Hydrology Report (Package-II)

DPR study of Chertalai – Thiruvananthapuram Section of NH-47 (New NH-66) (from KM 379/100 to KM 551/900) [Package –
KL/NH-47-III] under NHDP Phase III in the State of Kerala (Package II - Km 417.0 to Km 454.50)
CHAPTER 3 DRAINAGE AND HYDROLOGY DESIGN

3.1. Design-Hydrological Approach and Methodology
3.1.1. Objective
The main objective of the hydrological and hydraulic study is to determine the required size of
drainage structures to allow the estimated design flow of the streams to cross the road safely, and to
check whether waterways of existing structures are sufficient to transmit the flow without risk. This
involves calculation of design discharge, fixation of linear waterway and design HFL.
The hydrological and hydraulic study for the project has been based on:
 Topographic survey data of drainage structures
 Topographical data and maps of streams, upstream and downstream
 Rainfall pattern of the project site
 Site study of the characteristics of the catchment areas, HFL from local enquiries and tell-tale
marks, and hydraulic conditions at the existing drainage structures.
3.1.2. Location
The project road alignment under consideration lies in the hydro meteorological sub-zone of West
Coast Region. The alignment falls in the Malabar sub-zones 5 (b) as de-marked by the Flood
Estimation Report of Central Water Commission (CWC).
There are large numbers of small and medium coastal streams flowing in this subzone. The coastal
streams rise and overflow their banks during period of heavy rainfall in their catchment areas.
All the Project road fall in the southern corner of this subzone and precisely lie in the subzone 5 (b).
3.1.3. Rainfall and Temperature
The mean annual rainfall in area of the project road are taken from the Isopluvial maps in Flood
Estimation Report, 24 hour rainfall of 100 year return period is found to be 280 mm for this stretch of
road. The rainfall data has been given in Table 17 below:
Table 17: Rainfall Data
24 hours Rainfall for Return period of
Stretch Mean Annual Rainfall
25 Years 50 Years 100 Years
Trivandrum to 1000 mm to 4000
Cherthalai 240 mm ~260 mm 280 mm
mm
For rain fall of shorter duration less than 24 hrs a conversion ratio has been adopted from same CWC
report (FIG –10 of CWC Report). Mean average Time distribution curves of storms of various duration
are also adopted from CWC report subzone 5a and 5b (Fig-12). Aerial to point rainfall ratio for various
duration over different catchment is adopted from CWC report of Subzone 5a and 5b (Fig 11a and
11b). The general land use data and Soil Data are also adopted from the same report.
3.1.4. Soil and Land Use
Laterite soils, sandy loam soils and alluvial soils are found in the area of this subzone. Most of the
area in the region of this subzone is arable land under irrigated agriculture. There are a number of
minor and medium storage and diversion works on coastal stream mainly for irrigation.
Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 26

3.1.5. DATA COLLECTION AND DATA ANALYSIS
3.1.5.1. Requirements of Data for Hydrological Study
The hydrological study aims at estimating the peak discharge of the flood generated by the run-off of
rainfall within the catchment area. The hydrological study requires:
 Knowledge of the characteristics of peak rainfall in the regions:
 Intensity
 Duration
 Distribution in time and space
 Knowledge of the characteristics of the catchment areas:
 Surface area
 Length
 Slope
 Shape
 Permeability of the soil and vegetable cover
 Initial state of wetness
 Land use
Topographic data about the stream, upstream and downstream:

 Cross sections of the stream channel at crossing of road alignment and up to a reasonable
distance upstream and downstream
 Longitudinal or equivalent stream slope
 Type of soil in existing bed and banks
 Topography maps upto a scale of 1:2,50,000 for identification of catchment area and its
characteristics.
3.1.5.2. Data Collection and Data Analysis
 For determining the catchment area and its characteristics, Topo-sheets to a scale of 1:50,000 or
1:250,000 has been collected. Catchment area of the particular structure has been demarcated,
length of the stream and difference in elevation from originating point to the point of crossing is
determined from the topo sheets. The project corridors have lot of small to medium size
ponds/tanks/reservoir in their catchment area and these have been connected to each other for
irrigation purposes. Hence the catchment area has been judiciously reduced based on local
enquiry about flood and extent of water expected.
 Hydrological surveys have been done at all the major and minor river crossings with a view to
obtain the Cross section of the rivers/streams at the centerline of the road and up to a
reasonable distance at upstream and downstream.
 The Highest recorded Flood Levels (HFL) has been obtained from existing flood marks or
ascertained from local enquiry with local knowledgeable persons.
 For determining the characteristics of peak rainfall regimes, CWC report no. K&M/19/1992 –
Flood Estimation Report for West Coast Region Sub zone 5a & 5b is referred. The report has
been jointly prepared by CWC, MOST, Ministry of Railways and IMD and contains all the rainfall
data required for estimation of design discharge of 25, 50 and 100 year return periods.
3.1.6. GENERAL METHODOLOGY FOR HYDROLOGY FOR BRIDGES
3.1.6.1. Hydrological Analysis

Design flood of a specific return period is required for fixing the waterway vis-à-vis the design HFL of
bridges depending upon their size and importance to ensure safety as well as economy. IRC SP 84-2014
General Features of Design specifies that the waterway of a bridge is to be designed for a maximum flood
of 100 years return period. Hence floods will be calculated for 100-year return period for all the bridges.
Hydrological analysis includes the peak flood estimation for the bridges that depend upon the data
obtained from hydrological study i.e. delineation of catchment area and its characteristics.
The flood estimation method is generally divided based on the catchment area and the following
methods have been used to estimate the peak discharge for bridges on streams for catchment area
less than and more than 25 sq. km;
The following methods have been used to estimate the peak discharge for bridge sites on major streams
for catchment area less than 25 sq. km:
3.1.6.1.1. Improved Rational Formula
The design discharge for small bridge having catchment area less than 25 sq. km is determined by
improved rational formula as given in report “Flood Estimation Methods for catchment Less Than 25 sq.
km in Area (Bridges and Floods Wing Report No. RBF-16).”
The “Improved Rational Formula” proposed is the well-known “Rational Formula” with the
improvements in the values of C and I as indicated below:
Q = 2.78 C I A
Where,
Q = 100 year design flood discharge in Cumec.
C = Run off co-efficient
A = Catchment area in sq. km
I = 100 year rainfall intensity lasting for time of concentration (tc) in cm/hr.
Runoff coefficient, C, for the coastal areas is calculated by the formula:

C = 0.332 (R.F) 0.2
Where,
R = 100 year 24 hour point rainfall (cm)
F = Area reduction factor depending upon catchment area and duration of rainfall
obtained from Article 2.1 of Bridges and Floods Wing Report No. RBF-16.
The time of concentration is calculated by Bhatnagar’s formula as given by:

tc = (L3/H)0.345 (As per Bridges and Floods Wing Report No. RBF-16)
Where,
tc = Time of concentration in hrs.
L = Length of longest stream in m
H = Height of farthest point above the point of the interest along the river in meter
The intensity of rainfall, I, is calculated as per following steps:
Step –1 Read the ratio for tchr (from Fig. 4 of above report)
Step –2 Read the ratio for 1 hr (from Fig. 4 of above report)
Step –3 Obtain the coefficient, K = (tchr ratio)/ (1 hr ratio)
Step –4 R100 (tc) =K .R100(1)
Step –5 Find rainfall intensity, I=R100 tc) / tc
Where, R100(1) is the 100 year 1 hour point rainfall in cm

3.1.6.1.2. Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method
This method have been used to estimate the peak discharge for bridge sites on major streams for
catchment area more than 25 sq. km.
Determination of 1 hr. SUH for an ungauged catchment (As per the CWC “Flood Estimation Report no. EC
(U, L & S)/14/1986” for Eastern Coast Region subzones – 4(a), 4 (b) and 4 (c)):
a) Physiographic parameters of the ungauged catchment viz. A, L and S is determined from topo-
sheets or field observations.
b) SUH parameters are computed using the following equations:
(i) qp = 0.9178 (L /S)0.4313
(ii) tp = 1.5607*qp)-1.0814
(iii) W50 = 1.9251*(qp)-1.0896
(iv) W75 = 1.0189*(qp)-1.0443
(v) WR50 = 0.5788*(qp)-1.1072
(vi) WR75 = 0.3469*(qp)-1.0538
(vii) TB = 7.3801(tp)0.7343
(viii) Tm = tp + tr/2
(ix) Qp = qp x A
c) The estimated parameters of unit graph in (b) is plotted to scale on graph paper. The plotted
points were joined to draw synthetic unit graph.
d) The design storm duration is taken as equal to base period (TB) of unit graph.
e) Estimation of point rainfall and areal rainfall is done for the catchment under study.
f) Time distribution of area rainfall is computed.
g) Estimation of effective rainfall unit is done after taking design loss rate into account.
h) Base flow is estimated.
i) Finally, estimation of 100 yr. Flood peak s done.
3.1.6.1.3. Area – Velocity Method
Area – Velocity method has been used to calculate the flood discharge corresponding to HFL observed
from site. The velocity has been calculated using the Manning’s formula as given below:
V = 1/n R2/3 S1/2 , and
Q = V. A
Where,
Q = Discharge in cumec
V = Velocity in m/sec
R = Hydraulic mean depth in m
S = Flood slope/bed slope
n = Co-efficient of rugosity
A = Area of the cross - section

The values of ‘n’ depend upon soil type and rivers bed characteristics, observed at site and are taken
from Table 5.1 in IRC SP-13.
3.1.6.2. Fixation of Design Discharge
Flood discharges obtained from above methods are compared. The Design Discharge is fixed as the
highest of the values obtained from the methods. If the highest value exceeds the next highest
discharge by more than 50%, design flood discharge is restricted to 1.5 times of the next Highest
Discharge. (Ref: Clause 6.2.1 of IRC: SP: 13 -2004).
3.1.7. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
Hydraulic analysis involves the fixing of linear waterway, designed high flood level (HFL)
corresponding to adopted designed flood discharge and afflux for the bridges under restricted
conditions.
3.1.7.1. LINEAR WATERWAY
The Lacey’s regime width formulae are not applicable for fixing the linear waterway of bridges on
non-alluvial rivers in subzone 5(b). The linear waterway is fixed based on the available unobstructed
width of the stream or nallah.
After determining the design discharge from above described methods, computation of HFL has been
done generally with the help of Manning’s Equation (Area Velocity method) corresponding to
Designed Flood Discharge.
3.1.7.2. AFFLUX
Sometimes it is not possible to provide linear waterway of bridge as that of unobstructed width of
flow at HFL due to various reasons. This results in constriction of flow at upstream resulting in
heading up at the upstream. This causes afflux at bridge sites during flood. Afflux for the bridges is
calculated using Weir and Orifice formulae as described in Chapter 15 and Chapter 16 of IRC: SP:13-
2004. Thus, design HFL is fixed by adding the afflux to the calculated HFL as per design discharge. This
indicates the water level corresponding to design discharge after construction of bridge.
3.1.8. SCOUR DEPTH CALCULATION FOR DESIGN OF FOUNDATION
3.1.8.1. DESIGN DISCHARGE FOR FOUNDATION
For adequate margin of safety for design of foundation, the design discharge is recalculated for
100year return period (Clause 103.1 of IRC: 5-1998 and Clause 6.2.2 of IRC: SP: 13-2004) flood is
increased suitably by a percentage as given in Clause 703.1.1 of IRC: 78-2000 for determining the
depth of scour and foundation.
3.1.8.2. CALCULATION OF MEAN DEPTH OF SCOUR
Mean depth of scour below highest flood level for natural channel flowing over scourable bed is
calculated using the formula given below:
Db 2
dsm = 1.34  1 / 3 (As per Clause 703.2 of IRC: 78-2000)
Ksf 
Where,
dsm = Mean depth of scour in m

Db = design discharge for foundation per meter width at effective linear waterway
Ksf = Silt Factor
3.1.8.3. MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SCOUR FOR FOUNDATION
Maximum depth of scour below highest flood level (HFL) for design of piers and abutments is
determined as per Clause 703.3.1 of IRC: 78-2000 and is as follows:
 For piers - 2.0 dsm
 For abutments - 1.27 dsm
3.1.9. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
As per IRC SP 84-2014 General Features of Design specify that the waterway of a bridge is to be designed
for a maximum flood of 100 years return period. Hence the design discharge has been calculated for
the bridge taking 100 year return period flood.
The peak discharge has been calculated by the following methods:
 Improved rational formula (For catchment area less than 25 sq. km)
 Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method (For catchment area greater than 25 sq. km)
 Area-Velocity method.
HFL has been established by:

 Local enquiry.
 Area-Velocity method (taking into account afflux also).
For Retain & Widen bridges, the design discharge has been found by Improved Rational and verified
by Area Velocity at the bridge site with respect to observed HFL and found to be OK. While there are a
lot of irrigation canal, distributaries from the stream, so it is very difficult to define the exact
catchment area. However the best possible catchment area has been demarcated. A brief description
of the methodology adopted, findings and recommendations for each of the bridges is detailed
below:
1. Bridge at Km 432.550
This structure is a spillway having 40 number spans with clear width of vent as 8m and called
Thottapally Spillway. The water level at the structure is reported to have reached above the soffit
level and encroached the superstructure by about 0.5m as enquired from the local.
The new bridge is recommended to be made with same span arrangement or with bigger spans
having total waterway length same and without obstructing the flow. As the soffit of the bridge was
encroached, it is recommended to raise the soffit by 2m considering 0.5m of the encroached soffit
and 1.5m vertical clearance.
This structure is on west coast canal and being used as national waterway. The existing bridge is a
Canal Bridge called Thottapally canal and of clear span 26.5m in the central portion. Two additional
spans of 10.5m also exist on either side of the central channel which acts like spill through abutment.
The normal water level observed in and around the area is in the range of 4 to 4.5m. The soffit of the
bridge is 11.247 which is having navigational clearance of 7.0m above normal water level.
The maximum water level / HFL as enquired from the locals have been found to be 4.5 m above bed
which commensurate with the 1.2 to 1.35 m HTL above the normal water level. The available vertical
clearance even with the maximum water level/ HFL is more than 5.5m. Hence the bridge is
hydraulically adequate and to be retained. The new bridge to be constructed as per the existing clear
waterway with the soffit levels matched.

This structure is a minor bridge having one span with clear width of vent as 20.65m on
Kannukalipalam Nala. The adequacy has been checked for the bridge. The catchment area has been
demarcated on the toposheet and the HFL is taken as per the local enquiry which is 2.5m above the
LBL.
The discharge calculated by slope area method with observed HFL has been found more than that by
catchment area method and accordingly design discharge is fixed as 52.23 Cumec. Hence the Design
HFL corresponding to the design discharge is same as the observed HFL of 5.485. As the soffit level of
the existing small bridge is 8.115, the available vertical clearance is approximately 2.6m as against the
requirement of 0.9m. The existing bridge is hydraulically adequate and proposed to be retained. The
new bridge to be constructed as per the existing clear waterway with the soffit levels matched.
This bridge is on Narakathara Canal and called as Danapady Bridge. This is an 11m clear span bridge
having maximum water depth observed on the bridge as 2.2 to 2.6m from bed level as per the local
enquiry. This bridge has a vertical clearance of approximately 4.63m from soffit of the bridge to
lowest bed level. The bridge is adequate and having sufficient clearance, hence proposed to be
retained with same clear span/ waterway and matching the soffit with the existing bridge.
The discharge has been calculated by slope area method with the maximum water level observed.
The Discharge Calculation corresponding to Cross Section near the bridges has been presented in
Annexure 3.1 to Annexure 3.3
The recommended design discharge and design HFL has been given in Annuxure 3.4.
The scour calculated and founding level for all the bridges has been shown in Annexure 3.5.
3.1.10. CROSS – DRAINAGE STRUCTURE
Introduction
In the entire stretch of highway a total of 33 Cross Drainage structures were observed including
Bridges and culverts. These comprise of 04 bridges both major and Minor and 29 culverts comprising
pipe culverts and box culverts.
The details of the existing CD structures are shown below in Table 17:
Table 18: Existing Structures List
Type of Structures Numbers

Bridges Major Bridge 01
Minor Bridges 03
Sub total 04
Culverts Pipe 02
Slab / Box 25
Sub total 27
Total 31
Upgrading of the road section involves widening of the existing CD structures particularly culverts
depending upon the type of widening concentric or eccentric. Wherever there is eccentric widening
or the new alignment is away from the existing road, new culverts are required in the new alignment
to suit the full road width. New culverts are also required where the capacity of the existing ones is
inadequate or where the diameter of the pipes in case of pipe culverts is less from maintenance point
of view. Repair or reconstruction of culverts is called for when these are in distressed condition and

seems inadequate. Accordingly, detailed inventory of all the culverts was taken and their condition
survey was carried out to determine their present conditions. Also, hydrological investigation was
carried out to find out the hydraulic adequacy of the existing culverts, its suitability and requirement
from the considerations of the effective drainage of the area.
A detail site visit was done to find out the hydraulic condition of the existing culverts. The
requirement of additional culverts was also assessed based site condition and drainage requirement
of the area.
As per the assessment done during site visit, culverts consisting pipe, slab and box are found to be
either in distress condition or hydraulically inadequate and accordingly have been recommended for
reconstruction. Culverts which are found to be in good condition have been recommended for
retaining as it is. 10 additional culverts have been assessed to be provided as new construction which
is required for the effective drainage of the road stretch. These are required either at the valley
location or at some of the location to connect the roadside drains from one side to the other. Most of
these culverts are of balancing in nature.
A summary of the total culverts including additional culverts and those which are required to be
reconstructed are presented below:
Types Retained & Reconstruction Additional Total

Widen
Slab Culverts - - - -
Pipe culverts 1 - - -
Box Culverts 11 17 10 39
Total 12 17 10 39
The total list of the structures in the entire stretch along with its recommendation is presented in
Table 18 below:
Table 19: Structures with Recommendations
Location Details Type of structure Proposed clear

(Proposal for Span/inner Dia of Proposal / Remark
Topo Ch (km) widening) pipe (m)
417+636 1x1.5x1.5 Box Reconstruction
417+884 1x1.5x1.5 Box Additional
420+479 1x1.0x1.0 Box Retain & Widen
422+118 1X2.2x2.0 Box Retain & Widen
423+256 1x2x3.5 Box Retain & Widen
426+817 1x1.2m dia Pipe Retain & Widen

Location Details Type of structure Proposed clear

(Proposal for Span/inner Dia of Proposal / Remark
Topo Ch (km) widening) pipe (m)

Hydrology Report (Package-II)

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

Hydrology Report (Package-II)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DPR study of Chertalai – Thiruvananthapuram Section of NH-47 (New NH-66) (from KM 379/100 to KM 551/900) [Package –

CHAPTER 3 DRAINAGE AND HYDROLOGY DESIGN

3.1.3. Rainfall and Temperature

3.1.4. Soil and Land Use

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 26

3.1.5. DATA COLLECTION AND DATA ANALYSIS

3.1.5.1. Requirements of Data for Hydrological Study

Topographic data about the stream, upstream and downstream:

3.1.5.2. Data Collection and Data Analysis

3.1.6. GENERAL METHODOLOGY FOR HYDROLOGY FOR BRIDGES

3.1.6.1. Hydrological Analysis

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 27

3.1.6.1.1. Improved Rational Formula

Runoff coefficient, C, for the coastal areas is calculated by the formula:

The time of concentration is calculated by Bhatnagar’s formula as given by:

The intensity of rainfall, I, is calculated as per following steps:

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 28

3.1.6.1.2. Synthetic Unit Hydrograph Method

3.1.6.1.3. Area – Velocity Method

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 29

3.1.6.2. Fixation of Design Discharge

3.1.7. HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS

3.1.7.1. LINEAR WATERWAY

3.1.8. SCOUR DEPTH CALCULATION FOR DESIGN OF FOUNDATION

3.1.8.1. DESIGN DISCHARGE FOR FOUNDATION

3.1.8.2. CALCULATION OF MEAN DEPTH OF SCOUR

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 30

3.1.8.3. MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SCOUR FOR FOUNDATION

3.1.9. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

HFL has been established by:

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 31

3.1.10. CROSS – DRAINAGE STRUCTURE

Type of Structures Numbers

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 32

Types Retained & Reconstruction Additional Total

Location Details Type of structure Proposed clear

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 33

Location Details Type of structure Proposed clear

Final Detailed Project Report; Revision No. 1; | The SMEC Group | 34

You might also like