INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION—2013 DESIGN MANUAL

CHAPTER 203

Hydraulics and Drainage

Design

Design Revision
Sections Affected
Memorandum Date
13-04 Mar. 2013 203-2.02(10), 201-1.05 through 201-1.08
13-05 Mar. 2013 203-2.02(02)
203-2.02(09), 203-2.02(15), 203-2.06(04), 203-4.04(06),
13-11 May 2013
Figure 203-4E, Figure 203-4 I
16-19 May 2016 203-2.02(02)
16-21 May 2016 203-2.02(13), Figure 203-2F
203-2.02(02), 203-2.02(11) thru 203-2.02(15), 203-3.03(02),
17-07 Apr. 2017 203-4.04(03), 203-4.04(07), 203-4.04(09), 203-4.04(16), and
Figures 203-2A and 203-2B
203-2.04, 203-2.04(04) and 203-3.06
22-08 Apr. 2022
Figures 203-2L and 203-3C (deleted)
22-24 Dec. 2022
203-2.03(04)
Rev Feb. 2023
23-01 Jan. 2023 203-2.02(15) & Figure 203-2D
23-13 Sep. 2023 203-2.02, 203-2.08 (added)
 23-19 Nov. 2023 Figure 203-2G

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 7
203-1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 9
203-2.0 Small Structures ................................................................................................................ 9
203-2.01 Introduction [Rev. Apr. 2017] .................................................................................... 9
203-2.02 Small Structure Policy [Rev. Mar. 2013, May 2013, May 2016, Apr. 2017, Sep.
2023]................................................................................................................................ 10
203-2.02(01) Site Criteria .................................................................................................... 11
203-2.02(02) Allowable Headwater (AHW) [Rev. Mar. 2016, Apr. 2017] ........................ 12
203-2.02(03) Roadway-Serviceability Freeboard ................................................................ 14
203-2.02(04) Structure Freeboard ........................................................................................ 14
203-2.02(05) Maximum Velocity ........................................................................................ 14
203-2.02(06) Minimum Velocity ......................................................................................... 14
203-2.02(07) Temporary or Permanent Storage .................................................................. 14
203-2.02(08) Culvert Skew .................................................................................................. 14
203-2.02(09) Cover [Rev. May 2013] ................................................................................. 14
203-2.02(10) Culvert Sumping [Rev. Mar. 2013] ............................................................... 15
203-2.02(11) Culvert Sizing Process ................................................................................... 16
203-2.02(12) Pipe Culvert Interior Designation [Rev. May 2016] ...................................... 16
203-2.02(13) Pipe Lining ..................................................................................................... 17
203-2.02(14) Pipe or Box Extension Structure Sizing Process [Rev. May 2013, Apr. 2017]
..................................................................................................................................... 18
203-2.02(15) Energy Dissipator [Rev. Jan. 2023] ............................................................... 19
203-2.03 Design Considerations .............................................................................................. 20
203-2.03(01) Culvert Location ............................................................................................ 20
203-2.03(02) Culvert-Hydrology Methods .......................................................................... 20
203-2.03(03) Tailwater Relationship ................................................................................... 20
203-2.03(04) Inlet or Outlet End Treatment [Rev. Dec. 2022, Feb. 2023].......................... 20
203-2.03(05) Pipe Length Determination ............................................................................ 22
203-2.03(06) Buoyancy Protection ...................................................................................... 22
203-2.03(07) Relief Opening ............................................................................................... 23
203-2.03(08) Erosion and Sediment Control ....................................................................... 23

Page 2 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 203-2.03(09) Improved End Treatment ............................................................................... 23
203-2.04 Design Procedures [Rev. Apr. 2022] ........................................................................ 25
203-2.04(01) General ........................................................................................................... 25
203-2.04(02) Headwater Factors.......................................................................................... 26
203-2.04(03) Tailwater Factors............................................................................................ 26
203-2.04(04) Energy Dissipator [Rev. Apr. 2022] .............................................................. 26
203-2.05 Specialty Structure.................................................................................................... 28
203-2.05(01) Precast Concrete Box Culvert ........................................................................ 28
203-2.05(02) Precast Concrete Oversize Box Structure ...................................................... 28
203-2.05(03) Precast Concrete Three-Sided Structure ........................................................ 29
203-2.06 Specialty Structure Requirements ............................................................................ 33
203-2.06(01) Wingwalls and Headwalls .............................................................................. 33
203-2.06(02) Reinforcement Treatment .............................................................................. 34
203-2.06(03) Scour Considerations ..................................................................................... 35
203-2.06(04) Backfilling [Rev. May 2013] ......................................................................... 35
203-2.06(05) Plans Details, Design Computations, and Working Drawings ...................... 36
203-2.07 Documentation ......................................................................................................... 36
203-2.08 Replacement in Kind Policy [Add Sep. 2023] .................................................. 38
203-2.08(01) Condition Requirements for Replacement in Kind [Add Sep. 2023] ..... 38
203-2.08(02) Design Criteria for Replacement in Kind Culvert[Add Sep. 2023]........ 39
203-3.0 BRIDGE ......................................................................................................................... 40
203-3.01 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 40
203-3.02 Bridge Policy [Added Apr. 2017] ............................................................................ 40
203-3.02(01) Allowable Backwater [Rev. Apr. 2017] ........................................................ 41
203-3.02(02) Road-Serviceability Freeboard [Rev. Apr. 2017] .......................................... 42
203-3.02(03) Bridge Freeboard [Rev. Apr. 2017] ............................................................... 42
203-3.02(04) Bridge Waterway Velocity [Rev. Apr. 2017] ................................................ 43
203-3.02(05) Upstream Structure Impacts [Added Apr. 2017] ........................................... 43
203-3.02(06) Bridge Sizing [Rev. Apr. 2017] ..................................................................... 44
203-3.02(07) Channel Clearing ........................................................................................... 46
203-3.02(08) Temporary Runaround Bridge ....................................................................... 46
203-3.02(09) Bridge that Requires an IDNR CIF Permit [Rev. Apr. 2017] ........................ 46
203-3.03 Design Considerations .............................................................................................. 47
203-3.04 Design Procedure...................................................................................................... 48
203-3.04(01) Bridge Hydraulics Modeling.......................................................................... 48
203-3.04(02) Scour .............................................................................................................. 50
203-3.04(03) Scour Hydraulics Modeling Using HEC-RAS............................................... 51
203-3.04(04) Pressure-Flow Scour ...................................................................................... 52
203-3.05 Determination of Hydraulic and Scour Data Parameters ......................................... 53
203-3.06 Documentation [Rev. May 2015, Apr. 2022] ........................................................... 55

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 3

203-4.0 PAVEMENT AND STORM DRAINAGE .................................................................... 56
203-4.01 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 56
203-4.02 General Policy .......................................................................................................... 56
203-4.03 Design Considerations .............................................................................................. 57
203-4.03(01) Corridor Plan .................................................................................................. 57
203-4.03(02) Local Issues .................................................................................................... 57
203-4.03(03) Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 57
203-4.03(04) Downstream Conditions................................................................................. 57
203-4.03(05) Environmental Issues ..................................................................................... 58
203-4.03(06) Roadway Drainage ......................................................................................... 58
203-4.03(07) Bridge-Deck Drainage ................................................................................... 59
203-4.03(08) Construction and Maintenance ...................................................................... 59
203-4.04 Design Procedure and Criteria.................................................................................. 60
203-4.04(01) Data Collection and Preliminary Sketch ........................................................ 60
203-4.04(02) Inlet Location ................................................................................................. 60
203-4.04(03) Inlet Spacing and Spread [Rev. Apr. 2017] ................................................... 60
203-4.04(04) Pipe Capacity, Non-Pressure Flow ................................................................ 62
203-4.04(05) Hydraulic Gradient, Pressure Flow ................................................................ 62
203-4.04(06) Minimum Pipe Diameter and Design Velocity [Rev. May 2013] ................. 62
203-4.04(07) Pipe Cover [Rev. Apr. 2017] ......................................................................... 62
203-4.04(08) Connecting Inlets and Manholes .................................................................... 63
203-4.04(09) Sag Vertical Curve and Flanking Inlets [Rev. Apr. 2017] ............................. 63
203-4.04(10) Slotted Drain .................................................................................................. 64
203-4.04(11) Underdrains .................................................................................................... 66
203-4.04(12) Roadside or Median Ditch ............................................................................. 66
203-4.04(13) Curb and Gutter.............................................................................................. 66
203-4.04(14) Shoulder Gutter or Curb................................................................................. 67
203-4.04(15) Impact Attenuator .......................................................................................... 67
203-4.04(16) Bridge Deck Drainage [Rev. Apr. 2017] ....................................................... 67
203-4.04(17) Storm-Drainage Agreement Policy ................................................................ 70
203-4.04(18) Computer Programs ....................................................................................... 72
203-4.05 Documentation ......................................................................................................... 72
203-4.05(01) Spread Calculations for Inlet Spacing............................................................ 72
203-4.05(02) Storm Sewer Capacity.................................................................................... 72
203-4.05(03) Hydraulic Grade Line Check ......................................................................... 72
203-4.05(04) Plan and Profile .............................................................................................. 73
203-4.05(05) Additional Information .................................................................................. 73
203-5.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND DETENTION ............................................. 73
203-5.01 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 73
203-5.02 General Policy .......................................................................................................... 73

Page 4 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 203-5.02(01) Reasons for Storage ....................................................................................... 73
203-5.02(02) Downstream Conditions................................................................................. 74
203-5.02(03) Local Jurisdictional Requirements ................................................................. 74
203-5.03 Design Considerations .............................................................................................. 74
203-5.03(01) Detention Pond............................................................................................... 75
203-5.03(02) Retention Pond ............................................................................................... 75
203-5.03(03) Roadside Ditch Detention .............................................................................. 76
203-5.03(04) Underground Storage ..................................................................................... 76
203-5.03(05) Outlet Conditions ........................................................................................... 76
203-5.03(06) Maintenance ................................................................................................... 77
203-5.03(07) Safety Issues................................................................................................... 78
203-5.04 Design Procedure...................................................................................................... 78
203-5.04(01) Detention Pond............................................................................................... 79
203-5.04(02) Retention Pond ............................................................................................... 79
203-5.04(03) Roadside Ditch Detention .............................................................................. 80
203-5.04(04) Oversized Storm Sewer and Inline Detention ................................................ 80
203-5.04(05) Infiltration Trench .......................................................................................... 81
203-5.05 Pump Station ............................................................................................................ 81
203-5.06 Documentation ......................................................................................................... 81
203-6.0 CHANNEL OR DITCH ................................................................................................. 82
203-6.01 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 82
203-6.02 General Policy .......................................................................................................... 83
203-6.02(01) Significance.................................................................................................... 83
203-6.02(02) Design ............................................................................................................ 83
203-6.02(03) Federal Policy ................................................................................................ 83
203-6.02(04) INDOT Policy ................................................................................................ 84
203-6.03 Open-Channel Flow.................................................................................................. 84
203-6.04 Stream Channel ........................................................................................................ 85
203-6.04(01) Stream Morphology ....................................................................................... 85
203-6.04(02) Design Considerations ................................................................................... 85
203-6.04(03) Design Procedure ........................................................................................... 85
203-6.05 Roadside Channel or Other Ditches ......................................................................... 86
203-6.05(01) Design Considerations ................................................................................... 86
203-6.05(02) Design Procedure ........................................................................................... 87
203-6.05(03) Channel Lining............................................................................................... 89
203-6.06 Bank Protection ........................................................................................................ 90
203-6.06(01) Erosion Potential ............................................................................................ 91
203-6.06(02) Bank and Lining Failure Modes..................................................................... 92
203-6.06(03) Design Considerations ................................................................................... 92
203-6.06(04) Design Procedure ........................................................................................... 98

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 5

 203-7.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 110
FIGURES .................................................................................................................................... 113

Page 6 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title

203-2A Maximum Span Lengths for Culverts [Rev. Apr. 2017]

203-2B Minimum Pipe Culvert Size [Rev. Apr. 2017]
203-2C Design-Storm Frequency for Bridge or Culvert
203-2D Stream Velocity for Erosion Protection [Rev. Jan. 2023]
203-2E Pipe or Box Structure Sump Requirement
203-2F Recommended Manning’s n-Value for Culverts [Rev. May 2016]
203-2G Joint Probability Analysis[Rev. Nov. 2023]
203-2H Entrance-Loss Coefficient, Outlet Control, Full or Partly Full
203-2 I Entrance-Loss Coefficient, KE, for Standard Culvert
203-2J Minimum Riprap Apron Dimensions
203-2K Details of Riprap Basin Energy Dissipator
203-2L Riprap Basin Checklist [Del. Apr. 2022]
203-2M Riprap Basin Depth of Scour
203-2N Distribution of Centerline Velocity Flow from Submerged Outlets
203-2 O Oversize-Box-Culvert Segments Weight and Length
203-2P Determination of Acceptable Three-Sided Structure Alternates
203-2Q Three-Sided Structure Perpendicular-Span Designations
203-2R Three-Sided Structure-Rise Designations
203-2S Scour Protection of Channel at Three-Sided Structure
203-3A Values of Manning’s n for Uniform Flow
203-3B Riprap Scour Protection
203-3C Hydraulics Quality Assurance Checklist [Del. Apr. 2022]
203-4A Design Frequency for Allowable Water Spread
203-4B Compatibility of Drainage Structures and Castings
203-4C Manning’s n-Value for Street or Pavement Gutter
203-4D Inlet Capacity Chart
203-4E Inlet Spacing Computation Sheet [Rev. May 2013]
203-4F Manhole Types
203-4G Flanking Inlet Locations
203-4H Typical Floor Drain Sections
203-4 I Storm Drain Computation Sheet [Rev. May 2013]
203-5A Summary Performance Table for Storage
203-6A Maximum Velocity in a Drainage Ditch
203-6B Hypothetical Cross Section Showing Reaches, Segments, and Subsections Used in
Assigning n-Values
203-6C Lug Interval
203-6D Longitudinal Extent of Revetment Protection

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 7

203-6E Wave-Height Definition Sketch
203-6F Correction Factor for Wave Runup
203-6G Wave Runup on Smooth, Impermeable Slopes
203-6H Riprap-Toe Dimensions
203-6 I Geotextile Filter
203-6J Typical Riprap Installation: Plan and Flank Details
203-6K Typical Riprap Installation: Side View
203-6L Launching of Riprap-Toe Material
203-6M Rock and Wire Mattress Configuration
203-6N Rock and Wire Mattress Installation Covering Entire Channle Perimeter
203-6 O Standard Gabion Sizes
203-6P Criteria for Gabion Thickness
203-6Q Minimum Coating Weight
203-6R Flank Treatment for Rock and Wire Mattress Designs
203-6S Typical Stacked-Block-Gabion Revetment Details
203-6T Monoslab Revetment
203-6U Armorflex
203-6V Petraflex
203-6W Articulated Concrete Revetment
203-6X Tri-Lock Revetment
203-6Y Grouted Riprap Sections
203-6Z Grouted Fabric-Formed Revetment (Type 1)
203-6AA Grouted Fabric-Formed Revetment (Type 2)
203-6BB Details and Dimensions of Three Soil-Cement Facings Design Guidelines

Page 8 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

CHAPTER 203

HYDRAULICS AND
DRAINAGE DESIGN

203-1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Chapter describes aspects of highway drainage such as that for a small structure, bridge,
stormwater drainage, storage facility, pump station, or channel work. They should be accepted as
the most common uses and desirable course of action. There can be exceptions that deviate from
the policies shown. The Division of Hydraulics should be contacted for special considerations or
changes to a particular design.

The goal is a design that is the most cost-efficient while still satisfying the criterion described
below. In considering a cost-efficient drainage design, the initial cost should be considered, but
facility longevity and future maintenance costs and legal and environmental constraints should be
considered also.

203-2.0 SMALL STRUCTURES

203-2.01 Introduction [Rev. Apr. 2017]

This section provides design procedures for the hydraulic design of a highway small structure,
which are based on FHWA Hydraulic Design Series Number 5 (HDS #5) Hydraulic Design of
Highway Culverts. This Section also provides a summary of the design philosophy included in
the AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines, Chapter IV.

A small structure is defined as follows.

1. A structure used to convey surface runoff through an embankment.

2. FHWA defines a culvert as a structure with a span length of 20 ft or less along the centerline
of roadway between extreme ends of openings for multiple barrels. For the purposes of
asset management, the Department defines a culvert as a structure with a span length
measured along the roadway centerline ≥ 4 ft and ≤ 20 ft. Figure 203-2A, Span Length for
Culvert, provides schematics which define a culvert based on span length for various
structural configurations. A structure with a span length less than 4 ft is defined by the
Department as a pipe. For the hydraulic design of small structures, both culverts and pipes
have the same design criteria, regardless of nomenclature.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 9

3. A small structure, as distinguished from a bridge, which is covered with embankment and
is composed of structural material around the entire perimeter. However, it can be
supported on spread footings with the streambed serving as the bottom of the culvert.

4. A small structure such as a cast-in-place reinforced-concrete pipe, precast reinforced-

concrete pipe, structural-plate arch, etc., which is designed hydraulically to take advantage
of submergence to increase hydraulic capacity;

The culvert to be selected should best integrate hydraulic policy and economic and political
considerations. The selected culvert should be based on construction and maintenance costs, risk
of failure or property damage, roadside safety, land-use requirements, and satisfaction of the
applicable structural and hydraulic criteria. Culvert design should also consider the adjacent
channel. Considerations such as sumping, improved inlet, erosion at the inlet or outlet, are all an
integral part of culvert design.

The failure of, or damage to, a culvert or detention-basin outlet structure can be traced to
unchecked erosion. Erosive forces which are at work in the natural drainage network are often
exacerbated due to the construction of a highway or other urban development. Interception and
concentration of overland flow or constriction of a natural waterway inevitably results in an
increased erosion potential. To protect the culvert and adjacent areas, an energy dissipator can be
necessary.

203-2.02 Small Structure Policy [Rev. Mar. 2013, May 2013, May 2016, Apr. 2017, Sep.
2023]

The following policies are specific to a small structure. For the hydraulic design of small structures,
both culverts and pipes have the same design criteria, regardless of nomenclature.

1. Except as allowed in the Replacement in Kind Policy, each culvert should be hydraulically
designed. However, the minimum pipe size specified in Figure 203-2B will sometimes
control. See 203-2.08 for the Replacement in Kind Policy

2. HY-8 version 7.2 and the HEC-RAS culvert modules are the only computer programs
allowed for the hydraulic analysis of a culvert. The FHWA HDS #5 Hydraulic Design of
Highway Culverts is also acceptable and available from the FHWA website.

3. HY-8 and the HEC-RAS culvert module have design limitations if the structure span
approaches 20 ft. Therefore, in designing a replacement culvert, where the existing
structure has a span of 20 ft or greater measured perpendicular to flow, only the HEC-RAS
bridge module should be used for hydraulic analysis. Both the existing and proposed
structures should be analyzed using the same module.

Page 10 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

4. The Division of Hydraulics will be responsible for design,
review, and approval in accordance with 201-1.02.

5. The design-storm frequency selected should be consistent with the criteria described in
Figure 203-2C, Design-Storm Frequency for Bridge or Culvert.

6. Survey information should include topographic features, channel characteristics, high-

water information, existing-structure data, and other related site-specific information.

7. Culvert location in both plan and profile should approximate the alignment of the natural
channel to avoid sediment build-up in the barrel.

8. INDOT has a single-structure-opening policy to minimize debris accumulation.

9. The detail of documentation for each culvert site should be commensurate with the risk
and importance of the structure. Design data and calculations should be assembled in an
orderly fashion and retained for future reference as provided for in this Chapter.

10. The culvert design should incorporate the environmental requirements of IDNR, IDEM,
USACE, and other applicable resource agencies.

203-2.02(01) Site Criteria

1. Structure-Type Selection. A culvert is used at the locations as follows:

a. where a bridge is not hydraulically required;

b. where debris and ice are tolerable; or
c. where its use will be more economical than a bridge.

2. Length and Slope. The culvert length and slope should be chosen to approximate existing
topography and, as practical, the culvert invert should be aligned with the channel bottom
and the skew angle of the stream. The roadway clear-zone requirements and the
embankment geometry can dictate the culvert length. See Chapter 49.

3. Location in Plan. A severe or abrupt change in channel alignment upstream or downstream

is not recommended. The following apply.

a. A small culvert with no defined channel is placed perpendicular to the roadway

centerline.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 11

 b. A large culvert perpetuating drainage in a defined channel should be skewed as
necessary to minimize channel relocation and erosion.
c. All utilities should be located before determining the final location of a culvert to
minimize conflicts.

4. Location in Profile. The culvert profile should approximate the natural stream profile.
Exceptions which require approval by the Division of Hydraulics can be considered as
follows:

a. Arrest stream degradation by utilizing a drop-end treatment or broken-back culvert.

b. Improve hydraulic performance by utilizing a slope-tapered end treatment.
c. Avoid conflicts with other utilities that are difficult to relocate such as sanitary
sewers.

5. Debris Control. Debris control should be designed using HEC-9 Debris-Control

Structures, and can be considered as follows:

a. where experience or physical evidence indicates that the watercourse will transport
a heavy volume of controllable debris;
b. for a culvert under a high fill; or
c. where clean-out access is limited. However, access must be available to clean out
the debris-control device.

203-2.02(02) Allowable Headwater (AHW) [Rev. Mar. 2016, Apr. 2017]

Allowable headwater is the depth of water that can be ponded at the upstream end of a culvert
during the design flood. AHW will be limited by one or more of the following.

1. New Alignment. The maximum backwater, or increase in headwater elevation over the
sum of TW depth plus inlet flowline elevation, should not exceed 0.14 ft. The maximum
backwater may be modified if the backwater dissipates to 0.14 ft or less at the right-of-
way-line or the channel is sufficiently deep to contain the increased elevation without
overtopping the banks. If backwater remains within the channel banks or right of way, it
is limited to a maximum of 1 ft.

An exception to the 0.14 ft backwater allowance is subject to approval by the Division of

Hydraulics.

2. Existing Structure Replacement. Existing conditions are defined as the water-surface

profile that results from those encroachments that were constructed prior to December 31,

Page 12 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 1973 per Indiana Administrative Code. Each culvert with a diameter of 48 in. or greater
that is to be replaced will require a geotechnical report.

a. Design Criteria. Hydraulic modeling will be required to consider a replacement structure.

The program files should be submitted along with the hydraulic report and the version used
should be stated in the report. The following design criteria need to be met by the
replacement structure.

1) The replacement structure should have at least the same span and waterway area below
the 1% EP elevation as the existing structure.

2) In general, backwater should be calculated as follows: Q100 Headwater Elevation –

(Existing Inlet Invert Elevation + Q100 Tailwater Depth). If the backwater created by
an existing structure is greater than 3 ft, the proposed backwater for the culvert
replacement should be 3 ft or less. If the backwater created by an existing structure is
less than or equal to 3 ft, the proposed backwater for the culvert replacement should be
less than or equal to that of the existing backwater.

3) For upstream structure impacts concerning backwater requirements see Section 203-
3.02(05).

4) If existing scour issues exist, the design outlet velocity should be less than or equal to
the existing condition and no more than 150% of the natural (tailwater) velocity. If the
150% velocity is less than 6.5 fps, the proposed outlet velocity may reach up to 6.5 fps.

5) If a backwater depth of 1 ft is reached before the outlet velocity meets the natural
velocity comparison, the proposed structure may be designed to a maximum of 1 ft of
backwater regardless of the above velocity requirement.

6) Sumping depth, cutoff walls, and roadway serviceability, continue to apply to the
proposed structure.

If there are downstream constraints that could be negatively impacted by the design criteria,
the Hydraulic Division should be contacted for guidance.

3. Other. Other constraints on AHW include the following:

a. grades of adjacent drives;

b. elevation of existing cropland or other property.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 13

4. Inlet Depression. An inlet depression should be limited to a depth of not more than half of
the rise of the structure. If the structure is required to be sumped, an inlet depression should
not be used without prior approval of the appropriate resource agencies.

203-2.02(03) Roadway-Serviceability Freeboard

See Figure 203-2C, Design-Storm Frequency for Bridge or Culvert, for guidance regarding
roadway-serviceability freeboard and design-storm frequency.

203-2.02(04) Structure Freeboard

There is no structure freeboard requirement for a culvert.

203-2.02(05) Maximum Velocity

Riprap or an energy dissipator should be used to manage the design-outlet velocity. See Figure
203-2D.

203-2.02(06) Minimum Velocity

The minimum velocity in the culvert barrel should result in a tractive force, τ = γdS, greater than
critical τ of the transported streambed material at a low-flow rate. A flow rate of 3 ft/s should be
used if the streambed-material size is not known.

203-2.02(07) Temporary or Permanent Storage

Storage should not be considered. Because upstream storage is not typically controlled by INDOT,
it cannot be presumed to exist for the life of the structure.

203-2.02(08) Culvert Skew

The culvert skew should not exceed 45 deg as measured from a line perpendicular to the roadway
centerline, without the approval of the Division of Hydraulics.

203-2.02(09) Cover [Rev. May 2013]

For a circular pipe, a minimum of 1 ft of cover, measured from the top of the pipe to the bottom
of the asphalt or concrete pavement, should be provided. If the structure requires a deformed
corrugated-interior pipe material, at least 1.5 ft of cover should be provided. The cover for a
circular pipe structure should not exceed 100 ft. The cover for a deformed corrugated-interior pipe
structure should not exceed 13 ft. If the pavement grade or structure-invert elevations cannot be

Page 14 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

adjusted to satisfy the cover criteria discussed above, the Division of Hydraulics should be
contacted for additional instructions.

203-2.02(10) Culvert Sumping [Rev. Mar. 2013]

Sumping consists of placing the structure-invert elevation and scour protection at a specified depth
below the waterway or stream flowline to satisfy the IDEM Water Quality Section 401 permit
requirements. Sumping allows the natural movement of stream-bed material through the structure.
Sumping should be provided for each structure over Waters of the United States and Waters of the
State.

1. Three-Sided Structure. The sump depth should be 18 in. for a stream bed of sand, 12 in.
for a stream bed of other soil, or 3 in. for a stream bed of rock or till. The stream bed and
scour protection should be as shown on the INDOT Standard Drawings series 723-CCSP.
A base slab should be used only if the geotechnical report identifies flowline-area soil that
will not support riprap. No increase in structure size is required due to sumping. The sump
area will not require backfill as part of the contract work, but will be allowed to fill in
naturally over time.

2. Pipe or Box Structure. Such a structure should be sumped as shown on the INDOT
Standard Drawings series 714-BCSP and Figure 203-2E, Pipe- or Box-Structure Sump
Requirement.

If the required sump exceeds 3 in., the structure diameter or rise may need to be increased by the
sump value. The structure’s design capacity should be checked to determine if such increase is
required. If a pipe end section or riprap is required, these should be sumped to the same depth as
the structure. The sump area of the structure and end section or riprap will not require backfill as
part of the contract work, but will be allowed to fill in naturally over time.

Changes to the flowline elevation can occur between the initial project survey and construction.
Significant changes to the flowline elevation may require an adjustment to the invert or top of
footing elevation to ensure the appropriate sump is constructed. Where sumping is required, a note
should be placed on the General Plan sheet for Bridge Plans or Structure Details and General Notes
sheets for Road Plans as follows:

Contractor shall verify the existing flowline elevation to set the appropriate sump depth.

The designer should coordinate with the Division of Hydraulics to determine the necessary
elevation adjustments. Typically, if the difference between the flowline elevation shown on the
plans and existing flowline is half the sump depth or greater, the structure elevations should be
lowered accordingly to provide the sump as shown on the plans. If the existing flowline elevation

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 15

is higher than the flowline elevation shown on the plans, no changes are required to the structure
elevations.

Scour-protection limits should be shown on the plans. Quantities for geotextile and riprap, or a
base slab intended for scour protection, should be determined and identified as such in the Structure
Data table for each applicable structure. Appropriate columns have been incorporated into the
Structure Data table.

203-2.02(11) Culvert Sizing Process

The culvert sizing process is performed in accordance with a priority system. The design priority
system is as follows.

1. Single Circular Pipe Installation.

2. Single Deformed Pipe Installation.

3. Single Specialty Structure Installation.

4. Multiple Circular Pipes Installation.

5. Multiple Deformed Pipes Installation.

6. Multiple Specialty Structures Installation.

The principles of the priority system are summarized below.

1. A pipe structure is preferred to a specialty structure, e.g., precast reinforced-concrete box

section, precast reinforced-concrete three-sided culvert, structural plate arch.

2. A circular pipe is preferred to a deformed pipe.

3. A single-cell installation is preferred to a multiple-cell installation.

4. Multiple-cell installation should be considered as a last resort. If a multiple-cell installation

is being considered, the Division of Hydraulics should be contacted.

203-2.02(12) Pipe Culvert Interior Designation [Rev. May 2016]

For a circular pipe, smooth, semi-smooth, or corrugated alternates are required. For a deformed
pipe, both smooth and corrugated alternates are required. The smooth-interior hydraulic design

Page 16 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

will be based on a minimum Manning’s n value of 0.012. The semi-smooth interior will be based
on a minimum Manning’s n value of 0.015. For corrugated-pipe design, the Manning’s n value
should be in accordance with accepted engineering practice. See Figure 203-2F for typical values.
The two hydraulic designs for an individual structure will be based on identical pipe lengths and
invert elevations.

If separate hydraulic designs are performed for smooth and corrugated interior pipes, the following
situations are possible.

1. The required smooth interior, semi-smooth interior, and corrugated interior pipe sizes are
identical. The structure callout on the plans should include the required pipe size. No
reference to an interior designation is made.

2. The required smooth interior, semi-smooth interior, and corrugated interior pipe sizes are
different. The structure callout on the plans should indicate that the structure requires a
smooth pipe of one size, a semi-smooth pipe of another, or a corrugated pipe of another.

3. An acceptable pipe size can be determined for one interior designation but not the others.
If this occurs, the structure callout on the plans should indicate the required pipe size and
interior designation.

203-2.02(13) Pipe Lining

1. Introduction. Pipe lining is a technique for rehabilitating a culvert in poor condition where
replacement is difficult. Pipe lining can be used for a circular or deformed culvert.

The common types of pipe lining that have been standardized are high-density polyethylene
(HDPE) pipe or a cured-in-place (CIPP) system. If other types of pipe liners are to be
considered, the Division of Hydraulics should be contacted for approval. Pipe-lining
considerations include the following.

a. The structure barrel should be relatively straight, not significantly damaged, and
basically intact.
b. The backfill around the structure should be free from large voids.
c. There should be sufficient room to work from at least one end of the existing
structure.
d. The structure is in a location where a road closure is undesirable or impractical.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 17

2. Design Criteria. A structure may not increase backwater over existing conditions.
Exceptions to this will require justification and approval by the Division of Hydraulics.

a. Riprap scour protection should be used as shown in Figure 203-2D.

b. The smooth-interior hydraulic design will be based on a minimum Manning’s n
value of 0.012.
c. An HY-8 hydraulic analysis of each proposed pipe liner should be completed.
d. Deviation from the design criteria will require a design exception subject to
Division of Hydraulics approval.
e. The largest possible liner should be used, though a smaller liner can be
hydraulically adequate.
f. Because of cost, a CIPP liner should be considered only if the HDPE liner cannot
be applied. A CIPP liner should be used only in an existing structure with an
equivalent diameter of 96 in. or less.
g. A CIPP liner will reduce the existing structure size as follows.

(1) For an equivalent diameter of 24 in., the diameter is reduced by 1 in.

(2) For an equivalent diameter of 27 in. through 48 in., the diameter is reduced
by 2 in.
(3) For an equivalent diameter of 54 in. through 72 in., the diameter is reduced
by 3 in.
(4) For an equivalent diameter of 78 in. through 96 in., the diameter is reduced
by 4 in.

203-2.02(14) Pipe or Box Extension Structure Sizing Process [Rev. May 2013, Apr. 2017]

The sizing of a pipe or box extension structure should be in accordance with the following.

1. Perform Appropriate Hydraulic Analysis. Hydraulic analysis is required to determine the

acceptability of a pipe or box extension. A structure may be extended if the headwater
elevation does not exceed the existing headwater elevation or the headwater elevation stays
contained within the INDOT right-of-way or the upstream channel. Documentation
substantiating the containment within the right-of-way or channel must be provided.
Because the structure’s interior designation is known, it is necessary only to perform
hydraulic calculations appropriate for that interior designation.

2. Match Existing Pipe Size and Interior Designation. If practical, the pipe extension should
be the same size and material as the existing pipe. When metal pipe is selected, the base

Page 18 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 metal and coating specified shall match the existing pipe. However, at this stage, it is
necessary only to identify the required interior designation for the extension.

3. Headwalls and Anchors. Removal of headwalls or anchors damages the existing structure.
As a minimum, 40 in. of new structure should be placed for each headwall removed. Each
protruding headwall which is not in accordance with the obstruction-free-zone criteria
should be considered for removal or modification. A headwall which is shielded from
impact by guardrail should not be removed unless it is located within clearance range of
the guardrail as shown in Figure 49-4A.
4. Age and Condition. The remaining life expectancy of the existing structure should be
evaluated in comparison to the proposed extension.

If the extended structure satisfies the required design criteria, the structure-sizing process is
complete. If the extended structure does not satisfy the required design criteria, replacement of
the existing structure with a new structure should be considered. If it is not practical to replace the
existing pipe because of construction method, traffic maintenance, or other constraints, the
Division of Hydraulics should be contacted for further instructions.

A Structure Data Table should be included in the plans for drainage structures requiring
modification.

203-2.02(15) Energy Dissipator [Rev. Jan. 2023]

An energy dissipator is used to protect the culvert and downstream channel from scour. The two
primary types of scour are local scour and channel degradation. Local scour is the result of high-
velocity flow at the culvert outlet and extends only a limited distance downstream. Channel
degradation can proceed in a fairly uniform manner over a long length or can be evident in one or
more abrupt drops, or headcuts, progressing upstream with each runoff event.

The culvert should be designed independent of the dissipator design, with the exception of an
internal dissipator, which may require an iterative solution. The culvert design should be
completed before the outlet protection is designed and should include computation of outlet
velocity. The downstream channel protection should be designed concurrently with the dissipator
design.

A culvert will likely require outlet protection. The class of riprap used for outlet protection should
be sized in accordance with Figure 203-2D. For a side ditch that does not carry a live stream, sod
can be used at the outlet. Seeding should be used if the design velocity is less than 2 ft/s.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 19

Energy dissipators should be used for structures with a proposed outlet velocity greater than 13ft/s
and a span greater than 3ft. However, energy dissipators are not required for existing structures
with an outlet velocity greater than 13ft/s and do not show signs of scour.

203-2.03 Design Considerations

In addition to INDOT’s hydraulic policy, other design considerations that should be evaluated are
described below.

203-2.03(01) Culvert Location

A culvert should be located and designed to present a minimum hazard to vehicular and pedestrian
traffic. Where necessary as directed, a means should be provided for personnel and equipment
access to facilitate maintenance.

203-2.03(02) Culvert-Hydrology Methods

See Chapter 202 for information on hydrology. A constant peak discharge is assumed for culvert
design and will yield a conservatively-sized structure where temporary storage is available but not
considered.

203-2.03(03) Tailwater Relationship

A larger waterway downstream should be checked to determine if its flood elevations can
backwater through the system and affect road serviceability. If this potential exists, a joint stream
probability analysis should be performed (see Figure 203-2G) to check the correct storm events
that should be analyzed for potential road overtopping. The joint stream probability analysis is
based on the peak discharges of both the design stream and the larger downstream waterway
occurring at different times. The analysis compares the streams at different storm designs based
on their difference in drainage area.

203-2.03(04) Inlet or Outlet End Treatment [Rev. Dec. 2022, Feb. 2023]

The culvert end-treatment type should be selected from the list shown below based on the given
considerations and the entrance loss coefficient, KE. See Figures 203-2H and 203-2 I for the
recommended values of KE. Roadside safety should be considered in the selection and design.
See Chapter 49 for a discussion of practices for the safety treatment of a drainage structure.

The following discusses the types of culvert end treatments and their advantages and
disadvantages.

Page 20 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

1. Projecting Inlet or Outlet.

a. Extends beyond the roadway embankment.

b. Susceptible to damage during roadway maintenance or an errant vehicle.
c. Has a low construction cost.
d. Has poor hydraulic efficiency for thin material.
e. Should include anchoring the end treatment to strengthen the weak leading edge for
a culvert of diameter of 42 in. or larger.
f. Can be strengthened by use of a concrete collar, if necessary.

2. Mitered End Treatment.

a. Hydraulically more efficient than a thin edge projecting.

b. Should be mitered to match the fill slope.
c. Should include anchoring the end treatment to strengthen the weak leading edge for
a culvert of diameter of 42 in. or larger.

3. Improved End Treatment.

a. Should be considered for a culvert which will operate in inlet control.

b. Can increase the hydraulic performance of the culvert, but can also add to the total
culvert cost. Therefore, it should be used only if economically justified.

4. Pipe End Section.

a. Used to retain the roadway embankment to avoid a projecting culvert barrel.

b. Used where the side slopes of the channel are unstable.
c. Used where the culvert is skewed to the normal channel flow.
d. Provides the best hydraulic efficiency if the flare angle is between 30 and 60 deg.
e. Should be provided for a precast-concrete drainage structure.

5. Wingwall.

a. Available for either corrugated metal or concrete pipe.

b. Retards embankment erosion and incurs less damage from maintenance.
c. Can improve a projecting metal pipe entrance by increasing hydraulic efficiency,
reducing accident hazard, and improving the pipe entrance’s appearance.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 21

 d. Is hydraulically equivalent to a headwall, but can be equivalent to a beveled or side-
tapered entrance if a flared, enclosed transition occurs before the barrel.

6. Apron.

a. Used to reduce scour from a high headwater depth or from approach velocity in the
channel.
b. Should extend at least one pipe diameter upstream.
c. Should not protrude above the normal streambed elevation.
d. May be constructed of riprap and an appropriate geotextile or concrete.
e. Should be set at the structure invert elevation.

7. Cutoff Wall.

a. Used to prevent piping along the culvert barrel and undermining at the culvert end.
b. Should be used for all box structures with a concrete bottom.

• If bedding material (i.e. crushed stone, b borrow, etc.) is present, the cutoff wall
should extend 6 inches below the bedding material.
• If bedding material is not present, the depth of the cutoff wall should be a
minimum of 20 inches below the bottom of the culvert.

8. Weep Hole. A weep hole should not be used.

203-2.03(05) Pipe Length Determination

After the structure size and cover have been determined, the required length should be determined.
The design length for a culvert structure should be rounded to the next higher 1 ft.

203-2.03(06) Buoyancy Protection

Pipe end sections, concrete anchors, or other means of anchoring should be considered for a
flexible culvert where a projecting end treatment or outlet is used.

The severity of buoyancy depends on the steepness of the culvert slope, depth of the potential
headwater which debris blockage can increase, flatness of the upstream fill slope, height of the fill,
large culvert skew, or mitered ends. For anchor details, see the INDOT Standard Drawings section
715 and Standard Specifications.

Page 22 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

203-2.03(07) Relief Opening

Where a culvert serving as a relief opening has its outlet set above the normal stream flow line,
precautions should be made to prevent headcutting or erosion from undermining the culvert outlet.

203-2.03(08) Erosion and Sediment Control

Temporary measures should be shown on the plans. For more information, see Chapter 205.

203-2.03(09) Improved End Treatment

An improved end treatment is a flared culvert inlet with an enlarged face section and a
hydraulically-efficient throat section. An improved end treatment can have a depression, or fall,
incorporated into the end-treatment structure or located upstream of the end treatment. The
depression is used to exert more head on the throat section for a given headwater elevation.
Therefore, an improved end treatment improves culvert performance by providing a more-efficient
control section, which is the throat. An improved end treatment with a fall also improves
performance by increasing the head on the throat. For information concerning the design of an
improved end treatment, see HDS-5.

The selected culvert end treatment has the implications as follows.

1. A culvert end which is projecting or mitered to the fill slope offers no outlet protection.
2. Headwalls provide embankment stability and erosion protection. They provide protection
from buoyancy and reduce damage to the culvert.
3. Commercial end sections add little cost to the culvert and may require less maintenance,
retard embankment erosion, and incur less damage from maintenance.

Wingwalls are used where the side slopes of the channel are unstable, where the culvert is skewed
to the normal channel flow, to redirect outlet velocity, or to retain fill.

203-2.03(10) Energy Dissipator

In designing an energy dissipator, chosen alternatives should satisfy the topography, design
policies, and criteria. Alternatives should be analyzed for environmental impact, hydraulic
efficiency, and risk and cost. The selected dissipator should satisfy the selected structural and
hydraulic criteria. It should also be based on construction and maintenance costs, risk of failure
or property damage, traffic safety, environmental or aesthetic considerations, political or nuisance
considerations, and land-use requirements.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 23

The Division of Hydraulics allows a variety of energy-dissipator methods. These include
corrugated metal pipes, riprap aprons, riprap basins, internal dissipators, stilling basins, or other
external dissipators. The dissipator type selected for a site should be appropriate for the location.

Although technically not an energy dissipator, the higher Manning’s n value for a corrugated metal
pipe provides some velocity reduction at the outlet.
A riprap apron is the most commonly used form of energy dissipation and scour protection. It is
a riprap pad located at the outlet of the culvert. The minimum apron dimensions are shown in
Figure 203-2J, Riprap Apron. Site conditions can dictate a longer apron.

A riprap basin, also referred to as a designed scour hole, is the most common energy dissipator
where a riprap apron is not sufficient. It is acceptable for use where undermining of the culvert
outlet will not occur, the expected scour hole will not cause costly property damage, and there is
no nuisance effect. The design of a scour hole is described in Section 203-3.03(04). Other
dissipators should be considered if there is limited right of way.

An internal dissipator includes the tumbling-flow type and the increased-resistance type. This
should be used only for an inlet-control situation where the flow near the outlet of the culvert is
shallow enough. This should be used where the scour hole at the culvert outlet is unacceptable,
the right of way is limited, debris is not a problem, or moderate velocity reduction is required.

This Chapter does not address the design of an internal dissipator. See FHWA HEC-14 and
FHWA/OH-84/007 Internal Energy Dissipators if a design procedure is required.

Another type of external dissipator can be used where the riprap basin is not acceptable and a
moderate amount of debris is anticipated. This can include USBR Type VI Impact, CSU rigid
boundary, Contra Costa, hook, or hydraulic jump. This Chapter does not address the design of
this type of external dissipator. See HEC-14 if a design procedure is required.

A stilling basin is used where the riprap basin is not acceptable, and debris is anticipated. This can
include Saint Anthony Falls (SAF), USBR Type II, USBR Type III, or USBR Type IV. This
Chapter does not address the design of this type of stilling basin. See HEC-14 if a design procedure
is required.

This Chapter does not address the design of a drop structure. See HEC-14 if a design procedure
is required.

Additional factors should be considered in designing an energy dissipator. If ice buildup is a

factor, it should be mitigated by sizing the structure to not obstruct the winter low flow, and by
using an external dissipator. The flood frequency used in the design of the energy dissipator should
be the same flood frequency used for the culvert design. The downstream hydraulic conditions

Page 24 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

should be evaluated to determine a tailwater depth and the maximum velocity for an open channel.
A lake, pond, or large water body should be evaluated using the high-water elevation that has the
same frequency as the design flood for the culvert.

The material selected for the dissipator should be based on a comparison of the total cost over the
design life of alternate materials and should not be made using first cost as the only criterion. This
comparison should consider replacement cost, the difficulty of construction, and traffic delay.

Traffic should be protected from an external energy dissipator by locating it outside the appropriate
clear-zone distance as described in Chapter 49.

203-2.04 Design Procedures [Rev. Apr. 2022]

203-2.04(01) General

An exact theoretical analysis of culvert flow is complex. First, the analysis of non-uniform flow
with regions of both gradually varying and rapidly varying flow should be performed. Then, the
flow-type changes should be determined as the flow-rate and tailwater elevations change.
Backwater and drawdown calculations, and energy and momentum balances, should be completed.
Results of hydraulic-model studies should be applied. It should be determined if hydraulic jumps
occur and if they are inside of or downstream of the culvert barrel. Calculations can be simplified,
based on the following.

1. Control Section. The control section is where there is a unique relationship between the
flow rate and the upstream water-surface elevation. Inlet control is governed by the inlet
geometry. Outlet control is governed by a combination of the culvert end-treatment
geometry, the barrel characteristics, and the tailwater elevation.

2. Minimum Performance. This is assumed by means of analyzing both inlet and outlet
control and using the highest headwater elevation. The culvert can operate more efficiently
at times with more flow for a given headwater level, but it will not operate at a lower level
of performance than calculated.

3. Culvert Sizing. The culvert-sizing process should satisfy the criteria as follows:

a. allowable headwater elevation at 1% annual EP;

b. roadway serviceability for storm of specific magnitude, depending on functional
classification; and
c. maximum pipe-outlet velocity or energy-dissipator design.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 25

4. Computer Software. The HY8 software and the HEC-RAS Culvert Module are acceptable
design methods for structure sizing.

203-2.04(02) Headwater Factors

1. Headwater depth is measured from the flowline of the inlet-control section to the surface
of the upstream pool.

2. Inlet area is the cross-sectional area of the face of the culvert. The inlet-face area is the
same as the barrel area.

3. Inlet-edge configuration describes the entrance type. Inlet-edge configurations include

thin-edge projecting, mitered, square edge in a headwall, and beveled edge. See Figure
203-2H for the edge configuration of a culvert inlet.

4. Inlet shape is the same as that of the culvert barrel. Shapes include rectangular, circular,
elliptical, and arch. The shape should be checked for an additional control section, if
different than the barrel.

203-2.04(03) Tailwater Factors

1. The hydraulic conditions of the downstream channel should be evaluated to determine a

tailwater depth.

2. Backwater curves should be calculated for sensitive locations, or a single cross-section

analysis should be used.

3. The existing outlet depth may be used in lieu of the tailwater depth if the culvert outlet is
operating with a low tailwater depth or a free outfall.

4. The headwater elevation of a nearby downstream culvert should be used if it is above the
channel depth.

203-2.04(04) Energy Dissipator [Rev. Apr. 2022]

Since the riprap basin is the preferred energy dissipator where the riprap apron is not adequate,
design procedures are as follows. The riprap-basin design is based on laboratory data obtained
from full-scale prototypical installations. The features of the basin include the following:

1. pre-shaping and lining with riprap of median size, d50;

Page 26 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

2. constructing the floor at a depth of hS below the invert, where hS is the depth of scour that
will occur in a pad of riprap of size d50;

3. sizing d50 so that 2 < hS/d50 < 4;

4. sizing the length of the dissipating pool to be 10hS or 3Wo, whichever is larger for a single
barrel. The overall length of the basin is 15hS or 4Wo, whichever is larger;

5. angular-rock results were approximately the same as the results for rounded material; and

6. layout details are shown on Figure 203-2K, Riprap-Basin Energy Dissipator.

When high tailwater conditions, TW/yo > 0.75, exist, the following characteristics apply. The high-
velocity core of water emerging from the culvert retains its jet-like character as it passes through
the basin. The scour hole is shallower and longer than that found in a low-tailwater condition.
Riprap may be required for the channel downstream of the rock-lined basin.

1. Determine Input Flow. yo or yE, Vo, Fr at the culvert outlet, and yE, the equivalent depth at
the brink = (A/2)0.5.

2. Check TW. Determine if TW/yo ≤ 0.75.

3. Determine d50.
a. Use Figure 203-2M, Riprap-Basin Scour Depth.
b. Select d50/yE. Satisfactory results will be obtained if 0.25 < d50/yE < 0.45.
c. Obtain hS/yE using Fr.
d. Check if 2 < hS/d50 < 4 and repeat until d50 is found to be within the range.

4. Size basin as shown in Figure 203-2K.

a. Determine length of the dissipating pool, LS = 10hS or 3Wo minimum.
b. Determine length of basin, LB = 15hS or 4Wo minimum.
c. Thickness of riprap:
(1) Approach, 3d50 or 1.5dmax
(2) Remainder, 2d50 or 1.5dmax

5. Determine VB.
a. Basin exit depth, yB = critical depth at basin exit.
b. Basin exit velocity, VB = Q/WByB.
c. Compare VB with the average normal flow velocity in the natural channel, Vd.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 27

6. High-Tailwater Design.
a. Design a basin for low-tailwater conditions, Steps 1-5.
b. Compute equivalent circular diameter, DE, for brink area as follows:
πDE 2
A= = yoWo
4
c. Estimate centerline velocity at a series of downstream cross sections using Figure
203-2N, Distribution of Centerline Velocity for Flow from Submerged Outlets.
d. Size riprap using Figure 203-2D.

7. Filter Placement. Geotextile should be placed under a riprap feature.

The dissipator geometry can be computed using the HY-8, Culvert Analysis Software, Energy
Dissipator module.

203-2.05 Specialty Structure

Perpendicular-span length is measured between the inside faces of the structure walls,
perpendicular to them. Structural-span length is measured between the inside faces of the structure
walls, along the roadway centerline.

203-2.05(01) Precast Concrete Box Culvert

A precast-concrete box culvert may be recommended by the Division of Hydraulics. The

maximum perpendicular span for a box culvert is 12 ft. The recommended layout method for a
box culvert is to extend it to the point where the roadway sideslope intercepts the stream flowline.
The sideslope at the end or outcrop of a box culvert should be protected with guardrail or be located
beyond the clear zone.

203-2.05(02) Precast Concrete Oversize Box Structure

A precast concrete oversize box structure may be recommended by the Division of Hydraulics. A
box structure is considered oversize if its clear-perpendicular-span length is more than 12 ft.
Commercially available oversized boxes seem to be limited to 20 ft span in the Indiana region.
Any oversized box structure greater than 20 ft should be hydraulically modeled as a bridge.
Product information is available from local suppliers. If contacting a supplier, the designer should

Page 28 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

provide the most general information about project location. The designer should contact at least
two suppliers of the same product.

The hydraulic recommendations letter will indicate if a three-sided structure with a base slab is an
acceptable alternate to an oversize box structure. The designer should contact the Division of
Hydraulics for guidance as to whether the two structure types are interchangeable for the specific
site. A cost comparison should be used in making the final structure selection.

An oversize box culvert should be laid out so that the total structure length is a multiple of the box-
segment length for the given box size. It is not necessary to add a tolerance for the joints between
segments in determining the total structure length. The typically-available segment weights and
lengths are shown in Figure 203-2 O. For a 9-ft through 12-ft rise, at least one box-structure
supplier should be contacted for available weights and lengths.

203-2.05(03) Precast Concrete Three-Sided Structure

A precast-concrete three-sided structure may be recommended by the Division of Hydraulics.

1. Structure Sizing and Selection. The designer will choose either the flat-topped, arch-
topped, or true-arch structure section, show it on the plans and reference, by note, the other
sections. The designer will determine the hydraulic size for the alternate structures.

The hydraulic recommendations will include the Q100 elevation, the assumed flowline
elevation, the required perpendicular span, and the required waterway opening for all
structure sections. The designer will determine the rise of the structure for all structure
sections. The minimum desirable freeboard requirement will be 1 ft for a flat-topped or an
arch-topped structure, with the low-structure elevation determined at the structure
centerline for each section. The minimum desirable freeboard requirement will be 2 ft for
a true-arch structure. If the designer elects to use a freeboard of less than desirable, the
designer should obtain the concurrence of the Division of Hydraulics director.

Figure 203-2P should be used as guidance for determining the acceptable alternates to show
on the plans.

The arch-topped structure will likely have a greater perpendicular-span requirement than
the flat-topped structure where it is used with less than 2 ft of freeboard. The arch-topped
structure will not be included as an alternate in the hydraulics recommendation letter if its
required perpendicular span exceeds that of the flat-topped alternate by more than 4 ft. The
true-arch structure will likely have a greater perpendicular-span requirement than the flat-
topped or arch-topped structure.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 29

 Where the required structural span exceeds 30 ft, the designer will also provide the required
waterway opening for a spill-through bridge. The designer will size an appropriate bridge
and perform an economic comparison between the bridge and the three-sided structure
options.

The dimensional designation shown in Figure 203-2Q for perpendicular span, and Figure
203-2R for rise, should be used for designating each required three-sided structure. The
plans should show the structure size in feet.

2. Segment Configuration and Skew. Skew should be rounded to the nearer most-practical 5
deg, although the nearer 1 deg is permissible where necessary.

It is not necessary for the designer to determine the exact number and length of segments.
The final structure length and segment configuration will be determined by the fabricator
and may deviate from that implied by the plans. However, a minimum horizontal clearance
of 6 ft must exist between the front face of guardrail and the outside face of the structure
headwall where the drainage-structure end is within the clear zone.

Square segments are more economical if the structure is skewed. Laying out the structure
with square segments will result in the greatest right-of-way requirement and thus allow
ample space for potential redesign by the contractor, if necessary, to another segment
configuration.

For a structure with a skew of 15 deg or less, structure segments may be laid out square or
skewed. Skewed segments are preferred for a structure of less than 80 ft length. Square
segments are preferred for a longer structure. However, skewed segments have a greater
structural span. A structure with a skew of greater than 15 deg requires additional analysis
as described in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Skewed segments and
the analysis both contribute to higher structure cost.

For a structure with a skew of greater than 15 deg, structure segments should be laid out
square. If hydraulic conditions dictate the use of a flat-topped structure only, the segments
may be laid out skewed if the structure is relatively short.

A number of flat-topped structures are built with skewed segments, i.e., segments shaped,
in plan view, like parallelograms. However, some INDOT structures have been redesigned
to use only square segments. Where a flat-topped structure is laid out with ends parallel to
the roadway, skewed segments are implied by the designer.

Page 30 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 The preferred layout scheme for an arch-topped structure with a skew of greater than 15
deg should assume square segments with a sloping top of headwall to yield the shortest
possible wingwalls. Where an arch-topped structure is laid out with skewed ends,
therefore, headwalls parallel to the roadway, the skew will be developed within the end
segments by varying the lengths of the legs as measured along the centerline of the
structure. The maximum attainable skew is controlled by the difference between the full-
segment leg length as recommended by the arch-topped-structure fabricator and a
minimum leg length of 2 ft.

If the roadway above the structure is to be constructed in two phases, a segment-skew

configuration should be proposed which is compatible with the anticipated construction-
phasing line between construction phases. Therefore, if the structure length is 80 ft or
greater, a unique special provision should be included to require the contractor to design
and detail segments or cast-in-place construction required to conform to the construction
line between phases. These details should be reviewed by the designer at the time of the
working-drawings submission.

3. Plans Requirements for Structure Layout and Detailing. The designer should use the
perpendicular span and rise for the structure section shown on the plans as a reference for
the information required on the title sheet. The structure type to be shown on the title,
Layout, and General Plan sheets should be precast reinforced-concrete three-sided
structure.

The General Plan should include a note as follows:

An alternate structure type with a _____-ft perpendicular span and a _____-ft rise
may be substituted for the structure shown on the Layout sheet.

Where a flat-topped structure is the only option permitted, the General Plan should include
a note as follows:

A three-sided arch-topped or true-arch structure will not be permitted at this location.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 31

 The elevations to be provided on the General Plan or other detail sheet are as follows:

a. Q100;
b. flow line, at both structure ends and the roadway centerline;
c. the low structure at the centerline of the structure;
d. the tops of headwalls; and
e. the tops of wingwalls.

The assumed elevations of the top of the footing and the base of the structure leg should
also be shown. For structure-layout purposes, a 2-ft footing thickness should be assumed
with the base of the structure leg seated 2 in. below the top-of-footing elevation. With the
bottom of the footing placed at the standard depth of 4 ft below the flowline elevation, the
base of the structure leg should therefore be shown as 2’-2” below the flowline. An
exception to the 4-ft depth will occur where the anticipated footing thickness is known to
exceed 2 ft, where the footing must extend to rock, or where poor soil conditions dictate
that the footing should be deeper.

The footing should be kept level if possible. If the stream grade prohibits a level footing,
the wingwall footings should be laid out to be constructed on the same plane as the structure
footings.

The structure length and the flare angle, and the length and height of wingwalls should be
shown. For a skewed structure, the wingwall geometrics should be determined for each
wing. The sideslope used to determine the wing length should be shown on the plans.

A structure should extend to a point where the headwall height can be kept to a minimum,
preferably 1 ft. All headwalls should have standard-length-post guardrail protection unless
the structure cover does not permit it. Where structure cover does not permit a standard
headwall and standard-length-post guardrail installation, nested guardrail (long-span) or
another option as shown on the INDOT Standard Drawings should be shown, with the
selected low-cover guardrail option. A minimum of 6 ft of clearance should exist
horizontally between the face of guardrail and the outside face of the structure headwall.

If the height of the structure legs exceeds 10 ft, pedestals should be shown in the structure
elevation view. For illustration purposes, the pedestals should be drawn at approximately
2-ft width, but the dimensions and details should not be shown. The pedestal height should
be included in the rise dimension specified in the pay-item name.

Page 32 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 The design and details for footings or base slabs, wingwall footings, wingwalls, and
headwalls will be provided by the structure manufacturer once the working drawings are
submitted. The designer who prepared the contract plans will review the design
calculations and working drawings. For a federal-aid local-agency project, such documents
are reviewed and approved by the local agency or its design consultant.

Wingwall-anchorage system, wing thickness, wall thickness of precast units, corner

chamfer dimensions of precast units, footing-width, or footing-reinforcement information
that suggest a proprietary product should not be identified as such on the plans. Such
details will be shown on the working drawings.

The General Plan should include the design-data information as follows:

Designed for HL-93 loading in accordance with AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications, [current-edition year], and all subsequent interim specifications.

Dead load increased 35 psf for future wearing surface.

Quantities for the structure and wingwall footings should be included with those for the
structure and the wingwalls, respectively. Quantities for headwalls and foundation
excavation should also be included in those for the structure.

4. Foundations. The allowable soil bearing pressure should be shown on the plans. If the
footing is on piling, the nominal driving resistance should be shown.

Where a pile footing is required, the type and size of pile and the required pile spacing, and
which piles are to be battered, should be shown on the plans. The final design of the pile
cap will be performed by the fabricator, and the details will be shown on the working
drawings as is the practice for other footing types. If the geotechnical report recommends
that piling be used, the structure-type selection should be re-evaluated to consider a spill-
through bridge due to the added expense of pile footings.

The plans for a three-sided structure should include a sheet showing the soil boring logs for the
structure.

203-2.06 Specialty Structure Requirements

203-2.06(01) Wingwalls and Headwalls

Wingwalls and headwalls are required without regard to structure type or size. Such wingwalls
and headwalls may be precast or cast in place.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 33

The information to be shown on the plans is as follows:

1. a plan view showing the total length of the structure, skew angle, distance from roadway
centerline to each end of structure, and the flare angle of all wingwalls;

2. an elevation view of the end of the structure including wingwalls and headwall if
applicable. The perpendicular span and rise of the structure should be dimensioned. The
height of the headwall should be shown;

3. wingwalls labeled A through D with a table showing all dimensions and elevations for each
wingwall, and summarizing the wingwall areas required; and

4. the allowable soil bearing pressure. A table should be included on the plans listing the soil
parameters for wingwall design as follows:

a. angle of friction between wingwall footing and foundation soil, δ;

b. angle of internal friction of the foundation soil, φ;
c. ultimate cohesion of foundation soil, C; and
d. ultimate adhesion between foundation soil and concrete, CA.

These soil parameters will be provided in the geotechnical report for the structure. If the
geotechnical report is lacking this information, it should be requested from the Division of
Geotechnical Services.

Quantities should be determined for headwalls and wingwalls.

If a project includes at least one precast-concrete box structure, and at least one precast-concrete
three-sided drainage structure, each with wingwalls, the wingwalls’ quantities for both types of
structures should not be combined.

203-2.06(02) Reinforcement Treatment

If the distance between the top of the pavement and the top of the structure is less than 2 ft as
measured at the edge of travel lane, all reinforcement in a three-sided structure or an oversized box
structure should be coated. Coated reinforcement should be indicated in the Structure Data Table’s
structure-description name.

Page 34 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

203-2.06(03) Scour Considerations

The standard footing depth of 4 ft below the flowline and the riprap protection shown on the
INDOT Standard Drawings series 723-CCSP will suffice for scour protection in a routine
installation. Riprap and geotextile used in the waterway should be shown on the plans in the plan
view and labeled as Scour Protection.

Figure 203-2 S should be used to determine the type of scour protection required for a three-sided
structure, or the channel. The riprap type and quantity should be shown on the plans. A note should
be placed on the plans, similar to the following:

Quantities of ___ tons of [Class 1] [Class 2] [revetment] riprap and _____ sys of geotextile
shall be placed as scour protection.

For a routine installation, the riprap and geotextile shown on the INDOT Standard Drawings series
723-CCSP will suffice for scour protection on the stream banks adjacent to the wingwalls or
projecting ends of the structure. Quantities of riprap and geotextile used on the stream banks
adjacent to the wingwalls or projecting ends of the structure should be shown on the plans.

If an IDNR Construction in a Floodway, IDEM Water Quality 401, or a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers 404 permit application is required, the required scour quantities of riprap or cast-in-place
concrete should be incorporated into the application. If one or more of these permits has already been
granted, the designer must provide the quantities information to the Environmental Services
Division’s Ecology and Waterway Permitting Team. The Team leader will then apply for a permit
amendment.

For a three-sided structure, if the allowable soil bearing pressure is less than 1000 lb/ft2, or where
the stream velocity exceeds 13 ft/s, a concrete base slab should be provided instead of a
conventional strip footing. Details of the base-slab method of scour protection are shown on the
INDOT Standard Drawings. If the allowable soil bearing pressure is not extremely low or where
the stream velocity does not exceed 13 ft/s, the cost effectiveness of providing a base slab versus
providing a strip footing with scour protection should be considered. The input of the district
Office of Construction should be requested at the preliminary field check if the costs appear to be
equal.

203-2.06(04) Backfilling [Rev. May 2013]

Where there is less than 2 ft of cover between the top of the structure and the top of the proposed
pavement structure, as measured at the edge of travel lane, the backfill should be structure backfill
type 5 to the top of the structure. The backfill above the top of the structure should be structure
backfill type 2.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 35

Where there is 2 ft or more of cover between the top of the structure and top of the proposed
pavement structure, as measured at the edge of travel lane, all backfill should be structure backfill
type 2.

The minimum and maximum cover distances should be shown in the Structure Data Table. The
material used to backfill the structure should be also used to backfill the wingwalls.

The minimum cover distance between the top of the structure and the top of the pavement section
should be equal to the pavement-section thickness. If the minimum cover distance is less than the
pavement-section thickness, the Pavement Division should be consulted for the minimum
pavement thickness to be used above the structure.

For a three-sided structure, the structure and wingwall backfill limits should be shown on the plans.
The backfill limits should have a width of 1.5 ft at the bottom of the footing and should extend
upward at a slope rate of 1:4. The wingwalls’ backfill should extend upward at a 1:1 slope from
the bottom of the wingwall footings. The structure fabricator will also be required to show the
backfill limits on the shop drawings. The backfill pay limits should be based on the neat-line limits
shown on the plans. The type of structure backfill and the quantities for excavation and structure
backfill should be shown on the plans.

203-2.06(05) Plans Details, Design Computations, and Working Drawings

Only the conceptual layout for a precast-concrete three-sided or box structure, or precast wingwalls
and headwalls, should be shown on the plans. The structure centerline, minimum perpendicular
span, minimum structural span, minimum rise, and minimum Q100 hydraulic-opening area should
be shown on the Layout sheet.

Once the work is under contract, the fabricator will design and detail the structure. For each cast-
in-place structure, three-sided structure, or for each box structure of perpendicular span greater
than 12’-0” or of a size not described in ASTM C 1577, the fabricator will provide design
computations and working drawings which are to be checked by, and are subject to the approval
of, the designer.

203-2.07 Documentation

The hydraulic report and necessary software data or input files should be submitted to the Division
of Hydraulics for review and acceptance. All relevant information should be cross referenced if
utilized in other sections of the report. The information in the report should include, but should be
not limited to, the following:

Page 36 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

1. project-specific overview, including stating location, purpose, vertical datum used, and
other pertinent information;
2. Topographic Map with drainage area and flow path for Time of Concentration delineated
and labeled, including north arrow and graphic scale bar;
3. aerial photo with drainage area delineated;
4. Summary Table with the information, if applicable, as follows:
a. drainage area;
b. Q100 flow;
c. Q100 water-surface elevation;
d. structure size and type;
e. inlet-edge condition;
f. backwater depth;
g. culvert velocity;
h. headwater elevation;
i. road overflow area;
j. outlet-erosion protection;
k. sump depth;
l. outlet-flowline elevation;
m. minimum low structure elevation;
n. approximate skew; and
o. inlet-depression depth.

5. hydrology calculations which can include the Rational Method, Hydrograph (TR-20, HEC-
HMS, etc.), curve numbers, Manning’s n values, Time of Concentration, etc.
6. HY-8. Only information for the recommended structure, primary alternates, and existing
structure should be included if applicable. The input file, output file, and version of
software used should be included for the reviewer’s use;
7. plans including cross-section of downstream channel, road plan and profile, and layout
sheet if applicable;
8. site photos with key map;
9. backwater calculation with a justification of backwater and its effects, i.e., remains in
channel, below finish floor elevation, or contained within the right of way;

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 37

10. other calculations, meeting minutes, local testimony, telephone log, permits, etc., to add
clarity;
11. coordination with county surveyor; and
12. energy-dissipator calculations and files.

203-2.08 Replacement in Kind Policy [Add Sep. 2023]

The Division of Hydraulics will allow a culvert with a span or

diameter < 48 in. to be replaced in kind without modeling and
design computations or review and approval where the following
condition requirements are met. Where any of the conditions are
not met, hydraulic design in accordance with 203-2.02 and review
in accordance with 201-1.02 is required.

203-2.08(01) Condition Requirements for Replacement in Kind [Add Sep. 2023]

1. The existing culvert is not on a fully access-controlled

corridor, e.g. freeway. See 40-5.0 for access control
definitions.
2. The existing culvert is a single span, e.g. not twin pipes.
3. The existing culvert is not within the limits of a pavement
reconstruction project. See Ch 602 for pavement project
categories.
4. The existing culvert does not have drainage issues, e.g.,
scour holes, history of roadway overtopping, ponding, or
debris. The designer should contact the appropriate district
Culvert Asset Engineer to verify drainage history. The
Culvert Asset Engineer will contact the district Maintenance
Engineer for verification. Documentation should be included
with the project design computations, Engineering Assessment
report, or Field Check minutes. For LPA projects, the LPA
will determine the appropriate personnel.
5. The road profile does not change.

Page 38 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

203-2.08(02) Design Criteria for Replacement in Kind Culvert[Add Sep. 2023]

Where the condition requirements are satisfied, the following

design criteria should be applied to the replacement culvert.

1. The replacement culvert should match the dimensions of the

existing culvert, except if located within a Waters of the
US. For culverts located within a Waters of the US, the rise
of the replacement culvert should be increased by at least
the depth of the required sump. See 203-2.02(10) for culvert
sumping.
2. The replacement culvert should match the existing pipe’s
Manning’s n value. In practice, this means a smooth pipe
should be replaced with a smooth pipe and a corrugated pipe
should be replaced with a corrugated pipe.
3. The end treatments of the replacement culvert should match
the existing condition, e.g., headwalls should be replaced
with headwalls, metal pipe end sections should be replaced
with metal pipe end sections, etc. An inlet end treatment
may be substituted with an end treatment type that has an
equivalent entrance loss coefficient per Figure 203-2 I.
4. A culvert with an existing liner should be replaced with a
culvert that matches the dimensions of the original host pipe
rather than the dimensions of the liner.
5. Existing inlet and outlet protection (riprap) should be
replaced in-kind and on geotextile. Where there is no
existing outlet protection, then outlet protection riprap
should be revetment riprap on geotextile using the dimensions
shown in IDM Figure 203-2J.
6. The replacement culvert inlet and outlet invert elevations
should be the same as the existing culvert except for the
adjustment to meet the sump depth, as required for Waters of
the US. See 203-2.02(10) for culvert sumping.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 39

7. The replacement culvert should be the same length as the
existing culvert.
8. The replacement culvert should satisfy the minimum height of
cover requirements. Where cover requirements cannot be
satisfied, approval is needed from the appropriate district
Pavement Asset Engineer, Bridge Asset Engineer, or Culvert
Asset Engineer. Documentation should be included with the
project design computations.
9. Ecology and waterway permitting applies to culverts that are
replaced in kind. Projects requiring permits should follow
the policies in the INDOT Waterway Permit Manual or contact
INDOT Ecology and Waterway Permitting Office (EWPO) for
guidance.

203-3.0 BRIDGE

203-3.01 Introduction

FHWA defines a bridge as a structure with a total span greater than 20 ft, measured along the
centerline of the roadway. For a multiple-pipe structure, this includes the distance between the
pipes. For hydraulic purposes, a structure with a span greater than 20 ft, perpendicular to the
direction of flow, is considered a bridge.

203-3.02 Bridge Policy [Added Apr. 2017]

The following policies are specific to a bridge.

1. Each bridge defined by the Division of Hydraulics should be modeled using HEC-RAS
bridge analysis. See Section 203-3.03(02).
2. The Division of Hydraulics will review all bridge hydraulics.
3. The appropriate storm event for design should be determined using Figure 203-2C, Design-
Storm Frequency for Bridge or Culvert. The figure includes the design-storm requirements
for allowable backwater, allowable velocity, and roadway serviceability freeboard.
4. Survey information should include topographic features, channel characteristics, high-
water information, existing-structure data, and other related site-specific information.
5. Design data and calculations should be assembled in an orderly fashion and retained for future
reference as provided for in this Chapter.

Page 40 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

6. The bridge design should incorporate the environmental requirements of IDNR, IDEM,
USACE, and other applicable government agencies.

203-3.02(01) Allowable Backwater [Rev. Apr. 2017]

Allowable backwater is the difference in water surface elevation of the natural or base condition
and the upstream water surface elevation produced by the bridge. To establish the natural or base
condition, only the bridge of interest should be removed from the hydraulic model, i.e. existing
structures or restrictions are included. The maximum backwater is determined at the cross-section
which yields the largest difference in water surface elevations.

1. New-Alignment Bridge. For a new bridge on a new alignment, the maximum backwater
should not exceed 0.14 ft. The 0.14 ft maximum may be modified as follows:
a. the backwater dissipates to 0.14 ft or less at the right-of-way line;
b. the channel is sufficiently deep to contain the increased water height without
overtopping the banks; the backwater is less than or equal to 1 ft; and the maximum
velocity is not excessive; or
c. a flood easement can be purchased upstream of the bridge to allow for greater than
0.14 ft of backwater.
In a rural area where land costs are minimal, the cost savings may be substantial to purchase
flood easements and reduce the bridge-structure size. The use of flood easements should
be identified early in the design stage so that they can be included in any land purchasing.
However, flood easements are still limited to the maximum 1-ft backwater requirement.

An exception to the 0.14-ft backwater allowance for a new bridge on a new alignment is
subject to approval of the Division of Hydraulics.

2. Existing Bridge Replacement. The allowable backwater for a replacement bridge is

dependent upon the backwater created by the existing bridge or structure.
a. If the existing backwater is greater than 3 feet, then the proposed backwater should
be less than or equal to 3 feet.
b. If the existing backwater is between 3 feet and 0.14 feet, the proposed backwater
should be less than or equal to the existing backwater.
c. If the existing backwater is less than 0.14 feet, the proposed backwater should be
less than or equal to 0.14 feet.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 41

 d. A flood easement can be considered upstream of the bridge to allow for greater than
0.14 ft of backwater. See item 1 above.

The proposed bridge opening may require adjustment based on a number of additional criteria as
described in this section.

203-3.02(02) Road-Serviceability Freeboard [Rev. Apr. 2017]

The headwater elevation from the bridge should maintain a roadway serviceability freeboard to
the edge of pavement based on the functional classification shown in Figure 203-2C. If the
functional classification allows, embankment overtopping may be incorporated into the design,
but should be located away from the bridge abutments and superstructure. The required road
serviceability should be maintained throughout the entire flood reach of the stream.

Where existing conditions allow overtopping in the 1% EP event, and it is necessary to raise the
existing profile grade, it may be necessary to increase the size of the proposed bridge in order to
meet the backwater requirements described in this section. Proposed changes in the guardrail
and/or bridge rail configuration may impose additional blockage to the roadway overflow, which
also should be accounted for in the proposed bridge sizing.

A larger downstream waterway should be checked to determine if its floodwaters can backwater
through the system and affect road serviceability. If this potential exists, a joint-stream probability
analysis should be performed to check the correct storm events that should be analyzed for
potential road overtopping. See Figure 203-2G. The joint-stream probability analysis is based on
the peak discharges of both the design stream and the larger downstream waterway occurring at
different times. The analysis compares the streams at different storm designs based on their
difference in drainage area.

203-3.02(03) Bridge Freeboard [Rev. Apr. 2017]

Where practical, a minimum clearance of 2 ft should be provided between the 1% EP elevation

and the low chord of the bridge to allow for passage of ice and debris. Where this is not practical,
the clearance should be established based on the type of stream and level of protection desired as
approved by the Division of Hydraulics. For example, 1 ft may be adequate for a small stream
that normally does not transport drift. An urban bridge with a grade limitation may provide no
freeboard. A 3-ft freeboard is desirable for a major river which is known to carry large debris.
The crest vertical-curve profile is the preferred highway crossing profile in allowing for
embankment overtopping at a lower discharge.

Page 42 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

At sites where the existing structure experiences pressure flow in the 1% EP event, the proposed
low structure should be set at the elevation needed to provide an adequate amount of freeboard.
Where the existing low structure is above the 1% EP elevation but does not meet the freeboard
criteria described above, the profile of the proposed low structure may be as low as the existing
low structure profile provided that there is no history of debris accumulation on the existing
structure.

Approval by the Division of Hydraulics is required if the existing structure exceeds the freeboard
requirements described above and the proposed low structure elevation is lower than the existing.

203-3.02(04) Bridge Waterway Velocity [Rev. Apr. 2017]

The existing bridge should be evaluated for any significant evidence of scour or channel instability,
such as exposed footers or piles and the presence of large sand bars downstream of the bridge. In
addition, the HEC-RAS velocity distribution computations should be utilized to determine the
average and maximum flow velocities in the existing bridge.

Where there is no evidence of existing scour or instability issues, the proposed bridge waterway
average and maximum velocities should be less than or equal to the equivalent existing bridge
waterway velocities. If the existing bridge shows any significant evidence of scour or channel
instability, the proposed velocities should be less than or equal to the existing velocities and the
average velocity should be no more than 1.5 times the natural channel velocity downstream of the
bridge.

Figure 203-2D should be used to determine the appropriate riprap size. The appropriate riprap
size for abutments should be based on the average bridge waterway velocity. The appropriate
riprap size for piers should be based on the maximum velocity determined from velocity
distribution computations.

203-3.02(05) Upstream Structure Impacts [Added Apr. 2017]

The presence of residential, commercial or industrial buildings located upstream of the site may
also affect the proposed bridge sizing. The site should be evaluated to determine whether there
has been a record of flood damages or whether the lowest adjacent land grade at any upstream
building is lower than the computed 1% EP water surface elevation upstream of the existing bridge.
The lowest adjacent land grade should be considered to be the lowest elevation at which the
existing ground surface meets the outside perimeter of a structure.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 43

At sites where upstream buildings could be impacted by the 1% EP flood event under the existing
condition, it may be necessary to modify the allowable backwater for the proposed bridge. This
modification can be evaluated by determining a target elevation which is one foot below the lowest
adjacent land grade at any potentially impacted upstream structure. The proposed bridge should
then be sized such that the 1% EP flood elevation adjacent to the structure is at or below the target
elevation.

An exception can be made where a proposed bridge backwater of less of one foot is needed to
meet the target elevation. In that situation, the proposed backwater may be as much as one foot,
as long as the proposed backwater is less than the existing backwater. This applies even if the
target elevation at the structure is not met.

The only situation under which the proposed backwater may be greater than the existing backwater
is where the existing bridge has a backwater of less than 0.14 feet. Where this is the case, the
proposed bridge may have a backwater depth as high as 0.14 feet regardless of impacts to upstream
structures. See Section 203-3.02(09) for additional information on determining the allowable
backwater depth in this situation.

203-3.02(06) Bridge Sizing [Rev. Apr. 2017]

The following criteria are required for hydraulic bridge sizing

1. Span Lengths. Where possible, a single-span bridge is desired in lieu of a multi-span

bridge, though this may sacrifice desired structure freeboard. The proposed total out-to-
out structure length should not be less than the existing out-to-out structure length.

The minimum span length for a bridge with more than three spans should be 100 ft for
those spans over the main channel. A three-span bridge should have the center span length
maximized at a site where debris can be a problem.

Where a two-span bridge is being considered, the preferred option is to place a single-span
bridge with a relief structure on the overbanks to accommodate higher discharges. The
flow line of the relief structure should be set above the flow line of the main channel by an
amount appropriate to decrease the possibility of sedimentation and debris accumulation.
Typically, the flow line of the relief structure should match the existing overbank elevation.
Where an over flow structure is not feasible, a two-span bridge may be considered, but is
subject to prior approval by the Division of Hydraulics.

Page 44 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

2. Bridge Configuration. As a check, both the gross and the net waterway openings provided
by the proposed structure should be compared to the corresponding waterway areas
provided by the existing structure to ensure that the proposed structure will not offer a
reduced waterway area. The existing waterway opening areas should be determined based
on original design plans for the existing structure and not the current condition of the
waterway opening. The gross waterway area is defined as the total area between the bridge
abutments below the 1% EP water surface elevation and the net area is defined as the gross
area minus any area occupied by the bridge piers.

The existing structure alignment should be compared to the alignment of the stream
channel. Indicators of potential channel alignment issues include:
a. the presence of large sand bars or scour holes downstream of the structure
b. significant scour issues such as exposed footings or piles
c. the accumulation of sediment in a portion of the bridge waterway
d. evidence of active channel meandering such as channel bank sloughing or downed
trees, especially where the bridge is located on a curved channel alignment.

It may be necessary to adjust the location and skew of the proposed bridge to better
accommodate the existing channel alignment as well as potential future changes in the
channel alignment.

3. Multiple-Opening Structure. A multiple-opening structure is used in a wide floodplain to

pass a portion of the flow once the stream reaches a certain stage. The objectives in
choosing the location of a multiple opening include the following:
a. maintenance of flow distribution and flow patterns;
b. accommodation of relatively large flow concentrations on the floodplain;
c. avoidance of floodplain flow along the roadway embankment for a long distance;
d. crossing of significant tributary channels; and
e. possible reduction of the size of the main bridge and the overall cost of the project.

The most complex factor in designing a multiple opening is determining the division of
flow between two or more structures. If incorrectly proportioned, one or more of the
structures can be overtaxed during a flood event. The design of a multiple opening should
be generous to guard against that possibility.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 45

203-3.02(07) Channel Clearing

Channel clearing consists of the removal of sediment to enlarge the waterway opening. Channel
clearing should not occur within 1 ft of the Ordinary High Water elevation. Where the Ordinary
High Water elevation is less than 1 ft above the flowline elevation, channel clearing should not
occur within 2 ft of the flowline elevation.

203-3.02(08) Temporary Runaround Bridge

A temporary-runaround structure is typically operational for three months to two years. Therefore,
the serviceability criteria are greatly reduced. At a minimum, such a structure should be
serviceable during a 50% annual EP discharge.

Figure 203-2C should be checked to determine the road-serviceability design storm required. The
edge of pavement should be above the headwater elevation of the required design storm.

The backwater should be determined for the 1% annual EP discharge event. For a structure
requiring an IDNR permit, the backwater at 1% annual EP should not exceed 0.14 ft over existing
conditions. IDNR should be contacted for further guidance. For a structure not requiring an IDNR
permit, the backwater from the 1% annual EP event should not exceed 1 ft below the finished-
floor elevations of nearby buildings or residences. Impacts to crops and yards should be allowed
for only a short duration.

The most cost-efficient temporary-runaround structure is achieved by lowering the roadway profile
as much as possible while still obtaining the required road serviceability

203-3.02(09) Bridge that Requires an IDNR CIF Permit [Rev. Apr. 2017]

The IDNR Floodplain Guidelines Manual should be checked to determine if a CIF permit is
required and for the definition of what the existing or base conditions are. For most projects, an
increase in water surface elevation (surcharge) above the existing conditions will not be allowed.
Where an increase could be allowed, the water-surface elevation cannot be increased more than
0.14 ft from existing conditions outside the right of way. Data from the IDNR should be consulted
to determine whether there have been other IDNR-approved projects within the vicinity upstream
and downstream of the bridge. The cumulative impact of the proposed bridge with the other
projects may not exceed 0.14 feet above the IDNR base condition at the site, which normally
corresponds to conditions on January 1, 1973.

Page 46 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

203-3.03 Design Considerations

In addition to INDOT’s Bridge policy, the following hydraulic design considerations should be
evaluated.

1. Various stream-crossing systems should be evaluated to determine the most cost-effective

proposal consistent with design constraints.

2. Emergency access, safety, and consequences of catastrophic failure should be considered.

3. The legal requirements of government agencies and their policies and restrictions,
including permits should be considered. See Chapter 201 for a list of the involved agencies.

4 The Environmental Services Division Ecology and Waterway Permitting Team should be
contacted to determine all permitting and environmental requirements.

5. Backwater should not increase flood damage to property upstream of the crossing, and will
satisfy IDNR requirements.

6. Flood easements should be considered in a rural area, or where land is inexpensive, as a

possible cost-saving measure.

7. The effects of road or bridge realignment altering the flood-elevation location and
potentially causing property damage due to flooding should be considered.

8. Velocity through the structure should not damage the highway facility or adjacent property.

9. The existing flow distribution should be maintained as is practical.

10. In designing for overtopping, the crest-vertical curve profile location should be considered
as the preferred highway-crossing profile to allow for embankment overtopping.

11. The downstream conditions should be studied, including those at other bridges or larger
streams that can have the potential to flood back up to the structure. The proposed bridge
should then satisfy the road-serviceability requirements due to the downstream flood
backwater.

12. Side ditches should be checked to ascertain that their elevation is below the water-surface
elevation, and that the flow does not spill over and affect road serviceability in adjacent
watersheds.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 47

13. Forms of degradation and aggradation should be considered as imposing a permanent
future change for the stream-bed elevation at a bridge site if they can be identified. If the
waterway shows signs of meandering or change over time, historical aerial photographs
and topographical mapping should be examined to determine possible present and future
impacts. Bridge location, size, pier type and placement, skew, or channel and bank stability
measures may need to be adjusted accordingly.

14. The location of the opening should account for future stream meandering, floodplain
effects, and possible damage to wetlands or other environmental concerns. An overflow
structure can be required for a very wide floodplain.

15. Pier spacing, pier orientation, and abutments should be designed to minimize flow
disruption and potential scour. Piers should be kept out of the main channel where possible.

16. Foundation design for new bridges or scour countermeasures for existing bridges should
be provided to avoid failure due to scour.

17. Pier spacing and freeboard at the structure should be designed so that debris or ice can pass.

18. Minimal disruption of ecosystems and values unique to the floodplain and stream should
be considered.

19. A level of traffic service should be provided that is compatible with that expected for the
class of highway and the projected traffic volume.

20. Choices should be designed that are supported with costs for construction, maintenance,
and operation, including probable repair and reconstruction and potential liability.

21. The proposed structure’s span should be equal to or greater than the existing span unless
prior approval is given from the Division of Hydraulics.

203-3.04 Design Procedure

The design procedure includes both bridge hydraulic modeling and determining the potential for
scour.

203-3.04(01) Bridge Hydraulics Modeling

Page 48 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

The regulatory agencies require the use of computer hydraulic modeling software to support
calculations used in flood modeling. The required modeling program is HEC-RAS. The HEC-
RAS procedures are followed as stated in the IDNR manual, General Guidelines for the
Hydrologic-Hydraulic Assessment of Floodplains in Indiana, or Floodplain Guidelines, and the
USACE HEC-RAS manuals. The following should be considered in performing a HEC-RAS
model.

1. Survey Accuracy. A survey is performed for the purpose of bridge or road design.
However, the survey does not always extend far enough up- and downstream to cover the
entire reach used in hydraulic-modeling design. It may be necessary to propagate the last
cross-section up- and downstream as necessary to extend to the full reach length desired.
If available, some county, city, or USGS maps include contours that can be useful in
determining the cross-section shape outside the general project survey area. These tend to
be most useful in sizing the flood plain. Current aerial photography should be used where
current land uses may have changed from the original survey, such as new levees,
structures, etc. Other types of mapping are be available should be discussed with the
Division of Hydraulics prior to use. The hydraulic model should have adjusted the survey
to the NAVD 88 datum. The Floodplain Guidelines Chapters 4 and 5 provide information
on survey and mapping requirements.

2. Cross-Sections and Ineffective Flow. The cross-sections should extend far enough up- and
downstream to include areas that can affect the water surface as it passes through the bridge
of interest. This can include other downstream bridges or structures that can have potential
backwater effects to the bridge of interest. The beginning cross-section should be the same
for natural, existing, and proposed conditions for the same discharge. The ending cross-
section should show a decline in backwater converging back towards the natural water-
surface elevation.

The individual cross-sections should have data points that extend higher than the water-
surface elevation at its extents. Extending the cross-sections beyond the water-surface
elevation can affect the scale of the cross-section so that the channel itself is difficult to
visualize in the model display. The cross-sections should be chosen at appropriate
locations that are perpendicular to the channel. However, the overbank section may have
to be manipulated so that two cross-sections do not overlap. If possible, scour holes and
large sediment mounds near the bridge should be avoided as cross-section locations. If
such a location is necessary, manipulation of the flowline may be necessary to avoid large
rises and drops.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 49

 See Floodplain Guidelines Chapter 8 for more information on modeling. For the
appropriate roughness n value, see Figure 203-3A.

3. Bridge. In HEC-RAS, a bridge automatically uses the adjacent cross sections in the
modeling. It may be necessary to investigate the internal cross-sections to make changes
for channel clearing or lowering the channel’s n value through the bridge. The bridge
should be modeled such that is normal to the direction of flow. This can be done manually
or by using the skew function.

4. Check-RAS. - Check-RAS is a separate program that can be used in conjunction with HEC-
RAS to help determine if errors occurred during the modeling procedure.

203-3.04(02) Scour

Scour is the most common cause of bridge failure. Therefore, potential scour problems should be
recognized. The appropriate countermeasures should be used as necessary to improve bridge
safety. HEC-18 and HEC-20 are FHWA documents that provide information and appropriate
analysis procedure for determining scour. The scour can be computed using hand calculations
from HEC-18, or by using the bridge modeling from HEC-RAS.

The types of scour that are used in bridge-hydraulics calculations include contraction, pier or local,
and abutment. Only contraction and pier scour should be computed. Abutment scour is accounted
for, due to riprap protection required at each abutment. Abutment scour has been shown to be
overestimated.

For a new or replacement bridge, the scour should be computed for both the 1% annual EP and
0.2% annual EP. The 0.2% annual EP discharge should not be computed using the traditional 1.7
multiplier of the 1% annual EP discharge method, as this has typically overestimated scour and
increased foundation costs. The 0.2% annual EP discharge should be determined using the same
methods described in Chapter 202 as used to determine other storm events. Scour countermeasures
are not required, as all bridge pier piles will be driven below the low-scour elevation. However,
the embankment should have appropriately-sized riprap placed on it in a cone shape around the
entire abutment. See Figure 203-3B, Riprap Scour Protection. For a three-sided or box structure,
see INDOT Standard Drawings series 723-CCSP for the location of riprap.

A bridge-rehabilitation project requires only the 1% annual EP to be evaluated. It should be

determined if the bridge is potentially scour-critical, based on the determined low-scour elevation
and the elevation of the bridge foundation. For a scour-critical bridge, scour countermeasures
should be taken as shown in the INDOT Standard Specifications and Figure 203-3B. If the bridge

Page 50 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

is not scour critical, the scour countermeasures should still be identified. The designer should
decide whether they should be used or not.

In evaluating a bridge, all indications and locations of scour occurrence should be identified.
Bridge-inspection reports should also be checked, along with other historical scour and
geomorphology issues. Scour can be occurring though there are no apparent signs, as scour holes
can fill in prior to the water level sufficiently dropping to allow inspection. If overtopping occurs
before a 1% annual EP event, it is possible that the maximum scour can occur at a lesser event.
Therefore, the scour that occurs just before overtopping should be studied.

If the bridge is a single opening with a wide floodplain and the stream has a high probability of
meandering, guide banks, or spur dikes, should be used to align the approach flow with the bridge
opening and to prevent scour around the abutments. They are usually elliptically shaped with a
major-to-minor-axis ratio of 2.5 to 1. Their length can be determined according to HDS-1
procedures. Guide banks, embankments, and abutments should be protected with rock riprap with
a filter blanket or other approved revetment.

If possible, clearing of vegetation upstream or downstream of the toe of the embankment slope
should be avoided. For more information regarding riprap design and stronger armoring practices,
see Section 203-6.0.

The foundation design for the 1% annual EP should include a geotechnical-design-practice safety
factor of 2.0 to 3.0. The resulting design should then be checked using a superflood, the 0.2%
annual EP, and a geotechnical-design-practice safety factor of at least 1.0. See Chapter 107 for
more information.

203-3.04(03) Scour Hydraulics Modeling Using HEC-RAS

The hydraulic design model should be obtained. A velocity distribution at the bridge should be
computed that will determine the maximum velocity that occurs. The velocity distribution should
have at least 20 sections in the channel. This distribution is used later in the pier-scour calculations.

1. Contraction-Scour Analysis. Use live-bed calculations. Clear-water calculations should

be used for scour just downstream of a dam, overflow structure on a floodplain, or other
location where sediment in the stream is minimal.

Determine which upstream cross-section will be used as the fully-expanded approach

section to the bridge for scour analysis. This should be the first section before contraction
begins upstream of the bridge. If there is a nearby existing bridge upstream with no road
overflow, the most fully-expanded cross-section will be at the intersection of the upstream

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 51

 bridge expansion and the downstream bridge contraction junction; which may not be a
fully-expanded section.

Determine D50 from the geotechnical report. If D50 is unknown or a geotechnical report
does not yet exist at the time of hydraulic modeling, a value of 0.01 mm may be used which
will produce the most conservative result. If using HEC-RAS, D50 should have a value and
it must be at least 0.01 mm. If using a lesser value, HEC-RAS will incorrectly show
contraction scour as 0 ft.

Use the modeling to determine the remaining equation variables. HEC-RAS determines
this, or the equations in HEC-18 may be used for manual use.
Only the contraction scour result from the channel should be used.

2. Pier Local Scour Analysis. Choose the Maximum V1Y1 method for determining pier
scour. The channel can meander and the highest velocity can occur at the face of the pier.

Use the CSU Equation Method.

Determine the pier shape and the pier angle with respect to the channel-flow direction. The
pier angle, not the bridge skew, is typically 0 deg for a new or replacement bridge.
However, due to stream meandering, a bridge to be rehabilitated can have flow approaching
the piers at an angle. A pier angle value should be entered or HEC-RAS will not compute
pier scour.

Use the modeling to determine the remaining equation variables. HEC-RAS usually
determines this, or the equations in HEC-18 may be used for manual use.

3. Total Scour Analysis. Add the contraction scour and the pier scour for total scour depth.
This should be subtracted from the flowline at the bridge to determine low-scour elevation.
If analyzing an existing bridge, the foundation of the bridge should be checked against the
low-scour elevation to determine if the bridge is scour critical. If an existing bridge
foundation is unknown, the bridge is automatically considered scour critical

203-3.04(04) Pressure-Flow Scour

With pressure flow, the local scour depth at a pier or abutment is larger than for free-surface flow
with a similar depth and approach velocity. The increase in local scour at a pier subject to pressure
flow results from the flow being directed downward toward the bed by the superstructure and by
increasing the intensity of the horseshoe vortex. The vertical contraction of the flow is a more
significant cause of the increase in scour depth. However, where a bridge becomes submerged,

Page 52 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

the average velocity under it is reduced due to a combination of additional backwater caused by
the bridge superstructure impeding the flow, and a reduction of discharge which must pass under
the bridge due to weir flow over the bridge and approach embankments. As a consequence, an
increase in local scour due to pressure flow can be offset by a lesser velocity through the bridge
opening due to increased backwater, and a reduction in discharge due to overtopping.

In using HEC-RAS in a pressure-flow scenario, the program usually will not determine some
variables, such as the average flow depth at the bridge for contraction scour. They should be
entered manually.
HEC-RAS can be used to determine the discharge through the bridge and the velocity of approach
and depth upstream of the piers where flow impacts the bridge superstructure. These values should
be used to calculate local pier scour. Engineering judgment should then be used to determine the
appropriate multiplier times the calculated pier-scour depth for the pressure-flow scour depth. This
multiplier ranges from 1.0 for a low-approach Froude number Fr = -0.1, to 1.6 for a high-approach
Froude number, Fr = 0.6. If the bridge is overtopped, the depth to be used in the pier-scour
equations and for computing the Froude number is the depth to the top of the bridge deck or
guardrail obstructing the flow. Research sponsored by FHWA has a listed procedure for three
separate pressure-flow situations. See FHWA-HRT-09-041 October 2009 for more information
on this process.

203-3.05 Determination of Hydraulic and Scour Data Parameters

The method used to determine the hydraulic and scour data parameters using HEC-RAS is
described below. The parameters should be shown for both existing and proposed conditions
where applicable.

1. Hydraulic Data.

a. Drainage Area. The drainage area is the delineated area that drains to the structure
in question. See Chapter 202.

b. Q100. The 1% annual EP discharge should be determined using the methods

described in Chapter 202.

c. Q100 Elevation. This elevation is determined for natural conditions at the

downstream face of the bridge. If using HEC-RAS, this can be determined by using
interpolated sections between the adjacent bridge sections in natural conditions to
the downstream bridge face.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 53

 d. Q100 Headwater Elevation. This elevation is determined for the proposed
conditions at the closest upstream cross section from the bridge. This information
is used so that the reviewer can check road-serviceability requirements across the
entire floodplain and watershed.

e. Gross Waterway Area Opening Below Q100 Elevation. The required area is
determined by using the Q100 natural water surface elevation at the downstream
bridge face. Since this is to be the gross area, the flow-area output from HEC-RAS,
which is net area, should include the piers and adjusted flow-area water-surface
elevation to the Q100 elevation. The gross waterway area should be taken in a
direction parallel to the flow.
f. Road-Overflow Area. This is the actual flow area that will go over the road. This
is not based on the Q100 elevation. It should use the approach-crest elevation along
with the road profile to determine the area.

g. Q100 Velocity. This is the outlet velocity at the downstream face of the bridge as it
exits the structure. This is shown in the HEC-RAS Bridge Output as velocity for
the downstream side of the bridge. No other adjustments should be made, and the
continuity equation should not be used. The outlet velocity is the average velocity
across the whole structure.

h. Minimum Low-Structure Elevation. The low-structure elevation should be taken

at the lowest elevation point along the bottom of a beam, slab, or concrete flat
section under the bridge. If the structure is an arch, the low-structure elevation is
at the top inside of the arch structure.

i. Skew. The bridge skew is offset from the perpendicular to the roadway centerline.

2. Scour Data. Q100 and Q100 elevation are as described above.

a. Q100 Maximum Velocity. The maximum velocity is determined from the highest
value of a HEC-RAS velocity distribution that includes at least 20 subsections
across the channel. The maximum velocity should be the highest value of both the
upstream and downstream bridge sections.

b. Q100 Contraction Scour. This is the HEC-RAS-determined contraction scour for

the channel only.

c. Q100 Total Scour. This is the addition of pier scour and contraction scour, but does
not include abutment scour. For multiple piers, use the pier with the highest scour
value.

Page 54 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 d. Q100 Low-Scour Elevation. Subtract the total scour from the flowline elevation at
the bridge.

e. Q500. Use the methods described in Chapter 202. Do not use the 1.7 multiplier
method. Repeat the scour data parameters for Q500.

f. Flowline Elevation. This is the lowest point in the channel under the downstream
face of the bridge.
203-3.06 Documentation [Rev. May 2015, Apr. 2022]

The following provides an explanation of what is required in the submittal requirements for a
hydraulics report as it pertains to bridge-hydraulic analysis. The hydrologic requirements appear
in Section 202-4.0.

For standalone scour calculations a Sample Scour Report is available at

http://www.in.gov/dot/div/contracts/design/dmforms/, under Hydraulics

1. Narrative. The narrative should include a discussion of the thought process used for the
hydraulics or modeling of the bridge. This should also include special features or
conditions that the designer wants the reviewer to consider as a basis for decisions.
Historical flooding issues should be discussed.

2. Hydraulics-Summary Table. A tabulated hydraulics and scour-data summary should be

provided. This should include the hydraulic parameters listed in Section 203-3.04.

3. Hydraulic-Data Calculations. Computations should be provided to support the data in the

hydraulic summary. This can be done by using the output from HEC-RAS with
calculations on it, or a separate sheet. However, general HEC-RAS output sheets that are
not related to the calculations should not be submitted since they will already be in the
HEC-RAS modeling.

4. Plan Sheet. Provide a plan sheet showing the cross-section locations used in the modeling
analysis. Expansion and contraction ineffective-flow-area lines, if using a HEC-RAS
method, should be included.

5. Layout Sheet. A layout sheet should be provided showing the bridge geometry. It should
include the low-structure, Q100, flowline, ordinary-high-water, and channel-clearing
elevations.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 55

6. Site Photos and Aerial Photography. Photos of the site location should be provided that
show both up- and downstream views, and an aerial photograph, so that stream roughness
values, stream morphology, and structure alignment can be verified.

7. HEC-RAS Analysis. A hydraulic model should be provided in the submittal. The model
should be in a single project file. The natural, existing, and proposed plans should be
included within the file. By having the plans in one file, the natural, existing, and proposed
conditions can be compared next to each other.

8. IDNR Checklist and INDOT-IDNR MOU. If an IDNR Construction in a Floodway Permit

is required, an IDNR checklist should be provided. If the structure is replacement in kind,
an INDOT-IDNR MOU should be provided. These should also be submitted to the
Environmental Services Division Ecology and Waterway Permitting Team.

9. Check-RAS. This should be used to check for modeling warnings. The warnings should
be explained or corrected.

203-4.0 PAVEMENT AND STORM DRAINAGE

203-4.01 Introduction

This Section provides guidance regarding storm-drain design and analysis policy. A storm-
drainage facility consist of curbs, gutters, storm drains, side ditches, median ditches or other open
channels as appropriate, or culverts. The aspects of storm-drain design such as system planning,
pavement drainage, gutter-flow calculations, inlet spacing, pipe sizing, and hydraulic grade line
calculations are discussed herein. In addition to INDOT policy, local ordinances and legal
constraints should be considered in the final design.

The design of a drainage system should address the needs of the traveling public as well as those
of the local community through which it passes. The drainage system for a roadway traversing an
urbanized region can be more complex. This can be attributed to concentrated development areas
and conflicts with existing utilities and drainage systems.

See HEC-22 Urban Drainage Design Manual, Chapters 4 and 7, or LTAP Stormwater Drainage
Manual, Chapter 5 and 7 for more information on storm-drain design.

203-4.02 General Policy

Page 56 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

The placement and hydraulic capacity of a storm-drainage facility should be designed to consider
damage to adjacent property and to secure as low a degree of risk of traffic interruption due to
flooding as is consistent with the importance of the road, the design traffic service requirements,
and available funds.

The Rational Method is used for the design of a storm drain. The storm-drain flow method is
described in Chapter 202. The specific policies for pavement-drainage-system design and analysis
are described in Section 203-4.04.

203-4.03 Design Considerations

203-4.03(01) Corridor Plan

The type of facility determines allowable pavement spread and the amount of impervious area that
will be intercepted by the storm drainage system. See Figure 203-4A to determine the allowable
spread. If the facility is planned to be expanded as a future project, consideration should be given
to designing the storm sewer to handle the future impervious area. Other transportation users can
utilize the areas between the curb and edge of travel lane, which can affect the design.

203-4.03(02) Local Issues

INDOT policy is not generally required to be in accordance with local jurisdictional rules or
regulations. A local jurisdiction can be more restrictive than INDOT drainage requirements. If
so, the local design parameters should be followed as much as practical.

203-4.03(03) Existing Conditions

In considering the storm drain, the existing conditions should be evaluated. Off-site drainage may
need to be intercepted by the storm-drain system. This can require earth inlets for drainage that is
blocked by the road. Off-site areas drainage onto the roadway can require additional curb inlets
and storm-sewer capacity. A large concentrated volume of water can be collected more efficiently
in a channel using culvert-type inlets rather than being allowed to flow overland onto the pavement
and into the pavement inlets. Existing utilities should be considered in determining the storm-
drain location and depth.

203-4.03(04) Downstream Conditions

Where drainage is into an existing system such as a ditch or other storm drain, impacts to the
receiving system should be considered. Possible impacts include, but are not limited to, outlet
velocity, capacity of receiving system, erosion, finished floor elevations, etc. The outlet structure

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 57

flow should contain a reasonable outlet velocity and should be protected against scour. See Figure
203-2D for riprap size based on outlet velocity. Downstream flow conditions include the
following.

1. If the storm drain outlets into a legal drain, the county surveyor should be contacted to
ascertain that the legal drain can handle the additional flow.

2. If the receiving ditch cannot or should not satisfy the necessary capacity requirement, a
detention facility, either above or below ground, should be considered. See Section 203-
5.0.
3. The outlet invert into a ditch should be as high as possible. If the outlet invert has to be
less than 1 ft above the low-flow elevation, high-water analysis of the ditch should be
performed to determine the backwater effects into the storm-drain system.

4. FHWA has developed guidelines for determining the backwater effects through a storm-
drain system which could be affected by a high elevations in the receiving water body. See
Figure 203-2G, Joint Probability Analysis, for these requirements. For this situation, a flap
gate may be required on the outlet structure.

203-4.03(05) Environmental Issues

Some ditches are considered environmentally sensitive. If draining into a sensitive stream, water-
quality improvements may be necessary. A sensitive stream should be identified in the
environmental document. The Environmental Services Division Ecology and Waterway Permitting
Team should be contacted if questions arise. Sanitary and storm drainage systems should be
separate. A storm drain may be required to tie back into an existing storm-drain system that is a
combined sewer. The receiving wastewater-treatment facility should have sufficient capacity for
the additional flow, and all EPA requirements should be satisfied.

203-4.03(06) Roadway Drainage

In designing the storm drain, the trunk lines should be placed as shallow as possible while
satisfying cover requirements. This will reduce the cost of excavation and increase safety for the
construction crew. However, this is not always possible due to utility conflicts, slope
requirements, outlet elevations, or other issues. Where there is a slope, the inlets should be placed
on the upstream side of a driveway or intersection. Where practical, manholes should be placed
outside of the pavement limits. If this is not possible, inlets and manholes should be placed to
avoid the wheel path in the roadway mainline, an intersection or a drive. A trunk mainline may

Page 58 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

be required on each side of the roadway with few laterals, or only a single trunk mainline may be
required. Such features are a function of economy but can be controlled by other physical features.

203-4.03(07) Bridge-Deck Drainage

Bridge deck drainage is similar to that for a curbed roadway section. However, it can be less
efficient because cross slopes are flatter, parapets collect large amounts of debris, and small
drainage inlets or scuppers have a higher potential for clogging due to debris. Bridge-deck
construction requires a constant cross slope. Because of the difficulties in providing and
maintaining an adequate deck-drainage system, gutter flow from the roadway should be
intercepted before it reaches a bridge. Runoff should be collected by means of inlets, although
gutter turnouts may be used for a minor flow. The drainage system should prevent water, road
salt, or other corrosives from contacting the structural components. Runoff should be handled in
compliance with applicable stormwater-quality regulations. Deck drainage can be carried several
spans to the bridge end for disposal.

A bridge deck is usually the first segment of a highway to become icy in cold weather. Adequate
deck drainage through use of minimum grades and cross slopes is essential to prevent the
accumulation and spreading of icy spots. Icing on a bridge deck caused due to frost is difficult to
prevent except through surface texture and maintenance practices.

203-4.03(08) Construction and Maintenance

A storm drain is one of the earlier items constructed during the project work. Drainage should be
maintained throughout the construction process. The feasibility of construction should be
considered in designing the storm-drain system. Safety and costs should be analyzed. If the storm
drain is too deep, it may not be able to be constructed without extensive and expensive safety
measures. The storm-drain design should satisfy the specified velocity requirements of Section
203-4.04(06), so that less maintenance and cleaning will be required.

1. Compatibility of Drainage Structure and Casting. Figure 203-4B shows which casting may
be used with a given type of catch basin, inlet, or manhole. The information shown in the
figure is complementary to that shown on the related INDOT Standard Drawings series
720-CDSC. In developing a drainage plan, the designer should refer to the figure to
ascertain structure and casting compatibility. If a structure-casting combination other than
that permitted in the figure is desired, the Division of Hydraulics should be contacted.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 59

2. Pump Station. A pump station may be required to satisfy the grade requirements. The use
of a pump station is not desirable. If the designer is considering the use of a pump station,
the Division of Hydraulics should be contacted for approval.

203-4.04 Design Procedure and Criteria

203-4.04(01) Data Collection and Preliminary Sketch

The first step in the design of a storm-drainage system is to collect initial data about the project
and site location. This includes knowing the purpose of the project, coordinating with local
agencies, and understanding present and future land-use patterns. All possible outlet locations
should be determined. Topographical and aerial mapping is helpful at this point in the process.
Some cities and counties have detailed mapping information of their areas.

203-4.04(02) Inlet Location

An inlet is required where needed to collect runoff within the design controls specified in Figure
203-4A. An inlet may be necessary where it contributes little to the drainage area. Such a location
should be shown on the plans prior to performing computations regarding discharge, water spread,
inlet capacity, or run-by. Location examples are as follows:

1. sag points;
2. upstream of a median break, entrance or exit ramp gore, crosswalk, or street intersection;
3. immediately upstream and downstream of a bridge;
4. immediately upstream of a cross-slope reversal;
5. on a side street at an intersection;
6. at the end of a channel in a cut section;
7. behind a curb, shoulder, or sidewalk to drain a low area; or
8. where necessary to collect snowmelt.

An inlet should not be located in the path where a pedestrian is likely to walk.

203-4.04(03) Inlet Spacing and Spread [Rev. Apr. 2017]

An inlet will draw an amount of water off the road and into the storm-drain system. Once the
water spreads out a certain distance it is desirable to have an inlet added that will reduce this width
of water. This width is known as allowable water spread. The spread is determined based on
geometry of the roadway cross section and the quantity of water. To determine the amount of
water that reaches an inlet, the Rational Method should be used. The minimum time of

Page 60 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

concentration should be taken as 5 min. The design-storm frequency is determined based on the
type of facility. The runoff is typically all impervious unless there is some off-road drainage
coming on to the road.

Pavement can have a texture which can affect the friction of the water as it moves across the road.
See Figure 203-4C for Manning’s n value to be used for a street or pavement gutter. The transverse
and longitudinal roadway slopes can be determined from the proposed road design.

The desirable minimum longitudinal grade for a curbed pavement is 0.3% and for a ditch is 0.5%.
A minimum grade in a curbed section can be maintained in flat terrain by rolling the longitudinal-
gutter profile.

The inlet efficiency should be determined to see whether there will be by-pass flow from the inlet
that should be added to the next basin for determining the location of the next inlet. Each inlet
casting has a unique flow-intercept-efficiency coefficient. Manufacturer’s catalogs are a source
of this information.

A curved vane grate should be used for a curb-and-gutter application. Figure 203-4D provides a
hydraulic capacity chart for a curved vane-grate inlet. The chart is based on a roadway cross
section used by the Department. For another inlet type and roadway cross section, the procedure
for determining the hydraulic performance is described below. FHWA has developed computer
software, called “The Hydraulic Toolbox”, which is based on the methods described in HEC 22.
This program will analyze the flow in a gutter and the interception capacity of a grate inlet, curb-
opening inlet, slotted-drain inlet, or combination inlet on a continuous grade. Both uniform and
composite cross-slopes can be analyzed. The program can analyze a curb-opening, slotted-drain,
or grate inlet in a sag. Not all INDOT grate configurations have been included in HEC-22. The
curved vane grate and the reticuline grate used in the program are similar to the INDOT grates and
can be used by inputting the appropriate size.

See HEC-22 Chapter 4 for the spread-equation and inlet by-pass calculations.

The methodology for inlet location and calculating spread is done with a computer program or on
a spreadsheet similar to that shown in Figure 203-4E.

The maximum allowable spread requirement is shown in Figure 203-4A.

In general, inlet spacing design computations should use a clogging factor of 50%. However, a
clogging factor is not required in the following situations:

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 61

1. For inlet structures which include both a grate and a curb box, since the curb box will
provide the needed factor of safety. Thus, any flow into a curb box should not be
considered in the inlet spacing design computations;

2. Where Type P inlets are used, due to the size and configuration of the casting;

3. For sag inlets in median or other ditches or along curb lines which have been provided with
flanking inlets.

203-4.04(04) Pipe Capacity, Non-Pressure Flow

A storm-drainage system should be designed so that the 10% annual EP passes through the system
via gravity. Pipe size should not be decreased in a downstream direction regardless of the available
pipe gradient because of potential plugging with debris. See HEC-22 Chapter 7 for more
information.

203-4.04(05) Hydraulic Gradient, Pressure Flow

The storm-drain network should accommodate the 2% annual EP. The system may operate under
pressure, but the hydraulic grade line (HGL) should remain below the rim elevation at each system
manhole, inlet, catch basin, or similar structure. At the outlet, the initial HGL will be determined
based on the tailwater, which will be either the receiving flow depth or halfway between the crown
and critical depth. See HEC-22 Chapter 7 for more information.

203-4.04(06) Minimum Pipe Diameter and Design Velocity [Rev. May 2013]

The minimum pipe diameter is 12 in. A minimum full-flow velocity of 3.0 ft/s is desirable to
prevent sedimentation from occurring in the pipe. The recommended maximum storm-sewer
velocity is 10.0 ft/s. The minimum Manning’s roughness value allowed for pipe is 0.012 (smooth
interior pipe). For a situation that cannot be accommodated, the Division of Hydraulics should be
contacted.

203-4.04(07) Pipe Cover [Rev. Apr. 2017]

The allowable cover depth can vary based on pipe material and size. The INDOT Standard
Drawings series 715-PHCL provide the cover limits for circular and deformed pipes. The 2017

Page 62 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

revisions to this drawings series illustrates cover is measured from the outside crown of the pipe
and is measured differently for HMA pavement and PCCP.

Cover limits for specialty structures are provided in Section 203-2.06.

If these requirements cannot be satisfied, it is necessary to consider other structure types before
continuing with the Structure Site Analysis.

203-4.04(08) Connecting Inlets and Manholes

A manhole is utilized to provide entry to a continuous underground storm drain for inspection and
cleanout. As a cost-saving measure, the storm drain system should connect inlets together as much
as possible before connecting to a manhole. The inlets or manholes should be placed within 400
ft of each other so that maintenance can clean them when necessary. The manhole-bottom
elevation should match that of the pipe invert leaving the manhole to avoid sedimentation.

The locations where a manhole should be specified are as follows:

1. where two or more storm drains converge;

2. at intermediate points along a tangent section;
3. where the pipe size changes;
4. where an abrupt change in alignment occurs; or
5. where an abrupt change of the grade occurs.

A manhole should not be located in a traffic lane. However, if this is impossible, it should not be
in the normal vehicle-wheel path. Where practical, a manhole should be located off the roadway.
Figure 203-4F shows the guidelines for a pipe size connection to a particular manhole.

203-4.04(09) Sag Vertical Curve and Flanking Inlets [Rev. Apr. 2017]

Where a sag point occurs in a curb and gutter section or along a median barrier rail, a type 15 or
type 5 inlet casting should be utilized. These inlets include two grates, each of which should be
positioned to receive water from each upstream direction. A curb box is combined with the grate
to provide relief if the grate is plugged with debris. The curb box is ignored in the hydraulic-
capacity calculations. A sag grate inlet operates as a weir up to a depth of about 0.5 ft and as an
orifice for a depth greater than 1.5 ft. In a depressed section or underpass where ponding water
can be removed only through the storm-drain system, a higher design frequency, 2% annual EP,
should be considered to design the storm drain which drains the sag point. In a median ditch or
other open conveyance, the preferred inlet type is a P.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 63

Two methods should be used to provide adequate drainage in a sag vertical curve. One method is
to maintain a minimum slope of 0.3% within 50 ft of the level point in the curve and the other is
to provide flanking inlets. These will limit spread on a low-grade approach to the level point and
act in relief of the sag inlet if it becomes clogged. The location of or need for flanking inlets should
be based on the design spread, design speed, traffic volume, potential for clogging of the low point
inlet, maximum depth of ponding potential at the site, or other considerations that can be peculiar
to the site. Typically, the longer the storm drain reach, the greater the need for flanking inlets. In
a ditch or other open conveyance, the use of flanking inlets may not be required where the potential
depth of ponding would not present a significant risk. This may include facilities with low design
speeds or locations where water ponded at a clogged sag inlet could overflow to another location
with adequate capacity to receive the flow without exceeding the allowable amount of spread.

Figure 203-4G shows the spacing required for depth-at-curb criteria and vertical curve length
defined by K = L/A, where L is the length of the vertical curve in feet and A is the algebraic
percentage difference in approach grades. The INDOT geometrics specify a maximum K value
for the design speed, and a maximum K value of 170 for considering drainage on a curbed facility.
See HEC-22, Chapter 4.4 for design information.

203-4.04(10) Slotted Drain

A slotted-drain pipe is used at locations as follows:

1. high-side shoulder of a superelevated section;

2. high-side shoulder that slopes toward the traveled way;

3. high-traffic-volume freeway; or

4. roadway that is either curbed or uncurbed.

See HEC-22 Chapter 4.4 for more information on designing a slotted drain.

Snow accumulation adjacent to a concrete barrier on the inside or outside shoulder can present a
drainage problem. Therefore, a slotted drain should be used in conjunction with inlet type H-5 or
HA-5 as follows:

1. in a tangent section, at every third inlet;

2. on the low side of a superelevated curve, at all inlet sites; or

Page 64 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

3. in a sag vertical curve, three inlets, centered on the low point.

See the INDOT Standard Drawings for more-detailed information.

1. Slotted Inlet on Grade. A slotted inlet, which uses a vertical riser, is an effective pavement-
drainage inlet which has a variety of applications. It can be used on a curbed or uncurbed
section, and offers little interference to traffic operations. It can be placed longitudinally
in the gutter or transversely to the gutter. A slotted inlet should be connected into an inlet
structure so that it will be accessible to maintenance forces upon plugging or freezing.

a. Longitudinal Placement. Flow interception by a slotted-drain pipe and a curb-

opening inlet is similar in that each is a side weir, and the flow is subjected to lateral
acceleration due to the cross slope of the pavement. A slotted inlet can have
economic advantages and can be useful in a widening or safety project where right
of way is narrow and existing inlet capacity should be supplemented. A curb
opening inlet can be eliminated as a result of utilizing a slotted inlet. The standard
slotted-drain-pipe slot width is 1¾ in., and the length is 20 ft. The same equations
that are used for a curb-opening inlet are also used for a slotted inlet. See HEC 22
Chapter 4.4.4 for more-specific information.

b. Transverse Placement of Slotted Vane Drain. At a drive where it is desirable to

capture virtually all of the flow, e.g., a drive sloped toward the roadway, a slotted-
vane drain can be installed in conjunction with a grate inlet. Tests have indicated
that, if the slotted-vane drain is installed perpendicular to the flow, it will capture
approximately 1.6 ft3/s per running foot of drain on a longitudinal slope less than
6%. Capacity curves are available from the manufacturers. The ideal installation
utilizes a grate inlet to capture the flow in the gutter and the slotted-vane drain to
collect the flow extending into the shoulder. A slotted-vane drain is shaped and
rounded to increase inlet efficiency and should not be confused with a vertical-
riser-type slotted inlet, i.e., a slotted-drain pipe.

2. Slotted Inlet in a Sag Location. Except adjacent to a concrete barrier, the use of a slotted-
drain inlet in a sag configuration is discouraged because of the propensity of such an inlet
to collect debris. However, it may be used where it is desirable to supplement an existing
low-point inlet with the use of a slotted drain. A slotted inlet in a sag location performs as
a weir to a depth of about 0.2 ft, dependent on slot width and length. At a depth greater
than about 0.4 ft, it performs as an orifice. Between these depths, flow is in a transition
stage.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 65

203-4.04(11) Underdrains

Section 605-2.0 provides the procedure for the design of underdrains.

203-4.04(12) Roadside or Median Ditch

A roadside ditch is used with an uncurbed roadway section to convey runoff from the highway
pavement and from areas which drain toward the highway. Due to right-of-way limitations, a
roadside ditch should not be used on an urban arterial. It can be used in a cut section, depressed
section, or other location where sufficient right of way is available, and drives or intersections are
infrequent. Where practical, the flow from an area draining toward a curbed highway pavement
should be intercepted behind the curb to prevent flow onto the pavement.
A median area or inside shoulder should be sloped to a center swale to prevent drainage from the
median area from flowing across the pavement. This should be considered for a high-speed
facility, or for one with more than two lanes of traffic in each direction. Where a median barrier
is used, or on a horizontal curve with associated superelevation, it is necessary to provide inlets
and connecting storm drains to collect the water which accumulates against the barrier. A slotted
drain adjacent to the median barrier or weep holes in the barrier can also be used for this purpose.

Section 203-6.0 discusses the hydraulic design of a channel.

A median or roadside ditch can be drained by means of drop inlets similar to those used for
pavement drainage, pipe culverts under one roadway, or cross-drainage culverts which are not
continuous across the median. The type P inlet is used for median ditch drainage. See the INDOT
Standard Drawings for inlet details. See HEC-22 Chapter 4 for additional information regarding
design procedures.

203-4.04(13) Curb and Gutter

A curb at the outside edge of a pavement is common for a low-speed, urban highway facility. It
contains the surface runoff within the roadway and away from adjacent properties, prevents
erosion, provides pavement delineation, and enables the orderly development of property adjacent
to the roadway. See Section 45-1.05 for a discussion on curb types and usage.

A curb and gutter forms a triangular channel that can be an efficient hydraulic conveyance facility
to convey runoff of a lesser magnitude than the design flow without interruption to traffic. If a
design-storm flow occurs, there is a spread or widening of the conveyed water surface and the
water spreads to include not only the gutter width, but also parking lanes or shoulders and portions
of the traveled surface.

Page 66 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

Where practical, runoff should be intercepted from a cut slope or other area draining toward the
roadway before it reaches it. A shallow swale section at the edge of the roadway pavement or
shoulder offers advantages over a curbed section where curbs are not needed for traffic control.
The advantages include a lesser hazard to traffic than a near-vertical curb, and hydraulic capacity
that is not dependent on spread on the pavement.

203-4.04(14) Shoulder Gutter or Curb

A shoulder gutter or sloping curb may be appropriate to protect a fill slope from erosion caused
due to water from the roadway pavement. It should be considered for a 2:1 fill slope higher than
20 ft. It should also be considered for a 3:1 fill slope higher than 20 ft if the roadway grade is
steeper than 2%. Where permanent vegetation cannot be established, the height criterion should
be reduced to 10 ft regardless of the grade. Inspection of the existing and proposed site conditions
and contact with maintenance and construction personnel should be made by the designer to
determine if vegetation will survive.

A shoulder gutter or curb, or a riprap turnout should be utilized at a bridge end where concentrated
flow from the bridge deck will otherwise flow down the fill slope. The section of gutter should be
long enough to include the transitions. A shoulder gutter or riprap turnout is not required on the
high side of a superelevated section or adjacent to a barrier wall on a high fill.

203-4.04(15) Impact Attenuator

The location of an impact-attenuator system should be reviewed to determine the need for a
drainage structure. It is necessary to have a clear or unobstructed opening as traffic approaches
the point of impact to allow a vehicle to impact the system head-on. If the impact attenuator is
placed where superelevation or other grade separation occurs, a grate inlet or a slotted drain can
be needed to prevent water from flowing through the clear opening and crossing the highway lanes
or ramp lanes. A curb, curb-type structure, or swale cannot be used to direct water across the clear
opening because vehicular vaulting can occur once the attenuator system is impacted.

203-4.04(16) Bridge Deck Drainage [Rev. Apr. 2017]

HEC-21 should be referenced for bridge deck drainage design procedure. The longitudinal slope
of the bridge deck should be steep enough to satisfy the gutter-spread requirements without the
need for gutter inlets on the structure itself. However, this is not always feasible, and runoff

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 67

capture may be necessary. All surface drainage should be intercepted before it enters the bridge
section. If inlets are required on the structure, the criteria to be implemented are as follows.

1. For a structure length of less than 170 ft and on grade, or a structure length of less than 250
ft and on a crest vertical curve, inlets are not required. However, hydraulic calculations for
deck drains are required.
2. The gutter spread should be checked to ensure compliance with the design criteria
described in Figure 203-4A.
3. The desirable minimum longitudinal slope for bridge-deck drainage is 0.5%. A flatter
grade will be tolerated where it is not physically or economically desirable to satisfy this
criterion.
4. A clogging factor of 50% should be utilized for the inlets on the bridge. The end collectors
should be sized accordingly.
5. Considering hydraulics, inlets should be large and widely separated.
6. If deck drainage is required at the ends of the grade-separation structure, deck drains should
discharge into inlets located in the berm or on the slopewall under the bridge as shown on
the INDOT Standard Drawings.
7. A flat grade or sag vertical curve is not allowed on a bridge on a new alignment. Vertical-
curve criteria for an existing structure should be followed for inlet placement. Because a
grate inlet at a sag location is prone to clogging, a safety factor of 2.0 for the inlet design
size should be used if no alternative design is feasible.
8. Allowable inlet types should be the following:
a. Grate Type A. This grate fits onto roadway drain type SQ. It is a parallel bar grate
and the most hydraulically-efficient grate in use. The grate is 19 in. square.
Because the width of the openings is 1 in., the grate is not considered bicycle-safe
if placed with the bars parallel to the direction of traffic. However, it is feasible to
use this grate where bicycle traffic is allowed on the bridge if the bars are placed
perpendicular to the direction of travel. The perpendicular arrangement can
substantially reduce the hydraulic capacity of the grate. The outlet fitting is a
circular pipe with diameter of 6 in.
b. Grate Type D. This grate fits onto roadway drain type OS. This is a type C grate
with parallel bars but has two transverse bars which prevent bicycle wheels from
dropping into the inlet. Therefore, it is considered bicycle-safe. The transverse
bars reduce the hydraulic capacity of the grate. The grate dimensions are width of
19 in. by length of 20 in. The outlet fitting is a circular pipe with diameter of 6 in.
c. Slab-Bridge Floor Drain. This drain should be used on a reinforced-concrete slab
bridge. The drain is a PVC pipe, diameter of 6 in., set into the deck. This drain has

Page 68 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 limited hydraulic capacity. Therefore, the spacing will be much closer than that for
grate type A or D. The standard spacing is approximately 72 in. A ½-in.
depression, which extends 1 ft transversely from the face of the curb, slightly
increases the capacity.
d. Curved-Vane Grate. This grate should be used on a curbed roadway where the
inlets are located off the bridge deck.
e. Concrete Barrier Railing Scupper. This device should be used only on a local
public agency bridge with concrete-barrier railings.

The following applies to the design of the underdeck drainage system.

1. A bridge-drainage pipe beneath the deck is sized larger than necessary for hydraulic
purposes to facilitate maintenance. The minimum pipe diameter is 6 in. The inlet
conditions will control the flow capacity. Entrances, bends, and junctions in the underdeck
pipe system provide opportunities for debris to snag and collect. Smooth transitions and
smooth interior surfaces should be provided. Sharp bends, corner joints, or bevel joints
should be avoided.
2. The recommended minimum velocity for storm drainage should be used.
3. The INDOT Standard Drawings series 704-BDCG and 715-BDCG show details for bridge
deck drains (castings and grates) and drainage casting extensions, respectively. Acceptable
materials for castings and grates, drain casting extensions and enclosed bridge deck
drainage systems are included in the Standard Specifications and should not be shown on
the plans.
4. Figure 203-4H, Typical Floor Drain Sections, illustrates two alternatives to drains. Its
detail (a) shows a traditional arrangement including a short overhang and a steel beam,
which permits the drain pipe to be located internally with reference to the external beam.
Its detail (b) shows another arrangement including a large overhang and a bulb-tee beam,
which locates the drain pipe to the outside. This is aesthetically less pleasing, therefore
emphasizing the desirability of keeping the number of drains to a minimum.
5. A drainage casting should be positioned such that the outlet pipe is located inside the
exterior beam, if practical. See detail (a). If it cannot be located as such, the casting type
and position should be selected to locate the drainage pipe as close as practical to the
exterior beam. The plans should show the drain location, positioning, and attachment
details.
6. The pipe-conveyance system should not extend below the superstructure until the outfall.
The minimum desirable slope is 1% for a longitudinal pipe between drains or from a drain
to the point of discharge.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 69

7. An open deck drain should not be located over a roadway, sidewalk, or railroad. If a drain
is to be located in one of these areas, a closed drainage system should be provided.

The following applies to free-fall, where used beneath a bridge.

1. The downspout should be extended 6 in. below the beam soffit. The downspout should be
placed approximately 10 ft from the face of a substructure unit, unless a closed drainage
system is to be used. A downspout should not interfere with the required horizontal or
vertical clearances. A pipe system designed to bring water down to ground level can
become clogged with debris and ice and should only be used as the last option.
2. A downspout should not discharge water where such water can be windblown and can flow
down a column or pier.
3. Water should not be discharged openly over a traveled vehicular, railroad, or pedestrian
way, unpaved embankment, or unprotected ground where it can cause erosion or
undermine a structural element. An energy dissipator or riprap should be provided to
prevent erosion.
4. If a free fall is less than 25 ft, riprap or a splash pad will be required to prevent erosion.

A cleanout for maintenance access should be provided at key points within the system to facilitate
the removal of obstructions. A downspout should be located so that a maintenance crew can access
it from underneath the bridge and preferably from the ground. The most convenient arrangement
should be made, as a cleanout that is inaccessible or difficult to reach will not be cleaned.

203-4.04(17) Storm-Drainage Agreement Policy

A storm-drainage agreement is required if a new or reconstructed INDOT drainage facility is

designed to accommodate stormwater from a sewer controlled by an LPA. This is applicable
regardless of whether the shared drainage facility is constructed within or outside of INDOT right
of way.

Where INDOT constructs a drainage facility outside its right-of-way limits to provide adequate
drainage for a highway, I.C. 8-23-6-2 allows INDOT to assess a proportionate share of the cost of
constructing the drainage facility outside the right of way to beneficiaries of the drainage structure.
Therefore, a municipality or other beneficiary that connects to an INDOT drainage structure
outside INDOT right-of-way limits can be assessed a share of the cost of the drainage structure in
proportion to the amount of drainage discharged. The proportionate share is calculated as follows:

Page 70 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 𝑄𝑄
𝐴𝐴𝐵𝐵 = 𝐶𝐶𝐹𝐹 � 𝑄𝑄𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂� [Equation 203-4.1]
𝑇𝑇
Where AB = Amount of assessment to beneficiary
CF = Cost of drainage facility
QOR = Discharge from storm sewer draining from outside INDOT R/W
QT = Total discharge of drainage facility

The remainder of the cost will be paid by INDOT.

By common law, INDOT also has the authority to seek a contribution from the LPA if stormwater
from outside the INDOT right of way discharges into a drainage facility within the INDOT right
of way. For example, if a municipality wants to make a direct discharge into an INDOT trunkline
storm drain, INDOT’s policy will be to request a storm-drainage agreement for the trunkline-sewer
construction. The proportionate share will also be determined from Equation 203-4.1. If the
discharge is in the form of sheet flow onto INDOT right of way, INDOT will not seek a
contribution from the municipality involved.

If a particular situation involving sheet flow onto INDOT right of way is increased from existing
conditions, the LPA should agree to the necessary local contribution as a condition for initiating
the State highway improvement. Such an agreement cannot be forced upon an LPA, but must be
pre-arranged through negotiations between the LPA and the Planning Division or Environmental
Services Division. However, this can occur as late as the design phase.

A situation may arise if INDOT storm-sewer construction results in a request for stormwater
detention or a county assessment for the reconstruction of a regulated drain. If the situation also
involves INDOT conveying city or town stormwater, INDOT should seek a storm-sewer cost-
sharing contribution from the city or town. The procedure for determining the appropriate
contribution by the city or town will be as described above. INDOT cannot cite I.C. 8-23-6-2 as
authority to pass on a portion of a county drainage assessment to the city or town. Only a county
drainage board has the authority to levy a drainage assessment on a municipality or private-
property owner if a regulated drain is involved.

A county drainage assessment does not require a formal agreement to be legally binding on
INDOT. However, if an assessment includes a monetary contribution which relieves INDOT from
providing stormwater detention mandated by the county, the conditions of the assessment should
be formalized in a storm-drainage agreement.

The need for a storm-drainage agreement should be identified during the preliminary-plans
development. Information necessary for the preparation of the formal agreement should be
coordinated with the municipality prior to INDOT design approval. The preliminary cost estimate
of the trunkline sewer and the exact ratio to be used in determining the municipality’s share should

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 71

be verbally agreed to with the municipality. The ratio may be based on the sewer’s cross-sectional
area if the discharge of the municipality’s storm sewer cannot be reasonably determined. The
municipality should be notified in writing of the approximate cost of its share so that it can arrange
financing.

After design approval, the formal storm-drainage agreement will be written to bind the LPA and
the State. The Legal Services Division will prepare this document. The agreement must be signed
by all parties concerned before the project may be scheduled for a letting.

203-4.04(18) Computer Programs

INDOT does not limit the designer to particular software design programs. However, the designer
should provide output in a spreadsheet format as explained in Section 203-4.05.

203-4.05 Documentation

The following provides an explanation of the submittal requirements for an INDOT hydraulics
report as it pertains to storm-drain-hydraulics analysis. The hydrologic requirements are described
in Section 202-4.02.

203-4.05(01) Spread Calculations for Inlet Spacing

A tabulated summary of spread calculations for inlet spacing should be provided as shown in
Figure 203-4E. Computer software programs may be used for preparation of solutions. However,
the results should still be summarized and referenced in the accepted tabular form.

203-4.05(02) Storm Sewer Capacity

A storm sewer should be designed to carry the runoff from a 10% annual EP through the system
via gravity. Computer-software methods are available to the user to determine the capacity of a
storm-sewer system. The results from an electronic or manual method should be provided in an
accepted tabular method as shown in Figure 203-4 I.

203-4.05(03) Hydraulic Grade Line Check

The final storm-sewer design should be checked to determine its adequacy by analysis using a 2%
annual EP through the entire system of the hydraulic gradient. The gradient line should not exceed

Page 72 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

the elevation of an opening into the system. A tabular summary or plotted profile should be
provided in the hydraulics-report submittal.

203-4.05(04) Plan and Profile

Road plans for a storm-drain project should be submitted so that the appropriate inlet and storm
drain pipe locations can be identified. The plan view should be simplified to show the pipe type,
slope, and size; structure identifier, road grade, and other information necessary to evaluate the
storm-drain system. The plans structure numbers should match the computer and tabular results
in the report submittal. All discrepancies should be addressed prior to report submittal.

203-4.05(05) Additional Information

Other information that the designer deems necessary toward validation of the design should be
provided in the hydraulics report. Non-traditional methodology requires the approval of the
Division of Hydraulics director.

203-5.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND DETENTION

203-5.01 Introduction

The traditional design of a storm-drainage system has been to collect and convey storm runoff as
rapidly as possible to a suitable location where it can be discharged. However, the impact of such
a traditional storm-drainage design has not always been favorable. Rapidly conveying stormwater
can cause environmental impacts to karst topography and wetlands downstream, overwhelm
limited outlet capacities, and flood downstream properties, especially where the amount of
impervious area is increased as part of a roadway project. To reduce these impacts, various forms
of stormwater management have been developed, for an open-system or closed-system facility, as
described below.

203-5.02 General Policy

203-5.02(01) Reasons for Storage

Controlling the quantity of stormwater release using a storage facility can provide the potential
benefits as follows:

1. prevention or reduction of peak runoff rate increase;

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 73

2. mitigation of downstream drainage-capacity problems;
3. reduction or elimination of the need for downstream outfall improvements; and
4. protection of environmentally-sensitive areas, such as karst topography.

203-5.02(02) Downstream Conditions

Storage can be developed in a depressed area in a parking lot, road embankment, freeway
interchange, or a small lake, pond, or depression. The utility of a storage facility depends on the
amount of storage, its location within the system, and its operational characteristics. An analysis
of such a storage facility should consist of comparing the design flow at a point or points
downstream of the proposed storage site, with or without storage. Other flows in excess of the
design flow that can be expected to pass through the storage facility may be required in the
analysis, i.e., 1% annual EP flood. The design criteria for a storage facility should include the
following:

1. release rate;
2. storage volume;
3. grading and depth requirements;
4. outlet works; and
5. location.

At a minimum, a storage facility should be designed to detain the 1% annual EP, post-development
peak runoff rate, and release it at the 10% annual EP, pre-developed peak runoff rate. An
emergency overflow capable of accommodating the 1% annual EP post-development discharge
may be required.

203-5.02(03) Local Jurisdictional Requirements

A local jurisdiction can be more restrictive than INDOT drainage requirements. INDOT
requirements need not be in accordance with local jurisdictional rules and regulations. However,
the local design parameters should be followed as much as practical.

203-5.03 Design Considerations

Page 74 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

A pump station may be required to outlet from an infiltration/detention facility. The use of a pump
station to outlet a facility is not desirable. If a pump station is being considered, the Division of
Hydraulics should be contacted for approval.

Dam safety should be considered for a berm or embankment created as part of a detention facility.
An embankment should not be subject to IDNR regulation and inspection requirements. Per the
Indiana Code, IDNR has jurisdiction over all structures, except where the embankment is lower
than 20 ft, the contributing drainage area is less than 1 sq mi, or the storage volume behind the
structure is less than 100 ac-ft. For more information, see Indiana Code 14-27-7.5: Regulation of
Dams.

203-5.03(01) Detention Pond

A detention pond is designed to reduce the peak discharge and detain runoff only for a specific
duration. A detention basin should have a positive outlet that empties all runoff between storms.
The excavation of a detention pond can extend below the water table or outlet level where the
bottom is sealed due to sedimentation. This is a detention pond or wet-bottom detention basin.
The detention pond also has a positive outlet and releases all temporary storage.

A dry-bottom detention facility should be used. A detention basin will require additional right of
way. The basin will require a certain amount of space, and it should be outside the clear-zone for
safety purposes. The pond location and outlet should be considered, especially for flood routing.
The overflow location should avoid impacting nearby property and the roadway.

203-5.03(02) Retention Pond

A retention pond retains runoff for an indefinite time and has no positive outlet. Runoff is removed
only by means of infiltration through a permeable bottom or by means of evaporation. A retention
pond or lake is an example of a retention facility. A retention pond is designed to drain into the
groundwater table.

Soil characteristics are the primary concern in designing a retention pond. A geotechnical report
should be obtained from the Division of Geotechnical Services, county surveyor’s office, etc, to
determine the infiltration capacity of the substratum.

A retention pond will require additional right of way. It should be located outside the clear-zone
for safety purposes.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 75

203-5.03(03) Roadside Ditch Detention

A roadside ditch detention system takes advantage of the additional capacity of the roadside and
median ditches created by the clear-zone requirements. A roadside ditch detains runoff from the
roadway and discharges it at a restricted rate to a positive outlet.

A roadside ditch is the least expensive open-detention system, since it does not require additional
right of way or significant additional maintenance. Since the ditch is within the right of way, safety
considerations and roadway serviceability should be evaluated.

203-5.03(04) Underground Storage

Underground detention is best suited to an urbanized area where right of way and available land
are constrained. It is desirable for where an underground storage structure is to be located outside
the pavement limits. Coordination with local utilities is required. Conflicts should be minimized.
Clearances should be observed between stormwater and other systems such as drinking water and
sanitary sewers. In considering underground detention, the native soil should be determined to
ensure constructability. All inline detention should have a positive grade to minimize
sedimentation. Access should be provided for cleaning of the underground facility. The grade
should be set to avoid the need for a pump station if possible.

The types of underground detention include underground storage, inline detention, parallel storage
systems, oversize storm-sewer system, and infiltration trench. Underground storage can be built
as one single unit with one inlet and one outlet, under a large area such as a parking lot. It can also
be built as a pipe network or conduit system with multiple inlets and only one outlet, under a large
area such as a parking lot. Inline detention replaces part of a storm-sewer system with a larger
structure near the outlet to detain water within the system. A parallel storage system runs parallel
to the existing storm-sewer system to provide additional storage. An oversize storm-sewer system
increases the pipe sizes as needed in parts of the storm sewer to add storage to the entire system.
An infiltration trench functions like a roadway underdrain, but it can be used only in sandy soil,
where the infiltration rate is high.

203-5.03(05) Outlet Conditions

An outlet work can take the form of combinations of a drop inlet, pipe, weir, or orifice. An outlet
work selected for a storage facility includes a principal spillway or an emergency overflow. It
should be able to accomplish the design functions of the facility.

Page 76 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

A slotted-riser pipe should not be used due to clogging problems. A curb opening can be used for
parking-lot storage. The principal spillway is intended to convey the design storm without
allowing flow to enter an emergency outlet.
An emergency spillway is an outlet provided to allow excess water to exit the pond once the design
storm is exceeded. Usually in the shape of a weir, the emergency outlet should be located so that
the excess stormwater flows to an adequate outlet and does not damage nearby property. An
emergency spillway should be included in a storage-facility design if possible. However, a viable
emergency spillway location may not exist.

203-5.03(06) Maintenance

To ensure acceptable performance and function, a storage facility that requires extensive
maintenance is discouraged. The maintenance problems that are typical of a detention facility are
as follows:

1. weed growth;
2. grass and vegetation maintenance;
3. bank deterioration;
4. standing water or soggy surface;
5. mosquito control;
6. blockage of outlet structures;
7. litter accumulation; or
8. maintenance of fences and perimeter plantings.

The design should focus on the elimination or reduction of maintenance requirements by

addressing the potential for problems as follows:

1. Both weed growth and grass maintenance can be addressed by constructing side slopes that
can be maintained using available power-driven equipment, such as a tractor mower.
2. Bank deterioration can be controlled with protective lining or by limiting bank slopes.
3. Standing water or soggy surfaces can be eliminated by means of sloping the basin bottom
toward the outlet, or by means of constructing a low-flow pilot channel across the basin
bottom, from the inlet to the outlet.
4. Once the problems listed above are addressed, mosquito control will not be a major
problem.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 77

5. An outlet structure should be selected to minimize the possibility of blockage. A pipe of
diameter of less than 6 in. tends to block easily and should be avoided.
6. The facility should be located for easy access where the maintenance associated with litter
and damage to fences or perimeter plantings can be conducted regularly.
Routine maintenance activities include an annual inspection, preferably during wet weather, and
mowing, as required.

203-5.03(07) Safety Issues

Ponding of water for a significant period of time, at a relatively shallow depth, can introduce an
additional risk factor for property damage, personal injury, or loss of life. Safety considerations
include reducing the chance of drowning by fencing the basin, reducing the maximum depth, or
including ledges or mild slopes to prevent a person from falling in and to facilitate his or her escape
from the basin. A storage facility in a location that is easily accessible to the public should be
provided with fencing adequate to prevent entry onto the site by unauthorized persons. A storage
facility located adjacent to a roadway should be provided with an adequate clear zone to minimize
the accidental entry of an errant vehicle.

Protective treatment is required to prevent entry to a facility that poses a hazard to all persons.
Fences and signs are required for a detention or retention pond with a locked gate to allow for
maintenance access.

Where a storage facility is located near a roadway, the road should be provided with an adequate
clear zone. The maximum operating-pool depth is limited to 5 ft unless otherwise approved by
the Division of Hydraulics.

203-5.04 Design Procedure

A storage facility will require an inflow rate and an outflow rate to determine the necessary storage
volume.

The amount of water flowing into the storage facility should be determined. This inflow rate is
the post-developed 1% annual EP. However, an additional smaller inflow rate should be
considered, if a stricter local ordinance is being followed. The outflow rate should then be
determined. The outflow rate is the pre-developed 10% annual EP. However, additional smaller
outflow rate should be considered, if a stricter local ordinance is being followed.
The required storage volume should be calculated, based on the inflow and outflow rates, and
storm duration. If the watershed draining into a storage facility is greater than 2 ac, the design

Page 78 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

should be based on reservoir-routing methods which develop hydrographs for both inflow and
outflow. WinTR-20 and HEC-HMS are available public-domain hydrographic programs. A basin
regulating less than 2 ac can be analyzed using the Rational Method to create a triangular
hydrograph.

203-5.04(01) Detention Pond

For a detention pond, a minimum freeboard of 1 ft above the 1% annual EP storm highwater
elevation should be provided. Other considerations in setting the depth include flood-elevation
requirements, public safety, land availability, land value, present and future land use, water-table
fluctuations, soil characteristics, maintenance requirements, and required freeboard.

The primary outlet should be designed to drain the entire detention volume within 72 h. A
restrictor plate should not be used. See the INDOT Standard Drawings.

An emergency overflow structure should also be added. The emergency overflow structure should
be placed in a location that will accept the extra flow. This may or may not outlet to the design
outfall. Usually, the emergency overflow structure takes the shape of a weir.

The area above the detention pond’s normal high-water elevation should be sloped towards the
pond. The bottom area of the pond should be graded toward the outlet to prevent standing water
conditions. A low-flow or pilot channel constructed across the facility bottom from the inlet to
the outlet should be used to convey low flow. See HEC-22, Chapter 8 for example problems and
more information.

203-5.04(02) Retention Pond

The inflow rate is calculated using the Rational Method, regardless of the size of the drainage area.
Since the pond is retaining all of the runoff from the 1% annual EP, the outflow rate is almost
negligible, because infiltration and evaporation are the only available mechanisms for drainage.
To determine the infiltration rate, soil borings should be obtained to ensure accurate calculations.

A retention pond also requires an emergency spillway. The emergency spillway should overflow
to an acceptable outlet. The pond should be sized to allow for 1 ft of freeboard below the
emergency spillway. If an acceptable emergency overflow outlet is not available, the pond should
be sized for 1.5 times the total volume required, plus 1 ft of freeboard.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 79

The construction of a storage facility can require excavation or placement of an earthen
embankment to obtain sufficient storage volume. The embankment should be of less than 6.5 ft
height. A vegetated embankment should not be steeper than 3H:1V. A riprap-protected
embankment should not be steeper than 2H:1V. An excavated storage facility should not have an
operating design-pool depth of greater than 5 ft unless approved by the Division of Hydraulics.

203-5.04(03) Roadside Ditch Detention

A detention pond detains water from the entire drainage area. A roadside ditch detains water only
from additional pavement being added during construction. However, the methodology for
determining that volume remains the same. To detain the water in a roadside ditch, a berm should
be built upstream of the stream receiving the flow from the ditch. The outlet structure diameter
should not be smaller than 6 in. to prevent clogging. The berm should be constructed with an
overflow weir for a storm event that exceeds the design storm. For more information on
emergency overflow design, see HEC-22, Chapter 8. The capacity of the outfall may not allow
for a normal 1% annual EP inflow and 10% annual EP outflow situation. The release rate should
be considered, since the roadside ditch can be outletting upstream of existing structures.

203-5.04(04) Oversized Storm Sewer and Inline Detention

An oversized storm sewer system upsizes the pipes near the outlet of the system to provide extra
capacity. An oversized storm-sewer system uses larger round or deformed pipes to provide the
extra capacity, while inline detention uses vaults or boxes to provide the extra capacity.

An oversized storm sewer or inline detention should be designed in accordance with Section 203-
4.0 for inlet spacing, water-spread calculations, trunk-line placement, and outlet tailwater
conditions. However, detention-routing calculations should be performed to ensure that a
sufficient amount of water is being detained. Gravity flow should be maintained for the 10%
annual EP. The 2% annual EP hydraulic-grade line should remain below the structure top casting
elevation. If local detention requirements require the 1% annual EP to be detained, another
hydraulic-grade-line check should be made, to ensure that the hydraulic-grade line remains below
the structure top casting elevation at the 1% annual EP. Since the velocity through the oversized
section is likely to be lower than the suggested minimum velocity, sedimentation is a potential
problem. Manholes should be oversized and placed more frequently through the oversized section,
to assist maintenance personnel in removing sediment from the storm-sewer system.

Since inline detention is usually present near the outlet of the storm-sewer system, an emergency
overflow structure should be placed in the underground storage vault. This consists of a pipe

Page 80 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

placed in the upper corner of the storage vault. A pipe of diameter of at least 6 in. should be used
to prevent the emergency overflow structure from clogging.

203-5.04(05) Infiltration Trench

An infiltration trench is similar to a retention pond, except it is long and narrow and may work
within the right-of-way. An infiltration trench is lined with geotextiles and backfilled with
aggregate. The Rational Method should be used to calculate the inflow rate. The outflow rate will
then be determined based on the infiltration capacity of the soil. Only highly pervious soils should
be considered. The length of the system will depend on the volume required, given the inflow and
outflow rates. Only the volume of the pipe should be considered for storage. The volume of the
voids available in the backfilled trench should be ignored, to provide a factor of safety. Larger
pipes should be used, to allow for maintenance. An infiltration trench should be constructed in
accordance with Section 203-4.0. For additional information, see HEC-22, Chapter 8 or Chapter
10.

203-5.05 Pump Station

A pump station requires electricity as well as regular maintenance for proper function. It requires
accessibility, monitoring, has limited capacity, and can be expensive. During a large storm event,
it can be prone to flooding and failure. For these reasons, use of a pump station is discouraged by
INDOT. However, because of topography or geometrics, it may become necessary. If so, the
Division of Hydraulics should be contacted and the design guidelines for a pump station shown in
HEC-24 should be followed.

203-5.06 Documentation

The information is required for a storage-facility submittal is as follows:

1. project background, including existing and proposed structure;

2. summary of hydraulics design and assumptions, including design criteria;
3. USGS topographic map, or county 2 ft contour lines, and aerial map of the project site to
determine the drainage area for the storage design;
4. Hydrology, depending on methods used, IDNR discharge letter if required, coordinated
discharges, FIS information, gaged sites or TR-55 and hydrograph methodologies. See
Section 203-2.0;

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 81

5. computation of the inflow hydrograph;
6. computation of the outflow hydrograph or the restricted outflow according to the pertinent
ordinance;
7. summary performance table for the storage system used to determine the maximum storage
volume and the maximum water surface elevation, and to verify the release rate relative to
the INDOT, city or town, or county regulation. See Figure 203-5A;
8. computation of the outflow-rating curve, or stage-storage-discharge relationship;
9. plan sheet showing the geometric shape of the detention including the maximum water
surface elevation inside the pond, the freeboard, and the emergency spillway if applicable;
and
10. an appendix including the calculation and computer-program input and output data used to
determine the data shown on the summary-performance table.

203-6.0 CHANNEL OR DITCH

203-6.01 Introduction

An open channel is a natural or constructed conveyance for water in which the water surface is
exposed to the atmosphere and the gravity-force component in the direction of motion is the
driving force.

The types of open channels related to a transportation facility are stream channel, or artificial
channel or ditch.

The principles of open-channel-flow hydraulics are applicable to each drainage facility including
a culvert or a storm drain.

A stream channel has the properties as follows:

1. a natural channel with its size and shape determined by means of natural forces;
2. compound in cross section with a main channel for conveying low flow and a floodplain
to transport flood flow, and
3. shaped geomorphologically due to the long-term history of sediment load and water
discharge which it experiences.

Page 82 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

An artificial channel can be a roadside channel, interceptor ditch, or drainage ditch which can be
a constructed channel with regular geometric cross section, and is unlined or lined with artificial
or natural material to protect against erosion.

Although the principles of open-channel flow are the same regardless of the channel type, a stream
channel and an artificial channel, primarily a roadside channel, will be addressed separately herein.

203-6.02 General Policy

203-6.02(01) Significance

Channel analysis is necessary for the design of a transportation drainage system to assess the
following:
1. potential flooding caused by changes in water-surface profile;
2. disturbance of the river system upstream or downstream of the highway right of way;
3. changes in lateral flow distribution;
4. changes in velocity or direction of flow;
5. need for conveyance and disposal of excess runoff; and
6. need for channel lining to prevent erosion.

203-6.02(02) Design

Hydraulic design associated with a natural channel or side ditch is a process which selects and
evaluates alternatives according to established criteria. These criteria are the standards established
to ensure that a highway facility satisfies its intended purpose without endangering the structural
integrity of the facility itself and without undue adverse effects on the environment or the public
welfare.

203-6.02(03) Federal Policy

The federal policies which apply are as follows.

1. Channel design, or design of a highway facility that impacts a channel, should satisfy the
FHWA policies which are applicable to floodplain management if federal funding is
involved.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 83

2. FEMA floodway regulations and USACE wetland restrictions for permits should be
satisfied.
3. NEPA regulations including the MOU for karst areas or other environmental MOU.

203-6.02(04) INDOT Policy

The INDOT policies which apply are as follows.

1. Coordination with other federal, State, or local agencies concerned with water-resources
planning should have high priority in the planning of a highway facility.
2. The safety of the general public should be a consideration in selection of the cross-sectional
geometry of an artificial drainage channel.
3. The design of an artificial drainage channel or other facility should consider the frequency
and type of maintenance expected, and should make allowance for the access of
maintenance equipment.
4. A stable channel is the goal for each channel that is located on highway right of way, or
that impacts a highway facility.
5. The environmental impact of channel modification, including disturbance of fish habitat,
wetlands, or channel stability, should be assessed.
The most important factor in channel design is stability. Channel stability is the result of
controlling the effects of scour and siltation.

A highway alignment or improvement can cross, encroach upon, or otherwise require construction
of a new channel or modification of the existing channel. It is necessary to protect the public, the
highway investment, and the environment from the natural reaction to the highway changes. The
facility, including bank protection, should perform without significant damage or hazard to people
and property for flood and flow conditions experienced on a 1% annual EP. The facility, to the
maximum extent possible, should perpetuate natural drainage conditions thus protecting and
maintaining the environment.

203-6.03 Open-Channel Flow

Design analysis of a natural or artificial channel should proceed according to the basic principles
of open-channel flow (see Chow, 1970; Henderson, 1966). The basic principles of fluid
mechanics, continuity, momentum, and energy can be applied to open-channel flow with the
additional complication that the position of the free surface is one of the unknown variables. The
determination of this unknown is one of the principal problems of open-channel flow analysis. It

Page 84 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

depends on quantification of the flow resistance. A natural channel displays a wider range of
roughness values than an artificial channel.

203-6.04 Stream Channel

203-6.04(01) Stream Morphology

HEC-20 Stream Stability at Highway Structures, and HDS-6 River Engineering for Highway
Encroachments, should be consulted. Additional references can be obtained through FHWA
hydraulics publications.
203-6.04(02) Design Considerations

1. The hydraulic effects of floodplain encroachment should be evaluated for the 1% annual
EP, and other design-storm events as required, for a major highway facility.
2. If relocation of a stream channel is unavoidable, the cross-sectional shape, meander,
pattern, roughness, sediment transport, and slope should satisfy the existing conditions
insofar as practical. A means of energy dissipation may be necessary where existing
conditions cannot be duplicated. Coordination with the Environmental Services Division
Ecology and Waterway Permitting Team will be necessary for stream channel relocation.
See Section 203-3.0.
3. Stream-bank stabilization should be provided, where appropriate, as a result of a stream
disturbance such as encroachment. It should include both upstream and downstream banks
and the local site.
4. Provisions should be incorporated for access by maintenance personnel and equipment to
maintain features such as a dike or a levee.
5. Realignment or change to a natural channel should be minimized. The conditions that
warrant a channel change are as follows:
a. the natural channel crosses the roadway at an extreme skew;
b. the embankment encroaches on the channel; and
c. the location of the natural channel endangers the highway embankment or adjacent
property.
6. For channel clearing, see Section 203-3.03.

203-6.04(03) Design Procedure

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 85

The hydraulic analysis of a channel determines the depth and velocity at which a given discharge
will flow in a channel of known geometry, roughness, and slope. The depth and velocity of flow
are necessary for the design or analysis of a channel lining or highway-drainage structure.

The single-section method is a simple application of Manning’s equation to determine tailwater-

rating curves for a culvert or to analyze other situations in which uniform or nearly-uniform flow
conditions exist. Manning’s equation can be used to estimate the high-water elevation for a bridge
that does not constrict the flow. See Figure 203-3A for the n value for uniform flow in an artificial
channel or a natural stream channel.

The step-backwater method is used to compute the complete water surface profile in a stream reach
to evaluate the unrestricted water-surface elevation for bridge hydraulic design, flood easement,
or a longitudinal encroachment. The step-backwater method is a calculation-intensive iterative
process that is suited for a computer application. HEC-RAS should be used. Other programs may
be used with prior authorization from the Division of Hydraulics.

The step-backwater method should be used for stream-channel analysis. The single-section
method will yield less-reliable results, as it requires more judgment and assumptions than the step-
backwater method. However, the single-section method should be used for analysis of a standard
roadway ditch, culvert, or storm-drain outfall.

203-6.05 Roadside Channel or Other Ditches

203-6.05(01) Design Considerations

A roadside channel is a channel, or side ditch, adjacent to the roadway which intercepts runoff and
groundwater within the right of way and transports its flow to drainage structures or to a natural
waterway. If a property owner has a pipe instead of an open ditch on the property, an equivalent
new pipe should be provided instead of an open ditch.

A median ditch, ditch in a cut section, or other critical ditch section should be checked to verify
that the water surface elevation from a 1% annual EP does not encroach onto the travel lane.

The criteria which apply to a roadside channel or other ditch are as follows.

1. Safety. Clear-zone requirements should be satisfied (see Chapter 49). Channel side slopes
should not exceed the soil or lining’s angle of repose, and should be 3H:1V or flatter. See
Chapter 49 for more information on the cross section of a roadside channel.

Page 86 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

2. Design Discharge. The design discharge for a permanent roadside channel or channel
lining should be based on a 10% annual EP. If a natural stream or drainage ditch enters
the side ditch, the design should be for a 1% annual EP. A temporary lining should be
designed for a 50% annual EP.

3. Channel Freeboard. Freeboard provides a margin of safety against channel overtopping

and its consequences. The desirable channel freeboard should be 1 ft, or two velocity
heads, whichever is greater, measured from the top of bank. This should be adequate for a
small drainage channel. Variance from the freeboard of 1 ft should be justified in the
hydraulics report.

4. Intercept. Where a roadside ditch intercepts a drainage ditch located adjacent to a highway
embankment, riprap or other suitable protection should be provided where necessary.

5. Velocity. Figure 203-6A provides guidance regarding maximum allowable velocity for
natural stream-bed materials.

203-6.05(02) Design Procedure

There can be a location where a stage-discharge relationship has already been measured in a
channel. This exists at a gaging station on a stream monitored by the USGS. Measured stage-
discharge curves will yield more accurate estimates of water-surface elevation, and should take
precedence over the analytical methods described below.

1. Cross Sections. Cross-sectional geometry of a stream is defined by coordinates of lateral

distance and ground elevation which locate individual ground points. The cross section is
taken normal to the flow direction along a single straight line where possible. In a wide
floodplain or bend, it may be necessary to use a section along intersecting straight lines,
i.e., a dog-leg section. The cross section should be plotted to reveal inconsistencies or
errors.

Cross sections should be located to be representative of the subreaches between them. A

stream location with major breaks in bed profile, abrupt changes in roughness or shape,
control sections such as free overfalls, bends, or contractions, or other abrupt changes in
channel slope or conveyance will require cross sections at shorter intervals to better model
the change in conveyance.

Cross sections should be subdivided with vertical boundaries where there are abrupt lateral
changes in geometry or roughness, such as in overbank flow. The conveyances of each
subsection are computed separately to determine the flow distribution and ά, and are then

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 87

 added to determine the total flow conveyance. The subsection divisions should be chosen
so that the distribution of flow or conveyance is nearly uniform in each subsection
(Davidian, 1984). Selection of cross sections and vertical subdivision of a cross section
are shown in Figure 203-6B, Hypothetical Cross Section Showing Reaches, Segments, and
Subsections Used in Determining n Value.

2. Single-Section Analysis. This method, also known as the slope-area method, is a solution
of Manning’s equation for the normal depth of flow given the discharge and cross-section
properties including geometry, slope, and roughness. It assumes the existence of steady,
uniform flow. However, uniform flow rarely exists in either an artificial or natural stream
channel. Nevertheless, the single-section method is used to design an artificial channel for
uniform flow as a first approximation, and to develop a stage-discharge rating curve in a
stream channel for tailwater determination at a culvert or storm-drain outlet.

The procedure is as follows.

a. Select the typical cross section at or near the location where the stage-discharge
curve is required.

b. Subdivide the cross section and assign n values to the subsections.

c. Estimate the water-surface slope. Because uniform flow is assumed, the average
slope of the streambed can be used.

d. Apply a range of incremental water-surface elevations to the cross section.

e. Calculate the discharge using Manning’s equation for each incremental elevation.
Total discharge at each elevation is the sum of the discharges from each subsection
at that elevation. In determining hydraulic radius, the wetted perimeter should be
measured only along the solid boundary of the cross section, and not along the
vertical water interface between subsections.

f. After the discharge has been calculated at several incremental elevations, plot the
stage versus discharge. This plot is the stage-discharge curve, and it can be used to
determine the water-surface elevation corresponding to the design discharge or
other discharges of interest.

g. Perform the multi-section analysis using HEC-RAS due to the complexity of the
calculations.

Page 88 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

203-6.05(03) Channel Lining

The selection of a roadside-channel lining should reflect both initial costs and long-term
maintenance costs. The channel lining should be selected based on the method of allowable
tractive force. This is discussed in Section 203-6.05 Roadside Channel or Other Ditches. The
following provides the procedure for roadside-channel lining. However, the use of these criteria
should be confirmed using the lining-selection methodology described in Section 203-6.05.
1. Seeded Channel, G < 1%. A seeded channel is protected from erosion by means of fast-
growing permanent seeding. This type of channel has the advantage of being low in initial
cost and maintenance, aesthetically pleasing, and compatible with the natural environment.
The use of an erosion control mat, e.g., straw, coconut fiber, is encouraged to help establish
seed growth.

2. Sod-Lined Channel, 1% ≤ G < 3%. A sod-lined channel is protected from erosion by means
of a sod cover. It is used as a roadside channel in a median or at a channel change of a
small watercourse. It may also be used on a steeper grade where ditch flow is a minimum.
A sodded channel has the advantage of being low in initial cost, aesthetically pleasing, and
compatible with the natural environment. This type of channel should be selected for use
wherever practical. The channel should be sodded to a point 1 ft above the flow line.

3. Paved Channel, G ≥ 3%. A paved concrete ditch can be resistant to erosion. Its principal
disadvantages are its high maintenance and initial costs, susceptibility to failure if
undermined by scour, and the tendency for scour to occur downstream due to an
acceleration of flow. A paved channel is less desirable for a rural setting. However, it can
be appropriate in a select urban location. The INDOT Standard Drawings illustrate the
standard paved channels. Type A through H is used where the toe of the ditch is outside
of the clear zone. Type J through M is used where the toe of the ditch is inside the clear
zone. For Type J through M, the 6H:1V side slope should be placed nearest to the roadway.
The INDOT Standard Drawings also indicate the type of paved channel that should be
used based on the diameter of the pipe at the outlet and inlet.

The following applies to a roadside channel or other type of drainage ditch:

a. Transition. A paved-side-ditch transition is required at an intersection with an earth

ditch or pipe culvert.
b. Cut-Off Wall. A cut-off wall is required at the beginning and end of each paved
side ditch.
c. Lug. A lug has been proven to prevent sliding on a steep slope. A lug should be
provided at the locations as follows:

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 89

 (1) 10 ft downslope from a grade change;
(2) 10 ft downslope from the intersection of different types of paved side
ditches;
(3) at the downslope end of a transition between different types of paved side
ditches; or
(4) as shown in Figure 203-6C, Lug Intervals.
4. Riprap-Lined Channel, 3% ≤ G ≤ 10%. A riprap lining is effective for this slope range,
depending on the design flow of the channel. However, riprap should be used on a slope
steeper than 10% at a bridge cone. It is also appropriate to use riprap in a ditch where the
grade is flatter than 3%. For example, if there is a hill in the ditch watershed, riprap should
be placed to dissipate energy and minimize ditch erosion. A mild slope is constructed by
means of dumping riprap into a prepared channel lined with geotextile filter cloth and
grading to the desired shape. The advantages are low construction and maintenance costs
and self-healing characteristics. Riprap has a limited application on a steep slope where
the flow will tend to displace the lining material.

5. Non-Erodible Channel, 3% ≤ G ≤ 15%. A non-erodible channel has a lining of soil erosion

matting that is resistant to erosion. This type of channel is moderately expensive to
construct and, if properly designed, should have a very low maintenance cost. The lining
material should extend to the top of the channel, or to at least 6 in. above the design water
level measured vertically. HEC-15, Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings,
can be used as a reference for channel-lining design. The riprap design procedures
described in HEC 15 are for a channel having a design discharge of 50 cfs or less. Where
the design discharge exceeds 50 cfs, the design procedure provided in Section 203-6.06
should be followed.

203-6.06 Bank Protection

One of the hazards of placing a highway near a river or stream channel or other water body is the
potential for erosion of the highway embankment due to moving water. If erosion of the highway
embankment is to be prevented, bank protection should be anticipated. The proper type and
amount of protection should be provided in the appropriate locations.

The available methods of protecting a highway embankment from bank erosion are as follows:
1. relocating the highway away from the stream or water body;
2. moving the water body away from the highway, as a channel change;
3. changing the direction of the current with training works; and

Page 90 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

4. protecting the embankment from erosion.

This Section provides procedures for the design of revetment to be used as channel-bank
protection, and channel lining on a stream or river with a design discharge greater than 50 cfs.
Procedures are also provided for riprap protection at a bridge pier or abutment. For a small
discharge, the procedures provided in Chapter 202 should be used. Rock riprap revetment should
be used due to its low cost, environmental considerations, flexible characteristics, and widespread
acceptance. Other channel-stabilization methods such as a spur, guide-bank retard structure,
longitudinal dike, and bulkhead are discussed in Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 20, Stream
Stability at Highway Structures and Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 23, Bridge Scour and
Stream Instability Countermeasures.

203-6.06(01) Erosion Potential

Channel and bank stabilization is essential to the design of a structure affected by the water
environment. The identification of the potential for bank erosion, and the subsequent need for
stabilization, is best accomplished through observation. A three-level analysis procedure is
provided in HEC-20. The three-level analysis provides a procedure for determining the
geomorphological characteristics, evaluating the existing conditions through field observations,
and determining the hydraulic and sediment transport properties of the stream. If sufficient
information is obtained at a given level of the analysis to solve the problem, the procedure may be
stopped without proceeding to the other levels.

Observations provide the most positive indication of erosion potential. Observation comparison
can be based on historic information or current site conditions. Aerial photographs, old maps,
surveying notes, bridge-design files, and river-survey data are available from the Division of
Hydraulics and FHWA. Gaging-station records and interviews of long-time residents can provide
documentation of recent and potentially current channel movement or bank instabilities.

Current site conditions can be used to evaluate stability. If historic information indicates that a
bank has been relatively stable in the past, local conditions can indicate more recent instabilities.
Local site conditions which are indicative of instabilities can include tipping and falling of
vegetation along the bank, cracks along the bank surface, the presence of slump blocks, fresh
vegetation lying in the channel near the channel banks, deflection of channel flows in the direction
of the bank due to a recently-deposited obstruction or channel-course change, fresh vertical face
cuts along the bank, locally high velocity along the bank, new bar formation downstream from an
eroding bank, local head-cuts, impending or recent cutoffs, etc. The presence of one of these
conditions does not in itself indicate an erosion problem. Bank erosion is common in each channel
if the channel is stable.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 91

203-6.06(02) Bank and Lining Failure Modes

Prior to designing a bank-stabilization scheme, the common erosion mechanisms and revetment-
failure modes, and the causes or driving forces behind bank erosion processes should be known.
Inadequate recognition of potential erosion processes at a particular site can lead to failure of the
revetment system. Many causes of bank erosion and revetment failure have been identified. The
more-common causes include abrasion, debris flows, water flow, eddy action, flow acceleration,
unsteady flow, freeze-and-thaw, human actions on the bank, ice, precipitation, waves, toe erosion,
and subsurface flow. However, a combination of mechanisms can cause bank or revetment failure.
The actual mechanism or cause is difficult to determine. Failures are classified as follows.

1. Particle Erosion: Particle erosion is the most commonly considered erosion mechanism.
Particle erosion results if the tractive force exerted by the flowing water exceeds the bank
material’s ability to resist movement. If displaced stones are not transported from the
eroded area, a mound of displaced rock will develop on the channel bed. The mound has
been observed to cause flow concentration along the bank, resulting in further bank erosion.

2. Translational Slide: A translational slide is a failure of riprap caused by the down-slope

movement of a mass of stones, with the fault line on a horizontal plane. The initial phases
of a translational slide are indicated by cracks in the upper part of the riprap bank that
extend parallel to the channel. As the slide progresses, the lower part of the riprap separates
from the upper part and moves downslope as a homogeneous body. A resulting bulge can
appear at the base of the bank if the channel bed is not scoured.

3. Modified Slump: This riprap failure consists of the mass movement of material along an
internal slip surface within the riprap blanket. The underlying material supporting the
riprap does not fail. This type of failure is similar to the translational slide, but the
geometry of the damaged riprap is similar in shape to initial stages of failure caused by
particle erosion.

4. Slump: Slump is a rotational-gravitational movement of material along a surface of rupture

that has a concave upward curve. The cause of a slump failure is related to shear failure of
the underlying base material that supports the riprap revetment. The primary feature of a
slump failure is the localized displacement of base material along a slip surface, which is
caused by excess pore pressure that reduces friction along a fault line in the base material.

203-6.06(03) Design Considerations

1. Revetment Types.

Page 92 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 a. Riprap. Riprap is a layer or facing of rock, dumped or hand-placed to prevent
erosion, scour, or sloughing of a structure or embankment. Materials other than
rock are also referred to as riprap. These include rubble, broken concrete slabs, or
preformed-concrete shapes such as slabs, blocks, rectangular prisms, etc. These
materials are similar to rock in that they can be hand-placed or dumped onto an
embankment to form a flexible revetment. The minimum depth should be 18 in.
For minimum riprap-laying depths, see the INDOT Standard Drawings. For
determining which riprap class to use based on velocity, see Figure 203-2D, Stream
Velocity for Erosion Protection.

b. Wire-Enclosed Rock. A wire-enclosed rock, or gabion, revetment consists of

rectangular wire mesh baskets filled with rock. This revetment is formed by filling
pre-assembled wire baskets with rock and anchoring them to the channel bottom or
bank. A wire-enclosed rock revetment is either a rock-and-wire mattress, or blocks.
In a mattress, the individual wire-mesh units are laid end to end and side to side to
form a mattress layer on the channel bed or bank. The gabion baskets comprising
the mattress have a depth dimension which is much smaller than its width or length.
A block gabion is more equal-dimensional, having a depth that is approximately
the same as its width and of the same order of magnitude as its length. It is
rectangular or trapezoidal in shape. A block gabion revetment is formed by
stacking individual gabion blocks in a stepped fashion.

c. Precast-Concrete Block. The preformed sections which comprise the revetment

system are butted together or joined. As such, they form a continuous blanket or
mat. The concrete blocks which make up the mats differ in shape and method of
articulation but share certain common features. The features include flexibility,
rapid installation, and provisions for establishment of vegetation within the
revetment. The permeable nature of this revetment permits free draining of the
bank materials. The flexibility, although limited, allows the mattress to conform to
minor changes in the bank geometry. Its limited flexibility, however, subjects it to
undermining in an environment characterized by large and relatively rapid
fluctuations in the surface elevation of the channel bed or bank. Unlike wire-
enclosed rock, the open nature of precast-concrete blocks does promote
volunteering of vegetation within the revetment.

d. Grouted Riprap. Totally grouted riprap is not recommended because it is

susceptible to failure from undermining and the subsequent loss of the supporting
bank material. However, partially grouted riprap may be used, see Section 203-
6.06(04) for design procedures.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 93

 e. Grouted-Fabric-Slope Pavement. This revetment is constructed by means of
injecting sand-cement mortar between two layers of double-woven fabric which
has first been positioned on the slope to be protected. Mortar can be injected into
this fabric envelope either underwater or in-the-dry. The fabric enclosure prevents
dilution of the mortar during placement underwater. The two layers of fabric act
first as the top and bottom form to hold the mortar in place while it hardens. The
fabric, to which the mortar remains tightly bonded, then acts as tensile
reinforcement to hold the mortar in place on the slope. This revetment is analogous
to slope paving with reinforced concrete. The bottom layer of fabric acts as a filter-
cloth underlayment to prevent loss of soil particles through cracks which can
develop in the revetment as a result of soil subsidence. Greater relief of hydrostatic
uplift is provided by means of weep holes or filter points which are woven into the
fabric and remain unobstructed by mortar during the filling operation.

f. Soil Cement. Soil cement consists of a dry mix of sand, cement, and admixtures
batched in a central mixing plant. It is transported, placed with equipment capable
of producing the width and thickness required, and compacted to the required
density. Control of the moisture and time after introduction of the mixing water is
critical. Curing is required. This results in a rigid protection. Soil cement can be
placed either as a lining or in stepped horizontal layers. The stepped horizontal
layers are stable, provided that toe scour protection has been incorporated into the
design.

2. Design Discharge. The design flow rate for the design or analysis of a highway structure
in the vicinity of a river or stream has a 10% to 1% annual EP. This discharge level will
also be applicable to the design of a revetment system. However, a lower discharge can
produce hydraulically-worse conditions with respect to riprap stability. Discharge levels
should be evaluated to ensure that the design is adequate for all discharge conditions up to
that selected as the design discharge for a structure associated with the riprap scheme.

3. Flow Types. Open-channel flow can be classified as follows:

a. uniform, gradually-varying, or rapidly-varying flow;

b. steady or unsteady flow; and
c. subcritical or supercritical flow.

The design relationships described herein are based on the assumption of uniform, steady,
subcritical flow. The relationships are also valid for gradually-varying flow conditions.
Although the individual hydraulic relationships are not in themselves applicable to rapidly-
varying, unsteady, or supercritical flow conditions, procedures are provided for extending

Page 94 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 their use to these flow conditions. See Section 203-6.06(04) for more information related
to channel design.

A rapidly-varying, unsteady flow condition is common in an area of flow expansion, flow

contraction, or reverse flow. These conditions are common at and immediately
downstream of a bridge. A supercritical or near-supercritical flow condition is common at
a bridge constriction or a steeply-sloped channel.

4. Section Geometry. Aerial photography, current-channel surveys, and historic surveys can
provide valuable information. A comparison of current and past channel surveys at the
location provides information on the stability of the site and a history of past channel-
geometry changes. Past surveys for a particular site may not be available. If so, past
surveys at other sites in the vicinity of the design location can be used to evaluate past
changes in channel geometry.

5. Flow in Channel Bend. The increased velocity and shear stress that are generated as a
result of non-uniform flow should be considered on the outside of a bend. Superelevation
of flow in a channel bend should be considered in the revetment design. For a channel
with overbank flow, the revetment should extend to top of bank. For a channel where the
flow remains within the banks, the revetment should extend up the banks to provide a
freeboard of at least 1 ft. For guidance in the design of channels in a bend, see HEC-15
and HDS-4.

6. Flow Resistance. The hydraulic analysis performed as a part of the revetment design
process requires the estimation of Manning’s roughness coefficient. Physical
characteristics upon which the resistance equations are based include the channel-base
material, surface irregularities, variations in section geometry, bed form, obstructions,
vegetation, channel meandering, flow depth, and channel slope. Seasonal changes in these
factors should also be considered.

7. Extent of Protection. This refers to the longitudinal and vertical extent of protection
required to adequately protect the channel bank.

a. Longitudinal Extent. The longitudinal extent of protection required for a bank-

protection scheme is dependent on local site conditions. The revetment should be
continuous for a distance greater than the length that is impacted by channel-flow
forces severe enough to cause dislodging or transport of bank material. Although
this is a vague criterion, it should be considered. Review of existing bank-
protection sites has revealed that a common misconception in stream-bank
protection is to provide protection too far upstream and not far enough downstream.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 95

 One criterion for establishing the longitudinal limits of revetment protection
required is illustrated in Figure 203-6D. As illustrated, the minimum distance
recommended for bank protection upstream is 1 channel width, or downstream 1.5
channel widths, from corresponding reference lines. All reference lines should pass
through tangents to the bend at the bend entrance or exit. This criterion is based on
an analysis of flow conditions in symmetric channel bends under ideal laboratory
conditions. Real-world conditions are not as simplistic.

Many site-specific factors have an effect on the actual length of bank that should
be protected. The above criteria are difficult to apply on a mildly-curving bend or
on a channel having irregular, non-symmetric bends. Other channel controls such
as bridge abutments can produce a stabilizing effect on the bend so that only a part
of the channel bend should be stabilized. The magnitude or nature of the flow event
can cause erosion problems only in a localized portion of the bend, requiring that
only a short channel length be stabilized. Therefore, the above criteria should be
used only as a starting point. Additional analysis of site-specific factors is
necessary to define the actual extent of protection required.

Field reconnaissance is useful for the evaluation of the longitudinal extent of

protection required, particularly if the channel is actively eroding. In a straight
channel reach, scars on the channel bank can be useful to help identify the limits
required for channel-bank protection. The upstream and downstream limits of the
protection scheme should be extended a minimum of 1 channel width beyond the
observed erosion limits.

In a curved channel reach, the scars on the channel bank can be used to establish
the upstream limit of erosion. A minimum of 1 channel width should be added to
the observed upstream limit to define the limit of protection. The downstream limit
of protection required in a curved channel reach is more difficult to define. Because
the natural progression of bank erosion is in the downstream direction, the present
visual limit of erosion may not define the ultimate downstream limit. Additional
analysis based on consideration of flow patterns in the channel bend can be
required.

b. Vertical Extent. The vertical extent of protection required of a revetment includes

design height and foundation or toe depth.

(1) Design Height. The design height of a riprap installation should be equal
to the design high-water elevation plus an allowance for freeboard.
Freeboard is provided in a causeway situation to ensure that the desired

Page 96 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 degree of protection will not be reduced due to unaccounted factors,
including the following:

(a) superelevation in channel bends;

(b) hydraulic jumps;
(c) flow irregularities due to piers, transitions, or flow junctions; or
(d) wave action from wind or boat traffic.

Erratic phenomena such as unforeseen embankment settlement, the

accumulation of silt, trash, debris in the channel, aquatic or other growth in
the channel, and ice flows should be considered in setting the freeboard
height. Wave run-up on the bank should be considered.

The prediction of wave height from a boat-generated wave is not as

straightforward as other wave sources. Figure 203-6E provides a definition
sketch for the wave-height discussion below. The height of a boat-
generated wave should be estimated from observations.

It is necessary to estimate the magnitude of wave run-up which results if

waves impact the bank. Wave run-up is a function of the design-wave
height, the wave period, bank angle, and the bank-surface characteristics as
represented by different revetment materials. For a wave height of less than
2 ft, wave run-up can be computed using Figures 203-6F, Wave Run-up on
Smooth Impermeable Slope, and 203-6G, Correction Factor for Wave Run-
up. The run-up height, R, shown in Figure 203-6F, is for concrete
pavement. Correction factors are provided in Figure 203-6G for reducing
the run-up magnitude for other revetment materials. The correction factor
is multiplied by the wave height to obtain R.

As a minimum, a freeboard of 1 ft to 2 ft should be used in an unconstricted

reach, or 2 ft to 3 ft in a constricted reach. FEMA requires 3 ft for levee
protection, or 4 ft at a bridge for a 1% annual EP. If computational
procedures indicate that additional freeboard is required, the greater height
should be used. Wave and flow conditions should be observed during
various seasons of the year, if possible. Existing records should be
consulted, and persons should be interviewed who have knowledge of past
conditions in establishing the necessary vertical extent of protection
required for a particular revetment installation.

(2) Toe Depth. The undermining of revetment-toe protection has been

identified as one of the mechanisms of revetment failure. Figure 203-6H

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 97

 identifies dimensions of the toe trench for classes of riprap. For guidance
regarding the design of the toe depth, see HEC-11, Design of Riprap
Revetment.

203-6.06(04) Design Procedure

1. Rock Riprap. Guidelines are provided for bank slope, rock size, rock gradation, riprap
layer thickness, and edge treatment. The guidelines apply equally to rock or rubble riprap.

a. Bank Slope. A primary consideration in the design of a stable riprap bank-

protection scheme is the slope of the channel bank. For a riprap installation, the
maximum recommended face slope is 2H:1V. Although not recommended, the
steepest slope acceptable for rubble revetment is 1.5H:1V. To be stable under an
identical wave attack or lateral velocity, a rubble revetment with a steep slope will
require larger rubble sizes and greater thicknesses than one with a flatter slope.

b. Rock Size. The stability of a particular riprap particle is a function of its size,
expressed either in terms of its weight or equivalent diameter. See the INDOT
Standard Specifications and Figure 203-2D which relates the required riprap class
to the velocity.

(1) Bridge Pier. For recommendations, see Section 203-3.0.

(2) Wave Erosion. See Highway Engineering Circular 23, Volume 2, Design
Guide 17 for guidance if wave erosion is anticipated.

(3) Ice Damage. Ice can affect riprap linings. Moving surface ice can cause
crushing and bending forces and large impact loadings. The tangential flow
of ice along a riprap-lined channel bank can also cause excessive shearing
forces. Quantitative criteria for evaluating the impact ice has on a channel-
protection scheme are unavailable.

For design, consideration of ice forces should be evaluated as required for

each project. Ice flows are not of sufficient magnitude to warrant detailed
analysis. Where ice flows have historically caused problems, revetment
size should be increased.

Page 98 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 c. Rock Gradation. The gradation of stones in riprap revetment affects the riprap’s
resistance to erosion. The stone should be well-graded throughout the riprap-layer
thickness. The gradation limits appear in the INDOT Standard Specifications.

d. Layer Thickness. All stones should be contained within the riprap-layer thickness
to provide maximum resistance against erosion. For guidance, see the INDOT
Standard Specifications.

e. Geotextile Filter. A synthetic geotextile filter should be used as an alternative to a

granular filter. See Figure 203-6 I. Since the original geotextile erosion control
application in 1957, thousands of successful projects have been completed.

f. Edge Treatment. The riprap-revetment flanks, toe, and head require a treatment to
prevent undermining. The flanks should be designed as illustrated in Figure 203-
6J. The upstream flank is illustrated in section (a) and the downstream flank in
section (b). A more constructible flank section uses riprap rather than compacted
fill.

Undermining of the revetment toe is one of the primary mechanisms of riprap

failure. The toe of the riprap should be designed as illustrated in Figure 203-6K.
The toe material should be placed in a toe trench along the entire length of the riprap
blanket.

Where a toe trench cannot be dug, the riprap blanket should terminate in a thick,
stone toe at the level of the streambed. The toe material should not mound and
form a low dike. A low dike along the toe can result in flow concentration along
the revetment face which can stress the revetment to failure. The channel's design
capability should not be impaired due to placement of too much riprap in a toe
mound.

The size of the toe trench or the alternate stone toe is controlled by the anticipated
depth of scour along the revetment. As scour occurs, the stone in the toe will launch
into the eroded area as illustrated in Figure 203-6L. Observation of the
performance of this type of rock toe indicates that the riprap will launch to a final
slope of approximately 2H:1V.

The volume of rock required for the toe should be equal to or exceed 1.5 times the
volume of rock required to extend the riprap blanket at its design thickness and on
a slope of 2H:1V, to the anticipated depth of scour. Dimensions should be based
on the required volume using the thickness and depth determined from the scour

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 99

 evaluation. The alternate location can be used if the amount of rock required does
not constrain the channel.

2. Wire-Enclosed Rock. As described in Section 203-6.06(03), a wire-enclosed rock, or

gabion, revetment consists of rectangular wire mesh baskets filled with rock. The most
common types of wire-enclosed revetment are mattresses and stacked blocks. The wire
cages which make up the mattresses and gabions are available from commercial
manufacturers.

A rock-and-wire-mattress revetment consists of flat wire baskets or units filled with rock
that are laid end to end and side to side on a prepared channel bed or bank. The individual
mattress units are wired together to form a continuous revetment mattress.

A stacked-block gabion revetment consists of rectangular wire baskets which are filled
with stone and stacked in a stepped-back fashion to form the revetment surface. It is
commonly used at the toe of an embankment slope as a toewall, which helps to support
other upper-bank revetments and prevents undermining.

a. Mattress Gabion. Components of a rock-and-wire-mattress include layout of a

general scheme, bank and foundation preparation, mattress size and configuration,
stone size, stone quality, basket- or rock-enclosure fabrication, edge treatment, and
filter design. Design guidance is as follows.

(1) General. A rock-and-wire-mattress revetment can be constructed from

commercially-available wire units as illustrated in Figures 203-6M and 203-
6N. The use of commercially-available basket units is the most common
practice and the least expensive.

A rock-and-wire-mattress revetment can be used to protect either the

channel bank as illustrated in Figure 203-6M, or the entire channel
perimeter as illustrated in Figure 203-6N. If used for bank protection, this
revetment consists of a toe section and upper-bank paving. The vertical and
longitudinal extent of the mattress should be based on guidelines provided
in Section 203-6.06(03).

(2) Bank and Foundation Preparation. The channel bank should be graded to a
uniform slope. The graded surface, either on the slope or on the streambed
at the toe of the slope on which the rock-and-wire mattress is to be
constructed, should not deviate from the specified slope line by more than
6 in. Blunt or sharp objects such as rocks or tree roots protruding from the
graded surface should be removed.

Page 100 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 (3) Mattress-Unit Size and Configuration. Individual mattress units should be
of a size that is easily handled on-site. Commercially-available gabion units
are available in standard sizes as indicated in Figure 203-6 O.
Manufacturers’ literature indicates that alternative sizes can be
manufactured if required, provided that the quantities involved are
reasonable.

The mattress should be divided into compartments so that failure of one

section of the mattress will not cause loss of the entire mattress.
Compartmentalization also adds to the structural integrity of individual
gabion units.

On a slope steeper than 1H:3V, and in an environment subject to high flow

velocity, debris flow, ice flow, etc., diaphragms should be spaced at
minimum intervals of 2 ft to prevent movement of the stone inside the
basket.

The thickness of the mattress is determined by the erodibility of the bank

soil, the maximum velocity of the water, and the bank slope. The minimum
thickness required for given conditions is tabulated in Figure 203-6P. These
values are based on observations of a number of mattress installations which
assume a filling material in the size range of 3 to 6 in.

The mattress thickness should be at least as thick as two overlapping layers

of stone. The thickness of a mattress used as a bank-toe apron should
exceed 12 in. The range is 12 to 20 in.

(4) Stone Size. The maximum stone size should not exceed the thickness of the
individual mattress units. The stone should be well-graded within the sizes
available. Seventy percent of the stone, by weight, should be slightly larger
than the wire-mesh opening. For commercially-available units, the wire-
mesh opening sizes are listed in Figure 203-6 O.

The common median-stone size used in a mattress design ranges from 3 to

6 in. for a mattress thickness of less than 12 in. For a thicker mattress, rock
with a median size of up to 12 in. should be used.

(5) Stone Quality. The stone should satisfy the quality requirements for
dumped-rock riprap.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 101

 (6) Basket Fabrication. Commercially-fabricated basket units are formed from
galvanized steel wire mesh of triple twist hexagonal weave. The netting
wire and binding wire diameter is approximately 0.08 in. The wire diameter
for edges and corners is approximately 0.01 in. Manufacturers’ instructions
for field assembly of basket units should be followed.

Galvanized wire baskets can be safely used in fresh water or where the pH
of the liquid in contact with it is not greater than 10. For minimum coating
weight, see Figure 203-6Q.

For a highly-corrosive condition, such as in a salt-water environment,

industrial area, polluted stream, or soil such as muck, peat, or cinders, a
PVC coating should be placed over the galvanized wire. It should be
capable of resisting deleterious effects of natural weather exposure and
immersion in salt water. It should not show a material difference in its
initial characteristics over time.

(7) Edge Treatment. The toe, head, and flanks of a rock-and-wire mattress
revetment installation require treatment to prevent damage from
undermining. Figure 203-6M illustrates the possible toe-treatment
configurations. If a toe apron is used, its projection should be 1.5 times the
expected maximum depth of scour in the vicinity of the revetment toe.
Where little toe scour is expected, the apron can be replaced with a single-
course gabion toewall. This helps to support the revetment and prevents
undermining. Where an excessive amount of toe scour is anticipated, both
an apron and a toe wall can be used.

To provide extra strength at the revetment flanks, mattress units having

additional thickness should be used at the upstream and downstream edges
of the revetment, as shown in Figure 203-6R. A thin layer of topsoil should
be spread over the flank units to form a soil layer to be seeded once the
revetment installation is complete. The head of a rock-and-wire-mattress
revetment can be terminated at grade as illustrated in Figure 203-6M.

(8) Filter Design. Individual mattress units will act as a crude filter and a
pavement unit if filled with overlapping layers of hand-size stones.
However, the need for a filter should be investigated. If necessary, a layer
of permeable membrane cloth, or geotextile, woven from synthetic fibers,
or a gravel layer of thickness of 4 to 6 in. should be placed between the silty
bank and the rock-and-wire-mattress revetment to further inhibit washout
of fines.

Page 102 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 b. Stacked-Block Gabion: Components of a stacked-block gabion revetment include
the layout of a general scheme, bank and foundation preparation, unit size and
configuration, stone size and quality, edge treatment, backfill and filter
considerations, and basket or rock enclosure fabrication. Design guidelines for
stone size and quality and bank preparation are the same as those for a mattress
design.

(1) General. A stacked-block gabion revetment should be used instead of a

gabion mattress where the slope to be protected is steeper than 1H:1V, or
where the purpose of the revetment is for flow training. Methods include a
flow-training wall, as shown in Figure 203-6 S detail (a), or a low retaining
wall, as shown in Figure 203-6 S detail (b).

A stacked-block gabion revetment should be based on a firm foundation.

The foundation or base elevation of the structure should be below the
anticipated scour depth. In an alluvial stream where channel-bed
fluctuations are common, an apron should be used as illustrated in Figure
203-6 S. An apron should be used where the estimated scour depth is
uncertain.

(2) Size and Configuration. The common commercial sizes are listed in Figure
203-6 O. The most common size used is that of width and depth of 3 ft. A
thickness of less than 1 ft is not practical.

Configurations include a flow-training wall or a structural retaining wall.

The primary function of a flow-training wall is to establish a normal channel
boundary in a stream where erosion has created a wide channel, or to realign
the stream where it is encroaching on an existing or proposed structure. A
stepped-back wall is constructed at the desired bank location. Counterforts
are installed to tie the wall to the channel bank at regular intervals as
illustrated. The counterforts are installed to form a structural tie between
the training wall and the natural stream bank and to prevent overflow from
scouring a channel behind the wall. Counterforts should be spaced to
eliminate the development of eddy or other flow currents between the
training wall and the bank which can cause further erosion of the bank. The
dead-water zones created by the counterforts so spaced will encourage
sediment deposition behind the wall which will enhance the stabilizing
characteristics of the wall.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 103

 A retaining wall can be designed in a stepped-back configuration as
illustrated in Figure 203-6 S detail (b). Structural details and configurations
can vary from site to site.

A gabion wall is a gravity structure, and its design follows engineering

practice for a retaining structure. The design procedure is available in soil-
mechanics texts or in gabion manufacturers’ literature.

(3) Edge Treatment. The upstream and downstream flanks of the revetment
should include counterforts. See Figure 203-6 S detail (a). The counterforts
should be placed 12 to 18 ft from the upstream and downstream limits of
the structure, and should extend a minimum of 12 ft into the bank.

The toe of the revetment should be protected by means of placing the base
of the gabion wall at a depth below the anticipated scour depth. Where it is
difficult to predict the depth of expected scour, or where channel-bed
fluctuations are common, a mattress apron should be used. The minimum
apron length should be equal to 1.5 times the anticipated scour depth below
the apron. This length can be increased in proportion to the level of
uncertainty in predicting the local toe-scour depth.

(4) Backfill or Filter Requirements. Gabion-structure design requires the use

of selected backfill behind the retaining structure to provide for drainage of
the soil mass behind the retaining structure. The permeable nature of a
gabion structure permits natural drainage of the supported embankment.
However, because material leaching through the gabion wall can become
trapped and can cause plugging, a granular backfill material should be used.
The backfill should consist of a 2 to 12 in. layer of graded crushed stone
backed with a layer of fine granular backfill.

3. Precast Concrete Blocks. A precast-concrete-block revetment consists of preformed

sections which interlock with each other, are attached to each other, or butt together to form
a continuous blanket or mat. The concrete blocks which make up the mats differ in shape
and method of articulation, but they share common features. These include flexibility,
rapid installation, and provision for the establishment of vegetation within the revetment.

a. Block Configurations. Precast-concrete blocks are available the shapes and

configurations shown in Figures 203-6T, 203-6U, 203-6V, 203-6W, and 203-6X.
Other manufacturers’ configurations are available. A precast-concrete revetment
is bound to rectangular sheets of filter fabric, interlocks individual blocks, or is

Page 104 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 butted together at the site. The most common method is to join individual blocks
with wire cable or synthetic fiber rope.

b. Design Guidelines. Components of a precast-concrete-block revetment design

include layout of a general scheme, bank preparation, mattress and block size,
slope, edge treatment, filter design, and surface treatment.

As illustrated in Figures 203-6T, 203-6U, 203-6V, 203-6W, and 203-6X, precast-

concrete blocks are placed on the channel bank as continuous mattresses.

(1) Mattress And Block Size. The overall mattress size is dictated by the
longitudinal and vertical extent required of the revetment system. An
articulated block mattress is assembled in sections prior to placement on the
bank. The size of individual blocks is variable. Manufacturers have a
number of standard sizes of a particular block available. Manufacturers’
literature should be consulted in selecting an appropriate block size for a
given hydraulic condition.

(2) Slope. An articulated precast-block revetment can be used on a bank slope

up to 1.5H:1V. However, an earth anchor should be used at the top of the
revetment to secure the system against slippage (see Figures 203-6V and
203-6W). A precast-block revetment that is assembled by means of butting
individual blocks end to end with no physical connection should not be used
on a slope steeper than 3H:1V.

(3) Edge Treatment. The toe, head, and flanks require treatment to prevent
undermining. Toe treatment includes an apron as illustrated in Figures 203-
6T and 203-6W, or a toe-trench as illustrated in Figures 203-6U and 203-
6V. As a minimum, a toe apron should extend 1.5 times the anticipated
scour depth in the vicinity of the bank toe. If a toe trench is used, the
mattress should extend to a depth greater than the anticipated scour depth
in the vicinity of the bank toe.

The edges can be terminated at grade as shown in Figures 203-6T, 203-6U,

and 203-6W, or in a termination trench. A termination trench should be
used in silty or sandy soil, for a high-velocity flow, or where failure of the
revetment results in significant economic loss. A termination trench
provides more protection against failure from undermining and outflanking
than an at-grade termination. However, where upper-bank erosion or lateral
outflanking is not expected to be a problem, a grade termination can provide
an economic advantage.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 105

 For an articulated block, earth anchors should be placed at regular intervals
along the top of the revetment (see Figures 203-6U and 203-6V). Anchors
should be spaced based on soil type, mat size, and the size of the anchors.
See manufacturers’ literature for the recommended spacing.

(4) Filter. Prior to installing the mats, a geotextile filter fabric should be
installed on the bank to prevent bank material from leaching through the
openings in the mattress structure. Although a fabric filter is recommended,
graded filter material can be used if it is properly designed and installed to
prevent movement of the graded material through the protective mattress.
(5) Surface Treatment. The surface treatments should be as shown in Figures
203-6U and 203-6V. This treatment enhances both the structural stability
of the embankment and its aesthetic qualities.

4. Grouted Riprap. Partially-grouted riprap should be used. It consists of rock-slope

protection that is spot grouted to bind individual rocks into larger masses while leaving
ungrouted areas so they are not connected into a monolithic armor. Partially-grouted riprap
is flexible and allows vegetation to be established within the non-grouted areas which can
also assist in stabilizing the slope. It can be placed on a bedding or filter layer of sand,
gravel or geotextile fabric. It is hydrostatically stable, as it prevents trapping groundwater.
The large interlocking masses provide resistance to stream flow and wave action. Optimal
grouting ties together adjacent rock, but still leaves internal voids within the rock masses.
A grouted-riprap section is shown in Figure 203-6Y. For additional information regarding
partially-grouted riprap, see HEC-23.

Partially grouted riprap should extend from below the anticipated channel-bed scour depth
to the design high-water level, plus additional height for freeboard.

a. Bank and Foundation Preparation. The graded surface should not deviate from the
specified slope line by more than 6 in. However, a local depression larger than this
can be accommodated because initial placement of filter material or rock for the
revetment will fill the depression.

b. Bank Slope. The bank slope should not be steeper than 1.5H:1V. The Division of
Geotechnical Services should be consulted for guidance.

c. Edge Treatment. The head, toe, and flanks require treatment to prevent
undermining. The revetment toe should extend to a depth below anticipated scour
depths or to bedrock. The toe should be designed as illustrated in Figure 203-6Y,

Page 106 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 Grouted Riprap Sections, detail (a). The grout-free riprap provides extra protection
against undermining at the bank toe. Edge-treatment configurations are illustrated
in Figure 203-6Y.

d. Filter. A filter is required under the grouted-riprap revetment to provide a zone of

high permeability to carry off seepage water and prevent damage to the overlying
structure from uplift pressure. A granular filter of 6-in. thickness is required
beneath the pavement to provide an adequate drainage zone. The filter can consist
of well-graded granular material or uniformly-graded granular material with an
underlying filter fabric. The filter should be designed to provide a high degree of
permeability while preventing base material particles from penetrating the filter,
thus causing clogging and failure of the protective filter layer.

e. Pressure Relief. Weep holes should be provided in the revetment to relieve

hydrostatic pressure buildup behind the grout surface; see Figure 203-6Y detail (a).
Weep holes should extend through the grout surface to the interface with the gravel
underdrain layer. Weep holes should consist of pipes of 3-in. diameter with a
maximum horizontal spacing of 6 ft and a maximum vertical spacing of 10 ft. The
buried end of the weep hole should be covered with wire screening or a fabric filter
of a gage that will prevent passage of the gravel underlayer.

5. Grouted-Fabric Slope Paving. A grouted fabric-formed revetment is a relatively new

development for use on an earth surface subject to erosion. It has been used as an
alternative to traditional revetment such as a concrete liner, or riprap on a reservoir, canal,
or dike.

A grouted fabric-formed revetment is made by means of pumping a fluid structural grout,

or fine-aggregate concrete, into an in-situ envelope consisting of a double-layer synthetic
fabric. During filling, excess mixing water is squeezed out through the permeable fabric,
to reduce the water/cement ratio with consequent improvement in the quality of the
hardened concrete. An advantage of this type of revetment is that it can be assembled
underwater or in a dry location.

a. Types. The types of fabric-formed revetments are as follows.

(1) Type 1. Two layers of nylon fabric are woven together at 5 in. to 10 in.
centers as indicated in Figure 203-6Z. These points of attachment serve as
filter points to relieve hydrostatic uplift caused due to percolation of
groundwater through the underlying soil. The finished revetment has a

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 107

 deeply-cobbled or quilted appearance. Mat thickness averages from 2 to 6
in.

(2) Type 2. Two layers of nylon or polypropylene woven fabric are joined
together at spaced centers by means of interwoven tie cords, the length of
which controls the thickness of the finished revetment. See Figure 203-
6AA. Plastic tubes can be inserted through the two layers of fabric prior to
grout injection to provide weep holes for relief of hydrostatic uplift. The
finished revetment is of uniform cross section and has a lightly-pebbled
appearance. Mat thickness averages from 2 to 10 in.

(3) Type 3. Two layers of nylon fabric are interwoven into rectangular block
patterns. The points of interweaving serve as hinges to permit articulation
of the hardened concrete blocks. The revetment is reinforced with steel
cables or nylon rope threaded between the two layers of fabric prior to grout
injection and remains embedded in the hardened cast-in-place blocks.
Block thickness is controlled with spacer cords in the center of each block.

b. Design Guidelines. The woven fabric for a grouted fabric-formed revetment is

available from a number of manufacturers. Manufacturers’ literature should be
consulted for designing and selecting the appropriate type of material and thickness
for a given hydraulic condition.

6. Soil-Cement. Soil-cement is an acceptable method of slope protection for a dam, dike,

levee, channel, or highway embankment. Soil-cement can also be used to construct an
impervious core and provide a protective facing. Soil-cement is constructed in a stair step
manner by means of placing and compacting it in horizontal layers stair stepped up the
embankment (See Figure 203-6BB). An embankment slope from 2.5H:1V to 4H:1V, and
a horizontal-layer width from 7 ft to 9 ft provide minimum protective thicknesses of about
1.5 to 2.5 ft measured normal to the slope.

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) has data on soil types, gradations, costs, and
testing procedures. The PCA also has data on placement and compaction methods.

Use of soil-cement does not require further design considerations for the embankment.
Proper embankment design procedures should be followed based on individual project
conditions, to prevent subsidence or other type of embankment distress.

Page 108 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 a. Top, Toe, and End Features. All extremities of the facing should be tied into non-
erodible sections or abutments. Adequate freeboard and the carrying of the soil-
cement to the paved roadway, plus a lower section as shown in Figure 203-6BB,
will minimize erosion from behind the crest and under the toe of the facing. The
ends of the facing should terminate smoothly in a flat slope or against a rocky
abutment. A small amount of rock riprap can be placed over and adjacent to the
edges of the soil-cement at its contact with the abutment.

b. Special Conditions. Slope stability is provided for an embankment by means of the

strength and impermeability of the soil-cement facing. Further design
considerations should not be necessary for a soil-cement-faced embankment. It is
necessary to utilize proper design and analysis procedures to ensure the structural
and hydraulic integrity of the embankment. Conditions most likely to require
analysis include subsidence of the embankment or rapid drawdown of the reservoir
or river.

c. Subsidence. Embankment subsidence results from a compressible foundation,

settlement within the embankment itself, or both. Analyzing the possible effects of
such a condition involves assumptions concerning the embankment behavior.
Combining these assumptions with the characteristics of the facing, a structural
analysis of the condition can be made. If the unit weight and flexural strength of
the soil-cement are not known, they should be taken as 120 lb/ft3 and 150 to 200
lb/in2, respectively. The layer effect can be ignored.

The post-construction appearance of a pattern of narrow surface cracks of about 10

to 20 ft apart is evidence of normal hardening of the soil-cement. Substantial
embankment subsidence can allow the facing to settle back in large sections
coinciding with the normal shrinkage-crack pattern. If such settlement of the soil-
cement, with separation at the shrinkable cracks, takes place, the slope remains
adequately protected unless the settlement is large enough to allow the outer face
of a settling section to move past the inner face of an adjoining section.

d. Rapid Drawdown. Rapid drawdown exceeding 15 ft or more within 3 to 4 days

theoretically produces hydrostatic pressure from moisture trapped in the
embankment against the back of the facing. The design concepts that can be used
to prevent damage due to rapid drawdown-induced pressure are as follows:

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 109

 (1) designing the embankment so that its least-permeable zone is immediately
adjacent to the soil-cement facing, which ensures that seepage through
cracks in the facing will not build up a pool of water sufficient to produce
damaging hydrostatic pressure;

(2) arbitrarily assuming the weight of the facing sufficient to resist uplift
pressures that may develop; and

(3) providing free drainage behind, through, or under the soil-cement facing to
prevent adverse hydrostatic pressure.

203-7.0 REFERENCES

1. AASHTO Highway Drainage Guidelines, Hydraulic Analyses for the Location and Design
of Bridges, AASHTO Task Force on Hydrology and Hydraulics, 2007.
2. AASHTO, Model Drainage Manual, Chapter Ten, Bridges.
3. Abt, S.R., Donnell, C.A., Ruff, J.F., and Doehring, F.K., Culvert Shape and Slope Effects
on Outlet Scour, Transportation Research Record 1017, 1985.
4. ASCE Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Hydraulic Design of Stilling Basins, paper 1406,
October 1957.
5. Blaiswell, F.W., SAF Stilling Basin, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1959.
6. Bradley, J.N., Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways, HDS 1, Federal Highway Administration,
1978.
7. Brater, E. F. and King, H.W., Handbook of Hydraulics, 6th ed., New York: McGraw Hill
Book Company, 1976.
8. Brown, S.A., Design of Riprap Revetment, FHWA, Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 11
(HEC 11), IP-89-016, Washington, DC 20590, 1989.
9. Bureau of Reclamation, Hydraulic Design of Stilling Basins and Energy Dissipators,
Engineering Monograph No. 25, third printing, 1974.
10. Chow, C. N., Open Channel Hydraulics, New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1959.
11. Corry, M.L., Jones, J.S., and Thompson, P.L., The Design of Encroachments on
Floodplains Using Risk Analysis, Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 17, Federal
Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 1980.
12. Corry, M.L., Jones, J.S., Thompson, P.L., Watts, F.J., and Richards, D.L., Hydraulic
Design of Energy Dissipators for Culverts and Channels, FHWA, Hydraulic Engineering
Circular Number 14 (HEC-14), Chapter 5, 1983, Revised 2006.
13. Federal Highway Administration, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures:
Experience, Selection, and Design Guidance–Third Edition Hydraulic Engineering
Circular No. 23, September 2009.

Page 110 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

14. Federal Highway Administration, Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings,
Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 15, September 2005.
15. Federal Highway Administration, Evaluating Scour at Bridges, HEC 18, 2012.
16. Federal Highway Administration, Geosynthetic Design and Construction Guidelines,
FHWA-HI-95-038.
17. Federal Highway Administration, Hydraulic Design of Highway Culverts, Hydraulic
Design Series No. 5, FHWA-NHI-01-020, FHWA, Washington, D.C., 2001, Rev. May
2005.
18. Federal Highway Administration, Introduction to Highway Hydraulics, Hydraulic Design
Series No. 4, June 2008.
19. Federal Highway Administration, River Engineering for Highway Encroachments,
Hydraulic Design Series No. 6, December 2001.
20. Federal Highway Administration, Stream Stability at Highway Structures, HEC 20, 2012.
21. Federal Highway Administration, Urban Drainage Design Manual, Hydraulic Engineering
Circular No. 22. FHWA NHI-10-009, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.
C., 2009.
22. Holtz, R.D., Christopher, B.R., and Berg, R.R., Geosynthetic Design & Construction
Guidelines, Participant Notebook, National Highway Institute, US Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, July 29, 1994 Draft.
23. Ginsburg, A., HY8 Culvert Analysis Microcomputer Program, Applications Guide,
FHWA, EPD-87-101; and software available from McTrans Center, 512 Weil Hall,
University of Florida, Gainsville, FL 32611.
24. McBridge, M.C., and Sternberg, Y.M., Stormwater Management Infiltration Structures,
Publication No. FHWA-MS-83/04, Baltimore, Md., 1983.
25. Reihsen, G., and Harrison, L.J., Debris Control Structures, FHWA, Hydraulic Engineering
Circular Number 9 (HEC 9), Washington, DC 20590, 1971, Revised 2005.
26. Ruff, J.F., Abt, S.R., Mendosa, C., Shaikh, A., and Kloberdanz, R., Scour at Culvert Outlets
in Mixed Bed Materials, FHWA, RD-82-011, September 1982.
27. Sandvik, A., Proportional Weirs for Stormwater Pond Outlets, Civil Engineering ASCE,
pp. 54-56, March 1985.
28. Schueler, T.R., Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and
Designing Urban BMPs, Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments, 1987.
29. Sowers, G.B. and Sowers, G.F., Introductory Soil Mechanics and Foundations, 3rd ed.,
New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1970.
30. Spangler, M.G. and Handy, R.L., Soils Engineering, 4th ed., New York: Harper & Row,
1982.
31. Stevens, M.A. and Simons, D.B., Experimental Programs and Basic Data for Studies of
Scour in Riprap at Culvert Outfalls, Colorado State University, CER 70-7-MAS-DBS-57,
1971.

2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203 Page 111

32. Stormwater Management Manual – Volume 2 Procedures, Metropolitan Government of
Nashville and Davidson County. The EDGE Group, Inc., and CH2M Hill, July 1988.
33. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Design of Coastal Revetments, Seawalls, and Bulkheads,
Engineering Manual EM-1110-2-1614., April 1985.
34. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, HEC-RAS, River Analysis System, User’s Manual, Draft
Version 2.2, September 1998.
35. Wong, S.L. and McCuen, R.H., The Design of Vegetative Buffer Strips for Runoff and
Sediment Control in Stormwater Management in Coastal Areas, Annapolis, Maryland,
Department of Natural Resources, 1982.
36. Wycuff, R.L. and Singh, U.P., Preliminary Hydrologic Design of Small Flood Detention
Reserviors, Water Resources Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 337-49, 1976.
37. Yim, C.S. and Sternberg, U.M., Development and Testing of Granular Filter Design
Criteria for Stormwater Management Infiltration Structures, Baltimore, Maryland,
Department of Transportation, 1987.
38. Young, G.K. and Krolak J.S., HYDRAIN Integrated Drainage Design Computer System,
Volumes 1-6, FHWA, RD-88-120, 1987.
39. Yu, S.L., Norris, W.K, and Wyant, D.C., Urban BMP Demonstration Project of the
Albemarle/Charlottesville Area, Report No. UDA/530358/CZ88/102, Charlottesville,
University of Virginia, 1987.

Page 112 2013 Indiana Design Manual, Ch. 203

 Structure Minimum Circular Minimum Deformed
Application Pipe Size Pipe Area

New or Replacement

Drive 15 in. 1.1 ft2

Mainline or Public Road
15 in. 1.1 ft2
Approach (2 lanes)

Mainline or Public Road

36 in. 6.7 ft2
Approach (≥ 3 Lanes)

Bored Pipe in Conjunction with Small Structure Pipe Liner Project

Mainline or Public Road

Approach (2 lanes) 15 in. n/a

Mainline or Public Road

Approach (≥ 3 Lanes) 18 in. n/a

MINIMUM PIPE SIZE

Figure 203-2B [Rev. Apr. 2017]

 Bridge, Culvert,
Allowable Roadway Service-
Functional Allowable Allowable
Backwater, Serviceability, ability
Classification Velocity, Velocity,
Annual EP Annual EP Freeboard *
Annual EP Annual EP
Freeway 1% 1% 2 ft 1% 2%
Ramp 1% 1% 0 ft 1% 2%
Non-Freeway,
1% 1% 2 ft 1% 2%
4 or More Lanes
Two-Lane Facility,
1% 1% 1 ft 1% 2%
AADT > 3000
Two-Lane Facility,
1000 < AADT ≤ 1% 4% 0 ft 1% 4%
3000
Two-Lane Facility,
1% 10% 0 ft 1% 10%
AADT ≤ 1000
Drive 1% 10% 0 ft 1% 10%

* Required serviceability freeboard is based on the difference between the edge-of-pavement

and the structure-headwater elevations throughout the floodplain or watershed. Roadway
serviceability should consider backwater effects from a larger downstream waterway.

DESIGN-STORM FREQUENCY
FOR BRIDGE OR CULVERT

Figure 203-2C
(Page 1 of 2)
 Backwater
Roadway Service- Allowable
Functional Design
Serviceability, ability Velocity,
Classification Storm,
Annual EP Freeboard * Annual EP
Annual EP
Freeway 1% 4% 0 ft 10%
Non-Freeway,
1% 10% 0 ft 10%
4 or More Lanes
Two-Lane Facility,
1% 10% 0 ft 10%
AADT > 3000
Two-Lane Facility,
1000 < AADT ≤ 1% 50% 0 ft 50%
3000
Two-Lane Facility,
1% 50% 0 ft 50%
AADT ≤ 1000

* Required serviceability freeboard is based on the difference between the edge-of-pavement

and the structure-headwater elevations throughout the floodplain or watershed. Roadway
serviceability should consider backwater effects from a larger downstream waterway.

DESIGN-STORM FREQUENCY
FOR TEMPORARY STRUCTURE

Figure 203-2C
(Page 2 of 2)
 Riprap Sizing for Erosion Velocity, v (fps)
Protection v<6.5 6.5≤v<10 10≤v<13 v>13
x≤2' Revetment Revetment Revetment Revetment
Span of 2'<x≤2.5' Revetment Class 1 Class 1 Class 1
Structure, x 2.5'<x≤3' Revetment Class 1 Class 2 Class 2
x>3' Revetment Class 1 Class 2 Energy Dissipator
Stream Protection Revetment Class 1 Class 2 Class 2

Notes:
1. If clear-zone or other issues prohibit the use of the required erosion-protection method, the
Office of Hydraulics should be contacted for additional instructions.
2. Substitution of partially grouted riprap of one size smaller than that recommended in the table
may be used.

STREAM VELOCITY FOR EROSION PROTECTION

Figure 203-2D
[Rev. Jan. 2023]
 Structure Sump Required Sump Required Sump Required
Diameter for Stream Bed for Stream Bed for Stream Bed
or Span, S (ft) of Sand (in.) of Other Soil (in.) of Rock or Till (in.)
<4 6 3 3
4 ≤ S < 12 12 6 3
12 ≤ S < 20 18 12 3

PIPE- OR BOX-STRUCTURE SUMP REQUIREMENT

Figure 203-2E
 Type of Conduit Wall Description Manning’s n
Concrete Pipe Smooth Interior 0.012
Concrete Box Smooth Walls 0.012- 0.015
2.75 in. x 0.5 in Corrugations 0.024
6 in. x 1 in. corrugations 0.022-0.025
Corrugated Metal Pipe or Arch, 5 in. x 1 in. corrugations 0.025-0.026
Annular or Helical Pipe 3 in. x 1 in. corrugations 0.027-0.028
6 in. x 2 in. structural plate 0.033-0.035
9.25 in. x 2.5 in. structural plate 0.033-0.037
Spiral Rib Metal Pipe Semi-Smooth Interior 0.015
Thermoplastic/HDPE Pipe Smooth Interior 0.012
Cured in Place Liner (CIPP) Smooth Interior 0.012

Note: The value indicated in this table is the recommended Manning’s n design value. The actual field
value for an older, existing pipeline may vary depending on the effects of abrasion, corrosion,
deflection and joint conditions. A concrete pipe with poor joints and deteriorated walls may have
an n value of 0.014 to 0.018. A corrugated metal pipe with joint and wall problems may also
have a higher n value, and may experience shape changes which can adversely affect the
general hydraulics characteristics of the culvert.

RECOMMENDED MANNING’S n VALUE FOR CULVERTS

Figure 203-2F
 FREQUENCY FOR COINCIDENTAL OCCURRENCE
10% EP (10 YR) 4% EP (25 YR) 2% EP (50 YR) 1% EP (100 YR)
AREA RATIO
MAIN MAIN MAIN MAIN
TRIBUTARY TRIBUTARY TRIBUTARY TRIBUTARY
STREAM STREAM STREAM STREAM
1 10 2 25 2 50 2 100
10,000 TO 1
10 1 25 2 50 2 100 2
2 10 2 25 2 50 2 100
1,000 TO 1
10 2 25 2 50 2 100 2
5 10 5 25 5 50 5 100
100 TO 1
10 5 25 5 50 5 100 5
10 10 10 25 10 50 25 100
10 TO 1
10 10 25 10 50 10 100 25
10 10 25 25 25 50 50 100
1 TO 1
10 10 25 25 50 25 100 50
Source: JTRP: Report No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2023/09, DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTIPLE WATER COURSE
JOINT PROBABILITY ANALYSIS PROCEDURE FOR INDIANA WATERSHEDS

JOINT PROBABILITY ANALYSIS

FIGURE 203-2G
[Rev. Nov. 2023]
 Type of Structure and Design of Entrance Coefficient KE

Pipe, Concrete
Mitered to conform to fill slope ...........................................................................0.7
*End-Section conforming to fill slope .................................................................0.5
Projecting from fill, square cut end......................................................................0.5
Headwall or headwall and wingwalls,
Square-edged..................................................................................................0.5
Rounded, radius = 1/12D ...............................................................................0.2
Socket end of pipe, grooved...........................................................................0.2
Projecting from fill, socket end, grooved.............................................................0.2
Beveled edges, 33.7-deg or 45-deg bevels...........................................................0.2
Side- or slope-tapered inlet ..................................................................................0.2

Pipe or Pipe-Arch, Corrugated Metal

Projecting from fill with no headwall ..................................................................0.9
Mitered to conform to fill slope, paved or unpaved slope ...................................0.7
Headwall or headwall and wingwalls, square-edged ...........................................0.5
*End-section conforming to fill slope..................................................................0.5
Beveled edges, 33.7-deg or 45-deg bevels...........................................................0.2
Side- or slope-tapered inlet ..................................................................................0.2

Box, Reinforced Concrete

Wingwalls parallel, extension of sides,
Square-edged at crown ...................................................................................0.7
Wingwalls at 10 deg to 25 deg, or 30 deg to 75 deg to barrel,
Square-edged at crown ...................................................................................0.5
Headwall parallel to embankment without wingwalls,
Square-edged on 3 edges ...............................................................................0.5
Rounded on 3 edges to radius of 1/12 barrel
dimension, or beveled edges on 3 sides ...................................................0.2
Wingwalls at 30 deg to 75 deg to barrel,
Crown edge rounded to radius of 1/12 barrel
dimension, or beveled top edge ...............................................................0.2
Side- or slope-tapered inlet ..................................................................................0.2

* An end section conforming to the fill slope, made of either metal or concrete, is the section
commonly available from manufacturers. From limited hydraulic tests, it is equivalent in
operation to a headwall in both inlet and outlet control. An end section incorporating a closed
taper in its design may have a superior hydraulic performance. Such a section can be designed
using the information shown for the beveled inlet.

ENTRANCE-LOSS COEFFICIENT
Outlet Control, Full or Partly Full

Figure 203-2H
End-Treatment Type Entrance Type KE
Grated Box End Section, Concrete Pipe, headwall
0.5
Type 1 with square edge
Grated Box End Section, Concrete Pipe, headwall
0.5
Type 2 with square edge
Multiple-Pipes Concrete Concrete Pipe, projecting
0.5
Anchor from fill, square cut end
Multiple-Pipes Concrete Corrugated Metal Pipe,
0.9
Anchor Projecting from fill
Corrugated Metal Pipe,
Metal Pipe End Section end section conforming 0.5
to fill slope
Precast-Concrete End Concrete Pipe, end section
0.5
Section conforming to fill slope
Corrugated Metal Pipe,
Safety Metal End Section mitered to conform 0.7
to fill slope
Corrugated Metal Pipe,
Safety Metal End Section end section conforming 0.5
to fill slope
Corrugated Metal Pipe,
Safety Metal End Section mitered to conform 0.7
to fill slope
Corrugated Metal Pipe,
Safety Metal End Section end section conforming 0.5
to fill slope
Single-Pipe Concrete Corrugated Metal Pipe,
0.9
Anchor projecting from fill
Single-Pipe Concrete Concrete Pipe, projecting
0.5
Anchor from fill, square cut end
Single-Pipe Concrete Corrugated Metal Pipe-Arch,
0.9
Anchor projecting from fill
Multiple-Pipe Concrete Concrete Pipe-Arch, projecting
0.5
Anchor from fill, square cut end
Multiple-Pipe Concrete Corrugated Metal Pipe-Arch,
0.9
Anchor projecting from fill

ENTRANCE-LOSS COEFFICIENT, KE,

FOR STANDARD CULVERT

Figure 203-2 I
 Dissipator pool Apron
10h or 3W min. 5h or W min.
s 0 s 0

d
0f

n.
boar
ee
See Note A

mi
1.
Top of berm,

r
f
top of riprap See Note B Top of natural
channel

y TW
e
1V
:2H h 2H
s Horiz. 1V:

3d or 1.5d 2d or 2d or
50 max. 50 50

1.5 ft min. 2d or 1.5d 1.5d

50 max. max. Thickened or sloping toe

Geotextile (Typ.) 1.5d optional. Construct if

max. SECTION
downstream channel

A degradation is anticipated.
C B
m
r See Note B
D Be
a
rp
i
frp
po
To

2H
1V:
te
2H

xma
i
o r
1V:

pr e
t
Ap fw
a NOTE:
eo
2H

t dg
o e W = Diameter for pipe
n
1V:

p a
ra n Apron culvert
p ow
i
R sh 1 W = Barrel width for
b
3 1V:2H Symm. box culvert

1V:2H about W = Span of pipe-arch

Culvert c
Horizontal culvert

W
0
D B A
2 C
HALF PLAN

See Note B.

hs Berm

2d or 1.5d
50 max.

Excavate to this line, place

Natural channel
SEC. A-A geotextile, backfill with riprap.

2d or 1 W
0
SEC. C-C
50
1.5d 2 2
max.

Berm as required Berm as required to

to support riprap support riprap
2d or 1.5d
50 max.
Excavate to this line, place
SEC. B-B geotextile, backfill with riprap. SEC. D-D

NOTE A: If exit velocity of basin is specified, extend basin as requried to obtain sufficient cross-sectional
area at Section A-A such that Q / (Cross section area at Sec. A-A) = Specified exit velocity.
des

NOTE B: Warp basin to conform to natural stream channel. Top of riprap in floor of basin should be at
the same elevation or lower than natural channel bottom at Sec. A-A.

DETAILS OF RIPRAP BASIN ENERGY DISSIPATOR

Figure 203-2K
 RIPRAP BASIN CHECKLIST
Route Project No.
Designer Date
Reviewer Date
DESIGN VALUES FINAL
TRIAL 1 BASIN DIMENSIONS FEET
(IDM Figure 203-2M) TRIAL

Equivalent Depth, dE 10hS

Pool length is the
larger of:
D50/dE 3Wo

D50 15hS
Basin length is the
larger of:
Froude No., Fr 4Wo

hS/dE Approach Thickness 3D50

hS Basin Thickness 2D50

hS/D50
2 < hS/D50 < 4

TAILWATER CHECK DOWNSTREAM RIPRAP (IDM Figure 203-2N)

Tailwater, TW L/DE L VL/Vo VL D50

Equivalent depth, dE

TW/dE

IF TW/dE > 0.75, calculate riprap

downstream using IDM Figure 203-2N

DE = (4Ac/π)0.5

RIPRAP BASIN CHECKLIST

Figure 203-2L
 Culvert brink

Design discharge (Q)

v =
ave Wetted area at brink of culvert
TW

ya d = Median size of rock by weight,

50
rounded rock or angular rock
hs

y = Equivalent brink depth

a
= Brink depth for box culvert
0.5
SECTION = (A/2) for non-rectangular sections
3

3
0.
=
c
/y

4
0.
NOTE: 2 = h / d = 4

50
s 50

=
d

c
y
=

/
21

50
If TW/Y > 0.75, then

0.

d
0
riprap may be required on

=
2

31

5
0.
banks and channel bottom

0.

=
downstream from basin.

y
c

6
e
s

0.
/
h

50

=
RELATIVE DEPTH OF SCOUR HOLE,

y
c
=

/
41
0.

50
d

.7
=

0
51

=
0.

y
c
/
.2

0
d
5
= 0

=
1
.6
c
/y

1
50
d
1=
0.

1 2 3
v
ave
FROUDE NUMBER =
(g) (Y )
e

RIPRAP BASIN DEPTH OF SCOUR

Figure 203-2M
 1.0
0.9

0.8

0.7

Rectangular orifice into

0.6
an infinite basin
Design curve
0.5

(V Circular orifice into

L) ave
= Average velocity L meters
downstream from brink an infinite basin
0.4
(V
L) V = Average velocity at outlet
ave ave

Vave

0.3

0.2

NOTE: For partially full circular section or non-circular brink areas, convert wetted
cross sectional areas to an equivalent circular area with diameter W.

0.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50

L Distance downsteam from plane of the outlet

W Equivalent circular diameter

O

W Q V TW
O ave
3
SYM (ft) (ft /s) (ft/s) (ft)

23 15.09 1.61 NOTE: To be used for predicting channel velocities downstream from
1.44
culvert outlets where high tailwater prevails.
1.44 14 10.30 1.61

3.08 65 9.29 3.08

3.08 84 11.91 3.08

1.44 21 14.01 1.25

1.44 14 9.29 1.25

DISTRIBUTION OF CENTERLINE VELOCITY FLOW

FROM SUBMERGED OUTLETS

Figure 203-2N
RISE 4 ft 5 ft 6 ft 7 ft 8 ft
PERP. Wt., Lgth., Wt., Lgth., Wt., Lgth., Wt., Lgth., Wt, Lgth.,
SPAN T / ft ft T / ft ft T / ft ft T / ft ft T / ft ft
13 ft 2.00 6 3.15 6 3.30 6 3.45 6 3.60 6
14 ft 3.15 6 3.30 6 3.45 6 3.60 6 3.75 5
15 ft 3.30 6 3.45 6 3.60 6 3.75 5 3.90 5
16 ft 3.45 6 3.60 6 3.75 5 3.90 5 4.05 5
17 ft 3.60 6 3.75 5 3.90 5 4.05 5 4.20 5
18 ft 3.75 5 3.90 5 4.05 5 4.20 5 4.35 5
19 ft 3.90 5 4.05 5 4.20 5 4.35 5 4.50 4
20 ft 4.05 5 4.20 5 4.35 5 4.50 4 4.65 4

OVERSIZE-BOX-CULVERT SEGMENTS WEIGHT AND LENGTH

Figure 203-2 O
Case Freeboard Specified Acceptable Structure Alternates to be Shown on Plans
1 ≥ 1 ft Flat-topped, arch-topped, true-arch
2 < 1 ft Those indicated in hydraulics recommendation letter

DETERMINATION OF ACCEPTABLE
THREE-SIDED-STRUCTURE ALTERNATES

Figure 203-2P
 Feet Inches Feet Inches
12 144 24 288
13 156 25 300
14 168 26 312
15 180 27 324
16 192 28 336
17 204 29 348
18 216 30 360
19 228 32 384
20 240 34 408
21 252 36 432
22 264 42 504
23 276 48 576

THREE-SIDED STRUCTURE
PERPENDICULAR-SPAN DESIGNATIONS

Figure 203-2Q
Feet Inches Feet Inches
4 48 10’-4” 124
5 60 10’-8” 128
6 72 11’ 132
7 84 11’-4” 136
8 96 11’-8” 140
9 108 12 144
10 120 --- ---

THREE-SIDED-STRUCTURE
RISE DESIGNATIONS

Figure 203-2R
 MIN. AVG. MAX. AVG. RIPRAP
RIPRAP BASE-SLAB
STREAM STREAM AT OUTSIDE
AT CONCRETE
VELOCITY VELOCITY CURVED BEND
STR. AT STR.
ft/s ft/s IN CHANNEL
n/a ≤ 6.5 Revetment Class 1 n/a
> 6.5 < 10 Class 1 Class 2 n/a
≥ 10 < 13 Class 2 Base Slab Class B
≥ 13 n/a Base Slab Base Slab Class B

Note: The maximum average stream velocity at the structure can occur at a lesser event
than the design storm if roadway overtopping is present during the design storm.

SCOUR PROTECTION OF CHANNEL

AT THREE-SIDED STRUCTURE

Figure 203-2S
 Type of Channel and Description Minimum Normal Maximum
EXCAVATED OR DREDGED
1. Earth, Straight and Uniform 0.016 0.018 0.020
a. Clean, recently completed 0.018 0.022 0.025
b. Clean, after weathering 0.022 0.025 0.030
c. Gravel, uniform section, clean 0.022 0.027 0.033
2. Earth, Winding and Sluggish
a. No vegetation 0.023 0.025 0.030
b. Grass, some weeds 0.025 0.030 0.033
c. Dense weeds or aquatic plants in deep channel 0.030 0.035 0.040
d. Earth bottom and rubble sides 0.025 0.030 0.035
e. Stony bottom and weedy sides 0.025 0.035 0.045
f. Cobble bottom and clean sides 0.030 0.040 0.050
3. Dragline, Excavated or Dredged
a. No vegetation 0.025 0.028 0.033
b. Light brush on banks 0.035 0.050 0.060
4. Rock Cut
a. Smooth and uniform 0.025 0.035 0.040
b. Jagged and irregular 0.035 0.040 0.050
5. Channel Not Maintained, Weeds and Brush Uncut
a. Dense weeds, high as flow depth 0.050 0.080 0.120
b. Clean bottom, brush on sides 0.040 0.050 0.080
c. Clean bottom, highest stage of flow 0.045 0.070 0.110
d. Dense brush, high stage 0.080 0.100 0.140
NATURAL STREAM
1. Minor Stream (top width at flood stage < 100 ft)
a. Stream on plain
(1) Clean, straight, full stage, no rifts or deep
0.025 0.030 0.033
pools
(2) Same as above, but more stones or weeds 0.030 0.035 0.040
(3) Clean, winding, some pools or shoals 0.033 0.040 0.045
(4) Same as above, but some weeds or stones 0.035 0.045 0.050
(5) Same as above, lower stages, more
0.040 0.048 0.055
ineffective slopes and sections
(6) Same as (4), but more stones 0.045 0.050 0.060
(7) Sluggish reaches, weedy, deep pools 0.050 0.070 0.080
(8) Very weedy reaches, deep pools, or
floodway with heavy stand of timber and 0.075 0.100 0.150
underbrush
 Type of Channel and Description Minimum Normal Maximum
NATURAL STREAM (contd.)
1. Minor Stream (contd.)
b. Mountain stream, no vegetation in channel,
banks usually steep, trees and brush along
banks submerged at high stages
(1) Bottom: gravel, cobbles, and few
0.030 0.040 0.050
boulders
(2) Bottom: cobbles with large boulders 0.040 0.050 0.07
2. Floodplain
a. Pasture, no brush
(1) Short grass 0.025 0.030 0.035
(2) High grass 0.030 0.035 0.050
b. Cultivated area
(1) No crop 0.020 0.030 0.040
(2) Mature row crops 0.025 0.035 0.045
(3) Mature field crops 0.030 0.040 0.050
c. Brush
(1) Scattered brush, heavy weeds 0.035 0.050 0.070
(2) Light brush and trees, in winter 0.035 0.050 0.060
(3) Light brush and trees, in summer 0.040 0.060 0.080
(4) Medium to dense brush, in winter 0.045 0.070 0.110
(5) Medium to dense brush, in summer 0.070 0.100 0.160
d. Trees
(1) Dense willows, in summer, straight 0.110 0.150 0.200
(2) Cleared land with tree stumps, no sprouts 0.030 0.040 0.050
(3) Same as above, but with heavy growth of
sprouts 0.050 0.060 0.080
(4) Heavy stand of timber, a few downed
trees, little undergrowth, flood stage 0.080 0.100 0.120
below branches
(5) Same as above, but with flood stage
0.100 0.120 0.160
reaching branches
3. Major Stream (top width at flood stage > 100 ft).
The n value is less than that for a minor stream of
similar description, because banks offer less
effective resistance.
a. Regular section with no boulders or brush 0.025 n/a 0.060
b. Irregular and rough section 0.035 n/a 0.100
Source: Chow, V.T.
VALUES OF MANNING’S n FOR UNIFORM FLOW, Figure 203-3A
 Minimum
Type Thickness
Abutment Pier

Revetment 1.5 ft 2.0 ft

Class 1 2.0 ft 3.0 ft

Class 2 2.5 ft 4.0 ft

Riprap-Lay Thickness

Note: The thickness is measured such that the top is at the ground elevation.

Substructure
Lay Width
Type
Sloping The cone is covered top to toe, a square toe trench
Abutment is placed below the riprap, based on lay thickness.
Vertical
2 times the water depth or a minimum of 10 ft
Abutment
2 times the pier width or a minimum of 6 ft. The
Pier lay width is from the outside wall of the pier, all
the way around.

Riprap-Lay Width

Note: For an oversized-box or three-sided structure, see the INDOT Standard Drawings.

RIPRAP SCOUR PROTECTION

Figure 203-3B
 Hydraulics QA Checklist

Route: Des No.

County: City or Town:
Description:
Designer: Reviewer:

MAPS DESIGN APPURTENANCES

USGS Quad. Scale Date Dissipators, Riprap
ARC GIS Date Scour Analysis/Evaluation
Flood-Insurance Firm and FHBM
Soils Map
Aerial Photos Scale Date TECHNICAL RESOURCES
Indiana Design Manual, Part II
STUDIES BY EXTERNAL AGENCIES Other ___________________
FEMA Flood-Insurance Studies
NRCS Watershed Studies DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS
USGS Gages and Studies Drainage Area Delineation
Interim Floodplain Studies Drainage Areas of IN Streams
DNR Discharge Letter
STUDIES BY INTERNAL SOURCES Rational Formula
Office Records HEC-HMS / TR-20
Flood Record (High Water, Newspaper) NRCS
Gaging Da Regional Analysis
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORTS Coordinated Discharges of IN Streams
Log-Pearson Type III Gage Rating
CALIBRATION OF HIGH-WATER DATA
Discharge and Frequency of H.W. el. HIGH-WATER ELEVATIONS
Influences Responsible for H.W. el. - Check INDOT Survey
Maps for Larger Streams Nearby that May Plans for Existing Structure
Backwater the Site DNR Historic Flood Profiles
Analyze Hydraulic Performance of Maintenance Records
Existing Facility for 100-Year Flood External Sources
Analyze Hydraulic Performance of Personal Reconnaissance
Proposed Facility for 100-Year Flood
Field Reconnaissance Revisions Report

Hydraulics QA Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS COMPUTER PROGRAMS
INDOT HY8
HEC-RAS River Analysis System
TECHNICAL AIDS Log-Pearson Type III Analysis
Indiana Design Manual, Part II WSPRO Water-Surface Profile
INDOT and FHWA Directives PFP-HYDRA
FHWA Publications HEC-HMS / TR 20
HEC-RAS Scour Analysis

Other______________________

Designed by:_________________________ Date:________

Reviewed by:_________________________ Date:________

Hydraulics QA Checklist

(Continued)
 Type of Facility Design Frequency Allowable Spread, T
Freeway 2% Annual EP Edge of travel lane
Non-Freeway, ≥ 4 Lanes 10 % Annual EP Across one-half travel lane
Two-Lane Facility 10 % Annual EP 4 ft onto travel lane
Bridge Deck, Non-
Freeway 10 % Annual EP
Edge of travel lane
V ≥ 50 mph 10% Annual EP
3 ft onto travel lane
V < 50 mph
Ramp
V ≥ 50 mph 10% Annual EP Edge of travel lane
V < 50 mph 10% Annual EP 3 ft onto travel lane

Note:Consideration for a 2% annual EP storm event should be used when in a depressed area.
See Section 203-4.04(10)

DESIGN FREQUENCY AND ALLOWABLE WATER SPREAD

Figure 203-4A
 Casting Types
Str. Type
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 12A 13 14 15
A X X X
D X
Catch Basin

E X
J X
K X
S X
W1 X X X
A X X X
B X
C X
D X
E X
F X
G X
Inlet

H, HA X
J X
M X
N X
P X
R X
S X
T X
A X X X
B X X X
C2 X X X
D X X X
E X X X
Manhole

F X X X
G X X X
H X X X
J X X X
K X X X
L X X X
M X X X
N X X X
1
Notes: May be substituted for catch basin type A.
2
May be substituted for manhole type A or B.

COMPATIBILITY OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AND CASTINGS

Figure 203-4B
 Type of Gutter or Pavement Manning’s n
Concrete gutter, troweled finish 0.012
Asphalt Pavement
Smooth texture 0.013
Rough texture 0.016
Concrete gutter-asphalt pavement
Smooth 0.013
Rough 0.015
Concrete pavement
Float finish 0.014
Broom finish 0.016

Notes: 1. For a gutter with a small slope where sediment may accumulate, increase n value by
0.002.
2. Reference: USDOT, FHWA, HDS-3 (1961)

MANNING’S n FOR STREET OR PAVEMENT GUTTER

Figure 203-4C
 Curved vane grate: n = 0.016 S = 0.02 W = 16 in L = 36 in

3.53

3.18

3
Q(ft /s)
2.83

8.48
t /s)
3
f
(Q ,

2.47
i

70
.6
INTERCEPTED FLOW

2.12
5% 5.65
ce
incy3
Ef
fi

1.77
4.24

0%
e
incy4
Ef
fc
i

1.41

28
.3

1.06 2.12

c
ie
iny5
c 0%
Ef
f

14
.1

0.71

0%
e
incy6
Ef
fc
i
0.71

Ef
fc
ie
iny7
c 0%
0.35

0.35

0
0 0.005 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

LONGITUDINAL SLOPE (S)

INLET CAPACITY CHART

(CURVED VANE GRATE)

FIGURE 203-4D
ROUTE: __________ PROJECT: __________________________ COMPUTED BY: __________________________ DATE: ___________ SHEET ____ OF ____
GUTTER DISCHARGE GUTTER DISCHARGE
LOCATION INLET DISCHARGE
Design Frequency: _________ Allowable Spread: _________
Drain Run- Time Rain Q= Grade Cross Prev. Total Depth Gutt. Sprd. Inter- Run-
Area off of Inten- .002 – So Slope Run- Gutt. d Width T cept by REMARKS
Inlet Inlet
Station A Coef. Conc. sity, I 78 x Sx by Flow T/W W W/T Qi Qr
No. Type
C TC (in./ CIA
(ac) (min.) h) (cfs) (ft/ft) (ft/ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

INLET SPACING COMPUTATION SHEET

Figure 203-4E
 Manhole Inside- Maximum Trunkline Minimum Trunkline
Manhole
Dia. Dimension Pipe Size Pipe Size
Type
(in.) (in.) (in.)
A 48 dia. 24 12
B 36 dia. 18 12
C 49 dia. 24 12
D 58 x 74 42 27
E 80 x 74 60 48
F 108 x 74 84 66
G 136 x 74 108 90
H 49 dia. 36 24
J 62 dia. 36 24
K 74 dia. 48 36
L 98 dia. 54 48
M 104 dia. 72 54
N 110 dia. 84 72

MANHOLE TYPES

Figure 203-4F
 Speed
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 62 65 70
(mph)
d↓ K→ 20 30 40 50 70 90 110 130 160 167 180 220
0.1 20 24 28 32 37 42 47 51 57 58 60 66
0.2 28 35 40 45 53 60 66 72 80 82 85 94
0.3 35 42 49 55 65 73 81 88 98 100 104 115
0.4 40 49 57 63 75 85 94 102 113 116 120 133
0.5 45 55 63 71 84 95 105 114 126 129 134 148
0.6 49 60 69 77 92 104 115 125 139 142 147 162
0.7 53 65 75 84 99 112 124 135 150 153 159 176
0.8 57 69 80 89 106 120 133 144 160 163 170 188

Notes: 1. x = (200dK)0.5, where x = distance from the low point to flanking inlet, ft, and
d = depth at curb, ft
Maximum K for drainage = 170 (ft/%A) for a curbed facility.
2. K = L/A, where L = length of vertical curve, ft, and A = algebraic difference in approach grades, %.
Reference: HEC 12 Chapter 9 (modified).

FLANKING-INLET LOCATIONS

Figure 203-4G
 1"-9" 1’-0" 1’-0" 1"-9"
Beam Concrete
barrier rail

Drain type OS

Concrete Drain type SQ

Beam
barrier rail 1" 1"

11
:2 1:
12

3/8" x 1 1/2" 3/8" x 1 1/2"

hex head bolt hex head bolt

Concrete
Steel beam bulb-tee
Drain extension,
Drain extension, beam
6" dia.
6" dia.
Pipe support bracket

Pipe support bracket

6" 6"

(b)
(a)

NOTE: If possible, drain extension to be placed such

that runoff cannot directly enter the stream.

TYPICAL FLOOR DRAIN SECTIONS

Figure 203-4H
Route __________ Section _____________ County _______________________
Computed ____________________ Date ____________
Checked _____________________ Date ____________

Drainage
Flow Time Velocity

Runoff Coefficient
Area A (A)(C) Invert Elev.

Rainfall Intensity

0.00278CIA = Q
(min) (ft/s)

Slope of Drain
Diameter Pipe
Total Runoff

Capacity Fill
(ac)

Invert Drop
Manhole
I (in./h)
Length

(ft/ft)
(cfs)

(cfs)
(in.)
(ft)
Station

In Section
Increment

Increment

To Upper

Flowing

Design

Lower
Upper
Total

Total

Flow
Full
End

End

End
STORM DRAIN COMPUTATION SHEET

Figure 203-4 I
 Storm Durations for Inflow Rates Outflow Rates Peak Water Surface Peak Volumes
1% Annual EP (cfs) (cfs) Elevations (ft) (ft3)

1% Annual EP - 0.25 hr
1% Annual EP - 0.5 hr
1% Annual EP - 1 hr
1% Annual EP - 2 hr
1% Annual EP - 3 hr
1% Annual EP - 6 hr
1% Annual EP - 12 hr
1% Annual EP - 24 hr

SUMMARY PERFORMANCE TABLE FOR STORAGE

Figure 203-5A
 Maximum Allowable
Material
Velocity (ft/s)

Fine Sand 2.5

Sandy Loam 2.5
Silty Loam 3.0
Clay Loam 3.6
Clay 5.0
Silty Clay 5.0
Shale 6.0
Fine Gravel 5.0
Coarse Gravel 6.0

MAXIMUM VELOCITY IN A DRAINAGE DITCH

Figure 203-6A
 N
AI
PL

EL
10 ft

N
O
WATER SURFACE

AN
O
8

FL

CH

N
AI
WEED & WILLOW

ER
6

PL
SEEDLINGS

AT

D
4

O
-W

IL
FI
FL
W
2

RM

SO
LO
HA

0
AC

0 20 40 60ft
RE

CROSS SECTION 1
CR
OS
S
SE
CT
ION
1
SEGMENTS
OPEN
1 2 3
FIELDS
15’ 25’ 35’
10 ft
WATER SURFACE
8

LE &
BE

B EL
SCATTERED SAND

S
4

C AV
DR
TREES

B
R
OC

G
2

O
K
0
0 20 40 60 80 ft
2
ON
I
CT
REACH B

SE
OS
S CROSS SECTION 2
CR

SUBSECTIONS
1 2 3

OPEN
1000’ 30’ 1000’
FIELDS

10 ft WATER
COTTON SURFACE
FIELDS 8
CROSS
WOODS ECTO
I N3 6
S
REACH C

FIRM SOIL
2

0
(NOT TO SCALE)

CROSS SECTION 3

HYPOTHETICAL CROSS SECTION SHOWING REACHES,

SEGMENTS, AND SUBSECTIONS USED IN ASSIGNING n VALUES

Figure 203-6B
 Grade, G Interval
3% ≤ G < 5% 200 ft
5% ≤ G < 8% 150 ft
8% ≤ G < 10% 100 ft
≥ 10% 50 ft

LUG INTERVAL

Figure 203-6C
 Tangent Point
Tangent Point

1.
0
W

W
5
1.

FL
O
W
LONGITUDINAL EXTENT OF REVETMENT PROTECTION

Figure 203-6D
 Point of maximum wave runup

R »¿co

Design swl H
0

d
s

WAVE HEIGHT DEFINITION SKETCH

Figure 203-6E
Slope-Surface Characteristic Placement Method Correction Factor
Concrete blocks, voids < 20% fitted 0.90
Concrete blocks, 20% ≤ voids < 40% fitted 0.70
Concrete blocks, 40% ≤ voids ≤ 60% fitted 0.50
Concrete pavement --- 1.00
Grass --- 0.85 – 0.90
Grouted rock --- 0.90
Rock riprap, angular random 0.60
Rock riprap, hand-placed or keyed keyed 0.80
Rock riprap, round random 0.70
Wire-enclosed rocks or gabions --- 0.80

CORRECTION FACTOR FOR WAVE RUNUP

Figure 203-6F
 Point of Maximum Runup

Design Water Level

R »¿1 : X
H’
0

R = Wave Runup Height (ft)

H’ = Wave Height (ft)

0
» = Bank Angle with the Horizontal

6.0

5.0

4.0

3.0
R

H’
0
2.0

1.5

1.0

0.1 0.15 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.5 2.0 4.0 6.0

»¿X or (cot

WAVE RUNUP ON SMOOTH, IMPERMEABLE SLOPES

Figure 203-6G
 Riprap

h
Toe Dept

Ground
h
pt
De
ng
yi
La

Toe Width

NOTES:

1. Not to Scale.
2. For laying depth, see Standard Specifications.
3. Riprap to be placed on geotextile.

RIPRAP TOE DIMENSIONS

Figure 203-6H
Wrap cloth around
base of armor.

Filter cloth

GEOTEXTILE FILTER

Figure 203-6 I
 A A
B B

Direction of Flow

3T (min.)

1.5

1 5’-0"
Compacted
Backfill

SECTION: A-A

2T (min.)

3T

SECTION: B-B

TYPICAL RIPRAP INSTALLATION: PLAN AND FLANK DETAILS

Figure 203-6J
 Compacted, vegetated fill

Ground

Trenched Toe

Mounded Toe

2T T

Alternative toe material

placement location

Filter layer

TYPICAL RIPRAP INSTALLATION: SIDE VIEW

(Bank Protection Only)

Figure 203-6K
 Filter Layer
Original Stream Bed

Launching of Toe Material

Final Stream Bed

LAUNCHING OF RIPRAP TOE MATERIAL

Figure 203-6L
 Design High Water
Design High Water

Bank Paving Bank Paving

Apron
Filter Layer Filter Layer
Toe Wall

Anticipated
Bed Scour Anticipated
Bed Scour

(a) (b)

Design High Water Design High Water

Light Bank Paving

Bank Paving

Heavy Bank Paving

Toe Wall
Filter Layer
Toe Wall
Apron Filter Layer

Anticipated
Bed Scour

Anticipated
Bed Scour

(c) (d)

ROCK AND WIRE MATTRESS CONFIGURATION

Figure 203-6M
 Design High Water

Bank Paving

Filter Layer

ROCK AND WIRE MATTRESS INSTALLATION

COVERING ENTIRE CHANNEL PERIMETER

Figure 203-6N
 Wire-Mesh
Thickness Width Length
Opening Size
(ft) (ft) (ft)
(in. x in.)
0.75 6 9 3x3
0.75 6 12 3x3
1.0 3 6 3x3
1.0 3 9 3x3
1.5 3 12 3x3
1.5 3 6 3x3
1.5 3 9 3x3
1.5 3 12 3x3
3.0 3 6 3x3
3.0 3 9 3x3
3.0 3 12 3x3

STANDARD GABION SIZES

Figure 203-6 O
 Minimum Required
Maximum Velocity Bank Slope
Bank Soil Type Mattress Thickness
(ft/s) (H:V)
(in.)
10 Flatter than 1:3 9
Clay,
Heavy Cohesive 13 – 16 Steeper than 1:2 12
Soils
Any Steeper than 1:2 ≥ 18
Silt, fine sand 10 Flatter than 1:2 12
16 Flatter than 1:3 9
Shingle with Gravel 20 Flatter than 1:2 12
Any Steeper than 1:2 ≥ 18

CRITERIA FOR GABION THICKNESS

Figure 203-6P
Nominal Diameter Minimum Coating Weight,
of Wire (in.) Class 3 or A Coating (oz/ft2)
0.086 0.7
0.104 0.8
0.128 0.9

MINIMUM COATING WEIGHT

Figure 203-6Q
 Rock and Wire
Mattress Units

Filter Layer
Flow Direction

(a) Upstream Face

Rock and Wire

Mattress Units

Filter Layer
Flow Direction

(b) Downstream Face

FLANK TREATMENT FOR ROCK AND WIRE MATTRESS DESIGNS

Figure 203-6R
Stacked Gabion
Training Wall
Stacked Gabion
Retaining Wall

Toe Mattress
Counterfort
Original River Bed

Eroded River Bed

(a) Training wall with counterforts (b) Stepped back low retaining wall with apron

TYPICAL STACKED BLOCK GABION REVETMENT DETAILS

Figure 203-6S
 (a) Block Detail

Armor

Anchor

Filter Layer

(b) Revetment Detail

MONOSLAB REVETMENT

Figure 203-6T
 Varies

Varies

Varies

Cable Tunnels
OPEN CELL GRID

(a) Block Detail

Vegetation

Armorflex

Helix Anchor

Filter Fabric

(b) Revetment Configuration

ARMORFLEX

Figure 203-6U
 1’-0"

1’-0"

5"

(a) Block Detail

Petraflex Revetment

Earth Anchor

Continuous Woven
Filter Fabric

(b) Revetment Configuration

PETRAFLEX

Figure 203-6V
 Ordinary High Water

Longitudinal Cable or Rod

Cable to Anchor

POSITION OF BLOCKS
Cable or Rod AFTER SCOUR

PART ELEVATION

PART PLAN

ARTICULATED CONCRETE REVETMENT

Figure 203-6W
 12" Flap Produced on Filter Fabric

4’-8"

1’-6" Mat Length 1’-6"

TRI-LOCK REVETMENT

Figure 203-6X
 Compacted, Vegetated Backfill

2T Grouted Riprap

(Min.)

Under Drains Non-Grouted Riprap

Toe Protection

Channel-Bed
Filter Layer Scour Depth

Grout Penetration (Min.)

T
(a)

Extent of Protection
Desired

Filter Layer
1 4’-0"

Excavated 3
Backfill

(b)

T
2T

Filter Layer
2T

(Min.)

(c)

GROUTED RIPRAP SECTIONS

Figure 203-6Y
Filter Point
Spacing

GROUTED FABRIC-FORMED REVETMENT

(TYPE 1)

Figure 203-6Z
 Cord Spacing

Thickness

Weep Hole
Assembly

GROUTED FABRIC-FORMED REVETMENT

(TYPE 2)

Figure 203-6AA
 Ultimate Roadway
Level
3 2
1 1
Normal Water
Surface
Soil Cement
Embankment
Riprap Facing
5
1
Impervious Fill

Not to Scale

Normal Water Roadway

Surface

Minimum Water 4
1
Surface

Berm
6 Embankment
Soil Cement
1
Not to Scale

Normal Water Roadway

Surface
3.5
1
Minimum Water
Surface
Embankment
Soil Cement

Not to Scale

DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS OF THREE SOIL-CEMENT FACINGS

DESIGN GUIDELINES

Figure 203-6BB