Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03 - Design Report - Baxter Square Ph 1 - Water, Sewer, Stormwater
DESIGN REPORT WATER, SEWER & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT BAXTER SQUARE SUBDIVISION - PHASE 1 Prepared for: Baxter Square Partners, L.L.C. 317 Sanders Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59718 CAVU, L.L.C. 13707 Camp Creek Road, Manhattan, MT 59741 Prepared by: C & H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 205 Edelweiss Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 557-1115 Project Number: 02395 December, 2003 INTRODUCTION Baxter Square Subdivision is proposed as a 102 lot residential subdivision. The development will consist primarily of townhouse clusters with the exception of two lots on which 8-plexes will be constructed. The property was recently annexed into the City of Bozeman as two separate parcels with zoning designations of R-3. The entire 18.1207 acre subdivision is located on the northern boundary of the City of Bozeman limits off of Baxter Lane approximately ''/2 mile west of North 19'h Avenue. The property is surrounded by a mix of residential subdivisions and agricultural land. The development is situated in the east half of the southwest quarter and the west half of the southeast quarter of Section. 35, Township 1 South, Range 5 East of P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. There is currently one single family residence and several outbuildings located on the property. The remainder of the property consists of horse pasture and hay fields. The topography is relatively uneven with a general slope to the north. Cattail Creek flows along the southern half of the western boundary of the subdivision. Phase 1 of the subdivision consists of 42 lots within the southern half of the project. The project requires connection to the City of Bozeman water and sanitary sewer system. Access to the subdivision will be provided directly from Baxter Lane on A Street, and from Thomas Drive on B Street. Baxter Lane will be improved to one half a minor arterial standard along the frontage of the subdivision, and Thomas Avenue(North 271h Ave.) will be improved to one half a collector standard between Baxter Lane and B Street. Design.Report-Page I of 28 WATER SYSTEM LAYOUT Water supply To eliminate duplicate calculations with each phase of the development we will perform our analysis on the entire water system in this report. Water for domestic use and fire protection will be provided by connections to the City of Bozeman water system. 8-inch water mains will be looped through the subdivision connecting to the existing 12-inch mains in Baxter Lane and Thomas Avenue. The existing 12-inch main in Baxter Lane will be extended to the western boundary of the subdivision. All other mains installed with Phase 1 of the subdivision will be fl- inch mains. Water Usage is based on the following criteria: Using the city average of 2.54 persons per dwelling unit gives a total population of 294.64 persons for the 116 dwelling units in the entire subdivision. The overall annual average daily demand of 200 gallons per day(gpd)per person is suggested for all future development. The demand estimate includes: 1.) Fire flows, flat rate accounts, leakage, under registering meters and other unaccounted water usage such as street cleaning, hydrant and sewer flushing. (Water Facility Plan, page 18) 2.) Base flow water. 3.) Increases in summer usage including lawn and garden irrigation, non-commercial car washing, cleaning sidewalks, and other miscellaneous metered uses. Utilizing the 200 gpd per person the predicted average daily water demand for Baxter Square Subdivision is 58,928 gpd(40.92 gpm). Hydrant flow and pressure data was collected by the City of Bozeman Water Department on Thomas Lane just north of the intersection with Baxter Lane. Static and pitot Design Report-Page 2 of 28 pressures were measured to be 86 psi and 73 psi respectively. The residual pressure was measured as 75 psi while an adjacent hydrant was flowing. WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SIZING 1. INPUT DATA Minimum Fire Hydrant Flow = 1500 gpm Residual Pressure Required =20 psi for Fire Flow 1. Average Day Demand (Peaking Factor= 1) 2. Maximum Day Demand (Peaking Factor=2.5) 3. Maximum Hour Demand (Peaking Factor=3.0) Total Average Day Demand =40.92 gpm x 1.0 =40.92 gpm Total Maximum Day Demand =40.92 gpm x 2.5 = 102.3 gpm Total Peak Hour Demand =40.92 gpm x 3.0 = 122.8 gpm Available Pressure Hydrant on Thomas Drive north of Baxter Lane: Static = 86 psi Pitot= 73 psi Residual = 75 psi HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS A water distribution model using Watercad Version 6.5 has been provided to verify the adequacy of the system to meet minimum fire flow requirements and provide service. In order to model the system each junction node of the water distribution system was assessed a demand based on its service area. The table shown below quantifies the demands placed at the junction nodes for Average Day, Maximum Day and Peak Hour. The peaking factor for each case is 1, 2.5 and 3.0 respectively. Desigiz Report-Page 3 of 28 BAXTER SQUARE SUBDIVISION WATER SYSTEM JUNCTION NODE AVG. DAY GPM MAX. DAY GPM PEAK HOUR GPM 3 2.4694 6.1736 7.4083 4 4.9389 12.3472 14.8167 5 3.5278 8.8194 10.5833 6 1.0583 2.6458 3.175 7 2.1167 5.2917 6.35 8 1.7639 4.4097 5.2917 9 3.175 7.9375 9.525 10 2.8222 7.0556 8.467 11 4.9389 12.3472 14.8167 13 4.2333 10.5833 12.7 14 2.8222 7.0556 8.467 16 2.8222 7.0556 8.467 17 4.2333 10.5833 12.7 TOTAL 40.9221 102.3055 122.7677 The flow and pressure data collected by the City of Bozeman Water Department was used to model the connection to the existing system as a pump. The pump curve is generated from the data collected using the relationship between head. and flow. Calculations for the pump curve are included in Appendix A. The pump is attached to a reservoir in the model which acts as a source of water. The elevations of the reservoir is fixed at the elevation of the pumps, which is also equivalent to the elevation of the tie in point. The reservoir does not create any head on the system, the head is generated entirely by the pumps. The input data and the pump curves are included in Appendix A DISTRIBUTION MAIN The proposed water mains will provide capacity with regards to the Peak Hour Demands. The flows and pressures within the system for the Peak Hour Demands were generated with the Watercad program and can be found in Appendix A. Design Report-Page 4 of 28 The capacity of the system to meet fire flow requirements was tested by running a steady state fire flow analysis for all junctions at fire hydrant locations. The model shows that all hydrant junctions satisfy minimum fire flow constraints (pressure>20psi & flow rate> 1500 gpm), and there is still adequate pressure within the system to provide service to the lots. The model shows that for the worst case seenario(the hydrant at the northeast corner of the site) 2,413 gallons per minute is available while maintaining 20 psi in the rest of the system. The results of the analysis at peak hourly flow are given in Appendix A. SEWER SYSTEM Summary:- Baxter Square Subdivision will require connection to the City of Bozeman's existing sewage collection system. Extensions of the existing main in North 27"'Avenue at the southern boundary of Cattail Creek Subdivision will be required to serve the development. The existing 8-inch sewer in North 27"'Avenue will be extended northward, to the intersection of B Street and Thomas Drive(N. 27"'Ave.). The sewer will then be extended to the west into the proposed subdivision. Service to each of the lots will be provided with 4-inch services extended 6 feet beyond the property line. Service stubs will be provided to all lots along N. 27"'Ave./Thomas Drive between the proposed subdivision and Cattail Creek Subdivision. Sewage will be conveyed to and treated at the City of Bozeman's Wastewater Treatment Plant located at Moss Bridge and Springhill Road. The existing sewer in North 27t"Avenue is a tributary to the newly constructed 24-inch trunk main running through Cattail Creek Subdivision. The area for this proposed subdivision was included in the contributing area used for sizing the trunk main. Design Requirements There is an existing 24-inch trunk sewer main in Baxter Lane just to the south and east of the Design Report-Page 5 of 28 subdivision, and a 24-inch main proposed along the Davis Lane alignment. These trunk mains ensure that the sewer main proposed for this property will not need to be extended to the south or too far to the east or west. A map is enclosed in Appendix B highlighting the maximum service area for the new sewer main. The capacity of the 8-inch main to serve all phases of the subdivision and the surrounding properties is checked as follows: Maximum Service Area Population Baxter Square Subdivision = 116 d.u. x 2.54 persons/d.u. =294.64 persons Baxter Lane Subdiv.(Lots 1-7)= 7 d.u., x 2.54 persons/d.u. = 17.78 persons Jehovah's Witness(Zoned R-1) =2.3639 acres(3.81persons/acre) = 9.01 persons Western 1/3 of COS 1827 Tract C-1 =42 acres(12.19 persons/acre) = 51198 persons (future land use identified as business park in the 2020 plan -population density used is for R-O Zoning) NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 35 =40 acres(12.19 persons/acre) =487.6 persons (currently Zoned AS(county), property is identified as residential in the 2020 plan) Total Population = 1,321 persons Peaking Factor Calculation Harmon Formula: Peaking Factor=(18 +IP)/(4 +IP) P =Population in thousands Peaking Factor=(18 +11.321)/(4 +11.321) Peaking Factor=3.72 Assumed infiltration rate= 150-gallons/acre/day = 150(112 acres) = 16,800 gal/day The peak flow rate is calculated by multiplying the City's design generation rate of 72 gallons per capita per day by the population, multiplying by the peaking factor, and adding the infiltration rate. Desigtz Report-Page 6 of 28 Peak Flow Rate=72 gpcpd(1,321 persons)(3.72) + 16,800 = 370,617 gpd 257.37 gpm 0.57 cfs The capacity of an 8-inch main at minimum slope is checked using Manning's Equation: Qfun =(1.486/0.013)AR2/3S'/2 For the 8 inch main: Manning's n =0.013 for PVC Pipe Minimum Slope = 0.004 ft/ft A= (3.14/4)d 2= (3.14/4)(8/12)2= 0.34907 ft2 P =2(3.14)r=2(3.14)(4/12) =2.0944 ft R=A/P = 0.34907/2.0944= 0.16667 ft R2/3 =0.30105 ft S =0.004 ft/ft S'n=0.0632 ft/ft Qfu,l_(1.486/0.013)(0.34907)(0.30105)(0.0632) =0.76 cfs Q/Qf,,„ = 0.57/0.76 = 0.75 or 75% The 8-inch sewer main proposed to service this subdivision and the surrounding properties will be adequate to carry the design flows at full build out with minimum slope. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Summary STORM WATER run-off from Phase 1 of Baxter Square Subdivision will be directed to several storm water retention and detention areas on site. A map of the subdivision is enclosed in Appendix C, highlighting the Drainage Areas. The majority of the runoff from Phase 1(Drainage Area#2)will flow into a detention basin located within Phase 2 at the western end of B Street, in. the park, adjacent to Cattail Creek. A portion of the runoff from the western half of A Street and Design Report-Page 7 of 28 the frill width of D Street will go to a temporary retention area at the boundary of Phase 1 adjacent to D Street. The northern half of B Street will flow to two temporary retention areas on the north side of the road. A temporary retention area will be constructed at the north end of Thomas Drive to handle the runoff generated by the new asphalt. A permanent detention pond will be constructed off of Baxter Lane adjacent to Cattail Creek to handle runoff from the future road. The storm water runoff rate was calculated with the rational formula as shown. A runoff coefficient (C) of 0.90 applicable to hard surfaces, a runoff coefficient (C) of 0.85 for house development, and a runoff coefficient of 0.30 for residential lawns/landscaping was used for the system. Drainage Area #1 Total Area=53,900 ft2= 12374 acres Drainage Area#1 will flow to a temporary retention area at the western extent of Phase 1. The runoff from Drainage Area#1 will eventually flow to a permanent detention pond to be constructed with the Phase 2 infrastructure. Roads (Pavement,C=0.90) A Street(381 ft x 21.5 ft) = 8,191.5 ft2 D Street(112 ft x 33 ft) = 3,696 ft2 Driveway = 2,000 ft2 TOTAL = 13,887.5 ft2 RoofDrainage(C=0.85) = 4,103 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) = 35,909.5 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 13,887.5 ft2)+(0.85 x 4,103 ft2)+(0.30 x 35,909.5 ft2))/53,900 ft2=0.50 Design Report-Page 8 of 28 The storm water runoff rate for a 10-yr 2-hr storm event was calculated as follows: Q= CiA Q = storm water runoff rate (cfs) ilo=0.64(t-0.65) = 0.64(2 hrs)-1.61 =0.408 in/hr d=(0.408 in/hr)x(1 ft/12 in)x(2 hr) C =runoff coefficient d=0.068 ft d =depth of rainfall (ft) V= CdA A= surface area(ft2) V=total volume required V=0.50 x 0.068 ft x 53,900 ft2= 1,833 It' =volume to be retained The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 1,222 ft2. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond has a storage volume of 1,833 ft'. Drainage Area #2 (Includes Drainage Areas 2A, 2B, & 2C Total Area=277,306 ft2 =6.3661 acres Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) A Street(381' x 21.5'+ 389' x 43') = 24,918.5 ft2 B Street(942 ft x 21.5 ft) = 20,253 ft2 D Street(270 ft x 33 ft) = 8,910 ft2 E Street (396 ft x 37 ft) = 14,652 ft2 TOTAL = 68,733.5 ft2 Boulevards and additional R/W(Grass, C=0.30) A Street(381'x 7.5' + 389' x 15') = 8692.5 ft2 B Street(942 ft x 7.5 ft) = 7,065 ft2 TOTAL = 15,757.5 ft2 Design Report-Page 9 of 28 Residential = 192,815 ft2 From PUD Tabulation: 37.4% of residential area is buildings(C=0.85) = 72,113 ft2 12.3% of residential is driveway(C=0.90) =23,716 ft2 50.3% of residential area is grass(C=0.30) = 96,986 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 92,449.5 ft2)+(0.85 x 72,113 ft2)+(0.30 x 112,743.5 ft2)]/277,306 ft2 =0.64 Our calculations indicate that the curb and gutter on B Street is not capable of conveying the drainage from all of Drainage Area#2 during a 25 year event without exceeding the city's maximum spread widths. Catch basins and storm drain piping will be installed from the intersection of Streets A and B to the detention pond at the western extent of Drainage Area#2. Storm Sewer#1 Storm Sewer#1 dins from the northeast corner of Street A and Street B to the northwest corner and carries runoff from Drainage Area 2A(167,251 ft2). The flow from a 25-year event is calculated as follows: Time of Concentration Overland flow(200 ft @ 1.0%, C=0.30) =20.0 min.(see Figure I-1, Appendix B) Gutter flow(720 ft @ 1.57% avg.slope) V= (1.486/n)R21IS112 (n=0.013, A=1.24 ft, P=9.23, R21s=0.2623, 5112=0.1253) V=3.76 ft/s T= 720 ft/3.76 ft/s/60s/min = 3.19 min Total Time of Concentration =23.19 minutes(0.3865 hours) For a 25-year storm event I25 =0.78X'64=0.78(0.3865)-.64= 1.4332 in/hr Q25 = CIA= 0.64(1.4332 in/hr)(3.8396 acres) = 3.52 cfs Calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a 15" PVC pipe at 0.50% slope. The 15-inch pipe Design Report-Page 10 of 28 will flow at a depth of 9.88 inches with a velocity of 4.10 ft/sec. Storm Sewer#2 Storm Sewer#2 carries storm water runoff from Drainage Areas 2A and 2B to the western edge of Phase 1 where it will empty into a swale which flows to Detention Pond#2. Drainage Area 2A = 167,251 ft2=3.8396 acres Drainage Area 2B =44,848 ft2= 1.0296 acres Total =212,099 ft2=4.8692 acres Time of Concentration 23.19 min.(previously calculated time to reach Storm Sewer#1) Pipe flow(76 feet in 15" PVC pipe at 0.50%) V=4.10 ft/s Time =76 ft/4.10 ft/s/60s/min = 0.31 min Total Time of Concentration =23.50 minutes(0.3917 hours) For a 25-year storm event I25 =0.78X-.64=0.78(0.3917)-.64= 1.42 in/hr Q25 = CIA= 0.64(1.42 in/hr)(4.8692 acres) =4.43 cfs Calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a 15" PVC pipe at 0.41% slope. The 15-inch pipe will flow at a depth of 13.69 inches with a velocity of 3.77 ft/sec. Swale #1 Swale#1 will carry the runoff from Storm Sewer#2 to the detention area located within the park at the western boundary of Phase 2. The swale will be replaced with storm sewer piping with the construction of Phase 2. Details and calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a swale 12-inches deep with 4:1 side slopes and a P wide bottom. The Swale will flow 8.9-inches deep during a 25-year storm event. Detention Pond#2 Detention Pond#2 will detain the runoff from all of Drainage Area 42 at full buildout. Although we are constructing the pond with the Phase 1 improvements we will size the pond and outlet Design Report-Page 11 of 28 structure to handle the contributing area from Phase 2 as well. The storage basin located in the detention pond can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The calculation for the pre-development time of concentration is enclosed on Figure I-1 in Appendix C. The release rate is calculated as follows: Time of Concentration(900 LF @ 1.2%, C=0.20) =48 min= 0.80 hours ho=0.64X-.61 =0.64 (0.80)-_65 =0.74 in/hr Q,o= CIA=0.20 (0.74 in/hr)(6.3661 acres) =0.942 cfs #11a Release rate The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 0.942 cfs and using a C of 0.64. Detention Pond #2 c= 0.64 A= 6.3661 acres release = 0.942cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min)length hrs Intensity Q future Volume Volume Storage 54 0.9 0.685366 2.792388 9047.337 3052.08 5995.257 55 0.916667 0.67724 2.759281 9105.628 3108.6 5997.028 56 0.933333 0.669354 2.727153 9163234 3165.12 5998,114 57 0.95 0.661698 2.695958 9220.175 3221.64 5998.53 58 0.966667 0.65426 2,665652 9276.47 3278.16 5998.31 59 0.983333 0.64703 2.636197 9332.138 3334.68 5997.458 60 1 0.64 2.607555 9387.196 3391.2 5995.996 61 1.016667 0.633161 2.579689 9441.661 3447.72 5993.941 62 1.033333 0.626504 2.552567 9495.549 3504.24 5991.309 63 1.05 0.620022 2.526157 9548.874 3560.76 5988.114 The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 4,000 ft2. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond has a storage volume of 6,000 ft3. OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING The outlet control stricture for Detention Structure#2 needs to limit the release rate to the predevelopment runoff rate of 0.942 cfs. The slot width is sized using the following equation: Q=CLH3/2 Where:Q =Discharge(cfs) C =Weir Coefficient=3.33 L=Horizontal Length (feet) Design Report-Page 12 of 28 H=Head (feet) For the outlet control structure detailed in Appendix B. L= (0.942 cfs)/(3.33 x 1.5311) = 0.154 feet= 1.85 inches The weir needs to be 1.85" wide in order to limit the release rate to 0.942 cfs. Drainage Area#3 Total Area= 9,738 ft2 =0.2236 acres Drainage Area#3 includes the north half of B Street fiom the intersection with E Street to the western boundary of Phase 1. A temporary retention pond will be constructed at the Phase 1 boundary. The storm water from this area will eventually flow to the west down B Street and northward on C Street as future phases are constructed. Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) B Street(323.8 ft x 21.5 ft) = 6,961.7 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) = 2,776.3 fe Mean C=[(0.90 x 6,961.7 fe)+(0.30 x 2,776.3 ft2)]/9,738 ft2= 0.73 The storm water runoff rate for a 10-yr 2-hr storm event was calculated as follows: Q = CiA Q-=storm water runoff rate (cfs) ilo= 0.64(t-1-61) = 0.64(2 hrs)-0.61 =0.408 in/hr d=(0.408 in/hr)x(1 ft/12 in)x(2 hr) C=runoff coefficient d= 0.068 ft d =depth of rainfall (ft) V= CdA A= surface area(ft) V =total volume required V=0.73 x 0.068 ft x 9,738 ft2=483.4 ft3 =volume to be retained The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 324 ft2. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond has a storage volume of 486 ft3. Design Report-Page 13 of 28 Drainage Area#4 Total Area= 12,090 ft2 =0.2775 acres Drainage Area#4 includes the north half of B Street from the intersection with Thomas Drive to the intersection with E Street. A temporary retention pond will be constructed just west of the E Street intersection. The storm water from this area will eventually flow northward on E Street as future phases are constricted. Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) B Street(403 ft x 21.5 ft) = 8,664.5 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) = 3,425.5 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 8,664.5 ft2)+(0.30 x 3,425.5 ft2)]/12,090 ft2= 0.73 The storm water runoff rate for a 10-yr 2-hr storm event was calculated as follows: Q =CiA Q = storm water runoff rate (cfs) iio= 0.64(t-0-") = 0.64(2 11rs)-1-61= 0.408 in/lu d = (0.408 in/hr)x(1 ft/12 in)x( 2 hr) C =runoff coefficient d=0.068 ft d =depth of rainfall (ft) V= CdA A= surface area(ft2) V=total volume required V= 0.73 x 0.068 ft x 12,090 ft2 =600 ft3 =volume to be retained The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 400 ft2. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond has a storage volume of 600 ft'. Drainage Area #5 Total Area= 39,988 ft2 =09180 acres Drainage Area#5 includes one half of the Thomas Drive right-of-way(50') from the intersection with Baxter Lane to the intersection with B Street. A temporary retention pond will be constructed at the north end of the paving. Permanent storm water facilities will need to be installed further down the road as North 27"Avenue is constructed in the future. Design Report-Page 14 of 28 Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) Thomas Drive(799.76 ft x 29 ft) = 23,193 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) Thomas Drive R/W(799.76 ft x 21 ft) = 16,795 ft'- Mean C=[(0.90 x 23,193 ft2)+(0.30 x 16,795 ft2)]/39,988 ft2 = 0.65 The storm water runoff rate for a 10-yr 2-hr storm event was calculated as follows: Q = CiA Q =storm water runoff rate (cfs) i,o= 0.64(t-1.65) =0.64(2 hrs)-o.61 =0.408 in/hr d= (0.408 in/hr)x(1 ft/12 in)x(2 hr) C =runoff coefficient d= 0.068 ft d =depth of rainfall (ft) V= CdA A=surface area(ft2) V=total volume required V=0.65 x 0.068 ft x 39,988 ft2 = 1,767 ft' =volume to be retained .The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 1,180 ft2. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond iris a storage volume of 1,770 W. Drainage Area 96 Total Area=28,956 ft2=0.6647 acres Drainage Area#6 includes the north half of the Baxter Lane right-of-way from the intersection with Thomas Drive to 40 feet east of the Baxter Square Subdivision Boundary. The runoff from this area will travel via curb and gutter to the low point in the road where an inlet will intercept the flow sending it into a storm sewer pipe taking the water to Detention Pond #6 located adjacent to Cattail Creek. Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) Baxter Lane(599 ft x 30 ft) = 17,970 ft2 Design Report-Page 15 of 28 Grass(C=0.3 0) Baxter Lane R/W(549.3 It x 20 ft) = 10,986 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 17,970 fe)+(0.30 x 10,986 ft2)]/28,956 ft2 =0.67 Storm Sewer#3 Storm Sewer#3 will run from the low point in Baxter Lane, 40 feet east of the subdivision boundary, to the next inlet near Cattail Creek. The flow from a 25-year event is calculated as follows: Time of Concentration Gutter flow(455 ft @ 0.50% avg.slope) V= (1.486/n)R2/3S12 (n=0.013, A=1.24 ft, P=9.23, Reis=0.2623, S"2=0.0707) V=2.12 ft/s T=455 ft/2.12 ft/s/60s/min = 3.58 min Total Time of Concentration = 3.58 minutes(0.0596 hours) For a 25-year storm event I25 =0.78X-64=0.78(0.0596)-.14=4.74 in/hr Q25 CIA= 0.67(4.74 irL11hr)(0.6647 acres) =2.11 efs - Calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a 15" PVC pipe at 0.40% slope. The 15-inch pipe will flow at a depth of 7.65 inches with a velocity of 3.36 ft/sec. Storm Sewer#4 Storm Sewer#4 carries storm water runoff from Drainage Areas#6 and#7 to Detention Pond #6, located adjacent to Cattail Creek. Drainage Area#6 =28,956 ft2=0.6647 acres Drainage Area#7 = 9,289 ft2 =0.2132 acres Total = 38,245 ft2=0.8780 acres Design Report-Page 16 of 28 Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) Baxter Lane(784.78 ft x 30 ft) = 23,543.4 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) Baxter Lane R/W(735.08 ft x 20 ft) = 14,701.6 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 23,543.4 ft2)+(0.30 x 14.701.6 ft2)]/38,245 ft2 = 0.67 Time of Concentration 3.58 min.(previously calculated time to reach Storm. Sewer#3) Pipe flow(400 feet in 15" PVC pipe at 0.40%) V= 3.36 ft/s Time=400 ft/3.36 ft/s/60s/min = 1.98 min Total Time of Concentration =5.56 minutes(0.0927 hours) For a 25-year storm event I25 = 0.78X-.G4= 0.78(0.0927)-64=3.57 in/hr Q2; = CIA= 0.67(3.57 in/hr)(0.8780 acres) =2.10 efs Calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a 15" PVC pipe at 1.13% slope. The 15-inch pipe will flow at a depth of 5.69 inches with a velocity of 4.92 ft/sec. 3raiae Area#8 Total Area=23,304 ft2=0.5350 acres Drainage Area#8 includes the north half of the Baxter Lane right-of-way from the western edge of Drainage Area#7 to approximately 330 feet west of the subdivision boundary. The runoff from this area will travel via curb and gutter to Storm Sewer#5. Roads (Pavement, C=0.90) Baxter Lane(466.08 ft x 30 ft) = 13,982.4 ft2 Grass(C=0.30) Baxter Lane R/W(466.08 ft x 20 ft) = 9,321.6 ft2 Mean C=[(0.90 x 13,982.4 ft2)+(0.30 x 9,321.6 ft2)]/23,304 ft2 =0.66 Design Report-Page 17 of 28 Storm Sewer#5 Storm Sewer#5 will carry the runoff from Drainage Area#8 to Detention Pond#6, located adjacent to Cattail Creek. The flow from a 25-year event is calculated as follows: Time of Concentration Gutter flow(330 ft @ 0.50% avg.slope) V=(1.486/n)R2/3S'/2 (n=0.013, A=1.24 ft, P=9.23,R"=0.2623, S'/2=0.0707) V=2.12 ft/s T=330 ft/2.12 ft/s/60s/min =2.59 min Total Time of Concentration =2.59 minutes(0.0432 hours) For a 25-year storm event I25 = 0.78X-.64=0.78(0.0432)--64= 5.82 in/hr Q25=CIA=0.66(5.82 in/hr)(0.5350 acres) =2.06 cfs 1 Calculations are enclosed in Appendix C for a 15" PVC pipe at 0.40% slope. The 15-inch pipe will flow at a depth of 7.65 inches with a velocity of 3.36 ft/sec. i Detention Pond 96 Detention Pond#6 will detain the runoff from Drainage Area#6, #7 and#8. The storage basin located in the detention pond can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The calculation for the pre-development time of concentration is enclosed on Figure I-1 in Appendix C. The release rate is calculated as follows: Time of Concentration(950 LF @ 0.5%, C=0.20) = 64 min= 1.07 hours I,o=0.64X-.65 =0.64 (1.07)-.65=0.61 in/hr Qro=CIA=0.20 (0.61 in/hr)(3.0326 acres) =0.37 cfs Release rate The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 0.37 cfs and using a C of 0.67. Design Report-Page 18 of 28 Detention Pond#6 c = 0.67 A= 1.413acres release = 0.37cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min)length hrs Intensity Q future Volume Volume Storage 22 0.366667 1.22858 1.163109 1535.304 488.4 1046.904 23 0.383333 1.19359 1.129984 1559.377 510.6 1048.777 24 0.4 1.161023 1.099152 1582.78 532.8 1049.98 25 0.416667 1.130622 1.070371 1605.556 555 1050.55 26 0.433333 1.102162 1.043428 1627.748 577.2 1050.548 27 0.45 1.075454 1.018143 1649.392 599.4 1049.992 28 0.466667 1.05033 0.994357 1670.521 621.6 1048.921 29 0.483333 1.026643 0.971934 1691.164 643.8 1047.364 30 0.5 1.004268 0.95075 1711.35 666 1045.35 31 0.516667 0.98309 0.930701 1731.104 688.2 1042.904 The proposed pond has a mid-depth surface area of 702 ftz. At a depth of 1.5 feet, the pond has a storage volume of 1,053 ft3. OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING The outlet control stricture for Detention Structure#2 needs to limit the release rate to the predevelopment runoff rate of 0.37 cfs. The slot width is sized using the following equation: Q = CLH"2 `dVhere:Q=Discharge(efs) C= Weir Coefficient=3.33 L=Horizontal Length(feet) H=Head (feet) For the outlet control structure detailed in Appendix B. L= (0.37 cfs)/(3.33 x 1.5312) = 0.0605 feet= 0.726 inches The weir needs to be 0.726" wide in order to limit the release rate to 0.37 cfs. Design Report-Page 19 of 28 STREETS, CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALKS Access to the site will be provided directly from Baxter Lane and Thomas Drive. All public streets within the subdivision will be constructed to City of Bozeman standards within a 60' public right-of-way. Local streets will be constructed with a street width of 33' from back of curb to back of curb, a 7.5'wide boulevard and 5' wide sidewalk on each side of the street. Private streets within the subdivision will be constructed with a street width of 29' from back of curb to back of curb with 4'wide sidewalks placed directly against the curb. Baxter Lane will be constructed to half of a minor arterial street standard in front of the subdivision. Thomas Drive will be constructed to one half of a collector standard from Baxter Lane to the intersection with B Street. Pedestrian ramps will be constructed at all intersections providing handicap access to the sidewalks and the trail network planned adjacent to Cattail Creek. PAVEMENT DESIGN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SOIL CONDITIONS Test holes were excavated on March 23, 2003 on site with the test hole logs included in Appendix D. In general, the subsurface conditions consist of approximately 12 to 27 inches of topsoil underlain by tan clay-loam soils of high plasticity down to depths of 60"-63". Sandy saturated gravels and cobbles were found at depths greater than 5 feet. Samples were obtained of the clay-loam and proctors were performed with the results enclosed in Appendix D. For the purpose of roadway design we will assume that all roadways are constructed with the clay loam as subgrade. A CBR value of 7.1 was measured for the clay loam. STREET DESIGN Criteria for design: Bozeman Subdivision Regulations, Section 16.16.080: use AASHTO guide for design of pavement structures and refer to Asphalt Institute Manual Series No.l (MS-1) Minimum 20 year performance period traffic volume. Design Report-Page 20 of 28 Interior Roads According to the Traffic Impact Study prepared for the subdivision by Robert Peccia and Associates we should expect to generate approximately 1,261 trip ends per day. For the purpose of this report we will assume that all trips generated by the subdivision travel to and from Baxter Lane using A Street. It is likely that a large percentage of the vehicles will take a different route using B Street to reach Thomas Drive but we will ignore this for the purpose of this report. This assumption will give us conservative numbers when calculating the equivalent 18-kip single axle loading(ESAL). Our road section design will be for prepared for A Street. A Street contains two driving lanes so we must divide the number of trips per day in half to calculate the ESAL value for each lane. Average yearly traffic for each lane of Alder Creek Drive equates to 230,133 vehicles per year(1,261vpd/2 x 365 days =230,133 vehicles per year). The following assumptions were made while calculating the Total ESAL: 1. - 5% of the AYT will consist of heavy trucks. 2. Growth rate=4%over 20 years(Table 4, Appendix D) 3. 2000 lb axle load for cars, and 10,000 lb axle load for trucks. 4. 2 axles per vehicle Traffic Estimate for A Street Vehicle Type Vehicles Growth Design Vehicles ESAL Factor Design per year Factor (20 years) (Appendix 76.A) ESAL (4%,20yrs) Passenger Car 218,626 29.78 6,510,682 0.0003*2=0.0006 3,906 2 axle/6 tire 11,507 29.78 342,678 0.1 18*2=0.236 80,872 truck Total ESAL 84,778 Design Report-Page 21 of 28 The calculated estimate of the equivalent 18,000 lb Single Axle Load (ESAL)= 84,778 We will use 100,000 for this design. According to the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test (ASTM-D 1883/AASHTO T193) performed by HKM Engineering Inc., the CBR for the subgrade soil is 7.1. CBR can be related to MR by the following: (Highway Engineering Handbook, McGraw Hill, 1996) Subgrade Resilient: MR= 1,500 CBR(Shell Oil Co.) This value used by Asphalt Institute. MR= 5,409 CBR0-711 (United States Anny Waterway Experiment Station) MR=2,550 CBR'-" (Transport &Research Laboratory, England) With CBR= 7.1 MR= 1,500 CBR= 1,500 (7.1) = 10,650 psi MR= 5,409 CBR"" = 5,409 (7.1)0,711 =21,795 psi MR=2,550 CBR0.64=2,550 (7.1)0.64= 8,940 psi Use most conservative value = 8,940 psi USING THE AASHTO METHOD OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN 1. Subgrade Resilient Modulus MR=8,940 psi 2. Design serviceability loss: Estimate Initial Serviceability=4.2 Terminal Serviceability=2.5 (high volume roads) Design Serviceability Loss =4.2 - 2.5 = 1.7 3. ESAL(18,000 lb) = 100,000 4. Level of reliability: 90 estimated(conservative) (See Table 2 on Page 1 of Appendix C) Overall standard deviation: 0.49 (Underlined on Page 1, Appendix C) (Based on AASHTO Road Tests-flexible Pavement) 5. Pavement Structural Number: Layer Coefficients: a, =0.42 (Asphalt) (Fig. 3.18, Appendix C) a2 =0.13 (Base Course - 1 %2" minus) (Fig. 3.19, Appendix C) a3 = 0.12 (Sub-base Course - 6" minus) (Fig. 3.20, Appendix C) Drainage-Coefficients: m2 = 1.00 (good drainage 5-25%) (Table 3.25, Appendix C) m3 = 1.00 (good drainage>25%) (Table 3.25, Appendix C) % of time base & sub-base will approach saturation 6. Design Equation: SN = a,D, + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 Assume D, = 3" D2 =6" - Solve for D3 Solving for the equation shown on Figure 3.17 gives us SN=2.26 2.26 =0.42(3)+ 0.13(6)(1.0) + 0.12D3(1.0) 2.26,=2.04+0.12D3 D3 = 1.83" A street subbase section of 12" (1.0') should be more than adequate. Sample calculations using SpectraPave2 Software are enclosed showing the proposed road section having the capacity for 1,349,424 ESAL's. Due to the presence of fine grained soils it is recommended that an approved seperation fabric be installed between the subgrade soils and subbase materials. The seperation fabric will prevent contamination of subbase materials during construction and provide stabilization for the existing subgrade materials. Baxter Lane Baxter Lane is an existing roadway constructed to Gallatin County standards with an approximate paved width of 24-feet. The portion of the roadway directly in front of Baxter Square Subdivision will be reconstructed to one half of a minor arterial standard. The north half of the existing pavement in front of the subdivision will be removed and replaced with new asphalt and curb and gutter. A minimum of three inches of 1.5-inch minus crushed gravel base course will be required under the new pavement. The portion of the new road outside of the existing roadway will need to be constructed from native subgrade up to the new roadway elevation. The following design is for this section of the roadway. Design of Baxter Lane in front of the subdivision is heavily influenced by the amount of traffic generated by Baxter Meadows Subdivision currently being constructed to the west. At full build out Baxter Meadows will produce 23,000 trips per day. However, a large portion of this traffic will travel south to Bozeman on one of the new roads installed with the development. For the purpose of this report we will assume 50% of the traffic from Baxter Meadows will travel east on Baxter Lane. This equates to 11,500 trips per day. Data collected by Robert Peccia and Associates indicates there is currently an average of 814 vehicles per day traveling on Baxter Lane. The addition of 1,216 trips per day from Baxter Square Subdivision gives us a total average daily volume of 13,575 vehicles per day. Baxter Lane contains two driving lanes so we must divide the number of trips per day in half to calculate the ESAL value for each lane. Average yearly traffic for each lane of Baxter Lane equates to 2,477,438 vehicles per year(13,575 vpd/2 x 365 days =2,477,438 vehicles per year). The following assumptions were made while calculating the Total ESAL: 1. 5% of the AYT will consist of heavy trucks. 2. Growth rate=4% over 20 years(Table 4, Appendix D) 3. 2000 lb axle load for cars, and 10,000 lb axle load for trucks. 4. 2 axles per vehicle Design Report-Page 24 of 28 Traffic Estimate for Baxter Lane Vehicle Vehicles Growth Design Vehicles ESAL Factor Design Type per year Factor (20 years) (Appendix 76.A) ESAL (4%,20yrs) Passenger 2,353,566 29.78 70,089,195 0.0003*2=0.0006 42,054 Car 2 axle/6 tire 123,872 29.78 3,688,908 0.118*2=0.236 870,582 truck Total ESAL 912,636 The calculated estimate of the equivalent 18,000 lb Single Axle Load (ESAL)= 912,636 We will use 1.000,000 for this design. USING THE AASHTO METHOD OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN 1. Subgrade Resilient Modulus MR= 8,940 psi(previously calculated) 2. Design serviceability loss: Estimate Initial Serviceability=4.2 Terminal Serviceability=2.5 (high volume roads) Design Serviceability Loss =4.2 - 2.5 = 1.7 3. ESAL(18,000 lb) = 1,000,000 4. Level of reliability: 90 estimated(conservative) (See Table 2 on Page 1 of Appendix C) Overall standard deviation: 0.49 (Underlined on Page 1, Appendix C) (Based on AASHTO Road Tests-flexible Pavement) 5. Pavement Structural Number: Layer Coefficients: a, =0.42 (Asphalt) (Fig. 3.18, Appendix C) a2 = 0.13 (Base Course - 1 %2" minus) (Fig. 3.19, Appendix C) a3 = 0.12 (Sub-base Course - 6" minus) (Fig. 3.20, Appendix C) Design.Report-Page 25 of 28 Drainage Coefficients: m2 = 1.00 (good drainage 5-25%) (Table 3.25, Appendix C) m3 = 1.00 (good drainage>25%) (Table 3.25, Appendix C) % of time base & sub-base will approach saturation 6. Design Equation: SN = a,D, + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 Assume D, = 3" D2 = 6" - Solve for D3 Solving for the equation shown on Figure 3.17 gives us SN=3.31 3.31 =0.42(3) + 0.13(6)(1.0) + 0.12D3(L0) 3.31 = 2.04 + 0.12D3 D3 = 10.58" A street subbase section of 15" (1.25') should be more than adequate. Sample calculations using SpectraPave2 Software are enclosed showing the proposed road section having the capacity for 2,478,535 ESAL's. Thomas IDrive ITT. 27" Ave. Thomas Drive will be constructed to one half of a collector standard from B Street to Baxter Lane. Thomas Drive falls on the future alignment of North 27"i Avenue. North 27t"Avenue is currently discontinuous to the north and south making existing traffic patterns unusable for traffic projections. Roadways classified as collectors usually carry between 2,000 and 12, 000 vehicles per day. For the purpose of this design we will assume North 27'b will carry 12,000 vehicles per day at the end of the 20-year design period. North 27t"Avenue will eventually be a split facility with two lanes separated by a median. We must divide the number of trips per day in half to calculate the ESAL value for each lane. Average yearly traffic for each lane of North 27"'Avenue equates to 2,190,000 vehicles per year(12,000 vpd/2 x 365 days =2,190,000 vehicles per year). Design Report-Page 26 of 28 The following assumptions were made while calculating the Total ESAL: 1. 5% of the AYT will consist of heavy trucks. 2. Growth rate =4% over 20 years(Table 4, Appendix D) 3. 2000 lb axle load for cars, and 10,000 lb axle load for trucks. 4. 2 axles per vehicle Traffic Estimate for Thomas Drive(N. 27"'Ave.) Vehicle Type Vehicles Design Vehicles ESAL Factor Design ESAL per year (20 years) (Appendix 76.A.) Passenger Car 2,080,500 41,610,000 0.0003*2=0.0006 24,966 2 axle/6 tire 109,500 2,190,000 0.1 18*2=0.236 516,840 truck Total ESAL 541,806 The calculated estimate of the equivalent 18,000 lb Single Axle Load (ESAL)= 541,806 We will use the same road section for Thomas Drive(N. 27'h Ave.) as we are proposing for Baxter Lane, 3-inches of pavement, 6-inches of 1.5" minus crushed gravel base course, and 15- inches of 6" minus pit run base course. This road section was previously calculated to be adequate for a loading of up to 2,478,535 18-kip ESAL's. Special Considerations Field data we have obtained shows groundwater depths across the site to vary between 2 feet and 6 feet from existing grade. Past experience with road construction in the Gallatin Valley has shown us that the clay loam encountered is highly moisture sensitive. All subgrade material should be proof rolled prior to placement of pit run to check for structural competence. Where saturated materials or soft spots are encountered one of three alternatives should be pursued. The first alternative is to allow the subgrade to dry out. For fine-grained soils, this is best accomplished by frequently scarifying them during warm climactic conditions. This is the least Desigtz Report-Page 27 of 28 expensive method but can be cause delays to the project with even minimal precipitation. Prior to stopping work for the day it is recommended the all scarified soils be re-rolled with a smooth drum roller to seal them against moisture infiltration. Option 2 includes over-excavation of the subgrade soils and replacement with compacted engineered fill. When this option is exercised we recommend that over-excavation occur down to native sandy gravels. This option is most effective when native sandy gravels are found within a reasonable depth from bottom of sub-base. Option 3 includes over-excavation of subgrade soils and installation of a geotextile fabric and approved geogrid. This option should be utilized whenever there isn't time for the subgrade to dry out and when native sandy gravels are located at excessive depths. 02395/ofce/design report Desigtl Report-Page 28 of 28 APPENDIX A Pump Curve Calculations: Pump#1 Pressure(psi) Pressure(feet) Flow 86 198.46 0.00 80 184.62 1034.43 60 138.46 2283.42 40 92.31 3107.34 20 46.15 3776.19 0 0.00 4356.41 OV Nil r �y , I / t. f4lcD.5 .7`/((( Sy COMPUTATION TABLE Flowing Capacities of Water-Free Floes Indicated in Gallons per Minute Coefficient 1.0- Inlet Edge Smooth/Round Coefficient.88- Inlet Edge Square/Sharp Coefficient.77- Inlet Edge Square/Raised Coefficient 1.1 -for Open End Pipe "A11 Results Rounded to Nearest 5 GPM PITOT GAUGE PSf 1-1/2" 2" 2-1/2" 3" 3-1/2" 4" r 1/2" so ;0 IU ,30 35 :,�0 680 980 2 85 150 240 345 470 615 775 960 1380 3 105 185 290 420 570 740 9=0 60 1670 nn 3 1 0 1960 5 135 2-40 380 545 745 950 1220 52J 2190 5 150 260 4)0 590 805 1050 1340 i640 2360 7 160 280 440 635 860 i140 1440 1760 2535 8 175 310 480 690 940 1220 1540 1920 2765 9 180 320 500 720 980 1290 '1640 2000 2880 10 190 340 530 765 i040 1360 1730 2120 3050 11 200 355 555 800 1090 1420 1800 2220 3195 12 210 370 580 835 1135 1490 1890 2320 3340 13 220 390 605 870 1185 1550 1960 2420 3485 14 230 405 630 910 1235 1610 2040 2520 3625 15 235 415 650 935 1275 1665 2105 2600 3745 16 240 430 670 965 1315 1720 2180 2680 3860 17 250 440 690 995 1350 1770 2235 2760 3975 18 255 455 710 1020 1390 1830 2310 2840 4090 19 265 465 730 1050 1430 1870 2365 2920 4205 20 270 480 750 1080 1470 1920 2430 3000 4320 22 285 505 790 1140 1550 2020 2550 3160 4550 24 295 525 820 r180 1605 2110 2560 3280 4720 26 310 550 860 1240 1685 2190 2770 3440 4950 28 320 570 890 1280 1745 2280 2180 3560 5125 30 330 590 920 1325 1805 2350 2980 3680 5295 32 340 610 950 1370 1860 2430 3080 3800 5470 34 355 625 980 1410 1920 2510 3170 3920 5640 36 365 645 1010 1455 1980 2580 3260 4040 5815 38 375 665 1040 1500 2040 2650 3350 4160 5990 40 380 680 1060 1525 2075 2720 3440 4240 6105 42 395 700 1090 1570 2135 2780 3520 4360 6275 44 400 710 1110 1600 2175 2850 361,0 4440 6390 45 410 730 1140 1640 2235 2920 3990 ' 560 6565 48 ^.2C 740 115 0 IviO 2275 2980 3770 6680 50 430 760 1190 171 2330 3040 0860 4760 6850 57 635 775 17 740 J 7i 3" 39 �_ - � i0 i , - 3. 0 ,QO 0 4;�'U 6960 54 445 785 1 230 1 779 7!'v 3 90 e920 7080 53 450 JOJ 12�0 80( 2n00 oG20 rj'J 5000 7200 58 460 820 11480 18455 2510 3280 4160 5120 7370 JOSEPH G. POLLARD CO., INC. 200 ATLANTIC AVENUE • NEW HYDE PARK, NY 11040 —TEL: 800.437-1146 FAX: 516-746-0852 WWW.Pollardwa ter,Com COMPUTATION TABLE (CONTINUED) PITOT GAUGE PSI 1-1/2" 2" 2-112" 3" 3-1/2" 4" 4-1/2" 5" 6"6 60 470 830 1300 1870 2550 3330 4230 5200 7484 62 480 850 1320 1905 2595 3380 4290 5295 7625 64 485 860 1340 1940 2635 3435 4360 5380 7750 66 490 875 1360 1970 2680 3490 4425 5460 7870 68 500 890 1385 1995 2/20 3740 ^— 90 5545 7985 . 70 505 900 1405 2025 2755 3595 4560 5530 8100 72 515 910 1425 2055 2795 3645 4620 5705 8220 / 74 520 925 1445 2080 2835 3595 4685 5785 8330 76 530 940 465 2110 2875 3745 4750 5860 8440 78 535 950 1480 2140 2910 3795 4810 5940 8555 80 540 960 1500 2165 2950 3840 4870 6015 8660 82 550 975 1520 2190 2985 3890 4930 6090 8770 84 555 985 1540 2220 3020 3935 4990 6165 8875 86 560 1000 1555 2245 3055 3985 5050 6240 8980 88 570 1010 1575 2270 3090 4030 51'10 6310 9085 ' 9 0 ,75 1020 1590 300 3125 ^075 .17' 6380 9190 92 580 1030 1610 2320 3160 4120 5225 64s5n 9290 94 590 1045 625 234 3195 4165 52 80 6520 9390 96 595 645 2?10 =;230 4 6590 9490 2 0 �^ 0 8 Ko 'I0'JJ 16,0 400 32,3 4250 3)9J 6"J60 9�90 00 605 1075 1680 2420 3295 4295 5450 6725 9585 102 610 1090 1695 2445 3330 4340 5500 6790 9780 104 620 11,00 17i0 2470 3360 4380 5555 6860 9875 106 625 1110 1730 2495 3395 4425 5610 6925 9970 108 630 - 1120 1745 2515 3425 4465 5660 6990 10065 110 635 1130 1760 2540 3455 4505 5715 7055 10160 112 640 1140 1775 2560 3490 4545 5765 7120 10250 114 645 1150 1790 2585 3520 4585 5815 7180 103A'0 116 650 1160 1810 2610 3550 4625 5870 t C �0 0 cm ra � ro ro (? i j" L-d i N g-d i S-d 4 w v i _ o t � o � v .o E w t tZ-d Z-d y t St-d j j 0d w £4-d u ao I w ro t w v I m B A — E S B E S rjt�• L t Thomas Drive I 1 P"7 t H.D Project Inventory Title: Baxter Square Project Engineer: Matt Cotterman Project Date: 09/18/03 07:31:32 PM Comments: Scenario Summary Scenario Base Active Topology Alternative Base-Active Topology Physical Alternative Base-Physical Demand Alternative Base-Demand Initial Settings Alternative Base-Initial Settings Operational Alternative Base-Operational Age Alternative Base-Age Alternative Constituent Alternative Base-Constituent Trace Alternative Base-Trace Alternative Fire Flow Alternative Base-Fire Flow Capital Cost Alternative Base-Capital Cost Energy Cost Alternative Base-Energy Cost User Data Alternative Base-User Data Liquid Characteristics Liquid Water at 20C(68F) Specific Gravity 1.00 Kinematic Viscosity 1.0804e-5 ftz/s Network Inventory Pressure Pipes 27 Number of Tanks 0 Number of Reservoirs 1 -Constant Area: 0 Number of Pressure Junctions 22 -Variable Area: 0 Number of Pumps 1 Number of Valves 0 -Constant Power. 0 -FCVs: 0 -One Point(Design Point): 0 -PBVs: 0 -Standard(3 Point): 0 -PRVs: 0 -Standard Extended. 0 -PSVs: 0 -Custom Extended: 0 -TCV's: 0 -Multiple Point: 1 -GPVs: 0 Number of Spot Elevations 0 Pressure Pipes Inventory 6.0 in 56.00 ft 12.0 in 1,522.00 It 8.0 in 4,549.00 ft 48.0 in 1.00 ft Total Length 6,128.00 it Title:Baxter Square Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\02\02395\watercad.wcd C&H Engineering&Surveying Inc WaterCAD v6.5[6.5120] 09/18103 08:55:29 PM O Haestad Methods,Inc_ 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 co- ca E �!`p 0 L7 c - c.�. m :3 0 r •- U 41 m ILcis `tQQQQQQQQQQQQQ4QQ � Q � M � g� -� Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z d Z d m m cD m Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ¢ Q Q Q Q o Q o 0 o m U C5 = m om= Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o Z o 0 o c 3 cn m - 0 m O C > m.r c U��(L 0 m Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q o T m Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z (n 3_^ 3 m .c d E c � m o cN-�� �Q ! QQQQ 0 0Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ZQ =� m Q QQ Q Q QQ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q _Q _Q Q \Q Co Q N m lJ 3 m �^ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z - Z o coC6 r' 0 C CO Q, t0 V' 'ITN f L- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 02 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < E O .0 P- LO p0 N ro- m Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q QQQQQ Q Q Q o Q o o o cU a) � � 5 Z ZZZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o Z 0 0 00 w � (n '� O 3 N w N N N N CL Fu m m v i .Q Ca a) UX� 3 m R s m o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o o 0 0 o o o O o 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •y= m y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o Q N N N N N N .N N N N N N .N N N N N N N m 'p r- � LL cra- 0 0 Q� m `Q Q Q _Q Q Q Q 'Q Q Q Q _Q Q Q Q Q Q N Q N 03 W m L Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 6 Z cq � co W - _L $i i-lL O O) to �{' V' <i' O Q v 2N N N N i3 m O 0 0 1� E Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z pu Z 'Z Z q o � coma -= 0 ��Z�' LO � 0 � ci c m Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q LV Q ON W O vi c�a m E Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o Z ti L LO 0 0 p p co rn o Lev ti rn LD v c v m Q N N N N .p O O O O O O O O O O O O .O O O O O 0 o O O O co m p O O O O O O O O O InO '7. IA_ 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m a 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 O o m m m p1 In LO In Ln LL7 LI Ln L7 Ir L7 LO If) In L7 In LO IO IO tir IL7 LO Lf1 Z�� <- - - - r- - - - - � m 3� ca p to IL N y fN (n N N to y y rn W y N M V1 (A N 3 N Ca U)tL O U C- C.) u m 3 a 'S C Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q _Q Q Q Q Q LO Q 't N 0 U O Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z m m cu m is 3 Lo m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m w Co 1p c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c C N ¢7 O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O o O O O m 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N oN � 0 N CO d' IO CD 1-- rb O O N L m O c- CV C) 7 t0 O ti eb Q� <- r- c- r- <- r- N N N m •- F- ZT O Scenario: Base Fire Flow Analysis Junction Report Label Elevation Zone Type Base Flow Pattern Demand Calculated Pressure (ft) (gpm) (Calculated)Hydraulic Grad (psi) (gpm) (ft) J-1 4,724.40 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.19 89.04 J-2 4,722.50 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.18 89.85 J-3 4,720.50 Zone Demand 7.41 Fixed 7.41 4,930.17 90.71 J-4 4,716.00 Zone Demand 14.82 Fixed 14.82 4,930.14 92.65 J-5 4,713.60 Zone Demand 10.58 Fixed 10.58 4,930.13 93.68 J-6 4,711.10 Zone Demand 3.17 Fixed 3.17 4,930.13 94.76 J-7 4,710.04 Zone Demand 6.35 Fixed 6.35 4,930.13 95.22 J-8 4,707.74 Zone Demand 5.29 Fixed 5.29 4,930.13 96.22 J-9 4,707.50 Zone Demand 9.53 Fixed 9.52 4,930.13 96.32 J-10 4,705.44 Zone Demand 8.47 Fixed 8.47 4,930.13 97.21 J-11 4,707.30 Zone Demand 14.82 Fixed 14.82 4,930.13 96.41 J-12 4,707.50 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed OM 4,930.13 96.32 J-13 4,709.90 Zone Demand 12.70 Fixed 12.70 4,930.13 9528 J-14 4,712.10 Zone Demand 8.47 Fixed 8.47 4,930.14 94.33 J-15 4,714.30 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.18 93.40 J-16 4,715.00 Zone Demand 8.47 Fixed 8.47 4,930.13 93.08 J-17 4,714.20 Zone Demand 12.70 Fixed 12.70 4,930.13 93.42 J-18 4,728.00 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.17 87.47 J-19 4,712.30 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.14 94.25 J-20 4,719.80 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.14 91.00 J-21 4,715.30 Zone Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.13 92.95 J-22 14,715.001 Zone I Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 4,930.13 93.08 Title:Baxter Square Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:1c&h\02\02395Awatercad_wcd C&H Engineering&Surveying Inc WaterCAD v6.5[6.5120] 09/18/03 08:53:52 PM ©Haestad Methods,Inc_ 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 c N a:: E 0 50. (D 0 0) o ca 0CL mU (D c w 2 CL :Z- C) ro N r- o N C3 a 0 C3 CDI co 0) N 0 0 0 008 q q q -: — oq C� 0 00 00q a 0 o o 00 60 a o o o a o Q o a a o CD o o o CD. a C:) o o o M m co co N0 C3 M0 00 00 00 0 0 'T a 0 0 Cl V)0 a 0 0 0 V) U) O Cl q O o O q O O 0 q 0 q O q q q 0 C3 q 0 q 0 :3 CD 05 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD C� 0 0 0 Ck 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 a a 0 CD, 0 0 0 F cmn -:my N 7- + 0 m co I- 'r n Cl) m 0 co n n co n co m m 0 M M r-- C13 cl 7 7 7 — — 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7r r7 7 Q . N CD 0 0 a 0 CD� a 0 0 0 0 o0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a to22 m n n n n n co n (1) co m co 1.11) co n co n n n n m n m Cl) n C13 co D r1i (3i c3i (3i l7i l3i Cri l7i Ci cli l3i Cli c7i (Yi cyi l7i Ci (3i Ci ai Gi ai at ai ai Gi Ci co 'IT 0 E m CO (D ttJ t) 0 F- 0 C13 M Cc$ 0 �j CD 0 �2 �2 �2 Z-0 q 32 N a 0 0 0 0 0 a 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 c; 6 CO M M 0 n 0 C9 m n co 0 co n m co n 0 m co n m 0 n m n m CO n m ll. Cli C;i Cli (3i ai (3i (7i ly) Cli Cl� Gi Cli Cli (7i ai Cri a) ai Oi Cyi l3i ai Gi G� Oi ai 0 V' 'Ir Nr V' IT V --T It 'IT 7It E'5 Co 0 a) m a) 2 Co E�o C0 CL (D (D co w 't co n ant w C3 n w 0 n r.- r- 11, rl- rl- to CD� r.- a C. 0 ui 0 L ED fl- 0 �? = r-: . tom- C� lc� C2 q C) `I: C� Ci 't (Ii " W) 0 (D cl q q C2 q Cl q ca C\i N co (0 M " Lo M (0 w 6 6 6 a co to 00 o 0 .cC, (0 (D LO CN 00 .!=.R c c c c c c c c c c a a a c c c c c c c c a c c c c 0 0. CL CL CL 0- 0- CL a CL 0- a CL CL CL CL 0. D- OL CL CL D- CL a CL 0. D- D- C)co o 00 00 0 0 0 000 0000 000 000 0 00 0 0 0 C a C) N -I- Vr if) 0 LO -zr a c. m 0 n 0 m 'T 'T o m co N m Lo CN N N 0 O�9 q q q r*-� 1-: M C� r--: t': q 0� q c) M t,-: M "': I'D M11) w MQ0 lc� (q -q 0.0 0 0 N 0 a C) a C) 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 a M C) 0 0 N ":r r 0 'T t V, CD -1 0 tt=(D (D > a 4� 0 a 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 q q q E 0000000000000000000000a0000 N@ U co n n Cl) n m tn m M M M n Cl) m co co C) Cl) co n co n M n co n 0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2 2 76 a a cl 0 a a 0 0 cl 0 a a a cl a 0 0 a 0 cl CIO a o q d q q q q q q q q 0 q q o q q q q q q 0 W N N CO CO 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 04 CO CO 00 CO (D CO 00 10 C6 (6 E -Co 0- a 0 0 a 0 0 0 a a a a 0 0 0 a 0 Cl a 0 a a 0 0 0 a a a 0-L) O C! O O O O O d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 Cl) c w r 0 0 " (D LO O M N " 0 M r- t- a N 0 1- MLO M 0 co -I- N M N 0 cz r.- N 0 It N M r co r r - 9 0 C14 04 C14 C14 CN --T 04 cli co C\A I* ell It cm x 04 m T: 0 V) zr Lo 'D I- co -C 605 co C� C? . . I . . . . . . . . . . C? C� C? C? 1� C� fL a- m 12- a- m EL m m rL a- fL cL m m a- a� cL a- m ii iL cL cL m a. cL p O)o Scenario: Base Fire Flow Analysis Pump Report Label Elevation Control Intake Discharge Discharge Pump Calculated (ft) Status Pump Pump (gpm) Head Water Grade Grade (ft) Power (ft) (ft) (Hp) PMP-1 4,732.00 On 1,732.00 4,930.19 122.78 198.19 6.14 Title:Baxter Square Project Engineer Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\02\02395\watercad.wcd C&H Engineering&Surveying Inc WaterCAD v6.5[6.51201 09/18/03 08:54:44 PM 0 Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Base Fire Flow Analysis Reservoir Report Label Elevation Zone Inflow Calculated (ft) (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (ft) R-1 4,732.00 Zone-2 -122.78 4,732.00 Title:Baxter Square Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\02\02395\watercad.wcd C&H Engineering&Surveying Inc WaterCAD v6.5[6.5120] 09/18/03 08:54:59 PM ©Haestad Methods,Inc_ 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 APPENDIX B vl� -1211` SECTION 35 T I S R 5 E SCALE I"= 300' rrs 27 T R.�11111 TR.B- F14'r A SEE FACE PAGE !�-NALL-D OLE DAVIS I IL A;Lg.�k�3 t is- 7 Ar S2 267-2725 COS.7050 -COTr 4790---3 ;A11827 e5 F,-5?, -Cos Lot;k 1 Za;,W JL �4 TR C TR.D I* zi—.1 se 1M 16A3 S - s IVI TRACT-Imo` 3 io 45r L3T 3 a4 C05 Lor 254.44 75 Z474a 5 157A.4 35w, i 0 0 LoT I 12 -12L Sf, 871.2 M4 n TRACT 2 n FA F- 3baTt3C L, m L-Z)-, 3 2 ,2 t4lifog 5U5.FtO.145A LOT LA f LOT LCT 5 110 7- Z. TRACT 3 LOT rr Sub.Iq 5 A ..t I A LOT 25� CL z f TRACT 4 -aT gy COS 331 I ORY'LLE *41- 27 F,..t46 9fey LOT 3 LOT 4< 14 N!" t 2-. L T 5 .071 L,42� -os 500 TR 5 F2 99 rTRMA� LOT 3 7-14 '55 f-4,zr Sus Q! L 843 WE fs -13 IM"a cis rpi F.a. z lc�r I L07 2 r. LL# LU 6 _TRACT' 7 T 5- 'Zi < ID TRACTS LC,-,2 LOT 2 LST 3:E ------------- ---------- --------------------------- ---- --- ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------- --------------- ------- ------ ------- -------- ----------- - --------------------- j AA40A LUS AAJ- 7�6 J APPENDIX C EAD END BARRICADE f// I COEDSTD DWG No,09810- TEMPORARY REfEN710N POND 4 N LOT 14 I A7 AOL 16'x25'MID DEPTH)x ' DEE Richard L. Miller 'I I III III TE PO REENr�ON POND 3 1 SIDE SLOE LOT 1 �.. z36'MID DgPTH)x1.5' DEE LOTH n L. MillerU) — — 1 SIDE SLOPE — — _1 wide Uti� Easeme t bT p — — — — 34yFm 1576 ( I ICI .+ M \ a ~^� 0\ OP/STREET I N Ronald K. Lewis r —�N LOT 22 k y LOT rj Janice E. Lewis 6 y In 17 Fm 724 "� < o o I (y Larilyn L. Miller Q, r I I H. Gwendolyn Swonby I y 20 LF of 15 PVC O 0.50 aaWw •• LOT 21 LOT 2 o 0 0 0 ( I �PLEX 93 Fm 3646 co - ooaa I LOT 11 QN J J J I Lil a LOT 20 LOT 3 rL:Ito - ( PP I I -- PP00 S `� LOT 19 LOLij T LOT 18 O M I LOT 12 LOT 6 M r o o O I ( James D. Secor LOT 17 LO l ( 13 Bonnie L. Secor i 14 Fm 777 t I [[ w - DRIVEWA , LOT 16 LO PP - — B.6LOT 14 0 I —{�aa�� J --- --- -- -- -- I LOT 15 LOT 8 e P 33' wide Private Road and — LOT 15 DRIVE WA dL Public Utility Easement 1=•:-^-9 L I 14 LOT 9 i� t LOT 16 o E SOT 7 �30 it _W J�) I LOT 13 LOT 10 'N Brenda L. Burden C� Fm I [.. LOT 17 0 2024132III EAIPORMY RETENTION POND _ �• ox61.1't������11Ijjjyyy,,pE x1.5' OE LOT 18 I 4: IDE, E 1 1 I '3 .� unty) CID 37' wide Private Road and Public Utility Easement ' I� LOT 19 133 I/ LJ Y FEN I LOT 20 x x Q q D S eeCO ���' I I U1 ELEI' �i0';' iW IDEAA-I•END BARRICADED I' - - LOT 22J ZONED Fa i COB DWG NO. GUY W Ee n �'rl�ONE R-1 � / ^ (City) kt o GUY WIRE � I LOT 23 w II I• go A V I LOT 24 ( w� E ti LOT 25 HOUSE I� PARK 3 LOT 23 a LOT 26 Bozeman Congregation of s (� (� E Jehovoh's Witnesses �O � 200 Fm 0- I ® GARAGE%APT. I LOT 27 �ur»n x I LOT 28 WELL WATER SERVI Alk ' D NTION POND 6 /I 30'x24'AIID DEPTH�xt.� DEE \ I LOT 29 David Osteen, Sr. A A SIDE S OPE / T.O. ELEV=4701.00 ,X ( Ruth Osteen IN B.O.PPPPPP. ELEVa4699.509 x X C'i 2021212 W 1s LF of 15' PVC 01.0% i • I Film 17, P. 1595 Plat / r �•a,,� ur w INSfASEE DEN 10,SSHEE C4.4 �•,f'1'�'r4N — m I o LOT 30 69.2 LF OF 15• PVC 01.13R J 64 LF OF 15 PVC 01.0x 1 PHN BOXES N GUY WIRES p P N� — — — — — — — PA E OF PAVING -EDGE 0 PAVIN o 65.26 U G GAS 330.52 S lin 165.26 0 0 �69'16'OU' o� - - - - - - = - - — — _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- __ — == vp�- == — - � �- - - � - — ?Pr PHNNEE REPLACE EXISTING 36• CSP W/ 82.29 LF OF 36- RCP W/ F s Existing 60' wide County Road Right of Way Easement S line of SW 1/4, Sec. 35 1200 140 1000 ° I ( I I 120 'J o� O 1 I I 1 I I ` I D Ko I I I I ! I ( 1A&0 z LLJ LAJ II g 0-0uj I 80 +- ui z 0 a � U- O 400 60 i 1 J I I i I L -4-T 1r I ! E ► �� t 0 FIGURE I-1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Rational Formula) 28 Storm Sewer#1 Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Circular Solving for ..................... Depth of Flow Diameter ........................ 15.0000 in Flowrate ........................ 3.5200 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0130 Computed Results: Depth ........................... 9.8788 in Area ............................ 1.2272 ft2 Wetted Area ..................... 0.8572 ft2 Wetted Perimeter................ 28.4031 in Perimeter ....................... 47.1239 in Velocity........................ 4.1066 fps Hydraulic Radius ................ 4.3457 in Percent Full .................... 65.8586% Full flow Flowrate .............. 4.5678 cfs Full flow velocity .............. 3.7221 fps Critical Information Critical depth .................. 9.1333 in Critical slope .................. 0.0062 ft/lt Critical velocity ............... 4.4914 fps Critical area ................... 0.7837 ft2 Critical perimeter .............. 26.8285 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 4.2066 in Critical top width .............. 15.0000 in Specific energy................. 1.0814 ft Minimum energy.................. 1.1417 ft Froude number ................... 0.8783 Flow condition .................. Subcritical Storm Sewer#2 Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Circular Solving for..................... Depth of Flow Diameter ........................ 15.0000 in Flowrate ........................ 4.4300 cfs Slope ........................... 0,0041 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0130 Computed Results: Depth ........................... 13.6876 in Area ............................ 1.2272 ft2 Wetted Area ..................... 1.1747 ft2 Wetted Perimeter................ 38.1153 in Perimeter....................... 47.1239 in Velocity ........................ 3.7712 fps Hydraulic Radius ................ 4.4381 in Percent Full .................... 91.2505 % Full flow Flowrate .............. 4.1363 cfs Full flow velocity.............. 3.3705 fps Critical Information Critical depth .................. 10.3797 in Critical slope ......... O.0067 ft/ft Critical velocity ............... 4.8492 fps Critical area ................... 0.9136 ft2 Critical perimeter.............. 29.3213 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 4.4866 in Critical top width.............. 15.0000 in Specific energy ................. 1.2697 ft Minimum energy.................. 1.2975 ft Froude number ................... 0.7464 Flow condition .................. Subcritical Swale- I'deep w/4:1 side slopes and P wide bottom Channel Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Trapezoidal Solving for..................... Depth of Flow Flowrate ........................ 4.4300 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0041 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0350 Height.......................... 12.0000 in Bottom width .................... 12.0000 in Left slope ...................... 0.2500 ft/ft(V/H) Right slope ..................... 0.2500 ft/ft(V/H) Computed Results: Depth ........................... 8.8926 in Velocity ........................ 1.5080 fps Full Flowrate ................... 9.0223 cfs Flow area ....................... 2.9377 ft2 Flow perimeter.................. 85.3305 in Hydraulic radius ................ 4.9575 in Top width....................... 83.1411 in Area ............................ 5.0000 ft2 Perimeter ....................... 110.9545 in Percent full .................... 74.1053 % Critical Information Critical depth .................. 5.8568 in Critical slope .................. 0.0277 ft/ft Critical velocity............... 3.0745 fps Critical area ................... 1,4409 ft2 Critical perimeter.............. 60.2963 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 3.4412 in Critical top width .............. 58.8543 in Specific energy ................. 0.7764 ft Minimum energy .................. 0.7321 ft Froude number ................... 0.4083 Flow condition .................. Subcritical O �7 00 C7 0 o C r- � 0-) O -TIC) F- 0 O z on Fq Z � r / N FTI 12" to Zl! �:v�f�t. ��a �l'',�„r, .tl�5-�`�,`�f�lF(#��� ����/ €---t C_f" �, /✓f l.'''jf"t'�� 1200 140 1000 ° ° I I I 120 vj it I I I f cr- ui 600 I1 1/ 80 w o � II I o uj ;00 60 F- r F dI .1ui I _ I i � 1 I I f I -, r_ t FIGURE I-1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Rational Formula) 28 Storm Sewer#3 Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Circular Solving for..................... Depth of Flow Diameter ........................ 15.0000 in Flowrate ........................ 2.1100 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0040 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0130 Computed Results: Depth ........................... 7.6451 in Area ............................ 1.2272112 Wetted Area ..................... 0.6287 ft2 Wetted Perimeter ................ 23.8521 in Perimeter ....................... 47.1239 in Velocity ........................ 3.3561 fps Hydraulic Radius ................ 3.7956 in Percent Full .................... 50.9670% Full flow Flowrate .............. 4.0855 cfs Full flow velocity .............. 3.3292 fps Critical Information Critical depth ................— 6.9531 in Critical slope .......... .:...... 0.0055 ft/ft Critical velocity3.7903 s ............... fp Critical area ................... 0.5567 ft2 Critical perimeter.............. 22.4672 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 3.5679 in Critical top width.............. 14.9601 in Specific energy................. 0.8121 ft Minimum energy .................. 0.8691 ft Froude number................... 0.8343 Flow condition .................. Subcritical Storm Sewer#4 Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Circular Solving for..................... Depth of Flow Diameter ........................ 15.0000 in Flowrate ........................ 2.1000 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0113 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0130 Computed Results: Depth ........................... 5.6919 in Area ............................ 1.2272 ft2 Wetted Area ..................... 0.4271 ft2 Wetted Perimeter................ 19.9097 in Perimeter ....................... 47.1239 in Velocity........................ 4.9170 fps Hydraulic Radius ................ 3.0890 in Percent Full .................... 37.9459 % Full flow Flowrate .............. 6.8669 cfs Full flow velocity .............. 5.5956 fps Critical Information Critical depth ........,......... 6.9359 in Critical slope .................. 0.0055 ft/ft Critical velocity............... 3.7846 fps Critical area................... 0.5549 ft2 Critical perimeter .............. 22.4327 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 3.5619 in Critical top width .............. 149575 in Specific energy................. 0.8500 ft Minimum energy .................. 0.8670 ft Froude number ................... 1.4610 Flow condition .................. Supercritical Storm Sewer#5 Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Circular Solving for ..................... Depth of Flow Diameter........................ 15.0000 in Flowrate ........................ 2.0600 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0100 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0.0130 Computed Results: Depth ........................... 5.8223 in Area ............................ 1.2272 ft2 Wetted Area ..................... 0.4403 ft2 Wetted Perimeter................ 20.1780 in Perimeter ....................... 47.1239 in Velocity........................ 4.6786 fps Hydraulic Radius ................ 3.1422 in Percent Full .................... 38.8156 % Full flow Flowrate .............. 6.4598 cfs Full flow velocity.............. 5.2639 fps Critical Information Critical depth .................. 6.8665 in Critical slope .................. 0.0055 ft/ft Critical velocity ............... 3.7613 fps Critical area................... 0.5477 ft2 Critical perimeter .............. 22.2934 in Critical hydraulic radius ....... 3.5376 in Critical top width .............. 14.9464 in Specific energy ................. 0.8254 ft Minimum energy .................. 0.8583 ft Froude number ................... 1.3720 Flow condition .................. Supercritical �f �Y jJ„i Cr.✓��:�_ �"rF t...-�w: L_SJ �fE {...vt�•,,f�E£:,t t.I�.Fr}��;`�.�-I,\� I a� r 0. 1200 140 I 1000 ° ° I 120 O I i I o I iI I i I i i1-71I u LL II I a i I sow z I o 1. I G J 0 > 400 _ 60�;Oo I i. I I 171 ' l - ` I i I 0I o I I I1 Loll 21 n v FIGURE I-1 TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Rational Formula) 28 APPENDIX D V)(4 D:D z z ui cn_ ui Ln Lo:D CA W Lq 10 w :n U):D--.) 6 4 U) z 0 L 0 cl� 7 0 C) IL L i Z z 0 LLI :-;_ 0 z Co CL,J C) bi Ln < U3 V)M D- LIJ < < U LLJ cn M f D Ln LL]LJ (n uj <x M ID -.j z U- L < C)0 LJ z 0 z 41- UJ X 2 w LLI < z V�-J >'i u 0 71 uj w cn 13� -j LLJ 0:: Z>x >Li oo N, 0 X Z -,n <ca N try Elf L-0 F-<:D (n IL 0 mil` Q:�Z LO N ui (.D D 0 0 CO L, J, w n Lj W U-) cjz N < < m C) LL ILL z (D 0 m cr CL V) LU w 1-- 0 L) Ld< 09 4 CL:D ZD 1 LIJ Go cn in- V)X z w 1 CN C�D < CL (n j din Ir ; 1 F- 0:D 0 ct,- z10 C.)0 E -Lo V) LLJ uj 0 C)— LLJ C-) uj bi 0-0 �j -:�: 11f cn w cr 2E w Ji LJ LU cn CO a LLJ LLJ < < [L > F- LLj z LLI < a U) F- m z < th,0 Of Of C) < -j 00 LIJ co W < Ld >Z tt CK 2� LLJ—, =1 (n m 0 Lu LJ V)L/I z i� D co (A 0 z LIJ < IM DMZOW X Z) =3 LIJ < C)< ui (A z L� D od i5 z 2 U z -J w (n LLJ =) :) (n j w E3 c) z ZD E ��i 0 <C� .n Ld C) 0 LD V)X x Z I-iJ LIJ x - 0 L, < LLJ z ::D Cl- W U M 00 < X. -Ij 0 N U) CN 0 133 ILL Im x ILLJ (A a� — 0 -j CL CL LLJ 0- LJ U co a- 0 w a_ 6i 4Z) C) (A 0 o- W W- I--C) N < CE z < n LLJ ul a. :D L'I <( i LLJ z >L'i 0 0 -j Q) ,< 0 0 a� <0 'In — 0 Ii < LLJ < < LO A - LU ft�Z IN Li 5i L'i x o L LC o U1 -,, > Ul m i ui (f) Ld <-i F�, <ct� A :Z) I'D < > 3;: - r)V) �o 0 LL :�: 0 1 C 0 Of - CL Z -,) � ill� 0 Ij 1 0 0 1 Y�� i r)U) (00 L, 2zz n Of < uj 0 0 w (10< Ld LLJ (n 1�—IL F :E`11a< ui Z W<ILIJ (N Lr) w Z 0 J z < 0 LIJ Li > W L'i 3� Of L'i cl� x w L'i Lf) U UJ X W Ld L')W Z V) in 0- 0 M uj CL, ry 0 D <0V)Of-)w cn a.0 C) Uj U) < Lj LJ Lj u Wt 0 CD rif >Lj Uj= X z < <L, "(0 M 4'1 F Ln 0 t) L <C 0 LJ z<m Cif Lo a: C) In 9 u z L" off 77) U C) (if LIJ (n U 2 LU 47 0 LIJ z 0 1-- L'i Lj ct I(f) z d Z-- LLJ < LAJ LJ n V) CL (D V)-J W z rn D :�E It :D D <w z 0 Z C)0 W z IL ILL) < LLJ < -,C < L, 0> P tjj W LLI x 0 L� D M LLJ Zj 0 0 C3 U V) < < Z�: W of LIJ Li >Ljj LLJ < :D NI 0 D L'i z C&K ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING. INC: TEST HOLE LOG" 1 PROJECT: Baxter Square Sub. Div. PROJECT r: 02395.1 HOLE: Test Pit+ 1 CONFIRMATION : LOCATION: Baxter Lane COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sec. 35, T1S,R5E DATE: 03/24/03 RECORDED BY: AVP DRILL METHOD: Case 420 EXCAVATOR: Bill Eddy Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 6.5 Feet DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION -- Dark Brown silty loam topsoil with very few gravels, (5%).Low density,medium plasticity,no dominant structure, soft,very few organics(roots),tine grained-silty organic soil, (OL). One foot in thickness 1' l 2" Tan clay lolls with some silt,moderate"in sift,,"strength,medium to higI.toughness, dilatancy-slow, high plasticity,very few organics(roots),high cohesive characteristics,medium stiffness,moderate to high adhesive characteristics. Estimated=90%of material pass No.4 sieve. Moisture content increasing with depth. 2' No cobbles found. I\To gravels found,USCS-(CL). Soils have low permeability characteristic. 3, i 4' i I 60" Soil throuEh depth same as found above except for observed change in moisture content Ground water observed at 5 feet below top of bank.. Approxinnate thickness of clay loam soils are A.5 :eel. Ditra.ng di crt,ase v he-n e7:cavaffii -ravels. Permeability ah gr i� a a 2 " c r ne,of 7r S bl__, o X .. r rises t0 .J ie J c, Vital" ai ed�ra`��elS and�O bbieS �;Sn /� , ; c-_ of nn t of s Idy sarura� •�d �S - (GP) j,0% .:., ;, 3)0��sand,40%'pr an,,,s 20%,„o1) es. I End of Excavation, due to Groundwater. . i [ i i I 9' 10, 11' 12' c:\c&i,\02v02"95\023,95,i'7ESTcoc-Lwpd C&:H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG 2 PROJECT: Baxter Square Sub. Div. PROJECT 4: 02395.1 HOLE: Test Pit'1 2 CONFIRMATION r: LOCATION: Baxter Lane COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sec. 35, TI S,R5E DATE: 03/24/03 RECORDED BY: AVP DRILL METHOD: Case 420 EXCAVATOR: Bill Eddy Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 6.5 Feet DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION -- Dark Brown silty loam topsoil with very few gravels, (2%). Low density, medium plasticity,no dominant structure, soft, very few organics (roots),fine grained- silty organic soil, (OL). 27 inches thickness. f � 21 27" Tan clay soils,moderate"in situ"strength,medium to high toughness, dilatancy-none,high 3' plasticity,very few organics (roots),high cohesive characteristics,medium stiffness,high adhesive characteristics. Estimated-_-95%of material pass No.4 sieve. Moisture content increasing with depth. No cobbles or gravels found,USCS-(CL). Soils have very low permeability characteristic. 4' I i 63" Soil through depth same as found above--cept observe ch2nQ% in:7nois-mre con-Len". Ground waver ObSel�'�� at 5,7 _eCt bp-low%C:p OT 1Oa11iC. Api)I'0.-,;1ma1e ehtClU?.c,SS Q"Cla;,soils are 3 rt Di;;g i r di7r,:c�ilty II C ;aSe 1 ' n li ii eF.CflValiilg avelS. erll�eavilI G_gra;=ls high. Start of sandy saturated lgi-a-,,eis and cOb1)IeS. USCS - ((7TP) � T I 90° End O7 E3_CZ VaaOn, 17; i'avB1S. 47r0]71U ester 011y Qi1dS at bOtL Of hole. U 9' 10, Xr 12' G:\c&1)\02\02395\02395.I ITESTLO G-2.wpd CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO Bearing Ratio of Soaked Sample(CBR) 12.0 a —�—Bearing Ratio of Soaked 10.0 - I iI •� I Sample(CBR) i —� ° 8.0 d m o I O' is 6.0 o I Point#1 4.0 ++ 2.0 85.0 90.0 95.0 100.0 105.0 110.0 115.0 Dry Density as Molded(PCF) 180.0 i I U c120.0 -•----- -- --- -- --- ---- --- ------ ----------- � I I •,n 90.0 - --- ------ ------------- - - ----- ---- - �- ------ U) °� 60.0 ) --------- ------------------ ----- ------------ ---------- ---- ---------- � 30.0 -- O O O O O O O O O O O 0 OO C� O 1 O p CD 1,q O 0 N N M ri �{ � � a O O O O CDO O O CDO p AS T M: D698 Maximum Dry Density: 105.3 Optimum Moisture: 18.5% i TEST RESULTS i Point#1 Point#2 Point#3 ATTERBERG LIMITS Percent of rur-r Dry Dorisity 94.8°l_° -- (i OUID L!I✓IT Dtw Density As Molded/nrrl i OQ� � uL�;i!IC.. Lilh/li{ r ,� Dry Density After 96 Hour Soak(pcf) 99.1 PLASTIC INDEX Moisture Content(%): Before Compaction 18.9% CL^,SSIPiCAT101� After Compaction 18.9°0 I USCS € Top V After Soak 24.3% E ' A.ASHTO Average After Soak I 22.3% Swell(% of Initial Height) I 0,5% � DESGRIPTiON Surcharge Amount(psf) 102.4 Bearing Ratio of Soaked Sample(CBR) 7.1 E1 Remarks: PROJECT: C & H PROJECT NO.: 11A231.101 LAB NO.: 18316 LOCATION: Baxter Square SAMPLED BY: Client DEPTH: DATE SAMPLED: Rec.4/1/03 REMARKS: DATE TESTED: 4/3/03 HKM ENGINEERING INC. MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST 108 IIII I II ! ill I I II IIII Ili i I � I ! II I II III III II I i i II it l 106 1 IIII � II IIII - Illl IIII III ! IIII li ! I i _Ii ! III l � ! ! IIII , IIII IIII i � il I ! ► IIII i ! II I j i I i _V\ � � 102 IIII IIII 11 ► ! illI N IIII i l II II I .I . I II III III 11i I ! I III II IIII IIII IIII IIII II I III 1°° III I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I II I I I lii ! IIII Illi I ! Illll _ II iil 1 i i �7,,V Tor b Sp.U. - I 98 250 = 12 1=, 16 18 20 22 24 i t Vdatercontent, °o i i T esi specification: ASTiv!D 698-91 Procedure A Standard r // ..i:�vi .aSJ�..c 1 v;. -_ I i0 t. �i -- I I I O/0�,........_ % tI I 1,T ( I- i\T i !NT I 0.0 i i ' l EES i RESULTS f Maxim__ r_n_u dly densi� = 105.3 D C.f I 'Sandy Lean Clay j Optimum moistd,e= 18.5 % Project No. 20A222.101 Client: C&H Enginee ing and Surveying;Inc. Remarks: Project: Miscellaneous Testing Sampled By:AP/C&H103-24-03 Tested By:.T1v?L-33/HK1M/03-26-03 le Location: Subgrade MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST HKM ENGINEERING INC. LAB ID: 1915. Page J 8 Lesson 1 ASPHALT TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION 2. Select from Table 3, a Truck Factor for each vehicle type found in step i . 3. Select, from, Table 4, a single Growfh Factor for all vehicles or separate F actors for each vehicle type, as appropriate. 4. Multiply the number of vehicles of each type times the Truck, Factor and the Growth Factor (or Factors) determined in steps 2 and 3. 5. Sum the values determined in step 4 to obtain Design EAL. Fig. 1 iS an exa maple OI a PJOrksheet S OWing Il1e calculation Of Design of EA 1- for 3 two_lanc rural highway i0110;%.', the procedure outliP.; TABLE 4 GROWTH FACTORS' _ Annual Growth Rafe, percent LK No Growfh 2 4 5 5 7 8 10 " I 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 i 2.0 212 L04 105 Los 2J7 218 2110 V j 3 3.0 3.05 3.12 3.15 3.13 321 325 131 i 4.0 4. 12 4.25 i3i 4,37 44 451 164 i ..0 510 142 153 164 515 187 a.i 1 ( iq ^,n M f p 39 � ., � �� 1 ( ( /.V %.'^;J l,�J J. 1'-t V.J.7' V.v�./ G.�L ... , 1 3 i G.!.I 806 121 ...JJ 120 1120 Mo4 1144 I .J 915 1 5o 1103 KA2 1108 IM 2 1?0 MAI 15.03 15,92 110 -,7.89 119S 21 33 15 ( 15.0 17,29 20.02 21.58 2128 2113 205 31.77 16 I 110 13.54 2112 2156 25,67 2TB9 3M 3195 17 17.0 MY 2170 2184 2121 30.84 3175 4a55 i 8 18.0 2i,4 1 2165 28,13 30,9 i 34,0n 3T45 4S60 19 4.0 2184 9^b7 3n.54 3176 3/.33 41 A, 5W6 I I 20 20.0 24,30 09.78) 33.05 3S79 4110 45 t?• 5718 � 25 25.0 32.03 4 1 6"5 47.73 54.86 6125 /,-. r I 93.35 I 30 3M 40,57 5518 6144 7106 94,46 1 i 3.28 44 i 9 35 35.0 4199 7165 9132 i i L43 0814 17M M.02 N . r) n - 1 rate `actor r lyi`Iere r = 1VrJ and is W zero. If Annual Growfh is zero, Growth Factor = Design Period. APPEND [ CES APPENDIX 76.A Axle Load Equivalency Factors for Flexible Pavements (single axles and pt of 2.5) pavement structural number (S1') axle load (kips) 1 2 3 4 5 6 2 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 4 0.003 0.004 04 0.003 0.002 0.002 6 0.011 0.017 0.017 0.013 0.010 0.009 8 0.032 0.047 0.05i 0.04i 0.034 0.031 10 0.078 0.102 0.118 0.102 0.088 0.080 12 0.168 0.198 0.213 0.189 0.1 66 14 0.328 0.358 0.399 0.388 0.360 0.342 lv 0.59i Q513 C.646 0.6=?_b 0.623 0.606 18 Loo Loo Loo 1,00 1.00 1.00 20 1.61 1.57 1.49 1.47 ]..51 1.55 22 2.48 2.38 2.17 2.09 2.18 2.30 24 3.69 3.49 3.09 2.89 3.03 3.27 26 5.33 4.99 4.31 3.91 4.09 4.48 28 7.49 6.98 5.90 5.21 5.39 5.98 30 10.3 9.5 7.9 6.8 7.0 7.8 32 13.9 12.8 10.5 8.8 8.9 10.0 34 18.4 16.9 13.7 11.3 11.2 12.5 36 24.0 22.0 17.7 14.4 13.9 15.5 38 30.9 28.3 22.6 18.1 17.2 19.0 40 39.3 35.9 28.5 22.5 21.1 23.0 42 49.3 45.0 35.6 27.8 25.6 27.7 44 61.3 55.9 44.0 34:0 31.0 33.1 46 75.5 68.8 54.0 41.4 37.2 39.3 48 92.2 83.9 65.7 50.1 44.5 46.5 50 112 102 79 60 53 55 F om wide? Dcsign of Ta61e.D.-^_, copVri ht r✓ 199 the Anier;can Association o�5tee Hi;_',=:av ion -:ncia.is, Wasai2�r.on; _,.C. Used by oe,^,ission. PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS , I N C . PAVEMENT DESIGN .-,:�D RE}I.-�: 1LFFA T IC)N 311 i'riple TABLE 31 Axle Load Epivaiemy Kwmrs ?or Flexible Parer MN, SKY", Axles. and 1)1 of 3.0 Axle load. Pavetnent structural numoer(SN) kips 1 2 3 4 5 6 MO 2 0.0008 0.0009 0.0006 0.000> 0.0002 0.0002 I 4 0104 0.008 0106 R004 0112 C1002 r)03 6 0114 0130 0128 0.010 0.012 0.010 8 0133 0170 Q000 O.0i5 0.040 0.0 34 10 0 082 0.132 0.168 0132 0,HA AD 86 12 0- 73 0131 0196 0.260 UP Al 81, C; 14 0.3 32 0.388 OA68 RAQ 0.391 0.358 ,) i i�, 0.594 3-> G.69J 6 0. 0.69.3 0.65 i 0.62: 6 18 1 TO NO I TO 1.00 I TO Ito 20 1.60 113 1.41 1.38 1A4 IS I '6 22 2A7 219 116 113 117 2.16 1 24 317 3.33 219 139 210 206 26 5.29 432 315 3.08 3.33 301 28 7.43 6.56 4.88 3.93 4,17 5.00 30 10.2 0.9 6.5 5.0 5.1 6.3 32 118 121 8.4 6.2 6.3 7.7 34 112 117 10.9 7.8 7.6 9.3 36 231 M 14.0 17 9A i I.0 38 30.6 26.2 17.7 11.9 11.0 i3.0 40 318 312 212 M Ill 0.3 42 418 K6 2T6 17.0 15.5 i,8 44 60.6 V6 310 21.0 10.- 20.6 45 717 . x: ?iohway and tramporabor WON;, a_. D.C. 1991 5h par-Mon_ C SAW 4 t 11 n FoRondag mhbl# baud an to n t F Hcon)mende:d level of reliability Furiciion.,l C:InsiFication Urban Dural [nterstatc/;;-ee,,�i1 85-99.9 80-99.9 ( PrinMA arrenal; R0-91) 7-9.5 Co tumors 80-95 75-�5 Local 50-80 50-SO O tra]l Standard denailon Was rmommenGed by'.AASHTO are030 to X- O ii)r Figid pavements and 0A0 ,o O. O ^r : :� ; �a`.': ii;5. II';e lo' val'u- :ire .ISrC 1 when traffic predictions are nine reliable. VahIe1 derived irfrorn th�,- T est are (139) for rigid pa 'enl,ref): and OA9 An .`IeI J 3.50 CHA'PTFR T;IREF TABLE 3.25 Rccommended m.Values I`or ;\,icxlii�ins Strucl,ual Layer Coc1(1cients Oh UntrciltLd RLI c 811d SL!hhi1Sc :\'ILllcrltllS Ill i^iC.Ci171' Pavccml nts P Crcellt O1 Illlla pavcment SIRICU11C iS eXj)OSt(1 to illolSturP. In'PiS tlDlpi-Oachlll? S"HUratlon Quality Of Less than Greater than crr?lnP` 1 is 1-5% J 5 is 2 Excelleilt I.-DO-1.35 1. S-1.30 i30-l.?0 0 0. Good I.;�- 1.2: !.25—;.15 i.i5-1.00 00 =air 1.25-1.15 !.iS-<-05 I.00-0_80 r1.«0 Poor 1.15-1.05 1. 80 0.80-0.60 0.60 ' V y aoor 1.05-0.95 0.95-0.75 0.75-0.40 0.-0 Source: Grricle for of POI-t' cIll SO`ncni American Association of State HiQhc.<}' anti Transnortmion Oificial>:. \� ashineuln. D.C.. 199 ::itil p -mission. ,- 0. I ! I I i L v l i t t J Q-J - j 1 III � I ;r- 0.0 �rf 0 irJ'J.07J r� rYn ',0�nJ� "n�i.✓^✓ 7�:1�-^� E:12 S:iC h.!Odl11LS. tic rib%try,, qr the ...5��...3 ii Concrete ;at na rj PIGURF 3.IS Cr!mr[ 'Co �11�11;1':Il,' `;l i'll'.'llt!-1!I il:"t'( �Ul'lil'.'!C'I?i (rig) ;il tii 'a:i. A] the ;-c„Iie It niodulltt` (,grim of_Slrrrr,Ili,hit(1r rt O T,(rnc��or�ru�nn /)/('ir nrh. �I';n'lrirr�7r�rr. l).( l Vrl,�'. trial!j>crnrircirm I r 0.20 <0 -35-� - 2.0 3J J 25 50 { _ i 40 I c 70 S, 2.5 20 - - - - �_ - — - - - - - - - - m- 0.70 30 v I �. o 0.03 15 20 4.0 012 3.5 N U t by averaging c-rreia- Ivy ^' G I -0 ! or DeA n O1 J T.'.c.Uf'_S, Ame con ASS0Ct01i ?. Dag the Cause and rate of pavement deierloraiion, preoicdon of op rnd ili':le :Or inorv=- ilOn, Hilo e�Hllidii07 Oi the rilOSi CO 10 ?ical ieihabili�aiiOni S 'aiegY. ?aveilent management Can 7e applied at the project NVei. Or at the ntt',vork IeVel. �" very dependent it✓On vn- ano-htr, they are seldom applied a ithough both levels are e ry dope rnlr - A r e e ..ei Oil: le el H'�plies to me ,vhoe sySiern in a global sense. i0r t.,c Sa:, pL p0S i! 'eilz,�Ci1•: refers i0 SySteTlV✓:de averages and 1S used for S}rS-i budgeting and peri0r- mance modeling. This chapter addresses only the project-levt! aspects. P,-o.jCCt-level , t ied and Ore iiporia:t than Pave t . miagmt i i s appliedi KnouChout i l pavement design. Pa:emeili n��u;�l�el�:cr,t I:, ��;�r . � nz !ie of a pavement, whereas pavement design is completed and Forgotten once the pavemenl is roil Tally In service. 3,52 CHAPTER THRER 70 70 I i 50 � 3 K 0.10 — � — - - - - - -- - -- - -r- -- - - - "-- - - 14 I '0 0 13 5 I ,2 Z 0.48 ? 10 4 10 i I 4-0 0.(r3 I —_-- -- + - - -- - - - -- --- ----- --- 30 I i I f I ,, J�'u!e Jam("✓cJ 7,O;i, ='.�J t$ ..-rJ-'; ,l!i"7J". nb`,_ , fm yr r71!7Ci: ��' :i�i!'.ur , i'. Trr/rrs�>ur?uliull OjJir`ial.�•. ,u.rlr;n�uut. !)_r.. 147.1, tr11%r�)r'rrni�'srnn) 3.8.1 Pavemeliii Deterioratiorl r i � f,. two '�l�'�n,e.11 a�teriorati0n Or c!slr_.�:; r�_n �� c!�ssi!I�d into v,o ol�slc calie,ories )or all and iunciio!lal. Tile ;?lost ser!Otls C1l,I- Orj` IS structural. Sll'liCllli'�ll lellOr�l(1011 1'e.ti ]�i.S In 1�eC ,iCeC] 1}J��!Ijl 10 Carrjl I0:)d Lind a CeCre<iSed ni�nl lil?. u:)c;ion�ll deleriorati�:) can Dead to and 0T-1, ht!i If !S C)dl'_ iU rlde QULlll(l.' atld fr?CROP, 1 CiIEUaCtprlSUCS. A iilli'rdl 'und IeSS ICCtlileC il';J OI rYl "eI11eP( dt ttrlorIltjon is PilVlrOil!lleil.! l'1 Cle el'IOraI!0!l, ':,!h'c l most p lveil)enl enzoine"l-s lhlilir) with CunCllOniil and structural dciler!Orllilon. i nvironmental CiC_'(Crior�m;oll only the pa\Ien-jent nla!eriak :md %vi1) Lcntrcil)v , ;;n!;7i1 ifs--II^ as cithcr Cilnciloiml or struclur�d deicriorn[Mll. ` LI T� Y 'a e, naliabil`v -i d S d e p 7-1 d o i 9 factors R I tie values o h;a a-L i di L,)/ 01 Ell e blra-Lilc and -D':7 TT i:iserd aas i-_,-)_,�ut to t'lle- equa- -D- -Qos�ad. �-,-en�-oral. use -,��There a det-aile anal 0 Du, Va ties- o 12 Z�, 10 n - Vp Iliance o" :�u,ch d a a is n, o t I n-i-aa.d e_ are n I ao 22.1. -p-o p o se,a fuL.-art- ral T,C lv ',-10— DD "'D 0'1'� ji A_i ID 1 D D 7 ' P 17 r7 P. - t 1ADI E 22<1 E)-anda-d Davlat-a L ;:�[Ues Corresponding t.o Se-k--c-tad Laveds of 4 r D Olb p;J tand, a 0.25 j 4 �D.7 2S 2 98 2.0 5 4 99 -2327 n90 [ i k SN = 2.259825244 Reliability= 90 Standard Deviation = 0.49 ESAL= 100,000 resilient modulus= 8940 design serviceability loss= 1.7 Zr= -1.282 231125E-06 2 SpectraPaxe2--Tensar Earth Technologies,Inc. Page 3 of Copyright C11998-2001 Printed on 9118103 7:08:53 Pi\f BASE COURSE REINFORCEMENT INPUT DATA Course Name Type(in) Thickness(in) Layer Coefficient Drainage Factor Asphalt Surface Dense-Graded Asphalt 3 0.42 N/A N/A Dense-Graded Asphalt 0 0.40 N/A Base Course Dense-Graded Asphalt 6 .13 1.0 Subbase Course Dense-Graded Asphalt 12 .12 1.0 Subgrade Resilient Modulus =8940(psi) Reliability =90(%) Standard Normal Deviate=-1.282 Standard Deviation=0.49 Initial Serviceability=4.2 Terminal Serviceability=2.5 Geogrid Type=Tensar@ None Depth from Surface to Geogrid =O(in) Traffic Benefit Ratio(TBR)= 1 ANALYSIS RESULTS Structure Number(Unreinforced) = 3.48 Unreinforced Pavement, ESALs 1,349,424 Reinforced Pavement, ESALs = NIA current file name Project Name: Design Case: i T ; : r z N I (f) i' C N Q) — -0 a C � C O cY) c� U O o 0 v c — Ln .m C N I (D Ocran I c - (D - cv m _ O to o to 0 0 - O T - N - N - N + _ = � �� O O _ N r 'T N to C i a) + l _ (z W ul/sdi�) d `s Inpow au@IjIsaj o a Pos pagpeo OAIIOOJ13 c - + o a) o T rn z ; O V X O T _ if O to - Co O C + If L O to C O _ II (D O II (I _ Z) - N C, 5 — O O E I X _- _ 1111'' q T � + _ r'dt III t_d p. .I:. .:I j:l _ v= n O O O O Lr s _ U) N L = ti EN o m o a a 10 0co Co o - f �,� t f k .t4.✓ SN = 3.312812553 Reliability= 90 Standard Deviation= 0.49 ESAL= 1,000,000 resilient modulus = 8940 design serviceability loss= 1.7 Zr= -1.282 -1.07218E-05 SpectraPave2--Tensar Earth Technologies,Inc. Page 3 of 4,' Copyright 01998,2001 Printed on 911 9"03 1:3 13 2 PM BASE COURSE REINFORCEMENT INPUT DATA Course Name Type(in) Thickness(in) Layer Coefficient Drainage Factor Asphalt Surface Dense-Graded Asphalt 3 0.42 N/A N/A Dense-Graded Asphalt 0 0.40 N/A Base Course Dense-Graded Asphalt 6 0.13 1.0 Subbase Course Dense-Graded Asphalt 15 0.12 1.0 i r r Subgrade Resilient Modulus=8940(psi) Reliability =90(%) Standard Normal Deviate=-1.282 Standard Deviation=0.49 Initial Serviceability=42 Terminal Serviceability=2.5 i Geogrid Type=Tensar®None Depth from Surface to Geogrid=0(in) I Traffic Benefit Ratio(TBR)= 1 I' i i ANALYSIS RESULTS Structure Number(Unreinforced) = 3.84 Unreinforced Pavement, ESALs = 2.478.535 Reinforced Pavement, ESALs = N/A i i j current file name Project Name: Design Case: