3

CHAPTER 2

PERPARATION OF BRIDGE PROJECT

II. PREPARATION OF BRIDGE PROJECT: After joining the Design Circle the initial phase of studying the literature is completed . Then the preparation of bridge project work should be taken in hand. Various stages in project preparation are described below. The following points needs to be considered before preparation of project :II.1. SURVEY DATA -Scrutiny : Scrutiny of survey data received from the field officers is the first step in Designs Circle, Survey data should be as per the checklist given in I.R.C. clause 102 and as per Designs Circle Circular, Dated 18.09.74. the guidelines for the preparation of Survey data are issued by Design Circle under letter No.BC/CIR/93 dated 31.01.61. The observations, certain clarifications, and/or additional data /information required if any communicated to the Executive Engineer ,Road Project Division. Thereafter ,the site inspection by the Superintending Engineer ,Designs Circle for the bridges having length more than 60m is arranged and site is finalised. It is not necessary that site suggested by Road Project Division is approved . If some more study of better sites is necessary, Superintending Engineer, Design Circle issues instructions for collecting additional data . Some important points to be seen in survey data are detailed below :

Alignment of the proposed road along with the new bridge . What are the alternatives tired and depending on the standard of road whether geometry of road is wisely proposed or otherwise . Typical sketch of right angled and skew crossing is shown in the sketch. Fig.II.1 SKEW AND SQUARE CROSSING (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi) (xii) (xiii) (xiv) Cross section at different proper locations are taken , drawn and L/S and R/S are correctly marked . Information about dams ,weirs on u/s and d/s of the proposed bridge . The possibility of subsequent changes in the catchments characteristics like afforestation , deforstation ,Urban development etc. The catchment area plan should be properly drawn and certified by the Executive Engineer Road Project Division . Counter plan is to be attached. This is very important since it gives better idea about site from consideration of outflanking, submergence of nearby village etc. Topo-sheet may be referred for feeling confident about the site . Nearness of village on u/s and d/s sides. The effect of afflux on areas in the vicinity. Limitation on afflux should be reported. Effect of submergence should be studied . Trial pits are generally taken for a depth of 1.5 m to 2m only which do not give true picture of the founding strata. Trial pits for sufficient depth or trial bores should be plotted to show different strata below bed to decide type of foundation . In case of navigational channels, the clearances (horizontal and vertical ) are not generally supplied with the survey data which delays the project. H.F.L. from enquiry should be realistic . Else it may lead to unnecessary high level bridge some times the calculated discharge does not tally with Inglis discharge creating confusion . O.F.L. is to be assessed properly for submersible bridges with due consideration to permissible interruptions to traffic as per IRC codes. The rugosity coefficients are properly taken to depict the exact nalla characteristics for bed and bank . The value of silt factor reported is either by guess or by Laboratory test results should be considered more reliable . Thus detailed survey data obtained from the Road Project Division is scrutinised ,and clarification /additional information sought. Thus the work of project preparation start in Designs Circle . While proceeding with the project, methodology proposed to be adopted for preparation of the project should be got approved from Superintending Engineer, Design Circle. Certain assumptions, type of structures considered to be proposed , method of analysis and design etc. need be crystallised before detailed proposal is prepared. This would save time as corrections in the calculations and on the drawings can be minimised . II.2 HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS & HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE Hydraulics is the essential feature of bridge design. Fair assessment of flood levels, and maximum flood discharge expected to occur at bridge site during design life of bridge, and maximum scour levels are essential aspects of bridge hydraulics. The faulty determination of these parameters may lead to failure of structures. While doing hydraulic calculations attention should be paid to the following : (1) The river cross section should be truly representative. The cross section should not be vitiated by artificial cuts etc. If the bridge site is along the exiting natural crossing , the cross section for the hydraulics should be across the nearby natural undisturbed channel. The cross section within 100m U/S and D/S may be quite useful in addition to the c/s at 250m D/S and U/S. Generally existing cross section of river is disturbed due to present traffic crossing the river. In case of disturbed cross sections , exact length of bridge can not be ascertained, hence cross section at 10 m D/S and U/S will give representation of site condition. For fixing up the location of abutments, cross sections at 10m U/S and D/S should be used in such cases. (2) (3) (4) (5) Spill channels should be properly located, marked and created for . Appropriate coefficient of rugosity should be used . The same rugosity coefficient should not be used for bed and banks, as the nature of stream changes according to properties of material and vegetation growth etc. The reasonableness of computed velocity should be judged in relation to bed material. For example boulders and low velocity do not generally go together. In tidal creeks the possibility of high tides and floods coinciding should be kept in view. In such cases discharge by usual ways i.e. by Mannings formula may workout to be more than Inglis discharge. This difference will be more as we approach the sea.

(i)

5 (6)
(7) The adoption of either the observed H.F.L. obtained by local enquiry or the computed H.F.L as design level should be done judiciously. The observed H.F.L. may be affluxed by obstructions like rice fields, bounds, blocking of spill channels etc. Details of various levels are explained as below .

(i) (ii) HFL (Inglis) (iii) HFL(Modified) (iii) O. F.L.

HFL (observed) - Highest flood levels ever recorded. (50 years record) - Flood level giving Mannings discharge equal to Inglis discharge . - Flood level giving Mannings discharge equal to Modified Inglis discharge . - Ordinary flood level. This is level of flood when clearted by bridge without submergence will not give more than permissible interruption to traffic during floods . Maximum permissible interruptions (i) (ii) (iii) Bridges on SH, MDR with interruption to traffic for 6 times a year and the period not exceeding 12 hours at a time . Bridge on ODR, 6 times a year and not exceeding 24 hours at a time . Bridges on VR , 6 times a year and not exceeding 72 hours at a time.

Although record of rainfall exists to some extent, the actual record of rainfall is seldom available in such sufficiency (50 years) as to enable the Engineer to infer precisely the worst flood conditions for designing bridges. The current practice generally followed for calculating the discharge at the bridge site is by using empirical formulae as detailed below for various regions . (1) Inglis Formula (for Western Ghats and Tapi Vally ) Q = 7000 A A + 4 Where Q = Discharge in cusecs A = Catchment area in sq. miles. (2) Modified Inglis Formula : (Upper parts of western Ghats Annual rainfall <50cm) Q = 4000 A A + 4 Where Q = Discharge in cusecs A = Catchment area in sq. miles (3) Dickens Formua (for Vibration & Marathawada Regions) Q = C[A]3/4 Where Q = Discharge in cusecs A = Catchment area in sq. miles C = Constant whose value varies from 800 to1600 = 800 to 1000 for annual rainfall between 25to 50 = 1000 to 1400 generally this value taken in MP which can be adopted for Vidarbha . = 1400 to 1600 in western Ghats.

6
The discharge is then calculated at the assumed H.F.L. by using Mannings formula. The discharge calculated by Mannings formula is tallied with the discharge obtained from above empirical formulae. By trial and error the H.F.L. is fixed . The discharge calculated by the Mannings formulae is tallied with the discharge by above empirical formulae for the Catchment Area up to the bridge site. In the areas where Inglis flood is not excepted, the discharge calculated by the Mannings formulae is tallied with the one either Modified Inglis formula or Dickens formula. If the discharge calculated by the Mannings formulae is less than the above empirical formulae discharge, the H.F.L. is raised suitably to get the designed H.F.L. and vice -versa. The bridge designed on the basis of H.F.L.so fixed. (4) Discharge by Mannings : The discharge calculated as above from Inglis /Modified Inglis formula has to fairly tally with the discharge calculated by Mannings formula i.e. area-velocity method will use hydraulic characteristics of stream. Hydraulic characteristics of the channel influencing the maximum discharge are, (a) Velocity of flow , (b) Slope of stream, (c) Cross sectional area of stream , (d) Shape and roughness of stream. Mannings Velocity V( in m/sec) = 1 R 2/3 S 1/2 n and Q = A x V Wherer n = Rugosity coefficient depending on roughness of bed & bank values shall be as given in table -1. Fore more detailed description of the value refer Open Channel Hydraulics by Ven Te Chow. The exact values are given in Table -I. R = A i.e. Hydraulic mean depth . P A = Wetted Area in m2 P = Wetted Perimeter in m. S = Hydraulic gradient Q = Discharge n m3 /sec. A = area of cross section in m2 V = velocities is respective compartments . The discharge determined with the Mannings formula at H.F.L. shall generally be within 2%, variation with respect to Inglis or Dickens discharge. The river cross section is divided in to no. of compartments depending upon the bed characteristic and velocity & discharge is calculated for each compartment . Maximum velocity is then considered for design. Total discharge is taken as sum as all compartmental discharges. The discharge at O.F.L.may also be calculated from Mannings formula. Generally O.F.L. discharge is 25% to 30% of the discharge at H.F.L. This may not , be true in all the cases . TABLE 1 : Value of Regosity Coefficient (n) 1 R 2/3 S n in the formula V = n SrNo. Surface (Natural Stream)
1/2

Perfect 0.025 0.030 0.035 0.040 0.033

Good 0.0275 0.0330 0.040 0.045 0.035

Fair 0.030 0.035 0.045 0.050 0.040

Bad 0.033 0.040 0.050 0.055 0.045

1. Clear, straight bank, no rift or deep pools . 2. Same as (1) but some weeds & stones 3. Winding some poles and shoals, clear 4. Same as (3) but more ineffective slope and section 5 Same as (3) but some weeds and stones

7
6. Same as (4) but stony section 0.045 7. Sluggish river reaches rather weedy 0.050 8. Very weedy reaches 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.060 0.070 0.080 0.050 0.055 0.060

Note : As per Chao;s book , above values are applicable for streams having width less than 30 ft. IRC SP -13 also specifies the same values and may be adopted for major bridges also. However for more regorous estimation Chaos book may be referred to . Variation in the velocity across the depth of Cannel is described in the sketch below. Fig.II.2. CROSS SECTIN SECTION OF STREAM SHOWING VELOCITY CONTOURES II. 2.1 OBSTRUCTION TO DISCHARGE : The bridge proposal should not normally cause obstruction to the discharge of HFL. of more than 20% to 25%. This includes the obstruction caused by the approach roads and bridge structure itself. The percentage of obstruction to discharge should be calculated for design H.F.L. , O.F.L. and flood level equal to road top level over bridge (for submersible bridges ) in each case and normally the limits shall be satisfied. However, if the afflux and velocity are low then higher obstruction may not be objectionable. In case of raft foundations, it is reasonable to assume an total cross sectional area as available 30cm above top of raft slab for calculating discharge through vents and corresponding percentage obstruction and afflux . Fig II. 3 RAFT FOUNDATION AS PER TYPE PLAN II.2.2 DETERMINATION OF WATERWAY : The area through which the water flows between channel bed and bridge superstructure is known as the waterway of bridge. The linear measurement of this area along the bridge is known as waterway. This linear waterway equal to sum of all clear spans is called as effective linear waterway. Roughly linear waterway can be determined as below . (a) Linear waterway at HFL /OFL = A/D Where A = Wetted area of the discharging sections at HFL /OFL = A2 + A1 x Q1 + A3 X Q3 Q2 Q2 Where A1,A2,A3 Areas of compartments 1,2,and 3 Q1,Q2,Q3 Discharge of compartments 1,2,3, D = Maximum flood depth at HFL or OFL = HFL/OFL -lowest bed level in central compartment . For natural channels in alluvial beds and having undefined banks, effective linear waterway can be determined from some accepted rational formula. One such formula as per I.R.C. for regime conditions is given below . Linear waterway W = c Q Where Q = Design maximum discharge in m3/sec. C = A constant . Usually 4.8 for regime conditions but may very from 4.5 to6.3 according to local conditions. II.2.3 SCOUR DEPTH : When the velocity of stream exceeds the limiting velocity, which the erodable particles of bed material can stand, the scour occurs. The normal scour depth is the depth of water on the middle of stream when it is carrying the peak flood discharge . The probable maximum depth of scour to be taken for the purpose of designing foundations of abutment and piers shall be estimated after considering all local conditions. If possible the soundings for depth of scour shall be taken in the vicinity of bridge site during or immediately after the flood but before the score holes had time to silt up appreciably. Allowance shall be made for increased depth resulting from (a) (b) (c) The design discharge being greater than flood discharge . The increased velocity due to obstruction to flow caused by construction of bridge . The increase in score in the proximity of piers and abutments .

Theoretically the score can be estimated as below. However , this method is applicable for natural Channel flowing in non coherent alluvium. Mean depth of score dsm = 1.34 [ Qb2 ] 1/3 I Ksf I

Qb = Discharge in cumecs per meter width . Ksf= the slit factor for representative sample of bed material obtained up to the level of deepest anticipated scour .. = 1.76 dm Where dm = Weighted mean particle diameter in mm. The discharge per meter width (Qb) shall be maximum of ; (i) The total design discharge divided by effective linear waterway between abutments. (ii) The value obtained taking in to account any concentration of flow through a portion of the waterway assessed from the study of the cross section of river. However these , modification may be applied for bridge length more than 60m . The unit discharge (Qb) for a high level bridge is obtained by dividing the total discharge by effective linear waterway , For submersible bridges the unit discharge should be worked out by considering two layers . (1) Bed to R.T.L. (2) R.T.L. to H.F.L. In case of submersible bridges, the scour depth and afflux calculations are to be done simultaneously and involve trial and error procedure . To provided for adequate margin of safety , the foundation shall be designed for a larger discharge which should be a percent as mentioned below over design discharge . (IRC-78-1983 clause 703.1) The discharge worked out by Imperical formula be increased by : Catchment up to 500 sq . m. - 30% 500-5000 sq. km 5000- 25000 sq.m. More than 25000sq. m. - less than 10% - 25to 30% - 20 to 10%

The value of Ksf for various grades of bed material is given in Table 2. Table 2 : Value of silt factor (Ksf) for various bed materials. Sr. no. 1 Silt: Bed Material Grain size in mm Silt factor(Ksf)

Fine

Sand :

0.081 Fine Fine Medium Standard Medium Coarse Mixed with fine bajri Heavy

0.5 0.120 0.158 0.233 0.323 0.505 0.725 0.988 1.290

0.6 0.7 0.85 1.0 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.0

II.2.4 MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SCOUR FOR FOUNDATION DESIGN: The maximum depth of scour below the highest flood level (H.F.L.) shall be estimated from value of mean depth of scour (dsm) in following manner : (a) for the design of piers and abutments located in a straight reach and having individual foundations without any flood protection work . (i) In the vicinity of pier - 2.00 dsm. (ii) Near abutments - 1.27 dsm for approach retained. - 2.00 dsm for scour all round . (iii) Raft foundations - 1.0 dsm (with u/s & d/s protection aprons) For the design of protection to raft foundations, shallow foundations or flood protection the scour depth should be considered as follows : (i.) in a straight reach - 1.27 dsm. (ii) at a moderate bend (iii.) at a severe bend - 1.75 dsm . (iv) at a right angled bend - 1.50 dsm. - 2.00 dsm.

(b)

These above scour values can be suitably increased if actual observation data is available on similar structures in the vicinity . In the following abnormal conditions, special studies should be undertaken for determining maximum scour depth for the design of foundations. (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Bridge located in a bend of the river involving a curvilinear flow or excessive shoal formation . Bridge located at a site where deep channel in the river hugs to one side . Bridge having very thick piers inducing heavy local scours. Where the obliquity of flow in the river is considerable . Where a bridge is required to be constructed across a canal or across river downstream of storage works, with the possibility of the relatively clear water inducing greater scour. Bridge in the vicinity of the dam, weir ,barrage or other irrigation structures where concentration of flow , aggradation /degradation of bed , etc., are likely to affect behaviour of structure . If a river is of flashy nature and the bed does not lend itself readily to the scouring effect of floods , the formula for dsm given above shall not apply. In such cases the maximum depth of scour shall be assessed from actual observations. For bridges located across streams having bouldery beds the formula given in above para may be applied with a judicious choice of values for Db and Ksf and results may be compared with the actual observations at site or from experience on similar structures near by and there performance . II.3 Vertical Clearance : It is the height from the design highest flood level with afflux of the Channel to the lowest point of bridge superstructure. Clearance shall also be provided according to navigational or anti - obstruction requirement . Where these considerations do not arise, vertical clearance in case of high level bridges shall be as follow:

Discharge (m3/sec.) Up to 0.3 0.3 to 3.0 3.0 to 30 30 to 300 300 to 3000 above 3000

Minimum Vertical Clearance (in mm) 150 450 600 900 1200 1500

In structures with metallic bearings, no part of the bearing shall be at a height less than 500 mm above affluxed design highest flood level. II . 4. Afflux : When the bridge is constructed, the abutment and pier structures as well as approaches on either side clause the reduction of natural waterway area .the contraction of stream is desirable because it leads to tangible saving in the coast especially of alluvial streams whose natural surface is too large than required for stability . Therefore to carry maximum flood discharge within bridge portion ,the velocity under the bridge increases. This increased velocity gives rise to sudden heading up of water on the upstream .This heading up phenomenon is known as afflux .Greater the afflux, greater will be the velocity under downstream side of the bridge and greater will be the depth of foundations required . Fig.II.5 AFFLUX AT A BRIDGE

Afflux should be as small as possible and generally shall not exceed 0.6m. where the foods spread over the banks is large , use of average velocity for calculating the afflux will give an erroneously low afflux . In such cases , the velocity in the main channel /compartment should be used. The permissible afflux will be governed by the submergence effect on joining structures , fields etc. on upstream side. The afflux is calculated by one of the following formulae : (a) Afflux at H.F.L. by Molesworth formula (In case of high level bridge)

10

Afflux (ha) =

V2 ------17.86

0.0153 [Q2]

-1 [Q1]

Where V = Mean Velocity in m/sec. Total design discharge (Mannings) = ------------------------------------------------Total area of channel (Mannings) Q = Total design discharge in cum/sec. Q1 = Unobstructed discharge in cum/sec. (b) Afflux at H.F.L. by submerged weir formula (in case of submersible bridge Wetted area of channel at H.F.L. = Wa in m2 Designed discharge (Mannings) = Qm3/sec. Assume afflux = h in m Additional area due to assumed afflux = A a in m2 = Length at HFL x h Total area Va =Wa+Aa = Velocity of approach Wa = ------------ x Mean Velocity (VM) (W a + A a )

Vm

Design Discharge Q = ----------------------------- = ------Wetted area Wa V a2 = ha = ----2g Where g is 9.81m/sec 2 Total head =H= h + ha

Head due to Velocity of approach

.[ H3/2- ha3/2 ] Q a = A a x 0.625 x 2/3 2g [ H ] . Q b = A b x 0.8 2g H (2) Where A b is unobstructed areaabove top of slab. . Q c = A c x 0.92g xH. (3) Where A c is unobstructed areaabove of vent below soffit of slab. Total Q = Q a + Q b + Q c Thus this arrived Q should tally with design discharge . II. 5. Selection of Type Foundation . Next step is deciding the type of foundations as per the site conditions and as per the trial pits and /or bore results and also on the type of river flow, scour depths etc. II. 6 Selection of Type Bridge. Next step is to study of all the aspects of bridge site and also what type ofbridge is required to suit a particular site with respect to hydraulics on the basis of percentages obstruction and afflux.

11
II. 7. General points to be noted: While preparing proposal following points should be studied carefully . (i) (ii) (iii) the bridge should normally span the entire gorge from bank to bank .This is easy to determine in the case of defined gorges. Where flood water carries tree trunks and branches of high level submersible bridge should not be proposed, nor should small span be proposed. Span length should be enough to clear such floating bodies, trunks etc. All spill channels should be adequately bridged. If the cost of bridging spill channel is prohibitive then overflow section should be properly protected . It may be possible to divert spill channels to main stream in certain cases. If this is done the main bridge should be adequate to cater for this additional discharge. Discharge through spill should be judiciously decided. It is a good practice to allow the floodwater to flow in its natural course. Where the river channel is flat and undefined it may not be possible to provide a high level or high level submersible bridge without causing excessive obstruction. In such cases, either causeways or submersible bridge causing permissible obstruction to discharge may be provided. The obstruction to the discharge can be minimised by grading down the approaches to a level not higher than soffit of the superstructure. This will reduce some what the serviceability of the bridge Therefore, this practice should be adopted judiciously. Normally, the approach level could be the same as that of the road level over the bridge. In no case approach level could be the same as that of the road level over the bridge. In no case approach road should be higher than the road level over the bridge , nor lower than the soffit of the superstructure . In the case of submersible bridges the soffit of the superstructure should be such as to clear the affluxed O.F.L. Where stream are swift , raft foundations should be provided with caution. The cut-off walls should be taken below the scour depth. Protective aprons should be constructed with heavier stones. The aprons should be expanded on the sides to join with quadrant slope pitching . On soft soils, box culverts and multi-cell monolithic boxes will cause less obstruction to discharge than the usual simple structure on raft foundations. Boxes should be provided with upstream and downstream cut-off walls. In high level single span bridges, mesonry or plain C.C. abutments with front betters block major part of the vent and should therefore be avoided. This may also apply to the end span of multi-span bridges. The alternatives would be R.C.C. abutments or monolithic R.C.C. Box depending on foundation strata .

(iv)

(v) (vi)

(vii)

(viii)

(ix)

In deep gorges in hilly regions where currents are likely to be swift, locations of piers in the central gorge should be avoided as far as possible by adopting longer spans. In such cases unequal spans also be adopted i.e. longer spans in the central portion and shorter spans towards ends. Where there are islands in the river channel, spans in front of them will not be fully effective. Therefore, such islands should be removed. Where this is not possible the educed effectiveness of the spans should be taken in to account while proposing the linear waterway and evaluating the percent obstruction to discharge and afflux. GUIDELINE FOR BRIDGE DESIGN

CHAPTER 3

COMPONENTS OF BRIDGE STRUCTURE

12

III. COMPONENTS OF BRIDGE STRUCTURE: Let us now study the bridge components and its adaptability and suitability at particular site conditions. III.1 FOUNDATIONS: Generally two types of foundations are adopted for bridge structures. (i) (ii) Shallow foundations - Open foundations - Raft foundations Deep foundations - pile foundations - Well foundations

III.1.1 Depth of foundations: The foundations shall be taken to such depth that they are safe against scour, or protected for it. Apart from this, the depth should also be sufficient from consideration of bearing capacity, settlement , stability and suitability of strata at the founding level and at sufficient depth below it . (A) Depth of foundations in soil (Erodible strata) (a) Depth of shallow foundations : Foundations may be taken down to a comparatively shallow depth below the bed surface provided a good bearing stratum is available and the foundation is protected against scour. R.L. of foundation = Designed H.F.L. (Tallied H.F.L.) - Maximum scour Depth - Depth of Embedment (D.E.) Where Depth of Embedment = Min.2.0m for piers and abutments with arches Min.1.2m for piers and abutments supporting other types of superstructure. (b) Depth of deep foundations (in erodible strata)R.L. of foundation = Designed H.F.L. (Tallied H.F.L.) - 1.33* Maximum scour Depth. (B) Depth of foundations in rock The foundations R.L. in case of Hard Rock = R.L. of strata Hard Rock - 0.60m. The foundation R.L. in soft rock /Exposed rock = R.L. of strata of Soft Rock / Exposed rock-1.50m. (weathered rock strata is not considered while taking R.L. of rock taking R.L. of rock top)

13
Selection of particular type of foundation is a very important job as it affects the entire proposal for the bridge . e.g. if the rock is not available at shallow depth, the tendency may be for well foundation and because wells are costly the situation may lead to adoption of bigger spans ,and the P.S.C. structures and may be SP-33have to be used. On the other hand if scour depth is less and flood depth is also reasonable small the raft foundation could be the choice. Then we have smaller spans. less height of bridge, may be a submersible bridge with permissible interruptions is felt sufficient. Presence of soft/hard rock within 5 meters would attract open foundation depending upon the scour depth the type of bridge and the height of the bridge above and below the bed level .Situation with 5m depth of foundation below bed and 2m to 3m heights of pier above bed may not be sound good .Alternative should be thought of in such cases. So look for the strata where foundation can be rest. Start with open foundation. If the depth of strata is deeper than 6m to 7m thick of well or piles. Simultaneously study scour depth and height of the bridge above bed level . If the scour depth is within 3.0 m and no problem of standing water , consider the possibility of raft foundations. Some important points which help preparing a bridge proposal are noted below. - span to height ratio for Raft foundation be kept as 1.0 to 1.25 Open foundation be kept as 1.25 to 1.50 Well foundation be kept as1.5 to 2.0 Pile foundations it should be 1.5 to 2.0 - The height of pier is measured from foundation to top of pier i.e. pier cap top. from the I.R.C.Codes rock by about 15cm. The dimensions of pier, abutment and well foundation be taken from type designs or Proper uniform sitting of well foundation could be ensured by taking the foundation in to The raft foundation details be taken from the type of designs as applicable .

Other similar designs prepared and approved by the Designs Circle should also be studied and referred to. Open foundations are comparatively easy to be decided about.

Anchorage of open foundation in to the rock shall be as per IRC-78 i.e. minimum 0.60m in to hard and 1.50m into soft rock excluding scourable layers . Leveling course and annular filling should be proposed for open foundation. Annular filling should be done with M10/M15 concrete up to rock level . Stability of foundation should be worked out. The beginner should obtain the standard calculation sheets from office, and do the calculations manually to gain confidence. Further trials could be on computer. Software is available for checking the stability of the foundation and substructure . Area under tension up to 20% is allowed by the I.R.C. code. However under seismic /barge impact conditions 25% of the area could be allowed under tension (except for bridge on National Highway ).

(1) (2)

Open : Open foundations are preferred over any other type . These are to be provided when good founding strata is available at shallow depth and there is not much problem of dewatering .R.C.C. footings are preferred over P.C.C. footing in case of R.C.C. piers. Well :The shape of well can be, Single Circular , Double D-Type /Dumbel

Type ,Twin Circular or Rectangular .

(3) (4)

Piles : Although piles can be designed as frication piles and end bearing piles ,the states practise is to design only end bearing piles. Raker piles are also not preferred in bridge foundations. Raft : The raft foundation can be deigned with attached or detached cut-off

walls . III.1.2 More about raft foundation :

14
In case of channels where the good foundable strata is not met with at a reasonable depth of about 3m and that the scour depth also is small, RAFT FOUNDATION could be considered as a better solution for such week & scourable strata. The design circle has prepared type design designs for raft foundation. The latest type plan for raft foundation prepared by the Design Circle analysed raft of continuous beam on elastic foundation by using Heteneys equations. Earlier type design for the raft foundation was evolved considering the raft as a solid slab subjected to upward soil reaction. The cut off walls provided were not considered as structural elements but only for the protection from scour. Later on the raft has been designed as channel section where the cut off walls play very important role being a structural element. It is ,therefore, needless to say that in case of channel type of raft , the cut off walls shall be cast with utmost care, the concreting of cut off walls should be done in practically dry condition and the quality of concrete is ensured. Cross cut off walls should be invariably provided at the ends of raft . These should be similar to main cut off walls . The partial raft should be avoided. The pier height not exceeding 0.8 times span has been considered in the type of designs. Different span to height ratio could be adopted if the raft is so designed. Computer programme is available for the analysis and design of raft foundations for both slab type and channel type. While deciding the depth of cut off wall, the scour depth as work out by the formula. 1/3 Dsm = 1.34 [ Qb2 ] [ ------ ] [ Ksf ]

is to be considered. It is not to be increased by any factor as incase of open/well foundations. The top of the raft is kept generally 0.30 m below the lowest bed level and cut-off wall is taken generally 0.3m below design scour depth . It is necessary in case of the raft foundation to have a perfect elastic bed and uniform properties. The raft slab as well as cut off walls (for channel type of raft) should rest only and elastic bed . The raft foundation with spans up to 10m have been done in the state. Spans more than 10m have not been tired so far , the same could be tired if the site situation so warrants . Upstream and downstream protection to raft foundation is considered necessary. Launching aprons are provided on upstream and downstream side . The width of apron is worked out as : (Please see para II.2.4.b) 1. 2. The length u/s apron = 1.50 times the scour depth below bed level. The length of d/s apron = 2.00 times the scour depth below bed level.

The size of stone /block for the apron is worked out as per the formula given in IRC -89-1985 . The size of stone required for launching apron to resist mean design velocity (average velocity ) is given by the formula : . V = 4.893 d Where V = Mean design velocity in m/ sec at bed level . D = Diameter of stone in m. Generally following size and weight of stone can be adopted for different velocities. TABLE - 3: Mean design velocity in m/sec. Up to 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Dia. Of stone in cm 30 38 51 67 85 104 Weight of stone in Kg. 40 76 184 417 852 1561

We find that when the velocity at bed level exceeds 4.0m / sec.the weight of stone required for apron is quite large.

15
It may be difficult to get such large stones from quarries etc. We may , therefore think of concrete blocks or concrete stone blocks or crates. III. 2 SUBSTRUCTURE: III.2.1 Type designs available would provided sufficient information about the dimensions of the P.C.C. piers and abutments up to the height of 10m. These type designs available are for non -seismic zones only . For heights more than these R.C.C. pier of suitable dimensions will have to be considered. For grade of concrete to be used refer Govt. Circular No. RMR- 1094/184/R-1 dated 12-6-96. The provisions of this circular differ from I.R.C. provisions ,which should be noted carefully . The circular is appended as Annexure -4. III.2.2 Type design of R.C.C. piers are getting ready and could be referred even for seismic conditions. IRC-211972 allowed use of M-10 grade for mass concrete like solid piers and abutments . Our type designs of P.C.C. piers and abutments. Our type designs of P.C.C. piers and abutments are prepared accordingly . In 1987 the code of practice IRC-21 was revised and in use today. This revised code does not permit use of M-10 grade concrete for bridge works. Further the permissible stress in various grades of concrete have been drastically reduced . This thus result in very heavy sections of piers and abutments . In fact the large number of bridges in Maharashtra have been constructed in past with M-10 concrete and they are functioning well .Looking to our experience , the Govt. of Maharashtra has issued circular permitting use of M-10 grade concrete for piers and abutments and also solid returns behind abutment. ( Govt. Circular No. RMR- 1094/184/R-1 dated 12.06.96 ). III. 2.3 The proposed allowable compressive , tensile and shear stresses are as follows

(i) (ii)
(iii)

Flexural compression cb = 0.33 fck for all grade of concrete Flexural tension tb Shear = 0.033 fck for all grade of concrete As below.

(a) The available shear stress for R.C.C. members subject to flexural ,shear and members subject to axial compression , the allowable shear stress carried by the concrete (c)shall be as per following table . (Please refer IS- 456 -1978-Table 17)

TABLE- 4 : 100 As bd

Permissible Shear Stress In Concrete c N/mm2 Grade of concrete M-15 M-20 (3) M- 25 (4) M-30 (5) (6) M- 35 M- 40 (7)

(1)

(2)

16
025 0.5 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.0 and above 0.22 0.29 0.34 0.37 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.22 0.30 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.45 0.17 0.49 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.23 0.31 0.36 0.40 0.44 0.46 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.23 0.31 0.37 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.50 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.23 0.31 0.37 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62 0.23 0.32 0.38 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.52 0.55 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.63

Note - As is that area of longitudinal tension reinforcement which continues at least one effective depth beyond the section being considered except at supports where the full area of tension reinforcement may bre used provided the detailing conforms to 304.6.2.3 of IRC: 21-1987 . For slabs the allowable shear stress carried by concrete shall be K c where k has values given bellow : TABLE -5 Oberall depth Of slab in (mm) K Shear Reinforcement 300 or 275 more 1.00 1.05 250 1.10 225 1.15 200 1.20 175 1.25 150 or less 1.30

(i)

Where the design shear stress v exceeds the shear stress carried by concrete c shall be provided as per the following equation :

shear reinforcement

Asw = (T- Tc) x bs s(Sin +Cos) Asw b s s as in IRC:21-1987 CI.304.7.4

(ii)

The Type of shear reinforcement shall be in 1987.

accordance with CI. 304.7.4.1 of

IRC: 21-

Minimum Shear Reinforcement The minimum shear reinforcement calculated as per above equation shall not be less than : Grade of bars Asw Min. S240 0.002bs S415 0.001bs permissible shear max as given below.

III. 2.3.1 In no case design shear stress calculated shall exceed the maximum

17

III. 2.4

max

= 0.07fck or 2.5 MP a whichever is less.

P.C.C. piers need the provided with surface reinforcement to cater for effects of temperature variations in the structure. Such reinforcement is generally provided at 5 kg/Sq. m. area of the exposed surface. This reinforcement is also useful for having a good bond between two layers of concrete. The top width of pier is dependent on type of structure i.e. solid slab, grider slab system, prestressed concrete etc. The same therefore, need be carefully decided .Span length plays important role in deciding the size of bearing and its pedestals and expansion gap, which also need be considered while deciding the top width of pier .Prestrassed concrete construction warrants extra space for putting the prestrsseing jacks , which need be considered while deciding the top width of pier .Calculations are required with the help of properly drawn sketches .About 1.20m clear space between the faces of end diaphragms may be considered adequate for P.S.C. type of superstructures. The batter given to the pier generally is 1:3, 1:25, 1:20,1:18 and some times 1:15 and 1:12 .This is as per the stability calculations. The betters 1:15 and steeper do not look aesthetically pleasing and also result in increased obstruction to flow of water and hence may be avoided if possible. It is prudent to have one shape of pier for a bridge from asthetic point of view and also ease of work and economy due to repeated use of centring .

III. 2.5

Forces to be considered for stability of piers and abutment are given in IRC-6 (Section -II) . The permissible increase in stresses in the various member under different load combinations are also given in the code . The same is summarised as below: TABLE -7 Sr.No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Load combination Dead + Live 1 + Secondary + Deformation + Temperature 2 + wind + wave pressure 2 + seismic + wave pressure 2 + barge impact + wind load Dead + water current + buoyancy+ Earth pressure + erection + friction + Wind+ grade effect 6 + seismic - wind * Increase in permissible stresses. NIL 15% 331/3% 50% 331/3% 331/3% 50%

(* These values are not applicable for working out the base pressure for piers , abutment , returns etc. The permissible base pressure are given in I.R.C. 78 -1983 para 708) Apart from above mentioned combinations, following load combinations should generally be checked . 1. Dead + Live + wind in transverse direction. (i) (ii) 2. 3. Wind acting perpendicular to deck. 65% perpendicular and 35% along the deck . The wind velocity and method of computation of forces is given IRC-6-1966(Section-II).

One span dislodged (i.e. smaller span not in position ) for pier and no span condition for abutment . one span dislodged condition with Class A one train on span.

While considering the water current forces it is also assumed that the water flows at an angle of 20o resulting the transverse force on the pier.This force is quite substantial and is important on the stability analysis . Differential water head of 250 mm between opposite faces of the pier also need be considered in case of bridge with pucca floor or inerodible bed. The effect of live load surcharge on the abutments shall be as per IRC-78-1983 Clause 714.4 . It is further necessary to check the stability of pier of non-span condotion . The pire having no stabilising load from superstructure may be found unsafe under particular load combinations ,e.g. water current . Barge impact (in case of navigational channels) is one of the important factors in substructures design. The values of barge impact load should be judiciously consider depending on the weight of the moving barge .The highest point on the pier where barge need to defined and constructed accordingly .Typical arrangement is shown here .

18
Fig. III.1 Fig. III.2 Fig. III.3. HUNG TIMBER FENDER CHRUSHABLE CONCRETE BOX TENDER ON THE FRANCIS SCOTTKEY BRIDGE. OPEN FOUNDATION (NEW THANE CREEK BRIDGE)

All forces should be stated in a proper sequence. The combination of load & permissible base pressures. Specific requirements for different types of foundations should be explained . For important bridges from durability considerations the provisions of IRC-SP-33 shall have to be followed . (Refer Govt. Circular No. RMR-1094 /184/R-1 , dt. 12-6-1996 for applicability of IRC-SP-33).

(1)

Piers : The various type and shapes of piers used by the department are as given below . The materials used for pier are Masonary , P.C.C.and R.C.C.The shapes adopted are Solid wall type , Circular column, square column, rectangular , hollow circular , twin or multiple columns wit or without connected by diaphragm . Some of the typical sections for piers are shown in following Figures. Fig. III.4. Fig .III.6 Fig. III.5 FiG.7 Fig. III.8 Fig.9 SOLID WALL TYPE PIER HAMMER HEAD PIER SERIES OF COLUMNS FOR PIER TWIN CIRCULAR PIER SINGLE CIRCULAR PIER R.C.C. HOLLOW PIER

(2)

Abutment : Various types of abutments are used are gravity type , spill through type , counter fort type , box type . Typical sketches are shown bellow.

Fig. III10. SOLID ABUTMENT Fig. III 11. SPILL THROUGH ABUTMENT Fig. III 12. COUNTERFORT ABUTMENT III.3 RETURNS : The type of returns used are solid gravity ,R.C.C. box, Tied back or fly back type Fig. III 13. SOLID RETURN Fig.III 14. SPLAYED RETURN Fig. III 14 BOX RETURN ELEVATION Fig III.16 REINFORCED EARTH EMBANKMENT III. 4. BEARINGS : Various type of bearings used are M,S. plate , cast steel rocket rollers ,neoprene ,PTFE, pot bearing , R.C.C. roller . The selection of Bearings should be as follows : 1. Spans up to and including 10m for solid slab superstructure : Tar paper 2. Span> 10m and <40m :Neoprene pad 3. for any spans : Cast steel/ PTFE bearings . Reference should be made to I.R.C. -83-1982 Section IX part II. : for design of Neoprene bearings and part I : for steel bearings . A typical Neoprene Bearing is shown here . Fig.III 17 TYPICAL SECTION OF NEOPRENE BEARING FIGIII.18 STEEL ROCKER BEARING

Fig III.19 STEEL ROLER BEARINGS . Pot type bearings are also typically shown as below. Fig. III20 . POT BEARING

19
Fig.III 21. P.T.F.E.PAD BEARING. P.T.F.E. Bearings are for sliding or rotational movements .Proper selection would be necessary .Sufficient margin should be kept for movement due to deflection in the structure. Stopper /Lugs need be provided to arrest excessive movements in lateral direction due to centrifugal force etc. III.5 SUPERSTRUCTURES Various type of superstructures are arches , Masonary ,C.C.,R.C.C. Girder and deck slab ,Solid Slab , R.C.C. TBeam Slab , R.C.C. Box Beam , Voided Slab, P.S.C. two Girder ,Three Girder ,Multi- Girder , Box Girder ,Simply supported continuous Cantilever , Hammer head ,Bow string girder , Composit construction , cable stayed, suspension . III.5.1 Selection of proper superstructure : Generally the following criteria should be followed for selection of superstructure depending on span length. 1. Spans up to 10 R.C.C. solid slab . 2. Spans > 10 to 15m R.C.C. solid slab / Ribbed slab/ 3 girder 3. Spans > 15m to 20m R.C.C. 3 girder or Multi girder slab system . sl 20m to 30m R.C.C. Box Type superstructure. 5. Span > 30m to 60m P.S.C. Box girder.

4. Spans >

For spans more than 60m the discussions should be held with Superintending Engineer, Designs Circle for selection of the type of superstructures . 2- girder system for two lane superstructure should not be proposed unless other alternativies are considered unfeasible . For spans up to 10m solid slab superstructure are found most suitable. As the span increases beyond 10m the thickness of solid slab poses difficulties during concreting.lot of construction joints are created in the structure ifd proper programme of concreting is not prepared and insisted upon .It is thus ,desirable to go for ribbed slab or multi-girder system of deck slab . Spans between 10m to 15m could be conveniently covered in this manner. Spans between 15m to 20m ,3-grider or multi -girder system would be desirable . Two girder system should be avoided as far as possible. In case of single lane bridge two - girder system is natural choice . But this system should not be preferred in severe exposure conditions. There is a school of though that damage to one girder makes the entire structure unstable and unsafe and hence 3-girder system is to be preferred . For spans between 20m and 30m R.C.C. box type superstructure is considered suitable. Use of R.C.C. girder and slab system might result in excessive deflections under live load . Box girder is a more desirable shape for the superstructure . Beyond 30cm span , it is necessary to go for P.S.C. This enables us to somewhat restrict the deck height to the desired level. Generally the spans may not exceeds 60m. However , if such situation occurs, the discussions should be held with Superintending Engineer ,Design Circle for deciding the type of superstructure. The parameters influencing selection of superstructure need be studied . R.C.C. superstructure should be given suitable preconstruction camber. While estimating the deflection of superstructure , the effect of shrinkage ,creep etc. over a period of about 15 years should be considered . In case of P.S.C. superstructure precamber is generally not required. It should however be ensured that there will be no sagging in future . Typical cross-section of the superstructure adopted by the departmentare given below: Fig. III.22 SOLID SLAB

Fig. III 23. 2-GIRDER SYSTEM . Fig. 24 . 3-GIRDER SYSTEM . Fig.III.25 . 4-GIRDER SYSTEM. Fig,III. 26 6- GIRDER SYSTEM Fig. III.27 Girder System. Fig. III.28 SINGLE CELL BOX Fig. III. 29. TWO CELL BOX Fig. III. 30 THREE CELL BOX .

20
III.5.1.1 TYPE DESIGN Type designs are available for solid slab and girder type superstructures. The type designs prepared by M.O.S.T. are also available for R.C.C. solid slab up to 10m , R.C.C. girder slab up to 24m and P.S.C. girder slab bridges up to 40m spans. For box superstructure ,the type designs are to be done . However ,reference could be obtained from the already approved designs of similar nature . III.5.2 Type I and Type II structures . (PSC) In case of P.S.C. structure as per I.S. -1343 three types of structures are defined. However in our case only type-I and type-II structures are allowed in the state in spite of I.R.C. provisions for type-I and type-II structures are allowed in the state in spite of I.R.C. provisions for type-I only. For type-I P.S.C. structures minimum compression of 5 kg. /cm2 is assumed under all loading conditions. Where as for type-II P.S.C. structures no tension is allowed under dead load +60% live load, but tension up to 2/3 rd modulus of rupture of 7 day strength was allowed previously but now this stress limit is modified to 20kg/cm2 (tension ) in moderate and 10kg/cm2 in severe exposure conditions .Generally for important and in serve atmospheric conditions ,type I structures are designed so that there will not be any cracking causing ingress of moisture and there by leading to correction. For the bridge on less important routes and in dry climate , type II structures can be designed and constructed . III.5.3 Minimum thickness: Minimum thickness of deck slab is generally to be prescribed as 240mm either in case of box or girder slab system. This thickness is essential from practical point of view regarding placement of reinforcement , concrete and its proper compaction . Minimum web thickness for box girder shall be 250 mm , however this should be increased in case of severe exposure conditions. All the specified minimum thickness are from durability point of view . III.5.4 Methods of transverse analysis : III.5.4.1 T- Girder slab system: The longitudinal girders are connected by cross - girder at intermediate places and this arrangement supports the deck slab. Most complex problem in this case is determination of distribution of live loads between the longitudinal girders. When there are only two longitudinal girders, the reaction of longitudinal girders can be found by assuming the supports of the deck slab as unyielding. With 3 or more girders , the load distribution can be estimated using any one of the rational methods discussed as below . (a) Courbons method: Main assumption in this method is linear variation of deflection in transverse direction. In view of simplicity this method is popular but it has its own limitation like. (i) (ii) (iii) (b) (c) Ratio of span to width shall be grater than 2 but less than 4 . Longitudinal girders are interconnected by symmetrically spaced cross girder of adequate tiffness. Cross girders extend to a depth of at least 0.75 of the depth of main girder. Hendry jaeger Method : Here it is assumed that cross girder can be replaced in the analysis by a uniform continuous transverse medium of equivalent stiffness. Morice -Little Method : Orthotropic plate theory is applied to concrete bridge system . This approach has the merit that a single set of distribution coefficient for two extreme cases of no torsion grillage and a full torsion grillage and a full torsion slab enable the distribution behaviour of any type of bridge to be found . Design Circle is having computer programme for these types of analysis. Refer Essentials of bridge Engineering by D. Johnson Victor . III.5.4.2 Box girder bridge : Detailed transverse analysis for box girder bridge is difficult to perform. Exact finite element model will have to be generated to see the behaviour. In absence of rigorous analysis for the torsional moments and for forces due to restrictions of warping torsion at ends , design moments and shear in longitudinal direction are increased by 20% and transverse reinforcement steel by 5 % for simplicity and quick results . Generally following procedure is followed for transverse analysis. (i) Calculate bending moments in roadway slab consideration the slab considering the slab , web and soffit slab as closed frame.

21
(ii) (iii) III.6 EXPANSION JOINTS : To cater for the expansion and contraction of superstructure suitable expansion joint is required to be provided . The expansion joint is also supposed to be leak proof so that the superstructure ,bearings and piers do not get damaged due to such leakage of rainwater etc. Design Circle has issued some type designs for expansion joints which are being used commonly on the small span bridges. 1. 2. Copper plate expansion joints. Sliding M.S. plate expansion joints . Reinforcement in slabs, webs due to transverse moment is provided in addition to steel required to be provided in addition to steel required for shear or torsion. Distorsion of box girder of box girder due to transverse moment is to be considered in the design .

The sliding M.S. plate joint have been extensively used in past .The experience of its performance , however, is discouraging . The joints develops cracks in the bituminous wearing coat and during monsoon gets further deteriorated. It also creates lot of noise as the vehicles pass over it . The copper plate expansion joints has given satisfactory results (this joint is however susceptible to theft ).Up to 25mm gap, this type can be considered the best . The two types expansion joints are described in the sketch. Fig.III.31 DETAILS OF EXPANSION JOINTS BETWEEN R.C.C. SOLID SLAB Fig.III.32. COPPER PLATE EXPANSION JOINTS. Fig. III.33. DETAILS OF M.S. PLATE EXPANSION JOINTAND CEMENT CONCRETE WEARING COAT: Fig. III.34. DETAILS OF COPPER PLATE EXPANSION JOINT Fig. III.35 STRIP SEAL TYPE JOINT . Fig. III.36 TYPICAL BOX SEAL MODULER EXPANSION JOINT . Fig. III. 37. FIXING OF COMPRESSION SEAL JOINT. Most under circular dated RW/NH/33059/1/96-S&R 31-3-97 has prescribed different expansions joints suitable for particular expansion .The details are as per table bellow . TABLE :8 SUITABILITY CRITERIA FOR ADOPTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF EXPANSION JOINTS

Sr. No. 1. 2.

Type expansion Buried Filler joint

Suitability for adoption of joint Simply supported spans up to 10 m Fixed end of simply supported spans with insignificant moment .

Service life 10 years 10 years

Special consideration Only for decks with bituminous asphaltic wearing coat. The sealant and joint filler wood need replacement if found damaged

22
3. Asphalitc Plug joint Simply supported spans for right or skew up to (20 degree)moderately curved or wide deck with maximum horizontal movement not Exceeding 25mm 10 years Only for decks with bituminous /asphaltic wearing coat. not suitable for bridge with longitudinal gradient more than 2%and crosscamber /superie-vation exceeding 3%. Not suitable for curved spans and spans resting on yielding supports.

4.

Compression Seal joint Elastometric Slab seal joint Simple sterip Seal joint Modular Strip/Box seal Joint. Special joints for special condition

5.

6.

7.

8.

Simply support to continuous spans right or skew(up to (20degree) moderately curved with maximum horizontal movement not exceeding 40mm. Simply support to continuous spans right or skew(less than 70degree) moderately curved with maximum horizontal movement not exceeding 50mm. Moderate to large Simply supported. cantilever continuous construction having right ,skew or curved deck with maximum horizontal movement up to 70mm . Large to very large continuous/cantilever construction with right ,skew or curved deck having maximum horizontal movement in excess of 70mm . For bridge having wide decks/ span length of more than 120m. or /and involving complex moment / rotations in different directions /plans provisions of special type of modular expansion joints such as swivel joists joints may be made.

10 years 10 years 25 years 25 years 25 years

Chloroprene/closed foam seal may need replacement during service . Not suitable for bridges located in heavy reinfall area and spans resting on yielding support. Elastometric seal may replacement during service. Elastometric seal may replacement during service need

need

Elastometric seal may need replacement during service .Provisions of these joints may be made with prior approval of competent authority.

These are proprietary items for which 10 years warranty shall be insisted upon from the suppliers. For larger expansion gaps , of about 50mm and more the joints has to be designed suitability . Other types of joints are : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Finger type joint (Cast steel ) Strip seal joint (Elastomeric ) Compression seal joint (Elastomeric ) Slab seal joint (Elastomeric ) Modular joints (Modules with Elastomeric )

The above joints are costly as compared to conventional joint described earlier . We are, however , left with no choice for long span bridges but for adopting them. For details of material property refer M.O.S.T. specification for roads and Bridges 1997 edition. The above item are presently patented and hence detailed design calculations are not generally mace available . It should be insisted upon . For details of these joints refer literature given by the manufactures. Extra care need be taken for maintaining line and level of the joint to match perfectly with the geometry of the deck surface . III.7 PARAPET AND KERB Deciding the type of railing , kerb etc. as per type of bridge i.e. high level or submersible . (i) (ii) For high level :S.E.D.C.s Type drawings or bridge Sanchi type parapet as mentioned in designs criteria can also be adopted. The choice of drawing is recommended in S.E.D.C.s Circular No. For submersible Bridge : Railing shall be removable type .,Either pipe railing or collapsible type as shown in the type drawings can be adopted

23

III.8. WEARING COAT : Earlier up to 1980 R.C.C. wearing coat is generally adopted .Now as per Govt. in P.W.D. Circular No. CEC/1179/50677/CR-225/D-29-A dated 12.08.80, following type of wearing coat are generally provided for buildings Convensional Practice : High level bridges : Bituminour 50mm DBM + 25 mm AC/SDC Submersible bridges : C.C. M-20 with temperature steel . Long span bridges : Bituminous or C.C. M-20 with temperature steel . The performance of C.C. wearing coat and long span bridges (Where deflections under live load are considerable ) is not found to be satisfactory . It develops cracks and spoils the riding quality . The cracked surface also allows water to seep through the leads to corrossion in the main deck elements particularly in saline climates . Bituminous wearing coat with 50mm DBM + 25mm AC/SDC generally does not perform well during monsoon , particularly in high rain fall area (> 1000 mm per annum). Better treatment consider today is 12 mm Mastic Asphalt (as a water proofing layer) + 50 mm DBM + 25 mm Mastic Asphalt (top surface sealant) we may part with the 12mm. Thick Mastic Asphalt layer in areas where climate is not severe and that the rain fall is less than 1000mm per annum. III.9. WATER SPOUTS : Water spouts are required to drain out the rain water from the deck surface quickly ,. The deck has camber or super elevation which help rain water get quickly towards kerbs . The water spouts located near the kerb further disposes the water out . One water spout (as per M.O.S.T type deign No. SD-*303 ----) per 20 sq.m. of the deck area is considered adequate . Typical arrangement of rain water disposal is shown in following figure . Fig. III.38. DETAILS OF DRANGE SPOUT Fig. III. 39 FLY OVERS IN URBAN AREA (ARRANGEMET OF WATER SPOUT ) IV. SUBMERSIBLE BRIDGES : On number of occasions we come across with very flat or shallow channels . the banks are not properly defined and the depth of channel is too small. The water spread at H.F.L. is too big. It becomes difficult to decide the length of high level bridge covering the entire spread at H.F.L. by the bridge would be too uneconomical . Such channels are better for a submersible bridge with Road top level matching the general ground level. The obstructions to flow due to approach should be practically NIL. Bank work in approaches for a submersible bridge should be minimised as it is very much susceptible to washouts during monsoon. The percentage obstruction at O.F.L. (Ordinary Flood Level ) and R.T.L. should be worked out . At O.F.L. the obstructions may be aimed at about 20% .The value of at R.T.L. , however , are always higher (i.e. up to 40% ). This is due to obstruction to flow to superstructure .At H.F.L. however , the % obstructions should show a acceptable figure i.e. between 15% to 20% . Premissible interruption for different category of roads have been specified by Govt. These are already stated in previous chapter . While deciding the R.L. to be cleared by the submersible bridge, the above limitations should be considered. In absence of detailed hydrographs, the various levels reported by Road Project Division have to be relied upon. The substructure is generally just resting on the substructure . The same , therefore , need to be stable by itself during floods. Solid Slabs superstructures are the best for submersible bridges. However ,Girder -slab , ribbed slab, box girder type superstructure are used for submersible bridges.Care , therefore need be taken for no entrapping of air , quick filling of box with water etc. Adequate No. of holes should be provided in the superstructure for escape of air etc. Stoppers should be provided on d/s over the piers to add to the stability of the superstructure as an additional / precaution .

24
V. ANTI CORROSIVE TREATMENT Due to saline atmosphere, the steel get corroded due to electrochemical action.Not only the reinforcing steel but also the standards /wires used for prestressing gets corroded . Adequate care, therefore , need to taken to protect the bridge structure from this dangerous phenomenon. The concrete as well as steel need be provided with some anti-corrosive treatment. The bridges lying in coastal area are affected by corrosion. At place the atmosphere may itself be corrosive due to heavy chemical industralisation . The channel may also carry waste produce from the industries , which may lead to corrosion . The anticorrosive treatment is required to be applied to concrete and reinforcement steel incase of saline and severe exposure conditions . (a) for reinforcement, at present C.E.C.R.I. specification (Phosphatic jelly treatment) and FBEC (fusion bonded epoxy coating ) treatment as per I.S. 13620-1995 are adopted. Both the treatments have certain advantages and disadvantages , however the choice should be judiciously selected. Recently C.E.C.R.I. has developed CPCC ( cement polymer composite coating ) treatment ,thickness of coatings, effectiveness of coatings. The same could also be proposed being CECRI product . Anti Corrosive treatment for concrete surface. The Concrete surfaces that are in contact with earth of water -these surface are applied with zinc rich coal tar epoxy paint of primer plus 2 coats. This treatment can also be applied over linear of piles and pile caps . The concrete surface in splash zone -Acque epoxy paint in three coats is applied as the surface is alternately in wet and dry condition . The surface exposed to atmosphere - e.g. solid slabs ,girders and slab, outer faces of box girders. These are painted with epoxy coating in three coats as per C.E.C.R.I. specifications. Inside faces of the box girder are applied with cement based paint .

(b) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

VI. FUTURE PRESTRESSING ARRANGEMENTS: In case of prestressed concrete structures , located in severe/ saline exposure conditions , provision of future prestressing arrangement is felt necessary and should be obligatory. In case of box structures, the holes are kept in the end diaphragms at top portion. If intermediate diaphragms are provided then holes should be left in these also keeping in view the alignment of external cables. It is preferable to get the cable profile approved before approving the superstructure drawing . If the diaphragms are very wide /thick , then holes should be rectangular in size to adjust the profile of alignment. For prestressed structure , suitable arrangement for external prestressing should be decided at design stage . Such arrangement should be for imparting about 20% of the prestressing force originally applied . VII. USE OF COMPUTER FOR DESIGN OF BRIDGES : At present there are 16 stand - alone personal computers in the design Circle . List of software developed by the Designs Circle is attached as Annexure I. These all software are developed in house. Efforts are being made to develop more and more softwares. Recently purchased STADD-3 software is found to be quite useful in analysis of structures .It is seen that for bridge structures ,ready made softwares are not available in the market as a computer package . as soon as these becomes available , it should be purchased for office use.It must be kept in mind that computer should be used as a tool for helping the designs and its scrutiny . After all it is the fell of structure , judgement of the expert that will count in final decision . Before using any of the programmes it is desirable that the Design Engineer does the calculations with his own hands to get the fell of the problem . VIII. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL GEOMETRY: Aesthetics is a matter of taste and therefore it is not possible to codify the rules , which are to be followed in the Designs of bridges. However few criteria like alignment (horizontal and vertical ) with proper geometrics can add to the architecture of bridge . The approach gradients either for a valley curve or a summit curve shall have continuity without break . The change of slope should be gradual without any abrupt or sudden change . The approach to a bridge with a kink as shown below shall be avoided . (i) (ii) (iii) SUDDEN CHANGE OF GEADE (BAD) GRADUAL CHANGE OF GRADE WITH TWO VERTICAL CURVES (GOOD) GRADUAL CHANGE OF GRADE WITH ONE VERTICAL CURVE (BETTER)

25
Fig. VIII.1 bridge with valley curve (i) (ii) (iii) SUDDEN CHANGE OF GRADE (BAD) GRADUAL CHANGE OF GRADE WITH TWO VERTICAL CURVES (GOOD)) GRADUAL CHANGE OF GRADE WITH ONE VERTICAL CURVE (BETTER)

FIG. VIII. 2 BRIDGES WITH SUMMIT CURVE The approach gradients with the vertical curves at two ends with the bridge deck straight is preferable to the kink but a curve bridge deck in the vertical plane having single curvature will be most preferable . IX. DESIGNS CRITERIA Designs criteria is a guideline for contractors designer to design the structure with good Engineering practice and in conformity with departmental specifications Separate criteria are devised for flyover and river / creek bridges . The department has restricted use certain type of structures as mentioned below. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Structures sensitive to unequal settlement of foundations resting on yielding type of foundations Abutments resting on approach embankments . Stability of overall structure endangered due to failure of one or more span/ spans. Superstructure with joints at the tip of long cantilevers with higher or gap slabs . Structures with continuity only in deck slab, in transverse direction . Piers in the form of multiple columns with isolated /separate footings resting on yielding type strata . Spill through type of abutments for river bridges where spilled earth is subjected to stream velocity is more than 2m/sec. And tied back returns exceeding 3m in length . Square ended piers for river bridges. 2- girder slab system for superstructure in severe exposure .

(10) Piles in deep scour and navigational zone . Apart from this various limitations are given in the Designs Criteria in view of practices followed in the state .

X TRENDS AND PRACTISES FOLLOWED IN THE STATE: There are no hard and fast rules for good engineering practices. However , from the experience of the department in the State , these practices are listed in the designs criteria . The prominent ones are as below . There shall be minimum number of expansion joints for better riding surface . Shear strength of concrete is not considered as per I.R.C. Now the shear design is allowed as per I.S. -456 hence this aspect is now taken care of . (3) Reduced area of contact is allowed up to 75% for load combinations II and III of I.R.C. -78 . (4) P.C.C. footings supporting R.C.C. columns are not permitted . (5) The provision of sump for well foundations in made obligatory . Anchors bars & Nos.32 dia .are also made compulsory . (6) Minimum diameter. of piles is 750 mm for main bridge and 500mm for retaining structure. (7) Design with single row of piles is not accepted . (8) Pile foundations are not provided in flood zones or areas with deep scour or at locations where navigation is allowed . (9) Any dimension of any element of counter-fort type abutment is not to be less than 300mm. (10) Hollow R.C.C.Pier are allowed with minimum thickness of wall as 300mm in moderate exposure and 400mm in severe exposure condition . (11) The height of pedestal is limited to 500 mm . (12) Minimum deck slab thickness shall be 240mm and not less than 200mm at the trip of cantilever. Minimum thickness of intermediate diaphragm wherever provided has to be 300 mm and that of end diaphragm 5oomm . In the absence of rigorous transverse analysis for box , design live load moments and shear forces in longitudinal direction are increased by 20% and and transverse reinforcement steel be increased by 5%. All prestressed members are provided with spare cables at 5% of total numbers required for designs . This is needed in case of short fall in extensions of the designed cables. Provision for imparting 20% of design prestress at a future date is made in the deck and suitable anchorage , bulk heads are constructed for the purpose . (1) (2)

(13) (14) (15) (16)

26
(17) (18) (19) (20) (21) In case of submersible bridge sufficient vent holes are provided in box Superstructure to prevent entrapping of air inside and to get water in to and out of box instantly. Bearings are to be provided preferably within external line of pier /abutment and below the web of box girders . Trapaper bearings are allowed up to 10m and restrained neoprene bearings are allowed up to 40m span only. Anti- crash barriers are provided in high risk areas e.g. Intersections of important roads , tall bridges etc. Facilities for inspection of bridge are provided in case of tall bridges and those which pose difficulties in inspection . The bridge are designed for temperature gradient (t) of 35o centigrade for extreme atmospheric o exposure and 25 centigrade for moderate atmospheric expouser . The temperature indicated are total expansion /contraction aggregate value. (i.e. + 17.5 12.5 o ) The superstructure is also designed for effects of distribution of tempreture across the deck depth as shown in figure for calculation of the thermal forces , effect of E value of concrete should be taken as 50% of instantaneous value so as to account for the effect of creep on thermal strains. Fig. X.I. DESIGN TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCES X. TYPES OF PRESTRESSING AND ITS PROPER USE: Basically two types of prestressing and pretensioned and post tensioned are applied in bridge engineering .Generally pretensioning is very rarely used in the state because of its limitations like proximity and availability of plant , size of member, number of units etc. Post tensioning system is mainly used in the state .Various system of prestressing are (a) Freyssinet, (b) Magnel -Blaton , (c) Gifford-Udall system . Many of the post tensioning devices are covered by patents . In case of freyssinet systems, cable with a fixed number of wires e.g. 12-5 or 12-7 or 19-7 are used . Various system are explained in the accompanied sketch. The sheathing is generally of bright galvanised metal sheet of interlocking connection (0.3 to 0.5mm thickness).This can be manufactured at site. Fig. XI.1 ANCHORAGE FOR FREYSSINET SYSTEM Fig. XI.2 ANCHORAGE FOR MAGNET BLATTON SYSTEM Fig. XI.3 ANCHORAGE FOR GOFFORD -UDAL SYSTEM Fig. XI.4 ANCHORAGE FOR LEE MCCALLSYSTEM XII. Preparation of first stage proposal for the bridge The technical note of the proposal should cover following chapters. (i) introduction : General site and area location and background should be mentioned here.

(22)

(ii)History

The history shall give the chronological list of the event so far occurred in finalising bridge proposals .It shall include the date of receiving the survey data , scrutinising the data in the design circle , receiving the compliance of the remarks raised by the Design Circle , and dates of inspection of the site by various authorities . Mention shall also be made of the earlier proposal .Change in site as per directives of various authorities shall also be mentioned .Typical background and peculiarity of site may also be mentioned in this section if applicable .

(iii)Necessity

This should explain the necessity of bridge . How it will be facillitate the near by villages and improve the road network . This also must state the requirement of high level or submersible bridge etc.

27
(iV) Authority : If the work is approved administratively and if appearing in budget then its reference with amount should be stated . Or else priority given by the Chief Engineer should be mentioned .

(v) Site selection :

Site selection is a very important of site aspect . As per G.R. BDG - 1080/808308 (394) Desk -2 dated 03.11.80 the Designs Circle is supposed to prepared bridge proposals for length more than 30m to For the length of bridge between 30m to 60m, territonal S.E. is to finalise the site. However S.E. (Designs) has to finalise the site for bridge length more than 60m. Details of site inspection , alternatives studied and justification for the proposed site should be narrated in this para. This chapter of hydraulics should depict all the hydraulic characteristics of bridge site lite catchment,discharge ,surface characteristics, various water levels . The level to be cleared by the bridge with justification should be explained .

(vi) Hydraulics

(vii) Foundations :

This should explain the type of foundations adopted depending on trial pit or trial bore results with justification. The choice of type of foundations is discussed separately .

(viii) Proposal

This para should detail the proposed bridge weather submersible or high level . In some cases high level submersible bridge is also proposed wherein the clearnce over H.F.L. is normal and not standards as per I.R.C.T exact chainages of abutments with length of bridge proposed is to be mentioned . How RTL/ Soffit levels are workedout has to be mentioned as explained below :

H.F.L./ O.F.L. : ..m. (whichever is proposed to be cleared ) + Afflux (Assumed /actual ) :..m. + vertical clearance : .m.

Soffit of slab /grider of superstructure : m. + Girder height /Slab thickness/:.m. Superstructure depth + Wearing coat thickness :m. Road top Level (viii) Standards : :.m.

The para should state the type of loading for which the bridge is proposed to be designed .In case of bridge with footpath ,the loading should be mentioned Generally two lane bridge is designed for single lane of 70R wheeled / tracked or 2 lane of Class A whichever produces worst effects. The single lane bridge is designed for one lane of class A only .Further the seismic zone of the bridge site with seismic zone of the bridge site with seismic coefficient , soil structure interaction factor and importance factor has to be clearly written . This chapter should show the dimensions of substructures like abutments and piers along with grades of concrete proposed . if the sections can be taken directly from type plans well and good or else the stability calculations for piers /abutment is required to be done . Use of computer programmes can also be made . This para should inform about the type of superstructure adopted reference of type plan if adopted with grades of concrete and type of structures must be clearly given The miscellaneous item must spell out the provisions and details of wing walls/ returns, bearings , expansion joints, parapets , wearing coat , filling behind abutments ,anticorrosive treatment , special provisions with respect to inspection of bridges etc. This site that are likely to be affected by the dewatering problem shall have specific mention so that proper provision can be made in the estimate.

(ix) Substructure

(x) Superstructure. : (Xi) Miscellaneous :

28
(Xii) Approaches : The approaches may need some specific treatment is required . In case of blocking of discharge in approach area , provision of vents or otherwise and its details are to be given . In case of submersible approaches the type plan shall be used. For the approaches expose to wave action , proper design has to be obtained preferably from MERI/CWPRS . The special points feature should include any points , which need special attention. If any data is to be re-verified or some approvals are to be obtained from competent authorities then it should appear here . Application severe exposure or SP-33 conditions which has bearing on cost must have special mention. Special provision for formwork, centering , dewatering , slope , protection etc. Should be stated so that the same can be adequately incorporated in the estimate .

(xiii) Special points :

XIII . General Arrangement Drawing (G.A.D.) Apart from above description, the proposal should contain the general arrangement drawing .A drawing should necessarily contain L-section showing pier and abutment location , various levels, dimensions of pier / abutment , plan and typical cross section . Further the notes about various assumptions of design should be written on the drawing. Typical proforma of notes is attached as Annexure -2. Only applicable part of note has to be kept on drawing. Apart from this material table should appear on drawing. Thus drawing should be self explanatory and to be easy for preparation of estimate at field level. General guidelines to be followed for preparation of material table are given in Annexure -3 . The G.A.D so prepared should show sufficient details to enable preparation of detailed estimate . All dimension and provisions should be clearly shown on the drawing . Consider the whole proposal whether generally acceptable , workable , economical. A question should be asked at this stage weather there could be any better alternative. For reference of the new comers a sample technical note and general arrangement drawing is attached as shown below . The GAD also should have key plann showing bridge location, alignment , trail pit/bore result with location and three bench mark position with values . XIV. DETAILED ESTIMATE: After preparation of the proposal, estimate will be prepared by the field officers on the basis of these technical note and drawing. For the bridge length more than 60m. as per G.R. No. (Marathi) CEC -1083/(2008) /D-33 dated 5.4.83 , the estimates are to be countersigned by the Designs Circle. Generally the measurements / provisions are to be critically verified . XV . WORKING DRAWINGS : After this next stage is inviting tenders. The tenders may be either on B-1/ B-2 i.e. on departmental design or on C form i.e. On contractors own design. For B-1/B-2 type contracts the designs are to be prepared by Designs Circle & working drawings supplied to be concerned field officers. Generally for bridges with length more than 60m. tenders are invited on lump-sum basis (i.e. form C). For this type of works the designs criteria is to be given by Designs Circle. On receipt of contractors technical proposals with the tender, this is to be scrutinised with respect to the tender conditions and accept stability or otherwise need be communicated to field officers. Thereafter an important part is checking of contractors design after award of work. (XVI). PREPARATION OF WORKING DRAWINGS : Based on the site condition i.e. foundation level etc. , the detailed design with drawing is to be prepared for foundation substructure, superstructure etc. ( XVII). CHECKING THE CONTRACTORS ALTERNATIVE DESIGN: (1) (2) Design criteria for contractors alternative design is to be studied in detail . Contractors design are to be checked based on the design criteria.

(XVII). REFERENCES : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Open channel hydraulics - Ven Te Chow . Essentials of bridge Engineering - D, Johnson Victor Bridge Engineering - Rakshit Concrete bridges - Design & practise -V. K. Raina Foundation design - Teng . GUIDELINES FOR BRIDGE DESIGN

29

ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE-1. LIST OF SOFTWARES AVAILABLE IN DESIGNS CIRCLE (P.W.) Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Name of program IL1 IL2 IL3 FF1 FF2 FF4 RR Note AFFSUB B12 Programme language FORTRAN FORTRAN FORTRAN LOTUS 123 LOTUS 123 LOTUS 123 FORTRAN FORTRAN LOTUS 123 FORTRAN Name of programmer P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. Purpose of program To calculate Max SF and BM at user defined sections for passage of specified live load train for simple span. ----do for two span continuous beams----------do for three span continuous beam------Analysis of rectangular R.C.C. section for combined BM and Compression using first principle. ---Do--- for BM and tension. ----Do---for Tee section. Analysis of rectangular RCC section for combined BM and Compression. Programme to generate Draft Technical Note to be given with proposal Calculations of Afflux and scouer depth for submersible bridge using weir formulae . Analysis of rectangular RCC section for biaxial BM and Compression

30
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 UNIAX STAB98 STHELP CHINCH1 PRESTRE NEO HYD4 ABWELL SOLCP ABUT FEMG NBD WATER CURRENT FORCE WIND CURRENT FORCE SUMMARY OF DEAD LOAD SUMMARY OF LOAD OPEN FOUNDN SUMMARY OF LOAD WELL FOUNDN SUMMARY OF LOAD STEINING LEVEL REINFORCED SECTION SOLID CIRCULAR HOLLOW CIRCULAR Auto CAD C/S OF NALLAH SLAB RAFT CHANNEL RAFT BEAM RAFT PIER STABILITY PIER STABILITY COUNTER FORT ABUTMENT STABILITY NEOPRENE BERING DESIGN FORTRAN FORTRAN FORTRAN LOTUS 123 LOTUS 123 FORTRAN FORTRAN MS EXCEL FORTRAN MS EXCEL FORTRAN FORTRAN MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL MS EXCEL AUTOCAD-R14 FORTRAN FORTRAN FORTRAN FORTRAN MS EXCEL MS EXCEL LOTUS 123 P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. P.M. Baviskatr. Y.E. Sakhalkar. Y.E. Sakhalkar. Y.E. Sakhalkar. Y.E. Sakhalkar. Y.E. Sakhalkar. S.K. Mukherjee. S.K. Mukherjee. S.K. Mukherjee. S.K. Mukherjee. S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee S.K. Mukherjee Hiranwar To calculate stresses in steel and concrete for circular section To calculate stresses in steel and concrete for hollow section Programme to generete Lsection on Nalla for given bed levels Analysis of raft foundation(slab type) Analysis of raft foundation(channel Type) Analysis of raft foundation Programme to check abutment stability ----Programme to check abutment stability Worksheet for design of neoprene bearing design. Analysis of Circular RCC section for uniaxial BM and Compression Programme to check stability and material stresses at various levels in pier. Programme to generate input data for STAB 98.FOR Programme to check stability of submersible abutment. Sample calculations of Design of Prestressessed superstructure. To check the given dimensions of neoprene bearing for different load cases. Hydraulic calculations for bridges . Abutment well stability. Stresses in solid circular pier subjected to axial load and moment. Abutment stability.

Excel worksheets to calculate water current forces. Excel worksheets to calculate winder current forces. For design of pire,to calculate dead loads. For design of pire,to calculate dead loads. To calculate total load for various combinations for well design -----

Deotare Deotare

ANNEXURE -2: TYPE DESIGNS ISSUED BY THE DESIGN CIRCLE 2.1 TYPE DESIGNS (1. FOUNDATIONS) Sr. No 1 2 3 4 Drawing No. Drg.No.I/a-3/1/1972 Drg.No.BR-I/A-3/2/1972 Description

Details of well steining and curb 3m dia Notes and reinforced schedule of well stening and curbe for 3m internal dia. Drg. No. 1/B-1/1/1972 Well anchorage details for pier well 3m (Twin well) Drg. No. BR-III/I/C-2/1/1972 Details of well steining & curb 4m internal dia. Stening thick .0.7m

31
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Drg. No. BR-III/I/C-2/2/1972 Details of well steining & curb 5m internal dia. Stening thick .0.85m Drg. No. BR-III/I/C-2/3/1972 Details of well steining & curb 6.20m internal dia. Drg. No. BR-1/C-2/4/1972 Detailes of well steining and curb 3m internal dia. Drg. No. BR-I/C-2/5/1972 Detailes of well steining and curb 5.60m internal dia. Drg. No. BR-I/C-2/6/1972 Details of well steining & curb 4.2m internal dia. Stening thickness .0.9m internal dia. Drg. No. BR-I/C-2/7/1972 Details of well steining and curb 5.2m internal dia. Drg. No. BR-I/I/C/2/1/1972 Tentative details of steining & curb(for tapi bridge at Indgaon.) Drg. No. BR-I/D-1/1972 Details of well cap under under abutment 6.20m dia. Drg. No. BR-I/D-3/1972 Details of well cap and pier and abutment internal dia. 3m stening thickness 0.60 Drg. No. BR-I/D-3/1972 Details of well cap under pier 3 m internal dia. Drg.No.BR-I/E-2/1/4/1972 General layout of type design for R.C.C. rafts on shallow foundation (Two way rafts slabs ) Drg. No. BR-I/E-2/2/4/1973 Details of reinforcement for bars two way rafts slabs. Drg. No.BR-I/E-2/3/4/1972 Schedule or reinforcement for bars for R.C.C. rafts on shallow foundations(Two ways rafts slab) Drg.No.BR-III/I/E-2/4/4/1973 Details of reinforcement for two way.rafts on shallow foundations. Drg.No.BR-III/I/E-2/1/5/1979 Type designs for R.C.C. rafts foundation for bridges key plan. Drg.No.BR-III/i/2/5/1979/T.P. Type designs for R.C.Cum . Rafts foundations for bridges reinforcement arrangement. Drg.No.BR-III/E-2/3/5/1979/ Type designs for R.C.C . rafts foundations for T.P. bridges schedules of two spans. Drg.No.BR-III/I/E-2/4/5/1979/ Type designs for R.C.C . raft foundations for T.P. bridges schedule for more than two spans. Drg.No.BR-III/I/EType designs for R.C.C . raft foundations for 2/5/5/1979/T.P. bridges schedule for single span. Drg.No.BRN/CDR/178/92037 R.C.C. details of raft with cut-off wall walls.

(2.2) Sr. No. 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Drawing No.

TYPE DESIGNS (II.SUB- STRUCTURE) Description

R.C.C. return 9m height R.C.C. box return 4.5m height . R.C.C. box return 3m height R.C.C. box return 13.5m height R.C.C. box return 13.5m height Schedule of reinforcement for box return height 12m & 13.5m only. Drg.No.II/G-7/1972. R.C.C. box return 6m height. Drg.No.II/G-8/1972. R.C.C. box return 7.5m height. Drg.No.II/G-9/1972. R.C.C. box return 12m & 7.5m clear . Drg.No.II/G-10/1972. Schedule of reinforcement for 3m ,6m ,9m&12-m deep box return and statement of concrete and steel for different . Drg.No.II/G-11/1972. R.C.C. box return 10.5-m height. Drg.No.II/K-1/1972. details of abutment cap with dirt wall and pier caps for T-beam and slab and R.C.C. solid slab (superseded) Drg.No.BR-III/II-K/75001/T.P. Details abutment cap with dirt wall and pier cap for solid slab . Drg.No.BR-III/K-1A/1972 Details abutment cap with dirt wall and pier cap for T beam and slab. Drg.No.BR-II/N-1/1973T.P. Sketch showing surface reinforcement for pier abutments with mass concrete or c.c.1:3:6with plumb. Drg.No.BL-IV/II/A &B/74007 Type section for abutment (with solid slab deck ). /TP. Drg.No.BL-IV/II/A &B/74008 Type section for abutment(for T beam and slab /T.P. deck.

Drg.No.II/G-1/1972. Drg.No.II/G-2/1972. Drg.No.II/G-3/1972. Drg.No.II/G-4/1972. Drg.No.II/G-5/1972. Drg.No.II/G-6/1972.

32
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Drg.No.BL-IV/II/E&F/ Type section for return walls and wing walls . 74009/T.P.> Drg.No.BL-IV/II-G/75025 R.C.C. box returns 13.5m ht.(H.Y.S.D.and c.c.M150) Drg.No.BL-IV/II-G/75026 R.C.C. box returns 12m and13.5m height .(H.Y.S.S.) Drg.No.BL-IV/IIR.C.C. box returns 12m and13.5m height(schedule of G/75027/T.P. reinforcement). Drg.No.BL-IV/II-/75028/T.P. R.C.C. box returns 10.5m ht. (Schedule of reinforcement ) . Drg.No.BL-IV/II-/75029/T.P. R.C.C. box returns 9.0m ht.(H.Y.S.D. and c.c150m) Drg.No.BL-IV/II-/75030/T.P. R.C.C. box returns 7.5m ht.( H.Y.S.D. and c.c150m) Drg. No.BL-IV/IV-G/75031/ R.C.C. box returns 6.0m ht.( H.Y.S.D. and c.c150m) T.P. Drg,No.BL-IV/II-G/75032 R.C.C. box returns 4.5m ht.( H.Y.S.D. and c.c150m) /T.P. Drg,No.BL-IV/II-G/75033 R.C.C. box returns 3.0m ht.( H.Y.S.D. and c.c150m) /T.P. Drg,No.BR-II/C-79/T.P. piers for solid slab (non seismic)

(2.3) TYPE DESIGNS (III. SUPERSTRUCTURE) Sr. No. 1 2 3. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Drawing No. Drg.No.III/A-1/1972 Drg.No.III/A-2/1972 Description

Neoprene bearing for solid slab Neoprene bearing for T beam & slab 3 girder system clear span 10m ,12m .15m,20m &25m only Drg.No.III/A-1/1973 Restrained neoprene bearings for 20m span 4 girder system . Drg.No.III/A/74001/ Details of restrained neoprene bearing pads for 15m clear span T beam slab decking with footpath. Drg.No.III/A/74002/T.P. Details of neoprene bearing pads for 20m span with foot path. Drg.No.III/A/74003/T.P. Details of restrained neoprene bearing pad for 30m span(with footpath) Drg.No.III/A/74004/T.P. Details of restrained neoprene bearing pads for 10m clear span T beam slab decking with footpath. Drg.No. BR- II/III-A/75001/ Details of restrained neoprene bearing pad for 15m span 4m girder system. T.P. Drg.No. III /B-1/1972 Details of M.S. curved plate bearing (capacity 40to90 tons) Drg.No. III /B-2/1972 cast steel roller and rocker bearing (capacity 60 to 300 tons ). Drg.No. III /B-3/1972 cast steel rocker bearing (capacity 60 to 300 tons ). Drg.No. III /B-4/1972 Notes and standard dimension of different cast steel bearings. Drg.No. III /C-1/1972 Details of R.C.C. solid slab (single land double lane) Drg.No. III /D-1/1972 Details of R.C.C.deck slab span 16.5 m 3girder 7.5m clear roadway. Drg.No. III /D-2/1972 Details of inner girder 16.5 m span 7.5 m clear roadway. Drg.No. III /D-3/1972 Details of outer girder 16.5 m span 7.5 m clear roadway. Drg.No. III /D-4/1972 Details of cross girder 16.5 m span 7.5 m clear roadway. Drg.No. III /D-5/1972 Details of deck slab (without footpath) for span 11m , 13.5m .26.5m 3 girder system Drg.No. III /D-6/1972 Details in inner girder 11.0m span Drg.No. III /D-7/1972 Details in outer girder 11.0m span Drg.No. III /D-8/1972 Details in cross girder 11.0m span Drg.No. III /D-9/1972 Details of center girder 21.5m span Drg.No. III /D-10/1972 Details in outer girder 21m span Drg.No. III /D-11/1972 Details in cross girder 21m span Drg.No. III /D-12/1972 Details in inner girder 13.0m span Drg.No. III /D-13/1972 Details in cross girder 21m span Drg.No. III /D-14/1972 Details in inner girder 13.0m span Drg.No. III /D-15/1972 Details in inner girder 26.5m span

33
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Drg.No. III /D-16/1972 Drg.No. III /D-17/1972 Drg.No. III /D-18/1972 system . Details of R.C.C.solid slab (single lane )for 9m span (with H.Y.S.D. bars).submersible bridge . Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-1/1974 R.C.C. deck slab 4 girder system 7.5m clear road way for 15m,18, &30m span Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-2/1974 Details of inner 18.0m spans Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-3/1974 Details of outer 18.0m spans Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-4/1974 Details of cross 18.0m spans Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-5/1974 Details of inner girder 20.0m span c/c 4 girder. Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-6/1974 Details of inner girder 20.0m span c/c 4 girder Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-7/1974 Details of inner girder 20.0m span c/c 4 girder Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-8/1974 Details of outer girder 20.0m span c/c 4 girder Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-9/1974 Details of cross girder 20.0m span c/c 4 girder Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-10/1974 Details of inner girder 20.0m span (overall)c/c girder Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-11/1974 Details of in outer girder 15.0m span (overall)c/c girder . Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-12/1974 Details of in cross girder 15.0m span 4 girder. Drg.No.BR-II/III/D-13/1974 General notes for 4 girder system 15m span . Drg.No.III/G-1/1972 General layouts of piers superstructures for 1400span. Drg.No.III/G-2/1972 Cable profile for 140-0 span Drg.No.III/G-3/1972 Details of end block anchorage Drg.No.III/G-4/1972 Details of M.S.reinforcement main girder and cross girder 140-0 Drg.No.III/G-5/1972 Details of deck slab .. Drg.No.III/G-6/1972 Stressing scheduled and grouting specification . Drg.No.III-A/1/1973/TP./BL Typical drawing for lifting arrangement for solid slab -IV Drg.No.III-A/2/1/1973/ Typical drawing for lifting arrangement for T beam TP./BL-IV & slab. Drg.No. BL-IV/IIIDetails of R.C.C. solid slab up to 20.0m span (with C/ 74023/T.P. H.Y.S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III R.C.C. beam and slab girder system without -D/75005/TP footpath clear 10m main girder(H.Y..S.D. Bars) Drg .No.BL-IV/III Details of cross girder for 10m span R.C.C. KT . -D/75006/TP beam with H.Y.S.D.bers.Bridge without footpath Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75007/TP. Details of main and cross Girder for 12m clear span R Cum ..C.T beam bridge without footpath(with H.Y.S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75008/TP Details of main girder for 5m clear span R.C.C. T beam without footpath (With H.Y..S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75009/TP Details of cross girder 15m clear span R.C.C. T beam with footpath (With H.Y..S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75010/TP Details of outer & central girder 20m clear span R.C.C. T beam with out footpath (With H.Y..S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75011/TP Details of end & intermediate cross girder for 20.0m clear span R.C.C.20.1MT beam with out footpath (With H.Y..S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75012/TP Details of main and cross girder for 25m clears span R.C.C. T. beam without footpath (with H.Y.S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/III/75013/TP Details of R.C.C.deck slab T beam without footpath for span 10m , 12m, 15m, 20m (with H.Y.S.D.) Drg .No.BL-IV/IIICable profile foe longitudinal girder anchor details G/75036/TP. for 25m span Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75037 Details of attentioned reinforcement & main girder /TP./(39x21) 25.0m effects span Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/ 75038/ Details of cross girder for 25m effective span . T.P.(34x 13) Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75039 Details of R.C.C. decks slab for 25.0m effective / T.P./ (39x29) span. Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75046/. R.C.C. details of prestressed concrete 3 girder TP. (56x29) system bridge of 25m span c/c pier profile for longitudinal girder anchor details . Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75047 Reinforcement details of longitudinal girder 25m /TP./(49x21) span c/c of pier Drg.No. III /D-19/1972 Details in outer girder 26.5m span Details in cross girder 26.5m span Details /data for estimate T beam and slab 3 girder

62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

34
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75048 Details of cross girder 25m25m span c/c pf pier. /TP./(13x39) Drg .No.BL-IV/III-G/75049/ R.C.C. detail of deck slab for 25m span c/c piers TP.(39x29) P.S.C. girder bridge . Drg .No.BL-IV/IIIDetails of end block and top anchorage of cables G/75063/TP.(43x27) and shedule of cables 25m span c/c piers. Drg .No.BR-II/III-/HGeneral dimension drawing (Submersible bridge) 1/1/4/79/TP. Drg .No.BR-II/III-/HCable Profiles for main and cross girder> 1/2/4/79/TP. Drg .No.BR-II/III-/HReinforcement details in box girders. 1/2/3/79/TP Drg.No.BR-III/1/5/91/TP. General arrangement of members of superstructure 30cm span prestressed box girder . Drg.No.BR-III/2/5/91/TP Details of cable. Drg.No.BR-III/3/5/91/TP Details of share reinforcement Drg.No.BR-III/4/5/91/TP Details of cable anchorage. Drg.No.BR-III/5/5/91/TP Reinforcement detail of deck slab. Drawing No. Drg.No. BR-II/IV-A/77001/TP. Drg.No.IV/ B-1/1972 Drg.No.IV/ B-2/1972 box girder . Drg.No.IV/ B-3/1972 Drg.No.IV/ B-6/1972 Drg.No.IV/ D-1/1972/TP. Drg.No. IV/E-1/197TP. Description Details of wearing coat. Details of R.C.C. parapet and kerb Details of R.C.C. parapet and kerb. Prestressed Details of R.C.C. parapet (Precast)and kerb Details of pipe railing for submersible bridge Details of expansion joints Details of R.C.C. approach slab.

(2.5) Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Drawing No.

TYPE DESIGNS (V. OTHER ITEMS) Description

Types cross section of submersible approaches Type plan for sakav (foot bridge ) span up to 6m superseded section. Drg.No. V/F-3/1972 Relationship with span Vs B.M for single supported span. Drg.No. V/F-4/1972 Relationship with span Vs absolute maximum S.F. f for various loading . Drg.No. V/F-5/1972 Relationship with span Vs absolute maximum B.M. for various loading . Drg.No. V/F-6/1972 Relationship graph for classification of bridges Drg.No. V/F-7/1972 Type plan for sakav (foot bridge ) span up to 5m (see drawing No.) Drg.No. V/F-8/1972 Type plan for temporary R.C.C.span pipe culvert. Drg.No. P-26/1973 Sub-structure and foundations for pipers &abutments for sakav Drg. No. BR-II/V-P-F-/ Details of vent holes (for girder with deck slab 15m 75001/TP c/c of pier) Drg. No. BR-II/V-P-F-/ Details of vent holes for submersible girder and 75002/TP slab deck Drg. No.BR-II/V/F-9/1976 Details of pylon and pilaster for bridges . Drg. No.BR-II/V/F-10/1976 A type plan for bridge and bandhara (for minor bridge) Drg. No.BR-II/F-10/1979 Details of pre-cast deck for bullock cart bridges Drg. No.BR-II/F-11/1979 Detail of type plan for foot bridge per cast decking Drg. No.BR-II/F-12/1979 /Details of timber deck and pier Drg. No.BR-II/F-13/1979 Hand rail and anchorage details.

Drg.No. V/F-1/1972 Drg.No. V/F-2/1972

(2.6) Sr. No.

TYPE DESIGNS (V-D/R.C.C.BOX CULVERTS Drawing No. Description

35
1 2 3 4 5 Drg.No. BR-II-V/D-1/79/TP Drg.No. BR-II-V/D-2/79/TP Drg.No. BR-II-V/D-3/79/TP Drg.No. BR-II-V/D-4/79/TP Drg.No. V/D-4A/79/TP Type plan of single cell R.C.C.squre box culvert. Type plan of 5 cell R.C.C. box culvert Type plan of 5 cell R.C.C. box culvert Details of R.C.C. box culvert framed type (4 cell) schedule of reinforcement for R.C.C.box culvert framed type (4 cell)

(2.7) TYPE DESIGNS FOR SAKAV BRIDGE Sr. No. 1 2 Drawing No. Drg. No. BR-II-V/F-15/1981/TP Description Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians traffic 10m span. Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians traffic 15m span. Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians traffic 15m span. Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic 10m span. Type designs for sakav (foot superseads bridge ) for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic Type designs for sakav (foot superseads bridge ) for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic 20m span Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic 30m span Type designs for sakav (foot bridge ) for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic 30m span Type plan for piers for sakaw Type design s for sakav for pedestrians traffic (span 30.00m) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Drg.No.BL-1/82035/TP (span 30.00m) Drg.No.BL-1/82036/TP (span 30.00m) Drg.No.BL-1/82040/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82041/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82041/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82048/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82049/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82054/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82055/TP Drg.No.BL-1/82039/TP Type design s for sakav for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic (span 20.00m) Type design s for sakav for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic (span 15.00m) Type design s for sakav for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic (span 15.00m) Type designs for sakav for pedestrians traffic (span 15.00m) Type designs for sakav for pedestrians traffic (span 15.00m) Type designs for sakav for pedestrians traffic (span 20.00m) Type designs for sakav for pedestrians traffic (span 20.00m) Type design s for sakav for pedestrians cum bullock cart traffic (span 20.00m) Type design s for sakav for pedestrians traffic Type design s for sakav for pedestrians traffic

Drg. No. BR-II-V/F-15/1981/TP BL-I/82049/TP 3 Drg. No. BR-II-F-17/ BL-I/82054/TP BL-I/82049/TP 4 Drg. No. BR-II-V/F-18/1981/TP Size (30x32) 5 Drg. No. BR-II-F-19/TP. BL-I/82041/TP 15m span. 6 Drg. No. BR-II/V/F-20/TP. BL-I/82039/TP BL-I/82040/TP 7 Drg. No. BR-II/V/F-21/TP Supersedes BL-1/82035/ BL-1/82036/TP 8 Drg.No.BR-II/F-22/1981/TP Supersedes BL-1/82024/TP, BL-82025 TP 9 Drg.No. BR-II/F-23/1981/TP 10 Drg.No.BL-1/82024/TP

BL-I/82041/TP

ANNEXURE -3 : LIST OF TYPE DESIGNS ISSUED BY M.O.S.T. M.O.S.T.S. TYPE DRAWINGS FOR BRIDGES

36
SLAB BRIDGES a) R.C.C. slab type right bridges. Sr. No 1 2 3 4 Details of drawing Without footpath and effective spans from 3.37mto 8.37m Without footpath and effective spans from9.37m &10.37m With footpath and effective spans from3.37m to 8.37m With footpath and effective spans from9.37m &10.37 b) R.C.C. slab type skew bridges Skew angle from 15o to 60o With footpath and effective spans from 4.37m to 8.37m With footpath and effective spans from 5.37m to 10.37m c) R.C.C. piers for slab bridges. 7 8 Without footpath and effective spans from 3.37mto 10.37m Without footpath and effective spans from 5.37mto 8.37m d) Wearing coat expansion joint and drainage spouts e) General details 1 2 3 4 5 General Notes General Arrangements Miscellaneous Details Details of R.C.C. railing without footpath Details of R.C.C. railing with footpath f) Reinforcements details and quantities for slab without footpath 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Effective spans 3.0m Effective spans 4.0m Effective spans 5.0m Effective spans 6.0m Effective spans 7.0m Effective spans 8.0m Effective spans 9.0m Effective spans 10.0m g) Reinforcements details and quantities for slab with footpath SD/ 107 SD/108 SD/109 SD/110 SD/111 SD/112 SD/113 SD/114 BD/ 1-69-9 SD/101 SD/102 SD/103 & SD/104 SD/105 SD/106 BD/8-75,BD/9-75 BD/10-75,BD/11-75 Drawing No. BD/1-74A,BD-2-74 BD/3-74A,BD-4-74 BD/5-74A,BD-6-74 BD/7-74A,BD-8-74

5 6

BD/10-74A,BD/11-74 BD/12-74A,BD/13-74

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Effective spans 3.0m Effective spans 4.0m Effective spans 5.0m Effective spans 6.0m Effective spans 7.0m Effective spans 8.0m Effective spans 9.0m Effective spans 10.0m

SD/ 115 SD/116 SD/117 SD/118 SD/119 SD/120 SD/121 SD/122

PRESTESSDED CONCRETE BRIDGES a) 1 2 3 4 5 6 General Details SD/301 Sheets 1&2 SD/302 SD/303 SD/304 SD/305 SD/306 Sheets 1,2&3

General Notes General Arrangements Details of wearnig coat and drainage system Details of R.C.C. railing for superstructure without footpath Details of R.C.C. railing for superstructure with footpath Details of bearings b) details of 30m span without footpath

Dimensions and anchorage details

SD/ 311

37
2 3 4 5 6 7 Prestressing cables Reinforcement in deck slab and kerbs Reinforcement in girders Reinforcement in end cross girder Reinforcement in intermediate cross girder Schedule of reinforcement SD/312 SD/313 SD/314 SD/315 SD/316 SD/317Sheets 1,2&3

c) details of 30m span with footpath 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dimensions and anchorage details Prestressing cables Reinforcement in deck slab and kerbs Reinforcement in girders Reinforcement in end cross girder Reinforcement in intermediate cross girder Schedule of reinforcement d) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 details of 35m span with footpath SD/ 331 SD/332 SD/333 SD/334 SD/335 SD/336 SD/337Sheets 1,2&3 SD/ 321 SD/322 SD/323 SD/324 SD/325 SD/326 SD/327Sheets 1,2&3

Dimensions and anchorage details Prestressing cables Reinforcement in deck slab and kerbs Reinforcement in girders Reinforcement in end cross girder Reinforcement in intermediate cross girder Schedule of reinforcement e) Details of 40 m span without footpath

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Dimensions and anchorage details Prestressing cables Reinforcement in deck slab and kerbs Reinforcement in girders Reinforcement in end cross girder Reinforcement in intermediate cross girder Schedule of reinforcement

SD/ 341 SD/342 SD/343 SD/344 SD/345 SD/346 SD/347Sheets 1,2&3

38

ANNEXURE -4 STANDARDS NOTES FOR BRIDGES DRAWINGS . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. All dimensions are in millimeters and Reduced levels in meters unless otherwise mentioned. Dimension should not be scaled from the Drawing .Figured dimensions should be taken instead of scaled dimensions. The clear carriageway width is 7.5m unless stated otherwise. The clear carriageway width shall be measured in a direction perpendicular to the direction of traffic. The bridge is designed for two lanes of I.R.C. Class-A, single lane of I.R.C. Class-AA ,or 70R loading , whichever produces the worst effect . This designs and plans and estimates are based on survey data received from the Executive Engineer ,Road Project Division .under his number.dated Before starting execution , a working cross -section at the shall be taken by precision survey and abutment and pier positions shown on technically sanctioned drawings shall be verified on site .In case of any discrepancy or doubt , clarification shall be obtained from the concerned authority before hand . The temporary Bench Mark is located at .and its value are ..(However , IN case of doubt ,the same should be got confirmed before execution from the Executive Engineer , Road Project Division ..) Angle of the skew is .However , the piers & abutments should be oriented parallel to flow direction at site and discrepancy , if any ,reported to Designs Circle before hand . Rubble pitching should be done up to 0.50m above affluxed H.F.L.on both side or approaches, in flood zone.

7. 8. 9.

10. Filling behind abutments and returns shall be as per government of India Circular No. LB-9(3)/68 dated 17.8.71. 11. Adequate weep holes shall be provided in abutments , riding returns, solid returns and outer walls of box returns at not more than 2000mm center to center horizontally and 1000mm center to center vertically , regularly staggered .The weep holes shall be provided up to the beds level . 12. Foundation level shown on the drawing are tentative. Open foundation for abutments and piers shall be keyed in to soft rock or exposed rock by a minimum of 1500mm or in to hard rock by a minimum 500mm whichever gives higher foundation level. Foundation for return wings shall be keyed by a minimum of 500mm in to exposed rock . MATERIAL TABLE

ANNEXURE -5

Accompaniment to S.E.D.C.s Circular No. 1004, Dated 21.03.1997 Sr. No. Component Concrete Grades MINIMUM Moderate 1 1 2 a. Parapet (RCC) b. Railings3 M-20 Severe 4 M-25 AS PER SP -33 Moderate 5 M-20* Severe 6 M-25* 7 As per T.P.(8.5-12g/m) 11.1kg /m (Structural steel including pipes ) please type design M-25* As per T.P.(5.25kg/n/m) Quantity of steel per cum of concrete

Collapsible type for Submersible bridges

Kerbs

M-20

M-25

M-20*

39
3 Superstructure a) solid slab span upto & 10m b) Girder and slab 10<span <20m c) R.C.C. box i) Span 20m to 25m ii) Span 25mto 30m d) P.S.C.box span 30m to 60m

M-20 M-20

M-25 M-25

M-35 M-35

M-40 M-40

As per T.P. (85 to 105kg/cum) Girder 250-400kg/cum slab 160/190kg/cum.

M-20 M-25 M-35

M-25 M-30 M-40

M-35 M-35 M-35

M-40 M-40 M-40

150-175kg/cum 175-200kg/cum H.T.S. 30-40kg/cum HYSD 150 -200kg/cum (Untensioned steel)

Pedestal

Next higher grade of superstructure M-25 M-25

M-40

M-4-

80-100kg/cum

Abutment cap (fully resting)

M-35

M-40

85kg/cum solid slab 185kg/cum Girder system 70-85kg/cum solid slab 200kg/cum Girder system

Pier cap (fully resting for cap width 0.75 to 1.2m)

M-20

M-25

M-35

M-40

Sr. No.

Component

CONRETE GRADES MINIMUM AS PER SP -33 severe 4 M-25 Moderate 5 M-35 Severe 6 M-40

Quantity of steel per cum of concrete

1 7

2 Cantilever type cap for piers & abutment P.C.C.pier/Abutment

Moderate 3 M-20

7 230kg/cum

M-10

M-15

M-25

M-30

Surface reinforcement 5kg/m2 (10@ 200mm c/c

9 10

P.C.C. returns Solid R.C.C. pier /Abutment (ht. 8m to 15m)

M-10 M-20

M-15 M-25

M-15 M-35

M-20 M-40 75 to 100kg/cum

11

Hollow pier /counter fort retaining wall type abutment Leveling course below pier / abutment

M-20

M-25

M-35

M-40

120kg/cum

12

M-10

M-15

M-10

M-15

40
13 Well cap/ pile cap (Dia 4.2m to 8m) M-20 M-25 M-35 M-40 120-160kg/cum(pier resting on cap)80kg pier resting on steining

14

Well steining (Dia 3m to 6.2m & steining thickness 0.6m to 1m

M-10

M-15

M-25

M-30

14-20kg/cum

15 16 17

Top plug Bott om plug Well curb (Dia6.2mto 3m)

M-10 M-15** M-20

M-15 M-20** M-25

M-15* M-25 M-35

M-20* M-30 M-40 70 to 80 kg/cum

18

Box returns (ht.3m to 13.5m End unit & inter mediate units)

M-20

M-25

M-25*

M-30

52-78 kg/cum

Sr. No. 1 19

Component

CONRETE GRADES Munimum Moderate Severe 4 M-15 3 M-20

AS PER SP -33 Moderate 5 NOT RECOM MENDED Severe 6

Quantity of steel per cum of concrete 7 70 to 80 kg/cum

2 Raft slab with cut off walls i.e. a channel section . (Span 5m to 10m)

20 21

Cut of walls (detached) Piles

M-10 M-20 (Min cement content 400 kg/cum

M-15 M-25 (Min cement content 400 kg/cum

NOT RECOM MENDED M-35

5 KG/M2ON EACH FACE M-40 75-100kg/cum (please refer IS. :2911 part I:1979)

22 23

RCC Wearing cot Cutting edge (Dia of well 4m to 6.2 m Thickness of Steining = 0.6 to 0.9m

M-20 M.S.

M-25 Steel structural

M-35

M-40

6 @ 300c/c both ways

24

Expansion joint

41

Sr.No.1,2,3: for spans up to 10m

1. For solid slab up to M-10 m 2. For simply supported plans up to M-10m 3. Fixed end of simply supported spans up to M-10m

Bituminous pad type Burried type joint. Filler joint

Sr.No.4,5,6 : for spans between 10m to 25m

4. Simply supported spans up to 25m with maximum horizontal movement M-25 mm ((only for deck with bituminous . Wearing coat,Longitudinal Gradient less than 2 % & cross camber < 3%)

Asphaltic plug copper plate type .

joint

5. Simply Supported or continuous spans up to M-25 m with maximum horizontal movement less than M-40mm.

Compression seal Joint copper plate type.

6. Simply Supported or continuous spans up to M-25 m with maximum horizontal movement less than 50mm Sr.No. 7 For spans between 25m to 50m 7. Spans M-25 m to simply supported , cantilever construction with maximum horizontal movement up to 70mm

Elastomeric slab joint Copper plate joint Single trip seal Finger plate .

seal

joint

Sr.No. 8 for spans more than 50 m

8. Large to very large continues to cantilever construction with movement in excess of 70mm

Modular strip/ box seal joint Finger plate .

25

Wearing coat

1) For Annual reinfall>1000mm 2) For Annual reinfall<1000mm 3) A) For Annual rainfall > 1000mm ,For flyover and very important bridge works

50BM + 25AC thickness)

(75av.

50BM + 25SDBC (25av. thickness) 12 Mastic + 50 DBM + 25 Mastic

B) For Annual rainfall < 1000mm

50mm mastic

DBM

25mm

26 27

Water spouts Bearings

As per MOST type design except dia of pipe as 150 mm @ one no. / 20 Sq.m area of deck 1. Tar paper for solid slabs less than or equal to 10m.

Notes: 1. The grades specified in the table are minimum preferable . These can be changed as per design requirement .

42
2. 3. 4. 5. The Grades marked as* although are not as per SP-33 requirement , the changes are made as per functional importance of the component . Grades for levelling course in case of Sp-33 are kept lower as these are required only for levelling the surface. ** 4The concrete grades for bottom plug are increased one step above the grades for top plug as this concrete is excepted to prevent the seepage of water from bottom . The reinforcement quantities given in table are for estimate purpose only. These quantities may vary depending on the design requirement. Proper judgement should be used to choose appropriate steel reinforcement quantity per cum of concrete.

(K.S. JANGDE) Superintending Engineer (Bridges ) , Design circle ,Konkan Bhavan, Navi Mumbai, Navi Mumbai .

ANNEXURE - 6 : GOVY. CIRCULAR DATED 12.6.96 Supplementary measures for design ,detailing and durability of important bridge structures and parameters for designing bridges other than important bridges in Maharashtra . Government of Maharashtra , Public Works Department , Circular No .RMR 1094 /184/ R-1 , Mantralaya , Bombay 400032. Date : 12th June 1996 CIRCULAR Special publication No.33-1989 of the Indian Roads congress prescribes the special measures to be adopted for design ,detailing and durability of important bridge structures .The question of adopting these specification of the bridges on the state roads was under consideration of Government for some time 2. In accordance with the Special publication No. 33-1989 of the Indian roads congress , the provisions there in are to be made applicable broadly to the following categories of bridges irrespective of the class of the road , traffic intensity the severity of the environment :(i) (ii) (iii) Bridges with prestressed concrete superstructure . Bridges with individual span length move than 30m Bridges built with innovative design / construction /material.

43

3. Now after taking in to consideration the views of the chief Engineers committee on this issue , the Government is pleased to issue the following instructions. So far as the State roads are concerned , provisions of SP-33 shall be applied only to those bridge of the above mentioned categories which in addition satisfy at least one of the following two conditions : (a) Bridges exposed to moderate environment on routes where present traffic volume is above 5000 p.c.u. per day or 15000 tonnes per day or where the 10 years projected traffic volume is more than 12,000p.c.u. tonnes per day.or 36000 per day. Bridges exposed to severe environment .Event when provisions of SP-33 become applicable for a bridge , partial prestressed shall be permitted even in severe environment , but all other provisions of SP-33 shall be satisfied . 3. For the bridges other than those curved by para -3 above , specification of Indian Roads Congress Bridges Codes shall apply except for the items included in the Annexure to this chember depending on the degree of exposure to aggressive environment .

(b)

Bridges on national Highways are outside the scope of this circular . Encl: Annexure -1 Chief Engineer & Jt. Secretary to Government Copy to : All Chief Engineers, All Superintending Engineers , All Executive Engineers of PWD/ZP . All Technical Officers of PWD,Mantralaya Audit Branch ,P.W.D, Mantralaya , P.A. to Secretary (Roads ), P.A. to Secretary (Works ). Select ile -1

(Accompainment to Govt. Circular No. RMR - 1094 /184/R-1, Dt. 12th June 1996 ).

44

Specifications for bridges for which SP-33 is not to be applied . Sr. No. 1 2 3 DESCRIPTION Minimum Internal Dia of wells Minimum Steining thickness Pile foundations SPECIFICATION TO BE APPLIED In Severe Exposure Condition 3.00m 0.60m Pile foundations shall not be provided in flood zones with deep scour or at locations where navigations is allowed R.C.C.,0.4m (P.C.C.not permited .) R.C.C. 0.4m (P.C.C. not permited . Trestle not allowed in flood zone . Minimum 240mm for Cantilever type of Construction & minimum 200mm for other types of construction . Minimum grater of 200 mm + O.D. of duct or 300 mm 10mm M-15 0.45 250kg/cum M-25 0.40 310 kg/cum As per SP-33 As per SP-33 SPECIFICATION TO BE APPLIED In Severe Exposure Condition As per SP-33 In Moderate Exposure condition 3.00m 0.50m Pile foundations shall not be provided in flood zones with deep scour or at locations where navigations is allowed R.C.C.,0.3m (P.C.C.not permited .) R.C.C. 0.3m (P.C.C. not permited . Trestle not allowed in flood zone . Minimum 240mm for Cantilever type of Construction & minimum 200mm for other types of construction . Minimum grater of 200 mm + O.D. of duct or 300 mm 8mm M-10 0.50 210kg/cum M-20 0.40 250kg/cum M-35 0.M-40 In Moderate Exposure condition 360kg/cum

4 5 6 7 8 9

Minimum wall thickness of cellular piers and abutments . Trestle Piers Minimum deck Slab Minimum Web thickness Minimum nominal dia for Tor steel P.C.C. Minimum Grade Maximum W.C. Ratio Minimum Cement Content R.C.C. Minimum Grade Maximum W.C. Ratio Minimum Cement Content P.S.C. Minimum Grade Maximum W.C. Ratio DESCRIPTION Minimum Cement Content Minimum clear cover to reinforcement for all grades of concrete. Slabs Webs/ Column Footings/ Raft slab Cable duct Location of reinforcement splice

10

11

Sr. No.

12

40mm /As per SP-33 For P.S.C. 40mm /As per SP-33 For P.S.C. 50mm /As per SP-33 For P.S.C. As per SP- 33 50mm

25mm 30mm 40mm 60mm 50mm

13

Partial Prestress

Permitted (Tension in concrete up to 10 kg/sq,cm

Permitted (Tension in concrete up to 20 kg/sq, cm.

45

ANNEXURE -7 IMPORTANT CIRCULERS ISSUED BY THE DESIGN CIRCLE 7(1). Circular no. EC- MIS -8/1519 7(2) Circular no.BC CIR /93 7(3) Circular no.BR-11/SD/4683 of 1974 7(4) Design Circular (B &C) Survey for major bridges : Instruction for good bridge site : 7(5) Design Circular (B &C) Survey for major bridges : General Instruction : 7(6) Design Circular (B &C) Survey for major bridges :Instruction on trial pits , punch bores & bores . 7(7) Design Circular (B &C) Survey for major bridges :Standard proforma for Survey data for bridges

ANNEXURE- 7 (1) NO. Ec.mis .8/1519 Office of Superintending Engineer, Designs Circle ,(B&C) Department, Hutment No. 4,C.C.I., Bombay -1. Dated : 19.11.1968.

46

To, All Superintending Engineers of B&C , Circles All Executive Engineers ,B&C Divisions ,& Zilla Parishads, & Road Project Divisions , Designs Divisions No. I&II In accordance with the Irrigation and power Department Bombays No. MNS-1963-M.I(I). The flood discharge for catchments up to 20 sq.miles may be worked out as under i) ii) For catchments less than or equal to 1sq. miles : Run off -3 inchs per hour per acre. For catchments more than 1sq.miles

C+A Q = ----------------. (A + 4) Where Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Catchment area in sq. miles 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A = Catchments in sq. miles C = Values given in the table below Value of C 4600 4800 5000 5300 5550 5700 5850 6000 6100 6200 Sr No. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Catchment area in sq. miles 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Value of C 6330 6400 6500 6600 6700 6775 6850 6925 7000

(V.N. Gunaji) Superintending Engineer , Designs Circle,(B&C) , Bombay.

ANNEXURE-7 (2) NO.BC.CIR/93 Office of the Superintending Engineer, Designs Circle, (P.W.) Department, Hutment No. 4, Opposite C.C.I., Bombay 400 020. Date: 31st January 1961 To, All the Executive Engineers, of Road Projects Divisions. Subject: Instructions for collection and submission of Survey and Bore data for Major bridges. I enclose herewith a note containing detailed and exhaustive instructions for collection and submission of Survey and bore data for major bridges for your guidance. Some of the instructions issued in the past have also been incorporated in the present ones. D.A.: - 5 copies of the Note.

47

(S.V.NATU) Superintending Engineer, Designs Circle, B&C. Copy submitted to the Chief Engineer & Jt. Secretary to Government, Buildings and Communications Department Sachivalaya, for information. D.A: - 1 Note. Copy forwarded with compliments to all the Superintending Engineers of Building & Communications Department including Deccan Irrigation Circle I, Poona for information. D.A.: - 1 Note. Copy forwarded to all the Executive Engineers of Buildings & Communications Divisions for information. D.A.: - 1 Note. Copy forwarded to the Executive Engineer, Designs Division No. I and II for information giving a copy of each of the Assistant Engineers/Deputy Engineers. D.A.: - 5 copies of the Note. ANNEXURE-7 (3) NO.BR-IISD/4683/OF 1974, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, DESIGNS CIRCLE, B. & C. DEPARTMENT, GOVT. HUTMENT NO. IV, OPPOSITE C.C.I., BOMBAY 400 020 (TEL.NO. 296334) DATED: - 18th Sept. 1974.

To, The Superintending Engineer, Road Project Circle, Poona/Akola/Aurangabad. The Coastal Engineer, Bombay. Subject: Survey data for bridges. In the past, for collection of survey data a circular was issued by Shri S.V. Natu the then Superintending Engineer, Designs vide No. BC/Circular/93 dated 31.01.1961. Subsequently a check list for submission of survey data to Designs Circle was prepared and circulated under this office No. T-19/1786, dated 29.12.1969. Further instructions collection of survey data for bridges were issued under this office D.O.letter No.PB/2138, dated 20.4.1974. 2/The Government has since issued different circulars as mentioned below:(a) Chief Engineers Circular No.14 of 1971 issued under HBS-1970/94658(G)-C, dated 14.08.1971 in connection with construction of road and bridge works affecting railways. Government Circular No.BLN.1072/1197-P (I), dated 14.12.1973 issued in connection with the construction of bridge-cum bandhara type structures. Chief Engineers Circular No.5 of 1974 issued under No.RRS.1074-2643-P (I), regarding C.F.L. for survey data of major bridge works. Government Circular No. RRM-1074/6416-P (I), dated 9.8.1974 regarding co-ordination of road works and irrigation works affected by irrigation project.

(b)

(c)

(d)

3/In view of the above Government Circulars it has become necessary to modify the previous circular instructions issued by this office for the information to be supplied along with the survey data for major bridges. I am enclosing herewith detailed proforma which should henceforth be completed and sent to this office along with the detail survey data of major bridges invariably. This should be filled in even for bridges whose S.D. is already sent by Plan & Estimate are yet to be prepared.

48
4/Incidentally, a copy of instructions for selection of a good bridge site which were included in Shri. Natus circular, are again enclosed herewith for ready reference and guidance of all the field engineers working in Road Project Organisation. D.A.:- Copy of the proforma & instructions about bridge site. (N.V.Merani) SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER DESIGNS CIRCLE, BOMBAY-20.

Copy submitted to the Chief Engineer, Road Project and joint Secretary to Government Buildings and Communications Department, Sachivalaya, Bombay for favour of information. D.A.:- Copy of the proforma. Copy forwarded to Executive Engineer, Road Project Division. D.A.:- Copy of the proforma & instructions about bridge site.

ANNEXURE-7 (4) DESIGNS CIRCLE (B&C) SURVEY FOR MAJOR BRIDGES. INSTRCUTIONS FOR SELECTION OF A GOOD BRIDGE SITE (Reproduced from the broohura - Bridging Indias Rivers). WHAT IS A GOOD SITE? (1) The characteristics of an ideal site for a bridge are:1) 2) 3) 4) 5) A straight reach of the river; Steady regime of the river and absence of serious whirls or cross currents; A narrow and well defined channel; Suitable high bank above high flood level of each side; Rock or other compact and fairly unerodable foundations close to the bed level;

49
6) Secure and economical approaches which should not be very high, long or liable to flank attacks of the river and its spills during floods, nor should the approaches involve obstacles, e.g. hills, frequent drainage crossings, sacred places, graveyards, congested or built-up areas needing viaducts or troublesome land acquisition; Reasonable proximity to a direct alignment of the road to be served, i.e. avoidance of long detours; Absence of sharp curves in the approaches; If it is unavoidable necessary for the approaches of a bridge to cross the spillzone of a river face down-stream and not upstream. Facing upstreams will cause heading up. Pocket foundation, and danger to the approaches;

7) 8) 9)

10) Absence of costly training works and, where such works are unavoidable, the possibility of executing them largely in the dry; 11) Avoidance of excessive construction work under water. (2) It is hardly necessary to mention that the ideal site never exists in reality. At every site, one or more of the ideal conditions is lacking and the object of a reconnaissance (Recce for short) is to select the least objectionable site.

(3)

In making this selection, the relative importance to be attached to any one factor may very considerably according to the nature of the bridging problem. The best compromise is a matter of judgement but that judgement can only be applied after careful study of relevant data. It is the business of the Racce officer to collect that data and to record it. REJECTION PRECEDES SELECTION.

(4)

The officer deputed to reconnoitre for a bridge site should first study at home the largest available map of the area. He should tentatively fix the limits of the terrain within which his examination is to be conducted and make a tentative selection, on the map. of the sites and locations that seem to warrant inspection. The best method of doing this is by a process of rejection, i.e. by considering the topography of the reach of the river as a whole and rejecting such stretches where the chances of finding a suitable site for a bridge are negligible. After eliminating unsuitable sites, the Racce Officer should concentrate upon the remainder, giving prior attention to the probable site nearest to the line along which other things being favorable, the proposed road would run. Having decided the site or sites to which reconnaissance activities should be directed, the Recce officer should calculate the catchment areas at the probable sites from maps in his possession and get together any other information readily available with him about flood levels, discharges, waterway, etc. relating to the sites and to any bridges on the same river in the vicinity. He should also take steps to collect meteorological information like annual rainfall and seasonal distribution, storm data, direction of prevailing and strongest winds, range of temperature (seasonal and daily) and humidity conditions. If there are existing road or railway bridges not very far upstream or downstream of the site he is to examine, he should write and ask for particulars of these bridges. FIXED WORK Now the Recce office is ready to start his fieldwork. His party should include, if possible, the officer who is to be responsible for carrying out the subsequent details investigation and preparation of the project.

(5) (6)

(7) (8)

(9)
1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8)

Equipment : the equipment which the party will need during field work includes:Tapes and survey chains with plenty of arrows. Half a dozen bamboo poles, each shod with steel, marked in black and white for feet, and carrying flages at the top; A clinometer or Abney level; A dumpy level with staff or, alternatively, a straight edge, and an ordinary masons level; A prismatic compass or sextant; A stop watch or, in its absence, or ordinary watch with a second hand; A crowbar and one-inch diameter steel rod, about 12 ft. long, with one end pointed, and a sledge hammer; Pegs and mallets.

50
(10) WRITING THE REPORT The report should be brief and to the point but must not omit anything relevant clear, brief and crisp reports, accompanied by sketch maps, give a far better picture than do long narratives. (1) (2) The Recce officer will have to apply a broad vision and common sense to the problem taken as a whole. If only one site is predominantly superior to all others, the Recce officer should recommend that any subsequent investigations be confined to that site only. (3) (4) If several sites merit consideration, he should give his own order of their respective merits. In either case he should recommend the scope of the subsequent detailed investigations and surveys needed to obtain the full data required for the design of the bridge. (5) The scope of the detailed investigation may vary from a very brief local survey for determining locations, reduced levels, and sections in the simpler cases, to fairly comprehensive investigation of topographical, hydrological, and geological data including exploratory borings of the sub-soil in the more complicated cases. (6) For economy as well as speed it is necessary that the scope should be limited to actual requirements and intelligently drawn up reconnaissance reports are a great help in this.

(7)

POINTS THE RECEE OFFICER SHOULD REMEMBER.

i.

He is concerned with selecting the best possible bridge site but this does NOT always mean the place where the cheapest bridge can be built. The best site is generally the one where the cheapest bridge with its approaches can be built.

ii. iii.

He must think of the road and avoid long diversions if possible. He must also think of the road needs of the traffic that is going to use the road for the next thousand years and avoid sharp curves, steep gradients, blind approaches, etc.

iv.

He must also think of the origin and destination of traffic that will cross the river after the bridge is built and locate his site as far as possible to suit the needs of present and, more important, future needs of traffic.

v. vi.

But he must not be influenced in his decision by local vested interests either in land, or in traffic. In brief, the Recce officer is to select the best site, not only the best site technically but the best site having in view the long-term prosperity of the country. The Recce officer has a difficult and important task to perform.

(10)

MISTAKES It may help the Recce officer in his work and in writing his report to think of mistakes that have been made in the past by some of his predecessors. A few of the worst mistakes are listed below : 1) Bridge sited immediately downstream of a junction of two big rivers; (This mistake comes of looking only at a site and not upstream.)

51

2) Bridge undermined after construction owing to regression of soft rock in the riverbed. (This mistake comes through the recce and survey officers not looking immediately downstream where there were a series of water-falls rapidly travelling up the softrock bed of a river.) 3) The designs of two bridges were interchanged and each was built over the stream for which other was intended. (This extraordinary mistake occurred because the recce and survey officers did not take enough trouble to show the exact sites of the bridges on their plans with reference to neighboring villages, the streams, themselves, and the approaches. The construction officer, of course, also acted without intelligence.) 4) Site involving deep foundations selected when there was a site rock at no great depth only 700 ft. downstream. (This mistake would not have occurred had the recce officer sketched the course of the river downstream because there were surface indications (configurations of the banks and rocks on the banks on each side) that indicated the probable presence of rock at no great depth below the bed.) 5) Bridge much longer than necessary was built. (This mistake occurred because the recce officer did not notice that the wide spread of the river bank to bank at the selected site was due to the presence of an old causeway which had frequently been outflanked and extended in the past, half a mile upstream and half a mile downstream the river has accepted a much narrower bed.) 6) Afflux caused by guide banks flooded some villages. (This mistake occurred because the recce, survey, and construction officers did not calculate probable afflux and did not examine the levels of the country in the immediate neighbourhood of the site). 7) More money was spend on the approaches to a bridge than on the bridge itself. Had the bridge been built 200 ft upstream, the total cost would have been halved. 8) The mistakes quoted are mistakes that have actually occurred in the past. The list could be made much longer. In nearly every case the mistake arose because, first, the recce officer and then the survey and construction officers, had their noses glued to a particular site and neither looked upstream nor downstream, nor did they look to the right or the left hand approaches to the bridge. They were obsessed with a particular BRIDGE SITE. 12) Let the Recce officer look upstream and downstream of the river and to his right and left on the banks. Let him then make sketches of what he sees, putting in names of villages, a north point, direction of flow of his river, sketches of hills and nallas, temples and graveyards, in fact of obstructions of all kinds. Let him (1) Use his eyes and (2) Record what his eyes have seen.

ANNEXURE 7 (5) DESIGNS CIRCLE (B & C) SURVEY FOR MAJOR BRIDGES. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS ON THE SUBMISSION OF SURVEY DATA FOR MAJOR BRIDGES, PROJECTS. (Incorporating the requirements as per I.R.C Clause 101 and modifications thereto as per our practise) I. II. Survey data should invariably be submitted in duplicate, alongwith the tracings of the contour plan, village map and L-Section of the recommended alignment. A Brief note explaining existing crossing and interruptions to the traffic it causes, necessity of the bridge, the area it will serve, the importance of the road and the urgency of work should accompany the survey data. Please mention separately if the work is budgeted, or included in the Plan or in any approved programme. It should also indicate which other bridges on the same road and same stream within 50 miles upstream and downstream of the site proposed, are under construction or investigation. Existing bridges rail and road on the same stream within 50 miles upstream and downstream of the proposed site should also be indicated. The note should explain the reasons for selection of bridge site. A suitable road level, as would not cause more than permissible interruptions to traffic, for a submersible bridge should also be indicated provided a

52
submersible bridge would be sufficient to meet the requirements of traffic. If otherwise, a specific mention that a high level bridge is necessary should be made in the note. In case there are any existing and or proposed road or railway bridges on the same river in the vicinity, the details of waterway and foundation condition should be mentioned in this note. The note should also give the following details:A . HYDRAULIC DATA (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) Size and shape catchment. Intensity of rainfall in inches per hour and per day and its frequency in the catchment. Longitudinal and cross wise slope of catchment. Nature of catchment Whether under forests, under cultivation or urban etc. Nature of soil crust in the catchment Whether porous or rocky etc. Storage, artificial or natural, in the catchment. The possibility of subsequent changes in the catchment like aforestation, deforestation, urban development, extension of or reduction in cultivated area etc. A chart of the periods of high flood levels for as many years as the relevant data are recorded. If no flood data exist max : H.F.L should be determined with the help of flood marks and local inquiry. Opinion of the field officer as to the reliability of flood marks and information should also be given. Any other information affecting design, including geometric specifications. Hydraulic calculations by channel formula. Preferably Mannings formula should be adopted . Q= 1.486 --------- x M n Where 2/3 x I 1 /2

Q is discharge in cusecs n is coefficient of rugosity M is hydraulic mean depth I is hydraulic gradient

Discharge should be worked out for the max : HFL an dcompared with those obtained by empirical formulae such as Ingliss formula etc. If the river section is divided into various compartment, the value of n, the rugosity, coefficient, for each compartment should be fixed with a good judgement and reasoning. (xi) (xii) (xiii) If the road is an O.D.R., state whether a single lane high level bridge or a double lane submersible bridge with be preferable. If the bridge site is inspected by any higher officer, attach a copy of the Inspection Note. State and give details if possible of any existing or under construction or contemplated Irrigation works on the same river or its tributory in the vicinity of the bridge (Both up-stream and down stream) which are likely to affect the design of the bridge.

GENERAL : The category of road along which the bridge lies. Mention if there are any chances of upgrading the road. Also state whether the road is existing or under construction. If under construction, furnish the detailed position and progress of work. (III) AVAILABILITY OF MATERIALS :Complete and exhaustive information in respect of availability of materials useful for the construction of the proposed bridge should be given as per the accompanying statement. (IV) SURVEY DATA PLANS :The following plans should be submitted for a complete and proper appreciation of the bridge project.

1.

AN INDEX MAP :-

53
It should be plotted to scale of 1 : 1 mile and should extend to one important town (Preferably Taluka place or Municipal town) on either side of the proposed bridge. It should show : -

i. ii. iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix. x.

The existing bridges along the road The bridges under construction Other bridges under investigation The location of the proposed bridge Other unbridged crossings Alternative sites investigated for the proposed bridge under consideration The existing as well as proposed roads as per District Road Planning together with their classifications The general topography of the country. Other important towns within the scope of the map North line (Which should be vertical).

2.

A PLAN SHOWING THE CATCHMENT AREA :This should be prepared from topo sheets to a scale 1 : 1 mile and should cover the entire catchment area showing the details of various streams. The plan should be prepared with North line pointing due North i.e top of plan In case of catchment area above 200 Sq Miles, the scale may suitably be changed to 1 4 Miles. A reference to all the topo sheets covering the entire catchment should be given so as to facilitate independent checking of the C.A. This should be shown by a grid. On this plan also show the positions of irrigation works on the upstream and or downstream side of the bridge, that are likely to affect its design.

3.

A CONTOUR SURVEY PLAN :It should show all topographical features such as local high spots and depressions etc that may influence the location and design of the bridge and its approaches. All sites for crossings worth consideration along with their approach alignment shall be shown on the plan. It shall extend to about 10 above and the highest flood level known or covering a portion of ground equal to twice the river width on either side of the whichever is less. On the upstream and downstream side of the range of the river within which alternative sites have been recommended, it shall extend to the following limits. (a) (b) (c) (d) 300 for C.A of 1sq. mile ) Scales ) 1 = 100

500 for C.A of 1 to 25 sq. mile) 1 = 50 1000 for C.A of 26 to 50 sq. mile 2500 for C.A of 51 and above sq. mile) 1 = 50

The contour plan should be based on cross sections to be taken as detailed further under para (7) to follow. The base line which should be an unclosed traverse following generally one bank or bed of the river course as may be convenient, and the various cross section line (which should generally be at right angles to the base line) should be clearly indicated on the contour plan. All spots levels taken should be shown correct to one place of decimal only. It should also show :(i) (ii) (iii) North Line Direction of flow; H.F.L., O.F.L., L.W.L., H.T.L., L.T.L., etc. Inactive river terraces. Exact extent of exposed rock, located by offsets from base and cross section lines, positions of trial pits or bores

54
(iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) Boundary of built up area and important buildings nearby and all other permanents stray structures and miles and furlong stones on the roads. Existing road alignment Alternative bridge sites with their approach alignments. Position of openings of the existing bridge or causeway, if any within the scope of the plan. Angle of skew of proposed crossing (if any) All important B.M.S their location and values. The general contour interval should be not more than 5 For rivers having shallow and wide basin with low banks, contour interval should be 1, in the river portion only, if not too congested.

4.

A SITE PLAN :(In case of stream with a C.A of not more than 25 Sq. miles this may be combined with contour plan only) It shall be drawn to a scale of 1 = 200 and shall extend at least to 500 on the upstream and downstream of the range within alternative sites have been proposed. It shall show the alternative alignments of approaches for a length of atleast dafurlong after it meets the existing road (in case of big bridges for at least two furlongs) on either side of the bridge. It shall show the following details.

a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i)

The name of the stream or bridge and of the road and the identification number allotted to the crossing : The approximate outlines of the banks, the high water channel (if different from the banks) and the low water channel. The direction of flow of water at maximum discharge and if possible, the extend of deviation of lower discharges :The north point The alignment of existing approaches and of the proposed crossing and its approaches The angel and direction of skew if the crossing is aligned on a skew The name of the nearest inhabited locality at either end of the crossing on the roads leading to the site : References to the position (with description and reduced level) of the bench marks used as datum : The lines and identification numbers of the cross sections and longitudinal sections taken within the scope of the site plan and the exact location of their extreme points. j) k) l) m) The locations of trial pits or boring each being given and identification number. The location of nalas, buildings, walls outcrops of rocks, and outer possible obstructions to The solid strata, the extent of exposed rock with their chainages along the bridge line etc. The position of bores or trial pits. In case of streams with a gorge width of 500 and more the following additional information shall be given.

a road alignment.

Along the finally selected or recommended alignment a strip of 200 width (i.e 100 on either side of the bridge centre line) should be completely charted by a chain and compass survey and plotted to a scale of 1-40 showing the salient features falling within the strip such as exact rock exposures, pools or water, various soil strata, contours at 1 interval, bank lines (i.e the position of effective gorge of the river), the H.F.L., LWL., etc. This strip should extend along the alignment of 5 above the H.F.L and levels should be taken at very close intervals, say at every 10 or closer at obligatory points. Chainages along the alignment should also be marked on this plan.

55

5.

A VILLAGE MAP

The village map should be prepared with North line so pointing that the diversion i.e road alignment as chained and leveled, runs roughly left to right of the paper (i.e chainage should be progressive from left to right). This should extend to the same limits as those of the site plan or upto half a mile or existing road beyond diversion points on either side, with a maximum size showing an area 1 an d1/2 mile long along the road and 1 mile wide. It should show the following details :(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) Alternative bridge sites together with their approach alignments on both banks. specifically be given. Name of stream direction of flow at maximum discharge Angle and direction of a skew crossing if any. North point Exact extend and nature of built up area along the approaches (e.g Kutcha or pucca structures etc) Type of the land near the approaches showing the location of wells if any (i.e) Bagayat land or waste land etc. The position of bores and trial pits. Details of curves should

6.

A CROSS SECTION OF THE RIVER AT THE PROPOSED BRIDGE SITE AND ALONG APPROACHES :

This should be plotted to the scale of 1 = 100 horizontally and 1 = 10 vertically, and should include the following information :(a) (b) (c) The name of the stream and the serial number alloted to the crossing if any. The name of the road with mileage and chainage of the centre of the crossing. The bed lines upto the top of banks and the ground line with levels at intervals sufficiently close, to give a clear outline of markedly uneven features of the bed and banks. On the banks, the levels should be taken at every 25 while in the active gorge portion of the stream, levels shall be taken at every 10 for the river width upto 200 20 for the river width upto 500 and 25 for the river width exceeding 500. The changes marked on the cross section should be continous from left end to the right end as far as possible. While looking towards the downstream side of the stream, the bank to the left shall be called the left bank and shall preferably lie on the left side of the drawing. The practice of giving distances in between the two level points shall be totally discouraged. (d) Low water level, ordinary flood level and the Highest flood level, known in human memory. L.W.L. should be that particular level generally obtained in the month of February. If the water level as observed on any subsequent data is shown the data should be indicated against in into brackets. The ordinary flood level may be defined as that flood level which is not exceeded by more than 6 times in a year, each time duration being not more than 72 hours. If the bridge site is affected by back water, its details should be given i.e. the normal back water level and the highest back water level. In case of tidal rivers L.T.L of above bed and H.T.L. should also be given. Flood levels should be ascertgained as correctly as possible with the help of guage posts if any or from information locally available. The nature of the surface soil in bed, banks and approaches with trial put and bore hold sections showing the levels and nature of the various --- strata down tohard stream, suitable for foundations. The safe intensity of pressure on the proposed foundation soil should be indicated from local knowledge. For weather flow in the river (during November to May) should also be reported. (f) If a submersible bridge is tolerable with regard to traffic requirements a suitable road level which will give permissible interruptions as per I.R.C. clause 100.3 should also be shown on the cross section.

(e)

56
The cross section should be continued upto the point of diversion on the existing road and one furlong along it on either side showing on it the position of permanent features of the existing road such as mile and furlong stones, cross-drainage works with their destinctive number etc. The cross section shall extend to at least 5 above the maximum H.F.L. or backwater level which ever is higher. Whether this section is not at right angles to the river flow upto 5 above the H.F.L. an additional section exactly at right angles to the river and rising 5 feet above the H.F.L. should be taken and furnished, showing all the above information. This is required for hydraulic calculations. 7. VARIOUS OTHER CROSS SECTIONS:In addition to the cross section at the proposed site, further cross-sections should be taken at alternative sites and also at suitable intervals both upstream and downstream of the proposed bridge, extending upto limits as indicated below:(a) (b) (c) For catchments upto 25, sq.miles cross sections at 100 intervals upto 200 on upstream and down stream side. For catchments from 25 to 100 miles cross sections @200 intervals upto 1000: on upstream and downstream side. For catchments greater than 100 sq. miles cross-section at 500 intervals upto 2500 on upstream and downstream side. The above cross sections should extend at least upto 5 above the H.F.L. or back water level whichever is higher and should indicate all such details as in the case of cross section at the proposed bridge, applicable site except the trail pit or bore results. The scale of these sections should be 1 100 horizontally and 1 10 vertically, which may be suitably changed to 1 200 horizontal and 1 20 vertically in certain special cases. 8. A LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF THE SYSTEM

This should be plotted upstream on the left side. This should show the following details (a) (b) The site of the bridge. The H.F.L., O.F.L., L.W.L., H.T.L., L.T.L., max B.W.L and bed levels at suitably spaced intervals along the approximate centre line of along the approximate centre line of the deep water channel.

The L-Section should extend to the same limits as those of the contour plans and should be drawn to the same horizontal scale as that of the contour plan. The vertical scale should be 1-10. If there is any existing road or railway bridge over the same stream within a distance of 1 mile on the upstream or downstream side, the L-section should be extended to cover that bridge and all water levels as indicated above at this bridge should be given. Hydraulic gradient if observed during floods should be clearly marked on this L-section. HYDRAULIC GRADENT Observation of hydraulic gradient need to be carried out with great attention by local observations without placing any reliance on local inquiry or on the bed slope of the river. Hydraulic gradient should be determined by simultaneously marking the flood levels either on a gauge post if already fixed or on a peg driver firmlyfor the purpose at two points at least mile apart and then by connecting levels of these pegs. It will be desirable particularly in case of major rivers to fix five points in a length of 1 mile, one at the proposed site, and two each on up stream and downstream in order to get really representative and accurate figure for this very important items in the hydraulic calculations. Hydraulic gradients should be observed two to four times selecting normal, and high floods and the same given corresponding to each flood level for which it is observed. 9. RECORD PLAN OF THE EXISTING ROAD OR RAILWAY BRIDGE ON THE SAME RIVER IN THE VICINITY.

In case, a record plan is not available, a cross section of the stream at that existing bridge should be taken and the following details shown thereon : (i) Total linear waterway between faces of abutments

57

(ii) Number and clear size or sizes of spans maximum known H.F.L ascertained from local enquiry, designed H.F.L of the structure if available. Clearance available below bridge above maximum known H.F.L., Rail or road level, type of superstructure, foundation details (Open or wells or any other type ) and such other information as may prove useful in the design of the proposed bridge. In case of existing railway bridges the datum level for the same should be connected with that for bridge under survey. SPECIAL NOTE :(a) (b) (c ) (d) In the case of a small project, it may be convenient to combine two oro more drawing on one sheet. Every document shall contain the identification particulars of the crossing. Scale of scales shall be indicated on the drawings and all plans shall show the North point, bench marks, the direction of flow of the stream where necessary. The survey data should be connected to the nearest G.T.S.B.M if easily available. (R.T.Atre) Executive Engineer, Designs Circle (B&C), Division No. II, Bombay. (S.V.Natu) Superintending Engineer, Designs Circle (B&C) Bombay.

ANNEXURE 7 (6)

58
DESIGNS CIRCLE (B.C) SURVEY FOR MAJOR BRIDGES. INSTRUCTIONS ON TRIAL PITS, PUNCH BORES AND BORES. A. I. Trial Pits. Location :The spacing of the trial pits (on bore holes) should be such as to provide a full description of all substrata layers along the whole width of the gorge and the necessary width of crossing. Generally for small bridges, four trial pits would be sufficient one on each bank if low and halfway the bank slope and two in the bed of the river approximately at ends of middle third. The trial pits should be extended down to hard stratum. The nature of inflow of water at the time of taking trial pits (alongwith the date) should be reported. If necessary one or two pumps should be used in the trial pit to de-water the and their capacities and durations of working every day for initial dewatering and during excavation should be given also indicating the depth excavated everyday. When it is not possible to continue further with the work in trial-pits, further exploration may be done with probing. Probing with 1 and 1/2" 0 pointed rock should extend upto 20 below the deepest bed of the river and the nature of strata within that margin should be repeated. The penetration of such a crowbar at 20 depth (or earlier, if good soil is met with) when struck with a standard hammer (its weight and fall should be given). Should be reported.

B.

Punch bores :This probing can be much more effectively done by the method of punch boring.

Where bedrock is near, punch boring is sometimes used to secure information on the subsoil. The punch rod is of 7/8 or 1-in. steel with an enlarged point to make the hole slightly oversize (Fig .A.). A set of these rods should be 4,8,12 and 16ft. long. If it is necessary to go deeper than 16ft. the rods should be made up with threaded ends. Punch boring have been made as deep as 40 ft. The rod are driven into the ground either with sledge hammers, or by weighting a removable cross arm clamped to the rod. While two men rest their weight on the cross arm, two more men revolve the rod by pushing on the arms, thus twisting it into the ground. Every 4 feet, the rod is withdrawn. This can be done by slipping a plate over the rod and prying under one end of the plate as shown in (Fig A.) or by making up an arrangement of two eccentries as shown in (Fig B) which allows two piers to be used at one time, giving straight lift. A soil sample is taken every 4 ft. by means of a spoon on the end of a rod. Experienced punch bores claim they can be detect by the sound of the rod, when the point is passing from the stratum to another. Similarly, there is a decided difference in sound when the rod strikes bed rock or a bouldr:. C BORES :Boring should only be resorted to in case of major rivers. If rock is exposed to a great extent, no bores be taken. Boring should be done with such a machine as to get a 4 0 core. Two bores should necessarily be taken on banks one on either side. In the river bed, the bores should evenly be spaced at 200 intervals which may suitably be changed accordingly to site conditions in each case. The bores should extend at least 5 in hard rock of offset the possibility of a boulder being mistake for parent rock. If rock is not expected to be met with, the depth of bore shall be limited to 50 or 1 and times the flood depth whichever is deeper below the river bed level. The cores should neatly be preserved in wooden boxes.

59

ANNXURE -7(7) STANDRAD PROFORMA FOR SURVEY DATA FOR BRIDGE (Length 30m or more ) I. GENERAL (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Road and its classification Name of the stream . Road chainage at center line of the stream . What arrangements exist for crossing river at present ? (a) During Monsoon . (b) During dry season (a) The exciting road level connected to survey data of the crossing and details of interruptions. (b) Existing & expected traffic intensity on the bridge . In which seismic zone the bridge site is located . Authority for taking up the project . Whether the bridge site is arailway affection work vide C.E.,s Circular No. HBS -1870/94658(o) -C,dt. 14.09.71 Whether the bridge site is affected by any Irrigation project and whether coordi-nation with I.& P.D. Deptt. as per Govt. Circular No. RR /174/6416-P (I) ,dated 9.8.74is necessary . Whether high level or sub-mersible bridge is required . (a) Whether details of existing or proposed road or railway bridges on the same river in the vicinity including details of waterway and foundation conditions and other details linked up with survey data are finished . (b) give name & location of Bench Mark. Whether the site is suitable for bridge cum bandhara as per Govt. Circular No. PLN -1072/119097 -PI. , dt. 14.11.73

(v) (vi) (vii) (viii) (ix) (x) (xi)

(xii)

II. CATCHMENT AREA AND RUN-OFF (i) Catchment are . (a) In alluvial parts. (b) In plains (c) Total Area in square kms Rainfall in cm per year in the region . Max. recorded intensity of rainfall in the catchmentarea . Length of the catchment is kms . Width of the catchment is km. Longitudinal slope of the cachment Cross slope of the catchment.

(ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)

60
(viii) (ix) (x) Nature of catchment whether under forest ,under cultivation or Urban . Are there any artificial or natural storage such as lakeetc .in the catchment Nature of soil crust in the catchment, whether porous or rocky. HYDRAULIC DETAILS: Is the stream alluvial (a) with erodible banks (b) Quassi-alluvial with more or less fixed bed but erodible banks (c) Rigid with this erodible banks and bed Is the stream (a) Perennial or (b)Seasonable. Is where any stagnant water pool near the site. Dose the stream change the course and meander Are the banks at the proposed site (a) firm and steep (b) firm and gently sloping. (c) Dose the stream confine itself within banks or overtop banks in floods Nature of stream in vicinity of the proposed site. (a) Clean bed , straight banks or rifts or deep pools (b) As in (a) but with some weed stones (c) Winding, some sholes butclean (d) As in ( c )with weeds or stones (e) Stones section with ineffective slopes and sholes. (f) Sluggish river reaches are weedy with deep pools (g) With very weedy reaches what is the coefficient or rugosity in the bed & sprills. Are there any active spills if so , what is the nature, cross section , and bed slope of the sprills. If there is considerable water spread , is the ground level low on u/s as well as d/ and whether it is an effective decision charging section. Details of various levels, (a) Tide levels & distance from sea coast (M.H.W.,M.H.W.S.,M.L.W.S.,L.L.W.) (b) Flood levels. H.F.L.(Observed) H.F.L.( Inglis) H.F.L.(Modified Inglis) & O.F.L. (hydraulic calculations by Mannings formula should be attached

III.
(i)

(ii)

(iii) (iv) (v)

(vi)

(vii) (viii) (ix)

Surface velocities. At low water level At H.F.L. At O.F.L. (x) Nature of river bed and strata below based on trial pits or bore results (xi) R.L. and location of maximum recorded scour (or cracks in case of clayey bed)if any. (xii) R.L.of maximum anticipated scour (attached calculation separately) (xiii) If tests are taken on samples of bore or pits for the strata available at different depths, state the type of test and properties ascertained. (give detailed results separately) (xiv) Allowable bearing capacity of the strata at foundation level in tonnes per sq. meter (i) calculated theoretically (ii) calculated by conductinga standard test. (xiv) Dose the stream carry drifting materials in floods. If so , state the nature (such as bushes , trees, branches ,bouldersetc) (xv) Area the banks succeptible to scour if so , indicate the extent of cutting of banks occurecd in the past . (xvi) Is the stream navigable . (xvii) If so , the clearance required . (a) (b) (xviii) Horizontal clean spans/ spans required . Vertical clear above MHWS .

Are large scale river training works necessary .

IV. APPROACHES Is the proposed alignment of the bridge skew or normal . (a) (b) If skew give the angle of the skew. Will the bridge be straight , if not give the radios of curves on right approach and left approach.

61
(c) IV. Specify if there is any special requirement to be observed and approach gradients etc.

SUPERSTRUCTURE : (a) (b) Proposed clear roadway over the bridge . Proposed width of footpaths if necessary .

V.

FOUNDATIONS: (a) What type of foundations feasible and recommended . (i) Open foundations. (ii) Well foundations. (iii) Raft foundations. (iv) Pile foundations. Probable cost of dewatering in case of open foundations/raft foundations .

(b) VI.

EXCITING SUPERSTRUCTURES: Do any bridges exist on the stream ? If so, have their positions been marked on index plan? Size and No. of spans . Type of substructure . Type of superstructure . Type and depth of foundations. X- Sectional area at H.F.L. Under bridges . Is the waterway found to be adequate or excess or inadequate. Whether the foundations have been trouble free and depth provided is adequate .or inadequate . Any other information . MISCESSANEOUS: (1) (2) (3) (4) Name of nearest town and Railway station and its distance from sites. Is space available at site or in the neighbourhood for construction purpose . Mention if any special considerations for effect of bridge on adjoining village etc. are to be taken into account . Lead at site of the following materials (give information in respect of items of materials applicable ). (a) Masonry stones . (b) Sand for R.C.C. & Masonry work (c) Aggregates for R.C.C. work . Have the following been enclosed during completed ? (Plans to be as per Provisions in clause 101 of I.R.C. bridge Code Section I) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Key map scale . Index plan. Counter Survey plan . Site plan . Atleast three X- sections. Longitudinal Section & Hydraulic gradient . Trial boring and pits charts .

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) VII.

(5)

NOTE:- The size of the drawing sheets (outside dimensions ) may be any one of the following but all drawing sheets for one projects should be of the same size. 1) 2) 3) 4) 841mm x 1189mm. 594mm x 841mm. 420mm x 594mm. 297mm x 420mm.

Size at Sr. No .3 is preferable as it is approximately equal to drawings prepared for IDA projects . Asstt/ Deputy/ Sub - Divisional Engineer 1. 2. Executive Engineer , R.P.Dn. ---------.

The proposed site for the bridge has been inspected by ----. Any other remarks considered worth mentioning by the Superintending Engineer . Superintending Engineer ,

62
R.P. Circular -----.

ANNEXURE -8 LIST OF IMPORTANT CIRCULARS ISSUED BY M.O.S.T. M.O.S.T. S IMPORTANT TECHINICAL CIRCULARS AND DIRECTIVES RELATED TO DESIGN OF BRIDGES Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Circular No. RW/NH-33035/2/87-NH Std.D.O.II RW/NH-33045/5/90-D.O.II RW/NH -33022/4/92-D.O.III RW/NH-33013/5/88-D.O.II RW/NH-33054/20/88-D.O. RW/NH-33013/5/88-D.O.II RW/33013/5/88-D.O.II RW/33044/2/88-D.O.II RW/NH-33044/2/88-D.O.II Date 16.12.1988 19.12.1990 29.06.1992 31.03.1989 10.05.1989 11.03.1992 06.09.1988 04.01.1989 17.04.1989 Brief Subject Check list in respect of Technical Appraisal proposals and /or original Estimates for construction /improvement of existing road project . Typical cross section of 4 lane divided highway . Guidelines for design of Median Openings on Divided National Highways. Strengthening of existing flexible road pavements Guidelines on design of Overlays. Guidelines regarding provision of paved shoulders on NH. Strengthening of the existing flexible road pavements Guidelines on design of Overlays. Steps proposed for improvement in existing procedure for approval of designs of Bridges. Width of roadway on minor bridges on NHs. Supplemental measures for Design , ,detailing and durability of important bridge structures.on NHs.and other

63
certainly financed schemes. Width of roadway on minor bridge on NHs. Width of bridges on NHs. Supplemental measures for Design, ,detailing and durability of important bridge structures. Design of prestressed concrete bridges. Important considerations in the design, ,construction and maintenance of prestressed concrete bridge works on NHs and under others centrally sponsored schemes -Recommendations of high level technical committee therefore. Specification for new concrete bridges to be constructed in marine environments and susceptible to corrosion . Bridges on National Highway and other certainly sponsored schemes -Provisions of utility services thereon . Type Designs for intersections on National Highways Setting out of Horizontal /Vertical curves and junction . Guidelines regarding approach slab for bridges . Use of Fusion Bonded Epoxy Coated reinforcement on National Highway and other centrally sponsored bridge projects to be constructed in marine environment susceptible to severe corrosion . Investigations and Design for high embankments at approaches to bridges and overbridges on National Highway and other centrally financed roads . Modified interim specifications for Expansion joints . Proper execution of concrete warning coat and expansion joints Need for proper thorough service and site investigations and preparation of Bridge / Road Projects-realistic cost estimates . Surface reinforcement in mass concrete substructure of culverts -provision of Siting of rail and road bridges . Specifications for new concrete bridges to be constructed in marine environments and susceptible to being affected by corrosion . Maintenance , repair and rehabilitation of existing concrete bridges susceptible to being affected by corrosion . Inspection of bridges of National Highways and under other centrally financed schemes Inspection of bridges of National Highways. Proforma for detail bridge inspection.

10 11

RW/33044/5/88-D.O.II RW/33044/2/88-D.O.II RW/NH VI-50(3)/83-Vol.II

01.06.1989 21.09.1990 31.08.1987

12 13

RW/33044/2/88-D.O.II RW/NH-34020/1/90-D.O.II

13.01.1989 26.09.1990

14 15 16 17 18 19

RW/NH -34020/1/86-D.O.II RW/NH-11037/1/86-D.O.I(ii) RW/NH-33048/2/87-S&R. RW/NH -33054/7/92-S&R. RW/NH -34015/2/86-S&R RW/NH -34041/18/93-S&R.

14.11.1990 28.07.1993 12.02.1993 16.2.1993 22.06.1994 15.03.1994

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

NH VI-50(21)/79 RW/NH-34059/1/96-S&R NH VI-50(3)/83-Vol.II RW/NH III/P/31/77Vol.III RW/33045/1/86/D II NH11052/5/87NH III/DI RW/34020/1/86/NH(stds.) RW/34020/1/86/NH(stds.) RW/NH III/P/2/79 RW/33047/1/87/NH(stds.)

25.01.1980 31.03.1997 19.03.1996 29.07.1987 03.05.1988 02.03.1988 12.10.1987 15.03.1988 12.11.1986 23.09.1987

ANNEXURE -9 INCUMBENCY CHART 9(1) INCUMBENCY CHART FOR SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER(BR) NAVI MUMBAI

64
Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Name of officer incharge Shri A.G.Naik Shri S.V. Natu Shri B.K. Choksi Shri S.V. Natu Shri V.V.Navare Shri V.N. Gunaji Shri R.T. Atre Shri N.V. Merani Shri M.P.Gajapathy Rao Shri N.G. Thatte Shri N.V. Modak Shri A.G. Borkar Shri S.B. Patwardhan Shri D.K.Kanhere Shri D.K.Kanhere Shri K.S. Jangde Shri S.M. Sabnis Date of taking over 14.07.58 09.08.59 05.09.59 22.04.60 27.06.61 11.05.62 14.05.70 19.04.73 04.01.76 08.12.79 30.07.80 01.12.80 29.01.88 28.02.89 01.11.89 02.01.95 15.12.99 Date of handing over 08.08.59 04.09.59 21.04.60 26.06.61 10.05.62 13.05.70 18.04.73 03.01.76 07.12.79 29.07.80 30.11.80 29.01.88 28.02.89 31.10.89 01.01.95 14.12.99 To date Duration Yr. 01 08 02 02 03 07 01 05 04 Mon 07 02 10 11 08 11 07 04 01 08 02 11 Day 24 25 16 04 13 02 04 14 03 21 28 29 03 12

9(2) INCUMBENCY CHART FOR SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER(BL), NAVI MUMBAI Sr. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Name of officer incharge K.S Desai. P.D. Wani. A.G.Borkar A.V.Deshingkar S.B.Patwardhan D.K.Kanhere. S.P.Ahuja. D.K.Kanhere. K.S. Jangde D.K.Kanhere. K.S. Jangde P.K. Ninave Date of taking over 01.10.1984 24.07.1986 26.08.1986 26.09.1986 11.06.1987 30.06.1988 01.11.1989 09.07.1994 01.08.1994 14.03.1995 27.03.1995 20.11.1995 Date of handing over Yr. 07.07.1986 25.08.1986 25.09.1986 10.06.1987 19.06.1988 01.11.1989 08.07.1994 31.07.1994 13.03.1995 26.03.1995 19.11.1995 To date 01 01 01 04 Duration Mon 10 01 01 08 04 08 07 07 Day 07 02 06 09 12 08 23 13 11 19

ANNEXURE -10 PART -I

: TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF PROJECT PRPARATION

PRELIMINARY SURVEY DATA SUBMITTED BY FIELD OFFICER

Name of work : Construction of single lane Panvel . Submersible bridges across Gadhi River on Panvel - Vichumbe Road Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4 5 6 INDEX General Description Survey Data for Bridge Discharge Calculations I.R.C. paper clause 101 Discharge calculations by Mannings Formula Plans. PAGES

65

Name of work :Construction of single lane Panvel . Submersible bridge across Gadhi River on Panvel - Vichumbe Road . GENERAL DISCRIPTION Introduction : The villages Vichumbe and Usaroli are very near to Panvel talukas. These Villages are present connected to Panvel Via Bhingari Village . The Road length is 14.00km there is in a Muinicipal Road from Panvel upto village Podi and beyond about 2 kms. Length .The village Podi is one side and villages Vichumbe and Deod are on the other side of the Gadi River .At present people of these villages used to across the river by Railway Bridge of Panvel -Roha Railway line on foot . The villages have demanded the bridge .If this bridge is constructed , and people of village Deod and Vichumbe village will have direct contact with Panvel Town and also will be in position to go to Industrial area for work . the people of these two villages will be benifitted having population of about 1500Nos. The work is proposed to be included in 1992-93 Budget. Necessity: At present the people are crossing the river on foot through Railway Bridge. If this bridge is constructed about 8 to 10 kms..Distance will be saved and people will be position to go for work in Panvel Industrial Area. Selection of site : As such three site have been surveyed for the construction of the bridge , the merits and de- merits are given below.

1 2 3

Site No.1 Near Mahadeo Temple at Ch O. : This site is proposed by the villagers .The open foundations are there and the width of guarge is about 66m. This site is on the nose of the curvature of River .This site is also having larger depth of water at the center . Hence is not suitable of the bridge Scouring has taken place at U/S and D/Ss of this site Site No. 2 180M on D/S of site No 1: This site is having straight crossing but is at the end of curvature of the river .This site will have no land acquisition Problem. Exposed rock is seen in the bed . Site No. 3 at 215 M D/s of site No. 1: This site is having straight crossing C.I.D.C.O. Road coming from Panvel site meets this Bridge on Podi site bank . The banks are firm at straight . This site may cause some land acquisition Problem for only 60m length .But this site is suitable for construction of bridge .

Proposal : It is proposed to construct a single lane submersible bridge clearing O.F.L. R.L. 97.946 m. The length of bridge of about 60m would be required open foundation are proposed since exposed rock is seen in the bed . Catchment Area: The Catchment area of the river is observed from Topo sheets and is about 161.08 Sq. kms. These shape of catchment is almost oval shaped comparing partly paddy fields . Rain fall Data : The annual rain- fall data for the last 6 years as collected from the records of statstical office .Alibag is as under . 1987 1988 - 2159mm - 3169mm

66
1989 1990 1991 - 2520mm 4187mm 2847mm Average is at 2900mm

Hydraulic Data : These hydraulic details river at 300m D/s of site No. 1are given below. 1 Catchment Area 2 Discharge by Ingils Formula 3 Discharge by Run-Off Formula 4 Discharge by Mannings Formula at H.F.L.R.L. 98.620m 5 Discharge by Mannings Formula at O.F.L.R.L. 98.620m 6 Hydraulic Gradient 7 Maximum Velocity of Water 8 H.F.L.R.L. 9 O.F.L.R.L. 10 Lowest Water Level 11 Nature of Bed 12 Line or Waterway Required 13 Line or Waterway Required by Laceys formula. Plans: The following Plans are submitted herewith. 1) Key Map. 2) Index Map. 3) Site plan 4) Cross section at proposed site No.1. 5) Cross section at proposed site No.2. 6) Cross section at proposed site No.3. 7) Cross section at proposed at 50m U/s. 8) Cross section at proposed at 300m U/s. 9) Cross section at proposed at 50m U/s. 10) Cross section at proposed at 300m U/s. 11) Cross section at proposed existing Railway Bridge 12) L- Section of the river bed . 161.09 Sq.kms/ 1540 Cumecs 3464 Cumecs 1005 Cumecs 1005 Cumecs 1 in 600 3.45m./ sec. 98.62m. 97.945m Rockey in main Gourge portion . 60m. 180m.

The detailed hydraulic calculations alongwith questionnaire as per I.R.C. paper Clause -101 and Standard Proforma for Survey Data for Bridge are also Submitted . Sd/Sub- Divisional Engineer Road project Sub -Dn., Mahad Sd/Executive Engineer , Road project Dn.,Mahad

Name of Work : Construction of single lane Panvel . Submersible Bridge across Gadhi River on Panvel - vichumble Road . STANDARD PROFORMA FOR SURVEY DATA FOR BRIDGE I. GENERAL (i) Road and its Classification (ii) Name of the stream (iii) Road chainage at center line of the stream (iv) What arrangement exist for crossing river at present (a) During Monsoon . (b) During dry season . (v) (a) The exciting road level connected to survey data of the crossing and details of interruptions (b) Existing & expected traffic intensity on the bridge. (vi) In which seismic Zone the bridge site is located . (vii) Authority for taking out the project (viii) Whether the bridge site is arailway Panvel Podi Vichumbe Rd . V.R. No. 55 Gadhi River Km .No. 3 form Panvel-Pune Rd .N.h.4

For pedestrian from Rly. Over bridge for vehicles bridge on N.H. 4 to Bhingari and Bhingari to Vichumbe which is a longer route. 1) On Mahadeo Temple plinth assumed as 100m 2) Railway Bridge abutment top 300to 600 MT/day Seismic Zone-III Govt of Maharashtra letter No. plan / 3290/27914/(648)/No. 1/dated 13.12.90 No

67
affecting work Vide C.E.s Circular No. HBS1870/94658(0)-C,dt.,14.09.71 (ix) Whether the bridge site is affected by No any Irrigation Project and whether coordi-nation with i.& P.D.Deptt. as per Govt.Circular No. RAM /174/6416-P(I) Dated 9.8.74 is necessary . (x) Whether high level or Sub-mersible Ingle lane submersible bridge would be bridge is required sufficient. (xi) If submersible bridge is proposed Yes. whether the O.F.L. is reported taking in to consideration C. E. s Circular No.5 of 74 vode No RRS 1074 26431-P(I), dated 19.07.74 (xi) (a) Whether details of exciting or Existing Railway bridge is there at 600m proposed road or railway bridges on D/s of proposed bridge side having 6 spas the same rivers in the vicinity including of 13.5 c/c with open foundations. Road details of waater way and foundation bridge is also there at about 3 kms D/s conditions and other details linked up proposed bridge of N.H.4 Details will be s with survey data are finished , submitted in due course . (b) Give name & location of Bench Mark. T.B.M. is located on Mahadeo Temple by the side of the river having value as 100m (xiii) whether the site is suitable for bridge Yes. But there is Kolhapur type cum bandhara as per Govt.Circular No Bhandara at 2km. from the site. PLN-1072/119097-PI.dt.14.11.73 II. CATSHMENT AREA AND RUN-OFF (i) Catchment are. (a) In alluvial parts . (b) In plains (c) Total area in squre kms. (ii) Rainfall in cm per year in the region . (iii) Max. recorded intensity of rainfall in the catchment area (iv) Length of the catchment in kms (v) Width of the catchment in kms (vi) Longitudinal slope of the catchment (vii) Cross slope of the catchment (viii) Nature of the catchment whether under forest .under cultivation or Urban. (ix) Are there any artificial or natural storage such as lakeetc .in the catchment. (x) Nature of soil crust in the catchment whether porous or rocky III. HYDRAULIC DETAILS (i) Is the stream alluvial (a) with erodible banks (b) Quassi -alluvial with more or less fixed bed but erodible banks (c) Rigid with this erodible banks and bed . (ii) Is the stream (a) Pereninal or (b)Seasonable (iii) Is where any stagant water pool near (iv) Does the stream change the course and meander . (v) Are the banks at proposed site (a) firm and steep (b)firm and gently sloping (c ) Does the stream confine itself within banks or overlaps banks in floods (vi) Nature of stream in Vicinity of the propose site. (a) Clean bed, straight banks of rifts or deep pools Yes all alluvial. Yes.Gouege Alluvial with more or less fixed out errodible banks. Exposed work is seen in the 75% width of the Gourge .The remaining 25% sand in the bed. Resorvial No.Back water effect is there due tidal variations Yes. Firm and steep. over topped when flooded . the site 61.03Sq.km. 100.00Sq.km. 24000mm 4187mm 10.60kms. 17.50kms 1 in 600.

Only Kolhapur type Bandhara is on D/S at 2 Km.

Clean and straight banks.

68
(b) As in (a) but with some weed stones . -

( c) Winding , some sholes butclean . (d) As in(c) with weeds or stones (e) stones section with ineffective slopesStoney Sections with ineffective slope . and sholes (f) Sluggish river reaches are weedy with deep pools . (g) With very weedy reaches what is the 1).For compt.I0.08 coefficient of rugosity in the bed & sprills . 2) For compt. II 0.035 3) For compt. III 0.025 Vii)Are there any active spills if so what is The additional discharge of sewage The nature, cross sections , and bed disposal of the some of area of new Panvel slope of the spills by CIDCO is done (viii) If there is considerable water spread, Water spreads in 100 m.U/s & D/s sections is the ground level low on U/S as well but does not affect the discharging sections as D/and whether it is an effective decision charging section . (ix) Details of various levels (a) Tide levels & distance from sea cost No .Considerable effect is there of tidal (M.H.W., M.H.W.S. M.L.W.S.,L.L.W.) variation. (b) Flood levels H.F.L.(obsevered) 98.600 H.F.L.(Inglish) 99.000 H.F.L. (Modified Inglish)&O.F.L. 97.945 (hydraulic calculations by Mannings By attached herewidth formula should be attached ) (c ) Surface Velocities At low water level 2.00M/sec. AtH.F.L., 3.43M/sec. At O.F.L. 2.75M/sec (x)Nature of river bed and strata below Expose rock is seen in 75% bed portion . based on trial pits or bore results . (xi) R.L.and location of maximum recorded No. record is Maintained scour (or cracks in case of clayey bed) If any . (xii) R.L.of maximum anticipated scour 6.74m below H.F.L.R.L.98.600m (attach calculation saperatly) (xiii) If tests are taken on samples of bores No. test are taken or pits for the strata available at different depths,state the type of tests and properties ascertained .(give detailed results separately ) (ix) Allowable bearing capacity of the strata 200 M t/M2 approximately . at foundation level in tones per sq.meter . (i) calculated theoretically . (ii) Calculated by conductinga standard test . . (xv) Does the stream carry drifting materials in Bushes , trees branches floods .If so , state the nature (such a bushes , trees , branches , bouldersetc ). (xvi) Area the banks succeptible to scour if so Yes, Scouring of banks has taken ,indicate the extent of cutting of banks place .But the scoring is very less. accured in the past. (xvii) Is the stream navigable . If so, the clearance required . (a) Horizontal clean spans/spans required , (b) Vertical clear above MHWS . (xviii) Are large scale river training works necessary IV. APPROACHES Is the proposed alignment of the bridge skew or normal (a) If skew give the angle of the skew . (b) Will the bridge be straight , if not give the radious of curves on right approach and left approach Normal. Yes. Not necessary . Not necessary . No.

69
(c) Specify if there is any special requirement For 30m on either side of the bridge to be observed and approach gradient etc. pitching will be required to the approaches . V SUPERSTRUCTURES: (a) proposed clear roadway over the bridge . (b) proposed width of footpaths it necessary VI FOUNDATIONS: (a) What type of foundations feasible and recommended . (i) Open foundations . (ii) Well foundations .. (iii) Raft foundations. . (iv) Pile foundations. (b) Probable cost of dewatering in case of foundations/ raft foundations . 4.25m -

Open foundation. 1) Coffer-dam Rs.20,000/-for pier and abutment . 2) Dewatering Rs.20,000/-for each pier and abutment . each open

VII .EXISTING STRUCTURE :Do any bridges exist on the stream? If so, ,have their positions been marked on index plan? (a) Size and No. of spans . (b) Type of substructure. (c)Type of superstructure. (d) Type and depth of foundations. level (e) X -Sectional area at H.F.L. under bridges . (f)Is the waterway found to be adequate or excess. or inadequate . (g) Whether the foundations have been trouble free and depth provided is adequate or in adequate . (h) Any other information . VIII. MISCESSANEOUS :Panvel town at 4 Kms from site. Yes.,at site only . As per quarry charts attached . The cross section is attached . Adequate . Yes. Trouble free. Yes.1) Rly . Bridge at 600m D/S. 2) Road Bridge at 3Km.D/S. 1) For Railway Bridge 7 spans of 13.5mc/c. Plain C.C for piers abutment RCC Girders and slabs . Open foundation at 1m .below bed

(1) Name of nearest town and Railway station and its distance from site . (2) Is space available at site or in the neighborhood. for construction purpose , (3) Mention if any special considerations for effect of bridge on adjoining Village etc. are to be taken in to account . (4) Lead at site of the following materials (give information in respect of items of material applicable) (a) Masonry stones . (b) stand for R.C.C. & Masonry work . (c ) Aggregates for R.C.C., Works . (5) Have the following been enclosed during completed? (Plans to be a per provisions in clause 101 of I.R.C. bridge code section I). (a) Key maps scale (b) Index plan (c)contouer Survey plan . (d) Site plan. (e) Atleast three X- section (f) Longitudinal Section & Hydralulic gradient (g) Trial boring and pits charts

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. No trial bores is taken yet as exposed rock is seen in the foundation

NOTE:- The size of the drawing sheets (outside dimensions ) May be any one of the following but all drawings , sheets for one projects should be of same size .

70
1) 841mm x 1189mm 2) 594mm x841mm 3) 420mm x 594mm 4) 297mm x420mm Size of Sr.no 3. is preferable as it is Approximately equal to drawings prepared for IDA projects . Asst/Deputy/Sub-divisional Engineer . 1. The proposed site for the bridge has been inspected by---,Design Circle. 2. Any other remarks considered worth mentioning by the Superintending Engineer.

Executive Engineer ,Rp Dn.---No .site is not yet inspected by Superintending , Engineer

Name of work : Construction of single lane submersible bridge across Gadhi River or Panvel Vinchumbe Road in Raigad District . Discharge Calculations . 1). Catchment area 2) Discharge as per Inglis Formula as per I.R.C.13/1978 Q= 125 -------- M +10 125x 161.08 ------------ 161.08 = 1539.37 Cumecs 3) Discharge by Run -Off Formula. Q = 0.028 x PxA XIC2 = 0.028 X 0.6x 161.08X 10X 12.80 = 3463.86 Cumecs . Say 3464 Cumecs . Maximum Velocity = 3.43 M/Sec. Ventway required = Discharge by Mannings Formula Velocity = 1005 293.0 Sq.m. Diff. Between H.F.L. & Sill level = 98.00 -93.170= 5.43 m Linear Waterway required = 293.00 5.43 = 53.95m. Linear Waterway required by Laceys Formula . W = 4.8 Q 1/2 = 4.8 x 15401/2 = 188.36 m. Say = 189m. Sub-Divisional Engineer . Road Project Sub -Dn .No.2 Alibag . Executive Engineer , Road Project Division . Mahad . Say = 1540 Cumecs .

Name of work : Construction of single land submersible bridge across Gadhi River on Panvel Vinchumbe Road I.R.C. Paper Clause 101 Preliminary Data For Major Bridge .

71
Sr. no Questionnaires Reply Yes To scale of 1 = 1 Mile and a key Map to a scale of 1 = 4 Mile showing Portion of bridge site is given . -----------Yes. Gadhi River on Panvel Vinchure Rd. V.R. No. 56. Yes. Shown. Yes. Shown. Yes. Shown. Yes. Shown. Square crossing . The name of village Vinchumbe on East side and existing Panvel Addl Road .V.R. 38. Arbitrary Bench Mark on Mahadeo Temple plinth and on CIDCOC.D. work (i) location of trial pits for boring each being given an identification . (ii) The location of Nala ,building walls and the possible obstructions to the road alignment . 4 A cross section of the river at the proposed bridge site with following informations : (a) Name of stream (b) Name of the Road (c) The bed line up to toe of banks and the ground line to a sufficient distance beyond the edges of the stream . (d) Low water level (e) Nature of surface in bed, bank and approaches with trial pits or bore hole sections (f) High flood level . (g) Catchment area , discharge and average velocity . Inglis formula . 3. Discharge 3464 Comecs as per Sr. no Questionnaires Reply Run-Off formula . 4. Discharge 1005 Cumces by Manning formula. Exposed rock is being seen at the both side. Yes. One small Nala Crossed in alignment No.2&3.

1 An Index Map

2 A Countour Survey Plan 3 A site plan with the following details : (a) The name of stream and road . (b) Approx outline of the bank. (c) Direction of Water flow. (d) North Point (e) The alignment if approaches and of the proposed crossing (f) The angle and directions of skew , if any (g) The name of nearest identyfiable Facility at either ends of the crossing on the roads leading to the site . (h) Reference to the portion of the Bench Mark used as Datum.

Gadhi River . Panvel Vichumbe Road. Yes .Shown . Yes .Shown. Bed -rocky bed Bank-soil and gravel Approaches -B.C.soil. Yes .Shown . 1. Catchments area 161.08 Sq.Km. 2. Discharge 1540 Cumecs as per

6 7

Estimated depth of Scour or if scour depth has been observed the description of any other special courses responsible for the same. A L section of the stream . The following details to be furnished :(a) The size of the catchment. (b) The shape of the catchment . (c) The intensity of rainfall in the catchment . (d) The slope of the catchment both longitudinal and cross-section . (e) The nature of the catchment whether under forest , under cultivation ,Urban etc. (f) Possibility of subsequent changes in the catchment area like,a forest station , extermination or reduction in cultivated area. (g) Storage artificial or natural in the . (h) Important details of the bridge crossing on the same river within reasonable distance .

Yes. Given .The bed gradient is worked out 1 in 345. -Oval shape. 2400mm . Section across the Nala and along the Nala are submitted . Partly under forest ,partly under cultivation and partly under Urban. No such possibility . -Yes. Existing Rly. Bridge at D/s 580m. of the proposed bridge site

72
and about 2 Km D /s existing on Mumbai -Pune National Highway . No such case . Area falls under seismic Zone No.III. The site is having square crossing exposed rock and is near to the CIDCO road on Panvel side, hence site No. 2 or 3 are feasible. For I.R.C. class AA loading .

(i) Maximum permissible vertical Channel clearance and basis on which special requirement for navigation . (j) Liability of the size for earthquake disturbance . (k) Brief description or reasons determining particular site selection (l) The live load for which the bridge is to be designed .

Sub-Divisional Engineer . Road Project Sub -Dn.No.2 Alibag.

Executive Engineer, Road Project Division . Alibag.

Name of work : Construction of single land submersible bridges across Gadhi River on Panvel -Vichumbe Road. DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS AS PER MINNINGS FORMULA Chang e Bed level Depth Below In Metres 3 0.115 2.695 3.735 3.925 Mean Depth in Metres 4 --1.345 3.215 3.83 Diff.In depth Between two successive level (D) 5 Length in meteres 6 OFL.97.945 Area (4)x(6) 7 Wetted perimeter p=L2+D2= (5)/2+(6)/2 8 Discharge

1 2 COMPARTMENT -I 16 97.945 22 95.250 25 94.210 28 94.020

9 A/P=29.12/12.76=2.29 V1=1/n1 xR2/3XS1/2 =1/0.03x2.292/3 x 0. 00161/2 =1/0.0.3x1.74x 0.04 =2.32m/sec. Q1=A1xV1 = 29.22x2.23 = 67.69cumecus

2.695 1.040 0.19

6 6 3 Total

8.09 9.64 11.69 29.22

6.58 3.18 3.00 12.76

COMPARTMENT-II 28 31 34 37 40 43 47 50 53 56 59 62 65 94.02 93.570 93.520 93.370 93.320 93.220 93.220 93.170 93.17 93.320 93.370 93.345 93.370 3.925 4.375 4.425 4.575 4.625 4.725 4.725 4.775 4.775 4.625 4.575 4.600 4.575 4.15 4.40 4.5 4.6 4.67 4.725 4.750 4.775 4.70 4.60 4.59 4.59 0.45 0.05 0.05 0.25 0.10 0.050 0.17 0.05 0.025 0.015 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 12.45 13.20 13.5 13.80 14.01 18.90 14.25 14.32 14.10 13.80 13.77 13.77 3.03 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 A/P=120.34/46.66= 4.566 V1=1/n1 xR2/3XS1/2 =1/0.04x2.75x0.04 = 2.75m/sec. Q1=A1xV1 =210.34x2.75 =578.43cumecs

73
68. 71 74 93.355 93.420 93.770 4.590 4.525 4.175 4.58 4.56 4.35 0.065 0.350 3 3 3 Total Chang e Bed level Depth Below In Metres Mean Depth in Metres Diff.In depth Between two successive level (D) Length meteres in 13.74 13.68 13.5 210.34 Area (4)x(6) 3.00 3.00 3.02 46.6 Wetted perimeter p=L2+D2= (5)/2+(6)/2 Discharge

1 2 COMPARTMENT II. 74 93.770 77 82 85 88 91 92 94.190 96.395 97.385 97.385 97.895 97.945

3 4.175 3.755 1.550 0.560 0.560 0.050

3.965 2.650 0.560 0.560 0.050

0.42 2.205 0.990 0.510 0.050

3 5 3 3 3 1

11.89 13.25 2.97 1.68 0.92 0.03 30.74

3.03 5.46 3.16 3.00 3.04 1.00 18.69

9 A/P=30.74/1869 =1.645 V3=1/n1 xR2/3XS1/2 =1/0.25x1.6452/3 x 0.00161/2 9 =1/0.25x1.39x0.04 =2.22m/sec. Q3=A3xV3 =30.74x2.22 =68.36cumes. Q =Q1+Q2+Q3 =67.79+578.43 +68.36 = 714.48CUMES

DISCHARGE CALCULATIONS AS PER MANNINGS FORMULA Chang e Bed level Depth Below In Metres 3 Mean Depth in Metres 4 Diff.In depth Between two successive level (D) 5

HFL 98.6 Length in meteres 6 Area (4)x(6) 7 Wetted perimeter p=L2+D2= (5)/2+(6)/2 8 Discharge

1 2 COMPARTMENT -I

9 A/P=36.785/ 13.935=2.64

74
15 22 25 28 98.600 95.250 94.210 94.020 -1.675 3.870 4.485 V1=1/n1 xR2/3XS1/2 =1/0.03x2.642/3 x0.0016 1/2 =2.55m/sec. Q1=A1xV1 =36.785x2.55 =93.80cumecs.

3.350 4.390 4.580

3.350 1.040 0.190

7 3 3

11.72 11.610 13.455 36.785

7.76 3.175 3.00 13.935

COMPARTMENT- II 28 94.020 31 34 37 40 43 47 50 53 56 59 62 65 68 71 74 93.570 93.520 93.570 93.320 93.220 93.220 93.170 93.170 93.320 93.370 93.345 93.370 93.355 93.420 93.770

4.58 5.03 5.08 0.030 5.280 5.380 5.380 5.430 5.430 5.280 5.230 5.255 5.230 5.245 5.180 5.830 4.805 5.055 5.055 5.155 5.330 5.380 5.405 5.430 5.355 5.255 5.242 5.242 5.237 5.213 5.005 0.450 0.050 0.050 0.25 0.100 0 0.050 0.17 0.05 0.025 0.025 0.015 0.065 0.350 Total 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 14.415 15.165 15.165 15.465 15.990 21.520 16.215 16.290 16.065 15.765 15.726 15.726 15.711 15.639 15.015 239.872 3.03 3.00 3.00 3.01 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.02 46.06 A/P=239.872/ 46.06=5.20 V1=1/n1 xR2/3XS1/2 1/0.035x5.202/3 X0.00161/2 =1/0.035x3.00x 0.04 =3.43m/sec. Q2=A2xV2 = 239.872x440 =822.75comecs.

COMPARTMENT-III 74 93.770 77 94.190 82 96.395 85 97.385 Chang e Bed level

4.83 4.410 1.905 1.215 Depth Below In Metres

4.6203 3.157 1.453 Mean Depth in Metres

0.420 2.205 0.990 Diff.In depth Between two successive level (D)

3 5 3 Length in meteres

13.86 11.03 4.36 Area (4)x(6)

3.03 5.47 3.16 Wetted perimeter p=L2+D2= (5)/2+(6)/2

1 88 91 94 95

2 97.385 97.895 98.345 98.6

3 1.215 0.705 0.255 0

4 1.215 1.107 0.480 1.127

5 0.510 0.45 0.255

6 3 3 3 1 Total

7 3.64 3.32 1.44 0.127 37.780

8 3.00 3.04 3.03 1.03 21.76

Normal scour depth : R1=0.473xQ1/3 =0.473x1005 1/2 = 0.473x10.02 + 1/3 + 2.1 1/3 +1.31 D= Q . = 1005 = 6.74m Wxv 54x2.76

= 3.62

75

PART-II: TECHINICAL NOTE PREPARED BY THE DESIHGN CIRCLE NAME OF WORK : Construction on of single lane High level major Bridge across Gadhi river near village Vichumbe in Tal. Panvel Dist. Raigad . June 1997. TECHNICAL NOTE 1.Introduction & Authority : 1.1 1.2 This proposal is for the construction of single lane High Level major bridge across Gadhi river near village Vichumbe in Taluka . Panvel Dist Raigad . The Village Vichumbe & Usaroli are very near to Panvel Taluka. These Villages are at present connected to Panvel Taluka .These Villages are at present connected to Panvel via Bhingari village . The road length is 14.00 km .There is Municiple Road from Panvel up to Village Podi & beyond about 2km. in length.The Village Podi is on one side And Village Vichumbe & Deod are on the other side of the Gadi river . At present people of these village used as cross the river by Railway Bridge of Panvel Roaha Railway line on foot . The Villages have damaged the bridge . If this bridge is constructed the people of Village have demanded the bridge . If this bridge is constructed the people of Village Deod & Vichumbe will have direct contact with Panvel town .2.

2. Selection of Site : 2.1 2.2 The proposed bridge site has been selected by the Superintending Engineer P.W. Designs Circle , Navi Mumbai during site visit on dated 24.1.94 The proposed site is right angle to the river bed and c/s of the site is sent by Executive Engineer ,Alibag (P.W.) Division Alibag Vide latter No. AD/DB-1/12493 dated 23.12.96 The river bed is having exposed rock hence trial bores are not taken . Hydraulics: Hydraulics is done at the c/s proposed by the Executive Engineer , Alibag (P.W.) Division ,Alibagh. Hydraulic Data Submitted by Executive Engineer , Alibag (P.W.) Division is dated as below. 62.91 1524.4490 1508.889 3 No. 98.71m 99.51m 98.71m

3. 3.1 3.2

(i) Catchment area sq.miles

(ii) Discharge by Inglis cum/sec.Formula (iii) Discharge by Mannings cum/sec. Formula at HFL RL 98.5000. (iv) O.F.L. R.L. (v) H.F.L.R.L.(Reported) (vI) H.F.L. R.L.(Designed ) (vii) No .of compartments -

76
(viii) Rougosity Coefficient For Bank on Panvel Side For bed For bank Vichumbe Side Maximum Mean Compartmental M/sec. velocity

0.035 4.27

0.035 0.030

(ix) 3.3 3.4 4. 4.1

H.F.L. R.L.is reported as 98.71m. However , The discharge by Mannings formula fairly tallies with that by Inglis discharge at H.F.L. R.L.99.51m . Hence R.L.99.51 m is Considered for the design purpose . The bridge is proposed to be designed as single lane high level bridge as requested by field officers Foundations : The Executive Engineer Alibag (P.W.) Division Alibag reported that exposed trap rock is in the river bed hence open foundation is proposed . The foundation should be taken 2 m. below the G.L. for pier and at abutment location anchored in rock for minimum 1.50m depth . Proposal : It is proposed to construct single lane high level bridge in between ch.90m.to 150m having total length of bridge 60 meter . It is proposed to provide 6 span of 10.0m c/c.With above proposal the R.T.L.work out as below . . .. .. . 99.51m 0.600m. 1.200m. ----------101.31m 0.660m. 0.075m 102.045m.

5. 5.1. 5.2.

(i) H.F.L.R.L. (ii) Afflux (Assumed ) (iii) Vertical clearance (I.R.C. cl.106.2.1) Soffit R.L. (iv) Depth of superstructure ( for 10m span s.s.M25 grade)

(v) Wearing Coat .. -----------------------------------------------------------------Road Top Level ..

5.3 With the above proposal the percentage obstruction and afflux at H.F.L.R.L. works out to 19.70% & 0.52m. respectively 5.4 The bridge is to be designed for single lane of I.R.C. Class A loading 6. Sub Structure :

6.1 It is proposed to provide solid type of piers and abutment as per Designs Circle type drawings . Piers and abutment are proposed in M 10 .The top width of pier and abutment is 0.90 & 1.20m respectively .The batter for piers is 1in 25. 6.2 Solid returns in M10 as per type plan are proposed for required length . 6.3 Surface reinforcement @ 5kg./m2 is proposed for piers and abutments . 7. Superstructure :

7.1 The superstructure is proposed in M 25 as per Designs Circles type plan of solid slab of 10 m c/c 7.2 Tar paper bearing are proposed below the solid slab . 7.3 R.C.C. parapet is proposed as per type design 8. Standards:

8.1 The bridge is proposed to be single lane high level bridge with clear roadway.4.25 m without footpath. 8.2 9. The bridge site lies in seismic zone III. However , the seismic design is not to be done as length of bridge is 60m Misceleneous :

9.1 The wearing coat is proposed of 75m (av) thickness with 50BM +25 AC.

77

9.2 The Bituminous pad expansions joints are proposed. 9.3 The provision of water spout , should be as per MOST type design with 150mm dia. pipes. Filling behind abutment & return shall be as per Appendix-6 of I.R.C.-78-1983. 10. Special points: 10.1 The coefficient of rugosity for bed & banks are 0.03 &0.035 respectively .This shall be confirmed. 10.2 The angle of skew is assumed to be zero degree which shall be confirmed . 10.3 Approach on both (left & right) side should be suitable protected by providing pitching against flood zone . (D.P. Hadole) Sub-Divisional Engineer, Bridge Wing Unit -1, Designs Circle, Konkan Bhavan,Navi Mumbai. S.B. Tamsekar Executive Engineer, Bridge Wing Unit -1, Designs Circle, Konkan Bhavan,Navi Mumbai.

(K.S.Jandge) Superintending Engineer (Bridges), Designs Circle, Konkan Bhavan, Navi Mumbai. DBC/GB1.doc/C-15/f-06/31/08/98.