Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design
Design
ON
AND
BY
Page 0 of 72
CONTENTS
SL.
DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS PAGES
No.
1. INTRODUCTION 1
7. CONCLUSION 40 – 41
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 41
9. REFERENCES 41 - 43
10. FIGURES 44 – 72
Page 1 of 72
1. INTRODUCTION.
and to control and regulate the river bed configuration for effective
Page 1 of 72
(2) To fend the river off the bridge approaches in order to keep in-
(2) Spurs
Page 2 of 72
4. DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING WORKS :
of the bridge with respect to banks, flow conditions in the river and
Page 3 of 72
4.1.2 Waterway:
abutments.
P = 4.75 Q (1)
where,
P is expressed in meters
Q is flood discharge in m3/sec
4.1.3 LENGTH OF GUIDE BUNDS :
abutments.
Page 4 of 72
4.1.5 TOP WIDTH AND FREEBOARD :
The top width of the guide banks should not be less than 3.0
Side Slope
H.F.L. H.F.L.
B Launching
θ1 Rear Apron
Apron
ο :H)
R1 1:2 (V
Deepest Scour Hole
θ1 = 120 to 145°
A A Section B-B
R = 2.2 Q
1
L1 = 1.1L
L1
Launching Apron
H.F.L. 1:2
(V:
H )
Axis of the Bridge
L2= 0.25L L2
R2 Deepest Scour Hole
θ2 θ2 = 45° to 60°
R2 = 1.1 Q
Section A-A
Page 5 of 72
4.1.6 Stone Pitching On Sloping Sides And Launching Apron:
The sloping face of the guide bank as well as its nose are
the minimum size of the boulder used in this pitching is such that it
in which
Page 6 of 72
guide bank facing river flow to prevent washing out of fine
following relation:
D1 = XR (4)
where,
1/ 3
Q
R = 0.47 (5)
f
Page 7 of 72
Here D1 and R are both measured from the high flood level
Location Value of X
bed would launch into the scour hole to take a slope of IV: 2H with
Page 8 of 72
To account for the non-uniformity in launching, the thickness
Boulder Pitching
1:2
(V:
H) H.F.L.
20 cm Soling s
of Ballast Total thickness Launching Apron
including Soling (T)
2.25Ds
River Bed D1 = xR
1.5 T
Deepest Scour
Permeable spurs have been used more often for bank protection
than for diverting the flow. These spurs stabilise a reach of the
river by inducing siltation along the bank from which they are
Page 9 of 72
projected. They are generally provided as a series of spurs
Spurs are built of rectangular section with a top width of about 1.50
two rows at the spacing equal to top width of the spur. They are
rigidity and strength. The space between the two rows of `ballies'
not to deflect the current away from the bank. Further, short spurs
thereby reducing the chances of their failure. The width of the river
is also considered in fixing the length of the spur. For the railway
Page 10 of 72
bridge at Garhmukteshwar the width of the river during high flood
The main criterion for the stability of the spur is that it should
not overturn under the various forces that act on it. The stability on
stability.
be considered per unit length of the spur are as below and are
shown in Fig.5
Page 11 of 72
The method of estimating these forces is given below:
Drag force, FD :
of water, Hs is the height of the spur above the river bed. Here
Page 12 of 72
FIGURE 6 RELATIONSHIP FOR CD
the height of the fence and η is its porosity. The relationship shown
projecting from the river bank, Hf is taken as the length of the spur
the spur. However, the results of Ranga Raju and Garde (1969)
show that for the angle of inclination between 600 and 900, the
Page 13 of 72
Soil resistance, Fs :
For considering the overturning of the spur about its base, the soil
1
Fs= γ, (kp - ka ) D2 (8a)
2
internal friction and D is the depth of ballies below the river bed. In
The line of action of the force Fs is at 2D/3 below the river bed
level.
The self weight of the spur, W, per unit length may be computed
as
W = ϒs b (Hs + D) (9)
and b is the width of the spur. This weight acts vertically down
Page 14 of 72
4.2.4 STABILITY ANALYSIS IN UNSCOURED CONDITION :
Figure 8 shows the spur, with deepest scour at its nose and the
As can be seen from this figure, the soil has a sloping profile of
IV:2H below the bed level. For the computation of soil resistance in
Page 15 of 72
this case, the effective depth of soil has been assumed as 2/3D
soil level in Fig.8. Here D is the required grip length below riverbed
Page 16 of 72
the riverbed level. Schematic diagram showing forces on the spur
stresses depend on the grade of the timber used for ballies and
the factor of safety against overturning and stresses at the toe and
heel of the spur. The width of the spur could be modified if required
apron.
Page 17 of 72
5. CASE STUDY NO. 1: RIVER TRAINING AND PROTECTION
GANGA AT GARHMUKTESHWAR ON
MORADABAD-GHAZIABAD-DELHI (BG)
Span - 11 x 61 m.
H F L (1924) - 200.25 m
LWL - 195.4 m.
Page 18 of 72
5.2 BRIDGE DETAILS(In Progress 30 m D/S of existing) :
Span - 11 x 61 m.(UP/DN)
to H.F.L of 1924)
H F L (1924) - 200.25 m
LWL - 195.4 m.
Page 19 of 72
5.3 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM :
bridge site ,in alluvium stage with sand (Silt factor 0.9) in its bed, is
with Khadir width of 7-8 km was flowing hugging its extreme edge
with guide bunds 670 m long on u/s side and 150 m long on
side and 150 m on d/s side for left guide bund were constructed.
Left guide bund was kept shorter than the right guide bund,
keeping in view the proximity of the edge of the island. Mr. W.A
left guide bund has been purposely kept shorter to allow more
constrction of this bridge the river has been changing its course
Page 20 of 72
,1500 feet away from left, the river straightened itself and caused
only 200 m away from the Matwali bridge and some portion of the
flood, river Ganga also somewhat attracted towards the bank due
water). During the flood of 1948, the river attacked railway bank at
Page 21 of 72
radius. A 4.5 km long diversion was constructed from km 66/11 to
some flood repair works were carried out on the left approach bunk
spurs have been provided on the left bank of the river for
reach, the river is only 70. m away from the centre line of the track
Page 22 of 72
takes off from right bank.
Page 23 of 72
5.4 RECOMMENDED REMEDIAL ACTIONS TAKEN IN
VARIOUS STAGES :
constructed.
(II) Year 1948: River main channel was only 480 feet away from
bridge.
for right guide bund and 3500 feet long spur at km 63-
Page 24 of 72
km 63-64 was also collected and kept.With the
Page 25 of 72
(IX) Year 1981 :
(i) 305 Nos. large size trungers dropped around the nose of
spur at KM: 63 /12.
(ii) 3000 trees planted on the RGB, LGB and along the bank of
Ganga.
(iii) Turfing of the slops of retarded alignment was done.
(X) Year 1997 :
Roorkee had suggested in its 1st report that following action should
monsoon.
in Fig.16.
Page 26 of 72
3. Sandbag revetment be provided on the left bank
action on item No. 2 was deferred till detailed model study as its
problems were felt in flood of 1998 and 1999. The river came very
Page 27 of 72
To suggest safety measures for the protection of the molehead of
the left guidebund of the bridge and the existing solid spurs.
recommended that
(a)To extend all the three solid spurs that were built during
1998(shown in fig.20).
(b)To build two new solid spurs at locations Km 64/8-9 and 65/4-
(d)To strengthen the molehead of the existing left guide bund and
(e)To provide stone pitching along the left bankline over a distance
distance of 100 m d/s of the last permeable spur (Shown in fig. 20)
Page 28 of 72
(a) To study the effect of river stream on left and right guide bunds
(b) To study for making uniform distribution flow of water from all
were as under :
adequate.
Page 29 of 72
2. The right guide bund is required to be extended on the
upstream side along its straight length by 107.0 m keeping the top
width the same as in the existing guide bund, viz. 13.0 m and by
bund viz. 198.058 m. The width of these berms may also be kept
the same as in the straight portion of the existing right guide bund.
3. The curved head at the end of the extended portion of the right
portion of the right guide bund i.e. straight extended length and the
5. The mole head of the existing left guide bund be modified as per
the design proposed for the curved head of the right guide bund.
Page 30 of 72
channel is to be excavated below the existing surface level of the
island.
present design. The rise and the tread of the steps in these Ghats
spans and channel was found to get silted during the recession of
flood as such these two items were dropped and various other
6. Case study II :
Page 31 of 72
6.2 Details of Bridge No. 97
Page 32 of 72
6.2 Details of Bridge No. 98
Statement of Problem
Lakhimpur Kheri. Earlier the river course was almost straight and
in which flow is taking about 180 degree turn and river has come to
Page 33 of 72
meandering and coming very close to the Railway track, a
Originally the river Sharda was flowing quite away from the
Page 34 of 72
spurs out of 40 could be constructed which were also seriously
damaged in monsoon.
but no work was actually done by them. In the mean time the river
Railway embankment & Br. NO. 98, following works were executed
(ii) Strengthening and extension of the guide bund of Br. No. 98.
Page 35 of 72
However as the cost of the river training works as suggested
Railways flood protection work (and Bridge No. 98) and extension
Page 36 of 72
recommended that extension of existing spurs along Railway
opposing the above on the ground that this work is not for safety of
Railway bridge and track only but also for the safety of Civil area.
Further more the Railways also say that scope and cost of work
state govt. and therefore Railway is not liable to pay. This issue
Br. No. 98 has got 9 girders of span 6.1 m each and 1 girder
below the bottom of the girder of 6.1 m span due to which many
times water level in 12.2 m span comes above bottom of its girder
Page 37 of 72
been got sanctioned and is to be executed during current year so
7. CONCLUSION :
7.1 It is seen from the above case studies that timely action in
escalation of cost.
length.
Page 38 of 72
7.6 Distribution of discharge through all bays useful for safety
8. ACNOWLEDGEMENT :
9. REFERENCES :
N. Delhi
Paper No. 6.
Page 39 of 72
vii. Irrigation Research Institute Roorkee Report No. 75 RR
(H105 ) of 2004.
07 ) of 2005.
2004.
Page 40 of 72
downstream of bridges”, Annual Report (Technical),
CWPRS, Pune.
xvi. Ranga Raju, K.G., Mittal, M.K., Verma, M.S. and Ganeshan,
Page 41 of 72
FIG 1: TYPICAL LAYOUT OF GUIDE BUND
Page 42 of 72
FIG.2
Page 43 of 72
U.P. I R I ROORKEE
TRAINING OF RIVER GANGA AT
GARHMUKTESHWAR BR. NO. 52
INDEX PLAN
1978
Page 44 of 72
Page 45 of 72
Page 46 of 72
FIG.13
Page 47 of 72
FIG. 14
Page 48 of 72
FIG. 15
Page 49 of 72
Dry
Cha
nne
l (B
)
Bar
Left
Guide
Bank
km 66/0 X1
X2 km 64/7 Railway
km 65/0 Crossing No. 49
FIGURE 15a :
COURSE OF RIVER GANGA IN 1996 AT GARHMUKTESHWAR
RAILWAY BRIDGE
Page 50 of 72
30m
PROPOSED
BAR PILOT CHANNEL
X4
REVETMENT
(ABOUT 100m LONG)
RIVETMENT
(ABOUT 50m LONG) X2
EXISTING X1
PROPOSED DIKES A
BANK LINE
PERPENDICULAR TO EXPECTED
B BANK LINE
THE EXISTING BANK
25 1 EXISTING SPUR
20 5
GHA 15 10
ZIAB
AD
AD
RAILWAY MORADAB
TRACK
km 64/7 RAILWAY
CROSSING No. 49
825m
Page 51 of 72
FIGURE 17: DETAILS OF THE PROTECTION WORKS FOR THE SPUR
Page 52 of 72
FIG.18 (a)
FIG.18 (b)
Page 53 of 72
Page 54 of 72
Page 56 of 72
FIGURE 22 : FINAL PROPOSAL FOR PROTECTION WORKS
Page 57 of 72
TABLE 2
Page 58 of 72
FIG. 23
Page 59 of 72
FIG. 24
Page 60 of 72
26
FIG. 25
Page 61 of 72
FIGURE 26 : PLAN AND SECTIONS SHOWING DETAILS OF
THE MODIFICATIONS FOR THE MOLE HEAD OF THE LEFT
GUIDE BUND
Page 62 of 72
FIGURE 27 : COURSE OF THE RIVER SHARDA BETWEEN
1991 TO 2004 BRIDGE NO. 97 & 98
Page 63 of 72
FIGURE 28 : PLAN SHOWING RIVER SHARDA EDGE
BETWEEN BRIDGE NO. 97-98 AS ON 12-08-2004
Page 64 of 72
FIGURE 29 : VIEW OF RIVER SHARDA DURING FLOOD (TREE
PLANTATIO ACTING AS NATURAL PROTECTION MEASURE /
SPURS)
Page 65 of 72
FIGURE 30 : VIEW OF RIVER SHARDA DURING FLOOD
Page 66 of 72
FIGURE 31: VIEW OF RIVER SHARDA DURING FLOOD AT
BRIDGE NO. 98
Page 67 of 72
FIGURE 32: VIEW OF RIVER SHARDA DURING FLOOD AT
BRIDGE NO. 98
Page 68 of 72
FIGURE 34 : DETAILS OF PROTECTION WORKS OF FLOOR
AND EMBANKMENT AT BRIDGE NO. 98
Page 69 of 72
FIGURE 35 : DETAILS OF SPUR OF RIVER SHARDA
Page 70 of 72