Canadian Water Resources Journal

ISSN: 0701-1784 (Print) 1918-1817 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcwr20

Surface Water Drainage Design Considerations

and Practices

Dieter H. Lindner

To cite this article: Dieter H. Lindner (1987) Surface Water Drainage Design Considerations and
Practices , Canadian Water Resources Journal, 12:3, 67-78, DOI: 10.4296/cwrj1203067

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.4296/cwrj1203067

Published online: 23 Jan 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 608

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcwr20
Surface Water Drainage Design Gonsiderations
and Practicesl
Dieter H. Lindner2

Abstract:
Technical considerations and related issues affecting surface water drainage in rural
Alberta are outlined, Such items as appropriate design flow and frequency, ditch and
channel parameters, and grade and erosion control structures are addressed.
Current design philosophy and practice of rural drainage works relative to flood con-
trol are described. This paper focuses on the need to retain technical integrity, and the
desire to achieve ease and economy of construction, in the context of physical con-
straints and the institutional setting, Emphasis is placed on the design process.

Rdsum6.
Ce texte expose les grandes lignes des consid6rations techniques et des questions
connexes en ce quiconcerne le drainage des eaux de surface dans les 169ions rurales
de I'Alberta. ll traite des 6coulements et des fr6quences th6oriques appropri6es, des
paramdtres des foss6s et des canaux, ainsi que des ouvrages de contrOle de l'in-
clinaison et de l'6rosion des terrains.
ll d6crit la philosophie actuelle de la conception et de la pratique des ouvrages de
drainage en milieu rural, en rapport avec Ie contrdle des crues. Ce texte est ax6 sur le
besoin de maintenir l'int6grit6 de la technique et sur le d6sir de r6aliser des travaux de
construction faciles et 6conomiques au niveau des contraintes physiques et du cadre
institutionnel. ll met I'accent plus particulidrement sur le processus de conception.

Introduction Statues of Alberta (R.S.A.) of which the Water

Urban and rural runoff is often flashy
and
damaging and as such of interest to many par-
ties; the general public, owners of land, buildings,
and facilities, agencies, associations, govern-
ment departments, and the professional en-
gaged in the management of water and drainage
in particular, Drainage basically entails the con-
veyance of excess water to achieve certain
desirable oblectives, This paper addresses
issues of draining surface water in rural areas
and summarizes current practices in Alberta,
with emphasis placed on the design process.
lnstitutional Setting
All surface water drainage activities in Alberta
are mandated by legislation in the Revised
Resources Act (1980) and the Drainage Dis-
tricts Act (1980) are the most important.
These Acts, in the broad context of social and
economic oblectives, endeavour to facilitate
economic development and environmental
protection for the "common good." Endorsed
are principles of multi-purpose development,
initiation at the local level, avoidance of indis-
criminate drainage of permanent water bodies,
and the protection of downstream landowners
against improper drainage by others.
The Water Resources Act provides for licens-
ing and orderly development of water resour-
ces. lt also contains certain prohibitions and
provisions to order restoration,
The Drainage Districts Act enables groups to

1 The paper was presented to the Annual Conference of the Canadian Water Resources Association,
Alberta Branch with the Soil Conservation Society of America, Alberta Chapter, Edmonton, October
23-25, 1985.
2 Head, Hydraulics Sectron, Design and Construction Division, Alberta Environment,9820 - 106
Street. Edmonton. Alberta T5K 2J6.

Revue canadienne des ressources hvdnques /Yol.12, No. 3, 1987 67

drain lands. Nine formal drainage districts exist
in Alberta which operate a network of drainage
works. These formal districts levy taxes and
also are eligible to receive government grants.
For many years local authorities cost-shared
drainage prolects with government on a 25:75
basis under the Alberta Water Management
and Erosion Control Program (1980). This ratio
is now 14:86, equal to cost-sharing in the irriga-
tion sector. Similarly under the same program
certain drainage projects are fully funded by the
province, once designated as a "provincial
nrn ra.t " At tha anrl nf fha cnanlrr 'm lha
^fhar
farm water management is supported by Alberta
Environment by providing free technical assist-
ance to landowners but no capitai funding.
Direct financial contributions toward cost-
shared projects in recent years have ranged
from $3 to $6 million, while "provincial pro1ects"
entailed annual expenditures of $5 to $6 rniilion.
Given the need for drainage and the level of
expenditures entailed, it follows that consider-
able attentlon should be paid to implementa-
tion. An overview of the legislation and program
framework for drainage in Alberta was pre-
sented in greater detail by Tupper (1985), The
institutional setting under which drainage works
are implemented is depicted on Figure 1.
Basic lssues and Considerations
Drainage of surface water is normally under-
taken to achieve certarn desirable oblectives,
includ ng meeting certain functional require-
ments. technical adequacy, practicaliry, econ-
orry, public sa'ety, and "publ'c good.' All o'
these require the designer's attention in order to
desrgn and build drainage prolects that perform
adequately without compromising technical
integrity or accepting r:ndue risk. These basrc
project oblectives are shown on Figure 2,
Functional Requirements
Functional requirements are generally estab-
lished during prolect initiation in response to
perceived or identified oroblems at the local
level. For example, the Environment Con-
servation Authority (1976) documented ero-
sion and drainage concerns for north-western
Alberta. During the inrtiation stage, certain
expectations and possible solutions are ad-
vanced. Usually the person af'ected has a clearer perception of broad water management
fairly good appreciation of the "problem" and
some ideas as to suitable solutions. The
technicaland economic parameters are much
less well understood and defined at that staqe
of the process,
6B Canadian Water Resources Journal /Yol, 12, No. 3, 1987
Technical lntegnty
The design engineer must comply with all legal
and regulatory requirements. He must be con-
versant with applicable technical codes and
standards and apply them carefully and mettcu-
lously to his prolect. For example, structural
design is governed by the Alberta Building
Code and National Building Code, Basically
design criteria is prescribed and must be
adhered to, However, hydraulic design and
geotechnical desrgn codes generally do not
exist. Rather, the professional engineer applies
engineering principles and established prac-
tices to achieve satisfactory results. He also
slays abreast or past successes and'ailures.
new prolects and innovations to obtain an
improved product,
Practicailty and Economy
The solution to the problem obviously should
be both practical and economical. A practical
solution largely relies on tried and proven
materials, methods and approaches having
regard for unique situations and available
resources. when properly integrated, the
economics normally fcllow, Economics should
focus on both initial capital cost and subse-
ouent operation and maintenance costs over
the life of the prolect.
Safety and "Pubilc Good"
Gene.ally two distinct components are recog-
nized. The first relates to hazards and the need
to protect the public adequately. The second
deals with failure (destruction) of the investment
and all attendant economic losses and implica-
tions. Both recognize a degree of risk regard-
less of the actual decision made. This risk
decision has moral, social, ethical, economic
and legal dimensions and implications,
The "public good" component is the fun-
damental driving mechanism which lustifies the
infrastructure and the institutional arrangements
which facilitate drainage works,
Technical Considerations
The desrgner endeavors to integrate all these
factors nto a cohes've package in order to
ultimately arrive at a well balanced, practical
and economic drainage pro.ect. As such, a
issues of drainage works is desirable, An under-
standing of related types or projects, such as
flood controland erosion control, is also benefi-
cial. These basic project parameters are shown
on Figure 3.
Design Flow Frequency
Each project is designed to accommodate a
particular flow, having a certain return period or
frequency. The design flow will be equaled or
exceeded a certain number of times during the
project life. As such, risk is implicit in the selec-
tion of the design flood frequency.
Based on the expected life of the works and
the selection of the design frequency, an assess-
ment of risk can be made. This methodology is
well established and need not be further des-
cribed. The fundamental point is that a project
properly designed consistent with this approach
entails a defrnable risk. The degree of .isk
appropriate for partrcular pro.ects is a .natter o'
judgement. supplemented by analysis and
experience.
Design Flow Values
A further point of importance is the way flow is
measured or de'ined. Frequently either ",nstan-
taneous peak" values or "mean daily flows" are
provided, This is largely a function of the avail-
able data base. Desrgn engineers wit'r Alberta
Environment obtain these hydrolog c estimates
from the Technical Services Division of the
department while designers outsrde of the
.t^ t^r
alAn2rimAnt
uuPsr tr rrur anner,li hrrrlrnlaa
ryululv\Jr)tJ ul
design values.
Drainage versus Flood Control
One or the fundamental questions to be an-
swered relates to prolect classification. There is
no one universally accepted notion as to what
constitutes a "flood control" on the one hand
and "drainage" on the other. The distinctions
are not definitive and no formal or regulatory
provisions are in place in Alberta to say where
drainage ends and flood control begins, Simi-
larly, erosron control is closely linked with water
management and in many instances is an
integral and significant part of both flood control
and drainage type projects.
Drainage projects occupy a partrcurar niche
in the broad field of water resource manage-
ment in the rural setting. The issue is to define
where and how drainage works should be
implemented having regard for basic principles
and the efficient and timelv use of financial
resources,
Role of Economic Analysrs
Many drainage projects in Alberta and else-
where have been sublected to benefit-cost
studies. Benefit-cost ratios typically fall 1n the
range from 0.1 to 0.3. For example, economic
studies prepared by Alberta Agriculture (1970)
Revue canadtenne des ressources hvdrrques
and Alberta Environment (198.1) illustrate the
type of analysis done. Application of conven-
tional economic theory would often preclude
implementation of drainage prolects. However,
a considerable body o' opinion does not
recognize economic analysis as the approp-
riate decision tool, but rather favours the subject-
rve social approach. Further rigorous economic
analysis and refinement of techniques would
appear to add little to the dectsion-making
process.
Local Input
The need for local initiation of drainage prolects
is mandated by the legislation, expressed in the
guiding principles, r'eflected by the regulations
and fully endorsed by the department. Evidently
local input should not end with prolect initiation,
but should flow freely throughout the design
process. Local input during the design process
leading to project implementation is impera-
tive.
Drainage Channel Design
The single most important technical feature of
nearly all drainage projects is a stable drainage
channel. Several agencies have published
DUU''
^',^h comprehensive gr,rdes such as the U.S, Depart-
ment of Agriculture (1973) US Army Corps of
Engineers (1974), The Roads and Transporta-
tion Assocration of Canada (1982), and the U.S.
Geological Survey (1984). These references
may be readily consulted and allow the design
engineer to arr,ve at an acceptable design.
Basic Parameters
Regardless of the design flow and frequency
selected, all channels are designed to be stable
r^, +h^ aA rrl+arln Tho nhannal
'Ul lllg >VlUltVU
^^l^^. UllfvllA, rrrur nara-
Pqrq
meters which must be established are the chan-
nel base wrdth (b), the channel slope (So) and
the normal depth (dn), having regard for the
nature of the soils, topography, existing drainage
patterns, existing constraints, to some extent
local preferences and evidently costs. Stability
describes the condition in which a channel will
not be sublect to erosion, degradation or sedi-
mentation when the selected design flow is
conveyed. lt follows that when runoff exceeds
the design flow, some degree of instability will
manifest itself,
Channel Hydraulics
The hydraulics of drainage channels are largely
defined by the well known continulty equation
and Manning's formula. From these equations
the importance of the shape of the channel
/ Vol. 12, No. 3, 1 987 69
cross section and the gradient is evident. The
section must be large enough to accommodate
the flow, deep enough to collect excess water,
have a proper width to depth relationship to
remain stable, and to have a appropriate chan-
nel slope to convey water safely.
TypicalValues
The following represent typical values for trape-
zoidal channels in erosive soils subiect to sub-
critical flow:
t tr)anrh /,,{ \ Minimum : 0.3 m
Maximum : 2.0 m
2 Width (b) Minimum : 1 m
Maximum : 15 m
3, Average width/depth ratio ranging from 4 to
B. Most frequently this ratio is too low,
4. SideSlopes: MaximumislV:3Hformain-
tenance. Ftatter for geo_
technrcal reasons.
5 (lhannol Slnnoc Steaq 0.001
Fiat - 0.0003
6. Manning's Roughness Coefficient:
0.025 (n < 0,030,
These typical channel values represent the ini-
tial construction condition and a reasonably
well marntarned channel in the longer term res-
pectively. lt should be recognized that newly
excavated channels may initially have stilllower
values, while poorly maintained channels may
reach a substantially higher roughness, reflect-
ing erosion, sloughing and vegetative growth.
Furthermore, tailwater computations for con-
ventional hydraulic lumptype energy dissipators
are typically computed for both n - 0.030 and
n - 0.045 for the establishment of appropriate
structure elevations.
7. Mean Velocrties: Minrmum greater than
0.3 m/s
Maximum is less than
0.9 m/s.
Maximum mean velocities should not exceed
0,9 m/s unless the competence of the material
to withstand greater velocities has been estab-
lished by careful analysis or proven under
actual field conditions. A special word of cau-
tion is required as some "designers" erroneously
use values as V - 0.9 m/s as the "allowable
velocity" under all circumstances. Such an
approach is overly simplistic. Firstly, this average
velocity is lust "average' with the maximum
70 Canadian Water Resources Journal /Vol. 12, No, 3, 1987
velocity often being 30 to 50 percent greater.
Secondly localized conditions such as curves,
bends and obstructions may give rise to local-
tzed scour.
Use of the "permissible mean velocity"
approach is the initial tool for analysis, Con-
siderable judgement is required in applying text
book values. Silty sandy materials are much
more prone to attack and as such warrant sub-
stantially lower velocities, typically in the 0.6 to
0.7 metres per second range.
On the other hand, cohesive soils also warrant
careful consideration. Textbook values, such as
one finds for clays, permitting velocities of 1.5 to
2.0 metres per second have proven excessive
in Alberta, Such clay materials, while usually sta-
ble initially, tend to lose their cohesion (and
chemical bond) on the exposed surface, prob-
ably due to the weathering process and/or
freeze-thaw cycles. Invariably these have led to
breakdown, scour, erosion and instability entail-
ing subsequent repair and rehabilitation.
A good means of checking the channel
design is to compute the tractive force at
incipient scour to ensure the applicable values
for the soil are not exceeded. Sediment loading,
usually present in drainage ditches, increases
permissible velocities and tractive force values
thereby adding to stability.
Nonetheless, the allowable average velocity
approach is a relatively simple and practical
tool for arriving at suitable channel design tn
typical drainage projects, provided sound engin-
eering ludgement, preferably based on exper-
ience in the vicinity of the prolect, is applied
during analysis and design, lt is not the only tool.
Deviation from the 0.9 to 1.0 metres per second
values should be explained and/or rationalized
when design reports are prepared.
It should be noted that most drainage pro-
jects are designed to maintain uniform flow.
Usually this approach is sufficiently accurate for
analysis. The computation of the hydraulic
grade line using the "standard step method"
described by Chow (1959) for gradually varied
flow is initially not warranted during design but
can be readily computed using the HEC-2
computer program of the U.S, Army Corps of
Engineers (1981). Use of regime theory, favoured
by many for canal design, has no application in
rlrcinaaa nrnionic
Other Factors Affecting Design
Existing utilities, facilities, road and railway
crossings may impose technical constraints
and significantly affect costs.
The design engineer must also be cognizant
of the existing channel alignment relative to the
landowner's desire to achieve better land use
by rerouting of the channel. The farmer's wish
to straighten and confine ditches to margins of
his field may give rise to excessive gradients
and/or deep excavation. While such "require-
ments" have obvious merits from the agri-
cultural perspective, they often are a d rect
a2rqo nf hrn har annci/r ralinn a^ctc l-.)rranilrr
s, vvru
related is right-of-way acquisition. All too often
easements stipulate certain terms to be met
during prolect construction which are benefi-
cial to the landowner but non-essentia{ to
drainage. Direct land costs usually are minor
as in Alberta the local authority rs generally
required to secure ands in accordance with
the cost-sharing agreement.
One of the rmportant {actors af'ectrng costs
is the disposal of excavated material. The least
costly method is to spoil the material next to
the newly excavated channel or in adlacent
natural depressions. lf a new channel is dug,
reclaiming the old channel by backfilling with
borrow rather than spoil, can substantially add
to the costs, Furthermore farmers usually pre-
fer extensive "landscaping' o'adjacent lands
at the time the drainage prolect is constructed.
Initial stripping of topsorl and subsequent rop-
soiling and seeding after construction may
add sign;ficantly to prolect costs (Lindner
1984). Provisions must also be made for
local rnflows.
In recent years the rmportance of regular
p.eventive maintenance has been recognized.
Accordingly access roads, fences. gates and
additional crossings may need to be incor-
porated. While these may be legitimate require-
ments they also entail signrficant costs.
Gradient Control Structures
Some drainage channels require gradient control
structures to ensure long-term stability. Over the
years a great many structures have been built in
Alberta using a variety of construction materials
on flood control, drainage and erosion control
prolects.
Function
Since many channels traverse relatively steep
topography, drainage channels natural or
excavated, often have excessive gradients.
Water collected, gains too much energy leading
to scour and erosion within the project area and
deposition and silting in downstream reaches. A
gradient control structure is introduced to dissi-
n2ia ihic aY.aea ,.,,
Linaiin
-,,- or
,,rergy.
Revue canadienne des ressources hvdriques /Vol.12, No.3, 1987
LOCaUOn
These control structures must be incorporated
at locations where channel gradients are
excessive for the soils or lining provided, unless
regular annual maintenance to deal with result-
ing problems is a viable economic option,
Ilnnhce keel nrncrpqqirrc cfosion in the context
of drainage projects can not be tolerated.
Hydrauilc Jump and Standard Basrns
Undoubtedly the most effective way of dispos-
ing of excess energy is by means of the hydraul-
ic jump. The hydraulic jump has been studied
extensrvery and classified according to the
ope'atrve Froude Number.
In most drainage projects, simplified versions
of the Type lll basin developed by Smith (1985)
and the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administra-
tion (PFRA) achieve satistactory results.
Crest Design
The crest of each control structure serves to
maintain suitable upstream tlow conditions and
to admit water uniformly for energy dissipation
in a controlled manner,
Standard textbooks and references may be
consulted for classical values of crest coef-
fin onrc Trrninal rrelrroc erc
Concrete weir for vertical drop C - 1.83
Sheetpile weir for vertical drop C - 1.77
Tvnie:l hrna.l-r:reqle.i weir C 1.71
More complex shapes with higher coef-
ficients have little application in drainage struc-
tu res.
Concrete Slructures
Nearly all concrete grade control structures
relying on hydraulic jump basins can be readily
designed, as described by Peterka (1964), or
somewhat simplified versions, advocated by
Smith (1985). Both are used extensively by
PFRA on the Canadian prairie, Structures are
quite maintenance free with a design service life
of 50 years. AII basin lengths are defined in
terrns or a ratio to the sequent depth of the hy-
draulic jump, typically ranging from 3 to 6.
Qtoai Qhaat Dilo f)ranc
In the appropriate Froude Number range, verti-
cal drop structures are frequently built by driving
a steel sheet pile wall across the channel and
providing a gabion basin with downstream rock
riprap armour. These structures approximate
the classical concrete vertical drops with stan-
dard basin but are trapezoidal in cross-section.
71
Th^ ^-m^
| | ru Jar ur I d;^^h^'^^
rrv ,Ini+ .^n rnvoLr
urJur rdrvv ovv r.h I <
J rread
uogu f^r
rv
hydraulrc .Jmp determi.latior. Drop heig'rts
generally do not exceed 2 m in order to limit
sheet oile oenetration and associated costs.
These structures are relatively maintenance
free with a prolected service life of 35 years.
Timber sheet piling is not longer used because
of driving difficulty, fire susceptibility and cost.
Similarly all piling is now driven to grade rather
than buried and backfilled.
Gabion Drops
During the last decade, Alberta Environment
has developed standard gabion drop struc-
tures which have found wide aoolication in
many parts of north-west Alberta on drainage,
flood control and erosion control prolects. Over
100 such structures have been built to date.
The design was pioneered and standardized
by Alberta Environment (1982) The design has
the benefit of hydraulic model testing described
by Mah (.1981), field monitoring of a prototype
during spring runoff and a systematic follow up
inspection program descrbed by Sharp (1985),
C*ute slopes are typically lV:6H. Various
fa2tr rac and 2anaatc ral2iad tn daqrnn end
.^^l;^-t,^^ vr I hn,,a
avFriruar rln r h^a^
I 14vY or>u rhlichad
uEsr I puu'rrr nra-
ruu vre
^r
viously by Lindner (1983, 1984). These struc-
lr rraa a ra ahnr ri ?6 nar^ani laee an ctl\/ thtn
conventional concrete construction, reasonably
maintenance free with a projected service life oI
25 years.
Rock Chute Drops
Thic lrrno nf clrr rnir rro nnncicic nf adonrtetalrr-
sized rocks piaced on a flat chute slope of suffi-
cient width to limit unit discharges. The design
must be carefully done to ensure that these
three basic parameters are properly balanced
for the design flow. Typically the available size
of rock governs the slope and w dth of the struc-
ture. Medium rock sizes of 500 mm, slopes at
lV:BH and widths to lO m have been used,
The ma.or weakness of tl.is type of structure
is inherent rn the use of rocks. When the design
discharge is exceeded some of the rock will be
transported down the chute, progressive failure
is initiated, and concluded by complete collapse.
Repair o[ the erosion site and complete re-
building or replacement are a realistic scenario.
These structures are attractive because of ini-
tial low cost especially if a local source of suit-
able rock is readily available. Some annual
maintenance is indicated with major re-building
anticipated each time the design flow is signifi-
cantly exceeded. This greater inherent risk o1
failure must be recognized. Expected project
72 Canadian Water Resources Journal /Yol. 12, No. 3, 1987
life is uncertain but may average 15 to 20
years.
Pipe Drops
Pipe drop structures were developed for specific
apprcarior-s, mar y in tl'e inigatron sector. and have
relatively poor f low characteristics when design
flows are exceeded. They are also frequently
subject to icing during warm spells or chinook
conditrons common io southern Alberta. Accor-
dingly, pipe drops have found few applications
in surface water drainage projects in Alberta,
Other Structure lnnovattons
Synthetic materials as underlays to replace
granular filter systems and the use of manufac-
tured interlocking block systems hold promise
and will probably find wider application in the
future. Similarly the use of plant material in con-
junction with the traditional inert construction
materials of concrete, rock and steel is being
pioneered in Europe as reported by Schuler
(1971). Flaxstraw drops developed in Sas-
katchewan as described by Pelech (1979) and
prefabricated structures used in irrigation so far
have seen little application in surface water
dra,nage prorects in Alberta. These develop-
ments are being monitored to establish their
practicability and performance with a view to
ascertaining their potential.
Structure Selectron
Normally all these structure types can be ade-
quately designed with a fair degree of certainty
that they will withstand the forces exerted by
runoff. The technical integrity, public safety and
the functional oblectives are usually met al-
though each type of structure has certain uni-
nrro
Yvv
:ttrihr
sr!, rleq The seleCtton O' the mOSt
appropriate type for grade control in drainage
prolects is largely a question of economy. The
cost is greatly influenced by site conditions and
local availability of construction materials. Tim-
ing of construction also is very important as
weather and climate favour conventional con-
struction during summer and fall, Similarly the
users' expectations as to capital cost, opera-
tion and maintenance, operating characteris-
tics and projected service life influence the
selection made in the context of prevailing cost-
sharing policies.
Culverts
Nearly all drarnage prolects use culverts In one
form or another. On most prolects they entail
significant costs and are essential ingredients.
Although they are a simple structure, they often
do not receive sufficient attention durino
desrgn.
F u ncti o n al R e q u i re me nts
The culvert is basically an artificial conduit in a
water course to convey flow and to provide
farm access. Culverts can also provide a de-
nraa nf nrr^a nnntrnl
Attributes of a Good Culvert
A great deal of information has been published
on culvert design, Perhaps the best overall sum-
mary has been provided by an ASCE Task
Force on Hydraulics of Culverts. lts 13 state-
ments have been adopted as the guiding
principles for culverts designed by Alberta
Environment.
Culvert Hydraulics
Analysis of culverts can be complex. In its sim-
plest form the culvert represents a constriction
in the channel which causes certain loss of hy-
draulic head. The total loss is the summation of
the entrance loss, the frictional loss in the con-
duit plus the outlet loss, all expressed as a func-
tion of the velocity head in the culvert barrel,
The entrance loss reflects the type of en-
trance employed with typical loss coefficients
being 0.5, 0.7, 0.9 for headwall, metered and
projecting configurations respectively. Similar
values apply to concrete pipe.
The frictional loss may be computed by
assigning the appropriate Manning roughness
coefticient "n" as follows:
n: 0.024 CSP
: ties to about 4 m/s. Greater velocities require
n 0,026 SPCSP
n: 0,014 Concrete
The newer helical CSPs exhibit somewhat
lower relative roughness due to the helical flow
and the absence of bolts may be analysed as
outlined by Smith (1985).
Generally the culvert is placed on a slope to
permit drainage but not so steep as to cause
undue acceleration of the flow within the oioe.
Normally the culvert rs designed to avoid pond-
ing at the inlet during design discharge con-
ditions and flow almost full over its entire
length.
Design Aids
Trade associations such as American lron and
Steel Institute (1984) and the Portland Cement
Association (1964) have published design aids
and monographs which facilitate quick analysis
and design of culverts for most situations, Once
the designer understands the theory of culvert
Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques /Vol.12, No, 3, 1987
hydraulics and has gained some hands-on
experience the use of these comprehensive
design aids is invaluable.
It is important that the designer check both
inlet and outlet controlto ensure that the culvert
functions adequately, In most practical situations
there is no reliable way of ascertaining which
condition prevails. Inlet treatment is quite impor-
tant and should be tailored to the project. Pond-
ing should be avoided, Submergence generally
should be avoided to minimize desiqn com-
plications.
Culvert Material
Alberta Environment uses primarily CSP culverts
because of ease of handling and cost. Con-
crete culverts initially tend to be about 25 per-
cent more costly and pose transportation and
handling difficulties. CSPs exhibit flexibility while
concrete pipes are relatively rigid. These attri-
butes may be advantageous in a particular
application, However mixing of materials is
avoided.
Timber box culverts and woodstave oioes
are no longer used by Alberta Environment
given the relative superiority of both CSPs and
concrete pipe. The expected servrce life of
CSPs is about 20 years while concrete pipes
should be serviceable for 40 to 50 years.
Culverts for Grade Control
The basic principles of good culvert design still
apply except additional special attention is
given to the culvert outlet. Typically rock riprap
protection can be orovided for terminal veloci-
more elaborate provisions such as gabion mats
or full terminal structures. The two basic
aooroaches available for erosion control are
either reduce velocities or find ways to resist
them. A carefully prepared design seeks to
minimize the velocity increase and also pro-
vides adequate downstream armour. The extent
of downstream rock protection is set equal to
three oioe diameter for each one metre of
velocity reduction sought. The appropriate
median rock size is determined from empirical
expressron based on outlet velocity.
Culvert Safety
Given the culvert's limited increase in flow
capacity as the head increases, overtopping is
a realistic possibility. For this reason the design
usually limits the head build-up at the inlet, This
is done by providing a swale or low point where
the water can escape without causing a great
deal of damage. In this manner washout and
73
n,ninn failrrres o' ihc crlVert inStallatlon are
avoided.
Culvert Design Standard
Given the frequent and extensive use of CSPs in
drainage projects a separate design standard
has been adopted by Alberta Environment
(1982) for typical farm and road crossings, Pro-
vided the instructions are adhered to a reason-
able culvert design can be quickly prepared for
most drainage projects.
Other Agencies
Other agencies such as railways, highway
departments and municipal authorities may
have more stringent requirements which need
to be recognized. For example, while the drain-
age project may be designed throughout for the
1O-year period flood, Alberta Transportation
may require the culvert under their secondary
highway to be designed for the 25-year flow.
lndividual consultation and soecific desiqn is
requlreo.
lmplementation Process
Surface water drainage projects can be suitably
and consistently implemented by adhering to
the basic criteria outlined. The selection of the
appropriate design flow and frequency and
following the design process indicated should
ensure that the basic requirements and fune-
tional objectives are met.
Design Hydrology
Most drainage projects are designed to func-
tion adequately for flows up to a certain return
period. When flows of rarer frequency occur, the
drainage work functions less well and indeed
may fall as a whole or in part, In dra nage pro-
jects, this design frequency is typically selected
on the basis of experience and ludgement with
5-year to 10-year return periods being common
values used in Alberta,
Occasionally, a frequency as low as 2.3
years, presumably equal to the "dominant dis-
charge,'is used, This results in a very Iow level
of develooment and limited effectiveness. The
entire notion of "dominant discharge" does not
enjoy universal acceptance and as such its use
as a drainage criterion is dubious,
On the other hand, the 2)-year return period
for design of drainage works is difficult to sus-
tain, With intensive development higher expen-
ditures usually are a barrier even if greater
benefits are achieved.
The second hydrologic input is largely gov-
erned by the available data base. Typically,
Canadian Water Besources Journal /Yol. 12, No, 3, 1987
instantaneous peak flow values are provided
for the various frequencies. These are con-
sidered to be reasonable values to be used dur-
ing the preliminary design. Subsequently, once
the drainage project has been better defined,
and an alternative has been selected for final
design, the preliminary hydrologic estimates
should be confirmed, Hydrographs should be
developed for the detailed design. This will
allow consideration of storage effects and
associated flood routing. Alternatively, the use
of mean daily flows may be appropriate, if these
effects can not be firmly established or are
rgnoreo.
Design Process
The design process is initiated by the local
authority and implementation ceases when the
completed drainage project is turned over to
the local authority. In between the problems are
defined, alternatives designed and costed, and
solutions advanced in several discrete steps.
The department typically conducts two types of
design studies; feasibility design (Level l) and
final design (Level ll), Occasionally conceptual
designs are also prepared. The salient features
and rationale of each are described in subse-
quent seclons.
('nnoonlt tel f)ocinn
vvIvvHruu,
This level of investigation is largely an "office
study" drawing on readily available information
without a great deal of field work. Problems are
identified and possible solutions explored,
largely relying on experience and ludgement in
the analysis, The basic purpose of the "concep-
tual design" is to explore conceptual solutions,
provide order-of-magnitude estimates, and to
ascertarn whether or not, and what kind of
follow-up investigation may be indicated, The
project area is usually visited by the design
engineer during the course of the investigation
to develop an appreciation of the project, gain
familiarity and to note special or unique features.
Cost estimates target f 35 percent. Concep-
tual designs, if done at all, are more likely pre-
pared on complex large-scaled drainage
prolects, or when quick but cursory evaluation
is desired.
Feasibiilty Design (Level I)
This type of study is the primary decision-
making tool to ascertain technical feasibility
and associated costs. Once initiated at the local
level. appropriate field surveys are conducted
and drilling and laboratory testing of soils as
done, A site inspection is normally conducted
early during the design and subsequent site
visit(s) to access specific issues are required.
Typically the channel cross-sections are taken
every 40 m to 100 m and all structure sites are
drilled and logged. Subsequently preliminary
hydraulic, geotechnical and structural designs
are prepared. The channel, grade control struc-
ture and culverts are designed. Alternative
solutions for the S-year and 1O-year return
penod are conceived, developed, analysed
and costed with appropriate conclusions and
recommendations made.
Special issues such as land acquisitron,
safety and environmental impacts are identified
and also addressed in the Level I design report.
Cost estimates are to + 20 percent. This techni-
cal report and the merits (benefits) assigned to
the project determine whether implementation
is appropriate. An affirmative decision will also
target the preferred alternative for frnal design,
budgeting and cost-sharing. A negative deci-
sion often leads to a reconsideration of the oroi-
ect in light of findings, perhaps a change in
scope, and probably resurrection at a later
oate.
Final Design (Level ll)
During final design, the selected alternative as
identified during the Level I study and supple-
mentary instruction if any, are carefully reviewed,
Final design thoroughly investigates all aspects
of all project components. Site inspection by the
desrgn engineer of the entire prolect area is
considered essential with special attention paid
to specifrc problem areas. Follow-up inspec-
tions will be done as required to achieve
solutions to outstanding issues, Additional sur-
veys, drilling and laboratory analysis will be
undertaken as required. Typically channel cross
sections are taken at 20 m intervals and all
structure sites, and potential material sources
are Investigated.
Detailed hydraulic, geotechnical and structur-
al designs are prepared for the channel, grade
control structures, culverts and related works.
Design drawrngs and written specifications are
prepared and compiled as a formal tender pack-
age. A confrdential "engineers estimate' geared
to be within 1 0 percent of the low bid is prepared
to facilitate evaluation of the bids rece ved, Upon
implementation "as-built" drawings or "as-
constructed" reports are prepared as illustrated
by Alberta Environment (1982).
Usual Design Approach
Most drainage projects are prepared by doing
investigations that comply with the preliminary
Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques /Yol.12, No. 3, 1987
design (Level l), including the essential ele-
mentR n{ thtr nnn.pntr r:lizatiOn. The Level I
Design Report is the basic decision-making
tool. This report defines the purpose, docu-
ments the data, investigates alternative solutions,
establishes and reaches certain conclusions, In
other words, the technical integrity of the solu-
tion and cost thereof are established. Informed
decision can then logrcally follow.
The second step of design, assuming an af-
firmative decision, is to prepare a frnal design
(Level ll) of the selected alternative for the proj-
ect in question. The design approach is consis-
tent with the concept of the preliminary design
:nrl loadq fn 2.^mnlata tan.lar aaa?eaa
facilitating subsequent construction.
Closure
Most surface water drainage prolects in rural
Alberta follow these two discrete steps in the
design process. As such it provides for local
input, reasonable project documentation, tech-
nical analysis and feedback, to achieve func-
tional and cost effective solutions to drainaqe
prooiems.
References
Alberta Agriculture. 1 970. "The Namepi-Kennedy
Creek Project, An Economic Feasibility Study."
Alberta Environment, 1980, "Alberta Water
Management and Erosion Control Program."
Alberta Environment. 98 1 . "An Economic Study
'1
of the Namepi-Kennedy Drainage Project,"
Alberta Environment. l982. "Construction Report
No, 1 Namepi-Kennedy Creek Project,1977-
78 to 1981-82."
Alberta Environment. 1980. "Drainaqe Districts
Act." fr S.A., Chapter D-39
Alberta Environment, 1980. "Water Resources
Act," R.S.A., Chapter W-5.
American lron and Steel Institute. 1984. "Hand-
book of Steel Drainage and Highway Construc-
tion Products." Canadian Edition. W,P. Reymen
Associates, Inc.. New York.
Environment Conservation Authority. 1976.
"Erosion of Land in Northwestern Alberta."
Report and Recommendations.
Lindner, D,H. 1983, "Application and Design
Practise of Gabion Structures in Alberta." Cana-
dtan Society for Civil Engineering. Proceedings
of 6th Canadian Hydrotechnrcal Conference,
Vol. 1. Ottawa. p, 55.
75
Lrndner, D.H. 1984, "Design and Construction of
the Namepi-Kennedy Drainage Pro.ect in
Alberta," Proceedtngs of the Third Annual
Western Provrncial Conference. Winnipeg. p,
379.
Mah, J. 198'1. "Hydraulic Model Studies of Ber-
wyn Stepped Drop." University of Alberta,
Faculty of Graduate Studies, M. Eng. Thesis.
Pelech, Harry.1979. "Development and Use of
a Flexible Grade Control Structure." Canadian
Society of Agricultural Engineering, Summer
Meeting, Winnipeg. Paper 79-2014.
Peterka, A.J. 1964. "Hydraulic Design of Stilling
Basins and Energy Dissipators." U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, Engineering Monograph No. 25.
Portland Cement Association. 1964, "Hand-
book of Concrete Culvert Pipe Hydraulics."
Roads and Transportation Association of
Canada. 1982. Drainage Manual,Vol. 1.
Schluter, Uwe. 1971. "Lebensbau" (Live con-
struction), Verlag Georg Callwey, Munchen,
(Munich).
Smith, C.D. 1985. "Hydraulic Structures." Uni-
versity of Saskatchewan.
Sharp. R, 1985. "Gabion Structure Evaluation."
Canadian Water Resources Association, Alberta
Branch and Soil Conservation Society of America,
Alberta Chapter, Annual Conference, Urban
and Rural Runoff Management, Edmonton.
Tupper, D.A. I985. "Overview of Legislative and
Program Framework for Drainage in Alberta "
Proceedings of the Third Annual Western Pro-
vincial Conference. Winnipeg. p, 25.
United States Army, Corps of Engineers. 1970.
"Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels "
Washington, D.C,
United States Army, Corps of Engineers l98l.
"HEC-2 Water-surface Profiles, Users Manual."
Computer Program 723-X6-L2O2A, Davis, Cali-
fornia,
United States Bureau of Reclamation 1974.
"Design of Small Canal Structures." Denver,
Colorado.
United States Department of Agriculture. 1977.
Soils Conservation Service. "Design of Open
Channels." Technical Release No. 25.
United States Department of Agriculture. 1973.
Soils Conservation Service. "Drainage of Agri-
cultural Land."
United States Geological Survey. 1984. "Com-
putation of Water-surface Profiles in Open
Channels." U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C,

FIGURE 1: Institutional Setting

PRI NCIP LES

BALANCE : DEv€LOPMENT
TO ENVIRONMENIAL
PROTECTION
ACTIVITIES
I . MULTI - PURPOSE PROJECTS
LEGISLATION 2. LOUL INITIATIVE l3io5
cosr SHARtNG : Mirt /Yr
WAfER RESOURCES ACT 3. PROTECT PERMANENf WATER
DRAINAGE DISTRIC'S ACT 4. AVOIO INOISCAIMINATE ORAINAGE PROVINCIAL PROJECTS :

ENVIRONMENT ACT 5lo 6 Mill-/Y.

CLEAN WATER ACT FU NCT ION ON.FASM ORAINAGE :

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

- LICENCING
- COST SHARING
'
- " PnovrNcraL PRoJECTS
- TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
- REGULATTONS

76 Canadian Water Resources Journal /Yol. 12, No 3, 1987

FIGURE 2: Basic Obiectives FIGURE 3: Proiect Parameters

1, FUNCTIONALREOUIREI'IENTS I. DESIGI'I FLOl.l FREOUEHCY

TECHNICAL INTEGRITY L DESIGN FLOH VALttrS

PRACTICALITY & ECONOI'IY DRAII{AGE VS. FLOOD CONTROI,

l{, PUBLIC SAFETY & PUBLIC GOOD

q, ROLE OF ECONOI{IC ANALYSIS

q
LOCAL INPUT

FIGI RE 4: Technlcal Prrarrctors

.L CHANITTL D€SIGN

- BASIC PAPSfTETERS

- CHAi{I{EL HYDRAULICS
- TYPICAL VALIES
- OTI{ER FACTORS

6RASE CO{T ROT STRUCTURES

- FUflCTI0{
- HYDflAI}LIC JIJTP
. TYPICAL CO*CRETE STruCTUftTS
- STEEL SIi€ETPILE Dft:OPS

- GABIffi DROPS

- ROCK CHUTE DfrOPS

- PIPI DROPS

- iltN0vATltr{s
- STflUCTUflT SELECTIOII

E CULVERTS

- ATTRIBUTES

- CULVERT HYDRAULICS

- DESIGI1 AIDS

- I{ATERIALS

- GRADE COI{IROL

- SAFETY

Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques /Yol'12, No. 3, 1987

 z z>-
OJF
ts F
U JU =
z> zt-F
UU <oo
= HU z UF
J O
Lrn G>=
J
; Jfu@c
z = (/)l<oc
I E
za
a o
U z <.4
E<
U
U UO -i
E U
@t
FH
Lf- z@F
z.< F uza
ztn u EOUI
I t^l
<Hr a < d
I z o<-
OOE
F
=.u>t
HLrJl Z O - (ltHU E
LFI U H U GZUU <LE
EF z UHZ
UH
oQ u o=o
z<u(, =oF
O
<o
tJJ<
U
G
uctz
t-a u) uJ

U
OU
FU
<F
zz
HE
ZO
gU ZL
UJ

@
<9@
z
HF
za@a
FI OUOZ q
>-dr '-eO O
F
<OJ U U >- O F c
zut u > E z < U
J - < O A
-El z
=lJvz-z
'--!:ZI U O < a @ U O
J(l) @a) z E
LUHI O d J= =
E
d,u'tt o < u -J (J o a
O-LilI E F F U
Qr =<Jdc)U
z (J z
al
ta<
lttttl UUF
JdO
z MHU
o
(t EH dux
o UF zl
o QZ :i
o oH
F-
o.
c o-u 55
.9 =i q-
Fr
at
o =
U
o <=
OO =i€
ro
OZ
eu
UJ
E
f
g
lr

7B Canadian Water Resources Journal / Vol. 12, No. 3, 1987