M c, - .-
£3.33!qu

., i

.
.51 \
Alb: . .
be...
h.”

12.1

I.

3.
‘ I
‘ 1K“ it)”
. . . V 12
. 3:315}.
.4... .fi‘ . , . , “mm? H
1W); .«util‘v » . >0 ...0 Juana-l.

 

  

 

drawn“? .s.

, .Lfifl. $34.2: I

_ 2.- .04.- .11.. ..v.. v
..e. ,..£........_ . :. f. .Eh.wcm«n$flf.

   

 

 

 
   

    

      

   
   

r Syrngfirfii ‘41.; .
l, . . , 5.1.5): .33.. .. . . .4 ntinalf.
.4ku..$x...... ‘ . 1:!“ ,
M .. iffl:=£fl£1:wyu.§ ..,.,.....w.‘mm3. . .. I ‘
‘ . O. gdbru.un.‘u.Lv—slrc~ A .m... it .C: 4
Iii.....\h..2§y ri! _ hfdnmml. .mkqv in}? , .. .. . ‘ ..nl.l .. I‘
. m2. «2%.»? . ferns-$.35. ”sign? a. y ‘ . t ,.,,.u..,..|\:

   

,rémaésggg.

ENTARY
SHERLTEMRIAL

' INBACKOF

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 p:/ClRC/DaleDue.indd-p.1

 

 

 

.9 :I-I.‘ ‘I'IITIIIIA

DRAIHADE SYSTEK

"‘. I.“ :‘ ‘-‘~
3) LL\.‘ I\1 q o

A Thesis Smeittud to
The Faculty of
MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE
. of

*1
1-4

AGRICULT077 AND APPLIED SCIE‘CE.

{I}
«3

, ,.r’ ,
Um? Bi Reinicne. Fred W1 Moore.
w

Caniiiases for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science
in

Civil Entineering.

June 1935.

THE-‘83?)

"Engineering for Land Drainaje" by Elliott.
"American Civil Engineer? Pocket Book" by Herriwan.
"Hanibook of Construction Equipment" by Dana.
"Drainage in Michigan" by Miller and Simyons.
'Handboox of Cost D133“ by Gillette.

”Michigan Agricultural Collere Exreriment Station

Bulletin" - - "Utilization of Mlck Lands."

“in" .

APPEECIATTQU.

The writers wish to a 9 this opportunity
to eXpress their thanks t” the members of the
Civil Engineerinw Determent, especiillv to
Professors C. L. alien and F. A. Gould, and
to the menbers of the Farm Crepe Department
and Soils Department of Michigan State College,
and also to Hr. Victor Hikan, of Dureni, Michigan,
for their aid renicred in the preparation of

this work.

10mg; "1' D W3 "I 7‘ ' ni‘ ~
- . u_v. . A 4..

Fred W. Moore.

DJ
.13

i av

INTRODUCTION'

In various places of the southern part of Michigan
there are quite large areas of low or marshy land, sur-
rounded in most cases by nooi firming land ani near good
markets. The soil in these marshy places is usually rich
in plant food, the soil deep and free from rocks - - much
better, in itself, thin the soil Surroundinq it.

But due to the level of the ground being so low, he soil

is cold and wet, sometimes flooded, and so can ot be used

'for any useful Irming purposes. It is usually used for

pasture, or perhaps a little hay of a very inferior quality
is cut from it. Such land is valued at only about twelve
dollars per acre, while land right beside it, not nearly so
rich in plant food, rocky or hilly is vallued at one hundred
dollars_per acre or more.

If only such areis co.ld be drained, they would immediately
assume a value equal to or in excess of the land surrounding
them , and the productivity of the farms concerned would be
greatly increased by this opening Up of new farming drums.

Some such places, of course, could not be drained without
installing pumping stations, and lifting the water over
levees or enbiqkments. In most cases the cost of such a
drainage system woull be far in excess of tne benefits to be

0

Rainel cv it.

g3But some other areas require much simpler and Cheaper
drainage. They have a river or small stream flowing throurh

them, but usually it winds and meanders around so much that

its velocity is much less than it should be. This low

ivelocity and the fact that the land is so level ant that the

runoff is very slow, accounts for a good deal of the excess

"water in the soil. Added to these two factors is, of course,

the additional one of the soil level bein: only slightly above
the water level in the stream.

‘ In most of these latter named cases, about all that is
required to make this soil good and productive is to straighten
out the drainage changel so the velocity of the water will

be increased, and then insure a quicker runoff by the

1installation of a system of tile drainage.

This is the condition encountered in the area under
consideration in this work, the south one-half of the southeast
Oneefourth of Section 19 of Township 2 South Range 1 West in
Jachson County, Michigan. Here we have a small stream,
meandering through a valley about 4000 feet wide all of which
is marshy. Surrounded by gool farminr land, any of which}
“will sell for one hundred dollars per acre, this marshy land
is valued at twelve dollars per acre. Its only use is as
'rather poor pasture, and as a source of marsh hay, worth

:about‘one-fourth or one-fifth what cultivated hay such is

ishould be grown there is worth.

i
i
E

i

-2-

The authors in uniertaking this work wish to find if
it will be possible to drain this area, and change this
poor and unproductive land into some such valuable pronerty
as it seems that it should he, and di cover if the cost of

the improvement would he more than would be justified by the

benefits gained.

STATEKENT OF PfiOBLEfl.

It shall be the purpose of this worn then, to do

the following things:

1. Investigate the feasibility and probable
benefits to be derivei from changing the

river channel through this area.

3. Investigate the practicability of a tile
drainage system, and if dee ed advisable

to design such a system.

3. To determine the probable cost of such an

improvement.

SECTION NO. I.

CHANNEL CHANGE.

As shown by the accompanying map, the river flors at
this point in a side are so that its length is almost tvice
what would be necesSary if a direct Chan 81 were nade from
the south to the north side of the area. S ortenins this
distance by a new channel would give a are ter velocity and
so carry the water away faster. An investigation of th:
possibility of this is now pronosed.
Three HOOd sized lakes only about a mile upstream act
as a reservoir to pracaicllly eliminate a large flooi flo ,
so the channel need not be designed for very extreme eoniitions.
One of tn? writers has lived for ten yea“s within eight
of the river, so his knowledge as to the maximum flow to
be expected, based on his long observation, was used in the
computations for the size of the new channel. Measurements
of the depth of water and size of the old channel were pale,
at a time ween the flor was about fifty per cent of the
maximum. The computati;ns for this are foani on the
accompanyth‘ng :omrutition sheet Number 1.
The prOposed new channel does not follov the shortes
possible line between its upper and lower enis. Insteai it

is deflected slightly in order to follow the erperty line,

since the area under consideration belongs to two different
faras. But this deviation is so slight, and the increasci
length so negligible, that tfis course was deenei aivisable.

In the computations for earth work; quantities in the
channel change, a constant cross section YLS assured, instead
of the more often used method of c;oss sections at regular
intervals and computation of quantities by eni areas. At
first this seems inaccurate, but in View of the very level
nature of the ground, and the fact that a straight grade was
a sumed for the channel, this WLS deened to be entirely
sufficient.

To arrive at :his cross section the mean depth W1:
taken from the profile, by addins up all the cuts at the
different stations, and liviiin; by the total nunber. Siie
s10pes of 2:1 were assured, and a bottom vidtn of seven feet,
which see found to be slfficient (Computati n Sheet Nlnber l).

in conclusivn, it seems that such a channel vouli be
a very good thin , ani would serve very well the purpose for
whish it is intended, and so such a channel change shouli be

put in as the first step in draining this area.

Campotation sheet No. 1.
Determinition of Flow nun Xecccsnrj Size of flew Channel

For tnese computations Kutter's formula was used, as

follows:

 

 

1 + Z;l.6 + LQ%§%7I%%:/

when v 3 velocity of flow
9 - slooe of channel
n a coefficient of rougnness, varying witn each
type of channel

Qhwnnel'nr

a
r h‘draulic rquius 3
' J wetteu ycrihntc

SECTION NO. II.

TILE DQAI?AGE SYSTEM.

In the study of the possibility for a. tile delineate
systen five th}n s are n30essxry, as follows:

1. A contour non of the area.

8. A study of the erecticsbility of 1 tile
drainage svstem for the area.

3. A determination of the plan sni grades
of the various systems.

4. Determination of tile sizes in the virious
parts of the systems.

5. An estimate of the cost.

To obtain the dets for the contour may a transit ani
stadia survey was made of the entire area. A magnetic
hearing was used to establish a base line, as it was not
deemed necessary to tuke the extra trouble to establish
a true meridian for this problem, which was in no way
connected with any other project.

For similar reasons a purely arbitrary istuw plane
was assured and two bench marks nlseei in outstanding trees
on the edges of the urei. The location uni elevations of

these bench marks are given on the accompanying sup. So far

-7-

as the purnose of this investigation is concerned, this
seemed entirely adequate, and at any tire a reduction to
mean sea level data is necessary it can be so reducei by'
reference to these bench marks establishor.

From this base line, then, and with this assumei
elevation, a transit and stiui» survey Was made, and later
plotted up and the contour man of the area drawn.

In this survey distances were ne.sured to tie nearest
foot, and elevations were usually taken to the nearest
tenth of a foot. Angles w;re measured very carefully,
sepecially in moving the transit from one point to another.

In making the map, the contOurs were drawn with a
contour interval of five tenths of a font, because of :ho
extremely level ground surface.

The next problem, then, was to stuiy the practicability
of a tile drainage system for the area. On the west siie,
no especial difficulties were encountered. There it His
easily apparent that a very good drainage system could be
installed , which would take care of the excess soil water
and while the slone might be a little flat, tnis could be
taken care of b" increasing sovewhat the size of the tile.

But on the east side, or the system designated as
the "C” system, more difficulty was encointerel. This is
the area through whicn the streamnnow flows, so it is,

of course, the lowest ground of all. Investigation snowed

-8-

only a small difference in elev tion bethen the ground
surface and the bottom of the proyosed channel c anxe.

In Merrimuns ”AmeriCLn Civil Engineers Pocket Book":derth
for dreinuse tile of tWo and one-half feet is recommenled,
.to avoid damage from freezing, und interference With
cultiVition of the land.

Such a depth, however, Wis found to be impossible,
if any lepe wus to he Flinnined in the tile line. But it
Wis found that if the bogto: of the tile 1118 were alicei
two feet deep, this would make available a alone which fits
considered adequite, and would paimit the laterals to h:
Laid at a sufficient deith, since tne ground slcpes up on
each side of the preposed location of this “C“ main.

This nronosed placing of the nain tile at such a
shallow depth, howevur, introduced the danger of bre hing
it by cultiVution of the land, or by wheels driving over it.
But it Was thouuh‘ thit this danger mi ht be avoiled by
leaving uncultivated a strip of land about five or ten fenfi
vide, directly over this main tile. Such a strip would
soon become heavily nodded and would nuke an excellent
protection for the tile underneath.

It is admizted thut each u thing would b: bothersoxe
in an otherwise unobstricted field, sni would usually be

poor practice. But since the drainage of the entire system

depends upon a main placed at the: locativn, and this

s ems the oniy safe way to have a main so placed, it W18

(0

deemed advisable ani practicable t: do this.

So it seems that a tile driihage systeh for this sr:i
is praczioable, and Coali be made to reiuoe the water level
sufficientlw to make the iahi a gooi farming area.

The next item, the determination of the plan and :reies
for the different systems, WlS comparltively Sim; e. he
p113 was so run one larze main, with literals lendth orf
from one or both siies, degehiin; on the conto r of the
grooni. Virious authorities consulted as to the necess.ry
distance differed rather widely, but it was thou ht thxt
in View of the sandy, fdrily porous nets:e of the soil 4
distance between drains of one hundrei fiftv feet, as
reCOrwended in Elliott‘s "Engineering for Susi Drainage",
would be about right. T215, than, was the distance ueei
in drawing on the plan of the stains.

An effort was made wherever possible to have the

d31ihs follow the “ltdril SlOpG of the ground. The ms'n

V1,

benefit from this W18 to decree.e the necessary am unt o
excavation for the tile lines, and get us much fall as
possible.

The grades for each system were miffercnt, but the sime
v“&ic WIS adonte. for all parts of excn individual system.

.‘~

This was deemei better, in viex of the var level srouni,

-10...

than to break grade in the msins, or to use a number of
different grades in the laterals, ani increasei the necessary
excavation only verv slightlv if at all.

This grade was erriven at by plicihg ghe upper end 0;
then, knowing the length of the main, lay a straight wraie
for its entirelength, uti izing all the fell nViileble.

The anins were made fairly short in the “A" and "B"

e size of txe tile 103. But in

{3‘

svsteme, in order to keep t

i

the case of the "C" system this could not be done, for cv=ry

bit of fell aViilable had to b utilized to obtain enough

(B

of a firede to keep the tile free from seginent. As a result
We hive a quite long tile, with guite large sizes.

The next item necessary Wis the determination of the
sieve of tile necessary. Poncelets formula was nerd 1n
the Computations for these tile sizes, and the work is shotn
on the :10n.::x')1~11;-c111yins; computations since 3.

in every case large: tile was us d than would apps r
necessary fron these computations. The reasons for these
larger sizes were is follow». The Iraie in ewerv case is

quite flat, uni the soil is a fine, often silty send or

(I)

muck. ThEs will hive 80:3 teni ncy to enter the tile sni
010' it. This woali :ende: useless e swell tile line, but a

ment'without heco in; fully

P-

larger one could s;and some sci

.l.‘

stopped up. So for these reisons larger tile were used than

-11-

wonld at first appear to be necessary. TdiS will, of
course, make the first cost of tne project more then if
smaller tile were us;d, but it wil be e much more
perranent imprOchjnt.

plln the tile sizes are

(I)

It will be notei tnlt on tn
increased to 16" on the ”C" syssen, without any new tile
snovn entering the shin. This wee done with the ides in
mind that later the area Berth of that in this problex

might be drainefi, and this main is made large enou*h :0

to

cure for this gossible futire developmen..
The last item of this section, the cost, will he began
care of in the next section.
In conclusion, it seems that this lend can well be
drlined by a system of tile trains e as here outlined. The

systems "A" and "B" are good and suffiCicn: systems, their

only drawbacks being the; sumewhat oversizz tile have been

'V‘

deemed necessary. The system "J” is not eogood, ovinr to
the fact that the main must be laid so shallow, nni ls he
snn eXpensive tile ;re necessezy at the lower eni. But
,3

these obstacles were unavoiilole, ani are no: considerei

seriOus enou n to renier tne ;r03eot imprscuicsble.

.‘J‘itr

Couputution Sheet No. 2.

Quantity of Flow in 01d 3 «duel

8 a .00078
n g .030
I‘ I 1.43

v 0 1.05 feet/Beoond
q . area 3 velocity . (20 x 1.05) . 21 cu.ft/'eec

f“

*nis was estimated to bc 50 per cent maximum flow.

Quantity of Flow in New Channel
Agsumad bottom width of 7 feet, side slopes 2 to 1, and

depth of water 2,5 feet.

1' . 1.0375

v a 2.18 ft sec.

Q s 22 x 2.18 . 48 cu. rt/hec.

Since this quantity is more than tne estimated maximum

flow, tnis onnnnel is conuiuerea wnolly adequate.

Computation Shae No. 3.
Tile Sizes.

Ponoelets formula for velocity in closed channels:

.___-r ---—.«

,“‘&h
3 ,
v 111/be4

when V a velocity
m a constant for each tile size
a lengtn of tile
h a head in fee

d a tile diameter in feet

To find area drained by anon 8129 of tile. Runoff

coefficient equals 1/4 inch/’24 hour.

n Q3 --------- 16 inch tile.

“D”

yléfis x 2.6 _ .~
' ' 47 1000*.(54 x 1.33) 9'”’ ft/bcc'

 

Jiscgurge 3 Area (sq. ft.) x velocity (ft./hec.)

» . 1.39 x 2.66 . 3.71 cu. ft/heo.

fl. dinohnrre
runoff coefiic ant

 

Possible area drained .
A I “i“"r'ff'" ' 733-3 .'*.C‘1.“3:-".

Therefore a 16 inch tile is ample for the drain Ca.

('

Canputation agcct U0. 4.

drain Ch ----------- 12 inch tile.

 

2 - Q‘.

v 45 /r_ —-- .3' ft .3 ,

c 946 + 94 . (”0 /£‘0

.0 3 .785 X 636 u .5 CU. ft/HGC/

°§__ 47 5 .cr 3
A’.‘0‘1‘05 " ° '1 e

The"cfcce a 12 inch tile is HLDWG for Cb.

A
- u o u an O - O O a .1 fl - o- - u o a C ’ a O - u . p u o. .-

.23? :1 Cd a---------~."- 10 111011 tile.

’
q-
(9*
m—m

. ——Q

(1') ‘2 ') 3'1”} ‘
v . 44 /&L‘J‘J 3"“ . .705 ft/sec.
1"

n . .5375 x .765 . .411 cu. ft/éec.

.41]
A ' .0105

 

. 39 acres.

Therefore a 10 inch tile in «mple for Cd.

Lgaina AQL>BfiL73nd Cc -------- 8 incn tile.

 

. 0 FT)? x 3'4 4.47 ff. pee.
v 4 (150) +‘T54 x .67) . /

D - .549 x 4.47 - 1.55 cu. {t/aec.

1.56 r h
A . m . 147.0,01‘69.

" ' ' ... - 4 v 0|". ‘
Thercrore an 8 nah tile is nrple For awninn Aa, Ba, uni Le

10—: “

./’

All L'iteii‘fllfl - ----- - M 1:10.. Lilc.

 

1 r r)
v . :56 /-‘-’-—-—"~;‘=;—§ . 1.0": ft/sec.

600
Q a .197 x 1.6? o .528 cu. ft/cco.
'08 ,
A.- _&“2“ 3 . 1 . .
.0105 I 1 15 acres

Therefore a 6 inch tile iv

flute:

Boil tcrougu whicn they are laid.

All sizes arc taken large because of tnc candy

C"-
5.2114

Toe co :8 of this improvement are

’V
U

T10? NO. III.
(MDSP?.
xcll snoxn la

suite

‘

toe foIIOViog eStimlto coasts. Some explanition, however,

as to flu? those costs wc:e arrive} at will be neo ssury.
Toe astoors spool some time sacking informatio; on

too subject from viriocs sources, WithOJt much success.

Roshorc, aposrsnsLy, could be foonfi

information as to c v

t of

verv good and recent

excavation, laying and backfilling

v0.3

for toe file system.

So a request Wis miic to a frisniiy contractor,
151:. Victor Mixm, living: at Exam” if.cni;;~.z1,wiio owns a
iitcoing machine rod loos o :004 deal of this kind of W rk.
The liCROTS desire to tags this Opportudity to think h-
for his kini assistiocc.

His estimate of cos 5 for machine t,enching, laying tile,
ind ozckfillin , son for i-ioxing frm/tue railroad to :33
film have been used. Competitive bidding on the job might

r.su1t in a lover price,

3'3 to t.

The costs for tile delivered a

[‘0
U

}M)10t 1?

Products Company (Michigin Bronco) with offic

michigan. This tile is,

bu; the autiors h.vs made no attgmpt

J.
U

the

re taken from a price list of the American Vitrified

P

I

s at Jazkson,

of course, higher in price to.n

-13-

orzin‘irv drain tile, but is brought out in another part of

his .eport, the added expense Wes thought justifiable.
In computing the cost of excavatinr the channel change,
the authors are indebted to Mr. F. A. Gouid of tee Civil

Engineering Department, eni to information obtained frow the

”Handbook of Cost Data" by Gillette, in ietermining upon a

suitable unit price for excavation. The unit price miv seem

cf

rather low, but in viev of the fee thut no rocks or vary

‘iiffioult excavation is to be anticipated, and that it will

not be nece‘snrv to heal the excavated earth for any very

great distance, it Was thought by the authors to be enrle.
Tne estimate sheets covering each item of cost, e~e

found imweiiateiy following this section.

-14-

C3"C

78103.

A8 a result of the inqiiry ani investigation embodiei
in the report, it seems that this lsin'i 1;:1y very we“). be
urgined, and that if it is drained its vllue hill be ino:elsed

more than enough to
mne cost of the
pzr .c1e, wh ch is a

the
Agricult 111“ :11 C01 113;;
U; i.iizatien of Huck
tvili

e: 020 e, and

It will raise corn, preferably eaeiiege

1 henvy, renh vzow

may, yieldin

farm a

an

V

th

very of

may» 6 1 t.

improvement

fairl=

1,111 ' G

Exo Iirn

1‘,"

riiee no:

economical;

N
31‘

this land

As brought

this land is

l' .)
\a

V worth while.

average $3 about Fifty Dollars

35h but not at all pronibltive

xvo L11 :1 ‘ 1"oba .:

out in the Hichigen

Gilt 813.1;t1311 131511133111 ”The.

good for e VitiOEY

tum the 11.111 13.11 rounrii

corn, requ ring
1.19 ".011 {.25 his h I‘ 1-3.7.4. it “.111 :I'OW
ton t*e and one-half to thiee tone tor

acre, as brought out in .h; afOI euentiened bulleticn. A

yield of 2”O tine ;: acre on lend ulnoinEnm 18 21 te uncommon.
On lannn of u eirilni n tuza, on the e1he fury,

buck iny1t win IIVUI to ytxun: ago, 111131 yiellei d.ll)t 1 core

of 1bout w.elve dollare per acre, after all expenu 5 :et,

111d. There is no re 180m why this land will not do the

Sine, as this was not an e51eciz'1i y fivo-nule year.
Aimin, 1e broi ht out in the bulietiz mentioned, it Will

5

r1215 : LfUCK

1ni such crepe

- ‘
‘ b
L

onions, beets, etc., v;rv

successfully. To globe Iron this .ulletin, "tflfl arei (“n
the :3. Chis: 1-111 State Pris-son Fem, on much 15111.1) 17:15 11:71:31-

‘

in1tely 81‘ x and O‘e-q111tter acres. It was fertili%ei n

H.
c+
{3‘

‘ ‘ f :"f‘ " vs a ‘ 1 .4 ' ' r 7‘ I. ‘ ' ' V . " - .‘ r- .1; h ‘2' fl"
«.LDOLA‘C 119v 81.1 611L151“ [011.113 01 (40.1.1131: horee 131131.128 1111.1 .9, 1(5)

. - V 3 ‘ - s (.4 ., . , L‘ ,‘ ‘ ‘ .~. ~.. +fi '\ M”
IJOUD‘M‘. ($1444 120111111.) 1.. 231' :Qlflr‘l) O 1. c3. (.01.,41‘: .. 3 1 ‘21' 31 .L iZQI' o 1.33

foilOWing yields weze obti inegz ESCO crates of onions, Lie

4 ‘W' “ \ “- - ' -- . ' -. 1‘ 'TAI‘Av '50-, ‘ . \ - . - - -- -\ .- ,I.
Cldbjb of bGéfih, &pw£ 11:1tely mace e11tee or e1rroto, 1ni

Certiiniy land that will yielr. crops 121:3 that 1.; .1. rth
tne expennituze of fifty doilare per acre for irmln1g3.

But ictuallv the cost of tnle vork alone is leoe hin
thit, for no small per t of the 30:11 id t11en up by the
lover pact of the "C" Sf-SLOM main. This past of 343 ey‘tsm
buy with a good deal of reason be 511. te- n,rve tne are.

nur,n of tn: tract under on..ide"ation

O

V
G)
I
I.
(J
(i)
’—
k‘l’
(‘
M
Q;
IV
(D

in gar in size to care for tie proo1dili3v of vantin; 3”

connect once 1: for itiining this are1. So a.good pirt of

the cost of tnle rain m1; be 11(31111'101‘eri .18 a. part of t»;

.eoet of draining; this other; :1re.1, 11.133.20.111 on.) iubte 11y be

,1ii for as seen by agreement with the owner of the e:,1
The drainage system as here outlinei would be

vitrified

L4
u)
0
r0,

absolusely permanent. This is aeeure i by the i:

')

tile, and of the large sizes ueai. 11 the 0£ner of tn: 11nd

-lG-

desired to out :19 factor of safety sorewhnt - — which, in
the opinion of the authors, 0011d be done and still hale Sore
margin of safety - - the cost could be apvreciably out by
using: ordinary rirt-iin tile, or by Join: 4" laterals. Tn;
sizes 15-E are vebv conservative; more, even, than is
1oualiy recommended. So if it W18 desired to be a little
£033 liberml in dzsign, a finite aypreciable savinf in cost

1

could be effecte. in that Wiy.

-1Q-

 

Estimate Sheet No. 1.

Excavation for £93 Covnnel and Cost.

From computations as enown on Computation finest Mo. 1,
a bottom of 7 feet with a 2:1 eiue slope and a depth of 2.5

feet will be adequate.

Average depth of the channel 18 2.7 feet from profile.
The cross-section area using a depth of 2.7 feet is
3‘6. 48 81Uflt‘e feet 0

Lengtn of channel is 2175 feet.

__§3.48 x 2175

269? cubic yards.
27

2697 cu. yde. o 3.20 8 $539.40

Estimate

6 inch Tile

0
0

Sheet No.

Drainage Systems A. B. a C.

2.

O

Lengths and Sizes of Tile Required

 

 

Length Average: Length Average: Length Average
No. in Depth :No. in oepth :No. in flepth
_“1 Feet in Feet; Feet in Feet: Feet in Feet
.Ab ... 400 5.00 ; Bf... 700 3.00 :Cm ...900 3.2
no ... 770 2.50 : 33... 750 3.00 :Cn .. 910 3.25
,Ad ... 740 2.75 : Co...1800 5.00 :00 .. 490 2.50
ne 740 2.75 : Of 420 5.00 :Cp 590 2.75
Af 570 2.75 : Cg 570 3.00 :Lq 440 2.75
Ag 165 2.75 : Ch 710 2.75 :Cr 400 5.00
be 510 2.75 : 0i 500 5.00 :03 560 5.00
no 500 2.25 : 03 590 5.00 :Ct 510 2.50
ha 310 2.50 : Ck' 750 3.50 :Cu 510 2.50
Be 640 2.75 : Cl 780 5.25 :Cv 90 .QLQQ
Total l7;?05 ----
Average ----- 2.82fi
Cost of tile delivered at nearest freight depot $1,342.00

8 incn Tile

4

 

 

Ho. Length in feet Average depth in feet
An 160 3.00
Ba 160 2.75
Ce 470 2.75
Total 790 Average 2.94
Cost of tile delivered at nearest freight depot $98.00

Estimate Sheet No. 3

Lengths and Sizes of Tile Required

Drainage Syeteme A. B. h C. (con't).

10 incn Tile

 

gmm
No. Length in feet Average depth in feet
Cd 600 2.75

 
   

-.A «.7 -..-y -—-—-

Cost of tile delivered at nearest freight depot $107.00

12 incn Tile

 

No. Length in feet Average Jepth in feet

M 4*
_

Cb ' 640 3.00

 

 

Cost of tile delivered at nenreet freight depot $153.00

16 inch Tile

 

 

 

 

-~*:+*~_ ~:=====2============================Ifll=====flfl
ho. Length in feet Average depth in feet
Ca 750 5.00

A—M -——— -..

Cost of tile delivered at neareet freight depot $500.00

Estimate Sheet Ho. 4.

Number of hrencnee heeded

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Size Number Unit Total
of of Cost Cost
.__.311€__ Branches w__ 1. :=
15 in. 1 3 1.75 0 1.75
12 in. 6 1.11 6.55
10 in. 9 .82 7.40
8 i“. 6 0:)8 3.50
5 in. 9 .55 3.20

@220 50

- I. ....- __—_. .._._.__.3'

Total coet of tile laid down at nearest freight depot 52,022.50
Coat of trucking to Job -- 5 milee at $2.00 per

ton-mile, 134 tons U $6.00 .................... T 804.00

Coat of tile on the job ............. 52,825.50

 

Cost of excavation and laying tile:

5 incn tile, 1060 rods U 3.50 $636.00
8 iUCU tile, 48 reds u .60 50.50
10 in., 12 in., and 16 in. com-
bined, 120.5 reds u .60 72.59
Total ...... $739.00
Cost of beck-filling, 12:28.5 rods 9 £3.11 $5.00
Total cost of excavation, laying and backfilling :: 574L00

 

Total ooet of system .................. $3,700.50

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

570.211»

 

 

 

   

, ,3 ”genie.
, “We, :1.

 

 

   
 

 

Sic. 01-00
Sr: km A

  

 

 

 

 

 
  

 

    

fiance" - , a sea/1,.”
" , I; «’3 /Qs;‘
b it“ 3' C ..

‘ ‘ e, x "r‘ I~6 ”

‘ ¢ . 499‘“. +70

   

 

      

oaal/

    
 

GJ’dd:
"19'"
9‘
OI

   

570.!

C ... 90’... ' n

 

 

   

/ 8001_ 6 [a
V
\

 

 

    
 

 

 

 
      

' ‘ " 5 ‘ s ‘ ~ 77
‘ 1‘60 / 4:. .
V 7 ‘— . ’53:»,
l/
b 6 , 29¢! ‘
‘ " 2 ' “W" "‘““ ' *v ‘ “*““*““'*“ “‘ * "23.73 8731:." '3‘". v
Q

     

 

I.
7 ' ’ ,e
. ‘ >¢ ' / 1 ~
’ “ \ 0 . v
(I, ' ‘ 1 v s‘ ' ’2,»

-‘- ’i. .5 ~53 7' ._”_ » .
6x 0’: 0(6' 5/6,” ooo, 9- < , 7 ' t: «”50» 69567 ,‘

15-. 39. 5+7:
I »'I .1.

 
   
  

              

u’\
x "

 
 

5‘3

        
 
 

.4 =- i~ ' - .. 5+2.
V. ; > A /I$}S”

‘23 84” ' 39- r .
.8~° ' , 2 0—. aver,

L/A/E PEA/:5 ,v

  

' ' 7.183
“0 ”xv
‘ 1 \r

 

 

. ‘ , , r 7‘ a1"_- wit "2""
m ’ -‘ 2 , . a

73
13
6 I]:
319541;.

I

    

4;:

   

 

 

      
 

 

 

   

\ a1, ‘ ‘ Q
t \3 ' . 4" as“ 92
. ‘\ . ,, . x r 9::
a ‘ 3'.“ ,j 7 0 “a; l * _
r 0‘ Vs 6 * 615.9330» .\
N: \l * ,
§

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 

 

 

   
 

‘ , 1MB. P33103597

A V sea/e. [“21 a“

 

  

 

“-

.
.

... .. ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘nwmmn; NH 71°11‘17“

|
H

3

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
I?

 

.I
o
9
9
o
7
6
2
0
3
9
2
.I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

                   

 

 

 

 

  

 

4..
.

 

 

   

  

......
...