Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - Design Report - Spring Creek Village Resort - Water, Sewer, Storm DESIGN REPORT for WATER, SEWER & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT THE SPRING CREEK VILLAGE RESORT MINOR SUBDIVISION Prepared for: Delaney & Company, Inc. 101 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 Prepared by: C & H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 2415 West Main Street, Suite 1 Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-1115 Project Number: 00041 November, 2000 Introduction The Spring Creek Village Resort Minor Subdivision is located north of Huffine Lane(U.S.Highway 191), south of West Babcock Street, west of Ferguson Avenue and east of Cottonwood Road in Bozeman,Montana. The Spring Creek Village Resort Minor Subdivision consists of five lots to be developed in two Phases under the City of Bozeman's R-O and B-P zoning designation. This prof ect will include construction of all streets within the subdivision and shall tie into the City of Bozeman water and sewer utilities. All streets will be constructed with curb and gutter to a width of 37 feet from back of curb to back of curb with a 5.5 foot boulevard and 5 foot sidewalk. Proposed Water System The new system will complete the loop with the previously constructed Valley West Water Main Extension project. This will include tying into the 12-inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) at Ferguson Avenue and Fallon Street, and extending the main west to the 12 inch main in Cottonwood Road. An additional 12 inch main running east-west on West Babcock Street will be tapped into by a 8 inch line running north-south on Resort Drive. Approximately 2,881 lineal feet of 12-inch DIP and 2,572 lineal feet of 8-inch DIP will be placed along the streets within the subdivision. The static pressures for these areas are approximately 110-120 psi. Proposed Service Area The service area for the proposed water main extension will consist of the Spring Creek Village Resort Minor Subdivision. The total area of the five lots withing the subdivision is 107.6327 acres. Predicted Population Population density for this report are based on densities provided in the Bozeman May 1997, Wastewater Facility Plan,page 87(13.3 person per acre). Therefore the predicted population for the Spring Creek Village Resort Minor Subdivision is 1,431.5 persons for the 107.6327 acres proposed for development. Predicted Water Demand The predicted water demand used in this report is based on findings detailed in the Bozeman Water Facility Plan, page 20. 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 the Spring Creek Resort Minor Subdivision is 198.82 gpd. Peak Demand Factors The Maximum Daily Demand used for planning purposes is 2.37 and the Peak Hourly Demand Factor is 3.02. The Maximum Peak Demand Factor was determined from the average ratio of Maximum Peak Daily Demand to Average Daily Demand during 1990, 1991, and 1992. Similarly the Maximum Peak Hourly Demand Factor was determined from the average ratio of Peak Hourly Demand,during Maximum Peak Daily Demand to Peak Hourly Demand during Average Peak Daily Demand during 1990, 1991, and 1992. The determination of these values are detailed in the Water Facility Plan, page 20. Pressure Zones The proposed Spring Creek Village Resort Minor Subdivision lies in a high pressure zone. The areas directly north of the proposed development lie in a low pressure zone except the area east of Maynard Ditch which is included in the high pressure zone. There is an existing pressure reducing valve on Cottonwood Road approximately 20 feet north of the intersection with West Babcock Street. The proposed water main extension was modeled with information from this report using Cybernet Version 3.5. The model developed includes the 12 inch water main extended west on Fallon Street from Ferguson to Cottonwood Road,and the 8 inch main running south on Resort Drive from West Babcock Street to the right-of-way of Huffine Lane(Highway 191). Demand for each lot was evenly distributed among the services for the lots. An additional demand was placed on the system for the 2 inch service running into Tract A,just north of the subdivision. A conservative area of 8.262 acres was considered,this area is equivalent to an average daily demand of 15.26 gpm. A total average daily demand of 214.08 gpm was considered for the entire water system. The demands were distributed among the junctions as shown in the following table: SPRING CREEK MINOR SUBDIVISION WATER SYSTEM JUNCTION AVG. DAY GPM MAX. DAY GPM PEAK HOUR GPM NODE 1 15.26 36.17 46.09 3 29.1 68.97 87.88 7 18.82 44.60 56.84 3 9 18.82 44.60 56.84 13 18.12 42.94 54.72 17 18.12 42.94 54.72 21 28.51 67.57 86.10 24 28.51 67.57 86.10 25 19.41 46.00 58.62 26 19.41 46.00 58.62 TOTAL 214.08 507.36 646.53 Static, residual and pitot pressures for fire hydrants #703 located at Ferguson and Fallon, #900 located at Ferguson and Valley Commons, #717 located at Ferguson and West Babcock, #1134 at West Babcock and Cottonwood, and a hydrant on Cottonwood south of West Babcock were obtained from the City of Bozeman Utility Department. This information was used to develop relationships between static head and flow at the tie in points. This relationship was used in the model by simulation of pumps at all connection points. Model Results/Conclusion The Cybernet results indicate the water supply system has more than enough pressure and flow to supply the needed peak hour demand with fire flow while maintaining the required 20 psi residual pressure at all points within the system. The input data and results from the Cybernet analysis are included in Appendix A. The model was checked for adequate fire flow at average daily,maximum daily, and peak hour demands. Sewer System 8-inch sewer main will run throughout the subdivision on Fallon Street and the southern half of Resort Drive. The 8 inch mains will come together at the intersection of Fallon and Resort and feed the 10 inch main running north on Resort Drive to the existing 10 inch main in West Babcock. Design Requirements No extensive work has been done to determine mean sanitary sewer flow rates for the different zoning districts in Bozeman. The flow rates used herein are according to the Sansys Computer Model of the City of Bozeman's Sanitary Sewer System contained in the report by MSE/HKM Engineering. It is the best guide existing at this time. According to this report, the following values were used for sewage flow on a per acre basis: 4 ZONE DESIGN FLOW FOR SANITARY SEWER B-P 2020 gallons per day per acre R-O 117 gallons per day per capita We will check to make sure the sewer is sized adequately by calculating the flow anticipated from each lot into each branch of the main. We will estimate the flow by using the zoning designation and average flowrates found throughout Bozeman for each type of zoning. The number of residential units contributing at this time are unknown, therefore the more conservative value of the B-2 Zone will be used for Lots 2 and 3. First,we will do conservative capacity checks on the 8 inch mains by attributing the entire flow from each adjoining lot to each main. This approach is conservative because the flow from each lot will actually be distributed to several different branches rather than being concentrated in one. 8 inch sewer main on Fallon Street between Ferguson Avenue and Resort Drive: Contributing Areas: Lot 1 = 9.2520 Acres Lot 2 = 30.7519 Acres Lot 5 = 31.1070 Acres Total = 71.1109 Acres Design Flow: 71.1109 Acres * (2020 gpd/acre) = 143,644 gpd = 99.753 gpm 0.2223 cfs For the 8 inch main: Manning's n =0.013 Minimum Slope =0.00415 ft/ft (1.486/0.013)AR2"S"2 n=0.013 for PVC Pipe A=(3.14/4)d 2=(3.14/4)(8/12)'-=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 R211 =0.30105 ft S=0.00415 ft/ft S"'- =0.06442 ft/ft Qr u = (1.486/0.013)(0.34907)(0.30105)(0.06442) =0.774 cfs Q/Qr,,,i = 0.2223/0.774 =0.2872 or 28.72% Based on the previous calculations the 8 inch sewer main at the grades shown will be more than adequate to carry the design flows. 5 8 inch sewer main on Fallon Street between Resort Drive and Cottonwood Road: Contributing Areas: Lot 3 = 16.5097 Acres Lot 4 = 20.0121 Acres Total = 36.5218 Acres Design Flow: 36.5218 Acres * (2020 gpd/acre) = 73,744 gpd 51.2320 gpm 0.1142 cfs For the 8 inch main: Manning's n =0.013 Minimum Slope =0.00457 ft/ft Qfu11=(1.486/0.013)AR2/3Sv2 n=0.013 for PVC Pipe 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 =0.00457 ft/ft S12=0.067602 ft/ft (1.486/0.013)(0.34907)(0.30105)(0.067602) =0.8121 cfs Q/Qf„=0.1142/0.8121 =0.1406 or 14.06% Based on the previous calculations the 8 inch sewer main at the grades shown will be more than adequate to carry the design flows. 8 inch sewer main on Resort Drive between Huffine Lane and Fallon Street: Contributing Areas: Lot 4 = 20.0121 Acres Lot 5 = 31.1070 Acres Total = 51.1191 Acres Design Flow: 51.1191 Acres * (2020 gpd/acre) = 103,261 gpd 71.709 gpm 0.1598 cfs For the 8 inch main: Manning's n =0.013 Minimum Slope =0.01210 ft/ft (1.486/0.013)AR2/3Si'' 6 n=0.013 for PVC Pipe 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 R211=0.30105 ft S =0.01210 ft/ft S 12=0.1100 ft/ft (1.486/0.013)(0.34907)(0.30105)(0.1100) = 1.3214 cfs Q/Qr„li=0.1598/1.3214=0.1209 or 12.09% Based on the previous calculations the 8 inch sewer main at the grades shown will be more than adequate to carry the design flows. 10 inch sewer main on Resort Drive between Fallon Street and West Babcock Street: Contributing Areas: Lot 1 = 9.2520 Acres Lot 2 = 30.7519 Acres Lot 3 = 16.5097 Acres Lot 4 = 20.0121 Acres Lot 5 = 31.1070 Acres Total = 107.6327 Acres Design Flow: 107.6327 Acres * (2020 gpd/acre) = 217,418 gpd = 150.98 gpm 0.3364 cfs For the 10 inch main: Manning's n =0.013 Minimum Slope =0.01058 ft/ft Q ful,=(1.486/0.013)AR2/3S 12 n=0.013 for PVC Pipe A=(3.14/4)d 2=(3.14/4)(10/12)2=0.5454 ft2 P=2(3.14)r=2(3.14)(5/12)=2.6180 ft R=A/P=0.34907/2.0944=0.2083 ft R2'3 =0.3514303 ft S =0.01058 ft/ft S"2 =0.10286 ft/ft (1.486/0.013)(0.5454)(0.35143)(0.10286) =2.254 cfs Q/Qruij=0.3364/2.254=0.1492 or 14.92% Based on the previous calculations all of the sewer mains at the grades shown will be more than adequate 7 to carry the design flows. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Summary STORM WATER run-off falling on the roads will be directed by curb and gutter to storm water detention ponds located near the ditch in the center of the subdivision and retention ponds on the western side of the property. These detention areas will filter sediment and oils from the storm runoff. Retention and detention areas are also provided for the lot drainage. Each lot will require a site plan as they are developed, the location and size of the basins are subject to change as each lot is developed. The detention and retention basins were sized for a 10 year storm event. STORM WATER DETENTION FOR DEVELOPMENT In accordance with city policy,detention must be sized for a storm intensity with a 10 year frequency. The equation used to model the intensity of a 10 year frequency storm is given by the Bozeman STORM WATER Master Plan. The design intensity for this report was calculated as follows: I10=0.64(t-0.65) I=rainfall intensity(in/hr) t= storm duration(hours) STORM WATER RUNOFF(POST DEVELOPMENT) The storm water runoff surface areas for the roadway system and lots were calculated as follows: Please see the grading and drainage plan(sheet C1), and the Drainage Area Map located in Appendix B. DETENTION POND# 1 CONTRIBUTING AREAS Detention Pond#1 will handle runoff from the south side of Fallon Street(STA 13+00 to STA 27+25) and the lot drainage from the portion of Lot#5 west of the ditch. The area is highlighted as drainage area#1 on the map in Appendix B. Roads(Pavement) Fallon Street(1425 ft x 23.5 ft) — 33,488 ft' Lots Portion of Lot#5 = 266,992 ft' TOTAL = 300,480 ft'- Area=266,992 ft'- x (1 Acre/43,560 ft'-) = 6.8981 Acres For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 213, 593 ft'- Assume 20% of lot is grass = 53,399 ft'- Mean C coefficient 8 C =0.90 for pavement and concrete C= 0.30 for residential lawns/landscaping C=0.20 for undeveloped Mean C= [(0.9 x 33,488 ft2)+(0.90 x 213,593 ft2)+(0.30 x 53,399)]/300,480 ft'- =0.793 Use 0.79 RELEASE RATE The maximum release rate is determined by assuming a storm duration equivalent to the time of concentration for pre-development runoff. The time is calculated by finding the furthest point away from the pond and figuring the amount of time to reach the pond(see Appendix B). In this case the furthest point is the southwest corner of Lot#5. Then,by following the drainage arrows shown on Sheet C1 and using the table below, the time of concentration was calculated. Location/ Slope Distance C Travel Time street Description (ft/ft) (feet) (runoff Coefficients) (minutes) Lot 5 B-2 0.0125 1200 0.20 76 TOTAL 76 Total Time of Concentration Tc=76 min. = 1.27 hrs Using the formula for the 10 year storm duration a storm intensity and flow is calculated in the following formulas: I,o=0.64X-.G5 =0.64 (1.27)" =0.55 in/hr The retention catch basins located in the detention ponds can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The C coefficient for this is 0.20 and the release rate is shown in the following: For pre-development, the C coefficient=0.20 Q,o=CIA=0.20 (0.55 in/hr)(6.8981)=0.759 cfs +1111 Release rate The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 0.76 cfs and using a C of 0.79. Detention Pond #1 c = 0.79 A= 6.8981 acres release = 0.76cfs 9 Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min)length(hrs) Intensity Q future Volume Volume Storage 100 1.666667 0.459175 2.502274 15013.64 4560 10453.64 105 1.75 0.444841 2.424163 15272.23 4788 10484.23 110 1.833333 0.431592 2.351958 15522.92 5016 10506.92 115 1.916667 0.4193 2.284974 15766.32 5244 10522.32 120 2 0.407859 2.222629 16002.93 5472 10530.93 125 2.083333 0.397179 2.164429 16233.22 5700 10533.221 130 2.166667 0.387182 2.109948 16457.59 5928 10529.59 135 2.25 0.377799 2.058818 16676.42 6156 10520.42 140 2.333333 0.368973 2,01072 16890.05 6384 10506.05 145 2,416667 0.360653 1.965376 17098.77 6612 10486.77 150 2.5 0.352792 1.922541 17302.87 6840 10462.87 155 2.583333 0.345353 1.881998 17502.59 7068 10434.59 Use a pond that is 24 inches deep with a mid-depth surface area of 5280 ft'-. Volume Provided=40 ft x 132 ft x 2.0 ft= 10,560 ft' OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING Predevelopment runoff rate=0.76 cfs Use standard 36" diameter outlet control structure made be Anderson Precast. Size of 20" H slot in concrete division wall within structure: Compute flow as rectangular weir with end contractions Width berre�,;ve=baet"ai -0.1(N)(H) N=number of side contractions=2 be,r=baet -0.1(2)(1.67) H= 1.67 ft C,=Rehbock Coefficient= [0.6035 +0.0813(H/Y)+(0.000295/Y)]*[1 +(.00361/H)]'/2 C,= [0.80719]*[1.0022]'1'- H= 1.67 ft C,=0.8099 Y=0.67 ft 0.76 cfs = (2/3)C, berr.(2g)1aH 3r =(2/3)(0.8099)b,rr(8.025)(2.1517) beer=(0.76)/(9.3228) =0.0815 ft bait. =berr.+0.33 =0.4115 ft =4.94" Result: Use a 36" diameter outlet control structure with a slot 4.94" wide. DETENTION POND# 2 CONTRIBUTING AREAS Detention Pond#2 will handle runoff from the north side of Fallon Street(STA 13+00 to STA 27+25). The area highlighted as drainage area #2 on the map in Appendix B. Roads (Pavement) Fallon Street (1425 ft x 23.5 ft) = 33.488 ft2 10 TOTAL = 33,488 ft' Area=33,488 ft'- x (1 Acre/43,560 ft'-) =0.7688 Acres For pavement C=0.90 RELEASE RATE The maximum release rate is determined by assuming a storm duration equivalent to the time of concentration for pre-development runoff. The time is calculated by finding the furthest point away from the pond and figuring the amount of time to reach the pond(see Appendix B). In this case the furthest point is the highest point of Fallon Street(STA 27+25). Then, by following the drainage arrows shown on Sheet C1 and using the table below, the time of concentration was calculated. Location/ Slope Distance C Travel Time street Description (ft/ft) (feet) (runoff Coefficients) (minutes) Fallon Pavement 0.821 1425 0.20 95 (27+25) TOTAL 95 Total Time of Concentration T,=95 min. = 1.583 hrs Using the formula for the 10 year storm duration a storm intensity and flow is calculated in the following formulas: It,=0.64X-15 =0.64 (1.583)--"=0.475 in/hr The retention catch basins located in the detention ponds can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The C coefficient for this is 0.20 and the release rate is shown in the following: For pre-development, the C coefficient=0.20 Q 0=CIA=0.20 (0.475 in/hr)(0.7688)= 0.073 cfs *... Release rate The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 0.073 cfs and using a C of 0.90. Detention Pond #2 c= 0.9 A= 0.7688acres release = 0.073cfs 11 Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min)length(hrs) Intensit Q future Volume Volume Storage 170 2.833333 0.325227 0.225031 2295.316 744.6 1550.716 175 2.916667 0.319156 0.220831 2318.722 766.5 1552.222 180 3 0.313365 0.216824 2341,698 788.4 1553.298 185 3.083333 0.307834 0.212997 2364.262 810.3 1553.962 190 3.166667 0.302544 0.209336 2386.433 832.2 1554.23 195 3.25 0.297479 0.205831 2408.228 854.1 1554.128 200 3.333333 0,292623 0.202472 2429.662 876 1553.662 205 3.416667 0.287964 0.199248 2450.751 897.9 1552.851 210 3.5 0.283489 0.196151 2471.509 919.8 1551.709 215 3.583333 0.279186 0.193174 2491.947 941.7 1550.247 Use a pond that is 24 inches deep with a mid-depth surface area of 780 ft'. Volume Provided= 10 ft x 78 ft x 2.0 ft= 1560 ft3 OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING Predevelopment runoff rate=0.073 cfs Use standard 36" diameter outlet control structure made be Anderson Precast. Size of 20" H slot in concrete division wall within structure: Compute flow as rectangular weir with end contractions Width berreerive=baetual -0.1(N)(H) N=number of side contractions=2 berf.=baef -0.1(2)(1.67) H= 1.67 ft C,=Rehbock Coefficient= [0.6035 +0.0813(H/Y)+(0.0002951Y)]*[1 + (.00361/H)]3"- C,= [0.80719]*[1.0022]3''- H= 1.67 ft C,=0.8099 Y=0.67 ft 0.073 cfs =(2/3)C, berr.(2g)1/2H 3/2 = (2/3)(0.8099)befr_(8.025)(2.1517) berr=(0.073)/(9.3228)=0.00783 ft bae,. =berf+0.33 =0.3378 ft =4.05" Result: Use a 36" diameter outlet control structure with a slot 4.05" wide. DETENTION POND#3 CONTRIBUTING AREAS Detention Pond #3 will handle runoff from Resort Drive(STA 4+43 to STA 13+06), a portion of Fallon Street(STA 11+04 to STA 13+00), and the lot drainage from the portion of Lot#2 west of the ditch. The area is shown as drainage area#3 on the map in Appendix B. Roads (Pavement) Resort Drive (863 ft x 47 ft) = 40,561 ft2 12 Fallon Street(196 ft x 23.5 ft) = 4,606 ft'- Lots Portion of Lot#2 = 190,297 ft'- TOTAL = 235,464 ft'- Area=235,464 ft2 x (1 Acre/43,560 ft'-) = 5.4055 Acres For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 152,237.6 ft2 Assume 20% of lot is grass = 38,059.4 ft2 Mean C coefficient C=0.90 for pavement and concrete C =0.30 for residential lawns/landscaping C=0.20 for undeveloped Mean C= [(0.9 x 45,167 ft2)+(0.9 x 152,237.6)+(0.30 x 38,059.4 ft2)]/235,464 ft2 =0.803 Use 0.80 RELEASE RATE The maximum release rate is determined by assuming a storm duration equivalent to the time of concentration for pre-development runoff. The time is calculated by finding the furthest point away from the pond and figuring the amount of time to reach the pond. In this case the furthest point is the southeast corner of Lot#2. Then,by following the drainage arrows shown on Sheet C 1 and using the table below,the time of concentration was calculated. Location/ Slope Distance C Travel Time street Description (ft/ft) (feet) (runoff Coefficients) (minutes) Lot 2 B-2 0.0153 852 0.20 60.5 TOTAL 60.5 Total Time of Concentration T�= 60.5 min. = 1.008 hrs Using the formula for the 10 year storm duration a storm intensity and flow is calculated in the following formulas: 1,0=0.64X-65 =0.64 (1.008)`6' =0.637 in/hr The retention catch basins located in the detention ponds can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The C coefficient for this is 0.20 and the release rate is shown in the following: For pre-development, the C coefficient=0.20 Q =CIA =0.20 (0.637 in/hr)(5.4055) =0.6887 efs °11 Release rate io 13 The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 0.6887 cfs and using a C of 0.80. Detention Pond#3 c = 0.8 A= 5.4055acres release = 0.6887cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(m in)length hrs Intensit Q future Volume Volume Storage 80 1.333333 0.530848 2.295597 11018.87 3305.76 7713.106 85 1.416667 0.510336 2.206896 11255.17 3512.37 7742.799 90 1.5 0.491723 2.126408 11482.6 3718.98 7763.621 95 1.583333 0.474742 2.052976 11701.96 3925.59 7776.371 100 1.666667 0.459175 1.985657 11913.94 4132.2 7781.7 105 1.75 0.444841 1.923672 12119.14 4338.81 7780.326 110 1.833333 0.431592 1.866375 12318.07 4545.42 7772.655 115 1.916667 0.4193 1.81322 12511.22 4752.03 7759.189 120 2 0.407859 1.763747 12698.98 4958.64 7740.34 125 2.083333 0.397179 1.717563 12881.72 5165.25 7716.471 130 2.166667 0.387182 1.67433 13059.77 5371.86 7687.911 135 2.25 0.377799 1.633756 13233.42 5578.47 7654.954 Use a pond that is 24 inches deep with a mid-depth surface area of 3900 ft'. Volume Provided= 15 ft x 260 ft x 2.0 ft=7800 ft' OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING Predevelopment runoff rate=0.6887 cfs Use standard 36" diameter outlet control structure made be Anderson Precast. Size of 20" H slot in concrete division wall within structure: Compute flow as rectangular weir with end contractions Width b�,rtc,;,e=ba.u,,-0.1(N)(H) N=number of side contractions=2 b,,r=b, -0.1(2)(1.67) H= 1.67 ft C,=Rehbock Coefficient= [0.6035 +0.0813(H/Y)+(0.000295/Y)]*[1 +(.00361/H)]3'2 C,_ [0.80719]*[1.0022]112 H= 1.67 ft C,=0.8099 Y= 0.67 ft 0.6887 cfs =(2/3)C, b,,r.(2g)1/2H 3/2 _(2/3)(0.8099)b,,r(8.025)(2.1517) b,rr=(0.6887)/(9.3228) =0.0739 ft b,�,. =berc + 0.33 = 0.4039 ft =4.85" Result: Use a 36" diameter outlet control structure with a slot 4.85" wide. 14 DETENTION POND#4 CONTRIBUTING AREAS Detention Pond#4 will handle runoff from the portion of Lot 5 highlighted as drainage area#11 on the map in Appendix B. Lots Portion of Lot#5 = 815,733 ft' TOTAL = 815,733 ft' Area= 815,733 ft'- x (1 Acre/43,560 ft') = 18.7267 Acres For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered =652,586.4 ft'- Assume 20% of lot is grass = 163,146.6 ft' Mean C coefficient C=0.90 for pavement and concrete C=0.30 for residential lawns/landscaping C=0.20 for undeveloped Mean C= [(0.9 x 652,586.4 ft2)+(0.30 x 163,146.6 ft2)]/815,733 ft'- =0.78 Use 0.78 RELEASE RATE The maximum release rate is determined by assuming a storm duration equivalent to the time of concentration for pre-development runoff. The time is calculated by finding the furthest point away from the pond and figuring the amount of time to reach the pond. In this case the furthest point is the southeast corner of Lot#5. Then,by following the drainage arrows shown on Sheet C 1 and using the table below,the time of concentration was calculated. Location/ Slope Distance C Travel Time street Description (ft/ft) (feet) (runoff Coefficients) (minutes) Lot 5 Grass 0.0144 1250 0.20 76 TOTAL 76 Total Time of Concentration T,= 76 min. = 1.27 hrs Using the formula for the 10 year storm duration a storm intensity and flow is calculated in the following formulas: I,o= 0.64X--65 = 0.64 (1.27)--" =0.549 in/hr The retention catch basins located in the detention ponds can have a release rate of pre-development flow. The C coefficient for this is 0.20 and the release rate is shown in the following: 15 For pre-development, the C coefficient=0.20 Q =CIA=0.20 (0.549 in/hr)(18.73) =2.057 cfs +011 Release rate �o The maximum required storage is calculated below by varying the storm duration and holding the release rate at 2.057 cfs and using a C of 0.78. Detention Pond #4 c = 0.78 A= 18.73acres release = 2.057cfs Storm Storm Runoff Release Required length(min)len th hrs Intensit Q future Volume Volume Storage 100 1.666667 0.459175 6.708272 40249.63 12342 27907.63 105 1.75 0.444841 6.498867 40942.86 12959.1 27983.76 110 1.833333 0.431592 6.305295 41614.95 13576.2 28038.75 115 1.916667 0.4193 6.125719 42267.46 14193.3 28074.16 120 2 0.407859 5.958581 42901.78 14810.4 28091.38 125 2.083333 0.397179 5.802554 43519.15 15427.5 28091.6 130 2.166667 0.387182 5.656496 44120.67 16044.6 28076.07 135 2.25 0.377799 5.519423 44707.33 16661.7 28045.63 140 2.333333 0.368973 5.39048 45280.03 17278.8 28001.23 145 2.416667 0.360653 5.268918 45839.59 17895.9 27943.69 Use a pond that is 24 inches deep with a mid-depth surface area of 14,046 ft'. Volume Provided= 14,046 ft x 2.0 ft=28,092 ft' OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE SIZING Predevelopment runoff rate 2.057 cfs Use standard 36" diameter outlet control structure made be Anderson Precast. Size of 20" H slot in concrete division wall within structure: Compute flow as rectangular weir with end contractions Width berreceve=bae,ua1 -0.1(N)(H) N=number of side contractions=2 bea.=baC1. -0.1(2)(1.67) H = 1.67 ft C,=Rehbock Coefficient= [0.6035 +0.0813(H/Y) +(0.000295/Y)]*[1 + (.00361/H)]32 C,= [0.80719]*[1.0022]32 H= 1.67 ft C,=0.8099 Y=0.67 ft Qu,ax=2.057 cfs = (2/3)C, berj2g)1/2H 3/2 =(2/3)(0.8099)berr..(8.025)(2.1517) ber,­(2.057)/(9.3228) =0.2206 ft s bay,. =ben.+0.33 =0.5506 ft = 6.61" Result: Use a 36" diameter outlet control structure with a slot 6.61" wide. 16 RETENTION PONDS The storm water runoff rate was calculated with the rational formula as shown. A runoff coefficient(C)of 0.90 applicable to hard surfaces,and a runoff coefficient of 0.30 for residential lawns/landscaping was used for the system. 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-1.61)=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 (ft') V=total volume required RETENTION POND#1(Drainage Area#3) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Roads (Pavement) Fallon Street(725 ft x 23.5 ft) = 17,037.5 ft' Resort Drive(1300 ft x 47 ft) = 61,100 ft'- Residential 1/4 of Lot#4 = 217,931.25 ftz TOTAL = 296,068.75 ft2 For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 174,345 ft'- Assume 20% of lot is grass =43,586.25 ft'- Mean C= [(0.90 x 78,137.5 ft')+(0.90 x 174,345)+(0.30 x 43,586.25 ft'-)]/296,068.75 ft'-=0.812 Use 0.81 The volume required for the pond is given below: V =CdA V=0.81 x 0.068 ft x 296,068.75 ft'= 16,307.5 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: Vpmvi&d= 56 ft x 146 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth) = 16,352 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION PONDS#2,#3, & #4(Drainage Areas#5, #6, &#7)) The drainage from lot#4 is divided evenly between retention pond#1,#2,#3,and#4. Ponds#2,#3,and#4 each retain 1/4 of the drainage of the entire lot. The overall area for each pond is calculated in the following manner: Residential 1/4 of Lot#4 = 217,931.25 ft'- TOTAL = 217,931.25 ft'- For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 174,345 ft'- 17 Assume 20% of lot is grass =43,586.25 fr Mean C= [(0.90 x 174,345 ft2)+(0.30 x 43,586.25 ft'-)]/217,931.25 ft'-=0.78 Use 0.78 The volume required for each pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.78 x 0.068 ft x 217,931.25 ft'- = 11,559.1 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for each of the three ponds is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: Vp,.viaea= 58 ft x 100 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 11,600 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#5(Drainage Area#8) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Roads (Pavement) Fallon Street(725 ft x 23.5 ft) = 17,037.5 ft2 TOTAL = 17,037.5 ft'- Runoff coefficient(C) for pavement=0.90 The volume required for the pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.90 x 0.068 ft x 17,037.5 ft'-= 10,427 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: VP,o,id,d= 15 ft x 35 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 1050 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#6(Drainage Area#9) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential West 1/2 of Lot#3 = 409,674.4 ft'- TOTAL = 409,674.4 ft'- For R-O Zoning : Maximum of 60% of lot is covered = 245,804.64 ft'- Assume 40% of lot is grass = 163,869.76 ft'- Mean C = [(0.90 x 245,804.64 ft2)+(0.30 x 163,869.76 ft2)]/409,674.4 ft'- =0.66 Use 0.66 The volume required for the pond is given below: V = CdA V =0.66 x 0.068 ft x 409,674.4 ft'- = 18,386.2 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: 18 Vprovided=44 ft x 210 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 18,480 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#7(Drainage Area#10) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential East 1/2 of Lot#3 = 307,373 ftz TOTAL = 307,373 ft'- For R-O Zoning : Maximum of 60% of lot is covered = 184,423.8 ft'- Assume 40% of lot is grass = 122,949.2 ft'- Mean C = [(0.90 x 184,423.8 ft2)+(0.30 x 122,949.2 ft'-)]/307,373 ft'- =0.66 Use 0.66 The volume required for the pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.66 x 0.068 ft x 307,373 ft-= 13,795 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: VP,o,cded=20 ft x 350 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 14,000 ft' -volume to be retained. RETENTION POND#8(Drainage Area#12) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential Portion of Lot#5 — 214,000 ft'- TOTAL = 214,000 ft'- For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80%of lot is covered = 171,200 ft'- Assume 20% of lot is grass =42,800 ft' Mean C= [(0.90 x 171,200 ft')+(0.30 x 42,800 ft2)]/214,000 ft'-= 0.78 Use 0.78 The volume required for the pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.78 x 0.068 ft x 214,000 ft'-= 11,350.6 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: Vprovided= 29 ft x 200 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth) = 11,600 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#9(Drainage Area#13) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential Portion of Lot#5 = 156,432 ft- TOTAL = 156,432 ft' 19 For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 125,145.6 ft'- Assume 20% of lot is grass = 31,286.4 ft- Mean C= [(0.90 x 125,145.6 ft2)+(0.30 x 31,286.4 ft2)]/ 156,432 ft'- =0.78 Use 0.78 The volume required for the pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.78 x 0.068 ft x 156,432 ft'- = 8,297.2 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: Vprovi&d=26 ft x 160 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 8,320 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#10(Drainage Area#14) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential Portion of Lot#5 = 167,457 ft2 TOTAL = 167,457 ft2 For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 133,965.6 ft2 Assume 20% of lot is grass = 33,491.4 ft2 Mean C= [(0.90 x 133,965.6 ft2)+(0.30 x 33,491.4 ft2)]/ 167,457 ft2 =0.78 Use 0.78 The volume required for the pond is given below: V =CdA V =0.78 x 0.068 ft x 167,457 ft'-= 8881.9 ft'=volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: Vp,ovid,d=26 ft x 171 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 8892 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#11(Drainage Area#15) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential Lot#1 = 403,018 ft2 TOTAL = 403,018 ft'- For B-2 Zoning : Assume 80% of lot is covered = 322,414.4 ft'- Assume 20%of lot is grass = 80,603.6 ft'- Mean C= [(0.90 x 322,414.4 ft2)+(0.30 x 80,603.6 ft2)]/403,018 ft'- =0.78 Use 0.78 The volume required for the pond is given below: V =CdA V =0.78 x 0.068 ft x 403,018 ft- = 21,376.1 ft' =volume to be retained 20 The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: Vp,ovided= 26 ft x 411 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)=21,372 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#12(Drainage Area#16) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential East 1/2 of Lot#2 = 445,050 ft2 TOTAL = 445,050 ft2 For R-O Zoning : Maximum of 60% of lot is covered =267,030 ft2 Assume 40% of lot is grass = 178,020 ft'- Mean C= [(0.90 x 267,030 ft2)+(0.30 x 178,020 ft2)]/445,050 ft2 =0.66 Use 0.66 The volume required for the pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.66 x 0.068 ft x 445,050 ft2= 19,973.8 ft'=volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: Vp,.vided=22 ft x 454 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 19,976 ft' -volume to be retained RETENTION POND#13(Drainage Area#17) The overall areas were calculated in the following manner: Residential East 1/2 of Lot#2 = 685,647 ft2 TOTAL = 685,647 ft2 For R-O Zoning : Maximum of 60% of lot is covered =411,388.2 ft2 Assume 40% of lot is grass =274,258.8 ft'- Mean C= [(090 x 411,388.2 ft2)+(0.30 x 274,258.8 ft-)]/685,647 ft2 =0.66 Use 0.66 The volume required for the pond is given below: V =CdA V=0.66 x 0.068 ft x 685,647 ft'-= 30,771.8 ft' = volume to be retained The volume provided for the pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: Vp,,,vid,d= 33 ft x 470 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth) = 31,020 ft' -volume to be retained TEMPORARY RETENTION PONDS#14 & #15 Temporary retention areas will be necessary to handle the flow on Fallon Street from Cottonwood Road to the boundary of the site. The ponds will be located within the right of way of Cottonwood Road and will need to be moved in the future when Cottonwood is widened and Tract 1 is developed. Each pond will handle one half of the road drainage. 21 Pavement Fallon Street(365.7 ft x 32.5 ft) = 11,885.25 ft2 TOTAL = 11,885.25 ft2 Runoff coefficient(C) =0.90 for pavement. The volume required for each pond is given below: V=CdA V =0.90 x 0.068 ft x 11,885.25 ft-= 727.4 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for each pond is given below and shown on sheet C1 of the construction plans: Vp,o,idea= 12 ft x 31 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)= 744 ft' -volume to be retained TEMPORARY RETENTION PONDS#16 & #17 Temporary retention areas will be necessary to handle the flow on Resort Drive from West Babcock to the boundary of the site. Each pond will handle one half of the road drainage. Pavement Resort Drive (480 ft x 32.5 ft) = 15,600 ft2 TOTAL = 15,600 ft2 Runoff coefficient(C) =0.90 for pavement. The volume required for each pond is given below: V=CdA V=0.90 x 0.068 ft x 15,600 ft-=954.7 ft' =volume to be retained The volume provided for each pond is given below and shown on sheet C 1 of the construction plans: Vprovided= 12 ft x 40 ft x 2 ft deep(at mid-depth)=960 ft' -volume to be retained DRAINAGE TROUGHS The troughs are sized for a 25 year storm event. The formula for storm intensity for a 25 year period is given below: For the two troughs leading from Fallon Street to Detention Pond#14&#15: Time of concentration from STA 3+66 to STA 1+32( Length= 234', C = 0.90, Slope = 0.50%) _ 7 min. = 0.1 17 hours I„ =0.78X-64 = 0.78(0.117)-`'' = 3.085 in/hr Q,; =CIA = 0.90(3.085 in/hr)(0.2728) = 0.758 cfs 22 Using Mannings equation and the detail shown in Appendix B for the trough, the capacity of the trough is given in the following equation: For trough flowing 6" deep. Qtrough=(1.486/0.012)AR211SV2 n=0.012 for concrete A=0.25 ft'- P= 1.5 ft R=A/P =0.25/1.50 =0.1667 ft R"'=0.3029 ft S =0.015 ft/ft S"2=0.1225 ft/ft Qtrough=(1.486/0.012)(0.2728)(0.3029)(0.1225)= 1.25 cfs>0.758 cfs As shown here, the capacity of the trough exceeds the requirement. STREETS, CURB AND GUTTER, SIDEWALKS Summary Access to the site will be provided from four locations. One from Ferguson Avenue,one from West Babcock Street, one from Cottonwood Road, and one from Huffine Lane(U.S. Highway 191). All streets will be improved to the City of Bozeman standards. All streets will be constructed with a road width of 37 feet measured from back of curb to back of curb. Curb and gutter will be constructed to City of Bozeman standards. A 5 foot wide sidewalk on both sides of each street with a 5.5 feet boulevard will be constructed. All work proposed for this project will be as specified by Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS), Fourth Edition, January 1996, and the City of Bozeman Modification to MPWSS,Fourth Edition,May 1997,Addendum Number 1,February 1998 and Addendum Number 2, March 2000 0004 voffice/ds.nmt 23 ADDENDUM No. 1 PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT SPRING CREEK MINOR SUBDIVISION Prepared for: Delaney & Company, Inc. 101 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 Prepared by: C & H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. 2415 West Main St. Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-1115 Project Number: 00041 August, 2000 PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT SPRING CREEK MINOR SUBDIVISION INTRODUCTION The following pavement design report is in response to the comments letter received from the City of Bozeman Engineering Department dated August 17, 2000. C &H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. has previously performed a site soil investigation to determine the suitability of the soils in the area of Spring Creek Minor Subdivision. Test holes and samples were taken at nine locations throughout Spring Creek Minor Subdivision. Pavement design will be based on the lean clay loam layer found at a depth of 12" to 36" throughout the site(see Test Hole Logs, Appendix A). A California Bearing Ratio test was run on this soil type by SK Geotechnical for Harvest Creek Subdivsion(located within 1 mile ofthis site). California Bearing Ratio(CBR)tests for the subgrade soil resulted in a value between 6.3 and 6.8. (See Appendix A). PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SOIL CONDITIONS From the test holes excavated,the onsite soils exhibited low to medium load bearing characteristics. The CBR value of 6.3 was used for this design report. The road design will consist of nine inches of pit run gravel subbase over the prepared grade, and 6 inches of 1-'/2 inch minus base course material on the pit-run. The streets will have the standard 3 inches of asphalt surfacing. STREET DESIGN 1. 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. The design herein is for all streets within the subdivsion. An extremely conservative design is approached in this report by designing for a traffic load of 1000 vehicles per day. This design is very conservative considering none of the roads in the subdivision are arterial streets. Solve for ESAL=Equivalent Single Axle Load Traffic Estimate for Hunters Way Vehicle Type Vehicles per day Design Vehicles ESAL Factor Design (veh/d)(365 d/y)(20 y) ESAL Passenger Car 980 7,154,000 0.00146 10,445 Bus 10 73,000 0.243 17,739 2 axle/6 tire truck 10 73,000 0.534 38,982 Total ESAL 67,166 The calculated estimate of the equivalent 18,000 lb Single Axle Load (ESAL)= 67,166. For this design, we will use 100,000 ESAL to be conservative. According to the California Bearing Ratio(CBR)Test(ASTM-D 1883/AASHTO T 193)performed Geotechnical Report-Page I of 3 by SK Geotechnical, the CBR for the subgrade soil is between 6.3 and 6.8. CBR=6.3 will be used for pavement subgrade design. 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 CBR0-71 (United States Army Waterway Experiment Station) MR= 2,550 CBR`64 (Transport& Research Laboratory, England) With CBR=6.3 MR= 1,500 CBR= 1,500 (6.3)= 9,450 psi MR= 5,409 CBRO-"' = 5,409 (6.3)0"' =20,019 psi MR=2,550 CBRO-64 =2,550 (6.3)O64= 8,282 psi Use most conservative value= 8,282 psi USING THE AASHTO METHOD OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN 1. Subgrade Resilient Modulus MR= 8,282 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 A) Overall standard deviation: 0.49(Underlined on Page 1,Appendix A)(Based on AASHTO Road Tests-flexible Pavement) 5. Pavement Structural Number: Layer Coefficients: a, =0.42 (Asphalt)(Fig. 3.18, Appendix A) a2 =0.13 (Base Course- 1 1/2" minus)(Fig. 3.19, Appendix A ) a3 =0.12 (Sub-base Course - 6" minus)(Fig. 3.20, Appendix A) Drainage Coefficients: m2= 1.00 (good drainage 5-25%)(Table 3.25, Appendix A) m3 = 1.00 (good drainage> 25%) (Table 3.25, Appendix A) % of time base & sub-base will approach saturation 6. Design Equation: SN = a,D, + a2D2m2 + a3D3m3 Assume D, = 3" D2 =6" - Solve for D3 Geotechnical Report-Page 2 of 3 From Figure 3.17, SN= 2.24 2.24 =0.42(3) + 0.13(6)(1.0)+ 0.12DA1.0) 2.24 = 2.04 + 0.12D3 D3 = 1.67" =0.20' Use standard street subbase section of 9" (0.75') STREET SECTION DESIGN The street design has a subbase depth of 9" which is greater than the 2" requirement. 98 197/otticegemport 1 Geotechnical Report-Page 3 of 3 APPENDIX A Now d PAVE\IFNT 1)ESIGN AN1) RE:1IA131L11'AT10N 3.21 ple TABLE 3.7 A\le Load Equivalenec Factors for Flexible Pavements. Single Axles. and p,of 3.0 Pavement structural number(SN) _ Axle load, kips 1 2 3 4 5 6 i0 2 0.0008 0,0009 0.0006 0,0003 0.0002 0.0002 t I 4 0.004 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.002 ,63 6 0.014 0.030 0.028 0.018 0.012 0.0I0 1 8 0.035 0.070 0.080 0,055 0.040 0.034 10 0.082 0.132 0.168 0.132 0.101 0.086 12 0173 0,231 0.296 0,260 0,212 0.187 � 14 0.332 0.388 0.468 0.447 0.391 0.358 16 0.594 0,633 0.695 0.693 0.651 0.622 18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1.60 1.53 1.41 1.38 1.44 1.51 22 2.47 2.29 1.96 1.83 1.97 2.16 24 3.67 3.33 2.69 2.39 2.60 2.96 26 5.29 4.72 3.65 3.08 3.33 3.91 28 7.43 6.56 4.88 3,93 4,17 5.00 30 10.2 8.9 6.5 5.0 5.1 6.3 32 13.8 12.0 8.4 6.2 6.3 7.7 < 34 18.2 15.7 10.9 7.8 7.6 9.3 36 23.8 20.4 14.0 9.7 9.1 11.0 38 30.6 26.2 17.7 1 1.9 1 1.0 13.0 40 38.8 33.2 22.2 14.6 13.1 15.3 42 48.8 41.6 27.6 17.8 15.5 17.8 44 60.6 51.6 34.0 21.6 18.4 20.6 46 74.7 63.4 41.5 26.1 21.6 23.8 48 91.21 77.3 50.3 31.3 25.4 27.4 50 110. 94. 61. 37. 30. 32. Source: Guide for Design (/ Puremenr Structures. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.Washington. D.0. 1993. with permission. desired and the amount of total variation or the overall standard deviation. AASHTO recommends the following reliability based on the functional classification of the road: Recommended level of reliability Functional classification Ul-b;ut Rural Interstate/free%v as 85-99.9 80-99 9 Principal arterial, 80-99 75--95 Collector. 80-95 75-95 Local 50-80 50-80 Overall standard deviation value', recommended by ,AASHTO arc 0.30 to 0,40 lot- rigid pavements and 0.40 to 0 50 for Ilemble INivemena, The ItMer v31ue, :u'e uscd when traffic predictionN are nnorc reliahlc. Values deriVed From the AASHTO Road Test are 0,39 for rigid pa%ements and (�I'01- llesihlc pavement". 3.50 CHA[IT 1:R TIIREF TABLE 3.25 Recommended m VaIUCI, fur Nlo(lik in(_ Snucnnal Layer Coefficients of Untreated Base and Suhhwc Mittelwk in Flcxihlc Pavements Percent of time pavement su•urture is exposed to moisture levels approaching saturation Quality of Less than Greater than drainage IC/c I—5 5-25I/c 2 5% Excellent I.40-1.35 1.35-1.30 1,30-1 20 1.20 0.: Good 1.35-125 1.25-1.15 1.15-1.00 1.00 Fair 125-1.15 1.15-1.05 1.00-0.80 OX) 0 , Poor 1.15-1.05 1.05-0.80 0.80-0.60 0.60 Very poor 1.05-0.95 0.95-0.75 0.75-0.40 0.40 0.• Source: Guide for Desi,r;rt of Puremew Smutntre.%, American Association of State HighNa\ and Transportation Officials. Washington. D.C.. 1993. \kith per- mission. 0 0.5 0 0.4 0. wd a 0.( 0 0 c U 0.3 0.( v � o (n V y m 0c T V t0 J C io U 0.2 U ,[ 7 Q 0.1 I t F1 (1 00 Ti, 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400.000 500,000. thr Elastic Modulus. EAc(Ib/ n21,of Asphalt Concrete(at 58°F) FIGURF. 3.18 Chmt for i,mnm iim,' ,uuitural I;i\cr ctwil lcnt lu:l ill din,r'IAdCLI a I)IwIt ioncrcle Al ha.ed tin the ri,ilirni nuuiulu� 11 10111 (iunli fur Di,11211 ill PJ\Linrnt tiuuituri,. .1(n( (I(urr 1\\"( n(ritut foi 0/ Shrtr 1/rL:/nrur till(/ lc till vpmtfu(n(( 011(i iuly. W001in r(ur, l) C, 199",. a ulr l,rruir�v(m(r NC ttl;i Pit. Pit'' wh PAV1:MFNT DESIGN AND RHIABILI I A 1101N 0.20 0.18 40 0.16 � v 0.14 - - - - tW— 2.0 - - - --85— - - - — - -- - Nc r 80 n 60 25 Q 0.12 M 40 70 5 - - 2.5 -m-- - `° — 20 3 0.10 0—— — — 30 — — — — , X v 0 N 60 y 0.08 2 3.5 X 20 15 N - -50— -- - - - - - ---- 0.06 -- - - -- - - - 4.0 9 0.04 0.02 0 :1 I11 Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from Illinois. (2) Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from California. New Mexico,and Wyoming. (3) Scale derived by averaging correlations obtained from Texas k f4i Scale derived on NCHRP project. FIGURE 3.19 Variation in granular base layer coefficient (a,) with various base strength parameters. (From Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, American Association of State Hightira� nru( Tr-arnspor-tatiorn Officials, lVashington, D.C., 1993, wirh permission) 00.000 the cause and rate of pavement deterioration, prediction of optimal time for interven- tion, and evaluation of the most economical rehabilitation strategy. Pavement management can be applied at the project level or at the network level. nrrrtc Although both levels are very dependent upon one another, they are seldom applied for the same purpose. The network level applies to the whole system in a global sense. Network refers to systemwide averages and is used for system budgeting and perfor- mance modeling. This chapter addresses only the project-level icated moresImportantoProject-level -1 him pavement management is considered to be more comp pavement design. Pavement management is applied throughout the life of a pa\'ement. d and forgotten once the pavement is initially whereas pavement design is complete in service. 3.52 CHAPTER THREE 0.20 M 0.14 -- - - 100 - - -- - 9 _ _-- - _ _ 2 70 _ - - - �� c to 50 80 fV Z An 0.12 70 w 3 x n cc ? — 30 m > 15 N U 60 y 14 0.10 0 - - - -20 - -- - --- — - -- - - - ° -- - - i3 a� 50 ~ 11 2 0.08 10 4 10 40 N 0.06 —^---- - - -- - _ _ - - --- - -_----- 30 S 25 5 (1) Scale derived from correlations from Illinois. (2) Scale derived from correlations obtained from the Asphalt Institute, California, New Mexico, and Wyoming. (3) Scale derived from correlations obtained from Texas. (4) Scale derived on NCHRP project. FlGVRE 3.20 \'ariati\u) in LIMILIlar h:nr la\C1 rOcflicirnt ((I,) \\ith \ar10L), 1,uhhWC irciiLih para- II)cicn it r,„n GUIdC I't\r DC 11-n of P;)\cnlcnt SnuctuR:S. ,lrrterirun ,-1s.\n(11111nr) of slow t/igl111,n unrl 7*1(11)sl,,,rtotw)l 011i(iuly. lt"10111t.Vr„n. O.C. 01).". uitlr permissinrt) 3.8.1 Pavement Deterioration ) Pa\enlCnl dc(crioration or distress can he classified into two hasic categories for all Jm\Cnrenl t\I)Cs--structural and Iunctiollal. The niost serious Category is structural. Strtlk:lrlral (ICICrioration result� in reduced ability to carry load and a decreased pave- nlCrlt life FUI1Cllollal detel'Ioralloll Can lead to and accelerate structural deterioration, but it i� t)rll\ related to ride yualO and frictional characteristics. A third and less accepted t\pe of J)lIvclllelll Betel-loralloll is ell%,Irolitllelltal deterloratloll, which Illost pa\Cnlent enL'iI)CCr' lump \\ ilh I'unCtiunal and structural deterioralion. En\ ironlnental dc1cl-lor:1tioll al leas ollk the pa\enlent materials and will Lencrall\ exhibit as either lunctiunal or su-uClural delCI-loratlon. }'a\en)ent \lelCri�\ratit)n i. an inlpt)rt:ult Il ISLIrClnent f'01- a pa\enlCnt ciiLineer. To (rt •rniinr Ow win:)itl)t o fllr oI :1 t1:1\i`I1)elll. or file allloUllt 0I 1)a\CIIICIll repmr relJlllred z N (n C N O <! U) C to O tS3 0 — U ro � m r v c O t � 1) .� N c cc C 0 O I) 2 LO !� a) N N 1 O . N ' (y N T. N a rn N Lq d .- �t N Ln cus E N '" z (zui/sdiN aW 'sn pow waipsai O a v Dios pagpeoa ni1aa{l3 `O o +v CD O n Z ro II O X LO O '— cCY c O Lo �f) ILOC t O a�i + II p E S' cc (n 4 U) r J + .� Z J r, O ~ y Q o (suoi1yw) BLM 'suoileoildde peol alx a16uis )uajeninba diN-9 jejoa pajew s3 a y cn u Qj O O O O Ln i() C > U) L 0 o � C Q N v) ` _t, a E �o A/1110 r = p Z o rn 0 0 0 0 v, Ln x ^ ` 3.49 ti 150 ( 140 Zerd Air Voi s Curve I 130 w U a. 120 A r~' IA 110 100 8 I Moisture Content % Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture Sample No: --- Lab Sample No: P-1 Density, pcf* Content % Sampled From: Harvest Subdivision 104.0 19.5 Soil Description: Lean Clay, low plasticity, dark gray. (CL) < 1% aggregate retained on the #4 sieve (discarded). *Density and moisture results ASTM D 698 Method: A rounded to nearest 0.5. 0 o: Laboratory Compaction Characteristics 991000 of Soil (Proctor) Plate AppAra- Harvest Subdivision I te: Bozeman, Montana P-1 Date: 1/14/99 SK Geotechnical Corporation, Billings, Montana h Cnlifornia Bearing Ratio Test (ASTM D 1883/AASHTO T 193) Project: 99-1000 Date: 01/13/99 Harvest Subdivision Field No.: Lab No.: P-1 Depth: Sample Description: Lean Clay,low plasticity,dark gray(CL). (Remolded to 95%relative compaction.) (Sample was submersed in water and allowed to saturate for 96.1 hours.) Maximum Dry Density: 104.0 pcf Procedure: ASTM D 698, Method A Initial Final Wt.Specimen+Tare Wet 567.0 gins Wt.Specimen+Tare Wet 4393.1 gins Wt. Specimen+Tare Dry 498.6 gins Wt. Specimen+Tare Dry 3753.6 gins Wt.Tare 155.9 gins Wt.Tare 342.4 gms Moisture Content 20.0% Moisture Content 18.7% Initial Wt. 4034.0 gins Diameter 6.00 in Initial Ht. 4.58 in Initial Dry Unit WL 98.9 pcf Initial Relative Compaction 95.1% Final Dry Unit Wt. 98.1 pcf Final Relative Compaction 94.3% SWELL TEST Surcharge Weight 22.5 lbs Surcharge Pressure 133.4 psf Initial Dial Rdg. 0.5000 Final Dial Rdg. 0.5377 Swell 0.8% CBR TEST Surcharge Weight 22.5 lbs Surcharge Pressure 128.1 psf CBR @ 0.1 in. 6.8 CBR @ 0-2 in 6.3 160 140 120 A, 100 --- 80 --- En 60 CIO 40 j 20 --- - ! 0 4 - - 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Penetration (inches) ol �- -- -------------------------5 I pp O I ON 3 i I 9 g o° I °8 IN00'26'06"E) m 000'26'06- I 40 2564.68 m I �� I I -- --- ---- —-- --------- 80 ;•, ` j 1 t I v0 o WiI I\� .. \�\ N LA t I I rn m a OPOSEo CULVERT Z R III 1 �ti I I $ 4- S5 SERVICE r —1 1 z \\ C D OJ N t I w A OI I I I I W'•1 � '\ `\ ` �1 0 o� o n O <'j &� � N I I I ��C ^�'. /�•��, l.tf.,, 1 1 � C0* In Q7 5 , A IIw 0 C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH # 1 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing C I COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 4.0 Icct SCALEIDEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................S I dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and occasional gravels and 15%small gravels<3" -10.......................Brown silty clay loam with very few organics,and occasional gravels(25%). 1- 2- -29".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6" diameter). - No organics, medium density, low plasticity,gritty texture. 3- - In same material as described below. 4-48.....................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 5- 6- 7 8- Q""0I I I "11-1cc le.11u_I C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH #2 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing C I COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 5.0 feet SCALE/DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................SI dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. 1- -13".....................Brown silty clay loam with common gravels(<3" diameter)and very few organics. 2- 3-36"...................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<5" diameter). — Gritty texture, low plasticity, medium density, no organics. = T — In same material as described above. 4- 5-60"...................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 6- 7- 8- oxo I I I I+It Ice IC'AOU' C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH # 9 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing C I COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 4.5 feet SCALE/DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. 1- -17.......................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density, smooth texture, medium - plasticity. 2- -33" 3- -40".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6"diameter). - Medium density,non-plastic,gritty texture,no organics. 4- -48".....................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 5- 6- 7- w8ol I I olliCe'Ic>f1oCw C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH # 3 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing Cl COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 4.5 feet SCALE/DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. 1-12.....................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density, smooth texture, medium — plasticity. 2- -33".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<8"diameter). — Medium density, non-plastic,gritty texture, no organics. 3- In same material as described above 4- -54"'...................End of excavation.No groundwater encountered. 5- 6- 7- 4H01I 1 ulYcearxtluc) C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH #4 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing C I COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 5.0 feet SCALEIDEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. 1- -15.......................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density,smooth texture, medium - plasticity. 2- -30".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<5"diameter). — Medium density, non-plastic,gritty texture,no organics. 3- In same material as described above 4- 5-60"...................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 6- 7- 98011 1 1111kr11:1111¢1 C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH # 5 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing CI COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 5.5 feet SCALE/DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0.......................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. I- -14.......................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density,smooth texture, medium - plasticity. 2- 3-36"...................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6"diameter). — Medium density, non-plastic,gritty texture, no organics. 4- In same material as described above 5 -66".....................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 6- 7- C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 9801 I.l HOLE: TH#6 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Draw ingCI COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 4.5 feet SCALE/DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0".....................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. -10.......................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density,smooth texture, medium — plasticity. 1- 2- -28".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6"diameter). Medium density,non-plastic,gritty texture,no organics. 3- In same material as described above 4- -54".....................End of excavation.No groundwater encountered. 5- 6- 7- 4HUI I I oll Ce,le:0oea C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH# 7 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing CI COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 5.5 feet SCALEIDEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0......................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. -1 1".....................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density,smooth texture,medium — plasticity. 1- 2- -30".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6"diameter). — Medium density, non-plastic,gritty texture,no organics. 3- In same material as described above 4- 5- -66".....................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 6- 7- Q80 1 1 1'on ice.lc>d"O C & H ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, INC: TEST HOLE LOG PROJECT: Delaney PROJECT#: 98011.1 HOLE: TH#8 STATE: MT LOCATION: See Drawing C 1 COUNTY: Gallatin LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DATE: 12/17/98 RECORDED BY: SK DRILL METHOD: Excavator DRILLER: Crosland Excavation TOTAL DEPTH: 5.0 feet SCALEIDEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION 0-0".....................Dark brown silty clay topsoil with few organics and no gravels. 1- -14.......................Brown silty clay loam with no gravels and very few organics. Low density,smooth texture,medium - plasticity. 2- -33".....................Depth to a well graded fine to medium grained brown sand with gravels and cobbles(<6" diameter). — Medium density,non-plastic,gritty texture,no organics. 3- - In same material as described above 4- 5-60"...................End of excavation. No groundwater encountered. 6- 7- osoI I I olliccusllog8 APPENDIX A Project Inventory Title: Spring Creek Project Engineer: Matt Cotterman Project Date: 08/28/00 Comments: Scenario Summary Label Average Daily Demand Alternative Maximum Daily Demand Physical Alternative Base-Physical 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 Liquid Characteristics Liquid Water at 20C(68F) Specific Gravity 1.00 Kinematic Viscosity 0.108e-4 ftz/s Network Inventory Number of Pipes 43 Number of Tanks 0 Number of Reservoirs 3 -Constant Area: 0 Number of Junctions 38 -Variable Area: 0 Number of Pumps 3 Number of Valves 0 -Constant Power: 0 -FCV's: 0 -One Point(Design Point): 0 -PBV's: 0 -Standard(3 Point): 0 -PRV's: 0 -Standard Extended: 0 -PSV's: 0 -Custom Extended: 0 -TCV's: 0 -Multiple Point: 3 Number of Spot Elevations 0 Pipe Inventory Total Length 5,693.00 ft 6 in 238.00 ft 12 in 2,873.00 ft 8 in 2,570.00 ft 48 in 12.00 ft Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[3581 08/29/00 02:42:48 PM 0 Haestad Methods,Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Pump Curve PMP-1 140.0. . _ . _ - - - - - - 120.0 i - - - - - i 100.0 80.0 — - - - Q) 60.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . - - - - i 40.0 - - - - - - - - i , 20.0 0.0 - 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 Discharge (gpm) Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer. Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[358] 08/28/00 05 18:55 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Pump Curve PMP-2 140.0 120.01k - - - - - - - - - 100.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - 80.0 — - - - - - - _$ 60.0 40.0 20.0 - - - - - i 0.0 -- 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 Discharge (gpm) Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman untitled.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet 0 5[358] 08/28/00 04:37:50 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Pump Curve P M P-3 140.0, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 120.0 "�-�. ,; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100.0;. - - - - - - - - - 80.0' Z$ 60.0. . - - - - - - 40.0' 20.0 , 0.0 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 Discharge (gpm) Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[358] 08/28/00 0526:26 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 AUG-25-2000 13:03 FRPM. BOZEMAN CITY SHOPS TO 95879768 P.02 I Free �d?catar ir. Galt ,e= «' CCEY'� CI1' 1 . :nlat Eage ..lC. nl et Edgir uC=lla�'�,? ::1d► `�''e cce:�1Clei.t t ? is ,.e 4d.jE' J��tturrr ;t$1�i.�• �r 7 Citot, 3lSCbc tom''.S 1 }•"3 _�_—.. _.... �.�.. ... - ._.-_.r �_..... ...._ _ Lei 22C. :...�J L yv � � n;1 lr'It� I C.:st .:��`n �r.•r. J K w ..�.2 V i'�ti 0 L r F 1`• �.✓ n i J S at / L J J V C. - t 1G{; tl2,0 ��: S -k ai090 b" l i.� .� My r L+ �LQslry�y T ZG jCJ1u i� .l 4:ts 'J J�C 1275 - 6 4^' �tGC •'�V �U�L .L.a�3v ..GG',J ,. : v 224,,; 2' u M 2 ' y �• C. r. K.,i'7 J G�=? ..,�iv n ll .:G�: ,'hF�*. U L'' J .�.7 L n 2Ci � j '1 C1 7G^ +s Ld�Q i , cy, q * , �' '-• C v _ 22 40 26 �� l V Cjn G�Lr 3 A °J� s:`J .i8C Guv � i n 25?l'1 217C C 1 7 5 r s // i�'J C, 0h'� at:5{: _ � �v 4..:1 5 �+;J•_• .. � J a� n 0) jZj ZO l r 4720 = �v II�1 C f L; C. G /�L' ;J "1 nV 5S _i, 1 LG•J .-J11 _t �. +t J .. ./ so ,. -� 4 �G 1�'.; L t' lJ �V V•.\ L e v l� i 4�'J ti\..� _^. _ � '1� L i .- . r M ` s_ � • AUG-25-2000 13:02 FRC BOZEMAN CITY SHOPS TO 95879768 P.01 62 oar .3EG "4901 N , 71 1 Li .E v 2745 14G 2u3C :v 1480 795 k i 20 J w�l-v 54 1540 alzt 154 80 ; .� I L: v I,Gi1 075 160 4 . 12" 162 2 135 - It 00 i6Ef0 ti29;; 1?J M �y aG2t:?Czvr.�: boa 4380 » `k 1�r• � rC a 4K25 iF; ynfr Scenario: Average Daily - Fire Flow Analysis Pipe Report Link Length Diameter Material Roughness Minor Loss Initial Current Discharge Start End Headloss Friction Label (ft) (in) Status Status (gpm) Calculated Calculated (ft) Slope Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft/1000ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) P-1 2.00 48 Ductile Iron 140.0 0.39 Open Open 0.15e-2 4,977.80 4,977.80 0.00 0.00 P-2 379.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -0.62e-3 5,116.29 5,116.29 0.00 0.00 P-3 72.00 8 Ductile fro 130.0 0.35 Open Open -15.26 5,116.29 5,116.29 0.98e-3 0.01 P-4 279.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -15.26 5,116.29 5,116.29 0.2e-2 0.01 P-34 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.29 5,116.29 0.00 0.00 P-5 160.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open -44.36 5,116.29 5,116.30 0.01 0.06 P-6 413.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.89 Open Open -44.36 5,116.30 5,116.33 0.02 0.06 P-7 47.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 37.64 5,116.33 5,116.33 0.24e-2 0.05 P-28 134.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.09 Open Open -175.27 5,116.33 5,116.35 0.02 0.13 P-8 404.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 37.64 5,116.33 5,116.31 0.02 0.04 P-35 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.33 5,116.33 0.00 0.00 P-9 118.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 18.82 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.15e-2 0.01 P-10 338.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 18.82 5,116.31 5,116.30 0.39e-2 0.01 P-36 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-11 318.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 0.00 5,116.30 5,116.30 0.00 0.00 P-12 42.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.00 Open Open 0.00 5,116.30 5,116.30 0.00 0.00 P-37 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116,30 5,116.30 0.00 0.00 P-13 6.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.00 Open Open 0.01 4,994.80 4,994.80 0.00 0.00 P-14 44.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 0.01 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-15 203.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -0.01 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-38 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-16 87.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open -18.13 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-17 84.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -18.13 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-18 68.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open -18.13 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.49e-3 0.01 P-39 9.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-19 180.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -18.13 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-20 97.00 12 Ductile fro 130.0 0.74 Open Open -36.25 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.98e-3 0.01 P-21 289.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -36.25 5,116.31 5,116.31 0,15e-2 0.01 P-40 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-22 83.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open -36.25 5,116,31 5,116.31 0.49e-3 0.01 P-41 11.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 P-23 28.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -36.25 5,116.31 5,116.31 0.49e-3 0.02 P-24 233.00 12 Ductile fro 130.0 0.10 Open Open -64.76 5,116.31 5,116.32 0.34e-2 0.01 P-25 52.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -64.76 5,116.32 5,116.32 0.98e-3 0.02 P-26 60.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -64.76 5,116.32 5,116.32 0.15e-2 0.02 P-42 24.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.32 5,116.32 0.00 0.00 P-27 302.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.14 Open Open -93.27 5,116.32 5,116.33 0.01 0.04 P-29 279.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -194.68 5,116.35 5,116.38 0.04 0.13 P-30 315.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -214.09 5,116.38 5,116.43 0.05 0.15 P-31 335.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.00 Open Open -214.09 5,116.43 5,116.48 0.05 0.15 P-43 11.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,116.43 5,116.43 0.00 0.00 P-32 4.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.39 Open Open -214.09 4,992.20 4,992.20 0.00 0.00 P-33 1 33.001 61 Ductile Irol 130.01 3.391 Open I Open 1 0.001 5,116.301 5,116.301 0.001 0.00 Title Spring Creek Project Engineer.Matt Cotterman g\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5(3581 08/29/00 03:08 51 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Average Daily Fire Flow Analysis Junction Report Node Elevation Demand Demand Demand Calculated Calculated Pressure Label (ft) Type (gpm) Pattern Demand Hydraulic (psi) (gpm) Grade (ft) J-1 4,784.57 Demand 15.26 Fixed 15.26 5,116.29 143.45 J-2 4,785.61 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.29 143.00 J-3 4,789.81 Demand 29.10 Fixed 29.10 5,116.29 141.18 J-4 4,792.04 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.30 140.22 J-5 4,798.66 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.33 137.37 J-6 4,799.32 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.33 137.08 J-7 4,804.68 Demand 18.82 Fixed 18.82 5,116.31 134.76 J-8 4,806.24 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 134.08 J-9 4,810.94 Demand 18.82 Fixed 18.82 5,116.30 132.05 J-10 4,816.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.30 129.73 J-11 4,817.39 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.30 129.26 J-12 4,809.80 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 132.54 J-13 4,811.45 Demand 18.12 Fixed 18.12 5,116.31 131.83 J-14 4,811.03 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 132.01 J-15 4,810.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 132.33 J-16 4,809.70 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 132.59 J-17 4,807.19 Demand 18.12 Fixed 18.12 5,116.31 133.67 J-18 4,806.00 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 134.19 J-19 4,802.82 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 135.56 J-20 4,802.41 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 135.74 J-21 4,802.25 Demand 28.51 Fixed 28.51 5,116.31 135.81 J-22 4,801.11 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.32 136.31 J-23 4,800.86 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.32 136.41 J-24 4,800.56 Demand 28.51 Fixed 28.51 5,116.32 136.54 J-25 4,797.76 Demand 19.41 Fixed 19.41 5,116.35 137.77 J-26 4,796.36 Demand 19.41 Fixed 19.41 5,116.38 138.39 J-27 4,795.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.43 138.93 J-28 4,798.95 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.30 137.23 J-29 4,792.52 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.29 140.01 J-30 4,806.22 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.33 134.10 J-31 4,813.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 131.10 J-32 4,823.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.30 126.77 J-33 4,817.79 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 129.09 J-34 4,817.21 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 129.34 J-35 4,812.91 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 131.20 J-36 4,809.73 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.31 132.58 J-37 4,807.77 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,116.32 133.43 J-38 1 4,802.181 Demand 10.00 1 Fixed 10.001 5,116.431 135.89 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5(3581 08/29/00 02:41:00 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Average Daily Fire Flow Analysis Fire Flow Report Node Needed Total Satisfies Available Residual Calculated Minimum ZonE Calculated MinimW imum Sys terrCalculated Label Fire Flow Needed Fire Flow Fire Pressure Residual Pressure Minimum ZonE Zone Pressure Minimum System (gpm) Flow Constraint Flow (psi) Pressure (psi) Pressure Junction (psi) Pressure (gpm) (gpm) (psi) (psi) (psi) J-1 1,500.00 1.515.26 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-2 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-3 1,500.00 1,529.10 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-4 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 NIA J-5 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-6 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-7 1,500.00 1,518.82 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-8 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-9 1,500.00 1,518.82 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-10 1,500,00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-11 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-12 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-13 1,500.00 1,518.12 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 N/A J-14 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-15 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-16 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-17 1,500.00 1,518.12 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-18 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-19 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-20 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-21 1,500.00 1,528.51 false N/A 20.00 NIA 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-22 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-23 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-24 1,500.00 1,528.51 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-25 1,500.00 1,519.41 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-26 1,500.00 1,519.41 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-27 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-28 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,479.68 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-29 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,646.52 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-30 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,850.74 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-31 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 3,415.62 20.00 20.00 20.00 59.88 J-32 20.00 59.88 J-32 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 2,696.45 20.00 20.00 20.00 50.47 J-11 20.00 50.47 J-33 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,568.82 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PIMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-34 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,887.42 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-35 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,638.79 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-36 1,500.001.500.00 true 4,982.35 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-37 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,862.13 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-38 11,500.0011,500.001 true 15,128.211 20.001 20.001 20.001 79.91 PMP-2-Ini 20.00 79.91 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer, Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[3581 08/29/00 02:32:22 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Scenario: Average Daily Fire Flow Analysis Pump Report Link I p tShutoff Shutoff Design Design Maximum Maximum Current Start End Discharge Pump LabelPumpHead Discharge Head Discharge Operating Operating Status Calculated Calculated (gpm) Head P r (ft) (gpm) (ft) (gpm) Discharge Head Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft) (gpm) (ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) PMP-1 130.00 0.00 93.99 1,596.02 3,192.03 0.00 Pump cannot 4,977.80 5,116.29 0.00 0.00 PMP-2 120.00 0.00 86.76 1,438.84 2,877.68 0.00 Pump cannot 4,994.80 5,116.31 0.00 0.00 PMP-3 1 1 125.001 0.001 90.37 1,736.881 3,473.75 1 0.00 1 On 4,992.20 1 5,116.48 1 214.09 24.28 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5(358) 08/29/00 03:15:34 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Maxlf�vM Scenario:AkApage Daily Fire Flow Analysis -- Fire Flow Report Node Needed Total Satisfies Available Residual Calculated Minimum ZonE Calculated Minimbfir imum Sys terrCalculated Label Fire Flow Needed Fire Flow Fire Pressure Residual Pressure Minimum ZonE Zone Pressure Minimum System (gpm) Flow Constraint Flow (psi) Pressure (psi) Pressure Junction (psi) Pressure (gpm) (gpm) (psi) (psi) (psi) J-1 1,500.00 1,536.17 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-2 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-3 1,500.00 1,568.97 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-4 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-5 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-6 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-7 1,500.00 1,544.60 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 N/A J-8 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-9 1,500.00 1,544.60 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-10 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-11 1,500,00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 N/A J-12 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-13 1,500.00 1,542.94 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-14 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-15 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-16 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-17 1,500.00 1,542.94 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-18 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-19 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-20 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-21 1,500.001,567.57 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 NIA J-22 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 NIA 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-23 1,500.00 1,500.00 false NIA 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-24 1,500.00 1,567.57 false N/A 20.00 NIA 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-25 1,500.00 1,546.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-26 1,500.00 1,546.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 NIA N/A 20.00 N/A J-27 1,500.00 1,500.00 false NIA 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-28 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,434.58 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-29 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,605.52 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-1n 20.00 79.91 J-30 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,789.34 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-31 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 3,363.05 20.00 20.00 20.00 58.55 J-32 20.00 58.55 J-32 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 2,656.02 20.00 20.00 20.00 49.65 J-11 20.00 49.65 J-33 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,521.79 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-34 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,831.59 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-35 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,586.39 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-36 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,922.54 20,00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-37 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,804.33 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-38 11,500.0011,500.001 true 15,074.671 20.001 20.001 20.001 79.91 PMP-2-In1 20.001 79.91 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5(3581 08/29/00 03:19:54 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Scenario: Daily Fire Flow Analysis Pipe Report Link Length Diameter Material Roughness Minor Loss Initial Current Discharge Start End Headloss Friction Label (ft) (in) Status Status (gpm) Calculated Calculated (ft) Slope Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft/1000ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) P-1 2.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.39 Open Open 0.01 4,977.80 4,977.80 0.00 0.00 P-2 379.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -0.6e-3 5,114.31 5,114.31 0.00 0.00 P-3 72.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -36.17 5,114.31 5,114.31 0.29e-2 0.04 P-4 279.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -36.17 5,114.31 5,114.32 0.01 0.04 P-34 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.31 5,114.31 0.00 0.00 P-5 160.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open -105.14 5,114.32 5,114.38 0.05 0.32 P-6 413.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.89 Open Open -105.14 5,114.38 5,114.50 0.12 0.30 P-7 47.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 89.21 5,114.50 5,114.49 0.01 0,29 P-28 134.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.09 Open Open -303.31 5,114.50 5,114.55 0.05 0.37 P-8 404.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 89.21 5,114.49 5,114.40 0.09 0.22 P-35 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3,39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.49 5,114.49 0.00 0.00 P-9 118.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 44.60 5,114.40 5,114.39 0.01 0.07 P-10 338.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 44.60 5,114.39 5,114.37 0.02 0.06 P-36 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.39 5,114.39 0.00 0.00 P-11 318.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 0.00 5,114.37 5,114.37 0.00 0.00 P-12 42.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.00 Open Open 0.00 5,114.37 5,114.37 0.00 0.00 P-37 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.37 5,114.37 0.00 0.00 P-13 6.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.00 Open Open 112.07 4,994.80 4,994.80 0.00 0.00 P-14 44.00 12 Ductile fror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 112.07 5,114.51 5,114.50 0.29e-2 0.07 P-15 203.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 112.07 5,114.50 5,114.49 0.01 0.05 P-38 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.50 5,114.50 0.00 0.00 P-16 87.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 69.13 5,114.49 5,114.49 0.15e-2 0.02 P-17 84.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 69.13 5,114.49 5,114.49 0.2e-2 0.02 P-18 68.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 69.12 5,114.49 5,114.49 0.15e-2 0.02 P-39 9.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.49 5,114.49 0.00 0.00 P-19 180.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 69.12 5,114.49 5,114.48 0.34e-2 0.02 P-20 97.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 26.18 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.49e-3 0.01 P-21 289.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 26.18 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.98e-3 0.34e-2 P-40 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.00 0.00 P-22 83.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 26.18 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.00 0.00 P-41 11.00 6 Ductile fror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.00 0.00 P-23 28.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 26.18 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.49e-3 0.02 P-24 233.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open -41.39 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.2e-2 0.01 P-25 52.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -41.39 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.49e-3 0.01 P-26 60.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -41.39 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.49e-3 0.01 P-42 24.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.48 5,114.48 0.00 0.00 P-27 302.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.14 Open Open -108.96 5,114.48 5,114.50 0.01 0.05 P-29 279.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -349.31 5,114.55 5,114.66 0.11 0.40 P-30 315.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -395.31 5,114.66 5,114.81 0.15 0.48 P-31 335.00 12 Ductile fror 130.0 0.00 Open Open -395.31 5,114.81 5,114.97 0.15 0.46 P-43 11.00 6 Ductile Iro 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.81 5,114.81 0.00 0.00 P-32 4,00 48 Ductile Iro 140.0 0.39 Open Open -395.31 4,992.20 4,992.20 0.00 0.00 P-33 1 31001 61 Ductile Iro 130.01 3.391 Open I Open 1 0.001 5,114.381 5,114.381 0.001 0.00 Title: Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[3581 08/29/00 03.20:56 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 N6)(1 V/4 Scenario:4wampa Daily Fire Flow Analysis Junction Report Node Elevation Demand Demand Demand Calculated Calculated Pressure Label (ft) Type (gpm) Pattern Demand Hydraulic (psi) (gpm) Grade (ft) J-1 4,784.57 Demand 36.17 Fixed 36.17 5,114.31 142.59 J-2 4,785.61 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.31 142.14 J-3 4,789.81 Demand 68.97 Fixed 68.97 5,114.32 140.33 J-4 4,792.04 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.38 139.39 J-5 4,798.66 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5.114.50 136.58 J-6 4,799.32 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 136.29 J-7 4,804.68 Demand 44.60 Fixed 44.60 5,114.40 133.93 J-8 4,806.24 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.39 133.25 J-9 4,810.94 Demand 44.60 Fixed 44.60 5,114.37 131.21 J-10 4.816.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.37 128.89 J-11 4,817.39 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.37 128.42 J-12 4,809.80 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.50 131.76 J-13 4,811.45 Demand 42.94 Fixed 42.94 5,114.49 131.05 J-14 4,811.03 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 131.23 J-15 4,810.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 131.54 J-16 4,809.70 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 131.80 J-17 4,807.19 Demand 42.94 Fixed 42.94 5,114.48 132.88 J-18 4,806.00 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 133.40 J-19 4,802.82 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 134.77 J-20 4,802.41 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 134.95 J-21 4,802.25 Demand 67.57 Fixed 67.57 5,114.48 135.02 J-22 4,801.11 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 135.51 J-23 4,800.86 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 135.62 J-24 4,800.56 Demand 67.57 Fixed 67.57 5,114.48 135.75 J-25 4,797.76 Demand 46.00 Fixed 46.00 5,114.55 136.99 J-26 4,796.36 Demand 46.00 Fixed 46.00 5,114.66 137.64 J-27 4,795.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.81 138.23 J-28 4,798.95 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.38 136.40 J-29 4,792.52 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.31 139.15 J-30 4,806.22 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 133.30 J-31 4,813.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.39 130.27 J-32 4,823.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.37 125.93 J-33 4,817.79 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.50 128.31 J-34 4,817.21 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.49 128.55 J-35 4,812.91 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 130.41 J-36 4,809.73 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 131.79 J-37 4,807.77 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.48 132.63 J-38 1 4,802.181 Demand 1 0.00 1 Fixed 10.001 5,114.811 135.19 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Malt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[358) 08/29/00 03:21:25 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Mgt MGM. Scenario: Daily Fire Flow Analysis Pump Report Link IhpijtShutoff Shutoff Design Design Maximum Maximum Current Start End Discharge Pump LabelPumpHead Discharge Head Discharge Operating Operating Status Calculated Calculated (gpm) Head P r (ft) (gpm) (ft) (gpm) Discharge Head Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft) (gpm) (ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) PMP-1 130.00 0.00 93.99 1,596.02 3,192.03 0.00 Pump cannot 4,977.80 5,114.31 0.00 0.00 PMP-2 120.00 0.00 86.76 1,438.84 2,877.68 0.00 On 4,994.80 5,114.51 112.07 19.71 PMP-3 1 1 125.001 0.001 90.37 1,736.88 3,473.751 0.00 1 On 4,992.20 1 5,114.97 1 395.31 22.77 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3 5[3581 08/29/00 03:22:01 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 yak Nwrc t a�'A Scenario:- Fire Flow Analysis Fire Flow Report Node Needed Total Satisfies Available Residual Calculated Minimum Zone Calculated Minim W imum SysterrCalculated Label Fire Flow Needed Fire Flow Fire Pressure Residual Pressure Minimum Zone Zone Pressure Minimum System (gpm) Flow Constraints Flow (psi) Pressure (psi) Pressure Junction (psi) Pressure (gpm) (gpm) (psi) (psi) (psi) J-1 1,500.00 1,546.09 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-2 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-3 1,500.00 1,587.88 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 NIA J-4 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 N/A J-5 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-6 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 NIA 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-7 1,500.00 1,556.84 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-8 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-9 1,500.00 1,556.84 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-10 1,500,00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-11 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 NIA N/A 20.00 NIA J-12 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A NIA 20.00 N/A J-13 1,500.001,554.72 false N/A 20.00 NIA 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-14 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-15 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-16 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-17 1,500.00 1,554.72 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-18 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-19 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-20 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-21 1,500.00 1,586.10 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-22 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20,00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-23 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-24 1.500.00 1,586.10 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 NIA J-25 1,500.00 1,558.62 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 NIA N/A 20.00 N/A J-26 1,500.00 1,558.62 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 NIA J-27 1,500.00 1,500.00 false N/A 20.00 N/A 20.00 N/A N/A 20.00 N/A J-28 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,412.50 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-29 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,585.43 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-30 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,759.47 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-31 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 3,337.52 20.00 20.00 20.00 57.90 J-32 20.00 57.90 J-32 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 2,636.29 20.00 20.00 20.00 49.26 J-11 20.00 49.26 J-33 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4.498.71 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-34 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,804.30 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-35 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,560.76 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-36 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,893.39 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-37 1,500.00 1,500.00 true 4,776.13 20.00 20.00 20.00 79.91 PMP-2-In 20.00 79.91 J-38 11,500.0011,500.001 true 15,048.491 20.001 20.001 20.001 79.91 1 PMP-2-ln1 20.001 79.91 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer: Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[3581 08/29/00 03 49:50 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 Peak �ovrl Scenario: Mr Fire Flow Analysis Pipe Report Link Length Diameter Material Roughness Minor Loss Initial Current Discharge Start End Headloss Friction Label (ft) (in) Status Status (gpm) Calculated Calculated (ft) Slope Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft/1000ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) P-1 2.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.39 Open Open 0.01 4,977.80 4,977.80 0.00 0.00 P-2 379.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -0.6e-3 5,113.55 5,113.55 0.00 0.00 P-3 72.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -46.09 5,113.55 5,113.55 0.49e-2 0.07 P-4 279.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -46.09 5,113.55 5,113.57 0.02 0.07 P-34 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.55 5,113.55 0.00 0.00 P-5 160.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open -133.97 5,113.57 5,113.65 0.08 0.50 P-6 413.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.89 Open Open -133.97 5,113.65 5,113.84 0.19 0.47 P-7 47.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 113.67 5,113.84 5,113.82 0.02 0.46 P-28 134.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.09 Open Open -327.84 5,113.84 5,113.90 0.06 0.43 P-8 404.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 113.67 5,113.82 5,113.68 0.14 0.34 P-35 10.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.82 5,113.82 0.00 0.00 P-9 118.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 56.84 5,113.68 5,113.67 0.01 0.10 P-10 338.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 56.84 5,113.67 5,113.64 0.03 0.10 P-36 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.67 5,113.67 0.00 0.00 P-11 318.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 0.00 5,113.64 5,113.64 0.00 0.00 P-12 42.00 8 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.00 Open Open 0.00 5,113.64 5,113.64 0.00 0.00 P-37 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.64 5,113.64 0.00 0.00 P-13 6.00 48 Ductile Iror 140.0 0.00 Open Open 201.45 4,994.80 4,994.80 0.00 0.00 P-14 44.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 201.45 5,113.93 5,113.92 0.01 0.21 P-15 203.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 201.44 5,113.92 5,113.89 0.03 0.15 P-38 32.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.92 5,113.92 0.00 0.00 P-16 87.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 146.72 5,113.89 5,113.88 0.01 0.08 P-17 84.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 146.72 5,113.88 5.113.87 0.01 0.08 P-18 68.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 146.72 5,113.87 5,113.87 0.01 0.08 P-39 9.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.87 5,113.87 0.00 0.00 P-19 180.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 146.72 5,113.87 5,113.85 0.02 0.08 P-20 97.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.74 Open Open 92.00 5,113.85 5,113.85 0.39e-2 0.04 P-21 289.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 92.00 5,113.85 5,113.84 0.01 0.03 P-40 33.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3,39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.85 5,113.85 0.00 0.00 P-22 83.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 92.01 5,113.84 5,113,84 0.24e-2 0.03 P-41 11.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.84 5,113.84 0.00 0.00 P-23 28.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 92.01 5.113.84 5,113.84 0.2e-2 0.07 P-24 233.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.10 Open Open 5.90 5,113.84 5,113.84 0.00 0.00 P-25 52.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open 5.90 5,113.84 5,113.84 0.00 0.00 P-26 60.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open 5.91 5,113.84 5,113.84 0.00 0.00 P-42 24.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,113.84 5,113.84 0.00 0.00 P-27 302.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 1.14 Open Open -80.19 5,113,84 5,113.84 0.01 0.03 P-29 279.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.70 Open Open -386.46 5,113.90 5,114.04 0.14 0.49 P-30 315.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.35 Open Open -445.07 5,114.04 5,114.23 0.19 0.60 P-31 335.00 12 Ductile Iror 130.0 0.00 Open Open -445.07 5,114.23 5,114.42 0.19 0.57 P-43 11.00 6 Ductile Iror 130.0 3.39 Open Open 0.00 5,114.23 5,114.23 0.00 0.00 P-32 4.00 48 Ductile Iro 140.0 0.39 Open Open -445.07 4,992.20 4,992.20 0.00 0.00 P-33 1 33.001 61 Ductile Iro 130.01 3.391 Open I Open 1 0.001 5,113.65 1 5,113.65 1 0.001 0.00 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer.Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\0004 1\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[358] 08/29/00 03.50:07 PM 0 Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Fire Flow Analysis Junction Report Node Elevation Demand Demand Demand Calculated Calculated Pressure Label (ft) Type (gpm) Pattern Demand Hydraulic (psi) (gpm) Grade (ft) J-1 4,784.57 Demand 46.09 Fixed 46.09 5,113.55 142.26 J-2 4,785.61 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.55 141.81 J-3 4,789.81 Demand 87.88 Fixed 87.88 5,113.57 140.00 J-4 4,792.04 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.65 139.08 J-5 4,798.66 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 136.30 J-6 4,799.32 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.82 136.00 J-7 4,804.68 Demand 56.84 Fixed 56.84 5,113.68 133.62 J-8 4,806.24 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.67 132.94 J-9 4,810.94 Demand 56.84 Fixed 56.84 5,113.64 130.90 J-10 4,816.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0,00 5,113.64 128.58 J-11 4,817.39 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.64 128.11 J-12 4,809.80 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.92 131.51 J-13 4,811.45 Demand 54.72 Fixed 54.72 5,113.89 130.78 J-14 4,811.03 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.88 130.96 J-15 4,810.30 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.87 131.28 J-16 4,809.70 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.87 131.53 J-17 4,807.19 Demand 54.72 Fixed 54.72 5,113.85 132.61 J-18 4,806.00 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.85 133.12 J-19 4,802.82 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 134.50 J-20 4,802.41 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 134.67 J-21 4,802.25 Demand 86.10 Fixed 86.10 5,113.84 134.74 J-22 4,801.11 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 135.23 J-23 4,800.86 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 135.34 J-24 4,800.56 Demand 86.10 Fixed 86.10 5,113.84 135.47 J-25 4,797.76 Demand 58.62 Fixed 58.62 5,113.90 136.71 J-26 4,796.36 Demand 58.62 Fixed 58,62 5,114.04 137.37 J-27 4,795.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,114.23 137.98 J-28 4.798.95 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.65 136.09 J-29 4,792.52 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0,00 5,113.55 138.83 J-30 4,806.22 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.82 133.02 J-31 4,813.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.67 129.96 J-32 4,823.15 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.64 125.62 J-33 4,817.79 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.92 128.06 J-34 4,817.21 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.87 128.29 J-35 4,812.91 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.85 130.14 J-36 4,809.73 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 131.51 J-37 4,807.77 Demand 0.00 Fixed 0.00 5,113.84 132.35 J-38 1 4,802.181 Demand 1 0.001 Fixed 10.001 5,114.231 134.94 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer: Matt Cotterman g\c&h\00\00041\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3,5(3581 08/29/00 03:5025 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Pect/C 1 v yr(t n,,J Scenario.Fire Flow Analysis Pump Report Link I p tShutoff Shutoff Design Design Maximum Maximum Current Start End Discharge Pump LabelPurqpHead Discharge Head Discharge Operating Operating Status Calculated Calculated (gpm) Head P)wer (ft) (gpm) (ft) (gpm) Discharge Head Hydraulic Hydraulic (ft) (gpm) (ft) Grade Grade (ft) (ft) PMP-1 130.00 0.00 93.99 1,596.02 3.192.03 0.00 Pump cannot 4,977.80 5,113.55 0.00 0.00 PMP-2 120.00 0.00 86.76 1,438.84 2,877.68 0.00 On 4,994.80 5,113.93 201.45 19.13 PMP-3 1 1 125.001 0.001 90,37 1,736.881 3,473.751 0.00 On 4,992.20 1 5,114.42 1 445.07 1 22.22 Title:Spring Creek Project Engineer:Matt Cotterman g:\c&h\00\0004 1\cybernet.wcd C&H Engineering Cybernet v3.5[3581 O8/29/00 03:50:54 PM ©Haestad Methods, Inc 37 Brookside Road Waterbury,CT 06708 USA (203)755-1666 Page 1 of 2 APPENDIX B ENGINEERING AND Project Number: SURVEYING, INC. Project Name: • Civil Engineering •Structural Engineering •Land Surveying Date: Fig y:B ' G 2415 W.Main Street,Suite 1 (406)587-1115 Bozeman,Montana 59718 Fax:(406)587-9768 Subject: O l Page: a 9 Cl) ' t C� ^S 11 Q � a r- X C) x w i ca O o F 0 --� IG a Q s Y i I" V r 6 "b Me C�rtcer,-�ra� ior� `.t 800 100 x r tq cv O h /IT 90 700 ,_ ae 1- o' 80 600 , co 500 70 _ 400 80 G c �. !L 50 300 17 a� (ZX I 40 ~ »- 200 0 N > p 1:0 O 100 O 6 30 ~ IJ 0 20 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time 2-10 I rv�e o� Come n+ra+i �eO► �-�hO r Od o►"- �V e � O 100 800 toni 90 700 80 600 70 500 me 60 400 c U- 300 E m , C F- 200 40 y p as 100 O $ 30 ~ P 0 , 20 ' 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time 2-10 t � 800 Pone # 100 x. O o co a ae O 90 700 .i dP ?� O' 80 600 h - O' 70 _ 500 60 d 00 c �- 50 300 cv a, 0' E cca ' h 40 ~ 200 3F } C) co 0 60 30 ~ 100 0 �0 20 0 ` . 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time r c'r;t ioI A �n 800 100 x r t�j 90 700 r d4 i� o' 80 600 r. 70 500 60 400 c ci 300 47 s c ' h 40 ~ 200 m cn > ca 0 60 30 ~ 100 010 20 0 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time A F� 3100 'x 800 e g0 7 00 dP ?� O' 80 600 ap o' 0 70 500 80 40 G � ;�0 50 � 300 � c ' A 40 F- 200 m cn > LD F- 30 100 010 20 0 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flaw Travel Time 1 ` �.t L Acc POO,() 100 800 0 0 ,o -W ae i h cV O b 90 700 O' 80 600 ap 70 500 60 400 G c ti 30 0 0 as 4 ~0 200 3 m co 0 60 30 ~ 100 0�0 20 0 �—' --- 10 0 Figure 2-1 Overland Flow Travel Time W T }� LLJ J Q 0 z (D CD LLJ U Q � C) to `- O Ln cn o � `n i i � �? U �( rK NL n LJ U co O 0 c n ° CK cn LLJ _ < °- z � o � Li `� o E- L-L., co �C APPENDIX C 5-7 OPEN CHANNEL FLOW If the channel is divided by an island into two channels the full channel width, the weir is called a suppressed (figure 5.5), Q will usually be known. It may be neces- weir, since the contractions are suppressed. sary to calculate Q1 and Q2 in that case, or, if Qi and Q2 are known, it may be necessary to find the slope. 'H nappe Q A Y Figure 5.5 Divided Channel b Since the drop (zB—zA) between points A and B is the H� —' IH same regardless of flow path, _ zB — zA 5.21 Si L1 suppressed contracted _ zB —zA 5.22 S2 L2 Once the slopes are known, Q1 and Q2 can be found from equation 5.9. The sum of Qt and Q2 will probably not be the same as the given flow quantity, Q. In that Figure 5.6 Contracted and Suppressed Weirs case, Q should be prorated according to the ratios of Q1 and Q2 to (Q1 +Q2). The derivation of the basic weir equation is not partic- If the lengths L1 and L2 are the same or almost so, the ularly difficult, but it is dependent on many simplifying Chezy-Manning equation may be solved for the slope assumptions. The basic weir equation (equation 5.24 by writing equation 5.23.' or 5.25) is, therefore, an approximate result requiring l correction by the inclusion of experimental coefficients. �njAl 3 �3 � If it is assumed that the contractions are suppressed,Q = Qi +Q2 = 1.49 (rx,i) � + n2(rH,�)� upstream velocity is uniform, flow is laminar over the 5.23 crest, nappe pressure is zero, the nappe is fully ven- tilated, and viscosity, turbulence, and surface tension 10 FLOW MEASUREMENT WITH WEIRS effects are negligible, then the following equation may be derived from the Bernoulli equation: A weir is an obstruction in an open channel over which 2)3/2 s;2flow occurs. Although a dam spillway is a specific type Q — 26 2g H + vl — �U' 5.24 of weir, most weirs are designed for flow measurement. 3 2g 2g These weirs consist of a vertical flat plate with sharp- ened edges. Because of their construction, they are called sharp-crested weirs. If vl is negligible, then Sharp-crested weirs are most frequently rectangular, Q _ 36 2g(H)3�2 5.25 consisting of a straight, horizontal crest. However,weirs may also have trapezoidal and triangular openings. If a rectangular weir is constructed with an opening Equation 5.25 must be corrected for all of the assump- width less than the channel width, the overfalling liquid Lions made. This is done by introducing a coefficient, sheet (called the nappe) decreases in width as it falls. C1, to account primarily for a non-uniform velocity dis- This contraction of the nappe causes these weirs to be tribution. Q = 3( ) called contracted weirs, although it is the nappe that is Z CI 6 2g(H)3�2 5.26 actually contracted. If the opening of the weir extends 5-8 CIVIL ENGINEERING REFERENCE MANUAL A number of investigations have been done to evaluate C,. Perhaps the most widely known is the coefficient formula developed by Rehbock:5 H\ 0.0002951 0.00361 3/z H 10.6035+0,0813 + Y1 [1+ H/ 5.27 If the contractions are not suppressed (i.e., one or both sides do not extend to the channel sides) then the actual width, b, should be replaced with the effective width. Figure 5.8 Triangular Weir beffective = bactual — (0.1)(N)(H) 5.28 A trapezoidal weir is essentially a rectangular weir with N is one if one side is contracted, and N is two if there a triangular weir on either side. If the angle of the are two end contractions. sides from the vertical is approximately 14' (i.e., 4 ver- tical and 1 horizontal) the weir is known as a Cipoletti A submerged rectangular weir requires a more complex weir. The discharge from the triangular ends of a Cipo- analysis, due to the difficulty in measuring H, and be- letti weir approximately make up for the contractions cause the discharge depends on both the upstream and that reduce rectangular flow. Therefore, no correction downstream depths. The following equation, however, is theoretically necessary. The discharge from a Cipo- may be used with little difficulty. letti weir is given by equation 5.32. 3�2 0.385 Q = 3.367(b)(H)3�2 5.32 (Hdownstream 1 Qsubmerged = Qfree flow 1 — ` J Hupstream 5.29 Equation 5.29 is used by first finding Q from equation 5.26 and then correcting it with the bracketed quantity. H b Hupstream Hdownstream y Figure 5.9 Trapezoidal Weir Equation 5.26 can also be used for broad-crested weirs Figure 5.7 Submerged Weir (C = 0.5 to 0.57) and ogee spillways (C = 0.60 to 0.75). 71riangular (V-notch) weirs should be used when small flow rates are to be measured. The flow over a triangu- lar w ►r depends on the notch angle, 8. For a 90' weir, Example 5.6 C� a 0.593. A sharp-crested, rectangular weir with two contractions is 22 feet high and 4 feet long. A 4" head exists up- Q = C2 8/ tan ('0) 2g(H)51' 5.30 stream from the weir. What is the velocity of approach? Q � 2.5H� 5(90° weir) 5.31 11 = 4/12 = 0.333 ft 5 There is much variation in how different investigators calculate N = 2 and the effective width is the discharge coefficient,Ci. For ratios of 111b less than 5,Ct = From equation 5.28, 0.622 gives a reasonable value. With the questionable accuracy of some of the other variables used in open channel Bow problems, beffeuive = 4 — (0.1)(2)(0.333) = 3.93 the pursuit of greater accuracy is of dubious value. OPEN CHANNEL FLOW 5-9 The Rehbock coefficient (from equation 5.27) is The throat geometry in a Parshall flume has been cho- sen so as to force the occurrence of a critical flow there. ci = 0.6035+0.0813 (0.333) Following the critical section is a short length of super- ( \ 2.5 critical flow followed by a hydraulic jump. This con- +0.000295 1 + 0.00361 3/2 struction does not produce a dead water region where debris and silt can accumulate(as is the case with broad 2.5 ) 0.333 crested and other flat-top weirs). = 0.624 The discharge relationship for a Parshall flume is given From equation 5.26, the flow is by equation 5.33 for submergence ratios of Hb/HQ up to 0.7. Above 0.7, the true discharge is less than predicted Q = 3(0.624)(3.93) (2)(32.2)(0.333)3/2 by the equation. Values of K are given in the table 5.2, although using a value of 4.0 is accurate for most = 2.52 cfs purposes. _ _ 2.52 _ " (4)(2.5 +0.333) 0.222 ft/sec Q = Kb(HQ)" 5.33 n = 1.522(b )Q.016 5.34 11 FLOW MEASUREMENT WITH PARSHALL FLUMES The Parshall flume is one of the most widely used de- Table 5.2 vices for measuring open channel wastewater flows. It K values for the Parshall Flume performs well even in instances where head loss must be kept to a minimum or when there is a high concen- b K tration of suspended solids. 0.25 ft 3.97 The Parshall flume is constructed with a converging up- 0.50 4.12 stream section, a throat, and a diverging downstream 0.75 4.09 section. The walls of the flume are vertical, and the 1.0 4.00 floor of the throat section drops. The length, width, i.5 4.00 and height of the flume are essentially predefined by 2.0 4.00 the flow rate anticipated.6 3.0 4.00 4.0 4.00 • flow 12 STEADY FLOW b Steady open flow is one of constant-volume flow. How- ever, the flow may be uniform or non-uniform. Figure depth measurement 5.11 illustrates that three definitions of"slope" exist for I point determined open channel flow. These three slopes are the slope of by design the channel bottom, the slope of the water surface, and the slope of the energy gradient line. side wails-A ----- Under conditions of uniform flow, all of these three slopes are equal, since the flow quantity and flow depth _ are constant along the length of flow.7 With non- Ha Hb uniform flow, however, the flow velocity and depth van along the length of channel, and the three slopes are not necessarily equal. Figure 5.10 The Parshall Flume ` 7 As a simplification, this chapter deals only with channels of 6 This chapter does not attempt to design the Parshall flume, constant width. If the width is varied,changes in flow depth may only to predict flow rates through its use not coincide with changes in flow quantity. 2 by - G / ®" I I I I j I � -2 � i I I I 1 i - I I 7 I I I t I I I I / —3 I , I I I /I I I I I I I , I r , 1 ; I I I I , I I - co �' P—53 I , w I I m iI — 0 I I i i i I I I 1 I _38 - - �-3 ------ _31----- _ -27 _ -T i P— I � ' 1 � r , _ —2 g f � � 341 — I 7 I I I I I I I � I I 3 i -------------- _T - I \ P- I I I I DROP MN —1 I PIM=460:-3�1 P— t (AS SURVEYED! FL N-4'84.96 FL 4Vs4784.9' I 21 � FL S&E 4 a?._4 Ij {C,QB. DATUMI 4 I I 'Q I J- _3. 20 I 1 17 I I � i ! P -31 P-3-1 9 - - _ J-1 P_ P-2 P-1 0 I i FYI-� A � I' .� P-1 1 N ,I J- 32