Adena Gadera Report

Hydrology Report for Minor Bridge over Adena Gadera River at km 5 of Gadoliya-Pilkhi-Ghansali
Motor Road in the State of Uttarakhand
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Sr. Description Page
No. Number
1 Main Objective & Scope of Work 2
2 General Description of the Project Site 2
3 Data Collection and Data Analysis 3
4 Hydrological and Hydraulic Studies for Minor 5
Bridge
5 Scour Depth 17
6 Summary and Recommendations 17
7 References 21
1
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
1.1 Main Objective & Scope of Work
The main objective of the hydrological and hydraulic study is to determine the
required size of drainage structures to allow the estimated design flow of the
streams to cross the road safely, and to check whether waterways of existing
structures are sufficient to transmit the flow without risk so that appropriate
decisions could be taken concerning their rehabilitation.
The hydrological and hydraulic study for the project has been based on:
 Topographic survey data of cross drainage structures
 Topographic data and maps of streams, upstream and downstream
 HFL from local enquiries and telltale marks and hydraulic conditions at the
existing drainage structures.
The scope of Work is to prepare the Detailed Hydrological Report for the
Minor Bridge at design chainage 5+000 km over Adena Gadera River.
1.2 General Description of the Project Site
The minor bridge lies on Gadoliya – Pilkhi – Ghansali Motorable road near Tehri
in the state of Uttarakhand at km 5. The road alignment on which the bridges under
consideration falls in the hydro meteorological sub zone of Western Himalayas 7
between longitudes 730 to 810 East and latitudes 290 to 370 North. Major area of
the subzone is under intense irrigation. Forests are located in the areas northeast
and southeast of the zone.
The highest elevation is El.8611 m above MSL located in the Karakoram ranges
in Western Himalayas part of the zone and the lowest elevation is El.300 m above
MSL in the plain areas of U.P. and Punjab.
2
In the northern areas of the zone, skeletal soil along with saline and alkali soils are
found. The areas around Indus River are covered with mountain meadow soils.
Sub mountain soils are located in the central north-west to north-east areas of the
zone. The southern areas are covered with brown hill soil. The areas located in the
vicinity of the subzone 1e are covered with tarai soils. Nearly 75% area located in
north, north-east and south-east of subzone is waste. The annual normal rainfall
over the zone is highly variable ranging from less than 100 mm over Leh to a
maximum of more than 3000 mm. This part of the sub zone experience mean daily
temperatures between 19.6 and 21.8 degree Celsius.
1.3 Data Collection and Data Analysis

Requirements for Hydrological and Hydraulic Design
The hydrological study aims at estimating the peak discharge of the flood
generated by the run-off of rainfall within the catchment area. The hydrological
study requires:
 Knowledge of the characteristics of peak rainfall in the regions.
 Knowledge of the characteristics of the catchment areas.
 Topographic data about the stream, upstream and downstream.
 Survey of India toposheets maps to a scale of 1:50,000 for identification
of catchment area and its characteristics.
Data Collection
Topographic surveys have been done at river crossings with a view to obtain the
cross section of the rivers at the centre line of the road and up to a reasonable
distance at upstream and downstream. The High Flood Levels (HFL) have been
obtained from existing flood marks or ascertained from enquiry with local
knowledgeable persons.
The characteristics of the catchment areas have been ascertained from Survey of
India toposheets having a scale of 1:2,50,000 from which catchment area at the
3
proposed bridge site, length of the stream and fall in elevation from originating
point to the point of crossing, could be determined. Slope of the stream has been
determined from the contours on the toposheets.
For rivers/streams having catchment area more than 25 sq km, CWC Report on
Flood Estimation Report for Western Sub zone 7 in which the project site lies has
been obtained. This Report has been referred for determining the characteristics
of peak rainfall regimes. The report has been jointly prepared by CWC, MOST,
Ministry of Railways and IMD and contains all the rainfall data required for
estimation of design discharge of 25, 50 and 100 year returns periods by applying
the Synthetic Unit Hydrograph approach, the parameters of which have been
indicated in the above report.
The streams having catchment area less than 25 sq km, IRC-SP-13 has been
referred.
1.4 Hydrological and Hydraulic Studies for Minor Bridges
Design engineers essentially need the design flood of a specific return period for
fixing the waterway vis-a-vis the design HFL of bridges depending upon their size
and importance to ensure safety as well as economy. IRC: 5-1998, Section – I
General Features of Design specify that the waterway of a bridge is to be
designed for a maximum flood discharge of 50 years return period. But as per the
recent guidelines of IRC published in 2014, it is clearly mentioned that the bridges
have to be designed for a flood corresponding to 100 years return period. The
same guideline has been considered for the three minor bridges in this report.
The Detail of the minor bridge is shown in Table 1:

Table 1: Details of Minor Bridge
S.No Chainage (Km) Proposed Span (m)
1 5+000 1 X 52
4
The following methods have been used to estimate the peak discharge and HFL
for the minor bridge sites:
 Rational Method
 Area Velocity Method
 HEC – RAS Computations
Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method has not been used as the catchment area up to
the bridge site is less than 25 sq. km.
These methods have been discussed in detail and Design discharge (peak run-off)
is estimated for three minor bridges as indicated below in subhead of Hydrological
Aspect and Hydraulic Aspect.
1.4.1 Hydrological & Hydraulic Design Aspect
a. Estimation of Input Data for Hydrological Analysis
Catchment Area, length of critical point to the structure and slope of fall in river from
critical point to structure along with rainfall data is required for estimation of design
discharge.
Length of critical point to structure and slope of fall in river from critical point is also
measured. 24 hr rainfall for 100 yr return period is taken from CWC Flood Estimation
Report for Western Himalayas sub zone 7.
The plot of catchment area on topographic map for each bridge is enclosed in the
report and the calculated catchment area for the bridge is shown below under Table
2.
Table 2: Catchment Area of Minor Bridge
Catchment Discharge Using
Sr.
Chainage (Km) Proposed Span (m) Area (Sq. Dicken’s Formula,
No
Km) C=17
1 5+000 1 x 52 4.20 50
5
b. Rational Method
Q= 0.028 x P x f x A x IC
Where:
Q = Maximum runoff in cumecs
A = Catchment area in hectares
Ic = Critical intensity of rainfall in cm/ hr.
P = Coefficient of run-off for the given catchment characteristics.
f = Spread factor for converting point rainfall into area mean rainfall.
Ic = (F/T)*(T+1) / (Tc+1)
F = Total Rainfall of T hours duration (24 hrs.) in cm, corresponding to 100
yrs return period.
T = Duration of total rainfall (F) in hours= 24 hrs.
Tc = Time of concentration in hour.
Time of concentration
Times of concentrations (Tc) are determined on the basis of stream lengths (Lc)
and shape of catchment as well as from terrain slope and cover conditions from
the toposheets as well as hydrological survey data of stream. The values are found
both by Dicken’s (Empirical) formulae as well as from time of travel from furthest
point of catchment as follows:
Dicken’s formula
Tc = [0.87(L3/H)] 0.385
Where L is the length of catchment in km and H is the elevation difference in meter

in length L.
The value of runoff coefficient (P) depends on porosity of soil, area, size and shape
of the catchment, vegetation cover, surface storage viz. existence of lakes and
6
marshes and initial state of wetness of the soil. As per IRC: SP 13-2004, the value
of P may be taken from the formula given in following Table 3.
Table 3: Runoff Coefficient (P)

Catchment Characteristics P
Steep, bare rock and also city pavements 0.90
Rock, steep but wooded 0.80
Plateaus, lightly covered 0.70
Clayey soils, stiff and bare 0.60
Clayey Soils, lightly covered 0.50
Loam, lightly cultivated or covered 0.40
Loam, largely cultivated 0.30
Sandy soil, light growth 0.20
Sandy soil covered, heavy brush 0.10
The value of ‘f’ depends on the catchment area and has been taken from the Figure
4.2 given in IRC: SP 13-2004.
Thus after calculating the above parameters, the 100-year return period peak
discharge has been calculated using the formula as given above and has been
presented under respective Minor bridge Annexures. The summary of the
discharge from rationale method has been given at Table 4.
Table 4: Discharge estimated using Rational Method
Discharge in cumecs
Sr. No Chainage (Km)
using Rational Method
1 5+000 91
c. Area Velocity Method

This method has been utilized to calculate the discharge from the stream cross
section and stream slope/bed slope at the proposed bridge sites, for bridges. After
plotting the cross section of the river, and marking the observed HFL, the cross
sectional area (A) and wetted perimeter (P) have been computed. In the absence of
7
the flood slope of the stream, the bed slope of the river has been estimated along its
length.
The velocity and Discharge have been calculated using the Manning's formula:
V = 1/n * R2/3 * S1/2
Q=AxV
Where,
V = Velocity in m/sec;
R = Hydraulic mean depth in m
S = Flood slope/bed slope
n = Co-efficient of rugosity
Q = Peak Discharge
A = Area of cross section
The value of 'n' has been adopted as per soil criteria and river bed characteristics,
observed at site and are based on Table 3 in IRC SP-13 which has been tabulated
below.
The area velocity method has been adopted for all the three minor bridges and the
summary of the discharge values has been presented under Table 5.
Table 5: Discharge Using Area Velocity Method
8
Sr. No Chainage (Km) Discharge in cumecs
1 5+000 1651
The discharge computed using Area velocity method has been discarded on account
of impractical discharge through the river. Discharge if 1651 cumecs is not feasible
for such type of river/nala.
d. Summary of various Hydrological methods of Discharge estimation
The summary of the Discharge from the catchment area of all the minor bridge sites
from various methods are presented in Table 6 below.
Table 6: Summary of Discharge (Peak run off) from various methods
Dicken’s Area – Adopted

Catchment Rational SUH
Sr. Chainage Formula Velocity Design
Area Method Method
No. (Km) (cumecs) Method Discharge,
(Sq. Km) (cumecs) (cumecs)
(cumecs) cumecs
1 5+000 4.20 50 91 - 1651 91*1.5=136
1.4.2 Afflux Calculation

Since some of the bridges in the alignment have less clear waterway as compared
to natural stream width and also velocities at bridge sites are high due to steep bed
slopes, this combined effect causes afflux at bridge sites during flood. Afflux for the
bridges has been calculated using Weir and Orifice formulae as described in IRC
SP-13-2004.
Weir formula:
3/ 2
 u2 
Q  1.706CW L  Du   (5)
 2g 
Q = Discharge in cumecs
L = Linear effective clear waterway in meter under the bridge normal to channel
axis.
9
Du = Average depth of flow at upstream in meter measured above a datum

usually taken as reduced invert level of bridge
u = Velocity of approach in m/sec.
g = Acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/sec2.
Cw = Coefficient of discharge over weir, which may be taken as under as per IRC:
SP-13 as follows:
Type of Bridge opening Value of Cw

Narrow bridge opening with or without floors: 0.94
Wide bridge opening without floor: 0.96
Wide bridge opening with no bed floor: 0.98
u has been calculated using the relation
u = Q/(Du *W) = Q/Au (6)
Where:
W = Width of channel at upstream section and Au is the cross section of flow
upstream.
The above formula is valid when the weir flows freely depending on afflux (h) given
by
h = (Du- Dd) = (U/S H.F.L. – D/S HFL) (7)
Where Du and Dd are the depths of flow upstream and d/s of the bridge measured
above a given datum usually taken as the bed level of the stream. Weir equation
is applicable only when h/Dd ≥ 0.25.
Orifice formula:
 u2 
Q  C o 2 gLDd h  (1  e)  (8)
 2g 
h = Afflux = (Du – Dd) (9)

Co and e are coefficients to account for losses of head and recovery respectively.
10
Values of e and Co are taken from Fig 14 and Fig 15 of IRC-SP13, respectively.
In all the cases, energy head in terms of recovery has been neglected.
The above formula is valid for h < ¼ Dd
The summary of the afflux values has been presented under Table 7.
Table 7: Afflux Value
Sr. No Chainage (Km) Afflux in meters
1 5+000 0.595
1.5 Scour Depth

Various hydraulic parameters e.g. HFL, normal waterway, normal depth of scour
under bridges, Maximum scour level at bridge piers and abutments, Froude’s
number of flow (for scoured waterway under bridges), fluming ratio, afflux etc, are
computed.
Scour Depth
Lacey’s equation is adopted for estimating normal scour depth as per IRC: 5 2014.
R = 1.34 (q2/f) 1/3
Where R is the Lacey’s regime scour depth, measured below HFL, q is the design
discharge intensity under bridge in cumecs per meter and f is silt factor given by the
equation
f= 1.76 (d50)1/2
Where d50 is the mean sediment size in mm. Normal scour depth based on Lacey’s
equation and the actual observed depth (equal to the difference between HFL and
LBL)/1.27 are compared as per code. Higher of the two values is adopted for design.
Silt factor ‘f’ is found from Lacey’s equation corresponding to d 50 size of bed
materials. Maximum scour level for pier and abutment are calculated using a factor
of safety of 2 and 1.27, respectively as per IRC: Code-5. For computing scour depth,
design discharge is enhanced by 30% to provide for adequate margin of safety as
per provision of IRC: 78 - 2000. The scour depth calculations based upon the silt
11
factor as per surface bed material, are given at the respective Minor Bridge
Annexures (refer Annexure 1 to 2).
1.6 Summary and Recommendations
The design discharge has been calculated for 100-year return period flood by the
following methods:
 Empirical Formula (Dicken’s)
 Area-Velocity Method.
 Rational Method as per IRC:SP-13:2004
The Rainfall corresponding to 100 – year has been taken from CWC report and is
equal to 340 mm.
The catchment area has been calculated on Survey of India Map on scale of
1:50,000.
HFL has been established by:
 Local enquiry and Observed Flood Marks, where available.
Table 8: High Flood Level Summary
Sr. No. Chainage, Design HFL, m
km
1 5+000 887.920
The calculated High Flood Level using HEC – RAS has been adopted in
estimating the Finished Road Level at the Bridge. The cross sectional area of
flow, Water spread at HFL has also been calculated.
The linear waterway calculations have been calculated by Lacey’s Perimeter and as
per CWC guidelines.
12
Table 9: Waterway Calculation Summary

Chainage, Lacey’s CWC
Sr. Proposed waterway,
km Perimeter, requirements,
No. m
m m
1 5+000 55.97 46.02 52.00
References:
1. CWC Flood Estimation Report on Western Himalayas Subzone 7.
2. Geotechnical Investigation Report.
3. IRC: SP -13, 2004, General Guidelines for Design of Small Culverts and
Bridges
4. IRC: 005, 2014, Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road
Bridges, Section 1, general features of Design
5. Relevant Survey of India Toposheets
13
ABSTRACT OF HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS FOR - MINOR BRIDGE OVER ADENA GADERA RIVER
PEAK DISCHARGE COMPUTATION BY DIFFERENT METHODS
Bridge Inventory Computed Discharge (m3/s)

Clear Span (m) HFL (As Existing
Span Catchme Design
per Local Deck Level Slope-
Type of Chainage Name of Arrange Skew Angle (in Effective nt Area Dicken's Rational Weir/ Orifice Discharg REMARKS
Sl. No. CD. No. Along Enquiry) at U/S Edge Area Unit Hydrograph
Bridge (Km) Stream ment degrees) Span along (km2) Formula Method Formula e (m3/s)
skew U/S in m of c/w in m Method
(m) Normal
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (19) (20)
AS PER IRC
RCC T- ADENA GUIDELINE, THE
1 - BEAM 5+000 GADERA 1X52 0 - 52.00 891.352 - 4.20 50 91 1651 - NA 136 DESIGN DISCHARGE
GIRDER RIVER SHALL BE 91*1.5=136
CUMECS.
C=17
ABSTRACT OF HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS FOR THE NEW BRIDGE AT EXISTING SITE
Discharge Velocity
Depth
Effective Design Design for Normal through
Chainag Name of D50 from (HFL- MSL for abutment Froude's Water way Fluming Proposed
Sl. No. CD. No. Clear f, abutment HFL (m) Discharge(m foundation Scour depth existing L.B.L (m) Afflux (m)
e (Km) Stream (mm) LBL)/1.27 (m) No. at HFL (m) Ratio FRL (m)
Span (m) U/S 3/s) design (m) bridge
in metre
(m3/s) (m/s)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21)
ADENA
1 - 5+000 GADERA 50.5 1.29 2.00 887.920 136 177 2.45 0.70 10.14 884.81 887.030 2.07 20.73 2.44 0.595
RIVER
Note: If the proposed FRL is lower than the existing one, it is recommended to adopt the existing FRL value.
Refer Geotechnical Report for Silt factor Values:
Minimum Weighted Silt factor, f for abutment= 2.00
Weighted Silt factor, f for pier= 0.00
ABSTRACT OF HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS FOR - MINOR BRIDGE OVER
ADENA GADERA RIVER
DATA INPUT SHEET
Bridge Details
Chainage 5+000
Span 1X52
Physiographic Parameters
Calculated Catchment Area in Sq Km(A) = 4.20
The distance frm the critical pint to the structure in Km (L)= 6.07
The fall in level from critical Point to the structure in m (H)= 1313
Total Precipitation in cm (F)= 34
Duration in hr (T)= 24
Coefficien of Run-off (P) = 0.35

factor f = 0.92
Note: 100 yr. 24 hr rainfall data for the region is taken from CWC Report "flood
EstimationWestern Himalayas Subzone - 7"
DISCHARGE USING DICKEN'S METHOD
DISCHARGE CALCULATION USING IRC SP-13 2004
Chainage 5+000
Span 1X52 m
Catchment Area in sq Km (A) = 4.20

Normal annual rainfall in cm= 300
C= 17 Refer Clause 4.2, IRC SP-13-2004

Q= CM^(3/4)
Q= 50 cumecs
ABSTRACT OF HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS FOR - MINOR BRIDGE OVER ADENA GADERA RIVER
DISCHARGE CALCULATION FROM IMPROVED RATIONAL METHOD (REF: IRC SP-13 2004)
Details of Bridge: MNBR AT CH.5+000
Chainage 5+000
Span 1X52
1 Catchment Area calculation (A)
Catchment area is calculated from Survey of India Toposheets of scale 1:50000
Calculated Catchment Area (A) = 4.2 sq Km
2 Physiographic Parameters
Catchment Area in sq Km (A) = 4.2
The distance frm the critical pint to the structure in Km (L)= 6.07
The fall in level from critical Point to the structure in m (H)= 1313
Total Precipitation in cm (F)= 34
Duration in hr (T)= 24
one hour rainfall for a region in cm/hr (I ) = F/2*(1+1/T)
Hence I, cm/hr = 17.71

3 Determination of time of Concentration (t )
tc (in hr) = (0.87xL^3/H 0.385 (ref. eq 4.9 IRC SP:13-2004)
)
Hence,
tc = 0.48 hr
4 Determination of Coefficient of Run-off (P)

Coefficient of Run-off depends on Physical Charaectristics of catchment Region
As per Table 4.1 of IRC SP:13-2004
P= 0.35
6 Estimation of Rainfall Intensity lasting for tc hr duration

Critical or Design Intensity (Ic )
Ic 23.94 cm/hr
=
5 Intensity and spread of storm (f)
The larger the area considered, the smaller would be the mean intensity of the considered area
Mean intensity is some inverse function of the size of area under consideration
As per IRC:13 2004, a factor f is multiplied to critical/design intensity to calculate mean intensity
f = 0.92 (ref. as per fig 4.2 of IRC SP:13-2004)
6 Estimation of Max. Run-off (Q) (ref. as per eq 4.12 of IRC SP:13-2004)

Q= 0.028*(P)*(f) *(A) *(Ic ) .
Q = 91 cumecs
Area - Velocity Method
Major Bridge at - 5+000

Location at- 5+000
Cross section: AT Bridge
Design HFL = 891.352 m Lowest Bed Level= 887.030 m
Mean Depth of Distance Level Difference

Sectional Wetted
River Bed HFL - RBL water between between the between 2 2 2 2
Chainage (m) Area, XD X Y X +Y perimeter, P
Level (m) (m) adjacent points, D adjacent points, adjacent points,
(sq.m.) (m)
(m) X (m) Y (m)
0 896 -4.648
10.29 892 -0.648
13.25 891.352 0.000
20.52 887.38 3.972 1.986 7.270 14.44 -3.972 52.85 15.77678 68.63 8.28
39.27 887.03 4.322 4.147 18.750 77.76 -0.350 351.56 0.12250 351.69 18.75
46.14 895 -3.648
53.55 896 -4.648
61.56 897 -5.648
69.24 898 -6.648

SUM 26.02 92.19 27.04
CROSS SECTIONAL AREA OF RIVER= 92.19 SQ.M.

WETTED PERIMETER = 27.04 M
WATER SPREAD AT HFL= 26.02 M Average depth of flow= 3.066 m
HYDRAULIC RADIUS = 3.41 M
AVERAGE SLOPE OF RIVER = 0.12648 M/M
VELOCITY IN RIVER = 17.90 M/SEC
DISCHARGE IN THE RIVER = 1650.69 CUMECS
Design Discharge, Q = 1650.69 cumecs

899
898
897
896
895 HFL = 891.352 M
894
893
892
891
890
889
888
887
886
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
CLEAR WATER-WAY CALCULATIONS
A) Lacey Width, W = (4.8*Q^0.5) m

Design Flood, Q = 136 cumecs
Therefore, W = 55.97 m
Lacey's Equation shall not be taken into account as it only considers the discharge of the
river. The equation does not take into consideration the return period for which discharge
is calculated and also the type of river bed material.
B) CWC Requirement=8.95 * Q^(1/3) m

Design Flood, Q = 136 cumecs
Therefore, W = 46.02 m
C) Water spread at HFL between banks= 20.73 m
D) Proposed Waterway, L = 52.00 m
E) Clear Waterway = 50.5 m Obstructed area due to structure = 0.75 sq.m.

Number of piers proposed = 0 no. Unobstructed area= 14.16 sq.m.
Width of pier proposed= 1.4 m Reduction in ratio = 5.30% <30%
Width of abutment in flow area = 0.75 m
F) Design Velocity= Q/A

Cross Sectional Area of flow=
A= 13.41 sq.m. Average depth of flow @HFL,m= 0.5
V= 10.14 m/sec
G) Discharge Intensity, q= Q/Clear Waterway

q= 2.69 cumecs/m
AFFLUX CALCULATIONS
INPUT DATA:
A) Unobstructed Cross Sectional area of flow, A= 14.16 sq.m.
B) Width of flow at HFL, W= 20.73 M
C) Design flood = 136 cumecs
D) Area of flow under the bridge, a= 13.41 m
E) Mean velocity of flow prior to bridge, V= 9.60 m/sec
F) High Flood Level, HFL = 887.920 m
CALCULATIONS:
AS PER IRC 5: 2015, CL. 106.6.2 MOLESWORTH FORMULA IS GIVEN BY
h = {V2/17.88 + 0.01524} x {(A/a) 2– 1}
h = afflux in meters
V = is the mean velocity of flow in the river prior to bridge construction i.e.
corresponding to normal HFL
A = Area of flow section at normal HFL in the approach river section.
a= Area of flow section under the bridge.
Therefore,
Afflux, h= 0.595 m
Design HFL= 888.515 m
Adopt HFL= 888.515 m
A MINIMUM free board of 0.90 m shall be sufficient between the road deck
and HFL INCLUDING AFFLUX.
ANNEXURE : 1
SCOUR CALCULATION AT 5+000 MNBR @ ABUTMENT
Total span of the bridge (m) 52
Number of spans = 1
Number of piers = 0
Width of pier (m) = 0
Width of abutment in flowing area (m) = 0.75

Number of abutments = 2
HFL @ design discharge (m) = 887.92
Unobstructed cross sectional area of flow (Sqm) = 14.16
Clear Water way (m) = Span - (No. of Pier x width of pier)

50.5
- (No. of Abutments x width of abutment)
Silt factor for abutment and pier (Refer Geotechnical

2.00
Report), f =
Design discharge for foundation (cumecs) = 177
Discharge intensity (cumecs/m), q = Design discharge for

3.50
foundation / Clear Water way
Normal Scour Depth (m), R =1.34 (q^2/f)^(1/3) 2.45
MSL @ pier (m) = HFL @ design discharge - 2 x Normal

-
Scour Depth
MSL @ abutment (m) = HFL @ design discharge - 1.27 x

884.81
Normal Scour Depth
ANNEXURE : 2
CALCULATION FOR OBSTRUCTED AREA OF FLOW FOR MNBR @ Ch.5+000
Number of spans = 3
Number of piers = 0
Width of pier = 0
Width of abutment in flowing area = 0.75
Number of abutments = 2
Unobstructed cross sectional area of flow (sq. m.) = 14.16
Average depth of flow (m) = 0.500
Net flowing area through structure (sq.m)=Unobstructed

cross sectional area of flow - (No. of piers x Width of pier x
13.41
Average depth of flow) - (Width of abutment in flowing
area x No. of piers x Average depth of flow)
Obstructed area due to structure, sq.m. = 0.75

HEC-RAS Plan:
Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude # Chl
(m3/s) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m/m) (m/s) (m2) (m)
MNBR 5+000 150 PF 1 50.00 905.37 905.89 906.33 907.51 0.126583 5.70 9.03 18.88 2.54
MNBR 5+000 150 PF 2 77.00 905.37 906.04 906.63 908.28 0.126585 6.74 11.85 19.62 2.65
MNBR 5+000 150 PF 3 136.00 905.37 906.30 907.15 909.72 0.126586 8.39 17.05 20.92 2.80
MNBR 5+000 20 PF 1 50.00 890.38 891.19 891.66 892.86 0.100875 5.88 8.91 15.53 2.35
MNBR 5+000 20 PF 2 77.00 890.38 891.37 892.00 893.66 0.100498 6.93 11.80 16.47 2.45
MNBR 5+000 20 PF 3 136.00 890.38 891.68 892.59 895.12 0.100283 8.58 17.17 18.08 2.58
MNBR 5+000 5 PF 1 50.00 887.03 887.57 888.09 890.25 0.330371 7.29 6.93 19.62 3.87
MNBR 5+000 5 PF 2 77.00 887.03 887.69 888.38 891.16 0.287837 8.30 9.42 20.01 3.80
MNBR 5+000 5 PF 3 136.00 887.03 887.92 888.90 892.76 0.239807 9.83 14.16 20.73 3.70
MNBR 5+000 -20 PF 1 50.00 884.62 886.02 886.53 887.67 0.086449 5.62 8.78 12.56 2.15
MNBR 5+000 -20 PF 2 77.00 884.62 886.23 886.88 888.46 0.096775 6.53 11.64 14.46 2.32
MNBR 5+000 -20 PF 3 136.00 884.62 886.55 887.43 889.92 0.114440 8.02 16.75 17.34 2.61
MNBR 5+000 -150 PF 1 50.00 867.25 867.74 868.09 869.38 0.268068 5.67 8.83 30.66 3.36
MNBR 5+000 -150 PF 2 77.00 867.25 867.85 868.30 869.81 0.231722 6.21 12.45 34.02 3.26
MNBR 5+000 -150 PF 3 136.00 867.25 868.03 868.66 870.77 0.192202 7.35 18.70 35.78 3.17
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
150 M U/S OF BRIDGE
.04 .04 .04
913
Legend
EG PF 3
EG PF 2
912
EG PF 1
Crit PF 3
Crit PF 2
911 Crit PF 1
WS PF 3
WS PF 2
910 WS PF 1
Ground
Elevation (m)
Bank Sta
909
908
907
906
905
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Station (m)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
20 M U/S OF BRIDGE
.04 .04 .04
900
Legend
EG PF 3
EG PF 2
EG PF 1
Crit PF 3
898
Crit PF 2
WS PF 3
Crit PF 1
WS PF 2
WS PF 1
896
Ground
Elevation (m)
Bank Sta
894
892
890
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (m)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
5 M U/S OF BRIDGE
.04 .04 .04
898
Legend
EG PF 3
EG PF 2
EG PF 1
896
Crit PF 3
Crit PF 2
Crit PF 1
WS PF 3
894 WS PF 2
WS PF 1
Ground
Elevation (m)
Bank Sta
892
890
888
886
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (m)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
20 M D/S OF BRIDGE
.04 .04 .04
902
Legend
EG PF 3
EG PF 2
900
EG PF 1
Crit PF 3
898 Crit PF 2
WS PF 3
Crit PF 1
896 WS PF 2
WS PF 1
Ground
894
Elevation (m)
Bank Sta
892
890
888
886
884
0 20 40 60 80
Station (m)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
150 M D/S OF BRIDGE
.04 .04 .04
890
Legend
EG PF 3
EG PF 2
EG PF 1
Crit PF 3
885
Crit PF 2
Crit PF 1
WS PF 3
WS PF 2
WS PF 1
880
Ground
Elevation (m)
Bank Sta
875
870
865
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (m)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
150 M U/S OF BRIDGE
Legend
W.S. Elev
906.2
906.0
W.S. Elev (m)
905.8
905.6
905.4
905.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Q Total (m3/s)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
20 M U/S OF BRIDGE
Legend
W.S. Elev
891.6
891.4
891.2
W.S. Elev (m)
891.0
890.8
890.6
890.4
890.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Q Total (m3/s)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
5 M U/S OF BRIDGE
Legend
W.S. Elev
887.8
887.6
W.S. Elev (m)
887.4
887.2
887.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Q Total (m3/s)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
20 M D/S OF BRIDGE
887.0
Legend
W.S. Elev
886.5
886.0
W.S. Elev (m)
885.5
885.0
884.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Q Total (m3/s)
5+000 Plan: Plan 01 2/15/2019
150 M D/S OF BRIDGE
Legend
W.S. Elev
868.0
867.8
W.S. Elev (m)
867.6
867.4
867.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Q Total (m3/s)

Adena Gadera Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adena Gadera Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adena Gadera Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hydrology Report for Minor Bridge over Adena Gadera River at km 5 of Gadoliya-Pilkhi-Ghansali

Motor Road in the State of Uttarakhand

1.2 General Description of the Project Site

1.3 Data Collection and Data Analysis

The Detail of the minor bridge is shown in Table 1:

1.4.1 Hydrological & Hydraulic Design Aspect

a. Estimation of Input Data for Hydrological Analysis

Where L is the length of catchment in km and H is the elevation difference in meter

Table 3: Runoff Coefficient (P)

c. Area Velocity Method

V = 1/n * R2/3 * S1/2

Sr. No Chainage (Km) Discharge in cumecs

Table 6: Summary of Discharge (Peak run off) from various methods

Dicken’s Area – Adopted

1.4.2 Afflux Calculation

Du = Average depth of flow at upstream in meter measured above a datum

u = Velocity of approach in m/sec.

g = Acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/sec2.

Type of Bridge opening Value of Cw

h = (Du- Dd) = (U/S H.F.L. – D/S HFL) (7)

h = Afflux = (Du – Dd) (9)

The above formula is valid for h < ¼ Dd

Table 7: Afflux Value

Sr. No Chainage (Km) Afflux in meters

1.5 Scour Depth

R = 1.34 (q2/f) 1/3

1.6 Summary and Recommendations

Table 9: Waterway Calculation Summary

Bridge Inventory Computed Discharge (m3/s)

Coefficien of Run-off (P) = 0.35

DISCHARGE CALCULATION USING IRC SP-13 2004

Catchment Area in sq Km (A) = 4.20

C= 17 Refer Clause 4.2, IRC SP-13-2004

Hence I, cm/hr = 17.71

4 Determination of Coefficient of Run-off (P)

6 Estimation of Rainfall Intensity lasting for tc hr duration

6 Estimation of Max. Run-off (Q) (ref. as per eq 4.12 of IRC SP:13-2004)

Major Bridge at - 5+000

Mean Depth of Distance Level Difference

10.29 892 -0.648

13.25 891.352 0.000

46.14 895 -3.648

53.55 896 -4.648

61.56 897 -5.648

69.24 898 -6.648

CROSS SECTIONAL AREA OF RIVER= 92.19 SQ.M.

Design Discharge, Q = 1650.69 cumecs

A) Lacey Width, W = (4.8*Q^0.5) m

B) CWC Requirement=8.95 * Q^(1/3) m

C) Water spread at HFL between banks= 20.73 m

D) Proposed Waterway, L = 52.00 m

E) Clear Waterway = 50.5 m Obstructed area due to structure = 0.75 sq.m.

F) Design Velocity= Q/A

G) Discharge Intensity, q= Q/Clear Waterway

h = {V2/17.88 + 0.01524} x {(A/a) 2– 1}

Width of pier (m) = 0

Width of abutment in flowing area (m) = 0.75

Unobstructed cross sectional area of flow (Sqm) = 14.16

Clear Water way (m) = Span - (No. of Pier x width of pier)