Uniteo Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Great Lakes National
Program Office
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
EPA 905/2-87-005
GLNPO Report No 87-10
July 1987
c/EPA
Controlling Discharge
And Storage in a
Combined Interceptor
Sewer - Cleveland, Ohio
(Hydrobrakes)
Do not WEED. This document
should be retained in the EPA
Region 5 Library Collection.
-------
FOREWORD
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) was created because of
increasing public and governmental concern about the dangers of pollution
to the health and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water,
and spoiled land are tragic testimany to the deterioration of our natural
environment.
The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the USEPA was established
in Region V, Chicago, Illinois to provide specific focus on the water
quality concerns of the Great Lakes. The Section 108(a) Demonstration
Grant Program of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500) is specific to the Great
Lakes drainage basin and thus is administered by the Great Lakes National
Program Office.
This report details the results of a recently completed three and one-half
year Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) study conducted in a residential/
industrial area on the west side of Cleveland Ohio. The study involved
the in-line storage and controlled discharge of combined sewage flow,
generated during a rain event, utilizing a Hydrobrake as the control
device.
The object of the study was three fold.
1. To eliminate the combined sewer overflow to Lake Erie.
2. To study the effectiveness of the Hydrobrake when utilized
as a flow regulator in an in-line storage situation.
3. To provide an even flow to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment
Facility in a rain event.
We hope the information and data contained herein will help planners and
managers of pollution control agencies to make better decisions in carrying
forward their pollution control responsibilities.
Valdas V. Adamkus
Administrator, Region V
National Program Manager for the Great Lakes
-------
EPA-905/2-87-005
GLM)PO Report No. 87-10
Controlling Discharge and Storage In A Combined
Interceptor Sewer - Cleveland, Ohio
(Hydrobrakes)
by
Anthony S. Jordan
Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District
Cleveland, Ohio
Section 108(a) Demonstration Project
Grant No. S005602
Project Officer Technical Assistance
Ralph G. Christensen Douglas C. Ammon
John H. English
Richard P. Traver
Great Lakes National Program Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
October 1986
-------
Disclaimer
This report has been reviewed by the Great Lakes National Program Office, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and approved for publication. Approval does not
signify the contents necessarily reflect the views and policy of the USEPA, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
-------
INDEX
- W. 117th & Detroit
Description
Abstract
Conclusion
Recommendations
Part 1 Introduction
1.1 History
1.2 Construction of Hydrobrake
1.3 Flow Gauging
Part 2 Design Methodology
2.1 Site Selection & Design Criteria
2.2 Design Solution
2.3 Project Data
2.4 Preliminary Work
2.5 Description of Hydrobrakes
2.6 Description of Hydrobrake Installation
Part 3 Construction
3.1 Hydrobrake Construction Sites
3.2 Project Construction - Typical
3.3 Construction Problems
3.4 Total Cost
3.5 Final Inspection
Part 4 Hydrobrake Flow Monitoring
4.1 Computer Control Facility
4.2 Monitoring Facilities
4.3 Rain Gauge Facilities
4.4 Monitoring Hydrobrake Locations
4.5 Monitoring Results
Part 5 Environmental Considerations
5.1 Objectives
5.2 Sampling
5.3 Estimation of Pollutant Reduction
Part 6 Other Hydrobrake Projects
6.1 City of Cleveland, Ohio
6.2 City of Euclid, Ohio
6.3 City of Portland, Maine
Page Number
i, ii
iii
iv
1-8
1-3
4-5
5-6
9-21
9-12
12
12
13
14
14
22-30
22
22-24
24-25
25
26
31-51
31
31-32
32
32
33
54-57
54
54-56
57
58-59
58
58
59
Acknowledgments
60
-------
INDEX OF CHARTS. MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure No. Description Page
1 Photographic Reproduction - Hydrobrakes 7
2 Plan - View Diversion Chamber W. 117th & Detroit 8
3 N.W.I. Location Map With Hydrobrake Locations 15
4 Hydrobrake Location - Drainage Area Map 16
5 N.W.I. Profile With Storage Capacities 17
6 N.W.I. Flow Diversion Locations 18
7 Head/Discharge Hydrobrake Characteristics Sites 1-5 19
8 Head/Discharge Hydrobrake Characteristics Sites 6 and 7 20
9 Hydrobrake Flow Storage Data 21
10 Side View Hydrobrake Installation 27
11 Photograph Above Ground - Rocky River & Fischer - Site 6 28
12 Photographic Reproductions Upstream & Downstream of the
Weir at Site 6 29
13 Photographic Reproductions Upstream & Downstream of the
Weir at Site 7 30
14 Photographic Reproduction Computer Console 34
15 N.W.I. Profile With Monitor Locations 35
16 - 18 Flow Charts Rain Event 6/18/84 and 6/19/84 36-38
19 - 21 Flow Charts Rain Event 7/6/84 and 7/7/84 39-41
22 - 24 Flow Charts Rain Event 8/3/84 and 8/4/84 42-44
25 - 33 Flow Charts Rain Events With Rainfall Intensities 45-53
-------
ABSTRACT
This report details the results of a recently completed three and one-
half year Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) study conducted in a
residential/industrial area on the west side of Cleveland Ohio. The study
involved the in-line storage and controlled discharge of combined sewage flow,
generated during a rain event, utilizing a Hydrobrake as the control device.
The object of the study was threefold.
1. To eliminate the combined sewer overflow to Lake Erie.
2. To study the effectiveness of the Hydrobrake when utilized as a flow
regulator in an in-line storage situation.
3. To provide an even flow to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility
in a rain event.
The study area was a 1,400 acre residential/industrial site in the
District's Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant's service area. The combined
sewage flow from this area drains to the Northwest Interceptor (NWI). Because
of the NWI location and its potential for in-line storage, the District chose
to construct seven storage weirs in the Interceptor thereby capturing the
first flush in a rain event. A Hydrobrake was installed in each weir wall to
provide a uniform downstream discharge. The flow and storage conditions
behind the weirs and the resultant uniform downstream discharge was monitored
in real time by level sensors and the information was transmitted by telephone
data lines to the District's central computer system.
The construction of the weir and the installation of the Hydrobrake
resulted in a maximum stored flow of approximately four million (4,000,000)
gallons of sewage during each rain event. Previously this is flow that would
have been discharged to Lake Erie. The cost of construction including the
Hydrobrakes was $155,363 or a cost of approximately $0.04 per gallon of sewage
stored.
The Hydrobrake proved to be a cost effective device that when properly
installed is capable of reliably and accurately throttling flows, creating
storage and allowing a self-scouring drain down action without electrical or
mechanical controls and very little human intervention.
This report is submitted as a final requirement of Grant No. S005602-01
by the staff of the Sewer Control Systems Department of the Northeast Ohio
Regional Sewer District. The grant was jointly sponsored and funded by a
-------
Section 108 Grant from the Great Lakes National Program Office, Region V
U.S.E.P.A. and the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District. The report covers
the period of September, 1980 to June, 1984. Work was completed with the
submittal of this report April 30, 1986.
-11-
-------
CONCLUSION:
The Northwest Interceptor is now being utilized as a combination of seven
(7) incremental/in-line detention segments separately controlled for maximum
effective use of each storage segment. The high efficiency of flow control
has significantly reduced the number of combined sewer overflow events to Lake
Erie. The reoccurring capture of first flush runoff has improved the
efficiency of the Wastewater Treatment Plant as influent dilution is reduced
and solids concentration is increased. In addition, the hydraulic effluent
fluctuations normally associated with combined sewers has been dampened which
aides the wastewater treatment plant performance.
The Hydrobrake has proven to be a self acting regulator that has no
moving parts and does not require an outside source of power. It has
performed within the boundaries of its predicted discharge rate using only the
energy created by upstream flow and the depth of the stored flow at the weir.
Maintenance of the sites has not been required, a major factor in determining
the cost-effectiveness of the Hydrobrake is demonstrated by the adjoining
table.
Storage
Capacity
gal .
Drainage
area
acre
Capital
*Cost
Storage
Cost
$/gal.
Cost per
Acre
$/acre
Annual
O&M
$/year
3,800,000 1400 $156,363 0.041 111.68
*1983 pricing
$/acre x 2.47 = $/ha.
$/gal. x 0.264 = $/L
M gal. x 3785 = m
-m-
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
In conclusion, the District can recommend the use of the Hydrobrake as a
safe, cost efficient, maintenance free flow regulator for use in those
combined sewer systems with the capacity for in-line storage.
The District's long term experience from this large scale project has
proven the use of the Hydrobrake to be a cost effective, viable and safe
alternative in automatic flow control of sewers.
The relatively simple construction, installation and the low maintenance
requirements are the major factors contributing to the District's
recommendation of the use of Hydrobrakes for controlling discharge and storage
conditions in a combined sewer.
The Hydrobrake regulators are custom designed to fit each installation.
They also can be supplied segmented for assembly in the sewers facilitating
installation in either small or large access manholes. The material used in
the fabrication for this project was stainless steel with a service life of
approximately twenty-five (25) years.
-iv-
-------
PART 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 History:
The Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, formerly the Cleveland
Regional Sewer District was formed by court order June, 1972. The court ruled
that the water pollution problems affecting the City of Cleveland and the
suburbs could best be solved by formation of a metropolitan or regional sewer
district. This ruling transferred all wastewater treatment facilities and
interceptor sewers then owned by the City of Cleveland to the new entity.
The Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District has been established as an
independent political subdivision of the State of Ohio. Its purpose is to
provide for the environmentally safe collection, treatment and disposal of
wastewater generated by homes, businesses and industry in a way conducive to
the public health, convenience and welfare.
Today, the District's facilities serve all of the City of Cleveland and
all or portions of 40 suburban communities. This area of approximately 178
square miles includes much of Cuyahoga County and part of northern Summit
County. Nearly 1.1 million persons are served by the District's facilities.
As is the case with most Metropolitan Areas, the core community
(Cleveland) is served by a combined sewer system. Combined sewer systems
utilize combined sewer overflows (CSO's) to relieve the sewers when the
capacity is exceeded during a rain event. While CSO's provide hydraulic
relief to the system, they also often carry high concentrations of pollutants
to the receiving waters. The protection afforded to the combined sewer system
through the use of CSO is primarily with regard to downstream flooding. The
protection in terms of pollution abatement has not been at the same level of
intensity.
During the past two decades, numerous reports and studies have been done
on CSO's to determine cost effective methods to control the pollution problem.
Since its origin, the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District has carried on an
aggressive pollution abatement program. The District has made major
improvements to the three regional treatment plants and completed the
construction of approximately thirteen miles of interceptor sewer. As a
portion of the capital improvement program, the District has begun to
consolidate and control the number of CSO's in the Cleveland area. In 1974
-1-
-------
the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District began construction on three
computer controlled regulators. This system incorporated the use of hydraulic
gates on the dry weather outlet (DWO) and inflatable dams on the CSO, along
with gauging and telemetry equipment to obtain and relay data to a central
computer. This type of system allowed for storage and a reduction in the
overflow occurrences. While the method is viable for controlling CSO, it
requires a large capital outlay, and a considerable amount of operation and
maintenance expense.
In an attempt to reduce the costs associated with controlling CSO, new
methods were investigated. One device currently on the market is the
Hydrobrake. Originally developed in Europe, it's primary function is to
deliver flow to a downstream area at a nearly constant predetermined rate
under varying head conditions (see Figure #1).
During July, 1977, the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District installed a
Hydrobrake in the main diversion chamber for the upper portion of the
Northwest Interceptor. This Hydrobrake served two functions. It relieved
downstream flooding, and it diverted excess flow during rain events to the
lower portion of the Northwest Interceptor. Due to hydraulic conditions in
the main diversion chamber flow cannot surcharge enough to create storage in
the upper portion of the Northwest Interceptor, but the Hydrobrake still acts
as a regulating device to limit downstream flow to 25 cubic feet per second
(cfs), (.708 liters per second L/S). Since the installation of this
Hydrobrake, downstream flooding has not occurred. Details of the installation
of this Hydrobrake will be found in Section 1.2.
In 1978 the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District and the City of
Cleveland began to investigate further uses of the Hydrobrake. The two
entities along with the EPA Great lakes Demonstration Program Office were
willing to investigate the effectiveness of in-line and off-line storage using
the Hydrobrake. A combined grant was offered by the USEPA to the City of
Cleveland and the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District to perform this
demonstration. The City of Cleveland was to investigate the Hydrobrakes'
suitability for off-line storage and the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer
District for in-line storage. Prior to the commencement of the project
individual grants were awarded to the City of Cleveland and the Northeast Ohio
Regional Sewer District.
-2-
-------
District for in-line storage. Prior to the commencement of the project
individual grants were awarded to the City of Cleveland and the Northeast Ohio
Regional Sewer District.
-3-
-------
1.2 Installation of Hydrobrake - VI. 117th St. & Detroit Ave.
Immediately downstream of the upper portion of the Northwest Interceptor
is a large sidespill weir diversion chamber located at West 117th St. and
Detroit Ave., Diversion Chamber No. 1 (see Figure #2). It is in this chamber
that a Hydrobrake was installed in 1977. The chamber receives flow from the
Northwest Interceptor, through a 108" diameter sewer, and the Detroit Ave.
sewer, an egg shaped brick sewer (80" x 64"). Dry weather flow passes through
the Hydrobrake to a 30" RCP on West 117th St. In the past, during a rain
event, flow in this chamber would surcharge and be discharged eventually to
Lake Erie. To reduce the number of discharges to the environment it was
determined that storage and controlled discharge from the Northwest
Interceptor would be necessary. The flow from the Detroit Road sewer during
rain events cannot be stored and controlled for two reasons: 1) Shallow
depth of profile; 2) Age and condition of sewer.
In a rain event the flow peaks from the Detroit Ave. sewer reach the
Diversion Chamber before the flow peaks from the Northwest Interceptor. This
is due to the fact that the drainage area tributary to the Detroit Ave. sewer
is in close proximity to the chamber. The first flush being carried into the
chamber from the east causes a surcharge condition and is discharged to the
environment. This situation is unaffected by the Hydrobrake storage project.
The dry weather flow from the Detroit Ave. sewer is approximately 5 cfs. As
mentioned before, the Hydrobrake in the Diversion Chamber is rated at 25 cfs.
The remaining 20 cfs is the acceptable contribution from the Northwest
Interceptor to the Diversion Chamber, without an overflow occurrence. The
Hydrobrake storage project gives the opportunity to store flow in the
Northwest Interceptor during most rain events and deliver it to the Diversion
Chamber at a predetermined rate (approximately 20 cfs) with a time lag
sufficient to allow the flow in the Detroit Ave. sewer to return to near dry
weather conditions.
The construction consisted of the forming and pouring of a reinforced
concrete weir wall in the chamber, approximately 3 feet high, and the
installation of a 30" Hydrobrake.
-4-
-------
Access to the chamber was via a two foot (2'0") diameter manhole. This
access was not large enough to permit entry of the Hydrobrake without
extensive construction. As a result the regulator was installed through the
outlet pipe at the lakefront through the overflow pipe to Diversion Chamber
No. 1.
District personnel transported the Hydrobrake in a boat from a private
lakefront property to the outlet and then carried it through the sewer to the
Diversion Chamber. The entire operation took 3| hours.
The procedure related above, was not used for the 7 Hydrobrakes installed
in the Northwest Interceptor under this grant. All of the units installed in
1984 were custom designed and fabricated in segments for easy access through
existing manholes and assembled in the sewers prior to installation in the
weir walls.
1.3 Flow Gauging:
Prior to the construction of the Hydrobrake Project in the NWI, Northeast
Ohio Regional Sewer District personnel performed gauging and sampling in the
area of Diversion Chamber No. 1. The purpose of the gauging was to determine
the pre-construction contribution from each of the areas tributary to the
diversion chamber.
Flow level gauging was installed in this area in the form of permanent
level gauges telemetered to the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District
computer located at Sewer Control Systems. The gauging enabled the District
to determine the dry weather and wet weather contributions to the chamber from
each of the sewers.
A sampling device was also installed in the overflow pipe, downstream of
the diversion chamber on the CSO. The device was equipped with a self
actuating mechanism which enables the sampler to begin sampling when flow in
the chamber exceeded the fixed weir height.
With this gauging and sampling information it was possible to determine
the flow characteristics for the diversion chamber. Simply put, the wet
weather flow from the Detroit Ave. tributary area that arrived at the chamber
shortly after the start of a rain event. The Hydrobrake which had been
installed in the diversion chamber in 1977, acted as a throttling device, but
-5-
-------
did not create storage due to the low height (approximately 3 ft. at
downstream end) of the fixed weir. The flow that exceeded the weir height was
therefore discharged to Lake Erie. The net result was that the Hydrobrake
Project did not increase nor decrease the amount of flow which was discharged
to the environment from the Detroit Ave. tributary area.
The Hydrobrake Project concerned itself with flow tributary to the
upstream portion of the NWI area. As previously stated, due to the distance
upstream of this tributary area, the flow arrives at the diversion chamber
after the flow from the Detroit Ave. tributary area, even without the
Hydrobrakes in place. The Hydrobrake Project is used to increase the time
difference of arrival of the flows.
-6-
-------
Figure #1
Photographic Views of Hydrobrakes During Factory Assembly
-7-
-------
FIGURE #2
INV.!EL.655.I6
98 CFS
6'-G"-2.54%
725 CFS
NO. 12-0.40%
224 CFS
INV. EL.658.00
7X7.85'-8.0%
1897 CFS
I
HYDROBRAKE
INV. EL.655.29
WEIR EL.658.00
INV. EL.655.40
-NO. 12-0.40%
^24 CFS
INV EL.657.5S
-I08'L0.2)
573 CFS
-DETROIT AVE
SEWER
-N.W. INTERCEPTOR
DIVERSION CHAMBER NO.
DETROIT AVE. AT 117 ST.
-8-
-------
PART 2 DESIGN METHOLOGY
2.1 Site Selection & Design Criteria:
In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the Hydrobrake for in-line
storage, a suitable location was necessary. Prior to grant application it was
determined that the Northwest Interceptor would be ideal for the proposal, as
the combined sewer interceptors in the City of Cleveland would not be
applicable in this case, due to the large amounts of existing dry weather flow
in the sewers.
The Northwest Interceptor is a combined sewer Interceptor that was built
in the early 1970's. The sewer varies in size from 24" circular to a 9' x 20'
rectangular box. The interceptor approximately parallels the western
corporation line of the City of Cleveland from Puritas Ave. and Rocky River
Dr. to West 117th St. and Edgewater Dr. At this point it flows east along
Lake Erie to Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant (see figure #3).
The Northwest Interceptor is discontinuous at a point in the area of West
117th St. and Detroit Ave. As mentioned before, a Hydrobrake was installed in
this chamber prior to the project. This Hydrobrake could not take advantage
of the storage available in the Northwest Interceptor upper portion due to the
height of the bypass weir. The upper portion of the Northwest Interceptor
offered a suitable location for in-line storage due to its large diameter, low
grade, long length, and few connections.
The upper portion (west of 117th St. & Detroit Ave.) of the Northwest
Interceptor is approximately 30,000 feet in length. The majority of the pipe
is 108" diameter at .21% grade. The length, diameter and grade of this pipe
along with the low flow conditions during dry weather made it an excellent
candidate for in-line storage.
Seven Hydrobrake locations were chosen to maximize the use of available
grant money. The major criteria used for selecting Hydrobrake locations was:
-9-
-------
- Manhole locations
- Distance between Hydrobrake locations
- Chamber or manhole configuration
Since the Northwest Interceptor was not fully in service, the first step
in the Hydrobrake project was writing specifications, developing plans, and
awarding a contract to perform the Northwest Interceptor opening. When the
Northwest Interceptor was constructed, several sewer pipes that would be
contributing flow to the interceptor remained bulkheaded and flow continued to
be received by the local sewers. The Northwest Interceptor opening consisted
of removing these bulkheads and abandoning the existing lines. In addition,
short lengths of sewer were constructed to connect some of the larger combined
sewers to the Interceptor. Original plans for the Northwest Interceptor ended
at Puritas and Rocky River Dr. which would have allowed the Northwest
Interceptor to carry flow from Grayton Road Pump Station to Westerly
Wastewater Treatment Plant. This last leg of the Interceptor was not
constructed under the original Northwest Interceptor contract and; therefore,
required completion prior to the Hydrobrake Project. This stretch of sewer
was completed as a part of the Northwest Interceptor opening. After the
construction of the Northwest Interceptor and prior to the Hydrobrake Project
the City of Cleveland constructed the Triskett Road Relief Sewer. This sewer
connects directly to the Northwest Interceptor in the area of West 140th St.
and South Marginal Rd. These two major connections along with twelve other
smaller connections contribute all the flow to the upper portion of the
Northwest Interceptor.
The Northwest Interceptor opening provided several benefits to the
southwest portion of the City of Cleveland. Placing the Interceptor in
operation relieved an overloaded local system along Rocky River Dr. All flow
from this area of the City of Cleveland is now tributary to a District
Treatment Facility. Prior to this time, part of the flow from this area was
tributary to the Lakewood Treatment Plant. Also the flow being pumped by the
Grayton Road Pump Station was tributary to the District's Southerly Wastewater
Treatment Facility. The route that this flow had taken prior to the opening
of the N.W.I, did have the possibility of discharging to the environment
-10-
-------
through a CSO in any rain event. The flow from Grayton Road Pump Station is
now in an express route to Diversion Chamber No. 1, and this has significantly
reduced the possibility of pump station overflows to the environment.
The possibility of surcharging the Northwest Interceptor to the point
where basement flooding would occur is non-existent. There are seven storage
locations (Hydrobrake sites) along the length of the Northwest Interceptor
(see Figure #4 for the Hydrobrake locations and the project drainage area).
The total storage available is approximately 500,000 cubic feet.
In order to install the Hydrobrakes in the NWI, it was necessary to
construct storage walls (weirs) for two reasons: to fully take advantage of
the storage space in the large diameter sewer; and to act as the installation
frame for the Hydrobrake. The storage wall with the hydrobrake installed will
cause a back up in the interceptor during rain events. The Hydrobrakes used
on this project have a manufacturers discharge rate of 20 cubic feet per
second (cfs). When flow in the sewer exceeds this rate it becomes stored
behind the wall and the discharge from the Hydrobrake remains relatively
constant at 20 cfs even during varying head conditions behind the wall. When
storage capacity of the weir walls is exceeded the flow will top the wall with
the chance of being stored at a location further downstream.
Seven locations along the NWI were chosen for installation sites. Two of
the manholes at these sites are chambers which allowed the construction of a
larger weir wall (10 ft. in height) and still have sufficient distance between
the top of the wall and the top of the chamber to permit excess flow to
continue unobstructed. With the higher weir wall more storage was attained.
The remaining five locations are normal tee style manholes. The height of the
wall in these locations was limited to six (6) feet. This was to assure
sufficient space for excess flow to pass without obstruction.
The four Hydrobrakes in this last upstream section are working in
parallel, that is they are all storing flow at the same time. The three sites
closer to Diversion Chamber No. 1 work in series. After storage is exceeded
at the furthest Hydrobrake from the chamber, it will overflow and begin to
store at the next downstream Hydrobrake. When the next sites storage is
exceeded it overflows to the final storage site (see figure #5).
Construction of the storage walls and installation of the Hydrobrakes was
performed in January and February of 1983. The construction contract for this
project was competitively bid and awarded to the lowest and best bid received.
-11-
-------
One main contractor was used for approximately 90% of the construction. The
remaining 10% was performed by an approved minority business enterprise (MBE)
acting as a subcontractor to the main contractor. Construction of this
project was intentionally performed during the winter months to take advantage
of the reduced chance of experiencing a rain event while working in a live
combined interceptor. The project remained on schedule throughout the
construction phase.
2.2 Design Solution:
During the design phase it was decided to conduct the in-line detention
and controlled discharge study in the Northwest Interceptor. The major
factors contributing to this decision were the location of the Northwest
Interceptor, its flow capacity, and the relative ease of access to the
Interceptor. The actual construction of the weir walls and the installation
of the Hydrobrakes was relatively simple and proved to be the most cost
effective solution.
2.3 Project Data:
Total area: 1,400 acre (566 ha.)
Type of drainage: Combined sewer
Total length of sewer: approximately 6 miles (10 kilometers)
Difference in elevation: approximately 100 feet (30 meters)
Smallest pipe diameter: 66 inches (1.67 meters)
Intermediate pipe diameter: 84 inches (2.13 meters)
Largest pipe diameter: 108 inches (2.74 meters)
Available Detention Volume: 3,795,000 gal. (14.217m )
-12-
-------
2.4 Preliminary Work:
Prior to actual construction of the retaining walls and installation of
the Hydrobrakes in the Northwest Interceptor, it was determined that the
volume of dry weather flow present in the sewer was excessive for the
contractor to perform the necessary construction safely and expediently. In
an effort to reduce this dry weather flow, the District diverted flow from the
Northwest Interceptor at five (5) locations along Rocky River Drive. Flow
presently entering the Northwest Interceptor was temporarily diverted to the
Lakewood sewer system at the following locations.
1. Rocky River Drive at Lucille Avenue
2. Rocky River Drive at Marquis Avenue
3. Rocky River Drive at Munn Avenue
4. Rocky River Drive at Fischer Avenue
The contractor accomplished this flow diversion in the following manner.
The existing bulkhead in the 24" sanitary sewer running north along Rocky
River Drive was removed. A temporary bulkhead was then installed in the 24"
sanitary connection to the Northwest Interceptor. This resulted in a
surcharge condition in the manhole causing flow to enter the existing 24"
sanitary sewer and flow to the Lakewood Wastewater Treatment Plant.
This flow diversion work was initiated on December 29, 1982. During the
time period between December 29, 1982 and February 24, 1983, the City of
Lakewood was compensated by the District at a rate of $5.24/mcf for treatment
of the diverted sewage. Total amount expended by the District for sewage
treatment was $65,237. For location of the diversion sites (see Figure #6).
At the Rocky River Dr. and Puritas Rd. site the contractor inserted a 24"
inflatable sewer plug into the 24" sanitary sewer connection to the Northwest
Interceptor. This diverted flow to the Southerly Wastewater Treatment Plant
via the Puritas Road combined sewer. This was completed on January 3, 1983.
During the course of the entire Hydrobrake Project, dry weather flow was
not permitted to enter the environment. This flow diversion project reduced
the dry weather flow in the Northwest Interceptor from approximately 10" to
4", a more manageable amount of flow for the contractor to work with.
-13-
-------
2.5 Description of Hydrobrakes:
A Hydrobrake is a self regulating flow controller fabricated from 1/4"
stainless steel. It has a conical shape resembling a space capsule. Each
Hydrobrake used for this demonstration project consisted of five separate
segments. Each segment weighted approximately 130 Ibs. The effluent sleeve
which is cylindrical in shape constitutes one segment. The vortex cone was
divided into four equal sections. The assembly was performed inside the
sewer. The Hydrobrake requires no electrical power but uses static head of
stored water to create its own "energy" to retard flow. The movement of water
through a Hydrobrake involves a swirl action, dissipating energy to control
the rate of discharge. The unit has no moving parts and is virtually
maintenance free (see Figure #1).
Two Hydrobrakes had an outlet diameter of: 554mm (21.8")
Five Hydrobrakes had an outlet diameter of: 613mm (24.1")
Largest outside diameter: 1219mm (48")
Largest unit, including sleeve: 1981mm (78")
2.6 Description of Hydrobrake Installation:
Each Hydrobrake installation consists of constructing a reinforced
concrete retaining wall with either a 30" or 24" stainless steel sleeve in the
upstream side of the manhole.
The Hydrobrake was delivered to each site in five segments. The segments
were then lowered into the sewer separately and placed on the upstream side of
the retaining wall. After the segments were bolted together an "0" ring was
installed on the effluent sleeve and the entire unit was inserted into the
stainless steel sleeve cast into the retaining wall. The vortex cone came
equipped with an anchor bracket which was attached to the sewer invert by
means of an anchor bolt with an expansion shield. Installation was then
completed.
Figures No. 7 and 8 show the theoretical head/discharge characteristics
for the two sizes of Hydrobrakes installed on the project. Figure Number 9
shows the Hydrobrake flow storage data, including the volume of detention at
each of the seven sites.
-14-
-------
FIGURE 3
f *» A 1&\
fe'Wv
S*^;T?^\X >^ % ^' \
V,
.>
^oQfeX
c»v».\/ *T /">;/ x^
^ ^/vy/v/-~
YDROBRAKE LOCATION
~ ~
^^v/'^^l'^%//jK^^^^^
^^J^^^T//K₯^^^^, ' >
.xA >/4y /t£f
NORTHWEST AREA INTERCEPTOR
LOCATION MAP
AND HYDROBRAKE LOCATIONS
-15-
-------
Figure #4
NORTHWEST INTERSEPTOR DRAINAGE AREA
HYDROBRAKE AND RAIN GUAGE LOCATIONS
Numbers 1 through 7 denote Hydrobrake locations,
'
*gZffiZ
i r~i HM i" cor**T~3
dduLibinra
> WI5TT ~" ««^ - . <*
S-RAIN GAUGE
RAIN GAUGE
m
-16-
-------
FIGURE 5
NORTHWEST INTERCEPTOR
HYDROBRAKE AREA PROFILE
WITH
STORAGE CAPABILITIES
= MAXIMUM STORED FLOW
X
z
<
MONITORED
W. 117 STREET
O
cc
fr-
ill
O
j "HYDROBRAKE LOCATIONS |
740
730
720
kl
710
700 g
690 >
Ul
30,000
680
670
660
650
640
-17-
-------
Figure #6
N.W.L FLOW DIVERSION LOCATIONS
-18-
-------
Figure #7
1 -
*
:;.
. . . V. .
5.
-
i -
.
/i
^
>
p
- :: :LU ~ :
III
u. --,
CHARG
t
j
E
3T [INTERCEPTOR
Pf^OJE
j
- - 4
i -
-
HEIGHT-
" " i
0-BRAKE
: :. ^ITH 4VOR'
"i:. :£"-:-::
!.._..
-- - - 1
- -4 -- - . -
4 ..
0-BRiAKE
TOi VOF
i
X
X
- ---
-
1
^:? *
KA f h
-r- ;::
. - . __, ...
_ .. . _ _ _ . .
^tSC-HAf
ITEK^AC"
X
X
s
X
i
- - \ '
t
I
: : ^4 . ' ;"
j »0 \\
AT CI f
VT ^ V UV,
CT; SITES
i
J "-
__"
i-
----- -
- -- --- -
X"
---- ' "-, - '-- ^ - - ~~\
y
/
DISCHARGE A
fEX ACTION Y . ._
/
i - , / 1
-znzt-Ti:
v
i/ i
* ~ ~ )
/
j
-j/--
,4
-
i
- 1
w~
- -
--- -
1
- - - J
i
i
... . .
.:;-__-;. -J:T.
r . .
_. f. ,
- -- --- i
T i
i
1
'">"," "
l ^
::~ :~~-.:\j-'-^.
IGE ^
'tONx --"-
. ^ _ ___j
' I
..; ""~ _: * : i ~ :
I
r_._
:
"*
. _ t -
i
- .__. j - ._
- - ~ - --- -
p -44 - 1{
, j
\\fj ir* c c
'T! , \\tJl ^j
' !
|
o \i
J-2
.....j
j .
. : : i : T::
- - -i
- . _ .
. . ,
^\ "^^ /^t
_ . (
i
!
-19-
-------
Figure #8
- -
-----
... - . - -
. .-
H
- - i - - .
:;.:..
. _ , - __
- -
in
.10
... ...
\ ' :-
1
i i
rf r
it b
- ; -t
^
c
^
t -;rj
D
r
J rr
^^
-
::
_
©*
- - - -
_--
. -
-. i
1
: P
:: i-NO
YDRO-E
-': ;;:".;
. - -
- -.- ,
_
--- --
. -
).: 2 >
- . .., .
- -._-,.
- -
ROJECT
3THWE:
IRAI-
- - -
_ .---
vh.J
-
WEfF
- --- - -
- t - - -
j
i
::
HYDR
. _
WIT
--.if--
^
^
\ $> .,<
-DATC _
T>'3 ' t.
--
.
i
- 1 -
ED ! 01 J
5T IJNT
T
HEIGHT
i
1
O-BRAKE
H VORTE
i
- ._....
. - .
--t - -
>CHARGE
ERGEPTOR!
T SITES 6 ANt
- -^ - -
- : - [ -- - !
. jf'^ - - - 1 '
} - - -;
r
~T - j- - - - i
' ' -/
-! - -^ ; /
7 i J
OfSCHA^GE/
X ApTIONT
X
1 /
- i. y ... --- ---
I y _ .
-/
/ - -~t--- --
^/ -._...!
K . . .
' ^**
C ;HYDf
r"»r"»i/*s
PRIO
^ 40 --3
OF FL<)\
i .
i
- -
*Q-BRAK OISCHA
"> T/~\ Vy/SOTCV A/**
R TO yQRTEA AC
i
> 14 il4 18 2
V-_
. - - 1. - - -
) 7
. . -
. .
/ ^
f
- , _-.
-
,
- .._ _: .
_
- - ---
- - -
- -
RGE
TIAM
JJUN
D;:22
;:; :;:
- ..
-20-
-------
HYDRO-BRAKE FLOW STORAGE DATA
LOCATION
WALL HEIGHT PIPE DIA. GRADE
DETENTION VOLUME
#1 - 1497 West 117th St.
#2 - West 117th Street,
north of Berea Road
#3 - 12920 Berea Rd.
J f4 - Lakewood Heights Blvd.
f5 - West 153rd St. $ S. Marginal Rd.
#6 - Rocky River § Fischer Rd.
#7 - Rocky River 5 Chatfield Rd.
TOTAL
6 ft.
1.83 meter
6 ft.
1. 83 meter
6 ft.
1.83 meter
6 ft.
1.83 meter
6 ft.
1.83 meter
10 ft.
3.05 meter
10 ft.
3.05 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
108 in.
2.74 meter
84 in.
2.13 meter
0.21%
0.21%
0.21%
0.211
0.21%
0.21%
0.36%
53,000 cu. ft.
395,000 gal.
1,500 m3
53,000 cu. ft.
395,000 gal.
1,500 m3
53,000 cu. ft.
395,000 gal.
1,500 m3
53,000 cu. ft.
395,000 gal.
1,500 m3
53,000 cu. ft.
395,000 gal.
1,500 m3
167,000 cu. ft.
1,300,000 gal.
4,730 m3
70,000 cu. ft.
520,000 gal.
1,893 m3
502,000 cu. ft.
3,795,000 gal.
14,2.17 m3
=tt=
-------
PART 3 CONSTRUCTION
3.1 Hydrobrake Construction Sites:
PROJECT #1 1497 West 117th Street
PROJECT #2 West 117th Street, north of Berea Road
PROJECT #3 12920 Berea Road
PROJECT #4 Lakewood Hts. Blvd., 80' west of West 139
PROJECT #5 West 153rd Street and South Marginal Road
PROJECT #6 Rocky River Drive at Fischer Road
PROJECT #7 Rocky River Drive at Chatfield Avenue
Figures #3 and #4 shows the geographic location of each Hydrobrake site.
Figure #9 pertains to the site specific details including the total detention
volume 3,795,000 gallons.
3.2 Project Construction - Typical:
Construction at all project sites included opening a section of
pavement/tree!awn approximately 10 feet square around the access manhole,
excavation and removal of the conical manhole section and casting. A
temporary precast manhole riser was then set in place to provide safe manhole
entry and exit. A temporary bulkhead was also installed into any drop pipe
entering the Northwest Interceptor chambers, when applicable. Throughout the
course of the Hydrobrake Project two-way traffic was maintained at all sites
located on a designated street, in compliance with the Ohio Department of
Transportation specifications. During non-working hours, all areas of
construction were covered with steel street plates and identified with
appropriate barricades and flashers.
At all sites, in sewer work commenced with installation of sufficient
lighting to safely illuminate the work area within the manhole. Work then
began on flow control within the interceptor. This was accomplished by means
of a prefabricated temporary plywood weir. The weir was secured in place with
sandbags and positioned a satisfactory distance upstream of the chamber as not
to interfere with construction of the retaining wall. A 24" orifice was built
into the weir into which a 24" flexible plastic pipe was inserted to act as a
flume. This flume effected a dry work area for the contractor's personnel.
-22-
-------
In compliance with the contract specifications, work began on the receiving
channel preceding construction of the retaining wall. Saw cuts were made 4"
deep prior to chipping out the channel. Minimum depth of saw cuts were 4" in
the area of the orifice in the retaining wall and U" depth in other areas.
Concrete forms were erected for the retaining wall and placement of the
reinforcing steel completed. All forms were mortar tight and conformed to
proper dimensions and elevations. Reinforcing steel used at all sites was
grade 40 and installed in compliance with Item 509 of ODOT specifications. At
project sites 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 a 30" stainless steel sleeve was positioned
within the retaining wall. A 24" sleeve was used at project site 6 and 7. A
concrete adhesive was then applied to the receiving channel to bond the new
concrete wall to the old concrete in the existing sewer. At each site, while
the wall was being poured, the concrete in the wall was mechanically vibrated
to insure an uniform pour. Concrete used for all retaining walls was 4000
Ibs. Type II (ASTMC150). Concrete test for moisture slump and temperature
were performed at each site. Concrete compression tests were done at a local
testing laboratory. The dimension of the retaining wall at projects 1, 2, 3,
4 and 5 is 6' x 9' x T . A retaining wall 10' x 14' x T4" was constructed at
projects 6 and 7. After removal of the concrete forms, the Hydrobrake was
installed in each retaining wall. Figure #10 shows the typical weir
construction and Hydrobrake placement.
The Hydrobrakes were fabricated from 1/4" stainless steel. The segments
were lowered into the manhole and assembled on the upstream side of the
retaining wall. Assembly completed, the unit was inserted into the stainless
steel sleeve cast into the retaining wall and bolted to the sewer invert (see
figure #10). All facets of the Hydrobrake installation were supervised by the
manufacturer's representatives.
Restoration for all project sites included removal of the temporary
manhole riser and replacement with the conical manhole section section and
casting. Backfill consisted of a coarse interlocking aggregate placed in
layers not exceeding 4", loose depth. The aggregate was then compacted by a
mechanical device to 95 proctor density. A concrete sub-base was poured to
within 3" of the existing pavement and conformed to Item 499 of ODOT. The
remaining 3" of concrete needed to return the area to grade was poured over a
-23-
-------
layer of plastic. Final asphalt paving was performed by the contractor when
weather conditions permitted. At Project 6, restoration included sidewalk
replacement and the placement of sod to the damaged tree!awn.
Figure #11 is a photographic reproduction of the above ground facilities
at site #6 - Rocky River & Fischer Ave.
3.3 Construction Problems:
3.3.1 Manhole Depth:
Problems encountered throughout the construction period were minimal. At
all seven project sites the manhole depth posed the greatest difficulty,
particularly at projects #3 and #4. However, excessive manhole depth
was negated to some extent by incorporating a temporary manhole riser
for easy access. Proper safety procedures were pursued at each site,
with special attention directed towards hazardous gases in the Northwest
Interceptor chambers. Oxygen deficiency/hydrogen sulfide/explosion
meters were required at each site, and kept in sewer during working
hours. By following accepted safety regulations, manhole access was
considered an inconvenience, rather than a hindrance.
3.3.2 Infiltration:
Excessive infiltration was experienced at projects #5 and #6 access
manholes. Prior to manhole ingress sit was necessary to alleviate this
inflow of water to insure a safe work area. This was accomplished by
applying hydraulic cement to affected areas. Abnormal amounts of calcium
were also detected on a number of rungs at project #5. The calcium
deposits had to be chipped away before personnel could safety enter the
manhole.
-24-
-------
3.3.3 Existing Concrete Encasement:
During routine manhole excavation at projects #2, #3 and #4 it was
discovered that the conical manhole sections at each site were encased
in concrete. It was necessary for the contractor to use jack hammers to
remove this concrete before the conical manhole sections could be
removed. The concrete was considered an "unknown condition differing
materially from those ordinarily encountered." The concrete encasement
added an extra work day at the affected project sites and it resulted in
an extra work order submitted by one contractor. Also, project #1 access
manhole was encased in a compact granular material which required minor
jack hammering.
3.3.4 Flow Control:
Flow control within the interceptor was accomplished by means of a
temporary weir with a 24" flume. The weir was held in place with sand
bags at all project sites, with the exception of project #4. Extra
precautions were employed at this site due to its proximity to the
Triskett Road trunk sewer. It was necessary to protect the weir from a
greater volume of flow by using 2' x 4' braces.
3.4 Total Cost:
The contract awarded for all necessary manhole modifications,
construction of the weirs, Hydrobrake, Hydrobrake installation and site
restoration was $155,363. The total broken down by site is as follows:
Site
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
$21
$21
$21,
$21
$21,
183.00
183.00
183.00
183.00
183.00
$22,224.00
$27,224.00
-25-
-------
3.5 Final Inspection:
Final restoration was concluded at all seven project sites on February
22, 1983. Before contract completion could be achieved by the contractor,
removal of the temporary flow diversion devices was essential. At diversion
locations 1 through 4, the temporary bulkhead in the Northwest Interceptor
connection was removed and a permanent bulkhead with cleanout was installed in
the existing 24" sanitary sewer along Rocky River Drive. Flow was then
diverted back into the Northwest Interceptor. Flow previously going to the
Lakewood system was rerouted to the District's Westerly Wastewater Treatment
Plant. The 24" inflatable sewer plug was removed from the Northwest
Interceptor at Rocky River Drive and Puritas Road. Flow temporarily being
diverted to Southerly Wastewater Treatment Plant was returned to the Westerly
system. A minor diversion device was also removed from project 7 at this
time.
An on site inspected was performed by the contractor prior to final
inspection by the District Engineer. This finalized all site work on the
Hydrobrake Demonstration Project. Figures #12 and #13 are photographic
reproductions of the flow upstream and downstream of the weir wall at Site #6,
Fischer & Rocky River Drive and Site #7, Rocky River Drive & Chatfield Avenue.
-26-
-------
I
ro
CONICAL vorrtx
O-RINM TO K USED
INSTALLATION
T T. V« ""»»
ill FOR INS
UalL. ^-~
WICK MASONRY
Side View Existing Chamber Showing Weir Construction & Hydrobrake Installation
=%
o
-------
Figure
1
Photographic Reproduction Above Ground Facilities
Rocky River Dr. & Fischer Ave.
-28-
-------
;;:;«&; ^^^m^jmi
' X
-m
:-<;!<, Sb'* '*:»#/#
' I-1 vray.,*.
^j>:^Sr.&-
*---»" 3**lJa(*''^V*'' "
fcSr^^ffE" fc
%jj^m;
Figure #12
SITE #6
TOP VIEW
Showing both
upstream & downstream
of weir and
Hydrobrake
DOWNSTREAM SIDE
of the weir
showing discharge
end of the
Hydrobrake
UPSTREAM SIDE
of the weir
showing the
entrance end of
the Hydrobrake
-29-
-------
Figure #13
SITE #7
TOP VIEW
showing both
upstream & down-
stream sides of
the weir and
Hydrobrake
DOWNSTREAM SIDE
of the weir
showing the
discharge end of
the Hydrobrake
UPSTREAM_SIDE
of the weir
showing the
entrance end of
the Hydrobrake
-30-
-------
PART 4 HYDROBRAKE FLOW MONITORING:
4.1 Computer Control Facility:
The Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District operates and maintains an
extensive computer based combined sewer overflow (CSOC) control system. The
system as implemented provides for significant reductions in overflows to the
environment by utilizing excess transport capacity within the combined sewer
collection system for in-line storage. This distributed process control
system provides the ability to control and monitor each control site from a
central station and to store data for later analysis. This central station is
equipped with an operations console which allows for the observation of
control actions and the trending of data in real time. Figure #14 is a
photographic reproduction of the computer console showing the real time
monitoring of a Hydrobrake site in a rain event. The red line represents the
flow storage upstream of the weir and the yellow line depicts the flow
downstream of the weir.
4.2 Monitoring Facilities:
This distributed process control system provides the capability for
monitoring sewer levels at various locations within the wastewater collection
system. In addition to the level monitors that are a part of each control
site, several individual level monitors are available for installation at
various locations on a temporary basis. This provides the ability to observe
the operational characteristics of the wastewater collection system in real
time from a central location and compile a comprehensive archive of historical
data useful for planning purposes and maintenance activities.
The sewer level monitors are of the bubbler type that convert air
pressure to an electrical voltage that is proportional to the depth of flow.
This 105 volt signal is then transmitted on a continual basis to the central
station via leased telephone data circuits using frequency shift keying
telemetry. In turn, each signal is available for computer reading. The
central sewer control facility located at 3090 Broadway Ave. in central
-31-
-------
Cleveland in turn scans each individual signal on a round robin basis
approximately every 2 minutes. The computer converts each signal to proper
engineering units and stores the data for archives every 5 minutes.
4.3 Rain Gauges Facilities:
Another feature of the system is an extensive rain gauge network
implemented to cover watersheds of the Cleveland Metropolitan area. This rain
gauge network provides for the collection of real time rainfall data that,
when utilized with the sewer level monitors, provides a comprehensive data
base showing the response of the wastewater collection system to rain events.
The rain gauges are of the weighting type that convert the weight of
total rainfall to an electrical signal much the same as the level monitors.
Rainfall data is collected and stored in a manner similar to the sewer level
monitors.
4.4 Monitoring Hydrobrake Locations:
In order to determine the effectiveness of the Hydrobrake storage system
installed under this grant, two sewer level monitors were installed at each of
the three weir Hydrobrake locations. One level monitor was installed upstream
of the weir to measure the depth of stored flow. The second level monitor was
installed downstream of the storage weir to measure the level of flow that was
discharged from the Hydrobrake or topped the weir. Another level monitor was
installed in the 30" conduit located at the downstream end of the storage
system and conveys all dry weather flow and all the stored flow to the
westerly Interceptor and then to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant for
treatment prior to discharge to Lake Erie. The Profile Map (figure #15) shows
the location of each monitor.
-32-
-------
4.5 Monitoring Results:
The performance records collected from the computer data file at three
monitored locations indicates the efficiency achieved by comparison of the
Inflow Hydrograph, the Outflow Hydrograph and the individual weir level. It
can be seen that the outflow is very constant despite high fluctuation of the
inflow. The detention utilization rate is 100% as an overtopping of the weirs
occurs from time to time, depending on the rain event.
The following flow charts should be compared in combination starting at
Location #6, then Location #5 downstream, and finally Location #1 at the end
of the Northwest Interceptor. The storage/detention volume behind the weir
and the downstream flow for each rain event becomes very pronounced as
witnessed by the flow charts. Figures #16 - #18 depict the storage and flow
conditions during a rain storm June 18, and 19, 1984 at sites #1, #5 and #6.
Figures #19 - #21 show similar storage and flow conditions for a rain event
July 6, and 7, 1984 for the same three sites. Figures #22 - #24 show the
storage and flow conditions for the same three sites during a rain event
August 3, and 4, 1984. It should be noted the storage behind the weir varied
with the rainfall intensity; however, the depth of the downstream flow
remained relatively constant during each storm. Figures #25 - #33 show the
same three storms at the same sites. The storm duration is only 24 hours and
we have super imposed the rainfall intensity data. Again it should be noted
the depth of the downstream flow is relatively constant except when the stored
flow topped the weir.
-33
-------
Figure #14
Photographic Reproduction Computer Console
Monitoring Hydrobrake Site in a Rain Event
-34-
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
ROCKY RIVER/ FISHER LOCATION &G RAIN EVENT MONITORING 6-18*19-84 G.U.
CO
CN
I
-n
m
m
16
14
12
10
8
T
- UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
12 2
8
10 12 2
noon
8 10 12 2
8 IO 12 2 4 6
noon
8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.I53/ FERNWAY LOCATION #5 RAIN EVENT MONITORING
6-18419-84 GU
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
WER HEIGHT
c
-S
12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.II7/ FRANKLIN LOCATION -#l RAIN EVENT MONITORING 6-18*19-84 GU
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
fiaGHtr
12 2
8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12 2 4 6
noon
8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
ROCKY RIVER/FISHER LOCATION -#6 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 7-6^7-84
16
14
12
10
m
8
s.*-
wr '
\
^ **
^_
- »
- I
t"
-
>
" _
V.
V-
X-
"
_-
" .
,
1
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
^*
w
/-
^y
f
|
j
/
/-
/
V.
^-1
-J
_-
s_^
":
^N.
~:
k.
«
-
--_
-
,
^
/*
\
\
-
MHB
-
--_
I'l"^
'...
-"-
-
_-
V
::
--'-
---
-
2:
-
-
~~
--
_.
.-
"--
ss
~:
r~~
'--
-
-"
_
is
r~
-
v
\
X
\-
\
.
-
V
\
_
\
h. -
v.
\
^ *
-"
--
V
*«_
I**
-
*
10
^
^ ^_
---1
S
*
-
/-
* -
-
WEJR
,:.
-».
t
-
-
~*.
-
IE
-
«
IG
-
HMBH
T
=M
-
-"
-~
-
>**
- -
-"
^
-
:'
*~.
h
T^
1
in
c:
-s
fD
ID
12 2 4 6
8 10 12 2
noon
46 8 10 12 2 46 8
10 12 2
noon
4 6 8 10 12
-------
.p.
o
I
m
m
16
14
12
to
8
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.I53/ FERNWAY LOCATION #*> RAIN EVENT MONITORING 7-6*7-84 GU.
1
_u
1
J
-I
--
i
1
*-
6 9Sm- M
1
|
t
_ -__ n
i
J
_...
._
,^-
T^-
j
1
!
i
:
-r
-r -
i
I
f
--p
i
i
t
!
UPSTREAM LEVEL
OWNSTREAM LEVEL
-
._
H
T
"
-
~
-
-
11 "
^.
-^
i
I
XT"
- -
X
f
/
.._«!'.
«««,
^
--
._
««
-
V
_s
/
/
"'Xl
--
» -
-
^ V
» *
-
M
--
^ ^
-
..._.
*»»
1
t
^S,
N
rr
--
X
s
*v
%
^
-<
- ^:
I.
i
t
-
- -
-
- -
|
- - -p -
- i
i
1
-
w
1
1
-r *
,
i
j
R
__
=
«
.
ummm
+> *
,
i
i
^
i
*
-
ilc
1
i
-s
w
i
- 1 -
1
iHT
i
i
. *
- -r -
;
!
i
i
i
i
i
t
t
_j_
i
i
1
"*>--
- -T
to
c:
-5
fD
ro
o
12 2
6 8 10 12 2 46 8 10 12 2
noon
46 8 10 12 2
noon
6 8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.II7/ FRANKLIN LOCATION ^1 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 7-6*7-84 GU.
16
14
12
10
-n
m
m
~ 8
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
-f
O>
=**=
no
12 2
10 12 2 46 8
10 12 2
noon
8 10 12
-------
ro
i
m
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
ROCKY RIVER/FISHER LOCATION *& RAIN EVENT MONITORING 8-3*4-84
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
ro
ro
12 2
8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12 2
8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12
-------
-p"
CO
Tl
m
m
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.I53 / FERNWAY LOCATION 5 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 8~3*4-84
G.U.
16
14
12
10
* 8
-
T=
T -
* <
**1
i i
*
MBHI
«
^mmm
\
I
1
1
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
,
*****
-
mi^m*
tmm*~
B
i*
B t
._.
^
.
-
>«
^
«±P
«
-
/
-'-
- '
'
f
t
S
-
,
i
--
r
^ '
.
" -
-
^
_"
-".-"
--
-_-
'
J.~
-
. *
-"
'_
:-~
-
^
-
-
:::
---
<-»
_
-_-
-
-
V
*m
-~-
-
s.
>
M
'-"-
- -
\
:
^_
V.
,
^M
*
--
^^^
a
--
<*
c
--
**-
, -
^^P
f m»
'_
/
m
-
f
-
/*
--
^~
-
-
...
w
--
-
-
E,R
*>
-
^
-
-
\
-s
\
^
«
1C
k,
* .
-
H
^.
T
WM
*
N*.
«.
-
^
(O
ro
CO
12 2
8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2 4 6 8 10 12 2
noon noon
6 8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.H7 / FRANKLIN LOCATION -^1 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 6-3^4-84 G.U.
16
14
12
10
-n
m
m
H
8
^Kl
«
-
1 llfc.
1 ~ -.
,
f
iss
-s
-
..^_
.
-
«,
--
l*fc» .
- *.
\
UPSTREAM LEVEL
DOWNSTREAM LEVEL
«»M
P«
**
w
s
I HI
*m
«- ~m
^v
-
~
--
' :-
_..
/
^!~
. -
-
^^
-"-
-
.::.
X
"-
_-_-
-
-
-_-
~?
-
«
--
r_:
:i~
X
f *
-
"..-
-
-
-^
s
-
--
***
:-
II '
^1
.-_.
I !».
x,
"-"
...
\
>.
\
s>.
1* "
-
7~
f
~*
--
£
S
*~
-
-
w
=r?
E
X
i
R
1-
iE
._.
IG
i
H
.__
-
T
i
k- -m
]
^
^
ro
-F*
12 2
8 10 12 2
noon
8 10 12 2
8
10 12 2
noon
8 10 12
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
ROCKY RIVER/FISHER LOCATION -#6 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 6-18^19-84
m
.p.
en
.uu
.40
.80
1.20
1.60
2.00
240
10
8
3 6
H
E
3 4
n
H
2
1
-r
-i_
-
-jj:
-
-
- ;-
-
-
^
S-
I
1
-
---
--
-
^
-
"
r-"
_--
'
__
T"
_~
--
^z
r
- 1-
I
r .
.7
t
f ^
>
-
-
--
» ^
---
.~
...
.._
K
-_
- -
-
-
-
X
r
"r."
__.
Til
=^
--
"T
- -
.-'
'x
*
-"-"
_..l
-_
- -
-
-
to
~ ~
~_
-
--
-
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
~~
' -
-
__~
-
-
._
_.
;-;
-
-
___
-
-~
._..
-~
---
---
-
.
--
- -
~
-
^1
::
--
*s,
-
--
-
M
"
-_
-
-
^
---
--
-
"
-
-^*»
--
-
-
:
-
-
^H
-
~L
_-^
^^
-"--
-"-
_
__
*>
. _:
- -
--
--- *
-
--
--
s.
;-
-
-
:.."
-
*v~
S,
;
- -
--
-
\
-"--
-
--
^
s
_-"-
__
-
-
. *
_:_:
...
r
-
V
_-
---
*
~-~
- ',.
-
._..
.. .
s
\
-"
-
-
--
--
-"
;:
-
^
_
--
--
s,,^
-
-
-
«
---
-
_:.'
X
--
-
-
- - -
- -
--
-
SJ
" ^
._
. -
-
- -_
s^
* -
~
. _
-
_.
-
s
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
.*-
z .40
5 fl°
5 120
53 1.60
_ ?on
^24C
X
30
*
i
en
i
8
o
m r-
TJ b
H
I
TI 4
m
m
-H
~ 2
m
...
'~.
^
-
_
^
~-'
z.'
--
7
f
-
- *
-. .
~ff--
>s
--
~
-
r*"
i_
^*
.
- i
'^
"
._.
IT.;
-
1 ^"*
..
__
* '^i
~L~
-
-v
1 H
-
---
f-£
~^.
-j
f
~
~.:
"--<
_.
-
__
--
~
- ,
--*
...
.
* ,
-
--
-
-
~
-
-
"
...
MM
D
f
_
"H
-
.._.
IT
&
-^
-\
e:_-
...
~
-d
-L
1^
Ts3
~\
-
~J
"."
.. _
i /
.
~
-
-*)*
t
i^
ft
.--_
Rf
\K
t
...
r--
^^
A!
m "
-
LA
T'
...
-
1 '
-
-
.. _
E «
M
~
-
^
--
--
~
-
....
«?:
...
-
-
_
~
^-»,
.:.
-
_.
.!~:
~»-
-
..-
_
^
r.i"
i
r~~
«.
.--
--
__.
7""1
...
^w*
- -
_ ^
-
-
1
-
_
_..
...
v-
- -
'-
-
~
s»_.
"--
---
"
....
-
»s.
'->
-
~.
.:.
"^,
:- ;-"
'.".
-
~ "
-^
- -
-
^
' '
-
... .
-~
;
^_
"-
"
--
^M
-
\-
-
w
~-~
MB
*
--
-
e
...
:
-
PHM
--
-
^-
--
-'-.
**
- """
"-
"f.
-4
F
._.
f*k
-""
-
--
--
IE
«
-_;
._.:
If
\\*
-;
:^l
--
~
u
---
--
^B
_-
P
~--_
(^^
--
-
-
~_
***
* --JB
--
--
"-
r^
-5
n>
ro
en
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 I
A.M.
23456789 10 II 12 I 234
P.M,
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
5 oo
2 4Q
«VJ
5 .80
CO
H 1.60
-2.00
^^n
X
*
I
r 8
o
m c
-v o
i
X
~n 4
m ^
m
-i
~ 2
f-M
J
1
^1-1
r ..
VV
B
t
MM
. 1
r-j|
-
I
MM
--
1 /
rj|
~~~
II
/
MB
1
-- -j
±
E
~
.
t
"i
i
~
-
^
-
r\/
~
1
--
AM
^5
_-.
--
-_-
ir\
^M«
-~
-_--
L_l
....
MMM
IT'
--
IN
'--
'.'
-
rz
ir:
MB
--
~-
-
!_'
.
*,
__
U»V.
-
MM
- -
^»
-
sP
J
.
~r:
V 1
..:
"
~"
~
".~
i---
IU
--
1 &
-
IN
rr
-
.._.
.._
--'
...
"~:
-
//
...
_-
1
i
_ .
JL~:
::_";
f a
h
"--
-
-
~.
-
b fc
[A
rr_
r_.
^^
_--
"
-
M
IN
-_-
='
_
-
* m
1
._.
-~'
-_--
^Z-
--"-
> «
IV
_-
~:
_-
~ """
-
V ^
't
rrr
~
_
-
IN
~
...
1
-
*«
i
N
--
'_-£
~
-
1U
-
-
~
RM
"-
*
Nl
--
-"
_-
;
PMMM
":::
"-
"3
i
--
rr~
' -
-
-
=t
K
Uh
-""
^
i
-I
1
"-.
_r
--'-
w
«m
^
-
b
..-;
T
__
5
:.r.
-"-"
::-
-_£_
-"
I
^_
Ib
"
~r
._.
5-
"-
^
--
---
~'
N,1
-
y
--
-f
-i
-;
.:.
5
~
*^.
34
:-
-
"
r
--
«.
^
;-
'-
---
--
"f:"
i
-_-
--
--_
~.
:."
-;
.-- _
-_
-j
o>
=tt=
ro
p4M 5 6 7 8 9 10
12 I 23456789 10
A.M.
12 1234
P.M.
-------
8 $ 8 *! § g g * * *
RAIN INTENSITY (IN/MR.) -«- DEPTH (FEET
2
F
~
-
__
^-:
>.
* -
*C
.
~
i'-~.
._-
:T.
_
-
--
:-
h_
m *
"--
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
ICKY RIVER/ FISHER LOCATION #6 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 7-6£7-84
~
_
1
.. _
"_-
T_
/
/
1
. . .L.
/
/
- e
-
f
I
1
--
._ -
--
1
'--
1-
~
-
-N
--
._..
~-
-;
-_-
^
-
-"j;
-
^-^
_
~~
y
-
. *
--
-
1
--
-
:_"
- :
--
'---
* »
:--
~:
."_
__.
-
~_
TV
-
-_-"-
-;
"
~-
_"
~~-
"-
-
""-
-
*
"-"
" :
_~
~-~
~ ~
_::
_.,
'--
_..
--
1^
-
__
_-_
;~
- -,
...
-
_-
-
---
-
"~
-
f w
-"
_:.
_
---
-
-"-
-^P
1
._..
-".
:~
-
~_.
-"-"
_
MHB
-
--:
.
T.~
/
/
*
-
_
:-.
--
- '
~
\
^
--
....
~:
:-
«
»
-~
_~:'
-_-
"-"-
-
M ^
-
_
--
_-_
---
-
~
-
_..
-
->.
-
J^
__
-'-
-\
^
_-_--__
-
--
-
v:
-:
__
r_
*-
^
-
r"
--~
~-"
;
-
'--
-
;:
_.
_,
--
^*
--
":-
. .
'_-
_
--
---
--
._
-
~
--
^
_.
-
«-
--
--
ss
._.
. *
...
X
_
-
:::
-
"-
^
.Ss
:-
~
- -
X
- -
-
s
\
'(
K
-
:"
\
-
JF
^
;-
_
_
X
S
i fc ,
.E
-
-_
\
Tf
V
V
-
"-
N
^E
El
rf
El
x
A
£
r
-
to
\
vl
^_-
-
.._
El
-
\
i
AM
'-
-
--
--
R
X
":
"-
I
-
-
iE
-
1G
i
-*
H
-
;_-
r
i
"--_
-
- '-
*^
'- - -
*
!
-s
fD
=tt=
ro
oo
10 II 12 I
A.M. P.M.
23456789
10 II 12 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A.M.
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W. 153/FERNWAY LOCATION #5 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 7-6 £7-84
z
z -40
~^ or\
m .oU
2! lor>
t£ 1.20
3 IJ90
zZOO
"x"
33
i
ix'
i
8
% e
T)
H
X
4
-n H
m
m
d 2
-_--
"-'
-;
1
.-_.
_H
-:
-
--
^^
-
---
-
-"-
:1
-_
"-
MM
1 1
-
1 -
(--
---
._.
-
~:
-^
:--
-
-':..
--;
--
r£-
-
__
--
_
_..
"£."
---
^^
-
-
:_.
- -
-_--
-
-/
- if-
rJ-.-
--
r
_
~_:
--
'-~
-^.
--
-"
- -_
'
-
Z7"
-"-
--
-~-
X,
"-'
£1
~1.
m
~
~:
~--
-~
--_
~~
-
- »
~
-'-
,
--
:r_
-
- -
. -
--
F~
-."_'
--
-
_
._
--
--
'-^
._
-
--
-^
~
_.
^
-
- -
--
-
«-,
-
^
_--
-
'
-~"
~~~
«M^
- *H
. ^
7r
~~.-
...
-
-:
".'
-^*,
_<
-
__
7_
v
._
=3>
-
-'-
-
-
--
-
i-1^
^
-_-
~
- ~
.._
_"
_._
"
:::~
^.,.
~
^
~-
--
--
-
'-'-
-
-_
-
*-
--
-
-
__"_
s
-
-
r
-
_'-
-
- -
-v.
...
--_
~1
..
- -
"_-_-
;r
-
:-"
-
-_-
tr:
-
£^
-"
- -
-
r;
- -
-_
-_
".
i ".
-
y
- -
:-^
-
- -
7^
_~
---
"
"
.:::.
.1
....
-_
...
,
~
-
-
. .-
i
~
--
:_ :
-
-_
- -
~
"-
-
...
_
ni
"-
-
"_
-
_
--
--.
s>^
-
":-
-*
_
-
--
r
.
_-j
"--"
.
-
)C
~-
-
-
JF
W
-:
"-_
- ~_
_-.
_
:
-_
'S
L
N
.E
;."_
.__
Tl
:\
V
-
-
:-
^E
b
^F
EL
-
-
-
-"_
"-
--
-Al
L
"F
y
--
M
M
_
.
_
A
i
i._
- .
..
"-».
-
- -
?*.
**
,
-
V*
.
-_
E
«v^
-_-
...
- -
R
s*.
:
-
-
\
^
:
*EfG
\
-
S.
- »
_".
--
-
"__
H]T
^-rf-
^
.-.-
--
-
--
-
-*J
-"
--
03
10 II 12 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A.M. RM. AM
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
3D
£ 00
z jUU
5 .40
m .80
£2 i.ad
J i jfH*i
-< IjBO
z 200
:c
3J
i
u-
o
1
8
o r
m b
X
m
m
H
~ 2
ic
A.
.
-
=
__.
_.
ies
wr- «
~
W
_-_
_-
-
«Mfe
»«
I) 1
M.
. \\f
M-
1
~-
~
SSS
-r:5
1
"
~
mae
tf~m
~
\
.
.:_
_r
-~
^
w~ m
1-
-
/*
i
-
K/
.:..
^
MM**
^
»_ .«e
::
~
r-*
m
-
^
~^
-
-
~.
_»
LI
-
--
-=
-_
-
^
-
N
t
^
£{
._
-
.
-
':r»>
~:_
--
-
L
-:
--
r^
--
~
--
-"
.0
zr_
-
~
-
"-"
CA
._ _.
^
~~ 'i.
^^
- ~~
TIC
_
-_ -_--
-T!
N> 9"
)N
^r
~
~..*
-~
_«-
^^
'-
u-
T^*5
~-
"
-^
IT
|-"-
1
--
*>
'.
~
~~
*.:
F
-
9*B
mmm
~'~-
.__
~
:
'"
R/
>»v
^
~~.'
ur
--
2
-.
~ir
^
;-
^J
--
^.
r
.
E
i
_--
-_~
_.
r
-
Vf
TT
K=
_
....
*-:-
;-
EN
._
'rf:
7:.'
'""
":
IT
--
^m
~
--
.-i
-
-
>^w-
--
_;.
Ml
-;:
_._
__
"..:
^£-
-_-
Oh
..._
»
^;
*
---
Jll
"--"
_-
- -
* ~
-
ro
"_:.
^n
--
>R
miffm
--
:~:
p
HJ
12 I * 0 4 b 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 1 2 3
P.M. A.M.
N
._
~~7
i N
[fr
-
i^ti
-w
I
G
--
~~»
r-E
"-
« f
N
4
__
~
^v-»
b~
V
4
-
~-
ie
--
:_
r-p
F+i
El
5
7-
-
-"
G
^"
-
...
--"
-
..:.
tTi
A fc
B^
r
^
-
I
~ ~-
'-
t *"
4-
7-
ir-
1L
-:-
-
6 7
-6
--
1
-"..
i4
.
--
-
r
ITN
^
*
~-:
-
_
8
» 4
-
"-
~~
-^ -
- -
9
_:
s
I-- -
--
10
-S
ro
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
3> -ww
Z
5 .40
m
"Z.
CO
-H.80
-<
fl2D
^O
10
on
i
8
o
PI r
TJ 6
-H
X
^ 4
m
m
H
~ 2
-
-
-
-"
-~-
_:..
~-
-.
"-
~
'-'
--"-
-
!
II
_-"
~
i
/
4l
^^
.
V*
*^
-
-'-
-
r^
1
1
-
^ *
:r-
--
--
-"-
:
r
f]
'---
-"_-
"* i
~:
....
_-
7
;
k
-
-
--
,/
~"
-_
r-~~
-~~
/-
:
~
--"
^
">
_"
£-
-
^^
-
_~
- ::
~;
_1
---
3-".
sd
."_
~
"~»
--
-
I
--
-
-
--
~.r
"--
VT;
r "
Er.
>»,
'-'-'-
-
_"
i
~"
-
- -
-
-
"X
-_-
'-
-
., 7
-
--
:-
-
---
- -
-
***»
" "
> »
-
- --
'
-
v
-
-- -
s
. _
-
..
-
*."
X
\
.-.
- ."
-
S
-
-
""
:.
_
-
-
-\
m
"-
-.
H"
S
-m
1
-
sj
-
_-
_-_
-
-
-
-
'-"
.-~
-
-
--
_-
"--
.'..
-
'v
.-.
- -
--
::
j~
-
^
:~~:
-\
'-'
^
-
.-^=
'1
'-:
.
-"_"
--
s
-
CIr<
_
_.
_"_
-
--
-
--
2~
:..
: :
s
--
"~jj
-_--
-
- _
-
":
_
S
»-'»
_.
-;"-
-
- -
-
S-
_-
--
'
-
-
_-
K- -
-"-"-
. a
-
-
-
-"
--
-:
--
:r
-
-
-
_:
~-
._
_
-
--
_"-
-
;"--
~
"-
i ^
-
^
:
-'-
.
_.i^-MT
--
_'
,
W
"
/
~ «
_-_
:"-
El
:"
-"-"
R
1
/
-"
~-
-_.
--
. ^ -
1
4
-
h
-
.
E
^
)P
I
--
is
:v
-*
IG
*"
S
KE
T
-
H'
*
^
V
^
-
--
r
>
*E
-.1
:
it
'-'-_
--
~~
V,
Al
» '
::
_v
^
>
.;
-
234
RM,
56789 10 II 12 I 234 56789 10
A.M.
I 12 I 2
P.M.
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
23456
P.M.
7 8 9 10 II 12 I
A.M.
>
2
2 .40
-H
m
£ .80
-c
5J.2Q
I
po
^*^
1
en
K)
i
8
8 6
-0
* 4
T|
m
m
J 2
-Ti
r:
:~:
--
~"
!_'
~_T
:~~
"T
-- ^Hj
::~
h
__
:r
-:.
"-
^~-
» «
--
-"-"-
-__
-
: :
y
. *
r
--
-
,
-31'
._.
_'
f
""-
-
--
/
^
1
-
,---
--
--
_::
V
- -
~ -
_--
-
--
'
,
I
_-
7~
-
7
~:L
_.
--
-:-
..
...
_-
«
-:
-
...
-
---
"- -
-_~
i
-
--
r
-
-'-'_'_
emu
'-.:
-
-
~~
--
MHi
~~]
--
r~_
_-
B==
-
1
- -
~"
-
-
--
--
- -
_. .
^w.
-
vr
*
--
--
=.
...
-
_._
...
~
._.
-
"-
,
~~
-
__.
i
^ss
' ~
-
--
-
,
-
r -
-
:r
-^
-
__"-
-
_...
___
_
_
-
~-
--
-_-_
-
---
-
" "
~-~
i
;"-"
"-"-'
-
"-
*»
^
.::.
'
~~~.
-" --
-
_
"VJ
-
-
--
-
---
>»,
.
~ ~
--
_
:_:_
--
'
-
_. .
-
-
. __
-
N
-
-
--
-
XT-
«
-
--
-
-"-
-
~*«
_
-
_ -
" -
-
IBM*
%
- -
--
-
*
::~
-~
-
-
«!
" M
__.
-^
-
-
-
-
MB^>
*_ m
-
- -
-
.
>__«
._.
--
-I"
-
--
-
-
-
- ^
./.
-""
-
-
--
.__
: -
I
'--
--
]
1
--
r -
E
~-
^
- -
_
W
s
, '
-
-
-
il
/
r -
n
L/
-:"
--
R
/
. -
W
.
~_'[-
_-"--
_
-
1
"f
fr
L
:::
. ,
-
^
5f
s
:.\
' ~
I
-
IG
B
_E
. ^
TF
'E
.
-
H
r-f
:v
^E
-^
--
T
£
E
A
_
:-
-"
«««
A
r\
M
_
-
-""
-
:-
23456789
_.._...._ in
-5
ro
=»=
OJ
ro
10 II 12 I 2
RM.
-------
NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT
HYDRO-BRAKE DEMONSTRATION GRANT
W.I 17/FRANKLIN LOCATION #1 RAIN EVENT MONITORING 8-3£4-84
cn
CO
fr
r
= .40
}
i
. CM
C
*
*" 1 ^^f*\
^
5
*»
8
S 6
H
* 4
m
m
3l 2
/
R
~
_ ..
^?
--
-
'~
--
~^
^^
_.
---
-
i
.._
^
9M
_.
.._.
in
_
-"^
'-
'
-
,
M*
"~-
UTT!
^
'. "
...
_..-
._
^^^*
> ~**
~
_"~1
?>~
~~m*
«
_.
-
"£
i
i
.. ^
~
^
"A
rfL
«*
~
_
f
"_!
-~
-
-_
E
:i"
.....
^e
-
-~-:
- _
.-
i._r
-...
ZT
S»-
* «
_"..
'
-
__
--
--
-eS
;--
f-
_
_.-
._.
._.
_
-_
....
t^~
--':.
--
- -
__
.._
"
-
-
_
-
-~ «
?!
~
I
-
-
(X"
--
-"-
-
-
^-Z
*
._
<*
.._
» !
"
- ..
~T
I"1
»-«
-"
--
--
-**
-
r
- I
_..
.
^
~
"if
;L
~
....
- .
-
=r
MB
f
q
-^
\i
TV
"L
, .
-
-
~z:
T^
-4
Kf
"H
E
-
".
-
...
-
n
V
>i
V
'
.
:-.:
-
--
- -
^
(F
Et
EL
- -
-~
-
.
-
- -
>
P
L
--
-
~. .
^M
vf
-_.
-_
- -
»
A I
*\r
.
- -
i
-
_ "
r
rl
_
_':-
-
-
-
_.
-'-'-
-
-
-
~:
"*»;
-
B «
__
'
"-_-
-
-
-
s
_
-
...
'.-
-
-
...
-
-
-
"
s,
...
^i
-
- -
--
:...
--
r1:
-
v
\
\
~
-
_-.
--
--
-
--
"_-
"--_
\
-
-
m
__.
--
"-
--
^H~
- J
_-_-
'
_
"-
---
-
«N^
...
I
--
£
.:_
"
-.
--
w
::
^
T
_.
-
.
-_
-
Ei
.._
-
*>
-
-
_
R
..
^
~
-
-
~ *
j
~-;
-
_-
-»
'-
_-
^
P.MC
--
-
T^Z-
:.
::,
-
IE
_-*
_-
x
__.
.
1C
x-
I
-
~
1 -
"~"
"-
-'
H
-
!!!
-
--
-
.:.
::-
r
.»
--
~
._.
"-
_".
X
> <
: -
...
--
-
'-_
^
..
23456789 10 II 12 1 23456789 10 II 12 1 2
M. A.M. RM.
c.
-5
ro
OJ
OJ
-------
PART 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Objectives:
One of the major objectives of the Hydrobrake Project was to reduce
pollutant loading to the environment by controlling the surges of sewage flow
that results in overflows of the combined sewer system. The control or
reduction of combined sewer overflows is growing in importance. As the
hundreds of millions of dollars in sewage treatment plant expansion and
improvements are placed into operation, the pollution caused by combined sewer
overflows is becoming the major source of urban water degradation. In fact,
based upon a USEPA generated report entitled, CSO Loadings Inventory for the
Great Lakes Basin, Final Report, March 1983 combined sewage overflows are
estimated to contribute as much as:
258,895 Ibs. per year of phosphorus
3,862,000 Ibs. per year of BOD
9,933,000 Ibs. per year of suspended solids
These loadings are equivalent to 35% of the total phosphorus loadings,
43% of the BOD loadings and 66% of the total suspended solids loadings to the
water of the Cuyahoga River and near shore waters of Lake Erie in Cleveland.
Because of the significance of the CSO pollutant loading to the environment,
the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District has implemented many programs to
reduce combined sewer overflow, including in automated regulators to reduce
combined sewer overflows and aggressive program to inspect, clean, or repair
blocked sanitary outlets which could result in a dry weather discharge of
sanitary sewage. The awareness of the problems of combined sewer overflows
led to this Hydrobrake Projects.
5.2 Sampling:
Prior to and after the installation of the Hydrobrakes, samples of the
sewage in Diversion Chamber No. 1 (see figure #2) were collected. Four
twenty-four hour composite samples were collected in order to determine the
-54-
-------
background strength of the sewage during dry weather flow. The sampling was
performed using a Manning Model 4040 automatic sampler which collected two 250
ml samples per hour over a twenty-four hour period. The analytical results of
these four samplings are presented in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1 DRY WEATHER POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS OF SEWAGE IN
HYDROBRAKE PROJECT AREA, MG/L
Pollutant
6-23-1981
BOD
COD
TSS
Ammonia,
as N
Phosphorus,
as P
Chlorides
Sulfates
Alkalinity
Solids (TTL)
PH
Nickel
Copper
Chromium (TTL)
Zinc
Cadmium
Iron
Lead
Oil &
Grease
118
424
30
13.5
4.77
88
75
185
452
7.28
0.04
0.09
0.02
0.12
0.01
1.0
0.01
10
6-24-1981
77
106
42
11.1
4.45
71
74
174
408
7.2-7.6
0.03
0.07
0.0
0.11
0.01
1.2
0.01
22
5-2-1984
100
186
120
9.69
4.41
136
97
184
589
8.0
0.08
0.08
0.04
0.42
0.03
2.8
0.04
28
5-3-1984
145
237
108
16.7
Average
110
238
75
12.7
4.54
117
102
193
573
7.6
0.06
0.09
0.06
0.46
0.01
1.9
0.1
4.54
103
106
184
506
-
0.04
0.08
0.04
0.28
0.02
0.02
0.02
21
20
Eight combined sewer overflow events were also sampled. Five samplings
prior to the Hydrobrake installation and three afterward. These samplings
were also performed in Diversion Chamber 1. The samples collected were from
the combined sewage as it flowed over the weir enroute to the storm sewer. An
ISCO Model 1680 au:omatic sampler was used in conjunction with a liquid level
actuator. The sampler collected two 500 ml discrete samples every five
minutes for the first twenty-five minutes of the rainstorm/combined sewer
overflow event. Sampling in this manner, it was hoped that the effects of the
first flush could be measured. The eight rain/combined sewage overflow events
-55-
-------
were sampled and analyzed at the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District
laboratory. The data presented in Table 2, below, are the average
concentrations of pollutants in the five rain/overflow events monitored
TABLE 2. AVERAGE CONCENTRATION OF POLLUTANTS IN COMBINED
SEWAGE OVERFLOW, MG/L
Time BOD COD TSS Phosphorus T.S. *D.S.
1st 5 min
2nd 5 min
3rd 5 min
4th 5 min
5th 5 min
Average
129
179
236
244
285
FT?
704
536
709
788
787
TUB"
344
467
441
644
534
im
4.06
4.64
4.86
5.54
6.32
"5TDH
1267
1228
1277
1549
1067
TZ78~
924
761
836
904
532
797
* D.S. is Dissolved Solids by difference between Total Solids (T.S.)
and Suspended Solids (TSS)
The analytical data presented in Table 2 shows clearly that substantial
concentrations of pollutants exited the sewer system during rain events and
combined sewage overflow conditions.
The data, however, fails to show a "first flush effect" wherein the
highest concentration of pollutants are flushed within the first few minutes
of a rain event. This situation could be explained by the fact that overflow
was caused by increased flows from two catchment areas. The Detroit Avenue
catchment area is smaller and closer in proximity to the sampling point than
is the Northwest Interceptor catchment area. The blending of the wastewater
from these two separate catchment areas masked the scouring effect of the
initial surge of stormwater in the combined sewers.
Flow gauging was attempted in order to calculate the pollutant loadings
to the environment. Due to problems caused by the complexity of the sewer
system at Diversion Chamber No. 1, the enormous volume and pressure of the
flow during storm events, and in general, lack of a suitable and accessible
flow monitoring point the flows could not be determined.
-56-
-------
5.3 Estimation of Pollutant Reductions:
Although the pollutant loading reductions could not be calculated by
actual measurement, these reductions can be estimated by considering the
concentration of pollutants and volume of wastewater that is or could be
stored by the Hydrobrakes. The Hydrobrakes throttle the flow in the Northwest
Interceptor to 20 cfs. Flows in the Northwest Interceptor of greater than 20
cfs would cause an overflow condition at Diversion Chamber No. 1. Any volume
of water stored behind the hydrobrake which regulates the flow at 20 cfs is
essentially the volume of wastewater that is prevented from overflowing to the
environment. This volume could range from zero to a maximum of 3,800,000
gallons depending upon the duration and severity of the particular rain event.
For purposes of this report, the maximum storage volume will be used. The
data therefore will represent the maximum loading of pollutants that would be
removed from the 2nvironment as a result of the Hydrobrake installations. The
concentration of Dollutants used to determine the loading of the pollutants
removed from the environment are the average concentrations of the first 25
minutes of the overflow events presented in Table 2. With this as a basis,
the Hydrobrakes prevent the following pounds of pollutants from entering the
environment:
TABLE 3. MAXIMUM POLLUTANT REDUCTIONS, LBS
Pollutant Parameter For rain/overflow event Annual Reduction*
BOD 7,172 502,040
COD 23,519 1,646,330
TSS 16,213 1,134,910
Phosphorus 169 11,830
* Using the average of 70 overflow events annually
Based upon USEPA's estimates of pollutant loadings from combined sewer
overflows, the Hydrobrake Project is responsible for controlling as much as
13% of the BOD, 11% of the suspended solids, and 5% of the phosphorous that
are discharged to the environment of Greater Cleveland.
-57-
-------
PART 6 OTHER HYDROBRAKE PROJECTS
Several projects using Hydrobrakes have been implemented over the past
years for various applications.
6.1 City of Cleveland, Ohio:
Most common use has been Inlet Control where Hydrobrakes are used to
control street sewers to capacity so basement flooding can be eliminated in
all heavy rain events.
Off line storage of excess runoff from the surface has been directed to
underground stormwater tanks for controlled discharge by self acting
Hydrobrake Flow Regulators.
This type of application was investigated by the City of Cleveland as
reported in EPA publication EPA - 600/S2-B3-097, January, 1984.
6.2 City of Euclid, Ohio:
This City, having a separate sewer system, experienced very heavy
infiltration/inflow during rain storms pressurizing the sanitary sewer to a
point where basement flooding became a severe problem.
The City officials approved testing a small area using heavy runoff. The
results convinced the City officials that the Hydrobrake Inlet Control was the
most cost effective solution for the City.
During the period from 1978 through 1984 the City has installed more than
1,000 Hydrobrake Inlet Controls city-wide (approximately 4 square miles).
The City claims to have solved all basement back-up problems, reduced the
overflows at the Wastewater Treatment Plant and reduced the overall
infiltration volume. No off line storage tanks have been necessary as the
natural topography could be used for excess runoff without creating any
problems.
Experience over more than 7 years has proved that frequencies exceeding
5, 10, 25 and 50 year storms have been totally controlled. No extra operation
or maintenance has been experienced.
-58-
-------
6.3 City of Portland, Maine:
Portland started its first installations as early as 1977 and has
continued the implementation of Inlet Control on a City-wide scale.
(Approximately 400 units at present.)
The objectives have been to reduce the risk of sewer backups, blowing of
manhole covers, and minimizing or eliminating the combined sewer overflow to
the Back Cove from the existing combined sewer system.
The Superintendent of Sewers, Charles Perry, claims no increase in
maintenance, the elimination of basement flooding and all first flush events
are retained by the sewer. Only storm water will overflow to the Back Cove in
the future.
-59-
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District would like to acknowledge the
assistance and support of the City of Cleveland Departments of Public
Utilities and Engineering.
We would also like to thank Mr. Ralph G. Christensen, U.S.E.P.A., Region
V, Great Lakes National Program Office for his support and assistance. In
addition, Douglas C. Ammon and John N. English, U.S.E.P.A., Cincinnati, Ohio
and Richard P. Traver, E.P.A., Edison, New Jersey were extremely helpful in
the early phases of this project.
Finally, we wish to express our gratitude to Carl Maegaard, Hydro Storm
Sewage Corporation, Portland, Maine, the supplier of the Hydrobrakes, for his
assistance and technical direction throughout the study.
-60-
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
-
REPORT NO.
EPA-905/2-87-005
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Controlling Discharge and Storage in a Combined
Interceptor Sewer-Cleveland, Ohio (Hydrobrakes]
AUTHOR(S)
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
5GL
Anthony S. Jordan
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
GLNPO Report No. 87-10
__
RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
REPORT DATE
October 1986
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Northeast Ohio Regional
3090 Broadway
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
Sewer District
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
S005602-01
12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Great lakes National Program Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
13. TYPE OF REPORT
Final Report,
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
USEPA-GLNPO 5GL
1^isc^arcf/IEfrTaverN,0l;fouglas Ammon and John English-MERL Cincinnati.
Ralph G. Christensen - Project Officer-Region V, Chicago, Illinois
16. ABSTRACT
This report details the results of a recently completed three and one-half year
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) study conducted in a residential/industrial area on
the west side of Cleveland, Ohio. The study involved the in-line storage and
controlled discharge of combined sewage flow, generated during a rain event, utilizing
a Hydrobrake as the control device.
The object of the study was three fold.
1. To eliminate the combined sewer overflow to Lake Erie.
2. To study the effectiveness of the Hydrobrake when utilized as a flow
regulator in an in-line storage situation.
3. To provide an even flow to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility
in a rain event.
The Hydrobrake proved to be a cost effective device that when properly installed
is capable of reliably and accurately throttling flows, creating storage and
allowing a self-scouring drain down action without electrical or mechanical
controls and very little human intervention.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
CSO Pollution
Storm Water
Phosphorus Load
Combined Sewer
Hydrob rakes
Storage
Water Qual ity
I.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
13 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT DOCUIT]ent IS
to Public through the National Technical
Information Services, (NTIS),
_Springfield, VA 2
19. SECURITY CLASS {This Report)
72
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1987 745 - 3 1 9 / 0
------- |