PRINCIPLES OF BRIDGE DESIGN

HYDROLOGICAL AND HYDRAULIC

STUDIES
 OBJECTIVES

• Provide relevant hydrological and hydraulic

data

• Design Flood flows

• Channel Capacity Assessment
• Bridge sizing
• Hydraulic Design Parameters (Scour, etc)
 START-UP

• Field Inspection and reconnaissance

• Review of Available Literature
• Study of Physiographical Features
• General Topology
• Soils and Geology
• Climatic Features
• General Runoff Characteristics
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES

• Hydrological/Climatological Regime
– Rainfall
– Streamflow
– Climatological factors
• evaporation, temperature, humidity, wind speed
– Water Quality (sediment load)
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES

• Rainfall
– Sources of Data
• Department of Meteorological Services
– Data Type
• Daily, Monthly & Yearly mean
• Hourly totals (but limited)
• Intensity-duration-frequency relationships
IDF Relationships
IDF Relationships
 IDF Relationships
• Empirical Methods – Hassan Rainfall Intensity Conversion
Factors

24-hour Rainfall Intensity 1-hour Rainfall Intensity

Desired duration Conversion Factor Desired duration Conversion Factor
(hours) (minutes)

1 0.4 5 0.2
2 0.6 10 0.35
4 0.8 15 0.5
6 0.9 20 0.6
12 0.97 30 0.75
24 1.0 45 0.9
60 1.0
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES

• Streamflow
– Sources of Data
• Department of Water Affairs
• Water Utilities Corporation (WUC)
– Data Type
• Daily Water Levels
• Monthly and Annual minimum, mean and
maximum
• Discharge Rating Curves
Example of Discharge Rating Curve
Metsemotlhaba River at Thamaga

RANGE OF
PERIOD CEASE-TO-FLOW EQUATION APPLICABILITY
LEVEL, m

01 Oct 1986 – 14 Nov. 1992 1.00 Q = 123.649[H-1.0]6.438 H < 1.70m

1.00 Q = 23.31999[H-1.0]1.776 H > 1.70m

15 Nov 1992 - date 1.74 Q = 95.4020843[H-1.738999]2.5 H > 1.74m

Example of Discharge Rating Curve
Metsemotlhaba River at Thamaga
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Frequency Analysis of Recorded Data

• Synthetic Methods
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Frequency Analysis of Recorded Data

– Data Checks
– Data Extension and In-filling
– Analysis
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Frequency Analysis of Recorded Data

 HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

Validity of Streamflow Data - Outlier Test

High threshold - Y u = Y m + K n . sy
Low threshold - Y l = Y m - K n . sy
Where Yu is the upper threshold in log units, Y m and sy are the mean and standard deviation of sample data

and Kn the outlier test coefficient for a sample size of n.

Double Mass Curves

HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Frequency Distributions
– Normal
– Log-Normal
– Log-Pearson Type III
– Gumbel (Extreme Value I)
– Log-Gumbel (Extreme Value II)
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Plotting Positions
Relates probability, P, of an event in a given
series to the number of events, n
– Gringorten - P = (m - 0.44)/(n + 0.12)

– Weibull - P = m/(n+1)
Where ‘m’ is the ranking of the event
Comparison of Plotting Positions
Metsemotlhabe River at Thamaga
Peak Flood Rank Plotting Position

Weibull Gringorten

925 1 0.0476 0.0278

596 2 0.0952 0.0775
257 3 0.1429 0.1272
109 4 0.1905 0.1769
83 5 0.2381 0.2266
81 6 0.2857 0.2763
62 7 0.3333 0.3260
55 8 0.3810 0.3757
29 9 0.4286 0.4254
24 10 0.4762 0.4751
22 11 0.5238 0.5249
21 12 0.5714 0.5746
18 13 0.6190 0.6243
13 14 0.6667 0.6740
13 15 0.7143 0.7237
12 16 0.7619 0.7734
9 17 0.8095 0.8231
8 18 0.8571 0.8728
7 19 0.9048 0.9225
5 20 0.9524 0.9722
 Comparison of Selected Frequency Distributions for
Flood Estimation – Metsemotlhabe River at Thamaga

Estimated Flood
Probability of Return Period

Non-Exceedance (year) Log Pearson III Log-Normal Normal Gumbel Log Gumbel

0.01 1.01 3 3 -294 -266 3

0.5 2.00 29 29 86 80 28

0.8 5.00 110 108 296 285 101

0.9 10.00 251 294 455 421 239

0.96 25.00 669 517 545 594 705

0.98 50.00 1336 716 597 727 1573

0.99 100.00 2584 2627 805 851 3491

Flood Estimation – Okavango River at Mohembo

Summary of Annual Streamflow Statistics of the

Okavango River at Mukwe

Annual Mean Daily Streamflow Statistic (m 3/s)

Period
Min Mean Max

1949 – 1999 370 692 1470

2000 – 2013 494 825 1551
1949 - 2013 370 721 1551
Flood Estimation – Okavango River at Mohembo

Mass Curve of Mohembo and Mukwe Flows

Flood Estimation – Okavango River at Mohembo
Flood Estimation – Okavango River at Mohembo

Flood Estimates based on Log-Pearson Type III

Return Period Non-Exceedance Estimated Flood

(year) Probability (m3/s)

1000 0.999 2520

200 0.995 2035
100 0.99 1826
50 0.98 1616
25 0.96 1407
10 0.90 1131
5 0.80 922
2 0.50 646
1.0001 0.0001 437
Flood Estimation – Okavango River at Mohembo

Comparison of Flood Estimates with Recorded Flood

Return Period Recorded Flood Estimated Flood

(year) (m3/s) (m3/s)

50 1587 1616

25 1374 1407

10 1127 1131

5 993 922

2 673 646
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Synthetic Methods
– Ephemeral nature of rivers and streams
– Almost exclusive dependence on Rainfall
– Approaches
• varying degrees of accuracy & complexity
 HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation
• Synthetic Methods
Approaches have varying degrees of accuracy & complexity
– Level of parameterization
– Accuracy and reliability of input parameters
– Unit Hydrograph
– Rational Formula
– Craeger
– Mitchell
– Regional Maximum Flood (RMF)
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Synthetic Methods
– Unit Hydrograph
Simulates the runoff response of a given storm with time.
The design peak flood is then determined from the
flood hydrograph generated
– A number of Approaches/Methods
United States Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
method
 Unit Hydrograph
• Time to peak tp, and time base, tb

tp = 0.6 tc + dt/2
tb = (8/3) tp
where
tc is the time of concentration and,
dt is the time step adopted

• peak discharge ordinate, Umax,

Umax = 2A/tb
Where A is the size of catchment area
 Unit Hydrograph
• Time of concentration

tc (minutes) = 6.989 (Ln/s)0.6 Ieff-0.4

where

L = Overland flow length (m)

n = Manning’s roughness coefficient

s = slope of overland flow (m/m), and

Ieff = effective rainfall (mm/h)

 Unit Hydrograph

Design Storm
– Stacked Storm Profile
– Steady Storm Profile
 Unit Hydrograph

Design Storm Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)/Return Period (years)

Time 2 5 10 15 25 50
Stacked Steady Adopted Stacked Steady Adopted Stacked Steady Adopted Stacked Steady Adopted Stacked Steady Adopted Stacked Steady Adopted
mins

10 5.50 8.00 6.75 9.00 14.50 11.75 14.00 19.00 16.50 17.00 21.00 19.00 13.00 24.50 18.75 18.00 28.50 23.25

20 5.00 8.00 6.50 14.00 14.50 14.25 14.00 19.00 16.50 12.00 21.00 16.50 22.00 24.50 23.25 16.00 28.50 22.25

30 7.50 8.00 7.75 14.00 14.50 14.25 18.00 19.00 18.50 19.00 21.00 20.00 20.00 24.50 22.25 27.00 28.50 27.75

40 10.00 8.00 9.00 19.00 14.50 16.75 24.00 19.00 21.50 28.00 21.00 24.50 32.00 24.50 28.25 37.00 28.50 32.75

50 22.00 8.00 15.00 45.00 14.50 29.75 60.00 19.00 39.50 68.00 21.00 44.50 76.00 24.50 50.25 88.00 28.50 58.25

60 8.50 8.00 8.25 14.00 14.50 14.25 18.00 19.00 18.50 21.00 21.00 21.00 24.00 24.50 24.25 28.00 28.50 28.25

70 7.00 8.00 7.50 8.00 14.50 11.25 10.00 19.00 14.50 14.00 21.00 17.50 18.00 24.50 21.25 20.00 28.50 24.25

80 6.50 8.00 7.25 5.00 14.50 9.75 10.00 19.00 14.50 13.00 21.00 17.00 11.00 24.50 17.75 22.00 28.50 25.25

90 4.50 8.00 6.25 7.00 14.50 10.75 12.00 19.00 15.50 6.00 21.00 13.50 18.00 24.50 21.25 14.00 28.50 21.25

100 3.50 8.00 5.75 10.00 14.50 12.25 10.00 19.00 14.50 12.00 21.00 16.50 11.00 24.50 17.75 15.00 28.50 21.75
 Unit Hydrograph

Design Storm
 Unit Hydrograph
Area Reduction Factor
– Orstom
ARF
=
1 – (9 log n – 0.042 P + 152) x 0.001 log A,

where
F = area reduction factor
n = recurrence interval of storm, in years
P = average annual total rainfall, in mm
A = size of catchment area, km2

– BRDM
 Unit Hydrograph
Runoff
Pavements
Coefficients and Curve Numbers
Asphaltic and concrete 0.70 - 0.95
Brick 0.70 - 0.85
Gravel and cobblestone 0.25 - 0.60
Sand and gravel sidewalks and roads 0.15 - 0.30
Tarred streets and sidewalks
Slope 0 - 3% 0.85
3 - 6% 0.90
>6% 0.95
Lateral streets 0 - 5% 0.35
>5% 0.50
Roofs
Steep roofs 0.75 - 0.95
metal and slate 0.95
tiles and roofing felt 0.90
Flat roofs 0.50 - 0.75

Lawns

Sandy soil:
Flat < 2% 0.05 - 0.10
Average 2 - 7% 0.10 - 0.15
Steep > 7% 0.15 - 0.20

Heavy soil:
Flat < 2% 0.13 - 0.17
Average 2 - 7% 0.18 - 0.22
Steep > 7% 0.25 - 0.35
 Unit Hydrograph

Runoff Coefficients and Curve Numbers

• Representative coefficient
• Weighted coefficient
– Impervious areas
– Pervious areas
 Unit Hydrograph

Design Storm Duration

• Not to be confused with Time of Concentration

• The latter is determined from the effective rainfall
for each time step
 Unit Hydrograph

MIDUSS
• Menu driven
• Overland flows generated for individual sub-
catchments
• Permits hydrographs to be examined, stored,
accumulated or routed
• Allows simulation of various drainage elements
including ponds and diversion structures
Unit Hydrograph
HYDROLOGICAL STUDIES
Streamflow Estimation

• Synthetic Methods
– Empirical Formulae
These yield an instantaneous peak flow computed as a
function of runoff coefficient, total catchment area and
rainfall intensity
The most common is the Rational Formula
 Rational Formula
• In its simplest form

Qn
=
KCInA

where
Qn
=
peak discharge (m 3/sec) at a return period of n years
In
=
rainfall intensity (mm/hr) for duration equal to time of
concentration, tc, and for a return period of n years
n
=
return period (years)
A
=
contributory catchment area (km 2)
K
=
a factor for unit conversion (= 0.278, for units of the other
parameters stated)
C
=
runoff coefficient which is a function of land use and
degree of development
 Rational Formula

For design purposes, the probabilistic version of the rational

method formula is used

Qpeak[Y] = F . C[Y] . I (tc, [Y]) . A

where C as well as Qpeak and I are each labelled with an average recurrence interval (ARI) of Y
years. In this form, the rational formula is used to convert a rainfall with ARI of Y years into a peak
discharge with the same ARI.
 Rational Formula

Time of Concentration

– Kirpich
– Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
– Bransby-Williams
– Hathaway
– Flood Studies Report (FSR)
 Rational Formula
Time of Concentration, tc

– Kirpich and SCS yield shorter t c and most favoured for urban catchments
– SCS more conservative than the Kirpich

Kirpich Formula
tc = 3.97 L 0.77 S-0.385

tc = 0.00025 (L/S0.5)0.8
where
tc

= time of concentration, minutes;

L

= length of channel from most distant point on the divide to outlet, km;
S

= average channel slope, m/m;

Rational Formula
ESTIMATION OF RUNOFF QUANTITIES ( BY RATIONAL FORMULA)
TAUNG DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT RETURN PERIOD: 15 YEARS

O A SD O A SD O A SD O A SD O A SD PEAK PEAK TO TAL C UMM PEAK

C TB RC G AREA AREA O VERLAND O VERLAND O VERLAND O VERLAND ToC ToC AVERAGE AVERAGE INTENSITY ARF ARF DISC HARGE DISC HARGE DISC HARGE DISC HARGE
NO DE NO DE LENGTH LENGTH SLO PE SLO PE (KIRPIC H) (KIRPIC H) C C Rodie r Rodie r RP ARF ARF IDF PARAMETERS
(km2) (km2) (km) (km) (m/m) (m/m) (mins) (mins) (mm/hr) L/C R/C m3/s m3/s m3/s m3/s L/C R/C a b c

1 2 0.1750 0.0098 0.5 0.0060 0.0100 0.03 13.654 0.275 0.800 0.85 80.00 1 1 3.11 0.18 3.30 15 1.098 1.171 2389.1 28.64 0.784
3 4 0.0975 0.0081 0.15 0.0125 0.0100 0.03 5.212 0.495 0.800 0.85 80.00 1 1 1.73 0.15 1.89 5.19 15 1.270 1.421 2389.1 28.64 0.784
2 5 0.0119 0.0027 0.05 0.0060 0.0250 0.02 1.500 0.301 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.20 0.07 0.27 15 1.332 1.376 2389.1 28.64 0.784
4 5 0.0038 0.0005 0.05 0.0100 0.0250 0.02 1.500 0.453 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.09 15 1.426 1.284 2389.1 28.64 0.784
Naledi 5.27 2389.1 28.64 0.784
1 2 0.0423 0.0000 0.055 0.0125 0.0100 0.03 2.336 0.495 0.850 0.85 80.00 1 1 0.80 0.00 0.80 15 1.177 1.171 2389.1 28.64 0.784
3 2 0.0004 0.0004 0.01 0.0050 0.0100 0.03 0.597 0.238 0.850 0.85 80.00 1 1 0.01 0.01 0.02 5.28 15 1.438 1.253 2389.1 28.64 0.784
2 4 0.0300 0.0008 0.4 0.0050 0.0100 0.03 11.422 0.238 0.850 0.85 80.00 1 1 0.57 0.01 0.58 1.40 15 1.403 1.360 2389.1 28.64 0.784
CULVERT 2389.1 28.64 0.784
9 10 0.0012 0.0040 0.02 0.217 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 15 1.375 1.151 2389.1 28.64 0.784
10 11 0.0046 0.0005 0.05 0.0100 0.0300 0.02 1.395 0.508 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.08 0.01 0.09 15 1.427 1.438 2389.1 28.64 0.784
9 11 0.0107 0.0039 0.05 0.0100 0.0250 0.02 1.500 0.453 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.18 0.11 0.29 0.15 15 1.311 1.135 2389.1 28.64 0.784
CULVERT 2389.1 28.64 0.784
12 13 0.0034 0.0100 0.02 0.453 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 15 1.319 1.163 2389.1 28.64 0.784
12 14 0.0009 0.0100 0.02 0.453 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.00 0.02 0.02 15 1.396 1.405 2389.1 28.64 0.784
15 16 0.0019 0.0100 0.02 0.453 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.17 15 1.350 1.414 2389.1 28.64 0.784
15 17 0.007975 0.0024 0.07 0.0060 0.0200 0.02 2.147 0.301 0.500 0.8 0.17
14 18 0.008006 0.0009 0.07 0.0060 0.0250 0.02 1.963 0.301 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.14 0.02 0.16 0.02 15 1.394 1.163 2389.1 28.64 0.784
18 19 0.013125 0.0006 0.07 0.0060 0.0200 0.02 2.147 0.301 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.22 0.02 0.24 15 1.414 1.405 2389.1 28.64 0.784
CULVERT
20 21 0.0135 0.0009 0.2 0.0060 0.0250 0.02 4.547 0.301 0.500 0.8 121.92 1 1 0.23 0.03 0.25 0.23 15 1.391 1.414 2389.1 28.64 0.784
0.23
 RUN-OFF CALCULATION

Project : SHASHE ACCESS ROADS MAP : 464 mm/a

Catchment # : 1 Rainfall : Summer

Data input
Size of catchment 0.25 km2
Longest flow path 0.8 km
Average slope 0.017 m/m

Time for concentration

Overland flow Tc 0.58 h Values for r
Length of flow path 0.60 km Open ground 0.10
Paved area 0.02
Channel flow Tc 0.27 h Thin grass 0.30
Length of flow path 0.20 km Med grass 0.40
Thick bush 0.50
Calculated Tc 0.50 h Value used 0.15

Intensity calculation Return period 5 10 20 25

Point rainfall (mm) to be read off the graph 33 41 49 53
Intensity I (mm/h) 66 82 97 105

MAP
C-Value 0 - 300 300-600 >600 Chosen C
x<3% 0.01 0.02 0.03
Slope 3<x<10% 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.02
10<x<30% 0.09 0.12 0.16
x>30% 0.18 0.22 0.26
Very Perm 0.02 0.03 0.04
Soil Permeability Perm 0.04 0.06 0.08
Semi Perm 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.12
Not Perm 0.15 0.21 0.26
Dense Forest 0.02 0.03 0.04
Vegetation Thin Forest 0.04 0.07 0.11
Grassland 0.13 0.17 0.21 0.17
Bare rock 0.24 0.26 0.28 % Rural
C 0.31 0.20
% Urban
For Urban areas use the following C-value ResidentialS ingle 0.3 - 0.5 0.4 0.80
Apartment0.5 - 0.7
Industrial Light 0.5 - 0.8
Heavy 0.6 - 0.9
Commercial Dtown 0.7 - 0.95
Nb'hood 0.5 - 0.7

Insert C-Value to be used 0.382

CALCULATED RUN_OFF Return period 5 10 20 25

Calculated flow m3/s 1.7 2.2 2.6 2.8
 ALTERNATIVE FLOOD ESTIMATION
METHODS

EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE FLOOD ESTIMATION METHODS

Method of SIZE Basin Length Basin Width Basin Relief ESTIMATED FLOOD, (m3/s)
2
Flood Estimation km km km m 5 20 50

Unit Hydrograph 7 95 318

Rational Formula 648 996 1240

728 49 15 108
Creager 454 607 723

Mitchell 199 524 795

HYDRAULIC STUDIES
 HYDRAULIC STUDIES

Primary Considerations

– Design Return Period

– Design Flood
– Flood Velocity
– Afflux
– Freeboard
– Scour
 HYDRAULIC STUDIES

Primary Considerations

– Design Return Period

• Guided largely by the BRDM
• Class of approach road
• Size of contributory catchment area
 HYDRAULIC STUDIES

Primary Considerations

– Design Flood
• Design Return Period
• Reliability of estimated design flood
– Size and degree of accuracy of input parameters
– Method of estimation adopted
HYDRAULIC STUDIES
 HYDRAULIC STUDIES
Primary Considerations
– Afflux
Relates to rise in flow depth at the bridge due to the
constriction of flow
• Regime of approach velocity
• Degree of constriction at the bridge
• Level of approach road embankment
• Risk of flooding of adjoining properties
• Avoid creating flood plain/flood attenuation pond
 HYDRAULIC STUDIES

Primary Considerations

– Freeboard
Large debris, mainly tree trunks, is often carried in flood flows and
adequate freeboard will be necessary to ensure free passage of
such floating objects through the bridge opening
• Guided largely by the BRDM
• Class of approach road
• Size of contributory catchment area
 Bridge Waterway Sizing
Study of Existing River Channel
 ICOCHET (PTY) LTD
urveyors . gpr surveyors . gis consultants
P.O. BOX 404210, Gaborone, Botswana
Tel: + 267 393 7597 Fax: + 267 393 9619
E-Mail: ricochet@mega.bw
Oriental Plaza, Unit 10, Plot 20604
Ramakukane Road, Broadhurst Estate Park
 NATURAL HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF
RIVER CHANNEL
Estimation of Approach Channe l Flow Parame te rs
Mosope Rive r at Masitama

Return Period Channel Drain Type Lining Bed Size Water Side Side X-sect Wetted Manning's
Reach/Section slope Dia, depth slope slope (channel) Perimeter n
Width or Left Right
From To Bed width 1 to z 1 to z
2
m/m m m m m

50-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 2.536 6.440 6.230 66.102 42.529 0.028
0.010 0.000 2.625 10.240 11.320 74.281 56.839 0.028
0.010 10.000 2.352 8.340 8.780 70.873 50.540 0.028

25-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 1.773 6.440 6.230 37.644 32.742 0.028
0.010 0.000 1.971 10.240 11.320 41.879 42.678 0.028
0.010 10.000 1.661 8.340 8.780 40.226 38.630 0.028

20-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 1.430 6.440 6.230 27.254 28.343 0.028
0.010 0.000 1.669 10.240 11.320 30.028 36.139 0.028
0.010 10.000 1.348 8.340 8.780 29.034 33.235 0.028

15-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 1.108 6.440 6.230 18.857 24.212 0.028
0.010 0.000 1.379 10.240 11.320 20.500 29.859 0.028
0.010 10.000 1.053 8.340 8.780 20.021 28.150 0.028

10-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 0.831 6.440 6.230 12.685 20.659 0.028
0.010 0.000 1.120 10.240 11.320 13.522 24.251 0.028
0.010 10.000 0.797 8.340 8.780 13.407 23.737 0.028

5-year 0+000 0+394 Trapezoidal Natural 0.010 10.000 0.340 6.440 6.230 4.132 14.361 0.028
0.010 0.000 0.605 10.240 11.320 3.946 13.100 0.028
0.010 10.000 0.332 8.340 8.780 4.264 15.723 0.028
 NATURAL HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF RIVER
CHANNEL – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
SHEKWE RIVER

Return Period Channel Drain Type Lining Bed Size Water Side Side X-sect Wetted Manning's Velocity Carrying

Reach/Section slope Dia, depth slope slope (channel) Perimeter n Capacity

Width or Left Right
From To Bed width 1 to z 1 to z

m/m m m m2 m m/s m3/s

50-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.002 5.590 0.250 7.680 4.280 1.771 8.625 0.060 0.277 0.490
0.002 8.580 1.000 3.053 7.602 13.908 19.460 0.060 0.638 8.876
0.002 19.235 1.920 12.221 8.213 74.595 58.663 0.060 0.939 70.038
0.002 5.590 3.170 90.274 58.933 0.060 1.064 96.020

25-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.002 5.590 0.250 7.680 4.280 1.771 8.625 0.040 0.415 0.735
0.002 8.580 1.000 3.053 7.602 13.908 19.460 0.040 0.957 13.314
0.002 19.235 1.473 12.221 8.213 50.501 49.484 0.040 1.215 61.380
0.002 5.590 2.723 66.180 49.754 0.040 1.451 96.060

20-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.002 5.590 0.250 7.680 4.280 1.771 8.625 0.035 0.474 0.840
0.002 8.580 1.000 3.053 7.602 13.908 19.460 0.035 1.094 15.216
0.002 19.235 1.000 12.221 8.213 29.452 39.771 0.035 1.120 33.000
0.002 5.590 2.250 45.131 40.041 0.035 1.485 67.002

15-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.002 5.590 0.250 7.680 4.280 1.771 8.625 0.028 0.593 1.050
0.002 8.580 1.000 3.053 7.602 13.908 19.460 0.028 1.368 19.020
0.002 19.235 1.124 12.221 8.213 34.528 42.317 0.028 1.495 51.605
0.002 5.590 2.374 50.207 42.587 0.028 1.912 96.020

10-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.002 5.590 0.250 7.680 4.280 1.771 8.625 0.022 0.755 1.337
0.002 8.580 1.000 3.053 7.602 13.908 19.460 0.022 1.741 24.207
0.002 19.235 0.909 12.221 8.213 25.927 37.902 0.022 1.690 43.823
0.002 5.590 2.159 41.605 38.172 0.022 2.309 96.085

5-year 0+000 0+180 Trapezoidal Natural 0.007 9.000 0.600 1.250 14.500 8.235 18.681 0.028 1.726 14.214
0.007 18.450 0.570 1.250 1.320 10.934 20.306 0.028 1.974 21.579
0.007 12.000 1.000 1.250 1.320 13.285 15.257 0.028 2.723 36.181
 SIZING OF BRIDGE WATERWAY

Afflux, Af, is given by

Where V = approach velocity

w = approach top water surface
b = width of bridge waterway
g = acceleration due to gravity (9.81m/s2)
 BRIDGE SIZING

Table 6.7.1: Recommended Waterway and Bridge Deck Level

River Waterway No of Spans Depth Afflux Freeboard Total Depth River Bridge Min. Bridge Finished Flood
Crossing Mean Width of Flow 25-Year 25-Year 25-Year Invert Soffit Level Deck Level Road Level Velocity
m m m m m amsl m amsl m amsl m amsl

Shweke 40 2.00 1.97 0.327 0.33 2.63 977.69 980.32 981.32 982.02 1.48

Maeroro 60 3.00 2.43 0.231 0.33 2.99 979.08 982.07 983.07 983.54 1.34

Lonye 20 1.00 1.67 0.419 0.33 2.42 980.17 982.59 983.59 984.41 1.72

Mooke 40 2.00 1.88 0.246 0.33 2.46 978.17 980.63 981.63 983.18 1.43

Table 6.7.2: Estimated Waterway and Bridge Deck Level for 50-year Flood

River Waterway No of Spans Depth Afflux Freeboard Total Depth River Bridge Min. Bridge Finished Flood
Crossing Mean Width of Flow 50-Year 50-Year 50-Year Invert Soffit Level Deck Level Road Level Velocity
m m m m m amsl m amsl m amsl m amsl

Shweke 40 2.00 2.582 0.887 0.45 3.92 977.69 981.61 982.61 982.02 1.90

Maeroro 60 3.00 3.198 0.751 0.45 4.40 979.08 983.48 984.48 983.54 1.64

Lonye 20 1.00 2.047 0.848 0.45 3.35 980.17 983.52 984.52 984.41 2.13

Mooke 40 2.00 2.546 0.799 0.45 3.80 978.17 981.97 982.97 983.18 1.85
BRIDGE SIZING – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Estimated Flood Levels for Selected River Channel Roughness Coefficients

Flood Estimated Flood Level (m amsl) for Selected Manning’s Roughness Coefficient (n)
Return Period

n=0.022 n=0.028 n=0.035 n=0.040 n=0.060

Shekwe 979.85 980.06 980.28 980.41 980.86

Maeroro 981.18 981.42 981.67 981.83 982.42

Lonye 981.58 981.75 981.92 982.03 982.42

Mooke 979.89 980.07 980.26 980.38 980.78

 HYDRAULIC STUDIES

Primary Considerations
– Scour
Two main forms of scour are considered:

1.general scour induced by the reduction of the waterway at

the bridge across the entire cross-section

2.local scour at the bridge piers and abutments

 SCOUR

• General scour is caused by reduction from the

unrestricted cross-sectional area of flow at the
bridge
• Resulting in imbalance between Water Discharge
and Sediment Transport
• Lead to degradation of the riverbed at the
contracted section
 SCOUR

• Local scour occurs around piers (pier scour) and at

the abutments (abutment scour).
• Constitute the cardinal factors critical to the
stability and safety of the bridge.
 ANALYSIS OF SCOUR

• Approach flow
• Properties of the bed material
• Characteristics of the obstructions (piers and
abutments)
• Geometry of the river channel
• Time
 ANCILLARY SCOUR
PROTECTION WORKS

• River Training
• Riprap protection of riverbed
• Gabion protection of piers and abutments
• Adequate depth of pier foundation
Thank You for Your Kind Attention