Cross Drainage Works

The existing practice for design of waterways and canal aqueducts is based on IS-7784 (Part
I) – 1993, “Code of Practice for design of Cross-Drainage Works”. The relevant paragraphs
are reproduced below:
“Design flood for drainage channel to be adopted for cross drainage works should depend
upon the size of the canal, size of the drainage channel and location of the cross drainage. A
very long canal, crossing a drainage channel in the initial reach, damage to which is likely to
affect the canal supplies over a large area and for a long period, should be given proper
weightage
Cross drainage structures are divided into four categories depending upon the canal discharge
and drainage discharge. Design flood to be adopted for these four categories of cross drainage
structures is given in Table 2.4.

1. The design flood to be adopted as mentioned in this table should in no case, be less than
the observed flood.
2. In case of very large cross drainage structures where estimated drainage discharge is
above 150 cumec and canal design discharge is more than 30 cumec, the hydrology
should be examined in detail and appropriate design flood adopted, which should in no
case be less than 1 in 100 years flood.
Where possible, the discharges determined by different methods mentioned in IS:5477 (Part
4): 1971 should be compared to see if any large variations are exhibited and the most
reasonable value, giving weightage to the one based on observed data, should be adopted.
Where there are cross drainage works already existing on the same drainage channel, full data
regarding the observed flood should be obtained and the new cross drainage works

To safeguard against unforeseen nature of flood intensities the foundation of the cross
drainage structure should be checked for a check flood discharge of value twenty percent
higher than the design flood given in Table 2.4.
• Road and Railway Bridges
For road bridges, the Indian Road Congress IRC-5:1998, Section I applies. As per this the
design discharge for which the waterway of a bridge is to be designed shall be not less than
50 year return period peak; “shall be discharge from any other recognized method applicable
for that area; shall be the discharge found by the area velocity method; by unit hydrograph
method; and the maximum discharge fixed by the judgement of the engineers responsible for
the design with comparison of above mentioned methods is to be adopted”. For railway
bridges a 50-yr flood is to be used for smaller bridges carrying railways of lesser importance
like minor lines and very important rail lines a 100-yr flood is to be adopted as per the
railway codes (IRS-1963).
• Determination of Design Flood using Envelope Curves
In early fifties, Kanwar Singh and Karpov collected data of various Indian Rivers and drew
two envelope curves one to suit basins of southern India and the other for those of northern
and central India.
The PMF figures for a number of projects estimated by CWC and other organizations during
the period 1980-91 have been utilized for developing envelope curves for PMF peaks. Three
curves were developed as Upper envelope curves, Average line and lower envelope curves.
The curves correspond to the following equations:
Upper envelopes Qu = 1585 A0.35
Average Lne, Qav = 398 A0.425
Lower envelope, Ql = 100 A0.5
Wher Q is PMF in cumecs and A is catchment area in Sq.km.
These curves have been recommended to be used for prioritising the existing large dams for
further detailed investigations for dam safety assurance.
ii) Second Round Table Meet for Designers : Current Design Practices and issues,
Volume I, Basic Theme Paper, 1999
The criteria and procedure for estimation of design flood have undergone some changes
subsequent to the publication of the recommended procedure. The important changes in
respect of design criteria for various hydraulic structures are summarized in the Table-2.5.
With the availability of better computing facility and development of software, the processing
and analysis of data has become easier. As a result, more and more alternatives are attempted
with a view to arrive at the most appropriate result. Further, a number of studies have been
carried out and this has helped in adopting a more rational approach in the analysis of data.
One of the important works carried out in Central Water Commission in this regard is the
publication of Flood Estimation Reports for various sub-zones of the country. These reports
are extensively used in design flood estimation for small and medium basins with inadequate
data conditions. Further, the procedures for design flood estimation have also undergone
changes in light of recommendations of various committees etc. some of the important
changes (which have taken place since the publication of CWC guidelines in the year 1972)
are summarized in Table 2.6.

As can be seen from Tables 2.5 and 2.6, there have been significant changes over these years
in the criteria adopted and procedure followed in arriving at the design flood values. It was
felt necessary to revise the publication on the recommended procedures.
It is indicated in the CWC note on current practices that every effort is made to adopt latest
techniques in hydrological analysis in general and for flood estimation in particular with a
view to have the most rational estimate. Access to fast computers and related software has
also been instrumental in application of latest techniques in the analysis. However, a major
problem related to design flood analysis is the inadequacy and/ or inconsistency of data.
Many a times, this situation forces hydrologists to make appropriate assumptions and adopt a
conservative attitude. Tendency for adopting a conservative attitude is more so because the
results of the review studies for design flood in respect of some