Hydrological Guideline PDF

Government of Nepal
Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development
Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural

Roads (DoLIDAR)
COMPREHENSIVE BRIDGE MANUAL
PART 2: DETAIL SURVEY, INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN
Part 2.3 : Hydrological Investigations, Analysis and Reporting
Guideline for Local Road Bridges in Nepal
Local Roads Bridge Programme (LRBP)

Shree Mahal, Pulchowk, Lalitpur
June, 2014
Table of Contents
1. PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................................... 5
2. SCOPE OF GUIDELINES .................................................................................................................... 5
3. BASIC TERMINOLOGIES ................................................................................................................... 5
4. OBJECTIVES OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .......................................................................... 6
5. SCOPE OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................................... 7
6. HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND RELEVANT STUDIES ................................................. 7
7. ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIABLE HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATABASE ............................................ 8

7.1 Classification of basins based on data availability ................................................................................ 9
7.1.1 Table 1: Classification of Gauged River Basins [GRB] ............................................................................ 9
7.1.2 Table 2: Classification of Un-gauged River Basins [URB] ..................................................................... 10
7.2 Identification and Verification of Hydrologically Similar Catchment (HSC) ........................................ 10
7.3 Collection, Generation and Compilation of Data ................................................................................ 11
7.4 Collection and Use of Stream Flow Data ............................................................................................. 11
7.5 Measurement of Stream Flow ............................................................................................................ 12
7.5.1 Hydrometric Method (Velocity-Area Method) ................................................................................... 12
7.5.2 Hydraulic Method (Slope Area method) ........................................................................................ 13
7.5.3 Dilution Method .................................................................................................................................. 14
7.6 Data Processing ................................................................................................................................... 14
7.6.1 Stream Flow Rating Curves and their Extrapolation ................................................................... 14
7.6.2 Precipitation....................................................................................................................................... 14
7.6.3 Stepwise Procedures of Data Processing .................................................................................... 15
7.7 Adjustment of Flow Records ............................................................................................................... 16
7.8 Internal Consistency Checking of Data ................................................................................................ 16
7.9 External Consistency Checking of Data ............................................................................................... 16
8. EXTENSION OF HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATA.......................................................................... 16

8.1 Extension with Long-Term Stream flow Data at HSC .......................................................................... 17
8.1.1 Double-Mass Curve Method ........................................................................................................... 17
8.1.2 Catchment Area Ratio Method ........................................................................................................... 17
8.1.3 Regression Analysis Method .......................................................................................................... 17
8.1.4 Index Station Method ....................................................................................................................... 17
8.1.5 Langbein’s Log-Deviation Method ................................................................................................. 18
8.1.6 Mean Ratio Method .......................................................................................................................... 19
8.2 Extension with Long-Term Precipitation Record ................................................................................. 19
8.2.1 With long-term precipitation and short-term flow data at site..................................................... 19
8.2.2 With long-term precipitation at site & short-term flow or concurrent P-R data at HSC .......... 19
8.2.3 With only precipitation and temperature records at site ............................................................. 19
8.2.3.1. Khosla’s Formula ........................................................................................................................ 19
8.2.3.2. UPIRI Formulae ........................................................................................................................... 19
8.2.3.3. ICAR Formula .............................................................................................................................. 20
8.2.4. No data at all ..................................................................................................................................... 20
9. DETERMINATION OF BASIN AND CHANNEL CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................... 20

9.1 Catchment Area .................................................................................................................................. 20
H YD R O L O G I C AL I N V E S T IG AT IO N S
9.2 Basin Slope .......................................................................................................................................... 21

9.3 Basin Shape ......................................................................................................................................... 21
9.4 Average Width of Basin ....................................................................................................................... 21
9.5 Channel Length .................................................................................................................................... 21
9.6 Channel Slope ...................................................................................................................................... 21
9.7 Drainage Density ................................................................................................................................. 22
9.8 Time of Concentration......................................................................................................................... 22
10. COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSES .............................................................. 22
11. SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 22

Conclusion and Recommendation ......................................................................................................................... 23
Appendix 1 26
12. FLOOD HYDROLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 27

12.1 Design Flood ........................................................................................................................................ 27
12.1.1 Frequency for the Design Flood ..................................................................................................... 27
12.1.2 Construction Diversion Flood .......................................................................................................... 27
12.1.3 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) ................................................................................................... 28
12.2 Flood Estimation Methods .................................................................................................................. 28
12.2.1 Flood Frequency Analysis (Plotting Positions and Fitting of Theoretical Distributions) ......... 28
12.2.2 Regional Flood Frequency Analysis .............................................................................................. 28
12.2.3 Recommended Methods of Flood-Frequency Analysis .............................................................. 29
12.2.4 Estimation of PMF ............................................................................................................................ 29
12.2.5 Estimation of PMF in the absence of PMP ................................................................................... 30
12.2.6 Regional Methods for Flood Estimation ........................................................................................ 31
12.2.7 Empirical Formulae for Flood Estimation ...................................................................................... 31
12.2.8 Flood Investigation ........................................................................................................................... 33
12.2.9 Flood Estimation by Slope-Area Method ....................................................................................... 34
12.2.10 Investigation of GLOF (Glacier Lake Outburst Flood) ................................................................. 35
12.2.11 Investigation of CLOF (Cloudburst Flood) .................................................................................... 35
12.2.12 Checking of GLOF and CLOF with PMF ....................................................................................... 36
12.3 Stepwise Procedures for Hydrological Parameter Prediction in GRB.................................................. 37
12.3.1 Case G1 ............................................................................................................................................. 37
12.3.2 Case G2: ............................................................................................................................................ 47
12.3.3 Case G3: ............................................................................................................................................ 48
12.3.4 Case G4: ............................................................................................................................................ 49
12.3.5 Case G5: ............................................................................................................................................ 51
12.3.6 Case G6: ............................................................................................................................................ 52
12.3.7 Case G7: ............................................................................................................................................ 53
12.4 Stepwise Procedures for Flood Prediction in Un-gauged River Basins (URB) ..................................... 54
12.4.1 Case U1: ............................................................................................................................................ 54
12.4.2 Case U2: ............................................................................................................................................ 56
12.4.3 Case U3: ............................................................................................................................................ 57
12.4.4 Case U4: ............................................................................................................................................ 58
12.4.5 Case U5: ............................................................................................................................................ 59
12.4.6 Case U6: ............................................................................................................................................ 60
12.4.7 Case U7: ............................................................................................................................................ 61
12.5 Important considerations in flood prediction ..................................................................................... 61
13. MATRIX FOR THE PREDICTION OF DESIGN FLOWS IN GRB AND URB ............................................ 62
3
14. RATING CURVES AT BRIDGE SITE ................................................................................................... 63

14.1 Steven’s Method ................................................................................................................................. 64
14.2 Logarithmic Method............................................................................................................................ 64
14.3 Manning’s Formula ............................................................................................................................. 64
15. WATER SURFACE PROFILE AT BRIDGE SITE .................................................................................... 65
16. HFL CALCULATION ......................................................................................................................... 65
17. FREEBOARD .................................................................................................................................. 65
18. SCOUR DEPTH ............................................................................................................................... 65
19. RECOMMENDED DESIGN FLOOD ................................................................................................... 66
20. DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .................................. 67
Appendix 2 ...................................................................................................................................................... 68
21. RELEVANT HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL STUDIES IN NEPAL............................................................. 69

21.1 Hydrologic Studies of Nepal (WECS), 1982 ......................................................................................... 69
Flood Study ............................................................................................................................................................ 69
21.2 Water Resources Report, 1986 by Land Resources Mapping Project (LRMP) .................................... 69
21.3 Methodologies for estimating hydrologic characteristics of ungauged locations .............................. 69
21.3.1 Flood Flow Study ................................................................................................................................. 70
21.4 Maximum storm flood for the design of road structures of Nepal, 1996. P. C. Jha, (PCJ method) .... 70
21.5 Medium Hydropower Study Project (MHSP) Regional Approach, 1997 ............................................. 71
Appendix 3 ...................................................................................................................................................... 72
22. List of expected outputs from Steps G1-1 to G1-4, and output format .............................................. 73
23. Example of application of the double mass curve to test data consistency ....................................... 75
24. Example of application of Weibull Plotting Position method to find outliers and to estimate rainfall
of longer return periods ...................................................................................................................... 76
25. Numerical example of application of Gumbel, Log Pearson Type III and Log Normal methods ......... 77
26. Numerical example of application of WECS/DHM (1990) and DHM (2004) methods ........................ 80
27. Step by step application of the Rational Method (1889) .................................................................... 81
28. Example of rating curve development and HFL at a river section using Manning’s formula.............. 85
29. Numerical example of application of PCJ method (1996) ................................................................... 87
30. Degree day method ............................................................................................................................ 92
31. Annual and Monsoon Wetness Index Maps ....................................................................................... 93
32. Numerical example of application of Mishra et. al. method (2009) to estimate flood flows ............. 96
33. Example of application of Langbein’s log deviation method to extend short term data at base station
based on long term data at HSC.......................................................................................................... 97
Appendix 4 ...................................................................................................................................................... 99
34. Line Sampling Method to obtain grain size distribution curve in gravel bed rivers .......................... 100
35. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 110
36. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................ 111
4
1. PURPOSE
The Guideline on Hydrological Investigations, Analysis and Reporting for Local
Road Bridges in Nepal establishes procedural guidelines, specifications and
quality control criteria for hydrological investigations performed in support of
planning, investigation and design of local road bridges. The guidelines are
intended to ensure adoption of uniform and standardized procedures to support,
direct and guide the hydrologists and design engineers in the process of
hydrological investigations and study conducted by public and private sectors.
The intention of this guideline is to develop a systematic, uniform and standard

method of hydrological analysis, rather than to teach the methodology. Numerical
examples are provided, wherever deemed necessary, to avoid confusion on the
process of application of the methodology. This publication is primarily intended
to provide guidance to those responsible for estimating different hydrological
parameters required for the design, installation, commissioning, operation and
maintenance of bridges in local roads in Nepal. It is not intended to be exhaustive
or definitive and it will be necessary for users to exercise their own professional
judgment in deciding whether to abide by or depart from it. The guideline needs
regular updating with the availability of additional data and better methodologies.
2. SCOPE OF GUIDELINES
The guidelines cover the use of proper hydrological investigation techniques and
methods of analysis for hydrological studies for a bridge design in local roads in
Nepal.
The scope of hydrologic studies is bounded by the availability of hydro-
meteorological data. The guidelines shall outline the hydrologic study and analysis
based on different combinations of data availability at proposed site (upstream or
downstream in the same catchment) and at Hydrologically Similar Catchment
(HSC). This guideline is prepared to achieve a systematic method of prediction of
floods for the different combinations of data availability in Gauged River Basins
(GRB) and Un-gauged River Basins (URB) in Nepalese context.
This guideline is expected to be used for feasibility and detailed study for the
design of bridges in local roads in Nepal.
3. BASIC TERMINOLOGIES
Some of the basic terminologies used in this guideline are explained below.
Basin The horizontal surface area within a given drainage system.

For practical purpose, the basin and catchment mean the
same, and are used interchangeably in this document.
Basin characteristics The physical characteristics of a drainage basin that control
its average hydrologic response in terms of runoff.
Channel slope The gradient measured by drop in elevation over channel
distance. The application shall be consistent with the
methodology.
Consistency Statuses of agreement or compatibility among hydrologic
data if no unusual changes are present in the data.
5
CLOF Cloudburst flood

Daily flow records A record of average daily flows at a stream gauge.
DHM Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, Nepal
Envelope curve A smooth curve covering all peak values of events plotted
against other factors, such as area or time.
Flood A runoff event that causes a river to rise above normal non-
damaging limits.
Flood hydrograph A record of continuous stream flow versus time for a given
flood at a selected location of a stream.
Flood peak The highest flow discharge attained during the passage of a
flood wave
Gauged River Basin A basin where stream flows data are recorded at stations
(GRB) within the basin and are sufficient in quantity and quality to
provide confidence in development of a hydrograph at the
drainage-basin outlet.
GLOF Glacial Lake Outburst Flood
High-water mark A mark, which identifies the maximum stage that occurred at
a particular location during a historical flood.
Homogeneous data Hydrological data that comes from the same phenomena
during the same period.
HSC Hydrologically Similar Catchment
Probable maximum The flood that may be expected from the most severe
flood (PMF) combination of critical meteorological and hydrologic
conditions which are reasonably possible in the drainage
basin under study.
Probable maximum The greatest depth of precipitation theoretically possible for
precipitation (PMP) a given duration that is physically possible over a given size
storm area at a particular geographical location during certain
time of year.
Un-gauged River A basin for which available hydrologic data, recorded at
Basin (URB) stations within the basin are insufficient in quantity and/or
quality to provide confidence in development of an inflow
hydrograph, or a basin for which input and output
measurements necessary for calibration are not available.
WECS Water and Energy Commission Secretariat, Nepal
4. OBJECTIVES OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

The hydrological investigations performed at the planning and design stage of the
bridge projects should be geared towards making hydrological estimates and
prediction at proposed locations of the streams/river for hydraulic design of
bridges. Hydrological estimates help in sizing the bridge from different aspects.
The hydrological investigations for a bridge design include the following specific
objectives:
a. Establishment of a reliable hydro-meteorological database for the estimation
of design flood flows.
b. Input for the selection of return period for design flood and construction
diversion flood, including potential effects of climate change.
c. Prediction of flood flows of different return periods based on availability of
hydro-meteorological data.
6
d. Development of Rating Curve (RC) and Water Surface Profiles (WSP).

e. Estimation of linear water way.
f. Estimation of high flood level (HFL) and provision of freeboard.
g. Estimation of scour depth and calculation of depth of foundation.
h. Estimate afflux and provision of vertical clearance (free board)
The outcome of hydrological investigations should be documented and presented
in report with sufficient details to establish a sound basis for planning and design
of bridges in local roads.
5. SCOPE OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

To attain the objectives of hydrological investigations listed in Section 4, the
following activities should normally be performed in the bridge projects in local
roads:
a. Collection of secondary hydro-meteorological (stream flow and rainfall) data
from the catchment of proposed site from Hydro-meteorologically Similar
Catchment (HSC), if they exist.
b. Collection of primary data from direct measurements and field investigation at
the time of low flows and flood flows.
c. Investigation and collection of data on Glacier Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF)
and CLOF (Cloudburst Flood), if applicable.
d. Review and assessment of collected data in terms of adequacy, consistency
and reliability.
e. Analysis of collected data for computation of design flows, rating curve and
water surface profiles at the respective site.
f. Calculation of linear water way, high flood level, freeboard, scour depth, depth
of foundation, afflux and vertical clearance.
6. HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND RELEVANT STUDIES

Many rivers of the major basins in Nepal are partly snow or glacier fed. During the
monsoon, these rivers receive abundant runoff due to heavy rainfall, which results
in floods. The effect of the snowmelt factor becomes insignificant as they move
from north to south, due to reduction in ratio of snow covered area to total
catchment area. Depending on the altitude some basins are more influenced by
monsoon and some by snowmelt. In the basins that are entirely below 3000 m,
there is no significant contribution from snowmelt. The hydrograph of these
catchments show no rise in flow until the occurrence of the first monsoon rains.
As the meteorological and hydrological parameters are very site specific due to
varying topography and altitude of Nepal, the hydro-meteorological data also
varies largely in space as well as in time. The database is very poor for most of
the Nepalese river basins.
Currently, several bridge projects in Nepal are already in operation and many are
in the process of detailed and feasibility studies. Hydrological studies of these
projects have been conducted according to data availability, however some
differences have been found in the output of the study process because of the use
of different procedures and methods for flow studies.
7
If long-term stream flow data is available in a gauged river basin (GRB) then the
method of determining flood flows are almost the same i.e. through well-known
frequency analysis. However, theoretical distributions of different frequency
analysis can give some differences when extrapolation is done for the required
return period. But large differences in hydrologic output occur when either short-
term stream flow data is available or data is not available as in the case of un-
gauged river basin (URB). For URB some regional methods like WECS/DHM have
been used in the feasibility study of several projects in the past in Nepal. At the
same time, some empirical formulae are also used for the estimation of high flows
such as Dickens, Rational, Snyder, and Richard.
The general practice followed in Nepal to estimate flood flows is to apply different
possible methods and then select one of them for further design of the project.
Major differences among the hydrologists have been found during the selection of
an appropriate method. The selection of method varies from person to person
depending upon their theoretical knowledge and practical experience. This
document provides some guideline to minimize this variation in selection of the
methods. The selection of appropriate methodology will be recommended
according to reliability of flow estimates ensured by different methods and as per
existing hydrological database of a particular region.
Where river training works are to be used to establish desirable approach
conditions to a major structure such as a bridge or a barrage, it is necessary to
establish a width for the waterway opening. The linear waterway of the bridge is
the length available in the bridge between the extreme edges of water surface at
the highest flood level measured at the right angle to the abutment faces. High
flood level and freeboard are also the matter of technical structural requirements.
The following are some of the relevant hydro-meteorological studies conducted in
Nepal, a brief description of each are presented in Appendix 2. The reference
section and bibliography section consist of further list of documents related to
hydrological and meteorological studies of Nepal.
a) Hydrologic Studies of Nepal, 1982, WECS
b) Water Resources Report, 1986, Land Resources Mapping Project (LRMP)
c) Methodologies for estimating hydrologic characteristics of ungauged locations in
Nepal, 1990 (WECS/DHM method), an updated version of WECS 1982.
d) Maximum storm flood for the design of road structures of Nepal, 1996, (PCJ
method)
e) Medium Hydropower Study Project (MHSP) Regional Approach, 1997
f) Hydra-Nepal, 2001, Software for estimation of hydropower potential, developed
by Center for Ecology and Hydrology, Walling Ford, UK
7. ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIABLE HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATABASE

The reliability of the outcome of hydrologic studies basically depends on the
availability of high quality hydro-meteorological data. Hence, establishment of
reliable hydro-meteorological database is essential prior to commencing any
hydrological analysis.
8
The guidelines primarily focus on guiding, suggesting, referring and fixing the
minimum boundary line of action to a designer or a hydrologist. It includes the
stepwise procedures for the prediction of flows from different combinations of
reliable hydro-meteorological data. For the establishment of a reliable hydro-
meteorological database in the context of Nepal, it is necessary to classify the
basins according to availability of data and length of record.
7.1 Classification of basins based on data availability

For any flow study, the basic requirement is the availability of hydro-meteorological
data. The methodology of study and analysis depends solely upon type of data
(Hydrology or Meteorology) and their length of record (long-term or short term). In
Nepal, length of record of hydro-meteorological data for analysis is not adequate
in most of the cases according to the requirements of World Meteorological
Organization (WMO); the basic reason for this inadequacy is that most of the
gauging stations are new. Hence, length of record of the data is classified into
Long Term Data (more than or equal to 30 years) and Short Term Data (less than
30 years) based on present condition of data availability in Nepal. In future, this
standard should be upgraded.
The basins are broadly classified based on the type of hydro-meteorological data
availability (Hydrology and Meteorology) into two categories: Gauged River Basins
[GRB] and Un-gauged River Basins [URB]. Both types of basins are classified into
seven sub-categories expressed as G-1 to G-7 for GRB and U-1 to U-7 for URB
based on length of record of stream flow (Hydrology) and rainfall (Meteorology)
respectively. The classification has been assumed after careful study of the type
of hydro-meteorological data availability and their length of record in the context
of Nepal.
In the absence of hydro-meteorological data at proposed site, attempt should be
made for the transposition of data from Hydrologically Similar Catchment (HSC).
Detailed description on identification and verification of HSC is illustrated in
Section 7.2 and methods of data transposition from HSC are presented in Section
8.1.
Based on the possible combinations of hydrological and meteorological data
availability at proposed bridge-site catchment (PBC) and at HSC, basins are
classified as given below:
7.1.1 Table 1: Classification of Gauged River Basins [GRB]

Basin Data Availability at PBC and HSC
Classification Hydrological Meteorological
G-1 Long Term at PBC Long Term at PBC
G-2 Long Term at PBC
G-3 Short Term at PBC
Long Term at HSC
G-4 Short Term at PBC Long Term at PBC
G-5 Short Term at PBC Long Term at PBC
Short Term at HSC
G-6 Short Term at PBC Long Term at HSC
G-7 Short Term at PBC
9
7.1.2 Table 2: Classification of Un-gauged River Basins [URB]

Basin Data Availability at PBC and HSC
Classification Hydrological Meteorological
U-1 Long Term at HSC Long Term at PBC
U-2 Long Term at HSC
U-3 Short Term at HSC Long Term at PBC
U-4 Long Term at PBC
U-5 Short Term at PBC
Long Term at HSC
U-6 Short Term at HSC
U-7 No data No data
The classification, however, is intended to facilitate and provide necessary

direction to a hydrologist in selecting most appropriate stepwise procedure
corresponding to either of the combinations of data availability for hydrological
investigations. For all 14 combinations of data availability stepwise procedures for
determining flood flows are suggested in this guideline.
7.2 Identification and Verification of Hydrologically Similar Catchment (HSC)

An HSC needs to be identified when the data is not available in the proposed
bridge-site catchment (PBC). Ideally a HSC should the same runoff response as
in the PBC. For the same runoff response in a HSC, hydro-meteorological
parameters and basin characteristics shall be identical and hence these shall be
well compared and verified by homogeneity test and sensitivity analysis. The
homogeneity test is essential for the transposition of data from a HSC, but it is
difficult to perform this test in the context of Nepal. Hence, it is recommended to
compare following parameters of an identified HSC with PBC and decide logically
with proper justification.
a. Basin and channel characteristics
• Catchment area (total and below 5000 m)
• Basin shape factor
• Drainage density
• Time of concentration
• Length of main channel
• Slope of the channel and basin
b. Meteorological characteristics
• Average annual rainfall
• Annual Maximum daily/hourly precipitation
• Monsoon wetness index
• Climate
c. Topographical and geographical characteristics
• Short distance (neighboring basins)
• Latitude and Altitude
• Facing (North, South)
• Soil type (Rock, Boulder, Sand, Clay)
• Vegetation (Forest, Agricultural land, Barren land)
• Storage (Lakes, Reservoirs, Ponds)
• Lithology and groundwater table, springs
10
For the transposition of flood from HSC to PBC careful observation of the series
of instantaneous flood peaks is needed. These instantaneous flood peaks will
normally not be identical or similar.
7.3 Collection, Generation and Compilation of Data

The following steps are recommended for collection, generation & compilation of
data.
• All hydro-meteorological data available in the PBC and HSC shall be collected.
• A description of available hydro-meteorological data supported by inventories in
the form of bar diagrams indicating the source, location, altitude, drainage area
(where appropriate), period of availability of all stations within the area of interest
and the surrounding region shall be made.
• Source of data shall be mentioned. In case data is not available in a compiled
and printed publication, the availability of data shall be explored in reports of
water resources projects in the vicinity of the concerned basin.
• Collection of primary data (river gauge, discharge and rainfall) shall be continued
from the gauging station/reference point established during the study and
planning.
• Flow data shall be checked with the rainfall data and long series of flow data
shall be generated. Regional analysis shall be carried out, if necessary.
• For the purpose of statistical analyses, a convenient sequence of data shall be
compiled. For flood frequency analysis, the annual maximum flow series shall
be compiled.
• Consistency, reliability and adequacy of selected data shall be checked. The
basic data shall first be screened and adjusted to remove, as far as possible,
any nonconformity that may exist. Data shall be prepared for different analysis.
The following are some of the important considerations while preparing data for
analysis:
• Effects of man-made changes in the regime of flow shall be investigated and
proper adjustment should be made.
• For small watersheds, a distinction shall be made between daily maxima and
instantaneous flood peaks.
• Changes in the stage-discharge relationship make stage records non-
homogenous and unsuitable for frequency analysis. It is therefore preferable to
work with discharge data, if available. In case stage frequencies are required,
the results shall be referred to the most recent rating curve.
• Any useful information contained in data publications and manuscripts shall be
made use of after proper scrutiny.
7.4 Collection and Use of Stream Flow Data

Observed flow data is necessary for reliable conclusions about the stream flow,
as such, installation of a rain gauge, river gauge and daily discharge measurement
at the proposed bridge-site, immediately after selection of a bridge site, is highly
recommended. The objective of river stage monitoring and discharge
measurement is to develop a rating curve and convert the stage into discharge.
11
Stream flow data can be used to study the significant properties of flow on one
hand and to establish a correlation of the flow with the rainfall on the other hand.
Among the significant properties of flow, the maximum and minimum discharges
to be anticipated during the life of the project, the seasonal and monthly variations
in discharge, the total volume of water available in a season or in a year and its
dependability are required to be known.
The analysis for the maximum discharge is known as flood analysis. In this
analysis, it is required to find out not only the extreme values (highest probable
flood) but also the actual duration of such conditions and a precise day-to-day
sequential variation that can be anticipated.
The accuracy of any hydrological prediction of extreme rainfall or flood flow is
mainly dependent on the length and reliability of records. Ideally, long-term rainfall
records are needed from the project area, the main river catchment and the cross-
drainage catchments together with discharge records in the main river and, if
possible, the major cross drainage channels. Existence of long-term rainfall
records enables reasonable, direct estimates of reliable rainfall and storm runoff.
If sufficiently long stream flow records are available, these can be correlated with
the rainfall data and estimation of flows would be more dependable.
If no catchment rainfall records exist and if the records (both rainfall and stream
flow) within the project area are of short duration and of dubious validity, both
rainfall and run-off have to be assessed indirectly. If rainfall records are available
from other sites of hydrologically similar catchment (HSC), these could be used
as guides but careful consideration of reliability of data, latitude, altitude,
geographical location, and degree of exposure, etc. has to be made.
7.5 Measurement of Stream Flow
7.5.1 Hydrometric Method (Velocity-Area Method)

A current meter is the most widely used instrument for flow velocity measurement.
The floats are generally used when the use of a current meter is inconvenient, but
it can result in lesser accuracy.
7.5.1.1 Current-meter Measurements

A current-meter measurement is the summation of the products of the partial areas
of stream cross-section and their respective average velocities and the total
discharge Q is calculated by use of the following equation:
Eq. 1 Q   Ai Vi
where, Ai is an individual partial cross-sectional area and Vi is the corresponding

mean flow velocity normal to the partial area.
In shallow water, velocity may be observed at one point, at 0.6 of the effective
depth from the top, but a coefficient is normally required to convert the observed
velocity to mean velocity. The coefficient, called calibration coefficient, is provided
when the current meters are purchased. Regular calibration of the current meters
is required to increase reliability of the measured discharge value.
In deeper water, methods for velocity measurements could include two
observations, at 0.2 and 0.8 of effective depth, three observations, at 0.15, 0.5
and 0.85 of effective depth, and six observations, at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 of
effective depth, and at points close to the top and bottom. The average velocity
12
observed in the two and three point methods may be used as the mean in the
vertical. For the six-point method the mean velocity is given by:
Eq. 2 Vm  0.1Vs  2V0.2  2V0.4  2V0.6  2V0.8  Vb 
The details of the steps of stream discharge measurement can be found in
standard books on hydrology.
7.5.1.2 Float Measurements

This method is simple and convenient for stream flow measurement. This method
yields reliable results where the cross section of flow is of regular geometric shape.
In principle, any drifting object may serve as a float. Floats are classified into
surface float, depth float, double float, floating rod and depth-integrating float, etc.
Of all these, the surface float is most widely used.
This method is used when it is impossible to employ a current meter, because of
unsuitable velocities or depths or the presence of material in suspension, or when
a discharge measurement must be made in a very short time.
Floats must be uniformly distributed over the stream width, and their minimum
number shall be 15. Repetitive measurements are necessary because some floats
may touch the bottom. The float shall be released far enough above the upper
cross section to attain a constant velocity before reaching the first cross section.
The coefficient to be applied to the float measured velocity shall be determined, if
possible, for each site by an analysis of the discharge measurements made by the
current-meter method. When such measurements are not available, an
adjustment factor, F, which is a function of the ratio of the immersed depth of float
to depth of water (R), may be used for rough estimation, as given in the Table 3.
Table 3: Adjustment factor for float method of discharge measurement
R: 0.10 or less 0.25 0.50 0.75 0.95
F: 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.94 0.98
The US EPA’s Volunteer Manual recommends an F value of 0.8 for rocky bottom
stream and 0.9 for sandy/muddy river bed (WVDEP, 2014).
7.5.2 Hydraulic Method (Slope Area method)

The fall in water surface profile between the upper and lower sections of a river is
measured to compute the velocity by means of hydraulic formulae. The method is
generally used at flow-measuring structures such as dams, sluices and culverts,
etc. and gives accurate results.
During flood periods, it is impossible to measure discharge directly because of
excessive rate of change of discharge, excessive velocities, debris, depths or
widths; or because flooded conditions make roads impassable or measuring
structures inaccessible. When such conditions occur, the peak discharge may be
determined after the flood has subsided by computations that combine well-
established hydraulic principles with field observations of channel conditions and
highest stages reached during the flood. The application of the hydraulic methods
involves simultaneous solution of continuity and energy equations.
Such computations may be made through reaches of river channel, through
culverts passing under roadways, through bridge openings, and over weirs, dams
13
and highway embankments. Although the hydraulic formulae differ for each type
of waterway, all the methods involve the following factors:
a. Physical characteristics of the channel, geometry of the channel within and
adjacent to the reach used, and boundary conditions.
b. Water-surface elevations at time of peak stage to define the upper limit of the
cross-sectional areas and the difference in elevation between two significant
points.
c. Hydraulic factors, such as roughness coefficients based on physical
characteristics.
The most common type of indirect measurement is made through a reach of river
channel selected for uniformity or uniform variation in hydraulic properties.
Contracting reaches are chosen in preference to expanding reaches. Discharge
is computed on the basis of a uniform-flow equation, such as the Manning’s
equation, involving channel characteristics, water-surface profiles, and Manning’s
roughness coefficient.
7.5.3 Dilution Method

Using this method, the discharge is be obtained by measuring the tracer
concentration of water injected with tracer solution passing through the sampling
point after complete mixing has taken place. In Nepal, common-salt is normally
used as a tracer. This method is suitable for small streams where the use of
current meter is impractical due to low flow depth or cascading (turbulent) river
flow. This method consists of associating change in relative conductivity of water,
due to injection of salt water in river, to discharge.
7.6 Data Processing

In many cases, it is desirable to subject basic observational data to some analysis
before or immediately after publication to put the data in a form most useful to the
users. A few of the data processing procedures to be followed are described
below.
7.6.1 Stream Flow Rating Curves and their Extrapolation

The shape of the rating curve is a function of the geometry of the channel below
the gauge. The relation is generally concave upward on rectilinear co-ordinates;
at medium and high stages, it approximates a straight line on logarithmic co-
ordinates. The relation between river stage (m) and discharge (m3/s) is normally
presented in graphical (rating curve) or tabular (rating table) form.
A continuous record of flow at a gauging station may be computed from a record
of stage and a stage-discharge relation (rating curve) through extrapolation. The
product of the computation is a tabulation of the mean discharge for each day,
month and annual period. In addition, the tabulation shall include a list of the
instantaneous peak discharges.
7.6.2 Precipitation
In Nepal, precipitation data are available from the publications of the Department
of Hydrology and Meteorology (DHM) of the Government of Nepal (GoN). A
softcopy of the hydrological and meteorological data can be obtained from the
DHM by fulfilling required procedure.
14
The daily/hourly average depth of precipitation over a specific area, on a storm, is

required to obtain bridge design parameters from hydrological analyses. The
simplest method of obtaining the average precipitation depth is to average
arithmetically the gauged precipitation depths in the area. This method yields good
estimates in flat plains if the gauges are uniformly distributed and the individual
gauged data do not vary widely from the mean. The Thiessen polygon and
Isohyetal methods are recommended for averaging the precipitation depth over a
catchment area; both these methods yield area weighted average of precipitation.
The Thiessen method is objective and is considered better for plain area. The
isohyetal method is more flexible since the isohyet lines can be drawn to better
match the known variations in local precipitation pattern, which in turn, are affected
by local topography.
7.6.3 Stepwise Procedures of Data Processing

The following stepwise procedures shall be adopted while processing the
hydrological and meteorological data for hydrological investigations.
a. Notes on Quality of Data
Notes shall be made about the method of measurement, standards followed,
instruments used, frequency of observations, history of the station, and shifts in
location of the station and shifts in rating curves.
b. Development of Discharge Data
The source of the discharge data needs to be clearly stated. Whether the
discharges given are the observed (measured) discharges or are computed from
observed stages using stage-discharge ratings should be noted. If rating curve is
used in generation of the discharge data then discussion shall be made about the
development of stage-discharge rating curves at the gauge-discharge site,
bringing out the extrapolation involved to identify the peak water level and peak
discharge.
c. Gap Filling of Missing Data
The method used in filling missing data, if any, should be stated. The filled data
should be marked with an identifiable symbol. The data filling techniques may
include:
• Random choice from values observed for that period.
• Interpolation from adjoining values by plotting a smooth hydrograph (for runoff
alone)
• Using the average proportion with normal for the adjoining stations
• The double-mass curve technique
• Correlation with adjoining stations either of the same hydrologic element or of
a different hydrologic element
• Autocorrelation with the earlier period at the same station
d. Gap Filling of Annual Maximum Discharges

If the data gap is not caused by any hydrologic reasons which are liable to
introduce bias in the incomplete sample (e.g. washing away of the gauge due to
a very high flood), it is not be necessary to fill the gap. The whole series shall be
treated as one, i.e. the gap can be ignored.
15
7.7 Adjustment of Flow Records

It is normally necessary and convenient to use natural or virgin flows in
hydrological studies. The natural or virgin flows shall be computed by making
corrections for the effects of human activities. Care shall be taken to account for
the following:
a. When long historical runoff data shows a trend attributable to change in land
use, extrapolation of the trend and correction of the historical series to make it
compatible with present and future conditions is necessary.
b. When effects on flood flows due to existing projects in upstream areas are
considered appreciable, the adjustment of flood flows for the effect of storage
into and release from reservoir should be made. This may involve reservoir
and channel routing.
7.8 Internal Consistency Checking of Data

Stage discharge (S-Q) relation of observed data at all stations used in the study
shall be checked. If the S-Q relation is not stationary, attempt should be made to
analyze to find any physical reasons for the dynamic relationship. For points
showing large deviations, investigation is required for likely errors.
7.9 External Consistency Checking of Data

• Consistency between rainfall and runoff by comparing annual monsoon (June-
October) rainfalls in the drainage area and runoff at the gauging site shall be
checked. This may be done for the full length of the concurrent record at all sites
used in the study.
• Consistency of runoff shall be checked, by comparing the average annual
specific flow (expressed as liters/s/km2) with corresponding figures for adjoining
and hydro-meteorologically similar basins. When there is more than one
gauging site on a river, the figures of the average annual specific flow for sub
areas shall be calculated and compared. This study is required for all discharge
sites in the region including the central network sites nearby.
• Consistency of short period runoffs shall be checked by comparison with
concurrent short period runoffs at adjoining sites. To do this the hydrographs of
daily flows shall be superimposed with discharges plotted on log scale (semi log
paper) for visual comparison. When inconsistency is noted, possibility of errors
in the data shall be checked.
• For rainfall data, checking of quality by double-mass curve techniques is
required for all stations with known or suspected changes in location or
exposure conditions. If a kink (sudden change in slope of the double mass
curve) is observed, the data has to be made consistent to the new conditions.
• For runoff data, a similar technique of checking by the double-mass curve may
also be used when a change in gauge location or method of observation is
known or suspected.
8. EXTENSION OF HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATA

In Nepal, long-term data required for the design and planning of bridges are not
available adequately. This guideline describes some methods for extending the
short-term hydro-meteorological data with the help of two long-term records:
a. Long-term stream flow data at a hydrologically similar catchment (HSC)
16
b. Long-term precipitation record
8.1 Extension with Long-Term Stream flow Data at HSC

Following methods are recommended for extending the stream flow record on the
assumption that stream flow data for a sufficiently long period is available for a
HSC or on the same river at a downstream section.
8.1.1 Double-Mass Curve Method

The method consists of plotting the cumulative stream flow of the station and the
index station on a graph. The slope of the double-mass curve gives the relation of
the stream flows at two stations. The use of this method is limited because of its
constant slope, regardless of variation in size of yearly (or monthly) increments,
whereas the flow records of two streams may not necessarily correlate with each
other as straight lines. An example of the use of the double mass curve to test of
consistency of meteorological data is given in Appendix 3-2; the same process
can be used to check the consistency of flow data. If the data of the PBC is found
consistent with the selected index station, then the PBC station data can be
extended based on the index station data.
8.1.2 Catchment Area Ratio Method

If the two catchments are hydrologically similar then extension of hydrological data
could be done using the catchment area ratio (CAR) method as given below.
Eq. 3 Qb  Qi  Ab / Ai  n
where, suffix b stands for base (PBC) station and suffix i stands for index station.
The value of the exponent n depends on duration of flow to be transposed. For
instantaneous flood n is taken as 0.5. For higher duration, like 60 days or more, n
is taken as 0.8, and for annual runoff n may approach 1.0 (Cudworth, 1991).
8.1.3 Regression Analysis Method

Regression analysis determines the association between different variables. If Q b
is the dependent variable while Qi is the independent variable then a linear
regression can be used to find the relation between Qb and Qi. A linear regression
line can be fitted between the two variables, as given in equation 4.
Eq. 4 Qb  a  bQi
where, a & b are the regression coefficients which can be determined by standard
linear regression technique. Different modern spreadsheet programs, like MS
Excel, have built in facility to calculate the regression coefficients a and b. The
equation of linear regression line can be used to extend data of the PBC.
8.1.4 Index Station Method

The index-station method, which is more useful for the study of low flow in a river,
makes use of ‘duration curves’, which for stream flow are in some ways the
counterpart of rainfall-frequency curves. They are constructed by arranging the
values of the hydrologic event in the order of their descending magnitude, and
computing the percent of time for each magnitude to be equaled or exceeded. A
plotting of the magnitudes as ordinates against the corresponding percent of time
as the abscissa results in the so-called duration curve.
In this method a relation is established between two stations for the short period
of concurrent record by plotting a graph of the discharges for given duration points
17
at one station against the corresponding discharges at the other station. The graph
for the short period is also assumed to represent the relation between the stations
for a long period. If the assumption is true, the flow available 50 percent of the
time at the long-term station can be used to enter the curve of relation (based on
the short period of record), in order to obtain the adjusted (to long term) flow
available 50 percent of the time at the short-term station. Adjusted flows for other
percent of time at the short-term station can be obtained in the same manner.
(Searcy, 1969)
8.1.5 Langbein’s Log-Deviation Method

This method is the most accepted, latest and recommended by the Central Water
Commission, India for extension of short-term data with the help of long-term data
at HSC (Singh and Kumar, 2012). In this method, the correlations between the
base and index stations are made in terms of logarithms of the discharges, in order
to remove the skewness inherent in stream flow data. The usual practice is to
correlate 10-daily mean discharges or monthly mean discharges although flood
peaks, daily means or annual means could be used as well. The regression
equation assumed is:
Eq. 5 Y  a  bX
where Y (dependent variable) and X (independent variable) are the log-deviations
at the base and index stations respectively; a & b are the regression coefficients.
Eq. 6  Y  aN  b X
Eq. 7  XY  a X  b X 2
However, X = Y = 0, because X and Y are deviations from the mean.

Therefore, a = 0, b = XY/X2 and the correlation coefficient, r = XY/[X2Y2]1/2.
The stepwise procedure to extend the data by this technique is as follows:
1. Take logarithms of discharge at the base station.
2. Compute mean of the values obtained in step 1.
3. Deduct mean values of step 2 from the logarithms of discharges computed
under step 1 to give Y.
4. Repeat Step 1 to 3 for the concurrent data of the index station to give X.
5. Compute value of r.
6. Compute value of b, if the value of r is satisfactory (r > 0.6).
The Steps 7, 8 and 9 are to be operated only on data of the years for which the base
station data has to be extended, using mean value from existing data of base station.
7. Estimate log-deviation Y for the base station by multiplying the log-deviation X
of the index station by b.
8. Estimate logarithms of discharges at the base station by adding the mean of
logarithms of base station to Y, computed under step 7.
9. Antilogarithms of the values estimated under step 8 gives the required data at
proposed site extended from HSC.
A numerical example of the application of the Langbein’s log deviation method is given
in Appendix 3-12.
18
8.1.6 Mean Ratio Method

The application of the Mean Ratio Method consists of the following steps:
1. Calculate mean of the short-term record at base (PBC) station (Q bm).
2. Calculate mean of the long-term record for the same period at index station of
HSC (Qim).
3. Calculate mean ratio rm = (Qbm)/(Qim).
4. Calculate remaining records at base (PBC) station by multiplying each record
of index station of HSC with mean ratio rm.
8.2 Extension with Long-Term Precipitation Record

Extension procedures are recommended for the following 4 cases which generally
arise in practice.
8.2.1 With long-term precipitation and short-term flow data at site

The procedure is to establish statistical correlation between observed precipitation
and stream flow and plot it on a log-log graph. If the relationship is a straight line,
it is then suitably extended to find out the stream flow corresponding to weighted
precipitation of each year.
8.2.2 With long-term precipitation at site & short-term flow or concurrent P-R data
at HSC
First, the rainfall-runoff (P-R) correlation is established as in 8.2.1 for HSC. The
runoff series at proposed site is then worked out by feeding long-term rainfall data
of base station in the correlation equation established above.
8.2.3 With only precipitation and temperature records at site

Following empirical formulae are available to compute runoff in such cases.
Extreme caution needs to be exercised in using these formulae in Nepal because
these formulae are developed in areas which have different climate than Nepal.
8.2.3.1. Khosla’s Formula

Eq. 8 R  P  T / 3.74
where, R is runoff in cm; P is precipitation in cm; T is mean temperature in C. To
evaluate monthly runoff (Rm, in mm) Khosla gave the following relationship:
Eq. 9 Rm  Pm  Lm
where, Pm is monthly precipitation (mm) & Lm is monthly losses (mm).
(Subramanya, 2008). Lm can be estimated through mean monthly temperature
(Tm).
Eq. 10 Lm  5Tm (When Tm > 4.5 C)
For Tm < 4.5 C, mean monthly losses are taken from table 4.
Table 4: Monthly temperature and monthly runoff loss
Tm, C 4.5 -1 -7 -12 -18
Lm, mm 21 18 15 12.5 10
8.2.3.2. UPIRI Formulae

Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Research Institute (UPIRI), Roorkee, India, in 1960, has
developed a series of formulae relating runoff R and precipitation P in cm for
19
Himalayan Rivers in Uttar Pradesh (Jha and Smakhtin, 2008). Among such
relations, the following two formulae are close to Nepalese rivers due to their
proximity with Nepal.
Relation derived for Ganga basin at Hardwar:
Eq. 11 R  5.45 P 0.60
Relation derived for Sharda basin at Banbasa:
Eq. 12 R  2.70 P 0.80
8.2.3.3. ICAR Formula

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research has developed the formula for runoff
from small watersheds up to 100 km2 considering nine important physiographic
characters of 17 sub-catchments in the Nilgiri Hills, Tamil Nadu (Jha and
Smakhtin, 2008):
1.34
Eq. 13 Q  1.511P 1.44 / Tm A 0.0613
where, Q is annual runoff in cm; P is annual precipitation in cm; Tm is mean annual
temperature in C and A is catchment area in km2.
8.2.4. No data at all

When no data is available, the stream flow (generally flood) at the proposed
bridge-site is estimated by making a regional flood-frequency analysis in two
steps:
1. Plotting a curve between the catchment area versus the mean flood, and
2. Plotting a curve between return periods versus ratio of flood to mean flood.
The regional frequency curves have their most useful applications in estimating
the flood potential of un-gauged basins. But this method cannot provide general
stream flow data i.e. extension of flow records.
9. DETERMINATION OF BASIN AND CHANNEL CHARACTERISTICS
9.1 Catchment Area

The catchment area is the fundamental factor in any kind of river flow study; it is
recommended to estimate the catchment area by a number of methods. Suitable
value shall be adopted after comparing the estimated values obtained through
different methods. One of the logical options may be to take the average value, if
the reliability of the method used is low.
Assuming that the elementary physical law of surface runoff applies, that water
flows perpendicularly to contour lines, the watershed divide will be an orthogonal
trajectory to the contour lines originating at the indicated site on the stream and
leading to the highest elevation in the basin. If it is difficult to determine the
direction of the highest elevation towards which the watershed divide runs, the
drawing may start again on the other direction of the cross-section located on the
stream. The watershed divide line thus drafted must be thoroughly checked to
avoid mistakes leading to overlap of adjacent basins.
The measurement of the area of the basin on the map can be done by using a
planimeter. Transparent graph paper may be used when this instrument is not
available. After delineating the catchment boundary on transparent graph paper,
20
square grids and triangles shall be counted to estimate the catchment area. The
catchment area can also be found by using HydrA-Nepal software; for this the
coordinates (northing and easting) of different points of the basin boundary, and
map origin has to be entered in the software (CEH 2001). If soft copy of the
topographical sheets is available, GIS can be used to obtain the catchment area
more accurately.
9.2 Basin Slope

Flood magnitudes reflect the momentum of the runoff. Slope is an important factor
in the momentum. Basin slope reflects the rate of change of elevation with respect
to distance along the principal flow path. The principal flow path shall be
delineated, and the basin slope (S) shall be computed as the difference in
elevation (E) between the end points of the principal flow path divided by the
length of the flow path or channel length (L).
9.3 Basin Shape

Basins have an infinite variety of shape, and it reflects the rate of runoff at the
outlet. A circular watershed would result in runoff from various parts of the
watershed reaching the outlet at the same time. An elliptical watershed having the
outlet at one end of the major axis and having the same area as the circular
watershed would cause the runoff to be spread out over time, thus producing a
smaller flood peak than that of the circular watershed. A number of watershed
parameters have been developed to reflect basin shape. The following are a few
typical parameters:
A coefficient of the basin shape may be defined equal to L2/A, where L is the total
length of the channel and A is the area of the basin.
9.4 Average Width of Basin

The average width of the basin (bav) may be computed as the ratio of the
catchment area (A) and the channel length (L):
Eq. 14 bav  A / L
9.5 Channel Length

In addition to the catchment area and the basin length, the channel length is used
frequently in hydrologic computations. The distance measured along the main
channel from the watershed outlet to the end of the channel as indicated on a map
is called channel length and is denoted as L.
In a map streams are simplified. The channel of the stream very often changes its
bank line. The length of a stream can be accurately determined by field surveying
of the streamline or the center-line of the stream.
If the channel length is read from a map then it shall be multiplied by a tortuosity
coefficient 1.01 to 1.15. The measurement may be made with dividers, using 1 to
2 mm distances. The number of distances along the whole length of the stream is
noted and their sum shall be multiplied by the above coefficient, according to the
map scale. If the tortuosity of a river is low the channel length may also be
measured on map by using a thread.
9.6 Channel Slope

The channel slope could be described by a number of computational schemes,
the most common being as given below:
21
Eq. 15 S  E / L
where, E is the difference in elevation between the points defining the upper and
lower ends of the channel and L is the length of the channel between the same
two points. An approximation of this slope may be computed by the equation:
Eq. 16 S   hmax  hmin  / A
where, hmax and hmin are the highest and lowest points in the basin (in meter) and
A is the catchment area (in km2).
9.7 Drainage Density

The drainage density (D) is the ratio of the total length of streams within a
watershed to the total area of the basin. Thus, D has units of the reciprocal of
length. A high value of the drainage density would indicate a relatively high density
of streams and thus a rapid storm response.
9.8 Time of Concentration

Time of concentration (tc in hours) is the time for water to flow from the most
remote part of the basin to the outlet point and shall be estimated by Kirpich
equation (1940) given below.
Eq. 17 t c  0.00032 L0.77 S 0.385
where, L is maximum length of travel of water in meter and S is slope equal to
H/E, where E is the difference in elevation between the remotest point on the
basin and the outlet in meter, and L is the distance between these two points.
(Subramanya, 2008)
10. COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSES

The introduction of digital computers into hydrology during the 1960s and 1970s
allowed complex water problems to be simulated as complete systems for the first
time. Large computer models can now be used to match historical data and help
answer difficult control questions. Some of the computer models useful in
hydrologic studies are given in table 5.
Table 5: List of some computer software used for hydrological analyses
Model Author(s) Year Description
Stanford Crawford & Linsley 1966 Watershed model
HEC-1 HEC 1973,1981 Flood hydrograph package
HEC-2 HEC 1976,1982 Water surface profiles
HEC-4 HEC 1971 Monthly stream flow simulation
HEC-5 HEC 1979 Simulation of flood control
systems
SCS-TR20 USDA SCS 1975 Hydrologic simulation model
USDA HL-74 USDA ARS Holtan 1975 Model of watershed hydrology
HSPF Johanson et al 1980 Hydrological Simulation Program
11. SUMMARY
The hydrological analyses and predictions are based on the assumption that the
past history of water occurrence is more likely to be repeated in the future. In other
words plans for control and use of water are based on the assumption that the
22
precipitation and stream flow condition which have been observed in the past can
be expected to occur, within the reasonable limits of similarity, in the future, except
when stream flow are modified by human activities.
The ideal foundation for planning in hydrology would be comprehensive records,
covering an infinite period of years, of precipitation and other climatic conditions,
stream flows. Unfortunately, such records seldom exist, and the records that are
available in most instances fall for short of the ideal. In such cases the experience
of hydrologist (designer) is invaluable. S/he will by means of observation from
other fields, such as meteorology, topography, soils, vegetation etc. prepare flow
and flood estimates which are correlated with similar or neighboring areas where
flow records are available.
Conclusion and Recommendation

A hydrological study is bounded by the availability of hydro-meteorological data.
This guideline has outlined the hydrologic study and analysis based on different
combinations of data availability at proposed site (upstream or downstream in the
same catchment) and at HSC (Hydrologically Similar Catchment). This guideline
is prepared to achieve a systematic prediction of floods for the different
combinations of data availability in Gauged River Basins (GRB) as well as in Un-
gauged River Basins (URB). Therefore, it is recommended to hydrologist
(designer) that s/he examine the records available, scrutinize the gauging results
and correct the errors, if any.
In the context of hydraulic design, hydrologic analysis provides estimates of flood
magnitudes as a result of precipitation. These estimates consider processes in a
watershed that transform precipitation to runoff and that transport water through
the system to a project’s location. The design of bridges requires the designer to:
 Select the level of protection desired, specified in terms of probability or
return period flow,
 Find the corresponding flow rate and/or volume, computing in many cases
the corresponding water surface elevation. and
 Use the calculated hydrological parameters at as bases for design.
As we know in the design of bridges, floods are usually considered in terms of
peak runoff or discharge in m3/s. Depending on the needs of a particular project,
the hydrology study may provide:
 A flow rate for which the probability of exceedance is specified.
 A volume of water expected with a specified storm duration, for which the
probability of exceedance is specified.
 A hydrograph—flow rate as a function of time—for a specified probability of
exceedance. This provides information about peak, volume, and timing of
runoff level of protection desired.
These results may be obtained through statistical analysis of historical
observations or through empirical or conceptual models of the relevant watershed
and channel processes which are described in detail in Appendix 1. The following
flow diagram summarizes the steps taken in making hydrological decisions.
23
24
Similarly, the following flow diagram and notes given in the table is suggested to follow
for the estimations of design floods.
Design of food estimation methods
Stream flow based Rainfall based
If no data series and if rational

What period of records is available? Catchment area is less method are
than 12 km 2 not
≥25 years If data are too If no data series appropriate
short (1-5 yrs) and catchment
is large
Lognormal or Regional Empirical Rational Unit

extreme value methods methods methods Hydrograph
Methods for estimations of design floods
Notes:
Stepwise procedures for the prediction of floods based on data availability in GRB and
URB are listed in subchapter 13.3 and 13.4 of this guideline. Similarly, matrix tables have
been developed for the same to provide easy search of flood estimation methods and
presented in table 14.1 and 14.2 for GRB and URB respectively.
Estimation of PMF go to sub chapter 13.2.4
Estimation of PMF in the absence of PMP: go to subchapter 13.2.5
Regional Method for Flood Estimation: go to subchapter 13.2.6
Rational Method for Flood Estimation : go to subchapter 13.2.7
Empirical Methods: go to subchapter 13.2.8. There are several empirical formulae for
the estimation of flood flows. Empirical formulae have limited regional application.
Many of them do not provide information on the probable return period; hence they
shall be used only when a more accurate method cannot be applied because of lack of
data. Some of the empirical formulae suitable for the flood prediction in un-gauged
basins of Nepal are given here but these shall be used with great caution and proper
justification.
Enveloping Curve: go to subchapter 13.2.9
Follow table 14.1 for Gauged River Basin and table 14.2 for Un-gauged River Basin
In Nepal, long-term data required for the design and planning of-projects are not
available adequately. This guideline also describes some methods for extending the
short-term hydro-meteorological data. Such that it can be used for the design flood
estimation. For such case it is suggested to use lognormal or extreme value with caution.
Unit Hydrograph for Flood Estimation : go to subchapter 13.2..4-f
25
APPENDIX 1
26
12. FLOOD HYDROLOGY
12.1 Design Flood

The maximum flood that a hydraulic structure can safely pass is called the design
flood of that structure. Proper selection of the design flood is of utmost importance
as this affects both the safety and cost of any structure. Too small a design flood
for a major structure involves high risk, not only of the total failure of the structure
and the services rendered by it but also the safety of persons and properties
located downstream. An excessive design flood, on the other hand, will result in
an unnecessarily big structure, which may adversely affect the economic feasibility
of the project.
Most designs involving hydrologic analyses utilize a design or critical flood that
imitates some severe future or historical events. If runoff data are available, the
design flood hydrograph can be synthesized from available storm records using
rainfall-runoff (Unit Hydrograph) procedures. In the case of large river basins,
which may provide some amount of hydrologic data, a calculated risk can be taken
in designing hydraulic structures for a flood lesser than most severe flood. The
appropriate design return period is selected on the basis of economic analyses,
policy decisions and the degree of accepted risk. The degree of acceptable risk is
a function of resource availability, time availability, potential damage from the
failure of the project and importance associate with the project.
12.1.1 Frequency for the Design Flood

The first problem that a hydrologist faces in practice is to decide on the frequency
of the flood to be adopted in the design of a hydraulic structure. This depends
upon the degree of acceptable risk. The degree of risk, R in designing a structure
during an anticipated service life of n years for a flood of a particular return period
T can be theoretically evaluated by the following equation (Subramanya, 2008).
R  1  1  1 / T 
n
Eq. 18
The return period (T) is the reciprocal value of probability of occurrence (P), T =
1/P. Thus a flood of 100-year return period is equivalent to 1% probability of
occurrence. The risk or chance of 100-year return period flood to occur in 100 year
of project life is approximately 64%.
12.1.2 Construction Diversion Flood

The nature of runoff and construction program will influence the selection of the
diversion scheme. In selecting the design flood for construction diversion,
consideration shall be given to the following:
a. Time and duration of the construction work to consider the number of flood
seasons, which will be encountered.
b. The cost of possible damages to work completed or still to be completed if it is
flooded.
c. The cost of delay to the completion of the work including the cost of forcing
construction labor and equipment to remain idle while the flood damage is
being repaired.
d. The safety of downstream inhabitants in case of failure of diversion works
resulting in unnatural flood.
Cofferdams are temporary structures required for diverting the river flow from the
main work areas during the period of construction of permanent structures. The
design flood for cofferdams may be determined based on floods of 5 to 25 year
frequency depending on the period during which they are required to be in
operation and the risk of damage involved in their failure.
12.1.3 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)

In the design of major bridges in national highways the PMF may be used. The
PMF is the largest flood likely to occur in a basin, given the geographical,
meteorological and hydrological characteristics of the region. Its occurrence
depends on a combination of extreme events, and it is theoretically the maximum
flood that can occur. The PMF does not depend on statistical analyses of flow
records but rather on determining the most adverse, plausible meteorological
conditions that would be expected to occur in the basin. Consequently, a great
deal of basin-specific data must be collected in order to perform a PMF analysis.
12.2 Flood Estimation Methods

Flood estimation methods basically depend upon data availability. If long-term
maximum instantaneous flow data are available in gauged river basins (GRB) the
frequency analysis methods are used to estimate the design flood; the reliability
of this estimate is excellent. When there is no data at all, there are some options
to predict the design flood viz. regional methods, empirical formulae, envelope
curves etc. but the reliability of prediction will be poor. In this section different flood
estimation methods in Nepalese context are described.
The detailed stepwise procedures for the prediction of floods based on data
availability in GRB and URB are listed in Sections 12.3 and 12.4 of this guideline.
Similarly, matrix tables GRB and URB are provided in Section 13 for easy search
of flood estimation methods.
12.2.1 Flood Frequency Analysis (Plotting Positions and Fitting of Theoretical

Distributions)
When long term reliable flow data of the concerned catchment are available or
when long term flow data can be generated from data of HSC, flood values for use
in bridge design can be estimated based on plotting position method and
frequency distribution methods. Out of the various methods, the Weibull’s plotting
position method and the three frequency distribution methods - Gumbel, Log
Pearson Type III and Log Normal methods - are recommended for use in Nepal.
12.2.2 Regional Flood Frequency Analysis

When the available data at a basin is too short to conduct frequency analysis, a
regional analysis is adopted. In this, a hydro-meteorologically homogeneous
region from the statistical point of view is considered. Available long-term data
from neighboring basins are tested for homogeneity and a group of stations
satisfying the test is identified. This group of stations constitutes a region and all
the station data of this region are pooled and analyzed as a group to find the
frequency characteristics of the region.
Thus, the regional flood frequency analysis aims at utilizing available records of
streams in the hydrologically and topographically similar regions on either side of
the streams in question so as to reduce sampling errors. The analysis consists of
two major parts. The first is to develop the basic dimensionless frequency curve
representing the ratio of the flood of any frequency to the mean annual flood with
28
return period i.e. (QT/Q2.33) versus T. The mean annual flood corresponds to a
recurrence interval of 2.33 years. The second part is the development of relations
between topographic characteristics of the drainage area and mean annual flood
i.e. Q2.33 versus A, to enable the prediction of Q2.33 for an un-gauged basin at any
point within the region. The variations of Q2.33 with A, and the variations of QT/Q2.33
with T are the basic plots prepared in this analysis. The combination of the Q2.33
of an un-gauged basin with the basic frequency curve of homogeneous gauged
basins, which is in terms of Q2.33, provides an estimate of design flood for required
frequency at any location in the region.
12.2.3 Recommended Methods of Flood-Frequency Analysis

In selecting a particular method of frequency analysis adaptable to the character
of data available and the purpose of study, the following are the main
considerations:
 When adequate flow data (usually more than a 30-year record) are available
and flood magnitudes of large return periods are the primary concern, it is
customary to plot the annual series data on both extreme value and lognormal
probability papers. A tentative idea can then be had whether a lognormal or
extreme-value fit would be more appropriate depending upon the closeness to
the linearity of a line joining the plotted points. The observed data are then
fitted to the selected distribution either by the method using the frequency
factor or by the curve-fitting method.
 When available records are of shorter length (less than 30 years) and the
object is to determine floods of smaller return periods (seldom exceeding 25
years), partial duration series are compiled and analyzed. The results can
however be checked by analyzing the annual flood peaks by the Gumbel or
Log Pearson Type III or Log Normal method.
 When available data are too short or non-existent, regional flood frequency
analyses can be carried out.
 Occasionally, the observed point or points depart markedly from the computed
frequency curve on probability paper. Such a point or points that fall far outside
the curve may be considered non-homogenous (or outliers) with the rest of the
sample and the curve is recomputed excluding them from the analysis.
 It is a good practice to estimate the confidence limits wherever possible and
show the confidence bands on either side of the computed frequency curve on
probability paper as a guide to the reliability of the curve.
12.2.4 Estimation of PMF

The method of estimation of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) involves the use
of Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) and unit hydrograph principle. The
PMP is an estimate of the physical upper limit to storm rainfall over a basin. The
stepwise procedure for evaluating the PMF consists of the estimation of:
1. Duration of the design storm: The critical period of the design storm is equal to
the time of concentration of the basin, as this is the storm duration that permits
the whole catchment area to contribute to the peak flow rate.
2. Design storm: The most common method of estimating PMP involves the
transposition of selected storms to the basin and their maximization over there.
The three main steps of the transposition and maximization method are:
29
 Selection and analysis of past major storms on record considered

transposable to the project basin
 Adjustment to these transposable storms for maximum moisture that could
occur over the project basin
 Envelopment of the transposed adjusted storms
3. Time adjustment of the design rainfall: Time adjustment could be done
satisfactorily by a study of the time-distribution pattern of those observed
storms in the area for which adequate self-recording gauge data are available
by depth-area-duration analysis. Maximum rainfall depths for standard
durations of 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48 hours are obtained for each of the storms and
expressed as percentages of the total storm depth. Enveloping percentages
are then obtained and applied to adjust the design rainfall based on observed
daily data.
4. Design unit hydrograph: The steps in the derivation of the design unit
hydrograph are:
 Collection and examination of basic data
 Analysis of observed flood hydrograph and sub-division into base flow and
direct runoff hydrographs
 Analysis of rainfall data related to observed flood hydrographs
 Derivation of storm rainfall-runoff relationships from observed rainfall and
runoff records
 Derivation of unit hydrographs from observed flood hydrographs
 Plot all the unit hydrographs and determine the average unit hydrographs
5. Critical time sequence of the design storm: For an exact determination of
critical sequence the stepwise procedure is as follows:
 The increments of rainfall excess are arranged opposite to the ordinates of
the design unit hydrograph in such a way that the largest increment is
opposite the largest hydrograph ordinate, the second largest increment is
opposite the second largest ordinate, and so on.
 This arrangement is reversed to obtain the critical sequence.
6. The PMF hydrograph: The critical time sequence of the design storm is
superimposed on the derived design unit hydrograph to give the direct
hydrograph, which when added with the base flow, gives the PMF hydrograph.
12.2.5 Estimation of PMF in the absence of PMP

In areas of sparse data, PMF can be obtained by drawing envelope curves of the
maximum floods recorded in the region under study. In cases where estimates of
PMP have not been made, volumes of rainfall to be expected can also be
approximated from envelope curves of the world record rainfalls. In case there is
no extreme precipitation data Hersfield suggests the use of following equation to
estimate a 24 hour PMP at a point in a region so as to superimpose it on design
unit hydrograph to give the PMF:
Eq. 19 PMP24  Pm  KS n
where, Pm is mean of 24 hr annual maximum over the period of record; Sn is

standard deviation of the 24 hr annual maximum and K is a constant equal to 15.
A general rule of thumb is recommended for the evaluations of PMF, which is

frequently used for quick prediction. The PMF is approximately twice the 10000
year flood. Basis of this recommendation is the average ratio of PMF to 10000
30
year flood for many projects throughout the world. The range of ratios is from 1.34
to 2.94 and in particular 1.91 for Karnali in Nepal (Yadav, 2002).
12.2.6 Regional Methods for Flood Estimation

In the absence of maximum instantaneous flow data at the proposed site, regional
methods such as WECS/DHM (1990), DHM (2004), PCJ (1996), Mishra et.al.
(2009), and Medium Hydropower Study Project (MHSP) can be used, which are
derived for un-gauged locations of Nepal.
12.2.6.1 WECS/DHM Method (1990) and DHM Method (2004)

The WECS/DHM (1990) method is extensively used for flood prediction in the un-
gauged locations of Nepal for small projects. The DHM (2004) method is the
update of the WECS/DHM (1990) method. The primary variable in both methods
for estimation of flood flow of different return periods is the catchment area below
3000 m above sea level. The steps involved in the application of these methods
are given in Section 12.3.1. A numerical example of the application of both these
methods is presented in Appendix 3-5.
12.2.6.2 PCJ Method (1996)

Using this method, maximum storm-floods of different return periods can be
derived based on maximum hourly intensity. This regional method was developed
for the prediction of design floods in the absence of stream flow data at un-gauged
locations of Nepal. The maximum hourly intensity of different frequency has been
derived from daily maximum for 142 rainfall stations of Nepal that have more than
20 years of consistent data. Rainfall stations in the basin and/or nearby (outside)
should be selected from 142 analyzed stations so that maximum hourly rainfall
intensity on the entire basin could be carried out. A numerical example and
necessary data for the use of this method are given in Appendix 3-8.
12.2.6.3 Mishra et. al. Method (2009)

Mishra et. al. (2009) has used index flood method for the development of regional
equations to estimate flood flows of different return periods, by dividing Nepal into
5 hydrologically homogenous regions. The regional frequency factor for each
region and for different return periods and index flood for each region has been
developed. A numerical example with necessary equations and data for the use
of this method are given in Appendix 3-11.
12.2.6.4 Medium Hydropower Study Project Method (1997)

The medium hydropower study project (MHSP) method, developed in 1997, can
be used to find flood flow values of different return periods based on total
catchment area of the PBC. The formula and coefficients associate with this
method are given in Section 23.5 of this guideline.
12.2.7 Empirical Formulae for Flood Estimation

There are several empirical formulae for the estimation of flood flows. Empirical
formulae have limited regional application. Many of them do not provide
information on the probable return period; hence they shall be used only when a
more accurate method cannot be applied because of lack of data. Some of the
empirical formulae suitable for the flood prediction in un-gauged basins of Nepal
are given here but these shall be used with great caution and proper justification.
31
12.2.7.1 Modified Dicken’s Method

The Modified Dicken’s Method (1960) is an updated version of the Dicken’s
method (1865). The UP Irrigation Research Institute (UPIRI), Roorkee, India has
done frequency studies on Himalayan Rivers and suggested the following updated
relationship to compute Dicken's constant CT for desired return period (Jha and
Smakhtin, 2008).
Eq. 20 CT  2.342 log0.6T  log1185 / p   4
Eq. 21 p  a  6 /  A  a 100
where, a is perpetual snow covered area in sq. km, (A+a) is total catchment area
in sq. km, p is percentage of snow covered area and T is return period in years.
Now, T year flood discharge (QT) in m3/sec is determined by:
Eq. 22 QT  CT A 0.75
12.2.7.2 Rational Method

A rational formula, for flood discharge takes into account the intensity, distribution
and duration of rainfall as well as the area, slope, and permeability of the basin.
This method is applicable to small rural catchments with area not exceeding 12
km2 (DHM 2004). A typical rational formula is:
Eq. 23 QT = (C itc,p A) / 3.6
where, Q T is the maximum flood discharge in m3/s for required return period T; C
is the runoff coefficient and can be selected based on type of basin (Table 6), A is
the catchment area in km2; itc,p is the mean rainfall intensity in mm/hour for
probability P and time of concentration tc . In the absence of data on rainfall
intensity, the mean intensity of rainfall can be estimated by using Ram Babu’s
equation (1979):
Eq. 24 itc,p = (KTa)/(tc + b)n
where, K, a, b and n are constants for a particular location. For Nepal these value
can be assumed as for Northern India (K = 5.92; a = 0.162; b = 0.5 and n = 1.013).
The values of K, a, b and n for different cities in India are available in standard
books on hydrology (Subramanya 2008).
In Nepalese context, if rainfall data are available or can be extended from short-
term data at a HSC, the rainfall intensity of required duration and return period can
be estimated from time series data of 24 hour maximum annual rainfall by using
Richards’ method, Mononob method or Shakya method (2004); the details of
these methods are given in Appendix 3-6. Since the 24 hour maximum annual
rainfall data is available in many parts of Nepal, this method is recommended,
instead of Eq. 24, for estimating rainfall intensity of required frequency and time of
concentration in Nepal.
Time of concentration (tc in hours) can be estimated by Kirpich formula (1940), as
discussed in section 9.8 of this guideline.
32
Table 6: Values of runoff coefficient, C for Rational formula

Type of Basin C Type of Basin C
Rocky and permeable 0.8 – 1.0 Cultivated absorbent 0.3 – 0.4
soil
Slightly impermeable, bare 0.6 – 0.8 Sandy soil 0.2 – 0.3
Cultivated or covered with 0.4 – 0.6 Heavy forest 0.1 – 0.3
vegetation
12.2.8 Flood Investigation

In most countries the frequency method is used to determine the design flood.
This method is greatly influenced by the length of the data series and its
representativeness. For determining rarely occurring floods, a large amount of
extrapolation is often required, leading to unstable results with an accuracy that is
difficult to control. Frequency method can be used for calculating design flood if
flood measurement data for 30 years or more are available and they are
supplemented with thorough evaluation of historical floods. The main objective of
flood investigation is to apply and check the investigated historical floods data on
the frequency curve.
In small river basins where there are little or no information available, flood
investigations plays a very large role. Firstly, flood investigations can form
supporting evidence for results obtained from other methods. Small mountainous
rivers have very high speed and short duration of flood concentration. Regulating
and storage capacity of the watershed is limited and effects of some geographical
factors are quite prominent, so the variation in various hydrological elements is
unsteady. Thus, it is very difficult to determine from rainfall data the required
parameters for the design flood calculation.
With the help of historical information, it is possible to determine rough actual
floods, which occurred in the past and also within what range of flood flows a flood
of fixed return period lies. Also, the validity of computational parameters and
results derived from other methods can be assessed. For small runoff hydropower
projects where no data exist at all, an investigated historical flood, which is in the
upper range of discharges, can be directly taken as the design flood.
Apart from this, flood investigations can provide valuable and essential
supplementary information for the comprehensive hydrological analysis of the
region. Thus, it can be seen that flood investigations must not be neglected when
analyzing and studying the hydrological behavior of a region.
For a flood that has already occurred, the following shall be investigated:
a. The time and location of the flood, as well as the flood peak stage and
discharge.
b. Storm conditions, and special features of the basin and riverbed.
c. The flood process needs to be known and the flood volume calculated.
12.2.8.1 Investigation of Time of Occurrence

For river reaches where the density of population is relatively high, the occurrence
of large scale floods in the last thirty or forty years can easily be determined directly
33
by interviewing the senior people. They can even reliably recall information. Apart
from this, it is also very helpful to be acquainted with the historical documents and
facts to get additional hydrological information.
12.2.8.2 Investigation of the Probable Precipitation Regime

In areas prone to storm floods, precipitation data are important supplementary
evidence in this investigation. These data are indispensable for estimating the
flood process, studying regional flood distribution and testing how reasonable the
computed results are. The precipitation regime includes cause of precipitation,
amount of rainfall, precipitation process and trends. It is enough to have a general
understanding to supplement the actual flood investigation.
12.2.8.3 Investigation of Flood Traces

A flood trace means the highest mark or trace or position of a trace left on a
riverbank by the flood peak. Local residents when interviewed often point out
visible flood marks, and give relatively reliable indication of HFL.
If there are no visible traces to indicate the flood peak stage, then the interview
can give a concrete description from memory or a value description, with an error
of possibly 0.5 to 1.0 m in both cases. Therefore, this information can only be used
for reference.
12.2.8.4 Investigation of the Probable Flood Process

Occasionally, it is necessary to obtain the design flood process and calculate the
total design flood volume. But investigation of the process involves many
difficulties and the data obtained might only be approximate.
12.2.8.5 Investigation on Hydrological Conditions of the Basin and the River Course
This investigation is concerned with quantifying four factors: flood stage, surface
slope, wetted cross section and riverbed roughness. All of these directly affect the
accuracy of calculation of the peak flood flow, and therefore they shall not be
overlooked.
The items within the scope of the river course investigation include:
 The surface shape, flow conditions, bank features, riverbed condition and
characteristics,
 The change of scouring and silting of the river channel cross section, and
 The influence of human activities.
12.2.8.6 Procedures and Methods Used in Flood Investigation

A complete procedure for a flood investigation shall consist of work preparation,
choice of river reach, visits to villagers, observation of flood traces, measurements
of the river reach, processing of data, flow calculations, checking whether the
results are reasonable, and filling of all records. All these are interrelated but
independent.
12.2.9 Flood Estimation by Slope-Area Method

The slope area method is of particular use in estimating the flood discharges in a
river by past records of stages at different sections. Floods leave traces of peak
elevations called high-water marks in their wake. Floating vegetative matter, such
as grass, straw and seeds are left at high water levels when the flood subsides
34
and form excellent marks. Other high-water marks include silt lines on riverbanks;
trace of erosion on the banks called wash lines and silt or stain lines on buildings.
In connection with the estimation of very high floods, interviews with senior citizens
living in the area, who can recollect from memory certain salient flood marks are
valuable. Old records in archives often provide valuable information on flood
marks and dates of occurrence of those floods. Information relating to a particular
flood is collected during flood investigation and cross-checked for consistency and
only reliable data are retained. The slope-area method is then used to estimate
the flood.
The selection of the reach is probably the most important aspect of the slope-area
method. The following criteria can be listed towards this:
a. The quality of high-water marks must be good.
b. The reach shall be straight and uniform as far as possible. Gradually
contracting sections are preferred to an expanding reach.
c. The recorded fall in the water-surface elevation shall be larger than the
velocity head. It is preferable if the fall is greater than 0.15 m.
d. The longer the reach, the greater is the accuracy in the estimated
discharge. A length greater than 75 times the mean depth provides an
estimate of the reach length required.
The Manning’s roughness coefficient n for use in the computation of discharge is
obtained from standard tables. Sometimes a relation between n and the stage is
prepared from measured discharges at a neighboring gauging station and an
appropriate value of n selected from it, with extrapolation if necessary. For the
details of the application of the slope-area method, the readers are referred to
Subramanya (2008).
12.2.10 Investigation of GLOF (Glacier Lake Outburst Flood)

Many Nepalese rivers are prone to GLOF; the consistent and gradual increase in
annual average air temperature in the Himalayan region of Nepal is increasing the
propensity of GLOF. If the catchment of a river where a bridge is proposed
consists of glaciers, the hazard level of the glaciers should be estimated based on
published documents. If the hazard level of GLOF is low, the hydrological analysis
can be conducted without considering the potential effect of GLOF. If the hazard
level of GLOF is high, the return period of flood for the bridge design in local roads
should be taken as 500 year or 1000 year, depending on the potential loss from
damage to the bridge.
12.2.11 Investigation of CLOF (Cloudburst Flood)

When clouds bearing opposite charges come together, the water vapor in them
condenses instantly, resulting in heavy rainfall. Such events, called cloudbursts,
bring rainfall of very high intensity. In the Himalayan region, cloudbursts are a
common, though generally localized, phenomenon. A cloudburst may last from a
few minutes to several hours. Over mountain ranges, cloudbursts trigger mudflow,
landslides and debris flow.
A landslide triggered by a cloudburst often falls into a river, damming it temporarily
and creating a reservoir in the upstream reach. When the dam breaks after it is
over-topped or when the landslide dam fails because of its inability to withstand
the water pressure a sudden flood is created; such events are called landslide
dam breach flood. Such events occur randomly and cannot be predicted precisely.
35
An investigation of cloudbursts flood in the basin of proposed bridge-site is hence

very essential. The investigation may be conducted from past records. Following
points shall be considered in the investigation of a cloudburst:
 Date and time of cloudburst
 Maximum intensity and total time of cloudburst
 Captured area of cloudburst
 Passing time of cloudburst flood
Knowing the total volume and passing time of flood, the discharge of cloudburst
can be estimated approximately.
12.2.12 Checking of GLOF and CLOF with PMF

The Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) and the Cloud burst Flood (CLOF)
magnitudes shall be properly checked with Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) and
due consideration shall be given to larger flood value during the design of bridges
in local roads. GLOF or CLOF tends to bring very heavy load of debris, which can
block passage of flood flow underneath a bridge and eventually damage the
bridge. For safe passage of GLOF or CLOF under a bridge, the bridge has to be
designed for very high flood value. The economic viability of a bridge has to be
evaluated when designing a bridge for flood with GLOF and CLOF potential.
36
12.3 Stepwise Procedures for Hydrological Parameter Prediction in GRB
This section consists of step by step example calculations for different cases (7 cases of
gauged river basin – G1 to G7, and 7 cases of un-gauged river basin – U1 to U7) of data
availability, wherever appropriate, for the determination of different hydrological
parameters required for design of bridges in local roads. It is assumed that the technical
human resource using this guideline has basic background knowledge of hydrological
analyses of river systems in Nepal. As such, many of the technical terms are used in this
guideline without full explanation.
The basic hydrological parameters for a bridge design are:

a) Design flood flow
b) Construction period flood flow
c) High Flood Level and Rating Table
d) Linear Waterway width
e) Scour Depth
f) Afflux and
g) Free Board
12.3.1 Case G1
Determination of hydrological parameter for bridge design in a local road in Nepal when
long term hydrological and meteorological data of the proposed bridge-site catchment
(PBC) are available.
Step G1-1: Basic Physiographic Data:
Preparation of basic physiographic data of river catchment: Collect topographical maps
of the geographical area around the proposed bridge site (PBS), locate the bridge site on
the topographical map and draw catchment area of the river section at the PBS. Obtain
the catchment area under (i) different elevation ranges and (ii) different land use patterns,
from one of the following methods.
a. Planimeter method
b. Square count method
c. HydrA-Nepal method (CEH, 2001)
Application of the planimeter method normally consists of calibrating the readings of the
counter (difference in initial and final reading) to a known catchment area in a map, and
using the calibrated value to find the area of the whole or part of a catchment. In the
square count method the area covered by complete squares are counted first and the
areas which lie in part of a square are counted only if half or more than half of the square
are covered; the accuracy of the square count method can be improved by using a
transparent sheet with fine mesh of squares printed on it. The details of the HydrA-Nepal
software method are provided in the Users’ Manual of this software (CEH, 2001). All
these methods should yield same catchment area, within a certain error limit. If the
differences in the results are within 5%, an average value of catchment area can be taken
for further hydrological analysis. Higher differences, if any, should be checked and the
issue should be resolved before any further hydrological analysis.
Alternatively, if (i) digital version of the topographical sheets is available, (ii) Geographical
Information System (GIS) software is installed in a computer, and (iii) someone with GIS
skill is available, the GIS (or GIS based software like ILWIS) can be used to draw
catchment and obtain catchment area of the river section. Similarly, the areas between
different elevation ranges and under different land use patterns can be found by digitizing
the areas on the map.
37
A plot of elevation in abscissa and catchment area in ordinate will result in a hypsometric
curve. This curve is useful since various studies have found that different hydrological
parameters can be estimated by associating them with catchment area above or below
certain elevation, like area below 3000 m or 5000 m (WECS/DHM, 1990) and (DHM,
2004). The similarity in the shape of the hypsometric curve can be used as a parameter
to test if two catchments are hydrologically similar. The area under different land use
pattern is used to find runoff coefficient of the catchment by using area weighted average
method.
Step G1-2: Catchment Elevation and Slope:

Obtain the average catchment elevation and average catchment slope. Average
catchment elevation can be obtained by area weighted average of elevation of centroid
of each square in the topographical sheet. Average channel slope is the difference in
elevation between the end points of the main river divided by the length of the river.
Step G1-3: Wetness Index:

Obtain Annual Wetness Index and Monsoon Wetness Index of the catchment based on
publications of WECS/DHM (1990) and DHM (2004). The figures of the monsoon
wetness index for use in WECS/DHM and DHM methods are provided in the Appendix
3-10.
Step G1-4: Hydrometric Station Inventory:

Obtain list of hydrological and meteorological stations within the catchment and in the
surrounding areas, including their geographical coordinates, district, elevation, length of
record, and stated quality of data. Draw Thiessen polygons of the meteorological stations
to cover the PBC.
A list of the expected output from Steps G1-1 to G1-4 is provided in Appendix 3-1.
Step G1-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking

a) The consistency of the hydrological and meteorological data of the reference
station and other stations should be tested by using double mass curve method.
An example of the use of the double mass curve is provided in Appendix 3-2.
b) The runoff volume per catchment area (m3/s/km2) should be calculated and
compared with surrounding river catchments, and regional values. Any large
discrepancy in these ratios should be vetted thoroughly.
c) The average runoff volume per catchment area of the main river and its tributaries,
if data is available, should be compared as a part of data quality checking.
d) The recorded runoff volume as a ratio of recorded rainfall volume, for a particular
return period, should be checked; this ratio needs to be compared with the runoff
coefficient obtained from the land cover. The runoff coefficient table given in
Appendix 3-6b can be used to obtain area weighted runoff coefficient of the
catchment. The potential effect of water storage and release from artificial
reservoir upstream of the proposed bridge site, if any, should be accounted for.
e) The trend of the daily rainfall, 24-hour maximum rainfall and annual rainfall
volume, as shown by the long term meteorological data of the PBC should be
compared with the trend of same parameter in the surrounding stations.
The steps G1-6 to G1-8 are related to estimating design flood values for the design of a
bridge. The design flood value is a function of return period, which, in turn, is a function
of acceptable risk and design life of the bridge. The relation between acceptable risk (R,
percentage), design life of a bridge (n, in years) and return period (T, in years) is:
38
R = 1- (1 - 1/T)n
For example, if acceptable risk is 10%, and design life of the bridge is 25 years, then
0.10 = 1- (1 - 1/T)25, which yields a return period (T) of 238 years.
Similarly, if the design life of a bridge is 25 years and the design return period of the flood
value used is also 25 years, the risk inherent in the design is 64%, which means that in
each year, the chance of the bridge facing the design flood is 64%, assuming all other
data to be constant with time.
Step G1-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment

Obtain annual rainfall value of reference station and sort in descending order, with order
number (m) assigned to each sorted value. Calculate the return period (T, in years) of
each non-repeating values by using Weibull’s plotting position formula1, i.e., T = (N+1)/m,
where N is the number of sorted values. Calculate reduced variate (YT) for each value of
T. Plot YT (in abscissa) versus rainfall values (in ordinate). A linear best fit line through
the plotted points is useful to find outlier values. This plot can be used to estimate 24-
hour maximum rainfall for different return periods by extending the linear trend line. An
example of application of Weibull method is given in Appendix 3-3.
Step G1-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method

Just like in Step G1-6, obtain annual instantaneous flood value of reference station and
sort in descending order of each non-repeating values by using Weibull’s plotting position
formula, i.e., T = (N+1)/m, where N is the number of sorted values (annual instantaneous
flood) and T is in years. Calculate the reduced variate YT for each sorted value and plot
YT (in abscissa) versus annual instantaneous flood values (in ordinate) in Gumbel’s
probability graph. A linear best fit line through the plotted points is useful to find (i) outlier
values and (ii) whether the series fits the Gumbel’s Extreme Value Distribution. The
numerical example associated with Step G1-6 is applicable in this step as well.
Step G1-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods

If the annual instantaneous flood series fits the Gumbel’s Extreme Value Distribution, the
Gumbel’s analytical method can be used to estimate flood flow values of different return
periods, like 50 years or 100 years. Else, the flood flow values of different return periods
can be estimated from the Log-Pearson Type III method and Log Normal methods 2, and
the highest value from Gumbel, Log-Pearson Type III and Log Normal method should be
used as the design flood value for the selected return period.
Steps of Gumbel’s Extreme Value (GEV) analytical method:

a) Compile annual instantaneous flood value (X) of the reference hydrometric station,
& calculate average of X values (Xavg) and their standard deviation (n-1).
b) For the desired return period (T, in years) of flood, calculate reduced variate YT.
YT = - ln ln (T/(T-1))
c) For the number of data points N (number of years of instantaneous flood values),
obtain reduced mean (yn) and reduced standard deviation (sn) from standard
Gumbel tables (given in the Appendix 3-4).
d) Calculate frequency factor K associated with YT.
1
In a WMO survey of 55 agencies from 28 countries, the Weibull was found to be the most favored plotting position
formula (Cunnane, 1989)
2
The WMO study found the Gumbel Extreme Value Distribution (EV I) to be the most widely used method (25%)
for flood flow estimation, closely followed by Log Pearson Type III method (23%) and Log Normal method (15%)
(Cunnane, 1989, Appendix 6, Page A6.8)
39
K = (YT – yn)/ sn
e) Calculate the instantaneous flood value XT of desired (required) return period T by
using the relation XT = Xavg + K n-1
Steps of Log-Pearson Type III (LP III) method:

calculate log of each X value.
z = log X
b) Calculate average of z values (zavg) and their standard deviation of z values (n-
1).
c) Calculate sum of (z – zavg)2 and sum of (z – zavg)3
d) Calculate skewness coefficient Cz of the z values.
Cz = [N (z – zavg)3 ] / [(N-1) (N-2) n-13]
e) For the required return period (T) of flow and Cz, obtain the frequency factor KZ
from standard table (given in Appendix 3-4).
f) Calculate ZT, ZT = zavg + KZ n-1
g) Calculate the instantaneous flood value XT of desired (or required) return period T
Z
by using the relation XT = antilog ZT = 10 T
Steps of Log-Normal (LN) method:

calculate log of each X value.
z = log X
b) Calculate average of z values (zavg) and their standard deviation of z values (n-
1).
c) Set Cz = 0, and for the required return period (T) and Cz = 0 obtain the frequency
factor KZ from standard table (given in Appendix 3-4)
d) Calculate ZT, ZT = zavg + KZ n-1
e) Calculate the instantaneous flood value XT of desired (required) return period T by
Z
using the relation XT = antilog ZT = 10 T
Numerical examples of the application of the Gumbel, Log-Pearson Type III and Log
Normal methods to estimate flood flow of different return periods are given in Appendix
3-4.
Transfer of Design Flood Value from Upstream or Downstream stations

If the available annual instantaneous flood values are from hydrometric stations located
upstream or downstream from the proposed bridge site, then the calculated design flood
value needs to be transferred to the proposed bridge site by using catchment area ratio
(CAR) method. The CAR method consists of using the following relation between flood
flow and catchment area.
Q1/Q2 = [A1/A2]n
where Q1 area Q2 are flood flow values at station 1 and 2, with catchment area A1 and
A2, respectively. The n is the slope of the log-log graph of mean annual flood versus
catchment area (Wiitala et al, 1961), so if the data of mean annual flood is available, n
can be obtained from the log-log plot. The value of n is normally taken as 0.5 for
instantaneous flood (Cudworth, 1991).
40
Recent studies have shown an increasing trend in river flow values in Nepal; 50 year
floods are beginning to occur as 25 year return period flood, probably due to global
climate change (increased snow melt due to rising air temperature during peak monsoon
season, for example). The potential impact of climate change can be assessed by
analyzing data of the reference station and the surrounding stations for 10 years running
average, and if there is a clear increasing trend, then appropriate correction should be
applied in the estimated design flood value. Alternatively, the instantaneous flood values
of the last 10 years can be used to estimate design flood value.
Step G1-9: Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curve and Rational Method
If the catchment area of the river section at the proposed bridge site is small3 (less than
12 km2, as per DHM (2004), and if the quality and consistency of the available flood flow
data series is questionable, the Rational method (Kuichling, 1889) can be used as an
additional tool to check (or compare with the results of the frequency analysis methods)
flood flow value of different return periods. A detailed discussion of the development of
IDF curve from annual 24-hour maximum rainfall data and the use of IDF curve in
Rational Method is given in the Appendices 3-6a to 3-6c. If the catchment area is large
or if the quality of the available hydro-meteorological data of the PBC is satisfactory, the
step G1-9 may be skipped for Case G1.
Step G1-10: Construction Period Flood

The construction period for a bridge in Nepalese rivers is from November to May. The
daily flow value of each year of the reference station for the months from November to
May should be compiled, and a data series of the maximum flow in each year during the
construction months (November to May) should be prepared. The construction period
flood can then be estimated by following the steps G1-7 and G1-8 discussed above.
Step G1-11: Rating Curve and High Flood Level

The stage-discharge relation curves (rating curves) of the existing hydrological stations
are generally not made available in Nepal. As such, a rating curve of the river section at
the proposed bridge site needs to be developed based on hydro-geomorphological
characteristics of the river. The following steps can be followed for the development of a
rating curve by using Manning’s method.
a) Based on at least three cross-sections (one 50 meters upstream, one 50 meters
downstream and one at the bridge site) of the river, in the vicinity of the proposed
bridge site, the average bed slope of the river can be determined. The bed slope
can be assumed to approximate the energy slope (S) in the Manning’s formula.
b) The Manning roughness coefficient (n) (also called rugosity coefficient) for
different river stage needs to be assigned, based on river bed materials and river
bank roughness at different stage values. Standard books on hydrology provide
guidelines for assigning the Manning’s n value. However, each hydrologist assigns
the Manning’s n value based on his/her experience; a standard methodology is
yet to be developed for this task. The USGS has published documents to guide
on selection of Manning’s roughness coefficient (Arcement and Schneider).
c) The flow for different river stages (g) can be calculated by using Manning’s
formula.
Q = V. A = (1/n) R2/3 S1/2 A
3
In the United States where this method was developed, the Rational Method is recommended to be
used only for very small catchment area, like 1 to 2 km2.
41
where
Q = river discharge (m3/s)
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient
R = hydraulic radius (m) = cross sectional flow area for a particular river stage
divided by the wetted perimeter of flow for the same river stage
S = energy slope, which is assumed to be approximately equal to the average bed
slope in the vicinity of the proposed bridge site
A = cross sectional area of flow for a particular river stage, which can be obtained
from the river cross section at the proposed bridge site
A spread sheet can be set up to quickly perform the calculation of Q for
different river stage, if the cross section values of the river at the proposed
bridge site are available (see Appendix 3-7).
d) The plot of river stage (g) versus river flow (Q) provides the rating curve of the
river at the proposed bridge site.
e) The rating curve is used to obtain High Flood Level (HFL) associated with the
design flood flow value.
A numerical example of the development of rating curve and HFL from river cross-
sections is provided in Appendix 3-7.
Step G1-12 Field verification Manning’s Roughness Coefficient (optional for G1)
The validity of the Manning’s roughness coefficient (used in Step G1-11) can be checked,
if clear HFL markings of past high floods in the vicinity of the proposed bridge site are
available. The flood markings in both the banks can be used as HFL level. The residents
should be consulted in finding the HFL of the past flood, if clear HFL markings are not
available; however, information gathered from such sources have to be validated by
additional physical evidences, as far as possible. The HFL at two different locations can
be used find cross-sectional area of flow during flood event. The slope-area method can
then be used to find the discharge during flood event, assuming a Manning’s roughness
coefficient. A close agreement between the calculated discharge values from the slope
area method and the frequency analysis method verifies the Manning’s roughness
coefficient value used in Step G1-11.
Step G1-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method (optional for G1)
The peak flood values for the different return periods calculated from the statistical
methods and the Rational Method (1889) can be compared with the results of the
Modified Dicken’s method which is the updated version of the Dicken’s method (1865);
the updating was done by the UP Irrigation Research Institute (UPIRI), Roorkee, India. A
per this method
Qp = CT A3/4
where Qp = peak flood flow (m3/s)
CT = 2.342 log (0.6 T) log (1185/p) + 4

where T = return period (in years) and p = percentage of snow covered area
p = 100 (As + 6) / A
As = permanent snow covered area, which is area covered by glaciers and area above
5000 m above mean sea level (for Nepalese context).
A = total catchment area in km2
42
Step G1-14: Peak flood from regional methods: WECS/DHM, DHM, PCJ and
Mishra et. al. methods (optional for G1)
The peak flood values for the different return periods calculated from the statistical
methods and the Rational Method (1889) can be compared with the results of the regional
methods like the WECS/DHM method (1990), DHM method (2004), PCJ method (1996) 4
and Mishra et. al. method (2009); the DHM method (2004) is the updated version of the
WECS/DHM method (1990). The numerical examples of the application of PCJ method
and Mishra method are given in the Appendix 3-8 and 3-11 respectively. If the results
from the statistical methods and the WECS/DHM, DHM, PCJ and Mishra method are
very different it is recommended to thoroughly investigate the reasons for the difference.
Steps of WECS/DHM (1990) and DHM (2004) methods to estimate peak flood values
of different return periods:
Step 1: Calculate flood of 2-years return period, Q2.
WECS/DHM: Q2 = 1.8786 (A + 1) 0.8783
DHM: Q2 = 2.29 A0.86
Step 2: Calculate flood of 100-years return period, Q100.
WECS/DHM: Q100 = 14.63 (A + 1) 0.7342
DHM: Q100 = 20.7 A0.72
where A = area below 3000 m above mean sea level (for step 1 and 2)
Step 3: Calculate standard deviation 
 = ln (Q100/Q2)/2.326
Step 4: Obtain standard normal variate (S) for the desired return period (T, in years)
from the table 7.
Table 7: Return period versus standard normal vairate

T 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 5000 10000
S 0 0.842 1.282 1.645 2.054 2.326 2.576 2.878 3.09 3.54 3.719
Step 5: Calculate the peak flood QT of the desired return period.

QT = exp (ln Q2 + S )
A numerical example of the application of WECS/DHM method and DHM method to

estimate flood flow values of different return periods is given in the Appendix 3-5.
Step G1-15: Linear Waterway width of a bridge
For well-defined banks, the linear waterway width is taken as the width of the bank.
For natural flow in rocky areas, linear waterway width is taken as width of river channel.
For large purely alluvial streams in regime state with undefined banks, Lacey’s empirical
equation is used to estimate linear waterway width. As per Lacey’s formula
W = K Q1/2
where, K = a coefficient, varying according to local site conditions, the usual valued
adopted being 4.5 to 6.3 (for regime condition). The I.R.C.-13 recommends adopting a
value of 4.8 (OSRP, 2007).
Q = flood discharged (m3/s) for a return period of 50 years.
44
The PCJ method and Mishra method have not yet been recognized as standard methods for estimating
flood flows in Nepal; these methods are presented as additional tools to compare the flood flow analysis
results from other empirical methods.
43
W = linear waterway under regime condition (m)

If W is greater than top width of river at HFL, W is normally taken as equal to the top
water width at HFL.
A numerical example of the calculation of linear waterway width follows.
Q = design discharge = 183 m3/s

K = 4.8
W = linear waterway under regime condition (m) = 65 m (as per Lacey’s formula)
HFL at the design discharge = 115 m

With a free board of 2 m, bottom elevation of bridge superstructure = 117 m
From cross section of the river at the proposed bridge site, the river channel width at
elevation of 117 m = 50 m.
Hence, the recommended liner waterway for the bridge is 50 m.
Step G1-16: Scour Depth
The determination of realistic scour depth around bridge piers and abutment in the local
road bridges is a major concern in Nepalese rivers. The popular formulas used in Nepal
were developed for alluvial streams (consisting of loose non-cohesive sandy materials
having the bed material size in the range 0.13 to 0.43 mm) of India by Lacey (1929) and
Inglis (1944), and these formulas are recommended by IRC and Indian Railway (Kothyari,
2007). The Lacey-Inglish formula to estimate mean sour depth is:
DLq = 1.34 (q2/f)1/3
where,
DLq is the mean scour depth (m) below design flood level (HFL),
q the design flood discharge intensity in m 3/s/m allowing for concentration of flow,
obtained as the total design discharge divided by the effective linear waterway, and
f is the Lacey’s silt factor related to the median size of bed material 5 d by the equation:
f = 1.76 d0.5
where d is in mm.
The maximum scour depth, Dse below design flood level (HFL) = K DLq
The value of K is recommended by IRC to be 2.0, however, researchers have found the
value of K to range from 1.23 to 8.39, with a mean value of 3.78.
Recent studies have found that while the traditional Lacey-Inglish formula is satisfactory
to estimate mean scour depth for meandering alluvial rivers with loose non-cohesive
sandy materials, the results from this method is not satisfactory for rivers transporting
sediments and for gravel-bed rivers. Many Nepalese rivers in the hilly region carry heavy
sediments during flood, and the riverbed is laden with gravels. For such rivers, Kothyari
formula (1992) can be used to estimate scour depth below the normal bed level (Kothyari,
2007).
5
The median size of the bed materials for fine grained materials can be estimated by using regular sieve
analysis method. The median size of the bed materials for gravel-bed river can be better approximated by
using line sampling method.
44
The equilibrium scour below normal bed level dse, as given by Kothyari equation, is:
dse/D = 0.88 (b/d)0.67 (D/d)-0.6 -0.3
where,
dse = equilibrium scour below normal bed level, in m
b = the pier diameter (m),
D = the flow depth (m),
d = the median size of bed material (in mm)
B = centre-to-centre (C/C) spacing between the piers (m), and
α = the opening ratio which equals (B−b)/B,
As Dse represents the maximum scour depth below the HFL, Dse = dse + D.
A numerical example of the calculation associated with Lacey-Inglish method and

Kothyari method to estimate Maximum Scour Depth Elevation at a bridge site is given
below.
Input values:
HFL elevation (m) 200 K 2
Median size of bed materials, d (mm) 5 C/C distance between bridge pier (m) 10
Design flood discharge, Q (m3/s) 150 Flood depth (m) 2
Effective linear waterway width (m) 30 Bridge pier diameter (m) 0.9
Calculations (Lacey-Inglish method) Calculation (Kothyari method)

q (m3/s/m) 5 Alpha 0.91
F 2.0 b/d 0.18
DLq 2.5 D/d 0.4
Mean scour elevation (m) 197.5 Dse (m) 1.84
Max. scour depth, Dse (m) 5.0 Max. scour depth, Dse (m) 3.84
Max. scour depth elevation (m) 195 Max. scour depth elevation (m) 196.2
Step G1-17: Afflux
The afflux is the heading up of water over the flood level in the upstream side of a
bridge caused by constriction of waterway at the bridge. The afflux is measured by
difference in levels of water surfaces upstream and downstream of the bridge (Victor,
2004). The relation used to calculate afflux is:
X = [(V2/2g) ((L2/(c2L12)) – 1]
where,
V= velocity of normal flow in the stream = design discharge/ cross-sectional area of flow
g = acceleration due to gravity = constant = 9.81 m/sec2
L = width of river at (HFL + 2 m) elevation, obtained from river cross section
L1 = linear waterway under the bridge (refer Step G1-15 for details on linear waterway)
C = coefficient of discharge through the bridge, taken as 0.7 for sharp entry and 0.9 for
bell mouthed entry
X = afflux (meter)
A numerical example of the calculation of linear waterway width follows.
V= velocity of normal flow in the stream = 4.4 m/s

g = acceleration due to gravity = 9.81 m/sec2
L = width of river at (HFL + 2 m) elevation = 156 m
45
L1 = linear waterway under the bridge = 172 m

C = coefficient of discharge through the bridge = 0.8
X = Afflux = 0.286 m ≈ 0.3 m
Step G1-18: Freeboard
The following IRC guideline can be used to set the freeboard (vertical clearance) between
the HFL and the elevation of the lowermost part of the bridge super structure.
Discharge (m3/s) Free Board (m)

Below 0.3 0.15
0.3 – 3.00 0.30
3.00 – 30.00 0.60
30.00 – 300.00 0.90
300.00 – 3000.00 1.20
Above 3000.00 1.50
However, in Nepalese rivers, if the upstream of the bridge consists of potential large
landslide sites and debris flow, the free board may be increased by up to 50% of the IRC
recommendation or a minimum free board of 2 m, whichever is higher. Similarly, if the
upstream of the proposed bridge-site consists of potentially dangerous glacial lakes, the
free board may be increased by up to 100% of the IRC recommendation.
46
12.3.2 Case G2:

long term hydrological data of the project bridge site are available but no meteorological
data are available in the vicinity of the proposed bridge site.
The steps to be followed in this case is similar to the steps of case G1, except that due
to lack of meteorological data, some of the steps listed in case G1 cannot be conducted
or are not applicable, like the IDF curve generation and Rational method.
The following is the step by step discussion for Case G2.
Step G2-1: Same as Step G1-1
Step G2-4: Obtain list of hydrological stations within the catchment and in the
surrounding areas, including their geographical coordinates, district, elevation, length of
record, and stated quality of data. The list of output from steps G2-1 to G2-4 is same as
listed in Case G1, except that there will be no list of meteorological stations.
Step G2-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking
a) The consistency of the hydrological data of the reference station and other stations
should be tested by using double mass curve method.
b) The runoff volume per catchment area (m3/s/km2) should be calculated and
compared with surrounding river catchments, and regional values. Any large
discrepancy in these ratios should be vetted thoroughly.
c) The average runoff volume per catchment area of the main river and its tributaries,
if data is available, should be compared as a part of data quality checking.
d) If there are meteorological stations located close to the catchment, Thiessen
polygons should be drawn to estimate average rainfall in the catchment, and the
recorded runoff volume as a ratio of estimated rainfall volume should be checked;
this ratio needs to be compared with the runoff coefficient obtained from the land
cover. The potential effect of water storage and release from artificial reservoir
upstream of the proposed bridge site, if any, should be accounted for. If there are
no meteorological stations located close to the catchment, this step (G2-5d) can
be skipped.
Step G2-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Not applicable.
Step G2-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Same as Step G1-7.
Step G2-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: Same as Step G1-9.
Step G2-9: IDF Curve and Rational Method: Not applicable.
Step G2-10: Construction Period Flood: Same as Step G1-10.
47
Step G2-11: Rating Curve and High Flood Level: Same as Step G1-11.
Step G2-12: Field verification Manning’s Coefficient: Same as Step G1-12.
Step G2-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method: Same as Step G1-13, except
that no rational method is involved in Case G3.
Step G2-14: Peak flood from regional methods: Same as Step G1-14.
Step G2-15: Linear Waterway width of a bridge: same as Step G1-15
Step G2-16: Scour Depth: same as Step G1-16
Step G2-17: Afflux: same as Step G1-17
Step G2-18: Freeboard: same as Step G1-18
12.3.3 Case G3:

(a) short term hydrological data of the project bridge site are available, (b) long term
hydrological data at hydrologically similar catchment (HSC) are available, and (c) no
meteorological data are available in the vicinity of the proposed bridge-site catchment
(PBC).
The basic approach in this case is to extend the short term hydrological data at PBC
based on long term hydrological data at the HSC, as discussed in Section 8, and then
perform data analysis based on extended hydrological data of the PBC. Most of the steps
in case G1 and G3 are similar.
Step G3-1 to G3-3 are similar to the Steps G1-1 to G1-3.
Step G3-4: Obtain list of hydrological stations within the catchment and in the
surrounding area which are hydrologically similar to the PBC, including their geographical
coordinates, district, elevation, length of record, and stated quality of data. Since long
term hydrological data of HSC is available, the short term hydrological data at the PBC
should be extended. The data of the hydrologically similar catchment (the catchment
which best resemble the flow pattern of the PBC) should be considered as the reference
station. If the data length of the PBC is 10 years or more, data analysis should be
conducted with respect to the PBC (using extended data) and compared with the
reference station for consistency. If the data of the PBC is of less than 10 years, the data
analysis should be conducted with respect to the reference station, and the results should
be transposed to the PBC by using the catchment area ratio (CAR) method, as discussed
under Step G1-8.
The list of output from steps G3-1 to G3-4 is same as listed in Case G1, except that there
will be no list of meteorological stations. An additional output should be a comparative
table of different physical and hydrological parameters between the reference station
catchment and the project station catchment in the following format.
Comparison between reference station catchment and project station catchment
48
Parameter Project Station Reference Station

Total Catchment area
Catchment area above 5000 m
Catchment area between 3000 and 5000 m
Catchment area below 3000 m
Catchment slope
Average Catchment Elevation
Specific discharge (m3/s/km2)
Drainage density
Major River Basin
Step G3-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking: same as Step G2-5.
Step G3-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Not applicable.
Step G3-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Same as Step G1-7.
Steps G3-10 to G3-12: Same as Steps G1-10 to G1-12.
Step G3-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method: Same as Step G1-13, except
that no rational method is involved in Case G3.
Steps G3-14 to G3-18: similar to the Steps G1-13 to G1-18.
12.3.4 Case G4:
short term hydrological data and long term meteorological data of the proposed bridge
site are available.
Steps G4-1 to G1-3: Same as Step G1-1 to G1-3.
Step G4-4: Obtain list of hydrological and meteorological stations within the catchment
and in the surrounding areas which are hydrologically similar to the proposed bridge-site
catchment (PBC), including their geographical coordinates, district, elevation, length of
record, and stated quality of data. Since only a short term hydrological data of PBC is
available, best use of the data should be made. The data of the hydrologically similar
catchment (the catchment which best resemble the flow pattern of the PBC) should be
considered as the reference station. If the data of the PBC is of less than 10 years, the
data analysis should be conducted with respect to the reference station, and the results
should be transposed to the PBC by using the catchment area ratio (CAR) method, as
discussed under Step G1-8. If the reference station is in the same river located upstream
or downstream from the project station, then the data analysis should be conducted with
respect to the reference station, and the results should be transposed to the PBC by
using the CAR method.
49
The list of output from steps G4-1 to G4-4 is same as listed in steps G1- t- G1-4 of Case
G1.
Step G4-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking: same as Step G1-5, except that
due to short term hydrological data of the PBC, the consistency of hydrological data
cannot be checked.
Step G4-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall and rainfall-runoff relation: The collection and
analysis of the 24-hour maximum rainfall data is the same as Step G1-6. Additionally, a
series of runoff versus rainfall data should be prepared based on the short term
hydrological (runoff) data and the associated rainfall data. The equation of the best fit
curve of the plot of rainfall and runoff data should be used to convert rainfall data into
runoff data. The generated runoff data provides a basis for generation of annual flood
peak data which can be used in frequency analysis methods (Step G4-7 and G4-8).
Step G4-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Since only a short term
hydrological data is available for the PBC, attempt should be made to find HSC, based
on physiographic and meteorological data. An additional output should be a comparative
table of different physical and meteorological parameters between the reference station
catchment and the project station catchment in the following format.
Comparison between reference station catchment and project station catchment
Parameter Project Station Reference Station

Total Catchment area
Catchment area between 3000 and 5000 m
Catchment slope
Average Catchment Elevation (m)
Drainage density
Major River Basin
Mean Annual Precipitation (mm)
Mean Monsoon Precipitation (mm)
24-hour maximum precipitation (mm)
Mean Monsoon Temperature (°C)
Rainfall Runoff Coefficient
The process of application of the plotting position is the same as Step G1-7. The flood
values for different return periods from the reference catchment can be transposed to the
PBC. The transposed values should be compared with the results of rainfall runoff
coefficient. Additionally, if the percentage of snow covered area in the PBC is high, and
if daily air temperature data of the area are available, the degree-day method can be
used to estimate snow melt runoff, which needs to be added to the regular river flow
during flood. A brief description of the degree-day method is given in the Appendix 3-9.
Step G4-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: Same as Step G1-9,
except that the frequency analysis method is conducted on the data of hydrologically
similar catchment and the results are transposed in the PBC.
50
Step G4-9: IDF Curve and Rational Method: Same as Step G1-6.
If the area of the PBC is small, then this method yields reliable results. For big catchment
area, the reliability of the Rational Method is low so preference should be given to the
results of the frequency analysis methods.
Step G4-10: Construction Period Flood: Same as Step G1-10, except that the
frequency analysis method is conducted on the data of HSC and the results are
transposed in the PBC.
Steps G4-11 to G4-18: similar to the Steps G1-11 to G1-18.
12.3.5 Case G5:
(a) short term hydrological data at the proposed bridge-site catchment (PBC) and (b) long
term meteorological and short term hydrological data of a hydrologically similar
catchment (HSC) are available.
The basic stepwise approach in Case G5 is to correlate available meteorological data
with hydrological data at the HSC, generate long term hydrological data at the HSC based
on the correlation, generate long term hydrological data at the PBC based on the data
extension method discussed in Section 8, and then perform data analysis at the PBC.
and in the surrounding areas which are hydrologically similar to the PBC, including their
geographical coordinates, district, elevation, length of record, and stated quality of data.
The available short term hydrological data and long term meteorological data at the HSC
should be used to develop relation between precipitation and runoff at the HSC; if the
relation is high (correlation coefficient r2 value is high), then the rainfall-runoff coefficient
of the HSC can be used to generate long term hydrological data at HSC, which in turn
can be used to extend hydrological data at the PBC. If the data of the PBC is of less than
10 years, the data analysis should be conducted with respect to the reference station,
and the results should be transposed to the PBC by using the catchment area ratio (CAR)
method, as discussed under Step G1-8. If the reference station is in the same river
located upstream or downstream from the project station, then the data analysis should
be conducted with respect to the reference station, and the results should be transposed
to the PBC by using the CAR method.
The list of output from steps G5-1 to G5-4 is same as listed in Case G1.
due to short term hydrological data of the PBC and HSC, the consistency of hydrological
data cannot be checked.
Step G5-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall and rainfall-runoff relation: Same as step G4-6.
Step G5-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Same as Step G4-7. The
process of application of the plotting position is the same as Step G1-7. The flood values
51
for different return periods from the reference catchment can be transposed to the PBC.
The transposed values should be compared with the results of rainfall runoff coefficient.
Additionally, if the percentage of snow covered area in the PBC is high, and if temperature
daily temperature data of the area are available, the degree-day method can be used to
estimate snow melt runoff, which needs to be added to the regular river flow during flood.
However, the frequency analysis is conducted on (a) the runoff data of HSC and (b)
generated runoff value of the PBC.
Steps G5-9 to G5-18: Same as Steps G1-6 to G1-18.
12.3.6 Case G6:
(a) short term hydrological data at the proposed bridge-site catchment (PBC) and (b) long
term meteorological data of a hydrologically similar catchment (HSC) are available.
and in the surrounding areas which are hydrologically similar to the PBC, including their
geographical coordinates, district, elevation, length of record, and stated quality of data.
The data of the HSC should be considered as the reference station. If the data of the
PBC is of less than 10 years, the data analysis should be conducted with respect to the
reference station, and the results should be transposed to the PBC by using the
catchment area ratio (CAR) method, as discussed under Step G1-8.
due to short term hydrological data of the PBC, the consistency of hydrological data
cannot be checked.
Step G6-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall and rainfall-runoff relation: The 24-hr maximum
rainfall data will be analyzed following the procedure given in step G1-6. No rainfall-runoff
analysis will be conducted.
Step G6-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: The process of application
of the plotting position is the same as Step G1-7. The rainfall values for different return
periods from the reference catchment are calculated.
However, the frequency analysis is conducted on (a) the runoff data of HSC and (b)
generated runoff value of the PBC.
Step G6-9: IDF Curve and Rational Method: The IDF curve of the HSC should be
developed (process same as step G1-9) and using the Rational Method the flood values
of different return periods should be estimated (process same as step G1-9), which are
then transposed to the PBC using CAR method.
52
Step G6-10: Construction Period Flood: Same as Step G1-10.
Step G6-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method: Same as Step G1-13.
Step G6-14: Peak flood from regional methods: Same as Step G1-14. The estimated
flood flow values from different methods should be compared and an appropriate flood
value should be selected, depending on the length and quality of the available
hydrological data of the PBC and meteorological data of the HSC.
Step G6-15 to G6-18: Same as Steps G1-15 to G1-18.
12.3.7 Case G7:
only the short term hydrological data at the PBC are available.
Step G7-4: List of hydrological and meteorological stations in and around PBC:
Not applicable.
Step G7-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking: Not applicable.
Step G7-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall and rainfall-runoff relation: Not applicable.
Step G7-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: If the length of the
available hydrological data is of at least 10 years duration, use the Weibull plotting
position method to find flood of required return period, else skip this step.
Step G7-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: If the length of the
available hydrological data is of at least 10 years duration, use the frequency analysis
methods (as discussed in Step G1-9) to find flood of required return period, else skip this
step.
Step G7-10: Construction Period Flood: Not applicable.
Step G7-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method: Same as Step G1-13.
53
Step G7-14: Peak flood from regional methods: Same as Step G1-14. The estimated
flood flow values from different methods should be compared and an appropriate flood
value should be selected, depending on the length and quality of the available
hydrological data of the PBC, and experience of the hydrologist.
Step G7-15 to G7-18: Same as Steps G1-15 to G1-18.
12.4 Stepwise Procedures for Flood Prediction in Un-gauged River Basins (URB)
12.4.1 Case U1:
long term meteorological data of the proposed bridge-site catchment (PBC) catchment
and long term hydrological data of a hydrologically similar catchment (HSC) is available.
Step U1-1: Basic Physiographic Data: Same as Step G1-1.
Step U1-2: Catchment Elevation and Slope: Same as Step G1-2.
Step U1-3: Wetness Index: Same as Step G1-3.
Step U1-4: Hydrometric Station Inventory: Same as Step G1-4.
The list of expected output from Steps U1-1 to U1-4 is the same as that for the steps G1-
1 to G1-4.
Step U1-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking
a) The consistency of the meteorological data of the PBC should be tested by using
double mass curve method, as discussed in Step G1-5.
b) The runoff volume per catchment area (m3/s/km2) of the HSC should be calculated
and compared with surrounding river catchments, and regional values, as
discussed in Step G1-5.
c) The trend of the daily rainfall, 24-hour maximum rainfall and annual rainfall volume
in the reference station should be compared with the trend of same parameter in
the surrounding stations.
Step U1-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment
Find 24-hr maximum rainfall value of different return periods (T, in years) for the PBC by
using Weibull’s plotting position formula, a discussed in Step G1-6.
Step U1-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method
Find instantaneous peak flood value of HSC of different return periods (T, in years) by
using Weibull’s plotting position formula, a discussed in Step G1-7. Plot the annual
instantaneous peak flood values (of HSC) versus return period on Gumbel’s probability
graph and find (i) outlier values, if any, and (ii) whether the series fits the Gumbel’s
Extreme Value Distribution, a discussed in Step G1-7.
54
Step U1-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods
Using flood frequency analysis methods (Gumbel’s Extreme Value, Log-Pearson Type
III and Log Normal) estimate the flood flow values of different return periods of HSC. The
highest flood flow value from Gumbel, Log-Pearson Type III and Log Normal method
should be used as the reference design flood value for the selected return period, for the
HSC. The reference design flood value should be transposed to the PBC using the CAR
method, as discussed in Step G1-8.
Step U1-9: Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curve and Rational Method
Develop intensity duration frequency (IDF) curve of the PBC from the meteorological
data. Use the Rational method to estimate flood flow value of different return periods, for
the PBC, as discussed in Step G1-9.
Step U1-10: Construction Period Flood
The daily flow value of each year of the HSC for the months from November to April
should be compiled, and a data series of the maximum flow in each year during the
construction months (November to April) should be prepared. The construction period
flood can then be estimated by following the steps G1-7 and G1-8. The value so obtained
should be transposed to the PBC by using the CAR method.
Step U1-11: Rating Curve and High Flood Level (HFL)
The HFL associated with the selected design flood value should be developed by,
constructing a rating curve of the river section at the PBS. The details of the rating curve
construction and HFL marking is given in Step G-11.
Step U1-12 Field verification of Manning’s Roughness Coefficient
The validity of the Manning’s roughness coefficient used in Step U1-11 can be checked,
if clear HFL markings of recent floods in the vicinity of the proposed bridge site are
available. The flood markings in both the banks can be used as HFL level.
Step U1-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method
Use the Modified Dicken’s method to find the peak flood values for the different return
periods, as discussed in Step G1-13.
Step U1-14: Peak flood from regional methods
Use the WECS/DHM and DHM methods to find the peak flood values of different return
periods, as discussed in Step G1-14.
If the results associated with the design flood value from the statistical, modified Dicken’s
methods and the regional methods are very different it is recommended to thoroughly
investigate the reason for the difference.
Step U1-15 to U1-18: Same as Step G1-15 to G1-18.
55
12.4.2 Case U2:
the only data available is the long term hydrological data of a hydrologically similar
catchment (HSC).
The list of expected output from Steps U2-1 to U2-4 is the same as that for the steps G1-
1 to G1-4.
The runoff volume per catchment area (m3/s/km2) of the HSC should be calculated
and compared with surrounding river catchments, and regional values, as
Step U2-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Not applicable
Step U2-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Same as step U1-7.
Step U2-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: Same as step U1-8.
Step U2-9: Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curve and Rational Method: Not
applicable.
Step U2-10: Construction Period Flood: Same as step U1-10.
Step U2-11: Rating Curve and High Flood Level (HFL): Same as step U1-11.
Step U2-12 Field verification of Manning’s Roughness Coefficient: Same as step

U1-12.
Step U2-13: Peak flood from Modified Dicken’s method: Same as step U1-13.
Step U2-14: Peak flood from regional methods: Same as step U1-14.
Step U2-15: Linear Waterway width of a bridge: Same as Step G1-15.
Step U2-16: Scour Depth: Same as Step G1-16.
Step U2-17: Afflux: Same as Step G1-17.
Step U2-18: Freeboard: Same as Step G1-18.
56
12.4.3 Case U3:
(a) long term meteorological data of the PBC and (b) short term hydrological data of a
hydrologically similar catchment (HSC) are available.
The basic approach is: transpose flood values from HSC to PBS, estimate flood flows
from empirical methods for PBS and compare with the results of Rational methods.
The list of expected output from Steps U3-1 to U3-4 is the same as that from steps G1-1
to G1-4.

The quality and consistency of the meteorological data should be checked as
discussed in Step G1-5. The runoff volume per catchment area (m3/s/km2) of the
HSC should be calculated based on available short term hydrological data of the
HSC and compared with surrounding river catchments and regional values, as
Step U3-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Same as Step G1-6.
Step U3-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Same as step UG-7.
Step U3-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: Same as step U1-8.
Step U3-9: Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curve and Rational Method: Same
as Step G1-9.
Step U3-12 Field verification of Manning’s Coefficient: Same as step U1-12.
57
12.4.4 Case U4:
the only available is long term meteorological data of the PBC.
The basic approach is: estimate flood flows from empirical methods for PBS and compare
with the results of Rational methods.
to G1-4, except the data associated with the hydrological stations.

Step U4-7: Design Flood Value: Plotting Position method: Not applicable.
Step U4-8: Design Flood Value: Flood Frequency Methods: Not applicable.
as Step G1-9.
58
12.4.5 Case U5:
(a) short term meteorological data of the PBC and (b) long term meteorological data of
the HSC catchment are available.
The basic approach is: find correlation between the meteorological data of the PBS and
HSC, and if correlation is high, utilize HSC data for PBC.

as Step G1-9.
59
12.4.6 Case U6:
the only data available is the short term meteorological data of a hydrologically similar
catchment (HSC).
The basic approach is: utilize HSC data for PBC. The analysis will rely more on empirical
methods.
Step U6-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking: Not applicable.
Step U6-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Same as Step G1-6, if the length
of the available meteorological data is of at least 10 years.
as Step G1-9, if the length of the available meteorological data is of at least 10 years.
60
12.4.7 Case U7:
Determination of hydrological parameter for bridge design in a local road in Nepal in the
absence of any hydrological and meteorological data.
The basic approach is: use empirical methods and envelop curves. The analysis will rely
entirely on empirical methods.
Steps U7-1 to U7-3: Same as Steps G1-1 to G1-3.
Step U7-4: Hydrometric Station Inventory: Not applicable.
Step U7-5: Data Quality and Consistency Checking: Not applicable.
Step U7-6: 24-hr maximum rainfall in the catchment: Not applicable.
Step U7-9: Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curve and Rational Method: Not
applicable.
Step U7-15 to U7-18: Same as Steps G1-15 to G1-18.
12.5 Important considerations in flood prediction

1. Use only instantaneous maximum values for frequency analysis.
2. The concept of flow data transposition from HSC is not suggested when data
of the proposed bridge-site catchment is available or when reliable data series
for the PBC can be developed from available short term data.
3. If adequate data is not available for frequency analysis, use regional and or
empirical methods.
4. Where practicable and desirable, PMF based on PMP shall be determined,
depending on the importance of the bridge and potential loss from serious
damage to the bridge.
61
13. MATRIX FOR THE PREDICTION OF DESIGN FLOWS IN GRB AND URB
For the sake of easy and quick selection of methods for the prediction of high flows
in gauged and un-gauged river basins, two tables have been prepared and are
presented in Tables 8 and 9.
Table 8: Methods for Flow Prediction in Gauged River Basins

Data availability High Flows
G1.LTD (H) and LTD (M) Plotting positions and EV distributions.
at site Compare with PCJ, Mishra, WECS/DHM. Trend
analysis using LTD (M). Flood investigation.
H: Hydrology
Reliability: Excellent.
M:Meteorology
G2. LTD (H) at site Plotting positions and EV distributions.
Compare with WECS/DHM & others. Flood
investigation. Reliability: Excellent.
G3. STD (H) at site & LTD Plotting positions of STD (H) of site &
(H) at HSC extrapolation through distributions. Compare
with MHSP, WECS/DHM & others. Flood
investigation. Reliability: Very good
G4. STD (H) & LTD (M) at Plotting positions of STD (H) of site &
site extrapolation through distributions. Compare
with MHSP, WECS/DHM, PCJ, and Mishra
et.al. Flood investigation. Reliability: Very good
(M) with STD (H) at HSC extrapolation through distributions. Compare
investigation. Reliability: Good
(M) at HSC extrapolation through distributions. Compare
G7. STD (H) at site Plotting positions of STD (H) of site &
extrapolation through distributions. Compare
Table 9: Methods for Flood Prediction in Ungauged River Basins

Data availability High Flows
U1. LTD (M) at site & LTD PCJ, WECS/DHM, Mishra, MHSP, Empirical
(H) at HSC formulae (Dickens, Rational). Reliability: Good
U2. LTD (H) at HSC WECS/DHM, MHSP, Mishra, Empirical
formulae (Dickens, Rational), Reliability: Poor
U3. LTD (M) at site & STD PCJ, WECS/DHM, MHSP, Mishra, Empirical
(H) at HSC formulae (Dickens, Rational) Reliability: Good.
62
U4. LTD (M) at site PCJ, WECS/DHM, MHSP Empirical formulae

(Dickens, Rational,). Flood investigation.
Reliability: Good
U5. STD (M) at site & LTD WECS/DHM, MHSP, Use PCJ at HSC and
(M) at HSC transfer to the site, Empirical formulae
(Dickens, Rational), Flood investigation.
Reliability: Satisfactory
U6. STD (M) at HSC WECS/DHM, MHSP, PCJ at neighbor stations,
Empirical (Dickens, Rational). Flood
investigation. Reliability: Poor
U7. No data at all WECS/DHM, MHSP, PCJ, Empirical formulae
(Dickens, Rational), Envelope Curve, Flood
investigation. Reliability: poor
14. RATING CURVES AT BRIDGE SITE

The stage-discharge relation (rating curve) is defined by plotting measured
discharge as the abscissa and corresponding stage as the ordinate. The shape of
the rating curve is a function of the geometry of the channel below the gauge. The
relation is generally concave upward on rectilinear coordinates; at medium and
high stages it approximates a straight line on logarithmic coordinates. The relation
is used in graphical (rating curve) or tabular (rating table) form because it generally
cannot be expressed mathematically.
Individual discharge measurements will deviate from a mean stage – discharge
relation for the following reasons:
 Changes in roughness or elevation of the channel bed
 Vegetation growth or artificial control
 Variable backwater from tributary streams
 Acceleration due to rapidly changing discharge
A discharge measurement station is subject to shifting control due to the above-
mentioned reasons. No single rating curve would be applicable during the
transitional period of control. An average rating curve is drawn during the period.
Corrections to the observed gauge heights are required to obtain correct
discharges from such average rating curves.
Rising and falling stages have great effect upon the discharge curve. During the
rising stage of the river, the velocity and discharge are greater than they are for
the same stage when the discharge is constant, because of change in the bed
roughness and water surface slope. The reverse phenomenon occurs during the
falling stage of the river.
In Nepal, where the flood period is well defined during the monsoon months of
June to September, the bed rugosity and the water surface slope conditions are
different in two periods of monsoon and non-monsoon months. Under such
conditions, it would be desirable to develop separate stage discharge rating curves
for monsoon and non-monsoon months.
While plotting a rating curve, in general, difficulty is encountered in drawing a
complete and satisfactory discharge curve covering the full range of gauge heights
because in all probability most of the gaugings are within a limited range of gauge
63
heights and thus do not cover very low or very high stages. It is necessary,
therefore, to extend the curve downward for the low stages and upward for the
flood stages. It must be remembered that any extrapolation is open to possible
error if there is probability of a change of control in the extended range. Such
extrapolations beyond the range of actual observations shall always be checked
by the results obtained by more than one method.
The most common methods for the extension of a stage discharge curve are
described below:
14.1 Steven’s Method

The method is based on Chezy’s formula (Stevens, 1907):
Q  CARS 
0.5
Eq. 25
where, Q is discharge, C is roughness coefficient, A is the area of cross-section,

R is hydraulic radius and S is slope of the energy line. If CS0.5 is assumed constant
for the station, and the mean depth D is assumed a suitable substitute for R, then
from the equation Q is a function of AD0.5. Since both A and D are functions of
gauge height, a curve plotted between Q versus AD0.5 for all simultaneous
observations of discharges and stages would give a straight line. By extending this
curve upward, the discharge can be found for higher stages.
14.2 Logarithmic Method

If the cross-section of a stream at the site of a gauge is, or approximates to, a
uniform section, which one can roughly fit to a segment of a circle, parabola,
rectangle or trapezoid, then this method is more suitable. The discharge can be
expressed as:
Q  C G  G0 
n
Eq. 26
where, Q is discharge (m3/s), G is gauge height (m), G0 is gauge height

corresponding to zero discharge (m) and C, n are constants for the station. The
equation can be written in logarithmic form as: log Q = log C + n log (G – G0),
which is the equation of a straight line whose slope is n and whose intercept on
the discharge axis is log C. The details of the logarithmic method of rating curve
are provided in Subramanya, 2008.
14.3 Manning’s Formula

1
Eq. 27 Q AR 2 / 3 S 1/ 2
n
where n is rugosity coefficient. It is assumed that the finer particles from the river
bed and its sides are gradually lifted as the discharge increases and S1/2/n attains
a stable value for a maximum observed discharge and the same is assumed
constant beyond the range of observed discharges.
For the construction of rating curves at the proposed bridge sites, following
stepwise procedures shall be followed:
a. Points shall be detailed at which stage – discharge curves are required.
Normally, these will be required at the bridge site and also at the control points
for flood control purposes.
b. The approach shall be decided, hydrologic or hydraulic, as per data availability.
c. For the hydrologic approach (fitting a curve to actual observed stages and
discharges), reliability of data and also fitting techniques including choice of
64
zero of the gauge (elevation corresponding to zero discharge) shall be

discussed. Stability of the curve with reference to the historical data shall be
discussed. Possibilities of shifting controls shall also be discussed.
d. For the hydraulic approach, reaches of interest shall be defined. Assumptions
regarding the coefficient of rugosity or else detail studies for determining the
same shall be discussed. Non-uniform steady flow computations shall be
carried out from downstream to the required point for a set of discharges.
e. The assumptions of the initial water level at the downstream end shall be
discussed, whether they are assumed or based on known gauge-discharge
ratings derived from actual discharge measurements. These water surface
profile computations have the advantage in that the results in the upper
reaches are not sensitive to error in the initial levels assumed at the
downstream end. These will give water profiles and the stage-discharge rating
for the entire reach except at the downstream end.
f. For important hydraulic structures, the likely upper and lower limits of the
stage-discharge rating shall be computed either as statistical confidence limits
or by making different assumptions about rugosity, etc. within the acceptable
range.
g. In both, hydrologic or hydraulic approaches, additional allowance to cater for
the loop rating effect during the passage of a flood wave may also be added
when using the curve for determining design flood levels.
15. WATER SURFACE PROFILE AT BRIDGE SITE

a. Three cross-section surveys at the proposed bridge site shall be carried out
covering the highest flood marks, preferably at the same locations as of the
pre-feasibility study so that any change in the cross-sections can be observed
if occurred, and magnitude of flood peaks shall be checked with the previous
ones.
b. Rating curves shall be developed for the proposed bridge site.
c. Water surface profiles shall be estimated for required discharges from the
developed rating curves.
16. HFL CALCULATION

Stage discharge relations are developed for the river. The high flood level for the
maximum discharge is calculated from the stage discharge relation. The minimum
river bed level and high flood level is estimated at without constriction of the
existing river water way.
17. FREEBOARD
As per the recommendation of Indian Road Congress (IRC), freeboard depends
up on the discharge.
18. SCOUR DEPTH

The linear waterway from Lacey's formula for alluvial river is given by;
Eq. 28 𝑊 = 4.75√𝑄
Silt factor, 𝑓 = 1.76√𝑑
where, W = Linear waterway, m
Q = Flood discharge, m3/s
dm = mean grain diameter in mm.
65
𝑄 ( ⁄ )
The mean scour depth for Lacey's regime width, 𝑑 = 0.47( 𝑓)
The linear waterway from Kellerhals's formula for Gravel Bed River is given by;
𝑊 = 3.26√𝑄
.
and the mean scour depth for Kellerhals's river width, 𝑑 = 0.47 𝑞 . 𝑑
where, W = Linear waterway, m
Q = Flood discharge, m3/s
q = Flood discharge per unit width, m3/s/m
𝑑 = size of bed material (in mm) such that 90% of the materials are smaller
As per IRC recommendation, the correction formula for the scour depth when the
river width is contracted to L, from the regime width of W;
𝑑 = 𝑑 (𝑊 ⁄𝐿) .
Maximum scour depth for abutment, Dmax =1.27*dcor
Maximum scour depth for Pier, Dmax = 2 * dcor
For the rivers with gravel bed, which is very common in Nepal, line sampling
method can be used to obtain better grain size distribution curve, which can then
be used in the Lacey and Kellerhal’s formulas given above. The details of the line
sampling method to obtain grain size distribution curve is provided in Appendix 4.
19. RECOMMENDED DESIGN FLOOD

The following criteria for selecting the design flood is recommended based on
different criteria for the design of bridge structure in local roads in Nepal:
A. Cross Drainage
1. Multilane Roads: 100-year design flood

In Rural Areas: 50-year design flood
2. Two-Lane Roads - In Urban Areas -100-year design flood
3. In Rural Areas:
Q50 > 100 m3/s: 50-year
Q50 < 100 m3/s: 25-year
4. Culvert Outlet Scour Protection: 10-year
5. Pedestrian Walkways and Bikeways: 2 to 5-year
6. Bridge Foundation Scour: 100 and 500-year
7. Bridges with potential GLOF and CLOF problem: 1000 year
B. Parallel Drainage
Roadway Overtopping: Same as for Cross Revetment Drainage
Side Drains: 2 to 10-year
C. Storm Drains
Major System: 100-year
Minor System: 2 to 5-year
D. Detour Culverts monthly discharges

2 to 5-year
66
20. DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Hydrologic studies shall be documented in technical reports or in technical
appendices to project reports. The report or appendix presents a description of
the data used, methods employed, assumptions made, and results obtained. A
complete and well-written report is required and must be of sufficient detail to allow
an independent reviewer to follow the described analyses and support the study
findings.
While conducting a hydrologic study for a project and preparing the report on
hydrologic study, following contents shall be mentioned as far as possible.
 Introduction, objectives, scope and methodology
 Basin description and characteristics (location, size, elevation, shape,
steepness of the terrain, slope and length of the main water course, the
vegetation cover and the permeability of the soil, other basin
characteristics, snow area, catchment area below 5000m)
 Availability of data (stream flow, precipitation, snow, rainfall pattern, GLOF
and CLOF records, temperature, wind, glacial flow, length of record, data
quality)
 Field investigations (discharge measurement by different methods with
date, trash mark, cross-section of river at intake and tail race sites, highest
flood level according to old inhabitants, slope of the river, rough estimate of
Manning’s n, establishment of downstream water rights)
 Identification and verification (homogeneity test) of HSC (location, size,
shape, elevation, other basin characteristics)
 Availability of data in HSC (stream flow, precipitation, snow, rainfall pattern,
length of record, data quality)
 Review of past hydro-meteorological studies within the project area
67
APPENDIX 2
68
21. RELEVANT HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL STUDIES IN NEPAL
21.1 Hydrologic Studies of Nepal (WECS), 1982

This study developed regional methods for determining the characteristics of long
term monthly flows, flood flows and low flows. The regionalizations were done
using the major river basins as homogeneous regions. Each of the separate
regional hydrologic analyses is described below.
Flood Study
The regional flood study was undertaken for annual peak discharges and flood
volumes over durations of 1 day, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days and 5 days. The Gumbel
and two parameter lognormal distributions were selected for flood study and two
methods of regionalizations were then applied:
a) The index flood method developed by USGS
b) The British Institute of Hydrology (BIH) method
The USGS and BIH methods both used non-dimensional flood frequency curves,
non-dimensionalized by the mean annual flood. Therefore, a method for predicting
the mean annual flood for un-gauged basins was developed. The equation that
was developed is drainage catchment area versus mean annual flood. However,
the drainage area that was used is a reduced area that considers catchment area
below 3000m elevations only.
21.2 Water Resources Report, 1986 by Land Resources Mapping Project (LRMP)
The report describes hydrology of the three major river systems in Nepal – the
Karnali, the Gandaki and the Koshi rivers. The seasonal variation of flows in these
basins is discussed and an attempt at cross-station discharge – discharge
correlation was made. Subsequently, the relationship between precipitation and
runoff was investigated, but no methodology is presented for predictions at un-
gauged sites.
Flood flow frequency analyses were undertaken for selected gauges. Correlation
equations relating the 100 yr flood to drainage catchment area were developed.
Hydrograph separations were done in order to determine the relative quantities of
base flow and direct runoff. Investigations were then conducted to determine a
technique for predicting the monthly direct runoff coefficients from antecedent
precipitation. The attempts were not particularly successful.
An attempt was also made to develop the rational method for estimating floods in
small basins but it is not particularly useful for site-specific engineering
evaluations.
21.3 Methodologies for estimating hydrologic characteristics of ungauged locations

This WECS/DHM study is an update of the WECS 1982 report. The output of this
study is development of Methodologies for estimating hydrologic characteristic of
ungauged locations in Nepal, popularly called WECS/DHM method (1990), based
on the long-term flow records of DHM primary gauges. After detailed checking of
data quality, the monthly data was used in a multiple regression analysis involving
up to 14 basin parameters such as catchment area, main-stream length, area of
basin below 5000 m elevation, etc. A set of 12 regression equations was derived,
which can be used to predict the mean flow in each month of the year. These
regression equations were derived based on observed flows for basins ranging in
size from 4 to 54100 km2 (median 7000 km2). These equations cover the whole
69
country and require measuring the catchment area below 3000 m and 5000 m and
the average monsoon rainfall for the whole basin estimated from the DHM
isohyetal map.
The methods presented in this report for estimating low flow, flood flow and long
term flow of un-gauged and poorly gauged sites should be used only for
reconnaissance and prefeasibility level studies.
21.3.1 Flood Flow Study

Flood flow frequency analyses were performed for the selected gauges on the
maximum instantaneous and maximum mean daily flow of annual series using a
computer program CFA88. By using the three-parameter lognormal distribution,
daily and instantaneous flood peaks were obtained for 2yr, 10yr, 100 yr and 500yr
return period for the selected gauges. These results could be directly used for the
gauged sites, which were used for this study. However, for better results it is
recommended to analyze with additional data available after this study.
In order that estimates can be made of the flood flow characteristics of un-gauged
sites, the results of frequency analyses of gauged sites were related to the
physiographic and/or climatologic characteristics of un-gauged sites. Thus for both
maximum daily and instantaneous flood peaks of 2yr and 100yr return period,
regression equations were developed to predict floods in un-gauged basins.
For prediction of floods of any other frequency, it is required to estimate the 2yr
and 100yr floods and then to plot the values on lognormal probability paper. A
straight line connecting the two points then provides an estimate of the flood
frequency for the un-gauged site. Alternatively, the floods of required frequency
can also be computed by using algebraic equations developed in this study.
The study recognizes that the results are not applicable to basins located entirely
above 3000m. Even if the proportion of a basin lying below 3000m is very small,
the results would not be particularly reliable. The reason of this may be the
deficiency of hydrologic network at high altitudes.
21.4 Maximum storm flood for the design of road structures of Nepal, 1996. P. C. Jha,
(PCJ method)
Using this method, maximum storm-floods of different return periods could be
derived based on maximum hourly intensity. This regional method was developed
for the prediction of design floods in the absence of stream flow data at the un-
gauged locations of Nepal. The maximum hourly intensity of different frequency
has been derived from daily maximum for 142 rainfall stations of Nepal that have
more than 20 years of consistent data.
Rainfall stations in the basin and/or nearby (outside) should be selected from 142
analyzed stations so that maximum hourly rainfall intensity on the entire basin
could be carried out.
The design flood, Qp (m3/s) for the required exceedance probability p shall be
estimated using the equation:
Eq. 29 Q p  16.67 a p o p Fk F
Eq. 30 a p  ahr kt
where,
ap is the rainfall design intensity for required p in mm/min;
70
ahr is the maximum hourly rainfall intensity for required p in mm/min (PCJ Table 1)
& kt is a factor to ahr which varies according to the basin size (PCJ Table 2);
op is the infiltration coefficient of the basin for required p and is a function of p (PCJ
Table 3);
 is the discharge reduction factor and is a function of the basin size (PCJ Table
4);
F is the catchment area in km2;
kF is a coefficient that reflects the unequal distribution of rainfall in different size of
basin captured by one rain (PCJ Table 5);
The method may be used for the prediction of floods up to 100000 km2 of basin
size and flood frequency of 10 to 300 years return period. However, extrapolation
may be done up to 1000 years return period. The reliability of this methodology
depends on the number of rainfall stations in the catchment area. However, only
one representative station in the centroid of a medium sized basin may give
reliable flood values by this approach.
The method has been used in the feasibility study of different bridges and
hydropower projects in Nepal since 1997.
21.5 Medium Hydropower Study Project (MHSP) Regional Approach, 1997
Eq. 31 Q = KAb
where,
Q = flood peak in m3/s
K and b are constants, which depend on the return period (T)
T (Years) 5 20 50 100 1000 10000

K 7.4008 13.0848 17.6058 21.5181 39.9035 69.7807
B 0.7862 0.7535 0.738 0.7281 0.6969 0.6695
71
APPENDIX 3
72
Appendix 3-1
22. List of expected outputs from Steps G1-1 to G1-4, and output format
At the completion of Steps G1-1 to G1-4, the following information should be available.
(a) List of topographical sheets covering the catchment of river section of the
proposed bridge site
(b) List of main river and its major and minor tributaries, including length and slope of
each river
(c) List of glaciers, reservoirs, and other water bodies, if any
(d) Hypsometric Curve or hypsometric data table
(e) Area under different land cover, including area under permanent snow
(f) Runoff coefficient for each sub-area of the catchment under different land cover,
based on standard tables. This is a major source of uncertainty in hydrological
analysis; (Chow, 1988) describes it as the “least precise variable in rational
method”. Each professional hydrologist tends to use his/her best judgment in
assigning the runoff coefficient, based on experience. Different books provide
different coefficients for the same land cover. Some books provide runoff
coefficient only as a function of land cover, while others provide runoff coefficient
as a function of land cover, slope and return period.
(g) Average catchment elevation and average catchment slope
(h) Monsoon wetness index and annual wetness index
(i) List of hydrological stations within the catchment and in the surrounding area,
including coordinate, elevation, and length of record.
(j) List of meteorological stations within the catchment and in the surrounding area,
including coordinate, elevation, and length of record.
The output of steps G1-1 to G1-4 can be summarized in the following tabular format.
List (name of number of topographic sheets)
Hypsometric Data
Total Catchment area (km2)
Catchment area between 5000 m and 4000 m
Catchment area covered by glaciers
Name of glaciers
Name and area of other water bodies like lakes
Catchment areas under different land use

Land use / land cover type Flat Slope Average Steep slope
Dense forest
Light forest
Agriculture/Cultivated
Market area
City/Municipality area
Average catchment elevation

Average catchment slope
Monsoon Wetness Index
Annual Wetness Index
River System
Name of major river
Name of major tributaries
Name of minor tributaries
Length of major river (m)
Elevation difference between remotest point
and river outlet i.e., proposed bridge site (m)
Time of concentration, tc
Acceptable risk (R, %)
Design flood return period (years)
Area Weighted Runoff Coefficient of catchment
List of Hydrological Stations

Station Station Latitude Longitude Elevation Catchment Record length
Name Number area
List of Meteorological Stations

Station Station Latitude Longitude Elevation Record Thiessen
Name Index length Polygon area
(within catchment)
74
Appendix 3-2
23. Example of application of the double mass curve to test data consistency
Cumul. Stn. Cumul. Corrected

Annual Pptn. on at Station Average Avg. of 5 Pptn. Pptn. Pptn.
Year A B C D E of 5 station X X X
station
2013 1205 1036 795 1446 1048 1106 1106 687 687
2012 1210 1041 799 1452 1053 1111 2217 690 1377
2011 1190 1023 785 1428 1035 1092 3309 678 2055
2010 1180 1015 779 1416 1027 1083 4393 673 2727
2009 1090 937 719 1308 948 1001 5393 621 3349
2008 1101 947 727 1321 958 1011 6404 628 3976
2007 1104 949 729 1325 960 1013 7417 629 4606
2006 1290 1109 851 1548 1122 1184 8602 735 5341
2005 1090 937 719 1308 948 1001 9602 621 5962
2004 1080 929 713 1296 940 991 10594 616 6578
2003 1301 1119 859 1561 1132 1194 11788 742 7319
2002 1299 1117 857 1559 1130 1192 12981 740 8060
2001 1250 1075 825 1500 1088 1148 14128 713 8772
2000 1240 1066 818 1488 1079 1138 15266 707 9479
1999 1302 1120 859 1562 1133 1195 16462 1003 10482 742
1998 1245 1071 822 1494 1083 1143 17604 959 11440 710
1997 1199 1031 791 1439 1043 1101 18705 923 12364 683
1996 1196 1029 789 1435 1041 1098 19803 921 13284 682
1995 1200 1032 792 1440 1044 1102 20905 924 14208 684
1994 1203 1035 794 1444 1047 1104 22009 926 15135 686
1993 1187 1021 783 1424 1033 1090 23099 914 16049 677
1992 1156 994 763 1387 1006 1061 24160 890 16939 659
1991 1204 1035 795 1445 1047 1105 25265 927 17866 686
1990 1206 1037 796 1447 1049 1107 26372 929 18795 687
1989 1298 1116 857 1558 1129 1192 27564 999 19794 740
Data Break year determined to be 1999 by observation of break in slope of the line.
a = 19794 – 10482 = 9312
c = 17115 – 10211 = 6894 25000
Cumulative Average Precipitation
Correction ratio = c/a = 0.74

Data of station X from 1989 20000
of Station X (mm)
to 1999 corrected by
multiplying station X data by 15000 a
c
correction ratio. No
10000
correction in station X data
needed for the years 2000 to
5000
2013.
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Cumulative Average Precipitation of 5 stations (mm)
75
Appendix 3-3
24. Example of application of Weibull Plotting Position method to find outliers and to estimate rainfall of
longer return periods
Input Data
Location Index No District
Hetauda N.F.I 09 06 Makawanpur
Latitude Longitdue Elevation, m
27º 25' N 85º 03' E 474 Data Processing
24-hr Max. Date & Year Sorted 24-hr
Pptn. (mm) Month m Weibull T YT max. Pptn. (mm)
129 22-Jun 1977 1 16.00 2.74 453
98 6-Jul 1983 2 8.00 2.01 257
117 17-Sep 1984 3 5.33 1.57 223
159 5-Sep 1985 4 4.00 1.25 190
190 15-Sep 1986 5 3.20 0.98 170
223 24-Jul 1987 6 2.67 0.76 159
62 8-Sep 1988 7 2.29 0.55 152
152 6-Sep 1989 8 2.00 0.37 129
453 27-Aug 1990 9 1.78 0.19 124
94.4 11-Jul 1991 10 1.60 0.02 117
115.2 25-Aug 1992 11 1.45 -0.15 115.4
257 21-Jul 1993 12 1.33 -0.33 115.2
124 21-Sep 1994 13 1.23 -0.52 98
170 29-Jun 1995 14 1.14 -0.73 94.4
115.4 24-Sep 1996 15 1.07 -1.02 62
YT = - ln ln (T/(T-1)); Order number = m; Weibull Return Period (T, in years) = (N+1)/m;
N = Number of data points
The plot of YT versus annual maximum 24 hour precipitation has an r2 value of 0.85 (for
linear fitting), which can be considered as acceptable. This plot can be used to estimate
maximum 24-hour precipitation for different return periods. For example, to estimate
maximum 24-hour precipitation for return period of 50 years, we note that YT value for T
= 50 years is 3.9. Hence, a vertical line from YT axis at YT of 3.9 is drawn to intersect with
the linear best fit line. The ordinate value of the intersection point indicates the estimated
maximum 24-hour precipitation for return period of 50 years.
76
Appendix 3-4
25. Numerical example of application of Gumbel, Log Pearson Type III and Log Normal methods
Input Data Calculation for LP III & LN Method Summary of Gumbel EVI method
Annual Return
Max. z= Period
Year flood, x log x (z-zavg)2 (z-zavg)3 T yT K QT
1964 428 2.6314 0.0054 0.00039 10 2.250367 1.560494 576
1965 428 2.6314 0.0054 0.00039 20 2.970195 2.214645 659
1966 355 2.5502 0.0001 0.00000 25 3.198534 2.42215 685
1967 201 2.3032 0.0650 -0.01658 50 3.901939 3.061376 767
1968 287 2.4579 0.0101 -0.00101 100 4.600149 3.695883 847
1969 251 2.3997 0.0251 -0.00398 500 6.213607 5.162129 1034
1970 318 2.5024 0.0031 -0.00017
1971 264 2.4216 0.0186 -0.00255 N= 27 xavg = 377.5
1972 253 2.4031 0.0240 -0.00373 n-1 = 127.1
1973 349 2.5428 0.0002 0.00000 yn = 0.5332 sn = 1.1004
1974 860 2.9345 0.1416 0.05330
1975 432 2.6355 0.0060 0.00046 Summary of LP III method
1976 356 2.5514 0.0000 0.00000 T Kz ZT xT
1977 320 2.5051 0.0028 -0.00015 10 1.34 2.725261 531
1978 387 2.5877 0.0009 0.00003 25 2.045 2.813173 650
1979 370 2.5682 0.0001 0.00000 50 2.54 2.874899 750
1980 460 2.6628 0.0109 0.00114 100 3.02 2.934755 861
1982 305 2.4843 0.0055 -0.00040
1983 370 2.5682 0.0001 0.00000 zavg = 2.558 n-1 = 0.1247
1984 615 2.7889 0.0532 0.01228 Cs = 0.84
1985 340 2.5315 0.0007 -0.00002 
1986 328 2.5159 0.0018 -0.00008 Summary of LP III method
1988 370 2.5682 0.0001 0.00000 T Kz ZT xT
1989 430 2.6335 0.0057 0.00043 10 1.282 2.718028 522
1990 285 2.4548 0.0107 -0.00110 25 1.751 2.776512 598
1991 415 2.6180 0.0036 0.00021 50 2.054 2.814296 652
1993 415 2.6180 0.0036 0.00021 100 2.326 2.848214 705
Sum 0.40429 0.03909
Explanation:
1. The first two columns (Input data) are obtained from DHM records.
2. Annual maximum flood is referred to as X.
3. For Gumbel method, xavg and n-1 are arithmetic average and standard deviation,
respectively, of annual maximum flood values.
4. The reduced mean (yn) and reduced standard deviation (sn) for N = 27 are
obtained from Gumbel’s extreme value distribution tables (given in the following
page).
5. For Log-Pearson Type III method, zavg and n-1 are arithmetic average and
standard deviation, respectively, of z values.
6. Kz values for different return period (T, in years) are obtained from Kz table.
7. For Log-Normal method: Cs value is set to 0.0, and the Kz values for different
return period (T, in years) are obtained from Kz table.
77
Table 10: Reduced Mean yn in Gumbel extreme value distribution

N 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 0.4952 0.4996 0.5035 0.507 0.51 0.5128 0.5157 0.5181 0.5202 0.522
20 0.5236 0.5252 0.5268 0.5283 0.5296 0.5309 0.532 0.5332 0.5343 0.5353
30 0.5362 0.5371 0.538 0.5388 0.5396 0.5402 0.541 0.5418 0.5424 0.543
40 0.5436 0.5442 0.5448 0.5453 0.5458 0.5463 0.5468 0.5473 0.5477 0.5481
50 0.5485 0.5489 0.5493 0.5497 0.5501 0.5504 0.5508 0.5511 0.5515 0.5518
60 0.5521 0.5524 0.5527 0.553 0.5533 0.5535 0.5538 0.554 0.5543 0.5545
70 0.5548 0.555 0.5552 0.5555 0.5557 0.5559 0.5561 0.5563 0.5565 0.5567
80 0.5569 0.557 0.5572 0.5574 0.5576 0.5578 0.558 0.5581 0.5583 0.5585
90 0.5586 0.5587 0.5589 0.5591 0.5592 0.5593 0.5595 0.5596 0.5598 0.5599
100 0.56
N 150 200 250 300 400 500 750 1000 Infinity

yn 0.5646 0.5672 0.5688 0.5699 0.571 0.572 0.574 0.575 0.577
Table 11: Reduced Standard Deviation sn in Gumbel extreme value distribution

N 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 0.9496 0.9676 0.9833 0.9971 1.0095 1.0206 1.0316 1.0411 1.0493 1.0565
20 1.0628 1.0696 1.0754 1.0811 1.0864 1.0915 1.0961 1.1004 1.1047 1.1086
30 1.1124 1.1159 1.1193 1.1226 1.1255 1.1285 1.1313 1.1339 1.1363 1.1388
40 1.1413 1.1436 1.1458 1.148 1.1499 1.1519 1.1538 1.1557 1.1574 1.159
50 1.1607 1.1623 1.1638 1.1658 1.1667 1.1681 1.1696 1.1708 1.1721 1.1734
60 1.1747 1.1759 1.177 1.1782 1.1793 1.1803 1.1814 1.1824 1.1834 1.1844
70 1.1854 1.1863 1.1873 1.1881 1.189 1.1898 1.1906 1.1915 1.1923 1.193
80 1.1938 1.1945 1.1953 1.1959 1.1967 1.1973 1.198 1.1987 1.1994 1.2001
90 1.2007 1.2013 1.202 1.2026 1.2032 1.2038 1.2044 1.2049 1.2055 1.206
100 1.2065
N 150 200 250 300 400 500 750 1000 Infinity

sn 1.225 1.236 1.236 1.248 1.2545 1.2588 1.2651 1.2685 1.28255
78
Table 12: Table of Kz for use in Log Pearson Type III and Log Normal
distributions
Recurrence Interval, T (years)
Cs 2 10 25 50 100 200 1000
3 -0.393 1.180 2.278 3.152 4.051 4.970 7.250
2.5 -0.360 1.250 2.262 3.048 3.845 4.652 6.600
2.2 -0.330 1.284 2.240 2.970 3.705 4.444 6.200
2 -0.307 1.302 2.219 2.912 3.605 4.298 5.910
1.8 -0.282 1.318 2.193 2.848 3.499 4.147 5.660
1.6 -0.254 1.329 2.163 2.780 3.388 3.990 5.390
1.4 -0.225 1.337 2.128 2.706 3.271 3.828 5.110
1.2 -0.195 1.340 2.087 2.626 3.149 3.661 4.820
1 -0.164 1.340 2.043 2.542 3.022 3.489 4.540
0.9 -0.148 1.339 2.018 2.498 2.957 3.401 4.395
0.8 -0.132 1.336 1.998 2.453 2.891 3.312 4.250
0.7 -0.116 1.333 1.967 2.407 2.824 3.223 4.105
0.6 -0.099 1.328 1.939 2.359 2.755 3.132 3.960
0.5 -0.083 1.323 1.910 2.311 2.686 3.041 3.815
0.4 -0.066 1.317 1.880 2.261 2.615 2.949 3.670
0.3 -0.050 1.309 1.849 2.211 2.544 2.856 3.525
0.2 -0.033 1.301 1.818 2.159 2.472 2.763 3.380
0.1 -0.017 1.292 1.785 2.107 2.400 2.670 3.235
0 0.000 1.282 1.751 2.054 2.326 2.576 3.090
-0.1 0.017 1.270 1.716 2.000 2.252 2.482 2.950
-0.2 0.033 1.258 1.680 1.945 2.178 2.388 2.810
-0.3 0.050 1.245 1.643 1.890 2.104 2.294 2.675
-0.4 0.066 1.231 1.606 1.834 2.029 2.201 2.540
-0.5 0.083 1.216 1.567 1.777 1.955 2.108 2.400
-0.6 0.099 1.200 1.528 1.720 1.880 2.016 2.275
-0.7 0.116 1.183 1.488 1.663 1.806 1.926 2.150
-0.8 0.132 1.166 1.448 1.606 1.733 1.837 2.035
-0.9 0.148 1.147 1.407 1.549 1.660 1.749 1.910
-1 0.164 1.128 1.366 1.492 1.588 1.664 1.880
-1.4 0.225 1.041 1.198 1.270 1.318 1.351 1.465
-1.8 0.282 0.945 1.035 1.069 1.087 1.097 1.130
-2.2 0.330 0.844 0.888 0.900 0.905 0.907 0.910
-3 0.396 0.660 0.666 0.666 0.667 0.667 0.668
Cz = 0 corresponds to log-normal distribution
79
Appendix 3-5
26. Numerical example of application of WECS/DHM (1990) and DHM (2004) methods
Total Catchment area of the river section at the proposed bridge site = 2000 km 2
Catchment area below 3000 m elevation at a proposed bridge site (A) is 1800 km 2
Recommended Return period to be used for local roads bridge (T) = 20 years.
WECS/DHM (1990) Remark

Q2 = 1.8786 (A + 1) 0.8783 = 1359 m3/s
Q100 = 14.63 (A + 1) 0.7342 = 3593 m3/s
 = ln (Q100/Q2)/2.326 = 0.418
Standard normal variate, S = 1.645 from T versus S table
QT = exp (ln Q2 + S ) = 2703 m3/s
DHM (2004)
Q2 = 2.29 A0.86 = 1443 m3/s
Q100 = 20.7 A0.72 = 4568 m3/s
 = ln (Q100/Q2)/2.326 = 0.495
Standard normal variate, S = 1.645 from T versus S table
QT = exp (ln Q2 + S ) = 3260 m3/s
Note: The part of the catchment area below 3000 meters is used in both the
WECS/DHM and DHM methods for the estimation of flood flow.
80
Appendix 3-6a
27. Step by step application of the Rational Method (1889)
Step R1: From topographic maps, obtain areas of sub catchments, and area under
different land cover under each sub catchment.
Step R2: Using standard tables assign runoff coefficient for land cover under each sub
catchment, and calculate effective runoff coefficient for each sub catchment. Using area
weighted average method, find the effective runoff coefficient (C) for the whole
catchment.
Step R3: From topographic maps, obtain water travel length

(L), elevation difference between the most distant point on the
catchment and outlet (proposed bridge site) (H), and slope
(S) for each sub catchment. S = H/L
Step R4: Calculate time of concentration (tc) of each sub

catchment using Kirpich equation (1940).
tc = 0.01947 L0.77 S-0.385
where tc is in minutes and L is in meter
Based on the flow path from sub catchments to the main river, find the tc value for the
whole catchment.
Step R5: Compile several years’ 24-hour maximum rainfall data of meteorological
stations in and around the catchment of the river at the proposed bridge site.
Step R6: Use any one of the statistical methods (Gumbel, LP III or LN) or plotting
position method (like Weibull method) to obtain 24-hour maximum rainfall of different
return periods (like 25, 50 and 100 years).
Step R7: Using Richard’s equation or Mononob’s equation or Shakya equation, find
Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves of each sub catchment.
Richard’s Equation: ID,T = (P/T)(T+1)/(t+1)

where, ID,T = rainfall intensity of duration D hours and return period T years
P = rainfall of specific return period
T = 24 hours
t = rainfall duration
(Suresh, 1997)
Mononob Equation: ID,T = (R24,T/24)(24/D)2/3

where, ID,T = rainfall intensity of duration D hours and return period T years
R24,T = maximum rainfall of 24-hour duration of return period T Years
D = rainfall duration
(RCSP, 2008)
Shakya Equation: Pt/P24 = sin (t/48)0.4727

where, Pt = rainfall intensity of duration t
81
P24 = 24 hour maximum rainfall intensity of return period T years

t = rainfall duration, and sine of angle is in radian.
(Shakya, 2002)
Step R8: From the IDF curve, for each sub catchment, find the design rainfall intensity
(itc,p) associated with the required return period and time of concentration (tc). Normally,
for a local road bridge, the design return period is 50 years; however, due to changes on
instantaneous flood from climate change effects, it is recommended to adopt a return
period of 100 years for design of a local road bridge in Nepal.
Step R9: Use the following Rational Method equation to find the peak flood value
(Subramanya, 2008).
Qp = (C itc,p A) / 3.6
where, Qp = peak flood flow (m3/s)

C = area weighted average effective runoff coefficient for the whole catchment
itc,p = design rainfall intensity (in mm/hour) associated with the required return period (in
years) and time of concentration (tc) of the whole catchment. The itc,p value can be
obtained from the IDF curve. Example of an IDF curve is given in Appendix 3-6c.
A = catchment area of the whole catchment (km2)
82
Appendix 3-6b
Table 13: The Runoff Coefficient Table for use in the Rational Method
Return Period (years)

Character of Surface 2 5 10 25 50 100 500
Developed
Asphaltic 0.73 0.77 0.81 0.86 0.9 0.95 1
Concrete/roof 0.75 0.8 0.83 0.88 0.92 0.97 1
Grass areas (lawns, parks, etc.)
Poor condition (grass cover less than 50% of the area)
Flat, 0-2% 0.32 0.34 0.37 0.4 0.44 0.47 0.58
Average, 2-7% 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.53 0.61
Steep, over 7% 0.4 0.43 0.45 0.49 0.52 0.55 0.62
Fair condition (grass cover on 50% to 70% of the area)
Flat, 0-2% 0.25 0.28 0.3 0.34 0.37 0.41 0.53
Average, 2-7% 0.33 0.36 0.38 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.58
Steep, over 7% 0.37 0.4 0.42 0.46 0.49 0.53 0.6
Good condition (grass cover larger than 75% of the area)
Flat, 0-2% 0.21 0.23 0.25 0.29 0.32 0.36 0.49
Average, 2-7% 0.29 0.32 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.46 0.56
Steep, over 7% 0.34 0.37 0.4 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.58
Undeveloped
Cultivated land
Flat, 0-2% 0.31 0.34 0.36 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.57
Average, 2-7% 0.35 0.38 0.41 0.44 0.48 0.51 0.6
Steep, over 7% 0.39 0.42 0.44 0.48 0.51 0.54 0.61
Pasture/Range
Flat, 0-2% 0.25 0.28 0.3 0.34 0.37 0.41 0.53
Average, 2-7% 0.33 0.36 0.38 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.58
Steep, over 7% 0.37 0.4 0.42 0.46 0.49 0.53 0.6
Forest/Woodlands
Flat, 0-2% 0.22 0.25 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.39 0.48
Average, 2-7% 0.31 0.34 0.36 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.56
Steep, over 7% 0.35 0.39 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.52 0.58
Source: Chow et. al., 1988
83
Appendix 3-6c
Example of IDF curve generation from 24-hour maximum rainfall
Step 1: Obtain 24-hour max. Rainfall data of concerned meteorological station from DHM
Step 2: Using Gumbel method obtain 24-hr max rainfall (P) for different return periods
Step 3: Duration of rainfall data from which P of different return periods is obtained is 24 hours, so, set D
= 24 hours
Step 4: Find rainfall intensity (i) of other duration (t, in hours) of a particular return period, by using the
Richard equation, ID,T =(P/D)(D+1)/(t+1)
e.g., if for return period of 2 years, the max. 24-hr rainfall is 47 mm, then D = 24 hrs, P = 47 mm
For rainfall intensity of 10 hr of return period 2 years, t = 10 hr.
So, i = (47/24)(24+1)/(10+1) = 4. 5 mm/hr
Result from Gumbel method for a Surkhet rainfall station:
Return Period (yrs.) 2 5 10 20 50 100
24 hr. max rainfall (mm) 47 75 93 111 134 151
Calculated IDF curve values

Return Periods (years)
Rainfall Duration (hr) 2 5 10 20 50 100
0.25 39.2 62.5 77.5 92.5 111.7 125.8
0.3 37.7 60.1 74.5 88.9 107.4 121.0
0.35 36.3 57.9 71.8 85.6 103.4 116.5
0.4 35.0 55.8 69.2 82.6 99.7 112.4
0.45 33.8 53.9 66.8 79.7 96.3 108.5
0.5 32.6 52.1 64.6 77.1 93.1 104.9
0.6 30.6 48.8 60.5 72.3 87.2 98.3
0.7 28.8 46.0 57.0 68.0 82.1 92.5
0.8 27.2 43.4 53.8 64.2 77.5 87.4
0.9 25.8 41.1 51.0 60.9 73.5 82.8
1 24.5 39.1 48.4 57.8 69.8 78.6
2 16.3 26.0 32.3 38.5 46.5 52.4
3 12.2 19.5 24.2 28.9 34.9 39.3
4 9.8 15.6 19.4 23.1 27.9 31.5
5 8.2 13.0 16.1 19.3 23.3 26.2
10 4.5 7.1 8.8 10.5 12.7 14.3
100.0
Rainfall intensity (mm/hr)
2 yr.
5 yr.
10.0 10 yr.
20 yr.
50 yr.
100 yr.
1.0
0.1 1 10
Rainfall duration (hours)
84
Appendix 3-7
28. Example of rating curve development and HFL at a river section using Manning’s formula
Likhu Khola Rating Curve Development and High Flood Level (HFL) Estimation at Section A-A
Related formulae: Area of flow, A = Q / V; V = (1/n) R2/3 S1/2; R = A/P
For a fixed cross section, both A and P are functions of flow depth.
Example: Energy slope, S = 0.05091, Manning’s roughness coefficient = 0.07
HFL (m)
800 798 796 794 792 790.6 788 787.5
Distance from initial
Sectional width (m)

River bed elev. (m)
Elev. Diff. (m)

Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
Sectional Wetted
point (m)
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Sectional Area
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
Perimeter (m)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
(m2)
35.12 799.35
40.57 793.15 5.45 6.16 8.23 20.52
43.56 789.65 2.99 3.50 4.61 25.71 4.61 19.73 4.61 13.75 4.61 7.77
44.13 789.22 0.57 0.43 0.71 6.02 0.71 4.88 0.71 3.74 0.71 2.60 0.71 1.46 0.71 0.66
48.32 788.38 4.19 0.84 4.27 46.92 4.27 38.54 4.27 30.16 4.27 21.78 4.27 13.40 4.27 7.53
53.73 787.86 5.41 0.51 5.43 64.25 5.43 53.43 5.43 42.61 5.43 31.79 5.43 20.97 5.43 13.40
57.7 787.56 3.97 0.30 3.98 48.78 3.98 40.84 3.98 32.90 3.98 24.96 3.98 17.02 3.98 11.46 3.98 1.14
58.15 787.49 0.45 0.07 0.45 5.61 0.45 4.71 0.45 3.81 0.45 2.91 0.45 2.01 0.45 1.38 0.45 0.21
61.89 787.41 3.74 0.08 3.74 46.91 3.74 39.43 3.74 31.95 3.74 24.47 3.74 16.99 3.74 11.76 3.74 2.03 3.74 0.16
63.62 787.42 1.73 0.00 1.73 21.77 1.73 18.31 1.73 14.85 1.73 11.39 1.73 7.93 1.73 5.50 1.73 1.01 1.73 0.14
72.39 787.431 8.77 0.01 8.77 110.28 8.77 92.74 8.77 75.20 8.77 57.66 8.77 40.12 8.77 27.84 8.77 5.04 8.77 0.65
77.41 787.366 5.02 0.07 5.02 63.26 5.02 53.22 5.02 43.18 5.02 33.14 5.02 23.10 5.02 16.07 5.02 3.02 5.02 0.51
77.5 787.457 0.09 0.09 0.13 1.13 0.13 0.95 0.13 0.77 0.13 0.59 0.13 0.41 0.13 0.29 0.13 0.05 0.13 0.01
79.96 788.454 2.46 1.00 2.65 29.63 2.65 24.71 2.65 19.79 2.65 14.87 2.65 9.95 2.65 6.51
83.89 790.004 3.93 1.55 4.22 42.33 4.22 34.47 4.22 26.61 4.22 18.75 4.22 10.89 4.22 5.39
88.7 792.305 4.81 2.30 5.33 42.55 5.33 32.93 5.33 23.31 5.33 13.69
93.29 795.091 4.59 2.79 5.37 28.93 5.37 19.75 5.37 10.57
94.37 795.833 1.08 0.74 1.31 4.90 1.31 2.74 1.31 0.58
96.17 797.142 1.8 1.31 2.23 6.32 2.23 2.72
97.33 797.897 1.16 0.75 1.38 2.88 1.38 0.56
69.58 618.70 61.35 484.65 57.74 373.77 51.06 266.37 41.12 164.25 41.12 107.79 23.83 12.50 19.39 1.48
Summary of Calculations
Wetted Hydraulic
Perimeter Radius Velocity
HFL (m) Area (m2) (m) (m) (m/s) Q (m 3/s) Stage (m)
800 618.70 69.58 8.89 13.83 8559.48 800.0
798 484.65 61.35 7.90 12.78 6196.29 798.0
796 373.77 57.74 6.47 11.20 4184.57 796.0
794 266.37 51.06 5.22 9.70 2582.43 794.0
792 164.25 41.12 3.99 8.11 1332.75 792.0
790.6 107.79 41.12 2.62 6.13 660.49 790.6
788 12.50 23.83 0.52 2.10 26.20 788.0
787.5 1.48 19.39 0.08 0.58 0.85 787.5
85
H Y D RO L O G IC AL I NV E S T IG AT ION S
Likhu Khola High Flood Level at the Proposed Bridge Site
800
798
Reduced Level (m)
796
794
792
HFL
790
788
786
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
Distance (m)
86
Appendix 3-8
29. Numerical example of application of PCJ method (1996)
Remark
Catchment area near station Kakarpakha Depends on location of the project
Station Index 101 Depends on location of the project
Catchment area F (km2) 100 from topograhical map
Return Period T, years 50 depends on norm, design life, and
acceptable risk
Max. hourly rainfall intensity ahr 0.91 Depends on location of the project and
(mm/min) return period, available in Table 14
Kt 0.92 depands on catchment area, available
in Table 15
Design Rainfall Intensity ap 0.8372 ap = ahr * Kt
(mm/min)
Infiltration Coefficient Op 0.85 depends on return period, available in
Table 16
Discharge reduction factor,  0.196 depends on size of catchment,
available in Table 17
KF 0.99 depends on size of catchment,
available in Table 18
Design Flood Qp (m3/s) 230 Qp = 16.67 ap Op  F Kf
87
Table 14: Hourly rainfall intensity in mm/min for different return periods
at rainfall stations of Nepal (ahr for PCJ method)
SN Index no. Name of station 300 yr 100 yr 50 yr 33 yr 10 yr
1 101 Kakerpakha 1.08 0.95 0.91 0.87 0.74
2 103 Patan (West) 1.09 0.99 0.92 0.87 0.72
3 104 Dadeldhura 2.19 1.84 1.58 1.43 0.95
4 106 Belauri shantipur 2.53 2.25 2.09 1.98 1.62
5 201 Pipalkot 1.98 1.77 1.62 1.52 1.24
6 202 Chainpur (West) 1.01 0.89 0.84 0.79 0.67
7 203 Silgadhi doti 2.85 2.28 1.96 1.74 1.11
8 205 Katai 2.53 2.2 2.01 1.87 1.43
9 206 Asara ghat 2.38 2 1.72 1.55 0.98
10 208 Sandepani 2.27 2.03 1.9 1.81 1.49
11 209 Dhangadhi 2.69 2.31 2.06 1.9 1.34
12 219 Chisapani (Karnali) 3.2 2.79 2.53 2.31 1.69
13 301 Mugu 1.84 1.52 1.27 1.11 0.7
14 302 Thirpu 0.58 0.54 0.51 0.49 0.41
15 303 Jumla 2.22 1.74 1.43 1.2 0.63
16 305 Sheri ghat 1.18 1.09 1.03 0.99 0.84
17 306 Gamshree nagar 0.71 0.6 0.53 0.49 0.35
18 308 Nagma 0.72 0.65 0.6 0.57 0.46
19 309 Bijaypur (Raskot) 1.04 0.94 0.87 0.82 0.67
20 312 Dunai 0.99 0.84 0.75 0.68 0.48
21 401 Pushpa kami 2.19 1.9 1.74 1.65 1.24
22 402 Dailekh 2.76 2.22 1.9 1.68 1.01
23 403 Jammu (Tikuakuna) 1.55 1.33 1.2 1.14 0.89
24 404 Jajarkot 2.06 1.81 1.58 1.49 1.11
25 406 Surkhet (Birendranagar) 3.56 2.95 2.53 2.24 1.39
26 407 Kusum 1.84 1.68 1.56 1.49 1.25
27 408 Gularia 2.47 2.2 2.03 1.93 1.53
28 409 Kajura (Nepalganj) 3.23 2.76 2.44 2.22 1.58
29 410 Bale Buddha 2.12 1.84 1.66 1.53 1.14
30 412 Naubasta 2.6 2.25 2.04 1.9 1.39
31 413 Shyano Shree 3.39 2.91 2.63 2.41 1.71
32 501 Rukumkot 1.95 1.74 1.58 1.5 1.2
33 502 Shera Gaun 0.78 0.72 0.68 0.65 0.56
34 504 Libang gaun 3.23 2.47 2.03 1.71 1.01
35 505 Bijuar tar 1.72 1.49 1.33 1.22 0.9
36 507 Nayabasti (Dang) 2.03 1.81 1.66 1.55 1.22
37 508 Tulsipur 1.51 1.39 1.29 1.23 1.03
38 509 Ghorahi (Masina) 1.27 1.18 1.12 1.08 0.96
39 510 Koilabas 1.89 1.71 1.58 1.52 1.25
40 511 Luamjula Bazar 1.25 1.12 1.06 1.01 0.86
41 601 Jomsom 0.79 0.7 0.65 0.61 0.48
42 604 Thakmarpha 0.8 0.7 0.63 0.58 0.42
43 605 Baglung 0.94 0.89 86 0.83 0.75
44 606 Tatopani 0.98 0.87 0.81 0.77 0.62
45 607 Lete 0.99 0.86 0.77 0.72 0.52
46 609 Beni Bazar 1.29 1.14 1.03 0.95 0.71
47 701 Ridi Bazar 2.13 1.84 1.67 1.58 1.22
48 702 Tansen 2.98 2.44 2.12 1.9 1.17
49 703 Butbal 3.42 3.01 2.77 2.6 2.01
50 704 Beluwa (Girbari) 4.12 3.45 3.07 2.8 1.87
88
SN Index no. Name of station 300 yr 100 yr 50 yr 33 yr 10 yr

51 705 Bhairahwa Airport 2.24 1.96 1.82 1.7 1.39
52 715 Khanchikot 3.85 3.29 2.98 2.76 1.94
53 716 Taulihawa 2.66 2.38 2.19 2.03 1.62
54 722 Musikot 2.53 2.19 1.98 1.84 1.34
55 801 Jagat (Setibas) 1.25 1.06 0.96 0.9 0.68
56 802 Khudi bazar 2.47 2.22 2.04 1.19 1.55
57 804 Pokhara Airport 2.64 2.31 2.12 1.93 1.49
58 807 Kuncha 2.85 2.41 2.12 1.9 1.3
59 808 Bandipur 301 2.5 2.17 1.94 1.34
60 809 Gorkha 2.91 2.31 1.94 1.66 1.01
61 810 Chapkot 2.98 2.53 2.31 2.14 1.58
62 811 Malepatan Pokhara 2.29 2.09 1.96 1.87 1.58
63 814 Lumle 2.28 2.06 1.96 1.85 1.58
64 902 Rampur 2.45 2.19 1.98 1.87 1.46
65 903 Jabani 2.2 1.93 1.81 1.67 1.32
66 904 Chisapani Gadhi 2.6 2.31 2.14 2.01 1.58
67 905 Daman 2.1 1.87 1.7 1.58 1.27
68 906 Hetaunda 4.75 3.99 3.52 3.17 2.09
69 907 Amlekhganj 2.34 2.14 1.98 1.9 1.58
70 909 Simra Airport 2.44 2.22 2.08 1.98 1.67
71 910 Nijgadh 2.44 2.22 2.06 1.96 1.62
72 911 Parbanipur 3.07 2.63 2.38 2.19 1.58
73 912 Ramoli Bairiya 2.96 2.53 2.29 2.14 1.58
74 1001 Timure 2.13 1.71 1.46 1.27 0.68
75 1002 Aaru Ghat Bazar 2.01 1.81 1.65 1.56 1.27
76 1004 Nuwakot 1.43 1.27 1.19 1.11 0.89
77 1005 Dhading 3.01 2.46 2.08 1.9 1.39
78 1006 Gumthang 7.13 5.38 4.28 3.42 1.5
79 1007 Kakani 1.22 1.19 1.11 1.09 1
80 1008 Nawalpur 1.17 1.1 1.04 1.01 0.89
81 1009 Chautara 1.04 0.96 0.9 0.87 0.74
82 1012 Sundarijal Powerhouse 3.01 2.44 2.06 1.82 1.06
83 1013 Sundarijal Residence 1.3 1.18 1.11 1.03 0.87
84 1014 Kathmandu (Indian emb) 1.2 1.08 0.99 0.92 0.72
85 1015 Thankot 1.27 1.17 1.12 1.08 0.94
86 1022 Godabari 1.29 1.19 1.12 1.07 0.92
87 1023 Dolal Ghat 1.39 1.18 1.06 0.98 0.77
88 1024 Dhulikhel 1.9 1.58 1.39 1.27 0.95
89 1027 Barhabise 1.63 1.46 1.36 1.3 1.03
90 1028 Pachuar Ghat 1.15 1 0.91 0.85 0.63
91 1029 Khumaltar 1.11 1 0.94 0.89 0.73
92 1030 Kathmandu Airport 1.03 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.68
93 1035 Sankhu 1.01 0.93 0.87 0.84 0.71
94 1102 Charikot 1.19 1.05 0.97 0.91 0.72
95 1103 Jiri 0.92 0.85 0.8 0.77 0.67
96 1104 Melung 2.25 1.9 1.68 1.52 1.01
97 1106 Ramechhap 1.67 1.47 1.36 1.27 0.95
98 1107 Sindhuli Gadhi 2.77 2.45 2.26 2.13 1.78
99 1108 Bahun Tilpung 3.26 2.85 2.6 2.41 1.77
100 1109 Patharkot (East) 2.66 2.34 2.15 2.03 1.58
101 1110 Tulsi 2.79 2.25 2.03 1.89 1.39
102 1111 Janakpur Airport 3.33 2.76 2.38 2.12 1.33
89
Index
SN no. Name of station 300 yr 100 yr 50 yr 33 yr 10 yr
103 1112 Chisapani Bazar 2.69 2.22 2.03 1.89 1.43
104 1115 Nepalthok 3.17 2.53 2.22 1.96 1.27
105 1117 Hariharpur Valley 3.72 3.17 2.88 2.66 1.9
106 1201 Namche Bazar 0.97 0.86 0.79 0.75 0.59
107 1202 Chaurikhark 2.19 1.86 1.66 1.52 1.05
108 1203 Pakarnas 1.17 1.05 0.95 0.9 0.71
109 1204 Aisielukhark 1.43 1.27 1.22 1.14 0.95
110 1206 Okhaldhunga 1.1 1.03 0.98 0.95 0.84
111 1207 Mane Bhanjyang 3.96 3.1 2.57 2.2 1.24
112 1210 Kurule Ghat 2.38 2.22 2.11 2.01 1.51
113 1211 Khotang Bazar 1.65 1.49 1.36 1.27 1.01
114 1213 Udaypur Gadhi 2.27 2 1.84 1.72 1.39
115 1215 Lahan 1.7 1.55 1.46 1.41 1.22
116 1216 Siraha 1.82 1.65 1.55 1.46 1.24
117 1220 Chialsa 0.92 0.86 0.82 0.79 0.7
118 1301 Num 3.08 2.66 2.46 2.28 1.77
119 1302 Dumuhan 1.65 1.39 1.2 1.08 0.7
120 1303 Chainpur (East) 1.52 1.3 1.19 1.11 0.85
121 1304 Pakhribas 1.16 1.05 0.98 0.94 0.79
122 1305 Legua Ghat 0.97 0.87 0.81 0.77 0.64
123 1306 Munga 2.03 1.71 1.53 1.39 0.98
124 1307 Dhankuta 2.12 1.81 1.6 1.45 1.04
125 1308 Mul Ghat 2.53 2.1 1.85 1.66 1.2
126 1309 Tribeni 3.64 3.01 2.61 2.34 1.65
127 1311 Dharan Bazar 2.96 2.57 2.33 2.15 1.68
128 1312 Haraincha 2.04 1.84 1.72 1.65 1.41
129 1316 Chatara 2.72 2.44 2.25 2.13 1.7
130 1317 Chepuwa 1.39 1.2 1.05 0.94 0.67
131 1320 Tarhara 3.64 3.17 2.85 2.6 1.9
132 1322 Machuwa Ghat 1.71 1.52 1.43 1.36 1.1
133 1324 Bhojpur 1.05 0.98 0.94 0.91 0.81
134 1402 Pangthangdoma 5.07 4.05 3.39 2.95 1.52
135 1403 Lungthung 1.96 1.74 1.63 1.55 1.27
136 1404 Taplethok 1.65 1.33 1.22 1.1 0.75
137 1405 Taplejung 1.2 1.08 1 0.94 0.75
138 1406 Memeng Jagat 1.13 1.03 0.97 0.94 0.8
139 1407 Ilam 1.58 1.44 1.36 1.31 1.12
140 1408 Damak 2.69 2.41 2.25 2.14 1.73
141 1409 Ranibirta Anarmani 5.62 4.12 3.33 2.66 1.52
142 1411 Soktim 2.5 2.28 2.14 2.04 1.71
90
Table 15: Value of kt for PCJ method

Catchment area, F kt Catchment area, F kt
(km2) (km2)
0.0005 2.90 50 0.97
0.001 2.60 100 0.92
0.005 2.30 200 0.91
0.01 2.00 300 0.90
0.05 1.75 400 0.875
0.1 1.55 500 0.85
0.5 1.35 750 0.775
0.8 1.20 1000 0.695
1 1.18 5000 0.52
5 1.07 10000 0.40
7 1.05 50000 0.38
10 1.00 100000 0.34
Table 16: Value of o p for PCJ method

Return Period, 300 100 50 33 10
T(yrs)
Range value of op 1 1-0.9 0.9-0.8 0.8-0.7 0.55-0.45
Table 17: Value of  for PCJ method

Catchment area,  Catchment area, 
F (km2) F (km2)
0.0001 0.981 5 0.422
0.001 0.912 6 0.403
0.005 0.863 10 0.332
0.01 0.811 15 0.313
0.05 0.753 30 0.272
0.1 0.691 50 0.244
0.3 0.663 60 0.225
0.5 0.632 100 0.196
0.6 0.623 300 0.167
1 0.531 500 0.147
2 0.503 1000 0.126
3 0.471 10000 0.088
4 0.442 100000 0.058
Table 18: Value of KF for PCJ method

F, 10 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
km2
KF 1 0.925 0.855 0.785 0.710 0.640 0.570 0.495 0.420
91
Appendix 3-9
30. Degree day method
The degree-day method is a temperature index approach that equates the total daily melt
to a coefficient times the temperature difference between the mean daily temperature
and a base temperature which is generally taken as 0 °C (NRCS, 2004).
M = CM (Ta - Tb)
where,
M = snowmelt in in/d (mm/d)

CM = the degree-day coefficient in mm/degree-day C
Ta = mean daily air temperature (°C)
Tb = base temperature (°C)
The coefficient CM varies seasonally and by location, the typical values are from 1.6 to
6.0 mm/degree-day C. A value of 2.74 mm/degree-day C is often used when other
information is lacking. CM has also been related to snow density and wind speed and to
accumulated degree-days and elevation.
These variations reflect the different energy dynamics and changing snowpack
conditions over time and space. The fact that it varies like this demonstrates that this
single index (temperature) cannot represent all of the relevant processes so to
compensate, the degree-day coefficient must change with the changing conditions.
During rain-on-snow, the degree-day method must be used with caution as it most likely
is not valid. It is most applicable to clear weather melt in forested watersheds.
While the index approach has limitations, it is nevertheless commonly used because of
its simplicity.
92
Appendix 3-10
31. Annual and Monsoon Wetness Index Maps
93
Monsoon Wetness Index for use in WECS/DHM Method (1990)
Annual Wetness Index for use in DHM Method (2004)
94
Monsoon Wetness Index for use in DHM Method (2004)
95
Appendix 3-11
32. Numerical example of application of Mishra et. al. method (2009) to estimate flood flows
QTi = qT i
where, QTi = flood flow (m3/s) of region i of return period T (years)
qT = regional frequency distribution factor (growth factor)
i = index flood (scale factor)
Steps of application of Mishra et. al. method:

1. Find the region number in which the catchment is located (1 to 5) .
2. For a particular return period (T, years) and the region number, find the regional
frequency distribution factor (qT) from the table given below.
3. For the total catchment area A (in km2) and the region number, find the index
flood i.
4. Find flood flow associated with the region number, return period and catchment
area, QTi (m3/s).
Table19: qT (regional frequency distribution factor) Table 20: Index Flood

Return Region Number
Region
period Index flood
No.
T (years) 1 (scale2 factor)3 4 5
1 0.88i = 0.85
0.88
2 1.65 Ai 0.95 0.87 0.94
5 2 1.32 = 1.44 1.03
0.98 Ai 1.27 1.34 1.38
i
10 1.65 1.87 1.49 1.69 1.65
3  = 0.18 A –
20 2.00 i 2.31 1.71 2.06 1.89
50 2.50 5.94 2.02
2.95 2.60 2.18
4 2.91i = 3.46
0.72
100 5.15 Ai 2.27 3.04 2.38
200 5 3.37 = 4.02
0.16 A 2.55
1.26 3.52 2.57
Figure of Mishra et. al. method’s region number, along with the hydrological stations
used in development of the method.
96
Appendix 3-12
33. Example of application of Langbein’s log deviation method to extend short term data at base station based
on long term data at HSC
The following discharge data at the base station and index station is available. Extend the
discharge data at the base station based on discharge data at the HSC.
Year Base station Qy Index (HSC)Station

(m3/s) Qi (m3/s)
1980 120 162
1981 132 178.2
1982 123 166.05
1983 140 189
1984 144 194.4
1985 111 149.85
1986 121 163.35
1987 123 166.05
1988 134 180.9
1989 139 187.65
1990 129 174.15
1991 125 168.75
1992 DNA 162
1993 DNA 178.2
1994 DNA 166.05
1995 DNA 189
1996 DNA 194.4
1997 DNA 149.85
1998 DNA 163.35
1999 DNA 166.05
2000 DNA 180.9
2001 DNA 187.65
2002 DNA 174.15
2003 DNA 168.75
DNA = Data not available. This example deals with Langbein’s method to fill the gap in data.
Steps:
1. Discharge at base station = Qy. Take logarithms of discharge at the base station. Z = log Qy.
2. Compute Zavg (mean of the values obtained in step 1).
3. Deduct mean values of step 2 from the logarithms of discharges computed under step 1 to
give Y, i.e., Y = (Z - Zavg)
4. Repeat Step 1 to 3 for the concurrent data (data of the same years as used in Step 1) of the
index station to give X.
5. Compute value of r; r = XY/ [X2Y2]1/2
6. Compute value of b, if the value of r is satisfactory (r > 0.6); b = XY/X2
The following operations are to be performed only for the years in which data at base station is
to be extended; in this example, it is for the years 1992 to 2003.
7. a) for the available discharge data of the index station, calculate logarithm and log-deviation
X
b) estimate log-deviation Y for the base station by multiplying the log-deviation X of the
index station by b.
8. Estimate logarithms of discharges (Z) at the base station by adding the mean of logarithms
of base station to Y, computed under step 7. i.e., log Z = Zavg + Y
9. Antilogarithms of the values estimated under step 8 gives the required data at proposed site
extended from HSC.
97
Calculation details of Langbein's Log Deviation Method:

Given Given
Data of Step 1 Step 3 Data of Step 4 Step 4 Calculations for Steps 5 and 6
Base z= Y= Index zi = X=
Station log Qy z - zavg Station log Qi zi - zavg-i
Year Qy Qi XY x2 y2
1980 120 2.079 -0.028 162 2.210 -0.028 0.000801 0.000801 0.000801
1981 132 2.121 0.013 178.2 2.251 0.013 0.000171 0.000171 0.000171
1982 123 2.090 -0.018 166.05 2.220 -0.018 0.000309 0.000309 0.000309
1983 140 2.146 0.039 189 2.276 0.039 0.001494 0.001494 0.001494
1984 144 2.158 0.051 194.4 2.289 0.051 0.002589 0.002589 0.002589
1985 111 2.045 -0.062 149.85 2.176 -0.062 0.003864 0.003864 0.003864
1986 121 2.083 -0.025 163.35 2.213 -0.025 0.00061 0.00061 0.00061
1987 123 2.090 -0.018 166.05 2.220 -0.018 0.000309 0.000309 0.000309
1988 134 2.127 0.020 180.9 2.257 0.020 0.000385 0.000385 0.000385
1989 139 2.143 0.036 187.65 2.273 0.036 0.001263 0.001263 0.001263
1990 129 2.111 0.003 174.15 2.241 0.003 9.66E-06 9.66E-06 9.66E-06
1991 125 2.097 -0.011 168.75 2.227 -0.011 0.000112 0.000112 0.000112
Zavg 2.107 Zavg-i 2.238 Sum → 0.012 0.012 0.012
Step 5 r= 1.000 Step 6 b= 1.000
Given log-deviation at log-deviation Z of Extended

discharge Index station Y for the base base discharge
data at Zi = log Qi X = zi - zavg-I station station data of base
Year Index (Step (Step 7a2) (Step 7b) (Step 8) station (Step
Station (Qi) 7a1) 9)
1992 194 2.289 0.051 0.05088053 2.158 144.0
1993 214 2.330 0.092 0.09227321 2.200 158.4
1994 199 2.299 0.062 0.06160439 2.169 147.6
1995 227 2.356 0.118 0.11782732 2.225 168.0
1996 233 2.368 0.130 0.13006177 2.238 172.8
1997 180 2.255 0.017 0.01702226 2.125 133.2
1998 196 2.292 0.054 0.05448465 2.162 145.2
1999 199 2.299 0.062 0.06160439 2.169 147.6
2000 217 2.337 0.099 0.09880408 2.206 160.8
2001 225 2.353 0.115 0.11471408 2.222 166.8
2002 209 2.320 0.082 0.08228899 2.190 154.8
2003 203 2.306 0.069 0.06860929 2.176 150.0
Note: In this numerical example, the “given data” of base station and index station are
synthetically generated to force the r and b values to be 1.00; the purpose was to test the
validity of the method.
98
APPENDIX 4
99
34. Line Sampling Method to obtain grain size distribution curve in gravel bed rivers
The following article on line sampling is attached as an appendix in this guideline. This
article discusses in detail the concepts of the method and the steps involved in field
works. An MS Excel file related to line sampling is appended at the end of this article.
Einfache Bestimmung der Korngrössenverteilung von Geschiebematerial mit Hilfe der
Linienzahlanalyse
VonRenéFehr, Zürich
Schweizer Ingenieur und Architekt
Sonderdruck aus Heft 3811987
Druck: Konrad Bösch AG, ZürichSimple Determination of the Grain Size Distribution using the
Line Number Analysis
Translated from German by G.-A. Tannò, ITECO Engineering Ltd., on behalf of LOCAL ROADS
BRIDGE PROGRAMME [LRBP], Nepal
The solution of hydraulic problems or questions related to sediment transport in

mountainous rivers or torrents requires the exact knowledge of the grain size distribution of
the bed material. This paper describes a method which enables a fast and reliable
determination of the composition of bed material in terms of the grain size with relatively low
working input. The distribution of the coarse material is measured on site and analysed by
means of the so called “Line Number Analysis”, whereas the fine material is arithmetically
approached using the Fuller distribution.
Introduction
Various parameters must be specified to solve problems in the field of river mechanics and river
training works. One important parameter is the grain size distribution of the relevant material. It has
to be distinguished between the transported bed load, the armour layer (layer on the surface of the
river bed) and the subsurface bed material. For calculation purposes, these different materials are
often described by few characteristic grain size diameters. For example the roughness is determined
by the diameter d90, which represents the 90%-value of the sieve passage rate of the subsurface layer.
For calculations of bed load transport the 50%-value of the sieve passage rate, the diameter d50, or
the average diameter dm is used (dm = ∑Δpi · dmi, where dmi, stands for the characteristic (average)
diameter of the fraction i). Based on the grain size distribution of the bed material it is also possible
to calculate fraction-wise the armouring of the bed surface. The used formulas are based on results
of laboratory tests. For these tests, the grain size distribution of the used sand and gravel material
was determined by sieve analysis. For the application of such formulas, it is necessary to determine
the grain size distribution which corresponds to the sieve curve of the bed material in nature. The
same has to be respected for the determination of the grain size distribution for hydraulic model
tests with a movable bed.
Sampling and analysis methods
In soil mechanics there are various methods for the determination of grain size distribution, which
normally are also used for the needs of river hydraulics. Normally volume weight analyses of the
bed material are performed for the on-site-determination of grain size distribution. Therefore the
stones laying at the surface of the river bed are removed and a volumetric sample of the material
beneath is taken. Subsequently this sample is sieved class-wise for each fraction diameter and
weighed. The grain size distribution is determined based on the percentage of the weight of each
fraction in a cumulative frequency curve pi = f (di) (see DIN 66141). With increasing maximum
grain diameter this method gets more and more demanding and is not anymore practicable if the
maximum grain size exceeds 20 cm (the recommended volume of the sample is: V [m 3] ≥ 2.5 ×
100
H Y D RO L O G IC AL I NV E S T IG AT IO N S
dmax [m]; if dmax = 0.20 m then V ≥ 0.50 m3 !). This leads to the fact, that the big components of an
analysis are not or only vaguely considered.
Figure 1: The three main axis of a gravel Figure 2: Taking a line sample by help of
stone. For a line number analysis the a gauging tool. The line is determined by
middle axis [b-axis] is taken. a rope.
Figure 3: Principle of adjusting a Fuller-curve to the

converted and corrected line number analysis
101
The line sampling of the armour layer
The exact recording of the coarse components of a grain size distribution can easily be performed
by the so called line number analysis as described in [5].
This method is very user-friendly. No other method for in-situ analysing and evaluation enables
such a fast recording of a representative sample of coarse material. The sample can be locally
concentrated but also be extended as it is required. The work input for performing and evaluating of
a line sample is very low – with two manpower about 15 minutes are needed for a sampling –
enabling repetitive sampling and hence an assessment of the reliability of the results.
This method has successfully been applied several times at the Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology
and Glaciology of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (VAW, ETHZ), for example in the
context with hydraulic model tests of the confluence of the rivers Maggia and Melezza (rivers in the
southern part of Switzerland), as well as of various torrents and of the Thur near Weinfelden
(north-eastern part of Switzerland). Furthermore this method can also be very helpful for
assessment in the field of aquatic ecology.
Figure 4: Prediction of the portions of fine material by rigid

composing the converted and corrected line number
analysis of coarse components with a Fuller-curve
Same as for other analysing methods of sediment and bed material, the selection of a suitable location
for the line number analysis is very important. First of all the location depends on the problem to be
solved. If for example the friction losses or the resistance to erosion of the river banks are to be
determined, then the material of the river banks have to be examined and not the grain size
distribution in the middle of the river bed. Errors can occur if only few and not representative analyses
are performed. For the assessment of friction value of the riverbed, the location of the sample should
102
neither be on a fresh gravel bar (recently deposited sediments) nor should only sand deposits in calm
water zones be considered.
As the line sampling is limited to coarse components, it is obvious to locate it at places where coarse
components are concentrated, namely where the armour layer is suitable. The composition of the
subsurface layers, where big stones are only occasional, differs from the composition of the armour
layer because the latter is formed by the subsurface material by a sorting effect. The result of that
effect is that the coarse material is overestimated by the line number analysis. This fact has to be
considered when converting the results of the line number analysis into a volume weight analysis of
the subsurface material.
Line number analysis is normally performed at low river discharge. They can even be done in shallow
water. To avoid systematic errors when selecting the stones to be counted, a rope or measuring tape
is stretched over the armour layer. The line shall be parallel to the flow direction in order to be able
to distinguish between the riverbank and riverbed area. After fixing the line, the b-axis (see figure 1)
of all stones bigger than 1 to 2 cm which are located under the rope, are counted (see figure 2). The
stones are divided into classes of diameters (= fractions) and counted. To achieve a good reliability
of the probe, at least 150 stones of which 30 or more belong to the middle fractions should be counted
and measured. The limiting diameters of the fractions shall follow a geometric progression with the
quotient √2. The (below presented) example form shows another suitable graduation.
Whenever possible, several line number analyses shall be performed in the same river stretch in order
to compare their results and to compute the average values.
As, due to practical reasons, the line number analysis is only suitable for particles bigger than 1 to 2
cm, the result will only be a partial grain size distribution which comprises only the coarse
components. The distribution curve of the fine components must be determined in a different way
(see below). It doesn’t make sense to scrutinise grains smaller than 1 to 2 cm. On one hand the wasted
time should better be used for further samples, on the other hand in a river bed it is very difficult to
collect stones smaller than 1 cm lying exactly in a line (width of a measuring tape: 2 cm!). Easily one
would also select stones which are beside or underneath the principle line what would result in an
overestimation of these fine components.
As mentioned before, the distribution curve of the fine components must be determined in a different
way. In principle, that can be done by volume sampling of the bed material. For those, only the fine
components should be taken into consideration (10 to 20 mm). In that way the volume of the sample
could be reduced noticeably.
The assumption of a grain size distribution of the fine components according to Fuller
(1) p(d) = √ (d/dmax)
is another simple and for the practical use in the most cases sufficiently accurate approach. The
assumption of a grain size distribution fitting to the (highest possible) packing density is justified by
the fact that such a packing density can generally be found in Swiss or alpine rivers (at least for d ≤
d90). In the most cases a special analysis for the grain size distribution of fine components is not
necessary.
Conversion to the Grain Size Distribution of the Bed Material
As mentioned at the beginning, all formulas for the calculation of hydraulic problems are based on
the grain size distribution of the subsurface layer. After having performed one or more line number
analysis of the armour layer it is necessary to convert the results of these analyses. The following
formula allows the fraction-wise conversion of a line number analysis (derivation see [3] and [2]):
(2)
where
Δpi = weight of the fraction i / weight of the entire sample (volumetric weight analysis of the bed
material)
103
Δqi = number of stones of the fraction i / number of stones of the entire sample (line number
analysis of the armour layer)
dmi = characteristic (average) grain size diameter of the fraction i
n = number of fractions
0.80 = exponent  of the conversion of a line number analysis of the armour layer into a
volumetric weight analysis of the bed material.
The finest fractions of the line number analysis are underestimated by this formula. First of all the
distribution of fine components by the line number analysis is inaccurate because of the difficulty of
precise recording of stones with small diameter. Hence, the grain size distribution has to be corrected
after the conversion as follows:
(3)
where
pic = corrected cumulative frequency of the fraction i
Δpi = weight of the fraction i / weight of the entire sample
The calculated grain size distribution has to be completed by the distribution of the fine components.
Under the assumption of a distribution according Fuller a section of the conversed and corrected line
number analysis has to be chosen, where the inclination of the tangent (with linear depiction of the
grain sizes) corresponds to a Fuller-curve (figure 3). (To make it more evident, a logarithmic-scaled
diagram on probability plotting paper is presented opposite of a linear-scaled diagram in figure 4 and
3 respectively. As the distribution of the coarse components is principally an extreme-value-
distribution, the results of a line number analysis resemble more or less to a log-normal-distributed
straight.)
Figure 6: Form to conduct and evaluate a line

number analysis.
Figure 5: exponent for the conversion in

dependence of the hydraulic load (Shield’s factor)
For the design of the final grain size distribution curve of the bed material it is assumed, that this
curve follows the Fuller-curve up to the transition area, while the coarse components are distributed
according the conversed and corrected line number analysis (figure 4).
104
Discussion based on tests at the VAW
Big-scaled tests have been performed in order to determine the conversion from one type of analysis
to the other at the Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology of the Swiss Federal Institute
of Technology (VAW, ETHZ). The focus was placed on the influence of the hydraulic load which
transforms the grain size distribution of the armour layer. For that reason various specific mixtures
of material were exposed to different water discharges in a 10 m long and 1 m wide channel.
Subsequently the most common methods of analysis have been performed.
That allowed comparing the results of different analyses under controlled hydraulic conditions. For
the tests in the channel, a longitudinal scale towards nature between 1:1 to 1:10 has been applied.
The investigation about the dependence of the exponent  related to the hydraulic load enabling the
conversation of a line number analysis of a armour layer into a volume weight analysis of the
subsurface layer revealed following results: If hydraulic load is absent (Shield’s factor θ = 0.00)  is
1.80. This value drops considerably with increasing load (figure 5) and reaches right after beginning
of bed load transport (θ = 0.056) a nearly constant value of  = 0.80.
As even a small hydraulic load is sufficient to achieve this value which does not change with increasing
load, the value  = 0.80 can be applied for the conversion of any line number analysis of a armour
layer in a natural river into a related volumetric weight analysis of bed material.
Subsequently the value of the corrections to be performed (eq. 2) could be determined by means of
the known target grain size distribution.
These laboratory results revealed a good coincidence with available data of natural rivers. That applies
also for the mentioned assumption for the grain size distribution of the fine components according
Fuller.
Figure7: Form for the conversion of line number analysis of a armour layer into a volume weight analyses of the
bed material and estimation of the distribution of the fine components according to Fuller
105
Example
Figure 6 shows the result of a line number analysis of the armour layer based on a form as
recommended to be used. Several of such analyses in that river section are performed, compared and
if possible averaged.
The average values of these field survey are filled in the form “conversion and estimation of fine
sediments” [Formular “Umrechnung und Abschätzung der Feinanteile”] (figure 7) into the columns
1 and 3 (in that the example, the values of column 3 do not correspond to the results of the line
number analysis as a consequence of taking the averages!). Subsequently the characteristic diameters
di of the fractions (column 2) as well as the differences of the percent-values Δqi of each fraction
(column 4) are determined. The conversion according equation 2 is calculated fraction-wise (columns
5, 6). The percentages of the conversed line number analysis are added in column 7.
The compulsory correction of the fine components is performed according equation 3 in column 8.
This corresponds to the partial volumetric weight analysis of the bed material considering only coarse
components.
In order to estimate the distribution of fine components a Fuller curve has to be found which fits
best to the calculated curve. Principally, to achieve this target (n-1) Fuller-curves are computed and
compared with respect to the coincidence with the distribution curve of coarse components. Based
on the “fraction i” the percentage distribution of a Fuller-curve at point (i+1) is computed in column
9. First, dmax of the Fuller-curve is calculated with equation 1 based on the values di and pic in the place
“i”. With dmax and di+1 it is now possible to calculate at the place “i+1” a value pFU(i+1) (column 9) which
fits to the Fuller-curve as well (dmax corresponds di/pic2.0). Now it is checked how well the value pi+1c of
the calculated curve at the place “i+1” corresponds to the set point of the Fuller-curve pFU(i+1). In case
of a good coincidence the grain size distribution of coarse components in that section follows largely
a Fuller-curve and the distribution of fine components only has to follow this curve downwards.
In particular, the location (u+1) of the transition area shall be determined in such a way that pFU(i+1) is
not close to the margins of the overlapping sections of both curves (column 8 and 11). In the example
the values pFU(i+1) and pic are similar for di = 12.00 cm as well as for di = 20.00 cm, but the transition
area has been chosen at di = 12.00 cm in order to meet the second requirement, which is to make use
as much as possible of the coarse components.
Once the transition area has been determined (column 10) the distribution of the fine particles
(column 11) can be calculated using di and the corresponding percentage pic at the location u, whereas
the diameters have to be completed downwards until the affiliated percentages get so small that these
fractions do not have any more influence on the entire distribution. Finally, the complete grain size
distribution curve (column 12) is composed by the results of the calculated Fuller-curve up to the
transition area, whereas above of this area the distribution of the converted and corrected line number
analysis (column 8) follows.
Conclusion
The presented method consists of the

 Determination of the distribution of coarse components from the bed material using the line
number analysis of the armour layer on site
 Conversion of the line number analysis of the armour layer into a volumetric weight analysis
of the bed material
 Prediction of the portions of fine material by composing the converted and corrected sample
of coarse components with a Fuller-curve
It provides effective tools to make a good and reliable assessment of the grain size distribution in a
river considering the coarse components.
Bibliography
[ 1 ] Anastasi, G.: „Geschiebeanalysen im Felde unter Berücksichtigung von Grobkomponenten“.

Mitteilungen der Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie der ETH Zürich,
Nr. 70, 1984
106
[ 2 ] Fehr, R.: „Geschiebeanalysen in Gebirgsflüssen – Umrechnung und Vergleich von

verschiedenen Analyseverfahren“. Mitteilungen der Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau, Hydrologie
und Glaziologie der ETH Zürich,Nr.92, 1987.
[ 3 ] Kellerhals, R., Bray, D.I.: “Sampling Procedures for Coarse Pluvial Sediments”. ASCE
Proceedings, JHD, VOL. 97, HY8,1971.
[ 4 ] Meyer-Peter, E., Müller, R.: „Eine Formel zur Berechnung des Geschiebetriebs“. Mitteilungen
aus der Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau und Erdbau an der ETH Zürich, Nr.16,1949.
[ 5 ] Muir, T.C.: “Sampling and Analysis of Coarse Riverbed Sediments”. Proceedings, Mississippi
Water Resources Conference, Water Research Institute, Mississippi State University, State
College, Miss., 1969
107
Output of a line sampling in Rapti Khahare Khola
Line Sample Analysis Line Sample No.: D

di dmi ni qi qi * pi pi piC dmaxFu pi Fu Final
(cm) (cm) (-) (-) dmi0.8 (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) distribution
(-)
0
0.03 0.015
0.1 0.065
0.25 0.175
0.5 0.375
1 0.75 4 0.03 0.021 0.005 0.005 0.254 0.225855 0.226
2 1.5 16 0.11 0.146 0.034 0.039 0.279 0.319408 0.319
3 2.5 23 0.15 0.315 0.073 0.112 0.334 0.391193 0.391
4 3.5 14 0.09 0.251 0.058 0.171 0.378 0.451711 0.452
5 4.5 21 0.14 0.460 0.107 0.278 0.458 0.505028 0.505
6 5.5 22 0.14 0.566 0.132 0.409 0.557 0.193 0.55323 0.553
8 7 15 0.10 0.468 0.109 0.518 0.639 0.196 0.638815 0.639
10 9 11 0.07 0.420 0.098 0.616 0.712 0.714217 0.712
12 11 7 0.05 0.314 0.073 0.689 0.767 0.782386 0.767
15 13.5 9 0.06 0.475 0.111 0.800 0.850 0.874734 0.850
20 17.5 4 0.03 0.260 0.060 0.860 0.895 1.010055 0.895
25 22.5 3 0.02 0.238 0.055 0.916 0.937 1.129276 0.937
30 27.5 1 0.01 0.093 0.022 0.937 0.953 1.23706 0.953
35 32.5 1 0.01 0.107 0.025 0.962 0.972 1.336178 0.972
40 37.5 0.962 0.972 1.428434 0.972
50 45 0.962 0.972 1.597038 0.972
60 55 1 0.01 0.162 0.038 1.000 1 1.749467 1.000
80 70
Total → 152 1 4.295 1
Explanation:
di = diameter of sample collected (from under a fixed line in river), in the dia. range i
dmi = average diameter = mean dia. of (i and i-1 range)
ni = count (number of sample of size di)
qi = ratio of count = ni/ ni
pi = (qi * dmi0.8)/(qi * dmi0.8)
pi = cumulative of pi
piC = 0.25 + 0.75* pi
dmaxFu = (di/100)/ piC2 (in this step, attempt is made to find first minimum change
between two successive values of dmaxFu)
Pi Fu = [(di/100)/dmaxFu]0.5 (The value of dmaxFu used is the second of the two values); in this
example the value of dmaxFu used is 0.196.
Final distribution = Pi Fu (up to the second value of dmaxFu) and piC (for the rest)
The plot of grain size distribution follows.
108
109
35. REFERENCES
Arcement, G. J. and Schneider, V. R., Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness

Coefficients for Natural Channels and Flood Plains, United States Geological Survey
Water-supply Paper 2339,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/wsp2339.pdf , Accessed: May 24, 2014
CEH, 2001, HydrA Nepal Manual, Center for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK
Chow, V. T., D. R. Maidment, L. W. Mays, 1988, Applied Hydrology: International Edition,
ISBN 0-07-100174-3, McGraw-Hill Book Company. , p. 498
Cudworth, A. G., 1991, Flood Hydrology Manual: A water resources technical publication,
Scientific Publishers, Jodhpur, (published by permission of US Dept. of Interior), p.
210.
Cunnane, C., 1989, Statistical Distribution for Flood Frequency Analysis, World
Meteorological Organization, Operational Hydrology Report Number 33, WMO No
718, Geneva, Switzerland
DHM 2004, Hydrological Estimations in Nepal,
DHM 1998, Hydrological Records of Nepal: Stream flow Summary
Horton, R. E., 1914, American Society of Civil Engineers, Trans., Vol. 77, p. 665, (as
quoted in Jarvis, C. S., 1936, Floods in the United States: Magnitude and Frequency,
Water Supply Paper 771, US Dept. of Interior, p. 43),
http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/0771/report.pdf, accessed: June 2, 2014
Jha, R., and Smakhtin, V., 2008, A Review of Methods of Hydrological Estimation at
Ungauged Sites in India, Working Paper 130, IWMI Publication, ISBN 978-92-9090-
693-3, pp. 10-14
Kothyari, U., 2007, Indian practice on estimation of scour around bridge piers – a
comment, Sadhana. Vol. 32, Part 3, pp. 187-197
McLemore, S. and Gosselin, M., 2012, Bridge Hydraulics Handbook, Office of Design,
Drainage Section, Tallahassee, Florida, USA,
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/rddesign/Drainage/files/BridgeHydraulicsHB.pdf,
Accessed: May 24, 2014
Maidment, D. R., Handbook of Hydrology
Mishra, B. K.. K. Takara, Y. Yamashiki, and Y. Tachikawa, 2009, Hydrologic silumation-
aided regional flood frequency analysis of Nepalese river basein, Journal of Flood
Risk Management, Vol. 2, pp. 243-253, Blackwell Publishing Limited, DOI:
10.1111/j.1753-318x.2009.01041.x
NRCS, 2004, Snowmelt, National Engineering Handbook: Hydrology, Part 630, National
Resources Conservation Service, USDA, Chapter 11, pp. 5-6,
http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17753.wba,
Accessed: May 29, 2014
NRCS, 2008, Time of Concentration, Part 630, Hydrology, National Engineering
Handbook, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, Chapter 15, pp. 15-20
OSRP, 2007, Final Detailed Engineering Report for Phase I Roads: Hydrology Report
(Bhawanipatna to Khariar), Government of Orissa, India
Ram Babu, Tejwani, K. K., Agrawal, M. C. & Bhusan, L. S. (1979) - Rainfall intensity
duration return period equations & nomographs of India, CSWCRTI, ICAR, Dehradun,
India (quoted in Stochastic Hydrology, Mujumdar, P.P., IISc,
http://nptel.ac.in/courses/105108079/module6/lecture29.pdf
RCSP, 2008, Feasibility Study Report, Taulihawa-Bhairahawa Road, Road Connectivity
Sector I Project (ADB Grant No. 0051-NEP (SF)), April 2008
110
Richards, B. D., 1950, Flood Estimation and Control, 2nd edition, Catalogue Number
205/4, Chapman and Hall Limited, London
Searcy, J.K., 1969, Manual of Hydrology, Part 2, Low Flow Techniques, Geological
Survey Water-Supply Paper 1542-A, US Dept. of Interior, p. 12-1
Shakya B., 2004, Elements of Practical Hydrology and Meteorology for Environmental
Studies, ISBN 99946-31-22-5, page 125
Singh, K.K. and Kumar, S., 2007, Extension of stream flow series using artificial neural
network, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, The Indian Society for Hydraulics, Vol. 13,
No, 3, p. 55, Taylor and Francis, on line publication: 2012
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09715010.2007.10514883#preview,
accessed: May 31, 2014
Stedinger, J. R., R. M. Vogel and E. F. Georgiou, Frequency Analysis of Extreme Events
Stevens, J. C., 1907, A method of estimating stream discharge from a limited number of
gagings, Engineering News, Vol. 58, No. 3, July 1907 (as cited in Sittner, W. T., 1963,
Extension or rating curves by field surveys, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Prod.
of the ASCE, Vol. 89. No. HY2, Proc. Paper 3444, March 1963, pp. 1-9)
Subramanya, K., 2008, Engineering Hydrology, 3rd Edition, ISBN 0-07-462449-8, Tata
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi, India
Suresh, R., 1997, Watershed Hydrology, ISBN 81-86308-23-7, page 60
Victor, D. J., 2004, Essentials of Bridge Engineering, 5th ed., Oxford and IBH Publishing
Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, ISBN: 81-204-1471-3
WECS, 2003, Himalayan Sediments: Issues and Guidelines, Ministry of Water
Resources
Wiitala, S. W., K. R. Jetter, and A. J. Sommerville, 1961, Hydraulic and Hydrologic
Aspects of Floodplain Planning, Geol. Surv. Water Supply Pap. (US), p. 1526 (cited
in Walesh, S. G., 1989, Urban Surface Water Management, John Wiley and Sons
Inc., p.96
World Bank. 2007. Feasibiltity study and detailed project preparation for phase-1 roads :
Bhawanipatna - Khariar (SH-16). Vol. 1 of India - Orissa State Roads Project.
Washington, DC: World Bank.
WVDEP, 2014, Discharge Measurements, W. Virginia Dept. of Env. Protection,
http://www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/getinvolved/sos/Pages/SOPflow.aspx, accessed: June 1,
2014
Yadav, S. K., 2002, Hydrological analysis for Bheri-Babai hydropower project Nepal, MSc
Thesis in Hydropower Development, NTNU, Norway
http://www.ub.uib.no/elpub/NORAD/2002/ntnu/thesis01.pdf, accessed: June 2, 2014
36. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Hydropower in Nepal: Issues and concepts of development, Arjun P. Shrestha,

1991.
2. Basic Water Science, Ajay Dixit, Nepal Water Conservation Foundation, 2002.
3. Water Power Engineering, H. K. Barrows, S. B., Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi.
4. Engineering Hydrology, J. Nemec, Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, 1973
5. Water Power Engineering, Dandekar and Sharma, Vikas Publishing House, 1996
6. Hill Irrigation Engineering, Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, 1995.
7. Design Manuals for Irrigation projects in Nepal, M.7 Headworks, River Training
Works and Sedimentation Manual, Sir M. MacDonald & Partners Ltd., 1990.
111
8. Design Manuals for Irrigation projects in Nepal, M.3 Hydrology and Agro-
meteorology Manual, Sir M. MacDonald & Partners Ltd., 1990.
9. Snow and Ice Science in Hydrology, IHAS, UNESCO, 1998
10. The Water Resources Magazine 2005, Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk
Campus
11. Engineering Hydrology, R. S. Varshney, Nemchand &Bros, Roorkee, 1986
12. Applied Hydrology, K. N. Mutreja, Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, 1995
13. HydrA-Nepal (Version 1.0), Hydropower – potential estimation software, User
Manual and Technical Reference, Center for Ecology and Hydrology, U. K., 2001
14. Maximum rainfall design discharge for road structures of Nepal, Prem Chandra
Jha, Ph. D. Dissertation, Moscow, 1996
15. Design guidelines for surface irrigation in the Terai and Hills of Nepal, Volume I,
HMGN, MOWR, WECS, 1988
16. Likhu – IV Hydroelectric project, Feasibility study and environmental impact
assessment, NEA – MHSP, 1998
17. Hand book of Hydrology, David R. Maidment, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1992
18. Methodologies for Estimating Hydrologic Characteristic of Ungauged Locations in
Nepal, Water & Energy Commission Secretariat (WECS) & Department of
Hydrology & Meteorology (DHM), 1990.
19. Handbook of Applied hydrology, Chow V. T., McGraw-hill, New York, 1964
20. Guidelines for study of hydropower projects. HMG/N, MOWR, DOED, 2003
21. Hydrology and flood plain analysis. Philip Bedient and Wayne Huber, Addison-
Wesley publishing company, 1992.
22. Planning and implementation of hydropower projects, Norwegian Institute of
Technology, Division of Hydraulic Engineering, 1992
Some useful www sites related to hydrological analyses:
a. http://onlinemanuals.txdot.gov/txdotmanuals/hyd/bridge_hydraulic_consid
erations.htm#i1007328 (accessed May 24, 2014)
b. http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/0
9/06/000020439_20070906101250/Rendered/PDF/RP5790VOL.1.pdf
(accessed May 24, 2014)
c. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/wsp2339.pdf (accessed May 24, 2014)
112

Hydrological Guideline PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Hydrological Guideline PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Government of Nepal

Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development

Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural

COMPREHENSIVE BRIDGE MANUAL

PART 2: DETAIL SURVEY, INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN

Part 2.3 : Hydrological Investigations, Analysis and Reporting

Guideline for Local Road Bridges in Nepal

Local Roads Bridge Programme (LRBP)

2. SCOPE OF GUIDELINES .................................................................................................................... 5

3. BASIC TERMINOLOGIES ................................................................................................................... 5

4. OBJECTIVES OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .......................................................................... 6

5. SCOPE OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................................... 7

6. HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND RELEVANT STUDIES ................................................. 7

7. ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIABLE HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATABASE ............................................ 8

8. EXTENSION OF HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATA.......................................................................... 16

9. DETERMINATION OF BASIN AND CHANNEL CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................... 20

9.2 Basin Slope .......................................................................................................................................... 21

10. COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSES .............................................................. 22

11. SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 22

12. FLOOD HYDROLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 27

14. RATING CURVES AT BRIDGE SITE ................................................................................................... 63

15. WATER SURFACE PROFILE AT BRIDGE SITE .................................................................................... 65

16. HFL CALCULATION ......................................................................................................................... 65

17. FREEBOARD .................................................................................................................................. 65

18. SCOUR DEPTH ............................................................................................................................... 65

19. RECOMMENDED DESIGN FLOOD ................................................................................................... 66

20. DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS .................................. 67

21. RELEVANT HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL STUDIES IN NEPAL............................................................. 69

35. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 110

36. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................ 111

The intention of this guideline is to develop a systematic, uniform and standard

Basin The horizontal surface area within a given drainage system.

CLOF Cloudburst flood

4. OBJECTIVES OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

d. Development of Rating Curve (RC) and Water Surface Profiles (WSP).

5. SCOPE OF HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS

6. HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS AND RELEVANT STUDIES

7. ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIABLE HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATABASE

7.1 Classification of basins based on data availability

7.1.1 Table 1: Classification of Gauged River Basins [GRB]

7.1.2 Table 2: Classification of Un-gauged River Basins [URB]

The classification, however, is intended to facilitate and provide necessary

7.2 Identification and Verification of Hydrologically Similar Catchment (HSC)

7.3 Collection, Generation and Compilation of Data

7.4 Collection and Use of Stream Flow Data

7.5 Measurement of Stream Flow

7.5.1 Hydrometric Method (Velocity-Area Method)

7.5.1.1 Current-meter Measurements

where, Ai is an individual partial cross-sectional area and Vi is the corresponding

7.5.1.2 Float Measurements

7.5.2 Hydraulic Method (Slope Area method)

7.5.3 Dilution Method

7.6 Data Processing

7.6.1 Stream Flow Rating Curves and their Extrapolation

The daily/hourly average depth of precipitation over a specific area, on a storm, is

7.6.3 Stepwise Procedures of Data Processing

d. Gap Filling of Annual Maximum Discharges

7.7 Adjustment of Flow Records

7.8 Internal Consistency Checking of Data

7.9 External Consistency Checking of Data

8. EXTENSION OF HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL DATA

b. Long-term precipitation record

8.1 Extension with Long-Term Stream flow Data at HSC