GENERIC PIT INLET CAPACITY RELATIONSHIPS

Version 2, July 2005

This spreadsheet determines relationships that apply to pits in general, rather than particular types.
Its purpose is to define suitable relationships to be applied in the DRAINS program (see www.watercom.com.au).

The relationships are based on theoretical relationships such as the geometry of flow cross-sections and weir and orifice equa
Their source is Hydraulic Engineering Circular 22 of the US Federal Highway Administration, (2nd Edition, 2003),
which is available from www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/hyd.htm.

The material also includes comparisons between these "generic" relationships and specific relationships for particular types of
in the 'Checks' worksheet. You should review these to understand the suitability of the method to your needs.
Step by step instructions for using the spreadsheet macros are given with the sheets.
To see the full 18 cell width of the spreadsheet, you may need a higher screen resolution.

This version differs from Version 1 in two main respects:

(a) The macros for sag inlets and on-grade inlets have been consolidated into a single macro. Grate only and Kerb Inlet only
be modelled by giving zero dimensions for the other type of pit.
(b) Checks have been added to prevent relationships 'curling over' and giving decreasing capacities as approach flows or pon
In some cases this will result in capacities of grated inlets becoming constant as flows increase.
(c) An error in adjusting for the gutter face slope in on-grade pits in gutters has been corrected. This had a small effect.
(d) Allowance has been made for different gutter crossfalls in normal gutters and at a pit. Formerly these were treated as bein
(e) Changes have been made to selection procedures for sag combination inlets, with the choice being between weir and orifi
The Visual Basic macros are present in this sheet, but access is password-protected. If you need to know their contents
contact Geoffrey O'Loughlin on 0438 280 477 or Anstad@tpgi.com.au.

Disclaimer
This spreadsheet and the Visual Basic macros included are supplied to users of the DRAINS program
by Anstad Pty Ltd on the basis that the user will check the validity of the results obtained and methods used.
The results of checks made by the developer are included in the 'Checks' worksheet, and further tests
can be made by varying the program inputs.
Anstad Pty Ltd does not accept liability for loss or damage of any kind claimed to arise either directly or
indirectly from use of this spreadsheet.

ww.watercom.com.au).

s-sections and weir and orifice equations.

n, (2nd Edition, 2003),

c relationships for particular types of pits,

ethod to your needs.

cro. Grate only and Kerb Inlet only pits can

capacities as approach flows or ponding depths increase.

cted. This had a small effect.

Formerly these were treated as being the same.
choice being between weir and orifice flows.

ou need to know their contents

nd methods used.
urther tests

er directly or

SAG PIT INLETS IN STREET GUTTERS AND IN SWALES

HEC22 covers these in Section 4.4.5, dealing with grate inlets, kerb inlets, slotted inlets and combination (grate + kerb inlet) in
In Section 4 it also deals with grated inlets in ditches or swales in the medians or verges of highways.

The grated inlets it specifies are those tested in the Bicycle-Safe Inlets study from the 1980s, which are described in Section 4
Note - The Visual Basic macros select data from specific cells - do not add or delete rows or columns in this sheet.

Grated Inlets
For Grate Only Capacities enter zero Kerb Inlet Length in the Combination Inlet calculations located below.

Kerb Inlets
For Kerb Inlet Only Capacities enter zero grate dimensions in the Combination Inlet calculations located below.

Combination (Kerb Inlet + Grate) Inlets

The directions in Section 4.4.5.4 of HEC22 are followed, though there is some ambiguity. Equation 4-28 was not applied.
It is assumed that the weir capacity will be that of the grate, plus that of the part of the kerb inlet opening that is
The orifice capacity is the combination of both grate and kerb inlet flows, as in Equation 4-35.
The selected inflow is the lesser of these, unless the depth of ponding is less than 1.4 times the slot height of the kerb inlet.
(However, it is very unlikely that the orifice inlet capacity would be less than the kerb inlet capacity in this range.)
1. Inputs - Enter appropriate values in the green cells and press the Calculate button.
Length of Kerb Opening (m)
Inlet Slot Height (m)
Angle of Opening (90o vertical, 0o horizontal)

1
0.1
80

Length of Grate, L (m)

Width of Grate, W (m)
Perimeter of Grate (m)

(see HEC22 Figure 4-18)

Grate Opening Ratio (%)

Gutter Crossfall at Inlet (%)
Area of Grate Opening (m2)

2. Captured flowrates are given in the following table for the set of flowrates entered in the first column, which can be
Eqn. 4-30 Eqn. 4-26
Eqn. 4-31 Eqn. 4-27
Kerb Inlet
Grate
Total
Kerb Inlet
Grate
Total
Weir
Weir
Weir
Orifice
Orifice
Orifice
Capacity* Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m3/s)

Selected
Total
Inlet
Capacity
(m3/s)

0.8
0.7
t capacity (m 3/s )

Depth of
Ponding
at Kerb
(m)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

0.8

0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6

0
0.0016
0.004525
0.008314
0.0128
0.017889
0.023515
0.029632
0.036204
0.0432
0.050596
0.066511
0.083813
0.1024
0.122188
0.143108
0.2
0.262907
0.3313
0.404772
0.482991
0.565685
0.652625
0.743613

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0.0016
0.004525
0.008314
0.0128
0.017889
0.023515
0.029632
0.036204
0.0432
0.050596
0.066511
0.083813
0.1024
0.122188
0.143108
0.2
0.262907
0.3313
0.404772
0.482991
0.565685
0.652625
0.743613

0
0
0
0
0
0.008175
0.030768
0.042738
0.052023
0.059885
0.066829
0.078903
0.089361
0.098717
0.10726
0.115172
0.132905
0.148536
0.162672
0.175674
0.187778
0.199148
0.209902
0.220132

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0.008175
0.030768
0.042738
0.052023
0.059885
0.066829
0.078903
0.089361
0.098717
0.10726
0.115172
0.132905
0.148536
0.162672
0.175674
0.187778
0.199148
0.209902
0.220132

Inlet capacity (m 3/s )

0.7
0.6

0
0.5
0.0016
0.004525
0.4
0.008314
0.3
0.0128
0.017889
0.2
0.023515
0.1
0.029632
0.036204
0
0.0432
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.050596
Ponding
0.066511
T otal Weir Capac ity
0.083813
Selec ted Capac ity
0.098717
0.10726
0.115172
0.132905 * Use of Equation 4-28 was explo
0.148536
because it operates over an ill-d
0.162672
the combined capacity to decrea
0.175674
The standard Equation 4-30 for
0.187778
0.199148
0.209902
0.220132

Slotted Inlets
The relationships used come from Section 4.4.5.3 of HEC22.
These calculations are straightforward and are made by simple spreadsheet equations instead of a Visual Basic macro.
1. Inputs - Enter appropriate values in the green cells and the cells below will change.
Length of Slot (m)
Width of Slot (m)

3.66
0.045

2. Captured flowrates are given in the following table for the flowrates entered in the first column, which can be varied
Depth of Eqn. 4-32 Eqn. 4-33 (Minimum)
Ponding
Weir
Orifice
Inlet
over Slot Capacity Capacity Capacity
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
(m)
0
0.001812
0.005124
0.009413
0.014493

0
0.041247
0.058333
0.071443
0.082495

0
0.001812
0.005124
0.009413
0.014493

14

Inlet Capacity (m 3/s )

0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02

16

12
10
8
6
4
2

0.026625
0.040992
0.057288
0.105245
0.162035
0.226451
0.297677
0.375117
0.458304
0.6405
0.841959
1.06099
1.296281
1.546778
1.811608
2.090033
2.38142
5.124
14.49286

0.101035
0.116665
0.130436
0.159751
0.184464
0.206237
0.225921
0.244023
0.260871
0.291663
0.319501
0.345101
0.368928
0.391307
0.412474
0.432606
0.451843
0.583326
0.824948

0.026625
0.040992
0.057288
0.105245
0.162035
0.206237
0.225921
0.244023
0.260871
0.291663
0.319501
0.345101
0.368928
0.391307
0.412474
0.432606
0.451843
0.583326
0.824948

Inlet Capacity (m 3/s )

0.03
0.04
0.05
0.075
0.1
0.125
0.15
0.175
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
1
2

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

Ponding De pth (m )
Weir Capac ity

Orific e Capac ity

Inlet Capac ity

"Typical" weir factors of 1.4 and orifice coefficients of 0.8 are used
- see Section 4.4.5.3 of HEC22.

d combination (grate + kerb inlet) inlets.

0s, which are described in Section 4.4.3.

or columns in this sheet.

ons located below.

ulations located below.

Equation 4-28 was not applied.

b inlet opening that is not adjacent to the grate.

es the slot height of the kerb inlet.

capacity in this range.)

0
0
0
90
3

Grate Opening Ratios

1 - Reticuline - 60% of total grate area
(L+2W for grate against kerb, 2L+2W for

2 - 30o-85 Tilt Bar - 34% of total area

grate in swale or unobstructed area

3 - P-50x100 - 80% of total area

see values to right and 'Grate Types' sheet

4 - 45o-85 Tilt Bar - 34% of total area

(0% for flat base of swale)

5 - Curved Vane - 35% of total area

6 - P-30 - 60% of total area

(calculated from above information

- can be overwritten)

7 - P-50 - 90% of total area

These are from Chart 9 in HEC22.
See the 'Grate Types' sheet for pictures of these grates.)

in the first column, which can be varied.

0.8

t capacity (m 3/s )

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

3. Inlet Capacity Relation

(coloured cells)
can be copied and
transferred to DRAINS
Depth of
Ponding
(m)

Inlet
Capacity
(m3/s)

0.8

Inlet capacity (m 3/s )

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Ponding De pth (m )
T otal Weir Capac ity

T otal Orific e Capac ity

Selec ted Capac ity

* Use of Equation 4-28 was explored, but it was not adopted

because it operates over an ill-defined range and can cause
the combined capacity to decrease as depth increases.
The standard Equation 4-30 for weir calculations is used.

tead of a Visual Basic macro.

first column, which can be varied.

3. Inlet Capacity Relation

(coloured cells)
can be copied and
transferred to DRAINS
Depth of
Ponding
(m)
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02

Inlet
Capacity
(m3/s)
0
0.001812
0.005124
0.009413
0.014493

0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6

0
0.0016
0.004525
0.008314
0.0128
0.017889
0.023515
0.029632
0.036204
0.0432
0.050596
0.066511
0.083813
0.098717
0.10726
0.115172
0.132905
0.148536
0.162672
0.175674
0.187778
0.199148
0.209902
0.220132

1.5

2.5

(m )

ty

Inlet Capac ity

orifice coefficients of 0.8 are used

0.03
0.04
0.05
0.075
0.1
0.125
0.15
0.175
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
1
2

0.026625
0.040992
0.057288
0.105245
0.162035
0.206237
0.225921
0.244023
0.260871
0.291663
0.319501
0.345101
0.368928
0.391307
0.412474
0.432606
0.451843
0.583326
0.824948

ON-GRADE PITS IN STREET GUTTERS

HEC22 covers this situation in its Section 4.4.4, dealing with grated inlets, kerb inlets, slotted inlets and combination (grate
In Section 4 it also deals with grated inlets in ditches or swales in the medians or verges of highways.
The grated inlets it specifies are those tested in the Bicycle-Safe Inlets study from the 1980s, and are described in Section

Grates

Grate Inlets on grade are assumed to collect a frontal flow, the flow that directly runs onto them, plus a side flow
the grate along its length. The calculations define an inlet capacity relationship for a rectangular grated pit in a street gutte
Equations 4.4 and 4.16 to 4.21 in HEC22. The spread of the flow is calculated using equations from Section 4.3.2, which
the street gutter flow calculations in Australian Rainfall and Runoff, 1987.
For Grate Only Capacities enter zero Kerb Inlet Length in the Combination Inlet calculations located below.

Kerb Inlets

Also Applies to Slotted Inlets 45 mm Wide and Over

Inlet capacities are calculated using relationships from Section 4.4.4.2 in HEC22.
For Kerb Inlet Only Capacities enter zero Grate Length in the Combination Inlet calculations located below.

Combination Inlets (Kerb Inlet + Grate)

Section 4.4.4.4 of HEC22 states that the capacity of a combination inlet should be the capacity of the grate plus the capac
portion of the kerb inlet that is upstream of the grate. The portion of the kerb inlet adjacent to the grate is ignored.
It is assumed that the grate is located at the lower end of the longer kerb inlet.
1. Inputs - Enter appropriate values in the yellow cells and press the 'Calculate' button.
Road Profile Characteristics
Road Crossfall or Side Slope (%)
Gutter Crossfall (%)
Longitudinal Grade (%)
Gutter Width (m) (low point to edge)
Half Road Width (incl. Gutter) (m)
Gutter Depth (Kerb Height) (m)
Gutter Face Slope (degrees)
Manning's n of Street
Manning's n of Gutter
Adjustment Factor

3
8
0.5
0.45
8
0.18
90
0.014
0.012
0.8

Inlet Characteristics
Total Kerb Inlet Length (m)
Gutter Crossfall at the Inlet (%)
Grate Length (m)
Grate Width (m)
Grate Type (1 to 7) - Sect. 4.4.3, HEC22

1.5
8
1
0.5
7

0o - flat, 90o - vertical

1.0 in HEC22; in Australian practice 0.8 for vertical gutter face, 0.9 for sloping face

2. Captured flowrates are given in the following table for the flowrates entered in the first column.
Flow Characteristics
Approach
Flow
Flow
Flowrate
Depth
Width
(m3/s)
(m)
(m)

0
0.005

Kerb Inlet Results

Required
Flow
Length Efficiency Captured
(m)
Ratio
by Inlet
(m3/s)

Grate Results
Velocity
Remaining
Flow
Difference
Flowrate
Velocity
(m/s)
3
(m/s)
(m /s)

0
0.0001
0
0
0
0
0.0428 0.67668323 0.970146 0.728536 0.003643 0.00135732 0.31299812

0
0

0.01
0.015
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.125
0.15
0.175
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.25
2.5

0.054294
0.062012
0.068049
0.077508
0.085001
0.091325
0.096857
0.101812
0.106323
0.11048
0.114348
0.123031
0.130657
0.137505
0.143752
0.154892
0.164689
0.173498
0.181541
0.188971
0.195895
0.208531
0.2199
0.230285
0.239882
0.24883
0.25723
0.265164
0.27271
0.279937
0.286892
0.29361
0.300119
0.306441
0.312594
0.318594
0.333004
0.346691

1.0598101
1.31707344
1.51830718
1.83359122
2.08336845
2.29415099
2.4785634
2.64372617
2.79409841
2.93268058
3.06159983
3.35104615
3.60522344
3.83348916
4.04174391
4.41305583
4.73964399
5.03326034
5.30136888
5.54902244
5.7798317
6.2010475
6.57999016
6.92617549
7.24607571
7.54432018
7.82434875
8.08881473
8.34034087
8.58123232
8.81306103
9.03699499
9.25395655
9.4646859
9.66979268
9.86978986
10.3501209
10.806383

1.368534
1.698824
1.987017
2.483121
2.909237
3.288417
3.633245
3.9515
4.248393
4.527621
4.79192
5.40003
5.949413
6.453865
6.922499
7.776216
8.544561
9.247964
9.899845
10.50957
11.08399
12.14649
13.11689
14.0145
14.85274
15.64136
16.38777
17.09768
17.77585
18.42619
19.0518
19.65522
20.23856
20.80362
21.35194
21.88484
23.15697
24.35442

0.55888
0.46606
0.40652
0.332836
0.287835
0.256865
0.233946
0.216133
0.201791
0.189932
0.179921
0.160454
0.146161
0.135107
0.126236
0.112748
0.102855
0.095206
0.089068
0.084001
0.079729
0.072872
0.067565
0.063301
0.059777
0.056802
0.054247
0.052022
0.05006
0.048312
0.046743
0.045323
0.044029
0.042845
0.041755
0.040748
0.038529
0.03665

0.005589
0.006991
0.00813
0.009985
0.011513
0.012843
0.014037
0.015129
0.016143
0.017094
0.017992
0.020057
0.021924
0.023644
0.025247
0.028187
0.030856
0.033322
0.035627
0.037801
0.039864
0.043723
0.047295
0.05064
0.053799
0.056802
0.059672
0.062426
0.065078
0.067637
0.070114
0.072516
0.07485
0.077121
0.079335
0.081496
0.08669
0.091626

0.0044112
0.0080091
0.01186959
0.02001491
0.02848661
0.03715673
0.04596324
0.05487072
0.06385674
0.0729061
0.0820079
0.10494328
0.12807589
0.15135627
0.17475277
0.22181305
0.26914353
0.31667777
0.36437295
0.4121994
0.46013569
0.55627678
0.65270454
0.7493596
0.84620058
0.94319758
1.04032789
1.13757391
1.23492226
1.33236262
1.42988574
1.52748381
1.62515011
1.72287874
1.82066491
1.9185041
2.16330966
2.40837401

0.41183466
0.44399568
0.4668507
0.50458437
0.53565031
0.56219417
0.58545816
0.60623515
0.62505895
0.64230555
0.65824956
0.69365698
0.72427613
0.75139439
0.77581793
0.81862855
0.85553086
0.88813537
0.91745549
0.94417048
0.96876556
1.01293433
1.05192029
1.08695436
1.11886108
1.14822388
1.17547107
1.20092738
1.2253902
1.25020766
1.27508986
1.29982412
1.32428885
1.34841228
1.37215436
1.39549518
1.45205438
1.50611162

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

ts and combination (grate + kerb inlet) inlets.

d are described in Section 4.4.3.

, plus a side flow that is captured by

grated pit in a street gutter, using
rom Section 4.3.2, which are equivalent to

cated below.

f the grate plus the capacity of the

e grate is ignored.

Set to zero for a grate only

Set to zero for a kerb inlet only

(see 'Grate Types' sheet)
1 - Reticuline

5 - Curved Vane

2 - 30o-85 Tilt Bar

6 - P-30

3 - P-50x100

7 - P-50

4 - 45 -85 Tilt Bar

o

ce, 0.9 for sloping face

3. Inlet Capacity Relation

can be copied and
transferred to DRAINS
Frontal
Flow
Ratio

Captured Captured Captured

Frontal
Side
Flow
Flow Ratio Flow Ratio
Ratio
(m3/s)
0
1

0
0
1 0.745655

Total
Flow
Total Flow
Captured Captured
(m3/s)
by Grate
(m3/s)

0
0
1 0.0013573

0.000000
0.005000

Approach Total Flow

Flowrate Captured
(m3/s)
(m3/s)
0.000
0.005

0.000
0.005

0.997014
0.940653
0.870136
0.75764
0.679214
0.62192
0.577956
0.542903
0.514119
0.489934
0.469234
0.428208
0.39738
0.37309
0.353287
0.32259
0.299577
0.281459
0.266692
0.25434
0.243798
0.226624
0.213093
0.202055
0.192815
0.184924
0.178076
0.172055
0.166702
0.161884
0.157505
0.153496
0.149801
0.146379
0.143195
0.140221
0.133556
0.127784

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

0.641438
0.60975
0.58805
0.553792
0.527089
0.505351
0.487107
0.471443
0.457752
0.445619
0.434744
0.411727
0.393033
0.377365
0.363936
0.341862
0.324236
0.309663
0.297306
0.286627
0.277256
0.261466
0.248553
0.237703
0.228396
0.220283
0.213118
0.206722
0.200833
0.195103
0.189592
0.184336
0.179343
0.17461
0.170128
0.165885
0.156224
0.147746

0.998929
0.97684
0.946503
0.891857
0.848297
0.812983
0.783537
0.758398
0.736532
0.717229
0.699981
0.66363
0.634229
0.609664
0.588649
0.554171
0.52668
0.503965
0.484709
0.468066
0.45346
0.428836
0.408681
0.391729
0.377173
0.364471
0.353243
0.34321
0.334055
0.325402
0.317236
0.309537
0.302278
0.29543
0.288962
0.282845
0.268916
0.256651

0.0044065
0.0078236
0.0112346
0.0178504
0.0241651
0.0302078
0.0360139
0.0416138
0.0470326
0.0522904
0.057404
0.0696435
0.0812295
0.0922765
0.102868
0.1229224
0.1417524
0.1595945
0.1766149
0.1929366
0.2086532
0.2385513
0.2667482
0.293546
0.3191641
0.3437684
0.3674881
0.3904262
0.4125324
0.4335541
0.4536108
0.4728123
0.4912474
0.50899
0.5261027
0.5426389
0.5817477
0.6181116

0.009995
0.014815
0.019365
0.027836
0.035678
0.043051
0.050051
0.056743
0.063176
0.069384
0.075396
0.089700
0.103154
0.115920
0.128115
0.151109
0.172609
0.192917
0.212242
0.230737
0.248517
0.282275
0.314044
0.344186
0.372963
0.400571
0.427160
0.452852
0.477610
0.501191
0.523725
0.545329
0.56609732
0.58611121
0.60543778
0.6241348
0.66843808
0.70973755

0.010
0.015
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.080
0.090
0.100
0.125
0.150
0.175
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
0.500
0.600
0.700
0.800
0.900
1.000
1.100
1.200
1.300
1.400
1.500
1.600

0.010
0.015
0.019
0.028
0.036
0.043
0.050
0.057
0.063
0.069
0.075
0.090
0.103
0.116
0.128
0.151
0.173
0.193
0.212
0.231
0.249
0.282
0.314
0.344
0.373
0.401
0.427
0.453
0.478
0.501
0.524
0.545

apacity Relation
copied and
rred to DRAINS

0.6

m3/s)

0.5

0.4

0.6

Inlet Capacity (m3/s)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0

0.5

1.5

Approach Flow (m3/s)

Total Capture

Kerb Inlet Capture

Grate Capture

2.5

ON-GRADE GRATES IN SWALES OR DITCHES

This sheet uses a method taken from Section 4.4.7 of HEC22, which deals with median, embankment and bridge inlets.
Grated sag inlets operate the same way as on streets, although there will probably be a greater perimeter length
because the grate is not located against a kerb. Use the 'Sag Inlets' worksheet to calculate sag relationships.

It is assumed that the swale is trapezoidal, including rectangular and triangular channels, though the method can be adapted t
1. Inputs - Enter appropriate values in the blue cells, and press the 'Calculate' button.
Channel Base Width (m)
Channel Side Slope (1:?) V:H
Channel Depth (m)
Manning's n of Channel
Longitudinal Grade (%)

1.2
6
1
0.03
2

Inward Slope of Base (%)

Width of grate (m)

Length of grate (m)
Grate Type (1 to 7) - Sect. 4.4.3, HEC22

(used when base width exceeds grate width)

2. Captured flowrates are given in the following table for the flowrates entered in the first column.

0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.125
0.15
0.175
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35

Flow
Depth
(m)

Flow
Width
(m)

Flow
Velocity
(m)

Captured Total Flow

Flow
Captured
Ratio
(m3/s)

0
0.014594
0.021903
0.027638
0.032636
0.041164
0.04845
0.054916
0.060784
0.066192
0.071229
0.07596
0.080433
0.0907
0.099948
0.108414
0.116257
0.130487
0.138285
0.154842

0
1.375132
1.46284
1.53166
1.591627
1.693967
1.781401
1.858987
1.929408
1.9943
2.054748
2.111523
2.165193
2.288405
2.399378
2.500973
2.595086
2.765848
2.859423
3.058105

0
0.266082
0.342905
0.397359
0.439047
0.503664
0.553828
0.595287
0.630855
0.662139
0.690153
0.71558
0.738903
0.79014
0.83391
0.872299
0.906606
0.966196
0.997581
1.061677

0
0.619733
0.56265
0.531347
0.510242
0.481166
0.460762
0.444954
0.432009
0.421028
0.411485
0.403041
0.395468
0.379371
0.366176
0.355005
0.345331
0.329202
0.321045
0.305089

0
0.003099
0.005627
0.00797
0.010205
0.014435
0.01843
0.022248
0.025921
0.029472
0.032919
0.036274
0.039547
0.047421
0.054926
0.062126
0.069066
0.082301
0.089893
0.106781

Total Flow Captured

0.8
0.7

Inlet capacity (m 3/s )

Approach
Flowrate
(m3/s)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

Approach Flow (m 3/s)

4.5

0.4
0.45
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
5

0.165558
0.17554
0.184911
0.202156
0.217811
0.232212
0.245595
0.25813
0.281138
0.301966
0.32109
0.338822
0.355404
0.371015
0.385789
0.399835
0.413239
0.426074
0.532651

3.186691
3.306486
3.418928
3.625873
3.81373
3.986549
4.147144
4.297558
4.573662
4.82359
5.053083
5.265862
5.464853
5.652175
5.829465
5.998016
6.158873
6.312891
7.591814

1.101549
1.137699
1.170838
1.230038
1.281999
1.328483
1.370663
1.40936
1.478562
1.539376
1.593781
1.643254
1.688677
1.730746
1.769985
1.8068
1.841514
1.874385
2.135397

0.29563
0.287357
0.280019
0.267482
0.257063
0.248186
0.24048
0.233692
0.222191
0.212726
0.204725
0.197828
0.191789
0.186432
0.181632
0.177294
0.173342
0.169721
0.144634

0.118252
0.12931
0.140009
0.160489
0.179944
0.198549
0.216432
0.233692
0.26663
0.297816
0.327559
0.356091
0.383577
0.410151
0.435918
0.460963
0.485358
0.509162
0.72317

mbankment and bridge inlets.

eater perimeter length

ulate sag relationships.

hough the method can be adapted to other shapes.

0.6
0.6
7

Grate Types (see 'Grate Types' sheet)

1 - Reticuline
2 - 30o-85 Tilt Bar
3 - P-50x100
4 - 45o-85 Tilt Bar
5 - Curved Vane
6 - P-30

3. Inlet Capacity Relation

(coloured cells)
can be copied and
transferred to DRAINS

7 - P-50

first column.

Approach Total Flow

Flowrate Captured
(m3/s)
(m3/s)

Total Flow Captured

1.5

2.5

3.5

Approach Flow (m 3/s)

4.5

0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0.125
0.15
0.175
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35

0
0.003099
0.005627
0.00797
0.010205
0.014435
0.01843
0.022248
0.025921
0.029472
0.032919
0.036274
0.039547
0.047421
0.054926
0.062126
0.069066
0.082301
0.089893
0.106781

0.4
0.45
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
5
0
0
0
0

0.118252
0.12931
0.140009
0.160489
0.179944
0.198549
0.216432
0.233692
0.26663
0.297816
0.327559
0.356091
0.383577
0.410151
0.435918
0.460963
0.485358
0.509162
0.72317
0
0
0
0

Grate Types
The limited range of grates available are shown below. See HEC22 for more details.

Reticuline

45o Tilt Bar

P-50 and P-50 x 100

30o Tilt Bar

Curved Vane

P-30

US FHWA Splash-Over Velocities for Grates

This plot below shows the curve fits made to Figure 5 in Appendix A of Hydraulic Engineering Circular 22.
The power relationships shown are used in calculations for on-grade grated inlets.
Since they tend to "curl over", giving reducing capacities for increasing flowrates at higher approach flows,
values become constant at the highest calculated capacity.
Length of
Grate (m)

0
0.125
0.25
0.375
0.5
0.625
0.75
0.875
1

0.00
0.31
0.62
0.90
1.11
1.32
1.54
1.75
1.94

Splash Over Velocity (m/s) for Pit Type:

2
3
4
5
6

12
0.00
0.52
0.81
1.05
1.25
1.47
1.64
1.82
2.00

0.00
0.60
0.91
1.16
1.37
1.55
1.76
1.94
2.08

0.00
0.69
1.06
1.35
1.60
1.84
2.06
2.25
2.45

0.00
0.91
1.25
1.54
1.79
1.99
2.20
2.35
2.54

0.00
1.13
1.60
1.96
2.24
2.49
2.74
2.96
3.19

10
Splash Over Velocity (m/s)

0.00
0.42
0.72
0.97
1.19
1.40
1.62
1.82
2.00

Fitting
Factors

1.9953
0.8696

2.20
2.41
2.61

2.16
2.30
2.42

2.25
2.42
2.50

2.62
2.78
2.93

2.68
2.84
2.96

3.36
3.58
3.79

2.0204
0.7540

1.9845
0.6465

2.0870
0.6004

2.4379
0.6041

2.5261
0.4976

3.1844
0.4997

Grate Types (see above)

1 - Reticuline
2 - 30o-85 Tilt Bar
3 - P-50x100
4 - 45o-85 Tilt Bar
5 - Curved Vane
6 - P-30
7 - P-50

Splash Over Velocity (m/s)

1.125
1.25
1.375

0
0

P-50 and P-50 x 100

ing Circular 22.

approach flows,

12

Splash Over Velocity (m/s)

10

Splash Over Velocity (m/s)

0
0

4
6
8
Length of Grate (m)

10

12

CHECKS ON RESULTS
This section provides checks and comparisons so that potential users can assess the suitability of this macro
for use in their design and analysis work.

Users are encouraged to carry out their own tests by varying the inputs into the various calculation procedures (on the yello

Part 1. Examples from HEC 22

This section compares results from the examples in HEC22 with those calculated in the macros.
Example 4-2 (page 4-13 - note that page numbers are from the PDF version)

This is for an on-grade grate inlet on road section with gutter width = 0.6 m, longitudinal grade = 1%, crossfall = 2%, n = 0.
The gutter cross-slope is assumed to be 0.05/0.6 = 0.083333 or 8.333%. The flowrate corresponding to a spread of 2.5 m
In HEC22, the spread at a flowrate of 0.12 m 3/s is calculated as 3.5 m.
The first part of the on-grade pit spreadsheet is used to find the flowrate corresponding at a spread of 2.5 m as
The calculated flow width at a flowrate of 0.12 m 3/s given by the macro is 3.51 m, so agreement is good.
Example 4-7 (page 4-45)

For the road cross-section in Example 4-2, the capacity of a curved vane grate, 0.6 m x 0.6 m is to be found when approac
The example gives a velocity = 0.785 m/s, frontal flow portion = 0.70, frontal flow efficiency = 1.0, side flow efficiency =

For the flowrate of 0.06 m3/s, the 'On-Grade in Street' worksheet gives the following values that differ slightly from those in
Velocity = 0.788 m/s, Frontal flow portion = 0.66, frontal flow efficiency = 1.0, side flow efficiency = 0.10
The differences appear to be due to roundoff errors in charts in the HEC22 calculations. Our computer-based results shou
Example 4-8 (page 4-46)
For the road cross-section in Example 4-2, with a total flow width of 3 m, road crossfall of 0.025, longitudinal slope of 0.04
the flowrate is determined to be 0.19 m 3/s, and the inlet capacities of the following grates are estimated:
(a) P-50 Type, 0.6 x 0.6 m - 0.091 m3/s
(b) reticuline grate, 0.6 x 0.6 m - 0.082 m3/s
(c) grates (a) and (b) with a length of 1.2 m - both have 0.103 m3/s capacity.
The equivalent flowrates from trial and error calculations in the 'On-Grade Inlets in Streets' worksheet are:
Flowrate = 0.188 m3/s
(a) P-50 Type, 0.6 x 0.6 m - 0.088 m3/s
(b) reticuline grate, 0.6 x 0.6 m - 0.078 m3/s
(c) grates (a) and (b) with a length of 1.2 m - both have 0.100 m3/s capacity.
The capacities calculated here are slightly below those obtained in the HEC22 manual. This probably relates
to the way that cross-sectional flow capacities are calculated. These calculations are based on the procedures
set out in Australian Rainfall and Runoff, 1987, while HEC22 uses a slightly simpler procedure.
Example 4-9a (page 4-49)

This example considers a kerb inlet on a road with a 1% longitudinal grade, road and gutter crossfalls of 2% and a Mannin

For an approach flowrate of 0.05 m 3/s the inlet capacity of a 3 m long kerb inlet is found to be 0.031 m3
For this same flowrate, the capacity of a 3 m kerb inlet with a depression 0.6 m wide and 0.025 m deep is found to be

The macro here gives flowrates of 0.031 m3/s for the first configuration.
For the depressed gutter at the inlet having a crossfall of 0.025/0.6 = 0.0417 or 4.167%, the estimated inlet capacity from t

Example 4-9b (page 4-52)

For the same road system as in Example 4-7, the minimum length of kerb opening needed to capture 100% of a flow of 0.
was found to be 3.81 m.
The macro gives 99% capture at a length of 3.81 m. However, the answer is in an insensitive range.
100% capture is calculated to occur for a length of 4.1 m.

Example 4-10 (page 4-55)

A combination inlet system is on a road with a 2% crossfall, a 6.2% gutter crossfall, a longitudinal slope of 1% and a rough
The gutter is 0.6 m wide. The grate is 0.6 m x 0.6 m curved vane grate and the kerb inlet is 3 m long.
With an approach flow of 0.050 m 3/s, the combined inlet capacity is found to be 0.049 m3/s.
The macro for combination inlets defines a capacity of 0.0497 m3/s.

Example 4-11 (page 4-60)

A flow along a road with a 5% crossfall and a Manning's n of 0.016 is 0.19 m 3/s, based on an allowable width of 3 m.
The width of a grate in a sag is 0.6 m, and a 50% blocking factor is applied. The allowable depth at kerb is 0.15 m.
The HEC22 procedures specify a grate perimeter of 2.31 m, without allowing for blockage,
and then applies a complex procedure to allow for 50% coverage of the grate.
The sag inlet macro gives a capacity of 0.205 m 3/s at a gutter depth of 0.15 m for an unblocked pit with a perimeter of
This adjusts for the average ponding depth over the sloping face of the grate.

Example 4-12 (page 4-64)

An undepressed kerb inlet in a sag with a length of 2.5 m and a slot height of 0.13 m is on a road with a 2% crossfall..
For a ponding area width of 2.5 m, corresponding to a depth of 0.05 m, the inlet capacity is calculated as
derived from Equation 4-30.
If the gutter is depressed by 0.025 m, and the gutter is 0.6 m wide, the inlet capacity will be 0.048 m3/s,
derived from Equation 4-28.

The spreadsheet calculations give a capacity of 0.045 m3/s in the first situation, and the same value of
using Equation 4.30 only. It is difficult to determine the exact ranges over which Equation 4-28 works, and
the datum for the depths. The macro only uses Equation 4-30 with depth measured at the kerb face.
Example 4-13 (page 4-66)
A 45 mm wide slotted inlet is to limit a 0.14 m3/s flow so that the flow depth at the kerb is limited to 0.09 m.
A length of 3.66 m is selected.

The sag macro for a 3.66 m long slotted inlet of this length gives an inlet capacity of 0.138 m3/s when the depth of ponding
Example 4-14 (page 4-67)
A combination pit has a 0.6 m x 1.2 m P-50 grate and a kerb opening 1.2 m long with a slot 0.1 m high.
The road and gutter have a 3% crossfall. The flowrate arriving at this pit is 0.15 m 3/s.
The calculation in HEC22 determines that for a perimeter of 2.4 m, the average depth of ponding will be 0.11 m,
and the depth at the kerb will be 0.119 m. The corresponding width of ponding will be 3.97 m.
If the grate is completely blocked, all flow will be through the kerb inlet and the depth at the kerb will be
The macro gives a depth of 0.121 m for an inflow of 0.15 m3/s. This should be more accurate than the answer in HEC22.
If the grate is clogged, and is assumed to have zero dimensions, the depth corresponding to the required inflow is
Agreement can be regarded as satisfactory.
Example 4-17 (page 4-87)

A median ditch has a base width of 1.2 m and a Manning's roughness of 0.03. Sideslopes are 1:6 V:H and the longitudinal
A flow of 0.28 m3/s is to be intercepted by a 0.6 x 0.6 m P-50 grate. HEC22 indicates that nominally 0.10 m
and 0.12 m3/s will bypass the pit.

The Visual Basic macro for inlets in a swale calculates a capture rate of 0.090 m3/s, which should be more accurate than t
Example 4-18 (page 4-88)

This is similar to the previous example.

A median ditch has a base width of 0.6 m and a Manning's roughness of 0.03. Sideslopes are 1:6 V:H and the longitudinal
A flow of 0.28 m3/s is to be intercepted by a 0.6 x 0.6 m P-50 grate. HEC22 indicates that 0.16 m3/s will be intercepted an
The Visual Basic macro for inlets in a swale calculates a capture rate of 0.163 m3/s.

Part 2. Comparisons with Laboratory-Derived Relationships for Australian Pits

This section compares relationships obtained from laboratory testing for commonly-used Australian pits with relationships
obtained from the Visual Basic macros (coloured green). The numbers used in the macros are shown along with plots of

The fits obtained are quite variable. Some are good, or acceptable, while others are bad.
They show that the HEC22 procedures should be used with care, and with reference to any available information.
However, it must be recognised that in many cases, in many cases the HEC22 procedures will be the only avaialable infor

NSW RTA (DMR) SA1 1 m Long Inlets - Kerb Inlets and Combination (Kerb Inlet + Grate) Inlets

NSW RTA (DMR) SA2 1 m Extended Inlets (1.83 m Long Kerb Inlet and 0.9 m Grates)

NSW RTA (DMR) SA3 2 m Extended Inlets (2.45 m Long Kerb Inlet and 0.9 m Grates)

NSW Department of Housing RM.7 (Grated) Pit On-Grade

NSW Department of Housing RM.10 (Combination) Pit On-Grade

Since the manual's relationship

There is good agreement for a
Above this flow, the HEC22 pr
values from the manual.

The effect of longitudinal grade

Victorian VicRoads Side Entry Pits

Assuming 3% Road Crossfall

Queensland Department of Main Roads S Gully Pit

Queensland Department of Main Roads M Gully Pit

Queensland Department of Main Roads L Gully Pit

MaxQ Pits Drainway Plus Draincover Grate, Configuration 0TP/Z

The MaxQ inlets are unique in having been tested for a much greater range than any other sets oif pits,
up to 2.5 m3/s approach flow.
Generally, HEC22 gives a fairly good fit to this kerb inlet.

MaxQ Pits Drainway Plus Maxflow Grate, Configuration 0TP/Z

Fits between relationships derived from measurements and from HEC22 are reasonable.

Sag Relationships for Drainway Plus Inlets with and without Grates

ACT Inlet with Kerb KG (Kerb & Gutter), Single Type R Sump, 3% Crossfall

ACT Inlet with Kerb KG (Kerb & Gutter), Triple Type R Sump, 3% Crossfall

ACT Pit with MLBK Modified Layback Kerb, Type R Sump, 3% Crossfall

ACT Pit with Kerb MKG Mountable Kerb and Gutter, Type R Sump, 3% Crossfall

ACT Pits in Sags

South Australian Transport SA Single (900 mm long) Kerb Inlet

The HEC22 estimate underest

with deflectors (Def) and witho

The HEC22 procedure has no

Transport SA Double (1900 mm long) Kerb Inlet

ability of this macro

culation procedures (on the yellow cells).

the macros.

ade = 1%, crossfall = 2%, n = 0.016 and gutter depression = 50 mm

responding to a spread of 2.5 m is estimated to be 0.058 m3/s.

a spread of 2.5 m as 0.058 m3/s.

ement is good.

6 m is to be found when approach flow is 0.06 m 3/s.

y = 1.0, side flow efficiency = 0.11 and capacity = 0.044 m3/s.

s that differ slightly from those in HEC22:

ficiency = 0.10 and capacity = 0.042 m3/s.
Our computer-based results should be more accurate.

0.025, longitudinal slope of 0.04 and n = 0.016,

are estimated:

worksheet are:

his probably relates

ed on the procedures

r crossfalls of 2% and a Manning's n of 0.016.

be 0.031 m3/s.
.025 m deep is found to be 0.044 m3/s.

e estimated inlet capacity from the macro is 0.0415 m3/s.

d to capture 100% of a flow of 0.064 m 3/s

tudinal slope of 1% and a roughness of 0.016.

an allowable width of 3 m.
depth at kerb is 0.15 m.

cked pit with a perimeter of 2.31 m.

a road with a 2% crossfall..

s calculated as 0.045 m3/s,

e 0.048 m3/s,

ame value of 0.045 m3/s in the second,

4-28 works, and

imited to 0.09 m.

m3/s when the depth of ponding is 0.09 m.

t 0.1 m high.

onding will be 0.11 m,

e kerb will be 0.24 m.

rate than the answer in HEC22.

to the required inflow is 0.228 m.

are 1:6 V:H and the longitudinal grade is 2%.

nominally 0.10 m3/s (actually 0.092 m3/s) will be intercepted

should be more accurate than the HEC22 result.

are 1:6 V:H and the longitudinal grade is 3%.

0.16 m3/s will be intercepted and 0.12 m3/s will bypass the pit.

ustralian pits with relationships

s are shown along with plots of relationships.

y available information.
s will be the only avaialable information source.

let + Grate) Inlets

Fits for both the herb inlet alone and the combination of
kerb inlet and grate (modelled as a grate alone by HEC22)
are good in this low range.

A good fit to the combination grate and a poor one to the kerb inlet alone.

A good fit to the combination grate and an underestimate for the kerb inlet alone.

Agreement is good.
HEC22 shows variations between 6 and 12% grades,
rather than a single relationship.

Since the manual's relationships apply for all grades, they are compared with HEC22 results at 1% and 2%.
There is good agreement for approach flows below 0.15 m 3/s.
Above this flow, the HEC22 procedures give higher inflows than the
values from the manual.
The effect of longitudinal grade is relatively small.

The capacities from the VicRoads manual are higher than

from the HEC22 procedure. The latter allows for a 33%
gutter slope at the inlet.
There is no obvious explanation for this difference.
These Victorian relationships are the "odd men out" among the relationships,
having a poor agreement with the HEC22 relationships, while other pits
had relatively good fits.

The relationships from the Queensland DMR Manual are compared

with those from HEC22 using:
(a) a 0.835 m wide grate with an in-line kerb
(b) a 0.61 m wide grate in a recessed "channel lip line"

The HEC22 calculations underestimate the inflows from the manual

at low depths It is not possible to make comparisons at high ponding depths.

Generally, HEC22 relationships underestimate measured inflows, a point noted by Pezzaniti, D.,
Johnston, L. and Argue, J. (2000) Road Surface Drainage - cost and liability issues, IEAust
Civil Engineering Transactions, Vol. CE42, p. 42-47

r sets oif pits,

These show the HEC22 relationships overestimating the relationships from the Max Q brochure.

This is unusual because in other cases (ACT, Queensland DMR) the HEC22 reationships provide underestimates.

These pits exhibit the same pattern as for the Drainway Plus Pits, but not so severely.

Agreement is rather poor.

HEC22 procedures underestimate modelled capacities up to about 0.2 m depth.
They will probably be more accurate at higher depths.

The HEC22 estimate underestimates both the recorded pit capacity

with deflectors (Def) and without these (NoDef).
The HEC22 procedure has no means of making allowance for deflectors.

Generally the HEC22 results underestimate the measured capacity and

have a much greater spread.

provide underestimates.