DEWA_10(6)218(2) Vancampers H and H Memo.pdf

FHWA:I. Rosado:6257: KB: M:\PROJECTS\dewa\10(6)_218(2)\Techserv\Hydra\Reports\ Vancampers\DEWA_10(6)218(2) Vancampens Glen Bridge H&H Memo.pdf CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Form FHWA-201 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Rev. 11-87) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

MINUTE - MEMO

Use this form in lieu of transmittal slips within Dept. of Trans. when message comment is to be retained as file material. Do not prepare carbons. Not to be used in lieu of Form FHWA-121 for informal correspondence.

SUBJECT: NP DEWA 10(6)218(2), Vancampens Glen Bridge H&H Memo

TO MESSAGE/COMMENT FROM/DATE

Ramesh Kotadia Project Manager

Carlos Pena Bridge Team Leader

Shoukat Nawaz Highway Design Manager

We have updated this memo to remove any reference of the Dingmans Falls Access Bridge to meet permitting requirements. Hydrology and hydraulic analysis for Dingmans will be provided in a separate memo.

No additional design revisions have been performed for the Vancampens Glen Bridge in the Delaware Water Gap National Recreational Area since our previous memo dated 11/19/20.

As described in our previous memo dated 11/19/20, the Vancampens Glen Bridge analysis was revised due to the NPS and EFL Environmental team's request during the PIH PS&E review to reduce the limits of disturbance to ease the environmental permit process.

Vancampens Glen Bridge (Structure No. 4320-041P) is located on Old Mine Road in the Warren County, New Jersey.

The existing bridge is a 42-ft. long single span concrete encased steel beam structure in fair condition. Moderate sloughing along the south upstream channel bank, severe sloughing (10-in drop) behind the southeast wingwall and moderate erosion at the northeast wingwall were identified on the last Bridge Inspection Report (BIP) dated November 15, 2017. The BIP profile measurements log table shows the north abutment has experienced a long degradation of 5-in upstream of the bridge, and an aggradation of 2.5-inch downstream of the bridge during a 11-year period (October 1998 - November 2017). Based on this information and field observations, EFL consider the structure to be stable and scour is not a threat to the existing bridge. No work on the abutments is proposed, they would remain in place.

The Vancampens Glen Bridge drainage area was evaluated to be 7.62 square miles using USGS Streamstats® online automated hydrologic module that automates drainage area delineation from digital terrain models and computes peak flow discharges with standard regional regression. Hydrology is based on the National Streamflow Statistic Program V6.1, which uses regression equations to calculate the peak flow.

Vancampers Brook is not in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped floodplains.

Isis Rosado Hydraulics Senior Technical Specialist

11/19/20 07/01/24(updated)

Vancampers\DEWA_10(6)218(2) Vancampens Glen Bridge H&H Memo.pdf CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

The hydraulic modeling was performed using the two-dimensional software Sedimentation and River Hydraulics – Two Dimensional (SRH-2D) to obtain the water surface elevations (WSELs).

Based on the BIP report the existing low steel elevation (LSEL) seems to be 2.33 ft. below the top of bridge, which place the exiting LSEL approximately at 365.43 ft. Per our analysis, the existing bridge has a freeboard of 2.56 ft., which meet our PDDM Chapter 7 design standard of 2 ft freeboard for a 50-year storm event. Please refer to Table 3 for a summary of the flow rates along with their corresponding WSEL, and freeboards.

Table 3: Water Surface Elevation Summary

Event Flow (cfs)

WSEL

(ft)

Freeboard (ft)

25-year 1160 362.12 3.31 50-year 1450 362.87 2.56 100-year 1790 363.67 1.76

Bank Stabilization Analysis:

Bank Stabilization analysis for a 25-year storm event was performed based on the Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey (NJ SESC), 7th Edition, January 2014, Chapter 22, per NJ DEP guidance. Riprap was designed using the Hydraulic Toolbox v4.4.

software and it was based on the Federal Highway Administration, Hydraulic Engineering Circular No.11 Design of Riprap Revetment (1989) design criteria, which is one of the approved methodologies listed on Table 16-2, Chapter 16, of the NRCS Engineering Field Manual, Streambank and Shoreline Protection.

The natural channel has a profile gradient of 0.0136. Site velocities and flow depths shown in Table 4 were computed using SMS Version 13.0.8’s (SRH-2D) and a manning’s value of 0.025.

USGS Web Soil Survey indicates the type of soil at the site is a combination of high organic soils (PT) and lean clay (CL). Per NJ SESC Chapter 26, the use of bioengineering is not a feasible alternative when the streambank velocity is greater than the allowable soil velocity shown in Table 26-2. Therefore, the use of bioengineering is not feasible at this site and a structure measurement such as riprap is required.

Table 4: Velocities and Water Depth Summary

Location Flow depth

(ft)

Velocity (ft/s)

NE Wingwall 4.9 9 South upstream channel bank

4.9 9

South downstream channel bank

4.0 10

SW Wingwall 4.0 10

CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

During the pre-application meeting, NJDEP expressed their preference of using river rock over riprap due aesthetic reasons. In addition, NPS also prefers to use native stone to complements the landscape because they consider quarried rock tends to be white or light gray. However, based on the NPS input after the pre-application meeting, angular native stones do not exist in the area.

EFL will be open to the use of river rocks as long as the materials quality and gradation requirements in FHWA HEC 11, Section 4.2 Gradation, and Section 4.5 Material Quality are met.

EFL also considers that angular material has the best performance for streambanks stabilization.

FHWA HEC 11 Section 4.5 states round material can be used as riprap if placed on slopes flatter than 3:1. However, based on the mapping the existing banks slopes are 1:1 at the NE Wingwall, 1.5:1 at the south upstream channel bank, 1.2:1 at the SW Wingwall, and 0.2:1 at the south downstream channel bank. Grading the banks to a slope 3:1 to use round material would result in a greater disturbance than the NJDEP consider to be acceptable based on the Flood Hazard rule of only 10 square feet of riparian zone vegetation disturbance per linear foot. Therefore, the use of round material is not recommended at this site.

During the 70% PIH site visit, NPS expressed concerns on the extend of riprap and their desire to combine riprap with bioengineering methods at the SW Wingwall and south downstream channel bank. However, as previously mentioned, bioengineering is not a feasible alternative. Our EFL Environment team also expressed permitting concerns and desire to reduce the amount of fill at this location. As a result, stream stabilization is no longer recommended at the downstream channel bank since based on existing topography, and steep slopes proposing riprap at a maximum slope of 1.5:1 cannot be achieved without fill or significant disturbance beyond the existing top of bank. Therefore, we will only recommend riprap behind the SW wingwall to reduce potential erosion due roadway runoff.

NPS also expressed their concerns on the extend of riprap at the south upstream channel bank and NE Wingwall. During the site visit, it was agreed based on field observations not to provide stream stabilization along the south upstream bank and to reduce the end of riprap limits at the NE Wingwall. Since there is existing riprap in place in front of the SE wingwall and abutment, we will only recommend riprap behind the SE wingwall to address the severe sloughing due roadway runoff.

For the reasons mentioned previously, we recommend placing angular riprap class 4 behind the southeast and southwest wingwall and riprap class 7 at the northeast wingwall. Please refer to table 5 for the riprap summary. A 6-in thickness course of AASHTO No. 57 stone should be place under all riprap and over the geotextile, per NJ DEP design criteria. The cross-sectional flow area will not be reduced. Please refer to Attachment 9 for the riprap typical section and Attachment 10 for the plan view of the riprap layout.

CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

Table 5: Riprap Summary

Location Riprap Class

Riprap thickness

(in)

Maximum slope V:H

NE Wingwall 7 48 1.5:1 SE Wingwall 4 30 1.5:1 SW Wingwall 4 30 1.5:1

Please contact us if you should have any questions or concerns.

Attachments:

Vancampens Glen Bridge

1. USGS Streamstats:

M:\PROJECTS\dewa\10(6)_218(2)\Techserv\Hydra\Reports\Scour\Rev2\Attachmen ts\Attachment 6 Vancampers StreamStats.pdf

2. NSS Results:

ts\Attachment 7 Vancampers NSS.pdf

3. USGS Web Soil Survey:

ts\Attachment 8_Vancampers_Unified_Soil_Classification.pdf

4. SMS WSEL’s Cross Section:

ts\Attachment 9 Existing Vancampens Glen WSELs.pdf

5. Drainage Areas:

M:\PROJECTS\dewa\10(6)_218(2)\Techserv\Hydra\Reports\Scour\Rev2\Attachments\Attac hments\Attachment 10 Vancampers Drainage Areas.pdf

6. NE Riprap Analysis Hydraulic Toolbox v4.4 Results:

ts\Attachments\Attachment 11 NE Wingwall Toolbox Results.pdf

7. SE Riprap Analysis Hydraulic Toolbox v4.4 Results:

ts\Attachments\Attachment 12 SE Wingwall Hyd Toolbox Report.pdf

8. SW Riprap Analysis Hydraulic Toolbox v4.4 Results:

ts\Attachments\Attachment 13 SW Wingwall Hyd Toolbox Report.pdf

CC: Hydraulics, Geotech, Env, HD Engineer, TS Engineer, Bridge

9. Riprap Typical Sections:

ts\Attachment 14_Vancampers_Riprap_Typical Sections.pdf

10. Riprap Plan View:

ts\Attachment 15 Vancampers_Riprap Layout.pdf

11. Riprap Dimensions:

ts\Attachment 16 Vancampers Riprap Dimensions.pdf

12. Prop Contours:

ts\Attachment 17 Vancampers Prop Contours.pdf

13. CADD (Prop Contours and Riprap Layout):

ts\Attachment 18 02-dewa10(6)_map_Vancampers Bridge.dgn

Vancampens Glen Bridge StreamStats Report

Vancampens Glen Bridge 4320-041P Rte 10,Old Mine Road 41.058039, -75.000997

Basin Characteristics

Parameter Code Parameter Description Value Unit

DRNAREA Area that drains to a point on a stream 7.62 square miles

STORAGE Percentage of area of storage (lakes ponds reservoirs wetlands) 2.79 percent

CSL10_85 Change in elevation divided by length between points 10 and 85 percent of distance along main channel to basin divide - main channel method not known

140 feet per mi

POPDENS Basin Population Density 28.3 persons per square mile

APRAVPRE Mean April Precipitation 4.09 inches

FOREST Percentage of area covered by forest 77.3 percent

JUNAVPRE Mean June Precipitation 4.54 inches

LC11DEV Percentage of developed (urban) land from NLCD 2011 classes 21-24 1.63 percent

LC11IMP Average percentage of impervious area determined from NLCD 2011 impervious dataset 0.0345 percent

PERMSSUR Area-weighted average soil permeability from NRCS SSURGO database 0.65 inches per hour

Peak-Flow Statistics Parameters [Peak Valley and Ridge Region 2009 5167]

Parameter Code Parameter Name Value Units Min Limit Max Limit

DRNAREA Drainage Area 7.62 square miles 0.87 763

STORAGE Percent Storage 2.79 percent 2.36 30.1

CSL10_85 Stream Slope 10 and 85 Method 140 feet per mi 2.56 268

POPDENS Basin Population Density 28.3 persons per square mile 35 1493

Region ID: NJ Workspace ID: NJ20190201203239639000 Clicked Point (Latitude, Longitude): 41.05808, -75.00087 Time: 2019-02-01 15:32:53 -0500

Page 2 of 3StreamStats

2/1/2019https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/

Attachment 1: StreamStats Results DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Glen Bridge

Peak-Flow Statistics Disclaimers [Peak Valley and Ridge Region 2009 5167]

One or more of the parameters is outside the suggested range. Estimates were extrapolated with unknown errors

Peak-Flow Statistics Flow Report [Peak Valley and Ridge Region 2009 5167]

Statistic Value Unit

2 Year Peak Flood 315 ft^3/s

5 Year Peak Flood 572 ft^3/s

10 Year Peak Flood 796 ft^3/s

25 Year Peak Flood 1140 ft^3/s

50 Year Peak Flood 1430 ft^3/s

100 Year Peak Flood 1770 ft^3/s

500 Year Peak Flood 2720 ft^3/s

Peak-Flow Statistics Citations

Watson, K.M.,and Schopp, R.D.,2009, Methodology for estimation of flood magnitude and frequency for New Jersey streams, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5167, 51 p. (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5167/)

USGS Data Disclaimer: Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty.

USGS Software Disclaimer: This software has been approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Although the software has been subjected to rigorous review, the USGS reserves the right to update the software as needed pursuant to further analysis and review. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the

USGS or the U.S. Government as to the functionality of the software and related material nor shall the fact of release constitute any such warranty. Furthermore, the software is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.

USGS Product Names Disclaimer: Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Application Version: 4.3.0

Page 3 of 3StreamStats

2/1/2019https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/

NSS Vancampens Glen Bridge.txt National Streamflow Statistics Program Version 6.1 Based on Techniques and Methods Book 4-A6 Equations from database H:\Team_Folders\Tech_Services\Hydro\NSS_v6.mdb Updated by tkoenig 5/9/2014 1:49:13 PM Add new StatLabels for NJ 2014_5012, KS

2004_5032, MT, RI 2014_5010

Site: Vancampens Glen Bridge, New_Jersey User: FC Date: Friday, February 01, 2019 04:10 PM

Equations for New_Jersey developed using English units

Rural Estimate: Rural 1 Basin Drainage Area: 7.62 square miles 1 Region

Region: Peak_Valley_and_Ridge_Region_2009_5167 (none) Drainage_Area = 7.62 square miles Percent_Storage = 2.79 percent Stream_Slope_10_and_85_Method = 140 feet per mi Basin_Population_Density = 35 persons per square mile

Crippen & Bue Region 4

Results for: Rural 1

Equations used:

PK2 = 13.8*DRNAREA^0.753*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.054)*CSL10_85^0.251*(POPDENS+1)^0.127

PK5 = 28.5*DRNAREA^0.741*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.084)*CSL10_85^0.254*(POPDENS+1)^0.104

PK10 = 42*DRNAREA^0.736*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.104)*CSL10_85^0.258*(POPDENS+1)^0.092

PK25 = 63.6*DRNAREA^0.732*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.127)*CSL10_85^0.263*(POPDENS+1)^0.079

PK50 = 83.2*DRNAREA^0.729*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.144)*CSL10_85^0.267*(POPDENS+1)^0.07

PK100 = 106*DRNAREA^0.728*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.158)*CSL10_85^0.271*(POPDENS+1)^0.062

PK500 = 176*DRNAREA^0.725*(STORAGE+1)^(-0.189)*CSL10_85^0.278*(POPDENS+1)^0.043

Value, Standard Equivalent Statistic cfs Error, % Years

PK2 323 50 1

PK5 584 51 2

PK10 811 52 3

PK25 1160 55 4

PK50 1450 57 5

PK100 1790 60 5

PK500 2750 66 6

maximum: 18900 (for C&B region 4)

Attachment 2: NSS Results

DEWA 10(6) 218(2)

Vancampers Glen Bridge isis.rosado-vazquez Highlight isis.rosado-vazquez Highlight isis.rosado-vazquez Highlight isis.rosado-vazquez Rectangle

Unified Soil Classification (Surface)—Warren County, New Jersey (DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Soil Map)

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

3/13/2020

499890 499900 499910 499920 499930 499940 499950 499960 499970 499980 499990

499890 499900 499910 499920 499930 499940 499950 499960 499970 499980 499990

41° 3' 30'' N

' 5 '' W

41° 3' 30'' N

' 0 '' W

41° 3' 28'' N

' 5 '' W

41° 3' 28'' N

' 0 '' W

N

Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS84 0 20 40 80 120

Feet 0 5 10 20 30

Meters Map Scale: 1:505 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Attachment 3: USGS Web Soil Survey

DEWA 10(6) 218(2)

Vancampers Glen Bridge

MAP LEGEND

Area of Interest (AOI)

Area of Interest (AOI)

Soils Soil Rating Polygons

CH

CL

CL-A (proposed)

CL-K (proposed)

CL-ML

CL-O (proposed)

CL-T (proposed)

GC

GC-GM

GM

GP

GP-GC

GP-GM

GW

GW-GC

GW-GM

MH

MH-A (proposed)

MH-K (proposed)

MH-O (proposed)

MH-T (proposed)

ML

ML-A (proposed)

ML-K (proposed)

ML-O (proposed)

ML-T (proposed)

OH

OH-T (proposed)

OL

PT

SC

SC-SM

SM

SP

SP-SC

SP-SM

SW

SW-SC

SW-SM

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Lines

CH

CL

CL-A (proposed)

CL-K (proposed)

CL-ML

CL-O (proposed)

CL-T (proposed)

GC

GC-GM

GM

GP

GP-GC

GP-GM

GW

GW-GC

GW-GM

MH

MH-A (proposed)

MH-K (proposed)

MH-O (proposed)

MH-T (proposed)

ML

ML-A (proposed)

ML-K (proposed)

ML-O (proposed)

ML-T (proposed)

OH

OH-T (proposed)

OL

PT

SC

SC-SM

SM

SP

SP-SC

SP-SM

SW

SW-SC

SW-SM

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Points

CH

CL

CL-A (proposed)

CL-K (proposed)

CL-ML

CL-O (proposed)

CL-T (proposed)

GC

GC-GM

GM

GP

GP-GC

GP-GM

GW

GW-GC

GW-GM

MH

MH-A (proposed)

MH-K (proposed)

MH-O (proposed)

MH-T (proposed)

ML

ML-A (proposed)

ML-K (proposed)

ML-O (proposed)

ML-T (proposed)

OH

OH-T (proposed)

OL

PT

SC

SC-SM

SM

SP

SP-SC

SP-SM

SW

SW-SC

SW-SM

Not rated or not available

Water Features Streams and Canals

Transportation Rails

Unified Soil Classification (Surface)—Warren County, New Jersey (DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Soil Map)

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

3/13/2020

MAP INFORMATION

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

Background Aerial Photography

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:12,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Warren County, New Jersey Survey Area Data: Version 14, Sep 16, 2019

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 5, 2014—Oct 15, The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Unified Soil Classification (Surface)—Warren County, New Jersey (DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Soil Map)

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Unified Soil Classification (Surface)

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

PduoEb Paulins Kill-Otisville complex, 25 to 60 percent slopes, very stony

PT 0.2 44.8%

ScoA Scio silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes

CL 0.3 55.2%

Totals for Area of Interest 0.5 100.0%

Description

The Unified soil classification system classifies mineral and organic mineral soils for engineering purposes on the basis of particle-size characteristics, liquid limit, and plasticity index. It identifies three major soil divisions: (i) coarse-grained soils having less than 50 percent, by weight, particles smaller than 0.074 mm in diameter; (ii) fine-grained soils having 50 percent or more, by weight, particles smaller than 0.074 mm in diameter; and (iii) highly organic soils that demonstrate certain organic characteristics. These divisions are further subdivided into a total of 15 basic soil groups. The major soil divisions and basic soil groups are determined on the basis of estimated or measured values for grain-size distribution and Atterberg limits. ASTM D 2487 shows the criteria chart used for classifying soil in the Unified system and the 15 basic soil groups of the system and the plasticity chart for the Unified system.

The various groupings of this classification correlate in a general way with the engineering behavior of soils. This correlation provides a useful first step in any field or laboratory investigation for engineering purposes. It can serve to make some general interpretations relating to probable performance of the soil for engineering uses.

For each soil horizon in the database one or more Unified soil classifications may be listed. One is marked as the representative or most commonly occurring. The representative classification is shown here for the surface layer of the soil.

Rating Options

Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition

Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified

Tie-break Rule: Lower

Layer Options (Horizon Aggregation Method): Surface Layer (Not applicable)

Unified Soil Classification (Surface)—Warren County, New Jersey DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Soil Map

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Attachment 4:

Line

Attachment 5 : Draina e Areas

Vancampens Glen Bridge n i?

SW Wing

SE Wingwa/1 DA=0.12 ac

No scale

Hydraulic Analysis Report Project Data

Project Title: DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Site: Vancampers Bridge Project Date: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 Project Units: U.S. Customary Units Notes:

Riprap Analysis: NE Wingwall Notes:

Input Parameters Riprap Type: Revetment The channel is a natural channel Local Depth of Flow: 5.31 ft Riprap Shape is Rounded Stability Coefficient: 0.375 This value is updated by the selected Riprap Shape Blanket Thickness Coefficient: 1 Channel Cross-sectional Average Velocity: 9 ft/s Which is the Average Velocity with Spurs Centerline Radius of Curvature of Channel Bend: 150 ft Width of Water Surface at Upstream End of Channel Bend: 32.2814 ft Bank Angle: 1.5 :1 (H:V) .966 < Bank Angle < 4.011 The location of the revetment protection is on the inside of a bend Specific Gravity of Riprap: 2.65 Safety Factor: 1.1

Result Parameters Side slope Correction Factor: 0.717953 Velocity Distribution Coefficient: 1 Design Velocity: 12.5378 ft/s Design velocity never less than average channel velocity Computed D30: 19.1658 in Computed D50: 22.999 in isis.rosado-vazquez Text Box Attachment 6: NE Wingwall

Riprap Class Riprap Name: CLASS VII Riprap Class: VII The following values are an 'average' of the size fraction range for the selected riprap class.

d100: 49.5 in d85: 35 in d50: 25.5 in d15: 17.5 in

Project Title: DEWA 10(6) 218 (1) Site: Vancampers Glen Bridge

Project Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Project Units: U.S. Customary Units

Notes:

Rational Analysis: Rational Method Analysis US Wingwall

Notes:

Rational Method Input Parameters

Runoff Coefficient: 0.95

Basin Area: 0.1200 acres

Rainfall Intensity: 7.36 in/hr

Time of Concentration: 5.00 minutes

Recurrence Year: 25 year

Rational Method Results

Flowrate: 0.8 cfs

IDF Input Parameters

User Supplied Data

IDF Results

25 year IDF equation: i = 32.6386 / (Tc + 5.29083)^0.638898

Intensity: 7.3600 in/hr

Time of Concentration Input Parameters

Minimum Time of Concentration: 5.00 min

Computed Time of Concentration

Time of Concentration: 5.00 min

Sheet Flow Input Parameters

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft

Recommended length not to exceed 30 m. Maximum length is 90 m

Manning's n: 0.0000

See HDS-2 Table 2.1 isis.rosado-vazquez

Attachment 7: SE Wingwall

2 yr, 24 hr precip: 0.0000 in

Sheet Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Shallow Concentrated Flow Input Parameters

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft k: 0.0000

See HDS-2 Table 2.2

Shallow Concentrated Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Velocity: 0.0000 ft/s

HDS-2 equation 2.7

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Channel Flow Input Parameters

Define as: Channel Calculation

Channel Name: Local Channel Data

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft

Manning's n: 0.0000

Channel Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Velocity: 0.0000 ft/s

Determined by Channel or Curb & Gutter Calculator

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Total Time of Concentration

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Final Iterated Solution

Report for channel used in Time of Concentration calculations

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis

Notes:

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis US Wingwall

Input Parameters

Channel Type: Triangular

Side Slope 1 (Z1): 6.4000 ft/ft

Side Slope 2 (Z2): 0.3300 ft/ft

Longitudinal Slope: 0.3700 ft/ft

Manning's n: 0.0499

Lining Type: Rock Riprap - 300 mm (12-inch)

Flow: 1.0000 cfs

Result Parameters

Depth: 0.2619 ft

Area of Flow: 0.2309 ft^2

Wetted Perimeter: 1.9725 ft

Hydraulic Radius: 0.1170 ft

Average Velocity: 4.3317 ft/s

Top Width: 1.7628 ft

Froude Number: 2.1094

Critical Depth: 0.4940 ft

Critical Velocity: 1.2179 ft/s

Critical Slope: 0.0126 ft/ft

Critical Top Width: 17.82 ft

Calculated Max Shear Stress: 6.0474 lb/ft^2

Calculated Avg Shear Stress: 2.7022 lb/ft^2

Channel Lining Analysis: Channel Lining Design US Analysis

Lining Input Parameters

Channel Lining Type: Riprap, Cobble, or Gravel

D50: 1 ft

Riprap Specific Weight: 165 lb/ft^3

Water Specific Weight: 62.4 lb/ft^3

Riprap Shape is Rounded

Safety Factor: 1

Calculated Safety Factor: 1.32876

Lining Results

Angle of Repose: 39.25 degrees

Relative Flow Depth: 0.130963

Manning's n method: Bathurst

Manning's n: 0.0508023

Channel Bottom Shear Results

V*: 1.76652

Reynold's Number: 145154

Shield's Parameter: 0.114693 shear stress on channel bottom: 6.04736 lb/ft^2

Permissible shear stress for channel bottom: 10.0123 lb/ft^2 channel bottom is stable

Stable D50: 0.802566 ft

Channel Side Shear Results

K1: 1

K2: 1

Kb: 0 shear stress on side of channel: 6.04736 lb/ft^2

Permissible shear stress for side of channel: 10.0123 lb/ft^2

Stable Side D50: 0.802566 lb/ft^2 side of channel is stable

Channel Lining Stability Results the channel is stable

Channel Summary

Name of Selected Channel: Channel Analysis US Wingwall

Project Title: DEWA 10(6) 218(1) Site: Vancampers Glen Bridge

Project Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Project Units: U.S. Customary Units

Notes:

Rational Analysis: Rational Method Analysis DS Wingwall

Notes:

Rational Method Input Parameters

Runoff Coefficient: 0.95

Basin Area: 0.0900 acres

Rainfall Intensity: 7.36 in/hr

Time of Concentration: 5.00 minutes

Recurrence Year: 25 year

Rational Method Results

Flowrate: 0.6 cfs

IDF Input Parameters

User Supplied Data

IDF Results

25 year IDF equation: i = 32.6386 / (Tc + 5.29083)^0.638898

Intensity: 7.3600 in/hr

Time of Concentration Input Parameters

Minimum Time of Concentration: 5.00 min

Computed Time of Concentration

Time of Concentration: 5.00 min

Sheet Flow Input Parameters

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft

Recommended length not to exceed 30 m. Maximum length is 90 m

Manning's n: 0.0000

See HDS-2 Table 2.1

Attachment 8: SW Wingwall

2 yr, 24 hr precip: 0.0000 in

Sheet Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Shallow Concentrated Flow Input Parameters

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft k: 0.0000

See HDS-2 Table 2.2

Shallow Concentrated Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Velocity: 0.0000 ft/s

HDS-2 equation 2.7

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Channel Flow Input Parameters

Define as: Channel Calculation

Channel Name: Local Channel Data

Top Elevation: 0.00 ft

Bottom Elevation: 0.00 ft

Length: 0.00 ft

Manning's n: 0.0000

Channel Flow Results

Slope: 0.0000 ft/ft

Velocity: 0.0000 ft/s

Determined by Channel or Curb & Gutter Calculator

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Total Time of Concentration

Time of Concentration: 0.00 min

Final Iterated Solution

Report for channel used in Time of Concentration calculations

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis

Channel Analysis: Channel Analysis DS Wingwall

Input Parameters

Channel Type: Trapezoidal

Side Slope 1 (Z1): 1.0800 ft/ft

Side Slope 2 (Z2): 4.5700 ft/ft

Channel Width: 0.0270 ft

Longitudinal Slope: 0.6600 ft/ft

Manning's n: 0.0344

Lining Type: Rock Riprap - 300 mm (12-inch)

Flow: 1.0000 cfs

Result Parameters

Depth: 0.2116 ft

Area of Flow: 0.1322 ft^2

Wetted Perimeter: 1.3283 ft

Hydraulic Radius: 0.0995 ft

Average Velocity: 7.5652 ft/s

Top Width: 1.2225 ft

Froude Number: 4.0544

Critical Depth: 0.3740 ft

Critical Velocity: 2.4678 ft/s

Critical Slope: 0.0335 ft/ft

Critical Top Width: 2.14 ft

Calculated Max Shear Stress: 8.7139 lb/ft^2

Calculated Avg Shear Stress: 4.0985 lb/ft^2

Channel Lining Analysis: Channel Lining Design Analysis DS Wingwall Class 4

Notes:

Lining Input Parameters

Channel Lining Type: Riprap, Cobble, or Gravel

D50: 1.25 ft

Riprap Specific Weight: 165 lb/ft^3

Water Specific Weight: 62.4 lb/ft^3

Riprap Shape is Rounded

Safety Factor: 1

Calculated Safety Factor: 1.50016

Lining Results

Angle of Repose: 39.6 degrees

Relative Flow Depth: 0.0865035

Manning's n method: Bathurst

Manning's n: 0.0343818

Channel Bottom Shear Results

V*: 2.12052

Reynold's Number: 217802

Shield's Parameter: 0.15 shear stress on channel bottom: 8.71394 lb/ft^2

Permissible shear stress for channel bottom: 13.3736 lb/ft^2 channel bottom is stable

Stable D50: 1.22184 ft

Channel Side Shear Results

K1: 0.97162

K2: 1

Kb: 0 shear stress on side of channel: 8.71394 lb/ft^2

Permissible shear stress for side of channel: 13.3736 lb/ft^2

Stable Side D50: 1.18716 lb/ft^2 side of channel is stable

Channel Lining Stability Results the channel is stable

Channel Summary

Name of Selected Channel: Channel Analysis DS Wingwall

Attachment 9a: NE Wingwall DEWA 10(6) 218(2) Vancampers Glen Bridge

Toe of the bank

Varies ±0 - ±5.5'

Varies ±6.8 - ±7.5'

I

I

Coarse Aggregate #57, 6" depth

Geotextile filter, class 1, type C

I

I

I

I

I

I

I r

I

Class 7 Riprap, 48" depth

Attachment 9b: SE Wingwall

Vancampers Glen Bridge

-◄ 7.5' ►

Class 4 Riprap, D50=15" 30" depth

13. a r-� I f \

Coarse Aggregate #57, 6" depth

Geotextile filter, class 1, type C

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Wingwall

Note:

Place ri{lrap at a longitudinal slope of 1.5: 1 or flatter.

I-

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

_j

I

I I

Attach ment 9c: SW Wingwall

Vancampers Glen Bridge

CV')

V) -H

QJ I

Class 4 Riprap,D50=15" 30" depth

Varies ±6

- ±11

Coarse Aggregate #57, 6" depth (typ.)

Geotextile filter, class 1, type C

Toe of the bank

SW Wingwa/1 \Y. isturbance, L=32� Area '306 sqft

'·,. R • rap Class 4, L=20� AreaT 120 sqft Rip rian, L,max=23� W,ma..; = 7� Area=73 sqft '-, xisting __ -----rip,:ifl-p-

�o��----

• .r,.e --,, o�o. ---

Legend:

I

Disturbance Area

Proposed Riprap Area

Riprarian Area

�£?, L= ' 32 sqft ��C,..._'f ..... a = tJz-5 a-FtF, •·· 1 ······ .. -isis.rosado-vazquez

A tfacb men t 16 : Ri rap Dimensions DEWA 'lQl6) 218(2 Vancampens_ Glen ridge

----�-:,._; \' �i , ',-,":::-----..... '---._ '----- /

'--..._ I '.Zo�� � "', / 7, ,, i '--- /

/4

0,\ ,'Y \,_--.........._, / '

::: "-==---r-;,""'4! \ - >-,-:?.,,..____, // /4 '" ,, • ' /4 '"

-c,,a,,,_x-,,,,.. '--.........._ ' " ...., "c----ff':>'-1

2'-4 1 716 - 49" w N89° 28'Jfi'.!-W----

Existing riprap

/1/ ,, // "',,, 1/" \ I "'-

�\ _f_-(.1�;7•�··1.\�.,>--.-_�,, \ !f !i \

/ /� /------� \�:> o �<L_,"_ \

/ u'

SE Wingwa/1

__,...--r tr__,.

__,...--r

__,...--r-

Vancampens Brook

\ No Scale isis.rosado-vazquez