2.

Diversion Head Works

2.1 Introduction
River diversion headwork is constructed at the head of the canal to divert the river water towards
the canal, so as to ensure a regulated continuous supply of silt-free water with a certain minimum
head into the canal. It usually provides a small storage capacity. Diversion head works have the
following purposes:
(i) It raises the water level in the river so that the commanded area is increased
(ii) It regulates the supply of water into the canal
(iii) It provides storage of water for a short period
(iv) It controls the entry of silt into the canal
(v) It reduces the fluctuations in the level of supply in the river.
2.2 Location of Diversion Head Works

The selection of site for diversion head works may be made in accordance with the following
considerations.

i) As far as possible a narrow, straight, well defined channel confined between banks not
submerged by the highest flood;
ii) It should be possible to align the offtaking canal in such a way that the command of its
area is obtained without excessive digging.
iii) The material of construction such as stone, sand, etc. should be available in the vicinity
of the site.
iv) The site should be accessible by road. And there should be (enough) workers available
in the vicinity of project site.
The diversion head works consists of the following components:
(1) Weir or barrage
(2) Divide wall
(3) Fish ladder
(4) Pocket or approach channel
(5) Undersluices or scouring sluices
(6) Silt excluder
(7) Canal head regulator
(8) River training works, such as marginal bunds, guide banks

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 1

Figure 2.1 Typical layout of diversion headworks

Weirs and barrages are permanent river diversion works and are relatively low dams constructed
across a river to raise the river level sufficiently to divert the flow in full, or in part, into a supply
canal or conduit for the purpose of irrigation, power generation, domestic and industrial uses, etc.
Weirs are with or without gates, whereas barrages are always gate controlled.

2.3 Diversion Weirs: Types and Causes of Failure

2.3.1 Types of Weirs

Weirs may be classified according to the material of construction and certain design features as

1) Masonry weirs with vertical drop or vertical drop weirs

2) Rockfill weirs with sloping aprons
3) Concrete weirs with a downstream glacis
1) Masonry Weir (Vertical Drop Weir): Consists of:
- An impervious horizontal floor or apron
- A masonry weir wall (with both upstream and downstream faces vertical; or both faces
inclined; or upstream face vertical and downstream face inclined)
- Block protection at upstream end of floor, and a graded inverted filter at the downstream end
of floor
- Launching aprons or pervious aprons (or floors) after block protection and inverted filters.
This type of weir is suitable for any type of foundation.

Figure 2.2 Vertical drop weir

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 2

2) Rockfill Weir With Sloping Aprons: It is the simplest type of construction and Consists of:

- Masonry weir wall

- Dry packed boulders laid in the form of glacis or sloping aprons in the upstream and
downstream sides of the weir wall
The downstream slope is generally made very flat. It requires a very large quantity of stone. It
also has few intervening core walls.

Figure 2.3 Rockfill weir

3. Concrete weir with downstream glacis: It is of recent origin and its design is based on
sub-surface flow concept. Hydraulic jump is developed on the glacis due to which considerable
energy is dissipated. Protection works such as inverted filter; block protection and launching
apron are provided. May be constructed on pervious foundation. Sheet piles of sufficient depths
are provided both at upstream and downstream ends of the floor.

Figure 2.4 Typical cross section of concrete weir with downstream glacis on permeable foundation

Divide wall: It is masonry or concrete wall with top width of 1.5 to 3m constructed at right
angles to the axis of the weir and separates the ‘weir proper’ from under sluices. The divide wall
extends on the upstream side beyond the beginning of the canal head regulator and on the
downstream side, it extends up to the end of downstream protection of the under sluices.
The main functions of a divide wall are:

a) To separate the floor of the under sluices which is at lower level from the weir proper;
b) To help in providing a comparatively less turbulent pocket near the canal head regulator
resulting in deposition of silt in this pocket and, thus, to help entry of silt-free water into
the canal;

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 3

 c) To isolate the pocket upstream of the canal head regulator and facilitate scouring
operation;
d) To prevent formations of cross-currents to avoid their damaging effects on the weir.

Fish Ladder: This structure enables the fish to pass upstream. It is device by which the flow
energy can be dissipated in such a manner as to provide smooth flow at sufficiently low
velocity, not exceeding 3 to 3.5m/s. This object is generally accomplished by providing a
narrow opening adjacent to the divide wall and provide suitable baffles or staggering devices in
it, so as to control the flow velocity.

The various types of fish ladder are (i) pool type, (ii) steep channel type, (iii) fish lock type and
(iv) fish lift or elevator type. Types (iii) and (iv) are suitable for high dams only. Types (i) and
(ii) are generally provided for barrages.

Undersluices or Scouring Sluices: They are the openings provided in the weir wall with their
crest at low level. The openings are fully controlled by gates. They are located on the same side
of the off-taking canal.

Functions of Undersluices:

(i) They preserve a clear and well defined river channel towards the canal head regulator;
(ii) They scour the silt deposited on the river bed in the pocket upstream of the canal head
regulator;
(iii)They pass low floods without the necessity of dropping the weir crest shutters;
(iv) They help to lower the high flood level by supplementing the discharge over the weir
during high floods.

Capacity of Undersluices:

The discharging capacity is fixed from the following considerations:

(i) To ensure proper scouring, its capacity should be at least two times the maximum
discharge of the off-taking canal;
(ii) It should have sufficient capacity to discharge maximum winter flood – without the
necessity of dropping the weir shutter;
(iii) 10 to 20% of the maximum flood discharge – to supplement the discharge over the weir
during high floods.

Canal head regulator: The structure controlling diversion into a supply canal is called
regulator. It is provided at the head of the offtaking canal and serves the following functions:

(a) It regulates the supply of water entering in the canal;

(b) It controls the entry of silt in the canal;
(c) It prevents the river floods from entering the canal.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 4

 The head regulator is generally aligned at right angle to the weir, but slightly larger angles
(between 900 and 1100) are now considered preferable for providing smooth entry of water into
the regulator. The regulation is done by means of gates.

The design principles are the same as those used in the design of barrages, except that the
regulators are a smaller version of barrages. An important consideration in designing the
regulator is silt exclusion from canals. Silt-excluder tunnels are often provided in the barrage
bays adjacent to the regulator, so that the heavier silt-laden bottom layers of water bypass
through the tunnels (Figure 2.5).

Figure 2.5 Head regulator

**The maximum height of gated opening is determined by the differences in crest level of regulator
(sill level) and the pond level. During high floods, the water level in the river will be much
higher than the pond level. To avoid spilling of this water over the gates, a R.C. wall, called
Breast wall, is provided from pond level up-to river HFL. This wall rests over the piers of the
regulator bays.

The entry of silt into the canal is controlled by keeping the crest of the head regulator by about 1
to 1.5m higher than the crest of the under sluices.

Guide banks (river training works): Guide banks direct the main river flow as centrally as
possible to the diversion structure. They also safeguard the barrage from erosion and may be
designed so that a desirable curvature is induced to the flow for silt exclusion from the canals.
The side slopes of the guide banks must be protected by stone pitching, with a sufficient 'self-
launching' stone apron at the lowest feasible level. The top levels of the guide banks will depend
on the increase in the maximum flood level upstream of the barrage.

Protection Works: The concrete floor of a weir or barrage is protected on the upstream as well
as downstream by loose apron. In the immediate vicinity of the floor, a certain portion of the
loose apron is made non-launching. The non-launching apron prevents the scour hole travel close

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 5

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.

2.3.2 Causes of Failures of Weirs on Permeable Foundation

Causes of failures of weirs on permeable foundations may be classified into two broad
categories.

(1) Due to seepage or subsurface flow

(2) Due to surface flow

1. Failures due to seepage or subsurface flow

The seepage may cause the failure of a weir in two ways.

i) By piping or undermining: If the water percolating through the foundation has

sufficient force when it emerges at the downstream end of the impervious floor it may lift up the
soil particles at the end of the floor. With the removal of the surface soil there is further
concentration of flow into the resulting depression and more soil is removed which progressively
result in subsidence of the floor in the hollows so formed.
 To prevent these kinds of failures:
(a) Provide sufficient length of the impervious floor (so that the path of percolation is
increased) and reduce exit gradient.
(b) Provide piles at upstream and downstream ends of the impervious floor

(ii) By uplift pressure: If the uplift pressure is not counterbalanced by the weight of the
floor, it may fail by rupture.

 To prevent failure by uplift:

(a) Provide sufficient thickness of the impervious floor
(b) Provide pile at the upstream end of the impervious floor so that uplift pressure is reduced
on the downstream side.

2. Failures due to surface flow

The surface flow may cause the failure of a weir in the following two ways:
(i) By suction due to standing wave or hydraulic jump: The standing wave or hydraulic
jump developed on the downstream side of the weir causes suction or negative pressure which
also acts in the direction of uplift pressure. If the floor thickness is insufficient it may fail by
rupture in suction.
The following measures may be taken to prevent such kind of failure:

(a) Providing additional thickness of the impervious floor to counterbalance the suction
pressure due to standing wave.
(b) Constructing floor as monolithic concrete mass instead of in different layers of
masonry.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 6

(ii) By scour on the upstream and downstream of the weir: Upstream and downstream
ends of the impervious floor and bed of the river may be scoured during floods. If not prevented,
lead to damage to the floor and an ultimately failure.
Preventive measures which should be taken against failure due to scour are:

(a) Providing deep piles both at upstream and downstream ends of the impervious floor.
The piles should be driven much below the calculated scour depth.
(b) Providing launching aprons of suitable length and thickness at upstream and
downstream ends of the impervious floor.

2.4 Criteria for the Design of Weirs

Design of weirs and barrages consists of;

i) Hydraulic design
ii) Structural design

The hydraulic design deals with the evaluation of the hydraulic forces acting on the structure and
the determination of the configurations of the structure which will be most economical and will
have the best functional efficiency.

The structural design consists of dimensioning the various parts of the structure to enable it to
resist safely all the forces acting on it.

The hydraulic design is treated in respect of both subsurface and surface flows. The various
aspects of design in respect of subsurface flow involves determination of;

- Uplift pressure,
- Exit gradient,
- Length of impervious floor,
- Depth of sheet piles or cutoffs at upstream and downstream ends of the impervious
floor;
- Protection works.
Note: These aspects shall be discussed in detail in later sections.

On the other hand, the design in respect of surface flow involves determination of;

- Pond level;
- Afflux;
- Levels of upstream floor and crest of weir or barrage;
- Shape of weir crest;
- Waterway; decline
- Effect of retrogression.

Pond level: Pond level, in the undersluice pocket, u/s of the canal head regulator may be
obtained by adding the working head to the designed full supply level in the canal. The working

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 7

head should include the head required for passing the design discharge into the canal and the
head loss in the regulator.

Afflux: It is the rise in water level on the u/s of a weir or barrage as a result of its construction.
The value of afflux corresponding to the design flood is important for the design of the length of
the weir, crest levels, river training works, etc.

Levels of u/s floor and crest of weir or barrage

The u/s floor level of a weir or a barrage bays (other than undersluice bays) is fixed at the
general river bed level, at or below the level of the crest of the weir or barrage. Usually the floor
level is kept at 0.5 to 1.0 m higher than the u/s floor level of the undersluice bays.

The crest levels of weirs or barrages are fixed as follows:

(i) For weirs without shutters, the crest level should be at the required pond level; >=2
(ii) For weirs with shutters, the crest level should not be lower than 2 m below the pond
level as the maximum height of the falling shutters is limited to 2 m.
(iii) For barrages, the crest level is determined by the depth required to pass the design
flood at the desired afflux. The level of crest in this case should be fixed by
adjustment of the waterway. It should in any case be kept higher than the undersluice
crest level.

Shape of the weir crest

- A vertical drop weir is usually trapezoidal in cross section and its dimensions may be
obtained on the basis of stability considerations;

- A glacis type weir is provided with a top width of about 2.0 m, and u/s slope of 2:1 to 3:1
depending on site conditions and d/s slope as required for the glacis of stilling basin.

Waterway: The length of waterway which is equal to the length of the weir or barrage is fixed
to pass safely the maximum flood discharge. The length of the waterway should be equal to the
stable river width for the maximum flood discharge so that shoaling upstream is mostly
eliminated and a nearly straight and stable approach to the weir or barrage is obtained.

The clear waterway to be provided between guide banks or abutments, excluding thickness of
piers, is usually taken equal to the Lacey’s regime perimeter given by
P  4.75 Q
Where
P = Lacey’s regime perimeter in m,
Q = design flood discharge (m3/s)

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 8

To account for the silt load carried by the alluvial rivers, the clear waterway of 1.1 to 1.25 times
Lacey’s regime perimeter is provided.

Effect of Retrogression: As a result of construction of a weir or barrage progressive

retrogression or degradation of the downstream river bed is caused which results in lowering of
the downstream river stages and the same has to be suitably provided for in the design of
downstream cisterns.

2.4.1 Design of Impervious Floor for Subsurface Flow

The different Theories used in the design of impervious floor for subsurface flow are:

i. Bligh’s Creep Theory

ii. Lane’s Weighted Creep Theory, and
iii. Khosla’s Theory of Independent Variables

1. Bligh’s Creep Theory

Bligh assumed that the percolating water creeps along the base profile of the structure, which is
in contact with the subsoil. The length of the path thus traversed by the percolating water is
called the creep length. Bligh also assumed that the head loss per unit length of creep (called
hydraulic gradient) is proportional to the distance of the point from the upstream of the
foundation.

Figure 2.6 Bligh’s creep theory – definition sketch

Shortcoming of this theory is that it does not discriminate between the horizontal and vertical
creeps in estimating the exit hydraulic gradient.
The total creep length, L, is given by
L = d1 + d1 + L1 + d3 + d3 + L2 + d2 + d2 = (L1 + L2) + 2d1 + 2d2 + 2d3
L= b + 2(d1 + d2 + d3)

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 9

The hydraulic gradient or the loss of head per unit length of creep is,

H H H
 
L b  2d1  2d 2  2d 3 b  2d1  d 2  d 3 
Therefore, for any point the head loss is proportional to the creep length.
As the hydraulic gradient is constant, if L1 is the creep length up to any point, then head loss up
to this point will be (H/L) L1 and the residual head at this point will be (H - (H/L) L1).
The head losses at the three vertical cutoffs will be:

[(H/L) 2d1], [(H/L) 2d2] and [(H/L) 2d3]

The reciprocal of the hydraulic gradient, i.e., L/H is known as Bligh’s coefficient of creep, C.
(a) Safety against piping and undermining
**According to Bligh, the safety against piping can be ensured by providing sufficient creep length,
given by L = C.H, where C is the Bligh’s Coefficient for the soil.
Bligh recommended certain values of C for different soils. According to Bligh if the hydraulic
1
gradient H/L  (for the soil) there is no danger of piping.
C

Table 2.1 Recommended values of Bligh coefficient of creep C and safe hydraulic gradient

Type of soil Value of C Safe Hydraulic Gradient

Fine micaceous sand 15 1/15

Coarse grained sand 12 1/12

Sand mixed with boulder and 5 to 9 1/9 to1/5

gravel; and for loam soil

Light sand & mud 8 1/8

(b) Safety against uplift pressure

The ordinate of the subsoil hydraulic gradient line above the bottoms of the floor at any point
represents the residual seepage head or the uplift pressure at that point.
If h´ is the uplift pressure head at a point under the floor, the pressure intensity is,
P  gh 
This is to be resisted by the weight of the floor, the thickness of which is t and density ρm (for
concrete,  m = 2400 kg/m3). Downward force per unit area due to the weight of the floor is
W  mg t

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 10

Figure 2.7 Determination of floor thickness

Therefore, equating
 m g t  gh '
m
which gives h   t  Sm t

where Sm is the relative density of the floor material. Thus, we can write,
h   t  Sm t  t
which gives the thickness of the floor,
h  t h
t 
Sm  1 Sm  1
where h is the pressure head (ordinate of hydraulic gradient) measured above the top of floor,
and (Sm-1) is submerged specific gravity of the floor material.

Considering a safety factor of 4/3 to 3/2

4 h 3 h
t to
3 Sm  1 2 Sm  1
with Sm= 2.24, t ≈ 1.08 h to 1.2 h

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

Figure 2.8

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 11

Moreover, the provision of maximum creep length on the upstream side of the weir (barrier) also
reduces uplift pressures on the portion of the floor provided on the downstream side of the
barrier (Fig 2.8a). This is because a large portion of the total creep having taken place up to the
barrier; the residual heads on the downstream floor are reduced. Further, (see Fig 2.8b) a vertical
cutoff at the upstream end of the floor reduces uplift all over the floor. Thus, according to
Bligh’s theory a vertical cutoff at the upstream end of the floor is more useful than the one at the
downstream end of the floor.

2. Lane’s Weighted Creep Theory

Lane made distinction between vertical and horizontal creep. He indicated that the horizontal
creep is less effective in reducing uplift (or in causing head loss) than the vertical creep. He,
therefore, used a weightage factor of (1/3) for the horizontal creep. Thus, the weighted creep
length, Lw, is given by
1
Lw  N  V
3
Where N = sum of all the horizontal contacts and all the sloping contacts less than 450 to the
horizontal.
V = sum of all the vertical contacts and all sloping contacts greater than 450 to the
horizontal.
To ensure safety against piping Lw > C1H
Where H = Total seepage head (difference in water head between upstream and downstream)

C1 = Lane’s coefficient (empirical) of creep

 H   1 
Further if the hydraulic gradient      safety against piping can be ensured.
 Lw   C1 

Table 2.2. Recommended values of Lane’s coefficient of creep C1 and safe hydraulic Gradient.
 1 
Safe Hydraulic Gradient  
Type of Soil (Material) Value of C1  C1 
Very fine sand or silt 8.5 1/8.5

Fine sand 7.0 1/7

Coarse sand 5.0 1/5

Gravel & Sand 3.5 to 3.0 1/3.5 to 1/3

Boulders, with some cobble & gravel 2.5 1/2.5

Boulders, gravel and sand 2.5 to 3.0 1/2.5 to 1/3

Clayey Soils 3.0 to 1.6 1/3 to 1/1.6

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 12

Lane’s method for determination of the uplift pressure is criticized on the grounds that it is an
empirical method and not based on any mathematical approach. However, because of the
simplicity of the method it is also widely used.

3. Khosla’s Theory and Concept of Flow Nets

The main principles of this theory are summarized below:

a) The seepage water does not creep along the bottom contour of impervious 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 Laplacian equation:
𝜕2𝜑 𝑑 2𝜑
+ =0
𝑑𝑥2 𝑑𝑧 2
Where, φ = Flow potential = Kh; K = the coefficient of permeability of soil as defined by

Darcy’s law and h is the residual head at any point within the soil.

The above 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 the paths along which the 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 2.9.

Figure 2.9 Flownet for seepage flow through soil below a hydraulic structure

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.
CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 13
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.

b) 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 particles 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’s Theory of Independent Variables

In order to know how the seepage below the foundation of a hydraulic structure is taking place, it
is necessary to plot the flow net. In other words, we must solve the Laplacian equations. This can
be accomplished either by mathematical solution of the Laplacian equations, or by graphically
sketching and by adjusting the streamlines and equipotential lines with respect to the boundary
conditions. These are complicated methods and are time consuming. Therefore, for designing
hydraulic structures such as weirs or barrage on pervious foundations, Khosla has evolved a
simple, quick and an accurate approach, called Method of Independent Variables.

In this method, a complex profile like that of a weir is broken into a number of simple profiles;
each of which can be solved mathematically. Mathematical solutions of flow nets for these
simple standard profiles have been presented in the form of equations and curves (given in
Figure 2.16 (a), (b) and (c)), which can be used for determining the percentage pressures at the
various key points. The simple standard profiles used are:

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 14

a) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile at either end, i.e. at
upstream or downstream end.

Figure 2.10 (a) Pile at upstream end and (b) Pile at the downstream end

b) A straight horizontal floor depressed below the bed but with no vertical cut-offs.

Figure 2.11 Depressed floor

c) A straight horizontal floor of negligible thickness with a sheet pile line at some intermediate
position.

Figure 2.12 Intermediate pile

In general, the usual weir section consists of a combination of all or some of the three forms
mentioned above. Each elementary form is treated as independent of the others. The pressures as
a percentage of the water head are read from Khosla’s curves at the key points. The key points
are the junction of the floor and the pile or cut-off walls, the bottom points of the pile or walls,
and the bottom corners in the case of depressed floor. The percentage pressure observed from the
curves for the simple form into which the profile has been broken up, is valid for the profile as a
whole if corrected for:

(i) Mutual interference of piles;

(ii) The floor thickness; and
(iii) The slope of the floor

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 15

i) Correction for Mutual Interference of Piles
The correction C to be applied as a percentage of head is given by
D d  D
C  19  
b  b 
Where b’= the distance between two pile lines
D= the depth of pile line, the influence of which has to be determined on the neighboring
pile of depth d. D is to be measured below the level at which interference is desired.
d= the depth of pile on which the effect is to be determined.
b= total floor length.
The correction is positive for points in the rear or backwater and subtractive for points forward in
the direction of flow. This equation does not apply to the effect of an outer pile on an
intermediate pile, if the intermediate pile is equal to or smaller than the outer pile and is at a
distance less than twice the length of the outer pile.

Fig.2. 13 Mutual interference of piles

ii) Correction for Floor Thickness

In the standard forms with cutoffs, the thickness of the floor is assumed to be negligible. Thus as
observed from Khosla’s curves, the percentage pressures at the junction points E and C pertain to
the level at the top of the floor whereas the actual junction is with the bottom of the floor.

The percentage pressures at the actual points E and C are interpolated by assuming a straight line
pressure variation from the hypothetical point E to D and also from D to C.

For pile no. 1, since the corrected pressure at E1 should be less than the calculated pressure at E,
the correction to be applied for the joint E1 shall be negative. Similarly, the pressure calculated at
C is less than the corrected pressure at C1, and hence, the correction to be applied at point C1 is
positive.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 16

Fig. 2.14 Correction for floor thickness

iii) Correction for Slope of the Floor

A correction is applied for a sloping floor, and is taken as positive for the down and negative for
the up slopes following the direction of flow. The values of correction for various slopes are
tabulated below (Table 2.3).

Fig. 2.15 Correction for slope of the floor

Table 2.3 Correction for floor slope

Slope Correction
(V: H) (% 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 2.0

The correction given above is to be multiplied by the horizontal length of the slope and divided
by the distance between the two pile lines between which the sloping floor is located. This
correction is applicable only to the key points of the pile line fixed at the beginning or the ends
of the slope.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 17

iv) Exit Gradient (GE)
For standard form consisting of a floor length b with a vertical cutoff of depth d, the exit gradient
at its end is given by:
H 1
GE  .
d  
1 12
Where  , and
2
b

d
H = maximum seepage head
The exit gradient so calculated must lie within safe limits as given in the following table (Table
2.4).
Table 4.4: Safe exit gradient for different types of soils
Type of soil Safe exit gradient

¼ to 1/5
Shingle
Coarse sand 1/5 to 1/6

Fine sand 1/6 to 1/7

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 18

 (a) Intermediate sheet pile

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 19

 (b) Sheet pile at the end and depressed floor

(c) Exit gradient

Figure 2.16 Khosla’s Pressure Curves (a, b, and c)

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 20

Depth of sheet piles on upstream and downstream of impervious floor

The sheet pile must be taken up to the level of possible deepest scour below the bed of the river.
According to Lacey the depth of scour in alluvial soils is given by
1
 q2  3
R  1.35 
 f 
Where
R = scour depth measured below the highest flood level (HFL),
q = discharge per unit length,
f = Lacey’s silt factor.

In order to ensure further safety, for the design of sheet piles the scour depth is considered as
1.25 to 2 times R given by the above equation.

Design of protection works at the u/s and d/s ends of the impervious floor

In order to further safeguard the impervious floor against failure due to piping certain protection
works are provided at both the u/s and d/s ends of the impervious floor. These protection works
consist of

(i) Inverted filter,

(ii) Block protection, and
(iii) Launching apron or pervious apron (as shown in Fig. 2.17)

Inverted Filter: consists of layers of 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 loaded 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 D below the river bed and it usually varies from 1.5 D to
2 D, where D is given by

D = XR – Y

Where XR = depth of deepest scour level below high flood level

X = a multiplying factor (varies from 1.25 to 2)
Y = depth of the river bed or impervious floor below high flood level
Y = High flood level – River bed level (or floor level)

Block Protection: It is provided immediately at the u/s end 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

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 21

length of the block protection is usually equal to the depth of scour, D, below the river bed at the
u/s end of the impervious floor.

Figure 2.17. Upstream and downstream protection works

Launching apron or pervious apron: It is an apron of loosely packed stones. Its function is to
protect the impervious floor and the pile from the scour holes progressing towards the floor and
the pile.

The protection is provided by a launching apron by forming a protective covering of stones over
a certain slope below the bed of the river at which the apron is originally laid to the bottom of the
deepest scour likely to occur. As shown in Figure 2.18, when scour occurs, the new position
attained by this apron is called launched position.

The size of the stones (that shall not be washed away during maximum flood) is given by USBR
as
2
 V 
d A 
 4.915 
Where VA = average velocity of flow in m/s and d = mean diameter of stones in m.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 22

It is generally assumed that the stones launch at a slope of 2:1. The quantity of stone in a
launching apron should be sufficient to provide about 1.0 m thick cover over a slope of 2:1 in the
launched position. Thus if D is the depth of scour, the length of the launched apron would be
=L
about 5D  2.236D. Since the thickness of the launched apron is 1 m, the quantity of stone
required is 2.236D m3 per m length of the apron (See Figure 2.18).

Figure 2.18. Launching apron

2.4.2 Design of vertical drop weir

The design of a vertical drop weir consists of (see Fig. 2.19):

i. Hydraulic calculations to fix various elevations,

ii. Design of weir wall,
iii. Design of impervious floor (apron),
iv. Design of protection works on upstream and downstream sides.

The following data must be known for the design of the vertical drop weir:

a) Maximum flood discharge,

b) High flood level (H.F.L.) before construction of weir,
c) Downstream bed level,
d) Full supply level (F.S.L.) of canal taking off from the river,
e) Allowable afflux,
f) Lacey’s silt factor.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 23

 Figure 2.19 Vertical Drop Weir

2.4.2.1 Hydraulic Calculations

(i) The length of the waterway, L is calculated from Lacey’s regime formula (given in
section4.5.2).
(ii) The discharge per unit length of the waterway, q is calculated as q = Q/L.
(iii) The regime scour depth is calculated using Lacey’s formula
1
 q2  3
R  1.35 
 f 
(iv) The regime velocity and velocity head are calculated from
V = q/R, and velocity head = v2/(2g)
(v) Water levels and total energy line (T.E.L.) on the downstream side and upstream side are
calculated as
Level of d/s T.E.L. = (H.F.L. before construction) + v2/(2g)
Level of u/s T.E.L. = Level of d/s T.E.L. + Afflux
Level of u/s H.F.L. = Level of u/s T.E.L. – v2/(2g)
(vi) Discharge over the crest of the weir is determined from,
q  1.70 K 3 2

2 3
 q 
and K 
 1.70 
Therefore, crest level = u/s T.E.L. - K
(vii) Pond level = Level of top of gates
= F.S.L. of canal + Head loss through regulator
Head loss through regulator may be taken as 0.5 to 1.0 m.
CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 24
 Height of shutters = S = Level of top of gates – Crest level
(viii) Protection against scour
Level of bottom of u/s pile = u/s H.F.L. – 1.5 R
Level of bottom of d/s pile = H.F.L. after retrogression – 2 R

2.4.2.2 Design of Weir Wall

A weir wall is usually trapezoidal in cross-section with either both u/s and d/s faces inclined; or
u/s face vertical and d/s face inclined. The design of the weir wall involves the determination of
its top and bottom widths such that the section will be stable under the condition of maximum
stress. In general the condition of maximum pressure on a hydraulic structure is that in which the
head water is at the level of the crest of the weir or at the top of the crest of the shutters (if any)
and no water is flowing over the weir so that there is no water on the d/s side. However, the
condition of maximum stress on the weir may be different in certain cases. Hence, it is necessary
to check the stability of the weir under the following three states:

State 1. When the u/s water or head water is at crest level or at the top of the crest shutter (if any)
and there is no flow (Figure 4.20 a).

State 2. When water is flowing over the weir crest and the weir is submerged (Fig. 4.20 b).

State 3. When water is flowing over the weir crest and weir is discharging with a clear overfall
(Fig. 2.20 c).

Top width of weir wall

Top width of the weir wall is obtained using three methods:

1. No tension criterion (for elementary profile)

The top width is determined on the consideration of no tension criterion for determining the
width of an elementary (or triangular) profile of a dam or a weir, given by
d
B1 
Sm
Where B1 = top width of the weir
d = maximum depth of water above the weir crest, which is equal to u/s H.F.L. – crest
level,

2. No sliding criterion (for elementary profile)

The top width of the weir is given by,
d
B1 
 Sm

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 25

Where m = coefficient of friction. Assuming m = 2/3 as a safe value, we get
3d
B1 
2 Sm

3. Considering the height of the crest shutter

The top width of the weir is affected by height of crest shutter and it is given by,
B1 = S + 1 (meters)
Then, the largest of the three values is taken as the top width of the weir wall.

Figure 2.20 Calculations of flow over vertical drop weir

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 26

Bottom width of weir wall

The bottom width of the weir wall, B, is determined by equating the overturning moments to the
resisting moments taken at the outer middle third of the bottom width of the weir wall. In
determining the bottom width all the three states discussed before are considered.

State 1. Head water is at crest level or at the top of the crest shutter (if any)

Considering the pressure diagram in Fig. 2.20(a), the overturning moment is given by
 H  S
3
M0 
6
The resisting moment about the outer middle third point of the bottom is given by,
  
M r  Sm  1.5H  2.5SB 2  B1 S m H  H  SB  B12 H  3S
1
12  2 
The above expression is valid when u/s and d/s faces have the same slope. If the u/s face is kept
vertical, the resisting moment is given by
HSm 2
Mr 
6
B  BB1  B12 
By equating the overturning moment to the resisting moment, the bottom width B is determined.

State 2. Water is flowing over the weir crest and the weir is submerged (Fig. 2.20 b).

The overturning moment is given by,

hH 2
M0 
2
For maximum value of M0, h is taken corresponding to the case when the weir is just submerged.
The resisting moment about the outer middle third of the bottom, with tail water at weir crest
level, is given by,
HS m  1 2
Mr 
12
 
B  B1B - if both u/s and d/s faces have the same slope.

If the u/s face is vertical,

HS m  1 2
Mr 
6

B  B1 B  B12 
Equating M0 and Mr, B can be determined.
State 3. Water is flowing over the weir crest and weir is discharging with a clear over-fall (Fig.
2.20 c).
 3
M0 
6

H  3dH 2  D 3 
CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 27
In this equation there are two unknowns, viz. d and D and the relation between the two must be
known to find the maximum overturning moment. When the weir extends over the entire width
of the river and the width of the river is of considerable width in comparison to its depth, d is
roughly proportional to D, i.e. d = kD; where k is a constant and can be known if the river
discharge for any one depth is known (i.e. gauged).

Introducing this relation, M0 will be,


M 0  H 3  3kDH 2  D 3 
6
The maximum value of M0 is obtained from,
dM 0 
dD

 3kH 2  3D 2  0
6

Or DH k
Hence, the maximum value of M0 is given by

M0 
H 3
6

1  2k 3 2 
The resisting moment may be considered to be approximately the same as that given for state 2.
Like the previous cases, by equating M0 and Mr, B is determined.
The greatest of the three values of B obtained above is adopted.

2.4.2.3 Design of impervious floor (or apron)

For underseepage the worst condition occurs when the water on the u/s side is at the level of the
weir crest or at the top of the crest shutters and there is no tailwater.

Then, if the floor is designed on the basis of Bligh’s theory, the total creep length is given by

L = CHs
Where Hs is as shown in Figure 2.19.

However, if the floor is to be designed on the basis of Khosla’s theory, the horizontal length b of
the impervious floor is found by the consideration of the permissible exit gradient, GE, given by
H 1
GE  S
d  
1
Knowing the permissible value of GE for the soil and values of Hs and d, may be
 
1
calculated. From the exit gradient curve, for this value of , the corresponding value of α
 
may be found. Then from α = b/d, knowing α and d, the value of b can be determined.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 28

Out of the total impervious floor length b (or creep length L), the lengths L1 and L2 (Fig. 2.19) on
the d/s and u/s of the weir wall, respectively are fixed on the basis of Bligh’s recommendation as

(1) Downstream impervious floor length, L1:

Hs
L1  2.21C - for weirs without crest shutters
10
Hs
L1  2.21C - for weirs with crest shutters
13
(2) Upstream impervious floor length, L2

L2 = L – L1 – (B + 2d1 + 2d2) (according to Bligh’s theory)

L2 = b – L2 – B (according to Khosla’s theory)

2.4.2.4 Design of protection works on upstream and downstream sides

(i) Upstream side

Immediately at u/s end of the impervious floor, a block protection of length d1 is provided, where
d1 is the depth of pile below the river bed or the impervious floor at the u/s end. U/s of the block
protection a launching apron of length equal to 1.5d1 is provided.

(ii) Downstream side

The total length of the impervious floor, inverted filter, and launching apron on the d/s side of
the weir wall is also fixed on the basis of Bligh’s recommendations as
Hs q
L 3  18C x - for weirs without crest shutters
10 75
Hs q
L 3  18C x - for weirs with crest shutters
13 75
The minimum length of the inverted and the launching apron is then equal to L3 – L1.

However, an inverted filter of minimum length equal to 1.5d2 is to be provided immediately at

the d/s end of the impervious floor, where d2 is depth of d/s sheet pile. After the inverted filter, a
launching apron of length equal to 1.5 d2 and thickness of 1.5 m is provided. If the required
length (L3 – L1) is more than 3d2 the lengths of the inverted filter and launching apron may be
suitably increased.

CENG 6606 – Hydraulic Structures II Page 29