Awash Rive Bridge-Tendaho Project-Feb-2014-1 (Repaired)

Design review and Detail Design of the Tendaho Awash
Awash River Bridge

ERA River Bridge Project
Design Report
Detailed Design of the Tendaho Awash River

Bridge
Part I: Design Review
O M EG A
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
1
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Ethiopian Roads Authority has entered into contract agreement with Omega Consulting
Engineers to perform the consultancy services for the Design Review and Detailed Design of
the Tendaho Awash River Bridge Project. This report describes Design Review of the design of
the Awash River Bridge, with appropriate recommendations on all findings and then to realize
the construction of the same.
The site of the project is located in Afar Region about 621 km away from Addis Ababa, along
the main trunk road of Addis – Mille – Logia-Semera, which specifically turn off the trunk road
to the left of the Logia Town about 30 km on trail route. The selected bridge crossing
location is having a GPS coordinate (X, Y) of (0720985, 1294671).
Currently there is no bridge over this river and the community are using either by travelling
round the Awash River until Logia upstream or travelling downstream until one finds a
shallow location or cross by swimming. In this regard the Bridge will avoid such travel
distances, more than 30 km. Besides, this will enhance the socio-economic and health of the
community, who has been depending on cattle breading with cultural gaps to farming but
intends to involve in farming.
Per the original design attempt by the Water Works Design Enterprise, a two span of 35 m
have been proposed, where, the super structure is to be of steel Bailey Bridge with
counterfort RC abutment and RC wall pier. The design was commented as difficult to realize
the project due to the fact that the Drawings are not complete and many relevant details are
missing. Beside the sections of the abutments such as 2 m thick pad, four counterfort walls of
800 mm thick for the height under consideration and for a one lane bridge are exceptionally
expensive.
Nevertheless, as the hydrology/hydraulic requirement per this study demands a two span of
30 m each, two alternatives of superstructure proposed, where one is selected as a better
option, in the light of technical and economic advantages. The two option consist of RC box
girder of 30.6 m and a standard extra wide single lane steel baily bridge of 33.5 m (span
established due to the nearby available number of bays, 11x3.048 m).
Thus, this part of the report addresses the structural design review of the Tendaho Awash
River Bridge Project. Condition and detailed ground survey data is collected and a check on
the established data of the bridge crossing and associated elements including approach road
is being made. Opening size is also checked per the Hydrological discharge requirements
and/or geometric profile of the road section at the specific location. ERA 2002 Bridge Design
Manual and Drainage Manual are being used to check the relevant parameters of bridge
components. Reference to AASHTO and other relevant hand books is also made wherever ERA
2002 does not cover the particular aspect or wherever misgiving in the standard is
encountered.
1.2 Objectives of this Report

The main objective of this part of the report is to check the adequacy of the design drawings,
accuracy and appropriateness of the design with respect to current design standard and
provide all the necessary findings thereby either confirm the design or establish the rational
for changing the original design.
O M EG A
2
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
2. DESIGN REVIEW OF TENDAHO AWASH RIVER BRIDGE

The following are the findings on the Design Document and drawings submitted for the
Tendaho Awash River Bridge Project in the vicinity of the Tendaho Sugar Development
Irrigation, by the Water Works design Enterprise.
2.1 General comment
 The design document lacks standard procedure and has not addressed basic and
relevant design issues that include the following.
 No detail drawings of the superstructure on material property, types and

sizing indicated or the standard type specified,
 No bar schedule nor details of reinforcement for substructure shown on the

Drawing Album,
 No appropriate statical calculation including relevant assumption for

superstructure and substructures made,
 Hydrology/Hydraulic aspect of the report for the Bridge design study is

confined on the Hydrological aspect and not detailed with respect to
hydraulic requirements for the Bridge crossing,
 No standard geotechnical investigation program carried out nor proposed.

The one included is simple test pits dug in to the ground and laboratory
testing which did not involve field test such as DCP. Moreover, the need for
further geotechnical investigation not proposed
 No rational for selecting foundation type and substructure. No calculation shown

for the counter fort abutment and Pier.
 Basic information of Figures is not clear, which makes the information incomplete.
2.2 Specific Comments
 In the selection of Bridge location, two optional sites selected, where the report
mention that one is about 100 m away from the other. However, the GPS
coordinate of the two options from same document indicate 297.6 m, this seems
inconsistency in record or information,
 Bailey steel Bridge for superstructure proposed, where sizing is to be optimized

per the design report. Nevertheless, there is no rational for selecting such one
lane structures which occupy more than two lane space (~9.0 m). Moreover, no
method of sizing nor sized members indicated including
 Deck plate or slab thickness,
 Cross-section of Longitudinal stringers,
O M EG A
3
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 Cross beams
 Lateral bracing ties
 Details of members of Main graders and interconnection details
 Flood discharge magnitude of 1615.6 m3 for 100 years flood, which establishes the
high flood level prediction. However, neither grade elevation nor freeboard
indicated in any of the document. This need be compatible with road grade
around the approach to the bridge, which is to be shown on design drawings as
well as in the Hydrology/hydraulics part of the report
 Profile of the bridge does not contain important information such as:
 Grade Finish,
 High flood mark or design flood elevation
 Bed level and bank level
 The reinforcement to the sub-structure (both to Piers and footings) including

sizing such as, the 2 m depth footings, the 800 mm thick counter fort and the
spacing of the counter forts, all seems too conservative, thus call for detail
calculation to show such a need,
 Annex 2 of the report attempts to indicate footing analysis and design but lacks to
show
 Safety for stability of overturning, and sliding
 Which design standard adopted for determination of reinforcement

ULS/SLS and- EBCS or ERA/ ASHTO LRFD
2.3 Conclusion and Recommendation
The design document consisting of Design Report and Drawing Album has been reviewed
in the light of realizing the construction of the Bridge in question. As indicated above the
findings indicate that:
 The Design Report is not thorough and complete
 No explicit statical calculation of the basic structural element exhibited for

checking the safety as well as to make economical judgment
 The Design Drawings Album lacks many basic information and data which includes:
 Material information, detail bill of quantities,
 bar schedule for reinforcing steel in the substructures of foundation

footings, counter fort abutments and Piers,
O M EG A
4
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 Basic dimensions of structural steel and also schedule
 Details of connections
Hence, as the Document exhibits the above drawbacks, it cannot be used for realization of
the Construction.
O M EG A
5
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Detailed Design of the Tendaho Awash River

Bridge
PART II: HYDROLOGY HYDRAULIC
O M EG A
6
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
1 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY & HYDRAULIC DESIGN REVIEW
1.1 General
The Awash River Bridge hydrological study & hydraulic design was performed by Water Works
Design and Supervision Enterprise (WWDSE) in November 2013.
The hydrological study (design flood estimation) was conducted in detail considering all
upstream water resource developments in the basin. However, the bridge hydraulics needs
to be revised as the previous study is not detail enough to check and review it. Therefore,
the estimated design discharge of the previous study is used for hydraulic analysis of the
bridge after verifying by data acquired from site visit (observed high water mark) and
hydraulic design is conducted without considering the previous study by WWDSE.
The proposed bridge is located at Easting 720,985m and Northing 1,294,671m at location
shown on the image below. The bridge site is selected at appropriate location on the straight
reach part of the river by WWDSE.
Figure II-1: Proposed Bridge Location on Satellite Imagery
O M EG A
7
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Figure II-2: Picture of proposed bridge crossing site
1.2 Hydrological Study
The design flood is essential parameter that needs to be estimated cautiously. The design
discharge that is estimated by WWSDE is directly taken for subsequent hydraulic design. The
value is 1,616m3/s. As per the review, the design flood was estimated considering upstream
water development in the basin as well as the change in the reduction of Koka reservoir
capacity. According to the study, the reduction of Koka reservoir capacity balances the water
impoundment of Keseme reservoir (attenuation effect) i.e. there is no change of flow pattern
and magnitude in general at the proposed crossing site. The conclusion is logical and
accepted to proceed the hydraulic design of the bridge.
The design discharge estimated is 1,616m3/s for 100 years return period as per the study. The
analysis adopted and estimated value is logical. Therefore, estimated discharge value by
WWDSE is directly taken for the bridge hydraulic design.
1.3 Hydraulic Design
As was mentioned before, the report does not describe in detail to review the bridge
hydraulic design. Therefore, the hydraulic design is carried without considering the previous
design except the bridge location. The bridge site was verified with structural engineer and
highway engineer. After site verification, detail topographic survey was carried for
subsequent hydraulic, approach road and structural design.
The river cross-sections are extracted from the surface model generated in AUTOCAD Eagle
Point is exported to HEC-RAS at every 10m interval from topography survey.
O M EG A
8
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Figure II-3: The Awash River Crossing Site
1.3.1 Open Channel Flow Analysis
The water surface profile around the crossing is determined for the design flood. The high
water mark is determined for design flood 1,616m3/s. As per the analysis, the high water
mark is 381.35m for the design flood as shown in the model output below. The analysis
indicates that there is an overbank flow for the estimated design flood. The flow height
above the bank is above 1.30m which seems on the higher side according the hydraulic
analysis. This is due to limited length of the survey corridor along the river based on the
scope of the work (related only with bridge corridor).
Information about overbank flow was also acquired from the site by inquiring the local people
but less than 1.0m. To protect the surrounding area from the flooding (overbank flow), dike
was constructed along left bank of the river that justifies the information acquired from the
site. Generally, it is common to have that the computed value water level is higher than site
observation most of the time. Therefore, estimated discharge value is verified and can be
used for subsequent bridge hydraulic design.
O M EG A
9
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
AWASH RIVER BRIDGE AFAR Plan: Plan 10 23-Feb-14

Stream Centerli Reach 1
384 Legend
EG PF 1
382 WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Elevation (m)
380 Ground
378
376
374
0 20 40 60 80
Main Channel Distance (m)
Figure II-4: Water Surface profile
.03
383 Legend
382
EG PF 1
381
WS PF 1
Elevation (m)
380
Ground
379
378 Bank Sta
377
376
375
374
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (m)
Figure II-5: River Cross Section with design flood water level
O M EG A
10
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Table 1: Hydraulic analysis output for open channel at the crossing for open channel flow
1.3.2 Bridge Hydraulic Design
The bridges are designed hydraulically to accommodate the peak flood without excessive
restricting the flow of the stream or incurring damage either to the structure or the
surrounding land. Due consideration is paid to ensure restricting the flow does not causes
backwater above the limit given in the manual or scour that may damage the structure.
Using river morphology and design discharge, bridge with different span was analysed. The
60m span is required for the crossing structure at the proposed location. The analysis is
summarized and presented as follows.
Bridge with 60m span and 1 pier in the middle is proposed as shown in the cross section
below.
.03
384 Legend
EG PF 1
382
WS PF 1
Elevation (m)
380 Crit PF 1
Ground
378
Bank Sta
376
374
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (m)
Figure II- 3: Proposed Bridge Cross Section
The hydraulic analysis indicates that the water surface profile level upstream of the bridge is
381.83m as shown in the model output below. The water surface level for the design flood
without the bridge is 381.35m as it was described in the former section. The backwater as
result of bridge construction is 0.48m which is acceptable as the ERA DDM-2002 recommend
0.50m maximum.
O M EG A
11
Awash River Bridge
Design Report

Stream Centerli Reach 1
384 Legend
EG PF 1
382 WS PF 1
Crit PF 1
Elevation (m)
380 Ground
378
376
374
0 20 40 60 80
Main Channel Distance (m)
Figure II-4: Water Surface profile along the stream after bridge construction
Table 2: Bridge Hydraulic Analysis Output Table
The proposed bridge is adequate and safe. It satisfies the ERA-DDM-2002 all bridge hydraulic
design requirements.
1.3.3 Scour Depth Computation
ERA-DDM-2002 the Lauren’s empherical formula is recommended. The local scour estimated
with this method is determined based on the expected changes in the hydraulic variables and
parameters due to contraction scour or deposition.
The following general procedure is adopted for scour depth computation.
To determine if the flow in the upstream of the bridge is transporting bed material or not,
the critical velocity for beginning of motion (Vc) of D50 size of bed material has to be
O M EG A
12
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
determined. If the critical velocity of the bed material is larger than the mean velocity of the
flow (Vc > V), then clear- water contraction scour will exist. If the critical velocity of the bed
material (Vc < V), then live-bed contraction scour will exist. To calculate the critical
velocity, the following expression is used
Vc= KuY 1/6D 1/3
Where
Vc = Critical velocity above which bed material of size D and smaller
will be transported, m/s
Y = Average of flow upstream of the bridge, m
D = Particle size for Vc, m
D50 = Particle size in mixture of which 50% are smaller, m
Ku = 6.19
Then, for determination of the live-bed contraction scour is estimated using the expression
6/7 k1
y2 Q2  W1 
    
y1  Q1  W 2 
ys= y2-yo= (Average contraction scour depth)
Where
y1 = Average depth in the upstream main channel, m
y2 = Average depth in the contracted section, m
y0 = Existing depth in the contracted section before scour, m
Q1 = Flow upstream channel transporting sediment m3/s
Q2 = flow in contracted channel, m3/s
W1 = Bottom width of the upstream main channel that is transporting
bed material, m
W2 = Bottom width of the main channel in the contracted section less
pier width, m
k1= Exponent determined from the table based on fall velocity and slope of
hydraulic grade line
For clear-water contraction scour, the following expression is used
6/7
 K Q2 
 
u
y2 2/3 2 
 Dm W 
ys = y2-yo = (average contraction scour depth)
Where;
y2 = Average equilibrium depth in the contracted section after
contraction scour, m
Q = Discharge through the bridge or on the set-bank overbank area
at the bridge associated width W, m3/s
D50 = Median diameter of bed material
W = Bottom width of the contracted section less pier width, m
Yo = Average existing depth in the contracted section, m
Ku = 0.025
The bed material is fine and d50 is assumed. HEC-RAS software can be used to estimate the
scour depth of the structures based on the above principle. The total scour is sum of
O M EG A
13
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
construction, pier and abutment scours. The contraction scour is about 1.5m where as if the
abutment scour is added the scour depth 15m. The abutment scour is bit exaggerated.
Therefore, the abutment will be protected with scour depth about 3.5m shall be considered
for the design.
Figure II-8: Bridge scour depth
O M EG A
14
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
PART III: STRUCTURES
O M EG A
15
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Tendaho Awash River Bridge is situated in the Afar Regional State, in the North East
part of Ethiopia, and intended to provide access to the local community residing in the
Gurmude & Guideru Kebele of the Dubti Wereda. It is located in a climate of “Kolla”
dominantly hot weather but gets humid due to the Awash rive. The Project area assumes
an Elevation 380-382 m amsl.
It is believed that the construction of the bridge will enhance the socio economic
development of the community along across the river, particularly to entertain the
needs of the far end community, which otherwise would need to travel more than 30 km
to exchange or communicate the people over the other end of the river. Though the
communities used to live nomadic life, they have started settling and are to involve
themselves in the farm process for the Sugar industry as well as other cereal product
such as maize, sorghum, potato, vegetables etc for their domestic consumption.
Moreover, it will enable them to supply and sell their products to the nearby towns at
reasonable prices. Further, health care facilities and commercial products can be
supplied on all-weather road without fear of over flooding of the river which was a
threat to so many lives.
It is known that drainage structures in general and Bridges in particular are important
links of roads wherever valley and/or river/stream crosses roads and are expensive
components of road network.
Omega Consulting Engineers, Plc, (OCE), is appointed by the Ethiopian Roads Authority,
to carry out Detailed Engineering Designs and Tender Document Preparation for the
Construction of the Tendaho Awash River Bridge Project. The Contract agreement for
the consultancy services between the parties was signed on January 29, 2014. The
service is to include:
 To Review the design of the Awash River Bridge performed by Water Works
Enterprise and either amend, or,
 To carry Detailed Engineering Design for the structures of the Awash River Bridge
and modification wherever necessary,
 Prepare Technical specifications and Bill of quantities that can be applied for the
construction of the Bridge
A design proposed by Water Works Design Enterprise involves a superstructure of Steel

structures of one lane with substructure consisting of RC counter fort abutment and RC
pier for a span of 35 m + 35 m. This option is excluded for:
 Steel structures are for temporary use
 The design is for one lane and does not accommodate future development
 Steel structures are expensive (the cost of one lane steel is nearly same as a two
lane RC Bridge)
 Steel structures are fully imported and the purchase involves foreign currency
 The Concrete option includes the involvement of local labour and use of locally
available materials in addition the exclusion of foreign exchanges compared to
the steel option
O M EG A
16
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Thus, this report mainly covers the Structure Design Report for consultancy services of
Tendaho Awash River Bridge for permanent use. However, in view of the Client’s interest
(in case if exist any), and to retain the original proposed option, for the 2x30 m
hydrology/hydraulic opening requirement, a Steel Bailey Bridge of standard size is
considered, with adjustment to the span in question. In this regard, extra wide single
lane carriage way bridge for the 30 m opening requirement, a 33.53 m span (11 bay of
3.048 m each) is selected from the one available. It is a DSR2* type (with * indicating a
two bay of high shear panel at each end) to serve a single vehicle loading up to 60 tons,
which obviously serve the prevailing traffic of the community. The detail drawing and
relevant bill of quantity for its construction is included to give the Client a sight of
comparative evaluation.
Accordingly, condition survey and detailed ground topographic survey are conducted to
establish the crossing location with respect to foundation material, type of structures to
be selected and approach road designed and then constructed in relation to the
respective roads route intended to be connected with the structure in question.
It is believed that the construction of the bridge will enhance the socio economic
development of the Region in general and the community in the vicinity of the Project in
particular. Health care facilities and commercial products can be supplied on all weather
without fear of over flooding of the River especially which was a threat to so many lives
during peak flood. Thus the Awash River Bridge is to be designed and constructed as
new, thinking of future development, it is made to two lane standard.
Opening size for the bridge has been determined on the basis of hydrological discharge
requirements per the detail report and computation in Part II of this report.
Nevertheless, geometric profile of the road section at the specific location may also be
considered to be governing factor where the river course forms deep valley and where
the HWM may be quite low.
Appropriate design standard (ERA 2002 Bridge Design Manual has been used to determine
relevant design parameters of the structure. Reference to other relevant hand books and
Standards made wherever the ERA standard do not cover the particular aspect or
wherever misgiving in the standard is observed, with necessary explanation. Detail
design has been carried for each of the bridge component and the approach road to
produce detail construction drawings on the basis of which the Technical specification,
bill of quantities and confidential cost estimate prepared.
Thus, the service includes, carrying detail design and design drawings and Report
document preparation for the bridges’ crossing, which includes all fields and office
works in strict accordance with the highest standards of the civil engineering profession
and with proper interpretation of the duties and responsibilities of the Consultants.
In the Section to follow, design standards for determination of important bridge

parameters of the RC design treatment is briefed from general and particular points of
design solution.
2 DESIGN STANDARDS
In the design study and detail design of the bridges, ERA 2002 Bridge Design Manual is
adopted with additional reference being made to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification
3rd Edition, 2004, to complement the ERA Bridge Design Manual. This is made for the
following reasons.
O M EG A
17
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 The standard is applied to all bridges of the Roads in the Country;

 It is prepared to accommodate the particulars of the various region;
 It is prepared on the basis of other International standards which include
AASHTO, with due regard to the particulars of the country.
2.1 Methods of Design
Following ERA 2002 Bridge Design Manual and Complementary sections of AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specification (3rd Edition 2004), the Limit States Design Method is adopted for
design of these structures. Both ULS and SLS requirements are checked through explicit
calculation wherever necessary, and implicit provision is also made wherever found
appropriate.
2.2 Structure Type/Classification and Crossing Selection
Depending on the defined channel opening and discharge requirements, the span of the cross
drainage structures are determined on the basis of which are classified as:
 Below 6 m span are pipe, slab or box culvert,

 6 – 15 m span is slab Bridge,
 12 – 24 m span is T Girder Bridge,
 Above 24 m span is Box girder or a special type such as pre-stress system
In this part of the project, the structure under consideration falls under the fourth bullet
category due to the fact that the opening size requirement and the construction difficulty in
the presence of the huge stream movement, and hence, Box-girder bridges considered. The
proposed bridge crossing has almost straight reach to the stream flow, better and well
defined channel than its neighborhood both at upstream and downstream locations. Besides,
the location is having relatively shorter span requirements and better or equal foundation
material with respect to the respective neighborhood.
2.3 Minimum Dimensions
Table 2-1(ERA BDM) is used as a guide for cell component sizing with due consideration to the
design depth of the superstructure and free board height (Table 2-3, ERA BDM).
The width of the bridge is to provide two-lane carriage way width, while an 800 mm width
pedestrian walk way is provided on extreme left and right of the bridge. The walkways are
raised by about 250 mm above carriage way surface and railings are made to have height not
less than 850 mm above the walkways.
2.4 Construction Methods and Materials
The design consideration has assumed to make use of all available technology and resources
which include simple technique, available construction materials and labour input. In this
line, the structures are mainly to be constructed using Reinforced Concrete and Stone
Masonry. Accordingly, all super structural elements are to be of Reinforce Concrete, while
the sub-structures consisting of Piers and abutments (height greater than 9 m) are to be
O M EG A
18
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
made using RC while those of the Abutments and Wing wall including retaining walls (height
less than 9 m) are to be made using stone masonry of class B, founded on RC Pad (footing).
The relevant material grade and minimum requirements to be satisfied include the
followings.
2.4.1 Concrete
For all main structures of bridges, except for rails and posts, a concrete fck = 24 MPa (cylinder
crushing strength at the age of 28 days) shall be used.
For Rails, Posts and Pipes (wherever applies) - Class Y concrete, corresponding to fck = 28MPa,
used. Note that the corresponding cube crushing strength for fck =24 MPa and fck =28 MPa are
30 and 35 MPa, respectively. For mass concrete (lean concrete) for leveling purpose,
concrete C-15 shall be adopted.
2.4.2 Reinforcing Steel
All reinforcing steel shall be surface deformed satisfying ductility requirements per
ERA/AASHTO standard requirements and shall have the following properties.
Diameter of bar Steel grade Yield strength Elasticity modulus Unit weight
<16 mm 300 300 MPa 200 x 103 MPa 78.50 kN/m3
 16 mm 400 400 MPa 200 x 103 MPa 78.50 kN/m3
2.4.3 Substructure
Masonry for sub-structures is to be made using good quality stones, fulfilling the
requirements of ERA/AASHTO standard for testing, bedded in cement sand mortar of Class B.
 The substructures for the bridge consisting of abutments and Wing walls having height
less than 9 m are of Class B Stone Masonry. However, the Piers and Abutments having
height greater than 9 m shall be of RC of grade C-30.
 Foundation footings made up of RC for the respective substructure are
provided, where the planar dimension in each case is based on the bearing
capacity values of the material, per the investigation and test results for the
respective foundation level, details of which to be determined during
construction.
 The stability of the abutments will be checked against overturning, sliding and bearing
pressure.
2.4.4 Miscellaneous
2.4.4.1 Bridge Railing - Reinforced concrete posts and railings are provided.
O M EG A
19
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
2.4.4.2 Bridge Bearings - Due to functional requirements, Reinforced Elastomeric

bearings are provided to transmit the loads from the superstructure to the substructure and
accommodate the differential movements.
2.4.4.3 Deck Drains - Deck drains are provided at about 4m spacing for entire
length of the deck
2.4.4.4 Deck Joint Seals - Joint seals of the expansion joint are to be of steel T
profile or equivalent for same purpose, to be provided at the ends of the superstructure to
prevent the intrusion of material and water through the joint system in addition to
accommodating these movements.
2.4.4.5 Approach Slab - Approach slab having a thickness of 250 mm for a length
of 3 m covering the full carriage width shall be provided on both sides of the Bridge. It shall
be mesh reinforced with 12c/c 250.
2.5 Loadings
2.5.1 Superstructure
In design of these structures, vehicular loading combination of HL – 93 consisting of Truck +

lane load and/or tandem + lane loading, in accordance with ERA 2002 Bridge Design Manual
and other loadings such as permanent loads, including self weight, accessories and earth
pressure are considered.
In addition to Vehicular loads of HL – 93, other loads include:

 Impact;
 Permanent loads of self and superimposed dead loads, including 7.5cm - wearing
surface for future upgrading and maintenance;
 Secondary and associated live loads which include longitudinal forces due to braking
and traction, loads due to vehicle collision with bridge parapets
 Wind and stream loadings
 Seismic Design per EBCE 8, 1995, in conjunction with AASHTO seismic design criteria.
The design loads (shear forces and bending moments) are calculated at each relevant
section. Dead load and live load deflections are checked for the allowable limits and camber
is provided at mid span for the calculated dead load deflection.
2.5.2 Substructure
The substructure of these bridges consists of RC abutment where the height exceed 9 m,
which otherwise would be made using stone masonry including those for abutments and wing
walls. The following loads are considered in the design of the substructure.
 Dead loads;
 Live loads;
 Wind loads on structure;
 Wind load on live loads;
O M EG A
20
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 Longitudinal forces.
The load combinations were applied in the stability analysis of the substructure. The
stability of the substructures was checked against overturning, bearing pressure and
sliding.
3. PARTICULARS OF TENDAHO AWASH RIVER BRIDGE
The Awash River Bridge is new crossing, the span of which determined and designed for
construction. It is a two span Box Girder Bridge of 30.6 m each. Following the design
standards, the cross drainage structure is determined to be Box girders bridge due to ease of
construction in view of the high stream flow. The width of the bridge is made to fit to the
two lane road standard accommodating future traffic of both vehicular and pedestrians.
The Awash River Bridge is located in northern part of the country, in the Dupti Wereda of the
Afar Regional State, envisaged to be opened and newly constructed.
Per the site studies, it is realized that the Awash River Bridge crossing is a new bridge to be
designed and constructed along a new road, envisaged to be opened to the relevant
standard, connecting the community around to involve in the Sugar cane plantation
especially those of the Gurmudale & Guideru kebele. Thus, the proposed Bridge crossing will
certainly provide access to the community to cross the river on all weather, who will
primarily benefit from the construction of this project in many terms.
Accessibility: The proposed Awash River bridge crossing is located along the Gurmudale-and
Guideru Kebele, envisaged to be opened, specifically located in Dubti Woreda. Currently the
Bridge crossing can be accessed on by swimming across the river. This accessibility is a
problem for carrying the geotechnical exploration of the Bridge, especially at the Pier
location. Thus, geotechnical investigation shall be performed during construction, where, a
Provisional sum is retained in the bill of quantities.
Roads Geometry and Terrain: The topography of the proposed route alignment to the
Bridge crossing are dominantly flat, thus, no basic problem of the approach to the bridge.
Other factors such as foundation, straight reach, and defined channel are among many
considered. In this regard, the subsoil as observed is silt clay soil due to deposition by flood
stream all along the river bed as well as all along the river banks. The most important design
parameter considered is the high embankment fill on both sides of the bridge approaches due
to the overflow of the river from the banks.
In accordance with the previous WW Design report, a steel bridge was proposed. In this
regard, the steel option is disregarded primarily due to the fact that one lane steel baily
bridge cost nearly same as that of a two lane RC bridge, besides the latter is permanent.
Moreover, thinking of the forthcoming development, a two lane RC bridge is considered. The
substructure is to be either masonry founded on RC footings or RC abutment and piers
depending height consideration and foundation material nature.
River pebbles and alluvial deposit prevail on the river bed at the envisaged crossing. The
minimum hydrology opening size in this vicinity ranges between 45 m and 50 m at the time of
the visit, which is the minimum as it is the dry season. However, it is noticed that the river
stream shall assume as wide as 70-80 m during the wet season. However, to cater the
problem of constriction as required by the hydrology/Hydraulic requirements a two span of
30 m is found adequate. The selection do account straight reach, road geometry and also
O M EG A
21
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
satisfy the hydrology requirements. The sub-grade on the approach road on both side consist
of silty-clay soil mixed with alluvial deposit of rive pebbles dominating the river bed.
Moreover, the Bridge is to have a total width of 9.0 m, to fit to two lane road width of future
use.
Some of the salient feature of the crossings of the Awash River and activity carried is shown
in the pictures below.
Plate III-1-2: Water release through Canals from the Tendaho Dam
Plate III-3-4: Basic Livelihood of the Community around the Project
Plate III-5-6: Search for the location of the crossing by the Professional Team and Kebele
Administrators of the Project area
O M EG A
22
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Plate III-7-8: Team Crew observed presence of foot prints of Tiger around the envisaged Awash crossing
Plate III-9-10: Awash about 300 m upstream from the envisage selected crossing and Hydrology water
mark
Plate III-11-12: Envisaged selected crossing of the Awash River Bridge and the Omega Professional crew
O M EG A
23
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Plate III-13-14: The selected crossing location and downstream view
4 DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE
4.1 Proposal of Crossings

The Structural Engineer/Team leader, together with the other members of the Design Team
conducted reconnaissance site visit followed with detail studies to appreciate and determine
the volume of the works, identify peculiar drainage characteristics & problems of the Project
area and develop appropriate methodologies to handle them. Accordingly, the observations
(problem areas) are presented below together with the method of treatment.
As the crossing for the Awash Bridge was studied by WW Design Enterprise and, the earlier
chosen route referred in the checking and search for any other appropriate crossing location.
The crossing is assessed by the team consisting of the Team Leader, HWE, Structural,
Hydrologist and Material/Geotechnical Engineers and Chief Surveyor, where, decision was
made to select one for each on the basis of the following criteria.
 A straight reach with respect to approach roads,
 Well defined and stable bank,
 Shortest possible span in the neighborhood of the selected project route,
 Good foundation material in the neighborhood of the alignment,
 Least location of disturbing influence of tributaries.
As both satisfy all except one located near bent, the second option is selected as shown in
the Table below. The general information on the observed crossings the road route and the
corresponding drainage structure requirements are provided in Table 4.1, below.
Table 4.1: Location of the Awash River Bridge Crossings option

Approx.
It. River GPS Channel River Boundary
River Bed Remark
No Name Coordinate opening Reach Condition
(m)
1 Option-1 E 720690 69 Bent Defined Channel, Alluvial deposit Not chosen, for its
N1294739 point but overtops mixed with river near a bent
during high flood pebbles
2 Option -2 E720980 69 Straight Defined Channel, Alluvial deposit The Chosen option,
N1294672 overtops during mixed with river detail foundation
high flood pebbles and investigation to be
outcrops of rock carried during
construction
O M EG A
24
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
4.2 Design Selection of the Bridge
Following the site assessment and the outcome of the Hydrology/Hydraulic study result, the
profile for a 2x30 m span configuration has the following results.
The river bed elevation is 375 m, amsl. From the WW design, a design discharge of 1616
m3/sec considered, where the HFL is 381.8 m, amsl; this has required the grade finish
elevation of the Bridge to 385.0 m, amsl. Accordingly, an opening of 2x30 m shall be kept for
this Bridge, as required by the Hydrology/Hydraulic study. Other lesser multi-span
configuration is not considered as the construction over such big river is much costly than the
one selected. Thus, a two 30 m span box girder is considered.
4.2.1 The Bridge Component Dimensions
Major dimensions of the super-structures for span of 30 m box girder bridge are
provided following ERA 2002 design standards, wherever applies.
Ref Dimension
Remark
No Description in mm
1 Thickness of top flange, Min. 175 mm The spacing of the girders
220 are kept constants
2 Thickness of bottom flange, Min. 140 mm 170 The thickness established for
placing two layers of steel
3 Web thickness of girder, min 250 mm 500 This is selected for better
performance against shear
and local buckling
4 Overall Girder Depth, (0.06L and 0.07L) 2000
5 Overhang Thickness of deck, the free end 300
6 Protection barriers Posts: 250x300, height 850 The standard shall be
mm, posts at spacing of 1500, Rails:200x400, one adopted
at top height of the posts
4.2.2 Loading and analysis of Deck slab
The most critical loads are considered.
Permanent loads:
γc = 25 kN/m3, including reinforcement,
γbit = 22.5 kN/m3, for asphalt wearing surface
Variable Loads: HL-93 per ERA 2002 Bridge Design Manual consisting of:
O M EG A
25
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
a) Truck Axle load plus lane load,

b) Tandem Axle load plus lane load
Except for the design lane load, a dynamic allowance considered through an IM factor of
0.333. Nevertheless, for deck design, the Truck axle load and lane load is being
considered as they are the most critical.
Deck Slab of Girders:

The permanent design and variable design moments on deck slab is 100.93 kN-m/m, on
the overhand, where depth is 300 mm. With effective depth of 242 mm, fc’=24 MPa,
fy=300 MPa (as F< 16 mm), requires area of steel 1625 mm2. Provide ∅16 c/c 120.
Moreover, distribution bars of 0.67 As= 1089 mm2, provide ∅16 c/c 180. Shrinkage and
temperature reinforcement shall be of ∅12 c/c 300.
For bottom slab of the Box girder:

Reinforcement to bottom slab, parallel to the span As=0.004bh=670 mm2; requires ∅14
c/c 220.
Transverse to the girders, As=0.005bh=850 mm2, requires ∅14 c/c 180. Further, shrinkage
reinforcement of As> 0.75 Ag / fy =425 mm2 < As, provided.
4.2.3 Main Girders
Having the protection barriers to be of same design for both of the options, a typical
section for each of the two alternative cases is considered. Comparison has been carried
on the bases of the outcome of a typical section for each case and summarized in the
Table below.
Max. Main
Design
Ref Structure Design Reinforcement
Shear Shear Rein. Remark
No Description Moment (mm2 and No of
(kN)
(kN-m) bars)
1 30.6 m Box girder, In view of
D=2000mm, 2150 13,708.77 20,830 ∅12c/c overloading
d=1900 mm 26∅32, required 125/250 30∅32provided
4.2.4 Sub-Structure
4.2.4.1 Abutments
The sub-structure for this bridge is selected to consist of RC abutments and wing
walls, resting on RC pad, in addition to the intermediate RC pier support. Due to
O M EG A
26
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
height consideration the abutments and the Wing walls are cantilever RC, whereas
the rest retaining walls shall be simple stone masonry as may be required.
The bearing capacities have been estimated using presumptive bearing value
provided for similar type of bearing soil/ material. The Ethiopian building code of
practice and Boules Foundation material 5th edition has been used to recommend
a safe bearing capacity of 4.0 kg/cm2, which shall be confirmed with the details
of the geotechnical investigation, to be carried during construction.
In the light of the above discussion, a 400 kPa safe bearing capacity is adopted at
the envisaged foundation level, subject to adjustment from the outcome of the
detail geotechnical investigation during construction.
The following data governs the Design of the Cantilever Abutments for this Bridge.
 Grade Finish Elev. 385.000 m

 High Flood Level (100 Yrs) 381.800 m
 River Bed Elev. 375.000 m
 River Bank Elev at toe of Abutment 380.000 m
 Total Height with 7 m embedded below dredge line 12.000 m
 Superstructure Height includes bearings & bearing shelf 2.636 m
 Clear Height of Abutment 8.364 m
Initial Dimensions
Due to height consideration in addition to the stream condition, the abutment for
this bridge is selected Cantilever RC wall with initial dimensions below
 Width of Abutment 9.00 m

 Total Height of Abutment 12.00 m
 Length of Wing Wall 5.295 m
 Thickness of Wing Wall at the top 0.35 m
 The Wing Wall thickness at its base 1.00 m
 Thickness of Abut. stem at its base (on 1:48 slope) 1.30 m
 Width of Pad (0.4 to 0.7 of H) 7.295 m
It is checked for stability and bearings, which is also reinforced for various types
of design action. The Various dimensions are given in Figure 4.1, below and details
of the calculations given in Appendix.
O M EG A
27
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
w9
h3
w7
H
w 6 h2
w5
H 1 1
H
h1
m 1 m 2
P h2
w8
w3
P h1 w4 w2
Z1 w1 b 2
P1 P sc b 4
b 5 b 3 b 1
Figure III-4.1: Reinforced Concrete cantilever Abutment for the Bridge
4.2.4.2 Piers
As the bridge is a two span, hammer head RC pier is introduced for its better
performance in such big stream against Column type Piers. Accordingly, the following
initial dimension adopted.
 Top width parallel to flow 1.50 m
 Bottom stem width perpendicular to flow 2.08 m
 Top width perpendicular to traffic 7.90 m
 Bottom width perpendicular to traffic 3.30 m
 Dimension of Pad 7.08 m x8.3 m
O M EG A
28
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 Total Height of Pier (including Pad thickness) 12.864 m
Wp3 W p2 Wp3
h4
H4
h3
H3
wp1
w4 h1
H2
1 1
H
m1
m2
h2 H1
w3
w2 w2
w1
D D
b1 b2 b3 b2 b1 W2 W1 W2
Figure III-4.2: RC Hammer head Pier; Wp1=6300, Wp2=800, tt=220, tb=170, Dg=2000, bw=500,
h1=2550, h2 =7914, h3 = 1200, D=1200. Dimensions all in mm
4.2.5 Summary of Relevant Dimensions of the RC Awash River Bridge
Span of the Bridge 2x30.60 m

Bridge Type Box Girder
Bridge carriageway width: 7.30 meter
Sidewalk width: 0.80 meter
Railing height: 0.85 meter
Transverse Cross fall: 2%
Grade finishes Elevation 385.00 m, amsl
Central River Bed Elev. 375.00 m, amsl
Bank Elev. At the toe of abut. 380.00 m, amsl
O M EG A
29
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Thus, this bridge is to have a total width of 9.00 m with two traffic lanes of minimum
width 3.65 m each, while a 0.80 m width pedestrian walkway is provided on extreme left
and right of the bridge, cross section of which shown below.
50 50
W lc Cw W lc
tt
bw bw dg bw
tb
Cb Bb Cb
Figure III-4.3: Bridge Cross section; Wk= 800, Cw=7300, tt =220, tb = 170,Dg =2000,bw =500,Cb =
1400, Dimensions all in mm
4.2.6 Bridge Details
As has been shown earlier, the design of the Awash River Bridge is governed by the
hydrology/hydraulics of the Awash Flood. In this regard the following are relevant data used
in the detail design of the bridges.
4.2.6.1 Awash River Bridge Detail

Location - Gurmude & Guideru Kebele of the Dubti Woreda
Name - Awash
Type of Structure - Box - girder
Opening Width - Double span of 30 m
Girder overall Depth - 2,000 mm
No. of Girders - 3
Girder web width - 500 mm
Deck slab thickness (top) - 220 mm
Bottom slab thickness – 170 mm
O M EG A
30
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Carriage Width - 7.30 m
Walk way Width - 800 mm
Railing Type - RC posts and Rails
Approach slab - 3.0 m long and 0.25m thick on both sides
Abutments - Cantilever RC wall
Pier - Hammer headed RC
Any other requirement - Requires Considerable length Retaining wall of

Gabions and Stone Masonry to be decided on site
during construction
Maximum bearing stress permitted is 400 kPa
4.2.6.2 Works volume of the Bridge Construction of the RC Box girder
The work volume considered includes those of the work related to the bridge only. It is made
to consist of two span of 30 m, arrangement with one concrete Pier and two cantilever RC
abutments. The major quantity for this major structure consists of the following
 Excavation
o In soft material - 942.0 m3
o in hard material - 628.0 m3
 Backfilling
o Using excavated material - 628.0 m3
o Using imported material - 300.4 m3
o Foundation Rock fill - 507.6 m3
 C-15 Lean Concrete - 10.5 m3
 C-30 Concrete - 1100.0 m3
 Reinforcement - 145,090 kg
 Bridge Post & Rails - 146 m
 Bearings –
 Elastomeric Bearings - 12 No
 110 mm diam. PVC
Drainage pipes (Weep holes) - 316.8 m
 Expansion joint of Steel covered with
Pre-moldable elastomeric
Seal -Expansion joints - 27 m
 Riprap Construction for
Flood protection, about
10 m length on all sides
of the approach after the
RC wing walls - 500 m3
 Geotechnical Exploration - 3 No
 Diversion - 1 No
O M EG A
31
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Detail statical calculation for the Bridge is provided in Appendix of this report.
4.3 Steel Bailey bridge Option
As the earlier design works indicate a steel baily bridge, in this part, this alternative option is
considered. Accordingly, a standard bailey bridge available are in bays of length 3.048 m
each, with height 2.24 m and a normal lane width of 3.15 m or an extra wide single lane of
4.02 m, where the latter is chosen for handling the traffic, in addition to single vehicle. Due
to standardization an 11 bay type designated as DSR2*, (a two bays of high shear panels at
each end) is chosen to sustain a 60 Tons of vehicular loading, which is the typical prevailing
loading in the current Highways. This would make a two span of 33.53 m length steel bridge,
details of which adjusted to the substructure designed for the RC box girder. The rational
being the steel is of temporary use in nature and considered in case this is to be selected.
However, the sub-structure of the two lane concrete kept for the steel also, in case a change
is made for the permanent solution, much adjustment need not be made. Thus, the
substructure is designed to sustain either steel baily bridge or concrete box Girder Bridge,
depending the preference of the Client.
The following data governs the Design dimension of the steel baily Bridge.
 Grade Finish Elev. 383.664 m

 High Flood Level (100 Yrs) 381.800 m
 River Bed Elev. 375.000 m
 River Bank Elev at toe of Abutment 380.000 m
 Total Height with 7 m embedded below dredge line 10.900 m
 Superstructure depth below deck level 0.816 m
 Clear Height of Abutment 7.864 m
Except for the adjustment made on the end walls of the abutment and piers, due to the
fact that the Truss configuration is bottom boom loading, the relevant
hydrology/hydraulic relevant dimension and to such requirements are kept same as the
one for the RC box girder, details of which shown on the drawings.
Works volume for the Steel Bailey Bridge Construction
The work volume in this case includes those of the substructure identical to the one for the
RC box girder, excluding bearings and work related to the steel bridge only. It is made to
consist of two span of 33.5 m, arrangement with one concrete Pier and two cantilever RC
abutments. The major quantity for this major structure consists of the following
 Excavation
o In soft material - 942.0 m3
o in hard material - 628.0 m3
 Backfilling
o Using excavated material - 628.0 m3
o Using imported material - 300.4 m3
o Foundation Rock fill - 507.6 m3
 C-15 Lean Concrete - 10.5 m3
 C-30 Concrete - 605.9 m3
 Reinforcement - 54,000 kg
 110 mm diam. PVC
O M EG A
32
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
Drainage pipes (Weep holes) - 316.8 m

 Riprap Construction for
Flood protection, about
10 m length on all sides
of the approach after the
RC wing walls - 500 m3
 Extra Wide single lane steel bailey
Bridge (with double truss
System-DSR2*) - 67.6 m
 Geotechnical Exploration - 3 No
 Diversion - 1 No
4.3 Comparison
The table below gives the relative comparison between the Concrete and steel option and is
meant for this purpose only.
Sr. Item Description RC Box Steel bailey Remark
No Girder Bridge
option Option
1 Excavation in: Activity in both option is
 soft material 942.0 m3 942.0 m3 the same
 hard materials 628.0 m3 628.0 m3
2 Backfilling using: Activity in both option is
 excavated material 628.0 m3 628.0 m3 the same
 Imported material 300.4 m3 300.4 m3
 Rock fill 507.6 m3 507.6 m3
3 C-15 Lean Concrete 10.5 m3 10.5 m3 Activity in both option is
the same
4 C-30 Concrete 1100.0 605.9 m3 The difference is for the
m3 superstructure of the
box girder
5 Reinforcement 145,090 54,000 kg The difference is for the
kg superstructure of the
box girder
6 110 mm diam. PVC 316.8 m 316.8 m Activity in both option is
Drainage pipes the same
7 Bridge Post & Rails 146 m -
Expansion joint sealant filler
and cover 27 m
8 Riprap Construction for Flood Activity in both option is
protection, about 10 m length the same
on all sides of the approach
after the RC wing walls 500 m3 500 m3
9 Extra Wide single lane steel
bailey Bridge (with double
truss System-DSR2*) 67.6 m
10 Geotechnical Exploration No 3 No 3 Activity in both option is
the same, and, Minimum
one at abutment 1, 2
and Pier location
11 Diversion No 1 No 1 Activity in both option is
the same
 The cost of Superstructure of RC Box girder, includes bearings, rails and accessories is
estimated to 2x31.65 m x90, 000 Birr/m= ETB 5,697,000.00.
O M EG A
33
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
 The cost of the superstructure of the Steel Bailey Bridge all in accordance with the
detail Drawings including accessories is 67.6x83,000 = ETB 5, 610, 800.00.
As can be seen from the Table, all of the activities of the substructure are kept same except
for the superstructure and accessories which give a nearly equal cost. However, the steel
baily bridge is one lane, whereas, the RC box girder is a two lane; besides being permanent.
As the technical and economic advantages sighted earlier governs by the Concrete option,
the Reinforced Concrete Box Girder Bridge is recommended.
O M EG A
34
Awash River Bridge
Design Report
PART II STRUCTURES REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 16

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 16
1.2 Methodology .................................................................................................................
1.2.1 General ........................................................................................................................
1.2.2 Extension/Replacement of Existing Culverts and New Culverts
1.2.3 Investigations and Approach.........................................................................................
1.3 Design Standards ..........................................................................................................
1.3.1 1.3.1 General ...............................................................................................................
1.3.2 1.3.2 Methods of Design ...............................................................................................
1.3.3 1.3.3 Structure Type/Classification and Crossing Selection .........................................
1.3.4 1.3.4 Minimum Dimensions ...........................................................................................
1.3.5 1.3.5 Construction Methods and Materials ...................................................................
1.3.6 1.3.6 Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................
Retaining Walls ........................................................................................................................
1.3.7 1.3.7 Loadings, Analysis and Design .............................................................................
2 INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................................... 21
2.1 Site Visit and Proposal of Crossings ..............................................................................
Appendix A: Statical Calculations

A.1 Box girder - Super Structure
A.2 Abutments
A.3 Bearings and Piers
A.4 Bill of Quantities
O M EG A
35

Awash Rive Bridge-Tendaho Project-Feb-2014-1 (Repaired)

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

Awash Rive Bridge-Tendaho Project-Feb-2014-1 (Repaired)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design review and Detail Design of the Tendaho Awash

Awash River Bridge

Detailed Design of the Tendaho Awash River

Part I: Design Review

1.2 Objectives of this Report

2. DESIGN REVIEW OF TENDAHO AWASH RIVER BRIDGE

2.1 General comment

 No detail drawings of the superstructure on material property, types and

 No bar schedule nor details of reinforcement for substructure shown on the

 No appropriate statical calculation including relevant assumption for

 Hydrology/Hydraulic aspect of the report for the Bridge design study is

 No standard geotechnical investigation program carried out nor proposed.

 No rational for selecting foundation type and substructure. No calculation shown

2.2 Specific Comments

 Bailey steel Bridge for superstructure proposed, where sizing is to be optimized

 Deck plate or slab thickness,

 Cross-section of Longitudinal stringers,

 Lateral bracing ties

 Details of members of Main graders and interconnection details

 High flood mark or design flood elevation

 Bed level and bank level

 The reinforcement to the sub-structure (both to Piers and footings) including

 Safety for stability of overturning, and sliding

 Which design standard adopted for determination of reinforcement

2.3 Conclusion and Recommendation

 The Design Report is not thorough and complete

 No explicit statical calculation of the basic structural element exhibited for

 Material information, detail bill of quantities,

 bar schedule for reinforcing steel in the substructures of foundation

 Basic dimensions of structural steel and also schedule

Detailed Design of the Tendaho Awash River

PART II: HYDROLOGY HYDRAULIC

1 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY & HYDRAULIC DESIGN REVIEW

Figure II-1: Proposed Bridge Location on Satellite Imagery

Figure II-2: Picture of proposed bridge crossing site

1.2 Hydrological Study

1.3 Hydraulic Design

Figure II-3: The Awash River Crossing Site

1.3.1 Open Channel Flow Analysis

AWASH RIVER BRIDGE AFAR Plan: Plan 10 23-Feb-14

AWASH RIVER BRIDGE AFAR Plan: Plan 10 23-Feb-14

1.3.2 Bridge Hydraulic Design

AWASH RIVER BRIDGE AFAR Plan: Plan 11 23-Feb-14

Figure II- 3: Proposed Bridge Cross Section

AWASH RIVER BRIDGE AFAR Plan: Plan 11 23-Feb-14

Table 2: Bridge Hydraulic Analysis Output Table

1.3.3 Scour Depth Computation

The following general procedure is adopted for scour depth computation.

Vc= KuY 1/6D 1/3

For clear-water contraction scour, the following expression is used

ys = y2-yo = (average contraction scour depth)

Figure II-8: Bridge scour depth

PART III: STRUCTURES

A design proposed by Water Works Design Enterprise involves a superstructure of Steel

In the Section to follow, design standards for determination of important bridge

 The standard is applied to all bridges of the Roads in the Country;

2.1 Methods of Design

2.2 Structure Type/Classification and Crossing Selection

 Below 6 m span are pipe, slab or box culvert,

2.3 Minimum Dimensions

2.4 Construction Methods and Materials

2.4.2 Reinforcing Steel

2.4.4.2 Bridge Bearings - Due to functional requirements, Reinforced Elastomeric