×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

(OP)
Hi all,

I'm searching for documentation regarding Manning N values for overland flow in urban settings.

This is to use with PC-SWMM while modeling storm drainage in a suburb.

Thanks.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

What sort of resolution/detail are you modelling the overland flows in? Will you be modelling at a sufficiently fine scale where you can differentiate between flowpaths in roads vs through yards (I'm not really familiar with SWMM)

Generally when modelling at a broader scale (lumping roads/yards together) I would adopt a relatively high manning's n 0.1 - 0.15 to account for fences and other obstructions.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

As you guessed, I would like to model at a relatively broad scale, fixing one Manning coefficient for every 3-4 lots.  This would include the sidewalk, roofs, fences, yards, etc.

Runoff coefficients for surburban, urban, commercial or residential areas are easy to come by, but Manning's n are more rare.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

What type of flow are you trying to model?  The effective Manning's value can vary considerably depending on the depth of flow.

For example, channel flow with short grass cover might have a value of 0.03, while sheet flow across the same surface is typically 0.15.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Definitely sheet flow.

Do tables displaying the various types of surfaces and their corresponding coefficients exist?

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Google "mannings n overland flow". A number of items came up.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

See TR-55 table 3-1, sorted by Manning's value as follows:

0.011 Smooth surfaces
0.05  Fallow
0.06  Cultivated, Residue<20%
0.13  Range
0.15  Grass, short
0.17  Cultivated, Residue>20%
0.24  Grass, Dense
0.40  Woods, light underbrush
0.41  Grass, Bermuda
0.80  Woods, dense underbrush

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Great.  Thanks for the help!

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Dear ALL,
If we are referring to overland flow, i.e. sheet flow for depth less than 0.1 ft. The Manning's "n" is for the previous surface and its value depends on the type of surface. I note that there are large discrepancies especailly for the grassed surface, e.g for dense grassed surface n=0.06 based on the AR&R 1977, whereas n=0.35 for dense turf based on Crowford and Linsley 1966(obtained by calibration of Stanford Wwatershed Model)and n= 0.15 for short grass prairie and n= 0.41 for Bermuda grass based on Engman (1986). In other words, the former will give us a much higher runoff duscharge than the other two which have very similar n value. Can anyone comment and advise which set of n values be used in order to obatin more accurate runoff.I am using runoff block of EPA SWMM to calculate the runoff. Thank you!

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

I think the TR-55 table (posted above) covers the full range of conditions for shallow flow.

dcnnng:  Your Manning's value of 0.06 for "dense grass" sounds a bit low for sheet or shallow flow.  It's closer to the channel-flow value.

RE: Manning N for overland flow in urban settings

Hi pssmart,
Thank you for your reponse.
That is exactly what puzzle me. In fact I was told that we should use 0.06 for desnse grass as per Australian rainfall and runoff (AR & R): a guide to flood estimation of Institution of Engineers, Australia, c1987.
As I said there are 2 sets of values, which one would give use more accurate runoff?

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources