UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN

École Polytechnique de Louvain

Applied Hydraulics

2nd exercise:
Rainfall-runoff relations

Professors: Students:
S. Soares-Frazão Simone Mazzer (24042300)
M. Ebrahimi M.Oghor Battal (14572300)

Academic Year 2023/2024

 Table of Contents
1. Introduction .........................................................................................................................2
2. Calculation of the Discharge at the Outlet ............................................................................2
3. Design of the Conduit 118 diameter .....................................................................................4
4. Improved Discretization of the sub catchment ......................................................................6
5. Flow profile for the conduit between 301-121 ......................................................................8
6. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................9

List of Figures
1. Figure 2.1 Study area with the conduits…………………………………………………..3
2. Figure 3. 1 Use of the diameter found with the rational method in SWMM……………...6
3. Figure 4. 1 5 subcatchments………………………………………………………………7
4. Figure 4.2 Conduits max capacity check………………………………………………….8
5. Figure 5. 1 Water elevation profile for 5 years return period……………………………..9
6. Figure 5. 2 Water elevation profile for 25 years return period……………………………10

List of Tables
1. Table 2.1 Parameters of the Study………………………………………………………...3

2. Table 2.2 Peak discharge values…………………………………………………………..4

3. Table 3.1 Parameters of the conduit………………………………………………………4

4. Table 3. 2 Catalogue of the conduit………………………………………………………5

5. Table 3. 3 Diameter for Tr = 5 years and n=0.025………………………………………5

6. Table 3. 4 Diameter for Tr = 5 years and n=0.005………………………………………5

7. Table 3. 5 Diameter for Tr = 25 years and n=0.025 …………………………………….5

8. Table 3. 6 Diameter for Tr = 25 years and n=0.005……………………………………...5

9. Table 4.1 Outflow value for various subcatchments……………………………..7

Page | 1
 1. Introduction

The impact of runoff analysis is critical to insure no soil erosion and pollution of water occur in
agricultural areas. Furthermore, rain-runoff analysis is valued in the hydraulic field due to its
ability to alter the groundwater, subsurface and surface water occurring in various drainage
systems into a hydrograph.

Rain and runoff are closely linked as a result of that runoff will occur upon the rain intensity enters
a stage where it exceeds the infiltration capacity of the ground in question. I.E, the rain
gage/rainstorm is correlated with the soil infiltration rate, surface storage, and runoff cofeccient.
The total quantity of runoff and the volume of precipitation obtained are correlated to the
dimensionless runoff coefficient (C). With locations that have limited infiltration and heavy runoff
(pavements) it has a higher value; where for permeable, well-vegetated regions (forest, flat land)
the coefficient would be lower.

For this assignment the objective is to firstly calculate and analysis the peak discharge at the outlet
by two methods; the rational method and by the usage of the SWMM software. This is done to
insure that appropriate sizes of sewers and channels are available in the catchment area in order to
reduce the effect of overflow and the required amount of runoff is reached to its outlet, which in
our case is the lake of Louvain-la-neuve.

Upon calculating the peak discharge of the outlet the sewer conduit diameter of the outlet will be
calculated and analyzed by adopting the uniform flow theory. The theory is the flow of that
throughout a period of time the magnitude as well as the direction of the velocity are both constant
across the length of any given streamline.
Finally, the analysis will be repeated by dividing the watershed into various catchment areas to
insure more accurate results. Where additionally the water profile for a streamline will be evaluated
to insure accurate results.

2. Calculation of the Discharge at the Outlet

Regarding the calculation of the discharge at the outlet it is important to define the characteristics
of the sub catchment. Since we are using the constant velocity rational method, which is an
approximate method, it is possible to introduce some simplifying assumptions:

- The area is composed of 50% by grass and 50% by buildings, in this way the runoff
coefficient is 0.6;
- The runoff time is the same for the whole area and equal to 5 minutes;
- We consider a constant velocity of 1 m/s.
Furthermore, Figure 1 demonstrates the catchment area that is being investigated

Page | 2
 Figure 2.3 Study area with the conduites

For the first part it is required to find the discharge at the outlet (node 121) using the rational
method. In particular, the longest path possible considered is the one that starts at the node 607
and finishes at the node 121, similar distance can be deduced by starting at the node 101. Table 1
summarizes the parameters required for the obtaining the outflow discharge.

Table 2.4 Parameters of the Study

Length of the longest path [m] 600

Precipitation for 15 minutes and Return 13.2
Time of 5 years [mm]
Intensity [mm/h] 52.8
Precipitation for 15 minutes and Return 20.55
Time of 25 years [mm]
Intensity [mm/h] 82.2
Sub catchment area [m2] 143373

Page | 3
Moreover, upon obtaining the needed parameters by implementing formula 2.1 the peak discharge
at the outlet can be calculated.
𝑄 = 𝐶 × 𝑖 × 𝐴 (2.1)
The peak discharges that were found in both cases and for two time return periods 5 and 25 by the
Rational method and the SWMM software are demonstrated in table 2.2
Table 5.2 Peak discharge values

Maximum discharges Rational method Maximum discharges SWMM

1.26 m3/s (5 years) 1.7 m3/s (5 years)
1.96 m3/s (25 years) 2.8 m3/s (25 years)

It is possible to note that the solution for T R = 5 years is a lot more similar between theoretical and
numerical than the other one.

3. Design of the Conduit 118 diameter

The diameter of the conduit has been calculated by firstly imposing an angle 𝜃 = 0.927. The
important aspects are summed up in table 3.1.
Table 6.1 Parameters of the conduit

Slope of the conduit 1.6%

Value of n (new, perfect conditions) 0.025
Value of n (used, imperfections in the material and continuity between conduits) 0.05
Discharge (Tr=10 years) [m3/s] 1.7

Since the conduits for sewers come in set dimensions only these ones are considered, to do a more
thorough analysis below are displayed the different possibilities. In addition, there are some
properties specific to some cases:
 Conduits with ND = 300 mm are provided only without rebar;
 Conduits with ND = 2200 mm are provided only without spigot joint;
 Conduits with ND ≥ 1800 mm do not have a guaranteed resistance based on UNI EN
1916:2004;
Table 3.2 illustrates the catalogue

Page | 4
 Table 3. 2 Catalogue of the conduit
ND S1 S2 S3 B P Lu Lt Weight Gask. Guaranteed
[mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] mm] [mm] [mm] [kg] [mm] Resistance
Class
300 57 77 100 500 240 2000 2095 450 16 135
400 62 82 100 624 320 2000 2095 630 16 135
500 70 95 120 760 400 2000 2095 875 16 135
600 78 103 131 892 450 2000 2110 1145 18 135
800 90 105 145 1108 550 2000 2110 1695 20 110
1000 120 140 175 1374 650 2000 2126 2660 20 110
1200 140 160 217 1670 730 2000 216 3750 24 11
1400 160 175 220 1940 890 2000 2130 5000 24 100
1600 170 185 260 2140 920 2000 2130 5900 24 100
1800 190 210 300 2360 980 2000 2130 7700 24 -
2000 210 230 330 2625 1020 2000 2130 9500 24 -
2200 250 250 280 2700 1300 200 2130 10600 24 -

upon the calculations for both return periods the results are shown in the following tables

Table 3. 3 Diameter for Tr = 5 years and n=0.025 Table 3. 4 Diameter for Tr = 25 years and n=0.025

Final Diameter [m] 1.4

Final Diameter [m] 1.2
Theta [°] 0.93 Theta [°] 0.93
Wetted Area [m2] 0.82 Wetted Area [m2] 1.14
Wetted Perimeter 2.44 Wetted Perimeter [m3] 2.88
[m3]
Discharge [m3/s] 1.99 Discharge [m3/s] 3.10

Table 3.5 Real diameter for Tr = 5 years and n=0.051 Table 3. 6 Real diameter for Tr = 25 years and n=0.05

Final Diameter [m] 1.4

Final Diameter [m] 1.8
Theta [°] 0.93
Theta [°] 0.93
Wetted Area [m2] 1.32
Wetted Area [m2] 2.18
Wetted Perimeter 3.10
Wetted Perimeter [m3] 3.99
[m3]
Discharge [m3/s] 1.89 Discharge [m3/s] 3.70

Page | 5
 Figure 3. 2 Use of the diameter found with the rational method in SWMM

As expected, the assumptions made to calculate the diameter with the rational method are so strong
that the conduit is oversized with a finer analysis, in this case with SWMM

4. Improved Discretization of the sub catchment

When dividing the watershed into various subcatchments (Figure 3.1) firstly, it is required to find
the runoff coefficients for the 5 different subcatchments and their intensity values, thus in turn the
outflow discharge value would be calculated by the rational method. Table 3.1 demonstrates these
results for a return time period of 5 years. Furthermore, the outflow discharge value found from
the rational method would be compared to the value found from the SWMM program. Moreover,
due to that each sub catchment area has different characteristics the imperviousness percentage
will vary for each one depending where areas with amounts of roads and buildings will have a
higher percentage when compared to area with vegetation. Lastly the curve number is assumed by
considering the type of soil which in our case is a type C soil and the soil covering areas; the values
found varies between 60-75.

Page | 6
 Figure 4. 2 5 subcatchments

Table 4.1 Outflow value for various subcatchments

Run off Longest Time of Intensity Area Outflow
coefficients path concentration value
0.686 (catchment 1) 77m 10 mins 65 mm/h 1.74 ha 0.22 m3/s
0.686 (catchment 2) 96m 10 mins 65 mm/h 1.85 ha 0.23 m3/s
0.680 (catchment 3) 101m 10 mins 65 mm/h 3.86 ha 0.48 m3/s
0.685 (catchment 4) 94 m 10 mins 65 mm/h 1.74 ha 0.22 m3/s
0.524 (catchment 5) 237 m 12 mins 60 mm/h 7.18 ha 0.60 m3/s
Total 1.75 m3/s
SWMM value 1.539 m3/s

When dividing the watersheds to smaller catchments the system would under estimate the
infiltration and precipitation amount when compared to one large catchment thus providing a more
accurate results. Furthermore, when the watersheds are divided the outflow value decreases to a
more accurate results due to that the SWMM system over values the peak flows values.

The results found by the rational method are close when compared to the SWMM software thus
we can deduce that the results found are accurate.
Furthermore, Figure 3.2 illustrates that a number of conduits diameters where changes to
appropriate sizes in order to assure no overflow occurs.

Page | 7
 Figure 4.4 Conduits max capacity check

5. Flow profile for the conduit between 301-121

As can be deduced from Figure 5.1 and 5.2 in both cases the highest surface runoff was seen at
around 12:00 pm. However, in both cases the nodes and conduits where still below the maximum
depth and no overflowing occurs this was also assured from figure 4.2. thus we can deduce that
the system has no major overflowing issues and the sizes of the nodes and conduits are accurate to
carry the required discharge.

Page | 8
 Figure 5. 3 Water elevation profile for 5 years return period

Figure 5. 4 Water elevation profile for 25 years return period

6. Conclusion

To conclude the results has shown that when the catchment is reduced to various sub catchments
more accurate results are expected this is due to the fact that no overestimation is occurring and
the curve number as well as the imperviousness will be closer to the real value. Furthermore, to
find the peak discharge the rational method has proved its accuracy where the values found where
close to the values found from the SWMM system. The diameter of the conduit was also calculated
with accuracy as no overflow occurred in the system and the diameter found was sufficient enough
to transfer the required discharge with a realistic velocity value

Page | 9