NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) Hydraulic Report.pdf

Hydrology and Hydraulics

Recommendations Report

Federal Highway Administration

Central Federal Lands Highway Division

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1)

Veterans Memorial Road

Prepared by

HDR Engineering, Inc.

August 2021

09/01/2021

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 1 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Veterans Memorial Road Hydrology and Hydraulics

1. Introduction

Project Description HDR prepared a Project Delivery Plan for the Federal Highway Administration, Central Federal

Lands Highway Division (CFLHD) for roadway improvements along approximately 2.8 miles along

Veterans Memorial Road. Proposed roadway improvements include 22 feet wide new asphalt pavement and full depth roadway base reclamation using cement with 2 foot wide gravel shoulder on the north side of road.

The existing roadway is approximately 22 feet wide, and the pavement will not be widening in the proposed roadway. Therefore, the drainage analysis was not competed for roadside ditches.

There is no curb and gutter or inlets on the project, and drainage flows to existing culvert crossings towards the Rio Pueblo de Taos.

This report serves as the basis for hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for Veterans Memorial Road culvert replacement.

Project Location Taos County Road 110, also known as Veterans Memorial Road, begins at the intersection with

Los Cordovas and proceeds westerly ending at the trailhead parking lot for the Slide Trail Upper

Trailhead. Veterans Memorial Road is located within Taos County just west of Ranchos de Taos, NM as shown in Appendix A.

Veterans Memorial Road spans two FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for Taos County, New Mexico and Incorporated Areas, both with effective dates of October 6, 2010. Map Numbers

35055C0950E and 35055C0935E are included in Appendix A for reference. The entirety of

Veterans Memorial Road is located within the FEMA Zone X Floodplain, but it does cross Zone A

Floodplain in two locations. Zone X is defined as an area of minimal flood hazard and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-annual-chance (500-year) flood. Zone A is defined as an area subject to inundation by the 1-percent annual-chance flood event. FEMA maps have been attached in Appendix A.

Design Criteria The Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) "Project Development and Design Manual"

(PDDM), Chapter 7, supplemented with the New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT)

Drainage Manual was used as the basis to evaluate the proposed drainage features. The proposed design speed is less than 45 mph, the design average daily traffic is less than 1500, and the roadway is not designated as a critical access road. Therefore, Low-Standard Road have been applied. Criteria has been summarized in Table 1 below.

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 2 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Table 1 Hydrology and Hydraulic Criteria

Criteria

Design Feature PDDM Criteria

Peak Flow Methods Rational Method (<200 acre basins), TR-55 (>200 acre basins)

Design Storm Frequency Design: 25-yr

Check: 100-yr

Culverts

Capacity Design and Stability 25-year flood

Headwater

New culverts: not be greater than the bottom of the aggregate base layer for the roadway pavement structure at the local roadway low point

Existing: not be greater than the shoulder hinge point at the local roadway low point

HW/D Ratio: Limit ratio to 1.2 for larger than 48” equivalent culverts

Outlet Protection Riprap (PDDM and NMDOT)

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 3 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

2. Hydrology

Existing Basin Analysis

The hydrology for the project was developed to determine the functionality of the existing drainage structures onsite and design proposed drainage structures to meet PDDM criteria.

Hydrology for the site remains largely unchanged between existing and proposed conditions based on roadway improvements. The drainage basins contributing to roadway culverts under

Veterans Memorial Highway are large offsite desert basins. The change in impervious area of the proposed road is minimal in comparison to total area of the basins and will not be accounted for in the hydrologic calculations.

Hydrology was developed using the TR-55 method for existing basin since it is greater than 200 acres. Existing hydrologic patterns will remain unchanged.

Hydrologic calculations, summary tables, and basin maps have been attached in Appendix B.

TR-55 Method

The TR-55 Method was used to determine discharge flows for the existing basin which was greater than 200 acres in size because Streamstats did not have calculated flows for the project site. Rainfall data was gathered from NOAA 14 for the project location in Taos, NM. Basin delineation was performed using ArcGIS and USGS Streamstats. Existing hydrologic patterns will remain unchanged. According to the USDA Web Soil Survey, the basin contained hydrologic soil group C and D resulting from their boundaries reaching further south from the project. Table

2-2d in the TR-55 was used to determine the Curve Number for the basin with a weighted average being used for the basin containing more than one hydrologic soil group. The “Fair” designation was used for Curve Number based on the aerials of the project location and the vegetative cover present. The basin characteristics were then inputted into HEC HMS 4.5 to calculate discharge values using the TR-55 method for the 25- and 100-year storm events. TR-

55 Method calculations and results have been attached in Appendix B.

3. Hydraulics

Existing Culverts

There are 20 locations where existing culverts may be found along the length of the project.

One existing culvert was hydraulically analyzed and its condition evaluated with the aid of survey photos. It is worth noting that project survey notes non-standard culvert sizes (such as

26” or 40”), but standard sizes were assumed for the purposes of hydraulics calculations.

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 4 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

The existing culvert to be replaced at Sta 77+24, which consists of Corrugated Metal Pipe

(CMP) arch inlet and outlet sections connected to an interior Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert

(RCBC), will be replaced with a concrete box culvert matching the interior dimensions of the existing box culvert segment. The 69”x46” elliptical pipe was used at either end of a 72”x48”

RCBC under the roadway. The existing RCBC has multiple cracks and is in need of replacement.

Additionally, the existing culvert location was found to be undersized based on HY-8 analysis.

The HY8 calculations and existing culvert tables have been attached in Appendix C.

Proposed Culverts

There are a total of 20 existing culverts on the project, one is proposed as being replaced in kind due to a break (shown in Figure 1 below) which is allowing roadway base material to filter into the culvert, and one metal culvert pipe will be repaired where a guardrail post punched through the pipe near the crown. Existing and proposed culverts have been summarized in

Table 2 below with a more detailed table included in Appendix C.

Figure 1. Break in Concrete Culvert Section under Veterans Memorial Road at 77+24

Due to the metal arch corrugated metal pipe extensions added to the original concrete box culvert construction of the culvert at Sta 77+24, which consists of 69”X46” elliptical CMP end segments and original 6’x4’ RCBC, it will be replaced with a 6’x4’ RCBC culvert.

Proposed improvements may be found in the Culvert Summary Table below or the Culvert

Summary Table in Appendix C. Proposed HY-8 calculations may also be found in Appendix C.

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 5 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Table 2. Culvert Summary Table

STATION

EXISTING

PIPE

DIAMETER

(IN)

EXISTING

MATERIAL

EXISTING

LENGTH

(FT)

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT

15+00 2 - 108" CMP 65 Repair the existing pipe

1 77+24

69"X46"

ELLIPTICAL

ENDS

WITH

RCBC

ORIGINAL

SECTION

CMP/RCBC 60 Replace in kind with 6’x4’ RCBC

Note 1) Listed stations are existing culvert locations referencing the proposed alignment

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 6 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Table 3 – Culvert Summary

Existing

Station Material Culvert Height HW for

HW/D =

1.2 (ft.)

HW

Depth

HW/D Slope Length Flow Capacity at HW/D

= 1.2

Control Drainage Area

(acres)

Total Design Flow (cfs)

Design Flood

(in.) (ft.) (ft.) (%) (ft.) (cfs)

77+24 RCBC 43 3.58 4.3 9.27 2.59 4.00 60.05 119.50 Inlet 2869.4 1076.0

25-year

Proposed

Station Material Culvert Height HW for

HW/D =

1.2 (ft.)

HW

Depth

HW/D Slope Length Flow Capacity at HW/D =

1.2

Control Drainage Area

(acres)

Total Design Flow (cfs)

Design Flood

(in.) (ft.) (ft.) (%) (ft.) (cfs)

77+24 RCBC 48 4.00 4.8 9.82 2.46 10.0 48.3 184.5 Inlet 2869.4 1076.0

25-year

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 7 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

HY-8 Model Results and Undersized Culvert

The existing culvert have been analyzed using HY-8 to determine hydraulic capacity. The culvert has been analyzed whether it is able to convey the 25-year storm without the headwater exceeding depth of the bottom of roadway aggregate and checked that the 100-year storm will not overtop the roadway. The HY8 calculations have been attached in Appendix C.

The headwater where HW/D=1.2 is 6790.85 feet. The proposed flowrate discharge is 1076.0 cfs. The proposed headwater elevation is 6795.87 feet. The proposed discharge is higher than the capacity at HW/D=1.2, and the elevation of the bottom of aggregate base for the proposed roadway at this location is 6793.50 feet, 2.37 feet below the proposed water surface elevation.

Analysis of the culvert shows overtopping in the existing and proposed conditions. However, the work included with this project only includes replacement in-kind with this single culvert. The 6 foot by 4 foot culvert size is insufficient to carry the flow design flow events from the contributing drainage basin as identified in the PDDM.

Flood Plain Impacts

The proposed culvert is in Zone A which has floodplain impacts. According to the Section 7.4.1 of the PDDM, the FEMA Regulated and Unregulated Base Floodplain requirements without a detailed study, rise is not to exceed 1 foot based on pre- and post-project water-surface profile models. The water surface elevation in the proposed condition creates a rise of 0.14 feet for the

25 year event and 0.17 feet for the 100 year event, which is primarily due to the increase in paved asphalt surface of the roadway since both the existing and proposed culverts overtop during 25 year flow events. Therefore, it satisfies the maximum 1 foot rise criteria. Additionally, the channel area at this culvert replacement location, and areas immediately downstream where there are additional culvert crossings, are in a FEMA Zone A.

Taos County states that local construction that falls within a floodplain is regulated by local government using Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards. Since no functional change is occurring;

therefore, no detailed study is required.

Scour Protection Summary

The riprap size has been analyzed, and the summary of analysis is included in Appendix C. The analysis shows the riprap size to be 16’ span x 37.5’ length x 4’ thick. The proposed riprap will be Class 5.

4. Conclusion The culvert replacement is intended to match the existing concrete box culvert section size. The performance of the culvert is not considered part of the scope of work for this project, however a flow analysis was performed to demonstrate the performance of the new culvert did not violate the Zone A requirements. The replacement of the existing culvert is driven solely by the issue of the break in concrete box section and is not performance driven.

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 8 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on the conditions of the project site and the associated watershed at the time of this study. Any modifications to the site, man-made or natural, could alter the analysis, findings, and recommendations contained herein and could invalidate the analysis, findings, and recommendations. Site conditions, completion of upstream or downstream projects, upstream or downstream land use changes, climate changes, vegetation changes, maintenance practice changes, or other factors may change over time.

Additional analysis or updates may be required in the future as a result of these changes.

5. References

Federal Lands Highway Division, "Project Development and Design Manual", Chapter 7

Hydrology and Hydraulics, December 2012.

Federal Lands Highway Division, "Hydraulic Engineering Circular No.14, Third Edition", Chapter

Riprap Basins and Aprons, July 2006.

New Mexico Department of Transportation, “Drainage Design Manual”, July 2018.

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 9 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Appendix A

Maps and Supporting Documents

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 10 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Site Map

Project Limit

Project Limit

Crossing at Sta. 15+00

Crossing at Sta. 77+24

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) 13 Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Appendix B

Hydrologic Calculations

VETERANS MEMORIAL ROAD

SR 68

Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

EXISTING CULVERT HYDROLOGIC BASINS [PANEL A]

CFL NM FLAP TAO CB110(1)

VETERANS MEMORIAL ROAD

NOTE:

1) BASIN DELINEATION FROM STREAMSTATS AND TOPOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

2) SEE EXISTING CULVERT HYDROLOGIC BASINS [PANEL B] FOR FULL EXTENT OF BASINS 1 AND 18

³

0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet

LEGEND

EXISTING BASINS

SOIL GROUP C

SOIL GROUP D

FLOWPATHS

! EXISTING ROADWAY CULVERTS

# EXISTING DRIVEWAY CULVERTS

VETERANS MEMORIAL ROAD

SR 68

Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

EXISTING CULVERT HYDROLOGIC BASINS [PANEL B]

CFL NM FLAP TAO CB110(1)

VETERANS MEMORIAL ROAD

³

0 6,000 12,0003,000 Feet

LEGEND

EXISTING BASINS

SOIL GROUP C

SOIL GROUP D

FLOWPATHS

! EXISTING ROADWAY CULVERTS

# EXISTING DRIVEWAY CULVERTS

NOTE:

1) BASIN DELINEATION FROM STREAMSTATS AND TOPOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

Runoff Coefficients

Project: CFL TO114 NM FLAP TAO CB110 Veterans Memorial Road Computed: AST Date: 5/1/2021

System Name: Roadway Culverts Checked: Date:

Sub-Basin Data

Basin ID Description Total Area (ac)

1 USGS Streamstats 2869.41 0.50 C TR-55

Basins with areas larger than 200 acres were calculated using the TR-55 Method instead of Rational Menthod

Hydrologic

Soils Group

Hydrology

Method Used

Veterans Memorial Road Culverts

Hydrologic Soil Group determined through use of USDA Web Soil Survey

Notes:

C-Value

Assumed C-Value based on aerials of project site and surrounding areas

*C values determined from Arizona Department of Transportation Highway Drainage Design Manual, Figure 2-2

Runoff Coefficients

System Name: Roadway Culverts Checked: Date:

TR-55 Calculations

Sub-Basin Data

Basin ID Description Total Area (ac)

Total Area

(mi^2) Lag Time Soil Group 1 %

Soil Group 1

Curve Number Soil Group 2 %

Soil Group 2

Curve Number Curve Number

1 Streamstats 2869.41 4.48 113.38 68.03 C 0.92 81 D 0.08 86 81.40 696.00 1076.00 1803.10

Hydrologic

Soils Group 1

Hydrologic

Soils Group 2

Veterans Memorial Road Culverts

Notes:

Time of Concentration flowpath elevations and lengths determined using GIS USGS topographic maps

Hydrologic Soil Group determined through use of USDA Web Soil Survey

ToC (min) HMS Q10 HMS Q100HMS Q25

Standard Form SF-1 . Time of Concentration

System Name: Roadway Culverts Checked: Date:

SUB-BASIN DATA INITIAL/OVERLAND FLOW TRAVEL TIME

(ti) (tt)

1 USGS Streamstats 0.50 0.00 2869.41 41747.4 7.5 112.98 100 3.0 0.732 4.2 0.40 113.38 113.38

Notes:

Overland Flow ti = 1.8 (1.1 - K)Lo^0.5 / S^(1/3) hcddm, Section 600 - Runoff, Equation 602

Concentrated Flow tt=L/60v Undeveloped

Travel Time= Tc=ti+tt Streets and Roads

Final Tc= Min 10 minutes or Tc if >10 Paved

Gravel

Shallow Concentrated Flow Velocity, Vt = HEC22, Eqaution 3-4 V=KukSp^0.5

Ku English units = 3.28 Ku 3.28 English Units k HEC22 Table 3-3 HEC-22 Table 3-3. Intercept Coefficients for Velocity vs Slope

Time of Concentration flowpath elevations and lengths determined using GIS USGS topographic maps Land Cover/Flow Regime Metric English

Forest with heavy ground litter; hay meadow (overland flow) 0.076 0.11324

Trash fallow or minimum tillage cultivation; contour or strip cropped; woodland (overland flow) 0.152 0.22648

Short grass pasture (overland flow) 0.213 0.31737

Tc Reference http://gustfront.ccrfcd.org/pdf_arch1/HCDDM/Current%20Manual%20(Complete)/hcddm.pdf Cultivated straight row (overland flow) 0.274 0.40826

Clark County Regional Flood District Hydrologic Criteria and Drainage Design Manual (hcddm), August 2, 1999 Nearly bare and untilled (overland flow); alluvial fans in western mountain regions 0.305 0.45445

Grassed waterway (shallow concentrated flow) 0.457 0.68093 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/pubs/10009/10009.pdf Unpaved (shallow concentrated flow) 0.491 0.73159

FHWA HEC22, September 2009 Paved area (shallow concentrated flow); small upland gullies 0.619 0.92231 k

Description K or C10Basin ID Area

(ac)

Length

(ft)

Slope ti

(min) Length (ft)

So k

See

Table

Velocity

(fps)

Travel

Time tt

(min)

Percent

Impervious

FINAL Tc

(min)Tc

(min)

Veterans Memorial Road Culverts

K = 0.0132 CN - 0.39. For Rational Method C10 in Table 601 shall be used as K. hcddm, Section 600 - runof, Equation 603

Land Use

K Values from Table 601

Desert C 10 Value

0.25

0.90

0.40

Tao, NM IDF Computed: AST Date: 11/16/2020

NOAA Atlas 14 Checked: Date:

Time (in/hr)

(min) 2 Yr 5 Yr 10 Yr 25 Yr 50 Yr 100 Yr

5 2.98 4.03 4.86 6.08 7.08 8.18

6 2.840 3.840 4.630 5.790 6.740 7.790

7 2.690 3.650 4.400 5.500 6.400 7.400

8 2.550 3.450 4.170 5.210 6.070 7.010

9 2.400 3.260 3.940 4.920 5.730 6.620

10 2.26 3.07 3.71 4.63 5.39 6.23

11 2.180 2.960 3.580 4.470 5.200 6.010

12 2.100 2.860 3.450 4.310 5.020 5.790

13 2.030 2.750 3.320 4.150 4.830 5.580

14 1.950 2.650 3.190 3.990 4.650 5.360

15 1.87 2.54 3.06 3.83 4.46 5.14

16 1.830 2.480 2.990 3.750 4.360 5.030

17 1.790 2.430 2.930 3.660 4.270 4.920

18 1.750 2.370 2.860 3.580 4.170 4.800

19 1.710 2.320 2.790 3.500 4.070 4.690

20 1.670 2.260 2.730 3.410 3.970 4.580

21 1.630 2.210 2.660 3.330 3.880 4.470

22 1.590 2.150 2.590 3.250 3.780 4.360

23 1.540 2.100 2.530 3.160 3.680 4.240

24 1.500 2.040 2.460 3.080 3.580 4.130

25 1.460 1.990 2.390 3.000 3.490 4.020

26 1.420 1.930 2.330 2.910 3.390 3.910

27 1.380 1.880 2.260 2.830 3.290 3.800

28 1.340 1.820 2.190 2.750 3.190 3.680

29 1.300 1.770 2.130 2.660 3.100 3.570

30 1.26 1.71 2.06 2.58 3 3.46

31 1.240 1.690 2.030 2.550 2.960 3.420

32 1.230 1.670 2.010 2.510 2.920 3.370

33 1.210 1.650 1.980 2.480 2.890 3.330

34 1.200 1.620 1.950 2.450 2.850 3.280

35 1.180 1.600 1.930 2.420 2.810 3.240

36 1.160 1.580 1.900 2.380 2.770 3.200

37 1.150 1.560 1.880 2.350 2.730 3.150

38 1.130 1.540 1.850 2.320 2.700 3.110

39 1.120 1.520 1.820 2.290 2.660 3.060

40 1.100 1.490 1.800 2.250 2.620 3.020

41 1.080 1.470 1.770 2.220 2.580 2.980

42 1.070 1.450 1.740 2.190 2.540 2.930

43 1.050 1.430 1.720 2.160 2.510 2.890

44 1.040 1.410 1.690 2.120 2.470 2.840

45 1.020 1.390 1.670 2.090 2.430 2.800

46 1.000 1.360 1.640 2.060 2.390 2.760

47 0.990 1.340 1.610 2.020 2.350 2.710

48 0.970 1.320 1.590 1.990 2.320 2.670

49 0.960 1.300 1.560 1.960 2.280 2.620

50 0.940 1.280 1.530 1.930 2.240 2.580

51 0.920 1.260 1.510 1.890 2.200 2.540

52 0.910 1.230 1.480 1.860 2.160 2.490

53 0.890 1.210 1.450 1.830 2.130 2.450

54 0.880 1.190 1.430 1.800 2.090 2.400

55 0.860 1.170 1.400 1.760 2.050 2.360

56 0.840 1.150 1.380 1.730 2.010 2.320

57 0.830 1.130 1.350 1.700 1.970 2.270

58 0.810 1.100 1.320 1.670 1.940 2.230

59 0.800 1.080 1.300 1.630 1.900 2.180

60 0.779 1.06 1.27 1.6 1.86 2.14

Tao, NM IDF Computed: AST Date: 11/16/2020

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

R a in fa ll I n te n si ty in /h r)

Time (min)

Tao, NM

IDF Curve

2 Yr

5 Yr

10 Yr

25 Yr

50 Yr

100 Yr

Tao, NM IDF Computed: AST Date: ########

Data gathered: 11/16/2020

Tao, NM IDF Computed: AST Date: ########

HEC-HMS 4.5 TR-55 ANALYSIS FOR BASINS >200 ACRES

,-../.0123/456/7819:;/46/7;<3=8>/?/

@8A20=8>/>2:;B/C2>AD83/E;/F2836/,;G/H;I=A86

JK.L/

@20=09M;B/NOPN5Q4R6/@8>S=09M;B/T4U?POVWVR/

X1;Y20=8>B/OVN?PQZ/[0LL

������a�b� c-d,F/cCXedcdF.Fd-,/fCXgJX,eh/XKFdH.FXK

� �j�_���� �̂ �j�p��!�q�� �!�rj���!��a����j�����! ��s��j�̀ ����!�s�r��j�q���t�� j�b� u �� �j���� �!�u�����j�m (p�����p���j�q������k�o rj�v ���s���� wxyyj�w��

�����o�!���{�������

cf/02|912< cEKT|23;M/}8=>0/}<;A=}=020=8>/[<;~9;>A�/;30=:20;3/G=0D/QU�/A8>[=M;>A;/=>0;<Y213/�=>/=>AD;3�4

E9<20=8> .Y;<2S;/<;A9<<;>A;/=>0;<Y21/��;2<3�

4 Z ? 4U Z? ?U 4UU ZUU ?UU 4UUU

?T:=> UP4QZ

UPZ5V

UPNNO

UP5U?

UP?UW

UP?QU

UPOVZ

UPWWQ

UPQ4V

4PUN

4UT:=> UPZQ4

UPNWW

UP?44

UPO4V

UPWWZ

UPVQV

4PU5

4P4Q

4P5U

4P?W

4?T:=> UPNO4

UP5OV

UPON5

UPWO?

UPQ?W

4P44

4PZQ

4P5W

4PWN

4PQ?

NUT:=> UP5VO

UPOZQ

UPV?N

4PUN

4PZQ

4P?U

4PWN

4PQV

ZPNN

ZPOZ

OUT:=> UPOUZ

UPWWQ

4PUO

4PZW

4POU

4PVO

ZP45

ZP5?

ZPVQ

NPZ5

ZTD< UPW4Z

UPQUV

4PZ4

4P5O

4PV4

ZP44

ZP5N

ZPWV

NPZV

NPOQ

NTD< UPWOZ

UPQOO

4PZO

4P?4

4PVO

ZP4O

ZP5V

ZPVN

NPNN

NPW?

OTD< UPVW5

4P4U

4P5Z

4POV

ZPUO

ZPNW

ZPWU

NPUO

NP?V

5PU4

4ZTD< UPQQN

4PZ5

4P?W

4PV5

ZPZZ

ZP?N

ZPVO

NPZ4

NPW4

5P4N

Z5TD< 4PUW

4PNZ

4PO5

4PQU

ZPZW

ZP?O

ZPVV

NPZ5

NPW?

5P4W

ZTM2� 4P4Q

4P5V

4PVZ

ZPUQ

ZP5W

ZPWO

NPUO

NPNW

NPWQ

5PZ4

NTM2� 4PZV

4P?Q

4PQ?

ZPZ5

ZPO5

ZPQ?

NPZW

NPOU

5PU5

5P5N

5TM2� 4PNW

4PWU

ZPUV

ZPNQ

ZPVZ

NP4?

NP5V

NPVN

5PZQ

5PO5

WTM2� 4PO5

ZPUZ

ZP5?

ZPWQ

NPZ?

NP?Q

NPQN

5PZW

5PW4

?PU5

4UTM2� 4PV5

ZPZW

ZPW?

NP4Z

NPO4

NPQV

5PN?

5PW4

?P4V

?P?Z

ZUTM2� ZPNV

ZPQN

NP?Z

NPQV

5P?Q

?PU5

?P5V

?PQ4

OP5O

OPV?

NUTM2� ZPQZ

NP?Q

5PZV

5PVU

?P5W

?PQ?

OP54

OPV?

WPNV

WPWO

5?TM2� NPO4

5P5N

?PZ?

?PV?

OPO4

WP4N

WPOZ

VPU?

VP??

VPVW

OUTM2� 5P4Q

?P45

OPUW

OPWO

WPO4

VP4Q

VPW5

QPZN

QPVU

4UPZ

���o �� ������ ������!��q��� o�o ! ��������

���o ����o

���o ������r������ ���� o�o!�� �� � �

�wxyy�y�!����&�� u��r�� �q cf/S<2}D=A21

/0123430567082

9:08832;0853<56607=

,-./0123-40150..-67

,-./0123-4018-9

,-./0123-401-0.6-4

<=8

>86

?@@=8

A@86

?@@=8

A@86

��0 1�� ��!�2���� ������3� ��� ��3� � �����

1�� ��!�4����������� ��� 1�� ��!�4�����0������

9���� ��"��6��0�9����

A>@B

NM FLAP TAO CB110(1) Central Federal Lands Highway Division

Appendix C

Hydraulic Calculations

Project: CFL TO114 NM FLAP TAO CB 110(1) Veterans Memorial Road Computed: AST Date: 5/1/2021

Subject: Roadway Culvert Summary Checked: Date:

Basin/Culvert Number STA Existing Culvert Size Q25 Q100 25 Year Overtop? 100 Yr Overtop? Culvert Condition from Photos Proposed Improvement Length US (ft) Length DS (ft) Replace (ft) End Sections

1 77+24 69"X46" ELLIPTICAL 696 1803 Yes Yes Clear, broken 6x4 box in middle Replace with 6'x4' RCBC 0 0 48 Headwall

Project: CFL TO114 NM FLAP TAO CB 110(1) Veterans Memorial Road Computed: AST Date: 5/1/2021

Subject: Culvert Riprap Sizing Checked: Date:

Riprap Sizing

Reference: FHWA HEC14 Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipators for Culverts and Channels Ch.10

Outlet Pipe Size (ft) # of Barrels Design Discharge TW Depth G (ft/s^2) D50 (ft) D50 (IN) D50 Selected (IN) Class Length (FT) Depth (IN) Width at Outlet (FT) Width at End V

Culvert 77+24 5.33 1.00 696.00 2.13 32.20 6.15 1.07 2.31 2.50 73.74 22.00 5 37.30 44.00 15.98 28.42 24.984969

NMDOT Standard Detail 511-28 used to determine pipe spacing and width for pipes >48"

Use in conjunction with the Roadway Culverts spreadsheet: Roadway Culverts.xlsx Outlet Pipe Volumes

NOTE: Riprap to be placed at pipe extensions and pipe replacements only No. I.D. X L W T Volume Class

(in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (CY)

3*I.D.

77+24 64 15.98 37.30 28.42 3.67 112.45 5

D50 Size Class Apron L Apron D

5 1 4 3.5

6 2 4 3.3

10 3 5 2.4

14 4 6 2.2

20 5 7 2

22 6 8 2

Depend on D50

Existing Culvert

HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report

Crossing Discharge Data

Discharge Selection Method: Recurrence

Table 1 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: Existing Crossing 1

Headwater Elevation (ft) Discharge Names Total Discharge

(cfs) Sta 77+24

Discharge (cfs) Roadway

Discharge (cfs) Iterations

6795.72 25 year 1076.00 218.56 857.35 13

6796.71 100 year 1803.00 233.49 1568.78 2

6793.72 Overtopping 184.62 184.62 0.00 Overtopping

Rating Curve Plot for Crossing: Existing Crossing 1

Table 2 - Culvert Summary Table: Sta 77+24

Straight Culvert

Inlet Elevation (invert): 6786.45 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 6784.05 ft

Culvert Length: 60.05 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.0400

Discharge Names

Total Discharge

(cfs)

Culvert Discharge

(cfs)

Headwater Elevation

(ft)

Inlet Control

Depth (ft)

Outlet Control

Depth (ft) Flow Type

Normal Depth (ft)

Critical Depth (ft)

Outlet Depth (ft)

Tailwater Depth (ft)

Outlet Velocity

(ft/s)

Tailwater Velocity

(ft/s)

25 year 1076.00 218.56 6795.72 9.268 5.970 5-S2n 1.893 3.385 2.431 0.000 18.653 0.000 100 year 1803.00 233.49 6796.71 10.258 6.648 5-S2n 1.969 3.359 2.525 0.000 19.117 0.000

Culvert Performance Curve Plot: Sta 77+24

Water Surface Profile Plot for Culvert: Sta 77+24

Site Data - Sta 77+24

Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data

Inlet Station: 0.00 ft

Inlet Elevation: 6786.45 ft

Outlet Station: 60.00 ft

Outlet Elevation: 6784.05 ft

Number of Barrels: 1

Culvert Data Summary - Sta 77+24

Barrel Shape: Elliptical

Barrel Span: 68.00 in

Barrel Rise: 43.00 in

Barrel Material: Concrete

Embedment: 0.00 in

Barrel Manning's n: 0.0130

Culvert Type: Straight

Inlet Configuration: Square Edge with Headwall

Inlet Depression: None

Table 3 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: Existing Crossing 1)

Tailwater Channel Data - Existing Crossing 1

Tailwater Channel Option: Enter Constant Tailwater Elevation

Constant Tailwater Elevation: 6779.96 ft

Roadway Data for Crossing: Existing Crossing 1

Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation

Crest Length: 100.00 ft

Crest Elevation: 6793.72 ft

Roadway Surface: Paved

Roadway Top Width: 37.00 ft

Flow (cfs) Water Surface Elev (ft) Depth (ft)

1076.00 6779.96 0.00

1803.00 6779.96 0.00

Existing Replace in Kind Culvert HY-8 Culvert Analysis Report

Crossing Discharge Data

Discharge Selection Method: Recurrence

Table 1 - Summary of Culvert Flows at Crossing: Prop Crossing 1

Headwater Elevation (ft) Discharge Names Total Discharge

(cfs) Sta 77+24

Discharge (cfs) Roadway

Discharge (cfs) Iterations

6795.87 25 year 1076.00 333.48 742.17 12

6796.88 100 year 1803.00 355.71 1446.82 3

6794.05 Overtopping 289.18 289.18 0.00 Overtopping

Rating Curve Plot for Crossing: Prop Crossing 1

Table 2 - Culvert Summary Table: Sta 77+24

Straight Culvert

Inlet Elevation (invert): 6786.05 ft, Outlet Elevation (invert): 6781.17 ft

Culvert Length: 48.25 ft, Culvert Slope: 0.1017

Discharge Names

Total Discharge

(cfs)

Culvert Discharge

(cfs)

Headwater Elevation

(ft)

Inlet Control

Depth (ft)

Outlet Control

Depth (ft) Flow Type

Normal Depth (ft)

Critical Depth (ft)

Outlet Depth (ft)

Tailwater Depth (ft)

Outlet Velocity

(ft/s)

Tailwater Velocity

(ft/s)

25 year 1076.00 333.48 6795.87 9.815 3.962 5-S2n 1.595 4.000 2.384 0.000 23.313 0.000 100 year 1803.00 355.71 6796.88 10.831 4.629 5-S2n 1.669 4.000 2.502 0.000 23.699 0.000

Culvert Performance Curve Plot: Sta 77+24

Water Surface Profile Plot for Culvert: Sta 77+24

Site Data - Sta 77+24

Site Data Option: Culvert Invert Data

Inlet Station: 0.00 ft

Inlet Elevation: 6786.05 ft

Outlet Station: 48.00 ft

Outlet Elevation: 6781.17 ft

Number of Barrels: 1

Culvert Data Summary - Sta 77+24

Barrel Shape: Concrete Box

Barrel Span: 6.00 ft

Barrel Rise: 4.00 ft

Barrel Material: Concrete

Embedment: 0.00 in

Barrel Manning's n: 0.0140

Culvert Type: Straight

Inlet Configuration: Square Edge (30-75º flare) Wingwall

Inlet Depression: None

Table 3 - Downstream Channel Rating Curve (Crossing: Prop Crossing 1)

Tailwater Channel Data - Prop Crossing 1

Tailwater Channel Option: Enter Constant Tailwater Elevation

Constant Tailwater Elevation: 6781.17 ft

Roadway Data for Crossing: Prop Crossing 1

Roadway Profile Shape: Constant Roadway Elevation

Crest Length: 100.00 ft

Crest Elevation: 6794.05 ft

Roadway Surface: Paved

Roadway Top Width: 39.00 ft

Flow (cfs) Water Surface Elev (ft) Depth (ft)

1076.00 6781.17 0.00

1803.00 6781.17 0.00