Engineering Design Report

Gambela People’s National Regional State SWS Consultancy
Water, Mines and Energy Bureau
GAMBELLA PEOPLE’S NATIONAL REGIONAL STATE

WATER, MINES AND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
BUREAU
CONSULTANCY SERVICES
FOR
Feasibility Study and Detail for Gambella Town Water Supply and
Sanitation Project
Engineering Report for Road Part
SWS CONSULTANCY
P.O.Box 11351
Tel.: +251-116-478838
Fax: +251-116-478827
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
____________________________________________________________________________
Feasibility Study and Detail Design of Gambella Engineering Report-Road
Town Water Supply and Sanitation Project
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .........................................................................................................................ii

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 General .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2.1 Objectives of the Consulting Services ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.2.2. Purpose of this Design Report ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.3 Agreement Background ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.4 Project Basic Contract Data ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
2. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS .......................................................................................................... 5
2.1 General .......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Establishment of Control points and Benchmarks ........................................................................ 5
2.3 Cross Section Surveying ............................................................................................................... 6
2.4 Surveying Crew and Equipment Utilized ........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4.1 Personnel .................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
2.4.2 Equipments ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3. TRAFFIC SURVEY AND FORECAST ............................................................................................ 7
3.1 Traffic Survey ......................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Review of Available Traffic Data ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.1.2 Motorized and Non - Motorized Traffic................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.1.3 Daily Traffic Count and Traffic Composition .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.1.4 Traffic Variation: Day and Night ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.1.5 The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.2 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) .................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.2.1 Seasonal Variation of Traffic Flow .......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.3 Traffic Forecast ........................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.3.1 Traffic Growth Rate ................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.4 Road Section AADTS ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.5 Baseline Traffic ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.6 Traffic Findings ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4. SOIL AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATION ................................................................................... 9
____________________________________________________________________________
4.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 9

4.2 Subgrade Investigation ............................................................................................................ 9
4.3 Sub grade Extension Survey.......................................................................................................... 9
4.4 Test Pit Investigations ................................................................................................................. 10
4.5 In–Situ Subgrade Characteristics ................................................................................................ 10
4.6 Existing Road Condition Survey ................................................................................................. 10
4.7 In-Situ Strength Characteristics................................................................................................... 12
4.8 Construction Material Investigation ...................................................................................... 13
4.8.1 Gravel Wearing Course ................................................................................................. 13
4.8.2 Improved Subgrade and Embankment Material ............................................................ 14
4.8.3 Rock Quarry ......................................................................................................................... 15
4.8.4 Sand Sources ........................................................................................................................ 16
4.8.5 Water Sources....................................................................................................................... 16
4.9 Summary of Geotechnical Findings and Remarks ...................................................................... 17
4.9.1 Subgrade Soil Investigations ................................................................................................ 17
4.9.2 Subgrade Soil Classification ................................................................................................ 18
4.9.3 Subgrade DCP CBR Values ................................................................................................. 18
4.10 General Geology and Soil Characteristics of the area ............................................................... 19
5. PAVEMENT DESIGN ..................................................................................................................... 21
5.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 21
5.2 Design Subgrade Classification................................................................................................... 22
5.3 CBR Calculation ......................................................................................................................... 22
5.4 CBR Adjustment Factor (for moisture) ....................................................................................... 24
5.5 Design Input ................................................................................................................................ 24
5.5.1 Design CBR.......................................................................................................................... 24
5.6 Determination of Gravel Thickness ............................................................................................ 24
6. GEOMETRIC DESIGN .................................................................................................................... 27
6.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 27
6.2 Design Standards ......................................................................................................................... 27
6.2.1 Design Vehicle ..................................................................................................................... 28
6.2.2 Design Speed ........................................................................................................................ 29
6.2.3 Super-elevation..................................................................................................................... 30
6.2.4 Side Slopes ........................................................................................................................... 30
6.3 Terrain Classification .................................................................................................................. 31
____________________________________________________________________________
6.4 Construction of Digital Terrain Model (DTM) ........................................................................... 33

6.5 Horizontal Alignment .................................................................................................................. 33
6.6 Vertical Alignment ...................................................................................................................... 34
6.6.1 Gradient ................................................................................................................................ 34
6.6.2 Vertical Curves ..................................................................................................................... 35
6.7 Cross Section ............................................................................................................................... 35
6.7.1 Natural Ground Cross Section ....................................................................................... 36
6.7.2 Design Roadway Cross Section .................................................................................... 36
6.8 Roadway Safety........................................................................................................................... 36
6.9 Design Outputs ............................................................................................................................ 36
6.9.1 Earthworks and Pavements Quantities ................................................................................. 36
6.9.2 Typical Plan and Profile Drawings....................................................................................... 36
7. HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS ............................................................................................. 38
7.1 General ........................................................................................................................................ 38
7.2 Scope and Objectives .................................................................................................................. 38
7.3 Purpose of this Report and Its Contents ...................................................................................... 38
7.4 Design Standards and Data Collection ........................................................................................ 39
7.4.1 Design Standards .................................................................................................................. 39
7.4.2 Methods of Design Flood Computation ............................................................................... 40
7.5 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................ 40
7.5.1 Topographic maps and aerial photograph ............................................................................ 40
7.5.2 Climate ................................................................................................................................. 41
7.5.3 Temperature ......................................................................................................................... 41
7.5.4 Rainfall Data ........................................................................................................................ 43
7.5.5 Hydrologic Soil type ............................................................................................................ 46
7.5.6 Topography .......................................................................................................................... 50
7.5.7 Vegetation and Land Use ..................................................................................................... 51
7.6 HYDROLOGY................................................................................................................................ 53
7.6.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 53
7.6.2 Return Periods (Design Frequency) ..................................................................................... 53
7.6.3 Catchment area Delineation ................................................................................................. 54
7.6.4 Rainfall - Runoff Models ..................................................................................................... 54
7.7 HYDRAULICS ........................................................................................................................... 66
7.7.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 66
____________________________________________________________________________
7.7.2 Hydraulic Design Standard .................................................................................................. 66

7.7.3 Culvert Design Criteria ........................................................................................................ 69
7.7.4 Recommended Hydraulic Structures .................................................................................... 71
7.7.4.1 Chebidida Nyaata- Culule Habera Project ........................................................................ 71
8. DESIGN OF MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ........................................................................ 74
8.1 Other Components of External Drainage Scheme....................................................................... 75
9. Construction Technology and availability of Labor .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
9.1 Applicable Construction technology ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
9.2 Availability of Labor ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendixes ............................................................................................................................................ 77
Appendix A-Laboratory Test Results for Sub-grade Soil ................................................................. 78
____________________________________________________________________________
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
Gembela town water supply expansion and sanitation project study and design has
identified necessity of intake structure, new water treatment plant and four reservoirs
at different locations with different water reserving capacity in order to supply the
growing water demand and expansion of Gambela town. To ensure adequate supply of
water in response to future demands, the design team has identified proper intake
point, new reservoirs to be located at higher elevations and distribution system inside
and outside the town boundary as per the master plan in hand. The intake point is
situated at about areal distance of 4.5km upstream from Baro River Bridge found at
town. The layout of the distribution system and the locations of service reservoirs are
set based on the topography of the town, current built up area and anticipated future
expansion.
Accordingly, there is a need for access road to the intake point, treatment plant,
reservoirs and distribution system inside and outside the town boundary in parallel
with the pipe layout. The design team has selected corridor for access road and pipe
layout so that the alignment avoids gully, swampy area and steep slopes. In this study,
the consultant has focused on access road to the intake structure, treatment plant and
reservoirs as most of these structures are designed to be located outside the town
boundary. In related to the distribution system in the town boundary and future
expansion area, there are currently earthen road grid and/or that can be easily formed
which can be access to the pipe distribution system this time. In the future, it is well
understood that the town administration shall expand the road network in these areas.
As per the design team study, there is transfer of water from the source to the two
treatment plants and from the treatment plants to the three service reservoirs which
entails differences in elevations to a maximum of 80meters that brings to elevated
nearby hill and hence there is a need to adopt for standard road design to reach at top
of the hill.
The proposed access consists of design of the said roads to appropriate road standard
with a total length of 8.34km and preparation of tender documents.
____________________________________________________________________________
In addition to providing access to the water supply project structures, the access road
will enhance the administrative, social communications and economical aspects of the
area in the vicinity of project by creating year round- all weathered accessibility.
Although, nothing is mentioned in the Terms of Reference and in line with the
agreement regarding the access road, the consultant believes that there should be a
designed standard road part of the main project. Therefore, there is a need for
preparation and submission of engineering report though this section is not part of the
Client /Consultant Service Agreement.
The access road alignment and its general layout of the route including the location of
the water supply project structures are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1-1: Location map
____________________________________________________________________________
1.2 Objectives
The principal objectives of the consulting services in this respect are to identify the
access roads in parallel with pipe layout, to carry out detailed engineering design, and
tender document preparation required for the construction of the road as part of the
implementation of the water supply and sanitation project.
1.2.1 The main objectives of the Consultancy Services in this regard during the design
phase are as follows:
✓ To establish the technical viability and study of the road projects with due
consideration to topographical, geotechnical, environmental and social
safeguards (Selection of route taking consideration different technical and
social factors).
✓ The viability of the projects shall be established taking into account the
requirements with regard to low volume road design, pavement design,
provision of road furniture, quantities of various items of works and cost
estimates.
✓ The Detailed Design would include surveys and investigations, detailed road
design, condition and performance, design of pavement, design of bridges and
cross drainage structures, quantities of various work items, detailed drawings,
detailed cost estimates, and preparation of detail engineering design report and
documents required for tender.
The project work tasks of consultancy services will include the following:
➢ Collection and review of available data

➢ Review the road alignments for existing ones
➢ Topographical survey and setting up of Control Points
➢ Alignment and subgrade soils investigation
➢ Geotechnical and materials investigations
➢ Hydraulic and Hydrological investigations and drainage design
➢ Detailed Design of road alignment and pavement
➢ Design of bridges and structures
➢ Technical Specifications and BOQ
➢ Bidding Documents
____________________________________________________________________________
Generally, the study includes all field works, appropriate design standards will be
recommended all in accordance with ERA-Low volume roads, alternative routes, as
required has been identified and economic viability checked on the selected route and
materials investigation and pavement design will be carried out.
____________________________________________________________________________
2. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS
2.1 General
Topography survey data for design purposes consists of mapping of sufficient details
for the level of design undertaken. Thus, the topographic survey of the project roads is
concerned with collection of these data. The topographic survey of each of the project
roads has been carried out in two stages;
• Primary Control point and benchmarks establishment;

• Detail survey of road cross section.
The main objective of the topographic survey is to provide data required for the main
engineering design process. The information that has been captured during the ground
survey is used as a direct input in the geometric design of the road, design of minor
structures, and right – of - way staking. These include details for preparation and
design of;
• Roadway cross section and profile;

• Culverts and other drainage structures;
• Watercourses, both upstream and downstream of a structure, and side drains
2.2 Establishment of Control points and Benchmarks
A primary control point using hand held GPS is launched at each project start and with
reference to this point, series of benchmarks have been established.
Stone beacons buried to the ground and highlighted with white paints on the top were
set at reasonable average intervals approximately 300m with maximum of 500m
between the primary control point and end of each road project. These stone beacons
were placed as close as possible in such a manner that one beacon is visible from the
other along the entire length of the road and to serve as a bench mark for the
construction phase.
As to the level of the surveying methodology, it has been followed a local surveying
net to be established with reference to initially assumed coordinates of control point
taken using hand held GPS as the need for identification of EMA’s beacon points to tie
____________________________________________________________________________
or correlate the surveying data to a nearby national control point in the grid system is
costly and time taking with respect to the scope of the project.
2.3 Cross Section Surveying

The established primary control point and benchmarks have been used in the
subsequent detail survey of road cross sections using total station while leveling has
been separately run to obtain accurate figures for the elevations of the benchmarks.
This cross section survey has been conducted over a 20 to 40 meters wide corridor,
with a distance between cross-sections varying from 20 meters, depending on the
terrain conditions.
At major junctions and locations where significant changes in alignment are

anticipated, for instance sharp curves, the surveyed corridor has been widened to
collect sufficient amount of data to attain the flexibility the engineering design will
require in modifying the existing alignment.
____________________________________________________________________________
3. TRAFFIC SURVEY AND FORECAST
3.1 Traffic Survey
As it is known, the first step in determining the total traffic over the design life of the
road has been to estimate initial traffic volumes through traffic counts. The traffic
estimate should provide the annual average daily traffic (AADT) expected to use the
route during the first year the road is placed in service as it has been stated in part B:
Design standards for low volume roads, low volume roads manual (LVR). The AADT
reflects the classes of different vehicles too.
ERA maintains a data base of regular traffic count data on all roads under its
jurisdiction. Although, reliable information on traffic levels and traffic characteristics
is crucial to the design process, as per ERA, relevant traffic information available for
the project influence area should be collected. For geometric design purposes it is
necessary to count motorized, non-motorized and intermediate means of transport
including pedestrians, bicycles, animal transport, motor cycles, tractors and trailers.
On the other hand, the access road is expected to serve different traffics during
construction as well as after completion of the project. Moreover, the proportion of
heavy vehicles in the traffic stream is often quite high during the construction phase of
the main project. Besides, there will be generated traffic resulting of the construction
of the access road.
For such roads intended for accessing structures, there is no need of regular traffic
count. Therefore, a road standard of DC-3 has been selected taking the following
points in to account:
• The expansion of the town resulting in high probability of the road to be

upgraded to paved gravel graved.
• The number of large and heavy vehicles d0078
and taking in to account the heavy vehicles to be engaged in the construction phase of
the main project,
____________________________________________________________________________
and taking in to consideration of future use and upgrading to . This also considers that
the roads can be upgraded to paved low volume road.
However,
____________________________________________________________________________
4. SOIL AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATION
4.1 General
Preliminary soil and geotechnical field investigation works are undertaken to

determine the physical properties of the materials found along the road way, the
subgrade on which the road is constructed and to study construction material
availability in the vicinity of the project area. The work in general includes:
• Sub grade investigation;

• Existing route condition investigation;
• Construction materials investigation.
4.2 Subgrade Investigation
This investigation is undertaken to determine the physical characteristics of the

existing subgrade material and to determine the suitability of the existing subgrade for
construction of the new pavement. Visual identification has been made for the
delineation of stretches where representative samples have been taken for laboratory
tests investigation. The investigation work is also useful in identifying potential source
of side borrow material. Samples obtained from the route corridor representing the
subgrade material were subjected to soil classification, Gradation, Atterberg’s Limits,
and proctor tests. The following investigations are carried out to depict the
characteristics of the existing subgrade.
4.3 Sub grade Extension Survey
The survey has been conducted along the route corridor with the aim of identifying the
different types of the natural ground materials on which the route corridor traverses.
____________________________________________________________________________
The subgrade extension survey helps in identifying weak and problematic soils and
sources of side borrow material. In addition, the soil extension survey helps in
grouping homogenous section of the project road for pavement design and remedial
measure proposal in the case of soils that require special treatment. Subgrade soils
have been visually described based on colours, texture, moisture and consistency.
4.4 Test Pit Investigations
Test pits were opened for assessment of the subsurface condition of the ground along
the road corridor, for visual investigation and classification of the subsurface materials
and for extracting samples for determination of the physical properties of the subgrade
materials. The pits were dug at intervals where there may be change of soil condition
through visual identification at a staggered left and right position of the road. The
laboratory tests on the collected samples include: Atterberg limits, free swell,
gradation, and proctor tests (Appendix A).
4.5 In–Situ Subgrade Characteristics
In addition to the test pit lowering and sampling works, the knowledge of the in-situ
strength characteristics of the subgrade soils along which the road traverses is of vital
especially for upgrading of existing roads and animal and animal drawn routes as the
degree of incorporation of the existing condition and the different appropriate remedial
measures proposed depend on the these characteristics of the subgrade.The in-situ
strength of the subgrade soils were evaluated using field DCP equipment.
4.6 Existing Road Condition Survey

The existing condition of the road sections especially for those routes animal drawn
carts are using was visually assessed in terms of generally road way formation,
prevalent modes of distresses like formation of potholes, rutting, corrugation,
ravelling, upheavals and depression together with the degree of severity, riding quality
and drainage condition. Based on the road condition evaluation, the riding quality of
the road is presented as percent length of the total length of the road as shown below.
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 4-1: Riding Quality of C/Didagnaata-C/Habara Road Project
Percentage as the Total

Station Riding Quality
Length of the Road (%)
0+000 - 4+000 36.30 VPRQ
4+000 - 5+500 13.60 VDTD
5+500 - 11+015 50.10 VPRQ
Table 4-2: Riding Quality of Awasho-Sole-J/Wandaree Road Project
Percentage as the total Riding

Station
Length of the Road (%) Quality
0+000 - 1+500 9.30 VPRQ
1+500 - 2+100 3.70 ITD
2+100 - 7+200 31.50 VDTD
7+200 - 8+400 7.40 ITD
8+400 -13+100 29.00 VDTD
13+100-14+200 6.80 VPRQ
14+200 - 15+200 6.20 VDTD
15+200 – 16+200 6.20 VPRQ
Table 4-3: Riding Quality of B/Filicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisaa Road Project

Station
0+000 - 7+000 27.08 VDTD
7+000 - 9+000 7.74 ITD
9+000 - 10+000 3.87 VPRQ
10+000-12+000 7.74 ITD
____________________________________________________________________________

Station
12+000 - 13+000 3.87 VDTD
13+000 – 15+100 8.10 ITD
15+100 – 20+000 18.96 VDTD
20+000 – 23+100 12.00 VPRQ
23+100 – 25+850 10.64 VDTD
Where:
ITD, Impossible to Drive
VDTD, Very Difficult to Drive
VPRQ, Very Poor Riding Quality;
PRQ, Poor Riding Quality;
4.7 In-Situ Strength Characteristics
The determination of the in-situ strength and characteristics of subgrade is important in

the design of pavement, in the recommendation of appropriate measures for
rectification of observed subgrade defects. The in-situ strength of the subgrade is
investigated using dynamic cone penetrometer test that is important indicator of
residual road strength at field condition. The DCP can give information of sufficient
quality and quantity to allow the pavement strength to be estimated and improvement
works to be designed in our case. The advantage of the DCP is that information can be
gathered without disturbing the in-situ material.
The insitu bearing strength (CBR) of the subgrade soil was measured using (DCP)
apparatus at intervals of 500m.
Standard DCP – apparatus with the following basic parameters have been
deployed.
▪ 570mm dropping height

▪ 8kg falling weight
▪ 60o tipped cone having 20mm diameter.
____________________________________________________________________________
While the cone penetrates into the subgrade the depth of penetration with each blow
was read in mm from a fixed meter rule.
4.8 Construction Material Investigation
The availability and the quality of the construction materials generally depend on the
geological formations of the project route corridor. The maximum use of naturally
occurring unprocessed materials is a central pillar of the LVR design philosophy.
During the investigation possible sources of construction material would be identified,

sampled and analyzed. These include sources of:
• Borrow pit material for gravel wearing course and pavement layers;
• Rock sources for masonry works ;
• Sand for concrete works;
• Water for construction purposes.
4.8.1 Gravel Wearing Course
Selected material sources for gravel pavement layers were located within feasible
hauling distances as presented in the contract agreement. During selection of these
sources, accessibility, availability of working space, quality and quantity of the reserve
were considered. The borrow pit information is summarized in table 4.4. Generally,
subbase and gravel wearing course material are not available along or in close
proximity to Awasho-Sole-J/Wandare and Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa roads.
The already opened and ample source is located at average distances of 25.6 and 30.6
kms from the two project sites respectively. Other possible source though very limited
is found near to Kuyera town about average distances 20 and 18 kms.There is also
subbase material at about 10kms on the way to Wondo Genet. There is also a
probability to use material from Kore and Kofele Anas on the other end of the
Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa Project at the previously mentioned equivalent
hauling distance. However, for C/Didegnata-C/Habera road project the above
mentioned ample material source is located in close proximity of the road with an
average distance of 5.7kms.
____________________________________________________________________________
Therefore, client’s should be aware that for the need of machineries such as excavator
/dozer, Loader and dump truck is apparent.
4.8.2 Improved Subgrade and Embankment Material
In most cases, the soils excavated from the side drain and road way formation will be
used for leveling and camber formation along the route unless such soils are unsuitable
(like black cotton collapsible and dispersive soils) for rural road construction and if
there is a need of additional borrow material. Hence, for areas needing fill and
leveling, the excavated suitable material would be used.
The wearing course and borrow pit information are summarized and presented in
Tables 4.4 and 4.5 respectively.
Table 4-4: Summary of Gravel Wearing Course and Subbase material Sources
Coordinate
Offset Material Description
Easting Northing Remark
25.6km & 30.63km from - Hill forming, red ash mixed

Awasho-Sole-J.Wandare with selected granular and binder
446406 800951 and Butefilicha-Jigesa- material.
Meraro-Danisa
respectively.
Table 4-5: Summary of Improved Subgrade Material Sources (Borrow Pits)
Chaina RHS/ Offset Material Remark
____________________________________________________________________________
ge, km LHS (km) Description
Red clay mixed For use in Awasho-

7+000 LHS 0.5 with selected Sole-J.Wandare
material. project
10km on the
For use in Awasho-
way from -Clay mixed with
Sole-J.Wandare
Shashemen to selected material.
project.
Wendo Genet.
4.8.3 Rock Quarry
Good quality rock that can be used for masonry construction was investigated and
located. Fresh rock that can be quarried for concrete and road building works is
available in the vicinity of the projects. A summary of the rock quarries is shown in
Table 4-6. Sources of basaltic rocks were located at a fair hauling distance.
Table 4-6: Summary of Rock Quarry Sources
Chainage, Offset, Material

RHS/LHS Depth and Quantity Remark
km km Description
- 2m Overburden
0+350
RHS 0.7 Basaltic -Sufficient
-1 to 3m depth
9+000 LHS 0.5 Basaltic overburden.
For Awash-Sole-J.
- Sufficient Wandare Project
____________________________________________________________________________
Found around Kuyera

-2m Overburden town (21.5km and 20
21.5 Basaltic avg. From Butefilicha-
- Sufficient Danisa and Awasho-
Sole-J/Wandare.)
4.8.4 Sand Sources
The only good quality sand source especially for the construction of major drainage
works and culverts has been sited around Langano at about 60km from the project
roads on average in which most of the construction works in Addis Ababa uses the
sand from this area.
4.8.5 Water Sources
Water is an important construction material used in the compaction of road fills and is
main ingredient for concrete production in drainage structures constructions. Water is
also equally important to protect the natural environment from dust pollution during
construction through spray at different interval as ordered by the consultant.
During the field visits made to each of the project sites, it has been observed that there
is no water problem for the construction of the project road in Shashemene Ana.
The identified available source of water for constructing the road and the drainage
structures are: at different intervals along B/Filichaa-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa project
road, crossing the road, the water sources for the construction of Awasho-Sole-
J/Wandare and C/Dgnaata-Culullee Habaraa project road project are available at the
vicinity of the projects roads and in Shashemene town such as Essaa river located at an
offset of about 1.5km-3km from the project road on average. However, for
C/Didegnata-C/Haberaa the river at 3+200 is not perennial and hence water can be
brought from Shashemene town,Essaa river.
It was also observed that water is available all over the project vicinity along
B/Filichaa-Danisa and Awasho-Sole-J/Wandare projects. This shows that there is no
need of water truck for construction on these two routes, and the construction water
____________________________________________________________________________
can be transported by truckters or other non motorized transportation means such as

animal drawn carts.
However, due the material location distances mentioned above in section 4.8.1 there is
a need for dump truck to transport the material, which makes the construction both
machine and labor intensive-Mixed technology.
4.9 Summary of Geotechnical Findings and Remarks
Geotechnical investigation works on the following materials were undertaken to check

the suitability and/or availability of these materials for the intended work.
• Subgrade material;
• Existing pavement;
• Construction materials.
4.9.1 Subgrade Soil Investigations
Subgrade Soil Plasticity Index (PI)
The results of Atterberg limit tests conducted on subgrade soil along Butefilicha-
Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa,Awasho-Sole-J/Wandare and C/Didenyata-C/Habera routes
show the PI values fall in the range of 8 to 9.
____________________________________________________________________________
15
12
9
PI Value
Butefilicha-Danisa
6
Awasho-J.Wandare
3
C/Didenyata-C/Habera
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Chainage (km)
Figure 4-1: Summary of Subgrade Plasticity Index
4.9.2 Subgrade Soil Classification
The result of classification tests conducted on subgrade soil along the road shows that
the subgrade soil is characterized as to vary from gray silty clay to silt soil type along
the routes.
4.9.3 Subgrade DCP CBR Values
The result of the DCP CBR tests conducted on subgrade soil using the DCP has been
presented in the table 4.7 below:
Table 4-7: Subgrade Design CBR values
Station Subgrade Design

Project route
From To CBR , %
Cabididegnata-Cululehabera 0+000 11+015 5 to 14
Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa 0+000 25+850 5 to 14
0+000 1+700 5 to 14
Awasho-Sole-J.Wandare
1+700 5+560 <5
____________________________________________________________________________
5+560 6+660 5 to 14
6+660 9+660 <5
9+660 16+200 5 to 14
4.10 General Geology and Soil Characteristics of the area
The geologic formation of the projects site can be generalized as acidic volcanic rocks
dominate the area and these are acidic tuff, ignimbrite,rhyolites and trachytes. At some
places they are inter bedded with lavas and agglomerates of basaltic composition
which are in greater depth. Alluvial plains and lacustrine sediments cover the top of
these rocks. Being in the rift valley, both regional and local geologic structures are
common. Specifically, the effects of these geological features are reflected in vicinity
of C/Didegnata-Cululehabera route on the side of Lake Shala where small hole of land
fall and sliding have been noticed.
On the rift floor, topographic barriers created by lava flows, uplift, and faulting created
basins and lakes that acted as sediment traps. The volcanic rocks played major roles by
providing sediments to the rift basins. (Weldegebriel et.al,2000).
Generally, there have not been momentous & hazardous geological features in the
vicinity of the projects.
The general geological map of the area is presented in the figure below:
____________________________________________________________________________
Figure 4-2: Geological map of the project area
Qa/Qb: basalt flows, spatter cones, hyaloclastites. A) transitional, b) alkaline basalt
Q: alluvial and lacustrine deposits:sand,silt,clay,diatomite, limestone and beach sand
Qd:dino formation: ignimbrite, tuff, coarse pumice,waterlain pyroclastic rocks with

intercalations of lacustrine sediments
Qr:rhyolitic volcanic centers obsidian, pumice, ignimbrite, tuff, subordinate trachyte

flows
No/N: Nazareth series: ignimbrite, unwelded tuffs, ash flows, rhyolitic flows, domes
and trachyte
// : Faults or Fractures
____________________________________________________________________________
5. PAVEMENT DESIGN
5.1 General
The main objective of pavement design is to provide the best structural and
economical combination of pavement and surfacing materials, types, layer thicknesses
and configurations to carry traffic satisfactorily (i.e. to a pre-determined level of
service with minimal maintenance) in a given climatic environment for the design life
adopted.
From low volume road surfacing options, the natural gravel surfacing (S-02) has been
selected out of the categories as a result of main constituents for the availability and
cost of the natural gravel material found in the vicinity of the projects as compared to
other options.
The pavement thickness for gravel roads is determined based on the quality of
material, the number of traffic, and the location of the road. The pavement design for
gravel road mainly consists of the determination of thickness of specified gravel
wearing course, and the required thickness of improved subgrade layers below the
wearing course.
The LVRR Pavement Design Manual "pavement design for minor gravel roads" is
based on AADT and subgrade soil classes. It sets 2 traffic classes and 3 subgrade soil
strength classes.
1. Traffic
AADT < 25
AADT, 25 - 75
____________________________________________________________________________
2. Subgrade
S2 to S3 = 3 – 7 % CBR.
S4 = 8 - 14% CBR.
S5= 15 – 29 % CBR.
5.2 Design Subgrade Classification
The subgrade is classified in terms of the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) to represent
realistic conditions for design. In practice this means determining the CBR strength for
the wettest moisture condition likely to occur during the design life at the density
expected to be achieved in the field. Accordingly, subgrades are classified on the basis
of the laboratory soaked CBR tests on samples compacted to 97% AASHTO T180
compaction as indicated in LVR manual.
Alternatively, strength characteristics of the subsurface soils at field moisture and

density conditions can be obtained directly. A number of correlations exist to link the
DCP penetration rate (mm/blow) to the subgrade strength parameters required for a
pavement design. These correlations are based on either soaked or unsoaked CBR
values versus DCP penetration rates measured in different soil types.
It is important to make sure that the correlation being used is the correct one for the
purposes of the study. In general, the correlation should be between the DCP
penetration rate and the actual CBR of the material being tested (i.e. the CBR at the
density and moisture content of the material at that time). In this way the in-situ
strengths can be determined. Furthermore, for the design of DC1 and DC2 low volume
roads, a presumptive design CBR could be assigned on the basis of previous test data
and the performance of soils in similar environments.
5.3 CBR Calculation
The strengths of the sub grade is calculated by converting the penetration rate (mm per
blow) to a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value. A number of relationships between
penetration rate and CBR value have been derived and are given in Table 5-1 below.
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 5-1: Penetration rate-CBR relationships
Cone Name of relationship Relationship

angle
60° cone TRL(1) Log10(CBR) = 2.48 – 1.057 Log10(pen rate)
Kleyn(2) (pen rate > 2 CBR = 410 (pen rate)-1.27

mm/blow)
Kleyn(3) (pen rate ≤ 2 CBR = 66.66 (pen rate)2 – 330 (pen rate) + 563.33
mm/blow)
Expansive Clay Log10(CBR) = 2.315 – 0.858 Log10(pen rate)

Method(4)
100% Planings(5) Log10(CBR) = 1.83 – 0.95 Log10(pen rate)
50% Planings Log10(CBR) = 2.51 – 1.38 Log10(pen rate)
User-Defined Log10(CBR) = [constant] – [coefficient] Log10 (pen rate)

Constant and Coefficient can be defined by the user
30° cone Smith and Pratt(6) Log10(CBR) = 2.555 – 1.145 Log10(pen rate)
User-Defined Log10(CBR) = [constant] – [coefficient] Log10 (pen rate)

Constant and Coefficient can be defined by the user
(pen rate is the penetration rate measured in millimeters per blow)
The pavement design method adopted in our LVR manual is based on the South
African TRH20 manual “Unsealed roads: Design, construction and maintenance”. Ver.
1.4 (November, 2008)’ which takes both traffic volume and loading into account in the
design process (Kleyn and vanzyl, 1988).
The result of the DCP test is compiled using UK DCP 3.1 software and Microsoft
excel and CBR vs. Depth graph is plotted for each DCP test included as Appendix "B"
of Soils and Materials Report.
According to the South African TRH20 manual, A DCP penetration of more than
about 32 mm per blow indicates that the CBR is 5 percent or less for most subgrade
soils.
____________________________________________________________________________
5.4 CBR Adjustment Factor (for moisture)
DCP penetration data obtained from the upper layers of an unpaved road will vary
throughout the year as the moisture content of the layers changes with rainfall. In
unpaved roads, the moisture content of the surface can influence the penetration rate. A
dry surface will provide more resistance than a wet surface. An adjustment to the
penetration rate based on the surface moisture content is therefore necessary. There are
5 different options to consider depending on field condition, namely: wet, moderate,
dry, very dry, and unknown which will be analyzed in the UK DCP 3.1 software. For
design purposes, DCP testing should be carried out when the road pavement at its
weakest, i.e., when the subgrade is at its highest moisture content. However, this may
not be possible and the DCP results from unpaved roads at other times of the year will
over-estimate the strength of the pavement materials, in particular the upper layers.
Hence, we have considered the moisture condition to a conservative side so that the
anticipated weakest condition is considered.
5.5 Design Input

5.5.1 Design CBR
The design CBR for the project is determined by considering:
• Subgrade CBR;
• AADT.
From the traffic count analysis, 66 AADT for C/Didenyata-C/Habera route ,71 AADT
for Awasho-Sole-J.Wandare route and 72 AADT for Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa
route have been obtained. According to the traffic analysis obtained, the three project
roads fall under DC2 standard (2- way traffic; AADT: 25-75).
5.6 Determination of Gravel Thickness
The pavement design mainly consists of the determination of thickness of specified

gravel wearing course over compacted subgrade or improved subgrade material. The
____________________________________________________________________________
major parameters, which are used for pavement design, are the design traffic and
bearing strength of the subgrade material.
The recommended sub-base thickness and wearing coarse material strengths for
different sub-grade and traffic conditions from LVRR manual is presented below:
Table 5-2: Design chart for minor gravel roads (LVR manual)
Subgrade Strength Class Traffic Classes (AADT)
CBR (%) < 25 25 - 75
S2 to S3 (3-7) 150 WC 150 WC
150 G15 200 G15
S4 (8-14) 150 WC 150 WC
100 G15 150 G15
S5 (15-29) 150 WC 150 WC
Further, the above values are reviewed by the URRAP Consultants supervisors
namely: Nomy Engineering Plc. and ETHIO Infra Engineering Plc in the working
manual (Design Guidelines For URRAP Consultants) as presented in table below:
Table 5-3: Design Chart for minor gravel roads
Subgrade Strength Class CBR Traffic Classes (AADT)

(%)
DC1/DC2(1)
(< 75)
S2 (3-4) 150 WC
200 G15 (2)
S3 & S4 (5-14)
150 WC
____________________________________________________________________________
Earth Road
S5 (15-29)
The field and laboratory assessment of the routes indicated that the subgrade soils
varieties from silty clay to silt soils and the insitu strength of the subgrade have been
presented in the table below:
Table 5-4: Subgrade CBR Values
Station Subgrade
Subgrade Design
Project route Strength
From To CBR , %
Class , %
Cabididegnata-Cululehabera 0+000 11+015 5 to 14 S3 & S4
Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-
0+000 25+850 5 to 14 S3 & S4
Danisa
0+000 1+700 5 to 14 S3 & S4
1+700 5+560 <5 S2
Awasho-Sole-J.Wandare 5+560 6+660 5 to 14 S3 & S4
6+660 9+660 <5 S2
9+660 16+200 5 to 14 S3 & S4
Therefore, from the above CBR values, it can be concluded that design sub grade
strength of S2, S3 and S4 have been adopted for each section with the respective value
accordingly.
____________________________________________________________________________
6. GEOMETRIC DESIGN
6.1 General
The overall process whereby the road alignment (horizontal and vertical) in different
terrain condition be designed in such away to meet the need of the road users is
generally known as geometric design.The main geometric features are:
• The horizontal alignment;

• Vertical alignment; and
• Road Cross Section
Thus the Consultant highly emphasized and attempted to arrive at a final design,
which:
• Fits into the existing natural condition and terrain

• Encourages consistency and uniformity of operation.
• Economical for implementation
The geometric elements of the project road were basically designed using design
criteria derived from ERA’s LVRs geometric design manual.
6.2 Design Standards
Road design standards are selected based on function and traffic. The function of the
road is determined by the character and anticipated level of service that the road would
render. Typically this relates into categorization or classification of the road as Trunk,
Link, Main Access, Collector and Feeder for which a generic definition is given
____________________________________________________________________________
indicating its primary function and purpose. However, our project roads are low
volume roads and the basic standards for roads as ‘low volume ‘are adopted.
Road standards are also selected based on the road’s intended capacity to
accommodate traffic. Normally, for high traffic volumes a higher set of design
standard (i.e., wider carriageways, gentle curves, flatter vertical gradient, full
overtaking distances etc. In our case, the intention of providing road is to access the
intake, treatment, reservoirs and pipe network system. Hence, the use of traffic data as
an input in the geometric design is irrelevant.
The road is expected to serve different traffics during construction as well as after
completion of the project. The proportion of heavy vehicles in the traffic stream is
often quite high during the construction phase of the main project. Besides, there will
be generated traffic resulting of the construction of the access road. Therefore, a road
standard of DC-3 has been selected. This also considers that the roads can be upgraded
to paved low volume road.
6.2.1 Design Vehicle
For geometric design it is the physical dimensions of a vehicle that are important. A
truck requires more space than a motorcycle, for example, and this does not depend
whether the truck is empty or fully loaded. Four different design vehicles are used in
Ethiopia as shown in the table below:
Table 6-1: Vehicle Fleet
Design Overhang
Overall (m) Wheel Min. Design
Design Vehicle (m)
base Turning
Vehicle Designati
Height Width Length Front Rear (m) Radius (m)
on
4x4
Utility DV1 1.3 2.1 5.8 0.9 1.5 3.4 7.3
Vehicle
Single
Unit DV2 4.1 2.6 11.0 1.5 3.0 6.5 12.8
Truck
Single
DV3 4.1 2.6 12.1 2.1 2.4 7.6 12.8
Unit Bus
____________________________________________________________________________
Design Overhang
Overall (m) Wheel Min. Design
Design Vehicle (m)
base Turning
Vehicle Designati
Height Width Length Front Rear (m) Radius (m)
on
Semi-
Trailer 4.8+8.4=
DV4 4.1 2.6 15.2 1.2 1.8 13.7
Combinat 13.2
ion
Table 6-2: Design vehicle for each LVR class
Design Standard Design Vehicle
DC 4 DV3
DC 3 DV3
DC 2 DV3
DC 1 DV1
6.2.2 Design Speed
Design speed is defined as the speed which is used to determine the various geometric
design features of the roadway, such as horizontal curve radius, maximum gradient,
super elevation, curtailed sight distance and so on.
The design speeds for each classification based on traffic and terrain are shown in table
6-3 below.
Table 6-3: Design speeds for LVRs
Design Design Speed (km/hr)
Standard Flat Rolling Mount’n Escarp’t ‘Populated‘areas
DC 4 70 60 50 25 50
DC 3 70 60 50 25 50
____________________________________________________________________________
DC 2 60 50 40 20 50
DC 1 50 40 30 20 40
6.2.3 Super-elevation
Super-elevation rate is provided as per LVRs manual. The following table shows the
super-elevation development lengths where for a need of super-elevation, it should be
developed gradually as per the length shown.
Table 6-4: Super-elevation development length
Design Speed Development length

(km/hr) (m)
30 25
40 30
50 40
60 55
70 65
80 80
6.2.4 Side Slopes
The selection of side slopes is dependent upon stability, height of fill or cut and type of
material. Cut and fill slopes that are used for design are summarized in the table below.
Material Height of Side slope Back Safety
____________________________________________________________________________
slope (m) Cut Fill slope classification

0.0-1.0 1:3 1:3 1:2 Not recoverable
Earth(1) 1.0-2.0 1:3 1:3 1:2 Not recoverable
>2.0 1:2 1:2 1:1.5 Critical
Rock Any height Dependant on costs Critical
Expansive
0-2.0 n/a 1:6 Recoverable
clays(2)
Table 6-5: Slope Ratio Table (Ratios are vertical: horizontal)
6.3 Terrain Classification
The geometric design elements of a road depends primarily on the terrain through
which the road passes.
The design approach must recognize the variability of the terrain which can change
considerably along relatively short distances affecting the drainage design, selection of
surfacing, earthworks and stability of slopes and geometric design parameters.
According to ERA ‘s LVR manual, terrain properties are generally categorized into
four classes as follows:
Flat 0 to 10 five – meter counters per km. The natural ground

slopes perpendicular to the ground contours are generally
below 3%.
Rolling 11 to 25 five – meter contours per km. The natural

ground slopes perpendicular to the ground contours are
generally between 3% and 25%.
____________________________________________________________________________
Mountainous 26 to 50 five – meter contours per km. The natural

ground slopes perpendicular to the ground contours are
generally above 25%.
Escarpment Escarpments are geological features that require special

geometric standards because of the engineering risks
involved. Typical gradients are greater than those
encountered in mountainous terrain.
Based on the above criteria and using information gathered during the field
investigation, a broad terrain classification is performed for the roads project. However
within this broad classification change in terrain properties at pockets locations have
been observed.
The following table shows the broad classification used during design process:
Table 6-6: From intake to treatment plant terrain classification
Station
Predominant Terrain
From To
0+000 0+125.625 Flat
Table 6 -7: From treatment plant to reservoir terrain classification
Station
Predominant Terrain
From To
0+000 2+140 Flat
2+140 2+620 Rolling
2+620 End Mountainous
Table 6 -8: Treatment plant to town terrain classification
____________________________________________________________________________
Station
Start End Predominant Terrain
0+000 0+200 Rolling
0+200 0+760 Flat
0+760 1+060 Rolling
1+060 End Fat
6.4 Construction of Digital Terrain Model (DTM)

The data for analysis are extracted from global mapper for the project road corridor
which was received in coordinate format. That gives Point number, Easting, Northing,
Elevation, and description for each point surveyed. This data is imported to eagle point
software to construct the point and line strings of surface features noted with field
codes and other side shots at the specified elevations. The triangulation of the points is
processed in order to get the Digital Terrain Model (DTM), which is the surface model
to be used for all the design works. From this surface model contours are generated at
intervals of one meter.
The geometric design parameters were set according to the function and standard of
the road as stated in LVR manual. The above three access roads are classified as DC3
according to ERA’s LVR Geometry Design Manual. The last step observed before the
starting of the actual design of the road was, to identify the pavement and
hydraulic/structural design requirements that directly or indirectly affect the geometric
design of the road.
6.5 Horizontal Alignment
According to low volume road standard, the geometric design standards for roads
classed as DC 3 has been adopted for the design of horizontal and vertical alignment
and presented in the table below:
Table 6-8: Geometric design standards for DC 3 unpaved (AADT 75-150)
Populated
Design Element Unit Flat Rolling Mountain Escarpment
areas
____________________________________________________________________________
Design Speed km/ 70 60 50 25 50

hr
Road width M 7 7.0 6.5 6.5 7.0
Min.stopping sight M 125 105 75 28 70

distance
Min.horizontal radius M 245 175 110 23 110
Max. desirable gradient % 4 6 6 6 4
Max. gradient % 6 9 9 9 6
Max. super-elevation % 6 6 6 6 6
Min. crest vertical curve K 34 19 11 3 11
Min. sag vertical curve K 4.8 3.5 2.2 1.3 2.2
Normal cross-fall % 6 6 6 6 6
In designing the horizontal alignment of the road it was as much as possible tried to
use the higher values based on the above design standards. However, in some cases
departure from ERA’s, LVRs manual and/or the use of the lower values was
inevitable. All in all the horizontal alignment design, while it wasn’t possible to satisfy
the requirements set by ERA’s,LVRs manual at some definite locations , geometric
manual fully has been fitted for most section and sharp curve warning traffic signs
with the appropriate speed limits would be provided for those pocket locations.
6.6 Vertical Alignment

Two major aspects of vertical alignment are vertical curvature, which is governed by
sight distance and comfort criteria, and gradients, which are related to vehicle
performance and level of service. There are two types of vertical curves – summit (or
crest) and sag (or valley) curves which are introduced at vertical grade changes. The
lengths of vertical curves are controlled by sight distance requirements. However
longer curve lengths are always recommended for better aesthetics and riding
comforts. The selection of the most appropriate vertical alignment standards is done
with the following priorities in mind:
• Wherever practicable compliance with the ERA’s LVR geometric design

standards.
• To minimize earthworks
6.6.1 Gradient
____________________________________________________________________________
The maximum gradient recommended in LVR’s for DC 3 has been presented in the
above table; however there are exceptional locations where the maximum value has
been exceeded for different reasons. Recommendations based on different design
standards are referred.
It was attempted throughout the vertical alignment design to comply with the
maximum grade criteria and the gradient along the routes from intake point to
treatment plant and from treatment plant to town fits all the requirements. However,
along the route from reservoir to town a gradient exceeding the maximum value for the
respective terrain type has been adopted for 0.08km of the 2.55km, i.e. about 3.2% of
the total length. Along the route from treatment plant to reservoir a gradient exceeding
the maximum value for the respective terrain type has been adopted for 0.385km of the
3.629km, i.e about 10.62%. In addition, considering the fact that there are short
locations where the terrain may vary from the broad classification used for design,
comparison was made with respect to the absolute maximum gradients. It was found
out that about 0.155km, i.e. about 4.3%, of the total length of the route from treatment
plant to reservoir exceed the absolute maximum. These relatively larger gradients are
adopted due to existing topographic conditions that are unattainable without excessive
earthwork volumes especially of excavation of rock formation which otherwise makes
the construction inconceivable under the scope of low volume road.
Minimum gradient of 0.5% was adopted to facilitate drainage in most flat gradient
sections. However in some instances, existing grade has been maintained and less
value to zero has been provided for very short distances.
6.6.2 Vertical Curves
Minimum lengths of crest and sag vertical curves have been recommended based on
design speeds and stopping sight distance requirements. They provide for ride comfort,
appearance, and most importantly, safety. These are usually express in terms of “K”
value which has been provided in table 6.8.
6.7 Cross Section
____________________________________________________________________________
6.7.1 Natural Ground Cross Section
The natural ground cross-section is extracted from the surface model, following the
horizontal alignment established at intervals of 20m and at additional locations such
as: points of curvatures and locations of drainage structures.
6.7.2 Design Roadway Cross Section
The roadway cross-section (typical cross-section) has a one lane gravel road with
carriage width of 7.0m. A crown slope of 6% is provided.
6.8 Roadway Safety
To make vehicles operation for the given design speeds safe and comfortable and to
avoid drivers’ psychological fear, some safety measures such as super elevation, signs
and guideposts were provided on curves and higher grades as per the design
recommendation. However,sometime there will be cases where it is impossible to meet
any of the standards mainly due to severe terrain conditions. Under such circumstances
the standards must be relaxed and suitable permanent signage used to warn road users.
6.9 Design Outputs
6.9.1 Earthworks and Pavements Quantities
Using the extracted data from the global mapper, the digital ground model is
developed after importing the raw data in eagle point software. Afterwards the
horizontal and vertical alignments are designed. Following these, templates are
generated every 20 meters from which earthwork and pavement quantities are
computed using end area method with the help of the software.
6.9.2 Typical Plan and Profile Drawings
____________________________________________________________________________
Typical drawings include road cross-section sections with all dimensions, super-
elevation etc.
Plan - profile drawings are prepared using eagle point software. Each grading section
covers a plan and the corresponding profile of 1.5km. The plan and profile has two
scales i.e. a vertical scale of 1:50 and a horizontal scale of 1:500.
The plan drawing shows the roadway centerline, edge of the road, ground contours,
annotations of chainage every 50m, start and end chainage of curves etc.
The profile drawing shows the centerline ground profile, final road profile with the
corresponding elevations at an interval of 50 meters. It also shows the start and end of
vertical curve, gradient values,etc.
____________________________________________________________________________
7. HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS
7.1 General
7.2 Scope and Objectives

Amongst other supplementary matters, the scope and objectives discussed in this
report are:
▪ the geomorphology, soil and land use/ land cover based on field observation
and literature review;
▪ rainfall analysis and determination of different return period flood
magnitudes for the rivers, streams and flood paths crossing the road route;
▪ identification of different sections of the road route exhibiting unstable
hydrological conditions (eg. erosion) and the causes of such instability, and
the proposal of appropriate mitigation measures;
▪ determination of appropriate sizes of waterway opening for the various
watercourses as a major parameter in determining a suitable category of
conduit in each case, i.e. bridge, major culvert, minor culvert and road side
ditches
7.3 Purpose of this Report and Its Contents
The main purposes of this report are:
• To give detail description of the hydrological study and hydraulic analyses

and computations made, including the assumption and the design criteria
used, for the design of drainage facilities
• To provide a schedule showing the design discharge that must pass under
the road due to expected floods
This report is divided into four chapters including this introductory section. The
second chapter presents design standard of the project, data collection, climate, and
topography and soil type.
____________________________________________________________________________
The third chapter presents hydrological study. In this section, the design discharge
is estimated by analyzing rainfall data, topographic map, soil type, river
morphology, using the information acquired from site and data acquired from
different organizations and manuals. The design flood is computed using rational
formula and U.S. Soil Conservation Services (SCS) method.
The fourth chapter deals with waterway design of drainage structures. For the
design discharge estimated, adequate, economical and sustainable drainage system
that suite the site conditions are provided using appropriate hydraulic computation
as per ERA Drainage Manual (ERADDM-2002) recommendation.
7.4 Design Standards and Data Collection
7.4.1 Design Standards
7.4.1.1 Design Frequency or Return Period
Design Frequency or return period is indicative of the frequency with which a

certain magnitude of rainfall/runoff occurs in that period. The number of times
a flood of a given magnitude can be expected to occur on average over a long
period of time. Design frequency can be expressed with probability. The
probability of being equal or exceeded in any year can be defined by the
following expression.
1
P( X  X T ) 
T
Where:
P = Frequency Exceedance
T = Occurrence of design flood exceeded or equalled
once (Return period), in years
Since it is not economically feasible to design a structure for the maximum

runoff a watershed is capable of producing, a design frequency must be
established according to the cost, potential flood hazard to property, expected
level of service, political considerations, and budgetary constraints, and
considering the magnitude and risk associated with damages from inundatation.
The road is classified as DC2 according to the Geometric Design Standard and
this governs the design storm frequency period of cross and side drainage
____________________________________________________________________________
structures. The ERA low volume Manual recommends the design frequency as
shown in table 2-1 for DC2 roads. The recurrence interval values shown in the
table below are used for hydraulic design of drainage facilities.
Table7-1: Recurrence Interval for Drainage Structures Design
Return Period
Drainage Structures Type
Side ditch 10
Culvert, pipe (span < 2m) 15
Culvert, 2m<span<6m 25
Short Span bridges 6<span<15m 25
Medium span bridges

15<span<50m 50
Source: ERA low volume Manual
7.4.2 Methods of Design Flood Computation
As per ERADDM recommendations the design discharges are computed

using
• Rational Method for catchments area equal to or less than 0.5 km2
and
• Soil Conservation Services (SCS) unit hydrograph method for
catchments area greater than 0.5 km2.
7.5 Data Collection

Different data are collected from map, satellite imagery, field visit,
organizations, manual and publications. The data were used for the drainage
study.
7.5.1 Topographic maps and aerial photograph
Geomorphology & soil, land use & land cover, topographic maps and aerial
photograph were collected.
____________________________________________________________________________
▪ Soft copy of topography 1:50,000 from Ethiopian Mapping Agency

Topographic maps have been collected.
▪ Digital Elevation Model 30mX30m resolution
▪ Geomorphology/soil and land use/cover of the project area were
acquired.
▪ From the National Meteorological Service Agency (NMSA) daily
highest rainfall data of around the project areas were collected.
7.5.2 Climate
Climate is influenced by latitude, altitude, land and water surfaces, mountain
barriers, local topography, and such atmospheric features as prevailing winds,
air masses and pressure centres. Although Ethiopia is located in the tropics,
temperatures vary greatly with altitude and large climate variation, from hot
arid to cool temperate, exist in the country. Generally, the adiabatic lapse rate is
about 6oc decrease per 100 m altitude increase.
7.5.3 Temperature
Basic average climate data covering the project area is presented in the
following tables.
Table 7-2: Mean Monthly Maximum and Minimum Temperature
Annual
Station Month Jan. Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Average
Max 25.42 25.46 25.51 24.90 24.22 22.88 21.46 21.87 22.41 23.53 23.97 24.54 23.85
Hawassa
Min 8.17 9.58 10.45 11.21 10.98 10.76 11.08 10.95 10.76 9.78 8.29 7.31 9.94
Max 25.55 25.71 25.95 25.27 24.84 23.85 22.03 22.38 22.7 23.66 24.22 24.72 24.24
Kofale
Min 7.1 8.42 9.35 10.32 10.15 9.8 10.4 10.35 9.91 8.95 7.22 6.4 9.03
Max 28.75 29.25 29 27.48 26.78 25.49 24.12 24.34 25.52 26.44 27.21 28.06 26.87
Wolayita
Soddo
Min 11.21 12.22 12.92 13.32 12.8 12.83 13 12.82 12.8 12.14 11.52 10.81 12.37
[Source: National Meteorological Services Agency]
____________________________________________________________________________
a. Hawassa Station
b. Kofele Station
c. Wolayita Soddo Station
Figure 7-1: Monthly Mean Maximum and Minimum Temperature at the stations
____________________________________________________________________________
7.5.4 Rainfall Data
Monthly rainfall data is used to demonstrate the rainfall pattern in & around the
project areas. Thus, the data for several years were collected and analyzed to
demonstrate the variation of rainfall prevalence in the area.
Maximum, Minimum and Mean monthly rainfall values at this station is given
in table 2.4 and the distribution of monthly mean rainfall is illustrated in Figure
7.2
Table 7-3: Monthly Mean, Max and Min Rainfall Data
Recorded rainfall data’s at

Month Hawassa Station
Mean Max. Min.
27.83 101.60 0.00
January
45.13 164.90 0.00
February
70.65 198.70 0.00
March
105.67 211.80 6.80
April
116.99 238.80 40.40
May
112.33 386.00 36.40
June
120.64 210.00 54.70
July
123.29 194.20 39.50
August
124.98 290.00 40.20
September
80.90 222.90 21.60
October
36.43 244.00 0.00
November
21.15 152.60 0.00
December
____________________________________________________________________________

Month Kofele Station
Mean Max. Min.
32.12 98.30 2.20
January
72.52 160.20 3.40
February
124.01 260.90 2.50
March
163.46 338.00 49.40
April
97.33 183.80 66.30
May
121.24 273.00 44.00
June
135.81 198.30 77.20
July
180.57 283.00 122.00
August
168.14 350.00 84.90
September
94.87 156.60 23.20
October
58.51 381.00 0.00
November
19.24 68.00 0.00
December
____________________________________________________________________________

Month Wolayita Soddo Station
Mean Max. Min.
36.16 142.90 0.00
January
51.63 226.20 0.00

February
88.61 292.60 0.00

March
185.39 452.80 21.20

April
176.53 400.30 30.50

May
185.15 602.00 31.80

June
211.26 692.70 25.90

July
196.19 918.90 21.20

August
162.83 736.90 15.20

September
105.96 403.80 0.00

October
50.07 274.80 0.00

November
33.11 196.60 0.00

December
____________________________________________________________________________
Distributed Mean Monthly Rainfall on the

Project Area
250
200
150
100
50
0
Figure 7-2: Monthly Mean Rainfall Distribution of the project Area
The mean annual rainfall distribution is higher from April to September but highest in
April and July, when the project area receives frequent and peak rainfall prevalence.
Rainy season in the project area is therefore expected from April to September;
whereas the rest of months can be considered as little rainfall occurrence.
7.5.5 Hydrologic Soil type
The soil type and thickness in the project area is a function of geology, geomorphology
and climate and the hydrologic soil grouping is classified by the Ministry of Water
Resources Metadata Bases (Shape files) with 1: 50000 scale. The Hydrologic soil
grouping for each catchment is identified from examination of available soil maps and
physical assessment done on site.
Accordingly the percentage area coverage of soil types of the catchments and their
Hydrologic Soil Group as per ERA DDM 2002 were as tabulated below.
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 7-4: Soil Types of the Catchments and their Hydrologic Soil Group
Ana Name Soil Type Percentage Hydrologic Soil

Area Group
Vitric Andosols 31% B
B
Eutric 0.57%
Nitosols/Chromic
Luvisols
B
Chromic 42%
Shashemene
Luvisols
18.0% D
Chromic
Vertisols/ Eutric
Nitosols
15.43%
Mollic Andosols B
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Figure 7.3 Soil Types of the Catchments
____________________________________________________________________________
7.5.6 Topography
Generally the topography of the road project is characterized by mostly rolling with
some flat terrain.
Chebidida gnata-
Culule Habera
Project
B/Filcha-Jigesa-
Meraro-Danisa
Awasho-Sole-
J/Wandaree
Fig 7.4 Topography of the Catchments of Shashamane Aanaa Projects
____________________________________________________________________________
7.5.7 Vegetation and Land Use

Land use and land cover for each catchment is identified from examination of available
Land Use and Land Cover maps, land use shape files and physical assessment done on
site. Based on the obtained data, it is tabulated as follows.
Table 7-5: Vegetation and Land Use Types of the Catchments Area
Ana Name Vegetation and Land Use Percentage Remark

Area
Shrub Cover, closed-open, 11.52%

deciduous
Herbaceous Cover, closed-open 0.37%
Cultivated and managed areas 37.64%

Shashemene
Mosaic: Cropland / Tree Cover / 36.99%

Other natu
Mosaic: Cropland / Shrub and/or 13.48%

grass cove
____________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 7-5: Vegetation and Land Use Types of the Catchments Area
____________________________________________________________________________
7.6 HYDROLOGY
7.6.1 General
The hydrological study was undertaken in order to compute and evaluate peak
discharges for all watercourses crossing the project road. Calculation of these peak
discharge values enabled the determination of the hydraulic opening sizes and types of
waterway required.
There are many methods developed for calculation of the design flood but their
applicability depends mainly on the availability of hydrological data. As most of the
methods have parameters which depends on climate and morphological condition. The
climate data (rainfall and intensity) and morphological condition of the project area
were collected and investigated to determine inputs data for the methods of flood
calculation like runoff coefficient, curve number, design point rainfall and rainfall
intensity of the project.
The hydrological analysis was undertaken using available maps and digital terrain
model together with the data acquired from Meteorological Services Agency.
Additional hydrological and geological information has been gathered from site visits
and different sources.
Rational formula and U.S. Soil Conservation Services (SCS) Unit hydrograph method
were adopted to compute the design discharge depending on the size of catchments as
per ERA LOW VOLUME manual) recommendation.
7.6.2 Return Periods (Design Frequency)
The frequency of the flood for the design of drainage structures depends on the risk
likely to be encountered during the anticipated service life of the road. Return period
with which a given flood can be expected to occur is the reciprocal of the probability
or chance that the flood will be equalled or exceeded in a given year. The drainage
facilities have been designed for recurrence interval as shown on the Table 7-6 as per
Drainage Design Manual of ERA recommendation.
____________________________________________________________________________
7.6.3 Catchment area Delineation
The study of the watershed characteristics extensively studied using site investigation
and topographic maps, (Data regarding catchment areas) i.e. watershed size and
shape, stream slope, stream length and land slope were determined from topographic
map scale 1:50,000 and satellite data DEM 30mx30m resolution.
The catchment areas of each watershed on the whole route corridor were delineated
from DEM data of 30mx30m resolution and topographic map 1:50,000. The sizes of
each catchment area were determined using Arc GIS software.
7.6.4 Rainfall - Runoff Models
There are various recognized methods and approaches for hydrologic/hydraulic design
of drainage facilities. The choice among the different methods depends on the
availability of hydro-meteorological data required by those models and their
appropriateness and applicability in the particular area of interest.
In areas like Ethiopia where there is scarcity of hydro-meteorological data, it is very

difficult and often impossible to use most of the state-of-the art models found
commercially. It is, therefore, essential to adapt to some empirical formulas, which can
reasonably and safely enable to estimate the flood associated with the required return
period.
For the purpose of flood estimation a number of methods have been considered for
further review as to their suitability and applicability. These are:
Modified Rational Method (MRM)
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) graphical Method
7.6.4.1 Rational Method
The Rational Method is most accurate for estimating the design storm peak runoff for
areas up to 50 ha (0.5 km2). The Method can be applied to small rural catchments if
they do not exceed 0.5 km2 as per ERADDM. The consequences of applying the
____________________________________________________________________________
Rational method to larger catchments is to produce an over estimate of discharge and a

non conservative design.
The rational formula is expressed as:
Q = 0.278C I A
Where:
Q =Maximum rate of runoff, m3/s
C =Runoff coefficient representing a ratio of runoff to rainfall (Table 7-6)
I =Rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the time of concentration and

for design return period, mm/hr
A =catchment area tributary to the design location, km2
____________________________________________________________________________
Chebidida gnata- Culule

Habera Project
A
w
a
s
h
o
-
S
o
l Butte Felicha-Jigesa-
e Meraro-Danisa Road
Figure 7-6: Streams and their catchment area crossing the road
____________________________________________________________________________
i) Runoff Coefficient (C)
Values shown in Table 3-2 are stipulated in ERADDM for determination of C

(for non urban catchments), depending on terrain type and hydrologic soil
grouping.
Table 7-6: Runoff Coefficients, C Value (Adopted from ERA, 2002 and FHWA manual)
Runoff
Factor Description
coefficient
<3.5% Flat 0.05
3.5% - 10% Soft to moderate 0.10

Average slope of
Cs 10% - 25% Rolling 0.15
catchment
25%-45% Hilly 0.2
>45% Mountainous 0.25
0.10
1.15
Well drained soil e.g. sand and gravel
Fair drained soil e.g sand and gravel with fines
Cp Permeability of
Poorly drained soil e.g silt
Soil 0.25
Impervious soil e.g clay, organic silts and clay
Water-logged black cotton soilRock 0.50
0.40
0.05
0.10
Dense first/thick bush
Sparse forest/dense grass 0.15
Cv Grassland/scrub
Vegetation
Cultivation 0.20
Space grassland
Barren 0.25
0.30
C = Cs + Cp + Cv
____________________________________________________________________________
ii) Rainfall Intensity
ERADDM divides the country into different rainfall region and for each
provides Intensity - Duration - Frequency IDF curves, and theKara - Golu
Road project lies on rainfall region B1. Based on this the rainfall intensity for
different return periods were used from the IDF curve of region B1 based on
ERA regional rainfall classification.
Figure 7-7: Rainfall Regions of Ethiopia (From ERA Drainage Design Manual classification 2002)
Project
Location
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 7-7: 24hr rainfall depth
24 hour Depth (mm) vs. Frequency (yrs)

Region
2 5 10 25 50 100
A1 A4 60 79 93 113 127 142
A2 A3 52 67 79 95 107 118
B C 65 84 98 118 132 147
D 67 89 105 127 144 161
Bahir Dar 74 106 131 163 187 211
iii) Time of Concentration
The rainfall intensity used in the rational method is determined from the time of
concentration (Tc). Tc is defined as the time required for surface runoff water
to flow hydraulically from the remotest point of the catchment to the point of
exit.
Tc = 0.0147* L1.155 H-0.385 (Kirpich /SCS Equation)
Where
Tc = time of concentration, minutes
L = maximum length of flow, m
H = elevation difference between the most remote and outlet, m
iv) Frequency Factor
As per ERADDM, the frequency factor is used to magnify the less frequent
storms, i.e. storms with recurrence interval greater than 10yr. Table 7-8 shows
the frequency factor values.
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 7-8: (ERA DDM) Frequency Factors for Rational Formula
Recurrence Interval (years) Cf
5 1.0
10 1.0
25 1.1
50 1.2
100 1.25
7.6.4.2 SCS Unit Hydrograph Method
This method is developed by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service for calculating rates
of runoff and requires the same basic data as the Rational Method: catchment area, a
runoff factor, time of concentration, and rainfall. The SCS approach, however, is more
sophisticated in that it considers also the time distribution of the rainfall, the initial
rainfall losses to interception and depression storage, and an infiltration rate that
decreases during the course of a storm. With the SCS method, the direct runoff can be
calculated for any storm, either real or fabricated, by subtracting infiltration and other
losses from the rainfall to obtain the precipitation excess.
i) Catchment Area
The catchment area will be determined from topographic maps and field surveys. For
large catchment areas it might be necessary to divide the area into sub-catchment areas
to account for major land use changes, obtain analysis results at different points within
the catchment area, or locate storm water drainage structures and assess their effects on
the flood flows. A field inspection of existing or proposed drainage systems has been
made to determine if the natural drainage divides have been altered. These alterations
could make significant changes in the size and slope of the sub-catchment areas.
____________________________________________________________________________
ii) Rainfall
The SCS method is based on a 24-hour storm event which has a Type II time
distribution. The Type II storm distribution is a typical time distribution which the
SCS has prepared from rainfall records. It is applicable for interior rather than the
coastal regions and should be appropriate for Ethiopia. To use this distribution it is
necessary for the user to obtain the 24-hour rainfall value for the frequency of the
design storm desired.
iii) Rainfall – Runoff Equation
A relationship between accumulated rainfall and accumulated runoff was derived by

SCS from experimental plots for numerous hydrologic and vegetative cover
conditions. Data for land-treatment measures, such as contouring and terracing, from
experimental catchment areas were included. The equation was developed mainly for
small catchment areas for which daily rainfall and catchment area data are ordinarily
available. It was developed from recorded storm data that included total amount of
rainfall in a calendar day but not its distribution with respect to time. The SCS runoff
equation is therefore a method of estimating direct runoff from 24-hour or 1-day storm
rainfall. The equation is:
(P − Ia)2
𝑄=
(P − Ia) + S
Where: Q = accumulated direct runoff, mm
P = accumulated rainfall (potential maximum runoff), mm
Ia= initial abstraction including surface storage, interception,

and infiltration prior to runoff, mm
S = potential maximum retention, mm
The relationship between Ia and S was developed from experimental catchment

area data. It removes the necessity for estimating Ia for common usage.
The empirical relationship used in the SCS runoff equation is:
____________________________________________________________________________
Ia = 0.2*S
Substituting 0.2*S for Ia, the SCS rainfall-runoff equation becomes:
(P − 0.2 ∗ S)2
𝑄=
(P + 0.8 ∗ S)
S is related to the soil and cover conditions of the catchment area through
the CN. CN has a range of 0 to 100, and S is related to CN by:
25400
S=
CN − 254
iv) Runoff Factors
Runoff is rainfall excess or effective rainfall - the amount by which rainfall exceeds
the capability of the land to infiltrate or otherwise retain the rainwater. The principal
physical catchment area characteristics affecting the relationship between rainfall and
runoff are land use, land treatment, soil types, and land slope.
A. Land Use
Land use is the catchment area cover, and it includes both agricultural and non
agricultural uses. Items such as type of vegetation, water surfaces, roads, roofs, etc. are
all part of the land use. Land treatment applies mainly to agricultural land use, and it
includes mechanical practices such as contouring or terracing and management
practices such as rotation of crops.
The SCS uses a combination of soil conditions and land-use (ground cover) to assign a
runoff factor to an area. These runoff factors, called runoff curve numbers (CN),
indicate the runoff potential of an area. The higher the CN, the higher is the runoff
potential.
B. Hydrologic Soil Groups
Soil properties influence the relationship between rainfall and runoff by affecting the
rate of infiltration. The SCS has divided soils into four hydrologic soil groups based on
infiltration rates (Groups A, B, C, and D). These shall be given to the effects of
____________________________________________________________________________
urbanization on the natural hydrologic soil group. If heavy equipment can be expected
to compact the soil during construction or if grading will mix the surface and
subsurface soils, appropriate changes shall be made in the soil group selected. Also
runoff curve numbers vary with the antecedent soil moisture conditions, defined as the
amount of rainfall occurring in a selected period preceding a given storm. In general,
the greater the antecedent rainfall, the more direct runoff there is from a given storm. A
five-day period is used as the minimum for estimating antecedent moisture conditions.
C. Runoff Curve Numbers
The ERA Design Manual gives a series of tables related to runoff factors. The tables
are based on an average antecedent moisture condition, i.e., soils that are neither very
wet nor very dry when the design storm begins. Curve numbers shall be selected only
after a field inspection of the catchment area and a review of cover type and soil maps.
Care shall be taken in the selection of curve numbers (CN's). Use a representative
average curve number, CN, for the catchment area. Selection of overly conservative
CN’s will result in the estimation of excessively high runoff and consequently
excessively costly drainage structures. Selection of conservatively high values for all
runoff variables results in compounding the runoff estimation. It is better to use
average values and design for a longer storm frequency.
v) Time of Concentration (Tc)
Time of concentration (Tc) is the time for runoff to travel from the hydraulically most
distant point of the catchment area to a point of interest within the catchment area. Tc
for the river bridge hydrology is computed by using Kirpich time of concentration
formula shown below. Kirpich assumes that the catchment coverage is Agricultural
area, well drained soil and steep watershed slope.
𝐿0.77
𝑇𝑐 = 0.0078 ∗ ( )
𝑆 0.385
Where Tc = time of concentration (min)
L = length of overland flow (m)
S = slope (m/m)
____________________________________________________________________________
vi) Ia/p Parameter
Ia/p is a parameter that is necessary to estimate peak discharge rates. Ia denotes the
initial abstraction and p is the 24 hour rainfall depth for a selected return period. The
24 rainfall depth is taken from ERA drainage design manual for rainfall region B1. For
a given 24 hour rainfall distribution Ia/P represents the fraction of rainfall that must
occur before runoff begins.
vii) Peak Discharge Estimation
The following equation were used for the estimation of the peak discharge in SCS
method
qp =qu*A*Q
Where qp = peak discharge, m3/s
qu = unit peak discharge, m3/s/km2/mm
A = drainage area, Km2
Q = depth of runoff, mm
The unit peak discharge is obtained from the following equation, which
requires the time of concentration (tc) in hours and the initial abstraction
rainfall (Ia/p) ration as input:
2
qu = ∝ ∗ 10𝐶𝑜+𝐶1𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑡𝑐+𝐶2(𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑡𝑐)
Where Co, C1 and C2 = regression coefficients given in table 7-9 for

various Ia/p ratios: = unit conversion factor equal to 0.000431 in SI
unit.
Table 7-9: Coefficients for SCS Peak Discharge Method
Rainfall Ia/P C0 C1 C2
Type
0.10 2.306 -0.514 -0.117
I 0.20 2.235 -0.504 -0.089
0.25 2.182 -0.485 -0.066
____________________________________________________________________________
0.30 2.106 -0.457 -0.028
0.35 2.003 -0.408 0.020
0.40 1.877 -0.323 0.058
0.45 1.763 -0.156 0.005
0.50 1.679 -0.069 0.000
0.10 2.033 -0.316 -0.137
0.20 1.920 -0.282 -0.070
IA 0.25 1.838 -0.255 -0.026
0.30 1.726 -0.198 0.026
0.50 1.634 -0.091 0.000
0.10 2.553 -0.615 -0.164
0.30 2.465 -0.622 -0.117
0.35 2.419 -0.616 -0.088

II
0.40 2.364 -0.599 -0.056
0.45 2.292 -0.570 -0.023
0.50 2.203 -0.516 -0.013
0.10 2.473 -0.518 -0.171
0.30 2.396 -0.512 -0.132
0.35 2.355 -0.497 -0.120

III
0.40 2.307 -0.465 -0.111
0.45 2.249 -0.413 -0.115
0.50 2.178 -0.368 -0.095
The result of hydrological design /peak flood computation using Rational

and SCS method is presented in the appendix 1-3.
____________________________________________________________________________
7.7 HYDRAULICS
7.7.1 General
In the previous chapter, the runoff of the catchment area is determined in the previous
section. The next step is to provide adequate, economical and sustainable drainage
system that suite the site conditions for design discharge. This section deals with
design of waterway and selection of appropriate drainage structure type.
7.7.2 Hydraulic Design Standard
The chief aim of this task was to determine the opening sizes of the drainage structures
from the rate of flood runoff (discharge) and the volume of runoff that will pass
through the bridge.
This method deploys the hydraulic characteristics of the stream influencing the
maximum discharge, such as velocity of flow, slope of the stream, cross sectional area
of the stream and shape and roughness of the stream. This method will be used for
major streams to compute the design flood levels at crossing sites after the design
discharges have been estimated by the hydrological methods of either the SCS Unit
Hydrograph Method and compared with the observed flood marks. Cross-Sections of
the crossing sites are being determined by the survey.
7.7.2.1 Manning’s Formula of Hydraulic Analysis
This method deploys the hydraulic characteristics of the stream influencing the
maximum discharge, such as velocity of flow, slope of the stream, cross sectional area
of the stream and shape and roughness of the stream. This method is used for the
design flood levels at crossing sites after the design discharges have been estimated by
the hydrological methods of the SCS Unit Hydrograph Method. Cross-Sections of the
crossing sites have been determined by the survey. Accordingly, the following
Manning’s equation is used for high-water computations:
1 2 1
Q = ∗ R ∗ S2 ∗ A
3
n
Where:
Q = Discharge in [m3/sec]
____________________________________________________________________________
R = Hydraulic mean depth [m] = A/P
A = Cross-sectional flow area [m2]
P = Wetted perimeter [m]
S = Longitudinal bed slope [%]
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
Table 7-10: Free board recommendation ERA 2002
Discharge, Freeboard (m)

Q (m3/s)
0 – 3.0 0.3
3.0 -30 0.6
30 -300 0.9
> 300.0 1.2
Scour: Scour is an important parameter used in bridge hydraulics and structural

design. However, in most cases such practical method of determining scour is
not possible and a theoretical method is used when dealing with natural
streams. The following empirical equation where used to estimate the scour
depth at the bridge abutment and pier locations:
𝑄
D = 0.473 [ 𝑓 ] 1/3
Where, D = Depth of scour below HFL for regime conditions in a stable

channel in meters.
Q = Designed discharge in m3/s
f = Lacy’s silt factor for representative sample of the bed material which is
equal to 1.76 M, with ‘M’ = the mean diameter of particles in mm.
____________________________________________________________________________
Table 7-11: Recommended ‘f’ value for various Soil Types
Bed Material Mean Particle Diameter ‘f’ Value
Very fine silt 0.052 mm 0.400
Fine silt 0.120 mm 0.600
Medium silt 0.230 mm 0.850
Standard silt 0.323 mm 1.000
Medium sand 0.505 mm 1.250
Coarse sand 0.725 mm 1.500
Very coarse sand or gravel 1.290 mm 2.000
For the calculation of the maximum scour depth and depending on the location of the
drainage structure in the river bed the following factors are used:
- Maximum scour depth in a straight channel 1.27 D

- Maximum scour depth at a moderate channel bend 1.50 D
- Maximum scour depth at a severe channel bend 1.75 D
- Maximum scour depth at a right angled channel bend
2.00 D
- Maximum scour depth at the nose of piers 2.00 D
- Maximum scour depth at upstream noses of guide banks 2.75 D
For bridges causing constrictions of the stream/river channel (e.g. with piers) or
where the section of the stream/ river channel is not uniform or where there are
main currents with scour channels in the bed, the maximum scour depth is
determined by the following formula:
D1 = D ( ) 1.56
Where, D1 = the maximum scour depth.
D = estimated scour depth by the above formula
____________________________________________________________________________
W = Regime width of the stream.
L = Obstructed width of water way under the bridge.
7.7.3 Culvert Design Criteria
For the design of small drainage structures, i.e. culverts less than 2m, the use of inlet
control with a ratio of upstream head and the height of culvert of 1.2 has been used,
which is lower than the 1.5 recommended in the DDM. This yields approximately the
optimum hydraulic section, and was used for determining the height of embankment
over the culvert taking the norms for freeboard into account.
The following design limitations are required for the culverts.
Allowable Headwater is the depth of water that can be pounded at the

upstream end of the culvert that will be limited by one or more of the
following:
 Non-damaging to upstream property;

 No higher than the shoulder or 0.3 m below the edge of shoulder;
 Equal to an HW/D not greater than 1.5;
 Not higher than the low point in the road grade; and/or
 Equal to the elevation where flow diverts around the culvert.
The Headwater is the flood depth that:
 Does not exceed 0.5 cm increase over the existing 100-year in the
vicinity of buildings or dwellings, and
 Has a level of inundation that is tolerable to upstream property and

roadway for the review discharge.
It has been utilized the DDM which refers to various monographs and design
formulae for determining the design discharge. Additionally for ease of
calculation and to reduce monograph reading errors the discharge for inlet
control has been used by the following formula
Q = C A N [2g(H - 0,5D)]1/2
____________________________________________________________________________
Where:
Q is the discharge (m3/s)

H is the maximum design headwater level (m)
D is the diameter of a pipe culvert or height of a box
culvert (m)
g is the acceleration of gravity (9.81m/s2)
A is the cross-sectional area of the culvert, D2/4 for pipe culverts and
Dx width for box culverts (m2)
N is the number of pipe or box culverts of equal size
C is a dimensionless discharge coefficient varying with
H/D.
1.0 < H/D < 1.5 : C varies linearly from 0.55 to 0.60 For
Box culverts
1.0 < H/D < 1.5: C varies linearly from 0.55 to 0.61 For Pipe
culverts
Estimation of the outflow velocities was based on balancing the energy

equation between culvert inlet and outlet, assuming non-submerged conditions
at the culvert outlet, and expressed by the following formula:
H1 + Z1 = y2 +v22/2g + hf + hl
Where:
H1 depth of flow at point 1 upstream of inlet (m)
Z1 bed level at outflow point 1 (m)
y2 depth of flow at point 2 (m)
v2 flow velocity at point 2 (m/s)
g is the acceleration of gravity (9.81m/s2)
hf friction losses between point 1 and 2 (m)
hf = [(n*v)/r0.667]2 *L
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient (0.015 for smooth concrete)

v = average velocity between 1 and 2 (m/s)
r = average hydraulic radius between 1 and 2 (m)
____________________________________________________________________________
L = culvert length (m)

hl losses at inlet (m)
hl = k*v22/2g
Where the recommended ‘k’ values are:
Wing walls between 30° and 75° - 0.25

Wing walls 15° and 90° -0.5
Culvert face shaped to fill slope -0.7
Wing walls at 0° (extension of culvert sides) -0.9
7.7.4 Recommended Hydraulic Structures

7.7.4.1 Chebidida Nyaata- Culule Habera Project
Table 7-12: Hydrologic / Hydraulic Summary of Crossing Structures Chebidida

Nyaata- Culule Habera site
New Hydraulic Structures Recommendation & Existing Structures
Coordinate NO Span/External
Height
S.No Type of Dia
X Y (m)
cell (m)
1 447100.000 801351.000 FORD 4
2 447460.000 801990.000 PIPE 1 0.9144
3* 447914.000 803197.000 Bridge(EX) 11
4 448811.000 810666.000 PIPE 2 0.9144
5 448631.000 808663.000 FORD 12
*EX= Existing Structure
a) Shashemene-J/Wandaree road project
____________________________________________________________________________
7.7.4.2 Awasho-Sole-J/Wandaree Project Site
Table 7-13: Hydrologic / Hydraulic Summary of Crossing Structures for Shashemene–

J/Wandaree Project site
S.No New Hydraulic Structures Recommendation
Coordinate Span/External
NO Height
Type Dia
X Y of cell (m)
(m)
1 458989.000 793391.000 FORD 4
2 459685.000 792992.000 PIPE 1 0.9144
3 460363.000 792708.000 PIPE 1 0.9144
4 461496.000 792070.000 FORD 5
5 462845.000 791157.000 FORD 5
6 463530.000 790242.000 PIPE 2 0.9144
7 464335.000 788839.000 PIPE 2 0.9144
8 464899.000 787964.000 FORD 5
9 465900.000 786859.000 FORD 5
10 466270.000 786751.000 PIPE 1 0.9144
11 467244.000 784863.000 PIPE 1 0.9144
12 467897.000 784166.000 FORD 4
____________________________________________________________________________
7.7.4.3 Buttee Filichaa- Danisaa Project Site
Table 7-14: Hydrologic / Hydraulic Summary of Crossing Structures for Buttee

Filichaa– Jigesa-Meraro-Danisaa Project site
New Hydraulic Recommendation
S.No Coordinate
NO of Span/Dia Height
Type
cell (m) (m)
X Y
1 459083.000 797316.000 FORD
2 460071.000 796977.000 RELIEF PIPE 1 0.9144
SLAB
3 463096.000 796017.000
CULVERT(EX)
4 463261.000 796170.000 FORD 4
5 464522.000 795313.000 FORD 4
6 464857.000 794916.000 FORD 4
7 465790.000 794437.000 SLAB/BOX 10 5
8 466740.000 794101.000 FORD 4
9 467189.000 793440.000 FORD 4
10 468223.000 792695.000 Bridge 10 4.60
11 468604.000 792683.000 PIPE 2 1.219
12 469350.000 792288.000 Bridge 10 4.60
13 469837.000 791888.000 FORD 4
14 470025.000 791725.000 FORD 4
15 472503.000 789148.000 FORD 4
16 473049.000 788259.000 FORD 4
17 473762.000 787613.000 FORD 4
18 475025.000 786582.000 FORD 4
19 475379.000 786641.000 FORD 4
20 476047.000 785851.000 FORD 4
____________________________________________________________________________
8. DESIGN OF BRIDGES AND MINOR DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
There are five existing drainage structure along the proposed roads as inspected and
assessed during the engineering survey phase of the projects, four along Buttee
Filichaa-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisa project and one along CabiDida Nyaata-Culule Habara
project sites; while there is no existing drainage structure along Awasho-Sole-
J/Wandaree project route.
Among four existing structures along Buttee Filichaa-Danisa project site only the first
structure, which is Slab culvert is structurally sound and can accommodate the current
and the future traffic flow with minor masonry repair. While the other three are
wooden bridges which are not structurally sound (one not passable for even small
vehicle currently), and need for new drainage structure construction with their
hydraulic size indicated in Table 7.14 and the detail on structural drawing submitted.
The single existing slab bridge along Cabidida Nyaata-Culullee Habara project route,
which is constructed by ORA is new and can accommodate the prevailing and future
generated traffic.
The designs of the bridges and culverts have been based on the new Ethiopian Roads
Authority Drainage Design Manual (ERA DDM-2002).The standardization of culverts,
pipe or slab, meant no structural design was required in the design of culverts. The
opening requirement is determined based on both hydraulics and road geometry
considerations.
Three bridges with span of 10m have been provided for Butefilicha-Jigesa-Meraro-
Danisa route and single and double pipe culverts of diameter 36 “and 48” and fords
have been utilized for all routes. The concrete pipe culverts are precast in
approximately 1m lengths and for the foundation material pipe bedding of class B has
been designed to provide uniform support for the entire length of pipe.The details of
the material and specification requirements has been provided in the drawing for
bridge structures according to ERA 2001 design manual.
The following material properties are used in the design of the reinforced concrete pipe
culverts.
Compressive strength of concrete at 28 days, fc’ = 4000SI (27MPa)
____________________________________________________________________________
Steel Grade 40, fy = 40000 PSI (275 MPa).
8.1 Other Components of External Drainage Scheme
Adequate side, mitre drain and score checks scheme has been adopted as per the
provision in the LVRs manual. If the road has effective side drains and adequate crown
height, then the in situ sub-grade strength will stay above the design value. Hence, the
minimum crown height (h= 400mm for wet lands, h=300mm for dry lands) has been
maintained as per LVRs manual.
Erosion control in the side has been provided in the form of score checks (sometimes
called checks dam). Score checks are usually constructed with natural stone, masonry,
concrete or with wooden or bamboo stakes. In our case natural stone with wooden or
bamboo stakes has been selected for reason of cost and provided as per spacing shown
in the table below especially for steeper sections
Table 8-1: Spacing between score checks
Road Gradient (%) Score check interval(m)
3 Not required
4 17
5 13
6 10
7 8
8 7
9 6
10 5
12 3
It is normally best practice to discharge the water from the side drains as frequently as
possible. If the water can be discharged on the same side of road as the drain, a turn
____________________________________________________________________________
out or mitre drain is used to lead the water away. In order to ensure that water flows
out of the side drain, a block-off is required. The mitre drain has been adopted
maintaining the maximum spacing provided in the table below.
Table 8-2: Maximum spacing of mitre drains
Road Gradient(%) Max.mitredrain interval(m)
12 40
10 80
8 120
6 150
4 200
2 80
<2 50
Note: A maximum of 100m is preferred but not essential.
____________________________________________________________________________
Appendixes
____________________________________________________________________________
Appendix A-Laboratory Test Results for Sub-grade Soil

Engineering Design Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Design Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Design Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gambela People’s National Regional State SWS Consultancy

Water, Mines and Energy Bureau

GAMBELLA PEOPLE’S NATIONAL REGIONAL STATE

Engineering Report for Road Part

TABLE OF CONTENTS .........................................................................................................................ii

4.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 9

6.4 Construction of Digital Terrain Model (DTM) ........................................................................... 33

7.7.2 Hydraulic Design Standard .................................................................................................. 66

Figure 1-1: Location map

➢ Collection and review of available data

• Primary Control point and benchmarks establishment;

• Roadway cross section and profile;

2.2 Establishment of Control points and Benchmarks

2.3 Cross Section Surveying

At major junctions and locations where significant changes in alignment are

3. TRAFFIC SURVEY AND FORECAST

3.1 Traffic Survey

• The expansion of the town resulting in high probability of the road to be

4. SOIL AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATION

Preliminary soil and geotechnical field investigation works are undertaken to

• Sub grade investigation;

4.2 Subgrade Investigation

This investigation is undertaken to determine the physical characteristics of the

4.3 Sub grade Extension Survey

4.4 Test Pit Investigations

4.5 In–Situ Subgrade Characteristics

4.6 Existing Road Condition Survey

Table 4-1: Riding Quality of C/Didagnaata-C/Habara Road Project

Percentage as the Total

Table 4-2: Riding Quality of Awasho-Sole-J/Wandaree Road Project

Percentage as the total Riding

7+200 - 8+400 7.40 ITD

8+400 -13+100 29.00 VDTD

13+100-14+200 6.80 VPRQ

14+200 - 15+200 6.20 VDTD

15+200 – 16+200 6.20 VPRQ

Table 4-3: Riding Quality of B/Filicha-Jigesa-Meraro-Danisaa Road Project

Percentage as the total Riding

10+000-12+000 7.74 ITD

Percentage as the total Riding

13+000 – 15+100 8.10 ITD

15+100 – 20+000 18.96 VDTD

20+000 – 23+100 12.00 VPRQ

23+100 – 25+850 10.64 VDTD

4.7 In-Situ Strength Characteristics

The determination of the in-situ strength and characteristics of subgrade is important in

▪ 570mm dropping height

4.8 Construction Material Investigation

During the investigation possible sources of construction material would be identified,

4.8.1 Gravel Wearing Course

4.8.2 Improved Subgrade and Embankment Material

25.6km & 30.63km from - Hill forming, red ash mixed

Table 4-5: Summary of Improved Subgrade Material Sources (Borrow Pits)

Chaina RHS/ Offset Material Remark

ge, km LHS (km) Description

Red clay mixed For use in Awasho-

4.8.3 Rock Quarry

Table 4-6: Summary of Rock Quarry Sources

Chainage, Offset, Material