CSOs ABANDONMENT

SCHEME DESIGN

1
Goals
Carrying out hydraulic analysis using InfoWorks software to:

1. Assess performance of existing CSO

Reported not to satisfy EA regulations
Section A

CSO
2. Design CSO abandonment scheme
To avoid flooding in section A & downstream
for the 40-year return period
Identify storage solution

2
Current performance of the CSO (rainfall
data)
1. 1-year rainfall event:

 The CSO has a maximum

spillage volume of 1650m3
Section to be redesigned

 No flooding from the MH in

section under review

3
Current performance of the CSO (critical
storm)
2. The 5-year storm was determined to be the worst:
surcharging and some insignificant flooding in section to be redesigned

4
Consequences of abandoning the CSO -rainfall
data
1. For the 1-year recorded rainfall only one manhole flooded

5
Consequences of abandoning the CSO – critical
storm
2. 40-year rain storm (M40-30) was Critical – total flood volume of 5,288m3

 All the manholes flooded for 1-year,

5-year, 10-year & 40-year storms

Flooding during 40-year storm  Only MH SK35393201 flooded during

20-year and 30-year return period
6
Design solution
1. Mitigate flooding problem between section manholes SK35391401
and SK35393202 caused by abandonment of the CSO for the 40-
year storm

2. Maintain a flow of 240l/s in link SK35393202.1 up to the 40-year

return period to prevent flooding downstream

3. Maximum sewage retention time in storage - 8 hours

7
Design Alternative 1: Online Storage
Advantages
• Efficiently use the existing space - no additional land required
Disadvantages
 due to the site topography, the pipes would have to be laid deep in
the ground to have and efficient storage system.
Cannot do civil works while system is functioning
The length of the section is not sufficient to store the required
amount of sewage and storm water along the line

Therefore, not considered

8
Design Alternative 2: Offline Storage
Tank Storage and multiple Pipe Storage systems
Rectangular tank storage was preferred:
Space: pipe storage required more space

Tank storage
Pipe storage

𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 ≈ 1200 𝑚 2 𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎≈ 600𝑚 2

9
Design approach
1. Flooding to be controlled upstream of the section under redesign

Flooding due to installation of an orifice • Orifice to be installed upstream

Regulate the flow

• Existing throttled pipe to be upgraded

Flooding due to existing throttled pipe

10
Design approach
2. A rectangular storage tank (25x25x6m) will be used with a pump to
return the stored volume back to the main sewer line
Rectangular shape take less space compared to a shaft or circular tank
Initial flood volumes estimated at 5,288 m3
3. Storage volume was optimised to 3800 m3 because the pump is
working at the same time as the water flows into the tank
4. Orifice and pump to control flow downstream
Pump flow + orifice flow not to exceed 240l/s downstream

11
Design Layout
.

12
Simulation results
Flow in SK35393202.1 limited to 240l/s during peak flow (M30-120)

13
Simulation results
No flooding in the redesigned network section

14
Issues to consider for the design
 Regular inspections for the pumps
• Pump failure might cause flooding as well as septic conditions in the storage tank
The diameter of the orifice is very small due to the 240l/s limit at the
downstream
• Orifice may cause clogging due to its sharp edges and size thus regular removal of
litter/debris is required
• Provide storage downstream to allow more flow
A screen should be installed at the weir to prevent debris from collecting into
the tank
urban creep and climate change are likely to cause an increase in flooding if
not addressed
• Additional investments will be required to accommodate the flows

15