Memorandum

To: Margaret Lang

From: Enrique Diaz, James Lonergan
Date: Wednesday March 6, 2013
Subject: StormCAD Lab 2
The purpose of this memo is to analyze the hydraulic performance of the storm water
system (Figure 1), under the 310-meter and 312-meter tailwater conditions during the
following rainfall intensity return periods: 2-, 10-, and 100-yr.

Figure 1: Storm water system.

Conclusions

From the results of the simulation, we observed that the system worked best under
pressurized conditions. No hydraulic jumps would occur under pressurized conditions,
thereby reducing possible erosion effects. Therefore, we recommend material reinforcing
in pipes P-2 and P-3 to account for possible erosion from turbulent flow regimes, which
occurred under the 310-meter tailwater condition during the 2- and 10-yr. storm events.
Increasing the diameter of P-2 to 600-mm is recommended to avoid flooding, which
occurred at I-3 during the 100-yr. & 312-meter tailwater conditions.

Simulation Analysis

The system was partially pressurized and contained regions of rapidly varying flow under
the 310-meter tailwater and the 2-year return period (Addendum, Figure 2). A slope of
0.02 was observed between I-3 and I-2 causing a hydraulic jump, and the hydraulic grade
line (HGL) to be above the height of the pipe (Addendum, Figure 2). Increasing the pipe
diameter at I-2, from 300-mm to 525-mm, prevented the pipes downstream from
pressurizing, even though a hydraulic also occurred in the P-3 section of pipe. The
hydraulic jumps observed in sections P2 and P3, could cause increased erosion to the
system.
The HGL was above the pipe elevation with a tailwater depth to 312-meters. The latter
caused the pipes to flow full thereby pressurizing the system (Addendum, Figure 3).
Regions of rapidly varying flow were not observed under the higher tailwater elevation
scenario. Increasing the tailwater elevation decreased the friction slope at all sections of
the system (Table 1). Therefore, raising the tailwater elevation reduced energy losses in
the system. Similar results were observed for the 10 yr. and 100 yr. storm events.
Table 1: Friction slope under 310-meter and 312-meter tailwater elevations.

Start
Node
I-3
I-2
I-4

Stop
Node
I-2
I-4
O-1

310-m tailwater
friction Slope (m/m)
0.013
0.013
0.005

312-m tailwater
friction Slope (m/m)
0.008
0.002
0.004

The system was mostly pressurized and contained one region with a S-2 water surface
profile, observed under the 310-meter tailwater depth and a 10-year return period
scenario. At I-2 the diameter of the pipe was increased causing a hydraulic jump
(Addendum, Figure 4). The supercritical region in P-3 was the only section of pipe that
was not flowing full; the rest of he system was pressurized. Increasing the tailwater depth
to 312-meters entirely pressurized the system and reduced the area of turbulence
observed in P-3 under the 310-meter tailwater condition.
Testing the system under the 100-year return period pressurized the system entirely for
both tailwater elevations. At I-3 the depth of the water nearly rose above ground
elevation (Addendum Figure 6) under the 310-meter tailwater depth. However, raising
the tailwater elevation to 312 meters caused the HGL of the pipe to be above the ground
elevation and flooded inlet I-3 (Addendum, Figure 7).

Addendum
314.50
HGL
314.00

EGL

313.50

Elevation (m)

313.00

312.50

312.00

311.50

311.00

310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 2: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 310-meter tailwater condition with a 2-yr. return period.

314.50
HGL
314.00

EGL

313.50

Elevation (m)

313.00

312.50

312.00

311.50

311.00

310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 3: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 312-meter tailwater condition with a 2-yr. return period.

314.50
HGL
314.00

EGL

313.50

Elevation (m)

313.00

312.50

312.00

311.50

311.00

310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 4: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 310-meter tailwater condition with a 10-yr. return
period.

314.50
HGL
314.00

EGL

313.50

Elevation (m)

313.00

312.50

312.00

311.50

311.00

310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 5: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 312-meter tailwater condition with a 10-yr. return
period.

315.00

314.50

HGL
EGL

314.00

Elevation (m)

313.50

313.00

312.50

312.00

311.50

311.00

310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 6: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 310-meter tailwater condition with a 100-yr. return
period.

315.50
HGL

315.00

EGL

314.50
314.00

Elevation (m)

313.50
313.00
312.50
312.00
311.50
311.00
310.50

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

Station (m)

Figure 7: results of the system I-3 to O-1 under 312-meter tailwater condition with a 100-yr. return
period.