HYDROLOGICAL STUDY: BRIDGE SITE

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

HYDROLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
• DETERMINATION OF DESIGN DISCHARGE.
• DETERMINATION OF WATER WAYS
• CROSS SECTIONAL SURVEY
• HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
• BRIDGE SCOUR
• RIVER TRAINING WORKS

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 2

to design the structure of bridge the hydraulic study is conducted to determine
Waterway of bridge
and Design discharge at bridge site

hydraulic characteristics of bridge site are

• catchment,
• discharge,
• surface characteristics,
• various water levels

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 BRIDGE HYDROLOGY
Hydraulics is the essential feature of bridge design. Fair assessment of flood levels,
maximum flood discharge expected to occur at bridge site during design life of bridge,
and maximum scour levels are essential aspects of bridge hydraulics. Faulty
determination of these parameters may lead to failure of structures.

ESTIMATION OF
• DESIGN DISCHARGE
• SCOUR DEPTH,
• LINEAR WATERWAY
• AND AFFLUX

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 Hydrological Study should include
(i) Catchment area of the river up to bridge site
(ii) Length of the river from origin up to bridge site
(iii) Possibility of change of catchment
(iv) Nature, size and quantities of debris carried by the river
(v) Intensity, duration and distribution of rain in the catchment
(vi) Vegetation, cultivation etc. of the catchment.
(vii) Existence of reservoir's, Lakes etc. in the catchment .
(viii) Existing bridge or other hydraulic structures across the river in the vicinity of the
proposed bridge site with their details as much as possible.
(ix) General slope of the river from the critical point (origin) of the river up to bridge site and
general slope of the catchment in both sides of the river.

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY SHOULD INCLUDE
(x) Cross sections covering 200m. beyond flood lines of the river at
proposed bridge site, at about 500m. u/s and about 200m d/s.
wherein HFL, LWL,LBL, area of the cross section, wetted perimeter
and geological profile with silt factor of each strata shall be
indicated.
(xi) Bed slope of the river
(xii) Maximum discharge calculated by established formulas with
different return periods and the peak discharge observed over a
period of 100 years.
(xiii) Velocity and depth of flow at the time of survey.
(xiv) Shifting of the river in the past at proposed bridge site and in its
vicinity.
(xv) Other information required for river control, design,
6
construction and maintenance of the bridge.
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari
 HYDROLOGICAL STUDY
Estimation of flood
discharge
➢ Statistical : using past data of annual
flood (Direct method)
➢ Empirical : use of formulae or curve
(Indirect Method)
➢ Rational: rational formulae or
applying unit hydrograph (Indirect
Method)
(Gauged and Ungauged)

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

WECS/DHM Method
WECS/DHM (1990) method employs regional prediction methods. It is a modification of
WECS (Water and Energy Commission Secretariat) approach of 1982 and has been
developed jointly by WECS and DHM (Department of Hydrology and Meteorology) in
cooperation with WMO (World Meteorological Organization), WERDP (Water and Energy
Resource Development Project, until 1989) and WISP (WECS/NEA Institutional Support
Programme) in 1990. The following equations were used for flood forecasting:

Where,
Q2: 2 year return period instantaneous flood
Q100: 100 years return period instantaneous
flood
QR: Discharge with return period of R years
S: Standard deviation of natural logarithms
of annual floods
σ : Standardized normal variant for 8

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari particular return period R

 WECS/DHM Method

• Flood discharge for other return period

QR = exp(loge Q2 + Sσ)
𝑄
ln( 𝑄100)
Where, σ = 2
= standard deviation
2.326
S = standardized normal variate for particular return period
Return 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
Period
(yr)
S 0 0.842 1.282 1.645 2.054 2.326 2.576

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

Modified Dicken’s Method
Irrigation research Institute, Roorkee (for Himalayan Rivers)
• This method is also widely used in Nepal.
Qf= CA3/4

Where, A = total catchment area (Sq km)

As = the snow covered area (Sq km)
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari and T is return period in years. 10
B.D. Richards’ Method
Another widely used method of flood estimation using rainfall and catchment characteristics
is the [Link]’ method, which has been comprehensively used in Mahakali Irrigation
Project. The procedure involved is as follows:
Initially certain value is assumed for Tc , then
Where,
Tc= Time of concentration in hr.
A = Catchment area in sq. km.
L = Catchment length in km.
S = Catchment slope in % (= (Hmax-Hmin)/L *100)
F = Areal reduction factor
Rr = 24 hour rainfall for return period T
I = Rainfall intensity corresponding to the time of concentration Tc
Tc2 = Second estimate of time of concentration
If the difference between the first estimate T, and the resulting second
estimate Tc2 is greater than 5%,
the whole process is repeated with Tc = Tc2
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari To calculate the flood discharge then, the following formula is used11
Q= 0.222AIF in m/s.
Snyder’s Method
Another well-established method widely used in Nepal is the Snyder’s method. For an
ungauged river, the flood flow estimation by deriving a synthetic unit hydrographs based
on known physical characteristics of the basin. The method is based on the analysis on
large number of hydrographs from drainage basins ranging in area from 25 sq. km to 25000
sq. km. The method which has been used in Nepal to estimate the flood discharge
hydrographs in Nepali rivers is based on the following relationships.

Where,
tpr = lag time from mid-point of effective rainfall of duration
tr to peak of unit
hydrograph in hours.
Tr = Standard duration of effective rainfall in hours.
Ct and Cp values for a given catchment shall be obtained
from the maps
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 12
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari
Spatial distribution of Ct 13
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 14
Spatial distribution of Cp
PCJ Method
The PCJ method (Jha 1996) calculates design peak flood discharge based on hourly
rainfall intensity. This method employs following formula:

Where,
Qp = Maximum rainfall design discharge for required exceedence probability (p) in m3/sec
ap = Maximum rainfall design intensity for required exceedence probability (p) in mm/min ap = [Link]
where, ahr = Hourly rainfall intensity for required exceedence probability (p) in mm/min at selected
rainfall stations and kt = Reduction coefficient of hourly rainfall intensity (depends on the size of
catchment area)
Op = Infiltration coefficient of the basin, derived as the function of exceedence probability (p)
Φ = Areal reduction coefficient of maximum rainfall discharge (depends on the size of catchment)
F = Catchment area of drainage basin in sq. km.
kf = Coefficient for unequal distribution of rainfall in different size of basin, captured by one rain.
QS = Discharge by melting of snow, can be taken as 0 to 10% of QP in the absence of data.

15

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 FLOOD FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
Gumbel’s method
This is one of the most widely used extreme value prediction methods. Following key formula were
used for this study.
From gauging station
• The maximum discharge for required return period is analysed by suitable method like, Gumble

Where,
XT = Value of variate x at return period T
𝑋ത = Mean of variate X
K = frequency factor
σ n-1 =Standarddeviation of sample size N
Yt = Reduced variate
Yn = Reduced mean 16

Sn = Reduced standard deviation

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari
LOG-Pearson Type III Distribution
• Similar to Gumbel’s method, this is also widely used extreme value prediction
method. The following calculations were used for the analysis in this study:

Where,
X = variate of random hydrologic series
Z T = Transformed series value for return period T
Kz = frequency factor f (Cs, T)
σz= Standard deviation of Z variate sample.

17

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

Rational Method (US by Kuichling in 1886)
• small Catchment
• Provides Peak Discharge
• Peak Discharge due to surface flow rather than stream flow
Peak Discharge
Q = 0.278 C I A m3/sec (Cumec)
Where, C = Run off coefficient
I = intensity of rain fall within the time of concentration(mm/hr)
I = (100 T 0.2)/(tr + 20)0.7
A = Catchment area (sqkm)
T = return period in years
t r = rainfall duration in minutes 18

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

Hydraulic characteristics of the channel influencing the maximum discharge are-
(a) Velocity of flow,
(b) Slope of stream,
(c) Cross sectional area of stream,
(d) Shape and roughness of stream.
• Mannings Velocity V (in m/s) = (1/n) R 2/3 S 1/2
Where n = coefficient depending on roughness of bed & bank
R = A/P i.e. Hydraulic mean depth.
A = Cross section area, P = Wetted perimeter
S = Hydraulic gradient (Slope of stream)
Q = Discharge m3/s.
A = Area of cross section in m2
V = velocities of respective compartments in m/s 19

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

COEFFICIENT OF RUGOSITY (IRC SP 13: 2004)

20

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

High Flood Level (HFL): Flood mark can be observed near the bridge site. It plays great role
in fixing the height of bridge.
Linear Waterways :
For the purpose of determination of waterway requirements of bridges, the streams/ rivers can
be divided into three types
1. Streams/rivers with Rigid boundaries – those with hard and inerodible bank and bed.
for defined natural stream or channel the linear water way should be the full width of the
channel or stream measured edge to edge along the designed HFL on the plotted section.
2. Quasi-Alluvial rivers – in-erodible bank but erodible bed. In this type of river the
waterways should be made equal to the width of the water surface measured from edge to
edge along the design HFL.

21

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

3. Alluvial rivers – erodible bank and bed. The linear waterway of a bridge
across a fully alluvial river should kept equal to the regime width as given
by Lacey.
Regime Cross section Where, Q = discharge in cumec (m3/s)
P = 4.8 * Q0.5 P = wetted perimeter in m
R = 0.473*(Q/f)1/3 R = Hydraulic mean depth in m
A = CS area in sqm
A = 2.3* (Q5/6/f1/3)
v = velocity of flow m/s
Regime velocity and slope
w = regime width m
v = 0.44 *Q1/6*f1/3
d = regime depth m
S = 0.0003*(f5/4/Q1/6) 𝑑𝑚 = mean dia. of particles in mm
Regime width and depth f = silt factor
w = 4.8*Q1/2
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 22
d= 0.473*(Q/f)1/3 Silt factor f = 1.76*√𝑑𝑚
o Linear waterway should not be more than regime width – increase inspan will
not allow reduction in depth of foundation.
o Linear waterway should not be less than regime width- cost saving by a
decrease in waterways openings – increase cost of foundation and river training
works.
o Linear water ways other than regime flow w = C* 𝑄
C = constant (4.5 to 6.3) for regime flow C = 4.8

23

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

Afflux: heading up of water over the flood level
x = (v2/2g)*[{w2/(c*L2)}-1]
v = Velocity of normal flow (m/s)
w = natural linear waterway (width of river at HFL)
L = linear waterway under the bridge
C = discharge coefficient (0.7 for sharp to 0.9 bell mouth entry)
d = depth of flow

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 24

Allowable safe velocities
Soil type Loose clay or Coarse sand Fine gravel, Coarse Boulder and
under the fine sand sandy or silty gravel, rocky Rock
bridge clay soil
Velocity (m/s) Upto 0.5 0.5 to 1 1.0 to 1.5 1.5 to 2.5 2.5 to 5

• When velocity goes beyond the permissible safe limits, suitable protective works would be
needed

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 25

• To provide for adequate margin of safety, the foundation shall be designed for a
larger discharge which should be a percent as mentioned below over design
discharge. (IRC:78-2014 clause 703.1) The discharge worked out by Empirical Formula
be increased by
• Catchment up to 3000 [Link]. - 30 %
• 3000 - 10000 [Link]. - 30 to 20 %
• 10000 - 40000 [Link]. - 20 to 10 %
• More than 40000 [Link]. - 10 %

26

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

BRIDGE SCOUR
The estimated scour depth is a function of
• degradation or aggradation,
• general scour, and
• local scour

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 27

Scour Depth:
Scour is defined as the removal of material from the bed and banks of stream during
the passage of flood discharge.
Mean depth of scour for natural streams in alluvial beds
dsm = 1.34 [Db2/Ksf]1/3 ( IRC 5: 1998 cl 110.1.3)
Where, dsm= the mean depth of scour below HFL
Db = discharge in m3/s per m width = Q/linear waterway
Ksf = silt factor = 1.76 √𝑑𝑚,
𝐝𝐦 = weighted mean dia. Of bed material

28

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

• Normal scour depth based on Lacey’s regime equation
dsm = 0.47(Q/f)1/3
IRC recommendation for correction for scour depth – if contracted from regime
dcor = dsm*(w/L)0.61
Maximum depth of scour dmax = dsm * R

Condition Straight Moderate Sharp or u/s nose Nose of

of flow reach/near bend severe bend of guide piers/Right
abutment bank angled bend

R 1.27 1.50 1.75 2.75 2.0

29

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 30

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 MINIMUM FREE BOARD

Nepal Bridge Standard- 2067 (Revision 2073)

• In case of bridges over water bodies, the free board from the design HFL with afflux
to the lowest point of bridge superstructure shall not be less than 1.0 m. The
minimum freeboard shall be

31

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari

 EXAMPLE

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 32

 Hydrological Study

The hydrological Study of Surahi Khola Bridge has been carried out with
objective to design a bridge

Catchments characteristics

Catchment Area 60.40 Km2

River Length 18.22 km
Elevation of Critical Point 432 m
Elevation at bridge site 139 m

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 33

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 34
 Methodology
No Gauzing Data of Khola Bridge are available. The flood discharge at bridge site
has been determined by using Empirical method using Gumbell rainfall analysis.
DHM/ WESCS Method
Modified Diken’s Method
Synder Method
B.D Richards Method
Design Discharge

Summary of 100 years flood discharge

S.N. Method of Calculation Discharge m3/s Remarks
1 WECS Method 300.689
2 Modified Diken,s 274.028 100 Year Return
3 B.D. Richards' Method 201.452 Period
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 35
4 Synders Methods 220.122
Design Discharge ( Q100) 300.689
 High Flood Level (HFL)
From the field observation at the time of field visit the HFL is 179.60 m, but from HEC-RAS Analysis the
designed high flood level is 180.50 m as shown in HEC RAS Figure & table below.

Surahi_khola_kapilvastu Plan: P lan 01 5/26/2021

.035 .035 .035

186 Legend

EG PF 1
WS PF 1
185
Crit PF 1

Ground
Bank Sta
184

183
Elevation (m)

182

181

180

179

MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 36

178
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Station (m)
 Summary of Hydrology & Hydraulics of Bridge
Summary of Hydrology_Surahi Khola Bridge
Catchment area A 60.400 km2 From GIS Map
Design Discharge ( Q100) 300.689 m3/s From WECS method
Design Discharge ( Q100) for foundation
390.896 m3/s incrase 30% discharge for foundation design, as per IRC78-2000, Clause 703.1.1
design
Size of Dm (1.25Xd50) 0.313 mm From grain size analysis of BH-4, d50=0.25mm for depth 1.5m
Silt Factor F 0.984
Bridge length L 360.000 m As per D& B Contract agreement form DoR
Linear Water Way of bridge site w 202.000 From HEC RAS Analysis top width of river during HFL (ref: IRC 5-1998, Clause101.8)
Effective Linear water way 330.00 Ref: IRC 5-1998, Clause101.9
Ratio Db 1.935 take effective water way 202 m
Regime Depth ( Normal Scour) d 2.092 From IRC Method
From HFL, Take 1.27 coefficient flood without sesmic condition as per as per IRC78-
Maxium Depth of Scour for abutments dmax 2.657 m
2000, Clause [Link]
From HFL, Take 2 coefficient flood without sesmic condition as per as per IRC78-
Max. Scour Depth for piers dfinal 4.184 m
2000, Clause [Link]
Bed Level of River 178.200 from field survey Data
High Flood level 180.500 from HEC RAS Analysis
Calculated Scour Depth for pier dfinal 1.884
Calculated Scour Depth for abutments dfinal 0.357
From low Bed Level 178.2
Adopted Scour Depth for pier dfinal 3.000
Adopted Scour Depth for abutments dfinal 2.000
Free Board 1.5 m as per DoR standard
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 37
Soffit level 182.000
Scour Level of pier 175.200
Scour Level of abutmnet 176.200
Main channel velocity 1.5 m/s
 Surahi_khola_kapilvastu Plan: Plan 01 26-May-21

.035 .035 .035

186 Legend

EG PF 1
WS PF 1
185
Crit PF 1
0.8 m/s
1.0 m/s
184
1.2 m/s
1.4 m/s
1.6 m/s
183
Ground
Bank Sta
Ele va tion (m )

182

181

180

179

178
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 38
Station (m )
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 39
MSc (TEAM)- 2023 - KR Adhikari 40