HomeMy WebLinkAboutDesign Summary
~
.~
C
D
~
~
~
C
C
C
C
~
~
~
C
~
~
.~
L
=1
Medical Drive Shops
Carmel, Indiana
Design Summary
Docket No. 06080032 DP/ ADLS
March 1, 2007
Prepared By:
VS ENGINEERING, INC.
4275 North High School Road Indianapolis. Indiana 46254
vsei@vsengineering.com www.vsengineering.com
Phone: (317) 293-3542 Fax: (317) 293-4737
,f!"
, ~.~:::
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
Existine: Conditions
The project site is located at 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN 46032 and is owned
by Mukesh Patel of Carmel. The property is zoned B-8 and is approximately 1.058 acres
in size. The lot was the former location of a childcare facility that burned down in 1998.
The parking lot for the childcare facility is still located on the site, and access is achieved
by two curb cuts located along Medical Drive on the east and west ends of the property.
With the exception of the parking lot, the remainder of the property is grass with a group
of trees and brush. The high point is located on the north side of the property and slopes
towards the south. There is a 12' grade change from the high point to the low point of the
property.
Currently stormwater enters an enclosed storm sewer system at several locations
within the property. The neighboring properties are graded in such a way that stormwater
flows onto Mr. Patel's property and then into the city's storm sewer system. It should
also be noted that a City of Carmel 12" storm sewer runs through the north portion of the
property and is not located in an existing easement. This particular line services a
neighboring property, with no stormwater from the project site entering the line. The
existing site runoff for 2, 10 and 100 year recurrence intervals are summarized in the
appendices of this report.
Proposed Conditions
Site owner Mukesh Patel proposes that a commercial development be constructed
on the project site. The building will have one, or a combination of the following uses:
retail sales/general service, general office, and/or professional office. The maximum
amount of tenants possible will be eight; with a minimum of 1200 square feet per unit. It
should be noted that this project was approved by the City of Carmel Plan Commission
under Docket #06080032 DP/ADLS: Medical Drive Shops.
The proposed development was to have setbacks of 10' on the west, north, and
east sides, and a 30' setback on the south side of the property, which fronts Medical Dr.
However, due to the irregular shape ofthe property, Mr. Patel asked for a variance to
reduce the 30' setback to 15' so the building could be placed efficiently within the
property. This variance was approved 3-0 on June 26, 2006 under Docket No. 06050016
V, Shops on Medical Drive.
Due to the irregular shape of the property and the large change in elevation
within the property, a retaining wall will be built along the west edge, north edge, and
also a small portion of the east edge of the property. The wall will be constructed using
modular blocks manufactured by Keystone Retaining Systems.
The stormwater will be divided into two parts, detained runoff: and non-detained
runoff. The detained runoff consists of all areas that are within the perimeter of the
retaining wall and parking area. This flow will be routed through an enclosed storm
sewer system, through an oil/water separator and into an underground detention facility.
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
The underground detention facility will have an orifice that will be sized so that the
stormwater is released in a controlled manner. The areas that will not be detained consist
of an area located on the north side of the property where off-site flow, along with a small
strip of on-site flow is being re-directed via swale directly into the City of Carmel's storm
sewer system. This flow will be treated using an Enviropod Catch Basin Insert. The area
within the proposed drive from Medical Drive to where the Medical Drive Shops parking
lot begins is also being directly discharged to the City of Carmel's storm sewer system.
The underground detention facility will be located in the south parking lot, and
will consist of four 150' long 60" diameter corrugated metal pipes, and two 29' long 60"
diameter corrugated metal header pipes. The system will have a maximum capacity of
12919.80 cft. The underground detention facility has been sized assuming that the release
rate from the facility must be less than or equal to the release rate mandated by City of
Carmel Ordinances. When this was done, two orifices with sizes of 1" and 3 .5" were
used. However, pursuant to City of Carmel Ordinance a 6" diameter orifice will be
constructed with the option of placing orifice plates on the 6" orifice to further restrict
flow in the event of downstream flooding. The orifice structure also contains an
emergency overflow weir in the event that one of the orifices gets clogged or an extreme
rain event. The values for the allowable release were calculated taking into account the
direct discharge run-off. The direct discharge run-off is subtracted from the total runoff
of the site, which in turn gives the allowable detention facility release rate. The pre-
development discharge, direct discharge, pond inflow, allowable pond discharge, and
actual pond discharge are shown in Appendix A.
Appendices
A. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Summary Tables
B. Stormwater Calculations
o Rainfall Data
o Existing Drainage Area and Tc Flow Path Map
o Proposed Drainage Area and Tc Flow Path Map
o Curve Number Computations
o Time of Concentration Calculations
o Structure #11 As-built Calculations
o Stage Storage Calculations For Underground Detention System
o Stage Discharge Calculations For Underground Detention System
o Hydrologic Calcs & Hydrograph Routing for 2, 10, & 100 yr Rainfall
Events For Enclosed System
o Hydrograph Routing for 10 & 100 yr Rainfall Events For Underground
Detention System
o Oil Water Separator Calculations
C. Legal Description
D. Floodway Map
E. Notice ofIntent Form
F. Stormwater Management Permit Application
G. Geotechnical Report
~
~
~
~
. ~
~
~
~
Il
Ii
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.~
~
Appendix A
Hydrologic and Hydraulic Summary Tables
- -
- - - - -
r::=Jt=Jr=:JE:Jt=JE:Jr:=JEJEJEJr::=JEJr::=JEJCJc::JCJr:=Jt=J
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
~@ S ENGINEERING, INC.
~ 00 Civil CIl Structural e Transportation e Environmental
SHEET NO.
CALCULATED BY
CHECKED BY
SCALE
OF
DATE
DATE
SUMMARY OF HYDROLOGIC DATA AND ANALYSIS
1.058 0.00165 82 18.00 10.8 0.334 0.926 2.596
0.066 0.00010 75 5.00 3 0.072 0.148 0.343 819.100 818.374
11 0.100 0.00016 74 5.00 3 0.101 0.215 0.507 831.510 No Change No
0.047 0.00007 75 5.00 3 0.051 0.106 0.244 820.250 818.643 No
0.220 0.00034 98 5.00 3 0.638 0.925 1.568 822.800 821.510 No
0.166 0.00026 98 5.00 3 0.481 0.698 1.183 822.680 821.293 No
0.078 0.00012 93 5.00 3 0.201 0.307 0.540 821.660 820.480 No
0.071 0.00011 95 5.00 3 0.194 0.289 0.499 821.160 818.582 No
0.087 0.00014 97 5.00 3 0.248 0.363 0.618 820.650 817.510 No
0.128 0.00020 97 5.00 3 0.365 0.534 0.909 820.220 818.296 No
0.056 0.00009 82 5.00 3 0.091 0.164 0.335 Existing No Change No
0.017 0.00003 82 5.00 3 0.028 0.050 0.102 Existing No Change No
0.021 0.00003 98 5.00 3 0.061 0.088 0.150 Existing No Change No
0.281 0.517 1.094
2.249 3.368 5.904
D
D
we;) VS ENGINEERING, DINC.
~ [!] Civil - Structural- Transportation- Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shapps " Carmel, Indiana
sHtET NO. Of'
CALCULATED BY ____,___ DATE
CHECKED BY _____".__._._......__ DAlE ____.~__
SCALE
D
o
Post Development Discharges (cfs)
Recurrence Pre-Development Direct Discharge Pond Inflow Allowable Pond Actual Pond Total Site
Interval Discharge to Carmel Sewers Release Rate Release Rate Discharge
2 vear 0.334 0.281 2.249 - 0.00 0.281
10 year 0.926 0.517 3.368 0.053 0.043 0.5607
100 year 2.596 1.094 5.904 0.408 0.36 1.456
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
,
Appendix B
Stormwater Calculations
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
[~]~[..;)I VSENGINEERING, INCa
.;;..l Civil. Structural" Transportation. Environmental
JOB
__,_~~_,_"~,_~"""._"",,,_""",_.~'."'.'''m
SHEet NO. OF
CALC\JLAU'D BY bATE
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
TABLE 201-3: Rainfall Depths for Various Return Periods
Rainfall Depth (Inches)
Duration I Return Period (Years)
I 2 I 5 I 10 I 25 I 50 I 100
I 24 Hrs. I 2.66 I 3.27 I 3.83 I 4.72 I 5.52 I 6.46 I
*Table taken from the City of Carmel Stormwater Technical Standards Manual
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
D
o
D
o
[~]~[~I VS ENGINEERING, lINe..
;;;1 Civil" Structural" Transportation" Environmental
JOB
SHPETNO,_. OF
CALCULATED BY DATE
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
Rainfall Distribution for a 24-Hour Duration Storm Event
Cumulative Rainfall Totals
Carmel, Indiana
2 Year 10 Year 100 Year
Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative NRCS Type 2 Recurrence Recurrence Recurrence
Storm Time Storm Time Storm Time Rainfall Dist. Interval Interval Interval
(%) (hr) (min) (Cumulative %) (in) (in) (in)
0.0% 0.0 0.0 0.00% 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.0% 1.2 72.0 1.00% 0.03 0.04 0.06
10.0% 2.4 144.0 3.00% 0.08 0.11 0.19
15.0% 3.6 216.0 4.00% 0.11 0.15 0.26
20.0% 4.8 288.0 6.00% 0.16 0.23 0.39
25.0% 6.0 360.0 8.00% 0.21 0.31 0.52
30.0% 7.2 432.0 10.00% 0.27 0.38 0.65
35.0% 8.4 504.0 13.00% 0.35 0.50 0.84
40.0% 9.6 576.0 17.00% 0.45 0.65 1.10
45.0% 10.8 648.0 22.00% 0.59 0.84 1.42
50.0% 12.0 720.0 64.00% 1.70 2.45 4.13
55.0% 13.2 792.0 78.00% 2.07 2.99 5.04
60.0% 14.4 864.0 84.00% 2.23 3.22 5.43
65.0% 15.6 936.0 87.00% 2.31 3.33 5.62
70.0% 16.8 1008.0 90.00% 2.39 3.45 5.81
75.0% 18.0 1080.0 92.00% 2.45 3.52 5.94
80.0% 19.2 1152.0 94.00% 2.50 3.60 6.07
85.0% 20.4 1224.0 96.00% 2.55 3.68 6.20
90.0% 21.6 1296.0 98.00% 2.61 3.75 6.33
95.0% 22.8 1368.0 99.00% 2.63 3.79 6.40
100.0% 24.0 1440.0 100.00% 2.66 3.83 6.46
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
~ r.'c,
\(
1&
~ ,
~ ,
\ \
,
,
,
,
,
\
,
,
,
1
r~
<v
II
I
I
I
I
I
}
I
o
z
Cl
Z
~
<(
~
Cl
b <0
C'l ~
11 ~ re 0
. ....... z
-- ro l-c.o
u<O
w~~ W b!5~
~OLoJI-OI
u:J:> <( 0::<0
(fJ Cl a.. 0
~
W
~
~
Z
~
o
o
z
ti
x
w
f
a..
o
J:
Cf.)
~
a:
o
-I
t5
o
w
::::!!:
..., lD a..
~ LoJ U
Z I- lD
.. ~
>- lD
~ ~ lD Cl
lD lD Cl LoJ
Z ~ \i! ~
~ ~ 13 g:
LoJ ~ :J: 0..
Cl Cl U <(
..
(,)........
Z"''''
N....
<0....
....1
...... '"
en
<eN
..Z~
IJ11II1I ~~
~O'"
Z~
Z;;;'X
..... - <e
II: ~~
W~
W~
zg
_...IN
C>> 0....
0",
:r:",
.. u 1
... Ill",
I.. ~~
IllllIII :r:~
....
cn~5:
>~~
@-I
m
Ul
Z
o
Vi
5
LoJ
0::
w~:m - Looz'm JOn-............:llva
IAlOrl:lNUJ.e 03.ll01d
oz-nvosnKl f)Mo"dDn DaJy .!SoUlOlD ISlI!lrfll3...M.........31l:1
OZ"'"31V:lS.Ll \SIS.l..lVNV OnnVWA.H aNY OIOO-mlw..H\SJ.N3nnooa\NflISJO\-'O l"lpen UQ Sdct4S 9erz-90\900z\;,;r......ij()J.O~IO
~
5
~
r:;
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
?~
~~
go
;>
~
~
~
~
~
.
5
i~ ~
~r;J In
~f ~
!~ ~
;> g
~. N
~.r!~
~lil
~~~~
MA 1CHL\NE
STRUCTURE 11
AREA IMP. = 0.000
AREA PER. = 1.42
CN = 74
(llFf -SITE RUN-Off
CONSIDERED TO CHE:CK
CAPACITY Df PIPE
LEAVING STRUCTURE 11
DRAINAGE AREA TAKEN
fROM CONTOURS PROVIDED
fROM HAMIL TON CO. GIS SITE)
-
I I
I I
I 1
~ I
I I
I I I
I 0
I I I
11\\ ~
Ilil 22 ~ ~~~~
~~ ~~ . -. ~----:::::---- "'..--:::
~ ~=-;:::;;- ~---=:;; --- ~ ---::::
I ~4TRuCTURE 22 ~ ---=--::::---- ~--:;
AREA IMP. = 0.006 ~~... ------- ------ --:;'"
l-...=-...="'=- ~\ I ~E~ ~R.~ ~~~::::::=:--~""~--:;
Iii \~------- ~~~ ~ "'~~
--:==fffT~ \1 ~~ "'--~~
q=4AN ::::::-----
~~---
=----
:..---- /
REVISIONS
DESIGN BY:
DRAWN BY:
NRJ
lilf Y.!, ~~!!~~o~~~~,~, I!I~C.
I [.I] TEL. (317) 293-3542 fAX: (317) 293-4737
TEB
BCP
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
I
II
I
STRUCTURE 11
AREA IMP. = 0.000
AREA PER. = L42
(Off-SITE RUN-Off
CONSIDERED TO CHECK
CAPACITY Of PIPE
LEAVING STRUCTURE II'
DRAINAGE AREA TAKEN I
fROM CONTOURS PROVIDED
F'RllM HAMIL TON CD. GIS SITE)
i
MA 1 HL\NE
PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREAS
MEDICAL DRIVE SHOPPS
SCALE:
HOR.: 1" = 20'
VER.: NA
DATE: 8/28/06
PROJECT NO.
06-2366
DRA'MNG NO.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
~I;I~ ~SENGINEE~.NG,. INC.
...............1 [!] CIvil e Structural III Transportatlone Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shopps ... Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~"'-~~'i;;rRJ"'''''''''''~--''' OF 1118/06
CAtCULATEOBY 2.!?~..._DATE 11/9/06
CHECKED BY DAlE
SCAl.E
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #10
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
6.1
593.94
Table 2...2a
c
Grass... Good
74
93.9
6951.52
Table 2-2c
100 7545.45
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 7545.455 Use CN = 1"'tllliil&'1lil!
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 ... Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
, D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
[~]@[.-.. VS ENGINEERING, INCa
;;_ _~J Civil" Structural" Transportation" Environmental
JOB
Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ;;-------NRT---...----- OF 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP OATE11/9/06._
CHECKED BY DATe
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #11
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
0.0
0.00
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
100.0
7400.00
Table 2-2c
100 7400.00
CN (weighted)
total oroduct
total area
7400
100
1-"'''~'Wi-AMi1
Use CN = ,:~{dn;@\@Mk.,.' qd#l~;%@<r
t"';:~j_;:N:~~~,:$~~"r~::::: ^"', ~ ,';;;_;i;;::::{j;,,:,,~-:\.,;..
=
=
Note: All eN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
D
10
~o~.ml@[a:. VS ENGINEERING, INC.
;;_ 1J Civil e Structural 0 Transportation. Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET NO.__~.""NRJ .~=~
CALCULATED BY SBP
CHECKED BY
SCALE
OF 11/8/06
DATE ~~g~
DATE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #12
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
2.1
208.51
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
97.9
7242:55
Table 2-2c
100 7451.06
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 7451.064 Use CN = tI\~\11:1l111;...1
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
~@["':. VS ENGINEERING, INCa
L;;J II Civil. Structurale Transportation. Environment~1
Joe Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~...-'NRT._.--'''.'''''-' OF 11/8/06
CALCUl.ATEDBY SSP DATE 11/9/0?_
CHECKED 8Y DATE
sCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #13
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
100.0
9800.00
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
0.0
0.00
Table 2-2c
100 9800.00
eN (weighted)
total product
total area
9800
100
Use CN = t:;;~:Z_"~!~:'YHl
=
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
~]@[~I VS ENGINEERING, INC.
~. ..~J Civil. Structural. Transportation. Environmental
Joe Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~-""'NRJ""""""" OF 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP DATE 1119/06_
CHECKE08Y DATE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #14
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
100.0
9800.00
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
0.0
0.00
Table 2-2c
100 9800.00
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
9800
100
U C IW1'w".%~iIIWtWww':1
se N = 0ffi;%b'Thi<~t. .. 6J#fh~/ji:' :
:w"<';,%-};\A:':,,,;, _, '~"_' _~~~_8,,;,:":'i':'%:"~,c'"
=
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
I, 0
[~@[":I VS ENGINEERING, INC.
;;J~m Civil _ Structural _ Transportation- Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~..__m-NRT"'''''''-''''--"' OF 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP DATE ~~/O~
CHECKED 8Y DATE
SCAtE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #15
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
80.8
7915.38
98
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
19.2
1423.08
74
Table 2-2c
100 9338.46
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 9338.462 Use CN = Il"{~'II\I~1liltll
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
I 0
~[_Vm]@['- VSENGINEERING, INC.
;;_ ~--' Civil" Structural. Transportation. Environmental
.loa Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~-----NRT.--.------- OF _ 11/8/~._
CALCULATED BY _~~._.__ DATE 11/9/0~__
CHECKEO BY DATE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #17
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
87.3
8557.75
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
12.7
938.03
74
Table 2-2c
100 9495.77
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 9495.775 Use CN = ~?:/::rll'lri;!l:lt:~
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
I~I@[:] VS ENGINEERING, INC.
.;;_! Civil" Structurale Transportation" Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~-i\rR:r---'--- OF 11/8/06
CAL.CllL.ATED BY SSP DATE !'y9/~_
CHECKED BY DATE
SCAl.E
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #18
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
94.3
9236.78
98
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
425.29
74
5.7
Table 2-2c
100 9662.07
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 9662.069 Use CN = t~i"t.I..
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
o
D
o
10
I
~m ~~:=;IT~~;~~~?:~~~~~I
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ;;:--~-NRT"""~--""' OF 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP DATE 11/9/06
CHECKED BY DAlE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #19
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
93.8
9187.50
98
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
6.3
462.50
74
Table 2-2c
100 9650.00
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
Use CN =
=
=
9650
100
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
[~]@["':I VS ENGINEERING, INC..
;;.. !. Civil. Structurale Transportation. Environmental
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~.'-'"'...'''''j\JRT''-''.-''''''''''''' OF 11/8/06
CAl.CLllATED BY SSP DATE !..!~~!06_
CHECKED BY DA.lE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #21
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
32.1
3150.00
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
67.9
5021.43
Table 2-2c
100 8171.43
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 8171.429 Use CN = "J16: ~:a"lfi~1
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
~@I=I VSENGINEERING, INC.
L;;J [!J Civil e Structurale Transportatione Environmental
Joe Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ;;;o.---~---j\rRJ-"'--'-"" or 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP DAlE ~9/0~_
CHECKEO BY DAlE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Structure #22
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
98
35.3
3458.82
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
74
64.7
4788.24
Table 2-2c
100 8247.06
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
= 8247.059 Use CN = ~~<r.I\~1Kk~/'~
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
I 0
~m ~~,~:;~~~p~=~~?~;~~~~r
JOB Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET ~"--NRJ'"""-'"""""""-~"" OF ~~
CAtCULATED BY SSP DATE !.!!.9/06_
CHECKED BY DATE
SCAtE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Direct Discharqe from Drive
"
C
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
100.0
9800.00
98
Table 2-2a
C
Grass - Good
0.0
0.00
74
Table 2-2c
100 9800.00
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
9800
100
.. .,
"':'fhtt<,'t"':'-'?":'?f ,,', ' $i~t"
Use CN = . 40.<#49'.( !I~h'
"'oJ"";';">!'-"""';;'%.>., ' .::~,;~,. . _...n';;):',>::.
=
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
~I.~ml@[~ VS ENGINEERING, aHell
.;;. .~J Civil. Structural. Transportation. Environmental
Joe Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
SHEET NO. ---NRJ-----Mm-- OF 11/8/06
CALCULATED BY SSP DArE ~9/0~_
CHECKEO BY DATE
SCALE
Runoff Curve Number Computions
Existinq Conditions
B
Asphalt, Roof, Concrete
15.2
1491.30
98
Table 2-2a
B
Grass - Good
61
5171.74
84.8
Table 2-2c
100 6663.04
CN (weighted)
total product
total area
6663 0 3 U CN 1I"it1MI@!l.'.,.-F''":;1ilihQ\<!
= . 4 se =. A~{!i;\'l1:;A'i'l1*!ii~fWJ
100
=
Note: All CN Values taken from Technical Releae 55 - Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (T c) or Travel Time (T J
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ Date
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked Date
Present Developed Existing Site Conditions
Tc Tt through subarea
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment 10
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
1. Surface description (Table 3-1) . Grass Grass
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1) 0.24 0.24
3. Flow length, L (total::; 300 ft) ft 70 20
4. Change in Elevation, 6z ft 1.5 1
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in 2.66 2.66
6. Land Slope, s fUft 0.021 0.050 Total
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.B]/(P2o.5sO.4) Compute Tt hr 0.1908 0.0499 0.2407
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment 10
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, 6z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = U(3600V)
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, M
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = U(3600V)
Channel Flow
Segment 10
13. Diameter
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw
15. Hydraulic radius, r = alP w Compute r
16. Channel slope, s
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r2/3s 1/2)/n
19. Flow length, L
20. Tt = L/(3600V)
ft
ft
ftlft
fUs
hr
Un aved
66.84
3
0.044883
3.418
0.0054
ft
ft
fUft
ftls
hr
ft
fe
ft
ft
ftlft
1.5
1.77
4.71
0.375
0.004
0.012
4.08
44
0.002993
1.5
1.77
4.71
0.375
0.004
0.012
4.08
59.5
0.004047
fUs
ft
hr
Tc=
0.29 hr
17.13 min
Total
0.0378
Total
0.00704
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
J
J
)
Use a Tc of 18 min
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
'0
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #10
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total ~ 300 ft)
4. Change in Elevation, 6.z
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2
6. Land Slope, s
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5s0.4) Compute Tt
Grass
0.15
ft 10
ft 0.25
in 2.66
ft/ft 0.025
hr 0.0260
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, 6.z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = U(3600V)
ft
ft
fUft 0.027
fUs 2.64
hr 0.0026
0.134
5.90
0.0024
0.0536
3.74
0.0039
0.07
4.27
0.0034
Channel Flow
Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness eoeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r/3s 1/2)/n ft/s
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = U(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Te or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.02596
Total
0.01223
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Te of 5 min
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #11 On-Site Tt
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment 10
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total :5 300 ft)
4. Change in Elevation, h.z
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2
6. Land Slope, s
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5so4) Compute Tt
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment 10
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, h.z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = L/(3600V)
Channel Flow
Segment 10
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a fe
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = alP w Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s ftlft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r2/3s 1/2)/n ftls
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea T c or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Grass
0.15
ft 16
ft 0.99
in 2.66
ftlft 0.062
hr 0.0263
ft
ft
ftlft 0.01
ftls 1.613
hr 0.0179
Total
0.02632
Total
0.01791
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Te of 5 min
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #11 Off-Site Tt
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total::; 300 ft)
4. Change in Elevation, f:::,z
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2
6. Land Slope, s
7. Tt = [O.007(nL)0.8]/(P20.5s0.4) Compute Tt
Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L ft
9. Change in Elevation, f:::,z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = U(3600V)
Channel Flow Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49~/3s 1/2)/n ftIs
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = U(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Grass
0.15
ft 13.3
ft 0.5
in 2.66
ftIft 0.038
hr 0.0277
0.01
1.613
0.0136
Total
0.02771
Total
0.08855
Total
o
hrr::IIT:J
minC!!!:]
Use a Te of 7 min
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed ~Structure #12
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total ~ 300 ft)
4. Change in Elevation, f':,z
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2
6. Land Slope, s
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5so.4) Compute Tt
Grass
0.15
ft 30
ft 3
in 2.66
ftlft 0.100
hr 0.0359
Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L ft
9. Change in Elevation, f':,z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = L/(3600V)
Channel Flow Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r2/3s 1/2)/n ftls
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.03591
Total
0.00913
Total
o
hrl::]]I]
min~
Use a Te of 5 min
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (T,)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #13
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment 10
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total::; 300 ft) ft
4. Change in Elevation, !J.z ft
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in
6. Land Slope, s fUft
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.s]/(P2o.5s0.4) Compute Tt hr
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment 10
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, !J.z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. T, = L/(3600V)
Channel Flow
Segment 10
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a fe
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = alPw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r2/3s1/2)/n ftls
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Paved
ft 35
ft 0.05
ftlft 0.0014286
fUs 0.390
hr 0.0249
Total
0.0084
Total
0.02491
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Tc) or Travel Time (T,)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #14
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total $ 300 ft) ft
4. Change in Elevation, 6.z ft
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in
6. Land Slope, s fUft
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5s0.4) Compute T, hr
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, 6.z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. T, = U(3600V)
Paved
ft 67
ft 0.11
ft/ft 0.0016418
fUs 0.418
hr 0.0445
Channel Flow
Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a fe
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49~3s 1/2)/n fUs
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.00771
Total
0.04447
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (T c) or Travel Time (T1)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #15
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total S; 300 ft)
4. Change in Elevation, h,z
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, Pz
6. Land Slope, s
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.s]/(Pzo.5s0.4) Compute T,
As halt
0.011
ft 14
ft 0.96
in 2.66
fUft 0.069
hr 0.0028
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, h,z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. T, = U(3600V)
Paved
ft 91
ft 1.23
fUft 0.0135165
fUs 1.201
hr 0.0211
Channel Flow
Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ftz
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness eoeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49~/3s 1/z)/n fUs
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.00281
Total
0.02105
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (T c) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #17
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1) Grass As halt
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1) 0.15 0.011
3. Flow length, L (total ~ 300 ft) ft 17 53
4. Change in Elevation, h.z ft 0.25 1.64
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in 2.66 2.66
6. Land Slope, s fUft 0.015 0.031 Total
7. Tt = [O.007(nL)oB]/(P2o.5sO.4) Compute Tt hr 0.0491 0.0112 0.06027
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, h.z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. Tt = U(3600V)
Paved
ft 91
ft 1.23
ftlft 0.0135165
ftls 1.201
hr 0.0211
Channel Flow
Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s ftlft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49~3s 1/2)/n ftls
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = U(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.02105
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Te) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #18
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total :5 300 ft) ft
4. Change in Elevation, ,6.z ft
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in
6. Land Slope, s fUft
7. Tt = [O.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5so4) Compute Tt hr
Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L ft
9. Change in Elevation, ,6.z ft
10. Watercourse slope, s tuft
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1) tus
12. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Channel Flow Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s tuft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49~/3s1/2)/n tus
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.01666
Total
o
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Te of 5 min
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Tc) or Travel Time (Tt)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Structure #19
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total s; 300 ft) ft
4. Change in Elevation, I'1z ft
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in
6. Land Slope, s fUft
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5so.4) Compute T, hr
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L
9. Change in Elevation, I'1z
10. Watercourse slope, s
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1)
12. T, = L/(3600V)
Paved
ft 79
ft 1.44
ft/ft 0.0182278
fUs 1.394
hr 0.0157
Channel Flow
Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s ft/ft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49.-2'3s 1/2)/n ft/s
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = L/(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.00692
Total
0.01574
Total
o
hr~
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
Project:
Location:
Circle One:
Circle One:
Worksheet 3: Time of Concentration (Tc) or Travel Time (Tl)
Medical Drive Shopps By NRJ
154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN Checked
Present Developed Direct Discharge From Driveway
Tc Tt through subarea
Date
Date
Notes: Space for as many as four segments per flow type can be used for each worksheet
Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments
Sheet Flow (Applicable to Tc Only)
Segment ID
1. Surface description (Table 3-1)
2. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
3. Flow length, L (total::; 300 ft) ft
4. Change in Elevation, f::.z ft
5. Two-yr 24 hr rainfall, P2 in
6. Land Slope, s ftlft
7. Tt = [0.007(nL)o.8]/(P2o.5so.4) Compute Tt hr
Shallow Concentrated Flow Segment ID
7. Surface description (paved or unpaved)
8. Flow Length, L ft
9. Change in Elevation, f::.z ft
10. Watercourse slope, s ftlft
11. Average velocity, V (Figure 3-1) fUs
12. Tt = U(3600V) hr
Channel Flow Segment ID
13. Diameter ft
13. Cross Sectional Flow Area, a ft2
14. Wetted Perimeter, Pw ft
15. Hydraulic radius, r = a/Pw Compute r ft
16. Channel slope, s fUft
17. Manning's roughness coeff., n (Table 3-1)
18. V= (1.49r/3s 1/2)/n ftls
19. Flow length, L ft
20. Tt = U(3600V) hr
Watershed or subarea Tc or Tt (add Tt in steps 6, 11, and 19)
Total
0.00669
Total
o
Total
o
hrr::::Q]O
min~
Use a Tc of 5 min
~m CiVii~t~c~~IT~~;~rt~~~~~i~n~2~,
D
JOB j}cc/;ro/ Drive .<;~cJ/f5 - (;/JltllV
SHEET NO. OF
CALCULATED BY
CHECKED BY
SCALE
DATE
DATE
h: l;T~lT ::" .: :1' ' 'f.. :-:1 I 'jl),T-~ <r lr IJ " '..j i. · !. ,; ,) . I . :' ,
'. ,'.I:J.i:JJJ.."1: 0 ':/,' i fat' 'JJ 1I'tJf '0(1. /tJotfi: <,(J( d111hpe, t ()1R~rot.":'fIIJ ' I · '
;.1"1 .:;.....;f... "'1::.' I:; ;'. ,... '.I!',
- ' i, I" :, ,Ii. . · ; : .r:-;' 'I'~.' :
I;....... ....: ;.. .j .~: I:: ;"::1:.:
... . ';': ,'2~q ,l. J: VO : l' 'I .> i. 1[;'=' 5~l3;'50' ~.I :
~ , :,,',,' , ,-:-- : ~, :::' t qu,.' 0, ,.31,
.', ',. 'i , : ,: ' " ' , :.:: j . i i :.
':: "T,~.~ ~ ;3:~;; '. ',. : ' ' : ;: ; I : :, I' .: ..: i.!.: I ~
-; J1\\\J.:;c11.\Q . ::1';:;;' '. ; ....
~ '~~pad~riiJ~f~ hO~i: 1" ,:,' " " : , :
, '. I;'''' nl .... . , ,I. ; I. ';
....;' ;o.:-ri,y;r:)'\'''Sc~.!. . ':1 .... .:!:. 1:1,1 ,I;
~ ! :: .' ;: 1'1t\Yo.o\l)(Y~) ~<? 0 t;}~!, :' I I!' .. . ; . I '.... :. i . . .
. . .. : 5 Oc~ c. f;-:j I I." .. . , , '" I
:J.Pr: I~ DI.110 '5' ~jhow i~<! ~id fP,b; 5, ~ j~ i nk;, ,~(}7:nuJ~- ,,: '::1 ,i , : :' , '
" . i .. . ..: .' ;
_ i; .";' . '1'''' .'.; I. " i. . jl.' ,;: ; . ..
., I 'i.... . ' '. ,
i' .. . . ..' ",
. :., ' ..! '. 'i' ..'
.' 1:1.' i "1. !..' .,... I .'. :. .:.' . :
IJi " : ':. ", ,; .... . .. · !: , . .:. : \' ~ O\)t:~ D',,\(/16: . 'L 1\ : I
i ;' '1=i' .; '- : t' .~,..\ 1:\ 'Ili- l I .
:. ': .j : r- (')0 f.\'f'\:IoL\r:J1o: .: 11lt..~ \;.~: 0: .;: ... . ." ':." t
- ...... I ... N 1 ~>V,Ul , " I I i U$C
11~-.\()3,\.\J., .'. \<:iQ.t i:':: :~' ,;.. '1
.. '() I ~~o~c~<,-<i .~\ ~~ \}~~ frr~S<1.~d 5 rljdorc: \I.. . - . '. f:'~~
rl~I:~~.IV\+t ' _~; . ' :! I " ,J~;;: p)( ~foo~s~d . I. , I : r: . .' .
~~~/il.t~ (~~~'~l; .. ::-1 '[""<' 8. < ~ . ?~t:. ~. : i . :-~ ,: '
ru,.~8l1.1~(3Q.Hea~ln~)?yt~).: . I'; II:.,' j"';'. ,,:;:'.', I ,.1,'
1IIi." .~.;-:. j'Y>r; .' '1 . "" ......., . ' .' "'1 . .
:t 1 ,j ,t: ^ ',: _i 'L ': ,}- i :tl') . r ..;.., . t . I I :.' . .:.: · : : :' :' ,.',..' '.' , .
,111'1(,11::.11 .nn 0 J)t-{ ".11-;- J. T I, . 'i' II' " I' ,i. II.,
J,13d4;'U~f}q\ f\~:if\tu"f\~ 5 II,il:\1 to:s:~if\~'7.tt' cfs J0~r ~~~r~ iPUrSUof\\'~o: ~~c.hOI1 ~O$.OQ}'
lqb'~ic,O :&([1 'c,'\(~'~:~" S;\:t(t):( l' . :;':1 ::. I . :: I ;. I I" :; j'
~a.\4!(~s~ :[,1..( \Oll~ '~cJl ~( :~O~A)J .ly": )). I . : . j : I I . '. I . I: ' .: ; j .. i i
. . I~; .!t tHHI', ,', I I :" . . 'j. .',. ; " . I ': i . .:
J"'IIU~~~~l8"Rt~:~ifl i.... : 'j' i'" ,';; 'I: '.. ,J'i .i'l
I: I : i I j '. . i ': " . : : : ' '] :' . I
. ": '. " "'; '.
J . I:: ...., . · ~ i I. i ';.,: i., . I.... " 1.'1' ..... ..: '
, .
,
D
4275 North High School Road Indianapolis, Indiana 46254
(317) 293-3542 Tel (317) 293-4737 Fax
www.vsengineering.com
o
o
D
Joe Medical Drive Shopps - Carmel, Indiana
~m ~~.:~:.IT~=~~~:":=~~'
SHEET NO,
CALCULATED BV
CHECKEO 8'1'
SCALE
OF ___
DATE
PATE
D STAGE STORAGE RELATIONSHIP FOR UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEM
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Storage Calculations for Pioe Barrels Header Pipes Total Storage
Elevation a Cross-Sectional Area Volume Volume Volume
814,3 - 0 0,00 0,00 0,00
814.4 0,567588 0,09 56,23 5.44 61.66
814.5 0.805432 0.26 158.07 15.28 173.35
814.6 0.989868 0.48 288,59 27.90 316.49
814.7 1.147026 0.74 441.53 42.68 484.21
814.8 1.287002 1,02 ',613.13 59,27 672.40
814.9 1.414966 1.33 800.78 77.41 878.19
815 1.533988 1.67 1002.50 96,91 1099.41
815.1 1.646067 2.03 1216.69 117,61 1334.30
815,2 1.752596 2.40 1442.02 139.40 1581.41
815.3 1.85459 2.80 1677.36 162.14 1839.50
815.4 1.952821 3.20 1921.71 185.76 2107.47
815.5 2.047891 3.62 2174.17 210.17 2384.34
815.6 2.140283 4.06 2433.95 235.28 2669,23
815.7 2.230395 4.50 2700.29 261,03 2961.32
815.8 2.318559 4.95 2972.53 287.34 3259.87
815.9 2.405057 5.42 3250,00 314.17 3564.16
816 2.490134 5.89 3532.10 341 .44 3873.54
816.1 2,574004 6.36 3818.26 369.10 4187.36
816,2 2.656861 6.85 4107.92 397,10 4505.02
816.3 2.738877 7.33 4400.55 425.39 4825.93
816.4 2.820211 7.83 4695.63 453.91 5149.54
816.5 2.901013 8.32 4992.65 482,62 5475.27
816.6 2.981421 8,82 5291.13 511.48 5802.60
816.7 3.061571 9.32 5590.57 540.42 6130.99
816.8 3.141593 9.82 5890.49 569.41 6459.90
816.9 3,221614 10,32 6190.41 598.41 6788.81
817 3.301764 10.82 6489,85 627.35 7117.20
817.1 3.382172 11.31 6788.32 656.20 7444.53
817,2 3.462974 11.81 7085.35 684.92 7770.26
817.3 3.544308 12.30 7380.43 713.44 8093.87
817.4 3.626324 12,79 7673.05 741.73 8414.78
817.5 3,709181 13,27 7962.71 769.73 8732.44
817.6 3.793052 13.75 8248.87 797.39 9046,26
817,7 3,878128 14,22 8530.98 824.66 9355,64
817.8 3.964626 14.68 8808.45 851.48 9659.93
817,9 4.05279 15,13 908D.68 877.80 9958.48
818 4.142902 15.58 9347.02 903.55 10250.57
818.1 4,235295 16,01 9606.80 928.66 10535.46
818.2 4.330364 16,43 9859.27 953.06 10812,33
818.3 4.428595 16.84 10103.62 976.68 11080,30
818.4 4.530589 17.23 10338.95 999.43 11338.39
818.5 4.637118 17.61 10564,29 1021.21 11585.50
818.6 4.749197 17.96 10778.47 1041.92 11820.39
818.7 4.868219 18.30 10980.19 1061.42 12041.61
818,8 4.996183 19,63 11780.97 1138,83 12919,80
818.9 5,136159 18.90 11339.45 1096.15 12435.59
819 5.293317 19.15 11492,38 1110.93 12603.31
819.1 5.477754 19.37 11622.91 1123.55 12746.45
819.2 5.715597 19.54 11724.74 1133.39 12858.14
819,3 - 19,63 11780.97 1138.83 12919.80
Barrel Data
Length # Barrels Barrel Diameter
150 4 5
Header Data
Length # Headers Header Diameter
29 2 5
D
D
0) Cl>
~ ...
!C
~ <5
U
~~ OOOC"6I.B
000~"6~B
0006"B~8
0 OOOl"a~a
~
o OS"BI.9
0 OOC"IUII
U OOO~ "81.B
.........
0) 0OO6"l1.8
~
~ OOOl"lI.9
.... OOOS"lI. 9
0 ~
:J
~ u OOOC"lI.9
tD
0 c: 0001."l I. 8
~
~ 0:: 4=
.... 0006"91.8 .:
.~ tD Q) Cl>
... U
~ III ~ OOOl"91.8 ;'
.r:.
rJ1 It.) 'C t.n
III 0 OOOS"91.9
~ C
.... In
0 tD Q) OOOC"91.9
III M 0
. ,..-.l li) ti=1
tti s 'C 0001."91.11
0 0
~ <!:l 0006"5;1.11
0) ~ -
~ 0 S OOOL"!i1.9
Ci=1 0
s:: <!:l OOOS"SI.8
0) ......
OJ) ~
bJ) Q)
o::l 0 OOOC"SI.9
-
~ ~
s:: OOOI."!H.II
......
~ OJ)
Q)
U o::l
rJ1 OOOL"1i'1.8
.~
Q OOmr171.9
0) OOOC"171.9 ....
bJ) c:
0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 ....
C'j 10 ..., ..., M C":! N C'! ...... ...... 0 0 E
ci ci ci ci 0 ci 0 ci ci ci ci E
......... 5j;) U! aJ"eM e6JIi!I.I:l5!{) 0
r/J It.)
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
lie
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Enclosed Storm Sewer Routing - 2 yr Event
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 1
Project Precips
[2 yr]
[5 yr]
[10 yr]
[25 yr]
[50 yr]
[100 yr]
2.66 in
3.27 in
3.83 in
4.72 in
5.52 in
6.46 in
Reach Records
Reach 10: P-10
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
77.1000ft 0.35%
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 10 Str. 19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0660 ac 0.0715 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.004832 ft 0.024159 ft
Reach 10: P-12
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
45.8000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 12 Str. 17
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0470 ac 0.0509 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.003944 ft 0.019719 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5700 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.2473 ftls 0.1260 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.000309 ft 817.8431 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.8500 ft 817.6900 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.1269 fUs 0.1071 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.000093 ft 817.9885 ft
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-13
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
74.1000ft 0.41 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 13 Str. 14
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft "
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2200 ac 0.6379 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.019166 ft 0.095830 ft
Reach 10: P-14
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
98.6000 ft 0.86 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 14 Str. 15
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
I n/Exfi I Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3860 ac 1.1192 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.006306 ft 0.031530 ft
Reach 10: P.15
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
8.0000 ft 2.13 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 2
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
819.3800 ft 819.0800 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.2735 cf 2.4842 ft/s 0.3623 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.023618 ft 819.4423 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
818.4200 ft 817.5700 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
3.3168 cf 3.8114 ft/s 0.4003 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.096745 ft 818.9989 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert
Dn Invert
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 15 Str. 16
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 1.3199 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.003593 ft 0.017963 ft
817.3200 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
9.4420 cf
Frict Loss
0.003321 ft
Reach 10: P.16
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Diam Corr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
6.2000 ft 0.81 % Headwall
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 16 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 1.3199 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.053488 ft 0.106976 ft
Reach 10: P-17
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
51.0000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 17 Str. 18
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.1180 ac 0.2445 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.010070 ft 0.050351 ft
Up Invert
817.1500 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
3.4519cf
Frict Loss
0.007304 ft
817.1500ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
5.4229 ft/s
StartTW
818.9558 ft
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 3
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.3157ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
Dn Invert
817.1000 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match I nv
YES
Velocity
2.6247 ft/s
Start TW
817.6361 ft
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.5361 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.6900 ft 817.5100 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1225 cf 1.8007 ft/s 0.2292 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.002388 ft 817.9224 ft
Reach 10: P-20
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Diam Corr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
5.3000 ft 0.74 % Groove End Projecting
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node
D
o
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
SlormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-18
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
60.0000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 18 Str. 19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft.,
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2050 ac 0.4927 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.014942 ft 0.074709 ft
Reach 10: P-19
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
4.0000 ft 4.00 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 19 Str. 20
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 0.9293 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.116423 ft 0.582114 ft
Dn Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 4
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5100 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 2.1935 ft/s 0.3285 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.011409 ft 817.8431 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.3000 ft 817.1400 ft
Min Co,v Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
12.9544 cf 6.1228 ft/s 0.2266 ft
F rict Loss Start TW
0.000823 ft 817.5184 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
Up Invert
Dn Invert
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
I D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 20 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 0.9293 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.016629 ft 0.083144 ft
817.1400 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
3.3075 cf
Frict Loss
0.003095 ft
817.1010 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
2.3140 ftls
Start TW
817.5543 ft
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 5
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.4532 ft
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
SlormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 6
Node Records
Node 10: Pond Inflow
Desc: Underground Detention System
StartEI: 814.7500 ft Max EI: 817.9720 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Hgl Elev: 817.5543 ft
Node 10: Str. 10
Desc: Structure No. 10
StartEI: 817.5700 ft
Contrib Basin: B-10
Hgl Elev: 817.8735 ft
Struct Type: CONCRET.~ INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
819.1000 ft
Node 10: Str. 12
Desc: Structure No. 12
StartEI: 817.8500 ft
Contrib Basin: B-12
Hgl Elev: 818.0179 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2500 ft
Node 10: Str. 13
Desc: Structure No. 13
StartEI: 819.3800 ft
Contrib Basin: B-13
Hgl Elev: 819.8573 ft
Struct Type: AREA INLET- 24 Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.1416 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.8000 ft
Node 10: Str. 14
Desc: Structure No. 14
StartEI: 818.4200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-14
Hgl Elev: 819.1335 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 15
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
'0
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 7
Desc: Structure No. 15
StartEI: 817.3200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-15
Hgl Elev: 818.9989 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0315 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6600 ft
Node 10: Str. 16
Desc: Structure No. 16
StartEI: 817.1500 ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 818.9558 ft,
Struct Type: MH-TYPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.4566 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 17
Desc: Structure No. 17
StartEI: 817.6900 ft
Contrib Basin: B-17
Hgl Elev: 817.9885 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0197 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.1600 ft
Node 10: Str. 18
Desc: Structure No. 18
StartEI: 817.5100 ft
Contrib Basin: B-18
Hgl Elev: 817.9224 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0504 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.6500 ft
Node 10: Str. 19
Desc: Structure No. 19
StartEI: 817.3000 ft
Contrib Basin: B-19
Hgl Elev: 817.8431 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0747 ft
Bend Loss: 0.1169 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2200 ft
Junction Loss: 0.0085 ft
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 8
Node 10: Str. 20
Desc: Structure No. 20
StartEI: 81"7. 1400 ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 817.1605 ft
Struct Type: MH-TVPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.5821 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.5600 ft
I D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
ID
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 9
Contributing Drainage Areas
Drainage Area: 8-10
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0660 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0660 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-12
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0470 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0470 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0470 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-13
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.2200 ac 98.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.2200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 98.00 0.2200 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-14
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area CN
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 10
Pervious 0.1660 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 0.1660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
98.00
0.00
0.08 hrs
0.00 hrs
98.00
0.1660 ac
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-15
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs " Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0780 ac 93.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0780 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 93.00 0.0780 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-17
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0710 ac 95.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0710 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 95.00 0.0710 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-18
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 0.0870 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 0.0870 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area
Pervious TC Data:
CN
97.00
0.00
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
0.08 hrs
0.00 hrs
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
97.00
0.0870 ac
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 11
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-19
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.1280 ac 97.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.1280 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 97.00 0.1280 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
0 SlormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 12
0 Layout Hydrographs
D Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 2 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.65 min
D Peak Flow: 2.2492 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.1517 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
2.25 0.0005 9.75 0.0575 17.00 0.0427
D 2.50 0.0033 10.00 0.0518 17.25 0.0427
2.75 0.0038 10.25 0.0657 17.50 0.0428
3.00 0.0044 10.50 0.0868 17.75 0.0428
3.25 0.0048 10.75 0.1018 18.00 0.0342
D 3.50 0.0069 11.00 0.1242 18.25 0.0343
3.75 0.0075 11.25 0.1473 18.50 0.0343
4.00 0.0110 11.50 0.1865 18.75 0.0343
4.25 0.0119 11.75 0.7867 19.00 0.0343
0 4.50 0.0128 12.00 2.2492 19.25 0.0343
4.75 0.0140 12.25 0.3672 19.50 0.0343
5.00 0.0148 12.50 0.2345 19.75 0.0343
5.25 0.0156 12.75 0.1932 20.00 0.0258
5.50 0.0162 13.00 0.1516 20.25 0.0258
D 5.75 0.0168 13.25 0.1266 20.50 0.0258
6.00 0.0174 13.50 0.1099 20.75 0.0258
6.25 0.0232 13.75 0.0931 21.00 0.0258
6.50 0.0241 14.00 0.0847 21.25 0.0258
D 6.75 0.0249 14.25 0.0764 21.50 0.0258
7.00 0.0256 14.50 0.0679 21.75 0.0258
7.25 0.0263 14.75 0.0595 22.00 0.0258
7.50 0.0269 15.00 0.0595 22.25 0.0258
7.75 0.0275 15.25 0.0596 22.50 0.0258
0 8.00 0.0280 15.50 0.0511 22.75 0.0258
8.25 0.0343 15.75 0.0511 23.00 0.0258
8.50 0.0409 16.00 0.0512 23.25 0.0258
8.75 0.0418 16.25 0.0512 23.50 0.0258
D 9.00 0.0425 16.50 0.0512 23.75 0.0258
9.25 0.0495 16.75 0.0427 24.00 0.0172
9.50 0.0503 17.00 0.0427 24.25 0.0000
0 Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 100 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.16 min
0 Peak Flow: 5.9034 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.4142 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.00 0.0060 9.00 0.1285 16.50 0.1309
0 1.25 0.0118 9.25 0.1483 16.75 0.1091
1.50 0.0162 9.50 0.1496 17.00 0.1092
1.75 0.0198 9.75 0.1698 17.25 0.1092
2.00 0.0235 10.00 0.1521 17.50 0.1092
2.25 0.0263 10.25 0.1917 17.75 0.1092
0 2.50 0.0288 10.50 0.2515 18.00 0.0874
2.75 0.0316 10.75 0.2930 18.25 0.0874
3.00 0.0336 11.00 0.3552 18.50 0.0874
3.25 0.0355 11.25 0.4187 18.75 0.0874
D 3.50 0.0371 11.50 0.5239 19.00 0.0874
3.75 0.0385 11.75 2.1484 19.25 0.0875
4.00 0.0534 12.00 5.9034 19.50 0.0875
4.25 0.0554 12.25 0.9521 19.75 0.0875
D 4.50 0.0572 12.50 0.6063 20.00 0.0656
4.75 0.0587 12.75 0.4987 20.25 0.0656
5.00 0.0600 13.00 0.3907 20.50 0.0656
5.25 0.0613 13.25 0.3258 20.75 0.0656
5.50 0.0623 13.50 0.2826 21.00 0.0656
D 5.75 0.0633 13.75 0.2392 21.25 0.0656
0
o
StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 13
6.00 0.0642 14.00 0.2176 21.50 0.0657
6.25 0.0814 14.25 0.1959 21.75 0.0657
6.50 0.0825 14.50 0.1742 22.00 0.0657
6.75 0.0835 14.75 0.1525 22.25 0.0657
7.00 0.0844 15.00 0.1525 22.50 0.0657
7.25 0.0852 15.25 0.1526 22.75 0.0657
7.50 0.0860 15.50 0.1308 23.00 0.0657
7.75 0.0866 15.75 0.1308 23.25 0.0657
8.00 0.0879 16.00 0.1309 23.50 0.0657
8.25 0.1068 16.25 0.1309 23.75 0.0657
8.50 0.1259 16.50 0.1309 24.00 0.0438
8.75 0.1273 16.75 0.1091 24.25 0.0000
Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 10 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.40 min
Peak Flow: 3.3684 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.2313 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.50 0.0030 9.25 0.0787 16.75 0.0631
1.75 0.0045 9.50 0.0795 17.00 0.0632
2.00 0.0057 9.75 0.0904 17.25 0.0632
2.25 0.0086 10.00 0.0811 17.50 0.0632
2.50 0.0101 10.25 0.1023 17.75 0.0632
2.75 0.0113 10.50 0.1356 18.00 0.0506
3.00 0.0125 10.75 0.1589 18.25 0.0506
3.25 0.0135 11.00 0.1937 18.50 0.0506
3.50 0.0149 11.25 0.2296 18.75 0.0506
3.75 0.0159 11.50 0.2890 19.00 0.0506
4.00 0.0225 11.75 1.2013 19.25 0.0507
4.25 0.0239 12.00 3.3684 19.50 0.0507
4.50 0.0258 12.25 0.5467 19.75 0.0507
4.75 0.0270 12.50 0.3486 20.00 0.0380
5.00 0.0281 12.75 0.2871 20.25 0.0380
5.25 0.0291 13.00 0.2251 20.50 0.0380
5.50 0.0300 13.25 0.1878 20.75 0.0380
5.75 0.0309 13.50 0.1630 21.00 0.0380
6.00 0.0317 13.75 0.1380 21.25 0.0381
6.25 0.0406 14.00 0.1256 21.50 0.0381
6.50 0.0416 14.25 0.1131 21.75 0.0381
6.75 0.0426 14.50 0.1006 22.00 0.0381
7.00 0.0434 14.75 0.0881 22.25 0.0381
7.25 0.0442 15.00 0.0881 22.50 0.0381
7.50 0.0449 15.25 0.0882 22.75 0.0381
7.75 0.0455 15.50 0.0756 23.00 0.0381
8.00 0.0461 15.75 0.0756 23.25 0.0381
8.25 0.0561 16.00 0.0757 23.50 0.0381
8.50 0.0664 16.25 0.0757 23.75 0.0381
8.75 0.0672 16.50 0.0757 24.00 0.0254
9.00 0.0680 16.75 0.0631 24.25 0.0000
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
ID
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Enclosed Storm Sewer Routing - 10 yr Event
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 1
Project Precips
[2 yr]
[5 yr]
[10 yr]
[25 yr]
[50 yr]
(100 yr)
2.66 in
3.27 in
3.83 in
4.72 in
5.52 in
6.46 in
Reach Records
Reach 10: P-10
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material.
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
77.1000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 10 Str.19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0660 ac 0.1483 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.007469 ft 0.037343 ft
Reach 10: P-12
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
45.8000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 12 Str. 17
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0470ac 0.1056cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.006108 ft 0.030540 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5700 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.5508 ftls 0.1793 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.001328 ft 817.9993 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.8500 ft 817.6900 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.4024 ftls 0.1520 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.000400 ft 818.1459ft
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-13
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
74.1000 ft 0.41 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node On Node
Str. 13 Str. 14
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft "
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2200 ac 0.9251 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.023416 ft 0.117078 ft
Reach 10: P-14
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
98.6000 ft 0.86 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node On Node
Str. 14 Str. 15
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3860 ac 1.6231 ef
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.013264 ft 0.066320 ft
Reach 10: P-15
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
8.0000 ft 2.13 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node On Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 2
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert On Invert
819.3800 ft 819.0800 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold On Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.2735 cf 2.7459 ftls 0.4441 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.049678 ft 819.7652 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert On Invert
818.4200 ft 817.5700 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold On Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
3.3168 cf 4.2005 ftls 0.4937 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.203494 ft 819.4821 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert
On Invert
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
o
D
D
D
o
SlormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 15 Str. 16
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 1.9296 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.007678 ft 0.038392 ft
817.3200 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold On
NO
Capacity
9.4420 cf
Frict Loss
0.007098 ft
Reach 10: P-16
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Oiam Carr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
6.2000 ft 0.81 % Headwall
Oiam
1.2500 ft
Up Node On Node
Str. 16 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 1.9296 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.064891 ft 0.129783 ft
Reach 10: P-17
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Oiam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
51.0000 ft 0.35 %
Oiam.
1.0000 ft
Up Node On Node
Str. 17 Str. 18
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.1180 ac 0.3942 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.013256 ft 0.066278 ft
Up Invert
817.1500 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold On
NO
Capacity
3.4519 cf
Frict Loss
0.015612 ft
817.1500 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match I nv
YES
Velocity
6.0440 fUs
Start TW
819.3906 ft
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 3
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.3834 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
On Invert
817.1000 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
2.8910 fUs
Start TW
817.7681 ft
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.6681 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert On Invert
817.6900 ft 817.5100 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold On Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1225 cf 2.0660 fUs 0.2919ft
F rict Loss Start TW
0.006208 ft 818.0833 ft
Reach 10: P-20
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Diam Corr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
5.3000 ft 0.74 % Groove End Projecting
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-18
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
60.0000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 18 Str. 19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft .',
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2050 ac 0.7569 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.018912 ft 0.094561 ft
Reach 10: P-19
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
4.0000 ft 4.00 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 19 Str. 20
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 1.4387 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.150426 ft 0.752129 ft
Dn Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 4
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5100 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 2.4677 fUs 0.4136 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.026925 ft 817.9993 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.3000 ft 817.1400 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
12.9544 cf 6.9597 ftls 0.2813ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.001973 ft 817.6145 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
Up Invert
Dn Invert
1 --
D
o
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 20 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 1.4387 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.021016 ft 0.105078 ft
817.1400 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold On
NO
Capacity
3.3075 cf
F rict Loss
0.007419 ft
817.1010 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
2.6014 ft/s
Start TW
817.6776 ft
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 5
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.5765 ft
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D.
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
ID
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 6
Node Records
NodelO:Pondlnftow
Desc: Underground Detention System
StartEI: 814.7500 ft Max EI: 817.9720 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Hgl Elev: 817.6776 ft
Node 10: Str. 10
Desc: Structure No. 10
StartEI: 817.5700 ft
Contrib Basin: B-10
Hgl Elev: 818.0460 ft
Struct Type: CONCRET~ INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
819.1000 ft
Node 10: Str. 12
Desc: Structure No. 12
StartEI: 817.8500 ft
Contrib Basin: B-12
Hgl Elev: 818.1846 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2500 ft
Node 10: Str. 13
Desc: Structure No. 13
StartEI: 819.3800 ft
Contrib Basin: B-13
Hgl Elev: 819.9898 ft
Struct Type: AREA INLET- 24 Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.1416 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.8000 ft
Node 10: Str. 14
Desc: Structure No. 14
StartEI: 818.4200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-14
Hgl Elev: 819.7652 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 15
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
10
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 7
Desc: Structure No. 15
StartEI: 817.3200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-15
Hgl Elev: 819.4821 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0663 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6600 ft
Node 10: Str. 16
Desc: Structure No. 16
StartEI: 817.1500ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 819.3906 ft,
Struct Type: MH-TVPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.5672 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 17
Desc: Structure No. 17
StartEI: 817.6900 ft
Contrib Basin: B-17
Hgl Elev: 818.1459 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0305 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.1600 ft
Node 10: Str. 18
Desc: Structure No. 18
StartEI: 817.5100 ft
Contrib Basin: B-18
Hgl Elev: 818.0833 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0663 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.6500 ft
Node 10: Str. 19
Desc: Structure No. 19
StartEI: 817.3000 ft
Contrib Basin: B-19
Hgl Elev: 817.9993 ft
. Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0946 ft
Bend Loss: 0.1479 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2200 ft
Junction Loss: 0.0142 ft
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 8
Node 10: Str. 20
Desc: Structure No. 20
StartEI: 817.1400 ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 817.1547 ft
Struct Type: MH-TVPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.7521 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.5600 ft
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
ID
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 9
Contributing Drainage Areas
Drainage Area: 8-10
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0660 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0660 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing T,ime of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-12
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Affia CN ~
Pervious 0.0470 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0470 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0470 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-13
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.2200 ac 98.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.2200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 98.00 0.2200 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-14
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area CN
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
I,D
I
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 10
Pervious 0.1660 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 0.1660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
98.00
0.00
0.08 hrs
0.00 hrs
98.00
0.1660 ac
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-15
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs " Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0780 ac 93.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0780 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 93.00 0.0780 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-17
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0710 ac 95.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0710 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 95.00 0.0710 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-18
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 0.0870 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 0.0870 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area
Pervious TC Data:
CN
97.00
0.00
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
0.08 hrs
0.00 hrs
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
97.00
0.0870 ac
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D'
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 11
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-19
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area eN TC
. Pervious 0.1280 ac 97.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.1280 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 97.00 0.1280 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
0 StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 12
0 Layout Hydrographs
D Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 2 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.65 min
D Peak Flow: 2.2492 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.1517 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
2.25 0.0005 9.75 0.0575 17.00 0.0427
D 2.50 0.0033 10.00 0.0518 17.25 0.0427
2.75 0.0038 10.25 0.0657 17.50 0.0428
3.00 0.0044 10.50 0.0868 17.75 0.0428
3.25 0.0048 10.75 0.1018 18.00 0.0342
D 3.50 0.0069 11.00 0.1242 18.25 0.0343
3.75 0.0075 11.25 0.1473 18.50 0.0343
4.00 0.0110 11.50 0.1865 18.75 0.0343
4.25 0.0119 11.75 0.7867 19.00 0.0343
4.50 0.0128 12.00 2.2492 19.25 0.0343
D 4.75 0.0140 12.25 0.3672 19.50 0.0343
5.00 0.0148 12.50 0.2345 19.75 0.0343
5.25 0.0156 12.75 0.1932 20.00 0.0258
5.50 0.0162 13.00 0.1516 20.25 0.0258
D 5.75 0.0168 13.25 0.1266 20.50 0.0258
6.00 0.0174 13.50 0.1099 20.75 0.0258
6.25 0.0232 13.75 0.0931 21.00 0.0258
6.50 0.0241 14.00 0.0847 21.25 0.0258
6.75 0.0249 14.25 0.0764 21.50 0.0258
D 7.00 0.0256 14.50 0.0679 21.75 0.0258
7.25 0.0263 14.75 0.0595 22.00 0.0258
7.50 0.0269 15.00 0.0595 22.25 0.0258
7.75 0.0275 15.25 0.0596 22.50 0.0258
D 8.00 0.0280 15.50 0.0511 22.75 0.0258
8.25 0.0343 15.75 0.0511 23.00 0.0258
8.50 0.0409 16.00 0.0512 23.25 0.0258
8.75 0.0418 16.25 0.0512 23.50 0.0258
D 9.00 0.0425 16.50 0.0512 23.75 0.0258
9.25 0.0495 16.75 0.0427 24.00 0.0172
9.50 0.0503 17.00 0.0427 24.25 0.0000
D Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 100 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.16 min
Peak Flow: 5.9034 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.4142 acft
D Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.00 0.0060 9.00 0.1285 16.50 0.1309
D 1.25 0.0118 9.25 0.1483 16.75 0.1091
1.50 0.0162 9.50 0.1496 17.00 0.1092
1.75 0.0198 9.75 0.1698 17.25 0.1092
2.00 0.0235 10.00 0.1521 17.50 0.1092
2.25 0.0263 10.25 0.1917 17.75 0.1092
D 2.50 0.0288 10.50 0.2515 18.00 0.0874
2.75 0.0316 10.75 0.2930 18.25 0.0874
3.00 0.0336 11.00 0.3552 18.50 0.0874
3.25 0.0355 11.25 0.4187 18.75 0.0874
D 3.50 0.0371 11.50 0.5239 19.00 0.0874
3.75 0.0385 11.75 2.1484 19.25 0.0875
4.00 0.0534 12.00 5.9034 19.50 0.0875
4.25 0.0554 12.25 0.9521 19.75 0.0875
4.50 0.0572 12.50 0.6063 20.00 0.0656
D 4.75 0.0587 12.75 0.4987 20.25 0.0656
5.00 0.0600 13.00 0.3907 20.50 0.0656
5.25 0.0613 13.25 0.3258 20.75 0.0656
5.50 0.0623 13.50 0.2826 21.00 0.0656
D 5.75 0.0633 13.75 0.2392 21.25 0.0656
D
I 0
o
StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 13
6.00 0.0642 14.00 0.2176 21.50 0.0657
6.25 0.0814 14.25 0.1959 21.75 0.0657
6.50 0.0825 14.50 0.1742 22.00 0.0657
6.75 0.0835 14.75 0.1525 22.25 0.0657
7.00 0.0844 15.00 0.1525 22.50 0.0657
7.25 0.0852 15.25 0.1526 22.75 0.0657
7.50 0.0860 15.50 0.1308 23.00 0.0657
7.75 0.0866 15.75 0.1308 23.25 0.0657
8.00 0.0879 16.00 0.1309 23.50 0.0657
8.25 0.1068 16.25 0.1309 23.75 0.0657
8.50 0.1259 16.50 0.1309 24.00 0.0438
8.75 0.1273 16.75 0.1091 24.25 0.0000
Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow -10 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.40 min
Peak Flow: 3.3684 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.2313 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.50 0.0030 9.25 0.0787 16.75 0.0631
1.75 0.0045 9.50 0.0795 17.00 0.0632
2.00 0.0057 9.75 0.0904 17.25 0.0632
2.25 0.0086 10.00 0.0811 17.50 0.0632
2.50 0.0101 10.25 0.1023 17.75 0.0632
2.75 0.0113 10.50 0.1356 18.00 0.0506
3.00 0.0125 10.75 0.1589 18.25 0.0506
3.25 0.0135 11.00 0.1937 18.50 0.0506
3.50 0.0149 11.25 0.2296 18.75 0.0506
3.75 0.0159 11.50 0.2890 19.00 0.0506
4.00 0.0225 11.75 1.2013 19.25 0.0507
4.25 0.0239 12.00 3.3684 19.50 0.0507
4.50 0.0258 12.25 0.5467 19.75 0.0507
4.75 0.0270 12.50 0.3486 20.00 0.0380
5.00 0.0281 12.75 0.2871 20.25 0.0380
5.25 0.0291 13.00 0.2251 20.50 0.0380
5.50 0.0300 13.25 0.1878 20.75 0.0380
5.75 0.0309 13.50 0.1630 21,00 0.0380
6.00 0.0317 13.75 0.1380 21.25 0.0381
6.25 0.0406 14.00 0.1256 21.50 0.0381
6.50 0.0416 14.25 0.1131 21.75 0.0381
6.75 0.0426 14.50 0.1006 22.00 0.0381
7.00 0.0434 14.75 0.0881 22.25 0.0381
7.25 0.0442 15.00 0.0881 22.50 0.0381
7.50 0.0449 15.25 0.0882 22.75 0.0381
7.75 0.0455 15.50 0.0756 23.00 0.0381
8.00 0.0461 15.75 0.0756 23.25 0.0381
8.25 0.0561 16.00 0.0757 23.50 0.0381
8.50 0.0664 16.25 0.0757 23.75 0.0381
8.75 0.0672 16.50 0.0757 24.00 0.0254
9.00 0.0680 16.75 0.0631 24.25 0.0000
o
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
iD
I
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 1
Enclosed Storm Sewer Routing - 100 yr Event
Project Precips
[2 yr]
[5 yr]
[10 yr]
[25 yr]
[50 yr]
[100 yr]
2.66 in
3.27 in
3.83 in
4.72 in
5.52 in
6.46 in
Reach Records
Reach 10: P-10
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
77.1000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 10 Str. 19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0660 ac 0.3424 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.012160 ft 0.060801 ft
Reach 10: P-12
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
45.8000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str.12 Str. 17
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0470 ac 0.2439 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.009995 ft 0.049974 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5700 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.9788 fUs 0.2722 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.007083 ft 818.2957 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.8500 ft 817.6900 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.7940 ft/s 0.2294 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.002134 ft 818.5816 ft
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
o
ID
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-13
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
.12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
74.1000 ft 0.41 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 13 Str. 14
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft "
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2200 ac 1.5678 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.012375 ft 0.061874 ft
Reach 10: P-14
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
98.6000 ft 0.86 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 14 Str. 15
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3860 ac 2.7507 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.038095 ft 0.190474 ft
Reach 10: P-15
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
8.0000 ft 2.13 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 2
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
819.3800 ft 819.0800 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.2735 cf 3.1220 ftls 0.6104 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.142678 ft 821.2930 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
818.4200 ft 817.5700 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
3.3168 cf 4.7214 ftls 0.6950 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.584445 ft 820.4800 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert
Dn Invert
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
'0
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 15 Str. 16
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 3.2911 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.022335 ft 0.111677 ft
817.3200 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
9.4420 cf
Frict Loss
0.020648 ft
Reach 10: P-16
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Diam Corr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
6.2000 ft 0.81 % Headwall
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 16 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.4640 ac 3.2911 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.079587 ft 0.159174 ft
Reach 10: P-17
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
51.0000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 17 Str. 18
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.1180 ac 0.7430 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.018841 ft 0.094207 ft
Up Invert
817.1500 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
3.4519 cf
F rict Loss
0.045413 ft
817.1500 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
7.0046 ftls
Start TW
820.2152 ft
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 3
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.5093 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
Dn Invert
817.1000 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match Inv
YES
Velocity
3.2017 ftls
Start TW
818.0759 ft
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.9759 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.6900 ft 817.5100 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1225 cf 2.4631 ftls 0.4084 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.022052 ft 818.5022 ft
Reach 10: P-20
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material Mannings n
15" Diam Corr Metal - new
Length Slope Entrance Loss
5.3000 ft 0.74 % Groove End Projecting
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
SlormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Reach 10: P-18
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
60.0000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 18 Str. 19
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft "
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.2050 ac 1.3608 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.025378 ft 0.126892 ft
Reach 10: P-19
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
15" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
4.0000 ft 4.00 %
Diam
1.2500 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Str. 19 Str. 20
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 2.6124 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.211935 ft 1.059675 ft
Dn Node
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 4
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.5100 ft 817.3000 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 2.8586 ftls 0.5837 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.087044 ft 818.2957 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Mannings n Hyd params By
0.0130 Mannings Formula
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
817.3000 ft 817.1400 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match Inv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
12.9544 cf 8.2609 ftls 0.3807 ft
F rict Loss Start TW
0.006505 ft 817.7878 ft
Routing Method: Travel Time Translation
Hyd params By
0.0220 Mannings Formula
Up Invert
Dn Invert
10
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
o
D
D
o
D
o
D
o
D
I D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Str. 20 Pond Inflow
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.3990 ac 2.6124 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.027716 ft 0.138578 ft
817.1400 ft
Min Cov
3.0000 ft
Hold Dn
NO
Capacity
3.3075 cf
F rict Loss
0.024460 ft
817.1010 ft
Min Slope
0.5000 ft
Match I nv
YES
Velocity
2.9874 fUs
Start TW
817.9389 ft
Wednesday, February 28,2007
Page 5
Max Slope Min drop
2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Allow Smaller
NO
Normal Depth
0.8379 ft
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
ID
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 6
Node Records
Node 10: Pond Inflow
Desc: Underground Detention System
StartEI: 814.7500 ft Max EI: 817.9720 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Hgl Elev: 817.9389 ft
Node 10: Str. 10
Desc: Structure No. 10
StartEI: 817.5700 ft
Contrib Basin: B-10
Hgl Elev: 818.3737 ft
Struct Type: CONCRET.!= INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
819.1000 ft
Node 10: Str. 12
Desc: Structure No. 12
StartEI: 817.8500 ft
Contrib Basin: B-12
Hgl Elev: 818.6431 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.2500 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2500 ft
Node 10: Str. 13
Desc: Structure No. 13
StartEI: 819.3800 ft
Contrib Basin: B-13
Hgl Elev: 821.5099 ft
Struct Type: AREA INLET- 24 Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.1416 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.8000 ft
Node 10: Str. 14
Desc: Structure No. 14
StartEI: 818.4200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-14
Hgl Elev: 821.2930 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0000 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
822.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 15
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 7
Desc: Structure No. 15
StartEI: 817.3200 ft
Contrib Basin: B-15
Hgl Elev: 820.4800 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 3.3600 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.1905 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6600 ft
Node 10: Str. 16
Desc: Structure No. 16
StartEI: 817.1500 ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 820.2152 ft.,
Struct Type: MH-TVPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.7619 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
821.6800 ft
Node 10: Str. 17
Desc: Structure No. 17
StartEI: 817.6900 ft
Contrib Basin: B-17
Hgl Elev: 818.5816 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0500 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
821 . 1600 ft
Node 10: Str. 18
Desc: Structure No. 18
StartEI: 817.5100 ft
Contrib Basin: B-18
Hgl Elev: 818.5022 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.0139 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.6500 ft
Node 10: Str. 19
Desc: Structure No. 19
StartEI: 817.3000 ft
Contrib Basin: B-19
Hgl Elev: 818.2957 ft
Struct Type: CONCRETE INLET Classification Catch Basin
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 6.0000 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 0.1269 ft
Bend Loss: 0.1985 ft
Max EI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.2200 ft
Junction Loss: 0.0239 ft
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
'0
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 8
Node 10: Str. 20
Desc: Structure No. 20
StartEI: 817.1400 ft
Contrib Basin:
Hgl Elev: 817.1749 ft
Struct Type: MH-TYPE 1-72 Classification Manhole
Ke Descrip: CMP: Headwall or Headwall & Wingwall sq edge;.ke=0.5
Catch Depth: 0.0000 ft Bot Area: 28.1743 sf
Condition: No particular shape. Status: Proposed Structure
Approach Credit: 1.0597 ft
MaxEI:
Contrib Hyd:
820.5600 ft
I D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 9
Contributing Drainage Areas
Drainage Area: 8-10
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0660 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0660 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing T<ime of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-12
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0470 ac 75.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0470 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 75.00 0.0470 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-13
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.2200 ac 98.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.2200 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 98.00 0.2200 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-14
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area C N
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
o
,0
D
o
o
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 10
Pervious 0.1660 ac 98.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.1660 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 98.00
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
0.1660 ac
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-15
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs " Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0780 ac 93.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0780 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 93.00 0.0780 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-17
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.0710 ac 95.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.0710 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 95.00 0.0710 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
Drainage Area: 8-18
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd
Peak Factor: 484.00
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs
Area
Pervious 0.0870 ac
Impervious 0.0000 ac
Total 0.0870 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area
Pervious TC Data:
CN
97.00
0.00
Loss Method:
SCS Abs:
Intv:
TC
0.08 hrs
0.00 hrs
SCS CN Number
0.20
15.00 min
97.00
0.0870 ac
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 11
Flow type: Description: Length:
Fixed Fixed Existing Time of Concentration
5.00 min
Slope:
0.00 ft
Coeff:
0.00%
Travel Time
5.0000
Drainage Area: 8-19
Hyd Method: SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method: SCS CN Number
Peak Factor: 484.00 SCS Abs: 0.20
Storm Our: 24.00 hrs Intv: 15.00 min
Area CN TC
Pervious 0.1280 ac 97.00 0.08 hrs
Impervious 0.0000 ac 0.00 0.00 hrs
Total 0.1280 ac
Supporting Data:
Pervious CN Data:
Proposed Conditions Weighted Area 97.00 0.1280 ac
Pervious TC Data:
Flow type: Description: Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time
Fixed Fixed Proposed Time of Concentration 0.00 ft 0.00% 5.0000
5.00 min
0 StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 12
0 Layout Hydrographs
0 Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 2 yr
Area: 0.7970 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.75min
D Peak Flow: 2.0619 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.1392 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
2.25 0.0005 9.75 0.0526 17.00 0.0393
D 2.50 0.0034 10.00 0.0474 17.25 0.0393
2.75 0.0040 10.25 0.0600 17.50 0.0393
3.00 0.0046 10.50 0.0793 17.75 0.0393
3.25 0.0051 10.75 0.0930 18.00 0.0315
3.50 0.0065 11.00 0.1134 18.25 0.0315
0 3.75 0.0071 11.25 0.1345 18.50 0.0315
4.00 0.0103 11.50 0.1703 18.75 0.0315
4.25 0.0111 11.75 0.7192 19.00 0.0315
4.50 0.0119 12.00 2.0619 19.25 0.0315
D 4.75 0.0129 12.25 0.3370 19.50 0.0315
5.00 0.0137 12.50 0.2152 19.75 0.0316
5.25 0.0144 12.75 0.1774 20.00 0.0237
5.50 0.0150 13.00 0.1392 20.25 0.0237
0 5.75 0.0155 13.25 0.1163 20.50 0.0237
6.00 0.0160 13.50 0.1009 20.75 0.0237
6.25 0.0214 13.75 0.0855 21.00 0.0237
6.50 0.0222 14.00 0.0778 21.25 0.0237
6.75 0.0229 14.25 0.0701 21.50 0.0237
D 7.00 0.0235 14.50 0.0624 21.75 0.0237
7.25 0.0241 14.75 0.0546 22.00 0.0237
7.50 0.0247 15.00 0.0547 22.25 0.0237
7.75 0.0252 15.25 0.0547 22.50 0.0237
0 8.00 0.0257 15.50 0.0469 22.75 0.0237
8.25 0.0315 15.75 0.0470 23.00 0.0237
8.50 0.0375 16.00 0.0470 23.25 0.0238
8.75 0.0382 16.25 0.0470 23.50 0.0238
9.00 0.0389 16.50 0.0471 23.75 0.0238
0 9.25 0.0453 16.75 0.0392 24.00 0.0158
9.50 0.0460 17.00 0.0393 24.25 0.0000
D Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 100 yr
Area: 0.8630 ac Hydlnt: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.16 min
Peak Flow: 5.9034 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.4142 acft
0 Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.00 0.0060 9.00 0.1285 16.50 0.1309
1.25 0.0118 9.25 0.1483 16.75 0.1091
D 1.50 0.0162 9.50 0.1496 17.00 0.1092
1.75 0.0198 9.75 0.1698 17.25 0.1092
2.00 0.0235 10.00 0.1521 17.50 0.1092
2.25 0.0263 10.25 0.1917 17.75 0.1092
D 2.50 0.0288 10.50 0.2515 18.00 0.0874
2.75 0.0316 10.75 0.2930 18.25 0.0874
3.00 0.0336 11.00 0.3552 18.50 0.0874
3.25 0.0355 11.25 0.4187 18.75 0.0874
0 3.50 0.0371 11.50 0.5239 19.00 0.0874
3.75 0.0385 11.75 2.1484 19.25 0.0875
4.00 0.0534 12.00 5.9034 19.50 0.0875
4.25 0.0554 12.25 0.9521 19.75 0.0875
4.50 0.0572 12.50 0.6063 20.00 0.0656
0 4.75 0.0587 12.75 0.4987 20.25 0.0656
5.00 0.0600 13.00 0.3907 20.50 0.0656
5.25 0.0613 13.25 0.3258 20.75 0.0656
5.50 0.0623 13.50 0.2826 21.00 0.0656
D 5.75 0.0633 13.75 0.2392 21.25 0.0656
D
o
o
StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Page 13
6.00 0.0642 14.00 0.2176 21.50 0.0657
6.25 0.0814 14.25 0.1959 21.75 0.0657
6.50 0.0825 14.50 0.1742 22.00 0.0657
6.75 0.0835 14.75 0.1525 22.25 0.0657
7.00 0.0844 15.00 0.1525 22.50 0.0657
7.25 0.0852 15.25 0.1526 22.75 0.0657
7.50 0.0860 15.50 0.1308 23.00 0.0657
7.75 0.0866 15.75 0.1308 23.25 0.0657
8.00 0.0879 16.00 0.1309 23.50 0.0657
8.25 0.1068 16.25 0.1309 23.75 0.0657
8.50 0.1259 16.50 0.1309 24.00 0.0438
8.75 0.1273 16.75 0.1091 24.25 0.0000
Hydrograph 10: Pond Inflow - 10 yr
Area: 0.7970 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 1.48 min
Peak Flow: 3.0940 cfs Peak Time: 12.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.2125 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
1.50 0.0032 9.25 0.0719 16.75 0.0581
1.75 0.0048 9.50 0.0726 17.00 0.0581
2.00 0.0060 9.75 0.0826 17.25 0.0582
2.25 0.0082 10.00 0.0740 17.50 0.0582
2.50 0.0095 10.25 0.0934 17.75 0.0582
2.75 0.0106 10.50 0.1238 18.00 0.0466
3.00 0.0116 10.75 0.1451 18.25 0.0466
3.25 0.0125 11.00 0.1770 18.50 0.0466
3.50 0.0138 11.25 0.2099 18.75 0.0466
3.75 0.0147 11.50 0.2644 19.00 0.0466
4.00 0.0208 11.75 1.1006 19.25 0.0466
4.25 0.0220 12.00 3.0940 19.50 0.0467
4.50 0.0238 12.25 0.5027 19.75 0.0467
4.75 0.0249 12.50 0.3206 20.00 0.0350
5.00 0.0259 12.75 0.2640 20.25 0.0350
5.25 0.0268 13.00 0.2070 20.50 0.0350
5.50 0.0276 13.25 0.1728 20.75 0.0350
5.75 0.0284 13.50 0.1499 21.00 0.0350
6.00 0.0291 13.75 0.1270 21.25 0.0350
6.25 0.0373 14.00 0.1156 21.50 0.0350
6.50 0.0382 14.25 0.1041 21.75 0.0351
6.75 0.0390 14.50 0.0926 22.00 0.0351
7.00 0.0397 14.75 0.0811 22.25 0.0351
7.25 0.0404 15.00 0.0811 22.50 0.0351
7.50 0.0410 15.25 0.0811 22.75 0.0351
7.75 0.0416 15.50 0.0696 23.00 0.0351
8.00 0.0422 15.75 0.0696 23.25 0.0351
8.25 0.0513 16.00 0.0696 23.50 0.0351
8.50 0.0606 16.25 0.0697 23.75 0.0351
8.75 0.0614 16.50 0.0697 24.00 0.0234
9.00 0.0622 16.75 0.0581 24.25 0.0000
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 1
Underground Detention Routing - 10 yr Event
Project Precips
[2 yr]
[5 yr]
[10 yr]
[25 yr]
[50 yr]
[100 yr]
2.66 in
3.27 in
3.83 in
4.72 in
5.52 in
6.46 in
Reach Records
Reach 10: Outlet Pipe
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
7.1000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node Dn Node
Discharge Structure
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 inlhr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0000 ac 0.0434 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.003589 ft 0.017943 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Travel Time Translation
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Up Invert Dn Invert
Outlet 814.7500 ft 814.7250 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold Dn Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 1.0750 ft/s 0.0991 ft
F rict Loss Start TW
0.000010 ft 814.8241 ft
0 StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive_Detention Requirements Page 2
0 Node Records
D Node 10: Discharge Structure
Desc: Discharge Structure
Start EI: 814.7500 ft Max EI: 819.4200 ft
D Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd: Pond Inflow - 10 yr
Hgl Elev: 814.8707 ft
Storage Id: Underground Detention Discharge Id: Orifice
D Node 10: Underground Detention
Desc: Structure No. 13
Start EI: 814.3000 ft MaxEI: 819.3000 ft
D Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Stage Input " Volume Volume
814.30 0.00 cf 0.00 cf 0.0000 acft
814.40 61.66 cf 61.66 cf 0.0014 acft
D 814.50 173.35 cf 173.35 cf 0.0040 acft
814.60 316.49 cf 316.49 cf 0.0073 acft
814.70 484.21 cf 484.21 cf 0.0111 acft
D 814.80 672.40 cf 672.40 cf 0.0154 acft
814.90 878.19 cf 878.19 cf 0.0202 acft
815.00 1099.41 cf 1099.41 cf 0.0252 acft
815.10 1334.30 cf 1334.30 cf 0.0306 acft
D 815.20 1581.41 cf 1581.41 cf 0.0363 acft
815.30 1839.50 cf 1839.50 cf 0.0422 acft
815.40 2107.47 cf 2107.47 cf 0.0484 acft
0 815.50 2384.34 cf 2384.34 cf 0.0547 acft
815.60 2669.23 cf 2669.23 cf 0.0613 acft
815.70 2961.32 cf 2961.32 cf 0.0680 acft
815.80 3259.87 cf 3259.87 cf 0.0748 acft
0 815.90 3564.16 cf 3564.16 cf 0.0818 acft
816.00 3873.54 cf 3873.54 cf 0.0889 acft
816.10 4187.36 cf 4187.36 cf 0.0961 acft
D 816.20 4505.02 cf 4505.02 cf 0.1034 acft
816.30 4825.93 cf 4825.93 cf 0.1108 acft
816.40 5149.54 cf 5149.54 cf 0.1182 acft
816.50 5475.27 cf 5475.27 cf 0.1257 acft
0 816.60 5802.60 cf 5802.60 cf 0.1332 acft
816.70 6130.99 cf 6130.99 cf 0.1407 adt
816.80 6459.90 cf 6459.90 cf 0.1483 acft
D 816.90 6788.81 cf 6788.81 cf 0.1558 acft
817.00 7117.20 cf 7117.20 cf 0.1634 acft
817.10 7444.53 cf 7444.53 cf 0.1709 acft
817.20 7770.26 cf 7770.26 cf 0.1784 acft
D 817.30 8093.87 cf 8093.87 cf 0.1858 acft
817.40 8414.78 cf 8414.78 cf 0.1932 acft
817.50 8732.44 cf 8732.44 cf 0.2005 acft
D 817.60 9046.26 cf 9046.26 cf 0.2077 acft
817.70 9355.64 cf 9355.64 cf 0.2148 acft
817.80 9659.93 cf 9659.93 cf 0.2218 acft
817.90 9958.48 cf 9958.48 cf 0.2286 acft
0 818.00 10250.57 cf 10250.57 cf 0.2353 acft
818.10 10535.46 cf 10535.46 cf 0.2419 acft
818.20 10812.33 cf 10812.33 cf 0.2482 acft
0 818.30 11080.30 cf 11080.30 cf 0.2544 acft
0
0 StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements Page 3
0 818.40 11338.39 cf 11338.39 cf 0.2603 acft
818.50 11585.50 cf 11585.50 cf 0.2660 acft
D 818.60 11820.39 cf 11820.39 cf 0.2714 acft
818.70 12041.61 cf 12041.61 cf 0.2764 acft
818.80 12919.80 cf 12919.80 cf 0.2966 acft
818.90 12435.59 cf 12435.59 cf 0.2855 acft
D 819.00 12603.31 cf 12603.31 cf 0.2893 acft
819.10 12746.45 cf 12746.45 cf 0.2926 acft
819.20 12858.14 cf 12858.14 cf 0.2952 acft
D 819.30 12919.80 cf 12919.80 cf 0.2966 acft
Control Structure 10: Orifice - Multiple Orifice Structure
0 Descrip: Multiple Orifice
Start EI Max EI Increment
814.7500 ft 819.0000 ft, 0.10
Orif Coeff: 0.62 Bottom EI: 814.75ft
D Lowest Diam: 1.0000 in
out to 2nd: 3.0500 ft Diam: 3.5000 in
D Node 10: Outlet
Desc: Outlet
Start EI: 819.3800 ft MaxEI: 822.8000 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
D Hgl Elev: 814.8241 ft
Node 10: Underground Detention
0 Desc: Structure No. 13
Start EI: 814.3000 ft MaxEI: 819.3000 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
D Stage Input Volume Volume
814.30 0.00 cf 0.00 cf 0.0000 acft
814.40 61.66 cf 61.66 cf 0.0014 acft
814.50 173.35 cf 173.35 cf 0.0040 acft
0 814.60 316.49 cf 316.49 cf 0.0073 acft
814.70 484.21 cf 484.21 cf 0.0111 acft
814.80 672.40 cf 672.40 cf 0.0154 acft
D 814.90 878.19 cf 878.19 cf 0.0202 acft
815.00 1099.41 cf 1099.41 cf 0.0252 acft
815.10 1334.30 cf 1334.30 cf 0.0306 acft
815.20 1581.41 cf 1581 .41 cf 0.0363 acft
D 815.30 1839.50 cf 1839.50 cf 0.0422 acft
815.40 2107.47 cf 2107.47 cf 0.0484 acft
815.50 2384.34 cf 2384.34 cf 0.0547 acft
D 815.60 2669.23 cf 2669.23 cf 0.0613 acft
815.70 2961.32 cf 2961.32 cf 0.0680 acft
815.80 3259.87 cf 3259.87 cf 0.0748 acft
815.90 3564.16 cf 3564.16 cf 0.0818 acft
0 816.00 3873.54 cf 3873.54 cf 0.0889 acft
816.10 4187.36 cf 4187.36 cf 0.0961 acft
816.20 4505.02 cf 4505.02 cf 0.1034 acft
816.30 4825.93 cf 4825.93 cf 0.1108 acft
D 816.40 5149.54 cf 5149.54 cf 0.1182 acft
816.50 5475.27 cf 5475.27 cf 0.1257 acft
816.60 5802.60 cf 5802.60 cf 0.1332 acft
D 816.70 6130.99 cf 6130.99 cf 0.1407 acft
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
~D
o
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements
816.80
816.90
817.00
817.10
817.20
817.30
817.40
817.50
817.60
817.70
817.80
817.90
818.00
818.10
818.20
818.30
818.40
818.50
818.60
818.70
818.80
818.90
819.00
819.10
819.20
819.30
6459.90 cf
6788.81 cf
7117.20cf
7444.53 cf
7770.26 cf
8093.87 cf
8414.78 cf
8732.44 cf
9046.26 cf
9355.64 cf
9659.93 cf
9958.48 cf
10250.57 cf
10535.46 cf
10812.33 cf
11080.30 Cf
11338.39 cf
11585.50 cf
11820.39 cf
12041.61 cf
12919.80 cf
12435.59 cf
12603.31 cf
12746.45 cf
12858.14 cf
12919.80 cf
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 4
6459.90 cf
6788.81 cf
7117.20 cf
7444.53 cf
7770.26 cf
8093.87 cf
8414.78 cf
8732.44 cf
9046.26 cf
9355.64 cf
9659.93 cf
9958.48 cf
10250.57 cf
10535.46 cf
10812.33 cf
11080.30 cf
11338.39 cf
11585.50 cf
11820.39 cf
12041.61 cf
12919.80 cf
12435.59 cf
12603.31 cf
12746.45 cf
12858.14cf
12919.80 cf
0.1483 acft
0.1558 acft
0.1634 acft
0.1709 acft
0.1784 acft
0.1858 acft
0.1932 acft
0.2005 acft
0.2077 acft
0.2148 acft
0.2218 acft
0.2286 acft
0.2353 acft
0.2419 acft
0.2482 acft
0.2544 acft
0.2603 acft
0.2660 acft
0.2714 acft
0.2764 acft
0.2966 acft
0.2855 acft
0.2893 acft
0.2926 acft
0.2952 acft
0.2966 acft
D StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive_Detention Requirements Page 5
D Layout Hydrographs
D Hydrograph 10: Outlet - 100 yr
Area: 0.0000 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 0.06 min
D Peak Flow: 0.3625 cfs Peak Time: 13.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.2126 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
5.50 0.0037 13.50 0.3579 21.25 0.0669
D 5.75 0.0058 13.75 0.3507 21.50 0.0661
6.00 0.0073 14.00 0.3419 21.75 0.0661
6.25 0.0086 14.25 0.3318 22.00 0.0661
6.50 0.0098 14.50 0.3210 22.25 0.0654
D 6.75 0.0109 14.75 0.3090 22.50 0.0658
7.00 0.0119 15.00 0.2971 22.75 0.0654
7.25 0.0128 15.25 0.2857 23.00 0.0661
7.50 0.0136 15.50 0.2741 23.25 0.0654
7.75 0.0143 15.75 0.2621 23.50 0.0658
0 8.00 0.0150 16.00 0.2508 23.75 0.0658
8.25 0.0158 16.25 0.2400 24.00 0.0578
8.50 0.0166 16.50 0.2297 24.25 0.0473
8.75 0.0175 16.75 0.2190 24.50 0.0472
0 9.00 0.0183 17.00 0.2077 24.75 0.0471
9.25 0.0191 17.25 0.1969 25.00 0.0470
9.50 0.0200 17.50 0.1868 25.25 0.0469
9.75 0.0208 17.75 0.1774 25.50 0.0468
10.00 0.0216 18.00 0.1670 25.75 0.0467
0 10.25 0.0225 18.25 0.1558 26.00 0.0466
10.50 0.0235 18.50 0.1452 26.25 0.0465
10.75 0.0247 18.75 0.1356 26.50 0.0464
11.00 0.0260 19.00 0.1268 26.75 0.0462
0 11.25 0.0275 19.25 0.1188 27.00 0.0461
11.50 0.0292 19.50 0.1119 27.25 0.0460
11.75 0.0336 19.75 0.1059 27.50 0.0459
12.00 0.0440 20.00 0.0982 27.75 0.0458
12.25 0.3050 20.25 0.0881 28.00 0.0457
0 12.50 0.3404 20.50 0.0795 28.25 0.0456
12.75 0.3560 20.75 0.0734 28.50 0.0455
13.00 0.3625 21.00 0.0695 28.75 0.0454
13.25 0.3622 21.25 0.0669 29.00 0.0453
0 Hydrograph 10: Outlet - 10 yr
Area: 0.0000 ac Hydlnt: 15.00 min Base Flow:
0 Pending tt translation: 0.11 min
Peak Flow: 0.0434 cfs Peak Time: 20.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.0654 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
0 8.00 0.0032 15.25 0.0426 22.25 0.0433
8.25 0.0052 15.50 0.0427 22.50 0.0432
8.50 0.0067 15.75 0.0427 22.75 0.0432
8.75 0.0080 16.00 0.0428 23.00 0.0432
D 9.00 0.0091 16.25 0.0429 23.25 0.0432
9.25 0.0102 16.50 0.0430 23.50 0.0432
9.50 0.0112 16.75 0.0430 23.75 0.0432
9.75 0.0121 17.00 0.0431 24.00 0.0432
0 10.00 0.0130 17.25 0.0431 24.25 0.0431
10.25 0.0138 17.50 0.0432 24.50 0.0430
10.50 0.0149 17.75 0.0432 24.75 0.0429
10.75 0.0161 18.00 0.0433 25.00 0.0428
11.00 0.0174 18.25 0.0433 25.25 0.0427
0 11.25 0.0188 18.50 0.0433 25.50 0.0426
11.50 0.0203 18.75 0.0433 25.75 0.0425
11.75 0.0242 19.00 0.0433 26.00 0.0424
12.00 0.0328 19.25 0.0433 26.25 0.0423
0 12.25 0.0383 19.50 0.0434 26.50 0.0422
0
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements
D
0.0394
0.0401
0.0406
0.0411
0.0414
0.0416
0.0419
0.0421
0.0422
0.0423
0.0424
19.75
20.00
20.25
20.50
20.75
21.00
21.25
21.50
21.75
22.00
22.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.50
13.75
14.00
14.25
14.50
14.75
15.00
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
0.0434
0.0434
0.0434
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
0.0433
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 6
26.75
27.00
27.25
27.50
27.75
28.00
28.25
28.50
28.75
29.00
29.25
0.0421
0.0420
0.0419
0.0418
0.0417
0.0416
0.0415
0.0414
0.0413
0.0412
0.0411
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 1
Underground Detention Routing - 100 yr Event
Project Precips
[2 yr]
[5 yr]
[10 yr]
[25 yr]
[50 yr]
[100 yr]
2.66 in
3.27 in
3.83 in
4.72 in
5.52 in
6.46 in
Reach Records
Reach 10: Outlet Pipe
Section Properties:
Shape: Circular.,
Size Material
12" Diam Cone-Spun
Length Slope
7.1000 ft 0.35 %
Diam
1.0000 ft
Up Node On Node
Discharge Structure
Conduit Constraints:
Min Vel Max Vel
2.0000 ft 15.0000 ft
In/Exfil Hold Up
0.0000 in/hr NO
Conduit Summary:
Trib Area Flow
0.0000 ac 0.3625 cf
Ent Loss Exit Loss
0.012563 ft 0.062817 ft
Routing Method:
Hyd params By
Mannings Formula
Mannings n
0.0130
Entrance Loss
Groove End Projecting
Travel Time Translation
Up Invert On Invert
Outlet 814.7500 ft 814.7250 ft
Min Cov Min Slope Max Slope Min drop
3.0000 ft 0.5000 ft 2.0000 ft 0.0000 ft
Hold On Match I nv Allow Smaller
NO YES NO
Capacity Velocity Normal Depth
2.1135 cf 2.0113 ftls 0.2802 ft
Frict Loss Start TW
0.000731 ft 815.0052 ft
0 StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive_Detention Requirements Page 2
0 Node Records
D Node ID: Discharge Structure
Desc: Discharge Structure
Start EI: 814.7500 ft Max EI: 819.4200 ft
D Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd: Pond Inflow - 100 yr
Hgl Elev: 815.1056 ft
Storage Id: Underground Detention Discharge Id: Orifice
D Node ID: Underground Detention
Desc: Structure No. 13
Start EI: 814.3000 ft Max EI: 819.3000 ft
D Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
Stage Input Volume Volume
814.30 0.00 cf 0.00 cf 0.0000 acft
D 814.40 61.66 cf 61.66 cf 0.0014 acft
814.50 173.35cf 173.35 cf 0.0040 acft
814.60 316.49 cf 316.49 cf 0.0073 acft
814.70 484.21 cf 484.21 cf 0.0111 acft
D 814.80 672.40 cf 672.40 cf 0.0154 acft
814.90 878.19 cf 878.19 cf 0.0202 acft
815.00 1099.41 cf 1099.41 cf 0.0252 acft
0 815.10 1334.30 cf 1334.30 cf 0.0306 acft
815.20 1581.41 cf 1581.41 cf 0.0363 acft
815.30 1839.50 cf 1839.50 cf 0.0422 acft
815.40 2107.47 cf 2107.47 cf 0.0484 acft
D 815.50 2384.34 cf 2384.34 cf 0.0547 acft
815.60 2669.23 cf 2669.23 cf 0.0613 acft
815.70 2961.32 cf 2961.32 cf 0.0680 acft
. 815.80 3259.87 cf 3259.87 cf 0.0748 acft
D 815.90 3564.16 cf 3564.16 cf 0.0818 acft
816.00 3873.54 cf 3873.54 cf 0.0889 acft
816.10 4187.36 cf 4187.36 cf 0.0961 acft
D 816.20 4505.02 cf 4505.02 cf 0.1034 acft
816.30 4825.93 cf 4825.93 cf 0.1108 acft
816.40 5149.54 cf 5149.54 cf 0.1182 acft
816.50 5475.27 cf 5475.27 cf 0.1257 acft
0 816.60 5802.60 cf 5802.60 cf 0.1332 acft
816.70 6130.99 cf 6130.99 cf 0.1407 acft
816.80 6459.90 cf 6459.90 cf 0.1483 acft
0 816.90 6788.81 cf 6788.81 cf 0.1558 acft
817.00 7117.20 cf 7117.20cf 0.1634 acft
817.10 7444.53 cf 7444.53 cf 0.1709 acft
817.20 7770.26 cf 7770.26 cf 0.1784 acft
D 817.30 8093.87 cf 8093.87 cf 0.1858 acft
817.40 8414.78 cf 8414.78 cf 0.1932 acft
817.50 8732.44 cf 8732.44 cf 0.2005 acft
D 817.60 9046.26 cf 9046.26 cf 0.2077 acft
817.70 9355.64 cf 9355.64 cf 0.2148 acft
817.80 9659.93 cf 9659.93 cf 0.2218 acft
817.90 9958.48 cf 9958.48 cf 0.2286 acft
D 818.00 10250.57 cf 10250.57 cf 0.2353 acft
818.10 10535.46 cf 10535.46 cf 0.2419 acft
818.20 10812.33 cf 10812.33 cf 0.2482 acft
D 818.30 11080.30 cf 11080.30 cf 0.2544 acft
I D
I
D StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive_Detention Requirements Page 3
D 818.40 11338.39 cf 11338.39 cf 0.2603 acft
818.50 11585.50 cf 11585.50 cf 0.2660 acft
D 818.60 11820.39 cf 11820.39 cf 0.2714 acft
818.70 12041.61 cf 12041.61 cf 0.2764 acft
818.80 12919.80 cf 12919.80 cf 0.2966 acft
818.90 12435.59 cf 12435.59 cf 0.2855 acft
D 819.00 12603.31 cf 12603.31 cf 0.2893 acft
819.10 12746.45 cf 12746.45 cf 0.2926 acft
819.20 12858.14 cf 12858.14 cf 0.2952 acft
D 819.30 12919.80 cf 12919.80 cf 0.2966 acft
Control Structure ID: Orifice - Multiple Orifice Structure
0 Descrip: Multiple Orifice
Start EI MaxEI Increment
814.7500 ft 819.0000 ft, 0.10
Orif Coeff: 0.62 Bottom EI: 814.75 ft
D Lowest Diam: 1.0000 in
out to 2nd: 3.0500 ft Diam: 3.5000 in
0 Node ID: Outlet
Desc: Outlet
Start EI: 819.3800 ft Max EI: 822.8000 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
D Hgl Elev: 815.0052 ft
Node ID: Underground Detention
D Desc: Structure No. 13
Start EI: 814.3000 ft Max EI: 819.3000 ft
Contrib Basin: Contrib Hyd:
D Stage Input Volume Volume
814.30 0.00 cf 0.00 cf 0.0000 acft
814.40 61.66 cf 61.66 cf 0.0014 acft
814.50 173.35cf 173.35 cf 0.0040 acft
D 814.60 316.49 cf 316.49 cf 0.0073 acft
814.70 484.21 cf 484.21 cf 0.0111 acft
814.80 672.40 cf 672.40 cf 0.0154 acft
814.90 878.19 cf 878.19 cf 0.0202 acft
0 815.00 1099.41 cf 1099.41 cf 0.0252 acft
815.10 1334.30 cf 1334.30 cf 0.0306 acft
815.20 1581.41 cf 1581.41 cf 0.0363 acft
0 815.30 1839.50 cf 1839.50 cf 0.0422 acft
815.40 2107.47 cf 2107.47 cf 0.0484 acft
815.50 2384.34 cf 2384.34 cf 0.0547 acft
815.60 2669.23 cf 2669.23 cf 0.0613 acft
0 815.70 2961.32 cf 2961.32 cf 0.0680 acft
815.80 3259.87 cf 3259.87 cf 0.0748 acft
815.90 3564.16 cf 3564.16 cf 0.0818 acft
D 816.00 3873.54 cf 3873.54 cf 0.0889 acft
816.10 4187.36 cf 4187.36 cf 0.0961 acft
816.20 4505.02 cf 4505.02 cf 0.1034 acft
816.30 4825.93 cf 4825.93 cf 0.1108 acft
D 816.40 5149.54 cf 5149.54 cf 0.1182 acft
816.50 5475.27 cf 5475.27 cf 0.1257 acft
816.60 5802.60 cf 5802.60 cf 0.1332 acft
0 816.70 6130.99 cf 6130.99 cf 0.1407 acft
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
StormShed Report
Project: Carmel Medical Drive_Detention Requirements
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Page 4
816.80
816.90
817.00
817.10
817.20
817.30
817.40
817.50
817.60
817.70
817.80
817.90
818.00
818.10
818.20
818.30
818.40
818.50
818.60
818.70
818.80
818.90
819.00
819.10
819.20
819.30
6459.90 cf
6788.81 cf
7117.20cf
7444.53 cf
7770.26 cf
8093.87 cf
8414.78 cf
8732.44 cf
9046.26 cf
9355.64 cf
9659.93 cf
9958.48 cf
10250.57 cf
10535.46 cf
10812.33 cf
11080.30 d
11338.39 cf
11585.50 cf
11820.39 cf
12041.61 cf
12919.80 cf
12435.59 cf
12603.31 cf
12746.45 cf
12858.14 cf
12919.80 cf
6459.90 cf
6788.81 cf
7117.20cf
7444.53 cf
7770.26 cf
8093.87 cf
8414.78 cf
8732.44 cf
9046.26 cf
9355.64 cf
9659.93 cf
9958.48 cf
10250.57 cf
10535.46 cf
10812.33 cf
11080.30 cf
11338.39 cf
11585.50 cf
11820.39 cf
12041.61 cf
12919.80 cf
12435.59 cf
12603.31 cf
12746.45 cf
12858.14 cf
12919.80 cf
0.1483 acft
0.1558 acft
0.1634 acft
0.1709 acft
0.1784 acft
0.1858 acft
0.1932 acft
0.2005 acft
0.2077 acft
0.2148 acft
0.2218 acft
0.2286 acft
0.2353 acft
0.2419 acft
0.2482 acft
0.2544 acft
0.2603 acft
0.2660 acft
0.2714 acft
0.2764 acft
0.2966 acft
0.2855 acft
0.2893 acft
0.2926 acft
0.2952 acft
0.2966 acft
0 Storm Shed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements Page 5
0 Layout Hydrographs
D Hydrograph 10: Outlet - 100 yr
Area: 0.0000 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
Pending tt translation: 0.06 min
D Peak Flow: 0.3625 cfs Peak Time: 13.00 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.2126 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
5.50 0.0037 13.50 0.3579 21.25 0.0669
D 5.75 0.0058 13.75 0.3507 21.50 0.0661
6.00 0.0073 14.00 0.3419 21.75 0.0661
6.25 0.0086 14.25 0.3318 22.00 0.0661
6.50 0.0098 14.50 0.3210 22.25 0.0654
D 6.75 0.0109 14.75 0.3090 22.50 0.0658
7.00 0.0119 15.00 0.2971 22.75 0.0654
7.25 0.0128 15.25 0.2857 23.00 0.0661
7.50 0.0136 15.50 0.2741 23.25 0.0654
7.75 0.0143 15.75 0.2621 23.50 0.0658
D 8.00 0.0150 16.00 0.2508 23.75 0.0658
8.25 0.0158 16.25 0.2400 24.00 0.0578
8.50 0.0166 16.50 0.2297 24.25 0.0473
8.75 0.0175 16.75 0.2190 24.50 0.0472
D 9.00 0.0183 17.00 0.2077 24.75 0.0471
9.25 0.0191 17.25 0.1969 25.00 0.0470
9.50 0.0200 17.50 0.1868 25.25 0.0469
9.75 0.0208 17.75 0.1774 25.50 0.0468
10.00 0.0216 18.00 0.1670 25.75 0.0467
D 10.25 0.0225 18.25 0.1558 26.00 0.0466
10.50 0.0235 18.50 0.1452 26.25 0.0465
10.75 0.0247 18.75 0.1356 26.50 0.0464
11.00 0.0260 19.00 0.1268 26.75 0.0462
D 11.25 0.0275 19.25 0.1188 27.00 0.0461
11.50 0.0292 19.50 0.1119 27.25 0.0460
11.75 0.0336 19.75 0.1059 27.50 0.0459
12.00 0.0440 20.00 0.0982 27.75 0.0458
12.25 0.3050 20.25 0.0881 28.00 0.0457
D 12.50 0.3404 20.50 0.0795 28.25 0.0456
12.75 0.3560 20.75 0.0734 28.50 0.0455
13.00 0.3625 21.00 0.0695 28.75 0.0454
13.25 0.3622 21.25 0.0669 29.00 0.0453
D Hydrograph 10: Outlet - 10 yr
Area: 0.0000 ac Hyd Int: 15.00 min Base Flow:
0 Pending tt translation: 0.11 min
Peak Flow: 0.0430 cfs Peak Time: 19.75 hrs Hyd Vol: 0.0663 acft
Time Flow Time Flow Time Flow
hr cfs hr cfs hr cfs
0 4.50 0.0037 13.00 0.0405 21.00 0.0429
4.75 0.0040 13.25 0.0409 21.25 0.0429
5.00 0.0042 13.50 0.0412 21.50 0.0429
5.25 0.0044 13.75 0.0415 21.75 0.0429
0 5.50 0.0047 14.00 0.0417 22.00 0.0429
5.75 0.0049 14.25 0.0419 22.25 0.0428
6.00 0.0051 14.50 0.0420 22.50 0.0428
6.25 0.0054 14.75 0.0421 22.75 0.0428
D 6.50 0.0057 15.00 0.0422 23.00 0.0428
6.75 0.0059 15.25 0.0424 23.25 0.0428
7.00 0.0062 15.50 0.0424 23.50 0.0427
7.25 0.0064 15.75 0.0425 23.75 0.0427
7.50 0.0067 16.00 0.0426 24.00 0.0427
D 7.75 0.0069 16.25 0.0427 24.25 0.0426
8.00 0.0071 16.50 0.0427 24.50 0.0425
8.25 0.0074 16.75 0.0428 24.75 0.0424
8.50 0.0077 17.00 0.0428 25.00 0.0423
D 8.75 0.0080 17.25 0.0429 25.25 0.0422
0
o
StormShed Report Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Project: Carmel Medical Drive Detention Requirements Page 6
9.00 0.0083 17.50 0.0429 25.50 0.0420
9.25 0.0088 17.75 0.0429 25.75 0.0419
9.50 0.0099 18.00 0.0430 26.00 0.0418
9.75 0.0110 18.25 0.0430 26.25 0.0417
10.00 0.0120 18.50 0.0430 26.50 0.0416
10.25 0.0129 18.75 0.0430 26.75 0.0415
10.50 0.0141 19.00 0.0430 27.00 0.0414
10.75 0.0153 19.25 0.0430 27.25 0.0413
11.00 0.0167 19.50 0.0430 27.50 0.0412
11.25 0.0182 19.75 0.0430 27.75 0.0410
11.50 0.0198 20.00 0.0430 28.00 0.0409
11.75 0.0238 20.25 0.0430 28.25 0.0408
12.00 0.0326 20.50 0.0430 28.50 0.0407
12.25 0.0382 20.75 0.0430 28.75 0.0406
12.50 0.0392 21.00 0.0429 29.00 0.0405
12.75 0.0400 21.25 0.0429 29.25 0.0404
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
D
VORTECHS SYSTEM@ ESTIMATED FLOW CALCULATIONS
" Medical Drive Shopps
Indianapolis, IN
Model 3000
System 16
STORMWAlER
~
Orifice
Weir
Cd = 0.56
A (sf) = 0.17
Crest Elevation ft = 817.23
Cd = 3.37
Weir Crest Length (ft) = 5
Crest Elevation ft = 819.81
Head ft Elevation ft Orifice Flow cfS Weir Flow cfS Total Flow cfS
0.00 817.23 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.20 817.43 0.14 0.00 0.14
0.40 817.63 0.36 0.00 0.36
0.60 817.83 0.49 0.00 0.49
0.80 818.03 0.59 0.00 0.59
1.00 818.23 0.68 0.00 0.68
1.20 818.43 0.76 0.00 0.76
1.40 818.63 0.83 0.00 0.83
1.60 818.83 0.89 0.00 0.89
1.80 819.03 0.95 0.00 0.95
2.00 819.23 1.01 0.00 1.01
2.20 819.43 1.06 0.00 1.06
2.40 819.63 1.11 0.00 1.11
2.60 819.83 1.16 0.06 1.22
2.80 820.03 1.21 1.77 2.98
2.82 820.06 1.21 2.08 3.29
I 0.80 I 820.10 I 0.67 I 2.62 I 3.29
The last line shows the estimated water surface elevation upstream of the Vortechs System during the 100-year
event, with a tailwater elevation of 819.30 feet in effect.
ICalculated by: 11/1512006 IIChecked by:
VortechslM System
Stage Di scharge Curve
820.5
820.0
819.5
r--
e 819.0
c
0
li
> 818.5
~
UJ
818.0
817.5
_._-- --- r-~---~ ~-'---' ._~-~.. ~._._~ -
------- - - -- ------------ - r----- - -- --------- - ---------- ------ Weir res!
V
/
/
~
L____ - - -- ------------ - - - - ------- - -- ------- -- - ------- -- - ------ Orific Cres!
817.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Discharge (cfs)
o
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
o
VORTECHS SYSTEM@ ESTIMATED NET ANNUAL TSS REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
Medical Drive Shopps
Indianapolis, IN
Model 3000
System 16
~....---......
~OtunoN5*
Design Ratio1 =
(JJ.5 acres) x (JJ.88) x (449 gpm/cfs)
(19.6 sf)
Rainfall Intensity
"/hr
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
Operating Rate2
mist
0.2
" 0.4
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.4
2.8
3.3
3.8
4.2
4.7
7.1
9.4
14.1
18.8
% Total Rainfall
Volumes
8.9%
8.7%
7.6%
7.2%
5.7%
4.7%
4.6%
4.9%
3.6%
3.4%
6.8%
5.0%
4.4%
3.6%
2.4%
1.9%
6.9%
3.9%
4.8%
0.8%
= 9.4
Rmvl. Eff~
%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
97.0%
97.0%
95.8%
95.8%
94.1%
94.1%
90.0%
87.1%
79.1%
72.3%
% rain falling at >2"/hr =
Assumed Removal Efficiency of remaining % =
Removal Efficiency Adjustmenf =
Net Annual TSS Removal Efficiency =
Rei. Effcy
%
8.7%
8.5%
7.5%
7.0%
5.6%
4.7%
4.5%
4.8%
3.6%
3.4%
6.6%
4.8%
4.2%
3.4%
2.3%
1.8%
6.2%
3.4%
3.8%
0.6%
95.4%
0.0%
0.0%
6.5%
89%
1 - Design Ratio = (fotal Drainage Area) x (Runoff Coefficient) x (cfs to gpm conversion) I Grit Chamber Area
- The Total Drainage Area and Runoff Coefficient is specified by the site engineer.
- The conversion factor from cfs to gpm is 449.
2 - Operating Rate (gpm/sf) = intensity C'/hr) x Design Ratio
3 - Based on 10 years of hourly precipitation data from NCDC 4259, Indianapolis WSFO AP, Marion County, IN
4 - Based on Vortechnics laboratory verified removal of 50 micron particle gradation (see Technical Bulletin #1).
5- Reduction due to use of 60-minute data for a site that has a time of concentration less than 30-minutes.
ICalculated by: 11/1512006 IIChecked by:
D
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
VORTECHS SYSTEM@ ESTIMATED FLOW CALCULATIONS
Medical Drive Shopps
Indianapolis, IN
~ORMWATE~
~SOWTfONs., Model 2000
System 20
o rifi ce
Weir
Cd = 0.56
A (s~ = 0.19
Crest Elevation ft = 817.22
Cd = 3.37
Weir Crest Length (ft) = 4
Crest Elevation ft = 818.80
Head ff Elevation, ff Orifice Flow cfS Weir Flow cfS Total Flow cfs
0.00 817.22 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.15 817.37 0.10 0.00 0.10
0.30 817.52 0.28 0.00 0.28
0.45 817.67 0.46 0.00 0.46
0.60 817.82 0.57 0.00 0.57
0.75 817.97 0.66 0.00 0.66
0.90 818.12 0.74 0.00 0.74
1.05 818.27 0.81 0.00 0.81
1.20 818.42 0.88 0.00 0.88
1.35 818.57 0.94 0.00 0.94
1.50 818.72 1.00 0.00 1.00
1.65 818.87 1.05 0.27 1.32
1.76 818.98 1.09 1.05 2.14
, 0.25 I 819.55 , 0.43 , 1.71 , 2.14
The last line shows the estimated water sutface elevation upstream of the Vortechs System during the 100-year
event, with a tailwater elevation of 819.30 feet in effect.
'Calculated by: 11/1512006 I'Checked by:
VortechslM System
Stage Discharge Curve
819.2
819.0
818.8
818.6
g 818.4
c 818.2
0
II 818.0
>
~
w 817.8
. --
--
/ ,-
/
/
/
/
./"
~.
L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ----------------- ---------------- -----------------
817.6
817.4
817.2
817.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Discharge (cts)
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
VORTECHS SYSTEM@ ESTIMATED NET ANNUAL TSS REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
Medical Drive Shopps
Indianapolis, IN
Model 2000
System 20
Design Ratio 1 =
(0.3 acres) x (0.6) x (449 gpm/cfs)
(12.6 sf)
= 7.1
Rainfalllntensi1y
"/hr
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.50
2.00
Operating Rate2
mist
0.1
',0.3
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.9
1.0
1 .1
1.3
1.4
1.8
2.1
2.5
2.8
3.2
3.6
5.3
7.1
10.7
14.2
Rmvl. Effcy4
%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
98.0%
97.6%
96.0%
92.8%
% Total Rainfall
Volumes
8.9%
8.7%
7.6%
7.2%
5.7%
4.7%
4.6%
4.9%
3.6%
3.4%
6.8%
5.0%
4.4%
3.6%
2.4%
1.9%
6.9%
3.9%
4.8%
0.8%
% rain falling at >2"/hr =
Assumed Removal Efficiency of remaining % =
Removal Efficiency Adjustment' =
Net Annual TSS Removal Efficiency =
Rei. Eff~
%
8.7%
8.5%
7.5%
7.0%
5.6%
4.7%
4.5%
4.8%
3.6%
3.4%
6.7%
4.9%
4.3%
3.5%
2.4%
1.9%
6.7%
3.8%
4.6%
0.8%
97.8%
0.0%
0.0%
6.5%
91%
1 - Design Ratio = (fotal Drainage Area) x (Runoff Coefficient) x (cfs to gpm conversion) I Grit Chamber Area
- The Total Drainage Area and Runoff Coefficient is specified by the site engineer.
- The conversion factor from cfs to gpm is 449.
2 - Operating Rate (gpm/sf) = intensity C'/hr) x Design Ratio
3 - Based on 10 years of hourly precipitation data from NCDC 4259,Indianapolis WSFO AP, Marion County, IN
4 - Based on Vortechnics laboratory verified removal of 50 micron particle gradation (see Technical Bulletin #1).
5- Reduction due to use of 60-minute data for a site that has a time of concentration less than 30-minutes.
Calculated b : 11/1512006 Checked b :
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Appendix C
Legal Description
u
o
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
[J
[J
U
D
U
I U
D
o
D
o
154 South Medical Drive
Carmel, Indiana 46032
Legal Description
Part of the South Half of the Section 31, Township 18 North, Range 4 East in Clay
Township, Hamilton County, Indiana, described as follows:
Commencing at the Southwest comer of the South Half of Section 31, To~ship 18
North, Range 4 East; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds East (assumed
bearing) on the South line, of said South Half733.00 feet; thence North 00 degrees 24
minutes 05 seconds East 660.00 feet to the Southerly right of way line of Carmel Medical
Drive South and the place of beginning of the real estate herein described; thence North
76 degrees 56 minutes 20 seconds East to said right of way line 258.71 feet; thence North
13 degrees 03 minutes 40 seconds West 234.54 feet; thence North 89 degrees 35 minutes
55 seconds West 197.00 feet to a point on a line which bears North 00 degrees 24
minutes 05 seconds East from the place of beginning; thence South 00 degrees 24
minutes 05 seconds West on said line 288.32 feet to said place of beginning.
Subject to: Easements, restrictions, mortgages, and taxes of record
~
~
~
.~
~
~
~
, ~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
'~
.~
Appendix D
Floodway Map
ill
Cl a:
a: a:
Cl 0
0 Z Z
l?
ill <( <(
~ ::;; ::;;
:J :::>
0 <( <(
NAPPANEE
DR
SHOSHONE DR
ZONE X
EXECUTIVE DR
o
YRO'!EC. ,.
LOt.~,. \0 tJ
REVERE PL
Q
E 116TH ST
DETAILED STUDY
EDEN WAY
@
PL
EDEN
HOLLOW
INOIAN TRL
City of Carmel
D 180081
HUNTERS
LN
CARMEL DR
o
CARMEL DR
~ STATION
:s:
~ [
o
:Il
~
~
DR
a:
o
(I)
C)
z
a:
n..
(I)
C)
z
:J
.oJ
o
a:
EDEN
ESTATES PL
MEDICAL DR
0:
o
DO
D
JEFFERSON DR
City of Carmel
(Extraterritorial Jurisdiction)
180081
APPROXIMATE SCALE
o
1--1 I---i
500 FEET
I
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
HAMILTON COUNTY,
INDIANA
AND INCORPORATED AREAS
PANEL 228 OF 290
(SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
CONTAINS:
COMMUNITY
NUMBER PANEl SUFFIX
CARMEL. CITY OF
HAMILTON cOUmY
18Oll81 0228
180080 0228
F
F
Notice to Us.., The MAP NUMBER shown below should be used
when placing map orders; the COMMUNITY NUMBER shown
ebove should be used on Insurance applications for the subject
community.
MAP NUMBER
18051C0228F
EFFECTIVE DATE:
FEBRUARY 19, 2003
Federal Emergency Management Agency
SPRINGS
CT
This Is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It
was extracted using F-MIT On-Une. This map does not reflect changes
or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the
title block. For the latest product Information about National Flood Insurance
Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at WWN. msc.fema.gov
I
I~
I
~
~
~
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.~
~
~.
~
~
Appendix E
Notice of Intent Form
NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI) STORMWATERRQNOFF ASSOCIATED WITH
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
State Form 47487 (R6/9-04)
Approved by State Board of Accounts 2004
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Drinking Water Branch
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
o
Submission of this Notice of Intent letter constitutes notice that the project site owner is applying for coverage under
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit Rule for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction Activity. Permitted project site owners are required to comply with all terms and
conditions ofthe General Permit Rule 327 lAC 15-5 (Rule 5).
Check the type of Submittal: 0 Initial D Amendment 0 Renewal
Project Name and Location:
Project Permit # Project Name: Medical Drive Shopps County: Hamilton
Brief Description of Project Location: 154 Medical Drive app. 2 lots E of Rangeline Rd. in Carmel
(Permit Number below required for Renewals
and Admendments Only - Not required for
Initial Submittal)
Latitude Deg. ~ / Min. ~ / Sec. ~ and Quarter SW
Longitude Deg. ~ / Min. ~/ Sec. ~ Township 18N
Section 31
Range 4E
Does D all or D part of this project lie within the jurisdictional boundaries of a Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (MS4) 0 Yes 0 No If yes, please name the MS4(s):
City of Carmel, Indiana
Project Site Owner and Project Contact Information:
Company Name (If Applicable): N/A
Project Site Owner's Name (An Individual): Mr. Mukesh Patel
Address: 301 East Carmel Dr.
TitleIPosition: Owner
City: Carmel State: IN
Phone: (317) 843-8392 E-Mail Address (If Available):
Ownership Status (check one): Governmental Agency: 0 Federal D State 0 Local
Non-Governmental: 0 Public 0 Private D Other (Explain):
Contact Person: Sanjay B. Patel, P .E. Affiliation with Project Site Owner: Design Consultant
Company Name: VS Engineering, INC.
Address (if different from above): 4275 N. High School Road
City: Indianapolis
Phone: (317) 293-3542
Zip: 46032
State: IN Zip 46254
E-Mail Address (If Available): sbpatel@vsengineering.co
Project Description:
o Residential-Single Family D Residential-Multi-Family 0 Commercial D Industrial D Other
Discharge Information:
Name of Receiving Water: Carmel Creek
(If applicable, name of municipal operator of storm sewer. Please note that even if a retention pond is present on
the property, the name of the nearest possible receiving water is required).
Project Acreage:
Total Acreage: 1.348 Acres Proposed Acreage to be Disturbed: 1.348 Acres
TotalImpervious Surface Area (Estimated for Completed Project): 33105.6 Square Feet
(as defmed in 327 lAC 15-5-4(16) including structures, roads, parking lots, and other similar improvements)
Timetable:
Start Date: 12/1/2006 and Estimated End Date for all Land Disturbing Activity: 12/1/2007
NOTE: Within forty-eight hours of the initiation of construction activity, the project site owner must notify the
appropriate plan reviewing agency ofthe actual project start date.
(Continued on Reverse Side)
o
Construction Plan Certification:
By signing this Notice of Intent letter, I certify the following: ,
A. The storm water quality measures included in the construction plan comply with the requirements of 327 lAC 15-
5-6.5,327 lAC 15-5-7, and 327 lAC 15-5-7.5;
B. the storm water pollution prevention plan complies with all applicable federal, state, and local storm water
requirements;
C. the measures required by 327 lAC 15-5-7 and 327 lAC 15-5-7.5 will be implemented in accordance with the
storm water pollution prevention plan;
D. if the projected land disturbance is one (1) acre or more, the applicable Soil and Water Conservation District or
other entity designated by the Department, has been sent a copy of the construction plan for review;
E. storm water quality measures beyond those specified in the storm water pollution prevention plan will be
implemented during the life of the permit if necessary to comply with 327 lAC 15-5-7; and
F. implementation of storm water quality measures will be inspected by trained individuals.
In addition to this form, I have enclosed the Followin2:
o Verification by the reviewing agency of acceptance of the construction plan.
o Proof of publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected area that notified the public that a
construction activity is to commence, including all required elements contained in 327 lAC 15-5-5 (9).
"
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o $100 check or money order payable to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. If the project lies
solely within the permitted jurisdiction of an MS4 and is regulated by the MS4 under 327 lAC 15-13 - a fee is
not required with submittal of this Notice of Intent
A permit issued under 327 lAC 15-5 is granted by the commissioner for a period of five (5) years from the date
coverage commences. Once the five (5) year permit term duration is reached, a general permit issued under this rule
will be considered expired, and, as necessary for construction activity continuation, a new Notice ofIntent letter would
need to be submitted ninety (90) days prior to the termination of coverage.
Project Site Owner Responsibility Statement:
By signing this Notice ofIntent letter, I certify under penalty oflaw that this document and all attachments were
prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the
system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Printed Name of Project Owner Mr. Mukesh P,I
o Signature of Project Owner m [} r~ Date: 0/ r (p ,.. 0 ~
, This Notice ofIntent must be signed by an individual meeting the signatory requirements in 327 lAC 15-4-3(g)
and submitted in accordance with 327 lAC 15-5-6.
o Mail this form to: Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Urban Wet Weather Section
Cashiers Office Attn: OWQ Rule 5
o 100 North Senate Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46204
o
o
o
o
o
327 lAC 15-5-6 (a) also requires a copy ofthe completed Notice ofIntent letter be submitted
to the local Soil and Water Conservation District or other entity designated by the
Department, where the land disturbing activity is to occur.
Questions regarding the development of the Construction Plan and/or field implementation of327 lAC 15-5 may be directed to
your local Soil and Water Conservation District office or the Department of Natural Resources at 317-233-3870. Questions
regarding the Notice ofIntent may be directed to the Rule 5 contact person at 317/233-1864 or 800/451-6027 ext 31864.
o
o
o
State Form 47487 (R6 / 9-04)
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.~
~
Appendix F
. Stormwater Management Permit Application
(:1aJ? ffl.l e[(ffjJJ'mrei
S'fORlWIVtl A 'fER MANAGEMENT lP'EJR1"WIIH'f APlFLNCA'1flION
Peli'il11lit #:
SDission of this application constitutes notice that the project owner is applying for coverage under the Carmel City Code g60180 through ~60209 for
stW"t water discharges associated with construction activity. Pennit'"ted project site owners are required to comply with all tenns and conditions of the
Cannel City Code.
~ct Name:
Medical Drive Shopps
Bi ~Desc, riP, tion of IT, oject Location:
~ 54 Medical Dr., Cannel, IN- App.
Latitude:
go 57' 32" N
Section:
er:
2 Lots East of Ranqeline Road
Longitude:
860 07' 26" W
Range:
.-'"
Q
Township:
SW 31
JJ
Company Name (If Applicable):
~/A .
p\-.bct Site .O~er's Name (An Individual):
Mr. Mukesh Patel
A11ess:
-4.,P01 East Carmel Drive
City: .
Carmel
18N
4E
Title/Position:
Ownpr
State:
Zip:
IN
46032
N/A
o Governmental Agency
o Public
E-mail Address (If Available):
N/A
1m Private 0 Other (Explain)
e:
17-843-8392
~rnership Status (check one):
Fax:
PP Contact Person:
Mr. Sanjay Patel, P .E.
~tion to Project Site Owner:
siqn Consultant
Address (If differentfrom above):
cQ~27~ ~. High School Road
Indianapolis'
~e:
. 317-293-3542
Company Name (If Applicable): '
VS ENGINEERING, INC.
IN
Zip:
46254
State:
Fax:
317-293-4737
E-mail Address (If Available):
sbnatelcavspn~inPprin<Jrnm
eet Deseri tion:
Residential-Single Family 0 Residential-Multi Family !XI Commercial 0 Industrial 0 Other (Explain)
~e of Receiving Water:
Carmel Creek
Ii a detention pond is present on the property, the name of the nearest possible receiving water receiving discharge must be provided.)
I eet Acrea e: .
Total Acreage: 1.348 Proposed Acreage to be Disturbed: 1 .348
Total Impervious Surfaee Area (in square feet, estimated for entire project): 33, 1 05.6
~ect Duration:
i' Estimated Start Date: 12/1/2006
~ Estimated End Date for all Land Disturbing Activity: 12/1/2007
o
(Continued on Reverse Side)
1$Y :>mgmlllg Hmi Mpp~ll\id<!W.m., ~ t;",uMRymt: R'WlJlWm~,
A
D
c,
~
F,
o
The stm1ffi1 wSlter ql~BlW:y memm.lJKeS indjjj&ed in t.ulle St([wm Water p([}J~nlJ1tnl\}r~ Prewmtkm 1"~1i'llii! (SVVJP']P'P) c{[iJmply with the li'eqjlJ!IDr0n:nmltEl, of
96~ n::W thmllgb g6~209i ofthe Canuel City Code &."1& the City of C13Jrmel Stonnwater Teclmic811 SWriliO'lanrds Mm1!lJ'~I;
TI1e Stoml Water PolhJJtkm Preventiml PIma (SWPPP) complies with aU applicable federal, swte, rma lot!!l ston1i!.WBlter reqlJliremmllts;
The measures required by the Stmmwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SVJPPP) shaH be irnplemented;
Stormwater quality measures beyond those specified in the Stmmwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SVVPPP) will be implemented
during the life ofthe permit if necessary to comply wi~ the Carmel City Code; and
'Implementation ofstormwatel' quality measures will be iilspected by trained individuals;
Pursuant to Carmel City Code ~ 6-205, the City reserves the right to implement the stormwater quality measures outlined in the
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or provide maintenance thereto, at my expense, if not performed,
[permit issued under ~6-180 through ~6-209 of the Carmel City Code, and granted by the City of Carmel, is valid for a period oftive (5)
~s from the date coverage commences, Once the tive (5) year permit term duration is reached, a general permit issued under this .
ordinance will be considered expired, A new permit application shall be submitted ninety (90) days prior to the termination of coverage,
~at a new permit may be issued for continuation of construction activity,
~ signing this application, I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
suoervision in accordance with a system designl'd to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information
J ~mitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
~rmation, the inforination submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete, I am aware that there are
significant penaltiesj>r :ub,~tt~g false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations,
. ? ~l{/ Mukesh Patel 1- cJG r- 06
ature of Project Owner Printed Name Date
o
o
o
rrroval of this application will constitute acceptance of the construction plans by the City of CarmeL
1rf obtain a Rule S permit, the following should be sent to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and a copy sent to the
City of Carmel Engineering Department:
lflRule 5 Notice of Intent (NOI) .
~ Copy of approved Stormwater Management Permit Application, signed and dated by the City of Carmel Department of Engineering
m Proof of publication
$100 permit fee payable to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
umt Approved: Engineering Department
Date
o
o
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
~PP approved by the City of Carmel:
'Construction Plans approved by TAC:
\Jmt fee received:
All outstanding fees received:
D
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
I~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
Appendix G
Geotechnical Report
o
o
\0
'0
o
o
o
o
D
o
:0
o
,0
,0
o
o
o
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING. PROPERTY CONDITION SURVEYS
January 22, 2007
Mukesh Patel
301 E. Carmel Drive
Building A, Suite 600
Cannel, Indiana 46032
Re: Results of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Carmel Medical Shops, 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, Indiana
ESA Project No.: 06-1159
Dear Mr. Patel,
Enclosed are the results of the Subsurface Investigation and Geoteclmical Engineering
Recommendations for the proposed Carmel Medical Shops project located at 154 Medical Drive in
Cannel, Indiana.
The purpose of this study was to obtain general subsurface information in the proposed building and
retaining wall areas, and formulate the Geotechnical parameters/recommendations relevant to the
proposed design and constmction. This report summarizes our findings, test results and resulting
recommendations/opinions regarding the soil and groundwater conditions as they impact the
proposed project.
The contents of this report consist of 1) a cover letter, 2) report summary, 3) repOlt text, 4) plan map.
5) boring logs and 6) appendix materials. Often times it is considered appropriate to scan only the
summary of the report to obtain the needed design parameters and/or construction conditions; and/or
even separate portions of the repOlt before passing it on to other design disciplines/contractors; we clo
not recommend this practice. While we may have the naturally biased opinion that all the
information contained in this report is important, we recommend careful review of ALL patts of the
enclosed report to insure proper consideration of the potential soils related issues relevant to both
design and constmction. We also recommend project related discussions include the contractors
input at the earliest possible point in the project.
We appreciate the oppornmity to work with you on this project and look forward to serving as your
Geotechnical Engineering and Materials Testing Consultant on funrre projects. We would be pleased
to discuss any questions you have about the contents of this report.
1l&3JW~
Jeffery Watkins
Principal
P.O. Box 333 . CARMEL, IN 460820 PHONE 317.544.2133. FAX 317.544.2135. WWW.ESALLC.COM
,0
o
o
o
:0
'D
o
!O
o
o
D
:0
o
D
D
o
o
\0
o
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY - Page I
CARMEL MEDICAL SHOPS
CARMEL, IN
The following 'RepOlt Summary' briefly outlines, for preliminary review only, the peliinent
Geoteclmical aspects of the proposed project as they effect the design and construction. Additional
discussion of each of these items is presented in the appropriate report section, which should not be
separated from this Summary. The entire report text, inclusive of our understanding ofthe proposed
project, as well as the appropriate limitations and qualifications, should be reviewed prior to
incorporating these recommeridations, to understand any special site preparation/modification which
may be required to satisfy these recommendations, or achieve celiain conditions during construction.
such as dewatering, subgrade preparation, unsuitable soil removal, compaction criteria, etc.
Soils: The subsurface materials encountered consist of:
3 to 4 in.
TOPSOIL, or organic laden materials, over
5 to 12 ft.
SOFT to Stiff SILTY CLAY & CLAYEY SILT, over
Very Stiff to Hard FINE SANDY SILT.
Subsurface conditions worth specific mention include:
1. A Medium Dense SILTY FINE to MEDIUM SAND layer was encountered in Boring B-4 at
approximate depths of 5 to 8 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs).
2. Borings B-2 & B-3 encountered OLD FILL materials to approximate depths of 10 feet bgs.
3. Borings B-2, B-4, B-5 & B-6 encountered SOFT soils to approximate depths of 3, 5, 5 & 8
feet bgs, respectively.
Groundwater:
Short-term groundwater levels were monitored during the drilling operations, and up to a few hours
after completion. These observations/measurements, along with hole cave-in measurements, soil
color change and moisture condition of the samples obtained, indicates water levels at a depth of
approximately 10 to 12 feet bgs on the north side of the site, and approximately 5 feet bgs on the
south.
Precipitation levels in the project area over the past 90 days have been near normal.
2
o
o
,0
o
o
'0
:0
o
10
o
o
o
o
'D
D
o
o
o
o
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY - Page II
CARMEL MEDICAL SHOPS
CARMEL, IN
Site Preparation:
Topsoil Thickness: 3 to 4 inches; could be locally thicker in the vicinity of
Boring B-1.
Subgra.~e Stability: At the existing grolmd surface - poor due to significant
surface drainage discharge from the site to the north. At the anticipated
finished grade elevation near to slightly above Medical Drive - good with
adequate site drainage, except in the vicinity of Boring B-4 where SOFT soils
wen~ encountered to a depth of 5 feet bgs.
Subgrade Prep: Thorough proof rolling and evaluation by the Geotechnical
Engineer.
Old fill soils and buried debris should be anticipated. Several pieces of
concrete are visible at the ground surface in the central pOltion of the site.
Also, in the south-central portion of the site, an old foundation or basement
wall is partially visible.
Excavations: Excavation equipment should be able to operate n0l111ally.
Stability of the cut slope along the northern edge of the site should be carefully
considered due to the presence of SOFT soils (OSHA Type 'C') and water
seepage from the north.
Compaction Criteria: 95 % Standard Proctor with:!:: 2% moisture spec.
The on-site soils are suitable for reuse as engineered fill. The in-situ moisture
contents of these soils are above the estimated optimum moisture content in
accordance with Standard Proctor Method. Drying of these materials will be
required prior to compaction in order to achieve adequate in-place density.
Foundations:
Recommended Foundation Type: Shallow foundations bearing at the
nominal frost depth of 3 feet below final grade are suitable for support of the
proposed building as well as retaining wall.
Design Soil Bearing Pressure: 2,000 pounds per square foot.
Marginal Soils: Medium Stiff soils encountered in Borings B-4 & B-6; some
localized undercutting may be required.
3
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
D
o
:0
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
'0
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY - Page III
CARMEL MEDICAL SHOPS
CARMEL, IN
Slab-on-Grade:
Subgrade Prep: Thorough proof rolling and evaluation by the Geotechnical
Engineer. Marginal soils such as the Medium Stiff soils encountered in
Borings B-4 & B-6 may require some localized undercutting and replacement.
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (MR): Medium Stiff to Stiff Silty Clay &
Clayey Silt soils, or newly placed compacted engineered fill: MR = 150 pci.
Granular Drainage Layer: Recommended.
Poly Vapor Barrier: Recommended.
Dewaterin2: Desi2n Phase:
1. We recommend a perimeter foundation drain around the entire building.
2. The surface drainage discharge fro111 the site to the north must be divelied away 1'1'0111 the site.
The impact of this drainage on the design of the retaining wall must be carefully considered and
adequate drainage provided on the north side of the retaining wall.
3. Normal measures to establish positive discharge of all surface and roof drainage away from
the building.
Dewaterin2: Construction Phase: Groundwater seepage through the cut slope along the northern
edge of the site should be anticipated; some 'piping' and/or sloughing would be expected. If
extreme, it could cause localized instability of the cut slope, since most of the soils encountered in
this area are SOFT to Medium Stiff (OSHA Type 'c' soils). It may be necessary to install a
construction phase 'french drain' (installed a few feet outside the retaining wall footing line) along
the northern edge of the site (this drain is not to serve as the fOlmdation drain required behind the
retaining wall).
Due to the groundwater levels, existing drainage patterns and proposed grade changes, water seepage
in the retaining wall and building foundation excavations should be anticipated. This condition may
necessitate digging and pouring the foundations in smaller sections than usual to reduce the softening
impact of this seepage. The extent and effect of this situation should be gauged by the Geotechnical
Engineer while monitoring foundation excavation and testing.
4
D
D
,0
to
:0
'0
o
D
o
,0
'0
,D
D
'0
10
;
o
'0
o
o
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
6
2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
6
3.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
7
3.1 Geology
3.2 Soil Conditions
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
7
8
8
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9
4.1 General Site Preparation and Compaction Requirements
4.2 Foundation Support
4.3 Slab-on-Grade
4.4 Earth PressureIRetaining Wall Recommendations
4.5 Groundwater/Dewatering Considerations
4.6 Seismic Parameters
9
11
14
14
16
17
5.0 CLOSING REMARKS
17
APPENDIX
19
Boring Location Plan Map
Boring Logs
General Information/Drilling Procedures
Boring Log Terminology - USCS Classification
5
D
o
iD
,D
,0
,0
'D
:0
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
ID
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
CARMEL MEDICAL SHOPS
CARMEL, IN
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
The purpose of this study was to (1) investigate the subsurface conditions to the depths penetrated by
the Borings, (2) evaluate the epgineering characteristics of the subsurface materials, and (3) provide
information to assist in the design and construction of the proposed project.
Although some of the project details have not yet been finalized, we understand the proposed project
will consist of constructing an approximately 10,000 square foot, I to 2-story masonry block
structure with a slab-on-grade. A basement level is not planned at this time. If any below grade
elements are added at a future date, we must review the foundation plans to insure proper foundation
design to account for the soil conditions encountered.
Maximum column and wall loads are expected to be on the order of 100' kips and 3 kips/foot.
respectively.
Also planned is an approximately 8 foot high retaining wall along the northern and western edges of
the site.
The existing ground surface is grass covered with a couple of large trees. The ground surface slopes
upward from south to north. The southern p011ion of the site is near to slightly above Medical Drive,
and then slopes upward approximately 8 feet to the northern edge of the site. The finished grade of
the first floor (slab-on-grade) is expected to lie near or slightly above the existing elevation of
Medical Drive.
A schematic layout of the building and other site details are shown on the Boring Location Plan Map
included in the Appendix of this report.
2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration program consisted of drilling 6 Soil Borings to depths of 15 to 25 feet below the
existing ground surface. The Soil Borings were performed with a truck mounted rotary drill rig using
hollow stem continuous flight augers. At pre-selected depths, a disturbed soil sample was obtained
with a standard split spoon sampler in accordance with ASTM D-1586.
Samples of the soils recovered were sealed in jars and brought to our laboratory for review and
classification testing. The soil samples were visually classified by a Geotechnical Engineer based
upon texture, grain size, color, moisture condition and plasticity in general conformance with the
Unified Soil Classification System. The similar soil types are grouped into the main strata noted on
6
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
D
o
the Boring Logs. The stratification lines designate the approximate interface between similar
materials; in-situ transitions may be more gradual. The Boring Logs are presented in the Appendix of
this report for your review.
The Borings were located in the field by an engineering representative from our office using the
existing site features (i.e. roadways, fence lines, property lines or marker pins, power lines.
topographic features, etc.) as references for measuring/pacing distances and approximating right
angles. A map showing the proposed Boring locations, propeliy lines, proposed building/parking
areas and survey information (if available) was provided by the client for our reference. A copy of
this map is reproduced on the Boring Location Plan Map included in the Appendix of this report.
If topographic information was provided at the time of this repmi, the Elevations given on the Boring
Logs are based on the approximate Boring locations shown, and an interpolation of the topographic
(elevation) contours shown on the map provided.
3.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
3.1 Geology (Central Indiana)
The general surface topography across central Indiana is relatively flat to gently rolling. Most of the
relief across the area is developed by glacially deposited moraines and eskers, and along more recent
alluvial features such as streams and rivers.
The surficial geology of central Indiana includes mostly till plains of Wisconsinan age
(approximately 22,000 years ago) overlying older Illinoian age tills. The soils comprising the tills are
typically stiff to very stiff, low to moderate plasticity, silts and clays with minor (although varying)
amounts of sand and gravel. Occasional isolated areas of concentrated sand & gravel can be found
typically associated with moraine type deposits that have fluvial characteristics.
Superimposed on the till plains are recent age fluvial deposits associated with modern rivers and
streams. The soils comprising the recent fluvial deposits vary from predominantly sand and gravel in
the channel proper, to silts and clays in the terrace areas. The site being investigated for this study
lies within a known old channel system of the White River.
The bedrock geology of Indiana changes as you move from west to east across the state.
The youngest rocks (Pennsylvanian age) are found in the western part of the state, with the oldest
(Ordovician age) being found in the east. The bedrock lithology typically consists of soft,
sedimentary rocks such as Shale, weathered or argillaceous Limestone and occasional Sandstone, to
medium hard sedimentary rocks such as Dolomite. The depth to bedrock increases across the central
portion of the state from west to east, typically ranging from 50 to 100 feet in the west, to 200 feet in
portions of the eastern part of the state.
7
o
o
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
:0
o
'0
D
o
o
:0
o
3.2 Soil Conditions
This section presents a generalized description of the subsurface conditions encountered by the
Borings. For more detailed information at a specific location, please refer to the Boring Logs.
The subsurface materials encountered consist of:
3 to 4 in.
TOPSOIL, or organic laden materials, over
5 to 12 ft.
SOFT to Stiff SILTY CLAY & CLA YEY SILT, over
Very Stiff to Hard FINE SANDY SILT.
Subsurface conditions worth specific mention include:
1. A Medium Dense SILTY FINE to MEDIUM SAND layer was encountered in Boring B-4 at
approximate depths of 5 to 8 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs).
2. Borings B-2 & B-3 encountered OLD FILL materials to approximate depths of 10ft. bgs.
3. Borings B-2, b-4, B-5 & B-6 encountered SOFT soils to approximate depths of 3, 5, 5 & 8 ft.
bgs, respectively.
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
Short-term groundwater levels were monitored during the drilling operations, and up to a few hours
after completion. These observations/measurements, along with hole cave-in measurements, soil
color change and moisture condition of the samples obtained, indicates water levels at a depth of
approximately 10 to 12 feet bgs on the north side of the site, and approximately 5 feet bgs on the
south.
Precipitation levels in the project area over the past 90 days have been near normal.
Fluctuations in the long-term groundwater levels are normal and will change throughout the year
based upon variations in precipitation, evaporation, surface mnoff and other developments in the
area. The groundwater levels discussed herein and indicated on the Boring logs represent the
conditions at the time the measurements were obtained.
8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,0
'0
!D
o
.0
,0
D
o
o
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our conclusions and recommendations can obviously only be based on the information known to liS
at the time of this writing; e.g. the project information outlined above, and the field/laboratory test
results (both presented on the enclosed Boring Logs). If the proposed scope of the project, sllch as
building location, finished grade elevations, building geometry, structural conditions/assumptions.
etc., are different than those stated, or if conditions encountered during construction differ from those
summarized herein, we must have the opportunity to review these recommendations and make any
necessary modifications based on the new/additional information.
4.1 General Site Preparation and Compaction Requirements
The original grOlUld surface at the site has been previously graded, pa11ially filled and/or excavated.
Borings B-2 & B-3 encountered what appeared to be OLD FILL soils to depths of approximately 10
feet bgs. Old fill soils and buried debris should be anticipated. Several pieces of concrete are visible
at the ground surface in the central portion of the site. Also, in the south-central portion of the site,
an old foundation or basement wall is partially visible.
All old structural elements beneath the proposed building or retaining wall must be completely
removed. In the proposed parking areas, if old foundation walls or other structural elements are
encountered, they should be removed for a depth of2 feet below finished soil grade.
Subgrade stability at the existing ground surface will likely be poor due to significant surface
drainage discharge from the site to the north. Sub grade stability at the anticipated finished grade
elevation near to slightly above Medical Drive should be good with adequate site drainage, except in
the vicinity of Boring B-4 where SOFT soils were encountered to a depth of approximately 5 feet
bgs. Some isolated areas may require undercutting and replacement.
Subgrade preparation in the building area should consist of a thorough proof rolling and evaluation
by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Proof rolling should consist of several passes over the sub grade surface with a loaded tandem-axle
dump huck, or similar rubber tired vehicle with a minimum loaded weight of 20 tons, under the
observation of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any areas which defect, rut or pump excessively during
proof rolling, or fail to tighten up' with repeated passes should be undercut to suitable soils and
replaced with compacted fill, or otherwise stabilized based on the recommendations provided by the
Geotechnical Engineer observing the field conditions.
Even stable sub grade materials, if exposed to a combination of wet weather and construction
trafficking, will deteriorate. If these soils are allowed to become saturated, and subsequently exposed
to construction trafficking, by repeated machine passes, softening of the sub grade soils will occur. If
construction is planned for wet weather months, subgrade stability may be marginal. Care exercised
by the contractor to minimize construction traffic following rainfall will reduce these types of
problems. Problems with these soils should be minimal during dry weather.
The near surface on-site soils are suitable for use as engineered fill, with the exception of the topsoil
and any other organic laden material. The in-situ moisture contents of the silty/clayey soils are above
9
o
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
:0
o
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
the estimated Optimum Moisture Content determined in accordance with ASTM D-698, Standard
Proctor. The result of this in-situ moisture is that drying will be required prior to use as engineered
fill in order to reach adequate compaction.
If the materials are stockpiled for later use as engineered fill, covering them with a tarp will reduce
the infiltration of rainwater and the subsequent drying prior to reuse.
When using the on-site soils as engineered fill, maintaining moisture control will be critical to
achieving proper compaction. If earthwork construction is attempted during inclement weather, or
during typically wet weather months (November to March), it may become impractical to use the on
site soils as engineered fill due to their acquired high moisture contellts. One alternative to this
scenario is to allow for the import of granular materials for use as engineered fill. Granular materials
are less effected by moisture variations and are easier to compact during wet weather conditions.
Finished grade fill areas should be sloped, and 'sealed off smooth' with rubber tired equipment at the
end of each day to allow for efficient surface drainage. If a lengthy period of time occurs between
the initial site preparation proof roll, and the placement of the final structural elements (i.e. base
course aggregate and asphalt in the parking/drive areas, or drainage fill and concrete in the slab
areas), proof rolling may be required again to insure no soft spots have developed since the initial
evaluation.
It is recommended that all engineered fill be 1) free of all organic/deleterious materials, 2) have a
Plasticity Index less than 30, 3) have a maximum dry density greater than 90 pounds per cubic foot
(pct) and 4) be placed in 8-inch uniform lifts compacted to a density of not less than:
95 percent of the Maximum Dry Density as established by ASTM D-698,
Standard Proctor with a +2/-2% moisture content specification.
All newly placed fill should be placed in thin uniform lifts at the proper moisture content and
compacted uniformly throughout the proposed building, slab and parking areas. Each lift of material
placed should be tested at maximum I-foot intervals to insure the material is being compacted to a
density adequate for support of the proposed structures.
If new engineered fill is to be placed on areas having a slope of 3H: 1 V, or steeper, we recommend
the area be scarified to insure adequate inter-mixinglblending of the existing soils with the new fill
materials. In addition, we recommend 4 to 6 foot benches be cut into the existing grade to reduce the
potential for developing a 'slip' plane at the existing soil/new fill interface.
We recommend fill slopes be placed at 3H: IV or flatter. The near surface soils at the site (those
anticipated to be most used as fill materials) will be generally stable at slopes of 3H: IV or flatter.
We recommend newly constmcted slopes (cut or fill) have vegetation established as soon as possible
after completion. The on site soils would also be stable at slopes of 2H: 1 V, however maintenance
may become difficult and erosion could become a potential problem at these slope angles. If cutlfill
slope faces are required at 2H: 1 V, an erosion control product should be placed on the slope in
addition to immediately establishing vegetation.
Open trenches/excavations in SOFT to Medium Stiff silty clay/clayey silt soils are anticipated. These
soils correspond to OSHA Type 'c' soils. The contractor should plan and prepare his excavation
10
activities to comply with all local, state and federal regulations. These general observations mllst be
confirmed, or modified, by the contractors' competent person responsible for excavation safety.
Stability of the cut slope along the northern edge of the site should be carefully considered due to the
presence of SOFT soils and water seepage from the north.
Excavation equipment should be able to operate normally.
4.2 Foundation Support
This section of the report provides recommendations for the Geotechnical related design aspects of
the proposed foundations. the primary requirement in evaluating the most suitable foundation
system for a structure is to determine the soil stratum on which the structure may be safely suppOlted.
This determination includes considerations with regard to both allowable bearing capacity of the soil
and estimated settlement to be experienced by the proposed structure. In addition, since the method
of construction greatly affects the soils intended for foundation support, the recommendations
contained in other sections of this repOlt regarding suitable methods of site preparation, subgrade
preparation, fill compaction, and other Geotechnical related aspects of construction should be
reviewed and implemented.
No below grade levels (such as a basement) are plalmed at this time. If any below grade elements are
added at a future date, we must review the foundation plans to insure proper foundation design to
account for the soil conditions encountered.
We recommend typical wall & pier type shallow fOlmdations for support of the proposed retaining
wall and building structures. We recommend fOlmdations bearing at a depth of 3 feet below finished
exterior grade be dimensioned using a Design Soil Bearing Pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot.
We recommend foundations bearing on newly placed engineered fill be dimensioned using a Design
Soil Bearing Pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot.
Foundations in vicinity of Borings B-4 & B-6 may require localized tmdercutting due to the SOFT
and Medium Stiff soils encountered to depths of approximately 5 & 8 feet bgs, respectively.
During construction, the Geotechnical Engineer should carefully evaluate all foundations for bearing
capacity to a minimum depth of 4 feet below the bottom of the footing. This evaluation should
consist of a halld auger hole with dynamic cone penetrometer and hand penetrometer tests to
document the bearing capacity of the in-situ soils. The intent of this evaluation is to establish that the
actual soil bearing conditions are compatible with design.
Once the Geoteclmical Engineer inspects the individual foundation excavations, and the actual
conditions are determined on a footing-by-footing basis, the specific depth of undercut required can
be determined. The unsuitable materials should be undercut to the depth indicated by the
Geotechnical Engineer based on the actual field conditions. The undercut excavation can be
backfilled with either concrete, granular materials or on site soils.
11
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
,0
-D
o
o
o
o
o
'0
D
D
o
o
In general, foundation excavations should be dug with vertical sidewalls and a flat, clean bottom. If
the sidewalls will not stand vertically, they should be formed. The excavation bottom should be firm,
undisturbed soils with all loose soil removed. Water should not be allowed to stand on the bearing
surface soils. The bearing surface should not be allowed to freeze prior to concrete placement.
If the undercut excavation is backfilled with concrete, the sides of the undercut excavation can be
vertical, thereby reducing the volume/area of undercut required. If the undercut depth extends 1 foot
or less below the design bottom of footing, the undercut replacement concrete may be placed
simultaneously with the footing concrete. However, if the undercut extends deeper than 1 foot below
the bottom of design footing, the undercut replacement concrete should be placed and allowed to set,
then the design footing reinforcing steel placed on top of the undercut concrete, then the design
footing concrete poured.
Another option that would allow a vertical undercut trench would be to place the design thickness
footing at the bottom of the undercut surface and extend the height of the block foundation wall by
the amount equal to the undercut depth.
If the undercut excavation is backfilled with crushed aggregate, the excavation should be oversized in
plan dimensions by 0.25 feet (on all sides) per foot of undercut' depth. The aggregate materials
should be placed in lifts and tested as engineered fill (discussed in a subsequent section of this
report).
If the undercut excavation is backfilled with on site soils, the excavation should be oversized in plan
dimensions by 0.5 foot (on all sides) per foot of undercut depth. The soil materials should be placed
in lifts and tested as engineered fill (discussed in a subsequent section of this report).
We recommend design footing structural concrete be placed the same day, or as soon as possible after
establishing suitable design bearing materials. The risk of side seepage, or unexpected rainfall into
'the excavation, could render previously suitable bearing materials, unsuitable. If it is anticipated the
structural concrete cannot be placed immediately after establishing suitable design bearing materials,
consideration should be given to placing 3 inches of lean concrete (minimum compressive strength of
1,000 psi) on the bearing surface to protect the integrity of the bearing materials. This protection
layer, often refened to as a 'mud mat', must be placed only below the design bottom of footing. The
'mud mat' should be placed even if granular soils are present, or have been placed in the undercut
excavation, since these materials will allow excess water to pond in them, thereby softening the fine
grained soils around them. The 'mud mat' cannot be credited or deducted from the structural footing
concrete thickness required in the project specifications. The 'mud mat' does not eliminate the need
for maintaining the normal clearance requirements for the reinforcing steel placement in the structural
footing concrete. Once the 'mud mat' is placed, the reinforcing steel and structural concrete can be
placed at the contractors convenience, provided the sidewalls of the excavation are stable.
Any unsuitable soils found during the foundation evaluation should be removed (undercut) and
replaced with suitable materials. The undercut excavation sidewalls can be performed veliically if
the excavation is backfilled with lean concrete (minimum compressive strength 1,000 psi). Once the
unsuitable soils are removed, and backfilled with lean concrete, the normal design footing can be
placed on top of the concrete backfill without any additional design modifications.
12
o
o
,0
o
D
o
D
o
D
;D
o
'0
o
o
o
D
o
D
D
The soil bearing pressures discussed above, and their associated settlement estimates, are 'net'
values. The 'net' bearing pressure is the stress (pressure) imposed on the soils, above that which is
acting on them in their existing state. The allowable net pressure must include any foundation
loadings, as well as the pressure of any newly placed fill, or other surcharge loads. Newly placed fill
will impose approximately 125 pounds per square foot per foot of height of riew fill.
We recommend individual spread footings have a minimum dimension of 24 inches and continuous
wall footings a minimum width of 18 inches (or according to applicable local building code
requirements, whichever is larger) to provide for removal of loosened soils in the excavation, for
access to testing of the bearing materials and for protection of shear punching tlu"ough the foundation
soils.
For protection against frost heave, we recommend exterior foundations bear a minimum depth of 36
inches below final exterior grade, as well as footings in unheated areas. Interior footings in heated
areas should extend a minimum of 18 inches below finished grade for bearing capacity development.
Using the recommendations given above and properly designed and installed foundations, we
estimate up to %-inch post construction differential settlement in the following distribution:
Phase
Settlement Estimate
Distribution
End of Construction
1/4 - inch
Uniform
Service Loads (dead load)
1/4 - inch
Uniforml Differential
Service Loads (live load)
1/8 - inch
Differential
13
:0
o
o
o
o
o
,0
o
o
o
o
,0
:
,0
o
D
o
o
o
o
4.3 Slab-On-Grade
Grolmd floor slabs may be designed as slab-on-grade. For design and construction of the slab-on-
grade, we recommend general site preparation as previously discussed. The Medium Stiff to Stiff
clayey silt/silty clay soils, or newly placed and compacted engineered fill should have a Modulus of
Subgrade Reaction of 150 peL
A granular drainage layer is recommended for control of grolmdwater seepage. This layer will also
aid in better stress distribution to the subgrade soils. We recommend a minimum 4 inches of free
draining aggregate (less than 10% passing the #200 sieve).
The granular material used beneath the slab should be environmentally clean, free of debris, organic
and other deleterious materiat The granular material should be compacted to a minimum of 95
percent of the maximum dry density obtained in accordance with ASTM D698, Standard Proctor
Method. For open graded aggregate materials, a roller pattern can be established to insure proper
compaction.
A poly vapor barrier is recommended for groundwater condensation considerations on the inside of
the floor slab. Care should be taken during slab construction involving a ploy vapor barrier regarding
proper slab curing to prevent curling of the concrete slab. The considerations of proper slab curing
and its effects on slab curling as discussed in ACI 302 should be carefully reviewed and discussed
with the contractor.
The slab-on-grade should be isolated from the foundation elements so as not to induce shear cracks
caused by slight/nOlmal settlement of the foundations.
4.4 Earth PressurelRetaining WalI Recommendations
The proposed retaining wall along the nOlihern and western edges of the site will act as earth
retaining structures and should be designed to resist the lateral loads imposed by the soil backfill,
and/or groundwater behind the wall, as well as any surcharge loads imposed by adjacent equipment,
structures, pavements, etc. Triaxial Shear tests were considered beyond the scope of this study, and
were not performed to determine the exact lateral earth pressure coefficients for the specific soils
encountered at this site. However, based on our past experience with similar soils, we have included
the following general guidelines and conservative estimates of lateral earth pressure coefficients for
your use in designing the retaining walls. If the cost (thickness) of the walls becomes significant
using the estimates given herein, it may be considered cost effective to perform the appropriate
testing on the site specific soils to determine the actual coefficients, thereby reducing the amount of
conservatism in the estimates. We would be glad to discuss these alternatives with you at the
appropriate time. '
An in-situ soil unit weight of 125 pounds per cubic foot (pet) may be used for soil weight and earth
pressure calculations.
Retaining structures that are prevented from rotating or moving at both the top and bottom should be
designed to resist the 'at rest' lateral earth pressure. Retaining structures which are permitted some
14
o
o
D
o
o
D
o
'D
D
:0
D
D
D
D
D
D
o
D
o
rotational movement (approximately 1 inch per 10 feet of wall height), should be designed to resist
the 'active' lateral emih pressure.
We recommend using free draining, granular material (less than 10% passing the No. 200 sieve) as
backfill behind the wall. Granular material behind the wall will, 1) provide drainage, 2) expedite
construction and 3) reduce the potential for post construction settlements. The granular backfill
should be placed in 8-inch loose lifts and compacted using a small walle behind vibratory plate or
steel drum roller having a minimum impact force of 3,000 pounds. Heavy compaction equipment
should not be used within 10 feet of the wall.
The granular backfill should be placed to within 2 feet of finished grade. The backfill should be
capped off with cohesive soils. The surface of the backfill (cohesive soils) should be sloped away
from the wall to facilitate slii'face drainage. The interface between the granular backfill, and the
sun-ounding/overlying fine-grained soils, should be completely covered with a filter fabric geotextile.
An alternative to using granulm' backfill behind the wall for drainage purposes would be a pre-
fabricated composite drainage product that allows water to pass through a filter fabric into a 3-
dimensional (waffle, corrugated) plastic drainage core which promotes the flow and removal of
excess water tlu'ough a series of horizontal and veltical channels. The composite drain is affixed to
the exterior of the wall, and the backfill placed against it. If a composite product is used for purposes
of water drainage, the other benefits of granular backfill behind the wall should still be considered.
The wall drainage system should be tied to a foundation drain system. The foundation drain should
have a minimum slope of 0.5 %. If sufficient fall is available, gravity flow is acceptable; otherwise,
the drainage water should be collected in a sump and pumped away. Clean out pOlts should also be
considered to permit periodic flushing/cleaning of the system.
Retaining walls with free draining granular backfill should be designed to resist an equivalent fluid
pressure of 50 pounds per square foot (pst) for the 'at rest' condition, and 35 psf for the 'active'
condition. These values assume a horizontal backfill surface and proper drainage behind the wall to
prevent the build up of hydrostatic pressure on the back of the wall.
For the equivalent fluid pressure to be applicable, the backfill type stated should be placed in a zone
behind the wall defined by a line extending from the base of the wall upward and away from the wall
at an angle of 45 + <1>/2 from the horizontal. For granular backfill, <1> = 34 degrees.
We do not recommend using clayey soils as backfill behind retaining walls. The high energy
required to compact clayey soils could cause increased lateral stresses on the wall. The requirement
of using small compaction equipment near the wall increases the risk of inadequate compaction in
these materials, thereby increasing the risk of post construction settlement. Also, if compacted dry of
optimum, the clayey soils would produce additional lateral stresses on the wall as they re-hydrate.
If using granular backfill behind the wall is not considered feasible (cost effective), consideration
may be given to utilizing the on site soils. If the on site soils are used as backfill behind the wall, the
composite and subsurface drain systems discussed above must be installed.
15
o
o
o
o
D
D
D
'D
D
D
D
o
o
D
D
D
D
o
o
Retaining walls with silty soils used as backfill should be designed to resist an equivalent fluid
pressure of 70 pounds per square foot (pst) for the 'at rest' condition, and 50 psf for the 'active'
condition. For silty soil backfill, <1> = 25 degrees.
Retaining walls with clayey soils used as backfill should be designed to resist an equivalent f:luid
pressure of 80 pounds per square foot (pst) for the 'at rest' condition, and 55 psf for the 'active'
condition. For clayey soil backfill, <1> = 20 degrees. These values assume a horizontal backfill
surface and proper drainage behind the wall to prevent the build up of hydrostatic pressure on the
back of the wall.
The above recommendations for earth pressure distributions assume specific long-term
loading/deflection conditions; they are not applicable for design or dimensioning of temporary
bracing systems. "
Foundations that are subject to lateral loads should be evaluated for sliding stability. For purposes of
evaluating the Factor of Safety for sliding of the retaining wall foundations along its base, we
recommend a coefficient of friction between the base of the retaining wall and the underlying
foundation bearing soils of:
Silty Clay soils - 0.25
Clayey Silt soils - 0.35
Sand or Gravel - 0.45
4.5 Groundwater/Dewatering Considerations
Short-term groundwater levels were monitored during the drilling operations, and up to a few hours
after completion. These observations/measurements, along with hole cave-in measurements, soil
color change and moisture condition of the samples obtained, indicates water levels at a depth of
approximately 10 to 12 feet bgs on the north side of the site, and approximately 5 feet bgs on the
south.
Precipitation levels in the project area over the past 90 days have been near normal.
Dewatering: Design Phase
1. We recommend a perimeter foundation drain around the entire building.
2. The surface drainage discharge from the site to the north must be diverted away from the site.
The impact of this drainage on the design of the retaining wall must be carefully considered and
adequate drainage provided on the north side of the retaining wall.
3. Normal measures to establish positive discharge of all surface and roof drainage away from
the building.
Dewatering: Construction Phase
Groundwater seepage through the cut slope along the northern edge of the site should be anticipated:
some 'piping' and/or sloughing would be expected. If extreme, it could cause localized instability of
the cut slope, since most of the soils encoLlntered in this area are SOFT to Medium Stiff (OSHA Type
16
o
D
o
,0
D
o
o
o
o
o
,0
!D
o
D
D
o
o
o
o
'c' soils). It may be necessary to install a construction phase 'french drain' (installed a few feet
outside the retaining wall footing line) along the nOlthern edge of the site (this drain is not to serve as
the foundation drain required behind the retaining wall).
Due to the groundwater levels, existing drainage patterns and proposed grade changes, water seepage
in the retaining wall and building foundation excavations should be anticipated. This condition ma)
necessitate digging and pouring the foundations in smaller sections than usual to reduce the softening
impact of this seepage. The extent and effect of this situation should be gauged by the Geotechnical
Engineer while monitoring foundation excavation and testing.
Control of ALL surface water entering any excavation must be maintained at all times.
4.6 Seismic Parameters
The seismic conditions for this project have been determined using the information contained in the
1997 Uniform Building Code. Seismic design considerations for the project should incorporate the
following parameters:
Seismic Zone
Seismic Soil Profile Type
o - 10ft.
10 - 20 ft.
SE
SD
S-Factor
0.075
5.0 Closing Remarl{s
A Registered Professional Engineer has plmmed mld supervised the Geoteclmical Engineering
services, has evaluated the findings, and has prepared this repOlt in accordance with generally
accepted Geotechnical Engineering practices. The recommendations presented in this repOlt are
based on information disclosed by a limited number of Borings. The Boring information must be
extrapolated to estimate the subsurface conditions occuning over the entire site. No other wal1'anties,
either expressed or implied, are made concerning this report. If the concept of the project is changed
or other than stated, we should be advised of the changes so the conclusions and recommendations
presented in this repOlt can be revised.
17
o
D
o
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
D
D
o
D
D
o
We request continued involvement IS this project by providing the following plan/specification
reviews:
1) Project Specifications,
2) Grading Plan,
3) Site Drainage Plan, and
4) Foundation Plan,
to insure the enclosed recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the
project plans and specifications.
We recommend ESA be involved in the observation and testing of:
a) Site stripping activities to document the depth of topsoil removal,
b) Removal of other deleterious materials in any areas that will SUPP0l1 structures,
slabs and/or pavements,
c) Proof rolling of the natural subgrade soils prior to new fill placement,
d) All fill and/or backfill field compaction testing in any areas that will support
structures, slabs and/or pavements,
e) Foundation excavations prior to placement of concrete, and
f) Quality Control testing of concrete for foundations and other structural elements such
as floor slabs, retaining walls, etc.
We recommend tlus Quality Control Testing p0l1ion of the project be hired by, performed for and
directly reported to the owner/designer. ESA should provide tlle Quality Control Testing services
due to its unique familiarity with the existing soil conditions and its design interpretations comprising
the enclosed recommendations. The owner/designer should direct and hire the Quality Control
Testing services to eliminate tlle potential conflict of interest by having the contractor hire and pay
for testing services that are designed to 'hold in check' his specification compliance issues in the face
of his schedule/budgetary issues (e.g. "if you owned the chickens, would you hire the fox to watch
the hen house?").
18
'D
D
D
o
D
o
D
D
o
D
D
D
o
o
o
D
D
,0
o
APPENDIX
BORING LOCATION PLAN MAP
BORING LOGS
GENERAL INFORMATION/DRILLING PROCEDURES
BORING LOG TERMINOLOGY - USCS CLASSIFICATION
19
r:=J
E:J
E:J
r=:J
E:J
CJ
E:J
EJ
E:J
t=J
r:=J
E:J
E:J
CJ
!.s' 51DEWAl.K
EA$EL(ENT
i
~
i
~
i.
~
.g
~
1
1
.
i.
. ~ RlNISCNS
5~ ~
j2 i~
~!.
~!:j
i~.
Y' 'lllEl/CH FeR WAlER
AND SANITARY U11lJ1Y
CONNEC'IICNS
DESlGIt BY:
DRAWN BY:
NRJ
TEB
BOP
LAYOUT PLAN
~@B V!~!N~C!!~~~~ I!,C.
~ [Il tEL (J11) 2D3-3$42 'A:1:: (3t7) 293-.737
CMEaCED BY:
APPROWD ...
ME;DICAL. DRIVE SHOPPS
E:J
E:J
LJ
r=J
r=J
LEGEND
@ . UNto P""'T. .", .....'lE
@ UNE, PAINT, .", BUJE
@ PAvEUan' NMtQNG, STMSOI.. HMlD1CAP
.. - PLANlJNC AREAS IN StDEWAUC
-$- So;\ Bo. in.~ LoC4~;O~.s
PARKING SUMMARY
REQ"D. PARKING SPACES 35
PROVtDED PARKINC SPACES 38
REQ"o. /IDA SPACES 2.
PROVIDED /IDA SPACES 2
"""-E:
HOR.: 1. _ 20' ORAWNG NO.
~ NA
DAre B/2B/D6 ,... t:l 0
'VVa
PROJECi NO.
06-2366
!
t=J
t=J
t=:J
t=J
t=J
EJ
EJ
t=J
t=J
t=J
LJ
t=J
r::=:J
EJ
r::=J
EJ
LJ
LOG OF: B-1 Project: Carmel Medfcal Shops Project No. 061N206
Date Dl1lled: 1/17/07 Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN STANDARD PENETRA TION
Sample WATER GRADA TlON ('N? VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 8 ft.
Pe~ OBSERVATIONS: Water level at completion: 11 ft. Rln~ C)"" fnnf
mater Water level @ 24 hrs.: . 10 20 30 4()
<0
~ Value Hole cave-in depth: 20 ft. ~
oQ ", ", ", Moisture Content - %
~ Q) (Qu) c: c: Cl.
~ l ~ co lS ~ PL Natural LL
Depth Efev. <: ~ Ci) Ci) ~ ~
(ft) (ft) (tsf) 0 ~ u.: C3 oS! )( .. Jt
III
0 nFsc ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 4()
3" I-- TOrlSOil
- i--- 4
- 1 SS 1.00 Gray/Dark Gray Stiff SILTY CLAY, organic 6
I-- ....:..1.Q
3
- 5
- 2 SS 1.50 Gray & Tan Mottled Stiff CLAYEY SILT, trace sand 7
5 - ~
5.5 -
- 6
3 SS 1.00 7
- ~
- 5
- 4 SS 3.50 6
10_ - Brown Stiff to Very Stiff FINE SANDY SILT, trace to little gravel ~
-
- S-
5 S8 10
15 - -
17
- Gray Stiff FINE SANDY SILT, trace gravel r-
6 SS 1.50 7
20 8
NOTES:
Boring Terminated @ 20 feet
CJ
r=::J
-==:J
EJ
EJ
o
E:J E::J
EJ
CJ
EJ
t=J
EJ
r:=J
t=J
EJ
t=J
t=J
t=J
LOG OF: B-2 Page 1 of2 Project: Carmel Medical Shops Project No. 061N206
Date Drilled: 1/17/07 Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN ~TANDARD PENETRATION
Sample WA TER GRADA TION ('N, VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 7 ft.
Penetro- OBSERVATIONS: Water level at completion: 16 ft. Rfnw.<: "",r fnnf
meter Water level @ hrs.: ~ 10 200 30 40
~ Value Hole cave-in depth: 18 ft. -g ~ Moisture Content - %
.tl "tI i
5 Q) (Qu) l c: Q.
~ ~ ~ ~ PL Natural LL
Depth Elev. < ~ e CI,) ~ it'
(ft) (ft) (tsf) CJ (j :!i u: 0 ~ )( . k
ll:l
0 DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40
4" - Opsal
- - ~
1 5S 0.50 3
- ---i
-
-
,- 4
2 88 1.50 Brown Soft to Very 8tiff CLAYEY SILT, some sand, trace gravel 6
5 fo- ~
- fo- 4
3 55 2.00 5
- -1.
-
6
- 6
4 S8 3.50 -1.
10_ -
-
12
-
- 7""
.- 5 SS 3.00 7
15_ - Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY SILT, some sand ~
-
-
6 55 3.00
~
8
11
20
NOTES:
r=J
l:::::=J
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
EJ
LOG OF: B-2 Page 2 fo 2
Date Drilled: 1/17/07
Depth Elev.
(ft) (ft)
20
25
-
Sample
No.
~
.Q
5
<:
CI)
~
Hand
Penetro-
meter
Value
(Qu)
(tsf)
r---
7 SS 2.50
LJ CJ
CJ
EJ CJ
r=:J
Project: Carmel Medical Shops
Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN
WATER
OBSERVA nONS:
Water first encountered: 7 ft.
Water level at completion: 16 fl.
Water level @ hrs.:
Hole cave-in depth: 18 fl.
DESCRIPTION
Gray Very Sliff FINE SANDY SILT, some sand
Boring Terminated @25fl.
NOTES:
E::J
E::J
.
GRADATION
.
cc
"I:l "I:l l :s
] ~ fii tl.
l! t? t? :!:::: ~ ~
Cl <.) ~ u.: ii) (3 .Q
lQ
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
CJ
r=J
EJ
Project No. 061N206
STANDARD PENETRATION
('N? VALUE
Rln"?,,~rfnnf
10 20 l) 30 40
MoIsture Content - %
PL Natural LL
)( . )(
10 20 30 40
.,-
8
---1Q
CJ
r:=J
r:=J
CJ
r:=J
CJ
CJ
CJ
r:=J
r=:J
CJ
t=J
t=J
t=J
CJ
t=J
t=J
t=J
CJ
CJ
LOG OF: B-3 Project: carmel Medical Shops Project No. 061N206
Date Drined: 1/17/07 Location: 154 Medical Drive, carmel, IN STANDARD PENETRA TlON
Sample WATER GRADA TION ('N' VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 8 ft.
Penetro- OBSERVATIONS: Water level at completion: 11 ft. Rln~O"r fnnf
meter Water level @ 24 hrs.: . 10 20 30 40
<0
2 Value Hole cave-in depth: 16 ft. ~ ~ Moisture Content. %
"0 "0
~ CD (Qu) l 5i '" Q.
Depth EJev. ~ II) c'5 ~ :., ~ PL Natural LL
F0- e ~ .!!!
(ft) (ft) (tsf) (!) tS ::!i u.: (.) oS! )t . )(
tXl
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40
'$' - Tonsoil
- 2
1 SS 1.50 Dark Brown Stiff FINE SANDY SILT (FIll) 3
- ~
3
- "'
2 S5 3.00 4
5 - ~
- - r
3 5S 1.50 Brown Very Stiff to Stiff CLAYEY SILT, some sand (Fill) 7
- ~
- r
- 4 55 5
10 - -1
12
f-- 6'
5 SS 3.00 8
15_ ~ Gray Very Stiff to Hard FiNE SANDY SILT, trace gravel -1Q
-
-
6 SS >4.5
7
9
12
20
NOTES:
Boring Terminated @20feet
r=J
r:=J
r=J
r=J
r=J
CJ
r=J
EJ
EJ
r::=J
r=J
r=J
r=J
-=:J
-=:J
r=J
r=:J
r=J
-=:J
LOG OF: 8-4 project: Carmel Medical Shops Project No. 06IN2D6
Date Drilled: 1/11/01 Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN STANDARD PENETRATION
Sample WATER GRADA nON ('N7 VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 7 ft.
Penetro- OBSERVA nONS: Water level at completion: 10ft. RIIl";'()'''' filM
meter Water level @4 hrs.: 5 ft. fe 10 20 30 40
t Value Hole cave-in depth: 15 ft. .., 8. Moisture Content - %
.Q ~ ..,
g Gl (Qu) l ~ ~
~ ~ PL Natural LL
Depth IElev. :;;: l!! <I) <I) ;t:, i;-
(It) (ft) (tsf) Cl u :E u.: ~ U J2 lie . K
lQ
0 DESCR PTIOM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40
3" - TODSoil
- r
1 SS 1.00 Brown Medium Stiff FINE SANDY SilT 6
- ~
3 .
- 4
2 SS 0.50 Brown & Gray Soft CLAYEY SilT, little sand 4
5 ~ ~
5.5 ----
~ 4
:3 SS Brown Medium Dense SlL TV FINE to MEDIUM SAND, wet 5
f-- ~
8
'~ 5
4 SS 3.00 8
10 ~ Brown & Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY SilT, with gravel .....11
12
- Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY SilT
I-- 7
- 5 5S 4.00 9
15 ......g
- Boring Terminated @ 15 feet
-
NOTES:
r=:J
r=::::J
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
t:::::::J
t:::::::J
EJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ" CJ
EJ
r=J
CJ
CJ
CJ
LOG OF: 8-5 Page 1 of2 Project: Carmel Medical Shops Project No. 061N206
Date Drilled: 1/17/07 Location: 154 Medical Drive, Cannel, IN STANDARD PENETRATION
Sample WATER GRADATION ('N7 VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 16 ft.
Penetro- OBSERVA TIONS: Water level at completion: 13.5 ft. Rln~'OAr fn()f
meter Water level @ hrs.: . 10 20 30 4()
<0
~ Value Hole eave-in depth: 22 ft. "0 "0 ~ Moisture Content - %
.Q "0
~ CD (Qu) l :i lS ~ Q.
~ Ii) Ii) ~ ~ PL Natural LL
Depth EJev. <: e ~
(.) ~ u.: <3 .Q ;IE -- )(
(it) (it) (tsf) (,!) co
0 DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 4()
4" I-- lopso"
~ 4
1 SS 1.00 4
- Brown Medium Stiff to Soft SILTY CLAY, trace sand ~
~
-
I-- r
2 SS 0.50 4
5 - ~
5.5 -
- 3
3 SS 1.00 4
- ~
-
4
- 5
4 SS 2.00 ---1
10 - Brown Medium Stiff to Very Stiff CLAYEY SILT.
trace to some sand & gravel
-
- 7
- 5 S8 3.00 8
15_ - r--1Q
17
f--- Brown & Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY SILT 'r
6 SS 3.50 18
20 73
NOTES:
E:J
E:J
r=:J
r=:J
r=:J
r:=J
CJ
LOG OF: 8-5 Page 2 fo 2
Date Drilled: 1/17/07
Depth EJev.
(ft) (it)
20
-
22
25
Sample
No.
lil
oQ
~
~
CD
~
Hand
Penetro-
meter
Value
(Qu)
(tsf)
-
7 88 >4.5
-
-
-
-
r=:J
r:=J
r:=J
r:=J
r:=J
r:=J
Project: Carmel MedIcal Shops
Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN
WATER
OBSERVATIONS:
Water first encountered: 16 ft.
Water level at completion: 13.5 ft.
Water level @ hrs.:
Hole cave-in depth: 22 ft.
Brown & Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY 81L T
DESCRIPTION
Gray Hard FINE SANDY SILT. some gravel
Boring Terminated @ 25 ft.
NOTES:
r:=J
CJ
GRADA TION
.
<0
i ] ", lil
~ ~ Q.
li) ~ :... ~
15 u :::iE u.: .~ .!!! ..sa
(J Q:l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t=J
CJ
EJ
EJ
Project No. 061NZ06
STANDARD PENETRATION
('N, VALUE
Rln~ ~"'r fnnf
10 20r J 30 40
Moisture Content - %
PL Nawral LL
)E . .C
10 20 30 40
g-
12
~
r::=J
r:=J
EJ
EJ
EJ
E:J
E:J
E:J
l:::=J
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
EJ
LOG OF; 8-6 Page1of2 Project: Cannel Medical Shops Project No. 061N206
Date DriUed: 1/17/07 Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN STANDARD PENETRA TlON
Sample WATER GRADA TlON ('N, VALUE
No. Hand Water first encountered: 15.5 ft.
Penetro- OBSERVA TlONS: Water level at completion: 15 ft. Rln~()"""fnnf
meter Water level @ hIS.: . 10 20 30 40
<c
~ Value Hole cave-in depth: 22 ft. ! ~ Moisture Content - %
.Q "t:l "t:l
~ Gl (Qu) 1 ~ la Q.
Depth E/ev. ~ CJ) >. ~ PL Natural LL
<: ~ ~ ~ ~
(ft) (ft) (tsf) r.:i :E l.( If.) <.:l tn )1 . ilC
0 DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40
3" f--- opsoil
~ 3
1 SS 1.50 3
~ --1
-
~ 3
- 2 55 0.75 4
5 - Brown Stiff to Medium Stiff SILTY CLAY, trace to little sand & gravel. --1
scattered gray mottling
- '--
4
3 55 0.75 5
- ~
~
- 6
4 SS 1.00 ~
10 -
-
12
-
~ '6
5 SS 3.00 7
15 ~ ~
Brown Very Stiff FINE SANDY SILT. trace to some gravel
.
~ '7
6 55 2.50 9
20 13
NOTES:
EJ
EJ
LJ
LJ
E:J
E:J
E:J
LOG OF: 8-6 Page 2 to 2
Date Drilled: 1/17/07
Depth
(ft)
20
Sample
No.
Elev.
(ft)
l;;
.Q
~
<:
-
22
III
~
Hand
Penetro-
meter
Value
(Qu)
(tsfJ
25
f--
7 SS 4.00
-
-
-
-
E:J
r:::::::J
E:J
CJ
LJ
E:J
Project: Carmel Medical Shops
Location: 154 Medical Drive, Carmel, IN
WATER
OBSERVATIONS:
Water first encountered: 15.5 ft.
Water level at completion: 15 ft.
Water level @ hrs.:
Hole cave-in depth: 22 ft.
Brown Very Stiff FINE SANDY SILT, trace to some gravel
DESCRIPTION
Gray Very Stiff FINE SANDY SlL T, little gravel
BOring Terminated @ 25 ft.
NOTES:
E:J
EJ
LJ
LJ
CJ
CJ
Project No. 061N206
STANDARD PENETRATION
GRADATION ('N' VALUE
1'l/n~ 0"''' fnnt
fa 10 20 30 40
... ... ... ~ Moisture Content - %
~ r::: ~ ~ Q.
~ ~ ~ PL Natural LL
~ :$
ti ::E LL: tI) (J ,Q' x .. JK
<Xl
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 20 30 40
8
11
~
LJ
CJ
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
:0
o
o
GENERAL INFORMATION I
DRilliNG PROCEDURES
Drilling and sampling has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted methods of
subsurface investigation for earthwork and Geotechnical Engineering considerations. Unless
specifically stated, the investigation is intended to explore the subsurface conditions for purposes
of evaluating the sites suitability for shallow foundation support of the proposed structure(s).
"
Split-barrel drive sampling (referred to as the Standard Penetration Test - SPT) was performed at
prescribed intervals not exceeding 5 feet. Standard Penetration Test data (referred to as the 'N'
value) were recorded, and representative samples were preserved from each sampling increment.
Water seepage into the open borehole was also noted during drilling, and upon completion of each
boring. These short term water seepage observations are provided on the boring logs as one
piece of information to be used in estimating the long term groundwater level. Unless piezometers
are installed and measured over a longer period of time, the short term observations should not be
used to determine groundwater levels. Many factors can effect the amount of water seepage into
an excavation at a particular site, some of which may not be acting or apparent at the time of the
borings.
When the samples are received in our laboratory, they are visually classified by a Geotechnical
Engineer. The cohesive samples are tested for Unconfined Compressive Strength with a
calibrated hand penetrometer test. Moisture contents of representative samples are also
determined. Depending on the nature of the proposed project, and the type of materials
.encountered, a limited number of samples may be selected for Grain Size with Hydrometer,
Plasticity Index, Organic Content, CBR, etc., testing. The results of these tests are shown on the
boring logs, where appropriate.
The boring logs included in the Appendix have been prepared based on the drillers field record of
drilling and sampling observations, the Geotechnical Engineers visual classification and the results
of laboratory testing. Stratification lines on the boring logs indicating changes in stratigraphy
represent approximate depths of changes. Actual depths of transitions of different material types
may differ somewhat from the estimated depths, or transitions may occur more gradually than the
sharply defined line represented on the boring log. The boring logs therefore contain both factual
and interpretative information.
Although the borings disclose information generally representative of site conditions, it can be
reasonably expected that conditions may occur between borings, which are not precisely
represented by anyone of the borings. Soil deposition processes and natural geologic factors are
such that subsurface conditions may change in short vertical intervals and horizontal distances.
The soil and/or rock samples will be stored in our laboratory for a period of six months, after which
they will be discarded, unless notified by our client.
c2:\dei\DrillProc.doc
D
D
o
D
o
o
D
D
D
:0
o
D
o
o
o
D
o
D
o
BORING lOG TERMINOLOGY.
uses CLASSIFICATION
Depth (ft) - Distance in feet below the ground surface at the time of the investigation.
Elevation (ft) - Referenced to Mean Sea Level (MSL), or established project datum.
Sample No. - Sample numbers are numbered consecutively, increasing with depth. 'SS' indicates
split spoon sample, 'ST' indicates Shelby tube sample, 'AC' indicates auger cuttings, 'Bulk'
indicates bulk or bag sample.
Hand Penetrometer Value (Qu) (tsf) - The Unconfined Compressive Strength (Qu) of cohesive
soils is determined in tons per square foot using a calibrated hand penetrometer.
Description - The following terms are used to describe the relative density of granular soils
(sand and gravel):
RELATIVE DENSITY
'N' VAlUE-.
blows/foot
0-4
4 -10
10 - 30
30 - 50
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
Over 50
The following terms are used to describe the consistency of cohesive soils (silt and clay):
UNCONFINED 'Nil VALUE -
CONSISTENCY COMPRESSION - blows/foot PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
tons/sq. ft.
Very soft Less than 0.25 Below 2 Easily penetrated by fist
50ft 0.25 - 0.50 2-4 Easily penetrated by thumb
Medium Stiff 0.50 -1.00 4-8 Penetrated by thumb with moderate effort
Stiff 1.0-2.0 8-15 Readily indented by thumb but not penetrated
Very stiff 2.0-4.0 15 - 30 Readily indented by thumb nail
Hard Over 4.0 Over 30 Indented with difficulty by thumb nail
Color - If a soil is a uniform color throughout, the term is single; modified by adjectives such
as light or dark. If the predominant color is shaded with a secondary color, the secondary
color precedes the primary color. If two major and distinct colors are evident throughout the
soil, the colors are listed as 'and', or modified by the term "mottled".
c2:\dei\USCSclass.doc
o
D
o
o
o
o
,0
o
o
o
D
.0
:0
o
D
o
o
D
o
Texture is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Soil particle size definitions are as
follows: .
DESCRIPTION GRAIN SIZE DESCRIPTION SIZE
Boulders Larger than 8" Sand - Coarse 4.76 mm to 2.00 mm
- Medium 2.00 mm to 0.42 rom
- Fine 0.42 mm to 0.074 mm
Cobbles 8" to 3" Slit 0.074 mm to 0.005 mm
Gravel - Coarse 3" to.,%" Clay Smaller than 0.005 mm
- Fine %" to 4.76 mm
The main soil description consists of the main textural soil component with any secondary
components listed before the main component, e.g. a clayey sand is mainly sand with a
. secondary clay component.
Minor modifiers are indicated after the main soil description as follows (based on
percentage of dry weight of the sample), e.g. clayey sand, trace gravel:
trace -
little
o to 10%
10 to 20%
20 to 35%
35 to 50%
some -
"and" -
The moisture content of cohesive soils (silt and clay) is described as follows:
TERM
Dry
Damp
Moist
Wet
RELATIVE MOISTURE or APPEARANCE
Crumbles or is powdery
Moisture content slightly below plastic limit
Moisture content above plastic limit, but below liquid limit
Moisture content above liquid limit
The moisture content of granular soils (sand and gravel) is described as follows:
TERM
Dry
Damp
Moist
DESCRIPTION
No moisture present
Internal moisture, but none to little surface moisture
Free water on surface
Wet
Voids filled with free water
c2:\dei\USCSclass.doc
;0
o
,0
o
D
o
D
o
D
o
o
o
o
o
,0
D
:D
D
o
Gradation - When grain size and/or hydrometer tests are performed, the percentage of each
particle size is listed in the appropriate column (particle sizes are defined above).
Standard Penetration ('N') Value - (reported numerically as blows/6 inches; reported graphically
as blow per foot, or IN' value) The number of blows required to drive a 2-inch 0.0., 1-3/8 inch 1.0.,
split-barrel sampler using a 140-pound hammer with a 30-inch free fall. The blows are recorded in
6-inch drive increments. The Standard Penetration Resistance, IN' value, is determined from the
total number of blows required for one foot of penetration (summing the second and third 6-inch
increments) of an 18-inch drive.
50/n - indicates the number of blows (50) to drive a split-barrel sampler a certain number of inches
(n) other than (less than) the normal6-inch increment.
Moisture Content - % I PL - Natural - LL - When a test is performed to determine the natural
Moisture Content, Liquid Limit (Ll) or Plastic Limit (Pl), the result is indicated graphically. The
natural Moisture Content values are plotted as a solid circle, the 'N' values are plotted with an open
circle, the Plastic Limit and Liquid Limits are each plotted with an 'Xl.
Rock Description -
The following terms are used to describe the relative hardness of rock core:
TERM
Very Soft
Soft
DESCRIPTION
Difficult to indent with thumb nail; resembles hard soil but has rock structure
Resists indentation with thumb nail but can be abraded and pierced to a shallow depth by a
pencil point
Resists pencil point, but can be scratched with a knife blade
Can be deformed or broken by light to moderate hammer blows
Can be broken only by heavy blows, and in some rocks, by repeated hammer blows
Medium Hard
Hard
Very Hard
Rock Quality Designation (ROD) - This value, expressed as a percent, is an indirect
measure of rock soundness. It is obtained by summing the total length of all core pieces
which are at least four inches long, and dividing this sum by the total length of the core run.
c2:\dei\USCSclass.doc