
144
161
161
226
280
161
133
202
310
167
174
310

075
062
058
052
052
044
048
062
075
049
027
050
048
027

275
337
258
310
252
354
385
262
275
311
412
250
298
439

Example 1.1: The plan of a sewer system consisting of several lengths of

circular pipes is shown in Fig. 1.8. If the estimated entry time is 2 minutes,
and the coefficient of roughness n  0011, determine the times of
concentration for all lengths involved.
Solution: Table 1.2, which represents the solution, consists of the following
columns
Column 1
Column 2
Column 3
Column 4
Column 5
Column 6

pipe reference number m.n.

Lm.n  length of the pipe m.n.
dm.n  assumed diameter of the pipe m.n.
S0,m.n  longitudinal gradient of the pipe m.n.
Rm.n  hydraulic radius of the pipe m.n.
Assuming that the pipe runs full, Rm.n  dm.n/4
Um.n  mean velocity of flow in the pipe m.n.
U m.n 

U 1.1 

12

(Rm.n )2 / 3 S0 ,m.n
n
(00375)2 / 3 0017
0011

 133 m/s, and so forth.

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 13

Flow in drainage systems

Column 7

tm.n  time of flow in the pipe m.n  Lm.n/Um.n

t11 

Column 8

60
133  60

 075 minutes, and so forth.

Tm.n  time of concentration in pipe m.n.

From Eq. (1.6), T1.1  t1.1  20  275 minutes.
From Eq. (1.6a), T1.2  T1.1  t1.2  275  062  337 minutes,
and so forth.

The next step in runoff calculations is to find the intensity of rainfall for
each length of the sewer system. This is done by substituting the respective
times of concentration for the duration of rainfall in the Bilham formula.
The surface area As,m.n contributing to the runoff drained by the length m.n
is determined as follows:
As ,m.n  As ,m.n1  as ,m.n  As*,m.n
As ,m .1  as ,m .1

(1.7)
(1.7a)

where
as,m.n  area to be drained exclusively by the length m.n
As,m.n1  cumulative surface area drained by all lengths of the pipe m,
upstream of m.n
*
As,m.n  cumulative surface area drained by all other pipes discharging
into the manhole between the pipes m.n  1 and m.n.
The total runoff in each individual length is then obtained from Eq. (1.1).
This is compared with the capacity of the channel length obtained from Eq.
(1.3). If the capacity of the channel is found to be less than the runoff then
the pipe diameter has to be revised.
Example 1.2: The area to be drained by each pipe length of the sewer
system shown in Fig. 1.8 is given in column 4 of Table 1.3. For a storm
frequency of 1 year, determine the runoff (litres per second) for each
channel length, and check the value against the flow capacity of each pipe.
Solution: The solution is presented in Table 1.3 which contains the
following columns:
Column 1
Column 2
Column 3

pipe reference number m.n.

Dm.n  duration of rainfall for the pipe m.n  Tm.n
Im.n  intensity of rainfall for the pipe m.n obtained from
Eq. (1.5).
13

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 14

Design of linear drainage systems

Table 1.3 Determination of intensity of rainfall and maximum discharge from the
Lloyd-Davies formula (Example 1.1)
1
2
3
Ref. length Dm.n
Im.n
m.n
(min) (mm/hr)

4
as,m.n
(m2)

5
As,m.n
(m2)

1.1
1.2
2.1
2.2
3.1
2.3
1.3
4.1
5.1
4.2
1.4
6.1
6.2
1.5

1000
800
1200
600
1200
1200
1600
1200
1000
800
1200
1200
1400
1500

1000
1800
1200
1800
1200
4200
7600
1200
1000
3000
11 800
1200
2600
15 900

275
337
258
310
252
354
385
262
275
311
412
250
298
439

74
66
76
69
77
64
62
75
73
69
59
77
70
57

6
7
8
Qmax,m.n
Am.n
Q0,m.n
(l/s)
(m2)  1000 (l/s)
2056
3350
2533
3500
2567
7583
13089
2533
2055
5833
19667
2600
5128
25617

1767
3142
1767
3142
1767
4909
7069
1767
1767
4909
9621
1767
3142
12566

2350
5058
2544
5058
2845
6126*
19792
2845
2350
5466*
29825
2951
5467
38956

* See text.

Hence, for N  1,
I m.n 

1
1414(Dm.n )1 / 355  254

Dm.n

as,m.n  surface area drained, exclusively, by the pipe m.n.

As,m.n  cumulative surface area drained by the pipe m.n.
For instance, from Eqs (1.7), As,1.1  as,1.1  1000 m2
As,1.2  As,1.1  as,1.2  1000  800 1800 m2
A*s,1.3  As,2.3  3000 m2
Therefore, As,1.3  As,1.2  as,1.3  A*s,1.3  1800  1600  3000
 6400 m2
It can be verified that the last entry in column 5 is the sum of all entries in
column 4.
Column 6
Qmax,m.n  runoff carried by pipe m.n.
Taking Cr  10, we obtain from Eq. (1.1)
Column 4
Column 5

Qmax ,1.0 

14

74  1000
3600

 2056 l/s, and so forth.

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 15

Flow in drainage systems

Am.n  area of cross section of the pipe m.n  d2m.n /4

Q0,m.n  flow capacity of the pipe m.n  Um.n Am.n
where Um.n is taken from column 6 of Table 1.2.
It can be seen from Table 1.3 that pipes labelled 2.3 and 4.2 (denoted by
asterisk in column 8) have insufficient capacity, thus requiring their
diameters to be revised. All other pipe lengths are capable of carrying the
volume of runoff.
Column 7
Column 8

1.3.2 The Wallingford procedure

The Wallingford procedure [1.6] is a modified form of the Lloyd-Davies
formula. It calculates the peak discharge from the formula
Qmax 

Cr IAs
036

 278Cr IAs

(1.8)

in which As is in hectares (1 hectare  104 m2). This formula is applicable to

urban areas of up to 150 ha, with uniformly distributed impervious surfaces,
and to rainfall of duration in excess of 5 minutes. The runoff coefficient Cr is
split into the volumetric runoff coefficient Crv and the routing coefficient Crr:
Cr  Crv Crr

(1.9)

The volumetric coefficient Crv depends upon the permeability of the

surface. Its value ranges from about 06 for areas made up of rapidly
draining soils to about 09 for heavy soils, or paved surfaces. An average
value of 075 is therefore recommended. The routing coefficient Crr
depends upon the shape of the time-area diagram [1.7], and on the variation
of rainfall with the time of concentration. The recommended value for Crr
is 13, which leads to the usual practice of taking Cr  10.
As was done in the application of the Lloyd-Davies formula, the intensity
of rainfall is calculated on the basis of the time of concentration, but by a
procedure recommended by the Meteorological Office [1.8]. The central
parameter involved in this procedure is MTD, the depth of flow associated
with the specified values of the return period T and the duration of storm
D. The return time is specified by the drainage authority using the
procedure, and the duration of storm is calculated by the procedure
illustrated in Example 1.2.
For a given region, the basic data available are as follows:
(a) M560, the depth of rainfall for T  5 years, and D  60 minutes. The
value is obtained from a map of the United Kingdom (Fig. 1.9),
showing contours of various depths of rainfall.
15

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 16

Design of linear drainage systems

1
12

12

16

12

The values on the contours are

in mm of rainfall

12

20 16

16
20

16

20

12
20

20

12

16

16
20

12

16

12

16

16

16

7
2

16

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

16

16
12

16

16
20

20
16

20
16

20

20
20

16
20

16
16

16

16

20
16

Statute miles

16

20

20
16

0 20 40 60 80 100

16

20 12
3

Kilometres

12

16

16

12
16

12

16

12
12

12

16

12

12

16

16

3 12
12

5
20

20

20

20

20
20
24

16

20
20

20

20
20

16

20

20
20
20

16
20
20

16

20

20

20

16

Irish grid

20

20

20

20

20

20
20

20
20

20

2
20

20

3
20

20

20

20

20

20

20
20

20

20

1
20
20

National grid 1

20

20

Figure 1.9 Map showing rainfall depths of 5-year return period and 60-minute
duration (M560) in the United Kingdom.

16

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 17

Flow in drainage systems

(b) The conversion factor r defined by

M5 2 day

r

M5 60 min

(1.10)

Its value is obtained also from a map of the United Kingdom (Fig. 1.10).
(c) The ratio z1 is defined by the equation
z1 

M5 D
M5 60 min

(1.11)

Corresponding to the value of r determined in (b), and the specified D,

the value of z1 is read from a graph shown in Figs 1.11(a) and 1.11(b).
(d) The parameter z2, defined by the equation
z2 

MT D
M5 D min

(1.12)

The value of z2 is obtained from Tables 1.4(a) and 1.4(b).

(e) The area reduction factor (ARF), which depends on the extent of the
area contributing to flow, and the duration of rainfall. Its value is
taken from the graph shown in Fig. 1.12.
Finally, the intensity of rainfall is then given by
I

MT D
D

(1.13)

The following example illustrates the procedure.

Example 1.3: For a certain location in England, M560 min  20 mm, and
r  420%. Determine the intensity of rainfall over an area of 2 km2 for
T  2 years, and D  30 minutes.
Solution: For r  042 and D  30 minutes, we obtain from Fig. 1.11(b)
z1  08
Hence, from Eq. (1.11), the depth of rainfall of the specified duration of
D  30 minutes is
M5 30 min  08( M5 60 min )  08  20  160 mm
From Table 1.4
z2  080
17

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 18

Design of linear drainage systems

20

25

45
10

6
r
100

40
9

35

20

30
25
20
8

10

15

25

10

25

25

25

Kilometres
30

25

20 40 60 80 100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Statute miles

30
30
30
30

30
30

5
35

35

35

30
30

3
30

1
40

30

Irish grid

3
35

40

30
40

35

1
35

35
30

35

35
35

30

National grid 1

Figure 1.10 Ratio of 60-minute to 2-day rainfall of 5-year return period (r).

18

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 19

Flow in drainage systems

10
012

015

018
021
024
027

r  030

3
2

Z1

05

r  030

012

025

010

5 min

10 min 15 min

30 min

1 hr

2 hr

4 hr

6 hr

10 hr

24 hr

48 hr

Duration D

Figure 1.11(a) Relation between z1 and D for different values of r (012 r 03).

6
4

r  030
033
036
039
042
045

3
2

Z1

05 045
r  030

025

010
5 min

10 min 15 min

30 min

1 hr

2 hr

4 hr

6 hr

10 hr

24 hr

48 hr

Duration D

Figure 1.11(b) Relation between z1 and D for 03r045.

19

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 20

Design of linear drainage systems

Table 1.4(a) Relationship between rainfall of arbitrary return period T and rainfall
of return period of 5 years (England and Wales)
M5
(mm)
5
10
15
20
25
30
40
50
75
100
150
200

Ratio (z2) of MT to M5 rainfalls

M1

M2

M3

M4

M5

M10

M20

M50

M100

062
061
062
064
066
068
070
072
076
078
078
078

079
079
080
080
082
083
084
085
087
088
088
088

089
090
090
090
091
091
092
093
093
094
094
094

097
097
097
097
097
097
097
098
098
098
098
098

102
103
103
103
103
103
102
102
102
102
101
101

119
122
124
124
124
122
119
117
114
113
112
111

136
141
144
145
144
142
138
134
144
142
121
119

156
165
170
173
172
170
164
158
147
140
133
130

179
191
199
203
201
197
189
181
164
154
145
140

Table 1.4(b) Relationship between rainfall of arbitrary return period T and rainfall
of return period of 5 years (Scotland and Northern Ireland)
M5
(mm)
5
10
15
20
25
30
40
50
75
100
150
200

Ratio (z2) of MT to M5 rainfalls

M1

M2

M3

M4

M5

M10

M20

M50

M100

067
068
069
070
071
072
074
075
077
078
079
080

082
082
083
084
084
085
086
087
088
088
089
089

091
091
091
092
092
092
093
093
094
094
094
095

098
098
097
097
098
098
098
098
098
098
098
099

102
103
103
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
102
101

117
119
120
119
118
118
117
116
114
113
111
110

135
139
139
139
137
136
134
130
127
124
120
118

162
169
170
166
164
161
156
152
145
140
133
130

186
197
198
193
189
185
177
172
162
154
145
140

When this value is substituted in Eq. (1.12), the result is the depth of
rainfall of the specified duration of D  30 minutes and return period of
2 years. That is,
M 2 30 min  080  160  128 mm
20

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 21

Flow in drainage systems

100
90
80
70
60
50

055
060
065
070

40

075

30
080

085

Area AT (km2)

20
0875 090

092

10
9
8
7
6
5

094
096
098

4
3
2

099
1
5 min

10 min 15 min

30 min

1 hr

2 hr

4 hr

6 hr

10 hr

20 hr

48 hr

Duration D

Figure 1.12 Area reduction factor ARF related to area and duration of rainfall.

For D  30 minutes, and 2 km2 as the area to be drained, the area

reduction factor is about 094, therefore
M 2 30 min  094  128  1203 mm
The average intensity of rainfall is then obtained from Eq. (1.13):
I

1203
(30/60)

 241 mm/hr

1.3.3 The formula for intensity of rainfall applied to gully spacing

The time of concentration used in the design of gully spacing is usually less
than 5 minutes, which is out of the range of application of the Wallingford
procedure. Hence, in such situations, an alternative formula recommended
by the Highway Agency is to be used (see Chapter 9).

References
[1.1] SALTER R.G., Highway Design and Construction, 2nd edn, Macmillan
Education, London, 1988.

21

01 31/7/03 11:06 Page 22

Design of linear drainage systems

[1.2] RUSSAM K.H., The Hydraulic Efficiency and Spacing of British Standard Road
Gullies, Road Research Laboratory report LR 277, 1969.
[1.3] BILHAM E.G.J., The Classification of Heavy Falls of Rain in Short Periods, British
Rainfall 1935, HMSO, London, 1936, 262280.
[1.4] WALLINGFORD H.R. and BARR D.I.H., Tables for the Hydraulic Design of Pipes,
Sewers and Channels, 7th edn, Vol. II, Thomas Telford, London, 1998.
[1.5] A Guide for Engineers to the Design of Storm Sewer Systems, Road Note 35,
Road Research Laboratory, 1963.
[1.6] Design and Analysis of Urban Storm Drainage, The Wallingford Procedure, Vol.
4, The Modified Rational Method, Hydraulic Research, Wallingford, 1981.
[1.7] WHITE J.B., Design of Sewers and Sewage Treatment Works, Edward Arnold,
London, 1970, ch. 4.
[1.8] Rainfall Memorandum No. 4, Meteorological Office, London, 1977.

22