DIVERSION HEAD WORKS

Mr. V. P. Kumbhar
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
not
Bligh’s Creep Theory
• Bligh assumed that the water which percolates into the foundation
creeps through the joint between the profile of the base of weir and
the subsoil.
• He then stated that this percolating water loses its head en-route.
• The seeping water finally comes out at the downstream end.
• According to Bligh water travels along vertical, horizontal or inclined
path without making any distinction.
• The total length covered by the percolating water till it emerges out at the downstream
end is called a creep length.
• The head of water lost in the path of percolation is the difference of water levels on the
upstream and the downstream ends.
• Also, an imaginary line which joins the water levels on the upstream and the
downstream end is called a hydraulic gradient line.

• B = L = total creep length and

• h/L = the head lost in creeping or hydraulic gradient
Blighs creep theory
• Bligh designated the length of travel as ‘creep length’ and is equal to the sum of
horizontal and vertical length of creep
BLIGH’S CREEP THEORY

• If ‘H’ is the total loss of head, loss of head per unit length of creep (c),

• c-percolation coefficient

• Reciprocal of ‘c’ is called ‘coefficient of creep’(C)

BLIGH’S CREEP THEORY

• Design criteria
(i) Safety against piping
Length of creep should be sufficient to provide a safe hydraulic gradient according to the
type of soil

Thus, safe creep length,

Where, C= creep coefficient=1/c

BLIGH’S CREEP THEORY

• Design criteria
(ii) Safety against uplift pressure
Let ‘h’’ be the uplift pressure head at any point of the apron
The uplift pressure = wh’

This uplift pressure is balanced by the weight of the floor at this point
BLIGH’S CREEP THEORY

If, t =thickness of floor at this point

G = specific gravity of floor material

Weight of floor per unit area

=
BLIGH’S CREEP THEORY
• Limitations of Bligh’s Creep Theory:
i. In his theory Bligh made no distinction between horizontal and vertical
creep lengths.
ii. The idea of exit gradient has not been considered.
iii. The effect of varying lengths of sheet piles not considered.
iv. No distinction is made between inner or outer faces of the sheet piles.
v. Loss of head is considered proportional to the creep length which in actual
is not so.
vi. The uplift pressure distribution is not linear as assumed but in fact it
follows a sine curve.
vii. Necessity of providing end sheet pile not appreciated.
 Khosla’s Method Of Independent Variables
• A composite weir section is split up into a number of simple standard forms

• The standard forms

(a) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile either at the
u/s end or at the d/s end of the floor
KHOSLA’S METHOD OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

(b) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile at some
intermediate point

(c) A straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed but with no vertical
cutoff
KHOSLA’S METHOD OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

• These standard cases were analyzed by Khosla and his associates and
expressions were derived for determining
• The residual seepage head (uplift pressure) at key points (key points are the
junction points of pile and floor, bottom point of pile and bottom corners of
depressed floor)
• Exit gradient
• These results are presented in the form of curves
• The curves gives the values of Φ (the ratio of residual seepage head
and total seepage head) at key points

• The directions for reading the curves are given on the curves itself
Thank you