Loading...
NL Cypress- CS111005 I I ENGINEERING DESIGN REPORT I Cypress Waters Lift Station & Force Main ' Dallas, Texas o -17 0 1 0 w COU Prepared for: Billingsley Company One Arts Plaza ' 1722 Routh Street, Suite 1313 Dallas, TX 75201 Prepared by: ' Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 12700 Park Central Drive PRELIMINARY Suite 1800 FOR REVIEW ONLY Dallas, Texas 75251 Not for constructionor permit purposes. Kimley-Horn Phone: (972) 770 1300 = and Associates,Inc. Engineering Firm Registration#F-928 Fax: (972) 238-3820 Engineer MARIY S.PARIS t . P.E.No. 84766_.. .. Date 09/23/2011 „ Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. © September 2011 I ' Engineering Design Report September 2011 Table of Contents ' List of Appendices ii i Introduction 1 I. Design Flow Calculations 1 II. Pump Head Calculations 2 Ill. Cycle Time Calculations 3 IV. Net Positive Suction Head 4 V. Electrical 4 VI. Other Considerations 6 ' VII. Appendix 9 ' Table of Contents /�„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I Engineering Design Report September 2011 ' List of Appendices 1. Vicinity Map ' 2. Design Flow Calculations 3. System Curve Calculations ' 4. Pump&System Curves 5. Energy Loss Coefficients Table 6. Cycle Time Calculations 7. Available Net Positive Suction Head Calculations 8. Opinion of Probable Construction Costs ' This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of services is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of ' and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1 1 ' List of Appendices r•r, Kimley-Horn klb..NWand Associates,Inc. K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I Engineering Design Report September 2011 111 Introduction This project is located at the northeast corner of LBJ/I-635 Highway and Beltline Road, 5 miles ' from DFW Airport and 20 miles from Downtown Dallas. The property consists of approximately ' 1,661 acres, all within the City of Dallas. Of that land area, Billingsley Company will develop 928 acres of contiguous undeveloped land over several phases which will be adjacent to a 362 acre ' lake. A vicinity map is included in Section 1 of the Appendix. Flow analysis and capacity studies have been conducted to determine the need for a 1.8 MGD capacity lift station and 10-inch force main to convey wastewater for the first two phases of the proposed development, consisting of approximately 1,500 multi-family residential units. In accordance with an 1111 agreement between Billingsley Company and the City of Coppell, the 10-inch force main will outfall into an existing 12-inch gravity wastewater main in Beltline Road owned by the City of ' Coppell. After the 1.8 MGD capacity of the lift station is reached, development of a larger lift station will commence to connect to an existing City of Coppell 30-inch wastewater main north of the development in Beltline Road. The initial lift station will be decommissioned and abandoned once the larger lift station is in service. Billingsley Company retained the services of ' Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to provide analysis and design of the initial lift station and force main. I. Design Flow Calculations The first phase of the development will furnish approximately 700 residential units. The second phase of the development will add another 800 units for a grand total of 1,500 units. Coppell ISD is also planning to build a school in phase two with approximately 800 students that the lift ' station will need to serve. The sanitary sewer demand projections were calculated using the following assumptions: ' • 2.3 people per unit ■ 125 gallons per capita per day Appendix ' /Ell„ Kimley-Horn \ and Associates,Inc. 1 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc 1 Engineering Design Report September 2011 ' • 22 gallons per student per day ■ Peaking factor=4 ' Using the assumptions above, the sewer demand for phase one was calculated to be 805,000 gpd (0.81 MGD). The additional 800 units in phase two will add 920,000 gpd (0.92 MGD) and ' the school will add 70,400 gpd (0.07 MGD). This results in a total phase two demand of 1,795,400 gpd (1.8 MGD). A table summarizing the design flows can be found in Section 2 of the Appendix. In order to handle the phased flows, a duplex system of submersible pumps expandable to a triplex was considered. However, it is the preference of the owner that the lift station be ' installed as a triplex from the beginning. Therefore, all three submersible pumps will be installed in phase one, and each will be placed on an alternating cycle so that all pumps will be used. A more detailed discussion of the system conditions and the particular pump selected will be presented in the next section. II. Pump Head Calculations For phase one, the proposed lift station will operate off one submersible pump at a time. The tpump suction elevation was determined to be 480.29 feet. The flow line of the force main at its ' highest point in the system is 531.66 feet. This results in a static head of 51.37 feet. The total energy loss coefficients were calculated to be Fk = 9.47 (See Section 5 of the Appendix). The ' minor loss due to fittings in the system was calculated to be 0.94 feet using the following equation: h = kV' m 2g By using the Hazen-Williams Equation, a Total Dynamic Head (TDH) for phase one was calculated to be 61.79 feet for a pipe roughness coefficient (C) of 100, 60.51 feet for C=120, and ' 59.42 feet for C=150 at the peak conditions using a force main length of 900 feet to the high Appendix ' /gyp, Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 2 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I Engineering Design Report September 2011 point in the force main. The total length of the force main is 3,684 feet, but the elevation head from the high point to the outfall is 20 feet, which is enough head to carry the peak flow for phase one to the outfall. This information was used to create system curves for C=100, C=120, and C=150. The data and system curve information for phase one can be found in Section 3 of ' the Appendix. In phase two, there will be two of the three pumps running at the same time in order to handle the ultimate peak flow. The static head for phase two is 32.87 feet to the outfall elevation with a total force main length of 3,684 feet. The minor losses increase to 4.69 feet due to the increase in velocity from the additional pump. The TDH for phase two increases to 113.91, ' 93.47, and 76.23 for C=100, C=120, and C=150 respectively. The data and system curve information for phase two can be found in Section 3 of the Appendix. Based on the system curves for both phases, we were able to select a pump from ITT Flygt that meets the criteria for both phases. Flygt pump model NP3153.181 HT (curve number 63-462- 00-6050) was the pump selected. In phase one, this particular pump will operate at 750-800 gpm depending on the actual TDH, which results in a velocity of 3.39-3.61 feet per second in ' the 10" force main. In phase two with two pumps running, the total flow rate will be 1200-1250 gpm again depending on the actual TDH. This results in a force main velocity of 5.42-5.65 feet ' per second. Charts displaying the pump and system curves for each phase can be found in Section 4 of the Appendix. III. Cycle Time Calculations ' According to the Texas Administrative Code, Title 30, Part 1, Subchapter C, Rule 217.60(b)(7), the minimum cycle time (T) for a submersible pump of less than 50 horsepower (HP) is six minutes. The TCEQ minimum wet well volume requirement relative to pump HP is V=(T x Qpump)/(4 x 7.48). The selected pump (ITT Flygt NP3153.181 HT) runs at 20 HP, therefore the Appendix ' =„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 3 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc Engineering Design Report September 2011 ' minimum cycle time is six minutes and the TCEQ minimum required wet well volume is 112.30 ft3 (840 gallons). In phase two, there will be three pumps in total, with two pumps running at the same time for a combined 40 HP, which is still less than 50, therefore the minimum cycle time and wet well volumes remain the same. 1 The wet well was sized as a 12-foot diameter well, resulting in 846 gal/VLF of storage. The ' 'Pump On' elevation was determined to be 486.00 feet MSL, and the 'Pump Off' elevation was established as 482.00 feet MSL, resulting in 4 VLF of storage. The highest pump cycling frequency occurs when the inflow is equal to fifty percent of the pump flow. Assuming the flow of the pump in phase one to be 800 gpm, the highest pump cycling frequency will occur when the inflow equals 400 gpm. The pump cycle time for this scenario was calculated to be 16.9 minutes. Assuming the combined flow of the two pumps in phase two to be 1250 gpm, the pump cycle time was calculated to be 10.8 minutes during fifty percent of peak flow conditions. The calculations can be found in Section 6 of the Appendix. ' IV. Net Positive Suction Head The required net positive suction head of the selected pump, as specified by the pump manufacturer, is 18 feet. The available net positive suction head was calculated to be 24.63 ft ' for an elevation above sea level of 480.29, which is the designed suction elevation of the pump. The available net positive suction head is greater than the required net positive suction head, ' therefore, cavitation will not occur within the pump at the lowest possible water level in the wet well. The calculations can be found in Section 7 of the Appendix. V. Electrical p General The electrical load is three 20 HP pumps and loads for lighting and controls. Electrical Appendix ' " „ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 4 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 Iequipment is sized for a 200 amp main switch and a 260 amp automatic transfer switch (ATS). A 150 kVA transformer will power all three pumps. The Oncor standard pad size is 6'4" square. ' Service Oncor is the electric utility that will serve the project. A main size of 200 amps is adequate to run all three pumps. The main size determined the rating of the automatic transfer switch. The ' trip size of the main breaker is 200 amps. A 260 amp automatic transfer switch will be used, because the standard size goes from 150 amp to 260 amp. The transfer system is a closed- transition type that will allow re-transfer to utility after a power failure without stopping any pumps that may be running. ' Motor Control The pump motor starter can be supplied as either across-the-line or solid state soft starter. The soft starters assist with inrush loads during pump start-up and can also be used as surge control during pump start-up and shutdown. The pumps are small enough for this not to be a concern. ' Soft starters can potentially reduce the size of the generator. We have evaluated the sizing ' requirements for the proposed generator based on across-the-line starters and soft starters and found that it will not impact total cost, so the simpler across the line starter was selected. t The lift station is designed to have power factor correction capacitors and each capacitor is sized to come on with one pump. ' Backup Power The generator is sized to run two pumps along with other miscellaneous loads. The generator size is 100 kW with an upsized 150 kW alternator to handle starter inrush. An 8 hour base fuel tank is integrated into the generator skid as well as a sound enclosure designed to comply with local codes for noise at the property line. A load bank is separately mounted for exercising and testing the generator. A generator annunciator panel is located inside the autodialer enclosure with four outputs to the autodialer for low fuel, group alarm, running, and fault. A 100 kW generator with sound enclosure requires a concrete pad 14' long by 5' wide. Appendix 1111 Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 5 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I 4 Engineering Design Report September 2011 Instrumentation and SCADA Level instrumentation for the wet well consists of a submersible level transmitter and floats for ' low level cut-off of the pumps and a high alarm contact. The submersible level transmitter supplies an analog signal to the pump controller, and the floats are hardwired into the pump ' circuit as a backup. The high alarm float is sent to the autodialer. A Motor Protection Electronics model SC2000 is used for pump control. The pump controller is ModBus RTU ' compatible for use with future SCADA systems. An autodialer is utilized for the lift station for alarm notification. The autodialer meets or exceeds the functions of the Phonetics, Inc. Sensaphone 2000® unit, as required by DWU, and has 8 inputs (expandable to 48). The autodialer is also capable of reading analog signals. Site Lighting ' Lighting on the site is designed to provide security and enhance the aesthetics of the site. However, the site lighting will not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood and complies with codes for glare and foot-candle levels at the property line. Lighting is designed at 1- to 2- foot-candles to avoid shallow areas. Lights are pole-mounted along the site's perimeter. Cut-off type fixtures are supplied to prevent light trespass on adjacent properties. The emergency generator will supply power to the lighting system during power failures. Electrical Equipment The electrical equipment is housed in outdoor NEMA 4X rated enclosures and is mounted on a galvanized steel rack for support. The verticals consist of 4-inch galvanized rigid steel conduit embedded in concrete footings. VI. Other Considerations Site Access The site has a 15' wide concrete access drive with a 20' turn-off inside the fence that will support parking for two service trucks. There will be room for at least one more service truck if the driveway is also utilized for parking. The access drive is connected to a private drive within kb Appendix ' —IMF Kimley-Horn II and Associates,Inc. 6 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc Engineering Design Report September 2011 ' the Cypress Waters development that will be dedicated as a public utility and access easement. This private drive will be accessible via public roads within the Cypress Waters development ' that ultimately will connect to Belt Line Road to the west. Security The site includes an 8' tall intruder-resistant steel tube fence around the perimeter to restrict access by an unauthorized person. Fittings for locking the gate and a heavy duty padlock keyed to the owner's master will be provided. Flood Protection Per TCEQ requirements, the lift station, including all electrical and mechanical equipment is designed to operate during a 100-year flood event, including wave action. The current 100-year elevation of the lake is 510 feet and the top of the wet well elevation is 514.45 feet. Structural ' design has been performed for the wet well and vault slabs and the electrical equipment rack supports are embedded in concrete footings. The odor control unit, generator, and transformer ' are all anchored to the site slab or their own concrete pads for structural support. Pole mounted light fixtures are anchored to concrete piers extending a certain depth below grade as determined from the geotechnical report. Odor Control Odor control is accomplished via a drum scrubber odor control unit containing high-efficiency r<. dry-chemical air filtration media. The odor control unit filters approximately 3,811 cubic feet of air within the wet well. A Purafil DS-100 or comparable odor control unit would meet the criteria of a minimum of one air exchange per hour. However, the expected service life of the air-filtration media for this size unit is less than one year. Therefore, a larger Purafil DS-500 or comparable unit has been chosen which will provide for a media life of up to two years depending on contaminant levels. 1 Piping and Valves All piping, brackets, fixtures, and other appurtenances within the wet well are Type 316 Appendix ' mg F1 Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 7 K:\DAL Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc 1111111111.1111111111111111110 Engineering Design Report September 2011 1 stainless steel to prevent corrosion. The discharge pipes have flanged connections that allow for easy removal of each pump via a guide-rail system. All openings and connections through • the wet well wall will be prefabricated and sealed to prevent leakage and infiltration. The isolation valves on the discharge piping are eccentric plug type which provide excellent passing of solids and are each paired with a swing type check valve with external lever as per TCEQ requirements. The plug and check valves are housed in a separate valve vault. The valve vault includes a floor drain that drains to the wet well and the drain line includes a "P" trap and a flap valve to prevent gas from entering the valve vault as per TCEQ requirements. Metering ' The lift station includes a meter vault outside of the lift station fence so that it may be easily accessed by authorized personnel. The meter vault will utilize a Thermo Scientific Model ' DCT6088 transit time flowmeter as requested by the owner. The flowmeter readout is housed in a lockable control box mounted on a pedestal outside the meter vault for easy reading of the ' flow data. A heavy duty padlock keyed to the owner's master will be provided for locking the access hatch door. Emergency Provisions The lift station is equipped with a quick-connect mechanism on the force main to allow the wet well to be drained by a portable pump in an emergency. The lift station also includes an audiovisual alarm system that will transmit alarm conditions through an autodialer system that transmits to the owner's monitoring center. The alarm system will self-activate on power 0- outages, pump failures, or high wet well water levels. An on-site generator is also provided and sized to operate the lift station at its firm pumping capacity. TCEQ requirements state that if a ' backup generator is used, the wet well does not need to be designed based on retention capacity. However, we still analyzed the retention capacity of the system, and the wet well and collection system can provide approximately 54,368 gallons (7,268 cubic feet) of storage without discharging. This allows for a response time of 1.5 hours at peak flow for phase one (or Appendix PP"III Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 8 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc r IMF Engineering Design Report September 2011 at average flow for phase two) and 45 minutes at peak flow for phase two. Finally, the lift station site is graded to remain fully accessible during a 25-year, 24-hour rainfall event as per ' TCEQ requirements. 1 1 C Appendix EllIn Kimley-Horn r be..IOWand Associates,Inc. 9 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc 111111111MINIMMIN.- I IEngineering Design Report September 2011 I VII. Appendix 1. Vicinity Map I -; ..,.. . 6 . `. .- . - • 1:,..',,, „.. "..e..".. .... ,, X ontliimk,,,_ '4, s .2' • ... r .".c • -.' ,,.., .. , . '4 4,V, ,'' d .1i2.1:;• '—*-"•-•----,-.-:,4., "- ,, ."r ,.:.,.,, II 'i'!, . , ,. , ';'. '',,,,,,,Z '''' ' r ' ' .'11 r 3 '' $* '',..•''-l.,.4,,,,,,,,,,°'.441;;;,1444.% -ev-1 - - 0 - 0 ---- . . I _-4.\\P..•*. --- - - _, - ' .•._ - \-\___, - -::. • ,s I- oi..„--:-,:-:'-:-_---0130'-' : . .- -. I ---- . •_ . .. •c'• „:-,-,- z....- ,,„ . np .. , I ..‘, ,-,-- ,. . --- k .4 . •' I FUTURE T.O.D. — 1 I • ,,..... _.. . ... I 4 .. .. , . ,. .,. ,/ - - t. .• st„ ... -- 1 II . ...... .,.,.'- I I,I.F.4!.',. r,'1''4-4':.I,,-.',,,'-:,,.,,,„,5-.,..,,W"•.,..•,,',':-,.':.'‘,. /•.‘...-'t•uT * - - ... ..- ti NORTH LAKE 't 111 I i , . ,,,,,,,.„ ,,.. .• , ,..._._ .,, , . , „. .,, t / •... .P.A.,;, ,i' \. I ,allt .1.11:•, "4 ,. ',rev_ ,,t .-1- 14S-', •"' , . I .. , — 4 i,,'71.i',"i''.'?'„f.-7?z-c.).'",itlf•f.ft"‘ LIFT STATION (1r1GD -.7,..,---., ..,-..',, . . - _„.. - ,. ,.,, ---.."--VAI , ,V.A...• -- ' , ., 1.,-- :1'..,=, •,..",-, ...1 , .4 '--* E'3.•:,' . ,..., '.'',,; .t't'''' -',.--.1.),„ .' . .---,..'er''::.`..*:6 - • ,-.",e'.:.., `,.,--` .W.,c ''. •14 4 A •=s,„, . _ ''''''P!';••••,' . 40/ ",''. • '—' -.= IIP - V-, - --N. IN"%, '''a '14 , • ' ' '' ,-Ali. - -, -4 4 1 I v 7,1'1,7,CR- ' "' . 4-.. "." ''''('''• '•••;/ ''''' ' (--ff-,'IY-''-crrT" ',, :is— 1116\---911141"4—'- ' -kigoit * 8:41 I 1 ""ii, i . 4 4 - ,...)• STRK,F ''''---' . . - Oft Ma ROA. A,',.4. ,,, , 1.1.1:. •*- F.,,;,fi itg ..,. .PROPOSED 10" • , 0 lt`,;`''''t .--"% `4* FORCE MAIN . -,„: ,. ,.....„,.....--h ,- .7.iii 1 , I ., ,zil ..„ ....„,„,„___,,,,_,. L,FILL Sr- .1, 11 V •';#4."3,7*:::'•41, - '— ,.. 17.4:11'1. 0......4.4. \."1 v ...E.46,-..„,...,..:7...,L,.., 1 ik ,ix, ; 1 . ',..i.. S.',.Ai.1i.a.'"",-- - -..."''' ' °I ''. ' 'fIVALI't -jai= .' ...... - -....1 `...tr 1. . , . U-IL- ".'`''.'''''' " ;'''':-1 "->;'..'"' -... .Apicji 14 1 • •-••,.,V :-Iw 15-u 41:Xt--r _ 1 it.... ...4;1.1.7.4..--„_-__ _,.. „. , ,.. .„,„., I , ''' . ' ,„ / ., .i.,4f:•'.:,•'",;' -.4. ,r...., , r..., .7 qf .i.; ....r.-z,,,,,.b.• .,1;;;.:-. .;... - . "*.7,4,- •7, r,P:4,,'''.-.....•,:i• -'''''- ..&g•i....... '•:',. -........, -',...: , / ;,:l.eittA• '.4.7.44,..ti -'"---_, al 1,,f`R. ,trrY t.1Pc111M1r,CH(-171 , ' li.11. AY.:::".. ' • ' 4Cerrr T . .. I Appendix Cpp.-EN F1 Kimley-Horn Ihr..EMI 1 and Associates,Inc. 10 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 P 2. Design Flow Calculations LIFT STATION DESIGN Design Flow Calculations Kimley-Hom and Associates,Inc. I Job Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters Date 8/12/2011 Designed By JEB Checked By MSP Quantity Design Average Design Average Design Peak Design Peak Design Peak Design Row Land Use Quantity Unit Flow Flow Row Unit Row(MG)) Flow(gpm) Row(MG)) Flow(gpm) Rounded(gpm) Residential(Phase 1) 700 Units 287.5 gal/unit/day 0.20 139.76 0.81 559.03 560 i Residential(Phase 2) 800 Units 287.5 gal/unit/day 0.23 159.72 0.92 638.89 640 School 800 Students 22 gal/unit/day 0.02 12.22 0.07 48.89 50 TOTAL 0.45 311.70 1.80 1246.81 1250.00 !Pealing Factor I 4 I I I I I I I I I I Appendix r m„ Kimley-Horn iii \ and Associates,Inc. 11 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc P hi .r ..• 41111116. •rr.. .iii -MN I IEngineering Design Report September 2011 I3. System Curve Calculations LIFT STATION DESIGN ISystem Curve Calculations Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. rJob Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters I Date 8/12/2011 Designed By JEB Checked By MSP I L= 900 Feet Cold = 100 Id = 9.51 Inches Cnew= 150 hm = 0.94 Feet hd = 5 Feet C120= 120 I AZ= 51.37 Feet ' Flow(Q) = 750 gpm Velocity= 3.39 fps SYSTEM CURVE - PHASE 1 I Hazen- Williams Total Head (TDH) hfold Ht old I Flow(gpm) hfnew(ft) C=120 (ft) Ht new(ft) C=120 (ft) 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.31 57.31 57.31 50 0.02 0.03 0.04 57.33 57.34 57.36 100 0.08 0.12 0.16 57.39 57.43 57.47 I150 0.16 0.25 0.34 57.47 57.56 57.65 200 0.28 0.42 0.59 57.59 57.73 57.90 250 0.42 0.63 0.89 57.73 57.94 58.20 I 300 0.59 0.89 1.24 57.90 58.20 58.55 350 0.78 1.18 1.65 58.09 58.49 58.96 400 1.00 1.51 2.11 58.31 58.82 59.42 I 450 1.24 1.88 2.63 58.55 59.19 59.94 500 1.51 2.28 3.19 58.82 59.59 60.51 550 1.80 2.72 3.81 59.11 60.03 61.12 [1 600 1 3.19 59.42 60.51 61.79 PEAK Appendix ZII /SIN Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 12 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc E v s lir 011.1111.1Miw I IEngineering Design Report September 2011 I 650 2.45 3.71 5.19 59.76 61.02 62.50 700 2.81 4.25 5.96 60.12 61.56 63.27 750 3.19 4.83 6.77 60.51 62.14 64.08 in 800 3.60 5.44 7.63 60.91 62.75 64.94 850 4.03 6.09 8.53 61.34 63.40 65.85 900 4.48 6.77 9.49 61.79 = 64.08 66.80 950 4.95 7.48 10.49 62.26 64.79 67.80 1000 5.44 8.23 11.53 62.75 65.54 68.84 1050 5.96 9.01 12.62 63.27 66.32 69.93 1100 6.49 9.82 13.76 63.80 67.13 71.07 0 1150 7.05 10.66 14.94 64.36 67.97 72.25 1200 7.63 11.53 16.16 64.94 68.84 73.47 IL= 3684 Feet Cold = 100 d = 9.51 Inches Cnew= 150 hm = 4.69 Feet Ihd = 5 Feet C120= 120 AZ= 32.87 Feet IFlow (Q) = 1250 gpm Velocity= 5.65 fps I SYSTEM CURVE - PHASE 2 I Hazen- Williams Total Head (TDH) hfold Ht old Flow(gpm) hfnew(ft) C=120 (ft) Ht new(ft) C=120 (ft) 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.56 42.56 42.56 I 50 0.09 0.13 0.18 42.64 42.69 42.74 100 0.31 0.47 0.66 42.87 43.03 43.22 150 0.66 1.00 1.41 43.22 43.56 43.96 F 200 1.13 1.71 2.40 43.69 44.27 44.95 if 250 1.71 2.58 , 3.62 44.27 45.14 46.18 300 2.40 3.62 _ 5.08 44.95 46.18 47.64 I 350 3.19 4.82 6.76 45.75 47.38 49.31 400 4.08 6.17 8.65 46.64 48.73 51.21 450 5.08 7.68 10.76 47.64 50.23 53.32 I 500 550 6.17 9.33 13.08 48.73 51.89 55.63 7.36 11.13 15.60 49.4' 53.69 58.16 600 8.65 13.08 18.33 51.21 55.63 60.89 650 10.03 15.17 21.26 52.59 57.72 63.82 Appendix I /Ell VI Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 13 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 I 700 11.51 17.40 24.38 54.07 59.96 66.94 750 13.08 19.77 27.71 55.63 62.33 70.27 800 14.74 22.28 31.22 57.29 64.84 73.78 I 850 16.49 24.92 34.93 59.05 67.48 77.49 900 18.33 27.71 38.84 60.89 70.27 81.39 950 20.26 30.63 42.92 62.82 3 85.48 1000 22.28 33.68 47.20 64.84 76.23 89.76 111 1050 24.38 36.86 51.67 66.94 79.42 94.22 1100 26.58 40.18 56.31 69.14 82.74 98.87 1150 28.86 43.62 61.15 71.42 86.18 103.70 I 1200 31.22 47.20 66.16 73.78 89.76 108.72 1250 50.91 71.35 6.23 93.47 113.91 PEAK 1300 36.21 54.74 76.73 78.77 97.30 119.29 I 1350 38.84 58.71 82.28 81.39 101.26 124.84 1400 41.54 62.80 88.02 84.10 105.35 130.58 1450 44.33 67.01 93.93 86.89 109.57 136.49 1500 47.20 71.35 100.01 89.76 113.91 142.57 I 1550 50.16 75.82 106.27 92.72 118.38 148.83 1600 53.19 80.41 112.71 95.75 122.97 155.27 P 1650 56.31 85.13 119.32 98.87 127.69 161.88 1700 59.51 89.97 126.10 102.07 132.53 168.66 1750 62.80 94.93 133.06 105.35 137.49 175.61 1800 66.16 100.01 140.18 108.72 142.57 182.74 1850 69.60 105.22 147.48 112.16 147.78 190.03 1900 73.13 110.55 154.94 115.68 153.10 197.50 I 1950 76.73 115.99 162.58 119.29 158.55 205.14 2000 80.41 121.56 170.38 122.97 164.12 212.94 2050 84.18 127.25 178.35 126.73 169.81 220.91 I 2100 2150 88.02 133.06 186.49 130.58 175.61 229.05 91.94 138.98 194.80 134.50 181.54 237.36 2200 95.94 145.03 203.27 138.49 187.58 245.83 I 2250 2300 100.01 151.19 211.91 142.57 193.75 254.47 104.17 157.47 220.71 146.73 200.03 263.27 2350 108.40 163.87 229.68 150.96 206.43 272.24 2400 112.71 170.38 238.81 155.27 212.94 281.37 I2450 117.10 177.01 248.11 159.65 219.57 290.67 2500 121.56 183.76 257.57 164.12 226.32 300.12 I I I Appendix l I=„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 14 K:\DAL Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc M► s I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 I 4. Pump and System Curves 8f 1 I N I \ \ ii. $ t S 1 0 s S f 0 d rA + t I as 7 k s 'A- 7 .7T r u U V V V u v al co 3 U n N T . 1 C } ` 1 n i E 1\t. 1 \i'l - S el0 0 ri I S r r , r 1 0 I @ g ti m 8 (ul Hat I Appendix I Ell„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 15 K:\DAL Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I 1 Engineering Design Report September 2011 I 1 t! N ;♦ �`y $ S 0 t 1 it 0 m i. N It to I co Cl. \ 8 i uu' u' 0 5 E t 0 ~ F E FEn }I 3 n a Ito ,:\ C f f ca \I:. co 1 E EL i 0 / ; 8 \; ♦ S 1 0 . 0 N 1 p 1pp — —7 pp' t O C1 ti — .0 ... h �A N N r r r iu}Hat i Appendix .,1Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 16 K:\DAL Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc 4111111111. 4111111111111111ft 4111111. I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 I5. Energy Loss Coefficients Table Minor Loss Calculations 111 Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. I Job Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters Date 8/12/2011 I Designed By JEB Checked By MSP IEnergy Loss Coefficients FittingNalve k No. Ex It Exits 1 1 1 90o elbow,std 0.3 2 0.6 45o elbow* 0.37 12 4.81 tee,branch flow 0.75 1 1.5 Icheck valves 2.3 1 2.3 plug 0.19 2 0.38 ITotal Sk 9.47 I I I I I I I Appendix C pv= Kimley-Horn =I1 and Associates,Inc. 17 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc 1 I Engineering Design Report September 2011 I6. Cycle Time Calculations LIFT STATION DESIGN ICycle Time Calculations-Phase 1 Kimley-Hom and Associates,Inc. I Job Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters Date 8/12/2011 Designed By JEB IChecked By MSP Ground Elevation 4 513.70 ft MSL Invert Elevation= 490.00 ft MSL High Water Alarm= 489.00 ft MSL ILag Pump On= 488.50 ft MSL Pump On= 486.00 ft MSL I Pump Off= 482.00ftMSL Reset= 481.70 ft MSL Low Water Alarm= 481.00 ft MSL IBottom Wetwell= 480.00 ft MSL I Cycle Time Calculations: Qavg = 400.00 gpm Storage i 846.0 gaINLF Qpeak = 560 gpm Volume=Storage x(Pump On-Pump Off) Qpump = 800 gpm Volume 4 3383.87 gal Volume 7 452.39 ft3 > 112.30 OK I Per 30 TAC 217.61,minimum required wetwell wlume: V =(Tx Qpump)/(4 x 7.48) Now,the pump cycle time for this particular lift station can be determined using the inputted data: T = (V/Qin+V/(Qpump-Qin) Source: Appendix B,HI Pump Intake Design, 1998 EQavg = 400.00 gpm 53.5 cfm T = 16.9 min. Qpeak = 560 gpm 74.9 cfm T = 20.1 min. EQpump = 800 gpm 107.0 cfm C Appendix IIP III Ns vi Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 18 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 ILIFT STATION CALCULATIONS (CONTINUED) Average Flow Conditions Peak Flow Conditions ITime Elevation Pump Time Elevation Pump (min) (ft MSL) Status (min) (ft MSL) Status 0 482 OFF 0 482 OFF lb 1 482.47 OFF 1 482.66 OFF 2 482.95 OFF 2 483.32 OFF 3 483.42 OFF 3 483.99 OFF I 4 483.89 OFF 4 484.65 OFF 5 484.36 OFF 5 485.31 OFF 6 484.84 OFF 6 485.97 OFF I 7 485.31 OFF 7 486.63 ON 8 485.78 OFF 8 486.35 ON 9 486.26 ON 9 486.07 ON I 10 485.78 ON 10 485.78 ON 11 485.31 ON 11 485.50 ON 12 484.84 ON 12 485.22 ON 13 484.36 ON 13 484.93 ON I14 483.89 ON 14 484.65 ON 15 483.42 ON 15 484.36 ON 16 482.95 ON 16 484.08 ON I 17 482.47 ON 17 483.80 ON 18 482.00 OFF 18 483.51 ON 19 482.47 OFF 19 483.23 ON I 20 482.95 483.42 OFF 20 482.95 ON 21 OFF 21 482.66 ON 22 483.89 OFF 22 482.38 ON I 23 484.36 OFF 23 482.09 ON 24 484.84 OFF 24 481.81 OFF I I I M p Appendix r „ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 19 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc Engineering Design Report September 2011 LIFT STATION DESIGN 6 Cycle Time Calculations-Phase 2 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Job Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters Date 8/12/2011 Designed By J� Checked By MSP Ground Elevation = 513.70 ft MSL Invert Elevation= 490.00 ft MSL High Water Alarm= 489.00 ft MSL Lag Pump On= 488.50 ft MSL Pump On= 486.00 ft MSL Pump Off= 482.00 ft MSL Reset= 481.70 ft MSL Low Water Alarm= 481.00 ft MSL Bottom Wetwell= 480.00 ft MSL Cycle Time Calculations: Qavg = 625.00 gpm Storage 846.0 gal/VLF Qpeak = 1250 gpm Volume=Storage x(Pump On-Pump Off) Qpump = 1250 gpm Volume 1 3383.87 gal Volume 452.39 ft3 > 250.67 OK Per 30 TAC 217.61,minimum required wetwell volume: V =(T x Qpump)/(4 x 7.48) Now,the pump cycle time for this particular lift station can be determined using the inputted data: T = (V/Qin+V/(Qpump-Qin) Source: Appendix B, HI Pump Intake Design, 1998 Qavg = 625.00 gpm 83.6 cfm 10.8 min. Qpeak = 1250 gpm 167.1 cfm 2.7 min.** 1 Qpump = 1250 gpm 167.1 cfm ** Plus length of time at peak since Qin=Qout r Appendix M„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 20 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc I I Engineering Design Report September 2011 LIFT STATION CALCULATIONS (CONTINUED) is Average Flow Conditions Peak Flow Conditions r Time Elevation Pump Time Elevation Pump (min) (ft MSL) Status (min) (ft MSL) Status 0 482 OFF 0 482 OFF ill 1 482.74 OFF 1 483.48 OFF 2 483.48 OFF 2 484.96 OFF 3 484.22 OFF 3 486.43 ON 4 484.96 OFF 4 486.43 ON 5 485.69 OFF 5 486.43 ON 6 486.43 ON 6 486.43 ON F 7 485.69 ON 7 486.43 ON 4,, 8 484.96 ON 8 486.43 ON 9 484.22 ON 9 486.43 ON I 10 483.48 ON 10 486.43 486.43 ON 11 482.74 ON 11 ON 12 482.00 OFF 12 486.43 ON 13 482.74 OFF 13 486.43 ON I14 483.48 OFF 14 486.43 ON 15 484.22 OFF 15 486.43 ON 16 484.96 OFF 16 486.43 ON ill 17 485.69 OFF 17 486.43 ON 18 486.43 ON 18 486.43 ON 19 485.69 ON 19 486.43 ON I kw I Appendix I Ell„ Kimley-Horn 111b...INVand Associates,Inc. 21 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc Engineering Design Report September 2011 7. Available Net Positive Suction Head Calculations LIFT STATION DESIGN Available Net Positive Suction Head 0 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Job Number 63973002 Job Description Cypress Waters Date 9/23/2011 ` Designed By JEB Checked By MSP INPSHA = Hbar +IN- Hvap- hfs - hm - hvoi - FS I Barometric Pressure Static Head Hbar= 33.32 ft Atmospheric pressure at 480.29 ft above sea level hs= 1.71 ft Min. water level in wet well(Pump off- 482.00 ft.) Vapor Pressure Hvap= 3.40 ft Assume 115°F is maximum expected temperature I Pipe Friction Ns= 0.00 ft No suction piping Minor Pipe friction E h.= 0.00 ft No suction piping Volataile Organic Matter h„1= 2.00 ft Customarily estimated between 0.6 m or 2 ft Factor of Safety FS= 5.00 ft kil NPSHA = 24.63 ft > NPSHR= 18 ft Good I I I I I I 11r Appendix I /=VI Kimley-Horn \Mr I and Associates,Inc. 22 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc Engineering Design Report September 2011 8. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost # Description Units Quantity Cost Per Cost Unit Phase I—700 Units 1 Phase I Lift Station LS 1 $850,000 $850,000 2 Metering Station LS 1 $100,000 $100,000 3 SCADA EA 1 $60,000 $60,000 4 Electricity to Site EA 1 $100,000 $100,000 5 10" Force Main (Ph I LS to Beltline & Entrance LF 3,684 $65 $240,000 Road) 6 Subtotal $1,432,000 7 Construction Contingencies 15% $215,000 8 Total $1,565,000 The Consultant has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or over the Contractor's methods of determining prices or over competitive bidding or market conditions. Opinions of probable costs provided herein are based on the information known to Consultant at this time and represent only the Consultant's judgment as a design professional familiar with the construction industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual construction costs will not vary from its opinions of probable costs. Appendix II Ell„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 23 K:\DAL_Civil\063973002-CypressWaters\Phase 1\Design\Lift Station\Design Report\Lift Station Design Report_99%.doc