Design of Weirs on Permeable Foundations

Table of Content
4 DESIGN OF WEIRS ON PERMEABLE FOUNDATION...................................................................... 1

4.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1
4.2 Surface flow .................................................................................................................... 1
4.2.1 Seepage Theories......................................................................................................... 1
4.2.1.1 Bligh’s Creep Theory ............................................................................................. 1
4.2.1.2 Lane’s Weighted Creep theory ............................................................................... 3
4.2.1.3 Khosla’s Theory .................................................................................................... 3
4.3 Surface flow .................................................................................................................... 8
4.3.1 Hydraulic jump Computation ......................................................................................... 8
4.3.1.1 Water Surface Profile .......................................................................................... 10
4.3.2 Regime Scour depth due to surface flow ...................................................................... 11
4.4 Stability analysis of the weir body .................................................................................... 11
4.4.1 Loads on Diversion weirs............................................................................................. 11
4.5 General step for design of Vertical Drop Weir.................................................................... 12
4.5.1 Design Procedure ....................................................................................................... 12
4.6 Locks in Rivers ............................................................................................................... 13
4.6.1 Hydraulics of Locks..................................................................................................... 14
List of Tables
Figure 4-1: Treatment of Vertical Faces in the Bligh’s Method .............................................................. 3

Figure 4-2: Khosla’s Curve for ΦD and ΦE values (U/S and D/s Piles and, depressed floors) ................... 5
Figure 4-3: Khosla’s curve for ΦE, ΦD and ΦC values (Intermediate Pile) ............................................. 6
Figure 4-4: Khosla’s Curve (value of σ and λ) .................................................................................... 7
Figure 4-5: Correction for the floor thickness...................................................................................... 7
Figure 4-6: Correction for interference of piles.................................................................................... 8
Figure 4-7:- Hydraulic Jump formation ............................................................................................... 8
Figure 4-8: Blench curve................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 4-9: Montague Curve ............................................................................................................. 9
Figure 4-10: Pre and Post-Jump Water surface profile ....................................................................... 11
Hydraulic structure II Design of Weirs on Permeable foundation 2009
4 DESIGN OF WEIRS ON PERMEABLE FOUNDATION
4.1 Introduction
Hydraulic structures may either be founded on an impervious solid rock or on a pervious foundation.
Whenever such structure is founded on a pervious foundation, it is subjected to subsurface of water
beneath the structure (seepage pressure) and surface flow. The water seeping below the body of the
hydraulic structure endangers the stability of the structure and may cause its failure either by the
followings:
(a) Exit gradient (Ge) and piping-removal of soils:-The exit gradient is the hydraulic gradient of the
seepage flow under the base of the weir floor. The rate of seepage increases with increase in exit
gradient, and such an increase would cause ‘boiling’ of surface soil, the soil being washed away by
the percolating water. The flow concentrates into the resulting depression thus removing more soil
and creating progressive scour backwards (i.e. upstream). This phenomenon is called ‘piping’, and
eventually undermines the weir foundations.
(b) Uplift Pressures-fail by rapture:-The base of the impervious floor is subjected to uplift pressures
as the water seeps through below it. The uplift upstream of the weir is balanced by the weight of
water standing above the floor in the pond (Figure 4.1), whereas on the downstream side there may
not be any such balancing water weight. The design consideration must assume the worst possible
loading conditions, i.e. when the gates are closed and the downstream side is practically dry.
The impervious base floor may crack or rupture if its weight is not sufficient to resist the uplift
pressure. Any rupture thus developed in turn reduces the effective length of the impervious floor (i.e.
reduction in creep length), which increases the exit gradient.
The provision of increased creep lengths and sufficient floor thickness prevents this kind of failure.
Excessively thick foundations are costly to construct below the river bed under water. Hence, piers
can sometimes extended up to the end of the downstream apron and thin reinforced-concrete floors
provided between the piers to resist failure by bending.
To protect the weir from failure due to surface water flow, the following points should be considered:
9 Upstream and downstream cutoffs should be provided up to the maximum scour level to protect
the main structure against failure.
9 The launching apron should be provided at the upstream and downstream ends to provide a
cover to the main structure against scour.
9 The length of hydraulic jump should be determined in order to provide device is at the
downstream to dissipate energy.
So this chapter presents the different forces applied on the weir founded on pervious foundation and
methods to determine these forces.
4.2 Surface flow
4.2.1 Seepage Theories

Determination of the water uplift pressure and its distribution under hydraulic structures is a significant
part of their engineering design. Failures of weirs on permeable foundations can occur as a result of sub-
surface flow actions. A weir can fail when the uplift pressure creates an overturning moment in excess of
the superstructure’s balancing moment. To avoid this happening, the uplift pressure must be estimated
correctly and the structure dimensioned properly. There are different approaches (Theories) for assessing
the uplift pressure in pervious foundations.
4.2.1.1 Bligh’s Creep Theory

The water percolates along the base profile of the structure, which is in contact with the subsoil. The
length of the seepage path traversed by the water is called creep length (L). According to this theory,
there is no distinction between creeps in horizontal and vertical direction. The subsoil hydraulic gradient,
which is the loss of head per unit length of creep, is constant throughout the seepage path. Thus, if ‘H’ is
1
BDU-Engineering Faculty, School of Civil and Water Resources and Environmental Engineering
the total loss of head and ‘L’ is the total creep length; the loss of head per unit is equal to H/L. The
seepage H is the difference of water levels on the upstream and downstream.
Design Criteria: - For the safety of the hydraulic structure on pervious foundation, the following two
criteria should be satisfied.
1) The subsoil hydraulic gradient should be less than the permissible value to prevent piping failure.
2) The floor should be sufficiently thick to prevent its rupture due to uplift pressure.
1. Pilling failure According to Bligh, piping failure will not occur if the hydraulic gradient is equal to or
less than a safe value.
Thus for a safe design, i ≤1/C; C (Bligh creep coefficient and is a function of soil property); i
(percolation coefficient =H/L).
If the seepage head (H) and creep length (L), then i≤ (1/C) ;( H/L) ≤ (1/C); L≥CH. For limiting case,
L=CH.
If a horizontal floor of length L, subjected to a seepage head of H, then the residual head (h) at any point
⎛H⎞
is given by: h = H − ⎜ ⎟* L
⎝h⎠
Table: Beligh’s Creep Coefficient
Sr.No. Type of soil Creep coefficient (C) Safe hydraulic
gradient (1/C)
1 Light sand and mud 18 1/18
2 Fine micaceous sand 15 1/15
3 Coarse grained sand 12 1/12
4 Boulder or shingles and gravel mix sand 5 to 9 1/5 to 1/9
2. Failure due to rupture of floor (Uplift):
Let h’ be the uplift pressure head at any point of the apron
Uplift pressure U=wh’, w=unit weight of water
The downstream force (resisting) force per area is =t*w*ρ
Where: t= thickness of the floor at the point and
ρ= Specific gravity of the floor material,
Equating the two, we get (for equilibrium)
w*h’=t*w*ρ or h’=t*ρ
Or h’-t = t*ρ –t ⇒h’-t =t *(ρ-1)
From which, t= (h’-t)/ (ρ-1) ⇒ t=h/ (ρ-1)
h= ordinate of the hydraulic gradient line measured above the top of the floor.
h’= measured from the bottom of the floor to HGL, hence; h’=h + t
Providing a factor of safety of 4/3, we have
t= 4/3 x h/ (ρ –1)
Limitations of Bligh's Theory

1) The theory does not differentiate between the vertical creep and the horizontal creep and gives
the same weightage to both, which is not correct. Actually, the vertical creep is more effective
than the horizontal creep.
2) The theory assumes that the head loss variation is linear, which is not correct. The actual head
loss variation is non-linear.
3) No distinction is made between the head loss on the outer faces and that on the inner faces of
the sheet piles. Actually, the outer faces are more effective than the inner faces.
4) The theory does not emphasize the importance of the downstream pile without which piping
failure occurs. It considers the downstream pile only as a component of the total creep length
and not a controlling factor for the exit gradient and the piping.
5) The theory does not give any theoretical or practical method for the determination of the creep
coefficient “C” (or the safe gradient I/C). It has to be determined from experience or from actual
observations in the existing irrigation structures.
6) Bligh did not consider the effect of the length of the intermediate pile. Later investigations by
Khosla indicated that the intermediate pile is ineffective if its length is shorter than that of the
outer piles. However, there is some local redistribution of uplift pressure.
7) The theory does not give even the approximate results if the horizontal distance between the
piles less than twice their depths. .
2
Example: - Calculate the uplift pressure and floor thickness at the point X using Bligh’s theory.
Figure 4-1: Treatment of Vertical Faces in the Bligh’s Method
Total length of creep= Leq= t1+ 2*a+L1+2*b+L2+2*c+t2

Length of creep up to point, LX=t1+2a+L1+2b+d
From the pressure diagram, the uplift pressure according to Bligh at point X is
hx/(Leq-Lx) =H/Leq
hx=H(Leq-Lx)/Leq
Exit gradient ie=H/Leq<is
H/Leq =percolation coefficient
Where H=actual head water
Leq = equivalent creep length according to Bligh Theory
hx = Uplift pressure along the base
is = safe exit gradient which is dependent on the material of river bed
To avoid undermining of the foundation by the piping action at the toe of the foundation, the calculated
exit gradient ie must be less than the recommended safe hydraulic gradient is.
4.2.1.2 Lane’s Weighted Creep theory

In Lane’s method, the equivalent creep length is calculated as follows.
Leq=N/3 +V
N= sum of all the horizontal contacts and all the sloping contacts less than 45o
V= sum of all the vertical contacts and all sloping contacts greater than 45o
Example: For the fig 3.3 above, calculate the uplift pressure at the point X.
Total horizontal distances N=L1+L2
Total vertical distances V= t1+2a+2b+2c+t2
Leq = (L1+L2)/3 +(t1+2a+2b+2c+t2)
Horizontal distance from left to X =L1+d
Vertical distance from left to X =t1+2e+2b
Lx =(L1+d)/3 +(t1+2a+2b)
Hx =H(Leq-Lx)/Leq
Exercise: Find the uplift pressure at points 10,14, and 20 m from the u/s end of the floor and find the
thickness of the floor at these points using both the Bligh’s and lane’s method. Total length b/n piles
=27m.
4.2.1.3 Khosla’s Theory

After field measurements done on structures constructed by Bligh’s method, they (Dr. A.N.Khosla, Dr.
N.K.Bose and Dr. E.M.Taylor) come with different results that led to the following interim conclusions.
1) Outer faces of the end sheet piles are much more effective than the inner faces and the
horizontal length of floor.
3
2) Intermediate piles of smaller in length than the outer piles are ineffective except for some local
redistribution of pressure.
3) Undermining (piping) of the floors starts from the tail end when the hydraulic gradient at the exit
is greater than the critical gradient for that particular soil.
4) It is absolutely essential to have a reasonably deep cutoff (or pile) at the downstream end of the
floor to prevent undermining (or piping).
Applying the theory of complex variables (of potential theory) involved with the seepage flow under a flat
floor, Laplace differential equation can be formulated which on integration with appropriate boundary
conditions suggests that the pressure head (P) at any point beneath the floor is a fraction,Φ, of the total
head, H.
There is a simple standard form for composite sections: for all cases, it is assumed that the thickness of
the floor is negligible.
a. Case-I: - Impervious floor with an downstream Pile
The uplift pressure at points E, D and C are given by the following equations:
H ⎛λ −2⎞ 100 ⎛λ −2⎞
PE = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ or φ E = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠
H ⎛ λ −1⎞ 100 ⎛ λ −1⎞ 1+ 1+α 2
PD = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ or φ D = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ and Pc=0 . Where λ = and
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠ 2
α = b/d
b. Case-II: - Impervious floor with an Upstream Pile
The uplift pressure at points E1, D1 and C1 are given by the following equations: PE1 = H
H ⎛1− λ ⎞ 100 ⎛1− λ ⎞
PD1 = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ Or φ D1 = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ = 100 − φ D
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠
H ⎛2−λ ⎞ 100 ⎛2−λ⎞
PC1 = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ or φC1 = * cos −1 ⎜ ⎟ = 100 − φC
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠
The values of ΦD and ΦE are obtained from Figure 4.2 below.
4
Figure 4-2: Khosla’s Curve for ΦD and ΦE values (U/S and D/s Piles and, depressed floors)
c. Case-III: - Impervious floor with an Intermediate Pile

The uplift pressure at points E, D and C are given by the following equations:
H ⎛ λ −1⎞ H −1 ⎛ λ ⎞ H −1 ⎛ λ + 1 ⎞
PE = * cos −1 ⎜ 1 ⎟ ; PD = * cos ⎜ 1 ⎟ , and PC = * cos ⎜ 1 ⎟
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝λ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠
These equations are usually written in terms of the percentage pressures ΦE and ΦD, such that
ΦE=(PE/H)*100 and ΦD=(PD/H)*100.
100 ⎛ λ −1⎞ 100 ⎛λ ⎞ 100 ⎛ λ +1⎞
Thus, φE = cos −1 ⎜ 1 ⎟ ; φD = * cos −1 ⎜ 1 ⎟ , and φC = * cos −1 ⎜ 1 ⎟
π ⎝ λ ⎠ π ⎝λ⎠ π ⎝ λ ⎠
L1 + L2 1 + α 12 + 1 + α 22 L − L2 1 + α 12 − 1 + α 22
λ= = and λ1 = 1 =
2 2 2 2
Where: α 1 = b1 / d and α 2 = b2 / d
The values of ΦE, ΦD and ΦC are obtained from Figure 4.3 below.
5
Figure 4-3: Khosla’s curve for ΦE, ΦD and ΦC values (Intermediate Pile)
Exit Gradient
For the floor to safe against piping, the exit gradient should be less than the safe gradient for the soil.
H 1 1+ 1+α 2
The exit gradient (GE) is given by: G E = , where λ =
d π λ 2
To safeguard the floor against failure due to piping, the exit gradient must not exceed the permissible
values as given below table.
Table 0-1: Safe exit gradient for different soils

S. No. Type of soil Safe exit gradient
1 Fine sand 1/6 to 1/7
2 Coarse sand 1/5 to 1/6
3 Shingle ¼ to 1/5
The values of σ and λ can be alternatively obtained from Figure 4-4 below.
6
Figure 4-4: Khosla’s Curve (value of σ and λ)

h
t=
The floor thickness at any point is determined from the relation ρ − 1 , as the value of ‘h’ is more
accurate there is no need to provide factor of safety.
Correction Coefficients
The uplift pressures obtained from the superposition of the individual forms are to be corrected because
of the individual pressures have been obtained based on the following assumptions:
1. The floor has negligible thickness, 2. There is only one pile line, and 3. The floor is horizontal.
As the above assumptions are not satisfied, the following corrections have to be applied.
1. Correction for floor thickness, 2. Correction for mutual interference of piles, and 3. Correction for slope
of the floor.
i) Correction for the thickness of the floor
Figure 4-5: Correction for the floor thickness
Case (a): Pile at U/s end

Correction for C1 = ((ΦD-ΦC) * t1)/d1 (additive)
Hence, Pressure at C1 = ΦC1+ ((ΦD-ΦC) * t1)/d1
Case (b): Intermediate pile
Correction for E1= ((ΦE-ΦD) * t)/d (subtractive)
Correction for C1= ((ΦD-ΦC) * t)/d (Additive)
Case (c): Pile at D/S end
Correction for E1= ((ΦE-ΦD) * t2)/d2 (subtractive)
ii) Correction for the mutual interference of piles
The correction (C) is given by:
7
⎛d +D⎞ D
C = ±⎜ ⎟ '
⎝ b ⎠ b
Where C= percentage of correction to be applied to the pressure head
b’= distance b/n the piles
d= depth of the pile on which the effect of another piles of depth D is required to be determined
D = Depth of pile whose effect is required to be determined on the neighboring pile of depth d
b= the total length of impervious floor.
Correction is positive for points in the rear or backwater and subtractive for points forward in the
direction of flow.
Figure 4-6: Correction for interference of piles
iii) Correction for slope of the floor:

Correction is plus for the down slopes and minus for the upside slopes following the direction of flow.
These corrections are further to be multiplied by the proportion of the horizontal length of the slope to
the distance between the two piles lines in which the sloping floor is located. The slope correction is
applied only to those key points of pile line, which is fixed at the beginning or the end of slope.
Table 3.1 Slope corrections
Slope (V: H) Correction (% of pressure)
1:1 11.2
1:2 6.5
1:3 4.5
1:4 3.3
1:5 2.8
1:6 2.5
1:7 2.3
1:8 2
4.3 Surface flow
4.3.1 Hydraulic jump Computation

By constructing a head work across the river, there is a rise of water level on the upstream and there will
be a jump at the downstream to dissipate the energy. For diversion head works constructed on pervious
foundation, the length of the jump is an important and should be determined using hydraulic jump
equation as below:
( y 2 − y1 )
y1 * y 2 * ( y1 + y 2 ) = 2q 2 / g and the head loss due to the jump is H L =
4 y1 y 2
Velocity before jump: V1 = q / y1 and after jump: V2 = q / y 2
Figure 4-7:- Hydraulic Jump formation
8
In a hydraulic jump, there are six independent variables y1, V1, y2, V2, q and HL which can be interrelated
by the above four equations. In actual design q and HL are known. If so, the others can be obtained
using the above equations. As the process is cumbersome Blench provide curves that relate q and HL
with the specified energy Ef2 after the jump. The specific energy after (Ef2) the jump is given by:
Ef 2 = y 2 + V22 / 2 g . The specific energy before the jump is Ef 1 = Ef 2 + H L
Knowing the specific energies (Ef1 and Ef2), the corresponding depths can be obtained using:
Ef 2 = y 2 + (q / y 2 ) 2 * 1 / 2 g and Ef1 = y1 + (q / y1 ) 2 * 1 / 2 g
As these equation leads to trial and error, Montague’s curve simplify the solution.
Figure 4-8: Blench curve
Figure 4-9: Montague Curve
If the hydraulic jump goes beyond the impervious floor, it may scour the river bed. To avoid such
situation, a sloping glacis is provided on the d/s crest so that the hydraulic jump is formed on the glacis
and it is contained over the impervious floor.
9
The level of the horizontal floor up to which the glacis should be provided is calculated by deducting Ef2
from the d/s TEL. Thus the hydraulic jump will be formed on the glacis. In order to ensure turbulence-
free flow on the downstream of impervious floor, the length of the d/s horizontal floor beyond the d/s
glacis is kept equal to the length of the jump, which is usually taken as 5(y2-y1). The length of impervious
floor can be reduced by providing appurtenances like chute blocks, basin blocks, and dentated sill.
The head loss HL= U/S TEL- D/S TEL

D/S TEL= HFL before construction + V2/2g
U/S TEL= HFL before construction + afflux + V2/2g; where ‘v’ is the velocity of flow in the river.
The following procedure is used to determine the location of hydraulic jump when ‘q’ and ‘HL’ are known.
1. Knowing ‘q’ and ‘HL’, determine Ef2 from the Blench curve.
2. Subtract Ef2 from D/S TEL to determine the point ‘P’ at which the hydraulic jump is formed.
3. determine Ef1=Ef2 + HL
4. Determine conjugate depths y1 and y2 from Montague curve from the known values of Ef1 and
Ef2.
5. Determine the length of the jump, L=5(y2-y1).
4.3.1.1 Water Surface Profile

1. Profile before the Jump: - the water surface profile before the hydraulic jump can be determined
with the help of Montague curve. The following procedure is generally used.
a. select different points A, B, C, etc on the d/s glacis, upstream of the point P where the hydraulic
jump is formed
b. Determine the values of specific energy ‘Ef’ at these points from the relation Ef=U/S TEL-glacis
level at that point. Thus the specific energy at A, EfA= U/S TEL- R.L. of A.
c. Determine ‘Ef’ for all the points.
d. Determine the values of ‘y’ for different values of ‘Ef’ found in step 2 from the Montague curve.
Thus the values of ‘y’ for points A, B, C, etc are found. It may be noted that these values are for
the supercritical stage.
e. Determine the water surface level = Glacis level at that point + corresponding value of ‘y’. Thus
the water level at ‘A’ =R.L. of A + yA.
f. Join the water surface levels determined in step ‘e’ by a smooth curve to obtain the pre-jump
water surface profile.
2. Profile after the Jump:-The water surface profile after the jump can be determined as follows;
a. Determine the Froude Number F1 of the incoming flow from the relation,
F1 = V1 / g * y1 = q / g * y13
b. Select various points M, N, O etc downstream of point P.
c. Determine the horizontal distances (x) of these points from point P. Determine the values of
(x/y1) of different points, where y1 is the initial (pre-jump) depth.
d. Determine the values of (y/y1) of the different points for the given values of F1 and (x/y1) from
the graph.
e. Determine the points ‘y’ for different points from (y/y1) values and obtain the water surface
levels.
f. Join the water surface levels to obtain the post-jump profile.
10
Figure 4-10: Pre and Post-Jump Water surface profile
4.3.2 Regime Scour depth due to surface flow

The river bed is scoured during flood flows and large scour holes may develop progressively adjacent to
the concrete aprons which may cause undermining of the weir structure. Such flood scour depth below
HFL corresponding to a regime width is called regime scour depth (or more precisely regime hydraulic
radius), Rs, estimated by the following (Lacey’s) formula:
1
⎛ Q ⎞3
Rs = 0.475⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ f ⎠ If the actual waterway provided is greater or equal to the regime width and
1
⎛ q2 ⎞3
Rs = 1.35⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
⎝ f ⎠ If the waterway provided is less than the regime width
‘Rs’ is measured from the high flood level (HFL) and f is Lacey’s silt factor:
1
f = 1.76d 2
Where d is the mean diameter of the bed material (in mm) and q is the discharge per unit width of
channel.
Weir failure due to scour can be prevented by extending the concrete or sheet pile cut-offs to a level
sufficiently below the scour depth across the full width of the river. Usually the maximum scour depth is
taken as 1.25R to 1.5R for the upper and 1.5R to 2R for the down stream.
4.4 Stability analysis of the weir body
4.4.1 Loads on Diversion weirs

There are different forces that act on the weir. These forces can be resisting and overturning. In order to
be safe, the resisting force should be greater than the overturning forces. Here below, different loads on
the weir are discussed:
1) Resisting Load: Self weight load (W): - It is determined with respect to an appropriate unit
weight (үm) for the material. For simple elastic analysis the resultant is considered to operate through
the centroid of the section.
W = γ m * A , where A is the cross sectional area.
2) Overturning loads:
a) Water Load:-If the weir has a height ‘P’, then the hydrostatic pressure distribution on the
horizontal resultant force (Pwh) is given by:
Pwh = γ w * P 2 / 2 , [kN/m]; acting at P/3 from the base of the weir.
b) Uplift pressure: The uplift pressure if no pressure relief are provided is given
⎛ Z1 + Z 2 ⎞
by: U = A * γ m * ⎜ ⎟ ; where Z1 and Z2 is the water heads at u/s and d/s respectively.
⎝ 2 ⎠
11
c) Sediment Load: The gradual deposition of sediments creates overturning force at the upper
face of the weir. This force is a function of the submerged unit weight of the sediment ‘γs’ and
depth of accumulation ‘Z’. Mostly as the deposition is reached to crest level, it is normal to take
depth of weir height as depth of accumulation. The force is given by:
⎛γ * Z 2 ⎞
Ps = K a * ⎜ s ⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠ acting at Z/3 from the base of the weir.
⎛ 1 − sin φ ⎞
K a ≈ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ Where Φ is the angle of shearing resistance of the sediment
⎝ 1 + sin φ ⎠
d) Seismic Load: - If the project is located on the seismic area, it is necessary to consider this
force. It has two components and each are important for design of diversion head works.
For diversion weir stability, the critical load case may be the pond level case (i.e., the water level is up to
the crest level of the weir and no over flow) or the high flood level case (i.e., when there is over flow and
the weir is submerged). There fore it is necessary considering the two cases to check whether the
preliminary section of the designed weir is stable or not.
After determining the loads that applied on the weir for different cases, the head work should be tasted
for different cases as follows:
1. Stability Against Overturning: - Factor of safety against overturning, F0, in terms of moments
about the downstream toe of the weir:
F =
∑M +
∑M −
0
Where; ∑ M and ∑ M
+ −
is summation of stabilizing moment and overturning moment
respectively. F0 should be greater than or equal to 1.25.
2. Sliding Stability: -The weir should be stable against sliding at the base for different conditions
and it is the function of the shear strength of the construction materials. It is given by:
Fs = μ
∑F V
∑F H
Where; ∑F V and ∑F
H is summation of vertical and horizontal forces respectively. Fs should be
greater than or equal to 1.5.
3. Safety against tension: - For no tension on the base of the head work structure, for critical
section, the resultant (R) should act as 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.
−
X =
∑M −∑M + −
and the eccentricity,

−
e = X − B/ 2.
∑F V
B −
To be safe, the eccentricity ‘e’ should be: e ≤ −X
6
4.5 General step for design of Vertical Drop Weir

A vertical drop weir consists of a masonry crest wall with its d/s face vertical or nearly vertical. In this
type of weir, the energy dissipated by the impact of water, as no hydraulic jump is formed. It is generally
provided when the flood discharge is not very large.
4.5.1 Design Procedure

The design of weirs is usually done by Bligh’s theory, but the thickness and length of floor is also checked
by Khosla’s theory. The design consist the following procedures:
1. Water way: Determine the length of the water way using Lacey’s Formula: L=4.75*Q^0.5
12
2. Discharge Intensity:- q=Q/L

3. Scour depth: R=1.35*[(q^2)/(f)]^(1/3)
4. Velocity : V=q/R
5. TEL: D/S TEL=HFL before construction + ha, where ha=V2/2g
U/S TEL=D/S TEL + afflux
U/S HFL=HFL after construction + ha
6. Head over crest: the head over the crest for passing design discharge intensity ‘q’ for broad-
crested weir: q=1.705*(He) ^ (3/2) i.e. He=(q/1.705)^(2/3)
7. Crest level: crest level= U/S TEL-He
8. Pond level: Pond level= FSL + Head loss through the head regulator. The head loss through
the head regulator is usually taken between 0.5 to 1m depending the type of head regulator.
9. Depth of Cutoffs: - the cutoffs at u/s and d/s ends of the impervious floor are provided with
their bottom at the maximum scour of 1.5R and 2R respectively.
10. Total length of the floor: - the length is usually fixed from the consideration of the exit
gradient as discussed earlier.
11. Top width (a):- the top width is fixed as the largest of the two values obtained from the
following relations:
a. a=d/(ρ)^0.5: d= maximum water depth over the crest, ρ=specific gravity of the weir
material
b. a= d/ (μ*ρ) = [3d/ (2ρ)]; where μ is the coefficient of friction, usually taken as 2/3.
12. Bottom Width: - The bottom width should be sufficient so that the maximum compressive
stresses are within the allowable limits and the tension does not develop. For preliminarily
H +d
design, the base width may be taken as: B =
ρ −1
Where: H is the height of the crest wall above the river bed.
13. Length of down stream impervious floor: - The length of downstream impervious floor is
determined from the following formulae given by Bligh.
Hs
Ld = 2.21 * C , for weirs with shutter
13
Hs
Ld = 2.21 * C , for weirs without shutter
10
14. Length of u/s impervious floor:-If the total length of the horizontal impervious floor (b) has
to be determined from the exit gradient consideration: Lu=b-(Ld + B)
15. Thickness of floor:- The d/s impervious floor thickness can be determined based on Bligh’s
4⎛ h ⎞ ⎛ h ⎞
and Khosla’s theory: t = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ by Bligh and t = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ by Khosla.
3 ⎝ ρ −1⎠ ⎝ ρ −1⎠
16. D/s protection works:- the total length ‘L’ of the d/s impervious floor and the d/s protection
works combined is given by Bligh as follows;
Ld = 18 * C ( H s / 13) * (q / 75)
for weirs with shutter
Ld = 18 * C ( H s / 10) * (q / 75)
for weirs without shutter
Therefore the length (Lp) of d/s protection is given by Lp=L-Ld
4.6 Locks in Rivers

Concentrated heads on canalized rivers and canals are usually overcome by navigation locks. The main
components of locks are:
• Lock gates
• Lock chamber
• Lock valves and usually vertical lift
• Filling/emptying system: complicated unsteady flow occurs
The lock sizes (length L, width B, and particularly their head H), together with the selected system of lock
filling and emptying, determine the design of the locks as well as the type and function of its gates.
According to the size and type of filling, we can divide locks into four categories
1) Locks with direct filling and emptying
13
2) Locks with indirect filling by means of short or long culvert

3) Locks large dimensions in plan and high heads with more complex filling and empting systems
4) Locks with combined direct and indirect filling.
4.6.1 Hydraulics of Locks

The design parameters of major interest are the time of filling (emptying) T, the maximum discharge Q,
and the maximum forces acting on a vessel during lockage. If we assume that the lock is filled from a
large forebay with a constant water level, we can write
dV = Qdt = ca 2 gh .dt = − Adh …………………………………………………………………………………….. (a)
Where A is the lock area in plan
h is the instantaneous head (the difference between the forebay and lock water level)
c is coefficient
a is the filling system area (valve area)
For an instantaneous complete opening of the filling system eq.a yields, for the time of filling a lock with
a total head H,
T 0 1/ 2
T = ∫ dt = −
A dh H
ca 2 g
∫ 1/ 2
= 2A
ca 2 g
…………………………………………………………………………… (b)
0 H h
For a linear opening of the system in time T1 (a=a1T1/t)
T1 hT 1 hT 1
A dh AT dh
∫ dt = − c ∫ =− ∫h
1
1/ 2 1/ 2
0 2g H a1h cat 2 g
H
T1 2A
= ( H 1 / 2 − hT 1 ) …………………………………………………………………………………………..(c)
1/ 2
2 ca 2 g
The total filling time from eq. b and c then be

T1 2A
T= + H 1 / 2 ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. (d)
2 ca 2 g
In the special case of a linear opening of the filling /emptying system we can determine Qmax and the
head at which it occurs analytically from the two equations.
4 AT1
t2 = ( H 1 / 2 − ht
1/ 2
) and
ca 2 g
cat
Q= 2 ght
T1
For Q to be maximum, dQ / dht = 0 giving
ht = (4 / 9) H
The maximum discharge occurs at ( 4 / 9) H if the filling system is not fully open yet by the time this
level is reached. The criterion is the value of hT1 computed from eqn. c; if hT1< 4/9H, the maximum
discharge occurs at the head of hT1 corresponding to the end of opening of the filling/emptying system.
The real time of filling can be up to 12% shorter than the computed one owing to inertia effects in the
filling system.
Example:
A navigation lock, 200m x 12m in plan and with a 9m head, is filled through two longitudinal conduits
with rectangular gates 3m wide controlling the flow. The overall coefficient of discharge of the filling
system is 0.65 and the gates open 8.5mm/sec at a uniform speed in 4.5min. Determine the maximum
discharge entering the lock and the total time of filling.
14

Design of Weirs on Permeable Foundations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Weirs on Permeable Foundations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table of Content

4 DESIGN OF WEIRS ON PERMEABLE FOUNDATION...................................................................... 1

Figure 4-1: Treatment of Vertical Faces in the Bligh’s Method .............................................................. 3

4 DESIGN OF WEIRS ON PERMEABLE FOUNDATION

4.2 Surface flow

4.2.1 Seepage Theories

4.2.1.1 Bligh’s Creep Theory

Limitations of Bligh's Theory

Figure 4-1: Treatment of Vertical Faces in the Bligh’s Method

Total length of creep= Leq= t1+ 2*a+L1+2*b+L2+2*c+t2

4.2.1.2 Lane’s Weighted Creep theory

4.2.1.3 Khosla’s Theory

c. Case-III: - Impervious floor with an Intermediate Pile

Table 0-1: Safe exit gradient for different soils

Figure 4-4: Khosla’s Curve (value of σ and λ)

i) Correction for the thickness of the floor

Figure 4-5: Correction for the floor thickness

Case (a): Pile at U/s end

Figure 4-6: Correction for interference of piles

iii) Correction for slope of the floor:

4.3 Surface flow

4.3.1 Hydraulic jump Computation

Figure 4-7:- Hydraulic Jump formation

Figure 4-8: Blench curve

Figure 4-9: Montague Curve

The head loss HL= U/S TEL- D/S TEL

4.3.1.1 Water Surface Profile

Figure 4-10: Pre and Post-Jump Water surface profile

4.3.2 Regime Scour depth due to surface flow

4.4 Stability analysis of the weir body

4.4.1 Loads on Diversion weirs

and the eccentricity,

4.5 General step for design of Vertical Drop Weir

4.5.1 Design Procedure

2. Discharge Intensity:- q=Q/L

4.6 Locks in Rivers

2) Locks with indirect filling by means of short or long culvert

4.6.1 Hydraulics of Locks

The total filling time from eq. b and c then be

You might also like

Total length of creep= Leq= t1+ 2a+L1+2b+L2+2*c+t2