Hydraulic Calculations For Minor Bridge located at Prop Ch-454+200

1 Input
Existing Chainage = 454+200 km
Proposed chainage = 454+200 km
Name of the subzone = Krishna & Pennar
Subzone = 3h
Bridge slab thickness = 0.6 m
wearing coat thickness = 0.065 m
camber = 2.50%
width of the bridge = 16 m
Proposed clear vent = 5 9
Intermediate wall thickness = 0.3 m
External wall thickness = 0.45 m

I Flood Estimation at Bridge site

(A) By Unit Hydrograph Method

Step : - 1 Physiographic Parameters

From
Catchment Area, A = 47.41 sq km Toposheet

From
Length of longest stream, L = 21.32 km Toposheet

Unit rainfall duration tr = 1.00 hr

Design Flood As per Clause 7.5 of
= 100.00 yrs IRC:SP:73-2015
period T
Length of the main stream from the point near to the center of gravity of=Catchment
11.66to the km
bridge site Lc
Equivalent stream slope
Height Above Datum*
Reduced Level of River

Li x (Di-1 + Di) (m*km)

Starting From Bridge

Between the Datum

Site (Point of Study)

Segment (Li) (km)

Reduced Distance

(Di)=Difference
Length of Each

(Di-1 + Di) (m)

Bed (m)
Sl No

(km)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

1 0.00 260.00 - - - -
2 2.02 270.00 2.02 10.00 10.00 20.20
3 4.11 280.00 2.09 20.00 30.00 62.69
4 5.44 290.00 1.33 30.00 50.00 66.35
5 6.88 300.00 1.45 40.00 70.00 101.39
6 8.75 310.00 1.87 50.00 90.00 168.26
7 10.23 320.00 1.47 60.00 110.00 161.76
8 11.48 330.00 1.25 70.00 130.00 162.50
9 12.32 340.00 0.84 80.00 150.00 126.00
10 13.69 350.00 1.38 90.00 170.00 233.75
11 15.81 360.00 2.12 100.00 190.00 403.66
12 16.48 370.00 0.66 110.00 210.00 138.71
13 16.69 380.00 0.21 120.00 230.00 48.30
14 16.90 390.00 0.22 130.00 250.00 53.75
15 17.20 400.00 0.30 140.00 270.00 81.00
 16 17.39 410.00 0.19 150.00 290.00 53.65
17 17.54 420.00 0.15 160.00 310.00 46.50
18 19.43 450.00 1.89 190.00 350.00 661.50
19 21.32 500.00 1.89 240.00 430.00 812.70
SUM 21.32 3402.65

(*) Reduced level of river bed at the point of study, i.e. 260m
Hydraulic Calculations for Bridge at Proposed Ch 454+2
Equivalent
Slope S
= ∑(Li x (Di-1 + Di))/L2
= 7.49 m/km

Stream slope
y = 9.752x + 234.2
600.00
R² = 0.891
RL in m

400.00
200.00
0.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Distance in Km

Step : - 2 Determination of Synthetic (1-hr) Unit Hydrograph Parameterrs

Time from the center of Unit rainfall duration to the peak of Unit Hydrograph
tp = 0.325*[LLc / (S)^0.5]0.447
= 2.44 hrs
say 2.00 hrs
Peak discharge of hydrograph per unit area
qp = 0.996*[tp]-0.497
= 0.639 cumecs per sq km
Width of U. G. measured at 50% maximum discharge ordinate
W50 = 2.389*[qp]-1.065
= 3.85 hrs
Width of U. G. measured at 75% maximum discharge ordinate
W75 = 1.415*[qp]-1.067
= 2.28 hrs
Width of the rising side of U. G. measured at 50% of maximum discharge ordinate
WR50 = 0.753*qp-1.229
= 1.30 hrs
Width of the rising side of U. G. measured at 75% of maximum discharge ordinate
WR75 = 0.558*[qp]-1.088
= 0.91 hrs
Base width of Unit Hydrograph
TB = 7.392*[(tp)^(0.524)]
= 11.79 hrs
say 12.00 hrs
Time from start of rise to the peak of unit hydrograph
Tm = tp + tr/2
= 2.5 hrs
Peak discharge of Unit Hydrograph
 Qp = qp * A
= 30.32 cumecs
say 30.32 cumecs

Step : - 3 Drawing of Synthetic Unitgraph

Estimated parameter of Unitgraph in step-2 were plotted to scale. The plotted points were joined to draw
synthetic unitgraph. The discharge ordinates of unitgraph at ti=tr=1 hr interval were summed up and
compared with the volume of 1.00 cm direct runoff as calculated below
X values Y values
0 0.00 0 0
Tm-WR50 1.20 Qp*0.5 15.160
Tm-WR75 1.59 Qp*0.75 22.740
Tm 2.50 Qp*1.0 30.320
Tm-WR75+W75 3.87 Qp*0.75 22.740
Tm-WR50+W50 5.04 Qp*0.5 15.160
TB 12.00 0 0.000

Time (in hrs)

1-hr Synthetic Synthetic Unit Hydrograph
U.G. ordinates 35
0.0 0.00 30
1.0 12.50
2.0 28.50 25
3.0 29.80
Q (cumecs)

20
4.0 21.60
5.0 14.95 15
6.0 9.80
7.0 6.50 10
8.0 3.95 5
9.0 2.45
10.0 1.20 0
11.0 0.45 0 5 10 15
12.0 0.00 Time t (hrs)

Sum 131.70 cumecs ……1 ok

Sum(Qi) = (A*d)/(tr*0.36)
= 131.69 cumecs ……2
Since Eq-1 = Eq-2, so unitgraph drawn is in order

Step : - 4 Estimation of design storm duration

The design storm duration
TD = 1.1 * tp
= 2.2 hrs
Say 2.00 hrs

Step : - 5 Estimation of point rainfall and areal rainfall for design storm duration

(Isopluvial maps Plate-

100-yr, 24-hr rainfall = 20.00 cm 10 of CWC report)
Ratio of 24-hr rainfall to2-hr rainfall = 0.57 (from Fig-10)
100-yr 2-hr point rainfall = 11.40 cm
 Areal reduction factor corresponding to area 47.41sq km and TD=2 hrs
Areal reduction factor for 0 sqkm = 100.0%
Areal reduction factor for 50 sqkm 90.8%
Areal reduction factor corresponding to area 47.41sq km and TD=2 hrs= 91.2% (From Table-4)
So, 100-yr 2-hr areal rainfall = 10.40 cm

Step : - 6 Estimation of 1hr effective rainfall

Design Loss rate for subzone 3h is 0.1 cm/hr

This 100-yr 2-hrs areal rainfall is distributed as below (from Table-A-3)

Storm
Rainfall
Hourly Design
(cm) Rainfall
Time Distribution Rainfall Loss
=Rainfall Excess
Duration (hrs) coefficient Increame Rate
x (cms)
nt (cm) (cm/hr)
coefficien
t
1 0.89 9.26 9.26 0.100 9.16
2 1.00 10.40 1.14 0.100 1.04

Step : - 7 Estimation of base flow

The design base flow
Cwc Flood estimation
qb = 0.05 cumec per sq km
report for Subzone 3h para
Total base flow for catchment under consideration
Qb = 2.37 cumecs

Step : - 8 Estimation of 100-yr Flood Peak

For the estimation of the peak discharge the effective rainfall units were re-arranged against the ordinates
such that the maximum effective rainfall was placed against the maximum U.G. ordinates, the next lower
value of effective rainfall against the the next lower value of U.G. ordinates and so on as shown below:

1-hr
Direct
U.G. Ordinates effective
Runoff
(cumec) rainfall
(cumecs)
(cm)
28.50 1.04 29.75
29.80 9.16 272.85
Total = 302.61
Base Flow 2.37
100-yr peak flood 304.98

(B) Empirical Formula

Annual average rainfall in the project location 53.5 cm

Description Dicken's Ryve's

Value of C 11.000 8.500

adopted in the
present case
 Catchment area 47.41 47.41
(M) (Sq Km)
Discharge, Q (Cumecs)198.74 111.34

Flood Estimation by
(C)
Area velocity method using Observed HFL

Longitudinal Section of the river y = -0.006x + 260.8

261.500
Length RL of river bed 261.000 Bed slope
0 261.302

RL in m
260.500 Series1
19 260.734 260.000
44 260.242 259.500
Linear
68 260.152 259.000 (Series1)
118 259.962 0 100 200 300
194 259.792 Distance m

Average Bed Slope of River, S 0.006 1 in 167

Manning's Coefficient,n 0.035 As per Table 5.1 of IRC-SP-13Same as 3 some weeds and stones
Bed condition
Good
Cross section/Goerge data at bridge site
Ch (X) m RL (Y)
29 0 263.602 Stream c/s at bridge site
264
26 3.6 262.507
263.5
24 5.76 261.485
263
21 8.5 261.162
262.5
17 11.83 260.762
262
14 14.86 260.5 Gorge Data
261.5
12 16.9 260.658 Series2
261
10 19.03 260.822
260.5
8 21.64 260.644
260
5 23.9 260.6056
-40 -20 0 20 40
4 25.74 260.5735
2 27.68 260.539
0 29.27 260.512
-2 31.12 260.647
-3 32.69 260.76
-6 34.86 260.819
-8 36.94 260.878
-10 39.28 261.052
-12 41.74 261.242
-15 43.99 261.428
-17 46.01 261.582
-19 48.45 262.772
-20 49.69 263.602

Discharge calculations
Observed HFL 262.422 m
LBL 260.500 m
Q=AV=AxR2/3xS1/2
A P R Q
sqm m m3/s
C1 40.05 25.77 1.55 118.89
 C2 24.49 18.69 1.31 64.89
Total 64.53 183.78

Wetted
RL of Depth C/S
RL of Existing GL Distance Ht diff perimete
Distance (m) Modified HFL (m) of flow Avg Area
(m) depth of (m) (m) r
GL (m) (m) Sqm
flow (m) P (m)
25.490 262.422 262.422 262.422 0.00 0.47 1.980 0.93 0.94 2.19
23.510 261.485 261.485 262.422 0.94 1.10 2.740 3.01 0.32 2.76
20.770 261.162 261.162 262.422 1.26 1.46 3.330 4.86 0.40 3.35
17.440 260.762 260.762 262.422 1.66 1.79 3.030 5.43 0.26 3.04
C1
14.410 260.5 260.500 262.422 1.92 1.84 2.040 3.76 0.16 2.05
12.370 260.658 260.658 262.422 1.76 1.68 2.130 3.58 0.16 2.14
10.240 260.822 260.822 262.422 1.60 1.69 2.610 4.41 0.18 2.62
7.630 260.644 260.644 262.422 1.78 1.80 2.260 4.06 0.04 2.26
5.370 260.6056 260.606 262.422 1.82 1.83 1.840 3.37 0.03 1.84
3.530 260.5735 260.574 262.422 1.85 1.87 1.940 3.62 0.03 1.94
1.590 260.539 260.539 262.422 1.88 1.90 1.590 3.02 0.03 1.59
0.000 260.512 260.512 262.422 1.91
40.05 25.77
0.000 260.512 260.512 262.422 1.91 0.00
-1.850 260.647 260.647 262.422 1.78 1.84 1.850 3.41 0.13 1.85
-3.420 260.76 260.760 262.422 1.66 1.72 1.570 2.70 0.11 1.57
-5.590 260.819 260.819 262.422 1.60 1.63 2.170 3.54 0.06 2.17
-7.670 260.878 260.878 262.422 1.54 1.57 2.080 3.27 0.06 2.08
C2
-10.010 261.052 261.052 262.422 1.37 1.46 2.340 3.41 0.17 2.35
-12.470 261.242 261.242 262.422 1.18 1.28 2.460 3.14 0.19 2.47
-14.720 261.428 261.428 262.422 0.99 1.09 2.250 2.45 0.19 2.26
-16.740 261.582 261.582 262.422 0.84 0.92 2.020 1.85 0.15 2.03
-18.460 262.422 262.422 262.422 0.00 0.42 1.720 0.72 0.84 1.91
24.49 18.69
Total cross section area (A) 64.53 Sqm
Discharge Q 183.78 m3/sec
Velocity V 2.85 m/s
D Estiamted Design discharge Q with vairous methods
Design Discharge
Dicken's formula 198.745 cumecs
Ryve's formula 111.344 cumecs
SUH Method 304.976 cumecs
Area Velocity Method 183.775 cumecs
Design Discharge from Synthetic Unit Hydrograph is considered in
= 304.976 cumecs
accordance with IRC-5:2015 clause 106.3.2

E) High Flood level based on Area velocity method for Design discharge calculated using SUH

HFL 262.463 m
LBL 260.512 m
Bed slope 0.006
Rugosity Coefficient n 0.035

A P R Q
 sqm m m3/s
C1 50.24 25.75 1.95 173.59
C2 38.02 19.49 1.95 131.39
Total 88.26 304.98

Wetted
RL of C/S
RL of Existing GL Depth Avg Distance Ht diff perimete
Distance (m) Modified HFL (m) Area
(m) of flow depth of (m) (m) r
GL (m) Sqm
flow P (m)
25.750 262.547 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 0.080 0.16 0.00 0.08
25.670 262.507 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.160 4.21 0.00 2.16
23.510 261.485 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.740 5.35 0.00 2.74
20.770 261.162 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 3.330 6.50 0.00 3.33
17.440 260.762 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 3.030 5.91 0.00 3.03
14.410 260.5 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.040 3.98 0.00 2.04
C1 12.370 260.658 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.130 4.16 0.00 2.13
10.240 260.822 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.610 5.09 0.00 2.61
7.630 260.644 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.260 4.41 0.00 2.26
5.370 260.6056 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 1.840 3.59 0.00 1.84
3.530 260.5735 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 1.940 3.78 0.00 1.94
1.590 260.539 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 1.590 3.10 0.00 1.59
0.000 260.512 260.512 262.463 1.95
50.236 25.750

0.000 260.512 260.512 262.463 1.95

-1.850 260.647 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 1.850 3.61 0.00 1.85
-3.420 260.76 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 1.570 3.06 0.00 1.57
-5.590 260.819 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.170 4.23 0.00 2.17
-7.670 260.878 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.080 4.06 0.00 2.08
C2 -10.010 261.052 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.340 4.57 0.00 2.34
-12.470 261.242 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.460 4.80 0.00 2.46
-14.720 261.428 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.250 4.39 0.00 2.25
-16.740 261.582 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.020 3.94 0.00 2.02
-19.180 262.772 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 2.440 4.76 0.00 2.44
-19.490 262.98 260.512 262.463 1.95 1.95 0.310 0.60 0.00 0.31

38.024 19.490
Total Flow area (A) 88.260 Sqm
Discharge Q= AXV 304.98 m3/sec
Velocity V 3.46 m/sec

F) Design parameters for Bridge at Ch 454+200

Discharge, Q = 304.976 cumec
Afflux calculations
HFL (Without Afflux) = 262.463 m
Depth of flow = 1.95 m
Area before constriction, An1 = 88.260 sq m
Average velocity prior to constriction, Vn1=Q/An1 = 3.46 m/s
Area after constriction, An2=An2* - no. of piers * avg width of piers * avg depth(d) = 85.919 sq m
Afflux due to constriction (By Molesworth Formula), h= [(Vn1^2)/17.88+0.015] [
= 0.037 m
(An1/An2)^2-1]
Affluxed HFL = 262.500 m
 Approach velocity V2=Q/A2 = 3.55 m/s

Linear
Waterway
Design = 304.976 cumecs
dischargeofQ
Velocity = 3.46 m/s
river
HFL = 262.500 m
Depth of Flow = 1.99 m
Required linearwaterway =Q/(Vv*(d+afflux) = 42.44 m
Proposed Effective linear waterway = 45.00 m
Safe

F) Scour Depth calculations

ii. If Linear waterway is less than regime width
2 1/3
Dsm = 1.34 x (Db(as/kper
sf) article-9 of SP:13-2004)
Dsm is the normal ( mean) depth of scour below HFL in m
Db is the discharge in cumec per m width of effective waterway
ksf is the silt factor for sample of bed material
0.5
Ksf = 1.76 x (dm)(cl.703.2.2 of IRC :78-2000)
dm is the weighted mean diameter of bed material in mm
According to Clause 703.1.1 IRC:78-2000 To provide for an adequate margin of safety, the scour for foundation
shall be designed discharge over the discharge obtained (IRC:5)
Design discharge is increased in percentage depending upon the catchment area
Actual Discharge calculated = 304.976 cumecs
Increase in design discharge for scour depth calculation = 0.300 as per 703.1.1 of IRC:78
width of the Linear water way Db = 8.810 m3/sec/m
Type of bed material = Heavy sand
Silt factor for the bed material ksf
Abutment = 2.000
Pier = 2.000
Normal scour depth, Dsm
Abutment = 4.537 m
Pier = 4.537 m
iii. Maximum scour Clause
depth 703.3 of IRC:78-2000
Flood without seismic combination
The maximum scour depth may be adopted as
For Piers 2 x Dsm = 9.074 m
For Abutments 1.27 x Dsm = 5.762 m
iv Maximum scour level
Internal walls = 253.426 m
External walls = 256.738 m

E) Recommendation
Design Discharge, Q = 304.976 cumecs
Design Affluxed HFL = 262.500 m
Velocity at bridge site = 3.550 m/sec
Effective waterway provided = 45.000 m
Vertical clearance = 1.200 m
Min RL of soffit/invert level of bridge = 263.70 m
Minimum FRL = 264.56 m
Proposed FRL = 264.579 m
Proposed soffit level = 263.71 m
Available vertical clearance = 1.21 m
Proposed Structure Type = Box type
Clear Vent size = 5X9m
 Design of Floor Protection Works
Hydraulic Data
Design dischage = 304.9764 m3/s
Clear vent way = 45.00 m
Silt factor = 2.00
Discharge per meter width = 8.81 m3/s/m
HFL = 262.46 m
Scour depth = 4.54 m
Afflux = 0.04 m
Invert Level = 260.5 m
Specific gravity of Bed material = 2.65

Curtain Wall
D/S HFL = 262.463 m
U/S HFL = 262.500 m

As per IRC:SP-13:2004,CI.21.1.3 ,depth of curtain wall should be 0.3 m below scour level and scour depth
need not be increased in case of open foundation.

U/S Curtain Wall

Fdn. RL of curt. Wall = 257.663 m

TOC of bottom slab = 260.512 m
Depth of curtain wall = 2.85 m
Provide depth of curtain wall, u/s = 3 m
Safe
D/S Curtain Wall

Fdn. RL of curt. Wall = 257.626 m

TOC of bottom slab = 260.496 m
Depth of curtain wall = 2.87 m
Provide depth of curtain wall, d/s = 3 m
Safe
CHECK FOR UPLIFT PRESSURE:

DATA:
Structure width = 16 m
Length of floor apron U/S = 3.0 m
lenth of floor apron D/S = 5.0 m
Flexible apron, U/S = 3 m
Flexible apron, D/S = 6 m
Thick of floor apron t = 0.55 m
Pressure head Considered H = 1.000 m
Depth of curtain wall U/S, d = 3 m
Depth of curtain wall D/S, d1 = 3 m
Width of CW U/S = 0.2 m
Width of CW D/S = 0.2 m
Outer total length between CW L = 24.000 m
Inner distance between CW L1 = 23.600 m
Critical pressuere at sectction L2 = 18.800 m
Hydraulic Calculations for Bridge at Proposed C
 3.0 m 3.0 m 16.0 m 5.0 m 6.0 m

STR. WIDTH
U/S Flexible U Floor apron
/ D/S Flexible Apron
Apron
S
18.800 m D/S
CW
C 23.600 m
W
24.000 m

24.000 m

Up stream side C1 E Down stream side

3m 3m

D1
D

Check for Floor length

I Blighs Theory

Total length of the water path CH=L+2(d+d1)

Length of rigid flooring provided as per b/w curtain walls IRC89 ( L) 24.0 m
Total Flow path Lp 36 m
Considering a Head difference b/w u/s and d/s H 1.0 m
Hydralic gradient H/Lp 1 in 36 Safe
Length of the Flooring is adequate since provided gradient is less than the permissible gradient
II Lanes Theory
C1H=L/3+2(d+d1)
L 24.0 m
Creep ratio C1 20
Creep coefficient C1 is higher than the requirement hence flooring length provided is Ok
IIIKhoslas Theory
Total length of impervious
(L) floor = = 24.00 m

a = L/D = 8.00

1 1  a  2
l
2
l = 4.53

H
GE 
d 1 l
GE = 0.05 OR 1 in 20.06

Permissible exit gradient from Table 6.4 of IRC: SP-82 is 1 in 6

The exit gradient value is within permissible limits, Hence the proposed values of flooring length
& D/s wall cutoff depth is Ok
Check for adequacy of the Thickness of the Proposed Floor by Khosla Theory
U/S CUT OFF:

α = L/d1 = 8
2
λ = 0.5(1+sqrt((1+α )) = 4.54
φE = (1/π)cos-1((λ-2)/λ) = 31.10%
φD = (1/π)cos-1((λ-1)/λ) = 21.54%
φc1 = 100-φE = 68.90%
φD1 = 100-φD = 78.46%

D/S CUT OFF:

α = L/d1 = 8
λ = 0.5(1+sqrt((1+α2)) = 4.532
φE = (1/π)cos-1((λ-2)/λ) = 31.13%
φD = (1/π)cos-1((λ-1)/λ) = 21.56%

CORRECTION FOR FLOOR THICKNESS:

U/S side,
correction =φfc1= φC1+(φD1-φC1)/d)*t = 70.65%

1.000
D/S side, 0.627
correction φfE1= φE-(φE-φD)/d1)*t = 29.37%
30.000
18.800
CORRECTION FOR FLOOR THICKNESS:

The critical pressure section for floor thickness at the junction of box D/s end are:

Φf = φfc1-(φfc1-φfE1)/L1)*L2 = 0.378
Pr = 1.662*Φf = 0.628 m

Thickness of floor apron

T = 1.33 x Pr/(G-1) = 0.506 m < 0.550 m

Safe
 Protection Works - Bridge @ 454+200
No of Vents = 5
Clear Span = 9.00 m
Design Discharge for foundation = 304.976 Cum
HFL = 262.463 m
Lowest Bed Level (LBL) = 260.51 m
Depth of Flow (d) = 1.95 m

1 Cut of Walls
Silt Factor (Considered as heavy sand) = 2.00
Dischrge per meter width = = 8.81 cum/m
Scour depth = 4.54 m
Scour Level = 262.46 - 4.54 = 257.93 m
Cut of wall bottom level = 257.93 - 0.30 = 257.63 m
Depth of Cut of wall = 260.51 - 257.63 = 2.89 m
Provided Depth of Cut of wall 3.00 Ok
2 Exit Gradient
Pressure head considered H = 1.00 m
Length of Bridge = 16.00 m
Length of Rigid Appron on U/s = 3.00 m
Length of Rigid Appron on d/s = 5.00 m
Length of flexible Appron on U/s = 3.00 m
Length of flexible Appron on d/s = 6.00 m
Depth of Curtain wall U/s (D) = 3.00 m
Depth of Curtain wall d/s = 3.00 m
Total length of impervious floor = (L) = 24.00 m

a = L/D = 8.00

l  1 + (1 + a 2)^0.5 = 4.53
2
GE = Hx1x1
D x  x sqrt(l) = 0.05

i.e 1 in 20.06
Allowable exit gradient is 1 in 6 - Hence Ok

3 Check for Flexible Appron

1.5 Dsm = 1.5 x 4.54 = 6.81
2 Dsm = 2x 4.54 = 9.07
Length of Flexible Appron on u/s = 6.81 - 3.00 = 3.81
Length of Flexible Appron on d/s = 9.07 - 5.00 = 4.07
Provieded flexible appron on u/s = 5.00 m
Provieded flexible appron on d/s = 6.00 m
Hence Ok
Hence Ok