Sawla - Laska (Lot - I) Road Project Hydrology - Hydraulics M

THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA
ETHIOPIAN ROADS AUTHORITY
Consultancy Services for

Feasibility and EIA Study of
Package III
Sawla – Maji & Gog – Akobo Road
Projects
Sawla - Maji Road

Sawla – Laska Section (Lot – I)
HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULICS
AND STRUCTURE REPORT
(PHASE-II)
(FINAL)
December, 2008
Opastinsilta 12 H, P.O.Box 27
FIN-00521 Helsinki, Finland
Tel. +358-9-8689 880, Fax + 358-9-8689 8820
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
P.O.Box 62668; Tel. 4341065 / 4341499 / 4341733 / 4343004/432423-26; Fax 341230 / 341617
E-mail: [email protected] Web-site: www.saba-engineering.com
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
&
Draft Hydrology/Hydraulics and Structure Report-Phase II
Sawla-Maji Road Project December 2008
Table of Content
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Background Information...........................................................................1
1.2 Purpose of the Project...........................................................................................2
1.3 Objective of the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study................................................3
1.4 Project Location....................................................................................................3
1.5 Organization of the Report....................................................................................5
2. DESIGN STANDARD FOR HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS................6
2.1 General..................................................................................................................6
2.2 Hydrologic Design Standards................................................................................6
2.2.1 Selection of Design Frequency........................................................6
2.2.2 Flood Estimation Methods...............................................................7
2.2.2.1 Rational Method of Estimating Flood................................7
2.2.2.2 SCS Method of Estimating Flood......................................8
2.2.3 Hydraulic Design Standards............................................................8
2.2.3.1 Culvert Design Criteria......................................................9
2.2.3.2 Bridge Design Criteria.....................................................10
2.2.3.3 Roadside Channels Design Criteria.................................11
3. HYDROLOGICAL STUDY...............................................................................12
3.1 General................................................................................................................12
3.2 Review of previous Studies Documents, Maps and Existing Data......................13
3.2.1 Catchments Characteristics of the Project Area.............................14
3.2.1.1 Topography......................................................................14
3.2.1.2 Soil Map of the Area........................................................14
3.2.1.3 Vegetation Cover and Land Use........................................15
3.2.1.4 Field Survey.....................................................................15
3.2.1.5 Climate...............................................................................16
3.2.1.6 Drainage Characteristics..................................................17
3.3 Hydrological Analysis.........................................................................................20
3.3.1 Return Period.................................................................................20
3.3.2 Rainfall Analysis (Design Rainfall computation)..........................21
3.3.3 Peak Discharge Estimation............................................................25
3.3.3.1 General.............................................................................25
3.3.3.2 Rational Method for Estimating Discharge.....................25
Lot – 1: Sawla-Laska Section

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC i
3.3.3.3 Triangular Unit Hydrograph or Soil Conservation

Service (SCS) Method.....................................................29
4. HYDRAULICS....................................................................................................34
4.1 General................................................................................................................34
4.2 Open Channel Design.........................................................................................34
4.3 Culvert................................................................................................................36
4.4 Bridges................................................................................................................36
4.5 Condition Survey of Drainage Structure.............................................................37
4.6 Stream Hydraulic Investigations.........................................................................37
4.6.1. Scour Determination......................................................................37
4.6.2. Backwater Due to Constriction......................................................38
4.6.3. Streams Morphology and Protection.............................................38
5. BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES.......................................................................39
5.1 Condition and Description of Existing Structure.................................................40
5.1.1 Criteria of Assessment and Inventory............................................40
5.1.2 Drainage Structures Inventory.......................................................41
5.2 Foundation Investigation.....................................................................................42
5.3 Materials.............................................................................................................43
5.3.1 Concrete.........................................................................................43
5.3.2 Stone Masonry...............................................................................43
5.3.3 Reinforcement................................................................................44
5.4 Load Requirements.............................................................................................45
5.4.1 Load Factors and Combinations....................................................45
5.4.2 Earth Pressure................................................................................45
5.5 Design procedure of the Structure......................................................................46
APPENDICES
Appendix 3.1: Catchment area

Appendix 3.2: Time of concentration & average slope
Appendix 3.3: Summary of peak discharge by rational method
Appendix 3.4: Curve number determination
Appendix 3.5: Summary of SCS peak discharge
Appendix 4.1: Minor drainage structures schedule
Appendix 4.2: Drainage Structures Inventary
Appendix 4.3: Ditch Schedule

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC ii
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Design Flood Return Periods ......................................................................6

Table 3-1 EMA Topographic Maps 1:50,000............................................................14
Table 3-2 Monthly Mean Rainfall for Sawla Station.................................................16
Table 3-3 Monthly mean minimum and maximum temperature for Sawla station....17
Table 3-4 Design Storm Frequency (yrs) by Geometric Design Criteria...................20
Table 3-5 Daily Heaviest Rainfall Data for Sawla Station.........................................22
Table 3-6 Gumbel’s Daily Heaviest Rainfall Analysis for Sawla Station..................22
Table 3-7 Intensity –Duration Frequency Curve Equations for Sawla Station..........23
Table 3-8 Intensity –Duration Frequency Curve Equations for Laska Station...........24
Table 3-9: Runoff Coefficient based on Hydrologic Soil Group.................................26
Table 3-10: Frequency Factor Cf for the Rational Formula...........................................28
Table 3-11: Curve Number Determination Table..........................................................30
Table 3-12: Unit Duration and Dimensionless UH Determination Table.....................31
Table 4-1: Maximum Permissible Velocities in Erodible Ditches and Corresponding
Roughness Coefficients..............................................................................36

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC iii
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Location Map of Sawla Maji where Lot I refers the line from Sawla to
Basketo (Laska) stretch................................................................................ 4
Figure 3-1: Soil or Geomorphologic Map for Catchment area 0-50Km Stretch...........14
Figure 3-2: Land Use/Cover Map of the Catchment Area (0-50Km)...........................15
Figure 3-3: Sawla Maji Drainage Pattern (0-50Km)....................................................18
Figure 3-4: Sawla Maji Catchment as Sub Basin of Omo Basin (0-50Km).................19
Figure 3-5: Sawla Station IDF Curve...........................................................................23
Figure 3-6: Laska Station IDF Curve...........................................................................24
Figure 3-7: 25 Years 3 Hours Hyetograph for C-48.....................................................33
Figure 3-8: 25 Years 3 Hours Hydrograph for C-48.....................................................33

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC iv
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background Information
Because of the economic status, Ethiopia has been categorized among

the highly indebted poor countries (HIPC). With this grave situation
and understanding, Ethiopia’s economic policy is now focused on
poverty reduction strategy (PRS) based on long-term growth of
Agricultural Development-Led Industrialization (ADLI).The ADLI
incorporates different intervention programs including agriculture,
education, health and infrastructures (roads, electricity, water supply
and telecommunication) especially in the rural areas where the
majority of poor are encountered.
In Ethiopia, road transport is the dominant mode of mobility

accounting for more than 90 percent of motorized inter-urban
passenger and freight movements. In 2003/04, there were a total of
129,360 registered vehicles in the country comprising 82,491 (64%)
passenger vehicles and 46,869 (36%) freight vehicles. In 2002/03, a
total of 65.7 million passengers were transported between urban
centers generating 5.05 billion passenger-km, an average of 77 km
coverage per passenger. Regarding freight transport during the same
period, a total of 6.2 million tons were transported generating 2.7
billion ton-km, an average of about 430 km coverage per ton. The
average annual growth rates between 1993/94 and 2002/03 were
significant. In this regard, the number of transported passengers
increased by 11.5 percent with passenger-km of 8.2 percent.
Correspondingly, the volume of tons transported during the same
period increased by 6.6 percent and ton-km by 7.5 percent.
In order to effectively tackle poverty, the improvement of

infrastructure mainly road has become one of the major objectives of
the Ethiopian Government since the mid-1990. Accordingly, the
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, through ERA, launched a
Road Sector Development Program (RSDP) in 1996 with two phases
each covering five years. Phase I covers the period 1997-2002 and
Phase II 2002-2007. Accordingly, most of the road network in the
country has been considered for improvement and new construction
among which is the Sawla Maji Road Project.
The Government of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia has obtained a

credit from the Nordic Development Fund (NDF), towards the cost of
Consultancy Services for the construction of roads under package III:
1. Review of Feasibility Study, Review of Environmental Impact

Assessment, Detailed Engineering Design and Tender Document
Preparation for Sawla Maji Road Project;
Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC 1
2. Feasibility Study, Environmental Impact Assessment, Detailed

Engineering Design and Tender Document Preparation for Gog -
Akobo; under the Road Sector Development Program (RSDP).
The Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA), as the implementing agency of

the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia in the Road Sector has
entrusted the consultancy services for Feasibility study, Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA), Preparation of Resettlement Action Plan
(RAP) and Detailed Design and Tender Documents for Sawla-Maji
road Project to Finnroad Ltd in association with SABA Engineering
plc (SABA) .Accordingly Finnroad / SABA Engineering Plc. have
conducted the Feasibility study, Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) and Preparation of Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) at Phase I
stage and have received an instruction to continue for Phase II.
As per the instruction given by the client, on November 1, 2007,

Finnroad/SABA has been conducting major detail engineering design
works on the following areas:
 Alignment selection and/or adjustment;

 Geometric Design;
 Hydrology/Hydraulic design;
 Pavement design;
 Drainages structures design;
 Measurement and Bill of Quantities;
 Engineers cost Estimate
 Tender Document Preparation
Among the above aforementioned areas, Hydrology - hydraulic
&Structures design section for the first 50Km (Lot I starting from
Sawla to Laska town) is the one which has been treated in this report.
1.2 Purpose of the Project
The ultimate objectives of the project as a whole are to connect

important towns and villages along the route, i.e. Sawla,Bulki, Laska,
Laha, Malo Koza, Dime, Kudu, Hana, Say and Maji town where all
towns found in the Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’
Regional State.
The construction of the road links the people the above mentioned
towns and largely promotes the socio-economic development of the
area there by opening a new door of investment around the project
corridor.

1.3 Objective of the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study
The hydrology and hydraulic study has the following major objectives:
 Collect existing drainage related data,

 Conduct field investigation and identify cross drainage locations ,
 Identify and estimate catchment areas of culverts and bridges,
 Identify potential flood plain encroachment and channel stability
issues,
 Develop and define criteria and computational methods to be used
for the hydrological and hydraulic analysis of, culverts, bridges ,
and ditches
 Estimate design floods for culverts and bridges,
 Provide designs type, size, and location of culvert and bridges,
 Provide design flows and sizes for roadside ditches,
 Provide energy dissipation for culverts inlets and outlets, and
 Assess scour potential at bridge locations.
The main purpose of the hydrological/Hydraulics study for this project

is the computation and evaluation of peak discharges of all the
watercourses in which the main objective is to determine opening sizes
of drainage structures.
Landforms, land use, and vegetation coverage and rainfall pattern of

the project vicinity mainly influence the hydrological and hydraulic
condition of the project area. In addition to this, catchments shape,
size, and slope are vital factors in the processes of runoff flow.
The maximum discharge of a waterway is a function of its catchments

area, catchments slope, catchments soil type and vegetation (land cover
and land use), intensity of rainfall, duration of storm etc. The available
discharge computation methods work assuming appropriate values for
each of the factors affecting the discharge. Some of these methods are
more appropriate for larger catchments and others for smaller
catchments. Therefore in this study the most appropriate method will
be applied.
1.4 Project Location
Sawla Maji road is located in Southern Nations, Nationalities and

Peoples’ Regional State starting from Sawla town traversing through
Bulki, Laska, Laha, Malo Koza, Dime, Kudu, Hana, Say and ends at
Maji town. It is nearly 517Km away from Addis. However, the first
50Km road of the project classified as Lot I connects Sawla, Bulkie
and Laska towns.

Figure 1-2: Location Map of Sawla Maji where Lot I refers the line from Sawla
to Basketo (Laska) stretch

1.5 Organization of the Report
The report is organized in to five parts. The first one refers

introductory part which contains project Background Information,
purpose of project and project location. Design criteria of Hydrology
and Hydraulics take the second part of the report. Hydrology
comprising review of previous Studies documents, maps and existing
data, Catchments Characteristics of the Project Area, field
Work/observation, hydrological approaches and analysis are covered in
this third section report. The hydraulics takes the fourth section
addressing hydraulics of culverts, channel hydraulics and scour
protection are treated in this section. Bridge and Structure are
discussed in the last section of the report.

2. DESIGN STANDARD FOR HYDROLOGY AND

HYDRAULICS
2.1 General
The main objective of the hydrology and hydraulic study is to

determine the economical sizes of culverts and bridges which safely
evacuate the design flood along the Sawla-Maji road without causing
significant damage to the structures/river banks adjoining river and
streams under study.
2.2 Hydrologic Design Standards
The hydrologic design is carried out according to Drainage Manual,

ERA (2002). Salient features are reproduced herein.
2.2.1 Selection of Design Frequency
The minor system (used for conveying surface water runoff) including
the design of side ditches and pipes/ conduits are designed based on
1:5 year return period storm and checked in critical locations against
surcharging based on a 1: 10 year return period of the storm.
For major system includes crossings of rivers, streams and culverts are
designed based on 1:25 year return period storm and checked against
surcharging based on a 1:50 year return period storm. Large Bridges
(span > 50 m) are designed based on 1:100 year return period storm
and checked against surcharging based on a 1: 100 year return period
storm as reproduced in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2: Design Flood Return Periods
Geometric Design
Structure Type Standard
DS5/6/7
Gutters and Inlets* 2
Side Ditches 5
Ford/Low-Water Bridge -
Culvert, pipe (see Note) 5
Span<2m
Culvert, 2m<span <6m 10
Short Span Bridges 6m<span<15m 25
Medium Span Bridges 15m<span<50m 50
Long Span Bridges 100
spans>50m
Check/Review Flood 100

2.2.2 Flood Estimation Methods
Design floods are estimated using the Rational and the SCS methods.
Rational Method – This method is widely used for peak discharge

determination from smaller catchments (less than 50 ha or 0.5Km2
area) as recommended by ERA drainage design manual;
Techniques developed by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service (12) for

calculating rates of runoff require the same basic data as the Rational
Method: catchment area, a runoff factor, time of concentration, and
rainfall. The SCS approach, however, is more sophisticated in that it
considers also the time distribution of the rainfall, the initial rainfall
losses to interception and depression storage, and an infiltration rate
that decreases during the course of a storm.It is used for drainage areas
greater than 50 hectares;
2.2.2.1 Rational Method of Estimating Flood
The Rational Method is most accurate for estimating the design storm
peak runoff for areas up to 50 ha (0.5 km2). The rational formula is
expressed as:
Q = 0.278 C I A ---------------------------------- (eq.2.1)
Where
Q = Maximum rate of runoff, m3/s

C = Runoff coefficient representing a ratio of runoff to rainfall
I = Rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the time of
concentration, mm/hr
A = catchment area of design location, km2
Empirical relations shown at ERA DDM 2002 for sheet and shallow
concentrated flow travel time computation are used to arrive at
appropriate time of concentration value where Kirpich formula adopted
for channel flow travel time computation purpose.
Channel flow travel time computation using Kirpich formula:

0.385
Ttravel  0.02 L 0.77
S --------------------------- (eq.2.2)
Where
Tc = time of concentration, minutes
L = maximum length of flow, m
H = elevation difference between the most remote and outlet, m

2.2.2.2 SCS Method of Estimating Flood
SCS method is applied for watershed areas greater than 0.5 km2. Peak
discharge is estimated using:
Where:
qp = peak discharge (m3/s)
rd = the excess rainfall depth (mm)
A = watershed area (km2)
tc = time of concentration (hr)
D = duration of excess rainfall (hr)
The depth of runoff resulting from a required return period rainfall

depth of duration corresponding to the time of concentration (tc) is
estimated by
(P - 0.2S ) 2
rd =
P + 0.8S ---------------------------------- (eq.2.3)
Where:
S = Potential retention (mm)
P = design rainfall amount of duration tc corresponding to T
years return period (mm), and
S (mm) is estimated using
100
S = 254( - 1)
CN ----------------------------- (eq.2.4)
CN = Curve number
The curve number will be estimated from the land use and land cover
information together with CN table values provided in Drainage
Manual, ERA (2002).
2.2.3 Hydraulic Design Standards
The hydraulic design was carried out for newly proposed drainage
structures and also with the existing structures along the project road.
The size of the vent sizes were determined based on the peak design
discharge, bed slope of the crossing. In deciding the type and size of
structure, hydraulic efficiency and economy are taken besides local
hydrologic and geomorphologic characteristics.
The ERA Drainage Design Manual recommends a minimum size of

750 mm for culverts with a cross slope of less than 3%. In semi arid
area creeks /rivers are flashy and carry large debris such as trees,
boulders which possibly clog waterway. For maintenance purpose, the

minimum size of pipe culvert to be used is recommended as 900 mm

diameter. Accordingly the existing 800mm pipe culverts are replaced
with 900 mm and minimum diameter of 900 mm is proposed for new
pipe culverts.
2.2.3.1 Culvert Design Criteria
The following design criteria are used:
Allowable Headwater is the depth of water that can be pounded at the

upstream end of the culvert that will be limited by one or more of the
following:
 Non-damaging to upstream property;

 No higher than the shoulder or 0.3 m below the edge of shoulder;
 Equal to Head-Water (HW) /D not greater than 1.5;
 Not higher than the low point in the road grade; and/or
 Equal to the elevation where flow diverts around the culvert.
The Headwater is the flood depth that does not exceed 0.5 cm increase
over the existing 100-year in the vicinity of buildings or dwellings, and
has a level of inundation that is tolerable to upstream property and
roadway for the review discharge.
For inlet control, the following equation has been used:
Q = C A N [2g (H – 0.5D)]1/2------------------------(eq.2.5)
Where
Q design discharge (m3/s)
H maximum design headwater level (m)
D diameter of a pipe culvert or height of a box culvert (m)
g the acceleration of gravity (9.81m/s2)
A cross-sectional area of the culvert, D2/4 for pipe culverts and
D x width for box culverts (m2)
N - is the number of pipe or box culverts of equal size
C- a dimensionless discharge coefficient varying with H/D.
Box culverts
1.0 < H/D < 1.5: C varies linearly from 0.55 to 0.60

Pipe culverts
1.0 < H/D < 1.5: C varies linearly from 0.55 to 0.61
Estimation of the outflow velocities was based on balancing the energy

equation between culvert inlet and outlet, assuming non-submerged
conditions at the culvert outlet, and expressed by the following
formula:
H1 + z1 = y2 +v22/2g + hf + hl ----------------------------- (eq.2.6)
Where
H1 depth of flow at point 1 upstream of inlet (m)
z1 bed level at outflow point 2 (m)
y2 depth of flow at point 2 (m)
v2 flow velocity at point 2 (m/s)
g is the acceleration of gravity (9.81m/s2)
hf friction losses between point 1 and 2 (m)
hf = [(n*v)/r0.667]2 *L
n= Manning’s roughness coefficient (0.015 for smooth concrete)
v = average velocity between 1 and 2 (m/s)
r = average hydraulic radius between 1 and 2 (m)
L = culvert length (m)
hl losses at inlet (m)
hl = k*v22/2g
Where the recommended ‘k’ values are:
Wing walls between 30° and 75° - 0.25
Wing walls 15° and 90° - 0.5
Culvert face shaped to fill slope - 0.7
Wing walls at 0° (extension of culvert sides) - 0.9
2.2.3.2 Bridge Design Criteria
The following are the criteria related to the hydraulic analyses for the
sufficiency of the bridge.
 Design Floods: For such purposes as the evaluation of backwater,

clearance, and overtopping shall be established.
 Backwater: Backwater and/or increases over existing condition up
to 0.5 m during the passage of the 100-year flood, if practicable.
 Clearance: A minimum clearance conforming to the requirements
of the Bridge Design Manual shall be checked.
2.2.3.3 Roadside Channels Design Criteria
The following criteria apply to roadside channels:
The design discharge for permanent roadside ditch linings should have
a 10-year frequency while temporary linings shall be designed for the
2-year frequency flow. All roadside channels and/or ditches shall be
hydraulically designed as per this manual.
The project road traverses through a contrasting and unexpected

terrain, ranging from flat to mountainous. Soils also vary considerably
and some of them are susceptible to erosion and scouring. During the
rainfall season, the anticipated quantity of water is to be collected and
disposed rapidly and quickly. A comprehensive drainages study was
undertaken to provide various types of drains according to terrain
conditions.
a) Flat Areas
In flat areas drains are required for the following conditions:
 Cut section
 Embankment height is less than 1m.
 Embankment height is more than 1m but the surrounding ground is
falling towards the project road
The side drains in the flat areas are of the trapezoidal unlined type. The
bottom of the drain is 0.8 m wide, the depth is kept at a minimum of
0.50 m and the side slopes are 1 vertical to 2 horizontal. However, in
the expansive soils areas, the unlined drains have been replaced with
lined drains (of the type used in the rolling areas) to prevent the
exchange of moisture with the deeper layers of soils.
b) Rolling Areas
The drains to be used in the rolling areas are of the trapezoidal

masonry lined type. The bottom of the drain is 1.0 m wide, the side
slopes are 1 vertical for 1 horizontal, the depth of the drain is kept to a
minimum of 0.60 m.
c) Mountainous and Escarpment Areas
The drains to be used in the mountainous and very steep areas are of
the rectangular masonry lined type. The bottom of the drain is 0.60 m
wide; the depth of the drain is kept to 0.80 m.
d) Urban Areas
The drains to be used in the urban areas are of the Rectangular

masonry lined type. The bottom of the drain is 0.60 m wide and the
depth of the drain is kept to 0.60 m.

3. HYDROLOGICAL STUDY
3.1 General
Highway drainage is an important consideration in the overall design

of a highway project. In highway engineering, the diversity of drainage
problems is broad and includes the design of pavement, bridges,
culverts, and other crossing structures. The designs of these drainage
structures do require adequate hydrological analysis, which assesses
the flood potential of the watershed area at the road crossing point on a
highway corridor.
The hydrological analysis is the most important step prior to the

hydraulic design of any drainage structure. Assessment of hydrological
condition involves study of landscape characteristics of the watershed
area including topographic conditions, soil characteristics, land cover,
land use and climate conditions including atmospheric temperature and
rainfall.
As the relation between the amount of precipitation on a drainage basin

and the amount of runoff from the basin is, complex and too little data
is available on the factors influencing the rainfall –runoff relationship;
hydrologic analysis does not bring an exact solution in peak discharge
determination. However, peak discharge generated from a given basin
can be estimated by different methods depending upon physiographic
and climatic factor on the area.
Methods of flood-runoff analysis range from simplified methods to

rainfall-runoff models. Simplified methods may involve use of
formulas, previously derived regression equations, envelope curves,
etc. as a basis for making hydrologic estimates. Where adequate stream
flow data are available, frequency analysis of such data can be
performed to develop exceedance frequency relationships. For
situations where historical stream flow data is nonexistent or
inadequate to make the required estimates, a rainfall-runoff simulation
model is commonly used for flood-runoff analysis. Hydrologic studies
include design rainfall determination, the resulting peak run off, and its
time distribution at a particular drainage crossing point in relation to
the design period of the proposed structure.
In a broadly speaking the methods and step by step procedures stated

in ERA Drainage Design Manual 2002 which comprises the following
eleven sections has been used to conduct a detailed drainage study on
the project area.
1. Introduction
2. Standards and departure from the standards
3. Planning

4. Hydrographic Survey
5. Hydrology
6. Hydraulic design of open channels
7. Culverts
8. Bridges
9. Energy dissipaters
10. Storm drainage facilities
11. Appendices
3.2 Review of previous Studies Documents, Maps and Existing Data
a) Previous Studies: No detailed previous hydrological study

performed in the project area. However, inception, feasibility and
preliminary design reports of the project have been referred at
detail hydrological study phase of Sawla Maji Lot I Project.
b) River Hydrology Data: Omo River that will be crossed by the

road project is the only gauged major river found on the project
area.
c) Meteorological Data: Daily Peak rainfall records, with the date

of occurrence from 1 hour to 24 hours have been obtained from
Meteorological Service Agency for Sawla and Laska stations. The
data has been used for determination of rainfall runoff estimates
by applying different rainfall runoff models (namely SCS
dimensionless hydrograph and Rational method) as per ERA DM
2002.
d) Maps, aerial photos and satellite imagery: The followings

were used:
 Topographic maps scales 1:50,000

 Geological map of Ethiopia Scale 1:2,000,000
 Digitized Land Use and Land Cover Maps of scale
1:1,000,000 [Source: Ministry of Agriculture]
 Digitized Soil and geomorphology Map of Ethiopia
1:1,000,000
 Satellite imagery and Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

3.2.1 Catchments Characteristics of the Project Area
3.2.1.1 Topography
Topographic map of scale 1: 50000 covering Lot I project road

drainage area obtained from the Ethiopian Mapping Agency and DEM
data of 90m x 90 m resolution (about 1:100000 scale) are used for
assessing catchments areas of cross drainage structures.
Table 3-3 EMA Topographic Maps 1:50,000

S/No Map Number Map Name
1 0636D1 Laska
2 0636D3 Wib Hamer
3 0636D2 Sawla
4 0636D4 Beto
3.2.1.2 Soil Map of the Area
Soil or geomorphologic map for the overall catchment area lying

within 0-50 km stretch (Lot I) produced from 1,000,000 scaled
Geomorphologic map of Ethiopia using GIS software (Arc
view).Dysntric Cambisols and Orthic acrisols are the major soil types
covering the catchment area under hydrologic soil grouping B.
Figure 3-3 Soil or Geomorphologic Map for Catchment area 0-

50Km Stretch

3.2.1.3 Vegetation Cover and Land Use
Likely to soil map land use/cover map of the project area under Lot I
determined from 1,000,000 scaled Ethiopian land use /cover map
through the application of GIS software. Land use/ land cover within
the catchment areas of the streams crossing the road largely
characterized by bush shrubbed grassland, mixed and disturbed forest
and wood land combinations.
Catchment area from Sawla to Bulkie town largely dominated by wood

land and bush shrubbed land cover conditions where wood grass
land ,disturbed forest, bush shrubbed and dense mixed forest land
cover forms constitute the catchment area from Bulkie to Laska town.
Lnad use/cover map(0-50Km)

235000 240000 245000 250000 255000 260000 265000 N
700000
700000
W E
695000
695000
690000
690000
685000
685000
680000
680000
675000
675000
235000 240000 245000 250000 255000 260000 265000

Land use/cover Map(0-50Km).shp
BUSHED SHRUBBED GRASSLAND
DENSE MIXED HIGH FOREST
0 9 Kilometers
DISTURBED HIGH FOREST
WOODED GRASSLAND
Figure 3-4 Land Use/Cover Map of the Catchment Area (0-

50Km)
3.2.1.4 Field Survey
The Consultant hydrologist together with other professionals from

various field of specializations have visited the site to collect data
required for hydrological and hydraulic studies. The information
gathered includes structure site selection, flood mark identification at
relatively main crossings, land cover, soil type, and topography and
land use physical data collection.

3.2.1.5 Climate
a) Rainfall
The distinction in climate characteristics mainly caused by altitude

differences and its location where rainfall on the area is highly
influenced by Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).
Rainfall data at the nearby possible stations (Sawla and Laska stations)
has been collected and analyzed to see monthly rainfall distribution
pattern.
The area through which the project road traverses can be classified as
“Weina Dega” , around Sawla and Maji while the rest portion of the
project road is in “Kola” climatic zone. The first 50Km stretch mainly
categorized under “ Weina Dega” but “Dega” climatic zone also
reflected on the project area. The climatic characteristics are influenced
by the change in the altitude of the areas traversed the project road.
Data available from the Meteorological Map of Ethiopia, 1979,
indicate that:
Table 3-4 Monthly Mean Rainfall for Sawla Station
Month 33 Year Mean Monthly Rainfall
Jan 49.6
Feb 58.0
Mar 142.7
Apr. 235.5
May 186.7
Jun 130.0
Jul 153.7
Aug 124.8
Sept. 133.3
Oct. 164.5
Nov. 77.5
Dec. 50.9
b) Temperature
 The mean minimum monthly temperature in the project area is in

the range of 10 OC-15 OC, the lowest during the month of August.
 The mean maximum monthly temperature in the project area is in
the range of 25 OC-30 OC, the lowest occurring during the months
between July and November.

Table 3-5 Monthly mean minimum and maximum

temperature for Sawla station
Mean Monthly Temperature

Month
Minimum Maximum
Jan 17.5 31.1
Feb 17.9 31.2
Mar 18.2 31.1
Apr. 17.6 29.3
May 17.0 28.6
Jun 17.0 28.0
Jul 17.0 27.1
Aug 17.0 27.3
Sept. 16.8 28.4
Oct. 16.6 28.4
Nov. 16.5 29.3
Dec. 16.7 30.5
3.2.1.6 Drainage Characteristics
The overall watershed area draining towards the road serves as a sub
catchment area for one main drainage basin in our country Ethiopia,
Omo basin. Major streams on the project area originate from the
highland there by crossing the road at some major drainage outlet
points .Some streams are flowing to the right direction as we run from
Sawla to Laska town but others draining to the left . Streams in and
around the project area characterized fomr their steep slope nature with
high flow velocity condition. The catchment area is largely dominated
by moderately bushed shrubbed grassland and woodland forms. Major
Stream channel banks are covered by weathered rock formation but
most minor streams bank and bed covered by loose course materials.
Figure 3-5 and Figure 3-6 below give an overview of Sawla Maji Lot I
watershed drainage pattern and its sub basin category respectively.
Likely appendix 3.1 shows catchment area drainage pattern.

Sawla Maji Drainage Pattern (0-50Km)

235000 240000 245000 250000 255000 260000 265000 N
700000
700000
W E
695000
695000
S
690000
690000
685000
685000
680000
680000
Sawla majie Drainage.dxf
675000
675000
Road
Stream
235000 240000 245000 250000 255000 260000 265000
Catchment Boundary
0 10 Kilometers
Figure 3-5 Sawla Maji Drainage Pattern (0-50Km)

Sawla Maji Catchment as sub basin of Omo basin N
-100000 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 W E

1000000
1000000
S
Omo Basin
900000
900000
Sawla Catchment area
800000
800000
700000
700000
Sawla majie for jis.dxf
600000
600000
Road
Stream
500000
500000
-100000 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000
Catchment
0 100 Kilometers Omo utm.shp
Figure 3-6 Sawla Maji Catchment as Sub Basin of Omo Basin (0-50Km)

3.3 Hydrological Analysis
3.3.1 Return Period
Return period, also called recurrence interval is a term commonly used

in hydrology. It is the average time interval between the occurrence of
storms or floods of a given magnitude. The selection of the design
return period depends on economic balance between the costs of
periodic repair or replacement of the structure, potential flood hazard
to property, expected level of service, budgetary constraints as well as
the magnitude and risk associated with damage from larger flood
events. For structures where a potential damage or functional
operational requirement warrants a more severe criterion a greater
design recurrence interval should be used. The design storm frequency
(return periods) provided by ERA Geometric Design Standard manual
2002 for different structures corresponding to the road design standard
which is reproduced as Table 3-6Error: Reference source not found
below adopted accordingly on drainage structure design return period
selection on this road project. To impart a sustainable transportation
system, to promote and enhance the overall socio economic
development along the project road corridor, the Ethiopian road
authority planned to upgrade the road to design standard of
6(DS6).Hence the design storm frequency stated under DS6 used to
compute the design discharge and to design the respective drainage
crossing structures.
Table 3-6 Design Storm Frequency (yrs) by Geometric Design

Criteria
Geometric Design Standard

Structure Type DS3/ DS5/DS6/
DS1/DS2 DS8/DS9/DS10
DS4 DS7
Gutters and Inlets 10 or 5 2
Side Ditches 10 10 5 5
Ford/low water bridge 5
Culvert, pipe
(span<2m) 25 10 5 5
Culvert
(2m<span<6m) 50 25 10 10
Short span bridges
(6m<span<15m) 50 50 25 25
Mediumspan
bridges(15m<span<50
m) 100 50 50 50
Long span bridges
(span>50m) 100 100 100 100
Check/review flood 200 100 100 100

3.3.2 Rainfall Analysis (Design Rainfall computation)
In order to apply flood estimation models for peak discharge

computation using available rainfall data, the rainfall depth-duration-
frequency relationship is required. Rainfall records were obtained
from the National Meteorological Services Agency for the nearby
influential stations (Sawla and Laska Stations).
Available rainfall data on these stations has been collected and

analyzed in order to prepare the necessary depth or intensity input data
for peak discharges computation. The analysis and processing is aimed
at determination of appropriate intensity-duration relationship
applicable for the project road.
Estimates of Maximum rainfall depths for different return periods (T)

are obtained by statistical technique of frequency analysis. Extreme
value type I, Gumbel and Log Pearson Type III distributions can be
used for design storm determination of desired return periods in areas
where appropriate IDF curves are not available. Thus, the analysis
consists of determining maximum rainfall depths associated with T
value of interest.
In the absence extreme rainfall values for periods less than 24 hours
(12, 6, 3 or less than these hours) ,it is difficult to apply regression
analysis to drive appropriate IDF curve for a given area, hence rainfall
ratio method is used to estimate the rainfall depth to be distributed on a
given duration based on a 24 hour rainfall. With this condition, the
following the relationship adopted for IDF development at a given
station.
Rt/R24 = (t / 24) [(b + 24)n / (b + t)n ]

where: Rt: R24 -Rainfall ratio
Rt: Rainfall in a given duration ‘t’ (hr)
R24: Rainfall in 24 hours
n: constant
b: constant
t: time (hr)
Based on studies of a large number of rainfall gauges in East Africa,

the average values of b and n are found to be 0.3 and 0.9 respectively.
These values have been adopted for the project road IDF development
Daily extreme rainfall depth at Sawla and Laska stations for different
return periods was determined using the following relationship
(Gumbel’s Extreme Value distribution):
XT = Xavg + KT* -----------------------------eq. (3.1)

Where:
XT = Rainfall depth at return period T years [mm]

Xavg = Mean value of rainfall data (daily) [mm]

 = Standard deviation [mm]
KT = Gumbel’s distribution frequency factor (taken from
readily available table)
X avg 
X
n
X = Rainfall depth
--------------------------------- (eq.3.2)
n = Total number of X (individual data)
X 2

1
  X 2
 n
n 1
------------------------ (eq.3.3)
Table 3-7 Daily Heaviest Rainfall Data for Sawla Station
Annual Daily
YEAR Rank X(mm) X2
heaviest(mm)
1997 76.00 1 76.00 5776.00
1998 50.50 2 55.70 3102.49
1999 51.40 3 54.20 2937.64
2000 53.20 4 54.20 2937.64
2001 54.20 5 53.20 2830.24
2002 54.20 6 52.80 2787.84
2003 52.80 7 51.40 2641.96
2004 55.70 8 50.50 2550.25
2005 49.50 9 49.50 2450.25
2006 37.60 10 37.60 1413.76
∑ 535.10 29428.07

Table 3-8 Gumbel’s Daily Heaviest Rainfall Analysis for

Sawla Station
Applying Gumbels Extreme Value distribution, design 24 hours rainfall XT=Xavg +

K(T,n) *σX
Number of Region B
Return
years of Xavg(mm) K (T,n) Sx XT(mm) ERA
period(Tr)
records,n XT(mm)
2 10 53.51 -0.1355 9.398 52.237 65.000
5 10 53.51 1.0581 9.398 63.454 84.000
10 10 53.51 1.8483 9.398 70.880 98.000
25 10 53.51 2.8468 9.398 80.264 118.000
50 10 53.51 3.5876 9.398 87.226 132.000
100 10 53.51 4.3228 9.398 94.135 147.000
FiFigure 3-7 Sawla Station IDF Curve
Corresponding trend line equations under different return periods

shown below in a tabular form:

Table 3-9 Intensity –Duration Frequency Curve Equations for Sawla

Station
Sawla Station IDF equations

Return periods(yrs) Equation R2
5 Y=35.46X-0.5177 0.9702
10 Y=39.61X-0.5177 0.9702
25 Y=44.854X-0.5177 0.9702
50 Y=48.745X-0.5177 0.9702
100 Y=52.606X-0.5177 0.9702

Figure 3-8 Laska Station IDF Curve
Table 3-10 Intensity –Duration Frequency Curve Equations for

Laska Station
Laska Station IDF Equations

Return
Equation R2
periods(yrs)
5 Y=31.687X-0.5177 0.9702
10 Y=36.3661X-0.5177 0.9702
25 Y=42.278X-0.5177 0.9702
50 Y=46.665X-0.5177 0.9702
100 Y=51.018X-0.5177 0.9702
Intensity duration frequency or depth duration frequency curves

derived from daily heaviest rainfall data of Sawla stations used to
undertake a hydrological analysis from 0-14Km stretch of the road and
Laska IDF curve for 14-50Km stretch.
3.3.3 Peak Discharge Estimation
3.3.3.1 General
Hydrologic study primarily directed towards Peak discharge, often

called peak flow estimation, which is the maximum rate of runoff
passing a given point during or after a rainfall event. However the
volume of runoff associated with peak discharge and its time
distribution is of a vital concern in some cases. The recommended
hierarchy for selecting a method of computing discharge for design of
highway structure and the circumstance for their use depends on the
availability of relevant metrological and watershed data and the

expected level of accuracy that a particular method can give on a given

watershed area.
3.3.3.2 Rational Method for Estimating Discharge
This method is widely used for peak discharge determination from

smaller catchments (less than 0.5Km2 area) as recommended by ERA
drainage design manual. Here on this road development project (Lot I),
the peak discharge from twelve (65) catchment areas are determined by
rational method.
The idea behind the rational method is that if a rainfall of intensity ,I

begins instantaneously and continues indefinitely, the rate of runoff
will increase until the time of concentration tC, when all of the
watershed is contributing to flow at the outlet. The product of rainfall
intensity I and watershed area A is the inflow rate for the system, IA,
and the ratio of the peak discharge Q to this inflow rate expresses the
coefficient of runoff C. The discharge is expressed in the rational
formula as:
C I AC f
Q -----------------------------eq. (3.4)
360
Where: Q = is in m3/s,
I = is rainfall intensity in mm per hour
A = is catchment area in hectares
C f = frequency factor
C= runoff coefficient
The duration used for the determination of the design precipitation

intensity I is the time of concentration.

i) Runoff Coefficient
The runoff coefficient C is estimated on the basis of factors such as

slopes, soil texture, land use, vegetation coverage and terrain type.
Runoff coefficients are theoretically restricted to the range of 0 to 1.0.
Runoff coefficient values for pervious surfaces by selected hydrologic
soil groups and slope range given in the ERA drainage design manual
2002 reproduced as Table 3-9 below is used here in this project
accordingly. Equation (3.5) is used to determine weighted average
runoff coefficient values for each catchment area under rational
method.
C weighted 
  Ai * Ci  -----------------------------------eq. (3.5)
AT
Where Ci - runoff coefficient for a given hydrologic soil group area

Ai - area under each hydrologic soil group
AT -total catchment area considered
Table 3-11 : Runoff Coefficient based on Hydrologic Soil

Group
Soil Type
Terrain Type
A B C D
Flat < 2% 0.04 to 0.09 0.07 to 0.12 0.11 to 0.16 0.15 to 0.20
Rolling 2% to
0.09 to 0.14 0.12 to 0.17 0.16 to 0.21 0.20 to 0.25
6%
Mountainous 6%
0.13 to 0.18 0.18 to 0.24 0.23 to 0.31 0.28 to 0.38
to 15%
Escarpment >
0.18 to 0.22 0.24 to 0.30 0.30 to 0.40 0.38 to 0.48
15%
ii) Time of Concentration (tC)
Time of concentration is the time taken for runoff to travel from the
most remote point of the catchment to the drainage structure. For
specific drainage basin the time of concentration consists of sheet flow,
over land flow and channel flow time.
Sheet flow time
Sheet flow is flow over plan surfaces. It usually occurs in the

headwater of the streams (usually for the first 100-130m run). With
sheet flow, the friction value (Manning’s roughness coefficient ,n)
which take into account the effect of raindrop impact, drag over the
plan and other ground cover barriers has a significant impact on the
overall sheet flow travel time determination. Manning’s kinematic

solution (overtone and Meadows 1976) is used to compute sheet flow

travel time.
Tt  0.091 nL 
 0.8

0.5 0.4  -------------------------------eq. (3.6)
  P2  S 
Where: Tt = travel time, hr
n = Manning's roughness coefficient
L = flow length, m
P2 = 2-year, 24-hour rainfall, mm
S = slope of hydraulic grade line (land slope), m/m
Over Land Flow Time
The time required for runoff to flow over the surface from the end of
sheet flow to the nearest channel inlet is primarily a function of the
length of overland flow, slope of the drainage basin, and surface cover.
The overland flow velocity for the overland flow distance is estimated
by plugging eq. (3.7) developed for pervious surface flow velocity
estimation purpose.
V  4.9178 S  --------------------eq. (3.7)

0.5
Then, the velocity is divided to the flow distance using eq. (3.8) to
determine the total overland flow time.
D
Ttravel  -------------------------------eq. (3.8)
60  V
Where:
Ttravel-time of concentration (minutes)
D –Overland flow Distance (m)
V -approximate flow velocity over the surface (m/s) based
catchment Characteristics (land use of the area)
Channel Flow Time
Refers the time required for the runoff to flow from the channel inlet
point to the outlet point.
The time of concentration calculated by using Kirpich formula:
0.385
Ttravel  0.02 L 0.77
S -------------------------eq. (3.9)
Where:

Ttravel= time of concentration (min)

L = maximum length of travel (m)
S = slope, equal to H/L where H is the difference in elevation
between the most remote point in the basin and the outlet
In order to minimize error in calculating time of concentration

particularly when the average basin slope varies significantly from the
mean channel slope, time of concentration is calculated for two
sections. The first one is from the outlet point to 0.7of the channel flow
length and the second one is from 0.7L to the end of the channel.
Hence the channel flow time is added to the overland flow time to obtain
the total time of concentration.
Hence, the total travel time which is considered to be time of

concentration for the overall catchment flow system will be determined
by summation of all travel times under different flow system. Time of
concentration and catchment average slope is shown at appendix 3.2 of
this report.
iii) Rainfall Intensity
The intensity of rainfall I in mm/hr corresponding to the design return

period and time of concentration (Tc) is derived from the appropriate
rainfall intensity-duration-frequency curve in Figure 3-5 and 3-6 for
given required frequency.
iv) Frequency Factors
ERA drainage design manual 2002 recommends the use of frequency

factor Cf (Table 3-12) to account for different return periods while
computing the peak discharge for smaller catchments using rational
formula. For minor drainage structures of return periods other than 5 &
10 frequency factors corresponding to required frequency is considered
in peak discharge estimation.
Table 3-12 : Frequency Factor Cf for the Rational Formula
Recurrence Interval (yrs) Cf

5 1.00
10 1.00
25 1.10
50 1.20
100 1.25

Computation of flood discharge for catchment No.12 (C6) under

rational formula:

Catchment area = 0.19 km2

Elevation at remote = 2210m.a.s.l

Elevation at 100m =2200m.a.s.l

Elevation at crossing = 1890m.a.s.l

Concentrated flow length(m)=484.67m

Average slope=54.73(%)

Soil type=Dystric Cambisol (Hydrological soil group B)

Runoff coefficient=0.27

Time of concentration=0.13hr
Rainfall intensity for a return period of 10 years:
I10 = 39.61X-0.5177
=81.19 mm/hr
Therefore:
C I AC f
Q
360
=0.27*81.19*19*1/360
=1.15m3/s
Design discharge values for different return periods under rational

method are clearly shown in appendix 3.3.
3.3.3.3 Triangular Unit Hydrograph or Soil Conservation Service

(SCS) Method
This method was developed by the US Soil Conservation Service. It

relates rainfall intensities to catchment parameters and uses a standard
unit hydrograph to calculate the time of distribution of the runoff.
The basic rainfall-runoff relationship in the SCS methodology is

equated as:
-------------------------------------eq. (3.10)
Pc 
 P  Ia 2
 P  Ia   S

Where:
P = Maximum potential runoff (mm);
Pc = Actual runoff (mm);
Ia = Initial abstraction (mm); and
S = Maximum potential retention
The initial abstraction consists of interception, infiltration and surface

storage, all of which occur before runoff begins. The generally used
empirical relation between initial abstraction and the potential
maximum retention developed based on the study on a number of
small experimental watersheds is:
Ia = 0.2S-----------------------------------------eq. (3.11)
Pc 
 P  0.2 S 
2
P  0.8S
-------------------------------eq. (3.12)
The potential maximum soil water retention, S, is related to hydrologic
soil properties, ground type/cover, and soil moisture condition of the
catchment prior to the rain. S is defined as a function of Catchment
Curve Number (CN) as shown in the formula below.
The CN number is selected based on the conditions of soil, moisture

and land cover of the watershed area.
25,400
S  254
CN
----------------------------------eq. (3.13)
Table 3-13: Curve Number Determination Table

Curve N umber determined for each catchment whose area is greater

than 0.5km2 is shown in appendix 2.4.
The peak rate of flow is computed using the following equation:

A Q
q p  0.208 --------------------------eq. (3.14)
TP
Where:
Tp= Time to peak (hrs)
=0.7 TC
qp =Peak discharge (m3/sec)
A = Catchment area (km2)
Q= Storm flow depth or direct runoff (mm)
Ratios shown in Table 3-14 are used to determine the unit duration and
to derive SCS dimensionless unit hydrograph.
Table 3-14: Unit Duration and Dimensionless UH Determination

Table
t/Tp ratio q/qp

0.00 0
0.25 0.12
0.50 0.43
0.75 0.83
1.00 1.00
1.25 0.88
1.50 0.66
1.75 0.45
2.00 0.32
2.25 0.22
2.50 0.15
2.75 0.105
3.00 0.075
3.25 0.053
3.50 0.036
3.75 0.026
4.00 0.018
4.25 0.012
4.50 0.009
4.75 0.006
5.00 0.004

i) Design Storm Hyetograph for SCS Method
It is a primary input for rainfall-runoff system, and resulting rates of flow

through the system considered. SCS Type II rainfall distribution which
considers a rainfall of 24 hours duration primarily developed for interior
regions of the United State of America. However rainfall of 24 hours
duration that was first applicable in the United States rarely applicable in
tropical regions where the rainfall duration doesn’t range this much hours.
Instead 3 hours duration rainfall described in recently developed SCS
method is used here where the rainfall distribution is based on widely
adopted alternating block method described in detail on Vent Chow
Applied Hydrology.
Alternating block method is a simple way of developing a design

hyetograph from depth duration frequency curve .The design
hyetograph produced by this method specifies the cumulative rainfall
depth (excess rainfall depth) occurring in n successive time intervals of
duration Δt over the total duration considered.
ii) Discrete convolution
The ordinates of the individual hydrographs of direct runoff for each of

the unit storm periods calculated using the ordinates of the unit
hydrograph and corresponding excess rainfall depths through
convolution equation. Thus, the total hydrograph ordinates are
determined by adding the ordinates of the individual hydrographs by
using the following general equation:
in
Qn   PiU n i 1 -------------------------------eq. (3.15)
i 1
Accordingly peak discharge for catchment No.48 (C-48) is computed

using the above method as follows:

Catchment area 1.94 km2

Maximum elevation 1760 m.a.s.l

Elevation at 0.3point 1655 m.a.s.l

Elevation at 0.7point 1580 m.a.s.l.

Elevation at crossing 1400 m.a.s.l

0.7 length of stream 1279.48 m

0.3 length of stream 548.34 m

Total stream length 1827.83 m

Weighted average Runoff curve no. 58

The time of concentration, computed using the above stated approach

is 0.52 hrs. From 25 years 3 hour duration DDF curve, the excess
rainfall hyetograph of 0.075 hour unit duration using alternative block
method
Figure 3-9 25 Years 3 Hours Hyetograph for C-48
Applying equation (3.14), peak discharge of unit hydrograph became

1.15m3/s. Peak discharge of 0.50 m3/s obtained from 25 year 3 hour
convoluted hydrograph indicated below.
Figure 3-10 25 Years 3 Hours Hydrograph for C-48
Design discharge values for different return periods under SCS method
are clearly shown in appendix 3.5.

4. HYDRAULICS
4.1 General
Highway hydraulic structures perform the vital function of conveying,

diverting, or removing surface water from the highway right-of-way.
They should be designed to be commensurate with risk, construction
cost, importance of the road, economy of maintenance, and legal
requirements. One type of drainage facility will rarely provide the most
satisfactory drainage for all sections of a highway. Therefore, the
designer should know and understand how different drainage facilities
can be integrated to provide complete drainage control.
The design of drainage structures with the proper capacity to divert

water from the roadway, remove water from the roadway, and pass
collected water under the roadway is a hydraulic problem. Highway
drainage facilities can be broadly classified into three major categories
based on its design approach and function:
(1) open-channel
(2) Culvert
(3) Bridge
The design of these drainage structures requires the use of the

continuity, energy and momentum equations. From these fundamental
equations other equations are derived by a combination of
mathematics, laboratory experiments and field studies. These equations
are used differently to analyze open-channel flow and closed conduits
flowing full.
4.2 Open Channel Design
Open channels are artificial conveyances for water in which the water
surfaces are exposed to the atmosphere, and the gravity force
component in the direction of motion is the driving force. Open
channels are used to collect and dispose water at the side of the road.
Water flows in a sloping drainage channel because of the force of

gravity. The flow is resisted by the friction between the water and
wetted surface of the channel. The quantity of water flowing (Q), the
depth of flow (y), and the velocity of flow (V) depend upon the
channel shape, roughness (n), and slope (S0). Various equations have
been devised to determine the velocity and discharge in open channels.
A useful equation is the one that is named for Robert Manning, an Irish
engineer. The metric form of Manning's equation for the velocity of
flow in open channels is:

---------------------------------------eq.(4.1)
Where:
V = Mean velocity, m/s (ft/s)
n = Manning's coefficient of channel roughness
R = Hydraulic radius, m (ft)
S = Energy slope, m/m (ft/ft)
For steady uniform flow S = S0.
Ku = 1 (1.49)
Unpaved triangular side ditch is provided along sawla Maji road

depending upon geometric considerations (longitudinal slope).is less
than 5% and as the longitudinal slope exceeds 5%, paved triangular
side ditch provided on the project area. Interception channels also used
to intercept the incoming water from the catchment area or the runoff
from the hillside before it reaches the roadway and dispose it to the nearby
drainage outlet safely in conditions where it may not be possible to pass
the incoming water at the natural road crossing position due to deep cut
(geometric design output).
Intercepting Channels usually located on natural ground near the top edge
of a cut slope or along the edge of the right-of –way or some distance
away from the cut slope top edge. Intercepting the surface flow has a
particular importance in reducing cut slope erosion, silt deposition at
roadside ditches and to decrease the likelihood of flooding the highway in
severe storms.
Limiting values for the velocity of flow in the ditch to prevent scour,
together with the corresponding roughness coefficients for the different
types of ditch materials, which are normally encountered are listed out
below.

Table 4-15: Maximum Permissible Velocities in Erodible Ditches

and Corresponding Roughness Coefficients
Max. Permissible Roughness coefficient

Ditch material
velocity (m/sec) ‘n’
Sand, loam, fine gravel 0.6 0.022
and Volcanic ash
Stiff clay 1.1 0.020
Coarse gravel 1.5 0.025
Conglomerate, hard shale 2.0 0.040
and soft rock
Hard rock 5.0 0.040
Masonry 5.0 0.025
Concrete 5.0 0.017
4.3 Culvert
A culvert is a conduit that conveys flow through a roadway

embankment or past some other type of flow obstruction. Culverts are
typically constructed of concrete (reinforced and nonreinforced),
corrugated metal (aluminum or steel) and plastic in a variety of cross
sectional shapes.
Flow conditions in a culvert may occur as open-channel flow, gravity

full flow or pressure flow, or in some combination of these conditions.
A complete theoretical analysis of the hydraulics of culvert flow is
time-consuming and difficult. Flow conditions depend on a complex
interaction of a variety of factors created by upstream and downstream
conditions, barrel characteristics and inlet geometry. For purposes of
design, standard procedures and nomographs have been developed to
simplify the analysis of culvert flow.
Apart from design peak discharge debris and minor wood logs incoming
possibility also taken into account while selecting culvert size. Overall
minor drainage structures schedule is shown in appendix 4.1.
4.4 Bridges
Opening sizes of bridges checked for conveyance under hydraulic

analysis of bridge based on the river geometry, roughness coefficient
and slope of the river .Manning’s formula shown in equation is used to
determine bridge opening size:
1
Qn  AR 2 / 3 S 1 / 2 ---------------------------eq. (3.2)
n

Where,
Qn - Discharge at the design return period, N in m3/s
n - Manning’s roughness coefficient
S - Longitudinal slope
A - Cross sectional flow area in m2
R - Hydraulic radius in m
R=A/P where A is flow area and P is wetted perimeter
The hydraulic analysis of bridge includes a detail hydraulic

computation showing stage-discharge curve development, scour and
afflux computation due to constriction. After conducting a hydraulic
analysis safe and economical water way of the bridge is assigned for
each major structure.
Only one existing hydraulically sufficient bridge found on the first

50km stretch of the project area.
4.5 Condition Survey of Drainage Structure
Field survey was conducted to assess the performance of existing

drainage facilities (minor and major), to record condition of each structure
and also to collect information about high water mark observed on major
drainage structures.
Only one bridge structure is found on the Project Road with good
hydraulic performance and structural integrity. However, all minor
drainage structures will be demolished due to geometric design conditions
and hydraulic insufficiency.
4.6 Stream Hydraulic Investigations
4.6.1. Scour Determination
Determination of maximum scour depth that can occur at a crossing site is

necessary in the design of abutment and pier foundation because their
levels should be set below the scour depth for the design discharge.
Actual extent of scouring at a particular crossing site depends on various

factors such as velocity of water, change in the channel geometry and
hydraulics resulting from the introduction of the crossing structure, nature
of river bank and river bed materials, shape and size of Abutment/Pier
structure, etc.
As it is mentioned before only one existing bridge found on the project

road lying 0-50km.No significant scour problem observed at the bridge
but due to high energy condition of the incoming water at bridge up
stream right side bank, it is necessary to protect the bank approaching to
the bridge.

4.6.2. Backwater Due to Constriction
It is seldom economically feasible or necessary to bridge entire width of

the stream as it occurs at flood flow. This is mainly linked with specific
condition of the approach stream channel (flow distribution, hydraulic
performance and expected loss due to natural flow width constriction).
Where conditions permit, approach embankments are extended out onto
the flood plain to reduce costs, recognizing that, in so doing, the
embankments constrict the flood plain width of the stream during flood
stages. Constriction of flow causes loss of energy, reflected by rise of
water surface up stream of the bridge. This rise of water surface up stream
of the bridge due to natural flow channel constriction is called backwater
(afflux).
As flow channel constriction makes the overall design of bridges cost

effective compared to unobstructed stream bridge width, all bridges are
constricted at a reasonable size taking into account the associated
hydraulic impact on the natural flow pattern and expected losses. Afflux
due to natural stream flow area constriction can be estimated by different
empirical formulas which do require geometric and physiographic data.
Due to its vast geometric and physiographic data requirement, HEC

RAS hydraulic software is not recommended for backwater
computation on this project, rather Molesworth empirical relation is
used to compute afflux.
Molesworth Formula:
V2  A2 
h  0.015  2  1 ----------------eq. (3.3)
17.9  a 
Where h-afflux due to flow area constriction
V-normal velocity of flow (m/s)
A-area of natural water way (m2)
a-area of constricted artificial flow area (m2)
No flood width constriction which impart back water condition provided

on the existing bridge.

4.6.3. Streams Morphology and Protection
Streams have different alignments and geometry, there are meandering

rivers, braided rivers, and rivers that are essentially straight. In general,
braided rivers (streams having more than one flow channel) are relatively
steep and meandering streams have more gentle slopes. Meandering
streams that are not subject to rapid movement are reasonably predictable
in behavior; however, meandering streams are generally unstable with
eroding banks which may result in destruction of productive land, bridges
and other properties.
Bank revetment (gabion bank protection) is the best available engineering

response to the serious river bank erosion occurring around the bridge
sites there by maintaining more or less a defined channel flow. Hence
river bank protection work should be done both upstream and
downstream of those bridges which have some erosion problems to the
length and height that will be confirmed at the site level. Apart from these
protection works it is necessary to undertake both regular dredging works
around the bridge sites to clear boulders and deposition at and around the
bridge site.
It is also necessary some stream bank protection and guiding work where
ever it is vital to the performance of drainage crossing structures. Apart
from these protection measures, cut section should be vegetated to reduce
erosion on the cut slopes (sodding).

5. BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES
The previous section of the report describe the Hydrological and

Hydraulic investigations carried out, in order to derive waterway opening
sizes for the cross drainage of the project Road.
This section of the report discusses how the shape, level and alignment of
the cross-drainage structures have been modified by the influence of thlic
conditions at the crossing sites.
Bridges and other major structures are expensive items of road and
highway projects. Like any other engineering design, the structures should
also be safely and economically designed to provide adequate service.
New bridges and other major structures (e.g. box or masonry slab
culverts) for the present Project will generally be of reinforced concrete,
masonry or a combination of concrete and stone masonry, in order to
minimize the maintenance cost and to maximize the service life as well as
to utilize locally available materials and skills (for construction and
maintenance).
The following chapters of ERA Bridge Design Manual – 2002 have been
addressed in the analysis and design stage of the structures:
Chapter 2. General Requirements

Chapter 3. Load Requirements
Chapter 4. Site Investigation
Chapter 5. Preliminary Design/Layout of Bridges and Culverts
Chapter 6. Substructure Design
Chapter 7. Superstructure Design
Chapter 8. Bridge Details
Chapter 9. Reinforced Concrete
Chapter 10. Structural Steel (when required)
Chapter 16. Calculations, Drawings and Specifications
Chapter 17. Appendices

5.1 Condition and Description of Existing Structure
5.1.1 Criteria of Assessment and Inventory
The condition of existing structures has been assessed using the criteria
outlined below.
Geometrical Adequacy: The geometrical aspect of the drainage
structure with respect to horizontal and vertical alignments of the
approach road per ERA standard, since the bridge lied perpendicular to
the river flow direction & minimum standard vertical and horizontal
curves of the approach road.
Functional Adequacy: The existing bridge is well functioning with
required standard of carriage width, space provision of crash barrier, foot
path and railings.
Structural Adequacy: The superstructure, Left abutment & the two RC.
piers of existing bridge is structurally in good condition. But the right
abutment of the U\S side is scoured seriously (rifer to Fig. 1 to 3) and
provided with supportive structure.
Hydrology/Hydraulics Adequacy: According to our inventory data, the
3*20 span existing bridge is excessively adequate allow the maximum
design flood, scouring and any damage resulting there from.
In order to assess as per the criteria outlined above, inventory has been
carried on the structures as follows:
 Station; 38+ 725 & Bridge name: Hirgino Bridge
 Structure Type: T-girder superstructure, RC. abutment and
Span: 3*20
 Type of construction materials used: All structures RC.
 Alignment of structure: straight,
Moreover, the inventory has also focused on the following:
 A detailed inspection of all structures

 The Concrete elements of the bridges were checked for
deflection, cracks, rust staining, exposed reinforcement etc.
 The Condition of the deck slab, T-beam, bearings.
 The abutments, wing walls and piers were inspected for
settlement cracks, movement and scour.
 Changes of river course and formation of eddies around the
substructure were observed.
 The road alignment and the course of the river at the location of
the bridge recorded.
 The span, width of carriageway and other dimensions of the
structural elements were recorded for assessment of load
carrying capacity of the bridge

5.1.2 Drainage Structures Inventory
Site information was recorded for the existing bridge for Sawla- Magi
road project. The existing bridge is triple span 20m each, i.e.60m total
clear span. data comprises details of the structure types, construction
materials, major dimensions, clearances, height of substructure etc.
Photo.1: Right abutment of the existing bridge (Sawla side)
Photo.2: Left abutment of the existing bridge (Maji side)

Photo.3: Partial view of scoured Right abutment of existing bridge

(Sawla side)
An appraisal of each structure was carried out to determine the condition
of each bridge with respect to serviceability and user safety. A standard
inspection format has been used in listing all the elements of the bridge
structure and all the common defects encountered. A duly qualified
inspector experienced in bridge design and maintenance and rehabilitation
works has completed the forms.
The inspection is being used as the basis for proposing the maintenance
and rehabilitation measures to be implemented during the construction
phase.
5.2 Foundation Investigation
The foundation material was investigated and bearing capacities were

recommended for the following at the existing bridge sites. For a
complete list of investigation, the reader is referred to the section of the
Soils, Materials and Pavement Design Report.
The following table gives recommendation on the subsurface condition of

the bridges.

Table 5-16: Summary of Foundation Investigation
Investigation Result
Recommended
Bearing Recommended
Name of
Foundation Capacity at Bearing Depth
River
Material Proposed along the river
Foundation banks.
Depth
The first 10-
15mm depth,
Black cotton &
Hirigno
Above 15mm 400 KPa 3.0m
Bridge
depth, Reddish
brown, sandy
siltsoil
5.3 Materials
Designs should be based on the material properties cited herein.
5.3.1 Concrete
Concrete strengths are classified according to the minimum 28-day

crushing compressive strength of 150mm cubes in N/mm2.
Beams, Deck and other Class A 30 N/mm2

Reinforced concrete structures
Concrete Railings Class Y 30 N/mm2
Others like Blinding, Mass Concrete

(Nominally Reinforced Concrete) Class C 20 N/mm2
Kerb foundation and blinding Concrete 7N/mm2
Blinding concrete is that layer cast on the exposed face of the excavation,
prior to further construction.
A conversion factor of 0.8 will be used in converting the cube strengths to
cylinder strengths in the structural calculation.
5.3.2 Stone Masonry
Masonry is divided into 2 classes, depending primarily on craftsmanship.

Class A and Class B Masonry consist of stones shaped, dressed, and laid
broken-coursed in cement mortar in accordance with certain specified

requirements. The two classes differ only in the degree of the specified
requirements. Both classes of masonry are intended for use in any part of
a structure. Class A is used primarily for major structures such as arch
barrels, piers and abutments higher than 8m. Class B is used for minor
structures such as spandrel walls, piers, abutments and retaining walls less
than or equal to 8m high.
5.3.3 Reinforcement
The yield strength for deformed reinforcing bar steel would be grade 60
for main bars and grade 40 for secondary bars and ties with diameters less
than 12mm.
Minimum Clear Cover to Reinforcement
Minimum cover to main bars for superstructures, including bars protected

by epoxy coating, shall be 25 mm. Minimum cover for reinforcing bars
used in foundations should be 50mm. Cover to ties and stirrups shall be
12 mm less than the values specified in Table below for main bars, but
shall not be less than 25 mm.
Table 5-17: Cover for Unprotected Main Reinforcing Steel (mm)
Water/Cement Ratio 0,40 0,45 0,50

SITUATION COVER (mm)
Direct exposure to salt water 80 100 120
Cast against earth (i.e. Bottom of
60 75 90
footings)
Exterior other than above 40 50 60
Interior other than above (i.e. hollow
structures)
32 40 48
• Up to 35 Bar
40 50 60
• 45 and 55Bars
Bottom of cast-in-place slabs
• Up to 35 Bar 25 25 30
• 45 and 55Bars 40 50 60
Cast – in - place Piles
• Non-corrosive environnements 40 50 60
• Corrosive environments
- General 60 75 90
- Protected 60 75 90

5.4 Load Requirements
The load and resistance factor design method (LRFD) was used for all
structures. This method is technically safe and economical.
This section specifies minimum requirements for loads and forces, the
limits of their application, load factors, and load combinations used for the
design of new bridges. The load provisions may also be applied to the
structural evaluation of existing bridges.
The design shall be done under the most unfavorable load requirements.
A minimum load factor is specified for force effects that may develop
during construction.
5.4.1 Load Factors and Combinations
The total factored force effect shall be taken as:

Q = ii Qi
Where: i= load modifier
Qi = force effects from loads specified herein
 = load factors
The load factors for various loads comprising a design load combination
shall be taken as specified in Table 3.1 in ERA Design Manual-2002. All
relevant subsets of the load combinations shall be investigated. For each
load combination, every load that is indicated to be taken into account and
that is relevant to the component being designed, including all significant
effects due to distortion, shall be multiplied by the appropriate load factor
and multiple presence factors, if applicable.
5.4.2 Earth Pressure
Earth pressure shall be considered as a function of the:

 Type and density of earth,
 Water content,
 Soil creep characteristics,
 Degree of compaction
 Location of groundwater table,
 Earth-structure interaction,
 Amount of surcharge, and
 Earthquake effects.

Walls that can tolerate little or no movement should be designed for at-
rest earth pressure. Walls that can move away from the soil mass should
be designed for pressures between active and at-rest conditions,
depending on the magnitude of the tolerable movements. Movement
required reaching the minimum active pressure or the maximum passive
pressure is a function of the wall height and the soil type.
For walls that are backfilled with cohesive materials, the effects of soil
creep should be taken into consideration in estimating the design earth
pressures.
Under stress conditions close to the minimum active or maximum passive

earth pressures, the cohesive soils creep continually, and the movements
produce active or passive pressures only temporarily.
5.5 Design procedure of the Structure
Table 5-18: Bridge Span, Type of Superstructure and

Substructure
Bridge Description
Bridge Super- Sub-
Station Name Maintenance
Clear Structure Structure Remark
action
Span type type
RC Deck RC Provide River Existing
Girder Abutment Training Bridge
Hirgno
38 + 725 3*20 with no structure along
Bridge
wing wall the u/s side of
the Right bank
Design Procedure
In design process, the primary thing is the data gathering stage, followed
by conceptual, rhetorical, and schematic stages. In the data gathering
stage, much information shall be found about the bridge site, topography,
functional requirements, soil conditions, availability of materials,
hydrology, whether conditions (temperature ranges and wind variations),
and earth quake history will be studied.
The design procedure is described below diagrammatically.

Input Process Output
Description &
Data gathering Design procedure Justification
Stage
Regulations ERA-2002 Bridge design manual requirements, Costs, Time,

Safety, Codes of practice, Construction Methods
Figure 5.1: Model of Bridge Structural Design Process
In the above diagram, the output components are Description and

Justification. Description of the design will be drawings and Justification
of the design will be the structural integrity and stability of the proposed
design.

APPENDIX 3.1
CATCHMENT AREA

FINNROAD in association with Ramboll and SABA Engineering PLC
APPENDIX 3.2
TIME OF CONCENTRATION &

AVERAGE SLOPE

APPENDIX 3.3
SUMMARY OF PEAK DISCHARGE

BY RATIONAL METHOD

APPENDIX 3.4
CURVE NUMBER DETERMINATION

APPENDIX 3.5
Summary of SCS Peak Discharge

APPENDIX 4.1
MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES

SCHEDULE

APPENDIX 4.2
DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
INVENTORY

APPENDIX 4.3
DITCH SCHEDULE

APPENDIX 5.1
DESIGN OF SUPERSTRUCTURE

APPENDIX 5.2
DESIGN OF SUBSTRUCTURE


Sawla - Laska (Lot - I) Road Project Hydrology - Hydraulics M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sawla - Laska (Lot - I) Road Project Hydrology - Hydraulics M

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Sawla - Laska (Lot - I) Road Project Hydrology - Hydraulics M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA

ETHIOPIAN ROADS AUTHORITY

Consultancy Services for

Sawla - Maji Road

Lot – 1: Sawla-Laska Section

3.3.3.3 Triangular Unit Hydrograph or Soil Conservation

Appendix 3.1: Catchment area

Lot – 1: Sawla-Laska Section

Table 2-1: Design Flood Return Periods ......................................................................6

Lot – 1: Sawla-Laska Section

Lot – 1: Sawla-Laska Section

1.1 Project Background Information

Because of the economic status, Ethiopia has been categorized among

In Ethiopia, road transport is the dominant mode of mobility

In order to effectively tackle poverty, the improvement of

The Government of the Federal Republic of Ethiopia has obtained a

1. Review of Feasibility Study, Review of Environmental Impact

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

2. Feasibility Study, Environmental Impact Assessment, Detailed

The Ethiopian Roads Authority (ERA), as the implementing agency of

As per the instruction given by the client, on November 1, 2007,

 Alignment selection and/or adjustment;

1.2 Purpose of the Project

The ultimate objectives of the project as a whole are to connect

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

1.3 Objective of the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Study

 Collect existing drainage related data,

The main purpose of the hydrological/Hydraulics study for this project

Landforms, land use, and vegetation coverage and rainfall pattern of

The maximum discharge of a waterway is a function of its catchments

1.4 Project Location

Sawla Maji road is located in Southern Nations, Nationalities and

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

1.5 Organization of the Report

The report is organized in to five parts. The first one refers

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

2. DESIGN STANDARD FOR HYDROLOGY AND

The main objective of the hydrology and hydraulic study is to

2.2 Hydrologic Design Standards

The hydrologic design is carried out according to Drainage Manual,

2.2.1 Selection of Design Frequency

Table 2-2: Design Flood Return Periods

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

2.2.2 Flood Estimation Methods

Rational Method – This method is widely used for peak discharge

Techniques developed by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service (12) for

2.2.2.1 Rational Method of Estimating Flood

Q = 0.278 C I A ---------------------------------- (eq.2.1)

Q = Maximum rate of runoff, m3/s

Channel flow travel time computation using Kirpich formula:

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

2.2.2.2 SCS Method of Estimating Flood

The depth of runoff resulting from a required return period rainfall

2.2.3 Hydraulic Design Standards

The ERA Drainage Design Manual recommends a minimum size of

Lot-1: Sawla-Laska Section

minimum size of pipe culvert to be used is recommended as 900 mm

2.2.3.1 Culvert Design Criteria