DRAINAGE DESIGN FOR ROADS IN NAMANVE INDUSTRIAL PARK

Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................3
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4

BACKGROUND........................................................................................................ 3
CLIMATE................................................................................................................ 4
LAND COVER, AND VEGETATION.................................................................................6
DRAINAGE STATUS................................................................................................... 6

2.0 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................8
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4

DESIGN APPROACH.................................................................................................. 8
STORMWATER COLLECTION........................................................................................ 8
STORMWATER CONVEYANCE......................................................................................9
STORMWATER DISPOSAL........................................................................................... 9

3.0 HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS......................................................................10

3.1 ANALYSIS METHOD................................................................................................10
3.2 ESTIMATION OF DESIGN FLOWS................................................................................11
4.0 HYDRAULIC DESIGN...............................................................................14
4.1 CULVERT DESIGN.................................................................................................. 14
4.2 CHANNEL DESIGN.................................................................................................14
5.0 DRAINAGE SCHEDULES..........................................................................15
5.1 ROAD SOUTH B R1.............................................................................................. 15
5.2 ROAD SOUTH B R2.............................................................................................. 15
6.0 DIVERSION OF LARGE STREAM ALONG ROAD B R2...................................16
6.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 16
6.2 DESIGN OF THE CHANNEL DIVERSION........................................................................17
APPENDICES................................................................................................ 19
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
APPENDIX

A1: CROSS DRAINS - ESTIMATION OF DESIGN FLOWS............................................20

A2: CROSS DRAINS - SIZING AND CONFIGURATION...............................................21
B1: SIDE DRAINS - ESTIMATION OF DESIGN FLOWS...............................................22
B2: SIDE DRAINS - SIZING AND CONFIGURATION..................................................23
C1 - WATER SURFACE PROFILE PLOTS FOR CULVERTS ALONG ROAD SOUTH B R1.......24
C1 - WATER SURFACE PROFILE PLOTS FOR CULVERTS ALONG ROAD SOUTH B R1.......25

Page | 1

List of Tables
TABLE 1: CLIMATE
TABLE 2: SIZES

CHARACTERISTICS IN

ZONE L (SOURCE: HYDROCLIMATIC

STUDY

(2001)).................5

AND NUMBERS OF CULVERT CROSSINGS...............................................................16

List of Figures
FIGURE 1: SITE

LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE DRAINAGE PATHWAYS..................................................4

FIGURE 2: HYDROLCLIMATIC

ZONES IN

FIGURE 3: AVERAGE RAINFALL

FIGURE 4: PROJECT

UGANDA (SOURCE: HYDROCLIMATIC

FOR THE

NAMANVE

AREA (SOURCE:

STUDY

(2001))..................5

HYDROCLIMATIC

STUDY

(2001)).......6

AREA NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERN..................................................................7

Page | 2

1.0

Introduction
1.1 Background
The project is located within the Kampala Industrial Business Park at Namanve. It is located in central Uganda and is
bounded by latitudes 0o20'3.2"N and 0o21'6.8" N and longitudes 32o40'29.3"E and 32o40'58.7"E (Figure 1). The
business park was established in 1997 on over 850 acres of land. The business park is currently a hive of
construction activity with many companies setting up factories, warehouses and business offices. The proposed
project will involve constructing two linked roads. The first link, called South B R1, is 1427 m long. It starts at Old
Jinja Road (also referred to as Bweyogerere Industrial Area Road) between the site for Luuka Plastics and Provident
and ends at the site for Multiple ICD. The second link, called South B R2, is 3045 m long. It starts at Chainage 0+490
of road South B R1 and goes round in a loop before terminating at Chainage 1+210 of the same road.
The hydrology/drainage design was aimed at assessing the hydrology of the site and proposing appropriate cross
and longitudinal drainage structures for the project roads. Construction of the roads will facilitate the development of
the surrounding plots. Development of the plots will involve significant filling of the swamp thus exacerbating the
drainage challenges.

1.2 Climate
Namanve is located in climatic Zone B of Uganda according to the Uganda Hydroclimatic Study (2001) (Figure 2).
The proposed site falls within climatic Zone B The zone receives an average of 1,270 mm of rainfall which is
principally spread over 2 rainy seasons: The long rains of March to May and the short rains of August to November
( and Figure 3).

1.3 Land cover, and vegetation

The plots surrounding Road B R1 have either been developed or are in the process of being developed. Road B R2
still goes through undeveloped land in which the current vegetation is mostly made of thick bushes with scattered
trees mainly composed of short palms trees. There are numerous open ponds as a result of sand mining. The lower
part of Road B R2 traverses through a wetland that is permanently water logged. Planned construction of industries
should result in mainly impermeable conditions. The areas to the west of the project are mainly made up of
residences with some industries.

Figure 1: Site location map showing the drainage pathways

Table 1: Climate characteristics in project area (source: Hydroclimatic study (2001))

Zone

Districts, 2000
boundaries

Annual Rainfall and its

zonal variability

Main rainy seasons

Main dry
seasons

Evaporation verses
rainfall

Luwero,
Mukono,
Kampala,
Mpigi.

Average of 1250 mm.

Two rainy seasons,

main season March to
May with peak in April
and secondary season
August to November
with a modest peak in
October/November.

Main dry season

December
to
February,
secondary
dry
season is June to
July.

Evaporation > rainfall by a

factor of ~ 2 during the dry
months, December to
February. During the peak
of the rainy seasons
rainfall is greater and or
equal to evaporation.

and

Demarcated Rainfall Zones

H
I

F
1

ME

A2

A1

CE

CW
30

B
MW

-1

31

32

33

34

Scale 1:4,500,000

Figure 2: Hydrolclimatic zones in Uganda (source: Hydroclimatic study (2001))

40

40

80

12 0

16 0

20 0

24 0 Kilome ters

Legend
Prepared by the GIS Sub Unit of the Water Resources Management Department, Entebbe

35

Figure 3: Average Rainfall for the Namanve area (source: Hydroclimatic study (2001))

1.4

Drainage status

The site is located within a low-lying part of the Namanve drainage basin which receives significant amounts of runoff
from the surrounding hills with a high risk of flooding. Drainage of the proposed road links is mainly in a south
easterly direction (Figure 4). Drainage challenges for the roads stem from two major factors. One factor is that most
parts of the project roads are within a swampy setting that also forms part of the flood plain for multiple streams that
flow into Namanve River. The lower parts of road South B R2 are located within a permanent swamp. The second
factor is that the creation of the business park involved changing the land-use from forest cover previously to
industrial area. As more of the companies that have been allocated land within the business park start construction
activities, there is bound to be significant changes in runoff characteristics. The increasing percentage of
impermeable surfaces will result in increased volumes of runoff. Channelization of the drains will result in higher peak
runoff. The flat nature of the terrain will mean that chances of water stagnation are high.

Figure 4: Project area natural drainage pattern

2.0

Methodology
2.1 Design approach
Drainage design included appropriate sizing of components, recommendations on road alignment for proper
hydraulic characteristics and recommendation of protection systems against scour. The design was based on the
latest Road Design Manual January 2010 Volume 2 (Ministry of Works and Transport), supplemented by other local
and international guidelines. The approach was to undertake document review, as well as investigations to enable
the Consultant to carry out a hydrological and hydraulic assessment for the proposed road links.
The design approach entailed the following five phases:

Desk study appraisal of existing project documentation, design standards, and past studies.

Data collection especially climatological and hydrological data necessary for hydrologic analysis. Data
included climatological and hydrological data. Other data included drainage area characteristics namely
size, topography, land-use, soils, and other developments that may impact on the site drainage patterns.

Field surveys - to identify locations of drainage structures (existing and proposed) along the roads and their
drainage characteristics. Important characteristics for major drainage systems include cross-section, slope,
roughness characteristics, flow controls, ponding, historical flood stages, vegetation, topography, land-use,
and scour evidence. Other issues of concern during the field surveys included: existing developments along
drainage channels, scour evidence, and land-use changes. The proposed locations of cross-drainage
structures are shown in Figure 4.

Hydrologic analysis this involved use of recommended methods to estimate flood magnitudes for all
crossings. National standards were used to decide on the appropriate return periods to be used for the
designs.

Hydraulic design Hydraulics principles of open channel flow, and closed conduit flow were used in sizing
of the drainage structures i.e. culverts and longitudinal drains. For the sizes and materials of all related
facilities, recommendations were made for culvert entrance and exit conditions, side drain cross-section and
alignment.

2.2 Stormwater collection

Stormwater collection is a function of the natural drainage systems of the catchments and the drainage of roadway.
The quantity of the water to be drained depends on a number of variables that include; rainfall intensity, duration and
frequency of rainfall, type and size of the area that contributes to runoff among others.

2.3 Stormwater conveyance

Stormwater conveyance will be through longitudinal and cross drainage structures. The main factors considered in
selecting appropriate structures included; construction cost, ease of maintenance and performance record in similar
conditions. Appropriate measures for protection against scour have been proposed.

2.4 Stormwater disposal

Stormwater disposal will be achieved in several ways

Stormwater through cross-drainage structures will be conveyed to the existing natural streams downstream
without any modifications whenever possible. Modifications may be required in some cases to improve
hydraulic flow conditions and also protect the drainage structures and the natural streams.

Stormwater through longitudinal drains will be directed away from the road off-shot drains or into inlets to
cross drains, whichever is applicable.

3.0

Hydrological Analysis
3.1 Analysis method
Hydrological analysis dealt with estimating design flood magnitudes at each drainage structure as the result of
precipitation. There are many methods available in literature for carrying out hydrological analysis and the selection
of which method to use depends on the purpose of the analysis and the availability of hydrological data among
others. The project area is characterised by scarcity of hydrological data as all the major rivers and streams are
ungauged. For such sites, a class of analysis methods based on regionalisation has been found to give consistently
good performance. For the current drainage design, the Generalised Tropical Flood Model was used. The steps
involved in this approach are detailed in Watkins and Fiddes (1984) and updated as follows:
1. Generation of the catchment upstream of each drainage structure using digital elevation model (DEM) of the
area. The 30 m ASTER GDEM Model (http://gdem.ersdac.jspacesystems.or.jp/) was used in this study
2. Estimation of catchment area (A), land slope (SL) and channel slope (So) from the DEM
3. Establishment of the catchment type from site inspection which was used to estimate the surface cover flow
time, Ts. The values for Ts were set to 1 hour.
4. Determination of soil type by both geotechnical investigations and available soil maps, the soil permeability
class (I) and slope class (S). The soils in the area are mainly of low permeability with impeded drainage
when soils are wetted and the soil permeability was taken as 3. Slope classes were set to 3 owing to
catchment slopes that ranged between 2 and 5%. Using the soil class and the slope class, the basic runoff
coefficient was estimated using equation (1);
C s 53 12 I 8S

(1)

5. Determination of land use factor (CL) and catchment wetness factor (CW). Land-use factors were set to The
catchment has largely bare soils and built-up area with cultivation is some parts. Therefore, CL was set to
1.5. Central Uganda is within a wet zone and CW was set to 1.0.
6. Estimation of the runoff coefficient from equation (2);
C A C S CW C L

(2)

7. Estimation of the base time from equation (3)

CA1 2
Tb
Ts
S2

(3)

Where; Tb = base time (hr)

A = catchment area (km2)
S = Slope class
C = 30 for humid catchments
10

8. Computation of the design storm rainfall for each recurrence interval, to be allowed for during base time
(a) the 2 year, 24 hr rainfall (P2)= 70 for the region (Appendix 4.3, Drainage Design Manual, 2010)
(b) 10 year : 2 year ratio = 1.49 (Appendix 4.4, Drainage Design Manual, 2010)
(c) selection of design return period, T, as shown in the section below
(d) determination of T:2 year ratio (rT:2) (Appendix 4.5, Drainage Design Manual, 2010)
(e) determination of area reduction factor using the 'Kampala Equation' (equation 4)
(f)

ARF 1 0.04T 1 3 A1 2

(4)

(g) where T is selected as 8 hours since daily rainfall is used

(h) Determination of rainfall ratio from equation (5)
(i)

T b 24

RRt b
24 b Tb

(5)

(j) Where; Tb is the base time

a. b = 0.3
b. n = 0.95
(k) determination of the design rainfall intensity using equation (6)
(l)

PT P2 rT :2 ARF RRt

(6)

9. Calculation of the average flow during base time from equation (7)

C A PT A
360TB

(7)

10. Estimation of the design peak using a peak factor of 2.5 (applicable to humid catchments)

3.2 Estimation of design flows

Highway drainage facilities are designed to convey predetermined discharges in order to avoid significant flood
hazards. Provisions are also made to convey floods in excess of the predetermined discharges in a manner that
minimizes the hazards. Peak discharge magnitudes are a function of their expected frequency of occurrence, which
in turn relates to the magnitude of the potential damage and hazard. The chief interest in hydrological analysis rests
in estimating runoff and peak discharges for the design of highway drainage facilities. The aim is to develop a flood
versus frequency relation as a tabulation of peak discharges versus the probability of occurrence or exceedance. The

11

Ministry of Works Road Design Manual Volume 2 (2010), pg 10 notes that Design flood standards are influenced by
many factors including:
(a) safety;
(b) the level of hydraulic performance required;
(c) environmental impact;
(d) construction and operation costs;
(e) maintenance requirements;
(f) serviceability;
(g) Legal and statutory requirements.
Longer return periods are considered essential for some cases including the following;
(a) Where there is high potential damage to the road and high associated cost of repairs
(b) Long time needed for repairs to make the route usable for traffic again
(c) Detours not available
(d) Long period of flooding
(e) High traffic density
(f) Deep flow depth and high flow velocity of floodwaters
(g) High strategic importance (military, police, fire brigade, medical services, etc.)
(h) High economic importance.
The Ministry of Works Road Design Manual (2010), recommends the following recurrence intervals for highways on
the basis of the geometric design of the road
Structure Type

Geometric Design Standards

BIa, BIb, BII, GA

BIII, GB

GC

5/10
10
25

10
10

5
5

50
50

25
50

10
25

100

50

50

100

100

100

200

200

100

Gutters and Inlets*

Side Ditches
Culvert, pipe (see Note)
Span < 2m
Culvert, 2m < span < 6m
Short Span Bridges 6m <
span < 15m
Medium Span Bridges
15m < span < 50m
Long Span Bridges
spans > 50m
Check/Review Flood
BIa = Bitumen Ia,
GA = Gravel A,

BIb = Bitumen Ib,

GB = Gravel B,

BII = Bitumen II,

GC = Gravel C

BIII = Bitumen III

Source: MoWT Drainage Design Manual, 2010, Section 3, Table 3.2, Pg 10

12

Based on the above Table, the following recurrence intervals were adopted

For culverts with a total span less than 2 m the design recurrence interval was set to 25 years while for
larger culverts with total spans up to 6 m the design recurrence interval was set to 50 years

For all longitudinal drains the design storm with a recurrence interval of 10 years was selected

All culverts were checked for performance under a storm event less frequent than the design storm event shown
above as the Check/Review Flood. All other drainage structures were checked for the storm having the next lower
frequency than the design storm event. For example, culverts designed for a 25-year storm were checked for
adequate performance with a 50-year interval storm event.
The detailed analysis of the design floods at all culvert crossings are shown in Appendix A1 while the analysis for
longitudinal drains are shown in Appendix B1

13

4.0

Hydraulic Design
Hydraulic design was aimed at sizing and alignment of the drainage structures in such a way that they can safely
convey the design flood without significant damage to the drainage structure or roadway. Hydraulic designs were
carried out in two stages namely;

Sizing and alignment of cross drainage structures (mainly as culverts).

sizing and alignment of longitudinal drainage structures (mainly as trapezoidal drains)

4.1 Culvert Design

A culvert conveys surface water through a roadway embankment or away from the highway right-of- way. In addition
to this hydraulic function, it must also carry construction and highway traffic and earth loads; therefore, culvert design
involves both hydraulic and structural design. The hydraulic and structural designs must be such that minimal risks to
traffic, property damage, and failure from floods prove the results of good engineering practice and economics.
Culverts are considered minor structures, but they are of great importance to adequate drainage and the integrity of
the facility.
Culvert design was carried out using the HY8 Culvert Hydraulic Analysis Program from the US Federal Highway
Authority (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/software/hy8/). HY8 is windows based and enables users
to analyze:

The performance of culverts

Multiple culvert barrels at a single crossing as well as multiple crossings

Roadway overtopping at the crossing and

Develop report documentation in the form of performance tables, graphs, and key information regarding the
input variables

The resultant water surface profiles for the major culvert crossings are presented in Appendices C1 and C2 while
Appendices A1 and A2 present the hydraulic designs of all culverts.

4.2 Channel Design

Channel design involved selection of trial channel characteristics, application of Mannings equation for channel
analysis, and then iteration until the trial characteristics meet the desired criteria. The following considerations where
taken into account:

potential flooding caused by changes in water surface profiles

disturbance of the stream/river system upstream or downstream of the highway right-of way

14

changes in lateral flow distributions

changes in velocity or direction of flow

need for conveyance and disposal of excess runoff

need for channel linings to prevent erosion

The selection of the channel lining depends on channel material, the permissible velocities and the maximum
allowable shear stresses. All longitudinal drains have been designed as concrete lined channels will have side slopes
of 0.5:1. This is because other types of lining are not suitable for the area. Grass lining is not suitable for a highly
built-up area with limited spaces for operating while stone pitching may not withstand the movement of heavy trucks
in the industrial area.
The designs of the side drains are presented in Appendices B1 and B2.

5.0

Drainage schedules
5.1 Road South B R1
Roadway drainage will be in form of both longitudinal and cross drains. The sizing and alignment for cross drains are
presented in Appendices A1, A2 while the sizing and alignment for longitudinal drains are shown in Appendices B1
and B2. The water surface profiles for all cross drains are shown in Appendix C1.
There will be 4 new culvert cross drains in addition to the existing one at Ch. 0+170. All cross drains will be concrete
pipe with a diameter of 1200 mm. Culvert entrances and exits will be made of vertical headwall with 45 deg wingwalls. The culverts culvert inlets have been provided with vertical headwalls and wing walls to protect the
embankments and also allow for hydraulically smooth flow. The minimum culvert slope has been set to 0.5% to allow
for self cleaning. Most of the crossings will have drop inlets at the entrances.
All side drains will be lined with concrete. The total length of side drains will be 2,515 m of which 1,100 m will be
located on the left of the road while 1,415 m will be located on the right.

5.2 Road South B R2

Roadway drainage will be in form of both longitudinal and cross drains. The sizing and alignment for cross drains are
presented in Appendices A1, A2 while the sizing and alignment for longitudinal drains are shown in Appendices B1
and B2. The water surface profiles for all cross drains are shown in Appendix C2.
There will be 7 new culvert cross drains. The sizes and numbers of culvert crossings are shown in Table 2. Culvert
entrances and exits will be made of vertical headwall with 45 deg wing-walls. The culverts culvert inlets have been
provided with vertical headwalls and wing walls to protect the embankments and also allow for hydraulically smooth
flow. The minimum culvert slope has been set to 0.5% to allow for self cleaning. Most of the crossings will have drop
inlets at the entrances.
All side drains will be lined with concrete. The total length of side drains will be 1,270 m of which 705 m will be
located on the left of the road while 565 m will be located on the right.
15

Table 2: Sizes and numbers of culvert crossings

6.0

Type

Size

Number of crossings

Number of barrels

Concrete pipe

900 mm

Concrete pipe

1200 mm

Concrete box

1500 mm rise x 2000 mm span

Diversion of large stream along Road B R2

6.1 Introduction
Between chananges 0+620 and 0+820, Road B R2 runs over an existing major stream that is a tributary of River
Namanve (. Mecause maintaining the road along the current route will require some interventions in order to maintain
the functionality of the stream and that of the road. The viability of 3 possible interventions was considered in order to
select the best. The options are
1. Maintain the road and stream at current locations: This option would require construction of box culverts
over the stream before constructing the road. The section to be covered would be about 180 m in length.
This option is not considered viable because of the costs involved in constructing the box culverts.
Additionally, maintenance of the culverts would be a challenges over such a length.
2. Maintain the stream at current location and divert the road: This option would require carrying out
adjustments to the geometric profile of the road. Uganda Investment Authority has already demarcated and
assigned the plots and, presumably, titles have been issued. This option does not seem viable because the
process of adjusting plot boundaries would be tedious. Also changing the geometric profile of the road will
have an impact on project cost.
3. Maintain road at current location and divert the stream: This option is the most viable. Part of the land into
which the stream will be diverted in designated a green area (in from of PN Mashru plot). It will be
necessary to negotiate with Rwenzori beverages for some extra land. The cost of constructing a new open
channel will be much less than the cost of constructing the box culverts in Option 1 above.

16

Figure 5: Proposed channel diversion

6.2 Design of the channel diversion

The channel has been designed as a compound trapezoidal channel with a low flow section (Figure 6). The purpose
of the low flow section is to maintain velocities that are sufficient for channel self-cleaning during the dry season. The
channel will be concrete lined. Sizing of the proposed channel is shown in

Figure 6: Configuration of proposed diversion channel

17

Table 3: Sizing of the proposed diversion channel

Variable
Flow variables
Drainage Area (km2)
Catchment Slope (%)
Channel slope
Return Period (Years)
Design Flow (m3/s)
Channel type
Low flow section
Channel lining option
Channel lining
Manning's n
base width, b1
depth, d
side slope, n1
Flow area
wetted perimeter
Flow velocity
Discharge
Flood flow section
Channel lining option
Channel lining
Manning's n
base width, b2
depth, D
side slope, n2
Flow area
wetted perimeter
Flow velocity
Discharge
Combined section
Total flow
Comparison with maximum discharge
Overall channel size
Free board
Top width
Total depth

Units

Estimate

km2
%
%
Years
m3/s
Compound with low flow
section

1.81
2.6%
0.5%
50.00
17.15

3
Concrete
0.013
1.00
0.50
1.00
0.50
2.41
1.90
0.95

m
m
H:1
m2
m
m/s
m3/s
3
Concrete
m
m
H:1
m2
m
m/s
m3/s

0.013
4.00
1.40
1.00
4.76
7.96
3.86
18.38

m3/s

19.33
OK

m
m
m

18

0.2
6.8
2.1

Appendices

19

Appendix A1: Cross Drains - Estimation of Design Flows

20

Appendix A2: Cross Drains - Sizing and Configuration

21

Appendix B1: Side Drains - Estimation of Design Flows

22

Appendix B2: Side Drains - Sizing and Configuration

23

6.3 Appendix C1 - Water Surface Profile Plots for Culverts along Road South B R1

24

Appendix C1 - Water Surface Profile Plots for Culverts along Road South B R1

25

26