IRC 89, 1997, River Training & Control For Road Bridges

i IRC : 89-199'
GUIDELINES FOR
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
OF
RIVER TRAINING
AND
CONTROL WORKS
FOR
ROAD BRIDGES
(First Revision)
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2014
https://archive.org/details/govlawircy1997sp89_0
IRC: 89-1997
GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN AND

CONSTRUCTION OF RIVER TRAINING
AND CONTROL WORKS FOR ROAD
BRIDGES
(First Revision)
Published by:
INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi-1 10011
1977
Price Rs.120/-
(plus packing & postage)
IRC:89-1997
First Published November, 1985

First Revision April, 1997
Reprinted October, 2000
Reprinted December, 2004

Reprinted July, 2006
Reprinted September, 2008 (Incorporating Amendment
issued vide Notification No. 25
Reprinted May, 2012 dated 30th November, 2006 and
Errata issued vide Notification
No. 29 dated 28th March, 2007)
(All Rights Reserved, no part of this publication shall be reproduced or

transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission of
Indian Roads Congress)
Printed at Aravali Printers & Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi-110 020
(500 copies)
1
IRC: 89-1997
BRIDGES SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

(as on 18-4-95)
SI. No. Name Address
1 M.V. Sastry* DG (RD),Mimstry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),

(Convenor) New Delhi- 1 1 0 00
2. M.R. Kachhwaha Chief Engineer (B) S&R, Ministry of Surface Transport
(Member-Secretary) (Roads Wing), New Delhi
3. S.S. Chakraborty Managing Director
Consulting Engg. Service (I) Pvt. Ltd., 57, Nehru Place,
New Delhi-no019
4. A.D. Narain Chief Engineer (Bridges), MOST (Roads Wing),
New Delhi-1 10001
5. Prof. D.N. Trikha Director, Structural Engg. Res. Centre, Sector-19, Central
Govt. Enclave, Kamla Nehru Nagar, PB No. 10,
Ghaziabad-201 002
6. R.H. Sarma Chief Engineer, MOST (Retd.),
C-7/175, Safdarjung Dev. Area, New Delhi-1 10 016
7. Ninan Koshi DG(RD) & Addl. Secy, MOST (Retd),
56, Nalanda Apartment, Vikaspuri, New Delhi
8. S.N. Mane Sr. Vice President
Lok Global & National Constn. Ltd., Lok Centre, Marol-
Maroshi Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059
9. G. Bhatwa Chief Engineer (NH)
P.W.D., B&R Branch, Patiala
1 0. A.G. Borkar A-1 Susnehi Plot No. 22, Arun Kumar Vaidya Nagar, Bandra
,
Reclamation, Mumbai-400 050

11. N.K.Sinha Chief Engineer (PIC)
Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing), Transport
Bhavan, New Delhi-1 10 001
12. P.B.Vijay Addl. Director General (Border),
Central Public Works Deptt. , Nirman Bhavan, Room No. 424,
New Delhi-1 10011
13. H.P. Jamdar Secretary to the Govt, of Gujarat,
R&B Deptt., Block No. 14, Sachivalaya Complex,
Gandhinagar-382 010
14. G.C. Mitra Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.)
A-1/59, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751 007
1 5. Surjeet Singh Secretary to the Govt, of Madhya Pradesh,
E-2/CPC. Char ImU, Bhopal-462 016
* ADG(B) being not in position. The meeting was presided by Shri M.V. Sastry, DG(RD)
Govt of India MOST
IRC: 89-1997
SI. Name Address

No
16. V. Murahari Reddy Engineer-in-Chief (R&B),

Errum Manzil, Hyderabad-580 482
17. M. V.B.Rao Head, Bridge Division,
Central Road Research Institute, P.O. CRRI, Delhi-Mathura
Road, New Delhi-110 020
18. Prof. C.S. Surana Civil Engg. Department,
Indian Institute of Technology, Hauz Khas, New
Delhi-no 016
19. C.R. Alimchandani Chairman & Managing Director, STUP Consultants Ltd.,
1004-5 & 7, Raheja Chambers, 213, Nariman Point,
Mumbai-400 021
20. N.C. Saxena Director
Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats (P) Ltd., A-1 1,
Green Park, New Delhi- 110 016

21. M.K. Bhagwagar Consulting Engineer,
Engg. Consultants (P) Ltd., F-14/15, Connaught Place, New
Delhi-no 001
22. B.S. Dhiman Managing Director,
Span Consultants (?) Ltd., Rats 3-5, (2nd Floor), Local
Shopping Centre, J-Block, Saket, New Delhi-110 017
23. S.R. Tambe Secretary (R),
P.W.D., Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032,
24. S.A.Reddi Dy. Managing Director,
Gammon India Ltd., Gammon House, Veer Savarkar Marg,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400 025
25. DrG.P.Saha Chief Engineer,
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd, Hincon House, Lai Bahadur
Shastri Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400 083
26. P.Y. Manjure Principal Executive Director,
The Freyssinet Prestressad Concrete Co. Ltd., 6/B, 6th Floor,
Sterling Centre, Dr.Annie Besant Road., Worli, Mumbai
27. Papa Reddy Managing Director
Mysore Structures Ltd. 1 2, Palace Road, Bangalore-560 052
,
28. Yijay Kumar General Manager

UP State Bridge Constn. Co. Ltd., 486, Hawa Singh Block,
Khel Gaon, New Delhi-1 10049
29. P.C. Bhasin 324, Mandakini Enclave, Greater Kailash-II, New
Delhi-no 019
30. D.T. Grover D-1031 New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110 065
,
31. DrV.K. Raina B-13, Sector-14, NOIDA (UP)

32. N.V. Merani A-47/1344, Adarsh Nagar, Worli, Mumbai -400 025
IRC:89-1997
SI. Name Address

No.
33. C.V. Kand Consultant

E-2/136, Mahavir Nagar, Bhopal-462 016
34. M.K. Mukherjee 40/182, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi-1 10 019
35. Mahesh Tandon Managing Director

Tandon Consultant (P) Ltd., 17, Link Road,
Jangpura Extn., New Delhi-1 10 014
36. U. Bbrthakur Secretary, PWD B&R (Retd.)
C/o Secretary, PWD B&R, Shillong-793 001
37. Dr.T.N. SubbaRao Construma Consultancy (P) Ltd., 2nd Floor,
Pinky Plaza, 5th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai-52
38. S.C. Sharma Chief Engineer (R)S&R,

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),
New Delhi-1 10 001
39. The Director Highways Research Station, Guindy, Madras-25
40. G.P. Garg Executive Director (B&S),

Research Designs Sl Standards Organisation,
Lucknow-226 011
41. Vinod Kumar Director & Head (Civil Engg.),

Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan,
New Delhi-1 10 002
42. President, K.K. Madan Ex -Officio
Indian Roads Congress Director General (Works), CPWD,
New Delhi-1 10 Oil
43. DG(RD) & Hon. Treasurer, M.V. Sastry Ex-Officio

Indian Roads Congress
44. Secretary, S.C. Sharma Ex -Officio

Indian Roads Congress
Corresponding Members
Shitala Sharan Adviser Consultant,

Consulting Engg. Services (I) Pvt. Ltd.,
57, Nehru Place, New Delhi-1 10019
2. Dr. M.G. Tamhankar Dy. Director Sl Head,

Bridge Engg. Division, Structural Engg.
Research Centre, Ghaziabad (U.P.)
IRC: 89-1997
CONTENTS
Page
1 . Introduction 1
2. Scope 2
3. Terminology 3
4. Site Data 4
5. Guide Bunds 8
6. Spurs 29
7. River Bank Protection 39
8. Approach Road Protection 45
9. Design of River Training and Control 52

Works in Sub-Montane Regions
10. Floor Protection 53
11. Model Studies 54
12. Inspection 60
1 3 . Maintenance Aspects of River Training 63

and Protective Works
1
Figures
Fig. No. Page
1n
lU
5.1. Different forms of guide bunds
5.2. Extent of protection provided by parallel and 1
divergent guide bunds

5.3. Geometrical shape of guide bunds
1 'J
5.4.(a) Straight guide bund vîth circular head
(b) Elliptical guide bund followed by circular arc
5.5. Sketch showing a loop in a river
5.6. Size of stone pitching v/s velocity 1 o
5.7. Sketch showing toe wall at junction of slope 22

pitching and launching apron
5.8. Size of apron stone v/s velocity Z.5
5.9. Details of guide bunds ZD

6.1. Types of spurs or groynes 3u
I'i
6.2. Plan showing depth of scour for spurs JD
6.3. Typical design of spur 35
6.4. Tree spurs 51
6.5. Pile spurs io
A 1
7.1.(a) Steel Jetty-Kellner Jack 41
(b) Porcupine spur
7.2.(a) Upstream facing bed bar 42
(b) Downstream facing bed bar
AA
7.3. Typical design of stud 44
8.1. Typical sections of stone slope protection An
47
/IT
8.2. Details of cut-off at terminals of rip-rap blanket 47
8.3. Polar diagram of different inclination of a straight
spur showing type and extent of projection
8.4. Length requiring protection as a function of the 50
spur inclination
Appendices
Appendix 7(a) Formula for Computation of Afflux 68

(Para 4.6.3)
Appendix 1(b) Method For Computation of Backwater or 69

(Sub-para 4.6.3) Afflux at Bridge Piers for Rivers Carrying
Discharge more than 3000 mVsec.
Fig. 1. Normal crossing-wing wall and abutments 69

Fig. 2. Normal crossing-spill-through abutments 70
Fig. 3. Backwater coefficient base curves (sub- 72
critical flow)
Fig. 4. Incremental backwater coefficient for 73
piers
eccentricity
Fig. 6. Skewed crossings 76
skew
Fig. 8. Aid for estimating 78
Appendix 2 Details of Wire Mesh Crates 82

(Para 5.3.7.3)
Appendix 3 Mathematical Model Studies 83

(Para 11.2,4)
Appendix 4 Model Limitations 87

(Para 11.5.1)
IRC : 89-1997
1. INTRODUCTION
*
*The Guidelines for Design and Construction of River Training and
Control Works for Road Bridges" were first published in 1985. These
guidelines did not include floor protection works and maintenance of the
protective works. Also need for verifying the recommendations of
physical model studies on mathematical model has been felt. Further, new
materials like geo-synthetics now find use in the strengthening of earthen
embankment, slope protection and launching apron. As such need for
revising the existing guidelines was felt. Accordingly, a Committee
comprising of the under mentioned members was formed to review the
existing guidelines:
L.S. Bassi .. Convenor

M.P. Marwah .. Member-Secretary
MEMBERS
S.P. Chakrabarti Rep. of Central Water Power Res. Station

K.P. Poddar (S.B. Kulkami)
N.K. Sinha Rep. of RDSO (V.K. Govil)
H.S. Kalsi B.K. Bassi
G. Bhatwa Rep. of Central Water Commission
H. N. Chakraborty (G. Seturaman)
S. Manchaiah Research Officer, Hydraulic Div. Irrigation
M. Chandersekheran and Power Institute
CE (Design) Bldg. and Rep. of DGBR (S.P. Mukherjee)
Administration, Rep. of IRI (Harish Chandra)
Andhra Pradesh, PWD
Director, H.R.S., Madras
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS
President, IRC (M.K. Agarwal) Hon. Treasurer, IRC (Ninan Koshi)

Secretary, IRC (D.P. Gupta)
CORRESPONDING MEMBERS
J.S. Marya B.J. Dave

J.S. Sodhi Coastal Engineer, B.P.T.
2 IRC : 89-1997
The Protective Works Committee (B-9) reviewed the existing guide-

Hnes and finaUsed the modifications in their meeting held on 13-8-93.
These guidehnes have since been approved by the Bridges Specifications
& Standards Committee in their meeting held on 18.4.95. These were
approved by the Executive Committee and the Council of the Indian Roads
Congress in their meetings held on 19-4-95 and 1-5-95 respectively.
2. SCOPE \
2.1. The guidelines cover the layout and design of river training works
and approach embankment protection works for ensuring safety of the
bridges and their approaches. These guidelines also deal with some of the
construction and maintenance aspects. Protection works for open and
shallow foundations are also covered.
2.2. The scope of these guidelines is limited only to some salient aspects
of design and construction of the protection works mentioned above and
does not extend to the much wider associated problems of river behaviour,
control and bridge hydraulics, etc.
2.3.The necessity or otherwise of the guidebunds, spurs and other

protective works has to be decided upon carefully after observing the
behaviour of the river at the site under consideration. Data about the
protection works at other sites on upsu-eam or downsU*eam of the site under
consideration can also be a good guide.
River training works are costly and their maintenance cost is also very
high. In case, their location, configuration and size is not decided properly,
these works can cause damaging effects also. Therefore, they have to be
provided judiciously.
For bridges across major rivers, the extent and configuration of the
protective works should be decided with the help of physical models. For
accuracy, the results obtained from physical models may be further
checked on mathematical models by the same research station which
carried out physical model studies.
2.4. Given inadequate knowledge of and uncertainties around many

IRC : 89-1997 3
aspects of bridge hydraulics and river behaviour characteristics in general,

these guidelines cannot obviously claim to have any general validity of
application. Tliese are to be deemed as a guide to good practice of design
and construction of the protection works compatible with tlie current
experience and knowledge in the subject area. For particular applications,
these guidelines may have to be modified and supplemented in each case
based on subjective and objective judgement of the engineer, to cater for
site, river and specific requirements of a bridge structure.
3. TERMINOLOGY
3.1. The following definitions shall apply for the purpose of these
guidelines.
(i) Afflux/backwater: The rise in flood level of the river immedi-

ately on the upstream of the bridge as a result of obstruction to natural
flow caused by the construction of the bridge and its approaches.
(ii) Alluvial streams: A stream whose bed and banks are composed
of loose granular material, that has been deposited by the stream and can
be picked up and transported again by the current during the floods, and
is said to flow through incoherent alluvium, may be briefly referred to
as an alluvial stream.
(iii) Approach road protection: Approaches are protected by means

of pitching and turfing against ravages due to wind, rain-cuts, wave action,
erosive action of parallel flow or frontal attack of a river. Further, where
a bridge with constricted water-way is located in a wide khadir, guide
bunds alone may not afford protection to the entire length of approaches
from the river flow. In such cases, approaches beyond the influence zone
of guide bunds may need protection.
(iv) Floor protection works: Protection in the form of flooring where

adoption of shallow foundations, becomes economical by restricting the
scour.
(v) Guide bunds: These are embankments meant to confine and

4 IRC : 89-1997
guide the river flow past a bridge without causing damage to it and its
approaches. These are generally constructed in the direction of flow on

one or both flanks, depending on tiie site conditions.
(vi) Khadir: The maximum width over which the river meanders
during high floods is known as Khadir width of the river.
(vii) Meander: The curvature of flow, established in a stream either

due to its own characteristics or due to impressed external forces.
(viii) Ri^êr bank protection: Bank protection is afforded directly in

die form of slope pitching/turfing or indirectly in the form of spurs.
Spurs or Groynes: These are structures constructed transverse to

(ix)
the flow of the riverand extend from the bank into die river. These are
intended to induce silting and diverting die flow away from the point of
attack.
4. SITE DATA
The following information in line with die provisions of IRC:5-1985,

and amplified hereinafter shall be furnished. The nature and extent of die
data to be collected in each case will, however, depend upon the
importance of die bridge.
4.1. Topographical Data
(i) An Index map, to a suitable small scale (topo sheets scale 1 cm
to 500 m or 1/50,000 would do in most cases) showing die proposed project

location, reach under consideration, the existing means of communication,
die general topography of die country and important towns, any odier
existing or proposed structure across or along die river, etc., in the vicinity
of die proposed works.
(ii) River survey plans, preferably to a scale 1/10,000 for a river reach
of at least two meander lengdis upstream and one meander lengdi
downstream. In case die bridge is situated immediately downstream of the
IRC : 89-1997 5
confluence of two rivers, the reach to be considered in respect of both

of these should be at least 1.5 km upstream of the extent of back water
influence in the oibutaries under highest flood level.
(iii) A contoured site plan, to a suitable scale showing the location

of the bridge and covering approaches to a sufficient distance (not less
than 500 m on either side beyond the Khadir width in the case of a bridge
across major river), the direction of flow, names of nearest inhabited
localities, references to the bench marks used as datum, location of trial
pits for borings and the location of nullahs, wells and outcrop of rocks
and the existence of structures upstream and downstream of the river.
The site plan should extend for a distance of atleast 3 km upstream
and 1 km downstream and should indicate river course during high floods
and dry season duly superimposed in different colours for as many years
as available. The contours or spot levels should extend over this area at
a contour interval varying from 0.5 m in flat terrain to 2 m for steep terrain.
The nodal points which are not affected by meandering action of the
river should be suitably marked on the plan.
(iv) Cross sections, showing bed and bank levels, L.W.L. and H.F.L.
at the site and at L/10 interval for a distance of 1.5 L on upstream
bridge
and for a distance of L on downstream subject to a maximum spacing
of 30 m intervals where L is the length of the bridge.
4.2. Hydrological Data
(i) The size, shape and surface characteristics of the catchment area
including percolation and interception, area drainage pattern and the likely
effect of proposed protective works on the same.
(ii) The possibility of subsequent changes in the catchment like the re-
grouping or canalisation of the streams, afforestation, deforestation, urban

development, extension of or reduction in cultivated areas.
(iii) Storage in the catchment area, artificial or natural.

6 IRC : 89-1997
(iv) The slope of the catchment both longitudinal and cross.
(v) The intensity duration and frequency of rainfall in the catchment.
(vi) Hydrographs for one or more years if possible and in the absence
of such data, fluctuations of the water level observed during different
months of die year.
(vii) The highest flood level (on record for a period not less dian 50
years) and the year of its occurrence. If the flood is affected by the back
water, details of the same.
(viii) A chart showing High Rood Levels, corresponding discharges

and their duration for as many as years as available together with
maximum and mean velocities corresponding to the aforesaid flood
discharges.
(ix) The influence of afflux on areas in the vicinity likely to be

affected.
(x) Low water level.
(xi) River bed slope, flood slope and natural ground slope of flood
plain, if any.
(xii) Direction of the main current during low, medium and high
floods.
(xiii) In case the reach of river to be trained is tidal, information

regarding H.T.L. & L.T.L. of spring as well as high tides both during
freshets and dry season.
(xiv) Nature and extent of bank erosion noticed in a distance of 2

meanders (or 1 km whichever is more) upstream and 1 meander
downstream for meandering rivers and 5 L (or 1 km whichever is more)
upstream and 3 L downstream for non-meandering rivers.
(xv) The observed maximum depth of scour with corresponding H.F.L.

and details of obstruction or any other special causes responsible for this
scour.
IRC : 89-1997 7
(xvi) Studies of channel trends based on experience with comparable

situations and also on the basis of maps and published reports, if any.
(xvii) Description regarding terrain, slope, stability of river banks,

natural or artificial.
(xviii) Details of change in the river course, if any, found in the vicinity
of the proposed structure.
4.3. Geotechnical Data
(i) Soil strata chart/u:ial pit/bore hole particulars available, if any, in

the vicinity of the proposed structures.
(ii) Bore hole data along the length of proposed protective works upto
maximum anticipated scour level along with shear strength parameters
(cohesion and angle of internal friction), consolidation characteristics of
sub-soil strata, the particle size distribution and mean diameter.
(iii) Sediment load characteristics, river behaviour in the vicinity of the

bridge i.e. whether aggrading, degrading, senile or braided, etc. Specific
limitations, if any, imposed by the type of the river may also be indicated.
4.4. Environmental/Ecological Data
Existing environmental/ecological conditions in the immediate vicinity

of the structure and the effect of the proposed river training/control works
on die same.
4.5. Other Data
(i) The extent of land available beyond the deep channel banks on both
upstream and downstream within the reach shown on site plan together
with details as to whether land is vacant, cultivated, etc.
(ii) Availability of borrow-pit facilities, type and characteristics of local

8 IRC : 89-1997
soil, stone quarry having 40 kg (or 300 mm size) boulders and other
materials suited for river training and control works,
(iii) Need for plying of tippers on the top of guide bunds.
(iv) Availability of local labour and machines for construction and

maintenance works.
(v) Aerial photographs or maps for different years to study the

meandering characteristics of the stream.
(vi) Rate of aggradation for streams in sub-montane regions.
4.6. Design Data
4.6.1. Discharge: The design discharge for which the river training
works are to be designed shall be in accordance with the recommen-
*
dations of IRC: 5-1985 'Standard Specifications and Code of Practice
for Road Bridges, Section I, General Features of Design (Sixdi
Revision)".
4.6.2. Scour depth: The mean depth of scour (dsm) below the highest
flood level, shall be calculated in accordance with provisions of
IRC:5.
4.6.3. Afflux: Afflux shall be calculated as per formula given in

Appendix 1 (a).
For bridges across rivers carrying discharges more than 3000 mVsec,
afflux shall be calculated as per the method given in Appendix 1 (b) also
ând a reasonable value adopted.
5. GUIDE BUNDS
5.1. The provisions given hereunder apply only to guide bunds for
bridges across alluvial rivers. Guide bunds for bridges across sub-montane
rivers need special consideration which are discussed in para 9.
IRC : 89-1997 9
5.2. General Design Features
5.2.1. Alignment: The alignment shall be such that the pattern of flow
remains as uniform through all the spans of the bridge as may be possible
with minimum return currents.
5.2.1.1.Alignment of approach embankment: The alignment of

approach embankment should be so chosen that it is not affected by the
worst possible embayment which is influenced by the length of guide

bunds. In general these are aligned in line with the axis of bridge upto
high defined banks. In case the alignment of road has to be given a curve
before reaching the high defined banks, it has to be provided towards the
downstream side and not towards upstream side.
5.2.2. Classification of guide bunds: Guide bunds can be classified:
(i) according to their form in plan, and
(ii) according to their geometrical shape.
5.2.2.1According to form in plan: The guide bunds can be divergent,

.
convergent and parallel, Fig. 5.1.
(i) Divergent guide bunds: They exercise an onattracting influence

flow and they may be used where formed a loop
the river has already
and the approaching flow has become oblique. However, they have a
tendency of shoal formation at centre due to larger waterway between the
curved heads. The approach embankment gets comparatively lesser
protection in the case of worst possible embayment compared to equal
bank length of parallel guide bunds. Fig. 5.2. Divergent guide bunds,
therefore, require a longer length in comparison to parallel guide bunds
for the same degree of protection to approach embankments and so, shall
be used, only when found necessary.
(ii) Convergent guide bunds: Convergent guide bunds have disad-

vantage of excessive attack and heavy scour at the head and shoaling all
along the shank, rendering the end bays inactive. These should be avoided
as far as possible.
IRC : 89-1997
DIVERGENT UP STREAM
RIVER CURRENT
CONVERGENT UP STREAM
RIVER CURRENT
PARALLEL
Fig. 5.1. Different forms of guide bunds (Para 5.2.2.1)

IRC : 89-1997 11
BUND APPROACH BANK AND THE

WORST POSSIBLE EMBAYMENTS
Fig. 5.2. Extent of protection provided by parallel and divergent guide bunds
[Para 5.2.2.1 (i)]
(iii) Parallel guide bunds: Parallel guide bunds with suitable curved
heads have been found to give uniform flow from the head of the guide
bund to the axis of the bridge and so these are generally preferred.
5.2.2.2. According to geometrical shape: Guide bunds can be straight

or elliptical with a circular or multi radii curved head, Fig. 5.3. In case
of acute curved channel approaches, it has been found that the flow after
striking themole head does not follow the profile of parallel guide bunds
with circular heads but separates from the boundary as illustrated in.
Fig. 5.4. It results in an oblique approach of flow to the bridge thereby
making some of the end spans completely ineffective while increasing the
intensity of flow in the remaining bays. To improve the flow conditions
the provision of elliptical guide bunds is suggested. The ratio of major
to minor axis is generally kept in the range of 2 to 3.5. Elliptical guide
bunds have generally been found more suitable in case of wide flood plain/
rivers as compared to straight guide bunds.
IRC : 89-1997
MULTI RADII , SINGLE RADIUS

CURVE CURVE
45* TO 50*
r
flow
f i^'V
:r
> 0.4 TO 0.5L
,30* TO 60-
lll|lllll lllllllll
r- V 0.3 TO 0.5r2
STRAIGHT GUIDE BUND
CURVE —
MULTI RADII
SINGLE RADIUS
30* TO 40* CURVE
0.3 TO 0.5r2
0.25r2-
45- TO 60-
0.3 TO 0.5r2-
b1 b1 ORIGIN
II H IIIII H II H I
30* TO 60*
0.3 TO 0.5r.
ELLIPTICAL GUIDE BUND
Fig. 5.3. Geometrical shape of guide bunds

(Para 5.2.2.2)
14 IRC : 89-1997
5.2.2.3. Any other type of guide bunds differing in form or shape may
be provided, warranted by site conditions and supported by the model
studies.
5.2.3. Length of guide bunds on upstream side
5.2.3.1. For wide alluvial belt, the length of guide bund should be
decided from two important considerations, namely the maximum obliq-
uity of the current and the permissible limit to which the main channel
of the river can be allowed to flow near the approach embankment in the
event of river developing excessive embayment behind the guide bunds.
5.2.3.2. The radius of the sharpest loop should be ascertained from the
data of the acute loops formed by the river during the past. If survey plans
do not reveal the presence of a sharpest loop, it may be calculated as
follows:
Of available loops (Fig. 5.5.) calculate radius (r) of each at centre line
by formula.
Fig. 5.5. Sketch showing a loop in a river

(Para 5.2.3.2.)
Notations:
m. = Meander Length
= Meander Belt
b = Average width of channel during floods
IRC : 89-1997 15
(0.25 m,)^ + [0.5 (n\-b)]2
where = radius of loop in metre

nij = meander length in metre
= meander belt in metre
b = average width of channel during floods in metre
From the above, calculate the average radius of the loop. This average
radius divided by 2.5 for rivers having maximum discharge upto 5000 mV
sec. and by 2.0 for maximum discharge above 5000 mVsec. gives radius
of the sharpest loop. After having determined the radius of the sharpest
loop, the single or double loop are laid out on survey plan that contains
the alignment of approach embankments and high banks and it may be
ensured that the safe distance between the anticipated sharpest loop and
approach embankment is not less than L/3 where L is the length of the
bridge. However, specially in the case of meandering rivers, this safe
distance may be suitably increased.
5.2.3.3. The bund on the upstream side is normally kept

length of guide
as 1.0 L to 1.5 L where no model studies are carried out. For elliptical
guide bund the upstream length (semi major axis al) is generally kept as
1.0 L or 1.25 L.
5.2.3.4. Guide bunds will generally not be able to protect the approach
bank within the Khadir for more than three times its lengths, as evolved
above, beyond the abutments on the upstream side. Where approach banks
are more than three times the length of guide bunds, additional training/
protective measures may be necessary to protect the approach banks.
5.2.4. Length of guide bund on downstream side: On downstream

side of the stioicture, the river tries to fan out to regain its natural width.
Here the function of guide bund is to ensure that the river does not attack
approach embankments. Length equal to 0.2 L is generally found to be
adequate. In special situations, the length may have to be suitably
increased or decreased depending upon the circumstances.
16 IRC : 89-1997
5.2.5. Curved head and tail for straight guide bunds
5.2.5.1. Function of curved head to guide river flow smoothly and

is
axially through the bridge keeping the end spans active. A too small radius
gives a kick to the river current making it oblique and so larger radius
to attract and guide the river flow is needed. However, as it is uneconomical
to provide a very large radius, it may be kept as small as possible consistent
with proper functioning of guide bund.
5.2.5.2. Radius of upstream mole head may be kept 0.4 to 0.5

times the length of the bridge between abutments, but it should not
be less than 150 m nor more than 600 m unless indicated otherwise by
model studies.
5.2.5.3. Radius of curved tail may be from 0.3 to 0.5 times the radius
of upstream mole head.
5.2.5.4. Sweep angle: The angle of sweep of the upstream mole head
is kept 120° to 140° and that for the curved tail is kept 30° to 60°.
5.2.6. Curved head for elliptical guide bunds: In case of elliptical

guide bunds, the elliptical curve is provided upto the quadrant of an ellipse
and is followed by multi-radii or single radius circular curve. Fig. 5.3. The
shape should be finalised preferably on the basis of model studies.
5.2.7. For guide bunds of bridges across major rivers, hydraulic model
studies are recommended for deciding the various design features.
5.3. Design of Guide Bund
5.3.1. Top width: The top width of guide bunds for bridges across
major rivers is generally kept at least 6 metre to permit passage of vehicles
for carriage of materials.
Free board: The free board should be measured from the pond
5.3.2.
level behind the guide bund after taking into consideration the afflux,
kinetic energy head and water slope.
IRC : 89-1997 17
5.3.2.1. The minimum free board to top of guide bund above the pond
level is generally kept as 1.5 m to 1.8 m. This may be suitably increased
in the case of guide bunds for bridges across major rivers. The top of guide
bund should follow the slope of river flow.
5.3.2.2. In case where model studies are conducted for guide bunds,
the model studies will also indicate the highest anticipated pond level
immediately behind the guide bunds and at suitable intervals along the
approaches, wherever, significant ponding up is anticipated.
5.3.2.3. In cases where rivers have aggrading tendencies i.e. deposition

of silt/sand in bed over the years, suitable extra provision will have to
be made while working out the pond level to allow for die effect of
aggradation.
5.3.3. Side slope: The side slope of the guide bunds may be determined
from the consideration of slope stability of embankment and from
hydraulic gradient considerations. Generally a side slope of 2 (H): 1 (V)
is adopted for predominently cohesionless materials.
5.3.4. Slope protection: The river side earthem slope of guide bunds
by covering them with stones/concrete
are protected against river action
slabs. The pitching is intended to remain in
its laid position. It should be
extended upto the top of guide bund and tucked inside for a width of at
least 0.6 m.
5.3.4.1. Rear slopes of guide bunds are not subjected to direct attack
of the river and may be protected against ordinary wave splashing by 0.3
- 0.6 m thick cover of clayey or silty earth and turfed. Where moderate
to heavy wave action is expected slope pitching should be laid upto a
height of 1 m above the pond level.
5.3.5. Pitching on the river side slope: For the design of pitching on
the river side, the factors to be taken into consideration are size/weight
of the individual stone, its shape and gradation, diickness and slope of
pitching and type of filter underneath. The predominant flow characteristic
which effects the stability of the pitching is velocity along the guide bund.
Other factors like obliquity of flow, eddy action, waves, etc. are
18 IRC : 89-1997
indeterminate and may be accounted for by providing adequate margin of

safety over the size obtained from velocity considerations.
5.3.5.1. Size and weight of stone for pitching: The size of stone
required on the sloping face of guide bunds to withstand erosive action of
flow may be worked out from the following equation:
d = Kv
where
K = 0.0282 for face slope of 2:1 and 0.0216 for face slope
of3:l
d = equivalent diameter ofstone in metre
V = mean design velocity in metre/sec.

The weight of stone can be determined by assuming spherical stone
having a specific gravity of 2.65 (average). Plot of size and weight of
stone against velocity of flow for different face slopes are given in Fig
5.6. For velocities upto 5 m/sec, the size and weight of stone is also given /
in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1
Mean design Minimum size and weight of stone

velocity m/sec.
Slope 2:1 Slope 3:1
Diameter (cm) Weight (kg) Diameter (cm) Weight (kg)
Upto 2.5 30 40 30 40
3.0 30 40 30 40
3.5 35 59 30 40
4.0 45 126 35 59
4.5 57 257 44 118
5.0 71 497 54 218
Notes:
(i) No stone weighing less than 40 kg shall, however, be used.
(ii) Where the required size stones are not economically available, cement
concrete blocks or stones in wire crates may be used in place of isolated stones
of equivalent weight. Cement concrete blocks will be preferred wherever
practicable.
(iii) For slopes between 2: 1 and 3: 1, the value of 'K' in the formula above can be
interpolated linearly.
(iv) Weighted spherical dia of stone should not be less than 200 mm while using
wire mesh crates.
IRC : 89-1997 19
0.7 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 6 10
VELOCITY [) IN m/sec ^
Fig. 5.6. Size of stone pitching v/s velocity (Para 5.3.5.1)

20 IRC : 89-1997
5.3.5.2. Thickness of pitching: The thickness of pitching (t) may be

determined from the following formula:
t - 0.06 Q''
where Q = design discharge in mVsec.
The thickness of stone pitching computed from the above formula shall be
subject to an upper limit of 1.0 m and a lower limit of 0.3 m. The thickness of
pitching may be suitably increased in case of guide bunds of bridges across
major rivers.
For the stones in wire crate the thickness of pitching (t) may be determined
from the following formula:
= V'
^
2g(S,-l)
Where S2 Specific gravity of stone normally taken as 2.65
However, while working out size of wire crate as per Appendix-2 the mass
specific gravity (SJ and porosity (c) can be worked out using following
relationship
^ 0.245+0.0684
(dso)
Where d^^ = Mean diameter of stones used in crate in millimeters

5.3.5.3. Shape of stones: Quarry stone is preferable to round boulders as the
latter roll off easily. Angular stones fit into each other better and have good inter-
locking characteristics.
5.3.5.4. Placing of stones: In hand placed pitching, the stone of flat stratified
nature should be placed with the principal bedding plane normal to the slope.
The pattern of laying shall be such that the joints are broken and voids are
minimum by packing with spalls wherever necessary and the top surface is as
smooth as possible. In the case of guide bunds for bridges across major rivers,
stone masonry bands may be provided at suitable intervals if considered
necessary.
5.3.6. Filter design

5.3.6.1. Filter shall consist of sound gravel, stone, jhama (overbumt) brick
ballast and coarse sand. Now a days in other countries geotextiles are also being
used as filter material. But, in India these have not been used extensively. As
such these may be used only after considering their cost effectiveness and under
expert guidance.
5.3.6.2. Provision of a suitably designed filter is necessary under the slope

pitching to prevent the escape of underlying embankment material through the
voids of stone pitching/cement concrete slabs as well as to allow free movement
of water without creating any uplift head on the pitching when subjected to the
attack of flowing
IRC : 89-1997 21
water and wave action, etc. In order to achieve this requirement, the
filter may be provided in one or more layers satisfying the following
criteria:
D 15 (Filter)
<5
D 85 (Base)
4<-Bili^<20
D 15 (Base)
D 50 (Filter)
<25
D 50 (Base)
Notes: (1) Filter design may not be required if embankment consists of CH or CL

soils with liquid limit greater than 30 resistant to surface erosion. In this
case, if a layer of material is used as bedding for pitching, it shall be
well graded and its D 85 size shall be at least twice the maximum void
size in pitching.
(2) In the foregoing D 1 5 means the size of that sieve which allows 1 5 per
cent by weight of the filter material to pass through it and similar is the
meaning of D 50 and D 85.
(3) If more than one filter layer is required, the same requirement as above
shall be followed for each layer. The finer filter shall be considered as
base material for selection of coarser filter.
(4) Where brick bats are used as filter material, normally the grading is not
possible and in such cases, a layer of graded gravel shall be provided
below the brick bats.
(5) The filter shall be compacted firmly. The thickness of filter is generally
of the order of 200 mm to 300 mm. Where filter is provided in two layers,
thickness of each layer shall be 150 mm.
5.3.7. Toe protection
5.3.7.1 Launching apron shall be provided for the protection of toe and
.
it shall form a continuous flexible cover over the slope of the possible
scour hole in continuation of pitching upto the point of deepest scour.
The stone in the apron shall be designed to launch along the slope of the
22 IRC : 89-1997
scour hole so as to provide a strong layer that may prevent further scooping
out of river bed material. The size and shape of apron depends upon the
size of stone, thickness of launched apron, the depth of scour and the slope
of launched apron. At the junction of slope pitching with launching apron,
a toe wall shall be provided as shown in Fig. 5.7, so that pitching does
not rest directly on the apron. It will protect die slope pitching from falling
during the launching of apron even when the apron is not laid at low water
level.
Fig. 5.7. Sketch showing toe wall at junction of slope pitching and launching apron
(Para 5.3.7.1.)
5.3.7.2. Size and weight of stone for apron: The size of stone required
for launching apron to resist mean design velocity (average velocity) is
given by the formula:
1^ = 4.893 (ar^
where
"6 = mean design velocity in metre/sec
d = equivalent diameter of stone in metre
The weight of stone can be determined by assuming spherical stones

having a specific gravity of 2.65 (average). Plot of size and weight of stone
against velocity is given in Fig. 5.8.
24 IRC : 89-1997
For velocities upto 5.0 m/sec, the size and weight of stone is also given
in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2
Mean design velocity Minimum size and weight of stone

m/sec.
Diameter (cm) Weight (kg)
upto 2.5 30 40
3.0 38 76
3.5 51 184
4.0 67 417
4.5 85 852
5.0 104 1561
Notes (i) No stone weighing less than 40 kg shall be used for the apron.
(ii) Where the required size stones are not economically available, cement
concrete blocks or stones in wire crates or cement concrete blocks and
stones in wire crate in combination may be used in place of isolated stones
of equivalent weight. Cement concrete blocks will be preferred wherever
practicable.
5.3.7.3. Details of wire mesh crates: (see Appendix-2)
5.3.7.4. Depth of scour: The extent of scour depends on angle of attack,

discharge intensity, duration of flood and silt concentration. It is important
that maximum probable depth of scour should be assessed as realistically
as possible. The depdi of scour for different portions of guide bunds may
be adopted as under:
Location Maximum scour depth to be

adopted
Upstream curved mole head of 2-2.

5^^^
guide bund
bund including
Straight reach of guide tail
^-^dsm
on the downstream of guide bund
Where d is the mean depth of scour.

IRC : 89-1997 25
5.3.7.5. Shape and size of launching apron: It has been observed that
shallow and wide aprons launch evenly if the scour takes place rapidly. If the
scour takes place gradual, the effect of width on launching of apron is
marginal. A width of launching apron equal to 1.5 dmax is generally found
satisfactory (where dmax is the maximum anticipated scour depth below bed
level in meters). Thickness of launching apron at inner end may be kept as
1 .5 1 and at outer end 2.25 1 as shown in Fig. 5 .9.
When stones in wire crates are used the width of launching apron equal to
2.25dmax for slope of 2:1 and 3.20 dmax for slope of 3:1 may be used.
However, the thickness of launching apron may be kept same as that of
thickness of pitching (t).
Slope of launching apron: The slope of the launching apron

5.3.7.6.
may be taken as 2 (H): 1 (V) for loose boulders or stones and 1 .5 (H): 1 (V)
for cement concrete blocks or stones in wire crates.
5.3.7.7. An apron may fail to provide protection to the guide bund if the
river bed contains high percentage of silt or clay or where the angle of repose
of the bed material is steeper than that of stone as in such a case the apron
may not launch properly.
5.3.7.8. Certain types of kankar blocks develop cementing action under

water and such types of kankar blocks may be used with caution.
5.4. Constructional Aspects
5.4.1. Co-ordination is necessary for tagging together guide bunds of
road and rail bridges on the same river or streams where located in close
vicinity of each other is likely to be influencing one or the other and for the
same appropriate combined, if necessary, hydraulicmodel studies for both
should be carried out to evolve properly tagging design.
5.4.2. Trial pits should be taken in borrow area to examine suitability of

soil for construction and also to decide the type of earth moving machinery to
be arranged.
Guide bunds may be made of locally available materials from the

5.4.3.
riverbed preferably cohesionless materials. Low density cohesionless soils
(loamy soils) are susceptible to liquifaction and should be avoided.
5.4.4. Every effort should be made to complete the work of guide bund in
one working season.
26 IRC : 89-1997
o
IRC : 89-1997 27
5.4.5. For the construction of embankments for guide bunds IRC: 36

"Recommended Practice for the Construction of Earth Embankments for
Road Works" shall be followed unless otherwise stated in these guide-
lines. For high embankments IRC: 75 "Guidelines for the Design of High
Embankments" may be followed.
Dispatch of stone: Transport of stone from the quarries to the

5.4.6.
river bank and from the river bank to the site of work is an important
task. The quantities of stone required to be transported every day must
be worked out and trains/ trucks, etc., arranged accordingly. Similarly

prior arrangements may be made for taking the stones across the river
by ferry or boats.
5.4.7. Earthwork
5.4.7.1. For construction of guide bunds, four operations are involved:
(i) excavation of the pit for the apron
(ii) the completion of the earth work for guide bunds

(iii) the construction of approach banks
(iv) laying stones in apron and on slopes
5.4.7.2. It is necessary that sufficient length of pit along the guide bund
should be ready within one or two months of commencement of work so
that placing of stones in the apron and on slope can be started at the earliest.
About 70 per cent working season should be available for pitching.
Earthwork should be completed within 80 per cent of working season.
Good compaction of guide bunds is necessary as any slip during the flood
can be disastrous. No portion of the guide bund should be left below HFL
before the onset of monsoon. Bottom of apron pit should be excavated
as low as permitted by water level.
5.4.7.3. Sufficient labour and/or earth moving machinery of the right

type with spare parts and trained staff is necessary.
5.4.7.4. Borrow pits: No borrow pits should be dug on the rear of guide
bunds. It is preferable to take all earth for construction of the guide bunds
28 IRC : 89-1997
from the river side. The borrow pits should be sufficiently away from
the location of the launching apron.
5.4.8. Adequate labour for unloading of pitching stone, carrying and

laying it at site within the time available will have to be carefully worked
out.
guide bunds should be taken in hand along with

5.4.9. Construction of
piers and abutments. Where there is any doubt about completion of whole
guide bund within one working season, it is absolutely essential that the
construction of guide bund be started from abutment towards upstream.
Where full guide bund cannot be constructed in one working season
suitable protective measures may be taken.
5.4.10. On slopes, care should be taken in placing the stone not to have
big voids through which water will cause swirling. Comparatively smaller
stones should be at the bottom and larger ones at the top.
5.4.11. The top of the guide bunds should be protected with a layer
of 15 cm thick gravel against rain cuts.
5.4.12. While on river side, stone protection is provided upto the full
length of guide bunds, on the rear side this protection is just carried around
mole head beyond which usually good turfing is provided.
5.4.13. Closure of branch channels of a river: In case the alignment

of guide bund or the approach embankment crosses a branch channel of
the river, the usual practice under such circumstances is either to diveij
the branch channel to the main channel of the river with the help of spurs,
etc., or to construct closing dyke or closure bund across the branch
channel. In situations where diversion of channel is to be resorted to, then

action in this regard should be taken during the receding floods and at
least 2 to 3 months in advance of the construction of guide bund/
embankment. In situations where closing of the branch channel is
considered unavoidable, then the closure bund closing dyke or the
armouring of the approach embankment should be properly designed and
closing operation should be carried out as a continuous one.
IRC : 89-1997 29
6. SPURS
6.1. Functions of Spurs and their Classifications
6.1.1. Function of spurs
6.1.1.1. Sûrs are provided to take care of one or more of the following
functions:
(i) Training the river along a desired course by attracting, deflecting or

repelling the flow of a channel.
(ii) Creating a slack flow with the object of silting up the area in the vicinity.
(iii) Protecting the river bank by keeping the flow away from it.
(iv) Contracting a wide river channel, usually for the improvement of depth for
navigation.
6.1.2. Classification of spurs: Spurs can be classified as follows:
(i) Classification according to method and materials of construction: Perme-

able and impermeable (solid).
(ii) Classification according to the height of spur with respect to water level:
Submersible or non-submersible.
(iii) Classification according to the function served: Attracting, deflecting,

repelling and sedimenting. Fig. 6.1.
(iv) Special type-T-headed, Hockey or Burma type and kinked type, etc.. Fig.
6.1.
6.1.2.1. Permeable spurs: Permeable spurs obstruct flow and slacken

it to cause deposition of sediment carried by the streams. These are,
therefore, best suited for sediment carrying streams and are also preferable
in hilly regions.
In comparatively clear rivers their action results in damping erosive

effect of the current and thus prevent, local bank erosion.
6.1.2.2. Impermeable spurs (solid): Impermeable spurs consist of

rockfill or earth core armoured with resistant material like stone mattress
30 IRC : 89-1997
FLOW
SCOUR HOLE -SCOUR HOLE
-SCOUR HOLE
A: ATTRACTING SPUR B: DEFLECTING SPUR
SCOUR HOLE
STILL _
POCKET m
C: REPELLING SPUR D: SEDIMENTING SPUR
E: T - HEADED SPUR F: HOCKY OR BURMA SPUR
G: KINKED SPUR
Fig. 6.1. Types of spurs or groynes (Para 6.1.2. (iii) & (iv))
or sausages filled with stone. They are designed to attract, repel or deflect
the flow away from the bank along a desired course.
6.1.2.3. Submersible spur: A submersible spur is the one whose top

level is above the normal water level in the river but gets submerged during
the highest design floods.
6.1.2.4. Non-submersible spur: This is the type of spur which remains

above water even under the highest floods.
IRC : 89-1997 31
6.1.2.5. Attracting spur: These are the spurs which attract flow
towards the bank and are aligned in a direction pointing downstream. In
a river where there is a heavy attack on one bank, it may be desirable
to construct the attracting spurs on the opposite bank in conjunction with
a repelling spur on the affected bank.
6.1.2.6. Repelling spur: A spur pointing upstream has the property of

repelling the river flow away from it and hence it is termed as repelling
spur.
6.1.2.7. Deflecting spur: Where the spur, usually of short length

changes only the direction of flow without repelling it, is known as a
deflecting spur and gives only local protection.
6.1.2.8. Sedimenting spur: The spurs located at right angles to the river
flow fall under this category.
6.1.2.9. Special type spur: These spurs have been named after their
builders and have special design features like Denhey's T Headed, Hockey
or Burma type and kinked type, etc. A spur with a curved head is known
as a Hockey or Burma type spur whereas a spur with a short straight head
normal to spur direction is known as a Denhey's T Headed spur and a
spur with a slight angular head is known as a kinked type spur.
6.2. General Features
6.2.1. Location and length: No general rule can be laid for fixing the
length and location of the spurs. Those depend entirely upon the exigencies
arising in a specific case.Length should not be shorter than that required
to keep ê scour hole formed at the nose away from the bank. Short length
may al«o cause bank erosion upstream of the spur whereas too long a spur
may dam up the river. Normally spur should not obstruct more than 20
per cent of the channel width at ordinary flood level.
6.2.2. Orientation: For repelling spur (defined in clause 6.1.2.6) the

angle upstream varies from 60° to 80° with the bank. In the case of
attracting spur (defined in clause 6.1.2.5) the angle is usually 60° (within
a range of 30° to 60° with the bank. Orientation for deflecting spur (defined
in clause 6.1.2.7) can vary from 65° to 85°.
32 IRC : 89-1997
6.2.3. Spacing: In a straight reach the spacing is about three times the
length of spur. Spurs are spaced further apart (with respect to their length)
in a wide river than in a narrow one, if their discharges are nearly equal.
In a curved reach a spacing of 2 to 3.5 times the length of spur is
recommended. Larger spacing (3 to 3.5 times) can be adopted for concave

banks and smaller spacings (2 to 3 times) can be adopted for convex banks.
Sometimes the spurs are spaced further apart from consideration of cost
or for enabling construction of more spurs at a later date.
6.2.4. Location, length, orientation and spacing can best be finalized

from model tests.
6.3. Design of Impermeable Spurs
6.3.1. Top width The top width of spur should be

: 3 to 6 m at formation
level.
6.3.2. Free board: The minimum free board above the recorded highest
flood level (H.F.L.) or above the anticipated H.F.L. on the upstream of
spur, whichever is more is generally kept as 1.5 to 1.8 m.
6.3.3. Side slopes: For cohesionless soils, slopes on upstream and

downstream faces of 2 (H): 1 (V)may be adequate. For spurs constructed
wholly in stones steeper slopes may be adopted.
6.3.4. Size and weight of stone for pitching: Same as for guide bunds
(see para 5.3.5.1).
6.3.5. Thickness of pitching: Same as for guide bunds (see para

5.3.5.2).
The thickness *t* of the pitching should be provided in a length of 30

to 45m or for such a length of upsu:eam shank upto which the river action
prevails (whichever is more) and the semi-circular nose. In the next 30m
to 60m the thickness of pitching may be reduced to 2/3 1 on upstream and
in rest of the shank length 0.3 m thick stone pitching may be provided.
On the downsu-eam the thickness of pitching may be reduced to 2/3t in
30 m to 60 m and in rest of the shank length a nominal stone pitching
or turfing may be provided.
IRC : 89-1997 33
6.3.6. Filter: A graded filter 20 cm to 30 cm in thickness generally
satisfying the criteria mentioned in guide bunds (see para 5.3.6) should be
provided below the pitching at nose and on the upstream face in a length
of 30 to 45 m. In the next 30 to 60 m of the upstream shank portion the
filter can be reduced to 15 cm and then filter may be eliminated.
6.3.7. Launching apron

6.3.7.1. Size and weight of stone: Same as for guide bunds (see para 5.3.7.2).
6.3.7.2. The depth of scour for different portions of spur can be adopted
as given in Table 6.1 and shown in Fig. 6.2.
Table 6.1. Depth of Scour
S.No. Location Maximum scour depth

to be adopted
(i) Nose 2.0 d^^ to 2.5 d „

sin sni
(ii) Transition from nose to shank and first

sm
30 to 60 m in upstream
(iii) Next 30 to 60 m in upstream 1-27 d^^
sm
(iv) Transition from nose to shank and
first 15 to 30 m on downstream 1-27 d^^
sm
Where d^^ is the mean depdi of scour measured below highest flood
level (HFL)
30 TO 60m 30 TO 60m 30 TO 45m

2-2.5dsm
Fig. 6.2. Plan showing depth of scour for spurs (Para 6.3.7.2)
34 IRC : 89-1997
6.3.7.3. Shape and size of launching apron: A width of launching

apron equal to 1.5 (where d^^ is the maximum anticipated scour depth
below low water level in metres) should be provided at semi-circular nose
and should continue upto 60 to 90 m on the upstream or for such a length
of upstream shank upto which the river action prevails (whichever is
more). In the next 30 to 60 m on the upstream the width of launching
apron may be reduced to 1.0 d^. In the remaining reach, nominal
apron or no apron may be provided depending upon the flow conditions.
The width of the launching apron on the downstream should be
reduced from 1.5 dmax to 1.0 dmax in 15 to 30 m and should continue
in next 15 to 30 m. If the return flow prevails beyond the above
specified reaches, the apron length may be increased to cover the region
of return flow. Thickness of launching apron at inner end may be kept
as 1.5 t and at outer end as 2.25 t. A typical design of spur is illustrated
in Fig. 6.3.
6.3.7.4. Slope of launched apron: Same as for Guide Bunds (see para
5.3.7.6).
6.3.8. Alternatively, spurs can also be designed with the help of polar
diagrams discussed in para 8.
6.4. Permeable Spurs
6.4.1. Tree spurs: The objects of the tree spurs are to:
(i) Divert or deflect the current which is directly threatening erosion of a bund;
(ii) Deaden the flow in one channel of the river near the bund in order to open
out- another channel away from the bund; and
(iii) Silt up a channel of the river at its source by checking the flow in it.
6.4.1.1. Initially, the tree spurs should be laid pointing upstream at an

angle between 60^ to 70° so that when the spur launches and becomes
sand bound, assumes a position facing slightly upstream. Unlike an
it
impermeable spur, which is generally made to face 60° upstream, a

permeable spur should make a larger angle with the bank upstream, since
it would collect floating debris against the face, converting it to an almost
IRC : 89-1997
FLOW
1 r'
30 TO 60m .30 TO 60M 30 TO 45m
SCOUR
2 TO 2.5dsm
HIGH BANK OR
EMBANKMENT
2/3t THICK STONE PITCHING
3 TO 6M, t THICK STONE PITCHING

OVER GRADED FILTER
1— 2/3t THICK STONE PITCHING
SLOPE 2:1
LAUNCHING APRON
STONE PITCHING
0.3m THICK
15 TO 30m
GRADED FILTER 20 TO 30 cm
t THICK STONE
1.5m TO 1.8m FREE BOARD
PITCHING
I.Sdmox.
RIVER BED
MATERIAL FILL
ENLARGED SECTION X-X

3 TO 6m
0.3m- THICK STONE PITCHING
r— 1.5m TO 1.8m FREE BOARD
1_ H.F.L.
RIVER BED
MATERIAL FILL
%
LAUNCHING
APRON
ENLARGED SECTION Y^ Y
NOTE: THE THICKNESS OF LAUNCHING APRON'SHALL BE AS UNDER
(a) AT INNER END 1.5 TIMES THE THICKNESS OF SLOPE PITCHING
(b) AT OUTER END 2.25 TIMES THE THICKNESS OF SLOPE PITCHING
Fig. 6.3. Typical design of spur (Para 6.3.7.3.)

36 IRC : 89-1997
impermeable one with attendant disadvantages. Care should be taken that

after launching, it is not bodily shifted to assume a position of an attracting
spur, which would induce accretion only downstream of it.
6.4.1.2. Tree spurs consist of a thick wire rope firmly tied at one end
to the bank and tied at the other end to a heavy concrete block. Leafy
trees with large branches are suspended from the wire rope. Alternatively,
the tree spurs are also constructed as detailed below:
Vertical stakes are driven 1 .5 to 2.5 m into the river bed at 3 m intervals
along the cross section of river (see Fig. 6.4). Each row of such stakes
are placed about 9 m apart. These stakes are held in position by diagonal
stays and guy ropes secured to strong pegs well embedded in' the firm
banks. The verticals (stakes) are connected to each other by transverse
pieces having holes drilled in them to take the tapered end of intermediate
verticals of 75. to 100 mm dia, placed in between the main verticals at
0.3 m centres. The entire structure

is made watertight by lining the vertical
stakes on their upstream side by bundles of local grass and die space
between two such rows of spurs is thickly filled with trees. Holes are
drilled 0.3 m up their stem through which a ring is fitted. The trees are
held in position by a wire rope 2.5 cm dia attached to the rings, the wire
rope being firmly anchored to the bank.
6.4.1 .3. However, generally tree spurs are cumbersome to construct and
have not been found successful except in a few cases.
6.4.2. Pile spurs: Spurs of this type can be constructed out of timber,
sheet piles or even R.C.C. piles. In pile spurs (see Fig. 6.5) the piles
constitute the main verticals: they are driven down 6 to 9 m inside the
river bed, 2.4 to 3.0 m apart and in at least 2 similar rows. The rows of
verticals are notmore than 1.2 to 1.8 m apart. Between the main verticals,
there can be two intermediates, embedded at least 1.2 m below the bed.
Each row is either closely inter-twined with brush wood branches, going
in and out around each vertical or horizontal railings. The upstream row
is braced back to the downstream row by u-ansverses and diagonals. Every
other main vertical of the rear row has to be sUutted. The sunt being
embedded a minimum of 2.4 m below bed. Betweeen the two rows, the
IRC : 89-1997 37
IRC : 89-1997 39
space is filled with brushwood branches, closely packed and tamped. The
may comprise alternate layers of 1.8 m thick brush wood weighted
filling
down by 0.6 m thick stones and sand bags. However, debris collects
upstream and the spur becomes sand bound and functions subsequently,
like and impermeable spur. To guard against scour occurring under such
conditions, it is desirable to protect the bed, both up-stream and down-
stream of the spur and around the nose with a stone apron, 0.9 m thick,
3 m wide along the shank and 6 m wide around nose.
7. RIVER BANK PROTECTION
Normally river bank protection is the prime responsibility of flood

control authorities. However, for protection of a road embankment running
along a river course or for protection of bridge abutment close to the river
edge, bank protection measures are sometimes required to be
adopted.
7.1. Causes of Bank Failure
For the purpose of design of bank protection, the causes of bank failure
have first to be identified as listed below:
(i) Washing away of soil particles from the bank by a strong current
(ii) Undermining the toe of the bank by eddies, currents, etc., followed by a collapse
of overhanging material deprived of support
(iii) Sloughing of slope when saturated with water by floods of long duration
(iv) Piping in sublayers due to movement of ground water towards the river which
carries away material with it.
7.2. Type of Protection Work
7.2.1. Indirect method: Spurs, porcupines, bed bars and studs/

dampeners.
7.2.1.1. Spurs: These have been discussed in great detail in

Chapter 6.
40 IRC : 89-1997
7.2.1.2. Porcupines: These are one particular type of permeable

groynes which help to induce siltation along the banks. These are made
of steel, bamboo or timber and are provided on a scouring bank in a line
normal to the flow. These spurs increase the roughness of the channel
thereby deflecting the eroding current away from the bank. In course of
time, vegetation grows within the jacks and action of spur is enhanced
further.
One type of porcupine, known as Kellner Jack comprises three steel

angles about 5 m long bolted together at the centre with the wire string
between the legs. A typical unit of porcupine looking from the bank is
shown in Fig. 7.1 (a).
Other type of porcupine used for similar purpose is made of bamboo.

These are made of 3 to 6 long bamboo of 75 m diameter tied together mm
at the cenU"e in the form of a space angle and are weighed down by tying
boulder stones packed in wire cage at the centre. A typical bamboo type
porcupine spur is shown in Fig.7.1 (b).
7.2.1.3. Bed Bars: Bed bars are submerged structures which help to
divide the flow horizontally. Flow above the top of the bed bars can be /
compared to flow over the submerged weir while flow below the top level
of the bar is obstructed by it and is directed towards the nose as in the
case of a full height spur. When the alignment of a bed bar is skewed,
a pressure gradient is set up. The bed bars can be placed either facing
towards upstream of the direction of flow or facing towards downstream
of the flow direction.
When the bed bar is facing towards upstream of the flow, the pressure
gradient developed helps to deposit sediment on the upstream side of the
bar and thus is useful for bank protection. This is shown in Fig. 7.2(a).
When the bed bar is facing towards downsU'eam of the flow, the
pressure gradient directs the bottom current away from the bank while
surface flow is directed towards the bank. This is provided upstream of
an offtake point for sediment exclusion and is shown in Fig. 7.2(b).
42 IRC : 89-1997
Downstream Facing
upstream Focing Bed Bar
Bed Bar
Fig. 7.2 (a): Upstream facing bed bar Fig. 7.2 (b): Downstream facing bed bar
(Para 7.2.1.3.)
IRC : 89-1997 43
7.2. 1 .4. Studs: These are short spurs provided between the regular long
spurs to provide local protection to the river bank. Thus the studs are useful
device of bank protection where embayments occur between the T-head
groynes. A typical design of stud is given in Fig. 7.3.
7.2.2. Direct method: Stone or concrete block revetment with properly

designed launching apron.
7.3. Before undertaking the work of permanent river bank protection,

some sort of temporary protection work must be done near the abutments
of the bridges located on the downstream. Only after observing the
behaviour of the river for sometimes permanent river bank protection
works should be taken up.
7.4. Design of Bank Protection
7.4.1. Grading: Trees, brushwood, grass, etc., have to be removed both

above and below the water level for clearing the bank. The cleared bank
slope has then to be graded so that it is flatter or at least equal to the angle
of repose of the soil under water so as to prevent sloughing. The landside
slope of the pitched bank made in the form of an embankment should be
flat enough to be stable. The top width of the embankment may be at least
1.5 m.
7.4.2. Free board: A minimum free board of 1.5 m above HFL is
generally provided.
7.4.3. Pitching: Same as for guide bunds (see para 5.3.5).
7.4.4. Filter material: Same as for guide bunds (see para 5.3.6).
Apron: As the attracting influence of the pitched bank depends

7.4.5.
on which scour occurs at its toe, the revetment has to be
the extent to
provided with elaborate toe protection in the form of launching apron. The
apron has to be designed for the maximum depth of scour likely to occur.
Generally, the maximum anticipated depth of scour is assumed to be 1.5
d^^ in a straight reach and at a moderate Jbend where d^^^ is the mean depth
IRC : 89-1997
SHANK NODF LAUNCHING

APRON
BOULDER SHANK
BOULDER NOSE
TO BE TIED TO
HIGH BANK j^rr^D LEVEL
1.30 mo
LAUNCHING APRON
STONES IN G.I. WIRE CRATES
SECTION A-A
0.5 TO I.OD,
0.5 TO I.OD
2/3 'T'm THICK STONE

PITCHING
PLAN
T'm THICK STONE PITCHING
lAUNCHING APRON
L.W.L.
BED LEVEL
I. l.fjP MAX 1.5D MAX
SECTION B-B
Fig. 7.3. Typical design of stud (Para 7.2.1.4)

IRC : 89-1997 45
of scour measured below highest flood level to be calculated as per IRC:

5. In the case of bank at severe bend, it isassumed as 1.75 dsm and in
the case of bank at right angled bend, it is assumed as 2.00 d^^^. The design
of launching apron should be made in the same way as for guide bunds
(see para 5.3.7.1.).
8. APPROACH ROAD PROTECTION
8.1. Different Categories of Approaches to Bridges - Protection

Thereof
Nature of protection to be provided for approach embankment of

highway bridges depends upon its location which can be divided into the
following broad categories:
(i) Approach embankments subjected to flooding but where the velocity of flow is
insignificant (not exceeding 1 m/sec.) to cause erosion.
(ii) Approach embankments which are under direct and frontal attack of the river flow
or otherwise subjected to velocity of flow exceeding 1 m/sec.
(iii) Approaches to bridges located in the beds of meandering rivers with large khadir
width requiring guide bunds, etc.
8.2. Approach Embankments subjected to Flooding but where the

Velocity of Flow is Insignificant (not exceeding 1 m/sec.) to
Cause Erosion
8.2.1. These cases occur where the river flows through flat terrain with
large spills. In such cases, bridges have to be provided with adequate
waterway to allow for quick and easy flow of the flood water so as to
prevent undue afflux and consequent submergence of valuable agricultural
and other lands. Further where the bed material is scourable, flooring with
curtain walls is often provided. In case spill-through type abutments are
provided in conjunction with the flooring, the sloping embankments in
front of the abutments, often extending into the river causing some
construction in the flow, need to be adequately protected against the
erosive attack of the flow across the embankment.
46 IRC : 89-1997
8.2.1.1. Apart from the above, cases may also arise wherein spill-
through type abutments may be adopted from economic consideration for
bridges with open foundations in non-scourable or rocky bed. In such cases
also, the approaches will need to be adequately protected. In either case,
the treatment should be on the lines discussed in para 8.2.2.
8.2.2. For a particular bank slope and velocity of flow, the thickness
of the slope pitching, size of the stone, its gradation and filter design should
be worked out in accordance with the recommendations made in para 5.3.
However, the designed values arrived at should not fall below those
indicated in Figs. 8.1(A) or 8.1(B).
8.2.2.1. The slope pitching should terminate either in a short apron at

the bed level as indicated in Fig. 8.1(A) or the pitched slope anchored
in the flooring/rock as shown However, along the length
in Fig.8.1 (B).
of the approach, the bank protection should begin and end at a stable
section on the approach subject to a minimum of 15 m. In cases where
the river banks have to be protected they should also be protected in a
similar manner and if such stable sections are not available, suitable
terminal U"eatment of pitching should be provided at the ends as shown
in Fig.8.2.
8.3. Approach Embankments which are under Direct and Frontal

attack of the River or otherwise subjected to velocity of flow
exceeding 1 m/sec.
8.3.1. These cases occur where the flow is confined within banks during
ordinary floods but spills during high floods without meandering. In such
cases, waterways provided are often less than the bank to bank width of
the river, which is very wide during high floods and the approaches to
There will
the bridges protrude into the river tending to act like spurs.
be parallel flow with increase embankment. The
in velocity along the
distance of the embankment so affected depends directly upon the
percentage of constriction adopted and the angle of crossing. Large
constrictions will not only result in excessive cost of protection consequent
to deepening of bed but would also entail deeper foundation of bridges,
as well as change in channel profile both upstream and downsU"eam. The
final decision as to the percentage of constriction to be adopted should
IRC : 89-1997
FILTER BLANKET (min 0.15m thick)
J DESIGN HIGH WATER LEVEL
SJONE BLANKET (min. 0.3m thick)

^ 1 V2:1 SLOPE
0.80m min.
A-STONE BLANKET AND TOE DETAIL

'Recommended for alluvial bed without flooring;
FILTER BLANKET (min 0.15m thick)
HIGH WATER LEVEL

FREE BOARD ^ DESIGN
STONE BU\NKET (min. 0.3m THICK)
PUCCA FLOOR TOP ROCK
/vvv WW min. 1 .5m
B - STONE BLANKET AND TOE TRENCH DETAIL

(Recommended for floored structure/rocky bed)
Fig. 8.1. Typical sections of stone slope protection (Para 8.2.2)
D/S
PITCHING
y//////A
APRON ^:
u/s
PUVN SHOWING APPROACH EMBANKMENT
SECTION B-B (PLAN)
Fig. 8.2. Details of cut-off at terminals of rip-rap blanket (Para 8.2.2.1)

48 IRC : 89-1997
be such that the cost of the bridge plus the protection to be provided
isthe minimum. The various parameters that affect the design of protective
works of the approaches are as under:
(i) Intensity of discharge
(ii) Angle of crossing

(iii) Velocity of flow
(iv) Scour pattern around the approaches; and

(v) Soil in the embankment fill.
8.3.2. Under the above conditions, the approach embankment protrud-

ing into the river is under the direct attack of the river flow and this needs
to be protected like a spur. It is seen that the scour reduces as one moves
along the spur towards the bank for which the extent of protection could
be curtailed towards the bank. The polar diagrams given in Fig. 8.3 show
the centre line of spur as base and the ratio of deepest scour depth to mean
depth of scour as ordinates. These ratios can be made use of to ascertain
the maximum scour depth once the mean depth of scour is known.
Thereafter, once the points of deepest scour are known, the apron widths
for the approach embankments can be designed in accordance with the
provisions contained in para 5.3.
8.3.3. Another aspect is the length along the approach embankments
which needs to be protected. Th& lengdi on the upstream and downstream

side of the spurs needing protection bears a linear relationship with the
angle of spur as shown in Fig. 8.4. On the analogy of the approach
embankments acting as short spurs, the upstream and downstream lengths
needing protection may be divided into two categories as shown in Fig.
8.3 viz., category *X' extending from the bank to the point of mean depth
of scour and category Y' extending from the point of mean depth of scorn-
'
to the point of deepest scour towards the deep channel. The portion
covered under category Y' could be assessed based on the corresponding
*
values of the lengths of spurs requiring to be protected, i.e., *L^' given

as fraction of total length *Lj' of approach embankment projecting into
the river and obtained by taking the angle of spur to the direction of flow
and reading the values from Fig. 8.4. The length of the approach Lj-L^
gives the length of the approach under category 'X'. Design of the slope
pitching, filter backing and apron under category *X' and category 'Y'
IRC : 89-1997 49
crÂ. r IÂX. SCOUR DFPTH

SCALE MEAN DEPTH OF bUUUR
Lx = LENGTH OF SPUR REQUIRED TO BE PROTECTED BY AN APRON.

L, = TOTAL LENGTH OF PROJECTION OF SPUR INTO CHANNEL
type and extent

Fig. 8.3. Polar diagram of different incUnation of a straight spur showing
of projection (Para 8.3.2.) t
in para 5.3. The

could be made on the basis of recommendations given
one and its
apron width for category *X' may be designed as a nominal
required the end of category 'Y*
width^reduced uniformly from that at
to 2.5 m (minimum).
50 IRC : 89-1997
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00 1 1 0 1 20 1 30 1 40 1 50
ANGLE OF SPUR TO THE DIRECTION OF FLOW IN DEGREES
Fig. 8.4. Length requiring protection as a function of the spur inclination (Para 8.3.3.)
8.4. Approaches Beds of Meandering

to Bridges located in the
Rivers with large Khadir width requiring Guide Bunds, etc.
8.4.1. These cases pertain to rivers which meander in the alluvial plains
and have large Khadir widths even under ordinary flood conditions. From
economic considerations, it is, however, imperative to provide waterways
much less than the width between ends of the Khadir of the river. This
is achieved with the help of guide bunds, the treatment of which has been
discussed in para 5, which restrict the river to flow within an artificial
gorge. The embankment beyond the Khadir

section of the approach
portion is subjected to flooding but diere is no significant flow to cause
scour due to parallel flow or draw down conditions and balancing of water
on both sides of the embankment. For these conditions to be satisfied,
however, the alignment of the approach embankment and its distance from
the worst possible embayment loop should be fixed as indicated in paras
5.2.1.1 and 5.2.3.1 respectively.
8.4.2. In view of still water conditions, nominal slope pitching, e.g.,
0.3 m thick may be provided for embankment height upto 7.5 m increased
to 0.5 m in the lower portion where height exceeds 7.5 m. The minimum
its
weight of stones used shall be 40 kg.
8.4.3. The design of filter backing is dependent on the voids in the stone
\ pitching and the gradation of bank material. For the nominal nature of
IRC : 89-1997 51
pitching suggested in the preceding sub-para, base filter of 150 mm

thickness may do.
The slope pitching should extend well above the pond level taking
8.4.4.
into account the exigencies of abnormal floods and wave action. The free
board in any case, should not be less than 1 .2 m. A higher free board would
be advisable in case of aggrading rivers.
8.4.5. The pitched slopes should be provided with nominal toe

protection in view of very little velocity. At any rate, toe walls should
be avoided and nominal apron of at least 2.50 m width and 0.50 m
thickness should be provided at bed level. No protection of downstream
slope is ordinarily necessary and provision of turfing may suffice.
In case other types of pitching and filter materials as well as toe

protection measures are required to be adopted as per site conditions, a
suitable design as recommended in para 5.3 may be adopted.
8.4.6. For construction of approach embankments within the khadir area
no borrow pits shall be permitted within the area bounded by the guide
bund on one side, natural bank on the other side and the lines drawn
tangentially to the top of upstream and downstream curved heads parallel
to approach embankment. Moreover, the edge of the nearest borrow pits
shall be not less than 200 metre from the toe of the embankment both
on the upstream and downstream side in any case.
8.4.7. As far as possible, no opening should be provided in the bridge

approaches falling in the khadir portion of the river. However, if these
are unavoidable, only floored structures should be provided with revet-

ment in immediate approaches on either side of the structure. These
structures should be provided with sluice gates which should be kept
closed during flood season.
8.4.8. Where the approach embankment in the Khadir terminates in a

marginal bund or at any protective embankment/afflux bund constructed
by irrigation/flood conU"ol department, the adequacy of the latter within
the zone of influence of embay ment should be checked and if need be,
the same should be got suitably raised/strengthened in that stretch.
52 IRC : 89-1997
8.5. Special Consideration
The aforesaid guidelines do not cover the provision where the approach
embankments are under the attack of sea waves or tidal bores, etc. In such
cases, the protective measures may be evolved based on expert hterature/
model experiments. Stability of embankments to be protected should be
ensured on the basis of local experience and/or slope stability analysis
related to appropriate soil data.
9. DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING AND CONTROL

WORKS IN SUB-MONTANE REGIONS
The rivers in sub-montane regions do not present a regular pattern of
meanders as in the case of alluvial rivers in plains. The bed slopes of the
rivers in the hilly regions are very steep which create tremendous
and bed materials being unable to withstand such velocities are
velocities
scoured and transported down the river. They carry very heavy charge
of coarse sand, shingle and boulders, which are accentuated by large slips
and landslides that take place in the hill slopes and result in heaps of
deposits on flatter slopes. In the North-Eastem part of this country, it is
further aggravated by the seismic character of the Himalayan zone. Due

to seismic disturbances the friable rock loosens and landslides occur and
the sediment load of the Himalayan rivers increases substantially. The
channels become shallow and owing to the reduced velocity, obstructions
in the form of heaps result in diversion of the channel itself. As the river
bed upsU'eam through the bridge itself rises, the flood cannot pass through
the bridge quickly and it heads up-above the bridge submerging low lying
areas. The bed level of the river upsuream of the bridge thus rises
progressively with consequent rise in the flood levels resulting in increase
in flooding of areasupstream of the bridge. The protection works for sub-
montane regions merit special consideration besides the points abready
covered in earlier paras. It is, therefore, necessary that protection works
for bridges in sub-montane regions are decided judiciously by the
Engineer-in-charge keeping in view the site conditions and other relevant
factors.
9.2. Most of the rivers in sub-montane terrain are subject to the

phenomenon of rolling boulders during high floods. Huge boulders hitting
IRC : 89-1997 53
the piers and abutments may cause enormous damage. In such cases, heavy
protection around piers/abutments may be necessary which may be in the
form of stone facing or steel plate lining. The same may be decided by
the Engineer-in-charge keeping in view the site conditions. In case heavy
floating debris is anticipated, necessary traps may be provided to prevent
die same from reaching the structure.
9.3. Permeable spurs and toe walls with launching apron may also be
considered for protection works.
10. FLOOR PROTECTION
10.1. For bridges where adoption of shallow foundations becomes

economical by restricting the scour floor protection to bridges has to be
provided. The floor protection will comprise of rigid flooring widi curtain
walls and flexible apron so as to check scour, washing away or disturbance
by piping action, etc. Usually performance of similar existing works is
the best guide for finalizing the design of new works. However, the
following minimum specification for floor protection shall at least be
followed while designing new structures subject to the general stipulation
diat post protection works velocity under the structure does not exceed
2 m/s and the intensity of discharge is limited to 3 mVm.
10.2. Suggested Specifications
10.2.1. Excavation for laying foundation and protection works shall be

carried out as per specifications under proper supervision. Before laying
die foundation and protection works the excavated trench shall be
thoroughly inspected by the Engineer-in-charge to ensure that:
(a) There are no loose pockets, unfilled depressions left in the trench.
(b) The soil at the founding level is properly compacted to true lines and level.
(c) All concrete and other elements are laid in dry bed.
10.2.2. Rigid flooring: The rigid flooring shall be provided under the
bridge and shall extend for a distance of at least 3 m on upstream side
it
and 5 m on down stream side of the bridge. However, in case the splayed
54 IRC : 89-1997
wing walls of the structure are likely to be longer the flooring shall extend
upto the line connecting the end of wing walls on either side of the bridge.
10.2.2.1. The top of flooring shall be kept 300 mm below the lowest
bed level.
10.2.2.2. Flooring shall consist of 150 mm thick flat stone/bricks

on edge in cement mortar 1:3 laid over 300 mm thick cement concrete
M-15 grade laid over a layer of 150 mm thick cement concrete M-10
grade. Joints at suitable spacings (say 20 m) may be provided.
10.2.3. Curtain walls: The rigid flooring shall be enclosed by curtain

walls (tied to the wing walls) with a minimum depth below floor level
of 2 m on upstream side and 2.5 m on downstream side. The curtain wall
shall be in cement concrete M-10 grade/brick/stone masonry in cement
mortar 1:3. The rigid flooring shall be continued over the top width or
curtain walls.
10.2.4. Flexible apron
10.2.4.1. Rexible apron 1 m thick comprising loose stone boulders

(weighing not less than 40 Kg) shall be provided beyond the curtain walls
for aminimum distance of 3 m on upstream side and 6 m on downstream
side.Where required size stones are not economically available, cement
concrete blocks or stones in wire crates may be used in place of isolated
stones.
Wherever scour is restricted by provision of flooring/flexible

10.2.5.
apron, the work of flooring/apron etc., should be simultaneously com-
pleted alongwith the work on foundations so that the foundation work
completed and left to itself is not endangered.
11. MODEL STUDIES
11.1. Objects of Model Studies
The river has its own peculiarities depending on its size, load
characteristics, the terrain through which it flows and the nature of the
IRC : 89-1997 55
banks. Hence, each case is to be considered individually. In spite of our

efforts to improve the design, we are still to go a long way before
understanding the absolute truth of nature and till then one has to cater
for unknown parameters with a factor of safety. It is here that model
studies offer a handy tool at supplementing the work of designer and by

providing an insight into conditions likely to obtain in the prototype.
11.2. Situations Warranting Model Studies
11.2.1. River flow being a very complex phenomenon, eludes easy

analysis in many cases. is more so in the case of bridges on the alluvial
This
rivers where normal waterway is constricted. In some cases where
river
the bridges are not located on the straight reaches or where it is required
to study the effects of other structures viz., an existing bridge, a weir, a
new dam or flood embankments or ghats along the river, it is not possible
to visualise the river behaviour accurately in respect of flow pattern,
discharge distribution, etc., after the construction of the su*ucture. In all
such cases, model studies will be helpful.
11.2.2. In cases where the cost of a new bridge project or additional

river training works for existing bridge is substantial, model studies are
advisable. Model studies in such cases cost a very insignificant percentage
of the total cost of project and have the added advantage of suggesting
improvements which may sometimes lead to reduction in the cost of the
suaicture.
1 1 .2.3. The importance of the bridge viz., its location on strategic routes
or its proximity to major industrial complexes, towns, etc. is yet another
consideration for resorting to model studies.
11.2.4. In the situations warranting model studies mathematical

model studies may also be carried out as per guidelines indicated in
AppendiX'3.
11.3. Design Aspects Requiring Model Studies
11.3.1. Model studies may be required for one or more design aspects
56 ^ IRC: 89-1997
f ..
as mentioned below.
11.3.1.1. Selection of site and alignment: Selection of suitable site and

alignment of bridge in relation to river configuration and flow.
11.3.1.2. Waterway: Adequacy of bridge waterway in relation to
velocities, flow distribution, afflux and location of guide bunds.
11.3.1.3. Guide bunds
(i) Layout
(ii) Length of upstream and downstream parts in relation to velocities and
discharge distribution across the bridge and in relation to all possible
conditions of approach of the river for safety of guide bunds. The radius
of curvature of upstream mole head of guide bund to ensure smooth flow
conditions.
(iii) Water levels behind the guide bunds and along the approaches.
(i v) Maximum scour level at suitable points along the length of guide bund.
11.3.1.4. River bank protection: Works like spurs, bank pitching etc.,
required if any, upstream or downstream sides of the bridge.
11.3.1.5. Bridge piers: Afflux at the bridge piers, scour around the piers
and at the river bed and related protective measures.
1 1.3.1.6. To sUidy the effects of oîsting or future structures like dams,

ghats, spurs, embankments, etc., on bridges.
11.4. Data Required for Model Studies
The following details including ground survey, hydraulic and sediment

data are required for model studies.
11.4.1. Report: This should include :
(1) Enunciation of the problem, its history and probable causes, if any.
(2) Previous remedial measures taken, if any, their details and behaviour.
IRC : 89-1997 57
(3) Details along with design and hydraulic calculations of existing/

proposed structures such as dam, weir, bridge, causeway, embank-
ments, etc., which affect the river regime, in or near the problem
reach of the river.
(4) Photographs depicting behaviour of the river during floods, and
(5) In case of erosion problems:
(i) The stage of the river at which the erosion is most pronounced; and
(ii) Whether damage to bank occurs while gauge is rising or falling.
11.4.2. Survey data
(1) Index map: As indicated in para 4.1(i).
(2) River survey plan: As indicated in para 4.1 (ii), this plan should
show:
(i) A close traverse covering the entire reach to be modelled

(ii) Latitudes and longitudes
(iii) Dry weather channel
(iv) Formation of rapids, pools, etc.
(v) Position of existing and proposed structures like bridges, dams, weirs,
barrages, ghats, spurs and other pucca structures, etc.
(vi) Location of the problem area, and
(vii) Various channels in case of a braided river.
(3) Aerial Survey plan: Same as indicated in para 4.5(v).
(4) Cross sections: In addition to data as indicated in para 4.1(iv), the

cross-sections should cover the entire reach to be modelled (cross section
interval would be specified in individual cases as this will depend on model
scales). Positions of cross sections with their zero chainages should be
indicated on survey plan referred to in para 11.4.2(2).
(5) Contour plan: Same as indicated in para 4.1 (iii). This should,
however, cover the entire reach mentioned in para 11.4.2(2).
58 IRC : 89-1997
(6) Previous river surveys super-imposed on a plan indicating changes

in the river course, if any.
Note: All levels shall be connected to the G.T.S. Bench Mark.
11.4.3. Hydraulic data
(1) Daily gauge and discharge data at all existing stream gauging sites
for one or more flood seasons. If such sites are absent, a minimum of three
new stations should be located, one each at either end of the reach to be
modelled and one in the middle and data collected and furnished for at
least one flood season. The positions of all gauge stations should be shown
on plan mentioned in para 11.4.2(2) and their co-ordinates given.
(2) River cross-section at discharge site, indicating nature of river bed

(sandy, boulders or rocky) and sample discharge calculations.
(3) Flood data: Same as indicated in paras 4.2 (vi), 4.2 (vii) and 4.2 (viii).
(4) RLS of flood marks on structures and depth of spill flow and its
course.
(5) Discharge disU"ibution in various channels at important stages.
(6) Catchment characteristics: As indicated in para 4.2 (i) to (iv).
Note: All gauge and discharge sites should coincide with cross sections and should
be marked on survey plan referred to in para 11.4.2(2).
11.4.4. Sediment data
(1) Bed material data: Samples may be taken at three sections one
at either end and one in the centre of river reach under consideration. These
samplesmay be analysed for determination of particle size disU'ibution
and mean diameter.
(2) Bore hole data: Same as indicated in para 4.3(ii).

IRC : 89-1997 59
(3) Bank material data: Material of which both banks are made is
tobe collected on the same sections from which bed samples are collected
and/or in the reach where active erosion if noticed as indicated in para
4.2(xiv). The sample may be analysed for determination of following
properties.
(i) Particle size distribution and weighted mean diameter
(ii) Field density
(iii) Moisture content at field density
(iv) Plasticity index and liquid limit
(v) Cohesion and angle of internal friction, and
(vi) Angle of repose under water, if material is non-cohesive.
(4) Suspended sediment data: In addition to data as indicated in para

4.3 (iii), the following data is also required:
Suspended sediment data may be collected using suitable samplers near

the central gauge station in the reach. Samples should be collected at
medium and high flood stages. Samples may be analysed to estimate
percentage of coarse, medium and fine fractions.
Note: Position of bed-bank material samples, bore-holes and sampling particles

should be marked on survey plan referred to in para 11.4.2(2).
11.4.5. Other data
(1) Lines of flow at specific flood stages, low, medium and high.
(2) Design discharge, maximum flood discharge, waterway pro-

posed, deepest scour and afflux.
(3) The drawing of piers, abutments, etc. and their foundation.
(4) Design and drawings of guide bunds.

60 IRC : 89-1997
11.4.6. Terms of reference
(1) Terms of reference should be stated clearly by sponsoring authority.
(2) In case reach to be modelled includes tiributaries or branches or

confluence of two rivers, similar data would be required for each of the
concerned reaches.
11.5. Model Limitations
11.5.1. While some type of problems can be solved with the aid of
model studies with a high degree of accuracy, certain aspects of studies
connected witii the rivers flowing in alluvium present difficulties. In the
mobile bed river models, the results lack scalar transformation to the
prototype. They cannot, therefore, be applied quantitatively but can be
Some of these aspects are dQschbed in Appendix-
regarded as qualitative.
4. model techniques have been devised to reduce the gap between
Suitable
model results and natural occurrence showing what may be reasonably
expected from the model results and what should not be expected. Models
are always helpful in that, they make it easier to visualise the problerhs
and evaluate the felative affects of different treatments making allowance
for model limitations, but the success depends primarily on correct
diagnosis and evaluation of all factors causing change.
11.5.2. In the final analysis, the validity of results of model study and
interpretation of its results depends on experience, sound judgement and
reasoning of the experimenter.
12. INSPECTION
12.1. Purpose
The successful functioning of any river training and protective work

depends to a great extent on its proper design, construction and mainte-
nance. After completion of river training and protective works, a close watch
must be kept on their performance so that timely action, wherever necessary,
can be taken to avoid major damages and difficulties at a later date.
IRC : 89-1997 61
12.2. Frequency and Scope
The protective works like guide bunds spurs, pitching around abut-
ments, etc., shall be inspected.
(a) about a month before the flood season
(b) during the floods and
(c) immediately after the floods
The inspection before the floods shall be carried out to ensure that all
fl-ood protection measures have been carried out as per design in case of
new works. In case of existing works it will be ensured that these are intact
and in position as per design and drawings.
Inspection during the floods shall be carried out to have information

about HFL obtained, scouring of bed, and launching of apron etc., so as
to take corrective measures as soon as required. The inspecting officer
must look for aspects like launching of the apron, settling of the slopes,
piping action, improper drainage of the rain water causing the slope to
be disturbed, impact of waves, carrying away of the smaller particles and
thus disturbing the slope, any undue scour at the nose of the bund and/
or at the toe of the pitching and give his recommendations to ensure that
the protective works function adequately. The quantity of reserve stones
available at site for meeting emergent situations shall be checked before
floods against specified quantity and duly reported.
The floor protection shall also be inspected before, during and after
the floods to ascertain the extent of scour, cracking and damage of the
any and adequacy of the cut off walls and apron, etc. Specific
floor, if
recommendations for augmentation of the existing provisions, if any, shall
also be given.
12.3. Points to be Kept in View
(a) Most careful paU-oUing and watch is necessary during each flood
season especially the first flood season to detect any weakness
in construction and to take corrective action promptly.
62 IRC : 89-1997
(b) The Engineer-in-charge should acquaint himself with the past

history of the protective works and the behaviour of the river as
it is only when he possesses all this knowledge that he can deal
effectively with any problem that may arise.
(c) It is advisable to have a reserve quantity of stone which can be

used in case of an emergency. A part of the stone may be stacked
on the guide bund itself and a part in the nearest store from
where it can be loaded and transported quickly to site. The
quantity of reserve boulders would depend upon site conditions.
However, 2 per cent of the total quantity of boulders used in apron
and slope pitching may be kept as reserve in stock for emergent
use.
(d) It is necessary that during the flood season the field Engineers
remain vigilant and keep a careful watch on the behaviour of
the river as it affects the training works. During flood season it
is advisable to have regular patrolling of the guide bund and the

approach banks and proper action taken when any abnormal
swirls, eddies or scour are apprehended. Any small rain cuts
or displacement by waves along the guide bund or the approach
bank must be repaired immediately as there is always the
danger of a small cut developing into a major disaster, if not,
attended to.
(e) Any settlement in the bank or bridge or slip in the slope needs
immediate attention.
(f) During winter or dry weather a survey of the river course has to
be carried out to a sufficient distance on the upsu*eam and
downstream of bridges with guide bunds.
(g) Soundings preferably with the help of an echo sounder shall be

taken near the guide bund when the river is in flood.
IRC : 89-1997 63
13. MAINTENANCE ASPECTS OF RIVER

TRAINING AND PROTECTIVE WORKS
13.1. Proper maintenance of river training and protective works is
extremely important as damages to them can be more dangerous than

damages to bridges where no protective works are provided. It is,
therefore, important that maintenance Engineers are made aware of the

design principles underlying the various provisions made in different
protective works as well as likely causes and nature of damages so that
their significance is very well understood and the maintenance is carried
out effectively. They should also acquaint themselves with the past history
of the bridges, their protective works and behaviour of the river as only
when they possess all this knowledge that they can deal effectively with
any maintenance problem.
Keeping the above in view the list of important records which should
be available at site for proper maintenance has been drawn. But this list
is by no means exhaustive and other records as necessary in each
individual case should also be kept at site.
(i) Longitudinal section, cross section and plan indicating the course of the channel.
(ii) 'Plan showing location of bridge.
(iii) Salient design details of bridge and protective works.
(iv) Plan indicating layout and dimensions of the embankment slope pitching, filter
layers, cut off walls turfing launching apron, drains etc. and details of materials
used in the construction grading, Liquid Limit, Plasticity Index Proctor Density and
Optimum Moisture Content.
(v) Record of observed High Flood Level, discharge, velocity of flow, obliquity of
flow, functioning of the bridge and protective works including changes in the flow-
pattern. For important bridges gauge stations should be established to measure the
discharge.
(vi) Record of River Survey details upto a distance of 5 times the length of the bridge
(or 1 km whichever is more) on upstream side and for a distance equal to 3 times
the length of the bridge on downstream side alongwith cross sections at suitable
intervals for the last ten years.
(vii) Record by way of photographic evidence of the nature and extent of damages
observed in the past and the remedial measures undertaken.
64 IRC : 89-1997
(viii) Copy of the model study report if model tests were got carried out for location of
bridge and protective work.
(ix) A record of satellite imagery for important bridges updated every five years
through National Remote Sensing agency. In case any abnormal situation is
observed then additional satellite imageries even at lesser intervals should be

taken and record maintained.
13.2. The Maintenance Work can be Classified under two

Categories:
(a) Pre-monsoon Maintenance Work
(b) Monsoon Maintenance Work
a) Pre-Monsoon Maintenance Work
(i) Repairing or reconditioning the existing protective works to the original design
section in advance so that these can withstand the pressure of the ensuing flood.
(ii) Ensuring adequate free board to cater for any unexpected settlement with the
aggradation of the river bed by wave action or occurrence of flood of higher
intensity than the designed one, without any adverse effect on the performance
of bridge and protective works.
(iii) up all hollows and depressions in the embankment of the guide bunds
Filling
wherever existing and ramming earth after clearing the site of all loose and
vegetal materials.
(iv) Providing a cover of soil containing 10 per cent to 15 per cent of clay well
rammed and rolled where the filled top material is sandy or silty.
(v) Rodents and other animals make holes, cavities and tunnels through and under
the embankment of the guide bunds. These are sources of danger causing
excessive seepage which may give rise to serious breeches during flood period.
Such holes should be carefully located, examined and provided with inverted
filter, filled with earth and rammed. Alternatively such holes can be filled with
well rammed stiff clay.
(vi) Planting of trees on the top of guide bunds should not be permitted because their
roots tend to loosen the core of the guide bunds. Deep rooted bushy shrubs or
IRC : 89-1997 65
short grass or both growing on the slopes of embankments is good protection

against erosion and wave wash. Generally, the slopes should be turfed with
grass sods.
(vii) Examining necessity of Protective measures by revetment/rip-rap, launching

apron, floor protection, etc. and carrying out the same before onset of monsoon,
,
for bridge foundations, approach embankments and guide bunds which are in
imminent danger of erosion.
(viii) Top of guide bund wherever those are designed to carry vehicular traffic
should be kept in good condition so that they effectively serve the purpose of
transport of materials and inspection both during the monsoon and pre-
monsoon periods.
(ix) All Departmental vehicles, boats and launches should be kept operational. All
tools and plants including torch lights hurricane lamps and spades, etc. , and fire
fighting articles as well as materials for erecting temporary sheds at the work
sites for workers should be arranged and stored in a suitable place.
(x) Advance collection of sand bags, stone boulders, about 2 per cent of total
quantity used in apron GI wire for making wire crates, for use in the event of
emergency.
(xi) To take soundings near the bridge and protective works particularly at locations
where the river is showing a tendency to meander to compare actual observed
sour near bridge foundations and protective works with designed scour.
(xii) Proper communication system should be installed for quick transmission of

messages to higher authorities.
(b) Monsoon Maintenance Work
(i) During Monsoon very careful maintenance of the Protective Works is required
as the flood water of river threatens, safety of the guide bunds, spurs and
approach embankments. It assumes further importance in case of new guide
bunds. The establishment required to be engaged for proper maintenance will
depend upon the importance and behaviour of the river. As soon as the water
touches the guide bunds and shows further rising trend in its level, a control
room should be set up and round the clock patrolling should start. This should
continue until water recedes the Low Water Level. During this period inspection
by senior official should also be carried out.
IRC : 89-1997
(ii) Special vigilance is necessary towards the country side of the guide bund to
detect any formation of boils due to seepage which call forimmediate attention.
(iii) In the event of abnormal rise in water level threatening the washing away of the
guide bund, the level of the top of the guide bund may be suitably raised. The
common method of building up the height is by providing dowel on the river
side of the top of the guide bunds with bags filled with earth. These bags should
be half full only so that these will fit closely against each other. Sand should not
be used for filling the sacks, if clay or loamy soil is available.
(iv) During floods scour depth should be measured daily and in case it exceeds
designed scour depth dumping of boulders in the scour hole should be resorted
to with large size boulders as well as boulders in wire crates.
(v) In case of displacement of slope pitching/filter media the same should be

immediately restored wherever necessary with sand bags/stone boulders/stone
in wire crates/ cement concrete blocks.
( vi) After the flood season when the water level has fallen, cross-sections should be
taken at every 50 m interval along the length of the guide bund or spurs by
probings wherever necessary to ascertain the position of the stone in the slope
and the apron. The cross-sections will indicate the progress in launching of the
apron, its ultimate position and reveal any defect that may require remedy. The
cross-sections taken after each flood season should be compared with the
original cross-sections, to examine the variations, if any. The damages to
protection work should be restored to its original position by dumping further
quantity of loose stone of required size or boulders in wire crates wherever
necessary. Damaged wire crates should be replaced.
(vii) Model tests and field observations have confirmed that for satisfactory launching
of apron the bed materials should scour easily and evenly. If an apron is laid on
the river bed consisting of alternate layers of sand and clay, the sand layers scour
and clayey layers subside causing uneven cliffs as a result the apron cannot
launch uniformly. Stones fall in the river bed and are washed away by the water
current. Therefore, clayey beds cannot be used as dependable foundations for
aprons. In places where clayey beds are unavoidable sufficient quantity of
reserve stone at hand should be kept to fill the uneven depressions and scour
holes as well as to repair the other damages.
(viii) The launching apron if damaged should be repaired by diverting the flow, if
necessary. During such repairs the portion launched should not be disturbed and
new crated sausage work should be provided over it.
IRC : 89-1997 67
(ix) In the case of major damages like slope failure or major changes in river
behaviour it may be necessary to close the bridge to traffic pending restoration
on immediate basis which should be based on re-assessment of the damages
noticed, design parameters past and present.
(x) In the case of bridges and protective works which are in imminent danger every
year, permanent remedial measures should be finalised only on the basis of
model studies.
68 IRC : 89-1997
Appendix 1(a)
(Para 4.6.3)
FORMULA FOR COMPUTATION OF AFFLUX
Afflux is approximately calculated using Molesworth formula given below:
Where
*hj = afflux in metre
V - average velocity of river prior to obstruction in metre sec.
A = unobstructed sectional area of river in sq. metre.
Aj = sectional area of river at obstruction in sq. metre.
69
Appendix 1(b)
(Sub'para 4.6.3)
METHOD FOR COMPUTATION OF BACKWATER OR

AFFLUX AT BRIDGE PIERS FOR RIVERS CARRYING
DISCHARGE MORE THAN 3000 mVsec.
1. BACKWATER OR AFFLUX
The profile along the centre of the stream at the bridge site is given in Figs. 1 and
2. The rise in water level above normal water surface at Section 1 due to construction of
the bridge is denoted by h*^ and is called the backwater of afflux.
— W.S. ALONG BANK

SECT SECT SECT SECT
(3)
2g JSOL,.,
"
A p| A h
NORMAL
WS FLOW- ACTUAL
PÂCTU/' WS ON
U5-4-
PROFILE OF STREAM Q
PLAN AT BRIDGE
Hg. 1. Normal crossing- wing wall and abutments

PIAN AT BRIDGE
Fig. 2. Normal crossing-spill-through abutments

71
2. EXPRESSION FOR COMPUTATION OF BACKWATER (AFFLUX)
A practical expression for backwater has been formulated by applying the principle
of conservation of energy between the point of maximum backwater upstream from the
bridge Section 1 and a point downstream from the bridge at which normal stage has been
re-established in Section 4 (Figs. 1 A and 2 A). The expression is reasonably valid if the
channel in the vicinity of the bridge is essentially straight, the cross sectional area of the
stream is fairly uniform, the gradient of the bottom is aproximately constant between
sections 1 and 4, the flow is free to contract and expand, there is no appreciable scour
of the bed in the constriction and the flow is in the sub-critical range.
The expression for computation of backwater h*j (in FPS units) upstream from a bridge
constricting the flow, formulated on the basis of model studies is as follows:
To compute backwater, it is necessary to obtain the approximate value of h*j by using

the first part of expression (1)
h\ = K' a2
2g
— (1-1)
The value of Aj in the second part of the expression (1) which depends on h*j can then
be determined and the second terms of expression (1) evaluated.
3. BACKWATER COEFFICIENT
3.1. The value of the overall backwater coefficient K* is dependent on the following:
(i) The bridge opening ratio M, i.e., the degree of stream constriction involved,
expressed as the ratio of the flow which can pass unimpeded through the bridge
constriction to the total flow of the river and type of bridge abutments.
(ii) Number, size, shape and orientation of piers in the constriction.
(iii) Eccentricity or asymmetric position of bridge with respect to the valley cross-
section; and
(iv) Skew (bridge crosses stream at other than 90^ angle).
3.2. Base coefficient (K^^): is the backwater coefficient for a bridge in which only
the bridge opening ratio M is considered. Knowing the type of abutments, shape of wing
walls and the value of M, use Fig. 3 for estimating K^^.
72
0.3 0.4 0.5

M
Fig. 3. Backwater coefficient base curves (sub-critical flow;
3.3. Effect of Piers (normal crossing)
The introduction of piers in a bridge causes constriction and consequential backwater.

This incremental backwater coefficient is designated as A Kp,which can be obtained from
Fig.4. By entering chart-A with the proper value of J and reading upwards to the proper
pier type, AK is read from the ordinate. Obtain the correction factor, O from Chart-B in
Fig.4 for opening ratios (M) other than unity. The incremental backwater coefficient is
then
A Kp = a A K ... (2)
3.4. Effect of Piers (skewed crossings)
In the case of skewed crossings, the effect of piers is calculated as for normal crossings
except for the computation of J, An^ and M. The pier area for a skewed crossings Ap is
the sum of the individual pier areas normal to the general direction of flow as illustrated
in Fig. 4. An^ for a skewed crossing is based on the projected length of the bridge b^ cos
(j) and also includes the area occupied by the piers. The value of J is the pier area. Ap,
divided by the projected gross area of the bridge constriction, both measured normal to
73
based on
Wp length b Wp Width of pier normal to
flow - feet
hn2 Height of pier exposed

to flow - feet
N Number of piers
NORMAL CROSSING
N
0
Ap
^J> w
P
h
n2
total projected
area of piers normal to

flow - square feet
'{]
Wd ^
WD /
/
fA^^ based on Gross water cross section
in constriction bosed on
^ -I p Wp ^ length b COS 0
normal water surface
(use projected bridge
length normal to flow
for skew crossings)
SKEWED
CROSSING
NOTE : SWAY BRACING SHOULD .BE INCLUDED IN WIDTH OF PILE BENTS
02 .04 .06 .08 .10 0.12 0.14 0.16 O.li
Fig. 4. Incremental backwater coefficient for piers

74
the general direction of flow.The computation of M for skewed crossing is also based
on the projected length of bridge.
3.5. Effect of Eccentricity
The magnitude of the incremental backwater coefficient A Ke accounting for the effect
of eccentricity can be calculated from Fig. 5. Eccentricity is defined as 1 minus the ratio
of the lesser to the greater discharge outside the projected length of the bridge or
Qc Qb
r
Where Qc <Q3 or
Where Qd < Qc
0.9 1.0
Fig. 5. Incremental backwater coefficient for eccentricity

75
Qc
e = 1 - where Qc < Qa.
Qa
Qa
Or e = 1 - where Qc > Qa ... (3)
Qc
(if the cross section is extremely asymmetrical so that Qa < 20 per cent of Qc or vice
versa, the afflux coefficient will be some what larger than for comparable value of M shown
on the base curve).
3.6. Effect of Skew
The method of computation of incremental backwater coefficient AK^ for the skewed
crossing differs from that of normal crossing in the following respects:
The bridge opening ratio M

is computed on the projected length of bridge rather than
on the length along the centre-line. The length is obtained by projecting the bridge opening
upstream parallel to the general direction of flood flow as shown in Fig.6. The general
direction of flow means the direction of flood flow as it existed previous to the placement
of the embankments in the stream. The length of the constricted opening is bs cos (j) and
the area An^ is based on this length. The velocity head, V^J2% to be substituted in
expression (1) is based on the projected area Axi^. Fig. 7 may be used for determining
the incremental backwater coefficient (AK^) for the effect of skew, for wing walls and
spill-through type abutments. It varies with opening ratio M, the angle of skew of the bridge
(j), with the general direction of flood flow and the alignment of the abutment faces as
indicated by the sketches in Fig. 7.
3.7. K* (Total backwater coefficient for sub-critical flow)

= K,(Rg. 3) + AKp(Fig.4)
+ AK^ (Fig.5) + AK, (Hg.7) ... (4)
4. KINETIC ENERGY COEFFICIENT
A weighted average value of the kinetic energy is obtained by multiplying the average
velocity head computed as (Q/Aj)V 2g by a kinetic energy coefficient ttj defined as
= i:(qv^)
QV^, ... (5)
A second coefficient is required to correct the velocity head for non-uniform velocity
distribution under the bridge.
76
The value of can be computed but is not readily available, knowing the value
of a, and opening ratio M, use Fig. 8 for estimating a^.
78
y
o to
60
1
00
00
CN
V
79
5. Having known the value of K*, and Vn the approximate value of h*j using the
first part of the expression (1) is first determined. The value of Aj in the second part of
the expression (1) which depends on h*, can then be determined and the second term of
expression (1) is evaluated and total backwater or afflux h*j (in ft) found.
Note: The extract given in this Appendix has been taken from the Book "Hydraulics of
Bridge Waterways" with the permission of U.S. Deptt. of Transportation (Federal
Highway Administration).
80
Appendix 1(b)
(Contd.)
(Para 4.6.3)
NOTATIONS
Symbol Definition Reference to Fig.
Aj = Area of flow including backwater in

section 1 (sq.ft.) 1(B) and 2(B)
An, = Area of flow below normal water surface in

section 1 (sq.ft.) 1(B) and 2(B)
Aj = Area of flow including backwater in

section 2 (sq.ft.) 1(C) and 2(C)
An^ = Gross area of flow in constriction below

normal water surface at section 2(sq.ft.) 1(C) and 2(C)
A^ = Area of flow at section 4 at which normal

water surface is re-established (sq.ft.) 1(A) and 2(A)
Ap = Projected area of piers normal to flow,

between normal water surface and stream
bed) (sq.ft.) 4
b = Width of constriction (ft.) 1(C) and 2(C)
b^ = Width of constriction of a skew crossing

measured along centre line of roadway (ft.) 6
= Eccentricity
where < Q
or
\ Qc) / where Qc > Qa

Acceleration due to gravity = 32.2 ft./sec^
Total backwater (afflux) or rise above normal

stage at section 1 (ft) 1(A) and 2(A)
Ap = Ratio due to area obstructed by

piers to gross area of bridge waterway
^ below normal water surface at section 2 4
Backwater coefficient from base curve 3
AK incremental backwater coefficient for piers 4

81
Appendix 1 (b)
(Contd.)
Incremental backwater coefficient for eccentricity 5
Incremental backwater coefficient for skew 7
Kb+AKp+AKe+AKs
Total backwater coefficient for sub-critical flow
Bridge opening ratio = Qb

Qa + Qb + Qc
Qb
Q
Row in portion of the channel within projected
length of bridge at section 1 (cusecs) 1 and 2
How over that portion of the natural flood

plain obstructed by the roadway embankment (cusecs) 1 and 2
Qa + Qb + Qc = Total discharge (cusecs)
Discharge in sub-section (cusecs)
_2- = Average velocity at Section-1 (ft/sec.)
\
—Q = Average
.
velocity in constnction at
.
^ section 2 (ft/see.)
= Average velocity in constriction

for flow at normal stage (ft/sec.)
Average velocity in a sub-section (ft/sec)
Velocity head coeffcient at Section 1
Velocity head coefficient for constriction 8
Multiplication factor for influence of M on

incremental backwater coefficient for piers 4(B)
Angle of skew (degrees) 6

82
Appendix 2
(Para 5.3.7.3)
1. DETAILS OF WIRE MESH CRATES
For laying of wire crates in aprons of bridges, two situations arise.
(i) Where the crates are to be laid in deep water and have to be dumped and then
joined together.
(ii) Where depth of water is low or dry bed is available. In such cases, the crates
can be laid at site.
2. WIRE CRATES
Wire crates shall be made from hot dip galvanised mild steel wire of dia, not less than
4 mm in annealed condition having tensile strength of 300-450 MPa conforming to IS:
280-1978 (soft). The galvanised coating shall be heavy coating for soft condition
conforming to IS: 4826 - 1979. The mesh of crate shall not be more than 150 mm. Wire
crates for shallow accessible situations shall be 3m x 1.5 mx 1.25 m in size. Where these
have to be deposited and there is a chance of overturning, the crate shall be divided into
1.5 m compartments by cross netting.
For deep or inaccessible situations, wire crates can be made smaller subject to approval
of the Engineer-in-Charge.
Wire crates built in-situ, shall neither be larger than 7.5 m x 3.0 m x 0.6 m nor smaller
than 2 m X 1m x 0.3 m. Sides of large crates shall be securely stayed at intervals not
exceeding 1.5 m to prevent bulging.
The made by fixing a row of spikes on a beam at a spacing equal to

netting shall be
the mesh. The beam must be a little longer than the width of netting required. The wire
is to be cut to lengths about three times the length of the net required. Each piece is bent
at the middle around one of the spikes and the weaving commenced from one comer.
A double twist shall be given at each inter-section. This twisting shall be carefully done
by means of a strong iron bar, five and half turns being given to the bar at each splice.
The bottom and two ends of the crate or mattress shall be made at one time. The other
two sides shall be made separately and shall be secured to the bottom and the ends by
twisting adjacent wires together. The top shall be made separately and shall be fixed in
the same manner as the sides alter the crate or mattress has been filled.
Wherever possible, crates shall be placed in position before filling with boulders. The
crates shall be filled by carefully hand packing the boulders as tightly as possible and not
by merely throwing in stones or boulders.
83
Appendix 3
(Para 1L2.4)
MATHEMATICAL MODEL STUDIES
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The alluvial rivers are regulatory in the sense that they adjust their characteristics
in response to any change in the environment. These environmental changes may occur
naturally or may be result of such human activities as river training, diversion, construction
of dams, channelisation, bank protection, constriction of bridges, sand and gravel mining
etc. Such changes distort the natural equilibrium of a river. The river will adjust to the
new conditions by changing its slope, roughness, cross sectional shape or meandering
pattern. Within the existing constraints, any one or combination of these characteristics
may adjust as the river seeks to maintain the balance between its ability to transport the
sediment and the sediment load imposed.
1.2. River channel behaviour often needs to be studied in its natural state and its
responses to the afore mentioned human activities. Studies of river hydraulics, sediment
transport and river channel changes may be through physical modelling or mathematical
modelling or both. Physical modelling has been relied upon traditionally to obtain the
essential design information. What limits the accuracy of physical model is the scale
distortionwhich is almost unavoidable particularly when it involves sedimentation.
Mathematical modelling of erodible channels has been advanced with progress in physics
of fluvial processes and computer techniques. Since the actual size river is applied in
mathematical modelling, there is no scale distortion. The applicability and accuracy of
model depends on the physical foundation and numerical techniques employed.
1.3. Mathematical model of river channel changes require adequate and sufficient
physical relationships for the fluvial processes. Although the processes are governed by
the principles of continuity, flow resistance, sediment transport and bank stability, such
relations are insufficient to explain the time and spatial variations of channel geometry
in an alluvial river. Generally width adjustment occurs concurrently with changes in the
river bed profile, slope, channel pattern, roughness and so on. These changes are closely
inter relatedand delicately adjust to establish or to maintain the dynamic state of
equilibrium.While any factor imposed upon the river is usually absorbed by the
combination of the above responses, the extent of each type of resistances is inversely
related to the resistance to change. For example, in response to deficit in sediment supply,
the slope of the river is generally reduced more through meander development than through
degradation because the latter is usually inhibited by the coarsening of the bed material.
Also, there tends to be more adjustment in width in erodible bank materials than in erosion
resistant bank materials.
84
1.4. The following are some of the cases where man made changes affect the dynamic
equilibrium of the river:
(a) Storage Dam for Power Generation constructed upstream of a bridge - The effect
of dam upstream is that the time distribution of flow is changed although the
total volume is not. The flood peaks are reduced and the sediment transport is
cut off. These conditions may induce excessive scour near the bridge.
(b) Construction of Dam Downstream of a bridge - Aggradation occurs as the river

flow slows down upon its sediment load. The
entering the reservoir and deposits
method of deposition is usually complex in rivers with fine sediment load but
in coarse sand bed rivers, the sediment is largely deposited at the entrance of
the reservoir in a delta form.
(c) Strengthening of Upstream Embankments - There are several consequences

when minor channels are diverted under the main bridge by construction
the
of upstream embankments. First, the bridge obstruction increases the depth of
flow immediately upstream and so worsens the local flooding problem. The
concentrated overbank flow returns to the river just upstream of the bridge to
cause land erosion. The increased flow in the channel increases the channel scour
and bank attack until the excess flow can return to the downstream flood plane.
(d) Backwater with Aggradation - Construction of a bridge on a constricted channel

induces backwater effects. At the bridge crossing, because of a smaller width
the stream bed continues to scour while on the upstream side because of a
backwater effect deposition occurs. Channel widening in this reach would be
expected.
2. MATHEMATICAL MODELLING
2.1. Water Routing
Water routing provides temporal and spatial variations of the stage, discharge, energy
gradient and other hydraulic parameters in the channel. ITie "water routing component has
the following major features:
(a) Numerical solution of the continuity and momentum equations for longitudinal
flow,
(b) Evaluation of flow resistance due to longitudinal and transverse flows, and
(c) Upstream and downstream boundary conditions.
The continuity and momentum equations in the longitudinal direction are derived as
follows:
85
an
—A 1
— aq
at
+ g —
ax
+
A
1 a(Q/A)
ax
+ gs- q = 0 ... (2)
Where Q = discharge
A = cross sectional area of flow
t = time
X = longitudinal direction along the discharge centre line measured from the
upstream entrance
q = lateral inflow rate per unit length
H = stage of water surface elevation
S = energy gradient
g = acceleration due to gravity
The upstream boundary condition for water routing is the inflow hydrograph and the
downstream condition is the stage discharge relation.
The longitudinal energy gradient can be evaluated using any valid flow resistance
relationship. IfManning's formula is employed, the roughness coefficient 'n' must be
selected according to the bed diameter and river conditions.
2.2. Sediment Routing
The sediment routing component has following major features:
(a) Computation of sediment transport capacity using a suitable formula for the
physical conditions
(b) Determination of actual sediment discharge by making corrections for

availability, sorting and diffusion
(c) Upstream conditions for sediment inflow
(d) Numerical solution of the continuity equation for sediment
These features are evaluated at each time step and results so obtained are used in
determining the changes in channel configuration. To treat at the time dependent and non
equilibrium sediment transport the bed material at each section is divided into several size
fractions and sediment transport is computed using suitable formula.
The equation of continuity for sediment in the longitudinal direction is given by:
aA aqs
(1 - X) + -
% = 0 (3)
at ax
where X = porosity of the bed material
= bed material discharge
= lateral inflow rate of sediment per unit length

86
According to this equation, the time change of cross sectional area is related to the
longitudinal gradient in sediment discharge and lateral sediment inflow. In the absence
of lateral sediment inflow, longitudinal imbalance in is absorbed by channel adjustments
towards establishing uniformity in Q^.
The change in cross sectional area for each section at each time step is obtained through
numerical solution of Equation 3. This area change will be applied to the bed and banks
following correction techniques for channel width and channel bed profile.
One dimensional mathematical models like water routing and backwater models
2.3.
to solve problems such as dam break, flood wave transmission, effect of bridge constriction
etc. were commonly in use before the introduction of computers. Now with the easy access
to mainframe computer and personal computers with large memories, it has become
possible to develop software and study the morphological changes of short and long
duration by simulation models. Institutes such as Central Water Commission, Central Water
and Power Research Station, Pune, National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, and some
of the State Irrigation Research Institutes and Indian Institute of Technology at Delhi,
Bombay etc. have developed suitable softwares to study these aspects in the area of river
engineering.
87
Appendix 4
(Para 11.5.1)
MODEL LIMITATIONS
1 . In the mobile bed river model, the results lack scalar transformation to prototype.
They cannot be applied quantitatively, however, they can be considered as qualitative.

Some of these are:
1.1. Exaggerated Scour Holes
Silting in model is much slower than in the prototype while the scouring takes place
during the early stages of the hydrograph in model. Firstly, this suggested scour hole is
due to dissimilar horizontal and vertical scales, scour holes tend to be proportional to
vertical scale while the width tends to be proportional to horizontal scale. Secondly, in
falling stages of the hydrograph bed movement in model is negligible, as such the scour
hole which used to be filled up in prototype does not fill up in model. However, the scour
depth obtained gives an idea of the formation and direction of new channels and is helpful
for design of launching apron.
1 .2. Non-reproduction of SUting in Model
In prototype, most of the sediment moves in suspension and very little as bed load.
Silting is mostly due to suspended sediment, while in model, bed load is much higher than
the suspended. Moreover, due to limited length and duration of run of model the suspended
sediment does not settle down. The silting is only indicated by the slack flow or return
flow of low intensities.
1.3. Incorrect Throw Off
Throw off in distorted model is different from the corresponding throw off in the
prototype. This is partly due to the increased height in comparison to width of the structure,
and partly due to very steep side slopes. Some of the research institutes have constructed
full width as well as part width river models to reproduce approximately similar effects.
width river model is constructed to small scales, the entry conditions in part width
First full
model are adjusted to reproduce the lines of flow observed from full width model. The
throw off in part width model obtained is reproduced in full width model. The process
is repeated till approximate similarity is obtained.
1.4. Incorrect Meandering
Due to uncertainty of uniform bed movement, further development of meanders in case

of meandering rivers, is not correctly reproduced in the distorted models, It is due to this
reason that correct development of new channels, resurvival of old channels and further
silting of islands is seldom depicted from these models.
88
1.5. Longitudinal Distortion
In vertically exaggerated models for bridges and barrages the thickness of the piers
ismuch less and the width to depth ratio of model span and prototype span is not same.
As such sometimes either number of piers are reduced to maintain the above ratio, or a
few piers are combined to form one pier, the shape of such piers differs from that in
prototype and effects the coefficient due to changed shape.
1.6. Different Time Scale
To reproduce correct silting in model, the hydrograph in the model should be run for
a longer time. This time is defined as hydraulic time and the time scale for hydraulic
time is:
(T^y = Lr hr^-''^
When the sediment movement is guided by tractive force and the sedimenting time scale
could be obtained by tractive force method, this works out to (T2)r = h^'^. The only solution
to this is that h^ should be equal to L°-^ which results in higher exaggerations so more
departure from prototype. Generally, time scale adopted is hydraulic time. In the above
formulae (Tj)^ and (T^)^ are the time scales, L is the length scale and h^ is the height scale
of the model.
,
89
REFERENCES
1. Manual on River Behaviour, Control and Training; Central Board of Irrigation and
Power, Publication No.60 (Revised) 1971.
2. INGLIS, C.C., *'The Behaviour and Control of Rivers and Canals", Research \
Publication No.l3, Central Water Irrigation and Navigation Research Station, Pune.
3. SPRING, F.J.E., "River Training and Control on the Guide Bank System", Govern-
ment of India, Technical Paper No. 153, 1903.
4. "Scour at Bridge Piers," Central Board of Irrigation and Power, Status Report No.
4, September, 1974.
5. "River Training and Bank Protection," Rood Control Series No. 4, United Nation
Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, Bangkok, 1953, pp. 16-17.
'
6. SETHI, H.K.L. (1960), "River Training and Control for Bridges", Technical Paper
No.335, Research Designs and Standards Organisation, Ministry of Railways,
Lucknow.
7. B ARDLEY, J.N. ,
*
'Hydraulics of Bridge Waterways' ' Hydraulic Design Series No. 1
,
U.S. Deptt. of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration, (2nd edition revised

March, 1978).
8. Ministry of Shipping and Transport (Roads Wing)'s Specification for Road and Bridge
Works (PubUshed in 1978).
9. GALES, R., "The Principles of River Training for Railway Bridges and their
Application to the case of Harding Bridge over the Lower Ganga at Sora," Journal
of the Institution of Engineers, December, 1938.
10. SHARMA, H.D. and ASTHANA, B.N., "Study of Waterway for Bridges and
Barrages," Irrigation and Power Journal, Vol.33, No. 3, July, 1976, New Delhi.
11. GARG, S.P., ASTHANA, B.N. and JAIN, S.K., "River Training of Bridges and
Barrages." Journal of Institution of Engineers (India), Vol.5, May, 1971.
12. BALWANT RAO, B., NARAIN, A.D., and MOTWANI, S.C., "Protection to
Approach Embankments of Highway Bridges," Indian Highways, December, 1975.
13. GARG, S.P., ASTHANA, B.N. and JAIN, S.K., "Design of Guide Bunds for Alluvial
Rivers." Journal of Institution of Engineers (India), Vol. 52, Sept., 1971.
90
--i^. Indian Standard No. IS: 8408, 1994, "Planning and Design of Groyens in Alluvial
River Guidelines," (First Revision).
15. Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section I, (IRC: 5-
1985).
16. Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges, Section-VII, Foun-
dations and Substructure (IRC: 78 - 1983).
17. Manual for Highway Bridge Maintenance Inspection - IRC Special Publication 18.
18. Indian Standard No. IS: 10751, 1994, Planning and Design of Guide Banks for
Alluvial Rivers, Guidelines (First Revision).

IRC 89, 1997, River Training & Control For Road Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IRC 89, 1997, River Training & Control For Road Bridges

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IRC 89, 1997, River Training & Control For Road Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i IRC : 89-199'

GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN AND

First Published November, 1985

Reprinted October, 2000

Reprinted December, 2004

(All Rights Reserved, no part of this publication shall be reproduced or

BRIDGES SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

SI. No. Name Address

1 M.V. Sastry* DG (RD),Mimstry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),

Reclamation, Mumbai-400 050

SI. Name Address

16. V. Murahari Reddy Engineer-in-Chief (R&B),

Green Park, New Delhi- 110 016

28. Yijay Kumar General Manager

31. DrV.K. Raina B-13, Sector-14, NOIDA (UP)

SI. Name Address

33. C.V. Kand Consultant

34. M.K. Mukherjee 40/182, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi-1 10 019

35. Mahesh Tandon Managing Director

38. S.C. Sharma Chief Engineer (R)S&R,

40. G.P. Garg Executive Director (B&S),

41. Vinod Kumar Director & Head (Civil Engg.),

43. DG(RD) & Hon. Treasurer, M.V. Sastry Ex-Officio

44. Secretary, S.C. Sharma Ex -Officio

Shitala Sharan Adviser Consultant,

2. Dr. M.G. Tamhankar Dy. Director Sl Head,

7. River Bank Protection 39

8. Approach Road Protection 45

9. Design of River Training and Control 52

10. Floor Protection 53

11. Model Studies 54

1 3 . Maintenance Aspects of River Training 63

Fig. No. Page

divergent guide bunds

5.7. Sketch showing toe wall at junction of slope 22

5.9. Details of guide bunds ZD

Appendix 7(a) Formula for Computation of Afflux 68

Appendix 1(b) Method For Computation of Backwater or 69

Fig. 1. Normal crossing-wing wall and abutments 69

Appendix 2 Details of Wire Mesh Crates 82

Appendix 3 Mathematical Model Studies 83

Appendix 4 Model Limitations 87

L.S. Bassi .. Convenor

S.P. Chakrabarti Rep. of Central Water Power Res. Station

President, IRC (M.K. Agarwal) Hon. Treasurer, IRC (Ninan Koshi)

J.S. Marya B.J. Dave

The Protective Works Committee (B-9) reviewed the existing guide-

2.3.The necessity or otherwise of the guidebunds, spurs and other

2.4. Given inadequate knowledge of and uncertainties around many

aspects of bridge hydraulics and river behaviour characteristics in general,

site, river and specific requirements of a bridge structure.

(i) Afflux/backwater: The rise in flood level of the river immedi-

(iii) Approach road protection: Approaches are protected by means

(iv) Floor protection works: Protection in the form of flooring where

(v) Guide bunds: These are embankments meant to confine and

approaches. These are generally constructed in the direction of flow on

(vii) Meander: The curvature of flow, established in a stream either

(viii) Ri^^er bank protection: Bank protection is afforded directly in

Spurs or Groynes: These are structures constructed transverse to