DESIGN OF A CAUSEWAY ON A CREEK OF YAMUNA

NEAR PANIPAT

A dissertation
submitted in partialfulfilment of the requirements
for the award of the degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
(Civil Engineering)
by

VISHAL KUMAR
(Roll no. 211008)

under the guidance of

DR. BALDEV SETIA DR. S.N SACHDEVA

PROFESSOR PROFESSOR
Dept. of Civil Engineering Dept. of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology National Institute of Technology
Kurukshetra Kurukshetra

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA-136119
JULY 2013
 |WS>.
/A/' \A
 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
KURUKSHETRA

CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that the work presented in this dissertation entitled
DESIGN OF A CAUSEWAY ON A CREEK OF YAMUNA NEAR PANIPAT
which is being submitted to National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of Master of
Technology in Civil Engineering (Transportation Engineering), is an authentic
record of my own work carried out during the period from Jan 2013 to July 2013
under the supervision and guidance of Dr. S.N. Sachdeva, and Dr. Baldev Setia,
Professors, Civil Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology,
Kurukshetra.
The matter presented in this dissertation has not been submitted by me for the
award of any other degree of this institute or any other institute.

Dated: ) ^-Ql^^^^lO^ (v4alKumar)

RoU No. 211008

This is to certify that the alx)ve statement made by the candidate is correct to the
best of my knowledge.

Dr. Baldev Setia Dr. S.N. Sachdeva

Professor Professor
Civil Engineering Department Civil Engineering Department
National Institute of Technology National Institute of Technology
Kurukshetra Kurukshetra

Page i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This thesis is accomplished out of last six months of research that has been carried
out since January 2013. During this period of my work, there are some people
whose contribution in assorted ways to the research deserves a special mention. It
is a pleasure to convey my gratitude to them all in my humble acknowledgment.

In the first place I take this opportunity to express my sincere and heartfelt
gratitude to my guide Dr. S.N. Sachdeva and Dr. Baldev Setia, Professors,
Department of Civil Engineering National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra, for
his supervision, advice, and guidance from the very early stage of this research
work. Above all, he provided me the unflinching encouragement and support in
various ways. His valuable guidance, constructive suggestions, consistent
inspiration and most importantly the patience in developing this dissertation work
was exceptionally inspiring that enriched my growth as a student. Whenever I was
stuck up diiring the research work I found him available to provide his categorical
help. In fact, I am indebted to him far more than I can express myself here.

I am highly indebted to Dr. D. K. Soni, HOD, Department of Civil

Engineering, and National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra for his
administrative help and support to carry out the research work.

I would be highly thankful to Mr. Naresh Kumar, junior Engineer, PWD

(B&R) Haryana for his help and cooperation to carry out this work. My special
thanks are due to my friends Miss M.B Sushma, Mr. Ved parkash for their
consistent support and motivation throughout the dissertation work.

Last, but never the least, I express my heartfelt gratitude towards my parents
and, my Sister, for their support, motivation and encouragement throughout the
dissertation work and to take up this M.Tech course. , ,

VISHAL KUMAR
RollNo.2U.008

Page ii
 ABSTRACT
Safe and economical crossing of waterways is vital to road network as it can form
a significant proportion of the cost of construction and its maintenance. It is
necessary that the structures spanning the waterways must be in accordance with
the category of traffic, type of road and the necessity of end users. Category and
type of structure to be built on a stream will also be heavily dependent upon the
economics as well as the availability of funds.
Present work is the case study of a causeway 120 m long proposed to connect
two villages, namely DhansoU and Naglapar in district Panipat of Haryana. During
rainy season the villages gets disconnected via roads when the river Yamuna
flowing close by overflows its banks and water flows in a creek between the two
villages. Construction of submersible bridge at the same location would be much
costlier and a causeway could be defmitely adequate and economical proposal.
Data on hydraulic parameters like design discharge, bed slope of the creek, silt
factor. Manning's rugosity coefficient and longitudinal profile of the existing road
had been observed or computed on surveying the area. Data was also procured
fi-om the office of Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department (B&R)
Panipat. IRC: SP: 82-2008 has been adopted for the design.
The proposed causeway is 120 m long with the middle 70 m being design as a
vented causeway and the remaining 50 m, 25 m either side as a solid causeway. 33
nos. 1.2 m diameter, NP4 pipes have been recommended for the vented portion.
Guide posts of 0.90 m high spaced at a distance of 1.5 mfi-omeach other have
been provided on both sides of the road spanning thefiiUsketch of the vented as
well as the solid causeway. For the vented portion. Maximum scour depth and
depth of cut-off has been computed using Lacey's formulae. Further loose stone
protection has been provided upto 4.5 m and 8.1 m on the upstream and
downstream side of the causeway respectively. The design procedure has been
computed with the help of an Excel spreadsheet which aids in minimizing the
number of trials for different variables involved in the design. Design aspects are
presented in drawings prepared in AutoCAD. Some scope for fiirther work and
observations on the present IRC guidelines has also been outlined. The study and
the work are going to be equally useful to the field engineers and those involved in
academics.
Page iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS Page No.
CERTIFICATE (i)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (ii)
ABSTRACT (iii)
LIST OF TABLES (vi)
LIST OF FIGURES (vii-viii)

L INTRODUCTION 1-3
LI CAUSEWAYS 1
1.2 SCOPE OF STUDY 1
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF STUDY 2
1.4 ORGANISATION OF THE THESIS 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 4-19
2.1 TYPES OF CAUSEWAYS 4
2.2 SUBMERSIBLE BRIDGES 7
2.3 SELECTION OF THE TYPE OF CAUSEWAY 7
2.4 GEOMETRIC STANDARDS 9
2.4.1 Design Speed 10
2.4.2 Roadway Width 10
2.4.3 Camber 10
2.4.4 Gradient 11
2.4.5 Guide post, signs and markers 11
2.4.6 Maintenance 11
2.5 HYDROLOGY 12
2.5.1 Methods for determination of discharge 12
2.5.1.1 Empirical Method 12
2.5.1.2 Slope Area method 13
2.5.1.3 Rational Method 13
2.5.1.4 Unit Hydrograph Method 13
2.6 OTHER CAUSEWAYS 14
2.7 CONCLUDING REMARKS 19

Page iv
3. METHODOLOGY 20-25
3.1 GENERAL 20
3.2 IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM 21
3.3 IDENTIFICATION OF STRETCH 21
3.4 DATA COLLECTION FROM SOURCES 21
3.5 TABULATION OF DATA 22
3.6 ANALYSIS OF DATA 22

3.7 DESIGN OF CAUSEWAY BY IRC METHOD 23

3.8 FORMULAE TO BE USED 24

3.9 USE OF SUPPORTING TOOLS 25

3.9.1 AutoCAD 25
3.9.2 Microsoft Excel 25

4. STUDY AREA 26-30

4.1 GENERAL 26

4.2 PROBLEM AND THE CONCERNED VILLAGES 26

4.3 RIVER YAMUNA AND ITS RELEVANT CREEK 28

4.4 ADJOINING CAUSEWAYS 29

5. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 31-53

5.1 GENERAL 31

5.2 DESIGN OF WATERWAY 31

5.3 DESIGN OF CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT 44

5.4 DETAILS OF JOINTS IN C.C PAVEMENT 47

6. SUMMARAY & CONCLUSIONS 54-56

6.1 SUMMARY 54

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 55

6.3 SCOPE FOR FURTHER STUDIES 56

REFERENCES 57

APPENDIX 58-59

Page V
 LIST OF TABLES

Table no. Description Page No

2.1 Permissible number and Duration of Interruptions 9

2.2 MinimumWidthofCarriageway for Causeway 9

2.3 Width of Roadway 10

2.4 Pavement camber/cross fall 10

3.1 Levels taken along and perpendicular to the 22

existing road at site
3.2 Values of manning's n for different discharges 24

5.1 Reduced levels along the center line 31

5.2 Approximate K Value Corresponding to CBR 44

Values
5.3 Recommended Temperature Differentials for 45
Concrete Slabs
5.4 Values ofCo-efificientC Based on Bradbury's 46
Chart

Page vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. No. Description Page No

2.1 Fords with Boulders and Gabions 6

2.2 Vented causeway In Zimbabwe 14

2.3 Vented causeway-1 in Raygada,Odisha 15

2.4 Vented causeway-2 In Raygada,Odisha 16

2.5 Vented causeways over Pitesu Nallah On 18

Chandili-Dunduli road under KBK District
2.6 Scouring on the downstream of a vented 18
causeway
3.1 Schematic of study 20

4.1 Map showing course of River Yamuna 27

through Panipat

4.2 Broad location of site through Google Map 27

4.3 Photograph taken at actual site 28

4.4 Showing the location of Nanglaaar And 29

Nanglapar
4.5 Showing the location of Nawadaaar and 30
Nawadapar

5.1 Longitudinal profile at the center line of road 32

5.2 Vented causeway 38

5.3 Section A-A 39

5.4 Section B-B 40

5.5 Section C-C 41

5.6 Section D-D(Solid Causeway) 42

Page vii
5.7 Section E-E 43

5.8 Joints In cement concrete pavement 47

(Vented causeway portion)
5.9 Joints in cement concrete pavement 48
(Solid causeway portion)
49
5.10 Expansion Jo int
5.11 Contraction Jo int 50
(When slabs are cast continuously)
5.12 Contraction and construction joint 51
(When alternate slab are cast)
5.13 Longitudinal Joint 52
(When slabs are cast lane wise)
5.14 Longitudinal Joint (When concreting in 53
entire width is cast in one go)

Page viii
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Bridge is a structure built to span physical obstacles such as body of water, valley or
road for the purpose of providing passage over the obstacle. There are many different
designs that all serve unique purposes and apply to different situations. Design of
bridges varies depending on the fiinction of bridge, the nature of terrain where the
bridge is constructed, the material used to make it and the funds available to build it. A
bridge is an important element in transportation system. The history of development of
bridge construction is closely linked with the history of human civilization.

1.1 CAUSEWAYS

Among the various types of water crossings for low volume and less significant roads
are the submersible bridges, causeways, fords and gabions etc. The merit of such
structures lies in their economy and the life of these structures depend very much upon
their hydraulic design.

A causeway is one such paved submersible structure with or without openings

(vents) which allows flood to pass through and /or over it. These are proposed on rural
and less important link roads not likely to generate much traffic in near future. The
causeways may be proposed on streams of flashy nature with high frequency of short
duration floods or at sites where construction of submersible bridge is not economically
viable. Further, an essential requirement for a causeway is that it should not be
overtopped by stream flow comprising of surface runoff for more than six times in an
year. They are designed in a manner such that for majority of the period of the year, the
ordinary flow passes through the vents and is overtopped during the periods of high
flows only.

1.2 SCOPE OF STUDY

India is a coxmtry of villages. More than 70% of the population lives in villages. During
rainy season the rivers flow full and tend to overflow their banks. At places the banks
breach, resulting infloodingof the adjoining land. As a result the adjoining villages get
disconnected from the towns and from each other. The situation requires construction

Page 1
of bridges over the water flowing streams and creeks. Because of the huge cost
involved, construction of bridges may not be economically feasible. Therefore,
causeways may be the suitable alternative for such situations. In India, the large
number of villages and the requirement of connecting these villages with all-weather
roads necessitate construction of water crossing structures. However, most of the times
the proposals are offset by economics. Therefore, there is a large scope for construction
of causeways which are adequate and economical. The present study comprises of
design of a causeway for a creek of river Yamuna near Panipat. The essential input to a
causeway design is stream discharge, slope of stream, soil and traffic conditions.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

The present smdy is a combined field cum analytical study wherein a causeway has
been designed for a creek of river Yamuna. It was a referred problemfi-omthe B&R
wing of Public Works Department of Haryana. The data was partly provided besides
actual observations at site and elaborate discussion with the villagers. The design
calculations have been presented on Microsoft excel worksheet and drawings have been
made using AUTOCAD.

The major objectives of the study are as follows:

i. To study the locational details of the road crossing the Yamuna creek to
broadly assess the feasibility of construction of a causeway,
ii. To collect the hydrological, topographical, traffic and soil data for the site of
study.
iii. To design a technically safe and economically viable causeway as per the IRC
guidelines,
iv. To evolve and recommend easy-to-use guidelines for the design of causeways.

1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

The study undertaken for this dissertation has been covered in six chapters.

The first chapter. Introduction briefly discusses about bridges and causeways,
importance, scope and overall objectives of the study. The second chapter is of
Literature Review in which water crossing structures including causeways has been
explained. This chapter also includes guidelines as recommended by Indian Road
Congress (IRC).
Page 2
 In the third chapter, Methodology of the study has been given in which data
collected is tabulated and various steps of adopted methodology are discussed. In the
fourth chapter, Study Area has been verbally pictured besides explaining the details of
the specific. In the fifth chapter, Design of causeways has been done manually and
finally by using MICROSOFT EXCEL and drawings are prepared in AutoCAD.

The sixth chapter entitled the Summary & Conclusions summarizes the results of
the study. Scope of fiirther work on similar lines has also^been included in the same
chapter. This is followed by References and Appendix used during the study.

The present study is very helpful from the practical point as well as the academic
point of view. There are so many areas in our country where very high rainfall occurs
during the monsoons and these areas get inundated. During such periods these areas are
disconnected from the other areas. Such a situation warrants a good solution. From the
point of view of economics, construction of bridges is a very expensive proposition. So
causeway may be the suitable alternative. This study is very helpfiil for the field
engineers for constructing the causeways in ftiture.

Page 3
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
A caiiseway is a paved submersible structure with or without openings (vents) which
allows flood to pass through and /or over it. These are proposed on rural and less
important link roads not likely to experience much traffic in near future. The
causeways may be proposed on streams offlashynature with highfrequencyof short
duration floods or at sites where construction of submersible bridge is not
economically viable.
The following sections of the chapter covers various aspects related to causeways
which are mainly drawnfromIRC: SP: 82-2008 and IRC: SP: 20-2002.

2.1. TYPES OF CAUSEWAYS

There are mainly two types of causeways:
A. Paved causeways
B. Unpaved causeways
The following are covered under the category of paved causeways.
a) Flush causeway
In this type of causeway which is also called paved dip or road dam, the top level
of road is kept same as that of bed level of the channel. It is suitable where the
crossing remains dry for most part of year i.e. the stream is not perennial. Flush
causeways are not suitable for crossing the streams with steep bed slopes causing high
velocity even in low floods.
b) Vented causeway
A causeway provided with vents to permit normal flow of the stream to pass under
the causeway is known as a vented causeway. Vented causeways are classified as low
vented causeways and high vented causeways,
i. Low vented causeways
Low vented causeways are provided to cross quasi-perennial streams having
sandy beds in areas with annual rainfall less than 1000mm and where the carriageway
of a flush causeway would be liable to get slushy due to post monsoon flow in the
stream. The height of such causeways is generally less than 1.20m above the bed of
the watercourse. In exceptional cases, the height may be 1.50m above the bed level.
Page 4
Vents of small size are provided in the form of hume pipes. The sill level of vents is
kept about 150mni-300mm below the average bed level of the stream,
ii- High vented causeway
High vented causeway is provided when a road crosses a stream having one or
more of the following characteristics:
• Sizeable catchment area with annual rainfall more than 1000mm.
• Depth of post monsoon flow is more than 900mm.
• Flow is perennial but not large.
• Banks are low necessitating construction of high embankment in the
stream bed from considerations of the free board in non-submersible
portion as well as geometric standards of approach roads.
The height of causeway above the bed is generally kept between 1.5-3.0 m and larger
size of vents comprising of hume pipes.

The following types of causeways are covered under the category of unpaved
causeways. (Jones & Parry, 1993)
a) Fords
Fords are unpaved and only suitable for the lowest of traffic flows. These are the
simplest form of river crossings where the stream is wide, shallow and the approaches
are gentle. The running surface can be strengthened and made more even with stones
which are brought in and buried just below the surface. Alternatively, if the stones are
carried in theflow,these may be trapped by barriers made of boulders, gabions etc.

b) Boulders
Large stones placed across the river bed at the downstream side of the crossing are
reputed tofilterthe flow of water and retain gravel and sand, which eventually form a
more level and even surface for vehicles. However if the stones are too large, scour
will result. If they are not heavy enough, they will be washed away at thefirstflood.It
can shown in the Figure 2.1 (a)
c) Gabions
A more expensive but durable improvement may be made by replacing the
boulders with gabions to trap the river gravel or retain imported material. The
standard gabion is rectangular basket made of hexagonal steel wire mesh. It is
strengthened by edges of edges of heavier wire and by mesh diaphragms which divide
Page 5
it into Im long compartments. Gabion structure is more stable and durable. It is
important that gabions protrude only 150-300mm above the natural bed level of the
river, depending on the nature of the bed materials, otherwise they will cause heavy
scour at the downstream of the crossing. It can be shown in the Figure 2.1 (b)

Roadway

Boulders n

Plunge pool H I -niHini .0, i» 11 t iiii • • * > < • •

Sireann bed

(B) Ford with downstfcom boulders

0 3-ti mji I

< i X 1m rock ((,) fjjy^ ^ i j ^ dowrtsueam9dbion

filled gabion

Wire rope

Ic) Ford wilh {\M baskei

Figure 2.1 Fords with Boulders and Gabions
Page 6
2.2 SUBMERSIBLE BRIDGES
Where the traffic is dense enough to justify a dry crossing of a substantial ordinary
flood and the design flood is much greater, a submersible bridge is an alternative to a
vented causeway. Submersible bridges are able to pass a larger flow than the vents of
the causeway of the same height but are more susceptible to damage by the design
flood. The overturning moment at the pier foundation becomes very large unless the
piers are kept very short, and the horizontal and vertical forces on the deck require
solid restraint. Because of these difficulties submersible bridges are not recommended
for any foundation other than that on a rocky stratum.
Submersible bridge is normally sub classified as high submersible bridge or low
submersible bridge depending upon deck level with reference to OFL. The deck level
of high submersible bridge is fixed with reference to OFL and vertical clearance, and
as such the structure serves as high level bridge during OFL, but gets submerged
under higher floods with permissible number and duration of interruptions. This type
of bridge is suitable for streams having variation between HFL and OFL.
The deck level of low submersible bridge is fixed above the OFL so as to ensure
that the interruptions caused to traffic remain within permissible limits. However, the
submersible structures are also costly structures as compared to causeways. And in
the submersible structures the danger of scouring is high as compared to causeways.

2.3 SELECTION OF TYPE OF CAUSEWAY

The type of structwe across a watercourse has to be judiciously selected on the basis
of reconnaissance inspection report and available data. The choice mainly depends on
the classification of the project road, requirements of the user authority, hydrology of
the water course and availability of ftmds for the project. The following aspects may
be considered while selecting a submersible structure in general and a causeway in
particular.

a) Hydrological factors
i. Nature of stream i.e. flashy/perennial/seasonal etc. and velocity of flow
dxiring floods.
ii. Duration, magnitude of floods and interruption to traffic.
iii. Spread and depth of water during floods and post monsoon period.
iv. Extent of catchment Area.
Page 7
b) Transportation factors
i. Requirements of user authority and availability of funds,
ii. Category, importance of road and traffic intensity,
iii. Population to be served.

In the absence of any directions or specific guidelines by the user authority, the
following criteria may be followed for selection of suitable type of causeways on
different categories of roads.

a) Hydrological factors
i. Maximum mean velocity of stream during floods is more than 6m/sec.
ii. If firm banks are available and approaches are in cutting or height of embankment
for submersible portion of approaches is more than 2m.
iii. If after completion of causeway structures, the numbers of interruptions in a year
caused to traffic and duration of the interruptions are likely to exceed the
suggested values given in Table 2.1.

b) Transportation factors

i. These should be avoided on national highways.

ii. On roads which are likely to be upgraded or included, from fiiture traffic
considerations, in the National highway network,
iii. If the length of a high level bridge at such crossing would be less than 30m except
where construction of high level structure is not economically viable.

c) Economic factors

i. If the cost of causeway with its approaches is estimated to be more than

approximately 70% of the cost of high level bridge with its approaches near about
the same site,
ii. Roads of economic importance, roads linking important towns or industrial areas
with population more than 10000 where alternative all weather route with
reasonable length of detour is not available.

Pages
 Table 2.1: Permissible number and duration of interruptions
Category of roads
State highways, M.D
roads linking important
towns, industrial estates
O.D roads, village
roads
Source: IRC: SP: 82-2008
Max. no of permissible Duration of interruptions in
interruptions in an year hours at a time
6 2-6 h duration, less than 2h
not to be considered and
more than 6h not acceptable
6 6-12 h duration, less than 6h
not to be considered and
more than 12h not acceptable

2.4 GEOMETRIC STANDARDS

A road conforming to sound geometric standards results in economical operation of
vehicles and ensures safety. Geometric standards for approach roads to a causeway
depend on:
i. Classification of road
Whether state highway, major district roads or rural road which includes other
district road and village road,
ii. Location
Whether urban or non urban area,
iii. Terrain
Whether plain, rolling, mountainous or steep,
iv. Length of crossing
V. Requirements of the user authority

The following criteria (Table 2.2) may be adopted for minimum width of carriageway
for causeways.
Table 2.2: Minimum width of carriageway for causeways
Category of Road Minimum Width of Carriageway (m)
Plain & Rolling Mountainous &
Terrain Steep Terrain
Single lane 6.8 5.5
Two Lanes 7.5 7.5
Page 9
2.4.1 Design Speed
From considerations of safety of road users, lower design speed is adopted for the
immediate approaches to a causeway. The informatory sign boards installed on
approaches should indicate permissible speed of 35 km/hr in case of plain and rolling
terrain and 20 km/hr in case of mountainous and steep terrain irrespective of any
higher speed adopted for the design of the road.

2.4.2 Roadway Width

Width of roadway should be as shown in Table 2.3
Table 2.3: Width of roadway (m)
Road classification Plain &Rolling Terrain Mountainous &
steep Terrain

State Highways
o Single lane 12 6.25
o Two lane 12 8.8
Major District Roads
o Single lane 9.0 6.25
o Two lane 9.0 8.8
Rural roads
o Single lane 7.5 6.0
o Two lane 9.0 7.5

2.4.3 Camber/Crossfall
The Camber/crossfall on straight sections of immediate approaches and on causeway
should be unidirectional towards the downstream and as recommended in Table 2.4
depending on type of surface of pavement.
Table 2.4: Pavement camber/crossfall
Surface type Unidirectional
crossfall (%)
For all categories of roads
High type bituminous surfacing or cement concrete 2.0
Thin bituminous surfacing for approaches 2.5
Brick/Stone set Pavement 3.0

Page 10
2.4.4 Gradients
As a general rule, values of ruling gradient specified as per IRC: 73 should be
adopted. However in case of immediate approaches to causeways, carrying substantial
slow traffic, flatter gradients than ruling values should be preferred. Nevertheless,
gradients in immediate approaches unless, otherwise permitted by user authority,
should not exceed 5% (1 in 20) irrespective of nature of terrain.

2.4.5 Guide post, Signs and Marlcers

Guide post should be set each side of the carriageway between 1-1.5 m apart,
accordmg to the probability of catchingfloatingdebris. There are two opinions about
their height.
i) They should be high enough to be visible during the highest expected floods.
ii) They should be visible only when the water is shallow enough for vehicles to
cross.
The post may be of durable tinjber, metal or concrete, according to the material
used for the carriageway surface and curtain walls.
All water crossing should be well signed in advance. Low level crossings present
more of a hazard to traffic than conventional bridges because of the change in vertical
aUgnment as well as the possibility of encoimtering water on the carriageway. Depth
gauges should indicate the depth of water at the lowest point of the crossing. Simple
black and white marking are the best with an indication of the units used. Post should
be about 300nim in diameter or square placed within the easy vision of approach but
well away from possible impact damage by vehicles. The post may be of durable
timber, metal or concrete according to the material used for the carriageway surface
and curtain walls.

2.4.6 Maintenance
Submersible crossings of all types require more frequent maintenance than most
conventional bridges. Therefore, the structural design should allow for easy repair of
anticipated damage, which is usually caused by scour. On very erodible beds it is
often more successftil to build gabion curtain walls and use Reno mattress aprons
rather than a rigid concrete structure, and to accept that some rebuilding will be
required each year.
Page 11
2.5 HYDROLOGY
The design of efficient and economical hydraulic structures is achieved only if we
have knowledge of hydrology and the characteristics of the stream or river. In most
cases hydrological record of the stream, particularly data regarding floods may not be
available. A rational estimation of design flood discharge for the specified return
periods leads to economical design of bridge foundation for causeway. The hydraulic
structures especially bridges have failed in the part due to inadequate assessment of
high flood level or designflooddischarge.

2.5.1 Methods for Determination of Design Discharge

The design discharge for which the waterway of most of the causeway is to be
designed should be based on flood discharge corresponding to highest observed flood
level, irrespective of the return period of that flood or the flood of 50 years' return
period whichever is higher. The design discharge can be determined by the following
methods:
i. Empirical Method
ii. Slope area method
iii. Rational method
iv. Unit hydrograph method
2.5.1.1 Empirical Methods
Based on studies conducted, some empkical formulae for specific regions have been
evolved. The empirical formulae forflooddischarge suggested are in the form:

Where
Q = Max.flooddischarge in mVs
A = Catchment Area in sq. km
C = An empirical constant depending upon nature and location of catchment
n = A Constant
2.5.1.2 Slope Area Method >
•
In this method the maximum water level reached in a historic flood is estimated on
the evidence of local witnesses, which may include identification of flood marks on
structures or trees close to the site. The Discharge is then calculated by:
Q = AV
Page 12
Where,
Q = Discharge in mVs
A == Wetted area in m^
V = Velocity offlowin m/sec. which can be calculated by Manning's
formula
V = 1/n R% s'/2
where,
R = Hydraulic mean depth
s = The energy slope which may be taken as equal to bed slope
n = rugosity coefficient
2.5.1.3 RationalMethod
The Rational method for flood discharge takes into account the intensity, distribution
duration of rainfall as well as the characteristics of the catchment areas, such as shape,
slope, permeability and initial wetness of the catchment.
Q = A lo X.
Where
Q = Max. Flood discharge in mVs
A = Catchment Area in hectare
lo = Max. Intensity of rainfall in cm/h
X = Ftmction depending upon characteristics of the catchment in
producing peak runoff and given by
0.056/P
A =
Cc+l
Where f is the area correction factor, t is the time of concentration in hours and P
is the permeability coefficient of the catchment depending on the soil cover conditions
and slope of the catchment etc.
2.5.1.4 Unit Hydrograph Method
The unit hydrograph is defined as the hydrograph of storm runoff at a given point in
the river; resulting from an isolated rainfall of tmit duration (normally takes 6h to 12
h) occxxrring uniformly over the catchment and producing unit run off The unit runoff
is adopted 1cm. over the catchment area.
The hydrology aspects covered above is drawn from Subramanya (2010).

Page 13
2.6 OTHER CAUSEWAYS
• Vented Causeway in Zimbabwe
Vented causeway are designed to pass what may be called an ordinary flood with very
little water overtopping the carriageway, but may still be inundated and unusable for a
few days each year. These structures present a considerable obstacle to the free flow
of both normal flow and the design flood, so they must be built massive enough to
withstand water pressure and debris impact. They must also be provided with scour
protection where the bed is erodible.
The vents are usually concrete or corrugated steel pipes from 0.6 to 1.0m
diameter, set in a block of concrete or masonry. Where prefabricated pipes are not
available, vaulted masonry tunnels proved successftil. Concrete or masonry retaining
walls and aprons are required to channel the flow and prevent the scour at both
entrance and exit. In order to prevent blockage of the stream by debris or silting,
careful attention is required to setting the pipes level with the stream bed and at the
same gradient. The capacity of the vents is sufficient to pass all ordinary floods
without damage and with no more than 150mm of water overtopping the structure.
The figure 2.2 shows the vented causeway in Zimbabwe.

Figure 2.2 Vented causeway in Zimbabwe

Page 14
• Vented causeway-l over Hiidriguda Nalia on Durgi- Dukam road
Infrastructure developnKnt in terms of all weather roads has remained one of the most
iKglected aspects in the ray^ada district. Tte topogr^hy of the district is primarily
hilly with patches of rolling trnmn. There are large no of streams and the rainfall is
con5»aratively high being around 1400 mm per Aimum, Hence, the cost of
construction and maintenance of r o ^ in this district is con^aratively high and road
connectivity for that reason in the &stke KBK region is extremely poor.

- 4 ^

.*•.•* r * .

Figure 2 3 Vented Causeway-1 in Raygada, Odisha

After introdiKtion of RLTAP in the KBK districts, it was felt that connectivity is
die essential n^ans of delivery of other services and rural connectivity would boost
up the perfonnance of other schemes. Hence, it was decided to bridge the small
rivulets on top priority. A sum of Rs 69.75 lakhs has been spent in the year 2001-
2002. Similarly, during 2002-2003, a sum of Rs 167.76 has been spent for
construction of 7 small ami 20 medium cross drainage works. Out of that, 8 works

Page 15
have been con^leted andtibebalance works are in various degree of progress. The
Figure 2.3 shows the vent^ causeway-1 in Raygada, Odisha.(Rayagada.nic.in)

• Vented causeway-2 over Hildriguda Nalla

Bissam cuttack happens to be one of the most backward blocks of rayagada district,
Durgi Dukum road fe an wa^mimt road of the block convicting 4 panchayats namely
Dumemeli, Sahada, Jighidi, and Dukum to its block headquarter. The area is thickly
inhabited by tribals. The area is endowed with deep forests and undulating
agricultural lands. TWs road also connects bissam cuttack block to gudari block.
There are three unbridged crossings on the road, as a result of which it was not
ordinarily possible on the part of the local mhabitants to reach the outside world,
especially during the rainy season, which lasts for at least 5 nwnths. Hence, they were
deprive of ail modem facilities including health and education facilities available in
the nearby towns.

Figure 2.4 Vented causeway-2 In Raygada,Odisha

Accordingly it was proposed to construct 2 vented causeways on the streams,
mmely Hikiriguda -1 and Hikiriguda-2. The first one has 8 vents of 1.2m diameter
Page 16
and the Z""* one has 9 vents of 1.2m Diameter. The general arrangement drawing has
been finalized after extensive hydraulic and topographic Survey. The cross drainage
structure has been estimated to cost rupees 28.67 lakhs, out of which a sum of rupees
24.43 lakhs has since been spent. The vented causeway has been completed and the
approach roads are under construction. The causeway so constructed, will provide all
weather communication to 30 tribal villages, which were inaccessible till now. The
Figure 2.4 shows the vented causeway-2 in Raygada, Odisha.

• Pitesu Bridge on Chandili Denduli Road

Denduli is an important gram panchayat headquarters of kolanara block of Rayagada
district. It connected to the outside world by Chandili Denduli road (RD Road). There
was an unbridged crossing at 4 km over Pitesu Nallah. A good number tribal village
like Sourapitesu, lilibadi, Gobarapalli, Denduli, and Patraput are on the other side of
the Nallah. During rainy season, the villages on the other side of the nallah as stated
above were getting cut off from the kolanara block headquarters & the outside world.
The effected people were managing themselves without public distribution system,
medical facility etc. Most of the people of these villages are working as daily labour
in the J.K.Paper Mills. During the rainy season they were fmdings it impossible to
reach their duties in time & thus loose their daily wage. So it was essential to
construct a vented causeway over this Nallah to make the road all weather. Now this
vented causeway (7 nos of 1200 mm dia Hume pipe) over the Nallah have been
constructed with in a period of 5 month & opened to traffic. The funds to the tune of
Rs. 16.51 Lakhs were received out of KBK grant.

The problem of the tribal people of the villages has been solved & the people are
very happy by getting a solution to their communication problem. Nearly 2772 people
of 5 numbers of villages were benefited after completion of this project. Now the
transportation facility has opened & it is easier for the people to sell reach their
agriculture products in the near market place J.K.Pur throughout the year. The Figure
2.5 shows the vented causeway over Pitesu Nallah on Chandili-Dunduli road under
KBK district

Page 17
|Figttre 2.5 Vented causeway over Pitesu NaUah on Chandili-DunduU road under
KBK District

Figure 2.6 Scouring on the downstream of a vented causeway

Page 18
2.7 CONCLUDING REMARKS

Crossing a waterway is essential. But due to limitations of funds, bridges are not
possible. Under such situations causeways may be the suitable alternative. However
they are not popular. Therefore, there is a necessity to develop a simple computer
based stepwise procedure based on IRC guidelines. An attempt has been made in this
direction and the methodology has been applied on a case study.

Page 19
 CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY OF STUDY
3.1 GENERAL

The Yamuna river which passes nearby overflows during heavy rains whereby the
water of Yamuna gets scattered all around which submerges the entire area. Because
the road level is quite low here the water flows over it. The road becomes impassable
and the local people are put to great inconvenience. The villages falling in this area
are very old and they could not visualize the flitiire that their houses will be
submerged under the water. It has therefore, been found suitable to provide a vented
causeway. The present work is the outcome of a case study for design of a causeway
between two villages, Dhansoh and Nagalapar in district Panipat of Haryana. The
causeway when constructed would certainly improve the smooth passage of people
and vehicles on the considered stretch of road. The methodology adopted for the
present study is diagrammatically represented in Figure 3.1.

roENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM
X X
IDENTIFIED STRETCH
Z
DATA COLLECTION FROM
SOURCES

TABULATION OF DATA
U ^
ANALYSIS OF DATA
T I
DESIGN OF CAUSEWAY BY IRC
METHOD
^n^
FORMULAE TO BE USED
-T-ZU
USE OF SUPPORTING TOOLS

AUTOCAD MICROSOFT EXCEL

Figure 3.1 Schematic of study

Page 20
3.2 IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM

In our country a huge percentage of population still lives in villages. During rainy
season the villages get disconnected not onlyfromthe towns but alsofromeach other.
The access to these villages gets affected. The people of these villages have to face lot
of hardships and problems. To avoid these problems the means of communications in
the form of bridging waterways are needed in these villages and stretches of
waterways. So bridges may be the suitable alternative for these problems. But
considering the economics, most of the time construction of a causeway may be
possible and hence a better alternative. Thus, the first step is to identify such areas and
stretches which are severely affected and are cut off during rains and occasional
flooding.

3.3 IDENTIFIED STRETCH

This present study is dealing with a study area of Dhansoli and Nagalapar villages in
district Panipat of Haryana. These villages are having a population of ahnost 2000
each. In rainy season the access from one village to another gets destroyed. And the
people of these villages are very much affected. After the completion of the causeway
this problem will be solved to a large extent.

3.4 D A T A COLLECTION F R O M SOURCES

The data have been obtained from PubUc Works Department (B&R) besides actual
observations at the site and discussion with the villagers. The data contain the
information like discharge, length of stretch and topography of the area, levels of the
area, ordinary flood level (O.F.L), high flood level (H.F.L), traffic data etc. The data
regarding physical features of the site, wherever required, is collected by conducting
field visit to the sites.

3.5 TABULATION OF DATA

Some data was collected for ascertaining the velocity and discharge in the creek. The
data was in the form of reduced levels along the centre line of the existing road at
regular intervals of 15m each. Similarly, reduced levels were also obtained along the
dry patch of the stream. The data thus collected has been presented in Table 3.1.

Page 21
 Table 3.1 Levels taken along and perpendicular to the existing road at site (m)

Distance* -60 -45 -30 -15 0 15 30 45 60

(m) Centre
Chainage line
(m)l
0 99.02 98.98 98.94 99.78 100.34 98.49 98.07 98.12 97.73
15 98.73 99.27 98.02 99.14 100.00 98.02 97.95 97.83 97.00
30 96.83 97.00 97.45 98.14 98.34 97.13 97.18 96.73 96.52
45 95.84 95.90 96.41 96.83 97.63 96.90 96.45 96.80 96.45
60 95.71 96.00 96.32 96.51 97.39 96.72 96.36 97.00 96.80
75 96.00 96.32 96.90 97.13 98.45 97.45 96.00 96.42 96.51
90 95.77 96.38 96.71 97.42 98.60 97.13 96.02 96.28 96.42
105 95.98 96.21 96.45 97.42 98.90 97.80 96.55 96.12 96.02
120 95.88 96.02 96.98 97.18 99.04 98.15 97.13 97.45 97.14
Arbitrary datum: 100.00 m

3.6 ANALYSIS OF DATA

After the tabulation of the data is completed the further analysis of the data according
to condition is done. The requirements of the causeway are dependent on
hydrological, transportation and structural considerations. IRC: SP: 82-2008 and IRC:
SP: 62-2004 has suggested the guidelines regarding hydrological, transportation and
structural factors for the safe design of causeway. Given data is used to obtain area of
flow during normal times and during periods of flood. The levels are made use of to
ascertain the longitudinal slope of the river or the stream and then making use of the
Manning's or Chezy's rugosity equation, the velocity of flow can be worked out.
Further, making use of the Continuity equation the velocity so estimated is multiplied
by the area of flow to obtain the design discharge. Details of water conveyance
through vents or pipes is accordingly then worked out. Similarly, calculations are
made to fix the protected bed level and the road top level of the cement concrete road
of the causeway. Lacey's scour depth formulae are used to assess the maximum
depths of scour on the upstream and downstream of the causeway and to accordingly
design the depth of cutoff wall and stone pitching for protection. Detailed stepwise
procedure for the entire design according to IRC: SP: 82-2008 follows:

Page 22
 3.7 DESIGN OF CAUSEWAY BY IRC METHOD

The IRC: SP: 82-2008 has given some guidelines regarding the design of causeways.
There are following guidelines regarding the design of causeways.

i. Collect the normal hydraulic data, such as catchment area, annual rainfall, HFL,
site plan etc.
ii. Plot defined cross-section in the vicinity of proposed site to a natural scale,
iii. Road top level should be as low as possible but higher than the lowest RTL,
iv. Cushion over the structures should not be less than thickness of proposed road
pavement subject to minimum 300mm.
V. Sill level of vents should be 300mm below the lowest bed level with longitudinal
slope (in the direction of flow) nearly same as that of stream bed subject to
minimum of 1:100.
vi. The protected bed level (PBL) may be kept equal to the sill level of vents,
vii. In the case of less important crossings, if it is decided by the competent authority
to skip fixing of the lowest required road top level,
viii. Transfer RTLfixedas above to the defmed cross-section as first trial,
ix. Calculate the area below RTL at the defmed cross section.
X. Fix vent area i.e. about 40% but minimum 30 percent, in normal rainfall areas
and minimum 20% in case of scanty rainfall areas,
xi. Determine the no. of pipes/number of spans and span length of vents,
xii. Calculate the unobstructed natural area of flow at the defmed cross-section
between the bed level and the proposed RTL.
xiii. Calculate the area offlowavailable at vented causeway up to protected bed.
xiv. Calculate the percentage obstruction tofloodwater.
XV. If the obstruction is not less than 70 percent, then the steps are repeated by
increasing the RTL by 200mm.
xvi. The proposal with percentage obstruction less than 70 percent is then finalized,
xvii. This should be checked for flood level at design flood level, for which condition
the percentage obstruction should be less than 30%.

Page 23
3.8 FORMULAE TO BE USED

Lacey' normal regime scour depth (R) 0.473 (Q/f) 1/3

where,
Q = Discharge in m /sec.
f Silt factor
1.75 (Mr)''^
Mr = Weighted mean diameter
of sediment in mm
Lacey's normal scour depth (R) 1.35 (qVf)^'^

q Discharge intensity (Q/B)

Q Discharge
B Width of the stream
Mannmg's formula V l/nR^'^S'^^
V Velocity of flow (m/sec.)
R Hydraulic mean depth
S Bed slope of channel
n Rugosity coefficient
The Central Board of Irrigation and Power (India) has recommended the following
values of n for different discharges given in Table 3.2 (Garg, S.K. Jan. 2011)

Table 3.2 Value of Manning's n for different discharges

Discharge(cumec) 14-140 140 -280 280 and above

Value of n 0.025 0.0225 0.020

Chezy's formula V CVRS

Where, c Rugosity coefficient
R Hydraulic mean depth
s Bed slope of channel
Discharge (Q) Q AxV
Where, A Area
V Velocity

Page 24
3.9 USE OF SUPPORTING TOOLS

In this design the calculations are done manually and also with the use of supporting
tools. The calculations are done in Microsoft excel and the drawings are prepared in
AUTOCAD.

3.9.1 AutoCAD

AutoCAD is a software application for computer-aided design (CAD) and drafting.

The software supports both 2D and 3D formats. The software is developed and sold
by Autodesk, first released in December 1982 by Autodesk in the year following the
purchase of the first form of the software by Autodesk founder John Walker. The
AUTOCAD is a strong Engineering tool which is used in various engineering
disciplines. This software is very helpful in preparations of drawings. AutoCAD is
licensed at a significant discount over commercial retail pricing to quahfying students
and teachers, with a 36-month license available. The student version of AutoCAD is
functionally identical to the full commercial version, with one exception: DWG files
created or edited by a student version have an mtemal bit-flag set (the "educational
flag"). When such a DWG file is printed by any version of AutoCAD (commercial or
student), the output includes a plot stamp / banner on all four sides, objects created in
the student version cannot be used for commercial use. The Autodesk education
community provides registered students and faculty with fi"ee access to different
Autodesk applications.

3.9.2 Microsoft Excel

Microsoft excel is a spreadsheet application developed by Microsoft for Microsoft

windows. It features calculation, graphing tools, pivot tables, and a macro
programming language called Visual basic for applications. It has been a very widely
applied spreadsheet for these platforms. Microsoft Excel has the basic features of all
spreadsheets, using a grid of cells arranged in numbered rows and letter-named
colunmy to organize data manipulations like arithmetic operations. It has a battery of
supphedfimctionsto answer statistical, engineering and fmancial needs. In addition, it
can display data as line graphs, histograms and charts, and with a very limited three-
dimensional graphical display. The Microsoft excel is a tool which is used in making
calculations in a very short time.

Page 25
 CHAPTER 4
STUDYAREA
4.1 GENERAL

The study area conprises of the highway between two villages Dhansoli and Nagalapar
in district Panipat of Haryana over which a causeway is to be provided. The causeway
is to be constructed for the waters spilled by overflow of river Yamuna. The problem
specific and the description of study area are being presented under the following
subheads.

L Problem and the concerned villages

il River Yamuna and its relevant creek

iii. Adjoining causeways

4.2 PROBLEM AND THE CONCERNED VILLAGES

The concerned two villages being directly benefited by the construction of the
causeway are Dhansoli and N^alapar in district Panipat of Haryana. These villages are
having a population of ahnost 2000 each. The inhabitants of the villages comprising of
ferraers, worksman, labourers, and school going children are wholly dependent on the
connecting road for their normal daily movement. The river remains dry during
summers and during rainy seasons it overflows and tends to overflow the banks. At
places the banks breach, resulting in flooding of the adjoining land. During the rainy
season, because of the surface runoff and the surplus flow of water of river Yamuna,
the entire area between the two villages gets submerged. The road during such times
becomes impassable and the villagers have to fece great difficulty in commuting from
one place to another. Sometimes in the past, this situation has prevailed for a number of
days at a stretch. To avoid this problem, some kind of alternative should be provided
over there. Bridges are very costly structures, so causeways may be the suitable
alternative. The Figure 4.1 gives the map showing course of River Yamxma through
Panipat Figure 4.2 shows the broad location of site through Google map while Figure
4.3 is a photograph taken at the actual site.

Page 26
 mcXEX MAP
PAI««FAT DISTRICT, HARYAMA

"tr?

UTTAR
PRADESH

S ON«PAT V

Figure 4.1 Map showing course of River Yamuna through Panipat

Figure 4.2 Broad kication of site through Google Map

Page 27
 Figure 4.3 notf^raph taken at actual site
43 RIVER YAMUNA AND ITS RELEVANT CREEK

Rii^ Yamum originating from the Yamunotri glacier at a height of 6,387 metres on
tfie^south west«n slopes of Banderpooch peaks in the lower Himalayas in uttarakhand,
it travels a total length of 1,376 kilometres (855 mi) and has a drainage system of
366,223 sqimre kilometres (141,399 sq mi), 40.2% of the entire Ganges Basin, before
merging with the Ganges at triveni sangam, Allahabad, the site for the Kumbha Mela
e-PKry twelve years. It crosses several states, Uttarakhand, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh,
pecking by Himachal Pradesh and later Delhi. The river Yamuna reaches Tajewala in
Yamuna nagar disbxt of Haryana, where a barrage was built in 1873, is the originatii^
place of two important canals, the Western Yamuna Canal and Eastern Yamuna Canal,
whkh irrigate tl» states of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, respectivey. The Western
Yamuna Canal (WYC) crosses Yamuna Nagar, Kamal and Panipat before reaching the
liaadscpm treatOKOt plant, which supplies part of municipal water supply to Delhi,
fiirtl^- ft also receives waste water from Yamuna Nagar and Panipat cities. Yamuna is
replenished ^ain after this by seasonal streams and groundwater accrual, in fact during
the dry season, it remains dry in many stretches from Tajewala till Delhi, where it

Page 28
enters near Palla village after trav^sing 224 kilometres (139 mi). One of the creeks of
river Yamuna crosses these villages and in the rainy season this creek will overflow
and this will submerge the entire ^ea.

4.4 ADJOINING CAUSEWAYS

In district Panipat, there are two more oiuseways are there which was sufficiently serve
tte purpose. One of tte causeways is constructed between Nanglaaar and Nai^lapar
having a total stretch of 115m. Aad another causeway is constructed between
Nawadaaar and Nawadapm* als» having a stretch of 115m. Both these causeways are
constructed in the year 1996. Tte Figure 4.4 and 4.5 showing us the actual location of
these causeways.

Fignre 4.4 Showing the location of Nanglaaar and Nanglapar

Page 29
Figure 4.5 Showing tiie locatioii of Nawadaaar and Nawadapar

Page 30
 CHAPTER 5
DESIGN OF CAUSEWAY
5.1 GENERAL
In the preceding chapters, the description of the study area, methodology of design and
the governing IRC guidelines on geometric and hydrological considerations of design
of causeway have been presented. In the present chapter, the design of the causeway is
being presented under the following subheads:
i. Design of waterway
ii. Design ofcement concrete pavement

5.2 DESIGN OF WATERWAY ^

a) Observed data
i Reduced levels along the centerline of the existing bituminous road as given in
Table 5.1.
ii. The observations giving reduced levels along the road and perpendicular to the road
have been given in Table 3.1. From these levels the longitudinal slope of the bed of
the stream has been computed.
iii. Highest flood level, (HFL), m = 100.00 m
iv. Ordinary flood level = 98.85 m
V. Length of proposed causeway (solid and/or vented)^^ 120m
vi. Two lanes (7.5 m) wide cement concrete road with guide pillars,
vii. Silt factor of the stream =^ 1.0
viii. Traffic data: No heavy vehicles on this road except tractor/ trolley/ car and local
traffic.

Table 5.1: Reduced levels along the centerline

Chainage
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120
(m)
Reduced
level (m) 100.34 100 98.34 97.63 97.39 98.45 98.60 98.90 99.04

Page 31
 b) Computed data
L Profile of the waterway aIoi% the cento'line of the road is given in Figure 5.1. This
profile is confutedfix)mthe reducaitevelsgiven along the center line of the road.

Figure 5.1 Lon^tudinal profites at the center line of the road

ii. Area of flow will be calculatedfi*omthe profile of tte road.

Solution:
Design discharge, cumecs 90
Bank width at defined cross section (m) 120
Channel width at RTL, (m) 80
Highest flood level, (HFL), m 100
Lowest bed level, (LBL), m 97.39
Assume sill level of vents & PEL at RL (m) 97.09
(LBL-0.3) (97.39-0.3) = 97.09
Pipes available:
Select reinforced concrete pipes
Diameter of pipes 0.9,1.0 & 1.2 m
Options:
Pressure pipes, denoted by P and
Non-foessure p ^ s , denoted as NP

Page 32
Pressure in the pipes to be used for the waterway are not likely to exceed 0.7MPa
(equivalent head 7m), therefore non- pressure pipes are adequate to safely pass the
discharge under the likely heads.
Under the existing conditions, only NP3 and NP4 pipes are suitable. Further, takmg
into consideration the durability and serviceability of the structure under the rough
conditions, NP4 class of pipes has been shortHsted for use.
Diameter of pipes (NP4), possible for use - 1.00 m & 1.20 m (Because 0.9 m pipe
diameter has not been recommended by IS- 458-2003)

TRIAL 1:
Internal diameter of pipe (m) 1.0
Outer diameter of pipe (m) 1.23
Road top level (RTL) (m) 98.77
= (97.09+1.23+0.3+0.15) = 98.77
Channel width at RTL (m) 80
Area (A) m^ 73.6
80 (98.77-97.39) x 2/3
(Assuming parabolic profile of bed)
Vent area of causeway 29.44 (40% of A)
No. of pipes of dia. as above 37.5
No. of pipes adopted 38
Clear spacing between adjacent pipes (m) 0.6
Length of end portion for either side
for safety (m) 2
Total length (m) 72.94
i.e. (38x1.23+37x0.6+2x2)
Available vent area (m ) 29.83
i.e. (38x (7r/4x 1.0^))
Percentage of area of flow below Road top level= 40.52
Ok If more than the minimum requirement of 30 %

Page 33
 CHECK FOR OBSTRUCTION WHEN FLOOD LEVEL IS AT HFL:
Approach gradient on either side (I in n) n 20
Width of stream at HFL (m) 122.14
(72.94+2x20(100-98.77))
Area available for flow above RTL (m^) 124.31
(122.14+80)/2x(100-98.77)
Total available area forflow(m^) 154.14 (124.31+29.83)
Total area offlowbefore const, of
Causeway below HFL (m) 212.52
(122.14x(100-97.39)x2/3)
Area of obstruction (m^) 58.38 (212.52-154.14)
Area of obstruction Total area-flowarea
Percentage obstruction 27.47 OK ifless than 30%
Area offlow/Totalarea offlowbefore the construction of causeway x 100

SUMMARY OF TRIAL 1:
Total available area offlow(m) 154.14
Width of stream at HFL (m) 122.14
No. of pipes 38
Type of pipe NP4
Internal diameter (m) 1.0
Road top level (m) 98.77
Area (m^) 73.6
Total length (m) 72.94
Percentage obstruction 27.47

Page 34
NOW AGAIN DESIGN WILL BE DONE FOR TRIAL 2;
TRIAL 2:
Design discharge, cumecs = 90
Bank width at defined cross section (m) 120
Channel width at RTL (m) 85
Highest flood level, (HFL), m 100
Lowest bed level, (LBL), m 97.39
Assume sill level of vents & PBL at RL (m) 97.09
(LBL-0.3) (97.39-0.3) = 97.09
Internal diameter of pipe (m) 1.2
Outer diameter of pipe (m) 1.44
Road top level (RTL) (m) 98.98
(PBL+ outer dia. + cushion + slab thickness)
- (97.09+1.44+0.3+0.15) = 98.98
Adopt RTL (m) 99
Area (A) m^ 91.23 85 (99-97.39) X 2/3
(Assuming parabolic profile of bed)
Vent area of causeway 36.49 (40% of A)
No. of pipes of dia. as above 32.28 (36.49/(7r/4x 1.2^))
No. of pipes adopted 33
Clear spacing between adjacent pipes (m) 0.6
Length of end portion for either side
for safety (m) 2
Total length (m) 70

i.e.(33x 1.44+32x0.6+2x2)
Available vent area (m ) = 37.30 (33x (7r/4x 1.2^))
Percentage of area offlowbelow RTL = 40.88
OK if more than the minimum requirement of 30%

Page 35
 CHECK FOR OBSTRUCTION WHEN FLOOD LEVEL IS AT HFL:
Approach gradient on either side (I in n) n 20
Width of stream at HFL (m) 110.72
(70.72+2x20(100-99))
Area available for flow above RTL (m ) 97.86
(110.72+85)/2x(100-99)
Total available area forflow(m^) 135.20 (97.86+37.30)
Total area offlowbefore const, of
Causeway below HFL (m) 192.65
(110.72x(100-97.39)x2/3)
Area of obstruction (m^) 57.456 (192.65-135.20)
Area of obstruction Total area-flowarea
Percentage obstruction 29.8 OKiflessthan30%
Area offlow/Totalarea offlowbefore the construction of causeway X 100

The design of causeway has been done with two trials of 1.0 m & 1.2 m diameter of
pipes.

SUMMARY OF TRIAL 2:
Total available area offlow(m) 135.20
Width of stream at HFL (m) 110.72
No. of pipes 33
Type of pipe NP4
Internal diameter (m) 1.2
Road top level (m) 99
Area (m^) 91.23
Total length (m) 70 m
Percentage obstruction 29.8

Page 36
DEPTH OF CUT OFF WALLS:
Area of flow at HFL of 100.00m 208.80 m'
Average velocity 1.50 m/s
Discharge at HFL 313.2 mVs
Design discharge, Qdes 314 mVs
Discharge intensity, q 3.30 mVs/m
d/3
Lacey's normal scour depth, (R) 0.473 (Q/f)'
0.473(314/1)^^^
3.21 m
Depth of scour, da 1.35 (q^/f)'^^
1.35 ((3.30x1.2)^1)'^^
3.38 m
The depth of scour is taking addition Of 20 % of concentration of flow
Depth of d/s cut off 2xdsm-R
2x3.38-3.21
3.55 m
Depth of u/s cut off 1.5xdsm-R
1.5x3.38-3.21
1.86 m
Criteria for Minimum Required Cutoff:
Depth of d/s cutoff '/2X2.61 + 0.6m = 1.91m
Depth of u/s cut off 1/3 X 2.61 +0.6m = 1.47 m
Provide depths of cut off as
D/s 3.60 m
U/s 2.00 m
U/S and D/S Loose Stone Protection (P.W.D Specification, 1990)
U/s cubic content of launching apron = 2.25 X u/s depth of cut-off
2.25 X 2.00 = 4.50 m^
D/s cubic content of launching apron = 2.25 X d/s depth of cut-off
2.25 X 3.60 = 8.10 m^
Depth of loose stone protection on both sides 1.00m
Width of loose stone protection on both sides = Width of vented portion
70.00m
Length of loose stone protection on u/s & d/s = 4.50 & 8.10 m respectively
Page 37
 »u

00
ro
(U

a.

1/3

-0 %
S
U
»
"0
u

I
»!!
>
« in

I
1
•a
Xi
 A
A

-09'C-
Q

^
^
CO
o
in n 0)
ni >••

o a.

s ;.'«Tf--:
o
in
1^

I
o
8 Z

E
§ i o
o £
o> 8 lO
£ «
lb i
i ^
£ U
I
" v • •
u
u

Ql

d
§ I o
o
ll a
h.
0)
O

\n to \ ' , E
X
•<r
o.
z

1
o o
OOS'I- (5
£
£
o
o

I
£
£

I.
o
o

8ro
2Y0
I C3
in
(XJ
y
X

5
U
U

o
o
CIS .>^^^^>r:^v^-
.•>•«.•.
in

(J II
u o
E > in
^

O lo 1
A
•0'2-
LiiiSiil
A
I T
3
a
 o
DO
fO

s
EM
 Q)
DO
ro
a.

••
o
.2
{»
IT)

s
••«
to
 A
A

•09'e
-1 'J

(U

T
QO
TO

cz o
in

o
in
OJ
c>
Ifi
if
c E
u

E
u - £
U (j
•^ z oo
<N
iE U CO
CO

i< o
•ml
'©
»
o>
o
o
in d
U

ss
o o

SO

a>
u
s
61)
o
in
cu
o
T
o
i'ii r r v'- wwrn in

rt •00'2-
1
S "^ o
U in ^
cu
u
1 1 a
ESiMS
T — — y .-3
" ' I I 1 13
2 [—o6'o—I (—ero Q
 -009'^-

-Xfl«a8oiJjB30X-

rt- r rn 1
;:Mr.;nV.y#;vV>.v^^vKW^^'.*.VMV?p!^

-r r «8 I
I
i I fa I ^

'',

)'.

- W ' - ^

I1
ill

J
.>

I
I
I
-t •h

t
fet-.A•v.^:^<a;^;^^Vt^/;A.^:>;x^•^:u^•^:v:;^;^=V^^4^^..i^^^

^y
5.3 DESIGN OF CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT
a) Given Data
i. Wheel load = 3000 kgf
ii. CBR value =6%
iii. Traffic volume = 150 vehicles/day
Solution:
i) From Table 5.2 the value of k has been determined.

Table 5.2 Approximate k value corresponding to CBR values

Soaked CBR% 2 3 5 7 10 15

K Value(l^cmVcm) 2.1 2.8 4.2 4.8 5.5 6.2

Effective K over 100mm DLC 5.6 9.7 16.6 20.8 27.8 38.9
(kg/cmVcm)
Effective k value = 18.7 cg/cmV(:m
ii) Concrete strength
Adopt 28 days compressive strength of 30 N/mm^ (300 kgfcm^)
vl/2
Flexural strength ff =0.7(tk) = 3.834 N/mm^ (38.34 kgfcm^
28 days flexural strength = 38.34 kgfcm^
90 days flexural strength = 1.20x38.34
= 46.008 kgfcm^
iii) Thickness
Assume thickness of 15cm
iv) Radius of Relative Stiffness (0

4I Eh^
Jl2(l--H^)k
E = 3xl0^kg/cmVcm
h = 15cm
K = 18.7kg/cm^/cm
^ = 0.15
_4l 3x105x153
/
AJ 12(1-0.152)18.7

/ -• =46.35 cm

Page 44
Radius of load contact assumed circular (a) = (P/p7r) '^^
where p is tyre pressure.
\l/2
a = (3000/77r)'
a =11.67 cm
a/h = 0.778
Radius of equivalent distribution of pressure (b) = a for a/h> 1.724

= Vl.6a^+h^-0.675h for a/h < 1.724

b = 10.92 cm
(v) Edge load stress (ale)
= 0.529 P/h^ (1+0.54^) (4 logio //b + logic b - 0.4048)
= 0.529 3000/15^ (1+0.54X.15) (4 logio 46.35/10.92 + logio 10.92 - 0.4048)
(a/e) = 23.96 kgCcm^
(vi) Calculate Temp. Stress
The tenperature differential for Haryana for a slab thickness of 150mm is
12.5°c. This value is takenfromTable 5.3.
Table 5.3 Recommended Temperature Differentials for Concrete Slabs

2^ne States Temperature differential,

°C in slabs of thickness
(mm)
150 200 250
I Punjab, U.P, Uttaranchal, Rajasthan, Haryana, 12.5 13.1 14.3
Gujaratand North M.P, excluding Hilly regions.
II Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Assam and Eastern 15.6 16.4 16.6
Orissa excluding hilly regions and coastal areas
III Maharashtra, Kamataka, south M.P, Chhattisgarh, 17.3 19.0 20.3
Andhra Pradesh, Western Orissa and North tamilnadu
excluding hilly regions and coastal areas
IV Kerala and south tamilnadu excluding hilly regions 15.0 16.4 17.6
V Coastal areas bounded by hills 14.6 15.8 16.2
VI Coastal areas unbounded by hills 15.5 17.0 19.0

Page 45
Assuming a contraction joint spacing of 3.5m and 3.5m width.
L = 350 cm
B = 350 cm
L// =350/46.35
= 7.55
W// = 350/46.35
= 7.55
Both the values are same.
For VI = 7.55, Bradbury coefficient C = 1.055 (From Table 5.4)

Table 5.4 Values of Co-efficient C based on Bradbury's chart

L/land W/1 C L/land W/1 C
1 0.000 7 1.030
2 0.040 8 1.077
3 0.175 9 1.080
4 0.440 10 1.075
5 0.720 11 1.050
6 0.920 12 & Above 1.000

Edge Temp. Stress (aU) = E a At/2x C

= 3x 10^x10x10-^x12.5/2x1.055
= 19.78 kgCcm^
Total Stress = Edge load Stress + Temp. Stress
= 23.96 + 19.78
= 43.74 kgfcm^
This is less than allowable flexural strength of 46.00 kgfcm^ so thickness of 150mm
assumed is safe.(Khanna. S.K, Justo, C.E.G, 2005)
(vii) Calculate Comer stresses
= 3P/h^(l-(aV2//)'-^)
= 3x3000/15^ (1-(11.67^2/46.35)^-^)
= 28.41 kgfcm^
The comer stress is less than 46.00 kgf/cm^ and hence the thickness of 150mm is safe.

Page 46
5.4 DETAILS OF JOINTS FOR CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENTS FOR
RURAL ROADS (IRC-15-2002)

-A

Contraction
joints, 3.5m
spacing

pL,

Pk
Longitudinal
joint

-V -V

3.5 m- 3.5 m - S

^ ' 13<;m
-T—••:•-. i . ". •"••
Lean Cone M-IO, 10 cm fell
Placed on Pipes

Fig. 5.8 Joints in cement concrete pavement

(Vented causeway portion)

Page 47
 Causeway Slab
-A./~
Contraction
joints, 3.5m
•A.r- spacing
JS£-
Expaasion joint with
do wel b ar s (M .S Hounds)
25 mmdia.500mm
length 250 mm c/c
to be provided only Longitudinal
where pavement slab joint
abuts wi& causeway slab

•-V -V-
a s a
w-i o O
^— 3.5 m—*•— 3.5 m—H-

pq'
PQC 15 cm
Lean Cone M-10,10 cm
20 cm
GSB Gr-I

Fig. 5.9 Joints in cement concrete pavement

(Solid causeway portion)

Page 48
 BITUMEN PAINTING/
COMPRESSIBLE SYNTHETIC FILLER BOARD
PLASTIC SHEATHING \ SEALANT
OF 0.2 TO 0.5mm THK. 'A'

« i
DOWEL-CAP OF PLASTIC TUBE
WITH CLOSE) END FILLED WITH SPONGE
h ^ -'

SEALING TAPE
25mm 0 BAR @ 250 C/C
•POLYTHENE SHEET
125 MICRON THICK
EXPANSION JOINT

RUBBERISED BITUMEN/HOT POURED SEALANT

HEAT RESISTANT
DEBONDING STRIP{1mm THICK)
. ^-COMPRESSIBLE SYNTHETIC FILLER BOARD

DETAIL'A'"
SEALING DETAILS OF EXPANSION JOINT

-100
• DOWLROD
SEALING TAPE 25 r-DOWEL-CAP OF PLASTIC OR METAL
^ rjMVxm,'jmtxm^MfMmxmxf^^^^
h%r
TUBE WITH CLOSED END

•^mU
SPONGE

W7////?. V/y>//////y///////>7777m

DETAIL'S"

Fig. 5.10 Expansion Joint

(To be provided only where pavement slab of approaches abuts with causeway
slab)
Page 49
 SEALANT DETAIL ' C

POLYTHENE SHEET
125 MICRON THICK
DETAILS OF SAWN OR FORMED CONTRACTION JOINT
(WHEN SLABS ARE CAST CONTINUOUSLY)

r 13^

2.5+1

KVAVJw
15 • RUBBERISED BITUMEN/HOT POURED SEALANT

h/3 •COMPRESSIBLE DEBONDING

r STRIP WITH PAPERBACK
-TEMPORARY SEAL OF JUTE ROPE
INSERTED BEFORE WIDENING
JOINT GROOVE SHALL BE
3 - 5 WIDE
-REMOVED BEFORE SEALING JOINT

DETAIL'C''
SEALING DETAILS OF CONTRACTION JOINT
FORMED BY SAWING

GROOVE IS FORMED WITH

WOODEN STRIPS OF VWICH 22.5
TOP PART IS PULLED OUT
AFTER CONCRETE SETS

L_3 - 5 WIDE
DETAILS OF W O O D E N STRIP NEEDED
FOR FORMING CONTRACTION JOINT
GROOVE

Fig. 5.11 Contraction Joint

(When slabs are cast continuously)

Page 50
 SEALANT WOODEN STRIP IS PLACED DURING CONSTRUCTION
DETAIL'D' FOR FORMING SEALING GROOVE (22.5X13 SECTION)

POLYTHENE SHEET
125 MICRON THICK
DETAILS OF KEYED CONSTRUCTION JOINT
(WHEN ALTERNATE SLABS ARE CONSTRUCTED)

2.5+1
"T
RUBBERISED BITUMEN

COMPRESSIBLE DEBONDING
STRIP WITH PAPERBACK

DETAIL'D"
SEALING DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION JOINT

DETAILS OF WOODEN
STRIP, 22.5X13 SECTION
Fig.5.12 Contraction Joint and Construction Joint

(When Alternate Slabs Are Cast)

Page 51
 WOODEN STRIP IS PLACED DURING CONSTRUCTION
FOR FORMING SEALING GROOVE (8X18.5 SECTION)
SEALANT
DETAIL'E'

25

h ^ - ^ ^

-POLYTHENE SHEET
125 MICRON THICK
LONGITUDINAL JOINT OF KEYED TYPE
(WHEN SLAB WIDTH EXCEEDS 4.5m, A LONGITUDINAL JOINT IS PROVIDED)

2.5t1
T
RUBBERISED BITUMEN

DEBONDING STRIP

DETAILS 'E' •
SEALING DETAILS OF LONGITUDINAL JOINT

DETAILS OF WOODEN STRIP

(8X18.5 SECTION)

Fig. 5.13 Longitudinal Joint

(When Slabs are Cast Lane Wise)

Page 52
 SEALANT
DETAIL 'F'

POLYTHENE SHEET
125 MICRON THICK
SAWN OR FORMED LONGITUDINAL JOINT

6 ^

RUBBERISED BITUMEN/HOT POURED SEALANT

h/3 — COMPRESSIBLE DEBONDING

STRIP WITH PAPERBACK
TEMPORARY SEAL OF JUTE ROPE
INSERTED BEFORE WIDENING
JOINT GROOVE SHALL BE
3 - 5 WIDE
REMOVED BEFORE SEALING JOINT
'P .
DETAIL

Fig. 5.14 Longitudinal Joint

(When Concreting in Entire Widtii is cast in one go)

Page 53
 CHAPTER 6

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

6.1 SUMMARY

The Present work is a Design of Causeway constructed over two villages named
Dhansoli and Nagalapar in Panipat of Haryana. Both the villages have a population of
more than 2000 each. And hence are to be provided with an interruption free good
qxiality metalled road for use throughout the year. In order to achieve this objective, a
causeway has been designed connecting the two villages. The design is based upon
standards and codal provision as per IRC: SP: 82-2008. The hydrauUc, demographic
and traffic data had been either observed at site or obtained from the office of Pubhc
Works Department (B&R) Panipat. Certain issues and aspects of data were verified at
site as well as in discussion with villagers. An economical, technically viable and safe
design of the causeway has been done. The design is capable of providing a round the
year interruption free connection between the two villages. Data on hydraulic
parameters like design discharge, bed slope of the creek, silt factor. Manning's rugosity
coefficient and longitudinal profile of the existing road had been observed or computed
on surveying the area.

The present causeway is designed with two trials. One trial is made with 1.0 m
diameter of pipe and another trial is made with 1.2 m diameter. The final proposed
causeway is 120 m long with the middle 70 m being designed as a vented causeway
and the remaining 50 m, 25 m either side, as a solid causeway. 33 nos. 1.2 m internal
diameter, NP4 pipes have been recommended for the vented portion. Since a
carriageway 7.0 m has been planned, the width of the road is 7.5 m. Guide posts of 0.90
m high spaced at a distance of 1,5 mfromeach other have been provided on both sides
of the road spanning the fiill stretch of the vented as well as the solid causeway. For the
vented portion maximum scour depth and depth of cut-off has been computed using
Lacey's formulae. Further, loose stone protection has been provided up to 4.5 m and
8.1 m on the upstream and downstream side of the causeway, respectively. The design
has conformity with the various checks as required by the code.

Page 54
6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

a) Type of pipes = NP4

b) No. of pipes 33
c) Internal diameter 1.2 m
d) Road Top Level = 99 m
e) Total length of causeway = 120 m
i. Vented portion = 70 m (middle)
ii. Solid portion = 50 m (25m either side)
f) Depth of cut-off
i. U/s 2.00m
ii. D/s 3.60m
g) Loose Stone pitching
i. U/s 4.50m
ii. D/s 8.10m
h) Width Width of vented portion

70.00m (both sides)

i) Depth 1.00m (both sides)

J) Depth of scour 3.38 m
k) Guide pillars height 0.90 m
I) Guide pillars spacing 1.5m center to center

The Details of the design features have been detailed in Chapter 5. And the drawings
are prepared in AutoCAD and shown in chapter 5. The design will be of practical use
and of immense help to thefieldengineers for the proper design of Causeways.

Page 55
6.3 SCOPE FOR FURTHER STUDIES:

a) The present work needs to be validated by using some design software and a
comparison made thereof.
b) Comparative study of different waterway crossing modes be studied.
c) This present study needs to be done to include cost estimate.

Observations on IRC Code:

There seems to be some ambiguity regarding check for obstruction when flood level is
at HFL. Under this head Percentage obstruction has different meaning than intended.
This aspect needs to be looked into and rectified.

The existing IRC code may include its recommendations for

a) Specifications on guide pillars
b) Launching apron (whether loose stone pitching or cement concrete floor)

Page 56
 REFERENCES
Garg. S.K, "Irrigation Engineering and Hydraulic Structures" Khanna Publishers, New Delhi
(Jan 2011)

IRC: SP: 82-2008 "Guidelines for the Design of Causeways and Submersible Bridges" Kama
Koti Marg, Sector-6 KKPtiram, New Delhi (2008)

IRC: SP: 62-2004 "Guidelines for the Design and Construction of Cement Concrete Pavements
for Rural Roads" Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road New Delhi (2004)

IRC: 73 "Geometric Design Standards for Rural (Non urban) Highways" Jamnagar House,
Shahjahan Road New Delhi (1990)

IRC: SP: 20-2002 "Rural Road MdinvLdX" Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road New Delhi (2002)

IRC : 15-2002 "Standard Specification & Code of Practice for Construction of Concrete Road",
Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road New Delhi (2002)

IS: 458: 2003 "Precast Concrete Pipes (With or Without Reinforcements)" Bureau of Indian
Standards, Manak Bhawan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zqfar Marg New Delhi (2004-2005)

Jones, T.E., Perry, J.D, "Design of Irish bridges, Fords and Causeways in Developing
Countries" Transportation Research Laboratory, Crowthome Berkshire United Kingdom (1993)

Khanna, S.K, Justo, C.E.G, "Highway Engineering" Nemchand & Bros.Civil Lines Roorkee
(2005)

"P.W.D Specification: Govt. ofHaryana, PWD (B&R, Irrigation and Public Health Branches)
Specification No- 3.31, Boulders (1990)

Rayagada.nic.in, Rural Development Department of Government ofOdisha

Subramanya, K "Engineering Hydrology" Tata McGrawHill New Delhi (2010)

Page 57
 APPENDIX

'J5

•X

•2U 14C 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 30(
THICKNESS OF PAVEMENT(mm)

Figure: (A.1) Edge load stresses for wheel load of 30 KN with respect to thickness of the
pavement. (IRC: SP: 62-2004)

Page 58
 18C 200 220 240 260 2B0 300
THICKNESS OF PAVEMENT(mm)

Figure: (A.2) Corner stresses for wheel load of 30 KN with respect to thickness of the
pavement. (IRC: SP: 62-2004)
it'^* .Ji FV t~ -

Temperature differential, A t ("c)

Figure (A.3) For finding out the Edge temperature stresses (IRC :SP: 62-2004)

Page 59