Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Contents
1.6.5 Inventory & Condition Surveys for Bridges, Cross-drainage Structures and
Hydraulic Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 7
2.4.3 Synthetic Unit HydroGraph (as per CWC Manual-subzone 3e) ........................................ 13
1 The Project
1.1 General
Public Works Department, Maharashtra (SH Zone) has decided to take up the
development of various State Highways stretches/corridors in the country where the
intensity of traffic has increased significantly and there is requirement of augmentation of
capacity for safe and efficient movement of traffic.
The project road starts at Pachod (Km0+000) on SH-61 and terminates near Ashti
(Km 77+800). Total existing length of project road is 77/800 km while design length of
project road is 75+800 km. Project road lies at the Aurangabad district in which the entire
project road is within the state of Maharashtra. Existing alignment poor to Fair geometrics.
The present carriageway of the Project road is two lane of 3.5 to 7.0 m width. The project
road section is traversing through several villages such as Pimperkhed, Chinckhhed,
Ambad, and Ghanasavangi, etc. Key Map of the project road is shown in Figure 1.1.
Project Road Start: Km 0/000 (Km 0+000) Project Road End: Km 77/800 (Km 75+800)
Terrain
The existing project road alignment runs through plain terrain with cultivated fields and
plantations on either side.
Climate
The climate of Maharashtra state is sub-tropical in nature. It has a hot dry summer
between March to May, followed by monsoon rains from Jun to August and a cool but
relatively dry winter. The average rainfall is about 90.1 cm (35.47 in). The annual rainfall in
the state varies significantly. It decreases from west to east. The southeastern districts
have the heaviest rainfall, some places receiving as much as 74.1 cm (209.1 in), while
western and northwestern districts receive 100 cm (39.4 in) or less. While our project road
falls in the western parts of the state where rainfall is less than 80 cm (31.49 in).
Land use and Existing ROW
Page 3
DESIGN BASE REPORT
The land use pattern along the alignment is mostly agricultural along the project stretch.
The project road traverses adjacent to many villages and towns. There are small stretches
of barren lands on both sides of the project road. The important built-up area along the
project road are Ambad (Km 15/100 to Km 16/500), Gansavangi (km 42/200 to km
43/300), Chincholi Village (km 49/200 to Km 49/400), Kumbhar Pimpalson (km 59/700 to
Km 62/200), Ashti (km 77/300 to 77/600). Existing ROW is varies between 12.5 m to 23 m.
Carriageway
The existing highway is mixed lane configuration of 3.5 to 7.0 m width. The project road
surface is generally Fair. However, some stretches are fair to poor having cracks, potholes
and patches, etc. In general, pavement condition is fair to poor along the project road.
Existing pavement type is flexible along the project road.
Bridges/Structures
The existing road alignment crosses, 23 Minor Bridges, 01 Major Bridges, 54 Pipe
culverts, 2 slab culverts. The carriageway widths of these structures are generally varies
from 7.5 m to 8.2 m. The following Table 1.1 shows the summary of existing structures.
Table 1.1: Summary of Existing Structures
Sr. Type of Structure No. of Structures
No.
1 Minor Bridges 23
2 Major Bridges 01
3 Pipe Culvert 54
4 Box Culvert 02
Railway Crossing
There is no railway crossing on the existing alignment of project road.
Bus Bay & Shelter
There are 05 bus-bay/bus shelter in the existing alignment of project road.
Truck Lay Byes
There is no truck lay byes in the existing alignment of project road.
Roadside drains
No drain is provided along the existing road.
Intersections/Junctions
There are no. major junction and 57 nos. minor junctions exist along the project road.
Bypasses
There is no bypass on existing project on project road.
Utilities
Several utility lines cross and run parallel to the project road. The different types of utility
lines observed are as given below:
a) Electric Line (including junction boxes, lamp posts and transformers, mainly
overhead)
b) High Tension Transmission lines
c) Water and Sewerage lines (underground), Well, Hand Pump etc.
d) OFC Lines (underground), etc.
1.4 Scope of Work
The development of project highway shall include design and construction of following
scope as per Schedule B.
Table 1.2: Scope of Work
Page 4
DESIGN BASE REPORT
To meet the vision and scope of detailed design & construction, approach and
methodology is split in following stages. Each stage has been further divided into various
activities. Detailed methodology adopted for detail design of project road is shown in
Figure 1.2 below.
1.6 Engineering Surveys and Investigations Progress
Design Consultant has undertaken the following necessary field activities for detailed
engineering design of project road. The design team have undertaken detailed site visit
during 30th-31st March 2018 and select the traffic survey locations, revalidate the widening
scheme, appraisal of Authority documents i.e. schedules, Agreement & project reports etc.
Page 6
DESIGN BASE REPORT
standards proposed for the project road. Based on the design standards, the designs of
horizontal and vertical alignment will be done using MX Road software. After finalising the
centreline, the designed centreline will be staked on ground at 10 m interval with nail and
yellow paint for further levelling work.
Page 7
DESIGN BASE REPORT
In case of any specific requirements which are not covered in the Design Basis, a
technical note shall be prepared and discussed on a case to case basis before finalising
the construction drawings.
The proposals outlined in this Design Basis are based on the broad design standards
specified in Schedule D of the Concession Agreement.
The hydrological and hydraulic study for the project has been based on:
Topographic survey data of cross drainage structures
Generated topographical data and maps of streams for upstream and downstream, rainfall
intensity, duration and its distribution.
Rainfall pattern of the project site
Page 8
DESIGN BASE REPORT
The soil in the project site is having brownish to blacking silty clayey sand on top with
slightly weathered rock beneath.
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:
• Knowledge of the characteristics of the catchment areas:
• Topographic data about the stream, upstream and downstream:
• Survey of India topo maps to a scale of 1: 50,000 for identification of
catchment area and its characteristics.
• Site study of the characteristics of the catchment areas, HFL from local
enquiry.
Data Collection
Topographic surveys have been done at all the major and minor stream crossings with
a view to obtain the cross section of the rivers at the proposed road crossing. As per
IRC: SP: 13-2004 Clause 3.3, Table-1, approximate distances, upstream and
downstream of the selection site of crossing at which cross sections should be taken
are as under.
For major bridges and the spans more than 30m, the catchment area more than 15
square km the topographic surveys have been done one and a half km or the width
between the banks, whichever is more as per IRC 05-2015, clause 102.1.2.3.
The characteristics of the catchment areas have been ascertained from Survey of India
topo sheets, to a scale of 1:250000/1:50000 from which, catchment area at the
proposed bridge site, length of the stream and fall in elevation from originating point to
the point of crossing, could be determined.
HFL data
The High Flood Levels (HFL) have been obtained from existing flood marks or
ascertained from enquiry with local people.
Discharges for the major and minor bridges are worked out as per methodology
described under various applicable standards of IRC, e.g. IRC: 5 -2015, pocket book of
Page 9
DESIGN BASE REPORT
bridge engineers and SP-13-2004. The computed values are adopted through site
validation and local inquiry with judgment.
The following methods have been used to estimate the peak discharge and
waterway for bridge sites on major and minor streams.
Paths of streams having nominal discharges of minor bridges at some locations could
not identified on topo sheets. So, the calculation of discharges for that particular bridges
have to be done as per Area Velocity method only.
For catchment areas not exceeding 50 sq. km, Area velocity method is a universally
accepted relating formulae for discharge calculation as per clause 106.3.4 IRC:5-2015. If
the catchment area is more than 50 sq. km the calculation of discharge has to be done
as per Synthetic Unit Hydrograph method.
2.4.1 Area Velocity Method/Manning’s Formula
This method has been utilised to calculate the discharge from the stream cross-section
and stream slope/bed slope at the proposed bridge sites, for both major and minor
bridges. After plotting the cross section of the river, and marking the observed HFL, the
cross-sectional area (A) and wetted perimeter (P) have been computed. The bed slope
of the river has been estimated along its length.
The velocity and Discharge have been calculated using the Manning’s formula:
V = 1/n R 2/3 S 1/2
Q = AxV
Where,
V = Velocity in m/sec
R = Hydraulic mean depth in m
S = Flood slope/bed slope
n = Co-efficient of rugosity
Q = Peak Discharge
A = Area of cross section
The value of ‘n’ has been adopted as per soil criteria and river bed characteristics,
observed at site and are based on Table 5.1 of IRC SP-13: 2004 which has been
tabulated below.
Page 10
DESIGN BASE REPORT
a) Rational Formula
Pocket Book for bridge engineers, published by IRC or methodology available in IRC:
SP-13:2004 has been adopted for computation of discharge by this method. In this
method discharge is assumed to be proportional to the upstream catchments at the
crossing and critical intensity of rainfall.
Q= 0.028 P f A IC
Where:
Q = Maximum runoff in cumecs
A = Catchment area in hectares
Ic = Critical intensity of rainfall in cm/ hr.
P = Coefficient of run-off for the given catchment characteristics. The table is
reproduced in the next page.
f = Spread factor for converting point rainfall into aerial mean rainfall.
Ic = Io*[2/ (Tc+1)]
Io = Intensity of one hour rainfall that occurs from the severest storm in the region.
The intensity is chosen from Appendix – A of SP-13-2004.
Tc= Time of concentration in hour.
Page 11
DESIGN BASE REPORT
Time of Concentration
Time of concentration (Tc) has been determined from the following Empirical
Formula:
Where, L is the distance of basin critical point to the outfall point/crossing in km and
H is the elevation difference in meter in length L.
Point rainfall values are adjusted for aerial mean value using recommended spread factor
as per IRC: SP-13, vide fig. 4.2, showing ‘f’ curve.
Page 12
DESIGN BASE REPORT
Maximum rainfall
The maximum 24 hour rainfall had been taken as 200 mm for 100 years return period as
per flood estimation report of Central Water Commission and IRC SP 42
b) Dicken’s Formula :
It has been used to estimate flood discharges from a single parameter, catchment area.
Flood discharges calculated from these formulae cannot be assigned with any Return
Period.
Discharge, Q = C A 0.75
Where, A = Catchment area in Sq. km.
C is Run-off coefficient, which depends on the annual rainfall. The max annual rainfall
collected from various rain gauge stations within the project site is 800mm. So, the value
of C adopted is 12.
Page 13
DESIGN BASE REPORT
ê + 0 . 015 ú ´ ê ç ÷ - 1ú
ë17 .89 û ëêè Ae ø ûú
Page 14
DESIGN BASE REPORT
Typical sketch showing cross section of 2 –lane Highway with paved shoulder
If the width of additional widening will be less than 1m, the widening of the structure will be
dispensed with in accordance with para 7.3(ii) of Manual specification and standards.
3.3 Loads
❖ Dead Load (DL):
Unit weight of dead loads calculation shall be considered as per IRC: 6- 2017as below:
Unit weight of superimposed dead load shall be in conformity with IRC: 6. For calculating
the dead weight due to wearing coat, thickness of 65mm shall be considered.
The crash Barrier will be designed as per table 3 of IRC: 6 – 2017 under P-1 "Normal
Containment" category. The crash barrier shall be provided as per IRC: 5-2015. The railing
on top shall be replaced by concrete of same height. The cross-sectional area of the crash
barrier works out to be approx. 0.3 m2.
Weight of crash barrier = 0.3 x 25 = 7.5kN/m
❖ Live Load (Carriageway (CWLL)):
Breaking and centrifugal forces are to be considered as per codal provisions mentioned in
IRC: 6-2017.
Page 15
DESIGN BASE REPORT
❖ Wind Forces:
Wind Forces shall be considered as per IRC: 6. Drag Coefficient, Gust factor and Lift
Coefficient shall be calculated as per the above clauses.
❖ Buoyancy:
Buoyancy shall be considered as per IRC: 6. In the design of submerged structures, the
buoyancy effect through pore pressure may be limited to 15% of full buoyancy.
❖ Earth Pressure:
Active pressure due to filling behind the retaining / abutment shall be evaluated by
Coulomb's formula.
The Coefficient of active pressure (horizontal).
Ka =
Following soil properties for filling behind abutment and between return walls shall be
considered in the design.
i) Angle of Internal friction, ϕ = 30°
ii) Angle of Wall Friction, δ = 2/3 ϕ
iii) Angle of cohesion, c = 0
iv) Dry density of back fill material = 2.0 T/m3
The value for coefficient of active earth pressure, Ka is calculated using the above formula
and design parameters, case by case. Passive earth pressure in front will be suitably
accounted, case by case. For the Box structures, where uniform earth pressure act from
both sides of the box, earth pressure at rest (Ko) shall be considered in the design.
Ko = 1- sinϕ =0.5
Surcharge live load, equivalent to 1.2m of earth fill shall be considered in the design.
❖ Seismic Forces:
The project stretch falls under Seismic Zone III as per IRC: 6. The seismic coefficientis
calculated considering the Importance factor of 1.2 as there are at grade service roads
areavailable. Seismic reduction factor is considered as 3.0 with POT bearings for column
and 1.0 with POT bearing for wall section for the design of substructure & foundation.
Seismic reduction factor shall be 1.0 for bearings.
Page 16
DESIGN BASE REPORT
Bridges with length less than 10m are not required to be designed for seismic forces in all
zones. For bridges with span length less than 15m and total length less than 60m need not
be designedfor seismic forces in Zone II & III.
Rectangular stress distribution has been considered for concrete as per Annexure A-2 of
IRC: 112-2011.
The partial safety factor for loads for different limit states has been adopted, as given in
IRC:6 - 2017, shall be as per
• Table 3.1 for the verification of equilibrium
• Table 3.2 for checking the structural strength
• Table 3.3 for verification of serviceability
• Table 3.4 for base pressure & design of foundation
Ultimate Limit State of Shear, Punching Shear and Torsion shall be checked as per
section of 10 of IRC: 112.
Serviceability of Limit states of Stress levels, Crack width and deflection shall be carried
out as per section of 12 of IRC: 112.
3.5 Durability
Durability of structure depends on the materials used, mix proportions, workmanship
achieved, design and detailing including minimum cover to steel. The grade of concrete,
steel and cover to reinforcement given in Section 7 of this document is to be adopted.
All above are analyzed per meter width of strip for self-weight and superimposed loads.
For live load analysis, effective width method recommended by IRC is used for calculating
the dispersion. The section design is done for critical values of loads and combinations
from the output of the analysis.
3.6.2 Analysis for Superstructures with RCC/PSC Girders for Bridges
➢ Grillage Analysis
Superstructure decks of slab on girder bridges are analyzed as a two dimensional grillage
for the geometry by applying calculated grillage properties. Analysis is carried out for static
as well as moving loads. Secondary effect due to shrinkage and creep of concrete for
composite structures are accounted by IRC method.
The analysis of the slab on girder bridges for longitudinal flexure shall be carried out using
Grillage model on STAAD Pro on the following basis:
• Grillage model has been generated with longitudinal members along the C/L of the l-
Girder and along the outer edges. Suitable transverse members along the cross
beams have also been provided.
Page 17
DESIGN BASE REPORT
• Moment and shear force will be calculated separately for inner & outer girders by
keeping the loading with minimum eccentricity to crash barrier.
• For the design of the longitudinal Girders stresses and moments shall be determined
at End of solid section, End of tapering section, and mid-section at suitable intervals
for other locations.
• Transverse members of the grillage other than the Cross-diaphragm shall be modeled
as slab elements.
• The longitudinal members of bridges shall have negligible torsion carrying capacity.
Torsion effect is accounted in bridges by assigning very small torsional moment of
inertia for the members in the grillage model.
Page 18
DESIGN BASE REPORT
Cover:
The minimum cover to reinforcement shall be determined from the recommendations of
IRC: 112 table 14.2 taking into account the moderate environmental conditions .
Drainage Provisions:
Drainage Spouts shall be placed not greater than 5m center to center. Down-take pipes
will be provided to dispose the water below soffit of the superstructure.
Expansion Joints:
Strip seal type of expansion joint is provided.
Wearing Course:
50mm thick wearing course is proposed as per section 2702 of MoRTH Specification.
➢ IRC: 6-2017 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,
Section-II – Loads and Stresses.
➢ IRC: 22-2015 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,
Section-VI –Composite Construction.
➢ IRC: 24-2010 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,
Section-V –Steel Road Bridges (Limit State).
➢ IRC: 78-2014 Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,
Section-VII – Foundation & Substructure.
Page 19
DESIGN BASE REPORT
➢ IRC: 83-2002 (PIII) Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,
Section-IX –Bearings-Part III: POT,POT-cum-PTPE and Metallic guide Bearings.
➢ IRC: SP: 13-2004 Guidelines for Design of Minor Bridges & Culverts.
Page 20