INTRODUCTION

TO BRIDGES
BRIDGE HYDROLOGY
Raju Sharma
Assistant Professor
Civil Engineering Department
TIET, Patiala
 Determination of Flood
Discharge
 One of the essential data for the bridge design is a
fair assessment of the maximum flow, which could be
expected to occur at the bridge site during the design
period of the bridge.
 The conventional practice in India for determination of
flood discharge is to use a few convenient formulae or
past records.
 The faulty determination of flood discharge has led to
failure of many hydraulic structures.
 The Indian Roads congress has recommended that the
maximum discharge, which a bridge on a natural stream
should be designed to pass, should be determined by a
consideration of at least two of the following methods.
 Maximum Discharge (IRC)
From the rainfall and other characteristics of
the catchment.
 By use of an empirical formula applied to that region, or
 By rational method, provided it is possible to evaluate
for the region concerned, the various factors employed
in the method.
From the hydraulic characteristics of the stream
such as cross-sectional area, and slope of the
stream allowing for velocity of flow.
From the records available, if any, of discharges
observed on the stream at the site of the bridge,
or at any other site in its vicinity.
 Empirical Methods
Empirical methods for flood
estimation in India
Dicken’s Formula
Ryve’s Formula
Inglis Formula
Creager’s Formula
Khosla’s Formula
Besson’s Formula
 Basic Approach
In these methods, area of a basin or a catchment is
considered mainly.
All other factors, which influence peak flow, are
merged in a constant.
A general equation may be written, in the form

Q = C. An
where Q = peak flow or rate of maximum discharge,
C = a constant for the catchment
A = area of the catchment,
n = An index
Constant for a catchment is arrived at, after
taking the following factors into account:
(a) Basin characteristics, which include
(i) area
(ii) shape
(iii) slope
(b) Storm characteristics, which consist of
(i) intensity
(ii) duration
(iii) distribution
Limitations of Empirical Methods
These methods do not take frequency of
flood into consideration.
These methods cannot be applied
universally.
Fixing of constant is very difficult and
exact theory cannot be put forth for its
selection.
However, despite these limitations, these
methods give a fairly accurate idea about
the peak flow for the catchments they
represent.
 Dickens’ Formula
It was formerly adopted only in Northern India
Now it can be used in most of the states in India
after proper modification of the constant

Q = C. A3/4
where, Q = discharge in m3/sec
A = area of catchment in sq. km
C = constant
 According to the area of catchment
and amount of rainfall C varies from
11.02 to 22.04.

REGION VALUE OF C

Northern India 11.37

Central India 13.77 – 19.28
Western India 22.04
 Ryve’s Formula
This formula is used only in Southern India.
According to this,

Q = C. A2/3
Where, C = 6.74 for area within 24 km from
coast
C = 8.45 for areas within 24-161 km
from coast
C = 10.1 for limited hilly areas.
In worst cases it is found that value of C goes
up to 40.5.
 Inglis Formula
This formula is used only in the state of Maharashtra.
(a) For small areas only (it is also applicable for fan-
shaped catchment)
Q = 123.2√A
(b) For areas between 160 to 1000 square km
Q = 123.2√A-2.62(A-259)
(c) For all type of catchments
Q= 123.2 A
A  10.36
In all equations A is area in sq. km.
 Creager’s Formula
This method was given formerly by Creager, Justin
and Hinds in U.S.A.
In this, from the past records a graph is plotted
between peak flow per square km of the basin and
the basin area for various values.
The points obtained on the graph are joined by an
envelope curve.
The equation to the curve is of the type:
q  C. A n

Here, q = the peak flow per sq. km of a basin.

A = the catchment area in sq. km.
n = some index
By multiplying both sides of the above equation
area of the basin A, we get
n 1
Q  C. A
Where Q is peak flow 
 Equation given by Creager, Justin and Hinds is

Q  46.0C. A 0.89 A  0.048

 Khosla’s Formula
It is a rational formula and is based on the following equation
P = R + L, or
R = P – L
Here, R is run off, P is rainfall and L is losses.
According to Khosla, the main factor influencing losses is
temperature.
Losses are expressed in terms of mean temperature, Tm in
Fahrenheit.
The formula in C.G.S. system is given as
L = 4.82 Tm,
where L is in mm and Tm is in Centigrade
 R = P – 4.82 Tm
The above mentioned formula of losses cannot be
used for the values of temperature less than
400F.
For lower temperature the following table is
given:
Tom (F) 40 30 20 10 0
L in 0.84 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40
 
Khosla formula is useful in
assessing water potential for a
basin in river valley project.
 Besson’s Formula
This formula is very rational and can be used in
any case
Pm  Qr
Qm 
Pr

where
Qm = Peak flow expected
Qr = Some observed peak flow
Pr = Observed rainfall
Pm = Expected rainfall
 Rational Method
This method is applicable for determination of flood
discharge for small culverts only
In order to arrive at a rational approach, a relationship
has been established between rainfall and runoff under
various circumstances.
The size of the flood depends upon the following
factors:
(i) Climate or Rainfall Factors: These factors include
intensity, distribution, and duration of rainfall.
(ii)Catchment Area Factors: These factors include
catchment area, its shape, and its slope, porosity
of the soil, vegetable cover and initial state of
wetness.
 Relationship between the intensity and
duration of a storm
F = total rainfall in cm.
T = duration of rainfall in hours, and
I = mean intensity of rainfall in cm/hour taken over
the total duration of the storm
Then, I = F/T
If, i = mean intensity of rainfall in cm per hour,
obtained for a small time interval ‘t', and since the
intensity is not uniform throughout, the mean
intensity ‘i’ obtained over the time interval ‘t’ will be
higher than the mean intensity ‘I’ taken over the
whole period ‘T’.
Intensity of a storm is some inverse function of its
duration.
It has been reasonably well established that I and i
are connected by an empirical relation given by
i/I = (T+c)/(t+c)
Value of constant c is unity for all practical purposes.
I can be written as
I = F/T
Hence, i = I (T+1)/(t+1)
i = (F/T )* (T+1)/(t+1)
Let us consider time interval also t= 1 hour
Corresponding intensity of rainfall i = I0 say
Then I0 = (F/T )* (T+1)/(1+1)
Or
I0 = (F/T )* (T+1)/2
Io which is one hour rainfall can be calculated for
any region in which the total rainfall “F” and
duration of a severest storm are known.
Correct procedure for finding Io is to take a
number of really heavy and prolonged storms and
work out Io from the F and T of each of them.
The maximum of the values of Io thus found
should be accepted as the one hour rainfall of the
region for designing bridges.
The I0 is modified to suit the concentration time
of the catchment area for a bridge.
 Time of Concentration
May be defined as the time taken by runoff
to reach the site of the bridge or culvert
from the farthest point on the periphery of
the catchment.
This farthest point is known as the critical
point.
The time of concentration depends upon the
following catchment characteristics:
(i) Length of catchment area
(ii) Slope, roughness and depth of flow.
Time of concentration can be determined by
the following simple relationship:
0.385
 L3

Tc   0.89  
 H 
Where
Tc = Concentration time in hours.
L = Distance from the critical point to the site of
bridge or culvert in Kms
H = Fall in level from the critical point to the bridge
site in meters.
 Time of Concentration by
Richard’s Formula
1/ 3
 L 3
Tc    
 H
9  5280 
  2 
4  C KI 
where
K = Coefficient of runoff
C = Bazin’s coefficient
I = intensity of rainfall
 Time of Concentration by
Danson’s Formula
1/ 2
 L 
3
Tc   
 H
Where, 5280

C SI
Here,
L, H and Tc have got the same meaning
Both  and  depend on intensity of
rainfall and nature of the soil in the
catchment area.
Table below represents various values
of  for different rainfall intensities
and type of soils
 Critical Intensity of Rainfall
Shorter is the time interval taken, higher is the
intensity of rainfall.
But if the time interval taken is very small, run-
off from distant parts of the catchment will not
be able to reach the site of bridge.
Peak discharge at the site will be obtained only if
run-off is contributed by the entire catchment.
Hence, in determining the maximum discharge,
intensity of rainfall over the concentration time
will have to be considered.
This is known as Critical Intensity of Rainfall.
 Critical Intensity of Rainfall

Let Ic = critical intensity of rainfall

corresponding to concentration time Tc
Putting t = Tc and i = Ic in equation
i = (F/T )* (T+1)/(t+1)

we get Ic = (F/T )* (T+1)/(Tc +1)

In equation I0 = (F/T )* (T+1)/2

therefore
Ic = I0 (2/( Tc +1))
 Typical Rational Formula For Peak Run-off
Q = AIO λ
Where
Q = maximum flood discharge in m3/sec
A = catchment area in km2
IO = peak intensity of rainfall in mm/hour
λ = a component depending upon the characteristics
of the catchment in producing peak run off
= 0.56 Pf
tC  1
P = percentage coefficient of run-off for the catchment
characteristics
f = a factor to correct the variation of intensity of rainfall over the
area of the catchment
Values of P in the Rational Formula

Values of f in the Rational Formula

 AREA VELOCITY METHOD
This method is based on the hydraulic properties
of the stream and is possibly the most reliable
of the methods for measuring the discharge.
The velocity in this method is calculated by using
the Manning’s formula.
Discharge is given as Q= AV
Where, Q is the discharge in m3/sec
A is the wetted area in m2
V is the velocity of flow in m/sec
Velocity is calculated by Manning’s formula as
1 0.67 0.5
V  R S
n
n is the coefficient of roughness
S is the slope of the stream
R is the hydraulic mean depth in metres and is = A/P
Where, P is the wetted perimeter in m

Roughness coefficient n in Manning’s formula

for natural streams
 Flood Discharge from Flood
Marks on an Existing Structure
If there is an existing road or railway bridge or
culvert over the same stream and not very far
away from the selected site
Best means of ascertaining the discharge is to
calculate it from the data collected by personal
inspection of flood marks left on the piers and
abutments and the channel condition
Broad Crested Weir formula and Drowned
Orifice formula for discharge can be utilized for
this purpose
 Broad Crested Weir Formula
 Discharge through the bridge can be given by the following
equation
2/2
 v  2
Q  1.70C w L h1 
 2g 
Where L = Linear waterway under the bridge in meters.
h1 = Upstream depth of water in meters
v = velocity of approach in meters / second
Cw = Coefficient to account for losses due to friction, and
depends upon the type of bridge opening

Weir formula is applicable only when the afflux h given by h1 –

h2 is more than ¼th of the downstream depth, i.e. h2 / 4.
h2
h
4
Coefficient to account for
losses due to friction
 Drowned Orifice Formula
Orifice formula is applicable when the afflux is less than ¼th of the
downstream depth, i.e. h is less than h2
4
Orifice formula is given as
1/ 2
 v 
2
Q  C0 2 g Lh2 h  (1  e) 
 2g 
Where
Q = Discharge in cubic m/s.
L = Linear waterway under the bridge in meters
C0= Coefficient to account for loss of head through the bridge
v = Velocity of approach in meters / sec.
e = A constant depending upon the ratio of waterway under bridge to
natural waterway, i.e. L/W.

Values of C0 and e are given for different ratios of waterways

under bridge to the natural waterway.
 Linear Waterway
When the water course to be crossed is an artificial channel for
irrigation or navigation or when the banks are well defined for
natural streams, the linear waterway should be the full
width of the channel or stream.
For large alluvial stream with undefined banks, the required
effective linear waterway may be determined using Lacey's
formula as given. W  C Q

Where
W= the effective linear waterway in metres (Regime Width)
Q = the designed maximum discharge in m3/s
C = a constant, usually taken as 4.8 for regime channels, but
may vary from 4.5 to 6.3 according to local conditions.

The effective linear waterway is the total width of the

waterway of the bridge minus the mean submerged width of the
piers and their foundation down to the mean scour level.
It is not desirable to reduce the linear waterway
below that for regime condition, however, if a
reduction is effected, special attention should be
given to afflux and velocity of water under the bridge
With reduced waterway, velocity would increase and
greater scour depths would be involved, requiring
deeper foundations
Any possible saving from a smaller linear waterway
will be offset by the extra expenditure on deeper
foundations and protective works
In view of the deficiencies of the assumptions made
in the computations for design discharge and for the
effective waterway by Lacey's formula,
It is often prudent to adopt the full natural width for
the linear waterway.
 AFFLUX
Afflux is the heading up of water over the flood level
caused by constriction of waterway at a bridge site.
It is measured by the difference in levels of the water
surfaces upstream and downstream of the bridge.
Afflux can be computed as
V 2
 L
2

x  2 2  1
2g  c L1 
Where,
x = afflux
V = velocity of normal flow in the stream
g = acceleration due to gravity
 L = width of stream at HFL
L1 = linear waterway under the bridge
c = coefficient of discharge through the bridge,
taken as 0.7 for sharp entry and 0.9 for
bell mouthed entry.
The afflux should be kept minimum and limited to
300 mm.
It causes an increase in the velocity on
downstream side, leading to greater scour and
requiring deeper foundations.
The road formation level and the top level of
guide bunds are dependent on the maximum water
level on the upstream side including afflux.
The increased velocity under the bridge should
also be kept below the allowable safe velocity for
the bed material.
Typical values of safe velocities are as below:

Loose clay or fine sand up to 0.5m/s

Coarse sand 0.5 to 1.0 m/s

Fine gravel, sandy or stiff clay 1.0 to 1.5m/s
Coarse gravel, rocky soil 1 .5 to 2.5 m/s
Boulders, rock 2.5 to 5.0
m/s
 Economical Span
Economical span of a bridge is the one which reduces
the overall cost of a bridge to be a minimum.
 Overall cost of a bridge depends upon the following
factors:
(i) Cost of material and its nature
(ii) Availability of skilled labor
(iii) Span length
(iv) Nature of the stream to be bridged
(v) Climatic and other conditions.
It is not in the hands of engineers to bring down the
cost of living index or the price of the materials, like
cement, steel timber etc. but they can help in bringing
down the cost of bridges by evolving economical
designs.
 Economical Span
For a given linear waterway, the total cost of
the superstructure increases and the total cost
of substructure decreases with increase in the
span length.

The most economical span length is that for

which the cost of superstructure equals the
cost of substructure.
 ASSUMPTIONS
(i) The bridge has equal span lengths. In practice,
generally equal spans are kept.
(ii) Cost of the supporting system of super-structure
varies as the square of the span length.
This assumption is nearly justified, because the
design of supporting system sections of super-
structure depends upon the bending moment,
which in turn varies as square of span length.
(iii) Cost of flooring and parapets varies directly as
the span.
This assumption is justified because as the span
increases, the quantity of material also increases.
 ASSUMPTIONS
(iv) Cost of one pier and its foundation is constant. This is

more or less only approximately true, as the depth of

foundation is decided by scour considerations, which is

constant at a bridge site.

(v) Cost of the abutments and their foundations is also

constant.

As the end span length increases the load on the abutment

also correspondingly increases requiring costly design. The

variation is negligible.
 Derivation
Let, L = Total length of the bridge.
l = span length
n = the total number of spans, = L/l
P = Cost of one pier with its foundation
A1 = Cost of one abutment and its foundations
A2 = Cost of one approach
T = Total bridge cost.
According to the assumptions (ii) and (iii)
Cost of one span of super-structure = a1l 2
 a2l
where a1 and a2 are constants of variations.
There are (n – 1) number of piers, and two abutments.
Total cost of the bridge = Cost of supporting system of super-
structure + Cost of (n - 1) piers + Cost of approaches + Cost of
railings and parapets.
 T  n(a1l 2  a 2 l )  2 A1  2 A2  (n  1) P
L
Replacing, n 
l
For T to be minimum
L L 
T  (a1l  a 2 l )    1 P  2 A1  2 A2
2

l l 

PL
T  La1l  a2 L   P  2 A1  2 A2
l
Differentiating the total cost with the span,
dT PL
 a1 L  2
dl l
For T to be minimum
dT
0
dl
 PL
a1 L  0
l2

P
a1 
l2

P
Economical Span = l = a1

i.e. cost of supporting system of one span is equal to

cost of one pier.
 In other words, cost of sub-structure is equal to the
cost of super-structure.
 As a rule, the number of spans should be kept minimum,
as piers cause obstruction of water flow.
 If piers are necessary, an odd number of spans or
even number of piers is to be preferred.
General equation of the above methods is given
as: P
l= K
Where
l is the length of economic span,
K is a constant, and
P is the cost of one pier
IRC, with a little modification, has recommended
the following principle:

Cost of variable part of superstructure = Cost of

variable part in the substructure.
 Most acceptable method recommended
by Indian Code of Practice

n 1 P
l
n K1
Where l is the economic length of span (ELS), n is
the number of vents, n – 1 the number of piers; P,
the cost of one pier including foundation and K 1
the constant indicating variable part of the
superstructure.
While deriving the correction factors, it has been
assumed that the ratio (n-1/n) remains constant
in the range of variation in the ELS.
 DRAWBACKS
The following conditions make the adoption of
economic span unsuitable:

Suitable foundation for piers is not available at

locations, where piers come as per consideration of
economic span.
Sometimes economic span is more than a particular
value which renders it difficult to erect due to
increased dead load.
Sometimes section of the pier increases
considerably if the span is increased beyond a
certain value.
 LOCATION OF PIERS AND
ABUTMENTS
Piers and abutments should be so located as to
make the best use of the foundation conditions
available.
 Normally, the span lengths for a river bridge
would be influenced by the hydraulic
considerations, subsoil profile affecting the
foundation requirements, height of piers,
floating debris expected during floods,
availability of handling machinery and skilled
labour for construction and cost considerations.
As far as possible, the most economical span as
above may be adopted.
If navigational or aesthetic requirements are
to be considered, the spans may be suitably
modified.
As a rule, the number of spans should be kept
low, as piers obstruct water flow.
If piers are necessary, an odd number of
spans are to be preferred.
Placing a pier at the deepest portion of an
active channel may be avoided by suitably
adjusting the number and length of the span.
For small bridges with open foundations and solid masonry
piers and abutments, the economical span is approximately
1.5 times the total height of the pier or abutments, while
that for masonry arch bridges it is about 2.0 times the
height of the keystone above the foundation.
For major bridges with more elaborate foundations, the
question has to be examined in greater detail.
Alignment of piers and abutments should be, as far as
possible, parallel to the mean direction of flow in the
stream.
If any temporary variation in the direction and velocity of
the stream current is anticipated, suitable protective
works should be provided to protect the substructure
against the harmful effects on the stability of the bridge
structure.
VERTICAL CLEARANCE ABOVE HFL

For high level bridges, a vertical clearance should

be allowed between the highest flood level (HFL)
and the lowest point of the superstructure.
This is required to allow for any possible error in
the estimation of the HFL and the design
discharge.
It also allows floating debris to pass under the
bridge without damaging the structure. It is,
therefore, logical to provide higher values of
clearance for greater discharges.
For arched bridges, the clearance below the
crown of the intrados of the arch should not be
less than one-tenth of the maximum depth of
the water plus one-third of the rise of the
arch intrados.
For structures provided with metallic bearings,
the clearance between the base of the bearings
and the highest flood level taking afflux into
account is not to be less than 500 mm.
For irrigation channels, the vertical clearance
may be relaxed at the discretion of the engineer-
in-charge.
Minimum Vertical Clearances

Discharge (m3/sec) Minimum Vertical Clearance

(mm)

Below 0.3 150

0.3 to 3.0 450

3.1 to 30.0 600

31 to 3000 900

301 to 3000 1200

Over 3000 1500

 Difference between Vertical Clearance
and Freeboard
While vertical clearance is the difference in level
between HFL and the lowest point of the
superstructure, freeboard is associated with the
approaches and guide bunds.
The freeboard at any point is the difference
between the HFL after allowing for afflux, if any,
and the formation level of road embankment on the
approaches or top level of guide bunds at that point.
For high level bridges, the freeboard should not
be less than 1750 mm.
 SCOUR
Scour occurs due to the passage of high discharge when
the velocity of stream exceeds the limiting velocity that
can be withstood by the particles of the bed material.
In the design of piers, abutments, training works etc.
for bridges across rivers, the assessment of amount of
scour adjacent to the structures needs a careful
consideration.
To understand the mechanism of scouring, the rivers can be
classified as:
(i) Streams with rigid boundaries
(ii) Quasi-alluvial streams
(iii) Alluvial Streams
 Types of Streams
Streams with rigid boundaries: Stream whose
bed and banks are both very rigid.
Quasi-Alluvial Streams: Banks are made up of
rigid rock or mixture of sand and clay , whereas
the bed material is composed of loose granular
material which can be picked up by current and
transported. They can never attain regime
condition.
Alluvial Streams: Stream flowing between
erodible banks and having erodible beds.
 Alluvial Streams
REGIME CONDITION

Regime condition or equilibrium condition may be

defined as a stable channel whose geometrical

dimensions (Like width, depth and bed slope) have

undergone modifications by silting and scouring as well

as have attained equilibrium state.

When the velocity of stream exceeds the
SCOUR DEPTH

limiting velocity which the erodable particle of

bed material can stand, the scour occurs.
The normal scour depth is the depth of water
in the middle of the stream when it is carrying
peak discharge.
This can be easily ascertained by actual
soundings at or near the site proposed for the
bridge immediately after a flood before the
scour holes have had time to silt up appreciably.
Due allowance should be made in the observed depth for
increase in scour resulting from :
(i)The designed discharge being greater than the
flood discharge during which the scour was observed.
(ii) The increase in velocity due to the obstruction
in flow caused by construction of the bridge.
The scour pattern at a bridge depends upon factors like
flood discharge, bed slope, direction of flow, bed
material, alignment of pier, pier geometry i.e. its shape
and size etc.
For a safe and sound design of a bridge it is
important to estimate the correct scour depth.
Where the practical method of determining a scour is
not possible, the following theoretical methods may be
used to different types of streams.
Scour Depth of Alluvial Streams
Alluvial streams bed and banks are composed of
loose granular material that has been deposited
by the stream and can be picked up and
transported again by the current during flood.
These streams tend to scour or silt up till it has
acquired such a cross-section and more
particularly such a slope that the resulting
velocity in ‘non-silting’ and ‘non-scouring’.
When such a stage occurs the stream becomes
stable and tends to maintain the acquired shape
and size of its cross-section and the acquired
slope. Such a stream is known as ‘regime channel.’
The alluvial stream when comes to regime it
acquires a regime wetted perimeter ‘P’, a regime
slope ‘S’ and a regime hydraulic mean depth ‘d’.
As a result of this it will have a fixed area of
cross-section ‘A’ and a fixed velocity ‘V’.
Lacey developed following equations for these
regime characteristic of an alluvial channel
carrying a discharge of ‘Q’ in cu.m. per sec.
1/ 3
P  4.8 Q Q
d  0.473 
f 
V = 0.44 Q1/6 1/3 5
0.0003 f 2
S
2.3Q 5 / 6 Q1 / 6
A
1/ 3
 SCOUR DEPTH FOR ALLUVIAL
CHANNELS
Case I: Linear waterway of the bridge is not less than
the regime width (Without Constriction)
In this case the normal scour depth is equal to the
Regime depth given by following the Lacey’s Regime
equation.
d = 0.473(Q/f)1/3
where
d = normal depth of scour below H.F.L. for regime conditions
in a stable channel (in meters).
Q = Designed discharge in m3 per sec.
 = Lacey’s silt factor of a representative sample of the bed
m
material.
= 1.76 here m is the mean diameter of the bed
material in millimeter.
Maximum scour depth dmax = 1.5d

For non-uniform scour

Maximum scour depth dmax = d(w/L)1.56

LARGER OF THE TWO ABOVE

VALUES IS CHOSEN AS
MAXIMUM SCOUR DEPTH
SCOUR DEPTH FOR ALLUVIAL CHANNELS

CASE II: When the linear waterway is less than

regime width (With Constriction)

d’= d(w/L) 0.61

Maximum scour depth dmax = 1.5d’

For non-uniform scour

Maximum scour depth dmax = d(w/L)1.56

LARGER OF THE TWO ABOVE VALUES IS
CHOSEN AS MAXIMUM SCOUR DEPTH
IRC Formula for calculating scour depth
Clause 110
Scour Depth for Quasi-Alluvial Streams

In Quasi Alluvial Stream which have got rigid

banks and erodable beds, the normal scour depth
when the stream width is large as compared to
depth can be determined as follows:
(i) When velocity is known
Q
d
W .V

Where, W = Surface width of the stream

V = Velocity of flow
(ii)  When slope is known

1. 0
Q W .d 5 / 3 S 1 / 2
n
Where, n = Manning’s coefficient
S = slope

(iii) When both velocity and slope are not known

d = (1.21 Q^0.63)/

This formula can be used for finding NSD for contracted waterway.
The maximum scour depth is not uniform even in straight reaches for
natural streams.
Table gives the maximum scour depth under different conditions of
flow.
 Maximum Scour Depth

S. Condition of flow Maximum Scour

No. depth, dm

1. In straight reach 1.27 d

2. At a moderate bend 1.50 d

3. At a severe bend 1.75 d

4. At right angled bend 2.00 d

5. At noses of piers 2.00 d

6. At upstream noses of 2.75 d

guide banks

For Bad Sites on Curves or where diagonal currents exist or where the
bridge is a multispan bridge, maximum scour depth = 2d
 Non-Uniform Scour
It has been observed that the maximum scour in case of
abutment occurs at U/s corner, while in the case of a
pier, it occurs at the D/s end.
Due allowance should be made in the calculated depth of
scour for increase in scour resulting from possible
concentration of flow through a portion of the
waterway.
In case of bridges causing contraction, the maximum
scour depth should neither be less than the values
indicated above nor the values obtained by the following
formula
dm = d (W/L)1.56
Here, dm = Maximum scour depth
 CHOICE OF BRIDGE TYPE
The choice of an appropriate type of bridge and
planning of its basic features usually constitutes a
crucial decision to be taken by the bridge
engineer.
The designer must consider all the preliminary
data made available to him from the detailed
investigation before arriving at a solution.
The entire completed structure should be the
most suitable to carry the desired traffic,
adequately strong to support the incident loads,
economical and aesthetically pleasing.
Factors influencing the choice of
the bridge type
Need to economize on the overall construction cost to the
community by combining the railway and highway
requirements may necessitate a road-cum-rail bridge in two
tiers across a very wide river, e.g., Godavari second bridge.
Large navigational clearances required may dictate the use of
particular types such as arches, cantilever bridges, and cable
stayed construction or suspension bridges, e.g., Howrah
Bridge.
Long and high approaches may be too costly at a plain coastal
area for a railway line with low volume of traffic and it may
be desirable to have a low level structure with a movable
(bascule, swing or lift) span to cater to navigation, e.g.,
Railway Bridge at Pamban near Rameswaram.
A high level structure with uninterrupted traffic as
on a National Highway and the need to reduce the
number of piers may necessitate a cantilever bridge
or a cable stayed bridge or a series of simply
supported trusses, e.g., Zuari Bridge, Ganga Bridge at
Patna.
Climatic and environmental conditions would preclude
the use of some types and require some others. For
example, the corrosive atmosphere has dictated the
use of cantilever construction with precast segments
for the pre-stressed concrete navigation span for
the road bridge at Pamban near Rameswaram and has
precluded the use of a cable stayed steel bridge.
Deck bridges are preferred to through bridges for
highway traffic because of the better view of the
surrounding scenery, e.g., Rainbow Bridge near
Niagara Falls.
Weak subsoil conditions may lead to the use of
simply supported spans instead of continuous
spans, e.g., bridges in areas subject to mining
subsidence.
Shortage of funds may necessitate the adoption
of a submersible bridge instead of a high level
bridge on a road with low volume of traffic, and
this in turn may result in reinforced concrete slab
decking, e.g., Hosmatta bridge on Bisley Ghat
Road in S. Kanara District.
Type of traffic may restrict the choice of bridge
type. For railway traffic, steel trusses or steel
cantilever types are preferable to suspension
bridges.
Topographic and soil conditions at a site may limit
the choice to a few general possibilities, e.g., a rocky
ravine area is ideal for an arch bridge.
The personal preferences or company specialisation
of the designer/construction firm may influence the
type of bridge finally adopted, especially when
competitive tenders are obtained for long bridges
with freedom to submit alternative designs.
A firm specialising in pre-stressed concrete
cantilever construction and another firm specializing
in cable stayed steel bridges will offer different
designs for the same bridge site, each design
emphasising the specialisation of the concerned
firm.
THANK YOU
FOR PATIENT
HEARING