Chapter

AMERICAN RAILWAY ENGINEERING AND

MAINTENANCE OF WAY ASSOCIATION
Practical Guide to Railway Engineering

Drainage
5-1
©2003 AREMA®
AREMA COMMITTEE 24 - EDUCATION & TRAINING

Drainage

Kevin Bollinger, P.E.

Bollinger, Lach & Associates

Oak Brook, IL
[email protected]

5-2
©2003 AREMA®
 Chapter
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Drainage
The three most important elements in good track are: #1 Drainage,
#2 Drainage and #3 Drainage – Darrell Cantrell, Engineer Track
(Retired) BNSF

D rainage is the subject of stormwater behavior as it relates to the properties of

hydrology and hydraulics. This is a subject that is constantly being reviewed
on a regular basis within the regulatory bodies of government and it is
therefore always important to review local requirements to guide the engineer through
the design process. Even though one method of analysis may be appropriate to use in
an area one feels comfortable in, it may not be appropriate in another location. A good
rule of thumb is to contact the local highway department as a starting point and
continue your investigation to local authorities. The other primary source for the
Engineer is the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering, Chapter 1, Parts 3 & 4.

The engineer needs to be aware that one has to maintain existing drainage patterns and
not increase headwaters upstream or downstream. Adjacent property owners, whether
they are farmers or city dwellers, have certain rights and are protected under common
law concerning storm water conveyance and elevation as it relates to property damage.

5.1 Hydrology
For the purposes of this Guide, Hydrology will be defined as the study of rainfall
events (inches or inches per hour) and runoff (cubic feet per second) as related to the
engineering design of conveyance features such as ditches and culverts. These
conveyance features are typically designed to a particular storm event or storm
frequency. In other words, a storm water conveyance feature is going to be associated
with a certain amount of risk with respect to failure. For instance, a 100 year storm
return period has a 1% probability of occurring in any given year, a 50 year storm has a
2% probability of occurring in any given year, and a 10 year storm has a 10% chance of
occurring in any given year. So it is up to the designer to assign a certain amount of

5-3
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

risk to which he would like that feature to perform. We assign a certain amount of risk
because of cost and feasibility. The greater the conveyances of failure, the higher risk,
and therefore the storm return period. Here are a couple of examples:

Conveyance Feature Design Frequency

Culverts 50 yr

Ditches 50 yr

Storm Sewer 10 yr

Just because the designer has established the appropriate risk and designed the system
accordingly, it does not mean the feature is designed properly. Because most agencies
typically assess damage based upon the 100-year storm event, the designer should
always check or test the system against the 100-year storm to evaluate how the system
performs under those conditions. When the top of a culvert is designed to the 50-year
storm, check to evaluate what the 100-year storm event does. If, for instance, the
tracks are well above the 100-year storm elevation, then the designer has completed his
design. However if the storm overtops the tracks, the designer may reconsider
designing the size of the culvert.

The hydrology or stormwater discharge rate (Q) of a watershed is dependent on

several important factors such as the type of storm, the shape and size of the
watershed, soil types, urbanization and general slope. There are several techniques
available to the designer in determining the appropriate flow rate. Typically, the size of
the watershed or the area tributary to a drainage structure will usually dictate the type of
method to be used. Some of the more common methods or programs for
determining stormwater discharge can be summarized as follows:

5.1.1 Equations and Programs

• Rational Formula (hydrology) peak discharge

• National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) TR 55 (hydrology) hydrograph

• United States Geological Survey (USGS) Regression Equations peak discharge

• NRCS TR 20 (hydrology and hydraulics) peak discharge and continuous

simulation

• US Army Corps of Engineers HECRAS continuous simulation (hydrology and

hydraulics)

5-4
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) HYDRAIN (hydrology and hydraulics)

Typically, when watersheds become greater than one square mile, floodway and
floodplain issues are introduced. If these two elements are evident by review of the
Flood Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, flow
rates and flood elevations can usually be obtained in table format upon request.

Peak Discharge Method for Up to 200 Acres in Area

Rational Formula (1889)

Criteria

Q=CIA where

• C=Coefficient factor (Figure 5.1)

• I=Intensity of rainfall in inches/hour based upon a time of concentration

(minutes) minimum of 10 minutes

• A=Area in acres

Peak Discharge and Hydrograph Method for Areas Between 200 Acres and
2000 Acres

NRCS Method (Technical Release 55 or Technical Release 20)

Criteria

• Curve Number (CN) dependent on soil type

• Time of Concentration

• Total Rainfall (inches)

5-5
©2003 AREMA®
 C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

1 Rational Method Runoff Coefficient “C”

RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS

RUNOFF

VALUES OF C - Runoff/Rainfall COEFFICIENT C

TYPE OF DRAINAGE AREA SURFACES MIN. MAX.

ROOFS, slag to metal 0.75 0.95
PAVEMENTS
Asphalt 0.70 0.95
Concrete 0.80 0.95
Gravel, from clean and loose clayey and compact 0.25 0.70
R.R. YARDS 0.20 0.40
EARTH SURFACES
Sand, from uniform grain size, no fines to well Bare 0.15 0.50
Light vegetation 0.10 0.40
Dense vegetation 0.05 0.30
Loam, from sandy or graveliy to clayey Bare 0.20 0.60
Light vegetation 0.10 0.45
Dense vegetation 0.05 0.35
Gravel from clean gravel sand mixtures, no silt or clay to
high clay or silt content Bare 0.25 0.65
Light vegetation 0.15 0.45
Dense vegetation 0.10 0.35
Clay, from coarse sandy or silty to pure colloidal clays Bare 0.30 0.75
Light vegetation 0.20 0.60
Dense vegetation 0.15 0.50
COMPOSITE AREAS
City, business areas 0.70 0.95
City, dense residential areas, vary as to soil & vegetation 0.50 0.65
Suburban residential areas, vary as to soil & vegetation 0.35 0.55
Rural Districts, vary as to soil & vegetation 0.10 0.25
Parks, Golf Courses, etc., vary as to soil & vegetation 0.10 0.35
LAWNS
Sandy soil, flat 2% 0.05 0.10
Sandy soil, average 2% to 7% 0.10 0.15
Sandy soil, steep 7% 0.15 0.20
Heavy soil, flat 2% 0.13 0.17
Heavy soil, average 2% to 7% 0.18 0.22
Heavy soil, steep 7% 0.25 0.35

Note: Values of "C" for earth surfaces are further varied by

degree of saturation, compaction, surface irregularity and
slope, by character of subsoil, and by presence of frost or
glazed snow or ice.

Figure 5-1 Runoff Coefficients - Data Book for Civil Engineer Design, Elwyne Seelye

Note: Values of “C” for earth surfaces are further varied by degree of saturation, compaction, surface
irregularity and slope, by character of subsoil and by presence of frost or glazed snow or ice.

5-6
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

5.1.2 Rainfall Intensity or Precipitation

Rainfall can be described in terms of intensity or total rainfall. There are many charts,
maps and tables to choose from to obtain rainfall depending on the project location.
Information is constantly being updated, so the designer should demonstrate diligence
and investigate local design procedures. If one cannot find current precipitation data
within a certain region, the designer can still reference the material from the US
Weather Bureau. The current titles of the reports are as follows:

Precipitation Frequency

5 min – 60 min 1 hr – 24 hr

Eastern US Technical Memo 35 (1977) Technical Paper 40 (1961)

Western US Arkell & Richards (1986) NOAA Atlas 2 (1973)

Frederick & Miller (1979)

The information described in these reports illustrates rainfall in total inches, however,
the data can be converted to inches/hour for use in the Rational Formula. For
instance, if the Time of Concentration was found to be 30 min for a 100-year storm
within a watershed in the State of New Jersey, one could refer to Technical Memo 35
and determine that the total rainfall was 2.35 inches. This information could be used in
the NRCS method to determine runoff or could be converted to rainfall intensity for
use in the Rational Method by taking (2.35 inches)*(60min/hr/30min)=4.70in/hr.

In the central part of the United States, the Illinois Water Survey performed and
published studies that have established values for rainfall intensities that most agencies
in the area use today to evaluate and design drainage structures. These reference guides
are referred to as Bulletins 70 and 71. This is just one example of more current
information, and more than likely other areas of North America have the same types
of information. These values found in current rainfall publications can be used for any
type of method to be used, whether it is the Rational Method, NRCS or HECRAS.

5-7
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

TYPICAL NOMOGRAPH ILLUSTRATING

Figure 5-2 Rainfall Intensity vs. Duration – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-8
©2003 AREMA®
 C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

5.1.3 Time of Concentration

The Time of Concentration is the time it takes a water droplet to travel across a given
watershed along the longest watercourse. This is important because it establishes a
theoretical design storm unique to that particular watershed. Historically, storms with
shorter durations are more intense than longer duration storms. So by determining the
correct time of concentration, the designer will be able to optimize a design storm and
not over or under estimate the rainfall intensity and runoff. As with some of the
discharge equations, there are any number of the time of concentration equations and
nomographs that can be used and, again, the local agencies should be referenced for
assistance. The overland flow equations or nomographs (Figure 5-3) are only good for
a couple of hundred feet, and the remaining additional hydraulic length should consist
of times derived from typical water velocities between 2 ft/sec and 10 ft/sec that are
given in the figure below (Figure 5-4).

Figure 5-3 Overland Flow Time – Data Book for Civil Engineer Design Figure 5-4 Average Velocity – NRCS TR 55

5.1.4 Distribution
The distribution of a storm can take many forms since two storms are never alike. In
some cases, such as with the rational formula, distribution of rainfall across a drainage
area is not a factor, since the equation is based upon peak discharge. However, if

5-9
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

continuous simulation is necessary where the designer uses a hydrograph, then the type
of rainfall distribution definitely becomes an important element. As with the NRCS
method, the Soil Conservation Service has established different types of storms
depending upon the region of the country the project is in. When using some of the
other programs, different rainfall distribution types are also available.

5.2 Hydraulics
Hydraulics is the study of water conveyance either through a conduit (a conduit can be
a small culvert or a multi-span bridge structure) under pressure or a conduit exposed to
atmospheric pressure. When designing hydraulic features, it is important to realize that
different hydraulic equations or charts only apply to certain conditions within the
conveyance system. For instance, a ditch conveying water has several equations
associated with its characteristics, while the behavior of a tributary culvert has many
different variables related to its hydraulic attributes. The main objective the engineer
should try to achieve is a safe and economical system that poses no danger to the
railway operations or adjacent property owners during a significant storm event.

Not all systems are comprised of ditches and culverts. Sometimes a good system may
consist of an uncontrolled release off railway property where a ditch is not necessary.
This may occur at the top of a knoll at a natural ridgeline, or it may occur in a wetland
or depression area where any conveyance system would not be practical. It is up to the
engineer to determine when a system becomes justified. Remember, always think of
the possible consequences of the design and impacts the design may have on other
people, property or development downstream.

5.2.2 Open Channel Hydraulics

The designer will apply open channel hydraulic equations to either natural or artificial
conditions. When programs are used to study channels, they usually simulate varied
flow. However, steady uniform flow is the primary type of flow that in general practice
is used the most often.

For any flow at a channel section, the discharge Q can be expressed as:

Where V is velocity and A is the cross sectional area of the channel.

In 1889 an Irish engineer by the name of Robert Manning presented the well-known
equation

5-10
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Where V is the mean velocity in fps, R is the hydraulic radius in ft (area/wetted

perimeter), S is the slope of energy line and n is the coefficient of roughness,
specifically known as Manning’s n. The formula was developed from several different
formulas and verified by numerous observations. It wasn’t until 1936 at a conference
in Washington D.C. that a recommendation for its use was made.

If one substitutes V = Q/A, Manning’s equation becomes:

The equation can be used in most cases, at any given section along a channel, to
determine normal channel depth or discharge. Figures 5-5 and 5-6 illustrate the values
of the roughness coefficient for specific types of channels.

5-11
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-3 Roughness Coefficient - Uniform Flow – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-12
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-4 Roughness Coefficient - Uniform Flow Cont'd. – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-13
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

5.2.3 Culvert Hydraulics

Culvert hydraulics takes the form of both pressure flow and open channel flow. The
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has studied a wide variety of culverts that
resulted in numerous nomographs associated with culvert hydraulics. A culvert’s
hydraulic characteristics react differently depending upon what water conditions are
present at the outlet end of a culvert. When designing a culvert, it is important to
determine what produces the highest headwater conditions. This is accomplished by
what the FHWA terms as inlet control and outlet control. Figure 3.2.1 is an example
of the culvert design form developed by the FHWA that reflect both control
conditions.

Inlet control represents a condition where there is no normal water depth present at
the outlet portion of the culvert. The inlet portion of the culvert will almost act as an
orifice with a free discharge condition. Figures 5-7 and 5-8 are the nomographs that
represent inlet control conditions for concrete pipe and corrugated metal pipe
respectively.

Outlet control represents a condition where there is a normal water depth present at
the outlet portion of the culvert. Sometimes the depth of water at the outlet is referred
to as tail water. Determining what the tail water elevation is can be the most difficult
part in determining the size of culvert. The designer has several options available to
choose from that can be summarized as follows:

• Refer to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or Floodway Maps and Reports
to determine applicable downstream elevations.

• Calculate the downstream elevations using Manning’s equation based upon

existing conditions.

Once the condition of the outlet can be determined, the designer should refer to
Figures 5-9, 5-10 and 5-11 to determine the headwater condition of the culvert.

The headwater elevations for both inlet and outlet control need to be compared. The
elevation that produces the highest headwater condition is the actual allowable
elevation to be used by the designer. If the result is not favorable to the railway or
adjacent property owners, the calculation needs to be reiterated until a culvert size can
produce a result that is positive to both considerations.

5-14
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-5 FHWA Culvert Design Form

5-15
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-6 Entrance Loss Coefficient - Outlet Control – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-16
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-7 Inlet Control for Concrete Pipe – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-17
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-8 Inlet Control for Corrugated Metal Pipe – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-18
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-9 Critical Depth - Circular Pipe – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-19
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-10 Head for Concrete Pipe Culvert Flowing Full – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-20
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Figure 5-11 Head for Standard Corrugated Metal Pipe Culverts Flowing Full – Illinois Department of Transportation

5-21
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

5.3 Recommended Procedures

5.3.1 Existing Drainage Study

Before proceeding with the design of the project, it should be realized that it is always
important to visit the actual project site and identify problems that may be
encountered. Existing culverts always seem to be a problem and should be looked at
carefully. Examples of potential problems include excessive ditch scouring and
constant ponding of water along a ditch system. Railway ditches are typically very flat
and do not drain well. However, the designer should always review the situation as if
there is a solution. If it is economically feasible to remedy the situation, then the area
should be regraded and repaired to what is recognized as common engineering
practice.

Below is a recommended approach to an existing consistent drainage study:

• Utilize a USGS Quadrangle Map or a Hydrologic Atlas (HA) for the area.

• Plot existing and proposed railway right-of-way.

• Identify floodplain and floodway boundaries.

• Identify watershed areas based upon contour interpretation.

• Identify existing bridges, culverts and problem areas.

• Identify sheet and concentrated flow.

• Identify closed drainage systems.

• Select outlet points for each watershed area.

• Select the proper hydrology criteria (i.e. rainfall, frequency, formula, etc.).

• Calculate or run the model and assign flow rates to each of the watersheds.

• Add flow rates and hydrographs, as necessary, to determine proper flow through
the watershed.

• Select the proper hydraulic method to determine storm water elevations.

• Conduct a plan-in-hand field review.

5-22
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Remember the existing drainage study is the benchmark study on which all proposed
drainage features are based.

5.3.2 Proposed Drainage System

The proposed drainage system typically addresses impacts to an existing man made or
natural drainage system from a proposed improvement. This can take the form of new
ditches and culverts or it can take the form of improving existing problem areas. Keep
in mind that any improvement to an existing drainage system will more than likely
affect surrounding drainage patterns and elevations on adjacent or downstream
properties. For example, increasing the size of an existing cross culvert introduces
more storm water flow rate to downstream property owners. The designer should
determine whether this situation is going to present a problem.

Below is a recommended approach to the design of a proposed drainage system:

• Complete and review the existing drainage study.

• Superimpose the proposed improvements on a copy of the existing drainage study

map.

• Locate new drainage features such as ditches, bridges and culverts.

• Are there floodplain and wetland impacts?

• Never relocate an existing outlet point unless it is absolutely necessary.

• Try to maintain existing watershed limits (sometimes these do change).

• Calculate the new hydrology for the watershed.

• Calculate the new hydraulics for the watershed.

• Compare the new data with the existing data at the same points.

• Initiate Permitting process.

For adjacent properties, it is ideal to obtain the same results between existing and
proposed conditions and it may take a few iterations to obtain those results.
Sometimes it is impossible for this to occur. By studying the upstream and
downstream effects, the designer may be able to apply a certain amount of change that
does not harm or cause damage to adjacent property owners. For example, a 0.1’ or a
0.5’ increase in headwater may be acceptable, or a 5% increase in flow velocity may be
acceptable if the surrounding soil conditions are tolerable. There may be more

5-23
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

considerations to review. However, this is dependent upon the conditions and

regulations unique to that project location.

5.3.3 Floodplain Encroachment Evaluation

The floodplain is identified by criteria established by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) for the 100-year and 500-year storm events or known
depression flood prone areas. Typically, the 100-year base flood elevation is the most
commonly regulated stormwater elevation associated with rivers, streams and
concentrated flow areas. FEMA, State Water Resource Departments, counties and
local communities (that are part of the National Flood Insurance Program) closely
monitor flood plain areas. Any change to the flood plain will generally result in
extensive studies and computer modeling to be submitted for approval.

Below is a summary of possible floodplain permitting reviews:

FEMA:

• Physical Map Change (Extensive Floodplain Revisions)

• Letter of Map Revision (Typical Floodplain Revisions)

• Conditional Letter of Map Revision (Typical Floodplain Revisions done in the

design phase)

• Elevation Criteria (Typically for building structures)

US Army Corps of Engineers:

• Excavation below normal water elevation

State Water Resource Department:

• Floodway (Area within a floodplain that demonstrates conveyance)

County (Some counties may not be involved in the review process):

• Floodplain

• Floodway

• Compensatory Storage (Excavation required to compensate for floodplain filling)

• Elevation Criteria (Typically for building structures)

5-24
©2003 AREMA®
C H A P T E R 5 - D R A I N A G E

Local Community:

• Compensatory Storage

• Elevation Criteria

5.3.4 Erosion Control Evaluation

Erosion Control can be categorized into temporary construction applications and
permanent features. Today, many local governments, counties and states are taking an
active role to review soil erosion designs in the plan development phase and to
monitor erosion control features in the construction phase. The Environmental
Protection Agency and local soil conservation districts will come out to the site for an
inspection without notice.

In construction, the designer can apply many different erosion control devices that
limit the amount of soil erosion. Each type of system, with its appropriate application,
can be summarized as follows:

Erosion Control Device Area Function

Silt Fence Site perimeter Reduces offsite discharge

Hay Bales Ditches Reduces flow velocities for

sediment collection

Aggregate ditch checks Ditches Reduces flow velocities for

sediment collection

Settlement Basins Ditches Allows sediment to settle

In permanent applications, grass lined channels have different permissible velocities

depending upon soil type. Under normal circumstances, grass lined channels will
typically accommodate stormwater flow velocities on the average of 6 ft/sec in good
resistant soils. When velocities exceed the maximum permissible velocities, other
erosion control features should be reviewed, such as riprap. These concepts are
further explained in the Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 11, “ Use of Rip-Rap for
Bank Protection.” Keep in mind that vegetation (grass) or stone riprap are good
erosion control treatments and should not be confused with slope stability
applications. This is a common mistake among designers. Local soil conservation
districts can offer advice on permanent erosion control measures as well.

5-25
©2003 AREMA®