Design Review Report For Bridges in Northern Uganda

May 2011
C CO ON NS SU UL LT TA AN NC CY Y S SE ER RV VI IC CE ES S
f fo or r
C
C
O
O
N
N
S
S
T
T
R
R
U
U
C
C
T
T
I
I
O
O
N
N
O
O
F
F
B
B
R
R
I
I
D
D
G
G
E
E
S
S

I
I
N
N
N
N
O
O
R
R
T
T
H
H
W
W
E
E
S
S
T
T
U
U
G
G
A
A
N
N
D
D
A
A

D
DDE
EES
SSI
IIG
GGN
NN R
RRE
EEV
VVI
IIE
EEW
WW R
RRE
EEP
PPO
OOR
RRT
TT
(
((F
FFI
IIN
NNA
AAL
LL)
))

Ethiopia
Office
(Head Office)
P.O.Box 62668; Tel. 0114391065 /0114391499 /0114 391733 /0114393004; Fax 0114391230 /0114391617
E-mail: saba.eng@ethionet.et Web-site: www.saba-engineering.com
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Uganda
Office
P. O. Box 21321, Plot No. 1376, Block No. 244, Muyenga Diplomat Zone
Tel. +25641267547; Fax. +25641268352; Mobile +256772712178, Email: saba-
uganda@infocom.co.ug
Kampala, Uganda

T
TTH
HHE
EE R
RRE
EEP
PPU
UUB
BBL
LLI
IIC
CC O
OOF
FF U
UUG
GGA
AAN
NND
DDA
AA
U
UUg
gga
aan
nnd
dda
aa N
NNa
aat
tti
iio
oon
nna
aal
ll R
RRo
ooa
aad
dds
ss A
AAu
uut
tth
hho
oor
rri
iit
tty
yy

Construction of Bridges in North West Uganda Design Review Report
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority i
SABA Engineering P.L.C

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................... v
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 General ......................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Scope of the Design Review ........................................................................ 1-2
1.3 Purpose and Content of the Report ............................................................... 1-3
1.4 Approach of Design Review ........................................................................ 1-3
2 FIELD INVESTIGATION BY THE DESIGN REVIEW CONSULTANT ....... 2-1
2.1 Project Background ...................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Field Visit ..................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Factual Findings ........................................................................................... 2-1
2.4 Recommendation .......................................................................................... 2-2
2.4.1 Supervision Team ............................................................................ 2-2
2.4.2 Surveying Work ............................................................................... 2-2
3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF BRIDGE SITES AND
CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SOURCES ........................................................ 3-1
3.1 General ......................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Determination of Allowable Bearing Pressure for Bridge Foundations ....... 3-1
3.3 Foundation Recommendation ....................................................................... 3-2
3.4 Investigation of Construction Material Sources ........................................... 3-7
3.4.1 General ............................................................................................ 3-7
3.4.2 Potential Quarry Stone Sources ...................................................... 3-7
3.4.3 Potential Gravel (Muram) Sources ............................................... 3-17
3.4.4 Potential Sand Sources .................................................................. 3-22
4 HYDROLOGICAL and HYDRAULIC STUDY REVIEW ................................ 4-1
4.1 Background .................................................................................................. 4-1
4.2 Objective ...................................................................................................... 4-1
4.3 Hydrology ..................................................................................................... 4-2
4.4 Data Collection ............................................................................................. 4-2
4.4.1 DEM and Aerial Photographs ......................................................... 4-2
4.5 Drainage Characteristics, Geology and Topography .................................... 4-2
4.6 Climate ......................................................................................................... 4-5
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority ii
4.7 Peak Discharge Estimation ........................................................................... 4-5
4.7.1 Rational Method .............................................................................. 4-5
4.7.2 SCS Method ..................................................................................... 4-6
4.7.3 Regression Equation ........................................................................ 4-7
4.7.4 Historic data Analysis ..................................................................... 4-7
4.7.5 TRRL Flood Model ......................................................................... 4-7
4.8 Hydrology Review Summery ..................................................................... 4-49
4.9 Hydraulics .................................................................................................. 4-49
4.10 HEC Ras 4.0 Bridge Hydraulic Analysis ................................................... 4-50
4.11 HY-8.7 Culvert Hydraulic Analysis ........................................................... 4-62
4.12 Culvert Hydraulic Design Review Output ................................................. 4-70
4.13 Hydraulic Design Review .......................................................................... 4-70
4.14 Existing Structures Physical Assessment ................................................... 4-71
4.15 Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................ 4-76
5 STRUCTURAL DESIGN REVIEW ...................................................................... 5-1
5.1 General ......................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Scope ............................................................................................................ 5-1
5.3 Structural System ......................................................................................... 5-1
5.4 Design Codes ................................................................................................ 5-2
5.5 Materials Properties ...................................................................................... 5-3
5.5.1 Concrete Grade: .............................................................................. 5-3
5.5.2 Reinforcement Steel ......................................................................... 5-3
5.5.3 Structural steel grade: ..................................................................... 5-3
5.6 Design Limit States ...................................................................................... 5-3
5.6.1 Strength Limit State ......................................................................... 5-3
5.6.2 Serviceability Limit State ................................................................ 5-4
5.7 Minimum Clear Cover to Reinforcement ..................................................... 5-4
5.8 Detailed Design Review of Bridges ............................................................. 5-4
5.8.1 Superstructure ................................................................................. 5-4
5.8.2 Substructure .................................................................................... 5-4
5.8.3 Review Procedure ........................................................................... 5-5
5.9 Geometric Design Review of Approach Road ............................................. 5-6
5.10 Conclusion and Recommendation ................................................................ 5-7
5.10.1 Structural Analysis .......................................................................... 5-7
5.10.2 Foundation ...................................................................................... 5-7
6 KIA-KIA BRIDGE REVIEW ................................................................................ 6-1
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority iii
6.1 Background .................................................................................................. 6-1
6.2 Field Investigation ........................................................................................ 6-2
6.2.1 General ............................................................................................ 6-2
6.2.2 Field Visit ........................................................................................ 6-2
6.2.3 Surveying Work .............................................................................. 6-3
6.2.4 Geotechnical Investigations ............................................................ 6-5
6.2.5 Investigation of Construction Material Sources .............................. 6-5
6.2.6 Physical Hydrological Investigation ............................................... 6-7
6.3 Preliminary Design ....................................................................................... 6-8
6.3.1 General ............................................................................................ 6-8
6.3.2 Hydrological and Hydraulic Analysis ............................................. 6-8
6.3.3 Geometric Design .......................................................................... 6-13
6.3.4 Structures ....................................................................................... 6-13
6.4 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................... 6-14
7 NYAGAK-3 Culvert Hydraulic Design Adjustment ............................................ 7-1
8 TENDER DOCUMENT REVIEW ........................................................................ 8-1
8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 8-1
8.2 Section I: Invitation to Bid ........................................................................... 8-2
8.3 Section II: Instructions to Bidders ................................................................ 8-2
8.3.1 Contents of Bid Documents ............................................................. 8-2
8.3.2 Documents Comprising the Bid ....................................................... 8-2
8.4 Section III: Bidding Data ............................................................................. 8-3
8.5 Section IV: Part 1: General Conditions of Contract ..................................... 8-3
8.6 Section V: Part 2: Conditions of Particular Application .............................. 8-3
8.6.1 Contract Documents ........................................................................ 8-3
8.6.2 Settlement of Disputes ..................................................................... 8-4
8.6.3 Changes in Cost and Legislation..................................................... 8-4
8.7 Section VI: Technical Specifications ........................................................... 8-7
8.7.1 General Specifications .................................................................... 8-7
8.7.2 Special Provisions for the Standard Technical Specifications ........ 8-7
8.7.3 New Work Items .............................................................................. 8-7
8.8 Section VII: Forms of Bid, Appendix to Bid and Bid Security .................. 8-11
8.8.1 Appendix to Form of Tender ......................................................... 8-11
8.8.2 Tender Security ............................................................................. 8-25
8.9 Section VIII: Bill of Quantities .................................................................. 8-26
8.9.1 BOQ Specific Remark .................................................................... 8-26
8.9.2 New Updated BOQ ........................................................................ 8-26
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority iv
8.10 Section IX: Form of Agreement, Forms of Performance Security, Bank
Guarantee for Advance Payment & Letter of Acceptance ......................... 8-26
8.10.1 Form of Agreement ........................................................................ 8-26
8.10.2 Letter of Acceptance ...................................................................... 8-27
8.11 Section X: Drawings .................................................................................. 8-28
8.12 Section XI: Dispute Resolutions Procedure ............................................... 8-28
9 CHANGES MADE ON THE TENDER DOCUMENT UNDER THE NEW
SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................. 9-1

LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2-1: Location of 21 Bridges ............................................................................ 2-3
Figure 4-1: Areas for Calculation of 2 and 7 Day Antecedent Rainfall ................. 4-11
Figure 4-2: Soil zones .............................................................................................. 4-12
Figure 4-3: Rainfall Time (T
P
) Zones ...................................................................... 4-16
Figure 4-4: 2yr 24hrs point storm rainfall ................................................................ 4-18
Figure 4-5: 10 year to 2 year ratio ........................................................................... 4-19
Figure 4-6: Flood Factor .......................................................................................... 4-20
Figure 4-7: Oluffe Bridge catchment area drainage description .............................. 4-22
Figure4-8: Oluffebridge catchment area floworinetation ........................................ 4-23
Figure 4-9: Ore culvert watershed area drainage pattern ......................................... 4-26
Figure 4-10: Ore culvert drainage orientation with elevation labeling .................... 4-27
Figure 4-11 Enve Bridge drainage pattern ............................................................... 4-31
Figure 4-12: Enve bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling .................. 4-32
Figure 4-13: Goli bridge drainage pattern ............................................................... 4-35
Figure 4-14: Goli bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling .................... 4-36
Figure4-15: Lebijo Culvert e drainage ..................................................................... 4-40
Figure 4-16: Lebijo Culvert drainage orientation with elevation labeling .............. 4-41
Figure 4-17: Enyau-3Bridge drainage pattern ......................................................... 4-46
Figure 4-18: Enyau-3 bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling ............. 4-47
Figure 4-19: Oluffe proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view.................... 4-51
Figure 4-20: Oluffe proposed bridge with 25 years design flood ............................ 4-52
Figure 4-21: Enve proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view ...................... 4-54
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority v
Figure 4-22: Enve proposed bridge with 25 years design flood .............................. 4-55
Figure 4-23: Goli proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view ....................... 4-57
Figure 4-24: Goli proposed bridge with 25 years design flood ............................... 4-58
Figure 4-25: Enyau-3 proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view ................ 4-60
Figure 4-26: Enyau-3 proposed bridge with 25 years design flood ......................... 4-61
Figure 4-27: Ore existing culvert cross sectional view ............................................ 4-64
Figure 4-28: Ore new culvert cross sectional view .................................................. 4-66
Figure 4-29: Lebijo existing culvert cross sectional view ....................................... 4-68
Figure 4-30: Lebijo culvert (with additional culvert) cross sectional view. ............ 4-70
Figure 6-1: Kia-Kia Stream catchment and cross section over view ......................... 6-8
Figure 6-2: kia kia flood plain cross section along with water surface and proposed
structures position ................................................................................. 6-13

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table 2-1: List of GPS Data for Bridges ................................................................... 2-4
Table 3-1: Presumptive Allowable Pressures for Different Foundation Conditions . 3-2
Table 3-2: Review of Bridge Site Foundation Investigation and Presumptive
Allowable Pressures ............................................................................... 3-4
Table 3-3: Review of Bridge Site Foundation Investigation and Presumptive
Allowable Pressures as per the new scope of work
(Lot 1,Lot 2 &Lot 3) ............................................................................... 3-6
Table 3-4: Summary of Test Results on Rock Sources ............................................. 3-7
Table 3-5: Summary of Laboratory test results of the potential gravel sources ...... 3-22
Table 3-6: Summary of Laboratory test results of the potential Sand sources ........ 3-28
Table 4-1: Bridge catchment area physiographic description
(As per the new scope) ........................................................................... 4-4
Table 4-2: Antecedent Moisture Conditions for Storms of Greater than 50mm ..... 4-10
Table 4-3: Standard contributing area coefficients (Cs) .......................................... 4-13
Table 4-4: Catchment Wetness Factor (C
W
) ........................................................... 4-14
Table 4-5: Land Use Factor (C
L
) ............................................................................ 4-14
Table 4-6: Catchment lag Times ............................................................................. 4-15
Table 4-7: Rainfall time (T
p
) for East African 10 year storms ............................... 4-17
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority vi
Table 4-8: Oluffe Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-24
Table 4-9: Ore Culvert Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-28
Table 4-10:Enve Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-33
Table 4-11:Goli Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-37
Table 4-12: Lebijo Culvert Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-42
Table 4-13:Enyau-3 bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ....................................................................................... 4-48
Table 4-14: Ore existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis ............ 4-63
Table 4-15: Ore existing culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario one) ........ 4-63
Table 4-16: Ore existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis ............ 4-65
Table 4-17: Ore new culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario two) ............. 4-65
Table 4-18: Lebijo existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis ....... 4-67
Table 4-19: Lebijo Existing culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario one) ... 4-67
Table 4-20: Lebijo culvert (additional culvert) HY-8.7 input data .......................... 4-69
Table 4-21: Lebijo culvert (with additional culvert) hydraulic analysis summery
(scenario two) ....................................................................................... 4-69
Table 4-22: bridge physical survey summery for the 6 bridges under the new
scope of services. .................................................................................. 4-72
Table 4-23: Lot 1 bridge physical survey summery ............................................... 4-73
Table 5-1: List of Sample Bridges ............................................................................. 5-1
Table 5-2: Slope ratio table (Vertical to Horizontal ratio) ......................................... 5-6
Table 6-1:Kia-Kia Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination ......................................................................................... 6-9
Table 8-1: Bill 1000 General .................................................................................. 8-8
Table 8-2: Bill 3000 Earth Works and Pavement Layers of Gravel or
Crushed Stone ......................................................................................... 8-9
Table 8-3: Bill 5000 Ancillary Road Works ........................................................... 8-9
Table 8-4: Bill 6000 Structures ............................................................................... 8-9
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Uganda National Roads Authority vii
Table 8-5: Bill No 8: Schedule of Day Works ......................................................... 8-10
Table 8-6: Summary of currencies of the Bid .......................................................... 8-12
Table 8-7: Interest Rates .......................................................................................... 8-12
Table 8-8: Weightings for use with Local Currency (UGSH) ................................. 8-13
Table 8-9: Weightings for use with Foreign Currency 1: ........................................ 8-13
Table 8-10: Weightings for use with Foreign Currency 2: ...................................... 8-14
Table 8-11: Weightings for use with Foreign Currency 3: ...................................... 8-15
Table 8-12: Summary of Payment Currencies ......................................................... 8-16
Table 8-13: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 3: Earth Works &
Pavement layers .................................................................................... 8-17
Table 8-14: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 2 & 6 Drainage & Structures ...... 8-17
Table 8-15: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 5 Ancillary Works ....................... 8-18
Table 8-16: Local Currency ..................................................................................... 8-19
Table 8-17: Foreign Currency 1 (FC1)(a) ................................................................ 8-19
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ministry of Works and Transport 1-1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General

Recognizing the vital role the road network plays in enabling national objectives to be
achieved, the Government of Uganda, represented by the Ministry of Works and
Transport (MoWT) recently Uganda National Roads Authority took the
responsibility, is undertaking improvements to the countrys road network to a
standard that can cope with the present and anticipated traffic growth.

With financial support of the Arab Bank and Economic Development in Africa
(BADEA), economic and technical studies for rehabilitation of 66 bridges in the
eastern and northern regions of the country were carried out in 2002. Following
outcomes of the study, the bridges were rank ordered and placed in priorities 1 and 2
according to traffic levels, existing structural condition and risk of flooding. Based on
these criteria, 21 bridges were placed in priority I and the rest in priority II.
Twenty one (21) priority I structures have been selected for inclusion in phase 1 of
the implementation scheme. The Detailed Engineering Design and Tender
Documents for the Project have been prepared by an International Consultant, ACE
Consulting Engineers in the year 2002/ 2003.
The consultancy contract agreement between the Ministry of Works and Transport
and SABA Engineering Plc was signed on May 30
th
, 2007.
Though the project has progressed through design review stage, recently Ugandan
National Road Authority has agreed with BADEA to scale down the project scope to
exclude all the bridges located along the Vurra-Arua-Koboko-Oraba road where the
road is scheduled for upgrading under World Bank Financed Transport Sector
development Program (TSDP).The very recent revised scope now comprises only 6
bridges packaged to Enayao-3, Alla-1, Goli, Nyagak-3, Nyacara, Pakwala, bridges.
The bridges are subdivided into three lots as shown on the table below
LOT I LOT II LOT III
Arua Nebbi Nebbi
1 Alla Goli Nyacara
2 Enyau 3 Nyagak 3 Packwala

This Design Review report mainly emphasis 21 bridges in North West Uganda
including the recently agreed 10 bridges packaged but engineering estimates and
tender documents are revised based on the new scope for subsequent retendering
purpose. Kia-Kia bridge which took a special concern due to design insufficiency
problem as discussed with UNRA on 19 July 2010 also included and elaborated as
separate chapter though review report on Kia Kia bridge submitted to the client
before this report.
No
Lot and District
____________________________________________________________________________________________
The high cost of the civil work as compared to the available budget has forced the
client to seek alternative solution by abandoning Kia-Kia bridge which is considered
to be very expensive, Cido Bridge which is replaced in 2003 and still in a good
condition except its single lane configuration and Ora2 & Ora2.
Objectives of the Project
The project is divided into two distinct phases:
Stage I: Pre Construction Services
Stage II: Construction Supervision
The objectives of the services as described in the Terms of Reference are:
In Pre Construction phase, the Consultant familiarize himself with the
designs, reports and tender documents relating to the project; inspect the
respective bridge sites and propose any minor modifications deemed
necessary on the designs and packaging of the works. Subsequently the
consultant will assist the Client with procurement of Contractors.
During the Construction Supervision phase, supervise construction of the
Works (on behalf of the Employer) throughout the entire construction phase,
including the defects liability (maintenance) period.
1.2 Scope of the Design Review

In accordance with the Contract Agreement, the main objectives of the Design
Review are to carry out the following;
To Review all documents of previous studies, designs, reports etc after
acquainting himself with the location and structural condition of each bridge
structure included in the project, and compare these with the intervention measure
proposed for the structure.
To carry out field and laboratory tests where necessary to enable verification of
essential aspects in the detailed engineering design. This will also include
information on construction material sources.
Based on the above, recommend minor modifications deemed necessary to the
designs, bills of quantities, cost estimates and any other relevant aspects.
Accordingly prepare any necessary drawings at appropriate scales, incorporating
any modifications approved by the Client.
To prepare a detailed time schedule for the project and for each structure
assuming a practical sequence of activities under given climatic conditions and
taking into account the time for procuring a contractor. The expected cash flow
shall also be indicated.
The consultant shall satisfy himself with suitability of the existing bidding
documents (or propose any amendments thereof) prepared for national
competitive bidding,
____________________________________________________________________________________________
1.3 Purpose and Content of the Report

Tue purpose of this report is to provide a full and detailed description of the work
undertaken by the consultant in carrying out the design review services of each
respective review task. The report is dealing with all technical aspects of the projects
review works, detailed information, investigations, results and recommendations.
The following aspects of the Engineering Design Review have been addressed within
the report:
Section 1: General Introduction
Section 2: Field Investigation by the Design Review Consultant
Section 3: Geotechnical Investigation of Bridge sites and Construction
Material Sources Geotechnical Investigation
Section 4: Hydrological and Hydraulic Study Review
Section 5: Structural Design Review
Section 6: Tender Document Review

1.4 Approach of Design Review

Basically, the design review was carried out as per our technical proposal. Both field
investigations and desktop studies were carried out in the respective disciplines.
Details are presented in subsequent sections of this report.

____________________________________________________________________________________________
2 FIELD INVESTIGATION BY THE DESIGN REVIEW
CONSULTANT
2.1 Project Background

The selected bridges are located along national and district roads in the north
western region of Uganda in the districts of Arua and Nebbi and are categorized in
three Lots.
The Detailed Engineering Design and Tender Documents for the Project have been
prepared by an International Consultant, ACE Consulting Engineers in the year 2002/
2003.
The consultancy contract agreement between the Ministry of Works and Transport
and SABA Engineering Plc was signed on May 30
th
, 2007.
2.2 Field Visit
The review consultant conducted the field investigation for the Project from
September 27/2007 to October 1/2007. Kia-Kia and Pakwala bridge sites were not
visited due to their inaccessibility. The team composition is shown below;
S.No Name Profession/ Assignment
1
2
3
4
5
Dereje Tilahun
Kassa Dessie
Michael Abebe
Yared Amdie
Samuel Girma
Resident Engineer/ Team leader
Material Engineer
Structural Engineer
Hydrologist
Surveyor
Two personnel that were assigned from the Ministry of Works have been with the
team all the time.
2.3 Factual Findings

Of the 21 bridges considered under the review found in this project, all are proposed
to be replaced by the design consultant. The following main reasons are given for
replacement,
The non-compliance of the design load of the existing structure with the
required specifications.
The existing bridge width is too narrow.
The level of the existing bridge is lower than the flood water level.
The present span length of the bridge increases the water velocity, which
leads to the erosion of the substructure.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
The review consultant has visited all the sites except Kia Kia and Pakwala Bridge
sites, which were inaccessible at the time of the visit. The location of the bridges/
bridge sites under the new work scope is shown in Figure 2-1.
2.4 Recommendation

Following the completion of the field visit, the review consultant would like to bring
the following general recommendations.

2.4.1 Supervision Team

The field investigation during the review period took five days to cover the nineteen
sites. The proposed one team is in no way sufficient to efficiently conduct the
supervision work, so the following personnel list is advisable;

Full Time Staff

Resident Engineer (1)
Assistant Resident Engineer (3)
Senior Surveyors (3)
Inspector of Works (3)

Intermittent Staff

Material Engineer (1)
Contract/ Claims Engineer (1)
Environment Specialist (1)
The Design Consultant has also included office, vehicle and housing for Assistant
Resident Engineer for each lot. In addition, the Engineers house drawing prepared by
the Design Consultant also shows a housing accommodation for the Assistant
Resident Engineer. This shows that the Design Consultant has considered the
necessity of Assistant Resident Engineer for each lot. But it will be advisable to
assign resident engineer to address the revised neighboring lots and assistant resident
engineer for the other lot according to the new consensus.
2.4.2 Surveying Work
The design consultant established bench marks using relative coordinates and did not
connect it to the national grid. This has created problem in locating the bench marks.
Even on the BMs found, the markings are no more there. If it was tied to the national
grid, it would have been easier to identify each BM.
During the construction stage, the consultant will tie the bench marks to the national
grid.

Figure 2-1: Location of 21 Bridges

Figure 2-1: Location of 21 Bridges Legend: Location: selected 6 bridges

7
14
Bridge Legends

Lot II
Lot I
Lot III
Uganda National Roads Authority 2-4
Table 2-1: List of GPS Data for Bridges
No Description East North Elevation
1 Alla 285641 321381 873
2 Enyo-3 267062 333770 1192
3 Enayu-1 267125 342069 1140
4 Enve 267147 348930 1152
5 Oluffe 270332 352993 1119
6 Ayi 271353 360296 1106
7 Yoyo 271976 368197 1128
8 Oru 272522 369028 1106
9 Apa-1 272909 375995 1184
10 Ore 272892 373464 1165
11 Kochi 273325 381108 1194
12 Debara 265890 390867 1137
13 Lebijo 279881 380785 1064
14 ORA 1 321246 300833 636
15 ORA 2 321235 300861 628
16 Nyagak 3 266974 270220 1514
17 Goli 280863 263203 1375
18 Cido 262039 284418 1297
19 Nyacara 274042 287827 1003

Note: The highlighted including Pakwala bridges in table 2.1 above are the one
considered under the newly revised scope of work.
3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF BRIDGE SITES
AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SOURCES
3.1 General

Preliminary foundation investigations were conducted by the Design Consultant,
Arab Consulting engineers (ACE), on the major river crossing sites to identify
possible bearing layers and make recommendations on bearing capacity and
determine the required depth of foundation for safely conveying the superstructure
loads to the supporting strata. The field investigation and laboratory testing were
conducted by the Central Materials Laboratory in 2003.
The drilling investigations involved Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) and recovery of
undisturbed and disturbed soil/silty sand samples for laboratory tests. However, depth
of drilling was limited to top of hard stratum; no drilling was made in hard
formations/rock strata. Thus, the strength and extent of hard formations were not
adequately investigated. It seems that due to these uncertainties, a very low bearing
capacity of 300KPa has been assumed for all hard formations including those where
rock outcrops are evident.
The design consultant recommended placing the foundation on replaced soil/selected
granular fill material over river beds were exposed rock are encountered on the
surface, for example Ayi, Yoyo, Apa and Lebijo crossing sites. This has a potential
risk of scouring of the foundation soil; hence the review consultant recommends
placing the footings on the rock strata where sound rock is encountered at shallow
depths.
3.2 Determination of Allowable Bearing Pressure for Bridge Foundations

Most of the river crossings are constituted of alluvium deposit which is mainly clayey
silty/sandy loam on top of weathered gneiss. Rocky outcrops are visible at some
rivers.
Allowable (presumptive) bearing pressure values are commonly assigned for the
foundation bearing layers for foundation design purposes, taking their geology,
compactness of alluvial deposits, and degree of weathering and consistency of rock
outcrops, if any, into consideration as classified during the site investigation.
The presumptive bearing pressure values recommended by different codes of
practice, design manuals and reference texts for different type of foundation materials
and consistency are presented in Table 3.1 below.
The presumptive bearing pressure values for various foundation materials have been
adopted from the following code of standards, design manuals and reference texts:
Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th Edition, McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc., 1996, by J. E. Bowles;
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Design Manual (NAVFAC DM -
7.02, sec.4, table1: on Foundations & Earth Structures, 1986);
Overseas Road Note No. 9, Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), Design
of Small Bridges; 2nd Edition, 2000.

Table 3-1: Presumptive Allowable Pressures for Different Foundation Conditions

*Depth of ground water is assumed to be not less than B below the
base of foundation.
The presumptive bearing pressures should be used with caution to allow for the
uncertainties as determination of the actual extent and jointing requires drilling and
coring.
3.3 Foundation Recommendation

The minimum depth below riverbed at which the bottom of abutment / pier will be
placed is governed by the maximum scour depth and the presence of a good bearing
layer. An average depth of 2 meters below the lowest level of the river bed, is
recommended for those crossing foundations composed of alluvial deposits, is
recommended. For riverbanks and riverbeds composed of rock outcrops, a minimum
depth of 0.5m in sound rock for keying (anchorage) purpose is recommended. The
presumptive bearing pressures are used with caution assuming soft rock to allow for
the uncertainties.
Type of Bearing Material
Consistency in
place
Recommended Allowable
Bearing Pressure (KPa)
ORN 9 NAVFAC Bowles
Massive igneous and
metamorphic rock (basalt,
granite, gneiss)
Hard and sound 10,000 7,600 9,600
Foliated metamorphic rock
and sedimentary rocks (un-
weathered)
Medium hard and
sound
4,000 3,300 -
Weathered or broken bed rock
of any kind
Soft rock 1,500 1,000 1,400
Gravel, gravel-sand mixtures,
boulder gravel mixtures , and
Sand with little gravel
[Non-cohesive Soils]
-Dense/very
compact
-Medium dense
- Loose

600
500
150

600
480
280

400*
380*
200

Clay [Cohesive Soils]
Silt

-Hard
-Stiff
-Hard
-Stiff

200
150
200
150
The bearing pressure values recommended by the Design Consultant are generally
conservative and need to be amended during construction. Investigation by core
drilling (ASTM D2113) is neither feasible nor scope of this assignment; it is foreseen
that verification/confirmatory investigations would be scheduled during construction,
by means of rotary core drilling to a depth of at least 10m in soft /loose formation and
at least 3 meters into solid rock. If the foundation conditions encountered during
excavation are different from what has been revealed or assumed at design stage, the
necessary modifications on the foundation design shall be made by the engineer.
Pile load test shall also be conducted for bridges to be founded on pile foundations.
Static Load Tests are performed to determine the ultimate failure load of a foundation
pile and to determine the piles capability of supporting a load without excessive or
continuous displacement. The purpose of such tests is to verify that the allowable
loads used for the design of a pile are appropriate and that the installation procedure
is satisfactory. The Pile Load Test shall be conducted in accordance with the
procedures given in ASTM D1143.
Hence pay items for the structures shall include the estimated costs for confirmatory
investigations by core drilling and for pile load testing in the BOQ.
Tables 3.2 and 3.4 present the summary of Geotechnical Investigations conducted by
the Design Consultant.
Table 3-2: Review of Bridge Site Foundation Investigation and Presumptive Allowable Pressures
Sr.
No.
River
Name
Route & District
GPS
Coordinates
Foundation Material Description
Bearing Capacity (K Pa)
and footing depth (m)
recommended by the Design
Consultant (ACE)
1 Enayu-1
Arua-Koboko-Orba
(Arua)
267125 E,
342069 N
Arua side: Sandy clay with
few gravels 0.7m 5.0m,
SPT values: 7,8,9 at 3.0m
-Hard pan/rock below 5.0m
(refusal to penetration)
Koboko side: Stiff Sandy clay
0.7m 5.0m,
-Hard pan/rock below 5.0m
300KPa ,
Average footing depth 2.7m
2 Enve
Arua-Koboko-
Oraba(Arua)
267147 E,
348930 N
Dark brown silty clay on both abutments and the river bed
300KPa ,
3 Oluffe
Arua-Koboko-
Oraba(Arua)
270332 E,
352993 N
Arua side: Firm Sandy clay ,
SPT values: 3,2,4 at 1.5m and
7,9,9 at 3.0m and Hard
pan/weathered rock below
5.0m
Koboko side:
Sandy clay 2.0 6.0m,
Hard pan/rock below 6.0m
300KPa ,
4 Ayi
Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
271353 E,
360296 N
Rocky outcrops at both abutments and the river bed
300KPa ,
5 Kia-Kia
Arua-Wandi-Invep-
Rhino-Camp

Odupi Side: Grayish brown
firm clay up to 3.0m below
which is a hard pan/rock
Rhino Camp side: Loose
Brown sand up to 9.0m and
medium dense below 9.0m:
N-values at 6.0m and 9.0m are 10
and 24, respectively.
Pile foundation on Rhino
Camp sided

6
Yoyo
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
271976 E,
368197 N
Rock outcrops at both abutments, silty clay/sand 300KPa ,
7
Oru
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
272522 E,
369028 N
0.0 -4.0m: Loose Clayey sand and hard formation below 4.0m
300KPa ,
8 Apa-1
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
272909 E,
375995 N
0 4.0m Silty Sand on downstream
and exposed rock on up stream,
hard formation below 4.0m
300KPa ,
Sr.
No.
River
Name
Route & District
GPS
Coordinates
Consultant (ACE)
9
Ore
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
272892 E,
373464 N
Silty Sand at both abutments
300KPa ,
Average footing depth -------
m
10 Kochi
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
273325 E,
301108 N
Silty sand and sandy Clay, up to
300KPa ,
11
Debara
Arua-Koboko-Oraba
(Arua)
265890 E,
390867 N
Clayey silt alluvium, with some boulders exposed on down stream
300KPa ,
12
Lebijo
Arua Koboko-
Yumbe (Arua)
279881E,
380785N
Exposed rock at abutments and pier position
300KPa ,
Average footing depth -----m
13
Ora-1
(Lot 3)
Nebbi-Akaba-
Kucwiny-Wadela
(Nebbi)
321246E,
300833N
Arua side:
Sandy clay : 0 3.0m,
Below 3.0m hard pan
Pakwach side:
Stiff, black clay 0-2.0m
Granular fill material,
2.0 6.0m black sandy clay (N-value=8),
6.0m -14m (N-value=15) Black to gray Clay
Pile foundation on Pakwach
side
14
Cido
(Lot 2)
Nebbi-Goli-
Japanziri-Erussi
(Nebbi)
262039E,
284418N
Goli side: Dense Sandy
clay with gravel
(0.0 3.0m),
Hard pan below 3.0m

Errusi side: Sandy clay with quartz gravel
(0.0 4.0m),
Hard pan below 4.0m; i.e. refusal to
penetration,
N-value=45
300KPa ,
15
Ora-2
(Lot 3)

Nebbi-Akaba-
Kucwiny-
Wadela(Nebbi)
321235E,
300861N
Dense Silty Sand at both abutments 300 KPa

Note: All the bridges on table 3-2 are excluded under the revised work scope.

Table 3-3: Review of Bridge Site Foundation Investigation and Presumptive Allowable Pressures as per the new scope of work (Lot
1,Lot 2 &Lot 3)
Sr.
No.
River
Name
Route & District
GPS
Coordinates
Consultatnt (ACE)
1
Alla-1

Arua-Inde-packwach
(Arua)
285641 E,
321381 N
Arua side:
Brown to red silty
clay/alluvium, with gravel.
Hard pan at 2.0m
Inde side:
Light brown silty clay/alluvium 300KPa ,
2 Enayu-3 Arua-Ediofe (Arua)
267062 E,
333770 N
Reddish brown clayey Sand at both abutments
300KPa ,
3
Nyagak-3
Jqang-Okoro-
Alyenda(Nebbi)
266974E,
270220N
Silty Clay with few gravel at both abutments
300KPa ,
4
Goli

Nebbi-Goli
Custom-Mahagi
(Nebbi)
280863E,
263203N
Goli customs side:
Stiff to very stiff sandy clay with
gravel,
SPT-values: 5,6,7 at 3.0m and 12,
11,9 at 6.0m,
Hard pan (refusal to pen.) at 8.0m
Mahagi side:
Sandy clay with gravel,
SPT-values: 3,4,5 at 3.0m
Hard pan below 5.0m
300KPa ,
Average footing depth -----m
5
Nyacara
Nebbi-Erussi
(Nebbi)
274042E,
287827N
Sandy gravel with boulders
300KPa ,
Average footing depth 1.8 m
6
Pakwala
Nebbi-Erussi
(Nebbi)

300KPa ,
3.4 Investigation of Construction Material Sources

3.4.1 General
As part of the assignments in the Design Review Contract, the Consultant (SABA
Eng.) has conducted field investigations and laboratory tests on Potential
Construction Material sources; i.e. to enable verification of the findings during
detailed engineering design. These included assessment of the Geotechnical
Investigations report, and identification of construction material sources which were
conducted by the Design Consultant (ACE).
Based on the physical inspection of the potential construction material sources and
results of laboratory tests conducted on some representative samples, the Design
Review Consultant has evaluated the available design documents with regards to
adequacy of the investigations and compliance of the values obtained with relevant
standard specification requirements.
A total of twelve (12) locations; i.e. 7 were potential stone sources, 4 sand sources,
and 1 gravel source have been investigated by the Design Consultant. However, 5
(five) of these sources are located near Lira and Soroti district HQs, which are very
far from the project sites. The gravel source is located on the Lira Aloi road, 6.4Km
from Lira town.
3.4.2 Potential Quarry Stone Sources
Coarse aggregate for concrete has to be strong, durable and must have a particle size
distribution and particle shape which provide high mechanical stability.
Potential sources of hard rock for production of crushed aggregate for concrete works
were identified by the Design Consultant. Based on the test results report, conducted
by the Central Materials Laboratory in June 2003, four (4) of the stone quarry
samples tested meet all the specification requirements for concrete aggregates. The
following table has been taken directly from the Materials Investigation Report
prepared by the Design Consultant:
Table 3-4: Summary of Test Results on Rock Sources
Sr.
No.
Rock Source
Specific
gravity
(g/cc)
Water
Abs.
(%)
Acv
(%)
Aiv
(%)
Tfv
(KN)
Laa
(%)
SSS
(%)
Bitumen Affinity
1 Oparra (Arua) 2.5 0.1 29 30 150 28 0.3 Good
2
Over Senia
River
2.6 0.8 19 23 180 16 0.5 Good
3 Ngweny 2.6 0.2 16 11 200 18 0.3 Good
4 Akia 2.7 0.1 19 19 170 22 0.4 Fair
5 Ngetta 2.6 0.3 27 23 160 23 0.2 Good
Spec. Limits >2.5 -
25
Max.
26
Max
160
Min.
28
Max
12
Max
Good
ACV Aggregate Crushing Value, AIV-Aggregate Impact Value, TFV-10% Fines
Value LAA Los Angeles Abrasion, SSS Sodium Sulfate Soundness
From the test results, it can be concluded that with the exception of the rock source at
Oparra (Arua) which has marginally weaker values, all the investigated rock sources
fulfill the specification requirements.
The Design Review Consultant has inspected these sources and identified additional
potential sources. Photographs of the sites showing selected features of the source and
location of each quarry stone from the bridge sites is also given. Under the newly
revised scope of work all construction material indicated under lot 2 below can be
considered for Lot 1 bridges. Similarly the material sites under lot 3 could be
shared by lot 2 and lot 3 bridges.
3.4.2.1 Stone Quarry Sites Proposed For Lot 1

Priority 1 Lot 1
Description
Quarry Name Orawa
Location 3.5 km from Arua Town
Road Name Arua Air field Road
GPS Coordinates Elevation 1198
Easting 36N 269053
Northing 337155
Estimated Quantity (Cum) >11,000 m3
Overburden Varies from 0 -1.5m
Access Existing and in good Condition
Rock type Gneiss
Degree of weathering Un weathered
Distance from: Enyau 3 bridge 5 km
Enyau 1 bridge 7 km
Enve bridge 14 km
Oluffe bridge 21 k m
Ayi bridge 31 km
Alai-1 bridge 30.5 km
Kia Kia bridge 70 km
photos
Orawa-Photo 1 through 6

Orawa Site- Photo 3Orawa

Orawa Site Photo 1 Orawa Site- Photo 2

Orawa Site Photo 3 Orawa Site Photo 4

Orawa Site Photo 5 Orawa Site Photo 6

Description
Quarry Name Arivu
Location 14 km from Arua Town
Road Name Arua Nebbi Road
Easting 36N 274510
Northing 319462
Estimated Quantity
( Cum)
>100,000 m3
Overburden None
Rock type Gneiss
Degree of weathering Minor surface disintegrations
Distance from: Enyau 3 bridge 18.1km
Enyau 1 bridge 23.5 km
Enve bridge 31 km
Oluffe bridge 37.2 k m
Ayi bridge 47.7 km
Alai-1 bridge 23 km
photos Arivu Site Photo 1 through 4

Priority 2 Lot 1

Arivu Site Photo 1 Arivu Site Photo 2

Arivu Site Photo 3 Arivu Site Photo 4

Priority 3 Lot 1
Description
Quarry Name Ovisoni , adjacent to Ovisoni trading centre, LHS
Location 14 km from Arua Town
Road Name Arua Odiya -Vurra customs Road
Easting 36N 264731
Northing 321521
Estimated Quantity
(Cum)
>1,000 m3
Overburden 0.1-0.5m
Rock type Gneiss
Distance from; Enyau-3 bridge 18.1km
Enyau-1 bridge 23.5 km
Enve bridge 31 km
Oluffe bridge 37.2 k m
Ayi bridge 47.7 km
Alai-1 bridge 27km
photos Ovisoni Site- Photo 1 through 4

Ovisoni Site- Photo 1 Ovisoni Site- Photo 2

Ovisoni Site- Photo 3 Ovisoni Site- Photo 4
Priority 1- Lot 2

Description
Quarry Name Liru New proposal
Location 14 km from koboko Town
Road Name Koboko- liru Road
Easting 36N 269053
Northing 337155
Estimated Quantity ( Cum) > 11,000 m3
Overburden Varies from 0 -1.5m
Rock type Gneiss
Distance from: Yoyo bridge 26 km
Oru bridge 25 km
Ore bridge 20.3 km
Apa bridge 18 k m
Kochi bridge 16 km
Lebijo bridge 20.3 km
Debara bridge 30 km
photos Liru Site Photo 1 through 4

Liru Site Photo 1 Liru Site Photo 2

Liru Site Photo 3 Liru Site Photo 4

Priority 1 Lot 3
Description
Quarry Name Acwera Chinese Quarry
Location 12.3 km from NebbiTown
Road Name Nebbi- Pakwach Road
Easting 36N 295868
Northing 273361
Estimated Quantity ( Cum) >10,000 m3
Overburden Varies from 0 -1.5 m
Rock type Granite
Distance from: Nyacara bridge 13.3 km
Pakwala bridge 15.3 km
Goli bridge 26.3 km
Cido bridge 29.3 k m
Nyagak 3 bridge 51.3 km
Ora-1 bridge 37 km
Ora-2 bridge 37 km
photos Acwera Chinese Qs Photo 1 through 4

Acwera Chinese Qs Photo 1 Acwera Chinese Qs Photo 2

Acwera Chinese Qs Photo 3 Acwera Chinese Qs Photo 4

Priority 2 Lot 3
Description
Quarry Name Ngweny kumi
Road Name Nebbi- Goli Road ( New road in angir village)
Easting 36N 285917
Northing 271332
Overburden Varies -1m approx
Rock type Gneiss
Degree of weathering Un weathered boulders
Distance from; Nyacara bridge 2.6 km
Goli bridge 12 km
Cido bridge 15 k m
Ora-1 bridge 49.6 km
photos Ngweny k- Photo 1 through 4

Ngweny kumi - Photo 1 Ngweny k - Photo 2

Ngweny k - Photo 3 Ngweny k - Photo 4

Priority 3 Lot 3

Description
Quarry Name Cananyira rock New proposal
Road Name Nebbi- cananyira Road
Easting 36N 288156
Northing 273405
Overburden None
Rock type Gneiss
Distance from; Nyacara bridge 1.5 km
Pakwala bridge 4 km
Goli bridge 15 km
Cido bridge 18k m
Nyagak 3 bridge 40 km
photos Cananyira Photo 1 through 2

Cananyira Photo 1 Cananyira Photo 2

Priority 4 Lot 3

Description
Quarry Name Angir rocks New proposal
Road Name Nebbi- Goli Road ( near Angir primary school)
Easting 36N 286537
Northing 272491
Overburden None
Access Available and in good Condition
Rock type Gneiss
Distance from: Nyacara bridge 0.6 km
Goli bridge 12.4 km
Cido bridge 15.4 k m
photos Angir Photo 1 through 2

Angir Photo 1 Angir Photo 2
3.4.2.4 Conclusions and Recommendations on Potential Stone Sources:

Following the investigations conducted on the stone quarry sites proposed by the
design consultant, the following is recommendable:
For Lot 1: Stone aggregates from Orawa, Arivu or Ovisoni quarries are
recommended.
For Lot 2: The virgin rock at Liru (new proposal) is recommended as source
of stone aggregates ( as per the revised scope of work this material site
should be considered for lot 1 if the need arise)
For Lot 3: Stone Quarries Acwera Chinese Quarry, Ngweny Kumi,
Cananyira rock (new proposal) and Angir rock (new proposal) are
recommended. ( as per the revised scope of work these material site shall be
considered for both Lot 2 and Lot 3)
Ngetta Hill Quarry (5.3 Km from Lira town, on Lira kitgum road), Akia Hill Quarry
(5.9 km from Lira Town, on Lira Aloi road) and Ochuloi Quarry (19Km from
Soroti town, on Soroti Lira road), are all located at distances that are not
economically viable (more than 300Km far) relative to the project sites and are
therefore not recommendable for use as aggregate sources.
3.4.3 Potential Gravel (Muram) Sources
Gravel sources were not identified by the Design Consultant, for all the three lots.
Granular borrow materials are required for construction of embankments in approach
roads and for backfilling behind abutments. The Design Review Consultant has
identified a total of eleven (11) potential sources of gravel and collected
representative samples for laboratory tests.
It should, however, be noted that the construction material sources identified during
this phase are by no means exhaustive. Additional sources should be further located
and investigated by the contractors during construction.
I. Location of Gravel Sources for Lot 1:

Sample ID Location/nearest town Estimated Qty (m
3
)
G1/Lot (1)

11 Km from Arua town,
Arua District, Kijomoro Subcounty,
Near Loliragoro town
85,000
(200mx340mX1.3m)


Gravel G1/Lot 1 (1) Gravel G1/Lot 1 (2)

3
)
G2/Lot (1)

Arua District, Oleba Subcounty, 2Km
from Oleba Trading Center (Existing
Pit)
10,000
(165mx70mX1.0m)

G2/Lot 1 (1) Borrow area used by MoWT G2/Lot 1 (2) Borrow area used by MoWT

3
)
G3/Lot (1)

Arua District, Oluffe Subcounty,
near Ombere town ( Existing Pit)
17,000
(150mx100mX1.2m)


G3/Lot 1 (1) G3/Lot 1 (2)

Sample
ID
Location/nearest town Estimated Qty (m
3
)
Gravel
Arua
TC

8Km from Arua town, along Arua-Ajono
Road, Vura Subcounty, near Gil-gil
Existing Borrow pit, 200m away from
Congo/Uganda Boarder (at Ajono village)
100,000 (200mx500mx1m)

3
)
Gravel at Ala 1
Bridge

5Km from Arua town, along Arua
Pakwach Road, Ajiya Subcounty,
near Ajiya
8,600
(120mx60mx1.2m)

II. Location of Gravel Sources for Lot 2:

3
)
G1/Lot 2

5.5Km from Koboko town, along
Arua Koboko Road, Midia
Subcounty, near Danya TC
28,800
(120mx240mx1.0m)

3
)
G2/Lot 2

Subcounty, near Koboko
74,880
(320mx180mx1.3m)

Note: The Bridges under lot 2 are discarded under the new scope of work. Thus
these material locations can be considered for lot 1 bridges if the need arise,


G2/Lot 2

3
)
G3/Lot 2

74,880
(320mx180mx1.3m)

G3/Lot 2 (a) G3/Lot 2 (b)


G3/Lot 2 (1) G3/Lot 2 (2)

3
)
G4/Lot 2

74,880
(320mx180mx1.3m)

G4/Lot 2 (a) G4/Lot 2 (a)

III. Location of Gravel Sources for Lot 3:

3
)
G1/Lot 3

5.0Km from Nebbi town, near Okeya Village,
Used by MoWT

> 10,000
(150mx50mx1.5m)

G1/Lot 3(a) G1/Lot 3(b)

3
)
G2/Lot 3

5.0Km from Nebbi town, near Okeya Village,
Used by MoWT

> 100,000
(210mx300mx1.5m)


Table 3-5: Summary of Laboratory test results of the potential gravel sources

Sr. ID

Location
Grading, % passing
Sieves
Laboratory Test Results
2.0
mm
0.425
mm
0.075
mm
LL
(%)
PI
(%)
OMC
(%)
MDD
(g/cc)
BS Light
CBR
@ 95%
MDD
G1-Lot1
11 Km from Arua town, Arua
District, Kijomoro Subcounty,
Near Loliragoro town
39 30

20

46
25 11 2.02 26
G2-Lot1
District, Oleba Subcounty,
2Km from Oleba T C
40 30 23

47

24

11
2.06 20
G3-Lot1
District, Oluffe Subcounty,
near Ombere town
52 39 25 46 24 14 1.82 10
ALA 1
Bridge
5Km from Arua town, along
Arua Pakwach Road

38 30 22 50 25 12 1.86 22
Arua TC
8Km from Arua town, along
Arua-Ajono Road, Vura
Subcounty, near Gil-gil
42 32 25 45 21 11 1.84 27
G1-Lot2
5.5Km from Koboko town,
along Arua Koboko Road
43 33 25 44 24 10 1.96 20
G2-Lot2
32 25 13 36 17 10 12.10 45
G3-Lot2
50 34 21 45 22 10 1.90 18
G4-Lot2
36 27 16 37 23 11 1.98 27
G1-Lot3
5.0Km from Nebbi town, near
Okeya Village
44 33 22 40 22 10 2.03 15
G2 - Lot3 5.0Km from Nebbi town 45 33 25 42 21 11 2.02 37
Spec. requirements for Subbase to be used
for approach road & backfill
<45 <15 > 25
The test results revealed that the most of the identified gravel sources have relatively
good CBR values (>20%) strength but all have higher plasticity to be directly used as
subbase. Thus, it is recommended stabilized the materials with lime (usually 3% to
5% with the red clayey sandy lateritic gravels in Uganda), in order to improve both
on their plasticity and CBR values to within the specification limits.
Those sources with CBR values more than 10% and less than 20% can be used for
improved subgrade layers and embankments for approach roads.
3.4.4 Potential Sand Sources
The Design Consultants have identified and tested three sources of sand. The sources
were from Oreku on the Arua-Koboko Road, Ayi 1 on the Arua-Koboko Road, and
Akaba which is 6.6Km from Nebbi town. The test results showed that had high clay
contents and only the sand from Akaba fulfilled the specification limits for gradation.
As a result, only the sand from Akaba was recommended to be used as a filter media
(drainage layer) under high embankments and crushed fine was recommended
instead.
Efforts have been made by the Design Review consultant to exhaustively search for
possible sources of sand in the project area. As a result, the following sand sources
have been identified and laboratory tests conducted on them to assess their suitability
for concrete and mortar works.
I. Potential Sand Sources for Lot 1

Sample ID Location/nearest town Estimated Qty (m3)
S1/Lot 1

6.2Km from Arua town, from
Enyayu River bridge, on Arua
Koboko - Oraba Road
3,000

S1/Lot1 (1) S1/Lot1 (2)

S1/Lot1 (3) S1/Lot1 (4)

S2/Lot 1

17Km from Arua town, near Kijomoro
town, from Enve river bridge, on Arua
Koboko - Oraba Road
2,000

S2/Lot 1(1) S2/Lot 1(2)

S3/Lot 1

33.7Km from Arua town, near
Nyoro town, from Ayi river
bridge, on Arua Koboko - Oraba
Road
2,000

S3/Lot 1 (1) S3/Lot 1 (2)

3
)
ALA River Sand

17Km from Arua town, Arivu
Subcounty, from ALA river
bridge
2,000

II. Potential Sand Sources for Lot 2

3
)
S1/Lot2

Near Oleba town, from Oru 1
river bridge, on Arua Koboko
Oraba Road
1,000

S1/Lot2 (1) S1/Lot2 (2)

3
)
S2/Lot2

8.2Km from Koboko town, from
Lebijo river bridge, on Koboko
Yumbe Road, Appx. 2.1Km from
the Road
4,000

S2/Lot2 (1) S2/Lot2 (2)

3
)
S3/Lot 2

Otumbari Subcounty, from Oru
river bridge,
3,000


S3/Lot 2 (1) S3/Lot 2 (2)

III. Potential Sand Sources for Lot 3

S1/Lot 3

9.0Km from Nebbi town, from
Acwera river bridge, along Nebbi
Wadi Lai district rural road,
2Km off the highway
2,500

S1/Lot 3 (1) S1/Lot 3 (2)

S1/Lot 3 (C)

S1/Lot 3 (3) S1/Lot 3 (4)

S2/Lot 3

5.0Km from Nebbi town, from
Akaba river bridge, along Nebbi
Pakwach Road
2,500

S2/Lot 3 (1) S2/Lot 3 (2)

S2/Lot 3 (3) S2/Lot 3 (4)

S3/Lot 3

30Km from Nebbi town, from
Nam-Rwadho river bridge, along
Nebbi Pakwach Road
4,000

S3/Lot 3 (1) S3/Lot 3 (2)

Table 3-6: Summary of Laboratory test results of the potential Sand sources

From the laboratory test results, it can be seen that most of the identified sources can be used with some treatment, either blending to meet the
grading requirements or by washing to remove clay lumps and minor organics contents.
Sr.
No.
Location
Of Sand
Sieve Analysis, % passing, mm
Silt and
Clay
Content
(%)
Compressive
Strength of
Cement Mortar
(7 days, MPa)
Comments
10.0 5.0 2.36 1.18 0.60 0.30 0.15
1 S1/Lot 1 100 99 94 83 51 8 2 1.8 30 Meets grading I
2 S2/Lot 1 100 99 92 38 28 3.8 32 Very fine, needs blending
3 S3/Lot 1 97 94 89 73 34 6 4 3.4 28 Meets grading II
4 Lot 1- C 99 98 97 90 69 10 4 3.2 30 Meets Grading III
5 S1/Lot 2 100 98 94 70 13 5 4.2 29 Fine, needs blending
6 S2/Lot 2 100 98 90 65 13 3 2.0 35 Fine, needs blending
9 S2/Lot 3 100 97 88 66 34 6 2 1.6 29 Meets grading I
10 S3/Lot 3 98 95 84 65 39 16 11 9.6 35
High Clay Content, needs
washing
11 ALA River Sand 96 94 91 81 56 14 3 2.4 32 Meets grading II
Ugandan Grading
Spec. I
100 90-100 60-95 30-70 15-34 5-20 0-10 6% Max. 28 Min.
II 100 90-100 75-100 55-90 35-59 8-30 0-10
III 100 90-100 85-100 75-100 60-79 12-40 0-10
IV 100 95-100 95-100 90-100 80-100 15-50 0-15
Construction of Bridges in North West Uganda
Design Review Report
4 HYDROLOGICAL and HYDRAULIC STUDY REVIEW
4.1 Background

Highway drainage is an important consideration in the design of many projects. The
term drainage is defined in several different ways, including the process of removing
surplus groundwater or surface waters by artificial means, the manner in which the
waters of an area are removed, and the area from which waters are drained. A project
may alter the existing drainage. When this occurs, drainage features should be
provided which protect the highway, adjacent landowners, and the traveling public
from water, while maintaining water quality and protecting other environmental
resources.

Bridge is a structure which provides passage facilities over an obstacle without
closing the water way underneath. In a highway project the obstacle is usually of
valley water way that will be passed by the provision of a structure which can safely
pass both motorized and non motorized transport facilities without causing any
natural flow system disturbance on its underside zone.
The design of a bridge across a stream demands a special attention towards route
location, potential traffic flow and structural and foundation details, but also to the
characteristics of the stream beneath the structure. Collecting information and data
regarding to stream channel stability, anticipated flood, and sediment discharge and
scour potential is a basic and primary task prior to a detailed hydraulic design work of
a bridge.
A bridge must not only be hydraulically efficient, but also be consistent with the
importance of the road, safety, initial cost, aesthetics, environmental considerations,
maintenance and legal responsibilities. Highway bridge hydraulic design comprises
two major components:
1. Hydrological study
2. Hydraulic Analysis
Hydrology/Hydraulics design review of 21 bridges where the recently selected 10
bridges contained on it is conducted by undertaking a detailed hydrological and
hydraulic investigation at sample bridges and/or culverts representing the overall
design approach together with physical hydrologic survey data of the existing
structures.

4.2 Objective

The review has the following objectives:

Undertaking a detailed hydrological and hydraulic investigation at selected
sample bridges and culverts to examine and to compare the overall bridge/culvert
hydrological and hydraulic design of the consultant.
Estimating maximum probable flood through flood mark physical identification
and local people consultation and compare it with the design consultant remarks.
Examining the existing structure flood accommodation capacity or hydraulic
sufficiency or insufficiency in relation to the proposed once.
River bank condition assessment to visualize the extent of erosion in and around
the bridge sites and to identify the necessity of protection works
To check the design consultant remedial recommendations in relation to existing
and proposed structure.

4.3 Hydrology

Hydrology in a highway development deals with estimating flood magnitudes as the
result of precipitation (usually the peak discharge) .The necessity and extent of the
hydrologic analysis to be performed is based on the type of project, road design
standard and type of structure that will be laid in a highway.

An overview of the process of performing a hydrologic analysis, including criteria
(design flood frequency) and methodologies for determining the peak discharge. The
overall process which should be used to conduct the hydrologic analysis for a given
project is listed below:

Conduct preliminary assessment at the office level.
Take an initial field trip to the project site.
Select a methodology and design flood frequency, and calculate the design
discharge with some methods.
Take a final field trip to verify the analysis/design and to recheck flood damage
potential.

4.4 Data Collection
The hydrological analysis has been made using available digital elevation models
(DEM) and aerial photographs together with keen physical hydrologic survey made at
each bridge/culvert site. Additional hydrological and geological information have
been gathered by consulting local residents and from concerned bodies around the
project area.
4.4.1 DEM and Aerial Photographs

Available 90m resolution digital elevation model (DEM) showing all the drainage
pattern to the required level is used as an input to delineate bridge catchment area at
road. Widely used public domain GIS softwares (ARC View 3.3, WMS 8.1 and
ILWIS) are used for DEM hydro processing purpose at selected bridges watershed
areas thereby determining catchment characteristics such as area, slope, stream length
etc.

4.5 Drainage Characteristics, Geology and Topography
The overall watershed areas draining towards each bridge outlet point comprises a
number of minor and major tributaries originating from most remote and/or nearby
hillsides or dividing lines depending upon the nature of the stream and topographic
conditions. Dissected plateau with a number of narrow valleys and active flow nature
is the dominant surface drainage pattern on the area. Most streams are perennial in its
very nature but others are intermittent streams flowing only during rainy seasons of
the year. Dense vegetation cover (Dry combretum and grass) with some cultivation is
the major land use cover forms where most watershed areas are characterized. Sandy
loam, lithosols and sandy clay loam are the main soil types covering the catchment
area. The catchment area is also dominated by quartzo-feldspathic genesis,
magmatites of Aruan Complex, charnockites, enderbites, hypersthenes genesis and
basic granulites geological forms.
Table 4-1: Bridge catchment area physiographic description (As per the new scope)
S/N
Bridge
Name
Route & District Flow direction
Stream
nature
Topography Catchment Land use/cover
1 Alla
Arua-Inde-
packwach(Arua)
R to L (from Arua
to Inde) perennial Relatively Rolling terrain
Originates from
neighborhood Congo
highlands
Dense vegetation with
cultivated land in between
2 Enayu-3 Arua-Ediofe (Arua)
L to R (from Arua
to Ediofe) perennial Relatively steep terrain
Originates from
neighborhood Congo
highlands
Dominated by dense
vegetation but with some
cultivated land forms
3 Nyagak-3
Jqang-Okoro-
Alyenda(Nebbi)
L to R (from
Okoro to
Alyenda) perennial
Slightly steep
topographic condition
Originates from
neighborhood Congo
highlands
Dense vegetation cover with
little cultivated land and
swampy portion
4 Goli
Nebbi-Goli
Custom(Nebbi)
R to L (from
Nebbi to Goli)
perennial Moderately rolling Originates from
neighborhood Congo
highlands
Dominated by dense
vegetation but with some
cultivated land forms )
5 Nyacara
Nebbi-
Erussi(Nebbi)
L to R (from
Nebbi town to
Pakwala) perennial Rolling terrain
Originates from
nearby highlands
Scattered woodgrass lands
with little cultivated land
6 Pakwala
Nebbi-
Erussi(Nebbi) - perennial
Relatively rolling to hilly
terrain
Originates from
nearby highlands
Scattered woodgrass lands
with little cultivated land

4.6 Climate
The distinction in climate characteristics mainly caused by altitude differences and its
location where rainfall on the area is highly influenced by Inter Tropical Convergence
Zone (ITCZ).
Watershed areas of twenty one bridges mainly falls under the same climatic
zonation with an expected mean annual rainfall ranging from 1000-1500mm and
mean annual temperature in between 25 and 30
0
C .

4.7 Peak Discharge Estimation
There are several methods to compute peak discharge, among these methods the most
commonly used once are stated below:
1. Rational Method.
2. Modified Soil Cover Complex Method, SCS (plotting a hydrograph).
3. Regression Equations
4. Historical Data statistical analysis.
5. TRRL Model (East African Flood Model)

4.7.1 Rational Method

Rational method is recommended to determine the peak discharge, or runoff rate,
from drainage areas up to 80 ha and its application requires appropriate intensity data.
Assumptions under Rational Method are:
Peak discharge occurs when all of the drainage area is contributing,
A storm that has duration equal to the time of concentration (Tc) produces the highest
peak discharge for the selected frequency,
Intensity is uniform over a duration of time equal to or greater than the Tc, and
The frequency of the peak flow is equal to the frequency of the intensity.
The rational method formula is:
Q = kCiA, where:
Q = peak discharge or rate of runoff (m3/s)
k = 0.00278 (m 3/s) hr / (ha C mm)
C = runoff coefficient
i = intensity (mm/hr)
A = drainage area (ha)
4.7.2 SCS Method

A relationship between accumulated rainfall and accumulated runoff was derived by
SCS from experimental plots for numerous hydrologic and vegetative cover
conditions. Data for land-treatment measures, such as contouring and terracing, from
experimental catchment areas were included. The equation was developed mainly for
small catchment areas for which daily rainfall and catchment area data are ordinarily
available. It was developed from recorded storm data that included total amount of
rainfall in a calendar day but not its distribution with respect to time. The SCS runoff
equation is therefore a method of estimating direct runoff from 24-hour or 1-day
storm rainfall. The equation is:

S P for
S P
S P
Q 2 . 0
8 . 0
) 2 . 0 (
2
>
+
= -------------------------------eq. (4.1)

Where:
Q Effective accumulated rainfall depth (mm)
P Gross accumulated rainfall depth (mm)
S Potential maximum retention (mm)

The potential maximum retention S has been expressed in terms of the Curve Number
CN in order to make the operations of interpolating, and weighting more nearly
linear. This relationship is:

254
25400
=
CN
S ---------------------------------------eq. (4.2)

CN refers the runoff response characteristics of the watershed area.

Using the equation of the area of the triangle and expressing the volume in m
3
, the
peak discharge qp of the triangular unit hydrograph is given by the equation shown
below:

P
p
T
Q A
q 208 . 0 = -----------------------------------------------eq. (4.3)
Where:
qp-peak discharge of the unit hydrograph (m3/s)
A-area of drainage basin (km2)
Tp -time to peak runoff unit hydrograph (hr)
=0.7*TC
Q-excess rainfall (mm)

The ordinates of the individual hydrographs of direct runoff for each of the unit storm
periods calculated using the ordinates of the unit hydrograph and corresponding
excess rainfall depths through convolution equation. Thus, the total hydrograph
ordinates are determined by adding the ordinates of the individual hydrographs by
using the following general equation:

=
=
+
=
n i
i
i n i
U P Qn
1
1
-------------------------------------------eq. (4.4)

4.7.3 Regression Equation

It used on the application of regretted equations derived from gauged streams on the
nearby areas having more or less the same physiographic and climatic conditions.

4.7.4 Historic data Analysis
It involves statistical analysis of historic recorded discharge data using gumbel,
Pearson type III distribution at stream being considered.

4.7.5 TRRL Flood Model
This is an analogue model developed by the Transport and Road Research Laboratory
Department of the Environment for East African Countries particularly for Uganda,
Kenya, Tanzania and Malawi (Fiddes, 1976).

The model is made up of two parts. A linear reservoir model is used for the period
between the rain hitting the ground surface and the flood flow entering the stream
system (the land phase) and a finite difference routing technique is used for the
passage of the flood wave down the river to the catchment outfall.

It was presented as a paper to a flood Hydrology Symposium in Nairobi, Kenya in
October 1975 which was jointly sponsored by the Economic Commission for Africa,
the East African Community and the Transport and Road Research Laboratory. The
model is made up of two parts. A linear reservoir model is used for the period
between the rain hitting the ground surface and the flood flow entering the stream
system (the land phase) and a finite difference routing technique is used for the
passage of the flood wave down the river to the catchment outfall.

The peak flow can therefore be simply estimated if the average flow during the base
time of the hydrograph can be calculated.

For twenty one bridge projects hydrological study , principally TRRL Flood Model is
preferable than any other models because it is the model formulated by taking data
and catchments from Uganda (Fiddes, 1976)and also it is the model which take into
advantage the following reasons:
It can be applied to ungauged catchments using very few measurements of
catchment characteristics such as area, slope, and soil type. Hence, it is simple
and has a limited number of parameters.
Inputs are related to physical properties of the catchment, for example, soils/land
cover properties, and antecedent moisture condition prior to the design event
The review consultant has made a detailed hydrological investigation just taking six
sample watershed areas contributing water to each bridge/culvert outlet points. Peak
discharge generated from representative catchment has been determined through
TRLL East African flood model.
Selection of these sample watershed areas for undertaking hydrological analysis
mainly based on the following reasons:
Distribution with respect to geographical and/or road network location.
Distribution with respect to watershed area magnitude
Both minor and major structures distribution
Hydrological features(stream length, slope, boundary considerations)
With this ground Oluffee, Enve, Goli and Enyau-3 from major structures and Ore and
Lebijo from minor drainage structures are selected to undertake a detailed
hydrological investigation.
4.7.5.1 TRRL Flood Model for Estimating Discharge at Crossings
In this model once the parameters initial retention(Y), contributing area coefficient
(C
A
), and catchment lag times (K) have been made for a catchment a design flood
could be estimated by routing a design storm through the computer program. This can
be time consuming process and for many purposes a simpler technique is required.
From C
A
and Y the volume of runoff from any given design storm can be calculated
and if the hydrograph shape can be related to the catchment lag time (K), the peak
flow can also be estimated (Fiddes, 1976).
For many of the dimensionless hydrographs like that of the US Soil Conservation
Service the ratios of time to peak to base time are very similar. This was not found to
be true for the East African catchments studied. For consistency the base time was
assumed to be the time from 1 per cent of peak flow on the rising limb to 10 per cent
of peak flow on the falling limb of the hydrograph. Defined this way, the ratio base
time: time to peak is approximately 3.0 for the US hydrographs. For the East African
catchments it varied between 2.7 and 11.0. The use of a single hydrograph based on
time to peak was therefore not appropriate.
A much more stable ratio was found to be the peak flow (Q) divided by the average
flow measured over the base time ( Q) (Peak flow Factor F):

------------------------------------------------eq.(4.5)
This is the factor used by Rodier and Auvray in West Africa. For very short lag times
(K ~ 0.2h) F was 2.8 * 10%. For all lag times greater than 1 hour, F was 2.3 * 10%.
These figures hold true for the catchment results and were confirmed by a simulation
exercise in which area, slope, lag time and contributing area coefficient were
systematically varied.
Q
Q
F =
The peak flow can therefore be simply estimated if the average flow during the base
time of the hydrograph can be calculated.
The total volume of runoff in m
3
is given by:
3
10 . ) ( A Y P C RO
A
= ------------------------------------eq. (4.6)

Where: P = storm rainfall (mm) during time period equal to the base time
Y= initial retention (mm)
C
A
= contributing area coefficient
A= catchment area (km
2
)
If the hydrograph base time is measured to a point on the recession curve at which the
flow is
10
1 th
of the peak flow then the volume under the hydrograph is approximately
7 per cent less than the total runoff given by equation (4.2).

The average flow ( Q) in m
3
/s is therefore given by:

B
T
RO
Q
. 3600
. 93 . 0
= eq.(4.7)
Where: T
B
= hydrograph base time (hrs)

Estimates of Y and C
A
are required to calculate RO and lag time K to calculate T
B
.
These will now be discussed in turn.
Initial Retention (Y)
The probability of the soil on a catchment anywhere in East Africa being at field
capacity has been studied by Huddart and Woodward. For convenience their results
are reproduced in this study (Table 4.2, Figure 4.1 and 4.2). It will be seen that in the
wet zones the 7 day antecedent rainfall easily exceeds the potential evapotranspiration
during the same period. In the dry zones the figures are much closer but only in
Western Uganda are there a high probability that the surface layers will be below
field capacity. Here as in the semi arid zone, a 5mm initial retention is recommended
for design purposes. Elsewhere assume zero initial retention. All the bridges (twenty
one) are located in north Uganda, hence an initial retention (Y) of zero value adopted
for peak discharge computation purpose.

Table 4-2: Antecedent Moisture Conditions for Storms of Greater than 50mm

Potential
Evaporation
mm/day
2 day
antecedent
7 day antecedent
Rainfall (mm)
Soil Moisture
Recharge
(mm)Mean Mean Mean
SEMI ARID

North Eastern
Kenya
6.9 20.4 46.5
62.6

DRY ZONES

5.2 10.2 32.6
39
Central Uganda
4.6 10 42.9
61
Northern Uganda 5.3 12 39.5 57
Nyanza 5.6 21.1 48.4 53
Central Tanzania 5.6 23.6 68.5 59
WET ZONES
Kenya Coast
5.9 32.9 76.9
76
Tanzania Coast 6 52.6 56.9 64
Kitui 5.2 31.4 83.4 84.5
Nairobi 4.9 21.2 81.4 67
Lake Malawi
4.4 41 125.5
74


Figure 4-1: Areas for Calculation of 2 and 7 Day Antecedent Rainfall


Figure 4-2: Soil zones


Contributing Area Coefficient (C
A
)
When the catchment surface is very dry, runoff is small and only occurs from areas
very close to the stream system. For storms following a wet period a larger area
contributes and larger volumes of runoff occur. If the catchment were sufficiently
wet, the whole area would contribute and the value of C
A
would approach unity.
However, except on very small solid clay or rock catchment there is a practical upper
limit to C
A
which is well below unity. Evidence for this from the USA has already
been referred to and there is further confirmation in a recent TRRL study.
For simplicity it is assumed that the contributing area coefficient varies linearly with
soil moisture recharge until the soil reaches field capacity when the limiting value of
C
A
is attained.
Four factors influence the size of the contributing area coefficient. These are soil
type, slope, type of vegetation or land use (particularly in the valley bottoms) and
catchment wetness. The network of catchments had been selected to cover the range
of these factors to be found in East Africa. The results could therefore be used to give
indications of their effect on C
A
.
The effect of slope and soil type was studied by comparing the results of the
catchments with grass cover and the storms falling on soil at field capacity.
Table 4-3: Standard contributing area coefficients (Cs)

Catchment slope
Soil type
Well drained
Slightly
impeded
drainage
Impeded drainage
Very Flat < 1.0% 0.15 0.30
Moderate 1-4% 0.09 0.38 0.40
Rolling 4-10% 0.10 0.45 0.50
Hilly 10-20% 0.11 0.50
Mountainous
>20% 0.12

The effect of antecedent wetness was studied by comparing the runoff volumes
resulting from storms occurring at different stages of the rainy season. The reduction
in value of C
A
was assumed to vary linearly with the soil moisture deficit.
The effect of land use was calculated by comparing the recorded volumes of runoff
with those that would have occurred with a standard grassed catchment.
The design value of the contributing area coefficient is therefore given by:

L W S A
C C C C . . =

..eq. (4.8)

Where: C
s
= the standard value of contributing area coefficient for a
grassed catchment at field capacity
C
w
= the catchment wetness fact
C
L
= the land use factor
Table 4-4: Catchment Wetness Factor (C
W
)

Table 4-5: Land Use Factor (C
L
)
Largely bare soil
1.50
Intense cultivation (Particularly I valleys) 1.50
Grass Cover
1.00
Dense Vegetation (particularly in valleys) 0.50
Ephemeral stream, sand filled valley
0.50
Swamp filled valley
0.33
Forest
0.33

Catchment lag times (K)
Attempts were made to obtain correlation of K with various catchment characteristics
such as overland slope, contributing area and drainage density, but the only factor
found to show a strong relationship was vegetation cover. The same conclusion was
drawn in a similar study by Bell and Om Kar, involving results from 47 small
catchments located throughout the United States.
The appropriate value of lag time can be estimated in reference to Table 4.6. In
assessing which category to place a given catchment it should be remembered that
Rainfall zone
Catchment wetness factor (C
W
)
Perennial streams Ephemeral streams
Wet zones 1.0 1.0
Semi arid zone 1.0 1.0
Dry zones
(except West Uganda) 0.75 0.50
East Uganda 0.60 0.30
generally only small areas either side of the stream are contributing to the flood
hydrograph. It is these areas, therefore, which must be assessed.
Table 4-6: Catchment lag Times
Catchment type
Lag time (K) hrs
Arid
Very steep small catchments (slopes >20%)
Semi arid scrub (large bare soil patches
Poor pasture
Good pasture
Cultivated land (down to river bank)
Forest, overgrown valley bottom
Papyrus swamp in valley bottom
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.5
3.0
8.0
20.0
Base time
The method of estimating the base time is made up of three parts:
(a) The rainfall time
(b) The recession time for the surface flow
(c) The attenuation of the flood wave in the stream system.
The rainfall time (T
p
) is the time during which the rainfall intensity remains at high
level. This can be approximated by the time during which 60 per cent of the total
storm rainfall occurs. Using the general East African depth duration equation:
n
T
a
I
|
.
|
\
|
+
=
3
1
eq. (4.9)

Where: I = intensity
T = duration
a and n are constants
The time to give 60 per cent of the total storm rainfall is given by solving the
equation

n
T
T
)
33 . 0
33 . 24
(
24
6 . 0
+
=
.eq. (4.10)

The time for the outflow from a linear reservoir to fall to 1/10
th
of its initial value is
2.3K where K is the reservoir lag time. The recession time for surface flow is
therefore 2.3K.
In the simulation study, values for base time were calculated for various areas, slopes,
lag times and contributing area coefficients. Knowing the rainfall time and the surface
flow recession time, the additional time for flood wave attenuation (TA) can be found
by difference. It was found that this could be estimated from the equation.

eq. (4.11)

Where: L = length of main stream (km)
Q= average flow during base time (m
3
/s)
S = average slope along mainstream
The base time is therefore estimated from the equation

A P B
T K T T + + = 3 . 2
.eq. (4.12)

Figure 4-3: Rainfall Time (T
P
) Zones

2
1
4
1
) (
028 . 0
S Q
L
T
A
=
The average flow (
Q
) can be estimated. It will be noted that (
Q
) appears in equation
(2.7) so an iterative or trial and error solution is required. If initially T
A
is assumed
zero, two iterations should be adequate. Knowing ( Q) and F the peak flow is
calculated using equation (4.5).
Table 4-7: Rainfall time (T
p
) for East African 10 year storms

Zone Index n
Rainfall time
(T
p
)
Inland zone
Coastal zone
Kenya Aberdare
Uluguru Zone
0.96
0.76

0.85
0.75
4.0

2.0

Figure 4-4: 2yr 24hrs point storm rainfall


Figure 4-5: 10 year to 2 year ratio

Figure 4-6: Flood Factor
Peak Discharge determination for selected sample catchments
Catchment characteristics including area, stream length, basin slope, stream or
channel slope etc are determined from DEM Hydro processing using ARC View
3.3/WMS 8.1 / ILWIS GIS public domain softwares.

1. Oluffe Bridge
It is located on Arua-Koboko Oraba Road nearly 23Km away from Arua Town.
Watershed area of Oluffe Bridge largely dominated by scattered woodgrass land
combination but some portion of it is under cultivation. From DEM hydro processing
and visual hydrologic inspection at site level, Oluffe bridge catchment area has the
following drainage related salient features.
Catchment area = 82.04Km
2

Basin average slope =0.0348m/m
Stream (channel) slope =0.0068m/m
Stream (channel) length = 17.246Km
Grid reference =3.19
0
N 30.93
0
E
Soil type = slightly impended drainage
Catchment type = nearly 75% wood grass land (poor pasture) & the remaining
under cultivation
Figures below describe Oluffe bridge catchment area overall drainage pattern with its
clear geographical location.

Figure 4-7: Oluffe Bridge catchment area drainage description
#
Oluffe bridge watershed area.shp
# Oluffe bridge outlet.shp
Oluffe stream .shp
1 0 1 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Oluffe stream Drainage Pattern
258000
258000
260000
260000
262000
262000
264000
264000
266000
266000
268000
268000
270000
270000
272000
272000
3
5
2
0
0
0
3
5
2
0
0
0
3
5
4
0
0
0
3
5
4
0
0
0
3
5
6
0
0
0
3
5
6
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
3
6
0
0
0
0
3
6
0
0
0
0
3
6
2
0
0
0
3
6
2
0
0
0
Figure4-8: Oluffebridge catchment area floworinetation
Table 4-8: Oluffe Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge Determination
S/N. Description Value
1 Catchment Area in km
2
82.04
2 Land Slope in % 3.5
3 Channel Slope in % 0.6
4 Channel Length in Km 17.247
5
From table 4.6, Lag Time (K) in hrs (for 75% poor pasture &
25% Cultivated land) 1
6 Catchment Type: Poor Pasture(75%) & 25% cultivated land
7
From Figure 4.2 and Table 4.3, Standard Contributing Area
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.38
8 Soil Type: Slightly Impeded drainage
9 From Figure 4.1 and Table 4.4, Catchment wetness factor (C
w
) 0.75
10
Antecedent Rainfall Zone: Northern Uganda and Rainfall zone:
Dry Zone (Table 4.2)
11 From Table 4.5, Land Use Factor (C
L
) 0.95
12 Catchment cover: Grass Cover
13 Design Value for Contributing Area Coefficient(C
A
) 0.27
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in
No. 10 above 0
15 From Figure 4.3 and Table 4.7, Rainfall time (T
p
) in hrs 0.75
16 Rainfall Time Zone: Inland
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
in hrs(From equation 2.12) 3.05
19 From Figure 1: 2 yr 24hr point storm rainfall in mm(Figure 4.4) 70
20 From Figure4: 10yr: 2 yr ratio (Figure 4.5) 1.49
21
25 yr flood factor, Fig 4.6 for 2:10yr ratio 1.49 & 25 yr
recurrence interval 1.74
22 25 yr Point rainfall in mm 122
23 From Table 2.7, Index "n" 0.96
24 Rainfall during base time R
TB
in mm 103.0
25 Area Reduction Factor (ARF) 0.75
26 Average Rainfall (P) in mm 77.2
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 2.6) 1715646.346
28 Average Flow Q in m
3
/s (equation 2.7) 145.3
29 T
A
2.0
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
4.85
TB
in mm 108.7
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
1845194.867
3
/s 98.4
37 T
A
2.0
191 Flood Peak Factor(F) 2.3
192 Peak Discharge (Q
25
) in m
3
/s 226.26

Spread sheet TRLL East African Flood Model analysis results in a peak discharge of
226.26m3/s for 25 years recurrence interval at Oluffe bridge outlet point. This Spread
sheet analysis output strongly tally with the design consultant computed value
(229.2m
3
/s) though minor difference on assumptions and computational values
observed between the design and the review consultant.
2. Ore Culvert
Ore culvert is located on Arua Koboko-Oraba Road some 50Km away from Arua
Town. The existing culvert is a steel four circular culvert of diameter 1350mm.Ore
stream is an intermittent stream where the catchment area covered by scattered wood
grass vegetation with little cultivated land forms in between. Catchment
characteristics obtained from DEM hydro processing shown below.
2

Stream (channel) length = 4.689Km
0
N 30.95
0
E
Catchment type = nearly 75% wood grass land (poor pasture) & the remaining under
cultivation,Slope=moderately flat
Figure 4-9: Ore culvert watershed area drainage pattern
#
Ore watershed area.shp
# Ore culvert outlet.shp
Ore stream.shp
0 0.5 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Ore Culvert Drainage Pattern
269000
269000
269500
269500
270000
270000
270500
270500
271000
271000
271500
271500
272000
272000
272500
272500
273000
273000
3
7
2
0
0
0
3
7
2
0
0
0
3
7
2
5
0
0
3
7
2
5
0
0
3
7
3
0
0
0
3
7
3
0
0
0
3
7
3
5
0
0
3
7
3
5
0
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
3
7
4
0
0
0
3
7
4
5
0
0
3
7
4
5
0
0
3
7
5
0
0
0
3
7
5
0
0
0
3
7
5
5
0
0
3
7
5
5
0
0

Figure 4-10: Ore culvert drainage orientation with elevation labeling
Table 4-9: Ore Culvert Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge Determination
S/N Description Value
2
8.53
5
25% Cultivated land) 1
7
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.38
w
) 0.75
10
L
) 0.95
A
) 0.27
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in No.
10 above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
19
From Figure 4: 2 yr 24hr point storm rainfall in mm(Figure
4.4) 70
21
25 yr flood factor, Fig 4.6 for 2:10yr ratio 1.49 & 25 yr
recurrence interval 1.74
TB
in mm 103.0
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 4.6) 218632.5226
3
/s (equation 4.7) 18.5
29 T
A
0.50
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
3.55
TB
in mm 105.0
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
222059.3035
3
/s 16.1
37 T
A
0.52
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
4.08
TB
in mm 106.7
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
228367.0958
3
/s 14.5
45 T
A
0.54
46 4
th
Approximation
47 T
B
4.61
TB
in mm 108.1
51 Runoff (RO) in m
3
232173.2188
3
/s 13.0
53 T
A
0.551

East African Flood model analysis for Ore culvert watershed area brought a peak
discharge value of 27.09m
3
/s for 25 years recurrence interval. This value also tallies
with the design consultant computed discharge value (28.4m
3
/s).

3. Enve Bridge
It is found on Arua-Koboko-Oraba road 17Km away from Arua with geographical
location at bridge outlet 3.15
0
N and 30.90
0
E.
2

Stream (channel) length =1 4.242Km
0
N 30.90
0
E
cultivation
Slope=moderately flat

54 5
th
Approximation
55 T
B
5.17
TB
in mm 109.4
59 Runoff (RO) in m
3
235484.9882
3
/s 11.8
61 T
A
0.552
25
) in m
3
/s 27.09

Figure 4-11 Enve Bridge drainage pattern
#S
Enve bridge watershed area.shp
#S Enve bridge outlet.shp
Enve bridge drainage.shp
1 0 1 2 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Enve stream Drainage Pattern
256000
256000
258000
258000
260000
260000
262000
262000
264000
264000
266000
266000 3
4
4
0
0
0
3
4
4
0
0
0
3
4
6
0
0
0
3
4
6
0
0
0
3
4
8
0
0
0
3
4
8
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
0
3
5
2
0
0
0
3
5
2
0
0
0
3
5
4
0
0
0
3
5
4
0
0
0

Figure 4-12: Enve bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling
Table 4-10:Enve Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge Determination
S.n. Description Value
2
86.8
5
From table 4.6, Lag Time (K) in hrs (for 75% poor pasture & 25%
Cultivated land) 1
7
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.38
w
) 0.75
10
Antecedent Rainfall Zone: Northern Uganda and Rainfall zone: Dry
Zone (Table 4.2)
L
) 0.95
A
) 0.27
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in No. 10
above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
21
25 yr flood factor, Fig 4.6 for 2:10yr ratio 1.49 & 25 yr recurrence
interval 1.74
TB
in mm 103.0
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 4.6) 1797899.379
3
/s (equation 4.7) 152.3
29 T
A
1.27
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
4.32
TB
in mm 107.4
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
1888020.22
3
/s 112.9
37 T
A
1.40
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
5.69
TB
in mm 110.4
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
2052077.028
3
/s 93.2
45 T
A
1.40
25
) in m
3
/s 214.40

Computed peak discharge for 25 years recurrence interval (214.4m3/s) shows a slight
difference with the design consultant value (239.5m
3
/s). This difference is largely
expected due to minor design parameters difference during computation and
catchment characteristics determination.
4. Goli Bridge
It is found on Nebbi-Goli road 14Km away from Nebbi with geographical location at
bridge outlet 2.38
0
N and 31.03
0
E.
2

Stream (channel) length =1 7.318Km
0
N 31.03
0
E
cultivation
Slope=Rolling terrain

Figure 4-13: Goli bridge drainage pattern
#
Goli stream Catchment.shp
# Goli stream outlet.shp
Goli stream.shp
0 5 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Goli Stream Drainage Pattern
268000
268000
270000
270000
272000
272000
274000
274000
276000
276000
278000
278000
280000
280000
282000
282000
284000
284000
2
5
4
0
0
0
2
5
4
0
0
0
2
5
6
0
0
0
2
5
6
0
0
0
2
5
8
0
0
0
2
5
8
0
0
0
2
6
0
0
0
0
2
6
0
0
0
0
2
6
2
0
0
0
2
6
2
0
0
0
2
6
4
0
0
0
2
6
4
0
0
0
2
6
6
0
0
0
2
6
6
0
0
0

Figure 4-14: Goli bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling
Table 4-11:Goli Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge Determination
2
112.1
5
Cultivated land) 1.1
7
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.45
w
) 0.75
10
Antecedent Rainfall Zone: Northern Uganda and Rainfall zone: Dry
Zone (Table 4.2)
L
) 0.95
A
) 0.32
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in No. 10
above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
21
interval 1.74
TB
in mm 103.9
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 2.6) 2671065.412
3
/s (equation 4.7) 210.4
29 T
A
0.76
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
4.04
TB
in mm 106.6
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
2710677.159
3
/s 173.2
37 T
A
0.802
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
4.85
TB
in mm 108.7
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
2928053.27
3
/s 156.1
45 T
A
0.823
46 4
th
Approximation
47 T
B
5.67
TB
in mm 110.3
51 Runoff (RO) in m
3
3023451.441
3
/s 137.8
53 T
A
0.849
54 5
th
Approximation
55 T
B
6.52
TB
in mm 111.7
59 Runoff (RO) in m
3
3104787.086
3
/s 123.1
61 T
A
0.873
62 6
th
Approximation
63 T
B
7.39
TB
in mm 112.9
67 Runoff (RO) in m
3
3175357.881
3
/s 111.0
69 T
A
0.91
70 7
th
Approximation
71 T
B
8.29
TB
in mm 113.9
75 Runoff (RO) in m
3
3237464.083
3
/s 100.9
77 T
A
0.91
25
) in m
3
/s 232.15
Likely the computed peak discharge for Goli stream under 25 years recurrence
interval (232.15) shows a tolerable difference with the design consultant value
(202.3
3
/s). This difference is largely expected due to minor design parameters
difference during computation and catchment characteristics determination.
5. Lebijo Culvert
Stream out let found at 3.440N and 31.020E on Arua-Koboko-Yumbe road 62Km
away from Arua town.
2

Stream (channel) length =2.11Km
0
N 31.02
0
E
cultivation
Slope=Rolling terrain
Stream type = Ephemeral

Figure4-15: Lebijo Culvert e drainage
#S
Lebijo stream catchment.shp
#S Lebijo stream outlet.shp
Lebijo stream.shp
0.4 0 0.4 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Lenijo Stream Drainage Pattern
278000
278000
278500
278500
279000
279000
279500
279500
280000
280000
280500
280500
281000
281000
3
8
0
5
0
0
3
8
0
5
0
0
3
8
1
0
0
0
3
8
1
0
0
0
3
8
1
5
0
0
3
8
1
5
0
0
3
8
2
0
0
0
3
8
2
0
0
0
3
8
2
5
0
0
3
8
2
5
0
0
Figure 4-16: Lebijo Culvert drainage orientation with elevation labeling
Table 4-12: Lebijo Culvert Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge Determination
2
3.69
5
Cultivated land) 1.5
7 From Figure 4.2 and Table 4.3, Standard Contributing Area Coefficient (C
S
) 0.45
w
) 0.5
10
Antecedent Rainfall Zone: Northern Uganda and Rainfall zone: Dry Zone
(Table 4.2)
L
) 0.95
A
) 0.21
14 Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in No. 10 above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
21 25 yr flood factor, Fig 4.6 for 2:10yr ratio 1.49 & 25 yr recurrence interval 1.74
TB
in mm 107.0
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 4.6) 80402.31302
3
29 T
A
0.22
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
4.42
TB
in mm 107.6
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
80510.084
3
/s 4.7
37 T
A
0.219
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
4.63
TB
in mm 108.2
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
81384.39735
3
/s 4.5
45 T
A
0.221
46 4
th
Approximation
47 T
B
4.86
TB
in mm 108.7
51 Runoff (RO) in m
3
81834.2297
3
/s 4.4
53 T
A
0.223
54 5
th
Approximation
55 T
B
5.08
TB
in mm 109.2
59 Runoff (RO) in m
3
82260.13191
3
/s 4.2
61 T
A
0.225
62 6
th
Approximation
63 T
B
5.30
TB
in mm 109.6
67 Runoff (RO) in m
3
82664.2209
3
/s 4.0
69 T
A
0.228
70 7
th
Approximation
71 T
B
5.53
TB
in mm 110.1
75 Runoff (RO) in m
3
83048.36353
3
/s 3.9
77 T
A
0.230
78 8
th
Approximation
79 T
B
5.76
TB
in mm 110.5
83 Runoff (RO) in m
3
83414.21279
3
/s 3.7
85 T
A
0.232
86 9
th
Approximation
87 T
B
5.99
TB
in mm 110.9
91 Runoff (RO) in m
3
83763.23794
3
/s 3.6
93 T
A
0.234
94 10
th
Approximation
95 T
B
6.23
TB
in mm 111.3
99 Runoff (RO) in m
3
84096.74961
3
/s 3.5
101 T
A
0.236
102 11
th
Approximation
103 T
B
6.46
TB
in mm 111.6
107 Runoff (RO) in m
3
84415.92085
3
/s 3.4
109 T
A
0.24
110 12
th
Approximation
111 T
B
6.70
TB
in mm 112.0
3
84721.80501
3
/s 3.3
117 T
A
0.24
25
) in m
3
/s 7.51

Peak discharge generated from Lebijo stream catchment area (7.51 m
3
/s) nearly equal
to the computed discharge by the design consultant (7m3/s).
6. Enyau-3 Bridge
It is located on Arua Ediofe road with in the Arua town. Geographically the bridge
is found at 3.02
0
N 30.90
0
E.
Catchment area = 40.80Km2
Stream (channel) length =18.043Km
0
N 30.90
0
E
cultivation
Slope=moderately flat terrain
Stream type = Perennial


Figure 4-17: Enyau-3Bridge drainage pattern
Enyau-3 Catchment.shp
Enyau-3 stream.shp
0 3 Kilometers
N
E W
S
Enyau-3 Stream Drainage Pattern
260000
260000
262000
262000
264000
264000
266000
266000
268000
268000
270000
270000
272000
272000
3
2
4
0
0
0
3
2
4
0
0
0
3
2
6
0
0
0
3
2
6
0
0
0
3
2
8
0
0
0
3
2
8
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
3
2
0
0
0
3
3
2
0
0
0
3
3
4
0
0
0
3
3
4
0
0
0

Figure 4-18: Enyau-3 bridge drainage orientation with elevation labeling
Table 4-13:Enyau-3 bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination
S/N. Description Value
2
40.8
4 Channel Length in Km 18
5
25% Cultivated land) 1.02
7
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.38
w
) 0.75
10
L
) 1
A
) 0.29
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Antecedent Rainfall zone in No.
10 above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
21
interval 1.74
TB
in mm 103.2
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 4.6) 989320.2764
3
29 T
A
2.00
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
5.09
TB
in mm 109.2
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
1062440.566
3
/s 53.9
37 T
A
2.23
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
7.32
TB
in mm 112.8
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
1139050.838
3
/s 40.2
45 T
A
2.331
25
) in m
3
/s 92.48

25 years recurrence interval peak flood of 92.48m
3
/s makes a slight difference with
the design consultant peak discharge value (100m
3
/s).
4.8 Hydrology Review Summery

The design consultant used TRRL flood model to estimate the peak discharge for
both bridge and culvert structures hydraulic design .But no detail hydrologic
calculation shown on the design report for both bridge and culvert design
hydrological analysis .It was much preferable and advantageous to incorporate or to
show at least one sample calculation just to examine the overall hydrologic approach.

However, the review consultant TRLL East African Model hydrological analysis
finding for a total of six sample major and minor streams strongly tallies with the
design consultant hydrological investigation outputs.

Hence, it will be appropriate to accept the design consultant hydrological analysis
output mainly relaying upon the above sample peak discharge determination
implications.

4.9 Hydraulics

Hydraulic design primarily aims at providing a drainage structure of adequate
capacity that can safely convey the design flow without causing any damages or
inconveniences to the road body. This involves computation and evaluation of scour
and determination of waterway openings to accommodate the peak design discharges
of the watercourses located along the road alignment at their respective crossing sites.

Peak discharge determined (from hydrologic analysis), longitudinal and cross
sectional surveying data of the identified drainage crossing, geological and
geotechnical investigation data are the major prerequisite for hydraulic design.

HEC RAS software which needs a comprehensive geometric and physiographic data
is used for bridge hydraulic analysis (waterway opening size determination).Four
major sample bridges (Oluffe, Goli, Enve and Enyau-3) are taken to undertake HEC
RAS 4.0 detailed hydraulic analysis .This analysis enables the review consultant to
evaluate the design consultant hydraulic designs and to provide all the necessary
recommendation based on it.

Evaluation of the design consultant culvert hydraulic design is conducted by HY 8.7
culvert hydraulic design software of the FHWA which take into account hydraulic,
channel and road geometric data. Two sample culverts are taken for undertaking a
detailed hydraulic analysis and to evaluate the design consultant culvert overall
hydraulic design.

4.10 HEC Ras 4.0 Bridge Hydraulic Analysis

HEC-RAS is an integrated system of software, developed by U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Centre. It is designed to perform one-dimensional
hydraulic calculations for a full network of natural and constructed channels. The
system is comprised of a graphical user interface (GUI), separate hydraulic analysis
components, data storage and management capabilities, graphics and reporting
facilities. It contains three-one dimensional hydraulic analysis components for: (1)
steady flow water surface profile computations; (2) unsteady flow simulation; (3)
movable boundary sediment transport computations.

In addition to the three hydraulic analysis components, the system contains several
hydraulic design features that can be invoked once the basic water surface profiles are
computed. The effects of various obstructions such as bridges, culverts, weirs, and
structures in the flood plain may be considered in the computations. The steady flow
system is designed for application in flood plain management and flood insurance
studies to evaluate floodway encroachments.

Therefore, the latest version of the software, that is, HEC-RAS 4.0 used for bridge
hydraulic design at selected bridge site so as to check the hydraulic sufficiency of the
proposed structure by the design consultant.

1. Oluffe Bridge

Design parameters

Geometric data (stream cross section at bridge site, U/s and D/S of the proposed
bridge).Flow data from hydrological analysis (Q25=226.26m3/s)

HEC RAS 4.0 Hydraulic Analysis output

Routing the design discharge through Oluffe stream channel geometry make the flood
water to have a defined flood span and height with respect to the proposed bridge
waterway opening size.

Figure 4-19: Oluffe proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view


Figure 4-20: Oluffe proposed bridge with 25 years design flood
Summary of Oluffe Bridge HEC-RAS 4.0 (Review consultant)

Design discharge at 25 years flood =226.26m3/s
Flood depth = 3.17m
Free board ~1.8m
Froud number = 0.76
Flow type = sub critical flow
Bridge top width = 25m
Total clear height of the bridge =5.06m (From lowest river bed level)

Provided bridge opening size by the design consultant

Total clear height of the bridge =8.06

Finished grade level of the bridge obtained from hydraulic analysis by far less than
finished grade level provided by the design consultant. This is mainly due to
geometric design considerations thereby increasing the overall hydraulic performance
of the bridge in relation to the provided span.

2. Enve Bridge

Design parameters



Routing the design discharge through Enve stream channel geometry make the flood
waterway opening size.

Figure 4-21: Enve proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view

Figure 4-22: Enve proposed bridge with 25 years design flood
Summary of Enve Bridge HEC-RAS 4.0 (Review consultant)

Flood depth = 4.0m
Free board ~1.5m
Froud number = 0.65
Total clear height of the bridge =5.64m (From lowest river bed level)



Finished grade level obtained from both the design and the review consultant is
highly comparable. Hence, provided bridge opening size is hydraulically safe to
accommodate 25 years design peak discharge.

3. Goli Bridge

Design parameters



Routing the design discharge through Goli stream channel geometry make the flood
waterway opening size

Figure 4-23: Goli proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view


Figure 4-24: Goli proposed bridge with 25 years design flood
Summary of Goli Bridge HEC-RAS 4.0 (Review consultant)

Flood depth = 3.25m
Free board ~1.5m
Froud number = 0.97
Total clear height of the bridge =4.85 (From lowest river bed level)



Finished grade level obtained from the design consultant is higher than the computed
one with the same bridge span. This is just to maintain geometric design parameters
thereby improving the overall hydraulic performance the proposed bridge.

4. Enyau-3 Bridge

Design parameters

bridge).Flow data from hydrological analysis (Q25=92.48m3/s).


Routing the design discharge through Enyau-3 stream channel geometry make the
flood water to have a defined flood span and height with respect to the proposed
bridge waterway opening size.


Figure 4-25: Enyau-3 proposed bridge U/S & D/S cross sectional view


Figure 4-26: Enyau-3 proposed bridge with 25 years design flood
Summary of Enyau-3 Bridge HEC-RAS 4.0 (Review consultant)

Flood depth = 3.02m
Free board ~1.5m
Froud number = 0.58
Total clear height of the bridge =4.37 (From lowest river bed level)


Design discharge at 25 years flood =100m3/s

Likely, finished grade level obtained from the design consultant is higher than the
computed one with the same bridge span. This is just to maintain geometric design
parameters thereby improving the overall hydraulic performance the proposed bridge.

4.11 HY-8.7 CULVERT HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
HY-8 is culvert hydraulic design software developed by FHWA which take into
account specific geometric (channel and road features) and flow data. HY-8
automates culvert hydraulic computations. As a result, a number of essential features
that makes culvert analysis and design easier.

HY-8 enables users to analyze:
The performance of culverts
Multiple culvert barrels at a single crossing as well as multiple crossings
Roadway overtopping at the crossing and
Develop report documentation in the form of performance tables, graphs, and
key information regarding the input variables.

1.Ore Culvert

Two scenarios have been treated here just to evaluate the existing structure hydraulic
performance and to undertake culvert hydraulic analysis at the proposed one.

Scenario one

This scenario refers evaluating Existing Ore culvert hydraulic performance with no
amendment on the size of the culvert. Existing Ore Culvert has 4 X 1350mm diameter
steel pipe culvert.
Table 4-14: Ore existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis

Table 4-15: Ore existing culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario one)

Figure 4-27: Ore existing culvert cross sectional view

Table and figure above implied that existing Culvert hydraulic condition under
scenario one shows that culvert overtopped by the incoming flood as its existing size
doesnt accommodate the design peak discharge. This finding also tallies with the
design consultant existing structure hydraulic performance evaluation remarks.

Scenario two

This scenario refers replacing the existing Ore culvert by double 4500mm span by
1500mm rise box culvert with the intention of providing safe and hydraulically
efficient culvert.

Table 4-16: Ore existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis

Table 4-17: Ore new culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario two)

Figure 4-28: Ore new culvert cross sectional view

Ore newly provided or designed culvert as shown from the above table and figure can
sufficiently accommodate the design peak discharge with no road overtopping effect.
Hence, provision of double 4500mm span by 1500mm rise culvert by the design
consultant is appropriate so as to achieve hydraulically sound structure at specified
location of Arua-Koboko-Orba Road.

2. Lebijo Culvert

Likely, two scenarios have been treated here just to evaluate the existing structure
hydraulic performance and to undertake culvert hydraulic analysis at the proposed
one.

Scenario one

This scenario refers evaluating Existing Lebijo culvert hydraulic performance with no
amendment on the size of the culvert. Existing Lebijo Culvert has 3 X 1500mm
diameter steel pipe culvert and design discharge of 7.51m3/s.


Table 4-18: Lebijo existing culvert input data for HY-8.7 hydraulic analysis

Table 4-19: Lebijo Existing culvert hydraulic analysis summery (scenario one)


Figure 4-29: Lebijo existing culvert cross sectional view

Existing Lebijo culvert hydraulic performance evaluation shows that existing culvert
can safely accommodate 25 years recurrence interval peak flood. However, additional
pipe culvert provision with the existing one will increase the hydraulic performance
of the structure and its capacity to accommodate uncertain floods in its life time.

Scenario two

Provision of additional two pipes of the same size with the existing once. This will
make the structure more hydraulically safe there by accommodating all the probable
peak floods.i.e a total of 5 pipe culverts of diameter 1500mm provided.

Table 4-20: Lebijo culvert (additional culvert) HY-8.7 input data

Table 4-21: Lebijo culvert (with additional culvert) hydraulic analysis summery
(scenario two)
Figure 4-30: Lebijo culvert (with additional culvert) cross sectional view.

4.12 Culvert Hydraulic Design Review Output

HY 8.7 culvert hydraulic design output of Ore and Lebijo culverts under different
scenarios showed that the design consultant hydraulic finding and recommendation
by large tally with the review consultant deign output. Though the design consultant
used Culvert Master rather than the most advisable HY 8.7 culvert hydraulic design
software, small drainage structures overall design outputs are acceptable from the
review consultant evaluation perspective.

4.13 Hydraulic Design Review
The design consultant has made bridge hydraulic analysis using a widely adopted
HEC RAS software .However no detail hydraulic analysis input- output flow HEC
RAS progress steps or description provided on the report

The design consultant doesnt compute the possible constriction, pier and abutment
scour depths for each bridge. Though it may not be possible to see the scour on each
bridge physically at this time, the probable maximum flood may bring a significant
scour on the structure in its design period.

Culvert flow master software was used by the design consultant for culvert flow
hydraulic design purpose .Though it is a usual approach to undertake culvert
hydraulic analysis through culvert Master ,it will be much preferable and advisable
to undertake culvert flow hydraulic analysis using FHWA HY-8.7 software due to the
following reasons:

It take into account site specific channel and road geometric data
Considers minimum, design and peak discharge values specific to the
crossing.
Strong tabular and graphical presentation that will make the designer to
visualize the overall flow condition more clearly.

Likely to the hydrologic analysis no hydraulic design data which can be used for
comparison purpose presented on the report but hydraulic design output comparisons
at selected bridges and culverts showed that the design consultant hydraulic design is
reasonably acceptable.

4.14 Existing Structures Physical Assessment

As stated before the review consultant has made a detailed physical investigation
together with the concerned professionals from the Ministry of Work and Transport
on each existing and proposed structures .The findings of this physical investigation
presented i in a tabular form below for each lot under the new scope of the service
and the rest of the bridges:

Table 4-22: bridge physical survey summery for the 6 bridges under the new scope of services.

S/
N
Bridge
Name
Route &
District
Flow
direction
Coordinate Bridge span(m) Hydraulic Condition Remark
Easting Northing
Existing
(Design
con.)
Existin
g (Field
survey)
Proposed
(Des.
Cons.)
Design
Const.
Our field
survey
Design Cons. Review Cons.
1 Alla Arua-Inde-
packwach(Arua)
R to L (from
Arua to Inde)
285641 321381 14.23 14.2 20 Adequate Inadequate River training
work u/s
River channel protection
work both u/s & d/s
required. Large logs
transported through the
stream(no pier required)
2 Enayu-3 Arua-Edi0fe
(Arua)
L to R (from
Arua to
Ediofe)
267062 333770 9.42 12.3 15 Adequate Inadequate -
Some abutment protection
work required as the flood is
coming from steep portion
3 Nyagake-3 Jqang-Okoro-
Alyenda(Nebbi)
L to R (from
Okoro to
Alyenda)
266974 270220 10.5 12 4X4
(3)
Inadequate Inadequate Overtopping Overtopped and inundate
the str. Frequently as it is
flood plain. Height should
be raised.
4 Goli Nebbi-Goli
Custom(Nebbi)
R to L (from
Nebbi to
Goli)
280863 263203 12.2 15 25 Inadequate adequate Overtopping Proposed structure span
make the structure
hydraulically over safe
5 Nyacara Nebbi-
Erussi(Nebbi)
L to R (from
Nebbi town
to Pakwala)
287827 274042 - - 15 - - -
Flood plain area with flat
slope (No existing bridge)
6 Pakwala Nebbi-
Erussi(Nebbi)
- - - - - 15 - - - Site should be sited before
confirming the design

Table 4-23: Lot 1 bridge physical survey summery
S/N.
Bridge
Name
Route &
District
Flow
direction
Easting Northing
Existing
(Design
con.)
Existin
g (Field
survey)
Proposed
(Des.Cons.
Design
Const.
Our field
survey
Design
Cons.
Review Cons.
1 Enayu-1 Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
267125 342069 17.2 18 20 Adequate Adequate - Bank erosion d/s should be
protected and inland
obstruction down stream
should be removed as it
causes back water effect)
2 Enve Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
267147 348930 17.9 18 25 Inadequate Adequate River
overtops Proposed span make the
structure over safe
3 Oluffe Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
overtops
Proposed span make the
structure over safe and d/s
bank protection
recommended as it is a
loose deposition
4 Ayi Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
overtops
Channel constriction d/s
should be avoided as it
may cause back water
effect
5 Kia-Kia Arua-Wandi-
Invep-Rhino-
Camp
2 X 20m Surrounding area is
swampy dense grass land.
The construction bridge is
could be more expensive.
Rather it is cheaper to
construct a road on a fill
having series of box
culverts and relief pipes



S/N
Bridge
Name
Route &
District
Flow
direction
Easting Northing
Existing
(Design
con.)
Existing
(Field
survey)
Proposed
(Des.Cons.)
Design
Const.
Our field
survey
Design Cons. Review Cons.
1 Yoyo Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
271976 368197 14.8 15 15 Adequate Adequate -
Flow obstruction on immediate
U/S should be removed as it
causes sudden rise of water
2 Oru Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
272522 369025 20 but
culvert
u/s
20 20 Adequate Adequate Culvert acts as
flow obstruction
& overtopped
Culvert should be removed as it
alters flow condition on the
bridge
3 Apa-1 Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
272909 375995 8.6 8.6 15 Adequate Adequate -
Proposed span make the
structure over safe
4 Ore Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
272892 373464 Culvert(4
X
1350mm)
Culvert(4
X
1350mm)
2 X 4.5m
box
culvert
Inadequat
e
Inadequa
te
Culvert
overtopped
Culvert frequently overtopped
,proposed size accepted with
regular cleaning work in the
future
5 Kochi Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from Arua
to Koboko)
273325 381108 8 6.1 12 Inadequat
e
Inadequa
te
River overtops
existing structures overtopped
& should be replaced by the
proposed one
6 Debara Arua-Koboko-
Orba(Arua)
L to R
(from
Koboko to
Orba)
265890 390867 Culvert(4
X
1350mm)
Culvert(4
X
1350mm)
2 X 4.5m
box
culvert
Inadequat
e
Inadequa
te
River overtops
Failed bridge on immediate u/s
should be removed as it causes
sudden rise of water
7 Lebijo Arua-Koboko-
Yumbie(Arua)
L to R
(from
Koboko to
Yumbie)
279881 380785 Culvert(3
X
1800mm)
Culvert(3
X
1800mm)
15 Inadequat
e
Inadequa
te
River overtops Failed bridge on immediate d/s
should be removed as it has
back water effect on the
proposed structure

S/
N
Bridge
Name
Route &
District
Flow
direction
Easting Northing
Existing
(Design
con.)
Existing
(Field
survey)
Proposed
(Des.
Cons.)
Design
Const.
Our
field
survey
Design
Cons.
Review Cons.
1 Ora-1 Nebbi-Akaba-
Kucwiny-
Wadela (Nebbi)
L to R (from
Pakwach to
Arua)
321246 300833 24.5 24 2 X 20 Inadequate Inadequate Overtopping Overtopped and inundate the
bridge frequently. Height
should be raised .Gauging
station found on the bridge
2 Ora-2 Nebbi-Akaba-
Kucwiny-
Wadela(Nebbi)
L to R (from
Pakwach to
Arua)
321227 300847 8.34 20 2 X 4.0m
box
culvert
Inadequate Inadequate Overtopping
Overtopped and inundate the
str. frequently. Height should
be raised.
3 Cido Nebbi-Goli-
Japanziri-
Erussi(Nebbi)
R to L (from
Goli to
Erussi)
284420 262039 5.65 6 15 adequate Inadequate - Overtopping occurred in
history. Bank Protection work
required both u/s and d/s
4.15 Conclusion and Recommendations

As described before the review consultant through its detailed hydrological /hydraulic
investigation, report review and field survey come up with the following findings

Though the design consultant hydrology hydraulics design report doesnt incorporate
some deign parameters and detail spread sheet or any other software application
detail calculation, the overall design can be accepted as it is comparable with the
review consultant hydrologic and hydraulic analysis outputs. Apart from this, no
scour or erosion protection work design conducted by design consultant.

The review consultant has arrived at the following recommendations

Relaying upon the description on field survey summery table for each bridge, the
review consultant will recommend scour and erosion protection works where ever it
is required during project supervision period in relation to geotechnical investigation
that will be conducted at later stage of the project.

The review consultant also conducts any hydraulic design modification works
depending upon site specific conditions that will be seen at implementation phase of
the project with close coordination between the resident engineer and review
consultant hydraulic designer.

5 STRUCTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
5.1 General

The statical calculations that were carried out for the project by the design consultant
were not provided for review. The review consultant discussed the need to confirm
the sufficiency of the structural designs of at least four types of openings with
inclusion of one double span bridge (25, 20, 15 and 12mt will be covered).
The design consultant considered the following simple spans or combination of
spans.
25mt 4 Bridges
20mt 5 Bridges
15mt 8 Bridges
12mt 1 Bridge
Accordingly, the review consultant has carried out the necessary statical calculations
for the above mentioned span arrangements.
5.2 Scope

The scope of the Structural Design review is to
Conduct Detailed Structural Analysis of the Superstructure, Substructure and
check the sufficiency of the design done by the Design Consultant, ACE
Consulting Engineers according to the relevant British Standard (BS 5400 or
other British standards deemed applicable). The sample bridges are as listed
below;
Table 5-1: List of Sample Bridges
No. Bridge Name District Lot Span Remark
1 Kia Kia Bridge Arua 1 2 * 25 Pile foundation
2 Kochi Bridge Arua 2 1 * 12
3 Lebijo Bridge Arua 2 1* 15
4 Ora 1 Bridge Nebbi 3 2 * 20 Pile foundation

Based on the structural analysis, recommend modifications deemed necessary
to the designs, and any other relevant aspects. Make any necessary drawings
at appropriate scales, incorporating any modifications or details as required.
5.3 Structural System

One of the most popular types of highway bridges in use today is the composite steel
beam bridge. Composite Beam Bridge utilizes a concrete slab deck to act
monolithically with steel girders in resisting loads placed on the bridge. Shear
connectors welded to top flange are used to prevent slippage which is caused by the
compression in the top of the beam at the slab-beam interface. With shear connectors
in place, the slab and beam can be analyzed as a single unit.
The I-shaped beam is then replaced by a T-shaped cross section composed of the slab
and the girder. In the structural analysis the slab is transformed into an equivalent
steel section using the concept of modular ratio. The advantage of transforming the
slab into an equivalent steel section has the major advantage of increasing
significantly the moment of inertia of the bridge section and subsequently its section
modulus, thus resulting with stiffer cross-section and overload capacity and a
reduction in live load deflections.
The bridge designed as composite concrete-steel member will be analyzed to
determine the actual strength of the bridge and then to compare it with the member
forces loaded with the values specified by the British Standard for composite bridge.
5.4 Design Codes

The following British Standards have been used in analyzing the designed bridge:
BS 5400: Part 1: 1988
British standard Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 1: General statement

BS 5400: Part 2: 1978
Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 2: Specification for loads

BS 5400: Part 3: 1988
Part 3: Code of practice for design of steel bridges

BS 5400: Part 4: 1988
Part 4: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges

BS 5400: Part 5: 1988
Part 4: Code of practice for design of composite bridges

BS 5400: Section 9.1: 1983
Part 9: Bridge bearings
Section 9.1 Code of practice for design of concrete bridges

BS 5400: Part 10: 1980
Part 10: Code of practice for fatigue
5.5 Materials Properties

The design review is based on the material properties cited herein.
5.5.1 Concrete Grade:
Concrete strengths are classified according to the minimum 28-day crushing
compressive strength of 150mm cubes in N/mm
2
.

Reinforced Concrete for Column and Superstructure 35 N/mm
2

Reinforced Concrete for Abutments and Retaining wall 35 N/mm
2

Reinforced Concrete for Pile Caps 30 N/mm
2

Plain Concrete for Foundations 20 N/mm
2

Concrete for Piles 30 N/mm
2

E
c
= 29 000 N/mm
2
(Table 3-BS 5400: Part 4)
5.5.2 Reinforcement Steel

The reinforcing bar steel should be High Grade 36/52 with the following properties,
Ultimate Tensile Stress 5200kg/cm
2

Yield Stress 3600kg/cm
2

5.5.3 Structural steel grade:

The Structural Steel is Grade (37 2) according to DIN 17100 specification and BS
4360.
s
y
= 275 N/mm
2
for t < 16 mm
s
y
= 265 N/mm
2
for 16 < t < 40 mm
Modulus of elasticity, E
s
= 205 000 N/mm
2
(Article 6.6 BS 5400: Part 3)
5.6 Design Limit States

The following limit states are considered for the Design Review
- Strength limit state /Ultimate Limit State/
- Serviceability limit state

5.6.1 Strength Limit State

The strength limit state refers to providing sufficient strength or resistance to satisfy
the design limits for statistically significant load combinations that the bridge is
expected to experience in its design life. Strength limit states include the evaluation
of resistance to bending, shear, torsion and axial load.

Violation of the strength limit state occurs when safety of the structure is endangered
through:
- Unlimited deformation
- Overturning
- Instability
Extensive distress and structural damage may occur but overall structural integrity is
expected to be maintained.
5.6.2 Serviceability Limit State
The service limit state shall be taken as restrictions on stress deformations and crack
width, under regular service conditions. The design level of these actions is chosen so
that they:
- Do not make the bridge unfit for use
- Do not cause public concern
- Do not significantly reduce the service life of the bridge
5.7 Minimum Clear Cover to Reinforcement
Minimum cover to main bars for superstructures and substructures, shall be
25 mm for decks
40 mm for walls
70 mm for foundations
5.8 Detailed Design Review of Bridges
5.8.1 Superstructure
In the review of the superstructure design, the following loads have been considered.
Dead Load
Rolling Live Load
Lane Loading
Live Load Impact
5.8.2 Substructure
The substructure is analyzed based on the assumption that all piers and abutments to
be founded on solid rock with bearing capacity of 300 kPa.
The following loads had been considered in the review of substructures design:
Dead loads
Live loads
Wind loads on structure
Wind load on live loads
Longitudinal forces
Stream Forces
The stability of the substructures was checked against Overturning, Bearing Pressure
and Sliding.
5.8.3 Review Procedure
The following general procedure is used to review the structures design following
conventional structural theory:
Specify the quality of construction materials used and their strengths and
calculate material properties
Record dimensions for the different parts of the superstructure from drawings
Using the structure depth, prepare sketch of the cross section of the
superstructure with the above dimensions
Determine dead-load moments
Determine live-load moment at point of maximum moment
Slab Analysis
o Internal bending moment in slab
o Concrete Slab Bending Moment Strength
Non-Composite Steel Beam Analysis
o Internal bending moment in non composite portion of steel
girder
o Steel Girders Bending Moment Strength
o Composite Section Bending Moment Strength
- Loading on composite beam
- Bending resistance of composite steel girders
o Shear Connector Static Strength and Fatigue Strength
- Internal shear force in composite steel girder
- Shear Connector Static Strength and Fatigue
Strength
Check deflection due to dead load
Check details
Compute the reactions (maximum and minimum at supports) for bearing,
abutment and pier design
Substructure Structure Analysis
o Loading on Pile
o Pile Strength
o Pile Bearing Stress
o Pile Bearing Strength
o Maximum Moment at Base of Stem
o Moment Capacity
o Maximum Shear at Base of Stem
o Shear Capacity
Check Bridge Bearings
5.9 Geometric Design Review of Approach Road

In the review design the re-alignments ends were not on continuation of the existing
both on the plan and on the profile so an amendment is made to make it continuse by
provding a curve on the lay out. And it is also tried to make the re-alignment ends at
the same grade with the existing road.
Side slope should be designed to insure the stability of the roadway and to provide a
resonable opportunity for recovery of control vehicle. Therefore, the following values
,from uganda geometric design manual, would be adopted for design purpose of the
projects.
Table 5-2: Slope ratio table (Vertical to Horizontal ratio)
Material
Type
Height of
Slope(m)
Fill Side
slope
V:H
Cut
Type of slope
Back
Slope
Side Slope
V:H
soil
0.00-1.00 1:4 1:3 1:4* Recoverable
1.00-3.00 1:2 1:2 1:2 Critical
Over 3.00 1:1.5 1:1.5 1:1.5 Critical
Compacted
Lateritic Soil
0.00-1.00 1:4 1:2 1:4* Recoverable
1.00-3.00 1:2 1:1.5 1:2 Critical
Over 3.00 1:1.5 1:1 1:1.5 Critical
Hard Rock
0.00-2.00 1:1.25 3:1 1:1.25 Critical
over 2.00 1:1 4:1 1:1 Critical
Weathered
Rock
0.00-2.00 1:1.5 3:1 1:1.5 Critical
over 2.00 1:1 3:1 1:1 Critical
Decomposed
Rock
0.00-1.00 1:4 1:3 1:4* Recoverable
1.00-3.00 1:2 1:2 1:2 Critical
Over 3.00 1:1.5 1:1.5 1:1.5 Critical

* In hilly, mountainous and difficult area 1:4 could be reduced to

From traffic studies recommendation and conclusion shown clearly on Traffic Study
report of the design consultant, the road class will be considered as class III of
bitumens and as discussed with the ministry of works, to decrease the overall cost
(decreasing the width from 8.6m to 8.0m) and to increase the carriage way from 5.6m
to 6.5m, road design parameter shown below is adopted to design the approach road.


Road Design Classe

Design
Class
Capacity
[pcu x
1,000/day]
Road-
way
width[m]
Maximum Design speed
Kph
Functional
Classification
Level Rolling Mountainous A B C D E
III Paved 2 6 8.0 80 70 50

Road Design Classe (continued)

Design
class
Right of Way
width [m]
Road way
width [m]
Carriage way
Shoulder
width [m]
Median
width
[m]
Width
[m]
Lane width
[m]
No. of
lane

III Paved 50 8.0 6.5 3.25 2 2 x 1.0 -

Geometric Design Parameters for Design Standard III Paved

Design Element Unit Flat Rolling Mountainous
Urban/Peri-
Urban
Design Speed km/h 80 70 50 50
Min. Stopping Sight Distance m 115 95 60 60
Min. Passing Sight Distance m 545 485 345 345
Min. Horizontal Curve Radius m 240 185 85 100
Max. Gradient (desirable) % 4 5.5 9 9
Max. Gradient (absolute) % 6 7.5 11 11
Minimum Gradient in cut % 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Maximum Superelevation % 7 7 7 4
Crest Vertical Curve stopping K
min
32 22 9 9
Crest Vertical Curve passing K
min
310 246 126 126
Sag Vertical Curve stopping K
min
25 20 11 11
Normal Cross fall % 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
Shoulder Cross fall % 4 4 4 4
Right of Way m 50 50 50 30
5.10 Conclusion and Recommendation
5.10.1 Structural Analysis
The structural analysis carried out on the representative four bridges has determined
that all structural members of the superstructure and substructure of each bridge is
capable of carrying the loads stipulated by the British Standard BS 5400.
5.10.2 Foundation
The design consultant, in most places, recommended placing the foundation on
replaced soil or complete replacement including over the river bed where exposed
rock are encountered on the surface (Ayi, Yoyo, Apa and Lebijo crossing sites). This
will result in scouring of the foundation soil; hence the review consultant has
proposed placing the structures on the rock strata.
6 KIA-KIA BRIDGE REVIEW
6.1 Background

Following the insufficiency of the original design of Kia Kia Bridge and the
meeting with the Client on 19 July 2010, it was resolved that the Design Review
Consultant prepare preliminary engineering design for the bridge to address the actual
site conditions and to include these designs in the bidding documents to be issued to
the works contractors.

In actuality, the proposed bridge site is a swamp of about 3.1 Km that had initially
been designed for, as a stream of maximum width 100m. The swamp is made up of
about 4no. Perennial streams and small rivers which spill over during the rainy season
causing the whole swampy section of 3.1km to be waterlogged.
The proposed design would therefore, include the provision of one multiple
cell box culvert across the width of the defined channel flanked by a sufficient
number and size of pipe culverts adequately spaced along the 3.1km wide
stream section, with embankment/fill heights of between 2.5m to 3.5m. The
construction of the box culvert is intended to proceed simultaneously with the
construction of the lower sub-grade portion of the embankment during the
initial stage of the construction.

Due to very wet and swampy sub-grade conditions, a stage construction
technique is highly recommended for embankment works of this section in
order to accelerate the consolidation rate of the embankment and maintain a
stable sub- grade section. The stage construction will essentially take into
account a settlement period of 3-6 months which is presumed sufficient for
gradual consolidation (settlement) to take effect on the lower portion of the
embankment or bottom sub-grade, due to combined surcharge load and its
own weight. The consolidation will be closely monitored and recorded on
regular schedule until the bottom sub-grade is fully stabilized, allowing the top
sub-grade works to continue.

Based on the discussion held between the client and the review consultant, the
following design measures be taken so as to come up with appropriate designs for the
swamp crossing:
1. The Hydraulic/Hydrological design analysis of the culverts to be carried out
during this design review period by taking into account the actual topographic
survey data of the stream channel, the existing hydraulic/flood data, peak
discharge etc to enable the Consultant to ensure the adequacy of the proposed
hydraulic structures.

2. The Consultant to conduct a topographic survey of the existing river crossing in
order to establish appropriately channel cross-sections that would enable him to
generate cross-sections, preferably at intervals of 20m RHS/LHS of the
centerline, in order to carryout the Hydraulic/Hydrological design analysis of
culverts accurately and determine the volume of permanent works involved
realistically.
3. The Consultant to perform some materials investigation, by means of trial pits, or
other suitable means in order to establish the location and depth of unsuitable
material and estimate the work volume required for cut to spoil etc.

4. Based on the topographic survey data, hydraulic/hydrology studies and actual
findings of the geotechnical investigations, complete preliminary engineering
design drawings of the road embankment and the culverts, which show the bidder
all the relevant details of the permanent works, be prepared and made available
along with the tender documents so as to avoid or avert any claims that may arise,
during the construction period, due to discrepancies of ground data.
6.2 Field Investigation

6.2.1 General

The proposed swamp crossing on the one side at a point N326037, E0343029,
Elevation 630m marks the end of the road from Arua town-Wandi-Ocodri-Mile 3
(Panvara)-Rigbo-Aringa (78Km) and on the other side at a point N326784, E348582,
Elevation 620m marks the end of the road from Arua town-Wandi-Odravu-Odupi-
Kulikulinga-Okubani-Roga(Ewanga) 103Km. It should be noted however, that the
last 5Km via the Arua-Wandi-Kulikulinga route is a foot path used by the residents
who normally cross the swamp on foot especially during the dry season.
6.2.2 Field Visit

The Consultant carried out a field visit at the project site from 15 September 2010 to
18 September 2010, so as to come up sufficient design data for the proposed swamp
crossing. During the same period in particular, on the 17 September 2010; the
Consultant was joined by a delegation from UNRA, Arua Station as follow-up to the
Consultants field activities.

UNRA Official on the canoe through
the swamp

6.2.3 Surveying Work

The Consultant established benchmarks at the beginning of the proposed swamp
crossing so as to have control for the surveying work. The equipment that was
employed for use in the topographic survey work was the Total Station and Hand
GPS Receiver.

However, 20m into the swamp, it became practically impossible to do the required
surveying works stated on the agreement regarding to Kia-Kia swamp crossing. The
swamp at the time of the visit was water logged with water levels ranging from 1m to
2m covered by vegetation that will make the overall data collection process difficult
and insufficient. Hence, an agreement has been reached among data collection team,
local administrative body and UNRA representative to undertake topographic
surveying work and other investigation during dry seasons of the year.
UNRA Official measures depth of
water at a point along the crossing
Benchmark No.2 established at beginning
of proposed crossing

Photo shows one of the chainmen holding a prism in the swamp,
beyond this point, it was impossible to set up the Total Station.
Photo shows survey works hindered by depth of water.
6.2.4 Geotechnical Investigations
The review Consultant was only able to dig trial pits at the beginning of the proposed
swamp crossing (Ch 0+000) and at the end (Ch 3+100) and samples have since been
submitted to MoWT, Central Materials Lab, Kireka for the relevant tests.

However, the Consultant was hindered by the prevailing water levels to dig trial pits
at 500m intervals along the proposed crossing at the time of field investigation
.Likely to surving work an agreement has been reached to undertake geotechnical
investigation that will provide reliable input for further design work.

6.2.5 Investigation of Construction Material Sources
So as to have ready for supply, adequate (both quantity and quality) construction
materials for the proposed crossing at Kia-Kia, the Consultant also carried out some
material surveys.
A total of twelve (14) locations ( i.e. 7 were potential gravel sources, 5 potential
quarry sites, 2 potential sand sources) were identified.
Photos showing the trial pits that were
ably dug at beginning and end of
proposed swamp crossing.
However, the majority are situated between 19 to as far as 86Km away from the
proposed crossing site. Only 2 borrow pits and 1 sand source were identified within 1
3 Km away from the site and the samples from these ideal sources have since been
taken to Kireka Materials Lab for the relevant tests to be performed.
Some of the identified borrow pits

Some of the identified quarry sites


Some of the identified sources of sand

More details pertaining to location, quantity estimation and material test results will
be included in the Design Report to be submitted to the Client at end of the review
period.

6.2.6 Physical Hydrological Investigation
Physical hydrological data collection has been conducted during field survey mainly
on the following points:
- Flood inundation extent assessment (width and depth of flooding across the
flood plain)
- Flow concentrated zone physical identification
- Flood mark physical identification
- Appropriate Drainage structures type and extent physical identification
Based on physical hydrological assessment, flood depth across the plain (approximate
length of 3km) expected to range from 1.5-2.5m where the depth highly exaggerated
at low laying areas. The flood depth highly reduced during dry seasons of the year
according to local people.
6.3 Preliminary Design

6.3.1 General
Preliminary design based on 90m resolution digital elevation model has been
conducted to arrive at preliminary engineering estimates for the proposed crossing
and associated embankment along the plain.
6.3.2 Hydrological and Hydraulic Analysis
Hydrological analysis has been conducted based on digital elevation model of 90m
resolution, soil and land use maps and isohytal maps through east African flood
model application.Priliminary Hydraulic with the intention of determining the
number and size of drainage structures to accommodate the anticipated peak
discharge along the flood plain has been conducted based on digital elevation model
and peak discharge. Nearly 14 box culverts of size 2m span by 1.5m rise and 13 pipe
culverts placed with respect to geometric configuration of the flood plain channel to
accommodate the incoming dispersed flood at preliminary design level.
Figure 6-1: Kia-Kia Stream catchment and cross section over view

Table 6-1:Kia-Kia Bridge Catchment TRLL Model 25 Years Peak Discharge
Determination

2
2153.72
2 Land Slope in % 1
5
From table 4.6, Lag Time (K) in hrs (for papruse swamp vally
bottom) 20
6 Catchment Type: Papruse swamp vally bottom
7
Coefficient (C
S
) 0.38
w
) 0.75
10
Anteceedent Rainfall Zone: Northern Uganda and Rainfall
zone: Dry Zone (Table 4.2)
L
) 1
12 Catchment cover:Grass Cover
A
) 0.29
14
Initial Retention (Y) in mm for Anteceecedent Rainfall zone in
No. 10 above 0
p
) in hrs 0.75
16 Rainfall Time Zone:Inland
17 Rainfall time, T
A
in hrs 0
18 Base Time, T
B
21
25 yr flood factor,Fig 4.6 for 2:10yr ratio 1.49 & 25 yr recurence
interval 1.79
TB
in mm 129.5
27 Runoff (RO) in m
3
(equation 4.6) 38530208.4
3
/s (equation 4.7) 212.9
29 T
A
8.57
30 2
nd
Approximation
31 T
B
55.32
TB
in mm 130.5
35 Runoff (RO) in m
3
37180616.4
3
/s 173.6
37 T
A
9.019
38 3
rd
Approximation
39 T
B
64.34
TB
in mm 131.4
43 Runoff (RO) in m
3
43294997.6
3
/s 173.8
45 T
A
9.016
46 4
th
Approximation
47 T
B
73.36
TB
in mm 132.2
51 Runoff (RO) in m
3
45156718.3
3
/s 159.0
53 T
A
9.219
54 5
th
Approximation
55 T
B
82.58
TB
in mm 132.9
59 Runoff (RO) in m
3
46792321.4
3
/s 146.4
61 T
A
9.412
62 6
th
Approximation
63 T
B
91.99
TB
in mm 133.5
67 Runoff (RO) in m
3
48247722.3
3
/s 135.5
69 T
A
9.596
70 7
th
Approximation
71 T
B
101.58
TB
in mm 134.1
75 Runoff (RO) in m
3
49556378.2
3
/s 126.0
77 T
A
9.771
78 8
th
Approximation
79 T
B
111.35
TB
in mm 134.6
83 Runoff (RO) in m
3
50743393.4
3
/s 117.7
85 T
A
9.939
86 8
th
Approximation
87 T
B
121.29
TB
in mm 135.1
91 Runoff (RO) in m
3
51828065.5
3
/s 110.4
93 T
A
10.100
94 9
th
Approximation
95 T
B
131.39
TB
in mm 135.6
99 Runoff (RO) in m
3
52825533.4
3
/s 103.9
101 T
A
10.255
102 10
th
Approximation
103 T
B
141.65
TB
in mm 136.0
3
53747881.1
3
/s 98.0
109 T
A
10.405
110 11
th
Approximation
111 T
B
152.05
TB
in mm 136.4
3
54604900.2
3
/s 92.8
117 T
A
10.549
118 12
th
Approximation
119 T
B
162.60
TB
in mm 136.8
3
55404629.2
3
/s 88.0
125 T
A
10.688
126 13
th
Approximation
127 T
B
173.29
TB
in mm 137.1
3
56153743.8
3
/s 83.7
133 T
A
10.824
134 14
th
Approximation
135 T
B
184.12
TB
in mm 137.5
3
56857845.4
3
/s 79.8
141 T
A
10.955
142 15
th
Approximation
143 T
B
195.07
TB
in mm 137.8
3
57521677
3
/s 76.2
149 T
A
11.082
p
) in m
3
/s 175.21

Figure 6-2: kia kia flood plain cross section along with water surface and proposed structures
position
6.3.3 Geometric Design
Preliminary road Geometric design of Kia Kia plain crossing is undertaken primarily
based on 90m resolution terrain model and expected road standard taken from the
design consultant with due consideration to drainage requirement of the area which
seeks high fill embankment condition to relief a widely dispersed low velocity flow
(5m fill height at central plain portion and around 3m at both flank approaches of the
valley plain). Road plan profile detail for Kia Kia plain crossing included on the
revised drawing album and earthwork quantities on the revised tender documents.
6.3.4 Structures
Type of structure and its orientation has been identified with respect to flood plain
nature of Kia kia stream .As the flow across the plain widely dispersed with slight
flow concentration nature at some low laying land forms, provision of single bridge
across the valley is not practical solution to the anticipated drainage characteristics of
the area. Provision of Series of box culverts mainly at relatively flow concentrated
and high depth portions and pipe culverts at valley flank approaches is believed to be
a practical solution to relief wide flow condition .The structure should be placed on a
granular compacted material with good bearing capacity .Typical box and pipe
culvert detail drawing is included on the revised drawing album where detail
structures quantity incorporated on the revised tender document.
6.4 Conclusions and Recommendations

As the prevailing condition at the time of field visit to Kia-Kia bridge site or flood
plain zone didnt permit appropriate data collection and investigation work
physically, preliminary design analysis and preparation is undertaken mainly based
on 90m resolution digital elevation model and other supplementary data to identify
type of drainage structures and anticipated size, embankment height and to arrive at
reasonable engineering estimates.

It is highly recommended to undertake a detailed topographic surveying work and
other investigation at appropriate time where condition permits a conducive data
collection and investigation work to come up with reliable design and engineering
estimate that will lead to the overall implementation of the project.

7 NYAGAK-3 Culvert Hydraulic Design Adjustment

Nyagake bridge is found on JqangOkoro Atyenda road at UTM geographical
position of 266974 Easting and 270220 Northing .Previously a 30m double span
bridge was proposed to accommodate the incoming wide span flood along the swamp
section. However, wide and non concentrated flow nature over the swamp section
will make the proposed bridge slightly efficient enough to dispose the dispersed low
flow velocity flood. Long embankment section over the swamp may be soaked and
liable to piping effect from wide pondage during flood times.

Provision of major and minor relief culverts with respect to water surface profile and
flow concentration magnitude, significantly improve hydraulic efficiency and
embankment stability condition over the swamp section.

Flood routing along the swamp channel has been undertaken to determine flood
height, span and degree of concentration for floods of different return periods (shown
in table below).

Floods of different return periods
Peak discharge,m
3
/s
10
years
25
years
50
years 100 years
65.59 80.27 86.47 104.37

Routing of 25 years flood across the swamp section implied that triple 4m by 4m rise
box culvert spaced with respect to flood magnitude and degree of concentration have
been provided along with two relief pipes of size 1.2m diameter at both flanks of the
swamp thereby disposing the incoming discharge safely as shown below.


Flood disposing structures arrangement across the swamp section.

Conclusion
Hence, triple 4m by 4m rise box culverts and two relief 1.2m dia pipe culverts
safely accommodate the incoming discharge also reducing flood pondage
impact on the road embankment.

8 TENDER DOCUMENT REVIEW
8.1 Introduction
The Tender Documents are prepared for each Lot separately and hence three tender
documents are prepared. Previously, the documents are not designated Volume or
Section numbers. Hence, the Review Consultant has separated the documents into
two volumes as follows.
Volume I consists of ten sections as follows (for each Lot):
Section I : Invitation to Bids
Section II : Instructions to Bidders
Section III : Bidding Data
Section IV : Part 1: General Conditions of Contract
Section V : Part 2: Conditions of Particular
Application
Section VI : Technical Specifications
o A. General Specifications
o B. Special Provisions for the Standard Technical
Specifications
Section VII : Forms of Bid, Appendix to Bid and Bid
Security
Section VIII : Bill of Quantities
Section IX: Form of Agreement, Forms of Performance
Security & Bank guarantee for Advance
Payment
Section X : Drawings (Separately Bound)
Section XI : Dispute Resolutions Procedure
Volume II consists of one section as follows (for each Lot):
Design drawings

This section of the report discuss an overall assessment, finding and modifications
made on the projects bidding documents in conjunction with the design review
undertaken for the project.

The main purpose of this section is to point out new items required in undertaking the
construction works and to summarize their respective quantities.
For all identified new work items, specification is prepared and is included in the
revised special specification.

8.2 Section I: Invitation to Bid

The following is added
5. A pre-tender meeting will be held on 200 at hrs
local time at the venue indicated in clause 16 of the Instructions to Bidders.
In addition, some minor adjustments are introduced (Correct date, etc)
8.3 Section II: Instructions to Bidders

The following changes are made

8.3.1 Contents of Bid Documents
The set of Tender Documents issued for the purpose of Tendering includes the
volumes, drawings and invitation stated below, together with any Addenda thereto
issued in accordance with Clause 8:
Section I. Invitation for Bids
Section II. Instructions to Bidders
Section III. Bidding Data
Section IV. Part 1: General Conditions of Contract
Section V. Part 2: Conditions of Particular Application
Section VI. Technical Specifications
Section VII. Forms of Bid, Appendix to Bid and Bid Security
Section VIII. Bill of Quantities
Section IX. Form of Agreement, Forms of Performance Security & Bank
guarantee for Advance Payment
Section X. Drawings (Separately Bound)
Section XI. Dispute Resolutions Procedure

8.3.2 Documents Comprising the Bid
The Tender prepared by the Bidder shall comprise the following documents,
completed and signed. The bid submitted by the bidder shall comprise the following:
Form of Bid.
Appendix to Bid.
Form of Bid security.
Priced Bills of Quantities.
Foreign currency requirements (App. I).
Breakdown of currency requirements (App. II).
Outline program (App. III)
Proposed payment schedule (App. IV).
Major item of constructional equipment (App. V).
Key personnel requirement (App. VI).
Contractors Organization set up for works (App. VII).
Current Contract Commitments / Works in Progress (App. VIII)
Sub-Contractors (App. IX)
Sources and specifications of construction materials (App. X).
Catalogues of equipment and structural components supplied under the
contract (App. XI).
Built-up of Unit Rates (App. XII).
8.4 Section III: Bidding Data

The Bidding Data contains all necessary and specific data for the Works to be
procured and will amend or supplement the provisions in the Instructions to Bidders.
Whenever there is a conflict, the provisions herein will prevail over those in the
Instructions to Bidders.
This is a new section and for a complete reference, please refer to Section 3 of the
Bidding Document.
8.5 Section IV: Part 1: General Conditions of Contract

It is noted that the General Conditions of Contract (Part I) adopted is that of FIDIC
(Fdration Internationale des Ingnieurs-Conseils). This is considered appropriate
for international competitive bidding procedures and will be retained by the
Consultant.
8.6 Section V: Part 2: Conditions of Particular Application
8.6.1 Contract Documents
5.2: Priority of Contract Documents
It is replaced with the following
Delete the documents listed (1) to (6) and substitute with:-
(1) the Contract Agreement (if completed);
(2) the Letter of Acceptance;
(3) the Bid and the Appendix to Bid; Bid Addendum including the Minutes of
Pre-Contract Award Discussion;
(4) the Conditions of Contract Part II;
(5) the Conditions of Contract Part I;
(6) the Special Technical Specifications;
(7) the Drawings;
(8) the priced Bill of Quantities; and
(9) the General Specifications for Roads and Bridges Works January 2005;
and
(10) Other documents, as listed in the Appendix to Bid.
8.6.2 Settlement of Disputes
67.1 Settlement of Disputes
Add to Sub-Clause 67.1
The procedure for settlement of disputes is stipulated in the Appendix to Tender.
Section 10 of the Tendering Documents shall be incorporated in and be part of the
Conditions of Particular Application.
8.6.3 Changes in Cost and Legislation
Delete sub Clauses 70.1 and 70.2 and replace with new Sub Clauses 70.1 to 70.8
70.1 Price Adjustment
The amounts payable to the Contractor, in various currencies pursuant to Sub-Clause
60.1, shall be adjusted in respect of the rise or fall in the cost of labor, Contractors
Equipment, Plant, materials, and other inputs to the Works, by applying to such
amounts the formulae prescribed in this Clause.
70.2 Other Changes in Cost
To the extent that full compensation for any rise or fall in costs to the Contractor is
not covered by the provisions of this or other Clauses in the Contract, the unit rates
and prices included in the Contract shall be deemed to include amounts to cover the
contingency of such other rise or fall of costs.
70.3 Adjustment Formulae
The adjustment to the Interim Payment Certificates in respect of changes in cost and
legislation shall be determined from separate formulae of the following type for each
of the types of construction work to be performed and Plant to be supplied. The
formulae will be of the following general type:
o
n
o
n
o
n
n
E
E
d
M
M
c
L
L
b A P + + + =

Where:-
P
n
is a price adjustment factor to be applied to the amount in each specific currency
for the payment of the work carried out in the subject month, determined in
accordance with Sub Clause 60.1 (d), and with Sub Clauses 60.1 (e) and (f), where
such variations and Daywork are not otherwise subject to adjustment;

A is a constant, specified in the Appendix to Bid, representing the nonadjustable
portion in contractual payments;

b, c, and d, etc are weightings or coefficients representing the estimated proportion
of each cost element (labour, materials, equipment usage, etc) in the Works or
sections thereof, net of Provisional Sums, as specified in the Appendix to Bid;

L
n
, M
n
, E
n
, etc., are the current cost indices or reference prices of the cost elements in
the specific currency for month n, determined pursuant to Sub Clause 70.5,
applicable to each cost element; and

L
o
, M
o
, E
o
, etc., are the base cost indices or reference prices corresponding to the
above cost elements at the date specified in Sub Clause 70.5.

If a price adjustment factor is applied to payments made in a currency other than the
currency of the source of the index for a particular indexed input, a correction factor
Z
o
/Z
n
will be applied to the respective component factor of p
n
for the formula of the
relevant currency. Z
o
is the number of units of currency of the country of the index,
equivalent to one unit of the currency of payment on the date of the base index, and
Z
n
is the corresponding number of such currency units on the date of the current
index.
70.4 Sources of Indices and Weightings
The sources of indices shall be those listed in the Appendix to Bid, as approved by the
Engineer.
Indices shall be appropriate for their purpose and shall relate to the Contractors
proposed source of supply of inputs on the basis of which his Contract Price shall
have been computed. As the proposed basis for price adjustment, the Contractor shall
have submitted with his bid the tabulation of Weightings and Source of Indices in the
Appendix to Bid, which shall be subject to approval by the Engineer.
The Contractor shall not sign the agreement before he submits base indices from the
approved sources.
If the Contractor desires to order materials from a supplier other than from whom he
obtained his original quotations or indices because the original supplier ceases to
exist, the Engineer will look into the trend of increment of the material cost of the
new supplier and compare it with the trend of the original supplier, and determine a
cost with a trend which could fairly represent the original increment trend.
However, if the original supplier exists and the Contractor proposes a new supplier
for any reason, the Engineer will investigate the current quotations or indices of the
original supplier and the newly proposed supplier, and will use the quotations or
indices favorable to the Employer.
70.5 Base, Current and Provisional Indices
The base cost indices or prices shall be those prevailing on the day 28 days prior to
the closing date for submission of Bids. Current indices or prices shall be those
prevailing on the day 28 days prior to the last day of the period to which a particular
Interim Payment Certificate is related. If at any time the current indices are not
available, provisional indices as determined by the Engineer will be used, subject to
subsequent correction of the amounts paid to the Contractor when the current indices
become available.
70.6 Adjustment after Completion
If the Contractor fails to complete the Works within the time for completion
prescribed under Clause 43, adjustment of prices thereafter until the date of
completion of the Works shall be made using either the indices or prices relating to
the prescribed time for completion, or the current indices or prices, whichever is more
favourable to the Employer, provided that if an extension of time is granted pursuant
to Clause 44 the above provision shall apply only to adjustments made after the
expiry of such extension of time.
70.7 Weightings
The weightings for each of the factors of cost given in the Appendix to Bid shall be
adjusted if, in the opinion of the Engineer, they have been rendered unreasonable,
unbalanced or inapplicable as a result of varied or additional work already executed
or ordered under Clause 51 or for any other reason.
70.8 Subsequent Legislation
If, after the date 28 days prior to the latest date for submission of bids for the Contract
there occur in Republic of Uganda changes to any National or State Statute,
Ordinance, Decree or other Law or any regulation or by-law of any local or other duly
constituted authority, or the introduction of any such State Statute, Ordinance,
Decree, Law, or any regulation or by-law which causes additional or reduced cost to
the Contractor, other than under the preceding Sub Clauses of this clause, in the
execution of the Contract such additional or reduced cost shall, after due consultation
with the Employer and the Contractor, be determined by the Engineer and shall be
added to or deducted from the Contract Price and the Engineer shall notify the
Contractor accordingly, with a copy to the Employer. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
such additional or reduced cost shall not be separately paid or credited if the same
shall already have taken into account in the indexing of any inputs to the Price
Adjustment Formulae in accordance with the provisions of Sub Clauses 70.1 to 70.7.
However, if it proves difficult to obtain pertinent indices for price adjustment, Price
adjustment shall be made in accordance with the schedules used in calculating the
unit rates as in Appendix XII - Build up of Unit Rates of Section VII of this Bid
Document. However, the rates shall be reviewed every 12 months.
8.7 Section VI: Technical Specifications

Technical Specification is used for providing detailed description and reference on all
work items required under the Contract by specifying the work required, material
quality, testing requirements. Workmanship with measurement and payment
conditions detail alike within General Provisions or items for permanent works as
indicated in the BOQ.
8.7.1 General Specifications
The Standard Specification referred to in the Contract Documents is the General
Specifications for Road and Bridge Works prepared in January 2005 published by
the then Ministry of Works, Housing and Communications of the Republic of
Uganda. (Now Ministry of Works and Transport)
8.7.2 Special Provisions for the Standard Technical Specifications
For the Project, the Design Consultant, ACE Consulting Engineers had prepared/
compiled a full set of project specification which covers all the customary standards
and requirements for a typical Bridge Construction Project. The Design Consultant
has prepared two kinds of special specification for each lot, i.e., the first special
specification refers to General Specifications for Road and Bridge Works: Volume
III ANovember 1992 and the second special specification refers to General
Specification for Road and Bridge Works October 2004.
Towards this end, the Consultant requested for clarification from the Client. The
Client has instructed the Review Consultant to prepare one Special Specification by
compiling the two Special Specifications that were prepared based on the General
Specifications for Road and Bridge Works issued on November 1992 and October
2004 respectively. Accordingly the Review Consultant has prepared one Special
Specification based on the January 2005 edition of General Specification for Road
and Bridge Works.
In order to come up with a complete specification, it was found imperative to include
important new work items. For all identified new work items, specification is
prepared and is included in the revised special specification.
8.7.3 New Work Items
The following are new items that are identified from the review carried out for the
Project.

Table 8-1: Bill 1000 General
Item No Description Unit
14.01
Maintain, Service and pay all rents and municipal services for
a fully furnished and equipped house for the Engineer;
(a) Senior Staff House Type I ( 1 No.) month
(b) Junior Staff House Type II ( 3 No.) month
(c) Junior Staff House Type III (1 No.) month
14.02 Maintain, Service and pay all rents and municipal services for
fully furnished and equipped offices for the Engineer.
month
14.03
Maintain and pay all rents and municipal services for fully
furnished and equipped wash house for the Engineer.
month
14.04
Maintain and pay all rents and municipal services for fully
furnished and equipped site cabin/ office for the Engineer.
month
14.05 Four Wheel Drive Station Wagon for the Engineer
(a)
Provide approved diesel Station Wagon 4-WD vehicle for the
exclusive use of the Engineer as specified in 1407(b).
Lump Sum
(b)
Operate and maintain the vehicles provided under item 14.05(a)
for an average of 4,000km per month.
Month
(c)
Operate vehicles specified for travel distance in excess of average
4,000 km per month.
km
14.06 Four Wheel Drive Double Cab Pick-Up for the Engineer
(a)
Provide approved diesel double-cab 4-WD vehicle for the
exclusive use of the Engineer as specified in 1407(b).
Lump Sum
(b)
Operate and maintain the vehicles provided under item 14.06(a)
for an average of 4,000km per month.
Month
(c)
Operate vehicles specified for travel distance in excess of average
4,000km per month.
km
14.07 Maintain one (1) approved survey equipment as specified for the
exclusive use of the Engineer.
month
14.08 Provide one (1) fully furnished Central Laboratory which is to be
situated in Arua at the MoWT station and specified laboratory
equipment; maintain one (1) Laboratory and Specified Laboratory
Equipment for the Engineer.
month
14.09 Radio Communication System for the Engineer

(a) Provide radio system as specified under Section 1413 of the
Special Specifications
Lump Sum
14.10 Attendance to the Engineer
(a) Draftsman month
(b) Assistant Surveyor month
(c) Assistant Laboratory Technician month
(d) Secretary/ Typist month
(e) Chainmen month
(f) Office Cleaners/ Messengers month
14.11
Prime Cost Sum for telephone and facsimile charges incurred by
the Engineer.
Lump Sum
14.12 Hotel accommodation for the Engineer and his staff. PS
14.13 Provision and service of temporary facilities for the Engineer
and his staff

(a)
Office accommodation month
(b)
Laboratory accommodation month
(c)
Housing month
(d)
Type A vehicle veh-month
(e)
Type B vehicle veh-month
(f)
Surveying equipment month
14.14
Include a percentage of item 14.10, 14.11, 14.12 and 14.13 for
Contractor's as overheads, costs and profit.
10 %of item
14.10, 14.11,
14.12 & 14.13

Table 8-2: Bill 3000 Earth Works and Pavement Layers of Gravel or Crushed Stone
31.01 Clearing, grubbing and removal of top soil
(a) Clearing and Grubbing ha
36.01 Excavations

(b) Hard excavation (Rate only)
m
32.01
Removal of Existing Structures and transferring to Employers
Store
Lump Sum

Table 8-3: Bill 5000 Ancillary Road Works
54.06 Road Signs

(a) Area less than or equal to 1m
2

No.
(b) Area greater than 1m
2
and less than 2m
2

No.

Table 8-4: Bill 6000 Structures
61.11 Mobilization of all plant, equipment to site for piling.
Lump Sum
61.13 Provide all materials and construct 0.80 m dia. reinforced concrete
piles, 170 tons capacity, from ground level to -15.0 m. The rate to
include moving to and setting up the equipment at each position
for installing the piles and for the removal of top of pile heads to
spoil. m
61.32 Load test on Pile (2 times the nominal working load). Rate to
include establishing on the site. No.
61.33 Establishment on the site to conduct rotary core drilling.
Lump Sum
66.19 Drainage pipes and Weep holes

(a) 100mm dia PVC drainage pipe (c/c 2.5mt)
No.
(b) Weep holes
No.
66.26 150mm PVC pipe Service Ducts
No.

Table 8-5: Bill No 8: Schedule of Day Works
81 Labor
81.01 Unskilled labor day
81.02 Working ganger day
81.03 Timber man day
81.04 Carpenter/Stone mason day
81.05 Concertor day
81.06 Blaster (certified) day
81.07 Pipe layer day
81.08 Painter day
81.09
Watchman (including fire, lights, day and night or Sunday or
Public Holiday watching) day
81.10 Steel fixer /bar-bender day
81.11 Driver for Vehicle up to 3.5 Ton day
81.12 Driver for Vehicle over 3.5 Ton day
82 Material
82.01 Ordinary Portland Cement t
82.02 Hydrated lime t
82.03 Fine aggregate (sand) t
82.04 Coarse aggregare t
82.05 Steel reinforcement t
82.06 Granular material( subbase) t
82.07 Structural Steel t
82.08 Selected Back fill material for structure t
82.09 Timbering for trenches sq.m
82.10 Formwork, rough finish sq.m
82.11 Formwork, fair finish sq.m
83 Equipment
Where marked thus ______________*the contractor shall insert
the name of the model proposed for use.
83.01
D4 dozer or equivalent complete with blade and ripper CAT
D5H _____________________* h
83.02
D6 dozer or equivalent complete with blade and ripper
_______D6H CAT _____________________* h
83.03
_______D8L CAT _____________________* h
83.04
_______D8N CAT _____________________* h
83.05
Motor grader Cat, 14 or equivalent (complete with scarifier)
_________Caterpillar G14 _________* h
83.06
Ditto but cat. 12 equivalent ________ Caterpillar G12 ______*
h
83.07
Heavy grid or sheep foot roller _____ CASE _______
h
83.08 5-6t drawn vibrating roller and tractor h
83.09 12-15t drawn vibration roller and tractor h
83.10
10t pneumatic self-propelled roller ________BW 16R
_______________* h
83.11
15t pneumatic self propelled roller _____ BW 16R
________* h
83.12 10-12t smooth wheeled roller ripper ___________* h
83.13 16-18t smooth wheeled roller ripper ____________* h
83.14 Small hand propelled vibrating roller h
83.15 Wacker hand compactor or equivalent h
83.16 Vibrate plate compactor h
83.17 Tractor excavator with loader attachment, bucket 1 h
83.18 Ditto but bucket size 1-2 cu.m h
83.19 Ditto but bucket size over 2 cu.m h
83.2 5t tipper loory h
83.21 7t tipper lorry h
83.22 9t tipper lorry h
83.24 1t pick-up h
83.25 3t pick-up h
83.26
Compressor ____ Holman D175* (1201/m) complete with all
tools, hoses, steels, etc) h
83.27
Compressor ____ Holman D250_______* (>1201/m) ditto
h
83.28 Sludge pump, hand operated h
83.29 50mm delivery water pump and motor h
83.3 75mm delivery water pump and motor h
83.31 Concrete mixer 10/7 h
83.32 Concrete Vibrator (poker type) h
83.33
Wheeled excavator, bucket capacity <1 cu. M. ___ Komatsu
h
83.34 Ditto but bucket size 1-2 cu.m ___ CAT h
83.35
Self propelled water tank, 13,500 liters minimum capacity
with pick up pump ____ Mercedes Benz 2421*
h
83.36
Ditto but 9000 liters ditto ____ Mercedes Benz
1513_________* h
83.37 Mechanical broom _________________* h
83.4 Agricultural tractor ___ VALMET _____________* h

Based on Ministry of Works, Housing and Communications, General Specifications
for Road and Bridge Works, detailed specification for each of the above items is
prepared and included in the Special Specification. In addition to the above new
items, the necessary changes/ amendments is also made for the other items of the
Special Specification prepared by the Design Consultant, ACE Consulting Engineers.
8.8 Section VII: Forms of Bid, Appendix to Bid and Bid Security
8.8.1 Appendix to Form of Tender
The following new Clause numbers are included
Clause No 60.1, 60.10 & 60.11: Number of Copies of Statement for
Monthly, Final and Completion Six numbers
Clause No 67 : The procedure for settlement of Disputes is Version 2
(DRE).
Clause No 67.1: The appointing Authority is the President of the
International Court of Justice.
The following new tables are included that will be used for Changes in Cost and
Legislation.
Table 8-6: Summary of currencies of the Bid

Name of currency
A
Amount of
currency
B
Rate of exchange
(local currency
per unit of
foreign)
C
Local currency
equivalent
C = A x B
D
Percentage of Bid
Price
100xC
(Bid Price)
Local currency

1.00
Foreign currency #1

Foreign currency #2

Foreign currency #3

Provisional sums
expressed in local
currency

Total
Bid Price
100.00

Table 8-7: Interest Rates
Currency (as per Sub-Clause 60.1) London Over-night Inter-Bank On-Lending Rate
(LIBOR)
Plus 2 percent

Foreign Currency # 1
Foreign Currency # 2

Etc.

etc.

The above rates of interest for foreign currencies shall be supplied by the Bidder with the
appropriate publication, and these rates are subject to clarification/negotiation before
formalizing the Contract.

Approximate
Weightings
for Price Adjustment
Formulae

70.3

See tables below
Table 8-8: Weightings for use with Local Currency (UGSH)

Description of Input Index Code Factor
Weightings
Permitted
Range of
Values
Bidder's
Proposed
Value
Fixed - a 0.1 0.1
Local Labor LL b 0.2 - 0.4
Foreign Labor FL c 0 0
Equipment E d 0 0
Aggregate A e 0.2 - 0.4
Structural Steel SS f 0 0
Fuel F g 0.2 - 0.5
Reinforcing Steel S s 0,05-0,10
Cement C h 0.05 - 0.1
Total (must equal 1.0) 1.0

Note 1: Sources of cost price adjustment indices shall be recognized national or
international organizations and shall be acceptable to the Employer.

Note 2: The Base Values of Indices shall be those prevailing at the date 28 days prior
to the latest date for submission of Bids and shall be substantiated by Bidders by
appending copies of the relevant publication.

Note 3: The Employer shall give details of the sources and Base Values of local
indices 14 days prior to the latest date for submission of Bids.

Note 4: The Bidders Proposed Values are subject to the approval of the Engineer.

Table 8-9: Weightings for use with Foreign Currency 1:

Specify Currency______________________

Weightings
Permitted
Range of
Values
Bidder's
Proposed
Value
Fixed - a 0.1 0.1
Local Labor LL b 0 0
Foreign Labor FL c 0.1 - 0.2
Equipment E d 0.25 - 0.65
Aggregate A e 0 0
Bitumen B f 0.1 - 0.2
Fuel F g 0
Reinforcing steel S s 0,05-0,10
Cement C h 0

Note 1: Sources of cost price adjustment indices shall be recognized national
or international organizations and shall be acceptable to the Employer.

Note 2: The Base Values of Indices shall be those prevailing at the date 28
days prior to the latest date for submission of Bids and shall be substantiated
by Bidders by appending copies of the relevant publication.

Note 3: The Employer shall give details of the sources and Base Values of
local indices 14 days prior to the latest date for submission of Bids.

Note 4: The Bidders Proposed Values are subject to the approval of the
Engineer.



Weightings
Permitted
Range of
Values
Bidder's
Proposed
Value
Fixed - a 0.1 0.1
Local Labor LL b 0
Aggregate A e 0
Fuel F g 0
Cement C h 0




Engineer


Weightings
Permitted
Range of
Values
Bidder's
Proposed
Value
Fixed - a 0.1 0.1
Local Labor LL b 0 0
Aggregate A e 0 0
Fuel F g 0 0
Cement C h 0 0




Engineer.

Table 8-12: Summary of Payment Currencies

For [insert name of Section of the Works]

[Separate tables may be required if the various sections of the works (or of the Bill of
Quantities) will have substantially different foreign and local currency requirements.
The Employer should insert the names of each Section of the Works.]

Name of payment
currency
A
Amount of
currency
B
Rate of
exchange (local
currency per
unit of foreign)
C
Local
currency
equivalent
C=AxB
D
Percentage of Net
Bid Price
(NBP)
100xC
NBP
Local currency
__________________

Foreign
Currency #1
_________________

Foreign
Currency #2
_________________

Foreign
Currency #
_________________

Net Bid Price

Provisional sums
expressed in local
currency

BID PRICE

Table 8-13: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 3: Earth Works & Pavement layers

Description of index % Range of weighting
(a)

a) Fixed Portion 10%
b) Local Labor 0%
c) Foreign Labor 2 5%
d) Provision of maintenance and
equipment
20 75%
e) Fuel 5 50%
f) Structural Steel 0%
g) Cement 0%
h) Reinforcement 0%
Total 100

(a)
As guidance to bidders and for the purpose of checking their submissions, the
Employer has estimated and provided a range of acceptable weightings for
related major construction inputs in accordance with the potential range of
construction methodologies, based on estimated cost in a common currency.

Table 8-14: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 2 & 6 Drainage & Structures

(a)

b) Local Labor 0 20%
c) Foreign Labor 2 5%
equipment
15 35%
e) Fuel 2 10%
f) Structural Steel 15 25%
g) Cement 25 50%
h) Reinforcement 15 25%
Total 100

(a)

Table 8-15: Weightings Applicable for Bill No. 5 Ancillary Works

(a)

b) Local Labor 0
c) Foreign Labor 2 5 %
equipment
15 35%
e) Fuel 2 10%
f) Structural Steel 0%
g) Cement 0%
h) Reinforcement 0%
Total 100

(a)

Weightings and
Indices

13.7
13.8
In the tables immediately below, for each of Bill No.2,
Bill No.3, Bill No.5 and Bill No.6 bidders shall
(a) indicate their amounts of local currency payment,
(b) indicate their proposed source and base values of
indices for the different foreign currency elements of
cost,
(c) derive their proposed weightings for local and
foreign currency payment as indicated below, and
(d) list the exchange rates used in the currency
conversion.

If payment is to be made in more than one foreign
currency, the bidder shall complete a similar table of
source indices for each currency.

Table 8-16: Local Currency
Applicable for Bill No. -------- , ----------------- (insert No. and name)
Index
code
Index description
Source of
index
Base value
and date
Bidders
related
currency
amount
Bidders
proposed
weighting
- Nonadjustable - - - A: 10%
LL Local Labor - - - b: 0%
FL Foreign Labor c:
P Provision of maintenance
and equipment
d:
F Fuel e:
SS Structural Steel f:
C Cement g:
S Reinforcement h:
Total 100%

Table 8-17: Foreign Currency 1 (FC1)(a)
Applicable for Bill No. -------- , ----------------- (insert No. and name)
Index
code
Index description
Source of
index
Base value
and date
Bidders
related
currency
amount
Bidders
proposed
weighting
- Nonadjustable - - - A: 10%
LL Local Labor - - - b: 0%
FL Foreign Labor c:
P Provision of maintenance
and equipment
d:
F Fuel e:
SS Structural Steel f:
C Cement g:
S Reinforcement h:
Total 100%

(a)
If the bidder wishes to quote in more than one foreign currency (up to three), this
table should be repeated for each foreign currency.

The following new appendixes are included
Appendix V Equipment Requirement
Appendix VI Key personnel requirement
Appendix VII Contractors organization set-up for works
Appendix VIII Current contract commitments / works in progress
Appendix IX Sub-contractors
Appendix X Sources and specification of construction materials
Appendix XI Catalogues of structural components and equipment
Appendix XII Build - up of unit rates
In addition, letter to confirm VISIT OF THE SITE is now included. The Form of
Tender Security is also corrected.
The modified and new forms are shown below.
APPENDIX V
EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENT

The bidder must demonstrate that it has the key equipment listed hereafter:

No. Equipment Type and Characteristics
Number
required
Available
1 Bulldozer (280-300HP) 1
2 Motor Grader (130-140HP) 1
3 Wheel Excavator 2
4 Tipper trucks (<8m
3
) 3
5 Tipper trucks (>8m
3
) 3
6 Water browser (13000lit) 2
7 Wheel loader (2.5m
3
) 2
8 Back hoe digger 1
9 Vibrating Roller (10-12ton) 1
10 Hand Compactor 2
11 Concrete Mixers (>0.5m
3
) 5
12 Piling rig 1
13 Crane/ Mobile crane 1
14 Welding machine set 1
15 Water pump 3

APPENDIX VI
KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENT

The Bidder must confirm availability off the key personnel proposed at the pre-
qualification stage.

No Position Available
1 Project Manager

2 Construction Engineer

3 Bridge Engineer

4 Construction Superintendent

5 Chief Laboratory Technician

6 Chief Surveyor

APPENDIX VII
CONTRACTORS ORGANIZATION SET-UP FOR WORKS
(including Sub-Contractors)

APPENDIX VIII
CURRENT CONTRACT COMMITMENTS / WORKS IN PROGRESS

Bidders and each partner to a JV should provide information on their current
commitments on all contracts that have been awarded, or for which a letter of intent
or acceptance has been received, or for contracts approaching completion, but for
which an unqualified, full completion certificate has yet to be issued.

Name of
contract
Employer,
contact
address/ tel
/fax
Value of
outstanding
work (current
US$ equivalent)
Estimated
completion
date
Average monthly
invoicing over
last six months
(US$/ month)
1.
2.
etc.

APPENDIX IX
SUB-CONTRACTORS

If you intend to sublet part of the Works, indicate the sections for which a
subcontractor is proposed together with the name and address of the proposed
subcontractor. Enter a statement of similar works previously executed by the
proposed subcontractor, including description, location and value of work,
year completed and name and address of Employer.

Notwithstanding such information, the bidder, if awarded the Contract, shall
remain entirely and solely responsible for the satisfactory completion of the
Works.

Item
Section of
Work
Approximate
Value
Name and
Address of
Subcontractor
Statement of Similar
Works Previously
Executed

APPENDIX X
SOURCES AND SPECIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

1. Cement
2. Steel reinforcement
3. Aggregates
4. Admixtures
5. Waterproofing
6. Pavement materials
7. Geotechnical Items
8. Paints
9. Structural steel

APPENDIX XI
CATALOGUES OF STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS AND EQUIPMENT

1. Bearings
2. Expansion Joints
3. Mechanical Couplers
APPENDIX XII
BUILD - UP OF UNIT RATES

Bidders are required to provide a detailed explanation of the build-up of the unit rates
included by them in the Bills of Quantities. The build-up provided must clearly
indicate every step of the process used in the calculation of the rates, starting from
basic cost data and finishing with the unit rate, for every rate included in the Bills.

The information provided shall include, inter alia:

1. Detailed build-ups of hourly operating costs of all equipment including, where
appropriate, details of; purchase prices, taxes and duties, shipping, transportation,
insurance, assumed plant life, depreciation calculations, hire charges, costs of
fuels and lubricants, spare parts, maintenance etc.
2. Detailed build-ups of all staff and labor costs including, where appropriate,
details of salaries, any statutory employment dues, social health and welfare
benefits, leave allowances, overtime, travel costs etc.
3. Detailed build-ups of all materials costs including, where appropriate, details of;
purchase prices, production costs, taxes and duties, shipping and insurance,
transportation, storage, handling etc.
4. Detailed build-ups of all overhead margins, calculated separately for site
overheads and for head office overheads including, where appropriate, details of;
head office support staff, profit, taxes, finance charges, risk contingencies, site
management and other non-allocated support staff, insurance and guarantees etc.,
site establishment provision, building and running costs, utilities and
communications, furniture, fittings and equipment, transportation, survey and
setting-out, laboratory testing and materials etc.
5. Details of calculations of production rates for equipment and labor and assumed
rates of use of materials including, where appropriate; ideal production rates/rates
of use, efficiency factors, wastage factors, downtime factors, adverse weather
factors etc.
6. Details of planned resourcing of all construction operations including, where
appropriate, programming construction operations to meet overall programme
targets for completion, required construction rates for each operation, assumed
production rates for equipment and labor, the allocation of resources to direct
Bills of Quantities operations, the allocation of resources needed for associated
indirect operations (e.g. topsoil and overburden removal from borrow pits) to
appropriate Bills items.
7. Detailed build-ups for individual unit rates, incorporating equipment, labor,
materials and overhead costs as developed above, and including, where
appropriate; assumed equipment production rates, assumed labor production
rates, cost build-ups for intermediate construction operations (such as quarrying
and crushing operations) etc.
[Bidders letterhead]

STATEMENT OF VISIT OF THE SITE

I, _________________ , the undersigned, hereby certify that I have, on behalf of
________________ [insert name of Bidder or the joint venture if applicable] visited the Site
and its surroundings on the ______ [insert date(s)], and have obtained all necessary
information for submission of the Bid.

Signature:

Name and Title:

Date:

Name, Signature, and Date of the authorized representative:

Name:

Signature:

Date:

8.8.2 Tender Security
(Bank Guarantee)

__________________________ [Banks Name, and Address of Issui ng
Branch or Of f i ce]
Benefi ci ary: Mi ni stry of Works and Transport
P. O. Box: 10
Entebbe, Uganda
Date: __________________________
BID GUARANTEE No. : __________________________

We have been informed that __________________________ [name of the Bidder]
(hereinafter called "the Bidder") has submitted to you its bid dated ___________ (hereinafter
called "the Bid") for the execution of 21 Bridges in northwestern Uganda Lot 1 under
Invitation for Bids No. ___________ .
Furthermore, we understand that, according to your conditions, bids must be supported by a
bid guarantee.

At the request of the Bidder, we ____________________ [name of Bank] whose registered
office is at _________hereby irrevocably undertake to pay you any sum or sums not
exceeding in total an amount of ___________ [amount in figures] (____________) [amount
in words] upon receipt by us of your first demand in writing accompanied by a written
statement stating that the Bidder is in breach of its obligation(s) under the bid conditions,
because the Bidder:
(a) has withdrawn its Bid during the period of bid validity specified by the
Bidder in the Form of Bid; or
(b) having been notified of the acceptance of its Bid by the Employer during the
period of bid validity, (i) fails or refuses to execute the Contract Agreement
or (ii) fails or refuses to furnish the performance security, in accordance with
the Instructions to Bidders.
This guarantee will expire: (a) if the Bidder is the successful Bidder, upon our receipt of
copies of the contract signed by the Bidder and the performance security issued to you upon
the instruction of the Bidder; and (b) if the Bidder is not the successful Bidder, upon the
earlier of (i) our receipt of a copy of your notification to the Bidder of the name of the
successful Bidder; or (ii) sixty days after the expiration of the Bidders bid.
Consequently, any demand for payment under this guarantee must be received by us at the
office on or before that date.

We further acknowledge and agree to an extension of time or other modifications of terms
which may mutually be agreed upon between ___________________________
___________________________________________ (Name of Bidder) and the Permanent
Secretary, if we are notified of such agreement at the earliest date. Upon expiry,

Signature and Seal of the Bank
Address of the Bank _________________________________________

8.9 Section VIII: Bill of Quantities

The review of Bill of Quantities (BOQ) is aimed to examine the changes, additions
and amendments arising from the review of the design and in general as well as due
to the inclusion of new items.
8.9.1 BOQ Specific Remark
The BOQ is presented in a clear and comprehensive manner dividing each group in
different bills easing presentation.
The BOQ had some shortcomings including;
The mismatching of Item Number, i.e., Specification and BOQ,
Some work items were not included and estimated
8.9.2 New Updated BOQ
New and revised/ updated BOQ is now prepared. The following items are
incorporated in the bill of quantity for each lot;
Clearing and grubbing including removal of bushes.
Access road construction quantity included for those bridges with
accessibility problems (Kia Kia, Nygak 3 and Pakwala)
Pile loading test included for Bridge Structures with pile foundation.
Road Lime as a stabilizer is included.
Schedule of Day Works included.
Revising BOQ item numbers so that the BOQ pay items relate to the
specification
8.10 Section IX: Form of Agreement, Forms of Performance Security, Bank Guarantee
for Advance Payment & Letter of Acceptance

This is a newly regrouped section that was previously included in the Forms Section.
A new form, Letter of Acceptance is included
8.10.1 Form of Agreement
The following change is made on number 2
2. The following documents shall be deemed to form and be read and construed as
part of this agreement, via:
(a) Contract agreement
(b) The Clients Letter of acceptance
(c) The Contractors Tender including Separate Memoranda
(d) The Addenda to Tender Documents
(e) The conditions of Contract, Part II Conditions of Particular Application
(f) The conditions of Contract, Part I General Conditions
(g) The Bill of Quantities
(h) The Drawing
(i) The Special Provisions to the General specifications
(j) The General specifications.
8.10.2 Letter of Acceptance
The letter of acceptance included in the Bidding Document is shown below.

[Ministry of Works and Transport Letterhead]

LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE

[Date]

To: [Name and Address of successful Tenderer]

Dear Sirs,

This is to notify you that your Tender presented, discussed and agreed dated _________
[enter date] for the execution of the __________________ [name of the contract as given in
the Tender data] for the Contract Price of Ugandan Shillings
_____________________________ [amount in numbers and words], as corrected and
modified in accordance with the Instructions to Tenderers, is hereby accepted by us.
You are hereby required:

(a) to submit the performance security _________________________ [specify as
provided in the Tender documents];

(b) sign the attached Agreement and return _____________________ [specify as
provided in the Tender documents];

(c) to commence performance of the said Contract in accordance with the Contract
Documents; and

(d) to submit the bank guarantee for Advance Payment of ______ percent of the
Contract Price (excluding Provisional Sums) [specify as provided in the Tender
documents].

Authorized Signature __________________________________________________

Name and Title of Signatory _____________________________________________

Attachment: Agreement

NOTE: THIS LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE SHOULD BE SIGNED BY A PERSON
COMPETENT AND HAVING POWER OF ATTORNEY TO BIND THE
EMPLOYER.
8.11 Section X: Drawings

8.12 Section XI: Dispute Resolutions Procedure

A new section is included to discuss the procedures to be followed during dispute. For a
complete reference, please refer Section 10 of the Bidding Document.
9 CHANGES MADE ON THE TENDER DOCUMENT UNDER
THE NEW SCOPE OF WORK

Two major changes are introduced in the tender document based on the newly change
in the scope of work. The consultant has introduced post qualification criteria as a
separate volume in the tender document. Unlike the previous version of two volumes,
the consultant has presented the tender document in five volumes which have the
following structure

Volume I
Section I Invitation for Bids
Section II Instruction for Bidders
Section III Bidding Data
Section IV Condition of Contract Part I General Conditions
Section V Conditions of contract Part II Conditions of Particular
Application
Section IX Contract Forms
Section XI Dispute Settlement Procedures
Section XIV Eligible Countries

Volume II
Section XII Qualification Questionnaire

Volume III
Section VII Form of Bid, Appendix to Bid and Form of Bid Security
Section VIII Bill of Quantities

Volume IV
Section VI Technical Specifications

Volume V
Section X Drawings

Design Review Report For Bridges in Northern Uganda

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Design Review Report For Bridges in Northern Uganda

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

May 2011

S-ar putea să vă placă și