Pavement Drainage

Note: This section was extracted from the Urban Drainage Design Manual, Hydraulic Engineering
Circular Number 22 (HEC-22), Pavement Drainage; published by the Federal Highway
Administration in November 1996. All charts referred to in this section are provided in HEC 22
Charts. The HEC-22 methodology is used by FlowMaster to perform flow computations through
inlets.

FlowMaster performs hydraulic computations for analyzing or sizing one inlet at a time. For
analyzing or designing an entire storm sewer network, Haestad Methods offers StormCAD,
which also follows the HEC-22 methodology for inlet computations.

Effective drainage of highway pavements is essential to the maintenance of highway service level and to traffic safety. Water on
the pavement can interrupt traffic, reduce skid resistance, increase potential for hydroplaning, limit visibility due to splash and
spray, and cause difficulty in steering a vehicle when the front wheels encounter puddles.

Pavement drainage requires consideration of surface drainage, gutter flow, and inlet capacity. The design of these elements is
dependent on storm frequency and the allowable spread of storm water on the pavement surface. This section presents design
guidance for the design of these elements. Most of the information presented here was originally published in HEC-12, Drainage
of Highway Pavements, and AASHTO's Model Drainage Manual.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Design Frequency and Spread
Two of the more significant variables considered in the design of highway pavement drainage are the frequency of the design
runoff event and the allowable spread of water on the pavement. A related consideration is the use of an event of lesser
frequency to check the drainage design.

Spread and design frequency are not independent. The implications of the use of a criterion for spread of one-half of a traffic
lane are considerably different for one design frequency than for a lesser frequency. It also has different implications for a low-
traffic, low-speed highway than for a higher classification highway. These subjects are central to the issue of highway pavement
drainage and important to highway safety.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Selection of Design Frequency and Design Spread
The objective of highway storm drainage design is to provide for safe passage of vehicles during the design storm event. The
design of a drainage system for a curbed highway pavement section is to collect runoff in the gutter and convey it to pavement
inlets in a manner that provides reasonable safety for traffic and pedestrians at a reasonable cost. As spread from the curb
increases, the risks of traffic accidents and delays, and the nuisance and possible hazard to pedestrian traffic increase.

The process of selecting the recurrence interval and spread for design involves decisions regarding acceptable risks of
accidents and traffic delays and acceptable costs for the drainage system. Risks associated with water on traffic lanes are
greater with high traffic volumes, high speeds, and higher highway classifications than with lower volumes, speeds, and highway
classifications.

A summary of the major considerations that enter into the selection of design frequency and design spread follows:

1. The classification of the highway is a good starting point in the selection process since it defines the public's expectations
regarding water on the pavement surface. Ponding on traffic lanes of high-speed, high-volume highways is contrary to the
public's expectations and thus the risks of accidents and the costs of traffic delays are high.
2. Design speed is important to the selection of design criteria. At speeds greater than 70 km/hr (44 mi/hr), it has been
shown that water on the pavement can cause hydroplaning.
3. Projected traffic volumes are an indicator of the economic importance of keeping the highway open to traffic. The costs of
traffic delays and accidents increase with increasing traffic volumes.
4. The intensity of rainfall events may significantly affect the selection of design frequency and spread. Risks associated
with the spread of water on pavements may be less in arid areas subject to high intensity thunderstorm events than in
areas accustomed to frequent but less intense events.
5. Capital costs are neither the least nor last consideration. Cost considerations make it necessary to formulate a rational
approach to the selection of design criteria. Tradeoffs between desirable and practicable criteria are sometimes
necessary because of costs. In particular, the costs and feasibility of providing for a given design frequency and spread
may vary significantly between projects. In some cases, it may be practicable to significantly upgrade the drainage design
 and reduce risks at moderate costs. In other instances, such as where extensive outfalls or pumping stations are
required, costs may be very sensitive to the criteria selected for use in design.

Other considerations include inconvenience, hazards, and nuisances to pedestrian traffic. These considerations should not be
minimized and, in some locations such as in commercial areas, may assume major importance. Local design practice may also
be a major consideration since it can affect the feasibility of designing to higher standards, and it influences the public's
perception of acceptable practice.

The relative elevation of the highway and surrounding terrain is an additional consideration where water can be drained only
through a storm drainage system, as in underpasses and depressed sections. The potential for ponding to hazardous depths
should be considered in selecting the frequency and spread criteria and in checking the design against storm runoff events of
lesser frequency than the design event.

Spread on traffic lanes can be tolerated to greater widths where traffic volumes and speeds are low. Spreads of one-half of a
traffic lane or more are usually considered a minimum type design for low-volume local roads.

The selection of design criteria for intermediate types of facilities may be the most difficult. For example, some arterials with
relatively high traffic volumes and speeds may not have shoulders which will convey the design runoff without encroaching on
the traffic lanes. In these instances, an assessment of the relative risks and costs of various design spreads may be helpful in
selecting appropriate design criteria. Table 6-1 provides suggested minimum design frequencies and spread based on the type
of highway and traffic speed.

The recommended design frequency for depressed sections and underpasses where ponded water can be removed only
through the storm drainage system is a 50-year frequency event. The use of a lesser frequency event, such as a 100-year
storm, to assess hazards at critical locations where water can pond to appreciable depths is commonly referred to as a check
storm or check event.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Selection of Check Storm and Spread
A check storm should be used any time runoff could cause unacceptable flooding during less frequent events. Also, inlets should
always be evaluated for a check storm when a series of inlets terminates at a sag vertical curve where ponding to hazardous
depths could occur.

The frequency selected for the check storm should be based on the same considerations used to select the design storm, i.e.,
the consequences of spread exceeding that chosen for design and the potential for ponding. Where no significant ponding can
occur, check storms are normally unnecessary.

Criteria for spread during the check event are: 1) one lane open to traffic during the check storm event, and 2) one lane free of
water during the check storm event. These criteria differ substantively, but each sets a standard by which the design can be
evaluated.

Table 6-1: Suggested Minimum Design Frequency and Spread

Road Classification Design Frequency Design Spread
High Volume, <70 km/hr (45 mph) 10-year Shoulder +1m (3ft)
Divided, or >70 km/hr (45 mph) 10-year Shoulder
Bi-Directional
Sag Point 50-year Shoulder +1m (3ft)
Collector <70 km/hr (45 mph 10-year 1/2 driving lane
>70 km/hr (45 mph) 10-year Shoulder
Sag Point 10-year 1/2 driving lane
Local Streets Low ADT 5-year 1/2 driving lane
High ADT 10-year 1/2 driving lane
Sag Point 10-year 1/2 driving lane

Copyright and Trademark Information

Surface Drainage
When rain falls on a sloped pavement surface, it forms a thin film of water that increases in thickness as it flows to the edge of
the pavement. Factors which influence the depth of water on the pavement are the length of flow path, surface texture, surface
slope, and rainfall intensity. As the depth of water on the pavement increases, the potential for vehicular hydroplaning increases.
For the purposes of highway drainage, a discussion of hydroplaning is presented and design guidance for the following drainage
elements is presented:

! longitudinal pavement slope

! cross or transverse pavement slope
! curb and gutter design
! roadside and median ditches
! bridge decks
! median barriers
! impact attenuators

Additional technical information on the mechanics of surface drainage can be found in Improved Surface Drainage of
Pavements, published by the Federal Highway Administration in 1995.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Hydroplaning
As the depth of water flowing over a roadway surface increases, the potential for hydroplaning increases. When a rolling tire
encounters a film of water on the roadway, the water is channeled through the tire tread pattern and through the surface
roughness of the pavement. Hydroplaning occurs when the drainage capacity of the tire tread pattern and the pavement surface
is exceeded and the water begins to build up in front of the tire. As the water builds up, a water wedge is created and this wedge
produces a hydrodynamic force which can lift the tire off the pavement surface. This is considered as full dynamic hydroplaning
and, since water offers little shear resistance, the tire loses its tractive ability and the driver has a loss of control of the vehicle.

Hydroplaning is a function of the water depth, roadway geometrics, vehicle speed, tread depth, tire inflation pressure, and
conditions of the pavement surface. It has been shown that hydroplaning can occur at speeds of 89 km/hr (55 mph) with a water
depth of 2 mm (0.08 in). The following can reduce the hydroplaning potential of a roadway surface:

1. Design the highway geometries to reduce the drainage path lengths of the water flowing over the pavement. This will
prevent flow build-up.
2. Increase the pavement surface texture depth by such methods as grooving of Portland cement concrete. An increase of
pavement surface texture will increase the drainage capacity at the tire pavement interface.
3. The use of open graded asphaltic pavements has been shown to greatly reduce the hydroplaning potential of the
roadway surface. This reduction is due to the ability of the water to be forced through the pavement under the tire. This
releases any hydrodynamic pressures that are created and reduces the potential for the tire to hydroplane.
4. The use of drainage structures along the roadway to capture the flow of water over the pavement will reduce the
thickness of the film of water and reduce the hydroplaning potential of the roadway surface.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Longitudinal Slope
Experience has shown that the recommended minimum values of roadway longitudinal slope given in the AASHTO Policy on
Geometric Design will provide safe, acceptable pavement drainage. In addition, the following general guidelines are presented:

1. A minimum longitudinal gradient is more important for a curbed pavement than for an uncurbed pavement since the water
is constrained by the curb. However, flat gradients on uncurbed pavements can lead to a spread problem if vegetation is
allowed to build up along the pavement edge.
2. Desirable gutter grades should not be less than 0.5 percent for curbed pavements with an absolute minimum of 0.3
percent. Minimum grades can be maintained in very flat terrain by use of a rolling profile, or by warping the cross slope to
achieve rolling gutter profiles.
3. To provide adequate drainage in sag vertical curves, a minimum slope of 0.3 percent should be maintained within 15
meters (50 ft) of the low point of the curve. This is accomplished where the length of the curve in meters divided by the
algebraic difference in grades in percent (K) is equal to or less than 50 (167 in U.S. customary units). This is represented
as:
 (6.1)

Where K = Vertical curve constant (m/%, ft/%)

L = Horizontal length of curve (m, ft)
G = Grade of roadway (%)
i

Copyright and Trademark Information

Cross (Transverse) Slope
Table 6-2 indicates an acceptable range of cross slopes as specified in AASHTO's policy on geometric design of highways and
streets. These cross slopes are a compromise between the need for reasonably steep cross slopes for drainage and relatively
flat cross slopes for driver comfort and safety. These cross slopes represent standard practice.

As reported in Pavement and Geometric Design Criteria for Minimizing Hydroplaning, cross slopes of 2 percent have little effect
on driver effort in steering or on friction demand for vehicle stability. Use of a cross slope steeper than 2 percent on pavements
with a central crown line is not desirable. In areas of intense rainfall, a somewhat steeper cross slope (2.5 percent) may be used
to facilitate drainage.

On multi-lane highways where three (3) lanes or more are sloped in the same direction, it is desirable to counter the resulting
increase in flow depth by increasing the cross slope of the outermost lanes. The two (2) lanes adjacent to the crown line should
be pitched at the normal slope, and successive lane pairs, or portions thereof outward, should be increased by about 0.5 to 1
percent. The maximum pavement cross slope should be limited to 4 percent (refer to table 6-2).

Additional guidelines related to cross slope are:

1. Although not widely encouraged, inside lanes can be sloped toward the median if conditions warrant.
2. Median areas should not be drained across travel lanes.
3. The number and length of flat pavement sections in cross slope transition areas should be minimized. Consideration
should be given to increasing cross slopes in sag vertical curves, crest vertical curves, and in sections of flat longitudinal
grades.
4. Shoulders should be sloped to drain away from the pavement, except with raised, narrow medians and super-elevations.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Curb and Gutter
Curbs are normally used at the outside edge of pavements for low-speed, highway facilities, and in some instances adjacent to
shoulders on moderate to high-speed facilities. They serve the following purposes:

! contain the surface runoff within the roadway and away from adjacent properties,
! prevent erosion on fill slopes,
! provide pavement delineation, and
! enable the orderly development of property adjacent to the roadway.

Table 6-2: Normal Pavement Cross Slopes

Surface Type Range in Rate of Surface Slope
2 Lanes (High-Type Surface) 0.015 – 0.020
3 or more lanes, each direction (High-Type Surface) 0.015 minimum; increase 0.005 to 0.010 per lane; 0.040 maximum
Intermediate Surface 0.015 – 0.030
Low-Type Surface 0.020 – 0.060
Bituminous or Concrete Shoulders 0.020 – 0.060
Bituminous or Concrete Shoulders With Curbs >= 0.040

Gutters formed in combination with curbs are available in 0.3 through 1.0 meter (12 through 39 inch) widths. Gutter cross slopes
may be equal to that of the pavement or may be designed with a steeper cross slope, usually 80 mm per meter (1 inch per foot)
steeper than the shoulder or parking lane (if used). AASHTO geometric guidelines state that an 8% slope is a common
maximum cross slope.

A curb and gutter combination forms a triangular channel that can convey runoff less than or equal to the design flow without
interruption of the traffic. When a design flow occurs, there is a spread or widening of the conveyed water surface. The water
spreads to include not only the gutter width, but also parking lanes or shoulders, and portions of the traveled surface. Spread is
what concerns the hydraulic engineer in curb and gutter flow. The distance of the spread, T, is measured perpendicular to the
curb face to the extent of the water on the roadway and is shown in Figure 6-1.

Limiting this width becomes a very important design criterion and will be discussed in detail in Flow in Gutters.

Where practical, runoff from cut slopes and other areas draining toward the roadway should be intercepted before it reaches the
highway. By doing so, the deposition of sediment and other debris on the roadway as well as the amount of water which must be
carried in the gutter section will be minimized. Where curbs are not needed for traffic control, shallow ditch sections at the edge
of the roadway pavement or shoulder offer advantages over curbed sections by providing less of a hazard to traffic than a near-
vertical curb and by providing hydraulic capacity that is not dependent on spread on the pavement. These ditch sections are
particularly appropriate where curbs have historically been used to prevent water from eroding fill slopes.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Roadside and Median Channels

Figure 6-1: Typical Gutter Sections

Roadside channels are commonly used with uncurbed roadway sections to convey runoff from the highway pavement and from
areas which drain toward the highway. Due to right-of-way limitations, roadside channels cannot be used on most urban
arterials. They can be used in cut sections, depressed sections, and other locations where sufficient right-of-way is available and
driveways or intersections are infrequent.

To prevent drainage from the median areas from running across the travel lanes, slope median areas and inside shoulders to a
center swale. This design is particularly important for high speed facilities and for facilities with more than two lanes of traffic in
each direction.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Bridge Decks
Bridge deck drainage is similar to that of curbed roadway sections. Effective bridge deck drainage is important for the following
reasons:
 ! Deck structural and reinforcing steel is susceptible to corrosion from deicing salts
! Moisture on bridge decks freezes before surface roadways
! Hydroplaning often occurs at shallower depths on bridges due to the reduced surface texture of concrete bridge decks

Bridge deck drainage is often less efficient than roadway sections because cross slopes are flatter, parapets collect large
amounts of debris, and drainage inlets or typical bridge scuppers are less hydraulically efficient and more easily clogged by
debris. Because of the difficulties in providing for and maintaining adequate deck drainage systems, gutter flow from roadways
should be intercepted before it reaches a bridge. For similar reasons, zero gradients and sag vertical curves should be avoided
on bridges. Additionally, runoff from bridge decks should be collected immediately after it flows onto the subsequent roadway
section where larger grates and inlet structures can be used.

A detailed coverage of bridge deck drainage systems is included in Design of Bridge Deck Drainage, published by the Federal
Highway Administration in 1993.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Median Barriers
Slope the shoulder areas adjacent to median barriers to the center to prevent drainage from running across the traveled
pavement. Where median barriers are used, and particularly on horizontal curves with associated superelevations, it is
necessary to provide inlets or slotted drains to collect the water accumulated against the barrier. Additionally, some highway
department agencies use a piping system to convey water through the barrier.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Impact Attenuators
The location of impact attenuator systems should be reviewed to determine the need for drainage structures in these areas. With
some impact attenuator systems it is necessary to have a clear or unobstructed opening as traffic approaches the point of
impact to allow a vehicle to impact the system head on. If the impact attenuator is placed in an area where superelevation or
other grade separation occurs, grate inlets and/or slotted drains may be needed to prevent water from running through the clear
opening and crossing the highway lanes or ramp lanes. Curb, curb-type structures or swales cannot be used to direct water
across this clear opening as vehicle vaulting could occur.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Flow in Gutters
A pavement gutter is defined, for purposes of this circular, as a section of pavement adjacent to the roadway which conveys
water during a storm runoff event. It may include a portion or all of a travel lane.

Gutter sections can be categorized as conventional or shallow swale type as illustrated in Figure 6-1. Conventional curb and
gutter sections usually have a triangular shape with the curb forming the near-vertical leg of the triangle. Conventional gutters
may have a straight cross slope (Figure 6-1, a.1.), a composite cross slope where the gutter slope varies from the pavement
cross slope (Figure 6-1, a.2.), or a parabolic section (Figure 6-1, a.3.). Shallow swale gutters typically have V-shaped or circular
sections as illustrated in Figure 6-1, b.1, b.2., and b.3., respectively, and are often used in paved median areas on roadways
with inverted crowns.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Capacity Relationship
Gutter flow calculations are necessary to establish the spread of water on the shoulder, parking lane, or pavement section. A
modification of the Manning equation can be used for computing flow in triangular channels. The modification is necessary
because the hydraulic radius in the equation does not adequately describe the gutter cross section, particularly where the top
width of the water surface may be more than 40 times the depth at the curb. To compute gutter flow, the Manning equation is
integrated for an increment of width across the section. The resulting equation is:

(6.2)
 Where K = 0.376 SI, 0.56 U.S. customary
c
n = Manning's coefficient (see Table 6-3)
Q = Flow rate (m3 /sec., ft3/sec.)
T = Width of flow—spread (m, ft)
S = Cross slope (m/m, ft/ft)
x
S = Longitudinal slope (m/m, ft/ft)
L

Equation 6.2 neglects the resistance of the curb face since this resistance is negligible.

Spread on the pavement and flow depth at the curb are often used as criteria for spacing pavement drainage inlets. Design
Chart 1 in HEC 22 Charts is a nomograph for solving Equation 6.2. The chart can be used for either criterion with the
relationship:

(6.3)

Where d = Depth of flow (m, ft)

Chart 1 can be used for direct solution of gutter flow where the Manning n value is 0.016. For other values of n, divide the value
of Q by n. Instructions for use and an example problem solution are provided on the chart.
n

Table 6-3: Manning's n for Street and Pavement Gutters

Type of Gutter or Pavement Manning's n
Concrete gutter, trowled finish 0.012
Asphalt pavement, smooth texture 0.013
Asphalt pavement, rough texture 0.016
Concrete gutter-asphalt pavement, smooth 0.013
Concrete gutter-asphalt pavement, rough 0.015
Concrete pavement, float finish 0.014
Concrete pavement, broom finish 0.016
For gutters with small slope, where sediment may accumulate, increase the above values of "n" by 0.02
Reference: USDOT, FHWA, HDS-3

Copyright and Trademark Information

Conventional Curb and Gutter Sections
Conventional gutters begin at the inside base of the curb and usually extend from the curb face toward the roadway centerline a
distance of 0.3 to 1 meter. As illustrated in Figure 6-1, gutters can have uniform, composite, or curved sections. Uniform gutter
sections have a cross-slope which is equal to the cross-slope of the shoulder or travel lane adjacent to the gutter. Gutters having
composite sections are depressed in relation to the adjacent pavement slope. That is, the paved gutter has a cross-slope which
is steeper than that of the adjacent pavement. This concept is illustrated in Example 6-1. Curved gutter sections are sometimes
found along older city streets or highways with curved pavement sections. Procedures for computing the capacity of curb and
gutter sections follow.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Conventional Gutters of Uniform Cross Slope
The nomograph in Chart 1 solves Equation 6.2 for gutters having triangular cross sections. Example 6-1 illustrates its use for the
analysis of conventional gutters with uniform cross slope.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Composite Gutter Sections
The design of composite gutter sections requires consideration of flow in the depressed segment of the gutter, Q . Equation
w
6.4, displayed graphically as Chart 2, is provided for use with Equations 6.5 and 6.6 and Chart 1 to determine the flow in a width
of gutter in a composite cross section, W, less than the total spread, T. The procedure for analyzing composite gutter sections is
demonstrated in Example 6-2.

(6.4)

(6.5)

Where Q = Flow rate in depressed section of gutter (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)

w
Q = Gutter flow rate (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
Q = Flow capacity of gutter section above depressed section (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
s

(6.6)

Where E = Ratio of flow in a chosen width (usually the width of a grate) to the total gutter flow (Q /Q)
o w
S = S +a/W (see Figure 6-1 a.2)
w x

Figure 6-2 illustrates a design chart for a composite gutter with a 0.60 m (2 foot) wide gutter section with a 50 mm depression at
the curb that begins at the projection of the uniform cross slope at the curb face. A series of charts similar to Figure 6-2 for
typical gutter configurations could be developed.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Conventional Gutters with Curved Sections
Where the pavement cross section is curved, gutter capacity varies with the configuration of the pavement. For this reason,
discharge-spread or discharge-depth at-the-curb relationships developed for one pavement configuration are not applicable to
another section with a different crown height or half-width.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Shallow Swale Sections
Where curbs are not needed for traffic control, a small swale section of circular or V shape may be used to convey runoff from
the pavement. As an example, the control of pavement runoff on fills may be needed to protect the embankment from erosion.
Small swale sections may have sufficient capacity to convey the flow to a location suitable for interception.

Copyright and Trademark Information

V-Sections
Chart 1 can be used to compute the flow in a shallow V-shaped section. When using Chart 1 for V-shaped channels, the cross
slope, S is determined by the following equation:
x
 (6.7)

Example 6-3 demonstrates the use of Chart 1 to analyze a V-shaped shoulder gutter. Analysis of a V-shaped gutter resulting
from a roadway with an inverted crown section is illustrated in Example 6-4.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Circular Sections
Flow in shallow circular gutter sections can be represented by the relationship:

(6.8)

Where d = Depth of flow in circular gutter (m, ft)

D = Diameter of circular gutter (m, ft)
K = 1.179 SI, 0.972 U.S. customary
c

which is displayed on Chart 3. The chord of the arc which can be computed using Equation 6.9 represents the width of circular
gutter section T .
w

(6.9)

Where T = Width of circular gutter section (m, ft)

w
r = Radius of flow in circular gutter (m, ft)

Copyright and Trademark Information

Flow in Sag Vertical Curves
As gutter flow approaches the low point in a sag vertical curve the flow can exceed the allowable design spread values as a
result of the continually decreasing gutter slope. The spread in these areas should be checked to insure it remains within
allowable limits. If the computed spread exceeds design values, additional inlets should be provided to reduce the flow as it
approaches the low point. Sag vertical curves and measures for reducing spread are discussed further in Drainage Inlet Design.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Relative Flow Capacities
Example 6-1 and Example 6-2 illustrate the advantage of a composite gutter section. The capacity of the section with a
depressed gutter in the examples is 70 percent greater than that of the section with a straight cross slope with all other
parameters held constant.

Equation (6.2) can be used to examine the relative effects of changing the values of spread, cross slope, and longitudinal slope
on the capacity of a section with a straight cross slope.

To examine the effects of cross slope on gutter capacity, Equation (6.2) can be transformed as follows into a relationship
between S and Q as follows:
x

Let
 (6.10)

Then

(6.11)

And

(6.12)

Similar transformations can be performed to evaluate the effects of changing longitudinal slope and width of spread on gutter
capacity resulting in Equations 6.13 and 6.14 respectively.

(6.13)

(6.14)

Equations 6.10, 6.13, and 6.14 are illustrated in Figure 6-3. As illustrated, the effects of spread on gutter capacity are greater
than the effects of cross slope and longitudinal slope, as would be expected due to the larger exponent of the spread term. The
magnitude of the effect is demonstrated when gutter capacity with a 3 meter (9.8 ft) spread is 18.8 times greater than with a 1
meter (3.3 ft) spread, and 3 times greater than a spread of 2 meters (6.6 ft).

The effects of cross slope are also relatively great as illustrated by a comparison of gutter capacities with different cross slopes.
At a cross slope of 4 percent, a gutter has 10 times the capacity of a gutter of 1 percent cross slope. A gutter at 4 percent cross
slope has 3.2 times the capacity of a gutter at 2 percent cross slope.
 Figure 6-3: Relative Effects of Spread, Cross Slope, and Longitudinal Slope on Gutter Capacity

Little latitude is generally available to vary longitudinal slope in order to increase gutter capacity, but slope changes which
change gutter capacity are frequent. Figure 6-3 shows that a change from S = 0.04 to 0.02 will reduce gutter capacity to 71
percent of the capacity at S = 0.04.

Table 6-4: Spread at Average Velocity in a

Reach of Triangular Gutter

T /T 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

1 2
T /T 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.74 0.77 0.82 0.86 0.90
a 2

Copyright and Trademark Information

Gutter Flow Time
The flow time in gutters is an important component of the time of concentration for the contributing drainage area to an inlet. To
find the gutter flow component of the time of concentration, a method for estimating the average velocity in a reach of gutter is
needed. The velocity in a gutter varies with the flow rate and the flow rate varies with the distance along the gutter, i.e., both the
velocity and flow rate in a gutter are spatially varied. The time of flow can be estimated by use of an average velocity obtained
by integration of the Manning equation for the gutter section with respect to time.

Table 6-4 and Chart 4 can be used to determine the average velocity in triangular gutter sections. In the table, T and T are the
1 2
spread at the upstream and downstream ends of the gutter section respectively. T is the spread at the average velocity. Chart
a
4 is a nomograph to solve equation 6.15 for the velocity in a triangular channel with known cross slope, gutter slope, and spread.

(6.15)

Where K = 0.752 SI, 1.11 U.S. customary

c
 V = Velocity in the triangular channel (m/sec., ft/sec.)

Example 6-6 illustrates the use of Table 6-4 and Chart 4 to determine the average gutter velocity.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Drainage Inlet Design
The hydraulic capacity of a storm drain inlet depends upon its geometry as well as the characteristics of the gutter flow. Inlet
capacity governs both the rate of water removal from the gutter and the amount of water that can enter the storm drainage
system. Inadequate inlet capacity or poor inlet location may cause flooding on the roadway resulting in a hazard to the traveling
public.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Inlet Types
Storm drain inlets are used to collect runoff and discharge it to an underground storm drainage system. Inlets are typically
located in gutter sections, paved medians, and roadside and median ditches. Inlets used for the drainage of highway surfaces
can be divided into the following four classes:

! Grate inlets
! Curb-opening inlets
! Slotted inlets
! Combination inlets

Grate inlets consist of an opening in the gutter or ditch covered by a grate. Curb opening inlets are vertical openings in the curb
covered by a top slab. Slotted inlets consist of a pipe cut along the longitudinal axis with bars perpendicular to the opening to
maintain the slotted opening. Combination inlets consist of both a curb opening inlet and a grate inlet placed in a side-by-side
configuration, but the curb opening may be located in part upstream of the grate. Figure 6-4 illustrates each class of inlets.
Slotted drains may also be used with grates and each type of inlet may be installed with or without a depression of the gutter.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Characteristics and Uses of Inlets
Grate inlets, as a class, perform satisfactorily over a wide range of gutter grades. Grate inlets generally lose capacity with
increase in grade, but to a lesser degree than curb opening inlets. The principal advantage of grate inlets is that they are
installed along the roadway where the water is flowing. Their principal disadvantage is that floating trash or debris may clog
them. For safety reasons, preference should be given to grate inlets where out-of-control vehicles might be involved.
Additionally, where bicycle traffic occurs, grates should be bicycle safe.

Curb-opening inlets are most effective on flatter slopes, in sags, and with flows which typically carry significant amounts of
floating debris. The interception capacity of curb-opening inlets decreases as the gutter grade steepens. Consequently, the use
of curb-opening inlets is recommended in sags and on grades less than 3%. Of course, they are bicycle safe as well.

Combination inlets provide the advantages of both curb opening and grate inlets. This combination results in a high capacity
inlet which offers the advantages of both grate and curb-opening inlets. When the curb opening precedes the grate in a Sweeper
configuration, the curb-opening inlet acts as a trash interceptor during the initial phases of a storm. Used in a sag configuration,
the sweeper inlet can have a curb opening on both sides of the grate.

Slotted inlets can be used in areas where it is desirable to intercept sheet flow before it crosses onto a section of roadway.
Their principal advantage is their ability to intercept flow over a wide section. However, slotted inlets are very susceptible to
clogging from sediments and debris, and are not recommended for use in environments where significant sediment or debris
loads may be present. Slotted inlets on a longitudinal grade do have the same hydraulic capacity as curb openings when debris
is not a factor.
 Figure 6-4: Classes of Storm Drain Inlets

Copyright and Trademark Information

Inlet Capacity
Several agencies and manufacturers of grates have investigated inlet interception capacity. Hydraulic tests on grate inlets and
slotted inlets included in this document were conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation for the Federal Highway Administration.
Four of the grates selected for testing were rated highest in bicycle safety tests, three have designs and bar spacing similar to
those proven bicycle-safe, and a parallel bar grate was used as a standard with which to compare the performance of others.

Figures 7.5 through 7.10 show the inlet grates for which design procedures were developed. For ease in identification, the
following terms have been adopted:

P-50: Parallel bar grate with bar spacing 48 mm (1-7/8 in) on center (Figure 6-5).
P-50x100: Parallel bar grate with bar spacing 48 mm (1-7/8 in) on center and 10 mm (3/8 in) diameter lateral rods spaced at 102
mm (4 in) on center (Figure 6-5).
P-30: Parallel bar grate with 29 mm (1-1/8 in) on center bar spacing (Figure 6-6).
Curved Vane: Curved vane grate with 83 mm (3-1/4 in) longitudinal bar and 108 mm (4-1/4 in) transverse bar spacing on center
Figure 6-7).
45° – 60 Tilt Bar: 45° tilt-bar grate with 57 mm (2-1/4 in) longitudinal bar and 102 mm (4 in) transverse bar spacing on center
(Figure 6-8).
45° – 85 Tilt Bar: 45° tilt-bar grate with 83 mm (3-1/4 in) longitudinal bar and 102 mm (4 in) transverse bar spacing on center
(Figure 6-8).
30° – 85 Tilt Bar: 30° tilt-bar grate with 83 mm (3-1/4 in) longitudinal bar and 102 mm (4 in) transverse bar spacing on center
(Figure 6-9).
Reticuline: Honeycomb pattern of lateral bars and longitudinal bearing bars (Figure 6-10).
 Figure 6-5: P-50 and P-50x100 Grates

The interception capacity of curb-opening inlets has also been investigated by several agencies. Design procedures adopted for
this Circular are largely derived from experimental work at Colorado State University for the Federal Highway Administration, as
reported in both Hydraulics of Runoff from Developed Surfaces and Hydraulic Design of Depressed Curb-Opening Inlets.
Figure 6-6: P-30 Grate
Figure 6-7: Curved Vane Grate
Figure 6-8: 45 – 60-Degree and 45-85-Degree Tilt-Bar Grates
Figure 6-9: 30 – 85-Degree Tilt-Bar Grate
 Figure 6-10: Reticuline Grate

Copyright and Trademark Information

Factors Affecting Interception Capacity on Continuous Grades

Inlet interception capacity, Q , is the flow intercepted by an inlet under a given set of conditions. The efficiency of an inlet, E, is
i
the percent of total flow that the inlet will intercept for those conditions. The efficiency of an inlet changes with changes in cross
slope, longitudinal slope, total gutter flow, and, to a lesser extent, pavement roughness. In mathematical form, efficiency, E, is
defined by the following equation:

(6.16)

Where E = Inlet efficiency

Q = Total gutter flow (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
Q = Intercepted flow (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
i

Flow that is not intercepted by an inlet is termed carryover or bypass and is defined as follows:

(6.17)
 Where Q = Bypass flow (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
b

The interception capacity of all inlet configurations increases with increasing flow rates, and inlet efficiency generally decreases
with increasing flow rates. Factors affecting gutter flow also affect inlet interception capacity. The depth of water next to the curb
is the major factor in the interception capacity of both grate inlets and curb-opening inlets.

The interception capacity of a grate inlet depends on the amount of water flowing over the grate, the size and configuration of
the grate and the velocity of flow in the gutter. The efficiency of a grate is dependent on the same factors and total flow in the
gutter.

Interception capacity of a curb-opening inlet is largely dependent on flow depth at the curb and curb opening length. Flow depth
at the curb and consequently, curb opening inlet interception capacity and efficiency, is increased by the use of a local gutter
depression at the curb-opening or a continuously depressed gutter to the proportion of the total flow adjacent to the curb. Top
slab supports placed flush with the curb line can substantially reduce the interception capacity of curb openings.

Tests have shown that such supports reduce the effectiveness of openings downstream of the support by as much as 50
percent and, if debris is caught at the support, interception by the downstream portion of the opening may be reduced to near
zero. If intermediate top slab supports are used, they should be recessed several inches from the curb line and rounded in
shape.

Slotted inlets function in essentially the same manner as curb opening inlets, i.e., as weirs with flow entering from the side.
Interception capacity is dependent on flow depth and inlet length. Efficiency is dependent on flow depth, inlet length and total
gutter flow.

The interception capacity of an equal length combination inlet consisting of a grate placed alongside a curb opening on a grade
does not differ materially from that of a grate only. Interception capacity and efficiency are dependent on the same factors which
affect grate capacity and efficiency. A combination inlet consisting of a curb opening inlet placed upstream of a grate inlet has a
capacity equal to that of the curb opening length upstream of the grate plus that of the grate, taking into account the reduced
spread and depth of flow over the grate because of the interception by the curb opening. This inlet configuration has the added
advantage of intercepting debris that might otherwise clog the grate and deflect water away from the inlet.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Factors Affecting Inlet Interception Capacity in Sag Locations
Grate inlets in sag vertical curves operate as weirs for shallow ponding depths and as orifices at greater depths. Between weir
and orifice flow depths, a transition from weir to orifice flow occurs. The perimeter and clear opening area of the grate and the
depth of water at the curb affect inlet capacity. The capacity at a given depth can be severely affected if debris collects on the
grate and reduces the effective perimeter or clear opening area.

Curb-opening inlets operate as weirs in sag vertical curve locations up to a ponding depth equal to the opening height. At depths
above 1.4 times the opening height, the inlet operates as an orifice and between these depths, transition between weir and
orifice flow occurs. The curb-opening height and length, and water depth at the curb affect inlet capacity. At a given flow rate, the
effective water depth at the curb can be increased by the use of a continuously depressed gutter, by use of a locally depressed
curb opening, or by use of an increased cross slope, thus decreasing the width of spread at the inlet.

Slotted inlets operate as weirs for depths below approximately 50 mm (2 in) and orifices in locations where the depth at the
upstream edge of the slot is greater than about 120 mm (5 in). Transition flow exists between these depths. For orifice flow, an
empirical equation derived from experimental data can be used to compute interception capacity. Interception capacity varies
with flow depth, slope, width, and length at a given spread. Slotted drains are not recommended in sag locations because they
are susceptible to clogging from debris.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Comparison of Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade
In order to compare the interception capacity and efficiency of various inlets on grade, it is necessary to fix two variables that
affect capacity and efficiency and investigate the effects of varying the other factor. Figure 6-11 shows a comparison of curb-
opening inlets, grates, and slotted drain inlets with gutter flow fixed at 0.09 m3/s (3.2 ft3/sec.), cross slope fixed at 3 percent, and
longitudinal slope varied up to 10 percent. Conclusions drawn from an analysis of this figure are not necessarily transferable to
other flow rates or cross slopes, but some inferences can be drawn that are applicable to other sets of conditions. Grate
configurations used for interception capacity comparisons in this figure are described in Inlet Capacity.

Figure 6-11 illustrates the effects of flow depth at the curb and curb-opening length on curb opening inlet interception capacity
and efficiency. All of the slotted inlets and curb opening inlets shown in the figure lose interception capacity and efficiency as the
longitudinal slope is increased because spread on the pavement and depth at the curb become smaller as velocity increases. It
is accurate to conclude that curb opening inlet interception capacity and efficiency would increase with steeper cross slopes. It is
also accurate to conclude that interception capacity would increase and inlet efficiency would decrease with increased flow
rates. Long curb-opening and slotted inlets compare favorably with grates in interception capacity and efficiency for conditions
illustrated in Figure 6-11.

The effect of depth at the curb is also illustrated by a comparison of the interception capacity and efficiency of depressed and
undepressed curb-opening inlets. A 1.5 m (5 ft) depressed curb-opening inlet has about 67 percent more interception capacity
than an undepressed inlet at 2 percent slope, 3 percent cross slope, and 0.085 m3/s (3 ft3/sec.) gutter flow, and about 79
percent more interception capacity at an 8 percent slope.

At low velocities, all of the water flowing in the section of gutter occupied by the grate, called frontal flow, is intercepted by grate
inlets. Only a small portion of the flow outside of the grate, termed side flow, is intercepted. When the longitudinal slope is
increased, water begins to skip or splash over the grate at velocities dependent on the grate configuration. Figure 6-11 shows
that interception capacity and efficiency are reduced at slopes steeper than the slope at which splash-over begins. Splash-over
for the less efficient grates begins at the slope at which the interception capacity curve begins to deviate from the curve of the
more efficient grates. All of the 0.6 m by 0.6 m (2 ft by 2 ft) grates have equal interception capacity and efficiency at a flow rate
of 0.085 m3/s (3 ft3/sec.), cross slope of 3 percent, and longitudinal slope of 2 percent. At slopes steeper than 2 percent, splash-
over occurs on the reticuline grate and the interception capacity is reduced. At a slope of 6 percent, velocities are such that
splash-over occurs on all except the curved vane and parallel bar grates. From these performance characteristics curves, it can
be concluded that parallel-bar grates and the curved vane grate are relatively efficient at higher velocities and the reticuline grate
is least efficient. At low velocities, the grates perform equally. However, some of the grates such as the reticuline grate are more
susceptible to clogging by debris than the parallel bar grate.
 Figure 6-11: Comparison of Inlet Interception Capacity, Slope Variable

The capacity and efficiency of grates increase with increased slope and velocity if splash-over does not occur. This is because
frontal flow increases with increased velocity, and all frontal flow will be intercepted if splash-over does not occur.

Figure 6-11 also illustrates that interception by longer grates would not be substantially greater than interception by 0.6 m by 0.6
m (2 ft by 2 ft) grates. In order to capture more of the flow, wider grates would be needed.

Figure 6-12 can be used for further study and comparisons of inlet interception capacity and efficiency. It shows, for example,
that at a 6 percent slope, splash-over begins at about 0.02 m3/s (0.7 ft3/sec.) on a reticuline grate. It also illustrates that the
interception capacity of all inlets increases and inlet efficiency decreases with increased discharge.

This comparison of inlet interception capacity and efficiency neglects the effects of debris and clogging on the various inlets. All
types of inlets, including curb-opening inlets, are subject to clogging, some being more susceptible than others. Attempts to
simulate clogging tendencies in the laboratory have not been notably successful, except to demonstrate the importance of
parallel bar spacing in debris handling efficiency. Grates with wider spacings of longitudinal bars pass debris more efficiently.
Except for reticuline grates, grates with lateral bar spacing of less than 0.1 m (4 in) were not tested so conclusions cannot be
drawn from tests concerning debris handling capabilities of many grates currently in use.

Problems with clogging are largely local since the amount of debris varies significantly from one locality to another. Some
localities must contend with only a small amount of debris while others experience extensive clogging of drainage inlets. Since
partial clogging of inlets on grade rarely causes major problems, allowances should not be made for reduction in inlet
interception capacity except where local experience indicates an allowance is advisable.
 Figure 6-12: Comparison of Inlet Interception Capacity, Flow Rate Variable

Copyright and Trademark Information

Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade
The interception capacity of inlets on grade is dependent on factors discussed in Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade. In this
section, design charts for inlets on grade and procedures for using the charts are presented for the various inlet configurations.
Remember that for locally depressed inlets, the quantity of flow reaching the inlet would be dependent on the upstream gutter
section geometry and not the depressed section geometry.

Charts for grate inlet interception have been made and are applicable to all grate inlets tested for the Federal Highway
Administration. The chart for frontal flow interception is based on test results, which show that grates intercept all of the frontal
flow until a velocity is reached at which water begins to splash over the grate. At velocities greater than splash-over velocity,
grate efficiency in intercepting frontal flow is diminished. Grates also intercept a portion of the flow along the length of the grate,
or the side flow. A chart is provided to determine side-flow interception.

One set of charts is provided for slotted inlets and curb-opening inlets, because these inlets are both side-flow weirs. The
equation developed for determining the length of inlet required for total interception fits the test data for both types of inlets.

A procedure for determining the interception capacity of combination inlets is also presented.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Grate Inlets
Grates are effective highway pavement drainage inlets where clogging with debris is not a problem. Where clogging may be a
problem, see Table 6-5 where grates are ranked for susceptibility to clogging based on laboratory tests using simulated leaves.
This table should be used for relative comparisons only.

When the velocity approaching the grate is less than the splash-over velocity, the grate will intercept essentially all of the frontal
flow. Conversely, when the gutter flow velocity exceeds the splash-over velocity for the grate, only part of the flow will be
intercepted. A part of the flow along the side of the grate will be intercepted, dependent on the cross slope of the pavement, the
length of the grate, and flow velocity.

(6.18)

The ratio of frontal flow to total gutter flow, E , for a uniform cross slope is expressed by Equation 6.18:
o

Where Q = Total gutter flow (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)

Q = Flow in width, W (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)
w
W = Width of depressed gutter or grate (m, ft)
T = Total spread of water (m, ft)

Example 6-2 and Chart 2 provide solutions of E for either uniform cross slopes or composite gutter sections.
o

The ratio of side flow, Q , to total gutter flow is:

s

(6.19)

The ratio of frontal flow intercepted to total frontal flow, R , is expressed by Equation 6.20:
f

(6.20)
 Where K = 0.295
c
V = Velocity of flow in gutter (m/sec., ft/sec.)
V = Gutter velocity where splash-over first occurs (m/sec., ft/sec.)
o

Note: R cannot exceed 1.0.

f

Table 6-5: Average Debris Handling Efficiencies

of Grates Tested
Longitudinal Slope
Rank Grate
0.005 0.040
1 Curved Vane 45 61
2 30 – 85 deg. Tilt Bar 44 55
3 45 – 85 deg. Tilt Bar 43 48
4 P-50 32 32
5 P-50x100 18 28
6 45 – 60 deg. Tilt Bar 16 23
7 Reticuline 12 16
8 P-30 9 20

This ratio is equivalent to frontal flow interception efficiency. Chart 5 provides a solution for Equation 6.20, which takes into
account grate length, bar configuration, and gutter velocity at which splash-over occurs. The average gutter velocity (total gutter
flow divided by the area of flow) is needed to use Chart 5. This velocity can also be obtained from Chart 4.

The ratio of side flow intercepted to total side flow, R , or side flow interception efficiency, is expressed by Equation 6.21:
s

(6.21)

Where K = 0.0828 SI, 0.15 U.S. customary

c

Chart 6 provides a solution to Equation 6.21.

A deficiency in developing empirical equations and charts from experimental data is evident in Chart 6. The fact that a grate will
intercept all or almost all of the side flow where the velocity is low and the spread only slightly exceeds the grate width is not
reflected in the chart. Error due to this deficiency is very small. In fact, where velocities are high, side flow interception may be
neglected without significant error.

The efficiency, E, of a grate is expressed as provided in Equation 6.22:

(6.22)

The first term on the right side of Equation 6.22 is the ratio of intercepted frontal flow to total gutter flow, and the second term is
the ratio of intercepted side flow to total side flow. The second term is insignificant with high velocities and short grates.

The interception capacity of a grate inlet on grade is equal to the efficiency of the grate multiplied by the total gutter flow:

(6.23)

The use of Charts 5 and 6 are illustrated in the following examples.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Curb-Opening Inlets
Curb-opening inlets are effective in the drainage of highway pavements where flow depth at the curb is sufficient for the inlet to
perform efficiently. Curb openings are less susceptible to clogging and offer little interference to traffic operation. They are a
viable alternative to grates on flatter grades where grates would be in traffic lanes or would be hazardous for pedestrians or
bicyclists.

Curb opening heights vary in dimension; however, a typical maximum height is approximately 100 to 150 mm (4 to 6 in). The
length of the curb-opening inlet required for total interception of gutter flow on a pavement section with a uniform cross slope is
expressed by Equation 6.24:

(6.24)

Where K = 0.817 SI, 0.6 U.S. customary

c
L = Curb opening length required to intercept 100% of gutter flow (m, ft)
T
S = Longitudinal slope
L
Q = Gutter flow (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)

The efficiency of curb opening inlets shorter than the length required for total interception is expressed by Equation 6.25:

(6.25)

Where L = Curb opening length (m, ft)

Figure 6-13: Depressed Curb-Opening Inlet

Chart 7 is a nomograph for the solution of Equation 6.24, and Chart 8 provides a solution of Equation 6.25.

The length of inlet required for total interception by depressed curb-opening inlets or curb-openings in depressed gutter sections
can be found by the use of an equivalent cross slope, S , in Equation 6.24 in place of S . S can be computed using Equation
e x e
6.26.

(6.26)

Where S' = Cross-slope of the gutter measured from the cross-slope of the pavement, S (m/m, ft/ft)
W x
S' = a/[1000W],(a/[12w]) (m, ft)
w
a = Gutter depression (mm, in)
E = Ratio of flow in the depressed section to total gutter flow determined by gutter configuration
o upstream of inlet
Figure 6-13 shows the depressed curb inlet for Equation 6.26. E is the same ratio as used to compute the frontal flow
o
interception of a grate inlet.

As seen from Chart 7, the length of curb opening required for total interception can be significantly reduced by increasing the
cross slope or the equivalent cross slope. The equivalent cross slope can be increased by use of a continuously depressed
gutter section or a locally depressed gutter section.

Using the equivalent cross slope, S , Equation 6.24 becomes:

e

(6.27)

Where K = 0.817 SI, 0.6 U.S. customary

T

Equation 6.25 is applicable with either straight cross slopes or composite cross slopes. Charts 7 and 8 are applicable to
depressed curb-opening inlets using S rather than S .
e x

Equation 6.26 uses the ratio, E , in the computation of the equivalent cross slope, Se. Example 6-9 demonstrates the procedure
o
to determine spread and then the example uses Chart 2 to determine E .
o

Copyright and Trademark Information

Slotted Inlets
Wide experience with the debris handling capabilities of slotted inlets is not available. Deposition in the pipe is the problem most
commonly encountered. The configuration of slotted inlets makes them accessible for cleaning with a high pressure water jet.

Figure 6-14: Slotted Drain Inlet at an Intersection

Slotted inlets are effective pavement drainage inlets, which have a variety of applications. They can be used on curbed or
uncurbed sections and offer little interference to traffic operations. An installation is illustrated in Figure 6-14.

Flow interception by slotted inlets and curb-opening inlets is similar in that each is a side weir and the flow is subjected to lateral
acceleration due to the cross slope of the pavement. Analysis of data from the Federal Highway Administration tests of slotted
inlets with slot widths ≥ 45 mm (1.75 in) indicates that the length of slotted inlet required for total interception can be computed
by Equation 6.24. Chart 7, is therefore applicable for both curb-opening inlets and slotted inlets. Similarly, Equation 6.25 is also
applicable to slotted inlets and Chart 8 can be used to obtain the inlet efficiency for the selected length of inlet.

Use Charts 7 and 8 for slotted inlets the same way you would for curb-opening inlets. Additional examples to demonstrate the
use of the charts are not provided here for that reason. It should be noted, however, that it is much less expensive to add length
to an existing slotted inlet to increase interception capacity than it is to add length to an existing curb-opening inlet.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Combination Inlets
 Figure 6-15: Combination Curb-Opening, 45-Degree Tilt-Bar Grate Inlet

The interception capacity of a combination inlet consisting of a curb opening and grate placed side-by-side, as shown in Figure
6-15, is no greater than that of the grate alone. Capacity is computed by neglecting the curb opening. A combination inlet is
sometimes used with a part of the curb opening placed upstream of the grate as illustrated in Figure 6-16. The curb opening in
such an installation intercepts debris, which might otherwise clog the grate and is called a sweeper inlet. A sweeper combination
inlet has an interception capacity equal to the sum of the curb opening upstream of the grate plus the grate capacity, except that
the frontal flow and thus the interception capacity of the grate is reduced by interception by the curb opening.

Figure 6-16: Sweeper Combination Inlet

The following example illustrates computation of the interception capacity of a combination curb-opening grate inlet with a
portion of the curb opening upstream of the grate.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Interception Capacity of Inlets in Sag Locations
Inlets in sag locations operate as weirs under low head conditions and as orifices at greater depths. Orifice flow begins at depths
dependent on the grate size, the curb opening height, or the slot width of the inlet. At depths between those at which weir flow
definitely prevails and those at which orifice flow prevails, flow is in a transition stage. At these depths, control is ill-defined and
flow may fluctuate between weir and orifice control. Design procedures presented here are based on a conservative approach to
estimating the capacity of inlets in sump locations.

The efficiency of inlets in passing debris is critical in sag locations because all runoff which enters the sag must be passed
through the inlet. Total or partial clogging of inlets in these locations can result in hazardous ponded conditions. Grate inlets
alone are not recommended for use in sag locations because of the tendencies of grates to become clogged. Combination inlets
or curb-opening inlets are recommended for use in these locations.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Grate Inlets
A grate inlet in a sag location operates as a weir to depths dependent on the bar configuration and size of the grate and as an
orifice at greater depths. Grates of larger dimension will operate as weirs to greater depths than smaller grates or grates with
less opening area.

The capacity of grate inlets operating as weirs is:

(6.28)

Where W = Width of the grate (m, ft)

C = 1.66 SI, 3.0 U.S. customary
W
d1 = Flow depth at middle of grate(m, ft)
d2 = Flow depth at side of grate opposite the curb (m, ft)
The capacity of a grate inlet operating as an orifice is:

(6.29)

Where C = Orifice coefficient 0.67

o
A = Clear opening of the grate (m2, ft2)
g
g = Gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/sec.2, 32.16 ft/sec.2)

Use of Equation 6.29 requires the clear area of opening of the grate. Tests of three grates for the Federal Highway
Administration showed that for flat bar grates, such as the P-50x100 and P-30 grates, the clear opening is equal to the total area
of the grate less the area occupied by longitudinal and lateral bars. The curved vane grate performed about 10 percent better
than a grate with a net opening equal to the total area less the area of the bars projected on a horizontal plane. That is, the
projected area of the bars in a curved vane grate is 68 percent of the total area of the grate leaving a net opening of 32 percent,
however the grate performed as a grate with a net opening of 35 percent. Tilt-bar grates were not tested, but exploration of the
above results would indicate a net opening area of 34 percent for the 30-degree tiltbar and zero for the 45-degree tilt-bar grate.
Obviously, the 45-degree tilt-bar grate would have greater than zero capacity. Tilt-bar and curved vane grates are not
recommended for sump locations where there is a chance that operation would be as an orifice. Opening ratios for the grates
are given on Chart 9.

Chart 9 is a plot of Equations 6.28 and 6.29 for various grate sizes. The effects of grate size on the depth at which a grate
operates as an orifice is apparent from the chart. Transition from weir to orifice flow results in interception capacity less than that
computed by either the weir or the orifice equation; this capacity can be approximated by drawing in a curve between the lines
representing the perimeter and net area of the grate to be used.

Example 6-11 illustrates use of Equations 6.28 and 6.29 and Chart 9.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Curb-Opening Inlets
The capacity of a curb-opening inlet in a sag depends on water depth at the curb, the curb opening length, and the height of the
curb opening. The inlet operates as a weir to depths equal to the curb opening height and as an orifice at depths greater than
1.4 times the opening height. At depths between 1.0 and 1.4 times the opening height, flow is in a transition stage.

Spread on the pavement is the usual criterion for judging the adequacy of a pavement drainage inlet design. It is also convenient
and practical in the laboratory to measure depth at the curb upstream of the inlet at the point of maximum spread on the
pavement. Therefore, depths at the curb measurements from experiments coincide with the depth at curb of interest to
designers. The weir coefficient for a curb opening inlet is less than the usual weir coefficient for several reasons, the most
obvious of which is that depth measurements from experimental tests were not taken at the weir, and drawdown occurs between
the point where measurement were made and the weir.

The weir location for a depressed curb-opening inlet is at the edge of the gutter, and the effective weir length is dependent on
the width of the depressed gutter and the length of the curb opening. The weir location for a curb-opening inlet that is not
depressed is at the lip of the curb opening, and its length is equal to that of the inlet, as shown in Chart 10.

The equation for the interception capacity of a depressed curb-opening inlet operating as a weir is:

(6.30)

Where C = 1.25 SI, 2.3 U.S. customary

w
L = Length of curb opening (m, ft)
W = Lateral width of depression (m, ft)
d = Depth at curb, measured from the normal cross-slope—d = TS (m, ft)
x

The weir equation is applicable to depths at the curb approximately equal to the height of the opening plus the depth of the
depression. Thus, the limitation on the use of Equation 6.30 for a depressed curb-opening inlet is:

(6.31)
 Where h = Height of curb-opening inlet (m, ft)
a = Depth of depression (mm, in)

Experiments have not been conducted for curb-opening inlets with a continuously depressed gutter, but it is reasonable to
expect that the effective weir length would be as great as that for an inlet in a local depression. Use of Equation 6.30 will yield
conservative estimates of the interception capacity.

The weir equation for curb-opening inlets without depression becomes:

(6.32)

Without depression of the gutter section, the weir coefficient, C , becomes 1.60 (3.0, U.S. customary system). The depth
w
limitation for operation as a weir becomes d ≤ h.

At curb-opening lengths greater than 3.6m (12 ft), Equation 6.32 for non-depressed inlet produces intercepted flows which
exceed the values for depressed inlets computed using Equation 6.30. Since depressed inlets will perform at least as well as
non-depressed inlets of the same length, Equation 6.32 should be used for all curb opening inlets having lengths greater than
3.6 m (12 ft).

Curb-opening inlets operate as orifices at depths greater than approximately 1.4 times the opening height. The interception
capacity can be computed by Equation 6.33 and Equation 6.34. These equations are applicable to depressed and undepressed
curb-opening inlets. The depth at the inlet includes any gutter depression.

(6.33)

Or

(6.34)

Where C = Orifice coefficient 0.67

o
d = Effective head on the center of the orifice throat (m, ft)
o
L = Length of the orifice opening (m, ft)
A = Clear area of the opening (m2, ft2)
g
d = Depth at lip of curb opening (m, ft)
i
h = Height of curb opening orifice (m, ft)
h = TS + a (a/12 U.S. customary)
x

The height of the orifice in Equations 6.33 and 6.34 assumes a vertical orifice opening. As illustrated in Figure 6-17, other orifice
throat locations can change the effective depth on the orifice and the dimension (d – h/2). A limited throat width could reduce
i
the capacity of the curb-opening inlet by causing the inlet to go into orifice flow at depths less than the height of the opening.

For curb-opening inlets with other than vertical faces (see Figure 6-17), Equation 6.33 can be used with:

Where h = Orifice throat width (m, ft)

d = Effective head on the center of the orifice throat
o
 Figure 6-17: Curb Opening Inlets

Chart 10 provides solutions for Equations 6.30 and 6.33 for depressed curb-opening inlets, and Chart 11 provides solutions for
Equations 6.32 and 6.33 for curb-opening inlets without depression. Chart 12 is provided for use for curb openings with other
than vertical orifice openings.

Example 6-12 illustrates the use of Charts 11 and 12.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Combination Inlets
Combination inlets consisting of a grate and a curb opening are considered advisable for use in sags where hazardous ponding
can occur. Equal length inlets refer to a grate inlet placed along side a curb-opening inlet, both of which have the same length. A
sweeper inlet refers to a grate inlet placed at the downstream end of a curb-opening inlet. The curb-opening inlet is longer than
the grate inlet and intercepts the flow before the flow reaches the grate. The sweeper inlet is more efficient than the equal length
combination inlet and the curb opening has the ability to intercept any debris, which may clog the grate inlet. The interception
capacity of the equal length combination inlet is essentially equal to that of a grate alone in weir flow. In orifice flow, the capacity
of the equal length combination inlet is equal to the capacity of the grate plus the capacity of the curb opening.

Equation 6.28 and Chart 9 can be used for weir flow in combination inlets in sag locations. Assuming complete clogging of the
grate, Equations 6.30, 6.32, and 6.33 and Charts 10, 11 and 12 for curb-opening inlets are applicable.

Where depth at the curb is such that orifice flow occurs, the interception capacity of the inlet is computed by adding Equations
6.29 and 6.34 as follows:

(6.38)

Where A = Clear area of the grate (m2, ft2)

g
g = Gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/sec.2, 32.16 ft/sec.2)
d = Depth at the curb (m, ft)
h = Height of the curb-opening orifice (m, ft)
L = Length of the curb opening (m, ft)
d = Effective depth at the center of the curb-opening orifice (m, ft)
o

Trial and error solutions are necessary for determining the depth at the curb for a given flow rate using Charts 9, 10, and 11 for
orifice flow. Different assumptions for clogging of the grate can also be examined using these charts as illustrated by Example 6-
14.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Inlet Locations
The location of inlets is determined by geometric controls which require inlets at specific locations, the use and location of
flanking inlets in sag vertical curves, and the criterion of spread on the pavement. In order to adequately design the location of
the inlets for a given project, you need the following information:

! A layout or plan sheet suitable for outlining drainage areas

! Road profiles
! Typical cross sections
! Grading cross sections
! Superelevation diagrams
! Contour maps

Copyright and Trademark Information

Geometric Controls
There are a number of locations where inlets may be necessary with little regard to contributing drainage area. These locations
should be marked on the plans prior to any computations regarding discharge, water spread, inlet capacity, or flow bypass, as
described in the following examples:

! At all low points in the gutter grade

! Immediately upstream of median breaks, entrance/exit ramp gores, cross walks, and street intersections (i.e. at any
location where water could flow onto the travelway)
! Immediately upgrade of bridges (to prevent pavement drainage from flowing onto bridge deck)
! Immediately downstream of bridges (to intercept bridge deck drainage)
! Immediately up grade of cross slope reversals
! Immediately up grade from pedestrian cross walks
! At the end of channels in cut sections
! On side streets immediately up grade from intersections
! Behind curbs, shoulders or sidewalks to drain low areas

In addition to the areas identified above, runoff from areas draining towards the highway pavement should be intercepted by
roadside channels or inlets before it reaches the roadway. This applies to drainage from cut slopes, side streets, and other areas
alongside the pavement. Curbed pavement sections and pavement drainage inlets are inefficient means for handling extraneous
drainage.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Inlet Spacing on Continuous Grades
Design spread is the criterion used for locating storm drain inlets between those required by geometric or other controls. The
interception capacity of the upstream inlet will define the initial spread. As flow is contributed to the gutter section in the
downstream direction, spread increases. The next downstream inlet is located at the point where the spread in the gutter
reaches the design spread. Therefore, the spacing of inlets on a continuous grade is a function of the amount of upstream
bypass flow, the tributary drainage area, and the gutter geometry.

For a continuous slope, the designer may establish the uniform design spacing between inlets of a given design if the drainage
area consists of pavement only or has reasonably uniform runoff characteristics and is rectangular in shape. In this case, the
time of concentration is assumed to be the same for all inlets. The following procedure and example illustrates the effects of inlet
efficiency on inlet spacing.
Use the computation sheet shown in Figure 6-18 and perform the steps in the following procedure:

Step 1—Complete the blanks at the top of the sheet to identify the job by state project number, route, date, and your initials.

Step 2—Mark on a plan the location of inlets which are necessary even without considering any specific drainage area.

Step 3—Start at a high point, at one end of the job if possible, and work towards the low point. Then begin at the next high point
and work backwards toward the same low point.

Step 4—To begin the process, select a trial drainage area approximately 90 m to 150 m (300 to 500 ft) long below the high point
and outline the area on the plan. Include any area that may drain over the curb, onto the roadway. However, where practical,
drainage from large areas behind the curb should be intercepted before it reaches the roadway or gutter.

Step 5—(Col. 1, Col. 2, Col. 19) Describe the location of the proposed inlet by number and station and record this information in
columns 1 and 2. Identify the curb and gutter type in column 19, Remarks. A sketch of the cross section should be prepared.

Step 6—(Col. 3) Compute the drainage area (hectares) outlined in step 4 and record in column 3.

Step 7—(Col. 4) Determine the runoff coefficient, C, for the drainage area.

Step 8—(Col. 5) Compute the time of concentration, t , in minutes, for the first inlet and record in column 5. The time of
c
concentration is the time for the water to flow from the most hydraulically remote point of the drainage area to the inlet. The
minimum time of concentration is 5 minutes.

Step 9—(Col. 6) Using the time of concentration, determine the rainfall intensity from the Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF)
curve for the design frequency. Enter the value in column 6.

Step 10—(Col. 7) Calculate the flow in the gutter using Q = CIA / K . The flow is calculated by multiplying column 3 times
c
column 4 times column 6 divided by K . Using the SI system of units, K = 360 (= 1 for U.S. customary units). Enter the flow
c c
value in column 7.

Step 11—(Col. 8) From the roadway profile, enter in column 8 the gutter longitudinal slope, SL, at the inlet, taking into account
any superelevation.

Step 12—(Col. 9, Col. 13) From the cross section, enter the cross slope, S , in column 9 and the grate or gutter width, W, in
x
column 13.

Step 13—(Col. 11, Col. 10) For the first inlet in a series, enter the value from column 7 into column 11, since there was no
previous bypass flow. Additionally, if the inlet is the first in a series, enter 0 into column 10.

Step 14—(Col. 14, Col. 12) Determine the spread, T, by using Equations 6.2 and 6.4 or Charts 1 and 2 and enter the value in
column 14. Also, determine the depth at the curb, d, by multiplying the spread by the appropriate cross slope, and enter the
value in column 12. Compare the calculated spread with the allowable spread as determined by the design criteria outlined in
Design Frequency and Spread. Additionally, compare the depth at the curb with the actual curb height in column 19. If the
calculated spread, column 14, is near the allowable spread and the depth at the curb is less than the actual curb height,
continue on to step 15. Else, expand or decrease the drainage area up to the first inlet to increase or decrease the spread,
respectively. The drainage area can be expanded by increasing the length to the inlet and it can be decreased by decreasing the
distance to the inlet. Then, repeat steps 6 through 14 until appropriate values are obtained.

Step 15—(Col. 15) Calculate W/T and enter the value in column 15.

Step 16—(Col. 16) Select the inlet type and dimensions and enter the values in column 16.

Step 17—(Col. 17) Calculate the flow intercepted the grate, Q , and enter the value in column 17. Use Equations 6.18 and 6.15
i
or Charts 2 and 4 to define the gutter flow. Use Chart 5 and Equation 6.21 or Chart 6 to define the flow intercepted by the grate.
Use Equations 6.24 and 6.25 or Charts 7 and 8 for curb opening inlets. Finally, use Equation 6.25 to determine the intercepted
flow.

Step 18—(Col. 18) Determine the bypass flow, Q , and enter into column 18. The bypass flow is column 11 minus column 17.
b

Step 19—(Col. 1-4) Proceed to the next inlet down the grade. To begin the procedure, select a drainage area approximately 90
m to 120 m (300 to 400 ft) below the previous inlet for a first trial. Repeat steps 5 through 7 considering only the area between
the inlets.

Step 20—(Col. 5) Compute the time of concentration for the next inlet based upon the area between the consecutive inlets and
record this value in column 5.

Step 21—(Col. 6) Determine the rainfall intensity from the IDF curve based upon the time of concentration determined in step 19
and record the value in column 6.

Step 22—(Col. 7) Determine the flow in the gutter and record the value in column 7.

Step 23—(Col. 11) Record the value from column 18 of the previous line into column 10 of the current line. Determine the total
gutter flow by adding column 7 and column 10 and record in column 11.

Step 24—(Col. 12, Col. 14) Determine the spread and the depth at the curb as outlined in step 14. Repeat steps 18 through 24
until the spread and the depth at the curb are within the design criteria.

Step 25—(Col. 16) Select the inlet type and record in column 16.

Step 26—(Col. 17) Determine the intercepted flow in accordance with step 17.

Step 27—(Col. 18) Calculate the bypass flow by subtracting column 17 from column 11. This completes the spacing design for
the inlet.

Step 28—Repeat steps 19 through 27 for each subsequent inlet down to the low point.
Figure 6-18: Inlet Spacing Computation Sheet
 Figure 6-19: Storm Drainage System for Example 6-15

Copyright and Trademark Information

Flanking Inlets
 Figure 6-21: Example of Flanking Inlet

As discussed in the previous section, inlets should always be located at the low or sag points in the gutter profile. In addition, it is
good engineering practice to place flanking inlets on each side of the low point inlet when in a depressed area that has no outlet
except through the system. This is illustrated in Figure 6-21. The purpose of the flanking inlets is to act in relief of the inlet at the
low point if it should become clogged or if the design spread is exceeded. Flanking inlets can be located so they will function
before water spread exceeds the allowable spread at the sump location.

The flanking inlets should be located so that they will receive all of the flow when the primary inlet at the bottom of the sag is
clogged. They should do this without exceeding the allowable spread at the bottom of the sag. If the flanking inlets are the same
dimension as the primary inlet, they will each intercept one-half the design flow when they are located so that the depth of
ponding at the flanking inlets is 63 percent of the depth of ponding at the low point. If the flanker inlets are not the same size as
the primary inlet, it will be necessary to either develop a new factor or do a trial and error solution using assumed depths with the
weir equation to determine the capacity of the flanker inlet at the given depths.

Table 6-8 shows the spacing required for various depth at curb criteria and vertical curve lengths defined by K = L / (G2 – G1),
where L is the length of the vertical curve in meters and G1 and G2 are the approach grades. The AASHTO policy on
geometrics specifies maximum K values for various design speeds and a maximum K of 50 considering drainage. The use of
table 6-8 is illustrated in Example 6-16.

Table 6-8: Distance to Flanking Inlets in Sag Vertical Curve

using Depth at Curb Criteria
d(m) 4 8 11 15 20 25 30 37 43 50
0.01 2.8 4.0 4.7 5.5 6.3 7.1 7.7 8.6 9.3 10.0
0.02 4.0 5.7 6.6 7.7 8.9 10.0 11.0 12.2 13.1 14.1
0.03 4.9 7.0 8.2 9.6 11.0 12.3 13.5 15.0 16.2 17.5
0.06 7.0 9.9 11.6 13.5 15.6 17.5 19.1 12.2 22.9 24.7
0.09 8.6 12.1 14.2 16.6 19.1 21.4 23.4 26.0 28.0 30.2
0.12 9.9 14.0 16.4 19.1 22.1 24.7 27.1 30.0 32.4 34.9
0.15 11.0 15.6 18.3 21.4 24.7 27.6 30.2 33.6 36.2 39.0
0.18 12.1 17.1 20.1 23.4 27.1 30.2 33.1 36.8 39.7 42.8
0.21 13.1 18.5 21.7 25.3 29.2 32.7 35.8 39.7 42.8 46.2
0.24 14.0 19.8 23.2 27.1 31.2 34.9 38.3 42.5 45.8 49.4

· 1. x = (200dK) 0.5, where x = distance from sag point

· 2. d = depth at curb in meters (does not include sump depth)

· 3. drainage maximum K = 50

Copyright and Trademark Information

Median, Embankment, and Bridge Inlets
Flow in median and roadside ditches is discussed briefly in FlowMaster Theory and in Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 15 and
Hydraulic Design Series No. 4. It is sometimes necessary to place inlets in medians at intervals to remove water that could
cause erosion. Inlets are sometimes used in roadside ditches at the intersection of cut and fill slopes to prevent erosion
downstream of cut sections.

Where adequate vegetative cover can be established on embankment slopes to prevent erosion, it is preferable to allow storm
water to discharge down the slope with as little concentration of flow as practicable. Where storm water must be collected with
curbs or swales, inlets are used to receive the water and discharge it through chutes, sod or riprap swales, or pipe downdrains.
Bridge deck drainage is similar to roadway drainage and deck drainage inlets are similar in purpose to roadway inlets. Bridge
deck drainage is discussed in greater detail in Design of Bridge Deck Drainage, published in 1993 by the Federal Highway
Administration.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Median and Roadside Ditch Inlets
Median and roadside ditches may be drained by drop inlets similar to those used for pavement drainage, by pipe culverts under
one roadway, or by cross drainage culverts which are not continuous across the median. Figure 6-22 illustrates a traffic-safe
median inlet. Inlets, pipes, and discontinuous cross drainage culverts should be designed so as not to detract from a safe
roadside. Drop inlets should be flush with the ditch bottom and traffic-safe bar grates should be placed on the ends of pipes
used to drain medians that would be a hazard to errant vehicles, although this may cause a plugging potential. Cross drainage
structures should be continuous across the median unless the median width makes this impractical. Ditches tend to erode at
drop inlets; paving around the inlets helps to prevent erosion and may increase the interception capacity of the inlet marginally
by acceleration of the flow.

Pipe drains for medians operate as culverts and generally require more water depth to intercept median flow than drop inlets. No
test results are available on which to base design procedures for estimating the effects of placing grates on culvert inlets.
However, little effect is expected.

The interception capacity of drop inlets in median ditches on continuous grades can be estimated by use of Charts 14 and 15 to
estimate flow depth and the ratio of frontal flow to total flow in the ditch.

Figure 6-22: Median Drop Inlet

Chart 14 is the solution to the Manning equation for channels of various side slopes. The Manning equation for open channels
is:

(6.39)

Where Q = Discharge rate (m3/sec., ft3/sec.)

K = 1.0 SI, 1.486 U.S. customary
M
n = Hydraulic resistance variable
A = Cross-sectional area of flow (m2, ft2)
R = Hydraulic radius—area/wetted perimeter (m, ft)
S = Bed slope (m/m, ft/ft)
L

For the trapezoidal channel cross section shown on Chart 14, the Manning equation becomes:

(6.40)
 Where B = Bottom width (m, ft)
z = Horizontal distance of side slope to a rise of 1 m (ft) vertical (m, ft)

Equation 6.40 is a trial and error solution to Chart 14.

Chart 15 is the ratio of frontal flow to total flow in a trapezoidal channel. This is expressed as:

(6.41)

Charts 5 and 6 are used to estimate the ratios of frontal and side flow intercepted by the grate to total flow.

Small dikes downstream of drop inlets (Figure 6-22) can be provided to impede bypass flow in an attempt to cause complete
interception of the approach flow. The dikes usually need not be more than a few inches high and should have traffic safe
slopes. The height of dike required for complete interception on continuous grades or the depth of ponding in sag vertical curves
can be computed by use of Chart 9. The effective perimeter of a grate in an open channel with a dike should be taken as 2(L +
W), since one side of the grate is not adjacent to a curb.

Example 6-17 illustrates the use of Charts 14 and 15 for drop inlets in ditches on continuous grade.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Embankment Inlets
Drainage inlets are often needed to collect runoff from pavements in order to prevent erosion of fill slopes or to intercept water
upgrade or downgrade of bridges. Inlets used at these locations differ from other pavement drainage inlets in three respects.
First, the economies which can be achieved by system design are often not possible because a series of inlets is not used;
second, total or near total interception is sometimes necessary in order to limit the bypass flow from running onto a bridge deck;
and third, a closed storm drainage system is often not available to dispose of the intercepted flow, and the means for disposal
must be provided at each inlet. Intercepted flow is usually discharged into open chutes or pipe downdrains, which terminate at
the toe of the fill slope.

Figure 6-23: Embankment Inlet and Downdrain

Example problem solutions in other sections of this circular illustrate by inference the difficulty in providing for near total
interception on grade. Grate inlets intercept little more than the flow conveyed by the gutter width occupied by the grate.
Combination curb-opening and grate inlets can be designed to intercept total flow if the length of curb opening upstream of the
grate is sufficient to reduce spread in the gutter to the width of the grate used. Depressing the curb opening would significantly
reduce the length of inlet required. Perhaps the most practical inlets or procedure for use where near total interception is
necessary are sweeper inlets, increase in grate width, and slotted inlets of sufficient length to intercept 85-100 percent of the
gutter flow. Design charts and procedures in Interception Capacity of Inlets on Grade are applicable to the design of inlets on
embankments. Figure 6-23 illustrates a combination inlet and downdrain.

Downdrains or chutes used to convey intercepted flow from inlets to the toe of the fill slope may be open or closed chutes. Pipe
downdrains are preferable because the flow is confined and cannot cause erosion along the sides. Pipes can be covered to
reduce or eliminate interference with maintenance operations on the fill slopes. Open chutes are often damaged by erosion from
water splashing over the sides of the chute due to oscillation in the flow and from spill over the sides at bends in the chute.
Erosion at the ends of downdrains or chutes can be a problem if not anticipated. The end of the device may be placed low
enough to prevent damage by undercutting due to erosion. Well-graded gravel or rock can be used to control the potential for
erosion at the outlet of the structure. However, some transportation agencies install an elbow or a tee at the end of the
downdrains to re-direct the flow and prevent erosion. See HEC-14) for additional information on energy dissipator designs.

Copyright and Trademark Information

Grate Type Selection Considerations
Grate type selection should consider such factors as hydraulic efficiency, debris handling characteristics, pedestrian and bicycle
safety, and loading conditions. Relative costs will also influence grate type selection.

Charts 5, 6, and 9 illustrate the relative hydraulic efficiencies of the various grate types discussed here. The parallel bar grate (P-
50) is hydraulically superior to all others but is not considered bicycle safe. The curved vane and the P-30 grates have good
hydraulic characteristics with high velocity flows. The other grates tested are hydraulically effective at lower velocities.

Debris-handling capabilities of various grates are reflected in Table 6-5. The table shows a clear difference in efficiency between
the grates with the 83 mm (3-1/4 inch) longitudinal bar spacing and those with smaller spacings. The efficiencies shown in the
table are suitable for comparisons between the grate designs tested, but should not be taken as an indication of field
performance since the testing procedure used did not simulate actual field conditions. Some local transportation agencies have
developed factors for use of debris handling characteristics with specific inlet configurations.

Table 6-9 ranks the grates according to relative bicycle and pedestrian safety. The bicycle safety ratings were based on a
subjective test program as described in

Hydraulic and Safety Characteristics of selected Grate Inlets on Continuous Grades volumes 1 and 2, published by the FHWA in
June 1977 and April 1978, respectively. However, all the grates are considered bicycle and pedestrian safe except the P-50.

Grate loading conditions must also be considered when determining an appropriate grate type. Grates in traffic areas must be
able to withstand traffic loads; conversely, grates draining yard areas do not generally need to be as rigid.

Table 6-9: Ranking with

Respect to Bicycle and
Pedestrian Safety
Rank Grate Style
1 P-50x100
2 Reticuline
3 P-30
4 45-85 deg. Tilt Bar
5 45-60 deg. Tilt Bar
6 Curved Vane
7 30-85 deg. Tilt Bar

Copyright and Trademark Information