Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 1

BACKGROUND OF STUDY.......................................................................................................................... 1
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................................... 1

2. CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN....................................................................................................... 1
3. CLIMATE AND RAINFALL................................................................................................................ 2
4. RAINFALL ANALYSIS....................................................................................................................... 2

RAINFALL STATIONS (LONG TERM ANNUAL AND MONSOON RAINFALL)........................................................2

MAXIMUM DAILY RAINFALL........................................................................................................................ 2
MAXIMUM HOURLY INTENSITY.................................................................................................................... 2
INTENSITY DURATION FREQUENCY (IDF)................................................................................................... 3
TIME OF FLOOD CONCENTRATION............................................................................................................. 3

5. ESTIMATION OF DESIGN FLOOD................................................................................................... 4

RETURN PERIOD OF DESIGN FLOOD.......................................................................................................... 4

DHM 2004 METHOD................................................................................................................................ 4
MODIFIED DIKEN’S METHOD...................................................................................................................... 5
FULLER’S METHOD................................................................................................................................... 6
HORTON’S FORMULA................................................................................................................................ 7
RATIONAL METHOD................................................................................................................................... 7

6. RECOMMENDED DISCHARGE........................................................................................................ 8
7. BRIDGE HYDRAULICS..................................................................................................................... 9

HFL AND BRIDGE LENGTH......................................................................................................................... 9

8. SCOUR DEPTH................................................................................................................................ 10

SCOUR DEPTH CALCULATION.................................................................................................................. 10

LACEY’S EQUATION................................................................................................................................. 10
BLENCH EQUATION................................................................................................................................. 11
USBR METHOD...................................................................................................................................... 11

List of Tables
Table 1: Rainfall station near the project site...............................................................................2
Table 2: Maximum daily rainfall at different Return Periods (in mm)...........................................2
Table 3: Time of Concentration calculated using Kirpich formula................................................3
Table 4: Predicted Rainfall Intensity for IDF at different Return Periods (mm/hr)........................3
Table 5: Discharge estimated by DHM 2004 Method...................................................................5
Table 6: Discharge Estimated By Diken’s Modified Formula........................................................5
Table 7: Discharge Estimated by Fuller’s Method........................................................................6
Table 8: Discharge Estimated by Horton’s Formula.....................................................................7
Table 9: Value of C based on the coverage area of different landuse inside the project
catchment.....................................................................................................................................7
Table 10: Design flood discharge using Rational method............................................................8
Table 11: Summary of Design Flood using different methods......................................................8
Table 12: Estimated hydraulic parameters of proposed bridge....................................................9
Table 13: Scour depth using different methods..........................................................................11

List of Figures
Figure 1: Piple Handi Khola Bridge Catchment............................................................................1
Figure 2: IDF Curve for Project Site Catchment...........................................................................4
Figure 3: Hecras result at river section at bridge site...................................................................9
Figure 4: Rating curve at proposed bridge site after construction..............................................10
 1. INTRODUCTION

Background of Study

The Piple Handi river bridge site is located in Dhading district.

Scope and Methodology

Detailed hydrological study of Piple Handi river bridge has been carried out to estimate the
hydraulic design parameters such as design discharge (corresponds to 100 years return
period) and corresponding linear water way, normal and maximum scour depths, vertical
clearance and afflux for detailed design of proposed bridge.

2. CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN

Figure 1: Piple Handi Khola Bridge Catchment

Handi river which is a tributary of Thopal Khola, originates from the southeast about 3.5
kilometers from Proposed bridge axis. The river flows east about 3.88 km from south through
hilly area of Sunaula Bajar of Dhading district, Bagmati Province. Catchment characteristics at
the bridge site are described below.

1
  Catchment Area = 4.14 Sq.km

Area below 3000m = 4.14 Sq.km

 Max elevation = 1568.00 m

 Minimum Elevation = 687.00 m
 Length of River Channel = 3.88 km

3. CLIMATE AND RAINFALL

Bridge site has minimum annual temperature of 12.12℃ to maximum annual of temperature of
24.04℃. The site lies in Subartic, dry winter, cool summer climate zone. Annual average
precipitation of bridge site is found to be about 2121 mm per year.

4. RAINFALL ANALYSIS

Rainfall Stations (Long Term Annual and Monsoon Rainfall)

The nearest representative rainfall station is selected for the catchment of project site i.e. Stn
1005 Dhading. Details of selected rainfall station is given in Table 1. Rainfall data of these
stations are used basically for the flood analysis.

Table 1: Rainfall station near the project site.

STATION STATION LAT

LONG (E) ELEV (m) Remarks
NO NAME (N)

1005 Dhading 27.87° 84.93° 1420 Dhading

Source: Hydrological Estimations in Nepa, DHM, 2004vb

Maximum Daily Rainfall

Yearly maximum daily rainfall for the representative station was collected from the
Climatological Reports published by Department of Hydrology and Meteorology. Daily rainfalls
for 10, 33, 50 and 100 year return periods were calculated by frequency analysis using Gamma
distribution and Mononobe’s equation. The comparison of daily maximum rainfall at different
return periods for these stations is presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Maximum daily rainfall at different Return Periods (in mm).

T, yrs
Station
2 5 10 20 50 100

1005 Dhading 97.43 140.50 169.01 196.36 231.77 258.30

2
Maximum Hourly Intensity

Yearly maximum hourly rainfall intensity for the representative station for 10, 33, 50 and 100
year return periods were directly obtained from Mononobe’s equation using the maximum daily
rainfall for respective return periods.

Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF)

The flood concentration time at the project site is less than 24 hours. The rainfall intensity curve
of the study area was established by Mononobe’s equation, and presented by the following
equation:

Where, Rtc = Rainfall intensity in tc hours (mm/hr); R 24 = 24 hours rainfall (mm); t c= Time of
concentration in hour.

Time of Flood Concentration

The Time of flood concentration is derived from Kirpich formula:

Where, L=Stream length in km; h=Difference of the maximum and minimum elevations in m
If the time of concentration is less than 15 minutes then it is assumed to be 15 minutes as
recommended by ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers).
The calculated time of flood concentration value is shown in Table 3. The Rainfall Intensity
duration values for project site catchment are presented in Table 4 and the Intensity Duration
Frequency Curves are shown in Figure 2.

Table 3: Time of Concentration calculated using Kirpich formula.

L(km) h(m) tc (hrs) tc (min)

Piple Handi Khola Bridge 3.88 881 0.33 19.98

Table 4: Predicted Rainfall Intensity for IDF at different Return Periods (mm/hr).

Maximum Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)

Return
0.333h 0.333h
Period 0.167hr 0.5hr 1hr 2hr 3hr 6hr 12hr 24hr
r r
2 111.53 70.31 70.26 53.62 33.78 21.28 16.24 10.23 6.44 4.06
5 160.83 101.39 101.32 77.32 48.71 30.68 23.42 14.75 9.29 5.85
10 193.47 121.97 121.88 93.01 58.59 36.91 28.17 17.75 11.18 7.04
108.0
20 224.78 141.71 141.60 6 68.08 42.89 32.73 20.62 12.99 8.18
112.8
25 234.71 147.97 147.86 4 71.08 44.78 34.17 21.53 13.56 8.54

3
 127.5
50 265.31 167.26 167.14 5 80.35 50.62 38.63 24.33 15.33 9.66
142.1
100 295.68 186.40 186.27 5 89.55 56.41 43.05 27.12 17.08 10.76
156.7
200 325.94 205.48 205.33 0 98.71 62.18 47.46 29.90 18.83 11.86
175.8 110.8
500 365.86 230.65 230.48 9 0 69.80 53.27 33.56 21.14 13.32
190.3 119.9
1000 396.04 249.67 249.49 9 4 75.56 57.66 36.32 22.88 14.42

Intensity Duration Frequency Curve for Piple Handi Khola

Bridge
1000
2 years 5 years
10 years 20 years
Intensity of rainfall (mm/hr)

50 years 100 years

100

10

1
0 1 10 100
Duration (hrs)

Figure 2: IDF Curve for Project Site Catchment.

5. ESTIMATION OF DESIGN FLOOD

Return Period of Design Flood

The design flood frequency is determined with the basic consideration on the risk involved and
the cost of minimizing that risk. The risk factor is dependent on the type and size of structure,
volume of water impounded by it and the extent of damage in the event of failure of the
structure, which depends on the population and property downstream of the structure likely to
be affected by the worst eventuality of the failure of the structure.
Based on international practices, type and size of the structures, impounded volume and
preliminary assessment of the extent of likely damage in the event of worst failure, the
frequency of design flood for this bridge is recommended equal to 100 years.

4
Flood discharge at the bridge site has been estimated by following methods.

DHM 2004 Method

This method is similar to WECS 1990 but has more data base and it also uses the mean
elevation of basin. Flood results by this method may be obtained directly by the software called
“HYDEST2004” at any location of Nepal. However, following formulas have been used.
Q2=2.29(A3000+1)0.86
Q100=20.7(A3000+1)0.72
QT=exp{lnQ2+sσ}
where, T= return period in years
s= standard normal variate
σ= ln(Q100/Q2)/2.326
A3000= catchment area below 3000m elevation

Table 5: Discharge estimated by DHM 2004 Method.

Return Bridge Site

Period s Discharge
2 0 9.37
5 0.842 19.13
10 1.282 27.78
20 1.645 37.79
25 - -
50 2.054 53.45
100 2.326 67.32
200 2.576 83.22
500 2.878 107.50
1000 3.09 128.67
σ 0.848
2 9.37
100 67.32

Here, A3000= 4.14 sq.km

Modified Diken’s Method

It is an empirical method in which peak discharge is considered to be a function of basin area.

In this method, the T year flood discharge QT, in m3/s, is determined by

𝑄𝑇=CA0.75

Where A is the total basin area in sq. km and C is the modified Dicken’s constant proposed by
the Irrigation Research Institute, Roorkee, India, based on frequency studies on Himalayan
Rivers. This constant is computed as
𝐶=2.342* log (0.6𝑇)*log(1185/𝑃)+4

5
 𝑃=100*(𝑎+6)/(𝐴+𝑎)
where
a = snow covered area in sq. km. and
T = the return period in years.

Table 6: Discharge Estimated By Diken’s Modified Formula.

Bridge Site
Return
Dicken's Coefficient Discharg
Period
P C e
144.76
2 7 4.169 12.11
144.76
5 7 5.020 14.58
144.76
10 7 5.664 16.45
144.76
20 7 6.308 18.32
144.76
25 7 6.515 18.92
144.76
50 7 7.159 20.79
144.76
100
7 7.802 22.66
144.76
200 7 8.446 24.53
144.76
500 7 9.297 27.01
144.76
1000 7 9.941 28.88

Here, a = 0 sq.km &

A = 4.14 sq.km

Fuller’s Method

Although developed for basins in the United States of America, Fuller’s formula may be used
to estimate flood discharges in the ungauged basins of Nepal for comparison purposes. Using
this method, the maximum instantaneous flood discharge Qmax in cumecs shall be estimated as
Qmax = QT [1+2(A/2.59)-0.3]
where QT is the maximum 24 hour flood with frequency once in T years in m 3/s and A is the
basin area in sq. km. QT shall be given by
QT= Qav [1+0.8logT]
in which Qav is the yearly average 24 hour flood over a number of years, in m3/s, given by
Qav= Cf A0.8

6
where Cf is Fuller’s coefficient varying between 0.18 to 1.88. For Nepal, Cf may be taken as the
average of these values, i.e. equal to 1.03.

Table 7: Discharge Estimated by Fuller’s Method.

Return Bridge Site

Period Cf Qav QT Qmax
2 1.030 3.21 3.99 10.91
5 1.030 3.21 5.01 13.71
10 1.030 3.21 5.78 15.83
20 1.030 3.21 6.56 17.94
25 1.030 3.21 6.80 18.62
50 1.030 3.21 7.58 20.74
100 1.030 3.21 8.35 22.86
200 1.030 3.21 9.13 24.98
500 1.030 3.21 10.15 27.78
1000 1.030 3.21 10.92 29.89

Here, A= 4.14 sq.km

Horton’s Formula

Horton’s formula may be used to compute the flood qtr in m3/s/sq. km, exceeded in a T year
return period using the relation
qtr = 71.2(T0.25/A0.5)
where, A is the drainage area in sq. km.

Table 8: Discharge Estimated by Horton’s Formula.

Return Bridge Site

Period qtr Q
2 41.591 172.38
5 52.298 216.75
10 62.193 257.76
20 73.960 306.53
25 78.203 324.12
50 93.000 385.45
100 110.596 458.37
200 131.522 545.10
500 165.380 685.43
1000 196.671 815.12

Here, A= 4.14 sq.km

7
Rational Method

Rational formula was used to calculate the floods from the catchment by using
maximum hourly rainfall intensities for the time of concentration. The The formula is as follows:

C I A
Q P=
3.6
Where,
Qp= Maximum flood discharge in m3/s;
I = Intensity of rainfall within the time of concentration in mm/hr;
A = Catchment area in km2;
C = Dimensionless run-off coefficient, assumed equal to 0.5 for project area.
Table 9 shows the value of C calculated based on the area coverage of different type of
landuse inside the catchment of project site.

Table 9: Value of C based on the coverage area of different landuse inside the project catchment.

Landuse Fcode Coefficient of Discharge Area(km2) Area % C

Cultivated 25102 0.41 2.24 54.07% 0.22
Forest 25212 0.25 1.90 45.93% 0.11
Total 4.14 100.00% 0.34

Table 10 shows the design flood discharge calculated for different return periods at
project site using rational method.

Table 10: Design flood discharge using Rational method.

Rational Method for Design Floods

Return Bridge Site
Period C I (mm/hr) Discharge
0.3
2 4 70.31 27.24
0.3
5 4 101.39 39.28
0.3
10 4 121.97 47.25
0.3
20 4 141.71 54.90
0.3
25 4 147.97 57.33
0.3
50 4 167.26 64.80
0.3
100
4 186.40 72.22
0.3
200 4 205.48 79.61
0.3
500 4 230.65 89.36
1000 0.3 249.67 96.73

8
 4

Following table shows the summary of the design flood using different empirical methods.

Table 11: Summary of Design Flood using different methods.

Return Fuller's Rational Horton's Modified

DHM2/UP
Period Formula Method Method Dicken's
2 9.37 10.91 27.24 172.38 12.11
5 19.13 13.71 39.28 216.75 14.58
10 27.78 15.83 47.25 257.76 16.45
20 37.79 17.94 54.90 306.53 18.32
50 53.45 20.74 64.80 385.45 20.79
100 67.32 22.86 72.22 458.37 22.66
200 83.22 24.98 79.61 545.10 24.53
500 107.50 27.78 89.36 685.43 27.01
1000 128.67 29.89 96.73 815.12 28.88

6. RECOMMENDED DISCHARGE

After considering different methods to calculate maximum discharge on the bridge site, it was
found the design floods estimated with all methods are comparable except Horton’s method
giving higher values ( see Table 11). However, values of the design flood computed from all
empirical methods are higher than Modified Dicken’s method. Based on the rainfall data
available at site it is recommended to use results from rational method for further analysis. i.e.
the design discharge for 100years return period which is 72.22 m3/s.

7. BRIDGE HYDRAULICS

HFL and Bridge length

Table 12: Estimated hydraulic parameters of proposed bridge.

Minimum River

Highest Flood
Bed Level (m)
Design Flood

Total Bridge
Max Flood
Level (m)

Depth (m)

opening

Velocity
(m3/s)

(m/s)
(m)

SN

1. 72.22 664.39 667.21 2.81 17 clear 2.01

9
The HFL has been fixed by fitting the design flood in cross-section of river bridge site provided
by survey team. HECRAS is used for analysis. Result of analysis is presented in Table 12 for
design flood.

Piple Handi Khola Bridge

.04
680 Legend

678 EG 100yrs Rational

WS 100yrs Rational
676
Ground

674 Levee
Elevation (m)

Bank Sta
672

670

668

666

664
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (m)

Figure 3: Hecras result at river section at bridge site.

Piple Handi Khola Bridge

667.5 Legend

W.S. Elev
667.0

666.5
W.S. Elev (m)

666.0

665.5

665.0

664.5

664.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Q Total (m3/s)

Figure 4: Rating curve at proposed bridge site after construction.

From the hecras analysis, top width for the bridge to allow design flood to safely pass through it
is 20 meters. But due the site condition (i.e. location of exsiting kulo on both banks of river), the
span has been reduced to 17meters (See Table 12) with high flood level of 667.21 masl. By

10
adding 1.5 meter free board to the high flood level, the span of the bridge was determined.
Hence, it is recommended that 17 meters clear span of bridge must be constructed with base of
slab at 668.75 masl, so that the extreme flood can pass safely through it. But it is compulsory to
build the river training structures about 40 meters upstream of the bridge because of reduction
of the span by 3 meters.

8. SCOUR DEPTH

Scour Depth Calculation

The design of any structure located either along the riverbank and flood plain or across a
channel requires a river study to determine the response of the riverbed and banks to large
floods. Different methods are applied to determine the scour depth.

Lacey’s Equation

This method has been expanded for Reclamation use to include the empirical regime
equation and the method of zero bed- sediment transport by Blench in the form of Lacey
equation under the condition that the constricted waterway is less than the lacey’s waterway
regime condition:
dm = 1.388 (Q2/f)1/3
Where dm = mean depth at design discharge in m
Q = Design discharge in m3/s
f = Lacey’s silt factor = 1.76(Dm)½
Dm= mean grain size of bed material in millimeters.
ds = depth of scour below H.F.L = Z dm.
Where Z = multiplying factors for use in scour depths by regime equation.=1.25

Blench Equation

df0 = qf2/3 / Fb0 1/3

df0 = Depth for zero bed sediment transport in m
qf = Design flood discharge per unit width in cumecs per m

USBR method

ds = depth of scour below scour bed = Z dm.

dm = mean water depth in m

Here Z = 0.5
ds = depth of scour below scour bed = Z dm

The scour depths below the bed level obtained from above equations with D 50 =4.60mm are
shown in Table 10 below.
11
Table 13: Scour depth using different methods.

A. Regime Formulation by Lacey 1930

40.3666
Lacey's Linear Waterway (regime width) W = 4.75 Q1/2 = 2 m
3
Design Discharge Q100 = 72.22 m /s
As per IS Code IRC 78-2000,
increase design discharge (30 % & 10%
Qd = 1.4* Q10 = m3/s
for debris and climate change) 101.108
Mean Particle Size d50 = 4.6 mm
1/2
Friction factor f= 1.76*d50 = 3.77
effective linear waterway, lf = 17 m
5.94752
Specific design discharge qd= Qd/ lf m3/s/m
9
max flood depth yo = 4.13 m
Normal Regime Scour Depth dm= 1.34*(qd2/f)1/3 2.93 m
Max Scour Depth ds=1.25dm 3.66 m
Max Scour Below the Original bed level dsb= ds-dm -0.47 m
B. Regime Formulation by Blench
Normal Regime Scour Depth dm= 1.23*(qd2/3/d501/12) 3.56 m
Max Scour Depth ds=1.25m 4.44 m
Max Scour Below the Original bed level dsb= ds-dm 0.31 m
C. USBR
Normal Regime Scour Depth dm= 1.34*(qd2/f)1/3 2.93 m
Max Scour Below the Original bed level dsb=0.5dm 1.46 m

It is recommended to use 1.46 m as the depth of scour below the bed level for the design of
pier and abutment footing.

12