SL.

NO DESSCRIPTION PAGE NO
1 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 to 12
2 HYDRAULIC DESIGN 13 to 25
3 ABUTMENT DESIGN 26 to 60
(a) LIVE LOAD ANALYSIS 27 to 30
(b) DESIGN DATA 31 to 32
(c) EARTH PRESSURE CALCULATION 33 to 34
(d) PILE CAP DSIGN 35 to 43
(e) ABUTMENT SHAFT DESIGN 43 to 48
(f) PILE DESIGN 49 to 51
(g) ABUTMENT CAP DESIGN 52
(h) DIRT WALL DESIGN 53 to 54
(i) APPROACH SLAB DESIGN 55 to 56
(j) RETURN WALL DESIGN 57 to 58
(k) DEAD LOAD CALCULATION 59 to 60
4 PIER DESIGN 61 to 100
(a) DESIGN DATA 62
(b) WIND LOAD CALCULATION 63
(c) WATER CURRENT FORCE CALCULATION 64 to 65
(d) PILE CAP DSIGN 66 to 73
(e) PIER SHAFT DESIGN 74 to 82
(f) PILE DESIGN 83 to 85
(g) PIER CAP DESIGN 86 to 90
(h) DEAD LOAD CALCULATION 91 to 92
(i) LIVE LOAD CALCULATION 93 to 97
(j) SEISMIC ARRESTOR DESIGN 98 to 100
5 SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN 102 to 147
(a) DESIGN DATA 102 to 103
(b) RCC T GIRDER DESIGN 103 to 108
(c) DECK SLAB DESIGN 109 to 114
(d) STAAD FILE 115 to 147
6 QUANTITY CALCULATION 148 to 170
(a) BBS 148 to 166
(b) QUANTITY ESTIMATION 167 to 170
7 SOIL REPORT 171 to 186
8 BOQ & SOME DETAILS 187 to 194
9 PERFORMA A, B, C 195 to 203
10 COST ESTIMATE 204 to 211
11 RATE ANALYSIS 212 to 248
Page 1
 DETAILS OF DRAWINGS

1 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/01

2 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/ABUTMENT/02

3 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/PIER/03

4 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/MISC/04

5 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/MISC/05

6 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/ABUTMENT/PILE & CAP/06

7 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/ABUTMENT/07

8 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/ABUT. & SEISMIC ARRESTOR/08

9 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/PIER/PILE & PILECAP/09

10 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/PIER/PEDESTAL & PIER/010

11 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/SUPERSTRUCTURE PART I/011

12 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/SUPERSTRUCTURE PART II/012

13 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/GAD/SUPERSTRUCTURE PART II/013

14 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/SUPER STR./LONG.GIR./014

15 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/SUPER STR./CR.GIR./015

16 DRG NO : - SUPERSTAR-2017-18/PMGSY/KURSAKANTA 3/RCC/SUPER STR./DECK SLAB/016

17 DRG NO : - SURVEY DRAWING (SITE PLAN)

18 DRG NO : - SURVEY DRAWING ( CROSS-SECTIONS)

Page 2
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

General

Executive engineer Rural Road Development Department Araria

Government of Bihar has assigned to prepare Detailed Project Report
for high level bridge at L067 Kursakanta Hattachowk to Dograbandh road
at chainage- 4.9 km Forbesganj Block,in District - Araria to Superstar
designer Pvt Ltd Patna. This is a detailed report meant for approval of
all structural calculations of design, soil exploration, drawing and
estimate. Bridge length, span arrangement, HFL, soffit level & deck lvl.
has been approved in detailed calculation and the geo-technical
investigation data.

2 Nos of TBM points are indicated in survey plan drawing and shown
at site by paint marking at bridge site.
TBM1 :x +529536.634, y +2912238.989, z +99.644 is located on
A1 side bank.
TBM2 :x +529593.618, y +2912255.159, z +99.659 is located on
A2 side bank.

PRESENT PROPOSAL
Based on hydraulic survey detail & geotechnical investigation details
a high level bridge of RCC T beam & slab of 18 m as effective span
without footpath & 2 no of span is proposed.The proposed bridge
will be sited on the existing alignment crossing the stream.

The FRL of the bridge has been fixed considering the high flood level,
depth of the proposed superstructure and the level of the approach
roads.
 Page 3

The main features of proposed bridge are as given below :

General features
Name of the bridge : Bridge at L067 Kursakanta Hattachowk to
Effective span arrangement : 2x18m Dograbandh road
Length of bridge : 39.12 m
RL of deck formation level : 103.50 m
H.F.L. : 100.850 m
Lowest bed level : 97.817 m
Highest of deck level above L.B.L. : 5.68 m
Thickness of expansion joint : 40 mm
Thickness of concrete wearing coat : 75 mm
Overall width of superstructure : 6.4 m
Carriageway width : 5.5 m
Total width of bridge : 6.4 m
Diameter of pier : 2m
Width of abutment shaft : 1m
Approach slab : 3.5 m
Dirt wall thickness : 0.4 m
Length of approach roads : 100
Type of bearing : POT PTFE
Maximum discharge : 191.96 cumec
Type of bridge : High level RCC bridge
Type of superstructure : RCC T beam & slab
Type of substructure : RCC wall type abut./Circ.pier
Type of foundation : Pile foundation
Grade of concrete in superstructure : M30
Grade of concrete in substructure : M30
Grade of concrete in pile : M35
 Page 4
CHAPTER - 1.0
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This detailed project report is being submitted with the outline of the
terms of reference, for bridge at L067 Kursakanta Hatta chowk to Dogra
bandh road at Forbesganj block Division - Forbesganj, District - Araria.In
this report project overview, design standards of proposed bridge,
design methodology, bridge design calculations (along with hydrological
& hydraulic calculations) & cost estimate has been discussed.

The proposed format of the report is based on presenting as much

available information and data and their analysis ofthe bridge as possible
and on the consultant's presenting approach and methodology in the
preparation of every major item of the project components.

CHAPTER - 2.0
2.0 SITE VISIT REPORT & SITE SELECTION OF PROPOSED BRIDGE

2.1 General
It is a prerequisite that all available data are studied before any field
survey is taken up for filling up of the data gap.
Equipped with the road map of bihar and list of road links identified
for the dpr the consultant organized a field survey team for inspection
and detailed survey for the bridge.

2.2 Site visit report

The consultant carried out a detailed survey for the proposed bridge to
determine the waterway, span arrangement, type of foundation, type of
substructure . The approximate width of the river at proposed site is
62m. The average depth of water from lowest bed level is 2m. It may
however be noted that in times of flash flood, the information obtained
from local inquiry was that the level of water might even rise to much
higher fromthe LBL the above feature has been keptin mind while detailed
survey has been done.

2.2 Site selection for the proposed bridge

 The various featuresof thebridge like the locationand proposed formation
level have been based on the proposed alignment of road.

Page 5
CHAPTER - 3.0

The following chapter enlists the Design Standards proposed for the
high level RCC bridge.The cross-sectional width of the bridge will be
as follows.
3.1 proposed width of bridge
18m t beam and slab is used for superstructure.and grade of concrete
is taken as m30.
width of clear carriageway : 5.5 m (without footpath)
overall width of bridge : 6.4 m

3.2 Grade of concrete

- Superstructure - M30
- Return wall - M30
- Abutment & pier - M30
- Abutmentcap & piercap - M30
- Pilecap - M30
- Pile - M35
- Dirtwall - M30
- Approach slab - M30
- PCC below approach slab - M15
- RCC kerb & railing - M30
- Pedestal & reaction block - M30

3.3 Cement
43 Grade ordinary portland cement confirming to IS : 8112 or 33 grade
ordinary portland cement confirming to IS : 269 or portland slag cement
confirming to IS : 455 capable of achieving the required design concrete
strength shall be used.

3.4 Reinforcement steel

All reinforcement steel shall be of high yield strength deformed bars
(Grade designation FE 500) confirming to IS : 1786 (except for mesh
reinforcement whichshall be MSbars grade designation FE 240 confirming
 to IS : 432 part -1 mild steel)
H.D bolt - Steel confirming to Grade 8.8 shall be used
Anchor bolt
Bolt :- 8.8 Grade confirming to IS : 1367 (part 3) - 1991
Nut :- property class 8 confirming to IS :1367 (part iv) - 1980
Nut + Bolt to have matching rolled thread Page 6

3.5 Concrete
Concrete shall be of design mix and shall have to achieve 28 days
characterisitics strength on 150 mm cubes for moderate condition or
exposure.

To improve workability of concrete admixtures confirming to IS : 9103

may be used subjected to satisfactory proven use.

Cement content in concrete shall not be less than 360kg/cubic meter of

concrete for moderate exposure.

Maximum water cementratio shall be .45 for moderate weather condition

3.6 Bearing
POT PTFE bearing is provided

3.7 Expansion joint

Single strip seal/slab seal expansion joints have been proposed. These
type of joints shall confirm to CI :2607 of morth's specifications for road
& bridges.

3.8 Wearing coat

The wearing surface of 75 mm thick has been proposed.

3.9 Railing
Bridge has been proposed with RCC railing on both sides.

3.10 Drainage spout

Drainage spout & collection pit assembly shall be fabricated from mild
steel and after fabrication the complete assembly except grating shall be
given a hot dipped galvanised coating. The reinforcement of top slab of
 box shall be suitabily modified to accommodate the drainage spout
the drainage spout shall be galvanized after welding the plats.

Page 7

3.11 Dead Load

The dead load carried by T beam & slab or member has been considered
for design consisting of the portion of the weight of superstructure (and
the fixed loads carried there on), which is supported wholely or partly
by the T beam & slab or member including its own weight.

3.12 Superimposed Dead Load

Self weight of curbs, wearing coats, railing etc has been considered as
superimposed dead load in design.

3.13 Live Load

The following live load has been considered for the design of bridge,
2 lane of class A
1 lane of 70R wheeled

3.14 Horizontal forces due to water current

On piers parallel to the direction of water current the intensityof pressure
has been calculated from following equation.
P = 52 kv^2
where P = Intensity of pressure due to water current in kg/sq.m
v= The velocity of current at point where the pressure
intensity is being calculated in meter per second.
k = A constant depending on the shape of pier.

3.14 Longitudinal forces

In design of road bridges longitudinal forces have been considered
arising from any one or more of followings.
Tractive effort caused through acceleration of driving wheels.
Braking effect resulting from application of of the brakes.
Friction resistance offered to the movement of free bearings due to
 change of temprature or any other cause.

3.15 Centrifugal forces

Since bridge have not been proposed on curve, centrifugal forces do
not play any role in designing the bridges.

Page 8

3.15 Earth Pressure Forces

Structures designed to retain earth fill would be proportional to with
stand pressure calculated inaccordance with coulomb'stheory, subject
to modification that enter of pressure exerted by backfill, when
considered dry, is located at an elevation of .42 of height of the wall
above the base instead of .33 of that height. No structure would how
ever be designed to withstand a horizontal pressure less than that
exerted by a fluid weighing 480kg/cu.m.

3.16 Seismic Forces

Seismic forces have been considered in the design of the bridge.

3.17 Temprature effects

Provisions would be made for stresses or movements resulting from
variations in temprature

3.18 Buoyancy
100 % buoyancy would be considered while checking stability of
foundations irrespective oftheir restingon soil/weathered rock or hard
rock. Pore pressure uplift limited to 15 % would be considered while
checking stresses of substructure elements.

3.19 Wind Load

Wind load has been considered in design of bridge.

3.20 Load combination

All members would be designed to sustain safely the most critical
combination of various loads and forces that can coexist.
3.21 Exposure condition
Except wherestated otherwise moderate exposure condition would be
considered in design

Page 9

3.22 Codes of Practice used

(a) Various codes of practice referred are as under :-

(i) IRC : 5 - 2015
(ii) IRC : 6 - 2014
(iii)IRC : 112 - 2011
(iv) IRC : 45 - 1972 (reprint - 1996)
(v) IRC : 78 - 2014
(vi) IRC : 83 - 1988 (part - I)
(vii) IS : 2911 - 1978
(viii) IRC : SP - 13 (reprint -2000)
(ix) IRC : 89 - 1997
(x) Is : 456 - 2000

(b) Units
Metric units are followed

(c) Concrete clear cover

For all reinforcement - as per cl : 304 of IRC : 112 -2011

(d) Miscellaneous
For thedesignof structuralelements allforce elements including
bendings & shears would be as per IRC codes of practices.
 Page 10

CHAPTER - 4.0

4.0 APPROACH & METHODOLOGY

4.1 General
The data collected through field inspection and detailed survey was
analysed in a systematic manner. The data collected in the survey are
studied with reference to hydraulic adequacy priror to arriving at a
suitable provision of waterway & span arrangement.

4.2 Analysis of the Inventories, Approach and Methodology

The inspection and detailed survey of bridge site were aimed to
ascertain the performance of the proposed structure particularly from
hydraulic adequacy and nature of channel.

4.3 Survey & Investigations

Detailed topographical & hydraulic survey has been conducted as per
IRC-SP-13.the crosssections oftheriver havebeen taken atthe proposed
bridge site, one on the upstream side and another on the downstream
side. A longitudinal section of the river has been taken along the
approximate line of thedeep waterchannel to ascertain the slope of the
bed. The hfl has been noted from local enquiry. Geotechnical investigat.
have been carried outat bridge locations and testing of the soil samples
have been done in laboratory.The details of geotechnical investigations
 are shown in bore log drawing.

4.4 Hydraulic calculations

The discharge through the river is calculated from the following three
methods :-
(i) Area velocity method using manning's formula for stream velocity &
the measured cross-sectional area of the river.
(ii) Catchment area method using dicken's formula.
(iii) By peak runoff from catchment method ( rational formula)

The design discharge is fixed at the maximum of the above three values
provided it does not exceed the next lower value by 50%.
Page 11
The waterway is calculated from the Lacey's formula ,comparing it with
the widthofthe river inbetween banks.The actual waterway is provided
based on judicious examination of the values obtained from different
considerations.Thedetails ofhydraulic calculations are presented in DPR.

As mentioned a new bridge is proposed over the existing crossing. The

bridge apparently have been surveyed with due consideration to
highest flood level. Adequacy of waterway at bridge site and minimum
free board between high flood level and soffit of superstructure have
been an important criteria in deciding the bridge length and the
formation level of the new high level bridge. The data on HFL were
established through local enquiry alongwith these cross-sections of the
waterway were noted both at upstream & downstream of the existing
structure. Based on these data bridge length was decided.

The proposed formation level of the bridge is estimated as per the

following.
Proposed formation level = Free board as indicated in clause 106 of IRC
+ Depth of superstructure + wearing course
+ Depth of highest flood level w.r.to lowest
bed level.
4.5 Detailed Construction Proposal
This proposed bridge would meet the present and future traffic require
ment both in terms of traffic & load. The material of construction and
construction technology have been selected keeping in view the local
constraint on material and terrain in this selection process prevailing
 construction practices have been reviewed and discussions were held
with the department officials to arrive at an acceptable material and
methodology of construction.

4.6 Criteria for Construction

The criteria for construction proposals of bridge have been set in terms
of both design and material specification keeping in view the cost
effectiveness and feasibility of construction method and local constrains

The design standards adopted have generally been proposed based on

the stipulations and guidelines set in standard specifications and code
of practicefor roadbridge of IRCand morthcirculars onnational highways
as open as design approach formulated for similar type of ongoing
projects. Page 12