SSIGL-10 Diversion Weir Study and DesignVer-6

SSIGL 10
NATIONAL GUIDELINES
For Small Scale Irrigation Development in Ethiopia
Diversion Weir Study and Design
November 2018
Addis Ababa
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development in Ethiopia
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design
November 2018
Addis Ababa
National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development In Ethiopia
First Edition 2018
© MOA 2018
Ministry of Agriculture
Small-Scale Irrigation Development Directorate
P. O. Box 62347
Tel: +251-1-6462355
Fax: +251-1-6462355
Email: SSIDdirectorate@moa.gov.et
SSIDdirectorate@gmail.com
eDMS (intranet): MoA SSID DMS (http://172.28.1.188:8080/DMS/login.jsp)
Website: www.moa.gov.et
Financed by Agricultural Growth Program (AGP)
DISCLAIMER
Ministry of Agriculture through the Consultant and core reviewers from all relevant stakeholders included the
information to provide the contemporary approach about the subject matter. The information contained in the
guidelines is obtained from sources believed tested and reliable and are augmented based on practical
experiences. While it is believed that the guideline is enriched with professional advice, for it to be
successful, needs services of competent professionals from all respective disciplines. It is believed, the
guidelines presented herein are sound and to the expected standard. However, we hereby disclaim any
liability, loss or risk taken by individuals, groups, or organization who does not act on the information
contained herein as appropriate to the specific SSI site condition.
National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development MOA
FORWARD
Ministry of Agriculture, based on the national strategic directions is striving to meet its commitments in
which modernizing agriculture is on top of its highest priorities to sustain the rapid, broad-based and
fair economic growth and development of the country. To date, major efforts have been made to
remodel several important strategies and national guidelines by its major programs and projects.
While efforts have been made to create access to irrigation water and promoting sustainable irrigation
development, several barriers are still hindering the implementation process and the performance of
the schemes. The major technical constrains starts from poor planning and identification, study, design,
construction, operation, and maintenance. One of the main reasons behind this outstanding challenge,
in addition to the capacity limitations, is that SSIPs have been studied and designed using many ad-
hoc procedures and technical guidelines developed by various local and international institutions.
Despite having several guidelines and manuals developed by different entities such as MoA (IDD)-
1986, ESRDF-1997, MoWIE-2002 and JICA/OIDA-2014, still the irrigation professionals follow their
own public sources and expertise to fill some important gaps. A number of disparities, constraints and
outstanding issues in the study and design procedures, criteria and assumptions have been causing
huge variations in all vital aspects of SSI study, design and implementation from region to region and
among professionals within the same region and institutions due mainly to the lack of agreed standard
technical guidelines. Hence, the SSI Directorate with AGP financial support, led by Generation
consultant (GIRDC) and with active involvement of national and regional stakeholders and international
development partners, these new and comprehensive national guidelines have been developed.
The SSID guidelines have been developed by addressing all key features in a comprehensive and
participatory manner at all levels. The guidelines are believed to be responsive to the prevalent study
and design contentious issues; and efforts have been made to make the guidelines simple, flexible and
adaptable to almost all regional contexts including concerned partner institution interests. The outlines
of the guidelines cover all aspects of irrigation development including project initiation, planning,
organizations, site identification and prioritization, feasibility studies and detail designs, contract
administration and management, scheme operation, maintenance and management.
Enforceability, standardization, social and environmental safeguard mechanisms are well

mainstreamed in the guidelines, hence they shall be used as a guiding framework for engineers and
other experts engaged in all SSI development phases. The views and actual procedures of all relevant
diverse government bodies, research and higher learning institutions, private companies and
development partners has been immensely and thoroughly considered to ensure that all
stakeholders are aligned and can work together towards a common goal. Appropriately, the guidelines
will be familiarized to the entire stakeholders working in the irrigation development. Besides, significant
number of experts in the corresponding subject matter will be effectively trained nationwide; and the
guidelines will be tested practically on actual new and developing projects for due consideration of
possible improvement. Hence, hereinafter, all involved stakeholders including government & non-
governmental organizations, development partners, enterprises, institutions, consultants and
individuals in Ethiopia have to adhere to these comprehensive national guidelines in all cases and at all
level whilst if any overlooked components are found, it should be documented and communicated to
MOA to bring them up-to-date.
Therefore, I congratulate all parties involved in the success of this effort, and urge partners and
stakeholders to show a similar level of engagement in the implementation and stick to the guidelines
over the coming years.
H.E. Dr. Kaba Urgessa

State Minister, Ministry of Agriculture
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design i

SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT VISION
Transforming agricultural production from its dependence on rain-fed practices by creating reliable irrigation
system in which smallholder farmers have access to at least one option of water source to increase
production and productivity as well as enhance resilience to climate change and thereby ensure food
security, maintain increasing income and sustain economic growth.
ii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The preparation of SSIGLs required extensive inputs from all stakeholders and development partners.
Accordingly many professionals from government and development partners have contributed to the
realization of the guidelines. To this end MOA would like to extend sincere acknowledgement to all
institutions and individuals who have been involved in the review of these SSIGLs for their
comprehensive participation, invaluable inputs and encouragement to the completion of the guidelines.
There are just too many collaborators involved to name exhaustively and congratulate individually, as
many experts from Federal, regional states and development partners have been involved in one way
or another in the preparation of the guidelines. The contribution of all of them who actively involved in
the development of these SSIGLs is gratefully acknowledged. The Ministry believes that their
contributions will be truly appreciated by the users for many years to come.
The Ministry would like to extend its appreciation and gratitude to the following contributors:
 Agriculture Growth Program (AGP) of the MoA for financing the development and
publication of the guidelines.
 The National Agriculture Water Management Platform (NAWMP) for overseeing, guidance
and playing key supervisory and quality control roles in the overall preparation process and
for the devotion of its members in reviewing and providing invaluable technical inputs to
enrich the guidelines.
 Federal Government and Regional States organizations and their staff for their untiring effort
in reviewing the guidelines and providing constructive suggestions, recommendations and
comments.
 National and international development partners for their unreserved efforts in reviewing the
guidelines and providing constructive comments which invaluably improved the quality of the
guidelines.
 Small-scale and Micro Irrigation Support Project (SMIS) and its team for making all efforts to
have quality GLs developed as envisioned by the Ministry.
The MOA would also like to extend its high gratitude and sincere thanks to AGP‟s multi development
partners including the International Development Association (IDA)/World Bank, the Canada
Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID), the Netherlands, the European Commission (EC), the Spanish
Agency for International Development (AECID), the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program
(GAFSP), the Italy International Development Cooperation, the Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP).
Moreover, the Ministry would like to express its gratitude to Generation Integrated Rural Development
Consultant (GIRDC) and its staff whose determined efforts to the development of these SSIGLs have
been invaluable. GIRDC and its team drafted and finalized all the contents of the SSIGLs as per
stakeholder suggestions, recommendations and concerns. The MoA recognizes the patience,
diligence, tireless, extensive and selfless dedication of the GIRDC and its staff who made this
assignment possible.
Finally, we owe courtesy to all national and International source materials cited and referred but
unintentionally not cited.
Ministry of Agriculture
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design iii

DEDICATIONS
The National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development are dedicated to Ethiopian smallholder
farmers, agro-pastoralists, pastoralists, to equip them with appropriate irrigation technology as we envision
them empowered and transformed.
iv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

LIST OF GUIDELINES
Part I. SSIGL 1: Project Initiation, Planning and Organization
Part II: SSIGL 2: Site Identification and Prioritization
Part III: Feasibility Study and Detail Design
SSIGL 3: Hydrology and Water Resources Planning

SSIGL 4: Topographic and Irrigation Infrastructures Surveying
SSIGL 5: Soil Survey and Land Suitability Evaluation
SSIGL 6: Geology and Engineering Geology Study
SSIGL 7: Groundwater Study and Design
SSIGL 8: Irrigation Agronomy and Agricultural Development Plan
SSIGL 9: Socio-economy and Community Participation
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design
SSIGL 11: Free River Side Intake Study and Design

SSIGL 12: Small Embankment Dam Study and Design
SSIGL 13: Irrigation Pump Facilities Study and Design
SSIGL 14: Spring Development Study and Design
SSIGL 15: Surface Irrigation System Planning and Design
SSIGL 16: Canals Related Structures Design
SSIGL 17: Sprinkler Irrigation System Study and Design
SSIGL 18: Drip Irrigation System Study and Design
SSIGL 19: Spate Irrigation System Study and Design
SSIGL 20: Quantity Surveying
SSIGL 21: Selected Application Software’s
SSIGL 22: Technical Drawings
SSIGL 23: Tender Document Preparation
SSIGL 24: Technical Specifications Preparation
SSIGL 25: Environmental & Social Impact Assessment
SSIGL 26: Financial and Economic Analysis
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design v

Part IV: Contract Administration & Construction Management
SSIGL 27: Contract Administration

SSIGL 28: Construction Supervision
SSIGL 29: Construction of Irrigation Infrastructures
Part V: SSI Scheme Operation, Maintenance and Management
SSIGL 30: Scheme Operation, Maintenance and Management

SSIGL 31: A Procedural Guideline for Small Scale Irrigation Schemes Revitalization
SSIGL 32: Monitoring and Evaluation
Ancillary Tools for National Guidelines of Small Scale Irrigation Development
SSIGL 33: Participatory Irrigation Development and Management (PIDM)

SSIGL 34: Quality Assurance and Control for Engineering Sector Study and Design
vi SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORWARD ....................................................................................................................... I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. III
LIST OF GUIDELINES ................................................................................................... V
ACRONYMS.................................................................................................................. IX
PREFACE ..................................................................................................................... XI
UPDATING AND REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES ........................................................ XIII
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GUIDELINE .............................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Main objective......................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Specific objective .................................................................................................... 1
1.2 SCOPES OF THE GUIDELINE ...................................................................................... 1
1.3 DEFINITIONS OF TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGIES USED IN THE GUIDELINE .......... 1
2 DIVERSION WEIR AND ITS APPURTENANCES ................................................... 7
2.1 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF TYPICAL DIVERSION WEIR .................................... 7
2.2 FUNCTIONS OF DIVERSION HEADWORK AND ITS COMPONENTS ....................... 8
2.2.1 Functions of diversion headwork ............................................................................ 8
2.2.2 Components of a diversion headwork .................................................................... 8
2.3 CLASSIFICATION OF WEIR ......................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 General ................................................................................................................... 9
2.3.2 Classification of weir based on purposes ............................................................... 9
2.3.3 Classification based on construction material ...................................................... 10
2.3.4 Classification based on design features ............................................................... 11
2.3.5 Classification based on position of d/s water level ............................................... 14
2.3.6 Classification based on stabilizing factor .............................................................. 16
2.3.7 Classification based on provision of device on crest ............................................ 16
2.4 CAUSES OF FAILURE OF WEIR/BARRAGE ............................................................. 18
2.4.1 General ................................................................................................................. 18
2.4.2 Failure due to subsurface flow.............................................................................. 18
2.4.3 Failure by surface flow.......................................................................................... 19
2.4.4 Failure due to silt (aggradations and degradation or retrogression) ..................... 19
2.4.5 Failure due to seismic load ................................................................................... 20
2.4.6 Failure due to man-made activities....................................................................... 20
2.4.7 Remedies for failure of diversion headwork structure .......................................... 20
2.5 SELECTION OF SUITABLE WEIR/BARRAGE TYPE ................................................. 21
2.5.1 Criteria to be considered in selecting weir type .................................................... 21
2.5.2 Selection of type of diversion weir ........................................................................ 21
2.6 TYPES OF STILLING BASIN ....................................................................................... 22
2.6.1 General ................................................................................................................. 22
2.6.2 USBR standard stilling basin ................................................................................ 22
2.6.3 Indian standard stilling basin ................................................................................ 25
2.6.4 Appurtenant structures in stilling basin ................................................................. 25
2.7 RETAINING WALLS AND THEIR TYPES ................................................................... 26
2.7.1 General ................................................................................................................. 26
2.7.2 Gravity retaining wall ............................................................................................ 26
2.7.3 Cantilever wall ...................................................................................................... 28
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design i

2.7.4 Counterfort wall .................................................................................................... 29

2.7.5 Hybrid system of retaining wall ............................................................................. 29
2.8 SELECTION OF RETAINING WALLS ......................................................................... 29
2.8.1 General ................................................................................................................. 29
2.8.2 Embankment impacts ........................................................................................... 29
2.8.3 Foundation soils ................................................................................................... 29
2.8.4 Groundwater/drainage .......................................................................................... 30
2.8.5 Utilities .................................................................................................................. 30
2.8.6 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................. 30
2.8.7 Construction schedule .......................................................................................... 30
2.8.8 Maintenance ......................................................................................................... 30
2.8.9 Cost ...................................................................................................................... 30
3 DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR ............................................................................. 31
3.1 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF DIVERSION WEIRS ............................................... 31
3.2 SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE DIVERSION WEIR SITE ........................................ 32
3.3 DATA REQUIRED FOR WEIR AND BARRAGE DESIGN ........................................... 33
3.3.1 Physiographic data ............................................................................................... 33
3.3.2 Topographical data ............................................................................................... 34
3.3.3 Hydrological data .................................................................................................. 35
3.3.4 Geology and geotechnical data ............................................................................ 36
3.3.5 Irrigation agronomy............................................................................................... 37
3.3.6 Other data............................................................................................................. 37
3.4 DESIGN PROCEDURE AND STEPS OF WEIR/BARRAGE DESIGN ........................ 37
3.5 SELECTING DESIGN FLOOD OF APPROPRIATE RETURN PERIOD ..................... 39
3.6 RATING CURVE CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................ 39
3.7 SUMMARY OF BASE FLOW OF SOURCE OF IRRIGATION WATER SUPPLY........ 41
3.8 HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR AND RELATED STRUCTURES ......... 43
3.8.1 Fixing weir/barrage crest level .............................................................................. 43
3.8.2 Fixing crest length of diversion headwork ............................................................ 44
3.8.3 Determination of flow depth over broad crested weir ........................................... 51
3.8.4 Determination of flow depth over glacis and ogee weirs ...................................... 52
3.8.5 Flow depth over barrage....................................................................................... 52
3.8.6 Checking modularity of a weir .............................................................................. 53
3.8.7 Determination of weir/barrage geometry .............................................................. 54
3.8.8 Design of energy dissipater .................................................................................. 61
3.8.9 Selection of appropriate stilling basin ................................................................... 64
3.8.10 Determination of Exit Gradient (GE) ..................................................................... 77
3.8.11 Fixing upstream and downstream cut off .............................................................. 82
3.8.12 Design of protection works ................................................................................... 84
3.9 ANALYSIS OF UPSTREAM WATER SURFACE PROFILE/AFFLUX/ ........................ 94
3.9.1 Upstream water surface profile determination ...................................................... 94
3.9.2 Approximate method ............................................................................................ 95
3.9.3 Standard step method .......................................................................................... 96
3.10 DESIGN OF HEAD REGULATOR ............................................................................... 97
3.10.1 Location and functions of head regulator structures............................................. 97
3.10.2 Types and selection of intake on diversion weir ................................................... 98
3.10.3 Consideration in fixing intake level and its type .................................................... 98
3.10.4 Intake sizing.......................................................................................................... 99
ii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

3.10.5 Trash racks arrangement at intake structure ...................................................... 101

3.11 DESIGN OF SCOURING-SLUICE ............................................................................. 103
3.11.1 General ............................................................................................................... 103
3.11.2 Functions of scouring-sluice ............................................................................... 103
3.11.3 Locations of scouring-sluice ............................................................................... 103
3.11.4 Design Consideration ......................................................................................... 104
3.11.5 Hydraulic design of scouring sluices .................................................................. 106
3.12 DESIGN OF DIVIDE WALLS ..................................................................................... 109
3.12.1 Location and functions of the divide walls .......................................................... 109
3.12.2 Design consideration of the divide walls ............................................................. 109
3.12.3 Fixing section of a divide wall ............................................................................. 109
3.13 COFFERDAM DESIGN ASPECTS ............................................................................ 110
3.13.1 Functions and location of a cofferdam................................................................ 110
3.13.2 Construction materials of a cofferdam ................................................................ 110
3.13.3 Design considerations of a cofferdam ................................................................ 111
3.13.4 Design considerations of a cofferdam ................................................................ 111
3.14 HYDRAULIC DESIGN ASPECTS OF RETAINING/WING WALLS ........................... 112
3.14.1 Arrangements and functions of retaining/wing walls .......................................... 112
3.14.2 Design considerations for wing walls.................................................................. 112
3.14.3 Selection of wall type .......................................................................................... 113
3.14.4 Data required ...................................................................................................... 113
3.15 STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR ....................................................... 113
3.15.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 113
3.15.2 Structural design considerations for weir and wing-wall ..................................... 114
3.15.3 Structural design aspects of stone masonry ....................................................... 114
3.15.4 Types of gates used in irrigation......................................................................... 115
3.15.5 Design considerations of gates .......................................................................... 116
3.15.6 Design considerations of breast wall .................................................................. 117
3.15.7 Design considerations of gate operating deck.................................................... 118
3.15.8 Bedding under structures ................................................................................... 119
3.15.9 Common loads on irrigation structures ............................................................... 119
3.15.10 Forces acting on a weir and wing wall body ....................................................... 119
3.15.11 Stability analysis of the weir ............................................................................... 121
3.15.12 Stability analysis of retaining and flood protection walls ..................................... 124
3.15.13 Basic engineering property of materials ............................................................. 126
3.15.14 Commonly used standard grades of concrete .................................................... 126
3.15.15 Reinforcement steel............................................................................................ 129
3.15.16 Structural analysis .............................................................................................. 129
3.15.17 Limit state design................................................................................................ 130
3.15.18 Flexural design of reinforced concrete member ................................................. 130
3.15.19 Shear resistance design of reinforced concrete member ................................... 132
3.15.20 Water quality for concrete mix ............................................................................ 132
3.15.21 Minimum structural member thickness requirement ........................................... 132
4 EXPANSION/CONTRACTION JOINTS IN STRUCTURES ................................. 135
4.1 NEED FOR INTRODUCTION OF CONTRACTION/EXPANSION JOINT ................. 135
4.2 JOINT SEALANT........................................................................................................ 135
4.3 JOINT FILLER ............................................................................................................ 136
4.4 DOWEL BAR .............................................................................................................. 136
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design iii

4.5 PVC DOWEL SLEEVE ............................................................................................... 137

4.6 BOND BREAKER TAPE ............................................................................................ 137
4.7 WATER-STOPS ......................................................................................................... 138
4.8 WEEP HOLES............................................................................................................ 139
5 RIVER TRAINING WORKS AROUND HEADWORKS ........................................ 141
5.1 NEEDS FOR RIVER TRAINING WORKS .................................................................. 141
5.2 OBJECTIVES OF RIVER TRAINING OR IMPROVEMENT WORKS ........................ 141
5.3 CONSIDERATIONS IN DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING ........................................... 141
5.3.1 Peak flood level .................................................................................................. 141
5.3.2 Environmental impact assessment and socioeconomic considerations ............. 142
5.3.3 Freeboard requirement for levee ........................................................................ 142
5.3.4 Widths of levee ................................................................................................... 142
5.3.5 Cost–benefit consideration ................................................................................. 142
5.3.6 River cross sections ........................................................................................... 143
5.4 PRINCIPAL METHODS OF RIVER TRAINING ......................................................... 143
5.4.1 River regulation .................................................................................................. 143
5.4.2 Dredging ............................................................................................................. 148
5.5 DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING/FLOOD-PROTECTION WORKS ............................. 148
5.5.1 Required data ..................................................................................................... 148
5.5.2 Alignment of flood protection works.................................................................... 148
5.5.3 Cross section design of guide bank structures ................................................... 149
5.5.4 Design aspects of groynes ................................................................................. 151
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 155
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 157
iv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX I: Typical Values of Manning‟s Roughness Coefficient of Channels ......................... 159
APPENDIX II: Allowable bearing capacity .................................................................................... 159
APPENDIX III: Graphical Determination of Exit Gradient (Khoslas theory) .................................. 160
APPENDIX IV: Khosla's Graph to Determine Uplift Pressure at Cut Off Ends ............................. 161
APPENDIX V: Open Weir, Weir Crest and Contraction Factors ................................................... 162
APPENDIX VI: Seismic Risk Map showing 1:50 earthquake acceleration ................................... 163
APPENDIX VII: Maintenance Activities and Procedures for Diversion Headwork ........................ 164
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Recommended type of weir based on nature of river .................................................... 21
Table 2-2: Summary to select type of diversion weirs .................................................................... 22
Table 3-1: Estimated river flow by floating method for Petu SSI project (SNNPR) ......................... 42
Table 3-2: Pier contraction coefficient ............................................................................................ 46
Table 3-3: Abutment contraction coefficient ................................................................................... 46
Table 3-4: Permissible or non-scouring velocity of flow in rivers, (m/s) .......................................... 47
Table 3-5: recommended looseness factor .................................................................................... 47
Table 3-6: Correction factor for discharge for submerged (non-modular) flow ............................... 53
Table 3-7: Values of the constants K and n (S.K. Garg, 2006) ....................................................... 56
Table 3-8: Summary of types of hydraulic jump ............................................................................. 65
Table 3-9: Selection of energy dissipaters for different range of flows ........................................... 65
Table 3-10: Values of Lane's Creep Coefficient, C and Safe Hydraulic Gradient........................... 69
Table 3-11: Recommended values of Khosla‟s safe exit gradient .................................................. 78
Table 3-12: Values of Khosla‟s corrections for standard slopes ..................................................... 79
Table 3-13: Summary of corrected pressures at various key points ............................................... 82
Table 3-14: Lacey's silt factor "f" .................................................................................................... 84
Table 3-15: Allowable ranges of stability factor .............................................................................. 92
Table 3-16: Estimation of average longitudinal slope of reaches of the river ................................. 96
Table 3-17: Comparison of possible arrangement of intake gate ................................................... 98
Table 3-18: Head loss through trash racks ................................................................................... 102
Table 3-19: Particle Size Distribution and Corresponding Permeability Coefficient ..................... 107
Table 3-20: Average Particle Size, d (mm) for Various Types of Materials .................................. 107
Table 3-21: Summary of common forces acting on weir & wing-wall at different condition .......... 120
Table 3-22: List of possible forces and moments acting on weir section (full flow condition) ....... 124
Table 3-23: Possible Forces & moments acting on wing wall Section (full flow condition) ........... 125
Table 3-24: Unit weights of basic materials .................................................................................. 126
Table 3-25: Internal angle of friction (∅) of Soil ............................................................................ 126
Table 3-26: Allowable bearing pressure of soils ........................................................................... 126
Table 3-27: Commonly used Standard Grades of Concrete ......................................................... 127
Table 3-28: Standard mixes for ordinary structural concrete per 50kg of cement ........................ 128
Table 3-29: Minimum RF-Bars required for crack control of immature concrete .......................... 129
Table 3-30: Permissible shear in concrete (N/mm2) ..................................................................... 129
Table 3-31: Partial safety factor applied to material, m ................................................................ 130
Table 3-32: Partial factor of safety for loadings ............................................................................ 130
Table 3-33: Minimum structure thickness required for weir component ....................................... 133
Table 3-34: Recommended Slump for varies types of constructions ........................................... 133
Table 3-35: Maximum size of aggregate recommend for varies types of construction ................. 133
Table 5-1: Comparison between Spur and groyne ....................................................................... 145
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design v

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Main components of typical concrete diversion weir ...................................................... 7
Figure 2-2: A Sketch of a typical gabion weir (l) and rock-fill weir (r) .............................................. 10
Figure 2-3: Sketches of typical rectangular (l) and trapezoidal/glacis type weirs (r) ....................... 11
Figure 2-4: Typical longitudinal section of rcc (l) cyclopean concrete weir (r) ................................ 11
Figure 2-5: Ogee weir shape and corresponding parameters (Khatsuria, 2005) ............................ 12
Figure 2-6: Different shapes of ogee weir (Khatsuria, 2005) .......................................................... 12
Figure 2-7: Typical longitudinal section through broad crested weir ............................................... 13
Figure 2-8: Typical section of sharp crested weir ........................................................................... 14
Figure 2-9: Position of water level relative to crest level (typical) ................................................... 15
Figure 2-10: Schematic view of cross section through weir (a) and barrage (b) ........................... 17
Figure 2-11: Partial view of barrage weir on bilate river ................................................................. 17
Figure 2-12: Collapsed weir as a result of piping (L) & scouring & absence of wings (R) .............. 19
Figure 2-13: USBR Stilling Basin, Type-I........................................................................................ 23
Figure 2-14: USBR Stilling Basin, Type-II....................................................................................... 23
Figure 2-15: View of USBR stilling basin, type-III ........................................................................... 24
Figure 2-16: USBR stilling basin, type-IV ....................................................................................... 25
Figure 2-17: Typical gravity masonry retaining wall (Halcrow-ULG, 1988)..................................... 27
Figure 2-18: Alternative gravity masonry retaining wall arrangement............................................. 28
Figure 2-19: Cross sections of typical cantilever retaining walls .................................................... 28
Figure 2-20: Cross sections of typical retaining walls with counterforts ......................................... 29
Figure 3-1: Design procedures and steps for weir/barrage design ................................................. 38
Figure 3-2: Stage-discharge-curve for Petu SSI Project (SNNPR) ................................................. 40
Figure 3-3: Channel cross sections at U/S and D/S ends of flow measurement site ..................... 43
Figure 3-4: Typical Cross Section through and Arrangement of Barrage Diversion ....................... 50
Figure 3-5: Schematic Arrangements of Flow Heads over a Weir (Typical) ................................... 51
Figure 3-6: Recommended values of Kp and Ka ............................................................................ 52
Figure 3-7: Components of ogee weir, (S.K. Garg, 2006) .............................................................. 56
Figure 3-8: Discharge Coefficients for Vertical Faced Ogee weir (mowr, 2002) ............................. 57
Figure 3-9: Discharge coefficients for other than the design head (MoWR, 2002) ......................... 57
Figure 3-10: Discharge Coefficients for Ogee Shaped Crest with Sloping u/s Face ...................... 57
Figure 3-11: Effects of downstream influences on flow over weir crests ........................................ 58
Figure 3-12: Ratio of discharge coefficients resulting from apron effects ....................................... 58
Figure 3-13: H-Q relation for Selecting Coefficient of Discharge, C (MoWR, 2002) ....................... 60
Figure 3-14: Hydraulic Jump Interpreted By Specific Energy Curve .............................................. 63
Figure 3-15: Insufficient Basin Length as Resulted in d/s Retrogression (SNNPR) ....................... 68
Figure 3-16: Assumed Pressure Distribution under the Base Profile of the Structure .................... 69
Figure 3-17: Schematic Representation of Khosla‟s Flow Net ....................................................... 72
Figure 3-18: Simple Standard Profiles of Weir Floors of Khosla‟s proposals ................................. 74
Figure 3-19: Simplified profile at upstream (left) & downstream (right) of diversion headwork ...... 76
Figure 3-20: Schematic Cross Section of Glacis Weir for Khosla‟s Flow Net Analysis .................. 79
Figure 3-21: Hydraulic mean depth, hydraulic mean radius and mean flow depth ......................... 83
Figure 3-22: Typical weir cross section (for Design Exercise) ........................................................ 87
Figure 3-23: Arrangement of launching apron on horizontal floor (S.K. Garg, 2006) ..................... 88
Figure 3-24: Inverted filter and flexible (launching/talus) apron (P. Novak, 2007) .......................... 88
Figure 3-25: Typical arrangement of launching apron at an angle (S.K. Garg, 2006) .................... 88
Figure 3-26: Typical arrangement of launching apron on channel bed (Novak et al., 2007) .......... 89
Figure 3-27: Dumped or hand-placed or plated riprap, HEC-11, 1997 ........................................... 90
vi SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

Figure 3-28: Rock filled gabion (L) and under preparation (R) ....................................................... 93
Figure 3-29: Arrangement of mattresses (L) block gabions (R) ...................................................... 94
Figure 3-30: Schematic view of backwater profile .......................................................................... 95
Figure 3-31: Representative computation grids by standard step method ..................................... 97
Figure 3-32: Typical trash rack arrangement at intake structure .................................................. 102
Figure 3-33: Relative Arrangements of Typical Intake and Silt Gates .......................................... 105
Figure 3-34: Flow Profile in u/s of Scouring Sluice Channel, (JICA-OIDA, 2014) ........................ 107
Figure 3-35: Typical arrangement of cofferdam around construction zone .................................. 110
Figure 3-36: Check structure with slide gate (Thicknesses are in mm) ........................................ 116
Figure 3-37: Washout gate operated by Spindle (L) and sluice gate by chain block (R) .............. 116
Figure 3-38: Forces acting on a Critical Section of a Weir ........................................................... 121
Figure 3-39: Forces acting on wing wall or retaining wall ............................................................. 125
Figure 3-40: Section with stress diagram and stress block for singly reinforced section .............. 130
Figure 4-1: Sealant as seen in joints of concrete slabs ................................................................ 135
Figure 4-2: Joint fillers in concrete works ..................................................................................... 136
Figure 4-3: Dowel Bar Arrangement in Concrete Works .............................................................. 137
Figure 4-4: Plastic screw dowel and dowel bar sleeves ............................................................... 137
Figure 4-5: Bond breaker and its effect on concrete crack ........................................................... 138
Figure 4-6: Different types of water stops ..................................................................................... 139
Figure 5-1: Arrangement of groynes along river bank, gabion (L) Bamboo (R) ............................ 144
Figure 5-2: Schematic layout of groynes along river bank ............................................................ 144
Figure 5-3: Attracting, repelling and deflecting Groynes (L to R resp.) ......................................... 145
Figure 5-4: Arrangement of check Dams along River Reach ....................................................... 145
Figure 5-5: Arrangement of sill/Bed Sill along river bank (from Tree Trunks and Branches) ....... 146
Figure 5-6: Levee/dykes arrangement along river bank and its section ....................................... 146
Figure 5-7: Rock riprap (L) and protection by gabion at u/s of river crossing (R) ......................... 148
Figure 5-8: Schematic Plan of Guide Bank extended from Wing Wall ......................................... 149
Figure 5-9: Typical Cross-Section through Guide Bank ............................................................... 151
Figure 5-10: Typical Plan and Cross Sections of Groynes along River Bank ............................... 153
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design vii

viii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

ACRONYMS
AGP Agricultural Growth Program

BCW Broad Crested Weir
D Scour depth below river bed
d1or y1 Depth of flow before jump
d2or y2 Depth of flow after jump
dcor yc Critical depth of flow
DFL Design Flood Level
ESRDF Ethiopian Social Rehabilitation and Development Fund
Fr Froude number
GIRDC Generation Integrated Rural Development Consultant
Hav Approach velocity head
Hd Flow depth on the crest
HEC Hydrologic Engineering Center
HFL High Flood Level
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
L Length
m meter
m3/s Cubic meter per second
MoANR Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resource
MoWIE Ministry of Water Irrigation and Electricity
MoWR Ministry of Water Resource
OIDA Oromia Irrigation Development Authority
q Unit discharge per meter
Q Discharge
Qd Peak demand or discharge of canal
Qp Design Flood for the Selected Return Period i.e. Q50 in this Manual
R Hydraulic mean depth or scour depth or Hydraulic radius
RBL River Bed Level
RCC Reinforced concrete
RF Reinforcement Bar
SB Stilling Basin
SSID Small Scale Irrigation Development
SSIGL Small Scale Irrigation Guideline
SSIP Small Scale Irrigation Project
SSIS Small Scale Irrigation Scheme
TWD Tail Water Depth
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design ix

USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation

WC Weir Crest
WCL Weir Crest Level
WES Waterways Experiment Stations, US Army of Engineers
WL Water Level
x SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

PREFACE
While irrigation development is at the top of the government‟s priority agendas as it is key to boost
production and improve food security as well as to provide inputs for industrial development.
Accordingly, irrigated land in different scales has been aggressively expanding from time to time.
To this end, to enhance quality delivery of small-scale irrigation development planning,
implementation and management, it has been decided to develop standard SSI guidelines that
must be nationally applied. In September 2017 the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) had entrusted
Generation Integrated Rural Development Consultant (GIRDC) to prepare the National Small-
scale Irrigation Development Guidelines (SSIGLs).
Preparation of the SSIGLs for enhancing development of irrigated agriculture is recognized as one
of the many core initiatives of the MoA to improve its delivery system and achieve the targets in
irrigated agriculture and fulfill its mission for improving agricultural productivity and production. The
core objective of developing SSIGLs is to summarize present thinking, knowledge and practices to
enable irrigation practitioners to properly plan, implement and manage community managed SSI
schemes to develop the full irrigation potential in a sustainable manner.
As the SSIGLs are prepared based on national and international knowledge, experiences and
practices, and describe current and recommended practice and set out the national standard
guides and procedures for SSI development, they serve as a source of information and provide
guidance. Hence, it is believed that the SSIGLs will contribute to ensuring the quality and timely
delivery, operation and maintenance of SSI schemes in the country. The SSIGLs attempt to
explain and illustrate the important concepts, considerations and procedures in SSI planning,
implementation and management; and shall be used as a guiding framework for professionals
engaged in SSI development. Illustrative examples from within the country have been added to
enable the users understand the contents, methodologies presented in the SSIGLs.
The intended audiences of the SSIGLs are government organizations, NGOs, CSOs and the
private sector involved in SSI development. Professionally, the SSIGLs will be beneficial for
experienced and junior planners, experts, contractors, consultants, suppliers, investors, operators
and managers of SSI schemes. The SSIGLs will also serve as a useful reference for academia
and researchers involved and interested in SSI development. The SSIGLs will guide to ensure
that; planning, implementation and management of SSI projects is formalized and set procedures
and processes to be followed. As the SSIGLs provide information and guides they must be always
fully considered and applied by adapting them to the local specific requirements.
In cognizance with the need for quality SSIGLs, the MoA has duly considered quality assurance
and control during preparation of the guidelines. Accordingly, the outlines, contents and scope of
the SSIGLs were thoroughly discussed, reviewed and modified by NAWMP members (senior
professionals from public, national and international stakeholder) with key stakeholders in many
consultative meetings and workshops. Moreover, at each milestone of SSIGL preparation,
resource persons from all stakeholders reviewed and confirmed that SSIGLs have met the
demands and expectations of users.
Moreover, the Ministry has mobilized resource persons from key Federal, National Regional States
level stakeholders and international development partners for review, validation and endorsement
of the SSIGLs.
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design xi

Several hundreds of experienced professionals (who are very qualified experts in their respective
fields) from government institutions, relevant private sector and international development partners
have significantly contributed to the preparation of the SSIGLs. They have been involved in all
aspects of the development of SSIGLs throughout the preparation process. The preparation
process included a number of consultation meetings and workshops: (i) workshop to review
inception report, (ii) workshop on findings of review of existing guidelines/manuals and proposed
contents of the SSIGLs, (iii) meetings to review zero draft SSI GLs, (iv) review workshop on draft
SSI GLs, (v) small group review meetings on thematic areas, (vi) small group consultation
meetings on its final presentation of contents and layout, (vii) consultation mini-workshops in the
National States on semi-final versions of the SSIGLs, and (viii) final write-shop for the appraisal
and approval of the final versions of SSIGLs.
The deliberations, concerns, suggestions and comments received from professionals have been
duly considered and incorporated by the GIRD Consultant in the final SSIGLs.
There are 34 separate guidelines which are categorized into the following five parts concurrent to
SSI development phases:
Part-I. Project Initiation, Planning and Organization Guideline which deals with key considerations
and procedures on planning and organization of SSI development projects.
Part-II. Site Identification and Prioritization Guideline which treats physical potential identification
and prioritization of investment projects. It presents SSI site selection process and
prioritization criteria.
Part-III. Feasibility Study and Detail Design Guidelines for SSID dealing with feasibility study
and design concepts, approaches, considerations, requirements and procedures in the
study and design of SSI systems.
Part-IV. Contract Administration and Construction Management Guidelines for SSI development
presents the considerations, requirements, and procedures involved in construction of
works, construction supervision and contract administration.
Part-V. SSI Scheme Management, Operation and Maintenance Guidelines which covers SSI
Scheme management and operation.
Moreover, Tools for Small Scale Irrigation development are also prepared as part of SSIGLs.
It is strongly believed and expected that; the SSIGLs will be quickly applied by all stakeholders
involved in SSI development and others as appropriate following the dissemination and
familiarization process of the guidelines in order to ensure efficient, productive and sustainable
irrigation development.
The SSIGLs are envisioned to be updated by incorporating new technologies and experiences
including research findings. Therefore, any suggestions, concerns, recommendations and
comments on the SSIGLs are highly appreciated and welcome for future updates as per the
attached format below. Furthermore, despite efforts in making all types of editorial works, there
may still errors, which similarly shall be handled in future undated versions.
xii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

UPDATING AND REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES

The GLs are intended as an up-to-date or a live document enabling revisions, to be updated
periodically to incorporate improvements, when and where necessary; may be due to evolving
demands, technological changes and changing policies, and regulatory frameworks. Planning,
study and design of SSI development interventions is a dynamic process. Advancements in these
aspects are necessary to cope up with the changing environment and advancing techniques. Also,
based on observation feedbacks and experiences gained during application and implementation of
the guidelines, there might be a need to update the requirements, provisions and procedures, as
appropriate. Besides, day-by-day, water is becoming more and more valuable. Hence, for efficient
water development, utilization and management will have to be designed, planned and
constructed with a new set up of mind to keep pace with the changing needs of the time. It may,
therefore, be necessary to take up the work of further revision of these GLs.
This current version of the GLs has particular reference to the prevailing conditions in Ethiopia and
reflects the experience gained through activities within the sub-sector during subsequent years.
This is the first version of the SSI development GLs. This version shall be used as a starting point
for future update, revision and improvement. Future updating and revisions to the GLs are
anticipated as part of the process of strengthening the standards for planning, study, design,
construction, operation and management SSI development in the country.
Completion of the review and updating of the GLs shall be undertaken in close consultation with
the federal and regional irrigation institutions and other stakeholders in the irrigation sub-sector
including the contracting and consulting industry.
In summary, significant changes to criteria, procedures or any other relevant issues related to
technological changes, new policies or revised laws should be incorporated into the GLs from their
date of effectiveness. Other minor changes that will not significantly affect the whole nature of the
GLs may be accumulated and made periodically. When changes are made and approved, new
page(s) incorporating the revision, together with the revision date, will be issued and inserted into
the relevant GL section.
All suggestions to improve the GLs should be made in accordance with the following procedures:
I. Users of the GLs must register on the MOA website: Website: www.moa.gov.et
II. Proposed changes should be outlined on the GLs Change Form and forwarded with a
covering letter or email of its need and purpose to the Ministry.
III. Agreed changes will be approved by the Ministry on recommendation from the Small-scale
Irrigation Directorate and/or other responsible government body.
IV. The release date of the new version will be notified to all registered users and authorities.
Users are kindly requested to present their concerns, suggestions, recommendations and
comments for future updates including any omissions and/or obvious errors by completing the
following revisions form and submitting it to the Ministry. The Ministry shall appraise such requests
for revision and will determine if an update to the guide is justified and necessary; and when such
updates will be published. Revisions may take the form of replacement or additional pages. Upon
receipt, revision pages are to be incorporated in the GLs and all superseded pages removed.
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design xiii

Suggested Revisions Request Form (Official Letter or Email)
To: ---------------------------------------------------------------
From: -----------------------------------------------------------
Date: -----------------------------------------------------------
Description of suggested updates/changes: Include GL code and title, section title and #
(heading/subheading #), and page #.
GL Code and Date Sections/ Explanation Comments (proposed

Title Heading/Subheading/ change)
Pages/Table/Figure
Note that be specific and include suggested language if possible and include additional sheets for
comments, reference materials, charts or graphics.
GLs Change Action

Suggested Change Recommended Action Authorized by Date
Director for SSI Directorate: _______________________Date: ________________
The following table helps to track initial issuance of the guidelines and subsequent Updates/Versions and
Revisions (Registration of Amendments/Updates).
Revision Register
Version/Issue/Revision Reference/Revised Description of Authorized Date
No Sections/Pages/topics revision by
(Comments)
xiv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GUIDELINE
1.1.1 Main objective
To achieve at the above development interventions, the main objective of this guideline is to
capacitate active participants of the field of irrigation development sector under the existing
conditions to arrive at the most suitable and quality design and consequently increase agricultural
production and productivity through developing traditional and modern small scale irrigation
projects.
1.1.2 Specific objective
Specific objectives of this component of the guideline is to lay down study and design outlines,
present the stepwise procedures and templates for designing geometry, hydraulic and structural
aspects in terms of:
 Diversion weir structures,
 Energy dissipaters,
 Barrage structures,
 Wing walls,
 Flood protection structures,
 River training works around headworks, and
 Other related appurtenant components.
1.2 SCOPES OF THE GUIDELINE
This guideline gives a detailed design procedures including templates to be followed for the
hydraulic and structural design of diversion headwork structures mainly broad crested weir, ogee
weir, barrage and related components. The diversion structures considered in this guideline are
those structures with a height not exceeding 3.0m. However, height in excess of this limit requires
sound economic, social and other decisive justification. The structure to be considered here could
be submerged or free over-fall and it may be established either on rocky or permeable foundation.
Its longitudinal length could extend as long as to the requirement of piping and/or energy
dissipation requirement, whichever govern. Its width also extends to the existing channel width
and/or the requirement to bypass the expected return period flood without disturbing the
surrounding ecosystem.
1.3 DEFINITIONS OF TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGIES USED IN THE GUIDELINE
For the purpose of easily understandability of this guideline, the following technical definitions for
important terminologies as used in this guideline have been given:
 Abutment: That is part of a valley side against which the structure is constructed.
Artificial abutments are sometimes constructed to take the thrust on the structure where
there is no suitable natural abutment.
 Afflux: It is the rise in the high flood level of the river above normal level upstream of the
weir (or the bridge in case of non-erodible soils), or barrage, as a result of its
construction. It is the difference in water level at any point upstream of weir before and
after its construction. Thus, maximum afflux is expected just upstream of the
barrage/weir and declines gradually while moving upstream.
SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design 1

 Apron: Is the floor area at the upstream or downstream end of a diversion headwork
structure to protect the floor against erosion and scouring by water.
 Banks: Are lateral boundaries of a channel or stream, as indicated by a scarp, or on the
inside of bends, by the stream ward edge of permanent vegetal growth.
 Barrage is practically a low weir provided with an adjustable gate over it. Thus heading
up of water is affected by gate. This is usually practiced in the case of wider channels so
as to minimize cost of the solid structure and to provide a strong benefit where the
sediment load of a river flow is enormous. In this case, if flow in the river is limited, pond
level = Crest level + shutter height; but in case of weir, pond level  Crest level.
 Bed material: Is deposit of materials in bed of a river consisting of particle sizes large
enough to be found in appreciable quantities at the surface of a streambed.
 Canal: Is a long thin stretch of artificially made waterway for taking water from one area
to another or allow movement of boats from one point to the other;
 Capacity: A measure of the capability of a channel or conduit to convey water;
 Channel: Is the bed and banks that confine the surface flow of a natural or artificial
stream;
 Cofferdam: Is a temporary structure enclosing all or part of the diversion headwork
construction area so that construction can proceed in dry conditions. A diversion
cofferdam diverts a stream into a pipe or channel or tunnel (as in case of dam).
 Control section: Is a cross section, such as a bridge crossing, reach of channel, or
dam, with limited flow capacity, and where the discharge is related to the upstream
water-surface elevation. In an open channel, it is a cross-section where critical flow
conditions take place. The concept of „control‟ and „control section‟ can be used with the
same meaning/alternately.
 Crest length: Is that part of the diversion headwork on which the design flood is
bypassed i.e. waterway. If there are piers at both ends or on one side or in between
them, then the crest length which is accountable for bypassing this flood is the
difference of total crest length and cumulative thickness of these piers, which we call it
effective crest length.
 Critical depth: Is a depth at which water flows over a weir; this depth being attained
automatically where no backwater forces are involved. It is the depth at which the
energy content i.e. specific energy of flow is a minimum for the given discharge;
 Cross-section: is a hypothetical section line which defines the shape of a channel,
stream, or valley as viewed across its axis. In watershed investigations it is determined
by a line approximately perpendicular to the main path of water flow, along which
measurements of distance and elevation are taken to define the cross-sectional area;
 Cut-off wall: Is a wall that extends from the end of a structure to below the expected
scour depth or scour-resistant material for the whole crest length to control piping in the
foundation.
 Design discharge or flow: Is the rate of flow for which a hydraulic structure is
designed. Thus the structure is expected to accommodate it without exceeding the
adopted design constraints. It is also called design flood and is defined as maximum
flood selected/desired for certain return period that any structure can safely pass.
 Diversion headwork also called diversion weir or barrage is an overflow i.e. weir or
underflow i.e. barrage structure with or without shutter. It is constructed at the head of
main canals in order to divert river water toward the canal, so as to ensure a regulated
continuous irrigation water supply which is mostly silt free water with certain minimum
head into the canal. It can also be defined as a structure/facility/ies which is built at the
head reach of conveyance canals for abstracting water from a river into a canal and/or
pipe for irrigation purpose. It is one of the headwork structures, and is generally a solid
obstruction/structure placed across the river to raise irrigation water to required
head/level and allows it to turn away flow in to intake structures/ head regulators so as
to irrigate the command area by gravity.
2 SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

 Divide wall: is a long wall structure which is made as high as top level of wing walls or
top of crest level depending on size of sluice gate in order to divide the river flow
between the under sluice and the main over pass or underpass section of the headwork
structure. It may be constructed with stone masonry or cement concrete.
 Driving head: is the energy head above top lip of the intake (soffit level) to the design
water level or pond level on the upstream of the diversion headwork and is required to
motivate flow in to head-regulator side as per the demand.
 End Sill: This is a solid structure situated at end of stilling basin for serving as energy
dissipation arrangements.
 Energy grade line: Is a hypothetical line joining elevation of energy heads; a line drawn
above the hydraulic grade line a distance equivalent to the velocity head of the flowing
water at each section along a stream, channel, or conduit;
 Exit Gradient (EG): The slope (or gradient) of hydraulic grade line (for subsoil seepage
flow), at the exit end of the structure where the seepage water comes out from subsoil.
When the upward seepage force acting on soil at the exit end of the structure is exactly
balanced by the submerged weight of the soil, the exit gradient is known as the Critical
Exit Gradient, CEG.
 Fish ladder is provided just by the side of the divide wall for free movement of fishes. In
general, fishes tend to move from upstream to downstream in rainy season and from
downstream to upstream in dry season. Thus we should allow such essential movement
of fishes for their survival (if any from Environmental study report). In the fish ladder,
baffle walls are constructed in a zigzag manner so that velocity of flow within the ladder
remain small or does not exceed 3 m/s. The width, length, and height of the fish ladder
depend on the nature of the river and the type of the weir or barrage.
 Floodplain: Is the alluvial land bordering a stream or river bank, and is formed by
stream processes and is subjected to inundation by floods;
 Floor length: is the total length of impervious floor provided upstream or downstream of
a structure. It consists of upstream floor, upstream glacis, downstream glacis,
downstream stilling basin and end sill.
 Freeboard: is the vertical distance between level of the water surface usually
corresponding to design flow including afflux and a point of interest such as top of a
wing-wall or flood protection dyke.
 Froude number: It is a dimensionless number proportional to the square root of the
ratio of the inertial forces to gravitational force i.e. to the weight of fluid.
 Gabion: It is a cylindrical metal container made of wickerwork basket which is to be
filled with rocks/stones and/or earth material for use in the construction and rerouting of
waterways, diversion weir and in flood control.
 Gate: This is a valve or system for controlling/regulating the passage of water. In open
channels the two most common types of gates are the underflow gates (e.g. scouring
sluice gate and Intake gate) and the overflow gates (e.g. Shutter gate in barrages).
 Guide bank: When a barrage is constructed across a river which flows through the
alluvial soil, the guide banks must be constructed on both the approaches to protect the
structure from erosion. It is an earthen embankment with curved head on both the ends.
It serves: (a) To protect the barrage from the effect of scouring and erosion. (b) To
control tendency of changing the course of the river. (c) To control velocity of flow near
the structure.
 Head: is the difference in water level between two reference points and is thus energy
required to drive water from higher point to the lower point (for gravity flow).
 Head-loss is energy dissipated due to the resistance to flow from the material in which
it is flowing, hl = S*L= H, for open channel flow, where H-is head difference, S-is
longitudinal slope, L-is length but for pipe flow, hl = hf+KV2/2g.
 Headwork: is any hydraulic structure located across the stream or on the lake,
reservoir and/or ground water to collect, reserve or divert water for irrigating crops
and/or hydropower use. Thus it includes Diversion Headwork/Weir, Free Intake

structure, Pump, Spring Protection or Development, Dam and Ground water extraction.
In a storage system, such structure is called a 'Storage dam' and the main body of the
structure is mostly 'Earth-dam' where-as for a diversion system, it is called a 'Weir', and
the water pool is called a 'Pond'.
 Hydraulic jump: is a flow phenomenon in which flow transit from a rapid or supercritical
flow to a slow flow motion i.e. subcritical flow;
 Intake structure: It is also called ahead regulator structure, is a structure on the
headwork to divert or offtake flow. In a diversion headwork, it is situated at the
immediate upstream end of a headwork consisting of a chamber, trash-rack, gate and
sometimes provision for stop-logs. It is thus part of the structure in a weir through which
water is drawn into a canal or pipe by extending to upstream end of a channel;
 Irrigation project: is a time bounded activities consisting of development of irrigation
and related infrastructures like access road, bridge, camping, drainage, on-farm
structures, social service structures, etc. for supporting artificial watering of land to
sustain plant growth.
 Marginal embankments or dykes: are earthen embankments which are constructed
parallel to and on either or both sides of the river bank based on prevailing condition to
prevent the flood water from inundating the surrounding area and facilities.
 Meandering channel: is an alluvial stream characterized by a series of alternating
bends (i.e. meanders) as a result of alluvial processes;
 Normal depth: Is a uniform equilibrium open channel flow depth. It is the depth of flow
in a channel or culvert when the slope of the water surface and channel bottom is the
same and the water depth remains constant. Normal depth occurs when gravitational
force of the water is equal to the friction drag along the culvert and there is no
acceleration of flow;
 Piping is a phenomenon which results when flownet beneath the structure having
pressure at downstream end of the structure is more than critical exit gradient and thus
brings soil particles with it on the downstream side. Such seepage, if uncontrolled
causes springing at the downstream and finally results in hollows under the floor
causing collapse of the floor and/or the structure as a whole.
 Pond level: The level of water, immediately upstream of the headwork. It is required to
facilitate withdrawal into the canal or for any other purpose. In case of a diversion weir,
the pool level is at the crest level of the weir;
 Protection works: These are protection mechanisms which are required both on the
u/s and d/s of a weir to prevent possibility of a scour hole moving close to the u/s or d/s
Cut-offs which otherwise undermine the structure. On the u/s side the need is due to
higher velocities of flow near the structure due to draw down; whereas, on the d/s side
the need is due to the turbulent nature of flow as it leaves stilling basin to guard against
higher than expected exit gradients. When a weir is constructed on rock, such protection
works are not required. They include block works like apron and inverted filter and
launching apron;
 Riprap: It is a layer of rock, either dumped or hand-placed to prevent erosion, scour or
erosion of river bed or sloughing of river bank.
 River training: is the stabilization of the channel in order to maintain the desired cross
section and alignment. Its purpose is for maintaining sufficient channel conveyance
capacity and depth so that the intended design flood may not overtop the bank and
inundate the surrounding.
 Scour: Is a hydraulic phenomenon characterized by removal of bed material. It is
caused by the eroding power of the flow.
 Sediment: is any material carried in suspension by the flow or as bed-load which would
settle to the bottom of hydraulic structures in the absence of flow;
 Silt factor, f is a factor related to grain size and defines average particle size of the
material forming bed of channels;
 Specific energy: is that part of the total energy measured above the bed level of
channel i.e. the potential energy is ignored. It is quantity proportional to the energy per

unit mass, measured with the channel bottom as the elevation datum, and expressed in
meters of water.
 Stilling basin: is a solid impervious floor or apron structure on the downstream of a
main weir body, spillway, outlet work, chute or canal structure. It is required to dissipate
excess energy of falling water in the form of hydraulic jump so as to prevent scour and
undermining of structures and damage from waves;
 Stop-log: is a form of gate comprising a series of wooden planks, one above the other,
and held at each end to be used when maintaining main gate.
 Streamlines: These are the lines drawn so that the velocity vector is always tangential
to them i.e. no flow across a streamline. They are imaginary flow lines that are always
parallel to the local direction of the flow, and that for steady flow are also the lines
followed by individual fluid particles. When the streamlines converge it shows the
velocity is increasing;
 Subcritical flow: is flow in open channel when the flow depth is larger than the critical
flow depth or the Froude number, Fr< 1. In practice, subcritical flows are controlled by
the downstream flow conditions. It is a flow where the predominant part of the specific
energy is dictated by the depth of flow i.e. the gravitational force is in excess of the
inertia force.
 Supercritical flow: is flow in open channel when flow depth is less than the critical flow
depth. In a supercritical flow the Froude number, Fr is larger than one. Supercritical
flows are controlled from upstream. It is a flow where the predominant part of the
specific energy is dictated by the velocity head i.e. the inertia force is in excess of the
gravitational force.
 Submerged flow: is flow condition which exists when a change in the downstream
water surface elevation causes a change in the upstream water surface elevation. Thus,
downstream energy influences flow rate at that specific control section.
 Tail water depth: This is the normal depth of flow immediately downstream of the
structure;
 Under-sluice: is a flushing device in a diversion headwork structure constructed
adjustment to the head regulator on one and/or two abutments to control entry of
sediment in to intake structures by rejecting sediment during flooding.
 Uplift: is an upward pore water pressure or interstitial pressure in the pores of bed
material under the base of hydraulic structures. It can led to the destruction of stilling
basins and even to the failures of concrete dams, if not treated/managed, thus it dictates
the thickness of floor of stilling basins;
 Weir crest: is part of the diversion weir structure over which excess flow passes from
upstream to the downstream side. Its top level must be above the intake level so a s to
enable required flow depth to the intake side.
 Wing walls: are also called retaining walls and are designed immediately on the u/s
and/or d/s of main weir body to protect submergence of the structure as well as its
environs during flooding. They are laid on an impervious concrete floor either on one
and/or both sides of the weir depending on stability and nature of surrounding
topography.


2 DIVERSION WEIR AND ITS APPURTENANCES

2.1 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF TYPICAL DIVERSION WEIR
Any design engineer must know functions of a diversion headwork and its appurtenances and
visualize it so as to fix its size which best fits the existing conditions at the selected site. The
following figure shows a typical arrangement of diversion weir with its main components.
Figure 2-1: Main components of typical concrete diversion weir

2.2 FUNCTIONS OF DIVERSION HEADWORK AND ITS COMPONENTS
2.2.1 Functions of diversion headwork
The following are main functions of diversion headwork based on their purpose:
 To regulate water supplies in to the off-taking canal and river downstream,
 To raise water level in the river for maximizing the size of command area;
 To provide a stable riverbed level to abstract regulated flow from the river;
 To provide an impermeable cut-off to bed rock and drive sub-surface flow to the surface
often a major requirement for weirs in arid climates;
 To sustain continuous flow towards the intake;
 To reduce the beneficiaries work load in constructing temporary diversion bunds after
every flood season;
 To increase reliability of water supply.
 To form a temporary storage by construction of dykes on both side of banks of the river
so that water is available throughout the year.
 To control entry of silt into the canal and to control the deposition of silt at the head of
canal head regulator, and
 To control fluctuation of water level in the river during different seasons,
 To provide a positive cut-off to bed rock and thus drive sub-surface flow to the surface.
2.2.2 Components of a diversion headwork
To achieve at the aforementioned functions of diversion headwork, the structure need to comprise
either part or all of the following components based on site specific conditions and intended
purpose:
 Main weir body including part between sluices channels (Necessary)
 Intake Structure also called head regulator and that part embedded in wing walls
(Necessary)
 Sediment exclusion structures, like Scour/Under sluice and/or sand trap (Necessary)
 Silt Ejector (Conditional, depending on transported bed material condition)
 Intake and Under-sluice gates, i.e. spindle or sliding depending on flood condition
(Necessary)
 Stilling Basin and End Sill (depending on local bed material condition and magnitude of
flood) (Conditional, based on d/s foundation condition)
 Protection Works (Conditional, depending on local bed material condition)
 Divide Wall (Conditional, depending on amount of lean flow availability)
 Wing walls (Conditional, depending on size of flood, bank stability and level of
surrounding ground)
 River training bunds/marginal embankments or dykes (Conditional, depending on
magnitude of flood and level of surrounding areas and facilities)
 Guide Bank (Conditional, depending on magnitude of flood and level of surrounding
ground)
 Fish Ladder (Conditional, depending on availability of such resources)

2.3 CLASSIFICATION OF WEIR
2.3.1 General
Based on the availability of construction material, nature of flow and foundation condition at the
diversion site, the design engineer is expected to select types of diversion weir that suit to the
selected site. Consequently, understanding their types and characteristics is very crucial in order
to select the appropriate one for the proposed headwork site. The following sections present
classification of weir based on different considerations..
2.3.2 Classification of weir based on purposes
Based on their functions, weirs can be divided in to:
2.3.2.1 Diversion weirs
These are solid obstructions put across the river to raise or heading up its water level and divert
the water into the conveyance canal. Thus they are weir types constructed across a river for the
purpose of diverting water in to the canal. They are used for irrigation as well as hydropower
purposes.
2.3.2.2 Pick up weirs
In this case, there is separate storage dam upstream and the reservoir water is then released in to
the river through supply sluices or bottom outlet in a regulated manner. This released water is
allowed to flow through its natural channel and then picked up by constructing a weir across the
river where conveyance canal take off. A series of such pick up weirs may be constructed to utilize
the available water. Such type of weir are usually used where the distance between the location of
the reservoir (water storage) and its command is quite very far and uneconomical to construct a
canal and the natural channel is expected to have very low water losses due to seepage. The
pickup weir below Kessem dam is a typical example.
2.3.2.3 Storage weirs
These types of weir are also called low dams as they are used for storing water temporarily for
tiding over small periods of short supplies. They are used to account for the case when the
upstream farmers use large amounts of water and there is a risk of not getting the scheduled
minimal flow for the downstream ones, e.g. Cherechera Weir at starting point of Abbay River is
used as a storage/regulating weir.
2.3.2.4 Waste weirs
These are also called discharge weir and serve as discharge levelers and are generally used as
spillway for reservoirs to protect the reservoir and the main storage dam.
2.3.2.5 Gauging/ measuring weir
Such weirs are used as a control structure for measurement of discharge on a river or canal.

2.3.3 Classification based on construction material
Diversion weirs can be subdivided in to three types based on material used for construction,
design features and types of soil foundation. It can also be classified based on stabilizing factor
though in this case, it can be made from any one or combinations of the aforementioned
categories.
2.3.3.1 Masonry weir
This type of weir is made from locally available sound rock material. It is the most commonly
constructed type for SSI Projects in our country. Here, a crest gate may or may not be provided to
store more water during flood period. At the u/s and d/s ends of impervious floor, cut off piles are
provided if foundation material is loose. Launching aprons are also provided both at u/s and d/s
ends of floor to safeguard against scouring action. A graded filter is provided immediately at the
d/s end of impervious floor to relieve uplift pressure. This type of weir is suitable for any type of
foundation. It is of usually constructed with vertical face in the u/s and sloping in the d/s face.
2.3.3.2 Rock-fill/Gabion weir
Such a weir is also called 'Dry Stone Sloping Weir'. It consists of body wall. Dry stones are laid in
the form of glacis with some intervening core wall on its upstream and downstream sides. It is
suitable for fine sandy foundations like those in alluvial areas. Such a weir requires huge quantities
of stone and is economical when stone is easily available. The stability of such a weir is not
amenable to theoretical treatment. However, with the development of concrete glacis weirs, this
type of weir is also becoming obsolete. They usually have sloping apron as shown below.
HFL
Gabion Weir body

WCL
RBLU/S RBLD/S
SB Level
Figure 2-2: A Sketch of a typical gabion weir (l) and rock-fill weir (r)
Concrete glacis weirs type are now exclusively used especially on permeable foundations and are
generally provided with a low crest with counter-balanced gates, thus, making it a barrage.
2.3.3.3 Concrete weirs
This type of weir is the strongest and it is constructed from the most expensive material, thus used
when we don‟t care for cost of the structure but try to manage incoming high flood magnitude and
flood carrying large boulders. It is selected when the foundation material is soft and sandy and
used where difference in weir crest and downstream riverbed is not more than 3 m. Hydraulic jump
is formed when water passes over the sloping glacis. Weir of this type is of recent origin and
commonly has sloping glacis.

Figure 2-3: Sketches of typical rectangular (l) and trapezoidal/glacis type weirs (r)
In this family of weir types, there are two subgroups: Reinforced Concrete and Cyclopean concrete
weirs. In Reinforced Concrete weir, all components aprons, crest, glacis, etc. are constructed out
of reinforced concrete. Mostly sloping downstream glacis is provided to create hydraulic jump in a
short distance. In case of cyclopean concrete, the major control sections of the weir is constructed
out of cyclopean concrete i.e. a mix of rubble stone and cement concrete at the ratio of 1:1.9,as
per MOWE Guide line, 2002.
Figure 2-4: Typical longitudinal section of rcc (l) cyclopean concrete weir (r)
The sloping glacis weirs have the inherent advantage of stability. On rivers subject to high velocity
flows carrying boulders, weirs should be made as low as possible and a shallow glacis weir would
best transport boulders safely over the weir. Glacis weirs are used as diversion, head-regulator
and sloping drop structure (when found high, usually when greater than 2m height).
2.3.4 Classification based on design features
Based on design features, diversion weirs can be classified in to three categories:
2.3.4.1 Parabolic/Ogee weir
A parabolic weir is almost similar to spillway section of a dam. It has a high hydraulic
performance (C=2.2) than other weir types (e.g. C=1.7 for Broad Crested Weir). A weir with
such high coefficient gives a more economical design because the crest length can be reduced for
the same head and discharge. The weir body wall for this type is designed as low dam. A
cistern/stilling basin is provided on its downstream side.
Such weir is commonly constructed from concrete and is preferred to allow higher discharge on
rivers that transport relatively larger sized gravel and boulder. Its Disadvantages are the
difficulty in constructing it accurately and soundly, particularly from reinforced concrete and the
danger of reduction in coefficient of discharge if debris and sediment build up in front of the weir,
thereby reducing discharge capacity. The portion of the ogee profile upstream of the origin is
defined as a compound circular arc. The portion of ogee profile downstream of the origin is defined
by the equation presented in equation 3-23.

H or P
Figure 2-5: Ogee weir shape and corresponding parameters (Khatsuria, 2005)
Figure 2-6: Different shapes of ogee weir (Khatsuria, 2005)

2.3.4.2 Broad crested weir
This is a robust flat-crested structure, with a long crest compared to flow thickness i.e. depth of
flow. When the crest is "broad", the streamlines become parallel to the crest invert and the
pressure distribution above the crest is hydrostatic. Practical experience have shown that the weir
overflow is affected by the upstream flow conditions and the weir shape. This type of weir is the
most commonly designed and constructed diversion structure in our country as it is simple to
design and construct with locally available skilled manpower i.e. masons. If it is well constructed
from sound hard rock and good workmanship, stone masonry weir resist abrasion by far higher
than concrete. For a weir to be broad crested 0.5He < b < 2He, where b is crest width of the
structure.
U/s wing-wall
D/s wing-wall
Weir Crest
End sill
U/s impervious apron Stilling basin D/s launching apron
U/s
cut-off D/s
cut-off
Figure 2-7: Typical longitudinal section through broad crested weir
2.3.4.3 Sharp crested weir
Sharp Crested weirs prevails when the energy depth H is greater than half of the crest width. They
are usually used for flow measurement and thus come in many different shapes and styles, such
as rectangular (with and without end contractions), V-notch and Cipoletti weirs. Under controlled
conditions, sharp crested weirs can exhibit accuracies as good as ±2%, although under field
conditions accuracies greater than ±5% should not be expected. The discharge equation in this
case is given as:
Q = 1.84 (L – 2t) H3/2 ………………………………………….…………………………. (2-1)
Where, Q is design flood over the weir crest (m3/s)

(L – 2t) is the structure width minus the two end contractions (m),
L is width of the channel at that particular section, (m)
t is end contraction (m).

Figure 2-8: Typical section of sharp crested weir
The reduction in the coefficient for broad crested weirs as compared to ogee weirs is not very
large. Some negative pressures can develop on the weir for heads exceeding 2m (unit flows
of about 6 m3/s/m of unit width). For flatter graded streams of slopes of about 0.001 or less,
the weir is “drowned out” at higher heads and cavitation probably will not occur. For steeply
graded streams with higher unit discharges corresponding to heads exceeding 2m, the impact
of cavitation effects may be minimal if these events occur infrequently.
For weirs with design heads, Hd between 2 and 3m, the width of the flat crest width (L) shall
be between 0.8 and 1.2m. This will maintain the Hd/L ratio at 2.5 to result in a reasonably high
coefficient of discharge with only minimal negative pressures. For weir design heads of 1.5 to
3m the Froude number at the base of the weir will vary from about 3 to 4.5, which is in the
transition zone for hydraulic jumps and only a weak jump will form. For typical weirs for small
scale irrigation project diversions and for heads greater than 3m, the hydraulic jump is
drowning out with only surface roller phenomena occurrence.
2.3.5 Classification based on position of d/s water level
2.3.5.1 Free-Overfall (Clear-overfall) weir
Condition of flow over a diversion weir can be either free flow (modular) or submerged flow. The
condition of tail water level above the crest level of the weir shall not necessarily dictate
submergence of a weir. The level of the tail-water surface in relation to the upstream depth usually
justify whether a weir is submerged or not. During the free overfall or modular flow conditions, the
discharge over the weir is independent of the tail-water elevation and the depth at the crest of the
overflow structure is taken as the critical depth.
The depth of submergence is the criteria to distinguish between free overfall and submerged weir.
The depth of submergence is the difference in elevation between the downstream water surface
and the crest level of the overflow structure. When the depth of submergence is 70% of the critical
depth or less, the discharge is usually taken as similar to the free flow discharge (USSCS, 1973).
Or when the ratios of the energy depth or head over the weir crest in the downstream, H2 to
upstream H1 does not exceed 70% (Halcrow, 1988; Novak et al., 2007) the weir become modular.

In this case, Q = 2/3*Cd*L* (2g)0.5*H1.5 = 1.7LH3/2……………………………………….……… (2-2)

Where, Q is discharge m3/s;
L is effective crest length (m);
Cd is discharge coefficient;
H is flow depth over the weir crest.
Here, downstream water level /WL/ is lower than crest level, thus Q is independent of D/S WL but
Q α H. It is thus known as modular.
2.3.5.2 Submerged or drowned weir
Submerged flow exists when the tail water is sufficiently above the crest of the overflow structure
so that the downstream energy head affects the flow rate. When the depth of submergence is
more than 70% of the critical (USSCS, 1973) or the ratios of the energy head over the weir crest in
the downstream, H2 to upstream H1 exceeds 70% (Halcrow, 1988; Novak et al., 2007) the weir can
be considered become submerged.
In order to simplify the computation of discharge in submerged condition, a correction factor for
submergence is usually introduced to the earlier weir discharge equation. The discharge capacity
of a free overfall weir is reduced when it is submerged. This reduction factor is called a correction
factor and is expressed as
In this case, D/S WL is higher than weir crest, thus non-modular and discharge over the free
portion (i.e., upper portion) is given by:
3
2
Q1  C d * L * 2 g *  H 1  H 2 2 ………………………………………………..………….. (2-3)
3
And discharge over the submerged (i.e., lower) portion is given by:
Q C d
* L * H 2 * 2 g H 1  H 2  ……………………………………………………………. (2-4)
2
Therefore, total discharge expected to pass over the weir body: Q = Q1 + Q2 ..…..……….. (2-5)
Figure 2-9: Position of water level relative to crest level (typical)

Note: In selecting any of the above weir types, its economic aspect, its stability and its practicality should be considered.

2.3.6 Classification based on stabilizing factor
Depending upon the criterion of the design of their floors, weirs can be classified in to:
2.3.6.1 Gravity weir
In gravity weir, the weight of the weir (i.e. its body and floor) balances the uplift pressure caused
by the head of the seepage water below the weir. Thus, this type of weir depends on its self-weight
for counteracting any unbalanced disturbing force in order to sustain stability of the structure..
Therefore, the unit weight of the construction materials and its volume is crucial for gravity weir.
Such weir is used on permeable soil.
2.3.6.2 Non gravity weir
In this case, the weir floor is designed continuous with the divide piers as reinforced structure,
such that the weight of concrete slab together with the weight of divide piers, keep the structure
safe against the uplift. This type of weir rests on the piles (Cut-offs) and other pressure defusing
mechanisms for its stability against uplift force from the subsurface flow. It needs careful design
and reduces construction material cost. Stability of non-gravity weir is from its structural elements
and support. The non-gravity weir is usually constructed with thin or slim surface plat or slab which
is supported with pier or buttress. The structure is usually constructed in monolithic to enhanced
stability strength. The non-gravity weir is usually constructed with reinforced concrete.
2.3.7 Classification based on provision of device on crest
Based on provision of control devices on weir crest, weir can be classified in to the following:
2.3.7.1 Diversion weir
This is a weir with the crest at its top level thus no extra gates are provided (as can be seen in
figure below). Normally, a weir which is at its lower crest level and with some controlling devices is
preferred to weirs with high crest level in the case of flatter river bed slope and wider channels.
The reason is that the latter causes excessive afflux when the river is in floods. It‟s another
advantages is that when flood comes in, controlling devices lower the gates and makes extra
space available to discharge the flood quickly.
The only difference between a weir and a barrage is of their gates that is the flow in barrage is
regulated by gates and that in weirs, by its crest height. Barrages are costlier than weirs. Weirs
and barrages are constructed mostly in plain areas. The heading up of water is thus affected by
gates put across the river in barrages.

(a) Weir without shutter
(b) Weir with shutter i.e. Barrage
Figure 2-10: Schematic view of cross section through weir (a) and barrage (b)
2.3.7.2 Barrages
The function of a barrage is similar to that of weir, but the heading up of water is effected by the
gates. Thus, in this case, gates are provided on the crest of the barrier. The gates are housed in
the grooves made in the piers and abutments. The piers are constructed on the crest. They can
also be used for supporting road and support the platform used for lifting and lowering of gates.
Thus the head is controlled by the weir height and gates. The crest level in the barrage is kept at a
low level, but during the floods, the gates are raised to clear off the high flood level, enabling the
high flood to pass downstream with maximum afflux. When the flood recedes, the gates are
lowered and the flow is obstructed, thus raising the water level to the upstream of the barrage for
enabling water to divert in to conveyance canal. Due to this, there is less silting and better control
over the levels.
Figure 2-11: Partial view of barrage weir on bilate river
Barrages are preferred over conventional broad crested diversion weirs when:
 The channel is very wide;
 When the bed material at the selected site is of alluvial in nature thus require deep Cut-
off to support the large weir body;

 We are interested in partly to accommodate the floodplain discharge and partly to take
advantage of the dispersion of the channel flow induced by the obstruction caused by
the barrage itself;
 We need to control supply discharge based on demand at one center;
 We are interested in to control easily the rise in maximum flood level of the river
upstream of the barrier structure;
 If the difference between the pond level and crest level is within 1.5m
2.4 CAUSES OF FAILURE OF WEIR/BARRAGE
2.4.1 General
Failure of hydraulic structures like a weir or a barrage is the combined effect of subsurface flow
and surface flow at the site in addition to lack of quality of construction. Such causes include
piping, uplift force, suction caused by standing wave and scouring on both upstream and
downstream of the structures.
When hydraulic gradient or exit gradient exceeds the critical value of soil, surface soil at d/s end
starts boiling first and is washed away by percolating water. This process of removal or washing
out of soil continuous and eventually a channel in the form of pipe is formed by seepage water.
This is called piping which may cause the failure of foundation. Similarly uplift force of percolating
water is acting on the floor from bottom and if the weight of floor is not enough to resist this uplift
force, the floor subjected to such condition may fail by cracking or bursting.
2.4.2 Failure due to subsurface flow
There are two fundamental causes for such failure: piping or undermining and Uplift Pressure.
2.4.2.1 Piping or undermining
This occurs when water from the upstream side continuously percolates through the bottom of the
foundation and emerges at the downstream end of the weir or barrage floor. The force of this
percolating water removes the soil particles by scouring at the point of emergence. As the process
of removal of these soil particles goes on continuously, a depression is formed progressively which
extends backwards towards the upstream through the bottom of the foundation. This process of
erosion thus progressively works backwards towards the upstream and results in the formation of
a channel or a pipe underneath the floor of the weir, causing its failure and a hollow like pipe
formation develops under the foundation due to which the weir or barrage may fail by subsiding.
This phenomenon is known as failure by piping or undermining,
2.4.2.2 Uplift pressure
This phenomenon occurs when the percolating water exerts an upward pressure on the foundation
of the weir or barrage. If this uplift is not counterbalanced by the self-weight of the structure, it may
fail by rapture. Its distribution is high at the upstream and minimized while moving to the
downstream.

Figure 2-12: Collapsed weir as a result of piping (L) & scouring & absence of wings (R)
2.4.3 Failure by surface flow
2.4.3.1 By hydraulic jump
When the water flows with a very high velocity over the crust of the weir or over the gates of the
barrage, then hydraulic jump develops. This hydraulic jump causes a suction pressure or negative
pressure on the downstream side which acts in the direction of uplift pressure. If the thickness of
the impervious floor is not sufficient, then the structure fails by rapture.
2.4.3.2 By scouring during floods
The gates of the barrage are kept open and the water flows with high velocity. The water may also
flow with very high velocity over the crest of the weir. Both cases can result in scouring effect on
the downstream and on the upstream side of the structure. Due to scouring effect on the
downstream and on the upstream side of the structure, its stability gets endangered by shearing.
2.4.4 Failure due to silt (aggradations and degradation or retrogression)
Constructing a weir across the river causes progressive retrogression on the downstream part and
aggradations in the upstream part of the structure. The upstream aggradations have the tendency
of increasing the approach velocity in the upstream side of the weir since the initial flow area
computed for the approach velocity in the upstream side encloses between the U/S high flood
level and pond level.
The downstream retrogression on the other hand, causes lowering of the downstream river stages
which thus need to be considered during the design. Lowering of the river water level due to
retrogression on the downstream causes increased exit gradients and endanger the safety of the
structure. So, as a rule of thumb, a retrogression of 0.3-0.5m may be assumed for calculating the
design floor and exit gradient. However, if the downstream river course is strong rock,
retrogression will not be assumed.
Thus, silt deposition could hamper soundness of operation of the diversion headwork by clogging
of gates (under sluice gate for weir and gate for barrage) and other water ways there by reducing
its efficiency or leading to its collapse. Thus, following mechanisms are recommended:
 Introduce silt- controlling mechanism, (establish standard gate operation norm);

 Opening weir or barrage is recommended on Rivers with high sediment concentration

usually those with poor catchments on upper reach of a river and seasonal rivers,
 Depending on the magnitude and type of sediment, an excluder in the River or extractor
along the canal could be constructed,
 Usually on the lower reach, suspended silt is carried by the flood thus, an extractor in
the canal would be appropriate. The decision is dictated by the pertinent condition of the
silt and it is the designer who decide on either mechanism.
2.4.5 Failure due to seismic load
Failure due to earth quake is likely in seismic zones, especially on any elevated structure it is
considerable. Therefore, an appropriate ground acceleration coefficient should be adopted in the
design activity depending on the delineated seismic zones of our country. Seismic Risk Map
showing 1:50 earthquake acceleration has been attached as appendix for this purpose (Appendix
VI). In case of difficulty to get reasonable coefficient for site specific location it is advantageous to
be based on local and international practice by consulting appropriate institution or organization.
2.4.6 Failure due to man-made activities
Man-made activities can also be a potential cause for the failure of a diversion headwork structure.
Such activities like use of poor construction activity and construction material for the purpose of
fraud and absence of skilled construction labor including intentional interference like looting of
steel, cement and other materials and deliberate attack on the structure due to unhealthy attitude
towards it can also cause danger to the structure. This requires strict follow-up of the construction
activities and awareness creation for not only the project beneficiaries but also for the communities
around the project area.
2.4.7 Remedies for failure of diversion headwork structure
Remedies to avoid failure due to piping and uplift pressure is to decrease the hydraulic gradient:
this can be made by increasing the path of percolating or seeping flow through:
 Increasing path of percolation or creep length of seepage water either by providing
sheet piles at upstream, downstream or at intermediate point to reduce the hydraulic
gradient or increase length of the impervious layer itself;
 Increasing floor thickness to increase its self-weight to counterbalance the uplift force;
 Provision of energy dissipater blocks like friction blocks, impact blocks, i.e. select
appropriate type of stilling basin;
 Provision of inverted filter with concrete blocks on the top so that the percolating water
does not wash out the soil particles;
Remedies to avoid failure due to scour is
 to provide pile or curtain at greater depth in excess of the scour level
 to provide launching apron with sufficient length
Remedies to avoid failure due to man-made problem is
 to give sufficient time for study and investigation (hydrological study, geotechnical
investigation) to properly understand the hydrologic and geological condition of the
project
 to augment the analytical design with model simulation in order to increase the
confidence of design product
 to enforce sufficient construction supervision team for monitoring the construction
process (records of various tests should be retained)

 scaling down the maintenance norm to the ground and prepare feasible action plan
(with accountability) for inspection and maintenance of structure
2.5 SELECTION OF SUITABLE WEIR/BARRAGE TYPE
2.5.1 Criteria to be considered in selecting weir type
Diversion weir structures differ in type and shape, however they all are designed and constructed
to serve the same purposes i.e. diversion of water. Consequently, the following points shall be
considered to select type of a weir that suits to a specific site:
 Suitability of the local construction materials;
 The hydrological characteristics of the river at that particular site;
 A weir with a shape that can easily be constructed by local manpower;
 The availability of skilled manpower for implementing it;
 The skill of the local masons to perform it as per design and specification;
The cross sectional shape of a weir has to be decided based on a combination of hydraulic and
structural requirements conditions, as well as some consideration as to the nature of the weir. The
four commonly adopted shapes are:
 An ogee crested weir (as it can bypass more Qd than other for the same crest length);
 A vertical drop weir;
 A steep glacis weir;
 A shallow glacis weir.
The often claimed advantage of ogee shaped weir is that it has a higher coefficient of discharge
than other weir shapes and that the coefficient is more predictable than for other weirs. The main
disadvantage of the curved shape is the difficulty in constructing it accurately and soundly.
The vertical drop weir appears, at first glance, both simple to construct and easy and economical
to design. In truth, if all structural checks are undertaken and adequate factors of safety are
applied at maximum levels of flow, it will be found that for all weirs apart from those with very small
flows per unit width, the wall section becomes very thick to resist overturning and shear forces.
The glacis weir is an improvement on the vertical drop weir to enhance its structural stability.
2.5.2 Selection of type of diversion weir
Type of diversion weirs need to be selected based on nature of flow in the river, cost of the
structure, foundation condition at the selected site and function of the structure itself. The following
table shows a glance at ways to select type of diversion weir.
Table 2-1: Recommended type of weir based on nature of river

Diversion Recommended
SN Site condition
Function Crest Design Construction
Perennial river less significant bed load Masonry /cyclopean
Storage/
1 and moderate up to good foundation Weir Gravity /concrete/rockfill with
diversion
bearing capacity masonry/
Perennial or intermittent river highly Masonry /cyclopean
Storage/ Barrage/ open
2 significant bed load and moderate up Gravity
diversion slotted weir /concrete/
to good foundation bearing capacity
Same as above but bad foundation Storage/ Barrage/ open Cyclopean concrete/
3 Non-Gravity
bearing capacity diversion slotted weir reinforced concrete/
River water released from storage Gravity/Non- Masonry /cyclopean
4 Pick up Weir
dam and moderate up to good Gravity concrete /rock fill with

Diversion Recommended
SN Site condition
Function Crest Design Construction
foundation bearing capacity masonry/
Same as above but bad foundation Gravity/Non- Cyclopean concrete/
5 Pick up Weir
bearing capacity Gravity reinforced concrete/
Source: As adopted from MoWR, PART I-G Diversions, 2002
Table 2-2: Summary to select type of diversion weirs

Criteria\Weir
Broad Crested Ogee Barrage Glacis
Type
Nature of the Preferred for narrow river Preferred for narrow Preferred for the case of Preferred for the case
river and flow section and When flow in river section and diversion from wide of diversion from
condition the river is not dangerous when flow in the channel with large flow wide channel with
and carries small river carries large andwhen expected large flow
boulders flow and boulders backwater effect is high
Construction When quality stone is When there is not When there is not When there is not
material available in the nearby enough quality enough quality stone is enough quality stone
availability area of the project stone is available in available in the site is available in the site
the site
Easiness of This is the simplest and This is a bit harder Needs huge number of Needs huge number
construction preferred where there is and preferred where skilled manpower of skilled manpower
no skilled manpower is there is enough
limited skilled manpower
Foundation Preferred when Needs stronger Preferred in case of Preferred when the
condition foundation condition is foundation alluvial channel channel bed is
not complicated condition alluvial
Hydraulic This has the lowest The best Better performance Better performance
performance performance performance
Investment The cheapest Relatively Very expensive Very expensive
Cost expensive
Source: As compiled from own experience
2.6 TYPES OF STILLING BASIN
2.6.1 General
The stilling basin also called downstream impervious apron is an integral part of the diversion
headwork structure to its downstream side. It is used for the purpose of resisting uplift pressures
exerted from the bottom of the structure and to dissipate the incoming energy from over the
diversion headwork. There are different types of stilling basins, but the most commonly used types
are USBR Standard and Indian Standards. The USBR standard recommend lengths and depths
of basin, based on calculated specific energy, velocity and Froude number.
2.6.2 USBR standard stilling basin
Types of stilling basins as per Design of Small Dam, USBR, 1987, are divided in to the following.
2.6.2.1 Stilling basin type-I
For Froude numbers ranging between 1.0 to about 1.7, the incoming flow is only slightly below
critical depth, and the change from this low stage to the high stage flow is gradual and manifests
itself only by a slightly ruffled water surface. As the Froude number approaches 1.7, a series of
small rollers begins to develop on the surface, which intensifies as the value increases. Therefore,
no special stilling basin as well as baffle or other jump enforcing structure is needed to stabilize the

flow. However, the length of the stable channel (or simply basin) from the location where depth
starts to change up to its end should not be less than 4 times the conjugate depth (USBR, 1987).
Relatively smooth flows prevail throughout the Froude number ranging between 1.7 and 2.5. The
phenomena under this range designated as the pre-jump stage because flows are not attended by
active turbulence. Therefore, baffles or sills are not required. This type of basin is used where
hydraulic jump occurs on a horizontal apron thus energy dissipation is very low. Incoming velocity
is less than 15m/s, thus it is the weak jump zone. Such flows are not appeared by active
turbulence. Thus, in such case, the basin is plain horizontal and jump occurs on the floor with no
chute blocks, baffle piers or end sill provided thus simple for construction. Usually this is not
recommended because of need for excessive length, but discussed here since it provides a
grounding in the basic hydraulics of all stilling basins.
Figure 2-13: USBR Stilling Basin, Type-I

Source: S.K. Garg, 2006
2.6.2.2 Stilling basin of type-II
This type of basin is used for spillways of high concrete dam and embankment dams. Its incoming
velocity exceeds 15m/s and Froude number, Fr varies from 4.5 to 9.0. It is a range of well-
balanced jump and its performance is at its best and least affected by tail water variations. In this
case length of the basin can be shortened by introducing devices like baffles and chute blocks.
Such jump is called a steady jump.
Figure 2-14: USBR Stilling Basin, Type-II


2.6.2.3 Stilling basin of type-III
This can be more economical than basin II. Here a row of baffle piers is placed downstream from
the chute blocks. This basin relies on dissipation of energy by the impact blocks and also on the
turbulence of the jump phenomena for its effectiveness.
For Froude numbers range between 4.5 and 9, a stable and well-balanced jump occurs.
Turbulence is confined to the main body of the jump, and the water surface downstream is
comparatively smooth. Basin designated as USBR type III basin, can be adopted for this case if
incoming velocities do not exceed 18.2 m/s and the specific discharge do not exceed 18.6 m3/s/m
(USBR, 1987; Novak et al, 2007). The basin uses chute blocks, impact baffle blocks, and an end
sill to shorten the jump length and to dissipate the high-velocity flow within the short basin length.
This basin relies on dissipation of energy by the impact blocks and on the turbulence of the jump
phenomena for its effectiveness.
The large impact forces to which the baffles are subjected to by the impingement of high incoming
velocities creates the possibility of cavitation along the surfaces of the blocks and floor. There is a
temptation to use this type of stilling basin outside of the velocity and specific discharge range
because of reduced length. However, the danger of cavitations damage in these cases is
substantial and great care must be exercised in the design and positioning of the blocks (Novak et
al., 2007). The USBR type III basin is similar to the Saint Anthony Fall (SAF) basin but SAF is
provided with a larger safety factor (French, 1985).
Figure 2-15: View of USBR stilling basin, type-III

2.6.2.4 Stilling basin of type-IV
This type of basin is used for stilling basin design and wave suppressors for canal structures and
low head diversion weirs. Its Fr varies from 2.5 to 4.5 and is in the transition zone with incoming
velocity less than 15m/s. It has rough water surface with roller and oscillating jet. The jump is not
stable and waves are thus generated. This basin is a short basin, but complicated by floor and
chute blocks.

Figure 2-16: USBR stilling basin, type-IV

2.6.3 Indian standard stilling basin
Indian Standard Institution has also standardized certain stilling basins for uses under different
conditions in IS: 4997 - 1968. Stilling basin I and II (for Fr<4.5 and Fr> 4.5 respectively) with
horizontal aprons and stilling basins III and IV with sloping .aprons are described in detail in
standard. But the most commonly adopted basins are the above described USBR ones, if anyone
is interested in IS, it can be referred in the mentioned standard.
2.6.4 Appurtenant structures in stilling basin
2.6.4.1 Chute blocks
Chute blocks are a kind of ragged wedges (i.e. row of small projections like teeth of saw) and
provided at the entrance of the stilling basin i.e. foot of d/s sloping face. The incoming jet of water
is creased and partly lifted from the floor, producing a shorter length of jump than what would have
been without them. They also help in stabilizing the flow and thus improve the jump performance.
The dimension of the chute block and its spacing depends on the basin type as per the
recommendation.
Chute blocks: Height = d1 or d2/9, whichever is greater; and,

Width = spacing = 0.75 to 1.0 times height.
2.6.4.2 End sills and dentated siils
Sill or end-sill or more preferably dentated sill is generally provided at the end of the stilling basin.
The dentated sill diffuses the residual portion of high velocity jet reaching the end of the basin.
They, therefore, help in dissipating residual energy and to reduce the length of the jump or the
basin. The dimension of the end-sill and its spacing depends on the basin type as per the
recommendation.

Baffle/Basin blocks: Height = d1 or d2/8, whichever is greater;

Width and spacing are same as for the chute blocks, but staggered;
Location = 0.4*Lb from start of basin.
End Sill: Height = d2/10.
Note: These dimensions are indicative only, as it is based on the type of the selected stilling basin.
2.6.4.3 Baffle block or friction piers
Baffle Block or Friction Piers are the blocks placed within the basin, i.e. across the basin floor.
They help in breaking the flow and dissipate energy mostly by impact. These baffle piers,
sometimes called friction blocks are very useful in small structures, such as low spillways and
weirs, etc. They, however, give way due to cavitation, under the influence of high velocity jets, and
hence are unsuitable for large works.
2.7 RETAINING WALLS AND THEIR TYPES
2.7.1 General
Retaining wall is any structure that holds or retains soil, rock or other materials behind it. Such
walls are structures designed to restrain soil to unnatural slopes, thus provide a lateral support to
vertical slopes of soil that would otherwise collapse into a more natural shape. In general they are
used to bound soils between two different elevations often in areas of terrain possessing
undesirable slopes or in areas where the landscape needs to be shaped severely and engineered
for more specific purposes like hillside farming or roadway overpasses.
There are many types of materials that can be used to create retaining walls like concrete blocks,
poured concrete, masonry, gabions, treated timbers, rocks, or boulders. Some are easy to use,
others have a shorter life span, but all can retain soil.
Wing walls are short retaining structures and are used as a retaining wall and to stabilize the
abutment. They are short in section of walls used to guide a stream into an opening, such as at a
culvert or bridge inlet and/or outlet or diversion weir. A wing wall also named as "wingwall" or
"wing-wall" is a smaller wall attached or next to a larger wall or structure. In a bridge, the wing
walls are adjacent to the abutments and act as retaining walls. They are generally constructed of
the same material as those of abutments. The wing walls can either be attached to the abutment
or be independent of it.
There are four common types of Retaining walls as described in the following sections:
2.7.2 Gravity retaining wall
It is that type of retaining wall that relies on their huge weight to retain the material behind it and
achieve stability against failures. Gravity Retaining Wall can be constructed from concrete, stone
or even brick masonry. Gravity retaining walls are much thicker in section. Geometry of these walls
also help them to maintain the stability by their weight. Mass concrete walls are suitable for
retained wall heights of up to 3 m. For wall over 4.5m high the reinforced concrete cantilever wall
offers a substantial cost advantage over gravity masonry wall. The cross section shape of the wall
is affected by stability, the use of space in front of the wall, the required wall appearance and the
method of construction.

Gravity retaining walls rely on the mass of the wall structure for their stability. Thus, the wall mass
must be sufficient to counteract sliding and overturning forces from the retained soil. These
systems can use masonry, stone, concrete or other heavy material as well as mechanically
stabilized earth for stability. These are the most common type of retaining walls and include
gabions, bin walls, and modular block concrete construction. In most cases the slope behind the
wall needs to be temporarily removed during construction. For mechanically stabilized earth walls,
the reinforcing often extends horizontally into the embankment about as far as the exposed wall
face is tall.
Nr H(m) WT(m) T(m)

1 H ≤ 0.6 0.30 0.15
2 0.6 ≤ H < 1.6 0.30 0.15
3 1.6 ≤ H < 2.2 0.40 0.20
4 2.2 ≤ H < 2.7 0.50 0.30
5 2.7 ≤ H < 3.0 0.60 0.30
6 3.0 ≤ H < 3.4 0.70 0.40
7 3.4 ≤ H < 3.8 0.80 0.40
8 3.8 ≤ H < 4.1 0.90 0.40
9 4.1 ≤ H < 4.5 1.00 0.40
10 4.5 ≤ H < 4.9 1.10 0.40

11 4.9 ≤ H < 5.3 1.20 0.50
12 5.3 ≤ H < 5.7 1.30 0.50
13 5.7 ≤ H < 6.0 1.40 0.50

Figure 2-17: Typical gravity masonry retaining wall (Halcrow-ULG, 1988)

Figure 2-18: Alternative gravity masonry retaining wall arrangement
2.7.3 Cantilever wall
A cantilever retaining wall is one that consists of a wall which is connected to foundation. A
cantilever wall carries a significant amount of soil, so it must be well engineered. Thus, cantilever
walls are built of reinforced concrete and are typically composed of a horizontal footing (slab
foundation) and a vertical stem wall. They are the most common type used as a cantilever wall
rest on a slab foundation. This slab foundation is also loaded by back-fill and thus the back-fill and
surcharge also stabilizes the wall against overturning and sliding. The weight of the soil mass
above the heel helps keep wall stable. Cantilever walls are economical for heights up to 10 m.
Cantilever retaining walls thus have a large effective mass due to the soil placed over a horizontal
section of the wall. These walls are typically constructed of cast-in-place, reinforced concrete. The
horizontal (cantilevered) leg of the structure can either extend back into the retained soil or out
away from the slope. The slope behind the wall typically needs to be temporarily removed during
construction.
Cantilever walls are relatively expensive due to the work required to build concrete forms, install
reinforcing, pour concrete, and provide joints between pours. The concrete needs ample time to
cure before the soil can be replaced behind the wall.
Ps
DFL or HFL
Soil, rock
or other
materials
behind
Ws
wall
RBL
Wst
Pu
Figure 2-19: Cross sections of typical cantilever retaining walls

2.7.4 Counterfort wall
Counterfort or Counter-fort retaining walls are also known as buttressed retaining walls.
Counterfort walls are cantilever walls strengthened with counter forts monolithic with the back of
the base slab and base slab. The counter-forts act as tension stiffeners and connect the wall slab
and the base to reduce bending and shearing stresses. To reduce the bending moments in vertical
walls of great height, counterforts are used, spaced at distances from each other equal to or
slightly larger than one-half of the height. Counter forts can be used for high walls with heights
greater than 8 to 12 m.
Figure 2-20: Cross sections of typical retaining walls with counterforts

Note: Cantilever and Counter fort retaining walls are families of Reinforced Retaining Walls.
2.7.5 Hybrid system of retaining wall
The type of retaining walls that use both factors that is their mass and reinforcement for stability
are called hybrid systems or composite retaining wall systems.
2.8 SELECTION OF RETAINING WALLS
2.8.1 General
Below are important considerations that affect the decision to provide a retaining wall and which
type of wall should be constructed. The decision to construct a retaining wall can be subjective and
must balance the cost of installing a retaining wall with the overall impacts to utilities, wetlands, the
environment, or adjacent properties. Impacts to wetlands often demand construction of retaining
walls due to permitting requirements to avoid or minimize wetlands impacts if possible. Exact
locations of retaining walls will require further refinement during the design phase.
2.8.2 Embankment impacts
Gravity and cantilever retaining walls typically require some of the soil behind the wall to be
temporarily removed during construction. In some cases the slope can be cut to stand near vertical
for short periods of time to reduce impacts but OSHA embankment safety guidelines for worker
safety must be accounted for. Piling walls can minimize impacts to adjacent properties and
structures.
2.8.3 Foundation soils
Gravity and cantilever retaining walls require a solid foundation to resist the forces of the wall and
soil. Where foundation soils are weak, a piling or anchor wall should be considered or the weak
soil replaced. Existence of bedrock encountered near the south end of the Golden View Drive
project provides an excellent foundation but makes driving sheet piles very difficult.

2.8.4 Groundwater/drainage
Groundwater needs to be removed from behind the retaining wall to reduce hydrostatic forces.
Many types of wall are inherently porous while other types, like reinforced concrete, require weep
holes to be integrated into the design to relieve pressure from water behind the wall. In areas
where substantial groundwater and glaciation is expected, a sub-drain should be considered to
direct the runoff to drainage ditches or a piped storm drain collection system.
2.8.5 Utilities
Some types of retaining walls impact a considerable amount of soil behind the face of the wall.
The fabric behind the wall can impact existing utilities or limit future placement of utilities. Anchor
wall cables also extend into surrounding soils and affect utilities. Therefore, proper consideration
should be made for utilities, if any.
2.8.6 Aesthetics
Retailing walls are often very noticeable along a roadway corridor and they should be selected to
compliment the landscaping design and blend in with the surrounding zone. Sometimes retaining
walls are chosen to match existing walls on adjacent properties. However, such consideration shall
be taken in to consideration in urban areas.
2.8.7 Construction schedule
In some cases, the amount of time required to construct a retaining wall is very important since it
can affect impacts to adjacent property owners or the environment. Reinforced concrete headwalls
take a considerable amount of time to construct. They are typically not a good option for stream
culvert headwalls that need to be completed quickly to reduce environmental impacts.
2.8.8 Maintenance
Retaining walls and associated fences or handrails should be designed to require little if any
maintenance. Concrete surfaces can be provided with coatings to facilitate removal of spray paint
vandalism.
2.8.9 Cost
The estimated installed cost for retaining walls varies considerably from nature of surrounding
topography and height of the exposed vertical face and its stability. Some of the biggest factors
include soil conditions, wall height, tiebacks, construction access, type of fence and the amount of
soil to be removed behind the wall for construction.
As a generally guide, a stone masonry is commonly used for gravity retaining walls around
diversion structures for a height not in excess of 4.5m high. However, concrete with nominal
temperature and shrinkage reinforcing could be used. The base is typically constructed of
reinforced concrete. The factor of safety for structure stability (the ratio between stabilizing to
destabilizing forces) should be at least 1.5 to ensure long term sustainability. For gravity retaining
walls constructed on sound bedrock and adequately interlocked to the bedrock, stability should not
be a problem.

3 DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR

3.1 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF DIVERSION WEIRS
Before deciding to build a weir, it is worth considering if it is really necessary at that location.
Moreover, to design a stable and cost effective headwork structure with appropriate geometry, a
surface and subsurface flow analysis shall be done as flow condition is determined by the
geometry of a structure and in turn the geometry of such hydraulic structure affects its design and
economics. Therefore optimization between the economics and the design of a stable structure is
expected from the design engineer. The following successive sub-sections present design
considerations and procedural approach to design of diversion weir and related appurtenant
structures in this accord.
Setting design criteria and considerations ahead of design of any structure is imperative as it can
help designers to know their scope of design and direction. In view of that, diversion weirs need to
be designed from both hydraulic as well as structural design requirements points of view.To do
this, basic data as stated under, are required for design of such diversion weir that need to be
gathered before jumping to the next stage i.e. the design processes.
Weirs thus, should be designed to withstand recommended large flood events and last a
reasonably long time. Hence expensive construction materials and hence robust designs are
necessary. If the site is suited to a Free Intake then the high cost of such structure can be avoided.
In both cases the command should be lower than intake level/the head regulators so as to irrigate
the land without the need of pumping system. Pumping option shall be considered only where the
level of intake is lower than the irrigable command level.
The followings are also areas that need to be considered while designing diversion weir.
 Weir axis should be laid at right angles to the river flow so as to take advantages of
economy and for ensuring balanced flushing function of the scouring sluice along its
section.
 Design levels of intake must be secured(from topographic and irrigation requirement),
 The site shall be such that it can give economic structure and ensure proper intake
function,
 Weir height has to be designed to match the design water level in the conveyance
canal.
 Weir length has to be designed to allow design flood to safely discharge over the weir.
 Design discharge of intake should be estimated or obtained from agronomy report plus
some 10% for future need/expansion requirement (as flexibility factor),
 Determination of design discharge at the selected headwork site,
 Levels of flood flow under normal condition at the selected headwork site
 The height of the diversion weir structure should be fixed such that it is capable of
supplying irrigation water to intake at peak demand;
 Sill of under-sluice pocket shall be kept at or slightly above deepest river bed and about
0.5 to 1.0 m below sill level of canal head regulator.
 Divide walls are to be designed as cantilever retaining walls subjected to silt pressure
and water pressure from under-sluice side; and,
 Future level at which riverbed is expected to be stabilized must be studied and fixed in
order to set appropriate design conditions;
 Intake takes-off alignment should provide smooth entrance of diverted irrigation water.
According to several literatures an intake offtaking at an angle of 90° to the main river
flow direction is the least desirable one from hydrodynamic performance point of view.

Despite the controversies among scholars the recommended range is to have intake
aligned at an angle between 30°and 90° (Novak et al., 2007; Smith, 1995).
 Safety structure (like rejection spillway or sluice) and sediment control arrangement (like
settling basin) shall be provided if deemed necessary,
3.2 SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE DIVERSION WEIR SITE
The design engineer in collaboration with engineering geologist need to identify possible options of
diversion sites during the preliminary site identification stage. The most appropriate one can be
selected after comparing all options with multi-criteria analysis (topography, command area
location and potential, geological condition, environmental, social, cost, etc.). The selected site
should provide better comparative advantage.
Headwork site selection has direct implication on cost and stability of the structure. Therefore, due
attention has to be paid in selecting the best option among potential headwork sites.
The following points should be considered while selecting appropriate and ideal site for diversion
headwork.
 It shall be located in the narrowest valley
 It shall be located in straight reach of the river i.e. not meandering channel at the site.
However, in sediment laden river meandering might be considered as a potential site.
 It shall enable irrigation of maximum potential command area on both left and right sides
with short idle canal length;
 It shall be such that elevation of the site is at higher level than the area to be irrigated for
gravity flow.
 It shall have impervious and strong foundation condition, if not it requires especial
foundation treatment;
 It shall have strong, well defined, stable and water tight abutments/banks;
 It shall irrigate the command area with reasonable or minimum structure height;
 It shall be selected in such a way that there is enough flow without adverse effect for
downstream users. Site located downstream of confluence of rivers is the best;
 It shall be selected so that maximum water can be harvested, say d/s of confluence of
rivers;
 It shall be possible to align offtaking canal in such a way that command area is obtained
without excessive digging;
 It shall be environmentally friendly, socially and culturally acceptable, and economically
feasible;
 It shall be situated in the nearby command area (to reduce cost of idle MC)
 It shall be such that valuable land upstream of the headwork structure like weir or
barrage should not be submerged.
 It shall be at a location such that river width should be wide enough to accommodate
expected flood but narrow enough to avoid construction of long crested weir and ovoid
sluggish flow condition causing silt deposition, which could hinder the structure
performance leading to high maintenance cost.
 It shall be selected at a site where the thalweg is stable and located near the river bank
where it is easy to install the intake in the scheme and enable to set the scouring sluices
in the thalweg.
 It shall be accessible;
 Thus an ideal diversion weir site would be one where the river is stable, not meandering
and neither degrading or aggrading and capable of supplying maximum area with
minimum weir height;

3.3 DATA REQUIRED FOR WEIR AND BARRAGE DESIGN
3.3.1 Physiographic data
Physiographic and river morphology /bed and banks/ data which are required for design of a
diversion weir are data of the river from which irrigation water is expected to be supplied, such as:
3.3.1.1 Length/width across the river data
The shorter the crest length the more economical it is; but it results in higher flow depth over the
crest of the weir thus thicker energy dissipater and extended stilling basin are required. On the
other hand, the longer crest length results in lower/shallow flow depth over the crest of the weir
thus thinner energy dissipater and shorter stilling basin are required. Thus maintaining existing
natural channel width is preferred so long as it accommodates the incoming flood and requires
minimal training of the channel.
3.3.1.2 Longitudinal profile around the weir site data
Such profile is required to estimate average slope of the river along its thalweg around weir site
and hence flow of the river using Manning‟s equation or Velocity-Area method.
3.3.1.3 River banks data
Data is required related to river bank height and stability condition. Bank height is prerequisite to
evaluate its susceptibility flood and hence overtopping; whereas, its stability condition is used to
identify type of wing wall the need to be embedded in the abutments.
3.3.1.4 River flow regime data
This is concerned with the river geometry and nature of flow in river reaches such as discharge
condition, relation of water level and discharge and sedimentation conditions. A channel is said to
be in regime when, over a hydrological cycle, the channel shows no appreciable change in its
width, depth or gradient. Regime theory postulates that for a stable channel there is a relationship
between the channel parameters of width, depth, gradient and flow. Thus if any one of these four
parameters is artificially (or naturally) changed, the channel will adjust itself so that regime
conditions are re-established.
3.3.1.5 Water level or stage – discharge relationship data
It is also called rating curve or discharge curve. This curve is used to estimate different discharges
of a stream for specific water levels of that stream at that particular cross section. Thus, it is
important to estimate tail water depth for the expected design flood of certain return period.
3.3.1.6 River shape (meanders) data
River shape shall be straight at the diversion site so as to minimize unbalanced force distribution
on the structure. However, from the point of view of sediment exclusion, an intake can be aligned
in the outer (concave) bank of meandering river preferably located towards the downstream end of
the bend. This is because bottom layers of the flow (i.e. sediment laden flow) around a bend are
swept towards its inside (convex) bank. Therefore, river meander data should be provided.

3.3.1.7 Appropriate coffer dam site
Convenient site for temporary river diversion shall also be considered for its easy construction
without affecting surrounding environs severely.
3.3.2 Topographical data
3.3.2.1 General
Topographical features data around the river/channel both upstream and downstream of the
proposed weir site, including river cross-sections, profile between these cross sections,
topographic data like contour map of the weir site covering 200m on the left and right sides of the
river bank at weir site and a minimum of 300m on the upstream and downstream sides need to be
acquired to understand features around it and hence ranges of the layout. In general, the following
topographic data are required for the study and design of a diversion weir and appurtenant
structures:
3.3.2.2 Index map
An index map of scale 1:50,000 showing catchment features of the entire river system upstream of
the proposed site of diversion is paramount important for identifying appropriate headwork site and
boundary of potential command area. In addition to this, recent imagery map of the study area is
necessary to capture recent land use/ land cover of the catchment area and command area
including settlement pattern.
3.3.2.3 Topographic survey of the proposed headwork site data
Topographic survey of the proposed headwork sites is essential data as it shows the physical
appearance of the natural features of an area around headwork sites, especially the shape of its
surface. It enables us to look for different options for headwork site and select the best one (in
terms of technical, economic and environmental requirements).
3.3.2.4 Cross-sectional survey at the proposed site data
Once the headwork site has been selected, cross-sectional survey of the river and its flood-plain
up to about 5m above the floodplain along axis of the headwork, 50-100m both on the u/s and d/s
of weir axis need to be executed as they are required to enable to properly define the existing river
channel and helps to know nature of carrying capacity of the channel. This cross section need to
be taken from left to right banks while looking in the flow direction and corresponding map should
also be plotted in the same manner.
3.3.2.5 Flood mark data
Level of historical or observed flood on the banks of the river need to be identified to understand
the magnitude of incoming flood and decide on necessity precautions to be taken care of
longitudinal survey between u/s and d/s cross sections i.e. profile survey through thalweg of a river
is required to know average bed slope. The river to be used as input for discharge estimation at
that site.

3.3.2.6 Existing infrastructures around the proposed site data
Identification of any existing infrastructures around the proposed site is required either to make
use of it or take care of the necessary precaution in design. This infrastructure can be settlement
area, road, bridge, other diversion structure, etc. They are usually associated to the social value of
the community.
Details on topographic survey can be referred in "GL 4: Topographic and Irrigation Infrastructures
Surveying Guideline for SSID ".
3.3.3 Hydrological data
3.3.3.1 Design flood
For the design of headwork structure the design flood of the river shall be provided with probability
of exceedance. The probability of exceedance is usually expressed in terms of return period.
Usually a design flood of 50 to 100 years return period is quite common. If the area is vulnerable to
flood a design flood for flood protection dyke is also required to be provided.
Details on hydrological data analysis can be referred in "GL 3: Hydrology and Water Resources
Planning Guideline for SSID” as it is directly related with cost of the structure.
3.3.3.2 Monthly low flows data
Irrigation using diversion structure relies on the monthly distribution of river flow. Therefore,
understanding on the low flows of the river and associated water levels are important. The
hydrology analysis should provide information in this regard.
3.3.3.3 Stage - discharge relationship data
Based on the data from topographic survey and hydrological analysis, the relationship between
discharge and the corresponding water level are required to be established for the selected site.
The stage-discharge relationship should be verified and confirm its validity for the historical flood
level, if any.
3.3.3.4 Drainage module of the area
Drainage module is one of the most important parameter for the design of drainage system and
cross drainage works. The capacity of the drains and cross drainage structure is determined by
the drainage module and the area to be drained. The drainage module depends on soil type,
climate and land-use/land/cover.
3.3.3.5 Sediment data
Sediment rate in the river is another hydrological data which need to be assessed in order to
decide on the requirement of sediment excluding facilities. The sediment characteristics of the
river (during normal flow and flood season) is required to be determined. Sediment sampling need
to be carried out at least once during the normal flow.

3.3.3.6 Analyzed water quality data
Data on water quality of the source river water is also required. The chemical characteristics
(acidity and Alkalinity) is required to be known. The chemical characteristics need to meet the
standards set for irrigation water by various institution and organization like FAO. Water sample
has to be collected during the normal as well as the dry season.
3.3.4 Geology and geotechnical data
3.3.4.1 Geotechnical Data
Geology and geotechnical data including riverbed material and features such as rock outcrops
from foundation investigation are crucially required to know compressive strength of foundation
material and its bearing capacity and study piping condition.
3.3.4.2 River banks data
Geologic conditions of river bank data are required for wing walls‟ stability analysis at the
headwork site.
3.3.4.3 Foundation data
Depending on the identified foundation material of the river bed along weir axis as recommended
by geologist, we need to fix depth of cut off trench to the required good foundation material.
3.3.4.4 Weir Site Geological Cross Section Data
A graph showing geological cross section along headwork axis should be presented for deciding
depth of foundation and requirement for protection works. In addition to this, over burden
information and their suitability are required to decide type of structure on permeable foundation or
on hard foundation.
3.3.4.5 Laboratory test results data
Results of sampled soil and rock laboratory tests are essential as it indicate permeability condition,
Angle of internal friction, cohesion, density, bearing capacity of the soil in the foundation and in the
embankment soil. For details refer "Geology and Geotechnical guidelines on SSIP" component of
the guideline.
3.3.4.6 On-site construction materials data
Location map of quarry site: Quarry site for a certain SSI project needs to be located and as is has
a direct relationship with unit rate analysis of that project. Similarly, location and distance of sand,
gravel, cement, RF bar, pipe, etc. need to be shown to do the same.
In addition to this, type, texture, properties/quality and quantity of construction material are
important as they affect type of structure that need to be designed for a specific site.

3.3.5 Irrigation agronomy
Assessment of upstream and downstream irrigation water demands need to be obtained to

account for some percentage of flow for seasonal downstream and peripheral water use while
fixing abstraction amount.
To fix height of a diversion weir, net irrigable area, maximum elevation in the net command area
and depth of water in the conveyance canal are necessary. For this purpose, agronomic inputs
including the agricultural soil irrigation suitability or SMU based on waterlogging, salinity, etc. and
soil characteristics like permeability, water holding capabilities, etc. are required. This is not only
used for determining the irrigation area, but also for irrigation scheduling. Other factors that need
to be considered for irrigation design include the effective precipitation, evapotranspiration, surface
runoff, deep percolation, and overall crop water requirements.
3.3.6 Other data
In addition to the above basic data, the following additional data are required at the project site.
 Daily labourers‟ daily rate at the project site;
 Machinery rental rates at the project site;
 Local construction material costs (like cost of poles, rock, fill material, etc.) on site;
 Transportation cost to the project site;
 Loading and unloading rate at the project site, etc.
3.4 DESIGN PROCEDURE AND STEPS OF WEIR/BARRAGE DESIGN
The following flow chart shows design procedures and steps for design of a diversion headwork.

Figure 3-1: Design procedures and steps for weir/barrage design

3.5 SELECTING DESIGN FLOOD OF APPROPRIATE RETURN PERIOD
After appropriate weir site is selected, the next step to consider for designing a weir is selecting
design flood of certain return period for the flood which is to be adopted. Weirs are usually
designed to withstand a flood event of 50 years return period (either flood level corresponding to
this plus some free board or 100 years flood level). The selection however, is dependent on
economic and structural requirements.
Upstream and downstream guide bunds and channel protection bunds are usually designed for a
1 in 25 or 1 in 50 year flood event level where overtopping and failure of the bunds will not result in
catastrophic failure of the weir.
For L service years or design life of structures, the risk r of flood exceeding the design flood of a
given return period T years can be computed as (Novak et al., 2007).
 
r  1 1
1 L
T
…………………………………………………………………………….. (3-1)
In general, the selection of design flood depends on the risk anticipated as this implies a matter of
economics i.e. higher return period leads to larger structure and hence higher cost but lower risk.
Box 3-1:
Descriptive example-1: Should design life of structures be the same as that of the return period for
design conditions? If 25 years‟ service life of structure is considered, how much is the risk of flood
exceeding the design flood for 50 year and 100 years return period? For which percentage of risk
is the project ready to anticipate?
Solutions: Design life means the minimum duration a structure is expected to last. Thus, the longer
is the design life; the higher is the cost of a project. Therefore, in choosing the design life for a
structure, engineers should consider the design life which generates an economical project without
sacrificing the required function.
In selection of return period of certain design conditions, winds, waves, etc., one should consider
the consequences of exceedance. In fact, there are normally no extreme maximum values of
these design conditions and its selection is based on the probability of exceedance which is
related to return period. Therefore, design life may not be equal to return period of design
conditions because their selections are based on different considerations.
Based on the equation given in (3-1), the risks of flood corresponding to the given exceedance of
50 and 100 years return period design floods are 40% and 22% respectively.
3.6 RATING CURVE CONSTRUCTION
Rating curve also known as stage-discharge curve is a plot of the water levels/gauge heights on
the Y-axis against the corresponding discharges on the X-axis. In the absence of detailed local
measured or recorded stage-discharge data, preliminary rating curve for existing un-retrograded
condition of the river can be prepared by computing the flow depth for the corresponding discharge
either analytically or using computer models (like HECRAS or others). For analytical method, the
flow depth can be estimated preferably at 20-40cm interval and the corresponding discharge can
be computed using the Manning‟s formula:

⁄ ⁄ ⁄
…………………………………………………………………… (3-2)
Where, Q = Flow rate in (m3/s)

n = Manning‟s roughness coefficient for compound section, Refer appendix-1 for details
A =Cross-sectional area of flow (assumed composite trapezoidal channel, but need to be
estimated by breaking it in to small segments of say 0.5m wide, as shown in table 3-2 and
Figure 3-3), (m2)
R = Hydraulic mean radius = A/P, (m),
P = Wetted perimeter of channel, (m)
S = Avg. friction/longitudinal slope of channel at headwork site, S=H/L, (%) ….…. (3-3)
H = Head difference between reference points,(m) and
L = distance between reference points (m)
Then after, water level (assumed normal flow depth) corresponding to selected design flood
magnitude should be read from the plotted curve to use it for fixing top level of downstream wing
wall and thickness of downstream apron. For stage-discharge relationship using computer model
refer “GL 21: Major Application Software‟s Guideline for SSID”.
Figure 3-2: Stage-discharge-curve for Petu SSI Project (SNNPR)
Note: Indicated initial stage, H=1432.475 in table above is the lowest river bed level at selected weir site.
Cross section area and wetted perimeter can be estimated for each assumed raise in stage (say
0.2m for small channel or up to 1m for large channel) by either of AutoCAD or hydraulic tool box or
HEC RAS software. The following steps are prepared for manual computation using AutoCAD:
Step-1: Extract river cross section from DEM or survey data along axis of the structure, if any;
Step-2: Arrange the data by concatenate in excel from cumulative distance and elevation;
Step-3: Open AutoCAD and click on polyline;
Step-4: Then paste the concatenated data;
Step-5: Then simply click enter and zoom it out;
Step-6: Now draw a horizontal polyline through the lowest point of the channel;
Step-7: Then offset it at the required interval specified above up to river banks top level;
Step-8: Starting from one end of the offset polyline, digitize along bottom horizontal bed up to
another end of same line following river bank. This gives us the first wetted perimeter;
Step-9: On the same route draw another polyline and close it. This gives us the first cross section
area;
Step-10: Then compute hydraulic radius from these two values;
Step-11: Compute bed slope of the river;

Step-12: Assume roughness coefficient, n and estimate flow velocity and corresponding discharge
as shown in figure 3-2 above;
Step-13: Repeat same procedure and estimate flow velocity and corresponding discharge till we
get a value little bit greater than the expected return period flood;
Step-14: Plot stage or head against discharge which we call rating curve
Step-15: Finally, read a stage or level that corresponds to the selected design discharge from the
graph.
3.7 SUMMARY OF BASE FLOW OF SOURCE OF IRRIGATION WATER SUPPLY

Table 3-1: Estimated river flow by floating method for Petu SSI project (SNNPR)
Upstream Cross section, bu/s 3.5 Total/Avg
Partial distance, bui (m) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.5
Flow depth, dui (m) 0.02 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.064
Area of flow, Aui (m2) 0.0175 0.0275 0.03 0.0325 0.04 0.045 0.04 0.23
Downstream Cross section, bd/s 5.0 Total/ Avg
Partial distance, ddi 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 5.0
Flow depth, ddi (m) 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.02 0.049
Area of flow, Adi (m2) 0.02 0.025 0.0275 0.03 0.0275 0.025 0.0275 0.03 0.0275 0.0175 0.26
Flow time b/n sections, ti (sec) 13.8 11.8 12.6 12.73
Length b/n sections (m) 9.3
Velocity of flow, Vi (m/s)=L/t 0.73
Actual velocity of flow, Vact (m/s)=(0.6*Vi
0.51
+0.8*Vi)/2
Average area of flow, Aavg (m2) 0.25
Estimated base flow, Q=V*A, m3/s 0.125
Note: Marginal segments are assumed triangular and others trapezoidal or rectangular as perceived.

Figure 3-3: Channel cross sections at U/S and D/S ends of flow measurement site
3.8 HYDRAULIC DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR AND RELATED STRUCTURES
The followings are the widely practiced design procedures of a diversion weir. They can be found
in various national manuals and guidelines.
3.8.1 Fixing weir/barrage crest level
3.8.1.1 WCL when there is no downstream existing structures
Weir crest level is mainly governed by the targeted peak level in the irrigable command area and
water demand or depth of flow in the canal as well as head losses in the conveyance canal and
losses at crossing structures (if any).
Design consideration for fixing weir crest level is that:

 The crest level should be set at desired height or level that enable to obtain the required
driving head to safe delivery of the designed discharge to main canal offtake. This level
has direct implication on height of a weir crest thus care should be taken as it can affect
the discharge coefficient, water head over the crest, and backwater curve;
 Crest i.e. pond level, upstream of the canal head regulator shall generally be obtained
by adding the working/driving head to the designed full supply level in the canal
depending on the command topography;
 The weir crest should be set to allow a safely passage of maximum flood discharge
within designed weir crest length;
 Provision of appropriate crest width in weir design is crucial for a smooth flow and
moderate velocity.
 The bed level of the under sluice should be below sill level of canal head regulator. But
level of the under sluice can be taken as equal to or greater than RBL
 The MC at the head reach should not be too deep in order to avoid large excavation
work, to minimize construction cost and to reduce maintenance and side slopes stability
problems;
Weir Crest Level is then given by:
WCL = (Water surface level at 1st off-take down the main canal) + (L x S) + hg; Where, L = length
of main canal from the head regulator to the 1st off-take (m); S = Bed slope of the main canal; hg =
Head loss at head regulator (m) (usually taken as 0.1-0.3m); ………………….. (3-4)

National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development
Water surface level at 1st off-take down the main canal = Peak irrigable land level in the command
area + Water depth in the MC + Operational losses (usually 0.1m) ………….…. (3-5)
Weir Height, h = WCL – RBL …………………………………………………………………….. (3-6)
(Note: RBL refers to minimum or thalweg at weir axis). This height should be high enough for
allowing water in to the intake at peak demand case. Thus, a minimum of 0.15m driving head
should be permitted to allow full supply to the intake.
In case of barrage, it is a controlled structure where the whole crest excluding piers is provided
with a gate to control (regulate) the flow. It is costly structure but efficiently regulates the flood with
low afflux. It is used in seasonal rivers where regulation is highly required.
Box 3-2:
Worked Example-2: A design engineer has identified a peak point to be irrigated in Petu SSI
Project (SNNPR) irrigable command area to be 1433.000 m a.s.l. If the length of conveyance
canal up to junction to this block is 380m and bed slope of this canal, S = 0.01%, then how much
is the required height of a diversion structure if a RBL at this site is of 1432.475 m a.s.l. Assume,
Intake Level above min. RBL=0.5m; Water depth in this canal, d=0.35m (normally this is taken
from MC design); and Operational head loss, ho=0.10 m;
Solution: Head loss along the canal, hf = S*L = 0.38m; Head loss at the head regulator, hg=0.1m;
Water surface level at 1st off-take down this canal=1433.000 +0.35++0.10=1433.450; Therefore,
Weir Crest Level = 1433.450+0.38+0.1=1433.930 m a.s.l. and calculated Weir Height, h= 1.45m.
Now, let’s check if this height can supply the case of peak demand i.e. Bottom of Intake Level
=Max. Command level + Hf along MC+ hg=1433.480m a.s.l. Its top level is thus =1433.480+0.35
=1433.830m a.s.l.
Consequently, computed WCL-Top of Intake Level=0.10m, indicating it is less than the required
minimum driving head i.e. 15cm for peak demand. Now, if we increase weir height, h=1.6m,
updated WCL=1434.075m. Now, updated driving head for full supply discharge= 1434.075-
1433.830=0.245m, which is greater than 15cm. Thus, adopt WCL=1434.075m a.s.l.
3.8.1.2 WCL when there is downstream existing structures
When there is a downstream existing structure along the conveyance canal, then weir crest level is
mainly governed by the head required to cross such structure, rather than the targeted peak level
in the irrigable command area. If there is a siphon crossing along this canal, then head losses in
this structure comprises three components: trash rack losses, transition losses and pipe friction
losses. Usually a head lose at such crossing is assumed 0.5m.
3.8.2 Fixing crest length of diversion headwork
3.8.2.1 General
There are four conditions to fix crest length of a weir/barrage based on flow condition as described
in following sections.

3.8.2.2 Crest Length based on lacey’s equation
As per Lacey, the weir crest length (P) should be adequate to pass the design flood safely. The
minimum stable width of an alluvial channel is usually determined from the Lacey‟s wetted
perimeter (P). Lacey calculated a series of regime flow equations. One of these describes the
regime perimeter of a river in alluvial material in terms of its dominant flow. The equation, in metric
units, is as follows (Sharma-1987):
P = 4.75 Q ………………………………………………………………………………... (3-7)
Where, P is the wetted perimeter of the river (m), and

Q is the discharge (m3/sec).
This equation is used as a first approximation of the likely width of the river channel and an
appropriate maximum width of the weir for alluvial channels. Thus, the length of a weir shall be
chosen somewhere between the regime width of the river and that which gives about 5m 3/s/m
width of weir, and depend on site conditions in each case. Where rivers are naturally constrained
to less than the above values by rock banks, the weir length must be taken as the natural width of
the river though it may require raised wings and hence expensive design.
In other reference books, this equation has the following form (Murthy, 2009)
B = 4.83 Q ………………………………………………………………………………... (3-8)
Where, B is the waterway width (m)
It has been speculated that factors like consideration of the standard silt factor, unit conversion,
etc. could have caused the variation in the coefficient. Regardless of the difference in the
coefficient between the two forms of the regime equation, the width of waterway calculated is very
wide in most of the cases. Therefore, the reduction in the width of the waterway is inevitable. As a
result, a constant called a looseness factor, which is the ration of the actual linear waterway
provided to waterway calculated by the regime formula, is being adopted. The recommended
range of the looseness factor is between 0.5 and 1.0 (Murthy, 2009).
On the contrary, the minimum width of the weir can be calculated from estimate of the maximum
level which the water can be allowed to back up against the weir and the height of embankment
walls. An energy head of 3m over the weir crest is often considered as maximum allowable
(Halcrow, 1988) which is associated with the limit of validity of the assumption for hydrostatic
pressure over the weir crest during the derivation of modular weir formula given by;
3
Q m  C d B H 2 ………………………………………………………………………….. (3-9)
Where, Qm is the modular flow rate in m3/s,

Cd is the discharge coefficient (dimensionless),
B is the linear waterway in m and
H is the energy head over the weir crest in m.
For the most common type of diversion weir in small scale irrigation scheme in Ethiopia, i.e. broad
crested weir, a 2m energy head will corresponds to a maximum discharge intensity of 58.8m3/s/m
over the weir crest. The minimum linear waterway for the design discharge can be estimated from
this relationship. This will give width of waterway much smaller than that obtained by regime
equation.

As a rule of thumb, the adopted width of waterway (or simply weir crest length) is somewhere
between the waterways calculated by the regime equation (maximum limit) and that which give a
maximum discharge intensity of 5m3/s/m (minimum limit). As much as possible the adopted width
of waterway should be almost similar to the width of the natural river channel.
When there is pier to support crossing structure over the weir the effective width of waterway shall
be modified due to flow contraction. The effect may be taken as:
 
L e  L t  2 N K p  K a H d …………………………………………………………… (3-10)
Where Le is effective length of crest (m),
Lt is total length of crest (m),
N is number of piers,
Kp is pier contraction coefficient,
Ka is abutment contraction coefficient, and
Hd is design head on crest.
The coefficients for the different types of shapes are given in figure 3-6 and tables 3-2 and 3-3.
Table 3-2: Pier contraction coefficient

Shape and characteristics of pier Kp Remark
Square-nosed piers with corners rounded the upstream approach wall 0.02
and the axis of the flow, on a radius equal to about 0.1 of the pier
thickness
Round-nosed piers 0.01
Pointed-nose piers 0.0
Table 3-3: Abutment contraction coefficient

Shape and characteristics of abutment Ka Remark
Square abutments with headwall at 90O to direction of flow 0.2
Rounded abutments with headwall at 90O to direction of flow when 0.1 r is radius abutment
0.5Hd≤r≤0.15Hd
Rounded abutments where r > 0.5Hd, and headwall is placed not more 0.0
than 45O to direction of flow
3.8.2.3 Crest length for cohesive soils with velocity > 1.5m/s and <1.5m/s
The above Lacey‟s equation being valid has yet a limitation as to its applicability to all conditions
and magnitude of rivers. It is rather appropriate to apply it for designing new river channel (artificial
water way); and rivers expected to carry a flood more than their capacity due to river merging
intensive soil and water conservation; urbanization or other factors. For small and self-contained
rivers, the formula is not applicable as it yields highly exaggerated value.
Thus, the following formulas can be used depending on the nature of the River bed material:
For cohesive soils and rocks, with velocity >1.5 (MoWR, 2002)
Q* gh
P ……………………………………………………………………………… (3-11)
3
Vp

For non-cohesive soils with velocity <1.5

A Q
P ………………………………………………………………………..………. (3-12)
S 0.2
S
A ……………………………………………………………………………...…. (3-13)
Vp
Where, Q is design discharge of the river

h is upstream water depth
S is Slope of the River
Vp is Permissible or non-scouring velocity. Refer table below.
Table 3-4: Permissible or non-scouring velocity of flow in rivers, (m/s)

Bed Material Permissible Velocity of River Flow, (m/s)
Rock and gravel 1-5
Hard soil 1-1.1
Sandy loam black cotton 0.6-0.9
Very light loose sand to average sandy soil 0.3-0.6
Ordinary soil 0.6-0.9
In case of meandering alluvial rivers for minimizing shoal Formation, the wetted perimeter P is
further multiplied by a looseness factor. The looseness factor to be used in the above equations
(3-11 and 3-12) is given by:
f = 1.76* d 50
………………………………………………………………………….… (3-14)
Where, f is silt factor for 50% of particle distribution,

d50 is average particle size, mm (It is to be read from a gradation curve for the 50% of
particle distribution).
Table 3-5: recommended looseness factor

Silt Factor Looseness Factor
Rock and gravel 1.2 to 1.0
Hard soil 1.0 to 0.8
Source: MoWR, 2002
In case, the actual river cross-section is sufficient to carry the design flood, which should be
ascertained by field assessment, the lacey formula may not be used. Rather, the effective width of
a weir is determined by the following formula.
Bu   * B gross …………………………………………………………………..……. (3-15)
a*Hd
Coefficient of contraction,   1  ………………………………………….. (3-16)
B  H d 
Where a-coefficient/or shape factor is taken from sketches shown in Appendix-V.
Hd - head over crest
B - Crest width

3.8.2.4 Crest length based on actual river width
In practice, length of a weir crest is determined based on the physical characteristics of the
selected weir site and the width of the existing waterway. Rationally, a weir with a long crest gives
a small discharge per unit length i.e. intensity of discharge and hence, the required energy
dissipater per meter of the crest width is smaller than what is needed for a shorter crest length. On
the other hand, weir‟s crest longer than maximum wetted river width causes formation of islands at
upstream side of the weir. The formation of such island upstream of the weir reduces effective
length of the crest (part of the weir less effective in passing the flood).
In general, width of a weir could be the natural river channel width or it could be widened or
contracted depending on the flood flow condition in the river. Usually weir crest length is the river
width corresponding to the fixed crest height at that selected site. Thus, width of a river is usually
kept to be width of the weir crest if the river flow is not too sluggish with a velocity of low quantum
or if the flow doesn't spill over the banks. If it is too sluggish, to avoid silt accumulation we may
reduce the section till we get minimum or critical silt-driving velocity. If the river flow is perennial
with moderate fluctuation, the river width could be reduced to get the required commanding head
in the place of constructing high head weir or in seasonal rivers, an open weir with a barrage could
be cost effective and efficient.
On the other hand, the river channel width could be enlarged to reduce high head and high
velocity that could damage (cause scouring) the riverbed, river banks and the structures. The high
head over the crest could be reduced by elongated crest width without expanding the river
channel.
Thus, as a general rule, the crest length of the weir including scouring sluice, should be taken as
the average wetted width during the flood. If possible the flow per unit width should not exceed
15m3/s/m so as to avoid a relatively costly energy dissipation arrangement. In such case,
increasing the length of the weir crest to 1.2 times the river width is allowable. The designer need
to observe that by limiting the waterway, the shoal formation upstream can be eliminated.
However, it increases the intensity of discharge and consequently the section of the structure
becomes heavier with excessive gate heights and cost increases, though the length of the
structure is reduced.
3.8.2.5 Crest Length for Barrage
In case of barrage, the design flood usually passes through successive openings and hence the
flow hydraulics is quite different to diversion weir. Therefore, the modular weir discharge formula
does not work here. Therefore, the design assumes a standard gate opening size and determines
the maximum number of gates required to allow the passage of design flood safely. And the size
of gate opening of the barrage can be calculated based on submerged orifice formula given by
(USBR, 1987; Ankum, 1991; Smith, 1995; Novak et al., 2007)
Q  CA 2 gh ……………………………………………………………..………………. (3-17)
Where, Q is discharge in m3/s,

C is coefficient for the gate,
A is area of gate opening in m2,
g is gravitational acceleration in m/s2,

h is the differential head across gate opening in m.
Determination of h requires detail information on both sides of the gate. Therefore, in practice h is
taken as conservatively the difference in pool between upstream and downstream even if actual
effective differential head across the gate opening is marginally greater than this. Therefore, for
easy of work, the above formula is simplified as gate flow formula (Chow, 1986; Ankum, 1991).
Q  C d Bw 2 g d 1 ……………………………………………………………..……….. (3-18)
Where, Q is design discharge in m3/s,

Cd is the discharge coefficient,
w is the height of gate opening (gate setting) in m,
d1 is the average headwater depth above the intake crest level,
B the effective width or opening (water way) of the intake structure in m and
g is the gravitational acceleration in m/s2.
The discharge coefficient can be estimated by:

 ……………………………………………………………..………….. (3-19)
Cd 
w
1 
d1
Where,  is the contraction coefficient of the jet, usually taken as 0.6.

Others as defined in previous section
Once the size of a single gate opening is determined, the number of gate shall be obtained from
the magnitude of the design flood.
The flow through the gate can be either free or submerged. Free orifice flow prevails when the tail
water level is below a certain level which can be interpreted in terms of anticipated head loss. Free
orifice flow occurs with limit of gate opening and tail water level. In practice gate operates as free
with in the following limits
 0.15 d 1  w  0.5 d 1 ……………………………………………………………..…….. (3-20)
And the associated minimum head loss is

1 1
d 1  Z min  d 1 ……………………………………………………………..………. (3-21)
2 4
Where zmin is the minimum head loss in m.
The above is valid if the flow is free underflow otherwise the computation will not yield correct
magnitude of discharge. The free underflow at an adjustable vertical gate occurs when the tail-
water level is below a critical value called d3 both measured from the same reference level. The
critical value is given by:
d 3  0.37 d 1  0.75 w ……………………………………………………………..……… (3-22)

If computation dictates the flow under the gate is submerged, the discharge coefficient formula
cannot be used and is obtained from figure 3-4 using the ratio of headwater to gate setting and
tail-water to gate setting.

When the flood level reaches a stage corresponding to the deign discharge, the entire gates of the
barrage is required to be opened completely (lifted out of the water). It has to be understood that
when gate opening reached more than two-third of headwater depth, i.e. w=2/3d1, the flow
through the gate shifts from orifice to weir flow hydraulics and hence the weir flow formula applies.
In general, the barrage opening has to be checked to fulfill that the design flood pass through the
gate openings while computing using the weir formula under submerged condition. In addition, the
piers and abutment to cause side contractions have important influence in the case of barrage and
hence a correction need to be made on the width of waterway. The effective width of the overflow
section is less than the net width of the barrage opening. This can be represented by formula
given in equation 3-10.
Figure 3-4: Typical Cross Section through and Arrangement of Barrage Diversion

3.8.3 Determination of flow depth over broad crested weir
The general formula for computing discharge, Q, passing over such weir crest is given by:
Qp=C*Le*He3/2 ……………………………………………………………………. (3-23)

Where, Qp is flood discharge of a given return period (m3/s)
C is coefficient of discharge equal to 1.7
   
Le is effective crest length (m), L e  L t  2 * N * K p  K a * H e  t ….... (3-24)
Lt is Total crest length i.e. bank width at crest level (m)
N is Number of piers
Kp is pier contraction coefficient (as given in figure 3-6)
Kais abutment contraction coefficient
t is thickness of each pier (m)
He is specific energy head (m)=Hd +Hav (Refer the sketch shown below) .. (3-25)
Hd is flow depth on the crest (m)
Hav is approach velocity head (m)
Now, deriving equation from He = Hd+Hav, Hav=Va2/2g and Va =Q/A, we will have:
Va =Q/A = Qd/(Le*(h+Hd)) and from eq. (3-13), He = (Qd/CLe)2/3.
Thus, He =Hd+(Qp/(Le*(h+Hd)))^2/2g…………………………………………………………….. (3-26)
Then substituting equation (3-26) in to equation (3-23), we can solve for Hd by goal seek (self-
iterative or trial and error method on excel) i.e. compute and compare till the left side He from (3-
23) equals the right side i.e. by inserting different values of Hd in Hd+(Qp/(L*(h+Hd)))^2/2g).
Note: Discharges through a barrage under free flow condition is determined by the same formula
as above. But in case of submerged flow conditions, the flow over the weir is modular when it is
independent of variations in downstream water level. For this to occur, the downstream energy
head over crest (E2) must not rise beyond 80% of the upstream energy head over crest (E1). The
ratio (E2/E1) is known as the "modular ratio" and the "modular limit" is thus the value (E 2/E1 = 0.80)
of the modular ratio at which flow ceases to be free.
U/s pervious
protection
Z Stilling basin/Cistern or d/s

impervious apron
D/s pervious
U/s protection
U/s Cut-
off impervious
D/s Cut-
apron
off
Figure 3-5: Schematic Arrangements of Flow Heads over a Weir (Typical)

Figure 3-6: Recommended values of Kp and Ka
3.8.4 Determination of flow depth over glacis and ogee weirs
The same procedures which are described above for the determination of flow depth over broad
crested weir can be applied here in this case too, but the only difference is, coefficient of
discharge, C which is equal to 2.2 for ogee weir and 1.84 for Glacis and Sharp crested weir. Note:
the difference in all the three cases is value of coefficient of discharge, C= (2/3)*Cd(2g), where
Cd= 0.58, 0.62 and 0.75 for broad crested, glacis and ogee shapes respectively.
3.8.5 Flow depth over barrage
A barrage diversion structure consists of two parts: the overflow part located between piers that
acts as a broad crested weir and the shutter part which acts as a sharp crested weir. Thus, it
behaves as both hydraulic structures either as a broad crested weir when head over the barrage
bays crest, Hd is less than 1.5 times width of the crest and as a sharp crested weir when it is more
than 1.5 times width of the crest (S.K. Garg, 2006). Even when the shutters are not removed
completely, there is a condition when the barrage structure acts as an orifice flow, but this can
happen in rare cases.
Normally, it is assumed that shutters will be removed during flood times thus the broad crested
weir case can be considered however, in case these shutters are not removed due to different
reasons, then the worst case can happen. Anyway, assuming that the barrage will be operated as
per the design, flow over barrage structure can be considered for the first two scenarios:
Q  C * L  K * n * H e* H e3 2 ……………………………………………………...... (3-27)
Where,
Q is discharge over the barrage, m3/s
C is discharge coefficient =1.7 for BCW and 1.84 for sharp crested weir
L is clear waterway lengths i.e. crest lengths of the overflow (m)
K is Coefficient of end contraction (equals twice the number of gated bays and varies from
0.1 for thick blunt pier noses to 0.04 for thin pointed noses: generally taken as 0.1 in
ordinary calculations.
n is number of end contractions
He is specific energy head (i.e. Hd + hav), (m)
Consequently, flow depth over such structure, Hd needs to be considered for either of these cases
which is found fulfilling the above stated conditions.

3.8.6 Checking modularity of a weir
Modularity or non-submergence of a weir is checked by computing the ratio H2/H1 (where H1 and
H2 are the upstream and downstream head above the weir crest respectively, refer figure 2-9). The
design should check modularity and if it is found that the weir is submerged during the design, the
following table shall be used to correct the modular discharge in to submerged condition.
The discharge capacity of an overflow structure if submerged by tail water level is:
Q s  fQm ……………………………………………………........................................ (3-28)

Where Qs is submerged flow in m3/s,
Qm is the modular flow in m3/s, and
f is correction factor.
Table 3-6: Correction factor for discharge for submerged (non-modular) flow
Type of structure H2/H1 f Remark
≤0.75 1 Upstream and downstream faces vertical or sloping
0.80 0.95
0.85 0.88
Vertical faces
0.90 0.75
0.95 0.57
0.80 1
Broad-crested
0.85 0.95
weir Upstream face 1:5, downstream face 1:2
0.90 0.82
0.95 0.62
0.80 1
0.85 0.98
Upstream face 1:1, downstream face 1:2
0.90 0.90
0.95 0.73
This value usually varies from 0.79 to 0.94 for broad crested weirs with a shallow sloping back i.e.
downstream face, while for a vertical back face, the modular limit varies from 0.67 to 0.92,
depending on the value of the ratio (H2/H1).
Box 3-3:
Worked Example-3: If the design flood of a 50 years return period in a river supposed to supply
the command area mentioned in worked example-2 is found out to be 24.8m3/s, how high is flow
depth on the crest of this broad crested weir. Given: The headwork is designed to supply on both
left and right flanks, operating pier thickness is 0.5m and sluice channel width is 0.70m. Average
width of the river at the diversion site is 9m. Level corresponding to Qd at this site =1433.450m
(From rating curve).
Solution: Since this headwork is intended to supply on both sides, we need to provide two sluice
channels and hence we will have two piers. Consequently, effective width of the crest = 9-
2*(0.7+0.5) = 6.6m. From Q=C*L*He3/2, He= (Q/C*L)2/3 = 1.698m. Now, inserting different values of
Hd in equation (3-16) till it equals 1.698, or computing for Hd by goal seek gives Hd=1.622m.
Now, check for modularity or submergence of the weir. U/S WL = WCL+Hd = 1435.697m and D/S
WL = TWD + RBL = 1433.450m, where TWD=Level corresponding to Qd – RBL= 0.98m. Thus,
U/S water height above weir crest (WC), H2 =1435.697-1434.075=1.622m and D/S water height
above WC, H1 = -0.62m, meaning it is not submerged, thus the flow is modular in this case.

Box 3-4:
Worked example-4: If we plan to provide bridge over this structure, what are the advantages of
assigning the central pier and the abutment as fixed piers?
Solutions: (i) For abutment pier to be assigned as fixed pier while the bridge is quite long, the
longitudinal loads due to earthquake are quite large. As the earthquake loads are resisted by fixed
piers, the size of fixed piers will be large and massive. In this connection, for better aesthetic
appearance, the selection of abutment as fixed piers could accommodate the large size and
massiveness of piers. Normally abutments are relatively short in height and for the same
horizontal force; the bending moment induced is smaller. (ii) Secondly, for the central pier to be
selected as a fixed pier, the bridge deck is allowed to move starting from the central pier to the end
of the bridge. However, if the fixed pier is located at the abutment, the amount of movement to be
incorporated in each bearing due to temperature variation, shrinkage, etc. is more than that when
the fixed pier is located at central pier. Therefore, the size of movement joints can be reduced
significantly if central pier (being chamfered at both ends) is provided.
3.8.7 Determination of weir/barrage geometry
The following sections present the existing and widely practiced methods for determination of the
section geometry of diversion weir.
3.8.7.1 Geometry of broad crested vertical drop weir
This section is concentrated on how to fix top and bottom width of weir body. The weir body is the
main component of the diversion weir structures and its section is determined as follows.
If the weir is of broad crested (vertical drop weir and sloping glacis weir) type, the top width is the
maximum value of the following four equations:
He
b ……………………………………………………………………………(3-29)

3* H e
b ………………………………………………………………………..(3-30)
2* 
b = S + 1 ……………………………………………………………………………(3-31)
This top width can also be estimated using Etcheverry's Method as:

b  0.552 * h  H d  H av ………………………………………………….. (3-32)
Where, b is the top width of a weir, (m)
He is the specific energy head over the weir crest during the design flood, (Ii is the sum of
overflow depth and approaching velocity head), m
 is the specific gravity of the weir body material and
S is the shutter height if it is provided (in case of barrage).
h, Hd, and Hav are as described in figure 3-5.

The recommended top width for diversion weirs of SSI Project from practice/experience varies
from 1.0 m to 1.5m with vertical upstream face and 1:1 downstream slope of the weir body (if the
selected weir type is vertical drop weir).
The bottom width, B is given by:

H  He
B ………………………………………………………………………. (3-33)
 1
Where, H is height of weir, m
He and  are as described above
However, these formulae give preliminary sizes of the structure as the final one is governed by the
stability requirements of the structure especially for no over flow condition and the downstream
channel is dry, i.e. when the u/s water level is at crest level.
3.8.7.2 Geometry of ogee weir
If the weir is of ogee type, then the crest shape is determined based on the design head. The
profile of ogee weir is thus fixed for the design head as it is generally chosen to give the maximum
practical hydraulic efficiency, in keeping with the operational requirements, stability and economy
of the structure. If the actual head is less than the design head, the pressure on the crest gives
positive (i.e. above atmospheric) value. However, for the actual heads greater than the design
head, the pressure on the crest is negative (i.e. less than the atmospheric pressure) thus it leads
to cavitation (i.e. A hydraulic phenomenon of formation of vapor bubbles and vapor pockets within
dropping water caused by excessive stress. Cavitation may occur in low-pressure regions where
water has been accelerated). Thus, to avoid any possibility of negative pressures on the crest, the
ogee crest shall be designed for a design head in the condition, when the under sluices are not in
operation and whole of the design flood passes over the weir crest. Usually, the type of ogee
selected for SSIP is vertical upstream face and downstream face sloping at 45 degrees to the
vertical.
The downstream profile of the weir crest is represented by the equation:

n  1* Y …………………………………………………………………... (3-34)
X n  K *He
Where, He is the design head including velocity head, (m)
X and Y are coordinates of the points on the crest profile with the origin at the highest point
of the crest, called the apex.
K and n are constants depending on slope of u/s face (as shown below)
For vertical upstream faced ogee weir, the value of K and n are 0.5 and 1.85, respectively.

Ro/2
Figure 3-7: Components of ogee weir, (S.K. Garg, 2006)
Table 3-7: Values of the constants K and n (S.K. Garg, 2006)

Slope of the u/s face of the spillway weir K n
Vertical 2.0 1.85
1H:3V 1.936 1.836
1H:1.5H i.e. 2H:3V 1.939 1.810
2H:3V 1.873 1.776
Source: US Army of Engineers, WES
Determination of the discharge coefficient for ogee weir follows a series of trial and error method.
Furthermore, it requires the use of charts and figures. Here is the procedure for determining the
coefficient of discharge, C for ogee spillway:
i. Assume the anticipated design head over the weir for the given design flood and width of
waterway;
ii. Read value of C based on the ratio of height of weir to design head i.e. (Figure 3-8)
iii. If head on crest is different from design head, a correction for C can be read from Figure 3-9.
iv. Using the value of C, determine all the losses and calculate the effective head i.e. He
v. Read value of C based on the ratio of height of weir to the effective head i.e. (Figure 3-8)
vi. Based on value of based on the ratio of height of weir to the effective head and for the
appropriate upstream slope (Figure 3-10)
vii. Determine the value of C by multiplying the value of C and
viii. Calculate the total head and read degree of submergence from Figure 3-11. The reading
should be in the supercritical zone of the figure.
ix. Read the value of for the above value of degree of submergence from Figure 3-12
x. Determine the value of C by multiplying the value of C and
xi. Using the above C value determine the velocity head by multiplying the above value with the
effective head or He
xii. Determine the velocity of flow and calculate the velocity head. If the velocity head obtained
above is almost similar to this one, stop the computation and take the C value for the design
flood otherwise continue by changing width of waterway or design head over weir until you
get similar result.

Figure 3-8: Discharge Coefficients for Vertical Faced Ogee weir (mowr, 2002)
Figure 3-9: Discharge coefficients for other than the design head (MoWR, 2002)
Figure 3-10: Discharge Coefficients for Ogee Shaped Crest with Sloping u/s Face

Figure 3-11: Effects of downstream influences on flow over weir crests
Figure 3-12: Ratio of discharge coefficients resulting from apron effects

From stability and construction point of view, a downstream slope of 1:1 is commonly provided
following end of ogee shape and extends to a horizontal distance of (for vertical drop):

 S 
 
X  
0.85  0.85 
2* H
 S *1.85e 

…………………………………………………………….. (3-35)
 
Where, X is horizontal distance (m)
S is slope of d/s face of weir (e.g. if it is 1:1, then S=1 and if 1:3, then S=3)
According to the latest studies of U.S. Army Corps, the u/s curve of the ogee spillway having a
vertical u/s face, should have the following equation:
1.85
0.724 *  X  0.27 H e 0.625
Y  0.126 H e  0.4315 * H 0e .375 *  X  0.27 * H e .. (3-36)
H 0e .85
Where, Y is vertical distance, (m)
He and X are as defined above at any point X, (m)
This profile extends from peak point (crest level or apex) back to 𝑋=−0.27*He …………… (3-37)
The radius of the base bucket is calculated as follows (MoWR, 2002):
R o  0.305 *10 k ……………………………………………………………………….... (3-38)
V  6.4  ha  4.88
K ………………………………………………………………… (3-39)
3.6 * H d  19.5
V= 2 g * h / 0.5 * H d  ……………………………………………………………..…. (3-40)
Where, V is Velocity at the toe of the weir (m/s)

The radius of base bucket, Ro can also be assumed to be ¼ of H or P, as per S.K. Garg, 2006.
2
ha is approach velocity head (m) and given by, h a  V a ……………………….. (3-41)
2g
The discharge coefficient, C can be determined by the relation of P/ha when:
P/ha> 1.33, velocity head is negligible thus, C=2.225 ………………………........…. (3-42)
P/ha< 1.33, velocity head is need to considered, thus C is read from the curve given below.
Procedure for determining C:
i. Calculate Hc/Hd and P/Hd

ii. Then from the curve, read C/Cd
iii. Calculate actual discharge coefficient from C=c/Cd*2.225……………........………. (3-43)
iv. If the u/s face is not vertical correct the value of C calculated in step iii, multiplying it by the
correction factor for given P/Hd. Repeat the procedure with the corrected value of C and fix
Hc.

Figure 3-13: H-Q relation for Selecting Coefficient of Discharge, C (MoWR, 2002)
3.8.7.3 Geometry of sloping glacis weir
Such weir has sloping faces both on the upstream and downstream. The slope of the glacis u/s of
the stilling basin has little effect on the jump as long as the distribution of velocity and depth of flow
are reasonably uniform on entering the jump. The sloping glacis weirs have the inherent
advantage of stability. On rivers subject to high velocity flows carrying boulders, weirs should be
made as low as possible and a shallow glacis weir would best transport boulders safely over the
weir. Glacis weirs with an upstream slope of 1V:1H to 1V:1.5H and a downstream slope of
1V:1.5H to 1V:2.0H shall be adopted as required.
The position of the start of the jump on a sloping glacis can be estimated by projecting the
conjugate depth back from the tail water level to the incoming flow level.

3.8.8 Design of energy dissipater
3.8.8.1 General
Various types of structures have been developed for the dissipation of energy of flow. The
dissipation is achieved by transforming super-critical flow into sub-critical flow through hydraulic
jumps, turbulence, impacts, etc. Commonly used dissipaters in irrigation works are:
(i) USBR hydraulic jump basins (Types I to IV)
(ii) Vlugter basin;
(iii) SAF Basin;
(iv) Impact block (straight drop) type basin;
(v) Slotted grating dissipater;
(vi) Impact type stilling basin;
(vii) Plunge pool;
(viii) Stilling well;
(ix) Baffled spillway and
(x) Deflector bucket
Dissipaters‟ of type (i) to (v) and (x) are mostly used in spillways, whereas types (vi) to (ix) are
used in outlets. Deflector buckets are suitable for use in headworks structures, but not generally
used in canal works. In this manual only the hydraulic jump basins will be discussed.
3.8.8.2 Hydraulic jump computation
Hydraulic jump is one of the flow hydraulic characteristics which takes place when a super-critical
flow changes into a sub-critical flow. This characteristics usually occurs in the stilling basin and is
mainly a function of the Froude number, which also defines types of stilling basin. Froude number
is generally represented by Fr and is computed by:
V
Fr  …..………………………………………………..……………..... (3-44)
g*D
Where, V is mean flow velocity (m/s) and

D is Hydraulic depth or Hydraulic mean depth (=A/T), thus it is same as flow depth,
d in case of rectangular flow sections (m)
A is flow cross sectional area (m2) and
T is the water surface width (m)
The Froude number is generally used for scaling free-surface flows, open channels and hydraulic
structures.
For rectangular channels, The Froude number is given by:

V
Fr  …………………………………………………………………………….... (3-45)
g *d
For a channel of irregular cross-sectional shape, the Froude number is defined as:
V
Fr  …………………………………………………………………………….. (3-46)
A
g*
B

Where, Fr is The Froude number, dimensionless;

V is the mean flow velocity (m/s);
d is the characteristic geometric dimension and represent internal diameter of pipe for pipe
flows and flow depth for open channel flow in a rectangular channel (m);
A is the cross-sectional area (m2); and
B is the free-surface flow width (m).
To ensure adequate hydraulic jump stilling action, it would be desirable to keep the Froude
number of the incoming flow (Fr1) as high as possible. The Froude numbers shown in table 3-5
from Chow provides some guidance.
3.8.8.3 Determination of jump length
Length of jump is the distance that is generated when there is a transition from supercritical flow to
subcritical flow condition. It is thus the main indicator and decisive parameter for estimating length
of stilling basin. Hydraulic jump entering a stilling basin can be interpreted by a curve called
specific energy curve. This curve is given by:
V2 q2
HE  d   ……………………………….………………….……………… (3-47)
2g 2g d 2
Where, HE is Specific energy, (m)

d is flow depth (m)
q is unit discharge or discharge per meter width (m3/s/m)
A graph of specific energy plotted against depth generates u-shape curve with the specific energy
a minimum at a turning depth called critical depth as shown in figure below. Here, the flow passes
from subcritical to supercritical. At critical flow,
V2 = g*D ……………………………….………………….……………………………… (3-48)
In other words the Froude Number Fr = 1. At subcritical flows, the Froude Number is less than 1,
because the velocity is low and the depth is large. At supercritical flows the Froude Number is
greater than 1.
The specific energy curve shown in figure 3-14 illustrates that for any energy level there are two
possible depths: one subcritical and one supercritical. These are known as conjugate depths, and
if the flow state changes from one side of critical to the other it also changes from one depth to its
conjugate depth. The most dramatic instance of such a transition is the hydraulic jump.
dc=(qc/g)2/3 = 2/3 * HEmin …………………..…………………………………………… (3-49)
Where, V is flow velocity, (m/s)

dc is critical depth of flow, (m)
qc is discharge per unit critical width, (m3/s/m)
At this point, the curve produces a minimum specific energy, HEmin.

The depth before the jump is called the initial depth (y1 or d1) and the depth after the jump is called
the sequent depth (y2 or d2). These depths are shown on specific energy curve shown below.
These depths of flow must be differentiated from alternate depths y1 and y2'. y2' is the depth that
shall occur in a subcritical flow if there was no loss of energy in the jump formation; while y2 is the
actual depth that occurs after the jump, involving the energy loss Hl·
Figure 3-14: Hydraulic Jump Interpreted By Specific Energy Curve
 d 2  d 13
Hl  E f  E f  …………………..………………………………..….. (3-50)
1 2 4 * d 1d 2
V 12
E f  d1  …………………..…………………………………………………..….. (3-51)
1 2g
V 22
E f  d2 …………………..………………………………………………..…… (3-52)
2 2g
q
V1  …………………..…………………………………………….…………...…… (3-53)
d1
q
V2 …………………..………………………………………………………..…... (3-54)
d2
Where, Ef1 and Ef2 are specific energies at section 1 and 2 respectively, (m)
V1 and V2 are corresponding flow velocities at same section, (m/s)
Pre- and post-jump flow depths are interrelated with the following equation:
d  
 1   8 q g d 1   1 or
d  1  8 2
 1 ……………………….....……. (3-55)
d Fr
2
d  1 3
 1
2
2     2
2  1

Based on such computed flow depth values at pre- and post-jumps, one can estimate jump length
as:
Lj = 5 to 6*(d2-d1) ………………………………………………………………... (3-56)

3.8.8.4 Determination of location of the jump
Hydraulic jump can occur only when the Froude number exceeds 1. When the Froude number is
near one, the jump is very weak and somewhat gradual such that it might not even be able to see
it is "jumping".
Thus, to figure out where the jump occurs it needs to know when the Froude Number transits from
less than one to more than one. To help this, the following equation is extremely useful for
modeling open channel flow:
dy
1 
yn 3
y

S ………………………………………………………………………... (3-57)
dx yc 3
1
y
Where, y represents the depth of flow in a riverbed at any point,
x is the distance along the flow,
S is slope of riverbed (positive when flowing downhill, negative, when flowing uphill),
yc is the critical depth of flow corresponding to Fr =1, and
yn is the normal depth, the depth of flow corresponding to flow that is balancing the
frictional losses with gravitation gains.
As a general rule, it is easiest to work upstream i.e. from d2 towards d1. If we try to work
downstream from an initial guess, we'll end up with non-physical flows unless we happen to guess
perfectly.
In general, we can model the flow by going upstream from the subcritical section and downstream
from the supercritical section. Then having modeled the supercritical section we can plot vs
position of the depth of flow that would result from a hydraulic jump at that location. Any time that
plot intersects the subcritical plot which is a location where a hydraulic jump could be stable.
3.8.9 Selection of appropriate stilling basin
3.8.9.1 General
The objective of all stilling basin designs is to make the highly turbulent region of flow that occur on
the stilling basin at all levels of discharge and to ensure that the flow leaving the downstream end
of the basin is subcritical and will not cause excessive scour downstream. The most important
parameter required to set stilling basin is sequent depth of a hydraulic jump. There are numerous
studies carried out on the study of shape, dimension and details of stilling basins. One of the latest
and most comprehensive and being widely practiced investigations was conducted by USBR
which is presented here briefly.
However, if it is supposed to accommodate the jump and match exit gradient criteria by such
stilling basin alone, it results in costly and long massive structure. Although not adequate, the
length of apron from exit gradient could be reduced by introducing a cut off walls as long as the
jump remain within the apron. Such mechanism of controlling location of jump by introducing
energy dissipater results in cost reduction. Thus, provision of additional structures need to be
made within the stilling basin so as to optimize length and hence size of the structure by

accommodating and hence dissipating incoming energy from hydraulic Jumps. Details of this have
been discussed in section 2.6.2.
Table 3-8: Summary of types of hydraulic jump

Froude Energy
Types of Jump Jump Characteristics
number dissipation, %
Strong jump Fr> 9 Rough jump, lots of energy dissipation 5
Steady jump 4.5 <Fr< 9 Considerably energy losses 20
Oscillating jump 2.5 <Fr< 4.5 Unstable oscillating jump; production of large waves of 20-40
irregular period
Weak jump 1.7 <Fr< 2.5 Little energy loss 45-70
Undular jump 1.0 <Fr< 1.7 Free-surface undulations d/s of the jump; negligible 70-85
energy loss
Source: Types of Hydraulic Jumps (rough classification), Chow 1973
Table 3-9: Selection of energy dissipaters for different range of flows

Types of basin Consideration/ Application limits
USBR Type I Wide range of Fr, V< 15 m/s; Long basin, simple construction
USBR Type II For V>15m/s; Long basins, with chute blocks
USBR Type III For Fr> 4.5, V < 15 m/s; Short basin, but complicated by floor and chute blocks
USBR Type IV For Fr between 2.5 - 4.5, V < 15m/s; short basin, but complicated by floor and chute
blocks
Vlugter For canal falls of drop<4m; Simple to design and construct; Suitable for masonry
construction
SAF For small low head structures; Short basin, but complicated by floor and chute blocks
Impact block For drops<2m; Generally economical; Short basin, but complicated by floor and chute
blocks
Slotted grating For 2.5<Fr<4.5; for small structures; complicated by grating
Baffled spillway No tail water requirement; Complicated by blocks; economical
Bucket Needs more tail water than jump type basins; Good foundation and protection required,
in view of scour hole formation
Source: Guidelines for Irrigation Systems Design in Hills and Valleys, MoWR, Nepal, 2006
3.8.9.2 Fixing stilling basin floor level
The floor of the stilling basin must be set to a sufficient depth below the minimum tail-water to
confine the hydraulic jump to the basin at all times. If the setting of aprons/stilling basins is too high
to ensure hydraulic jump formation, instead of a hydraulic jump dissipating the energy over a
relatively short reach, a gradual thickening of the flow results in dissipating the energy over a
relatively long reach. Thus, the typical stilling basin/apron length selected shall be set shorter to
provide protection from these gradually varying flows by depressing it and introducing additional
structures like chute blocks, baffle blocks, end sill, etc.
Typical small scale diversion weir stilling basins usually have lower Fr (generally between 2.5 and
4.5), and the USBR “Design of Small Dams” recommends a type IV basin. Flows for these basins
are considered to be in the transition flow stage because a true hydraulic jump does not fully
develop. Stilling basins that accommodate these flows are the least effective in providing
satisfactory dissipation because the attendant wave action ordinarily cannot be controlled by the
usual basin devices. Waves generated by the flow phenomena will persist beyond the end of the
basin and must often be dampened by means apart from the basin.
USBR thus recommends that “because of the tendency of the jump to sweep out, and as an aid in
suppressing wave action, the water depths in the basin should be about 10 percent greater than

the computed conjugate/sequent depth”. Also they indicate that higher Fr stilling basins and better
hydraulic jump performance can be facilitated by selecting wider structure/basin widths. The USBR
chart for jump/basin length for type IV basins (generally with chute blocks which are probably not
practical for typical small scale weir diversion projects) indicates basin lengths of about 5 to 6d 2 for
Froude numbers between 2.5 and 4.5.
In general, to design the stilling basin we need to estimate the depth of flow, velocity of flow and
Froude number at the upstream end of the stilling basin. This is done by undertaking an energy
balance between the top of the weir, where flow conditions are governed by the weir equation, and
the downstream toe of the weir where supercritical flow is occurring (neglecting losses due to
friction and turbulence in between). This energy balance also called Bernoulli‟s equation is
expressed as follows:
E=d1+ Z +V12/2g =d2+V22/2g……………………………………………………………. (3-58)

Where, E is the total energy at the upstream, (m)
d1 is flow depth at entrance to the jump, (m)
Z is datum level, i.e. reference elevation (in this case it is RBL, m);
V1 is velocity of flow entering the jump, (m/s);
d2 is sequent depth, (m)
V2 is velocity of flow leaving the jump, (m/s).
The left hand side of the above energy balance equation can be solved at first hand since all
parameters are known, the right hand side of the equation however has to be solved iteratively or
by goal seek for d2 by varying d1 by assume floor level of the d/s apron/stilling basin (i.e. fist
assume floor level then compute equation on LHS till it equals RHS by varying d1).Thus the
general procedure for designing stilling basin is as outlined below:
 Determine the pre-jump and post-jump water depth, d1 and d2,
 Determine the pre-jump velocity V1 and Froude Number, Fr1,
 Select suitable basin from the following types of Jump and recommended Stilling Basis.
 The floor of the basin should be set to give a tail water depth to be at least 10% greater
than the sequent depth D2 given by the equation (3-55).
And rearranging the above relationship yields:
q
d1  ……………………………………………………………………….. (3-59)
2 g E  d 1
Primarily, a drop in the floor level between upstream and downstream is assumed. Then, using
calculated E and q, the value of d1 is determined by iteration. Once the value of d1 determined, the
Froude Number calculated and if it is within the acceptable range for the proposed basin type
proceed to determination of d2 using equation (3-55). The level of d2 should be compared to the
tail water level at design discharge and if it is above the tail water level, modify the design until d2
is sufficiently below the tail water level.

3.8.9.3 Estimation of length of stilling basin
The length of the downstream impervious apron or stilling Basin is determined considering the
hydraulic jump length and the available exit gradient at the end of the apron. The apron thickness
varies along this length from a maximum at the start of the hydraulic jump in the stilling
basin/apron to a minimum at its end. In practice the length requirement for jump is small compared
to the length requirement for safe exit gradient especially there is only cutoff (no sheet pile).
To ensure safety against piping, Lane's Weighted Creep Theory states that “The sum of the
vertical creep lengths, plus one third the sum of the horizontal creep lengths must be greater than
the differential head across the structure times Lane's creep coefficient (C)” which is given in the
table 3-7.
The downstream cistern i.e. solid apron should be long enough to accommodate the jump and is 5
to 6 times jump height, as given in equation (3-56).
Level of stilling basin is fixed either by energy method (or trial and error) or conventional method.
Energy method involves assuming level of stilling basin and applying Bernoulli‟s/Energy equation
shown in equation (3-58) at two sections: on the u/s and on the d/s of weir body and solve for
initial depth of flow entering the jump such that the difference between tail water depth and
sequent depth is within allowable range of 20 to 40%. Thus, data required for this method are:
i. Data required on the upstream side:
 Approaching velocity head, Hav;
 River Bed Level, RBL;
 Head of design discharge or Overflow depth, Hd; and
 Weir height, h
ii. Data required on the downstream side:
 Characteristics of entering hydraulic jump such as d1 and Hav1;
 Assumed level of the basin.
This method also involves calculations based on approximation as well as trial and error methods.
It also neglects losses between points/sections and considers similar datum.
The Conventional Method on the other hand, involves experimental formula as has been
presented here under:
L  3 * h * F ……………..………………………………………………………. (3-60)
D  0.5 * h * F ……………..………………………………………………….....(3-61)
F F
The required criteria in this case is,  D  ……………..………………………..…..(3-62)
2 3
Where; L is length of the basin (horizontal length of the d/s slope of the weir + length of the d/s
apron floor), (m)
D is Depth of the stilling basin below RBL, (m)
Hd is Overflow depth, (m)
F is the difference of (u/s Water Level + Velocity Head) – (d/s Water Level)…..… (3-63)
Finally, if both the conditions stated under the two methods are satisfied, then select the shorter
length from economic point of view. For this purpose, and from practical experiences, the result of
Conventional Method is lower than the Energy Method.

In general, the following steps can be used to fix length of the stilling basin.
i. For the design flood determine the scour depth and determine the cutoff depth at the
downstream end of the floor d (use the appropriate equation and factors)
ii. Assume floor length b (covering the upstream apron, diversion headwork base width and
stilling basin)
iii. Determine  using the above formula
iv. Determine the exit gradient and compare it with the safe exit gradient recommended for the
type of foundation materials. If it exceeds modify the cutoff depth and/or floor length until
the calculated exit gradient is less than the safe exit gradient recommended for the
foundation material.
v. This procedure should loop again and again in order to optimize the cutoff depth and floor
length.
Note: The selected basin length should also satisfy piping and exit gradient requirements.
Figure 3-15: Insufficient Basin Length as Resulted in d/s Retrogression (SNNPR)
3.8.9.4 Determination of Thickness of Stilling Basin
The floor of a stilling basin is subjected to uplift pressures resisting the tail water loads and water
loads whose magnitudes depend on hydraulic-jump depths. For articulated slabs, such uplift
pressure must be resisted by the weight of the slab and the water inside the basin and by anchor
bars. Consequently, to know effect of such subsurface flow or seepage which builds up an uplift
pressure under the foundation of the structure, especially on pervious foundations, proper
seepage analysis should be carried out to enable the designer to evaluate the threat and
incorporate necessary measures to defuse it. Three methods of such seepage analysis are
discussed in following section.
(a) Bligh's Creep Theory
For the safety of hydraulic structures on pervious foundation, he considered the following two
design criteria that should be satisfied.
 The subsoil hydraulic gradient should be less than the permissible value to prevent
piping failure.
 The floor should be sufficiently thick to prevent its rupture due to uplift pressure.
For this purposes, Bligh postulated that percolating water follows the outline of the base and
foundations of a structure, i.e. water creeps along the bottom structural contour, According to his
theory:

 Percolating water creeps along the base profile of the structure, which is in contact with
the subsoil. The length of path traversed by the percolating water is called creep length;
 Head loss per unit length of creep called hydraulic gradient is proportional to the length
of the creep, HL/L;
 No distinction is made between horizontal and vertical creep, i.e. he assumed them as if
they are equally effective.
LB d2
d1
Figure 3-16: Assumed Pressure Distribution under the Base Profile of the Structure
Uplift pressure, hB at any point B from above pressure diagram is determined as follows:
H L  L 
eq B
hB  ………………………………………………………………........... (3-64)
L eq
Where, hB = Uplift pressure along the base i.e. residual head up to point B, (m)
Leq = equivalent creep length according to Bligh's Theory (m)
= (t1+2a)+L1+2b+L2+(t2+2c) …………………………………………..……..(3-65)
LB = Creep length along the base up to point B, (m)
H = Actual water head, (m)
Table 3-10: Values of Lane's Creep Coefficient, C and Safe Hydraulic Gradient
Safe exit gradient
Type of soil Value of C
Lane's Method (1/C) Bligh's Method
Very fine sand or silt 8.5 1/8.5 1/18
Fine sand 7.0 1/7.0 1/15
Medium sand 1/6.0 -
Coarse sand 5.0 1/5.0 1/12
Fine gravel 1/4.0 -
Medium gravel 1/3.5 -
Gravel and sand 3.5 to 3.0 1/3.0 1/9
Coarse gravel including cobbles 1/3.0 -
Boulders, cobbles and gravels 1/2.5 -
Boulders, gravel and Sand 3.0 to 2.5 - 1/4-6
Soft clay 1/3.0 -
Medium clay 3.0 to 1.6 1/2.0 -
Hard clay 1/1.8 -
Very Hard clay and Hard pan 1/1.6
Source: As adopted from MoWR, Garg and Halcrow

For final design of a non-piping structure at the toe of the foundation, the exit gradient, Ge should
be less than the recommended safe hydraulic gradient shown in the table above.
L= C*H …………………………………………………………………….…................... (3-66)
Where, L is required creep length, (m)

C is creep coefficient
Bligh, then calculated floor thickness from t = hB/(G-I) ……………………………..………... (3-67)
Where, G is specific gravity of floor material;

With safety factor, t =(4/3)* hB/(G-I) …….………………………………..……………. (3-68)
Required criteria in this case is:
Exit gradient Ge= H/Leq<Gs…….…………………….…………………..……….……. (3-69)
This theory is simple but with its limitation in that its exaggerated safety factor results in high value
and hence high construction cost.
The design will be economical if the greater part of the creep length (i.e. of the impervious floor) is
provided upstream of the weir where nominal floor thickness would be sufficient. The downstream
floor has to be thicker to resist the uplift pressure. However, a minimum floor length is always
required to be provided on the downstream side from the consideration of surface flow to resist the
action of fast flowing water whenever it is passed to the downstream side of the weir.
Bligh‟s Theory is simple but has the following limitations:

 Bligh made no distinction between horizontal and vertical creep.
 The theory holds well as long as horizontal distance between cut-offs or pile lines is
greater than twice their depth.
 No distinction is made between the effectiveness of the outer and inner faces of sheet
piles and short and long intermediate piles. However, investigations, later, have shown
that the outer faces of the end piles are much more effective than the inner ones. Also
intermediate piles of shorter length than the outer ones are ineffective except for local
redistribution of pressure.
 No indication on the significance of exit gradient. Average value of hydraulic gradient
gives idea about safety against piping. Exit gradient must be less than critical exit
gradient (for safety).
 The assumption, loss of head is proportional to creep length is not true and actual uplift
pressure distribution is not linear, but it follows a sine curve.
 Bligh did not specify the absolute necessity of providing a Cut-off at the downstream
end of the floor, whereas it is absolutely essential to provide a deep vertical Cut-off at
the downstream end of the floor to prevent undermining.

(b) Lane's Weighed Creep Theory:
Lane modified Bligh's Creep Theory, after analyzing the foundations of 200 dams worldwide, and
stipulated that in computing the creep length, a weighting factor of one third should be applied to
the horizontal creep as it is less effective in reducing uplift or differential head. Thus to ensure
safety against piping:
“The sum of the vertical creep lengths, plus one third the sum of the horizontal creep lengths must
be greater than the differential head across the structure times Lane's creep coefficient (C) which
is given in the table below”. Thus:
Lc = 1/3*N +V…………………………………………………………..………………….(3-70)
Where, N= sum of all horizontal and all sloping contacts less than 45°.
V= Sum of all vertical contacts and all sloping contacts greater than 45°
Lc = equivalent creep length according to Lane's Theory (m)
= 1/3 * (L1+L2)+(t1+2a+ 2b+2c)………………………………..…………………..… (3-71)
Lane‟s principles are:

 Always, the exit gradient must be less than the safe gradient.
 The horizontal creep is less effective in reducing uplift pressure than vertical one, hence
N/3 is taken.
To determine the thickness of the apron both dynamic and static case should be considered. The
bottom parts of the apron will generally require larger thickness when static case is selected, but
the top part of the apron (the toe section) will have larger thickness when dynamic case is
considered. Therefore, the thickness at any point say A, B and C are calculated from:
  L   f
t   H max 1  A   TWL  WL A  *
  Lc   ( m  1) ………………………………………………………..……(3-72)
Where, t=Thickness of apron at any point A, B, and C where residual pressure head is computed
(m)
f = Factor of safety = 1.3
Hmax = Total seepage head i.e. U/S and D/S differential (maximum) head, m
1
Lc= Weighted creep length total (m), Lc   Lv   LH  CH max …………….….(3-73)
3
LV =Vertical creep length (m) and
LH = Horizontal creep length (m)
C = Lane‟s creep coefficient (From Table 3-7)
Note: Required condition is:Lc C*Hmax; or (Hmax /Lc) ≤ (1/C) ……………..……………….. (3-74)
(c) Khosla's Theory
To assess the uplift pressure under composite weirs in any hydraulic structure, Khosla (1954)
evolved the method of independent variables. In this method, the base of the structure is split up
into a number of simple standard forms of known analytical solutions.

Figure 3-17: Schematic Representation of Khosla’s Flow Net
This theory is used to analyze the uplift pressure under any hydraulic structure of regular, irregular
or composite shaped foundation. The method takes in to account effects of their shape and
thickness.
Base of the structure is divided in to a number of single standard forms of known analytical
solutions i.e.:
 Straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile at either ends;
 Straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile line at some
intermediate position;
 Straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed but with no vertical cut-offs.
The main principles of this theory are:
The seepage water does not creep along the bottom contour of pucca-floor as stated by Bligh, but
moves along a set of streamlines. This steady seepage in a vertical plane for a homogeneous soil
can be expressed by the 2-D partial differential equation called the Laplacian equation:
2 2
d   d   0 ………………………………………………….... (3-75)
2 2
dx dy
Where,  = Flow potential = K*h; ……………………………………..………………… (3-76)
K = Coefficient of permeability of soil as defined by Darcy‟s law and
h = is the residual head at any point within the soil
This equation represents two sets of curves intersecting each other orthogonally. The resultant
flow diagram showing both of the curves is called a Flow Net.
The streamlines represent paths along which water flows through the sub-soil. Every particle
entering the soil at a given point upstream of the work will trace out its own path and will represent
a streamline. The first streamline follows the bottom contour of the works and is the same as

Bligh‟s path of creep. The remaining streamlines follows smooth curves transiting slowly from the
outline of the foundation to a semi-ellipse, as shown in Figure
Treating the downstream bed as datum and assuming no water on the downstream side, it can be
easily stated that every streamline possesses a head equal to h1 while entering the soil; and when
it emerges at the downstream end into the atmosphere, its head is zero. Thus, the head h 1 is
entirely lost during the passage of water along the streamlines.
Further, at every intermediate point in its path, there is certain residual head, h, still to be
dissipated in the remaining length to be traversed to the downstream end. This fact is applicable to
every streamline, and hence, there will be points on different streamlines having the same value of
residual head h. If such points are joined together, the curve obtained is called an equipotential
line.
Every water particle on line AB is having a residual head h = h1, and on CD is having a residual
head h = 0, and hence, AB and CD are equipotential lines.
The seepage water exerts a force at each point in the direction of flow and tangential to the
streamlines. This force (F) has an upward component from the point where the streamlines turns
upward. For soil grains to remain stable, the upward component of this force should be
counterbalanced by the submerged weight of the soil grain. This force has the maximum disturbing
tendency at the exit end, because the direction of this force at the exit point is vertically upward,
and hence full force acts as its upward component.
For the soil grain to remain stable, the submerged weight of soil grain should be more than this
upward disturbing force. The disturbing force at any point is proportional to the gradient of
pressure of water at that point. This gradient of pressure of water at the exit end is called the exit
gradient. In order that the soil articles at exit remain stable, the upward pressure at exit should be
safe. In other words, the exit gradient should be safe.
This exit gradient is said to be critical, when the upward disturbing force on the grain is just equal
to the submerged weight of the grain at the exit. When a factor of safety equal to 4 to 5 is used,
the exit gradient can then be taken as safe. In other words, an exit gradient equal to ¼ to 1/5 of the
critical exit gradient is ensured, so as to keep the structure safe against piping.
Khosla et al. used the method of independent variables and obtained solutions of Laplace
equation for a number of simple profiles. This solution is commonly known as Khosla‟s solution.
The following forms of these simple profiles are very useful in the design of weirs and barrages on
permeable foundations:

Figure 3-18: Simple Standard Profiles of Weir Floors of Khosla’s proposals
For sheet piles at either upstream end or downstream end [as shown in Figure 3-13above]:
1  2
E  cos  1  ……………………………………………………………………. (3-77)
   
1   1
D  cos  1  ……………………………………………………………………. (3-78)
   
 C1  100   E …………………………………………………………………………… (3-79)
 D1  100   D …………………………………………………………………………… (3-80)
1
Where,   1  1   2  …………………………………………………………….… (3-81)
2  
b
And   …………………………………………………………………………..……. (3-82)
d
For sheet piles at the intermediate point [as shown in Figure 3-13, above]:
1  2
 E  cos  1 1  ………………………………………………………………..… (3-83)

  2 
1  1 
D  cos  1  …………………………………………………………………...… (3-84)

  2
1  1  1 
C  cos  1  ……………………………………………………………….…...(3-85)

  2 
1 2 2
Here,1   1   1  1   2  ….………………………………………………….(3-86)
2 
1 2 2
And  2   1   1  1   2  …………………………………………………….…(3-87)
2 

b1 b2
Where, 1  and  2  ………………………………………………….………..….(3-88)
d d
In the case of a depressed floor [as shown in Figure 3-13 (iv), above]
 D'   D 
2
 E   D 
3
……………………………………………………………. (3-89)
3 2
 D '  100   D ' …………………………………………………………………….…..….. (3-90)
b
Where,  D and  E are as given above and   ,……………..………………….……(3-91)
d
In general, sufficient thickness should be provided in order to counterbalance the uplift pressure.
Usually an apron having thickness varies along its length from a maximum at the start of the
hydraulic jump (or at location of initial depth) to a minimum at its end. Sometimes floor slabs,
strengthened by anchor bars. The design will be considered economical if the greater part of the
creep length (i.e. of the impervious floor) is provided upstream of the weir where nominal floor
thickness would be sufficient. However, practical conditions do not allow for doing so. In earlier
times it had been in use of the following method.
Suppose h is the pore water pressure head (ordinate of hydraulic gradient) measured above the
top of the floor at a point and introducing a factor of safety of around 1.5, the thickness t of the
concrete floor at that spot is;
……………..………………….………………………………… ..(3-92)
In another approach the thickness of the floor is designed for the worst condition anticipated. Here
is the practice
The minimum floor thickness t follows a stability calculation, i.e. the uplift pressure at location x
designated as Px should be less than the weight of the floor plus the weight of the water above the
floor.
……………..………………….………………….. (3-93)
Where is the unit weight of the floor in N/m3,
d is minimum floor thickness in m,
w is the unit weight of water (equal to 9,810 N/m3) and
yflr is the water depth above the floor in m, Px is the uplift pressure in N/m2.
Usually the weight of the water is ignored in computation in order to increase safety.
On the other hand, the maximum net uplift pressure at a location occurs with a condition when the
water on the upstream is up to normal water level or crest elevation of the weir and no flow in the
downstream (dry). This condition is usually considered as a governing during the design of safe
floor thickness. However, the negative pressure developed in the hydraulic jump (standing wave)
shall be checked under some circumstance.
Therefore, the floor thickness shall be worked out for the largest of the with-standing wave in the
stilling basin and when downstream flood is dry. The thickness of the floor at a point is the ratio
pressure and submerged unit weight of the floor material.
The following formula can be used at key location along the length of the floor (say at toe, midway,
etc.) to design the floor thickness

……………..………………….………………………………. (3-94)
Where ti is the minimum floor thickness required at location i in m,

Hi is the uplift pressure per unit weight at location i in m,
SGf and SGw are the specific gravity of floor material and water, respectively.
It is required to determine the floor thickness at several locations on the downstream floor using
the available uplift pressure in order to decide on safety of floor thickness.The length of the
downstream slab or floor depends on the floor length requirement calculated for energy dissipation
and the anticipated exit gradient.
The determination of the seepage pressure can be worked out using a relationship established by
Khosla et.al. (1955) as percentage of the available maximum pressure head at the upstream. The
relationship is based on Figure 3-16.
Figure 3-19: Simplified profile at upstream (left) & downstream (right) of diversion headwork
Referring to figure the percentage of the uplift pressure (in terms of head of water) can be
computed at the key location below the floor at the downstream as:
……………..………………….…………………………………………… (3-95)
*( ⁄ ) ( )+……………..………………….………………………….. (3-96)
*( ⁄ ) ( )+……………..………………….………………………….. (3-97)
Where  can be calculated using the above formula provided by Khosla et al. (1955).
The percentage of the uplift pressure (in terms of head of water) can be computed at the key
location below the floor at the upstream as:
……………..………………….…………………………………... (3-98)
……………..………………….………………………………….. (3-99)
……………..………………….………………………………………. (3-100)
A correction for uplift pressure due to floor thickness might be required. The correction can be
computed at key points on the floor and interpolated linearly over the entire length of the basin
floor. The correction for percentage uplift pressure at the end of the floor is:
( )
……………..………………….………………………………… ..(3-101)

The correction for percentage uplift pressure at the beginning of the floor is
( )
……………..………………….……………………………… (3-102)
The correction reduces the percentage uplift pressure at the end of the floor by that amount while
it increases at the beginning of the floor.
A correction for uplift pressure due to interference of intermediate cutoff can be computed at key
points on the floor and interpolated linearly over the entire length of the basin floor using the above
stated formula.
3.8.10 Determination of Exit Gradient (GE)
When the upward thrust exceeds a certain value at the exit, piping will occur. Exit gradient is a
gradient of pressure of water at the exit end of structure. This exit gradient is said to be critical,
when the upward disturbing force on the grain is just equal to the submerged weight of the grain at
the exit. When a factor of safety equal to 4 to 5 is used, the exit gradient can then be taken as
safe. In other words, an exit gradient equal to ¼ to 1/5 of the critical exit gradient shall be ensured
so as to keep the structure safe against piping.
When upward thrust of seepage flow passing beneath a structure is greater than submerged
weight of the soil resisting the upward thrust on the d/s side of end cut off wall, piping will occur
and bed material will be washed upwards and into river flow. Two popular methods for determining
GE are: flow net which may be plotted by drawing or the use of electrical analogue methods and
Khosla's approximation. But commonly Khosla's approximation is adopted for its easiness.
Khosla determined that for a standard form of structure with a floor length (b) and vertical cut-off
(d), the exit gradient at the downstream side is given by:
H max 1
GE  * , ……………………………………………………………….…… (3-103)
d  
b 1 1 2
Where,   and   ……………………………………………………….... (3-104)
d 2
GE is exit gradient
Hmax is maximum pressure head under Dynamic Case and/or Static Case
b is total length of impervious floor, m
d is depth of downstream Cut-off, m
 is a number to be computed from equation above,
 is a number to be computed from equation above,
Critical Exit Gradient, CEG can be expressed mathematically as CEG = (S - 1) (1 - n) where S is

the specific gravity of the soil and n is its porosity. When critical exit gradient is divided by factor of
safety, it gives the safe exit gradient (SEG). For example, for ordinary alluvial type of soil, S = 2.6
and n = 0.4. If a factor of safety of 3 is adopted then SEG = CEG/SF = 0.32.
Note: To keep the exit gradient to a safe value, the depth of Cut-off (D) and the flow length are to
be suitably adjusted. It may be required to increase the downstream floor length than needed, from
hydraulic considerations. If the jump is not formed, this length can be adopted as 6 times the
downstream water depth. Thus, the total floor length is the total of impervious floor consisting of

upstream floor, upstream glacis (if any), downstream glacis, downstream stilling basin and end sill.
It need to satisfy the requirements of exit gradient, scours as well as economy.
The above equation has been graphically established by Khosla (Refer appendix -III). A graph
based on Khosla's theory is placed to indicate the correlation between the floor length, (b) Cut-off
depth and (d) i.e.  and 1/() to determine exit gradient figuratively. By adopting suitable ratio of
b and d, i.e. , safe value of exit gradient can be achieved and ready from the graph.
Table 3-11: Recommended values of Khosla’s safe exit gradient

Type of soil Values of Khosla’s Safe Exit Gradient
Shingle 0.25 to 0.20
Coarse sand 0.20 to 0.17
Fine sand 0.17 to 0.14
In general, Khosla‟s procedure for analyzing uplift pressure under a structure consists:
 Splitting up the foundation into standard forms
 Determining the pressure as a percentage of the water head at the key points.
(Junctions of the floor and the pile; bottom points of pile; and bottom corners in case of
depressed floor).
The profiles are then corrected for:
 Mutual interference of pile
 Floor thickness
 Slope of floor
Box 3-5:
Worked Example-5: Referring to the previous worked examples 1-3, design bed level, length and
thickness of the stilling basin floor for the specified headwork site.
Solution: From Bernoulli’s equation, equating energy at sections ‘1’ on the u/s and ‘2’ on the d/s of
weir body, we can develop the equation: RBL+Hd+h+Hav1 = Z+d1+Hav1, i.e. Ef1=Ef2, where Z is level
of the stilling basin floor.
Now, assume floor level of the d/s apron i.e. stilling basin is to be 0.2m below RBL. From
Hav1=V12/(2g) and V1=q/d1; d1+q2/d12/2g=3.498. Thus by goal seek or trial and error, varying value
of d1 and solving this equation till RHS and LHS equals gives d1= 0.49m and consequently,
V1=7.72m/s; Hav1= 3.04m; Fr1=3.53; d2=1.446m from equation (3-24) but deducting it from
assumed drop of 0.2m gives updated d2=1.25m; V2=q/d2=2.6m/s; Hav2= 0.34m; Fr2=0.69;
d3=TWD=0.98m from rating curve; V3=q/d3=3.86m/s and Hav3=0.76m. Now, difference between
TWD and d2=0.3m, thus it lies within allowed range of 0.2 to 0.4 and hence the assumed stilling
basin level is acceptable.
Length of the stilling basin is given by Lj =5 to 6*(d2-d1) =6*(1.446-0.49) =5.76m, say 6m.
Box 3-6:
Worked Example-6: Determine the percentage pressures at various key points in Figure below.
Also determine the exit gradient and plot the hydraulic gradient line for pond level on u/s and no
flow on downstream.

Table 3-12: Values of Khosla’s corrections for standard slopes

Slope (Horizontal :Vertical) Proposed Correction factor
1:1 11.2
2:1 6.5
3:1 4.5
4:1 3.3
5:1 2.8
6:1 2.5
7:1 2.3
8:1 2.0
Figure 3-20: Schematic Cross Section of Glacis Weir for Khosla’s Flow Net Analysis
Solution: These analysis have been calculated and presented in detail as follow.
(1) For Upstream Pile Line No. (1)
Total length of the floor = b = 68 m
Depth of u/s pile line =d= 6.0
=b/d= 11.27
= 0.089
From the curve Plate, c1 = 71%
From same curve,d1 = 80%
These values of c1andd1 must be corrected for three corrections as follow
Corrections for c1

(a) Correction at C1 for Mutual Interference of Piles. c1 is affected by intermediate pile Nr-2.
Where, D = Depth of pile Nr-2= 5.0

d=Depth of pile Nr-1 = 5.0
b' = Distance b/n two piles = 10.8 m
b = Total floor length = 68 m
Thus, Correction 1.91%
Note: Since the point C1 is in the rear of direction of flow, the correction is + ve.
:. Correction due to pile interference on C1 = 1.88% (+ve)

(b) Correction at C1 due to thickness of floor.

Pressure calculated from curve is at C1', but we want pressure at C1. Pressure at C1 shall be more
than at C1' as direction of flow is from C1 to C1' as shown; and hence, the correction will be +veand
Thus, Correction 1.50% (+ve)
(c) Correction due to slope at C1 is nil, as this point is neither situated at start nor at end of a slope.
:. Correctedc1 = 71 % + 1.88% + 1.5% = 74.41%
Hence, corrected c1 = 74.41% Ans
and D1 = 80%
(2) For Intermediate Pile Line Nr-2

d = 154.00-148.00 6.0 m
b= 57.0 m
= b/d = 9.5
Using curves of Plate shown in Appendix IV, we have b1 in this case 11.4
= b/d = 0.200
Thus, 100%-b1/b= 0.800
c for a, base ratio of 0.712 and  = 9.5 30%
Thus,E1 = 100%-30% = 70%
For a base ratio 0.298 and  = 9.5; c2 56%
d2 for a base ratio of 0.702 and = 9.5; = 37%
Thus, D2 = 100%-37% 63%
Corrections
for E2
(a) Correction at E2 for sheet pile lines Nr-1 will affect pressure at E2and since E2 is in the
forward direction of flow, this correction shall be -ve. The amount of this correction is given as :
Where, values of these

parameters are computed as
above
But in this case
correction is negative 1.91%
Thus, Correction at E2 due to floor

thickness 1.17%
Since the pressure observed is at E2' and not at E2, and by looking at direction of flow, it can be
stated easily that the pressure at E2 shaII be less than that at E2', hence, this correction is negative.
:. Correction at E2 due to floor thickness 1.17% (-ve)
(c) Correction at E2 due to slope is nil, as the point E2 is neither situated at start of a slope
nor at end of a slope.

Hence, corrected percentage pressure at E2 66.92% Ans

Corrections for c
(a) Correction at C2 due to pile interference. Pressure at C2 is affected by pile Nr-3 and since point
C2 is in the back water in the direction of flow, this correction is +ve. The amount of this
correction is given as:
Where, D = Depth of pile Nr-3= the effect of

which is considered below the level at which
interference is desired 11.3
d=Depth of pile Nr-2, effect on which is
considered = 5.0
b' = Distance between pile-2 and pile-3= 56.8 m
2.42
Thus, Correction % (+ve)
(b) Correction at C2 due to floor thickness. From Fig. above, it can be easily stated that the pressure
at C2 shall be more than that at C2' and since observed pressure is at C2',
this correction shall be +ve and its amount is same as was calculated for the point E2, thus
=1.17%(+ve)
(c) Correction at C2 due to slope. Since the point C2 is situated at the start of a
slope of 3:1, i.e. an up slope in the direction of flow; the correction is negative.
Correction factor for 3:1 slope from Table= 4.5
Horizontal length of the slope = 6.0
Distance b/n two pile lines b/n which sloping
floor is located 56.8 m
:. Actual correction = 0.48% (-ve)
Hence, corrected c2 59.11% Ans
(3) Downstream Pile Line

d= 152.0-141.7 = 10.3
=1/ b/d = 0.181 m
Then from curves of Plate shown in Appendix IV, we get:
D3 = 32%
E3 = 38%
Corrections for E3 =

(a) Correction due to piles. Point E3 is affected by pile Nr-2, and since E3 is in the forward
direction of flow from pile Nr-3, this correction is negative and Its amount is given by:
Where, D=Depth of pile Nr-2, effect of w/h is

considered 2.7 m

d= Depth of pile Nr-3, effect on which is

considered 9.0
b' = Distance between piles = 56.8 m
Thus, correction = 0.85% (-ve)
(b) Correction due to floor thickness

It can be stated easily that pressure at E3 shall be less than at E3' since pressure observed from
curves is at E3' this correction shall be -ve
and equals: 0.76% (-ve)
(c) Correction due to slope at E3 is nil, as the point E3 is neither situated at start nor
at end of any slope 0%
Hence, corrected E3 = 36.39% Ans
Table 3-13: Summary of corrected pressures at various key points

Upstream Pile Nr-1 Intermediate Pile Nr-2 Downstream Pile Nr-3
E 100% E 66.92% E 36.39%
D 80.0% D 63.0% D 32%
C 74.41% C 59.11% C 0%
3.8.11 Fixing upstream and downstream cut off
Cut-off is a wall used for controlling piping in pervious foundation material. The required depth of
this wall to satisfy the safe exit gradient can be calculated once foundation type and dimensions of
the structure are known. If the required depth cut-off is greater than can be constructed, two or
more Cut-offs of reduced depth may be used. However the space between the two Cut-offs should
not be less than 6/5 times the Cut-off depth, otherwise the full benefit of the multiple Cut-off will not
be obtained. The factor 6/5 originates from the requirement that the weighted creep length along
the short path between the tips of the Cut-offs should at least equal the weighted creep length
along the contact line. In practice, a Cut-off spacing of two or more times the Cut-off depth is
generally used, but for most typical small scale diversion weirs this is not a problem.
A downstream erosion Cut-off is usually required to protect the structure from downstream
retrogression. When a reverse filter with a drain pipe is not included at the end of the downstream
hydraulic jump stilling basin/apron, this will also act as a seepage Cut-off to increase the seepage
path length and assist in protecting the structure from a piping failure. An upstream Cut-off may
also be necessary to increase the seepage path and protect against a piping failure.
For a diversion weir not constructed on bedrock, the Cut-offs will not only be required to resist
seepage and piping, but will probably also be required to ensure that the structure will not slide. As
a general rule, a typical small scale diversion weir with upstream and downstream Cut-off depths
at least 50 % of the weir height will usually be adequate with respect to sliding resistance.
Bottom level of a weir body is fully dependent on condition of bed material on which the structure
rests. If it rests on rocky bed material, then only key wall is required to tie or create bondage
between the structure and the bed rock. However, if the bed material is other than bed rock, then
bottom level of a weir body is fixed based on the requirement of cutting off piping effects under that
structure.

To determine bottom level of the weir body, we therefore need to determine vertical cut-offs that
need to be fixed at the upstream and downstream ends of the weir to safeguard against scouring
and piping effects. Intermediate cut-offs are usually provided at the ends of upstream and/or the
downstream slopes of the impervious floor based on the length required to dissipate subsurface
hydraulic/pressure head and are useful in protecting the main structure against sliding too.
The depth of cut-offs should therefore be such that the structure‟s bottom level is lower than the
level of possible flood scour at that section. In addition, the downstream cut-off should also be
sufficient to reduce the exit gradient within safe limits, which is decided by the sub-surface
conditions.
At the outflow from the stilling basin, there remains a certain proportion of energy in the flow that
scours the downstream of the basin. The scour holes so formed may progress towards the
structure end and results in structural failure. Such failures can be prevented by providing piles or
cut-off at u/s and d/s ends of the impervious floor, by extending below the calculated scour level.
This normal scour depth below High/Design Flood Level (HFL), R i.e. depth of normal scour is
given by the Regime scour depth method developed by Lacey‟s equation. Accordingly, if the
waterway provided is less than the regime width, the regime scour depth can be:
(R), ( ) ………………………….……………………………………… (3-105)

Where, R = Hydraulic mean depth or scour depth below HFL, m
q = Unit discharge or discharge per meter length, = Q/b, m ……………… (3-106)
f = Lacey‟s silt factor, for the stated bed material = 1.76d50 …………….. (3-107)
d = Average river bed material particle/grain size, mm
To fix bottom levels of cut-offs, the scour depth, R is multiplied by a factor of safety ranging from
1.25 to 1.5 and 1.75 to 2.0 for upstream cut-off and downstream cut-off depths respectively.
Upstream Cut-off level = Upstream HFL - l.5R……………………………………… (3-108)

Downstream Cut-off level = Downstream HFL – 1.75R……………………………. (3-109)
Note: Hydraulic mean depth (=A/T) is different from Hydraulic mean radius (=A/P) and mean flow
depth (d) as indicated in following sketch (Where T is top width of water surface, and P is wetted
perimeter). Both hydraulic mean depth and hydraulic mean radius are the same for rectangular
cross section. However, for other types of sections, they are completely different.
Figure 3-21: Hydraulic mean depth, hydraulic mean radius and mean flow depth

Table 3-14: Lacey's silt factor "f"

Type of Reach Mean value of "f"
Large boulders and shingle 20
Boulders and shingle 15
Boulders and gravel 12.5
Medium boulders, shingle and sand 10.0
Gravel and bajri 9.0
Coarse gravel 4.75
Coarse bajri and sand 2.75
Heavy sand 2.0
Fine bajri and sand 1.75
Coarse sand 1.5
Medium sand 1.25
Standard silt 1.0
Medium silt 0.85
Very fine silt 0.6
Fine silt 0.4
Clay 5.0
Source: Weir Design Manual, Halcrow-ULG, 1988
Box 3-7:
Worked Example-7: If investigation of the river bed material mentioned in above examples
indicate coarse gravel sand of average particle size 7.26mm (i.e. diameter of 50% of particle size
distribution), then how much is the hydraulic mean depth of the river at the selected site and
bottom levels of upstream and downstream cut-offs?
Solution: Unit discharge, q = Q/b = 24.84/6.6= 3.76; Lacey’s silt factor for coarse gravel material
from table above is selected to be 4.75 or f=1.76*SQRT(7.26)=4.75. Accordingly, R = 1.94m;
assuming a factor of safety of 1.5 for upstream and 1.75 for downstream cut-offs respectively,
bottom level of u/s cut-off = u/s HFL – 1.5R= 1432.782m, but this gives u/s dCut-off of 1432.782-
1433.475= (+) 0.3m, +ve value implies it is not required but for the sake of structural stability take
u/s dCut-off = 1.0m. Similarly, bottom level of d/s cut-off = d/s HFL – 1.75R= 1430.050m implying
1430.050-1433.475= (-) 2.425m, thus take 3m for bottom level of d/s cut-off i.e. 1429.475m.
3.8.12 Design of protection works
3.8.12.1 General
To maintain normal function of a weir for its intended design period, additional protection works are
necessary based on stability conditions prevailing around the structure. These protective works
are required both on the u/s and d/s of a weir depending on nature of foundation condition to
prevent possibility of a scour hole moving close to the u/s or d/s Cut-offs and undermining the
structure. These works are required in addition to impervious floors. Thus, provision of sufficient
Cut-offs are enough for small structures, and remaining works shall be provided only in cases
where the nature of the river is erosive as well as the river bed material is of loose/alluvial.
These protection work could be in the form of concrete block or stone riprap. Sometime, both the
concrete block and the stone riprap might be used and usually the concrete block protection is
provided next to the impervious floor followed by the stone riprap. The protection work should be
provided throughout the whole contact surface of the river or channel. . A toe wall of nominal
dimension is often provided in between and at the end of launching apron and concrete blocks so
that stability of the protection work improved.

3.8.12.2 Upstream protection works
On the u/s side, the need for such protection works is owing to higher velocities of flow near the
structure as a result of draw down. Thus, upstream protection works are required to keep the
upstream apron and loose river channel from scouring. Such protection commonly include
provision of combinations and/or either of cut off piles, block protection, rip-raps and launching
apron as found necessary. The non-launching apron prevents the scour hole travel close to the
floor or sheet pile line; whereas launching apron is designed to launch along the slope of the scour
hole to prevent further scooping out of the underlying river bed material.
The most commonly used protection is cut-off and riprap in a form of dumped rock or precast
concrete block or rock filled gabion (wire container or welded bar enlargement). Cut-off design has
been presented in preceding section. However, the minimum length of stone rip-rap on upstream
can be estimated by:
Lpu =1.25 to 1.5 *Du/s .………………………………………………………………..…. (3-110)
Where, Lpu is length of upstream protection work (m),

Du/s scour depth below the river/channel bed on the u/s (m),
3.8.12.3 Downstream protection works
On the d/s side, the need for protection works is due to the turbulent nature of flow as it leaves
stilling basin. The downstream impervious floor shall be safe guarded against exit gradient higher
than expected and retrogression effects. The minimum length of stone rip-rap on the d/s side is
given by:
Lpd =1.5 to 2.0 * Dd/s………………………………..…………………………………… (3-111)
Where, Lpd is length of downstream protection work (m),

Dd/s scour depth below the river/channel bed on the d/s (m),
The protection work usually consists of dry stone pitching whose sizes are fixed based on the
anticipated velocity of flow. According to USBR (1987) the relation between velocity of flow and
mean stone diameter is expressed as;
D  V 2
4.915
………………………………………………………………………….. (3-112)
Where, D is Stone size/diameter (m),

V is average flow velocity at a cross-section under consideration, m/s
In actual practice only stones up to 40-50kg can be handled. Generally it is assumed that the
stones launch at a slope of 2:1 (H:V).
According to Bligh theory, the total combined length of the downstream impervious floor and
protection works (L) is computed under two conditions:

(i) For weir with shutters, it is given by:
Hs q
L  18 * C * * ………………………………………………………….…… (3-113)
13 75
(ii) For weir with no shutters, it is given by:
Hs q
L  18 * C * * ………………………………………………………………. (3-114)
10 75
Where, Hs is the seepage head, the difference in water levels u/s and d/s of the weir,
C is coefficient of creep,
q is unit discharge over the weir, m3/s/m
The upstream and downstream apron lengths, can also be computed from (MoWR, 2002):
2 3  1.5 *
L u  2.25 * q d u / s .…………………………………………………….…. (3-115)
Where, Lu is apron length on the u/s portion of the weir

q is discharge per meter width of channel;
du/s is water depth at upstream corresponding to design discharge.
2 3  1.5 *
L d  3.0 * q d d / s …………………………………………………………. (3-116)
Where, q is as defined above and dd/s is water depth at downstream corresponding to design
discharge, i.e.d3 or TWD.
The length of the downstream impervious floor, Ld is also given by Bligh as follow:
For weir with shutters, it is given by:
HS
L d  2.21 * C * …………………………………………………………….…… (3-117)
13
For weir with no shutters, it is given by:
HS
L d  2.21 * C * ……………………………………………………………….... (3-118)
10
And the length of the upstream impervious floor, Lu is as:

L u  L  L d  B  2 d 1  2 d 2  …………………………………………………… (3-119)
Where, B, d1 and d2 are as defined in figure 3-16.
In general, the value that can give safe exit gradient, taking economic aspects in to view shall be
selected.
The downstream length could be reduced by providing a stilling basin with different energy
defusing elements, i.e. chute blocks, friction block, arrow, dented sill, deflector, biff wall ribbed
pitch, baffle wall, etc. (as described under section 2.6.4).
Note: When a weir is constructed on rocky foundation, such apron and protection works are not
required.

Box 3-8:
Worked Example-8: Check safety of a horizontal impervious floor of typical weir cross section
shown below from the exit gradient point of view.
Figure 3-22: Typical weir cross section (for Design Exercise)
Solution: From this graph and the above exit gradient equations, the total length of floor, b=18m
and depth of downstream Cut-off, d=3m;  = b/d= 6.0;  = 3.54. Lane's creep coefficient for coarse
gravel sand material, C=3.2 (from table 3-7);
Thus, maximum pressure head under dynamic case Hmax = U/S water level above WC, H2 - D/S
water level above WC, H1 = 2.25m and/or static case Hmax= Updated WCL - Stilling basin level
=1.80m and consequently, C*Hmax =7.19 dynamic case and C*Hmax = 5.76 for static case.
3.8.12.4 Launching Apron
Launching apron also called pervious apron or floor is a protection work provided after block
protection and inverted filters. It is that part of the protection work laid horizontally over the
riverbed on both the upstream and downstream sides of weir, as shown in figure 3-23. It is also
provided as continuation of the pitching whenever its sloping face needs to be protected by stone
pitching against scour by extending it beyond the toe on the bed in the form of packed stones
especially in river training works, as shown in figure 3-23. The launching apron consists of dry
stone pitching whose sizes are based on the anticipated velocity of flow and hence the size is
determined as indicated above. The stone is layered in either dumped or hand-placed or plated
placement method. The stone in hand-placed riprap is aid carefully by hand following a definite
pattern, with the voids between the larger stones filled with smaller stones and the surface kept
relatively even. The launching apron can be provided in the downstream or both upstream and
downstream depending on the condition of the river at the headwork site.

D/s impervious
Launching
floor
apron Launching apron
Figure 3-23: Arrangement of launching apron on horizontal floor (S.K. Garg, 2006)
The different aspects to be looked into in the design of launching apron are:
 Size of the stones (from equation 3-94),
 Depth of scour (from Lacey‟s scour equation),
 Thickness of launching apron,
 slope of launching apron,
 Shape and size of launching apron.
Figure 3-24: Inverted filter and flexible (launching/talus) apron (P. Novak, 2007)
The required size of stone for the apron can be obtained from the curves. In case of non-
availability of required size of stones, cement concrete blocks or stone sausages, prepared with 4
mm GI wire in double knots and closely knit and securely tied, may be used.
Figure 3-25: Typical arrangement of launching apron at an angle (S.K. Garg, 2006)

Figure 3-26: Typical arrangement of launching apron on channel bed (Novak et al., 2007)
3.8.12.5 Inverted filter
This protection mechanism consists of layers of selected materials of increasing permeability from
bottom to top. The thickness of the inverted filter varies from 0.5 to 1.25 m. To prevent the filter
material from dislocation by surface flow, they are weighted down with large size stones or
concrete blocks. The blocks are usually 0.9 to 1.2 m thick and are placed with open joints filled
with river sand or filter material. It is provided immediately at the d/s end of the impervious floor to
relieve the uplift pressure. The length depends on the scour depth R below the river bed and it
usually varies from 1.5R to 2R as given by equation:
D= XR – Y ……………………………………………………………………………..... (3-120)
Where, R = depth of the deepest scour level below HFL (m),

X = a multiplying factor (varying from 1.25 for u/s to 2 for d/s)
Y = HFL-RBL is depth of river bed or impervious floor below HFL (m)
For details of filter design refer “GL 12: Small Embankment Dams Study and Design Guideline for
SSID, section 3.18 and 3.19”
3.8.12.6 Block protection
Block protection is made of concrete blocks and usually provided immediately at the upstream and
downstream ends of the impervious floor. It consists of 0.6 to 1.0 m thick stone or concrete blocks
laid on 0.4 to 0.6 m thick loosely packed stone. The length of the block protection is usually equal
to 1 to 2 times the depth of scour, D. The upstream concrete block protection is laid without open
joints between blocks so that uplift pressure relief is not required. However, the downstream
concrete block is laid with 70–100 mm open joints filled with sprawls (broken stones) so that the
uplift pressure is relieved through the openings. An inverted filter of well-graded gravel and sand is
placed under the concrete block in order to prevent the loss of soil through the joints to avoid
particle migration.

3.8.12.7 Riprap protection
Riprap protection can be rock/rubble, broken concrete slabs, and preformed concrete shapes.
However, rock riprap is the most widely used and most desirable type of revetment. It is
compatible with most environmental settings. The term "riprap" alone is most often used to refer to
rock riprap.
The rock is layered in either dumped or hand-placed or plated placement method. Dumped riprap
is graded stone dumped on a prepared slope by mechanized means, such as crane and skip,
dragline, or some form of bucket in such a manner that segregation will not take place. Hand-
placed riprap on the other-hand is stone laid carefully by hand following a definite pattern, with the
voids between the larger stones filled with smaller stones and the surface kept relatively even.
Plated or keyed riprap is stone placement on the bank with a skip and then tamped into place
using a steel plate, thus forming a regular, well organized surface. During the plating operation, the
larger stones are fractured, producing smaller rock sizes to fill voids in the riprap blanket.
Figure 3-27: Dumped or hand-placed or plated riprap, HEC-11, 1997
The basic premise underlying riprap design based on tractive force theory is that the flow induced
unit tractive force should not exceed the permissible tractive force or critical shear stress of the
riprap.
Shapes of stones affect how well the stones are interlocked and offer resistance to movement.
General design consideration:
 Riprap stone should be block in shape rather than elongated.

 It should be predominately angular and sub-angular in shape.
 Less than 30% of the stone should have a/c < 2.5
 Less than 15% of the stone should have a/c < 3.
 An approximate guide to stone shape is that neither the breadth nor thickness of a
single stone should be less than one-third its length.
 It should not be steeper that 1V:1.5H; Recommended 1V:2H to 1V:3H though Ideal Side
slope equals angle of repose of the material.
 Stone for riprap should be hard, durable field or quarry materials. They should be
angular and not subject to breaking down when exposed to water or weathering. The
specific gravity should be at least 2.5.
 The minimum layer thickness should be 1.5 times the maximum stone diameter, but in
no case less than 150mm. It should not be less than the spherical diameter of the D100
stone, or less than 1.5 times the spherical diameter of the D50 stone, whichever results
in the greater thickness. For practical placement, usually 300 mm is adopted. The
thickness determined by either method should be increased by 50 percent when the
riprap is placed underwater to provide for uncertainties associated with this type of
placement. An increase in thickness of 150-300 mm, accompanied by an appropriate

increase in stone sizes, should be provided where riprap revetment will be subject to
attack by floating debris or waves from wind, or bed-forms.
 Placement of Stone for riprap should follow immediately after placement of the filter.
Place riprap so that it forms dense, well-graded mass of stone with a minimum of voids.
 Stones should be shaped so that the least dimension of the stone fragment is not less
than one-third of the greatest dimension of the fragment. Flat rocks should not be used
for riprap. Blocky and angular shaped rocks with sharp clean edges and relatively flat
faces are good. If rounded stones are used, they should be placed on flatter slopes (not
exceeding 2.5:1 horizontal to vertical) and the recommended median rock diameter
should be increased by 25% with a comparable increase in the thickness of the
revetment.
Note: The size of individual rock is usually expressed by the dimensions of their three axes. The
long axis, a, is the maximum length of the stone. The intermediate axis, b, is the maximum width,
perpendicular to the long axis. The short axis, c, is the thickness of the stone perpendicular to the
plane of axes, a and b. The size of an individual rock is usually expressed as its b-axis dimension.
The use of rock or stone size is preferred for riprap dimensions; however, weight is commonly
used. The relationship of size to weight depends on stone shape and also on the specific weight or
density of the rock. Typically, the space that the rock used for riprap is not spherical and its shape
lies between that of a sphere and a cube.
Theoretical shear stress on channel bed is given by:
 b  K b *  * R * S ………………………………………………………………… (3-121)
On channel sides:
 s  K s *  * R * S …………………………………………………………………. (3-122)
Where, b is theoretical shear stress on bed
s is theoretical shear stress on sides
is the unit weight of water;
R is the hydraulic radius; and
S is the energy grade line slope;
Kbis 0.97 but usually taken as 1;
Ksis a function of stone size but it can be taken to be equal to 0.75
The riprap materials‟ resistance to movement i.e. its permissible unit tractive force is known as
critical shear stress, (c) and given by the following relationship the form of which was first
proposed by Shields:
 c  K * S p *  s   * D 50 …………………………………………………………... (3-123)
Where, SP is the Shields parameter;

s is the unit weight of the riprap material;
 is as defined above;
D50 is the median riprap particle size; and
K is the tractive force ratio defined as:

12
K 
sin 2  
 1   ………………………………………………………………… (3-124)
 sin 2 
Where,  is the bank angle with the horizontal; and
ϕ is the riprap material's angle of repose.
The ratio of the riprap‟s critical shear stress and the tractive force exerted by the flow is defined as
the stability factor.

SF  c ……………………………………………………………………………….... (3-125)
s
As long as the SF is greater than 1, the critical shear stress of the material is greater than the
tractive stress induced by flow, thus the riprap is considered stable.
Dividing the critical shear stress by the tractive force due to the flow, rearranging terms, and
replacing the hydraulic radius (R) with the average flow depth (h avg) yields the following
relationship:
D50 SF  K s S 
 ..……………………………………………………………… (3-126)
havg S p  K S s  1 
Where, SF = the stability factor

Ss = the specific gravity of the rock riprap.
This equation represents the basic form of the tractive stress relationship and here, the median
riprap size is primarily a function of flow depth and slope.
Table 3-15: Allowable ranges of stability factor

Factor Range of SF
Uniform flow; straight or mildly curving reach (curve radius/channel width >30); Impact 1.0-1.2
from wave action and floating debris is minimal; Little or no uncertainty in design
parameters.
Gradually varying flow; Moderate bend curvature (30 > curve radius/channel width > 10); 1.3-1.6
Impact from waves or floating debris moderate.
Approaching rapidly varying flow; Sharp bend curvature (10 > curve radius/channel 1.6-2.0
width); Significant impact potential from floating debris and/or ice; Significant wind and/or
boat generated waves (0.30 - 0.61 m)); High flow turbulence; Turbulently mixing flow at
bridge abutments; Significant uncertainty in design parameters.
A filter is a transitional layer of gravel, small stone, or fabric placed between the underlying soil
and the structure. The filter
 Prevents the migration of the fine soil particles through voids in the structure,
 Distributes the weight of the armor units to provide more uniform settlement, and
 Permits relief of hydrostatic pressures within the soils.
 For areas above the water line, filters also prevent surface water from causing erosion
(gullies) beneath the riprap.
The proper design of granular and fabric filters is critical to the stability of riprap installations on
channel banks. If openings in the filter are too large, excessive piping through the filter can cause
erosion and failure of the bank material below the filter. On the other hand, if the openings in the

filter are too small, the build-up of hydrostatic pressures behind the filter can cause a slip plane to
form along the filter resulting in massive translational slide failure. Thus, for rock riprap, a filter ratio
of 5 or less between layers will usually result in a stable condition (HEC-11). The filter ratio is
defined as the ratio of the 15 percent particle size (D15) of the coarser layer to the 85 percent
particle size (D85) of the finer layer. An additional requirement for stability is that the ratio of the 15
percent particle size of the coarser material to the 15 percent article size of the finer material
should exceed 5 but be less than 40. These requirements can be stated as:
 D CoarserLayer   5  D CoarserLayer   40 ..…………………….. (3-127)

15 15
D FinerLayer
85 D FinerLayer
15
The left side of this equation is intended to prevent piping through the filter, the center portion
provides for adequate permeability for structural bedding layers, and the right portion provides a
uniformity criterion.
The thickness of the filter blanket should range:

 From 150 mm to 380 mm for a single layer, or
 From 100 mm to 200 mm for individual layers of a multiple layer blanket.
3.8.12.8 Gabions and Mattress Protection
Wire-enclosed rock revetments consist of rectangular wire mesh baskets filled with rock. They are
formed by filling pre-assembled wire baskets with rock, and anchoring to the channel bottom or
bank. Wire enclosed revetments are applicable for conditions that are similar to those of other
revetments. However, their economic use is limited to locations where the only rock available
economically is too small for use as rock riprap slope protection.
Figure 3-28: Rock filled gabion (L) and under preparation (R)
General design consideration:
 Subgrade should be compacted and levelled to receive first layer of gabions.
 The first row should be keyed into the existing grade at the toe, a minimum of 0.5 m.
 Gabions should be placed according to the manufacturers recommendations.
 Gabions should be filled with stone or crushed rock from 100 to 200mm in diameter.
 In corrosive environments, gabion wire should be coated with Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC).
Wire-enclosed rock revetments are generally of two types distinguished by shape or geometry:
 Mattresses: consist of flat wire baskets having a depth dimension which is much smaller
than their width or length. The individual mattress sections are laid end to end and side

to side on a prepared channel bed or bank to form a continuous mattress layer. The
individual basket units are attached to each other and anchored to the base material.
 Block gabions: consist of rectangular wire baskets having depths that are approximately
the same as their widths and of the same order of magnitude as their lengths. The
baskets are stacked in a stepped-back fashion to form the revetment surface. They are
typically rectangular or trapezoidal in shape.
Figure 3-29: Arrangement of mattresses (L) block gabions (R)
3.8.12.9 Indirect protection
This includes works that are not done directly on the bank but in front of them with the view of
reducing the erosive force of the current by deflecting the current away from the banks or by
inducing deposition. Vegetation can function as either revetment or indirect protection, and in
some applications, can function as both simultaneously.
3.9 ANALYSIS OF UPSTREAM WATER SURFACE PROFILE/AFFLUX/
3.9.1 Upstream water surface profile determination
When a barrier structure is constructed across a river, water surface propagates upstream and
consequently the water surface profile changes from the normal water surface to a level that is
detained by the barrier plus depth of water over the crest. Afflux, though confined in the beginning
to a short length of the river above the barrier, extends gradually very far up till the final slope of
the river upstream of the barrier is established due to sediment deposition in-front of the structure.
Thus, afflux is maximum at location close to the barrier structure and reduces gradually while
moving towards the upstream until it vanish at far upstream. The difference between afflux level
and weir crest level shall be the depth of water over crest. Afflux shall also govern the top levels of
protection embankment, their sections, length and all top levels of the components of structure like
abutments, operating platform, divide walls, etc.
Determination of the upstream water surface profile (afflux) is mostly not required, unless there are
some upstream concerns with the raised river water levels (e.g. shallow upstream bank, incidence
of flooding, land control, etc.) for the case of shallow u/s/ banks. With lesser upstream velocities,
generally there should not be additional erosion, except possibly some isolated bank erosion
concerns because of the raised water levels.
The value of afflux at the design flood permitted to bypass the structure is one of the factors that
the width of a weir is governed by, in addition to the existing stream width and the proposed crest
levels. Moreover, the upstream water surface profile helps us to determine depth of water
upstream of the weir and to find out whether water has sufficient head to feed the off taking canal
in addition to its use for the weir stability analysis. The amount of afflux determines the top levels

of guide banks and their lengths, and the top levels and cross-sections of flood protection bunds. It
also governs the dynamic action, as the greater the afflux or fall of levels from upstream to
downstream, the greater is the action. It also controls the depth and location of the standing wave.
By providing a high afflux, the width of the barrier can be narrowed but the cost of training works
can go up and the risk of failure by out flanking will increase. Thus, selection and adoption of a
realistic medium value is imperative, which is commonly 1-1.2m.
There are different methods for determining this profile but the most common ones are stated as
follow.
3.9.2 Approximate method
This is applicable method for determining the upstream water profile for preliminary design
purpose by considering a channel with uniform cross section and constant hydraulic properties.
2
Y
 XS  2 *  0
………………………………………………………………….. (3-128)
4 * 0
Where, Y - Water rise at distance X upstream of the weir above the normal water depth.
X - Distance from the crest to the point where Y is required to be determined.
S - Slope of the riverbed
0= (h+Hd)-TWD, is rise of water above normal flow depth at X=0..……………… (3-129)
Figure 3-30: Schematic view of backwater profile
Box 3-9:
Worked Example-9: If coordinates of the lowest three points along thalweg of upstream of weir
site, along weir axis and downstream of weir site are identified to be (793197.715, 789102.648,
1398.107); (793156.162, 789105.566, 1396.686) and (793117.610, 789121.653, 1396.219)
Adindan UTM Zone-36 respectively, then how far does water level corresponding to the given
design flood Q50 will be back?
Solution: First the average longitudinal slope of upstream and downstream reaches of the river
bed, (S=H/L) need to be estimated. Then using equation (3-105), we need to estimate water rise
and corresponding distance, X upstream of the weir above the normal depth.

Table 3-16: Estimation of average longitudinal slope of reaches of the river

Description X Y Part. Dis. Cummu. Dis. OGL
RBL @ u/s 793197.715 789102.648 0.000 0.000 1398.107
RBL @ weir site 793156.162 789105.566 41.66 41.66 1396.686
RBL @ d/s 793117.610 789121.653 41.77 83.43 1396.219
From this table, Slope on u/s side, Su = (1398.107-1396.686)/41.66 = 3.4%; Slope on d/s side, Sd=
(1396.686-1396.219)/41.77=1.1%; thus average slope, Savg=2.26%. 0=(h+Hd)-TWD=
(1.60+1.622)-0.98=2.25m. Consequently, by goal seek or trial and error, Y=0 at X=214m. This
means back water effect on the water profile during peak flood due to weir ceases at 214 m from
the axis back.
3.9.3 Standard step method
This method is used to determine both the upstream and downstream water profile. It is preferred
if the water stretches long distance back and the friction loss is considerable. Steps to follow in this
method are:
 Identify cross sections of the river at points where geometrical and hydraulically
characteristics are expected to show a change.
 Determine cross sectional area of each section, A
 Determine wetted perimeter of each cross sections, P
 Determine hydraulic radius of each cross sections, R
 Prepare a table
 Start computation by assessing water level if not known at the 1stsection
Sf   
 Qi 2
Ki
…………………………………………….……………………………. (3-130)
Where, Sf is friction slope of each sub areas

Qi is flow in each sub areas
Ki is conveyance parameters within each sub areas
Equation above can be used by starting from one end of the channel where the flow depth and
velocity are known and working backward or forward in steps as required. Here, two, methods are
used of which we shall discuss one, called the standard step method. Avery popular computer
program called HEC-2 developed by hydrologic engineering center of the US Army Corps of
Engineers is based on this method. In this method, for any given discharge the depth of flow would
be known at the control section. It is then required to calculate the depth of flow at the section
immediately next to the control section as illustrated in Figure below.

Weir
Weir
Figure 3-31: Representative computation grids by standard step method
(a) Profile behind the structure: Calculation proceeds upstream from control section
(b) Profile in a steep channel: Calculation proceeds downstream from control section
3.10 DESIGN OF HEAD REGULATOR

3.10.1 Location and functions of head regulator structures
Head regulator is a structure located at the off-take from a diversion headwork structure by atleast
0.5 to 1m on the upstream side of the scouring sluice to allow irrigation water to conveyor or main
canal.
The functions of head regulator structures are:

 Serve for regulation of flow in to the canal for all river stages;
 Stilling basin and transition into the downstream canal;
 A room for measuring device such as Crump weir or cut-throat flume;
 Allow integration of canal crossing bridge in order to access the headwork structure and
river banks.
The first requisite for the intake site is that the river channel, in other words the thalweg, should be
stable. Stability of river banks and condition of sediment are also the most important factors
governing the site selection and design of intake structure. Sediment inflow to the canal would
takes place in the following cases:
 If the intake site is not correctly sited in relation to meandering of the river;
 If water intake is required even during flood season;
 If the intake is located too close to the riverbed elevation and the intake flow velocity is
large;
 Flow velocity through the intake is high.

As a rule of thumb, flow velocity through the intake gate opening in the order of 1.5 to 2 m/s is
recommended at design discharge and minimum pool level to keep the head loss through the
structure less than 0.3m.
Intake structure can be situated on the upstream face of the wing wall or in the middle or on the
outer side. However, each and every option has its own advantage and disadvantage as shown
below.
Table 3-17: Comparison of possible arrangement of intake gate

Possible position of Intake Advantage Disadvantage
On the upstream face of the wing - In this case the intake can - Trash racks and the gate itself
get water without any can easily be susceptible to
wall
problem destruction/deflection by flooding
In the middle of the wing wall - No problem of flood hazard
- Difficult to maintain
- Easily manageable
- Pressurized water can dismantle
On the outer side of the wing wall - The most easily operable the system
- Easy to maintain - Subject to clogging/sedimentation
- Susceptible to stolen
Thus, the middle arrangement may be the most suitable though its selection is left to the designer
based on site condition.
3.10.2 Types and selection of intake on diversion weir
Types of intake for off-taking water from the diversion headwork of SSIP can be:
 Rectangular opening (box), or, and
 Circular opening (concrete pipe).
Box type could be rectangular or square in shape and is used when required flow in the
conveyance canal is larger. For smaller flow, piped system is preferred as it is more efficient in
discharging than the box intake. If the adjacent topography is also steeper, then piped system is
preferred to bury it and extend till it emerges from the rugged surface.
When considering intake of water on both banks, the intake levels of both sides should be equal,
otherwise available low flow may be imbalanced thus slanted to the intake with lower bottom level.
Their intake capacity shall rather be managed by water level passing through the intake by
corresponding gate installed in the wings. Their location may not necessarily be parallel to each
other, rather governed by adjoining geology and topography.
3.10.3 Consideration in fixing intake level and its type
The following points need to be considered while selecting type of and fixing intake level of Intake
or head-regulator:
 Capacity of intake should be such that it allows the peak discharge or the maximum
irrigation water demand plus some 20-30% allowance for future demand.
 Bed level of an intake structure should be high enough to prevent entrance of bed load
in to the canal and the same time, it should be low enough to harvest available low flow
of the river.
 Intake should be such that it enables regulation of supply of irrigation water based on
the irrigation schedule or demand and the availability of water in the river.
 If the level of the intake at the headwork site is higher than the existing riverbed level
then a weir with seepage under it, even with a deep vertical cut off and/or an upstream

seepage apron shall be considerable. In addition, if there is considerable evaporation

losses from the pond created upstream of the weir, moving the weir‟s location further
upstream should be considered.
 Perennial flow available in the river at the intake location limits the design discharge
capacity. Thus the design discharge at the intake should be less than the 1:5 year low
flow in the river for every month of the year.
 For most irrigation schemes it is usually sufficient to provide a simple gated orifice intake
in the weir abutment wall just upstream of the scour sluice;
 The intake to the irrigation canal should be gated so that the canal can be closed off
during floods;
 If not closed off sediment may enter the canal, requiring (labor intensive) cleaning or
settling basin along the MC;
 The gate should be capable of being operated under high pressure of water during
floods. So, should it be located in the wall or on the outer side of the wall?
 If gates are not accurately manufactured, during floods they may be jammed against
their (rubber) gate seals rather than moving freely on their bronze track bars;
 The bed level of the intake canal should be below the main weir but above the invert of
the scour sluice;
 The intake should be sufficiently below the main weir level to allow the full design flow to
enter the intake for a river water level equal to the main weir crest level;
 Reinforced concrete breast walls are usually provided to the head regulator so that
orifice flow occurs during floods;
 This makes the flow through the regulator proportional to the square root of the flow
depth (i.e.  h0.5), rather than proportional to the flow depth to the power 1.5 (i.e.  h1.5).
In general, the inlet elevation is preferred to be 1.0m higher than scouring sluice sill and also
preferred to be more than 1/6 of maximum flood depth of the river from the riverbed for prevention
of sand in case of alluvial channel. But in case of small head diversion weirs, a minimum inlet
elevation is at least 0.5m higher than scouring sluice sill. If the height from scouring sluice sill to
inlet elevation is lower than 1.0m, settling basin should be considered especially if the river is
sediment laden type.
3.10.4 Intake sizing
Intake also called Head Regulator can be box /rectangular or square/ type or concrete piped
system. In case of box type, it acts as a submerged orifice. Thus, same formula as that shown in
equation 3-17 is adopted:
Q  CA 2 gh ……………………………………………………………….................... (3-131)
Where, Q = Discharge through the opening (m3/s)
C = Coefficient of discharge, usually = 0.62
g = Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
A = Actual water area, (m2) =b*d, if rectangular and =d2/4, if pipe ….................. (3-132)
h=Working head (=d/2+driving head i.e. water head above center of opening) .... (3-133)
d = Depth of flow in conveyance canal/MC
The size of opening of the intake structure is determined based on the amount of irrigation water
required if the available flow in the river is greater than the quantity of irrigation water demand;
otherwise it is based on the available base flow in the river with considerations of some
downstream release. Computed discharge through this opening should not in any case be less
than the design discharge of MC, rather this capacity shall be considered in excess of the design
discharge by at least 10 to 20% for the purpose of unaccounted and future demand.

Due to the difficulty to measure h, a simplified vertical gate flow formula was derived as:
√ …………………………………………………………......................... (3-134)
Where Cd is the discharge coefficient and
y1 is the average headwater depth above the intake crest level.
If the intake is a box:
√ …………………………………………………………...................... (3-135)
Where w is the height of gate opening (gate setting) in m,
B the effective width or opening (water way) of the intake structure in m.
It is important to understand that:

 There is no problem with the supply during the rainy or flood season.
 The peak irrigation demand is usually synchronized with the low river flow (or simply dry
season).
It seems that the governing condition for the design of the intake is satisfying the peak irrigation
demand during the dry season i.e. low river flow and peak canal discharge. Therefore, it is unlikely
to have submerged flow under such condition and hence the designer is required to check the
condition of flow.
The other important factor to be considered while designing the intake is the requirement for
sediment cleaning. If there is a culvert connecting the intake to the irrigation canal the condition for
cleaning of the culvert should be considered. It is usually recommended to have at least two bays
of intake in order to get prepared for unexpected accident that block or clog or damage one of the
bays of the intake.
The following procedure can provide guidance on the sizing of intake:
i. Get the necessary input data i.e. design canal discharge (peak), normal pool level at the
diversion headwork, under-sluice sluice bed level, canal full supply level (optional),
selected type of intake (box or circular);
ii. Set the design criteria i.e. maximum gate setting and head-loss (as percentage of
headwater depth);
iii. Assign value for width and depth (box) or diameter (circular);
iv. Assign level for intake gate crest level i.e. 0.5 to 1m higher than under-sluice level
v. Determine y3 and compare with the critical value of y3 and understand the condition of
flow (submerged or free flow);
vi. Determine the value of CD using the formula of free flow or using Figure 3-8;
vii. Calculate the discharge and compare with the design canal discharge; calculate the
head-loss and compare it with the criteria. If enough accept the assigned width and depth
(box) or diameter (circular) otherwise modify it;
viii. If there is a culvert integrated with the intake, refer a separate guideline for the design of
the culvert.
When the pool level is at minimum, energy dissipation in the head regulator at design discharge is
not a problem because the velocity through the gate is very low. However, when the canal
operates at discharge less than design discharge, the canal water surface will be lower and
significant differential head may exist across the head regulator. In order to control the discharge
and for dissipation of the extra head, the gates must be partially closed. It is to be expected that
the worst condition for design will occur when maximum pool level developed upstream of

headwork and the head regulator is operated at design discharge, since both the head and
discharge are maximum.
The head regulator stilling basin must be designed to accommodate a free or submerged hydraulic
jump for this condition. Floor baffles and an end sill may be used. The design procedure is similar
to that used for the stilling basin of diversion structure here in above. It is interesting to note that
the gates are sized for the minimum pond level, whereas the basin floor must be sized for the
maximum pond level.
For the case of concrete pipe head regulator system, head losses through the pipe shall first be
estimated based on design discharge of MC from the following equations.
Intake loss, hl= (V2/2g)*FT …………………………………………………………….. (3-136)
Where, FT= (Entry loss + Friction loss (FL) + Exit loss) coefficients…………………….…. (3-137)
Entry and exit losses are taken 0.5m and 1m respectively.
Head loss due to friction, FL = f*L/D ………………………………………….………. (3-138)
Where, factor f=124.5*n2/D1/3 ……………………………………………………….……........ (3-139)

V = Velocity of flow through the opening (m/s)
D = Internal pipe diameter (m)
L = Length of pipe (m)
n =Roughness coeff. of concrete pipe=0.014 and 0.012 for plain and reinforced resp.
Note: To simplify operation of such intake pipes, a minimum pipe diameter of 0.5m is usually
adopted. For details, refer additionally accompanied excel template.
3.10.5 Trash racks arrangement at intake structure
These are simple structure provisions that need to be installed on intake structures and need to be
mounted to the inlet of any structure that could suck floating debris, or any other animals that could
cause damage or blockage to the intake. The requirement for trash rack is inevitable when the
river flow is loaded with various forms and type of debris and rubbish. Therefore, a trash rack is
required in front of an intake on the river side. The trash rack consists of stationary parallel row of
steel bars that allows flow of water through it with the required flow velocity. It is recommended
that the steel bars are required to be placed at 7.5 to 15.5cm spacing (USBR, 1987). Usually a
minimum inclination of 10 degree from the vertical is in practice for trash rack.
Design considerations of trash racks for intake or head regulators are:

 Trash racks are bar screens, made from steel bars spaced at 5 to 15 cm center to
center (in both directions) depending upon the maximum size of the debris required to
be excluded from entering the conduit. Thus, they should be installed at the entrance to
intakes, tunnels and inverted siphons as a matter of course.
 The velocity of flow through the trash rack is kept low (generally less than 0.62 m/s), so
as to minimize losses. This is sometimes accomplished by constructing the trash rack in
the form of a half cylinder.
 Rack Inclination: 60 degrees from horizontal;
 The racks shall be identical and interchangeable between intake bays;

 Rack Height: The rack shall extend above the elevation of the service bridge a distance
considered necessary by the manufacturer to ensure the debris falls freely onto the
conveyor. The rack shall be designed to facilitate the movement of the debris by the
raking equipment to the conveyor by means of metal guides, sloping end bar sections,
etc.
Design of these structures should consider that such trash rack shall be installed at the entrance of
intake, tunnel and siphon. Flow velocity through the trash racks shall be kept low to minimize
losses (generally less than 0.62 m/s) and the rack extends sufficiently above the soffit level of the
entrance or opening.
Figure 3-32: Typical trash rack arrangement at intake structure
Table 3-18: Head loss through trash racks

Velocity through Trash Rack, m/s Head loss, m
0.15 0.006
0.30 0.03
0.45 0.09
0.62 0.15
Source: SK Garg 2006

Box 3-10:
Worked Example-10: If a plain concrete pipe length of 5m is required for taking off 56.5 l/s
discharge for the aforementioned worked examples, how much shall the size of this pipe be?
Solution: Assuming diameter of pipe (to start with), entry and exit losses to be 0.5m and 1m
respectively and roughness coefficient of concrete pipe=0.014; factor f=124.5*n 2/D1/3 = 0.03074;
Thus head loss due to friction, FL = f*L/D = 0.30745m giving total loss FT = 1.80745m. Area of flow,
A =ΠD2/4 =0.19625m2 and Velocity of flow through the opening =Q/A=0.29m/s. This consequently
gives a velocity head, hV = V2/2g*FT = 0.007634m.
Now, check this capacity of the designed pipe using orifice formula: Qintake=C*A*(2gh)1/2, Where: C
is orifice coefficient=0.62 for circular intake, Qintake=C*A*(2gh)1/2 = 0.0471m3/s which is less than
the required discharge of 56.5l/s thus, revise it by assuming another diameter, say D=15cm which
gives Qintake=C*A*(2gh)1/2 = 0.6098m3/s. But from operation point of view,adopt, d=50cm i.e. so as
to allow operators to move and clean silt in the pipe.
If it is of box type, A=Q/(C*(2g*h)1/2) = 0.032m2, where h= (1/2)*0.35 +0.24= 0.42m. Thus, from
A=b*w; w=0.11m, say w=20cm.
3.11 DESIGN OF SCOURING-SLUICE

3.11.1 General
Scouring-sluices are also called under-sluices as well as sluiceways. A scouring sluice is one of
the parts of the headwork structure that must be provided at the intake side so as to stabilize flow
in to the intake. It is also designed to prevent sediment inflow into the canal as much as possible
when drawing water.
3.11.2 Functions of scouring-sluice
Scouring-sluice is used to evacuate the accumulated sediment deposit upstream nearby the head
regulator or intake during normal operation condition, to allow passage of flood during flood period,
and to maintaining a channel towards the head regulator or intake (Smith, 1995; Novak et al.,
2007).
By operating the sluiceway at full capacity during floods a current is maintained and the channel is
kept clear. During normal operating period when most of the flow is being flowing through the
sluiceway, a dune may buildup progressively towards the head gate and eventually sediment
could pass in to the canal. This can be prevented if the sluiceway is opened alternatively and
periodically to discharge the accumulated deposit in front of the head regulator or intake. In river
having sufficient seasonal discharge a sluiceway may be set to operate continuously while a
diversion is being made. Under-sluice should be left fully open during the rainy season/flood flows/
to drain as much sediment as possible through the sluice channel.
3.11.3 Locations of scouring-sluice
Scouring-sluices need to be located adjacent to the irrigation inlet or intake that is in-front of the
head regulator or off-taking canal. They should be left open during the rainy season/flood flows/ to
drain as much sediment as possible through the sluice channel. Thus they need to be set at a
lower elevation than the intake.

The main weir portion is separated from the under-sluices portion by a long structure called divide
wall. The arrangement is aimed at keeping approach channel to the intake or canal head regulator
comparatively clear of silt and to minimize the effect of main river current on the flow conditions in
the regulator. Hence the purpose of under-sluice is for flushing out the lower bed loads and
comparatively enable drawing of silt free water by the intake. This structure should therefore be
located adjacent to the intake structure so as to minimize entrance of silt in to intake and hence
main conveyance.
By operating the sluiceway at full capacity during floods, flow current is maintained and the
channel is kept clear. During normal operating periods when the flow is being diverted, a dune
may build up progressively toward the head-gate and eventually sediment could pass into the
canal. This can be prevented if the sluiceway is opened periodically to discharge the accumulated
deposit from in-front of the head-gate.
The bay before the gate serves as a settling basin as the turbulent water rushing in to it is forced
to calm down thereby sediment-load is also settled down and relatively clear water is picked up by
intake canal through the head regulator, which is usually raised by a meter or above from crest of
the sluice way.
3.11.4 Design Consideration
In order to accomplish the foregoing function and objectives of under-sluice the design must meet
the following requirements (Halcrow, 1988; Smith, 1995):
 The sluiceway must be located adjacent to the head gate;
 The width and opening size of the under-sluice portion of a weir shall be determined on
the basis of considerations that it should not be too wide to keep the approach velocities
to cause maximum settlement of suspended silt load within the pond and should be
manageable size that can be operable by a single operator;
 The invert level of the sluiceway and its approach apron and gates should be about 1m
below the head gate invert level. Normally, it is kept equal to the deepest bed level of
the river. As the crest of the under sluice pocket is at a low level, a deep channel
develop towards this pocket, which helps in bringing low dry weather discharge towards
this pocket, thereby, ensuring easy diversion of water into the intake;
 The under-sluice bay floor level is generally kept as low as possible to create pool
conditions for silt settlement and its exclusion later. Thus, its crest level is fixed by
considering the workability of the river bed and the required head below the canal sill
level to scour the deposited sediment in front of the canal off take.

b
b‟
Figure 3-33: Relative Arrangements of Typical Intake and Silt Gates

 Normally, the crest level of the under-sluices is kept equal to the deepest bed level of
the river during non-monsoon season. As the crest of the under sluice pocket is at a low
level, a deep channel develop towards this pocket, which helps in bringing low dry
weather discharge towards this pocket, thereby, ensuring easy diversion of water into
the canal through the canal head.
 If the waterway is very wide, then the whole length is divided into bays each being
separated with piers and each bay is provided with a gate so as to act as an opening of
controlled height for flushing during flood times;
 The under-sluiced length of weir is then divided into a number of bays by piers, and
separate gates are installed on these bays. Each bay can thus, be opened to any
desired height by lifting its gate and hence, act as a gate controlled opening, and will
help in bypassing the excess supplies to the down-stream side of the river. These
openings will also help in scouring and removing the deposited silt from the under
sluiced pocket; and hence are also called the scouring sluices;
 A substantial stilling basin must be designed for a sluiceway because it may have to
operate when the discharge over the diversion dam is low. The tail water depth in the
river channel will be correspondingly low, much lower than at flood stage, yet the
sluiceway may have to be operated at or near full capacity in order to effectively flush
out silt deposits. The slab elevation for the hydraulic jump stilling basin will have to be
much lower than the basin slab for the diversion structure.
Discharging capacity of under-sluices is carefully chosen based on the following criterion:
 They should be able to ensure sufficient scouring capacity, for which discharging
capacity should be at least twice the full supply discharge of MC at its head.
 They should be able to pass dry weather-flow and low floods during the months
excluding rainy season without necessity of dropping weir shutters,
 They should be able to dispose of 5 to 20% of design flood discharge during expected
design floods so as to reduce flood height over the structure and hence wing wall
height, i.e. it should be designed to ensure sufficient scouring capacity to dispose off the
above range of the peak flood. This value shall at least be greater than 2 times the
intake capacity;
 Bottom Level of Under Sluices should be fixed such that it allows easy flushing of
sediment (usually kept on river bed level);

The simplified vertical gate flow formula is still used for the under sluice. The usual opening in
under-sluice is box type. The design of the opening size shall be made for three cases of
scenarios. The size of opening fixed by the design of the sluiceway should fulfill the requirement of
all the three cases. However, it should be understood that the governing case is when the river is
at design flood and the under sluice is totally submerged because it is during this case the under
sluice operates at maximum capacity.
Case 1: When the headwater depth in upstream is at normal pool level or crest level and no tail
water in the downstream, then the opening of under-sluices work as free flowing orifice. The
discharge through free flowing orifice is calculated by similar formula with box type opening.
Case 2: When the headwater depth upstream is at highest flood level and tail water level in the
downstream is below the soffit level of the sluiceway, then above formula still holds true. However,
check for submergence might be necessary as it is most likely to prevail.
Case 3: When the headwater level upstream is at highest flood level and tail water level in the
downstream is above the soffit of the sluiceway (or above sluiceway opening), the sluiceway will
acts as submerged orifice.
3.11.5 Hydraulic design of scouring sluices
The hydraulic design of scouring sluice is sizing of its opening and floor related works. The sizing
of the opening use the simplified vertical gate formula given above but with box type of opening.
The design procedure for sizing the under-sluice opening is almost similar to the procedure given
for intake gate, however,
 The opening is box type (width and height) and the flow condition is submerged. The
design criteria shall be the gate setting equivalent to the height of the gate.
 The flow velocity through the opening of the under sluice should be greater than the critical
velocity. This will enable easy flushing of sediment deposited upstream of the sluice.
The following has also been in practice during the design of under sluice.
Q  Cd x A 2 gh  cd x Leff xdx 2 gh
…………………………………………………. (3-140)
Velocity of flow through these openings is also given:
V  Cd x 2 gh
……………………………………………………………....................... (3-141)
Where, Q = Discharge through the openings (m3/s)

A = Area of flow through the openings, (m2)
g = Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
h = Head above center of orifice for worst case, i.e. when it is at pool level, (m)
Cd = Coefficient of discharge, usually = 0.60
Leff= effective length of the openings (m)
d = Depth of opening, (m)
This velocity of flow through each sluice channel should be greater than critical velocity, Vc, so as
to enable easy flushing of sediment through the openings, i.e. flow within the scouring sluice
should be in supercritical condition to remove sediment deposited in-front of intake, but that
through the intake should give a critical flow condition so as to allow flow to the canal.
Design of these sluices should therefore be made so as to allow transportation of the maximum
particle sizes of the riverbed materials with this critical flow velocity, V c which is given by the
following formula (JICA-OIDA, 2014).

V c  20 * d m …….………………………………………………………................. (3-142)
20 * d m
hc  …….……………………………………………………….................... (3-143)
g
 20 * d m 3
qc  …….……………………………………………………….......... (3-144)
g2
Where, Vc is Critical flow velocity through the openings (m/s)
dm is maximum particle size through the openings, 90 % passing by weight, (m)
hc is Critical depth of flow through the openings, (m)
qc is flow per unit critical width, (m3/s/m)
g is acceleration of gravity, (m/s2)
The height of the guide wall H required to form a channel for the scouring sluice is made 1.5hc at
the point of intake.
Figure 3-34: Flow Profile in u/s of Scouring Sluice Channel, (JICA-OIDA, 2014)
Note: River bed grain size distribution need to be sampled, tested in laboratory and analyzed so as to use in
these equations. However, in case there is no data, the following indicative ranges of particle size
distribution and corresponding permeability coefficients can be used (though not recommended unless it is
compulsory).
Table 3-19: Particle Size Distribution and Corresponding Permeability Coefficient

Classification Clay Silty Clay Silty sand Fine sand Medium Course Gravel
sand sand
d (mm) 00.01 0.010.05 0.050.10 0.100.25 0.250.50 0.501.0 1.05.0
K (cm/s) 0.000003 0.00045 0.0035 0.015 0.085 0.35 3.0
Note: d is average or 50% of grain size distribution, mm.
Table 3-20: Average Particle Size, d (mm) for Various Types of Materials
Type a/material (soil) Average grain size, d (mm)
Very fine 0.05 to 0.08
Silt Fine 0.12
Medium 0.16
Standard (i.e. f=1.0) 0.32
Sand Medium 0.51
Course 0.73
Fine 0.89
Bajri and sand
Medium 1.29
Course 2.42

Type a/material (soil) Average grain size, d (mm)

Gravel Medium 7.28
Heavy/Course 26.1
Small 50.1
Boulders
Medium 72.5
Large 188.8
Box 3-11:
Worked Example-11: Suppose the designed diversion weir in the previous worked examples has
two scour channels. Thus, how much shall the size of these openings be to allow recommended
design flood? If 10% of this design flood is allowed to pass through these sluices compute
appropriate size of these channels (Note: This exercise illustrates either assuming sizes and check
for the capacity or fix capacity of channels and check for the sizes).
Solution: First assume size of sluice channels and check for allowable flow capacity in these
channels.
Case-1: When U/s WL is at WCL:

Let, length of the openings, Leff = 0.7m each, Cd=0.6and Depth of opening, d =0.7m; Sluice bottom
Level, SBL=RBL=1432.475m, thus its top level = 1433.175m. Head above center of orifice for
worst case, h = weir height – (driving head + ½ * Depth of opening) = 1.01m. Now, Discharge
through the openings, Qs= 2*(0.6*0.7*0.7*SQRT(2*9.81*1.01))=2.62m3/s, which is 10.5% of
design flood discharge thus ok as it is within allowable range. Velocity of flow, V=0.6*
(SQRT(2*9.81*1.01))=2.66m/s and Critical velocity, Vc = qs/dc, Where qs is unit discharge and dc
is critical depth of flow; qs= Qs/b = 1.31/0.7=1.87m3/s/m anddc =(qs^2/g)^(1/3)= 0.71m; Thus,
Vc=2.64m/s; implying V >Vc. Thus, take 0.7m wide by 0.7m high sluice channel openings.
Case-2: When U/s WL is at its maximum i.e. HFL:

In this case head above center of orifice opening, h= weir height + flow depth over crest - ½ *
Depth of opening=2.87m. Based on above procedure, this gives 17.8% for the above sizes, which
thus satisfies condition of 5-20%, thus ok in both cases.
Case-3: For the case when 10% of this design flood is allowed, discharge of each sluice,
Qs=10%(24.8)/2= 1.24m3/s; Thus, critical width of sluice channel, L= bc =Qd/(C*H3/2), Where H =
h+Hd (for the case of design flood )=24.8/(1.7*(1.6+1.622)^3/2)=0.13m, taking a practical value of
multiple of 0.5, L=0.5m; With this width of channel, unit discharge, q in the sluice= Qs/b = 1.24/0.5
= 2.48m3/s/m; Consequently, critical depth, dc =(qs^2/g)^(1/3)= 0.86m; and corresponding critical
velocity, Vc = qs/dc = 2.89m/s; In this case head above center of orifice opening, h=2.79m; Thus,
Vc=qs/dc = 2.89m/s, but Velocity through each sluice, Vsluice =0.6* (SQRT(2*9.81*2.79)=4.44m/s,
implying Vsluice>Vc; But, sluice channel width required here i.e. 0.5 by 0.9 is not proportional.
For course gravel bed material, dm=26.1mm (from table above), thus, critical unit discharge in
sluice channel, qc= 0.038m3/s/m; 1and corresponding critical depth, dc =0.05m; andVc= 0.72m/s,
but Velocity through each sluice, Vsluice =4.50m/s, implying Vsluice>Vc; Thus, take 0.7m wide by
0.7m high sluice channel openings on both left and right sides as they satisfied all required
conditions.

3.12 DESIGN OF DIVIDE WALLS

3.12.1 Location and functions of the divide walls
Divide walls are structures provided at right angles to the axis of the diversion headwork on the
upstream side of a weir and extends from crest to a bit longer than intake structure or up to end of
upstream impervious apron. Sometimes these walls also extend to the foot of downstream sloping
face of the weir i.e. the beginning of launching apron when there is a bridge over the weir or even
it extends down to the basin end sill when we are interested to provide a barrier between the
stilling basin and scouring bay, so as to avoid cross-currents.
These walls are provided between two portions i.e. under sluices portion and weir portion to
minimize flow current. Thus, the main functions of divide walls are:
 To form a still water pocket in front of the canal head so that the suspended silt can be
settled down which then later can be cleared through the scouring sluices from time to
time,
 To control the eddy current or cross current in front of the canal head,
 To provide a straight approach in front of the canal head,
 To resist the overturning effect on the weir or barrage caused by the pressure of the
impounding water,
 To separate the turbulent floodwater from the pocket in front of canal sluice,
 To check parallel flow that would be caused by the formation of deep channels leading
from the river to the pocket in front of the sluices, and,
 To support gate operation slab, if the gate is rotary/spindle type (if it is sliding type, no
slab is required of-course).
3.12.2 Design consideration of the divide walls
 The length of these walls should extended atleast beyond the upstream end of the head
regulators on the upstream side, just to cover the canal head regulator and on the
downstream side, it is extended up to the launching apron;
 The dividing wall is built at right angles to the axis of the weir, separating the weir and
the under-sluices;
 The dividing wall can be designed from masonry or concrete walls. However, the choice
is dependent on availability of construction materials around the project area;
 Their height is as high as that of wing walls to serve as support for RCC operating desk
thus extends from river bed up to the top level of upstream wing walls. However beyond
of the operating slab deck, the height can be reduced to the pool level or crest level for
economic reason;
 It should be designed at a right angle to the axis of a weir or a barrage to maintain
stable streamlines of flow to the pocket/groyne of sluices;
 The foundation of the divide wall is to be kept well below the raft or floor and have their
own foundation, and shall depend upon the scour depth.
3.12.3 Fixing section of a divide wall
Its length range lies between 0.5 to 2m depending on the magnitude of flood. The divide Wall
height can be fixed using the most governing parameters of upstream high flood level and the weir
bank condition. Therefore the height of the divide wall is the difference between the HFL and the
river bed level plus some free board on the u/s or to the top of the weir in case when there is no
rotary gate but operated by sliding.

Also downstream wall height can be fixed by subtracting the foundation or river bed level from the
downstream HFL and adding free board of that range. Divide wall thickness is fixed by considering
the wall height, the load‟s acting on the wall and the materials proposed for wall construction (i.e.
concrete or masonry wall).
3.13 COFFERDAM DESIGN ASPECTS

3.13.1 Functions and location of a cofferdam
A cofferdam is a temporary retaining embankment (as in case of diversion weirs) or permanent

structure (as in case of dams) that has to be designed and built in a river both on the upstream
and downstream side of construction zone (for weirs as shown in figure below, not to let water
come back in to construction zone) or on the upstream side alone (based on slope of the river) or
to enclose an area during construction to withstand consecutive flood seasons (i.e., for the
expected years of completion of construction of the main structure) and offer protection against
expected return period flood.
Figure 3-35: Typical arrangement of cofferdam around construction zone
3.13.2 Construction materials of a cofferdam
Generally, cofferdams must be as watertight as practicable, relatively cheap and, if possible,

constructed of locally available materials. It is constructed from earth (rolled), rock or steel sheet
materials. Metal sheet piling coffer dams which are usually reinforced with timber or earthfill is also
common.

3.13.3 Design considerations of a cofferdam
Dewatering could prove to be impossible during excavation for the foundation because of water
path in the trail of the thalweg where stone and gravel layers exist, and/or the lower layer below
the cofferdam is broken by piping. In such case, riverbed deposits should be investigated based
on geological data and information in order to prevent construction failure.
3.13.4 Design considerations of a cofferdam
Dewatering is less effective during excavation for foundation of the diversion headwork. The
riverbed deposits should be properly investigated in order to get enough geological data and
information so that construction failure is prevented.
Design of an adequate cofferdam involves concerns with economics. When the construction is
planned so that foundation work can be executed and completed during the low river water season
or dry season, the cost of cofferdams can be to the minimum by providing smaller height
cofferdam. However, where the stream flow characteristics do not allow to do so or construction
work period exceed the dry season period, construction of smaller cofferdam is not possible option
because it is not safe. The construction of high cofferdam due to fear of risk of flooding is not
economical. Therefore, an optimum cofferdam height should be determined and constructed
based on safety and economic factor. This involves hydrological analysis to determine the
magnitude of the flood with probability of exceedance.
Usually 50 years return period flood magnitude is considered for fixing the crest level of the coffer
dam and temporary river diversion channel. However, depending on the prevailing site condition
the design flood magnitude for the cofferdam can be minimized.
Depending on the prevailing condition at the selected diversion headwork site, the cofferdam can
be either single stage or two stage construction type (Figure 3-35).
In the case of single stage construction the construction zone can be cleared from river flow using
the followings components of temporary work
 upstream coffer dam

 downstream cofferdam
 river diversion channel
 rock riprap protection works at the outlet of diversion channel
In the case of a two stage construction the construction zone can be cleared from river flow using
the followings components of temporary work
 first stage cofferdam isolating either the left or right half of the river channel with enough
working space to carry out construction of part of the diversion headwork
 second stage cofferdam isolating the remaining half of the river channel with enough
working space to carry out construction of remaining part of the diversion headwork
 river diversion channel is not required
The design of the cross section (geometry) of the cofferdam shall consider safety against piping
and uplift.

3.14 HYDRAULIC DESIGN ASPECTS OF RETAINING/WING WALLS

3.14.1 Arrangements and functions of retaining/wing walls
Retaining walls are structures provided with wing walls flanking the diversion headwork at the
upstream and supporting the adjoining earth bunds.
Wing walls have at least the following functions:

 As flood protection walls: To constrict and control design flood levels within the river
banks so that there may not be submergence and inundation on the back of the
diversion and crossing structures as a result of construction of such burrier structure
across the river,
 As retaining structures: To restrain/hold or retain soil, rock or other materials behind it so
that the river bank slopes get stabilized thus may not be collapsed as a result of the
scouring created by hydraulic jump,
 They can also be used for protecting conveyance canals running on steep landscape
from being eroded and sliding.
Wing walls are arranged both on the u/s and d/s of the weir body and both on the left and right
banks of the river right from end of u/s impervious apron up to the end of stilling basin but being
keyed to the natural ground such that, these keys should find design flood levels on all directions.
The wing walls and existing abutment walls may coincide or not depending on required intensity of
flow we are interested in. if incoming design flood is high, the abutments need to be widened and if
smaller, then the abutments need to be constricted so that allowable intensity of design flood can
pass safely.
3.14.2 Design considerations for wing walls
Wing walls are retaining structures designed on river banks/abutments along with diversion
structure such that there will not be overtopping of flood level for the expected design discharge of
known return period, which is usually Q50 for SSI Projects as a result of introduction of such barrier
structure. Thus, the flood protection wall height is determined based on the high design flood
levels with some free boards. It is commonly designed from masonry walls (refer section 2-7 for
details of more retaining structures).
Hydraulic design aspects of this structure should consider free board on top of Q50 flood level. In
addition to this, wing walls are also required on downstream side of the crest so as to protect the
scouring of the banks due to formation of jumps. Usually a free board on upstream is taken 0.4-
0.5m and downstream one is 0.5-0.6m but at least 1.05 d2 is recommended due to jump.
Retaining walls shall be designed to withstand lateral earth and water pressures, the effects of
surcharge loads, the self-weight of the wall and in special cases, earthquake loads. If the retained
earth is not allowed to drain, the effect of hydrostatic water pressure shall be added to that of earth
pressure and hence a weep hole is provided for draining (for detailed stability analysis of wing
walls, refer section 3-15-12).
Note: Provisions of wing walls both on the u/s and d/s may not be required if geology of the
abutment on both sides of the bank is rocky, stable and deep enough for accommodating incoming
design flood level.

3.14.3 Selection of wall type
Selection of appropriate wall type is based on:

 An assessment of the design loading,
 Depth to adequate foundation support,
 Presence of deleterious environmental factors,
 Physical constraints of the site,
 Cross-sectional geometry of the site both existing and planned,
 Settlement potential,
 Desired aesthetics,
 Constructability,
 Maintenance, and
 Cost.
3.14.4 Data required
Data required for hydraulic design of wing walls are:

 Weir wall height, h
 Head over the weir, hd
 Sequent depth, D2
 U/s river bed level,
 D/S High flood level, (D/S HFL)
 U/S High flood level, (U/S HFL)
 Depth of depression
 Stability of the abutments on both banks of the river and its foundation
 Topographic conditions (Map and coverage conditions)
Box 3-12:
Worked Example-12: Determine top levels of upstream and downstream wing walls for the
structure designed in preceding worked examples.
Solution: From worked example-3, for the upstream wing walls He=1.698m; Weir Crest Level has
been fixed to 1434.075m a.s.l.; flow depth on the crest, Hd is 1.622m and approach velocity head,
Hav=He-Hd = 0.08m. Thus taking free board of 0.4m, u/s wall top level= 1434.075+1.622+0.08+0.4
=1436.173m
For the downstream wing walls, top level of the downstream wing walls = downstream river bed
level + TWD + d/s energy head (hv3=V32/2g =(q/D3)2/2g=(q/TWD)2/2g)+ freeboard
=1432.475+0.98+0.76+0.5=1434.709m.
3.15 STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF DIVERSION WEIR

3.15.1 Background
The objective of this section is to lay basis for consideration in structural design of weir/barrage,
wing-wall, breast wall, operating deck and gate structures for irrigation projects, such as flat or
sliding gates, spindle and radial gates.

3.15.2 Structural design considerations for weir and wing-wall
It is inevitable that, irrigation structures are subjected to different types of loading with varying
magnitudes. These structures should thus withstand such loads, with tolerable damage and deliver
the services requirements for which they are designed for. Usually, the ultimate limit state design
approach has been followed to design such structures. Under limit state design approach,
structures are designed for service as well extreme loads. For the service loads, especial attention
has to be paid to limiting the crack width of the structures because the structures are exposed to
water with high pressure.
This section thus gives considerations in structural design aspects of a weir/barrage and wing-wall
sections which involves stability and sizing of the structure based on hydraulic requirements stated
in previous sections and structural requirements. The structural design of weirs is mainly related
with the nature of flow and foundation conditions.
Such analysis is made for a masonry and/or concrete wall imbedded in cement mortar like for
retaining/wing wall, guide wall, divide wall, piers, river training and other related purposes. Gravity
walls are usually stabilized by their own weight. But checking for tension in critical sections of
masonry walls are necessary as it is weak intension. In case of concrete it can be alleviated by
introduction of reinforcement bars.
All structures should be checked for the safety against stability and stress conditions. The major
factors involved in the structural design aspects are construction materials, various loads to be
considered and factor of safety to be adopted. According to our current construction industry
practice, for small scale irrigation project construction, stone masonry and reinforced concrete are
the dominant structural units used for weir type head work design. Steel structures are also in use
for gates, ladders and railing purposes.
3.15.3 Structural design aspects of stone masonry
3.15.3.1 General
In most cases of small scale irrigation scheme diversion headwork structure construction, the use
of stone masonry structural as side soil retaining work is quite common practice. Because,
compared to other construction materials, masonry is relatively cheap and easy to work with and
can be constructed with locally available materials. One major disadvantage of masonry work is
however, that its capacity to withstand tension is very limited. Due to this it will be necessary to
check the magnitude of tension force at critical sections. The unit weight for stone masonry and
soil for design purpose can be taken from Table 3-24 above. Active earth pressure on such
structure shall be calculated based on Equation (3-146) below.
3.15.3.2 Design assumptions
 When a surcharge load is to be considered, the value of surcharge load should be taken
according to the nature of fill and slope of surcharge.
 For Hydraulic structures 2/3 of the bottom soil is assumed to be saturated.
 The triangular wedge of the retained soil is assumed to assist the stabilizing effect.
 The passive earth pressure is assumed to be counter blocked by an equivalent active
pressure.

3.15.3.3 Stability analysis of masonry wall
This has been presented in detail under section 3.15.12.
3.15.4 Types of gates used in irrigation
The followings are types of gates which are commonly used in irrigation projects:
 Vertical Lift Gates: such as Fixed wheel/roller type gate, Rotary/Spindle gate, Slide gate,
Double leaf gate and Stop-log;
 Hinged Type Gates: such as Radial gate, Sector gate, Mitre gate, Flap gate and Swing
gate. These types are typically used in large scale irrigation projects.
Out of these different types of gates, the most commonly used gates for small scale irrigation
projects are vertical lift gate type. On account of their low cost, small slide gates are used
everywhere for passing discharges up to a few cubic meter per second. The problem with
them are however, they are prone to frequent jamming thus require careful operation.
Type of gate is decided after considering its purpose, installation location, cases of operation,
safety, dependability and economy of water intake function, especially from the view point of
effective usage of the water resources, appropriate style and operation method to reduce over
diversion.
Fixed wheel type gate is mechanically and structurally simple. Hoisting load is also lighter than for
slide gate and is more dependable. It is the most frequently used gate for barrages. In this type of
gate, hydraulic load is transmitted to a horizontal main girder through the skin plate (sheet metal)
and its supporting girder. The load is finally transmitted to the guide frame by way of vertical end
girders at each side of the gate leaf and wheel.
Slide gates can be used both for diversion weir and on-farm structures like division box and
turnouts. This type of gate is suitable for a relatively small span and water level difference. The
mechanism is simple as a metal plate can be used for guide frame. Operation under hydraulic load
causes a large load for hoisting since the gate leaf has to slide on the guide frame. Thus, this type
is not suitable for large gate leaves unless operated under balanced water pressure.
For the on-farm structures, it is used as undershot or overshot and are a common form of structure
used for turnouts. Such gates should be fixed in a concrete structure which can be precast to
ensure high quality. They do not normally have a regulating function other than diverting the flow in
an on/off situation. Indeed, there is little point in using them as variable flow structures, because
farmers will generally use them either fully open in order to maximize the flow, or else shut when
they do not require irrigation water.
Radial gates are typically used in sizes up to 5 m wide with a capacity of up to 40 cubic meter per
second each.
Stop-logs are not commonly self-stand gates but provided as reserve gates to be used during
maintenance of main gate. Stop-logs are less expensive than gates and are more quickly adjusted
but do not control the flow as closely.
Flap gate is a simple hydraulic automatic upstream water level control gate. Its simplicity is derived
from ease of construction and maintenance-construction only requires flat plate and tubing

fabrication, rather than curved surfaces as for other types of hydraulic automatic gates. Once
installed and proper operation is verified, flap gate only requires lubrication of its bearings and
occasional painting for maintenance.
Foot Bridge
Slide Gate
Check Structure
Figure 3-36: Check structure with slide gate (Thicknesses are in mm)
Operation Deck
Wing wall
Top of Wing wall
Intake WCL
Washout
Sluice Channel Weir body
Figure 3-37: Washout gate operated by Spindle (L) and sluice gate by chain block (R)
3.15.5 Design considerations of gates
3.15.5.1 Materials of gate structures and precaution to be taken
Such water control gate structures are designed with heavy brass thrust nuts on the rising spindle
gates set in to concrete or plastered stone masonry. Steel gates invariably leak around the sides
and base, contributing to seepage flows and leakage losses. The main problem is that the close
tolerances required for gate seals can rarely be achieved during construction in the field. Thus,
precaution should be taken care of it so as to obtain the desired design flow.
Materials used for gate structures comprise steel, aluminum, stainless steel, rubber and FRP
(fiberglass reinforced plastic). The selection is based on different flow conditions approaching to
gate. When using materials other than steel for gate, the characteristic features of the material for
gate should be studied carefully.
Gate structures consist of a gate leaf, guide frame, pivot and hoisting equipment. The gate leaf is
the part which receives the hydraulic load and conveys it to pivot. The guide frame is the
embedded part in concrete and adjacent to the sealing part of the leaf to prevent water leakage.

The pivot is part of a hinged type gate which transmit the external force (load) to the concrete. 'The
guide frame covers this function for a vertical lift type gate. The hoist is the equipment which
operates a gate leaf.
Slide gates are designed and fabricated from special shaped extrusions or structural angles, flats,
and plates are assembled by welds and bolts. Since there are no machined parts or wedging
devices in such gate itself, the gate depends upon water pressure and seal design to seat the
fabricated slide. Fabricated slide gates are usually furnished with rubber seals to improve water-
tightness. Head capacity is dependent on opening size and availability of structural members.
The gates recommended for SSI project should meet the following requirements:
 Should be reasonably watertight. Leakage if any unless otherwise specified shall not
exceed 5 to 15 litres per minute per meter length of periphery of the sealing surface.
 Shall be rigid, smooth, straight and without offset at joints.
 Bottom shape of the gate shall be suitably designed to minimize down pull and to
provide a converging fluid way.
 Slot shall be as narrow as possible in conformity with structural safety of the gate leaf.
 The gate as a whole shall be capable of being raised or lowered by the hoisting·
mechanism provided.
3.15.5.2 Structural design aspects of sliding gates
The structural analysis of slide gates is part of electromechanically design work, however the
structural design shall provide the provisions and structural detail such as get sliding steel channel
embedding concrete groves, appropriate thickness of grove sides and reinforcement detail
designed to withstand the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic pressure plus force induced during gate
operation activity.
With respect to the gate sizing for both sluiceways and canal intakes, it is preferable to keep the
gate width narrower, and use narrower gates than less wider gates. Gates (and the associated lift)
wider than about 0.6 to 1 m are more expensive to construct, and can present operation and
maintenance difficulties. Generally each gate is operated by a centrally located single stem screw
lift. The sill/invert of the canal intake gate(s) should be as high as possible and at least 0.5 to 1 m
higher than the sluiceway sill/invert. A number of relatively narrow/small canal intake gates with
weir flow (as opposed to orifice flow) may be required. This will decrease the potential for future
canal intake gate siltation problems, and reduce maintenance costs.
3.15.6 Design considerations of breast wall
3.15.6.1 Arrangement of breast wall
Breast wall is an RCC thin wall structure arranged vertically and designed to avoid spilling of water
over the under sluice structure during HFL and canal regulator gate. It is provided from top level of
the gate up to the HFL. It is also used as a runner for the under sluice spindle gate.

3.15.6.2 Structural aspects of breast wall
Breast wall is constructed out of reinforced concrete. The minimum thickness required for head
work and scouring sluice breast walls are indicated in Table 3-29 above. The critical loading
condition for the beast wall is during design flood flow condition. The hydrostatic force is a
triangular force distribution nil at wall top that is at high flood mark and unit weight of water times
breast wall height at beast wall bottom.
The hydrodynamic force can be computed as unit weight of water multiplied with approach flow
velocity and hypothetical discharge over the breast wall area. Once the wall dimensions, end fixity
condition with the side piers and the imposed loads and are known, the analysis can be easily
managed by SAP-2000 software.
For the design, the critical actions to be investigated are the bending moments at span and at wall
ends and the shear force at wall ends. Reinforcement therefore, can be designed with the limit
state design for flexural and shear resistance design equations provided in previous sections. The
reinforcement provided finally shall be checked if it is well above the minimum requirement, if
otherwise the minimum reinforcement requirement will govern.
3.15.7 Design considerations of gate operating deck
3.15.7.1 Arrangement of operating deck
Operating deck is an RCC thin slab structure arranged horizontally and designed to serve as a
bridge for operation of gates.
3.15.7.2 Structural aspects of operating deck
Operation slab is made to have dimensions of commonly 1m long by 3m wide for sluice and intake
operation or as found necessary to make the operator free from risk during operation by enclosing
it within hand rails drilled on both of its edges.
Thicknesses of the slab and breast wall are simply determined from practical recommendations of:
L/t = 20 to 35 ……………………………………………………………………………. (3-145)
Where, L = length of greater span = 3.0m

t = thickness (m)
However, t =0.10 to 0.20m thicknesses are provided for the slab and breast wall work. And provide
the reinforcement bar of φ12mm diameter spread out @ 150mm c/c spacing in all directions with
reinforcement cover of 20mm.
The minimum slab thickness provided for gate operation slab is 200mm as indicated in table 3-29
above. However the thickness shall be checked to be satisfactory by conducting the analysis and
design of the deck slab. In addition to the thickness of the deck slab the other geometrical data
required for structural analysis is the lateral dimensions i.e. slab span and width over the
supporting piers and the end restraint conditions shall be also defined based on the actual fixity
condition provided in the design. The imposed operation live load recommended is 7.2KN/m2
which is presented in previous section, load on operation deck. The structural analysis and design
will then be carried out in similar manner as explained for breast wall design.

3.15.8 Bedding under structures
Bedding, which are normally made of granular materials or concrete, serves four main functions:
 To enhance a uniform support under pipes in order to reduce the bending moment
longitudinally;
 To increase the load-supporting strength of the pipes;
 For pipes with spigot and socket joints, it enables pipes to be supported along pipe
lengths instead of pipe sockets. Otherwise, uneven stress may be induced and it may
damage the pipes;
 To provide a platform for achieving correct alignment and level during and after
construction.
3.15.9 Common loads on irrigation structures
The principal load which should be considered for structural design of components of a diversion
headwork are self-weight, earth pressure, water pressure including uplift, imposed live load such
as live load at get operation platform, earth quake load and wind load. For small scale irrigation
scheme the effect of earth quake load and wind load are usually negligible and are not considered,
if outside of seismic zone.
Operating decks for the head regulator and scouring sluice area of the weir part shall be designed
for a uniform live load of 7.2 KN/m2 (Design of Small Canal Structures, 1978).
Stability of body of the diversion weir wall above foundation slab is checked for two conditions: one
is for condition of high flood level on the upstream and the other is for condition when water level is
at crest level, i.e. no over flow condition for the downstream.
Foundation could be permeable or impermeable. The structural analysis design for both foundation
conditions is the same except that weirs on permeable foundation need additional analysis
regarding piping and uplift pressure. Therefore, these aspects have to be properly analyzed.
3.15.10 Forces acting on a weir and wing wall body
Before going to analyze stability of hydraulic structures, it is essential to identify the forces acting
on such structures. Accordingly, expected forces which act on a weir body both on the surface and
from subsurface direction can be categorized in to: Static water pressure, Uplift water pressure,
Deposited Silt Pressure; Soil reaction at the weir base (on foundation), Friction forces at the base,
Self-weight and water wedge, Dynamic force unburden, and Seismic force (if the structure is
situated in the seismic zone).
These Loads can be classified in terms of applicability/relative importance in to three:

a) Primary Loads: are identified as those of major importance to all weirs, irrespective of type,
e.g. water and related seepage loads, and self-weight loads.
b) Secondary Loads: are universally applicable although of lesser magnitude (e.g. sediment
load) or, alternatively, are of major importance only to certain types of weirs (e.g. thermal
effects within concrete weirs).
c) Exceptional Loads: are so designed on the basis of limited general applicability or having a
low probability of occurrence (e.g. tectonic effects, or the inertia loads associated with
seismic activity).

Dynamic force: This is a water reaction acting on the weir but supposed negligible as water behind
the weir builds up gradually and filled with water and/or silt up to crest, however it could be
considered if the designer found it necessary.
Silt brought by runoff commonly gets deposited against the upstream face of a weir just after
construction. If hs is the height of silt deposited, then the force exerted by this silt in addition to
external water pressure, can be represented by Rankine's formula as:
1 2
P s  * K a *  s * h s ………………………………………………………………… (3-146)
2
1  sin 
Ka  …………………………………………………………………………… (3-147)
1  sin 
Where, Ps is force exerted by deposited silt and it acts at 1/3hs…………….……... (3-148)

Ka is the coefficient of active earth pressure, as shown below
hs is height of deposited silt, m
s is submerged unit weight of silt material, KN/m3
 = Angle of repose or angle of internal friction of soil
Table 3-21: Summary of common forces acting on weir & wing-wall at different condition
No Flow Static Dynamic
Structure Load\Flow Condition Remark
Condition Condition Condition
Weir critical Water pressure on u/s face, Ph1 No Yes Yes
section(Refer Water pressure on top, Ph2 No No Yes Force on weir crest
figure 3-31) Water pressure on d/s face, Ph3 No No Yes
Self-weight Yes Yes Yes Force
Silt/sediment load No Yes Yes
Uplift No Yes Yes
Seismic load Yes Yes Yes
U/s Wing- Water pressure on river side, Ph1 No Yes Yes
wall (Refer Self-weight Yes Yes Yes
figure 3-32) Earth pressure from back Yes Yes Yes As per shown figure
Uplift pressure No Yes Yes
D/s Wing- Water pressure on river side, Ph1 No No Yes
wall (Refer Self-weight Yes Yes Yes
figure 3-32) Earth pressure from back No Yes Yes Similar to u/s wall but
differ in height and
base
Uplift pressure No No Yes
Note: - No Flow Condition is when there is no flow in the river; Static Condition is when there is no-overflow i.e. water is
at WCL; Dynamic condition is when flow is at its design capacity.
- Refer figure 3-31 for forces acting on weir and figure 3-32 for those on Wing-walls.
- Seismic impact should be considered based on the delineated seismic zones in Appendix-VI.

Figure 3-38: Forces acting on a Critical Section of a Weir
These different forces acting on weir body can act together simultaneously thus can be
combined into a single resultant force, R, that can ultimately lie either inside or outside of weir
body. However, for a stable structure it has to remain within the middle third of base of the
structure. These forces are presented for full flow condition; however, for no overflow
condition, Ph2 and Ph3 and corresponding moments will not exist.
3.15.11 Stability analysis of the weir
3.15.11.1 General
The objective of stability analysis of a diversion weir is to keep the compressive stresses within the
allowable limit, and prevent the development of any tension stresses in the concrete. Unreinforced
concrete or possibly stone masonry is weak in tension, the ultimate tension strength being only
one-tenth of the ultimate compressive strength. Thus it is considered unwise to permit any tension
stresses whatsoever. To achieve this, the “middle third rule” is adhered to, where the resultant of
all the forces is maintained in the middle third of the structure. If the reinforced concrete apron is
connected to the weir, which is required to resist apron uplift, overturning will generally not be a
problem for the typical diversion weirs for small scale irrigation projects. Such analysis is made by
considering forces acting on the structure and possible moment resulting from these forces which
is taken about external toe of critical section of a weir as shown above bit internal toe for wing
walls.
The objective of a stability analysis in general is to maintain horizontal, vertical, and rotational
equilibrium of the structure (USACE, 2005). For sliding and bearing, the stability requirements
have been expressed deterministically in terms of an explicit factor of safety that sets the minimum
acceptable ratio of foundation strength along the most critical failure plane to the design loads
applied to the failure plane. The analysis for determination of the resultant location in prior
guidance has been termed an overturning stability analysis. This is a misnomer since a foundation
bearing, crushing of the structure toe, and/or a sliding failure will occur before the structure
overturns. The section of the weir shall satisfy the requirements of no overturning, no sliding and
no settlement. A minimum factor of safety need to be set in stability and structural analyses
because of the potential variability in loads and material strengths. The factor of safety required to
be higher when site information is so limited.
When analyzing stability conditions of structures, we need to consider economic aspects as well.
Thus, we need to design a structure which is economical and stable. For the diversion structure to
be kept under stability condition, the following conditions must be fulfilled:
 The structure must be safe against sliding, on any plane or combination of planes within
the structure, at the foundation or within the foundation;
 The structure must be safe against overturning at any plane within the structure, at the
base, or at any plane below the base;
 The resultant force acting on the structure must lie within the middle third of the base;
 There should not be tension under the base of the structure;
 The maximum toe and heel pressures on foundations should not exceed the prescribed
safe limits i.e. the safe unit stresses in the body of the structure or in the foundation
material shall not be exceeded.
3.15.11.2 Stability against sliding
A weir should be stable against sliding at the base for different load conditions. The stability
against sliding is a function of the shear strength of the construction materials. It is given by:
  FV FH
Fs   1.5 or F s   0.75 …...………………………………….….. (3-149)
FH  FV
Where, Fs is Factor of safety against Sliding and it should be greater than or equal to 1.5.
 is coefficient of friction b/n the material and the horizontal section and its value varies b/n
0.65 to 0.75 up on the materials used.
FV is summation of vertical forces
FH is summation of horizontal forces
3.15.11.3 Stability against overturning
Factor of safety against overturning, F0, in terms of moments about the downstream toe of the weir
is given by:
…………………………………………………………………….. (3-150)
Where, Fo is Factor of safety against overturning

M(+) is summation of stabilizing moment
M(-) is summation of overturning moment
F0 should be greater than or equal to 1.5.
3.15.11.4 Safety against Tension
For no tension on the base of the head work structure, for critical section, the resultant force, R
should act at the middle third part of the critical section. This implies that the eccentricity (e) should
be less than or equal to one-sixth (1/6) of the base width (b) of the weir at the critical section.
R = SQRT((FH)2 + (FV) 2) ………………………………………..…………………. (3-151)


X =M/Fv …………………………………………………………………………….. (3-152)

e = X - B/2 ………………………………………………………..…………………….. (3-153)

Where, R is the resultant force, (KN)


X is arm length of resultant force from toe, i.e. centroidal distance, (m)
e is eccentricity, (m):
For the structure to be safe, the eccentricity „e‟ should satisfy the following condition otherwise
overturning may occur if the resultant R fell outside of the base:
………………………………………………………………….. (3-154)
Where, M = M+ - M- ……………………………………………………………………….. (3-155)

M+ and M- as defined above
B is bottom width of the structure (m)
3.15.11.5 Safety against bearing capacity of foundation
Also called safety for contact pressure or vertical stress. Here it is assumed that the distribution of
vertical stress between foundation and bed of structure is linear. The required condition in this
case is, if the magnitude of contact pressure at the base of the structure is less than allowable
foundation material, is safe against settlement this is it is within safe limit of the crushing strength
of the masonry or concrete. Thus, compressive stress or vertical stress, Pmax/min can be estimated
with the trapezoidal law, shown by the following equation:
……………………………………………………………….. (3-156)
Where, Pmax is the maximum compressive stress or vertical stress, KN/m2
Pmin is the lower limit compressive stress or vertical stress, KN/m2
3.15.11.6 Safety against buoyancy
This is the ability that weight of the material can resist the uplift pressure exerting from the bottom
of the structure. It is given by the equation:
W m
 1.2 …………………………………………………………………………. (3-157‟)
Px
Where, Wm is weight of the material
Px is the uplift pressure
3.15.11.7 Safety against seismicity
Seismic impact especially on any elevated structure is high, therefore a seismic coefficient should
be adopted in the design activities depending on the delineated seismic zones. An earthquake,
which is a violent shaking of the earth's crust, may be treated as a reversing horizontal
acceleration. Due to the inertia of the weir, it tends to resist the motion, and the stresses in the
weir and foundation may increase momentarily. In the static loading method of analysis, the
motion is replaced by the equivalent inertia force Se applied at the center of gravity of the weir,
and is given by:

Se = W*a …………………………………………………………………………….. (3-157)
Where, W- is the weight of the weir and

a- is earthquake intensity factor
Earthquake intensity is expressed in terms of the factor “a” which is the ratio of earthquake
acceleration to the acceleration due to gravity. Design values for “a” ranges from 0.0 to 2.0 for
Ethiopia, the largest being in the rift-valley (for details refer Appendix-VI).
Table 3-22: List of possible forces and moments acting on weir section (full flow condition)
Description Vertical Forces Lever Arm Moments Remark
Weight of structure
Weight of top rectangular W1=b*h*m L1=b/2+(B-b) M1 = W1*L1 (+) Moment about
part of weir, W1 external toe, O
Weight of top triangular part W2=1/2*(B-b)*h*m L2=B/3 M2 = W2*L2 (+)
of weir, W2
Weight of bottom rectangular W3=(b+a)*d1*m L3= b/2+(B-b) M3 = W3*L3 (+)
part of weir, W3
Weight of bottom rectangular W4=1/2*a*d2*c L4=B-b-a+a/3 M4 = W4*L4 (+)
part of weir, W4
Weight of bottom rectangular W5=(B-b-a)*d2*c L5=(B-b-a)/2 M5 = W5*L5 (+)
part of weir, W5
Weight of bottom rectangular W6=(B-b-a)*d1*c L6=(B-b-a)/2 M6 = W6*L6 (+)
part of weir, W6
Static water pressure
u/s water pressure, Ph1 Ph1 = 1/2* h*h*w L7=1/3*h M7 = Ph1*L7 (-)
Top water pressure, Ph2 Ph2=1/2* hd*hd*w L 8=((B-b)+2/3b) M8 = Ph *L
2 8 (+)
d/s water pressure, Ph3 Ph3=1/2*h*(B-b)*w L9=1/3*(B-b) M9 = Ph2*L9 (+)
Uplift pressure
Uplift pressure, Pu1 Pu1 =1/2*b*(h-d‟)*w L10=2/3*b+(B-b) M10 = Ph1*L10 (-)
Uplift pressure, Pu2 Pu2 =b*d‟*w L11=1/2*b+(B-b) M11 = Ph1*L11 (-)
Uplift pressure, Pu3 Pu3 =1/2*(B-b)*d‟‟ L12=2/3*(B-b) M12 = Ph1*L12 (-)
Uplift pressure, Pu4 Pu4 =(B-b)*d‟‟‟ L13=1/2*(B-b) M12 = Ph1*L13 (-)
Silt pressure
u/s silt pressure, Ps Ps =1/2* hs*hs*s L14=1/3*hs M14 = Ph1*L14 (-)
Note: - Parameters a, b and B are as indicated in figure 3-31and others have their usual meaning; hs=silt height.
- Based on the these formulae and the identified common forces acting on weir and wing-walls under different
flow conditions in table 3-18, stability of the structure can be checked for all the conditions i.e. for no flow
condition, static i.e. no-overflow condition or when water is at WCL and dynamic condition. (For details refer the
accompanied excel templates.
3.15.12 Stability analysis of retaining and flood protection walls
In the same way to stability of weir, gravity retaining walls should also be designed to provide
adequate stability against sliding, overturning, foundation bearing failure and if applicable deep
foundation failure due to seepage. The forces acting on the wall must be identified at first and then
moments on the wall shall be determined with reference to front toe of the wall (unlike weir body).
Forces acting on such walls are the lateral earth and water pressure, weight of wall and any soil on
the wall; surcharge loading to account for items such as heavy equipment next to the wall (if any);
and, in some instances uplift pressures and horizontal seismic loading if applicable with respect to
diversion weir loads. The following figures show the generalized forces on gravity retaining walls.

Figure 3-39: Forces acting on wing wall or retaining wall
Table 3-23: Possible Forces & moments acting on wing wall Section (full flow condition)
Description Vertical Forces Lever Arm Moments Remark
Weight of structure
Weight of rectangular part of wing W1=b*H*m L1=b/2 M1 = W1*L1 (+) Moment about
wall above RBL, W1 internal toe, O
Weight of triangular part of wing W2=1/2*(B- L2=b+1/3*B M2 = W2*L2 (+)
wall above RBL, W2 b)*H*m
Weight of rectangular part of wing W3=(B+t)*d1*c L3=½*(B+t) M3 = W3*L3 (+)
wall below RBL, W3
Static water pressure
U/s water pressure, Ph1 Ph = 1/2* H*H*w L4=1/3*H M4 = Ph1*L4 (+)
Silt pressure
Inclined overburden soil pressure,Ps1 =1/2* H*(B-b)*s L5=b+1/3*(B- M5 = Ph1*L5 (+)
Ps1 b)
Vertical overburden soil pressure, Ps2 =1/2* H*H*s L6=1/3*hs M6 = Ph2*L6 (-)
Ps2
Retaining wall design is said safe, when the average compression does not exceed the
allowable compressive stress, otherwise reinforcement need to be provided in concrete at
base of the walls.
These forces are presented for full flow condition; however, for no overflow condition, Ph and
corresponding moment will not exist. Uplift pressure is assumed negligible so long as we provide
weep holes in the body of the walls. Moreover, overburden soil pressures, Ps1 and Ps2 are treated
separately as they are opposite in reaction i.e. Ps1 (+) and Ps2 is (-).
The base is usually constructed of reinforced concrete. Generally the factor of safety for structure
stability (i.e. the ratio between stabilizing to destabilizing forces) should be at least 1.3 to ensure
long term sustainability. For gravity retaining walls constructed on sound bedrock and adequately
interlocked to the bedrock, stability is not a problem.
For a quick stability analysis on a retaining wall, Retwall software (that can be obtained online by
own cost) can give us soil bearing loads, analyze the wall stability, calculate all wall moments,
design our rebar arrangement and give us design sketches. The program handles flowing water
and multi-layers of backfill. We can adjust all allowable values to meet whatever code
requirements we are tied to.
The retaining walls need to be backfilled with granular backfill material. Its foundation needs to
be filled and compacted from this material; however, this is often not possible as impervious
backfill is required to prevent seepage. Clay backfill material of swelling nature should be

avoided. If granular backfill is used, it is good practice to place an impervious soil layer at the
top of the backfill to reduce the amount of infiltration.
3.15.13 Basic engineering property of materials
Basic construction materials to be used in the structural analysis of structures have their own unit
weight. Such unit weights of common engineering materials are presented as follow.
Table 3-24: Unit weights of basic materials
SN Dead Load Weight (KN/m3)
1 Water 9.8
2 Stone masonry 23.0
3 Brick masonry 21.0
4 Mass concrete 24.0
5 Reinforced concrete 25.0
6 Steel 78.5
7 Timber(steel) 8.0
8 Wood(teak) 6.0
9 Dry backfill 16.0
10 Saturated backfill 20.0
11 Submerged compacted backfill 10.2
12 Dry compacted backfill 18.5
13 Saturated compacted backfill 21.5
14 Submerged compacted backfill 11.7
15 Gabions 14.0
Table 3-25: Internal angle of friction (∅) of Soil

SN Soil Type Angle of internal friction, 
Gravel 400-550
Sand-Gravel 350-500
Sand-Loose 280-340
Sand-Dense 340-450
Silt, silty sand- Loose 200-220
0
Silt, silty sand- Dense 250-30
Note: For small structures a conservative value of =250 is commonly used
Table 3-26: Allowable bearing pressure of soils
SN Soil Type Allowable Bearing Pressure (KN/m2)
1 Soft clays and silts < 80
2 Firm clays and firm sandy clays 100
3 Stiff clays and stiff sandy clays 200
4 Very stiff boulder clays 350
5 Loose well graded sands and gravel/sand mixtures 100
6 Compact well graded sands and gravel/sand mixtures 200
7 Loose uniform sands < 100
Compact uniform sands 150
Note: that for dynamic loads a 25% overstress may be allowed
3.15.14 Commonly used standard grades of concrete
Concrete is graded in terms of its characteristics strength. Compressive strength of concrete is

determined from tests on 150mm cubes at the age of 28 days in accordance with standard issued
or approved by Ethiopian Standard. Table below gives the permissible grades of concrete for the
two classes of concrete works commonly used in our country. The number in the grade
designation denotes the specified characteristics compressive strength in MPa.

Table 3-27: Commonly used Standard Grades of Concrete

Class fck Nature of Concrete Mix Remark
I II ratio
Permissible C5 C5 Blinding/lean concrete 1:5:10 Used under structure
grades of C7 C7 Mass/Plain concrete of roughest type 1:4:8
concrete C10 C10 Mass/Plain concrete 1:4:8 Where more stabilization is req‟d
C15 C15 12 Unreinforced concrete 1:3:6
C20 C20 16 Standard-grade Reinforced concrete 1:2:4
C25 20 High-grade Reinforced concrete 1:2:3
C30 24 High Strength Reinforced concrete 1:11/2:3
C40 32 High Strength Reinforced concrete 1:1:3
C50 40 Higher Strength Reinforced concrete 1:1:2.5 High-rise structures and
buildings
C60 48 Supper High Strength Reinforced concrete 1:1:2 High-rise structures and
buildings.
Note: Given ratios are dry-volume ratios of cement, sand, and coarse aggregates respectively, Civil Engineering
Hand book
The amount of water added to these mixtures is about 1 to 1.5 times the volume of the cement.
For high-strength concrete, the water content is kept low, with just enough water added to wet the
entire mixture. In general, the more water in a concrete mix, the easier it is to work with, but the
weaker the hardened concrete becomes.

Table 3-28: Standard mixes for ordinary structural concrete per 50kg of cement
Nominal max size of Aggregate 40 20 14 10 cement per m3
Concrete
Workability Medium high Medium high Medium high Medium high of concrete
grade
Limit of slump that may be expected 30 to 60 60-120 20-50 50-100 10 to 30 30-60 10to 25 25-50 40 20
640 550 540 4800
Total aggregate (kg) Fine Aggregate (%)
C5 30-45 30-45 35-50 35-50 1.70 1.89
Vol. of finished con.(m3)
0.312 0.275 0.277 0.252
370 330 320 280
Total aggregate (kg) Fine Aggregate (%)
C15 30-45 30-45 35-50 35-50 2.61 1.89
Vol. of finished con.(m3)
0.200 0.183 0.277 0.252
305 270 280 250 220 240 200
Total aggregate (kg) Fine Aggregate (%) 255 35-
C20 30-35 30-45 30-40 35-45 40-50 40-50 45-55 3.13 3.34
Vol. of finished con.(m3) 45 0.146
0.165 0.155 0.156 0.143 0.130 0.137 0.121
265 240 240 215 195 210
Total aggregate (kg) Fine Aggregate (%) 220 35- 175 45-
C25 30-35 30-40 30-40 35-45 40-50 40-50 3.52 3.89
Vol. of finished con.(m3) 45 0.130 55 0.110
0.147 0.137 0.137 0.127 0.118 0.124
235 215 210 190 170 180
Total aggregate (kg) Fine Aggregate (%) 195 35- 150 45-
C30 30-35 30-40 30-40 35-45 40-50 40-50 3.83 4.18
Vol. of finished con.(m3) 45 0.115 55 0.097
0.134 0.127 0.124 0.115 0.106 0.109
Note: Compressive strength of concrete at 28 days in Mpa is given by the following formula from 7 day strength
fc28=fc7+2.491fc7^0.5Mpa; Source: “The Civil Engineering Hand book”.

3.15.15 Reinforcement steel
The characteristic tensile strength of reinforcement bar to be used shall have yield strength not
less than 400MPa (fy = fck = 400MPa to be used for design in this manual). The mean value of
Modulus of Elasticity of reinforcement bar Es can be assumed 200GPa.
Minimum reinforcement provision is required to control the concrete crack during the immature age
and the minimum reinforcement required shall be provided as per table below.
Table 3-29: Minimum RF-Bars required for crack control of immature concrete
3.15.16 Structural analysis
Structural Analysis is the process for the determination of the actions on the structure due to all the
possible applied loads as mentioned in section above: load on structures. The main actions
obtained after the structural analysis are bending moment, Shear force and axial force. The
analysis can be carried out manually with the help of equilibrium equations for simple determinate
type structure, however for indeterminate type problem, the use of software application like SAP-
2000 is preferred for accuracy and time saving. Following the completion of the analysis, the
design of the member size and reinforcement requirement shall be carried out based on the limit
state design.
Table 3-30: Permissible shear in concrete (N/mm2)

Grade of Concrete
100Ast/bd
M-15 M-20 M-25
0.25 0.22 0.22 0.23
0.50 0.29 0.30 0.31
0.75 0.34 0.35 0.36
1.00 0.37 0.39 0.40
1.25 0.40 0.42 0.44
1.50 0.42 0.45 0.46
1.75 0.44 0.47 0.49
2.00 0.44 0.49 0.51
2.25 0.44 0.51 0.53
2.50 0.44 0.51 0.55
2.75 0.44 0.51 0.56
3.00 0.44 0.51 0.57
Source: Hydraulic Structures Design, A.E. 2009

3.15.17 Limit state design
In this manual, the limit state design will be in use as this method is the acceptable current practice
by our local codes and other international codes. The limit state method multiplies the working load
by partial factor of safety and also divide the materials ultimate strength by further partial factor of
safety.
Table 3-31: Partial safety factor applied to material, m

Material
Limit state
concrete steel
Ultimate
Flexure 1.5 1.15
Shear 1.25 1.15
Bond 1.4
Serviceability 1.0 1.0
Table 3-32: Partial factor of safety for loadings

Ultimate
Serviceability all
Load combination Imposed, Earth and Wind,
Dead, G (G, Q, W)
Q Water, Q W
Dead and Imposed (+Earth and Water) 1.4 (or 1.0) 1.6 (or 0.0) 1.4 - 1.0
Dead and Wind (+Earth and Water) 1.4 (or 1.0) - 1.4 1.4 1.0
Dead, Imposed and Wind (+Earth and 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0
Water)
For small scale diversion weir structure design, the structural strength requirement needs to check
for bending moment (flexure), shear force and axial stress are quite sufficient.
3.15.18 Flexural design of reinforced concrete member
The theory of bending for reinforced concrete assumes that the concrete will crack in the regions
of tensile strains and that after cracking all the tension is carried by the reinforcement. It is also
assumed that plane section of a structural member remains plane after straining, so that across
the section there must be a linear distribution of strains.
Figure below shows the cross section of a member subjected to bending and the resultant strain
diagram together with 3 different types of stresses distribution in the concrete.
Figure 3-40: Section with stress diagram and stress block for singly reinforced section

Case-1: The triangular stress distribution applies when the stresses are very nearly proportional to
the strains, which generally occurs at the loading levels encountered under working
conditions and it is, therefore, used at serviceability limit state.
Case-2: The rectangular – parabolic stress block represents the distribution at failure when the
compressive strains are within the plastic range and it is associated with the design for the
ultimate limit state.
Case-3: The equivalent rectangular stress block is a simplified alternative to the rectangular –
parabolic distribution.
For singly reinforced section in equilibrium, the ultimate design moment, M, must be balanced by
the moment of resistance of the section so that:
M = Fcc* z = Fst*z ……………………………………………………………………….. (3-158)
Where, z is the lever arm between the resultant forces Fcc and Fst
fstis design strength of steel reinforcement (N/mm2)
Fcc = 0.567 * fck*bs ……………………………………………………….…………….. (3-159)
M = 0.567 * fck*bs*z…………………………………………………………..…………. (3-160)
Where, z = d - s/2 ……………………………..………………………………..………………. (3-161)
M = 1.134 * ( ) …………………………………………………………….…. (3-162)
Where, K = M/( ) …………………………………………………………………………. (3-163)

Therefore, [ √ ]……………………………………………….…….. (3-164)
Hence, ……………………………………………..……………………….……… (3-165)
The lower limit for the lever arm can be determined from the limit depth of the neutral axis that is
x=0.45d, Minimum lever arm limit is therefore, z= d-(0.8*0.45d/2)= 0.82d ..…………… (3-166)
Hence, for balanced failure,
Mbal = 1.134fckb*(d-0.82d)*0.82d = 0.167fckbd2………………………………..…….. (3-167)
Therefore,
M bal
 K bal ………………………………………………………………..……….... (3-168)
bd 2 f ck
For section to be designed as single reinforcement and failure first to happen in yielding:
Kbal< 0.167…………………………………………………………………..….……….. (3-169)

3.15.19 Shear resistance design of reinforced concrete member
It is inconvenient to use shear reinforcement in slabs because it is difficult to fix, impends placing
of concrete, and is inefficient in the use of steel. The wall or base slab thickness therefore should
be at least sufficient to allow the ultimate shear force to be resisted by the concrete in combination
with the longitudinal reinforcement. Maximum ultimate shear carrying capacity of reinforced
concrete slab is given by equation below as per British Standard (BS 8110).




 c   0.79 * 

ck
25



*   
 f 1 3  100
b *
A
d
s
1 3 400 1 4 
*
d
/
 m ……………………………. (3-170)

Where, c is Maximum ultimate shear carrying capacity of RCC
b is width of rectangular section (mm)
d is effective depth of the section (mm), its value of should not be taken > 400mm
fck is characteristic tensile strength of RF bar and it should not be taken as > 40N/mm2
As is area of reinforcement steel
m is unit weight of material and shall be taken as 1.25
Note: The steel ratio should not be taken as greater than 3.
3.15.20 Water quality for concrete mix
Large amount of water is usually required in every construction site. Water is required for concrete
mixing, curing, compaction for embankments, foundation moistening before placement, etc. Water
for the above purposes can be obtained from river, spring, sea, lake, pond, groundwater, rain, etc.
Water to be used in masonry and concrete works shall have the following properties:
 It shall be free from injurious amounts of oils, acids, alkalies, organic and inorganic
impurities and
 It shall be free from mud, iron, vegetable matter or any substance which is likely to have
adverse effect on concrete, masonry or reinforcement.
pH values between 6 and9 are usually don't need special precautions, but out of these ranges
special protective measures such as increasing the cement proportion in the mix, increasing the
dimensions of the section or corrosive resisting cement types shall be used. Similarly, sulphate
attack (S03) is small if the water contains a concentration of sulphate less than 300mg/l, otherwise
similar remedial measures have to be taken on the concrete works.
Some of the tests required in water for construction purposes include impurities and suspended
material determination and chemical tests such as pH, sulphate, chloride, etc. The standard on
material specifications (Part III.A) gives detail information on construction materials requirements.
3.15.21 Minimum structural member thickness requirement
The following table presents provision for the minimum concrete member and masonry wall
thickness required for weir construction in small scale irrigation scheme context.

Table 3-33: Minimum structure thickness required for weir component

Structure Description Recommended Minimum Requirement
Reinforced Concrete Structural Members
Head Regulator, Scouring Sluice Gate and Operation
Deck thickness 200mm
Head Regulator Side and Middle Piers thickness 800mm
Scouring Sluice Side and Middle Piers 1000mm
Breast Wall for Head Regulator 300mm
Breast Wall for Scouring Sluice 400mm
Stone Masonry Retaining Wall
Masonry Wall top Cup Concrete Thickness 150mm
Masonry Wall Base Slab Thickness 200mm
Masonry Wall Top Width 500mm
Front Side Wall slope, Water Side Vertical
Rare Side Wall Slope, Soil Side ( Horizontal :Vertical ) 1:2.5
Table 3-34: Recommended Slump for varies types of constructions

Slump (m)*
Type of construction
Max. Min.
Reinforced foundations, walls and footings 175 50
Plain footings, caissons and sub structure walls 10 25
Slabs, beams, and reinforced walls 150 75
Building columns 150 75
Pavements 75 50
Heavy mass construction 75 50
*When high frequency vibrators are used, the values given above should be reduced by about one third.
Table 3-35: Maximum size of aggregate recommend for varies types of construction
Maximum Size of Aggregate (mm)
Minimum
Reinforced Walls,
Dimension of Un-reinforced Heavily Lightly Reinforced Un-
Beams and
Section (mm) walls Reinforced slabs reinforced Slabs
Columns
62.5 - 125 12.5 - 20 20 20 - 25 20-40
150 - 275 20-40 40 40 40- 80
300 - 275 40- 80 80 40- 80 80
750 or more 40- 80 160 40- 80 80-160

Box 3-13:
Worked Example-13: Working stress and limit state design approaches have been stated as
design approaches for structural aspects of engineering activities. But what are the basic
differences between these two approaches?
Answer: For working stress approach, service loads are used in the whole design and the
strength of material is not utilized in the full extent. In this method of design, stresses acting on
structural members are calculated based on elastic method and they are designed not to exceed
certain allowable values. In fact, the whole structure during the lifespan may only experience
loading stresses far below the ultimate state and that is the reason why this method is called
working stress approach. Under such scenario, the most economical design can hardly be
obtained by using working stress approach which is now commonly used in the design of
temporary works.
For limit state approach, for each material and load, a partial safety factor is assigned individually
depending on the material properties and load properties. Therefore, each element of load and
material properties is accurately assessed resulting in a more refined and accurate analysis of the
structure. In this connection, the material strength can be utilized to its maximum value during its
lifespan and loads can be assessed with reasonable probability of occurrence. Limit state
approach is commonly used for the majority of reinforced concrete design because it ensures the
utilization of material strength with the lowest construction cost input.

4 EXPANSION/CONTRACTION JOINTS IN STRUCTURES

4.1 NEED FOR INTRODUCTION OF CONTRACTION/EXPANSION JOINT
This part of the guideline is aimed to enable designers‟ to select appropriate contraction joints.
Contraction joints are used mainly to control locations of cracks caused by shrinkage of concrete
after it has hardened. If the concrete, while shrinking, is restrained from moving, by friction or
attachment to more rigid construction, cracks are likely to occur at points of weakness. Expansion
joints accommodate volumetric increase due to rise in temperature besides preventing transfer of
stress between different exposed units of the structure. Contraction and expansion joints are
constructed in such a manner that there is no bond between the adjacent units of the structure.
A need for introduction of expansion joint in concrete structures normally contains the following
components: joint sealant, joint filler, dowel bar, PVC dowel sleeve, bond breaker tape and cradle
bent.
4.2 JOINT SEALANT
This seals the joint width and prevents water and dirt from entering the joint and causing dowel bar
corrosion and unexpected joint stress resulting from restrained movement.
Joint sealants are typically fluid, gel, or solid agents used to seal construction gaps in masonry,
asphalt, timber, or steel structures. The use of a joint sealant serves the dual purpose of creating a
physical barrier to exclude water, air, or dirt while creating an aesthetically pleasing finish to
otherwise unsightly joints. The two most common types of joint sealant are fluid/gel and preformed
solid seals. These joint sealants are specifically engineered with specific physical attributes and
may also have additives such as flame or bacterial retardants included in their formulations.
Joints in construction elements are an unavoidable and often essential feature of most industries.
Whatever their function, most joints require sealing to keep out moisture or air and exclude plant
and dirt intrusion. In the case of decorative structures such as walkways, patios, decks, and pool
paving, the joint sealant should also make for a visually pleasing finish. Joints in high traffic or
stress applications such as sidewalks, roads, and bridges need to exhibit superior abrasion and
shock resistant qualities along with their general sealing characteristics.
Figure 4-1: Sealant as seen in joints of concrete slabs

4.3 JOINT FILLER
A filler is a rigid material that supports the edge of the joint when heavy traffic crosses. This type of
material is only effective with saw-cut joints; rounded tooled edges can't support the filler. It is
compressible rubber type filler so that the joint can expand freely without constraint. Someone may
doubt that even without its presence, the joint can still expand freely. In fact, its presence is
necessary because it serves the purpose of space occupation such that even if dirt and rubbish
are intruded in the joint, there is no space left for their accommodation.
Figure 4-2: Joint fillers in concrete works
Note: Both sealers and fillers should only be installed after the slab has had a chance to shrink as
much as possible. Fillers are only effective if installed after the concrete has gone through most of
its shrinkage, although that can take a year or more. Fillers and sealers should be checked at the
end of the first year of service and repaired or replaced as needed. Effective sealant materials
must bond to the concrete, be impermeable, and be able to handle the expansion and contraction.
Before installing a sealant, the joint must be dry and free of dust and debris. Vacuum it thoroughly
before sealing. Carefully follow the sealant manufacturer's installation instructions.
There are two types of fillers: Concrete Control Joint Filling and Concrete Expansion Joint Filling.
Concrete control joints are intended to be cut the first or second day following placement of the
slab at either 25% or 33% percent depth (depending on the day cut). Their purpose is to “control”
stress cracking in the slab as the concrete expands and contracts with changes in moisture and
temperature. If desired, control joint filler can be installed. Polyurea joint filler is intended to give
the concrete joints protection under weight and traffic. This is a 2-part semi–rigid product that
cures quickly, reaches high compressive strength, and forms a 3-sided bond.
The concrete expansion joint is visibly larger than the control joints and they allow for movement of
the concrete slab due to vibration, settling, or temperature changes. The most common type of
concrete expansion joint filler is caulk. Expansion joint caulk (or expansion joint sealant) is typically
installed over backer rod or other foam insert, it forms a bond on 2 sides only.
4.4 DOWEL BAR
This is a major component of the joint. It serves to guide the direction of movement of concrete
expansion. Therefore, incorrect direction of placement of dowel bar will induce stresses in the joint
during thermal expansion. On the other hand, it links the two adjacent structures by transferring
loads across the joints.

Figure 4-3: Dowel Bar Arrangement in Concrete Works
Dowel bars are typically placed at the mid-depth of the slab and should be parallel to the
pavement surface and parallel to the direction of travel. The center of the dowel bar should be
below the joint.
4.5 PVC DOWEL SLEEVE

It serves to facilitate the movement of dowel bar. On one side of the joint, the dowel bar is encased
in concrete. On the other side, however, the PVC dowel sleeve is bonded directly to concrete so
that movement of dowel bar can take place. One may notice that the detailing of normal expansion
joints in structures standard drawing is in such a way that part of PVC dowel sleeve is also
extended to the other part of the joint where the dowel bar is directly adhered to concrete. In this
case, it appears that this arrangement prevents the movement of joint. If this is the case, why
should designers purposely put up such arrangement? In fact, the rationale behind this is to avoid
water from getting into contact with dowel bar in case the joint sealant fails. As PVC is a flexible
material, it only minutely hinders the movement of joint only under this design.
Figure 4-4: Plastic screw dowel and dowel bar sleeves
4.6 BOND BREAKER TAPE
A bond breaker is a substance applied over concrete surfaces to ensure that there is permanent
bonding between the surfaces. Bond breakers are used normally on tilt-up walls and precast
segments to ensure the right pieces are cast together. Bond breakers allow lifting and moving of
precast pieces after stripping them from the form. As the majority of joint sealant is applied in liquid
form during construction, the bond breaker tape helps to prevent flowing of sealant liquid inside the
joint. Cradle bar: It helps to uphold the dowel bar in position during construction.
Bond breakers are used over concrete surfaces to eliminate or reduce the cracking of slabs due to
temperature and moisture fluctuations. Bond breakers also avoid shrinkage cracks on tilt-up walls.
Bond breakers are applied on surfaces that will be eventually joined together, since once the
concrete is poured, they will be inseparable. Bond breakers are available in different forms, such
as: Liquid, Spray, Rods, and Tape. Bond breakers are engineered products that form a

membrane, allowing the surfaces to be separated easily. In some countries wax, petroleum-based
substances or grease are used as bond breakers but these chemicals will change characteristics
of the surfaces on which they are applied.
Bond breakers are classified into two major groups: membrane forming and non-membrane
forming. They can also be divided into water based or non-water based products. Membrane
forming bond breakers hold water in the casting slab and they are formulated to meet ASTM C-
309, the standard specification for liquid-membrane-forming compounds. These types of bond
breakers are made of crude resins to form the thin film. Non-membrane bond breakers are
subdivided into reactive and non-reactive. The reactive bond breakers react forming a crude soap.
The non-reactive bind breakers interact with the concrete surface and generate a waterproof
surface.
Figure 4-5: Bond breaker and its effect on concrete crack
4.7 WATER-STOPS
The principal function of waterstops is to prevent liquids (e.g. water), water-borne materials and
solids to pass through concrete joints. In essence, it aims at providing water tightness to the
drainage channel. Besides, waterstops in drainage channels or box culverts can also serve two
other purposes:
 To avoid water contacting joints‟ dowel bars and causing corrosion.
 To avoid water seeping in from the underside of drainage channels or box culverts,
thereby washing in soil particles and causing voids underneath these structures and
finally leading to their failure.
To serve the second purpose, obviously only one waterstop is required at any depth location. To
serve the first purpose, a waterstop has to be installed on top of dowel bars to prevent water from
drainage channels from leaking through. On the other hand, a water stop has to be provided below
dowel bars to avoid underground water from surging upwards. In fact, the other way out to serve
the first purpose is by using corrosion resistant bars.
Water stops can be types: PVC type, Rubber water stop and Bentonite strip water stops.

Figure 4-6: Different types of water stops
4.8 WEEP HOLES
Usually, the weep holes of 2 inch PVC at every 1m interval for high guide walls and additional
expansion joints for long masonry work at headwork sites and retaining structures are provided.
“Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges.”(American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Officials) requires that contraction joints be provided at intervals not exceeding 9m.
Alternate horizontal bars should be cut at these joints for crack control. Expansion joints should be
located at intervals of up to 27m.


5 RIVER TRAINING WORKS AROUND HEADWORKS

5.1 NEEDS FOR RIVER TRAINING WORKS
Natural processes and human interference may disturb the equilibrium between the sediment load
contributed to the channel and the transport capacity of the flow. Seasonal variations in the flow,
dredging of the river, construction of a reservoir, construction of a weir and deforestation in the
catchment area are all examples of causes of such disturbance. Training structures are thus
necessary in order to protect the channel against the changes that occur due to this disturbance.
This guideline, is focused to river training works that need to be considered so as to protect
overtopping of the channels as a result of introduction of hydraulic structures such as diversion
weir, cross drainage structures, bridges as well as channel stabilization within the project
boundary. Thus, river training here refers to the structural measures which are taken to improve a
river and its banks. Such training is an important component in the prevention and mitigation of
flash floods and general flood control, as well as in other activities such as ensuring safe passage
of a flood over a weir and under or over cross drainage structures.
5.2 OBJECTIVES OF RIVER TRAINING OR IMPROVEMENT WORKS
The objectives of river training or improvement works are to prevent overtopping and hence
flooding, to reclaim or protect land around river banks or to provide protection against conveyance
canal for irrigation water supply, hydropower development or domestic and industrial use and/or to
aid navigation.
River training or improvement works are mainly implemented for two purposes:
 Maintain normal flow depth of design flood within the existing reach of rivers,
 Reduce effect of erosive nature of rivers around structures under consideration.
Specifically, the objectives of river training are summarized as:
 To increase safety against flooding by accommodating the flood flow,
 To improve the efficiency of the sediment transport,
 To minimize bank erosion by stabilizing the course of flow,
 To direct the flow to a desired river stretch/reach,
 To reduce the probability of meandering, and
 In most cases, the primary objective of river training is to improve navigation by
maintaining channel depth (though it is not the objective of this guideline).
5.3 CONSIDERATIONS IN DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING
5.3.1 Peak flood level
River training works are required particularly when a weir does not extend over the existing width
of a river and/or backwater effect is significant. These comprise embankments and spurs, which
may be stone-protected earthen embankments or gabion or masonry structures. The
embankments need to be sufficiently high and robust to convey flood flows over the weir without
overtopping or failing. They should be designed for a 1 in 25 year flood event where overtopping
and failure of the bunds will not result in catastrophic failure of the weir and other costly structures.
Otherwise they should be designed for a 1 in 50 year flood event.

5.3.2 Environmental impact assessment and socioeconomic considerations
The design of river improvements works in general is dependent upon fluvial geomorphology and
wider river engineering aims and river mechanics. In any design of river training works, it is
extremely important to consider a holistic approach and to incorporate environmental impact
assessment and socioeconomic considerations, as it directly affects land adjacent to river banks
and hence conflict of interest may arise. The proposed structures need to be environmentally
friendly to maintain the natural riverine environment and ecology.
5.3.3 Freeboard requirement for levee
The minimum vertical distance between the maximum flood level and the top of the levee (the
crown or crest) is generally taken to be 1.5 times the height of the wave (hw), which is calculated
from the following (Physical Methods for River Training, 2017):
h w  0.032 * V * F  0.763  0.271 * F 1 4 , for F< 32km ……………..….…………. (5-1)

h w  0.032 * V * F , for F< 32km ……………..….…………………………………… (5-2)
Where, V is velocity of wind km/hr, and

F is fetch length, km.
5.3.4 Widths of levee
The top width of the embankment should be sufficient to keep the seepage line well within the
levee. For a small levee, this top width is generally governed by the minimum roadway width
requirements. The minimum top width (A) of an earthen levee can be calculated as follows:
H
W   3 , for a very low levee……………..….……………………………………… (5-3)
5
W  0.55 * H  0.2 * H , for a levee lower than 30 m ……………..….…………….. (5-4)
13
W  1.65 *  H  1.5 , for a levee higher than 30 m……………..….……………. (5-5)
Where, H is the height of the levee.
Its bottom width is dependent on the expected height of dyke and pore-water pressure is safe on
all the faces and phreatic line remains within the body of the dyke (refer Figure 5-6 for its cross
section and profile).
5.3.5 Cost–benefit consideration
Flood protection schemes require a careful cost–benefit analysis to determine a suitable design
discharge which depends on the type and necessity of land to be protected, type of structures and
property to be protected and the processes involved. The return period of this discharge may vary
from 1 to 100 years and in very special cases (large settlements, ancient historic monuments,
nuclear installations, etc.) may be substantially higher. But for design of diversion weirs and cross
drainage structures most commonly 50 years design flood level is adopted to design such
protection structures. For flood protection at small crossings structures 25 years design flood level
is enough.

When structures are designed for a flood less than the maximum probable value, there exists a
certain amount of flood risk to the structures, nor is it economical to design for 100% flood
protection. But protection against the highest rare floods is uneconomical because of the large
investment and infrequent flood occurrence.
5.3.6 River cross sections
For designing flood protection structures river cross sections should be surveyed at upstream and
downstream of the river reach requiring protection and longitudinal slope of this reach need to be
determined.
The approximate river flood level for the design flood event can then be estimated using Manning‟s
equation taking into account the surveyed cross sections, the slope of the river and an appropriate
Manning‟s roughness coefficient “n” (refer appendix-I for ranges of Manning‟s roughness values).
Where possible the river levels should be checked against trash marks left by floods, which should
be noted when river cross sections are surveyed.
5.4 PRINCIPAL METHODS OF RIVER TRAINING
Flood-protection works include high-water river training (mainly by dykes), diversion and flood-
relief channels with or without control structures, and flood-control reservoirs. The principal
methods used to improve river channels are categorized in to two: River Regulation and Dredging/
Scouring.
5.4.1 River regulation
In river regulation method of training, the river is encouraged to follow its natural course or it may
be straightened. But, the latter approach requires great sensitivity and should be used only with
caution and due regard to environmental constraints is given. In the upstream reaches, the main
problem is the short-term and seasonal variation of flow, high velocity, channel instability and
shoal/raised area/ formation. In the middle and lower reaches, it is often necessary to raise river
banks and carry out works reducing the channel width. To do this, there are a number of types of
river training structures. The selection and design of the most appropriate structure depends
largely on the project site conditions. River regulation training structures can be classified into two
main categories: transversal protection structures and longitudinal protection structures.
5.4.1.1 Transverse protection structures
Transversal protection structures are installed perpendicular to the water course, such as around
cross drainage structures. They are used to lower the river gradient in order to reduce the water
velocity and protect the river bed and banks from erosion. Most of the rivers from highlands
originate in the high mountains, where they have steep gradients giving the flow a massive erosive
power. Moreover, intense rainfall and breakout events can accelerate the river flow to such an
extent that the water has a significant impact on the watercourses and surrounding areas.
Transversal protection structures are effective for controlling the velocity of such rivers and
streams and reducing the development of flash floods.
Spurs: A spur or spur dyke, or groyne is a structure employed as an indirect way for protection of
banks. They are in general cheaper than direct protection measures. They are made to project
flow from a river bank into a stream or river with the aim of deflecting the flow away from the side
of the river on which the groyne is built. Two to five structures are typically placed in series along

straight or convex bank lines where the flow lines are roughly parallel to the bank (McCullah and
Gray 2005). Such structure train a river to flow along a desired course by preventing erosion of the
bank and encouraging flow along a channel with a more desirable width and alignment.
Spurs can be made from many materials including stone, for example in the form of gabions or in
bamboo „cages‟; tree trunks and branches; concrete; or any material that is not easily detached by
the river and is strong enough to withstand the flow and the impacts of debris.
Figure 5-1: Arrangement of groynes along river bank, gabion (L) Bamboo (R)
Figure 5-2: Schematic layout of groynes along river bank
Groynes can be categorized in to three: Attracting, Repelling and Deflecting Groynes. Attracting
Groyne is designed obliquely to the bank by making an angle of 60 0 to 750toward the
downstream/flow direction. Thus, flow of water is attracted towards the bank and the velocity of the
flow is reduced to such an extent that it cannot cause any erosion to the bank. However, a bank
protection of stone pitching is provided for safety (refer figure below).
In case of repelling groyne, the alignment is towards the upstream i.e. against flow direction at an
angle of 600 to 750 with the river bank. Here a still water pocket is formed on the upstream where
silting takes place. Thus, the bank protection is not necessary because the flow of water does not
touch the bank and there is no effect of erosion on the bank. But still pitching should be provided
for safety.
Deflecting groyne is designed perpendicular to the river bank and are also called ordinary groyne
or normal groyne. Here flow of water is deflected from the bank by the perpendicular obstruction
called Deflecting groyne. The flow of water follows an undulating path just outside the head of the

groyne. An eddy current is formed on the upstream side of the structure. This eddy current will not
affect the river bank. But a bank protection of stone pitching is provided for safety.
Figure 5-3: Attracting, repelling and deflecting Groynes (L to R resp.)
Table 5-1: Comparison between Spur and groyne

Spur Groyne
It is a temporary structure It is a permanent structure
It is permeable It is impermeable
It requires repair works It does not require any repair work
It is recommended for small rivers It is recommended for large rivers
It is useful for low or medium velocity of flow It is useful for high velocity of flow
It is constructed with bamboo pile, timber pile, It is constructed with rubble masonry
sand bag, boulders, etc. with cement mortar.
Source: Irrigation Engineering, by N. N.Basak, 2007
Check dams: These are weir like structures / low dams that are built across a stream bed to
facilitate the bed-slope reduction. They can be made of gabions, concrete, logs, bamboo, and
many other materials so as to decrease the morphological gradient of the torrent bed and reduce
the water velocity during a flood event by increasing the time of concentration of the hydrographic
basins and reducing the flood peak and solid transportation capacity of the river. They also help to
reduce erosion and debris flow. The main purpose of check dams on rivers is to stabilize the
riverbed over a long distance. Check dams generally require additional protection structures in the
bed or on the banks to hinder undermining.
Bank Top Level
Final river bed

Original river bed
Figure 5-4: Arrangement of check Dams along River Reach

Check dams are usually designed such that the crest of the u/s dam is in line with the toe of the
next check dam (if any) upslope. These structures should be used when it is not feasible or
practical to line the channel or implement flow control practices.
Sills: A sill (also called a bed sill or ground sill) is a transverse gradient control structure built
across the bed of a river or stream to reduce bed or head-ward erosion. Sills are installed along
river stretches with a medium to low morphological gradient. They are used when small check-
dams are not acceptable.
Figure 5-5: Arrangement of sill/Bed Sill along river bank (from Tree Trunks and Branches)
5.4.1.2 Longitudinal protection structures
Longitudinal protection structures are installed on river banks parallel to the river course, generally
with the aim of protecting adjoining areas from inundation, erosion, and river meandering, typical
example is protection around diversion weirs. They are usually constructed on natural banks and
extend for a considerable distance. The most common structures are embankments or levees in
the form of guide bunds or banks, afflux bunds, and approach embankments. Very often, spurs are
constructed together with longitudinal structures to protect the latter.
Levees or Earth Fill Embankments/Dykes: Levees, or marginal embankments, are dam-like

earthen structures constructed along a river in order to protect the surrounding countryside from
flooding and/or to confine the course of a river to provide higher and faster water flow. They are
usually constructed for long stretches along a river in low lying areas with an extended floodplain.
Figure 5-6: Levee/dykes arrangement along river bank and its section

The top width is generally 3 to 4 m and side slope is generally 1½: 1 to 2:1 (H:V). The height of the
embankment depends on the level of the selected design flood. A suitable margin is provided
between the toe of the embankment and the bank of the river. To resist the effect of erosion on the
embankment, wooden piles are driven along the river banks throughout the length of dyke. The
length of the dyke is protected by boulders pitching with cement grouting and the downstream side
is protected by planting turf. They are built (a) To prevent the flood water or storage water from
entering the surrounding area. (b) To retain the flood water or storage water within a specified
section. (c) To protect the towns and village from devastation during heavy flooding. (d) To protect
valuable agricultural lands from submergence.
Guide Banks and other Approach Embankments: Guide banks are extension of wing-wall
structures built to guide a stream or river through a bridge opening or towards other hydraulic
structures such as weirs, especially when river flow level is markedly higher than usual. The aim is
to confine the river within a reasonable waterway and direct the flow in a manner that ensures its
safe and expeditious passage. They also reduce or eliminate local scour at the embankment and
adjacent piers. In a wide river lined by levees, a series of diversion structures may be used to
guide and narrow the water course and protect the levee or highway embankment, where a
highway or other bridge crosses the river. These consist of an afflux embankment or bund, an
approach embankment, and the guide banks themselves.
Guide banks are constructed in a river in order to:

 Confine the flow to a single channel,
 Improve the distribution of discharge across the width of a river thus controlling the
angle of attack by a flash flood,
 Protect weirs, barrages, or other hydraulic structures constructed in the river such as
intakes from flash floods,
 Control the meander pattern of a river,
 Control overtopping of natural embankments in a flash flood and protect adjacent land
from flooding,
 Reduce erosion of banks by the water current,
 Prevent sliding of soil as a result of the draw down effect of the flood water level,
 Facilitate smooth transportation of water, and
 Prevent piping of water through the banks.
Concrete Embankments: Concrete embankments are made from cemented bricks, stones, or
concrete. These are thin but strong embankments usually installed in urban reaches of water
courses where there is not enough space to build more massive structures. They can also be
combined with earth fill structures. The construction cost of concrete embankments is higher than
that of earth fill embankments and such an embankment has a significant impact on the
environment and often destroys the ecology of riparian areas.
Revetments and rock riprap: Revetment refers to a continuous artificial surface on a river bank
or embankment slope and part of the river bed, which is designed to absorb the energy of the
incoming water and protect against erosion by the river current. Revetments are usually placed
along the concave side of a river bend where river velocities are high. Upstream from barrages,
revetments may be used to hold approaching river banks in their existing positions. Revetments
can be flexible or rigid. They can be constructed from various materials including rock, stones,
stone-filled gabions, concrete slabs, timber piles, bamboo piles, old tyres, and sandbags. If there is
a potential for scour at the toe, the revetment must be extended down to the expected level of the
scour and sufficient material added in the form of a thickened toe or horizontal apron such that the

toe material will launch to a stable slope as the bed scour develops (For detailed design aspects of
riprap, refer section 3.8.12).
Figure 5-7: Rock riprap (L) and protection by gabion at u/s of river crossing (R)
5.4.2 Dredging
Dredging is implemented using mechanical or suction dredgers and is the most effective means of
estuarine or of confluence river regulation, but its impact is often only temporary, thus not
considered in this guideline.
5.5 DESIGN OF RIVER TRAINING/FLOOD-PROTECTION WORKS
5.5.1 Required data
Data required for design of flood protection works are:

 The design flood levels established according to the economic value of the protected
area or structure that need to be protected;
 The design freeboards against overtopping and wave attacks;
 The duration of the flood levels for calculating seepage and hydraulic gradients in
earthen dykes and underground; and
 The probability of silt deposit and consequent backwater.
5.5.2 Alignment of flood protection works
Alignment of flood protection structures, (such as wing walls) need to be considered carefully,
taking into consideration the following:
 Topography: for example island, outcrops, etc.
 The existing (and historical) river alignments;
 Farmers wishes, land ownership, location of other infrastructures such as houses, etc.
 The regime river width (for alluvial river beds);
 The effect of the proposed works on “others” outside the scheme area, such as on the
opposite bank of the river to that being protected;
 The stability of the river bed, location of any rock outcrops, etc.

5.5.3 Cross section design of guide bank structures
5.5.3.1 General
Design of flood protection structures as related to diversion weir such as wing walls, dykes/levees
and launching apron has been covered partly under hydraulic design aspect of this guideline and
phreatic line analysis is in Small Dam Design Guideline, thus can be referred there.
Such flood protection structures can be designed and constructed from masonry, gabion or
compacted clay materials thus selection of these materials depend on their availability,
volume/quantity and quality in the vicinity of the project, cost, environmental impact assessment
and socioeconomic considerations, etc., the most commonly used in relation to irrigation structures
being longitudinal flood protection structures such as Levees or earth fill embankments or dykes,
guide banks and revetments and rock riprap. Consequently, design of cross section of guide bank
structures are presented as follow.
5.5.3.2 Length of the guide bank
Generally for shifting alluvial rivers, if any, the length depends on the distance necessary to secure
a straight run for the river, and the distance necessary to prevent the formation of a bend in the
river so as to avoid the angle of attack of the anticipated flash flood. In case of guide banks around
diversion weir their length should be fixed such that they find and keyed to the natural ground
corresponding to high flood levels shortly both on the upstream and downstream sides of the weir.
5.5.3.3 Plan shape of the guide bank
Ideally, the guide bank should have a converging curved shape forming a bell mouth entry to the
waterway. The axis should be parallel to the principal direction of flood flow through the opening at
crossing structures but governed by the shortest distance to HFL in case of weir. This shape is
particularly suitable where the direction of flow can vary. In most cases, the main sections of the
two banks are constructed parallel to each other, but other forms are possible, for example curved
or converging. Refer typical sketch shown below.
Figure 5-8: Schematic Plan of Guide Bank extended from Wing Wall

5.5.3.4 Embankment/guide bank section
The angle of the embankment slope is calculated according to:

 The subsoil conditions,
 the angle of repose of the embankment material, and
 The type of slope revetment provided, usually the slope should have a horizontal to
vertical ratio of between 2:1 and 3:1.
In general, the top of the embankment is made wide enough to accommodate vehicles for
construction and maintenance purposes. Guide banks should normally extend above the design
high water level with a freeboard allowance of 1–1.5 m depending upon the discharge condition
(Singh 1980). Lower guide banks that can be overtopped under high flood discharge condition
may be preferred in some cases for economic purpose. However, under these conditions, the top
of the bank and outside slope must be protected against erosion.
5.5.3.5 Spacing between the guide banks
The layout of the guide banks should be such as to guide the flood smoothly throughout the guide
bank length. Generally, the guide banks are constructed to form a symmetrical pair. They should
confine the river within a reasonable channel that can ensure safe and rapid passage of water
during a flash flood. The confined width of the river between the guide banks in an alluvial river
can be calculated using the Lacey‟s formula presented in (3-6).
5.5.3.6 Pitching
The inside slope of the embankment is subjected to erosion from the river flow, particularly during
floods and flash floods. The continuous movement of water saturates the embankment material as
a result of pore water pressure. Sudden increases and decreases in the water level can change
the water inflow and outflow in the embankment material and damage the embankment. Hence,
the inside slope should be protected by stone pitching. The usual thickness of the pitching varies
from 40–60 cm. The thickness can be determined from the formula (Varshney et al. 1983):
t = 0.60 Q1/3……………..….……………………………………………………………… (5-6)
Where, t is the thickness in meters and

Q is the maximum river water discharge in m3/s
Thickness of stone riprap determination has also been given on Figure 3-19: arrangement of
launching apron, thus can adopt either but the one that gives safe condition should be selected.
Stone pitching protects the face of the bank. However, floods can induce scouring at the toe which
would undermine the pitching and cause its collapse. To prevent this, a stone cover or launching
apron has to be laid beyond the toe of the bank on the horizontal river bed (Figure 3-19). As the
scour undermines the apron starting at its farther end and working back towards the slope, the
apron falls to cover the face of the scour, with the stones forming a continuous carpet below the
permanent slope of the guide bank. The apron must have sufficient stone to ensure complete
protection of the whole of the scour face. The length of the scoured face should extend to the
anticipated scour depth below the apron and is given by:

L a  5 * D or 1.5*D ……………..….………………………………………………….. (5-7)
Where, La is launching apron length, (m)

D is scour depth below the apron, (m)
The scouring effect is a function of the gradation of the silt available in the river bed and the
discharge of the flowing water. It can be calculated using equation (3-81) or the following formula:
Q
R  0.47 * 3 ……………..….………………………………………………………….. (5-8)
f
Where, scour depth below HFL, (m)
Q is the maximum discharge the river for 50 years, m3/s,
f is Lacey‟s silt factor as defined in equation (3-83)
Stone launching apron

Top of
1.5*D guide bank
Riprap slope revetment
Estimated depth of scour below apron, D
Figure 5-9: Typical Cross-Section through Guide Bank

Note: Numbers indicate relative values for any given size distribution
5.5.4 Design aspects of groynes
5.5.4.1 Length of groynes
Length between two successive Groynes in SSI projects is dictated by the intended channel
alignment around the diversion structures and downstream reaches within the project command
boundary. If the banks are deep enough to accommodate incoming flood such structures are not
required,
5.5.4.2 Crest levels of groynes
For alluvial channels, the crest levels of the groynes are kept above the water level corresponding
to the selected design discharge / dominant discharge selected for the intended return period plus
1-1.5m free board or as given under section 5.3.3,
The crest levels are either horizontal or inclined upward to meet the bank requirements. This helps
to reduce the risk of scouring at higher floods especially at the bank-groyne junction.

5.5.4.3 Angle of groynes
No definite recommendation as to the angle between the groynes and the channel bank exist. In
fact, experimental studies show some conflicting results
 Some studies show that groynes pointing upstream experience less scouring,
 Other studies show that groynes at 900 rather have less scouring,
 Other studies show that groynes pointing downstream experience less scouring.
In general, recent practices tend to favour an upstream inclination making 15-30 degree with a line
normal to the flow.
5.5.4.4 Distance between groynes
So far no theoretical way to determine the distance between groynes. However, too short distance
leads to expensive structure and too long distance leads to erosion of the banks. Thus, either of
the following empirical rules of thumb are recommended:
 Twice the channel width;
 1-5 times the length of the groynes;
 The distance is such that one strong vortex/eddy is formed.
5.5.4.5 Embankment materials
Embankment materials for the construction of the groynes is best taken from the stream bed
material, if this proves unsatisfactory, rockfill may be used. Gabions can also be used
5.5.4.6 Scour Protection
The heads of groynes may be subjected to scouring and thus require protection such as mattress
revetment or gabion can be used.

Figure 5-10: Typical Plan and Cross Sections of Groynes along River Bank


REFERENCES
1. EBCS 1-Basis of Design and Actions on Structures, by MoWUD, 1995;
2. EBCS 2- Structural use of Concrete, by MoWUD, 1995;
3. Ethiopian Water Sector Development Program, by MoWR, 2001;
4. FDRE, Small Scale Irrigation Capacity Building Strategy, by MoANR2011;
5. Guidelines for Irrigation Systems Design in Hills and Valleys, MoWR, Nepal, 2006;
6. Guideline, Manuals and Standard Design of Small and Medium Scale Irrigation Projects:
Part I-G;Design Guideline on Diversion Structure Sept.by MoWR, 2001;
7. Hydraulic Structures, by P. Novak, 2007;
8. Hydraulic Structures Design Guideline for SSIPs in Amhara (Unpublished), by A.E. 2009;
9. Irrigation Engineering and Hydraulic Structures, by S.K. Garg, 2006;
10. Irrigation Engineering, by N. N. Basak, 2007;
11. Open Channel Hydraulics, Pub. McGraw Hill Chow, by VenTe, 1978;
12. Review of Hydraulics of Spillways and Energy Dissipaters, New York by Khatsuria, R.M.,
2005;
13. Standard Handbook for Civil Engineers, by F.S.M. 1999;
14. The Hydraulics of Open Cannel Flow: An Introduction, by H.C., 2010;
15. Technical Guideline for Design of Headworks, JICA-OIDA, 2014;
16. Weir Design Manual, by Halcrow-ULG, 1988.
Web sites:
http://www.Nptel.ac.in/courses/105105110/pdf;
http://www.codecogs.com/library/engineering/fluid_mechanics/weirs/discharge.php;
http://libraryku.co/download/design-and-drawing-for-sloping-glacis-weir.pdf;
https://www.scribd.com/document/129278154/Design-of-a-Barrage;
http://lib.icimod.org/record/27710/files/Chapter6PhysicalMethods.pdf;


APPENDICES


APPENDIX I: Typical Values of Manning’s Roughness Coefficient of Channels
SN Channel type Manning's Values Commonly Used Value

1 Concrete lined canals 0.012–0.017 0.012 for RCC and0.014 for lean
Concrete
2 Rough masonry 0.017–0.030 0.018
3 Brick-lined channel 0.012–0.018 0.015
4 Roughly dug earth canals 0.025–0.033 0.025
5 Smooth earth canals 0.017–0.025 0.018
6 Earth channel: very overgrown 0.050-0.120 0.080
with weeds, etc.
7 Floodplain 0.025–0.033 0.030
8 Natural river in gravel 0.040–0.070 0.040
Source: Practical Hydraulics, By Melvyn Kay, 2008
APPENDIX II: Allowable bearing capacity
Supporting Ground Compactness or Presumed Bearing

Description
Type Consistency Value (t/m2)
Rocks Basalt Hard and sound 400
Slate, schist Medium Hard 200
Sandstone, limestone Medium Hard 200
Soft limestone Soft 100
Soft shale Soft 60
Non-cohesive soil Gravel, sand and Dense 40
Gravel Medium dense 30
Loose 20
Sand Dense 30
Medium dense 20
Loose 10
Cohesive soil Silt Hard 20
Stiff 15
Medium stiff 10
Soft 5
Clay Hard 30
Stiff 20
Medium stiff 10
Soft 5

APPENDIX III: Graphical Determination of Exit Gradient (Khoslas theory)

APPENDIX IV: Khosla's Graph to Determine Uplift Pressure at Cut Off Ends

APPENDIX V: Open Weir, Weir Crest and Contraction Factors

APPENDIX VI: Seismic Risk Map showing 1:50 earthquake acceleration
Source: Adopted from Hydraulic Structures Design Guideline for SSI Projects in Amhara, 2009

APPENDIX VII: Maintenance Activities and Procedures for Diversion Headwork
(i) Removing dumped and/or anchored wood

 Check the river flow and bank stability condition. If the river condition is safe, remove the drifting
wood. If the river condition is dangerous, do not try to remove the drifting wood as it may harm you.
 Remove drifting wood. If the drifting wood is big and difficult to remove, handsaw/axe has to be
prepared to cut the wood in to pieces.
 Check the gate condition after removing drifting wood. If the gate can be operated smoothly, there is
no problem. If the gate cannot be operated smoothly, the gate itself needs maintenance.
(ii) Painting
 Remove rust by wire brush and sand paper.
 Remove dust from the surface of iron
 Paint by brush three times. Paint should be rust preventive.
(iii) Greasing
 Remove dust from the spindle
 Put grease on the spindle
 Operate gate up and down to put grease
(iv) Chain block
 If there is problem on the chain block, it is necessary to bring it to maintenance workshop.
(v) Chain
 The chain on the beam should be bolted by spanner. If the bolt is loose, the bolt should be tightened
immediately.
 When problem (e.g. elongation) is found on the chain, the chain must be replaced.
(vi) Dredging/desilting from main canal
 Open the under sluice/s to stop water flowing into the main canal.
 Wait for some days till soil in the main canal dry.
 Remove soil from the canal by using hoe, shovel, Spindle
(vii) Repairing crack/s
 Clean the surface of canal structure to find crack clearly
 Put chalk to make clear crack line
 Chisel crack part to be U shape ditch (Width: 10-50mm, Depth: 10-50mm) by chisel and hummer
 Remove dust from the U shape ditch
 Mix mortar and put it into the U shape ditch. Materials required are Cement, Sand, Bucket to keep
water for mixing mortar, trowel, and shovel. Mixing ratio of mortar is commonly 1 (cement): 3 (sand)
for structures subject to water.
 Cure the mortar at least 2 days after casting mortar it.
(viii) Concrete work
 Prepare platform to mix concrete on it.
 Put sand and cement according to the mix ratio (1 (cement):2 (sand):4 or as required (aggregate) for
plain concrete (C-15), 1: 2: 3 for reinforced concrete(C-20)) on the platform. Measurement box (L:
50cm, W: 40cm, D: 18cm) should be prepared ahead.
 Spread the sand evenly on the platform.
 Dump cement on sand and spread evenly.
 Mix the sand and cement thoroughly with shovel/hoe until it is of even color and free from streaks.
 Spread aggregate in another place of the platform by shovel/hoe and spread the sand-cement mixer
on it.
 Thoroughly mix the whole mass by shovel/hoe and turning over by twist from centre to side then
back to the centre and again to the sides.
 Make a hollow in the middle of the mixed materials to add water. Water-cement ratio should be 50%
in weight.

 Add required water gradually and turn the materials from side to centre with spade.
 Continue mixing until all material is mixed uniformly.
 Cast concrete to the place where repair is needed and compact concrete by vibrator/wooden stick.
Buckets are needed to bring concrete to the casting site, if there is some distance from the mixing
place.
 Cure the casted concrete at least 5 days after casting concrete.
 Finish surface by trowel
(ix) Mortar work
 Prepare platform (like. CIS) to mix mortar on it.
 Put sand and cement according to the mix ratio (1 (cement):3 (sand)) on the platform. Measurement
box (L: 50cm, W: 40cm, D: 18cm) should be prepared. Water-cement ratio should be 50% in weight.
 Mix sand and cement until it is of even color and free from streaks by shovels/hoes.
 Make hallow on the surface of the mixed material to add water. Bucket should be prepared.
 Add water gradually and mix.
 Cast mortar by trowel where the mortal is needed.
 Cure the mortar at least 2 days after the casting it.

SSIGL-10 Diversion Weir Study and DesignVer-6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSIGL-10 Diversion Weir Study and DesignVer-6

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

SSIGL-10 Diversion Weir Study and DesignVer-6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSIGL 10

Diversion Weir Study and Design

National Guidelines for Small Scale Irrigation Development in Ethiopia

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

Financed by Agricultural Growth Program (AGP)

Enforceability, standardization, social and environmental safeguard mechanisms are well

H.E. Dr. Kaba Urgessa

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design i

SMALL SCALE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT VISION

ii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design iii

iv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

Part II: SSIGL 2: Site Identification and Prioritization

Part III: Feasibility Study and Detail Design

SSIGL 3: Hydrology and Water Resources Planning

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 11: Free River Side Intake Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design v

Part IV: Contract Administration & Construction Management

SSIGL 27: Contract Administration

Part V: SSI Scheme Operation, Maintenance and Management

SSIGL 30: Scheme Operation, Maintenance and Management

Ancillary Tools for National Guidelines of Small Scale Irrigation Development

SSIGL 33: Participatory Irrigation Development and Management (PIDM)

vi SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design i

2.7.4 Counterfort wall .................................................................................................... 29

ii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

3.10.5 Trash racks arrangement at intake structure ...................................................... 101

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design iii

4.5 PVC DOWEL SLEEVE ............................................................................................... 137

iv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design v

vi SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design vii

viii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

AGP Agricultural Growth Program

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design ix

USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation

x SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design xi

xii SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

UPDATING AND REVISIONS OF GUIDELINES

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design xiii

Suggested Revisions Request Form (Official Letter or Email)

GL Code and Date Sections/ Explanation Comments (proposed

GLs Change Action

Director for SSI Directorate: _______________________Date: ________________

xiv SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

1.1.1 Main objective

1.1.2 Specific objective

1.2 SCOPES OF THE GUIDELINE

1.3 DEFINITIONS OF TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGIES USED IN THE GUIDELINE

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design 1

2 SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design 3

4 SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design 5

6 SSIGL 10: Diversion Weir Study and Design

2 DIVERSION WEIR AND ITS APPURTENANCES

Director for SSI Directorate: _______Date:

In this case, Q = 2/3CdL* (2g)0.5*H1.5 = 1.7LH3/2……………………………………….……… (2-2)