Drop Structure Selection, Construction, and Maintenance Part 2

Mark Hunter, Manager Maintenance Program April 11, 2006

Twenty years ago, in 1986, the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) and McLaughlin Water Engineers completed an extensive evaluation and report on drop structures in the Denver metropolitan area. The study was not intended to criticize any particular design or concept. Rather, the main purposes of the study were to learn about various drop structure concepts and situations and to develop improvements to those design concepts. Evaluating the maintenance requirements for every type of drop structure was an integral part of the study. After considering the limited data available it became evident that sloping riprap drop structures required more frequent and more structural maintenance work than the other types of drops evaluated in the study. At the conclusion of that study one of the immediate actions recommended was to shift away from "sloping riprap drops" toward grade control structures like "baffle chute drops (BCD)," "vertical hard basin drops (VHB)," and "grouted sloping boulder drops (GSB)." That recommendation was promptly put in place and the current Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manual (USDCM) still holds to those three categories of drop structures. Two Design Systems The USDCM points out that for drop structures there are two separate systems that require analysis and design. The above-ground drop system is based on upstream and downstream hydraulics, height of drop, aesthetics, and public safety. For this design system the primary considerations are the design flow rate and the overall appearance of the structure. The second design system considers the underground foundation and seepage control system and deals with soils and groundwater conditions. It is primarily concerned with the cutoff wall and the weep drain system. There are many examples of drops that have needed structural repairs where one design system performed successfully while the other one was under-designed and subsequently led to the failure of the structure.

An Essential Maintenance Consideration The structural elements shown in the plan view and profile view for every drop structure design have to begin someplace and end someplace. It is at these beginnings and endings, at these transitions, where most of the maintenance problems for drop structures develop. These transition points are construction boundaries where the structure begins or ends or where there is a change from one material to another. In a dry situation these transitions may not be troublesome, but the complication comes because drop structures deal with water; and water simply follows the laws of nature available to it in trying to get from a high elevation to a lower elevation. A drop structure concentrates the area where the stream's potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. The energy of flowing water cannot be extinguished, it can only be relocated or dissipated. The result is that hydraulic pressure is exerted on every transition point of the drop structure. For the designer and builder the way to reduce maintenance costs is to consider and respect what the water will do at every transition point. This means one must pay special attention to the following: the extent of excavation and the soil compaction associated with the cutoff wall, the concrete cold-joint between the cutoff wall and the descending face of the drop, and the potential for erosion at the ends of the cutoff walls buried in the banks. In general, one must assess every location where the structure meets the existing soil. Baffle Chute Drop Structures The UDFCD Maintenance Program has been involved in the construction of half a dozen baffle chute drops; however the most recent one was built 15 years ago. Their appeal, at least to a flood control manager, is that they are quite effective hydraulically through a broad range of flows and their design and construction are straightforward. The UDFCD Maintenance Program has done no major repairs on baffle chute drops and, other than debris catching on the baffle teeth, they have low routine maintenance requirements. Their major shortcoming is that their limited structural and aesthetic flexibility have caused them to be undesirable in most urban settings. Figure 1 is an oblique design view of a typical baffle chute drop structure. The transition between the toe of the structure and the downstream longitudinal slope is vulnerable to localized scour. An apron of buried riprap at the toe of the baffle chute drop is a good precaution to help protect the transition, (See Figure 2). Degradation of the downstream channel could undermine the toe of the structure, but this is a weakness of all drop structures.

Figure 1. Typical Design View of a Baffle Chute Drop Structure

Figure 2. Baffle Chute Drop Structure on Tallman Gulch in Douglas County

Vertical Hard Basin Drop Structures This category of drop structure includes all drops where the upper portion of the vertical cutoff wall is left exposed on its downstream side thereby allowing the stream flow to jet past the crest wall into the basin below. It is the purpose of the impact basin to be rough enough and long enough to force the water into a hydraulic jump. A sill of concrete or grouted boulders at the downstream end of the basin is a common means of forcing the jump to occur and thus allowing a shorter impact basin (See Figure 3). Figure 3. Typical Design Profile for a Vertical Drop Structure

The components of a vertical drop result in a structure that is visually harsh, higher in maintenance needs, and less safe than the other types of drops (See Figure 4). Most of the on-going maintenance costs are associated with the impact basin. Sediment is often deposited in the corners of the basin. The basin itself can be damaged by the impact of the free-falling jet of water or from uplift pressures. Vertical drops have a flexible configuration and can be designed to suit special situations (See Figure 5). Perhaps the most troubling maintenance issue with a vertical drop is the erosion that often occurs at the downstream end of the impact basin. If the drop structure was built without an end sill the water may retain too much kinetic energy as it passes out of the basin causing erosion at the transition between the basin and the earth-lined channel. On the other hand, if the drop structure includes an end sill there will be a range of flow events during which water cascades over the end sill onto the earth-lined channel beyond. This interface is very vulnerable and it is common to find a scour hole forming at this location.

Figure 4. Vertical Drop Structure on Sanderson Gulch in Denver

Figure 5. Special Vertical Drop Structure on Goldsmith Gulch at Wallace Park

Grouted Sloping Boulder Drop Structures Dozens of grouted sloping boulder drops have been installed throughout the Denver area. Much of their popularity is due to the flexibility in the layout of the structure. They can be designed to fit in a broad floodplain or a narrow incised channel. They can have drop heights as short as one or two feet or they can control grade changes of greater than 10 feet. As long as the criteria in the USDCM are met, grouted sloping boulder drops can effectively and safely accommodate this wide range of applications. Grouting rock is more likely to be successful if all the rock particles are large enough to allow the grout to easily flow through and around the rocks all the way to the subgrade. Experience has shown that grouting graded riprap is not effective as this process usually results in a frosting of grout on top of the riprap. A drop structure constructed with grouted riprap predictably results in a weak structure with voids between the grout and the subgrade where piping and erosion can occur. Boulders is a better description of the rock particles that should be used in grouted drop structures. Individual boulders should be used with the result that the rocks are machine-placed one at a time in their final position (See Figure 6). Figure 6. Typical Design Profile for a Grouted Sloping Boulder Drop Structure

Grouted sloping boulder drops share a maintenance vulnerability with baffle chute drop structures at the transition between the toe of the structure and the downstream longitudinal slope where localized scour is possible. An apron of buried riprap at the toe of the grouted boulder drop is a good precaution to help reduce this erosion. The flexibility of design for this type of drop allows two other means of reducing maintenance needs at the downstream end of the structure. The flatter (and therefore longer) the slope of the descending face of the structure the lower the velocity of the water when it reaches the transition to the earth-lined channel at the toe of the structure. The other means of reducing maintenance needs is to manage the size and configuration of the boulders to create roughness on the descending face of the structure. The resulting turbulence will dissipate some of the water's kinetic energy before it reaches the toe of the structure. Placing the boulders in a stair-stepped pattern with the upper surface of each rock forming a horizontal step (rather than matching the slope of the face) will add turbulence (See Figure 7). Another maintenance vulnerability (this one is shared with all grade control structures) is that degradation of the downstream channel could lead to undermining of the toe of the structure. The sculpted sloping drop structure is a recent aesthetic modification to the grouted sloping boulder style of drop. Limited maintenance experience indicates that they appear to have the same advantages in flexibility and the same maintenance needs as a typical grouted boulder drop. Figure 8 shows a new sculpted sloping drop on Rock Creek in Boulder County. Figure 7. Grouted Sloping Boulder Drop on Big Dry Creek in DeKoevend Park

Figure 8. Sculpted Sloping Drop Structure on Rock Creek in Boulder County

Drop Structure Maintenance Cost effectiveness is a useful tool for assessing drop structure alternatives. There is a temptation to simply look at the immediate construction cost of projects in place without regard for the long term maintenance and repair costs which are an inseparable part of the life cycle costs for the structure. Drop structure designs with high maintenance requirements are less desirable, therefore maintenance costs should be a decision factor in alternative selection. The 1986 study acknowledged that maintenance costs were difficult to determine due to the random nature of damaging floods and the limited length of records available. At that time the UDFCD Maintenance Program was only 5 years old, but even at that point it was already clear that sloping riprap drop structures required twice the level of maintenance funding that other drops needed. This was the basis for the recommendation that sloping riprap drops be eliminated from the criteria manual. Drop structure maintenance generally falls into one of two groups: That which is necessary to sustain or improve the appearance and safety of the structure, and that which maintains the function of the drop structure. As expected the more

expensive maintenance activities deal with the function of the structure and fall within one of the following categories:

Replacement of displaced riprap or boulders Repair of eroded earthfill areas, particularly at the downstream end of the structure Repairs to structural members, particularly at the downstream toe and at transitions

Deficiencies That Will Require Maintenance Deficiencies that contribute to functional failures of drop structures are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Grout not penetrating to the subgrade Small rock or boulders used in the face of the structure Crest cutoff walls that are not carried far enough into the overbanks Crest cutoff walls that are not deep enough Poor contact between concrete cutoff walls and the excavated subgrade for the wall Poor contact between concrete cutoff walls and boulders that are set on top of the cutoff wall to yield a more aesthetic look for the structure Headcutting from downstream that undermines the toe of the drop structure

These deficiencies have all been observed in the field while repairing existing drop structures. The best way to minimize these types of failures is for the designer and the builder to pay special attention to the transition areas where the structure begins or ends or where there is a change from one material to another.