Railway Electrification Feasibility Study Review

Detail Survey and Design of Electrified Railway Line (HSR) for
Feasibility Study Review Report

Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector of Mechi-Mahakali Railway (Package-1)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1
2. COMPOSITION AND CONTENTS OF F/S REPORT..................................................................................1
2.1 Composition of F/S......................................................................................................................1
2.1.1 Volume 1A...........................................................................................................................1
2.1.2 Volume 1B............................................................................................................................1
2.1.3 Volume 2..............................................................................................................................2
2.1.4 Volume 3..............................................................................................................................2
2.1.5 Volume 4..............................................................................................................................2
2.1.6 Drawings..............................................................................................................................2
2.2 Objectives of the F/S Study..........................................................................................................2
2.3 Scope of Work.............................................................................................................................3
2.3.1 Traffic Survey and Demand Forecast...................................................................................3
2.3.2 Selection of Alignment and Preliminary Designs..................................................................3
2.3.3 Rolling Stock and System Studies.........................................................................................4
2.3.4 Specification for the Project.................................................................................................4
2.3.5 Preliminary Cost Estimate....................................................................................................5
2.3.6 Environmental and Social studies........................................................................................5
2.3.7 Financial and Economic Studies...........................................................................................5
2.3.8 Institutional Capacity Studies...............................................................................................6
3. DETAILED REVIEW RESULTS OF F/S......................................................................................................6
3.1 Railway Alignment.......................................................................................................................6
3.1.1 Review Results of Design Criteria.........................................................................................6
3.1.2 Review Result of Trackbed...................................................................................................7
3.1.3 Railway Route Status...........................................................................................................9
3.1.4 F/S Route Status Comparison............................................................................................10
3.1.5 F/S Route Comparison (Recommended Route vs. Alternative Route)...............................11
3.1.6 Review Result (F/S Recommended Route vs. F/S Alternate Route)...................................12
3.1.7 F/S Alignment Evaluation...................................................................................................13
3.1.8 F/S Alignment Review and Improvement Measures..........................................................15
3.1.9 Comprehensive Review Result...........................................................................................25
3.2 Bridge........................................................................................................................................26
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV i
3.2.1 Basic Concept.....................................................................................................................26

3.2.2 Design Considerations........................................................................................................27
3.2.3 Review Results of Major Design Criteria in Railway...........................................................27
3.2.4 F/S Bridge Analysis.............................................................................................................28
3.2.5 Review Result of F/S Bridge...............................................................................................31
3.3 Hydrological Studies..................................................................................................................39
3.3.1 Review Results of F/S.........................................................................................................39
3.3.2 Application Plan for Detail Design......................................................................................45
3.4 Geological and Geotechnical Surveys........................................................................................46
3.4.2 Application Plan for Detail Design......................................................................................46
3.5 Station.......................................................................................................................................49
3.5.1 Track Layout of Stations on F/S Report..............................................................................49
3.5.2 Review Result of Stations...................................................................................................50
3.5.3 Review of Stations Track Layout Plan.................................................................................52
3.6 Track..........................................................................................................................................55
3.6.1 Gauge.................................................................................................................................55
3.6.2 Ballast................................................................................................................................56
3.6.3 Rail.....................................................................................................................................56
3.6.4 Sleeper...............................................................................................................................56
3.6.5 Fastening............................................................................................................................57
3.6.6 Long Welded Rail (LWR).....................................................................................................57
3.6.7 Turn Out.............................................................................................................................58
3.7 Electrification System plan.........................................................................................................58
3.8 Signaling and Train Control........................................................................................................59
3.8.1 F/S Report Summary of Signaling and Train Control System..............................................59
3.9 Telecommunications..................................................................................................................64
3.9.1 Review Results of Clause General Study............................................................................64
3.9.2 Review Results of Telecommunications Network through Optical Fiber Cable System.....64
3.9.3 Review Results of requirement Telecommunications System...........................................65
3.10 Train Operation..........................................................................................................................68
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV ii
3.10.1 Rail Network and Facilities at Different Stations................................................................68

3.10.2 Freight Operation...............................................................................................................69
3.10.3 Passenger Operation..........................................................................................................71
3.10.4 Line Capacity......................................................................................................................72
3.10.5 Application System of Working..........................................................................................73
3.10.6 Review Comment...............................................................................................................73
3.11 Environmental and Social Impact Study....................................................................................73
3.11.1 General Introduction.........................................................................................................73
3.11.2 Concerning Issues..............................................................................................................74
3.12 Quantity and Cost Estimates......................................................................................................75
3.12.1 Cost Estimates....................................................................................................................75
4. KEY ISSUES FOR DESIGN.....................................................................................................................79
4.1 Railway Alignment.....................................................................................................................79
4.2 Mobilization of Engineering Survey Team for various Activities................................................79
4.3 Mobilization of Geotechnical Investigation Team......................................................................80
4.4 Environmental Issues.................................................................................................................80
4.5 Social Issues including Land Acquisition.....................................................................................80
5. CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................................81
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Salient Features and Description of the Project.........................................................2
Table 2 Comparison Results for Design Criteria of Railway..................................................6
Table 3 Earthwork of Banking Cross Section.........................................................................7
Table 4 Earthwork of Cutting Cross Section...........................................................................8
Table 5 Type of Retaining Wall..............................................................................................9
Table 6 Application in Banking Area......................................................................................9
Table 7 Application in Cutting Area.......................................................................................9
Table 8 F/S Route Comparison (1).......................................................................................11
Table 9 F/S Route Comparison (2)........................................................................................12
Table 10 Composition of Trackbed.......................................................................................12
Table 11 Horizontal Alignment Status..................................................................................14
Table 12 Vertical Alignment Status......................................................................................15
Table 13 Comparison F/S Alignment....................................................................................16
Table 14 Salient Features of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and Buffer Zone....................17
Table 15 Bardibas Station Section (106km000~118km000(L=12km000))..........................23
Table 16 Sta.118km000~197km000(L=79km000)...............................................................23
Table 17 Sta.197km000~243km000(L=46km000)...............................................................25
Table 18 Comparison of Alignment......................................................................................26
Table 19 Major Design Criteria.............................................................................................27
Table 20 Standard Type of Superstructure............................................................................28
Table 21 Statement of Road Under Bridge...........................................................................29
Table 22 Statement of Minor Bridge.....................................................................................30
Table 23 Statement of Major Bridge.....................................................................................30
Table 24 Application of Structure.........................................................................................31
Table 25 Application of Substructure...................................................................................32
Table 26 Application of Foundation.....................................................................................32
Table 27 Statement of Major Bridge (on the F/S Report).....................................................33
Table 28 Statement of Minor Bridge (On the F/S Report)....................................................34
Table 29 Statement of Road Under Bridges (RUB's) (On the F/S Report)..........................37
Table 30 HFL at crossings of Bardibas-Inaruwa Alignment................................................42
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV iv
Table 31 Items and Purpose of Geological and Geotechnical Investigation.........................47

Table 32 Station Plan status of F/S Report............................................................................50
Table 33 Track layout Plan at Intermediate Station..............................................................54
Table 34 Review of Track gauge..........................................................................................55
Table 35 Review of Ballast...................................................................................................56
Table 36 Review of Rail........................................................................................................56
Table 37 Review of Sleeper..................................................................................................56
Table 38 Review of Fastening...............................................................................................57
Table 39 Long Welded Rail..................................................................................................57
Table 40 Review of Turn Out................................................................................................58
Table 41 Yards Where Additional Facilities.........................................................................69
Table 42 Speed of Passenger & Freight................................................................................69
Table 43 Train Composition- Freight....................................................................................70
Table 44 Type and Capacity of Coaches...............................................................................71
Table 45 Transit Time of Passenger Trains...........................................................................71
Table 46 Tentative Cost Estimate as per F/S........................................................................78
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV v
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Railway Route Map for Section-4..........................................................................10

Figure 2 F/S Recommended & Alternative Alignment Route..............................................11
Figure 3 Location of Project..................................................................................................13
Figure 4 Alignment Overview...............................................................................................14
Figure 5 Installation Rate by Curve......................................................................................14
Figure 6 Horizontal Alignment Composition Rate.............................................................14
Figure 7 Gradient Installation Rate.......................................................................................15
Figure 8 Vertical Alignment Composition Rate.....................................................................15
Figure 9 Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve................................................................................17
Figure 10 Wild water buffalo and Birds................................................................................18
Figure 11 Review on Alternative Alignments Outline..........................................................19
Figure 12 Review on Alternative Alignments Sector A........................................................19
Figure 13 Review Alternative Alignment Section B.............................................................20
Figure 14 Review Alternative Alignment Section C.............................................................21
Figure 15 Bardibas Station Section.......................................................................................22
Figure 16 Sta.118km000~197km000(L=79km000)..............................................................23
Figure 17 Sta197km000~243km000(L=46km000)...............................................................25
Figure 18 Relation between catchment area and 100 years flood of Nepalese rivers...........40
Figure 19 Status of Kamala River.........................................................................................41
Figure 20 Status of Sapta Koshi river...................................................................................41
Figure 21 Station Plan Status of Review Alignment.............................................................51
Figure 22 Status of Typical Curved Station..........................................................................52
Figure 23 Track layout at Bardibas and Lahan Station (F/S Report)....................................53
Figure 24 Review Result of Bardibas and Lahan Station.....................................................54
Figure 25 Review Results of Track layout Intermediate Station..........................................55
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV vi
1. INTRODUCTION
This Review Report has been prepared as per the agreement signed between Government of
Nepal (GoN), Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport, Department of Railways,
Railway and Monorail Development Project and Yooshin Engineering Corporation
(YOOSHIN), Korea in JV with Korea Rail Network Authority (KRNA), Balaji Railway
System Limited (BARSYL) India, Korea Railroad Technical Corporation (KRTC), Korea,
Full Bright Consultancy (Pvt. Ltd) (FBC), Nepal in association with Birat Infrastructure
Development (P) Ltd. (BID), Nepal on July 6, 2016 in accordance with the Terms of
Reference (ToR) provided to the Consultant for carrying out Detailed Survey and Design of
Electrified Railway Line (HSR) of Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector of Mechi-Mahakali
Railway(Package-1).
The Consultant has reviewed the findings and recommendations made in the Feasibility
Study Report (F/S Report) prepared by RITES Ltd. in association with SILT Consultants
for Feasibility Study of Mechi - Mahakali and Pokhara – Kathmandu Electrified Railway.
The final Feasibility Study Report was submitted in August 2010 to the Railway
Construction Project under MoPIT of the Government of Nepal. This report has further
recommended revision/update on some findings and recommendations made in the
Feasibility Report considering both suitability and latest technology available in the railway
sector.
2. COMPOSITION AND CONTENTS OF F/S REPORT
2.1 COMPOSITION OF F/S

The Feasibility Study’s Consultant had prepared and submitted the following Reports:
2.1.1 Volume 1A
Volume 1A contains Executive Summary and a part of the main report, which includes
general description, objectives of study, scope of works along with technical component like
traffic and demand forecast, selection of alignment, general design specifications and
preliminary design specifications for civil structures and signaling and telecommunications.
2.1.2 Volume 1B
Volume 1B contains a part of the main Report and deals with preliminary design
specifications of overhead electrical equipment, power supply and selection of electric
locomotives, selection of wagons, coaches and shunting engines, train operation and
maintenance organisation and maintenance methodology, abstract cost estimates,
construction schedule and institutional framework for construction, financial and economic
appraisal.
YOOSHIN-KRNA-BARSYSL-KRTC-FBC-BID JV 1
2.1.3 Volume 2
Volume 2 of the Report describes geological studies and construction material investigation,
hydrological studies, environmental and social impact study.
2.1.4 Volume 3
Volume 3 of the Report depicts the main features of the project giving summary of salient
features of Nepal Railway Project. It has included the salient features of the following eight
sections of the project, together with four connections as given in Table 1
Table 1 Salient Features and Description of the Project

SN Section/ Connection Section Description
1 Section-1 Mahendranagar-Attariya-Kohalpur-Mahadevpur
2 Section-2 Mahadevpuri-Bhalubang-Mahuwa
3 Section-3 Mahuwa-Butwal-Tamsariya
4 Section-4 Tamsariya-Simara-Chandranigahpur
5 Section-5 Chandranigahpur-Lahan
6 Section-6 Lahan-Mechi
7 Section-7 Tamsariya - Bharatpur - Abukhairini
8 Section-8 Kathmandu - Pokhara
9 Connection-1 Kohalpur – Nepalgunj link
10 Connection-2A , 2B Butwal-Bhairahawa and Bhairahawa- Lumbini links
11 Connection-3 Simara – Birgunj links
12 Connection-5 Itahari - Biratnagar
2.1.5 Volume 4
Volume 4 of Report contains the cost estimate of the Project, which includes the cost of total
Project along with separate cost estimate for each section. Further, it also contains the unit
rate analysis of various items of works as required to come up with the Project.
2.1.6 Drawings
A compilation of drawing were submitted covering all aspects of the Project as required for
the feasibility study.
2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE F/S STUDY

The objective of the assignment was to prepare a Feasibility Study Report for the
construction of above mentioned new Electrified Railway Lines for assisting Government of
Nepal for construction of railway line in cost effective, efficient and sustainable manner.
The services to provide include:
 Selection of alignment and preliminary engineering designs for railway system
 Traffic survey and determining the existing and future transportation demand
 Preliminary cost estimates for track, bridges and other structures, power supply
arrangement, overhead electrical lines, rolling stock, signaling and
telecommunication, stations etc.
 Assessment of technical and economic feasibility
 Assessment of environment and socio-economic impacts

 Project implementation and operation modalities
2.3 SCOPE OF WORK

The Feasibility Study Report is comprehensive in dealing with all aspects of planning,
development and construction of a new Railway Line, a technology for railways is
practically nonexistent in Nepal. The study has dealt with all areas of railway technology
like as rolling stock, specifications of materials and systems, institutional arrangements for
construction, maintenance, and operation. The principal services provided by the feasibility
study Consultants to fulfill the objective of the consultancy services are given below.
2.3.1 Traffic Survey and Demand Forecast

The task included investigation and data collection of:
 Current spatial development along the proposed rail corridor
 Economic conditions population size and destiny, employment etc. along the
proposed corridor
 Necessary traffic count surveys
 Traffic share of different modes of transport and travel demand survey
 Traffic type and volume studies for forecast of future traffic growth for freight
 Considering requirement of open top cars, covered wagons, containers &
general purpose flat wagons, hopper wagons and oil tanker cars/ wagons etc.
and passenger reflecting the likely changes in socio-economic factors
 Public transport information such as fare, route, and transport mode preference
surveys etc.
 Bus occupancy surveys
 Journey time surveys along the corridor
 Probable fare structure and comparison with other mode of transport
2.3.2 Selection of Alignment and Preliminary Designs

The tasks included:
 Identify alternative alignments for:
- Mechi - Mahakali and Kathmandu – Pokhara Railways lines passing
through different control points;
- Network linkages to India at Jogbani, Raxaul, Sunauli, and Rupendehi from
the proposed Mechi – Mahakali Railway
- Connection of proposed Mechi – Mahakali and Kathmandu – Pokhara
Railway Lines.
 Utilize knowledge and experience of local people to understand social and
environmental constraints in the selected alternatives
 Select most feasible, economic and environmentally suitable alignments
 Prepare technical drawings of horizontal and vertical alignments

 Identify locations of stations, depots, workshops for the railway system with
view to maximize developments as transport interchanges and also potential
commercial developments including provision of any facilities for future
extension for the system for network extension within the country or network
linkage with neighboring countries
 Proposed track-bed and track structure
 Study of viability of construction material and possible quarry sites
 Prepare Project implementation plan.
2.3.3 Rolling Stock and System Studies

The feasibility study Consultants have recommended choice of equipment and system based
on the selected alignment, situations, and depots based on:
 Appropriate and economic rolling stock;
 Train operation and necessary number of trains;
 Power supply requirement, power supply system, feeding method, substation
details, structure of OHE, power collection details, supply and catenary details,
power supply for signaling and other system etc;
 Signal and Telecommunications system (signaling system, train radio system,
fixed line telephone, operation control system); and
 Station operation equipments etc.
2.3.4 Specification for the Project

The feasibility study Consultants have specified the standard/specification details for
following basic standard adopted for the study as:
 Maximum moving dimension and speed, axle load;
 Traction system;
 Geometric standards for curve, radius, gradient etc;
 Track structure;
 Bridges and other structure;
 Electric facilities including OHE; and signaling and radio communication
system etc.
2.3.5 Preliminary Cost Estimate

Preliminary cost estimates includes:
 Preconstruction costs
 Land acquisition costs
 Removal and relocation of services
 Relocation of household/business resettlement, cost of environmental impact

mitigation measures, protection of heritage etc.
 All civil engineering works
 Rolling stock and coach
 Electrical and mechanical system costs
 Operation, management and administration costs
 Detail design costs, construction supervision costs and maintenance costs.
2.3.6 Environmental and Social studies

The Report includes:
 Information regarding temporary and permanent damage by the proposed
project to the environment e.g. forests, wildlife reserves areas of known
archeological values and other potential environment risks
 Socio-economic profile and socio-economic impact assessment of people
likely to be effected by the Project and an appropriate environmental
management and monitoring plan; and
 Cost of major environmental impact mitigation, minimization measures.
2.3.7 Financial and Economic Studies

The Feasibility Study’s Consultants has conducted studies to provide estimates of both
economic and financial analysis to cover the following:
 Summary of investment costs(construction, rolling stock, power supply,
catenaries, signaling, telecommunications, centralized traffic control center,
station and depot equipment)
 Summary of operating costs
 Estimates the economic benefits of the Project, considering scenarios with and
without the Project, stage wise construction approach and estimates the
economic rate of return based on evaluation of cost and benefits
 Financial analysis of the project
 Sensitivity analysis of the project.
2.3.8 Institutional Capacity Studies

The feasibility study Consultants have conducted studies to assess the present institutional
capacity of MoPIT and recommended the institutional set up required for implementation of
the project and operation and maintenance of the railways after completion.
3. DETAILED REVIEW RESULTS OF F/S
3.1 RAILWAY ALIGNMENT
3.1.1 Review Results of Design Criteria

The design criteria proposed in F/S Report has been reviewed and compared with TOR of
Detail Survey and Design of Electrified Railway Line (HSR) for Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector of
Mechi-Mahakali Railway (Package-1). The Consultants has proposed design criteria which
needs to be discussed and finalized so that there is consistency and quality in the design
outputs. The review and comparison of design criteria is given as follows:
Table 2 Comparison Results for Design Criteria of Railway

Application in Detail Design
SN F/S Report (Group “A”) (TOR of Detail Survey and Design of Electrified
Railway Line (HSR) for Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector of
Mechi-Mahakali Railway (Package-1))
Gauge  1,676mm(Broad Gauge)  1,435mm (Standard Gauge)
Max  Max Speed : 100km/hr  Passenger ; 250km/hr

Design Speed  Operation Speed: 90km/hr  Freight : 120km/hr
 Maximum cant : 140mm  Maximum cant : 160mm
Cant  Cant deficiency : 75mm  Cant deficiency : 80mm
 Cant excess : 75mm  Cant excess : 110mm
Min.  R=3,100m (V=250km/hr)
 R=640m (V=100km/hr)
Curve radius  R≥11.8V2/(Cmax+Cdmax)
 Apply when the tilt's difference is
 Apply when the tilt's difference is
0.1% or more
Vertical 0.4% or more
 Min. vertical curve radius
Curve  Min. vertical curve radius,
R=0.35V2=22,000m(250km/hr)
R=2,500m
(If unavoidable, Rv=0.25V2)
 Generally: 1/150
 Main Line : 12.5/1,000(1/80)
Track (Exceptionally up to 1/80 )
 Exceptional case : 25/1,000(1/40)
Inclination  Station: 1/1200(if unavoidable,
 Station : 2/1,000(1/500)
1/260)
Track
 5.3m  4.3m
Spacing
Formation
 6.85m  8.0m(4.0m(Left) + 4.0m(Right))
Width
Rail  Main line : UIC 60  Main line : UIC 60
 Earthwork and bridge
 Earthwork and bridge
-Ballasted track
Trackbed -Ballasted track
 Tunnel
 Tunnel not applicable for this section
-Unballasted track(Rheda-2000)
*Design Criteria related matters can be changed based on ground conditions.
3.1.2 Review Result of Trackbed

1. Earthwork
a) Banking Section
Table 3 Earthwork of Banking Cross Section

Classification Standard Cross Section (Banking/Embankment)
Feasibility
Study
 Trackbed width : 6.85m  Banking slope inclination 1 : 2.0

 Install 1.5m of berm every 6 6m  Berm side ditch inclination 3%
Detail Design
Review
Height Slope
 Roadbed Width : min. more than
8.0m H<3.0m 1:1.8
 Install 1.5m of berm every 6.0m 3.0m≤H<9.0m 1:1.8
 Berm side ditch inclination 5% 9.0m≤H<15.0m 1:2.0
 Banking slope inclination
H≥10.0m 1:2.3
 Feasibility report has applied, banking trackbed width as 6.85m.
 Trackbed width will have the width for at least securing safe train
operation, maintenance and stabilizing the ballast.
 So, the trackbed width will be at least 8.0 m or wider.
 The slope inclination will be uniformly set as 1:2, which will be compensation
for land and earthwork quantity etc.
Review  The final inclination will be determined
Opinion based on the reviewed option,
considering the form and strength of
the banked area's supporting
foundation.
 Considering the poor ground condition,
risk of erosion by torrential rain, ballast
settlement and train operation safety,
the reinforced trackbed is to be installed.
b) Cutting Section
Table 4 Earthwork of Cutting Cross Section

Classification Standard Cross Section (Cutting)
Feasibility
Study
 Trackbed width: 6.25m  Slope inclination1 : 1.0

 Install 1.5m of berm every 6m  Berm side with inclination 3%
Detail Design
Review
Height Slope
 Roadbed width : min. more than
8.0m Sand 1:1.5 & over
 Install 1.5m of berm every 5.0m Weathered rock 1:1.2 & over
 Berm side ditch inclination 5% Soft rock 1:0.7
 Slope inclination
Hard rock 1:0.5
 Feasibility study has applied, cutting trackbed width as 6.25m. Cutting
trackbed width will considered to be at least 8.0m.
 The cutting slope inclination is uniformly set as 1:1, which will be
Review economically unfeasible.
Opinion  Therefore, the final inclination will be determined based on the form and
strength of the soil/rock layer and interpretations of the stability of the
slope.
 If necessary, slope stability analysis will be performed.
2. Retaining Wall
Retaining wall should be of proper design, height and width and form to prevent water
infiltration on existing roads, or to decrease banking and excavation volume. Retaining wall
shape should be as shown below. Height is typical in railway retaining wall. But, if
construction materials (ex. Concrete, Steel bar) will allow the resistance of strength,
maximum application height should be changed as high as possible
Buttress type retaining wall will be avoided as much as possible due to difficulty in
construction as well as expensive.
Table 5 Type of Retaining Wall
Classification Gravity Type Reverse T Type Buttress Type
Height Less than 3.0m 3.0~7.0m 7.0~14.0m
ⅰ) Application Plan
Table 6 Application in Banking Area

Classification Railway Banking
Type Gravity Type Reverse T Type
Cross
Section
Height Less than 3.0m 3.0~7.0m
Table 7 Application in Cutting Area

Classification Railway Cutting
Gravity Type
Type Reverse T Type
Plain Concrete Stone Wall
Cross
Section
Height 1.0~3.0m 1.0~3.0m 3.0~7.0m
3.1.3 Railway Route Status

The proposed design project envisages construction of the 137km railway between Bardibas
(which is in Section 5 as per F/S Report) and Inaruwa (which is in Section 6 as per F/S
Report). The stated railway lines are part of the Mechi-Mahakali line which is the major line
that connects the eastern and the western Nepal territory in the Terai plains.
In Section 5, the initial F/S Report, comparative studies have been made between two
alternatives – the line running parallel to the East-West Highway (EWH) and the other one
passing through Janakpur; and the F/S Report has recommended the line running parallel to
the EWH.
In Section 6, the initial Feasibility Study Report (F/S Report), comparative studies have been
made between two alternatives – the line parallel to Koshi barrage at about 500m upstream
and the other one bypassing Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve from northern side and the F/S
Report has recommended the line parallel to Koshi Barrage.
The F/S Report has evaluated that the alternative with the border-city crossing line would
have advantages of generating earnings and expanding services. Therefore, the F/S Report
recommended the railway route the line running parallel to the East-West Highway (EWH)
and crossing upstream of Koshi Barrage.
The railway route map is shown below:
Figure 1 Railway Route Map for Section-4
3.1.4 F/S Route Status Comparison

To select the optimum route axis for the project section, the Consultant reviewed and
compared the route recommended by F/S and the proposed route, in terms of economic
efficiency, train operation and environmental aspect.
1) Recommended Route
This route, crossing upstream of Koshi Barrage, is the shortest distance. The length of the
line is about 11km717 shorter than the other alternative by passing Koshi Tappu Wildlife
Reserve from Northern side which is favorable in terms of construction cost and travel time
reduction. However, as it passes through upstream of Koshi Barrage, the social aspect and
the environmental aspect must be taken into consideration.
Figure 2 F/S Recommended and Alternative Alignment Route
1) Alternative Route
The route departing from Bardibas Station, passing through Lahan and Phattepur along the
EWH by passing Koshi Barrage and Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, connects to Itahari. This
option has a social benefit as it minimizes interaction with the Koshi Barrage, and the
Mohanpur~Phattepur~Itahari section can be used to connect northern part and Dharan areas
which will serve the residents of those areas.
The drawback is that the line is elongated by 11km717 compared to the other option,
entailing system construction cost increase and as there is restriction on operation speed due
to topographic conditions, this option is deemed competitively inferior.
3.1.5 F/S Route Comparison (Recommended Route vs. Alternative Route)

1) Line Standard and Length
Table 8 F/S Route Comparison (1)

F/S Alternative
F/S Recommended Route
Route
Classification Bardibas~Lah Lahan~Mohanp Mohanpur~Itah Mohanpur~Itah
an ur ari ari
(Section 5) (Section 6) (Section 6) (Section 6)
Max. Speed 160km/hr 160km/hr 160km/hr 80km/hr
Min. Curve Radius 2,000m 2,000m 1,500m 350m
2) Line Length and Structure Status
Table 9 F/S Route Comparison (2)

Classificatio F/S Alternative
F/S Recommended Route
n Route
Bardibas~Lah Lahan~Mohanp Mohanpur~Itaha
Mohanpur~Itahari
Section an ur ri
(Section 6)
(Section 5) (Section 6) (Section 6)
Line Length 66km130 24km000 72km000 83km717
63km257(95.7
Earthwork 22km817(95.1%) 69km792(96.9%) 81km308(97.1%)
%)
Bridge 2km873(4.3%) 1km183(4.9%) 2km208(3.1%) 2km409(2.9%)
Tunnel - - -
3.1.6 Review Result (F/S Recommended Route vs. F/S Alternate Route)
F/S recommended route is deemed more plausible than the option route in every respect.
The review shows that F/S recommended route for the Bardibas~Mohanpur~Inaruwa section
is more beneficial than the F/S Alternate route (Bardibas-Mohanpur-Chatara-Ithari) in terms
of economic efficiency, and operability.
In the F/S Alternate case,
 Extension (about 11km717) of alignment length.
 Low operating speed and delayed operation time due to the unfavorable alignment
condition as follows
- Increase in running time of the train because of number of curves with the
minimum curve radius (R=350m) and extended long alignment length.
- Increase in total construction cost and future operation and maintenance cost
A review of the routes shows that F/S's recommended route is more feasible than the
alternative route. Therefore, the recommended route is chosen, but the Consultant plans to
analyze the alignment of this option, deduce improvement measures in terms of economic
efficiency and operability and reflect the result in the detail design.
Table 10 Composition of Trackbed

Trackbed Structure
Line Length
Earthwork Bridge Tunnel
3.1.7 F/S Alignment Evaluation

The horizontal alignment is a key factor that determines the train's train interval headway
and scheduled speed along with the vertical alignment, and strongly influences the
construction cost, operation & maintenance cost and facility repair cost. Therefore, the
alignment plan must be drafted with caution.
The alignment must be designed to reinforce transport capacity, shorten headway, and
increase scheduled speed. Also, modifying the Trackbed to increase speed entails a large
cost, and it will be unrealistic to modify the Trackbed mid-operation as it obstructs regular
services. Therefore, the minimum curve radius must be expanded to the utmost extent in
preparation for future train operation speed increases.
1) F/S Alignment Overview
 Section 5: Bardibas~Lahan
- Line Length : 66km130 (53km000~119km130)
- Line Length of TOR : 63km130(56km000~119km130)
 Section 6: Lahan~Inaruwa
- Line Length : 73km870 (0km000~73km870)
 Bardibas~Inaruwa
- Total Line Length : 140km000 (53km000~193km000)
- Total Line Length of TOR : 137km000(56km000~193km000)
Note: The starting point of Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector in the TOR and the end point of Detail Survey
and Design of Electrified Railway Line of Simara-Bardibas are different.
Figure 3 Location of Project
 Number of station is 14
This review Report was based on the endpoint (Sta.106km000) of Project section (Simara ~
Bardibas) of which Detail Survey and Design was carried out in 2012-13.
Figure 4 Alignment Overview
2) Horizontal Alignment Status
Table 11 Horizontal Alignment Status

Number of
Curve Status Length Ratio Remarks
Curves
1,500m 5 8km238.820 5.9%
2,000m 17 24km678.788 17.6%
2,500m 10 11km825.310 8.4%
3,500m 12 12km308.410 8.8%
Straight Line 46 82km948.672 59.3%
Total 90 140km000.000 100.0%
Figure 5 Installation Rate by Curve Figure 6 Horizontal Alignment

Composition Rate
The horizontal alignment shows that there are a total of 44 curves, and the min. curve radius
is 1,500m. In the overall line, the linear length is 57km051.3, and the ratio of straight lines is
59.3%.
3) Vertical Alignment Status.
Table 12 Vertical Alignment Status

Gradient Number Length Ratio Remarks
Level 4 10km250.0 7.3%
G≤5‰ 56 119km500.0 85.4%
5‰<G≤10‰ 5 10km250.0 7.3%
G>10 - - -
Figure 7 Gradient Installation Rate Figure 8 Vertical Alignment Composition

Rate
A review of the vertical alignment shows that the max. Gradient is 8.7% (1/115), and
gradients of Level~10‰ rates up to a total of 100%, showing that the overall vertical
alignment has a gentle sloping. The gradient of stations is 0.83% (1/1,200) or less, which
satisfies the standards for station sites.
3.1.8 F/S Alignment Review and Improvement Measures

1. Outline of Alignments
Two alignments were reviewed on feasibility study report for the sector from Bardibas to
Inaruwa
One F/S recommended alignment, passes through or upstream of the Koshi Barrage and
Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve Buffer zone, whereas another one F/S alternative alignment,
the bypasses Koshi Barrage and Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, starting from Bardibas
Station, passing through Lahan and departing from Mohanpur through Phattepur along the
EWH to Chatara, and connects to Itahari. Every alignment has pros and cons, so after
review, the Consultant that performed Feasibility Study concluded that F/S recommended
alignment has advantages than alternative one in terms of total length, economic, efficiency
and train operation etc.
The Consultant has also reviewed the F/S alternative route, and comparison of F/S
recommended and alternative alignment are shown below:
Table 13 Comparison F/S Alignment

Composition of Alignment
Classification F/S Remarks
F/S Alternative
Recommended
Alignment Length 162km130 173km847 less by 11km717
Earth increase by
155km325 167km302
work(length) 11km977
Trackbed Bridge 6km625 6km465 less by 160m
structure
Tunnel - -
Audit Tunnel - -
Total Stations 15(14) nos. 17(16) nos.
Min Curve Radius 1,500m 350m
Track Slope 1/10,000~1/115 1/1,200~1/85
Operation Max 160km/h 100/80km/h
Speed Average 100~120km/h 60~80km/h
i) Analysis Result for F/S Alignment

 Difficulties in construction because the bridge is located just upstream of Koshi
Barrage
- Need the special construction method for long pier and high elevation of
bridge.
- Difficulties in access of special construction equipment to the Barrage area
- Increase in bridge construction cost and period
 Increase of total construction cost & maintenance cost
 Most of the north residents of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and Dharan area
cannot be avail the railway facility because it does not pass through their
village/city.
Therefore, detail design will be conducted based on F/S recommended alignment through
consultations, meetings and presentations to the Client and other concerned stakeholders.
2. Factors to be considered as selecting alignment:
i) Factors to be considered
There are many factors for choosing optimal alignments like economic feasibility,
constructability, train operation, passenger’s convenience including minimal effect to
environment and wildlife.
ii) Status on wildlife in Koshi Tappu area
According to the meeting with warden office officials in Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve,
there are many precious plants and animals including wild buffalo and elephant, gharial
crocodile, dolphin, etc. The background and status of major flora and fauna in Koshi Tappu
is shown below:
Table 14 Salient Features of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and Buffer Zone
Wildlife Reserve Gazetted 86°55’15” - 87°05’02” E
1976 AD Location
year 26°33’57” - 26°43’40” N
Reserve Area 175㎢ Climate Tropical monsoon climate
Buffer Zone Area 173㎢ Districts Sunsari, Saptari and Udayapur
Buffer Zone declared year 2004 AD VDCs 16
IUCN Category Ⅳ Physiographic region Terai
Ramsar Site declared year 1978AD Biogeographical region Indo-Malayan
Landscape Large floodplain made by Koshi and Trijuga Rivers
Figure 9 Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve
Major Flora and Fauna

 The existing vegetation consists of diverse physiognomic types such as submerged
and floating aquatic plants, tall reed stands, seasonally flooded grassland/ savannah
and structurally complex forest communities in various conditions of spatial
arrangements.
 Among 514 species of plants, Dalbergiasissoo, Bombaxceiba, Saccharum app,
Phragmitesspp, Typhaspp, Imperataspp, Valisneriaspp, Eichorniaspp, Hydrillaspp,
Azollaspp, Nelumbospp.are common species found in the wetlands.
 Six species of plants found in this area, Rauwolfia serpentine, Alstoniascholoris,
Oroxylumindicum, Acacia catechu, Butea monosperma and Dalbergialatifolia, are
listed in the different threat categories and appendices of IUCN and CITES
respectively.
 Wild buffalo (Bubalusarnee), Elephant (Elephus maximus), Gharial crocodile
(Gavialisgangeticus) and Dolphin (Platanistagangetica) are the main protected
animals of this reserve.
 The wild buffalo, prominent species of the reserve, has increased from 63 in 1976 to
432 in 2016. Among other mammals, the wild boar (Susscrofa) and hog deer (Axis
porcinus), spotted deer (Axis axis), smooth coated otter (Lutrogaleperspicillata),
fishing cat (Fails viverrina), jungle cat (F.chaus), indian fox (Vulpesbengalensis) and
the jackal (Canis aureus) are common.
 Among 502 species of birds, notable birds recorded in the site include
Gallicrexcinerea, Caprimulgusasiaticus, Budocoromandus, Coracinamelanoptera,
Saxicolaleucura and Megaluruspalustris.
 It is the only area in Nepal where water cock (Gallicrexcinerea) and Abbott's babbler
are found. Out of these 502 species of birds, 12 species are globally threatened and
101 species are nationally threatened.
Figure 10 Wild water buffalo and Birds
3. Review on alternative alignments

 The Consultant has reviewed alternative alignments in comparison with F/S
recommended alignment for passing the Koshi Barrage
 The alternative alignments were selected through meetings and presentations
with the Client and concerned stakeholders.
 Main sections reviewed are as below:
- Section A :Bardibas Station Area (Connecting Line of Jaynagar-Janakpur-
Bardibas Railway line)
- Section B :Along the East-West Highway (cities, rivers)
- Section C :Koshi Tappu Area (Wildlife Reserve Area, Buffer zone, Koshi
Barrage)
Figure 11 Review on Alternative Alignments Outline
a) Section A: Bardibas station Area (Connecting Line of Jaynagar-Janakpur-

Bardibas Railway line)
Figure 12 Review on Alternative Alignments Sector A
 A narrow gauge line was running by the Government of Nepal (GoN) from Jaynagar
Station (India) and Janakpur (Nepal). The GoN desires to expand the gauge and is
planning to construct a new railway line in the same section under the financial
assistance of its Indian counterpart.
- Jayanagar - Janakpur Section: Gauge expansion (narrow → broad gauge)
- Janakpur – Bardibas Section: New railway (broad gauge) construction
 According to the FS, the Jayanagar-Janakpur-Bardibas Railway Line is planned to be
connected to the Bardibas Station. In the detailed design stage, the Consultant will
extensively sought out feasible means to reduce the bridge construction cost or even
alternative routes in case the curve radius increases (1,000m→3,100m). The
Bardibas Station will be reviewed from the perspective of accessibility with from
adjacent cities (See above Figure).
 The Jayanagar (India)-Janakpur-Bardibas Railway Line will be modified following
potential changes in the starting point and/or the Bardibas Station.
 The Consultant deems it necessary to consider changes regarding the aforementioned
criteria with applicable agencies and stakeholders
 The alternative alignment sectors during the presentation discussed were Alternative
Alignment A1 and A2
b) Section B: Along the East-West Highway (cities, rivers)
Figure 13 Review Alternative Alignment Section B
 The main section will be designed in accordance to the high speed railway operation
standards and guidelines described in the TOR. For a design speed of 250Km/hr, the
minimum curvature radius will be 3,100m or greater.
 The operational speed can only be determined based on the minimum curvature
radius. If the minimum radius of curvature becomes larger, the operational speed
can also increase. In such the scenario, the construction cost is likely to increase as
well. On the other hand, if the minimum radius of curvature becomes smaller, the
construction cost might decrease but operational speed will suffer.
 The new railway will be constructed in the project section where the land is mostly
leveled and flat. This implies that the difference in the construction cost will be
minimal regardless of designing the track with a minimum radius of curvature
R=3,100m for a design speed of 250km/hr. Especially, since the roadbed structure is
almost permanent once it has been constructed, Accordingly, the Consultant will
consider any future speed increase at sections with curve radius of 3,100m or larger.
 The FS alignment will be modified to minimize any geographical overlap with
existing obstacles while meeting high-speed railway operational conditions (i.e.,
minimum radius of curvature). (See the table in above figure)
c) Section C: Koshi Tappu Area (Wildlife Reserve Area, Buffer zone, Koshi
Barrage)
Figure 14 Review Alternative Alignment Section C
 The Consultant will work out a better solutions for crossing the Sapta Koshi River.
According to the F/S, alternative alignments are designed with a bridge over the
Koshi River by detouring the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve Area; or the railway line
will be linked to the Inaruwa Station in the shortest distance by partially overlapping
the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve Protected Area with a bridge upstream of the
Koshi Barrage (about 500m).
 The Consultant suggests that the alignment of the F/S alternative routes be modified
to meet HSR operational conditions (V=250km/hr) as per the provisions in the TOR.
 Alignment No. 1: As a detour route avoiding passing through the Koshi Tappu
Wildlife Reserve area, the route crosses the Koshi Barrage upstream (about
3.4~6.4km) with the Sapta Koshi River. However, this alignment will increase the
minimum required bridge length. In addition, this alternative is highly likely to affect
the residential and commercial areas in Bhantabari, adjacent to the national border
with India
 Alignment No. 2: As a northern detour of the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve
Protected Area, the route crosses the Sapta Koshi River (about 28 km) from the
Koshi Barrage area. Compared to Alignment No. 1, this alternative is clearly
preferable in terms of alignment conditions, total distance, and operation. However,
this alternative will increase the length of the bridge leading to increase in
construction costs. Accessibility for the residents of Bhardaha, Bhantabari, Haripur
Chowk, Laukahi, and Inaruwa will be worse affected than the above alternative.
 Alignment No. 3: As a complementary alignment for the problem of track
improvement for the operation of high speed railway and review of alignment No.1,
it is necessary to consult with related government agency due to conflict with Koshi
Tappu Wildlife Reserve protected area.
4. Review Station Plan

a) Bardibas Station Section (106km000~118km000(L=12km000))
This section is planned to be a linear station. Bardibas Station is for passengers and freight,
and serves as a junction station for connecting the line of Jaynagar-Janakpur-Bardibas
Railway line.
For the F/S, the Bardibas station was planned after Rato River and for the DPR (Simara-
Bardibas), the Bardibas station was planned before Rato river. Meanwhile, the Bardibas
station will be constructed near the DPR location.
So, the Consultant will consider the Jaynagar-Janakpur-Bardibas railway line when deciding
the station’s location.
Figure 15 Bardibas Station Section
Table 15 Bardibas Station Section (106km000~118km000(L=12km000))

SN F/S Report Improvement Review Alignment
53km000~63km410(10km41
Line Length 106km000~118km000(12km000)
0)
Number of Stations 1 1
Min. Curve Radius 2,000m 1,500m
Number of Curves 3 2
Curve Length 5km155 5km262
Detail Design Compare to F/S alignment, the improved review alignment is 1 Km 590
Review longer, considering the Bardibas station planning.
d) Sta.118km000~197km000(L=79km000)
Kusumbisauna ~ Mohanpur is paralled with the east-west highway, and generally pass
through the small towns and rivers, mainly in plain area.
The Consultant will modify the F/S route in detail in consideration of obstacles such as
highways, cannels, power transmission lines, towns, factories, etc.
Figure 16 Sta.118km000~197km000(L=79km000)
Table 16 Sta.118km000~197km000(L=79km000)
Line Length 63km410~144km129(80km719) 118km000~197km000(79km000)
 Compared to F/S alignment, there might be cost saving by shortening of
route length (L=1km719). And the efficiency of train operation will be
Detail Design
better through increased radius and straightened alignment.
Review
 Also reasonable size of station will be planned in consideration of traffic
demand and operation pattern.
e) Sta.197km000~243km000(L=46km000)
Mohanpur ~ Itahari section crosses Koshi River detouring Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve
area and the Koshi Barrage.
In the F/S, the alignment was recommended upstream of the Koshi Barrage (500m).
The optimal route will be selected by the comparison of pros and corns of Alt.1, 2 and 3.
Alt. 1, 2 and 3 routes are reviewed for this section.

ALT-1 is about 3.4 ~ 6.4km distance from the Koshi Barrage and shortest route
(L=64km987) (Rajbiraj and Inaruwa station are available)
ALT-2 is the route by which the Udaypur area without passing through the Rajbiraj and
Inaruwa and finally reached to Itahari.
ALT-3 passes Rajbiraj, without passing Inaruwa, via Udaypur area to Ithari (the longest
route)
Accordingly, the Consultant will review considering issues as mentioned below:
 Rajbiraj and Inaruwa station should be consider; if possible.
 Minimal impact on the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve and Koshi Barrage
 Distance of station to station; approx. 10km(by traffic demand and train
operation)
 Planning straight station wherever possible
 Efficiency of train operation etc.
Figure 17 Sta197km000~243km000(L=46km000)
Table 17 Sta.197km000~243km000(L=46km000)

Line Length 144km129~193km129(49km000) 197km000~243km000(46km000)
 Compared to F/S alignment, there might be cost saving by shortening of
route length (L=3km000). And the efficiency of train operation will be
better through increased radius and straightened alignment.
Detail Design  The construction cost will be saved by deleting 10 curves, enlarging min.
Review radius (R=1,500m⇒ R=3,100m), planning straight station.
 Also train operation speed will be increased.
 Also train operation will be more efficient accordingly to the train speed
will be faster.
3.1.9 Comprehensive Review Result

The Consultant reviewed the alternative alignment based on F/S alignment through the
Koshi Barrage and Koshi Tappu wildlife reserve as a condition of receiving the permission
of the relevant authorities.
The Consultant reviewed the alignments and summarized as below.
Table 18 Comparison of Alignment

Classification F/S Alignment Proposed New Alignment
ALT-1 ALT-2 ALT-3
Review Section Section 5 Bardibas~Itahari Bardibas~Itahari Bardibas~Itahari
(66km129) ~ (106km000 ~ (106km000 ~ (106km000 ~
Section 6 261km980) 265km280) 270km840)
(70km871)
Min Curve Radius 1,500m 1,500m 1,500m 1,500m
Track Inclination 1/115 max 1/100 max 1/100 max 1/100 max
Line Length(km) 162km130 155km980 159km280 164km840
Trackbed Earth work 155km325 142km415 145km015 150km575
Structure
Bridge 6km265 13km565 14km265 14km265
(53 nos) (53 nos) (59 nos) (59 nos)
Tunnel - - - -
Station 14 41 14 14
(S-curve: (Straight Line) (Straight Line) (Straight Line)
5nos.)
Review Result 1) This review Report was based on the start point(Sta. 106km 000)
of the project section (Simara ~ Bardibas)
2) New Alignment(ALT.1) has the following advantages:
 Alignment improvement through reduction of curves
 Shorten 6.15km in length
 Minimal environmental damage
 Improvement of straight alignment
 Installation of the linear station
 Efficient train operation
 Improvement of workability
3) The Consultant recommends new Alignment (ALT.1) because of
the advantages above.
3.2 BRIDGE
3.2.1 Basic Concept

 Structural analysis and design of railway bridges will be conducted in
sufficient detail to enable preparation of detailed structural drawings,
technical specifications and construction cost estimate.
 In the absence of codes of practice for railway bridges in Nepal, the structural
analysis and design will be performed in accordance with relevant
international best practices(including IRS Bridge Rules and Korea railway
Rules and EURO code, etc.)
 Final bridge design criteria will be prepared which provides a reasonable
design standard by reviewing actual on-site application, propriety in general
and safety of F/S's design standard and used code for the similar project
sections previously done (i.e Simara-Bardibas, Simara-Tamsariya and
Tamsariya-Butwal-Lumbini).
3.2.2 Design Considerations

The principal design considerations for the railway bridges will be as follows:
 Bridge configuration, including number of rail tracks, component widths,
structure expansion, etc.
 Structural design philosophy, including seismic design class
 Nature and magnitude of design loads and additional loads, if any
 Material characteristics
 Design standards and specifications for high speed railway (250km/hr)
3.2.3 Review Results of Major Design Criteria in Railway
Table 19 Major Design Criteria

Application in Detail
No. Criteria F/S Report
Design
Korea Railway Rules:

For concrete structure
-Ultimate Strength
1 Design Method Limit State Design Method (USD)
For steel structure
-Allowable Stress
Method (WSD)
UIC LM 71 Standard
IRS MBG Loading Standards Loading
2 Loading – 1987 (Broad Gauge (Standard Gauge 1,435mm)
1,676mm) → To recommend as the
HSR loading
Maximum Axle 245.2 kN for bridge,
3 250.00 kN
Load 220.6 kN for bed
Korea Railway Rules along
with IRS, IRC, Euro Codes
4 Codes IRS Codes & Manuals
& Manuals
(for some items)
IRS Bridge Rule
* For single track spans: Will be reflect after the
5 Impact Factor 8
CDA=0 .15+ review
(6+L)
Basic Loads Comply with design standards
-Dead Load applied for the DPR
6 -Live Load IRS Bridge Rule (Simara~Tamsariya), DPR
-Braking Load (Simara~Bardibas) and DPR
-Centrifugal Force (Tamsariya-Butwal-Lumbini)
Comply with design standards
applied for the DPR
7 Wind Force IS: 875-1987 (Simara~Tamsariya), DPR
(Simara~Bardibas) and DPR
(Tamsariya-Butwal-Lumbini)
IS: 1893-2002 & IRS code
8 Seismic Force To reflect after the review
(For damping Euro code)
applied for the DPR
9 Derailment Load IRS Bridge Rule (Simara~Tamsariya), DPR
applied for the DPR
10 Material Properties IS code (Simara~Tamsariya), DPR
Permissible Stress
11 -Compressive IRS CBC-1997 Korea Railway Rules
-Tension
3.2.4 F/S Bridge Analysis

1) Superstructure Standard Type
For railway bridge, general type of superstructures used are prestressed concrete T beam and
slab, prestressed concrete rigid frame, prestressed concrete box girder, and for larger spans
steel bridges. Simply supported span are preferred for railway bridges.
After reviewing the F/S Report, it is found that the following types of superstructures are
used for different bridges.
The summary of standard type and spans available are given below.
Table 20 Standard Type of Superstructure
No Type Span Material & Shape
1 PSC Girder 30.5 m Prestressed concrete Box Girder
2 PSC Girder 12.2 m and 18.3 m Prestressed concrete I Girder
3 Plate Girder 12.2m ,18.3m and 24.4m Steel I Girder without Deck Slab
4 Composite Girder 12.2m, 18.3m and 30.5m etc Steel Girder with Deck Slab
3) Substructure (Pier and Abutment)

For bridge, mostly used substructures are wall type, trestle type two or more reinforced
concrete column, and single column type. Out of these, mostly wall type of abutment and
pier substructures are used for highway bridges in Nepal and contractors are also much
familiar in its construction. Requirements of Substructure (Piers & Abutments) the
feasibility study proposes circular type of pier for height up to 20 m, depending on the
hydrological and geotechnical studies for particular bridges.
4) Substructure (Foundation)
The choice of foundation for the bridges depends upon the conditions of soil. Foundations
can be broadly classified as: (i) open foundations (ii) pile foundations (iii) well foundations.
Open foundations are suitable for small bridges and bridges which are sited in a location
where rock or firm founding soil is available at a willow depth and, at the same time, the
scour in the river is not considerable. The next choices, from considerations of economy, are
pile foundations which are again more suitable for being used in cohesive soils and beds
subject to minimum scour. Well foundations are more suitable for larger spans and high
scourable rivers. A recent development is to make use of larger diameter bored piles which
are as good as well foundations and at the same time, are quicker to construct, more
economical and can be taken deeper.
It seems that rivers in project area (Mechi - Mahakali) will be generally having considerable
scour. Therefore open foundations in Mechi - Mahakali have not been considered.
Pile foundations and well foundations are costlier than open foundations. The design
Consultant will be adopting open spread footing type foundation, if the soil strata and
hydrological study permits.
This type of foundation is easier to construct, maintenance is easy and is cheaper than pile or
well foundations.
5) F/S Bridge Status
After reviewing the types of superstructures proposed in the feasibility Report, the proposal
by the design Consultants is shown on the tables below. As per the site condition,
considering the structure on the East-West Highway, and international practice the following
superstructure types are proposed by the design Consultant in the statement of Major
Bridges. However, at present, no suggestion has been made for minor bridges and road
under bridges, they are similar as proposed in the F/S Report.
Detailed status of bridges in F/S Report are shown on Table 21 and Table 22.
The bridges in F/S Report are summarized in table below
ⅰ) Statement of Road Under Bridge
Table 21 Statement of Road Under Bridge

Type of No. of
Classification Size Function
Bridge Units
RCC Box 1×5×5m 39 Pass Regular Vehicles
Unmetalled 1×6.25×5.5
RCC Box 1
Road m
Pass Large Vehicles
2×6.25×5.5
RCC Box 10
m
Total 50
ⅱ) Statement of Minor Bridge
Table 22 Statement of Minor Bridge

Type of No. of
Classification Size Function
Bridge Units
RCC
1×2×2m 6
Box
RCC Kholsi, Canal,
1×3×3m 97
Box Pokhari
Drainage Box
RCC
1×5×4m 1
Box Cross Drain
RCC
2×6×6m 1
Box
RCC Pedestrian and Main
Passage Box 1×3×3m 4
Box trail
Total 109
ⅲ) Statement of Major Bridge
Total 47 bridges, include of 5 important Bridges. All pass over rivers or waterways.
The span length is the distance from the front of the pier to the next pier's front.
Table 23 Statement of Major Bridge
Classification Span Composition (m) Total Length(m) Units

1×12.2 12.2 3
2×12.2 24.4 2
3×12.2 36.6 4
4×12.2 48.8 2
5×12.2 73.2 1
8×12.2 97.6 2
1×18.3 18.3 6
2×18.3 36.6 2
3×18.3 54.9 2
PSC I Girder 4×18.3 73.2 4
5×18.3 91.5 2
6×18.3 109.8 1
7×18.3 128.1 2
9×18.3 164.7 1
10×18.3 183.0 2
11×18.3 201.3 1
64×18.3 1171.2 1
1×18.3+2×12.2 42.7 1
6×18.3+2×12.2 134.2 1
4×30.5 122.0 1
5×30.5 152.5 1
7×30.5 213.5 1
PSC Box Girder
8×30.5 244.0 1
9×30.5 274.5 1
17×30.5 518.5 1
24×30.5 732.0 1
Total 4959.3 47
3.2.5 Review Result of F/S Bridge

1) Application of Superstructure
We considered a simple and light bridge type that can ensure continuity and uniformity.
The selected structure types are economically efficient, workable, easy to maintain, and
aesthetically pleasing.
Table 24 Application of Structure

S
F/S Report Application in Detail Design
N
Use IPC Girder 30m and 35m

1 PSC Box Girder 30.5 m
For easier construction, & reducing the girder height
Use PSC Girders 20 m and 25m
PSC Girders (12.2 m and 18.3
2 For economical design with appropriate girder height &
m)
longer span reducing number of piers.
Steel Plate Girder without Deck Not Recommending (if possible) because of difficulty
3 Slab in construction and maintenance considering the
(12.2m ,18.3m and 24.4m) situation in Nepal
Composite Steel Girder with Not Recommending (if possible) because of difficulty
4 Deck Slab (12.2m, 18.3m and in construction and maintenance considering the
30.5m) situation in Nepal
1) Application of Substructure
We considered optimum pier type by reviewing the superstructure type, spans and of 1 st
stage project
The selected pier type minimizes the impact on water flow in river sections.
Table 25 Application of Substructure
SN F/S Report Application in Detail Design
Pier
Solid circular type Solid circular type
(up to 20m)
Solid circular type (π

Type)
Pier( 20m~40m Hollow circular [Hollow circular type has
) tapered upward problem for tied rebar
analysis & installation in
case of seismic design]
Semi-gravity Type
(Height 3~7m)
Abutment No recommendation
Reverse T Type
(Height 6~20m)
2) Application of Foundation
Table 26 Application of Foundation
SN F/S Report Application in Detail Design
Open foundation are sited in a location where rock or Use open spread foundation
1
firm founding soil is available at a willow depth. available
Pile foundation are suitable to use in cohesive soils Use in situ concrete pile
2
and beds subject to minimum scour foundation
Use in situ concrete pile
Well foundations are more suitable for larger spans
3 foundation
and high scourable rivers.
(Larger diameter bored piles)
3) Summary
After detail survey, geotechnical and hydrological investigation, the location, types of
foundation, substructures, superstructures of the bridges and crossings will be determined
more precisely and accordingly the changes in foundation, substructure, and superstructure
and the their construction materials will be made to achieve economy and safety of the
structures during design.
Table 27 Statement of Major Bridge (On the F/S Report)
Name of
Classificatio Chainage
Road/River/Khol Type of Bridge Span(m) Remarks
n (km) a
1 54.380 Ratu Nadi PSC Box Girder 8×30.5
2 59.472 Badahari Khola PSC Box Girder 5×30.5
SE 3 61.389 Sukhajor Khola PSC Girder 4×18.3

C.
5 4 63.636 Basai Khola PSC Girder 6×18.3
5 65.684 Aurahi Khola PSC Box Girder 7×30.5
6 67.371 Jaladh Khola PSC Box Girder 9×30.5
7 68.153 Basani Khola PSC Girder 1×18.3
8 68.880 Jagdar Khola PSC Girder 6×18.3+2×12.2
9 70.996 Jhij Khola PSC Girder 1×18.3+2×12.2
10 76.165 Baluwa Nadi PSC Girder 7×18.3
11 81.304 Canal PSC Girder 4×18.3
13 84.575 Kamala Nadi PSC Box Girder 24×30.5
16 92.620 Jiwo Khola PSC Girder 1×12.2
17 92.860 Bataha Khola PSC Girder 7×18.3
18 96.880 Ghurmi Khola PSC Box Girder 4×30.5
19 97.996 Lahojor Khola PSC Girder 3×18.3
103.24
20 Mainawati Khola PSC Girder 8×12.2
3
106.76
21 Gagan Khola PSC Girder 10×18.3
5
115.91
22 Canal PSC Girder 1×18.3
3
SE 23 5.921 Balan River PSC Box Girder 17×30.5 IMP.

C
6 24 9.017 Birdhana River PSC Girder 3×12.2
25 9.347 Surunga Khola PSC Girder 5×12.2
26 12.224 Nala PSC Girder 1×12.2
27 13.215 Amaha Khola PSC Girder 2×18.3
28 16.288 Chapin Khola PSC Girder 5×18.3
29 17.282 Chapin Khola PSC Girder 8×12.2
30 18.847 Kharak Nadi PSC Girder 10×18.3 IMP.
31 21.019 Lakahwar Nadi PSC Girder 3×18.3
32 22.351 Devdhar Nadi PSC Girder 5×18.3
33 25.025 Tarkhana Khola PSC Girder 4×12.2
34 33.048 Ghodaha Nadi PSC Girder 2×18.3
35 41.540 Khodo Khola PSC Girder 11×18.3 IMP.
37 43.941 Jita Dhar Khola PSC Girder 3×12.2
Mahuli Dhar
39 48.430 PSC Girder 3×12.2
Khola
40 56.258 Saptakoshi Nadi PSC Girder 64×18.3 IMP.
41 57.063 River PSC Girder 4×12.2
42 58.990 River PSC Girder 9×18.3 IMP.
45 67.201 Khola PSC Girder 4×18.3
46 67.474 Khola PSC Girder 4×18.3
47 68.787 Haripur Baranch PSC Girder 3×12.2
Table 28 Statement of Minor Bridge (On the F/S Report)
Classi Chainage Name of

ficatio Type of Bridge Span(m) Remarks
n (km) Road/River/Khola
SEC. 1 53.282 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3

2 53.438 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
5
3 53.595 Cross drain RCC Box 1×3×3
11 57.943 Main Trail RCC Box 1×3×3
17 61.237 Pedestrian RCC Box 1×3×3
22 74.712 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3

26 78.049 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
27 78.125 Pokhari RCC Box 1×5×4
28 78.631 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
31 80.469 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
33 81.026 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
35 82.689 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
36 83.646 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
37 84.020 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
39 87.381 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
40 87.815 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
43 89.321 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
44 89.532 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
45 89.940 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
46 90.934 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
SEC. 48 91.649 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
5
51 97.746 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
52 97.936 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
55 101.755 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
56 102.079 Canal RCC Box 1×2×2
58 103.163 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
59 103.364 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
60 103.963 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
63 106.512 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
64 107.801 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
65 108.249 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
66 108.319 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
67 109.181 Kholsi RCC Box 1×2×2
68 109.209 Kholsi RCC Box 1×2×2
69 109.736 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
70 109.940 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
71 111.034 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
72 111.566 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
73 112.338 Kholsi RCC Box 1×3×3
74 114.274 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
75 115.738 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
76 116.478 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3
77 117.261 Canal RCC Box 1×3×3

78 117.691 Canal RCC Box 1×2×2
79 117.871 Canal RCC Box 1×2×2
80 118.865 Kholsi RCC Box 1×2×2
81 0.232 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
82 0.446 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
83 1.323 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
84 10.124 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
85 10.358 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
86 11.825 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
87 14.160 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
88 14.474 Singesara Khola RCC Box 2×3×3
89 18.097 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
90 19.044 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
91 22.881 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
92 23.092 Pond RCC Box 1×2×2
93 25.461 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
SEC. 94 25.751 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
95 28.548 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
6 96 30.764 Track RCC Box 1×3×3
97 31.220 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
98 33.358 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
99 36.583 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
100 36.793 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
101 38.363 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
102 42.529 Canal RCC Box 1×2×2
103 44.755 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
104 45.371 Canal RCC Box 1×2×2
105 47.049 Nala RCC Box 1×2×2
106 59.610 Pond RCC Box 2×3×3
107 65.185 Nala RCC Box 3×2×2
108 65.817 Mariya Dhar Khola RCC Box 1×5×5
109 69.730 Nala RCC Box 1×3×3
Table 29 Statement of Road Under Bridges (RUB's) (On the F/S Report)
Name of
Classif Chainage
Road/River/Khol Type of Bridge Span(m) Remarks
ication (km)
a
SEC. 1 58.380 Unmetalled Road RCC Box 1×5×5
2 59.666 Unmetalled Road RCC Box 1×5×5
5
Metalled Road
4 62.904 RCC Box 2×6.25×5.5
Highwayay
12 82.417 Metalled Road RCC Box 1×5×5

32 3.289 Metalled Road RCC Box 2×6.25×5.5
34 10.430 Unmetalled Road RCC Box 1×6.25×5.5
SEC. 40 32.673 Unmetalled Road RCC Box 2×6.25×5.5
6 41 41.934 Unmetalled Road RCC Box 1×5×5
3.3 HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
3.3.1 Review Results of F/S

1) Hydrological Characteristics of Nepal
Climate
Weather of Nepal is generally predictable and pleasant. There are four climatic seasons:
a) Spring: March-May
b) Summer: June-August
c) Autumn: September-November
d) Winter: December-February
The monsoon period is from the end of June to the middle of August. About 80 percent of
the rain falls during that period, so the remainder of the year is dry. Spring and autumn are
the most pleasant seasons; winter temperatures drop to freezing level with a high level of
snowfall in the mountains. Maximum summer and late spring temperatures range from 28ºC
(83ºF) in the hill regions to more than 40ºC (104ºF) in the Terai. In winter, average
minimum and maximum temperatures in the Terai range from 7ºC (45ºF) to a mild 23ºC
(74ºF). Much colder temperatures prevail at higher elevations. The Kathmandu Valley, at an
altitude of 1310m (4297ft), has a mild climate, ranging from 19-27ºC (67-81ºF) in summer,
and 2-20ºC (36-68ºF) in winter.
Rainfall
In Nepal, the intensity and pattern of monsoon is governed by the topography of the
Himalayas. It usually moves to the north and later on to the west, causing maximum
precipitation in the southern Terai belt, and diminishing gradually while moving towards the
north. The annual precipitation is 2200 - 2500 mm in the Terai and Siwaliks range, 1500 -
2500 mm in the Mahabharata range, and less than 1000 mm in the Himalayan range.
Beginning from the end of June to the middle of August, the monsoon occurs first in the east
and progressively moves along the Himalayan chain, into the west covering the entire stretch
of the country.
The months between October and May are mainly dry, though a winter monsoon which
travels eastward from the Mediterranean Sea occasionally brings rain. The winter monsoon
has more influence in the west than east. Precipitation in the form of hail may occur during
February and March.
2) Flood characteristics of Nepalese rivers
Based on an average annual rainfall of about 1400 mm in Nepal, 174 billion cubic meters of
water per year is assumed to be surface run-off. The total run-off of Nepal, including run-off
from the Tibetan catchments, is estimated at about 200 billion cubic meters per annum. Due
to high concentration and intensity of precipitation during the monsoon period, about 72% of
the total run-off is instantaneous, while the rest is conserved as snow and ground water
which drain into the rivers during the dry season.
All major river basins except those of the southern rivers originate in the Himalaya or the
Tibetan Plateau. These river basins 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. Rivers
originating south of the Mahabharata and flowing towards the Terai belt through the Siwalik
Hills are categorized as southern rivers and they depend entirely on rainfall for their runoff.
The hydrograph of these catchments show no rise in flow until the first monsoon rains. In
Nepal, monsoon rains and snowmelt contribute to river flow. Depending on the altitude
some catchments are influenced by monsoon and some by snow melt. On catchments that
are entirely below 3000 m, there is no significant contribution from snowmelt. On
catchments that are above 5000 m, snow melting is major source for stream flow.
Catchments lying between 3000 and 5000 m are influenced by both monsoon and snowmelt.
As the meteorology and hydrology both are very specific due to varying topography and
altitude of Nepal, the hydro-meteorological data also varies largely in space as well as in
time. At the same time, the database is very poor for most of the river basins. In most of the
rivers hydrometric stations have been established by Department of Hydrology and
Meteorology (DHM). Maximum instantaneous flood data have been collected for these
stations. A relationship between catchment area and 100 years flood has been presented in
Figure 18 with the help of data provided.
Figure 18 Relation between catchment area and 100 years flood of Nepalese rivers
1. River on the alignment of Bardibas-Inaruwa

Kamala River
The stream flow data is not available for Kamala river. However it has big floods at the time
of monsoon. A weir with intake on both sides of the river has been constructed on upstream
of Highway Bridge for irrigation.
(a)Upstream of Kamala with East-West Highway br. (b) Downstream of Kamala with East-West Highway br.
Figure 19 Status of Kamala River

Sapta Koshi River
Sapta Koshi River is trans-boundary river flowing through Nepal and India. Some of the
rivers of the Koshi system, such as Arun, Sun Koshi and Bhote Koshi, originate in the Tibet,
an Autonomous Region of China. It is one of the largest tributaries of the Ganges. The river,
along with its tributaries, drains 29,400 km² in China (mainly the upper Arun basin north of
the Mount Everest region), 30,700 km² in Nepal (the eastern third of the country) and 9,200
km² in India.
The Koshi has an average discharge of 1,564 m³/s. During floods, it increases to as much as
18 times the average. The greatest recorded flood was 24,200 m³/s on Aug. 24, 1954. The
Koshi Barrage has been designed for a peak flood of 27 014 m³/s. Shift in course is a regular
feature of Koshi. It has moved westwards by 120 km in the past 250 years through more
than 12 distinct channels [Figure 20(a)]. [Figure 20(b)] shows the silt deposition and shifting
process by Koshi. [Figure 20(c)] shows the upstream from Koshi Barrage.
(a) Course shifting (b) Silt deposition and meandering (c)Upstream of Barrage
Figure 20 Status of Sapta Koshi river

Although it is difficult to accurately transfer floods to the crossing points of railway,
however floods can be transposed by Catchment Area Ratio and again for estimation of HFL
the cross - sections at river crossings are needed. The survey of cross - sections is not in the
scope of feasibility study. Hence the data of river crossings in East-West Highway have
been collected as far as possible. Basically these data are flood depth above river bed or
above river bank. It is assumed that the deck level of the bridges is approximately 100 years
HFL as most of these bridges are designed for 100 years flood. The free board below the
deck level is not subtracted assuming that it will compensate the rise in the bed level due to
silt deposition. Mechi-Mahakali Railway alignment has been divided in six sections. Flood
depth and HFL at crossings of rivers and streams of these sections (5 and 6 section) are
provided in Table 30.
Table 30 HFL at crossings of Bardibas-Inaruwa Alignment

SN Chainage Name of River/Khola HFL above bank, m
1 4.257 Paurai Khola 1.2
2 6.9 Bagmati River 2.5

3 9.351 Dumajor Khola 0.9
4 10.307 Canal- -2.0

5 12.39 Hariaun Khola 0.5
6 18.69 Lakhandai Khola 1.6
7 23.24 Karma Khola 0.4
8 23.867 DumDume Khola 0.5
9 24.139 Canal -1.0
1 26.277 Kalinjor Khola 0.9
0
1 28.639 Phuljor Khola 1.1
1
1 37.095 Balse Khola 0.8
2
1 37.68 Butuwa Khola 0.5
3
1 41.137 Dujan Nadi 0.3
4
1 42.617 Maraha Khola 0.9
5
1 44.055 Kholsi 0.4
6
1 44.898 Dhungre Khola 0.5
7
1 48.2636 Gadhanta Khola 0.7
8
1 48.925 Jangha Khola 1.1
9
2 50.397 Kholsi 0.4
0
2 51.465 Bhabsi Nadi 1.0
1
2 54.38 Rato Nadi 2.1
2
2 59.472 Badahari Khola 0.9
3
2 61.359 Sukhajor Khola 0.8
4
2 63.636 Basai Khola 0.75
5
2 65.684 Aurahi Khola 1.5
6
2 67.391 Jaladh Khola 1.0
7
2 68.153 Basani Khola 0.5
8
2 68.88 Jagdar Khola 0.8
9
3 70.996 Jhij Khola 0.6
0
3 76.165 Baluwa Nadi 1.1
1
3 81.304 Canal -0.5
2
3 83.502 Canal -0.5
3
3 84.575 Kamala Nadi 2.5
4
3 88.003 Canal -0.5
5
3 92.031 Canal -0.5
6
3 92.62 Jiwo Khola 0.3
7
3 92.86 Bataha Khola 0.8
8
3 96.88 Ghurmi Khola 0.7
9
4 97.996 Lahojor Khola 0.5
0
4 103.24 Mainawati Khola 0.7
1
4 106.77 Gagan Khola 0.9
2
4 115.94 Canal -0.4
3
4 4.257 Paurai Khola 1.2
4

4 6.9 Bagmati River 2.5
5
4 9.351 Dumajor Khola 0.9
6
4 10.307 Canal -2.0
7
4 12.39 Hariaun Khola 0.5
8
4 5.921 Belan River 3.5
9
5 9.017 Birdhana River 1.0
0
5 9.347 Surunga khola -2.0
1
5 12.224 Nala 0.0
2
5 13.215 Amaha Khola 1.0
3
5 16.288 Chapin Khola -2.0
4
5 17.282 Chapin Khola -1.0
5
5 18.847 Kharak Nadi 0.0
6
5 21.019 Lakahwar Nadi -2.0
7
5 22.351 Devdhar Nadi -2.0
8
5 25.025 Tarkhana Khola -2.0
9
6 33.048 Ghodaha Nadi 1.0
0
6 41.54 Khodo Khola -2.0
1
6 43.55 Canal -1.0
2
6 43.941 Jita Dhar Khola 1.0
3
6 45.636 Canal -1.0
4
6 48.43 Mahuli Dhar Khola -0.5
5
6 56.258 Saptakoshi Nadi -1.8
6
6 57.063 River 0.0
7
6 58.99 River 0.5
8
6 59.261 River 0.5
9
7 61.194 River 0.0
0
7 67.201 Khola 0.5
1
7 67.474 Khola 0.3
2
7 68.787 Haripur Baranch Canal -1.0
3
7 76.5 Suksena Branch Canal -1.0
4
7 80.086 Sunsari Khola 1.2
5
7 80.93 Shankarpur Branch Canal -1.0
6
7 84.166 Shankarpur Branch Canal -1.0
7
7 90.024 Garaun Dhar Khola 1.0
8
7 93.591 Chatara Main Canal -1.0
9
8 99.336 Budhi Khola 2.0
0
8 101.069 Gachhiya Khola 1.0
1
8 110.385 Betna Khola 0.0
2
3
4

8 113.231 Kesaula Khola 0.0
5
8 118.457 River 1.0
6
8 122.187 Dahi khola 1.0
7
8 123.764 Sita khola 1.0
8
8 124.141 Das khola 1.0
9
9 126.192 Pathari khola -1.0
0
9 130.868 Bakraha khola 2.5
1
9 135.123 Mawa khola 2.0
2
9 135.838 Betani khola -2.0
3
9 139.119 Ratuwa nadi 3.5
4
9 142.025 Gauriya khola -1.0
5
9 146.008 Dhyangree khola 2.0
6
9 147.495 Kamal khola 2.2
7
9 149.242 Rate khola 2.0
8
9 151.771 Jhiljhile khola 0.5
9
1 152.988 Satasi khola 1.5
0
1 154.586 Canal -1.0
0
1 156.705 Kankai mai nadi 0.5
0
1 160.749 Surunga khola 1.0
0
1 164.04 Birin khola 2.5
0
1 166.024 Ghagara khola -0.5
0
1 173.359 Rekha khola 1.5
0
1 175.062 Dewaniya khola 1.5
0
1 177.895 Phulbasa khola 2.5
0
1 179.6 Hadiya khola 1.2
0
1 180.117 Hadiya khola -0.5
1
1 180.455 Hadiya khola 0.5
1
1 182.109 khola 2.0
1
1 182.944 Ninda khola 0.3
1
1 185.768 Paliya khola 1.2
1
1 186.588 Paliya khola 1.2
1
1 4.8 Budhi Khola 1.5
1
1 6.819 Chatara Main Canal -1.0
1
1 12.143 Singiya Khola 1.0
1
3.3.2 Application Plan for Detail Design

For the safe and economic design of the bridges and protection structures against flood, it is
essential to carry out reasonable hydrological and hydraulic analysis.
The items and purpose of hydrological and hydraulic study are as follows:
1) Hydrological Analysis
Hydrologic and hydraulic analysis should be conducted to suggest proper river width, HFL,
protections for major rivers on the railway alignment and design box culverts for small
streams with site visits, data collection. To calculate discharges for each basin, specific
parameters and several methods will be applied with HEC-HMS (Hydrologic Modeling
System).
 River basin by GIS and field investigation
 Rainfall analysis and distribution for each river
 CN values by NRCS for estimating surface runoff
 Estimation of Time of concentration, Lag time and Storage coefficient.
1) Hydraulic analysis
For major rivers, steady flow analysis is essential to decide the height of each bridge. After
investigating site and calculating river width by the formulae on the bridge section, river
width for each river will be decided with consideration of discharge, shape of basins and
current velocity by flood.
2) Vertical and horizontal clearance for bridge
For deciding vertical clearance (Free board), the minimum values have to be decided
according to the ‘Nepal Bridges Standards-2067’.
3) Field Investigations and Verifications
Most of the rivers are unconfined or braided having large flood plains in plain areas of the
proposed railway alignment which may require longer span of bridges. However, following
requirements were taken into consideration while selecting the bridge sites.
 Suitability of foundation
 Straight approaches having free from flood damages
 Straight reach with well-defined banks on upstream and downstream
 Minimum width and right angle crossing
 Availability of construction materials
Most designs involving hydrologic analyses utilize a design or critical flood that imitates
some severe future or historical event. If runoff data are available, the design flood
hydrograph can be synthesized from available storm records using rainfall-runoff (Unit
Hydrograph) procedures.
Based on international practices, guidelines, type and size of the structures, impounded
volume and preliminary assessment of the extent of likely damage in the event of worst
failure, the design frequency of HFL was decided equal to 100 years for whole railway
alignment.
4) Design of bridge protections
Thickness for scour protection will be decided according to ‘Improvement of Technical
Manuals for River Training Works, Volume 1(Ministry of Water Resources in Nepal).’
Also, a lateral extent of scour protection at pier will be decided according to ‘Evaluating
Scour at Bridges 5th Edition, U.S. Department of Transportation‘.
5) River training
The orientation, length, height, top width and side slope of guide bank will be decided by
site visits, results of hydraulic simulation, surveyed data, Nepal and Korean standards.
3.4 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL SURVEYS

 Available literatures and geological maps, photographs and Landsat images were
collected and reviewed
 Geological and geomorphologic information were collected and studied
 Geological information were collected and have conducted field survey
 Geological and seismic hazards such as faults and thrusts were identified
 Measurement of discontinuities to analyze slope stability was carried out
 The construction material survey for ballast and blanket materials and its testing
were carried out
 The soil mostly consist of sands, pebbly sands and clayey sands
 The bedrocks are composed of sedimentary rocks like mudstone, sandstone and
conglomerate
3.4.2 Application Plan for Detail Design

For the design of the trackbed structure considering economy and rational collection, it has
reviewed the geotechnical engineering data near the project area, field surveys of strata
composition and characteristics, geologic structure including various engineering properties
were identified, the results based on the structures, slope and soft ground used as a basis for
design.
In order to get geotechnical engineering data of the project area including the tunnel section,
site investigation, in-situ survey, discontinuity survey, laboratory test to perform various
investigation and test, results analysis of geotechnical parameters for foundation and slope
stability by calculating the structural analysis, will be performed, thereafter geotechnical
investigation Report will be prepared and finalized.
The items and purpose of geological and geotechnical investigation is as follows:
Table 31 Items and Purpose of Geological and Geotechnical Investigation
S
Items Purpose
N
Surface Geological Investigation

• Identify the topography, geology, soil and
•Regional geological study
1 rock distribution
•Engineering geological study
• Reflect the detailed investigation plan
•Discontinuities survey
•Determine the sub-soil condition including

Drilling
2 engineering properties of subsoil
Earthwork, structure, station & building etc
• Soil & rock sampling
• Identify the strata and liquefaction

Standard Penetration Test & Dynamic Cone possibilities
3 Penetration Test •Deduce the soil characteristics and
•All boreholes geotechnical parameters
• Disturbed soil sampling, etc
• Identify the permeability properties of
Permeability Test & Lugeon Test
4 strata
•All boreholes
• Identify the lugeon pattern of the rock
•Identify the location and amount of the
Construction Material Survey
construction materials
5 •Bulk sampling by test pit
•Determine the engineering properties of
•Riverbed & borrow areas
riverbed and borrow pit material, etc
Laboratory Tests •Identify the physical and epidemiological

6
•All borehole samples characteristics of the soil and bedrock
Result analysis • Determine soil strength paremeter & rock

•Structure foundation mass classification
7 •Soft ground •Design and analysis of the foundation, soft
•Slope stability ground and liquefaction
•Seismic hazard, etc • Slope stability analysis, etc
1) Investigation of existing information

Site conditions, topographical and geological characteristic of the project area will be
grasped sufficiently through collecting and reviewing previously conducted soil
investigation Report nearby, topographical map and geological map.
6) Site Investigation
a) Surface Geological Survey
Surface geological survey will include geological structure such as topography, fault,
surface of discontinuity, etc. and a good grasp of the geological hazards through the exposed
strata. Especially, it will be conducted with an emphasis on discontinuity survey for
preparing the slope stability analysis.
b) Boring Investigation
Boring investigation will be performed in the subsoil state, thickness and depth of layers,
etc. by observing soil samples using the boring machine.
The subsoil distribution, fractured zone and soft ground will be grasped for the foundation
design of structures depending on boring test results. In addition, in-situ tests, sounding, and
underground water level measurement will be performed using bore-holes.
c) Auger Boring
Auger boring will be usually applied to the unconsolidated ground without gravels such as
soft soil, fine grained soil with medium density and adhesive wet sand.
Collecting representative samples consecutively with the configuration status of the soft
ground should be conducted to confirm the presence of soft ground.
d) Sampling
In the process of standard penetration test, disturbed samples will be collected and
undisturbed samples will be taken from the soft ground, when boring rock that will be
recovered during excavation using rock core samples, laboratory tests will be performed.
e) Sounding
Sounding test such as SPT(standard penetration test)/DCPT(dynamic cone penetration test)
will be a method for measuring soil characteristics of relative density and strength simply
and quickly by penetrating, rotating resistance into the ground and pulling out it onto the
ground.
SPT/DCPT will be executed with whole strata except rock bed. Sounding will be used to
estimate soil strength parameter, subsoil distribution and possible existence of soft layer.
f) Permeability Test and Lugeon Test
The Consultant will carry out field permeability tests in overburden, at specified depths or as
directed by the Client, as variable head (rising or falling head) and/or constant head method
in every interval down to the depth during the drilling against all boreholes.
Permeability test in rock, at depths specified, will be carried out as a Packer Test. Single or
double packer, as required, will be used. A complete record of all observations will be
presented in lugeons.
g) Test Pit and Sampling
1m × 1m × 2m (deep) sized open test pit will be excavated to observe and log the general
characteristics of material deposit. From the excavated material representative test sample
will be collected and transport to the laboratory for further test.
7) Material Survey
Investigations for sources of construction materials for embankment filling, retaining
structure, pavement and drainage structures etc. will be carried out and suitable material
sources will be surveyed and shown in the plans. This will involve study of the already
known / used borrow areas and quarries, discussions with knowledgeable local people
regarding potential sources and appraisal of geology. Samples from the promising sources
will be evaluated for properties through laboratory tests.
8) Laboratory Test
The laboratory soil tests and rock testing will be performed for undisturbed samples,
disturbed samples and rock samples to get the physical characteristics and mechanical
properties.
Uniform classification and engineering properties of soil to determine the availability of

construction materials and parameter estimation of rock strength and rock mass
classification will be utilized.
9) Result Analysis
Soil strength parameter will be calculated by result analysis with in-situ tests and laboratory
test so that it will be utilized as input data for reviewing structure foundations or slope
stability analysis. Nepal's topography, geological nature of seismic hazards and slope
stability considering reviewing the structure further by calculating the number of horizontal
seismic accelerometer seismic stability have been reflected on the review.
Geotechnical Investigation Report determined based on the results of the survey design and
construction by the engineering details needed to manage soil (soil parameters, settlement
characteristics, etc.), and various construction and anticipated problems will be stated.
3.5 STATION
3.5.1 Track Layout of Stations on F/S Report

There are 14 stations in the project section. 11 stations excluding Bardibas, Lahan, Rajbiraj
Station (processing passengers and freight), are to be intermediate station for the operation
and shunting of the trains.
The Station Plan and Typical Plan (include Platform) for this project section is as shown
below.
Table 32 Station Plan status of F/S Report

Station Plan Status of F/S Report
St.No Name of station Location Type of Station Remarks

1 Bardibas 56km750 Junction Straight
2 Kusumbisauna 68km750 Intermediate Partially Curve(R=3,500m)
3 Lakshmipur 75km250 Intermediate Partially Curve(R=3,500m)
4 Thalaha 88km650 Intermediate Straight

5 Bathantol 98km050 Intermediate Straight
6 Mothiyahi 108km650 Intermediate Straight
7 Lahan 121km130 Intermediate Partially Curve(R=2,000m)
8 Amaha 133km480 Intermediate Partially Curve(R=2,500m)
9 Mohanpur 143km080 Intermediate Straight
10 Rajbiraj 154km180 Intermediate Straight
11 Durgapur 166km730 Intermediate Straight
12 Koshi Barrage 173km380 Intermediate Partially Curve(R=1,500m)
13 Haripur Chowk 183km380 Intermediate Straight
14 Laukahi 192km380 Intermediate Straight
Bardibas and Lahan Stations are the station that processes passenger and freight in this
project section. It serves as a junction station for connecting to the INDIA~NEPAL Railway
line in the future. Rajbiraj Station is the station that processes passenger. Eleven stations
including Hathimoda Station are to be signal stations.
3.5.2 Review Result of Stations

The Consultant reviewed the station locations for the project section, and reviewed the
propriety of the station functions and measures to save construction costs. Most of stations
proposed in F/S are located on curves, obstructing maintenance and undermining
functionality, and some stations were nearby rivers or waterways, increasing the
construction cost.
1) Review the Function of Station

The location of stations was reviewed considering Alternative 1 can be selected as an
optimal alignment.
Bardibas junction station moved 3 km from a point of F/S locations to meet the end point of
Simara-Bardibas section. Koshi Barrage station in Koshi Barrage area is planned as a signal
station, moved about 3.5 km upstream in order to minimize effect on koshi Barrage. Other
stations were reviewed as intermediate stations which are operated for passengers and
freight.
Table 33 Station Plan Status of Review Alignment

Station Plan Status of Review Alignment
St. No Name of Station Location Type of Station Remarks

1 Bardibas 106km900 Junction Passenger/freight
2 Kusumbisauna 120km900 Intermediate Signal
3 Lakshmipur 131km600 Intermediate Signal
4 Thalaha 143km500 Intermediate Signal
5 Bathantol 155km000 Intermediate Signal
6 Mothiyahi 163km800 Intermediate Signal
7 Lahan 174km300 Intermediate Passenger/freight
8 Amaha 185km400 Intermediate Signal
9 Mohanpur 196km200 Intermediate Signal
10 Rajbiraj 207km000 Intermediate Passenger
11 Durgapur 216km800 Intermediate Signal
12 Koshi Barrage 223km100 Intermediate Signal
13 Haripur Chowk 234km900 Intermediate Signal
14 Laukahi 241km700 Intermediate Signal
10) Problems of Curved Station

Typical curved station is as shown in Figure. 22
The problem of curved station is as follow
 Train operation safety undermined due to the difficulty of seeing the front
signal upon train departure
 Not good for maintenance, due to rail abrasion compared to the straight part
upon train braking and departure
 Not good for maintenance due to the installation of a switch at the curve
 Overall scheduled speed decrease due to the restriction on the train's speed in
passing through the station
 Economic efficiency undermined due to the elongation of the station length
with the S-Curve generated on the side line.
11) Review of Result of Alignment

 To improve the alignment, station location/s may need to be changed or
slightly aligned.
 Station plan, as shown in Table 33, is the result of reviewing the satellite
photos and topography maps but the consultant plans to review the possibility
after studying the topography and surveying rivers.
 Station structures will be reduced with change in station location, like straight
station against curved station.
 Need to check the adequacy of station location through detailed review.
 With the suggestion of train operation expert, EIA and SIA report, train
operation plan may need to be changed.
Figure 21 Status of Typical Curved Station
3.5.3 Review of Stations Track Layout Plan

1) Junction Station (F/S, Bardibas and Lahan station)
Junction Station comprises of one platform for passenger processing, one freight platform
for processing containers, and station facilities. The alignment plan is as shown below.
Figure 22 Track layout at Bardibas and Lahan Station (F/S Report)
Classification Length Function

Line 1 750m Side track
Line 2 750m Main track

Line 3 750m Passenger processing track/departure and
arrival track
Line 4 750m Passenger processing track
Line 5 750m Freight storage track
Line 6 - Engine line
Line 7 750m Freight car loading track
Drawn out track 720m Car shunting
Side track 4 lines Safety side track
Platform 1 unit/600m x 12m Passenger boarding and unboarding
Container storage yard 1 unit/600m x 30m Container loading and unloading
a) Problem
 Two-way departure from all tracks - increase of facility(signal, track, Trackbed, etc.)
construction cost
 Excessive platform facility considering the passenger demand - increase of
construction cost
 The platform is too far from the station - longer passenger movement trail,
undermines passenger comfort
h) Review Result (Bardibas and Lahan Station)
Figure 23 Review Result of Bardibas and Lahan Station
 Reduce transshipment time and transit distance in connection area to save operation
cost.
 Promote convenience by reducing the circulation of the passengers when they get on
and off trains.
 Secure the user's convenience by shortening passenger's moving distance.
12) Intermediate Station

Intermediate Station in the project section has 11 signal stations. Four of them are planned to
process passengers, but the F/S Report does not provide a demand forecast for each station's
passenger processing plan in the future. Therefore, considering how the four signal stations
are planned to process passengers in the future, the Consultant considered the basic platform
scale, and presented the necessary scale of site necessary for such operations.
The Intermediate Station alignment plan proposed by F/S is as shown below.
Table 33 Track layout Plan at Intermediate Station
a) Problem
 Two-way departure from all tracks (Including the main track) - Increase of facility
(Signal, Track, Trackbed, etc.) construction cost.
 Excessive land for station site - Increase of land purchase cost, economically
infeasible.
 Excessive platform facility scale - Increase of construction cost.
i) Review Result of Track Layout (Intermediate Station)
The Consultant recommends applying Type 1 (Passenger Station) and Type 2 (Signal
Station), comprehensively considering the construction cost, facility site, and the prospect of
building the double track line in the future.
Figure 24 Review Results of Track layout Intermediate Station
3.6 TRACK
3.6.1 Gauge
Table 34 Review of Track gauge
Classification F/S Detail Design
Application Plan 1,676mm 1,435 mm
1) Review Opinion
Broad gauge has been originally suggested by F/S considering connectivity to India and
easier availability of rolling stock and technology from neighboring country.
Design speed for this section is 250km/h. In this case standard gauge (1435mm) is
preferable to broad gauge (1676mm) as most of the high-speed rail lines are standard gauge.
3.6.2 Ballast
Table 35 Review of Ballast
Classificati
Gravel Ballast Ballastless
on
Front View
of
Constructio
n
Application Tunnel
Earthwork, Bridge
Plan (Not Applicable in this project)
1) Review Opinion
Ballasted track will be applied to the earthworks and bridges. Ballast less track will be
applied to tunnel sections, but there is no tunnel for this section of the project.
3.6.3 Rail
Table 36 Review of Rail
- Main Line : 60kg 90 UTS rail

Application Plan - 60kg 90 UTS rail
- Side Line : 52kg/m rail
1) Review Opinion
The rail of 60kg 90 UTS has been suggested by F/S study, 60kg 90 UTS rail on main line
and 52kg/m rail on side line will be suggested and applied at the detail design considering
economy and future maintenance of the rails.
3.6.4 Sleeper
Table 37 Review of Sleeper
PSC monoblock sleeper PSC monoblock sleeper

Application
- Main Line : 1660Nos/km - Main Line : 1660Nos/km
Plan
- Loop line : 1540Nos/km - Loop line : 1540Nos/km
1) Review Opinion
Concrete sleepers are 10~25% cheaper than wooden sleepers. PSC sleepers have lots of
advantages and are echo-environment friendly particularly during installation. The number
of sleepers per Km will be determined to be appropriate for the installation. Rail track will
be decided after reviewing the plans for the maintenance and stability.
3.6.5 Fastening
Table 38 Review of Fastening
Application Plan E.R.C E.R.C
1) Review Opinion
Elastic rail fastening has been recommended with e-clip on F/S Report. ERC has been
usually used with a fastening device. The fastener will be considered and decided with
superiorities for good maintenance, easiness of material supply, stability of fastening and
economical advantage in future.
3.6.6 Long Welded Rail (LWR)

F/S Report suggests LWR for main line and SWR for sidings and loop lines. It also pointed
out that for some restrictions on installing LWR, for hilly areas SWR should be considered
for main line.
F/S Report suggests Flash Butt welding for plant and thermite welding in site. It also pointed
out that mobile Flash Butt welding plants are also available at site nowadays.
Table 39 Long Welded Rail
Classification LWR SWR Welded method
Plant : flash butt weld

Application
Main Line Loop Line Field : thermit weld
Plan
(mobile flash butt weld)
1) Review Opinion
LWR gives lots of merits compared to SWR. It gives one-third longer rail and sleeper
life, better-quality ride, cuts on track maintenance, reduces noise and breakages of
rolling stock spring, and it permits higher speed and formation and ballast life etc.
So, LWR rail for main line and SWR for sidings are recommended. For welding
method, Falsh Butt for plant welding and thermite welding for site welding is
suggested. Where mobile Flash Butt welding is available and preferred, mobile Flash
Butt welding can be considered for site welding.
3.6.7 Turn Out
Table 40 Review of Turn Out
Application Main Line : F12 over Main Line : F12 over

Plan Loop & non-running : F8.5 Loop & non-running : F8.5
1) Review Opinion
F/S report suggests F12 to main line and F8.5 to loop lines and non-running lines. It
also suggests F16 or F20 in main line at some locations where site constraints occurs.
F12 for main line and F8.5 for loop lines and non-running lines should be installed. At
some locations the other number turnouts can be considered. Higher number turnouts
for the locations where operational train speed is high or site constraints occur.
3.7 ELECTRIFICATION SYSTEM PLAN

We have considered that the specification of 25kV AC Traction system. Power line
crossings over the proposed alignment and electrical general supply arrangements at stations
are satisfied except for as followings:
1) Minimum lateral distance of Electrical Clearance
We assure that the minimum lateral distance of electrical clearance for short duration will be
maintained 250mm for a safety.
2) Types of Masts
Mast size was divided into nine types of the kind conducted, depending on climate and
various load conditions will need to be adjusted on the detailed design.
13) Setting of Masts
The setting of masts will be taken into account the state of track rail and catenary load.
14) Contact wire and Catenary wire
The CdCu 65mm² of catenary wire and Cu 107mm² of contact wire will be determined in
accordance with the terms of the Catenary tension.
15) Catenary Tension
The catenary tension is presented as 1200kgf, but the catenary tension will be also
determined in accordance with the terms of the climate and catenary conditions.
16) Contact Wire Height

The height of the Contact wire is presented as 5,600mm-5,750mm, which will be needed to
review the size of the electrical locomotive which has relationship with it.
17) Neutral Sections
Depending on the speed of the train, the neutral section will need to be adjusted.
18) Droppers
Dropper thickness will be required to select after determining the size and tension of the
catenary wire.
19) Tension lengths

Tension lengths will be taken into account after determining the size of the contact and
catenary wire.
20) Cantilever Assembly
Cantilever assembly will be designed based on the ‘I’, ‘O’ and ‘F’ type.
21) Remote Terminal Unit
It is better to use CU than Remote Terminal Unit as it is more modern and cheaper than
RTU. CU will satisfy the RTU’s functions.
22) Diesel Generator and UPS Facilities for the emergency power supply on
stations
Diesel Generator and UPS facilities are mentioned as the emergency power supply of
stations. DG and UPS will be determined depending on the characteristic of the general
power supply network. So it will be needed to be reviewed on the detailed design.
3.8 SIGNALING AND TRAIN CONTROL

The Consultant has reviewed the F/S Report for Signaling and Train Control system to plan
a most effective and stable signaling system. The Consultant has examined and reflected
facilities that are required in the F/S Report.
Signals, Interlocking, Electric point machine, Occupancy/vacancy detection of track,
Connectivity of field gears with Interlocking system have been proposed in the F/S Report.
The Single line token less block instruments (SLTLBI) is planned for the Train Control
System. Also, it is planned that the operators control the trains at the train control office at
each Division Head Quarters office.
Additionally, the Consultant proposes the CTC system rather than the one suggested in F/S
Report. The Consultant will decide about the facilities which are not required but suggested
in the F/S Report after discussion with Client including CTC systems.
3.8.1 F/S Report Summary of Signaling and Train Control System

1) Signaling and Interlocking System
Signals, Interlocking, Electric point machine, Occupancy/vacancy detection of track,
connectivity of field gears with Interlocking system
 Signals
- Multi aspect colour light signals (MACLS) AC LED signal lighting units.
- Junction type route indicators
- Calling ON signals
- Shunt signal (dependent & independent)
 Interlocking
- Electronic interlocking system
 Mid-Section Level Crossing Gates Interlocking
 Data logger
 Power supply
- 2 diesel generator
 Electric point machine
- Points, derail/trap switches

- Non-trainable point machine
 Occupancy/vacancy detection of track
- DC track circuits
- Multi Section Digital Axle Counters
 Connectivity of field gears with Interlocking system
- Location boxes
- Signaling cables of different corage
 Earthing & Lightning protection arrangements

23) Train Control System
 Train Control in Block Section
- Absolute block system of working

- Block Instruments
- Single line tokenless block instruments (SLTLBI)
- Single Section Digital Axle Counters (SSDAC)
 Train Control in station Yard
- Station master
- Operating panel/ computer workstation
 Train control office at each Division Head Quarters office
- Train Controller
- Deputy Control
- Traction Power Control
- Traction Loco Control Engineering Control
- S & T Control
- Remote Control

1) Signals
LED signals with two aspects (G, R) and three aspects (G, Y, R) are planned.
 Two-position system: Signal indication system wherein stop/proceed or

caution/proceed color lights are turned on.
 Three-position system: Signal indication system wherein stop (Red), caution (Yellow)
and proceed (Green) color lights are turned on: three-aspect, four -aspect, and five-
aspect signals fall under the category of this three-position system.
 In case of LED type, extinction detection is activated when extinction rate is not less
than 30 %. In case of LED type, LEDs are replaced when extinction rate is not less
than 50 %. LED signals with home, starter, outer, advanced starter signals, and
shunting indicator are deemed most suitable for this project as their recognition
distance is more than 800m and they consume less power (12W), can be used semi-
permanently, and require less maintenance.
24) Point Machine

The F/S Report selected NS-AM type point machine as the optimal point machine. NS-AM
type point machine is an upgraded version from the NS type. It has an electronic (magnetic)
clutch which is not sensitive to seasonal temperature change. The NS-AM type point
machines do not require periodic repair/inspection and are structured to protect a motor from
overload or potential hindrance during switching. To improve on the NS type point machine,
an electronic clutch and anti-movement rod are installed in the NS-AM type point machine.
The NS-AM type point machine is maintenance-free with improved stability and reliability
by removing potential faults due to the surrounding environment.
NS type point machine uses AC110/220[V] single-phase 60[HZ] motor and uses a friction
clutch to prevent overload and transmit power. It has high reliability and safety but it is
necessary to inspect and repair friction clutch periodically. The enclosure of this electric
point machine is made of cast iron.
An additional recommendation is made to install anti-flood covers to protect the point
machines. There would not be difficulties in using mechanical point machines for loop lines
since the machines are not frequently used (2~4times a month).
25) Electronic Interlocking
For the Electronic Interlocking System (EIS), the centralized type is applied, which is
configured in such a manner that all the relays, electronic cards or modules are installed at a
Signal Equipment Room (SER) of each station.
EIS is redundantly configured with CPU section, an interlocking logic section, a display
section, a communication section, a monitoring section and power supplies. The display
section of EIS uses an LCD monitor.
There are two types of EIS. One is a centralized type and the other one is a distributed type.
The centralized type is configured in such a manner that all the relays, electronic cards or
modules are installed at a Signal Equipment Room (SER). The distributed type controls site
signaling equipment remotely by using relays, electronic cards or modules at an enclosure
adjacent to a starting signal or a home signal.
26) Block System
To operate trains safely and rapidly, a preceding train and a following train should be
operated by maintaining a regular distance. For this purpose, a fixed zone is set up and
allows only one train to run within the zone. This zone is called as a block section and this
system is referred to as a block system. Inter-locked block systems are used when train
operations are less frequent.
Inter-locked block system is a system unifying signal aspects and block handling by
interlocking block controllers, which are installed at both stations of a block section with
signals. As the relevant signals are inter-locked to a block system, a train cannot depart if
any of the conditions are not satisfied. Train drivers do not need to pick up token from the
station and can proceed to the next station according to the aspects of the signals.
Provision of digital axle counters is also installed at the same points of Outer signals and
Advanced Starter Signals in each station for detecting the complete departure and arrival of
trains.
27) CTC (Centralized Traffic Control) System
The CTC consists of a state-of-the-art computer system and fiber-optic communication
network. The major components for the CTC are as follows:
- Large display panel
- Server/workstation
- Operator console
- Installation of dedicated power supplies
- Use current fiber-optic communication network for connection to site
equipment
Computers include a train control computer (TCC) and management support computer
(MSC). Industrial computers are redundantly configured so as to continue controlling train
operations in case equipment fails. A fault-tolerant system or a high availability system can
be used. As a high availability system consists of general purpose computers, it is easy to

supply spare parts and requires less cost.
Operator consoles have overall control over train operations on the mainline including
remote control of signaling equipment at stations. Operator consoles redundantly configured
using industrial grade PCs. Plotters for preparing diagrams and printers are installed in
peripheral area.
The structure of operator consoles will be able to accommodate equipment and facilities
such as phones that are necessary for train control work. The communication network is
based on IP protocol Ethernet.
The Digital Light Processing (DLP) system is adopted for the large display panel (LDP)
because it is an advanced system widely used for newly installed facilities and is a display
panel suitable for computerized systems.
28) Earthing & Lightning Protection Arrangements
As signaling equipment consists of various micro-processors and uses software,
instantaneous errors resulting from surge can cause system interruptions. Accordingly, earth
is provided to prevent this. Earth will be provided to prevent signaling equipment and
maintenance workers from lightning, short-circuit and various induction.
Single point earth and common earth are available for earth. The common earth is no
interference of electric potential between electrodes and is simplified earth system and also it
is possible to drop earth resistance.
29) Power Supply
Power supplies for signaling are exclusively used for the signaling system only and
redundantly configured to maintain normal train operations even in case of power failure
and uninterruptible power supply system will be adopted. Power supplies for the signaling
system will consist of a power panel for input, an Automatic Transfer Switch panel, UPS, a
rectifier, storage batteries, and distribution switchboard. A Generator will be provided for
potential power failure.
Power supplies for signaling equipment will be redundantly configured with main power
supply and standby power supply in principle to ensure normal operations of trains in case
of power failure. When power is normal, the main power supply is used. If a power failure
or fault occurs, the power source is switched to the standby power supply, which is a
generator, through an automatic transfer switch. Once the main power has recovered, power
source is switched back to the main power supply and operations continue.
3.9 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
The Consultant reviewed and analyzed the telecommunication system recommended in the
Feasibility Study and has following remarks.
3.9.1 Review Results of Clause General Study

 Apply Data Links of various places and latest technology/equipments as is being
used worldwide in Railways.
 Support in train operation, emergency management as well as management of

information systems.
 The OFC System will serve as backbone for all other communication systems.
According to the review, general matters listed above are required during the construction of
Railway Telecommunication Systems. But instead of unconditional application of latest
technology/equipments we are plan to reflect an optimum Railway Telecommunication
Network by reviewing synthetically the local condition and extend ability, maintainability,
economics, security, efficiency, an interface with other systems, etc.
3.9.2 Review Results of Telecommunications Network through Optical Fiber Cable

System
 Speech and data are transmitted in the form of light through glass fiber from one
end to another end and vice-versa.
 Telecommunication backbone will consist of 24 fibre Optic Fibre Cable (OFC)

laid by the side of the track.
 Cable will be terminated at each station and in control offices.
 Cable will be laid at a depth of 1 meter in HDPE duct for safety & security.
 Cable enables communication from control office to various wayside stations.
 Each way station will have SDH (Synchronous Digital Hierarchy) with associated
equipments.
 Major station will have STM-4 equipment and other station with STM-1 having
21EI card configuration with ADD Drop Mux (ADM) has been proposed.
 Connectivity between equipments installed at different stations will be through

optical fiber cable used in ring topology.
Generally, in case of configuring Railway Telecommunication Network, we consider
Backbone Network of OFC to provide communication line of good quality on speech, data,
line and control line etc of Long distance Railway Telecommunication. According to the
review of the Feasibility Study, it is concluded that there won’t be insufficiency on the
composition of network and securing enough preparatory Core on the installation of 24 Core
OFC. However, during the progress of the detailed design, in case it is considered that it’s
too much or it’s not enough, considering the establishment plan and expendability of the
additional line, it might result in change of OFC standards. Also, Telecommunication
Network for transmission of speech, data etc from one point to another point through a
transmission line, is concluded that it could be insufficient capacity of equipments if we
consider the establishment plan and extendability of additional line on the proposal of major
station with STM-4 equipment and other station with STM-1 equipment. So, it is planned to
apply Backbone network STM-16 and Station Network STM-4 but we are planning to
compose system after reviewing the traffic capacity during the progress of the detailed
design and also to compose ring topology on the Network composition with stability being
verified.
3.9.3 Review Results of requirement Telecommunications System

1) Control Communication
 Omnibus voice control type where large number of telephones are connected
across one voice channel in parallel at way side stations.
 Controller in the control office is given the facility of selective as well as group
calling of the stations.
 No ringing facility is necessary from stations to controller.
 Two or more stations can communicate with each other.

30) Trunk Circuits
 All the stations i.e. Terminal, Junction and crossing stations are provided with
electronic exchanges.
 These exchanges are interconnected through the trunk circuits.
 These are 2 wires/4 wires point to point circuits.

31) Emergency Communication through GSM-R (Mobile Communication)
 The system for emergency communication between Driver to controller, Guard to
controller and maintenance supervisory staff to controller are now a day provided
through either of the following systems;
- Using quad cable, laid throughout the sections, terminated at control office,
each station and at each emergency posts provided at a distance of 1km in
the section.
- Using mobile communication through GSM-R.
 It’s 25 FV electrified area and also it is not possible to erect emergency posts in
tunnels beyond the limit of infringements, so the emergency communication using
6 quad cables is not recommended.
 Keeping in mind the above constraint, Mobile communication through GSM-R is
recommended for emergency communication not only on Pokhara-Kathmandu

corridor but other proposed Rail corridors also to maintain similarity over the
entire railway network.
 GSM-R system would encompass track to train and on-board voice and data
communications together with the ground based mobile communication needs to
track-side workers, station and maintenance depot staff and railway administrative
and managerial personnel. A frequency band is required for the functioning of
GSM-R.
32) Electronic Exchange Network for Administrative and Commercial
Communication.
 Various administrative offices, support offices, Training center, workshops,
hospitals etc proposed at different locations require suitable and efficient
communication network.
 These exchanges will be connected to various control and administrative centers

through trunk circuits on OFC.
 Based on the requirement, fully digital non blocking ISDN Multimedia EPABX
exchanges of suitable capacity at the locations, detailed hereunder, are proposed to
be installed.
 The exchange will be equipped with 32 bit CPU, dual bus architecture, and most
reliable flash EPROM storage.
 The exchange will have DID and DOD facility.

Telephone exchange system, to enable calls between station staff and dispatcher as means of
communication needed on the Railway operation and Maintenance, to review, group calling
and communication between two or more stations, and DID and DOD facilities, etc are
necessary functions during Railway operation. So, to make the implementation of the
functions proposed on the F/S Report possible, we are planning to apply IP System and
configurator System to connect the Telephone Network through Trunk Circuit to the place
where necessary. And for the specification of the IP exchanger, the Consultant is planning to
select after reviewing the economics and extendibility etc.
On the required GSM-R Systems, for the secure Train Operation as only means of
communication between train and train, maintenance person of facility on the trackside of
the railway, dispatch room, depot and station with the moving train, the Consultant proposed
to install emergency telephone in every 1km post laying copper cable (6 quad) from each
stations. However, GSM-R is wireless Telecommunication System, so the Consultant is
planning to install emergency telephone, using OFC of the track side, with a system
separated with the GSM-R Systems for the detailed design.
 Design to enable speech and data communication through GSM-R system on the
entire permanent way section and to enable radio communication on locomotive
equipment, ground equipment and OCC.
 Install the Base Transceiver Station (BTS) to enable radio communication

considering the RF Coverage through analysis of the site investigation result and
map study of the propagation environment on the entire way and in those areas
with poor reception, install a proper equipment of solution for the dead spot area.
The steel tower for the antenna installation needed on the BTS, the height
considers the RF Coverage. The location of the steel tower should be installed on
the storage place around the track side.
 Configuration of System will be Main Switching Centre (MSC), Base Station

Controller (BSC) and Base Transceiver Station (BTS)
 Consultant proposes to install Dispatching system in the detailed design to enable

call between OCC and the driver which is not included in the F/S Report.
 The scope for the call service is listed below:
- Point to point voice calls (Individual calls)
- Broad cast voice calls
- Group Voice calls
- Multi-party voice calls
- Emergency voice calls

The VHF system is simple, much lower price than GSM-R, convenient on the radio
communication between the train operations and also easy to maintain.
3.10 TRAIN OPERATION
3.10.1 Rail Network and Facilities at Different Stations

1) Main Lines
ⅰ) Mechi (Kakarbita) – Mahakali (Gaddachowki) (East West Corridor) : 945 km
ⅱ) Kathmandu ~ Pokhara (Western Corridor) : 187 km
ⅲ) Tamsariya ~ Abukhaireini Link connecting the two corridors : 72 km
33) Branch Lines

ⅰ) Nepalgunj – Kohalpur : 14 km
ⅱ) Bhairahawa – Butwal : 21 km
ⅲ) Madhwaliya – Lumbini : 23 km
ⅳ) Birgunj – Simara : 34 km
ⅴ) Janakpur – Bardibas (Being constructed under separate project) : 42 km
ⅵ) Biratnagar – Itahari : 22 km
34) Stations near Indo-Nepal Border
ⅰ) Nepalganj
ⅱ) Bhairawha
ⅲ) Birgunj
ⅳ) Janakpur
ⅴ) Biratnagar
ⅵ) Kakarvitta
35) Functional Distribution of Stations
ⅰ) Terminal Stations: 4 stations Kathmandu, Pokhara, Lumbini, Gaddachowki
ⅱ) Junction Stations: 9 stations Kohalpur, Rangital, Butwal, Madhawaliya,
Tamsariya, Simara, Bardibas, Itahari, Abukhaireini
ⅲ) Intermediate stations: 123 Stations
36) Infrastructural Facilities
ⅰ) Passenger Train Examination (Washing line & Sick Line)
ⅱ) Goods handling facilities according to the nature of traffic to be handled
ⅲ) Ordinary goods requiring goods shed facilities
ⅳ) Loose bulk handling facilities
ⅴ) Container handling facilities
ⅵ) POL/LPG handling facilities
ⅶ) Goods Train Examination (Sick line)
ⅷ) Accident Relief Train
ⅸ) Crew HQ
ⅹ) Running room
Table 41 Yards Where Additional Facilities

Classification Lahan Bardibas Itahari Biratnager Biratamod Kakarbitta
Junction N Y Y N N N
Terminal N N N N N Y
Goods Loading Y N Y Y Y Y
Goods Train Exam N N N Y N Y
Passenger Train Exam N N N Y N Y
Trip Inspection of Locos N N N N N N

Accident Relief Train N N Y N N N
Crew HQ N N N Y N Y
Running Room N N N N N Y
37) Choice of Locomotives for Freight, Passenger and Shunting Operations

ⅰ) Passenger Operation: WAP – 7 (Electric)
ⅱ) Freight Operation: WAG – 9 (Electric)
ⅲ) Shunting services: WDS – 6/WDG – 2 (Diesel)
38) Speed
Table 42 Speed of Passenger and Freight

Passenger Freight
Operation Operation
Section
Maximum Booked Maximum Booked
Permissible speed speed Permissible speed speed
Mahadevpur-
Bhalubang- 100 90 100 90
Mahuwa(Shivpur)
Pokhara-Katumandu 100 90 100 90
Tamsariya-Simara 100 90 100 90
Tamsariya-Simara 100 90 100 90

Rest all sections 160 145 100 90
3.10.2 Freight Operation

1) Goods Loading Station
ⅰ) Lahan
ⅱ) Janakpur
ⅲ) The other 13 Stations
39) Type of Wagons to be used
ⅰ) Open –for transporting coal, construction material etc.
ⅱ) Open/ Flats –for handling iron and steel material
ⅲ) Covered –for handling cement, fertilizers, food grains, salt, sugar etc.
ⅳ) Container Flats –for transporting containers holding smalls in consolidated
form
ⅴ) Tank Wagon for transporting POL and petroleum products.
ⅵ) Tank Wagon for transporting LPG.
40) Pay load and train composition
Table 43 Train Composition- Freight

Tare
No. of Pay Load Net Train Gross Train
Wagon Type Weight
wagon/ Train (ton) Load(ton) Load (ton)
(ton)
Open 58 65 22.47 3770 5073

Open/ Flat 40 65 23.28 2600 3532
Covered 40 65 24.55 2600 3582
Container-Flat 45 2x20ft/1x40ft 19.1 2700 3600
Tank-POL
48 55 27 2640 3936
Products
LPG 33 22.3 41.6 735.9 2109
41) Wagon Turn Round/ Rake Turn Round (WTR)

ⅰ) Procedure for Calculation of Wagon Turn Round
- Detention at originating terminal
- Transit time from loading station to destination station
- Detention at unloading terminal
- Transit time from unloading station to loading station
- Exigencies - crew change, unforeseen circumstances
ⅱ) Detention and Transit time of Goods Train

Total Turn Round (h) = Transit x 2 + Originating (8h) + Terminating (8h) + Enroute(5h)
42) Calculation of Wagon and Locomotives Requirement

ⅰ) Requirement of Wagon
Once the number of wagons to be loaded daily is known, it is multiplied with WTR and will
bring out the number of wagons required for accomplishing the required level of daily
loading. Since the wagons are likely to get damaged or sick during usage, adequate
allowance in terms of % of wagons has to be given so as to ensure maintaining the requisite
level of daily loading. This allowance is given keeping in view the sickness level through
experience. However, as a thumb rule, the bare requirement is enhanced by 4 % for repairs
and spares to arrive at the gross requirement of wagons.
ⅱ) Requirement of Locomotive
- Freight Train Operation
- Banking services at Tamsariya and Abukhareini
- Shunting Operations
3.10.3 Passenger Operation

1) Type and Capacity of Coaches
Table 44 Type and Capacity of Coaches

Capacity
S. No. Type of Coach Remarks
Seating Sleeping
1 Upper Class Sleeper Coach – AC 24 24
2 2-Tier Sleeper Coach – AC 54 54
3 Chair Car 83 -
4 3- Tier Sleeper Coach 80 90

5 Seating Ordinary Coach 99 -
6 SLR 40 -
43) Transit Time of Passenger Trains
Table 45 Transit Time of Passenger Trains

Transit time in Hrs. and
S. No. Section
Mins
1 Gaddhachowki-Tamsariya-Kathmandu 10.32
2 Kakarbita-Tamsariya-Kathmandu 9.53
3 Birgunj -Simara-Tamsariya-Kathmandu 5.36
4 Gaddhachowki-Tamsariya 7.05
5 Kakarbita-Tamsariya 6.18
6 Tamsariya-Pokhara 3.25
7 Kathmandu-Pokhara 3.54
8 Nepalgunj-Kohalpur-Gaddhachowki 5.59
9 Lumbini-Butwal-Kohalpur 7.21
10 Bhairahawa-Butwal-Simara-Birgunj 6.05
11 Birgunj-Simara-Bardibas-Janakpur 4.31
12 Kakarbita-Itahari-Biratnagar-Janakpur 7.52
44) Requirement of Coaches and Locomotives

For the purpose of working out coaches and locomotives, the number of trains required to be
run on the system was established and thereafter, depending upon their transit times and
anticipated links, number of rakes was determined. The requirement of locos was worked
out as per the passenger plan. In order to determine number of coache class wise each rake
was evaluated according to the classes of passengers likely to use this facility. This
allowance is given keeping in view the sickness level through experience. However, as a
thumb rule, the bare requirement is enhanced by 4 % for coaches and 15 % for locomotives.
3.10.4 Line Capacity

1) Calculation of Line Capacity
ⅰ) Runing time of the ruling block section by the slowest train

ⅱ) Block working time
ⅲ) Efficiency factor is taken as 70% as the trains are not always evenly spaced
ⅳ) 50 % of the result is counted for single line
# Scotts formula is as under
Line Capacity – {(1440/(running time + Block working time)*70/100}/2
45) Observation on Line Capacity
ⅰ) There is no line capacity constraints on the entire network except on Tamsariya –

Abu Kaireini and Abu Kaireini – Kathmandu sections where line capacity
utilization has crossed the 100% mark. However, due to the in built cushions it
will not force any problem during the first stage commencing from 2019-2020.
ⅱ) During the 2nd stage 2024-2025 onwards the utililisation of above mentioned 2 nd
sections has crossed 150% mark without maintenance block and with
maintenance block still further up to 187.9 %. In this stage yet another section
Chandranigahpur~Lahan~Mechi (Kakarbitta) section approaches 51% mark
ⅲ) During the 3rd stage for the two critical section mention above the utilization
crosses even 200% mark and for the 3rd section it approaches almost 65%.
ⅳ) During the last stage 2034-2035 onwards it almost touches 300% in respect of the
two already critical sections and around 80% in the case of 3rd section.
3.10.5 Application System of Working

1) The Absolute Block System.
2) The Automatic Block System.
3) The Following Trains System.
4) The Pilot Guard System.
5) The Train-Staff and Ticket System
6) The One Train Only System.
3.10.6 Review Comment

Running time is obtained by theoretical calculations, and is sometimes inconsistent with the
actual driving condition. Therefore, when developing a train operation plan by rectifying the
standard travel time, trial operation should be conducted prior to system opening in order to
check performance of rolling stock, facilities condition, operation handling problems, and
over run/under run of the running time calculated.
As a result of trial operation, when tractive performance or run performance is too low to
make the train run at a scheduled speed, if various reasons including restricted traction force
due to the machine capacity make speed limits necessary, the standard travel time should be
re-rectified for train operation planning.
Separate facility planning is not required in the section of Chandranigahpur~Lahan~ Mechi

(Kakarbitta) because there is room of track capacity. However, it has to be reviewed and laid
out for smooth train operations while planning train operation.
3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT STUDY
3.11.1 General Introduction

Bardibas-Inaruwa sector of the Mechi-Mahakali Electrified Railway is under detail design
process. The alignment passes through 5 districts namely Mahottari, Dhanusha, Siraha,
Saptari, and Sunsari. After finalizing the alignment, affected districts and the
VDC/municipality will be assessed for social impact. The major three alternatives are
distributed differently from the proposed Mohanpur and Rajbiraj Stations of Saptari to
Inaruwa the end point of the alignment. All these alternatives have different pros and cons
that should be considered rationally.
The railway alignment runs through south of the East-West Highway. As it approaches
nearer the EW Highway, the residential impact upon densely settlement-structures will be
high, raising the compensation cost to the affected land and structures. The railway as like
other Mega Project in Nepal- social impact of the project will be high enough. However,
major settlements should be avoided from the alignment section and the replacement cost of
the affected private properties should be appropriate for the social impacts mitigation
measures.
3.11.2 Concerning Issues

1) The feasibility study has not much considered about the sensitivity of the geology of
the large sedimentation of the Koshi basin along the proposed Koshi Bridge, hydrology of
the catchment area of the Koshi River system and the inherent political agreement about the
Koshi Barrage between Nepal and India. It should be considered all those issues while
designing the Railway Bridge on the Saptakoshi River.
Alternative-1
The proposed first alternative of the railway alignment passes through upstream of Koshi
Barrage, which is high flood zone and the sediment area. It has proposed 8.80 km bridge on
the Saptakoshi River. Being outburst corridor of Koshi, the long stretches of the eastern side
is also sensitive for frequent flooding due to weak river training, it may need bridge like
structure across the long outburst river course section. Similarly, authority of the Koshi
Tappu Wild life Reserve has not positive cooperation to conceive such a sensitive railway
project crossing along the southern side of its area. Moreover, the alignment will pass near
to 500 meters distance from the Nepal- India border that has great strategic sense in the
safety and security perspective of the railway service in Nepal.
Alternative- 2
The proposed second alternative alignment that turns left from the Mohanpur Station along
the side of degraded forest and hillock like topography in the north. It passes along the side
of frontier land, it will not benefit its periphery people due to forest area in one side. It can
also affect the forest area in some extent across the section. Ultimately, it will also coincide
with the same area for crossing over the Koshi River into the third alternative alignment
section. Therefore, it is also not much significant alignment as like first alignment.
Alternative-3
The proposed third alternative which turns toward the north from the Rajbiraj Station and
crosses nearby Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve by 9.50 km bridge on Koshi Bridge. Though it
is the longest alignment, it has great significance due to less sedimentation and hard bed
rock. It has much better geological, hydrological features and the strategic point of view as
well. Moreover, people of long stretches will also be benefited by this alignment. It runs
from outer side of the KTWR area from the north. This alternative is accounted as the best
alternative alignment due to above mentioned reasons.
2) Due to the lowering down of the ground surface toward the south, there will be higher
possibility of conflict between the two countries people by the river lodging caused by
border side Dams that constructed by the Indian side. The ultimate reason for the river
denudation across the submerging situation in Nepal have been identified as border side
Dams. To fix the final Railway alignment, the above reasons should be considered nicely.
Therefore, it will recommend selecting the northern alignment rather than the southern one.
3) The affected properties have been categorized as private, community and the
government. In the private properties, cultivable and residential land loss will have major
impact. Perennial and non-perennial trees and crops, houses, sheds, shops, wall, wells, tap
etc. also will be the major affected private properties. Under the community properties,
grazing land, community forest, schools, community buildings, religious sites, canals,
public water supply system, etc. will be considered. Under the government properties,
government open land, forest and building structures will be the major affected assets by
this project.
4) Social impact will be high in this long railway section where almost private land falls
under it. Changes on local movement patterns and improved access to markets and social
facilities has also envisaged. Households who are solely dependent on agriculture and lose
their maximum lands, will be more affected.
5) To address the potential losses and social impact, the social impact assessment will be
under taken as a part of resettlement plan. A census of potentially affected land owners and
other assets falling within the ROW of railway alignment will be carried out. Likewise, 20
percent of the project affected households will also be assessed in socio-economic sample
survey. The gender and local aspects will be included in the social assessments. A complete
inventory of affected persons and their assets will be prepared for the compensation
estimation of affected assets.
3.12 QUANTITY AND COST ESTIMATES
3.12.1 Cost Estimates
Unit rate of each cost estimate item in the feasibility study report, except railway
specific items, is based on standard norms for construction works in Nepal published by
the Government of Nepal, and rates for labor, materials and equipment are as per the
rates fixed by the various District Development Committees of the project area.
Likewise some rates are based on the market rates prevalent in Nepal and adopted by
the consultants and contractors working in similar ongoing projects in Nepal. Rates for
railway specific items are generally not available in Nepal and for such items the
international rates used in India have been adopted by justifying that it is the nearest
country to Nepal having a broad gauge network. The international rate has been
adjusted for local duty and transport tariffs and custom duty of 1% has been taken for
entry into Nepal. In the basic rates transport tariff is also added for final rates.
In the feasibility study report the total cost estimate has been divided into two main
groups, Capital Cost Estimate and Operation and Maintenance cost estimate. Capital
cost estimate is further divided into Fixed Infrastructure and Rolling Stocks.
The Fixed Infrastructure cost is divided in different segments. Average rates per
Kilometer calculated by the F/S Report for different segments are summarized as
follows:
 Land & Associated Activities: The cost of land acquisition, compensation for
buildings, roads and other mitigation measures has been used for rate analysis as
per government rate. The cost does not consider forest land, river land and
government land. Total cost for land and associated activities is estimated as
NRs. 14.4 million per km.
 Earthwork: Rate Analysis was carried out as per standard norms approved by the
Government of Nepal (GoN). Final cost for earthwork is estimated as NRs. 41.7
million per km.
 Protection Work (Retaining Walls): Rate Analysis was carried out as per
standard norms of GoN. Final cost is estimated as NRs. 0.5 million per km.
 Blanketing: Rates calculation uses norms of Government of Nepal for similar
kind of works. Final cost is estimated as NRs. 11.2 million per km.
 Bridges: The quantity as per feasibility report was calculated using the
feasibility stage design as deemed good by the structure bridge engineer and
quantity survey expert. Final cost of bridges in feasibility report is estimated as
 Permanent Way (Tracks items including ballast and Permanent Way
Machinery): The Indian rate for these items adjusting for custom duty and
transport tariff has been used. Ballast rate is worked out in feasibility study as
per norms for similar item in Nepal. Final cost is estimated as NRs. 38.6 million
per km.
 Station, Buildings, Sheds, and Offices etc: In the feasibility study rate used is as
per prevailing market rates in Nepal and as per standard norms of GoN. Final
cost estimated is NRs. 5.3 million per km.
 Electrical Engineering Works: Rate of similar items used in India at the study
time has been used with transport tariff and duties etc. Final cost estimated is
 Signaling, Train Control and Telecommunication Works: The unit rates of the
items taken in the cost estimates are derived from the latest accepted unit rates
for these items from the contracts awarded for similar work in India. These unit
rates are also inclusive of transportation and duties etc. Final cost estimated is
 Maintenance Facilities for Rolling Stock: Final estimated cost is NRs. 7.2
million per km.
 Preliminary Expenditure like DPR, Detailed Engineering and Supervision etc. :
The rate taken for Detailed Project Report is 2% of total cost and Detailed
Engineering and Supervision includes 8% of total cost. The total cost per km
estimated is NRs. 20.4 million.
 Contingencies: 5% of the total project cost is used as contingencies. The total
cost per km estimated is NRs. 10.2 million per km.
Rolling Stock cost includes the cost of wagon, coaches, shunting (diesel) locomotives
and accident relief crane, and electrical locomotives. The F/S Report provides the
estimated total cost of rolling stock for different horizon years. The total cost for rolling
stock for the nearest coming year 2019-2020 as used in feasibility report is NRs. 53.26
billion.
The Operation and Maintenance cost is divided into different head as Operation and
Commercial Activity Cost, Operation and Maintenance Cost of Electrical Locomotives,
Maintenance Cost of Civil Engineering Structures, Maintenance Cost of Signaling,
Train Control and Telecommunication works, Maintenance Cost of Electrical
Engineering Works, Maintenance Cost of Coaches, and Operation & Maintenance Cost
of Shunting (Diesel) Locomotives. The total estimated cost is projected for different
years. The total cost for the nearest coming year 2019-2020 as used in feasibility report
is NRs. 5.57 billion.
The feasibility study has provided the fixed infrastructure capital cost estimate for each
section of railway. For instance above cost of each segment from 1 to 13 is based on the
cost estimate of section 4, Chandranigahapur-Lahan. But the cost estimate for rolling
stock and operation and maintenance is for total project of Mechi–Mahakali Railway.
Based on above rates the total Fixed Infrastructure capital cost of Bardibas-Inaruwa
section of MMR is summarized as NRs. 32,061.5 million assuming that the project
length is 137 Km. Brief breakdown is presented in Table 46.
Table 46 Tentative Cost Estimate as per F/S
Lengt Cost/Km in Total

S
Description of Item h (Million (Million Remarks
No
(Km) NRs) NRs)
Land and Other

1 associated 137 14.4 1,972.80
Properties
2 Earthwork 137 41.7 5,712.90
3 Protection Work 137 0.5 68.50
4 Blanketing 137 11.2 1,534.40
137 Considering Structures

5 Bridges 55.3 7,576.10
of project section only.
6 Permanent Way 137 38.6 5,288.20
Stations and other 137

7 5.30 726.10
Buildings
8 Tunnels 137 0.00
9 Electrical 137 12.2 1,671.40
Signaling and 137

1
Telecommunicatio 17.1 2,342.70
0
n
1 Maintenance 137
7.2 986.40
1 Facilities
Total 27,879.50
1 Design and 13 2,788.0

@ 10% of total cost
2 Supervision Cost 7 0
1 1,394.0
Contingencies @ 5% of total cost
3 0
32,061.
Grand Total
50
Conclusion and review comments
 Though the unit rates are calculated on the basis of Government norms and rates
fixed by the respective District Development Committees, some of the unit rates
such as earthwork, collection of local construction materials could be compared
with equipment based norms. Such comparison may optimize the total cost of
the project.
 Lead is one of the main factors, which affect the unit rate substantially. Though
it is very difficult to ascertain all details about the lead of each and every item
for each section in such a huge project, it is necessary to analyze in more detail
during the detailed design period.
 Presently rate of some construction materials has gone up sharply in comparison
to the rates of feasibility period. For instance fuel (diesel, petrol etc),
reinforcement, labor charges etc. have been increased considerably.
Subsequently the transportation cost, equipment hire charge, locally available
construction materials will automatically increase.
 During the detail design period all parameters considered by the feasibility study
will be once more analyzed in detail and more pragmatic unit rates and cost
estimate will be produced.
4. KEY ISSUES FOR DESIGN
4.1 RAILWAY ALIGNMENT

The railway lines in the FS have been reviewed to identify problems to provide an optimal
route plan. The route plan will be prepared by utilizing the existing topographic map and
Google map and will be finalized after site survey. Main considerations for route planning
are as follows:
 Economic Feasibility (Minimum Construction Costs)
- Route will be planned in a cost saving manner to minimize construction
costs for project feasibility by minimizing route length and structures
(bridges etc.)
 Environment and Social Impacts
- Route will be planned in consideration of environment and social impacts to
minimize expected environmental damage and reduce interference with
various utilities including houses, power transmission lines, canals,
highways and factories to minimize civil complaints.
- Especially regarding the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve area.
 Passenger Convenience and Train Operation
- Route will be planned in consideration of passenger convenience and
efficient train operation.
4.2 MOBILIZATION OF ENGINEERING SURVEY TEAM FOR VARIOUS

ACTIVITIES
Railway alignment and station locations finalized by the design team need to be approved by
the Client side before mobilizing the detail topographical survey team. The survey works
will be led by a senior surveyor who will form minimum of three field survey teams. The
one field survey team will carry out the survey works starting from Bardibas side and
proceed eastward and other field survey team will start from Talaha and proceed eastward.
The third field survey team will start from Koshi River and proceed eastward up to the
endpoint. In each of the field survey team, sub-teams will consist for setting of
monumentation, bench marks, detailing and leveling. After the conclusion of the field
survey works, the same team will prepare the topographic map. The map will be verified in
the field and a final topographic map will be produced. The detail design team will
periodically verify and monitor the field survey team's work.
4.3 MOBILIZATION OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEAM

Geotechnical investigation team and the topographical survey team will be mobilized at the
same time. The geotechnical expert will oversee the investigation works and determine the
required number of field teams.
4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

The major issues that will be studied in detail during detailed EIA study phase are as
follows.
 Inventory of private land, house, factories and other properties likely to be lost
due to project implementation
 Inventory of loss of biological resources, especially forest loss and pressure on
the Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve area
 Detail of the construction materials required, especially embankment material
for railway track, its quantification, its possible sources and its possible
impacts
 Impacts and pressure on local environment during construction period, local
resource use and labor related issues
 Possible impacts due to bridge construction, especially Koshi bridge
Each of the above major issues and impacts will be studied in detailed with respect to its
magnitude and severity, and then methods to minimize or avoid such impacts will be
proposed. Working procedures and monitoring mechanisms will be devised for better
Environmental Management during construction period.
4.5 SOCIAL ISSUES INCLUDING LAND ACQUISITION

During detail study phase, following social related works will be studied.
 Inputs to detail design team for possible local social issues, such as settlement,
religious and cultural issues etc.
 Cadastral map acquisition for the corridor and verification of landowners, their
plot size and affected plot sizes, with coordination from respective Land
Revenue Offices
 Inventory of all households who are likely to lose their private properties –
land, houses or other properties
 Estimation of the property value for calculation of compensation costs – based

on current land prices
 Estimation of resettlement costs and resettlement plans for displaced people
A detailed social report will summarize all the local social issues that are identified during
the study.
5. CONCLUSION
Feasibility Study Review Report is prepared based on TOR of Detail Survey and Design of
Electrified Railway Line (HSR) for Bardibas-Inaruwa Sector of Mechi-Mahakali Railway
(Package-1).
Current status of alignment, structure (earthwork, bridges etc.) plan, railway system, etc. are
reviewed and examined through the feasibility study review while critical issues and
direction of detail design are established. The direction of detail design is as follows:
 Detail design to reduce construction costs with
- Minimum length of alignment
- Minimum length of structure (bridges)
- Minimum interference of utilities and obstructions (houses, power
transmission lines, canals, highways and roads and factories, etc.)
 Minimum civil complaints
- Civil complaints are resolved by minimizing interference with residential
areas
 Combined operation (HSR, Local and Freight trains)
 Design of alignment and structures in consideration of constructability
The Consultant would exert its best efforts to deliver an optimal alignment plan, structure
and system designs in consideration of economic efficiency, constructability, safety, etc. The
Client's guidance, suggestions and close cooperation are necessary for successful
implementation of the service.

Railway Electrification Feasibility Study Review

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

Railway Electrification Feasibility Study Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Detail Survey and Design of Electrified Railway Line (HSR) for

Feasibility Study Review Report

3.2.1 Basic Concept.....................................................................................................................26

3.10.1 Rail Network and Facilities at Different Stations................................................................68

Table 31 Items and Purpose of Geological and Geotechnical Investigation.........................47

Figure 1 Railway Route Map for Section-4..........................................................................10

2. COMPOSITION AND CONTENTS OF F/S REPORT

2.1 COMPOSITION OF F/S

Table 1 Salient Features and Description of the Project

2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE F/S STUDY

 Assessment of environment and socio-economic impacts

2.3 SCOPE OF WORK

2.3.1 Traffic Survey and Demand Forecast

2.3.2 Selection of Alignment and Preliminary Designs

 Prepare technical drawings of horizontal and vertical alignments

2.3.3 Rolling Stock and System Studies

2.3.4 Specification for the Project

2.3.5 Preliminary Cost Estimate

 Relocation of household/business resettlement, cost of environmental impact

2.3.6 Environmental and Social studies

2.3.7 Financial and Economic Studies

2.3.8 Institutional Capacity Studies

3. DETAILED REVIEW RESULTS OF F/S

3.1 RAILWAY ALIGNMENT

3.1.1 Review Results of Design Criteria

Table 2 Comparison Results for Design Criteria of Railway

Gauge  1,676mm(Broad Gauge)  1,435mm (Standard Gauge)

Max  Max Speed : 100km/hr  Passenger ; 250km/hr

3.1.2 Review Result of Trackbed

Table 3 Earthwork of Banking Cross Section

 Trackbed width : 6.85m  Banking slope inclination 1 : 2.0

Table 4 Earthwork of Cutting Cross Section

 Trackbed width: 6.25m  Slope inclination1 : 1.0

Table 5 Type of Retaining Wall

Classification Gravity Type Reverse T Type Buttress Type

Height Less than 3.0m 3.0~7.0m 7.0~14.0m

Table 6 Application in Banking Area

Height Less than 3.0m 3.0~7.0m

Table 7 Application in Cutting Area

Height 1.0~3.0m 1.0~3.0m 3.0~7.0m

3.1.3 Railway Route Status

Figure 1 Railway Route Map for Section-4

3.1.4 F/S Route Status Comparison

Figure 2 F/S Recommended and Alternative Alignment Route

3.1.5 F/S Route Comparison (Recommended Route vs. Alternative Route)

Table 8 F/S Route Comparison (1)

2) Line Length and Structure Status

Table 9 F/S Route Comparison (2)

Table 10 Composition of Trackbed

3.1.7 F/S Alignment Evaluation

Figure 3 Location of Project

Figure 4 Alignment Overview

2) Horizontal Alignment Status

Table 11 Horizontal Alignment Status

Figure 5 Installation Rate by Curve Figure 6 Horizontal Alignment

Table 12 Vertical Alignment Status

Figure 7 Gradient Installation Rate Figure 8 Vertical Alignment Composition

3.1.8 F/S Alignment Review and Improvement Measures

Table 13 Comparison F/S Alignment

i) Analysis Result for F/S Alignment

Figure 9 Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve

Major Flora and Fauna

Figure 10 Wild water buffalo and Birds