UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF CIVIL AND HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF HYDRAULIC AND WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING

Performance Assessment of Stormwater Drainage Systems in Gondar City

A Thesis Submitted to University of Gondar Institute of Technology in Partial

fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Hydraulic Engineering in the School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering.

By: Awoke Tiruye Agrew

Main adviser: Teodrose Atnafu (Ph.D.)
Advisor Alemu Tezera (MSc)
Co-adviser: Ashenafi Zinabe (MSc)

August, 2020

Gondar, Ethiopia
 Performance Assessment of Stormwater Drainage Systems in Gondar City

Awoke Tiruye

A Thesis Submitted to University of Gondar Institute of Technology in Partial

fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in
Hydraulic Engineering in the School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering.

August 2020

Gondar, Ethiopia
 APPROVAL PAGE

This thesis entitled with “Performance Assessment of Stormwater Drainage Systems in

Gondar City” has been approved by the following examiners in partial fulfillment of the
requirement for the degree master of science in Hydraulic Engineering.

Approved by Board of Examiners

_____________ ___________

Advisor Signature Date

_____________ ___________
Advisor Signature Date

_____________ ___________
Co - Advisor Signature Date

_________________________ _____________ ___________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

_________________________ _____________ ___________

External Examiner Signature Date

_________________________ _____________ ___________

Chairman Signature Date

_________________________ _____________ ___________

Department Head Signature Date

_________________________ _____________ ___________

Post Graduate Coordinator Signature Date

 DECLARATION

This thesis is my original work, has not been presented for a degree in any other university and
that all sources of material used are duly acknowledged.
Name: Awoke Tiruye Agrew

Signature: ______________________

Place: Institute of Technology, University of Gondar

Gondar, Ethiopia

Date of Submission: August, 2020

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First of all, I would like to thank the almighty God for the life strength and courage that he has
granted me throughout this study.

Correspondingly, my special thanks and heartiest appreciation goes to my main advisor, Dr.
Teodrose Atnafu (Ph.D.)

And my co-advisor Mr. Ashenafi Zinabe (MSC) for his kind academic advice, continuous
support during the data preparation, and thesis writing and provided me to had fruitful
knowledge about research writing methods.

Second, I would like to thank Dr.kidie Kessie (Ph.D.) and Mr. Alemu Tezera (MSC) for reading
my thesis and providing me valuable advices.

Finally, I wish to thank all those who have helped me in one or another way during the
research work.

I
ABSTRACT

Urbanization and surface runoff are the main problems of stormwater flooding in many cities in
Ethiopia. Gondar city has also faced this problem. This study aimed to evaluate the existing
stormwater drainage systems in Gondar city by selecting the most flood-prone areas. The
research included the collection of both primary and secondary data. The collected raw data
were edited, classified, and tabulated to make it ready for analysis. Furthermore, spatial works
were conducted using Arc GIS, Bentley civil storm, Google Earth Pro, and Auto CAD software.
There are three runoff outlet points such as Waliya school outlet point, College Mazoriya outlet
point and Gt. college outlet point. The study area was divided into 28 sub-catchment areas and
the land uses and landcovers of 2005 and 2015 were used to assess the runoff coefficients. The
rational method was selected to carry out the hydrology of the sub-catchments. The existing
depth and width of the stormwater drainage channels were measured for all sub-catchments of
the city and used to determine the existing drainage capacity using the Manning equation.
The computed discharge values which were determined by Bentley's civil storm model were
compared with the design discharges that can be conveyed by existing structures. It shows that
some of the stormwater drainage structures are insufficient to run water efficiently. Most of
inadequate structures are found in Waliya school catchment and the other fewer are found in
College Mazoriya catchment. However, the Gt. College catchment is safer from flooding.
Besides the insufficient conveyance capacity, the challenges of stormwater drainage
management in Gondar city are the lack of community awareness, shortage of disposing area,
existing drains in the city are not well planned, blockage of the drainage system by the solid
wastes, lack of strong integration among stakeholders, and lack of maintenance of stormwater
drainage lines which are out of services.

Keywords: ArcGIS 10.5, Bentley civil stormV8I, stormwater drainage systems

II
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...................................................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................. vi
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................... vii
ACRONYM .................................................................................................................................................. viii
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. General Background ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Statement of the problem .................................................................................................. 3
1.3. Main Objective ................................................................................................................. 4
1.3.1. Specific Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 4
1.4. Research Questions........................................................................................................... 4
1.5. Significance of the study .................................................................................................. 4
1.6. Scope and Limitation of the Study ................................................................................... 5
1.7. Thesis outline.................................................................................................................... 5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1. History of urban stormwater drainage systems ............................................................ 6
2.2. Urban Stormwater Management ................................................................................... 6
2.3. Effect of Urbanization on Strom Runoff ...................................................................... 7
2.4. Current Urban Drainage Perspectives .......................................................................... 8
2.5. Urban drainage systems ................................................................................................ 9
2.6. Stormwater drainage ................................................................................................... 10
2.7. Causes of Flooding and Flood Types ......................................................................... 10
2.7.1. Causes of Flooding .............................................................................................................. 10
2.7.2. Flood Types ......................................................................................................................... 11
2.7.3. Effects of Flooding............................................................................................................... 12
2.8. Uncontrolled Urban Settlement .................................................................................. 12
2.9. Stormwater Management in Urban Areas .................................................................. 12
2.10. Model Selection ...................................................................................................... 13
2.11. Urban Stormwater Drainage Practice in Ethiopia ................................................... 15
III
 2.12. The overview of Stormwater Management Practices in Gondar city ..................... 15
2.13. Previous studies in Ethiopia about performance of stormwater drainage systems . 16
2.14. Table 2.1Summery of previous studies ................................................................... 16
3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 17
3.1. Description of the Study Area .................................................................................... 17
3.2. Data Collection ............................................................................................................... 19
3.2.1. Materials Used .......................................................................................................................... 19
3.2.3 Primary ....................................................................................................................................... 20
3.2.3 Secondary Data .......................................................................................................................... 20
3.3 Data analysis .................................................................................................................... 20
3.3.1 Hydraulic and Hydrological Analysis .......................................................................................... 25
3.3.1.1 Meteorological data availability.......................................................................................... 25
3.3.1.2 Estimating missing rainfall data .......................................................................................... 25
3.3.1.3 Check the quality of data .................................................................................................... 26
3.3.1.4 Checking Data Reliability ................................................................................................... 26
3.3.2 Design Rainfall Analysis .............................................................................................................. 27
3.3.2.1 Estimation of the average depth of Rainfall ........................................................................ 27
3.3.3 Design Rainfall Computation of shorter duration ...................................................................... 27
3.3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) Curves ............................................................................... 28
4. 3.4 Catchment delineation using Arc GIS and Google earth pro ................................... 29
3.5 Hydrological Equations for Determining Peak runoff .................................................... 30
3.5.1 Rational Method ........................................................................................................................ 30
2.5.2 .Time of Concentration .............................................................................................................. 32
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................... 36
4.1 Hydrologic Analysis ........................................................................................................ 36
4.1.1 Intensity–Duration–Frequency Curves (IDF) .............................................................................. 36
4.1.2 Catchment delineation using Arc GIS and Google earth pro ..................................................... 40
4.1.3 Estimation of Runoff for the study area .................................................................................... 41
4.2 Hydraulic Analysis .......................................................................................................... 45
4.2.1 Adequacy of Existing Drainage Structures ................................................................................. 45
4.3 Major Challenges of the Storm Water Drainage system in the Study Area .................... 54

IV
 4.3.1 Dumping of solid wastes into stormwater drainages system .................................................... 55
4.3.2 Lack of clearance in the stormwater drainage system .............................................................. 55
4.3.3 Type of Existing Drainage System of the Town .......................................................................... 56
4.3.4 Effect of Urban Population on Urban Drainage ......................................................................... 58
4.3.5 Assessing Flooding and diminished Gondar city Street at the Study Area ................................ 59
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 61
4.1. 5.1 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................. 61
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................. 63
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 64
Appendixes.................................................................................................................................................. 71

V
LIST OF TABLES

Table 4. 1: Comparison of IDF curve results of ERA and IDF curve developed for this study ... 36

Table 4. 2 Design Point Rainfall and return period ...................................................................... 37

Table 4. 3 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment areas by
using Gondar city landuse landcover map 2015 ........................................................................... 42

Table 4. 4 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment areas by
using Gondar city lan duse landcover map at 2005 ...................................................................... 42

Table 4. 5 Total Time of concentration result............................................................................... 43

Table 4. 6 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment ......... 44

Table 4. 7 Existing, Rational method and Excess Discharge Results ........................................... 45

Table 4. 8 Flooded prone areas ..................................................................................................... 46

Table 4. 9 Respondents response on the existing conditions of drainage system......................... 57

Table 4. 10 Challenge of urban population on the stormwater management system based on field
survey ............................................................................................................................................ 59

Table 4. 11 Major flood- prone areas in the study area ................................................................ 59

Table 4. 12 Major causes in urban flooding ................................................................................. 60

VI
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure3. 1. Location Map of the Study Area ................................................................................ 18

Figure3. 2 Evaluate the capacity of the existing urban stormwater drainage system ................... 23
Figure3. 3 Assess the land use land cover change effect on stormwater runoff ........................... 24

Fuigure 4. 1: Plots of Frequency Analysis Results ....................................................................... 38

Fuigure 4. 2: Gondar IDF curve .................................................................................................... 39

Fuigure 4. 3: IDF curve for Region A-2 (Source; ERA, 2013) .................................................... 40

Fuigure 4. 4: Delineated catchment with outlet points of the study area ...................................... 41

Fuigure 4. 5: The water flow from starting into outlet point two ................................................. 47

Fuigure 4. 6: The water flow from starting Cross-section into Outlet two ................................... 47

Fuigure 4. 7: The water flow from starting Cs-5-65 into outlet one ............................................. 48

Fuigure 4. 8: The water flow from starting Cs-142-119 into out let two...................................... 49

Fuigure 4. 9: The water flow from starting Cs-142-119 into Out let- 1 ....................................... 50

Fuigure 4. 10: The water flow from starting Cs-65-66 into outlet two......................................... 51

Fuigure 4. 11: The water flow from starting Cs-66-67into outlet point one................................. 52

Fuigure 4. 12: The water flow from starting Cs-67-17 into out let- 1 .......................................... 53

Fuigure 4. 13: The water flow from starting Cs-94-88 into outlet point one................................ 54

Fuigure 4. 14:Dumping of solid waste in Gondar city (Fieldwork, 2019) ................................... 55

Fuigure 4. 15: Blocked sediments ditches in Keble 18. ................................................................ 56

Fuigure 4. 16: Blocked drainage system in the study area at college mazoriya ........................... 58

VII
ACRONYM

CH channel
CM Catchments
CS Cross section
DEM Digital elevation models
ERA Ethiopian Road Authority
Geographical information
GIS systems
GPS Global position systems
Intensity Duration frequency
IDF curve
International journals of
IJSR science and research
Natural resources
NRC conservation service
O Outfall
Urban stormwater drainage
USWDDM design manual
TC Time of concentrations
LULC Landuse Landcover
RR Rainfall Regions

VIII
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General Background

Stormwater drainage systems in urban areas placed in dry environmental regions generally
consist of storm drain networks and artificial ponds for disposal and collection runoff
respectively. To develop in town boundaries as a result of population growth, the capacity of
existing drainage systems has been drained. Therefore, such systems overflow even during the
smaller the design return period floods (Hoang and Fenner 2016).

Fluctuating rainfall patterns and flash floods due to climate change are other phenomena that
need appropriate attention. Therefore, the towns in dry environmental regions are facing
challenges for effective decision making concerning (i) improvement needs for drainage
networks for safe collection of Stormwater, (ii) selection of most feasible locations for additional
ponds, and (iii) evaluation of other suitable options, such as micro-tunneling (Alhumaid,
Ghumman et al. 2018).

Urban stormwater drainage systems are part of the urban infrastructure basics and Stormwater is
rain, melt and rinse water that temporarily runs off the ground surface. In towns with many
impermeable surfaces, large quantities of Stormwater storage may be designed(Lind 2015).

In the Ethiopian context, where watersheds of various urban centers receive a significant amount
of annual rainfall and where rainfall intensity is high, control of runoff at the source, flood
protection, and safe disposal of excess runoff through appropriate drainage facilities becomes
important (Hoang and Fenner 2016).

Drainage problems in urban areas consist of flooding, deterioration of roads, land degradation,
sedimentation, blockage of drainage facilities, waterlogging, etc. (Duan, Li et al. 2016).

Drainage facilities in most urban centers of the country are nearly absent or at lower coverage,
Most of the existing stormwater drains are in poor period owing to improper maintenance or
inadequate design(Ferguson 2017).

The drains are usually designed using procedures that are based on some expected future
conditions. Additionally, the values of parameters/variables related to the design of the network
are traditionally considered to be deterministic. But, in reality, the parameters/variables have

1
uncertainty due to natural and/or inherent randomness. There is a need to consider the
uncertainties for designing stormwater drain systems that can successfully transport the
discharge (Gouri and Srinivas 2015).

Urban development along with its impermeable structures is the major cause of flooding in urban
areas. Urban stormwater influences the service life of urban infrastructures. The rainfall intensity
and characteristics of the catchment area are the major factors for designing urban stormwater
drainage facilities. These facilities have a paramount advantage to safely dispose of the generated
floods to the ultimate receiving system(Wang, Sun, et al. 2017).

Urbanization alters the hydrological response of catchments to storm events and spatial measures
of urban extent and imperviousness are routinely used in hydrological modeling and attribution
of runoff response to land-use changes. The study of urbanization change effect evaluated by
measuring urban catchment extent can account for differences in runoff generation from storm
events along a rural-urban gradient (Miller and Hess 2017).

With urbanization, impermeability increases because of the increase in impervious surfaces. This
in turn changes the drainage pattern, increases overland flow resulting in flooding and related
environmental problems. The impact of this is severe on spatial structures like the road. This is
because, flooding and its related environmental problems like sheet and gulley erosion, surface
inundation tends to affect road services and its life span (Mugume, Gomez, et al. 2015).

Flooding is the main risk in many urban areas that leads to significant damage to properties and
disruption of services. Hydraulic modeling is the key to a better understanding of flood dynamics
such that improved adaptation events can be applied for disaster risk reduction. For most modern
cities, storm sewer networks are built to manage surface water caused by local rainfall(Chang,
Wang, et al. 2018).

The prevention of flooding in urban areas caused by insufficient drain systems has become an
important issue. With increased property values of buildings other structures, the potential
damage from prolonged flooding can easily spread into the millions of dollars (Markovi, Zele, et
al. 2014).

Landuse changes related to urbanization include the deduction of vegetation, replacement of

pervious areas with impervious surfaces which result in changes in the characteristics of the

2
surface runoff hydrograph increasing Stormwater runoff volumes, and peak flows (Barbosa,
Fernandes, et al. 2012).

Set against a scenario of climate change and uncertain economic and socio-political futures, it is
inevitable that there will be a variety of both new risks and opportunities which will arise in the
implementation and management of urban surface water drainage infrastructure. The primary
objectives must be to avoid or minimize increased flooding and pollution risks whilst increasing
performance efficiency and enhancing local environmental quality-of-life (Lundy, Ellis, et al.
2012).

Stormwater source control has become a common alternative solution for managing Stormwater
in urban areas. Source control establishes one irregular of best management practices (BMPs)
that can be evaluated to various criteria, including hydraulic efficiency, pollution retention,
environmental impact, operation and maintenance, economic investment, and social and
sustainable urban living(Hoang and Fenner 2016).

The discharge of Stormwater into water bodies is likely to cause impacts that depend on the
characteristics of the discharge (quality and flow velocity) and the volume and quality of the
receiving water. Urban areas produce higher discharge peaks and runoff volumes; these
processes increase the flow velocity and, therefore, force the streams to adjust their geomorphic
properties (Berland, Shiflett, et al. 2017).

1.2. Statement of the problem

Lack of urban Stormwater drainage management represents one of the most common sources of
complaints from the residents in many urban centers of Ethiopia, and this problem gets worse
and worse with the rate of urbanization. The location of Gondar city being at the foothills of
mountainous or topography effect is the main challenge of stormwater drainage problem and it is
always under a risk of over flooding that stormed from the upper part. Growth in the construction
industry has led to a decrease in infiltration processes in structured areas and increase surface
runoff. Hence, it increases over flooding in most parts of areas in a town if there is no proper
design and construction of stormwater drainage channels. In addition to that, a lack of or poor
maintenance of the drainage system paves away for the accumulation of stormwater. Thus, it
results in flooding. The process of urbanization not only destroys the vegetation cover but also
alters the natural course of water flow.

3
1.3. Main Objective

The main objective of this research is to evaluate the existing stormwater drainage systems of the
most flood-prone areas in Gondar city.

1.3.1. Specific Objectives

 To evaluate the capacity of existing urban stormwater drainage systems in the study area

 To assess landuse landcover changes affect the stormwater runoff of the study area

 To identify the major challenges in urban stormwater drainage management systems in the
study area

1.4. Research Questions

 Do the existing drainage systems perform well?

 Do the landuse landcover changes the impact of stormwater runoff within the study area?

 What are the major challenges in urban stormwater drainage management systems?

1.5. Significance of the study

This study is beneficial to the area for future stormwater drainage structures construction by
assessing the performances of the existing stormwater drainage structures and proposing
mitigation measures to avoid improper functioning. The findings from this research could also
provide valuable information that can be used as an input or reference for further studies in this
area. The study is beneficial for academicians and researchers who conduct similar researches on
other stormwater drainage structures, urban drainage, stormwater management, local street
drainage, and land use/land cover effects on runoff. The result of this study may also help in
filling the gaps by identifying problems to sustainability, taking proper designing of the
stormwater drainage system, and proper functioning of drainage schemes in the town. Managing
urban stormwater drainage systems has an important role in sustainable environmental
management by keeping the service life of urban utility like road, building houses, water supply
lines, and any urban infrastructures.

4
1.6. Scope and Limitation of the Study

Evaluating the whole catchment is not necessary to come up with a solution for the current storm
flooding problem. Therefore, some representative major flood-prone areas were selected.
According to the residents these areas have been flooded most of the rainy season and based on
field observation three major flood-prone areas were selected. Therefore, this study is
geographically limited to Kebele-18 particularly at Waliya school outlet points, college Mazoriya
outlet points, and GT. college outlet points. Generally; it addresses issues related to urban
stormwater drainage. The specific focus of this study includes: evaluating the extent and
performance of the existing system, identify some of the challenges, and proposing the best
management practice for the existing problem.

1.7. Thesis outline

The thesis is organized into five parts from the introduction part to the conclusion and
recommendation. The first and the second parts deal with the introduction, the objective of the
research, question, statement of the problem, the significance of the study, the scope of the study,
and the second part contain literature review and state of ability related to stormwater drainage
systems. The third part is about the description of the study area, materials, methods, and
procedure to be applied in the research from data collection to the result of the analysis. The
fourth part includes assessing parts, results, and discussion. It ends with the conclusion and
recommendation of the possible solutions.

5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. History of urban stormwater drainage systems

Historically, urban drainage systems have been seen with several perspectives. During different
periods and in different locations, urban drainage has been considered a vital natural resource, a
convenient cleansing mechanism, an efficient waste transport medium, flooding concern,
nuisance wastewater, and a transmitter of disease (Fletcher, Shuster, et al. 2015).

In general, climate, topography, geology, scientific knowledge, engineering and construction

skills, societal values, and religious beliefs have influenced the local perspective of urban
drainage(Adugna 2016).

Population growth and urban expansion can create potentially severe problems in urban water
management. One of the most important services in preserving and improving the urban water
environment is an adequate and appropriately functioning stormwater drainage system
Construction of houses, commercial buildings, parking lots, paved roads and streets increase the
impervious cover in a watershed and reduces infiltration (Butler, Digman, et al. 2018).

Also, with urbanization, the spatial pattern of flow in the watershed is altered and there is an
increase in the hydraulic efficiency of flow through artificial channels, curbing, gutters, and
storm drainage and collection systems (Walsh, Booth, et al. 2016).

These factors increase the volume and velocity of runoff and produce larger peak flood
discharges from urbanized watersheds than occurred in the pre-urbanized condition. Many urban
drainage systems constructed under one level of urbanization are now operating under a higher
level of urbanization and have inadequate capacity(Rawat and Kumar 2015).

2.2. Urban Stormwater Management

A stormwater management system is a tool for managing stormwater runoff from rainfall.
Naturally, this water flows from fields to streams from stream to rivers and so on. However,
development has changed some of these natural flows and has led to overflowing concerns
(Berland, Shiflett, et al. 2017).

6
A stormwater management system is required to deal with the overflows. Therefore, sustainable
stormwater management on the street has the potential to bring street comfort through shading
and reducing peak stormwater runoff volumes (Gebrewahed 2016).

Archaeological evidence tells that drainage was provided to the buildings of many ancient
civilizations such as the Mesopotamians, the Minoans (Crete), and the Greeks (Athens).
Historical explanations show that the drainage systems aimed to accumulate rainwater, avoid
flooding, and convey wastes (Walsh, Booth, et al. 2016).

Urban drainage was confidently established as a vital public works system in the early parts of
the twentieth century (Mguni, Herslund, et al. 2016).

Engineers continued to improve design ideas and methods. During the second half of the
twentieth-century regulatory elements were spread in the United States, Europe, and other
locations addressing urban drainage issues (Alemu 2017).

First Stormwater engineered systems were found in Greece or even in the Mesopotamian
Empire. Stormwater runoff systems experienced various changes until the sewer network
systems were established in the 19th century. Their concept was to collect waste and stormwater
in urban areas and dispose of it outside as fast and as fully as possible(Berland, Shiflett, et al.
2017).

2.3. Effect of Urbanization on Strom Runoff

Problems with drainage in urban areas introduce flooding, waterlogging, land degradation,
sedimentation, road degradation, etc. With urbanization, soil impermeability increases with the
increase of impermeable surfaces with this change in drainage patterns, flooding, and
environmental problems such as increasing soil degradation. The existing and future road
infrastructure is facing a crucial problem (Anim, Fletcher, et al. 2018).

To make them hydraulically smoother, natural channels are often straightened, deepened, and
lined. In the urbanized area, drains, storm drainage pipes and gutters are laid to quickly transmit
runoff to stream channels(Yao, Chen, et al. 2017). Stormwater is rainwater falling into the
buildup area. It would cause inconvenience damage, flooding, and further health risks if
stormwater were not drained properly.

7
The interface between human activity and the natural water cycle needs drainage systems in
developed urban areas (Khare, Patra, et al. 2017). urban drainage includes two types of fluids
wastewater and stormwater (Khare, Patra, et al. 2017).

If the stormwater is not drained accurately, it would cause inconvenience damage, flooding, and
further health risks. The urban drainage system handle to minimize the problems caused to
human life and the environment (Yao, Chen, et al. 2017).

The development of impervious landcover implies both larger stormwater runoff volumes and
peak flows and consequently reduces other components of the hydrologic cycle (Itsukushima,
Ogahara, et al. 2018).

Urbanization also has a major impact on the area's climate. Precipitation, evaporation, and local
temperature have been found to increase as a result of urbanization. Besides, stormwater directly
transports harmful substances to downstream water systems from urban surfaces (Urbaniak,
Tygielska, et al. 2016).

Human activities in urban areas release into the environment a wide range of emissions including
carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, lead, and many other
pollutants. Cities often get more rain than the surrounding countryside as dust can cause water
vapor to condense into rain droplets (Kyaw and Aye 2018).

Rapid development can lead to very high levels of river channel erosion and sedimentation.
Pollutants are frequently dispersed throughout cities or concentrated in industrial or waste sites.
Evaporation may decrease as transpiration (lack of vegetation) and soil moisture decreases as a
result of urbanization. Evaporation reduction also increases the sensitive heat resulting from an
increase in temperature. (Anim, Fletcher et al. 2018)

2.4. Current Urban Drainage Perspectives

Urban drainage in the early parts of the twentieth century was firmly recognized as a vital public
works system. Engineers continued to improve design ideas and methods during the second half
of the twentieth-century regulatory elements were promulgated in the United States, Europe, and
other locations addressing urban drainage issues. Extensive monitoring efforts vastly improved
the understanding of urban drainage quantity and quality characteristics (Fletcher, Shuster, et al.
2015).

8
Computer modeling tools forward-thinking the methods used to design and analyze urban
drainage systems. Regulations, checking, computer modeling, and environmental alarms have
changed the perspective of urban drainage from a public health and flooding alarm during the
first half of the twentieth century into a public health and nuisance flooding with additional
concerns for ecosystem protection and urban sustainability(Xia, Zhang, et al. 2017).

Methods to design and construct sustainable urban drainage systems are presently being
researched and tested. Alternative development concepts are manipulating development practices
to minimize the impacts of development on stormwater drainage. Also, alternative on-site
wastewater management policies are being touted as more sustainable than centralized
wastewater management for some situations (Birgani and Yazdandoost, 2014).

Communities are searching for innovative techniques to capture, detain, and use rainwater
within the watershed instead of constructing massive drainage constructions. Many communities
are developing watershed-wide stormwater quality management plans to meet the dual objectives
of flood prevention and water quality control (Dierkes, Lucke, et al. 2015).

Urban drainage has indeed expanded significantly during the past few decades beyond a
technical task to drain the urban area expeditiously to include the consideration of social,
economic, political, environmental, and regulatory factors (Duan, Li et al. 2016).

2.5. Urban drainage systems

Urban stormwater drainage systems are generally networks of drains that carry urban wastewater
and rainwater to one or more terminal points, where it is discharged to the surroundings.
Combined sewer systems carry rain- and wastewater together (Mugume, Gomez, et al. 2015).

In many towns where the municipality has been increasing fast and rains are frequent, the
existing combined drain systems are unable to carry all the rain and wastewater to the treatment
plants when high-intensity rain occurs (Mugume, Gomez, et al. 2015).

The surface runoff amount and volume are increased due to more impervious areas like rooftops,
squares, and roads. Overland flow direction is also changed by man-made facilities such as
drainage systems, roads, and buildings (García, Barreiro-Gomez, et al. 2015).

9
The design and operation of an urban drainage system are closely associated with the rainfall
characteristics of the local urban area, especially the intensity and amount of rainfall(Mugume,
Gomez, et al. 2015).

2.6. Stormwater drainage

Stormwater is untreated water formed from rain or melting snow that does not soak into the
ground but runs into neighboring waterways. In a natural landscape without expansion,
stormwater is absorbed into the ground or falls into water bodies (Granata, Gargano, et al. 2016).

In an urban landscape, stormwater falls onto impermeable surfaces (surfaces that do not absorb
water) such as roads, sidewalks, rooftops, or parking lots and is not soaked up by the
ground(Ferguson 2017).

As the runoff flows across the ground, it picks up waste products and carries them into local
waterways, such as rivers, lakes, and streams, before eventually making its way into the ocean.
In a natural system, a variety of plants act as filters that clean pollution from the water as it
infiltrates into the ground (Palla, Gnecco, et al. 2017).

Without the natural filters, pollutants and other debris accumulate and are washed into water
bodies. Furthermore, to transporting contaminants, runoff can also cause erosion and
sedimentation by sweeping away and displacing soil. It can also cause localized flooding when
stormwater drains take too much water at once(Ferguson 2017).

Stormwater is runoff produced by precipitation, both wastewater and stormwater must be

considered during urban drainage system planning(Overton and Meadows 2013).

2.7. Causes of Flooding and Flood Types

2.7.1. Causes of Flooding

Floods occur for a period of existences when there is too much rainwater to adequate in the
rivers, and water spreads over the surrounding land, when a lot of heavy rainfalls over a short
period, it can happen very quickly (Afanasyev, Mahadevan, et al. 2013).

Floods are one of those hydrological phenomena that occur due to an extremely complex
sequence of natural events (Pazwash 2016).

10
The frequency and magnitude of inundations are determined by numerous factors, and itis often
as a result of heavy rainfall, but floods can arise in several ways that are not directly related to
ongoing weather events (Smith, King, et al. 2015).

The description of flooding must include processes that may have little or nothing to do with
metrological events. Flooding, by its very nature, is usually a result of both metrological and
hydrological processes (Amoako and Frimpong Boamah 2015).

2.7.2. Flood Types

 Flash Flood  River Flood

 Coastal Flood  Pluvial Flood
 Urban Flood
Flash Floods: a rapid and extreme flow of high rainwater into the sub-catchment area is called
flash flooding, or a rapid rise in a watercourse starting within six hours of the relevant event. The
threshold time may vary in different parts of the area. Continuing flooding can increase to flash
flooding in cases where powerful rainfall results in a rapid surge of rising floodwaters (Lucía,
Comiti, et al. 2015).

The intensity, duration of the rainfall, the steepness of watershed, and stream gradients are the
main factors in flash flooding (Lazrus, Morss, et al. 2016).

Coastal Floods: it happens when dry lowland is flooded by seawater. The extent of coastal
flooding is a function of the elevation inland floodwaters penetrates which is well-ordered by the
topography of the coastal land exposed to flooding (Hapuarachchi, Wang, et al. 2011).

Urban Flooding: the inundation of land or goods in a constructed environment, particularly in

more densely populated areas, caused by rainfall devastating the capacity of drainage systems,
such as stormwater sewers is called urban flooding (Hammond, Chen, et al. 2015).

River Flood: River Flood: During an extended period of rainfall and an extended area, major
rivers may overflow their banks, downstream areas may be affected, even though they have not
received much rain (Arnell and Gosling 2016).

Pluvial Flood: Pluvial is a type of flood that is relatively flat in areas that can occur, rainwater
that falls in an area is normally stored in the ground, in canals or lakes, ordained or pumped out.
11
Flooding occurs when more rainwater enters a system of water that can be stored or can leave the
systems (Komori, Nakamura, et al. 2012).

2.7.3. Effects of Flooding

The failure of stormwater drainage systems causes large damage to constructions and other
public and private infrastructure. Correspondingly, street flooding can limit the effectiveness of
road traffic systems and has significances such as loss of business and opportunity, the flow
velocity on the surface might have an impact on potential flood damage (Bandino, Hang, et al.
2015).

The consequences of urban floods are varied significantly depending on the location, the extent
of flooding, the vulnerability, and the value of the natural and constructed environments they
affect (Stanke, Murray, et al. 2012).

2.8. Uncontrolled Urban Settlement

Impervious surfaces and the construction of drains for rapid storm-water removal are the major
causes of urban floods due to traditional urban settlement, pursued without regard for the
environment. Such urbanization arrangements make it hard to control urban drainage since it not
only causes or aggravates local flooding but can also create problems downstream (Silveira
2002).

The total of impervious cover is directly correlated with runoff coefficients and also with
population density so that an indirect method of evaluating the impact of urbanization on
drainage is to relate population density with runoff coefficients (Silveira 2002).

2.9. Stormwater Management in Urban Areas

Stormwater management which had systematically consisted of resounding rainwater away as

soon as possible in conventional piped systems and, more recently, in controlling runoff using
detention ponds and basins has been facing a new model for a few years (Tao, Chocat, et al.
2009).

This occurs in a context in which increasing stresses on water resources and urban waterways,
rising concerns on public health, climate change, and global warming have become major issues
(Richter, Völker, et al. 2013).

12
As cities develop, urban water managers are being confronted with increasingly complex and
multi-faceted challenges as societal expectations grow and natural resources reach the limits of
sustainable exploitation (Brown, Keath, et al. 2009)

The stormwater management integrates technical, scientific, and social approaches and
Conventional urban stormwater drainage changes stream hydrology, stream protection requires a
more complete approach to flow restoration (Hassall and Anderson 2015).

2.10. Model Selection

When selecting a suitable model, it should first be considered if it is possible to use the model in
respect of investments in time and money. It should then be considered whether the model gives
the wanted output data required for the project and if the input data required is possible to obtain
within a reasonable amount of time and price (Beven 2012).

A complex model regularly requires more input data than a simple model, while a simple model
with scarcer input data instead may not be specific enough for the current study. It is therefore
important to select a good combination of model complexity and available input data (Shamsi
2005).

Finally, it should be considered whether there are limitations in the model that will affect the
results (Beven 2012).

The main steps in selecting a model are presented in the figure below.

13
 Figure 1.1 Steps to select a proper model

Based on the above criteria for this thesis Arc GIS, Auto CAD, Bentley Civil storm, Global
Mapper, and google earth pro were used.

Arc GIS: - The first step in doing any kind of hydrologic modeling involves delineating streams
and watersheds, and getting some basic watershed properties such as area, slope, flow length,
stream network density. With the availability of digital elevation models (DEM) and GIS tools,
watershed properties can be extracted by using automated procedures. The processing of DEM to
delineate watersheds is referred to as digitizing.

There are several tools available online for digitizing. In this thesis, Arc Hydro tools were used
to process a DEM to delineate catchment areas and some other basic drainage layout components
that collectively describe the drainage patterns of a basin.

GIS tools were used to convert the delineated catchment area with basic drainage layout
components into a series of layers and DXF files. This approach was chosen due to the
availability of the necessary dataset and the GIS approach is faster and more accessible. GIS is
applied to (I) select appropriate study sites, (ii) delineate study area sub-catchments, basic
drainage layout components, and (iii) To evaluate land use land cover analysis.

Bentley Civil storm: Civil Storm is software that was developed by Bentley Systems, USA.
Bentley Civil storm is an easy-to-use program that helps civil engineers/hydraulic engineer to
undertake hydraulic analysis for the analysis of pipes, ditches, open channels, and more and it
computes flows related parameters (depth, discharge, and velocity) in a given flow system i.e.
open channel flow, pipe flow by using well-known formulas such as Darcy-Weisbach, Hazen-
Williams and Manning‘s formula.

Bentley Civil storm also to calculate the design flood of the given catchment and to check the
capacity of the drainage system with the measured dimensions of the drainage lines and to design
the proposed system. The need to use Bentley Flow Master hydraulic design software enables:

 Analyze various hydraulic problems (open channel hydraulics)

 Evaluate different kinds of flow elements

 Civil storm used to design roadside ditch and/or interception channel

14
For this thesis, the selected Bentley Civil storm (Version V8) was used. Bentley Civil storm
uses a proprietary hydraulic engine, which provides a fully dynamic solution for modeling
stormwater drainage systems. The program has a GIS-based model interface and features many
useful tools for model building, calibration, and simulation results analysis.

The advantage of using the software can be enumerated but not limited to the following reasons.

 It Minimizes Capital Investments: - By simply entering design restrictions, velocities,

slopes, cover depths, pipe, and manhole matching offsets, Bentley Civil storm recommend
the most cost-effective pipe sizes and invert elevations by avoiding unnecessary pipe trench
excavation, while meeting design restrictions
 It builds and Manages Hydraulic Models: - Jumpstart the model-building process and
manage our model effectively, so that you can focus on making the best engineering
decisions. Leverage and import virtually any external data format, which maximizes on
geospatial and engineering data, and automate terrain extraction and node allocation.

2.11. Urban Stormwater Drainage Practice in Ethiopia

Inadequate integration between the road and urban stormwater drainage lines followed by
blockage of drains by solid wastes dumping bad sewerage connection are the major causes of
flooding in Ethiopia In the Ethiopian context, where watersheds of many urban centers receive a
significant amount of annual rainfall and where rainfall intensity is generally high, control of
runoff at the source, flood protection, and safe disposal of the excess water/runoff through proper
drainage facilities become essential (Belete 2011).

2.12. The overview of Stormwater Management Practices in Gondar city

Gondar’s topography demands that virtually all 168 km of roadways in the city have side
drainage. However, at present, the drainage system is only about 62.87 km in aggregate length,
and most of this is substandard in design, poorly constructed, and inadequately Maintained.
There is about 11.9 km of open masonry drains and about 14.31 km of masonry drains covered
with a slab.

Drains are adjacent to roads, those adjacent to asphalt roads are generally rectangular and open,
In some cases, drainage channels are covered by pre-cast concrete slabs with recessed edges
(often) with the intent that the covering slabs be used as sidewalks, Drains adjacent to gravel

15
roads are earth trains of trapezoidal cross-section, However, some drains adjacent to gravel road
are rectangular. In effect, the city’s drainage system is a two-tier system of open masonry
channel drains (with a limited number of underground pipes in specific areas) and shaped earth
drains. Very few of the earth drains are effective (Niras and Thomas 2012).

2.13. Previous studies in Ethiopia about performance of stormwater drainage

systems

2.14. Table 2.1Summery of previous studies

Title Author study Areas Results

Investigation on Urban Seyifu Bedada Sululta city The drainage system in
Drainage System in Sululta the Sululta city is
City,Ethiopia inadequate
Road and urban storm water Dagnachew Addis Ketema Common people are
drainage network integration Adugna Sub-city suffering due to lack of
in Addis Ababa: Addis drainages facility
Ketema Sub-city
The Hydraulic capacity of Dagnachew Addis Ababa, Stormwater
Ethiopia
existing drain systems and Adugna management in Addis
the management challenges Ababa is purely
of stormwater in Addis traditional, with no
Ababa additional purpose than
collecting and
conveying stormwater
from source to rivers

16
3. METHODOLOGY

3.1. Description of the Study Area

Gondar is a historic royal city of Ethiopia, in the northern Amhara region. It was the home of
many emperors and princesses who ruled the country from the 12th century to the last decade of
the 20th century, including Suseneos, Fasiledes, Empress Mentwab, Iyasu I, Tewodros II and
Empress Taitu. Gondar served as a strong Christian kingdom for many years. Gondar previously
served as the capital of both the Ethiopian Empire and the subsequent Begemder Province. The
city holds the remains of several royal castles, including those in Fasil Ghebbi (the Royal
Enclosure), for which Gondar has been called the Camelot of Africa.

3.1.1. Location

Gondar, the capital of North/Central Gondar Administrative Zone is located in the north of the
capital city of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa at a distance of
740Kms and 175kms to the capital of Amhara Nation Regional State, Bahirdar.

The geographical location of the study area is located between latitude 12°36'N and longitude
37°28'E. The highest elevation of the town is 2133m above mean sea level, in its northeastern
part with monthly rainfall varying 67mm in October to 306mm in July and maximum
temperature varies from 23oc in July to 30oc in March, whereas minimum temperature ranges
from11oc in January to 15.6oc in April and May.

Humidity varies from 39% in March and 79% in August. Wind speed is low, thus minimizing
potential Evapotranspiration values between 101mm /month in July and 149 mm/month in
March. Sunshine duration is reduced to 4.2 -4.9 hours during July and June respectively.

17
 Figure3. 1. Location Map of the Study Area

3.1.2. Topography

Gondar city and its surroundings are situated on mountainous terrain at an average
elevation of 1950masl. The topography of the town is characterized with rounded hills and
gentle slopes. Two rivers are running across the boundaries of the town, Angereb
River and Keha River and the main parts of the town are located on the ridge between the
two rivers.

The topography of the town facing Angereb is steeper than the slope facing
Keha River and as result; most of the population of the town is concentrated on the slope
facing the Keha River. The topography of the majority of the town including the Airport and
Azezo is a gentle slope.

18
3.1.3. Climate

The western and north-western parts of Ethiopia have two seasons, namely the main rainy
Season summer which runs from June to September, and dry season. The climate of the study
area is largely controlled by the movement of the inter-tropical convergence zone, which results
in a single rainy season between June and September.

The main rainy season runs from June to September (around 80% of the annual rainfall), with a
peak in July or August. Mean annual rainfall over the Lake Tana basin is estimated to be 1,326
mm, with slightly more rain falling in the south and south-east than in the north of the catchment.

The highest rainfall occurs over the Gilgel Abbay catchment in the south (1,600 mm). The
climate of Gondar City town is humid and temperate. The mean annual temperature in Gondar
city varies between 16oC and 20oC.

According to Ethiopian temperature zoning, Gondar belongs to Woinadega Zone. Diurnal

temperature variation exceeds 15oC during the dry season. The absolute maximum temperature
usually occurs from March to May. Minimum temperature occurs from November to February
(Niras and Thomas 2012).

3.2. Data Collection

3.2.1. Materials Used

The following materials were used to conduct the study

Tape meter: To measure the existing urban stormwater drainage facilities, road, and natural
waterways

Digital camera: To take the photographs of the existing stormwater drainage systems

Base map: To investigate the overall conditions of the urban stormwater drainage system,
natural waterways/rivers, and integration of stormwater drains and roads in the study area

Contour map: To delineate a watershed boundary, it is needed to visualize the landscape as

represented by a topographic map. The map helps to examine the elevation, determine flow
direction and flow length of the catchment areas

Gps: was used to collect coordinate points and exact location of each outlet points

19
DEM12.5:12.5: was used as an input data for ArcGIS software for catchment delineation and
estimation of catchment characteristic

3.2.2 Methods

Primary and secondary data were collected and gathered from field observation, literature, and
documents.

3.2.3 Primary

Field observation, interview, and questionnaires were employed for primary data collection
with the help of a base map and checklist.

3.2.3 Secondary Data

The secondary data were collected through Literature studies and document analysis. The major
secondary data were collected includes:

 Landuse landcover map of Gondar city 2005 to 2015: of the study area: was used for land
use landcover classification of the urbanization effect and surface runoff effect and where
found Gondar city municipality
 Road networks: were used to check the exact location of the outlet points in the study area
by overlying with Google earth pro at2005 and 2015 maps
 Metrological and Hydrological data: used to know the existing and the purposed discharge
of the study areas
 Rainfall data: to estimate the rainfall intensity or develop Intensity – Duration – Frequency
curves and to prepare the storm data

3.3 Data analysis

For accomplishing the objectives of the study and to answering the research questions, the
collected raw data was edited, coded, classified, and tabulated to make it ready for analysis.

Microsoft excels: to analyze the hydrological data, to calculate the existing stormwater urban
drainage systems and its discharge, to compare the existing runoff and the excess runoff and to
formulate a comparison graph

AUTOCAD: to integrate the master plan of the town with contour map and google earth pro the
flow direction and flow length for each drainage can be unknown

20
ArcGIS: was used for extracting geographical data such as location map of the study area,
masterplan of the town, business areas, commercials areas, industrial areas, public areas, green
areas, boundaries of Keble with respective landuse landcover and used to fixed drainage outlet
points. Additionally used for delineating the study area by digitizing techniques.

Bentley civil storm: used to analyzed and design the stormwater drainage system of the study
areas

Google Earth Pro: to know the exact location of the study area by overlaying the master plan of
the study area, the couture map and the base map of the study area to calculate
average weighted runoff coefficient (Cw) for each delineated catchment for different
landuse landcover classifications

Global mapper: to download the base map of the study area and generating couture map of the
study area

The main steps that are used to address the specific objectives of this study are:

 Check the quality of data

 Frequency analysis by using different static parameters then check the coefficient of R 2 for
each formula and selected the better value
 Estimated design rainfall of shorter duration by using the formula provided ERA drainage
design manual 2013
 Developed IDF curve 2, 5,10,25,50 and 100
 Delineate watershed by using ArcGIS, DEM, google earth pro, and masterplan of the town
 Applying hydrological equations to determine the peak discharge
 Calculating the time of concentrations
 Estimation of rainfall intensity by using TC and IDF curve
 Estimation of weighted runoff coefficient based on land use landcover classification and its
area coverage
 Finally, estimate peak discharge by using the rational method
 Estimate the hydraulic parameters by using manning equations for existing and proposed
discharge then fixing the size of proposed drainage

21
A general schematic methodology used to address the specific objectives of the study area:

Collecting baseline data and developing delineation the study catchment areas

Select study area from Google Eath pro

Load the KML file in to Global mapper

Download the basemap of the study area from Globalmaper

Add DEM 12.5 -12.5 and generate contour map in Arc GIS 10.5

Add basemap and master plane in to ArcGIS

Adjust the projection and coordinate system of the files

Catchment delineation based on Artificial barres, topography, contour and flow direction

Digitize the conduit/channel , manhole and catchment

Export the digitize file to DXF file

Add DXF file in to Bentley Civil storm

Input data peparation for Bentley Civil storm

22
 Analysis using Bentley civil storm

Open a new project option Bentley civil storm

put the background of the exsiting strmwater drainage neteworks by converting AutoCAD
file into DXF file to Bentley civil storm

Adding Gondar IDF curve in Storm Data

Tracing main road lines and catchment areas in Bentley civil storm with the help of
background files

Inserting invert level and ground elevation in each manhole

Inserting conduit properties and manning’s values in each conduit

Inserting time of concentration and runoff coefficient in each catchment

Validate and simulate the program

After running the program successfully, the software itself calculates the flow and hydraulic
gradelines in each manhole and slopes, flow and velocity in each conduit.

Evaluate the capacity of existing urban storm water drainage systems

Figure3. 2 Evaluate the capacity of the existing urban stormwater drainage system

General uses of the storm cad are:

Bentley Civil storm: can be used for the analysis of the existing stormwater drainage networks
or the new design of the stormwater drainage networks

 To design multiple stormwater lines

 To evaluate different scenarios for stormwater
 Import and export AutoCAD and DXF files

23
 Forecast rainfall runoff

To assess the land use land cover change effect on storm water runoff of the study area
1. Data

2. Gondar city master plan CAD File

3. Converting this CAD File into DXF

4. Importing the the DXF into Google earth pro to get the exact lacation

5. Importing kml file int Arc map10.5

6. Georeferencing the map

Digitizing the map to know the property of the study area,slope ,landuse landcover and
runoff coeffitionts of the landuse landcover map of gondar city at 2005 and at 20015

8. Insert the runoff coefficient (Cw) to the Bentley civil storm

9. Finaly checking the effect of stormwater runoff

Figure3. 3 Assess the land use land cover change effect on stormwater runoff

24
3.3.1 Hydraulic and Hydrological Analysis

3.3.1.1 Meteorological data availability

To apply flood estimation models for peak discharge computation using available rainfall data,
the rainfall depth duration frequency relation is required. Available rainfall data were collected
and analyzed using two methods of distribution analysis namely Log Pearson-III and Gumbel’s
Methods. Due to the rain gage station in the study area is one the outlier test is appropriate to
check the quality of the data.

Any probability distribution can be used as the model but the reliability of the distribution is
checked by the goodness of fit tests. Among many method, Gumbel and Log Pearson Type III
methods are used for these research based on as suggested by Ethiopian Drainage Design Manual
(ERA, 2013).

3.3.1.2 Estimating missing rainfall data

Due to the absence of observer or instrumental failure rainfall data records occasionally are
incomplete. In such a case, one can estimate the missing data by using the nearest station rainfall
data. There are different approaches for estimating missing rainfall data varying with and based
on the effect of orography on rainfall, the distance between the rainfall stations and the variation
of rainfall amount recorded on the stations (Caldera, Piyathisse, et al. 2016).

Among different methods Normal ratio methods are one of them which is recommended to
estimate missing rainfall data in regions where annual rainfall between stations differs by more
than 10% (Radi, Zakaria, et al. 2015).

1  Nz Nz Nz  (3.1)
pz   p1  p2  p3 
3  N1 N2 N3 

Where: Pz-missing rainfall data (daily, monthly or yearly) P1, P2, and P3 – rainfall data at the
nearest different station (daily, monthly or yearly) Nz - mean annual rainfall at missed station N1,
N2, and N3- mean annual rainfall at the different nearest station.

25
3.3.1.3 Check the quality of data

Check on outliers was undertaken on the recoded rainfall data to identify any low or high
outliers. Outliers are data points, which proceed significantly from the trend of the remaining
data. The outlier test is done to check whether the adopted data is within the limited range or not.

The daily heaviest rainfall data of Gondar meteorological station from 1988to 2018 was taken for
the design. Hence, 30 years of daily heaviest rainfall data is available. These data were also
checked for its consistency by higher and lower outlier testes using the following equations.

Test for Higher outlier

Higher outlier Y H  Y avg  K n * n -1 (3.2)

Where: Y avg = mean of data in log unity

Kn= from the table for sample size N (Subramanya, 2008).

δn – 1 = standard deviation

Higheroutliertesst  10YH (3.3)

Test for Lower outlier

YL  Yavg - Kn * n - 1 (3.4)

Lower outllier  10YL (3.5)

3.3.1.4 Checking Data Reliability

Relative standards less than 10% the data series could be regarded as reliable adequate
n
Relative standard= *100 (3.6)

Where: - δn = standard deviations

   mean of data

26
3.3.2 Design Rainfall Analysis

3.3.2.1 Estimation of the average depth of Rainfall

The most hydrological complications require knowledge of the average depth of rainfall over a
significant area such as a basin. The rain catch at one station in a basin may be different from
that of other stations in a similar basin.

A. Point Rainfall
Point rainfall is precipitation occurring at a single point in space as opposed to areal precipitation
which is precipitation over a region. For point precipitation frequency analysis, the annual
maximum precipitation for a given duration is selected by applying statistical analysis to
historical records for each duration frequency analysis is performed on the data to derive the
design precipitation depths for various return periods (Marani 2003).

B. Area Rainfall
Area rainfall requires a method of estimating aerial average rainfall over a basin by using the
Arithmetic average method to be used for this research by judgment consideration of quality and
nature of the data, and the importance and required precision of the result rainfall data used
(Cifelli, Chandrasekar et al. 2018). Therefore, the arithmetic means the method is appropriate for
the study area and was used for estimation annual runoff volume in 30 years is the sum of the
average depth of rainfall over a Gondar city catchment it is found in appendixes.

C. Return period

Return period, also called recurrence interval is a term normally used in hydrology. It is the
average time interval between the occurrence of storms and floods of a given magnitude. The
selection of the design return period depends on the economic balance between the costs of
periodic repair or replacement of the structure, potential flood hazard to property, expected level
of service, monetary constraints as well as the magnitude and risk associated with damage from
larger flood events(Salas and Obeysekera 2014). Based on the above criteria for this study 10-
year return period was used.

3.3.3 Design Rainfall Computation of shorter duration

These rainfall analyses and processing is aimed at the determination of the appropriate Intensity-
Duration Frequency relationship. Extreme rainfall depth at town station for different return

27
periods was determined using Log Pearson Type III distributions and Gumbel method analysis.
The rainfall depths obtained from the gauging station are of 24hr duration depth. Design and
analysis of drainage structures require a rainfall intensity duration relationship of shorter
duration. Because rainfall data of shorter duration is not an available appropriate IDF derivation
for the shorter duration is require Ethiopian road authority (ERA) 2013suggests the following
equation.

A. Log Pearson Type III distributions

YT  Yavg  KT * Sy (3.7)

Where YT  Log XT logarithm of Rainfall depth (X T) at return period T years [mm]

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

Sy = Standard deviation [mm]

B. Gumbel method analysis

XT  Xmean  K * Sy (3.8)

1
 y 2 - ( y )
2

Sy  n (3.9)
n -1

Sy=Stander deviation of sample size N

K= frequency factors expressed as

Yt  Yn
K (3.10)
Sn

Yn and Sn reduced standard deviations, as sample N in the table (Subramanya 2013).

3.3.4 Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) Curves

The IDF relationships are used when designing drainage works for any engineering project,
and allow the engineer to design safe and economical flood control measures.

The rainfall depths obtained from the gauging station are 24hr duration depth. Design and
analysis of drainage structures require a rainfall intensity duration relationship of shorter

28
duration. Because rainfall data of shorter duration is unavailable, appropriate IDF derivation for
the shorter duration is required.

t  (b  24)n 
RRt    (3.11)
24  (b  t )n 
 

Where: RRt= Rainfall depth ratio Rt: R24

Rt = Rainfall depth in a given duration t

R24 = 24hr rainfall depth Coefficients b = 0.3 and n = 0.78 - 1.09

Substituting Intensity (mm/hr.) in the above equation

R 24  (b  24)n 
It  RR / t    (3.12)
t  (b  t )n 
 

The methods employed to develop the IDF curve for the shorter duration events using the above
equations are as follows. Among many frequencies analyses Log Pearson type III better R2value,
so for this thesis, Log Pearson type III distribution was selected. Using the trend line equation
obtained from the Log Pearson type III distribution method of frequency analysis, i.e. y =
0.2715x + 59.841 where y is 24-hour rainfall depth (R24) of a return period x under
consideration, R24 is calculated for 2, 5, 10, 25, 50- and 100-year return period.

4. 3.4 Catchment delineation using Arc GIS and Google earth pro

Every hydrological modeling starts from delineating streams and watersheds and obtaining
watershed properties such as area, slope, flow length, flow direction, stream network, etc. The
hydrologic modeling tools in the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst extension toolbox provide methods
for describing the physical components of a surface or digital elevation model.

The catchments areas were delineated by taking a base map, contour map, master plan of the
study area by considering artificial barriers, Topography, contour/elevation, and flow direction as
an input.

Landuse landcover: the land use and landcover condition of the study area was analyzed by
using ArcGIS and Google earth pro and masterplan of Gondar city as an input data. The specific
study area was selected from Gondar university main get to Gt.college by using the two main

29
roads as reference the hospital main road from Meraki campus to piazza and the college main
road from Marki campus to the piazza. Generally, the land use landcover effect was estimated by
using currently used master plan and old master plan, the current master plan covered business,
commercials, green, private house, recreational and paved asphaltic areas and the old land use
land cover map was also covered with bared land, private house, and bush.

3.5 Hydrological Equations for Determining Peak runoff

3.5.1 Rational Method

The main purpose of the hydrologic analysis is to determine the maximum amount of runoff
(peak discharge) that can be accumulated at certain storm drainage outlet (usually a ditch)
along a highway/access road alignment section for the design of the stormwater drainage system.
The Rational method is one of the most commonly used simplified models for road storm
drainage is primarily based on the concept that the peak discharge from a watershed will
always occur when the rain lasts long enough at its maximum intensity to enable all portions
of the basin to contribute to the flow.

The Rational Method considers the entire drainage area as a single unit and estimates the peak
discharge at the catchment outlet. This method is widely used for peak discharge determination
from smaller catchments (less than 50 ha or 0.5Km2 area) as recommended by the ERA drainage
design manual. The equation of rational formula is the function of the catchment area, runoff
coefficient, and time of concentration. The equation is expressed as:

Q = 0.00278 CIA (3.13)

Where

Q= Discharge at outlet (m3/s)

C =Runoff Coefficient

I =Maximum probable rainfall Intensity (mm/hr.)

A =Catchment Area (hectares)

A. Runoff Coefficient

30
The runoff coefficient (C) is the variable of the Rational Method least susceptible to precise
determination and requires judgment. This variable represents the ratio of runoff to rainfall it
represents the interaction of many factors, including the storage of water in the surface
depressions, infiltration, antecedent moisture, ground cover, ground slopes, and soil types.
Runoff coefficients are theoretically restricted to the range of 0 to 1.0. When the catchment
the area contains a varying amount of different covers, a weight average method is employed to
obtain the representative runoff coefficient i.e. the individual areas multiplied by their specific
and their values added together and divided by the cumulative area (Mohtar 2015).

The equation below is used to determine weighted average runoff coefficient values
for each catchment area under the rational method using land use land cover map of Gondar city
2015.

 (Ai * C i )
C wighted  (3.14)
AT

Where = Ci- Runoff coefficient for a given hydrologic soil group area

Ai = Area under each hydrologic soil group

AT = Total catchment area considered of town

A. Rainfall Intensity

The rainfall intensity (I) is the average rainfall rate in mm/hr for the duration equal to the time of
concentration for a selected return period. Once a particular return period is selected for design
and time of concentration calculated for the catchment area, the rainfall intensity can be
determined from Rainfall-Intensity-Duration curves (Hearn 2019).

B. Catchment Area

Like the Rational method, the catchment area can be determined from Base maps and site
observation. However, for large catchment areas like Gondar city, it is necessary to divide the
area into sub-catchment areas using Google earth pro and ArcGIS. A common outlet of the town
was accounted for by overlaying the base map, contour map, and master plan of the town using
ArcGIS10.5.

31
2.5.2 .Time of Concentration

The time of concentration (Tc) is used in the Rational Method to determine the critical rainfall
duration, which can then be combined with an appropriate rainfall intensity duration frequency
(IDF) relation to establishing the required design rainfall intensity. Tc is the time required for
water to flow from the most remote point of the basin to the location being analyzed (Ethiopian
Roads Authority 2013).

Runoff is assumed to reach a peak at the time of concentration Tc when the Entire watershed is
contributing to flow at the outlet. The time of concentration to any point in a storm drainage
system is the sum of the inlet time (the time it takes for flow from the remotest point to reach the
sewer inlet), and the flow time ft. in the upstream sewers connected to the outer point. The
velocity of flow depends on the catchment characteristics and slope of the watercourse. Among
many empirical formulas available Sheet flow and Shallow concentrated flow methods were
selected.

A. Sheet flow Time: -Sheet flow is flow over plan surfaces. It usually occurs in the
headwater of the streams (usually for the first 100 m run). With sheet flow, the friction
value (Manning’s roughness coefficient) which takes into account the effect of raindrop
impact, drag over the plan and other ground cover barriers have a significant impact on
the overall sheet flow travel time determination. Manning’s kinematic solution was used
to compute sheet flow travel time.

 0.091*(n * L)0.8 
Tt    (3.15)
 p 0.5 s 0.4 
 2 

Where: Tt = travel time, hr.

n = manning’s roughness coefficient

L = flow length, m

P2 = 2-years, 24-huors rainfall, mm

S = slope of hydraulic grade line, m/m or land slope based on topographic map

B. Shallow concentrated flow

32
After a maximum of 100 meters, sheet flow usually becomes a shallow concentrated flow.
Shallow concentrated flow is assumed not to have a well-defined channel and has flow depths of
0.1 to 0.5feet. Therefore, a shallow concentrated flow was computed using these formulas.

For unpaved v  4.9178S 2 (3.16)

V  6.196s0.5 (3.17)
Where V = average velocity, m/s

S = slope of hydraulic grade line (watercourse slope), m/m overland flow time

L
Tt  (3.18)
360v

Where: Tt = travel time hr

L = flow length, m

C. Open channels

Open channels are assumed to begin were field surveyed cross-section channel information
has been obtained, where channels are visible on the meter, Average flow velocity is usually
determined manning’s equation information can be used to estimate average flow velocity.
When the channel section and roughness coefficient (Manning's n) are available, then the
velocity can be computed using the Manning Equation.

2 / 3S1/ 2
VR (3.19)
n

Where

R = the hydraulic radius = Aw/Pw and

A = the cross-sectional area of flow normal to the flow direction in m2

S = the bottom slope of the channel in m/m (dimensionless)

n = Manning's roughness coefficient

P = wetted perimeter

33
 L
Tt = (3.20)
360v

Where: Tt = travel time hr

L = flow length, m

Then the total time of concentration is the sum of values for the various consecutive flow
segments.

T C  T C1  T C 2  T C 3 (3.21)

The capacity of Existing Drainage Structures

The current conditions of hydraulic calculations were performed and evaluated by collecting the
data of existing stormwater drainage structures using a field survey. The existing depth and
width of the stormwater drainage channel were measured for all sub-catchments of the town and
used to determine the existing drainage capacity using Bentley civil storm.

Adequacy of Existing Drainage Structures and it's proposed

Based on the hydraulic calculation of the result drainage capacity of the existing system was
checked to compare with the proposed discharge. This process was also done first by
determining the peak discharge for each existing catchment from the measured depth and width
of the stormwater drainage channel for all sub-catchments of the town.

The design capacity of the sub-catchments of the town was calculated by taking the intensity for
a 10-year return period from the IDF that was determined by the rational formula. This discharge
was also compared with existing discharge which determined from the measured depth and
width of the stormwater drainage channel for all sub-catchments of the town.

Drainage Size determination for proposed

The size of drainage channels depth and width for excesses discharge or the proposed condition
was determined by using manning most economical channel section equation.

2 / 3S1/ 2
Q  AR (3.22)
n

Area of rectangular channel A  b * y (3.23)

34
For most economical rectangular channel b  2* y Area of a rectangular channel

2 y2
A  2 y 2 P  2 y  2 y  4 y And R   0.5 y (3.24)
4y

Q*n Q*n 8/ 3
 y8 / 3y  ( ) (3.25)
s1/ 2 s1/ 2

 roposed Depth - Existing Depth 

% Additional Depth    *100 (3.26)
 Existing Depth 

 roposed width - Existing width 

% Additional width    *100 (3.27)
 Existing width 

35
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter describes and discusses the results obtained in this research. Impact of landuse
landcover change on stormwater runoff within the study areas, the current condition of the
drainage system in Gondar city, hydraulic performance and capacities of the drainage systems,
problems of the stormwater drainage system in the study area and the proposed size of the new
drainage network are presented and discussed.

4.1 Hydrologic Analysis

4.1.1 Intensity–Duration–Frequency Curves (IDF)

The resulting IDF curve from the steps shown in table 4.1 is as follows. The IDF curve is
developed from 24-hour rainfall data of 29 years i.e. 1989 to 2018, obtained from Ethiopian
Meteorological Agency rainfall gauge located in Gondar city, Ethiopia.

An appropriate reduction equation as described in the methodology section has been applied. The
developed IDF curve is compared to the existing IDF curve which was prepared by Ethiopian
Road Authority (ERA) for region A, B, C and D are presented and Gondar also found in the
region A. The comparison results were too difference this is because the rainfall data used for
developing IDF curve for Gondar city was from 1989 to 2018 and ERA used to develop IDF
curve was five years less than from this study data (up to 2013) and the other reason is ERA
develop IDF curve for the different station (A, B, C, and D) and collected data ranges. Due to
those reasons, the intensity values were too different.

4.1.1 Rainfall intensity

The intensity was selected based on the design rainfall duration and return period. For this thesis,
the 10 years return period was established based on ERA drainage design standards as a design
parameter.

Table4. 1: Comparison of IDF curve results of Drainage Design Manual RR-A2 (ERA – 2013)

and IDF curve developed for this study

36
 T=5 T=100
Duration Present
(Hr) ERA study ERA Present study
R24 65.52 63.98 102.45 94.30
0.08 119.05 116.24 186.15 171.34
0.17 93.86 91.65 146.77 135.09
0.25 82.58 80.64 129.13 118.86
0.33 73.47 71.74 114.88 105.74
0.50 58.94 57.55 92.16 84.83
1.00 38.08 37.18 59.54 54.80

The full comparison table is presented from appendix-1 Table-8

Table4. 2 Design Point Rainfall and return period

ERA
period log Pearson type III Gumble 2013
2 52.26 51.95 51.92
5 63.98 62.57 65.52
10 71.28 69.62 74.45
25 79.48 78.51 85.7
50 85.40 85.11 94.07
100 94.30 91.66 102.45

37
 120.00 Frequency Analysis
y = 0.3558x + 63.064
R² = 0.7818
100.00

80.00 y = 0.3426x + 62.274

precipitation (mm)

R² = 0.7668
Legend
60.00 Log pearson III
Gumble
Linear (Log pearson III)
40.00 Linear (Gumble)

20.00

0.00
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Return Period ( year)

Figure4. 1: Plots of Frequency Analysis Results

From frequency analysis, the Log Pearson type- III distribution method shows better R2 values
than the Gumble method. Therefore, the Log Pearson type- III distribution method was used for
the analysis of design rainfall for the required return period or 10 years for design and 25 years
for the check. Because of the flood hazards happened per 10 years in once need to check the max
hazard flood for the longest return period which means that for 25 years based on the ERA
drainage design manual.

38
180.00 Developed IDF curve for Gondar station

160.00
2 year

140.00

5 year
120.00
Intensity (mm/hr)

100.00 10 year

80.00
25 year

60.00

50 year
40.00

20.00 100
year

0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Duration (hr)

Figure4. 2: Gondar IDF curve by using log Pearson type three methods

39
200.00 Developed IDF curve for Gondar station

180.00

2 year
160.00

140.00
5 year
Intensity (mm/hr)

120.00

10 year
100.00

80.00 25 year

60.00
50 year
40.00

20.00 100 year

0.00 Duration (hr)

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Figure4. 3: IDF curve for Rainfall Region A-2 (Source; ERA, 2013)

4.1.2 Catchment delineation using Arc GIS and Google earth pro

Catchment delineation of the study area was based on the base map, contour map, the master
plan of the study area by considering artificial barriers, topography, and contour/elevation, and
flow direction.

40
 Figure4. 4: Delineated catchment with outlet points of the study area

4.1.3 Estimation of Runoff for the study area

The existing capacities of the drainage systems were evaluated by estimating the current runoff.
As some of the existing cross drainage systems are overtopped during heavy rainfalls the
roadside drains, walkways, and the asphalt are flooded sometimes even during the average storm.

41
Thus, the hydrological study of this research intended for determining the current runoff and
providing a solution to such problems.

Table4. 3 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment areas by
using Gondar city land-use landcover map 2015

Area Total IDF (for 10 year Runoff Peak

Sub-catchment
(Ha) Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.) Coefficient discharge(m3/s)
CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.85 2.18
CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.85 2.66
CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.85 2.45
CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.85 2.72
CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.85 2.99
CH-6 49.8 1.40 37 0.85 2.99
CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.85 2.94
CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.85 2.99
CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.85 2.99
CH-10 45 1.50 26 0.901 2.59
CH-11 47 1.30 38 0.901 2.71
CH-12 49.5 0.25 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-13 49.5 1.63 27.6 0.901 3.17
CH-14 49.5 1.29 38.8 0.901 3.17
CH-15 49.4 1.11 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-16 49.5 2.13 27.6 0.901 3.11
CH-17 49.6 1.36 38.5 0.901 3.05
CH-18 45 1.23 43 0.901 2.59

The above table result shows the amount of weighted runoff coefficient value and the area of
land use land cover change by using the Gondar city master plan before 10 years ago or in 2007
that to differentiate the urbanization effect of the study area.

The full table presented in appendix – 2 in table -13

Table4. 4 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment areas by
using Gondar city land-use landcover map at 2005

42
 Total IDF (for 10-year
Sub- catchment Area (Ha) Runoff Coefficient Peak discharge(m3/s)
Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.)

CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.46 1.17

CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.46 1.43

CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.46 1.31

CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.46 1.43

CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.46 1.44

CH-6 49.8 1.4 37 0.46 1.45

CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.46 1.45

CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.46 1.45

CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.22 0.7

CH-10 45 1.5 26 0.22 0.63

CH-11 47 1.3 38 0.22 0.66

CH-12 49.5 0.25 98.5 0.22 0.69

CH-13 49.8 1.63 27.6 0.22 0.7

CH-14 49.8 1.29 38.8 0.22 0.7

CH-15 49.5 1.11 98.5 0.22 0.69

CH-16 49.5 2.13 27.6 0.22 0.69

CH-17 49.6 1.36 38.5 0.22 0.7

CH-18 45 1.23 43 0.68 1.95

CH-28 49.5 1.14 42.5 0.68 2.14

The above table 4.4 was found by replacing the runoff Coefficient value into landuse landcover
map of 2015 to know the urbanization effect. The increasement of runoff coefficient is from2005
to 2015 by 15% and the color shows that the sub-catchment areas which has gone increasement
of runoff coefficients.

The full table presented in appendex-2 in table -14

Table4. 5 Total Time of concentration result

Sheet flow Shallow concentrated flow Open channel flow Total Tc

(hr) (m/s) (hr) (m/s) (hr) (hr)

43
Tt=[0.091(nL)0.8/ V=4.9178(S)0.5 Tt=L/3600v V=R2/3S1/2/n Tt=L/3600v
(P20.5*S0.4)]
0.02 9.98 0.84 4.27 0.02 0.88
0.08 1.84 0.15 4.69 0.02 0.25
0.04 8.47 1.30 1.87 0.08 1.42
0.02 13.83 1.22 3.12 0.03 1.26
0.08 5.79 1.50 5.16 0.05 1.64
0.05 7.21 1.32 5.60 0.03 1.41
0.03 10.10 1.27 4.28 0.03 1.33
0.03 11.14 1.61 5.87 0.02 1.67
0.02 12.94 0.99 4.67 0.02 1.02
0.04 9.49 1.44 3.68 0.04 1.52
0.04 7.80 1.23 4.13 0.04 1.31
0.16 0.83 0.07 3.61 0.02 0.26
0.03 10.37 1.57 4.31 0.04 1.64
0.04 7.76 1.22 5.55 0.03 1.30
0.03 9.03 1.07 5.06 0.02 1.12
0.10 5.82 1.94 2.72 0.12 2.16
0.04 8.99 1.30 4.01 0.04 1.37

The full table presented from appendix -2 in Tables -11

Sample calculation Total T C  t c1  t C 2  t t 3  0.02  0.84  0.02  0.88 hr

When we compare the land use landcover map of Gondar city in 2005 and 20015 until now the
runoff coefficient increased from 45% to 66%

Table4. 6 Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment
Sub- catchment Area (Ha) Total IDF (for 10 year Runoff Peak
Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.) Coefficient discharge(m3/s)

CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.85 2.18

CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.85 2.66
CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.85 2.45
CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.85 2.72
CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.85 2.99
CH-6 49.8 1.40 37 0.85 2.99
CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.85 2.94
CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.85 2.99
CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.85 2.99

44
The full table is presented in appendix – in table

4.2 Hydraulic Analysis

4.2.1 Adequacy of Existing Drainage Structures

The current conditions of the hydraulic system were performed and evaluated by collecting data
on the existing stormwater drainage structure. The stormwater drainage channels were measured
for all sub-catchments of the town and used to determine the existing drainage capacity using the
Manning equation.

Table4. 7 Existing, Rational method and Excess Discharge Results

Sub-catchment Existing Condition Rational Excess

discharge(m3/s) Method discharge
discharge(m3/s) (m3/s
Ch-1 2.01 2.18 0.17
Ch-2 2.60 2.66 0.06
Ch-3 2.28 2.45 0.17
Ch-4 2.61 2.72 0.11
Ch-5 2.01 2.99 0.98
Ch-6 2.18 2.99 0.81
Ch-7 2.37 2.94 0.57
Ch-8 2.51 2.99 0.48
Ch-9 1.12 2.99 1.87

The full table presented in appendix -2 in Table-15

The existing discharge is the discharge calculated by the given channel section can convey and
calculated based on the carrying capacity of the existing channel.

Sample calculation

Existing Disch arg e  Q design - Q existing  Q Excess  2.18 - 2.01  0.17 m3/ s
Flooding Occurrence of Storm Water Drainage System of Gondar city

The flood Occurred prone sub-catchment areas, channels, cross-sections, and outlet points
indicated the table below. From those study the outlet points that fixed as Waliya school (outlet
point one ), college Maziya (outlet point two), and Gt.college (outlet point three), the two outlet

45
points one and two were selected as flood-prone areas based one Bentley civil storm modeling
results.

Table4. 8 Flooded prone areas

Flooded prone areas

Sub-catchment Cross-section Channel Outfall The Outlet points area
CM-6 Cs-246-186 CH-110 O-2 Gondar college Maziya
CM-7 Cs-178-246 CH-111 O-2 Gondar college Maziya
CM-8 Cs-179-178 CH-112 O-2 Gondar college Maziya
CM-9 Cs-142-119 CH-113 O-2 Gondar college Maziya
CM-1 Cs-5-65 CH-123 O-1 Waliya school
CM-2 Cs-65-66 CH-124 O-1 Waliya school
CM-3 Cs-66-67 CH-126 O-1 Waliya school
CM-4 Cs-67-17 CH-127 O-1 Waliya school
CM-5 Cs-94-88 CH-128 O-1 Waliya school

46
 Figure4. 5: The water flow from starting into outlet point two

As shown in figure 4.5 above the model result shows that on Cs-246-186 on CM-6 hydraulic
grade line exceeded the rim elevation of the locked structure that results in surcharge flow.
Flooding on the cross-section happens due to the limitation of channel size (the existing channel
size does not compensate for the incoming flow of stormwater from the catchments).

Figure4. 6: The water flow from starting Cross-section into Outlet two

As shown in figure 4.6 above due to an increase in the channel depth flooding extent is reduced
in CH-111and CH-112 and there is a proper flow of stormwater into these drains in figure 4.6.
The hydraulic grade line is above the rim elevation of the drainage layout that results in
surcharge flow. Flooding on the cross-sections, Cs-178-246 into an outlet- 2 on catchments of
CM-7 occurs due to the existing channel size that does not compensate for the incoming flow of
stormwater from the catchments. The conveying capacity of CH-111 is 2.085m3/s but the runoff
which is generated from this catchment is 3.531m3/s and the conveying capacity of CH-112 is
0.593m3/s but the runoff which is generated from the catchment is 1.502m3/sec.

47
 Figure4. 7: The water flow from starting Cs-5-65 into outlet one

As seen from the figure above modeling results the hydraulic condition in the stormwater
drainage system is the overcharged-flow resulted in street surface flooding from CM-8 in Cs-5-
65 into outlet- 1. This is the condition in which the drainage flow into the sewer channel is
beyond the existing capacity of the channel.

48
 Figure 4. 8: The water flow from starting Cs-142-119 into outlet two

Figure 4.8 shows at the end of Cs-142 and the start of Cs-119 the HGL and ENL join together,
that means the normal depth equals to the channel depth such condition shows there is a flood at
this point and the excesses discharge is 1.45m3/s.

49
 Figure 4. 9: The water flow from starting Cs-142-119 into outlet- 1

Figure 4.9 shows that there is a rise in water level and backwater flow from Cs-142-119 due to
the negative slope the engineering profile shows that channel- CH-123 has a slope of -0.180
m/m. So, to solve these backflow and logging problem the elevation of the cross-sections should
be modified.

50
 Figure 4. 10: The water flow from starting Cs-65-66 into outlet two

As seen from Figure 4. 10 the modeling results show that the hydraulic condition in the
stormwater drainage system is the overcharged flow. This causes flooding from CH-2 into Cs-65
into outlet one flooded drainage layout.

51
 Figure4. 11: The water flow from starting Cs-66-67into outlet point one

For figure 4.11 indicated the backwater flow of water and waterlogging problem in case of the
high elevation of the cross-sections Cs-66-67 the depth of the channel should be improved or
increased to prevent backwater and waterlogging problem.

52
 Figure 4. 12: The water flow from starting Cs-67-17 into outlet- 1

Figure 4.12 shows the backwater effect because of the negative slope and at the end of Cs-67 and
the start point of Cs-17 the hydraulic grade line greater than the energy grade line that means the
Norman depth of the channel greater than the channel depth which leads to flooding at the
endpoint of the channel.

53
 Figure 4. 13: The water flow from starting Cs-94-88 into outlet point one

Figure 4. 13 Shows that there is raise in water level at some point and backwater flow from Cs-
94-88 due to the negative slope the engineering profile shows channel at CM-5 has the slope of -
0.17 m/m and at the indicated point the HGL and the EGL were equal at the same time the
normal depth of the channel and the channel depth were equal shows that flooding.

4.3 Major Challenges of the Storm Water Drainage system in the Study Area

The existing conditions of the drainage system at the study area were assessed in detail, and
photos were taken to show the existing condition of the drainage system. Interviews at the
household level were also performed to know the perception of the people of the town.

54
4.3.1 Dumping of solid wastes into stormwater drainages system

Dumping solid waste materials into drainages is the challenge of a stormwater drainage system.

Urban clutter (alternatively called trash, waste materials, garbage, or solid waste) has become a
major problem as a result of damping these solid wastes into drains the drainage system has been
clogged and causes flooding over the streets.

From a total of 60 respondents of monitoring Survey (2019) about the solid waste in the City is
disposed: a shortage of disposing area 24 (40%) lack of awareness 15 (25%) and carelessness 21
(35%) for stormwater drains system.

The overall result indicates that the blockage of the drainage system by the solid waste is due to
shortage of disposing of area for solid wastes; inadequate drainage operation management was
because of unawareness of Community who dispose solid and liquid wastes into the drainage
structures inlets and on the pavement of the road.

Figure 4. 14: Dumping of solid waste in Gondar city (Fieldwork, 2019)

4.3.2 Lack of clearance in the stormwater drainage system

Concerning drainage infrastructure provision, the main problems associated are poor
coordination and integration among stakeholders. Furthermore, community participation is
among the lowest in the study area. In the study area, 42 out of 60 respondents or (70%) of
respondents showed that there is no community participation in one way or another for drainage

55
infrastructure provision. Due to the lack of stormwater drainage lines clearance, they have
become out of services.

Sediment load and solid wastes blocked most of the drainage system. Therefore, unless proper
and scheduled clearance is part of the tasks, the service life of those ditches and channels could
be shorter than the anticipated design time.

Figure4.15: Blocked sediment ditches in Keble 18.

4.3.3 Type of Existing Drainage System of the Town

To find out the existing drainage system condition based on field survey by using the
photographic techniques and questioners to ensure performance level such as excellent, very
good, good, average, and poor condition.

To find out the existing drainage system condition based the following on questions listed in the
table a total of 60 respondents the following result. Therefore, the current condition of the
drainage system is not properly managed by the society and the government.

56
Table4. 9 Respondents response on the existing conditions of the drainage system

Items Excellent very good good poor Total

No. o 5 10 45 60

percentage 0 8.33 16.67 75 100

Based on field survey data 75 of the respondents claimed that the existing condition of the
the drainage system is poor and unable to perform their intended purpose, and 16.67 % of them
said that the drainage infrastructures of the town are at a good condition, whereas 8.33% were
responded that the drainage system is a very good condition.

Therefore, the Existing drainage network Condition was checked by the above questionaries’ and
field visited result shows that:

 Drainage systems are not well connected into the outfall

 Ponds or other spaces are not properly allocated to accommodate an overflow of flooding
 Most ditches do not have the proper slope to let water pass through them
 In some areas, there are no drainage networks provided at all
 Some of the existing drainage ditches have been silted by sand and other rubbish materials it
leads to flooding or inundation and losing the capacity of drainage channels
 Damage to properties like existing drainage facilities and buildings or houses block the
drainage systems and lose the performance of the exciting channel

57
 Figure4. 16: Blocked drainage system in the study area at college Mazoriya

4.3.4 Effect of Urban Population on Urban Drainage

Respondents were asked to report on the challenge of urban Population on stormwater

management as regards to increasing of surface runoff.

From the results obtained (50%) reported that it led to increased flooding, (16.67%) resulted to
unsustainably using stormwater drainage facilities, (25%) of the respondents reported that of
urban Population lead to increasing flooding risks and (8.33%) indicated that urban Population
leads to don’t know/No response.

As the population grows, demand for housing and commercial amenities naturally follows. The
urbanization enhances roads, rooftops, parking lots, sidewalks, and other imperviousness to the
landscape (Moglen, 2007 240).

Therefore, the Gondar city population rapidly increasing from time to time due to this it has a
great impact on increasing surface runoff.

58
Table4. 10 Challenge of urban population on the stormwater management system based on field
survey

The urban population on stormwater No questionnaires

Percentages (%)
Management received
Increasing surface runoff 30 50
unsustainably use of drainage
facilities 10 16.67
Increasing flooding risks 15 25
No response 5 8.33
Total 60 100

The results of this survey indicate that urban populations greatly affect stormwater
management in increasing flooding in Gondar city. Urban conditions made worse drainage
problems; runoff is increased by impermeable urban surfaces, residential area, commercial
area, street, paved road and due to inadequate development control mechanisms and their
incompetent enforcement, settlements are built with slight consideration for stormwater
drainage system.

4.3.5 Assessing Flooding and diminished Gondar city Street at the Study Area

Currently, road flooding and its related effects are common in Gondar city. Most of the drains
are in poor condition for proper functioning. Breasted roads have their challenge over the
drainage systems because their damaged surface couldn’t transport the runoff generated over the
impervious area.

Table4. 11 Major flood-prone areas in the study area

specific Ranking of the flood-prone area
respondents
site
Number Percentage Rank
Maraki 3rd
toWaliya 15 25
school
Waliyaschool
to college 25 41.67 1st
Mazoriya

59
College
2nd
Mazoriya to 20 33.33
Gt. college
Total 60 100

This problem implies that flooding has been noticed in most of Waliyaschool to college
Mazoriya suburban roads due to:

 Inadequate integration between the road and urban stormwater drainage lines
 Inadequate drains are that causes of flooding in the study area,
 Does not carrying capacity drainage system for the problem of solid waste dumping
increasing with a Sewerage connection
 Urban stormwater drainage facilities not welled constructed with roads safely
discharge to flood generated within the study area of stormwater drainage facilities
which is a challenge for the town.

Table4. 12 Major causes in urban flooding

No Major causes in urban flooding Respondents
Number Percentage
1 Blockage of drains by solid wastes 30 50
2 Inadequate drains 10 16.67
3 Absence of drains 15 25
4 Other 5 8.33

60
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1. 5.1 CONCLUSIONS

The main objective of this study was to assess the existing condition and provide a better
solution of the stormwater drainage system of Gondar city. The result shows that the storm
drainage facility is inadequate to convey the peak discharge for 10 years design period.

The existing conditions of urban stormwater drainage structures were assessed through critical
site observations and interviews. The capacity and adequacy of urban stormwater drainage
structures were assessed through hydrologic and hydraulic analysis. Under hydrologic analysis,
return periods, IDF curves, 24-hour rainfall analysis, delineation of watershed areas, computation
of catchment parameters, and peak discharge computation were carried out.

The hydraulic analysis was carried out to assess the adequacy of the existing drainage structure
and the proposed urban stormwater drainage structure. The peak discharges computed by the
rational formula method were compared with the discharges determined from the existing
measured depths and widths of the stormwater drainage channels for all sub-catchments of the
town. It shows that the existing stormwater drainage system is insufficient at different sub-
catchments of the town. Besides improving the existing stormwater drainage channels, it is also
necessary to construct additional drainage channels to contain probable flooding.

There are three runoff outlet points located at Waliya School, College Mazoriya and Gt. College.
The areas were divided into 28 sub-catchments. From these, 32% of the catchments have
insufficient conveyance capacity while the remaining 68% have sufficient conveyance capacity.
Generally, the performance of this stormwater drainage is no satisfactory and needs a serious of
regular maintenance. It is also necessary to provide drainage networking for the areas without
drainage systems for its complete service.

The land use land cover of the area had been changed from 2005 to 2015. Most of the cultivated
land, shrubs, and bare land at Waliya_outlet and Mazoriya were changed to a new area for
business, commerce & markets, recreation, residence, road, and transportation. As the result, it
changed the runoff coefficients which directly affect the amount of discharge or runoff in the
vicinity area. From 2005 to 2015, the runoff coefficient was increased by 15% because of

61
urbanization and impervious area increment. The study shows that the challenges of stormwater
drainage management in Gondar city.

The challenges of stormwater management in Gondar city are the blockage of the drainage
system by solid waste; inadequate drainage operation management, lack of stormwater drainage
maintenance.

62
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the finding of the research the following recommendations are given:

1. Proper land-use planning should be carried out for the watershed before the implementation
of any developmental projects.
2. There is no organized data regarding stormwater drainage structures in Ethiopia which
is essential to investigate the structure in detail. Therefore, the data should be organized.
3. The challenges of stormwater management were the blockage of the drainage system by solid
waste; inadequate drainage operation management and lack of stormwater drainage
maintenance. To solve those problems use different Best Management Practices (BMP) are
recommended, such as a wet pond, dry pond, Porous Pavement and Infiltration Basin.

4. Finally, it is very essential to create awareness for the community on how to dispose of solid
wastes.

63
REFERENCES

Adugna, D. (2016). Study of the Urban Drainage System in Addis Ababa, Yeka Sub-city, Addis
Ababa University.

Adugna, D., et al. (2019). "Evaluating the hydraulic capacity of existing drainage systems and
the management challenges of stormwater in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia." Journal of Hydrology:
Regional Studies 25: 100626.

Afanasyev, A., et al. (2013). Interest flooding attack and countermeasures in Named Data
Networking. 2013 IFIP Networking Conference, IEEE.

Alemu, H. (2017). "Investigation of Flooding Problems in Urban Drainage System."

Alhumaid, M., et al. (2018). "Sustainability evaluation framework of urban stormwater drainage
options for arid environments using hydraulic modeling and multicriteria decision-making."
Water 10(5): 581.

Amiri, M. J., et al. (2016). "Modification of furrow Manning's roughness coefficient estimation
by finite difference technique under surge and continuous flow." International Journal of
Hydrology Science and Technology 6(3): 226-237.

Amoako, C. and E. Frimpong Boamah (2015). "The three-dimensional causes of flooding in

Accra, Ghana." International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development 7(1): 109-129.

Anim, D. O., et al. (2018). "Effect of urbanization on stream hydraulics." River research and
applications 34(7): 661-674.

Arnell, N. W., and S. N. Gosling (2016). "The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at
the global scale." Climatic Change 134(3): 387-401.

Authority, E. R. (2015). "The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia." Addis Ababa.

Authority, E. R. and E. R. AUTHORIT (2013). "Pavement Design Manual." Addis Ababa,

Ethiopia.

Bandino, J. P., et al. (2015). "The infectious and noninfectious dermatological consequences of
flooding: a field manual for the responding provider." American journal of clinical dermatology
16(5): 399-424.

64
Barbosa, A. E., et al. (2012). "Key issues for sustainable urban stormwater management." Water
Research 46(20): 6787-6798.

Belete, D. A. (2011). "Road and urban stormwater drainage network integration in Addis Ababa:
Addis Ketema Sub-city." Journal of Engineering and Technology Research 3(7): 217-225.

Benedetti, L., et al. (2013). "Modelling and monitoring of integrated urban wastewater systems:
a review on status and perspectives." Water science and technology 68(6): 1203-1215.

Berland, A., et al. (2017). "The role of trees in urban stormwater management." Landscape and
Urban Planning 162: 167-177.

Beven, K. (2012). Rainfall-Runoff Modelling.

Birgani, Y. T. and F. Yazdandoost (2014). "A framework for evaluating the persistence of urban
drainage risk management systems." Journal of Hydro-environment Research 8(4): 330-342.

Boogaard, F., and S. Eslamian (2015). "Water reuse and sustainable urban drainage systems."
Urban Water Reuse Handbook: 37-44.

Brown, R. R., et al. (2009). "Urban water management in cities: historical, current, and future
regimes." Water science and technology 59(5): 847-855.

Butler, D., et al. (2018). Urban drainage, CRC Press.

Caldera, H., et al. (2016). "A comparison of methods of estimating missing daily rainfall data."
Engineer: Journal of the Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka 49(4).

Chang, T.-J., et al. (2018). "The effect of inclusion of inlets in dual drainage modeling." Journal
of Hydrology 559: 541-555.

Clague, J. J., and J. E. O'Connor (2015). Glacier-related outburst floods. Snow and ice-related
hazards, risks and disasters, Elsevier: 487-519.

Di Matteo, M., et al. (2017). "A multi-stakeholder portfolio optimization framework applied to
stormwater best management practice (BMP) selection." Environmental modeling & software
97: 16-31.

Dierkes, C., et al. (2015). "General technical approvals for decentralized sustainable urban
drainage systems (SUDS)—The current situation in Germany." Sustainability 7(3): 3031-3051.

65
Duan, H.-F., et al. (2016). "Multi-objective optimal design of detention tanks in the urban
stormwater drainage system: uncertainty and sensitivity analysis." Water resources management
30(7): 2213-2226.

Duan, H.-F., et al. (2016). "Multi-objective optimal design of detention tanks in the urban
stormwater drainage system: LID implementation and analysis." Water resources management
30(13): 4635-4648.

Elsayed, S., and H. Oumeraci (2016). "Combined modeling of coastal barrier breaching and
induced flood propagation using XBeach." Hydrology 3(4): 32.

Ethiopian Roads Authority (2013). Drainage Design Manual.

Ferguson, B. K. (2017). Stormwater infiltration, CRC Press.

Fletcher, T. D., et al. (2015). "SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD, and more–The evolution and
application of terminology surrounding urban drainage." Urban Water Journal 12(7): 525-542.

García, L., et al. (2015). "Modeling and real-time control of urban drainage systems: A review."
Advances in Water Resources 85: 120-132.

Gebrewahed, F. (2016). "Improving Stormwater Management Capacity of Cobblestone Paved

Local Streets through Green Infrastructure Design and Technologies ".

Gouri, R., and V. Srinivas (2015). "Reliability assessment of a stormwater drain network."
Aquatic Procedia 4: 772-779.

Granata, F., et al. (2016). "Support vector regression for rainfall-runoff modeling in urban
drainage: A comparison with the EPA’s stormwater management model." Water 8(3): 69.

Hammond, M. J., et al. (2015). "Urban flood impact assessment: A state-of-the-art review."
Urban Water Journal 12(1): 14-29.

Hapuarachchi, H., et al. (2011). "A review of advances in flash flood forecasting." Hydrological
processes 25(18): 2771-2784.

Hassall, C., and S. Anderson (2015). "Stormwater ponds can contain comparable biodiversity to
unmanaged wetlands in urban areas." Hydrobiologia 745(1): 137-149.

66
Hearn, G. J. (2019). "Slope hazards on the Ethiopian road network." Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 52(3): 295-311.

Hoang, L. and R. A. Fenner (2016). "System interactions of stormwater management using

sustainable urban drainage systems and green infrastructure." Urban Water Journal 13(7): 739-
758.

Hoover, D. J., et al. (2017). "Sea-level rise and coastal groundwater inundation and shoaling at
select sites in California, USA." Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 11: 234-249.

Itsukushima, R., et al. (2018). "Investigating the influence of various stormwater runoff control
facilities on runoff control efficiency in a small catchment area." Sustainability 10(2): 407.

Jia, H., et al. (2013). "Development of a multi-criteria index ranking system for urban runoff best
management practices (BMPs) selection." Environmental monitoring and assessment 185(9):
7915-7933.

Khare, D., et al. (2017). "Impact of land-use/land cover change on run-off in the catchment of a
hydropower project." Applied Water Science 7(2): 787-800.

Khosravi, K., et al. (2018). "A comparative assessment of decision trees algorithms for flash
flood susceptibility modeling at Haraz watershed, northern Iran." Science of the Total
Environment 627: 744-755.

Komori, D., et al. (2012). "Characteristics of the 2011 Chao Phraya River flood in central
Thailand." Hydrological Research Letters 6: 41-46.

Kyaw, M. K. K., and N. Aye (2018). "Mitigation Measures of Flood and Drought for
Ayeyarwady Basin." American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and
Sciences (ASRJETS) 45(1): 280-298.

Lazrus, H., et al. (2016). "Know what to do if you encounter a flash flood”: Mental models
analysis for improving flash flood risk communication and public decision making." Risk
analysis 36(2): 411-427.

Lind, J. (2015). Stormwater modeling tools: a comparison and evaluation.

Lucía, A., et al. (2015). "Dynamics of large wood during a flash flood in two mountain
catchments." Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 15(8): 1741.

67
Lundy, L., et al. (2012). "Risk prioritization of stormwater pollutant sources." Water Research
46(20): 6589-6600.

Markovi, G., et al. (2014). "Rainwater infiltration in urban areas." WIT Transactions on Ecology
and the Environment 181: 313-320.

Mguni, P., et al. (2016). "Sustainable urban drainage systems: examining the potential for green
infrastructure-based stormwater management for Sub-Saharan cities." Natural Hazards 82(2):
241-257.

Miller, J. D., and T. Hess (2017). "Urbanisation impacts on storm runoff along a rural-urban
gradient." Journal of Hydrology 552: 474-489.

Mohtar, R. H. (2015). "Ven Te Chow memorial lecture: Localizing water and food security."
Water International 40(4): 559-567.

Mugume, S. N., et al. (2015). "A global analysis approach for investigating structural resilience
in urban drainage systems." Water Research 81: 15-26.

Niras, C., and V. Thomas (2012). Systolic variable-length architecture for discrete Fourier
transforms in Long Term Evolution. 2012 International Symposium on Electronic System
Design (ISED), IEEE.

Overton, D. E., and M. E. Meadows (2013). Stormwater modeling, Elsevier.

Palla, A., et al. (2017). "The impact of domestic rainwater harvesting systems in stormwater
runoff mitigation at the urban block scale." Journal of environmental management 191: 297-305.

Pazwash, H. (2016). Urban stormwater management, CRC Press.

Radi, N. F. A., et al. (2015). Estimation of missing rainfall data using spatial interpolation and
imputation methods. AIP conference proceedings, AIP.

Rawat, J., and M. Kumar (2015). "Monitoring land use/cover change using remote sensing and
GIS techniques: A case study of Hawalbagh block, district Almora, Uttarakhand, India." The
Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science 18(1): 77-84.

Razaz, M., et al. (2013). "An acoustic travel time method for continuous velocity monitoring in
shallow tidal streams." Water Resources Research 49(8): 4885-4899.

68
Revil-Baudard, T., et al. (2015). "Investigation of sheet-flow processes based on novel acoustic
high-resolution velocity and concentration measurements." Journal of Fluid Mechanics 767: 1-
30.

Richter, S., et al. (2013). "The Water Framework Directive as an approach for Integrated Water
Resources Management: results from the experiences in Germany on implementation, and future
perspectives." Environmental earth sciences 69(2): 719-728.

Shahzad, Y., et al. (2015). "Breaching the skin barrier through temperature modulations." Journal
of Controlled Release 202: 1-13.

Shamsi, U. M. (2005). GIS Applications for Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Systems,
Taylor & Francis.

Silveira, A. d. (2002). "Problems of modern urban drainage in developing countries." Water

science and technology 45(7): 31-40.

Smith, D. R., et al. (2015). "Surface runoff and tile drainage transport of phosphorus in the
midwestern United States." Journal of Environmental Quality 44(2): 495-502.

Stanke, C., et al. (2012). "The effects of flooding on mental health: Outcomes and
recommendations from a review of the literature." PLoS currents 4.

Subramanya, K. (2008). Engineering Hydrology, third edition. Tata Mc Graw-Hill Publishing

Co. Ld.

Subramanya, K. (2013). Engineering Hydrology, 4e, Tata McGraw-Hill Education.

Tao, T., et al. (2009). "Uncertainty analysis of interpolation methods in rainfall spatial
distribution–a case of a small catchment in Lyon." Journal of Water Resource and Protection
1(02): 136.

Urbaniak, M., et al. (2016). "Effects of stormwater and snowmelt runoff on ELISA-EQ
concentrations of PCDD/PCDF and triclosan in an urban river." PloS one 11(3): e0151756.

Walsh, C. J., et al. (2016). "Principles for urban stormwater management to protect stream
ecosystems." Freshwater Science 35(1): 398-411.

Wang, M., et al. (2017). "Optimization of storage tank locations in an urban stormwater drainage
system using a two-stage approach." Journal of environmental management 204: 31-38.

69
Xia, J., et al. (2017). "Opportunities and challenges of the Sponge City construction related to
urban water issues in China." Science China Earth Sciences 60(4): 652-658.

Yao, L., et al. (2017). "Exploring the linkage between urban flood risk and spatial patterns in
small urbanized catchments of Beijing, China." International journal of environmental research
and public health 14(3): 239.

70
Appendixes

Appendix 1: Rainfall Region, metrological stations and 24-hr rainfall depth (ERA, 2013)

Figure 1: Rain Fall Regions of Ethiopia

Table 1: Meteorology station in Ethiopia (Years of record through 2010)

Meteorological Meteorological Years of

Station Years of Record Station
Region Region Record
A1 Axum 17 Bedale 39
Mekele 46 Gore 56
Maychew 32 B Nekempte 40

Gondar 52 Jima 54
A2
Debre Tabor 15 Arba Minch 23
Bahir Dar 45 Sodo 49
Debre 55 Awasa 36

71
 Markos
Fitch 44 Kombolcha 57
Addis Ababa 57 C Woldiya 29
Debre Zeit 55 Srilanka 27
A3 Nazareth 46 D1 Gode 33
Kulums 43 KebreDihar 40
Robe/Bale 29 Kibremengist 33
A4 Metehara 24 D2 Negele 51
Dire Dawa 58 Moyale 29
Mieso 42 Yabelo 34

Table: 2 24hr Rainfall Depth Vs Frequency

Return 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500

Period
Years
RR-A1 50.3 66.02 76.28 89.13 98.63 108.06 117.48 130
RR-A2 51.92 65.52 74.45 85.7 94.07 102.45 110.91 122.27
RR-A3 47.54 59.61 67.66 77.92 85.62 93.34 101.13 111.58
RR-A4 50.39 63.83 72.28 82.55 89.97 97.2 104.32 113.63
RR-B1 58.87 71.26 79.29 89.35 96.84 104.37 112.02 122.41
RR-B2 55.26 69.95 79.68 92.03 101.29 110.61 120.07 132.87
RR-C 56.52 71.04 80.54 92.52 101.48 110.5 119.66 132.06
RR-D 56.23 76.84 90.37 107.46 120.23 133.05 146 163.44

Table: 3 Calculations of rainfall of shorter duration using log person type three methods for
rainfall region A2 by ERA 2013

Duration(hr) T= 2 5 10 25 50 100

72
 R24 = 51.92 65.52 74.45 85.70 94.07 102.45
0.08 94.34 135.27 155.71 170.92 186.15
0.17 74.38 93.86 106.66 122.77 134.77 146.77
0.25 65.44 82.58 93.84 108.02 118.57 129.13
0.33 58.22 73.47 83.48 96.10 105.48 114.88
0.5 46.71 58.94 66.98 77.10 84.63 92.16
1 30.17 38.08 43.27 49.80 54.67 59.54
1.5 22.51 28.41 32.28 37.16 40.79 44.42
2 18.06 22.79 25.89 29.80 32.71 35.63
2.17 16.93 21.36 24.27 27.94 30.67 33.40
2.33 16.01 20.20 22.95 26.42 29.00 31.59
2.67 14.34 18.10 20.56 23.67 25.98 28.30
3 13.05 16.46 18.71 21.54 23.64 25.74

200.00
Developed IDF curve for Gondar station
180.00
2 year
160.00

140.00 5 year
Intensity (mm/hr)

120.00
10 year
100.00

80.00 25 year

60.00
50 year
40.00
100
20.00
year
0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5Duration (hr)2 2.5 3 3.5

Figure: 2 Intensity-Duration-Frequency curves log Pearson type three methods for A2 Rainfall

Region by ERA 2013

Table 4: Max rainfall data from 1989-2018 and its statistical calculation
S.No. Year Max. Descending Rank Logarithmic (Yo-Yo)2 (Yo-Ym)3 Log X
RF Order Value/Yo/
1 1989 47.9 92.6 1 1.966610987 0.054340706 0.012667413 1.680335513
2 1990 63 72.3 2 1.859138297 0.015784968 0.001983196 1.799340549
3 1991 52.8 70.5 3 1.848189117 0.013153581 0.001508572 1.722633923
4 1992 36.8 69.4 4 1.84135947 0.011633654 0.001254799 1.565847819

73
5 1993 54.3 65.8 5 1.818225894 0.007178468 0.000608202 1.73479983
6 1994 40.1 65.1 6 1.813580989 0.006412956 0.000513555 1.603144373
7 1995 30.9 64.6 7 1.810232518 0.005887871 0.000451791 1.489958479
8 1996 45.5 63 8 1.799340549 0.004334971 0.000285417 1.658011397
9 1997 72.3 60.2 9 1.779596491 0.002124881 9.79495E-05 1.859138297
10 1998 64.6 58.1 10 1.764176132 0.000941022 2.88669E-05 1.810232518
11 1999 58.1 55 11 1.740362689 4.70958E-05 3.23201E-07 1.764176132
12 2000 92.6 54.3 12 1.73479983 1.68941E-06 2.19586E-09 1.966610987
13 2001 65.1 52.8 13 1.722633923 0.000118073 -1.283E-06 1.813580989
14 2002 60.2 52.8 14 1.722633923 0.000118073 -1.283E-06 1.779596491
15 2003 69.4 52 15 1.716003344 0.000306135 -5.35635E-06 1.84135947
16 2004 51.1 51.2 16 1.709269961 0.000587097 -1.42254E-05 1.7084209
17 2005 45.3 51.1 17 1.7084209 0.000628964 -1.57739E-05 1.656098202
18 2006 70.5 50.3 18 1.701567985 0.001019657 -3.25598E-05 1.848189117
19 2007 48.1 48.1 19 1.682145076 0.002637334 -0.00013544 1.682145076
20 2008 51.2 47.9 20 1.680335513 0.002826468 -0.000150268 1.709269961
21 2009 46 46 21 1.662757832 0.005004462 -0.000354027 1.662757832
22 2010 52 45.5 22 1.658011397 0.005698538 -0.000430175 1.716003344
23 2012 52.8 45.3 23 1.656098202 0.005991047 -0.000463718 1.722633923
24 2013 41.3 44.3 24 1.646403726 0.00758577 -0.000660693 1.615950052
25 2014 44.3 41.3 25 1.615950052 0.013818003 -0.001624306 1.646403726
26 2015 36.4 40.1 26 1.603144373 0.016992604 -0.002215082 1.561101384
27 2016 50.3 36.8 27 1.565847819 0.028107272 -0.004712247 1.701567985
28 2017 65.8 36.4 28 1.561101384 0.029721302 -0.005123913 1.818225894
29 2018 55 30.9 29 1.489958479 0.059312499 -0.014445059 1.740362689
SUM 1563.7 49.87789685 0.302315161 -0.010985325 49.87789685
MEAN 53.92068966 1.719927478 0.010424661 -0.000378804 1.719927478
STANDARD 13.03129144 0.102986291 0.102986291
DEVIATION
SKEWNESS 0.820219365 0.041413584 0.041413584
COEFFICIENT
Number of data 29
=

Table 3: Data quality checking

Data Quality
Check
Number of data = 30
Standard deviation, 19.43
The standard error of mean = 3.5483114

74
 6.27020922
%<10%
5
Relative standard = data consistent

Outlier Test
Kn for 30 years
2.564
Higher Limit; YH= Ymean+Kn*бy 2.055
Higher Limit; QH= 113.62 <134
Lower Limit; YL= Ymean- Kn*бy 1.412
Lower Limit; 31.40
QL=
<30.9

Consideration of the outliers depends on the value of the skewness

coefficient. If the value is b/n -0.4 and +0.4, we consider both the
higher and the lower outliers; if the value is < -0.4, and if the
skewness coefficient is >+0.4 consider the higher outlier fit; based
on this we consider the Lower And higher outlier. But in this case,
no data is out of the outliers, so all the data can be considered.

Table 4: Yearly Extreme Series and Frequency Analysis Calculations Log-Pearson Type
IIII distribution
Return Appling Log Pearson type III distribution, 24 hours’ rainfall design
Period (T) X mean Sy KT YT =Yavg + KT*Sy XT
2 1.7199 0.102986291 -0.017 1.718176711 52.26
5 0.836 1.806024017 63.98
10 1.292 1.852985765 71.28
25 1.751 1.900256473 79.48
50 2.054 1.931461319 85.40
100 2.472 1.974509588 94.30

Table 5: Rainfall ratio (RRt) computation sheet

5 10 15 20 30 60 90 120 130 140 160 180
t(min
t)
t(hr) 0.083 0.167 0.250 0.333 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.167 2.333 2.667 3.000
b+24 24.300 24.300 24.300 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30 24.30
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

75
(b+2 17.662 17.662 17.662 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66 17.66
4) n 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
b+t 0.383 0.467 0.550 0.633 0.800 1.300 1.800 2.300 2.467 2.633 2.967 3.300
n
(b+t) 0.422 0.504 0.584 0.663 0.818 1.266 1.697 2.116 2.254 2.390 2.661 2.929
RRt 0.145 0.244 0.315 0.370 0.450 0.581 0.650 0.696 0.708 0.718 0.737 0.754

Table 6: Rainfall of shorter duration for Gondar city using log person type-III for n=0.92, b=0.3

Duration(hr) T= 2 5 10 25 50 100
R24 = 52.26 63.98 71.28 79.48 85.45 94.30
0.08 94.95 129.51 144.41 155.26 171.3
4
0.17 74.87 91.66 102.12 113.86 122.42 135.1
0
0.25 65.87 80.64 89.84 100.18 107.70 118.8
6
0.33 58.60 71.74 79.93 89.12 95.82 105.7
4
0.5 47.01 57.56 64.12 71.50 76.87 84.83
1 30.37 37.18 41.42 46.19 49.66 54.80
1.5 22.66 27.74 30.91 34.46 37.05 40.89
2 18.17 22.25 24.79 27.64 29.72 32.79
2.17 17.04 20.86 23.24 25.91 27.86 30.75
2.33 16.11 19.73 21.98 24.51 26.35 29.07
2.67 14.44 17.67 19.69 21.95 23.60 26.05
3 13.13 16.08 17.91 19.97 21.47 23.70

76
180.00
Developed IDF curve for Gondar station
160.00
2 year
140.00
5 year
Intensity (mm/hr)

120.00

100.00 10 year

80.00 25 year
60.00
50 year
40.00

20.00 100
year
0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5Duration (hr)2 2.5 3 3.5

Figure 3: Intensity-Duration-Frequency curve log Pearson type three methods

Table 6: Calculations of rainfall of shorter duration using Gamble methods

Duration(hr) T= 2 year 5 10 25 50 100

R24 = 51.95 62.57 69.62 78.51 85.11 91.66
0.08 94.39 113.69 126.50 142.65 154.63 166.55
0.17 74.42 89.64 99.74 112.48 121.92 131.32
0.25 65.47 78.86 87.75 98.96 107.27 115.53
0.33 58.25 70.16 78.07 88.04 95.43 102.78
0.5 46.73 56.29 62.63 70.63 76.56 82.46
1 30.19 36.36 40.46 45.63 49.46 53.27
1.5 22.52 27.13 30.19 34.04 36.90 39.75
2 18.07 21.76 24.21 27.30 29.60 31.88
2.17 16.94 20.40 22.70 25.60 27.75 29.89
2.33 16.02 19.29 21.47 24.21 26.24 28.26
2.67 14.35 17.28 19.23 21.69 23.51 25.32
3 13.05 15.72 17.50 19.73 21.39 23.03

77
 180.00

160.00

140.00
Intensity (mm/hr)

120.00
2 year
100.00 5 year

80.00 10 year
25 year
60.00
50 year
40.00 100 year

20.00

0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Duratin (year )

Figure4: Intensity-Duration-Frequency curve by using Gumble methods

Table 7: Design point rainfall

ERA
period log Pearson type III Gumble 2013
2 52.26 51.95 51.92
5 63.98 62.57 65.52
10 71.28 69.62 74.45
25 79.48 78.51 85.7
50 85.40 85.11 94.07
100 94.30 91.66 102.45

78
 120
y = 0.3558x + 63.064
R² = 0.7818
100

y = 0.3426x + 62.274
80
R² = 0.7668
presipitatios (mm)

Log pearson III

60
Gumble
Linear (Log pearson III)
40
Linear (Gumble)

20

0
0 20 40 Return period
60 (year) 80 100 120

Figure: 5 Plot of Frequency Analysis Results

Table8: Comparison of IDF curve results of Drainage Design Manual RR-A2 (ERA – 2013) and IDF
curve developed for this study

T=2 T=5 T=10 T=25 T=50 T=100

Duration (Hr) ERA Present study ERA Present study ERA Present study ERA Present study ERA Present study ERA Present study
R24 51.92 52.26 65.52 63.98 74.45 71.28 85.7 79.48 85.7 94.07 102.45 94.3
0.08 94.34 94.95 119.05 116.24 135.27 129.52 155.71 144.41 170.92 155.17 186.15 171.34
0.17 74.38 74.87 93.86 91.65 106.66 102.12 122.77 113.86 134.77 122.35 146.77 135.09
0.25 65.44 65.87 82.58 80.64 93.84 89.84 108.02 100.18 118.57 107.64 129.13 118.86
0.33 58.22 58.60 73.47 71.74 83.48 79.93 96.10 89.12 105.48 95.76 114.88 105.74
0.5 46.71 47.01 58.94 57.55 66.98 64.13 77.10 71.50 84.63 76.83 92.16 84.83
1 30.17 30.37 38.08 37.18 43.27 41.43 49.80 46.19 54.67 49.63 59.54 54.80
1.5 22.51 22.66 28.41 27.74 32.28 30.91 37.16 34.46 40.79 37.03 44.42 40.89
2 18.06 18.17 22.79 22.25 25.89 24.79 29.80 27.64 32.71 29.70 35.63 32.79
2.17 16.93 17.04 21.36 20.86 24.27 23.24 27.94 25.91 30.67 27.84 33.40 30.75
2.33 16.01 16.11 20.20 19.73 22.95 21.98 26.42 24.51 29.00 26.33 31.59 29.07
2.67 14.34 14.44 18.10 17.67 20.56 19.69 23.67 21.95 25.98 23.59 28.30 26.05
3 13.05 13.13 16.46 16.08 18.71 17.91 21.54 19.97 23.64 21.46 25.74 23.70

79
Appendices 2: Peak discharge Estimation for Gondar city catchment using rational
method.

Time of concentration

Sheet flow Time: Sheet flow is flow over plan surfaces. It usually occurs in the headwater of the
streams (usually for the first 100 m run), but from topographic map obtained 100 m Sheet flow,
natural range and short grass slope of 0.015 m/m, and length of 100 m and Manning’s roughness
coefficient is 0.15. The 2-year, 24-hour rainfall depth is calculated to be 33.466 mm.

Hence, from Equation travel time for sheet flow is determined as:

 0.091*(n * L)0.8 
Tt   
 p 0.5 s 0.4 
 2 

 
 0.091*(0.013*100)0.8
Tt   0.02 
 (51.94756)0.5 0.4 
 s 

Table 9: Time of concentration by sheet flow

Outlet points Max.E Min.E A_slope L n p2 Tt (Sheet flow
Name time) (hr.)
Outlet_1 4470 3220 4.120 303.4 0.013 51.948 0.021
4472 4431 0.140 293 0.013 51.948 0.081
6296 4658 2.966 552.3 0.013 51.948 0.040
5968 3459 7.907 317.3 0.013 51.948 0.017
5954 4657 1.388 934.3 0.013 51.948 0.082
5895 4474 2.148 661.6 0.013 51.948 0.052
5968 4056 4.218 453.3 0.013 51.948 0.029
5895 3220 5.134 521 0.013 51.948 0.030

Outlet_2 5773 3873 6.927 274.3 0.013 51.948 0.016

5906 3873 3.727 545.5 0.013 51.948 0.036
5907 4479 2.513 568.2 0.013 51.948 0.043
4479 4470 0.028 317.4 0.013 51.948 0.163

80
 5822 3402 4.444 544.5 0.013 51.948 0.033
5888 4475 2.487 568.2 0.013 51.948 0.043
5912 4479 3.374 424.7 0.013 51.948 0.030
5738 4057 1.401 1199.9 0.013 51.948 0.099
5799 4057 3.344 521 0.013 51.948 0.036

Outlet_3 6296 3449 10.588 268.9 0.013 51.948 0.013

5968 4474 5.347 279.4 0.013 51.948 0.018
5895 4468 6.385 223.5 0.013 51.948 0.014
3449 3323 0.178 707.1 0.013 51.948 0.148
4658 3323 2.584 516.6 0.013 51.948 0.040
6307 4663 7.323 224.5 0.013 51.948 0.013
4669 3323 3.962 339.7 0.013 51.948 0.024
4663 3323 1.796 746 0.013 51.948 0.061
4657 3220 2.953 486.7 0.013 51.948 0.036
5954 3449 2.638 949.6 0.013 51.948 0.064
4473 3323 2.143 536.7 0.013 51.948 0.044

Open Channels Flow: For channel flow, natural stream channel, winding with weeds and pools,
the slope is 0.04m/m, and length is 303.4 m. By direct measuring the average bottom width of
the stream, the channel is 0.56m, side slopes are 1V:1H, 10- year storm depth is observed from
flood mark and measured to be 0.4m. Manning’s roughness coefficient for channels = 0.013by
referring different kinds of literature like, (FHA, 2014).
2 / 3S1/ 2
Q  AR
n
Where

Q = the volumetric flow rate passing through the channel reach in m3/sec.

A = the cross-sectional area of flow normal to the flow direction in m2

S = the bottom slope of the channel in m/m (dimensionless)

n = Manning's roughness coefficient

R = the hydraulic radius = Aw/Pw and,

81
P = wetted perimeter

Sample calculation of open channel flow

Velocity through the channel

2 / 3S1/ 2 0.152 / 3 *0.0141/ 2 )

VR =  4.27m / s
n 0.013

L 303.4
T t2
   4.27
3600V 3600* 4.27

Table 10: Time of concentration by open channel flow

Max. Min Area(ha slope L n Dept Widt P=2D+ R V=R2/3S1/

E E ) h h W 2/n Tt=L/360
0V
4470 4458 0.224 0.04 303.40 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.27 0.02
5
4472 4458 0.224 0.05 293.00 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.69 0.02
5
6296 6290 0.135 0.01 552.30 0.013 0.45 0.3 1.2 0.1 1.87 0.08
1
5968 5958 0.12 0.03 317.30 0.013 0.4 0.3 1.1 0.1 3.12 0.03
1
5954 5900 0.224 0.06 934.30 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 5.16 0.05
5
5895 5850 0.224 0.07 661.60 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 5.60 0.03
5
5968 5950 0.224 0.04 453.30 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.28 0.03
5
5895 5856 0.224 0.07 521.00 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 5.87 0.02
5
5773 5760 0.224 0.05 274.30 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.67 0.02
5
5906 5890 0.224 0.03 545.50 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 3.68 0.04
5
5907 5886 0.224 0.04 568.20 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.13 0.04
5
4479 4470 0.224 0.03 317.40 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 3.61 0.02
5
5822 5800 0.224 0.04 544.50 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 4.31 0.04
5
5888 5850 0.224 0.07 568.20 0.013 0.56 0.4 1.52 0.1 5.55 0.03
5
5912 5890 0.225 0.05 424.70 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 5.06 0.02
6
5738 5720 0.225 0.02 1199.9 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 2.72 0.12
0 6
5799 5782 0.225 0.03 521.00 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 4.01 0.04
6
6296 6292 0.2 0.01 268.90 0.013 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.1 2.56 0.03

82
 4
5968 5964 0.2 0.01 279.40 0.013 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.1 2.52 0.03
4
5895 5892 0.2 0.01 223.50 0.013 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.1 2.44 0.03
4
3449 3430 0.2 0.03 707.10 0.013 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.1 3.45 0.06
4
4658 4640 0.225 0.03 516.60 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 4.15 0.03
6
6307 6298 0.225 0.04 224.50 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 4.45 0.01
6
4669 4650 0.2 0.06 339.70 0.013 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.1 4.97 0.02
4
4663 4650 0.225 0.02 746.00 0.013 0.5 0.45 1.45 0.1 2.93 0.07
6
4657 4650 0.24 0.01 486.70 0.013 0.6 0.4 1.6 0.1 2.60 0.05
5
5954 5910 0.24 0.05 949.60 0.013 0.6 0.4 1.6 0.1 4.67 0.06
5
4473 4445 0.24 0.05 536.70 0.013 0.6 0.4 1.6 0.1 4.96 0.03
5

Shallow concentrated flow

V=4.9178(S) 0.5

V=velocity in m/s

S=slope

Tt=L/3600v

V=4.9178(S) 0.5

V=4.9178(0.04)0.5=9.98m/s

Tt=303.4/3600*9.98=0.84hr

Therefore, total time of concentration

Tc  Tc sheet flow  Shallow concentrated flow  Tc open channel flow

Or T C  t1  t 2  t 3  0.02hr  0.02hr  0.84hr

Table 11: Total Time of concentration

Sheet flow Shallow concentrated flow Open channel flow Total Tc

(hr) (m/s) (hr) (m/s) (hr) (hr)

83
Tt=[0.091(nL)0.8/ V=4.9178(S)0.5 Tt=L/3600v V=R2/3S1/2/n Tt=L/3600v
(P20.5*S0.4)]
0.02 9.98 0.84 4.27 0.02 0.88
0.08 1.84 0.15 4.69 0.02 0.25
0.04 8.47 1.30 1.87 0.08 1.42
0.02 13.83 1.22 3.12 0.03 1.26
0.08 5.79 1.50 5.16 0.05 1.64
0.05 7.21 1.32 5.60 0.03 1.41
0.03 10.10 1.27 4.28 0.03 1.33
0.03 11.14 1.61 5.87 0.02 1.67
0.02 12.94 0.99 4.67 0.02 1.02
0.04 9.49 1.44 3.68 0.04 1.52
0.04 7.80 1.23 4.13 0.04 1.31
0.16 0.83 0.07 3.61 0.02 0.26
0.03 10.37 1.57 4.31 0.04 1.64
0.04 7.76 1.22 5.55 0.03 1.30
0.03 9.03 1.07 5.06 0.02 1.12
0.10 5.82 1.94 2.72 0.12 2.16
0.04 8.99 1.30 4.01 0.04 1.37
0.01 16.00 1.20 2.56 0.03 1.24
0.02 11.37 0.88 2.52 0.03 0.93
0.01 12.43 0.77 2.44 0.03 0.81
0.15 2.08 0.41 3.45 0.06 0.61
0.04 7.91 1.13 4.15 0.03 1.21
0.01 13.31 0.83 4.45 0.01 0.86
0.02 9.79 0.92 4.97 0.02 0.97
0.06 6.59 1.37 2.93 0.07 1.50
0.04 8.45 1.14 2.60 0.05 1.23
0.06 7.99 2.11 4.67 0.06 2.23
0.04 7.20 1.07 4.96 0.03 1.15

Table13: Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment areas by
using Gondar city land-use landcover map 2015

Area Total IDF (for 10 year Runoff Peak

Sub-catchment
(Ha) Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.) Coefficient discharge(m3/s)
CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.85 2.18
CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.85 2.66
CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.85 2.45
CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.85 2.72

84
 CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.85 2.99
CH-6 49.8 1.40 37 0.85 2.99
CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.85 2.94
CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.85 2.99
CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.85 2.99
CH-10 45 1.50 26 0.901 2.59
CH-11 47 1.30 38 0.901 2.71
CH-12 49.5 0.25 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-13 49.5 1.63 27.6 0.901 3.17
CH-14 49.5 1.29 38.8 0.901 3.17
CH-15 49.4 1.11 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-16 49.5 2.13 27.6 0.901 3.11
CH-17 49.6 1.36 38.5 0.901 3.05
CH-18 45 1.23 43 0.901 2.59
CH-19 44 0.92 42 0.88 2.48
CH-20 43 0.80 37 0.88 2.42
CH-21 47 0.59 42 0.88 2.65
CH-22 49.9 1.20 58 0.88 3.15
CH-23 48 0.85 64 0.88 2.7
CH-24 46 0.96 26.6 0.88 2.59
CH-25 49.8 1.48 42.5 0.88 3.04
CH-26 49.8 1.21 65 0.88 3.1
CH-27 49.8 2.21 36 0.88 3.1
CH-28 49.5 1.14 42.5 0.88 3.04

Table 14: Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated catchment
areas by using Gondar city land-use landcover map at 2005

Total IDF (for 10-year

Sub- catchment Area (Ha) Runoff Coefficient Peak discharge(m3/s)
Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.)

CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.46 1.17

CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.46 1.43

CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.46 1.31

85
CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.46 1.43

CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.46 1.44

CH-6 49.8 1.4 37 0.46 1.45

CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.46 1.45

CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.46 1.45

CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.22 0.7

CH-10 45 1.5 26 0.22 0.63

CH-11 47 1.3 38 0.22 0.66

CH-12 49.5 0.25 98.5 0.22 0.69

CH-13 49.8 1.63 27.6 0.22 0.7

CH-14 49.8 1.29 38.8 0.22 0.7

CH-15 49.5 1.11 98.5 0.22 0.69

CH-16 49.5 2.13 27.6 0.22 0.69

CH-17 49.6 1.36 38.5 0.22 0.7

CH-18 45 1.23 43 0.68 1.95

CH-19 44 0.92 42 0.68 1.9

CH-20 43 0.8 37 0.68 1.86

CH-21 47 0.59 42 0.68 2.03

CH-22 49.9 1.2 58 0.68 2.16

CH-23 48 0.85 64 0.68 2.07

CH-24 46 0.96 26.6 0.68 1.99

CH-25 49.8 1.48 42.5 0.68 2.15

CH-26 49.8 1.21 65 0.68 2.15

CH-27 49.8 2.21 36 0.68 2.15

CH-28 49.5 1.14 42.5 0.68 2.14

Table 15: Results of rainfall intensity and peak discharge for each delineated area
Sub- catchment Area (Ha) Total IDF (for 10 year Runoff Peak
Tc (Hr.) frequency) (mm/hr.) Coefficient discharge(m3/s)

CH-1 40 0.88 64.5 0.85 2.18

CH-2 49 0.24 99 0.85 2.66
CH-3 45 1.39 37.5 0.85 2.45
CH-4 49 1.25 45 0.85 2.72
CH-5 49.5 1.62 27 0.85 2.99
CH-6 49.8 1.40 37 0.85 2.99

86
CH-7 49.7 1.32 40 0.85 2.94
CH-8 49.8 1.66 25 0.85 2.99
CH-9 49.8 1.01 46.5 0.85 2.99
CH-10 45 1.50 26 0.901 2.59
CH-11 47 1.30 38 0.901 2.71
CH-12 49.5 0.25 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-13 55 1.63 27.6 0.901 3.17
CH-14 55 1.29 38.8 0.901 3.17
CH-15 49.5 1.11 98.5 0.901 3.11
CH-16 49.5 2.13 27.6 0.901 3.11
CH-17 49.6 1.36 38.5 0.901 3.05
CH-18 45 1.23 43 0.901 2.59
CH-19 44 0.92 42 0.88 2.48
CH-20 43 0.80 37 0.88 2.42
CH-21 47 0.59 42 0.88 2.65
CH-22 49.9 1.20 58 0.88 3.15
CH-23 48 0.85 64 0.88 2.7
CH-24 46 0.96 26.6 0.88 2.59
CH-25 49.8 1.48 42.5 0.88 3.04
CH-26 49.8 1.21 65 0.88 3.1
CH-27 49.8 2.21 36 0.88 3.1
CH-28 49.5 1.14 42.5 0.88 3.04

Appendices 3: Peak Discharge Estimation for Gondar city Catchment Using U Manning
Equation
Table 16: Existing Storm Sewer Hydraulic Performance Results
Drainage types Rectangular

Label Width(m) Depth(m) A(m2) P(m) R(m) So n V(m/s) Q(m3/s)

CM-1 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.15 0.013 8.98 2.01
CM-2 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.25 0.013 11.6 2.6
CM-3 0.45 0.3 0.135 1.05 0.13 0.74 0.013 16.88 2.28
CM-4 0.4 0.3 0.12 1 0.12 1.35 0.013 21.75 2.61
CM-5 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.15 0.013 8.97 2.01
CM-6 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.18 0.013 9.73 2.18

87
CM-7 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.21 0.013 10.56 2.37
CM-8 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.23 0.013 11.2 2.51
CM-9 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.05 0.013 5.01 1.12
CM-10 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.09 0.013 7.12 1.59
CM-11 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.06 0.013 5.78 1.29
CM-12 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.07 0.013 6.02 1.35
CM-13 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.04 0.013 4.4 0.99
CM-14 0.56 0.4 0.224 1.36 0.16 0.27 0.013 12.05 2.7
CM-15 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-16 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-17 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-18 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.15 0.27 0.013 11.51 2.3
CM-19 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.15 0.27 0.013 11.51 2.3
CM-20 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.15 0.27 0.013 11.51 2.3
CM-21 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.15 0.27 0.013 11.51 2.3
CM-22 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-23 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-24 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.15 0.27 0.013 11.51 2.3
CM-25 0.5 0.45 0.23 1.4 0.16 0.27 0.013 11.85 2.67
CM-26 0.6 0.4 0.24 1.4 0.17 0.27 0.013 12.37 2.97
CM-27 0.6 0.4 0.24 1.4 0.17 0.27 0.013 12.37 2.97
CM-28 0.6 0.4 0.24 1.4 0.17 0.27 0.013 12.37 2.97

Drainage Size determination for proposed

The size of drainage channels depth and width for excesses discharge or the proposed condition
was determined by using manning most economical channel section equation.

2 / 3S1/ 2
Q  AR
n

Area of rectangular channel A  b * y

For most economical rectangular channel 𝑏 = 2 ∗ 𝑦 Area of a rectangular channel

2 2 y2
A  2 y P  2 y  2 y  4 y And R   0.5 y
4y

88
Q*n Q*n 8/ 3
 y8 / 3y  ( )
s1/ 2 s1/ 2

 roposed Depth - Existing Depth 

% Additional Depth    *100
 Existing Depth 

 roposed width - Existing width 

% Additional width    *100
 Existing width 

Table 17: Drainage size determination for proposed or excess discharge

Sub- Depth Existing condition Excess %additional %additional

proposed b=2y
catchment width(m) (m) discharge(m3/s) discharge(m3/s) depth width
depth(m)
CM-1 0.56 0.4 2.01 0.17 0 0 99.79 99.7
CM-2 0.56 0.4 2.6 0.06 0 0 99.97 99.95
CM-3 0.45 0.3 2.28 0.17 0 0 99.91 99.88
CM-4 0.4 0.3 2.61 0.11 0 0 99.97 99.96
CM-5 0.56 0.4 2.01 0.98 0.01 0.02 97.03 95.75
CM-6 0.56 0.4 2.18 0.81 0.01 0.02 98.02 97.18
CM-7 0.56 0.4 2.37 0.57 0 0.01 98.95 98.51
CM-8 0.56 0.4 2.51 0.48 0 0.01 99.27 98.95
CM-9 0.56 0.4 1.12 1.87 0.08 0.15 81.24 73.2
CM-10 0.56 0.4 1.59 1 0.02 0.03 95.69 93.84
CM-11 0.56 0.4 1.29 1.42 0.04 0.08 90.03 85.75
CM-12 0.56 0.4 1.35 1.76 0.05 0.1 86.95 81.36
CM-13 0.56 0.4 0.99 2.18 0.12 0.23 71.23 58.9
CM-14 0.56 0.4 2.7 0.47 0 0.01 99.36 99.09
CM-15 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.44 0 0 99.48 99.07
CM-16 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.44 0 0 99.48 99.07
CM-17 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.38 0 0 99.58 99.25
CM-18 0.5 0.4 2.3 0.29 0 0 99.69 99.51
CM-19 0.5 0.4 2.3 0.18 0 0 99.85 99.76
CM-20 0.5 0.4 2.3 0.12 0 0 99.92 99.87
CM-21 0.5 0.4 2.3 0.35 0 0 99.59 99.35
CM-22 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.48 0 0.01 99.41 98.94
CM-23 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.03 0 0 99.99 99.98
CM-24 0.5 0.4 2.3 0.29 0 0 99.69 99.51
CM-25 0.5 0.45 2.67 0.37 0 0 99.6 99.28
CM-26 0.6 0.4 2.97 0.13 0 0 99.91 99.88
CM-27 0.6 0.4 2.97 0.13 0 0 99.91 99.88
CM-28 0.6 0.4 2.97 0.07 0 0 99.96 99.95

89
Appendices 4: Estimation of Runoff for the study area

Runoff Coefficient

A weighted method is employed to obtain the representative runoff coefficient i.e. the individual
areas multiplied by their specific runoff coefficient and their values added together and divided
by the cumulative area.

 (Ai * C i )
C wighted 
AT

Where Ci= Runoff coefficient for a given hydrologic soil group area

Ai =Area under each hydrologic soil group

AT =Total catchment area considered of tow

Table 18: Land use composition of the study area by using land use landcover map of Gondar
city 2015
No. Outlet point Areas
Category Land Use Land Cover Waliya_ Area
1 Outlet (Ha) C Cw
Business, Commerce & Markets 5.31539 0.85 0.619996
Recreation 4.140019 0.18
Residence 0.192935 0.53
Road & Transportation 2.914283 0.83
Services 0.020871 0.83
Total Area 12.583498
Category Land Use Land Cover Area
2 _Mazoriya outlet (Ha) C Cw
Business, Commerce & Markets 3.780858 0.85 0.669766
Recreation 1.254188 0.18
Residence 5.783357 0.53
Road & Transportation 4.625378 0.83
Total Area 15.443781
Category Land Use Land Cover _Gt. Area
3 college outlet (Ha) C Cw
Business, Commerce & Markets 2.51718 0.85 0.675691
Forest & Green 0.064232 0.15

90
 Residence 8.279234 0.53
Road & Transportation 4.262482 0.83
Services 0.929731 0.83
Total Area 16.052859

Table 19: Recommended Runoff coefficient for use in rational method :( ERA, 2013)

Runoff coefficient values for different drainage areas

Types of Drainage areas Runoff coefficient value, C
Business
downtown areas 0.70-0.95
neighborhood areas 0.50-0.70
Residential
single_ family areas 0.30-0.50
multiunit, detached 0.40-0.60
multiunit, attached 0.60-0.75
suburban 0.25-0.40
Apartment dwelling area 0.50-0.70
industrial
Light areas 0.50-0.80
heavy areas 0.60-0.90
parks, cemeteries
playgrounds, 0.10-0.25
Railroad yards areas 0.20-0.40
unimproved areas 0.10-0.30
streets
Asphaltic 0.70-0.95
concrete 0.80-0.95
Brick 0.70-0.95

Table 120: Typical Range of Manning's roughness Coefficient (n) for Channels and Pipes
(FHA, 2014)

Conduit material manning's n*

Closed conduits
Concrete pipe 0.010-0.015
CMP 0.011-0.037

91
Plastic pipe (smooth) 0.009 - 0.015
Plastic pipe (corrugated) 0.018 - 0.025
Pavement/gutter sections 0.012 - 0.016
Small Open channels
concrete 0.011-0.015
Rubble or riprap 0.020 - 0.035
Bare Soil 0.016 - 0.025
vegetal 0.030-0.40
Rock Cut 0.025 - 0.045
Natural channels (minor streams, top width at flood stage
<30 m (100 ft))
Fairly regular section 0.025 - 0.050
Irregular section with pools 0.040 - 0.1
Lower values are usually for well-constructed and maintained (smoother) pipes and channels

92
Figure 2: Gondar city master plan designed 2015 land use the land cover map

93
Figure 3: Gondar city master plan designed 205 land use land cover maps

94
Figure 4: Gondar city Google Earth Pro. Image old and current

95
Appendices 4: Challenges of Storm Water Drainage managements in the Study Area
Questioners for Gondar city community

A. General Information
Name of informer------------------Sex------------Age---------- Education Background-------
Position------------
B. Specific Storm Water Drainage Related Questions:
1. Does Urban flooding one of the major challenges in Gondar?
A. Yes
B. No
2. If your answer is yes, how do you rate the extent?
A. Very high
B. High
C. Medium
D. Low
E. limited
F. Other………………………………………………
3. What do you think is the possible cause of the stormwater drainage system is not?
Control?
A. Heavy Rain
B. Sediment is occupied
C. Heavy load
D. Lack of drainage
E. Other
4. What do you think is the major cause of the flooding problem in your Town?
A. Absence of urban stormwater drainage infrastructure
B. Inadequate urban stormwater drainage infrastructure
C. Blockage of urban stormwater drainage structures
D. If others specify
5. How do you judge the construction quality of the constructed stormwater drainage
system and Status of Existing Drainage System of the town (Poor, fair, good, very good,
Excellent)

96
6. If your response for question number 5 is poor, what construction shortage have
did you observe on the constructed stormwater drainage system?
What are the reasons for the area to dispose of solid wastes into the stormwater
drainage systems?
A. Lack of awareness
B. Shortage of disposing area
C. Carelessness
D. Others, Explain
7. Which one the major challenges of the urban stormwater drainage system in Gondar
Town?
A. Natural Drainage Problems
B. Human activity-related Problems
C. Others specify ……………………………………... regret
8. Which specific sites are most prone to flooding for the town and why?
9. What temporary solutions/measures have ever been taken to the urban flooding
problems?
10. What solutions you suggest to handle such flooding problems on existing
stormwater drainage system?
11. How the stormwater management problems minimized and what measures are?
12. What do you think should be done to have Stormwater drainage problem for the
future?
13. What role is set for the community in the expansion of stormwater drainage
systems?
14. What reasons you believe are accounted for the unsustainable use of the urban
stormwater drainage facilities in the area?
15. What supports did the community get from the Government organizations in
relation to managing the stormwater drainage system to make properly
functional and sustainable?
16. Generally, any comments/suggestion regarding in management the impact of the urban
the drainage system on Gondar.

97