Drainage falls - Maximum/minimum?

Foul and surface water, private drains and public sewers, land drains and soakaways, filter drains and any other ways of getting rid of water.
Post Reply
Uncle_Harry
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 2:00 pm
Location: Leeds

Post: # 10359Post Uncle_Harry

I have a 150 dia combined drain, 9.0m long, which needs to be altered. Is there a maximum fall for this? I need to install it at 1:8 to avoid a foundation!!

Tony McC
Site Admin
Posts: 8346
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
Contact:

Post: # 10373Post Tony McC

There is no maximum - just a minimum.
Site Agent - Pavingexpert

TheRobster
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:04 pm
Location: Leeds, UK

Post: # 10388Post TheRobster

There's no official maximum but there used to be an unwritten rule not to go steeper than 1/10. This was because there were fears of scour and hammer occuring (damage to pipes and joints due to high water velocities) although personally I've never heard or seen any reliable research which has proved this actually occurs in practice.

I know quite a few drainage engineers that won't go steeper than 1/10 though......but this is probably them just sticking to tradition. I'd say you should be fine with 1/8.

flowjoe
Posts: 1136
Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 9:25 am
Location: North West

Post: # 10397Post flowjoe

I don’t know if its just around here but building control certainly believe you can have to much fall on a system

We installed a new build system that ran through a steep banking before connecting to a sewer, we had to lay the 150mm line at a set fall until the line was 600mm from the surface at which pint we installed a new chamber with backdrop to take the line deeper and off we set again, in all we put three 2mtrs chambers in which added greatly to the labour and materials costs, as it happens it was an architects house so as they say , every cloud and all that.
http://draindomain.com

Many paths can lead to riches, few in sunlight, some in ditches

Tony McC
Site Admin
Posts: 8346
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:27 pm
Location: Warrington, People's Republic of South Lancashire
Contact:

Post: # 10405Post Tony McC

It's not unusual for BCOs to insist on a shallower fall and a backdrop chamber in preference to a steep fall, but there's still no max fall. According to SfA and/or Part H, you could, in theory, have a pipe laid vertically, which is, after all, what a backdrop chamber has.

An old Drainage Inspector I knew in Bury used to waffle on about attenuation, and could make a fairly good case for 'slowing down' the flow before it hit the ETW or the Irwell (is there a difference?) but it was just his own theory. Given that he was 'God' when it came to getting drains passed and adopted in Bury MBC, we generally did what he asked! :D
Site Agent - Pavingexpert

TheRobster
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:04 pm
Location: Leeds, UK

Post: # 10409Post TheRobster

Tony McC wrote:An old Drainage Inspector I knew in Bury used to waffle on about attenuation, and could make a fairly good case for 'slowing down' the flow before it hit the ETW or the Irwell (is there a difference?) but it was just his own theory. Given that he was 'God' when it came to getting drains passed and adopted in Bury MBC, we generally did what he asked! :D

I don't think that would be really all the relevant now anyway. Any major sewer system is designed using a computer these days (usually MicroDrainage is used in England) and this takes into account the rate of flow through the pipes and can optimise them for the best slope.

On a small system (say a domestic one) any attenuation you'd get by changing the level of the pipes would probably be negligable when looking at the whole system...

Post Reply