Engineering Tools / H&H Tools

Channel Lining Design Calculator

Check whether grass, riprap or another lining can withstand the flow in a roadside or open channel, and how large the stone must be.

Results

Enter your values; the answer appears here as you type.

The curve appears with a result.

Shear stress method
The FHWA HEC-15 procedure (3rd ed., 2005), which TxDOT Hydraulic Design Manual Ch. 7 §3 follows. Normal depth is solved with the lining’s n recomputed at each trial depth. Applied shear on the bottom is τd = γyS; on side slopes K1τd; in bends Kbτd. A location is within permissible shear when τp ≥ SF·τ.
Grass
n = 0.213 Cn τ0−0.4 with Cn from cover condition and stem height. Permissible shear combines soil and cover: τp = τp,soil/(1 − Cf)·(n/ns)². Non-cohesive soil: τp,soil = 0.4 D75; cohesive soil: you enter it.
Riprap, cobble and gravel
Blodgett roughness for da/D50 from 1.5 to 185. τp = F*(γs − γ)D50 with Shields’ parameter and the least safety factor from the particle Reynolds number; stable D50 for the bottom and the side slopes.
Other linings and concrete
Enter n and, for mats or gabions, the manufacturer’s permissible shear. For a rigid lining leave it blank: shear, Froude number and depth are still reported.
Bends and freeboard
Kb from Rc/T, length of protection below the bend Lp = 0.60 R7/6/n, superelevation Δd = V²T/(gRc). Freeboard is your criterion.
Ranges
Outside a published range the calculator stops and says why: da/D50 below 1.5 (Bathurst), riprap slopes above 10% (HEC-15 Eq. 6.11), soil D75 above 2 in.

The calculator is tested against the cases below every time its code changes.

CaseWhatReferenceValues comparedLargest differenceResult
The table loads with the calculator. The same results are in verification.json.

Tolerance: 1% or half a unit of the last printed digit; a wider tolerance is used only where a published example rounds an intermediate value, with the reason recorded. Hydraulic Toolbox lining runs are scored at the depth of its second run (owner decision O8).

  • Steep-slope riprap sizing (HEC-15 Eq. 6.11) and the Bathurst roughness for shallow flow over large stone are not included; the calculator stops instead.
  • The angle of repose of riprap is an input (HEC-15 Fig. 6.1). The permissible shear of cohesive soils is an input (HEC-15 Eq. 4.6 or Fig. 4.1).
  • Composite linings (for example a riprap bottom with grass sides) are not combined yet.
  • The FHWA Hydraulic Toolbox computes the grass effective shear with soil grain roughness 0.016 even for coarser soils; this calculator follows HEC-15 Eq. 4.4, and that value is not scored.
  • Your city, county or TxDOT may set the design frequency, freeboard and lining types. Those criteria decide the design.

What is permissible shear?
The largest shear stress a lining resists without eroding, from the FHWA HEC-15 tables and equations for grass, riprap and other linings. The check compares the maximum bed shear, γ d S, times your safety factor with the permissible shear (HEC-15 Eq. 3.2), on the channel bottom and on the side slopes.
What if the lining fails the check?
Use a stronger lining (for example larger riprap), reduce the slope with drops, or widen the channel so the flow runs shallower. The results show the shear next to the permissible value at each location checked, so you can try each option.
Does this check bends and steep channels?
Bends are checked with the HEC-15 bend factor and the superelevation of the water surface. Slopes steeper than 10% are outside the HEC-15 riprap method used here, and the calculator refuses them rather than extend it.
Can I attach the calculation sheet to a design report?
You can print it and include it as a supporting calculation that you have checked. It is a calculation aid, not a sealed engineering document: the engineer of record reviews it and is responsible for the design, and the criteria of the reviewing agency decide which methods and values apply.

TopicReference
Flexible liningsFHWA (2005). Design of Roadside Channels with Flexible Linings, HEC-15, 3rd ed., FHWA-IF-05-114.
Texas practiceTxDOT Hydraulic Design Manual, Chapter 7 — Channels, §3 Channel Design and §6 Channel Analysis Methods.
Riprap roughnessBlodgett, J.C. (1986). Rock Riprap Design for Protection of Stream Channels near Highway Structures, USGS WRI 86-4127.
Reference program (verification)FHWA Hydraulic Toolbox 5.5.3.0 (public domain), run by HERO E&C on 2026-11-01.

Need an engineer’s review of this calculation?

HERO E&C prepares drainage and floodplain studies, channel and culvert design, HEC-HMS / HEC-RAS models, and development permit applications across Texas.

Request a review

A free calculation aid using the published methods above. Not a sealed engineering document; the engineer of record is responsible for design. HERO E&C · TBPELS Firm F-27793.

Full disclaimer

A free calculation aid. This calculator applies the published methods named on this page to the inputs you enter. It is not a sealed engineering document, has not been reviewed by a licensed professional for your project, and no warranty is expressed or implied. Check the results independently before using them for design, bidding or permitting.

The criteria of the reviewing agency decide which methods and values apply to a design. The engineer of record is responsible for the design.

Using this calculator does not create an engineer–client relationship. Calculations run in your browser; your inputs are not sent to or stored by HERO E&C. HERO E&C · TBPELS Firm F-27793.